10 reasons why liberal democrats should consider voting for Rand Paul: Rand Paul will be more cautious with waging war than Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush. Sen. Paul has called Obamas ISIS war illegal and isnt against defending American interests through military intervention, but stresses the importance of Congress making these decisions. Hillary Clinton, in contrast, thinks we should have armed the Syrian rebel groups several years ago. Try naming even one of the Syrian rebel groups and explaining their differences with ISIS. Furthermore, The Week states that Clintons instincts appear to be far more hawkish than Barack Obamas. Imagine a more hawkish Obama and youll get the next President Clinton. Also, famed neocon Robert Kagan is one of Clintons advisers and states in The New York Times, I feel comfortable with her on foreign policy. That should tell you how liberal Clinton will be on matters of perpetual war in the Middle East. 2. The Los Angeles Times has referred to Paul as one of the foremost critics of the governments domestic spying program. In early 2014, Sen. Paul filed a lawsuit against the NSA over domestic spying. Neither Hillary Clinton, Jeb Bush, nor any other candidate in 2016 has made this a top priority in their campaign. Sen. Paul has also voted against PATRIOT Act Extension bills, voted for an amendment that prohibits detention of U.S. citizens without trial (which of course didnt pass the Senate), and his voting record protects American citizens from politicians paranoid over terrorism. Sen. Paul was vehemently against the NDAA Indefinite Detention Bill that passed in 2013, because, This bill takes away that right and says that if someone thinks youre dangerous, we will hold you without a trial. Its an abomination. 3. Rand Paul has teamed up with liberal Democratic Sen. Cory Booker to reform the criminal justice system. Their bill would improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans whove been adversely affected by non-violent criminal sentences. Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush dont care about reforming the criminal justice system, and if they do, its on the bottom of their to do lists, far behind cozying up to Wall Street and increasing Americas military presence in the Middle East. 4. POLITICO states Hillary Clinton is Wall Street Republicans dark secret in 2016. I dont see Clinton as being any more liberal than Paul on Wall Street or banking, although perhaps shed be more willing to save failed corporations than the Kentucky Senator. Also, Paul is one of the few Republicans whos addressed the GOPs love affair with corporations, stating that, We cannot be the party of fat cats, rich people, and Wall Street...corporate welfare should once and for all be ended. 5. Sen. Paul thinks Edward Snowden was treated unfairly as a whistleblower and should have only spent a few years in prison. No other candidate in 2016 would dare take that position. The Wall Street Journal criticized Pauls position on the Snowden matter, and their criticism actually makes me like Rand Paul in 2016 even more. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, is puzzled why Snowden would want to leave the U.S. and feels he might have helped terrorists with his disclosures. 6. Rand Paul publicized the issue of a possible government drone strike, on American soil, against American citizens. No, Im not making this up. I dont want to get blown up eating a burrito at Chipotle because I visited Egypt to see the pyramids and happened to sit in a café frequented by a terrorist. In 2013, Rand Paul asked Eric Holder whether or not American citizens could be targeted by drones on American soil. Jon Stewart has a great segment about this. Eric Holder actually answered that theoretically, yes, drone strikes to kill Americans on U.S. soil could be viewed as legal, depending on the circumstance. If this doesnt frighten you, then vote for Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush, since neither one cares about this matter. Issues like drone strikes on American soil, against Americans, is why I dont believe in conspiracy theories. This sort of thing is being discussed today in plain sight, yet only Rand Paul and a few others have shown outrage over the potential of our government to possibly target its own citizens. If its not an ISIL beheading video, nobody seems to care nowadays. 7. Rand Paul could bring back an era in American politics when conservatives and liberals socialized with one another. This alone would solve some of the gridlock in Washington. Paul has worked with 7 leading Democrats on a number of issues; working on everything from judicial reform, NSA surveillance, the limits of presidential authority to launch strikes in Iraq, and other issues. Imagine Ted Cruz reaching out to Nancy Pelosi, or Mitch McConnell having lunch with Hillary Clinton. Rand Paul, on the other hand, has worked to emulate this picture. 8. Rand Paul will not gut the economic safety nets of this country in the manner espoused by Paul Ryan and others. He doesnt want to dismantle Social Security. I do disagree with his view of the SNAP Program and certain other issues. However, Paul has stated, Im for a social safety net, but it should be minimized to helping those who cant help themselves. I dont ever recall Ted Cruz or Paul Ryan making that type of statement and mainstream Republicans do everything in their power to promote the view that safety nets equate to communism or socialism. 9. Neoconservatives hate Rand Paul. They like Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush a lot more, and The Weekly Standard, National Review, and others have voiced their reservations about a Rand Paul presidency. If neocons disagree with you, then you must be doing something right. 10. Rand Paul could be the answer to our philosophical conundrum as a nation. Were stuck with a GOP who thinks the globe is one giant Stratego board game with God helping roll the dice, a Democratic Party more focused on defending Obamacare than stopping endless wars or protecting civil liberties, and a populace that cares more about beheading videos than the erosion of rights or the welfare of our warriors. Is Paul the answer? Im not certain. But compared to Hillary and Jeb Bush? I cant imagine either one of them taking the time to visit Ferguson just to hear people out or put on free eye surgery clinics in Puerto Rico in their free time.
Posted on: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 03:11:58 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015