Jonathan wrote last week about Rand Paul’s 2016 ambitions, and what this means for the pro-Israel GOP. Now get ready for what Politico dubs the “Rand Paul evolution,” the younger Paul’s effort to steer the GOP in the direction championed by his father:
In an interview with POLITICO, Paul said he’ll return to Congress this week pushing measures long avoided by his party. He wants to work with liberal Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy and Republicans to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for pot possession. He wants to carve a compromise immigration plan with an “eventual path” to citizenship for illegal immigrants, a proposal he believes could be palatable to conservatives. And he believes his ideas — along with pushing for less U.S. military intervention in conflicts overseas — could help the GOP broaden its tent and appeal to crucial voting blocs that handed Democrats big wins in the West Coast, the Northeast and along the Great Lakes.
“We have three big regions where we’re not competitive,” Paul said. “And we have to be competitive in those regions.” ….
Now, Paul appears to want a more influential role in his party than simply the bomb-throwing back-bencher with a penchant for grabbing headlines. Unlike his father, retiring Texas Rep. Ron Paul, who toiled on the GOP fringes for years and battled with the party establishment, the younger Paul seems to have developed political savvy in dealing with GOP leaders.
As Politico notes, Paul hasn’t had much legislative luck with the “tea party agenda” he campaigned on in 2010. But Paul is trying to take a leading role Congress’s illegal immigration debate. His proposal calls for coupling a long-term “path to citizenship” with a concurrent total lockdown on legal immigration. In other words, a plan that rewards illegal immigrants while punishing foreigners who want to come to the U.S. legally.
Politico also reports that Paul has forged a close relationship with GOP Senate leadership:
The establishment has also brought Paul into the fold. Jesse Benton, a former political aide to both Pauls, is running Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s reelection campaign in 2014. McConnell and Rand Paul have become increasingly close political allies after the minority leader strongly backed Paul’s primary challenger in 2010. McConnell needs the energy of the younger, conservative Libertarian-minded voters in his state, while Paul could use the blessing from the GOP leader as he lays the groundwork for a possible run for national office in 2016.
Paul seems to be trying to rebrand himself as a conduit between the grassroots and GOP establishment. The story doesn’t mention anything new or specific he’s proposing that relates directly to foreign policy, and I actually wonder if he’ll downplay his non-interventionist positions for the next few years as he prepares for a presidential run. The Senate GOP establishment may be willing to overlook his fringe foreign policy views as long as he doesn’t spotlight them, but they’re still going to exist in 2016.
Not that I agree with Paul Jr. completely but he has a point. Given a choice between a "legal" islamist with four wives and honor killing and "illegal" Christian Mexican, I would pick the latter. And kids brought here before the age of consent, well, you'll have a hard time explaining why we should deport them to a hellhole. Besides, in every businessman's eye's giving a job to someone who wants to work vs. paying a lazy bum who doesn't is not an argument we should oppose. As to Israel, I say that Canada and Mexico come first no matter what. We all know that the enemies of Israel–all of them–are the enemies of America, so this is an easy position to embrace.
I don’t trust Paul over Israel, or our other genuine. And moral, foreign policy commitments, but I think your response to him on immigration is over the top. To describe it as rewarding illegals while punishing legal immigrants does not appear to have much justification in Paul’s actual comments.
And as a Texas Republican, I am constantly befuddled by the level of anti mexican rhetoric. Romney lost working and lower middle class non evangelical voters in the rust belt and latinos, who are mostly from the same classes. Paul actually offers a solution on immigration that will remove the issue for a generation without betraying conservative small government principles, and unlike some other Republicans he isn’t talking about punishing capitalists.
I am sure most Commentary readers are very wary of Rand Paul for foreign policy reasons, I know I am. But he has not yet proved himself to be his father. I never expect him to be a friend, but unless we find a solution we will be permanently doomed to an active foreign policy devoted to aiding the worst anti liberal forces and clouded by the poison of crypto anti semitism.
No. No.No. American law abiding U.S. tax paying citizens, are sick and tired of this non-ending bending over backwards for Illegal Immigrants and Legal immigrants. This sovereign nation, belongs to the American U.S. citizens, and our American children. We own it. We will not stand down, while rich elite Traitors in our government, try to redistribute our wealth left to us, by our American Ancestors. Our American sovereignty is our wealth. It will not be doled out so cheaply, to lawless immoral illegal immigrants, or the citizens of the world. They have their countries. This United States is ours.
Rand Paul holds as much promise for the Republican Party as did the man he succeeded, Jim Bunning.
What people fail to understand is that once there is an Amnesty, all those granted citizenship will also get preference under Affirmative Action over native born white males. n nAnd what the GOP fails to understand is that Romney would have won if the same number of working class white males had voted for him that had voted for McCain back in '08 — if we hadn't instead just decided to walk away from politics in general. n nFor every minority supporter the GOP gets through this stuff, they are loosing 5-10 working class white guys and that is not how you build a party….
Affirmative action should be abolished immediately. n nAmerica should be a meritocracy. n nWe do no group favors making their academic and professional achievements suspect, and creating and sustaining the divisiveness and bitterness affirmative action engenders is counterproductive. Under those circumstances, there would be no issue with a more open immigration plan. n nLevel field, equal opportunity, not guaranteed equal results. The latter is not workable. The Soviet Union, its satellites and China proved that.
I am shocked to read this sort of nonsense. It is a no brainer for me. I will under no circumstances support in any way whatsoever a Republican party which relents on ammnesty for illegal aliens and the betrayal of the US commitments to Israel. Either one is a deal breaker. I am not going to waste my time explaining about why. Figure it out yourself.r n In fact, I would switch parties. r n Maybe we are better off with the amateur Obama because I dare say Rand Paul would be a far worse enemy of Israel than Obama appears to be.
Rand Paul should be marginalized within the GOP for no other reason than his father abandoned Mitt Romney and refused to endorse the party candidate. Rand supported his father openly an publicly. He should pay the consequences of his father's actions and his own duplicitousness.Furthermore, his failure to understand modern economics (seriously a return to the gold standard and getting rid of the federal reserve?), plus his isolationist-conspiratorial reaction to world events basically makes his someone to laugh at, not follow. If he is allowed to revamp the GOP in his own image when it comes to foreign policy and economic policy he will basically turn the GOP back to the ignorance of the early 20th century. These are the politicians who followed, supported and allowed Hitler and fascism to rise around the world. n nThe reaction to the leftist progressive agenda of statism is not the go the complete opposite and follow the lunatic libertarian fringe. The GOP needs to find a way to educate the populace that true freedom comes with economic viability, less debt and adherence to the US Constitution. But it is also important to teach American exceptionalism and the important role that the US plays in the world at large. Yes it is our responsibility to help those who cherish freedom around the world. we cannot put a super bubble over the US and act like nothing around the world affects us in any way shape or form. If you actually think that interdependence is not real then you might as well wear a tinfoil hat and wait for the mother ship.
Ms. Goodman, I read that entire article on Politico before even reading this post and I have to say that your description of Sen. Paul's immigration prescription is somewhat wide of the mark. My take away is that we would beef up border security, and dissallow immigration from certain countries so as to give our country some breathing space in absorbing these new immigrants. We did that in the past in the nation and as a sovereign nation we have the power to do that now. Your description of it being a "punishment" is wrong