Should a liberal Democrat vote for Rand Paul? Here's one who says, "yes."

[Jimmy Higgins]

6. Rand Paul publicized the issue of a possible government drone strike, on American soil, against American citizens. No, I'm not making this up.

Yeah, you kind of are making it up.

No he isn't. Rand Paul is completely against drone strikes.

*waits for reaction in public*

I mean to say Rand Paul was against drone strikes in the US. Totally for it in other countries. God bless America!!!

 

[laughing dog]

I mean to say Rand Paul was against drone strikes in the US.

Yes, his stand against a hypothetical and unlikely policy is the mark of true visionary statesman.

 

[boneyard bill]

The problem with your line of reasoning is that the "liberals" and "progressives" that you are referring to, (especially Hillary Clinton) do not stand for anything remotely progressive or liberal either. Of course, we have no assurance that Rand Paul would keep his campaign promises any more than Obama or George Bush did, but we can be assured that those, like Hillary, who do not even make the campaign promises certainly won't keep them.

The problem with your response is that the "liberals" and "progressives" I am referring to are the voters.

The idea that liberals and progressives should run into the loving arms of Rand Paul merely because Hillary Clinton isn't all that terribly liberal or progressive is absurd. Yeah, I get it...Hillary is considered by many to be only Democratic in name, but whatever you consider her to be, and whether she keeps the promises of the campaign which hasn't even started yet, it still doesn't make Rand Paul a progressive or liberal, nor a candidate that a progressive or liberal voter should support.

You have to see how the campaign develops.

Not really. No matter how the campaign develops, Rand Paul will never be a progressive or a liberal or even a moderate.

No one assumes that Rand Paul is somehow an across the board liberal. But if you are concerned about our war-mongering foreign policy and the outrageous abuse of civil liberties, Rand Paul definitely is more liberal in those areas. Meanwhile, Paul will cut the budget. But we're running deficits of a trillion dollars a year! So there's a crying need to cut the budget, and Rand Paul wouldn't spare the defense budget as Hillary probably would. Rand Paul is a true liberal on a few issues. Hillary is a faux liberal on just about everything. Will some liberals vote for Rand Paul on that basis? The author of the OP article will and apparently so will some on this discussion board.

 

[boneyard bill]

Keep in mind that Rand Paul has generally been among the top three in most national polls and has often been first. Guys like Rubio and Cruz swept to the top for a while and then tanked into the middle to low single digits, but Rand has remained steady and never very far out of first place. And RP's organization is strong in three of the first four primary states: Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada. Only South Carolina lacks a strong Ron Paul-built grass-roots organization.

LOL...and how much did that grass-roots org help RP get "close" to the nomination? National polls at this point are essentially meaningless...just fodder for the junkies. The Repug machine would go to war against RPII if he was getting real traction in the primaries.

Oh, I agree. I don't think you can classify Rand Paul as the front-runner by any means although a few pundits have. Still, Rand is running about twice a good in the polls as his father was at this stage four years ago. And he has a good chance to get out of box quickly. But he'll need to raise enough money to compete in the big states down the road. But you never know. McCain had very little money in 08 and still managed to carry some of those big states.

 

[boneyard bill]

Oh heck no! Not two years of Rand Paul crap up ahead!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/im-a-liberal-democrat-im_b_6169542.html

Here's one liberal Democrat who's so disaffected with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton that he's ready to support Rand Paul for president in 2016. Anybody here think he's wrong?

That's a rhetorical question, right?

As I recall, you were saying just about the same thing four years ago when I was talking about Rand Paul for the Senate.

 

[boneyard bill]

6. Rand Paul publicized the issue of a possible government drone strike, on American soil, against American citizens. No, I'm not making this up.

Yeah, you kind of are making it up.

No he isn't. Rand Paul is completely against drone strikes.

*waits for reaction in public*

I mean to say Rand Paul was against drone strikes in the US. Totally for it in other countries. God bless America!!!

You're wrong on both counts. Rand Paul did not endorse drone strikes for other countries. He simply didn't challenge it's legality. But he has also made clear that he doesn't oppose the use of drones for legitimate law-enforcement in this country. The issue wasn't about drones. It was about the authority of the president of the US to order American citizens to be assassinated on US soil. Rand Paul wasn't saying we should use cross-bows instead.

 

[boneyard bill]

I mean to say Rand Paul was against drone strikes in the US.

Yes, his stand against a hypothetical and unlikely policy is the mark of true visionary statesman.

He didn't take the stand against a hypothetical policy. He said he assumed the answer would be no. But when Brennan passed the issue off to the Attorney-General who said, essentially, "He would never do it, but he has the authority." That's when Paul launched his filibuster. It was the very real answer from the AG that prompted the filibuster, not a "hypothetical" policy.

 

[Ford]

No one assumes that Rand Paul is somehow an across the board liberal.

Well you're trying pretty hard here to sell him as the best choice for liberals.

But if you are concerned about our war-mongering foreign policy and the outrageous abuse of civil liberties, Rand Paul definitely is more liberal in those areas.

In those areas, he is not liberal, but rather libertarian. Why do I need to explain this to you, Bill?

Meanwhile, Paul will cut the budget.

This is the promise of every right leaning politician in this country. Elect a Republican and the budget deficits will vanish and the government will shrink and trickle down will free up the economy and we'll all become rich.

The reality takes over and the budget under the deficit hawks in the GOP explodes.

Rand Paul is a true liberal on a few issues.

Again, Rand Paul is a liberal like Al Sharpton is a Klansman. You keep desperately trying to put the younger Paul into a box where he just doesn't fit. The man is a right wing libertarian, not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[NobleSavage]

Again, Rand Paul is a liberal like Al Sharpton is a Klansman. You keep desperately trying to put the younger Paul into a box where he just doesn't fit. The man is a right wing libertarian, not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Oh heck no! Not two years of Rand Paul crap up ahead!
That's a rhetorical question, right?

As I recall, you were saying just about the same thing four years ago when I was talking about Rand Paul for the Senate.

You can feel free to quote me to back that up. I did make a similar comment about Ron "The Kingmaker" Paul.

 

[Sabine Grant]

The problem with your response is that the "liberals" and "progressives" I am referring to are the voters.

The idea that liberals and progressives should run into the loving arms of Rand Paul merely because Hillary Clinton isn't all that terribly liberal or progressive is absurd. Yeah, I get it...Hillary is considered by many to be only Democratic in name, but whatever you consider her to be, and whether she keeps the promises of the campaign which hasn't even started yet, it still doesn't make Rand Paul a progressive or liberal, nor a candidate that a progressive or liberal voter should support.

You have to see how the campaign develops.

Not really. No matter how the campaign develops, Rand Paul will never be a progressive or a liberal or even a moderate.

No one assumes that Rand Paul is somehow an across the board liberal. But if you are concerned about our war-mongering foreign policy and the outrageous abuse of civil liberties, Rand Paul definitely is more liberal in those areas. Meanwhile, Paul will cut the budget. But we're running deficits of a trillion dollars a year! So there's a crying need to cut the budget, and Rand Paul wouldn't spare the defense budget as Hillary probably would. Rand Paul is a true liberal on a few issues. Hillary is a faux liberal on just about everything. Will some liberals vote for Rand Paul on that basis? The author of the OP article will and apparently so will some on this discussion board.

If the "some on this board" are "Liberal Democrats", I doubt they will support Rand Paul considering his stances on :

http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=issue&id=3

HOME / ISSUES
Sanctity of Life

I am 100% pro-life. I believe life begins at conception and that abortion takes the life of an innocent human being. It is the duty of our government to protect this life as a right guaranteed under the Constitution. For this reason, I introduced S. 583, the Life at Conception Act on March 14, 2013. This bill would extend the Constitutional protection of life to the unborn from the time of conception.

It is unconscionable that government would facilitate the taking of innocent life. I have stated many times that I will always support legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion. There are many ways we can work toward this ultimate goal and items we can hope to accomplish in the near term. I strongly oppose any federal funding of abortion and will attempt to stop the flow of tax dollars to groups who perform or advocate for abortion.

Now, what type of "liberal" minded individual would endorse such stances? Further, what type of Libertarian would promote a legislation which empowers the government to exercise a custodial role over women by depriving them from the right to choose to terminate or pursue a pregnancy? What type of Libertarian is to be that dismissive of Privacy Rights which dominated the Roe/Wade deliberations leading to the SCOTUS Final Decision in 1973?

Well, if we have folks on this board who are self declared "Liberal Democrats" and would support Rand Paul, they are now aware of his above stances. I would be vividly interested how they can justify any compatibility between being a "Liberal Democrat" and endorsing Rand Paul's stances on abortion.

 

[boneyard bill]

Well you're trying pretty hard here to sell him as the best choice for liberals.

But if you are concerned about our war-mongering foreign policy and the outrageous abuse of civil liberties, Rand Paul definitely is more liberal in those areas.

In those areas, he is not liberal, but rather libertarian. Why do I need to explain this to you, Bill?

Meanwhile, Paul will cut the budget.

This is the promise of every right leaning politician in this country. Elect a Republican and the budget deficits will vanish and the government will shrink and trickle down will free up the economy and we'll all become rich.

The reality takes over and the budget under the deficit hawks in the GOP explodes.

Rand Paul is a true liberal on a few issues.

Again, Rand Paul is a liberal like Al Sharpton is a Klansman. You keep desperately trying to put the younger Paul into a box where he just doesn't fit. The man is a right wing libertarian, not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination.

If you want to acquit liberals of any desire to oppose warmongering, police state legislation, and crony capitalism and insist that these things only apply to libertarians then I can only agree that Rand Paul is not a liberal. Some people who call themselves liberals, however, are likely to disagree with you.

Rand Paul wants to reduce the budget because we are spending ourselves into oblivion, and most of Washington has their heads in the sand.

 

[boneyard bill]

The problem with your response is that the "liberals" and "progressives" I am referring to are the voters.

The idea that liberals and progressives should run into the loving arms of Rand Paul merely because Hillary Clinton isn't all that terribly liberal or progressive is absurd. Yeah, I get it...Hillary is considered by many to be only Democratic in name, but whatever you consider her to be, and whether she keeps the promises of the campaign which hasn't even started yet, it still doesn't make Rand Paul a progressive or liberal, nor a candidate that a progressive or liberal voter should support.

You have to see how the campaign develops.

Not really. No matter how the campaign develops, Rand Paul will never be a progressive or a liberal or even a moderate.

No one assumes that Rand Paul is somehow an across the board liberal. But if you are concerned about our war-mongering foreign policy and the outrageous abuse of civil liberties, Rand Paul definitely is more liberal in those areas. Meanwhile, Paul will cut the budget. But we're running deficits of a trillion dollars a year! So there's a crying need to cut the budget, and Rand Paul wouldn't spare the defense budget as Hillary probably would. Rand Paul is a true liberal on a few issues. Hillary is a faux liberal on just about everything. Will some liberals vote for Rand Paul on that basis? The author of the OP article will and apparently so will some on this discussion board.

If the "some on this board" are "Liberal Democrats", I doubt they will support Rand Paul considering his stances on :

http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=issue&id=3

HOME / ISSUES
Sanctity of Life

I am 100% pro-life. I believe life begins at conception and that abortion takes the life of an innocent human being. It is the duty of our government to protect this life as a right guaranteed under the Constitution. For this reason, I introduced S. 583, the Life at Conception Act on March 14, 2013. This bill would extend the Constitutional protection of life to the unborn from the time of conception.

It is unconscionable that government would facilitate the taking of innocent life. I have stated many times that I will always support legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion. There are many ways we can work toward this ultimate goal and items we can hope to accomplish in the near term. I strongly oppose any federal funding of abortion and will attempt to stop the flow of tax dollars to groups who perform or advocate for abortion.

Now, what type of "liberal" minded individual would endorse such stances? Further, what type of Libertarian would promote a legislation which empowers the government to exercise a custodial role over women by depriving them from the right to choose to terminate or pursue a pregnancy? What type of Libertarian is to be that dismissive of Privacy Rights which dominated the Roe/Wade deliberations leading to the SCOTUS Final Decision in 1973?

Well, if we have folks on this board who are self declared "Liberal Democrats" and would support Rand Paul, they are now aware of his above stances. I would be vividly interested how they can justify any compatibility between being a "Liberal Democrat" and endorsing Rand Paul's stances on abortion.

Of course there are liberal Democrats who oppose abortion, and there are libertarians who oppose abortion. It isn't about a right to choose. It's about when life begins. And if there is any doubt, it is surely preferable to choose a right to life over a right to privacy especially since the constitution says absolutely nothing about a right to privacy.

 

[Ford]

It isn't about a right to choose. It's about when life begins. And if there is any doubt, it is surely preferable to choose a right to life over a right to privacy especially since the constitution says absolutely nothing about a right to privacy.

Well about 40 years ago the Supreme Court disagreed with you on both the right to privacy and the right to choose. Four decades later this ruling has yet to be overturned.

 

[Sabine Grant]

The problem with your response is that the "liberals" and "progressives" I am referring to are the voters.

The idea that liberals and progressives should run into the loving arms of Rand Paul merely because Hillary Clinton isn't all that terribly liberal or progressive is absurd. Yeah, I get it...Hillary is considered by many to be only Democratic in name, but whatever you consider her to be, and whether she keeps the promises of the campaign which hasn't even started yet, it still doesn't make Rand Paul a progressive or liberal, nor a candidate that a progressive or liberal voter should support.

You have to see how the campaign develops.

Not really. No matter how the campaign develops, Rand Paul will never be a progressive or a liberal or even a moderate.

No one assumes that Rand Paul is somehow an across the board liberal. But if you are concerned about our war-mongering foreign policy and the outrageous abuse of civil liberties, Rand Paul definitely is more liberal in those areas. Meanwhile, Paul will cut the budget. But we're running deficits of a trillion dollars a year! So there's a crying need to cut the budget, and Rand Paul wouldn't spare the defense budget as Hillary probably would. Rand Paul is a true liberal on a few issues. Hillary is a faux liberal on just about everything. Will some liberals vote for Rand Paul on that basis? The author of the OP article will and apparently so will some on this discussion board.

If the "some on this board" are "Liberal Democrats", I doubt they will support Rand Paul considering his stances on :

http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=issue&id=3

HOME / ISSUES
Sanctity of Life

I am 100% pro-life. I believe life begins at conception and that abortion takes the life of an innocent human being. It is the duty of our government to protect this life as a right guaranteed under the Constitution. For this reason, I introduced S. 583, the Life at Conception Act on March 14, 2013. This bill would extend the Constitutional protection of life to the unborn from the time of conception.

It is unconscionable that government would facilitate the taking of innocent life. I have stated many times that I will always support legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion. There are many ways we can work toward this ultimate goal and items we can hope to accomplish in the near term. I strongly oppose any federal funding of abortion and will attempt to stop the flow of tax dollars to groups who perform or advocate for abortion.

Now, what type of "liberal" minded individual would endorse such stances? Further, what type of Libertarian would promote a legislation which empowers the government to exercise a custodial role over women by depriving them from the right to choose to terminate or pursue a pregnancy? What type of Libertarian is to be that dismissive of Privacy Rights which dominated the Roe/Wade deliberations leading to the SCOTUS Final Decision in 1973?

Well, if we have folks on this board who are self declared "Liberal Democrats" and would support Rand Paul, they are now aware of his above stances. I would be vividly interested how they can justify any compatibility between being a "Liberal Democrat" and endorsing Rand Paul's stances on abortion.

Of course there are liberal Democrats who oppose abortion, and there are libertarians who oppose abortion. It isn't about a right to choose. It's about when life begins.

And such "sanctity of life" (from the time of conception) minded "Liberal Democrats" and Libertarians would somehow not be influenced by their religious beliefs?Ah!You see Boneyardbill, a self declared "liberal Democrat" is not going to dismiss science for the sake of abiding to beliefs promoted by the Bible. Again, I will be vividly interested to see how "some on this board" self declared "liberal democrats" supporting Rand Paul will justify compatibility between opposing abortions based on the "sanctity of life" (just like Rand Paul) and being a "liberal Democrat".

And if there is any doubt, it is surely preferable to choose a right to life over a right to privacy especially since the constitution says absolutely nothing about a right to privacy.

Oh dear...now I have to rub your nose into the Bill of Rights :

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/rightofprivacy.html

Never heard of how privacy rights have been extended over the course of several court precedents? Let me suggest you read the content of the link above.

Anyhow, so it is quite clear, my reply was not there for you to give me your opinion about terminating or pursuing a pregnancy. My reply was to point to the improbability of self declared "liberal Democrats" and especially "some on this board" to just sweep under the carpet Paul's stances on abortion. I have to wonder how many "liberal Democrats" you frequent and socialize with, especially "some on this board".

 

[Harry Bosch]

The problem with your response is that the "liberals" and "progressives" I am referring to are the voters.

The idea that liberals and progressives should run into the loving arms of Rand Paul merely because Hillary Clinton isn't all that terribly liberal or progressive is absurd. Yeah, I get it...Hillary is considered by many to be only Democratic in name, but whatever you consider her to be, and whether she keeps the promises of the campaign which hasn't even started yet, it still doesn't make Rand Paul a progressive or liberal, nor a candidate that a progressive or liberal voter should support.

You have to see how the campaign develops.

Not really. No matter how the campaign develops, Rand Paul will never be a progressive or a liberal or even a moderate.

No one assumes that Rand Paul is somehow an across the board liberal. But if you are concerned about our war-mongering foreign policy and the outrageous abuse of civil liberties, Rand Paul definitely is more liberal in those areas. Meanwhile, Paul will cut the budget. But we're running deficits of a trillion dollars a year! So there's a crying need to cut the budget, and Rand Paul wouldn't spare the defense budget as Hillary probably would. Rand Paul is a true liberal on a few issues. Hillary is a faux liberal on just about everything. Will some liberals vote for Rand Paul on that basis? The author of the OP article will and apparently so will some on this discussion board.

If the "some on this board" are "Liberal Democrats", I doubt they will support Rand Paul considering his stances on :

http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=issue&id=3

HOME / ISSUES
Sanctity of Life

I am 100% pro-life. I believe life begins at conception and that abortion takes the life of an innocent human being. It is the duty of our government to protect this life as a right guaranteed under the Constitution. For this reason, I introduced S. 583, the Life at Conception Act on March 14, 2013. This bill would extend the Constitutional protection of life to the unborn from the time of conception.

It is unconscionable that government would facilitate the taking of innocent life. I have stated many times that I will always support legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion. There are many ways we can work toward this ultimate goal and items we can hope to accomplish in the near term. I strongly oppose any federal funding of abortion and will attempt to stop the flow of tax dollars to groups who perform or advocate for abortion.

Now, what type of "liberal" minded individual would endorse such stances? Further, what type of Libertarian would promote a legislation which empowers the government to exercise a custodial role over women by depriving them from the right to choose to terminate or pursue a pregnancy? What type of Libertarian is to be that dismissive of Privacy Rights which dominated the Roe/Wade deliberations leading to the SCOTUS Final Decision in 1973?

Well, if we have folks on this board who are self declared "Liberal Democrats" and would support Rand Paul, they are now aware of his above stances. I would be vividly interested how they can justify any compatibility between being a "Liberal Democrat" and endorsing Rand Paul's stances on abortion.

Of course there are liberal Democrats who oppose abortion, and there are libertarians who oppose abortion. It isn't about a right to choose. It's about when life begins. And if there is any doubt, it is surely preferable to choose a right to life over a right to privacy especially since the constitution says absolutely nothing about a right to privacy.

Glad to hear that you are such an ardent defender of liberals!! (oh brother)

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Isn't Ron Paul at the very least sympathetic to anarcho-capitalism? Why should liberals vote for him on that basis?

 

[boneyard bill]

It isn't about a right to choose. It's about when life begins. And if there is any doubt, it is surely preferable to choose a right to life over a right to privacy especially since the constitution says absolutely nothing about a right to privacy.

Well about 40 years ago the Supreme Court disagreed with you on both the right to privacy and the right to choose. Four decades later this ruling has yet to be overturned.

Perhaps the most badly reasoned court decision since Dred Scott. Blackman pretty much made up the idea of a "right to privacy" out of thin air. Of course, it hasn't been overturned, but that's because of politics, not judicial reasoning.

 

[Ford]

Well about 40 years ago the Supreme Court disagreed with you on both the right to privacy and the right to choose. Four decades later this ruling has yet to be overturned.

Perhaps the most badly reasoned court decision since Dred Scott.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

 

[boneyard bill]

The problem with your response is that the "liberals" and "progressives" I am referring to are the voters.

The idea that liberals and progressives should run into the loving arms of Rand Paul merely because Hillary Clinton isn't all that terribly liberal or progressive is absurd. Yeah, I get it...Hillary is considered by many to be only Democratic in name, but whatever you consider her to be, and whether she keeps the promises of the campaign which hasn't even started yet, it still doesn't make Rand Paul a progressive or liberal, nor a candidate that a progressive or liberal voter should support.

You have to see how the campaign develops.

Not really. No matter how the campaign develops, Rand Paul will never be a progressive or a liberal or even a moderate.

No one assumes that Rand Paul is somehow an across the board liberal. But if you are concerned about our war-mongering foreign policy and the outrageous abuse of civil liberties, Rand Paul definitely is more liberal in those areas. Meanwhile, Paul will cut the budget. But we're running deficits of a trillion dollars a year! So there's a crying need to cut the budget, and Rand Paul wouldn't spare the defense budget as Hillary probably would. Rand Paul is a true liberal on a few issues. Hillary is a faux liberal on just about everything. Will some liberals vote for Rand Paul on that basis? The author of the OP article will and apparently so will some on this discussion board.

If the "some on this board" are "Liberal Democrats", I doubt they will support Rand Paul considering his stances on :

http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=issue&id=3

HOME / ISSUES
Sanctity of Life

I am 100% pro-life. I believe life begins at conception and that abortion takes the life of an innocent human being. It is the duty of our government to protect this life as a right guaranteed under the Constitution. For this reason, I introduced S. 583, the Life at Conception Act on March 14, 2013. This bill would extend the Constitutional protection of life to the unborn from the time of conception.

It is unconscionable that government would facilitate the taking of innocent life. I have stated many times that I will always support legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion. There are many ways we can work toward this ultimate goal and items we can hope to accomplish in the near term. I strongly oppose any federal funding of abortion and will attempt to stop the flow of tax dollars to groups who perform or advocate for abortion.

Now, what type of "liberal" minded individual would endorse such stances? Further, what type of Libertarian would promote a legislation which empowers the government to exercise a custodial role over women by depriving them from the right to choose to terminate or pursue a pregnancy? What type of Libertarian is to be that dismissive of Privacy Rights which dominated the Roe/Wade deliberations leading to the SCOTUS Final Decision in 1973?

Well, if we have folks on this board who are self declared "Liberal Democrats" and would support Rand Paul, they are now aware of his above stances. I would be vividly interested how they can justify any compatibility between being a "Liberal Democrat" and endorsing Rand Paul's stances on abortion.

Of course there are liberal Democrats who oppose abortion, and there are libertarians who oppose abortion. It isn't about a right to choose. It's about when life begins.

And such "sanctity of life" (from the time of conception) minded "Liberal Democrats" and Libertarians would somehow not be influenced by their religious beliefs?Ah!You see Boneyardbill, a self declared "liberal Democrat" is not going to dismiss science for the sake of abiding to beliefs promoted by the Bible. Again, I will be vividly interested to see how "some on this board" self declared "liberal democrats" supporting Rand Paul will justify compatibility between opposing abortions based on the "sanctity of life" (just like Rand Paul) and being a "liberal Democrat".

And if there is any doubt, it is surely preferable to choose a right to life over a right to privacy especially since the constitution says absolutely nothing about a right to privacy.

Oh dear...now I have to rub your nose into the Bill of Rights :

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/rightofprivacy.html

Never heard of how privacy rights have been extended over the course of several court precedents? Let me suggest you read the content of the link above.

Anyhow, so it is quite clear, my reply was not there for you to give me your opinion about terminating or pursuing a pregnancy. My reply was to point to the improbability of self declared "liberal Democrats" and especially "some on this board" to just sweep under the carpet Paul's stances on abortion. I have to wonder how many "liberal Democrats" you frequent and socialize with, especially "some on this board".

From your own link:

The U. S. Constitution contains no express right to privacy.

The "right to privacy" is a shorthand expression for the 4th and 5th amendments and other provisions of the constitution which pertain to privacy but say absolutely nothing about abortion. It makes no sense to claim that this mere expression somehow creates a right to more than what it is referring to, but that is exactly what Justice Blackman did.

I'm sure for liberal Democrats its a matter of priorities except for the minority which actually do support abortion. I imagine there were quite a few Democrats who did not agree with Obama when he said in his 2008 campaign that we should escalate the war in Afghanistan but most of them voted for him anyway because they favored national health care, infrastructure spending, etc.

- - - Updated - - -

The problem with your response is that the "liberals" and "progressives" I am referring to are the voters.

The idea that liberals and progressives should run into the loving arms of Rand Paul merely because Hillary Clinton isn't all that terribly liberal or progressive is absurd. Yeah, I get it...Hillary is considered by many to be only Democratic in name, but whatever you consider her to be, and whether she keeps the promises of the campaign which hasn't even started yet, it still doesn't make Rand Paul a progressive or liberal, nor a candidate that a progressive or liberal voter should support.

You have to see how the campaign develops.

Not really. No matter how the campaign develops, Rand Paul will never be a progressive or a liberal or even a moderate.

No one assumes that Rand Paul is somehow an across the board liberal. But if you are concerned about our war-mongering foreign policy and the outrageous abuse of civil liberties, Rand Paul definitely is more liberal in those areas. Meanwhile, Paul will cut the budget. But we're running deficits of a trillion dollars a year! So there's a crying need to cut the budget, and Rand Paul wouldn't spare the defense budget as Hillary probably would. Rand Paul is a true liberal on a few issues. Hillary is a faux liberal on just about everything. Will some liberals vote for Rand Paul on that basis? The author of the OP article will and apparently so will some on this discussion board.

If the "some on this board" are "Liberal Democrats", I doubt they will support Rand Paul considering his stances on :

http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=issue&id=3

HOME / ISSUES
Sanctity of Life

I am 100% pro-life. I believe life begins at conception and that abortion takes the life of an innocent human being. It is the duty of our government to protect this life as a right guaranteed under the Constitution. For this reason, I introduced S. 583, the Life at Conception Act on March 14, 2013. This bill would extend the Constitutional protection of life to the unborn from the time of conception.

It is unconscionable that government would facilitate the taking of innocent life. I have stated many times that I will always support legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion. There are many ways we can work toward this ultimate goal and items we can hope to accomplish in the near term. I strongly oppose any federal funding of abortion and will attempt to stop the flow of tax dollars to groups who perform or advocate for abortion.

Now, what type of "liberal" minded individual would endorse such stances? Further, what type of Libertarian would promote a legislation which empowers the government to exercise a custodial role over women by depriving them from the right to choose to terminate or pursue a pregnancy? What type of Libertarian is to be that dismissive of Privacy Rights which dominated the Roe/Wade deliberations leading to the SCOTUS Final Decision in 1973?

Well, if we have folks on this board who are self declared "Liberal Democrats" and would support Rand Paul, they are now aware of his above stances. I would be vividly interested how they can justify any compatibility between being a "Liberal Democrat" and endorsing Rand Paul's stances on abortion.

Of course there are liberal Democrats who oppose abortion, and there are libertarians who oppose abortion. It isn't about a right to choose. It's about when life begins.

And such "sanctity of life" (from the time of conception) minded "Liberal Democrats" and Libertarians would somehow not be influenced by their religious beliefs?Ah!You see Boneyardbill, a self declared "liberal Democrat" is not going to dismiss science for the sake of abiding to beliefs promoted by the Bible. Again, I will be vividly interested to see how "some on this board" self declared "liberal democrats" supporting Rand Paul will justify compatibility between opposing abortions based on the "sanctity of life" (just like Rand Paul) and being a "liberal Democrat".

And if there is any doubt, it is surely preferable to choose a right to life over a right to privacy especially since the constitution says absolutely nothing about a right to privacy.

Oh dear...now I have to rub your nose into the Bill of Rights :

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/rightofprivacy.html

Never heard of how privacy rights have been extended over the course of several court precedents? Let me suggest you read the content of the link above.

Anyhow, so it is quite clear, my reply was not there for you to give me your opinion about terminating or pursuing a pregnancy. My reply was to point to the improbability of self declared "liberal Democrats" and especially "some on this board" to just sweep under the carpet Paul's stances on abortion. I have to wonder how many "liberal Democrats" you frequent and socialize with, especially "some on this board".

The Bible doesn't say anything about abortion.