An overweight Republican from the northeast is thinking about running for president. No, not that one.
The Hill (“Rep. King: ‘Not saying no’ to 2016 run“):
Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.) told The Hill on Thursday he’s open to running for president and sees himself as the most “serious” Republican on national defense currently considering a bid for the GOP nomination.
We’ll see where it goes. I’m not ruling anything out. What I’m going to try to do is certainly use this as an opportunity to get my views out on national defense and foreign policy,” he said in a phone conversation. “I’m not saying no.”
King said he doesn’t want the views espoused by some of his Republican colleagues on national defense — particularly those of Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, who has said he is considering a presidential run — to characterize the GOP.
“When I see people like Rand Paul talking about drones killing people out to get a cup of coffee, I don’t want that to be the face of the national Republican Party,” he said.
There’s about as much danger of that as there is of Peter King being the nominee. It’s not that King is without credentials:
The former Homeland Security Committee chairman cited his national security experience as one of his greatest assets for a potential run. If former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton runs in 2016, King said: “I know I could answer her on foreign policy.”
King said he hadn’t initially considered the idea with much seriousness, but had been contacted by supporters suggesting the possibility after the Boston Marathon bombings, a time when he featured prominently in the congressional response to the crisis.
He also serves on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Paul, along with a handful of other GOP elected officials, are considered potential 2016 contenders, but few have the background in national defense that King has from his seven-year tenure as chairman of the Homeland Security committee.
Asked what he felt to be his main asset in a potential race, King said he would be the candidate who’s “serious about national defense, foreign policy and homeland security.”
The problem is that, while he has genuine expertise on national security policy, there’s scarcely an issue on which he’s not wrong. He’s an anti-Muslim extremist, pro-torture, pro-Provisional IRA, and pro-PATRIOT Act.
