VIDEO UPDATE: Rand Paul knocked it out of the park in today's debate.
Submitted by Neverquit on Tue, 02/16/2010 - 09:05
Trey Greyson imploded badly today.
Bill Johnson has proven himself as either uneducated, a liar or both!
I was extremely proud of Rand today and I think the next poll will show him way ahead now.
Video Here:
Kentucky Republican US Senate Forum from Liberty Insider on Vimeo.
Who do you think won?
Trey Greyson
Bill Johnson
Rand Paul
Not a Knock out of the Park
If I lived in KY, I would vote for Rand, but I think he didn’t do very well in this debate. He didn’t really distinguish himself from the other two candidates, except on the Patriot Act. He didn’t really do much to convince the uneducated on this issue. Why didn’t he talk about ending the Fed, abolishing the income tax, bringing the troops home, and getting out of the U.N.?
That comment about the “fence” below the ground - ouch!
As far as the abortion issue is concerned, I could clearly see that he was flustered. Instead of defending himself on the issue repeatedly, he should have fought back and asked the other candidates if they would vote for Department of Health and Human Services Appropriations bills which are the main source of Planned Parenthood funding. Bill Johnson didn’t even quote the relevant part of the 14th amendment, which is “nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” He even left off “without due process”. What a dope.
Trey Grayson
reminds me of Carl Cameron, eww.
The DP is proof that the grassroots support for Ron Paul and his peaceful message of individual liberty is large, real, and not going away!
Rand Paul did not do well in this debate.
Not only were his answers off target, but his attacks against the other candidates and poor body language, often facing his opponents rather than the audience, and leaning on and walking away from the podium, did not present a professional image of Rand Paul.
I don't know if he was having a bad day, but it really appeared like he is taking the race and his support for granted.
Ron Paul's Convention Speech
RAND REALLY DROPPED THE BALL!
I thought overall that Rand did a good job. As someone who is 100% pro-life though I wish he had taken the opportunity to (much like Senator Sam Brownback does) to point out he is pro-life and whole life and point out that the other two folks on the stage A.) Want our military to kill more people and B. say they respect life but have complete disregard for the way living and potentially innocent people are sometimes treated. He missed an opportunity and instead looked kind of oily on that subject. His dad always does a great job on this issue and its one of the reasons I support him so strongly.
BUT....Rand really dropped the ball in the beginning when Gurley Martin approached the stage and was escorted out by LE. Gurley Martin is not polling high enough (around 2-4 % when he has been included in the polls) and so is excluded from the debates.
WAS NOT THIS THE ARGUMENT THEY USED TO KEEP RON OUT OF ONE OF THE DEBATES!!!!!
Rand should have at that very moment called on both of his opponents to join him in inviting Gurley Martin to join the debate. He should have said that no qualified person willing to serve should be excluded. He should have turned right to Trey and Bill and said said Mr. Martin who served his country in the Army has every right to be on that stage as the three of them. And then he should have shut up and watch them squirm.
I did not even know who that man was until I read his name on this forum and googled his name.
I have donated money to Rand and am not sure I will again because of the way the stood by and let that old man be treated with such disrespect. I still think Rand did a great job in the debate, but he really, really dropped the ball on that one. Very disappointing since he is the son of the 2008 Liberty candidate for President. Very disappointing indeed.
Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!
RonPaulRocks1, The people of
RonPaulRocks1,
The people of KY have a right to hear Mr. Martin's message, but this was an event put on by two private organizations. They hold the right to invite or exclude whomever they wish. Since he was not invited, it was rude and tacky of him to disrupt the event after it had officially began. Rand was not in charge, he was only a guest. It would have been out of line for him to demand Martin join the debate. I was there, it was uncalled for on Martin's part and it's completely illogical for you to discredit Rand over this.
Wrong Answer!
I completely disagree. Sure the sponsors of the debate can invite or not invite any candidate they like. However, that does not stop one or more of the candidates from calling on those sponsors, even at the start of the debate from including any qualified candidate who wishes to participate!
Do high poll numbers for our candidate in this race give us short term memory loss? IE: Ron Paul 2008.
your justification is the same that was used against Ron and there were not too many people here who were accepting of that logic. But now because our preferred candidate is the front-runner we turn our heads and close our eyes when another candidate is treated the way Ron was in some cases? When our candidate leads in the polls, Liberty for ALL no longer matters?
There was no reason for LE to escort a frail, elderly man who has qualified for the ballot away and Rand really dropped the ball for not saying so. I still support Rand, but I am very disappointed. His fathers shoes are big shoes to fill and his feet just may be a little too small.
Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!
RonPaulRocks1 I agree with
RonPaulRocks1
I agree with you. Although it is not Rand Paul's choice who was allowed on the stage, it would have been impressive and nontraditional to take a stand and fight for the little guy. Being anti-establishment is half the fun of the Ron Paul Revolution! There is no question it is one of the biggest reasons myself and other college types got involved with such passion. I'm sure there could be many excuses made for Rand and making that gesture (too risky at this point in the campaign to be involved in controversy, not wanting to start the debate with a tough approach, or even simply being respectful of the event and letting them handle things). But personally, I appreciate those who will take the time to fight those little fights. It's indicative of one's personality and would be a nice example to see how he will be towards the "angry guy in the corner" when has all the power that comes along with being a US Senator.
There's a right way and wrong way to go about it
Medina was excluded from the belo debates. Did she just show up and demand to be on stage? No, her supporters did, weeks in advance until belo relented and invited her to be in the debates. The man could have done the same.
As far as Rand, perhaps he could have acknowledged him in someway and maybe earn the respect of his supporters, perhaps pick up a few votes, but ultimately the man was rude and disrespectful and was treated appropriately.
Anyone notice...
in the beginning the cops dragging out that old man?
I am waiting for the congressman or senator that actually pauses to listen to their constituents. I find it hard for candidates to advocate liberty yet ignore the people. Regardless of his complaint (the old mans), I am sick of seeing people escorted out by the police. If we can't voice our opinion (good or bad), where do we stand as citizens.
Joe
His "complaint" was that he
His "complaint" was that he was running for Senate as well and had a right to be on the stage just like them. It was rude, tacky and disrespectful for him to disrupt the event. It was put on by two independent groups, they have the right to exclude whomever they wish. That's why the cops hauled him off.
Can't watch any more
Rand's opening statement was great, but I can't stand listening to what's his face... Greyson's voice is very annoying, and obviously he is very shallow. If Rand doesn't win this race, I will never support Kentucky again when I drive through and spend $3.50 at the convenience store there on my way up North!!!
hostile crowd!
hostile crowd!
Ventura 2012
Here or at the debate?
I got to be honest, in my opinion he did well but, "knocked it out of the park"?
To me it seems like he's playing it safe. That strategy may see him to office. It also may leave him shy of the endzone.
We have diametric campaign strategies going with Medina and Rand and it will be interesting to see which one is more effective in the end. This is the way I see it:
Rand's campaign less risk, less potential payoff
Medina's campaign more risk, more potential payoff.
Rand's seems more safe and traditional as far as rhetoric and appealing to the electorate. The ideas and ideals that many of us fight for here are sprinkled here and there but couched in nuanced language so as not to alarm. He's staying out of controversy which is good but he also risks sounding like a politician by not making strong principled stands and educating Kentuckians about why some deeply held beliefs about government are misguided or wrong.
Medina's campaign on the other hand seems much more bold and straightforward. While inspiring and hard hitting this approach is far more susceptible to risk and disaster. A completely honest candidate is a muckraker's dream, as we've witnessed with the whole Glenn Beck setup. The advantage though is that this straight forward honesty lends her huge credibility with supporters and voters who might not have voted or known about her previously. This effect can carry her through the controversies and pay off big.
So which is the better strategy? Go big or go home, or play it safe and pick your battles? I don't know. Maybe both are the best strategy for their respective state and personality. May they both be right.
wouldn't work here
Kentuckians can be very much Republican but not really very conservative. Remember, we are a net receiver and we have lots of rural areas that are dependent.
There are issues here you can stand boldly on, but we aren't Texans here just yet...unfortunately...
I say knocked it out of the
I say knocked it out of the park because for the most part he kept his composure for 98% of the debate, that is a great thing during debates.
at the debate. They seemed
at the debate. They seemed really anti-Rand.
I agree with your post. If Rand runs for POTUS after he wins this seat, then it could be high reward. I agree that him winning the Senate seat is not that high reward because he does not stand out rhetorically as much as I would like.
Ventura 2012
I meant high reward as in support
Staying on safe ground will get him some good support, but will it be enough?
Where as being bold could net him some major support, or major ruin. Perhaps not the best course to take in Kentucky.
I agree with Neverquit and understand that Kentucky and Texas are different states so he's probably going about it the right way. I just don't like the two pronged attack from greyson and johnson. One pretending to be rand paul the other pretending to be even more constitutional than rand. I fear unless he gets more bold and get out to territory they can't follow, he will be lost in the slander and seemingly similar messages of the other two. By all appearances though it seems like Rand and co know what they're doing and leading the polls, so I wish them all the best and hope they get this thing done.
Go RAND!
Johnson is a vote splitter.
Johnson is a vote splitter. find my post on this issue here : http://www.dailypaul.com/node/125499
They did this to the Mayor of
They did this to the Mayor of Baltimore, a real intellectual who came out for drug legalization. They ran a black and white democrat against him, so the black vote was split and our current Governor(who said that taking the swine flu vaccine was patriotic) won.
Ventura 2012
Didn't realise..
That Rand was so short!!
Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/youownyou (quotes)
Website: http://www.own-yourself.com (Under construction)
Greyson is Secretary of State
in Kentucky and that means he is a major player
in how the votes are counted and what computer program
is used in the election.
Please Rand supporters watch the vote and how it is counted.
"Freedom is a right that can never be won in war,only by each individual "
I don't see the fire of his father.
Where is the boldness on issues like the Fed, Income Tax, State's rights.
Trey's attacks about the "Potomac Two-Step" start to gain ground when issues that should be presented with boldness and surety are nuanced in.
Rand failed to mention that abortion was illegal in all 50 states before RvW and that the case Federalized a state and local issue. Morality cannot be encouraged or governed from a central power and he needs to proudly proclaim this.
I think Paul's performance lacked luster and the solid backbone he should have inherited from his father. He needs to get up there and knock some heads even if it does rattle McConnell.
That's an understatement
I think he outright stunk. He spent a lot of time trying to prove that he is just like his two opponents on the issue of abortion, and he did come across as cagey on this issue. And honestly, this is a CRAP issue ... of all the huge problems with the current government, Rand chooses to talk about abortion. I never got behind Ron Paul because of his abortion issue .. there are plenty of politicians who want to ban it, and in fact, I don't even agree with the Republicans on this issue; I think it should be legal. Would Rand make abortion illegal in cases where the mother's life is in danger? He certainly does not mention any exceptions on his website.
Johnson spoke about eliminating the IRS. Rand did not.
Anyway, I could go on and on, but really, he came across to me as just another typical Republican. George W. Bush before he got into office also complained about the spending in Washington, and that he would cut it .. all these Republican candidates do .. so the fact that Rand was up there making these same promises that audiences have heard again and again from past Republican candidates ... well, the public does not know from this debate that Rand is the 1 in 1,000 that is not lying.
I also didn't like his comments on Guantanamo. What about the people who were there who were COMPLETELY INNOCENT .. and locked up there for years, e.g., the Uighurs ... don't they deserve any type of retribution for the injustice that the US has done to them??? Sorry to all his fans out there, but I kind of think Rand is a bonehead who has not put a lot of deep thought into a lot of important issues.
Also, he should be the one taking the stand and stating that he is against the Patriot Act. When he just is quiet about it, and allows his opponents to let us know where he stands on this issue, he comes across as completely spineless.
I really don't care for any of the candidates, but in all honestly, to the average couch potato in Kentucky, I would guess that Johnson probably came out as the winner of this debate, not Rand.
Abortion is a "CRAP" issue?
Abortion is a "CRAP" issue? You're blind. The abortion issue is one of the most major issues that could be talked about, and it was the most important issue Rand could clear up for Paducah. Republicans aren't baby killers here, and they won't vote for someone who they think is pro-choice. You need to look at the bigger picture and stop being an "End-The-Fed/End-The-War" elitist. The killing of innocent life and disobedience to God's law is the reason this nation is in the war, economic and tyrannical mess we're in. Read Deuteronomy 28. I was at the debate and in my opinion, Rand came out on top to the crowd. Tons of ppl stayed to talk and get pictures with him, whereas Grayson left almost immediately. Johnson had a lot of followers but Rand showed how much of a liar he was that I don't think he has much credibility anymore.
Abortion IS a crap issue
The reason I supported Ron Paul, is because DESPITE the fact he is against abortion, that he was pushing it out of the Federal level. Rand does seem to be a waffler here. I heard him talk out both sides of his mouth .. here for the sake of the Kentucky, "non-baby killers" he started to suggest he would love to ban abortion at the national level if it were possible. You know, even murder is not a Federal crime, this is regulated at the state level.
But in any case, 2/3 of this country wants abortion LEGAL in the first trimester. So if Rand's major issue is going to be to try to spearhead this effort by a minority of the US population to make abortion illegal, this is an enormous waste of time. The country as a whole is not going to allow it.
As far as reading Deuteronomy 28, you need to respect the fact that a lot of people in this country are NOT Christian, and many not religious at all. I will respect your religious beliefs if you don't try to shove them down everybody else's throat. This is a major reason why people vote AGAINST Republicans (without even blinking) .. because Republicans are viewed as Christian fanatics who think that their set of moral codes are better than everybody else's, and thus should be imposed on everybody else. When given a choice between socialist Democrats, and religious nuts, a lot of people pick the commies (that is why Obama is sitting in office today .. oh, and not that a lot of Republicans are that far off from socialists these days.)
But as far as smaller govt., Rand really did not make any stronger a case than the typical lip service you hear from Republican candidates. He was too busy talking about abortion. Who cares if he convinces everyone that the other two "lied" about his stand; it doesn't change the fact that the other two are also very "pro-life"
Unlike his dad, Rand is NOT somebody that I would get behind and send contributions for his campaign. The best I could say about him, is that he might not stink as much as the other guys.
You are missing the point anti-fairtax
The abortion issue needs to be taken back to the local level - even the state level is too high - but it's a good step in the right direction and it's where the criminal laws concerning life can be applied.
The greatest deterrent to abortion is local shame of which - today - there is none because the issue has been claimed all the way back to Washington.
What we need are strong, courageous, moral leaders (like Medina) - and from what I've seen - Rand is pandering. If he wins the race like this - he'll lack the strength to make the required changes once he attains office.
Not that this has any
Not that this has any relevance but does Grayson come off as a homosexual to any of you? One of those grew up in a Church kind so he can't express himself fully? Maybe I'm wrong.
http://twitter.com/doctor_jones
http://youtube.com/silencemagazine
Homo???!!!...
Yes, I even caught that as he walked on the stage to his podium. His mannerisms were feminine also as was his stride to the podium. Dr.Rand Paul was not forceful enough as many have suggested, but he does not desire to appear as too reactionary as his father was branded in his run for the presidency in 2008. Sarah Palin endorsement was not needed for Dr. Rand Paul to win, and he will be forced to support her phony self in the next presidential race. Not worth the risk to my thinking! Further, I believe Dr. Rand does not want to be a parrot to his father on issues, but I think he will be a great Senator for Kentuckians. Keep on keeping on Dr.Rand Paul.
He who sells what isn't his'n, buys it back, or goes to prison!!!...-whzh-
+1
+1
Ventura 2012
he doesn't seem gay, he just
he doesn't seem gay, he just seems like another sissy that loves jesus too much for his own good.