30 votes

Rand Paul in an Awkward Situation in Kentucky

Despite having already begun to launch (ridiculous) campaign ads against likely Democratic opponent Alison Lundergan Grimes, it now appears Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell may indeed face a rumored primary challenge for his Senate seat in 2014. The Daily Caller reports:

It looks like Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell is going to get a Republican primary challenger after all.

Louisville businessman Matt Bevin plans to kick off his campaign with eight stops across the Bluegrass state, starting Wednesday. He’s expected to campaign against McConnell from the right.

According to a media advisory, he plans to announce his intentions Wednesday for the Senate race at the Kentucky State Capitol in Frankfort. He’ll hold subsequent events in Newport and Louisville.

McConnell is a long time “big government” Republican, voting in favor of just about every awful bill that libertarians and genuine, small government conservatives have derided for years – TARP, NAFTA, No Child Left Behind, PATRIOT ACT, indefinite detention of Americans, et al. If you hate it, McConnell probably supported it.

Despite his horrendous record, McConnell has taken many steps in the last year in an attempt to avoid a “Tea Party” primary challenge from the right. Last year he hired Jesse Benton, Ron Paul’s former campaign manager, in an ill-advised maneuver to try to capture the grassroots. Perhaps McConnell hadn’t done his research, but Benton had drawn the ire of many of Ron Paul’s supporters for many reasons, up to and including allegations that he sabotaged Ron Paul’s 2012 Presidential Campaign.

Continue Reading




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I realize that.

I've been doing what you are doing now on county and state central committees in the GOP since 1994.

The question was, what COUNTY GOVERNMENT form did you sign that was an oath to support Mitt Romney.

You asserted you signed one. I don't believe you did. I don't need a link. I'll trust what you tell me. But you have not answered the question.

The second question was what party oaths did you sign? No link required, just state it.

My assertion, that you countered illogically, was that PARTY oaths of loyalty have no standing in law. I'm looking for your LOGICAL counterpoint, which you have as of yet not provided.

Thanks.

OK

MY COUNTY GOP REGISTERED IT'S BY-LAWS WITH THE COUNTY CLERK AND TO ACCEPT MY ELECTED COMMITTEE (representing a district in my county) SEAT, I HAD TO SIGN THE LOYALTY TO MY COUNTY GOP BY-LAWS IN THE COUNTY CLERKS OFFICE which state that I WILL SUPPORT THE GOP PRIMARY ELECTION WINNER / NOMINEE. Romney WON the primary, he became the nominee. romney, AS THE NAMED REGISTERED NOMINEE WITH THE COUNTY and THE STATE, I would have broken the oath to the BY-LAWS, if I voted for ANYONE BUT THE REGISTERED AND DECLARED WINNER OF THE CA PRIMARY ELECTION.

In addition I sign a I WILL NOT COMMIT PERJURY, Form 470, registered with the county and state. That if I do not UPHOLD the oaths I sign I will be subject to perjury http://www.thefreedictionary.com/perjury

OK this was the info I was looking for.

An oath to bylawys, filed or not filed does not have a legal standing. As such, it is not perjury were you to break that oath.

It may have a moral understanding to you, I appreciate that.

With regards to actual law, like I said before, and there's been no evidence to the contrary, I'm almost certain that any statutory language surrounding loyalty oaths contains verbiage regarding your "best effort".

And, again, if despite your best efforts to do otherwise, you voted for Ron Paul, there would have been no law broken.

There would also have been no perjury unless you were brought before a judge and lied.

It is not up to my moral understanding

It is because my committee black balled me from the signing party, made it very clear they did not support Ron Paul, and were not going to support Ron Paul, that I was not invited by them on the committee, not welcomed by them, and any reason, or excuse, short of breaking my bones, they would eliminate me any way possible.

I was reminded of my oath every meeting, and since it was a hostile committee, and I did not know any attorney that was qualified or interested in representing me (gratis, locally), and I had a lot on my plate to deal with besides challenging them over loyalty oaths, it was in my best interest to stay in the game and keep my seat.

(The former chair of our committee is in prison for what appears to be to be a frame up, doing 25 years, I was reminded of him every meeting, as in what can happen; and in this area, things happen).

I knew there was no way Ron Paul was going to win, and if it had not been for Rand Paul's endorsement of Romney, I might have made the mistake of writing in Ron Paul. Our ballots come in the mail and we return them in a provided envelope that we sign, so secret ballots are for those who don't understand that one can read the name on the envelope and match the ballot inside. The past Treasurer of the committee was the prescinct elections inspector, and since I watched the polls on primary election day, they told me that they opened envelopes and placed the ballots in the box. Do I think they would have looked at my ballot? YOU BET. Do I want to get in legal entanglements over an election there was NO WAY Ron Paul could not win? NO!

I signed oaths to UPHOLD the constitution and the By-Laws of the MCRCC. WHICH STATES that I WILL SUPPORT THE GOP WINNER OF THE PRIMARY ELECTION, in 2012, that was (I'm VERY SORRY TO SAY) Robme. So, had I written in Ron Paul, and my ballot was seen, I would have committed perjury by NOT UPHOLDING the MCRCC By-LAWS which I signed voluntary to recieve my elected seat, and as an elected seat, my committee, with the help of the CA GOP, could have, and I believe they would have, filed against me for Perjury, by NOT following the BY-LAWS.

They can afford to put me before a judge, and would have LOVED to put me before a judge, to show the COUNTY that RON PAUL REPUBLICANS do NOT keep the oaths they sign with two witnesses in the County Clerk's office. It would be a HUGE blow to Ron Paul.. furthermore, as the NW Pon Paul team leader, my district receieved more support for Ron Paul than 50 other counties. We came in third place out of 53 counties. So, it would have been a perfect smear, and worth the price for many laughs, for the CA GOP, and the past committee's good standing in the CA GOP. As it is, most left the committee. And the chair, when it was over, summed it all up, "None of us supported Romney in the primary". None of us know how he won.

Politics is not a Sport

I'm sick of the sports treatment, with teams, popcorn, and winners and losers. The media need to stop reporting strategic errors, points, and trades.

What about facts? What about real issues? What about character?

It is the sports reporting memtality that cost voters a real chance to change histoy with Ron Paul.

Libertarians are "playing" a win-win "game," between voters. No losers!

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

Libertarians are playing a win-win game?

They haven't won an election, so how do you figure they are playing win-win? They have NOTHING, so they have NOTHING to lose. Is that a win-win? NOTHING is a win-win?

It's not about the "L" party, it's about the ideals...

I don't think he's specifically talking about the big "L" Libertarian Party, I believe he is talking about all those people who, whether they be registered or running as a republican or libertarian or independent, hold small-gov't, constitutional conservative, individualist ideals in their heart, and apply them in their proposed policies.

Mitch McConnell, may be a 'Republican', but he's not a Ron Paul type republican, he's a John McCain, Lindsey Graham type republican. Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Justin Amash, Tom Davis, etc., etc. are all republicans. Then you have your Garry Johnsons, your Bob Barrs, and others from several different parties.

The point is their ideals are similar, or consistant with 'libertarian' (small L) principles. That is really all that matters.
I do believe the strategy you support is to swing the GOP back towards small-gov't, individual, constitutional rights, freedoms, and limitations on gov't.

Please express that, when you make a comment like the one above. Many people here will take that as a knock on libertarianism, not just the "L" party.

PEOPLE OPPOSING TYRANNY - Real Grass Roots!
Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

I don't agree

When I got on board, it was, "Join the Ron Paul rEVOLution". The rEVOLution was all about changing the GOP, and many former Libertarians, such as myself, who spent decades losing elections, saw that Ron Paul's invitation was an open door to a major party where we could win our ideas.

Then came the Liberty Movement(LM), and this was for all those who refused to join the GOP for their own personal bias. While that would be fine, what wasn't fine, is that they were the ones who worked, and continue to work, at undermining the rEVOLution.

Wonder where most of the rEVOLuton is? They left DP long ago. There is very little support here, and I am aware that I am barely tolerated, where years ago, I was greatly supported to the point, I joined the GOP and became a committee member. If I was to join DP today, I would not join the GOP because the little "l" of "ideas", works to keep people OUT of the rEVOLution.

A few weeks ago I made a topic post about the changes Wiki was making to political isms. "libertarianism" has become austrian economics, which they claim, is owned by the left wing, Noam Chompsky. I have spent the majority of my political life in either the libertarian Party or as an indy (to fight for ballot access and debates, since we lost that in 1992), and it was divided left/right, Chomsky was never known as a Libertarian, and it leaned to the right, hard.

The LM promotes "libertarianism", not as econimics as wiki, but as a means to learn to: hate government, hate America, hate Israel and smoke pot. While I have been on DP longer than most here, and did far more to get Ron Paul as president than the vast majority here, I am not welcomed by most self identified NEW libertarians, who are autoritarian and collective (notice the group downvotes within seconds of a post I make. They have every right to do that, I am not complaining, merely pointing it out).

I am knocking the NEW do nothing, go nowhere, authoritarian collective that poses as libertarians, just as the knock me for joining the GOP and not backing down or running away.

Peace be with you.

I can't

Wait for Bevin to start calling out McConnell on past votes. How will Paul react? How much more stupid shit can Benton say? It's like watching a train wreck!