Republican party defined - Conservatism or Libertarianism.
While the major election in Kentucky will be the 2010 general election for this United States Senate seat, the election that could have the most impact on the future of the Republican party, will be when Grayson and Paul battle during the Republican primary. The primary will pit a down the line Conservative Republican elected official against a Libertarian who has no experience, and opposes the War in Iraq.
Paul apparently supports the War in Afghanistan, however, he opposes the War in Iraq, opposes the Patriot Act which has successfully saved lives in this Nation, opposes warrant less searches which have been vital towards National security at home, and he apparently opposes all measures we have taken to fight the terrorists at home.
While one could write off his opposition to the War in Iraq, which I will never do, would Dr.Paul oppose launching an attack against Iran? Would he oppose joining with our Israeli allies and attacking Iran's nuclear program, which is a threat to both Israel and America. Would Dr.Paul oppose Military action against North Korea?
Will we support a Conservative who supports the wars, and the measures needed to fight these wars, or will we support a Libertarian who opposes a crucial front in our war on terrorism, and supports removing the measures which have made America safer over the past eight years.
That is the question that needs to be answered, because Libertarians who oppose National security already have a place, that place is not the Republican party or the United States Senate.
Dirty politics.
While Grayson has run a clean campaign against Paul, Paul's supporters have launched a deceptive website being used to slander Mr.Grayson's campaign. The website even makes issue with the fact Mr.Grayson attended Harvard University, that Republicans who happened to support the banker bailout held a fundraiser for Mr.Grayson's campaign, and makes issue of the fact Mr.Grayson supports fighting the war on terrorism with all possible resources.
I thought Libertarians we're suppose to support those who are successful and wealthy, then how come they attack Mr.Grayson because his father was successful and wealthy, and because Mr.Grayson attended Harvard University? Since when has the above mentioned become a bad thing for any American?
Also, the slandersite includes this little tidbit about health care, " Trey Grayson will fix the heck out of the health care industry. You just wait and see!", guessing from the fact Mr.Grayson has a full page dedicated to health care on his campaign website, which includes support for Tort reform, companies competing on a nationwide basis, and more consumer choice & freedom, Mr.Paul's backers are suffering from denial.
Conservatism or Libertarianism?
Will we support a Conservative who believes in the principles of National security, or will we support a Libertarian who believes in the policies of what led to the terrorist attacks, which was inadequate security, failure to recognize the enemy, and burying your head in the sand while the enemy prepares to attack.
Perhaps it me, however, I will support the Conservative.
Trey Grayson for United States Senate - www.treygrayson.com
Trey Grayson on health care - http://www.treygrayson.com/issues/health-care
Slandersite against Grayson by Paulites - www.treygraysonforsenate.com
Bookmark our site!
Consider advertising on our site!
11 comments:
And Trey Grayson's supporters launched this piece of trash:
w ww.tookookyforkentucky.com
Grayson sucks.
Trash? Paul supporters attack a man for believing in National security, being wealthy, and going to Harvard. Grayson supporters attack Paul because of his kooky beliefs......facts vs. slander......who was using slander again?
Paulites.
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism." - Ronald Reagan
While "Libertarianism" might be the soul of Conservatism, Conservatism is still Conservatism.
National defense, fighting evil & terrorists, doing anything to protect America are things Reagan believed in, something he would not compromise.
Libertarians pose a greater threat to our National defense then Liberalism, because Republicans sometimes elect Libertarians....whose opinions on war are even more radical then liberals.
"facts vs. slander......who was using slander again?"
You're either blind or a liar. That site is all about slander. When your premise is: "Ron Paul is personal friends with a leftist congressman, and thus Rand, being related to Ron, is therefore guilty of everything previously-mentioned leftist congressman believes"....well, you fail.
The stuff on treygraysonforsenate.com, is actually stuff, TRUE stuff, about Trey Grayson.
So is the face he admits to supporting Clinton in 1992.
face=fact
Well Mr.K,
if you´re right, why do you think that Senator DeMint (your favorite next presidential candidate) and almost 90% of the people involved in his new PAC, the Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF), prefer Paul over Grayson in the Kentucky race and will probably formally endorse him soon?
I highly doubt DeMint will endorse that jackass. Also, Grayson supported Clinton in 1992, as did Art Laffer in 1996 and Senator Shelby in 1992.......and Rand Paul last supported a Republican when?
If you so "highly doubt" that, I guess you´re in for a surprise.
And the question that would make much more sense than yours is ..... and Rand Paul last supported a Democrat when?
Contrary to the picture you try to paint here, Rand is not a Libertarian but a lifelong Republican with libertarian leanings - like many great Republicans were.
Some libertarians, like those who believe in defense know what they're talking about:
http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2009/09/interview-with-libertarian-republican.html
I agree with you that the military has become too powerful and therefore given politicians unlimited options. Dispersing it a bit among the 50 states could be very good.
Post a Comment