DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Religious Dick on May 19, 2010, 09:13:18 PM
-
Landslide Rand
By W. James Antle, III on 5.19.10 @ 6:09AM
On Tuesday, the Tea Party movement scored its first major statewide victory over the Republican establishment. Bowling Green ophthalmologist Rand Paul trounced Kentucky Secretary of State Trey Grayson by 59 percent to 35 percent, winning the GOP nomination to succeed retiring Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY).
Grayson was the handpicked candidate of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and the National Republican Senatorial Committee. In a normal year, that might have assured him the nomination. Instead such ties became a liability, one Grayson exacerbated by demonstrating a sense of entitlement to a Senate seat last seen when Martha Coakley turned up her nose at shaking hands with voters outside Fenway Park.
Rand Paul tapped into the primary electorate's anger at Barack Obama, bipartisan bailouts of private industry, and the steady growth of the federal government. But the son of 11-term libertarian Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) won in large part because he knew when to follow in his father's footsteps and when to chart his own course.
"Have you ever made an embarrassing mistake?" conservative Christian broadcaster James Dobson asked. Dobson went on to say that he did when he initially endorsed Grayson. "Senior members of the GOP told me Dr. Paul is pro-choice and that he opposes many conservative perspectives, so I endorsed his opponent," Dobson said. "But now I've received further information from OB/GYNs in Kentucky whom I trust, and from interviewing the candidate himself."
Grayson tried to present Paul as a caricature of libertarianism. His campaign manager described Paul as a "pro-choice marijuana advocate." In fact, Paul was -- like his father -- more conservative on abortion, marriage, immigration, and other social issues. The younger Paul described himself as "100 percent pro-life" and even though he preferred to overturn Roe v. Wade through federal court jurisdiction stripping he pledged to support the mainstream pro-life movement on national legislation.
After misrepresenting Paul's views on social issues, few voters trusted Grayson when he shifted to foreign policy where he might have been on more solid ground. The Grayson campaign enlisted Dick Cheney, Rudy Giuliani, and Rick Santorum, among other supporters of a neoconservative foreign policy. Yet their attacks did not move the polls -- and here Rand Paul did not completely follow his father's playbook.
Consider the question of whether 9/11 was blowback from American foreign policy. When the subject came up in the 2008 Republican presidential debates, Paul and Giuliani squared off. A day after the exchange, Paul triumphantly presented a reading list to educate the former New York City mayor on the theory that U.S. interventionism could make American less safe from terrorism. But he was perfunctory in addressing Giuliani's direct charge: that the Texas congressman blamed America for the terrorist attacks.
When Rand Paul faced similar criticism, he didn't spend time explaining blowback to Republican primary voters. Instead he energetically disassociated himself from "blame America first." He didn't distance himself from his father, who he noted lived near the Pentagon at the time of the 9/11 attacks. But he did strike a very different tone.
"We were attacked on 9/11 and fighting back was the right thing to do," the younger Paul said, looking straight into the television camera. "Trey Grayson, your shameful TV ad is a lie and it dishonors you." Rand continued to oppose the Iraq war, but emphasized he was "strong on defense," opposing civilian trials for terror detainees, and said he was not yet ready to pull out of Afghanistan or close Guantanamo Bay.
Paul united his father's national army of libertarian followers, who became his avid fundraising base, with a much larger group of rank-and-file conservatives who were ready for someone who would fight for limited government. It was a union of Ron Paul Republicans and Rush Limbaugh Republicans. In April, an exit poll taken at the Tea Party protest at the National Mall showed the demonstrators' favorite politicians were Sarah Palin and Ron Paul. Rand Paul, with his focus on the size of government, unified both wings of the Tea Party movement.
"Grayson wanted this primary to be about national security because that's where they thought they had the best opposition research," Louisville Republican strategist Scott Jennings told Politico. "But this race was about spending and fiscal issues from the beginning, and Grayson's lack of focus on that cost him early momentum which he never regained."
Paul's enemies in the GOP still hope to count him out come November. The early polling data suggests they should pack a lunch. "I have a message, a message from the tea party, a message that is loud and clear and does not mince words: We have come to take our government back," he said in his victory speech. "What I say to Washington is, 'Watch out, here we come.'"
Washington has been put on notice.
W. James Antle, III is associate editor of The American Spectator.
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/05/19/landslide-rand (http://spectator.org/archives/2010/05/19/landslide-rand)
-
CBS's Rodriguez to Rand Paul: What About Dems Who Say You're 'Way Too Controversial'?
By: Kyle Drennen
May 19, 2010
In an interviewing with senate primary winner Rand Paul on Wednesday's CBS Early Show, co-host Maggie Rodriguez asked the Kentucky Republican about Democratic spin: "What do you say to Democrats who actually are happy about your victory in this primary?...ready to pounce on you in the general election, saying that your views are way too controversial and they could take this Republican seat?"
Paul dismissed the idea and noted the unpopularity of Washington Democrats in the state: "I say, bring it on, and please, please bring President Obama to Kentucky. We'd love for him to campaign down here." Rodriguez acknowledged that fact by pointing out: "It didn't work too well for Arlen Specter to have President Obama on his side." Paul added: "the Democrats will really have to run away from President Obama if they have any chance down here."
Earlier in the interview, Rodriguez wondered if Paul could garner enough Republican support: "a lot of people say that you have your work cut out for you in the general election because how will you unite a GOP party...53% of voters who voted for your opponent in this primary don't like you, 43% said they wouldn't vote for you." After Paul discussed efforts to unify, Rodriguez followed up: "Do you think that your victory gives the tea party legitimacy? Will we see this become a legitimate political party?"
Prior to Rodriguez's interview with Paul, correspondent Jeff Glor reported on electoral results in various states on Tuesday, emphasizing one in particular: "The special congressional race here in Johnstown to replace the late John Murtha. This was seen as a critical bellwether....Democrat Mark Critz, a former John Murtha aide, was triumphant....Beating Republican Tim Burns in a blue collar district that actually went for John McCain in 2008."
Glor noted how both Democrats and Republicans "may have learned something" from the special election result, as a sound bite was featured from the Politics Editor for The Atlantic, Marc Ambinder: "Republicans are going to have to rethink their strategy, perhaps, of trying to nationalize the election, making it a referendum against Obama and the Democrats. Because, in this district, it didn't work." In reality, Critz ran against national Democratic figures like Nancy Pelosi and against ObamaCare.
No expert was brought on to discuss the lack of influence the Obama White House had on the Pennsylvania senate primary.
Here is a full transcript of Rodriguez's May 19th interview with Paul:
MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: Joining us this morning from Bowling Green, Kentucky, is the winner of the Republican primary, supported by the tea party, Rand Paul. Senator-elect, good morning ? I mean, excuse me, not yet.
RAND PAUL: Good to be with you.
RODRIGUEZ: I guess you're optimistic that that will be-
PAUL: I'd like to skip the November ? yeah, I'd like to skip the November election, also.
RODRIGUEZ: Oops, oops. Are you optimistic that that will be the outcome?
PAUL: Well, things look good in Kentucky. You know, if you look at all the polls, John McCain won Kentucky overwhelmingly, in a not so good year for Republicans. And President Obama's less popular in our state than he's ever been. And he never was very popular in Kentucky. So I think we have a very good chance in the fall.
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Tea Party Politics; Paul Wins, Capitalizes on Frustration]
RODRIGUEZ: But a lot of people say that you have your work cut out for you in the general election because how will you unite a GOP party that, according to at least one poll, has an unfavorable view of you, 53% of voters who voted for your opponent in this primary don't like you, 43% said they wouldn't vote for you in the general election.
PAUL: Well, the interesting thing is we got nearly 60% of the vote, so I think that's a pretty good mandate from the Republican Party. And the other thing is, is that we're going to unify. I'm going to meet with Senator McConnell on Saturday. We've been talking, actually, for weeks now, about unifying. I've been talking with the Republican Party structure, and I think we will be unified going in to the fall. And I think the message we have is one that not only do Republicans like, a lot of independents like what I have to say. The tea party message is popular well outside the Republican Party.
RODRIGUEZ: But the tea party and the Republican Party, as you're stating, are not the same thing. Do you think that your victory gives the tea party legitimacy? Will we see this become a legitimate political party?
PAUL: No, I don't see the tea party really becoming a political party. But I see it having an influence on both parties. But I also see that the tea party really has ramifications outside the party, and that I think independents are attracted to it, as well.
RODRIGUEZ: What do you say to Democrats who actually are happy about your victory in this primary? Because they are ready to pounce on you in the general election, saying that your views are way too controversial and they could take this Republican seat?
PAUL: I say, bring it on, and please, please bring President Obama to Kentucky. We'd love for him to campaign down here.
RODRIGUEZ: Didn't work too well for Arlen Specter, did it?
PAUL: Run that by me one more time?
RODRIGUEZ: It didn't work too well for Arlen Specter to have President Obama on his side. What do you think that says?
PAUL: Yeah, I think you're right. I think you're right. And actually, in our Democrat primary a few years ago, Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama by 30 points, and he's a lot less popular than he was. And so really, I think his message ? the Democrats will really have to run away from President Obama if they have any chance down here. And he's the leader of their party. It's just going to be very difficult for them in Kentucky.
RODRIGUEZ: Alright, Senator-elect wanna-be Rand Paul. I'm sorry for the slip. Although I'm sure you didn't mind it too much. Thank you, sir.
PAUL: Not at all. Thank you.
Naaaa, no bias here (http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2010/20100519015808.aspx)
-
Under Fire (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100520/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2167)
-
Under Fire (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100520/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2167)
I don't think it'll hurt him a bit. I'm not seeing the screaming coming from anyone who was planning to support him in the first place, and on top of that, I think the public is getting truly sick and tired of the Cry Racist! contingent. For all the hue and cry, my money says this will roll off of him like water off a duck's back.
-
]Starting in the 1950's, you started to see in local, privately owned businesses, especially restaurants, the sign that reads "We reserve the Right to Refuse to Serve Anyone". This was the way that proprietors had to tell Balck people to go elsewhere. Wherever you saw this sign, there were no Black patrons. This is Rand Paul's and Ron Paul's riff on civil rights: Gee, we are really really against discrimination, but private property rights trump all other rights, including the right to build a restaurant on a public highway and refuse service to all you do not like traveling on that highway. Paul claims that if you take away the right to bar people for racial reasons, then you also take away the right of bar owners to prevent patrons from bringing in guns to their bars.
It is a bogus argument, in my opinion. If a business is open to the public, then it should serve the public. Customers cannot expect to have the owner bar people from a place of business because of their race: being Black, Hispanic or Asian is not contagious. On the other hand people with guns, especially in a place selling alcohol, DO pose a threat to others, so the owner clearly has a right to bar them, as he would to bar people with bombs or smallpox.
I would not vote for either Paul.
-
I don't think it'll hurt him a bit. I'm not seeing the screaming coming from anyone who was planning to support him in the first place, and on top of that, I think the public is getting truly sick and tired of the Cry Racist! contingent. For all the hue and cry, my money says this will roll off of him like water off a duck's back.
Well, it's not only what he says, but how he says it. He doesn't come across as particularly articulate during the Maddow interview.
And yeah, the people gunning for him wouldn't have voted for him anyway as evidenced by this quote from the NPR guy:
Siegel, when reached by phone Thursday, said he wasn't sure why the civil-rights question didn't come up since the Courier-Journal editorial. "It's the first time I've interviewed him," he said. "If I interviewed him a month ago, I would have asked him the same thing."
The reason for asking Paul that question, Siegel said, is because "the overarching question is, 'Just how conservative, how radical, how extremist are you?' "
But I guess it is ok for the NPR guy to have that bias since, so many are doing the same thing with Kagan. Assuming she is extremist, radical and out of the mainstream because Obama nominated her.
Besides Paul really isn't the target, the Tea Party is, since they are claiming Paul as their poster boy. And we all know, how racist the Tea Party is. Look at both Pauls.
-
I see the point Paul is trying to make: property rights trump all ohter rights, because they are personal rights.
A racist can say "we oughta send them n*ggers back to Africa", because we have freedom of speech, and unless he tries to actually kidnap Black people and send them back to Africa, he has every right to say this. (of course Paul would never EVER say this). Now, if someone has the right to deny entry to their home of anyone he wishes, then how could he not have the same right to deny entry to his business? FPL and Exxon can deny me the right to their boardrooms, so how can Bubba's White Trash Diner not deny entry to Black customers, just because Bubba and his customers do not wish to eat with Black people? Of course, Paul would Never, EVER eat at Bubba's.
The answer is in the word PUBLIC. All Bubba has to do is to make Bubba's a private club: "Bubba's Private White Trash Dining Club". He can sell memberships and then admit only members.
But as I see it, if Bubba wants to forgo the hassle of membership cards and some bouncer at the door checking for membership cards, then civil rights trumps property rights, and Bubba has to serve everyone. Being as people can get shot with guns, Bubba still has the rights to protect his clients and himself from gun-wielding nutjobs by banning firearms. No one was ever shot with a Negro or a Mexican.
I assume that this private club thing is legal: here in Miami, we have private clubs open basically to only Jews, only Whites (including Jews, I think: this is Miami) and only Blacks. There are also private Chinese clubs, but being as the signs are all in Chinese, non Chinese never even try to enter, being as hardly any non Chinese read even simplified characters.
-
Shooting back (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/2010_Elections/rand-paul-fires-back-critics-civil-rights-act/story?id=10705651)
-
When does his honeymoon start?
Paul sounds like he is whining.
-
Throw that man a wedge of cheddar to go with all that whining. No, make it a whole wheel. Roll it over him.
Someone needs to tell this pitiful turkey that you don't get a honeymoon when you win a primary election. You have to wait for the general election for that. What he said to Maddow was that he would have been against any attempt to ban discrimination in private businesses. He thinks private business is sacred and should be able to do whatever it wishes.
He refuses again and again to ANSWER THE F*CKING QUESTION that is put at him again and again and AGAIN and THEN complains and whines because he thinks that he should be allowed to waltz around every word he has said for the past 10 years without disavowing even one dumb thing he has said.
What he really said was that he is against increasing the minimum wage, no matter how low it might be, he will allow Big Oil and Big Coal to do whatever tickles their corporate fancies, and he will oppose all regulation of business forever.
And like all the rest of the moron Republicans, he refuses to call the DEMOCRATIC Party by its proper name. Bury him in teabags for that.
-
Since you don't live in Kentucky, you cannot comment on this.
-
d'oh ;)
-
There are also private Chinese clubs, but being as the signs are all in Chinese, non Chinese never even try to enter, being as hardly any non Chinese read even simplified characters.
here in s.f. we have all chinese(no english words) restaurants , but non-chinese loves going to those .the food is way better than anywhere else. the reason it`s pure chinese is because there is no english words for those foods. the waitress would translate as best she can whats on the menu. the flavours are different.
it like ordering a prime rib in a hong kong restaurant , it`ll taste different
-
It appears that Miami is not like San Francisco. Miami has nothing you could call a Chinatown.
I have a Chinese friend who tells me about several clubs. Some require memberships to enter, others have expositions of art and culture and such. I know of no restaurants that do not have signs that are not in Roman letters, though the translation of the name of the restaurant is often totally different from the name in Chinese.
As for Paul, I can and will comment on him as much as I like. I don't think anyone here is from Kentucky, either. One Paul out of 435 in the House is really all we need. No one needs another in the Senate.
Ru Paul would be more amusing than Ron Paul OR Rand Paul. DC has not had a decent transvestite since J Edgar donned his last pinafore.
-
took me a moment
college mandarin- romanization-
that bring back memories
very common for the name to not match the translation.
I get that alot with movies also.
I`m not sure here in california , we got those kinds of clubs
probly wrong
-
Chinese seem to like names that sort of rhyme: Sun Sun, etc.
In English names that rhyme tend to sound dopey.
There are two ways of writing Chinese in the Roman alphabet One is called Pin Yin and was developed by missionaries, and then there is a newer system. Neither is very useful to English speakers, as the pronunciation is often unrecognizable by Chinese listeners when spoken.
Mao Tse T'ung is actually pronounced more like "Mousie Dung."
Chao En-Lai is more like Joe Own Lie
-
Rand Paul Is Too Thoughtful? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvFsCo1EMig#)
-
Mao Tse T'ung -mouse dung
I would never of made that connection.
especially since mao is also means cat.
mandarin just sounds angry to me, cantonese sounds calming
but I`m cantonese so I might be bias
-
Mao Tse T'ung -mouse dung
I would never of made that connection.
especially since mao is also means cat.
mandarin just sounds angry to me, cantonese sounds calming
but I`m cantonese so I might be bias
I have heard that Mao himself never learned Mandarin, could that be true?
-
One has to wonder what Paul was doing on the Maddow show in the first place.
-
I agree that it was politically unwise for Rand to appear on Maddow's show. He had to know that his opposition to civil rights and disability rights based on the absolute right of a property holder would be the main item on her agenda.
But Rand Paul is an ideologue. He actually does believe that property rights trump everything, and believes that explaining this to the electorate is a totally logical argument. It is a bit like the Ayatollah's rejection of the Baha'i religion: Allah opposes Baha'i, they are British agents, they are the work of Satan and all moral people must oppose them: to not do so is an anathema to Allah.
Paul says that property rights are sacred, and may not be violated to dictate the rights of the minorities or the disabled. Even though a business owner COULD set up his business as a private membership club, he should not have to do so. He believes that logic dictates that discrimination is a bad business plan, and logic will dictate that any sane businessman will choose not to discriminate. Logic, therefore, trumps property rights, just as property rights trump civil rights.
In Rand Paul's world, all offices would have a ground floor so that no proprietor would have to build an expensive elevator for disabled employees. But of course, this is silly, because the business owner will simply not hire a disabled employee as a rule, since that avoids all such problems: they can rent the cheaper office on the second or third floor and not have to provide the elevator, either.
Good governance depends on compromise. The US government already suffers from excess polarization. The whole "Party of NO" strategy is based on a refusal to compromise. This is particularly true of the Senate, where one stubborn jackass can block everything. This Dr. Paul should stick to medicine.
-
This Dr. Paul should stick to medicine.
This will be decided by the people of Kentucky, not by you, since you don't live there.
This issue is moot because Paul said he would have supported the civil rights act and voted for it. Move along.
-
You won't decide this either, and I have as much right to my opinion than you do.
It shows that Paul is a stubborn ideologue. As I said, we do not need such creatures in the Senate.
You move along.
-
Your opinion is useless because you don't live in Kentucky. You will not change the results there one teensy little bit.
You are the stubborn ideologue. Since when did you ever compromise with a Republican on anything? What a joke.
-
If I opened a restrant , just as sure as shooting, the first thing I would get would be a bus load of people dressed as Hitler and Eva Brawn. Next night the Jaun Peron fan club would have dinner there then Friday night the Ninjas and Pitsburgh Pirates would come in together.
Couldn't turn any of them away could I?
-
You would have to have either a strange restaurant or a weird reputation to attract Eva Braun and Adolf Hitler impersonators. Juan Peron has been deceased for many years now, and he has few fans even in Argentina. Eva was always more popular than Juan, and she died 57 years ago. I can report that the guards at the Evita Peron Museum in Buenos Aires do not seem to be real fans. They were as pro-Evita only in the way that the museum guards at the Museum of natural History are pro-dinosaur.
I am not sure of what Ninjas or Pittsburgh Pirates like to eat, but I doubt that they share common tastes. I know of no restaurants that have ever been menaced by either, other than in a couple of Chinese Bruce Lee films.
In my opinion, you would not have a problem with any of these people.
The probability of all appearing as you say would be considerably less than "shooting", in my opinion.
-
That was a very long winded comment, but you didn't answer the question.
-
These types are indeed scarce as you say , but they concentrate behind Chuck Norris as they follow him around. So if my restraunt became the favoriate of Chuck Norris I would have one really good customer and fifty to an hundred Chuck haters.
-
I am not sure of what Ninjas or Pittsburgh Pirates like to eat, but I doubt that they share common tastes. I know of no restaurants that have ever been menaced by either, other than in a couple of Chinese Bruce Lee films.
Seafood!
-
I agree pirates and ninjas probably would both like seafood. Pittsburgh Pirates, however, are named for inland river pirates, such as those who used to hang out in the Pittsburgh area. There is no seafood in the Monongahela, so far as I know.
When I think about going to a restaurant, I do not consider the probability of seeing Chuck Norris at all, ever. I once saw a guy with a Chuck Norris jacket in a Waffle House, once. It was uneventful.
-
I agree pirates and ninjas probably would both like seafood. Pittsburgh Pirates, however, are named for inland river pirates, such as those who used to hang out in the Pittsburgh area. There is no seafood in the Monongahela, so far as I know.
When I think about going to a restaurant, I do not consider the probability of seeing Chuck Norris at all, ever. I once saw a guy with a Chuck Norris jacket in a Waffle House, once. It was uneventful.
Of course you didn't see the ninjas , ..
...duh..
, what part of Ninja didn't you understand?
(http://www.topatoco.com/graphics/00000001/goat-ninja.png)