Why The Choice Must Be Rand Paul

Elections are about choices, and in the GOP primary on May 18th the choice for republicans should be Rand Paul. Here are ten of the top reasons why:

1. Americans have grown justifiably weary of “politics as usual”. In 2008 an emerging sentiment in our nation helped propel a man into the Presidency in large part because he gave people hope that he would change the way things were going to be done in Washington DC. He didn't, and now Obama’s popularity has plummeted. Yet ever since his campaign ended, the cry for change has grown louder, and has spread like wildfire throughout the nation. Along the way it has also ignited a spark in the hearts of those loyal to the Republican Party and those who join in spirit the respectful yet insistent members of the TEA party movement calling for a return to conservative principles. Rand Paul is born of this movement; he brings to the Kentucky GOP much needed new blood. He alone offers a fresh break from the politics of the past. Rand Paul articulates a more sincere conservative vision than Grayson whose scripted responses seem to repeat as if by rote the chant of the old guard party line. If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over yet expecting different results, then perhaps it’s time for Kentucky republicans to come to our senses by remembering our history, and our battles. In the beginning it was the Republican Party which challenged an entrenched political system throughout the Commonwealth offering the people fresh ideas and new blood. We were the challengers to a system of patronage and hand picked successors which was closed to all but a handful of political insiders. Rand Paul’s challenge is reminiscent of our party’s heritage, his campaign helps us remember our our struggles as outsiders to the system and his inspiration offers our stuporous party a better chance for re invigoration. Our choice next Tuesday will become the face and the future of our party. In the climate of that new future Rand Paul has shown that he will be a more credible representative of conservatism and republicanism than Trey Grayson.

2. Rand Paul has clearly articulated a vision designed to meet head on the fiscal crisis facing our nation. He offers details rather than the kind of platitudes we've come to expect from more seasoned politicians. His answers to questions are thoughtful which inspires confidence in him across a broad spectrum of voters. His answers to our problems may seem tough at times, but when the going gets tough, the tough know how to get going. Grayson by comparison has offered what at best can be described as timid responses to hard questions, appearing more often to agree with Dr. Paul than thinking on his own. With Rand Paul Kentucky republicans get a man who says “I Will”, with Grayson they'd get a man who says “Me Too”.

3. Rand Paul has attracted incredible national attention, not only because he is articulate and clear thinking, but because he represents the mood of the country without the need to offer hollow platitudes. If elected it is likely that he will become a rising star in his own right, which will be good for Kentucky. Grayson by comparison has hitched his wagon to fading stars, and his campaign has demonstrated that he is unable to stand on his own the way Paul does. Kentucky deserves two votes in the United States Senate and only with Rand Paul will that be possible.

4. Rand Paul is the only true conservative. Grayson on the other hand was raised and schooled in the home of democrats, educated by progressives. It is time for Northern Kentucky Republicans to remember from whence he came: For decades we republicans in Northern Kentucky fought lopsided battles against an entrenched democratic political machine. The grease which kept that machine running was money raised in part from those influenced by Grayson’s father, Merwin Grayson II. For decades Mer was a powerful force within the democratic power base against which republicans battled. We fought for the right to bring new ideas and new candidates into the political debate. We lost many of those battles before we began to win. Yet all the while Republicans were working to build the party and to break the democratic stranglehold on Northern Kentucky, in his home around his dinner table, in rightful admiration of his father and his political friends, Merwin Grayson III (Trey) was being indoctrinated in the ideology and political strategy of democrats, liberals and progressives. He registered as a democrat, worked as a Clinton democrat and only switched parties after it became clear that his side was losing more than it was winning. Grayson's background as a democrat, his decision to switch parties and the wonderful work he has done for the GOP are all things for which he should be proud. Both Grayson and Paul are men of respect. And out of respect for their families, their mentors and their friends neither would ever disavow the people who helped shape him and instill in him his core principles. As such it is worthy to note that when it comes to having had instilled into him core republican principles, that description belongs exclusively to Rand Paul.

5. Paul is a first time candidate motivated to run, he says, by the urgency of the financial and leadership crises facing our nation. In this sense he better represents our founder’s image of “the citizen legislator”. Grayson has succeeded in becoming what he always aspired to be, a career politician. There is a stark contrast between the motivations of these two men as they seek the nomination of the Republican Party.

6. I conducted one of the first interviews with Rand Paul. I asked him why he formed an exploratory committee at a time when Jim Bunning was still in the race. He said that Trey Grayson’s decision to run inspired him. He was concerned that if the power brokers in the Republican Party were allowed to “hand pick” the nominee, that the people would be offered no meaningful choice. He immediately expressed his loyalty to and respect for Jim Bunning. Grayson on the other hand conspired with Mitch McConnell to run against Jim Bunning. Together they worked behind the scenes to elbow Bunning out of the race. Republican voters would be well advised to remember that this is not the first example of Grayson's propensity for disloyalty. It must be remembered that he announced plans to run against a sitting republican Governor, Ernie Fletcher, at Fancy Farm. Of course he abandoned that ill conceived plot but only after his disloyalty caused many republicans to rail against him. When we are asked to consider all of the good work Trey has done as a loyal republican, we must not ignore the fact that his record also includes both historic and recent instances where he has demonstrated a lack of party loyalty and, in the case of Jim Bunning, a man Grayson called “his mentor”, a lack of personal loyalty as well. As such, republican voters have every right to be concerned that his past behavior may well foretell his potential conduct in office should he be elected to the United States Senate. Might he abandon the party of conservative principles, as Arlen Specter and others have? Might he stray from the conservative conscience of Kentucky when tempted by the seductive flirtations of those offering him personal advancement in exchange for his vote? Grayson’s record is of his own making. His record of "political" philandering squarely places his "political" fidelity in issue.

7. Rand Paul has managed to raise a surprising amount of money without the taint of special interest groups and lobbyists. Grayson on the other hand has climbed in bed with special interests, their Political Action Committees and been the debutante at Beltway Balls sponsored by the very groups who worked to help AIG and other beneficiaries of Federal bailout money. Lately, with Grayson down in the polls by double digits one of these “shadowy” secretive special interest groups linked to some of the most notorious smear campaigns in modern history has funneled money into Kentucky to help Grayson. If one is known by the company he keeps, Grayson, will be seen by many as having chosen to lie down with dogs and covered with their fleas. He made his choice and for that reason expect many to reject him as their choice.

8. Because Trey Grayson is the state official who presides over elections, he had to know that someday he would be called upon to address concerns regarding the “appearance of impropriety” should he insist upon presiding over his own election. When that day came Grayson solicited and then celebrated an ethics opinion which said he need not step aside. Grayson could have taken a higher road. He chose otherwise. Kentucky deserves better.

9. Rand Paul offers Kentucky “fresh legs”. His clearly articulated vision for America demonstrates that he will be ready on day one to help with the formidable task of setting our nation’s ship of state back on the right course. He offers much needed “new blood” to the Republican Party of Kentucky; he is not a “hand picked” career politician and has none of the political baggage dragging behind Grayson. In fact the worst things Grayson has been able to say about Rand Paul he had to be piece together from snippets of Paul's speeches, and for the most part taken out of context. This has resulted in Rand Paul saying many times that the Grayson campaign has been "intellectually dishonest". If Grayson has tried to fool the public then he has demonstrated little or no respect for the intelligence of voters. Even Dr. James Dobson says that “senior GOP leaders” tried to mislead him about Rand Paul in order to secure his endorsement for Trey Grayson. Mitch McConnell is one of Grayson's primary supporters, and certainly ranks among the “senior” leaders of the GOP. Mitch must know exactly to whom Dr. Dobson was referring yet endorsed Grayson's campaign anyway. In contrast Rand Paul’s campaign has offered Kentucky a fresh, clear, strong, conservative message while Grayson’s campaign has only sputtered, spewing forth misleading information engaging in dirty tricks and demonstrating a fundamental disrespect for the will and intelligence of the 2010 republican voter. Voters have every right to consider political campaigns as a preview of the performance in office of the candidates they seek to advance. The lesson learned from watching these two campaigns, is really very simple: voting against intellectual dishonesty is a no brainer.

10. Dr. Rand Paul has a life of accomplishment outside of politics. His motivations for running have been thoroughly vetted and are soundly based upon solid conservative principles. His respect for the traditions of our party, his respect for Jim Bunning, his respect for the intelligence of the voters, the transparency of his campaign and his ability to clearly communicate his thoughts, his beliefs and his vision for the future truly breathes a breath of fresh air into the world of Kentucky politics which the public sees as having been run for far too long out of smoke filled rooms, cloaked in secrecy, and populated by shadowy characters. The Republican Party of Kentucky should always be looking for a set of fresh legs. It will thrive with an infusion of new blood. And perhaps what is even more important, Kentucky can come to the aid of our nation at this critical time in our history by sending a man to Washington with the vision, energy and principled leadership to help solve our most pressing problems, rather than sending one who has cast in with those who are part of the problem.

If the time has come for republicans to break clean from the politics of the past, if the time has come for the republican party to prepare for the future with boldness, rededicated to the mission of advancing the conservative agenda, then on May 18th 2010, when republicans go to the polls for the purpose of nominating their candidate for the United States Senate, the right choice is a clear choice.

Now cover the race that Kokesh is in and the other candidates.

If you want me to learn everything about some other race, to make the case for putting the liberal Trey Grayson into the Senate, then you will have to tell me about it.

At this moment, Jim DeMint, Jim Bunning, Sarah Palin, Steve Forbes, Gun Owners of America, Concerned Women for America, and Dr. James Dobson, carry more weight than you do with me.

**How would you explain to pro-military conservatives Rand Paul’s support for a left-wing antiwar activist...**

It’s the DOPE they so desparately want to Legalize.

ROFL.

You might want to check my posting history, I am a despised, anti, Ron Paul guy, and you don’t want to ask the libertarians how fond of me they are, (they aren’t).

You missed that one by a mile, you just don’t have any credibility, this demonstrates how you just throw junk out and hope it will stick.

You haven’t made any defense yet of your man Trey Grayson.

You need to understand the concept.

Trey and Rand are the candidates, you are trying to stop Rand and have everyone vote for Trey, that makes you a dedicated Trey man. (dedicated, because you clearly are)

If you do not support Trey then quit supporting him, one thing that you cannot get away with is fighting tooth and nail to destroy half of a two man race, and pretend that you aren’t campaigning for the other.

A Republican voter will be voting for Rand Paul, or Trey Grayson, are you suddenly neutral, or do you prefer one over the other?

That’s assuming I’m going to stop exposing L. Ron Jr. once the primary is over. I’m not.

Here’s the concept: the Pauls and their leftist, antisemitic, drug-addled, military-hating supporters are the most destructive force in the Republican Party. If they’re allowed to co-opt the Tea Party movement as they’re trying to do, it will be destroyed... and the opposition to the socialist advance will be obliterated. They’re poison. And I will expose them every opportunity I get.

If that means I’m helping an establishment RINO or even a Democrat get elected, so be it. Letting the Cult of Paul take over the Tea Party movement will be the death of it. And with it dies any hope of saving this country.

Get it?

Of course not.

Get it?

"If that means I’m helping an establishment RINO or even a Democrat get elected, so be it."

Of course I get it haven't you been reading my posts? I pegged you way back, it just took all this time for you to admit it. You prefer Trey Grayson.

Part of your pitch should include telling us something positive about Trey.

I’d prefer an unnamed Democrat, a homeless guy, a horse or a potato bug, too.

The one positive thing I have to say about all of the above is, they’re not L. Ron Jr. And that’s good enough for me.

There you are then, you are endorsing the liberal Trey Grayson and if he can’t catch up and defeat the more conservative Republican, then you endorse the Democrat.

It took a while but at least we know where your politics are.

And you’re endorsing an antiwar, anti-military leftist stalking horse son of a kook truther magnet.

But it didn’t take any time to figure that out.

Rand was endorsed by Jim DeMint, Sarah Palin, Dr. James Dobson, Steve Forbes, and Jim Bunning, Concerned Women for America, and Gun owners of America.

Paul wins all conservatives, church goers, gun owners, social conservatives and remains a consistent 15 points ahead of Trey (Bill Clinton/Romney Trey).

The only Republicans that Grayson has won is the pro-choice Republicans, all that sounds pretty solid to me.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.