Will Kentucky Sell Her Soul for Rand Paul?

[Flash]

Establishment darling Trey Grayson, who is a supporter of the Human Life Amendment and has been endorsed before by Kentucky Right to Life, is still polling in the running while Bill Johnson, a staunch conservative and a decorated Navy veteran with an MBA, can't seem to make headway amid all the "Son of Ron Paul" fervor.

Will Kentucky sell her soul for the son of Ron Paul? Not this Kentuckian. It's very sad to see Ron Paul purchase the soul of my beloved Kentucky.

h ttp://genuinegopmom.blogspot.com/2009/10/will-kentucky-sell-her-soul-for-rand.html

Found on the top of Google News today when searching for Rand Paul.

[silverhandorder]

Yeah fucking abortion is what matters when the country is falling apart.

[Matt Collins]

I don't think ignorance of this level warrants any consideration.

[Cowlesy]

It is a person's blog.

[Flash]

It is a person's blog.

Found on Google News when you type in Rand Paul. ;)

[RonPaulFanInGA]

I saw this earlier and thought about posting it, but figured it was just another random idiot with an opinion.

These three or four percent hardcore abortion-obsessors are really insufferable. Perfect is the enemy of the good with these people. The congress is never going to pass a constitutional amendment to ban abortion across the entire nation nor is Massachusetts or New York ever going to ban it. But at least if it went back to the states, a few states like Mississippi and Alabama and South Dakota would fully ban abortion. Instead these people basically help to allow continued abortion in these states because they just can't accept anything other than a full national ban. I've almost come to think they don't really want abortion banned; they know a constitutional amendment is never happening and many of these pro-life sites make a ton of money from these fringe suckers.

[erowe1]

The weird thing about this argument is, undoing Roe v. Wade, which is precisely the position she comes out against, would be the biggest victory the pro-life movement has ever had since 1973. And doing this legislatively, rather than waiting for SCOTUS would be a totally revolutionary development. The piddly little pro-life symbolic victories that we've seen happen at the federal level over the past 36 years have all been puny in their significance compared to that. And those are the only kinds of things you'd ever get from senators like Grayson. And that's if you're lucky. It's not like he has actually come out with any specifics that should make any pro-lifer think he's a more reliable ally than his hero Romney.

[angelatc]

The weird thing about this argument is, undoing Roe v. Wade, which is precisely the position she comes out against, would be the biggest victory the pro-life movement has ever had since 1973. And doing this legislatively, rather than waiting for SCOTUS would be a totally revolutionary development. The piddly little pro-life symbolic victories that we've seen happen at the federal level over the past 36 years have all been puny in their significance compared to that. And those are the only kinds of things you'd ever get from senators like Grayson. And that's if you're lucky. It's not like he has actually come out with any specifics that should make any pro-lifer think he's a more reliable ally than his hero Romney.

I can see her side though, even though I don't agree with it. She probably worked hard to get the partial birth abortion ban and the late term abortion laws passed, and doesn't want to see them undone.

[hueylong]

This is one of the two issues I identify in the most recent post "rand paul campaign passes first major test" at randpaul.ning.com.

Rand has to establish a strong and unapologetic position on abortion or he is going to get hammered. He's being criticized by some of the more strident types who want both the overturning of Roe, and a Federal abortion ban.

He isn't going to be able to hang on to every christian voter who cares about abortion strongly, but he can hold on to a lot of them if he is aggressive about his position.

Here are my thoughts:

1. Rand is personally, strongly pro-life. This is a powerful statement. He is a Doctor, and a Christian, and feels strongly about the sanctity of life. Rand has had this respect for life since he was a child. His father is an obstetrician, and delivered more than 4,000 babies. He understands the horrors of abortion.

2. Rand favors overturning Roe v. Wade. The supreme court decision that makes abortion widely available, and allows for federal funds to be available for it -- needs to be rescinded. Rand favors congressional action to overturn Roe, rather than waiting for the supreme court, which is less and less likely by the day now that Obama is appointing Justices. So, Rand's position is most likely to provide a realistic path for getting rid of Roe.

3. Rand favors giving states the ability to ban abortion, which congressional rescinding of Roe would accomplish. It is likely that a federal ban on abortion would likely be ruled unconstitutional. It would certainly be litigated for years.

4. Rand recognizes that pro-life activists have different views about how best to end the slaughter of innocent life. Rand respects the views of Christians of various denominations and Americans of conscience who may have different political opinions on how to most effectively end abortion in our time.

5. Rand believes his approach is the best possible way to end or reduce abortions. Given all the case law and medical science that has become part of legal precedent in the courts in the wake of Roe, overturning does not necessarily equal a ban. The issue will certainly be tied up in the courts for years, absent congressional action. Congressional action is the clearest, most timely and most effective avenue available.

Anyway, that's my rap on it.

[LibertyEagle]

And it says GOP MOM, so be nice.

[erowe1]

I can see her side though, even though I don't agree with it. She probably worked hard to get the partial birth abortion ban and the late term abortion laws passed, and doesn't want to see them undone.

Ron Paul voted for the federal partial birth abortion ban. And, truthfully, of all the pro-life victories, that one is probably the single one that best exemplifies symbolism over substance, since it's a law that doesn't prevent a single abortion, or even a single late-term abortion from happening, but just requires that some other equally grotesque method be used instead of the grotesque method they banned.
"Ending partial-birth abortion, which would more accurately be named "late-term murder," does not save a single human life. Abortion is still legal throughout nine months of gestation."
-James Dobson
http://www.citizenlink.org/focusaction/fofafeatures/A000006802.cfm

I know what you mean though. I also understand the lady's position. But I think her concern, which I've encountered among many other pro-lifers, who are often single issue voters, and who make up a sizable chunk of the Republican base, is one that can be overcome by appealing to them with reasonable answers that are very much compatible with their staunch pro-life convictions. Also, in response to what someone else said above, there's no need to downplay the importance of the abortion issue, and doing that will only make those people even less confident in Rand as their ally. For someone who believes that life begins at conception, the fact that well over a million unborn babies are killed every year can never be a minor issue. All the devastation caused by our foreign policies amounts to far fewer murders than that.

[specsaregood]

5. Rand believes his approach is the best possible way to end or reduce abortions. Given all the case law and medical science that has become part of legal precedent in the courts in the wake of Roe, overturning does not necessarily equal a ban. The issue will certainly be tied up in the courts for years, absent congressional action. Congressional action is the clearest, most timely and most effective avenue available.

Anyway, that's my rap on it.

And some pro-life groups/advocates agree. IIRC, his father was endorsed by a few during the presidential campaign. It might be worth digging up some of those folks.

Early in in June 2007 when many of us were still carrying "Who is Ron Paul?" signs at fairs, etc. I walked by a pro-life booth and the lady came out and said, "Who is Ron Paul?! I know who he is, he has been one of our strongest allies in washington. Everybody in the pro-life movement knows him!" So obviously there are some pro-lifers that recongize the intelligence in that stance...

[erowe1]

And some pro-life groups/advocates agree. IIRC, his father was endorsed by a few during the presidential campaign. It might be worth digging up some of those folks.


RP has a very strong relationship with the National Right to Life Committee. He has spoken at their events multiple times with warm receptions. They first endorsed Fred Thompson in the 2008 primary and after he dropped out I don't believe they endorsed anyone. There was also a former head of a state Right to Life Committee who very enthusiastically endorsed Ron Paul. If anyone can dig up the old pro-life slim jim from the campaign, I'm sure her quote and other helpful points will be found on it.

Edit: Here's one good video to use with the NRLC logo prominently displayed in front of him.
YouTube - Ron Paul Speaks To The Right To Life Foundation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmKNCm7_-jo)
And here's a Youtube channel with several videos on the topic.
http://www.youtube.com/user/RonPaulForLife

[anaconda]

Ron Paul did not purchase the soul of Kentucky. The Liberty loving grassroots donated their hard earned small donations.

I wish the pro life militants would manage to squeeze their philosophy into the Constitutionally limited Federal government concept. Rand Paul is saying that he believes they should not have to abide by Roe vs. Wade. I would think they would view him as a kindred spirit.

I'm betting that Kentuckians care about enough of the other breaches in Liberty by a tyrannical Federal government that they will elect Rand Paul.

[hueylong]

The issue is very important to a large portion of the Republican primary electorate in Kentucky. Rand just needs to strongly establish his Pro-Life credentials as they are.

A pro-active move to establish Rand's position, and just as important, compare Rand's lifelong principled positions to Trey's equivocations over the years... can moot this issue and keep the electoral debate on turf more fertile for us vote wise -- smaller government, lower taxes, less spending.

[erowe1]

Here are some good points on Ron Paul and abortion I found by searching our forum archives. I know it's not Rand. But this lady is quite understandably connecting the two.

"The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle. In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman. In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, HR 1094. I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn. I have also authored HR 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.” Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken direct action to restore protection for the unborn. As an OB/GYN doctor, I’ve delivered over 4,000 babies. That experience has made me an unshakable foe of abortion. Many of you may have read my book, Challenge To Liberty, which champions the idea that there cannot be liberty in a society unless the rights of all innocents are protected. Much can be understood about the civility of a society in observing its regard for the dignity of human life."
- Ron Paul

"I support Ron Paul for president because we share the same goal, that of overturning Roe v Wade. Ron Paul doesn’t just talk about being pro-life, he acts on it. His voting record truly is impeccable and he undoubtedly understands our constitutional republic and the inalienable right to life for all. Ron Paul is the prime author of H.R. 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v. Wade. As the signor of the affidavit that legalized abortion 35 years ago I appreciate Ron Paul’s action to restore protection for the unborn. Ron Paul has also authored H.R. 1094 in Congress, which seeks to define life as beginning at conception. He has never wavered on the issue of being pro-life and has a voting record to prove it. He understands the importance of civil liberties for all, including the unborn."
- Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe)

“Ron Paul’s speaking to people like me. He’s an honorable man. He’s a hard-working man. I want my party back. I want my country back, and I want the U.S. out of Iraq. ... Pro-Lifers from all political persuasions can and should support Congressman Ron Paul for President. His voting record is impeccable and he understands our Constitutional Republic and the Inalienable Right to Life for all.”
- Rep. Barbara Hagan, Former State Representative, New Hampshire; Former Chair, New Hampshire Right to Life Committee

“A vote for Ron Paul is a vote to end abortion – now.”
- Ashley Tyndall, president of Caroline Students for Life

Some bullet points:
- Ron Paul was the only candidate in 2008 who was 100% prolife, no exceptions, no compromise (abortion, war, death penalty).
- Ron Paul was the only candidate who sponsored the "Sanctity of Life Act" (HR 1094), defining throughout the nation when human life begins as always known by medical science but ignored by the judges during Roe deliberations.
- Ron Paul was the only candidate who sponsored the "We The People Act" (H.R. 300), removing the ability of activist federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life.
- Ron Paul was the only candidate who sponsored the "Taxpayers' Freedom of Conscience Act" (H.R. 1095), preventing federal funds to be used for population control.
- Ron Paul was the only candidate who sponsored the "American Sovereignty Restoration Act" (H.R. 1146), ending United Nations control over our national sovereignty, as the proabortion UN policies and international treaties would superscede and overturn any local, state, or national law.

[sofia]

Trey Grayson....former Clinton supporter.


...and this fool trusts him to overturn Roe v. Wade???

Federal abortion ban will NEVER happen.......NEVER. What's wrong with National Right To Life?....I guess they have been corrupted too.

[Working Poor]

I posted a comment but I think it was not allowed to be posted.

[Promontorium]

So we obviously use Google News. I have a customized section just for news on Ron Paul. This was at the top of the pile. That's right, she's bashing Ron and Rand.

Google favors its blogs, which is cool for bloggers.

Our threads will never show up, but if we promoted pro- Ron Paul, and Rand Paul blogs, they would show up in the news.

I saw how this fanatic and her people managed to get this to the top of the heap, lots of comments with just the link to the same article.

By itself it's a really douchey tactic, but it works.

This woman is particularly vicious. She is saying in her blog that Rand Paul is satan, that he will take the souls of all the people of Kentucky, and he will single handedly murder every baby in America. She does a little poetic dance, but that is what she is asserting. She is a bad person.

[Flash]

So we obviously use Google News. I have a customized section just for news on Ron Paul. This was at the top of the pile. That's right, she's bashing Ron and Rand.

Google favors its blogs, which is cool for bloggers.

Our threads will never show up, but if we promoted pro- Ron Paul, and Rand Paul blogs, they would show up in the news.

I saw how this fanatic and her people managed to get this to the top of the heap, lots of comments with just the link to the same article.

By itself it's a really douchey tactic, but it works.

Interesting, I didn't realize how this blog/Google News thing worked. She seemed nice enough in her post just a little confused about Rand's policy on the issue. But now I'm not so sure. I was wondering why all those comments were linking to the same article.

[erowe1]

So we obviously use Google News. I have a customized section just for news on Ron Paul. This was at the top of the pile. That's right, she's bashing Ron and Rand.

Google favors its blogs, which is cool for bloggers.

Our threads will never show up, but if we promoted pro- Ron Paul, and Rand Paul blogs, they would show up in the news.

I saw how this fanatic and her people managed to get this to the top of the heap, lots of comments with just the link to the same article.

By itself it's a really douchey tactic, but it works.

This woman is particularly vicious. She is saying in her blog that Rand Paul is satan, that he will take the souls of all the people of Kentucky, and he will single handedly murder every baby in America. She does a little poetic dance, but that is what she is asserting. She is a bad person.

Great thinking. Maybe some of our Kentucky bloggers should make blogs about why Rand is the best candidate for pro-lifers to counteract this one (and highlighting Ron's pro-life credentials as well). Then let us know so we can comment there and link it places.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

UPDATE: Comments left on Ron Paul Forums responding to this blog post show the ignorance on this legislation and the complaceny many of them have regarding unborn children. If they were concerned about BOTH fiscal conservatism AND abortion, they would be getting full force behind Bill Johnson, but no, they want "Son of Ron".

Since you're reading, let me inform you that broke Bill (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=215124), who is polling 2%, is a sure-loser and a non-starter.

Why does this BS make it to the top of Google News?

[jfriedman]

The issue is very important to a large portion of the Republican primary electorate in Kentucky. Rand just needs to strongly establish his Pro-Life credentials as they are.

A pro-active move to establish Rand's position, and just as important, compare Rand's lifelong principled positions to Trey's equivocations over the years... can moot this issue and keep the electoral debate on turf more fertile for us vote wise -- smaller government, lower taxes, less spending.

Yeah I think Rand's people can handle this one if they get ahead of it, if it ever arises in a robust fashion.

Rand is strongly pro-life, and he should make it a point to articulate this fact through the family-values and anti-DC prisms.

[Promontorium]

Interesting, I didn't realize how this blog/Google News thing worked. She seemed nice enough in her post just a little confused about Rand's policy on the issue. But now I'm not so sure. I was wondering why all those comments were linking to the same article.

I don't think she cares about Rand Paul's position. She's made her assertion. Even when she edited the post to admit he's pro-life, she made sure to jab him for not supporting some exacting amendment she supports, then reasserted that he will murder babies.

Notice how she also attacked Ron Paul.

"Will Kentucky sell her soul for the son of Ron Paul? Not this Kentuckian. It's very sad to see Ron Paul purchase the soul of my beloved Kentucky."

Ron Paul purchase the soul? This woman knows exactly what she's saying. She knows exactly what she's doing.

[MRoCkEd]

She now links to this thread in that post:


UPDATE: Comments left on Ron Paul Forums responding to this blog post show the ignorance on this legislation and the complaceny many of them have regarding unborn children. If they were concerned about BOTH fiscal conservatism AND abortion, they would be getting full force behind Bill Johnson, but no, they want "Son of Ron".

[Epic]

this doesn't make sense, cause Rand Paul is the most pro-life person running... throwing it back to the states is the best method.

[Promontorium]

I'm glad she links here. The truth shall set them free!

I'm really glad Rand Paul is getting enough attention that people are actually pissed enough to libel him.

[bucfish]

No but Kentucky might sell their soul their to McConnell and his DC Mammon ilk

[specsaregood]

The thing this lady doesn't seem to realize is that if you push for legislation of morality at the federal level then places like kentucky will end up having their morality rules by the big blue states such as california and new york because those states have more congressman.

Removing things such as abortion from the federal level is quite simply the easiest way to allow kentuckians to enjoy the social conservative laws they crave so badly. But evidently this lady prefers to have californians deciding what is right for her state.

[angelatc]

Trey Grayson....former Clinton supporter.


...and this fool trusts him to overturn Roe v. Wade???

Federal abortion ban will NEVER happen.......NEVER. What's wrong with National Right To Life?....I guess they have been corrupted too.

No. She's a Johnson woman.

[itshappening]

why the hell is this crap showing up in google? it's hardly news.

maybe we should complain to them...

I'm guessing we should try:

abuse@google.com

[angelatc]

It's really a shame that we have to be so divided on this. I mean, the woman is trying to save the lives of unborn babies, and she is genuinely afraid that if Rand Paul gets his bill through, even more babies will die.

I don't think that's true, but neither of us can produce evidence to support our positions because it's based on speculation. A the end of the day, we're on the same side of the issue. We're only disagreeing about the best means to reach the end.

Leave the lady and her blog alone. She's doing what she believes in her heart to be right, and that's more than 99% of the people in this world do.

Not everybody who hates our candidates or disagrees on a single issue is evil incarnate.

[erowe1]

No. She's a Johnson woman.

Her blog as it appeared before her updates was more along the lines of both Grayson and Johnson being preferable to Paul. It's possible that upon further consideration in light of the debate that she's been engaged in since then she's leaning more toward thinking only Johnson is worth supporting. Frankly, I think this is a positive step for her, since the real contest is just between Rand and Grayson.

[MRoCkEd]

There seems to be no reasoning with her.

[angelatc]

Her blog as it appeared before her updates was more along the lines of both Grayson and Johnson being preferable to Paul. It's possible that upon further consideration in light of the debate that she's been engaged in since then she's leaning more toward thinking only Johnson is worth supporting. Frankly, I think this is a positive step for her, since the real contest is just between Rand and Grayson.

No, I was over there this morning. She's been a Johnson woman all along. That revelation is above her first update.

It does seem to fit into the hueylong scenario that the only Ran Paul attacks are going to come from the Johnson camp though.

[angelatc]

There seems to be no reasoning with her.

She probably says the same about us. :)

But I have a question: is there really a federal law restricting late term abortions? I always thought there was, but a few months ago there was a story about a baby born alive and subsequently murdered that made me question that. I though the answer ended up being negative, but she indicates there is such a restriction.

[specsaregood]

It does seem to fit into the hueylong scenario that the only Ran Paul attacks are going to come from the Johnson camp though.

And they hail from the "church of lincoln"; bunch of lincoln-loving big-government republicans.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

No. She's a Johnson woman.

No one called her a lesbian.

[rprprs]

I don't think ignorance of this level warrants any consideration.

I agree.

This issue is way down on my list of priorities, but I realize that it is a hot button topic, and many reasoned people have very strong feelings in this area. Rand's stance on the issue is likely to sit very well with all but the craziest of the crazies in this arena. A quick peek at Mommy's blog is all it takes to identify her as one of the latter. A religious fanatic and a lost cause.

She states right on her blog: "...Whether or not my readers agree or disagree is of no concern to me...". Take her at her word and let it be.

[freedoms-light]

I think this was an important pro life endorsement Ron got.
Maybe Norma McCovey can be contacted and would endorse Rand.
Then we could blog it big time..

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Before the March for Life this morning Norma McCorvey, the former Jane Roe of the infamous abortion case that allowed unlimited abortions nationwide, backed Ron Paul fo the GOP presidential nomination. McCorvey is now pro-life and she says Ron Paul is the best candidate to make sure abortion is no more.

McCorvey runs Crossing Over Ministry and is a frequent speaker across the country on pro-life issues.

“Ron Paul states, ‘The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty.’ I support Ron Paul for president because we share the same goal, that of overturning Roe v Wade," McCorvey said Tuesday.

"Ron Paul doesn't just talk about being pro-life, he acts on it. His voting record truly is impeccable and he undoubtedly understands our constitutional republic and the inalienable right to life for all," McCorvey added.

"He has never wavered on the issue of being pro-life and has a voting record to prove it. He understands the importance of civil liberties for all, including the unborn," she said.

"After taking all of the presidential candidates into consideration, it is obvious that Ron Paul is the only one that doesn't just talk the talk. For this reason and those stated above, I am publicly endorsing Ron Paul for president," McCorvey concluded.

http://www.votekansas.org/reform/f/node/349

[freedoms-light]

Also, Peg Luksik, an anti-abortion activist running for the PA Senate Republican nomination could endorse as well. She is being supported by Ron Paul folks. Just and idea.

[PubliUS_CorneliUS_TacitUS]

One of the best ways to argue Ron & Rand's constitutional stance on abortion is to pose a few questions to the pro-life crowd out there.

Is every human life valuable?
If you can save a life now would you?...

Then...It could take 10 to 30 years for a human life amendment to pass and even longer to pack the Supreme Court with Pro-Life justices.

Are all of the lives sacrificed worth that wait?

What if we could start saving lives now?

How?

Remove abortion from the federal courts.

You've never heard of this? It is Constitutional.

Is Kentucky pro-life?
Do you think that the state legislature would prohibit abortion in Kentucky?
What about Tennessee?
What about Ohio?
What about Indiana?
What about Missouri?
We are free to focus our resources on Illinois, Virginia and other states.

This sounds like a plan...

Why haven't you heard of this solution from any "mainstream" candidates?

Do they like the status quo?

Will a Human Life Amendment ever be passed?

Does the wedge issue of abortion give Republicans votes in values-laden Democratic states?

Don't these questions answer themselves? :eek:

[Malachi]

hello

[ForLiberty-RonPaul]

Thank you! :)

[skyorbit]

I think in Kentucky you'd probably see most abortions outlawed almost overnight if Roe V Wade were overturned and this particular type of murder because a state issue again (like every other kind of murder is.) I know I'm in South Dakota, and we tried to ban in twice, and much of the reason for people opposing it was because the supreme court case that would happen after it would cost the state to much money.

If the Supreme Court wasn't dictating it, Abortion would be banned in South Dakota. It would have happened 6 years ago.

Tracy

[Chieftain1776]

I think in Kentucky you'd probably see most abortions outlawed almost overnight if Roe V Wade were overturned and this particular type of murder because a state issue again (like every other kind of murder is.) I know I'm in South Dakota, and we tried to ban in twice, and much of the reason for people opposing it was because the supreme court case that would happen after it would cost the state to much money.

If the Supreme Court wasn't dictating it, Abortion would be banned in South Dakota. It would have happened 6 years ago.

Tracy

Exactly but the Republican Party DOESN'T WANT IT OFF THE TABLE. They just want to string along Pro-Lifers into voting for them while having them ignore their incompetence on other issues that actually can be measured.

It's simple and effective for the GOP really: Propose the elimination of all abortion and just cast symbolic votes to keep the pro-lifers riled up and voting against the Democrats but never really moving on the issue and never having it go away. A constitutional amendment is a perfect foil for GOP politicians. 2/3's of both chambers of congress and then 3/4's of the states (oh no! it still leaves the issue to the states :eek:)??? It's PERFECT for the politicians: the voters get to feel good about themselves and the politicians get their support simply by posturing! We couldn't even get a Balanced Budget Amendment past Congress which almost all of America supported and they are waiting for an amendment on abortion :rolleyes:

Some people just want to be strung along because it makes them "feel good" about themselves which is really what voting is really about. It's sad they're playing right into the GOP's political strategy. The status quo is really a dream come true for the politicians. Rand actually wants to do something and bar millions of abortions until the same amendment can be passed and ratified. "How naive and silly of him!" Grayson & Co must be thinking right now even though it's the right thing to do.

Rand just needs to focus on the economy the voters who really want to prevent more abortions will go his way.

[Chieftain1776]

Another thing that rankles me. The fact that the blogger had to be pointed out Rand's position by commenter when all she needed to do was click on his webpage tells us a lot about her credibility and motivation.

That is just remarkable that you can write a long-winded smear about a candidate and not even make the effort to look at his website. Wow :rolleyes:

Oh and where's the establishment candidate on the issue? Can't tell ya, even after taking the rudimentary step of checking his webpage!

At least Rand has the decency of making his position clear for all to criticize. Treyson & Co dodged this act of plain decency and are being rewarded for it by these types of bloggers. No doubt Treyson & Co are sitting back and measuring the reactions and are crafting a poll driven position to every single issue not just this one.

Maybe, given the reaction by the bloggers, they were correct to do so politically... but it's still wrong.

[erowe1]

I tried to post comments on this blog post and one of her other ones on the subject and when they didn't get posted I messaged her to ask why, since I thought I was being pretty polite and amenable to her views. She answered that blog comments were turned off because too many pro-Rand people were submitting things full of cursing and mocking the Catholic faith. Whoever the people were who did that are absolute morons. Rand would be better off if the people doing that were Trey Grayson supporters.

[hueylong]

This one lady's blog is not the issue. Trying to convince her is not the strategy.

Rand needs to articulate his position strongly and unapologetically in order to establish his bona fides vis a vis Grayson. This is something the campaign needs to be doing.

[Flash]

This one lady's blog is not the issue. Trying to convince her is not the strategy.

Rand needs to articulate his position strongly and unapologetically in order to establish his bona fides vis a vis Grayson. This is something the campaign needs to be doing.

+1.

[TruthisTreason]

The whole world can see Rand's stance on Abortion here:

http://www.randpaul2010.com/issues/abortion-2/


This thread should die. This lady has her own agenda and we are only feeding it. This is something hueylong should know.

[nathanmn]

I don't have time to read through this whole thread so I don't know if this has been brought up or not... but someone should author a good pro-rand paul blog so that pops up instead of this. Make it generic and appealing to Republican primary voters. I don't really care about this blog and I'm guessing no one else does either, but I do find it disturbing that it comes up right away when you google search "rand paul".

[hueylong]

Visiting and posting on the lady's blog feeds her agenda. Posting here, doesn't.

Having Rand's position on his website is fine and good, but only a fraction of Republican primary voters in Kentucky will ever visit Rand's website.

Abortion is one of two issues (the other being national security) that Rand must establish his credentials on, or face ongoing withering attacks through May 18.

[Arklatex]

I don't give stuff like this the benefit of my click. I saw it pop up the other day under a google search and avoided it like the plague.

[Flash]

Abortion is one of two issues (the other being national security) that Rand must establish his credentials on, or face ongoing withering attacks through May 18.

Agreed, and I think that's the bigger issue here.

[PubliUS_CorneliUS_TacitUS]

Two largest religious influences in Kentucky are Catholic (especially in WestKY) and Baptist (in the rest of KY). Rand needs to explain how his position can save lives sooner rather than later and that though he approves of a Human Life Amendment he is not content to wait for it.

Then ask why the establishment Republicans and his opponent are willing to let babies die (maybe not that exact wording).

Then ask the pro-life voter if it is better to begin saving lives now or to wait...and wait....and wait.

I mean, after Roe was foisted on America Republicans were told they had to voter for Republican presidents who could appoint pro-life justices to overturn Roe v Wade. Well guess what its been 36 years and we are still waiting. Of the previous 4 presidents 3 have been republicans and nothing is closer to changing on the SCOTUS front.

Now...people are catching on to the futility sooooo....we just come up with an even more difficult method AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION. Maybe it will only take the pro-life voter another 36 years to realize how futile this effort is as well.

*Disclaimer* P_C_T is a Catholic residing within the Diocese of Owensboro which covers Western Kentucky.

[HarryBrowneLives]

I concurr. I'm Catholic, pro-life, and agree with Rand's position 100%. This person seems to have an ax to grind against Rand more than his position on Life which is stronger than his opponents. Rand's position is a winning issue in front of the most ardent pro-lifer's. Those who would wait around only for Roe v Wade to be overturned are content apparently to let millions of babies die while we could be doing something to stop it around the country with the Sanctity of Life Act. A lot of politicians have sold a bill of goods to pro-lifer's over the years on a single issue and only the idea of overturning Roe. Decades later, they are no further to their goal than when they started.

[RyanRSheets]

I don't understand how she can equate pragmatism to baby killing. Abortion has been on the table for 36 years now and the "ban it, period" approach hasn't done a thing for us.

Has Rand even said that he wouldn't support a Federal ban on abortion if it came to a vote? I seem to recall Ron saying he wouldn't, but she seems to be making an unfair assumption.

[freedoms-light]

From Rand Paul2010.com today.

Rand Paul supports the efforts of these students and pledges to do everything in his power as a United States Senator to end abortion.

[Flash]

From Rand Paul2010.com today.

Rand Paul supports the efforts of these students and pledges to do everything in his power as a United States Senator to end abortion.

Great news. Looks like Rand Paul is taking advice from Huey now.

[skyorbit]

http://randforsenate.blogspot.com/2009/10/rand-on-pro-life-solidarity.html

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Since this thread is currently at the top, and my posting this won't be moving it up, I'll go ahead and ask:

Can we please stop bumping this?

[thisisengage]

By asking, didnt you just bump it? :cool: