Today alone Jack Conway was exposed for turning down media....

[BamaFanNKy]

interviews with Joe Arnold from WHAS 11 ABC and Mandy Connell on WHAS-AM radio. These are two of the biggest TV and Radio stations in the state.

Really?!?! He's ducking local media?

[sailingaway]

interviews with Joe Arnold from WHAS 11 ABC and Mandy Connell on WHAS-AM radio. These are two of the biggest TV and Radio stations in the state.

Really?!?! He's ducking local media?

They aren't as liberal as those who love him best. Like Daily Kos who endorsed him, and Act Blue which carries a donation ticker for him, etc.

[BamaFanNKy]

They aren't as liberal as those who love him best. Like Daily Kos who endorsed him, and Act Blue which carries a donation ticker for him, etc.

Yeah, Act Blue doesn't like him so much. He's the second lowest in fundraising per their site.

[sailingaway]

Yeah, Act Blue doesn't like him so much. He's the second lowest in fundraising per their site.

:D

[specsaregood]

I hope he continues the Trey Grayson approach to campaigning. Hide in the shadows, have your minions take pot shots at Rand and hope he implodes. It worked so well for Trey afterall. Didn't I hear somewhere the Trey and Jack actually had the same company making their campaign ads too?

[RonPaulFanInGA]

I hope he continues the Trey Grayson approach to campaigning. Hide in the shadows, have your minions take pot shots at Rand and hope he implodes. It worked so well for Trey afterall.

I was about to say that Conway's campaign resembles the one Grayson ran. Conway is heard of about as little as Grayson in the media; and that is because he's avoiding them.

[sailingaway]

I was about to say that Conway's campaign resembles the one Grayson ran. Conway is heard of about as little as Grayson in the media; and that is because he's avoiding them.

And because his name doesn't sell papers.

I mean, you see a google blub "Jack Conway speaks to ...." do you click? do you care?

[Aratus]

dare i ask how TMCL and Jake do think about all this media dodging by their once admired "smilin' jack" ...???
dare i ever ask those two bloggers if the charismatic A.G had once toyed with monogramming his cuff links
with the first initial an' the last initial of his given name and did he ever speak to either of them of water
and an ability to walk on the same more often than william jennings bryan was wont to in the 1890s?

[Ethek]

dare i ask how TMCL and Jake do think about all this media dodging by their once admired "smilin' jack" ...???
dare i ever ask those two bloggers if the charismatic A.G had once toyed with monogramming his cuff links
with the first initial an' the last initial of his given name and did he ever speak to either of them of water
and an ability to walk on the same more often than william jennings bryan was wont to in the 1890s?

I love your posts. I can see the oppo now

[roho76]

Rachel Maddow did more to help Rand than anyone. I have a right mind to send her flowers thanking her but she probably prefers beef jerky and if I buy beef jerky I'm eating it myself.

[FSP-Rebel]

Didn't want to make a thread out of this so I just tacked it on to this one. Anyway, sounds like Rand backtracked from his underground electric fence idea: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/02/rand-pauls-campaign-calls_n_633883.html.

A spokesman for Rand Paul clarified on Friday that while his campaign website has long touted a proposal to build an underground electrical fence along the border to deter immigration, the Kentucky Republican Senate candidate himself has never endorsed that specific idea.

Jesse Benton, who declined repeated attempts for comment from the Huffington Post (which first reported on Paul's plan for an underground electrical fence), told the Plum Line's Greg Sargent that Paul actually doesn't believe a fence should be built below ground. Rather, the fence he envisions would be constructed above ground while still carrying an electric current, explained Benton.

"That's a stupid word that was put in by whoever is writing for our Web site and we need to remove it," Benton said, of the "underground" description.

At best, this explanation pins the blame on an underling (in this case, some unknown Web hand). At worst, it's a lie. Certainly it's misleading. Paul has been videotaped on multiple occasions talking very specifically about building a fence underground. In May 2009, he spoke about the need to bury the fence because anything constructed above ground would create a Berlin-Wall-like symbolism that might offend Hispanic voters.

"I don't like the symbolism of a 15-foot fence going the whole border. It's extraordinarily expensive, and it reminds me of the Berlin Wall which was built to keep people in and from fleeing to the West," Paul said. "I think you could actually put in an electronic fence under the whole border for probably $10 or $15 million, which sounds like a lot to us but that's peanuts. And you could probably have helicopter stations in maybe five different locations, and I think you could have any breach of the border could be stopped at any point and we send them back."

Then there was the infamous interview he gave to a Russian television station shortly after winning the Republican Senate primary, in which he was asked the following question: "You also talk about an underground electrical fence, what is that about?"

Paul didn't dismiss the questioner as ill-informed about his position. Instead, he said:

Story continues below

"I think that would be one way. And I've recently been talking also more about satellite observation... so I think you can also monitor your border with satellites and then you have to have some means of intercepting people who come in illegally. You can have helicopter stations positioned every couple hundred miles."

Clearly, Paul believed at one point in time that an underground electric fence was cost-effective, more humane to Hispanics and a valuable way to stem illegal immigration. That his campaign distanced himself from the idea is a reflection of just how politically unpalatable it is, even in a conservative non-border state like Kentucky.

Jesse Benton, not surprisingly, did not immediately return a request for comment.

**********************

Any thoughts?

[sailingaway]

That wasn't a backtrack, it was never really a fence, it was sensors to signal when people walked over, and helicoptors would pick them up. He said he didn't like the symbolism of a physical fence. When RT asked him about it the day after the primary he said "yes, OR we could...." it was clear he was never wedded to a specific means. He just does agree that you can't have unlimited immigration and a welfare state, and that we want the people here who FOLLOW our rules..

[MarionCountyLine]

dare i ask how TMCL and Jake do think about all this media dodging by their once admired "smilin' jack" ...???
dare i ever ask those two bloggers if the charismatic A.G had once toyed with monogramming his cuff links
with the first initial an' the last initial of his given name and did he ever speak to either of them of water
and an ability to walk on the same more often than william jennings bryan was wont to in the 1890s?

Thought I would respond to this...

In order for Jack Conway to have been "once admired" at MCL he would have had to have been "admired" at some point. I didn't cover the senate race in-depth during the primary season. I did cover and photograph Conway at his victory party in Louisville the night of the primary, but I was only there because i was the DD to a carload of Marion County Democrats.

I was optimistic at the conclusion of the primaries that we had a race on our hands between two good candidates: an anti-war/anti-drugwar/audit-the-fed Republican and a pro-choice Democrat (a rare animal in Ky politics). This illusion was dashed within 24 hours when I learned, along with the rest of America, that Rand Paul would have "modified" one title of the Civil Rights Act to allow private business owners to discriminate based on race. I understand that Rand Paul subsequently walked back those claims, but until the Maddow moment, I didn't understand why folks at Stormfront were as interested in his candidacy as you Liberty Movement folks; after the Maddow moment, I understood, and it troubled me.

As for Conway's invisible candidacy, it's inaccurate to lump MCL's coverage and PageOne Jake's coverage together, in that Jake is vocally supportive of Conway, has been since the primaries. I have not been, and have stated several times that I could, in fact, end up voting for Rand Paul, despite the concerns I continue to have with his philosophy, issue positions and candidacy.

If you've been even a casual MCL reader, you'd know that MCL has been critical of Jack Conway for his lack of visibility at least Paul is "out there" talking about issues and educating voters on his point-of-view. Conway's strategy of invisibility is frustrating to me to a significant degree, for which I've criticized him at MCL -- on May 25 (http://www.marioncountyline.com/2010/05/double-standard.html), June 14 (http://www.marioncountyline.com/2010/06/conway-stall.html), and June 15 (http://www.marioncountyline.com/2010/06/political-malpractice.html).

Frankly, I am unhappy with covering a one-person race: Rand Paul against himself. I will continue to be critical of Conway's invisibility, just as I will continue to criticize Paul when I think he's wrong and agree with him when I think he's correct.

In the meantime, will someone here explain to me Tom DiLorenzo's thesis that Abraham Lincoln was a tyrant?

[sailingaway]

Thought I would respond to this...


In the meantime, will someone here explain to me Tom DiLorenzo's thesis that Abraham Lincoln was a tyrant?

You might have that in general forums, we have a lot of people with different opinions about that. However, we are all pretty much strict constructionists, and I think a bunch of us intellectually feel states had the right of secession implicit in the Constitution. It wasn't just the south that thought this, north eastern states wanted to secede to get away from 'THOSE people' in the slave south, because they (the north east) were abolitionists. It is merely a historical position. We debate philosophy ad nauseum, you have to understand. Obviously, the force of the federal government and the result of the civil war kind of rule out secession, today.

In any event, Lincoln's own papers said he wasn't trying to abolish slavery by the war, he was trying to keep the union together. To look at this as a 'slavery' issue is deemed insulting by the south, most of whom had ancestors far too poor to own slaves, in any event. So that hardens opinion, being implicitly called a racist all the time. They and frankly, I, think it is about federalism/antifederalism and THAT is a huge issue on this board. (I also think it was economics, but that is the northern motive issue, not the 'tyrant' issue)

Most of us see decisions of most sorts best made locally, by the community. There was an exception with slavery/CRA ONLY, because of Jim CRow laws, BY THE STATE. there was a monopoly for segregation / racism ENFORCED by the state. So there was no real market. However, that is a very rare sitution.

Local governance may be 'inconvenient' to big (and particularly, global) business which has to conform to mulitiple different laws and (heaven forbid!) respect different cultural preferences, but the localities best can serve their individual inhabitants. Think about it. You, personally, have a much bigger voice appearing with friends and neighbors at your city council than you have in DC to actually shape what the deliberative body passes. Stuff passed in DC needs lobbyists, and that needs money and presence most individuals and small businesses don't have. So most of us are antifederalist. Take that to its logical extreme and apply it to the civil war... and they should have been able to determine their own fate. Does that mean we are pro-slavery? Not at all, only that we are wont to argue about the numbers of angels who can dance on the head of a pin, with no real life consequences intended.

I think it is disingenuous to hold Rand responsible for people who support HIM if he doesn't support THEM. Probably every president who ever won an election had murderers and degenerates of various sorts voting for them, for whatever reason. Hamas at one point endorsed Obama... The candidate isn't responsible for those who like them.

I think some unsavory individuals may like not just Rand but his Dad and others who believe in liberty because liberty does say you have to 'tolerate the nonsense, too.' I think you are smart enough to be aware for yourself of the pitfalls in letting government enforce what it thinks are 'appropriate opinions'.

That doesn't mean you go along with it or don't shun it, just that the 'community' is not the state and the 'community' has other resources to address issues than with the force of the state. For example, Woolworths was desegregated because of sit ins and public pressure, really, not the law. I believe COMMUNITY is big with us, but the state, not so much. The state in its growth, seems to actually erode community, in some intstances. Direction from DC isn't the same as sitting down with your neighbors and participating.

But I can really only speak for myself, in discussing this.

I do think people think your question is a trap, like asking Rand about the 1964 CRA when he had NEVER brought it up on the campaign trail. I am personally certain the C-J chose that only BECAUSE they knew it would be spun as racist. And Conway, knowing better, still does, IMHO. Your opinion may differ.

We shouldn't hijack the thread, though. You can start another in a different forum.

[TheDriver]

In the meantime, will someone here explain to me Tom DiLorenzo's thesis that Abraham Lincoln was a tyrant?

Post that on general politics. Abraham Lincoln's shortcomings and Tom DiLorenzo's thesis have nothing to do with Rand Paul forums.

I think you have a hard-on to bait "randpaulsupporters" into smearing Lincoln, so you can do a little blog and impress the liberals.

Does Rand Paul campaign talking about Lincoln? No, in fact one of his first speeches in the campaign was at a Lincoln Day Dinner.

QFT!


This issues of today are not slavery, civil rights and Lincoln.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Any thoughts?

Yeah: quit posting garbage from the Huffington Post. :rolleyes:

And why would the campaign even entertain the idea of talking to such a source? What, are they going to respond to questions from Daily Kos too?

It must suck to live in that echo chamber. To sit around reading hit piece after hit piece on Paul or Angle or whatever Republican has their panties in a wad on any given day and read the comments all attacking the Republican and thinking this represents the status of the race...only to see Paul/Angle/whomever still winning.

[FSP-Rebel]

Yeah: quit posting garbage from the Huffington Post. :rolleyes:

Oh please. I got sideswiped by this after it was brought to my attention by one of my anarchist buddies that constantly berate Rand. Just wanted to see what people thought of it here.

[Aratus]

MCL --- In 2oo8 we have Ms. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama split nearly all Democratic Party
primary election people into two camps even though there were few policy stance differences.
If you blog in a more rational manner than Jake of pageOne, i stand corrected. If Jake is often
more glandular & reactive than thee, perhaps this hints at his maturity level. Kentucky politics
is legendary for its nuances. Let's both agree that Jack Conway is avoiding all debate formats!

[specsaregood]

but until the Maddow moment, I didn't understand why folks at Stormfront were as interested in his candidacy as you Liberty Movement folks; after the Maddow moment, I understood, and it troubled me.


That is pretty amusing. Here is a gem from stormfront, why don't you share this with your readers:



Rand Paul? Give me a break. He worships at the alter of capitalism.
Jack Conway is much more in line with National Socialism.
If you could count actually votes in Kentucky of Stormfront voters, Jack Conway would receive more votes than Rand Paul.


You can smear all you want, the vast majority of Rand supporters have nothing to do with racism or anything of the like. Ron and Rand are ideologically opposed to the notion and so are most of us.

[Aratus]

.




MCL --- The crux of this, the media firestorm over the 2oo2 letter that Jake of pageOne felt he
got ignored about seems to have been triggered by someone deep inside the A.G's camp and if
rand's contention that barry goldwater had the last intellectually sound commerce clause logical
objection is correct ...then there are no moral objections extant in our political landscape to the
bill in 1964 that LYNDON BAINES JOHNSON signed. the inference is, well long after the deaths
of charles sumner and andrew johnson, we all are metaphoric metaphysical UNIONISTS, now.




.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

That is pretty amusing. Here is a gem from stormfront, why don't you share this with your readers:

Yep. St*rmFr*nt hearts Conway!

http://i48.tinypic.com/2nq74lc.jpg

I'm not going to link to it, even a broken one...but it's worth googling and seeing how much they hate Rand Paul and Ron Paul. It's very encouraging. Hopefully their dreams of a (D.O.A.) David Duke candidacy come to fruition so they'll all support Duke's sorry ass and not drag Ron Paul down with them again in 2012 like they tried to do in 2008.

[rprprs]

Post that on general politics. Abraham Lincoln's shortcomings and Tom DiLorenzo's thesis have nothing to do with Rand Paul forums.

I think you have a hard-on to bait "randpaulsupporters" into smearing Lincoln, so you can do a little blog and impress the liberals.

Does Rand Paul campaign talking about Lincoln? No, in fact one of his first speeches in the campaign was at a Lincoln Day Dinner.

QFT!


This issues of today are not slavery, civil rights and Lincoln.

Yes, baiting is exactly what it is... on this and every other issue he thinks he can make hay on. The quicker and more completely this is understood on these boards, the better. DO NOT BITE!