Is Democratic TN Senate Nominee a Ron Paul Democrat?

[Krzysztof Lesiak]

On August 2nd, Mark Clayton won the Democratic Party nomination for US Senate in Tennessee with 48,000 votes, or 30%. But the Democratic Party was quick to disavow him and his candidacy the next day. Why?

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/mark-clayton-tennessee-democrats-senate

He's basically the exact opposite of the Dems on every issue. They even called him an "anti-gay conspiracy theorist". Off his Facebook page:


IF ELECTED, MARK CLAYTON WILL

*FIGHT TO REMOVE SECRET NATIONAL ID CARDS FROM TENNESSEE DRIVERS' LICENSES
*STAND UP FOR FISCAL RESPONSIBLILITY AND AGAINST WASTEFUL SPENDING BY AN OUT-OF-CONTROL CONGRESS AND PRESIDENT
*WORK TO SHUT DOWN THE RIDICULOUS AND UNQUALIFIED TSA COMPLETELY AND IMMEDIATELY
*DEMAND THE ENFORCEMENT OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS AGAINST DRONES AND ELECTRONIC SPYING BY THE GOVERNMENT AS WELL AS BUSINESSES WHO ALSO SPY ON AMERICANS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY
*OPPOSE NATO EXPANSION IN EASTERN EUROPE

THREE MAJOR POSITIONS OF THE CLAYTON FOR SENATE CAMPAIGN

1) FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION, PERIOD: Stop non-declared, endless war policy in Washington. Non-declared, unlimited war is a fundamental danger to liberty as it is endless war from which the Orwellian Super-State derives its power. The U.S Constitution REQUIRES that Congress declare war and THEREFORE PROHIBITS the President from waging unlimited war as long as Congress continues approving funds. A constitutional war declaration necessarily requires Congress to define our enemies as well as what constitues victory. Ask ten US Senators why we are in Iraq today and you get ten different opinions. If Congress would submit to the Constitution, this confusion would not exist. The last time which Congress declared war was World War II.

2) PRO-LIFE/TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE ONLY: We believe that abortion kills millions of innocent people. We also believe that marriage is between only a man and a woman. The government, as under both Bush and Obama, has no business waging tax-funded propaganda campaigns pitting perverted and immoral behavior against religious liberty law and mainstream family values.

3) ORWELLIAN SUPER-STATE SWALLOWS AMERICA WHOLE: The Federal Government forced Tennessee to turn all driver's licenses into National ID cards with a secret electronic tag inside; and has created gigantic "Fusion Centers" for collecting information to hunt and track innocent Americans against our will; and mandates transexuals and homosexuals grabbing children in their stranger-danger zones in the name of airport security. Meanwhile, Congress continues to bring American workers to our knees, driving up the national debt and sending our economic infrastructure to China and Mexico. The US Congress has betrayed Americans for three decades. We must craft legislation which gives American citizens streamlined and legally inexpensive "cause of action" protections against the Federal Government for secret personal spy attacks and groping or else Americans will be too poor to defend themselves from their own treacherous Congress.

Looks like the Dems didn't do their homework and had no idea who they were voting for. What's even more funny is that his campaign site hasn't been updated since the time he ran against "neo-conservative" Lamar Alexander in 2008 in the Dem primary, which he lost. He also spent basically nothing on his run. The Dem chair blamed his being the first name on the ballot as the reason for the very surprising win.

What's even more interesting is that Mark Clayton is/was a member of a Ron Paul Meetup group in Nashville (http://www.meetup.com/ronpaul-69/members/5394924/). The last time a Ron Paul Democrat was nominated to run for US Senate was likely 2008, when Bob Conley won 42% of the vote against neocon Lindsey Graham in SC.

What do you think? Is he in fact Ron Paul Democrat who we should be taking a serious look at?

[tangent4ronpaul]

What do you think? Is he in fact Ron Paul Democrat who might be worth taking a look at? Or his he just a quixotic guy with some good positions but the rest foolish, stupid, and/or delegitimizing and should just be ignored?

The people in his Meetup would know best. Ask them.

-t

[The Goat]

The last time a Ron Paul Democrat was nominated to run for US Senate was likely 2008, when Bob Conley won 42% of the vote against neocon Lindsey Graham in SC.



I voted for Bob Conley! :D

[trey4sports]

well it looks like he was a member in a RP meetup so i'd imagine he is a ron paul guy. The question is.... can he win....?

[AuH20]

Corker is atrocious. I'd send this kid money if he has talent.

[AuH20]

BTW Collins has to have the lowdown on this guy. Wait until he appears.

[ronpaulfollower999]

Also know there is a RP Democrat running for US congress in New York.

We're taking over. :)

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

I don't know about this guy... but I really think this is the direction to go in. It might sound like it splits the votes, but Ron Paul republicans and Ron Paul democrats can do a lot to educate those people into voting for which ever Ron Paul candidate busts through the mold. It's quite possibly the sought after "swing vote" that politicos usually call 'independents.'

[AuH20]

His facebook mentions TEH COLLINS!!!!

http://www.facebook.com/ClaytonforUS/info


TN VOTE AUG 2ND-May God bless Matt Collins for his courage in standing up to the bailout Republicans who have now run over to attack him for being proud of NOT shaking Bailout Zach Wamp's hand. We stand with you Matt and also refuse to shake Wamp's hand.

[AuH20]

Need to get in contact with DeMint, Club for Growth, Norqvist, etc. Outflank Corker that treasonous SOB!! Send a message to these career RINOs that their time is over.

[ronpaulfollower999]

His facebook mentions TEH COLLINS!!!!

http://www.facebook.com/ClaytonforUS/info

Lol...it's in his about section. And judging by the posts on his wall, Matt knows about him already.

I guess this really makes him a Matt Collins Democrat...

[AuH20]

Make Corker dance!!! At the very least that's what Clayton needs to do:

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120703/NEWS02/307030022/Sen-Bob-Corker-s-image-takes-beating-from-foes

[FrankRep]

Aug. 3, 2012

Slate Article:

How Does a Neo-Bircherite Conspiracy Theorist Win a Democratic Nomination in Tennessee?
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/08/03/how_does_a_neo_bircherite_conspiracy_theorist_win_ a_democratic_nomination_in_tennessee_.html

[trey4sports]

i predict that this will get picked up nationally before long.

[Krzysztof Lesiak]

Also know there is a RP Democrat running for US congress in New York.

We're taking over. :)

What's his name?

[GeorgiaAvenger]

What's his name?Dan O'Conner, but he was beaten.

[trey4sports]

Dan O'Conner, but he was beaten.


slaughtered is more like it. 8% in the primary.

[Seraphim]

NYC epitomizes why Jefferson didn't like cities. Cesspool of corruption and sheep.


slaughtered is more like it. 8% in the primary.

[GeorgiaAvenger]

slaughtered is more like it. 8% in the primary.

I know a couple of people from that area posted that he was going to win so I added him into my signature...from then on I have decided not to take anybodies word for it.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Need to get in contact with DeMint, Club for Growth, Norqvist, etc. Outflank Corker that treasonous SOB!! Send a message to these career RINOs that their time is over.

Yeah, right, it'll be a cold day in hell before they support a Democrat.

[ronpaulfollower999]

Dan O'Conner, but he was beaten.

Shame, but not surprised considering it was New York.

[Brett85]

Yeah, right, it'll be a cold day in hell before they support a Democrat.

This guy has nothing in common with the Democratic Party. Surely the conservative groups would realize that.

[jmdrake]

The people in his Meetup would know best. Ask them.

-t

I've met Mark Clayton. He's for real and one of us.

[Brett85]

I've met Mark Clayton. He's for real and one of us.

Awesome. He should be added as one of the "defenders of liberty." I can't believe there's a race where I actually prefer the Democrat over the Republican.

[erowe1]

This guy has nothing in common with the Democratic Party. Surely the conservative groups would realize that.

I doubt it.

I don't expect Ron or Rand to endorse him either.

[trey4sports]

I doubt it.

I don't expect Ron or Rand to endorse him either.


yeah that is the sad reality of the situation.

[Feeding the Abscess]

I've met Mark Clayton. He's for real and one of us.

Is he for a marriage amendment, or is he for eliminating government marriage?

[AGRP]

What do you think?

I think this is a awesome story. Even if they do manage to kick him out it is an awesome sign.

[TCE]

Clayton is in the Kurt Bills grouping of needing millions of dollars to be competitive. Every outlet has it listed as Safe Republican. Nate Silver gives the Democrat a 2% chance: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/16/democrats-odds-of-retaining-senate-improve/. Look at who he beat in the Democratic Primary, nobody of note: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Tennessee,_2012. Everyone knows it is Corker's seat to lose.

It isn't O'Connor's fault. First rule of liberty movement politics: NEVER run in a primary against an incumbent at the U.S. House or U.S. Senate level. I believe we are currently sporting a 0% success rate. Additionally, I do not believe we have beaten an entrenched incumbent yet, either. All of our victories are of the open-seat variety. Rand, Massie, Amash, Gunny, etc. Bentivolio has the right idea.

[Badger Paul]

"This guy has nothing in common with the Democratic Party. Surely the conservative groups would realize that."

It doesn't matter. Party's are simply brands names if we can try to take over the GOP we can do the same with the Democrats, especially in the South. The party barely exists outside the black community. Nobodies gained over 40 percent of the vote against Obama in primaries. You run Ron Paul Democrats in open primaries where Republicans can vote and you can win nominations just like Conley did and just like this Clayton fellow did in Tennessee. That way our movement isn't limited to just one party.

[Valli6]

8/03/2012

The Tennessee Democratic Party disavowed its own U.S. Senate nominee Friday, announcing that he is “associated with a known hate group” — in this case, a conservative advocacy organization.


“Mark Clayton is associated with a known hate group in Washington, D.C., and the Tennessee Democratic Party disavows his candidacy, will not do anything to promote or support him in any way, and urges Democrats to write-in a candidate of their choice in November,” the statement concluded.

The “hate group” referred to in the statement is Public Advocate USA, a group that, according to a description on its website, “has become a highly visible political organization and a model for other conservative activist groups in Washington D.C. and across the country.”

Public Advocate USA’s recent efforts include advocacy campaigns against same-sex marriage and in favor of pro-life legislation.


The “hate group” label, said Tennessee Democratic Party press secretary Sean Braisted, comes from the Southern Poverty Law Center.

“Our assumption is they’re going to try and use this to launch free media about their cause,” Braisted says.

The state party ended up having to disavow its nominee, he added, because it “didn’t really have anyone on our side running a well-funded, serious campaign, and so no one was able to gain the statewide recognition or support to overcome the top of the ballot phenomenon which is people just pressing the first name they see.”
hxxp://dailycaller.com/2012/08/03/tenn-democratic-party-disavows-its-own-us-senate-nominee/

[KingRobbStark]

I think we should back him up fully. I believe that his win will be one of the greatest moment this movement will ever produce. The message it will send will prove to be priceless.

[Krzysztof Lesiak]

I agree, if they don't throw him off the ballot for whatever concocted and illegitimate reason, we should get behind this guy.

[AJ Antimony]

Wow it's almost like this forum is trying to be as fringe as possible.

I have no problems with Ron Paul Democrats, but associating with this guy will do nothing but hurt the movement.

Like it or not, the media has characterized this guy as a gay hating, conspiracy theory nut job (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/03/mark-clayton-senate-democrats_n_1738980.html?utm_hp_ref=politics).

From the full motherjones (http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/mark-clayton-tennessee-democrats-senate) article:

Quoting Clayton: "Schwarzenegger, born in Austria, wants to amend the Constitution so that he can become president and fulfill Hitler's superman scenario."

"Public Advocate supports a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, opposes abortion rights, and believes the Boy Scouts are under assault from the gay agenda"

Why would anyone want to associate with this guy?

[GeorgiaAvenger]

I don't know about Arnold, but a marriage amendment is a pretty common idea though I disagree with it, pro-life SHOULD be a part of this movement, and Boy Scouts are under assault from the gay agenda(and I'll add the secular agenda as well). They get sued like every day.

[BlackTerrel]

Wow it's almost like this forum is trying to be as fringe as possible.

I have no problems with Ron Paul Democrats, but associating with this guy will do nothing but hurt the movement.

Like it or not, the media has characterized this guy as a gay hating, conspiracy theory nut job (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/03/mark-clayton-senate-democrats_n_1738980.html?utm_hp_ref=politics).

From the full motherjones (http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/mark-clayton-tennessee-democrats-senate) article:

Quoting Clayton: "Schwarzenegger, born in Austria, wants to amend the Constitution so that he can become president and fulfill Hitler's superman scenario."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDxn0Xfqkgw

[erowe1]

Wow it's almost like this forum is trying to be as fringe as possible.

I have no problems with Ron Paul Democrats, but associating with this guy will do nothing but hurt the movement.

Like it or not, the media has characterized this guy as a gay hating, conspiracy theory nut job (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/03/mark-clayton-senate-democrats_n_1738980.html?utm_hp_ref=politics).

From the full motherjones (http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/mark-clayton-tennessee-democrats-senate) article:

Quoting Clayton: "Schwarzenegger, born in Austria, wants to amend the Constitution so that he can become president and fulfill Hitler's superman scenario."

"Public Advocate supports a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, opposes abortion rights, and believes the Boy Scouts are under assault from the gay agenda"

Why would anyone want to associate with this guy?

You're trying to come up with reasons not to support him, and that's the best you can do?

[DerailingDaTrain]

You're trying to come up with reasons not to support him, and that's the best you can do?

That's not enough? I certainly wouldn't donate money to him just for the idiotic Shwarzenegger quote. Who thinks like that?

[erowe1]

That's not enough? I certainly wouldn't donate money to him just for the idiotic Shwarzenegger quote.

Not to mention him being a Democrat

I'm not going to donate to him anyway. But that seemed petty to me. He's right about Arnold wanting to be president. And the superman line was the kind of tasteless but harmless hyperbole that all politicians get caught delivering at some point.

[DerailingDaTrain]

I'm not going to donate to him anyway. But that seemed petty to me. He's right about Arnold wanting to be president. And the superman line was the kind of tasteless but harmless hyperbole that all politicians get caught delivering at some point.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is going back to acting. He will not be involved in politics any more. His upcoming films include:

The Expendables 2 (2012)
Last Stand (2013)
The Tomb (2013)
Ten (2013)
Triplets (2014)
Unknown Soldier (2015)

[Brett85]

Wow it's almost like this forum is trying to be as fringe as possible.

I have no problems with Ron Paul Democrats, but associating with this guy will do nothing but hurt the movement.

Like it or not, the media has characterized this guy as a gay hating, conspiracy theory nut job (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/03/mark-clayton-senate-democrats_n_1738980.html?utm_hp_ref=politics).

From the full motherjones (http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/mark-clayton-tennessee-democrats-senate) article:

Quoting Clayton: "Schwarzenegger, born in Austria, wants to amend the Constitution so that he can become president and fulfill Hitler's superman scenario."

"Public Advocate supports a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, opposes abortion rights, and believes the Boy Scouts are under assault from the gay agenda"

Why would anyone want to associate with this guy?

I don't like his support for conspiracy theories, but some of us on these forums are just libertarian-leaning paleo-conservatives and don't really have a problem with his views on issues like abortion and gay marriage. I can understand how the hardcore, down the line libertarians would object to him. But I certainly think he would be a huge improvement over Corker.

[BlackTerrel]

I'm not going to donate to him anyway. But that seemed petty to me. He's right about Arnold wanting to be president. And the superman line was the kind of tasteless but harmless hyperbole that all politicians get caught delivering at some point.

Unless he was joking it definitely strikes me as someone not completely balanced (I'll take that back if he was joking and I hope he was)

"Schwarzenegger, born in Austria, wants to amend the Constitution so that he can become president and fulfill Hitler's superman scenario."

"Ellison, a Muslim, wants to become President so he can restore the Islamic caliphate"

If he said that how many people on this forum would support him? I'd guess 0 and about 80% would classify him a neo-con.

[AJ Antimony]

You're trying to come up with reasons not to support him, and that's the best you can do?

Those are not all the reasons not to support him. Those were mainly just some examples of him being characterized as a nut job by the media. If the statements are true and in context, then they may be enough not to support him. But let's give him the benefit of the doubt for now...

The reasons we shouldn't support him are perception and party politics.

Perception:
Like it or not, the media and the TN Democratic party have decided that Clayton is a gay-hating, conspiracy theorist nut job. Furthermore, it's not like the guy actually has public support. His election win was a total fluke. Never do you see a major party abandon its U.S. Senate candidate. Never do you see a major party actually encourage its voters to write in another candidate for the general election. Never do you see a major party actually prefer splitting the vote and giving the election to the opposition party rather than having their own nominee elected! The facts in this case create the perception that Clayton is a fringe nutjob with no support whatsoever.

Also, like it or not, we have guilt by association in this country. If you support a nutjob, then you are seen as a nutjob. It's as simple as that. This movement is trying so hard to gain respect, credibility, and influence among the electorate and among the political parties. By supporting perceived nutjobs, we do nothing but lose respect, credibility and influence. Hell, by supporting perceived nutjobs, or at least, fringe candidates, then we will be as useless as the loser 3rd parties that have supported them before. Remember, perception is reality.

Party Politics
Most people who are successfully growing the liberty movement are doing so by taking over the GOP. For us to fully take over the GOP, along the way we have to convince others to start working with us, we have to respect those who have been in the GOP long before us, and we have to prove that the GOP will be healthier under our leadership then theirs. Again, we can only get to this point by gaining respect and credibility. By supporting a fringe Democratic candidate, while we ourselves are still a superminority within the GOP, then we actually hurt our respect and credibility. We are supporting the opposition candidate against 'our' candidate, and we are supporting a set of superminority, fringe issues. What do you expect others to think of us?

[thoughtomator]

It isn't O'Connor's fault. First rule of liberty movement politics: NEVER run in a primary against an incumbent at the U.S. House or U.S. Senate level.

That's a very dubious rule - I can think of one horrible GOP US Senator who would still be exerting enormous political power for all the wrong causes if he had not been take down in a primary; in addition, the knock-on effects of scaring the piss out of other establishment figures has served well in moderating their aristocratic agendas.

[AuH20]

Gay hating conspiracy theorist??? I love the ridiculous tags they throw out. Anyone who speaks openly about the NAU/NAFTA highway system that the Texans temporarily stopped gets high marks in my book. Where do I send him money? :)

[AuH20]

Clayton appears pretty sharp:

http://www.newschannel5.com/story/19197360/clayton-defends-victory-and-affiliation


"I want to use my education to go to Congress, and my experience on Capitol Hill to go and defend the average person that is like me, that's living like me, and faces the same things that I face," said Mark Clayton (D) U.S. Senate Nominee.

At his first official press conference Saturday, Clayton credited his primary victory to shaking many hands and appealing to average voters, not the placement of his name on the ballot as the Democratic Party contends.

Clayton thanked everyone from President Obama to the people who bought Chick-fil-a sandwiches.

He is standing firm in his nomination and says that his detractors have simply underestimated him. The day after Mark Clayton won the Democratic primary he held a press conference defending his victory and affiliation with an organization some are calling a hate group.

"So if Public Advocate is a hate group, then the state of Tennessee is a hate group, because it's in our constitution that marriage is between a man and a woman," said Clayton.

Clayton defended Public Advocate's record. He says the group focuses on pushing pro-life legislation, defending marriage between a man and a woman and even advocating for the Boy Scouts of America.

He insists they are not a hate group. However, a spokesman for Clayton did have strong words for State Democratic Party chairman Chip Forrester.

They claim by using party resources to attack a "duly elected candidate" Forrester violated federal campaign law.

"We ask for his immediate dismissal or resignation. If we don't have that resignation by the end of business on Monday, we will be filing a complaint with the Federal Election Commission," said Rick Simpkins, a spokesman for Clayton.

[erowe1]

Arnold Schwarzenegger is going back to acting. He will not be involved in politics any more. His upcoming films include:

The Expendables 2 (2012)
Last Stand (2013)
The Tomb (2013)
Ten (2013)
Triplets (2014)
Unknown Soldier (2015)

So?

What he was talking about was how Arnold lobbied for amending the Constitution so he could run for president. That's not controversial. He did. It was national news. He didn't succeed. That doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[RonRules]

When I saw an article about Democrat Mark Clayton wining the Democratic nomination, and then being rejected by the party, I thought I had found the perfect story for this forum. Is Liberty that toxic to the establishment?

You guys beat me to it, but here's the story from the Tennessean:
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120803/NEWS02/308030124/Senate-nominee-Mark-Clayton-disavowed-by-Tennessee-Democratic-Party-?odyssey=nav%7Chead

The party of Cordell Hull, Estes Kefauver and Al Gore Sr. and Jr. won’t have a standard-bearer — or at least not one it can stomach — in Tennessee’s next U.S. Senate race.

Less than 24 hours after a man espousing conservative and libertarian views surprised the state’s political scene by winning the Democratic nomination, the Tennessee Democratic Party disavowed him, saying he’s part of an anti-gay hate group.

The party said Friday that it would do nothing to help Mark Clayton, 35, who received nearly twice as many votes as his closest challenger in Thursday’s seven-candidate primary, winning the right to challenge Republican U.S. Sen. Bob Corker in November.

"The only time that Clayton has voted in a Democratic primary was when he was voting for himself,” the party said in a news release. “Many Democrats in Tennessee knew nothing about any of the candidates in the race, so they voted for the person at the top of the ticket. Unfortunately, none of the other Democratic candidates were able to run the race needed to gain statewide visibility or support.

“Mark Clayton is associated with a known hate group in Washington, D.C. (and what is it?), and the Tennessee Democratic Party disavows his candidacy, will not do anything to promote or support him in any way, and urges Democrats to write-in a candidate of their choice in November.”

Clayton defended his work for Public Advocate of the United States, the pro-life, pro-marriage group in question, and said he was disappointed with the Tennessee Democratic Party’s “zero-sum politics.”

“It’s not necessarily surprising, unfortunately,” he said in a phone interview. “But that’s not the way I deal with my political opponents. I have good friends who are liberals.”

Clayton acknowledged his social conservative instincts but said he’d been deeply disappointed by the presidency of George W. Bush, the last Republican to occupy the White House.

Tennessee Republican Party Chairman Chris Devaney gloated on Twitter about the opposition party’s failure to find a suitable candidate.

“Nice vetting job by the Dems,” Devaney wrote.

The reaction wasn’t any more sympathetic in some Democratic quarters.

“What a debacle in Tennessee,” the liberal Daily Kos website wrote Friday morning, hours before the party announced its decision. “It's not like Democrats were ever going to have a shot at unseating freshman Sen. Bob Corker, but at least our preferred candidate, actress and activist Park Overall, is a real Democrat. The guy Dems did nominate seems to be anything but.”

Clayton said he’s an unpaid vice president and does occasional writing for Public Advocate of the United States, which was designated as “an anti-gay hate group” by the Southern Poverty Law Center in March. A story on the center’s web site says Public Advocate “has spread lies and vitriol about LGBT people to raise funds, impede progress toward greater equality and to deny LGBT people basic dignity and respect.”

The organization says on its own site that it has worked to support a “federal traditional marriage (man-woman) amendment to the Constitution to defend traditional marriage from assaults from those who claim to promote ‘same sex marriage’.”

Clayton said the group protects “the rights of people who don’t want to live their lives differently.” He said the Southern Poverty Law Center teaches a “gender-bending” curriculum and uses its national list of hate groups as a fund-raising strategy.

The Clayton campaign’s Facebook page champions three major positions: strict adherence to the U.S. Constitution, family stances that are pro-life, and keeping the country from turning into “AN ORWELLIAN SUPER STATE.”

Sean Braisted, a Democratic Party spokesman, left the door open for a possible legal maneuver to try to get Clayton’s name off the Democratic line of the November ballot.

“The only option we are taking off the table in this situation,” he said, “is supporting Mark Clayton.”

Contact Michael Cass at 615-259-8838 or mcass@tennessean.com. Follow him on Twitter @tnmetro.

[TCE]

That's a very dubious rule - I can think of one horrible GOP US Senator who would still be exerting enormous political power for all the wrong causes if he had not been take down in a primary; in addition, the knock-on effects of scaring the piss out of other establishment figures has served well in moderating their aristocratic agendas.

Look at who was backing the Orrin Hatch disposal. Erick Erickson was in on it as was a large chunk of the Utah GOP and TEA Party groups everywhere. If you would like an all en-compassing rule: the liberty movement cannot win in a Primary nor General Election versus an entrenched incumbent unless there are great forces already in play that are set to help us out.

Besides, would you like to suggest that we begin running against incumbents as a rule just because Mike Lee won? That is one victory out of a countless number of losses.

[Indy Vidual]

We should run in both parties.

[RP Supporter]

Speaking as someone who supports same sex marriage, I must say I find it interesting that apparently lobbying against it is enough to have one declared a member of a "hate group." I guess once Obama declared support, all the Dem parties fell in line. So a man who now holds the majority position in his state is an extremist. Wonderful message, dems. Can't wait to see how your new position impacts you in states like Alabama and North Carolina.

And an eye roll to the Republicans. I get that they don't want to come to Clayton's aid, but apparently they're all willing to jump onto the "hatemongering extremist" train as well.

He won't win, but I hope the guy breaks 40%. Were I him, I'd attend all the tea party events I can, advertise completely to Republicans and conservative independents about how conservative I am and how liberal Corker is, and hope enough of them break rank and combine with the straight ticket Democratic voters to get a win.

[roho76]

"Many Democrats in Tennessee knew nothing about any of the candidates in the race, so they voted for the person at the top of the ticket."

Why does this not surprise me. This is the equivalent of marking all the (D)'s on a multiple choice and hoping you pass the test.

So, State Democratic Party chairman Chip Forrester thinks democrat voters in TN are dumb, stupid, animals who can't read? Whether they are or not is up for debate but I'm sure they don't like being called that by their "leader".

[DerailingDaTrain]

So?

What he was talking about was how Arnold lobbied for amending the Constitution so he could run for president. That's not controversial. He did. It was national news. He didn't succeed. That doesn't mean it didn't happen.

So because he did that he's a Nazi trying to play out Hitler's final plan? Sure

:rolleyes:

[The Free Hornet]

We should run in both parties.

+1

Every party. Or at least, if not on the R and D sides, have an L or C on the ballot for protest vote if not outright victory.

[QWDC]

If he actually got money to run ads, he could flip much of the things the party is hitting him on into pluses in TN. Attack the Democrats for abandoning the conservative principles most Tennesseans registered with the Democratic Party support, calling them "extreme", and attack Corker for being more liberal than he is. He sure is making it hard to get support with some of his former statements, though.

[erowe1]

So because he did that he's a Nazi trying to play out Hitler's final plan? Sure

:rolleyes:

No. That part was just silly. I see no reason to pay attention to it (like I already said in the post you already replied to before you got sidetracked on all the movies Arnold is going to be in).

[jmdrake]

Is he for a marriage amendment, or is he for eliminating government marriage?

I don't know. I don't care. It's not one of my issues. My issues are ending the fed, ending the wars and ending the police state. I know he agrees with all of those issues. And he is a Ron Paul supporter.

Edit: His websites getting hammered. I found this information from the Internet wayback machine. It's from his earlier campaign against Lamar Alexander.

http://web.archive.org/web/20110708163723/http://www.claytonforsenate.com/issues.html
Issues in the Clayton for Senate Campaign

Mark Clayton is a traditionalist Democrat who's campaign has filed in hope of unseating neo-conservative Lamar Alexander. For the last twenty years, neo-conservatives in Washington like Lamar Alexander have tried to bury the "American system" of states and economics in favor of war and economic policy which is foreign to American traditions and values.

The success of neo-conservatives like Lamar Alexander, if it can be called success, has been a total catastrophe for all Americans and has left the United States in massive debt to the Communist Chinese government.

Mark Clayton is:

PRO-LIFE

A PROUD CONSTITUTIONALIST

AGAINST national ID cards

AGAINST NAFTA, GATT, NAU

AGAINST the NAFTA superhighway

AGAINST legalization of slave labor abroad for American-based multinational corporations

FOR repeal of all tax-exempt registration imposed on churches by the so-called "501 (c) (3)" status

FOR principles of sound money and the "American system" of states and economics and AGAINST so-called free-trade treaties which undermine the "American system" of states and economics

FOR immediate conscription of military "contractors" and subjecting them to the same regulations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, chain of command, physical training, and discipline to which American soldiers must adhere

THIS CAMPAIGN IS DEDICATED TO THE DEFEAT OF NEO-CONSERVATIVE LAMAR ALEXANDER -- The first time you may vote to elect Mark will be on August 7th, 2008.

No matter which party you belong to, you may participate and vote for Mark.

If you are not registered, see the following link so that you may register and vote for Mark.

REGISTER TO VOTE CLICK HERE

[BSU kid]

He is getting a REALLY bad rap by the media right now, but its nice to see a RP democrat. Maybe we should give him his own section lol. :p

[jmdrake]

Those are not all the reasons not to support him. Those were mainly just some examples of him being characterized as a nut job by the media. If the statements are true and in context, then they may be enough not to support him. But let's give him the benefit of the doubt for now...

The reasons we shouldn't support him are perception and party politics.

Perception:
Like it or not, the media and the TN Democratic party have decided that Clayton is a gay-hating, conspiracy theorist nut job. Furthermore, it's not like the guy actually has public support. His election win was a total fluke. Never do you see a major party abandon its U.S. Senate candidate. Never do you see a major party actually encourage its voters to write in another candidate for the general election. Never do you see a major party actually prefer splitting the vote and giving the election to the opposition party rather than having their own nominee elected! The facts in this case create the perception that Clayton is a fringe nutjob with no support whatsoever

Considering that democrats consider Chick-fil-a to be "gay hating nutjobs", being labeled that is a plus.



Also, like it or not, we have guilt by association in this country. If you support a nutjob, then you are seen as a nutjob. It's as simple as that. This movement is trying so hard to gain respect, credibility, and influence among the electorate and among the political parties. By supporting perceived nutjobs, we do nothing but lose respect, credibility and influence. Hell, by supporting perceived nutjobs, or at least, fringe candidates, then we will be as useless as the loser 3rd parties that have supported them before. Remember, perception is reality.

Party Politics
Most people who are successfully growing the liberty movement are doing so by taking over the GOP. For us to fully take over the GOP, along the way we have to convince others to start working with us, we have to respect those who have been in the GOP long before us, and we have to prove that the GOP will be healthier under our leadership then theirs. Again, we can only get to this point by gaining respect and credibility. By supporting a fringe Democratic candidate, while we ourselves are still a superminority within the GOP, then we actually hurt our respect and credibility. We are supporting the opposition candidate against 'our' candidate, and we are supporting a set of superminority, fringe issues. What do you expect others to think of us?

We as a movement have already made it clear that we won't support Romney. Crossing over and supporting a conservative dem is in line with what we already do. If you don't want to support him then fine. Don't. But your rationale is not rational.

[AuH20]

I don't know. I don't care. It's not one of my issues. My issues are ending the fed, ending the wars and ending the police state. I know he agrees with all of those issues. And he is a Ron Paul supporter.

Edit: His websites getting hammered. I found this information from the Internet wayback machine. It's from his earlier campaign against Lamar Alexander.

http://web.archive.org/web/20110708163723/http://www.claytonforsenate.com/issues.html
Issues in the Clayton for Senate Campaign

Mark Clayton is a traditionalist Democrat who's campaign has filed in hope of unseating neo-conservative Lamar Alexander. For the last twenty years, neo-conservatives in Washington like Lamar Alexander have tried to bury the "American system" of states and economics in favor of war and economic policy which is foreign to American traditions and values.

The success of neo-conservatives like Lamar Alexander, if it can be called success, has been a total catastrophe for all Americans and has left the United States in massive debt to the Communist Chinese government.

Mark Clayton is:

PRO-LIFE

A PROUD CONSTITUTIONALIST

AGAINST national ID cards

AGAINST NAFTA, GATT, NAU

AGAINST the NAFTA superhighway

AGAINST legalization of slave labor abroad for American-based multinational corporations

FOR repeal of all tax-exempt registration imposed on churches by the so-called "501 (c) (3)" status

FOR principles of sound money and the "American system" of states and economics and AGAINST so-called free-trade treaties which undermine the "American system" of states and economics

FOR immediate conscription of military "contractors" and subjecting them to the same regulations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, chain of command, physical training, and discipline to which American soldiers must adhere

THIS CAMPAIGN IS DEDICATED TO THE DEFEAT OF NEO-CONSERVATIVE LAMAR ALEXANDER -- The first time you may vote to elect Mark will be on August 7th, 2008.

No matter which party you belong to, you may participate and vote for Mark.

If you are not registered, see the following link so that you may register and vote for Mark.

REGISTER TO VOTE CLICK HERE

His platform is so thorough and amazing.

[AuH20]

He is getting a REALLY bad rap by the media right now, but its nice to see a RP democrat. Maybe we should give him his own section lol. :p

He's much better than Jeff Flake. In fact, he may have the best platform of any potential senator I've ever seen, in that there is no fluff. Now we have to see if he has the communication skills. Hopefully, this guy can talk.

[jmdrake]

I doubt it.

He should bypass the conservative "groups" and go straight for conservative talk radio. Right now he's getting a lot of press. Talk radio types may have him on just for the novelty and the "rub it in the dems face" factor. Oh, and this is Tennessee we're talking about. One of the most popular conservative members of the state legislature for the past few decades has been a democrat by the name of Doug Henry. In his last election he solidly beat his republican opponent in a solidly republican district.



I don't expect Ron or Rand to endorse him either.

Rand can't. Ron can and should.

[BSU kid]

This video makes it sound like they are kicking him from the ballot...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3IhPZypFB8&feature=player_embedded

[AuH20]

This video makes it sound like they are kicking him from the ballot...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3IhPZypFB8&feature=player_embedded

I love the lead-in. Labeled a "Anti-gay activist and conspiracy theorist" before he's even allowed to talk. The media sucks.

[BSU kid]

Gotta love NBC :rolleyes:

[jmdrake]

This video makes it sound like they are kicking him from the ballot...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3IhPZypFB8&feature=player_embedded

The fact that the democrats are considering breaking the law to get Clayton off the ballot proves that the conspiracy is no mere theory.

[BSU kid]

The fact that the democrats are considering breaking the law to get Clayton off the ballot proves that the conspiracy is no mere theory.

I read in some article yesterday that they did it before, to a state senator who voted with republicans but I'll have to find that again. I think seeing as this is a race for a federal office, the rules are different now.

[AJ Antimony]

Considering that democrats consider Chick-fil-a to be "gay hating nutjobs", being labeled that is a plus.

We as a movement have already made it clear that we won't support Romney. Crossing over and supporting a conservative dem is in line with what we already do. If you don't want to support him then fine. Don't. But your rationale is not rational.

I always love it when people respond to my paragraphs of argument with a couple sentences of juvenile arrogance. Yep, you really convinced me! :rolleyes:

[Karsten]

Wouldn't make sense to try to get him off the ballot unless he was a threat to win. I know it's earlier, but any general election poll numbers, or indicators on how he'd do against the Republican?

[jmdrake]

I always love it when people respond to my paragraphs of argument with a couple sentences of juvenile arrogance. Yep, you really convinced me! :rolleyes:

What's "juvenile" about pointing out that (in Tennessee anyway) being labeled a "gay hating nutjob" is a plus? It's either a fact or it isn't. Being that I'm on the ground in Tennessee I believe I'm in a better position that you are to judge that. Whether I convince "you" of anything is irrelevant. You can keep your wrong opinion all you want. You were the one trying to tell others what to do. (We shouldn't support this guy). That is what is truly "juvenile arrogance".

[jmdrake]

I read in some article yesterday that they did it before, to a state senator who voted with republicans but I'll have to find that again. I think seeing as this is a race for a federal office, the rules are different now.

Well just because they did this before doesn't make it actually legal. ;) That said, laws in this country are so screwy these days that anything is possible. But defrauding voters of their choice, and defrauding the state of tax dollars to run a special primary when there was nothing wrong with this one except the fact that they didn't like the result should be illegal if it isn't already.

[jbauer]

I was planning on voting for the Democrat anyway in the General because Bailout Bob Corker is terrible. I wouldn't throw money at it, there's better oppertunities out there then this one, but its still funny.

Fyi, there's not a snowballs chance in hell of this guy beating Corker unless Corker "Sandusky's" some little kids around here.

[jbauer]

You are correct Gay Hating is a plus here. Frankly I could care less, but don't tell that to anyone here they'd go nuts. Heck being anti-muslim is nearly a party plank here.


What's "juvenile" about pointing out that (in Tennessee anyway) being labeled a "gay hating nutjob" is a plus? It's either a fact or it isn't. Being that I'm on the ground in Tennessee I believe I'm in a better position that you are to judge that. Whether I convince "you" of anything is irrelevant. You can keep your wrong opinion all you want. You were the one trying to tell others what to do. (We shouldn't support this guy). That is what is truly "juvenile arrogance".

[jbauer]

You are correct Gay Hating is a plus here. Frankly I could care less, but don't tell that to anyone here they'd go nuts. Heck being anti-muslim is nearly a party plank here.


What's "juvenile" about pointing out that (in Tennessee anyway) being labeled a "gay hating nutjob" is a plus? It's either a fact or it isn't. Being that I'm on the ground in Tennessee I believe I'm in a better position that you are to judge that. Whether I convince "you" of anything is irrelevant. You can keep your wrong opinion all you want. You were the one trying to tell others what to do. (We shouldn't support this guy). That is what is truly "juvenile arrogance".

[AJ Antimony]

What's "juvenile" about pointing out that (in Tennessee anyway) being labeled a "gay hating nutjob" is a plus? It's either a fact or it isn't. Being that I'm on the ground in Tennessee I believe I'm in a better position that you are to judge that. Whether I convince "you" of anything is irrelevant. You can keep your wrong opinion all you want. You were the one trying to tell others what to do. (We shouldn't support this guy). That is what is truly "juvenile arrogance".

*gay hating, conspiracy theorist nutjob. You left that part out!

I could care less if you are "on the ground in Tennessee." What I could care about is if you were "on the ground in the Tennessee Republican Party." What do Tennessee Republicans (specifically, NOT Tennessee Ron Paul Republicans) think of a general election versus Clayton? Do they fear him or laugh at him? What would the national Republican Party think if the Ron Paul people actually tried to flip a Senate seat to the Democrats when the GOP is trying very hard to win a majority in the Senate?

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

Awesome. He should be added as one of the "defenders of liberty." I can't believe there's a race where I actually prefer the Democrat over the Republican.

Democrat? Republican?

Who cares anymore, really...

Attention, RINOs. Party's over - party affiliation is meaningless, now. We've learned the rules to the Game you play. :-)

[jmdrake]

*gay hating, conspiracy theorist nutjob. You left that part out!

I could care less if you are "on the ground in Tennessee." What I could care about is if you were "on the ground in the Tennessee Republican Party." What do Tennessee Republicans (specifically, NOT Tennessee Ron Paul Republicans) think of a general election versus Clayton? Do they fear him or laugh at him? What would the national Republican Party think if the Ron Paul people actually tried to flip a Senate seat to the Democrats when the GOP is trying very hard to win a majority in the Senate?

The "conspiracy theory" attack isn't based on 9/11 or any other "politically incorrect" conspiracy theories, but rather the typical conspiracy theories most tea party types ascribe to. (There's a "gay agenda" or "We've got to be worried about Agenda 21 and the United Nations".) Really, 70% of the TN republican party are "conspiracy theorists" based on the way Mark Clayton has been "attacked". He hasn't even come out as a "birther".

Now to your questions.

What do Tennessee Republicans (specifically, NOT Tennessee Ron Paul Republicans) think of a general election versus Clayton? Do they fear him or laugh at him?

Good question. I haven't done a poll or had a chance to listen to talk radio. I'll put my ear to the ground the next few days and let you know what I find out. But realize that there's as much of a divide between "moderate" republicans and "tea party" republicans as there are between republicans and democrats. So some "moderate" republicans might indeed fear or laugh at him.

What would the national Republican Party think if the Ron Paul people actually tried to flip a Senate seat to the Democrats when the GOP is trying very hard to win a majority in the Senate?

What does the national Republican Party think of the fact that Ron Paul hasn't (and won't) endorse Mitt Romney? Sorry, but I don't think the way forward is by totally abandoning principle just because of what the "national Republican Party" thinks. The "national Republican Party" tried to stop Rand from winning the KY senate seat. If democrat Doug Henry had gone up against Corker many republicans, Ron Paul or otherwise, would have supported him and the national Republican Party wouldn't have been able to do jack about it. Someone who plans on running for office on the GOP ticket can't afford to help Clayton out, but for the rest of us it's a total non issue.

[jmdrake]

Quick research. Bob Corker backed extending the debt ceiling past the 2012 elections and said that the debt ceiling shouldn't be tied to deficit reduction.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/29/bob-corker-debt-ceiling_n_913174.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/14/gop-senator-maybe-we-shouldnt-tie-debt-vote-to-deficit_n_898350.html

It's unconscionable not to try to oust this guy.

[jmdrake]

I was planning on voting for the Democrat anyway in the General because Bailout Bob Corker is terrible. I wouldn't throw money at it, there's better oppertunities out there then this one, but its still funny.

Fyi, there's not a snowballs chance in hell of this guy beating Corker unless Corker "Sandusky's" some little kids around here.

That's true. But if we could force Corker to pay attention to the race it would be worth it. I'd love to see Corker shoot himself in the foot by parroting DNC talking points. "My opponent hates gay people because the SPLC says so and because his group is pushing for a federal marriage amendment. My opponent wants to get repeal the NDAA. My opponent wants to get rid of the TSA. My opponent doesn't respect a woman's right to choose. My opponent was against the bailout. My opponent doesn't think we should have raised the debt ceiling."

[Brian4Liberty]

I love the lead-in. Labeled a "Anti-gay activist and conspiracy theorist" before he's even allowed to talk. The media sucks.

Got that right.

"OMG! He wants to eliminate the TSA! He's crazy!" Tomorrow the same idiot "reporter" will probably do a story about the TSA molesting people. Cognitive dissonance is no problem down at The Ministry of Truth. Oh no, an Orwell reference! Pure lunacy!

[BSU kid]

Got that right.

"OMG! He wants to eliminate the TSA! He's crazy!" Tomorrow the same idiot "reporter" will probably do a story about the TSA molesting people. Cognitive dissonance is no problem down at The Ministry of Truth. Oh no, an Orwell reference! Pure lunacy!

Yeah the TSA quip kind of made me lol. :rolleyes:

[FrankRep]

The New American
06 August 2012

Establishment Balks as Tenn. Democrats Nominate Pro-life Conservative in Senate Race (http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12331-establishment-balks-as-tenn-democrats-nominate-pro-life-conservative-in-senate-race)

[qh4dotcom]

I donated to the last Ron Paul Democratic nominee Bob Conley...and will be donating to Mark Clayton too

[AuH20]

Not bad Clayton........Not bad


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7G8ERsud4o&feature=player_embedded

[AuH20]

Maddow mocking the Ron Paul Democrat.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9mPkNlY-Y8

[Matt Collins]

Looks like the TNDP is looking to throw Clayton out:

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2012/aug/11/democrats-could-act-against-clayton/?politics

[Sematary]

If it weren't for this:
2) PRO-LIFE/TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE ONLY: We believe that abortion kills millions of innocent people. We also believe that marriage is between only a man and a woman. The government, as under both Bush and Obama, has no business waging tax-funded propaganda campaigns pitting perverted and immoral behavior against religious liberty law and mainstream family values. this would be someone that I can vote for.
1. I'm trying to see how he's tying abortion into the rest of this bullshit.
2. A true Ron Paul candidate wouldn't give two shits about whom marries whom.
3. The government has no business determining what "family values" are so he can suck it.
4. What does he consider to be "religious liberty law".
5. I hope he gets his ass handed to him for being an ass hat

Guess I should have watched the Rachel Madow video first. Then I could have had MORE reasons to hate him. What an ass hat.

[AuH20]

If it weren't for this: this would be someone that I can vote for.
1. I'm trying to see how he's tying abortion into the rest of this bullshit.
2. A true Ron Paul candidate wouldn't give two shits about whom marries whom.
3. The government has no business determining what "family values" are so he can suck it.
4. What does he consider to be "religious liberty law".
5. I hope he gets his ass handed to him for being an ass hat

Eh. Gary Johnson believes the opposite and I'm going to vote for him despite personally be against those 2. Those aren't critical issues.
Secondly, like in the video above, he states that he's an advocate for the equal rights of all homosexuals, which would lead me to believe he's in favor of civil unions.

[jmdrake]

If it weren't for this: this would be someone that I can vote for.
1. I'm trying to see how he's tying abortion into the rest of this bullshit.
2. A true Ron Paul candidate wouldn't give two shits about whom marries whom.
3. The government has no business determining what "family values" are so he can suck it.
4. What does he consider to be "religious liberty law".
5. I hope he gets his ass handed to him for being an ass hat

Guess I should have watched the Rachel Madow video first. Then I could have had MORE reasons to hate him. What an ass hat.

I'm surprised you support Ron Paul. (He's prolife, supports DOMA, would be against gay marriage being forced by judges even at the state level (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html), and thinks Lawrence v. Texas (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul120.html) was a bad decision). Ron and Mark disagree on the federal marriage amendment idea, but that's about it.

But hey, let Rachel Maddow think for you.

[Sematary]

I'm surprised you support Ron Paul. (He's prolife, supports DOMA, would be against gay marriage being forced by judges even at the state level (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html), and thinks Lawrence v. Texas (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul120.html) was a bad decision). Ron and Mark disagree on the federal marriage amendment idea, but that's about it.

But hey, let Rachel Maddow think for you.

Ron Paul doesn't think the government should decide any of what was mentioned there - which is WHY I support him. Because those questions are best left to the states as the Constitution intended, just like pretty much everything else. And I know he's pro life (as am I) but (again), I don't believe it is an issue for the federal government to be involved in. It sounds to me like this guy is a Democrat version of an evangelical Republican. I can live without that.

[Sematary]

I'm surprised you support Ron Paul. (He's prolife, supports DOMA, would be against gay marriage being forced by judges even at the state level (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html), and thinks Lawrence v. Texas (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul120.html) was a bad decision). Ron and Mark disagree on the federal marriage amendment idea, but that's about it.

But hey, let Rachel Maddow think for you.

P.S. - as for DOMA, even Ron Paul can be wrong sometimes and the little additional dig at the end was completely unnecessary - especially considering that we are looking for the same thing - a government which recognizes and defends liberty.

[jmdrake]

Ron Paul doesn't think the government should decide any of what was mentioned there - which is WHY I support him. Because those questions are best left to the states as the Constitution intended, just like pretty much everything else. And I know he's pro life (as am I) but (again), I don't believe it is an issue for the federal government to be involved in. It sounds to me like this guy is a Democrat version of an evangelical Republican. I can live without that.

You didn't actually read what I referenced did you? Ron Paul:

If I were a member of the Texas legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state.


P.S. - as for DOMA, even Ron Paul can be wrong sometimes and the little additional dig at the end was completely unnecessary - especially considering that we are looking for the same thing - a government which recognizes and defends liberty.

So you can dig at a Ron Paul supporter you've never met (Mark Clayton) based according to you on what you saw from Rachel Maddow, and it's wrong of me to call you on it? Ummmmmm.....okay. Whatever. Mark Clayton is a Ron Paul supporter. He was before he ever ran for office. And just like you disagree with Ron Paul on DOMA, he disagrees with Ron Paul on the federal marriage amendment. Either you are going to be consistent towards people you slightly disagree with, or you aren't. It's your choice.

[Sematary]

You didn't actually read what I referenced did you? Ron Paul:

If I were a member of the Texas legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state.




So you can dig at a Ron Paul supporter you've never met (Mark Clayton) based according to you on what you saw from Rachel Maddow, and it's wrong of me to call you on it? Ummmmmm.....okay. Whatever. Mark Clayton is a Ron Paul supporter. He was before he ever ran for office. And just like you disagree with Ron Paul on DOMA, he disagrees with Ron Paul on the federal marriage amendment. Either you are going to be consistent towards people you slightly disagree with, or you aren't. It's your choice.

Actually, I took a dig at him BEFORE I saw the Maddow video. And, if you read what you just wrote, Ron Paul said the TEXAS state legislature. That's fine. States have rights and he believes they should exercise them. As for this Democrat - A liberty loving Ron Paul supporter would not attempt to use the federal government to enforce his own moral code. So, ipso facto, he isn't a Ron Paul supporter but a pretender.

[One Last Battle!]

Actually, I took a dig at him BEFORE I saw the Maddow video. And, if you read what you just wrote, Ron Paul said the TEXAS state legislature. That's fine. States have rights and he believes they should exercise them. As for this Democrat - A liberty loving Ron Paul supporter would not attempt to use the federal government to enforce his own moral code. So, ipso facto, he isn't a Ron Paul supporter but a pretender.

He's running in Tennessee. Who cares? Gay marriage and abortion are non-issues. Thousands of people are dying in the Middle East and the American economy is due to fly off a cliff, and you're going to support a fascist like Bailout Bob over a mostly decent candidate like Clayton because you don't like his views on two non-issues?

[jmdrake]

Actually, I took a dig at him BEFORE I saw the Maddow video. And, if you read what you just wrote, Ron Paul said the TEXAS state legislature. That's fine. States have rights and he believes they should exercise them. As for this Democrat - A liberty loving Ron Paul supporter would not attempt to use the federal government to enforce his own moral code. So, ipso facto, he isn't a Ron Paul supporter but a pretender.

1) You initially said Ron Paul doesn't think the government should decide any of what was mentioned there - which is WHY I support him. . Last time I checked the Texas state legislature was part of a government.

2) Ron Paul's "We the People Act" would essentially accomplish the same thing as a federal marriage amendment, but without amending the constitution.

3) If you think Mark isn't a "real Ron Paul supporter" then you ought to look at who Ron Paul ultimately supported for president in 2008. http://baldwin08.com/Pro-Traditional-Marriage.cfm

[jmdrake]

He's running in Tennessee. Who cares? Gay marriage and abortion are non-issues. Thousands of people are dying in the Middle East and the American economy is due to fly off a cliff, and you're going to support a fascist like Bailout Bob over a mostly decent candidate like Clayton because you don't like his views on two non-issues?

+rep

[roho76]

I'm in Nashville working for Carlex Glass. Is anybody in the area gonna go door to door for this guy? Would love to help out. I'm working 12 hours a day but I get out at 6PM so I could jump in for a couple hours. I'm going to contact his campaign and see what I can do.

[Matt Collins]

I'm in Nashville working for Carlex Glass. Is anybody in the area gonna go door to door for this guy? Would love to help out. I'm working 12 hours a day but I get out at 6PM so I could jump in for a couple hours. I'm going to contact his campaign and see what I can do.I dont know what Mark has planned for his campaign, but you should hook up with the local movement, we're on Facebook and Meetup.

[roho76]

I dont know what Mark has planned for his campaign, but you should hook up with the local movement, we're on Facebook and Meetup.

Are you in Nashville, Matt?

Which groups? I did a search for Nashville on FB and Meetup and found a couple of them on both.

[roho76]

Nvmd. found them.

[roho76]

Damn I missed the 241 beer meetup yesterday. I ended up sitting at Judge Beans by myself. :(

[Matt Collins]

Damn I missed the 241 beer meetup yesterday. I ended up sitting at Judge Beans by myself. :(Liberty on the Rocks in Nashville is always a fun time :-)

[Feeding the Abscess]

1) You initially said Ron Paul doesn't think the government should decide any of what was mentioned there - which is WHY I support him. . Last time I checked the Texas state legislature was part of a government.

2) Ron Paul's "We the People Act" would essentially accomplish the same thing as a federal marriage amendment, but without amending the constitution.

3) If you think Mark isn't a "real Ron Paul supporter" then you ought to look at who Ron Paul ultimately supported for president in 2008. http://baldwin08.com/Pro-Traditional-Marriage.cfm

For what it's Wuertz, Ron didn't affirmatively answer an interview with a Christian group about voting to ban gay marriage in Texas:


Along those lines with marriage, if you were on the state level for something like Proposition 8, would you vote for or against?

Well, I believe marriage is between one man and one woman.

At the state level, then, would you endorse a particular policy?

I don't think the laws would change morality.

Basically said the same thing on abortion, too:


Along those lines, if Roe v. Wade was reversed, what would you do from there?

I'm always disappointed that my proposal to remove the jurisdiction from the federal court has been ignored. Some people are overly confident about the federal government. As long as you have to have the courts or amend the Constitution, they play with that for years and years or decades and that never gets done, so the abortion continues. Our Constitution doesn't permit it, but it doesn't work. That's what Roe v. Wade was about. It was nationalized, but the wrong way, and that's what permitted the abortions.

So if it were reversed and became a state issue, would you regulate it?

No, to me the government has very, very little responsibility for molding us and our personal behavior, you go to church and all that. But taking life, protecting life is a responsibility of the government. But we don't have any — all our laws are written by the states about murder and first-degree murder and manslaughter and actions that kill people. That's all dealt with at the state level, and that's where the abortion issue. I say it's taking a life and it has to be dealt with at the local level.

It would have been beautiful to see general election Ron. Sad face.

[jmdrake]

For what it's Wuertz, Ron didn't affirmatively answer an interview with a Christian group about voting to ban gay marriage in Texas. Ron answered with "I don't think it's the government's role to enforce morality".

Well I'll take a sourced house floor speech over a unsourced comment from some interview sometime. But here's the most important thing. Assume for a minute that Ron wasn't lying in the speech I posted and it does represent his current view. Would that alone be enough for you or anyone else here not to support him? Is gay marriage really that important to you? Because it isn't to me. I would support Ron Paul, and Mark Clayton, even if both were pushing to overturn DOMA. I support them and I believe both of them support DOMA. And while I disagree with the position Mark's group takes on the federal marriage amendment (I'm not sure what Mark's personal position is), that's not enough to outweigh someone who's against the NDAA, the Patriot Act, the drug war, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the bailouts, the federal reserve, the TSA etc.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Well I'll take a sourced house floor speech over a unsourced comment from some interview sometime. But here's the most important thing. Assume for a minute that Ron wasn't lying in the speech I posted and it does represent his current view. Would that alone be enough for you or anyone else here not to support him? Is gay marriage really that important to you? Because it isn't to me. I would support Ron Paul, and Mark Clayton, even if both were pushing to overturn DOMA. I support them and I believe both of them support DOMA. And while I disagree with the position Mark's group takes on the federal marriage amendment (I'm not sure what Mark's personal position is), that's not enough to outweigh someone who's against the NDAA, the Patriot Act, the drug war, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the bailouts, the federal reserve, the TSA etc.

It wouldn't change my feelings on them being in office, but it probably would affect my decision to donate or vote for them. But my threshold is stupid high, if a candidate isn't running on a platform to abolish the entire federal government, I won't send money to them.

[Brett85]

if a candidate isn't running on a platform to abolish the entire federal government, I won't send money to them.

Then I guess that means you didn't send any money to Ron.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Then I guess that means you didn't send any money to Ron.

That is correct. I also didn't like his campaign staff, that was another factor. I also don't vote. Did spread the message in as many effective ways I could, though. To liberals, conservatives, and apathetic types, mostly.

[Brett85]

I also don't vote.

That seems really counter productive. I'm often criticized by people here for some of my views, but at least I actually voted for Ron in the 2008 and 2012 Republican primaries. If you're going to support a candidate, you have to be involved in the political process. Ron Paul received about 2 million votes in the Republican primary, and there's probably a lot of people like you who could've added to that number if you had voted. It seems as though Ron always had a lot more people at his rallies than actually voted for him on election day. I guess that explains why.

[Feeding the Abscess]

That seems really counter productive. I'm often criticized by people here for some of my views, but at least I actually voted for Ron in the 2008 and 2012 Republican primaries. If you're going to support a candidate, you have to be involved in the political process. Ron Paul received about 2 million votes in the Republican primary, and there's probably a lot of people like you who could've added to that number if you had voted. It seems as though Ron always had a lot more people at his rallies than actually voted for him on election day. I guess that explains why.

I live in California; even if I did vote, Ron had stopped actively campaigning by the time my state voted in both 2008 and this cycle.

[jmdrake]

That is correct. I also didn't like his campaign staff, that was another factor. I also don't vote. Did spread the message in as many effective ways I could, though. To liberals, conservatives, and apathetic types, mostly.

Well at least you're consistent. I tell you though, if you were running for office, if I thought you had a shot at winning, and if I had the extra cash that wasn't allocated anywhere else, I'd still donate to you because I think our agreements outweigh our differences. I just roll like that. ;)

[Feeding the Abscess]

Well at least you're consistent. I tell you though, if you were running for office, if I thought you had a shot at winning, and if I had the extra cash that wasn't allocated anywhere else, I'd still donate to you because I think our agreements outweigh our differences. I just roll like that. ;)

lol, wanna chip in for a 2014 challenge of Darrell Issa?

[jmdrake]

lol, wanna chip in for a 2014 challenge of Darrell Issa?

You show me that you beating him is at least somewhat possible? Sure! Not now because I lack the "extra unallocated cash" component, but in a year hopefully that will turn around. ;)