• BamaFanNKy

      by Published on 09-21-2012 03:31 PM

      We are just $3,900 dollars away.

      The Most Important Race in Kentucky
      Chris Hightower is standing tall after winning his primary for state rep in the KY’s 16th District, despite the establishment opposing him. Although he faces an incumbent, the general election is very winnable, as it was held by a Republican until he retired in 2008. Senator Rand Paul is doing his part and recently held a fundraiser for Chris, where he related a story about how in the early days of 2009, when he started running for Senate, and thought he had no chance of winning, he would find Chris working in a hallway of his doctor’s office day in and day out to make the impossible happen – and he did. After a few months, Rand finally decided he’d better pay Chris something – which Chris promptly donated back to Rand’s campaign! He went on to play a huge role in our historic victory of 2010. Chris knows the nuts and bolts of elections, and if we get him the support to win, he will be hands-down the best rep in Frankfort, and start a conservative revolution like Ron & Rand did in their respective offices. Furthermore, it would replace a supporter of Obama’s agenda with a reliable champion of fiscal conservatism and limited government like Rand – and possibly even help flip the majority in the KY House. Furthermore, he’ll be in position to step up for Congress when Rep. Whitfield retires or another opportunity opens up!

      But victory will come down entirely to us. If we can raise $60k and get a handful of volunteers, Chris will win his race. It should be a drop in the bucket compared to our million-dollar moneybombs… but it is harder getting attention for a local race. But now you’re aware of what a huge opportunity we have. So I’m asking you today to click here and make the most generous donation you can! If I wasn’t broke from donating to Ron & Rand and living on savings to fight for freedom, I’d make the max donation too. Since we’ve essentially won Massie’s race, I really believe this is the most important race in Kentucky right now. We also have a phone-from-home system set up, and even a determined few should be able to contact every single voter in the district. Please send me an email if you can help, and I’ll set you up! Thanks for your consideration in this vital race.

      https://secure.hightowerforkentucky.com/
      by Published on 05-25-2011 06:09 PM

      WASHINGTON, D.C. – Moments ago, Sen. Rand Paul again urged Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) to keep his agreement to allow debate and an open amendment process for the USA PATRIOT Act, but Sen. Reid refused. Sen. Paul took to the Senate floor to address Sen. Reid’s scurrilous attacks and to ask the Senate for unanimous consent for reasonable consideration of three amendments. Sen. Reid personally objected, proving that he is to blame for holding up the USA PATRIOT Act and unwilling to keep his word allowing debate and amendments to the extension bill.



      TRANSCRIPT:

      I rise in response to a scurrilous accusation. I've been accused of wanting to allow terrorists to have weapons to attack America. To be attacked of such a belief when I'm here to discuss and debate the constitutionality of the PATRIOT Act is offensive.

      I find it personally insulting. And I think it demeans the body. It demeans the Senate body and the people that we can't have an intelligent debate over the constitutionality of this.

      I am somehow to be told that because I believe a judge should sign a warrant that I'm in favor of terrorists having weapons?

      The absurdity of it, the insult of it. If one argues that judges should sign warrants before they go into the house of an alleged murderer, are you in favor of murder?

      Can we not have a debate on a higher plane, a debate over whether or not there should be some constitutional protections, some constitutional procedure? But to come to the floor and accuse me of being in favor of giving weapons to terrorists. Can our Constitution withstand?

      Is our Constitution strong enough that we could actually capture terrorism -- capture terrorists and protect our liberties at the same time?

      Should we have some rules that say before they come into your house, before they go into your banking records, that a judge should be asked for permission, that there should be judicial review? Do we want a lawless land? Do we want a land that is so much without restraint, a government without restraint that at any point in time they can come into your house?

      We were very worried about that. That's why our country was founded on principles such as the fourth amendment to protect us from an overzealous government. But to transform an argument where good people might disagree into an accusation that I would let terrorists have weapons, no, I believe that we would stop terrorism but do it in a constitutional fashion where you would have a warrant issued by a judge.

      Some people say we don't have enough time to do that. In the morning, judges are routinely called when someone is accused of rape, when someone is accused of murder. When there is an alleged crime, we get warrants and it's worked for 225 years until we decided to throw out the Constitution.

      We threw out the Constitution with the PATRIOT Act because we changed the Constitution, not by two-thirds in this body voting for it and not by three-fourths of the state but by a scared 51 percent who threw out their liberties. They said make me safe. I want to be safe. I'm afraid, make me safe, but they gave up their liberties.

      I think it was a mistake and i think we should have an intelligent and rational discussion over this, but i don't think it furthers the debate to accuse someone who has Constitutional concerns about the way we were doing things to accuse them of being in favor of putting hands -- weapons into the hands of terrorists. I object strongly to this.

      The leader has said that they will compromise. They said one week of debate in February and open amendments. They would be open to amendments, even amendments they disagreed with. Do whatever people feel is appropriate on this bill. This doesn't mean just amendments that are not emotional or just amendments that had nothing to do with guns.

      They are petrified to vote on issues of guns because they know that a lot of people in America favor the second amendment, own guns and want to protect it in the right to own guns and the right to have those records not sifted through by the government.

      We don't want a government that eventually will allow for direction of the police towards those who own guns. We don't want our records to be public. We don't want our records to be sifted through by a government without judicial review.

      They don't want to vote on this because they know the American people agree with us, and if you polled this question, you would find 80% to 90% of Americans don't want their banking records, don't want their gun records to be sifted through by a government without a judge ever giving any approval of this.

      This is a constitutional question, and I would ask the leader to stand by his agreement to an open -- an open amendment process.

      And so at this time I will ask unanimous consent that my amendments numbered 363, 365 and 368 be in order, and within one hour of debate on each be followed by a roll call vote. I ask unanimous consent that this occur at this time.

      [Comment on Forum]
      by Published on 12-15-2010 05:08 PM



      From Press release:

      WASHINGTON, D.C. - In response to Sen. Tom Coburn's amendment introduced today in the Senate, Sen.-elect Rand Paul issued the following statement commending Sen. Coburn's action:

      "I applaud Senator Coburn's attempt to bring spending cuts into the discussion today. While I am in favor of lower taxes for all Americans, we simply cannot continue to ignore our out-of-control spending. The Coburn Amendment is a step in the right direction to at least begin to act. Any Senator who does not support this amendment is not serious about fixing our fiscal mess, and clearly did not get the message from the American people this November."

      Source: http://www.freemaninky.com/2010/12/s...tement-on.html

      Photo: Gage Skidmore
      by Published on 12-14-2010 03:47 PM
      Article Preview



      Senator-Elect Rand Paul Announces Initial Staff Appointments

      WASHINGTON, D.C. - In anticipation of the 112th Congress, Sen.-elect Rand Paul announced today the following hires to his official Senate office. This staff will be in place in early January 2011 to support Sen. Paul's plans for an aggressive legislative agenda.

      Kentuckians sent a resounding message to Washington when they elected me to serve the Bluegrass State in the U.S. Senate. I am proud to announce the following members of my staff, who share my dedication to reforming government and ending business as usual here in our nation's capital," Sen.-elect Paul said in a statement Tuesday

      Chief of Staff Doug Stafford joins Sen.-elect Paul's office with over a dozen ...
    • Follow us on Twitter! Like us on Facebook! Subscribe to our top news RSS Feed! New! Subscribe to us on YouTube!





    • End the Fed Coin