Introducing Dr. Greg Brannon, possible draftee for US Senate 2014

Good morning Paulers, I am working on an effort to draft Dr. Greg Brannon for US Senate 2014.

Dr Brannon is an OB/GYN in Cary, NC with a clear vision for restoring the Founder's vision of these united States, by restoring the Constitutional order. In my humble experience, he is the best of both worlds between Ron and Rand. He has the hard-hitting uncompromising principled of Ron, while he is able to articulate those principles in ways that Conservatives and Tea Parties directly understand like Rand.

Here is a news report including an interview of Dr. Brannon from 2010:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPT3lcKqzfg

http://www.facebook.com/founderstruthorg

http://www.facebook.com/greg.brannon.79

http://founderstruth.org/Home/tabid/...g-Brannon.aspx

An unflinching adherent to Ron Paul's strict Constitutionalist foreign policy (more so than Rand), as well as being able to articulate that policy towards Republicans, Tea Partiers, and Conservatives in ways that even Ron Paul can not, Dr. Brannon will be one of the strongest and most celebrated advocates for our movement in the US Senate in the last 200 years.

Therefore, I submit for your consideration, this effort to draft Dr. Greg Brannon for US Senate in 2014.

Does he have any skeletons in his closet or any weird fetishes?

He sounds pretty good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LibertyEagle

Does he have any skeletons in his closet or any weird fetishes?

---

Not that I know of, and I would doubt it in the extreme. As an extremely successful OB/GYN and critical care surgeon, a pillar in the community, and a prominent movement leader, such things would have already come out if they existed. There is always somebody somewhere to be OCD about their doctor, particularly if that doctor is an OB/GYN.

Why, is that a real problem we have had in our movement until now?

Closest I can think of is Debra Medina, but that was not her issue but Beck's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rifleman

He sounds pretty good.

---

I think so, I will wholeheartedly and without reservation vouch for him. Take the unflinching principled philosophy of Ron, and the rhetorical skill of Rand, put them together into one person only 52 years old and that is Greg Brannon.

Hello afternoon crowd. :-)

Hard money / Competing currencies ?

Does he know how to campaign and fundraise? Who else is going to run for Hagan's seat in 2014? Does Dole want it back? Is there someone else 'next in line'? A current congressman? A current state-wide officer?

Best advice would be to write the Club for Growth and SCF immediately with a synopsis of Greg's beliefs and how he would be a valuable ally in the Senate. They are the main reason Cruz won with virtually no name ID early on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bxm042

Hard money / Competing currencies ?

---

Wanting to place the dollar back on the classical gold standard and encouraging competing currencies is something our politicians, definitely need to support, but they must not emphasize it too much, lest they get thrown into the nutjob category.

I prefer for Brannon to let US know, and talk about other things to everyone else.

I'll answer when I can, on my way to keynote an RLC thing for RNC delegates

Has Dr. Brannon shown a clear interest in running? Is he gauging potential support right now? Or is he active in politics but reluctant to throw himself headlong into the messy cesspool of politics, for which I can't blame him a bit?

What form(s) of support are being requested?

If you make a Facebook group or page for this I'll join based on Gunny's recommendation.

Found these, will listen when I have time.

http://billlumaye.blogspot.com/2012/...-american.html
http://billlumaye.blogspot.com/2012/...ency-gold.html
http://billlumaye.blogspot.com/2012/...ation-law.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeorgiaAvenger

Found these, will listen when I have time.

...
http://billlumaye.blogspot.com/2012/...ency-gold.html
...

---

Thanks for that. Only 3 minutes in and I can already tell he's an A+ on currency freedom. I approve

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GunnyFreedom

He has the hard-hitting uncompromising principled of Ron, while he is able to articulate those principles in ways that Conservatives and Tea Parties directly understand like Rand.

---

Get this guy elected quick before the Tea Party realizes he's a real liberty candidate :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bxm042

Get this guy elected quick before the Tea Party realizes he's a real liberty candidate :)

---

Actually, in NC we Paulers get along famously with the local grassrooters. The plastic astroturf Teocons are another matter, of course. I was...um...pretty insistant that we NC Paulers stay engaged with the local grassroots tea parties because eventually their ideas would fail, and if we were friends they would see that ours didn't.

Look, I'm getting invited to speak to tea party things all over the state. I'm not a candidate any more, so I'm kinda trying to piss them off. I hit on NDAA, PATRIOT, undeclared wars, and the Federal war on drugs, if I can't make them angry about the broken government, then I at least want to make them angry at me for calling it out. I figure when it breaks down they will remember me.

I am all over topics we could never dream about in 2010 or 11. I'm literally scolding Republicans for obeying just the bits they like on the Constitution, and telling them this is why the country is broken. We can't obey just the bits we like, you see because that what the Democrats do. Both parties, and look where it's gotten us.

A good man and a retired Marine Michael Speciale running for NC House likes to use the illustration of forced federal reciprocal concealed carry, and that the NC State Constitution reserves the right to regulate concealment, so constitutionally we can't support it at the federal level. OK, I think an argument may be made in another way, that the US Government was given jurisdiction over the right to bear arms (empowered to protect it, specifically), but it really the Constitutionally correct argument that concealment is not granted to Congress, so that under the 10th Amendment and the State of NC reserves it under Article 1 Section 30.

Quote:

---

Sec. 30. Militia and the right to bear arms.A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; and, as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be maintained, and the military shall be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. Nothing herein shall justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons, or prevent the General Assembly from enacting penal statutes against that practice.

---

I don't actually like the provision, but it actually is there, and therefore the 10th Amendment (not having been reserved) says the Feds can't force NC to allow concealed carry.

He uses that to explain to Republicans how we can't just do what we like but have to follow the Constitution. We have 5 good people in the General for State Assembly, and two that have already won. The local grassroots Tea Parties are eating it up. The worst blows I can give establishmentarians in a political environment and they ask me back because they want more.

It's the the point that I'm a bit surprised that other states are having so much trouble. Listen, you have to get engaged with the local grassroots tea parties on good terms, not the astroturf, and stay engaged, because their construct is already failing. Just be right and watch. They are coming over like crazy. We stayed engaged and it worked here.

The worst thing that AFP and others can do in NC is to oppose the grassroots Tea Parties because it will destroy their credibility. The whole country east of 95 is on fire, and little brushfires are popping up all over everywhere else, especially Asheville and north of Mecklenburg County. I almost wish I weren't going to the RNC because there is so much to do here.

CD 1 is crazy ripe for a Ron Paul Democrat. SD4 and HD27 too. The whole East of 95 can get picked up over time. Use their own redistricting schemes against them. :p

I would love to see a trans-partisan Constitutionalist caucus in the NC General Assembly. That way no matter who is in the majority we can advance the restoration of the Constitution. A CC of say 7 Republicans and 5 Democrats could break Speaker and Speaker Pro Tem elections. 10 and 7 will do it easily. That's kinda profound, actually. Press release "Bi-Partisan Constitutionalist Caucus blocks majority vote for House Speaker, negotiations ongoing between both parties for candidates for Speaker that may be more acceptable to all three caucuses."

I'm not sure anything can break down the two party delusion faster than a fully independent (from the Speaker on) Constitutionalist Caucus composed of members of both parties whose one common goal is to "get back to the Constitution." full stop, a caucus that makes regular headlines. LOL you could break down whole coverage areas with mass conversions. :p



tl;dr - all of the Tea Parties I am going to, and heavy hitters in NC, are rejecting the teo-cons and embracing strict Constitutional compliance, no matter how bad it hurts. Since I'm not running for anything anymore, I am actually trying to flush out the sacred cows and openly beat them. And they love it. So you all do it too. :)



25 February 2013 ETA - In case this post is confusing to anybody, it is in fact a praising of the real Grassroots Tea Parties, and the drawing of a contrast against organizations who are attempting to co-opt the Tea Parties back into the Status-Quo. I left the above text perfectly intact so you can make your own judgement. The only people who need consider me an 'enemy' are those who would prefer a government that abandons the Constitution. I have been a strict construction Constitutionalist for 20 years. Restoring the Constitution is and has always been my ONLY goal, and that has at times put me at odds with EVERYBODY. Including the Paul supporters on this very board.

A big part of the reason I am able to develop coalitions to expand the Republican Base, drawing in the 18-40 demographic and bringing in minority voters such as African Americans, is because I know how to translate the same concepts into different languages where people can understand what I am saying.

If there is one thing I can assure you, as God is my witness, the ONLY goal I have is to restore Constitutional government. If you also want to restore the Constitution, then you are an ally. If you would rather abandon the Constitution, then I am your enemy. That's as cut and dried as it gets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GunnyFreedom

Actually, in NC we Paulers get along famously with the local grassrooters. The plastic astroturf Teocons are another matter, of course. I was...um...pretty insistant that we NC Paulers stay engaged with the local grassroots tea parties because eventually their ideas would fail, and if we were friends they would see that ours didn't.

Look, I'm getting invited to speak to tea party things all over the state. I'm not a candidate any more, so I'm kinda trying to piss them off. I hit on NDAA, PATRIOT, undeclared wars, and the Federal war on drugs, if I can't make them angry about the broken government, then I at least want to make them angry at me for calling it out. I figure when it breaks down they will remember me.

I am all over topics we could never dream about in 2010 or 11. I'm literally scolding Republicans for obeying just the bits they like on the Constitution, and telling them this is why the country is broken. We can't obey just the bits we like, you see because that what the Democrats do. Both parties, and look where it's gotten us.

A good man and a retired Marine Michael Speciale running for NC House likes to use the illustration of forced federal reciprocal concealed carry, and that the NC State Constitution reserves the right to regulate concealment, so constitutionally we can't support it at the federal level. OK, I think an argument may be made in another way, that the US Government was given jurisdiction over the right to bear arms (empowered to protect it, specifically), but it really the Constitutionally correct argument that concealment is not granted to Congress, so that under the 10th Amendment and the State of NC reserves it under Article 1 Section 30.

[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

I don't actually like the provision, but it actually is there, and therefore the 10th Amendment (not having been reserved) says the Feds can't force NC to allow concealed carry.

He uses that to explain to Republicans how we can't just do what we like but have to follow the Constitution. We have 5 good people in the General for State Assembly, and two that have already won. The local grassroots Tea Parties are eating it up. The worst blows I can give establishmentarians in a political environment and they ask me back because they want more.

It's the the point that I'm a bit surprised that other states are having so much trouble. Listen, you have to get engaged with the local grassroots tea parties on good terms, not the astroturf, and stay engaged, because their construct is already failing. Just be right and watch. They are coming over like crazy. We stayed engaged and it worked here.

The worst thing that AFP and others can do in NC is to oppose the grassroots Tea Parties because it will destroy their credibility. The whole country east of 95 is on fire, and little brushfires are popping up all over everywhere else, especially Asheville and north of Mecklenburg County. I almost wish I weren't going to the RNC because there is so much to do here.

CD 1 is crazy ripe for a Ron Paul Democrat. SD4 and HD27 too. The whole East of 95 can get picked up over time. Use their own redistricting schemes against them. :p

I would love to see a trans-partisan Constitutionalist caucus in the NC General Assembly. That way no matter who is in the majority we can advance the restoration of the Constitution. A CC of say 7 Republicans and 5 Democrats could break Speaker and Speaker Pro Tem elections. 10 and 7 will do it easily. That's kinda profound, actually. Press release "Bi-Partisan Constitutionalist Caucus blocks majority vote for House Speaker, negotiations ongoing between both parties for candidates for Speaker that may be more acceptable to all three caucuses."

I'm not sure anything can break down the two party delusion faster than a fully independent (from the Speaker on) Constitutionalist Caucus composed of members of both parties whose one common goal is to "get back to the Constitution." full stop, a caucus that makes regular headlines. LOL you could break down whole coverage areas with mass conversions. :p



tl;dr - all of the Tea Parties I am going to, and heavy hitters in NC, are rejecting the teo-cons and embracing strict Constitutional compliance, no matter how bad it hurts. Since I'm not running for anything anymore, I am actually trying to flush out the sacred cows and openly beat them. And they love it. So you all do it too. :)

---

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

:p

"plus two who have already won." total of seven.

He loses me with some of his immigration talk (tosses in some "we have to give up some individual power to the collective to protect our rights" goodness, too), but he's still way less of an immigration hawk than most in the tea party movement. Those statements likely eliminate any possibility of me giving money to him, but he'd be a very nice upgrade over whoever he'd replace in the Senate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GunnyFreedom

Actually, in NC we Paulers get along famously with the local grassrooters. The plastic astroturf Teocons are another matter, of course.

---

Quote:

---

Listen, you have to get engaged with the local grassroots tea parties on good terms, not the astroturf, and stay engaged

---

How do you decide who are the real grassroots you should be engaging with, and who are the Teocons you should be showing the door?

When I say I Tea Party, I mean the entire Tea Party... Teocons and all. When you say Tea Party, you seem to imply that you exclude the "fake" people from that label just as a matter of fact, which would make your argument that the Tea Party is receptive to your views as simply an affirmation of the premise.

I hope you're right. But getting people to like what you say on an external level, and for them to internalize it so they actually take action on it, are two different things. If they're actually internalizing Constitutional principles on the scale that you're talking about, there should be dramatic changes within 4 years. If the education campaign is as successful as you think it is, North Carolina should be making huge strides toward freedom, and be significantly more free in 2016 than it is today. If it is, then I'll bite my tongue and agree you were right. If in 4 years NC is continuing down the tracks of tyranny with the rest of the country, I'll hope you can re-assess the viability of politics entirely.

If you don't think 4 years is a fair timeframe, let me know what is. But I'll hope you'll hold yourself to that. We can't keep playing politics, get nothing done for 4 years, then think the next 4 years are different, but they aren't, and repeat the cycle.

Now running for Senate!

http://carolinalibertypac.com/2013/0...ace-kay-hagan/

Brannon has just joined facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Greg-B...52463691431298

I'm going to have to chuckle a bit here, because I have just learned that someone is going around taking this specific thread out of context to claim that I am trying to 'play' the Tea Parties. What's especially funny is that when you read it in context I am actually PRAISING the real grassroots Tea Parties as contrasted with the fake astroturf organizations trying to co-opt the Tea Parties back into the Status Quo.

I hope and pray that integrity rules the day.

Also, I was under the impression that I was above actually defending the real sincere and principled Tea Parties against the fake ones trying to co-opt them back to the Status Quo, and then praising the real sincere and principled Tea Parties for actually holding their ground on principle vs the onslaught of pressure trying to subvert them.

I did so in the midst of a contentious election amongst a group of people who are at loggerheads with Tea Parties around the United States, in effect trying to push YOU Ron Paul supporters towards becoming more accepting the Tea Parties.

This is how you build bridges and coalitions. Pushing Ron Paul supporters to become more accepting of the Grassroots Tea Parties is not an easy job, but if we are going to save America, then somebody has to do it. Demonstrating that we both have a common enemy in the fakers who are trying to co-opt the Tea Parties into the status-quo is something that should bring both us, and the real sincere and principled Tea Parties together.

Please, ladies and gentlemen, we have real enemies in flagrante dilecto destroying America as we speak. Glenn Beck was right about 'libertarians eating their own' but what he doesn't seem to realize is that this is a disease that infects the ENTIRE right....otherwise why would Ronald Reagan have famously said, "The person that agrees with you 80% of the time is a friend and ally—not a 20% traitor, or enemy."

We have real enemies in America, and we don't have much time left -- certainly not enough time to hate on our 80% allies as though they were 20% traitors while America dies around our ears.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GunnyFreedom

otherwise why would Ronald Reagan have famously said, "The person that agrees with you 80% of the time is a friend and ally—not a 20% traitor, or enemy."

We have real enemies in America, and we don't have much time left -- certainly not enough time to hate on our 80% allies as though they were 20% traitors while America dies around our ears.

---

Totally agree and that's why it irks me to see some libs nitpicking certain candidates about not being pro-liberty enough even though they clear the 80% threshold. They spend way more time doing that than really taking on the establishment of both parties and going on offense to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FSP-Rebel

Totally agree and that's why it irks me to see some libs nitpicking certain candidates about not being pro-liberty enough even though they clear the 80% threshold. They spend way more time doing that than really taking on the establishment of both parties and going on offense to do so.

---

I think what I find most disheartening about the whole thing, is that a Tea Party supporter has apparently decided to treat me with suspicion based on my attempts to make Ron Paul people more supportive of the Tea Parties, at the height of the contentious 2012 General Election.

Remember when Chairman Robin Hayes revealed that the reason North Carolina was the only swing State that Mitt Romney won in 2012, was because we were the only swing State that did not shut down and squeeze out the Ron Paul people? That North Carolina was to become the model for a Republican resurgence nationwide because of that unprecedented success? Well, here you go.

We have to decide right now whether we want Republicans to win or lose. If we want Republicans to win, then it means reaching out to groups like the Ron Paul supporters and helping make them more accepting of the grassroots Tea Parties. If we want Republicans to lose, then criticizing me for trying to win over the Ron Paul supporters to embrace the grassroots Tea Parties is possibly a good way to go about it.

An enemy of my enemy is my friend.

We must use the crackpots to our advantage. TEA party and Tea Party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GunnyFreedom

We have to decide right now whether we want Republicans to win or lose. If we want Republicans to win, then it means reaching out to groups like the Ron Paul supporters and helping make them more accepting of the grassroots Tea Parties. If we want Republicans to lose, then criticizing me for trying to win over the Ron Paul supporters to embrace the grassroots Tea Parties is possibly a good way to go about it.

---

Until it becomes possible for America to be a multi-party PR constitutional Republic, I support good Repubs and good Dems. I know Brannon is not going to become corrupt, and while in theory we are opposites, the great thing about libertarianism is that I don't need to agree with him in order to support him. He'll protect the Constitution and obey his oath of office - that's good enough for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GunnyFreedom

I think what I find most disheartening about the whole thing, is that a Tea Party supporter has apparently decided to treat me with suspicion based on my attempts to make Ron Paul people more supportive of the Tea Parties, at the height of the contentious 2012 General Election.

Remember when Chairman Robin Hayes revealed that the reason North Carolina was the only swing State that Mitt Romney won in 2012, was because we were the only swing State that did not shut down and squeeze out the Ron Paul people? That North Carolina was to become the model for a Republican resurgence nationwide because of that unprecedented success? Well, here you go.

We have to decide right now whether we want Republicans to win or lose. If we want Republicans to win, then it means reaching out to groups like the Ron Paul supporters and helping make them more accepting of the grassroots Tea Parties. If we want Republicans to lose, then criticizing me for trying to win over the Ron Paul supporters to embrace the grassroots Tea Parties is possibly a good way to go about it.

---

cognitive dissonance, since we were the tea party first. But I understand what you mean, the 'other side' of the tea party. The part that still identified with the label whole heartedly even after Beck and Fox and the lobbiest groups wanting to be hired were done with it....

I agree we have a lot in common and but for the president where people have the 'whole ball of wax' approach, and the one favorite, we actually work well with them.

Is there any update on this? Have any other candidates entered the race yet?