Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Giving thanks

There are many things to be thankful for as Thanksgiving approaches, but one thing we are especially grateful for is the fact that we haven't been invaded by the avid Rand Paul supporters, unlike a lot of other blogs on both sides of the ideological spectrum.

The Paul supporters, not so affectionately dubbed "Paultards," are frequent posters on media blogs as well as both conservative and liberal sites. Any attacks on their hero and his unorthodox views or those of his father, Texas Congressman and former GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul, are met with a vehement and passionate response.

We make no bones that we are not fans of Rand Paul. We disagree with several of his views, particularly regarding national defense and the war on terrorism. But likewise, we are not fans of Trey Grayson, who does not demonstrate enough conservative views and traits so as to warrant consideration for an important office like senator or governor. We won't be supporting either Paul or Grayson in the Senate campaign.

We'll continue to be thankful if the "Paultards" continue to keep their rants confined to other sites.

Enjoy your turkey, everyone, and be careful out there if you venture out to the stores on Friday.

17 Comments:

At 3:44 PM, November 25, 2009, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good! Rand Paul is not liked by the establishment flotsam that operates this second-rate blog.

 
At 6:23 PM, November 25, 2009, Anonymous Anonymous said...

LOL! We have found you :D

Go Rand Paul!

 
At 6:24 PM, November 25, 2009, Blogger Lucas said...

Agreed 100% with Anonymous!!! Hmmm, lets take a look where our country is: Never have we seen more anger with the establishment, same old same old GOP leadership under Bush and the RINO/neocon house and Senate, so fed up were the people that they got demolished in 2006 and 2008... Now we have even more anger because we get socialism in return.

So what does this blogger want? Back to the self defeating RINO days!!! Yay!! Thank God you dont speak for the rest of country, pal! I would probably move! God bless the teaparty movement! It gives me faith that the American people have had enough and dont care what people like you think!

 
At 6:40 PM, November 25, 2009, Blogger brian said...

Ron Paul 2012

 
At 6:41 PM, November 25, 2009, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ron Paul 2012!

 
At 6:44 PM, November 25, 2009, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rand Paul 2010!

 
At 6:47 PM, November 25, 2009, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, does that confirm that you are a GWB RINO-T-A-R-D? You guys need to go ahead and admit that you RINOs have reestablished your neocon party only now your labelled secretly under the Nancy Pelosi/Obama. LOL!

 
At 6:53 PM, November 25, 2009, Blogger Roger said...

Rather than 'invade your blog' with passionate rhetoric, how about you and I have a rational and dispassionate conversation about your views on foreign policy vs those of the so called "paultards"? Whatcha say? Thank of how you can put us in our place by showing how wacky and out of touch with America's founders a non-interventionist foreign policy is. Think how red face a Paul supporter like myself will be when you clearly demonstrate the superiority of the Bush policy of preemptive war to fight the so called "War on Terror" (as if you can fight a war against a tactic: i.e. the war on drugs, the war on poverty... all of them so very successful) and to ensure American security.
Let's do it, and let the readers decide. You can start by explaining what you believe motivates bin Laden and his Sunni extremist to declare war on the United States. Why did they do that? I look forward to your response.

 
At 7:31 PM, November 25, 2009, Blogger a said...

National Defense is not invading other countries that have not attacked us, without declarations of war from Congress.

The current invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan are illegal according to our highest law, the United States Constitution.

If you want to learn the truth, visit www.dailypaul.com

 
At 7:41 PM, November 25, 2009, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 7:45 PM, November 25, 2009, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rand Paul money bomb this coming December 16th.

http://www.randsteaparty.com/

 
At 7:53 PM, November 25, 2009, Blogger TenBobNote said...

I would also like to here your stance on declaring the war. Does history not provide us with ample examples that once war is officially declared a war is fought concisely and efficiently so that it is quick and clear cut? A president is not given the opportunity to make the troop level some superficial political matter, yet it is handled without delay because we would be at war! Not to mention the federal reserves involvement...

 
At 10:19 AM, November 26, 2009, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'd try for rational debate, but the "Paultard" slur is too damn much proof of this blogger's stupidity. The reason we don't post here is because you're a dimwit whose opinion does not matter, ok? Whining about real conservatives like the Pauls won't help either your blog or the RINOs you support. Face it, you're just not that bright, so the irony of you calling us Paultards is great. FAIL.

 
At 9:17 PM, November 26, 2009, Blogger K-Pac II said...

The rule here is "no profanity." The poster who dropped the f-bomb violated that so the post was deleted.

You guys can't read. We said we support neither Paul nor Grayson. We're pragmatic common-sense conservatives. Our ideal Senate candidate would come from the ranks of the Kentucky congressional delegation. We'd be thrilled to see Geoff Davis run, he has the background and experience (West Point grad) to serve Kentucky well.

 
At 9:18 PM, November 26, 2009, Blogger K-Pac II said...

And one point to the first commenter in the thread: "establishment?" We've been critical of nearly every establishment Republican from McConnell to Bunning to Grayson to others.

 
At 10:31 PM, November 26, 2009, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Our ideal Senate candidate would come from the ranks of the Kentucky congressional"

Sucks for you: Mitchie had decreed Trey Grayson the candidate. He has cleared the field except those like Rand Paul he cannot control.

 
At 7:06 AM, November 27, 2009, Blogger Roger said...

Perhaps some of my over zealous fellow patriots failed to read the post carefully... and those who are using profanity have more passion than sense. But I hardly see how any of that applies to my post. I was addressing your complaints about Paul's views concerning national security and the wars. It seems to be your contention that these views are anti-conservative, and thus, you are on the opposite side on these pressing matters.
But here is the problem I see, and the very issue I have raised concerning the original post:
- Paul's views are very conservative, when you define the word 'conservative' in the way it used to be defined, and not how it has come to be understood in very recent history. Non-interventionism was part and parcel of purest conservatives up till WW2... and even after that tragedy there were still a solid percentage of Republicans who opposed interventionist foreign policies.
It is simply a fact that the views of Ron and Rand Paul (although somewhat different between the two of them) are very much in line with old style conservatives such as Barry Goldwater. It is a sad fact that the word 'conservative' was co-opted by a new breed of activist who use the term to mean something quite different in any number of areas. To be frank, calling your views on foreign policy - which is really what the issue should be labeled as instead of "national security" and the "war of terror" - to call your views 'conservative' is enough to make Goldwater and men like Robert Taft roll over in their graves.
Your views are not conservative. Conservatives seek to limit centralized power. The war on terror and the catch phrase 'national security' are used to expand centralized power. It is a funny thing. People like you will complain endlessly about the size and scope of the Federal government in domestic issues, then turn clean around and support its vast expansion and spending in the area of foreign policy. The only conclusion I can draw from such duplicity is that, in your view, big government can't do anything right at home, but can't do anything wrong abroad. LOL!
So called 'conservatives' like yourself will complain about the unintended consequences of Govt domestic programs, then turn clean around and call the Paul's wrong for simply pointing out the harmful unintended consequences of America's ever expanding interventionist foreign policies over the course of the last 90 years.
My post seeks to have an open and dispassionate conversation on these issues. Let me be clear, I use to think like you, then I woke up[ to reality and realized how WRONG this thinking is. At rock bottom, it is my Christian principles that help lead me to these views. Are you a Christian? If so, then let's discuss this my brother. And I pray that the Lord bestow his Grace and manifold wisdom to open your blinded eyes to the actual state of things.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home