Help the Club for Growth endorse Rand Paul

From the Daily Paul:

I have been studying non stop about how to help get a good candidate elected as a fiscal conservative and I have found out that the true anti establishment yet powerhouse is the US Club For Growth (aka Club for 'economic' Growth)! They put more than $1,000,000.00 per candidate at least and they run their own adds supporting the candidate and then run adds slamming the competitor.

I just got off the phone with them (yes I joined) and they said that they are almost ready to make a decision, but before they make a decision they want to see what the people want. They said they have a few people calling to join for Greyson, but more people called for Paul. Ok, they said the more people call in for the Paul, the more likely they will make a selection. Club For Growth will also have national fundraisers all over the country for Paul. If you think the Money Bomb will help Rand, well this will be the full push to office.

PLEASE CALL CLUB FOR GROWTH, TELL THEM YOU WANT TO JOIN SOLELY TO SUPPORT RAND PAUL!!! CALL THEM ASAP BECAUSE THEY ARE CLOSE TO MAKING A DECISION AND IF CLUB FOR GROWTH SELECTS GRAYSON, WE ARE NEAR FINISHED!!! PLEASE!!!!!!!!

Of course the poster forget to include contact information for the Club for Growth.

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/contact/?id=39 (<- For e-mail) (Copy and paste into your browser.) .

Club for Growth Hours of Operation: 9am - 6pm EST weekdays; closed weekends
Phone: 202-955-5500
Fax: 202-955-9466

Organizations like this primarily care about increasing their membership. So if they hear from a lot of enthusiastic people encouraging them to support Rand Paul, supporting Rand Paul is an indication that they might get more members by supporting him then by not supporting him. Also mention Rand Paul's taxpayer group Take Back Kentucky

PS Don't forget to keep talking to Senate Conservatives too.





Rand Paul
Trey Grayson

Rand Paul at Hawesville Tea Party (pics and vid)

This is Rand again, talking to voters every chance he gets.From Gage's Flicker page. 

Remembering the spirit of the Revolution.




Rand Paul
Trey Grayson

Carol Paul, Ron Paul's Wife Weighs in.

Screen shot from Carol's facebook account.





Rand Paul
Trey Grayson

Divide and conquer: It's What The Establishment Wants

Thanks to Humble Libertarian who just linked to my thread over at Rand Paul Forums by this thread title's name:

This is what the establishment wants. Divide and conquer. Please don't let them succeed. Personally I don't agree with Rand on this particular issue, but he's still miles more free market, and non-interventionist then anybody else currently in the US Senate.

Trey Grayson attacked Rand on the issue because he knew it would be divisive. Trey new Paul either had to say one thing, and make the people of Kentucky very unhappy, or say another thing and cause problems in much of his national base.

Please read the two articles I've put together. This is definitely a very well orchestrated event by the Trey Grayson camp.

Rand Paul and Guantanamo: First debate with Trey Grayson

Clinton backer turned GOPer Grayson calling Rand Paul a "flip flopper"

Remember people, this is why we LIKE Rand, because he ISN'T a career politician, but that means he's going to make a mistake now and then.

Rand Also clarified his positions which I've blogged about here:
Clarifying Rand's Position on Guantanamo

The problem then, seems to be the lack of any official declaration of war, like I've blogged about before. Had Rand been in the US Senate at the time, he would have forced an official declaration and there wouldn't be any question about whether or not these are prisoners of war and what their rights are vs regular citizens or "enemy combatants" (which seems to mean whatever Bush wanted it to mean).

But the fact is the Afghanistan war wasn't done properly and constitutionally, and now we have to figure out the best way to unscramble an omelet. I will state for the record that I disagree with Rand on the issue, but I do think it's possible for libertarians and anti-war people to disagree on the best way to unscramble the evils of the state. Murray Rothbard and Frederick Hayek disagreed on the best way to unscramble the central bank, but they were both classified as solid Libertarians. read the rest

Left Coast Rebel has issued his statement too.

To summarize, I think that infighting among activists w/Rand Paul is meaningless. He believes in free minds and markets. He would be a clear distinct voice for capitalism and freedom. To me it is nearly meaningless if he wishes to try terrorists here or there, anywhere. That is not the issue that I want him in the Senate to tackle.

There's a lot of angles to this. We need a filibustering, small government Constitutionalist in the Senate. Rand's the only viable candidate we've got. Please consider pledging to our Tea Party Moneybomb this December 16th.



Update:
Carol Paul, Ron Paul's Wife Weighs in.

Rand Paul
Trey Grayson

More of the 11/19 Rand Paul/Trey Grayson debate.

From the media reports, and the liberty blogs you'd think the only thing Rand Paul talked about was Guantanamo. It wasn't. Apparently it was actually a pretty successful night for Rand Paul. I don't have video of the entire night, but here's footage of a fairly bold move on Rand's part. If Rand keeps working hard like this, he'll be a US Senator.



Rand Paul
Trey Grayson

Clarifying Rand's Position on Guantanamo

W. E. Messamore who writes for The Humble Libertarian has some good comments about the recent Guantanamo discussion regarding the Rand Paul race at The Daily Paul. From Rand's press release he quotes:

He wrote to clarify some of Rand's position, and I'm posting the text of his clarification below with some of my own emphasis on certain parts:

The orginal post did not say that Rand Paul wanted to try the terrorists in the US but the Grayson campaign falsely asserted that it did. The question of closing down GITMO is a separate question.

Rand Paul feels that more important than the location of the prison is whether or not we should be detaining anyone, anywhere without a judicial hearing.

Rand Paul remains committed to his opposition to fighting "undeclared" wars. Rand Paul remains committed to the belief that we should not torture prisoners of war. Rand Paul remains committed to his belief that prisoners deserve trials and disposition not indefinite detention.

This current controversy, though, stems from whether or not prisoners of war should be treated identically to US Citizens. Should we read Miranda rights to prisoners captured on the battlefield? Should we release KSM because he was tortured? There are reports that a great number of detainees at GITMO were detained not on the battlefield but were turned in by competitors for their positions. The US should not detain anyone indefinitely anywhere whether in the US or otherwise.

While military tribunals may appear to some to be unjust, we currently try our own GI's in military court when they are accused of crimes such as rape and murder. Military court provides legal representation for the accused.

Rand Paul is opposed to the policy of scooping up people from around the globe and holding them in indefinite detention. Rand Paul believes that most of the detainees could have been tried, convicted, and or released long ago. Those whom the military has deemed untriable, like the Uighurs, should be deported to where they were captured not relocated in the South Pacific. Detainees who return to the battlefield and are captured should be imprisoned in the country in which they are captured.

Messamore believes there are 2 main points coming out of this clarification.

1. Rand Paul unequivocally opposes indefinite detention.
2. Military tribunals are good enough for our troops, so they're good enough for theirs.

The problem then, seems to be the lack of any official declaration of war, like I've blogged about before. Had Rand been in the US Senate at the time, he would have forced an official declaration and there wouldn't be any question about whether or not these are prisoners of war and what their rights are vs regular citizens or "enemy combatants" (which seems to mean whatever Bush wanted it to mean).

But the fact is the Afghanistan war wasn't done properly and constitutionally, and now we have to figure out the best way to unscramble an omelet. I will state for the record that I disagree with Rand on the issue, but I do think it's possible for libertarians and anti-war people to disagree on the best way to unscramble the evils of the state. Murray Rothbard and Frederick Hayek disagreed on the best way to unscramble the central bank, but they were both classified as solid Libertarians.

Read the rest

I'll also be putting The Humble Libertarian on my blog roll at the left.

Updates:
Divide and conquer: It's What The Establishment Wants

Carol Paul, Ron Paul's Wife Weighs in.

Rand Paul
Trey Grayson

The Mitch McConnell Dilemma

Wendy Macy has an excellent video (documentary?) about McConnell and how he's really been a big government Republican all along.


Rand Paul will be a good conservative Republican like Jim Bunning was, and be a good balance to the liberal Mitch McConnell.


Rand Paul
Trey Grayson