Page One header image 1

Rand Paul On the Anointing of Trey Grayson

August 31st, 2009 · 28 Comments

U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul is all up on attacking Trey Grayson, the GOP favorite.

Check this statement sent out by his campaign:

U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul on Monday pledged not to accept campaign contributions from any U.S. Senator who voted for the bank bailout and challenged his opponents to follow suit.

Dr. Paul issued this challenge after learning that Trey Grayson has scheduled a Washington D.C. fundraiser co-sponsored by several U.S. Senators, seventeen of whom voted for the so-called TARP bailout in 2008, which was then used to fund an auto industry bailout Congress rejected.

“This isn’t about holding politicians to an impossibly high standard of agreeing with everything one’s supporters say or do,” Paul said. “But a primary focus of my campaign is that we need Republicans in office who will have the courage to say no to federal bailouts of big business.”

“There is nothing in the Constitution that allows the government to pick winners and losers in the private sector and the Republican party platform specifically condemns bailouts,” Paul said. “I’m running for the U.S. Senate to stand up for true Republican principles and the Republicans I’ve talked to agree that is what we need.”

Let the games begin.

Tags: Rand Paul · Senate · Trey Grayson

28 responses so far ↓

  • 1 E // Aug 31, 2009 at 2:22 pm

    LOVE IT!

  • 2 Um... // Aug 31, 2009 at 2:36 pm

    Well, looks like Rand won that round, however minor any victory related to campaign finance is.

    Note to Trey: anytime you concede a point to Rand moving forward, you’re only feeding into the narrative that he’s a true conservative and you’re not. It’s your job to make him look crazy and nonviable– not to let him tell you who you can and cannot take money from.

  • 3 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Aug 31, 2009 at 2:39 pm

    “There is nothing in the Constitution that allows the government to pick winners and losers in the private sector and the Republican party platform specifically condemns bailouts,” Paul said.

    That’s a very ignorant statement. The representative bodies in Congress can legislate anything, and I mean anything, that is not explicitly or implicitly barred by the U.S. Constitution.

    Beyond this, I wonder how Ayn Rand Paul can get anywhere in the GOP by breaking Reagan’s 11th Commandment this early.

  • 4 Josh Manuel // Aug 31, 2009 at 2:45 pm

    Win Rand Win!

    If this was the general election then it would be no problem if the GOP got behind the winner of the primary.

    However, this is a highly contested primary and the GOP establishment shouldn’t be picking the winners and losers of this close race.

    They have made this a national battle for Kentucky.

    Big Govt Republicans vs We The People!

  • 5 E // Aug 31, 2009 at 2:50 pm

    Legislate; to make or enact laws.

    I’m not sure the way the bailouts were conducted were ‘made or enacted laws’…but more like allocating/budgeting money to be handed out with little or no oversight or direction from the legislative bodies of our government.
    [get anywhere in the GOP]…that’s kind of the point all along isn’t it? That he is not the GOP’s bitch, and that he doesn’t work for or answer to the GOP hierarchy. He presents his ideas, and answer to the voters of Kentucky.

    I’m liking it more everyday!

  • 6 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Aug 31, 2009 at 2:52 pm

    But “We the People” in Kentucky don’t want an economic libertarian (read: modern feudalist) to be our Senator.

  • 7 curtis morrison // Aug 31, 2009 at 2:57 pm

    Steve-I concur that Kentuckians ultimately will not select and economic libertarian in this race, but let’s say you were voting in the Republican primary, would you really vote for a McConnell-backed elitist like Grayson?
    I’ve decided not to pick on Paul until after the primary. I’m interested in the thoughts of other progressives on this idea though.

  • 8 Taylor // Aug 31, 2009 at 3:23 pm

    Curtis- I think they’re both crazy, but that’s generally my assessment of most right-wingers until they’ve belt of a considerable report to the contrary. Pick on them both.

  • 9 Taylor // Aug 31, 2009 at 3:24 pm

    wow…how did “built” become “belt” in the transition from my brain to the computer screen. damn you interwebs!!!

  • 10 E // Aug 31, 2009 at 3:45 pm

    “But “We the People” in Kentucky don’t want an economic libertarian (read: modern feudalist) to be our Senator.”
    Maybe many don’t see it the way you do…That’s why we have elections.
    Good luck with those two outstanding dem candidates !

  • 11 David Adams // Aug 31, 2009 at 3:59 pm

    How is it “attacking” to expect Republicans to follow the Republican party platform on something as important as economic freedom?

  • 12 Mike // Aug 31, 2009 at 4:10 pm

    Actually Steve, you have it backward. The Constitution enumerates specific powers to the Federal Government. Congress cannot legislate whatever it pleases, under the 10th Amendment.

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

  • 13 David@TheLiberty Blogger // Aug 31, 2009 at 4:19 pm

    I suppose if you like the bailouts you should vote for Grayson – considering the support he is getting in D.C. from Senators who voted for the bailout you probably can expect him to go along with another bailout.

    Also if you like it when politicians talk about balanced budgets but then vote for an unbalanced budget, Grayson is probably your man – Paul has pledged not to vote for a single unbalanced budget.

    Going off of that, if you like our nation going deeply in debt and being forced to borrow from foreign nations – Grayson is probably your man. He is a supply-sider at best (Keynesian at worst) who thinks that national debt isn’t necesarily a bad thing.

    If you are sick and tired of economic wrecklessness in Washington D.C., Paul is your man. Grayson will attack Obama relentlessly, but will he ever criticize his own party for supporting poor economic choices (hint: McCain supporting the bailout, Bush supporting the bailout, etc.)?

  • 14 Tray // Aug 31, 2009 at 4:50 pm

    Why is McConnell breaking Reagan’s 11th commandment so early on, is he that afraid? McConnell attacked Rand first by holding a fundraiser for Trey Grayson, it was an incredibly rude gesture – much more than any words. Rand has never held an opposing fundraiser to attack McConnell. Further, how is McConnell even considered a Republican any longer? He backed bailouts, welfare, thinks Kennedy is great, he blindly helped Democrats nearly bankrupt the US, and now he is helping former Democrat, Trey Grayson, run for Senate. He and Grayson and career politicians, not true Republicans.

    Rand is up against nothing but career politicians – and to top it off, career politicians that have lead the state of Kentucky to the second highest budget deficit of any state in the union in the 2010 cycle. I would certainly prefer a small business owner, who is on the side that accurately predicted the economic mess years in advance. Why would you want any of the traditional Democrats or Republicans that are attempting to run against him? All they have is a tradition of bankrupting our country.

  • 15 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Aug 31, 2009 at 6:59 pm

    Mike, you’re just plain wrong.

    The Congress indeed has the power to LEGISLATE about anything not explicitly/implicitly barred. The powers that have been reserved to the states is part of that implicit bunch.

    The Congress absolutely can do what it did regarding the bailouts. There’s absolutely no question about it.

    You can argue all day that the Congress *shouldn’t* do these things, but pretending that it can’t is NONSENSE.

  • 16 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Aug 31, 2009 at 7:02 pm

    Tray, so let’s instead have somebody who knows nothing about governing, let alone the Constitution, represent our state in the Senate. Not gonna happen.

    Remember that Democrats and Independents decide these races, and we’re not voting for a feudal lord. Period.

  • 17 Conservative // Aug 31, 2009 at 8:34 pm

    That’s a very ignorant statement. The representative bodies in Congress can legislate anything, and I mean anything, that is not explicitly or implicitly barred by the U.S. Constitution.

    Disagree with this and agree with the other person who replied. Congress can do ONLY what the Constitution allows it to do if we truly believe the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. All other power is vested in the states or the people. Of course Congress will try to justify anything under one of the clauses (I imagine if push came to shove, they’d try to justify the bailouts under the Commerce Clause) but the truth is, Congress oversteps its bounds on many items and violates the spirit, if not the actual language, of the constitution. The federal government uses the 10th Amendment as toilet paper.

  • 18 Larry West // Aug 31, 2009 at 9:44 pm

    Steve, Mike was quoting to you the tenth amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

    What part of that statement do you not understand? The fact that Congress violates it, just as they violate the “religious test” portion almost every time someone is nominated for a high position, doesn’t mean it’s not there in the Constitution and SHOULD be followed.

    Perhaps part of the Pauls’ popularity is due to the fact that FINALLY there is someone running for office that thinks that the Constitution should be followed – just as we all learned in our Civics or Social Studies class in High School.

    Rand Paul knows far more about the Constitution and about politics than you or I ever will — remember that his father has been involved as a congressman and political figure for decades — surely some of the knowledge that his father has learned has been passed down to the son.

    Calling someone ignorant when they accurately quote you the entire amendment, and then you saying the opposite is true, is a prime example of a black pot calling an obviously non-black kettle black.

    I urge you to get a copy of the Constitution to read the tenth amendment yourself. In fact, re-read the entire document, then tell us where in it that it states what you stated — that Congress can do what it wants to when it wants to. (Perhaps the original Constitution could be read to imply that interpretation – but that is why they added the tenth amendment; so that no one would misunderstand the intent of the original framers.)

    (By the way, “Rand” is short for Randall. He was not named after Ayn Rand.)

  • 19 E // Aug 31, 2009 at 11:54 pm

    I’m really enjoying the irreverance and spunk of the Rand Paul suporters (of which I unapologetically count myself)…here’s the latest, complete with another ‘up yours’ kind of disclaimer.
    Give it up for free speech!

    http://randpaul.grassrootsite.com/?Contests

  • 20 Curt Morrison // Sep 1, 2009 at 1:52 am

    I’m with Steven on what Congress can do (whatever it wants). Sitting around and pretending like it doesn’t may satisfy some inherent idealist yearning, but it ignores 95% of the legislation that is passed that has nothing to do with anything in the Constitution…First one that comes to mind: Yarmuth Introducing a Bill to End Automatic Withholding at Race Tracks
    Second one: Do not call list…

  • 21 KY college student // Sep 1, 2009 at 2:58 am

    I’d like to take this opportunity to let Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) and Curt Morrison that they can both shut it. I’m a college student towards the end of my schooling who spent too long ignoring politics. I’m sick of the crap coming elected officials practicing the status quo crap you both think is good just because it’s the way it’s been done for a long time. A bunch of guys who died a long time ago saw this coming, and made some pretty simple rules, and put these dogs on a very short leash. Just because they’ve been off the leash for a while doesn’t mean we should toss the leash. I’m sick of these Tools, and I think a lot of people under 40 feel the same way. Youth in politics will no longer be limited to the liberal whiners I go to school with, and their sworn enemies, the 5 or 6 “Young Republicans” left on the planet.

    Steve said “Remember that Democrats and Independents decide these races, and we’re not voting for a feudal lord. Period.” – Sorry, Steve, but you’re a Tool too. Democrats and Independents doesn’t mean what it used to – I now represent those Independents way more than you, chief. We’re sick of the crap, and we want someone who isn’t the normal “born to be a politician” suit that usually wins these things. I’ll be passing out (yes, paid with my own money) bumper stickers that say “don’t vote for a Tool in 2010″ . Watch for them. Anyone who knows what I mean by “Tool” will NOT be voting for guys like Grayson or McConnell or pretty much any other career politician. Without even naming Rand Paul, my “No Tools” them will be helping to get him elected. And if you do win this round, we’re really going to be pissed, and clean the floor with your Suits next time. Thanks sweet hearts.

    Yes, I’m capable of a more refined discourse: I chose not to in this post to help convey my STRONGLY felt emotions. And if I’ve really upset you, feel free to email your complaints to me.

  • 22 KY college student // Sep 1, 2009 at 3:04 am

    I realized I didn’t leave a visible email for you to send criticism to (please post all agreements as comments in here, of course ;)

    I also left a bunch of typos in – just turn me in to the English Department.

    bettyjohnson3858354@yahoo.com

  • 23 William // Sep 1, 2009 at 4:51 am

    Better watch it now because Marxist Brother Number One on here from the South Louisville/Auburndale area will tell you all about the Constitution. Which is why in 1783 about 20 percent of the colonial citizens were removed from this country by force. That being because of their support of the British crown and being the Redcoats they were ended up being a threat to the stability of the new government. Which is what the socialists on these boards are. Socialism and big government is Un-American

  • 24 William // Sep 1, 2009 at 5:05 am

    The current cast of Republicans and Democrats running this nation in the ground are Tools. They are tools of the power elite who may not dictate exact policies but they know the system they want to create. Communism was never a group of the masses seizing power. It was always a top down affair. Just modern day feudalism as was every other socialistic government.

    Ironically, the Marxists that call themselves democrats and liberals these days. It hides their true intentions.

    Interestingly a poster made a comment about economic liberty being such a bad thing. I guess it would be better for us all to submit to our slave master government and multinational corporations for our daily bowl of rice. A government that is increasingly totalitarian in nature and rapes our pockets to the tune of 30 to 40 percent of our increasingly meager earnings.

    Or would it be best to support the gigantic Fortune 500 corporate infrastructure as the current occupiers of Washington, DC support being that both Democrats and Republicans both supported bailouts, welfare schemes, and giveaways of your tax dollars for generations of leeches both in the USA but also around the world.

    Billions for Israel and Egypt. Billions more for Iraq and Afghanistan. Military maneuvers in over 100 countries. All of that is something to be proud of correct? Or just power for abuses by government being hijacked by criminals with nice titles. Who are the real crooks? The person paying the bill ie. taxpayers who are increasingly being screwed into the ground by government or the people running around spending trillions.

    Now if our resident Marxist from South Louisville would like to comment, exactly how is Obamacare going to pay for itself with the nation currently 11 trillion dollars in the hole.

  • 25 Taylor // Sep 1, 2009 at 10:00 am

    Marxists! the reds! un-american terrorists!!1!1! poor people with health care?! OMFG SWINE FLU!!!!

    get a grip, folks.

  • 26 E // Sep 1, 2009 at 12:11 pm

    …and some people make unqualified statements…[I think they’re both crazy]…indeed, get a grip folks.

  • 27 The Liberty Blogger » Blog Archive » The Main Event: Wed. September 23rd – Rand vs. Trey // Sep 2, 2009 at 12:55 pm

    [...] fundraiser I mentioned earlier includes seventeen Senators who voted for TARP – the bank bailout. While Paul speaks out against the bailouts, Grayson has been mum on his stance. [...]

  • 28 ConservaChick // Oct 27, 2009 at 9:55 am

    I’m voting in the Republican primary and I will be voting for Rand Paul. We need at least ONE Senator who is a fiscal Conservative!

    Grayson is too heavily favored by McConnell and the DC Establishment. He’d be no more than a puppet for them.

    And, unless McConnell has a Republican challenger in the primary for his seat, I’ll be sitting that election out completely. If the GOP in this state has any brains, they’ll hold Trey back and have him run AGAINST McConnell in the primary.