Showing posts with label Rand Paul 2. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rand Paul 2. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Rand Paul Responds to President Obama's Address 03/28/11 VIDEO FULL TEXT

Following President Obama's national address this evening regarding the situation in Libya, Sen. Rand Paul released the following remarks in response to the President.

VIDEO AND TRANSCRIPT: Sen. Rand Paul Response to President Obama’s Address Time to consult Congress, follow Constitution before action Monday, March 28, 2011.


Rand Paul Responds to President Obama

The President of the United States often faces unforeseeable dilemmas that demand tough decisions based on reliable intelligence. The recent events in Libya presented President Obama with such a scenario. But how our Commander in Chief chose to handle this new dilemma raises serious questions about his understanding of constitutional checks and balances.

Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi is every bit the madman Ronald Reagan once said he was, but are the rebels adherents to Jeffersonian democracy or Bin Laden’s radical jihad?

In 2007, then-candidate Obama said that “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”

I agree with candidate Obama. Unfortunately, President Obama has failed to heed his own advice. He has ignored our constitution and engaged us in a military conflict without congressional debate and approval

What imminent threat did Gadhafi or Libya pose to the United States? Obviously, the decision to take military action of this magnitude is something that should not be taken lightly, and should first require determining whether it is in the United States’ vital national interest.

Over the weekend, even Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted that America has no vital interest in Libya.

Our brave men and women in uniform are patriotic defenders of our nation. They are members of the greatest military in the world, and in times of war, I am confident of their willingness and ability to ensure that our vital interests are protected.

But they should not be asked to be nation-builders or the world's policemen. And they should serve in wars authorized and called for by the United States Congress, not the United Nations.

At the moment, there are uprisings taking place across the Middle East. The problem with sending U.S. military to help rebels in Libya or anywhere else is that we are taking sides in a conflict and on behalf of a people whom we know nothing about.

When, or if, there is regime change in Libya, what kind of leadership, exactly, will replace Gadhafi? Who are the Libyan rebels exactly? The Daily Telegraph newspaper in London reported over the weekend that some Libyan rebel leaders now claim they have members of al-Qaida within their ranks and are glad to have them. Why do we have American soldiers, our best and bravest, helping people in Libya who may be the very same people we ask our military to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Intervening in a civil war in a tribal society in which our government admits we have no vital interests to help people we do not know, simply does not make any sense. Libyan society is complicated, and we simply do not know enough about the potential outcomes or leaders to know if this will end up in the interests of the United States, or if we are in fact helping to install a radical Islamic government in the place of a secular dictatorship.

Of even more lasting concern is how our troops were committed to this battle by President Obama.

The Founding Fathers understood the seriousness of war and thus included in our Constitution a provision stating that only Congress can declare war. The decision to wage war should not be taken cavalierly. As Madison wrote:

The Constitution supposes what the history of all Governments demonstrates, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature.

If President Obama had consulted Congress, as our Constitution requires him to do, perhaps we could have debated these questions before hastily involving ourselves in yet another Middle Eastern conflict.

The Constitution doesn't say the president can wage war after he talks to a handful of Congressional leaders.

The Constitution says Congress – all of Congress – is responsible for declaring war.

While the President is the commander of our armed forces, he is not a king. He may involve those forces in military conflict only when authorized by Congress or in response to an imminent threat. Neither was the case here.

We are already in two wars that we are not paying for. We are waging war across the Middle East on a credit card, one whose limit is rapidly approaching. And this is just wrong.

We already borrow money from countries like China to pay for our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and it would be interesting to know how many Americans believe we should continue borrowing money and saddling future generations with debt to pay for our current actions in Libya.

The subtext to the President’s speech concerning Libya tonight was “What if we had done nothing?” But a better question might be, What if helping Libya’s interest actually hurts America’s interests? What if we are sending our military to places where we might actually be helping the same terrorists we fight in other countries or potential future terrorists?

It’s time that we re-examine these policies by once again consulting the Constitution on such matters and the common-sense principles that made this country great. We can no longer afford to spend what we don’t have. And we can’t afford to address every other nation’s problems before we can address our own.

Over the coming days and weeks, Congress will force President Obama to confront these questions. Our brave young men and women have answered the call of duty time and time again over the past decade. Our soldiers deserve, at the very least, that before we send them into a third war that Congress – the People’s House – deliberate, debate, and decide whether this war is in our vital national interests.

We will gather information, ask questions, and deliver our best advice about whether we, as the people's representatives, believe we should be at war. Whatever the outcome, we stand square behind our troops, and seek that their mission be clear and true.

Thank you for listening tonight, and God bless the United States of America.

TEXT CREDIT: Senator Paul, U.S. Senator for Kentucky:


Tuesday, November 02, 2010

Rand Paul Election acceptance (victory) speech 11/02/10 VIDEO

Rand Paul Election acceptance (victory) speech 11/02/10 VIDEO

Rand Paul Claims Victory in KY Senate Race Republican Rand Paul referred to his win over state Attorney General Jack Conway as part of a "Tea Party tidal wave."


Rand Paul Rand's Promise VIDEO

Rand Paul is running for US Senate in KY against Jack Conway. He is vying for the seat of retiring Sen Jim Bunning.

Dr. Rand Paul has been married for 19 years to the former Kelley Ashby, who is originally from Russellville, Kentucky. Rand and Kelley have three sons: William, 17; Duncan, 13; and Robert, 10.

Kelley Ashby Paul

VIDEO CREDIT: randpaul

TEXT CREDIT: Rand Paul 2010 | U.S. Senate

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Rand Paul Jack Conway Kentucky Senate Debate 10/25/10 VIDEO

Dr. Rand Paul and FamilyRand Paul Jack Conway Kentucky Senate Debate 10/25/10 VIDEO FULL STREAMING VIDEO.

BOWLING GREEN, Ky.- At a news conference today in Lexington, Dr. Rand Paul announced that he would attend the final scheduled debate between he and his opponent Jack Conway, despite the shameful political attack ad released by Conway earlier in the week attacking Paul’s religious beliefs.
Below are Dr. Paul’s remarks:

I continue to be astounded that Jack Conway thinks it is appropriate to attack my pro-life Christian faith and by inference my family. To date, he has refused to apologize for his abhorrent behavior and that is a shame.

For the past week, Republicans and Democrats across the nation have condemned my opponent’s ad as “despicable,” “odious,” and “dangerous.”

Throughout the last year and a half, dozens of people have brought personally damaging information to us about my opponent and his family. My instructions to my staff, “We won’t go there.”

Do I want a pat on the back for this? No. But would I like to raise the debate to a higher plane? Yes.

For that reason, while I do not respect Mr. Conway’s inappropriate attacks, I do respect the voters of this state and therefore will participate in Monday’s final debate.

Kentuckians deserve another opportunity to understand the very real differences between Jack and myself.

With ten days to go, I wish the campaign were about who has the best vision for Kentucky and America. We face a serious debt crisis in this country and I want to be part of finding the solution. I don’t think the debate is advanced by personal invective and slander.

As the campaign comes to a close, I will continue to talk about the main issues of the day: an unsustainable debt, the federal takeover of healthcare, the President’s desire to raise taxes in a recession, and the President’s policies that are destroying coal related jobs.

I ask my opponent to do likewise, to aspire to statesmanship, to seek a higher plane for the betterment of our citizenry and cast aside the politics of personal destruction that diminish us all.


IMAGE and TEXT CREDIT: RandPaul2010

Monday, October 18, 2010

Rand Paul, Jack Conway False Witness VIDEO

Rand Paul, Jack Conway False Witness VIDEO

"Those who stoop to the level of attacking a man's religious beliefs to gain higher office, I believe that they should remember that it does not profit a man to gain the world if he loses his soul in the process,"
Rand Paul
VIDEO CREDIT: randpaul

Rand Paul Responds to Jack Conway's shameful Ad VIDEO

Rand Paul Responds to Jack Conway's shameful Ad VIDEO Rand Paul responds to Jack Conway’s shameful ad in his Louisville debate appearance on October 17th.

TEXT CREDIT: Rand Paul 2010 || U.S. Senate:

VIDEO CREDIT: randpaul

Sunday, October 17, 2010

Rand Paul Jack Conway Kentucky Senate Debate 10/17/10 VIDEO

Rand Paul and FamilyRand Paul Jack Conway Kentucky Senate Debate VIDEO FULL STREAMING VIDEO.

Rand Paul Jack Conway Kentucky Senate Debate 10/17/10 VIDEO. After the debate at the University of Louisville, Rand Paul refused to shake hands with his Jack Conway.
"You know Jack, you know how we tell you're lying? It's when your lips are moving. Ok. You're accusing me of crimes. Do you know nothing about the process? You're going to stand over there and accuse me of a crime from 30 years ago from some anonymous source? How ridiculous are you? You embarrass this race. ...

How do you respond to a guy who's going to quote somebody anonymously from 30 years ago that's untrue? You just out and out lie because you have nothing to stand on. Run a race as a man. Stand up and be a man instead of just calling me names."


IMAGE CREDIT: RandPaul2010

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Rand Paul Jack Conway Kentucky Senate Debate Fox News Sunday VIDEO TEXT TRANSCRIPT

Rand Paul Jack Conway Kentucky Senate Debate Fox News Sunday VIDEO TEXT TRANSCRIPT

The following is a rush transcript of the October 3, 2010, edition of "Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace." This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

CHRIS WALLACE, ANCHOR: I'm Chris Wallace, reporting from Louisville, Kentucky, and this is "Fox News Sunday." The Kentucky Senate showdown -- with 30 days till the election, it's one of the nation's most closely watched races. Republican Rand Paul, one of the original tea party candidates, who opposes government intervention in the private sector, and Democrat Jack Conway, the state's attorney general, who supports much of the Obama agenda -- Paul and Conway, in their only national debate, on "Fox News Sunday."

Then, a key player leaves the White House. We'll ask our Sunday panel what Rahm Emanuel's departure means for the midterms and a president seeking reelection.

And as Mr. Obama tries to whip up the Democratic base and Congress leaves town with plenty of unfinished business, we go "On the Trail," all right now on "Fox News Sunday."

And hello again from Fox News, today on the road in Louisville, Kentucky, the home of the most famous horse race in the world, the iconic Louisville slugger baseball bats, and now one of the hottest Senate races in November.

We are in the studios of WDRB TV, our Fox affiliate here in Louisville, and we're joined by the two contenders for the Kentucky Senate seat, Democrat Jack Conway and Republican Rand Paul.

And, gentlemen, welcome to "Fox News Sunday."


WALLACE: I'd like to ask each of you to take a minute to lay out what you think is at stake in this race. What is the choice for Kentucky voters?

Dr. Paul, why don't you start?

RAND PAUL, REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR KENTUCKY SENATE SEAT: Well, I think I'm very concerned about the debt that we're piling on -- I think mountains and mountains of debt.

I'm concerned about President Obama adding trillions of dollars of entitlement programs.

I'm concerned about the president adding or allowing the largest tax hike in our history.

And I'm concerned about President Obama foisting cap and trade on Kentucky which will be a disaster for our coal jobs.

I think this election really is about the president's agenda. Do you support the president's agenda or do you not support it? I think his agenda's wrong for America. I will stand up against President Obama's agenda. And I think that's what people in Kentucky want.

WALLACE: Attorney General Conway, same question. What's at stake in this race? What's the choice for Kentucky voters?

CONWAY: Well, Chris, welcome to Kentucky. First of all, it's a real clear choice. I think we need to put the people of Kentucky first.

The special interests in Washington have enough people standing up for them. As attorney general, I have stood up for the people of Kentucky. I've taken on pharmaceutical companies when they have lied to our Medicaid program. I have taken on oil companies that have gouged us. I have taken on anyone that would do wrong by the people of Kentucky.

And there's a real clear choice in this race. There's a real clear choice between someone who has taken on the drug issue and someone who says that drugs aren't a pressing issue in Kentucky, someone who stands up to criminals and someone who says that nonviolent behavior shouldn't be a crime, someone who supports the rights of the disabled and someone who has said that he's against the Americans With Disabilities Act, between someone who's going to stand up and protect Medicare and someone who says in Medicare we need a $2,000 deductible. I mean, that's a really clear choice.

WALLACE: Attorney General Conway, you have even gone further than that. On the campaign trail you have called Dr. Paul "crazy." Your campaign ads call him "out of touch." Why?

CONWAY: I just think he's out of touch with the values of mainstream Kentuckians. You know, as Democrats, we need to talk about our values a little more. I think we value inclusivity.

We have 12,000 new disabled vets since 9/11 here in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. And I don't think it's appropriate to stand up and say that you're against the Americans With Disabilities Act in that environment.

I'm not saying Dr. Paul is crazy. I think some of his ideas are out of the mainstream and they're out of touch with the values of normal Kentuckians.

WALLACE: Dr. Paul, quite frankly, you say very little about Attorney General Conway on the campaign trail. You say nothing about him in your ads. Now's your chance, sir.

PAUL: We're waiting for him to catch up a little bit in the polls and then we may refer to him more. But really, he has to -- what he needs to do is he needs to either defend his president or run away. So far he's running away from President Obama and the agenda.

He supports "Obamacare." He supported repealing the tax cuts before he was against it, before he was before it again. Cap and trade, he's been on both sides of the issue. Kentuckians are not going to tolerate someone who's ambivalent on cap and trade. Cap and trade will be a disaster to our economy.

And these are the issues of the day, and these are the things that people want to talk about. People are concerned about jobs and the economy. And if we pass cap and trade, it will be a disaster to Kentucky's economy and to Kentucky jobs.

WALLACE: Let's talk -- and you kind of led in the direction that I wanted to head in this debate. Let's talk about jobs and the economy, which I think we would all agree are the key issues for voters here and across the country.

Unemployment in Kentucky is now 10 percent. In fact, it has been below that figure of 10 percent only one month in the last year and a half.

Attorney General Conway, you say -- and this picks up on what Dr. Paul was saying -- that you would have voted for the stimulus, you would have voted for TARP's $700 billion for Wall Street. And you would have voted for Obama's health care reform.

So if you had been in the Senate the last two years, you would have supported most of President Obama's agenda.

CONWAY: Some of President Obama's agenda. Listen, these are all hypotheticals. I've been attorney general of the Commonwealth of Kentucky the last two years.

The stimulus, a third of it went to tax cuts. No one talks about it. A third of it went to keeping the jobs of police and firefighters. And a third supposedly went to shovel-ready projects where the administration hasn't done that great a job.

Actually, I wouldn't have voted for the bailouts. The bailouts are -- there weren't enough accountability in them. You know? There were not enough accountability in them. We had people getting bonuses after getting the bailouts.

And on health care, look, we've got 654,000 Kentuckians getting health care for the first time as a result of this bill. I have a friend who's had a kidney transplant -- tells me how hard it is to get coverage with a preexisting condition. I'd like to fix health care. I'd like to make it more responsible going forward by allowing Medicare to engage in bulk purchasing.

WALLACE: You actually take me in the direction of the question I wanted to ask Dr. Paul. And incidentally, this is a free-flowing...


WALLACE: ... debate. Feel free to talk to each other if you would like to.

Dr. Paul, you say you would have voted against the stimulus. Kentucky has received $2.9 billion, almost $3 billion, in stimulus funds. And according to records, to the government, 17,000 jobs were saved or created. What are you saying to those people? Fend for yourselves?

What I'm not for -- what I'm not for -- is the $2,000 deductible and taking our health care system back to a pre-World War II system, which is what Rand Paul's on the record as having said. So I'd like to fix health care. He wants to repeal it. And I think that's a stark difference. Kentucky Senate Showdown on 'FNS' | Fox News Sunday FULL TEXT TRANSCRIPT