Cyberhillbilly

Rand Paul "AWOL" on Afghanistan

2009-12-03T07:53:00.004-05:00

Geoff Davis, Trey Grayson, Hal Rogers, Mitch McConnell, Brett Guthrie, Jack Conway, Dan Mongiardo, someone who's running against Geoff Davis.... all have taken the time to comment on the most important political decision taken over the past year: the Afghan surge.

So where's Rand? Too Kooky for Kentucky says he's AWOL, and that's a pretty apt description.

On his web page Paul assures us: Defending our Country is the most important function of the federal government. When we are threatened, it is the obligation of our representatives to unleash the full arsenal of power that is granted by and derived from free men and women. Our supreme law, the Constitution, enumerates certain powers for the federal government. Primary among them is national defense.

So where does the Paul campaign stand on this most important decision on this most important issue? Could it be they're having trouble coming up with a viable, responsible policy that appeals to both Kentucky conservatives and Rand Paul's/Ron Paul's national base??

Too irresponsible for Kentucky!

UPDATE: The Herald Leader has this snip- "Trey Grayson supported [the surge] but resisted the idea of setting a timeline... while Rand Paul... did not return a message seeking comment that was left with a spokesman."

Despite Prevaricating Speech, Obama Gives U.S. Fighting Chance in Afghanistan

2009-12-03T06:06:00.004-05:00

It's about time! Obama dithered much of the fall and was clearly reluctant to pull the trigger on the Afghan surge. But he was in a box and knew it. Much credit for placing him in that box goes to Senator McCain (and the GOP establishment) who made fighting the War on Terror such a priority over the past few years. Their resolve on that issue was what made Obama commit to winning in Afghanistan (not that you hear much use of that term today) on the campaign trail last night.

More recently, credit goes to General McChrystal who locked that box even tighter with his leaked pleas for more troops. The whining on the part of the Obama administration and its flacks made it clear that they didn't enjoy 4 stars posturing the President.

Nonetheless, Obama's actions on Afghanistan spoke louder than his lackluster words Tuesday night and for that we can be grateful.

Here's Commentary (magazine):

The decision President Obama made was better than the speech he gave. What will matter, long after his address is forgotten, is that Barack Obama gave Generals McChrystal and Petraeus, two of our greatest military minds, the troops (30,000, plus additional allied troops) and strategy (counterinsurgency) they need to prevail in Afghanistan.

To the president’s credit, this is the second wave of troops he has sent to Afghanistan (in February, he approved sending 17,000). Mr. Obama, in siding with McChrystal and Petraeus, wisely ignored the counsel of his vice president, Joe Biden, whose 35-year track record on national-security matters is an almost unbroken string of unwise decisions. And the president made a decision that puts him at odds with his liberal/left-wing base, which seems as eager to lose in Afghanistan as it was eager to lose in Iraq.

As for the understandable concern some people have about Obama’s 18-month time line: it is, at least for now, less worrisome than it might appear. In his speech, Obama said we will “begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011. Just as we have done in Iraq, we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground.” That is a key caveat; if conditions on the ground change, Obama has left himself plenty of room to revisit his decision. Nothing is etched in stone.

I'm not quite as sanguine as Peter Wehner (author of the aforequoted piece) on Obama's time-line. Obama hasn't completely painted himself into a corner, but he's certainly made a further ramp up more difficult. Trey Grayson and Jim Bunning pointed that out.

But at least America, as Commentary points out, now has a fighting chance in Afghanistan.

Kauffman Foundation on Increasing Jobs

2009-12-02T21:32:00.003-05:00

From the Kauffman Foundation:

According to studies from the Kauffman Foundation, companies less than five years old have created all net new jobs in the United States since 1980. In 1997, young firms accounted for two-thirds of job creation.

A recent Kauffman Foundation study, however, shows that, in 2008 and most of 2009, firm foundation declined.

Schramm recommends five strategies to boost entrepreneurship and job growth:

Create a "Founders Visa" for immigrants who found new companies in the
United States to keep their businesses—and the jobs they create—here.

Offer a payroll tax holiday so that young companies can afford to
hire and expand.

Provide clarity about taxes and future regulations to avoid
unintended and harmful consequences to entrepreneurs.

Create entrepreneur fellowships for recently graduated Ph.D.s, giving
them an opportunity to commercialize their research.

Offer Sarbanes-Oxley exemptions to certain young companies so they can
offer IPOs more quickly.

New York Times: Too Kooky for Kentucky in the Gray Lady

2009-11-25T22:01:00.005-05:00

For maybe the first time in a little over a century Breathitt County, Kentucky made the New York Times. The last time the county was in the Times (at least by my search) Breathitt County gunmen were involved in a bitter, internecine war; a civil war of sorts. This time, a new age Breathitt County hot-shot- one who fires with his computer keyboard- is involved in a bitter, internecine war; a civil war of a different sort.

The New York Times story, which is, all in all, pretty unflattering to Rand Paul, says of the Republican turned Libertarian turned back Republican:

A fervent opponent of big government, Dr. Paul believes that federal authorities should stay out of drug enforcement, and that same-sex marriage, which he opposes, should be a decision left to the states. He supports gun rights and thinks abortions should be illegal, even in cases of rape, incest or where the life of the pregnant woman is at stake. Unlike his father, Dr. Paul opposes all legislative earmarks, even those that might benefit his constituents.

“I consider myself a constitutional conservative and a part of the insurgency that’s going on out there,” he said.

Dr. Paul, however, has not received financial support from Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, who is chairman of the Senate Conservatives Fund and has become a kingmaker for conservative challengers.

“A surprising number of voters are drawn to Paul,” said Joe Gershtenson, a government professor at Eastern Kentucky University. It is still not clear, however, how many of those people are registered Republicans who will be able to vote in the primary, Professor Gershtenson said.

“They may see Paul as less electable now,” he said. “But they also view him as being separate from the establishment, and they seem to have faith that his odds will improve with time.”
Mr. Grayson disagrees.

“The celebrity factor is what is attracting people now,” said Mr. Grayson, who was a lawyer before being elected secretary of state in 2003. “Mr. Paul has his dad’s following and his dad’s e-mail list, and he has shown he can raise money outside the state.”

But before long, Mr. Grayson said, voters will see that Dr. Paul’s views are out of step with this state’s values.

“Mr. Paul believes we should close Guantánamo and return those terrorists to Afghanistan; Kentucky voters would not agree,” he said. “Mr. Paul believes federal authorities should not have a role in drug enforcement, but Kentucky voters know we have a drug problem here in the state, and they certainly would disagree with that, too.”

The Times then segues to this part of the story about Mike Bryant and TooKookyforKentucky.com:

Others share that view.

“Grayson will win because Paul’s views are extreme and he will turn off social conservatives,” said Mike Bryant, the Breathitt County Republican Party chairman, who maintains a blog called TooKookyforKentucky, which highlights some of the more controversial positions espoused by Dr. Paul and his father.

The TooKooky.com hyperlink used by the Times takes you to a post about Ron Paul, Rand's choice for President twice, and his belief that America should legalize heroin.

Great work, Mike!

RNC Making a List, Checking it Twice

2009-11-25T06:25:00.003-05:00

The NY Times has a story on Michael Steele’s latest effort to curtail the civil war in the GOP about who’s a moderate, who’s conservative, etc. A snip:

A group of conservative Republican leaders is proposing a solution to the internecine warfare over what the party should stand for: a 10-point checklist gauging proper adherence to core principles like opposing government financing for abortion and, more generally, President Obama’s “socialist agenda.”

In what was being dubbed a purity test when it leaked out to reporters on Monday, the proposal would require the party to withhold campaign money and endorsements from candidates who do not adhere to at least seven principles on the checklist.

[…]

Its introduction increases pressure on the party chairman, Michael Steele, as he tries to maintain a balance between those in his party who have been saying the road to a Republican comeback is to include divergent views and appeal to the political center, and those who say the party needs to more fully embrace conservative principles.

But it was also likely to inflame moderate party members who have been urging the
party to resist pressure from activists — spurred by commentators like Glenn Beck on the Fox News Channel and leaders of the diffuse Tea Party movement — to move against those deemed insufficiently conservative or lose their grass-roots support altogether.

Here's the list, in it's entirety, courtesy of The Nation (which gleefully points out that Ronald Reagan would have had some troubles with the list himself):

(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill;

(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare

(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

(4) We support workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check;

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing, denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership; and be further...

RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy positions of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee; and be further

Phillip Caputo on "The Fall of Mexico"

2009-11-23T08:05:00.002-05:00

Caputo has a must read piece in the Atlantic Monthly on the so called " Fall of Mexico." I'm currently reading Caputo's latest book, The Crossers, a multi-generational story about the borderlands between Mexico and Arizona. The central characters in Crossers are a 9/11 widower who comes out west to recover from his wife's death and his grandfather who lived in another era filled with revolution and chaos.

Paultards in Disarray

2009-11-23T07:41:00.007-05:00

Funny stuff from the Daily Paul:

Trey's got nothing on Rand but he does have McConnell's machine working for him behind the scenes and they've found something that can hurt Rand...a divide and conquer move that riles up his supporters. Rand is in a no-win scenario here and was forced to play a hand he probably didn't want to play. Now we are at each others throats and the McConnell/Grayson crew are high-fiving each other: Mission Accomplished!

If you don't think that they've got people monitoring DP and other websites and reporting back to their bosses you are a fool. Yes...that's what I said. Tough love, remember? Rand would rather focus on his core issues: the economy and the monetary system but now he's sidetracked thanks in large part to the war that's erupted among us.

If this was a candidates forum 6 months away from the election and if we hadn't started this feud amongst ourselves then it would've been a blip and gone away to be forgotten by primary voters in May. Now it's exploded onto the internet where everyone can see it. The opposition now sees they can use this and they'll run with it. And if Rand wins, don't think they won't hand it over to Conway or Mongiardo to use because Rand has gone up against McConnell and NOBODY stands up against McConnell without them paying a price. This is being proven right before our eyes as you pound away on your keyboards bashing Rand while the McConnell/Grayson crew literally are watching every word that you post here and they are laughing at us.

Great job guys! Way to throw us Rand supporters in Kentucky under the bus!

Posted by an author named Lexington Green.

Robert Samuelson: The Assault on America's Youth

2009-11-23T07:32:00.003-05:00

From Samuelson's latest:

One of our long-running political stories is the economic assault on the young by the old. We have become a society that invests in its past and disfavors the future. This makes no sense for the nation, but as politics, it makes complete sense. The elderly and near elderly are better organized, focus obsessively on their government benefits, and seem deserving. Grandmas and Grandpas command sympathy.

Everyone knows that the resulting "entitlements" dominate government spending and squeeze education, research, defense and almost everything else. In fiscal 2008 -- the last "normal" year before the economic crisis -- Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid (programs wholly or primarily dedicated to the elderly) totaled $1.3 trillion, 43 percent of federal spending and more than twice military spending. Because workers, not retirees, are the primary taxpayers, this spending involves huge transfers to the old.

Comes now the House-passed health care "reform" bill that, amazingly, would extract more subsidies from the young. It mandates that health insurance premiums for older Americans be no more than twice the level of younger Americans. That's much less than the actual health spending gap between young and old.

Samuelson looks at this as an issue of fairness, and that's true. But a deeper concern is the lost opportunity cost: younger taxpayers won't be able to create as many businesses or go back to the school the way they might if they had more disposable income.

Redistribution isn't simply a question of fairness, it's a question of efficiency. Sooner of later Americans will have to face facts that our welfare state, whose raison d'etre is welfare, must give way to a new construct: the opportunity state. That will entail a shift away from promoting basic welfare to a model where entrepreneurship, higher education, and basic opportunity is promoted. The question is, when will America have this collective epiphany?

Read More of Samuelson's Post at www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/11/23/the_assault_on_the_young_contd_99244.html

Rand Paul's Fringe Friends Could Hijack KY Senate Race

2009-11-12T22:51:00.008-05:00

An amazing phenomenon is unfolding in the GOP primary for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky. Rand Paul is running two campaigns: Paul is running as both a Kentucky conservative and as the national heir to the Ron Paul, libertarian, political machine.

The first campaign involves reassuring Kentucky voters that his documented libertarian views aren't really that extraordinary. Yes, he's against the federal war on drugs, but only because the states can fight it better. Never mind that this is a repudiation of GOP doctrine since Nixon.

Yes, he's against federal regulations on abortion, but he's a staunch pro-lifer who'd turn abortion policy back to the states. Never mind that conservatives have fought dearly for federal pro-life legislation in Congress and pro-life Justices on the federal bench who often vote to uphold such federal laws.

And yes, Rand Paul is against the war on terror, but that's because we never declared war on terrorism. Rand's policies would have America declare war, go in fast and furious, kill all the baddies quick, and come home. Never mind that such a declaration is often politically impossible or that such tactics don't work. Never mind that Republican Presidents from Nixon to Reagan to George HW Bush to George W. Bush never felt compelled to follow such a course, nor did the GOP rank and file do much complaining at the time.

That Paul has succeeded to such an extent in his first campaign is a testament to two things.

First: the stagnation of political thought among the far right. For example, Ayn Rand is actually making a comeback among many conservatives, more than half a century after we thought William F. Buckley and Whitaker Chambers slew that beast once and for all. Beck has replaced Burke, Rush Limbaugh has replaced Russell Kirk in the pantheon of political thought for many right wingers.

Secondly: the lackadaisical manner with which Kentucky journalists have covered this race.

While Kentucky journalists fawn over Paul's fund-raising figures, a bigger story is being ignored. Namely, that second campaign that I referred to above: the one to inherit the Ron Paul political machine.

This second campaign involves people most Kentucky Republicans would find abhorrent. First, there's Ron Paul. He's campaigned to legalize heroin and cocaine, voted against a ban on child pornography, opposed the National Amber Alert, has consistently flirted with so-called truthers (people who believe 9/11 was orchestrated by the "police state"), and has hobnobbed with various public racists and militia types for decades. Of course folks say that the son can't be held accountable for the sins of the father. That didn't stop conservatives from blaming Barack Obama for the rants of Jeremiah Wright. But all Obama did was sit in the choir. When it comes to Ron Paul's silly preaching Rand Paul has actually helped him deliver the sermon. He's been a surrogate for Ron Paul since the early 1980's when Ron ran against Phil Gramm for U.S. Senate and dispatched Rand to debate the future supply sider. In 1988 Rand was Ron's "aide de-camp" in Ron's bizarre Presidential bid. In 2008 he traveled all over the country delivering speeches for his dad.

Ron Paul's political forums are chock full of Rand Paul references and links. His political fundraising machine is churning out full force for Rand Paul and makes no bones about it. Meanwhile, in Kentucky, there's yet to be a single substantive story covering the ties between Rand Paul and a man who received a scant 6.8% of the GOP primary vote in 2008. (Admittedly an improvement from the first time Ron ran for office in Kentucky; in 1988's Presidential contest he received approximately 2,000 votes out of more than 730,000.) Poor Roger Alford of the AP wrote about the election yesterday and said this of the Ron Paul connection: "Ron Paul's son is borrowing a page from his father's playbook... tapping the enthusiasm of young Republicans on college campuses." YR's?? This is Rand's base? Where was Alford during the Knob Creek Machine Gun Shootout?

But it isn't just Ron Paul who's helping Rand Paul raise money. Rand's also getting help from Jamie Kesslo at StormFront. Keslo, a neo-nazi, has openly publicized Paul for months and has linked to his site. Kentuckians deserve to know how much money Rand Paul has raised from such a dubious source, but as yet, there's been zero reporting on this issue.

Of course folks will claim, as they do on the blogs, that Rand Paul can't control content on sites like StormFront. Have they tried? Have they asked StormFront to take down solicitations such as these that clearly work to bring Paul support from StormFront viewers?

And what of Rand's ties to Alex Jones. As the web site Too Kooky for Kentucky has shown, Paul openly regularly appears on Alex Jones radio programs, despite the fact that Jones has made repeated claims that 9/11 was a government orchestrated conspiracy. While there Paul makes shameless pleas to Jones' listeners to give him money to run his primary in KY. Paul and Jones even talk about how Paul's web site crashed the last time he was on the Jones show and how such money... hate money, plain and simple... is used to buy Paul credibility with the mainstream media in KY.

WKU Professor Scott Lasely referred to the Paul campaign as a "guerrilla campaign" in an AP story. That's probably a pretty apt description. Like many guerrilla campaigns, this one receives financial support from shady characters who care not a wit about the locals. Like previous guerrilla campaigns, this one's being waged by a highly ideological cadre who pretend to be the true locals. But the problem for guerrillas is that sooner or later they face a choice: do they attempt to take over the ground they occasionally seize and fight their battles conventionally, or do they disperse back into the countryside and wait for another opportunity to ambush or raid. Unfortunately for Rand Paul, he has to choose the former. That puts him on ground that's more favorable to the conventional forces. Someday soon, expect that to be his undoing.

Read More @ www.tookookyforkentucky.com

Tom Friedman: Give Up on Mid-East Peace

2009-11-08T11:49:00.003-05:00

Is it me, or shouldn't this be big news? One of the most astute and famous pundits on Palestinian-Israeli affairs has said, 'give up, U.S., they don't want peace.'

A snip:

The Israeli-Palestinian peace process has become a bad play. It is obvious
that all the parties are just acting out the same old scenes, with the same old
tired clichés — and that no one believes any of it anymore. There is no romance,
no sex, no excitement, no urgency — not even a sense of importance anymore. The
only thing driving the peace process today is inertia and diplomatic
habit...

Admittedly, Friedman oscillates between brilliance and sheer stupidity, but I think this is one of his more clairvoyant moments. Maybe now we can stop trying to get Israel to make territorial concessions that would endanger their national security.

Read More @: www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/opinion/08friedman.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

Conservative Democrat Says Rand "Too Kooky for Kentucky"

2009-11-03T22:39:00.003-05:00

The following column appeared in the (Pikeville) Appalachia News Express and is reprinted here with permission by author:

Paul’s Strange Candidacy, By T. J. Litafik

Buoyed by his father’s aggressive, ragtag band of national followers, Rand Paul has raised a significant amount of money—over $1 million—for his quixotic U.S. Senate campaign. Paul, a Bowling Green eye doctor and political neophyte, is simply channeling the ideas of his father, Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), into next year’s Kentucky race.

Congressman Paul has in many instances taken admirable and independent stances on a wide variety of issues, across the spectrum, and it has made him very popular with those outside the political mainstream. During the 2008 presidential cycle, Ron Paul supporters were easily identifiable as loud and unruly party crashers at both Republican and Democratic candidates’ campaign events. At one event this writer attended in Johnson City, TN with former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, the rude and crude behavior of the Paulites went so far as to bring their own signs and shouts into Gov. Huckabee’s rally. On the way out, one fellow fervently waving a Ron Paul sign could be heard mumbling something about black helicopters and the Kennedy assassination.

The Paulite philosophy of government is basically this: the Federal government never did anything to help anybody; we’ve got to cut all “pork” out of the budget, scrap a variety of regulatory agencies, including the IRS and (gasp!) the Federal Reserve, and in the name of “freedom” repeal, repeal, repeal and we’ll start with anti-drug laws.

The senior Paul was the 1988 presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party. That was a silly and gratuitous political venture, just like his son’s U.S. Senate bid is now. While the Pauls can undoubtedly find a lot of takers for their ideology across America, the problem they have here is that in Kentucky people know better than the idea that all government is bad. Were it not for the progressive populism of Democratic and Republican leaders, Eastern Kentuckians would have never had a chance. Today we have the roads, schools, airports, flood control projects and hospitals that the Paul philosophy of government would have denied us.

Legislative politics, especially, are about tact, reasonableness and compromise—and yes, bringing home the bacon for the people you represent. The Pauls call such legislative accomplishment “pork” and denounce good public servants like Congressman Hal Rogers who deliver for their districts.

Earl Long once said of an opponent, “He’s got about as much chance to be Governor of Louisiana as I do Pope of Rome, and I’m not even a Catholic.”

Either Lt. Gov. Dan Mongiardo or Attorney Gen. Jack Conway would steamroll Rand Paul in the general election. Good Kentucky conservative Republicans who honestly seek a fresh political face and a change in Washington should think twice before joining the Paulite crowd. There is room for Ron Paul in the national debate, to be sure. But Kentuckians can’t afford a wild ideologue representing them; we must have earnest advocates for our people who want to continue the work of leaders like Hal Rogers, Carl D. Perkins, John Sherman Cooper and Wendell Ford. The problem with Paul is that he’s just too kooky for Kentucky.

Rand Paul: Too Kooky for Kentucky Families on Child Porn, Amber Alert, Legal Heroin

2009-11-01T10:39:00.003-05:00

Too Kooky for Kentucky continues educating Kentucky voters on the Pauls’ kooky views.

Paul Would Legalize Heroin: This week we’ve learned that, back in 1988 when Rand Paul was Ron Paul’s Presidential Campaign’s “aide de-camp”, the Pauls campaigned to legalize both heroin and cocaine. It’s hard to imagine that a Republican party loathe to legalize expanded gaming in Kentucky would side with a candidate who wants to expand opportunities for KY families to experience the horrors of heroin.

Paul Would Eliminate FDA: The Pauls also advocated for the elimination of the FDA. While common sense conservatives can agree that this government agency, like any, has a history of mission creep, its elimination would undoubtedly put American families at risk of consuming tainted food and drugs.

Pauls Opposed National Amber Alert: It seems that the Amber Alert, that draconian federal legislation that, like the Patriot Act also opposed by Ron and Rand Paul, could lead to the end of the Republic as we know it. Thus the Pauls opposed it.

Pauls Wouldn't Use Federal Law to Ban Computer Generated Child Porn: In the Paul family’s warped version of the U.S. Constitution, banning computer generated child pornography is taboo.

In case after case the Pauls put their warped version of the U.S. Constitution, a view so extreme that it attracts almost no votes in either house of Congress, ahead of what’s good for America’s and Kentucky’s families.

VA's Bob McDonnell on Green Energy: An All of the Above Strategy

2009-11-01T07:52:00.002-05:00

McDonnell is running as adept a campaign for Governor in VA as anyone has seen in recent years. Among his campaign planks: more energy. While McDonnell doesn't neglect oil, coal and natural gas, he wisely takes some time to promote Green, that is Renewable, Energy.

Snips from his campaign site:

Bob McDonnell will establish Virginia as a “Green Jobs Zone” to incentivize companies to create quality green jobs. Qualified businesses would be eligible to receive an income tax credit equal to $500 per position created per year for the first five years (up to 350 jobs annually). If the position is created within Virginia’s enterprise zone, the business will qualify for the current enterprise zone grant in addition to the new $500 income tax credit. The existing requirements pertaining to Enterprise Job Creation Grants will also apply. Qualifying businesses could include suppliers, manufacturers, installers and construction contractors for solar, wind, or biomass products and services, energy-efficiency products and services, pollution management systems and production of alternative transportation fuels.

Bob McDonnell will continue his work toward alternative energy that is renewable and sustainable, building on his energy record, including support for hydrogen energy. We must foster innovation by encouraging partnerships between Virginia Universities and private industry that will lead to new technologies and jobs in this field.

While there are several federal tax incentives for alternative fuel vehicles and alternative fuel infrastructure, Virginia lags behind. The Virginia Alternative Fuels Revolving Fund was established to assist local governments that convert to alternative fuel systems, but no funds have been allocated for its use. As Governor, Bob McDonnell will expand the purpose of this fund to include infrastructure such as refueling stations, provide seed money and aggressively pursue additional grants.

Crab Orchard (Lincoln County) Parody

2009-11-01T07:23:00.003-05:00

Funny parody of a quaint community in Lincoln County. Lesson: if you don't define yourself, some bored, young whipper-snapper with a video cam and a YouTube account will.

Garrard County Promo Video: IT'S GAR-AD COUNTY!

2009-11-01T07:16:00.002-05:00

Nice video with cameos from lots of celebs, including the Guv, Congressman Chandler, Justice Venters, Rep. Lonnie Napier, Judge Exec John Wilson and even me:

PS- You're welcome in Garrard County, anytime.

Too Kooky for Kentucky: Ron and Rand's 1st Run for President

2009-10-28T23:34:00.004-04:00

While most of the press on Rand's efforts on his dad's political campaign for President (OK, admittedly, there's been little press at all when it comes to Ron and Rand's weird statements) has centered on his 2008 bid, Too Kooky for Kentucky is finding some real nuggets of gold (pun intended, Gold Buggers) in Ron Paul's campaign for President as a Libertarian in 1988.

After deeming Ronald Reagan a failure because government was "in our wallets and into our bedrooms... more than ever before", Paul launched a Quixotic bid for President. And his loyal Sancho Panza: "Randall Paul, Dr. Paul's 25-year-old son and aide-de-camp...".

Among the Pauls' campaign planks:

1. Abolish CIA.

2. Withdraw from NATO. (Dumb enough now, but in 1988 there was the Cold War to contend with)

3. Eliminate Public Schools.

4. Repeal all Drug Laws.

But have no fear, the crowd that harps about "career politicians"... they've lived well pushing their oddball views:

His campaign is a world apart from the long motorcades, chartered airplanes and consultant-laden Republican and Democratic efforts. Even so, his son said, travel expenses come to $40,000 a month.

''It costs $40,000 a month for me to travel?'' Dr. Paul said with evident surprise during a quick lunch stop at a McDonald's north of Houston, where he cadged french fries off his son's tray.

Being kooky ain't easy (or cheap), but it sure it fun.

New Release: Rodney Stark Makes the "Case for the Crusades"

2009-10-28T23:21:00.005-04:00

Rodney Stark has written on the role of Roman cities in the rise of Christianity, the role the early Catholic church played in the development of capitalism, and a book on how monotheism led to science, with-hunts and the abolition of slavery. These works probably garnered Stark little controversy, but his most recent work has the potential to be a bombshell.

In God's Battalions: The Case for the Crusades, Stark argues that the Crusades were a force for good:

In God's Battalions, award-winning author Rodney Stark takes on the long-held view that the Crusades were the first round of European colonialism, conducted for land, loot, and converts by barbarian Christians who victimized the cultivated Muslims. To the contrary, Stark argues that the Crusades were the first military response to unwarranted Muslim terrorist aggression.

Stark reviews the history of the seven major Crusades from 1095 to 1291, demonstrating that the Crusades were precipitated by Islamic provocations, centuries of bloody attempts to colonize the West, and sudden attacks on Christian pilgrims and holy places. Although the Crusades were initiated by a plea from the pope, Stark argues that this had nothing to do with any elaborate design of the Christian world to convert all Muslims to Christianity by force of arms. Given current tensions in the Middle East and terrorist attacks around the world, Stark's views are a thought-provoking contribution to our understanding and are sure to spark debate.

Find the book @ Amazon:

www.amazon.com/Gods-Battalions-Crusades-Rodney-Stark/dp/0061582611/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256786616&sr=1-3

Book Review: Berlin Noir (March Violets)

2009-10-28T23:06:00.003-04:00

Phillip Kerr’s detective Bernie Gunther is a sort of German Humphrey Bogart just trying to stay alive and make a few Deutschemarks as a wise cracking, fast with his fists, P.I. as Hitler’s Nazi Party forcefully saddles up the German people for a near suicidal world war. Reading Kerr’s work offers insights into a nation on the brink. While Gunther detests the Nazis, he’s occasionally willing to make compromises and work with the future monsters of the Holocaust (they’re mostly just brutal thugs prior to World War II). After all, you don’t say “no” to Nazis in post-Weimar Germany without running the risk of finding yourself taking a prolonged swim in the River Rhine. Kerr’s noir is a must read for fans of detective fare and students of pre-war history.

Will Kentucky Republicans Endorse Rand Paul's Kooky Foreign Policy/Defense Goals

2009-10-24T18:09:00.005-04:00

As the latest foray into the proliferating and messy universe that is Kentucky’s political blogosphere has shown, Rand Paul, despite his impressive polling, is a new and unusual phenomenon in Kentucky politics. Too Kooky for Kentucky has, with video proof, shown that Paul is, among other things:

Anti-Department of Homeland Security: Paul is on record as saying we should abolish the DHS. This could be problematic on two levels. First, there's the little problem that this agency and several of the companies its funded provide hundreds of jobs in the most Republican region in the state. In addition to the potential economic losses in the Old 5th (and don't tell me voters there won't notice such things) Paul makes little effort to show how America’s shores will be protected in the absence of the DHS. He simply regards the agency’s very existence an affront to small government principles. That may play well in New Hampshire Republican primaries, but will it work in Kentucky?

Against the Patriot Act: Over the past few years Republicans have made much political hay out of liberal Democrats opposition to this measure. Last year, they even forced a reluctant Candidate Obama to vote for the measure’s latest extension. Yet Ron Paul has consistently voted against the measure and Rand Paul has taken the stump to speak against it for years.

Against Funding the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: Perhaps no line hurt Candidate Kerry in 2004 when he ran for President against George W. Bush as much as this: “I actually did vote for the 87 billion, before I voted against it." Of course part of the hit was that Kerry was a flip flopper. But the reason Kerry felt impelled to resort to such twisted logic in the first place was his fear that he’d be revealed as one who was less than a 100% supporter of the War on Terror. Ron and Rand Paul are both on record as saying the War on Terror should never have been declared. Both have flirted with Truther arguments (especially Ron) and both have essentially laid the blame for 9/11 at the feet of “Imperial America.” It’s hard to imagine that, as was pointed out earlier this week on Too Kooky for KY, Rand’s efforts to defund the war won’t be used against him a state anchored on the west by Fort Campbell. After all, there are likely many soldiers from that base who wouldn’t have received their body armor, their armaments, and other support had Paul’s vision prevailed.

Against the Euro Missile Shield: While Republicans busy themselves taking shots at President Obama for his retreat on missile defense in East Europe, Ron and Rand Paul have long opposed such imperial platforms.

Doesn't Believe Iran is a National Threat: While Republicans are worried that Obama will use multilateralism and direct talks as an excuse to avoid a strong response on Iran, Rand Paul is on record as saying it's OK if the Iranians acquire a nuclear weapon:

In the above video Paul not only indicates he’s OK with Iranian nuclear weapons, he goes as far as to explain that the Iranians feel threatened by the aggressive actions of the U.S. One can imagine the hue and cry if Barack Obama said such a silly thing.

Critical of Israel: Both Ron and Rand Paul have stated their desire to end foreign aid to Israel. Of course they both say they’d also cut foreign aid to Arab nations as well. But scrutiny of the Paul’s rhetoric yields an impression that they’re somewhat hostile to the Middle East’s sole democracy. While the Chief Correspondent for one of Isreal’s leading daily newspapers, Haaretz Daily, hasn’t found any specific anti-Israel animosity, he has listed many issues that could be problematic for Paul in a GOP primary. Ron Paul has repeatedly criticized the Israel lobby, spoke negatively of Israel’s Gaza invasion, and voted against support for Israel repeatedly. Will his son and assumed political heir be able to convince a conservative, evangelical population that he’s still pro-Israel in spite of such a record?

For years Republicans have used less than hawkish rhetoric and policy by Democrats to good effect. Yet in many cases the Democrats’ words and actions have been more pro-defense than Paul’s rhetoric. And that’s in a general election… not an (assumedly) more hawkish Republican primary in a military state.

Rand Paul faces many barriers to becoming the GOP nominee next spring. He’s a relative newcomer to Kentucky (sorry, 18 years don’t make you an insider in this state), is more of an ideological candidate in a race that usually favors political animals, and is opposed by much of the Republican machine. But a look at Rand’s foreign policy and defense credentials- nay Anti-Credentials- shows that his biggest problem will likely be his own views.

Congratulations Senator Stivers (and Clay County)

2009-10-23T22:29:00.002-04:00

Congratulations, Senator Stivers, on your election to the post of Senate Majority Leader.

This is a great day for Robert and his family, but it's also a great day for Clay County. The county's gotten a bad rap in recent weeks but it's guys like Robert who show the county's potential for leadership.

It's no coincidence that Richie Farmer and Robert Stivers were both Clay Countians and have been as successful as they are... especially relative to the rest of the region. This election serves to remind us of the county's potential.

Too Kooky for KY: Rand Paul is from Venus, Not Kentucky

2009-10-22T22:53:00.004-04:00

Trey Grayson got it partially right when he cast Rand Paul as a non-Kentuckian. In fact, after looking over some of the things that Ron and Rand Paul have been for over the years, it appears they're actually from Venus. (As in Robert Kagan's seminal work "Americans are from Mars, Euorpeans from Venus.") After all, they practically blame the 9/11 attacks on the U.S., have failed to support the troops in war in Iraq and Afghanistan, seek to end the war on drugs, and were against the Patriot Act. They don't even like the term "War on Terror." Sound familiar? Wasn't that John Kerry's platform?

Remember Lincoln's admonition: "What would you do in my position? Would you drop the war where it is? Or, would you prosecute it in future, with elder-stalk squirts, charged with rose water?"

Read More @: http://www.tookookyforkentucky.com/

Rand Paul Must be Kooky: Surrender on War on Drugs Not an Option in Appalachia, KY

2009-10-20T20:49:00.008-04:00

Not that it's a surprise, but Rand Paul is Too Kooky for Kentucky. Literally. Last year he served as the one of the principle spokesmen for a Presidential candidate who wants to decriminalize… perhaps legalize… drugs. Here's the Courier Journal's Joe Gerth on Rand and the drug war:

Paul said that on federal drug laws, he believes “most policies of crime and punishment should be and are addressed at the state level.”

He wouldn't say if the U.S. laws should be done away with or if the Drug Enforcement Administration should be disbanded, but he said, “I would favor a more local approach to drugs.”

By taking away precious federal resources, such as the DEA, the FBI, and various forms of federal aid for communities, Paul would hamstring our Appalachian communities in their bid to stem the drug tide. What’s more, difficult cases that require US Attorney oversight and cases built using RICO statutes would be harder to make.

Paul’s ideological take is also at odds with the politics of the region. Congressman Rogers has done a yeoman’s job trying to create programs that would alleviate some of the worst ravages that drugs have inflicted on our communities. These often rely on federal funds. Paul’s decision to abandon outright these efforts won’t make his Senate bid easy in the old (or new) 5th C.D.

Some of the programs that could be directly affected by the election of Rand Paul include:

City/County/DEA partnerships (which provide undercover task force officers in local communities)
Appalachian HIDTA (High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas)
Operation UNITE

At the end of the day, for many main street conservatives in KY, choosing our next Senator is a matter of choosing someone who will find you the resources and tools you need to make your communities better. For Rand Paul to abandon outright many of the tools rural communities have come to rely upon is downright kooky.

Read More @ http://www.tookookyforkentucky.com/

The GOP's Challenge

2009-10-14T21:39:00.003-04:00

Lots of indignation on the web about Susan Collins' controversial vote to get the Baucus bill out of committee. Folks are shouting "RINO!, RINO!!" from the rooftops. But here's the political reality:

A new poll of Maine voters from the Pan Atlantic SMS Group, which regularly surveys the state, offers a glimpse at the home state pressure on Olympia Snowe -- and Susan Collins -- to break with her party and back health care legislation, and suggests that they would be rewarded at home for backing a public option.

The survey finds that 58% of Mainers approve of how President Obama is doing his job, and that a plurality of 46% back his plans for health care.

A twenty-point majority favor a public option...

Maybe Collins and Snowe aren't doing a sufficient job explaining to the public why public option is such a silly idea, I don't know. But this suggests that the real challenge the GOP faces isn't with a few recalcitrant members; it's with certain segments of the electorate.

If that's the case, then the GOP has to decide if it can handle a few wayward members in order to make a national party and reach a Congressional majority.

Read more on the polling at:
www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1009/Maine_polls_shows_support_for_Obama_plan_public_option.html?showall

WYMT Poll: Opposition to Baucus Bill Runs High in EKY

2009-10-13T22:26:00.002-04:00

According to an unscientific WYMT TV poll, opposition to Senator Max Baucus's health care bill is running strong:

Results: Do you support the Baucus plan pending before the senate finance committee?
Poll Results:
Yes - 5.7%
No - 80.9%
Undecided - 13.5%
Total Responses - 230

The previous poll, which is already closed, yielded similar lopsided results:

Results: Are you in favor of the proposed senate version of the health care plan?
Poll Results:
Yes - 11.3%
No - 75.3%
Undecided - 13.4%

No word on how many takers in that one.

Read More @:
www.wkyt.com/polls?pollID=64034347&submit=submit&oid=2&mr=1&cid=6500&pid=64034347

Kentuckians for the Commonwealth vs. EKY Folk, Coal Miners

2009-10-13T22:05:00.003-04:00

KYians for the Commonwealth are liveblogging the event.

As noted in our previous post, the anti's are outnumbered, big time, by the pro-coal people.

You can sense the frustration reading KFTC's posts. A few snips:

"Bob Mitchell - Coal industry supporters are cheering after everything he says, causing him to go over time. He claims coal provides 50% of the nation's energy, but the number is actually closer to 43%."

"Dan Mongiardo compares MTR to surgery in his operating room. "It may look bad while it is happening, but in the end it will only leave a small scar." "We should stop calling it mountaintop removal, instead call it mountaintop development." Stuff about trails and adventure tourism."

"The hearing is starting to feel more like a pep rally than a public hearing. "Coal provides us energy security." "

"Doug Doerrfeld is on the stand. The boos and expletives from the crowd continue making it difficult to hear his comments. There seems to be an increasing number of coal supporters leaving the arena. About 1/3 of the original audience remains."

www.kftc.org/blog/archive/2009/10/13/live-blogging-the-pikeville-valley-fill-hearing/view