Skip to comments.Breaking: Pro-Life Rand Paul Wins by Landslide in Republican Primary in Kentucky
Posted on 05/18/2010 5:57:46 PM PDT by tcg
The Major news sources have all called the Republican Primary in Kentucky and Rand Paul, the son of Ron Paul, has soundly defeated Trey Grayson for the Republic Party nomination for a seat in the US Senate.
By the time the votes are all counted it could be a near landslide for the first time Senatorial candidate. Dr. Paul is a family man who has been married to his wife Kelley for 19 years. They have three sons. He is a doctor, and not a politician. That is part of the appeal he had for the voters of Kentucky.
There will be pundits parsing the meaning of this election all evening. They will discuss the meaning of this strong showing. Rand Paul certainly was not the preferred candidate of the Republican Party establishment. He had the backing of the broad coalition being called the "Tea Party" movement.
He has never run for public office. He all but eschewed the traditional fundraising model, opting instead to utilize the internet in the manner that his father used the internet in his outsider bid for the Presidency.
While the pundit class pontificates, those who recognize that the foundation of all human rights is the fundamental Right to life should take heart from Rand Paul's position in defense of the dignity of every human life from conception to natural death.
Here are his own words:
"I am 100% pro life. I believe abortion is taking the life of an innocent human being. I believe life begins at conception and it is the duty of our government to protect this life. I will always vote for any and all legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.org ...
Heh...better check with CNN to see if he really won!
Just like his great Dad who delivered 4000 babies as a physician!!
I would like to see Paul go a bit further with this statement. Not only will he vote for legislation to end abortion, he will tirelessly author such legislation.
Could this be the beginning of the end of this national nightmare we’ve been living?
From your post to God’s ear!!!!
“I would like to see Paul go a bit further with this statement. Not only will he vote for legislation to end abortion, he will tirelessly author such legislation.”
Clueless, uber lib Stevie would not be happy with the type of landslide you’re referring to.
Did he get the endorsements of Right to life or the Eagle Forum? We have a guy in my district who gave virtually the same pledge, then blew off the right to life banquet and went to a fundraiser with the pro embryonic stem cell research Main Street Republicans.
Don’t stop thinkin’ `bout tomorrow!
I don’t know his endorsements other than the Tea Party. Maybe the FReepers in Kentucky can give you a clearer picture of who endorsed him.
Can’t fit this in our exchange, but since I’ve slammed her liberal behind, I feel it only fair to give a hat tip to this bit of pop magnificence:
Nothing less than a gift from God, via his talented songbird, Stevie Nicks.
Congrats to Paul.
Time to remove the “Gobbler” (Mitch McConnell) from his leaderless post.
Then, let the voters of Kentucky remove him from office.
Throw all the bums out.
Rand Paul caught lying about his pro-life survey
What about instances of rape or incest or where the outcome may not be death, but severe medical problems for the mother or child. Do you think that in these cases the decision should be left to the government rather than the families?
Paul: In cases of rape, trying to prevent pregnancies is obviously the best thing. The morning-after pill works successfully most of the time. Ultimately we do better if we do have better education about family planning. With partial-birth abortion, there were five women who testified that it threatened their life. It wasnt completely true in all cases. They were non-viable babies. They were babies with awful genetic mutations that were not going to survive, and I tend to think we let nature take its course. (Lorie Settles, US Senate Hopeful Rand Paul Visits Middlesboro, The Middlesboro Daily News, 1/26/10)
I think a whole lot of people got snookered tonight.
And to GOP operatives this makes Rand a anti-jewish nazi. I do not undertand their slander of the man or his father.
Dr. Paul, like both of the people he was named for, is a dedicated libertarian. He is therefore incapable of being honest when it comes to abortion. This being America, he is free to claim to believe that life begins at conception, even if he doesn't.
Kentucky Right to Life opposed Dr. Paul in the primary for one reason: He was given a questionaire, which he returned incomplete. Specificially, he refused to answer questions about his position on stem cell research. He then lied to the press and said he was given a "100% Pro-Life" rating (he's making referrence to that in the quote you provided). When KRL called him on this, he went so far as to produce a bugus survey, forcing KRL to make the original he faxed to their office (complete with time stamp) to the press. Even then, Dr. Paul persisted in the lie. He released a statement saying that he opposed federal funding of stem cell research. But this was not the question, and libertarians oppose federal funding of everything anyway. Here's KRL's point: If you can't oppose ALL ebryonic research, you can't oppose abortion on it's only logical ground: That it is always the murder of a human being. Murder of a unique living human inside the womb is also murder outside it. Dr. Paul knows he is not being consistent, so he can't answer the questions. KRL also believes that Dr. Paul supports partial birth abortion, and the "morning after pill," but these questions were not on the survey.
I can't vote in Kentucky, but I will be rooting for Dr. Paul. That being said he takes the libertarian positions in opposing foreign military activity in Iraq and opposing the Patriot Act. He was not the the "Pro Life" candidate in this election, Trey Grayson was. If elected senator, he will undoubtedly follow in his father's footsteps and run for president repeatedly. In some cases as a third party candidate, who takes votes from a more traditionally conservative candidate and leaves us with four (or even eight) years of Democrat presidency.
See post 19