Katy Resident Tim Graney Announces Congressional Bid
October 26th, 2009 | by John Pape | Published in News | 70 Comments
Katy resident Tim Graney has announced his candidacy for the 14th Congressional District, challenging maverick Republican incumbent Ron Paul.
Grainey, a former small business owner who will be entering his first political race, said the district needs a new voice in Congress, particularly in the area of foreign policy.
“It is time for Ron Paul to step down and step aside so he can pursue his own interests while a new statesman emerges to represent the district,” Graney said. “I told him so Sunday afternoon.”
Graney went on to say that Paul’s Libertarian leanings are not consistent with the beliefs of residents in the district.
“I am a fiscal conservative, but I do not support Ron Paul’s weak foreign policy views, nor do I support his do whatever you want ultra-Libertarian views that conflict with our American values,” Graney said.
In his first term in office, Graney said he will focus on three key areas of legislation to propel this country forward – energy, business growth and American values.
“The first two are paramount to the economic and long-term security of our nation and the third will help return us to our roots that founded and built the greatest nation on earth,” he said.
He said he believes in energy initiatives and will focus on “expansion of drilling, expansion of nuclear energy and expansion of research.”
“For decades, the issue of energy independence has been talked about without anything ever getting done,” Graney said. “Continued failure to act by the representatives in Washington has lead to a weakened national security and economy. I am here to help reverse that trend.”
He also outlined “the 3 R’s of my business growth initiatives: reduce regulation, reduce taxation, re-grow jobs in America.”
As a former small business owner, Graney said he understands the pain of dealing with business regulations and wants a zero percent tax rate for small businesses that have a profit of less than one million dollars so they can reinvest money into the business and continue to grow jobs.
Graney said his third plank is maintaining American Values.
“As we move our nation into the future it is imperative that we not forget where we have come from and how we got here,” he explained. “We must not lose sight of our American values that are being slowly eroded by political correctness. We must return to the principled roots of the founding values that have made America what it is today.”
Within his first week of campaigning, Graney raised in excess of $15,000. He called the support “overwhelming” and “humbling and inspirational.”
“It confirms to me that people are willing to support a conservative candidate with traditional values and a clear message that resonates with them. Even in tough economic times, people are finding ways to contribute toward my campaign,” Graney said. “I am more resolute than ever to help steer our nation back onto the path of common-sense energy initiatives, a government that is friendly to small business and a return to our American values.”
Graney’s wife of 15 year, Corrine, said she was proud of her husband’s for taking on the challenges of a congressional race.
“He is serving a cause greater than himself. Our boys, ages 11 and 9, look up to their father, who is teaching them by example that politics can indeed be a noble calling.”
Graney attributes his values, instilled at a young age, to his upbringing. He said the upcoming election cycle will define our country in crucial ways.
“My time to serve this great nation has arrived; it is the least I can do the repay all she has given me,” he said.
The 14th Congressional District includes part Fort Bend County, including much of Cinco Ranch. It also extends across the upper Texas Gulf Coast from Aransas County north to Chambers County, including Galveston.
October 26th, 2009 at 12:07 pm (#)
I like his platform but he’s going to have a tough time beating Dr. No.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:45 pm (#)
1) Paul beat his GOP primary challengers in 2006 and 2008 by a mile.
2) Paul has over 2 million dollars on hand
3) How much of that 15,000 for Graney is self financed? Even if it’s none, it’s not much going against the congressman with the most money.
4) This wannabe political opportunist is only four in line behind Cherry, Gay and Wall.
5) When he loses badly in March, does that mean it’s him and not Paul who is really out of touch with the TX14 district?
This story deserves a big ol’ YAWN.
October 26th, 2009 at 8:05 pm (#)
“…do whatever you want ultra-Libertarian views that conflict with our American values.”
Representative Paul is a strict constitutionalist. As in… the United States Constitution.
Apparently Mr. Graney is going to conduct the typical smear campaign we’ve come to expect from rightists who do not like Representative Paul’s allegiance to the Constitution.
Sad that Mr. Graney believes such views “conflict with our American values”.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:02 am (#)
This candidate doesn’t understand that Dr. Ron Paul has values of America at heart more than ANY other candidate to hold office since the FOUNDERS OF THIS COUNTRY!
If the 14th district is ever STUPID enough not to re-elect Dr. Ron Paul, this will then become a country no long even worth living in!
October 27th, 2009 at 9:14 am (#)
Mr. Graney’s statements are Orwellian newsspeak. Mr. Graney is a neocon warmonger.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:51 am (#)
Congratulations on your novel campaign! It will make politics considerably simpler in the future if you are elected. Heretofore, I would always have to attempt to correct someone who says the customary “We need to kick out all the bums in Congress!” I would have to say “No, we need to kick out all but one, Ron Paul! He is the only one in Congress consistantly speaking out against ALL this self-destructive socialist insanity.” In the unlikely event of your election, I’ll then be able to say “Sounds reasonable!”
October 27th, 2009 at 10:02 am (#)
I plan to donate to RON PAUL’s campaign, to help ensure he beats Mr Graney’s brains out. Graney is a typical Bush/Cheney Republican who believes Washington should police the world. He also has no problem with the welfare state.
Save your time and money, Mr Graney. You have no chance to beat the most intelligent and principled member of Congress.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:04 am (#)
His platform:
1. A warmonger–does not respect Constitutional views of non-intervention with the matters of foreign soverign countries rights to govern themselves.
2. “American values” , how about LIBERTY, many of us in the 14th probably don`t care for your “values” but we do care for Liberty. You do as you wish and I`ll do as I wish as long as we don`t encroach on each others Liberty.
3. The 3 “R`s”. No one in congress has fought harder against Gov. regulations and taxation than Ron Paul. Only a free Capitalist society can create meaningfull jobs.
4. This guy needs to read Ron Pauls book “The Revolution, A Manifesto” . Maybe then he will understand Liberty and the true meaning of the Constitution.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:20 am (#)
“Graney said his third plank is maintaining American Values.”
Just when does ANY Congressman have that kind of power in DC to enact something as abstract as “American Values”? What is his specific plan to do so? Indoctrination? Re-education camps? Require schools to teach his version of American Values? Print a little Red, White, and Blue book, akin to Mao’s red book, and distribute to all US citizens to keep on their persons at all time, to quote passages?
All paid by tax-payer dollars, no doubt.
What hubris this guy has. We already have a set of American Values–they are written in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Perhaps he ought to read it someday, so he understands that its not America’s prerogative nor mission to “make the world safe for democracy”.
This guy cannot even come close to holding a candle to a man of Ron Paul’s caliber & integrity.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:23 am (#)
His “platform”? What platform? How vague and amorphous can you get? Reduce regulation, reduce taxation, re-grow jobs in America - when have regulations or taxes ever been reduced? “Re-grow jobs” - what an ignorant turn of phrase. The government can’t re-grow anything.
On the point about “weak” foreign policy - all we need is one more vote for bankrupting wars and imperial policies and we can reduce regulation, taxes and re-grow jobs. This guy Graney is a moron and beneath contempt. Apparently, if we just bombed brown people 10,000 miles away who have done nothing to us things will improve here at home. If we had only known that 50 years ago think how much better off we would be today. That’s sarcasm. Dr. Paul is right - the only way we can actually accomplish the goals Graney set out is by bringing our occupation forces home from Europe and Asia and using those resources to reduce regulation, taxes and “re-grow” jobs.
If we send an imbecile like Graney to Congress that would be fine - we already have 434 others - he would fit right in.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:55 am (#)
Good to see so many speaking up in support of Paul. I sure hope he can get the fed audited.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:36 am (#)
Graney, are you kidding me? A warmongering supporter of more oil drilling is offensive to *my* American values. This must be a joke. Ron Paul will blow this neocon out of the water and Graney can slither back under his rock.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:57 am (#)
Being a conservative card carrying Libertarian, I support Dr. Ron Paul and his non-interventionist foreign policy, and we should start withdrawing troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. What are we doing there these days?
I don’t need politicians to tell me what my (our) values are!
http://www.lp.org/
Billy, etech
October 27th, 2009 at 2:22 pm (#)
Excellent points sureshot. I truly believe that this guy will be defeated in a landslide.
American values have been on the decline for years and Ron Paul has been fighting tiressly to regain them. These are the basic values which include opposition to meddling in the affairs of foreign governments and waging preemptive wars against them.
Ron Paul will kick his butt! Get em’ Ron! Take a hike Graney!
October 27th, 2009 at 4:21 pm (#)
This poor guy is so wrapped up in the two-party politics system that he has forgotten the most important American values–LIBERTY and LIMITED GOVERNMENT. I believe the Republican party would love to have someone defeat Dr. Paul because his “flashlight” into their dark places is causing too many people to take a closer look. Mr. Graney appears to be just another status quo candidate and I hope the 14th has more common sense than to vote for him instead of Dr. Paul (the only Congressman who still honors the Constitution as far as I’m concerned).
DR. PAUL AGAIN IN 2010!!!
October 27th, 2009 at 7:04 pm (#)
From a blog entry by Lew Rockwell, President of the Ludwig von Mises Institute:
“When Timothy Graney, one of Ron’s neocon opponents for the republican nomination for congress in Texas’s 14th district, saw Ron at a republican event, he barged through the crowd, arrogantly tapped his name tag, and loudly announced, “See that name? You are going to be seeing that name a lot in the next four months.” Ron replied, in typically gentlemanly fashion, that he was glad to meet Graney.”
Mr. Graney, Americans are finally starting to see the light (but Lord knows why they didn’t while Bush was in office). We don’t need you to drag them back into the dark.
While Dr. Paul has a lot of support in his district, you can’t discount the support that he has from a nation in the midst of an awakening. I’d suggest starting with something small, like, maybe a school board or city council position.
On second thought, give it your best shot. We could use a lot more shamed neocons on the scene.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:13 pm (#)
Is this all Newt the Neo Con could come up with this time. Not looking good for Newt and the good old boys any longer..
15k… lmao
October 27th, 2009 at 7:22 pm (#)
If Dr. Paul is so amazing, what has he actually gotten done for us during his 20 years in office? A lot of talk, books and TV time is all I can see. Anyone who falls for that slight of hand deserves to live in his district, but many of us want new representation.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:57 pm (#)
I wonder who put this idea into this fellow’s head about running against Ron Paul. Goodness, the Republicans in TX must be really in a dither regarding Representative Paul and what he stands for.
I hate to say he is an imbicile, Graney, but he is. At least his thought process and he is just as bad as the dems.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:02 pm (#)
One other thing, how come he is a former small business owner?
What happened to why he is no longer a small business owner?
Just wondering because when someone claims that and they no longer are one i start to
question and wonder.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:34 pm (#)
FBCAD & CAD unlawful actions have affected the economy of American values, thence increasing financial crisis. American values are effected by local, state, & federal RED Party.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:40 am (#)
“WhatUsayNow says:
October 27th, 2009 at 7:22 pm (#)
If Dr. Paul is so amazing, what has he actually gotten done for us during his 20 years in office? A lot of talk, books and TV time is all I can see. Anyone who falls for that slight of hand deserves to live in his district, but many of us want new representation.”
What has he gotten done for us? My measure of my congress critter doesn’t consist of “what they do for us”. Quite the contrary. I’m only concerned about what they are doing TO us. You can’t put your hand out if you just stick it in your pocket.
There’s this really neat document call the Constitution for the United States. Have a read. Have a read of the Federalist and Anti-Federalist arguments. Have a read of various correspondence, specifically that written by the father of the constitution, Mr. James Madison. Have a read of George Washington’s farewell address. Have a read of almost anythin Thomas Jefferson has ever written.
Compare that to what we have today, and you’ll have the answer to the question: “Is this what we were meant to be?” I’m quite certain Dr. Paul will look far more comfortable in a powdered wig than in the current sea of vipers, if you are capable of contrasting and proper categorization…
As for the books and the TV appearances, well, since tyranny is so successful a marketing entity, a counter-revolution must itself be marketed and financed. Make no mistake; mainstream Ds and Rs are the revolutionaries. Dr. Paul is the spearhead of the counter-revolution.
October 28th, 2009 at 8:37 am (#)
He’s made a career out of being an obstructionist for his own party. I really can’t see why people keep electing him. Talk about being counterproductive. I guess everybody loves a rebel…
October 28th, 2009 at 9:02 am (#)
MEGABITE, how is he an obstructionist and counterproductive? Because he’s not a lemming and won’t follow the rest of the crowd off a cliff? Do you personally have something against individual liberty and our constitution. What, exactly, are you looking to receive from federal gunverment?
Without facts to back up your statements, they are nothing but childish teasing thrown about a kindergarten playground.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:31 am (#)
Redneck- How do you think he got the nickname Dr. No? I’ll tell you, because he voted against everything, that’s why.
All this ’strict Constitutionalist’ is all fine and dandy but unfortunately going against his own party only helps the other side. man you Ron Paul minions get angry when someone has the gall to actually say something negative against your hero, or get this run against him in an election!! GASP!!
HOW DARE THEY! Give me a break. Time for a reality check.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:34 am (#)
We need term limits.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:02 am (#)
Ah. I see. So he has to vote for unconstitutional legislation with the rest of his party in order to be a real republican? Gotcha.
I’d hardly call myself a minion. LOL! However, I am able to read our founding documents and discern right from wrong based on the criteria laid out in them. All I have to say is, when Democrats are pushing unconstitutional legislation, don’t try to make the argument that it’s unconstitutional. That’s call hypocrisy, sir. Voting on principle is voting on principle. Keep your Hannity talking points of helping the other side to yourself.
I don’t get angry when people say childish things. I just feel compelled to ask them to expound and when they can only respond with republican platitudes, it’s very easy to dismiss them.
I agree with the term limits, even if they are self-imposed. Hey, wasn’t Boehner an original proponent of the Contract with America? Wasn’t term-limits part of that? Where’d that go? How many subsequent terms has Boehner served.
Yeah. Thanks.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:14 am (#)
No, the legislation wasn’t unconstitutional. It’s just a buzz word. People like you tink everytime he votes no it’s because what he was voting for is somehow unconstituional. Bull. I think he does it to get attention and be different than everyone else. How is that helping? It’s not. But obviously it dupes some people like yourself.
I don’t listen to Hannity so you’re barking up the wrong tree on that one.
His voting record and stances on issues is public record. Some of it is pretty funny actually.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm
October 28th, 2009 at 10:24 am (#)
My comment is awaiting moderation because I added a link to Paul’s voting record and stances on issues, it’ll pop up eventually.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:33 am (#)
I’m aware of his voting record.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:41 am (#)
And you still support him?? WOW
October 28th, 2009 at 10:43 am (#)
Again…platitudes. Be specific.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:57 am (#)
You’re against the death penalty?
You’re against IDs for immigrants?
You’re for gay marriage?
You’re for flag burning?
You’re against AMBER alerts?
You think we should only attack anopther nation if we’re attacked first?
You want to end the Cuban embargo?
You think gun manufacturers should be sued for product misuse?
The list goes on and on…
October 28th, 2009 at 11:53 am (#)
There are cases, especially here in the Houston area, where evidence has been tampered with/improperly handled and innocent people have been incarcerated for years wrongfully. If there’s the possibility of putting innocent people to death, then yes, I’d be against it. So, are you saying that, if there’s a chance that you are killing an innocent man, that you’d do so as long as he’s convicted in a court of law?
I’m not against IDs for immigrants. I’m against IDs for illegal immigrants. Immigration law is another area for which the constitution actually grants power to congress.
I’m neither for nor against gay marriage. If one believes in liberty, and go look that word up, one believes that people are free to do what they want as long as they aren’t infringing upon the liberties of others.
I’m neither for nor against flag burning. See above.
I’m not against Amber alerts, I’m for them. However, there’s nothing that I can point to in the constitution that gives federal government authority to participate. The powers not granted by the constitution to the federal government no prohibited of the states, are reserved to the states respectively or to the people.
I think we should only attack another nation if we are attacked or under threat of imminent attack. Pre-emptive strikes are a neoconservative philosophy and is not rooted in traditional conservatism at all. Are you suggesting that the US .gov has some kind of divine Nostradamus power to see who needs to be pre-emptively attacked and who doesn’t? Even if the intelligence is shaky at best. See Iraq. See Afghanistan. Why didn’t we attack Saudi Arabia? Hmmmm…
I would end the Cuban embargo. What reason would there be to continue it? Because Cuba is communist? (uh…we trade with the Chinese) Because their regime is oppressive? (uh…we trade with the Chinese and the Saudis). Please give me a valid reason to continue the embargo, and denying me really great cigars.
Nice try on the gun manufacture suit fallacy. He didn’t vote against the bill because of its merits. He voted against it based on the damage it does to second amendment rights. You are simply making your opinion based on the title of the bill and not its contents. Here’s Dr. Paul’s critique of the specific gun rights violations that S. 397, Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, would have imposed:
“Senate amendments added two sections to S. 397 that impose unconstitutional controls on American gun owners and sellers.
First, a section was added to the bill to outlaw any licensed gun importer, manufacturer, or dealer from selling, delivering, or transferring a handgun without a “secure gun storage or safety device.” Each and any violation of this requirement can result in a person being fined up to $2,500 or having his license revoked. This gun lock requirement amounts to the imposition of a new Federal tax on each handgun sale because gun buyers will be forced to pay the cost of the “secure gun storage or safety device” that is required with a handgun, irrespective of if that device is desired. Further, the severe penalties for noncompliance — whether intentional or accidental — add yet more weight to the crippling regulations that hang over gun transactions in the United States.
Second, a section was added to the bill to create draconian penalties for people who possess “armor piercing” bullets. Just like the Democratic Congress before it that passed the “assault weapons” ban, the Republican Congress is poised to give in to anti-gun rights scare tactics by selectively banning bullets. Instead of each gun owner being able to decide what ammunition he uses in his gun, Federal bureaucrats will make that decision. To recognize the threat such regulation places on gun owners, just consider that a gun without ammunition is nothing more than an expensive club. Regulating ammunition is the back door path to gun regulation.
The “armor piercing” bullets restriction imposes a 15 years mandatory minimum sentence for just carrying or possessing such bullets — even without a gun — during or in “relation to” a crime of violence or drug trafficking. Given the wide scope of criminal laws and the fact that people are on occasion accused of crimes they did not commit, this provision promises to discourage many non-violent, law- abiding individuals from possessing ammunition protected under the Second Amendment. Further, it does not take much imagination to see how such a provision could be used by an anti-gun prosecutor in the prosecution of an individual who used a gun in self defense, especially considering that use of such bullets to murder can result in a death sentence. In such instances, a defendant who exercised self defense may well accept a guilty plea bargain to avoid the severe enhanced penalties imposed under S. 397.
I am particularly disturbed that the House of Representatives’ leadership has taken the unusual step of bringing S. 397 to the floor for a vote without House members at least having an opportunity to vote on removing the gun control amendments. Instead of voting on a bill that contains the new gun control provisions, we should be considering H.R. 800, the House version of S. 397 prior to its perversion by gun control amendments. Notably, Gun Owners of America has written to House members to request that they oppose S. 397 and, instead, support H.R. 800. Last month, I wrote to House Speaker DENNIS HASTERT, Majority Leader TOM DELAY, and Committee on the Judiciary Chairman JAMES SENSENBRENNER of my opposition to these anti-gun rights provisions in S. 397. While I am concerned about some of the federalism implications of H.R. 800, it is a far superior bill because it neither requires gun locks nor restricts gun owners’ ammunition choices.”
Facts are very tricky things, aren’t they?
October 28th, 2009 at 11:57 am (#)
Good grief, when can we expect chapter 2 of your novel?? haha
October 28th, 2009 at 12:09 pm (#)
So you are willing to sacrifice justice for the victims families because a mistake might be made? It’s a good thing 75% of Texans disagree with both you and Paul on that.
I’m against IDs for illegal aliens as well. Common ground.
I believe marriage should be between a man and a woman, only.
The voters of Texas believe this too since we chose to bar it
in the Texas Constitution.
Amber alets- So anything not specifically spelled out in the Constitution you are against? That’s take it WAY too far IMO.
So I see you are for his mamby pamby hands off defense policy? Doesn’t work in this day and age and opens the U.S. up to countless attacks and mass deaths. We must be proactive, not reactive. Much of the World wants to kill us, like it or not.
Cuban embargo- Give me a reason we need to trade with Cuba. Just so you can have good cigars? 8^P
Gun bill- I did not know about the add ons. Thank you, I have been schooled.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:10 pm (#)
LOL! Sorry…when I have a point to make, I make it…platitude-free. :D
October 28th, 2009 at 12:32 pm (#)
It’s not that I’m willing to sacrifice justice. It’s that I’m unwilling to condone murder, which is what the execution of an innocent person would be.
I believe as you do on marriage. However, you can’t say that you believe in liberty only where things that you agree with are concerned. Just because somebody chooses to do something that you don’t agree with is not grounds to deny them their own choices.
When I was 17, I took an oath to defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The constitution must be interpreted as written or it is meaningless. Many a Republican is just as guilty as Democrats where this is concerned. The founders had just fought a war for freedom from British control. The goal was to not allow such tyranny to arise on this continent again. It HAS happened and it’s because the provisions of the constitution were specifically ignored. The constitution doesn’t prevent states from participating in the Amber Alert system.
Creating enemies does nothing to enhance national security. Are you aware of why we are at odds with Iran? Let me tell you a short story. In 1950 or so, Britain gave Iran back to their people and they elected a president, democratically. That president decided that Iran’s natural resources should benefit its own people…so he nationalize Iranian oil. This upset British Petroleum. So, British Intelligence, along with the CIA, fostered and helped stage a coup against the democratically elected president…and a dictator was installed. The rest, as they say, is history.
The big fight in Afghanistan, currently, is not against al-qaeda, which was the reason for going there in the first place. So we overthrow the government there, largely controlled by the taliban. Well, Afghanistan is a very tribal country. Who we are now fighting there are simply people who are trying to defend their homes, families and villages (I’m certain if a foreign occupying force were killing my family (whether on purpose or not), I would become an insurgent). Put yourself in them shoes, if you’re able.
We and our government might see what we are doing as good, however, there can be disastrous, unintended consequences associated. We need to understand that. For the most part, they don’t “hate us for our freedom”. It’s our meddling and presence in their countries and affairs that they object to.
I can’t come up with a reason we NEED to trade with Cuba, so there ya go. However, please give me a reason we SHOULDN’T trade with them. I seems that we’ve gotten past the trading with communists and tyrants deal.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:51 pm (#)
No, murder is purposely taking a life unlawfully, actually.
There is no ‘right’ to get married so no one is being denied anything. Plus, they can get married if they want to, provided it’s to a person of the oposite sex.
We are at odds with Iran, along with most of the World, because they are pursuing nuclear arms. They’ve already
announced Israel should be wiped from the face of the Earth.
Are we supposed to sit around and wait for that to happen before doing anything? No.
Defend their homes and villages? Total BS. I cannot believe you’re trying to justify those savages’ actions. How dare you claim they’re killing our servicemen to protect their families. Protect them from what? We aren’t butchering
families over there. We’re after barbarian terrorists. You know, our enemy. the World’s enemy.
We shouldn’t trade with Cuba because we don’t have to. As long as Castro or his brother are ruling there, the embargo should remain IMO.
October 28th, 2009 at 12:52 pm (#)
But I’ve wasted enough time on Ron Paul for today. Vote for him if you want. 8^)
October 28th, 2009 at 1:38 pm (#)
That’s exactly what murder is. So, taking the life of an innocent person is ok as long as it’s done lawfully? What law can you point to that says life can be taken from the innocent?
You are absolutely right. Marriage is not a right. However, contract law is common law and should not be controlled by the state.
Turn off Hannity and FauxNews. Incorrectly translated Farsi does not an existential threat make. If Israel thinks they are a threat, let them deal with it. There’s no active or imminent threat to us.
More FauxNews propaganda. It seems that factual subject matter is simply fed to you rather than obtained. Hear about the marine captain turned US diplomat who just resigned his position? I’m in agreement with him, simply because he was a lot closer to that situation than you or I:
“I found that the majority of those who were fighting us and the Afghan central government were fighting us because they felt occupied. This concured with history I had read and with what colleagues had told me.”
“I disagree and I think it is emotional arguments like this that keep us tied to Afghanistan and to a policy that fuels the insurgency as well as adds credence to calls for global Islamic jihad. 9/11 was a tragedy for this country and we cannot let another event like that happen, particularly as we have still not recovered from the emotional shock of the event 8 years later. Additionally, events like 9/11 cause tremendous shock to world financial markets, something we cannot allow to occur, especially at this point in time. However, since 9/11 al-Qaeda has evolved and no longer will tie itself to a political state or geographical boundaries. They have turned into an ideological cloud that exists on the internet and recruits worldwide. Look at the makeup of the attackers for the 9/11, London and Madrid attacks and additionally looked at where they planned and trained for their operations. Heck, the 9/11 attackers trained here in the US! The people we are fighting, for the most part, in Afghanistan are fighting us becasue they do not want to be occupied by either a foreign army or a central government force. Simply put, al-Qaeda does not exist in Afghanistan and 60,000 troops with the hope of stabilizing the Afghan central government which may or may not succeed in 5-10 years time will not defeat al-Qaeda.”
“However, we cannot justify the deaths of our young men and women for the goal of changing a society’s internal cultural and familial norms. This is a goal best left to NGOs and IOs or through the US goverment’s strategic communications. But this is a process that will take generations/decades.”
“The terrain is formidable to put it in an understated manner. The societal makeup to include the interaction of village to village and valley to valley, is such that allegiances seem to be to family and then to village/valley above and beyond anything else. This is why I use the term “valleyism” to explain the reasons why local populations are fighting us and the Afghan central government.”
I just hope the same never happens here. I don’t know if I’d be able to live with being called a barbarian or terrorist.
Ah…gotcha. So we should trade with communist and oppressive regimes like Saudi Arabia and China because…we HAVE TO? I’m failing the make the connection…
What I find interesting in this conversation is your list of responses gets shorter with each post. Should I assume that I am discrediting and dispelling myths with each passing post? When facts are presented, conjecture is obliterated.
I’m not trying to be condescending, but all I’ve seen are assumptions that aren’t backed up with any facts. Saying someone is a “kook”, “counterproductive”, or an “obstructionist” without evidence is akin to a 7 year-old calling a classmate a “doo-doo head” over by the merry-go-round.
October 28th, 2009 at 2:17 pm (#)
No one is taking innocent lives, we are punishing cold blooded murderers. Why do you have a problem with that?
like I said, it really doesn’t matter what you or Paul
thinks about his issue, the vast majority of Texans support it.
I already told you I don’t listen to Hannity. I visit the Fox News site along with dozens of other ones, so please leave the worthless rhetoric out. Israel isn’t the only one that thinks Iran is a threat. You really should research who all is against them gaining nuclear capabilities. You act like it’s no big deal. You really trust the Iranians? WOW. Israel is ally. I know you and Paul would rather not have any allies as well as enemies? Are you really that much of an isolationist? Cmon it’s time to face reality now.
911 was not the only reason we went into Iraq. I know how RP likes to hear himself talk but he’s really out of touch with what’s going on over there. We should not let terrorists do whatever they want out of fear it will recruit more if we retaliate. That is ridiculous. Thanks to our troops the Taliban is basically defeated and there is a mountain of dead terrorists. He conveniently forgets to add that part in his rants. I wonder why?
Unless you murder innocent people you won’t be called a barbarian or terrorist. I see you are still trying to justify what they do. It’s really quite pathetic.
You can assume whatever you want, you obviously have a problem with reality. Your hero has you brainwashed.
Let me know when you want to talk about real life, not
this soapbox constitutional grandstanding. If you can’t see
how him going against the party is detrimental to us,
I really question who’s side you’re on in the first place. It’s common sense type stuff we’re dealing with. But like I said, people like you need a rebel, a hero they can rally behind. It’s obvious. Never mind if he’s full of it?
October 28th, 2009 at 2:19 pm (#)
Funny you question the size of my postings when your last one was mainly RP rants. Hmmmm.
October 28th, 2009 at 2:28 pm (#)
Do you have RP holding the Constitution tattooed across your chest? 8^P
October 28th, 2009 at 2:38 pm (#)
Don’t worry redneck, some just don’t get how badly the republican party needs reformers like Dr. Paul. They still think everything is fine and getting your brains beat out by a liberal is ok. Some will never get the relevance of the constitution and the protections it provides for individuals. Too bad it is only a slogan for some in the party and nothing more.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:04 pm (#)
I’m not against executing the guilty. I am against executing the potentially innocent. There is a difference.
I’m not brainwashed, I am simply capable of critical thinking…of analyzing facts and separating them from rhetoric.
3 reasons were given for invading Iraq:
1. Weapons of mass destruction. No.
2. Iraq somehow had a hand in 9/11. No.
3. Saddam had links to Al Qaeda. An even greater no.
9/11 had absolutely nothing to do with Iraq. President Bush said so himself.
I find it interesting that so many people are “married” to the above reasons for invading Iraq after they’ve all been dispelled.
I don’t trust the Iranians anymore than I trust the Israelis…or my own government for that matter. You say “isolationist” like it’s a bad thing. If anything, bullying isolates us more than simply participating in commerce, instead of trying to instill values that aren’t even American values into these countries we invade. We’d be better off leading by example rather than imposing our goodness at the point of a gun. We’d also do well to be more wary of “enemies” who are not so overt in their anti-American activities. China’s kinda got us by the economic boo-boo now, don’t they?
What people who espouse the killing of “brown people” base their opinions on is fear. Plain and simple. How so large a percentage can confuse what 19 criminals pulled off (15 of which were Saudis) with the need to kill more of their kind and the overthrow of the governments of sovereign nation-states to make themselves feel safer is beyond me. I liken it to bombing an entire neighborhood into oblivion opposed to going after the actual drug gang who is causing the violence (another issue altogether). I didn’t expect to change your opinion. I simply offered an alternative, more rational explanation for the folly of our current foreign exploits, and Tim Graney only offers more of that.
You are confusing justification with understanding. I don’t think you understand the entire breadth of the subject at hand. The people we are primarily fighting were not combatants prior to our being there.
Actually, my last post, the portions quoted, were from an interview with Matthew Hoh. :D
Your steadfast adherence to the official republican party platform is commendable, however, it’s no more pro-American than what liberals espouse. You point fingers at the Obama administration for abusing the commerce and general welfare clauses of the constitution, but praise Bush for suspension of habeas corpus, sneak and peak searches, warrantless wiretapping (both violations of 4th Amendment), medicare prescription program and TARP (abuse of general welfare and commerce clauses), going to war without a declaration. All violations of the Constitution. You are a statist and condone the abuse of constitutional powers by federal government, as long as your preferred party is the one doing the violating; a different version of statism than the left represents. Go say your “pledge of allegiance” (which was written by socialist Francis Bellamy).
Either you support the constitution or you don’t. There is no middle ground. If you don’t like it, there is a vehicle in Article V. to amend it.
I did not take an oath to support a government or a party. I took an oath to defend the constitution. That’s what I’m doing. Have you ever taken that oath? If Mr. Graney were to somehow win the nomination and election, he would have to take that oath. Would you expect him to live up to it? From your positions, the answer is no.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:07 pm (#)
“Do you have RP holding the Constitution tattooed across your chest? 8^P”
I just might. :P
It’s not that I hold the man in high regard…it’s the principle. It’s the advocacy for liberty. It’s the uncompromising integrity.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:08 pm (#)
More should hold the constitution with esteem, rather than dumping on it as so many do in our party.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:12 pm (#)
If you don’t have confidence in our judicial system there’s really nothing I can do for you. Luckily roughly 75% of Texans do.
Peruse the Iraq Resolution (which was passed by Congress BTW). There were more than 3. I’m not going to let you drag me into a 911/Iraq debate. Been there, done that a thousand times. I will ask you how many terrorist attacks have we had on U.S. soil since 911? None. Coincidence? Of course not.
I say isolationist likes it’s a bad thing because it is. We must have allies to help us fight our common enemies.
Good for you for supporting the Constitution, just don’t let the self back patting get in the way of rational thought and reality.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:22 pm (#)
Whatever happened to “Give me liberty or give me death”? According to you, 9/11 changed that to “Take my liberty and make me safe”. I guess cowards can talk themselves into anything.
You say we must have allies to help us fight our common enemies. I ask why we must have enemies (real or imagined)?
Thanks. I’ll make sure I don’t let it cloud my judgment. So you’re for socialized healthcare, fiscal stimuli, and bailouts, I presume?
October 28th, 2009 at 3:27 pm (#)
As I said before some just don’t get it redneck.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:28 pm (#)
In a perfect World we’d all sit around the campfire with singing Kumbaya, Ron Paul leading the chorus of course. haha
October 28th, 2009 at 3:29 pm (#)
And no, I don’t have confidence in our judicial system. There is such a thing as judicial tyranny. How does a majority of justices construe that the 4th Amendment applies somehow to the taking of unborn human life, when it is in direct contrast with the 5th Amendment’s no person may be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law? That is not misconstruction. That is deconstruction.
It’s not necessarily the judicial system, however, that is the issue. Part of the problem is the methods by which some wrongful convictions occur. No such system is perfect, agree or not? So you’d be ok with allowing your own execution as long as you were convicted in a court of law, regardless if innocent or guilty?
October 28th, 2009 at 3:33 pm (#)
Well that’s too bad. You’ll get over it one day, maybe.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:38 pm (#)
Redneck this guy attacks Paul whenever he gets a chance. He’s a big Tom Delay type. He probably doesn’t even know they carved Delay’s district out of Pauls years ago.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:38 pm (#)
Nah. I’ve been in this fight for awhile. I think I’ll stick it out. :D Have a good one.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:40 pm (#)
The Paul minions are a feisty bunch, I’ll give em that!
October 28th, 2009 at 3:40 pm (#)
Many people do it, cult, but can never form valid arguments for why they do it. It’s always conjecture. There are some that will never get it, but they will be the first to scream when something near and dear to them is taken away.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:47 pm (#)
Nothing is being taken away from me. The sky is not falling like Paul would have you believe. If he told you the sky was green I’m sure you’d believe it.
October 28th, 2009 at 3:51 pm (#)
:D Conjecture…..
Have a good one!
October 28th, 2009 at 3:54 pm (#)
You too!
October 28th, 2009 at 4:05 pm (#)
Yes redneck, it reminds me of the mixed signals coming out of the party regarding property rights. A republican supreme court gives them away to private companies and then the party claims to defend our property rights. Simply amazing what goes on behind the closed doors. I sure hope they can get the treasury department audited. It was also nice to see Dr. Paul propose a healthcare reform bill that countered the current plan that some of our party officials are selling out for via the pork-barrel projects.
October 28th, 2009 at 5:01 pm (#)
Wow, this thread on RP beat the one by Wall 63 to 40. I wonder who will finish second in this one? How many total candidates are there now?
October 28th, 2009 at 5:29 pm (#)
b_tabor, are you, perhaps a transplant from KC? Know a marine? :D
October 28th, 2009 at 8:36 pm (#)
Nope, I’m not a jar-head.
8 ^ )
October 28th, 2009 at 8:36 pm (#)
But I can appreciate lively commentary!
October 28th, 2009 at 10:46 pm (#)
Some won’t flinch or even raise a partially closed fist when more is taken from us, because they are already in a deep coma like sleep and could care less. As long as someone is wiping their spittle away and changing their Attends.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:52 pm (#)
It wasn’t meant as an insult. One of my friends who lives out in Katy with the last name Tabor who is an ex-jarhead. I’m an Army dog, so we give each other hell on occasion. :D
October 29th, 2009 at 8:58 am (#)
No offense taken. I wish Paul and all the candidates the best. Hopefully we can get more into congress like him.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:45 pm (#)
My father in law was a jarhead. He took great pride in the nick.