GRANEY
Congressional candidate and Katy resident Tim Graney is calling out long-time incumbent Congressman Ron Paul (R-Lake Jackson) to take part in a series of debates across the 14th Congressional District.
That district includes parts of Fort Bend County, including most of Cinco Ranch, and much of the upper Texas Gulf Coast.
Graney is challenging Paul in the spring Republican primary and wants the maverick GOP incumbent to take part in face-to-face debates on issues facing the district and nation.
So far, Paul had not responded.
Graney said he has been traveling the district, and people are telling him they want to see the candidates debate.
“As we’ve travelled the district, the number of people who have expressed their interest in seeing a debate between me and Paul is astonishing. Both my supporters and his want to see this debate,” Graney said.
He also said voters have “grown tired” of Paul’s “antics and self-promotion.”
“This district is made up of good, hard-working folks who want to see results. Grandstanding is not going to put Americans back to work,” Graney said. “(People) don’t want career politicians who advance their personal political careers at the expense of their communities.”
Graney also questioned why Paul would find time to challenge conservative pundit and television personality Ben Stein to a debate, but cannot commit to a debate of the issues facing his own congressional district.
“We’ve seen this song and dance before when Paul had no time to hold a health care town hall (meeting) in Katy, or anywhere else in the district,” Graney said. “However, the good doctor did find plenty of time to throw a campaign fundraiser and birthday bash for himself in Galveston during the summer recess, which was attended by many from outside the district and as well as outside of Texas.”
Graney also noted that other Katy-area Members of Congress held town hall meetings to discuss health care and other critical topics, but not Paul.
“This time around, it seems that Paul is more interested in a debate with Ben Stein to garner national attention for his own agenda than he is in a debate that the people of the 14th District want to see and ultimately have a say in – a debate on the issues that affect them most (such as) creating jobs and putting Americans back to work”
Paul’s campaign had no comment on Graney’s debate challenge, and a spokesperson said they “have no information” on whether Paul would be agreeing to any debates.
In 17 years in the US Congress, only two bills that Ron Paul has sponsored have passed. Only one other has even reached the floor for a vote.
One bill honored NASA. One bill honored Hispanics. That is it.
If he was the Ft. Bend dog catcher, and only caught one stray every 8 1/2 years, I don’t think he would be re-elected, why should he be re-elected for Congress?
I think I too would like to know the answer to the question ktunstall posted above. It isn’t unreasonable to ask if those criticizing Ron have been in the line of fire.
Are you a vet ‘southerncomfort’?…but you would have to give us your real name in order for this to be verified.
“Dr. Paul is a vet as well. Are you? ”
I would like an answer to this one too.
‘Thumbs up’ to the *real* men and women with backbone in politics who are willing to debate or respond to a mature debate challenge if truly available to do so!
I said it before and I will say it again we can hardly afford to keep paying to police other countries with the current debt level.
I found the Tunstall response made several salient points that should be heeded by both major tax subsidized parties. I get mad when I see so many domestic base closings going on impacting local economies, while many GOPers and liberals protect the over-seas bases at all cost.
The founders of this country and even more recent leaders have repeatedly warned about trying to nation build. After the mission is accomplished it is time to bring the troops home. I for one get sick of reading about the labels being thrown around in all these forums. I would agree with raymond that debates are good for a society as long as all candidates are included, not just Graney and Paul (there are several others being well financed in this race). If you are unable to accomplish such then perhaps conducting your own “interview” will work by simply calling the candidates.
I think it is counter-productive though for neocons to attack one of the few real conservatives operating on the national level in the republican party though. Dr. Paul is a good man and easy to talk to. Just call him and “interview” him.
It seems to me the topic is if there should be DEBATES. From these posting there is most certainly not a clear consensus on issues, which begs the question, why shouldn’t ALL candidates debate the issues in very public forums?
When I hire a person to do a job I like to know where they stand and how well they will perform and what it is they believe they can do for me. Sending in a resume is one thing but there is no substitute for a personal interview. I consider a series of public debates focused on the issues facing the community as that interview. No matter how long someone has been with us, no matter how well they did yesterday, we must know what their thoughts are going forward.
We must not lose sight of the fact that every two years our Congress is elected and even though many are up for “re” election they are still applying for the job. They should welcome the opportunity to share their Capitol experiences with us, shouldn’t they? Just as importantly those who want to go to Washington as the “new man” should be able to articulate why they are the better option and make their case.
Given Mr. Paul’s position on Constitution protections, which I share, he should support FREE speech and not force challengers to dig into their own pockets all the while he sits on about two million dollars in campaign funds. Are we supposed to make our decision on the basis of who can create and pay for the slickest ads and then run them one after another? Is the plan to continue to run ever more expensive campaigns and limit access (membership) to Congress to only those with connections?
Congress is supposed to represent the “common man” and the common man wants to hear what ALL the candidates have to say. The best and most practical way to achieve this is via a series of public debates. Hiding behind “my schedule won’t work” is a poor excuse as what is more important by way of Congressional duties than a candidate coming before the voters to outline their plans for OUR future? Let the debates begin in every district!!
Last night those who would carry the GOP banner for governor this fall, sat down to talk about things and I for one found it to be refreshing and look for more. Paul, Graney, and others owe us no less.
Amen to that, Ktunstall!!
Jim, there is more of a difference than you’ll admit. Libertarians actually MEAN what they say and do not simply pay lip service to the voters in order to get elected, then break our oaths to enrich political contributors. We believe and adhere to the oaths that we take. You claim to be conservative. What is it that you are trying to conserve?
Regarding isolationism. Perhaps you do not understand the term. While it is true that we do not in general support “entangling alliances” (we actually revere the advice of our founding fathers) that is not what a “non-interventionist” position means.
Libertarians believe in energetic diplomacy and robust international trade. That is not an isolationist position. We simply do not believe that our children should be utilized as cannon fodder for THE UN to police the world.
Tell me, do you think that China has the “right” to tell us what to do? If not, then how can you be so presumptuous to suggest that we have some moral basis to do so with other nations? How can you claim to support your own sovereignty (as a so-called conservative), yet have absolutely no respect for the sovereignty of other nations?
If you do not understand why our founding fathers disliked the notion of permanent and entangling alliances, you may find a study of conflicts throughout history quite edifying.
If you question our reasoning for bringing troops home, instead of having them in 700 military bases in 130 (out of 191) countries, while closing domestic bases, well the reasoning should be obvious. The EU is quite capable of defending itself as is Japan. We should not be subsidizing the defense of the most wealthiest nations on the planet.
Thinking that we can inject ourselves into any conflict, anywhere at anytime without Constitutional authorization or in clear violation of the Laws of Nations will eventually lead the the exhaustion of our assets, resources and people. The logical conclusion is the bankruptcy of the nation. Is that what you desire?
If you are so bold as to suggest that I do not support our military, allow me to dissuade you from an ill-conceived strategy. My wife is a vet, my son is going to boot camp in a couple of months, my nephew is with 3rd ID and my family has been involved in every conflict throughout our history, including the first one (revolution).
Dr. Paul is a vet as well. Are you? Dr. Paul was the first Republican elected in Fort Bend County since reconstruction. He (along with the other “l”ibertarians in the GOP) was described as the “conscience” of the GOP by Reagan. Do you have a conscience?
Again, what are you trying to conserve? If anything other than the constitution, you are not a conservative.
Who are these “troops” that ya’ll keep talkin about? And how many of em per gallon does your big ole truck get?
Our military is now a privatized military of mercenaries Blackwater.
Can ya’ll say “imperialism”?
What I think is really sad is the wrong turn modern “conservatism” took several years ago away from the constitution and towards “neocon” principles under sheeple leaders like Carl Rove. The base was lost at the end of last year because of excessive republican tax and spend policies at the national level that lead to the current recession and the attempt to privatize more government functions to select corporate vendors locked into a local and national crony network.
How can government protect and defend a constitution and its people when they have sold out. We expect this of the liberals, but the current “neocon” direction is lost on the base.
The party had an opportunity to return to traditional conservatism through candidates like Ron Paul and 1 or 2 others, but chose the corporate welfare bunch instead. They will continue to present two faces. One to the sheeple and one to the financial string pullers of the party in their duplicity. It’s long past time to cut those strings and reform the political industry that is destroying this country and selling out the middle classes to the highest bidder.
From what I have been reading, the diatribe of the neocons hasn’t changed and has even harshened and we continue to see the ever present sheeple leaders of the neocons in here. Reducing the cost of government is only a banner to be waved by party main-liners like Graney. Name calling and marginalization hasn’t worked in the past, why do you think it will work now?
Good Luck to all in this race, but my sympathies are for the experienced real voice of conservatism in Dr. Paul. Stop the diatribe and misleading the base. There is nothing “true” in that.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/03/30/blackwater-army/
Who are these “troops” ya’ll keep talkin about? and how many of them per mile does your cars get?
There are some points where neo-libertarianism and true Conservatism line up. We need to respect the Constitution and States rights. We need to shrink the power and scope of the bloated Federal bureaucracy, we need to practice fiscal responsibility, and we need to eliminate Statists regardless of their stripes. We’re more alike in these areas than you guys choose to admit!
The disconnect comes in two points that both boil down to security.
First, in regards to isolationism; which is indeed a Ron Paul mantra. Prove me wrong. Such a concept is absurd because if we retreat from the world, there is still a large populace that will hate us and try to kill us. Period. End of story. Prove me wrong.
Second, we have obligations of mutual security we have guaranteed other nations. Do you all think we should abrogate those responsibilities? And if so, exactly how does that strengthen America?
Come on, all you Ron Paul supporters come off with these cute little one-liners, but where is the debate? If you really intellectually believe this stuff – back it up! I’ve posted several times here and I get nothing of intellectual value in return! Don’t just parrot the crap you heard at the last meeting – say something intelligent!
Why won’t your chosen one debate a real contender here in the district he pretends to serve?
Some pretend ending foreign involvement would work. Time to get a grip on reality.
Southern, you don’t always have to accept the labels some posters throw around in here. Reducing our foreign involvements and balancing our budget, debt and other obligations doesn’t = “isolation”. Most know that, but some would rather pretend.
SC- If you look at Paul’s stances, you’d see he is in fact an isolationist. Wanting to bring all our troops home from our bases around the World is what’s naive. Like it or not, we have foreign interests to protect and allies to defend and help. That’s just the way it is.
I’m one of those that does not think an endless and expensive ground war on terror is effective. I also remember when Eisenhower warned American citizens about the military industrial complex, not the average troopers, but the corporations and vendors that feed of taxpayers during large undeclared wars. I’m with tabor. We can no longer afford to police the world. If they want to pay our huge debt or get it forgiven, then maybe we can continue, but not without help. Painting those that oppose excessive foreign intervention as isolationist is naive as well as shortsighted.
How long would you continue to leave our young men and women in harms way and soaking the taxpayers to do it?
Voters opposes Dr.Pauls unhealthy an non-health plans.
b_tabor… if you are implying I’m with someone’s campaign, you’d be wrong. I am just a regular guy who happens to be a constituent of CD14. Do you live in the district?
I also did not say anything pro or con about spending trillions of dollars policing the world. Please don’t put words in my mouth.
Do you think we should honor treaties that we have signed with other countries concerning mutual defense?
Do you believe that if we were to re-deploy all American forces to American bases, we would be more or less safe? In your opinion, would such redeployment end terrorism here and abroad?
We can hardly afford to keep paying to police other countries with the current debt level.
Some people fall for the constant grandstanding on isolationism (unrealistic in the day and age), HIS
personal interpretation of the Constitution, and the
usual rhetoric and some don’t.
Sounds like someone from the campaign is here to attack Ron. I guess they would rather see us continue to spend tens of trillions we don’t have policing the rest of the world while other rich countries sit back a benefit. Ron Paul supports the troops always, but knows the difference between being the police for the UN and defending the U.S.
And Jim, we’ve never had any trouble getting a hold of him. I wonder why you have such trouble?
If being someone who says what they mean and acting on it is “hoodwinked”, then let us hope for more politicians who suffer from this affliction of honesty and directness.
Hey, Patriot I don’t get your point. I happen to live in his district and it takes months to even get a letter answered by his staff. I’m not tacky and disrespectful when I write, I just want to understand his position – and it takes forever to get an answer. Paul does not make himself available to his own constituents; I guess because he’s too busy building his national base for his planned but unannounced 2012 Presidential bid.
Personally, I would like to have a Representative that actually met with more than just a narrow slice of his constituency from time to time. Is that too much to ask? Is it too much to ask that he debate in his own district instead of making hay of some ‘national’ debate with an entertainer?
Come on, just try to think objectively for a moment.
Well stated, Jim. He’s got alot of people hoodwinked, that’s evident by the comments here. Time for him to go.
Lightweight amateurs don’t get to fight the heavy weight champion.
Ron Paul has about a voting record of about 73% in line with Republicans. That is because he’s always there to vote for naming of post offices. I guess that is a serious constitutional issue. He votes fairly consistently for commendations to troops for deployments, service, etc. but then turns around and votes against funding them. He slams their mission and believes that if we recalled all our troops from everywhere in the world, there would be no more terrorism. I believe in freedom, liberty and support for the Constitution too, but when it comes to foreign policy and defense, the Paul approach is fatal.
How about initiate the effort to audit the treasury and keep cronyism and spending down (by voting NO on pork barrel riders that you and the other neocons thrive on at our expense).
Oh, and vote NO on everything?
What’s he done besides constantly grandstand and drape himself in the Constitution?
Go Dr. Paul! We are with you. Stump these neocon fakes off the ballot!
NEWSFLASH! It ain’t broke!
Come on Graney! You just want to stand by Dr. Paul so he can make you relevant. It doesn’t matter your positions on the key issues, because we already have someone with a record that proves that his “antics” are always in favor of the people. Belittling what Dr. Paul has done for not only Texans, but Americans as well, is not very classy.
Amen thirty3na3rd! We should have listened, but it’s easier to ignore and walk through life with blinders on.
Dr. Paul has been serving the United States, not just Texas, for his whole career at his own expense. He could have easily tried to make more money by now and anyone that knows anything about Congress knows he is the SOLE voice of reason and integrity about protecting the U.S. Constitution and the liberties of U.S. Citizens.
For this mongrel Graney to claim that Ron Paul is anything other than a patriot and statesman is disingenuous at best and slander at worst.
What has Graney done? A consultant? The only thing it looks like he consults is the desert cart.
Dr. Paul served in the military as a flight surgeon and has delivered thousands of babies in TX. He has put aside decades of his medical career to instead serve the U.S. and the people of Texas.
The only thing Graney should debate is if he should be on Jenny Craig or Slimfast.
Yeah, he’s a real Constitution thumper alright!
I think Rep. Paul’s “antics” – promotion of the CONSTITUTION and pursuit of a real remedy for the recession/near-depression, not making it worse like most of his colleagues in Washington have been prone to do – are something that the people of the 14th district can be very proud of. I wish our own representative and Senators were cut from the same cloth as Rep. Paul. Sadly, they are not.
What decision do you think ‘Dr. No’ will make? Hmmm