Conway/Rand debate in NKY

[ladiesbballcoach]

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101009/NEWS0108/10100328/1055/NEWS/Paul-Conway-to-debate-here

 

HIGHLAND HEIGHTS - On Monday, the candidates for U.S. Senate will face off for the first - and likely only - time in Northern Kentucky.

 

Republican Rand Paul and Democrat Jack Conway will debate at 7 p.m. Monday at Northern Kentucky University's Greaves Concert Hall.

 

WCPO-TV news anchor Clyde Gray is the moderator, and the candidates will take questions from a panel of journalists: WCPO's Tom McKee, the Enquirer's Amanda Van Benschoten, and Scott Reynolds of WAVE 3 News in Louisville. Original plans also called for Conway and Paul to ask each other two question, but the Paul campaign objected to that at the last minute.

 

The debate is free and open to the public, but organizers say the event is a sell-out: all 600 tickets are already taken.

 

The debate will be broadcast live on WCPO in Cincinnati, wcpo.com, kypost.com and on WAVE 3 in Louisville.

[Voice of Reason]

So did anyone watch the debate or is your mind already made up? I saw the majority of the debate. IMO Rand Paul came across as ill informed and very simplistic. If he is elected, it will be an indictment of our electorate. I am not saying Conway is a world beater but he is light years ahead of Rand Paul. Voting for someone to send a message to Washington and the two party system sounds great but when you realize who you have elected to govern, the phrase "cut off your nose to spite your face" comes to mind.

[bballfamily]

So did anyone watch the debate or is your mind already made up? I saw the majority of the debate. IMO Rand Paul came across as ill informed and very simplistic. If he is elected, it will be an indictment of our electorate. I am not saying Conway is a world beater but he is light years ahead of Rand Paul. Voting for someone to send a message to Washington and the two party system sounds great but when you realize who you have elected to govern, the phrase "cut off your nose to spite your face" comes to mind.

 

That is what I thought of when Obama was elected. He campaigned on that "Hope and Change" to send DC a message. Hopefully there will be some change in Nov of both 2010 and 2012.

[RomanEmpire]

IMO, Conway is just another wannabe career politician. Do we really need anymore of those?

[bballfamily]

IMO, Conway is just another wannabe career politician. Do we really need anymore of those?

 

I'm all for term limits.

[History]

I hope Rand Paul smokes him just like he did insider Grayson. The winds of change are a blowin'.

[Voice of Reason]

I hope Rand Paul smokes him just like he did insider Grayson. The winds of change are a blowin'.

 

I am all for some change. But I am not for sending an even higher level of incompetency to DC.

[leatherneck]

I am all for some change. But I am not for sending an even higher level of incompetency to DC.

 

I attended the event. Had a great seat. Right smack in the center and 7 rows from the front (it's good to have connected buddies I guess). I agree with you that Conway came across as a much more polished speaker. Paul actually seemed nervous. Which may have been why you thought he was ill nformed. I've read enough of his material to know he is not ill informed. Conway's polished manner of speaking actually turned me off. Frankly, to me, he seemed like just another smooth talking politician that once elected wants to be in office for a long time.

 

Every time Conway said "I'm for Kentucky", I was dying for Paul to reply: "Great. Reid is for Nevada, Pelosi is for California and Byrd was for WV. This Country and this State doesn't need another Senator like those three; this Country and this State doesn't need another Senator only interested in bring home pork for Kentucky to help the Senator get re-elected term after term. You can be for Kentucky. I'm for the United States and Kentucky. And you know what, that short term help you want to bring to Kentucky won't matter much if this Country falls apart economically and otherwise down the road. If we want to do what is best for Kentucky, we first have to fix this Country. "

 

Every time Conway said he wasn't going to balance the budget on the back of Kentucky's senior citizens, I was dying for Paul to reply: "Great, we'll balance the budget and deal with the problems you want to avoid someday in the future when things get even worse and tougher, and we'll do so on the backs of the children and grandchildren of Kentucky's senior citizens" .

 

Every time Conway said he wasn't supportive of raising taxes now, I was dying for Paul to reply: "Just when are you goint to be supportive of raising taxes and under just what conditions?"

 

Every time Conway criticized Paul for wanting to eliminate federal agencies, I was dying for Paul to reply: "Well then tell the crowd, me and the voters watching, just how are you going to magically stop the deficit from increasing if we don't eliminate agencies and dramaticlly reduce federal spending, unless of course your support for not raising taxes ends right after you get elected?"

 

Sorry to those that support Jack, but to me he's just another in a long list of smooth talking professional politicians that this country has sent to DC messing up this country. Kentucky can't be improved unless and until this Country is improved. I believe we need to stop sending the smooth talkers to DC. I believe we need to start sending people to DC that think first about what is best for this Country and then about what is best for their state (ie,bringing home the pork to help them get re-elected). I believe we need people that grasp the big problems facing this country and address them now. Yes it will cause pain, perhaps extreme pain for some. But that pain will only get worse if we don't address the problems now.

 

VOR, I realize that some of Paul's positions come across as extreme. I may not think they are as extreme as you do, but for discussion's sake, I'll say they are extreme. I see some merit in sending someone extreme to the U.S. Senate. Every negotiator worth a lick, knows that if one party is to one extreme, if the other party starts in the middle, the resolution is somewhere between the middle and the extreme position. Thus, I see some serious value in having some extreme to the right people in Congress to, if you will, counterbalance the extreme people to the left in Congress, in the hope we can end up with some reasonable resolutions to our problems. If we send Conway to Congress, that doesn't happen in my opinion. Again, to me, he seems like someone very interested in serving a long time in Congress. Which means he has to be beholden to the controlling Democrats in Congress and the President to get the pork and the committee assignments needed to get re-elected often; which means he can't buck them. Paul on the other hand, looks like he'd hate being in Congress. It will make him sick. I see him as a two term Senator at best that will do everything in his power at every opportunity to resist the way those folks govern and to change the way those folks govern. I think we need more people like that in the Senate these days. At other times in our country's history, not so much, but now, we do.

 

I respect others opinions, but the above is how I'm looking at the situation.

[mcpapa]

I guess I'm trying to figure out how Mr. Paul is going to improve Kentucky by, say, eliminating the Department of Education. His views are so extreme that, quite frankly, few of them are likely to be given even a glance. That helps no one.

[leatherneck]

I guess I'm trying to figure out how Mr. Paul is going to improve Kentucky by, say, eliminating the Department of Education. His views are so extreme that, quite frankly, few of them are likely to be given even a glance. That helps no one.

 

 

Logical thing to want to figure out, but in order to know what we will be missing if it's eliminated, we first need to know how is the Department of Education helping Kentucky? And does the level of help justify the level of cost?

[kygirl]

I did watch most of the debate. My thoughts- both Conway and Paul consistently ducked answering questions. Paul concerns me a great deal because it seems that if he doesn't get his way he just doesn't do anything. For instance in the original plans of the debate it had called for Conway and Paul to ask each other two questions, but the Paul campaign objected to that at the last minute. My concern is if Paul gets elected that if he doesn't like something he won't participate. Rand Paul kept speaking of state and federal government roles without any details. In all honesty ever since Rand Paul got into a bit of trouble for saying that the drug problem in Eastern Kentucky is "not a real pressing issue" I feel he is fundamentally wrong.

[leatherneck]

I did watch most of the debate. My thoughts- both Conway and Paul consistently ducked answering questions. Paul concerns me a great deal because it seems that if he doesn't get his way he just doesn't do anything. For instance in the original plans of the debate it had called for Conway and Paul to ask each other two questions, but the Paul campaign objected to that at the last minute. My concern is if Paul gets elected that if he doesn't like something he won't participate. Rand Paul kept speaking of state and federal government roles without any details. In all honesty ever since Rand Paul got into a bit of trouble for saying that the drug problem in Eastern Kentucky is "not a real pressing issue" I feel he is fundamentally wrong.

 

Is the drug problem in eastern Ky something a U.S. Senator should make a major concern if elected; try to solve; has the capability to solve? Or is that more of a local problem to be a addressed by parents, local law enforcement, churches, school personnel and business and community leaders? Is every problem, even a big problem like drugs in eastern Ky, something the federal govt should be looked to for the answers?

 

I have no idea what Paul meant when he said it wasn't a real pressing issue. I'd have phrased it: "it's a big problem. But it's a big local govt problem. Solve it yourselves and don't look for the federal govt to fix all your problems. As a U.S. Senator, I've got other problems that are the responsibility of the federal govt to fix and they are more pressing to me."

 

I think the best way that the federal govt can help the drug problem is to fix this economy, revamp the tax code to stimulate the creation of more jobs, and reduce the amount of federal regulations driving jobs overseas. And those should be the pressing issues of our next U.S. Senator.

Edited October 14, 2010 by leatherneck

[gchs_uk9]

IMO, Conway is just another wannabe career politician. Do we really need anymore of those?

 

That's going to be real interesting in the coming election. Many Tea Party candidates have complained about career politicians, but it will be interesting to see how many of them step down after only one or two terms. My guess is that not many will be leaving Washington by choice any time soon, be they Democrat, Republican, Tea Party, or whatever.

[mcpapa]

Logical thing to want to figure out, but in order to know what we will be missing if it's eliminated, we first need to know how is the Department of Education helping Kentucky? And does the level of help justify the level of cost?

 

Exactly. Why not at least get an assessment before we tear it down?

[mcpapa]

Is the drug problem in eastern Ky something a U.S. Senator should make a major concern if elected; try to solve; has the capability to solve? Or is that more of a local problem to be a addressed by parents, local law enforcement, churches, school personnel and business and community leaders? Is every problem, even a big problem like drugs in eastern Ky, something the federal govt should be looked to for the answers?

 

I have no idea what Paul meant when he said it wasn't a real pressing issue. I'd have phrased it: "it's a big problem. But it's a big local govt problem. Solve it yourselves and don't look for the federal govt to fix all your problems. As a U.S. Senator, I've got other problems that are the responsibility of the federal govt to fix and they are more pressing to me."

 

I think the best way that the federal govt can help the drug problem is to fix this economy, revamp the tax code to stimulate the creation of more jobs, and reduce the amount of federal regulations driving jobs overseas. And those should be the pressing issues of our next U.S. Senator.

 

I will respectfully (because you are one of the members that put some reasoning into your posts) disagree. Revamping the tax code will not help the drug problem. Bringing back jobs from overseas will not help the drug problem. Fixing the economy will not help the drug problem.

 

People will use and abuse chemicals whether they have jobs or not and whether they have money in their pockets or not.

 

And if one believes that oxycontin abuse, for example, is a victimless crime and is therefore not a problem, one is out of step with much of the Commonwealth.