BluegrassBulletin.com

Matt Bevin And Friends

Without comment:

 

 

1200 Fools Gather In Louisville

1200 people gathered in Louisville yesterday to be fooled into believing that a man who sexually violated his 20 year old intern and disgraced the Oval office was worthy of their time.  And what is worse, it appears that they were conned into giving money to Obama's next "reliable vote" by the cad.

Bill Clinton helped Alison Grimes rake together what in the final analysis could be just short of a million dollars, according to one democratic insider.  In addition, Clinton convinced the assembled "marks" that Alison has all the momentum in this race.

As time goes on the entire campaign of both Grimes and Matt Bevin boils down to a hatred of Mitch McConnell.  And for what?

He was hired to do a job, a specific job, and that was to serve as a check on the runaway liberal agenda, see that Kentucky was front and center when it came time for federal budget consideration and to enhance the image of a state which everywhere else in the nation is considered to be home to a bunch of corrupt backwoods politicians, barefoot hillbillies and black faced coal miners living in shacks on stilts in muddy snake infested mountains.

And McConnell has achieved everything we sent him to Washington to do, and more.

He is now the most prominent and powerful republican in our Commonwealth's history.  He has continued to see that Kentucky is a receiving state, that is we get back from Washington more money than we send there in taxes.

He has studied and mastered the rules of political engagement using them to advance the interests of Kentucky and stem the bleeding which would occur at the hands of an unchecked liberal president.

He voted the way Kentucky wanted him to vote until in the most recent days people started saying "No more spending."  In all the years he has been in office voters clearly wanted money for roads, bridges, factories, schools, universities and other government programs that helped the people of Kentucky.  The pop culture trend to despise those who spend federal money is a sea change from the world of just a few years ago.  To hate Mitch now for doing what we asked him to do then is just plain ignorant.

And clearly his class and calm demeanor has helped the image of Kentucky around the world.  The kind of snake handling, back slapping, tobacco spitting hick that most of the people of this country envision when they hear of Kentucky politicians dissolves when the success of Mitch McConnell is mentioned as a real life example in contrast to the fictional images they carry in their heads.

So, for all you who were fooled in Louisville to follow the lead of man who dishonored our country, cheated on his wife in public office, was impeached by Congress, disbarred as an attorney and has been accused of rape like conduct by many women, admit to your debauchery.

And to you republicans out there who still think that Mitch has to go because ......well......he voted for spending, put down the bong and back away.  We sent him there and told him what we wanted.  He delivered what we wanted.  The fact that you now want something else doesn't support your argument that he has to go.

In fact, if you were honest about it, looking for example at his support for the hemp initiative and other measures supported by Rand Paul, it looks like Mitch is more than willing to listen to what you want and to use his superior skills to deliver it to you, something Bevin could never offer.

And to the rest of you conservatives who think that somehow not supporting Mitch shows how truly conservative you are, consider this, once again.

Michelle Obama took the stage at 12:42 p.m. inside a softly lit ballroom at the Sheraton Hotel in Midtown Manhattan for a women-themed fund-raiser benefitting the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

The ballroom had about 25 tables, with several female senators and three Senate candidates in attendance. Candidates included Michelle Nunn in Georgia, Alison Lundergan Grimes in Kentucky and Natalie Tennant in West Virginia.

Obama spoke about the importance of electing a Congress to support her husband, alluded to the government shutdown, and invoked the narrow margin in the Senate to encourage the crowd to "max out."

"And let's not forget about that common-sense gun legislation, that so many of us feel so strongly about. Sadly as you know, that bill failed. Anyone know by how many votes? It failed by just six votes in the Senate. Six. So make no mistake about it: the midterm elections, they matter. They matter."

Obama said there was something the crowd could do to make a "huge difference."

"And it's simple, you can write a big ol' fat check," she said. [Capitol New York]

Read that over and over to everyone who will listen. 

Michelle Obama has singled out Alison Lundergan Grimes as a reliable vote for Barack Obama's agenda, including gun legislation.

It's just what our former adulterer in chief told people in Louisville.  "Follow me.  Write a check so Alison can help Obama."

Don't be fooled by disgusting Bill Clinton who left semen on a young female employees dress.  And don't be fooled by his "Scarlet Letter Tour". 

What he is up to is helping Obama get more votes in Congress and removing the most effective check on that runaway power Kentucky has ever sent to Washington DC.

I ain't fooled, are you?

Anniversary Of Stimulus Smells Like A Bust

From the Wall Street Journal:

Five years ago today, President Barack Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act into law. The $830 billion spending blowout was sold by the White House as a way to keep unemployment from rising above 8%. But the stimulus would fail on its own terms. 2009 marked the first of four straight years when unemployment averaged more than 8%. And of course the unemployment rate would have been even worse in those years and still today if so many people had not quit the labor force, driving labor-participation rates to 1970s levels.

It might seem like old news since everybody knows the recovery act was a terrible failure, but what needs to be remembered is that the money actually went somewhere, it's just that it went to well connected cronies and into the pockets of the wealthy.

 

But what is perhaps worse than all of that is the reality that no one, and I mean no one seems to have a plan or an idea that will save us from catastrophe.  I have a plan, and a good one, but damned if anybody ever wants to listen to reason.

Right now we are an economy of consumers with most of our products being made overseas.  That means the money you spend on foreign made goods is going out of this country and not coming back.

Our economy is a "circulatory system".  When a manufacturer sells a product he pays his workers, distributes his profits to his shareholders and sets aside a certain amount to be spent on improvements or business expansion.  The workers then take their paychecks and spend them in our economy.  That in turn pools money into the local grocery store, the local car dealership or that money pays the local carpenter to add a deck onto the worker's house.  In turn the grocer has money to spend on new flooring, on advertising, on parking lot expansion.  The car dealer makes money which he in turn spends on a new house.  The carpenter buys lumber from the local lumber yard improving the bottom line of the lumber dealer and on and on and on the money in circulation in our nation passes through any number of hands and improves the life and the prosperity of us all.

But when the money made by a foreign manufacturer comes in, it gets spent in that country, not ours.  The workers may be subjected to near slave labor conditions in that country and thereby unable to improve their own economy, but regardless, the money leaves America and does not come back, except as a loan to us, a debt we are required to pay.

The solution to our economic problems may lie in a very simple policy change, one that doesn't increase taxes at first but will in the end increase revenues thus alleviating our dependence on borrowed money.

Not all foreign manufacturing is being done by foreign owned companies.  Many of the jobs which have gone "off shore" are jobs in foreign plants working under contract to supply goods to American importers.  And in some cases, the companies that used to make goods in America are now making them elsewhere.

If the Federal Government would give a tax credit to any company equal to 100% of the wages paid to workers for every job now being done overseas if that job was brought home to America, think what that would do.

First, the foreign companies are not paying taxes here anyway, so giving them a tax credit is a net zero impact on revenue.

Second, the tax credit could be phased in over a five year period and tied to the requirement that the jobs be maintained for five years in order to get the credit.

For every job brought into the USA a worker would get a paycheck that is now going to somebody in another country.  That paycheck would be taxed as always and thus the government would be receiving revenue from a source that currently does not exist.

In addition the earnings would be put into circulation in our country.  Those earnings would not only improve the prosperity of the workers, but as they spent that money in our own economy, they would lift all boats along the way.  And as things currently exist, as that money circulated and became income to more and more people as it traveled around in our economy, it would generate revenue at many stages along the way.

Over a short period of time a large number of people could return to work.  This would lessen the economic burden on the government at the same time as revenues were increasing from the growing prosperity.  Because manufacturers would be free from heavy corporate taxes this would provide an incentive for companies to find America a friendly environment in which to do business.  In addition, free from heavy taxes due to the tax credits, companies could keep prices competitive with foreign produced goods particularly adding to our nation's awareness of how despite our current racial tensions, we are still supporting slavery around the world.

With more and more jobs being created, with prices more competitive due to the favorable tax environment, with more revenue pouring in at the same time as entitlement costs are going down, an aggressive Congress might see enough light at the end of the tunnel to begin a serious plan to balance the budget.

Over time as the notion of tax cut incentives improving the overall economy caught on the opportunity for more people from other countries to come here and participate in our prosperity could add many more people to our consuming public all living here rather than in some other nation, spending money there.

The plans for fixing our nation's bleak outlook isn't as hard as some might like you to think.  But it is very difficult when you have Barack Obama, Harry Reid and their democrat friends in power who are pulling us in the opposite direction, increasing the cost of government, increasing unemployment and incorrigible when it comes to talking about any form of tax cut or credit.

Is my idea workable?  Might it succeed?  Others can make that decision on their own.  But one thing is clear.

We are not going to get out of this rut until we remove Barack Obama, Harry Reid and the progressive liberal democrats from power and the start of that juggernaut begins this year.

God help us.

Obama Takes It To McConnell At Home

Don't think for one minute that Barack Obama wouldn't like to have complete control of the government.  He said as much in his speech last night vowing to take action with or without Congress.  But to make the point even more emphatically he gave a shout out to Democrat Steve Beshear in Mitch McConnell's home state.

Mitch has been the single most effective check on a runaway Obama administration and anything the president can do to elevate Kentucky democrats in his effort to defeat McConnell and replace him with Alison Lundergan Grimes, who the FLOTUS has already dubbed "a reliable vote" for their plans to fundamentally transform America, he's going to do.

I mean come on, you don't really think that patting Beshear on the head was a sincere gesture of accomplishment now do you?  Beshear did fall in line right behind Obama on the socialized medicine plan, but spreading favor to Kentucky has much more to do with helping clear the field for his next three years than raising the political capital of a lame duck governor.

Pay attention folks.  The president wants complete control and he won't get it as long as we have Mitch in office.  Like it or not, no one else on the R side or the D side of the ticket can possibly be as effective, and that's just a fact.

Thank You Barack For Slapping The Hillbilly Sticker On Eastern Kentucky Again

I am aghast.  Barack Obama announces a big federally funded program to help the po' folks around the country and on any other day, in this political climate, Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell would be railing against runaway spending, "great society" programs and creating greater dependence on government.

But, because a chunk of the money is coming to Eastern Kentucky they stand up and cheer, along side the president, in the White House.  It's not that I have any personal position on the program it's just that my exposure to politics over such a long time has once again confirmed my belief that little of what politicians say they stand against they wouldn't lie down for at the right price. (Yes, that association was intentional)

So what did the Obama cash for Kentucky do in the media?  Re-awakened LBJ's photo op on the front porch of Tom Fletcher's cabin in Martin County and start the discussion of how poor and impoverished the people of Kentucky are.  Just take a look at some of the words written in response to this newly announced program published in the National Review:

"There are lots of diversions in the Big White Ghetto, the vast moribund matrix of Wonder Bread–hued Appalachian towns and villages stretching from northern Mississippi to southern New York, a slowly dissipating nebula of poverty and misery with its heart in eastern Kentucky, the last redoubt of the Scots-Irish working class that picked up where African slave labor left off, mining and cropping and sawing the raw materials for a modern American economy that would soon run out of profitable uses for the class of people who 500 years ago would have been known, without any derogation, as peasants. Thinking about the future here and its bleak prospects is not much fun at all, so instead of too much black-minded introspection you have the pills and the dope, the morning beers, the endless scratch-off lotto cards, healing meetings up on the hill, the federally funded ritual of trading cases of food-stamp Pepsi for packs of Kentucky’s Best cigarettes and good old hard currency, tall piles of gas-station nachos, the occasional blast of meth, Narcotics Anonymous meetings, petty crime, the draw, the recreational making and surgical unmaking of teenaged mothers, and death: Life expectancies are short — the typical man here dies well over a decade earlier than does a man in Fairfax County, Va. — and they are getting shorter, women’s life expectancy having declined by nearly 1.1 percent from 1987 to 2007.

If the people here weren’t 98.5 percent white, we’d call it a reservation."

Great.

We finally achieved some serious clout in Washington DC with the power of Mitch McConnell.  We finally proved that we are capable of thinking outside the box with the ascendancy of Rand Paul and his brand of "new think".  And we finally captured back to back basketball championships in the NCAA and look what Barack Obama has done with the stroke of a pen.

It's back to possum holler.

Oh, and for you Republicans who can still think, don't let this one slip past you.  There is a US Senate race in Kentucky this year and the lady challenging the republican just might need some more votes out of the mountains than the hands of the republican power brokers in that part of the Commonwealth would ever deliver to her. 

Think, think, think.  Her buddy Barack just opened the door for her there.

Pandering, Profiting And Politicizing On The Back's Of Kentucky's Unemployed

The U.S. Senate democrats led by the words of Barack Obama and now many democrats in Kentucky have begun trying to build a voter block on the backs of the unemployed.  In a nation which at one time stood for unbridled opportunity and the land of prosperity, this is a shameful display of inhumanity.

Let's face facts.  The agenda, the decisions and the actions of Barack Obama, aided by a complicit U.S. Senate, have all combined to worsen the living conditions of millions of Americans since he took office in 2009.

There Are 7.7 Million Americans Who Are Currently Working Part-Time Because They Can’t Find Full-Time Employment. 

27 Percent Of Unemployed Americans Have Been Unemployed For A Year Or More – Up From 11 Percent When Obama Took Office In 2009.

The “Real” Unemployment Rate, Including Those Who Have Given Up Looking For Work Or Are Involuntarily Working Part-Time, Is 14.6 Percent In Kentucky. The Real Unemployment Rate In Kentucky Was 12.6 Percent When Obama Took Office In 2009.

The Labor Force Participation Rate Is 63 Percent – Down From 65.7 Percent When President Obama Took Office In 2009. [Bureau Of Labor Statistics]

In other words, the Obama administration, pursuing his policy agenda for America, with the help of the U.S. Senate democrats have made matters far worse for America's workers since he took office in 2009 and now they want to paint the picture as if "they" are out to help the unemployed by extending benefits.

Look, get the teat out of your mouth and think for a minute.  If they really wanted to help they would stop bankrupting the country and playing politics with the future of Americas middle class, get off the backs of businesses and working people and let this economy flourish creating REAL jobs, not made up government paychecks sent to potential voters.

You don't think that the democrats are essentially buying votes with this behavior?  Well, Candy Crowley at CNN has virtually admitted that they are.

CANDY CROWLEY: If I am an unemployed American and I hear from Republicans that, “Yeah, you know, we should go ahead and do that provided we do the following three things,” and it’s a caveat approval of extending those [unemployment] benefits, or if I am a minimum wage worker and I find, I see Republicans who say, “You know what? It's artificial, it messes with the marketplace, it might mean some teens can't get into the job market,” why would I become a Republican? How do you message that in any way to reach out to those who are disinclined to sign up for the Republican Party?

Doesn’t Crowley know that she indicted the Democratic Party as one that is basically buying votes?

So folks that are currently unemployed or on minimum wage must support politicians that promote policies that hurt the very job creation that might lead to them having better lives?

And if Republicans aren’t willing to support such failed policies, it behooves such people to be Democrats thereby potentially condemning themselves to mediocrity and possibly lifetime government dependence?

Clearly, Crowley has forgotten that in 1980, a great deal of unemployed and minimum wage workers voted for Ronald Reagan because they realized Democratic policies weren't helping them. [Newsbusters]

It is time for the people of America to wake up.

The stated "need" to continue extending these benefits is a symptom of the Democrats economic failures under Harry Reid and Barack Obama and their biggest failure is the fact that they’ve failed to create jobs. 

So of course the people of Kentucky are being bamboozled into thinking that all we need to do to make things better is to shift the balance of power in the Senate by getting rid of Mitch McConnell, the most powerful counter force to this failed agenda, and replace him with another reliable vote for Harry Reid and Barack Obama.

Ignorance is the offense which condemns those guilty of it to the consequences of their inaction.  Remember the words of Patrick Henry:

"There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come....

Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!"

TEA Party Liberals To Face Battles On Multiple Fronts In 2014

Ron Paul lovers take credit for the TEA party movement based upon a 2007 money bomb event on the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party.  Those involved in the modern larger TEA party movement deny Paul's paternity and say that they began Feb. 19, 2009 when CNBC’s Rick Santelli gave what is now known as the “rant heard around the world".

But there can be no doubt that between 2007 and 2009 there was nothing like the modern day TEA party movement anywhere on the radar screens of current events.  Today however things are much different.

Those who got there feet wet in politics as a part of the new and larger TEA party for the most part got involved due to the crashing economy, anger over the government bailouts and in reaction to many of the worrisome ideas being advanced by Barack Obama.  Over time the Ron Paul folks, the Libertarians, the anarchists and smart democrats changed the dynamics of the TEA party to their own ends.

What was once considered to be a movement designed to move the GOP back to its fiscally conservative platform has morphed into a protest movement which seems more devoted to altruistic ideals than pragmatic solutions.  Fixing problems in a real world sense is far less appealing to the TEA party than crashing the system entirely by removing anybody with any experience under the banner that everybody except their candidates are corrupt.

Straying from their original goal of being more conservative republicans into being the party of disruption has caused them to face a number of new challenges in 2014.

The US Chamber of Commerce and the business community in general have joined forces and declared war on the TEA party.

Now it appears that the social conservatives are about to gear up in the battle for the heart and soul of the GOP.

It shouldn't be assumed that the second front in the battle for republican votes will be fought alone by the TEA party.  Granted it has become more of a de-facto Libertarian organization when it comes to social issues, but Social Conservatives led by groups like The American Principles Project, Gary Bauer’s American Values outfit, James Dobson’s Focus on the Family, Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom Coalition, Americans United for Life, the Family Research Council and the National Organization for Marriage are now plotting to raise and spend mega-millions to move the GOP back on the track it took during the Bush years. [POLITICO]

How will this new dynamic affect TEA party efforts?  It may be too soon to tell, but the libertarian influences in the direction the movement has taken could prove problematic in the face of pressure from social conservatives.

For example, the idea that abortion should be a state's right to decide sounds a lot like the argument that abortion should be a woman's right to decide, a position which social conservatives will likely find unacceptable.

And neither is the Ron Paul position on prostitution and legalizing drugs likely to set well with the Family Values folks.

What might this battle on two fronts do to the TEA party movement?

On one hand the fiscal conservatives could take charge and return the movement to its original position making it a representative group for the "cut taxes, cut spending" republican ideology.

On the other hand, the Ron Paul libertarians might already have taken such control of the movement that it will have no choice but to act solely as a spoiler, unwittingly helping democrats and along the way losing members who don't want anymore democratic votes controlling the House and Senate agendas.

Or there could be a rising wave of libertarian thought in the nation that, through the TEA party, could change the direction of the country and cause tremendous social upheaval, much like the protests of the sixties did which of course were followed by years of liberal governments and devastating international blunders.

But one thing is clear.  The liberals in the TEA party movement will face a very big hurdle this year fighting their battles on multiple fronts in 2014.

Related articles

Has TEA Party Won The Battle Of Ideas In Washington?

Told Jah: TEA Party Leader Avowed Democrat

Social conservatives' big money plans

Has TEA Party Won The Battle Of Ideas In Washington?

POLITICO has a piece up on top of its website today that starts like this:

If this was a dud year in Washington, get ready for 2014 — the year to “go small.”

Lawmakers had already lost their appetite to “go big” this year, letting reforms of immigration, guns and the Tax Code slip away in the face of gridlock and dysfunction.

And now there’s a new problem. Lawmakers are reluctant to rely on the federal government to get anything done — a guilt-by-association consequence of Obamacare’s botched rollout. Republicans have called it an indictment of more than a website, but of Big Government itself.

While Democrats argue the problem is obstructionism — not ideology — the result will be the same: As Washington laments the end of a do-nothing year, lawmakers are fully prepared to do as little — or even less — in the new year.

“I think anything that has a significant expansion or role for the federal government is going to be problematic,” South Dakota Sen. John Thune, a top Republican message strategist, told POLITICO. “Because I just think there’s going to be such a cynicism and skepticism attached to any promises made with regard to the federal government’s role.”

Ron Paul, the Grand Poobah of the smaller is better ideology has been saying that the Republicans and Democrats are all the same, even saying on some occassions that they are all part of the same party.

Does this mean that his brand of governance which has usurped the TEA party movement has finally caught on?  The answer is no.

The reaction that POLITICO is predicting for 2014 is more a response to the ineffectiveness of the Obama administration and a growing uneasiness with what many used to dismiss, but now fear, are his nefarious plans for America.  In fact most of the anger and angst of the TEA party was born in reaction to Obama, has fed off of Obama's agenda and is still a reactionary movement rather than a pro-active one.

I saw this meme on Facebook sent out by a local TEA party group:

 

You have to ask yourself, what does this really say to people?  Is it some sort of rallying cry to keep the flames of discontent burning hotter than ever?

The phrase "More Constitution" means what exactly?  Lower taxes?  Taxes are undesirable no doubt, but they are certainly constitutional.  Does it mean more civil liberty?  We certainly have suffered in this area lately and numerous cases are working their way through the court system which ultimately decides, as the arbiter of these debates, what is and what is not constitutional.

How does this meme fit into the reality of political life?  What, no republican who wants more civil liberty and lower taxes can be trusted, and neither can any democrat?  Then who?  What other party is out there?  Aren't most of the TEA party candidates running as republicans?  And isn't it a fact that in places where they do, for the most part, they give democrats an added advantage of being able to run on their liberal agenda while republicans eat each other alive in primaries?

So just what does the observation of the POLITICO piece mean.  Has the TEA party won the battle of ideas in Washington?  Is there really some meaning to the concept of "More Constitution" that is controlling how elected officials act?

No, and no.

The fact is that even the proper role of government, as seen even by TEA party types, is considered dangerous territory.  Standing up in favor of building bridges and fixing roads, and repairing a half century or older infrastructure lights a match under the "big spender" accusers who have found a way, much like the protesters of the sixties did, to get attention in front of cameras and try to steer the policy of the nation.

Spend no money, collect no taxes, go to Washington, do nothing, dismantle the federal government, weaken our military, and withdraw into a kind of isolation that fools people into believing that the world will just leave us alone and allow us to prosper so long as we don't intervene in anybody else's business.

Foolhardy, reckless, ignorant thinking like this makes America vulnerable to the evil forces at work in the world.  If the worst happens it will be on the shoulders of those who failed to take charge in difficult times.  The blame will be squarely upon the heads of those who would give Israel over to the Palestinians, chemical weapons to Assad, control of Afghanistan to the drug cartels, who would remove border security and issue terms of engagement to our military that told them to stand up and take the first shot before firing back.

War is, as the saying goes, hell.  And hell is at our doorstep.  The last thing we need is a nation of bong hugging gamers driving the ship of state.

If the TEA party really wishes for an America that used to be, maybe they ought to be asking things like, where are the real men, the John Wayne's of our time, instead of asking that old time policy be implement by a bunch of impotent 'fraidy cats. 

Think about it.  America was strong, and stood up for itself in the days the Ron Paul folks wish they could return us to.  To get there might take a much tougher, rougher approach than the rally attending, flag-shirt wearing, malcontents and protesters can deliver on their own.

If a do nothing Congress is the result of a TEA party victory, then I think Merle might have asked the right question a long time ago: Are the good times really over for good?

 

McConnell: "I Stand With Rand"

Wow!  It used to be that having your name associated with Mitch McConnell was the kind of affiliation you hoped would be a big political plus.  But judging by the big spend about to be launched in the Commonwealth by Kentucky Opportunity Coalition, McConnell is getting cozy with Rand Paul.

Just one more example of the shifting political powers in the Commonwealth.

McConnell Slams Bevin Again

Matt Bevin gave an interview in which he claims that republican voters are ready to sweep McConnell out of office because he hasn't fought hard enough against Obamacare.  He also claims that there is a tidal wave of support building for him.  McConnell sees things quite differently and issued this reply:

“Mitch McConnell was leading the fight against Obamacare while Matt Bevin was lying on his bailout application and pretending to be an MIT alum,” McConnell spokeswoman Allison Moore said. [Joe Gerth via NKY.com]

Let's look at this.

First, Bevin is emboldened by a small group of disgruntled fanatics who act out on their hatred of anybody already in office, particularly republicans in office, by falling for the first guy to come along and pander to their seething discontent.  They do not represent the larger republican community.

Second, Bevin cannot compete financially with McConnell, although he can be enough of a nusiance to make McConnell spend money which though it might seem like a waste of November resources really isn't.  In fact, Bevin will make McConnell do only one thing that Mitch doesn't like to do, spend money early.  Then again, for Mitch's sake this could be a good thing.  The early he reminds folks what he has done for Kentucky, the less likely they will be to give money to the democrat.

Third, Bevin is running statewide, not just in a few Northern Kentucky counties where the TEA party has out worked the rank and file GOP and has a foothold of power.

Fourth, Bevin is virtually unknown, which makes all "interviews" with him by the liberal media so revealing.  The liberal media in Kentucky (and the United States for that matter) would like nothing more than to see the end of McConnell. Bevin is one more liberal weapon in that battle.

Fifth, does anybody with a lick of sense really think that Bevin or Grimes have any chance at being more successful in navigating the complicated mine field of the United States Senate than Mitch McConnell?  If so it might be time for you to put down the bong and step away from the Chee-tos.

The tag team of Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul have brought great pride to Kentucky.  Neither of Mitch's opponents can hold a candle to these guys and neither will likely win.  In fact, the appearance of 90 year old Gurley Martin in the race is a far more interesting development than Bevin's blustery claim that he is riding a wave of angered support.

Put your money on McConnell.  The others are just a distraction.