Did any just see Coburn?

Tom Coburn does not like Gingrich. At all. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20015074-503544.html

Based on his voting record I could see him supporting Ron, but I suspect he's not entirely sure whether or not Ron is actually a serious candidate - I doubt he pays attention to Iowa or New Hampshire polling.

That said, if anyone is from Oklahoma, a serious, well thought out letter to Sen. Coburn outlining Ron's viability and his commitment to slashing the budget might go a long way.

I'm pretty certain he knows Ron is a serious candidate, but a bunch of the Club for Growth types don't care about US soveriegnty and think NAFTA etc are great. Ron is more free trade than any of them, but is not willing to sell out sovereignty and create managed trade for the benefit of only insiders, so he votes against things like NAFTA. That is why Club for Growth praised Bachmann more than Paul, she's fine with that stuff too. They say Ron is wonderful but worry about his idealogical puritism.
 
Last edited:
I don't know how anyone in their right mind could be for NAFTA. Unless you are one of the chosen few who benefit from the managed trade that it purports. And that doesn't even mention GATT, who even Gingrich glibly noted, would handover a good part of our sovereignty to a world ruling body.

How the Club for Growth supports this, I will never know.
 
The good news is Tom Coburn got re-elected in 2010, so he doesn't have to worry about any potential blowback for endorsing Ron. Here's a letter I just put together, feel free to use it as a template. I'd send it but he's not my senator.

Senator Coburn,

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your dissent on S 1867. You are one of the only principled and consistent voices in the United States Senate, and I am extremely proud to call you Senator.

I am writing this letter in order to urge you to seriously consider supporting Representative Ron Paul in his bid for the Republican presidential nomination. Out of all the potential nominees only Representative Paul appears to truly understand the dangerous and dire situation presented by our mounting national debt to the viability and security of our country. He has put forward the most comprehensive and bold initiative, calling for one trillion in cuts in his first year. The other candidates, I am disappointed to say, do not seem to understand that we are on the precipice and that swift, decisive action must be taken.

With regards to Representative Paul's foreign policy, I believe it is necessary in order to return to a balanced budget and a smaller, constitutional government. Our current policy of bases and troops spread throughout the world is a 19th century holdover. In this age of satellites and instant communications we simply do not need soldiers patrolling every square inch of the globe, and we certainly cannot afford it.

At the moment Representative Paul has strong, growing, numbers both in Iowa, where he is second behind Newt Gingrich, and in New Hampshire, where he is third behind Gingrich and Mitt Romney. Furthermore, as of this date, he has the best numbers of all the potential Republican nominees when put head-to-head against President Obama.

Due to Representative Paul's commitment to reducing spending in his first year by one trillion dollars, and his dedication to reducing the size and scope of government overall, I hope that you will consider lending him your endorsement and support for this primary season. I very appreciate your time and consideration.

Best regards,
 
He just put the first nail in Gingrich's coffin!

I heard a couple weeks ago that Coburn was REALLY down on Newt. And that he has a vendetta against him. This should mean something. Coburn is Tea Party, isn't he?
 
I don't know how anyone in their right mind could be for NAFTA. Unless you are one of the chosen few who benefit from the managed trade that it purports. And that doesn't even mention GATT, who even Gingrich glibly noted, would handover a good part of our sovereignty to a world ruling body.

How the Club for Growth supports this, I will never know.

A myopic focus on a single variable (growth) leads one to be blind to all other factors.
 
^^ Didn't click on page 2 to see someone literally said that already, lol.

Coburn is known as "Dr. No" of the Senate.

I will have to check on how he voted on the detention bill.

Hoax, you think a letter would do so? I will think about it.

He voted No with Rand.
 
If you have not sent this letter yet, I offer two minor corrections.

"With regards" should be "With regard"

and

"I very appreciate" should be "I very much appreciate" :)

Nice letter.
 
The good news is Tom Coburn got re-elected in 2010, so he doesn't have to worry about any potential blowback for endorsing Ron. Here's a letter I just put together, feel free to use it as a template. I'd send it but he's not my senator.
+rep Hoax, but one more correction: I assume you mean 20th century holdover.
 
If you have not sent this letter yet, I offer two minor corrections.

"With regards" should be "With regard"

and

"I very appreciate" should be "I very much appreciate" :)

Nice letter.

Good points. I'm not sending it out though. We need to find an Okie to volunteer, stuff it in an envelope and send it out.

+rep Hoax, but one more correction: I assume you mean 20th century holdover.

Heh, nah, I meant 19th century, its much more dismissive.
 
I don't know how anyone in their right mind could be for NAFTA. Unless you are one of the chosen few who benefit from the managed trade that it purports. And that doesn't even mention GATT, who even Gingrich glibly noted, would handover a good part of our sovereignty to a world ruling body.

How the Club for Growth supports this, I will never know.

They represent corporate interests.
 
Tom Coburn is overall fairly good and isn't part of the establishment but he is also fairly hawkish. However, I like him. He is a also a doctor btw.
 
Back
Top