Quotes of the day

posted at 10:52 pm on August 27, 2012 by Allahpundit

This week will be about more than watching the Weather Channel for Hurricane Isaac updates; it will also represent a chance to take the temperature of the contemporary GOP. If the schedule is anything to go by, the readings will be mixed indeed—on Wednesday night, for example, delegates will be greeted in rapid order by a video of Ron Paul, then Senate Minority Leader and longtime establishment hack Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), then the man McConnell tried desperately to prevent winning the GOP senatorial primary in Kentucky (Sen. Rand Paul), then after another speaker a man who stands for most everything Ron Paul abhors (Sen. John McCain [R-Arizona]). You can count on one hand, maybe even one finger, the core beliefs those four men share.

The Ron Paul insurgency in particular presents a conundrum to the GOP. Even though some establishmentarian types would love to wash their hands of him, and the liberty movement’s future without its anti-charismatic leader is unclear, Republicans just can’t afford to lose Paul’s 11 percent share of the primary vote…

So the party that hasn’t figured out what it believes cannot afford to alienate any of its members who disagree strongly with one another. Though you will hear a lot this week about Republican unity against President Obama, that masks an ideological peace that at best is fragile, unattractive, and unsatisfying.

***

[I]n some ways, the Republican Party today appears more factionalized — ideologically, politically and culturally — than Republican leaders said they could remember in recent history.

There are evangelicals, Tea Party adherents, supply-siders who would accept no tax increases and a dwindling band of deficit hawks who might. There are economic libertarians who share little of the passion that social conservatives hold on issues like abortion and same-sex marriage. There are neoconservatives who want a hard line against Iran and the Palestinians, and realists who are open to diplomatic deal-cutting…

“For some folks in the party these days, it’s not only the Washington establishment they’re running against. They’re opposed to anything that is perceived as being any kind of establishment, even if they are conservative,” Mr. Quayle said. “To me, that is craziness. The party has got some real challenges coming down the pike. It’s a minority party, and we’ve got to realize that it’s a game of addition, not subtraction.”

***

Other presidential campaigns have gotten much further, then folded. But Paul’s people kept up hope. Maybe they could influence the Republican platform. Maybe they could scoop up uncommitted delegates and nominate Paul anyway. Maybe they could force the convention to a third ballot—which would free up delegates to look into their souls and vote for Dr. No…

The common theme: Ron Paul could still win, if these bastards didn’t keep taking delegates away. A group of Maine delegates walked around PAUL Fest in matching baseball caps, explaining how the state party had taken half their votes away in a series of arguments before the larger, pro-Romney Republican National Committee. It was so rotten, such obvious cheating, that Maine’s Republican governor was refusing to come to Tampa…

This is what outsiders don’t understand: Oodles of Paul supporters believe that the delegate switch-ups literally cost them a chance at the nomination. James DiPasquale, a Florida activist who watched some friends try and fail to become delegates, argues that Paul could win if the contest stretched on for a few ballots. (There has been no multi-ballot convention for decades.) “If every delegate was allowed to vote his conscience,” he asks, “how many of them really would want to vote for Romney? It would be a landslide for Ron Paul.”

***

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee has a message for Ron Paul supporters who say they feel “disrespected” by the Republican Party’s delegate allocation process: You lost, move on.

“I don’t think they’ve been disrespected,” Huckabee told a gaggle of reporters as we walked through the convention center here near the Tampa Bay Times Forum. “Elections are about—you get numbers. I lost four years ago, and I didn’t feel disrespected as much as I felt defeated. You have to accept that the voters make a choice and the voters made a choice.”…

Huckabee has called Paul supporters “fanatical believers” who “don’t represent mainstream Americans.”

***

Mr. Paul’s backers here exemplified the eclectic cross-section of the old, the young, politicians, musicians and anti-war advocates he drew together with his libertarian message. And it was difficult to find anyone who was ready to move on…

Danielle Alexandre, 33, a political analyst for the Liberty Underground radio show in Florida, said Mr. Paul’s movement was larger than the man. She, too, plans to vote for [Gary] Johnson.

On “the big issues, I don’t see a big difference between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama,” Ms. Alexandre said. “I’m not one to support the Republicans or support the Democrats.”

But would electing Mr. Romney advance Mr. Paul’s message at all? “No,” she said, shaking her head.

“Burn in hell before you vote for that son of a bitch,” added a man standing nearby.

***

It was Paul’s second attempt at an “alternative convention.” In 2008, he brought supporters to Minneapolis for the “Rally for the Republic.” Tucker Carlson, in his pre-Daily Caller says, emceed the proceedings. I should say: He emceed them until Jesse Ventura spoke and started talking about 9/11, which scared Carlson (and Willie Geist) the hell out of there. Gary Johnson spoke at that rally, when he was a retired politician. Now that he was a Libertarian presidential candidate, he was absent. This was a Ron Paul show, a kind of tribute, and the candidate would use it to say all the things people never let him say. “I don’t do it out of sacrifice,” said the candidate. “I do it out of self-interest. I do it because it’s good for me.”

They say “Osama bin Laden would still be alive if we listened to you,” said Paul. “You know what I say? So would the 3000 people killed on 9/11!” That, and every sticking-it-to-the-neocons comment, got huge cheers. When America’s agressive, said Paul, “it’s easier for them to kill us over there than to come over here, where the Second Amendment is alive and well.”

***

***

Via Mediaite.

***

“I think a big part of sort of the libertarian Republican or the Ron Paul Republicans is that I think they can help the Republican Party,” he said. “There’s many places in New England as well as California where we’re not winning statewide races. It’s very difficult for Republicans to win. So I think embracing and bringing in these liberty-minded, Constitution-minded people and making them an integral part of the party is the way we might start winning races where we’re not winning races.”



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

good take this am KJ…

cmsinaz on August 28, 2012 at 7:16 AM

They say “Osama bin Laden would still be alive if we listened to you,” said Paul. “You know what I say? So would the 3000 people killed on 9/11!”

That is so crazy, that is like blaming the Jews for the Holocaust…but then again given Ron Paul’s attitudes toward Israel he has come pretty darn close to doing that.

Terrye on August 28, 2012 at 7:06 AM

I agree again, Terrye.

A long time ago, when I was what I now call “new to political reading and maginations”, I received some blind email inviting me to some MoveOn group or something…only to find out it was one of those “911″ sites or group webrings…and from, situated in Texas, supposedly by “conservatives”…

so I looked into it (of course did not join) and right there without much seaching found out that the webring project was funded by George Soros under auspices of being, generally, ‘conservative citizens supporting Ron Paul’ who were/are sure that “911 was an inside job” or otherwise pushing the “Israel the puppetmaster is responsible” stuff.

I of course never joined such a group and wouldn’t ever then or now but it is clear that Paul and supporters (some, all, part) are associated with beliefs and assocations that most on the Right aren’t.

I’m sure the man, Paul, has been a nice doctor to people he’s treated. I respect his prolife views. BUT he holds views and encourages views that are both irreular and downright troubling otherwise and what that does is then paint everyone else if not the entire party, GOP, with similar dubiousnes.

So I question Paul’s motives as I do his followers. Some of their views are credible but they are unfortunately folded in with some very troubling views (and intetions) that suggest a bad name for the rest of us on the Right.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:17 AM

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:04 AM

Mark Levin and Sarah Palin, too?

kingsjester on August 28, 2012 at 7:08 AM

I don’t understand your question.

Mark Levin hits some very accurate notes but he, too, has his fringe moments. Palin I define by her followers and I’ve long since expressed why and what as to that.

But otherwise, I don’t understand what you’re either asking or implying.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:25 AM

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:25 AM

The floor fight against the changing of the delegate rules at the RNC is supported by both Sarah Palin and Mark Levin.

They’re not anarchists.

kingsjester on August 28, 2012 at 7:28 AM

Man, if there is anything that will screw things up, it will be a blood and guts dustup in full view of the media. The guys who dreamed this rules change business up should be staked to an anthill.

a capella on August 28, 2012 at 1:26 AM

I wonder which would be worse: the theatrics and Convention derailment planned by the “Ronulans” or the Leftmedia’s and Libertarian’ theatricals about “the rule change”.

Seems the GOP has proceeded to resolve this so I’m finding the use of this issue by those who seek to undermine the GOP sorta’ weak but certainly predictable.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:29 AM

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:25 AM

The floor fight against the changing of the delegate rules at the RNC is supported by both Sarah Palin and Mark Levin.

They’re not anarchists.

kingsjester on August 28, 2012 at 7:28 AM

I never said they were “anarchists”.

And I’m not aware of any tinfoil helmet we on the Right “must wear” that might cancel out our ability to think for ourselves. Which includes disagreeing with politicians and radio hosts when they opine with perspectives we figure differently.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:31 AM

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:25 AM

The floor fight against the changing of the delegate rules at the RNC is supported by both Sarah Palin and Mark Levin.

They’re not anarchists.

kingsjester on August 28, 2012 at 7:28 AM

Levin’s gone off into other pastures before, doesn’t mean I follow along when he does, or that anyone should.

And Palin seems mostly comfortable when she’s kicking the GOP, as do most of her club members.

Generting disorder, encouraging it, isn’t usually a productive solution to a problem.

I agree that the Rules Change issue appears to have been a necessary move to try and prevent further disorder but that it bodes areas that then can be exploited for no good, but I don’t agree that “a floor fight” is productive. One wonders if Palin has been looking for an issue to rationalize encouraging such…

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:36 AM

Here’s the bottom line. Ron Paul supporters are rude potheads. They incessantly whine that nobody respects them as they run around acting like rude guests at a wedding. They style themselves as “renegades” when the reality is that they are nothing but sore losers.

Happy Nomad on August 28, 2012 at 7:40 AM

And I’m not aware of any tinfoil helmet we on the Right “must wear” that might cancel out our ability to think for ourselves. Which includes disagreeing with politicians and radio hosts when they opine with perspectives we figure differently.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:31 AM

Very well put.

It bothers me sometimes how some people here, in order to know what to think about a particular issue, wait to hear what their favorite radio show host has to say about that issue.

bluegill on August 28, 2012 at 7:40 AM

now onto bashing costco…it doesn’t ring truthful that they would love costco

cmsinaz on August 28, 2012 at 7:05 AM

You’re joking, right?

It’s a very successful business (and an American/Capitalist made one since gone international) and although COSTCO managment is a big DNC donor, it’s non-union AND it’s very useful to many consumers (me included).

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:40 AM

None of them are stealth communist, lying, corrupt, anti-American, lazy, unqualified, racist, pampered turds.
In short, none of them are Obama.
Good enough for me.

justltl on August 28, 2012 at 7:43 AM

now onto bashing costco…it doesn’t ring truthful that they would love costco

cmsinaz on August 28, 2012 at 7:05 AM

mika doesn’t believe ann buys the shirts herself. what a petty little witch.

renalin on August 28, 2012 at 7:43 AM

The day is very near that the laws and by-laws of the Republican Party will need to be changed to remove the power and money of the RNC and turn it into a mere governing board. No centralized system is capable of adapting to local and State concerns, and that is where the strength of any political party is: local and State level.

Getting the rules and organizing by-laws of the Republican Party changed to cement down the electoral process and to make any mere rule changes a process of submission to the State level parties and a minimum 1 year submission before a party meeting would get rid of candidates trying to change the process at the last minute. By setting up the rules to work with and not allowing changes to be instituted until the NEXT convention, the process becomes much harder for a candidate or even the governing board to change.

This is a major problem for any political party with centralized control: it is brittle and prone to last minute breaking of rules without a set and established process that requires some prior buy-in from those who ARE THE PARTY as a prerequisite. Rules changes that can get backing by at least 5 State level organizations that can demonstrate State level meetings in which the overwhelming majority of precinct members show up and vote to approve passing a rules change forward would go a long, long way to pulling the rug out from under the RNC. If you want a grassroots led organization, then getting this system changed from the inside is paramount.

Starting now and getting another general party meeting by next year to start redrawing and redrafting the outlines of how the Republican Party operates will not only secure the primary process for all candidates but require the adjustment of State level organizations to adjust their procedures to unify the ground rules and perhaps, just perhaps, start closing the primary process to outsiders and limit it to the party members, as well. For those States going authoritarian, this might mean having a ballot mail system done at the precinct level for each State.

Rules fights should be for how the party operates in the future, not about what has already happened under a set and known set of rules. To do that power has to be removed from the highest levels and put into the State and local levels of the party. Not only will this solidify the process, but it takes the RNC out of the picture of ‘organizing’ the party and puts them into a rules governing organization that has no money and is not allowed to pick and choose candidate support: take the money and power away and the abuse of the party purse and party power will end. That isn’t done from the RNC level or started at the National convention, but at the lower levels and hashed out as to what the procedure for debate and instituting changes are at the State level and then put to a vote by the States and party members at a National meeting.

Trying to change rules at the last minute is a sign of pettiness and being power-hungry, and doesn’t look good at all in a candidate. Change the process so that can’t happen, and you will start to get a different sort of candidate that doesn’t see ‘lawyering up’ as a viable option.

ajacksonian on August 28, 2012 at 7:44 AM

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:40 AM

they didn’t feel like anne or mitt were being truthful about liking costco…

idiots…

cmsinaz on August 28, 2012 at 7:45 AM

renalin on August 28, 2012 at 7:43 AM

desperate in their bashing…

cmsinaz on August 28, 2012 at 7:46 AM

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:40 AM

they didn’t feel like anne or mitt were being truthful about liking costco…

idiots…

cmsinaz on August 28, 2012 at 7:45 AM

Oh, O.K., understood. Thanks fer splainin.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:46 AM

Trying to change rules at the last minute is a sign of pettiness and being power-hungry, and doesn’t look good at all in a candidate. Change the process so that can’t happen, and you will start to get a different sort of candidate that doesn’t see ‘lawyering up’ as a viable option.

ajacksonian on August 28, 2012 at 7:44 AM

The lawyers are necessary. For candidates, for political parties. This is the age we live in if not always have, with a nod in the direction of John Adams’ memory.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:49 AM

‘lawyering up’ as a viable option.

ajacksonian on August 28, 2012 at 7:44 AM

Easily overlooked is that our Constitution IS ‘laws’. That’s the whole nature of the document, from a specific perspective of what the country is about. So “lawyering” is necessary, particularly when faced with challenges BY “lawyering”.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:51 AM

I agree that the Rules Change issue appears to have been a necessary move to try and prevent further disorder but that it bodes areas that then can be exploited for no good, but I don’t agree that “a floor fight” is productive. One wonders if Palin has been looking for an issue to rationalize encouraging such…

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:36 AM

Sometimes it seems like Palin feeds off conflict between conservatives. Remember how, throughout the primary season, she kept mentioning (in an approving way) the possibility of a brokered convention? She kept hinting that she hadn’t “closed the door” on the possibility of her throwing her own hat into the ring, should a brokered convention had become a reality. Also, she kept pushing for the primary in-fighting to continue and seemed uncomfortable with the idea of Republican voters uniting around one front runner. It was almost as if she was saying to just continue the in-fighting just for the sake of it, and she seemed totally uninterested in evaluating who would have been the strongest general election candidate. (In my opinion, we are, thankfully, nominating, the candidate [Romney] who always was the strongest and the one with the best shot to defeat Obama.) Interesting that you say she seems especially comfortable when knocking the GOP. Seems that she loves setting herself up as someone who speaks for the so-called “true blue” conservatives fighting against the GOP “establishment” boogeymen.

bluegill on August 28, 2012 at 7:54 AM

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/08/27/sen-rand-paul-republican-party-needs-to-embrace-libertarians-in-order-to-win/

canopfor on August 28, 2012 at 1:56 AM

And Jeb Bush says we have to ‘embrace illegal immigration/amnesty for illegal aliens’ if we want to win and, and…

I like Rand Paul in general, think he’s a good guy with good ideas and sincere in his work for the nation and all that…

BUT where I go about these various “we have to (dance with the devil if we want to be popular and get more dates)” sort of thining and advice is just screwy.

Maybe it’s the Libertarian who “need to” get with the GOP and maybe it’s illegal aliens (and Jeb Bush) who need to stop suggesting violating the laws and our national security is somehow something “Hispanics” are entitled to do and should be rewarded for.

Fringes, those are fringes.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:59 AM

bluegill on August 28, 2012 at 7:54 AM

Knocking the GOP, so to speak, is Palin’s schtick.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 8:01 AM

cristie and morning joe ecstatic that the republican party no longer needs the south.

renalin on August 28, 2012 at 8:24 AM

bluegill on August 28, 2012 at 7:54 AM

Knocking the GOP, so to speak, is Palin’s schtick.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 8:01 AM

she also likes knocking mitt too. thats why she’s nowhere near tampa. she knows the ship is sinking.

the best way to support mitt from now until election day is to sit in your lazy boy eating mooseburgers and guzzling PBR’s

renalin on August 28, 2012 at 8:28 AM

ajacksonian on August 28, 2012 at 7:44 AM

Excellent…as always.

kingsjester on August 28, 2012 at 8:31 AM

via MM

Update: 11:53pm Eastern Sarah Palin weighs in while campaigning on the road in Arizona. From her Facebook page:

We have to remember that this election is not just about replacing the party in power. It’s about who and what we replace it with. Grassroots conservatives know this. Without the energy and wisdom of the grassroots, the GOP would not have had the historic 2010 electoral victories. That’s why the controversial rule change being debated at the RNC convention right now is so very disappointing. It’s a direct attack on grassroots activists by the GOP establishment, and it must be rejected.

Palin 2016

renalin on August 28, 2012 at 8:43 AM

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 6:56 AM

+ 100..:):)

Dire Straits on August 28, 2012 at 9:25 AM

The Paulines have much to be ashamed of, over the last four years. Lying, cheating, and perverting anything they can in order to create the illusion of greater popularity for their candidate than truly exists.

But as they say, it all falls on leadership. It’s the same way Rep. Paul does business in Washington. “Dr. No” pretends as though he is opposed to pork-barrel spending as a matter of conscience, while submitting into bills as much or more in earmarks as any congresscritter in the House. Then, while voting against those bills and screaming about the waste and unconstitutional abuse of public trust, and of taxpayers’ money, he gladly takes those appropriated dollars when the bills pass, in “opposition” to his NO votes.

Dishonesty begets dishonesty. And I could consider forgiving such behavior as simply doing business in the climate of a corrupt place, but when placed alongside his insane foreign and military policy positions, and the conscience-free ideology of extreme libertarianism, such a person ought to be kept out of the White House.

Freelancer on August 28, 2012 at 9:41 AM

renalin on August 28, 2012 at 8:28 AM

renalin on August 28, 2012 at 8:43 AM

Like I wrote earlier here, and have written in the past, she’s identified and known by her supporters. So is Ron Paul. They attract a troubled lot who are generally antisocial and worse, while maintaining some sort of higher-authority that somehow never is revealed in their behaviors toward others.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 9:42 AM

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:25 AM

The floor fight against the changing of the delegate rules at the RNC is supported by both Sarah Palin and Mark Levin.

They’re not anarchists.

kingsjester on August 28, 2012 at 7:28 AM

Morning kj..I think the problem with the Rule Changes is many don’t take the time to understand them. It’s not about Ron Paul only, it is about ALL State Delegates and what they are doing is a power grab.

It’s easier to blame Ron Paul rather than read what is really going on by the Rules Committee!!

bluefox on August 28, 2012 at 9:44 AM

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 6:56 AM

+ 100..:):)

Dire Straits on August 28, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Yeah, looking forward to this remake film (RED DAWN, the remake). Though it does look more like a video-game than the original drama, but that seems to be the style that’s popular nowadays.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 9:44 AM

problem with the Rule Changes is many don’t take the time to understand them. It’s not about Ron Paul only, it is about ALL State Delegates and what they are doing is a power grab.

It’s easier to blame Ron Paul rather than read what is really going on by the Rules Committee!!

bluefox on August 28, 2012 at 9:44 AM

The Libertarian delegates have been alluding to using the Convention for a display of criticism, non-support, for a while now and I include Palin and her plans in that (everyone’s heard by now her story about not being invited, followed by refusing the invite, plans for her “own convention” or big-do nearby simultanously, etc.)…

These sort of tactics don’t accomplish ANYthing except to generate and encourage disorder, by which I mean, it’s “protest” and not paticipation. One can call it “grassroot conservatives” for the sake of skirting the real intent and avoiding responsibility for the negation of accomplishent by the GOP but it more seriously insults many a voter who is both “grassroots” and “conservative” and voting for Romney/Ryan2012 and not out there in a costume or encouraging protests.

There are many conservatives who are more than eager and happy to vote for Romney/Ryan and being “grassroots” is nothing more than being an individual voter who has a life and is living it.

This whole attempt to capitalize on buzzwords that establish “us versus them” isolation of voting intents is psychological mishmash, but it does create antagonisms that work to service the negative and not the right solutions.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 9:54 AM

…by which I mean, it’s “protest” and not PARTICIPATION.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Morris is one of those guys whose “analysis” always sounds too good to be true.

He predicted a McCain win last time around too.

Alberta_Patriot on August 28, 2012 at 2:55 AM

To be fair, McCain had a decent chance of winning, right until the market crashed in October. Until then polls showed McCain competitive, with several showing him polling ahead.

I suspect this poll likely makes one or two too many optimistic assumptions. However, assuming it isn’t using a faulty methodology, you could pump up the democrats in the party affiliations a few points and Romney would still be ahead by about 3%

WolvenOne on August 28, 2012 at 9:59 AM

And I’m not aware of any tinfoil helmet we on the Right “must wear” that might cancel out our ability to think for ourselves. Which includes disagreeing with politicians and radio hosts when they opine with perspectives we figure differently.

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 7:31 AM

Have you read and do you know what the Rule Changes are about?
This all started with Romney and his Atty Ben Ginsberg & Barbour.
It was not started by Ron Paul. Ron Paul was the first to challenge the Rule Changes, but not the last. Texas have 300 Delegates & Alternates and this is what they said: “Our delegates are in shock that such an amendment even would be presented before the Rules Committee much less passed into rule,” Fredricks said. “Please know from the Texas delegation standpoint that the only way a floor fight can be avoided is for this rule to be stricken.”

At that point, the entire Texas delegation stood up and applauded.

Fredricks, a Romney supporter, says only 30 people of the more than 300 Texan alternates and delegates support Ron Paul, yet the delegation is “united” in its opposition to the rule.

By the way all of this and other info regarding this issue has already been posted on this very thread.

bluefox on August 28, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Trying to change rules at the last minute is a sign of pettiness and being power-hungry, and doesn’t look good at all in a candidate. Change the process so that can’t happen, and you will start to get a different sort of candidate that doesn’t see ‘lawyering up’ as a viable option.

ajacksonian on August 28, 2012 at 7:44 AM

I agree. This power grab is against the Conservatives and the Tea Parties. They want all of the power to decide which Candidates at the State level to support with Karl Rove’s PAC & the RNC. In order to do that, they need this Rule change to decide which State Delegates they will allow and those they don’t want, they will replace. In plain words, out with the grassroots and the voice of the voters, WE WILL DECIDE FOR YOU.

Take it to the Floor if they don’t rescind this Rule#12!!

bluefox on August 28, 2012 at 10:07 AM

cristie and morning joe ecstatic that the republican party no longer needs the south.

renalin on August 28, 2012 at 8:24 AM

LOL, right. And with this Rule Change, the RNC & Karl Rove PAC and the Establishment GOP think they don’t need the Conservatives and the Tea Party members.

bluefox on August 28, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Dire Straits on August 28, 2012 at 9:25 AM

We need your betrayal quote:-) It’s certainly becoming more true, LOL

Oh, I see that “True Cons” are being derided. Maybe I need a definition? I don’t want to be thrown into the Ron Paul camp, LOL

bluefox on August 28, 2012 at 10:14 AM

It’s the same way Rep. Paul does business in Washington. “Dr. No” pretends as though he is opposed to pork-barrel spending as a matter of conscience, while submitting into bills as much or more in earmarks as any congresscritter in the House.

Freelancer on August 28, 2012 at 9:41 AM

The ignorance is strong with this one. Some facts:

Ron Paul believes every dime in the budget should be earmarked. He believes since Congress is authorized by the US Constitution to appropriate the money, they should be the ones who decide how it gets spent… not the Executive branch.

But then again, I’m explaining the Legislative and Executive branches to someone who clearly gets his political information from Cosmopolitan

JohnGalt23 on August 28, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Lourdes on August 28, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Your criticism of Sarah Palin aside, you don’t seem to understand the terms “grassroots”, nor ELECTED State Delegates.

If you were a grassroots participant, you would do the following:
Go house to house knocking on doors in support of a Candidate, make phone calls, email, drive to the neighborhoods, attend meetings, attend Rallies for your Candidate, get out the vote, attend many functions at the local level. This good be for a year or more. Then you would attend State Conventions and be elected as a Delegate. Make plans & pay for Air fare, hotels, food and all other necessary expenses to attend the National Convention. After all of this, the Rule Change decides that YOU can’t vote & they will replace you!!!

Josh Mandel is running for Senate in Ohio against Sherrod Brown. Do you know he started out at the very lowest level of any elected position and he knocked on over 19,000 doors and wore out 3 pairs of shoes in the process. Yes, he was among the “grassroots”.

Oh, back to Sarah Palin. She has done all of this and more and on her OWN DIME!

bluefox on August 28, 2012 at 10:32 AM

H/T Mark Levin and Michelle Malkin

Julianne Thompson of Georgia’s GOP delegation — a Romney delegate — weighs in.

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE

By: Julianne Thompson – National Delegate, Georgia

Chairman Reince Preibus, members of the Rules Committee, and the entire voting delegation of the 2012 Republican National Convention:

As a National Delegate to the 2012 RNC, I am extremely disappointed that a rule would be passed through committee that essentially strips the grassroots of all of it’s representative power by ridding State Parties of their ability to choose whom they will send as delegates and alternates to represent their State to the Republican National Convention. The rules change would allow the Presidential nominee sweeping new power to override that process and choose their own National Delegates. The rule also allows the RNC (with only a 3/4 vote) the power to amend the party’s rules without a vote by the full Republican National Convention.

The GOP is the political Party of the grassroots. Our national delegates are the boots-on-the-ground that get Republicans elected. We are there for County meetings, State Conventions, National Conventions, and most importantly we spend our time and money canvassing our neighborhoods, going door to door, making phone calls, writing personal endorsement letters, and getting-out-the-vote for Republicans. We are the worker bees, and we are the heart and soul of the Republican Party.

We have always believed that our Party is the one who best represents what it means to be an American…freedom! With your current attempt at this rules change, you are essentially striking the first blow that chips away at that freedom, and you disenfranchise the very people that turned the tide for the GOP in 2010 by returning power in the U.S. House of Representatives to Republicans.

I would like to hope that our nominee is unaware of the skullduggery that occurred with regard to this attempt at shutting out the people that have unified to help him win in November. The audacity of creating a firestorm when there is an opportunity for unity and peace that is needed to win back the Senate and take back the White House is irresponsible and I seriously question the motives of those behind this attempt.

Why the change in rules? That is the million-dollar question, and it is fairly easy to answer. There are still those in place in the GOP and on campaigns that would like to use the delegate and alternate seats as rewards for donating large checks to campaigns and the RNC.

If your desire is to win elections, then I strongly suggest that you engage the grassroots and show respect to those who help put you in power.

During a time that should ring of unity, you have put the GOP at a crossroads. Do you want to win this election and future elections? Now is your opportunity to prove it. Either take it to the floor and let us vote it down, and better yet, pull this insulting attempt to disenfranchise the heart and soul of our Republican Party!

Sincerely,

Julianne Thompson, National Delegate for Mitt Romney – Georgia

bluefox on August 28, 2012 at 10:39 AM

the best way to support mitt from now until election day is to sit in your lazy boy eating mooseburgers and guzzling PBR’s

I’m sure if SP drinks at all, which we don’t know, she would knock back a finely chilled Alaskan Amber. She’s all AK all the time. Paul is a nut who speaks like a nut collecting other nuts along the way. He’s a long time DC politician who has no record of achievement. He needs to retire so the good people in his district can elect someone who would truly represent their interest.

Kissmygrits on August 28, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5