You'll love this one..."Backlash Continues Against Ron Paul Movement"

[wgadget]

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2008/06/05/075526.php

Refers to the activities at the conventions of both parties.

[ronpaulhawaii]

Friggin stealth tactics

arrrggghhhh

just giving these fools ammo

[pinkmandy]

Grrrrr. As if the GOP welcomed RP and his supporters from the get go.

[jblosser]

The majority of that article has not met reality.

[Crickett]

Yeah..or..the reality of that article has not met the majority....YET

[Rhys]

spin

[WRellim]

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2008/06/05/075526.php

Refers to the activities at the conventions of both parties.

EXCELLENT article, and I think fairly objectively written (illuminated by his earlier article here: http://www.fontcraft.com/rod/?p=316)

BTW, this is EXACTLY WHAT I FEARED would happen as soon as the "Dr. Steve Parent" misinformation started being spread around. It would create havoc and end up backfiring on the ENTIRE movement, and reflect badly on ALL involved.


I even STAYED HOME from our State Convention (and convinced some others to stay back as well) -- solely in order to DISTANCE ourselves from these types of disruptive (and futile) tactics (planned by a handful of people with more zeal than wits). It was utterly pointless in our state anyway, as the state convention doesn't have anything to do with the RNC delegate selection process. End result is that it was necessary (for long term success) to NOT be connected to this kind of wackiness (trust me both the presence AND the absence, actions and inactions ARE noted by your local people, and they will LONG remember it). All of which was actually pretty SAD, because I *had* been looking forward to attending in order to make some progress on LOCAL and STATE issues! (So thanks a bunch SGP! You F'd over my months-long efforts to make ANY progress on several in-state issues!)


This kind of BS (using RRoO as a "weapon") is in my opinion both unethical AND impractical. It creates a LONG-TERM dislike, distrust, and disgust against the individuals involved in using it. And (without a MAJORITY of those present behind you) it is viewed as a "piratical" thing, much like an attempted "hijack" -- and it is doomed to failure, because (if it is a "surprise") it just backs the chairman up against the wall and the time deadlines are used as an excuse to keep the meeting moving (which IS a primary and VALID task of a chairman); and if it ISN'T a surprise, then the chairman will have people in place around the floor prepared for motions, seconds, calling the question and the effort will become moot (typically resulting in a screaming match that makes people look like children engaging in temper tantrums).

Conversely, THE BEST way to make progress in a long-term "takeover/makeover" is to be the voice of CALM and REASON. And this has to be done SLOWLY, and in an entirely NON-disruptive fashion. The key is to be present at every (or virtually every) meeting, and to SLOWLY become one of the people that is "expected" to speak.

That means in the first meeting or two you basically just sit on the side, listening and analyzing; if you speak at all, it should be as a "newbie" and in a fairly deferential (but not "slavish") manner and regarding something that is NOT controversial (more of an "I'm new here, and you seem to do things a bit differently than I am used to, so forgive me if I this seems 'basic' to you all, but if I understand correctly, the ________ would mean _____ ? Am I right? Or am I confused?") What you want is to be RESPECTED by everyone. What you most certainly do NOT do is start shouting "point of order"! THAT is the path to being HATED by everyone... which is emphatically NOT what you want.


And, alas, THAT is not to be achieved by following the foolish advice of one SGP. (Which should be obvious from his posts... as he earned the respect of very few, and the vitriol of many.)

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

It's not a "backlash" against the Ron Paul movement. The backlash is *from* the Ron Paul movement. The republican establishment was viciously against Ron Paul and his supporters from the beginning.

To hear the etablishment blaming Paul for their own failing party is just more of the same. And to suggest that Paul supporters are some type of Robert's rules ninjas is just stupid. Paul supporters have been outmaneuvered many times. Maybe it's within the rules, but it goes against the spirit of democracy.


Conversely, THE BEST way to make progress in a long-term "takeover/makeover" is to be the voice of CALM and REASON. And this has to be done SLOWLY, and in an entirely NON-disruptive fashion. The key is to be present at every (or virtually every) meeting, and to SLOWLY become one of the people that is "expected" to speak.

Sure. How many years would you like to take? 16? 24? 32? I don't think we can stay on the same track for 8 years without dire consequences. In fact, if we want to talk about what's THE BEST, it would be THE BEST if the establishment treated Paul and his supporters with a small amount of respect. It would be THE BEST if the establishment loved Ron Paul and treated him like they do that unintelligent clown McCain. It's just not the reality of the situation.

[allyinoh]

Things like this make me realize why I'm not part of the GOP and why I want nothing to do with them!

We're trying to make a difference and it's looked at negatively? Give me a break...

[slacker921]

.....
That means in the first meeting or two you basically just sit on the side, listening and analyzing; if you speak at all, it should be as a "newbie" and in a fairly deferential (but not "slavish") manner and regarding something that is NOT controversial (more of an "I'm new here, and you seem to do things a bit differently than I am used to, so forgive me if I this seems 'basic' to you all, but if I understand correctly, the ________ would mean _____ ? Am I right? Or am I confused?") What you want is to be RESPECTED by everyone. What you most certainly do NOT do is start shouting "point of order"! THAT is the path to being HATED by everyone... which is emphatically NOT what you want.

+10

piss people off and they won't ask for your help when they get their asses handed to them in November. Be a calm and steady resistance and you'll be the new leadership soon after November.

[ronpaulhawaii]

...

BTW, this is EXACTLY WHAT I FEARED would happen as soon as the "Dr. Steve Parent" misinformation started being spread around. It would create havoc and end up backfiring on the ENTIRE movement, and reflect badly on ALL involved.

...

All of which was actually pretty SAD, because I *had* been looking forward to attending in order to make some progress on LOCAL and STATE issues! (So thanks a bunch SGP! You F'd over my months-long efforts to make ANY progress on several in-state issues!)


This kind of BS (using RRoO as a "weapon") is in my opinion both unethical AND impractical. It creates a LONG-TERM dislike, distrust, and disgust against the individuals involved in using it. And (without a MAJORITY of those present behind you) it is viewed as a "piratical" thing, much like an attempted "hijack" -- and it is doomed to failure, because (if it is a "surprise") it just backs the chairman up against the wall and the time deadlines are used as an excuse to keep the meeting moving (which IS a primary and VALID task of a chairman); and if it ISN'T a surprise, then the chairman will have people in place around the floor prepared for motions, seconds, calling the question and the effort will become moot (typically resulting in a screaming match that makes people look like children engaging in temper tantrums).

Conversely, THE BEST way to make progress in a long-term "takeover/makeover" is to be the voice of CALM and REASON. And this has to be done SLOWLY, and in an entirely NON-disruptive fashion. The key is to be present at every (or virtually every) meeting, and to SLOWLY become one of the people that is "expected" to speak.

That means in the first meeting or two you basically just sit on the side, listening and analyzing; if you speak at all, it should be as a "newbie" and in a fairly deferential (but not "slavish") manner and regarding something that is NOT controversial (more of an "I'm new here, and you seem to do things a bit differently than I am used to, so forgive me if I this seems 'basic' to you all, but if I understand correctly, the ________ would mean _____ ? Am I right? Or am I confused?") What you want is to be RESPECTED by everyone. What you most certainly do NOT do is start shouting "point of order"! THAT is the path to being HATED by everyone... which is emphatically NOT what you want.

And, alas, THAT is not to be achieved by following the foolish advice of one SGP. (Which should be obvious from his posts... as he earned the respect of very few, and the vitriol of many.)

Sad, but true. This is my entire point regarding the necessity of discussing the credibility and performance of anyone who takes a leadership role in our movement. I have seen countless posts like this, describing the damage SGP continues to wreak. I believe it is his tactics and "leadership" that enables these hit articles. I, too, have been waiting for this particular POS to hit the fan. Now that it is, what can we do about it?

[countrykidz4freedom]

Actually, had it not been for DSP, I wouldn't have had the courage to go and participate in my state's convention. I listened to his instructions, then also checked my state's party rules, (which he had advised everyone to do) I am thankful for DSP for taking out his time and helping those who needed it. Listening to him gave me the confidence to go and make my stand for freedom.

[ronpaulhawaii]

Actually, had it not been for DSP, I wouldn't have had the courage to go and participate in my state's convention. I listened to his instructions, then also checked my state's party rules, (which he had advised everyone to do) I am thankful for DSP for taking out his time and helping those who needed it. Listening to him gave me the confidence to go and make my stand for freedom.

OK so we have one person who was encouraged by SGP and one who was so discouraged that he avoided the circus and convinced others to do the same. So far the balance is weighted towards the net negetive side.

I have never discounted the benefits of promoting convention participation, and do see that there are rare instances like ck4f cites above. SGP's honey is sweet, it is the poison of "stealth" (read: dirty) tactics that I feel is the problem. ISTM that many, much more qualified and respectable people were doing the same before the emergance of this un-verified "persona". IMO- SGP's only claim to fame is screaming louder than the others.

The proof will be in the pudding. What I have seen is an increasing failure rate in seating national delegates, since the emergance of this self-proclaimed expert of RRoO who has taken a leadership role in our movement.

What is most pointed is that HQ has continually shot down his "advice". I feel such "stealth tactics" run counter to the philosophy of RP and the continued use of these tactics will only stain the r3VOLutions, and by extension, RPs reputataion.

[jblosser]

I have never spoken to Steve Parent and to my knowledge neither has anyone involved in the fairconvention.org movement in Texas so I can't really speak to anything to do with him.

I have regardless not hear one credible report of any convention that has actually occurred this cycle where people other than the establishment used RONR as a weapon. I have heard plenty of examples where new people tried to get involved and found themselves being shut out and objected under the rules, as is their right and, frankly, duty.

People who walk into a room where they are duly elected delegates and start hearing and seeing people not elected being seated are not being disruptive to object, nor are they being rebellious when they are ignored, nor are they the ones abusing the rules when the leadership throws them out.

It's ludicrous to suggest that any group can use guerrilla parliamentary tactics to oust an established chair and start things over if they don't have a majority. Parliamentary tricks work in favor of a minority only when that minority is already the established leadership. The majority simply won't go along with a minority "takeover". And if a group does oust a temporary chair because they did have the majority, there's nothing particularly newsworthy about it from a parliamentary perspective. That's how the process is supposed to work.

[WRellim]

Sad, but true. This is my entire point regarding the necessity of discussing the credibility and performance of anyone who takes a leadership role in our movement. I have seen countless posts like this, describing the damage SGP continues to wreak. I believe it is his tactics and "leadership" that enables these hit articles. I, too, have been waiting for this particular POS to hit the fan. Now that it is, what can we do about it?

Well, the short term damage is already done (it was done weeks ago when SGP's unethical agenda was accepted by even a minority of people).

Whether and how much we can "salvage" remains to be seen. In some cases, for example my own state, the fact that a lot of us held back and stayed home means that WE (at least) are still welcomed participant in the local GOP groups. (That does NOT mean we are suckups or brown nosers -- trust me, EVERYONE of any note in my local GOP knows damn well that I will NOT be extending even a pinkie's worth of effort on behalf of McCain *or* the RNC -- and they are actually fine with that, some even respect it -- but they understand that I still have "value" as a team member in the local and state races; which really should have nothing to do with the national RNC crapola.)

And because we CAN still work with and on local stuff we get the chance to "root" ourselves in the groups.

Provided the whole McCain thing blows-up or disintegrates and he loses by a landslide in November** -- then the RNC's (and McCain's) names will be MUD. Since they will have damaged local & state people as well, OUR ACTIONS in focusing on helping in those races will be seen as having been both WISE and CRUCIAL in preventing a complete rout by the Dems (no matter how much ground the GOP loses, without our help, they would have lost even more).

Now, if we can get the "troublemakers" to wisen up and join our efforts, they MAY be able to "rehabilitate" themselves in peoples eyes -- but from what I have seen so far that is not likely to happen. Much MORE likely is that they have/will stumble off away from the GOP in a huge "huff" of disgust.

Which means we lose numbers, but since many of them were the "loose cannons" to begin with... well, we're probably better off without them for the long term.


**Conversely, if McCain actually pulls off a win... then IMHO there is (probably) no point in staying in the GOP, and people would probably be better off switching to the CP.

[WRellim]

Actually, had it not been for DSP, I wouldn't have had the courage to go and participate in my state's convention. I listened to his instructions, then also checked my state's party rules, (which he had advised everyone to do) I am thankful for DSP for taking out his time and helping those who needed it. Listening to him gave me the confidence to go and make my stand for freedom.

Well, glad to hear he gave you a boost of confidence... but did you achieve anything worthwhile? (I mean that as a serious question, and not as a dig. Each state has it's own dynamics that are entirely different from others... some groups were able to make good progress in an ethical manner {Alaska & Washington State come to mind} -- others achieved nothing more than making themselves into a minor "fringe" group to be swatted aside.)

My main problem with SGP was not the everything he said was wrong... just that there was a lot of toxic waste type stuff mixed in, and I knew it would cause problems (even pre-convention it already had caused major problems in my state's groups). To me SGP's info was a lot like having a bowl of healthy soup with lots of veggies, etc -- all good stuff -- and then lacing in just a spoonful of arsenic. The veggies and broth are still nutritious, but you'll end up sick as a dog or dead. SO I do not recommend SGP's homemade arsenic-vegetable soup mix! :(

[WRellim]

OK so we have one person who was encouraged by SGP and one who was so discouraged that he avoided the circus and convinced others to do the same. So far the balance is weighted towards the net negetive side.

I have never discounted the benefits of promoting convention participation, and do see that there are rare instances like ck4f cites above. SGP's honey is sweet, it is the poison of "stealth" (read: dirty) tactics that I feel is the problem. ISTM that many, much more qualified and respectable people were doing the same before the emergance of this un-verified "persona". IMO- SGP's only claim to fame is screaming louder than the others.

The proof will be in the pudding. What I have seen is an increasing failure rate in seating national delegates, since the emergance of this self-proclaimed expert of RRoO who has taken a leadership role in our movement.

What is most pointed is that HQ has continually shot down his "advice". I feel such "stealth tactics" run counter to the philosophy of RP and the continued use of these tactics will only stain the r3VOLutions, and by extension, RPs reputataion.


Personally, I think that "stealth" -- in the form of NOT wearing your candidate's name on your shirt-sleeve -- does NOT sinks to the level of being unethical.

But, if you combine it with lies, and then using RRoO as a "weapon" to disrupt convention proceedings (with the intent of causing massive disruptions & chaos) -- THEN there is an ethical problem.

And a practical one -- because it seldom succeeds in the way the disrupters want, and is much more likely to "go off in their faces." (Just as children should be kept away from fireworks unless supervised by and adult, political "noobs" should be kept away from "Roberts Rules" in a similar fashion.)

[WRellim]

I have never spoken to Steve Parent and to my knowledge neither has anyone involved in the fairconvention.org movement in Texas so I can't really speak to anything to do with him.

I have regardless not hear one credible report of any convention that has actually occurred this cycle where people other than the establishment used RONR as a weapon. I have heard plenty of examples where new people tried to get involved and found themselves being shut out and objected under the rules, as is their right and, frankly, duty.

People who walk into a room where they are duly elected delegates and start hearing and seeing people not elected being seated are not being disruptive to object, nor are they being rebellious when they are ignored, nor are they the ones abusing the rules when the leadership throws them out.

It's ludicrous to suggest that any group can use guerrilla parliamentary tactics to oust an established chair and start things over if they don't have a majority. Parliamentary tricks work in favor of a minority only when that minority is already the established leadership. The majority simply won't go along with a minority "takeover". And if a group does oust a temporary chair because they did have the majority, there's nothing particularly newsworthy about it from a parliamentary perspective. That's how the process is supposed to work.

QFT.

The problem is that this is EXACTLY what people were trying to do -- "use guerrilla parliamentary tactics to oust an established chair and start things over" when they had ONLY A TINY, MINOR FRACTION the delegates.

I have NEVER seen a successful use of "guerrilla parliamentary tactics" UNLESS the "consensus" of the membership (meaning MORE than 50% more like 80%) was already VERY dissatisfied with the established chairman and leadership. The "guerrillas" might be a small group, but they MUST have the backing of the people, otherwise it is FAILURE TIME.

Much more likely to be successful is a slow "join-'em, then stake-over, take-over & make-over" process, which is both honest AND ethical.