PDA

View Full Version : Local GOP Resist Takeover (Weigh-In)




JS4Pat
06-29-2008, 09:44 AM
In today's Sunday paper, coverage was FINALLY given to the exclusionary tactics of our local Republican Executive Committee. The article is pretty fair and gives the Ron Paul Movement / Republican Liberty Caucus some favorable coverage.

Please do me a favor in weigh-in with your comments. We would really like to show the community that there is overwhelming support for what we are doing.

h ttp://staugustine.com/stories/062908/news_062908_002.shtml

Background

Many of us in the Ron Paul movement have been blocked from joining the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee solely because of who we supported in the primary. Rules were changed, information was withheld, meeting times and locations were altered at the last minute etc.

On June 20th State Law allowed Republicans to submit applications to become Precinct Commitee People for the next term commencing after the November election. If the position was open and you filled out the necessary paperwork, then you will automatically become a part of the REC. We recruited like crazy and it looks like in December the RON PAUL REPUBLICANS will have a significant voice in the Party.

This is how The R[evol]ution can continue and gain strength.

The Article

THE ST. AUGUSTINE RECORD
Local GOP resists 'takeover'

New conservative caucus challenges party's stance

By PETER GUINTA | More by this reporter | peter.guinta@staugustine.com | Posted: Sunday, June 29, 2008 ; Updated: 2:57 AM on Sunday, June 29, 2008

Bob Veit, chairman of the county's Republican Executive Committee, said last week that The Republican Liberty Caucus, a national organization of libertarian-minded Republicans, has formed a new St. John County chapter that seems to be seeking control of the committee.

Veit said the Caucus wasn't doing anything illegal, but it wants to put supporters into vacant precinct leader positions and thereby influence the composition of the Executive Committee to press its agenda.

"(The Caucus is) attempting a hostile takeover," Veit said. "It's a threat. What happens to all the centrist and less-conservative Republicans who don't agree with them?"

He called Caucus members "ultra-conservatives."

William G. Pitts of St. Johns, a successful builder and a founder of the local Caucus chapter, disagrees with Veit.

Pitts said his members aren't planning a takeover or coup. They are applying for the vacant precinct slots because the Executive Committee was "effectively blocking" them from serving due to their political beliefs. The committee had passed restrictive new rules, changed the requirements of membership and delayed or tabled applications from Caucus members to keep them off, Pitts said.

"We're puzzled why, in a time when the Republican Party faces serious problems, they want to become a party of exclusion," Pitts said. "(The Caucus doesn't) want to exclude people. We represent traditional Republican Party values of low taxes, individual responsibility, states rights and the Constitution. I believe most people in St. Johns County believe in these principles."


The new group


The Caucus calls itself a "grassroots, statewide organization working within the Republican Party."

Its mission, stated on its Web site, is straightforward: to "promote individual liberty, limited government, and free enterprise within the Republican Party, identifying and supporting candidates sympathetic with these ideals and promoting Caucus membership among Republican Party registrants, officials, and officeholders."

The local chapter has about 60 members and is three months old.

On May 26, Pitts wrote the Executive Committee to accuse Veit of impeding the party's growth, lowering the morale of the activist base and arbitrarily evicting groups of registered Republicans from meetings.

He asked the committee to dump Veit as chairman.

Pitts also wrote Jim Greer, head of the Republican Party of Florida, to ask the state party to unify Republicans.

"Have we reduced the entire Republican Party platform to a Middle East foreign policy?" Pitts wrote to Greer. "Is anyone thinking or reading anything more than main-stream media sound bites? If my own local party refuses to allow me to join because of what I believe, how can I support the party?"

Greer was not available, though, Katie Gordon, spokeswoman for the Republican Party of Florida, said this issue is a "very internal and localized" problem. "There's no benefit to the party for the chairman to take a side between different factions, unless there is a major issue and (the local chairman is) unable to deal with it. Our mission is to get Sen. McCain elected."

The Caucus position, however, appears opposing McCain's. The support a non-interventionist foreign policy, elimination of many federal agencies and giving the states power to regulate themselves, for example.

Pitts said, "We don't need the federal government to tell us how to educate our school children or what is illegal or legal. That determination should be left to the states."

He addressed Veit's accusation that the caucus seeks to control the party.

"Republicans can't 'take over' the Republican Party. The Republican Party in St. Johns County belongs to all Republicans," he said.


The division deepens


St. Johns County has 127,697 registered voters -- 67,372 Republicans, 35,259 Democrats and 25,000 independents or other parties.

Veit, representing about half the county's voters, believes Caucus members want the party to follow the libertarian views of 10-term Republican Congressman Ron Paul of Texas, whose ideas generally align with Caucus planks.

In the Republican presidential primary, Paul got 42 delegates, but 1,191 were needed to win. He won no states.

He officially dropped out June 12 and then donated $4.7 million of his campaign contributions to a new organization, Campaign For Liberty. Its web site said the group's objectives include "(gaining) a foothold in political life at every level of government by expanding our precinct leader program."

Veit said that's precisely what the Caucus is doing.

A memo issued by the Caucus stamped "Confidential" asks local conservatives to apply for precinct leader slots.

It said, "We are doing this because if small government, liberty-minded conservatives become the majority of precinct committee persons, then (we) can get elected to the boards of county Republican Executive Committees, write platforms and change the rules. In short, we can return the Republican Party to its principles: pro-Constitution, pro gun, pro veteran, pro low tax, pro liberty, pro limited government, pro individual responsibility, pro states' rights!"


Battle of words


Veit e-mailed local Republicans May 23, clarifying the Executive Committee's stance toward the Caucus.

"I did not support Pitts and (John Charles) Stevens (another Caucus founder) for membership in the St. Johns County REC because their often-stated intentions were to gain control of the Republican Party apparatus and turn it into a campaign committee for either a political candidate or a narrow political philosophy that has limited appeal to Republican voters, much less all voters."

The following day, an angry Stevens wrote Veit and denied making those statements. He also asked for a retraction.

"Smearing the name of good Republicans by making false accusations to the county REC leadership and the (Republican Party of Florida) is totally unacceptable," Stevens wrote. "(We) are well aware that the role of the REC is to promote and support Republican candidates to office."

No retraction was forthcoming.

Caucus members had already filled 44 of the 105 filled precinct slots, with another 105 slots still vacant,Veit said.

Precinct leaders are tasked with getting voters to the polls in their districts. They also are the electorate for Executive Committee positions. The Caucus has apparently taken advantage of Florida law, which says applicants seeking precinct slots and who attract no opposition are immediately installed.

The application process closed June 19. Contested races go to Republican voters in the Aug. 26 primary.

Veit believes the Caucus wants to take over the party by those tactics, not only here but also in other counties.

"(Republicans) don't mind people having libertarian views," he said. "But we do mind being hijacked by supporters of a particular candidate or another political party."


Ideological standoff


Pitts said the Caucus would maintain its ideals of liberty and limited government, despite the obstacles.

"(Incumbent) committee members will fight desperately to maintain the positions they now have," he said. "They say we 'have narrow views that don't represent the people of St. Johns County.' But if we don't become a party of principles, we'll never beat the Democrats, because we can't out-promise them."

Veit said the Caucus may really have more precinct leaders than he's counted because, he said, at the moment he has no way of telling which precinct candidate was a caucus member or not.

"We're still sorting them all out," Veit said. "Their approach is brilliant. If I were going to try to take over an organization, that's what I'd do."

Contested races: Each precinct gets one male and one female precinct leader per 1,000 voters.


The candidates are:


* State Committeeman: Incumbent Jon Woodard of St. Augustine faces caucus leader John Charles Stevens of St. Johns.


* State Committeewoman: Incumbent Rebecca Reichenberg faces caucus member Wynona R. Mayer, both of St. Johns.

* Precinct 104: (vote for five) Bill Cosnotti, Brian A. Iannucci, Dale H. McKnight, David Reichenberg, John P. Safar, Henry K. Stevenson, David VanDerZee and Neil R. Woida, all of St. Johns.

* Precinct 108: (vote for three) Gayle Chappell, Wynona R. Mayer, Etta R. Raines and Vanessa M. Warner.

* Precinct 110: (vote for four) Stepan Kira, Michael Lee, Phillip W. Milliken, William G. Pitts, James VanDerZee III and Kerry Williams, all of St. Johns.

* Precinct 201: (vote for three) Wesley L. Bunce, Harlan Mason, Ken Neikirk and Anthony Pacetti, all of St. Augustine.

* Precinct 503: (vote for two) Douglas A. Conolly, Robert Federer, Donald Heine, Gary McMahon and Martin Barry Miller (all of St. Augustine).

JS4Pat
06-29-2008, 10:51 AM
Comment Posted.

The article's reference to the RLC as 'ultra-conservative' can be a bit misleading in a time when the term "conservative" has been so maligned that some voters actually think George W. Bush or John McCain represent the conservative movement. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have found a more accurate description of the RLC of Northeast Florida to be "ultra-constitutional". And that definition lends itself to attracting a very large and diverse group of patriotic activists. State sovereignty, opposition to unconstitutional wars, protection of civil liberties, the elimination of the Federal Income Tax, returning to a sound monetary system and stopping the out-of-control growth of government are the issues these Republicans are rallying around.

I urge people to take a look for themselves by visiting WWW.RLCNF.ORG and attending the July 1st Meeting. If you are unhappy with the direction of both political parties over the past 8 years - The RLC of Northeast Florida is offering you a way to do something about it!

John Stevens
Vice Chair
RLC of Northeast Florida

Roxi
06-29-2008, 11:55 AM
bump

Matt Collins
06-29-2008, 11:58 AM
Have you spoken to Nick E of the Orlando Meetup? They are trying very very very similar things in the Orange County GOP and continue to hit brick walls.

His profile is here:
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/184/members/4220909/
and
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=445

JS4Pat
06-29-2008, 12:24 PM
Have you spoken to Nick E of the Orlando Meetup? They are trying very very very similar things in the Orange County GOP and continue to hit brick walls.

His profile is here:
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/184/members/4220909/
and
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=445


Yes, thanks Matt.
We are on each others distribution lists.

North Florida vs Central Florida - it's a quite a battle for supremacy in the spreading of the Liberty Message. :D

pennycat
06-29-2008, 01:07 PM
The Chairman of St. John's County Republican Executive Committee has been EXTREMELY hostile to RP supporters. Mind you that they did nothing to warrant that kind of rude reception. Persistence is going to pay off though, and hat's off to really AWESOME RP supporters!

Matt Collins
06-29-2008, 02:10 PM
I only wish it was this easy in TN as it is in Florida

DeadtoSin
06-29-2008, 02:12 PM
Here in Texas things aren't going that bad. My county GOP abided by the rules when RP supporters got a majority of the people behind a resolution. They allowed an obvious RP supporter to go to state as a delegate with no fighting. Heck, they even listened to what we had to say.

JS4Pat
06-29-2008, 02:43 PM
Here in Texas things aren't going that bad. My county GOP abided by the rules when RP supporters got a majority of the people behind a resolution. They allowed an obvious RP supporter to go to state as a delegate with no fighting. Heck, they even listened to what we had to say.

Yes, some counties in this area are receptive or at least "fair" when it comes to ROn Paul supporters becoming party activists.

But it is important that we identify and call out the ones who aren't.

Matt Collins
06-29-2008, 02:44 PM
Here in Texas things aren't going that bad. Texas tends to be one of the more libertarian states out there.

limnahlady
06-29-2008, 04:57 PM
I witnessed the St. Johns REC as they trashed Will Pitts when he petitioned to become a member. It was sad to watch. Sad because I had to admit that our Government is corrupt from the very top to the very lowest levels. And Sad because Will Pitts and John Stephens are Patriots and they are BRAVE.

My experience was similar. While at the same REC meeting I walked up to an acquaintance whom I have know for 10 years and said "hi". He replied with disdain with "What are YOU doing here?" I replied that I am a Republican and this was a Republican meeting. He let me know that they didn't want us there and that he didn't want to be seen talking to me and some other mean things I don't remember.. (Does this sound 5th grade or what?)

Will, John and I have been trying to gain admittance to the St. Johns REC since last summer/fall. It has been absolutely dumbfounding to witness the reaction we received just because we supported Ron Paul.

I wrote President Veit and James Greer letting them know what I thought. Needless to say I am now officially on their ____ list. When I turned in my notarized Application to become a Precinct Committeewoman at the REC meeting it was returned to me via US Mail with a note informing me that I had forgotten to take it with me. It is one thing after the other.

Crickett
06-29-2008, 06:11 PM
So sad that happened to you. I would, however, as a Republican, bring up two things. Number one, get the Libertarian word out of your minds. Republicans are not Libertarians, and invoking them with Libertarian ideals, is not the way of the Party. Number two, PLEASE add "balanced budget" (and not borrowing money from Communist countries) to your list of ideals. The balanced budgt was one of the MAIN Republican ideals I joined the party for, years ago, and seems to have been forgotten. If they do not realize how "on the brink" this country is now, I do not know how they will ever see it, with their short-sighted eyes only seeing the trees..

JS4Pat
08-02-2008, 08:50 AM
Another Newspaper Article (8/02/08) Regarding Our Local Republican Party and the RLC...

Please Post Comments:
http://staugustine.com/stories/080208/news_080208_030.shtml



GOP Warns Dissident Wing
Republicans try to stop 'Liberty Caucus'
By PETER GUINTA | More by this reporter | peter.guinta@staugustine.com | Saturday, August 2, 2008

This week, the Republicans sent warning letters to 10 state chapters of the Republican Liberty Caucus -- an organization within the party that promotes an agenda much the same as Ron Paul libertarians. The letter warned the caucus the law doesn't allow them to use the word "Republican" in its name without permission.

Some local Republicans see the caucus as seeking control of their party and then opposing Sen. John McCain, who they see as too liberal. This is similar to what is playing out on the national stage, as mainstream Republicans are losing western support for McCain to libertarians.

This week, the caucus here vowed a strong court fight to keep its name.

"We're Republicans, too," state caucus chairwoman Lisa Bullion said. "We're Republican activists within the party. We feel we're operating under the law."

William Westmiller of Thousand Oaks, Calif., chairman of the national Republican Liberty Caucus, said no other caucus has this problem.

"To my knowledge, this type of law only exists in Florida. Our strategy has always been to work in a civil and cooperative fashion within the Republican Party," he said.

St. Johns County libertarians joined the Republican Party after Paul, a Texas congressman and former Libertarian Party candidate, polled only single digit percentages in nearly all states. They say the mainstream party has lost its conservative base.

Northeast Florida's Republican Liberty Caucus president, Will Pitts, a St. Johns County resident and Jacksonville businessman, said taking away their name is "un-American. We have every right to use that name."

Bob Veit, president of St. Johns County Republican Club, said, "They're generally nice people, but also are zealots. They would marginalize other Republicans, moderate and conservative. This augurs no good for the party in the long term."

Two caucus members -- John Charles Stevens and Wynona Mayer -- are running Aug. 26 for state committeeman and state committeewoman, seeking to oust mainstream incumbents Jon Woodard and Becky Reichenberg.

Veit said Woodard and Reichenberg had "dedicated themselves to victory in November for the Republican slate."

State committee seats make and change Republican strategy. The caucus leadership wants to inch ahead and get more members elected to such posts.

The libertarian agenda now assumed by the caucus seems plucked directly from an earlier Republican playbook.

It seeks more individual liberty, minimal government intrusion, fiscal responsibility, opposition to welfare and entitlements, no foreign aid, lower taxes, state sovereignty, elimination of federal agencies duplicated at the state level, less regulation and a strong national defense with fewer military bases abroad.

Many Republicans believe those aims are the heart of their party.

But Veit said he doesn't like their tactics, and mainstream Republicans have filed grievances to Florida Republican Party Chairman Jim Greer, reporting anti-Republican comments by caucus members.

Stevens reportedly said "bashing the (Republican) party did nothing to advance (our) agenda," and added that "a chunk of 'the base' (of Republican voters) can be turned our way."

He also discussed obstacles the caucus faced if it tried to take over the Democratic Party or third parties.

Veit said said Stevens and Mayer had sworn to support McCain.

"They obviously do not take their oath seriously because they both are actively trying to torpedo McCain's candidacy as evidenced by their stated intentions to demonstrate against McCain at the National Convention in Minneapolis. I want Republicans to know what's happening."

Bullion said vocal dissenters like Stevens don't speak for the caucus. Stevens later said many of the comments attributed to him were taken out of context.

"We're a little more expressive and passionate (than other party members), kind of in your face," Stevens said. "I don't believe (the state party) has legal grounds (to prevail in a lawsuit)."

Still, some local Republicans don't want a divided party. For example, Joe Moody of Ponte Vedra Beach, a lifelong Republican voter, doesn't belong to the caucus and hadn't met Veit.

"(But) if he's a true conservative Republican, I will support him with vigor. If he is not, I won't. If the Republican Party would move back to its base, it would be more cohesive and more effective getting Republicans out to vote."

Another Republican voter, Robert Champion, president of the Ponte Vedra Beach Republican Club and a member of the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee, said the caucus has good ideas, one being low taxes.

"(But) I think their approach is wrong," Champion said. "They might get a victory for (themselves) at the cost of the election. John McCain is much more of a Republican than Barack Obama. They'd be better off getting behind McCain. They could be an election spoiler."

SLSteven
08-02-2008, 09:00 AM
"They obviously do not take their oath seriously because they both are actively trying to torpedo McCain's candidacy as evidenced by their stated intentions to demonstrate against McCain at the National Convention in Minneapolis. I want Republicans to know what's happening."



McCain is drifting in a leaky rowboat as it is. Who needs torpedos?

PatriotOne
08-02-2008, 09:26 AM
Another Republican voter, Robert Champion, president of the Ponte Vedra Beach Republican Club and a member of the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee, said the caucus has good ideas, one being low taxes.

"(But) I think their approach is wrong," Champion said. "They might get a victory for (themselves) at the cost of the election. John McCain is much more of a Republican than Barack Obama. They'd be better off getting behind McCain. They could be an election spoiler."

McCain is the election spoiler you dumbasses.

tonesforjonesbones
08-02-2008, 09:30 AM
When I got an email about how the St Johns County GOP was treating the Ron Paul Republicans I called the state GOP and got the State Field Director on the phone. I pretty much let him have it for about 15 minutes. He said if the Ron Paul Republicans didn't like where the GOP was headed ( moderate, towards center..and he admitted it) they should find a party that was more suited to their views. He also said that political parties are private organizations and could accept who they want to join or reject who they don't want in there. I got the feeling from talking to the Field Director that the Republican Party of Florida does not want Ron Paul supporters...that was from the state level. I believe the state GOP had sent memos to all of the local GOP chairs warning them about the Ron Paul Republicans. This is part of the reason I went to the LP...I didnt' want to waste my energy on a party that doesn't want me. I considered it better to let the GOP crash and burn...and start over. Tones

JS4Pat
08-02-2008, 11:07 AM
I got the feeling from talking to the Field Director that the Republican Party of Florida does not want Ron Paul supporters...that was from the state level. I believe the state GOP had sent memos to all of the local GOP chairs warning them about the Ron Paul Republicans. This is part of the reason I went to the LP...I didnt' want to waste my energy on a party that doesn't want me. I considered it better to let the GOP crash and burn...and start over. Tones

I respect your opinion and I realize that all of us in this Liberty Movement are not in agreement on the best political strategy but...

3 Points

#1 - That small group who currently holds the power and makes the rules is NOT the Republican Party. When our group is able to present our literature and ideas in a fair and unbiased forum - namely face to face at our monthly meetings and before and after REC meetings - we have found that we have all kinds of allies within the GOP.

#2 - Leaving the party out of frustration is exactly what that small group who currently holds the power and makes the rules wants us to do. Rather than be challenged as to whether or not the Platform and Candidates truly represent the ideals and principles of the Republican Party - they want everyone to just shut their mouths and get in line. Those who won't they would prefer just leave. But guess what? - there are more of "us" than "them" and we aint leavin'.

#3 - We're winning as evident by 2 front page newspaper stories in the last 2 months and this frivolous "Cease & Desist Letter" from the RPOF to the RLC. They are worried about maintaining their power.

Fortunately, no one can stop an idea whose time has come. ;)

www.RLCNF.org

Dary
08-02-2008, 11:39 AM
Will Pitts' resume is outstanding. His republican credentials go back to forever. His support for conservative republican principles both actively and monetarily (I'm sure) would far outweigh most current members of the St. John's REC (SJREC). He is a well respected member of the community and has quite a number of friends that currently hold office on the Jacksonville City Council.

For the SJREC to put up such a staunch resistance to his membership (and John's) is simply beyond belief. I can absolutely say without reservation that I am so proud to know both him and John Stevens personally. These are good people who care about their community and their country.

Just recently, members of the Northeast Florida RLC (NEFRLC) and the Americans for Prosperity worked diligently together and defeated a $250 million tax increase that was about to be shoved down the throats of the people of Duval County. Without these two groups working together I have no doubt that the tax increase would have passed. Republicans (and everyone else too) owe these people a debt of gratitude and respect for what they did. I know that one of the most active members of the NEFRLC working to defeat this tax increase was also one of the most active members of the grass roots Ron Paul campaign.

I also know of at least one member of the Duval REC who openly advocated for the passage of the new tax. Here I've always thought that republicans were supposed to stand against tax increases and big government. Yet this particular Duval County REC member (as far as I know) hasn't had his membership questioned.

Could it be that every single member of the current SJREC agrees totally on everything? I find that highly improbable. The same can be said about the NEFRLC.

I am not a member of the NEFRLC but I did attend the last meeting and I was greatly surprised and delighted to see so many people that I've meet at other group meetings. There were people from the old Ron Paul Meetup group, the Duval County REC, past Libertarian meetings, and I think that there was one person there who I met at an ACLU meeting once (and many moons ago).

All of these people from all of these different backgrounds were there to show support for the principles of freedom and liberty, and limited government; principles that the Republican Party once espoused. You would think (or at least I would think) that the Republican Party leadership would be falling all over itself to get these people into the tent. THEY are the activists. Give them a liberty minded conservative republican candidate and they will work their asses off in order to get that candidate elected.

I just don't get it. The only thing I can come up with is that the leadership really doesn't want smaller government, less taxes, individual liberty, states rights, personal responsibility, strong national defense, and constitution adherence, ect....

It seems like they are trying to destroy any notion of having a "big tent". I just don't want to admit that to myself but from every indication I've seen, what else am I supposed to believe?

The GOP is self destructing. Without new blood, eventually they will just fade away. That can't be what they want.

ladyjade3
08-02-2008, 11:44 AM
i respect your opinion and i realize that all of us in this liberty movement are not in agreement on the best political strategy but...

3 points

#1 - that small group who currently holds the power and makes the rules is not the republican party. When our group is able to present our literature and ideas in a fair and unbiased forum - namely face to face at our monthly meetings and before and after rec meetings - we have found that we have all kinds of allies within the gop.

#2 - leaving the party out of frustration is exactly what that small group who currently holds the power and makes the rules wants us to do. Rather than be challenged as to whether or not the platform and candidates truly represent the ideals and principles of the republican party - they want everyone to just shut their mouths and get in line. Those who won't they would prefer just leave. But guess what? - there are more of "us" than "them" and we aint leavin'.

#3 - we're winning as evident by 2 front page newspaper stories in the last 2 months and this frivolous "cease & desist letter" from the rpof to the rlc. They are worried about maintaining their power.

Fortunately, no one can stop an idea whose time has come. ;)

www.rlcnf.org

q
f
t
!

JosephTheLibertarian
08-02-2008, 11:47 AM
Why are you fighting like this with the GOP when the LP represents your beliefs? The GOP is a lost cause people lol

Dary
08-02-2008, 11:52 AM
Why are you fighting like this with the GOP when the LP represents your beliefs? The GOP is a lost cause people lol

That would be a good question for Ron Paul.

JosephTheLibertarian
08-02-2008, 12:04 PM
That would be a good question for Ron Paul.

He's only a GOP member because he probably can't win in the LP.

Dary
08-02-2008, 12:12 PM
He's only a GOP member because he probably can't win in the LP.

And that may be why so many of us are "fighting like this with the GOP". :)

JosephTheLibertarian
08-02-2008, 01:28 PM
And that may be why so many of us are "fighting like this with the GOP". :)

The neocons have nowhere else to go.... they are staying. Your battles will accomplish nothing but usher in the age of democratic socialism; dems don't need to pander to fiscal conservatives ;)

Goldwater64
08-02-2008, 02:02 PM
Have you spoken to Nick E of the Orlando Meetup? They are trying very very very similar things in the Orange County GOP and continue to hit brick walls.

His profile is here:
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/184/members/4220909/
and
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=445

I don't recall the RLC being involved in the Orange County situation at all. In fact, many RLC members joined the Orange County REC without problem and the people who did have problems in Orange County were not RLC members or certainly were not acting under the RLC name.

JS4Pat
08-02-2008, 09:51 PM
Why are you fighting like this with the GOP when the LP represents your beliefs? The GOP is a lost cause people lol

You might be right but you have to admit Ron Paul turned a lot more people onto the message of Liberty through the Republican Party than he would have had he spent the last 20 years in the Libertarian Party.

That is why we are doing this through the GOP. We want to spread the message to the most people in the shortest amount of time.

If you have the patience to spread it via a third party - more power to you.

tonesforjonesbones
08-03-2008, 12:44 AM
Ron Paul is 73 years old. He's secure in his congressional seat in the GOP. He recently said his supporters can come at this from the GOP or Libertarian Party or Constitution Party. If the GOP crashes in November it would be the best thing that could happen..then you could fill that vaccum the next go round with Ron Paul Republicans..hopefully. No matter how you look at it..if you don't get those neo cons flushed out of the GOP..it's through. Tones

JS4Pat
08-03-2008, 07:00 AM
No matter how you look at it..if you don't get those neo cons flushed out of the GOP..it's through. Tones
Flushed out or converted.

Our movement is full of FORMER neo-cons.

We have to earn their respect, work on the things we agree on first and then in time many more will "come around". Those who don't will become the minority in the party - kind of like we have been for the last year. :)

Dary
08-03-2008, 07:16 AM
The neocons have nowhere else to go.... they are staying. Your battles will accomplish nothing but usher in the age of democratic socialism; dems don't need to pander to fiscal conservatives ;)


Many of the neocons were once democrats. They can always go back. I'm guessing that they will. I'd say that the age of democratic socialism is already upon us.

Cap'n Jack
08-03-2008, 10:25 AM
Many of the neocons were once democrats. They can always go back. I'm guessing that they will. I'd say that the age of democratic socialism is already upon us.

Agreed.

I've noticed an interesting pattern. Anyone who doesn't sign on to the lunatic "9-11 Truth" conspiracy theories, eagerly support the abolition of every federal agency except for the Department of State (and even that's up in the air,) or agree that Ron Paul is the Savior of the Republican Party is a neocon.

What the french IS a neocon. Does anyone using the term really know?

Are Rockefeller Republicans "neocons?"

Are pro-defense Libertarians "neocons?"

Are senior citizens, resistant to change in any form, "neocons?"

Are the country-clubbers and Chamber of Commerce crowd all "neocons" too?

Because if 90% of the Republican Party is enemies of the people to either be converted or dispatched in the Great Purge, you're not gonna have enough of a party left to change anything.

The majority of Republicans have already dismissed the Ron Paul movement as a collection of crackpot RINOs. The message, coming through loud and clear, is "You're not welcome here anymore. Go back to whatever fringe group you came from. Adios. Sayonara. Buh bye."

Don't hate me for saying it. I'm merely the message bearer.

Backlash Continues Against the Ron Paul Movement (http://www.nolanchart.com/article3982.html)

speciallyblend
08-03-2008, 11:08 AM
The neocons have nowhere else to go.... they are staying. Your battles will accomplish nothing but usher in the age of democratic socialism; dems don't need to pander to fiscal conservatives ;)

well in my eyes the gop/lp/cp are all worthless,until they swallow their pride and unify under a new platform and new party with a new brand name,that will attract like-minded dems and indys ,until then the lp/cp and the republican party is full of bullshit, until they unify we will all be back to square one after the election!!!!!

JS4Pat
08-03-2008, 11:29 AM
What the french IS a neocon. Does anyone using the term really know?

Yes many of us know all to well what a NEOCON is...

The Neo-Con Agenda
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4MdyJDnSoI&NR=1

On Neoconservatives
When watching this keep in mind "status quo" means U.S. Constitution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvNoKmORYMM&feature=related

Leo Strauss - the Neo Con Inspiration
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3l0ceOoxujk&feature=related

Pat Buchanan vs Neo-Cons
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugesi_gaqLU

Pat Buchanan - President Bush has beeen "wedded and converted" to neo-conservative ideology
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CY0mq9BstA&feature=related

What do neoconservatives believe?
http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101.html

Neoconservatives and Their Blueprint for Power
http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/index.html

What Is a Neo-Conservative Anyway?
http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=19618

The Neocons: An Illustrated Progression. From exile to redemption to exile again: a history of "militaristic idealists" known as neocons.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/02/01/GR2008020102389.html

Neo-Conservatism (Contains a Bio and Links to the leading Neo-Conservatives)
http://home.earthlink.net/~platter/neo-conservatism/index.html

Project for the New American Century (PNAC)
http://home.earthlink.net/~platter/neo-conservatism/pnac.html

Richard Perle
http://home.earthlink.net/~platter/neo-conservatism/perle.html

Henry Kissinger and the Neo Conservatives have placed foreign interest above the U.S. Constitution and are placing the interest of foreign nations and their personal econmonic interest about the soveighnty and will of the American people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtD38l3mC8I

JosephTheLibertarian
08-03-2008, 11:57 AM
well in my eyes the gop/lp/cp are all worthless,until they swallow their pride and unify under a new platform and new party with a new brand name,that will attract like-minded dems and indys ,until then the lp/cp and the republican party is full of bullshit, until they unify we will all be back to square one after the election!!!!!

Too many social cons in the cp/gop. Why do people think th LP is closer to the GOP than the democratic party? It's about 50/50 either way.

Cap'n Jack
08-03-2008, 12:19 PM
Yes many of us know all to well what a NEOCON is...

Well, how can I argue with respected sources like YouTube, free Earthlink pages, and some nonsensical story at that last bastion of libertarian journalism, the WaPo.

However, I'd like to explore this a little further, if we can.

The matter still remains, 90% of the Republican Party just can't jive with the John Bircher (http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/04/05/ron-paul-endorses-the-john-birch-society.php), Neo Nazi (http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html), 9-11 Truther (http://www.reason.com/blog/show/120289.html), freakshow (http://theamericanscene.com/2007/12/21/tucker-on-ron-paul) that the Paul campaign degenerated into.

That doesn't make 90% of the Republican Party neocons, enemies of the people, or worthy of our contempt. It makes them conservative. You know, "resistant to change."

Just a thought I'm gonna toss out here. If the rabid Paul supporters across the United States had not attempted to reverse the results of the caucuses and primaries and force delegates for an unelectable candidate on the 90% of Republicans who'd rather stick with someone who has a remote chance of winning, the Florida GOP might not have stomped us the way they did.

Again, just a thought.

Don't be hatin'

JosephTheLibertarian
08-03-2008, 12:31 PM
Well, how can I argue with respected sources like YouTube, free Earthlink pages, and some nonsensical story at that last bastion of libertarian journalism, the WaPo.

However, I'd like to explore this a little further, if we can.

The matter still remains, 90% of the Republican Party just can't jive with the John Bircher (http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/04/05/ron-paul-endorses-the-john-birch-society.php), Neo Nazi (http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html), 9-11 Truther (http://www.reason.com/blog/show/120289.html), freakshow (http://theamericanscene.com/2007/12/21/tucker-on-ron-paul) that the Paul campaign degenerated into.

That doesn't make 90% of the Republican Party neocons, enemies of the people, or worthy of our contempt. It makes them conservative. You know, "resistant to change."

Just a thought I'm gonna toss out here. If the rabid Paul supporters across the United States had not attempted to reverse the results of the caucuses and primaries and force delegates for an unelectable candidate on the 90% of Republicans who'd rather stick with someone who has a remote chance of winning, the Florida GOP might not have stomped us the way they did.

Again, just a thought.

Don't be hatin'

If Americans want another imbecile in the highest office then McCain is their man!

troll

JS4Pat
08-03-2008, 12:36 PM
Just a thought I'm gonna toss out here. If the rabid Paul supporters across the United States had not attempted to reverse the results of the caucuses and primaries and force delegates for an unelectable candidate on the 90% of Republicans who'd rather stick with someone who has a remote chance of winning, the Florida GOP might not have stomped us the way they did.

Again, just a thought.

Those are the rules - that is how the process is supposed to work. It is not the Primary or Caucus vote that is the ultimate determination of who the Party nominee is. "Activists" within the party have the opportunity to become delegates and influence other party delegates right through the national convention. It is the convention vote that determines the party nominee. I don't know whether or not I agree with this system - but nonetheless that is how it works.

You seem to be suggesting that certain Party Activists (Ron Paul Supporters) should not work within the rules to push for the candidate they believe would be the best Party nominee?

That is not very Republican nor very American...

JosephTheLibertarian
08-03-2008, 12:39 PM
Those are the rules - that is how the process is supposed to work. It is not the Primary or Caucus vote that is the ultimate determination of who the Party nominee is. "Activists" within the party have the opportunity to become delegates and influence other party delegates right through the national convention. It is the convention vote that determines the party nominee. I don't know whether or not I agree with this system - but nonetheless that is how it works.

You seem to be suggesting that certain Party Activists (Ron Paul Supporters) should not work within the rules to push for the candidate they believe would be the best Party nominee?

That is not very Republican nor very American...

Why abandon the LP?

JS4Pat
08-03-2008, 12:56 PM
Why abandon the LP?

Who is abandoning the LP?

I have never been a member of the Libertarian Party.

I certainly respect the platform and most of the candidates who run, but I am out to spread the message of liberty as FAST and as EFFECTIVELY as possible.

Not to diminish your efforts or anyone else's who are promoting the LP but my bet is on the GOP as the best vehicle for accomplishing this.

Cap'n Jack
08-03-2008, 02:02 PM
You seem to be suggesting that certain Party Activists (Ron Paul Supporters) should not work within the rules to push for the candidate they believe would be the best Party nominee?

That is not very Republican nor very American...

Of course, that's a perfectly reasonable argument, John.

Before he opened his brewery, I believe Sam Adams was one of the Founding Fathers. He would have this to say, "It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."

Works fine for me.

I'm merely observing that the backlash was not directed toward Republican activists working within the rules, but rather, toward RINOs who joined the party solely to support their candidate. RINOs hell-bent on changing the rules at the last minute after it became obvious that the overwhelming majority of Republicans rejected Ron Paul.

To have the idea the Old Guard would sit still for a hostile takeover of this sort is truly naive.

I got that quirky notion from reading Dave Nalle. I believe Dave is an associate of yours in the Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Nalle), is he not? Perhaps your organization has been infiltrated by neocons.

Don't be hatin' -- I'm simply sharing the thoughts of others in your organization.

Dary
08-04-2008, 08:36 AM
... the backlash was not directed toward Republican activists working within the rules, but rather, toward RINOs who joined the party solely to support their candidate.

Will, John, and Wynona have been republicans since forever. The only reason that they are being denied membership to the St. Johnís REC is because of their support for Ron Paul during the primary.

The question needs to be asked again; how is it possible for republicans to take over (hostile of otherwise) the Republican Party?


To have the idea the Old Guard would sit still for a hostile takeover of this sort is truly naive.

The Old Guard, are they simply all John McCain supporters? This being Florida and all, there are probably some people in the SJREC that supported Goldwater when he overthrew Rockefeller. Should they be denied their membership as well? There were probably members who were at one time democrats. Shall the SJREC undergo a purge?

The SJREC should look upon these three (Will, John, and Wynona) with respect for what they and their group did in helping defeat the $250 million dollar tax increase that was about to be levied upon Duval taxpayers. They should be held up as examples for other members to see what can be accomplished when we work together. But instead, the SJREC leadership is treating them with disrespect.

Itís as if the SJREC leadership is saying, "You can support us, but we wonít support you." So much for the "big tent" theory.

Iíve got to hand it to Will, John, Wynona and their group. Many would probably say to heck with it, you donít want us, fine, we donít want you either. But they understand that it isnít they who have veered off the road.

Cap'n Jack
08-04-2008, 09:04 AM
Will, John, and Wynona have been republicans since forever. The only reason that they are being denied membership to the St. John’s REC is because of their support for Ron Paul during the primary.

The question needs to be asked again; how is it possible for republicans to take over (hostile of otherwise) the Republican Party?

I have an answer to that first question, but I dunna think you want to hear it, Dary.

The Old Guard isn't necessarily all John McCain supporters. They do understand, however, that once we have a clear winner in the primaries and caucuses, it's time to unite behind that guy. John McCain has 1490 pledged delegates (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/#val=R). Ron Paul has 35. That's a pretty clear winner.

My thought, and this is purely rum-induced babbling, it's less about John McCain and more about the Old Guard just not liking the RINOs that came on board for Ron Paul.

The Republican Liberty Caucus of NE Florida is now perceived just a proxy for the fringe elements trying to cause trouble for the Party not just in Florida, but 10 other states as well. It's why the SJREC shut them out, and the RNC is now telling them, "Stop using our brand."

Kudos on defeating the Duval tax increase, guys, but that's yesterday's news.

Don't be hatin' I'm only playing the devil's advocate.

Dary
08-04-2008, 10:55 AM
I have an answer to that first question, but I dunna think you want to hear it, Dary.

Why would you think that?


...it's less about John McCain and more about the Old Guard just not liking the RINOs that came on board for Ron Paul.

RINOs like Will, John and Wynona? That's ridicules. Yet it is they who are being denied membership.

Many of these so called RINOs were at one time hard core republicans (like me). What Ron did was bring us back. Yet somehow this is seen as a bad thing by the leadership. Because I consider myself a conservative, and because the Republican Party went neo, I left. Ron Paul brought me back. But now the SJREC says they don't want me. So why should I "unite behind" John McCain (as if I could anyway)? Like I said, I can support them, but they won't support me? That's insane.

By the way Will and John didn't need to come back because they never left.


The Republican Liberty Caucus of NE Florida is now perceived just a proxy for the fringe elements trying to cause trouble for the Party...

Perceived by whom? At the last RLC meeting, Jerry Holland, long time republican, former Jacksonville City Council president and close friend of Will Pitts headlined the meeting with his lecture on the Electoral College. Maybe in this case, those doing the perceiving are the actual RINOs.


Kudos on defeating the Duval tax increase, guys, but that's yesterday's news.

It may be yesterday's news but that doesn't diminish the accomplishment. Even without the defeat of the tax increase, Will and John should be welcomed with open arms. Their part in defeating the tax increase should earn them lifetime membership with honors.

So why then are they being denied? Is it because they are too conserevative? If so, then what makes them overly conservative? Is it their belief in limited government, less taxes, personal responsibility, strong national defense, the constitution, or that they strongly support of the 2nd amendment? Or is it because they believe that pre-emptive war and interventionism is a liberal/left philosophy (which it is), rather than a conservative one?

The actions of the SJREC suggest that you can not be a participatory republican unless you believe in pre-emptive war and intervention. That doesn't sound very conservative to me let alone republican.


Don't be hatin'...

No hate here.

Cap'n Jack
08-04-2008, 11:42 AM
RINOs like Will, John and Wynona? That's ridicules. Yet it is they who are being denied membership.

Many of these so called RINOs were at one time hard core republicans (like me). What Ron did was bring us back. Yet somehow this is seen as a bad thing by the leadership. Because I consider myself a conservative, and because the Republican Party went neo, I left. Ron Paul brought me back. But now the SJREC says they don't want me. So why should I "unite behind" John McCain (as if I could anyway)? Like I said, I can support them, but they won't support me? That's insane.

By the way Will and John didn't need to come back because they never left.
Guilt by association. If you can't unite behind John McCain, may I suggest finding something you CAN unite behind? Wasting political capital in an already lost contest just to make a statement will get you stomped. Every time.

That may be the rum talking, so don't take it too personally.


Perceived by whom? At the last RLC meeting, Jerry Holland, long time republican, former Jacksonville City Council president and close friend of Will Pitts headlined the meeting with his lecture on the Electoral College. Maybe in this case, those doing the perceiving are the actual RINOs.
It would seem to be the perception at the RNC, else they would not have sent out the cease and desist. The SJREC doesn't operate in a bubble. They've seen what's been going down in other states and they just don't feel like playing. Checkmate. Game over. Idealogues 35, Pragmatists 1490.


It may be yesterday's news but that doesn't diminish the accomplishment. Even without the defeat of the tax increase, Will and John should be welcomed with open arms. Their part in defeating the tax increase should earn them lifetime membership with honors.
I'm on your side, believe me. Unfortunately, as you know, politics is all about "What have you done for me lately?" Not to mention, if you pal around with "the wrong elements" people might suspect you're one of the wrong elements yourself.


So why then are they being denied? Is it because they are too conserevative? If so, then what makes them overly conservative? Is it their belief in limited government, less taxes, personal responsibility, strong national defense, the constitution, or that they strongly support of the 2nd amendment? Or is it because they believe that pre-emptive war and interventionism is a liberal/left philosophy (which it is), rather than a conservative one?

The actions of the SJREC suggest that you can not be a participatory republican unless you believe in pre-emptive war and intervention. That doesn't sound very conservative to me let alone republican.
There's the rub, my friend. I doubt it's that single issue that's the big motivator.

However...

It's possible to be for the intervention in Iraq without being a neocon.

Not to wander too far off down this road, but there's a pretty convincing argument that could be made about keeping promises to our allies.

At the end of Gulf I, George H.W. Bush encouraged the Iraqi people to rise up and overthrow Saddam. The Kurds did. They expected our support. Instead, their villages were gassed, and they were driven into the mountains, where over 100,000 men, women and children died of starvation and exposure.

In 1992, more than a few Republicans sat out the election because they felt ol' H.W. broke his promise by not going all the way and finishing the job.

You can fault Shrub for looking for any reason to finish what Daddy started. Frankly, in some very conservative corners, it was the right thing to do. Ultimately, Saddam was brought to trial for his crimes, sentenced, and hung. Nothing is left of his evil offspring except for a couple DNA swabs at Langley. The 500+ tons of yellowcake uranium that lunatic had stockpiled have now been safely relocated to Canada. The world is a safer place.

Clearly, we have strategic interests in the Middle East. If you know the history of the region, you know the U.S. has kind of a bad rep for abandoning our friends at their hour of need. What you call "pre-emptive," others might call "finishing the job." It's entirely possible to want justice for the Iraqi people without losing your conservative or libertarian credentials.

Dismissing Republicans as neocons because they don't sign off completely on Ron Paul's concepts of limited government, less taxes, personal responsibility, strong national defense, the constitution, and the 2nd amendment might be a little wrong-headed. Those are complex issues, and while a person may agree on one or three, they may not agree entirely on all.

Instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, tolerance and compromise might produce better results.

Again, merely some random thoughts. The question was, "How do we get back in?" and I'm only tossing out some suggestions.


No hate here.
Right on.

pauletteNV
08-04-2008, 11:50 AM
Why would you think that? .........

So why then are they being denied? Is it because they are too conserevative? If so, then what makes them overly conservative? Is it their belief in limited government, less taxes, personal responsibility, strong national defense, the constitution, or that they strongly support of the 2nd amendment? Or is it because they believe that pre-emptive war and interventionism is a liberal/left philosophy (which it is), rather than a conservative one?

The actions of the SJREC suggest that you can not be a participatory republican unless you believe in pre-emptive war and intervention. That doesn't sound very conservative to me let alone republican.


No hate here.

Well stated Dary. It seems as though trying to reinstate the original concepts of the Republican Party...to be conservtive...is no longer a viable option for those of us who are conservative Republicans, but I repeat myself, or so I thought.

Ut oh....who forgot the Rules?
"Party Rules
The Rules Of The Republican Party As adopted by the 2004 Republican National Convention August 30, 2004

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Republican Party is the party of the open door. Ours is the party of liberty, the party of equality of opportunity for all and favoritism for none.

It is the intent and purpose of these rules to encourage and allow the broadest possible participation of all voters in Republican Party activities at all levels and to assure that the Republican Party is open and accessible to all Americans."

Source: http://www.gop.com/About/AboutRead.aspx?Guid=a4cc4fcb-6043-4af2-860a-41ae912a2c42

Dary
08-04-2008, 02:15 PM
At the end of Gulf I, George H.W. Bush encouraged the Iraqi people to rise up and overthrow Saddam. The Kurds did. They expected our support. Instead, their villages were gassed...

Yeah Bush shouldn't have done that, but let's also not forget where Saddam got the gas.

However, the thread is about the discriminatory actions of the SJREC. I'll try to stay on topic.


Dismissing Republicans as neocons because they don't sign off completely on Ron Paul's concepts of limited government, less taxes, personal responsibility, strong national defense, the constitution, the 2nd amendment, and a strong national defense, might be a little wrong-headed.

I'm not dismissing them, and besides, they gave themselves that moniker. It wasn't something their political rivals came up with.


Those are complex issues, and while a person may agree on one or three, they may not agree entirely on all.

I couldn't agree more, yet the SJREC appears do disagree with you on that statement. Otherwise, why the discrimination? They must be under the assumption that every member in the SJREC agrees totally on everything.


Guilt by association.

Guilt? Guilty of what?


If you can't unite behind John McCain, may I suggest finding something you CAN unite behind?

Yes you can, and I already have. Thanks.


Wasting political capital in an already lost contest just to make a statement will get you stomped. Every time.

Tell it to the RNC.


...people might suspect you're one of the wrong elements yourself.

Let's not forget that the neo-conservatives were former democrats that came to the Republican Party in and around the time of Reagan when they saw that there was no chance of them winning and gaining power as democrats. Your statement would make sense to me if you were referring to those folks, but not to Will and John. Their credentials are solid.


Instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, tolerance and compromise might produce better results.

That is really great advice. Too bad the RNC and the SJREC won't take it.

Cap'n Jack
08-04-2008, 02:51 PM
Let's not forget that the neo-conservatives were former democrats that came to the Republican Party in and around the time of Reagan when they saw that there was no chance of them winning and gaining power as democrats. Your statement would make sense to me if you were referring to those folks, but not to Will and John. Their credentials are solid.
Their credentials may be solid, but the Ron Paul movement is suspect. While you're talking about Reagan Democrats who managed to blend in years ago, they're looking at a fringe element who jumped on the bus very recently. A fringe element that not only refuses to assimilate but has demonstrated somewhat hostile intentions.

There are two issues here, as I see it. 1) The SJREC launched a pre-emptive attack on the Paulunteers, locking them out of the delegate selection process; and 2) The RLC of Northeastern Florida has been issued a cease and desist regarding use of the name Republican.

If I didn't know any better, I might think the SJREC seems to be perfectly happy neutering the Paulunteers before any silliness gets started, and the Florida RLC is clearly seen as being way too tight with a known bunch of trouble-makers.

Given the tiny fraction of votes Ron Paul managed to garner nationally, it would certainly appear the RNC, and the SJREC, have made a decision. If you can't get on message, you're not part of the team.

Which leads to the next point...


That is really great advice. Too bad the RNC and the SJREC won't take it.
Indeed, however, they were winning elections before Ron Paul showed up, and they'll be winning them after.

A friend of mine, former state chairman for the LP, commented on a similar situation in my neck of the woods the other day.

"Sometimes you have an iron choice between making a statement, and making a difference... You make a difference by working the system as it is, not by whining around the edges of it."

Does that argument make sense?

Not trying to piss anyone off -- Just food for thought.

Dary
08-04-2008, 03:44 PM
Guilty of what? Suspect of what? What is it exactly that Will and John (or the rest of us) have done that leads the SJREC to suspect us of anything?

We want to help, but they speak in terms of hostile takeovers. We want to fill the vacant committeeman slots, but they talk about silliness and fringe elements. We want to work but they say we are just "a bunch of trouble-makers".


Does that argument make sense?

No. You mention refusal to assimilate and working within the system in the same breath. How are we supposed to work within the system if we are being denied entry? That doesnít make any sense at all.

Look. We all know why the SJREC, and the RNC are refusing the Ron Paul republicans entry. Itís the war. Itís always been about the war, and it will continue to be about the war. Letís stop beating around the bush.

The leadership of the Republican Party by their actions is now making it perfectly clear that they are the party of and for the war. Period. No dissent. It's now up to the membership to decide if that is what they want. We shall see. If after their defeat in November they want to talk (to me) about working together for some good conservative candidates, I'll give a listen.

Until then, I wish Will and John the best of luck in their efforts.

JS4Pat
08-04-2008, 06:39 PM
If you can't unite behind John McCain, may I suggest finding something you CAN unite behind? Wasting political capital in an already lost contest just to make a statement will get you stomped. Every time.


Just curious how far you take that line of reasoning...

Possible Scenario:

Let's say you are a lifelong Republican. You've donated years of time and thousands of dollars to promote good candidates and build the Republican Party. Then an election cycle comes around where you find yourself in support of 2 or 3 really good local Republican candidates. You are out campaigning for these strong candidates and convincing people to get involved in the Republican Party because of them.

At the same time the party somehow nominates a candidate for a national office who is running on a platform that would clearly violate the 1st 2nd and 10th amendments to the US Constitution. In addition to that he has clearly demonstrated that he is racist and can not be trusted. You decide although this candidate legitamitly won the party nomination - you can not in good conscience go out and stump for him - in fact you feel the need to educate your fellow Republicans as to why his election might be detrimental not only to the country but to the Republican Party.

Questions:

Would you advocate ignoring your personal assessment/feelings and instead just "uniting behind the national candidate"?

Would you advocate leaving the Republican Party (or being forced out) even though you still believe the party can be reformed from within and you still want to work for those 2 or 3 strong local Republican candidates?

pennycat
08-04-2008, 08:04 PM
Well, Well, Well, so there seems to be a few apologists for the Republican Party around here. They go on and on about how we're a bunch of freaks. That the Republican Party is doing just fine winning elections. That maybe we should go sit with the Libertarian Party and respect our elders. Ha, Ha. Seems like a few of these umm, polemicists need to wipe there reading glasses once in a while.

Let's start off with the idea that the Republican Party, in this case the Republican Party of Florida (RPOF). Is somehow just doing a grand job representing the Grand Old Party (GOP). It ain't. The Republican Party is losing elections like crazy, even in places where Republicans have had strongholds for DECADES!

What is happening with the RP supporters is that we are merely ripping the away the curtain on a corrupt bunch of pigs that have fed too long at the trough.

Here's a great example of two fine upstanding Chairman that we can all look up to. The Chairman of the Seminole County REC calls the Chairman of the Orange County REC "a sloppy and unethical lawyer" who charges over 100 percent interest on loans. These aren't my words these are written in legal briefs open to public view. See for yourself

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/seminole/orl-gop0108aug01,0,2346799.story

So the next time someone starts slinging mud around and trying to aim it at the RP crowd, better look to see who's hands are dirty. Bet it's not the RP'ers. Nope, the Republican Party has lost it's moral compass. Nothing is to cheap and slimy for their paws.

I'm actually willing to get in and start the cleanup process. When the whole story is told of what the Republican Party LEADERSHIP has become, we're not going to need apologists like some of the above posters. We'll just need a lot of bleach, mops, and elbow grease. And yes, while we roll up our sleeves and start explaining what the Party USED to be before the Neo-Cons, and other assorted sellouts got control, there will be a few bystanders...Monday Morning Quarterbacks if you will...who will be ever so eager to point and sneer shoulda, woulda, coulda. To which I say, "Thanks For Nothing!"

Fyretrohl
08-04-2008, 08:18 PM
You know Capn Jack, I find one of your arguments...Amusing. Let's make it a real life type scenario...

A bus, travelling a winding cliff road, misses a turn because the bus driver is not paying attention, and starts to head for the precipice. The other people on board the bus trust this driver, as every good bus rider should. You, a dedicated bus rider, can do a couple of things:

1 - Unite with the other people behind the 'good bus driver'.
2 - Realize that the bus driver is off course and try to fight him to pull it back on course.
3 - Jump off the bus and allow all those fellow good bus riders to go over the precipice with the driver.

You seem to have chosen number one and suggest we, who can do number one, should pull a number 3. Sorry, I will unit AGAINST the party and pull it back on course. I will scream at the numbnuts who refuse to see what a failure option one is that they need to get up and help overpower the bus driver to save our lives. And, I will not feel bad about standing up to that corrupt bus driver, just to 'unite' with everyone else. So, enjoy the ride to the bottom of the cliff on your bus. I sure hope I can impact and save mine.

SeanEdwards
08-04-2008, 08:59 PM
Looking forward to the day when the American public is pissing on the smouldering corpse of the GOP.

Cap'n Jack
08-04-2008, 09:49 PM
You know Capn Jack, I find one of your arguments...Amusing. Let's make it a real life type scenario...

A bus, travelling a winding cliff road, misses a turn because the bus driver is not paying attention, and starts to head for the precipice. The other people on board the bus trust this driver, as every good bus rider should. You, a dedicated bus rider, can do a couple of things:

1 - Unite with the other people behind the 'good bus driver'.
2 - Realize that the bus driver is off course and try to fight him to pull it back on course.
3 - Jump off the bus and allow all those fellow good bus riders to go over the precipice with the driver.

You seem to have chosen number one and suggest we, who can do number one, should pull a number 3. Sorry, I will unit AGAINST the party and pull it back on course. I will scream at the numbnuts who refuse to see what a failure option one is that they need to get up and help overpower the bus driver to save our lives. And, I will not feel bad about standing up to that corrupt bus driver, just to 'unite' with everyone else. So, enjoy the ride to the bottom of the cliff on your bus. I sure hope I can impact and save mine.

I love the hypothetical. While you're overpowering said busdriver, chances are I'll be tossing people out the fire escape in the back.


Would you advocate ignoring your personal assessment/feelings and instead just "uniting behind the national candidate"?

Would you advocate leaving the Republican Party (or being forced out) even though you still believe the party can be reformed from within and you still want to work for those 2 or 3 strong local Republican candidates?
It's difficult for me to answer that question, because I'm not in the precarious situation of having to comply with a cease and desist. From where I'm sitting though, it certainly looks as if someone has fired a shot across your bow.

One friend to another, those local races will make a helluva lot more difference for you than anything else. Just my two cents, of course. Take it for what it's worth.

Flash
08-05-2008, 01:00 AM
Don't be hatin' I'm only playing the devil's advocate.


First post:


Bravo, comrade! Bravo.

Those who don't support us in the Revolution are enemies of the people. There is no room for dissent, no quarter for these socially dangerous elements.


Yeah it seems as if you were simply playing devil's advocate since you joined. Could you atleast be honest since non-RP fans aren't banned? Your attitude is annoying. You've been a negative wormy poster since you joined, making sarcastic comments, and now when people begin replying to you for once you use the excuse "hey guys I'm just playing devil's advocate". I've seen that before on a bunch of other forums, its annoying. Why can't people ever just be honest, especially on a friggin internet anonymous messageboard?



RINOs hell-bent on changing the rules at the last minute after it became obvious that the overwhelming majority of Republicans rejected Ron Paul.

If Ron Paul had gotten the media support that Barack Obama had then this would be a fair statement. However he was largely ignored by the mainstream media. Many Republicans still have no idea who Ron Paul is, you make it sound like hes a household name to Republicans. Everyone knew who Giulliani was. Hence the phrase "Who is Ron Paul?".

Flash
08-05-2008, 03:27 AM
Looking forward to the day when the American public is pissing on the smouldering corpse of the GOP.

Its already happening. Who is John Mccain? Hes an old guy that strongly associated himself with a very hated president. Who is Obama? Hes young, has charisma, has pop-star status, and makes all these promises about fixing the american economy, ending the war, etc...
It is only natural for the people to blame the Republican party for what has been happening. A lot of people are fed up with Republicans, no matter what their excuses are. Can Republicans seriously tell the Americans that 4,000 people died for "strategic interests". I don't think too many people will take that lightly. I'm just saying what the average guy thinks.

I Just watched Mccain's appearance on Conan O brien's show. He was unfunny, couldn't connect to anyone, and got way too angry too easily. Not the most likeable personality as a president. Meanwhile Obama had a crowd of 200,000 in Germany. The guy [Mccain] throws hissy-fits when the slightest things happen to him, just imagine him as a president.

I wonder how large of a landslide Obama will beat Mccain by.


Yeah but Republicans keep telling yourself that everything is all good with the party and you don't need to change and adadpt. Keep saying it.

Cap'n Jack
08-05-2008, 11:13 AM
Your attitude is annoying. You've been a negative wormy poster since you joined, making sarcastic comments...
Boo hoo :(

I've been a big fan of Ron Paul (http://www.veiled-chameleon.com/weblog/archives/000055.html) since way back in the day. Considering we could have had an impact this election cycle, I'm actually rather pissed at seeing the campaign marginalized and ultimately quashed.

Reality Check: If you understand the SJREC and the RNC as conservative organizations, as in "resistant to change," then it's a little easier to grasp why they've taken steps to put out this little brushfire before things get out of hand. It doesn't matter what I think, do, or say. The SJREC and the RNC have apparently already decided that no, in fact you won't "make a difference in the election anyways." Due to the hostile, self-defeating tactics of the Ron Paul "Revolutionaries" in county and state conventions across the country, now they're in triage mode. They've cut off the finger to save the arm.

I don't support their approach, but I can explain it. That, my friend, is being perfectly honest.


I wonder how large of a landslide Obama will beat Mccain by.

May I suggest creating your own thread on the subject, instead of hijacking this one?

JS4Pat
08-05-2008, 12:35 PM
Reality Check: If you understand the SJREC and the RNC as conservative organizations, as in "resistant to change," then it's a little easier to grasp why they've taken steps to put out this little brushfire before things get out of hand. It doesn't matter what I think, do, or say. The SJREC and the RNC have apparently already decided that no, in fact you won't "make a difference in the election anyways." Due to the hostile, self-defeating tactics of the Ron Paul "Revolutionaries" in county and state conventions across the country, now they're in triage mode. They've cut off the finger to save the arm.

I don't support their approach, but I can explain it. That, my friend, is being perfectly honest.

Cap'n Jack -

May I ask for your real identity?
Do we know each other?

I know my opponent for State Committeeman was on RPFs digging for some dirt on me because I obtained a copy of an e-mail he sent to Jim Greer (State Party Chair) where he copy & pasted a post I made back in March (out of context of course).

This is how he prefaced the copy & pasted quote:


This email alone should stop any political fallout from happening if he and the others associated with this movement are prevented from serving on the REC and SREC.

It looks someone is preparing to tamper with the results of an election?

Now you tell me who holds the moral high ground in this situation.

Cap'n Jack
08-05-2008, 01:43 PM
Cap'n Jack -

May I ask for your real identity?
Do we know each other?

Of course you can ask, I'll PM you. But you gotta pinky swear never to tell ;)


It looks someone is preparing to tamper with the results of an election?

Now you tell me who holds the moral high ground in this situation.
I'm not sure how you get from that preface to election tampering, but I'll take your word for it.

Morality and principle are mighty nice things, but in my experience, they're only secondary. $$$ and organization wins.

I don't like it, I'm just sayin' it.

John, have you asked Bill Westmiller or Aaron Biterman for their input?

michigan wolverine
08-05-2008, 02:32 PM
It's easy to understand the leap Cap'n. You see Ron Paul supporters believe they can do no wrong. And when they don't win they use the excuse that the election was fixed. I agree with everything you have said in this thread. They also have perception that if they say something then people will just fall over join the revolution. The also have the misconception that they can say whatever they want about other candidates and other republicans and they can't understand why they are not liked.

Flash
08-05-2008, 02:39 PM
May I suggest creating your own thread on the subject, instead of hijacking this one?

Huh? I was replying to someone about the GOP dying. Somehow thats more off topic than your random whine-fest about the Kurds.

Dary
08-05-2008, 03:59 PM
The also have the misconception that they can say whatever they want about other candidates and other republicans and they can't understand why they are not liked.

Give me a break.

You either choose to ignore or you're completely oblivious to the insults and verbal abuse that we've had to put up with just because of our support for our candidate.

Did you not watch the debates? Did you not see the condescending bullshit that Ron Paul had to put up with every time he took the stage? You didn’t hear the pompous giggling, the snide remarks and sarcastic questions that Ron was given? Have you ever visited the Wonkett website?

Your attempt to lump us all together shows a certain collectivist mindset on your part as well. Have SOME of us been over the top? You’re damn right we have. Have all of us been over the top? No.

So there’s plenty enough blame to go around.

Yet here we are having a rather civilized discussion and you have the gall to come here after 3 posts and start spouting shit?

What the fuck is wrong with you?

(Pardon the hate Cap'n Jack)

Cap'n Jack
08-05-2008, 04:30 PM
(Pardon the hate Cap'n Jack)

No harm, no foul.

Flash
08-05-2008, 05:11 PM
Give me a break.

You either choose to ignore or you're completely oblivious to the insults and verbal abuse that we've had to put up with just because of our support for our candidate.

Did you not watch the debates? Did you not see the condescending bullshit that Ron Paul had to put up with every time he took the stage? You didn’t hear the pompous giggling, the snide remarks and sarcastic questions that Ron was given? Have you ever visited the Wonkett website?

Your attempt to lump us all together shows a certain collectivist mindset on your part as well. Have SOME of us been over the top? You’re damn right we have. Have all of us been over the top? No.

So there’s plenty enough blame to go around.

Yet here we are having a rather civilized discussion and you have the gall to come here after 3 posts and start spouting shit?

What the fuck is wrong with you?

(Pardon the hate Cap'n Jack)

Just about every Republican messageboard hated Ron Paul. Republicans on the radio kept calling him an idiot. And all because a relatively small Ron Paul messageboard exists that actually talks negative about Mccain and Obama, for some reason people feel the need to complain to us that we're to negative about the party.

And I hate this "give up the movement failed everyone rejected Ron Paul", I hope these people realize the media hardly ever reported on Ron Paul and the majority of Republicans never had a clear chance to turn to his side. I know since I watched CNN and Fox just about every day. We raised money for a blimp and barely got ANY coverage. Compare RP's coverage to Mccain, Obama, Romeny, etc..

Anyone remember Frank Luntz's biased group that kept calling Ron Paul 'Insane' after every debate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFL-LubDF9c&feature=related

If you asked the average American who Ron Paul is the response would be, "Who?".

One again I will post this and expect no answer:


May I suggest creating your own thread on the subject, instead of hijacking this one?

Huh? I was replying to someone about the GOP dying. Somehow thats more off topic than your random whine-fest about the Kurds.


Well, how can I argue with respected sources like YouTube

I hope you realize Youtube is a platform where you can easily reproduce clips from TV networks. Its silly to say "YOUTUBE ISN'T A RESPECTED SITE".


The matter still remains, 90% of the Republican Party just can't jive with the John Bircher, Neo Nazi, 9-11 Truther, freakshow that the Paul campaign degenerated into.

lol. A Neo-Nazi supported Ron Paul? Name one National Socialist that supported Ron Paul.

And as for 9/11. It didn't seem to harm the Ron Paul movement much despite all the 9/11 truthers. It is becoming more and more accepted to question 9/11. And I'm not a truther. Michael Moore is already planning on making a documentary about 9/11 being an inside job.

michigan wolverine
08-05-2008, 05:51 PM
I am sorry but the poor sportsmanship start before the first debate. We had people people attending other candidates functions then posting what they did on this forum. People hear applauded their actions. There were a few that cautioned against such conduct. But they were put down. Yes Congressman Paul's view were ridiculed by some. Yes there were snickers and such in the audiences. So what happens his supporters make bigger fools of themself.

Dary
08-05-2008, 08:04 PM
<snip>

There were more than just snickers in an audience. There were lies told. There was censorship. There were smear campaigns. There were rigged straw poles. There were news blackouts. There were attempts both successful and unsuccessful to keep Ron out of debates and forums. There were posts being removed from news websites. Some supporters found themselves in legal battles with their city because the cities were unfairly targeting people with Ron Paul signs on their lawns. In one instance a law enforcement officer unlawfully dragged a supporter out of his house, threw him to the ground, handcuffed him and arrested him simply because he had a Ron Paul sign on his property.

Who is your candidate? Are you saying that all of your candidate's supporters would just have said awww.. that’s ok. Fuck us over. We don’t mind. We’ll just be nice and let them walk all over us.

Please.

To suggest that we drew first blood is pure bullshit.

But what if there were Ron Paul supporters showing up at other candidates events? I’ve been here since the beginning and I’ve never seen a single post where any one of us ever did anything that could be considered improper prior to the debates.

Why are you here? Why are you posting on this board?

pennycat
08-05-2008, 09:17 PM
Capn Jack, Michigan Wolverine, etc. are all noob's with few posts. I wouldn't even be surprised if they were all the same person. Stop replying to their childish baiting. They'll go away soon enough.

Goldwater64
08-05-2008, 09:36 PM
Nope, the Republican Party has lost it's moral compass. Nothing is to cheap and slimy for their paws.
!"



Come on dude...it's like you're trying to give them quotes to take out of context...watch the way you word stuff like that.

JS4Pat
08-05-2008, 11:27 PM
Give me a break.
Did you not watch the debates? Did you not see the condescending bullshit that Ron Paul had to put up with every time he took the stage? You didn’t hear the pompous giggling, the snide remarks and sarcastic questions that Ron was given?

Here is a little refresher...

Ron Paul - The Smear Campaign Fox
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jZTd9j6_yg

Fox Tells why they excluded Ron Paul from NH Debate (Propaganda)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFYqtDL50AM&feature=related

Media Caught Lying About Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iW5kOB1pmg

Cap'n Jack
08-06-2008, 06:36 AM
A Neo-Nazi supported Ron Paul? Name one National Socialist that supported Ron Paul.
Wills Carto, Will Williams and Don Black (http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html) are three that readily come to mind.


Here is a little refresher...
John, you're pissing up a rope.

When Paul ran as LP nominee in 1988, he won less than one-half of 1 percent of the national vote. In this year's primaries and caucuses he did a little better, but still didn't break out of single digits.

That's fringe. Fringe candidates (http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/06/ron_paul) don't get no respect.


To suggest that we drew first blood is pure bullshit.

But what if there were Ron Paul supporters showing up at other candidates events? I’ve been here since the beginning and I’ve never seen a single post where any one of us ever did anything that could be considered improper prior to the debates.
From Eric Dondero's blog: Ron Paul Campaign officials deny involvement in attacks on Giuliani in Michigan (http://libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com/2007/09/ron-paul-campaign-officials-deny.html)

It's probably worth noting, Eric Dondero was one of the founders of the Republican Liberty Caucus.

Dary
08-06-2008, 09:15 AM
From Eric Dondero's blog: Ron Paul Campaign officials deny involvement in attacks on Giuliani in Michigan (http://libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com/2007/09/ron-paul-campaign-officials-deny.html)

Thanks for backing up my assertion that Ron was being smeared by posting that link to the Dondero hit piece.

I find it sadly amusing how Rudy Giuliani can suggest that Ron Paul’s position on 911 is anything other than what he stated his position was, a position that he came to based on all of the evidence published; everything from the 911 commission report to Michael Scheuer’s book and a whole list of other books on the subject, but Ron's supporters shouldn't get upset about it. :rolleyes:

Dondero implied that the whole Mackinaw Island ferry incident was preplanned and that it came down from on high. But the Ron Paul people had no idea that Giuliani was going to be on that ferry until he showed up unannounced.

It's also funny how Dondero acts like a fool at a Bush rally and then tries to spin it like those are the kinds of tactics that we all engage in.

It was Dondero who was being the idiot.

He even admits though that Ron's opposition at the time was using underhanded tactics like drawing swastikas on Ron's signs and holding demonstrations calling Ron Paul a fascist.

Yet somehow Ron Paul supporters are the bad guys because they fought back. I would think that we wouldn't be very supportive of our candidate if we didn't stand up against that sort of thing.

I'm not suggesting that we are all innocent little children. Some of us may have gone over the top in our passion to support our candidate (yours truly included).

But what did Goldwater say? Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice?

This is politics and emotions run high amongst all of the campaigns. But evidence shows that the playing field was far from level, and to have someone like Michigan wolverine come here and claim that only Ron Paul supporters believe that they can do no wrong and that we alone are at fault is disingenuous at best.

At worst it's hypocritical. Not withstanding his admission that there were "snickers in the audience". If Michigan wolverine fails to acknowledge the smears, the censorship and the discrimination, then really he is just as guilty of what he accuses Ron Paul supporters of being. Only he can say whatever he wants. Only he believes he can do no wrong.

In a vain attempt to stay on topic I'll just say that I've heard those types of comments made repeatedly at REC meetings and other venues as well, and it's those types of ridicules statements that are being used against us now in our attempts to participate.

It smacks of duplicity and self righteousness.


Wills Carto, Will Williams and Don Black (http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html) are three that readily come to mind.

Shouldn't the question be "Name one National Socialist that Ron Paul supports"?

Cap'n Jack
08-06-2008, 10:53 AM
Thanks for backing up my assertion that Ron was being smeared by posting that link to the Dondero hit piece... It was Dondero who was being the idiot.
I think Eric's running against Paul for his Congressional seat. Don't quote me on it though.

Good rebuttal. Nicely done, Dary. :)


Shouldn't the question be "Name one National Socialist that Ron Paul supports"?
That would be the right question, however... The point I was making is that an awful lot of kooks came out of the woodwork for Ron Paul: Neo Nazis, 9-11 Truthers, John Birchers and the like. Those aren't Republicans. The Old Guard took one look at the freakshow and said, "Uh, no thanks" to the entire Ron Paul campaign.

Not that it was the right thing to do, but it may help explain the cold shoulder our friends in Florida have gotten. When you hang around the wrong element, people starts to thinks that maybe you the wrong element yourself.

Perhaps if the good doctor had made more of a point of disavowing some of the kooks, people may not have associated him and the subsequent Campaign for Liberty with the lunatic fringe. Instead, he specifically said he wouldn't return Don Black's money, or anyone else's for that matter.

That may have been a tiny tactical error. Am I wrong?

Dary
08-06-2008, 11:43 AM
Am I wrong?

A little bit. :)

The thing is that Ron had already spent Black's money before he knew that the money came from him. If he would have sent any money back to Black, then that money could have come from someone like me, and I wouldn't want Ron Paul giving my money to Black. If it were me, I'd like to see Ron take all of the contributions that he could get from hate groups all over and spend it on liberty minded things. I'd rather that Ron Paul have the money in order to spend it on good, than to have hate groups spend it on evil. But that's just me.

I understand your point about the kooks coming out of the woodwork though.

Kooks like Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams, Irving Kristol, Douglas Feith, William Kristol, John Bolton, Karl Rove, Richard Armitage, David Wurmser, Ken Adelman, Norman Podhoretz, William Bennett, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, David Frum, Joshua Goldberg, Paul Bremer, Max Boot, Rupert Murdoch, James Woolsey, ect., ect., ect.

Kinda like those kinds of kooks?

michigan wolverine
08-06-2008, 12:41 PM
Hey just my opinion as to what has transpired over the last 20 months. You can either convert people or repulse them. Some people would rather make turn people off. Hey but we don't need new people in the movement. Let's just preach to the choir.

And if anyone should know it's the guy from Orlando

Cap'n Jack
08-06-2008, 12:41 PM
I understand your point about the kooks coming out of the woodwork though.

Kooks like Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams, Irving Kristol, Douglas Feith, William Kristol, John Bolton, Karl Rove, Richard Armitage, David Wurmser, Ken Adelman, Norman Podhoretz, William Bennett, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, David Frum, Joshua Goldberg, Paul Bremer, Max Boot, Rupert Murdoch, James Woolsey, ect., ect., ect.

Kinda like those kinds of kooks?

OMG... Those are the *kookiest* of the kooks. :)

Flash
08-06-2008, 01:51 PM
Wills Carto, Will Williams and Don Black are three that readily come to mind.

None of those people you mentioned seem to be National Socialists whatsoever.

Dary
08-06-2008, 01:55 PM
You can either convert people or repulse them.

How true. How true.

The RNC and SJREC leadership couldn't convert me to John McCain and war, so they figure that they'll just repulse me out of participating (good conservative candidates who need volunteers and contributions be damned). They would rather turn me off than bring me in. Like you said, I guess they just don't need new people in the movement. They are content to preaching to their ever dwindling choir.

That's a shame really because I've always considered myself to be a Republican. Now they don't want me, my votes or my support.

Oh wait!

They still want my votes and my support; it's just ME that they don't want. Unfortunately for them, I'm just not into abusive relationships (anymore).

JS4Pat
08-06-2008, 08:32 PM
Perhaps if the good doctor had made more of a point of disavowing some of the kooks, people may not have associated him and the subsequent Campaign for Liberty with the lunatic fringe. Instead, he specifically said he wouldn't return Don Black's money, or anyone else's for that matter.

That may have been a tiny tactical error. Am I wrong?

I have never understood this line of reasoning.

Shouldn't the only issue be WHAT the candidate supports not who supports the candidate?

Who supports the candidate is kind of irrelevant to me when evaluating candidates.

I mean...

If you are running on a platform of Gun Owner Rights and Gun Control advocates are giving you money - wouldn't you have to view that as a victory?

If you are running on a PRO LIFE platform and NARAL is giving you money - wouldn't you have to view that as a victory?

If you are running on a platform promoting Freedom and Civil Liberties and the KKK gives you money - wouldn't you have to view that as a victory?

One thing that Ron Paul's campaign taught me was to NOT be so quick to judge people. I found that some of those young tattoed and pierced "fringe looking" folks had a greater knowledge and respect for the constitution than many of the educated elitist leading the party. The issues that the campaign rallied around - TRUTH, INTEGRITY, RULE OF LAW aka THE CONSTITUTION, INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY and PEACE crossed all educational, religious, racial, and class boundaries. That is one reason I KNEW I was doing the right thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLixUxMN4M4

Flash
08-08-2008, 01:49 AM
I'm sure there were tons of racists donating to Mccain and Obama. Why is Ron Paul singled out.

Flash
08-18-2008, 09:57 AM
Now that Cap'n Jack the troll has abandoned this thread and jumped to others, may I go off-topic a little bit?

I want to point out how insane it was for him to support the Iraqi war to "justify the iraqi people". I wonder if he ever talked to Iraqis online, because I would bet they wouldn't like hearing the word "justice" come in to play with the Iraqi situation.

I hope you realize that the Iraqi war unleashed an ancient ethnic rivalry in Iraq. The Kurds didn't rebell against Saddam because America told them so, but because they are an Indo-European people in an "Arabic" country. The Shiaa are said to have Persian Iranian ancestry and that is why they hate the Sunni arabs. Saddam was the one who kept everyone in line and prevented any kind of ethno-religious war from taking place. Zionist Occupied America ruined Iraq, period. I'm not sure if it was about oil, I think it may have had something to do with Saddam being a strong Arab anti-israeli leader.
Its silly for Neo-Conservatives to suggest a Republic could work for a non-Western Middle Eastern nation which never had a democracy or republic in its past ancient history.


It's entirely possible to want justice for the Iraqi people without losing your conservative or libertarian credentials.

Congratulations, you have given them their justice.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/images/iraq-map-group1.gif

JS4Pat
08-28-2008, 05:55 AM
http://staugustine.com/stories/082508/news_news01_002.shtml


2 Republican candidates drop from ballot
By PETER GUINTA
Monday, August 25, 2008 ; Updated: 8:51 AM on Monday, August 25, 2008

Two members of the Republican Liberty Caucus running for Republican state committeeman and state committeewoman agreed last week to drop off the Primary Election ballot after assurances they won't be barred from the St. Johns County Republican Executive Committee.

However, as of Friday, neither had submitted written requests to withdraw.

John Charles Stevens and Winona Mayer, both of Northwest St. Johns County, had launched a campaign against incumbent Republican State Committeeman Jon Woodard and incumbent Republican State Committeewoman Becky Reichenberg.

But at a meeting of the Ponte Vedra Republican Club last week, Stevens and Mayer announced they planned to drop out of the race.

Stevens, a former Army officer, said he'd support Woodard now as long as the incumbent would "deliver our conservative message to Tallahassee as our representative" and "drop all tactics designed to keep (Republican Liberty Caucus) members out" from serving on the Executive Committee.

"I think it was a good move," Stevens said. "I kept thinking, 'What is it we really want to gain here?' It didn't make sense to continue the party infighting."

Woodard said he had been exchanging e-mails with Stevens, who discovered that Woodard had similar conservative Republican views.

"We sat down and talked, and I told him that those (conservative) issues were important to me," Woodard said. "St. Johns County voters are more conservative than other county's (voters), and I'm committed to being their voice."

He wants to bring Republicans together.

"It's best to have all Republicans on the same side," he said.

Mayer said she talked to Woodard and Reichenberg and thought, "We differ very little on our agendas."

She said the two incumbents were "very strong advocates for smaller government and that the Republican Party needs to go back to the way it used to be. They promised to help us to join the (Executive Committee)."

Reichenberg said she had been told about Stevens and Mayer leaving the ticket but hadn't seen anything in writing yet. She didn't want to comment further until that had happened.

"I wish (Stevens and Mayer) well and am happy for John and myself," she said.

Bob Veit, president of the St. Johns County Republican Club, said Stevens and Mayer are also on the ballot for precinct captain posts, both without opposition.

Veit said he wouldn't oppose their efforts to join the Executive Committee, a change in his previous stance of trying to expunge all caucus members from the Executive Committee because they said they would never support John McCain.

A few acrimonious e-mail exchanges had divided the party between mainstream Republicans and caucus members. Veit said there's peace now.

"As long as they're party members in good standing and will support our candidate, John McCain, I'd like to bury the hatchet and put this whole thing to bed," Veit said. "It's not good for the Republican Party to have these kinds of fights."