Ron Paul Not Given Role at Republican Convention [mod: premature]

[green73]

http://www.examiner.com/article/paul...can-convention

In a political move that defies logic, CNN is reporting that presidential challenger Ron Paul has not been asked to speak at the Republican National Convention in Tampa. Instead, the Romney team has invited Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez and South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley. Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, Ohio Governor John Kasich, Arizona Senator John McCain and Florida Governor Rick Scott will also have prime time speaking roles.

This is an impressive list or prominent Republicans but none of them has the popular support of Congressman Paul, who just a few months ago was tied with President Obama in a national poll of likely voters. During the campaign, Paul was seen by voters as the candidate most likely to champion the cause of middle income people. Additionally, Congressman Paul is the leader of an important social movement that has already changed the political landscape. One would think Governor Romney, who is having trouble with high negatives, and the inability to inspire independent voters in swing states, would want to do everything possible to tap into Paul's political mojo. Apparently, that is not the case. Congressman Paul's supporters will notice the snub.

I seems likely that Congressman Paul's Audit the FED bill and his stance on military intervention, while popular nationally, may be displeasing to the big money interests that are funding Governor Romney's campaign.

[Sola_Fide]

I predicted this and everyone thought I was crazy.

[jkr]

then LOSE YOU LOSER!
keep rejecting that cornerstone...

[CaseyCBenn]

It is the saddest state of national affairs that Romney and Obama are considered actual "choices" in this election.

I don't know what is worse? Romney getting elected which would guarantee another wave of liberal buildup over the next four years possibly guaranteeing that there will be a worse democrat in office.... OR... another 4 years of Obama which would pretty much shoe in the next watered down GOP candidate?

I am not sure if the US is really that stupid or if we really are victims of an elite group of political glitterati running things from both sides?

[Okie RP fan]

If, in fact, true, this is simply more reason to abstain our votes, vote third party, or write-in Ron Paul's name.

Even if they decided to let him speak, it would just be more reason to support Paul than anyone.

[realtonygoodwin]

The conventional (pun intended) is that the VP candidate is not announced to have a speaking role at the convention. In other words, if someone has a speaking slot, that means they are not the VP selection.

In my wildest dreams, Ron doesn't have a slot because he is Romney's VP choice.

[Kotin]

You are $#@!ed Romney. I will do everything I can to make sure you lose.

[TruthisTreason]

If Ron would endorse Romney during his speech, they would let him speak (I assume). Then everyone here would be pissed. The convention has turned into nothing more than a pep rally for the media-crowned nominee.

[jmdrake]

Good. I hope this means Ron will endorse a third party candidate again. I hate that Gary Johnson is such an idiot on foreign policy, but I may still vote for him. I hate Chuck Baldwin is only on the ballot in Kansas apparently.

[green73]

Rockwell:

Even though this is an outrage in one sense--Ron Paul is one of the very few non-sociopaths in Republican politics--it also makes sense. After all, he would have been required to Heil Romney in his speech, in words written by the Mittster's minions, and that is something Ron Paul would never do. After all, Romney--warmonger, Keynesian, bankster, nationalist, gun-controller, socialized medicine advocate, dronist, torturer, police statist--is the exact opposite of Ron Paul. Romney clearly yearns to commit mass murder against the Iranians. Let's face it: Ron Paul is far too good for the Republican party. And in what passes for its heart, that criminal organization knows it.

[Athan]

Well the GOP will not have my vote in non-critical offices. I'll vote for two specific republican offices and then just someone else through the whole thing.

[thatpeculiarcat]

I hope our delegates make this convention interesting then...

then LOOSE YOU LOOSER!
keep rejecting that cornerstone...

Keep rejecting Rosetta Stone...

[The Gold Standard]

I wonder what they offered everyone who sold out that was supposed to be part of the "liberty movement" if they didn't even offer Ron a speech at the convention. Eventually people will learn that you don't compromise with evil. You either oppose it or support it.

[Tiso0770]

I don't believe Ron will endorse Romney due to the Revolution and Ron knows that.

[truthspeaker]

After someone mentioned about Romney's dad's anti-Goldwater history, I say we start posting on articles and around everywhere that Romney is continuing his father's Anti-Goldwater legacy by abandoning economic conservatives and siding with big-gov't conservatives. Uh, maybe I'm wrong could cause more trouble, but I'm sick of these moves.

When I was at the GOP TX convention, many of the top guys made proud speeches about how they were Goldwater Conservatives during a time the establishment was not. The tactic we used to them by writing e-mails about abandoning ECONOMIC conservatives won out. Infact, that comment was used during the convention by the convention leaders. They heard the polite message loud and clear.(And a big THANK YOU for the forum for helping write those e-mails, the response they gave the Paulites was awesome.

[TrishW]

I am not at all surprised that Ron Paul was not a guest speaker. I doubt if he would have accepted the terms of such a speech. Full of praise for the Republican party and their pick for president.

BUT

If Ron Paul has enough states to be nominated, he is given time to speak.. Isn't that right? The speech will be uncensored... right? This will happen... right?

[tsai3904]

This is not the final list.

Does everyone think there will only be 7 speakers in 4 days?

[trey4sports]

Honestly it is Romney's only move.

Why would he let Ron Paul speak when it is clear there is more enthusiasm for Ron? Ron would talk about issues that Mitt does NOT want to talk about. Mitt would be playing second fiddle at his own convention. Ron stealing the show would be a media nightmare for Romney.


With that said, he's still a piece of $#@! statist.

[trey4sports]

I am not at all surprised that Ron Paul was not a guest speaker. I doubt if he would have accepted the terms of such a speech. Full of praise for the Republican party and their pick for president.

BUT

If Ron Paul has enough states to be nominated, he is given time to speak.. Isn't that right? The speech will be uncensored... right? This will happen... right?

no.

yes, as in if he has enough states to get nominated he will get a speaking slot, however, the rules committee is stacked heavily for Romney and it is pretty much certain they will cheat Ron out of the 5+ wins he has.

[Carehn]

I said it months ago, I'll say it again.

I will never Vote Republican ever again!

[SilenceDewgooder]

This is not the final list.

Does everyone think there will only be 7 speakers in 4 days?

I've seen this called the 1st round of speakers and the initial list of speakers, so I think more will be added. But if we want Dr. Paul to speak, it's time to fully exemplify the affects of an "irate minority"

[tsai3904]

I've seen this called the 1st round of speakers and the initial list of speakers, so I think more will be added. But if we want Dr. Paul to speak, it's time to fully exemplify the affects of an "irate minority"

Yes, this is just the initial list. You don't see Rubio, Christie, Pawlenty, etc. on there. That doesn't mean they won't be speaking.

I don't understand why everyone is jumping to conclusions. It's possible Ron Paul will not be invited to speak but this initial roll out doesn't prove anything.

[Badger Paul]

Romney is down to his last strike. If the rules committee decides to screw us on Louisiana then I say we engage in a little hell raising on the convention floor.

[NoPants]

The conventional (pun intended) is that the VP candidate is not announced to have a speaking role at the convention. In other words, if someone has a speaking slot, that means they are not the VP selection.

In my wildest dreams, Ron doesn't have a slot because he is Romney's VP choice.

Even with Ron Paul as the VP, I wouldn't vote for Romney. There is little to no power as VP and he would be unlikely to have any influence. I know that gives him a Senate seat, but even that isn't enough. I just won't vote for Romney or Obama.

[rb3b3]

I'm just writing Ron Paul's name in... I'm still holding on to hope of a plurality of delegates from 5 states and a nomination from the floor.. I see things getting very ugly at the rnc if all of Ron's national delegates show up !!!

[rb3b3]

I just read the main article from CNN and none of th comments even mention Ron Paul ... I wonder if CNN deletes any pro Ron Paul comments about him not getting initial speaking slot?? U think they do? Lol

[sailingaway]

I predicted this and everyone thought I was crazy.

No, people thought it served the RNC's purposes and not ours to project the idea that there should be any doubt, since, if you follow the rules, Ron has enough states to nominate him into contention from the floor giving him a 15 minute speech.

Similarly, I think this article which is 'on our side' isn't helpful in suggesting he doesn't have a place there as a matter of right.

I read the article, it just said that is who has been picked 'so far'. I am sure they will dangle it out there to try to keep people 'compliant' with them, but Ron is entitled to be nominated from the floor and if they violate or 'change' their rules to disallow that after all the contests are over, I honestly believe it destroys the GOP going forward. Look at the demographics.

[sailingaway]

Even with Ron Paul as the VP, I wouldn't vote for Romney. There is little to no power as VP and he would be unlikely to have any influence. I know that gives him a Senate seat, but even that isn't enough. I just won't vote for Romney or Obama.

I would because I trust Ron to always be Ron. He'd have a vocal counterpoint for every awful policy position. Much better than having him retired in Texas.

[Sola_Fide]

No, people thought it served the RNC's purposes and not ours to project the idea that there should be any doubt, since, if you follow the rules, Ron has enough states to nominate him into contention from the floor giving him a 15 minute speech.

Similarly, I think this article which is 'on our side' isn't helpful in suggesting he doesn't have a place there as a matter of right.

I read the article, it just said that is who has been picked 'so far'. I am sure they will dangle it out there to try to keep people 'compliant' with them, but Ron is entitled to be nominated from the floor and if they violate or 'change' their rules to disallow that after all the contests are over, I honestly believe it destroys the GOP going forward. Look at the demographics.

I'm with ya. "Follow the rules" is the little caveat in there though. But I'm with ya.

[cajuncocoa]

Making great strides in the GOP....