Ron Paul 2012!!! Your thoughts on who we should pick for our "Cause"?

[itisme]

How full of shit is the MSM and press. The coverage of stealing the election the Establisment have done, which would be ZERO. These pathetic propagandist have lied so much now they are going to look stupid for trying to hide Ron Paul like the masses aren't behind reviving our Freedoms. That starts with and means, "LEGALIING THE CONSTITUION!" which will be done.

 

[SpasticGramps]

I still feel my point is valid

Hardly, but whatever.

 

[itisme]

Hehe...Valid even though he has no evidence!

 

[zymos]

How many executive orders will he pass?
Well let's see:

114 so far, compared to 290 Bush 2, 363 Clinton, 155 Bush 1, 380 Reagan, 289 Carter, 168 Ford, etc. etc......

In other words, fewer than his predecessors
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html

Your point was what again....?

Talk about gaming the system....How many executive orders with this chump pass?

http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.c...international-law-for-the-united-states/14439




EXECUTIVE ORDER
- – - – - – -
PROMOTING INTERNATIONAL REGULATORY COOPERATION

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to promote international regulatory cooperation, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), states that our regulatory system must protect public health, welfare, safety, and our environment while promoting economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation. In an increasingly global economy, international regulatory cooperation, consistent with domestic law and prerogatives and U.S. trade policy, can be an important means of promoting the goals of Executive Order 13563.

The regulatory approaches taken by foreign governments may differ from those taken by U.S. regulatory agencies to address similar issues. In some cases, the differences between the regulatory approaches of U.S. agencies and those of their foreign counterparts might not be necessary and might impair the ability of American businesses to export and compete internationally. In meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation. International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.

Sec. 2. Coordination of International Regulatory Cooperation. (a) The Regulatory Working Group (Working Group) established by Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993 (Regulatory Planning and Review), which was reaffirmed by Executive Order 13563, shall, as appropriate:
(i) serve as a forum to discuss, coordinate, and develop a common understanding among agencies of U.S. Government positions and priorities with respect to:
(A) international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulatory actions;
(B) efforts across the Federal Government to support significant, cross-cutting international regulatory cooperation activities, such as the work of regulatory cooperation councils; and

(C) the promotion of good regulatory practices internationally, as well as the promotion of U.S. regulatory approaches, as appropriate; and

(ii) examine, among other things:

(A) appropriate strategies for engaging in the development of regulatory approaches through international regulatory cooperation, particularly in emerging technology areas, when consistent with section 1 of this order;

(B) best practices for international regulatory cooperation with respect to regulatory development, and, where appropriate, information exchange and other regulatory tools; and

(C) factors that agencies should take into account when determining whether and how to consider other regulatory approaches under section 3(d) of this order.

(b) As Chair of the Working Group, the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) shall convene the Working Group as necessary to discuss international regulatory cooperation issues as described above, and the Working Group shall include a representative from the Office of the United States Trade Representative and, as appropriate, representatives from other agencies and offices.

(c) The activities of the Working Group, consistent with law, shall not duplicate the efforts of existing interagency bodies and coordination mechanisms. The Working Group shall consult with existing interagency bodies when appropriate.

(d) To inform its discussions, and pursuant to section 4 of Executive Order 12866, the Working Group may commission analytical reports and studies by OIRA, the Administrative Conference of the United States, or any other relevant agency, and the Administrator of OIRA may solicit input, from time to time, from representatives of business, nongovernmental organizations, and the public.

(e) The Working Group shall develop and issue guidelines on the applicability and implementation of sections 2 through 4 of this order.

(f) For purposes of this order, the Working Group shall operate by consensus.

Sec. 3. Responsibilities of Federal Agencies. To the extent permitted by law, and consistent with the principles and requirements of Executive Order 13563 and Executive Order 12866, each agency shall:

(a) if required to submit a Regulatory Plan pursuant to Executive Order 12866, include in that plan a summary of its international regulatory cooperation activities that are reasonably anticipated to lead to significant regulations, with an explanation of how these activities advance the purposes of Executive Order 13563 and this order;

(b) ensure that significant regulations that the agency identifies as having significant international impacts are designated as such in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, on RegInfo.gov, and on Regulations.gov;

(c) in selecting which regulations to include in its retrospective review plan, as required by Executive Order 13563, consider:

(i) reforms to existing significant regulations that address unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements between the United States and its major trading partners, consistent with section 1 of this order, when stakeholders provide adequate information to the agency establishing that the differences are unnecessary; and

(ii) such reforms in other circumstances as the agency deems appropriate; and

(d) for significant regulations that the agency identifies as having significant international impacts, consider, to the extent feasible, appropriate, and consistent with law, any regulatory approaches by a foreign government that the United States has agreed to consider under a regulatory cooperation council work plan.

Sec. 4. Definitions. For purposes of this order:

(a) “Agency” means any authority of the United States that is an “agency” under 44 U.S.C. 3502(1), other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(5).

(b) “International impact” is a direct effect that a proposed or final regulation is expected to have on international trade and investment, or that otherwise may be of significant interest to the trading partners of the United States.

(c) “International regulatory cooperation” refers to a bilateral, regional, or multilateral process, other than processes that are covered by section 6(a)(ii), (iii), and (v) of this order, in which national governments engage in various forms of collaboration and communication with respect to regulations, in particular a process that is reasonably anticipated to lead to the development of significant regulations.

(d) “Regulation” shall have the same meaning as “regulation” or “rule” in section 3(d) of Executive Order 12866.

(e) “Significant regulation” is a proposed or final regulation that constitutes a significant regulatory action.

(f) “Significant regulatory action” shall have the same meaning as in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.

Sec. 5. Independent Agencies. Independent regulatory agencies are encouraged to comply with the provisions of this order.

Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof;

(ii) the coordination and development of international trade policy and negotiations pursuant to section 411 of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2451) and section 141 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2171);

(iii) international trade activities undertaken pursuant to section 3 of the Act of February 14, 1903 (15 U.S.C. 1512), subtitle C of the Export Enhancement Act of 1988, as amended (15 U.S.C. 4721 et seq.), and Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2171 note);

(iv) the authorization process for the negotiation and conclusion of international agreements pursuant to 1 U.S.C. 112b(c) and its implementing regulations (22 C.F.R. 181.4) and implementing procedures (11 FAM 720);

(v) activities in connection with subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31 of the United States Code, title 26 of the United States Code, or Public Law 111-203 and other laws relating to financial regulation; or

(vi) the functions of the Director of OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

 

[itisme]

How many executive orders will he pass?
Well let's see:

114 so far, compared to 290 Bush 2, 363 Clinton, 155 Bush 1, 380 Reagan, 289 Carter, 168 Ford, etc. etc......

In other words, fewer than his predecessors
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html

Your point was what again....?

Since your reading comprehension skills seem to be lacking.....Let the issue be REITTERATED!

So look at what we have now.
■The Patriot Act which allows unlimited spying on the American people by the government.
■The National Defense Authorization Act with Sections 1021 and 1022 for the military arrests and indefinite detention of American nationals without any due process of the law.
■HR 347 Trespass Law for the implementation of Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act upon any citizen who dares to speak out against the insurgency.
■Executive Order National Defense Resources Preparedness Act, which allows the dictator to confiscate every resource of the United States, including we the people as conscripts to be put in servitude to the insurgency.

How many of those others Executive orders vioate the CONSTITUION??? You see the problem with you is your biased and I could not give a shit less what R/D lie they have by their name tag...I AM AN INDEPENDANT that seeks the truth and I don't care about R/D.

So the others sold us out too. Obama and Bush have done more to destroy the Constitution and Bill of Rights than most US Presidents. So what is the point of posting how many Executive Orders others have passed supposed to prove? My point that I've been making?

The NWO places these puppets on stage and parades them around like we chose them. I know that's a lie and I know that is why they BLACK OUT RON PAUL! Ron Paul is not a part of the NWO or more formally known as the: Trilatteral Commision, Bilderberg Group, CFR -Council on Forgeign Reltaions, which is a group of Fascist that includes Obama, or Skull & Bones - like Bush, Bush, John Carrey, which are part of a know SATANIST CULT..

Obama/Bush Who cares as they are part of the same machine!

So your point was? Proving me right....I guess. THX

 

[zymos]

Since your reading comprehension skills seem to be lacking.....Let the issue be REITTERATED!

So look at what we have now.
■The Patriot Act which allows unlimited spying on the American people by the government.
■The National Defense Authorization Act with Sections 1021 and 1022 for the military arrests and indefinite detention of American nationals without any due process of the law.
■HR 347 Trespass Law for the implementation of Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act upon any citizen who dares to speak out against the insurgency.
■Executive Order National Defense Resources Preparedness Act, which allows the dictator to confiscate every resource of the United States, including we the people as conscripts to be put in servitude to the insurgency.

How many of those others Executive orders vioate the CONSTITUION??? You see the problem with you is your biased and I could not give a shit less what R/D lie they have by their name tag...I AM AN INDEPENDANT that seeks the truth and I don't care about R/D.

So the others sold us out too. Obama and Bush have done more to destroy the Constitution and Bill of Rights than most US Presidents. So what is the point of posting how many Executive Orders others have passed supposed to prove? My point that I've been making?

The NWO places these puppets on stage and parades them around like we chose them. I know that's a lie and I know that is why they BLACK OUT RON PAUL! Ron Paul is not a part of the NWO or more formally known as the: Trilatteral Commision, Bilderberg Group, CFR -Council on Forgeign Reltaions, which is a group of Fascist that includes Obama, or Skull & Bones - like Bush, Bush, John Carrey, which are part of a know SATANIST CULT..

Obama/Bush Who cares as they are part of the same machine!

So your point was? Proving me right....I guess. THX

Dude, it's you with the impaired comprehension skills- math AND reading.

You post implying the number of executive orders passed by Obama is unusually high, even though the facts show differently.

I point this out, you respond with the typical irrelevant " skull and bones NWO satanist cult" rant, since you can't argue with facts.

Sounds familiar....

 

[itisme]

Dude, it's you with the impaired comprehension skills- math AND reading.

You post implying the number of executive orders passed by Obama is unusually high, even though the facts show differently.

I point this out, you respond with the typical irrelevant " skull and bones NWO satanist cult" rant, since you can't argue with facts.

Sounds familiar....

You see that is why your COMPREHENSION IS OFF!

You just wanted to focus on the number of Exec orders but what the orders to is much more important, you can't understand that. Not to mention you have numerous people with EIGHT YEARS in office listed in the same category as your honey who has not even finished FOUR. Obama is circumventing the Constitution and GAMING THE SYSTEM much like both BUSH's, I already said that, along with D/R don't make a difference. The are all GAMING THE SYSTEM! That is the point and if you deny that, your a biased person or a straight up liar! You are focusing on that because your points against RON PAUL have been dismantled and exposed one by one.

Only a low level IQ person would think known Satanist or Fascists secretive communities that do deals in the back rooms would be irrelevant. The fact that Skull & Bones and CFR do exist and can be linked to exactly what I stated. You can act as if it doesn't matter but I say it makes perfect since to consider that as factors when looking at the big picture. You can't call these confirmed organization CONSPIRACIES! You don't understand that apparently. You can try to disconnect them from the events if you chose, however unwise. Skull & Bones had member G.W.Bush and G.H.Bush & John Carey among many others. They are also confirmed Satanists but defectors and observers. The CFR of which OBAMA is a part of and this can be confirmed. You see I try to connect dots and try to create a picture of truth, you just attack my point of view and argue over the irrelevant because you can't see the truth.

The CFR Welcomes You To Fascism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSV3xf6WXYw

Council on Foreign Relations Truth with Official Member Barack Obama!
EU/NAU/African Union/Asian Union! These are all verifiable and anybody calling them conspiracy has no idea what the word means.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ug4Z_NTFmuM&feature=related

North AMERICAN UNION is a part of the NWO Agenda, and if you don't know it...then learn about it. If you know about the NAU and don't see the link to the NWO Agenda then maybe you should read some more books.


BY the WAY! I remember you and will not respond to your weak arguments over simple stuff that you fail to comprehend. You're a waste of time and only in here to disrupt.

 

[ShroomDr]

This thread has turned into 3-4 crackpots all rating themselves helpful...

Its self fulfilling

 

[zymos]

You see that is why your COMPREHENSION IS OFF!

You just wanted to focus on the number of Exec orders

Was it me that made the post decrying the number of Executive Orders made by Obama?
No, chum, that was you, and when informed that the number was lower than most other presidents (even one term presidents- I supplied the link, try and do the math yourself), you start crying about satanists instead.
Sadly typical...

 

[itisme]

ShrromDr

This thread has turned into 3-4 crackpots all rating themselves helpful...

Its self fulfilling

Finally some truth, however accidental.
I agree so ShroomDr, Zymos, & Discobuscuit should probably stop coming in here, but I am a Ron Paul supporter for a good reason. I believe in letting those with different opinions speak even if it does nothing but make them look bad.



http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/11211-ap-ron-paul-campaign-

didnt-assist-army-in-thorsen-inquiry
Ron Paul Campaign Didn't Assist Army in Thorsen Inquiry

The Ron Paul presidential campaign refused to assist the Army in its investigation into the activities of an Army reservist who spoke, while in uniform, in support of the Texas congressman at an event in Iowa.

A report published by the Associated Press on Tuesday reveals that the news organization filed a Freedom of Information Act with the Army requesting the release of documents related to the military’s inquiry into the endorsement by Corporal Jesse Thorsen of the GOP presidential hopeful in January.

The Army launched an investigation into the matter presumably prompted by a belief that Thorsen had violated a Defense Department regulation prohibiting uniformed service members from actively assuming an openly political posture.

The directive in question, No. 1344.10 issued in February of 2008 mandates that:

members on active duty should not engage in partisan political activity, and that members not on active duty should avoid inferences that their political activities imply or appear to imply official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement

While such rules make sense, there is one problem in applying it to Jesse Thorsen: he spoke at the Ron Paul rally in January 2012, but he’d been off active duty since October 2011.

On the other hand, Section 4.4.1 of Directive No. 1344.10 may cover Thorsen’s appearance. That paragraph reads:

Subject to any other restrictions in law, a member of the Armed Forces not on active duty may take the actions or participate in the activities permitted in subparagraph 4.1.1., and may take the actions and participate in the activities prohibited in subparagraph 4.1.2, provided the member is not in uniform and does not otherwise act in a manner that could reasonably give rise to the inference or appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement.

There is no doubt that Thorsen was in uniform and that he was not on active duty. The relevant question is whether Thorsen’s wearing of his uniform reasonably gave rise to the restricted inferences.

Undoubtedly the appropriate application of these Defense Department guidelines formed the principal part of the Army’s investigation into Thorsen’s impassioned appeal to his fellow Americans on behalf of Ron Paul.

Documents obtained by the AP indicate that the investigation was hindered by the Paul camp’s refusal to participate with the Army. According to information in the AP story, the military investigator made “numerous calls,” left many “messages and voice mails” all of which went unanswered by Paul representatives in Iowa.

The investigator from Thorsen’s unit, the Dubuque, Iowa-based 389th Combat Engineer Battalion, Bradley Borgos, writes in a memo included in the cache of documents obtained by the AP: “Multiple attempts were made to contact the Ron Paul campaign. Further time was requested to seek out a response. Despite multiple attempts, no one from the campaign responded to my inquiries.”

The record indicates that Borgos was assigned the task of looking into Thorsen’s appearance at the Iowa event and whether or not there any evidence of cooperation between the corporal and officials of the Ron Paul presidential campaign prior to the interview and the subsequent speech.

When contacted for a response, a representative speaking on behalf of the Ron Paul 2012 presidential campaign, said that he was “looking into the matter.”

The video of Thorsen standing on stage with the candidate was run over and over on the all of the 24-hour news channels. Prior to his remarks on stage, Thorsen, 28, gave an interview with a CNN reporter working at the Paul Headquarters in Ankeny, Iowa that night after the caucus (January 3) wherein he explicitly endorsed Ron Paul, particularly his policy of putting an immediate end to the endless (and illegal) foreign wars and “bringing the soldiers home.” “I’ve been in the military ten years now and all ten years have been during war time. I’d like to see a little peace,” Thorsen added.

Later, at the rally held after the interview, Ron> Paul summoned Thorsen to the stage and Thorsen obliged, telling the crowd, “we don’t need to be picking fights overseas” and said meeting Ron Paul was “like meeting a rock star.”

After Thorsen stepped away from the podium, Paul addressed the crowd remarking that Thorsen’s message was “very powerful,” and reminding the throng of supporters “we all know where the active duty crowd sends their money.”

The candidate’s claim to be the recipient of the lion’s share of campaign contributions from active duty military is borne out by the evidence presented in an article published on the Yahoo! Finance site.

That story from February reports that:

Especially notable is that Paul raised about triple the amount Obama received and about six times that of all currently-competing Republicans — Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Buddy Roemer, and Rick Santorum — combined.

Taken together, this means Dr. Paul raised approximately double the money from active military than all the candidates from both parties combined.

Romney and Gingrich each received around $10,000, meaning Paul trumps them by about 15 times in a head-to-head matchup.

The AP reports that the Army began its inquiry into Thorsen’s activities in Iowa in March and then enlarged the scope of the investigation in order to facilitate a “look at Thorsen’s background after news reports showed he was arrested in connection with breaking into a home in Florida in 2004.”

Curiously, the AP account provides no evidence of Thorsen’s criminal behavior, despite being replete with excerpts from the file compiled by the Army during its investigation.

A cursory web search by this author resulted in a record of a couple of arrests in Florida in 2006, posted on various internet sites along with the obligatory mug shots.

One consequence of the investigation was a recommendation by Thorsen’s superior that he be reprimanded and that he be prohibited from re-enlisting as punishment for his alleged violation of the directive highlighted above, as well as for his “criminal history.”

Documents show that Thorsen’s Battalion Commander Lt. Col. Matthew Baker gave the go ahead to the suggested reprimand but demurred as to the rest of the disciplinary recommendations.

The account of the situation as told by the AP portrays Jesse Thorsen and the Paul campaign in Iowa of conspiring to co-opt the military by way of Thorsen’s uniformed praise of their man.

However, the records of the proceedings against Thorsen as summarized in the AP article also paint Thorsen in a less than flattering light, casting him in the role of rube, an unsophisticated soldier subject to the manipulation of Ron Paul operatives who should have known better than to allow Thorsen to appear in front of television cameras in his BDUs.

In what is described by the AP as part of a “sworn statement” made by Thorsen, the latter seems to support the depiction of himself a pawn played by Paul:

“I am also surprised that Ron Paul, an Air Force Officer and congressman of many years or his advisors who told me they too served in the military, would not have explained to me that wearing my uniform was in violation of regulation,” Thorsen is quoted as testifying.

All this hue and cry over Thorsen’s (and by association, Ron Paul’s) disregard for military regulations is ironic in light of the irrefutable fact that for over decades now one after the other “Commander in Chief” has unconstitutionally, unconscionably, and unapologetically manipulated our uniformed armed forces for their own political purposes, resulting in the death of thousands of those noble men and women.

That's right! Do your own dirty work, to suppress the truth from our very own MILITARY TROOPS!

 

[zymos]

Pretty much every time you post anything you come off sounding like a schizophrenic moron,
but I believe you should continue because it makes me laugh.

But you sure aren't helping your cause, as has pointed out by some of your fellow Paul supporters several times over the past 348 pages...

 

[itisme]

Real issues and reasons to ELECT RON PAUL!
I find it sad to point out they took up livestock and other foods much like the FDA, EPA, and DNR have been doing all over America.

So look at what we have now.
■The Patriot Act which allows unlimited spying on the American people by the government.
■The National Defense Authorization Act with Sections 1021 and 1022 for the military arrests and indefinite detention of American nationals without any due process of the law.
■HR 347 Trespass Law for the implementation of Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act upon any citizen who dares to speak out against the insurgency.
■Executive Order National Defense Resources Preparedness Act, which allows the dictator to confiscate every resource of the United States, including we the people as conscripts to be put in servitude to the insurgency.

This is exactly what the Bolsheviks did to the Russian people in 1917. Now we have this new executive order for the implementation of laws not legislated by our Congress.

They are trying to circumvent the Constitution because it limlts Governments abilities.

 

[itisme]

http://www.examiner.com/article/romney-loses-to-paul-his-own-state

What may be the most embarrassing moment yet for Mitt Romney, during the race for the 2012 Republican Nomination, happened over the weekend in the very state in which he is the former Governor and calls home.

Ron Paul won.

Even though it was reported Sunday that Mitt Romney himself was apparently responsible for picking the slate of Massachusetts State Delegates he was hoping everyone would vote for, his delegates.

Unfortunately for Mitt Romney, that didn't happen.

Instead, over half of the delegates he was hoping people would vote for never made it, including notable State Republicans such as the House Minority Leader and other state politicians who even wanted to remain nameless.

Romney lost so badly in his home state that Ron Paul supporters were even voted in as the majority of the Alternate-Delegates, spiting hopefuls that included a popular 2010 gubernatorial candidate and a prominent Sheriff.

Even worse for the old Republican establishment is that all these new Mass. State Delegates for Paul will now get to vote for the State Party Chair, the Party Platform, and the VP of their choice. Bet your bottom dollar they will all most likely be Ron Paul Delegates, supporters and ideals.

Massachusetts, however isn't the only state that has seen this explosion for Ron Paul support.

As the race has developed many states around the country have ultimately gone for Paul, much in the same way. Iowa, Minnesota, Colorado, Louisiana and Alaska thus far have seen similar results play out there, and many more states are expected to follow suit.

This overwhelming show of support for Ron Paul is also expected to dominate Nevada's State Convention on May 5th.

The main reason is because Ron Paul supporters have been the most dedicated and the most educated on the GOP nomination process and have also been the most willing participants in their post-Caucus and post-Primary delegate selection processes around the country.

Now that Paul has won the majority of the delegates in at least 5 states he is also assured to have his name on the ballot during the RNC in Aug.

In addition to the incredible outpouring of support for Paul and his campaign, the fact that he is now a shoe-in to be on the ballot and have a platform at the National Convention is worrying the establishment very deeply and gives new life to a candidate who was once thought to have no chance of being the party's nominee.

 

[itisme]

http://ivn.us/2012/05/01/forget-the...volution-is-taking-over-the-republican-party/

What little commentary we’ve seen from the media on Ron Paul’s silent coup presently underway in the Republican Party has focused mostly on its implications for the 2012 Republican Primary and whether Paul can hold back Romney’s delegate count just long enough to ensure a brokered convention, which is the only feasible scenario in which Paul could emerge as the party’s nominee.

But perhaps more important and far-reaching in its implications for the future of national politics in the US, is not Ron Paul’s delegate count, but the fact that his supporters are successfully taking over the Republican Party district by district, county by county, state by state. That the fiercely independent Republican congressman from Texas might still have a tiny chance at winning his party’s nomination, while interesting, is less important than what he will most certainly have succeeded at doing: Ron Paul has built a political machine.

Judging by recent events in state and local GOP conventions across the country, it may not be at all presumptuous for Ron Paul’s supporters to call their burgeoning movement a revolution.

In Iowa, it is no exaggeration to say that Ron Paul’s people have taken over the GOP. After a stunning coup on April 21st, the new Iowa GOP state central committee now has six members who have publicly expressed support for Ron Paul’s candidacy– and that includes the new state chair of the Iowa Republican Party, A. J. Spiker, the former vice chairman for Ron Paul’s Iowa campaign! Think about that. This is major news. It signals a sea change in the Republican Party. We are now living in a world where the head of the Republican Party of Iowa is a Ron Paul supporter.

And it’s not just Iowa, though Iowa is especially significant because of its prominent role in the national primary process. Ron Paul’s supporters are taking over the Republican Party everywhere. This weekend during the April 28th district conventions, Ron Paul supporters also took over the GOP in Louisiana, with not a bare majority, but a whopping 74% of the delegates to Louisiana’s state convention in June. You can bet they’ll show up and you can bet they’ll elect their own to positions of leadership in the state GOP.

It’s the same story in Alaska, where the Ron Paul movement took over the Republican Party’s state convention on Saturday, and elected two Ron Paul supporters to the positions of state chair and co-chair, Russ Millete and Debbie Holland-Brown, respectively. Even in Mitt Romney’s own home state of Massachusetts, Ron Paul’s movement swept the state’s district conventions Saturday, and stacked the slate of delegates bound to vote for Romney on the first ballot in Tampa with activists who will vote for Ron Paul on the second ballot if there’s a brokered convention.

Looking back further to mid-April, Paul’s supporters also dominated conventions in Minnesota and made a strong showing in Colorado. Looking ahead, Paul’s supporters are poised to continue repeating their successful takeover strategy at the Nevada State GOP’s convention this weekend, and careful observers should look out for more possible surprises in the upcoming Texas and California processes, especially with the likelihood of Newt Gingrich’s withdrawal from the race, leaving Ron Paul as the only alternative to an electorate that is hardly enamored with Mitt Romney.

Again, the bigger story here is not Ron Paul’s chances at winning his party’s nomination, but his supporters’ marked success at winning control over the party apparatus itself.

Another important angle here is that what we’re seeing happen in states all over the country completely disproves the pervasive narrative that Ron Paul’s supporters are computer-bound, “armchair activists” that can win online polls but just never show up to vote in person. In fact, we can infer from their apparent tenacity that Ron Paul supporters are actually more energetic than typical Republicans, more likely to show up and vote, and more likely to get more deeply involved in the political process by becoming delegates and attending party conventions at every geographic level.

It now looks more like Paul has suffered in state-wide primaries and straw poll votes not because his supporters lack the energy and follow-through to vote, but because they are merely still outnumbered by voters more inclined to choose one of Paul’s opponents. But while Paul’s camp is outnumbered by people more likely to vote for a Romney or a Santorum on election day, the number of such voters with the energy to get as deeply involved as possible in the party process now appears lower than the number of Ron Paul supporters willing to do the same in states everywhere.

Whether media commentators consider this change a good or bad thing for the Republican Party and for the future of American politics, they have an obligation to report it to their audiences and acknowledge just how significant this change is. We are witnessing no less than a political revolution in the country and a major shift in the GOP’s internal composition. For two election cycles now, Paul’s supporters were an outside minority that had to make their case to the party establishment. It looks like in 2014 and 2016, Republican candidates will have to make their case to Ron Paul supporters in many places.

Start looking for more of Ron Paul’s platform of limited government, individual liberty, and constitutional rule-of-law in the rhetoric and on the agendas of candidates, policy-makers, and party leaders at every level of American government in the years to come.

The Grand Old Party is becoming a Grand New Party.

 

[bushdoctor215]

youre correct, i was in typing the thinking in a hurry, i ment Aristotle not plato.

I would also agree with you here
The only problem is his (blind) supporters do not draw the distinction. I still feel my point is valid, Ron Paul is (attempting to) exploit the system, his supporters have no problem with this (if they are aware).

Im not saying Mitt and his fat cats dont use/exploit aspect too. Hell the money in politics is ruining any semblance of Democracy, but at least Mitt is going after popular votes and delegates.

If Mitt promised $100 for every person who voted for him, i would still find that slightly more 'attractive' than Ron Paul's 'delegate' approach.

One is gaining the support of the people, the other is using/exploiting/gaming the system. (Neither is particularly attractive).

-

I`m pretty sure that you think the whole rules process for determining the nominee is bad. It should be a democratic process where the popular vote should decide right? If so, do you also agree that obama should NOT be president because he used the delegate plan and actually recieved LESS popular votes for the nomination then Hillary Clinton?

 

[bentom187]

here's somthing else,ann romney has been making robocalls directley to deligates asking them if they will join together against paul at the RNC,now we KNOW they are scarred and need numbers,so the fight is far from over.

[YOUTUBEIF]4JWy9u_Owgw[/YOUTUBEIF]

 

[bentom187]

http://www.policymic.com/articles/7853/ron-paul-will-win-nevada-and-the-gop-wants-to-stop-him


In a shockingly brazen power trip, the national GOP has sent a threatening letter to Nevada Republicans demanding that they show support for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney at their state convention this weekend.

The Nevada Republican Convention is the highest legislative body of the state's Republican Party and the desultory letter seeks to challenge that autonomy. In the letter, Republican National Committee Chief Counsel John R. Phillipe, Jr., introduces a new way of thinking that entitles former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney to, in essence, veto the election of delegates that he is unhappy with. The text of the letter can be read here. http://media.lasvegassun.com/media/p..._Delegates.pdf''

The letter, dated May 2, was addressed to newly-elected Nevada GOP Chairman Michael McDonald and ended on a paternalistic tone in which it threatened to strip all of Nevada's delegates: "I believe it is highly likely that any committee with jurisdiction over the matter would find improper any change to the election, selection, allocation, or binding of delegates thus jeopardizing the seating of Nevada's entire delegation to the National Convention."

This letter points to a possible bias against Texas Congressman Ron Paul among the national Republican leadership and comes on the heels of strong Paul finishes over the last two weeks in Louisiana, Minnesota, Alaska, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts.

Las Vegas-based journalist John Ralston commented.

"Clearly the RNC fears that mischief at the Sparks convention this weekend could result in Ron Paul delegates taking Mitt Romney slots and then not abiding by GOP rules to vote for the presumptive nominee in the first ballot in Tampa. So they are trying to force McDonald to ensure the actual Romney delegates fill 20 of the 28 national convention slots, thus removing any question of who they will vote for."

Republican voters aren't moved. An unnamed Republican voter commented Thursday: "The beautiful thing about our party is that it's decentralized. The county parties can do what they want and the state parties can do what they want. This guy's dreaming if he thinks he has a prayer influencing any decent Republican. Ron Paul's not my first choice, but if some DC lawyer thinks I'm [going to] side with him over a decent guy like Paul, he doesn't know Republicans very well ... Mind your own business, D.C."

Such pressure tricks are unlikely to work in a state like Nevada where Ron Paul supporters were rebuffed at the state convention four years ago after winning congressional district votes for Nevada delegates. GOP officials went so far as to turn off the lights in a windowless room as a method of adjourning the state convention. Instead of going home and sulking, Paul supporters fought back. Four years later, the GOP old guard is still feeling the blowback from 2008 as Ron Paul supporters have succeeded in influencing the party at almost all levels of government and removing the old guard from party positions statewide.

 

[CannaBunkerMan]

here's somthing else,ann romney has been making robocalls directley to deligates asking them if they will join together against paul at the RNC,now we KNOW they are scarred and need numbers,so the fight is far from over.

[youtubeif]4JWy9u_Owgw[/youtubeif]

Video has been removed. Here it is again:

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

 

[ShroomDr]

I`m pretty sure that you think the whole rules process for determining the nominee is bad. It should be a democratic process where the popular vote should decide right? If so, do you also agree that obama should NOT be president because he used the delegate plan and actually recieved LESS popular votes for the nomination then Hillary Clinton?

im no fan of the electoral college or the nomination process for Dem or Rep nominee (fwiw the GOP process is slightly better; superdelegates are total bullshit).

you could use a mat to 'jump to conclusions'...

To answer your round about question, yes i believe popular vote should decide the presidency.

Neither Quincy nor Dubya would have followed daddy...

Nepotism FTL... although Megan McCain is getting SMOKING HOT!!!!

 

[SpasticGramps]

Ron Paul: "Central Bankers Are Intellectually Bankrupt"

Likely glowing from his glorious victory (h/t Trish Regan) over Krugman in Bloomberg's recent Paul vs Paul debate, Rep. Ron Paul destroys the central-planning arrogance of Bernanke and his ilk in an Op-Ed released by the FT today.

Control of the world’s economy has been placed in the hands of a banking cartel, which holds great danger for all of us. True prosperity requires sound money, increased productivity, and increased savings and investment. The world is awash in US dollars, and a currency crisis involving the world’s reserve currency would be an unprecedented catastrophe. No amount of monetary expansion can solve our current financial problems, but it can make those problems much worse.​

Fuck it. Let's monetize everything. It's worked great so far. Monetize the warfare state, monetize Wall Street, monetize the welfare state, print money to bailout Europe. I mean, damn, look how great things are going. Let's keep doing the same thing and expect a different result. Totally rational response, right? Right?