The rabid supporters of Ron Paul are trying to take over the Republican Party. They tried going with the Losertarians (Michael Medved's term for Libertarians) but got no one elected. This time they are working the trenches and having some success.
Update 8/13 added at bottom.
It's easy to get started at the grass-roots level because the lowest-level office, precinct committee officer, has a vacancy rate - guessing - of over 50% in the RP. So they can get into those slots almost by asking. Where the PCO slot is occupied there is an election every two years, which is always ignored, because it's never contested.
This year they are going for broke. They are taking on a powerful, entrenched incumbent - ME.
A good looking, soft spoken neighbor is carrying the Ron Paul banner in Sheridan Heights, Lake Forest Park, WA. He makes no pretense of being a Republican or sharing our values. He won't even promise to support our candidates if he becomes the Republican PCO.
Our district chairperson was on top of things, smelled him out immediately and went on the alert. The district helped me get the word out to my neighbors - that I am the real Republican - while I am incapacitated by my injury and cannot doorbell. Broken pelvis
Vote Ron Hebron
Precinct Committee Officer
LFP-1056 - 32d District
Eric Earling covered some of their techniques in June.
Cross posted at Economic Freedom.
Update 8/13
The ringleader of the Ronulans finally exposed himself at comment #47.
Read it all. Sample: "If you want to continue that kind of lock-step, brain-numbed, top-down liberalism as the leadership of the Republican Party, you should vote for PCO candidates like Mr Hebron."
Posted by Ron Hebron at August 10, 2008 01:37 PM | Email ThisI have been a GOP member for over 20 years. I have voted for part party line every year.
I'm from the state of Va. Our former Va. Senate race George Allen (GOP) vs. Jim Webb was a unique race to point out. George Allen would later support Fred Thompson and many media pundits concluded that George Allen would become the next GOP presidential nominee. But, allow me to share a few points. Jim Webb won his campaign by exposing former Gov. Allen lies regarding stock trades and his lock stop support of "W." Allen a long member of the NRA did in fact support former resolutions which were nothing more then Gun Compromises with the Gun control groups. I voted for Allen to show a no compromising stand with gun control issues as did many GOP members. Allen who like many GOP members claim pro-life during an election session but provide little opposition to pro-abortion crowds other then press releases of words backed by little action. Webb, was pro gun ownership but pro-choice. George won my vote due to his pro-life stand but had Jim offered a pro-life stand I would have voted for Jim Webb.
When we begin to present support of one candidate over another we must always think in terms of individualism not collectivism. The republican party the reason is to root out Globalist who have highjacked our party. Though I voted for "W" he has outspent every democratic president and has laid the foundation of our nation of ruin. Ron Paul did predict the issues we have seen in regard to Fannie Mac and the housing crisis. John McCain has only offered solutions which will cause greater issues. Both parties have failed the founders wishes and we must return to the rule of law.
2008, will be the first election year that I will not vote party line. Since, Paul has suspended his run I will either offer Paul's name is a write in or I will vote for Chuck Baldwin. I will not vote for John McCain or any fake conservative. Have you failed to remember that it was John McCain, Ted, "W" and Graham who all pushed Amnesty and McCain promised he had changed his ways. Yet, he has changed his position again. By the way I'm supporting the opposition to Graham who is pro-america, pro-life, pro-free market and who is also running as a donkey.
You seem to imply you support the views of Michael Medved, remember it was Medved who told his listeners that we would win the war in Iraq in less then 2 weeks. So, why quote a man who has limited vision of facts?
Ron Paul is a true member of the party and those who follow the rule of law only support the founders views.
Posted by: Darel on August 10, 2008 03:45 PMFirst read Eric Earling's disclosure of the stealth techniques the Ronulans used at our county and state conventions. Then look for any coherence at all in the rabid supporters of an also-ran candidate at http://www.ronpaulwa.com/. I give Paul credit for being consistent, but his state "supporters," well, their web site is now dead, but they aren't.
Posted by: Ron Hebron on August 10, 2008 04:29 PMHave you gone to the monthly meetings? Have you looked at the website? All of the PCO's are listed by their district in Kitsap County and their phone numbers and email addresses are available to you if you have any questions. I know that most of the PCO's sent out cards to the known republicans in our districts to invite you to the caucus this year. I also know that since we are all volunteers we would be happy to have your help in getting republican canditates elected.
It is just a bit strange that individuals who have never attended a meeting, or a caucus and in their own blogs have bad mouthed the republican party are running against people who have been working hard within the party for years. So if you see two names on your ballot check the republican website and see if your current PCO is listed and give them a call they would love to talk to you.
Posted by: Minterbrook 216 on August 10, 2008 04:52 PMLets get real and analyze what you call the "Ronulans" tactics are. I can only speak for my county but their tactics seemed to be to follow the rules run for the lowlyist offices and become a part of the party. I know at our convention they had the organization and did not have any 'dinners' or other social events to take them away from the convention in mid afternoon. They were there because they were committed to defining a Republican party their ideals dictated. Many of us old timers left and allowed that to occur. But the Ronulan tactics were legal and in many cases admirable.
I would hope that Ron Hebron has attempted to perform these functions over his 20 years. It seems to me if he had been an inclusive recruiter of new idea conservatives and done his job in building his party.. he would not have been challenged in his position.
The thing that I have noticed a great deal about the 20 or so precinct races against incumbents in my county's PCO races is that most of the incumbents think, for some reason, they have a "right" to hold the position and any challenge is an extreme insult; instead of a chance for the incumbent to touch base with his or her neighbors and win elections and grow the party.
Finally I would hope us INS can show some leadership and make this challenge to our views a party building oppurtunity and not render anyone interested in changing things as somehow evil.
The only reason Ron Paul did not become a "Top Tier" candidate after the first debate, is that the oligarchic corporate media smothered the news of his overwhelming victory, then made up a story about spammers. It was only later that they came up with the "scientific" polls to show how unelectable he was. Then they waited until right before the key primaries, and had him run the "are you a racist?" gauntlet, over the words (of some one else) in his newsletter over a decade ago.
But the answer is not more government controls on the press. While we need some protection from multi-national corporations, it is the power to control that creates the need to lobby/corrupt government. The best way to stop it is to remove the incentives.
What some of us are concerned about are people registering to run for a position when they have not even attended a meeting.
Posted by: Minterbrook 216 on August 10, 2008 05:18 PMAs far as I can tell it has something to do with the War on Terror and banning gay marriage while giving a lot of tax breaks, but not reducing spending in any way, except as it pertains to stem cell research. Oh, and No Child Left Behind.
What happened to the party of fiscal responsibility, small government, states rights, and promoting individual responsibility?
Posted by: Jim on August 10, 2008 07:41 PMI won't even waste my time talking about Bush or Clinton--both complete failures and pathological liars. It is the Party that concerns me. There's too much groupthink, too much rigidity, and too much willingness to say, "yes sir, yes sir, 3 bags full." It's idiotic. At least Paul was trying to break out of this madness--no thanks to the RP apparatchiks who beat him down. But they weren't beating Paul down so much as they were beating down the new life that was surfacing from within the ranks of the RP who were tired of Stalinism. So the "faithful" got McCain, a total joke, after he was selected by the Party apparatchiks, At least they picked a Navy man to ride the ship to the bottom.
Posted by: Scott Harmon on August 10, 2008 08:12 PMIt might help to point out here that Paul is attracting young people into the party in droves. We need these people badly if we're going to head off socialism before it crashes our whole economy. Pushing away Paul supporters is only helping the Democrats.
Posted by: Sam Marsh on August 10, 2008 08:35 PMOK, we work together to get good, small-government, low-taxes, low-spending candidates. What help are people who refuse to support our candidates - in advance before they know who they will be?
That is the situation here. I have no problem with their joining our process. But They want the Rep Party for their Lyndon LaRouche ideas - Paul is out, but they continue on.
Posted by: Ron Hebron on August 10, 2008 09:43 PM Where did you get the idea that
Ron Paul supporters are trying to take over the Republican
Party? While its true there are
aprox 13,000 new indivduals in
Party due to Ron Paul as far I
know they just want to be part of the process.
I thought and correct me if I'm
wrong that the idea is to grow
the party. All I have ever heard
from you and your sound politics
friends is that they are trying
to take over the party. None of you have ever offered one bit of
substance to back that up. Other
than the fact that some guy who is a Ron Paul supporter had the gall to run against you for Pco.
Heaven forbid that somebody would actually exercise there right to run for office.
Before anybody says Spackman just one of those Ron Paul supporters. I actually supported
Romney. I just don't think what
the state party has been doing to these people is right.
"A good looking, soft spoken neighbor is carrying the Ron Paul banner in Sheridan Heights, Lake Forest Park, WA. He makes no pretense of being a Republican or sharing our values. He won't even promise to support our candidates if he becomes the Republican PCO."
Second, Eric Earling quotes their own tips on stealth techniques at the conventions:
"A loyal and trusted reader passes along a revealing site used by the Ron Paul faithful in the Evergreen State to organize for county conventions and such. Note in particular the "Convention Bullet Points":
Do not wear Ron Paul Gear- You are the candidate and you are running for a delegate position. Create your own election flyer or card with you as the candidate running for delegate...you can list credentials- soccer coach, bible study teacher, veteran, home schooler etc etc.
Translation: you're screwed if you let on who your guy is. Must assimilate.
Do not mention the war, as this is a sensitive issue that will allow the other delegates to identify you as a Ron Paul supporter. And this will also serve to polarize our Ron Paul slate from other conservatives in at the convention."
Third, they made the site http://www.ronpaulwa.com/info/ disappear. Wonder why?
Posted by: Ron Hebron on August 11, 2008 05:30 AMUS Rep District 6:
Doug Cloud (Republican)
Governor:
Dino Rossi (Republican)
Leg District 35:
Position 1:
Brad Gehring
Position 2:
Randy Neatherlin (GOP)
Country Commissioner District 2:
Tim Matthes
But the answer is not more government controls on the press. While we need some protection from multi-national corporations, it is the power to control that creates the need to lobby/corrupt government. The best way to stop it is to remove the incentives.
Hey RP supporters, wanna know why we think you are nuts?
This is why.
Posted by: Cliff on August 11, 2008 06:49 AMWhat some of us are concerned about are people registering to run for a position when they have not even attended a meeting."
Minterbrook 216 when is the last time you went door belling? I've never met you, yet I live less than a mile from you. Just because some of us don't support fiscally irresponsible people doesn't mean we don't support the republican party.
Posted by: Charlie Minterbrook 216 on August 11, 2008 07:15 AM Nothing you presented suggests to me that they are trying to
take over the party. What you just described is the only way they
believed they had a chance at being elected a delegate to the
state convention. That doesn't mean they are trying to take over
the party. The fact is they felt they were being cheated. All they
ever wanted was to be part of the process. Just because they don't
support every candidate that you do doesn't mean there trying to
take over.
Believe it or not some Republicans actually don't vote like robots. Democrats on the other hand well there record speaks
for itself.
Personally, I vote Republican on the national level because they are the only party that is serious about defense. Locally I vote for them mostly because they aren't liberals, and I absolutely despise people who have some kind of utopian model of how everyone should live and (ab)use their power to try to make us conform to it. But that doesn't really answer the question of what Republicans stand FOR.
As others have pointed out, Ron Paul and his supporters really are much more conservative and "Republican" that the far-center GOP.
The new Ron Paul supporters want to be a part of the process because they get inspired by Ron Paul's idealism and dedication to restoring the little guy back to his rightful throne as master of himself and his domain.
Posted by: blindman on August 11, 2008 10:33 AMSo what are your values? This is a perfect chance to enumerate them for your constituents.
Posted by: blindman on August 11, 2008 10:35 AMThis guy wants to be an officer in the Republican Party, but not participate. Hello! It's the Republican Party. If you Ronulans can't support Republican candidates go create your own political party. We work together.
Have I found the only bad egg? Are the rest of you ... promising to participate? Maybe a handful.
Posted by: Ron Hebron on August 11, 2008 04:34 PMToo many of the Ron Paul crowd don't recognize that the Republican Party is a TEAM. A team where individual members support each other even when they don't agree on everything.
Ron Paul supporters want to use the team's name, use the team's money, use the team's notoriety, all for their own individual purposes, but without supporting the broader team. This is not their democratic right. It's an immature power grab.
We do have a big tent, and it's more than big enough for libertarians, even Ron Paul's loony toon brigades. But they're only welcome in the tent once they exercise some maturity and demonstrate they want to be in the tent - BY SUPPORTING THE WHOLE TEAM, EVEN WHEN THEY LOSE A PRIMARY.
Posted by: AD on August 11, 2008 04:46 PMSince when is there a prerequisite for participation in our political process. Today I can't participate because I didn't support your candidate's ideals, tomorrow it's because I'm Black, or Jewish or Pro Life...
Posted by: C.B.Ross on August 11, 2008 05:41 PMThese things are fluid. And, ironically, the very fact that they are so fluid is what necessitates playing as a team!
Dogma's too easy. We're all too smart to play the ideological dogma game.
Posted by: AD on August 11, 2008 05:53 PMYes, you definitely should point out mistakes on these projects as you see them. That's your responsibility (and that's what primaries are for) But... when people on your team, including leaders above you, don't agree with your assessment and overrule you, what do you do? Do you openly sabotage the team by refusing to support the project (while still, ironically, DEMANDING that you remain a member of the team)? And if you did engage in behavior that undermined the project, would it be incumbent on the team to PROTECT your position and status, even as you undermine them?
Seriously, this idea of reciprocity shouldn't be so foreign as you guys make it seem. If you're a part of a group (any group) there's always some give and take.
So, let's graduate from Kindergarten, kids, and realize that out in the big world it's just not all about YOU.
Posted by: AD on August 11, 2008 09:10 PMYou call them the Ron Paul Looney Toon Brigade and then in the next sentance say that they are immature. Does that not strike you as a tad bit like the pot calling the kettle black?
Posted by: Lysander on August 11, 2008 09:29 PMLet me know if this sounds a little crazy -- how about welcoming any type of Republican who wants in.
Then listen, communicate and open a dialogue with them. Why does there have to be an "us vs. them" attitude? Won't everybody do better if we just inventory our similarities and differences and press forward with those areas in mind?
Seriously, we're like rival gangs fighting over the neighborhood we both live in. We'd do much better if we worked together against the real enemies. Let's just sit down together and figure out who our common enemies are.
I really do want to graduate from Kindergarten, but I'm finding it hard to obtain the necessary instruction. I'm waiting for an educated person to fill in the blanks:
1. We are fighting in Iraq because _________
2. The War on Terror is about __________
3. The Republicans want small government by __________
4. The RP can't accept dissent because _____________
5. McCain is a good Republican because he offers ___________
6. The Republican Party is different from the Democrats because it offers a different vision, including ______________
7. The Federal Reserve has given us the following benefits: ___________ (just list 4 or 5)
8. The Department of Education is necessary because _________
9. We have military occupations in 130 countries and Marines stationed in about 165 countries because _______________
10. The US believes in free markets, yet manages sanctioned trade relationships (NAFTA, CAFTA, etc) because _______________
11. The US sanctions GITMO yet criticizes many countries on human rights violations because _____________
12. Bush has denounced nation-building, but yet, we are destroying and rebuilding Iraq, because_________
13. The US is fighitng the "war on terrorism" but has not seriously undertaken the fight against the source of 9/11 terrorists (Saudi Arabia) because ______________
14. The war on drugs has been ongoing in Colombia for at least 20 years, yet we're seeing little improvement. (Cocaine is still a hot commodity; and much of it comes from Colombia.) Why is that? And, is this war worth the cost of enforcement? __________________
15. The Constitution is a big item nowadays. So why aren't Republican Presidents and Congressmen following it? And, if it's defunct, why aren't they saying that? ________________ (keep answer to 250 words or less).
I have about 100 more questions, but these 15 will suffice for now. Please fill in the blanks so I can graduate.
Posted by: Scott Harmon on August 11, 2008 10:02 PMhttp://www.nodicks2008.com
Posted by: Charlie Minterbrook 216 on August 12, 2008 03:43 AM1) the SoS has revoked the 10% rule to elect PCO's, because no formal Party candidate can be identified in the Top Two Primary.
2) write-in filing for PCO costs the same $1 fee and can continue after filing week closed June 6. Write-in filing can continue to Aug 18.
3) Paulistas can get a listing of local contributors to the Paul campaign from FEC web site.
4) look for PCO recruits, in vacant precincts, from the FEC lists, file them as write-in, have them circulate a promo door drop so voters know the name to write in - they can win with 1 vote (10% rule revoked).
So, this year, any dedicated faction can try to load the precincts with their followers, as write-in PCO candidates - the convergence of Top Two with former PCO election rules makes this particularly easy when the 10% rule has been revoked.
Write-in filings do not show up in the King County PCO candidate listing ...
http://your.kingcounty.gov/elections/200808/candidatefilings.asp
It will be fun to see how many more PCO's get elected than filed before the June 6 closing.
___________________
I notice Stan Lippmann has filed for GOP PCO in ...
Lippmann, Stan LFP 32-1075
How many folk would argue Stan is a Republican, of any flavor?
Just use GOP if typing out Republican Party is too tedious.
Posted by: AD on August 12, 2008 08:47 PMLuckily every single McCain-allocated delegate has received notice that his credentials are being challenged as illegitimate to attend the National Convention.
That McCain campaign marched in lock step to weaken our State Platform on Life, and most other areas, to keep the Second Amendment out of the platform entirely, and, when they began to lose blind loyalty, as the convention began to realize what had happened, finally, attempted a mass (illegal)walkout to shut down the Convention in order to keep Republicans from even discussing their own platform which was their right, just as they had been prevented from influencing the National Delegation.
The "McCain Team" for which Mr. Hebron, here, continues lying, is the criminal element of the Republican Party.
I was going to expose them with a few articles. It now appears it may become a paperback.
If you want to continue that kind of lock-step, brain-numbed, top-down liberalism as the leadership of the Republican Party, you should vote for PCO candidates like Mr Hebron. That's what his faction supported at State. But if you want to return to Traditional Republican Principles, the philosophy of Ronald Reagan, vote for real conservatives like his opponent, Robert Ream.
Doug Parris,
President,
The Reagan Wing of the Republican Party.
Kinda funny, though: "I am the head of a Washington State Republican association..."
Wow, for only $12.99 to buy a website, way too much time on your hands, a very active imagination, and some delusions of grandeur, ANYONE could be "the head of a Washington State Republican association"!
Posted by: AD on August 12, 2008 11:50 PM At least Doug's not afraid to admit who he really is. Unlike
yourself who hides behind one phony name after another.
"take over"???????
The party has been taken over. Taken over by some of you meet-eat-and-retreat types who always come into this topic with "I have been in the party for ".
Well I got news for you long-time party members: You failed.
Look at your party now.
I suppose I should now go on a long posting about how we are trying to take the party back from you corrupt wannabe elitist hacks who have condemned us all to socialist hell, but instead I will now post the 10 planks of communism, asking that with each plank, ask yourselves if the republican party has done anything about it IF NOT COMPLICIT.
---------------
1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes.
Americans do these with actions such as the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868), and various zoning, school & property taxes. Also the Bureau of Land Management (Zoning laws are the first step to government property ownership)
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
Americans know this as misapplication of the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913, The Social Security Act of 1936.; Joint House Resolution 192 of 1933; and various State "income" taxes. We call it "paying your fair share".
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
Americans call it Federal & State estate Tax (1916); or reformed Probate Laws, and limited inheritance via arbitrary inheritance tax statutes.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
Americans call it government seizures, tax liens, Public "law" 99-570 (1986); Executive order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 which gives private land to the Department of Urban Development; the imprisonment of "terrorists" and those who speak out or write against the "government" (1997 Crime/Terrorist Bill); or the IRS confiscation of property without due process. Asset forfeiture laws are used by DEA, IRS, ATF etc...).
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
Americans call it the Federal Reserve which is a privately-owned credit/debt system allowed by the Federal Reserve act of 1913. All local banks are members of the Fed system, and are regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) another privately-owned corporation. The Federal Reserve Banks issue Fiat Paper Money and practice economically destructive fractional reserve banking.
6. Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State.
Americans call it the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Department of Transportation (DOT) mandated through the ICC act of 1887, the Commissions Act of 1934, The Interstate Commerce Commission established in 1938, The Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Communications Commission, and Executive orders 11490, 10999, as well as State mandated driver's licenses and Department of Transportation regulations.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
Americans call it corporate capacity, The Desert Entry Act and The Department of Agriculture� Thus read "controlled or subsidized" rather than "owned"� This is easily seen in these as well as the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and the IRS control of business through corporate regulations.
8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
Americans call it Minimum Wage and slave labor like dealing with our Most Favored Nation trade partner; i.e. Communist China. We see it in practice via the Social Security Administration and The Department of Labor. The National debt and inflation caused by the communal bank has caused the need for a two "income" family. Woman in the workplace since the 1920's, the 19th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, assorted Socialist Unions, affirmative action, the Federal Public Works Program and of course Executive order 11000.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries, gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of population over the country.
Americans call it the Planning Reorganization act of 1949 , zoning (Title 17 1910-1990) and Super Corporate Farms, as well as Executive orders 11647, 11731 (ten regions) and Public "law" 89-136. These provide for forced relocations and forced sterilization programs, like in China.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.
Americans are being taxed to support what we call 'public' schools, but are actually "government force-tax-funded schools " Even private schools are government regulated. The purpose is to train the young to work for the communal debt system. We also call it the Department of Education, the NEA and Outcome Based "Education" . These are used so that all children can be indoctrinated and inculcated with the government propaganda, like "majority rules", and "pay your fair share". WHERE are the words "fair share" in the Constitution, Bill of Rights or the Internal Revenue Code (Title 26)?? NO WHERE is "fair share" even suggested !! The philosophical concept of "fair share" comes from the Communist maxim, "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need! This concept is pure socialism. ... America was made the greatest society by its private initiative WORK ETHIC ... Teaching ourselves and others how to "fish" to be self sufficient and produce plenty of EXTRA commodities to if so desired could be shared with others who might be "needy"... Americans have always voluntarily been the MOST generous and charitable society on the planet.
---------------
Off to Florida with you corrupt old hacks!
This is our party, we are real conservatives, and we are taking it back, one way or the other.
Posted by: Doktor Jeep on August 13, 2008 08:38 AMThis blog post is absolutely the wrong direction. Libertarian leaning conservatives are a part of this platform.
Are we truly ready to turn our back to the libertarian wing of the GOP? If so then continue using derogatory terms such as losertarian and paulistas. I'm not sure what you think you will accomplish other then turning off potential voters.
What evidence do you have that RP supporters look to him in this manner? Is this the kind of accusation and attitudes that we are to expect from the "big tent" Republicans who allow in baby-killing Republicans, big-government Republicans, amnesty-granting Republicans, but ask the Republicans who stand for liberty, fiscal conservatism, limited government, low taxation and stand for human life to stand outside the tent? You anti-conservatives look more foolish as time goes on. RP supporters need not "take over" any party, what you are part of is falling apart at the seams because of LACK OF PRINCIPLE.
When Dino Rossi wins _BECAUSE OF_ the Ron Paul Republican vote, what will you say then?
If they had anything of substance to provide they would have done so already. Instead they resort to childish name-calling, behavior I'd expect from the Democrats over at HA.
Posted by: Constitutionalist on August 13, 2008 09:05 AMTell me, sirs, what is wrong with that? Please explain. It is THAT mentality that got us John McCain and you guys will run out and vote for this liberal, telling yourselves that you're supporting the party, the party must win, it's for the party! Talk about brainwashing at its finest...
Well, what kind of party do you have when you are putting liberals in control of it? What are YOU doing about party hacks who have allowed the nomination of John McCain? How do you check out Repub candidates? It seems you don't- got an R next to his name, good enough for you? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize this party has been HIJACKED. Look closely at the people running things. They are NOT conservatives. At all. So instead of helping oust these liberal imposters you are screaming vote for them because they say they are Republicans? What's your iq again?
We need to steer the Repub party back on course and to do that we need to screen every single candidate running. Fiscal conservatism, small govt- these are important issues and anyone w/out those stances should be disqualified because that person is NOT a Republican.
Paulites are Republicans. They are more conservative than the John McCains by a thousand. The party needs help. You have the opportunity to pull in the votes of many, many disenfranchised conservatives everywhere and what are you doing with that opportunity? Name calling while bending over for the liberals? Great job in leadership. Get in line...and yay for carbon taxes, amnesty, welfare for illegals, bigger govt, more war, more spending, more debt, less freedom! Thank you, Republicans. Stalin would be so very proud.
Posted by: Sm on August 13, 2008 09:57 AMRon, I'm in no real nor metaphorical sense of the phrase, "after you". I didn't know who you were until we met at the district convention this March. Neither did I realise you were so powerful and so entrenched, congratulations. But yes, it is obviously true that I haven't ever been actively involved much in Republican politics or politics in general before this year. But I'm hardly a stranger to it either. I grew up on Capital Hill, 17th and Republican ("surrounded by communists" I like to joke), but my political disposition was greatly influenced by the Republican rhetoric of the 1980s and early 1990s: i.e. free markets, state's rights, limited constitutional government, etc. My father, a long time small business owner, was a big supporter of the Regan/libertarian leaning elements within the Republican Party. Back when I was younger, he would frequent the events of the Downtown Republican Club, held at the College Club usually. He particularly enjoyed the lunches. His business partner for a time, and close friend for many years, John Nicholson, was heavily involved in the Republican party for over 40 if I remember correctly. John was the president of the Downtown Republican Club for 8 or 9 years. He was also a PCO over in the Eastside for quite some time, in the Newport area I believe. He went to the state convention pretty much every cycle, and was a delegate to the national convention several times as well. Before this year, the last political event I went to was a Republican event: a large Republican picnic at the Puyallup Fair Grounds back in the summer of 2000. My father encouraged me to go to the picnic because I was engaged in a path of self directed independent study on law, and the history of legal systems, and he thought that I might like to meet Jeannette Burrage, whom he had befriended through the Downtown Republican Club. But, since John passed away roughly 5 years ago, though, neither my dad nor I have really been involved in the Republican party, for good or for worse. But this year he is also running for PCO in his precinct. (So this is a heads-up for all of you fearless "unity" leaders in the KCGOP, if you'd like to try and alienate some more of your conservative neighbors who are showing a new found interest in politics this year, my dad also supported Ron Paul whole hearted. Go get em'!)
One of the reasons I decided to run for PCO was because of my neighbor, Terry. From what I understand while talking with her at the caucus and on other occasions, she was the PCO for LFP32-1056 for some time prior to your tenure and seemed very excited that I showed up to the caucus. She encouraged me to get involved and to maybe become a PCO. She seemed to have really liked the social aspect of being a PCO, e.g. door belling and meeting neighbors and such. She suggested we could maybe have Republican BBQs or dinner parties for the precinct. (It sounded like a fun idea to me, how about you?) But, given the less than warm welcome I have received by the district (and now it looks like precinct?) party leadership I wonder if it's worthwhile, and have lately been more leaning towards spending what spare social time I have with my more amicable family and friends. I have a 10 month old son, who I think tends to appreciate my company and smile at me a little more than Lisa (and I guess you) might. You see, last fall and this winter I made repeated attempts to contact Lisa for the time and location for the district meetings. I wanted to attend to get the feel for how things worked, having never been involved, and see if it was a worthwhile use of my time. But she never responded. I figured at the time that perhaps meetings were sparse or irregular and she was too busy to reply, or something. I was also too busy myself to really peruse it further (newborn baby, work, hobbies, etc.). I did not assume much more than this was going on at the time. Particularly because I had what I considered to be a very hospitable conversation with her husband Doug when he stopped by to sign me up for helping out on the caucuses. Of course, I now it seems clear she was intentionally ignoring my sincere requests to participate in the meetings. I'm sure I could have put in more of an effort to counter her desire to exclude me, but if this is the way the existing leadership runs the party, I really don't see any benefit in trying to actively influence her behavior otherwise. It seems to me your second or third hand depiction of what transpired is quite off the mark.
Regarding me having supposedly told Doug that I could not or would not support or vote for any Republican candidates were I to become a Republican PCO, this is completely missing the subtlety of my position. First of all, I made it quite clear who I was supporting in the primary. The two very visible Ron Paul signs outside on 37th was certainly a good hint, or "smell", as you might put it. So congratulations on your stellar detective work Lisa and Doug, you caught me. I supported Ron Paul and still do. Second of all, I told Doug that even though I was well aware that Dr. Paul would not win, I couldn't, with good conscience, vote for any of the other Republican candidates running for president. I know from observation, that this is the position many "pro-life" Republican voters take as well with regards to Republican candidates that fall short of their principles. Are these folks treated with a similar kind of hostility and scorn from you? I sure hope not. It's an important issue for them. Ronald Regan once said, "Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." Well, perhaps he's right, politics is not really for the principled amongst us. It's better left to those more approximating the practitioners of the oldest profession I suppose. During our conversation I was honestly and sincerely attempting to communicate to Doug my acknowledgment that politics requires a large doses of compromise, but also help him understand my personal beliefs and the common ground that I have with most Republicans, as well as my limit on how far I was willing to compromise my beliefs for the sake of participating within the party. Though my communication of this was obviously ineffectual.
In my defense as well, I also pointed out to Doug that it would be, statistically speaking, hardly of practical consequence who I or he might ultimately vote for or support for president. So my strong disapproval of the other candidates wasn't that big of a practical deal breaker for the local party anyhow. When it comes to presidential elections, this state is a Democratic state, period. All the Washington state electoral votes will go to a Democrat. I'm willing to bet my hard earned money on it. Your vote and my vote won't really count towards the final outcome, at all. Absent a candidate with the rhetorical strength of a Ronald Regan and coincided with the sorry economic milieu of the late 1970s and early 1980s, thinking otherwise, I feel, is even more delusional than thinking Ron Paul could have actually won the Republican nomination this year.
I suppose this is one of the drawbacks of attempting to be open and honest within the realm of politics regarding a controversial subject, and attempt to explain one's political and philosophical disposition to what seemed to be a curious and friendly neighbor, e.g. Doug. This leads one to conclude that the prerequisite for acceptable participation in local Republican politics is one's capacity for lying and subterfuge. But, I'm willing to concede that this perception of the conversation Doug and I had was due to a failure of communication on my part. Perhaps the next time you're doing the requisite PCO chores, knocking on doors, campaigning for the latest round of Republican candidates (Dinno perhaps?), I invite you to stop by and have a chat regarding all of this in person, but given your injury I suppose I ought to be the one stopping by. That is, of course unless you feel confident or content in continuing a characterization regarding one of your precinct neighbors based on mainly on misinformed second hand information. Although, Ron, I am quite flattered that you find me to be easy on the eyes, my wife would (thankfully) happen to agree with your assessment, and although I guess I could be characterized to be soft spoken, I hope it is clear that I'm not feather weight.
For your benefit, Ron, concerning future posts regarding me, here's another part of my story I'm sure Doug left out: There is an economic crisis that is brewing in this country. It actually has been hanging over this country and growing every year, pretty much my whole life. This crisis is the out of control fiscal profligacy of the Federal government. This profligacy will, with certainty, bankrupt the institution in my life time. Any fiscal conservative worth his weight in gold knows this. The whole Federal government is so out of control, it can't be stopped, for this is really what people seem to want. Live for today, spend as we may, and let our children and grandchildren clean up the mess. That is the moral disposition of our neighbors towards many things, especially the Federal government. This spending spree has been undertaken and instigated by Democrats and Republicans alike for close to a century. So I put little faith in there being anything I or you, or especially men like John McCain, can do to change this trend. Richard W. Fisher of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas estimates the current total liabilities to be a whopping $99.2 trillion and counting.
http://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/fisher/2008/fs080528.cfm
Print it out. Read it several times. Take it all in...
This is massive. It is unconscionable. It is immoral. If there's anyone "going for broke" this year (and every other year) it is surely the United States government, and of course the Washinton State legislature and Christine Gregoire aren't helping much either... But, thanks to honest to goodness, principled well learned fiscal conservatives, such as Dr. Paul, what I have come to realize will most likely happen in our future is a Federal default on it's liabilities through a multi-faceted process including a huge dose of debt monetization, e.g. monetary inflation, perhaps even resulting in "hyper inflation". Having learned quite a bit regarding this subject over the last 15 years or so of independent study, one of my main inspirations for getting out and involved with politics at this point is my desire to spread awareness to this reality, about what is happening now and what is likely going to happen in the future, given this seeming inexorable trajectory we are on. What can I say, Dr. Paul inspired me by his use of politics as a means of education. I, maybe naively, think this is perhaps one way I can move a few hearts and minds away from the siren song of socialism that seems to be and will most likely be soon seducing our society further. But, I set my sights very low in this regard, for even many self-described fiscal conservatives are not really interested in this dose of reality at this time, with it's implications regarding their own moral culpability in the whole mess. It takes quite a bit of moral courage to approach the subject with sincerity and not run away in fear.
For other very honest, accurate and sobering assessment of the Federal fiscal future, there's no better man than David Walker, the prior Comptroller General of the United States and head of the GAO. Check out any of his presentations on the subject from the last 9 years:
http://www.gao.gov/cghome/dwbiog.html
Next Thursday, August 21st, there will be a showing of a documentary called I.O.U.S.A. in 400 theatres around the nation (see details below). David Walker, Warren Buffett, Bill Novelli, Bill Niskanen and Pete Peterson will be giving a 45 minute town hall meeting from Omaha via satellite afterwords. I.O.U.S.A. won an award at this year's Sundance Film festival. But, I guess that's not saying much, seeing as how Al Gore's fictional fairy tale of a move won an award at Sundance too. I'm sure it will be well done though, and far more honest and accurate an account of the real inconvenient truths of our epoch than a man like Gore could handle. I highly recommend you and the rest of the readers of this blog go see this movie, even if you don't consider yourself a fiscal conservative. If you can't make it on the 21st, then it ought to be showing in a local theater in the proceeding few weeks as well, if not, then you surely ought to rent it on DVD when it comes out.
So in closing, seeing as how I'm more ideologically and educationally oriented in my interests and goals, and neither as powerful nor as entrenched as you, it is very likely that you will win. I try my best to follow the admonition to "be wise as serpents, and harmless as doves". So Ron, you really have nothing to fear from this Ronulan. And if I lose, I will surely congratulate you on a job well done, perhaps I could buy you a beer, or lunch to celebrate your victory.
-Robert
----------------------------------------------
http://www.agorafinancial.com/iousa.html
Dear Friends,
Some of you have heard me mention our forthcoming feature documentary, "I.O.U.S.A." A few of you may have even had the chance to see an early version of it. The film tells the story of America's large and growing fiscal challenge, how the richest country in the world came to be in the position we are in today, and what could happen to us if we don't do something about it soon. It covers our nation's four key deficits: budget, savings, balance of payments/trade, and worst of all, our leadership deficit.
The film is fact-based, nonpartisan and nonideological, and it features a number of candid appearances, including by Warren Buffett, Alan Greenspan, Paul Volcker, my Foundation's chairman Pete Peterson, Sens. Kent Conrad and Judd Gregg, former Treasury Secretaries Paul O'Neill and Robert Rubin, former CBO chief Alice Rivlin, Rep. Ron Paul, my Fiscal Wake-Up Tour colleague Bob Bixby, and myself.
For one night, August 21, the film will show in about 400 theaters around the country -- with our own special version of a "bonus track!" Immediately following the movie itself, audience members everywhere will be treated to a 45-minute town meeting on the US economy with Buffett, Bill Novelli of AARP, Bill Niskanen of the CATO Institute, Pete and I. We'll be coming to you live by satellite from Omaha. You can find out more about this very special town meeting, submit your own question to the participants, and locate the showing in a theater near you at www.IOUSAtheMovie.com.
Starting on August 22, the film will run in 10 cities for at least one week. Those cities also are listed on the movie's website.
I hope you will take the time -- and take your family and friends! -- to see the film. It's as clear an explanation of the four deficits threatening our economic future as you'll find anywhere. Nothing is more important than educating the public about this looming crisis and building the political will in Washington to enact change.
Anything that you're willing to do to spread the word about the film would be greatly appreciated.
All the best,
Dave
David M. Walker
President & CEO
Peter G. Peterson Foundation
----------------------------------------------
It will be playing at the following theaters:
Alderwood 7 Theatres
3501 184TH ST. SW
LYNNWOOD, WA 98037
425-672-2077
Bella Bottega 11 Cinema
8890 NE 161ST AVENUE
REDMOND, WA 98052
425-861-6880
AMC Pacific Place 11
600 PINE STREET
SEATTLE, WA 98101
206-652-8908
AMC Kent Station 14
426 RAMSAY WAY
KENT, WA 98032
253-850-2684
Century Theatres Federal Way 16
2001 S. COMMONS
FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003
253-946-0942
Auburn 17 Theatres
1101 SUPER MALL WAY, SUITE 901
AUBURN, WA 98001
253-735-8052
Capital Mall 14
625 BLACK LAKE BLVD. SW
OLYMPIA, WA 98502
360-943-0769
-Robert
Posted by: Robert W. Ream on August 13, 2008 05:01 PMYou have to balance your principles with a belief in pluralism because both are necessary.
Moving on. You guys are welcome in the party. That said, if you don't support John McCain and won't vote for him and if you don't support Dino Rossi and won't vote for him (like your little SP standard bearer, Travis Pahl) then while you're welcome in the Party, maybe being a PCO isn't the best fit. Why would the Republican Party, an institution that is interested in self-preservation (ie, it wants to thrive and grow) start to put individuals in low level leadership positions who are openly and aggressively hostile to the organization's top leadership?
I mean, you guys are welcome to try. But don't get so damn exasperated when you get some push-back. You don't support the Party's leadership, but you demand their assistance in getting you positions. Do we see how this doesn't make a ton of sense?
Posted by: AD on August 13, 2008 06:19 PMJust kidding! I supported Ron Paul but I'd actually love having people like you in my precinct willing to make the race for PCO a little more exciting. As far as I know I'm the only one in my precinct even putting shoe leather into doorbelling for Rossi, Nixon, Haistings, Reichert, etc. I sure could have used the extra help defending conservative values in my neighborhood - especially now that ballots are already mailed and time is running out. I really hope you have a speedy recovery and are able to make friends with your neighbor rather than feel like he is out to get you.
Posted by: RDP on August 13, 2008 09:19 PMWhile the concept of a team is great in sports and politics and so forth, the output of the team far exceeds the importance of its construction. That's why coaches are fired and players are traded. The "GOP Team" needs a new coach and a lot of new players. I doubt that 45 and 46 would root for a team with a losing record, and one which is populated by a roster of outdated, mentally aged players who are led by a non-dynamic coach. But, if it's all about "The Team" that "is," and not the one you would like to have (I'm paraphrasing Rumsfeld here), then keep going. Faith, reverence, an subordination--that's all it takes.
This is just so choice one second your going to claim there
intolerant of your views, the next minute you characterize
them all as loons. Well you know what you can't have it both
ways. The only ones that are intolerant are you and your establishment
friends. you treat these people like dirt and yet you expect them
to play nice with you. Maybe if you and your friends had ever
treated them with even a little bit of common decency this party
wouldn't be in the downward spiral it is now,
I understand what pluralism is, but under your definition, would it not be "OKAY" for one to vote for a Democrat? If not, why not?
What you are basically saying is what others have said all along. If the person has an 'R' after the name, they get a vote. This is not principle and it is not pluralism, it is an uninformed vote.
Being a religious person, I am quite familiar with pluralism in religion. Lets look at what it has brought us. Jesus is God -- Jesus is not God. Justification by faith alone -- justification by faith and works. Particular redemption -- universal atonement.
As you can see, "pluralism" merely is a mask that allows one to believe anything he or she wants without any foundation to build upon.
Standing on principles cannot lead to pluralism. Compromise leads to pluralism.
"You guys are welcome in the party."
Really? Does it really look like it? Does it sound like it? I was at the state convention and saw what happened - I sat in the front row. YOu can't tell me that we are welcome in the party.
"and if you don't support Dino Rossi and won't vote for him (like your little SP standard bearer, Travis Pahl)"
Don't know Travis Pahl and he doesn't determine who I vote for anyway. Rossi has recently reached out to the RP Republicans and answered many of their questions (see Doug Parris' article at www.thereaganwing.com) and it seems that he is more conservative than the party is allowing him to be portrayed. Again I'l reiterate, Dino Rossi will win _BECAUSE OF_ the Ron Paul vote.
"Why would the Republican Party, an institution that is interested in self-preservation (ie, it wants to thrive and grow) start to put individuals in low level leadership positions who are openly and aggressively hostile to the organization's top leadership?"
How can a party claim interest in self-preservation when it ignores the largest grass roots movement in the party? What about Esser ignoring RP candidates or the state party even running candidates against RP Republicans who are running for office and doing well?
Posted by: Constitutionalist on August 14, 2008 12:02 PM"And just to head off the inevitable criticism - people like me aren't intolerant of the kooky views of RPers. I mean, when I see the illuminati tablers at Westlake or scientologists or hare krishna monks at the airport, I just chuckle and think it's GREAT that I live in a society where people are free to believe in whatever batshit crazy thing they want."
This is what I am talking about. You are obviously placing the RP Republicans on the same level as those folks that you mentioned.
Since when did limited government, low taxation, cutting spending, and human life constitute "batshit crazy" things? Tell us AD! Even better, vote for people that support these principles.
"We're intolerant of their blind zeal and, yes, intolerance. We don't want them on the team because they've shown they don't want to maintain the team. They demand a big tent only so they can make it a (very) small tent. That's a no-go."
Intolerance? It was Ruth Gibbs that stood at the door into the convention hall and handed out anti-RP material, and on each chair was a supposed quote from RP that claimed to show he was racist. No one stood up and denounced these things. One the second day when someone placed a CFR sheet on each chair showing that Paul was the only one who wasn't CFR-affiliated, WE stood and denounced it!
It was a state leader for another Republican presidential candidate who approached us after the convention and congratulated US for now sinking to the state party's level and spoke to us about the open cheating and willful violations of the rules. The cat is out of the bag AD.
Posted by: Constitutionalist on August 14, 2008 12:11 PMWe are on the threshold of the greatest R3Volution in the history of the Party since 1854 and it will be based on the principle of intolerance of lawlessness.
This will be the fusion of at least two revolutions, both accused of being cults, of being radical, intolerant, uncooperative, exclusionary extremists... the Rons.
Worn out old propaganda. The snapping of a dog at the tires of a passing car.
And we are passing.
We do Ron-Ron, yeah, we do Ron-Ron.
Come RINOs and Whiners across this great land
And don't criticize what you can't understand
New Wave Republicans are beyond your command
Your old road is rapidly fading
Get out of the new one if you can't lend a hand
Cause this Party's a changin'
I'd much rather have a PCO that supports Republican values than blindly supporting Republican candidates.
Oh wait, I am one. :)
Posted by: Andrew Brown on August 16, 2008 12:59 PM