"F*** YOU TYRANTS!" - Revolution on Convention Floor

[howardroark]

****UPDATE****

PARTY ESTABLISHMENT ELITES GO FOR POWER GRAB AND OVERRULE "NAYS" IN VOICE VOTE:

________________________ __________



A minor revolt broke out on the floor of the Republican Party's presidential convention Tuesday afternoon and evening. Ron Paul delegates from several states erupted into protest over a controversial change to the party's rules to block future insurgencies mounted by outside candidates like their hero. Paul supporters also freaked out over the convention's refusal to recognize about two dozen Paul delegates and for refusing to treat Paul like a serious candidate for the nomination.

During the roll call of the states, the Paulites were irate, screaming at the podium, as convention secretary Kim Reynolds declined to read out the delegate votes for any candidate other than Romney. "The Republican Party is so afraid of Ron Paul that they won't repeat his name," shouted Jim Ayala, a Nevada delegate and Paul supporter wearing an Oath Keepers T-shirt.

Minutes earlier, the Paulites were enraged when the convention adopted the new set of rules on a voice vote during which the Paul backers out-shouted the other delegates. One Nevada delegate and Paul supporter, Mark Carducci, thrust two middle fingers into the air toward RNC Chairman Reince Priebus and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), screaming "Fuck you, tyrants!" (That's him in the above picture.)

Read more: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/ron-paul-supporters-rebel-convention-floor-fuck-you-tyrants

[howardroark]

The article is incorrect in stating that it is only the Ron Paul supporters who are furious at the GOP Establishment:

[Dos Equis]

A minor revolt broke out on the floor of the Republican Party's presidential convention Tuesday afternoon and evening. Ron Paul delegates from several states erupted into protest over a controversial change to the party's rules to block future insurgencies mounted by outside candidates like their hero. Paul supporters also freaked out over the convention's refusal to recognize about two dozen Paul delegates and for refusing to treat Paul like a serious candidate for the nomination.

During the roll call of the states, the Paulites were irate, screaming at the podium, as convention secretary Kim Reynolds declined to read out the delegate votes for any candidate other than Romney. "The Republican Party is so afraid of Ron Paul that they won't repeat his name," shouted Jim Ayala, a Nevada delegate and Paul supporter wearing an Oath Keepers T-shirt.

Minutes earlier, the Paulites were enraged when the convention adopted the new set of rules on a voice vote during which the Paul backers out-shouted the other delegates. One Nevada delegate and Paul supporter, Mark Carducci, thrust two middle fingers into the air toward RNC Chairman Reince Priebus and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), screaming "Fuck you, tyrants!" (That's him in the above picture.)
Read more: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/ron-paul-supporters-rebel-convention-floor-fuck-you-tyrants

Yeah that's the way to get taken seriously. 

[howardroark]

Yeah that's the way to get taken seriously. 

How do you feel about the GOP Establishment power grab, specifically meant to disenfranchise not just Ron Paul supporters, but the entire conservative grassroots?

[Dos Equis]

How do you feel about the GOP Establishment power grab, specifically meant to disenfranchise not just Ron Paul supporters, but the entire conservative grassroots?

I don't have a problem with whatever they did to prevent a handful of unreasonable people from trying to disrupt the convention.  Ron Paul isn't supporting the Republican nominee, again, and I doubt many of supporters will either.  All they really wanted to do was put on a show.   

Ron Paul is a good man, but a disproportionate number of his supporters didn't help him at all.  That picture is an example of why many don't take them seriously. 

[howardroark]

I don't have a problem with whatever they did to prevent a handful of unreasonable people from trying to disrupt the convention.  Ron Paul isn't supporting the Republican nominee, again, and I doubt many of supporters will either.  All they really wanted to do was put on a show.   

Ron Paul is a good man, but a disproportionate number of his supporters didn't help him at all.  That picture is an example of why many don't take them seriously. 

So you have no problem with the GOP Establishment disenfranchising Ron Paul supporters, Tea Partiers, and grassroots conservatives by changing the rules, thereby making it impossible for grassroots Republican operatives to make it to the convention and vote for something that's actually meaningful?

Conventions aren't supposed to be "shows." That's the way things were done in the USSR. Conventions are supposed to be serious Party gatherings where things get done.

[Soul Crusher]

I don't have a problem with whatever they did to prevent a handful of unreasonable people from trying to disrupt the convention.  Ron Paul isn't supporting the Republican nominee, again, and I doubt many of supporters will either.  All they really wanted to do was put on a show.   

Ron Paul is a good man, but a disproportionate number of his supporters didn't help him at all.  That picture is an example of why many don't take them seriously. 

Ron Paul's fanatics are his biggest turn off.   They spam face book w cultish devotion hardly any different than the Obama bots and are about 5:1 in terms of attacking the GOP vs attacking the left and then complain why they are treated as outcasts.  

It is what it is.   You have to build coalitions in politics, not treat people who disagree with you on 30% things as enemies and hand over an election to obama.  

[howardroark]

Ron Paul's fanatics are his biggest turn off.   They spam face book w cultish devotion hardly any different than the Obama bots and are about 5:1 in terms of attacking the GOP vs attacking the left and then complain why they are treated as outcasts.  

It is what it is.   You have to build coalitions in politics, not treat people who disagree with you on 30% things as enemies and hand over an election to obama.  

Yes, you have to build coalitions in politics. So why, then, is the GOP Establishment specifically attacking its grassroots support?

[howardroark]

Here's a video of the Party Establishment snubbing the grassroots GOP operatives:

This was a vote over the proposed rule changes. Did you hear the voice votes? Wouldn't you say it was too close to call - or that perhaps the "nays" had the majority? The Party Establishment doesn't care - this is a power grab orchestrated by them, after all.

[Roger Bacon]

So you have no problem with the GOP Establishment disenfranchising Ron Paul supporters, Tea Partiers, and grassroots conservatives by changing the rules, thereby making it impossible for grassroots Republican operatives to make it to the convention and vote for something that's actually meaningful?

Conventions aren't supposed to be "shows." That's the way things were done in the USSR. Conventions are supposed to be serious Party gatherings where things get done.

Save yourself the time.  You absolutely cannot reason with this childish neoconservative troll.

[Soul Crusher]

Yes, you have to build coalitions in politics. So why, then, is the GOP Establishment specifically attacking its grassroots support?

Don't know and i don't agree with what they tried, but both sides here are of unclean hands. 

[Dos Equis]

So you have no problem with the GOP Establishment disenfranchising Ron Paul supporters, Tea Partiers, and grassroots conservatives by changing the rules, thereby making it impossible for grassroots Republican operatives to make it to the convention and vote for something that's actually meaningful?

Conventions aren't supposed to be "shows." That's the way things were done in the USSR. Conventions are supposed to be serious Party gatherings where things get done.

I have no problem with changing the rules to prevent a sideshow.

I agree in part about the "show."  The nominating process isn't a "show," but the remainder of the convention is basically a pep rally.  

The Ron Paul supporters were not at the convention to represent their states' interests or to support the party.  They had an agenda.  It's pretty transparent.  

[Soul Crusher]

I have no problem with changing the rules to prevent a sideshow.

I agree in part about the "show."  The nominating process isn't a "show," but the remainder of the convention is basically a pep rally.  

The Ron Paul supporters were not at the convention to represent their states' interests or to support the party.  They had an agenda.  It's pretty transparent.  

Ron Paul ran in the GOP primary and would not have supported the GOP nominee regardless of who it was other than himself. 

That is really wrong on many levels and he should have went third party if that was going to be how he rolled.   

[Dos Equis]

Ron Paul ran in the GOP primary and would not have supported the GOP nominee regardless of who it was other than himself. 

That is really wrong on many levels and he should have went third party if that was going to be how he rolled.   

Completely agree. 

[howardroark]

Who here has the agenda? Is it not the Party Establishment, which has snubbed the duly elected delegates of several states (e.g. Maine, Louisiana) as well as its grassroots support?

Here's a letter by Morton Blackwell, founder of the Leadership Institute and a grassroots conservative activist leader of literally historic proportions:

Dear Fellow Delegate,

On Tuesday of this week, as Republican National Convention delegates, you and I will be voting on rules changes that could fundamentally change our Republican Party — and not for the better.

Over the years, I’ve served on the Louisiana and Virginia GOP Rules Committees. I currently serve on both the Republican National Committee’s Standing Committee on Rules and on the National Convention’s Committee on Rules and Order of Business.

I was Barry Goldwater’s youngest elected delegate in 1964, I was honored to serve on President Ronald Reagan’s White House Staff from 1981-1984, and I have attended every Republican National Convention Rules Committee meeting since 1972. My wife and I have contributed major donations to the Romney-Ryan campaign.

These rule changes are the most awful I’ve ever seen come before any National Convention.

I’m writing you today to urge you to join the growing effort to stop the worst-ever changes in this Rules Committee’s Report and to vote in favor of amendments to Rules 12 and 15. The Minority Reports will restore important rights and protections which state parties and grassroots Republicans would lose under the Rules Committee Report as written.

These amendments to Rules 12 and 15 are contained in Minority Reports supported by at least 25% of the members of this convention’s Committee on Rules and Order of Business.

It’s rare for Minority Reports to come before our national convention, but the issues involved here are vital to the future of our party.

I must tell you there is tremendous arm-twisting now to peel signers off of the Minority Reports.

Finally, whether on Minority Reports or on voting down the Rules, it will require at least six states’ delegations to insist upon a roll call vote.

I will not pretend that the deck is not stacked against us.

But many state leaders, liberty-minded activists, and grass-roots conservatives are up-in-arms as word of this power grab spreads.

Our convention will make this important decision Tuesday as some of our first work. Many folks skip these procedural sessions thinking nothing of importance occurs.

This year, that is far from the truth.

If the Rules Committee Report were to pass without adoption of the Minority Reports, it would amount to a power grab by Washington, D.C. party insiders and consultants designed to silence the voice of state party activists and Republican grassroots by:

*** Handing national party officials the power to change national party rules adopted by state and grassroots leaders at the Republican National Convention. For generations, the prohibition of manipulated changes in the national Rules of the Republican Party between national conventions has served as one of the crown jewels of our party. It’s a power grab which opens the door to many future power grabs.

*** Stripping state parties in all states with binding primaries of the power of choosing who will represent their states as national delegates and alternate delegates.

This outrageous change would empower presidential campaigns to disapprove and remove delegates and alternate delegates selected by rules adopted by state Republican parties. Rather than grassroots activists who won delegate and alternate delegate slots by following state party rules, a large majority of positions would be handed to top donors of the winning campaign.

*** Gutting the great and successful reform adopted in the current election cycle to stop the dangerous trend to front-load the selection of national convention delegates. Our party would move again toward a national primary which would deny grassroots Republicans the opportunity to vet presidential candidates in a nomination contest of reasonable length. This reform must not be abandoned.

Like most of us delegates to this convention, I’ve spent years gladly battling in the trenches for our Republican Party.

And as the President of the Leadership Institute — which specializes in training thousands of conservative activists, students, and leaders to fight for our country’s future –I can’t tell you how disheartened I am to see these rules changes even considered.

These rule changes would give good folks like you less of a say over our Republican Party in favor of insiders and consultants in Washington, D.C.

At a time when Tea Party activists have re-invigorated our Republican Party — leading to massive gains in the U.S. House, the Senate, and many state legislatures in the 2010 elections — why would we want to discourage activism?

Thanks to their efforts, you and I have a new generation of exciting conservative leaders in Washington, D.C., who — in many instances –were elected despite the opposition of establishment-backed opponents.

Certainly this is not to say GOP leaders are always wrong.

But history shows that our Republican Party grows when we welcome newly active participants and treat them fairly.

Our Republican Party is strongest when we listen to the wishes of grassroots conservatives.

Instead of strengthening our party, these insider power grabs will weaken it.

For these reasons, I urge you to join the growing effort to adopt the Minority Reports when the Rules Committee Report comes up for consideration by the convention.

Morton Blackwell

P.S. Some of the most important work of the convention will take place on Tuesday where you and I will be voting on rules that could fundamentally change our Republican Party for the worse.

New rules will be voted on that have been designed to silence state Republican parties and Republican grassroots in favor of party insiders and Washington, D.C.-based consultants.

The vote will take place at Tuesday’s convention session, and I’m counting on you join the growing effort to defeat these new rules.

Please vote to adopt the Minority Reports on Rules and urge your delegation to call for a roll call vote on all Rules-related votes.

This fight is too important for us not to make a stand.

[howardroark]

WAKE UP PEOPLE - The Party Insiders are illegally grabbing power from you and me - and you'll sit there and be a shill for them?!?

[howardroark]

A post from RedState's Erick Erickson yesterday:
_______________

GOP Rules Committee Rapidly Moving to Shut Out Grassroots at 2:00 p.m. Today

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  August 28th at 08:47 AM

At 2:00 p.m. today in Tampa, the Republican National Committee, led by Team Romney, is moving to shut down conservative grassroots activists. I’ve been on the phone with several individuals involved in the fight who tell me that the fight is not over, it is only just starting.

Specifically, the media is reporting that the rules fight is over because Team Romney is abandoning Ben Ginsberg’s effort to allow candidates to control delegates. Under an initial proposal, delegates would, in effect, be chosen by the presumed nominee’s campaign and not based on votes in the states and delegate selection processes in the states.

That issue appears resolved, but several people I’ve spoken to this morning make clear that Team Romney and the RNC establishment are using that compromise as a red herring to distract from two major rules change proposals that would decimate Republican grassroots and prevent upstart political campaigns.

Reports that the floor fight threat is over might be designed to calm the grassroots and get them to ignore what is coming at 2 o’clock.

The first rule to be proposed is one that would give the Republican National Committee the power to change rules between conventions with a three-quarters vote of the RNC. One source tells me, “With a Republican President, of course this is doable. Everybody will roll over if a President Romney asks them too. They’ll be able to get Ben Ginsberg’s proposal next year.”

In other words, if Team Romney prevails in this rules change, they don’t have to worry about Ben Ginsberg not getting his way today on the delegate changes. They’ll be able to do it later when the press and grassroots are not watching.

The second rules change would front load winner takes all primaries. Grassroots conservatives point to both Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum as reasons to stop this rule. Had there been front loaded winner takes all primaries, neither the Gingrich nor the Santorum campaigns would have been able to get any traction.

“This is going to be a fight on the floor if they don’t back down. They have too much pride to back down and we’re going to humble them,” said one delegate to the convention.

Another tells me, “They’ve gotten social conservatives comfortable with the platform and now that they’re placated [Team Romney] is going to undercut them with this change.”

Speaking to one person familiar with the rules changes who supports them, I’m told a number of people support the changes because they see the current rules as efforts by Michael Steel to “liven up” the process, but all it did was run up the cost and drag it out. “Are we really going to keep the status quo because the guy who brought the convention to hurricane country in hurricane season thought they were a good idea?” the delegate asked.

The Rules Committee will meet at 2:00 p.m. today in Tampa to consider the rules changes. If they make it through the committee, delegates are telling me they promise a huge floor fight and there’s no guarantee Team Romney will get its way given the current make up of the delegates in Tampa.

http://www.redstate.com/2012/08/28/gop-rules-committee-rapidly-moving-to-shut-out-grassroots-at-200-p-m-today/

[howardroark]

What do you think, 3333, Beach Bum, etc.??

We have to remember that this election is not just about replacing the party in power. It’s about who and what we replace it with. Grassroots conservatives know this. Without the energy and wisdom of the grassroots, the GOP would not have had the historic 2010 electoral victories.

That’s why the controversial rule change being debated at the RNC convention right now is so very disappointing. It’s a direct attack on grassroots activists by the GOP establishment, and it must be rejected. Please follow the link to Michelle Malkin’s article about this.

https://www.facebook.com/sarahpalin/posts/464351206919086

[Soul Crusher]

What do you think, 3333, Beach Bum, etc.??
https://www.facebook.com/sarahpalin/posts/464351206919086

I don't agree with what they are trying to do. 

I favor closed primaries and have 4 super tuesdays by region. 

[howardroark]

Read what conservative blogger/activist Michelle Malkin has to say on the power grab orchestrated by Party Insiders: http://michellemalkin.com/2012/08/27/floor-fight-grass-roots-activists-battle-attempt-to-rig-gop-convention-delegate-rules/

[howardroark]

I don't agree with what they are trying to do. 

I favor closed primaries and have 4 super tuesdays by region. 

BTW, are you involved in your local Republican Party structure as a precinct delegate or the NY equivalent?

[howardroark]

The Texas delegation is livid. At a morning meeting of Texas delegates, Munisteri and a boisterous crowd discussed how the proposed change would affect the way Texans might send delegates to future conventions.

We will be “told how to select our delegates,” Munisteri said.

Texas prides itself on being a state party whose members choose who will go the national convention. It’s a grassroots — versus top-town — approach, said James Dickey, an at-large alternate from Bee Cave.

Dickey said the result of the change, if it is approved, could be drastic.

“It would dampen enthusiasm a lot,” Dickey said. “It would dampen excitement about running to be a delegate.”

With the support of Texas’ delegates, Munisteri said he’s ready to take the fight to the floor of the convention.

In a letter to the national rules committee, the Texas delegation said: “The only way a floor fight can be avoided is if the rule is stricken.”

Read more: http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/politics/entries/2012/08/27/national_republicans_at_odds_w.html

[Soul Crusher]

BTW, are you involved in your local Republican Party structure as a precinct delegate or the NY equivalent?

No.  NY GOP is riddled with corruption and really disgusting people.   I once tried to get involved but was so turned off by the insiders i now am involved only w the Westchester County Tea Party and do voter fraud monitoring for the RNC every 4 years for the presidential races.  

[Dos Equis]

I agree with this comment:  "The battle is being cast by some observers as a narrow fight between Ron Paul advocates and the rest of the party."  

Also, they ought to change the rules that make it more difficult for a delegate to vote in direct conflict with the primary results.  A delegate voting for a candidate who was trounced in the primary disenfranchises the voters who supported the winner.  

[Roger Bacon]

They (people like the Bum) really couldn't care less about issues like this.  It takes effort to research these issues, and take on a point of view that contradicts that of the status quo candidates.  It's much easier to watch the MSM, focus on the issues they report on (and nothing else), enjoy the scripted show they're neatly putting on at the convention, and  enjoy the scripted, safe, clean candidates "debate".

We're giving up our rights, the government is getting bigger and bigger, we're giving up more and more.  To some of these foolish children though, that's okay.  They take the easy route and refuse to acknowledge it. 

The TSA could finger bang their daughters and they'll keep telling themselves "anything in the name of security".  That's a much easier way to deal with our current situation.