The Truth Begins To Come Out

If you are reading this blog, chances are you voted in the primary election wherever you live–most of the people who read this blog are politically active. People who vote in primary elections believe that their vote counts and will make a difference. Unfortunately, that is not always the case.

Because of the recent events in the North Carolina Republican Party, I am no longer registered as a Republican voter. I see very few differences between the parties at this point. I will be voting for Donald Trump because I don’t want Hillary Clinton picking Supreme Court Justices. However, I really don’t expect a lot of change in Washington regardless of who wins.

The Republican establishment is strong, and they are very capable of causing trouble for anyone who truly wants change.

The Daily Haymaker posted an article today about the real reasons behind the coup in the North Carolina Republican party that took place on Saturday. I strongly suggest that you follow the link and read the entire article. I will, however, provide a few excerpts.

The article was written by Brant Clifton and quotes Sammy Dodd, who was a delegate to the 2012 Republican Convention in Tampa.

Mr. Dodd writes:

In 2012 I was elected as a National Delegate to the RNC National Convention in Tampa, Florida. Many of the political hijinks that were pulled that year are well documented. Everything from the results of voice votes on a huge teleprompter before the vote was taken, changing the Party Rules to prevent Ron Paul from being nominated from the floor, disqualifying delegates from the State of Maine and replacing them with Romney delegates, and finally then Chairman Robin Hayes strong-arming the North Carolina delegation to support the Rules change.

Robin Hayes is the newly-elected Chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party (after the coup that deposed Hasan Harnett).

Mr. Dodd continues:

In North Carolina, National Delegates are bound to vote in accordance with the results of our Primary. This is not only State Party rules, but State Law. The purpose of this law is to ensure that the Primary voters’ votes are represented at the Convention.

  Knowing that, in 2012 I pledged my vote and was bound to Newt Gingrich. At the time of the Primary, Romney, Paul, Gingrich, and Santorum were all in the race, so each candidate received a certain number of delegates according to the percentage of the votes. But before the Convention, Gingrich and Santorum dropped out. However, by State Law and Party Rules, Gingrich and Santorum delegates were still supposed to cast their votes accordingly on the first ballot. In fact, the NCGOP made me sign a pledge form, threatening legal action and up to a TEN THOUSAND DOLLAR fine for deviating from said pledge.

When it came time to cast that first vote, no one came to me and asked how I was voting or to give me a ballot to cast my vote. Instead, the North Carolina delegation “voted” 49 for Romney, and 6 for Ron Paul. So what happened to the Gingrich and Santorum votes? Simple. My vote was cast for me without my prior knowledge or consent. In essence, this vote was not only in violation of State Party rules, but violation of State Law!

Robin Hayes is, and was, directly responsible for how the North Carolina delegation was to be proportioned and bound.  Fortunately, I have not yet been held responsible for my law-breaking vote. The reason Ron Paul received votes was to appease his supporters and keep them at bay.

…And how you may ask, does the Kangaroo “Trial” Court annihilation of Chairman Harnett on April 30th 2016 relate? Not only is the State Chairman unbound by virtue of his position, but also he has control of the delegation and its proportioning. By his actions in 2012, Hayes showed that he is the RNC’s puppet, and with a contested convention likely in Cleveland, the RNC needs their tool/agent/Chairman to control the North Carolina delegation. They knew Chairman Harnett would have followed Party Rules and State Law; Hayes will not.  So what occurred on April 30th had nothing to do with the bogus set-up hacking charge or State Convention fees. This was, and is, about the RNC and the NC Delegation all along.

Americans have given up their choice of President. I will be voting for Donald Trump because I feel that Hillary Clinton is a true radical. However, I will not rejoin the Republican Party until they change the way they do business.

 

Why American Voters Are Angry

The Washington Examiner posted an article today that represents the opening salvo of the establishment Republican effort to determine the Republican nominee for President without considering the will of the voters.

The article reports:

The Republican Party does not require a presidential candidate to win eight states to qualify to be placed in nomination at its upcoming Cleveland convention, GOP officials say.

The Republican National Committee’s “Rule 40(b)” makes eligibility for the GOP nomination contingent upon winning a majority of the convention delegates in at least eight states or territories, an achievement generally accomplished by winning at least eight primary or caucus elections. However, Rule 40(b) only applied to the 2012 Republican convention in Tampa, Fla., that nominated former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

When the rules don’t agree with your wishes, change the rules.

The article explains:

Party officials and knowledgeable sources have confirmed over the past few days that Rule 40(b) doesn’t exist for the purposes of the upcoming convention. That means at this point, the three candidates left in the race, front-runner Donald Trump, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich, are all eligible for the nomination, as, possibly, are the Republican contenders who have since suspended their campaigns.

Rule 40(b) was put in place in 2012 to block the name of Ron Paul from being introduced as a presidential candidate in Tampa. The bigwigs interfered in the primary choice and came up with a candidate who lost. I believe Mitt Romney would have won the nomination even if Ron Paul was also running, and I think there would have been more voters willing to come out and support Mitt Romney. It would be nice if the party let the voters decide who the nominee is. The Democrats have a similar problem with the super-delegates. Those delegates came into existence to prevent the Democrats from choosing a candidate significantly outside the mainstream of American politics after the resounding defeat of George McGovern. We do live in a representative republic rather than a democracy, but I believe that in a representative republic, the voters get to choose the people who represent them.

I’m Feeling A Little Insecure

Yesterday Infowars posted an article about some changes the Department of Justice is making in fighting the war on terror at home. I think fighting the war on terror at home is a really good idea–particularly since we have no way of vetting the refugees from Syria that the United Nations is sending us (rightwinggranny). However, I guess the Department of Justice does not necessarily see things the same way I do.

The article reports:

The DOJ announced it will appoint a “domestic terrorism counsel” to focus on who the Obama administration and the controversial Southern Poverty Law Center considers “extremists.”

“Looking back over the past few years, it is clear that domestic terrorists and homegrown violent extremists remain a real and present danger to the United States,” the DOJ’s John Carlin said on Wednesday.

But the Justice Dept. and the Department of Homeland Security previously characterized libertarians, conservatives and constitutionalists as militia-inspired “domestic extremists.”

“Militia members most commonly associated with third-party political groups,” a 2009 Missouri Information Analysis Center report stated. “It is not uncommon for militia members to display Constitutional Party, Campaign for Liberty or libertarian material.”

“These members are usually supporters of former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr.”

Even more concerning, the MIAC report encouraged law enforcement to scrutinize Americans who oppose abortion, illegal immigration and the rapid growth of the government, all of which are views shared by a plurality of Donald Trump supporters.

I guess we have come to the point where not totally agreeing with the Democratic Party agenda puts you under suspicion as a ‘domestic terrorist.’ Meanwhile the Justice Department is ignoring the obvious threat that is currently invading our country, both as legal refugees and illegal aliens. At some point I hope the voters in America will hold these people accountable for what they are doing–they are not only putting our national security at risk, they are creating divisions among Americans that weaken us as a nation, This is not the way to bring America together.

You Can’t Win If You Are Not Willing To Fight !

The Washington Examiner posted an editorial yesterday about the fight that went on at the Republican convention about rules changes the Romney campaign wanted to make.

The editorial points out:

Ginsberg’s (Romney campaign lawyer Ben Ginsberg) rule change, launched without warning Friday morning, would have given the presidential campaigns the power to replace any of the delegates pledged to them, functionally giving them the power to select every state’s delegation. Many in the conservative movement saw this as a power grab by party insiders at the expense of grassroots conservatives, with the Paul threat serving merely as a bogeyman.

The article concludes:

…As they learned in the Bush era with the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers, conservatives often achieve better results by holding a Republican president’s feet to the fire. In the event of a Romney administration, conservatives must learn from this small fight and keep up their efforts. We hope Romney learns from it, too.

The bottom line here is simple. If the conservative wing of the Republican party intends to wrest control of the party from the establishment Republicans (who are not noticeably different from the Democrats on many issues), they need to increase their numbers in Congress and fight hard. We can win this battle without forming a third party–we just need to be willing to fight the battle.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Experts Talk About New Hampshire

 

Congressman Poe and Governor Mitt Romney

Image via Wikipedia

National Review Online posted an article today by a number of its political pundits on the meaning of the results of the New Hampshire Primary. I will try to summarize, but please follow the link to the article–it is very informative.

Hunter Baker stated that Mitt Romney benefited by the winner in New Hampshire being declared early–more people saw him give his victory speech, and the speech was very effective.

Mona Charen pointed out that both Iowa and New Hampshire chose Romney. She also noted that the attacks on capitalism from Newt Gingrich may have helped shore up Mitt Romney’s conservative credentials. Regardless of how you feel about Mitt Romney, you have to admit that he is a capitalist!

Jim Geraghty points out that after the Romney win in New Hampshire, the only viable opponent to Mitt Romney is Rick Santorum. Mr. Geraghty wonders if Senator Sentorum will be able to overcome the Romney momentum.

Hugh Hewitt also agrees that Santorum is the only other candidate who could possibly beat Mitt Romney. He states that Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich ended their campaigns when they went after Romney and Bain Capital. Mr. Hewitt ends his comments with the question, “So who does Jim DeMint endorse?” Interesting question.

Kathryn Jean Lopez also comments that the attacks by Newt Gingrich helped Mitt Romney from his candidacy as a defense of capitalism. This is the beginning of the narrative Mitt Romney will use in his run against President Obama.

Grover Norquist takes a different approach. He has three suggestions for Mitt Romney–who to choose for a running mate, who to choose for a chief-of-staff, and to convince Ron Paul to speak at the Republican convention. He believes the Romney needs to include Ron Paul in order to insure that Ron Paul does not run as a third-party candidate.

Henry Olsen stated that the strong victory in New Hampshire almost assures that Mitt Romney will be the candidate. He makes an interesting observation though:

Jon Huntsman? He carried only four groups — those who consider themselves Democrats, those who strongly oppose the Tea Party, those who are satisfied with Obama, and those who are dissatisfied with the GOP candidates. ’Nuff said.

Great comment.

John J. Pitney commented on the morphing of Newt Gingrich into Michael Moore. Mr. Pitney states that he hopes Newt will go back to being the Newt we saw early in the campaign–focusing more on attacking President Obama than attacking fellow Republicans.

Cal Thomas notes that Mitt Romney is well on his way to being the Republican nominee for President. Although he is not universally loved, the other candidates will be running out of money and organization soon. Mr. Thomas notes that it is still a long way to the White House.

Now, my comments. I live in Massachusetts. Governor Romney was a good governor. He did not move the state in a conservative direction (it’s Massachusetts, I am not sure that is possible, we are one of two states that voted for George McGovern for President!) He is an honest, hard-working man. If he is elected, I am sure he will do everything in his power to rescue the American economy, and I believe that he has the knowledge and work ethic to do that. He is not my first choice, but I believe that he is a good choice.

Enhanced by Zemanta