Tom Rants: GOP Convention fun in Branson: Tom Rants
ag
· 1 year ago
Tom, I appreciate your post here. Still, the numbers are questionable.
Katrinka Yobotz
· 1 year ago
You are right that Alan Keyes has left the Republican Party. He did so over party bosses who went against the will of the people in running an off-platform "moderate" whom they admitted must be re-invented in order to appease conservatives.
Reagan-conservative Keyes, who believes the American people need a strong pro-liffe, pro-border, anti-tax/spend leeader, is continuing his presidential run as an independent. New information will continue to be available at: www.americasrevival.com www.selfgovernment.us
tomhanna
· 1 year ago
Katrinka: No insult intended to Alan Keyes. I'm simply saying that once he made the decision to leave the GOP, the GOP had no further obligation to him.
ag: What numbers do you think are wrong? The delegate count was closer to 1,700, but was an estimate. Regarding your own post:
Security was provided by members of the Taney County Sheriff's Department, in uniform. The pages nearest me were college kids. The one closest was a girl of about 20. The guy handling the microphone nearest me was an elderly gentleman and was much more intimidated by the people yelling at him than he was intimidating himself.
The Platform Committee incorporated far more of the proposed amendments than in years past, when the Platform has largely been passed unamended. This is the nature of having a single day of convention. The unpaid, elected volunteer members of the State Committee do the work the other 1,460 days of the election cycle. These folks are unpaid, elected volunteers chosen by the local county committees who are themselves unpaid, elected volunteers chosen by the Republican primary voters. My first suggestion if you have concerns is to raise them with your current County Chair and State Committeeman and Committeewoman. If you find, after dealing with them as human beings and not as Bilderbergers, which they aren't, that you aren't satisfied, then try organizing at the committee level.
Delores
· 1 year ago
28 delegates/28 alternates plus 3 party regulars, 2 electors and 2 national committee members were elected.
None were conservative Ron Paul supporters. The party's trick of challenging delegates worked -- only the strongest patriots showed up and will carry the message forward.
ag
· 1 year ago
It's hard to believe that 15% of the floor abstained from the standing vote. 1283/1500
We're not talking about red-shirted college kids. Were Riders and deputy sheriffs posted solely around contested delegates and alternates to protect them from some imagined threat from the main body?
If in your area, you experienced your own congressional district posing several suited Republicans shoulder-to-shoulder, blocking the aisle between you and your microphone, would you not be concerned about their behavior? Would you not question your party's policies as a result of this demonstration?
tomhanna
· 1 year ago
I'm not sure that I'd call the challenges "the party's trick". I think you're misinformed about how the challenges happened. Remember there was no challenge of the Jackson County delegates, almost all of whom were Ron Paul supporters, despite the irregularities at that caucus.
Over 10% of the challenges came from the crackpot Scott Magill (spelling may be wrong). This is the crackpot who put forward the 3 conspiracy theory platform resolutions. The delegates he challenged were seated. Only about 1 out of 10 challenged delegates bothered to attend the Credentials Committee hearing, but roughly 9 out of 10 were seated anyway - hardly "committed patriots".
Perhaps most importantly though, you "committed patriots" should remember that you were engaging in an effort to overturn the results of an election, to disenfranchise the Missouri Republican primary voters who voted 95% against Dr. Ron Paul. You lost the election in a landslide and still got 1/3 of the delegates at the convention.
The R Man
· 1 year ago
Dang, only 5% of us voted the right way in the primaries, huh ;)
Thanks for the update on the convention. I've been looking forward to today to read this, figuring you'd be there, and maybe Mister Truc as well, but of course, I couldn't go, what with Queen City welfarist events and adventures to pursue.
It's quite a world where Mister Keyes has gone to the Constitution Party, Ron Paul is a serving Republican U.S. Congressman and Republican Presidential candidate, and Bob Freakin' Barr is the Libertarian Presidential candidate-the last of these being the most whacky and unbelieveable. I wonder what he'd think of me challenging every traffic stop by showing the cop my Heritage Foundation pocket U.S. Constitution and demanding to see where it says I have to wear a seatbelt, drive sober, register my machinegun, not smoke dope, et cetera? He'd be alarmed. (By the way, I am law-abiding *in extremis* behind the wheel these days, just sayin')
The R Man
CD9 Delegate
· 1 year ago
Overall this is an apt description of the events of last weekend, I would question this comment though: "Ironically, the Chair was as put out by the early adjournment as the «Old Right» crowd, but to the delight of everyone else, there was nothing they could do about it."
If my memory serves, the person who made this 'privileged motion' was also one of the old guard who had been standing in the aisle all day, acting important and helping with the counting of votes, etc.
If the chairman claimed to be unaware of what he was planning, I would be very surprised. At the very least, Jared Craighead was involved.
I found it almost laughable the way he (Craighead) was manipulating the public address system. Whenever someone that wasn't 'liked' was speaking their mikes were turned way down. Whenever Craighead wanted to make a point, even when someone else was already speaking, his microphone would magically be on, and be louder then the person already speaking.
It's games like this that make me resolve to oust the incumbents and begin with a fresh group. CD9 Delegate.
CD9 Delegate
· 1 year ago
"Perhaps most importantly though, you «committed patriots» should remember that you were engaging in an effort to overturn the results of an election, to disenfranchise the Missouri Republican primary voters who voted 95% against Dr. Ron Paul. You lost the election in a landslide and still got 1/3 of the delegates at the convention."
I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a compliment or a dig, but I'm guessing the latter.
My way of thinking is that 65% of Missouri's Republican voters are getting John McCain shoved down our throat when he wasn't our choice. So why should I support him? Oh that's right, he has that (R) after his name. Sorry that isn't good enough for me. I need someone that actually walks the walk of conservative government, not just talks it.
John McCain is no conservative.
ag
· 1 year ago
Twelve hours have elapsed since I posed questions to Mr. Hanna. So far, he's sideslipped them and answered subsequent questions instead.
And while you're failing to paradigm-shift from your myopic vision, let's talk about your assertions,
"Perhaps most importantly though, you «committed patriots» should remember that you were engaging in an effort to overturn the results of an election, to disenfranchise the Missouri Republican primary voters who voted 95% against Dr. Ron Paul. You lost the election in a landslide and still got 1/3 of the delegates at the convention".
First, we "patriots" didn't make the rules. Our party, yours and mine, made the rule to remove primary voters one-step away from nominating the candidate. Before you point at us as the culprits in this imaginary drama of yours, perhaps you'd best spend a conscious moment thinking about who made the rules. Perhaps, while you're busy offering your readers presupposing admonitions in terms of concerns, you might consider raising your own to "your current County Chair and State Committeeman and Committeewoman" about why the rules exist as they do.
Second, to "engage in an effort" means to participate. Are you suggesting by your comment that the open-door policy of our party means that folks of differing views ought not to participate?
Third, your bombastic assertion that each individual citizen, invited by published calls, while asserting his own view in caucuses around the state was somehow an organized collective?
At first, you wrote, "There were homeschoolers, evangelicals and others typically called «social conservative», gun rights advocates and at least one old cowboy. They were at every opportunity touting free markets, free minds, property rights, limited government and strong families".
Now, you want to backpedal as an apologist for a party that doesn't take these varied interests into account by writing, "you were engaging in an effort to overturn the results of an election, to disenfranchise the Missouri Republican primary voters".
Which of your truths is true, Mr. Hannah? Do some individuals interested in getting rid of the Federal Reserve and at the same time don't care one iota about Ron Paul part of your "you committed patriots" ? How about those individuals that don't give a dang about the IRS, and would rather pay taxes to their local and state government where they can keep a better eye on them? Is that part of your "you committed patriots"?
Instead of falling back on defensive Republican party spin when questioned, you might remember to inform your blog readers that bigotry and prejudicial assertions are not part of the 2008 Missouri Platform.
tomhanna
· 1 year ago
AG, I'll get to you, but since CD9 Delegate was polite, I'm going to answer him first.
The "committed patriots" comment was sarcastic. There was a comment which came to my email that had that phrase. I thought it was posted here and I see that it wasn't. Sorry for the confusion. I don't question their commitment generally, but in the context of only 10% of them showing up for the credentials committee hearing. Remember that the GOP and the credentials committee (all volunteers) had not choice in whether to hear these challenges. Again at least some of these challenges came from crackpots, not any "establishment" politicians.
I'm not sure if there was any "plan" to move to adjourn, but the look on the Chair's face, the fact that he wasn't quite ready to deal with it and that he practically had to beg the crowd to stay long enough to say a few words of thanks (including thanks to all the first time delegates) made me think he wasn't done. Judging from the 2000 convention, I am fairly sure the "planned program" wasn't over. (The 2004 convention was adjourned two hours early due to the death of Ronald Reagan, so I only have 2000 to really go by.)
AG:
I'll get to your questions, but first - you're being an ass. This is my microphone, if you don't like how I use it - here's double your money back. I was carrying petitions to put Ron Paul on the ballot in Missouri when some of this current crop were still twinkles in their parents' eyes. In 1988 we petitioned, met the requirements and were shut out at the last minute because the petitions listed Ron Paul and Andre Marrou instead of listing the Presidential electors. I was listed as a plaintiff in the lawsuit against the state of Missouri and Roy Blunt that came out of that situation. (Since then, I've seen Blunt do good things, bad things and lots of mediocre things. I've also seen Ron Paul vote against free trade and get pork barrel earmarks for his district in Texas.)
It really irks me to be told off by people who only discovered the Constitution in the last six months.and somehow think it's their prerogative to brand me a liar, a fascist and a bigot on the strength of their recent conversion on the road to Branson. Are you one of the antiwar crowd who've gone from crucifying conservatives to crucifying Republicans because you don't think they're conservative enough?
In 20 years, we've gone from both Republican and Democratic politicians using the power of the state to prevent Ron Paul from being on the ballot to people explicitly supporting Ron Paul controlling a third of the GOP state convention. Plus, whether you want to believe it or not there are a lot of potentially sympathetic people in the other 2/3. But since the the 1/3 seem to have a real problem in the manners department, that sympathy is likely to die as quickly as the rest of us can nurture it.
Second, I'm not obligated to answer your questions at all. I came home from Branson and headed to work Sunday and have put in about 20 hours since the end of the convention. I will answer your questions, because I choose to. If the timetable isn't to your liking, tough.
As to your initial questions.
"Were Riders and deputy sheriffs posted solely around contested delegates and alternates to protect them from some imagined threat from the main body?"
Asked and answered. I already said that I didn't see this happen. Perhaps it did, but the pages in my area were not the least bit intimidating and were certainly unarmed. Unfortunately, as I said, video devices weren't allowed or I'd have proof. Those who've known me longer than 24 hours will take me at my word.
"If in your area, you experienced your own congressional district posing several suited Republicans shoulder-to-shoulder, blocking the aisle between you and your microphone, would you not be concerned about their behavior? Would you not question your party's policies as a result of this demonstration?"
I suppose. But again, I didn't see this. I was seated directly across the aisle from 170 Ron Paul delegates from Jackson County, who were given full access to the microphone. Within my own district at least one county was almost entirely composed of Ron Paul delegates. (all unchallenged) and they were duly counted on every question. It sounds like, there was a real problem with that district (or distrtictcs). It certainly wasn't a statewide effort. The "officials" from my district (the 7th district), ranging from county chairs to the 7th district executive secretary (I may have that title wrong) were of the opinion that several hundred committed conservative, grassroots activists would be an asset to the party both in terms of winning elections and in terms of setting the party's agenda in the right direction. Sorry if your experience is different.
As to your next set of statements/questions:
"Our party, yours and mine, made the rule to remove primary voters one-step away from nominating the candidate. "
That's not correct. The Missouri Presidential Preference Primary was started by the state legislature in 1988 when Dick Gephardt, Missouri's favorite Democratic son, was running for President and has been renewed several times since, mostly because either Gephardt or John Ashcroft were expected to run. Prior to that, Missouri chose its nominee by caucus and convention. The caucus and convention is a holdover, an anachronism. The nominee is chosen through the primary and the convention is a relic of a bygone era in the first place. In past years the slates of electors and delegates were simply chosen by the winning candidate's campaign. For 20 years, the convention has been a party for the nominee and a chance to debate a few relatively inconsequential platform planks. It's mostly about sitting in uncomfortable chairs and hoping for a little excitement. In the excitement category, this year was better, not worse. In the uncomfortable seating category, it was right in line with the past. But maybe they knew I was a Ron Paul supporter in 2000 and my uncomfortable chair that year was part of an Illuminati plot. I'm sorry if you expected different. I'll send a memo to Jared Craighead - "Dear Jared, as I've asked before, please get better chairs."
"Second, to «engage in an effort» means to participate. Are you suggesting by your comment that the open-door policy of our party means that folks of differing views ought not to participate?"
I never said or suggested anything of the sort.
"Third, your bombastic assertion that each individual citizen, invited by published calls, while asserting his own view in caucuses around the state was somehow an organized collective?"
Yes, that is exactly the case and not merely a "bombastic assertion." I was an early contributor to the Ron Paul Exploratory Committee and received the emails from the campaign asking me to help in the post-primary effort to subvert the election. It was an organized effort. I will post the emails, if you insist on calling me a liar.
tomhanna
· 1 year ago
R!
I almost missed your comment among the folks calling me names with my own microphone. Next, I'm going to be accused of censorship for not taking it lying down.
So you were among the 5%? It only took 20 years and a change of party by the Congressman to get your vote. Now see, if these hotheads could just learn that given twenty years a little acorn can grow into a mighty oak. Or at least one more vote. Damn the Man!
VotedPaulin88
· 1 year ago
Tom -- I don't know you from Adam but thought your recap was fair, balanced, and great. I am the most libertarian guy you could imagine. Please don't worry about some of the slings and arrows you are taking here from a few permanent malcontents. There is a silent majority of us here in Jackson County who thought your recap was great.
Iola French
· 1 year ago
It is refreshing to see so much commentary regarding the Republican State Convention, the process involved, and how things were handled in general.
I am a state committee woman from the 32nd Senatorial District and was a member of the credentials committee and would like to address the process.
As a volunteer to the credentials committee I presumed it was basically a non-Job. Generally speaking there are very few or no challenges. This year there were many. If challenges are received by the 25th of March (according to present rules) they have to be investigated and the committee makes recommendations to the floor. That is how the process works.
We as a committee worked long and hard to sort out the valid challenges from the invalid. For me the meeting in Jefferson City was a day off work , a 400 mile trip and a 30 gallon tank of gas. For informational purposes we committee people are volunteers (although we are elected) and always pay our own expenses.
My opinion (and it is on record) was that we should recommend for seating and welcome as many of the challenged as possible (unless there was clear evidence that the challenges were valid and they couldn't be seated).
After many meetings, teleconferences, and deliberations this is what happened, and our recommendation was accepted by the floor.
I find the "old right" enthusiasm refreshing and feel it will enhance the MO GOP. Personally I welcome the contribution they have made curently and will make in the future. As far as who to support in the general election I hope they realize its really a non-choice. Stay home or vote for the libertarian candidate and we have Barrack Obama as the next president
ps
The microphones mal functions were not a concentrated plot, they just malfunctioned. People taking the microphone and asking to be recognized were. Perhaps J.C. was just stationed near a good mike.
Many who have been delegates for many conventions weren't happy about the guards taking our water, coffee, camera's, etc. and viewing our disorganized pureses and "man bags". The media gave great "hype about a revolution" - and it was the party was responsible to assure safety. I, however, saw no guards on the floor in our area (and we wre next to Jackson County one of the most vocal delegations).
Next, I am fairly sure that the early adjournment was not planned, it was however pounced upon by the floor with numerous seconds. I put into evidence the fact that the bar-keeps at the appreciation event were ranting about being told they had to get ready minutes early.
Thanks, have a great year, a great election, and hope to meet more of the "Old Right" in our local efforts and at our next events.
Mark Anthony Jones
· 1 year ago
Thank you Mr. Hanna for a fair assessment of the Convention. Thank you to Iola French on the Credentials Committee for all of your hard work and dedication. As a Jackson County (Ron Paul) Delegate and strong and faithful Republican since 1980, (before I was old enough to vote), I can assure all that none of us want Barack Osama, I mean Obama as a president, and we will all be voting for McCain to win in the fall. Thank you to Dr. Paul for awakening something within me to make me realize that if I don't get involved, not only will we lose our party, but also our country. I am proud to be considered a Ron Paul Republican, a member of the "Old Right". Just know that we will be involved permanently to bring the values of personal liberty and US sovereignty back to our consitutional republic.
tomhanna
· 1 year ago
Thanks for all the comments. The single biggest point I was trying to make about the Convention was that there is much more in common than separating a Huckabee supporter from a Ron Paul supporter, for example. (I'll leave Mitt Romney and his great hair out of it for the moment.) I don't have any idea what Ron Paul's plans are for the future aside from continuing to serve his District in Congress, but I look forward to working with all of you (even AG) on common causes in the future. And perhaps helping Sarah Steelman win the Governor's mansion this year.
The R Man
· 1 year ago
Oh, yeah! I thought I'd told you about me being "in the 5%" at Lincoln Days. But don't get too excited, I don't run a "smoking accessories shoppe" yet, nor do I have a pony-tail, so maybe it hasn't "took" yet. And of course, had Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter stayed in the race I might be thinking differently-gah, just can't get excited about McCain-but he's a darned sight better than B. Hussein O. or H. Rotten AntiChrist.
R
Robert C. Smeby
· 1 year ago
I have been a Ron Paul supporter since the 1980's when I lived in TZ. After retirement, I moved to MO. I think Mr. Hanna's comments were balanced an probably accurate. Any attention Ron Paul can get is a great big plus. The major media owned by the big money (hidden government) boys wants to keep Ron Paul and his supporters unknown. The Republican's have done everything they can think of to unseat him in TX. This is why some of the above commenters do not know what to do now! There is an effort to keep, and add, Ron Paul supporters and keep them busy on followup, but you need to look at the internet to find them. Ron Paul.com; We The People Foundation, etc. If you want to know what is really happening in this country, and the world, read the weekly newspaper American Free Press. Thanks for bearing with me, but I for one, am trying to restore this country to it prior greatness which is by the Constitution only! Bob
All Comments
Reagan-conservative Keyes, who believes the American people need a strong pro-liffe, pro-border, anti-tax/spend leeader, is continuing his presidential run as an independent. New information will continue to be available at:
www.americasrevival.com
www.selfgovernment.us
ag: What numbers do you think are wrong? The delegate count was closer to 1,700, but was an estimate. Regarding your own post:
Security was provided by members of the Taney County Sheriff's Department, in uniform. The pages nearest me were college kids. The one closest was a girl of about 20. The guy handling the microphone nearest me was an elderly gentleman and was much more intimidated by the people yelling at him than he was intimidating himself.
The Platform Committee incorporated far more of the proposed amendments than in years past, when the Platform has largely been passed unamended. This is the nature of having a single day of convention. The unpaid, elected volunteer members of the State Committee do the work the other 1,460 days of the election cycle. These folks are unpaid, elected volunteers chosen by the local county committees who are themselves unpaid, elected volunteers chosen by the Republican primary voters. My first suggestion if you have concerns is to raise them with your current County Chair and State Committeeman and Committeewoman. If you find, after dealing with them as human beings and not as Bilderbergers, which they aren't, that you aren't satisfied, then try organizing at the committee level.
None were conservative Ron Paul supporters. The party's trick of challenging delegates worked -- only the strongest patriots showed up and will carry the message forward.
We're not talking about red-shirted college kids. Were Riders and deputy sheriffs posted solely around contested delegates and alternates to protect them from some imagined threat from the main body?
If in your area, you experienced your own congressional district posing several suited Republicans shoulder-to-shoulder, blocking the aisle between you and your microphone, would you not be concerned about their behavior? Would you not question your party's policies as a result of this demonstration?
Over 10% of the challenges came from the crackpot Scott Magill (spelling may be wrong). This is the crackpot who put forward the 3 conspiracy theory platform resolutions. The delegates he challenged were seated. Only about 1 out of 10 challenged delegates bothered to attend the Credentials Committee hearing, but roughly 9 out of 10 were seated anyway - hardly "committed patriots".
Perhaps most importantly though, you "committed patriots" should remember that you were engaging in an effort to overturn the results of an election, to disenfranchise the Missouri Republican primary voters who voted 95% against Dr. Ron Paul. You lost the election in a landslide and still got 1/3 of the delegates at the convention.
Thanks for the update on the convention. I've been looking forward to today to read this, figuring you'd be there, and maybe Mister Truc as well, but of course, I couldn't go, what with Queen City welfarist events and adventures to pursue.
It's quite a world where Mister Keyes has gone to the Constitution Party, Ron Paul is a serving Republican U.S. Congressman and Republican Presidential candidate, and Bob Freakin' Barr is the Libertarian Presidential candidate-the last of these being the most whacky and unbelieveable. I wonder what he'd think of me challenging every traffic stop by showing the cop my Heritage Foundation pocket U.S. Constitution and demanding to see where it says I have to wear a seatbelt, drive sober, register my machinegun, not smoke dope, et cetera? He'd be alarmed. (By the way, I am law-abiding *in extremis* behind the wheel these days, just sayin')
The R Man
"Ironically, the Chair was as put out by the early adjournment as the «Old Right» crowd, but to the delight of everyone else, there was nothing they could do about it."
If my memory serves, the person who made this 'privileged motion' was also one of the old guard who had been standing in the aisle all day, acting important and helping with the counting of votes, etc.
If the chairman claimed to be unaware of what he was planning, I would be very surprised. At the very least, Jared Craighead was involved.
I found it almost laughable the way he (Craighead) was manipulating the public address system. Whenever someone that wasn't 'liked' was speaking their mikes were turned way down. Whenever Craighead wanted to make a point, even when someone else was already speaking, his microphone would magically be on, and be louder then the person already speaking.
It's games like this that make me resolve to oust the incumbents and begin with a fresh group.
CD9 Delegate.
I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a compliment or a dig, but I'm guessing the latter.
My way of thinking is that 65% of Missouri's Republican voters are getting John McCain shoved down our throat when he wasn't our choice. So why should I support him? Oh that's right, he has that (R) after his name. Sorry that isn't good enough for me. I need someone that actually walks the walk of conservative government, not just talks it.
John McCain is no conservative.
And while you're failing to paradigm-shift from your myopic vision, let's talk about your assertions,
"Perhaps most importantly though, you «committed patriots» should remember that you were engaging in an effort to overturn the results of an election, to disenfranchise the Missouri Republican primary voters who voted 95% against Dr. Ron Paul. You lost the election in a landslide and still got 1/3 of the delegates at the convention".
First, we "patriots" didn't make the rules. Our party, yours and mine, made the rule to remove primary voters one-step away from nominating the candidate. Before you point at us as the culprits in this imaginary drama of yours, perhaps you'd best spend a conscious moment thinking about who made the rules. Perhaps, while you're busy offering your readers presupposing admonitions in terms of concerns, you might consider raising your own to "your current County Chair and State Committeeman and Committeewoman" about why the rules exist as they do.
Second, to "engage in an effort" means to participate. Are you suggesting by your comment that the open-door policy of our party means that folks of differing views ought not to participate?
Third, your bombastic assertion that each individual citizen, invited by published calls, while asserting his own view in caucuses around the state was somehow an organized collective?
At first, you wrote, "There were homeschoolers, evangelicals and others typically called «social conservative», gun rights advocates and at least one old cowboy. They were at every opportunity touting free markets, free minds, property rights, limited government and strong families".
Now, you want to backpedal as an apologist for a party that doesn't take these varied interests into account by writing, "you were engaging in an effort to overturn the results of an election, to disenfranchise the Missouri Republican primary voters".
Which of your truths is true, Mr. Hannah? Do some individuals interested in getting rid of the Federal Reserve and at the same time don't care one iota about Ron Paul part of your "you committed patriots" ? How about those individuals that don't give a dang about the IRS, and would rather pay taxes to their local and state government where they can keep a better eye on them? Is that part of your "you committed patriots"?
Instead of falling back on defensive Republican party spin when questioned, you might remember to inform your blog readers that bigotry and prejudicial assertions are not part of the 2008 Missouri Platform.
The "committed patriots" comment was sarcastic. There was a comment which came to my email that had that phrase. I thought it was posted here and I see that it wasn't. Sorry for the confusion. I don't question their commitment generally, but in the context of only 10% of them showing up for the credentials committee hearing. Remember that the GOP and the credentials committee (all volunteers) had not choice in whether to hear these challenges. Again at least some of these challenges came from crackpots, not any "establishment" politicians.
I'm not sure if there was any "plan" to move to adjourn, but the look on the Chair's face, the fact that he wasn't quite ready to deal with it and that he practically had to beg the crowd to stay long enough to say a few words of thanks (including thanks to all the first time delegates) made me think he wasn't done. Judging from the 2000 convention, I am fairly sure the "planned program" wasn't over. (The 2004 convention was adjourned two hours early due to the death of Ronald Reagan, so I only have 2000 to really go by.)
AG:
I'll get to your questions, but first - you're being an ass. This is my microphone, if you don't like how I use it - here's double your money back. I was carrying petitions to put Ron Paul on the ballot in Missouri when some of this current crop were still twinkles in their parents' eyes. In 1988 we petitioned, met the requirements and were shut out at the last minute because the petitions listed Ron Paul and Andre Marrou instead of listing the Presidential electors. I was listed as a plaintiff in the lawsuit against the state of Missouri and Roy Blunt that came out of that situation. (Since then, I've seen Blunt do good things, bad things and lots of mediocre things. I've also seen Ron Paul vote against free trade and get pork barrel earmarks for his district in Texas.)
It really irks me to be told off by people who only discovered the Constitution in the last six months.and somehow think it's their prerogative to brand me a liar, a fascist and a bigot on the strength of their recent conversion on the road to Branson. Are you one of the antiwar crowd who've gone from crucifying conservatives to crucifying Republicans because you don't think they're conservative enough?
In 20 years, we've gone from both Republican and Democratic politicians using the power of the state to prevent Ron Paul from being on the ballot to people explicitly supporting Ron Paul controlling a third of the GOP state convention. Plus, whether you want to believe it or not there are a lot of potentially sympathetic people in the other 2/3. But since the the 1/3 seem to have a real problem in the manners department, that sympathy is likely to die as quickly as the rest of us can nurture it.
Second, I'm not obligated to answer your questions at all. I came home from Branson and headed to work Sunday and have put in about 20 hours since the end of the convention. I will answer your questions, because I choose to. If the timetable isn't to your liking, tough.
As to your initial questions.
"Were Riders and deputy sheriffs posted solely around contested delegates and alternates to protect them from some imagined threat from the main body?"
Asked and answered. I already said that I didn't see this happen. Perhaps it did, but the pages in my area were not the least bit intimidating and were certainly unarmed. Unfortunately, as I said, video devices weren't allowed or I'd have proof. Those who've known me longer than 24 hours will take me at my word.
"If in your area, you experienced your own congressional district posing several suited Republicans shoulder-to-shoulder, blocking the aisle between you and your microphone, would you not be concerned about their behavior? Would you not question your party's policies as a result of this demonstration?"
I suppose. But again, I didn't see this. I was seated directly across the aisle from 170 Ron Paul delegates from Jackson County, who were given full access to the microphone. Within my own district at least one county was almost entirely composed of Ron Paul delegates. (all unchallenged) and they were duly counted on every question. It sounds like, there was a real problem with that district (or distrtictcs). It certainly wasn't a statewide effort. The "officials" from my district (the 7th district), ranging from county chairs to the 7th district executive secretary (I may have that title wrong) were of the opinion that several hundred committed conservative, grassroots activists would be an asset to the party both in terms of winning elections and in terms of setting the party's agenda in the right direction. Sorry if your experience is different.
As to your next set of statements/questions:
"Our party, yours and mine, made the rule to remove primary voters one-step away from nominating the candidate. "
That's not correct. The Missouri Presidential Preference Primary was started by the state legislature in 1988 when Dick Gephardt, Missouri's favorite Democratic son, was running for President and has been renewed several times since, mostly because either Gephardt or John Ashcroft were expected to run. Prior to that, Missouri chose its nominee by caucus and convention. The caucus and convention is a holdover, an anachronism. The nominee is chosen through the primary and the convention is a relic of a bygone era in the first place. In past years the slates of electors and delegates were simply chosen by the winning candidate's campaign. For 20 years, the convention has been a party for the nominee and a chance to debate a few relatively inconsequential platform planks. It's mostly about sitting in uncomfortable chairs and hoping for a little excitement. In the excitement category, this year was better, not worse. In the uncomfortable seating category, it was right in line with the past. But maybe they knew I was a Ron Paul supporter in 2000 and my uncomfortable chair that year was part of an Illuminati plot. I'm sorry if you expected different. I'll send a memo to Jared Craighead - "Dear Jared, as I've asked before, please get better chairs."
"Second, to «engage in an effort» means to participate. Are you suggesting by your comment that the open-door policy of our party means that folks of differing views ought not to participate?"
I never said or suggested anything of the sort.
"Third, your bombastic assertion that each individual citizen, invited by published calls, while asserting his own view in caucuses around the state was somehow an organized collective?"
Yes, that is exactly the case and not merely a "bombastic assertion." I was an early contributor to the Ron Paul Exploratory Committee and received the emails from the campaign asking me to help in the post-primary effort to subvert the election. It was an organized effort. I will post the emails, if you insist on calling me a liar.
I almost missed your comment among the folks calling me names with my own microphone. Next, I'm going to be accused of censorship for not taking it lying down.
So you were among the 5%? It only took 20 years and a change of party by the Congressman to get your vote. Now see, if these hotheads could just learn that given twenty years a little acorn can grow into a mighty oak. Or at least one more vote. Damn the Man!
I am a state committee woman from the 32nd Senatorial District and was a member of the credentials committee and would like to address the process.
As a volunteer to the credentials committee I presumed it was basically a non-Job. Generally speaking there are very few or no challenges. This year there were many. If challenges are received by the 25th of March (according to present rules) they have to be investigated and the committee makes recommendations to the floor. That is how the process works.
We as a committee worked long and hard to sort out the valid challenges from the invalid. For me the meeting in Jefferson City was a day off work , a 400 mile trip and a 30 gallon tank of gas. For informational purposes we committee people are volunteers (although we are elected) and always pay our own expenses.
My opinion (and it is on record) was that we should recommend for seating and welcome as many of the challenged as possible (unless there was clear evidence that the challenges were valid and they couldn't be seated).
After many meetings, teleconferences, and deliberations this is what happened, and our recommendation was accepted by the floor.
I find the "old right" enthusiasm refreshing and feel it will enhance the MO GOP. Personally I welcome the contribution they have made curently and will make in the future.
As far as who to support in the general election I hope they realize its really a non-choice. Stay home or vote for the libertarian candidate and we have Barrack Obama as the next president
ps
The microphones mal functions were not a concentrated plot, they just malfunctioned. People taking the microphone and asking to be recognized were. Perhaps J.C. was just stationed near a good mike.
Many who have been delegates for many conventions weren't happy about the guards taking our water, coffee, camera's, etc. and viewing our disorganized pureses and "man bags". The media gave great "hype about a revolution" - and it was the party was responsible to assure safety. I, however, saw no guards on the floor in our area (and we wre next to Jackson County one of the most vocal delegations).
Next, I am fairly sure that the early adjournment was not planned, it was however pounced upon by the floor with numerous seconds. I put into evidence the fact that the bar-keeps at the appreciation event were ranting about being told they had to get ready minutes early.
Thanks, have a great year, a great election, and hope to meet more of the "Old Right" in our local efforts and at our next events.
R
I think Mr. Hanna's comments were balanced an probably accurate. Any attention Ron Paul can get is a great big plus. The major media owned by the big money (hidden government) boys wants to keep Ron Paul and his supporters unknown. The Republican's have done everything they can think of to unseat him in TX.
This is why some of the above commenters do not know what to do now! There is an effort to keep, and add, Ron Paul supporters and keep them busy on followup, but you need to look at the internet to find them. Ron Paul.com; We The People Foundation, etc. If you want to know what is really happening in this country, and the world, read the weekly newspaper American Free Press.
Thanks for bearing with me, but I for one, am trying to restore this country to it prior greatness which is by the Constitution only!
Bob
Bob