Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How To Make the GOP Eat Itself Alive
Free Republic Original Content | September 1, 2012 | By Laz A. Mataz

Posted on 09/01/2012 1:16:40 PM PDT by Lazamataz

Recently, the GOP passed some Presidential primary and delegate rules changes, in a very shady manner, that enraged conservatives. This rule will lessen the impact of delegates, and soften the voice of conservatives and Tea Party members. I was one of those who were enraged. In fact, I was at the front of the parade.

However, in life and especially in politics, not all is as it seems. One of Mitt Romney's closest advisors, a man by the name of James Bopp Jr., led the charge to prevent the rules from being this drastically changed. In a letter he wrote, he states:

This is the biggest power grab in the history of the Republican Party because it shifts the power to select delegates from the state party to the candidate. And it would make the Republican Party a top down, not bottom up party.

It would also hurt state parties because they use delegate selection as a way to honor party volunteers and party contributors. A Presidential candidate will have his own agenda for delegate selection. As a result, this always is a threat to party regulars who make up most of our delegates. But it is also a threat to both moderates and conservative who could be purged, depending on who is the Republican Presidential nominee.

This proposal is an over reaction to the problems in a few states where Ron Paul delegates threaten to not support the winning Presidential candidate. I agree that they should honor that pledge, but that can be fix by a few tweaks in a few state laws. Massachusetts handled this successfully by requiring an affidavit promising to vote for the candidate, Mitt Romney, who carried the state. But the Rules change here is overkill -- killing a fly with a sledgehammer.

After the Rules change imbroglio, I decided not to dash off a furious editorial, but instead to let time reveal all the workings, and to allow a little cooling off period. I'm glad I did. It's not as simple as it seemed.

Are there some scoundrels in the Republican party? Absolutely. John Boehner, who ruled against the floor vote in an entirely arbitrary way, springs to mind. One cannot help but think that Karl Rove clapped his chubby little hands together upon the Rules Change, as well. John Sununu, another villain in this power grab, may have been instrumental in removing key Florida delegates from the Rules Commitee. Perhaps the largest and most damning villain in the fiasco is Ben Ginsberg, who is Romney's chief legal advisor. It appears he was interested in even more power-consolidating Rules Changes.

There will be more revelations in the days ahead. It has been leaked to me that there will be more to follow, and that it may well show that Romney's camp initially wanted the Rules Change -- to undercut the Ron Paul brigades -- but when some of the party Establishment took the ball and ran too far downfield, that many in the Romney camp backed off of support. Of course, at that time, it was too late. The blue-blood establishment hacks had grabbed the concepts, racheted them up, and ran as hard as they could for the goal line.

So, we are starting to see the first glimmers of discontent in the Romney camp over the Rules Changes. If more follows, the changes may well be addressed -- with a little push from us, the Dreaded Grassroots.

The fact remains, though, that the Rules, having been changed, are horrific for the grassroots conservative and Tea Party members.

Romney, if he wants our support, should lead.

He should get in front of some conservative groups and let us know that the Rules will be changed again to allow our voices to be heard. We do understand if Romney himself cannot do it, since it is an old chestnut -- run to the right for nomination, run to the left for election -- but a high level surrogate would help us believe his intent.

The jury is still out. Is Romney willing to forego conservative support? We shall see. The blowback from a Romney rejection would be tragic for his election efforts.


TOPICS: FReeper Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: convention; delegates; gop; jamesbopp; rnc; romney; ronpaul; rule12; rulechanges; vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-219 last
To: MV=PY

You are the 142nd Satisfied Customer!™


201 posted on 09/02/2012 7:49:47 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Communist Party = Democrats. Socialist Party = Republicans. WE NEED A CAPITALIST FREEDOM PARTY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: June2

You are the 143rd Satisfied Customer!™


202 posted on 09/02/2012 7:50:48 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Communist Party = Democrats. Socialist Party = Republicans. WE NEED A CAPITALIST FREEDOM PARTY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: lyby; Marcella
Thank you for your posts. Of all the reading I have done today, this thread has been THE most insightful. I am a former member of county and state executive committees. I became disillusioned... However, I am willing to fight again... just need some direction.

Thanks for the kind words, and Marcella has wonderful insights as well.

No matter how deep this runs, the post at #28 by yefragetuwrabrumuy is nothing short of brilliant.

THERE, sir or madam, is your direction. From the ground-up, shall we capture the Republican party..... much as the radical left captured the Democrats.

203 posted on 09/02/2012 7:57:56 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Communist Party = Democrats. Socialist Party = Republicans. WE NEED A CAPITALIST FREEDOM PARTY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Please add me to your ping list.


204 posted on 09/02/2012 8:00:33 AM PDT by Earthdweller (Harvard won the election again...so what's the problem.......? Embrace a ruler today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Earthdweller

You are the 144th Satisfied Customer!™


205 posted on 09/02/2012 8:05:44 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Communist Party = Democrats. Socialist Party = Republicans. WE NEED A CAPITALIST FREEDOM PARTY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
"The Tea Party will get more and more conservative candidates elected, likely dominating the mid-term election. "

BTTT

206 posted on 09/02/2012 8:15:42 AM PDT by Earthdweller (Harvard won the election again...so what's the problem.......? Embrace a ruler today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

Agreed


207 posted on 09/02/2012 9:02:00 AM PDT by verga (Forced to remove tag line by administrator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

You can’t reach the goal of reestablishing our most important fundamental principles by surrendering those principles for perceived political expediency, any more than you could win a war by surrendering your armies and arms to the enemy.

You should read up on how and why William Wilberforce was able to end the institution of slavery in the British empire. He played the incremental compromise game for years in Parliament, until he finally figured out that not only was what he was doing wrong, it just plain didn’t work. He then adopted a no-compromise position, which succeeded.


208 posted on 09/02/2012 9:37:45 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (The saving of America starts the day Christians stop supporting what they say they hate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

In spit of all the hoopla during the Republican convention, there was and has been something missing for generations now in both paratpoliical parties:
Something larger than life, absolutely essential to the ssurvival of our blessed country. Perhaps this an explain it far better than I:

http://stg.do/Iwpc


209 posted on 09/02/2012 10:23:45 AM PDT by Paperdoll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

t5hank you and God bless.


210 posted on 09/02/2012 10:25:13 AM PDT by Paperdoll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: SE Mom; Lazamataz

Thanks very much, SE Mom!

Keep the information coming.

Good job, LAZ!

Out with Boehner! We need a TEA Party replacement. NOT Cantor!


211 posted on 09/02/2012 11:32:17 AM PDT by onyx (FREE REPUBLIC IS HERE TO STAY! DONATE MONTHLY! IF YOU WANT ON SARAH PALIN''S PING LIST, LET ME KNOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Paperdoll

Great link. Thanks!


212 posted on 09/02/2012 12:43:29 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (The saving of America starts the day Christians stop supporting what they say they hate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Eatten Alive ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-fD1cn64is


213 posted on 09/02/2012 2:55:26 PM PDT by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon

LOL!!!

Ooooo, that picture is grand!


214 posted on 09/02/2012 7:29:09 PM PDT by netmilsmom (Romney scares me. Obama is the freaking nightmare that is so bad you are afraid to go back to sleep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: Marcella

Spot on, although one of the things I think you sell short is the influence of the Bush Family Mafia. None of this could have been done without the presence of Rove’s people in the Romney apparatus, for instance, Ed Gillespie.

Best,

Chris


215 posted on 09/03/2012 8:31:55 AM PDT by section9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: section9
“None of this could have been done without the presence of Rove’s people in the Romney apparatus, for instance, Ed Gillespie.”

Yes, I didn't include Rove because he wasn't there in the actual rules committee meeting or actually taking the vote on the floor.

He, more than anyone else in the Romney group, would know how to compromise party rules. He is likely the one who thought to do this and gave instruction to Sununu and the lawyer.

You are also correct that the Bush family desperately wanted Romney as president and did all they could to bring that about. I heard them over and over praising Romney, starting months ago.

Thanks for your “thinking” post.

216 posted on 09/03/2012 10:19:48 AM PDT by Marcella (Conservatism is dead. PREPARE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

LOL bttt


217 posted on 09/03/2012 12:08:47 PM PDT by Matchett-PI ("A right can't come at the expense of another" ~ Walter Williams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler
You actually expect people to believe that nonsense?

I've spoken the truth. Whether anyone believes me or not is up to them. I've run into many fools who refuse to believe when I speak the truth.

218 posted on 10/04/2012 2:47:50 AM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Can you expound on exactly what the states can do to minimize the effects of these Rule Changes?

I don't want to minimize the effect of the rule changes. To me, giving the candidate some veto power over the delegates sent to the convention makes sense. We disagree over Mitt Romney, but let's go back to 2008 as an example.

Many people in the party hierarchy seemed to want Rudy Giuliani or John McCain to be our nominee as we went into the primary season. Rudy Giuliani lost too much momentum when he refused to participate in any contest before Florida, but let's assume that John McCain had health problems that kept him from running at all. If that had happened, Mike Huckabee might have won Iowa and South Carolina. If Rudy Giuliani had campaigned in New Hampshire, he might have won. Mitt Romney would have lost support quickly once Huckabee and Giuliani were splitting victories. Under those conditions, I could easily see many state GOP establishments hoping to seed their delegations with Giuliani supporters even if Mike Huckabee won the state. In that case, this kind of rule would help prevent the establishment from seeding delegations this way by giving Mike Huckabee veto power over delegates pledged to him. He'd pick delegates who would come to the convention willing to be loyal to him instead of people looking for an excuse to change their votes and give the nomination to Rudy Giuliani.

I realize that all sorts of people wanted an ugly floor fight this year to try to give the nomination to anyone but Mitt Romney. They spouted the usual "establishment" insults the way that liberals cry "racist" whenever they lose an argument. This year, these rules would be a hindrance to "conservatives" trying to derail Mitt Romney. Next time, the same rules may be all that saves a conservative from being derailed by someone more liberal.

219 posted on 10/04/2012 2:59:50 AM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-219 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson