Posted on 08/28/2012 12:30:07 PM PDT by elephant
The past 48 hours has been a whirlwind of activity for grassroots activist across the nation, especially here in Tampa Bay. Activist have diligently pushed for state delegations to oppose proposed changes to RNC rules.
Last night there was great optimism after the RNC agreed to compromise on the rule changes in an effort to avoid a floor fight. Unfortunately as a result of that compromise, RNC proposed rule 12, which would allow the RNC to rewrite the rules post convention, free of delegate and grassroots influence, will likely stand.
This new rule could be a huge blow to the grassroots community, the RNC rules committee sets the parameters for how we as a party operate, how we establish the platform and how we choose candidates. Allowing the RNC to change the rules without our influence is a contingency plan for the RNC to keep the power to choose the direction of the GOP out of the hands of patriots like you and me.
(Excerpt) Read more at freedomworks.org ...
What is the exact wording of this rule 12? I’d say before we get too worked up about it, based on what others say it says, we should all look at it ourselves. I’m somewhat limited right now, but will continue to look for it myself (I’m stuck surfing on my iPhone).
But for example, from what I briefly saw before (earlier in the day) it (rule 12) says 75% of the RNC must agree to any changes in off convention years. Now, I’d ask: Does this mean 75% of all in the RNC or 75% of those who respond to a proposed change? The latter could be devastating in off election years when no one is watching but the former would seem to be a high hurdle even given a lot of “back room deals”.
So again, what’s the exact reading of the entire “Rule 12”? Then let’s go from there. Let’s be careful here, this is not a time to go off half cocked.
That has to stop; one way is with term limits. No perks or pensions for Congress that any working person in the same earning range couldn't have. Two terms per position, then out.
It ain’t about the Paulista’s it is about having the delegates being nothing but rubber stamps for the GOP~e who would rather suck donkey dick than fight to restore the Constitutional Republic .
Update:
What follows is the exact wording of “Rule 12”, as best as I can determine at this time (gop.com does not seem to have this up at this time, which is probably a CYA maneuver):
“The Republican National Committee may, by three-fourths (3/4) vote of its entire membership, amend Rule Nos. 1-11 and 13-25. Any such amendment shall be considered by the Republican National Committee only if it was passed by a majority vote of the Standing Committee on Rules after having been submitted in writing at least ten (10) days in advance of its consideration by the Republican National Committee and shall take effect thirty (30) days after adoption. No such amendment shall be adopted after September 30, 2014.”
First, one (small) positive to be taken from this: A careful reading of this rule clearly indicates rule 12 itself cannot be changed. Why is this a positive? Because of the last line that reads, “No such amendment shall be adopted after September 30, 2014.”
Thus, we must be vigilant over the next two years, but only the next 2 years, not 4. That is, in the last 2 years, we can focus more on much more relevant concerns, such as holding Romney’s feet to the conservative fire (or if he looses, nominating a true conservative in 2016).
That’s the only real “positive” here, as far as I can see. This is, as feared, much more disastrous. After all, as is pointed out here: www.preservetheparty.com “A compromise is being reported that doesn’t fix the real problem. Rule 12 is reportedly still intact. With Rule 12 intact, the only thing preventing the RNC from adding back in the exact same language after the convention is a 3/4 vote. That looks high, but multiple RNC members have testified that it is not — the chair always gets what he wants if he wants it bad enough. Further, there’s no attempt to preserve the strength of the individual states. Vote strength at the convention is based on delegation size, but in the RNC it’s three for every state. If this change is adopted, small blue states will have the exact same voice and vote as Texas.
Note, at that same site (preservetheparty.com) there is also additional commentary from Morton Blackwell, who LLS mentioned previously, was on the Mark Levin show criticizing this “deal”.
Bottom line? IMO, it’s as said elsewhere: We now have to be as vigilant towards the RNC as the DNC (if not more so IMO, since complacency on our part is a real danger with the RNC).
Second “bottom line” (IMO): It would be, at this time, presumptuous and too risky to think of a third party jump, HOWEVER, this disgrace of clear elitist influence makes it, IMO, only “presumptuous” by the THINNEST of margins.
Again, we must NOW police the RNC VERY CLOSELY, and make our voices heard with regularity and force against any rule changes that could favor an elitist candidate such as Romney in the future (again presuming he doesn’t win this year).......
...these are my thoughts now, given the state of this insanity, now. May change in the future. Any rule change under this new rule (12) that would favor a “backroom deal” type of candidate, an “elitist” candidate, would be, IMO, the last straw. It would destroy any semblance of “place” a true conservative voice could, or would expect in the GOP. At that time, the only reasonable option would be a third party, as the last vestige of “conservatism” in the GOP would be destroyed.
Apparently so.
With the goo-pees overt attack on grassroot conservatives that refuse to drink the "Rule-aid," they are sprinting to the insignificance of third-party status.
True conservatives will not need to lift a finger...
.
Thanks.
...’ll be voting third party for the first time in my life this november.
I would rather stay home than spit in the wind to accomplish nothing at all.
upon reflection I will be voting this November - for Romney/ryan.
You won’t be voting for a third party. You’ll be voting for a SECOND party.
What’s the difference between handing an election to the ‘rats and handing it to the gop who is doing it’s best to imitate them?
You’ll have a bit of company. My first time to pull the lever for a SECOND party in many years.
You can’t be serious ..?? A third party is not the solution.
A better plan is to load the Congress with Tea Partiers and that should end the battle.
Boehner will have no place to hide and will be forced to see things differently.
I will never, ever, support a third party!!!!!
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.