Archives

PO’d at the RP PTB

This category contains 3 posts

Candace Owens, Steve Bannon, future of the Republican Party

@SteveBannon: More bartenders and fewer lawyers, not the donor-class candidates.

@RealCandaceO; Mock the Left, be cultural, not so staid.

Here’s the video, https://youtu.be/qC-r0izU4j0

Me: Use the energy and frustration and STOP tearing each other down!

The interview started out covering the grass roots efforts to build a border wall using private money, but these two talk about even deeper issues.

Here in Texas, we have some perfect examples: MQS and Speaker Bonnen, the”Freedom Caucus” vs. the Republican Caucus and the division in the pro-life, pro-family community are prime examples of their position.

Since 2012 at least, the various factions in our own Republican Party of Texas are fast losing our sense of cameraderie, and have already lost our sense of humor. In order to prove our uber-conservatism has been engaged in “Ready, Fire, Aim,” a circular firing squad.

Take the Strickland vs. Geren cookie incident:

https://www.texastribune.org/2015/05/03/stickland-and-texas-house/

Sure, Gerens’ joke was a little mean spirited, but it was funny. Strickland would have been so much better laughing it off, perhaps offering Green some Grecian Formula in response.

I’ve compared our factions to the sanctimonious deacon who loudly and critically disapproves of the prodigal church members who show up on Mother’s Day or Easter Sunday. Rather than making them welcome and encouraging them to come back next week.

I know I’d rather debate an atheist on issues than some of our faithful. Both sides might tell me to go to hell, but it’s a lot more damning when the believers give you directions.

Consider: Is it true, is it really importantis it necessary, and will it make the situation better or turn the frustration back on our own side? Why not look for a way to turn the debate around to unite Conservatives in a win/win deal?

Possible deal struck on Rule 15 (delegate) changes, no word on Rule 12 @GOPconvention #TxGOP #RNC

 

The Hill is reporting that there may be a compromise that “allows” State GOPs to continue to chose their delegates to the National GOP convention. There is no mention about killing the proposed rule allowing the Rebublican National Committeetoo change the rules – with a 3/4 majority vote – once we all go home.

Unfortunately, the controversy is being cast as Mitt Romney vs Ron Paul, rather than Grassroots vs PTB (Powers That Be):

“We are currently reviewing and getting feedback from our delegates. While we are not sure how this will ultimately be received, [it] is very positive that the Romney campaign is listening to feedback from the grassroots and looking to find common ground,” said Jesse Benton, Paul’s campaign manager.

Under the agreement, a bound delegate must vote for the presidential candidate that they are required to vote for under state law or state party rules, leaving the actual selection of delegates up to the states.

Previously, a proposal would have given presidential candidates the power to veto delegates sent by the states — a change that had Paul supporters crying foul, seeing it as an establishment attempt to stifle the upstart contingent.

The deal strikes a middle ground between establishment Republican leaders and conservative delegates, but is likely to infuriate some Paul backers who had spent much of the last year gaming the system to their benefit and who virulently opposed compromise on the issue.

“We were able to achieve an agreement that accomplished what everyone wanted to accomplish,” Bopp told The Hill. “The Romney campaign wanted to make sure the delegates pledged to support him will actually vote for him … and at the same time the concern we had was addressed so that state parties have complete control of the delegates.”

Bopp had blasted the Romney campaign’s original rule when it was approved, calling it “the biggest power grab in the history of the Republican Party.” He said Monday he did not know if the Paul camp would be satisfied by the changes — and didn’t care much, accusing them of “causing chaos for chaos’s sake in order to achieve their agenda.

Susurrus – Or, “How to divide a Party”

Okay, I’ll admit it: I like the word, “susurrus,” and look for excuses to use it. A better term would be “whispers from the crowd that are going around” or . . .

There are rumblings that the 2012 Republican Party of Texas Platform is “pro-amnesty.”  the ones saying this have a history of assuming the worst and getting attention because they accuse.

The wording in the RPT 2012 platform (on page 21)  titled, “The Texas Solution” plank isn’t “pro-amnesty.” It is a little wimpy and *too easily interpreted* to allow amnesty –  especially if someone  or some group chooses to interpret it that way.

I, too, wanted to see changes in the wording of “The Texas Solution” that would ensure that no one claimed that we in the RPT approve amnesty of any kind.  The term “illegal alien” should have been used instead of “undocumented individuals” and the plan should specifically require guest workers to return to their country of legal residence to apply for guest worker visa.

However, the most important fact is that the Platform was passed after the Delegates had plenty of time and warning to read the planks and even some advance warning about what to read and why. The amendments failed in Sub-Committee, in the larger Platform Committee (on both Wednesday and on Thursday) and then, at the General Session when voted on by the Delegation.

The good news is that the Platform isn’t law. It is a list of those things we in the RPT believe. We do believe in “solutions,” not just complaints and criticisms. We will insist that our elected officials not –  in any way, shape or form –  promote “amnesty.”

spelling change 6/10/12 “Susurrus”

@bnuckols tweets

Click here to get your “Choose Life” license plate

Rick Perry RickPAC

Yes, I'm still for Governor Perry!

RickPAC

What to read around here

Archives

SiteMeter