I’ve been in a writing funk for a while now – too many targets, no focus, trying to run for re-election in my town, a couple of other projects, and I find myself stretched too thin (yeah, self-induced again). However, the following came over the gunwales a few minutes ago, and the fog (smog?) that has settled in cleared for a few minutes rather quickly to respond:
http://thedailybell.com/3693/Ron-Holland-No-Paul-No-Vote-in-November
“I would also say of Ron Paul . he doesn’t need to win. In his view he is winning already. This is an ideological point he is making. But here’s why it’s electorally significant . a lot of people, I mean 41 percent in Virginia, only two people on the ballot, still a lot of people voted for Ron Paul. A lot of those voters are portable. They’re not Republican . they’re not dedicated Republican voters.” . Tucker Carlson, Editor, The Daily Caller
It is time for a groundswell of Ron Paul supporters to quietly, respectfully but firmly make their position clear to the mainstream media and the GOP establishment. Simply put, “No Paul on the ticket means no vote for the GOP in November.”
Alright, I’ll say it – with all of the levers of the Executive Branch at his command, and his willingness to use them regardless of whether he has Constitutional or even legal authorization to have them do the actions he wants, how much of this Country will be left? In the news and in the blogosphere, I see agency and department in the Executive Branch doing what bureaucracies have always done – push their authorizations to do more and more. And lately, there is a very disturbing trend that, under Obama (knowing that there will NEVER be retribution from him from doing so), they are making rules and regulations that totally disregard their authorizing legislation.
Heck, Obama’s own policy of “We Can’t Wait” has publicly said that he will go around and disregard Congress pretty much any time he wants. Robert, what will be the end result of 4 more years of what is rapidly becoming Obama’s reign as Monarch (vs a Constitutional Presidency)?
Look, I am not one of the Conservatives that dislikes Libertarianism – in fact, there is a lot that I embrace from a smaller govt standpoint as well as fiscal sanity. There are also a lot of Conservatives like me that have reached out to make common cause with Libertarians regardless of what the Republican Party thinks of us as a result. While I am an official Delegate to the NH GOP, I doubt ANY one would ever categorize me as part of the “GOP Establishment”:
- Make no mistake – if a significant number of Ron Paul supporters do sit on their hands and not vote, I am betting that:
- Most Republicans will blame Libertarians forever if this country is permanently turned to socialism because of this election
- Most of Conservatives that have been friendly will walk back to their side of the bridge – and stay there
- Rand Paul will have an extremely hard time running for President
And to the latter – I would be more included to vote for Rand than for Paul….but given the above scenario, it would never happen.
Even Saul Alinksky had a profound disdain for overtly loud radicals, even if they were right with him ideologically, for he knew that they’d never gain access to those levers of power. Obama has hidden his formerly open radicalism and has carried out Alinsky’s dream – his hands are solidly where they should not be because he went “covert”.
Bob, Republicans have often been Democrat / Progressive-lite in growing the size of govt. You are right – there may be enough Ron Paul supporters to change the outcome of the election by not voting at all (resulting in Obama v2.0). With your active choice, are you willing to accept the responsibility of the outcome? Or will you pull an Obama and blame everyone else? Alinsky also knew that a 1/2 loaf was better than no loaf – but I see that many Ron Paul supporters want that whole loaf or nothing. Given that Ron has created a 1/2 loaf and has started a change in the election conversation, are you ready to continue to grow that conversation, or are you advocating for Libertarians to “pull a Sampson” and pull the whole house down around you and everyone else? Tell me, what do you think that would do to that nascent conversation?
