NBC mentions Ron Paul "the ayes have it" screwover in convention write-up

[randomname]

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...siders-speak-out-contested-convention-n541146

Romney Precedent

Apart from the current candidates, some RNC members have a bitter aftertaste from an obscure skirmish over rules at the 2012 convention. Romney backers raised the bar for how candidates could qualify on the convention ballot, in order to avoid any symbolic floor votes for Ron Paul.

"I really didn't like what happened in 2012," says committee member Peter Feaman. "The Romney folks silenced it with the rule change — we didn't need to do this, and it alienated the Ron Paul supporters — and for what? It was like taking a fly off someone's forehead with an ax," he said.

When those rules were brought to a voice vote on the floor, the delegates cries of "no" sounded about as loud as the "yes" votes, according to a review of the footage.

Image: At the 2012 Republican convention
At the 2012 Republican convention, the prompter for Speaker Boehner's remarks showed he would find delayed voted "yes" on a rules package before the vote was actually held. mckenziedog / YouTube

Speaker Boehner deemed the voice vote a yes, though, and the rules were adopted. As some delegates would later complain, the official teleprompter even scripted Boehner saying the "ayes have it" before the vote occurred (the moment was caught on tape).

The new Speaker, Paul Ryan, will chair this year's convention, a role he mentioned Thursday while noting there's a "perception" that an "open convention" is likely.

 

[pmbug]

Thanks for the reminder. 2016 is going to be a delegate thunderdome. Good thing Cleveland has initiated their billy clubs for blue hairs security program.

 

[euphemia]

All the more reason for liberty lovers to work together the best way we can.

 

[brushfire]

Ron was a "fly on the forehead"? I think he was a bigger threat than that.

 

[Valli6]

Hoping to see this scandal finally exposed

Great to see drips and drabs of the story finally leaking out. Hope it develops into a deluge!

Breitbart also recently did a story referring to the "Ron Paul rule" for the first time. I'm wondering if the resignation of Paul-smearing editor, Ben Shapiro, has anything to do with the willingness to almost acknowledge that Ron Paul got outrageously screwed by the establishment at the 2012 RNC. (As recently as last month, Shapiro made a point of calling Ron Paul an "anti-semite." No kidding! I managed to get the first post under that story and called Shapiro a liar over it. A number of people agreed with me, but of course, my post got deleted. )

I wish someone would interview (rules committee member) Morton Blackwell, about how his bus got "lost" on the way to the convention the day the rules committee made those changes. It even circled the convention hall numerous times and the driver would not allow them to get off. Blackwell was an outspoken opponent of the rules changes and they needed for him and some other members, to be held up elsewhere, in order to force through those changes without any opposition. (This took place at a meeting, before the phony voice vote.) It was all incredibly sleazy!

(Sad to realize that Paul Ryan will be in charge of the next convention, but it always goes to the house speaker, doesn't it?)

 

[fisharmor]

You guys can't talk about this. It's not allowed.

If you open up the possibility that something important happened at the 2012 convention that Ron Paul supporters were needed for, then you open up the possibility that Rand's endorsement of Romney actually was a kick in the teeth.

And if there's one thing that we've settled on this site over the last four years, it's that there was absolutely no problem with Rand's endorsement. Ron was done by June 2012 and there was nothing at the convention worth doing outside of Rand's schmoozing and politicking.

By bringing up the idea that the 2012 convention was about more than just the nominee, you're giving those retards who didn't like the Romney endorsement more evidence that they were actually right. So cut it out.

 

[brushfire]

You guys can't talk about this. It's not allowed.

If you open up the possibility that something important happened at the 2012 convention that Ron Paul supporters were needed for, then you open up the possibility that Rand's endorsement of Romney actually was a kick in the teeth.

And if there's one thing that we've settled on this site over the last four years, it's that there was absolutely no problem with Rand's endorsement. Ron was done by June 2012 and there was nothing at the convention worth doing outside of Rand's schmoozing and politicking.

By bringing up the idea that the 2012 convention was about more than just the nominee, you're giving those retards who didn't like the Romney endorsement more evidence that they were actually right. So cut it out.

To be fair, I think Rand was trying a different approach, which has shown to fail too. Dr Paul has taken a much tougher road, and was beginning to see dividend payments, after 30+ years of prophecy fulfillment. Its too bad Dr Paul did not have another 2-4 elections to chase. I dont blame Rand for trying a different strategy, and I dont blame others for taking issue with Rand either. Seems that we have very few eggs in the Liberty basket, and folks want to make sure great care is taken with each and every one of them.

 

[Dianne]

What a bunch of pricks.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Ron was a "fly on the forehead"? I think he was a bigger threat than that.

No, not in winning the nomination, he wasn't. But, I think there was the possibility that he would have a speaking slot and that, they did not want.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Great to see drips and drabs of the story finally leaking out. Hope it develops into a deluge!

Breitbart also recently did a story referring to the "Ron Paul rule" for the first time. I'm wondering if the resignation of Paul-smearing editor, Ben Shapiro, has anything to do with the willingness to almost acknowledge that Ron Paul got outrageously screwed by the establishment at the 2012 RNC. (As recently as last month, Shapiro made a point of calling Ron Paul an "anti-semite." No kidding! I managed to get the first post under that story and called Shapiro a liar over it. A number of people agreed with me, but of course, my post got deleted. )

I wish someone would interview (rules committee member) Morton Blackwell, about how his bus got "lost" on the way to the convention the day the rules committee made those changes. It even circled the convention hall numerous times and the driver would not allow them to get off. Blackwell was an outspoken opponent of the rules changes and they needed for him and some other members, to be held up elsewhere, in order to force through those changes without any opposition. (This took place at a meeting, before the phony voice vote.) It was all incredibly sleazy!

(Sad to realize that Paul Ryan will be in charge of the next convention, but it always goes to the house speaker, doesn't it?)

There is a video somewhere where Blackwell talked about that and said the conspiracy bullshit about it being intentionally late was not true. So, you might want to search for it. It was posted on here at the time, I recall.

 

[Carlybee]

I guess its somewhat of a validation

 

[Champ]

I love how there was next to no articles, no news, no attention being given to the fact this happened, as it was happening. You had to turn into alternative news sources, like Democracy Now, to get any kind of coverage on this. Instead, it was all about how unstoppable Romney was and how he was cruising to victory. I don't remember them even mentioning Ron Paul's name on the media networks throughout the convention, short of Wolf Blitzer interview with Rand..

Now that we have Mr. Anti-Establishment, real or not, being in the same position Romney was in, brokered and open conventions are suddenly a "thing" and are an important matter that needs further reporting and attention.

Thanks media for using the same level of thorough reporting and investigation in 2012 as you are now in 2016. Oh wait..

 

[RDM]

Ron was a "fly on the forehead"? I think he was a bigger threat than that.

He was a intestinal parasite up Romney's ass.

 

[brushfire]

He was a intestinal parasite up Romney's ass.

I think Dr Paul was highly disruptive and did pose a significant threat. The extreme measures taken by the RNC were not, IMO, an overreaction.

Also, I would not call Ron Paul an intestinal parasite. I think the establishment wing of the republican party an absolute infestation of parasites in the world's intestines though. Maybe Ron Paul could be called the de-worming agent, in your analogy? Not trying to put words in your mouth, just trying to make the analogy work better

 

[invisible]

Hopefully this time there will be a motion from the floor to remove the teleprompter entirely.

 

[erowe1]

I'm not sure it was a screw over. I think Ron Paul didn't want to be nominated and probably supported the rule change as a way to keep himself from having to decline a nomination.

 

[erowe1]

Ron was a "fly on the forehead"? I think he was a bigger threat than that.

How was he any threat at all?

 

[brushfire]

How was he any threat at all?

? You were here... Ron Paul was threatening the delegation process and influencing the platform at the RNC.

I would not consider that insignificant - not in the least. I dont agree with your theory on him not wanting the nomination, btw. I think it was strange that he made his deal with Romney, but Wead (awesome human being) did a good job, and was very generous, in explaining the situation.





<head_scratch> Did RPF get redirected somewhere? Not sure I recognize this place anymore.

 

[dannno]

I'm not sure it was a screw over. I think Ron Paul didn't want to be nominated and probably supported the rule change as a way to keep himself from having to decline a nomination.

How do you think the end of this speech would have gone when he declined the nomination?

Sorry to all the hundreds of thousands of people in the Middle East who will be murdered by our next President. Sorry to the millions of non-violent Americans in prison who will continue to have their lives stolen from them by the state. Sorry to all of the wage slaves in this country who will have to continue being robbed of nearly 50% of their income. Sorry to all of the unborn children who will be murdered. Sorry to all of the people who will continue to live in poverty and starve because of government intervention into the marketplace and our monetary system. Sorry to all of the small family ranchers who will continue to have their livelihood and land stolen from them by the government.

I could have stopped it. I could accept the nomination. But I can't, because ______(fill in your response here)______.

 

[erowe1]

How do you think the end of this speech would have gone when he declined the nomination?

Which is exactly why Ron didn't want to have to give a speech at all. The rule change benefited him.