Take Over the GOP! Join the Republican Liberty Caucus, Ron Paul is a Member!

[Rob]

To the RLC contact people here:

Which current/former members of Congress are affiliated with RLC?

Which current/former members of Congress that are not affiliated with RLC have been supported in recent elections by RLC?

I want to get a better idea of what you consider a pro-liberty Congressman/candidate. If Ron Paul is the gold standard, how close to that standard does a Congressman or candidate for Congress need to be to gain RLC support? Thanks.

Please see our issues section.

http://www.rlc.org/?p=FAQ#4252

Then look at the candidates we endorsed for the 2006 elections cycle.

http://www.republicanliberty.org/candid/

 

[thexjib]

of all of the members of the Republican Liberty Caucus Board of Advisors are pro war pro bush... 'cept Dr. Paul

 

[Rob]

of all of the members of the Republican Liberty Caucus Board of Advisors are pro war pro bush... 'cept Dr. Paul

The national committee is decidedly pro-libertarian, actually paleo-libertarian

In fact since many of you probably aren't too well versed in libertarian history, I'll give some background. There was actually a rift in the libertarian movement, with the main division being war policy.

Paleo-libertarians (like Ron Paul) are anti-war whereas Neo-libertarians are pro-war.

Please keep in mind I have GROSSLY oversimplified this but you can read more at the following wikipedia articles.

Neo-libertarian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-libertarian

Paleo-libertarian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolibertarianism

Those who are neo-libertarian are still essentially support the same issues that paleo-libertarians support outside of war policy. As I said earlier the decision-making body is decidedly paleo-libertarian as are most of our members. Let's get of us elected to Congress to give Ron Paul some company.

 

[stevedasbach]

Please see our issues section.

http://www.rlc.org/?p=FAQ#4252

Then look at the candidates we endorsed for the 2006 elections cycle.

http://www.republicanliberty.org/candid/

Thanks. That was the information I was interested in. I want to check out the voting records of the elected officials and the VoteSmart profiles of the candidates.

 

[Sesshomaru]

You know, if the Republican party is stupid enough to nominate McCain or Romney, I hope they lose this election by such a landslide that the party implodes and a new party steps up to take over its spot. At least then we can start from scratch and be rid of the neocons.

 

[nullvalu]

You know, if the Republican party is stupid enough to nominate McCain or Romney, I hope they lose this election by such a landslide that the party implodes and a new party steps up to take over its spot. At least then we can start from scratch and be rid of the neocons.

They won't let go that easily. Don't rule out a landslide loss as a planned maneuver.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Not to throw cold water on a logical 'takeover' step in transforming the GOP, but....

This is the same RLC that, last year when an early endorsement of Paul would have been very helpful and obviously fitting, failed to give him one. Something about their internal rules requiring that all their regional chapters had to agree on it in order for the national group to endorse, or some such figleaf. A few of the regional groups were favoring GIULIANI, basically because he was the perceived frontrunner, and that was that, everybody was to get in line.

If the Revolution is to prosper by taking over a Republican subgroup it MUST resist being expected to go with the flow when the central command orders them to. Paul supporters MUST avoid becoming merely cosmetic constitutionalists/libertarians, whose only substance is in being GOP ambassadors to outside movements, making the constitutionalist case for a McCain, Romney or whichever CFR guy is anointed the frontrunner.

Supporters who go into the RLC MUST recognize many of its current members are in fact simply spies for the GOP leadership, who act as steering agents to keep the subgroup from ever endorsing a Paulite candidate, or otherwise 'going off the reservation.' Most of all, Revolution members taking over the RLC must threaten, and outright demonstrate WALKING POWER to take their votes elsewhere if Paul or successor candidates get treated the way Paul was treated this year. The mantra: "No more establishment games. Revolution candidates get nominated, or this party gets decimated!"

 

[dblee]

Sticky This Thread

 

[Rob]

Not to throw cold water on a logical 'takeover' step in transforming the GOP, but....

This is the same RLC that, last year when an early endorsement of Paul would have been very helpful and obviously fitting, failed to give him one. Something about their internal rules requiring that all their regional chapters has to agree on it in order for the antional group to endorse, or some such figleaf. A few of the regional groups were favoring GIULIANI, basically because he was the perceived frontrunner, and that was that, everybody was to get in line.

If the Revolution is to prosper by taking over a Republican subgroup it MUST resist being expected to go with the flow when the central command orders them to. Paul supporters MUST becoming cosmetic constitutionalists/libertarians, whose only substance is in being GOP ambassadors to outside movements, making the constitutionalist case for a McCain, Romney or whichever CFR guy is anointed the frontrunner.

Supporters who go into the RLC MUST recognize many of its current members are in fact simply spies for the GOP leadership, who act as steering agents to keep the subgroup from ever endorsing a Paulite candidate, or otherwise 'going off the reservation.' Most of all, Revolution members taking over the RLC must threaten, and outright demonstrate WALKING POWER to take their votes elsewhere if Paul or successor candidates get treated the way Paul was treated this year. The mantra: "No more establishment games. Revolution candidates get nominated, or this party gets decimated!"

Yes, some members in New York wished to nominate Giuliani, but it was very few of our members nationally. The majority of members and the governing body is paleo-conservative like Ron Paul (see above). The New York leans toward neo-libertarianism, but I'm hoping we can get enough people to sign up and push them to paleo. This is very ideologically pure organization as far as organizations go, but if we were to make and EXACT platform that all were to follow, we'd end up as successful as the Libertarian or Constitution Parties. In fact, the things we're discussing actually imply the typical arguments for and against the Libertarian Party. However, the results are clear; they have never elected anyone to national office and have been trying for 35 years.

I'd like to add that since our organization is essentially paleo-libertarian with a few neo-libertarians thrown in, we could quickly make the already few neo-libertarians insignificant if enough Ron Paul supporters join.

 

[torchbearer]

Take over your state central committee should be step one.

 

[thexjib]

Not to throw cold water on a logical 'takeover' step in transforming the GOP, but....



If the Revolution is to prosper by taking over a Republican subgroup it MUST resist being expected to go with the flow when the central command orders them to. Paul supporters MUST avoid becoming merely cosmetic constitutionalists/libertarians, whose only substance is in being GOP ambassadors to outside movements, making the constitutionalist case for a McCain, Romney or whichever CFR guy is anointed the frontrunner.

truer words were never spoken!

I’m not making peace with the GOP until they make peace with me! I feel absolutely betrayed by the conservative movement… they never were for liberty.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Yes, some members in New York wished to nominate Giuliani, but it was very few of our members nationally. The majority of members and the governing body is paleo-conservative like Ron Paul (see above). The New York leans toward neo-libertarianism, but I'm hoping we can get enough people to sign up and push them to paleo. This is very ideologically pure organization as far as organizations go, but if we were to make and EXACT platform that all were to follow, we'd end up as successful as the Libertarian or Constitution Parties. In fact, the things we're discussing actually imply the typical arguments for and against the Libertarian Party. However, the results are clear; they have never elected anyone to national office and have been trying for 35 years.

I'd like to add that since our organization is essentially paleo-libertarian with a few neo-libertarians thrown in, we could quickly make the already few neo-libertarians insignificant if enough Ron Paul supporters join.

The reason alternative candidates running in 3rd parties have not succeeded at the federal level, is because the MSM/establishment have had a stranglehold over the election process. The reason alternative candidates running WITHIN THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM have not succeeded at the federal level, is because the MSM/establishment have had a stranglehold over the election process. The media blackout of Paul is not new, it is just the current application of tried and true elite methods of structurally suppressing alternative candidates, regardless of the party organ they used.

Has the RLC ever had any previous success challenging the party leadership to back a Paulite candidate, versus a CFR drone in a major nomination battle? Do they contemplate ever fighting such a battle? Will they even fight for a rules change, to move away from a unanimous endorsement policy that effectively gives the New York RLC veto powers over the whole national group? I'm hopeful things will change, but I'm not holding my breath. In the meantime, I will certainly suggest that local NYC meetup group members try to take over the state RLC, if that will help start the process.

 

[Rob]

Not to throw cold water on a logical 'takeover' step in transforming the GOP, but....



If the Revolution is to prosper by taking over a Republican subgroup it MUST resist being expected to go with the flow when the central command orders them to. Paul supporters MUST avoid becoming merely cosmetic constitutionalists/libertarians, whose only substance is in being GOP ambassadors to outside movements, making the constitutionalist case for a McCain, Romney or whichever CFR guy is anointed the frontrunner.

truer words were never spoken!

I’m not making peace with the GOP until they make peace with me! I feel absolutely betrayed by the conservative movement… they never were for liberty.

We're not the GOP, we're trying to take it over. We are NOT beholden to it in any way. The vast majority of our members don't vote Republican in the presidential election, except for perhaps this one.

 

[RPinSEAZ]

Yes, some members in New York wished to nominate Giuliani, but it was very few of our members nationally. The majority of members and the governing body is paleo-conservative like Ron Paul (see above). The New York leans toward neo-libertarianism, but I'm hoping we can get enough people to sign up and push them to paleo. This is very ideologically pure organization as far as organizations go, but if we were to make and EXACT platform that all were to follow, we'd end up as successful as the Libertarian or Constitution Parties. In fact, the things we're discussing actually imply the typical arguments for and against the Libertarian Party. However, the results are clear; they have never elected anyone to national office and have been trying for 35 years.

I'd like to add that since our organization is essentially paleo-libertarian with a few neo-libertarians thrown in, we could quickly make the already few neo-libertarians insignificant if enough Ron Paul supporters join.

How does the voting on endorsements work? If there's one thing I won't do, it's be part of an organization that endorses people like Giuliani.

Edit: I just read in a previous post that it's by unanimous approval, it seems that's an easy way for the GOP to insert moles into the organization to effectively negate everything you're trying to do.

 

[Rob]

How does the voting on endorsements work? If there's one thing I won't do, it's be part of an organization that endorses people like Giuliani.

Much ado is being made of very little here first of all. Essentially a few people who are neo-libertarians find the war to be a big enough issue to block the recommendation that every other charter state organization made for Ron Paul. Please do note, that Ron Paul has been consistently endorsed for his Congress run, and will be for this one as well.

The people in New York won't be able to endorse anyone in their state like Giuliani, because our governing body refuses to approve them. We have a few neo-libertarians (NOT neo-libertarians, please looks these terms up if unfamiliar) in New York, however, they can easily be overwhelmed by paleo-libertarians (Ron Paul) if only a fraction of our meetup members join from NY. The national committee is essentially paleo-libertarian. Please see my previous posts for more info on that.

 

[Rob]

How does the voting on endorsements work? If there's one thing I won't do, it's be part of an organization that endorses people like Giuliani.

Edit: I just read in a previous post that it's by unanimous approval, it seems that's an easy way for the GOP to insert moles into the organization to effectively negate everything you're trying to do.

The state nomination process works very differently. For US House and Senate, it just needs approval of the state and the national committee (very paleo-libertarian ie. Ron Paul).

 

[jm1776]

We need a national organization to smoothly transition into from the 1,600+ meetup groups we are currently in.

The fact that the RLC is a part of the GOP is perfect. Excellent practice for the ultimate goal/takeover! I say we jump in and make it work.

 

[BuddyRey]

Could you explain in some detail the various membership levels and the differences between them?

 

[Rob]

We need a national organization to smoothly transition into from the 1,600+ meetup groups we are currently in.

The fact that the RLC is a part of the GOP is perfect. Excellent practice for the ultimate goal/takeover! I say we jump in and make it work.

It's not quite "a part" of the GOP. We're affiliated with it, but have ABSOLUTELY NO obligations to it. None. Nada. Our relationship is heavily skewed in our favor.

 

[RPinSEAZ]

Much ado is being made of very little here first of all. Essentially a few people who are neo-libertarians find the war to be a big enough issue to block the recommendation that every other charter state organization made for Ron Paul. Please do note, that Ron Paul has been consistently endorsed for his Congress run, and will be for this one as well.

The people in New York won't be able to endorse anyone in their state like Giuliani, because our governing body refuses to approve them. We have a few neo-libertarians (NOT neo-libertarians, please looks these terms up if unfamiliar) in New York, however, they can easily be overwhelmed by paleo-libertarians (Ron Paul) if only a fraction of our meetup members join from NY. The national committee is essentially paleo-libertarian. Please see my previous posts for more info on that.

Thanks for clarifying. What kind of "weight" do you think an endorsement by the RLC carries with card carrying republicans? What does the typical member of the Republican establishment think of the RLC? Besides endorsements of specific "liberty minded candidates" is there any other work that the RLC does on behalf of changing the Republican party from within?