Meyer Fired
By Brian Kirwin | May 3, 2008
Filed Under Campaigns and Elections, Republicans |
Republican 2nd District Chairman Bruce Meyer walked into today’s convention with the endorsement of almost every Republican elected official in the district (not that many of them were there). He walked out with only 34% of the vote, as veteran of the Reagan White House Gary Byler swept into the chairmanship, and brought most of his slate with him.
And Leo Wardrup had a few choice exchanges with Ron Paul supporters.
A packed auditorium was hopping with excitement, as Congresswoman Thelma Drake and Commonwealth’s Attorney Harvey Bryant spoke for Meyer, who gave an excellent pitch for his continued leadership. Then John Welch stood up and laid down the story for change. 4 races in November that were lost, and we need to get the Party back to its roots.
Gary Byler was at his populist best, talking the talk of winning elections, broadening the party and being positive. The vote was not even close, and Byler swept in two new State Central members who ousted two incumbents.
The highlight of the day, other than Del. Bob Marshall’s joke, was former Delegate Leo Wardrup absolutely pasting the Ron Paul folks from the podium. A candidate for delegate to the national convention went off on a Libertarian tangent about the Patriot Act and the war and the budget and whatever else the fringe likes to carp about.
Leo Wardrup took the podium to speak for Del. Bob Purkey for the same convention race and absolutely blasted the Paulites “This is a REPUBLICAN convention” said Leo, urging voters to send people to the National Convention who will support the Republican nominee as chosen by the voters.
Ron Paul supporters booed Leo, and did so loudly, and Leo blasted them with a quote from Shakespeare’s era that had me so roaring with laughter I can’t even remember what it was. Something about his horse and their donkey.
Jim Gilmore swung by and gave a really, really, really good speech. Damn, if he gets this going, he might be on the way. A bit too Buchananite for the mainstream middle still, but firing up the base? No problem.
Del. Bob Marshall was there, and as usual was l-o-n-g on talking about his legislative accomplishments. He should’ve stopped 30 seconds after his joke (How many Democrats does it take to change a light bulb? NONE - Democrats only promise change.)
But Byler whipping Meyer was the big story of the day. I know how hard Gary fights, and it looks like the days of the “kinder, gentler, bipartisan” Republican Party are over, at least in this neck o’ da woods.
Comments
70 Responses to “Meyer Fired”
Leave a Reply
What the heck are you talking about? Is this some sort of neo-con jibberish?
Most people call it “English”
Does Byler’s election mean anything for Jeff Frederick? Every district chair endorsed Hager. Did Byler speak for or is know to be leaning towards Frederick?
Byler is supporting Frederick. Hager can’t say every district chair is supporting him anymore; two from his endorsement list aren’t chairs anymore.
Funny thing is that Hager has most of the establishment with him too, who all say he’s winning. Problem is, as Thema learned today, the establishment doesn’t have the votes.
That Meyer was ever District Chairman is a stain on the Second District. The kind of stain that Meyer represents is not identifiable in polite company.
Attack Bruce Meyer’s politics if you may, but don’t attack him personally. Bruce is as good a guy as there is in politics.
Meyer was very good to me when I was a Republican City Committee backbenhcer. Therefore, I went Saturday to try to start to repay him for everything he had done for me.
Then, Byler and his “Team GOP” romped….
because Bruce would n-e-v-e-r say anything bad about anyone else…
Quote from Byler regarding the state Chairman’s race: “call that lazy son of a bitch Tyler Whitley [at the Times-Dispatch] and tell HIM that Hager no longer has 11 district chairmen supporting him.”
“Operation Chaos meets the RP Revolution” swung the vote yesterday.
Conventions are pretty simple. Sign people up and turn them out. The person who lost didn’t do that very well.
The real question, Brian, is whether those that turned-out and voted for Byler yesterday will continue to support the Republican Party and Republican candidates or whether they showed as a favor.
Another question is whether rank-and-file Republicans that are currently active will continue their involvement.
Clearly, Byler demonstrated excellent organizational and political skills — and if he can do that for his own election, then there is certainly hope for the future of the party…but only time will tell.
Yes, and the answer to whether Bruce Meyer could generate the same interest was a resounding “NO”
Though mentioned only in passing, I think you can’t discount the degree to which Thelma Drake had a bad day. She was pushing Bruce as if they shared genetic material, had her vols working the floor, etc. Well stated here that politics on the local level is about finding your people and getting them out, so easy conclusions can be made as to Thelma’s stroke in her back yard. Her candidate did win Norfolk chair 2 weeks ago, but the vote was awful close against a guy who was hardly a force.
Don’t want to say anything negative against Bruce, he’s a good guy - but he got flat out beat, and I’m wondering if Thelma helped or hurt in the end. She should wise up and realize its time to stay the hell out of inter-party politics, though I doubt any GOP officials are going to be banging down her door for her stamp of approval any time soon.
I don’t know much about his politics, Henry. Don’t much care. This is a question of personal honesty and integrity. If that’s a “personal” attack, so be it. I seem to recall a President who claimed that attacks on his integrity were “personal,” too. I just know that Meyer was personally involved in sleazy, dishonest machinations during his time as part of the cabal that took over — and practically destroyed — the YRFV. Now, I’m sure there are those who will dismiss it as “ancient history.” However, my experience is that those who conduct their affairs dishonestly early in life seldom change.
And before you challenge my credentials to comment on that, while Bruce was doing that, the club of which I was honored to be Chairman was doing that which earned it honors as the nation’s best YR club. And Virginia’s, in fact.
Henry,
It would have been nice if you introduced yourself.
I was there.
Pam
res ipsa,
Just to let you know—I was not anybody’s candidate or endorsed by Congresswoman Drake for Chairman of the Republican Party of Norfolk.
I ran for election, and won on my own merit.
Yet you were nominated by her husband, Ted Drake.
Pam,
I was the big, bearded guy in the bright green shirt that you slapped one of your lapel stickers on.
We’ve crossed paths in Norfolk before (I was a Rerras volunteer in 99, 03, and 07) so I didn’t think an introduction was needed. That’s what happens when you assume….
I can understand Pam not recognizing Henry. I can’t remember the last time he attended a Beach Republican event.
Res, I’ve said this to people, so I don’t mind doing so here. I don’t think this had anything to do with Drake. Ronald Reagan could’ve endorsed Meyer from heaven and Byler would’ve won. The auditorium was packed with people who were specifically there to vote for Gary. I saw people Saturday that haven’t been involved with the Republican Party for years.
Signs and speeches won’t sway on Convention day for the top of the ticket. Once Byler filed twice as many applications as Meyer did, it was over.
The “star” of the convention was Chuck Smith, who gave one of the best Republican speeches I’ve heard in years, and was the top vote-getter for national delegate and State Central.
Jim,
You are correct. Ted Drake gave my nomination,he is a long standing member of the Norfolk Party and my second nomination speech came from Dan Haworth.
For the record, I never even directly discussed my run for Norfolk Chair with Thelma, and I did not ask her for an endorsement.
You are right, I guess that would be people’s perception.
[…] Meanwhile, good news from the Second District Republicans in the VA-2 District met Saturday and changed course, replacing Bruce Meyer with Gary Byler. This is good news for two reasons (Bearing Drift). […]
I think this change will be positive for the VBRP.
Reid,
First of all, it’s the RPVB, not the “VBRP”.
Second, the only real area it impacts is candidate recruitment, as the district chair tends to be the chief candidate recruiter (see: Dave Hummel).
Third, if you think Byler and his slate will take the unit organization (i.e. RPVB), think again. If he tried, the electeds would nail him like they did Karen Beauchamp in 2002.
Hey Henry,
Bless you for taking one of those stickers….
Sorry, I am so tired, and Amerigroup is killing me right now.
Guess I had better hit the sack. Norfolk Party is covering some precincts tomorrow for Thelma.
We believe in free enterprise, individual rights, fiscal responsibility, the constitution, strong defense, the right to life, and the right to bear arms and faith in God.
Who truly speaks for these ideals?
You will find that there are actually two lines of thinking, two currents of philosophy that are at work within the party today. One line of thinking is that of Taft, Friedman, Goldwater, and Reagan. The other, the left-handed path, is a line of thinking that traces it’s lineage back to Wolfowitz, Podhoretz, Shachtman, and Trotsky.
I ask you again, who stands for these values, that have made America the greatest nation on Earth?
We must ask ourselves this as we decide who to support. ‘Conservative’ no longer means ‘keep things as they are’, it means that it’s up to us to fight the attack on our currency, family structure, and our ideals from the radical Left, though it is coming at us from all directions. From the Media. From Academia. From those that forsake principle for power. From those that would weild the invincible fist of the state against their own countrymen. From the enemy within, that Cicero warned us of. ‘Conservative’ means, ‘make things as they ought to be.’
Why would you consider caucusing, let alone voting for someone:
*who almost joined the democrats twice
* He was intimately involved in the “Keating 5″ scandal, a disgrace to Capitalism
* He has been endorsed by the liberal left New York Times
* He is a big advocate of the global warming scare, amnesty for illegals, the un-Constitutional McCain-Feingold bill, restrictions on 2nd Amendment rights.
* Favors Roe v. Wade.
* He is no fiscal conservative, and will raise taxes on Social Security benefits.
There are three Democrats still in the race. Clinton, Obama and John McCain. McCain does not support our values or our platform!
Ron Paul, on the other hand, is a True Patriot!
He has never voted to raise taxes, for an unbalanced budget, for restriction on gun ownership, or to raise congressional pay, the patriot act or regulating the internet.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program and returns part of his congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
He supports overturning Roe Vs. Wade.
He believes that more freedom and less government is better for everyone, and that the principles that made this country great are the principles that we must defend.
I think that McCain is far more dangerous than Hitlery or O-Baaa-a-a!-ma . If one of those two get elected, there will be a backlash against the Dems when America is reminded once again how rough socialism is (the average American simply can’t fathom that Bush is a Trotskyite). However, when McCain gets in, thanks to those of you that were so unprincipled as to take part in Limbaugh’s little ‘Operation Chaos’, rather than pick the best candidate from your own party (at least then, Romney would be in the lead), as well as the those of you unprincipled enough support anyone with an R- in front of their name even if they’re a disgrace to the letter R itself, then something far worse will happen. That is, the same thing that has been going on for the last sisxteen years. We’ll have a corporatist (still a socialist, albeit an upside down one) in charge and once again, the evils that collectivism breeds will once again be pinned on the Republicans, allowing the country to slide even further to the left. I cringe at the thought of our national anthem being replaced by ‘La Internationale’.
Do remember what the proper functions of government are?
Do you love your country enough to do what’s right, and not what’s simply popular?
Do you remember what it means to have the conscience of a Conservative?
Are we ‘Paulites’ so fringe, Mr. Kirwin? Are we? Or are the trotskyites that have hijacked our party the fringe?
Was Barry Goldwater a Democrat, Mr. Wardrup? Perhaps it’s you who are out of touch.
Dan,
How much of the primary vote did Ron Paul get? (Only 5% in Virginia Beach.)
Case closed.
Mr. Lyons, you ask me if you are fringe?
If you don’t think you are, please set an appointment with reality. The two of you need to meet as soon as possible.
Brian, there’s no requirement to be mainstream to be a member of the party. What should be a requirement is that the elected officials actually represent OUR Republican creed:
We believe…
That the free enterprise system is the most productive supplier of human needs and economic justice.
That all individuals are entitled to equal rights, justice, and opportunities and should assume their responsibilities as citizens in a free society.
That fiscal responsibility and budgetary restraints must be exercised at all levels of government.
That the Federal Government must preserve individual liberty by observing constitutional limitations.
That peace is best preserved through a strong national defense.
That faith in God, as recognized by our Founding Fathers, is essential to the moral fibre of the Nation.
Can you honestly say that the mainstream party represents our own creed? Does McCain really represent what the Republican creed states?
Here’s the requirement. The ones who never win elections don’t get to tell the ones who do what they should do. Ron Paul lost in 1988 when he LEFT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY to run for President. He lost every Republican primary this year.
When he wins something other than his district, get back to me.
Get back to you with what? I think you forgot to read my post and assumed what I was going to say. I mean, what does his losing have to do with anything? Please, answer my question.
Here’s my two cents (not that anyone cares). I have typically voted for republicans in the past, mostly because I was raised an “Erb”. Until last year was I never very active in politics, but after seeing Dr. Paul in the debates, that changed.
This was my first attendance @ a GOP convention, and likely my last. After witnessing the negativity there, and in the above comments it appears to me the GOP shows about the same maturity level as the typical middle school student gov’t. No wonder the Dems have gained so much new support. What better way to drive people to switch parties with this kind of juvenile bickering and attacks?
And to Mr. Ryto’s comment above regarding the (5%)…if folks had used their BRAINS and voted for the candidate that was actually the best for the country, rather than voting for whomever would keep them on the gravy train (for future favors), Paul would have had a better support base.
Also, Mr. Kirwin, Paul did not lose NV.
I care, Vicky. The capital of gambling and prostitution voted for Ron Paul. There’s a campaign slogan for ya.
Insulting 95% of the voters is no path to victory. Bottom line, most people don’t agree with Ron Paul. There are a lot of platform ideas I agree with him on, but he’s wrong on trade, on drugs, on military policy and I think he’s completely paranoid about civil liberties.
As far as the negativity, it was the Ron Paul supporters that BOOED speakers in the middle of their remarks. Is that the negativity you’re talking about?
A Ron Paul supporter was running for delegate to the National Convention to nominate John McCain. He gave a speech bashing McCain and supporting Ron Paul. The audience did not scream, boo, hiss or interrupt him.
They also didn’t vote for him.
When Leo Wardrup stood up and reminded folks what the purpose of the Republican convention was, the Ron Paul contingent (all sitting together) booed, screamed and interrupted him.
As far as “favors,” check out all the earmarks Ron Paul brings home to his district before you criticize “gravy trains” and “future favors”
Stephen, what does his losing have to do with anything?
Are you serious?
What’s the point of voting if those who lose elections get to decide what happens in government?
If you aren’t happy with how “conservatively pure” a Republican is, support someone else, recruit someone else, or run yourself. Win. And then you get to decide.
You made the charge that mainstream Republicans don’t live up to the Republican creed. On some counts, I may agree. But if people you agree with lose elections to those who don’t meet your purity test, and you’re unable to gain popular support for your candidates or your ideas, you’re just talking.
Bottom line. Most elected officials will respond to what a majority of voters want no matter what party they belong to.
For one thing, I did not ‘boo’, we weren’t all sitting together, and, btw, I am not a gambler nor a prostitue, thank you. Personally I don’t feel the FED should control that anyhow. Leave it to the states.
I was referring to Leo’s bashing of fellow republicans, your above comments, and the comments of others (ie, correcting spelling and telling people to get a reality check).
The ‘purpose’ of the convention should be to vote your conscience. I still think the ‘counting’ was not totally legit. Obviously the majority just goes with the flow rather than making a stand for what is right. McCain will do nothing but pursue more wars, further bankrupting this country. Do you have a son that could be drafted in the next few years due to McCain’s foreign policy of forced democracy? I do. Perhaps you’d feel differently if you did, or maybe not.
Tell me, what good is ‘national security’ if it infringes on civil liberties? Paranoid? No. Have you not witnessed the illegal gun confiscations, illegal search and seizures, and outright unconstitutional treatment of our citizens that is going on? You will not see this on network tv, so I assume youre not aware, or just feel “that won’t happen to me”.
Lastly, I suggest you read The Revolution - a manifesto before you criticize Dr. Paul’s position on earmarks. Dr. Paul doesn’t take money from lobbyists.
Well, then I wasn’t talking about you.
The “purpose of the convention” is to vote for the candidate who won the primary.
Now, if you’re going to write here “I still think the ‘counting’ was not totally legit” I’m going to ask why you think that. Is it not possible that a person who takes the microphone and bashes the Republican nominee for President at a Republican convention would lose an election to be a delegate to the Republican National Convention?
Did you expect his speech to win over the crowd?
Oh, and yes, i said paranoid. Like thinking elections are fixed just because you lose them. Secret government agents are confiscating guns and conducting illegal searches and no one seems to know about it except Ron Paul supporters.
Reminds me of the only people who seem to see UFOs.
And for your last suggestion, I’ll read Ron Paul’s book when you learn what an earmark is. Earmarks have nothing to do with taking money from lobbyists.
When talking to Ron Paul supporters becomes like talking to Scientologists, it’s time to be worried.
Mr. Ryto,
Perhaps you’re right, but as a great deal of the 20th Century proves, it doesn’t matter if the majority is wrong, they’re still wrong. Of course, it’s easier to maintain the status quo than to stand for principle. Don’t cry about our party losing seats if you can’t fathom that our platform and the uninspiring candidates such as Drake and McCain that purport to represent said platform have nothing to do with it.
Mr. Kirwin,
The lack of substance in your attacks is of no surprise, nor is it a surprise that you’re far too complacent to realize that there is something very wrong with the way things are running. The budget is only something that the fringe carps about? You’re right, I’m sorry - being concerned about the health of our economy and the currency that drives it must make me a barking moonbat, my apologies.(/s)
If you’d like a ‘reality check’, our party has been invaded by leftists and authoritarians. How’s that for a reality check?
The media completely stifled Paul, again, employing the old Soviet tactic of simply not discussing him. Listen to Mike Savage, even he has not once mentioned Paul. Tony Macrini is the only one that gave him any play in Hampton Roads, so, there’s your 5%.
Make no mistake, those of us that are still currently Ron Paul supporters are here to stay.
We aren’t leaving the party just because Paul didn’t get elected, quite the contrary. The fact that Paul only got 5% shows me how much work we have to do in reminding the likes of you what the proper functions of government are. This party is going back to it’s Constitutional, Conservative roots, and we’re going to drag it, kicking and screaming if we have to. This thing isn’t even about Paul. It’s about our ideas, and they are the right ideas. A man can die. Ideas are bulletproof.
“Vote for Palpatine. Vote for the Empire. Make Mon Mothma vote for him too. Be good little Senators. Mind your manners and keep your heads down. And keep doing all those things we can’t talk about.”
?Padmé Amidala to Bail Organa, during the Declaration of a New Order
(You want UFOs? Fine, that lost quote is from ‘Star Wars’. Are you for the Old Republic, or the Empire?)
“What’s the point of voting if those who lose elections get to decide what happens in government?”
Is this really what you think is happening? What I saw was people vote for someone who best represents them. Ron Paul has nothing to do with the local elections, so stop trying to bring him into them to discredit us. You say yourself that the mainstream doesn’t follow it’s own creed and then you bash people for trying to elect officials who do. You even call the ones who support candidates who best represent their own party “fringe,” as if we’re out of touch. You even tell a supporter of liberty that he needs to get in touch with reality.
“But if people you agree with lose elections to those who don’t meet your purity test, and you’re unable to gain popular support for your candidates or your ideas, you’re just talking.”
How else am I supposed to have a voice within our party? Shouldn’t I stand up and say when I believe our party is in the wrong? We are not trying to overthrow our party, or do anything but get officials to represent the party truthfully and faithfully. You have a right to disagree, and I welcome honest disagreement. But when the people believe that we’re not Republican because we disagree with the mainstream, we as a party are heading down a dangerous path.
Furthermore, McCain isn’t officially the nominee until September 4th, there’s plenty of time for him to get caught disregarding his own campaign finance reform laws between now and then.
This will be my last post because I have neither the energy nor desire to argue w/you. Sorry I didn’t elaborate, I’m trying to keep the posts as short as possible…yes, I know what an earmark is. Slashing earmarks won’t make a DENT in the amount of money Washington is wasting. They are nothing compared to the billions being thrown away fighting unconstitutional war. But heck, it makes the contractors and oil companies richer at our expense, so who cares, right?
Industry lobbyists go for the candidate that will pass legislation favoring them. Candidates are bought and sold.
Regarding the counting…I wasn’t referring to the candidate that made the notorious ’speech’. There was much support for another candidate, and a rather shocking outcome. It also took an outrageously long time for that final vote to be counted, did it not? Odd with the amount of people that had left prior to the vote.
For the record, I’ve never seen a UFO and don’t wear a tinfoil hat. (This is the kind of negativity I was talking about before) Yes, I have seen first hand the injustices occuring today, they are not fairy tales. There’s plenty of documentary and video out there. Best advice I can give you for finding the truth is turn off your television and do some research.
I wish you no ill will, so best of luck to you in the future. I suppose I’m a little too kind to be part of your GOP.
And by the way, it was me alone that spoke loudly when Wardrup spoke. Please don’t include all of the RP supporters.
^That’s not entire true, I booed pretty loudly as well.
No one can lie to my face and call someone who’s more of a Republican than he will ever be a Democrat and accuse them of being at the wrong convention, and expect anything less than a boo.
Why all the animosity towards Ron Paul Republicans? What happened to that Big Tent? And why is supporting Big Government RINOs all the rage these days (all the while wondering why we republicans are losing elections and majorities)?
I mean, the independents (read: centrists-whatever that is, and lefties) are welcomed when it comes to supporting McCain; Ron Paul Republicans are told that we’re in the wrong party. Republicans don’t screech when it is reported that Joe Lieberman, a dyed in the wool liberal who has NEVER been a republican, may speak at the RNC, in fact, there’s a VP poll linked on this blog with Joe Lieberman as one of the choices for McCain (!!!!!); y’all would probably have apoplexy if Ron Paul was invited to speak at the RNC, let alone, considered as a VP candidate.
I’m a republican for a reason: the stated principles outlined in the Virginia Republican Creed. Is there some other “rule book” I’ve missed out on?
The disconnect here between Brian Kirwin’s focus (doing whatever it takes to win elections and gain political power) and everyday (non-wonkish/pundit) Republicans seeking to nominate individuals that stand for the core GOP principles and for the proper enforcement of a limited Federal Government as specified by our Constitution is the growing rift that will need to be bridged.
Brian Kirwin understands the obvious, that being that if the Republican Party candidates do not win election; the GOP can do nothing to control government in the hopes of steering the decisions closer to Republican Party principles.
The Republican supporters of GOP Congressman Ron Paul understands the obvious too, that being that if the Republican Party selects candidates that do not stand for Republican Party core principles and focus their actions of seeking to garner the votes of “moderates” and “swing voters”, we all end up with guys like John McCain who isn’t really committed to principle, rather he is committed to pragmatism - and doing whatever political strategists decide will “win the lection”.
Henry Ryto has been banging a drum for many years about changing demographics and the “need” for the GOP to pander to the growing “minority voting blocks”, or face losing elections.
Interestingly, in Virginia the GOP has been losing elections - but not because they aren’t being “moderates”, but BECAUSE THEY ARE - and their Republican “base” has stopped supporting them.
The GOP “party insider” disciples of the “Must Be A BIG Tent At All Cost” in order to “win” aren’t producing the “wins”, they are producing loses.
So, here we find the GOP at a critical cross roads - what path do the GOP “party insiders” chose?
Do they keep shifting to the Left - pretending/claiming they are only “shifting to the center”?
Or do they return to the core Republican Party principles and re-energize their disillusioned “base”?
Or, do they try to steal from the Democratic Party playbook and try to out spend the Democratic Party and grow government at a rate that even the Democratic Party had not achieved?
Why aren’t our borders secured? It has been nearly 7 years since 9/11/2001. The GOP is pandering to the Hispanic “voting block” – I believe this proves that a majority of the “party insiders” think as Henry Ryto does. In order to win elections they must pander to minorities.
So, what happens? We have unprotected borders and the safety of our citizenry is in jeopardy because the primary role of the Federal government is being ignored in favor of winning elections.
The question I think the disconnect between the Brian Kirwin/Henry Ryto “whatever it takes to win elections” and the old school Republicans that seek to elect representatives that will strictly adhere to the core principles of the Republican Party raises is this?
Do guys like Brian Kirwin and Henry Ryto (and Leo Wardrup, and Ken Stolle, too) actually believe that if they stood firm in support of Republican Party core principles they cannot win elections?
If so, why doesn’t the Republican Party “insiders” admit that they no longer stand for the old school Republican Party core principles and draft new core principles that honestly capture what it is that the GOP leadership actually stands for?
What core values and core principles are the GOP leadership unwilling to “compromise”?
Or, is it as I suspect, the GOP leadership will compromise ANYTHING to win elections and gain political power?
If that is the case, then why would any American citizens actually support such a political party?
Oh, that’s right – simply because the GOP leadership and their legions of political pundits/campaign strategists claim that the Democratic Party having power would be worse. Isn’t that what all those GOP mail pieces, emails, and robo-calls we receive clearly state?
I believe the “reality” Brian mentioned in his posts is actually that the real Republican Party core principles are now:
1. Do whatever it takes to win elections and gain political power
2. Vote for Republicans because Democrats are worse.
I say that if this is in fact, “reality”, why vote for either party?
This is why I left the Republican Party and I am working to grow the Libertarians Party.
Oh, where to begin….
Dan attacks me by complaining about my attacks. And quoting Star Wars! What’s next? Are we going to talk about the destruction of Krypton when we debate global warming?
But it does loosely tie in. Star Wars = fantasy. President Ron Paul = fantasy.
Stephen, I didn’t bring Ron Paul into the discussion. The speaker at the convention did. Blame him.
Otherwise, I don’t have a problem with your comment. But someone who doesn’t support the Republican nominee wanting to go to the National Convention to vote for the nominee he doesn’t even support confuses me to no end.
My point is this. You fight for your issues and others will, too. Someone wins, and someone loses. If you lose, have the maturity to realize that most people don’t agree with you.
Terri, the only point was that someone was running to be a McCain delegate who didn’t support McCain. Big tent is one thing, but after the election, it kind of works out better to support the winner - unless you really aren’t supporting the Party.
Reid, you look at things a little more globally, but your comments are strong ones.
John McCain won. Ron Paul didn’t, but neither did Giuliani or Thompson or even Romney.
I’ll note that the Democrats ignored their base for years, and doing so was the only way they captured the Presidency in the last 30 years.
“But someone who doesn’t support the Republican nominee wanting to go to the National Convention to vote for the nominee he doesn’t even support confuses me to no end.”
I fail to see the confusion. When a delegate goes to the National convention, they are only required to vote for the nominee once. If there happens to be a dispute, the Delegate can then vote for whomever they choose. It should be obvious that he hopes for a dispute.
“If you lose, have the maturity to realize that most people don’t agree with you.”
Okay, you lost me there. I have no problem with losing. I have a problem with someone saying that I am not a Republican because I refuse to compromise my principles. I keep hearing about Republican principles, but I fail to see our elected officials representing them. If you say that Reid makes a strong case, then it seems you have chosen the path of doing whatever it takes to get the party in office. I can not see how anyone can do so, and strongly believe that it is our principles that attract people. And I will defend the Republican priciples whenever I am faced with the opportunity.
“he hopes for a dispute”
There’s a good Republican!
So, you’re saying he would go and vote for McCain while hoping the nomination process somehow tanks?
Stephen, I’d never say you weren’t a Republican. It’s the folks on the far right that do that with the “RINO” tag telling people that elected officials aren’t “real Republicans” because they can’t build 9 billion dollars of roads for free.
Defend your principles, and support candidates who closely mirror them. But at the end of the day, if we fight each other to the point that the Democrats win elections, I’m not happy with that outcome.
Some are. Some would rather have a conservative Democrat than a moderate Republican. Some on the right n-e-v-e-r attack Democrats with the same fire that they pummel moderate Republicans.
I would rather have Republicans in office than Democrats. Guilty as charged.
Brian writes:
“I would rather have Republicans in office than Democrats. Guilty as charged.”
This begs the question - why?
If the “price” of winning elections is to abandon Republican Party core values and principles to “win” ’swing voters” away from the Democratic Party - what difference does it make if the elected big government, tax & spend/borrow & spend politician claims an “R” or a “D” in front of his or her name?
Brian, it is not the label in front of their name that matters - it is how they vote and their unwillingness to compromise core Republican values and principles that matters.
Well, matter is you believe the nation is better off by having a government that adheres to the Constitution, seeks smaller government, less spending, lower taxes, and a strong defense. A government that limits itself to its Constitutional functions.
A nation that doesn’t believe that I should have a percentage of my family’s paycheck taken away from me so government can pay for someone else’s “healthcare”.
A nation that doesn’t believe that I should have a percentage of my family’s paycheck taken away from me so government can send millions to Burma because they suffered from a tragic storm.
A nation that doesn’t believe that I should have a percentage of my family’s paycheck taken away from me so that government can pay to build billion of new highways in Iraq while our own local roads are overwhelmed with grid lock because one of the nation’s premier PORTS is expanding to increase our international trade debt by mostly importing more goods from other nations – a flawed economic policy that has resulted in a LOSS OF AMERICAN JOBS. Meanwhile, our port is expanding to EXPORTmuch more of our own native COAL – while we are increasing our use for forging oil!
A nation that doesn’t believe that I should have a percentage of my family’s paycheck taken away from me so the Federal government can give away billions to use as an “economic stimulus” hand out - and use my family’s income to pay back the money it borrowed - with interest - to pay for this Unconstitutional folly.
A nation that doesn’t believe that I should have a large percentage of my family’s paycheck taken away from me so the Federal government can give away billions to use to bail our banks that make bad loans and speculators that are now left holding the bag with portfolios of over inflated houses as collateral - and use my family’s income to pay back the money it borrowed - with interest - to pay for this folly.
I could go on, but I think you grasp my point.
You got a problem with Star Wars? What’s not a fantasy is that there are lots of Real Republicans that are very unhappy with the way things are going. I’m sure there were lots of folks calling Goldwater a fantasy - mostly friends of Prescott Bush, no doubt - but they were vindicated when Reagan got in. We will be too. It might not be Ron Paul (don’t worry, we’re already working on the 2012 campaign), and it really doesn’t matter who it is in the end, so long as they have the right ideas.
What is important, and what is definitely not a fantasy, is that the real defenders of Capitalism, Reason and Individual Liberty are here to stay and we aren’t giving up. We are supporting the party. The party isn’t supporting the party, especially not with shenanigans like ‘operation clueless’.
Why would I rather elect Republicans than Democrats?
Reid, you voted for Mark Warner because you thought he wouldn’t raise taxes and you voted for Tim Kaine because he said he wouldn’t do regional authorities.
Sucks to be you, eh?
Keep voting for Democrats, Reid. Then ask me your question again.
“I could go on”
Obviously.
Dan….Goldwater lost and Reagan raised taxes several times.
True, but nowhere near to the degree that Carter or the Bush/Clinton clan did. It’ll be a cold day in hell before I vote for a Democrat, I think that was what (to bring this full circle) set me off the most about Wardrup’s comments. I’m for a traditional Republican platform, I actually want my Republic back. Not a socialized empire. The same could be said for Mr. Hendrix, the gentleman who gave the speech, and it was pretty well received before Wardrup started spouting nonsense.
Given your last comment, “Dan….Goldwater lost and Reagan raised taxes several times.”, I’d appreciate if you actually took the time to read my posts before responding. I believe I pointed that out.
(Please excuse the double post.)
I’m well aware that Goldwater lost. What I’m saying is that Reagan getting elected against the odds vindicated the Goldwater voters, as he was a far better choice for a candidate than Bush Senior.
What planet were you on? Well-received?
Everyone was polite. He was WAY out of step with the convention, but eh….we let him have his say politely. It was when someone stood up to you that y’all started whining like a bunch of Cindy Sheehans.
Dan, I read every word of your comments, and you didn’t mention Reagan’s tax increases.
Touche’, so I didn’t. Ya got me. I did mention that Goldwater lost, but enough semantics. To even think of casting the Ron Paul supporters with Cindy Sheehan shows clearly that you don’t have a very good grasp of what Ron Paul is all about.. or was that another snide ad-hominem remark trying to pass as discussion, much the way Trotskyites are trying to pass for Republicans?
Brian,
You write:
“Why would I rather elect Republicans than Democrats? Reid, you voted for Mark Warner because you thought he wouldn’t raise taxes and you voted for Tim Kaine because he said he wouldn’t do regional authorities. Sucks to be you, eh?”
Candidate for Governor Mark Warner lied to my face. My mistake? I took him at his word.
The GOP candidate for Governor that ran against Tim Kaine ran on a plan to create regional taxing authorities for regional transportation for Tidewater - so, it doesn’t matter - “D” or “R” - it made no difference. Either way we end up with an unaccountable regional taxing authority and myself and other citizens have to sue the General Assembly to have the HRTA thrown out.The primary architects of HB 3202 were Republicans - to include Attorney General Bob McDonnell.
SB 668 and HB 3202 were the product of Repubicans and Democrats.
It didn’t matter to the GOP that the voters of our region said “No” in November 2002 to SB 668 - Republicans lead the way to ignore the voters and inflict us with HB 3202 anyway.
Thus, is sucks having to suffer RINOs.
What part of HB 3202 was “less government” and “lower taxes”?
We all know it failed the Supreme Court’s evaluation and was found to be unconstitutional.
So how exactly did having people with “Rs” next to their name make any difference?
The “Rs” were no better than the “Ds” in the example you used.
Dan, I heard his speech and the Paulas boo and hiss, and I’ve heard Cindy Sheehan. I couldn’t tell much difference. Sorry if that disappoints you.
Reid, next time you see people giving away free highways, let me know.
Brian,
Who is paying for the rest of the “new” RT 460 highway that will exist outside of our region?
I guess the good folks outside of Tidewater get a free highway since the GOP plan/HB 3202 doesn’t tax them.
Brian, I am just wondering. Would you be happy if those of us who have supported Ron Paul because he represents the core values of the Republican party, left it? It really seems to me that this is what you are looking for.
Reid, no one’s paying for the “new” 460 highway.
Stephen, no I wouldn’t be happy. But Ron Paul lost. Deal with it. My candidate didn’t win the nomination either, and I’m not rhythmically nodding my head and saying “read Dr. Paul’s book….read Dr. Paul’s book…”
Reid,
Every PPTA proposal for 460 builds it all the way to I-95. One proposal even does it with zero tax dollars; they simply collect tolls.
BTW, Reid, since you called me a closet Democrat last week on two blogs, glad to see you (rightfully) put me back in the Republican Party.
Ron Paul lost. Deal with it. My candidate didn’t win the nomination either, and I’m not rhythmically nodding my head and saying “read Dr. Paul’s book….read Dr. Paul’s book…”
I do believe it is this type of comment that drives a wedge between us. I must say that it is not us Ron Paul supporters that cause the problems.
Ok, Ron Paul didn’t lose. He actually won, but the media refuses to report it.
Feel better?
You’re right. You’re so right. You just won’t realize it for a few years yet.
“You’ll come around.”
-Ron Paul, to John McCain
L. Ronpaul Hubbard?
“Ok, Ron Paul didn’t lose. He actually won, but the media refuses to report it.
Feel better?”
Sarcasm is no substitute for wit. I can’t believe people take you seriously.
Lighten up, Francis.
Stephen - They do? Who?
Mr. Kirwin, all you have left is name calling, Sir?
That establishes that you haven’t won this debate, so I’ll let up. For now. Good day.
Dan, do you have an internal self-editor that makes you ignore the namecalling you’ve done throughout this thread?
[…] May 3rd, 2008, Brian Kirwin posted a story about the 2nd District Convention. In his story, there were many errors and it was flush with […]