Founded in 1991, the Republican Liberty Caucus works to advance the principles of limited government, free markets and individual liberty within the Republican Party.

>>>>Emcee Tucker Carlson makes a point. Carlson objected when the John Birch Society’s President made the case for closed U.S. borders at the Rally for the Republic.< <<<

Good for Tucker. It is shameful that many who call themselves 'conservatives' put their personal prejudices ahead of the economy, individual freedom and this country's immigrant heritage.

Recall the RLC's position of immigration, from our statement of principles and positions:

"Peaceful diplomatic relations, free trade and open borders enhance the ability of citizens to travel, engage in international commerce and support the pursuit of liberty everywhere in the world."

See: http://www.rlcfl.org/issues/principles.html

http://www.cato.org/dailypodcast/podcast-archive.php?podcast_id=721

This message was posted by Florida RLCer John Stevens to the RLC of Florida discussion group, but is probably more appropriate here:

+++++

The contrast between the people, the enthusiasm and the message of
the Rally for the Republic and the Republican National Convention
could not be any more stark. The RNC had hundreds of police
officers in full riot gear ready to pounce. Whereas the concerts and
events at the Rally for the Republic had very little police presence
and I saw not one display of inappropriate conduct. The RNC
officials confiscated Ron Paul buttons and signs and continually
warned delegates not to show any form of dissent during the McCain
nomination. The Rally for the Republic was open to anyone and
everyone. There were McCain Delegates in attendance,
9/11 “truthers”, Pro-Lifers, Pro-Choicers, religious people,
atheists, hippies, geeks, businessmen, conservatives, liberals and
even anarchists. However I think everyone there felt a common bond –
we all sought truth and liberty.

Ron Paul is right when he says “freedom brings people together”.

I ask you which group – the RNC or the Rally for the Republic -
better represents the “Founders’ libertarian philosophy”?

Some of the fringe elements of the Ron Paul movement do make me a
little uncomfortable but nowhere near as uncomfortable as some of
the rank and file of today’s Republican Party.

I agree with pragmatism and choosing your battles wisely – but those
of us in the RLC had better at least be courageous and smart enough
to acknowledge who CURRENTLY stands for liberty and who doesn’t.
Otherwise why even have an RLC? Just join your local REC and drink
the kool-aid with the rest of them. Those of us who are serious
about restoring the republic will get on with the real work that
lies ahead. Personally I am not interested in fighting liberty road
blocks from both the Republican establishment and the RLC.

Do you want the RLC to maintain the same presence and influence of
the past 10 years or are you interested in growing it exponentially
in a matter of months? Because if the RLC does not get on board with
the revolution that is taking place accross this country, then I
assure some other organization will.

John Stevens
Vice-Chair
RLC of NE Florida
http://www.RLCNF.org

This is George Blumel’s (my father’s) response to John Stevens and others regarding the C4L rally:

+++++

I’m glad you had a good time. The writers do not make mention of the anti-Republican event’s purpose, being scheduled near and during the GOP convention, to diminish the Republican message and momentum. It didn’t succeed, of course. There are numerous opportunities to network and hear legitimate libertarian speakers (not the Jesse Ventura and ”Truther” types). I would commend Freedom Fest in Las Vegas to you all.

For a Republican Liberty Caucus to try to compete against the party in a crucial election is hardly the way a Republican group worthy of the name should act. No wonder so many Republicans do not trust libertarians. We all get painted with the “fringe” brush.

The RLC is hurt by such counter-productive behavior. If you want to participate in any event of any type, that’s OK. Just don’t do in your own name, not as a member of an organization whose very mission you are betraying.

–Geo.

Dave Shields responds to George Blumel:

+++++

I don’t see how challenging a party’s platform is “counter productive”
behavior?

Unfortunately, your attitude of blind loyalty to the party platform no
matter how far off base it has become is the EXACT reason why we have
moderates like McCain chosen to represent the Republican party. You
shouldn’t criticize a movement designed to bring the Republican party
back to it’s conservatives roots. Why else do you think the GOP would
choose a libertarian leaning Republican like Palin for the VP slot?
Hmmmmm, it couldn’t be because they are at risk of losing their
conservative base that DARES to challenge the party platform? No it
couldn’t be that at all, it must have been to appease those who blindly
support the platform without dissent!

Seriously, why do you support a political process if you don’t plan to
challenge our party platform? In fact there is no reason to vote at all
since it is obviously “counter productive” to have dissenting opinions
in your view? Debate is good for the party and is needed! Those who try
and stop or criticize this sort of dissent do not understand the
evolution of the Republic and the political process needed to maintain a
check and balance if you value your freedom and liberty.

No, this needs to be done in the Republican party, nowhere else would
serve the purpose of this debate.

Dave

David Terry responds to George Blumel:

+++++

< << being scheduled near and during the GOP convention, to diminish the
Republican message and momentum. It didn't succeed, of course. >>>>>

Perhaps the writers did not mention “the anti-Republican purpose” of the
event because that WASN’T the purpose any more than warning the captain
of the Titanic about ice bergs was “anti-Titanic”

< << a crucial election is hardly the way a Republican group worthy of the
name should act. >>>>

With all due respect, George seems unaware of the actual PURPOSE of the
RLC. It certainly isn’t to rubber stamp and blindly follow the decrees
of the NRC hierarchy. It IS to lead, push, cajole and direct the GOP in
a more libertarian direction on the one hand and to resist, restrain, call
attention and raise an alarm when the GOP moves in a more authoritarian
direction.

We want to SAVE the Titanic, not sink it! If having to oppose or embarrass
the Captain and all the sycophants and apparatchiks on the bridge, SO BE IT!

respectfully,
David Terry