Will Reince Priebus exclude Ron Paul and Gary Johnson from the 2012 RNC debates?

Despite the fact that no candidates have formally announced for President, we know that campaign season is upon us because the usual suspects are working to find a way to exclude new ideas from the Presidential debates.

Presidential debates in our country have often been exclusionary, especially since the formation of the Commission on Presidential Debates after Ross Perot’s successful third party campaign in 1992. The Libertarian Party candidate has never been included in a nationally televised debate. Congressman Ron Paul was excluded from at least one debate in Iowa in 2007, but was ultimately included in the important debates. If he had not been included in the debates, both his ideas and his popularity would have suffered as a result. Perhaps the Tea Party never would have formed.

Last week, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus formed a committee comprised of RNC member Jim Bopp, former RNC Chair Mike Duncan, former Florida GOP Chair Al Cardenas, and former Congressman Dick Armey to decide whether the Republican National Committee should sponsor debates to raise money for themselves. According to James Bopp, “The RNC or its designee may at its discretion determine the time, place, co-sponsors, format , subject matter, moderators and participants” for the debates.

“Those candidates invited to participate in RNC-sanctioned debates will be allowed to participate in a list exchange with the RNC,” wrote Bopp.

And therein lies the problem. Certain candidates will be invited and other candidates will be excluded.

This is exactly what I warned of when I asked you to write your RNC member to oppose the nomination of RNC Chairman Reince Priebus just a few months ago.

The RNC is planning to pick favorites. If conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt — who thinks this is a grand plan for the Republican Party — has his way, Congressman Ron Paul and Governor Gary Johnson will be excluded from RNC-sanctioned debates. Writes Hewitt:

“Bar the stage to those candidates who simply cannot win the nomination, even under Iowa-upset circumstances. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., and former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania are long-shots, but they have a plausible path to the nomination. Former Rep. Buddy Roemer of Louisiana and former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson do not. If Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, asks for another giant chunk of valuable time, the RNC should say no, and put up with the howls from the 1 percent who will scream.“

Fortunately, some debates are already scheduled, including a May 5 South Carolina debate, a June 7 New Hampshire debate, an August Iowa debate, two debates in Florida in September and October, and the Politico/NBC debate on September 14 in California. However, if the RNC continues with its plan, they could simply adopt some of these debates and begin excluding whomever they want — just as the bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates excludes third party candidates each Presidential election cycle.

TAKE ACTION

Please contact RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, RNC Chief of Staff Jeff Larson, RNC Committeeman from Indiana Jim Bopp, RNC Committeeman from Kentucky Mike Duncan, FreedomWorks’ Dick Armey, and American Conservative Union’s Al Cardenas. Ask them for inclusive debates that include Congressman Ron Paul, former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, former Louisiana Governor Buddy Roemer, and former Reagan official Fred Karger.

Here is a sample letter:

Dear Committeeman Bopp,

I recently learned that the Republican National Committee is sponsoring its own debates to raise money for the RNC.  I am a Republican party activist and am also involved with my local Tea Party.  I saw conservative commentator Hugh Hewitt comment that certain candidates should be excluded from the RNC-sanctioned debates.

Mr. Bopp, rest assured that I will not donate to the RNC if they exclude candidates like Congressman Ron Paul, Governor Buddy Roemer, or Governor Gary Johnson.  I want to hear as many voices as possible so that the Republican Party can have its best choice to defeat President Obama in 2012.

If your debates are going to be inclusive, then please forge ahead.  However, if you’re going to exclude candidates and ideas from the process, count me out.

Best Regards,

[Your Name]

You may also want to write to Hugh Hewitt to ask him why he believes American voters should be isolated from new ideas and different approaches to solving our problems.

GET INVOLVED

This leads us to the most important point about the discussion: We need more liberty-loving Republicans involved in the Republican Party so our voices can be heard.

Please join the Republican Liberty Caucus today and get involved in your state or local chapter.

If we’re not able to change the Republican Party from within, liberty will lose.

It’s really that simple. We choose to inject libertarian ideas into the party, or we give up. Those are our options.

by David Badash

A new study released by Gallup finds that only 17% of Americans who vote or lean Republican say social issues and moral values are important, and rank them third of four major categories, after government spending and power (38%), and business and the economy (32%), in stark contrast to the focus of over a dozen current Republican presidential candidates and aspirants.

Despite an overwhelming focus by over a dozen possible GOP presidential candidates who claim that social and moral issues are tied together, their own constituents believe they are not. Moreover, other studies show the American people want their political representatives to focus on jobs and the economy, not social issues like marriage equality, abortion, or religion.

That said, the study notes that “Republicans who care the most about social and moral issues are most likely to support Huckabee and Palin. All other candidates gain only single-digit support among these voters. Romney, who is in first or second place among all other groups, does no better than tie Gingrich and Ron Paul among social issues voters.”

“Despite some observers’ claims that Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum have a special following among social conservatives, these two politicians do not have an unusual appeal among Republicans who care most about social and moral issues.”

The Gallup study found national security and foreign policy were the least important of the four categories, with just 12% of respondents giving it weight.

What is striking is how many GOP presidential aspirants are not only willing to associate with radical religious extremists — but are actively seeking them out — to been seen as rubbing elbows with America’s religious conservatives in hopes of gaining credibility on social issues.

Last week, Republican hopeful Michele Bachmann (R-MN) announced, “Social conservatism is fiscal conservatism.” Bachmann teamed up with Republican presidential aspirants Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, and Haley Barbour to headline a fundraiser for Tony Perkins, president of the certified hate group the Family Research Council (FRC), and other hate preachers, such as Lou Engle and David Barton to create the fundraiser, which was broadcast to churches Sunday.

Mike Huckabee, an ordained Baptist Minister, also spoke at Perkins’ fundraiser, titled, “Rediscover God in America,” saying, “I pray that God will raise up spiritual warriors who will say America will not fall – that we will not let this nation fall to the hands of those that will enslave us. This battle is one that pits good against evil. There are things that are right and there are things that are wrong and the great battle that we will live or die by to preserve this nation is one in which we identify and then we fight for until the last breath – that there are some things that are holy and pure and that are just.”

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee also spoke about what he sees as the need to stand up for traditional marriage, and against same-sex marriage, even at the risk of job loss.

Newt Gingrich, despite two divorces, three marriages, numerous adulterous affairs, and House ethics violations, has also made a career of focusing on social issues, religion, and so-called morality. On Sunday, Gingrich gave a speech at a San Antonio, Texas megachurch, Cornerstone Church, and stated “I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America,” he fears America will become “a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists.”

Cornerstone Church is led by Rev. John Hagee, who had close ties to John McCain’s 2008 Republican presidential campaign. Hagee was criticized for comments he had made, like saying Hurricane Katrina was “the judgment of God on the city of New Orleans” for its “level of sin,” relating to a gay pride parade.

Hagee also was criticized for suggesting Hitler was God’s “hunter,” and hastened the Jews’ return to Israel in accordance with what he suggested was God’s will.

The question is, why, in stark contrast to what the American people have said repeatedly they want their political leaders to focus on, namely the economy and jobs, are Republicans politicians focusing on anything but?

__________________________________________________

This article was posted with the permission of its author. The original article appeared at The New Civil Rights Movement website.

Last weekend, Republicans in California gathered for their 2011 GOP Convention in Sacramento. Members of the Republican Liberty Caucus of California hosted their Convention on Friday night and participated in numerous activities throughout the weekend at the state GOP Convention.

On Saturday, the RLC-CA hosted a straw poll at its booth at the CAGOP Convention at the Sacramento Hyatt. Participation in the straw poll was limited to convention delegates, party activists, and registered Republican voters.

Republican Congressman and RLC Advisory Board member (and past Honorary Chairman) Dr. Ron Paul of Texas won the 2012 Presidential straw poll with 17.8 percent of the vote.

On Wednesday afternoon, Ron Paul appeared on Neil Cavuto’s program on Fox News and was asked specifically about the RLC straw poll victory (see screenshot above). Watch the clip.

Below, members of the California RLC administer the straw poll at the booth.

Obama’s political left, who thought they had a champion for their causes, is not only disgusted with the President’s recent authorization for the U.S. military to attack Libya, but continues to be dismayed regarding Obama’s War on Drugs policies.

Marijuana legalization advocates say the president should be taking a harder stance on the issue. And, if you believe his promises on the campaign trail, why wouldn’t he?

Barack Obama voiced support for medical marijuana access, harm reduction programs, and the reform of mandatory minimum drug sentences. He also spoke out in favor of marijuana decriminalization during his time in the Illinois Senate.

As Daily Caller reports, officers from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) raided two medical marijuana dispensaries in West Hollywood, California on March 15, 2011. Similar DEA raids also swept through Montana and forced at least one business to close its doors.

Last year, DEA agents ignored a Mendocino County, California ordinance to regulate medical marijuana cultivation by raiding the very first grower to register with the sheriff. Joy Greenfield, age 70, had paid more than $1,000 for a permit to cultivate 99 plants in a collective garden that had been inspected and approved by the local sheriff.

These raids occurred despite that the Obama administration said it wouldn’t pursue cases against marijuana dispensaries that are legal under state law — which is the case in California, Montana, and 14 other states.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder issued a 2009 memo guiding authorities not to arrest or prosecute users of suppliers who are not breaking local laws. On the campaign trail, President Obama repeatedly promised not to waste federal resources interfering in states with laws protecting medical marijuana patients from arrest on the campaign trail. On March 28, 2008, for example, he told Southern Oregon’s Mail Tribune editorial board, “I’m not going to be using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws on this issue.”

At DailyKos, one left-wing activist says, “Obama is going to once again re-double the military/law-enforcement angle that maintains the status quo, that supports illegal drug prices, that support the profits for drug trafficking …”

In short, Obama appears quite far from the truth of his promises on the issues surrounding drug policy.

Eighty percent of Americans support medical marijuana access, 75 percent believe that the War on Drugs has failed and cannot be won, and 75 percent also say that adults should be fined (but not jailed) for using marijuana recreationally.

President Obama continues his change agenda with a complete lack of change and — instead — a whole lot more of the same.

Republican Liberty Caucus favorite Senator Rand Paul is contemplating his future, according to today’s Charleston Post & Courier newspaper. Quoth the paper:

U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is visiting Charleston today talk about his possible presidential bid, how to reign in the national debt and the current military action in Libya.

Paul, a Tea Party favorite who won his Senate seat last fall, is visiting several early presidential voting states independently of his father, 2008 presidential contender and current U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas.

“The only decision I’ve made is I won’t run against my dad,” Rand Paul said, adding that he wants to see the Tea Party influence the 2012 GOP nominee. Paul is set to appear this afternoon before the College of Charleston’s bully pulpit series.

This evening, he will address the Charleston Meeting, a new invitation-only, center-right organization that invites prominent politicians to address its members off the record.

I previously opined that his father, RLC Advisory Board member Dr. Ron Paul, would likely pass on running for President for the third time. I mentioned that the status of Ron Paul’s son Rand may factor into his decision.

So which Paul, if either, will run for President in 2012?

I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

This weekend, Republicans in California gathered for their 2011 GOP Convention in Sacramento. Members of the Republican Liberty Caucus of California hosted their Convention on Friday night and participated in numerous activities throughout the weekend at the state GOP Convention.

On Saturday, the RLC-CA hosted a straw poll at its booth at the CAGOP Convention at the Sacramento Hyatt. Participation in the straw poll was limited to convention delegates, party activists, and registered Republican voters.

Republican Congressman and RLC Advisory Board member (and past Honorary Chairman) Dr. Ron Paul of Texas won the 2012 Presidential straw poll with 17.8 percent of the vote. Complete results of the straw poll can be found here. Learn more about the Republican Liberty Caucus of California here.

MSNBC and the Sacramento Bee both covered the RLC straw poll, as did the local news media in Sacramento. Congratulations to the California RLC for drawing attention to liberty principles!

(Photo: Ron and Carol Paul with RLC members in Texas.)

From the New Hampshire Union Leader‘s John DiStaso:

“Tea Party leader and Minnesota U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann’s schedule for Saturday, March 12: Bachmann will attend a coffee sponsored by the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire for lawmakers who are members of that group. It will be held at the new Liberty Harbor Academy, a new conservative educational institute in Manchester. The Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire is expected to become an important stop on presidential candidate schedules this year.

We will post additional details as they become available. This event will mark the first time the RLC has hosted Michele Bachmann at any event.

The state chapter has already hosted Governor Gary Johnson and Sharron Angle.  They will again host Governor Johnson in late April.

Sometimes it is preferable to be boring. After the roller coaster ride of current events that have unfolded both domestically and abroad over the previous decade, many of us might yearn for some boring times for a change. Massive ups and downs in the economic sphere have only been matched by equal turmoil in the political one: it seems the House and presidency are switching hands more than homes at the height of the real estate bubble.

This is true in our personal lives as well, as most of us value steadiness and seek to steer clear of massive peaks and valleys in our personal relationships and family lives. So if we place such a premium on the times marked by a lack of upheaval, why do we not look back fondly on those who presided over such times while in the Oval Office? Our presidents who reigned during times of war or massive government intervention are constantly glorified and placed on a pedestal, while the ones who presided during times of peace and economic expansion are rarely even brought up.

Praise is ceaselessly heaped on the Wilsons, FDRs, Trumans, Lincolns, and Johnsons of our past. Not to say these men did not do some good things during their terms, but is it unrealistic to expect the same sort of folk tales to be told about the presidents who avoided war, saving us from untold carnage by their diplomacy? What about the ones who stuck to laissez faire principles, the men who kept the budget balanced, currency strong, and the government off the backs of the American people? These names are only brought up as historical footnotes, chalked up as too “boring” for in depth discussion. Grover Cleveland and Calvin Coolidge come to mind; but I would wager most Americans have been taught little about the presidencies of these two men. I know I was not.

We need to teach the next generation about the men who placed peaceful international relations and a trust in market mechanisms at the forefront of their agenda, not necessarily the ones who, in the words of John Quincy Adams, sought to go overseas seeking “monsters to destroy.” Considering this sort of leader has been more the exception than the rule, learning about their administrations is valuable for those who want to curtail the massive apparatus that has emerged over the preceding decades.

While a holistic reading of our history is vitally important, we should not overlook the presidents who maintained a restrained view of presidential powers. In fact, America could use a boring president once again; after all, running the world and managing the economy is not exactly part of their job description. Our presidents need to be defined by what they don’t do, not just what they do. The urge to constantly be responding to this problem or that, intervening in this crisis or the next, has left us saddled with massive commitments we have no way of following through on. As the Republican presidential primary season gets underway in earnest over the next few months, perhaps we can look past the glamor and navel gazing, opting instead for the most boring of the bunch. Now that would be change we could all believe in.

A founding member of the New Hampshire Tea Party Coalition, Jack Kimball, has been selected to lead the New Hampshire Republican Party for the next term. Mr. Kimball was supported by the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire early in the race, citing his experience and ability to mobilize the grassroots. By a margin of 222-199 — voting members of the New Hampshire GOP Committee — Mr. Kimball defeated the establishment opponent.

At the end of the day long meeting to elect the NHGOP Chair was the announcement of results of a WMUR-ABC News straw poll taken throughout the event. The poll put 21 names of potential 2012 presidential candidates before the voters. With 273 votes cast by New Hampshire GOP insiders, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney came out on top with 35 percent, followed by Ron Paul with 11 percent; former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty had 8 percent; former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin had 7 percent; and Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota and Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina had 5 percent each. Governor Gary Johnson received support from 2 percent.

Since January 17, the New Hampshire RLC has received the following notable media hits:

• “Tea Party Activist Takes Over New Hampshire G.O.P.“, New York Times, Jan. 22
• “Romney wins New Hampshire straw poll“, CNN Politics, Jan. 22
• “Romney keeps away from Tea Party”, Boston Globe, Jan. 21, 2011
• “Republicans Battling in New Hampshire”, The Caucus on NYTimes.com, Jan. 21, 2011
• “Chairman vote will indicate Tea Party influence on NHGOP“, Union Leader, Jan. 21
• “GOP vote barometer of party“, Concord Monitor, Jan. 17

New Republican House Speaker Bill O’Brien and new House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt both consider themselves affiliated with the RLC. In November, the RLC actively supported O’Brien in his race for House Speaker.

And on November 2, the New Hampshire RLC elected 81 of its endorsed candidates for the legislature, including two former RLCNH Chairmen, Jim Forsythe and Dan McGuire. Forsythe was elected to the State Senate, which only has 24 members.  The New Hampshire RLC has a total of 99 State House members, 6 State Senators, and one Executive Councilor.

Please join the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire on Facebook and join the RLCNH e-mail list.  The New Hampshire RLC is on the move!

I keep hearing about how Ron Paul is going to run for President.

I don’t think that’s the case, and here’s why:

1) Age. Ron Paul will be 77 years old in 2012. It would be tough for anyone that age to run for President. I can only imagine the grueling schedule and various annoyances that a Presidential candidate must deal with. Add advanced age into the mix and it complicates things.

2) Alternative candidates. New Mexico’s Gary Johnson is an appealing candidate who many Paul supporters could lend their energy to. Additionally, Dr. Paul has spoken well of the former Governor.

3) Rand Paul. Now that Rand Paul is in the Senate, the Congressman is likely to not only feel a sense of tremendous pride, but also understands that his tireless efforts in the U.S. House have paid off.

4) The U.S. House. The House Republican Leadership allowed Dr. Paul to Chair the House Subcommittee that oversees the Federal Reserve. With this position comes a tremendous amount of responsibility and a significant time commitment.

5) Legacy. Ron Paul’s legacy was his 2008 campaign. He changed the debate in our country and helped inspire the most dynamic political movement in American history — the Tea Party. There is less opportunity to surpass what the 2008 campaign achieved in 2012.

These are just a few of the reasons that Congressman Paul is less likely to run for President in 2012. But never say never.