41 votes

Lew Rockwell Suggests Ron Paul Will Appear via Recorded/Edited Video at the RNC

Read A 'Tribute Video' to Ron Paul? here -


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Imagine: a sea of Ron Paul masks

Outside the convention.

At every capital.

On every road, just walking around, singing patriotic songs.

Those Anon folk have high-quality masks of that Guys Fawkes character. We need high-quality masks of Ron Paul.

The Ron Paul Anon.

Here's a cool RP mask: http://evilwarlord.deviantart.com/art/Ron-Paul-V-Mask-297949990

Tom Woods Perspective

When we find out who negotiated this pathetic deal, maybe we ought to criticize this person, instead of pretending for the gazillionth time that it’s all part of a secret plan to win the nomination, and that those of us on the outside should keep our mouths shut, since we’re not privy to all the inside information, etc.


allegory - ˈalɪg(ə)ri/ - noun - 1. a story, poem, or picture which can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one.

Wasn't Lew Rockwell the one who said

that Ron Paul wasn't invited to the RNC when he was? Clearly Lew was wrong on that account and is now just making up stuff against the GOP. I know how dirty the establishment can be, but I think this is all heresy. Now you have sources claiming Ron Paul will speak at the RNC.


Now you have sources...

that say he won't - at least not by invitation.


It's up to the delegates to get Dr. Paul a speaking slot. The Romney Campaign and the RNC have made a big mistake on this account; They have simply helped to further motivate the anti-Romney sentiment among Paul and other non-Romney delegates that are looking for a way out.

Hopefully, the delegates get credentialed.

Pewk! Barf! Vomit! Convulsion!

Blatant propaganda! I never dreamed that I would live to see our precious country lose so much of its integrity. Is nothing sacred besides the Almighty Dollar?


Play all the videos you like RNC. I am a delegate and I am coming to Tampa. Guess what, I am not alone either - Here is a video for you! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFKZqbGRuxs


What a great response! I am re-sharing this video far and wide. Big thanks!

I woud'nt be surprised .....

if they put up a video of RP and superimposed Romney's viewpoints into the audio. Just when you thought they could not get any more disgusting and underhanded - they ALWAYS manage to.
Too bad Romney will get slaughtered in the election even worse than McCain did.

WOW!! We are really progressing now... Thank you RNC


"Tribute Videos" are for dead people

Which is saying something, I guess, about the GOP establishment's view of things. Its like the death of Ron Paul, politically, so they do a video tribute of his political life. This would be their way of saying "goodbye forever" to a longtime thorn in their side.

Its a mockery. Down the memory hole with it.

SteveMT's picture

My hope. Some how, Ron Paul gets nominated from the floor.

His name gets placed into nomination. A live feed is setup between Tampa and Texas, and Ron Paul gets his 15 minute speech in unedited real prime time, applause breaks and all. That would rock the GOP house for sure.

Tribute video to willard for Paulfestival

"You'll just have to wait, Tim..."
What IF... they learned from history?
Rally For THe Republic...

"I'm not concerned about the voters" Romney teeshirts

Ought to be popular Tampa convention souvenirs. Ironically, Mitt's quote came from the 2008 Florida debate. Now he gets to go back there in 2012 to prove it!

Great choice of contrasting videos, FoxCreek!

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

I hope this is a joke.

I hope this is a joke.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

I think it's great

First they give Ron Paul his own space to hold an event that should have more people than the RNC event, and then they play a tribute to him. Lew brings up issues that boil down to UN Agenda. Ron Paul Republicans are aware of those issues, and those who are seated and running and holding offices are willing and wanting to work on those issues. Whatever they present on Ron Paul will be what we need to keep uplifed and forefront, while we battle the issues LR brings up in our states. This RNC is a double hitter for the Paul's with Rand as a speaker, and a tribute to Ron Paul. If Ron Paul is there when they show the tribute, how can he not speak, and as the RNC is a long event, he will be getting many congratulations, some sincere and some because they feel obligated by the conventioneers.

One thing about many here, which is very unlike Ron Paul, is this tendency to dwell on the crap, rather than simply accepting it for what it is, and seeing the opportunity.

What if we were to see ourselves as Farmers of The US Constitution, were the Constitution is seed. Most gardners understand that fertilizer is crap, and there are many kinds and strengths that are good for one type of admentment or another, so the amendemts to the Constitution, we can see different types of crap being good to plant that seed in, water it with our work, and shine the light of truth and grow it until it becomes even a better bill of rights.

We have tons of opportunity in this crap.

So I don't agree with LR's doom and gloom about this issue. In 07-08 there was ONE Ron Paul, today there is a Senator Paul and congressment who are inspired by Ron Paul and tens of thousands of Republicans who became Republicans to work on Ron Paul's message in materializing it.

We are winning. I'm not saying it's time to celebrate, as we have a lot of work to do, but we should not be neglecting to see that we've come a long way, and that this RNC has a double hitter with the Paul.. we are winning!

If this keeps up, your

If this keeps up, your "great" event will only have a few people as you listen lovingnly as your boy Rand talks up Romney.

It only takes a few people

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.

It sure won't be people like you Granger that honor dishonorable

oaths they sign and then after being exposed to the truth deny it and would vote for Romney anyway 1st round like you would.



In 2008 A McCain Bound Delegate Was Allowed To Vote His Conscience At The RNC Convention

Exchange of letters between RNC Attorney Jennifer Sheehan and

Nancy Lord Utah Republican Republican National Committeewoman

clarifying that delegates are not bound by State rules at the

RNC convention.

RNC Associate Counsel's Opinion on Rule 38 of the RNC Rules barring the "unit rule"





DATE: AUG 20, 2008


This Memorandum is based on your request to examine the Republican Party Rules history

relating to the so-called “Unit Rule” provision currently found at Rule 38 which states, “No

delegate or alternate delegate shall be bound by any attempt of any state or congressional district

to impose the unit rule”.

This language was initially adopted at the 1964 Republican National Convention, paraphrasing

the words of the proponent of the amendment, in order to codify in party rules the actual practice

followed in past conventions, namely to allow delegates to vote as they chose even if state law

bound them to vote for a specific candidate.

This amendment which modified then Rule 18(a) was initiated by the RNC Rules Committee and

adopted by the full RNC at its pre-convention meeting. That ’64 language stated, “No Delegate

or Alternate shall be bound by any attempt of any State or Congressional District, the District of

Columbia, Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands to impose the unit rule.” Based upon a review of the

transcripts of the RNC debate on the “Unit Rule”, proponents of the ’64 amendment argued that

their amendment to Rule 18 merely reflected current practice and adopting this Rules change

would simply memorialize what was the historical Convention practice, not create a new policy.

During the debate on the “Unit Rule” amendment, there was some concern raised that the new

language would be interpreted by some to prohibit the individual states from adopting rules

that would bind or allocate delegates to specific candidates. The proponents, however, gave

assurances that it was not their intention to effect any “legal or “moral” obligation of the delegates.

Based upon the concern raised that this provision would be erroneously read to prohibit states to

bind or allocate delegates a concerted effort was made to defeat the amendment. That effort to

reject the addition of the new “Unit Rule” language based on that concern, failed, 59 to 41.

In 1976 the no “Unit Rule” language was modified by the RNC Rules Committee, effectively

requiring the 1976 Convention to record delegate votes based on the results of “any binding

Presidential Primary or direct election of delegates bound or pledged pursuant to state law.” The

Convention Rules Committee and the Convention itself accepted this RNC modification without

any debate. The additional Rule 18(a) language applicable to the 1976 Republican Convention

read as follows, “…however, that in any event, the vote of each state for the nomination for

President shall be announced and recorded (or in the absence of an announcement shall be

recorded) in accordance with the results of any binding Presidential Primary or direct election of

delegates bound or pledged pursuant to state law. No delegate or alternate shall be bound by any

attempt of any state or Congressional district to impose the unit rule.”

The ’76 language was deleted in 1980 effectively reverting back to the 1964 language and the

current language regarding the “Unit Rule” now found in Rule 38 is consistent with the 1980


Dear Blake and Sean,

Thank you so much for the memorandum [above] regarding the history of the Rule 38.

After studying it, I still have unanswered questions.

From the memo, I am clear that:

1. Rule 38 was not intended "to prohibit the individual states from adopting rules that would bind or allocate delegates to specific candidates".

What I need clarified is the following:

1. Do the RNC Rules require a state's delegation to follow its state laws or state party rules in the matter of binding of their national delegates to vote for a particular candidate? (I believe the answer is no; the RNC Rules are silent on this issue. My understanding is that any “legal" or “moral” obligation of the delegates, under either state law or state party rules, is simply that -- a state party matter. The RNC will not get involved in any such issue unless it deems that there is a violation of Rule 38 - an attempt to invoke the "Unit Rule" - during the time of the national convention.)

2. Do the RNC Rules prohibit a state party from changing its rules regarding the binding of their national delegates after the 2nd Tuesday in the September the year before the convention but before the national convention begins? (I believe the answer is no - the RNC Rules are again silent on this issue.)

3. Do the RNC Rules allow a national delegate to cast their vote for anyone they choose at the national convention, regardless of any vote-binding rules in their state or regardless of whether or not that "candidate" has been officially nominated under the RNC "majority of delegates from five states" rule? (I believe the answer is yes. I cite the actual rolling roll call of the states vote in 2000 as an example. In several states, even though George W. Bush had for many months been the presumptive nominee, several states, including Arkansas (19 for Bush, 5 for Alan Keyes) in the 2nd session on Monday evening, Massachusetts (35 for Bush, 1 for McCain, and 1 abstention) in the 3rd session on Tuesday evening,

4. Is the process of the "rolling roll call of the states" the process by which it is determined which candidates have met the RNC "majority of delegates from five states" rule in order to have their name officially placed in nomination? In other words, or as a corollary, do only those candidates who receive a "majority of delegates from five states" votes during the "rolling roll call of the states" become an official nominee, while any candidates receiving votes who did not receive the required majority of five states' votes simply fall to the floor, having not met the threshold?

Is there any way that you can clarify the answers to these questions in writing before tomorrow morning?

Nancy Lord

Utah Republican Republican National Committeewoman

From: Jennifer Sheehan - Legal

To: Nancy Lord

Cc: Sean Cairncross - Legal ; Blake G. Hall

Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008

Subject: RE: The Unit Rule

Mrs. Lord:

I am going to attempt to clearly answer your questions as listed below.

1. You are correct - the answer is no. The national convention allows delegates to vote for the individual of their choice, regardless of whether the person's name is officially placed into nomination or not.

2. National Party Rule No. 15(e) does prohibit State Parties from changing their delegate selection and allocation process that the State Party had to submit to the RNC no later than Sept. 4, 2007. However, the time frame for submitting a challenge to the national convention delegation based upon these Rules has expired, as any delegate contests had to be filed by August 2, 2008.

3. Yes - see #1 above.

4. Your question is mixing two separate issues. The first issue involves the nominating process, which requires the majority of delegates from five states to put a candidate's name into the official nominating process. The delegates from these five states must sign a nominating form that is then submitted to the Secretary of the Republican National Convention. After the Secretary receives these forms, the candidates are announced who have been officially placed into the nominating process and are therefore eligible to accumulate votes from the national convention delegates.

The Rules require that a roll call be taken from each state who announces the number of votes that its delegates cast for any eligible candidates, as well as for any person someone would like to cast a vote for in the roll call. You are correct that a person does not have to be officially nominated in order to receive votes, however, this vote is essentially pointless as it will not count towards the official tally.

Therefore to clarify, a candidate must receive the support of the majority of five state delegations in order to be officially placed into the nomination. Only candidates that have been officially nominated can accumulate votes that will count towards the majority of delegates necessary to officially nominate the Republican nominee for President. The Republican nominee for President must receive at least 1191 votes from the national convention delegation in order to receive the official nomination.

Please let me know if you have additional questions or need further clarifications related to this process.


Jennifer SheehanAssociate Counsel

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul

I'm in CA, NOT Utah

And time will tell, as I look forward to your apology, when that time comes.

In CA the presidential campaigns select their National delegates. I was selected as a National Delegate by Ron Paul's campaign. I was not selected a national Delegate by Romney's campaign.

Romney won with over 75%. Romney's delegates are going to Tampa.

NOTHING I can do about it, it's all sealed under the CA Secretary of State.

I did write to the Secretary of State and ask why Romney is listed at THE NOMINEE before the RNC in Tampa. No word from her yet.. I asked two weeks ago.

Everyone KNOWS I'm a Ron Paul Republican and I put up with more than my fair share of stuff from the GOP, the Democrats and folks like you who didn't do what Ron Paul said and don't respect the work I've done, and furthermore have put all your bets on one election, whereas my seat is a two year committment which the Neocon would LOVE to have me lose, like you. Please stop acting like a Neocon in the name of Ron Paul. You don't have me fooled.


I'll never apologize to you because you stated you would vote for Mitt Romney on the first round regardless because you took some oath.

And your response shows your intelligence because what does living in CA and not Utah have to do with anything in the letters between the RNC attorney and Utah GOP? Are you that dense that you cannot see it applies to all delegates from all States? I guess so.

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul

Well, I'm glad we cleared that up

CA has different laws established with the GOP than Utah.

Sometimes you

revel in recognition and feel good, sometimes your refusal defends your principles.

For example, in 2003 an unknown Jew, Grigori Perelman, in Russia, put up his calculations on his webpage to prove the "unprovable" theorem - Thurston's geometrization conjecture. This consequently solved in the affirmative the Poincaré conjecture, posed in 1904, which before its solution was viewed as one of the most important and difficult open problems in topology.

He was awarded The Fields Medal (the highest award in mathematics since Nobel does not give awards in Math) - he declined. US Math society awarded him $1mil award, green card, books opportunity & tenure - he declined. Russian Communist party urged him to accept the prize and give it to them or the poor - he declined.

He defended his principles to reject the establishment. He has BALLS.


You have to engage to fight. While this is not for everyone, it was for Ron Paul and it is for me.

Declining awards, medals and money does not mean he did not engage, especuially from Communist China.

No one is offering Ron Paul Republicans awards, medals ot money, actually establishment is doing everything they can to have those who joined the GOP dienfrancised, so to me, to join the GOP and get that committee seat, and keep it, despite the objections and dirty tricks of the establishment, takes balls. To make excuses to do nothing, but to allow them to remain in control, and simply say, (while you are using thier power and technology) that you are not engaged is fooling yourself.

A double hitter for the Paul's?

Granger - "This RNC is a double hitter for the Paul's with Rand as a speaker, and a tribute to Ron Paul."

Give me a break.

Granger - "Lew brings up issues that boil down to UN Agenda."

What article did you read? I didn't realize that the UN had a damn thing to do with the Republican National Convention? Are they appointing foreign peace keeping troops in place of the duly elected delegates?

Your silly, Granger. I chuckle at your wonderful sense of humor.

Only to the dolts

who think Rand is anything like his dad.

The UN has everything to do with Romney being the nominee

Been to the Council of Foreign Relations web site recently?

It was not the GOP that gave us Romney, but those who are working for a NWO/ UN Agenda. The game is rigged, and while some want to remain outsode and claim that's how you fight, I believe Ron Paul Rand are correct, you get in the game and stand for your principles, knowing you may not win all the battles, but you will win some and with the convictions of the like minded, the war for Freedom and Restoring America to constitutional government.

Thanks Rand!

and his sycophants (Jack Hunter, & all of you who thought "the endorsement" was a good idea).

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself." - Thomas Jefferson

Rand is the one who

Rand is the one who arm-twisted Romney to let Ron address the RNC.

Thomas Jefferson 1796, 1800, 1804; James Madison 1808, 1812; Ron Paul 1988, 2008, 2012; Rand Paul 2016.


This would almost be funny, if it didn't ring with the sound of truth :)
Can anybody smell a bit of FEAR coming from Willards camp?

how about

the Maine Gov boycotts as he suggested, then challenge the whole crooked thing, and go 3rd? is it too late? anyone know the guidlines on getting on a 3rd party ticket this late in the game?
If fraud was alleged and proved, it would be game over for the entire GOP 2012 process. That would pretty much be Paul vs. Obama.
Or, maybe I'm just day dreaming here..