346 votes

RNC Sham 2012 Video: "Assault on America's Last Statesman"

RNC Sham 2012


The Convention is where delegates are meant to cast votes for the nominee, yet the Tampa Bay Times Forum was already plastered with embedded Romney banners, and additional signs for people to hold were also smuggled in to make it appear that many are behind him. All Ron Paul material was promptly confiscated.

Ron Paul was going to be nominated on the floor after acquiring a majority of delegates from five states, but the RNC had a quick meeting in the morning and was able to change the rules last minute and raised the qualification to eight states. A busload of delegates was literally kidnapped preventing their key input in to the early morning ruling.

Rather than taking proper vote counts or listening to objections, several votes were clearly not unanimous, but this didn't stop the RNC "leaders" from ignoring the dissent. Ron Paul's name and delegate totals were not allowed to be mentioned officially on the stage, even when he won the specific state.

The Republican Party has lost all hope, and the disrespect Paul supporters received will eventually be replied with "I told you so."

UPDATE: Further Expansion: Democracy Now! Reports on RNC Deception.

Comment viewing options

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

Theory 3. Ron and Rand

Theory 3. Ron and Rand actually disagree on some things and both are acting according to their beliefs.

On the Rom/Ryan ticket, Ron says "no way"' while Rand says "they're way better than the alternative".

Is it so hard to imagine that they simply disagree that we have to make up elaborate theories to explain their actions?

The simple explanation is usually the right one. Ron can't bring himself to support a ticket led by men with whom he so disagrees. Rand disagrees less with Rom and Ryan and can comfortably support them.

End of story.

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein

I agree...to an extent

You are correct Remnant. It is certainly possible that Ron and Rand have honest disagreements on some issues and each acts in accordance with his own beliefs and that is not at all hard to imagine. On the other hand, I don't view the theory that Rand would act strategically as being particularly elaborate nor do I believe that the theory you've presented is necessarily the simplest one. But even if we say it is the simplest, I'm not convinced that the idea that the simplest explanation is usually the right one necessarily applies to politics. It could be argued, after all, that the simplest explanation for Obama's "kill list" and indefinite detention provisions is that, as claimed, he's trying to protect us from terrorists or that the simplest explanation for 9-11 is the official government narrative. Besides, if the simplest explanation is *usually* right then that implies that it is sometimes NOT right. The belief that a particular explanation for someone's actions is correct should be based only on the evidence that supports that conclusion and unfortunately, when it comes to judging a person's *motives*, such evidence can be hard to come by. This is particularly true if the "strategic action" hypothesis is correct, in which case Rand will have to continue playing the game until 2016!

As horrible as most U.S. politicians are, I think we would do ourselves and our cause a disservice by being too quick to jump to conclusions - particularly with regards to politicians with voting records as good as Rand's and of course this applies to other liberty candidates as well. Mind you, I'm not saying that your theory is wrong nor am I claiming that the "strategic action" theory is correct. All I'm saying is that I personally have not yet reached "end of story" status with regards to this issue. I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to any politician who fights for as many of our causes as Rand does therefore until I *know* why Rand has chosen to endorse a candidate whose policies are so inconsistent with his own I won't make any assumptions regarding his motives.

The other point I'd like to make is that even if Rand's actions DO reflect his beliefs, as disappointed as I'd be with that, he'd still have my vote as would other liberty candidates, Kurt Bills and Justin Amash for example, who endorsed Romney. And believe me when I tell you that seeing Rand endorse Romney and watching him refuse to condemn the criminally corrupt RNC during his interview with Wolf had me shaking my head and wanting to put my fist through the wall but I try to avoid making important decisions based on emotion.

The corrupt leadership of our Country brought us to this point through the practice of incrementalism. Rather than instituting this tyranny all at once and inciting massive public resistance they've chosen to chip away at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights little by little so that each successive generation would be born into a more tyrannous system but they would not recognize the tyranny because for them, that's the way things have always been. That is their baseline. The leaders of their generation would then chip away a bit more and so forth and so on until the PTB finally get things where they want them to be.

If Rand and other liberty-oriented politicians succeed in raising awareness of and eliminating, or at least weakening, the Patriot Act, the NDAA, CISPA/SOPA, etc. then, aside from being a good thing in its own right, things will be that much easier for the next generation of liberty-oriented leaders as they won't have quite as far to go and there will already be a precedent for candidates fighting for those positions. Look at how long it took Ron to make the Federal Reserve a "real" issue. Even though he was not able to get rid of it his actions have made it easier for the current crop of leaders to focus on it without being considered lunatics. The idea that we should only support candidates who take exactly the stance we want on all issues is, I believe, a losing proposition because, well, where are they? Who can we support that's better than Rand, Amash, Bills, etc? If the statists took that approach they would not have succeeded to the extent they have in turning the United States of America into a socialist police state. We should emulate successful models and the
Statists, despicable as they are, have been tremendously successful at implementing their agenda. We can do the same but not if we insist on total doctrinal purity and instant gratification.

PATRICK FREEMAN~~~listen up!~~~regarding Rand comment

You are a short-timer with just 9 months here, and an advocate for Rand, once again. Would you just bugger off, please?

We don't need you to point out the "possibilities".

We are not stupid. We will be happy for anybody who votes for our liberty-minded issues on Capitol Hill, but that doesn't mean we will give carte-blanche support for them as a Senator or Congressman.

Rand Paul was sitting at a dinner function for his dad in the 2007-2008 campaign. With a disappointing ring to his tone of voice, he questioned why we should like his dad. I have the quote, but I've been asked not to quote the person. All I can say is that this one-on-one personal conversation was a shocker, and it really indicated the depth of personal jealousy & competition that he deeply feels for his father. That's all I will say on that.

I think you need to quit speculating, Patrick. Rand, unfortunately, is not as loyal to his father as you dream. We can only judge him by his "actions". To make other reaching statements about his "thoughts" & "inner calculating" is simply pure folly!

On Rationality, Maturity and Respect

One of the more frustrating comments I encounter from time to time in forums such as this one is the obviously irrational suggestion that the value of a person's opinions is directly proportional to the amount of time that has transpired since that person created his/her account. Do you really believe that? What's the cutoff? Do people's opinions become valid after 12 months? After 24 months? Would you say that people who have been here longer than you have should automatically be viewed as having more valid opinions that you do? After you created your account how long did you wait before posting your first comment? Should we consider all of the opinions you expressed after being here for 9 months or less to be automatically invalid? You see how silly this can get? Worse still, when I look at your username I don't see any indication of how long you've been a member which tells me that this petty issue was so important to you that you felt the need to view my profile in order to determine whether I've been here long enough in your estimation to be entitled to express an opinion regarding a current topic.

Now I understand that you are just being territorial, something that we domesticated primates excel at, however I would hope that upon further reflection you will realize that although you may not be stupid, the suggestion that a fellow DPer should "bugger off" because he had the gall to express an opinion that you do not agree with belies a lack of maturity, particularly when coupled with the whole "I've been here longer than you have" thing.

The fact that people will sometimes hold - and possibly even express (gasp!)- opinions divergent from one's own needn't be taken personally and it certainly shouldn't be so threatening to one's ego that the ability to disagree in a civil manner goes out the window. One would think that with all the name-calling, snide remarks and other attacks constantly being directed at members of our community from the outside (i.e. from neocons,social conservatives, liberals and the mainstream media) we would recognize and value the importance of treating one another with tolerance and respect. How can the Liberty Movement hope to survive, let alone grow, if we compound our already difficult situation by adding constant infighting to the list of challenges we face?


Wonderful job of bringing all of it together. I am so proud to have so many brothers and sisters in Freedom. Ron Paul has planted the seed of Liberty and it is up to us to feed and nourish it so that it's roots spread far and deep. It has been a wonderful journey that shows the true depth of good in mankind but also the deep reaching tentacles of the evil that also surrounds us. Ron Paul has given us the knowledge and tools to win this revolution and we must never comprimise as he never did. It's a good feeling to know that all of you are out there and that I will never be alone.

But in closing I must add, in the 63 years, this is the first time in my life that I am truly ashamed of my country, I no longer recognize what it has become.

You Shall Know Them By Their Fruit

Mitt Romney is very foolish! A large percentage of Ron's followers wouldn't have voted for him anyway, but he just lost another large chunk of maybes. With all the votes he stole from Ron, he knows how many real votes that is! Still, he had this situation manipulated in his favor and didn't need to show the world that he wwould run the U.S. as heavily handed as Obama. How could anybody vote for Mitt!

The moments in life.

Where you want to almost cry. I tried not to all day watching the RNC when I knew what was happening. I succeed in not.. This video however..

They look

Ridiculous !!!!

"Its easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
Mark Twain

great video

great video

Very nice

It seems Mr. Boehner's hearing was bad enough in 2008, but has gotten progressively worse in 2012!

Well done!

The clip of Boehner blatantly lying epitomizes the true state of what was once our government.

Dr. Ron Paul

Continued to educate us on what goes on in the inner workings of the party. He is a TEACHER as well as a statesman. I just learned a lot.

What a Bunch of Sons of B****

The RNC is turning into a dictatorship. I'm not voting for Mitt. You watch Mitt!! You will loose this election and when this election is all over we will still be chanting President Paul! President Paul!!

Great video

Beautifully highlights all the injustices at the RNC Convention. The great thing is that when liberty finally does prevail we will have record of all the injustices that have been done and who they have been done by. I personally feel bad for all the people that continually try to pull the wool over the peoples eyes. They will one day, themselves, recognize how awful their decisions were and will have wished that they made different decisions. Eventually everything ends and the tyranny that has been reigning in this country by the oligarchs' time has come.

  • New Jersey's Premier Junk Removal Junk Service!
  • Accepts Bitcoin
    Check out my blog:



    For Freedom!
    The World is my country, all mankind is my brethren, to do good is my religion.

    bumping for the last great . . .


    it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

    Republican party has

    just signed its death warrant. Not to be rude or disrespectful, not that neocons deserve respect, but the Republican party dies as the old times die off. I'm happy that I will get to see this in my life time. Hopefully the DNC becomes extinct in my life time as well.

    Just do better

    than we did. Many of us will be gone.

    SteveMT's picture

    Two greatly run (by-the-rules) campaigns have resulted in this.

    Are things going to change the third time around with the GOP? Your guess is as good as mine. Both our strategy and our support for the best candidate made no impression on these people, IMO. Next time, there will be many differences when comparing 2016 to this campaign. If we want to integrate with the republican party, then we should start using the same tactics that they employ, as distasteful as that sounds. Either that or some other way, but not this way again. Why repeat the same thing and expect a different result with a candidate without the record of Ron Paul? At least this campaign fully exposed what they are capable of, and that is anything that they need to do to get what they want. What will be our strategy to fight them in 2016?

    Rand Paul is a joke

    I saw Rand's non-response to Wolfe Blitzer about what the RNC did to his father and Rand is no Ron, and then he endorses Mitt Romney, so how pitiful is that? What a shame!

    if you think this is not

    planned out and carefully thought out by the 2 Pauls to behave this way to the media and the sleeping sheep, then you missed the bus man. The train has left without you. The fact that people like you still don't get it blows my mind. The only way Rand could be more obvious as to his intentions to infiltrate is to flat out and openly admit it. Which of course would ruin the whole plan. Listen to his language and view his actions very closely. Let him keep talking nice to the neocons, and let him keep sneaking in bills and platforms that are pro liberty. DUH!!!! How do you think no drones over US soil got put on the platform. Cause of the Pauls manoeuvring. He actually got neocons to cheer when he mentioned that we need to cut military spending. Its time to stop being like the sheep and read between the lines. Holy crap people. I get the whole knee jerk reaction, I was pissed too. but after all this time you people still don't get what's going on is beyond me.

    SteveMT's picture

    Clarifying: No drones over U.S. soil without a warrant.

    Rand is fine with drones, so long as there is a judge that signs a warrant for that purpose.

    Most of us get what's going on. We just don't like it.

    So you believe that Ron and Rand got together and planned all of this out.
    Ron Paul: Rand, you endorse Romney, and I'll remain silent. Rand, if you get to speak at the RNC, endorse Romney again, and do nothing when I and my delegates are shown the door. Just because I've not been given an opportunity to speak after 30 years in politics and was denied the honor of even the mention of my name on the podium, that is no problem for me. Rand, you support the party and make it appear like you've abandoned me and are integrating like a good GOP Senator should do. I'll leave with your mother one day before your speech to make it appear like I'm upset. The Liberty Movement should buy this plan 100%, vote for Romney, and reelect you in 2016.

    Do you really believe that conversation occurred?

    Does it matter if it occurred?

    They are father and son for crying out loud, chances are they have talked about it. I would put money it. There was some discussion. It was not likely the ridiculous one you just portrayed. But again does it even matter. Do you go on lip service or peoples actions? If lip service, then you haven't learned anything from the movement. We need to start practising what we preach, and apply some patience and common sense. To think they didn't expect or anticipate this reaction from the "no compromise crew" would be stupid. Does Rand or Ron come off as stupid to you. Ron is about as selfless as they come. He's sacrificed for us his entire career. You think he wouldn't sacrifice a little "face" for the greater good? You honestly think Ron is petty enough to care if the RNC give him respect. I don't like Rands endorsement and continued neocon ass kissing any more then you or all the Rand cry babies. I knee jerked just as hard after the initial endorsement. But time to let your emotions stop controlling your actions, and start thinking about it. If you don't want to consider Rand part of team Liberty fine. Doesn't mean you can't use him to push forward liberty minded bills. Didn't anyone every teach you to judge people by their actions. Oh and FYI---Requiring warrants for drones is a HELL of a lot better then warrantless drones...Which would not even made it on to the platform it it weren't for both Paul's interaction. Give it time. If the move doesn't bare fruit. then go back to crying. Otherwise go on actions not words. The Paul's themselves have only mentioned this several times. READ BETWEEN THE LINES. Its been not even 4 months for crying out loud.

    SteveMT's picture

    Yup. It would matter if a conversation like that occurred.

    Transparency = Ron Paul, not planning secret deals with your own son trying to hoodwink the Liberty movement and RNC. Does that sound like something Ron Paul would do? No such conversation occurred, IMO. Rand did this on his own and the GOP was more than happy to oblige because it made Ron Paul look weak. Why would they hatch a plan where there were no winners, only losers? Some plan.

    I agree

    I wish a lot of people here would stop letting emotion cloud their reasoning


    Actions speak louder than words. Rand Paul has always been and will always be on our side.

    You remember the saying "You'll never meet a former Ron Paul supporter"? Truer words have never been spoken.

    To insinuate that Rand Paul, raised and influenced by Ron Paul for over 49 YEARS, is now an "establishment" republican... is simply foolish. He's just using a different strategy, and positioning himself for a 2016 presidential run... mark my words.

    It made me cry

    But it also fires me up because I'm not going to run away like me wish I would. I'm going to hold them to the lotalty oath to the constitution like they held us to the party with loyalty oaths.

    I'm voting Romney, because Obama is the worst president in the USA history and needs to be removed, and I TRUST Ron Paul Republicans WILL have our day!!!

    This fight isn't over, they just gave me a reason to not threatened them with the loyalty oath to the constitution, but to press charges.

    Don't run, stand and FIGHT! While we are still armed with the constitution.

    um, hello?

    romney is part of the whole progressive movement that took over the GOP.


    And he is also placed by tptb who want Obama.

    So are you going to stay in the Ron Paul rEVOLution and fight in Ron Paul's Party? Or are you going to run away?

    Ron Paul's ideas are more

    Ron Paul's ideas are more important than his party. This party unity BS is for the feeble minded. You give two options, yet there are any more. Your logic is pathetic. You are actually here on the Daily Paul saying you are voting for someone with nearly opposite principles of Ron Paul. Shameful.