How can people be this ignorant? I would like to see their faces in 2016 when their world is upside downSubmitted by ralph hornsby on Fri, 08/31/2012 - 02:10
This is from a delegate from Arizona that attended the RNC this week:
From the Arizona Delegation: Day 3: Business as usual
There was very little agitation at the convention today as there was no business, just speakers and singers.
The tribute video for Ron Paul was less than 4 minutes long, which was probably the shortest
segment of the whole evening. And of course, the Romney supporters from Arizona around me who know next to nothing of what Dr. Paul really stands for where making snide remarks and sneering faces when thousands of people would cheer for something he or his congressional peers said something beautiful about the Constitution or liberty. The video hardly scratched the surface of the principles Congressman Paul has promulgated with such perseverance for 30 years in Congress, not even getting 10 seconds per year of this statesman's service to our country.
Most of the day was filled with conversations about the rules business from yesterday. An Arizona representative on the Convention Rules Committee said that the discussion was that the rule (increasing number of states from 5 to 8) was needed to stop the nomination of Dr. Paul, and so it had to be retroactive. The chairman of the Standing Rules Committee told me that the Rule 40 change was not to stop Ron Paul from being nominated because he didn't have the states or the votes. Of course, I pointed out to him that simple thinking about his words leads to one path or another - that of the fool or that of the poor liar.
The fool because only an idiot would make retroactive a rule change desired for future application.
Or the mentally impoverished prevaricator because if Dr. Paul didn't have the votes, there was no need for any rule changes, especially ones that took effect immediately and retroactively.
Silence was his reply, and I was left to decide for myself whether he and his comrades were neither wise nor brilliant or both.
Amongst the non-rules committee members of the Arizona delegation, there is nary a glimmer of comprehension of what transpired with the rules. Their thinking is that if their leaders said the rule changes were good, they didn't need to give it a second thought. One person asked me today, "Are you feeling a lot better about things today since we got past that nasty little episode (rules business) yesterday, and you've heard all the great speakers?"
I had to tell them that there was nothing to feel better about because the injustice had not been rectified, and worse - it had been made permanent.
They said that they didn't understand how we could be upset as all that was done was to fix the loopholes the Ron Paul supporters were exploiting. Isn't that just the convenient label to use anytime reality turns out to be different than lazily imagined? And the perfect cure for such self-inflicted "injury" is retroactive application.
They see nothing wrong with changing the scoring rules of the game after play has concluded and the champion is to be scored and crowned, because such behavior did, after all, prevent a pesky extra inning which would serve no purpose but to delay the announcement of their victory.
They mention the rule of law over and over, but pretend that they can't see the brazen disregard for it that they are supporting, even personally orchestrating.
They can't comprehend how they have closed off a wing of their "very inclusive" tent, all in the name of their crusade for purity to principles of very questionable quality.
One member even had the audacity to say to me, "Well, we're the majority. Why shouldn't we be allowed to change the rules when we have the votes?"
DISGUST is too mild a word!