It's become a place where if you help promote the lies you are accepted but if you stand up for the truth you are suddenly not american. This needs to change.
Are we trying to set some kind of #%#$ record for SGP ego posts? I come home to yet another one. Steve, you did some really good work getting peopple to understand the basics of Robert's Rules, the delegate process, etc.... then you managed to ride that pony into the GROUND.
This post immediately brought YOU to mind to me.. I had to double-check who the OP was.
Thanks for the work you tried to do.. sorry that you can't manage time very well and I'll be personally tickled if you leave Friday but deeply shocked if you don't show up on a board somewhere Saterday.
--------
We don't know how to mind our own business
'Cause the whole worlds got to be just like us
Now we are fighting a war over there
No matter who's the winner
We can't pay the cost
-Steppenwolf 1969
The longer I don't get an answer, the more curious I get! And from what college did this advanced degree come from? I've never met a PhD that couldn't string a proper sentence together.
Seriously "Dr.", I'm grateful for what good you've done and for the masses that you've sacrificed your time and wisdom for. If you actually helped the r3VOLution one little bit, then I thank you.
I'd use that degree and research the term "modesty", though, you'd go a lot further with your endeavors.
.....
We don't know how to mind our own business'
Cause the whole worlds got to be just like us
Now we are fighting a war over there
No matter who's the winner
We can't pay the cost
-Steppenwolf 1969
If you do not understand, then here it is in a hypothetical:
"You may all show up and become delegates, even if your state has already selected them. You can write in Dr. Paul on a piece of notebook paper and slip it into a ballot box. Go Ron Paul!" If I were to say these things, it's obvious I'm passionate about getting Dr. Paul elected. However, my facts would be wrong. Someone might ask "how am I supposed to slip a piece of notebook paper into a Diebold machine?" to which I suppose I could respond "you're part of the problem, naysayer. You've already given up."
It sounds silly, doesn't it. I could be offended people are questioning me, or I could use it as an opportunity to either question myself and my facts I'm spreading, or to stand on my own and simply emphasize my correct statements and provide as much backup as is humanly feasible, or I could stop responding if I have a personal problem with the person questioning me.
*I* don't understand why the approach has been: do not question me. Move forward or you are part of the problem. Your cites mean nothing. You are anti-Paul.
I took the time to explain the thing you didn't understand... can you do me a similar courtesy? :/
And yes I know your post was just kidding :) Actually I was a state delegate, as was my husband, and we worked very hard within Mon County in WV. As you can see from the voting in WV on Super Tuesday, that work yielded results. As reports post-Convention showed, a deal was struck that I can honestly say I was witness to.
I don't belong to a meetup, because I am the official driver for my husband, who runs our city's meetup group. We traveled across the state with paperwork in hand prior to the Convention and got the forms to people who wanted to become delegates to the WV GOP Convention. I have been to several meetings of various Ron Paul groups in our area, and am constantly there to support my husband as he does the more physical side (sign waving, getting out there and meeting people). I am more of a virtual gal... health issues keep me from being able to stand around for 4 hours waving a sign lol.
I have participated in and support various grassroots efforts, and endure the scorn of many people who march past me and are insulted when I don't join with them. I will always march my own way with the same hopes and values in my heart :) History will wash it all over and lump us together anyhow.
I have gotten to shake the hands of some great people, sleep on some comfortable couches, and hear some great DJs strut their stuff on a nightly basis. I am damned lucky that I get to see results near and far on this whole thing! We all can :) I can't wait to see where this all goes from here, and I will continue to help people who want to get involved in local politics here (I'm not running; anyone who knows me knows why).
Private political party delegate behavior is governed by state law???
Do you have any legal citations, law book references or anything whatsoever to back up your assertions? Please provide supporting documentation for all 50 states of the union. These are way too important issues to have or expect people to act on unreferenced assertions.
.. should read a little bit further down. Search for "Missouri Revised Statutes" in this thread.
SGP said this:
"I have never told anyone to vote for Ron Paul if they are bound for mccain and the very least that would happen is they will never be able to be a delegate again EVER."
and this...
"i have mad that clear on many occasions that there could be civil action should they defy party rules"
Here is my opinion..
Most Ron Paul supporters are Ron Paul supporters because they are not followers but leaders and have the tendency to question
the status quo and think outside the box.
So naturally they are not going to follow any one person hook link and sinker.
Steve you got me to check into Robert Rules and take a closer look at my state's GOP rules and I thank you for that.
As far as any other information you are putting out there..honestly I have
not paid that much attention to it. I know how my state works and that is all that really concerns me..because no matter who gets the nomination I will not be casting my vote for anyone else but Ron Paul.
But seriously you are discrediting yourself by posting this thread here and also continuing to fight with the people on ronpaulforums.
Give it up because all it is doing is dividing people that should be coming together to fight for our liberties.
don't think I'm totally crazy posting the above..the original post of this thread was a link to ronpaulforums thread that he created to call out a couple people over there for not agreeing with him...it turned into a nightmare thread.
I'm glad he decided to remove the link and original post from Dailypaul.
I am glad you have educated yourself as i have always encouraged everyone to do the same.
I do believe my job is done here anyway for you can pass this information on to everyone and educate from there.
I hav spent too much in the last 3 months and will not continue to spend any more.
Most of my expense has been calling the meetups back i educated in the first place because of people like this and to be honest i have had anough of it.
I may even cancell my interview on friday because i am just burned out.
I have spent countless hours and have not had a good night sleep for months so i could use the break. I just hope the rest of you will continue to fight and educate until i return which may be a month or so from now.
.. that most states "delegates bound" "rules" are actually STATE LAWS that apply generally to all parties and that a delegate that "revolts" is breaking state law and can PERSONALLY be open to civil litigation by the State?
If you lose a civil lawsuit you have to pay BOTH SIDES legal expenses AND possibly a large fine.
Delegates who "revolt" can also have civil cases filed against them by the party itself for breaking party rules.
Personally, I think it is important for any person who is advising a delegate to "revolt" to make that delegate aware of this issue. Don't you?
they are not bound by the primary. But yes I did know that for other states.
But it is wonderful to see people becoming delegates and getting involved and taking back the republican party from the neocons. :o)
My friend told me they were very worried about popular revolt.
He is in Military Intelligence so shouldn't even be involved in domestic affairs.
He said they were required to protect the people from enemies within so it was OK.
I've now concluded that there will not be an election.
Unlike other Presidents, the Bush administration is still pushing and winning with the house and the senate.
This makes no sense!
One contact said that since the both houses and the Supreme Court were now on board. they couldn't risk anything but a Hillay McCain result and McCain was another good Bush.
So, I'm a RP write in, a supporter to Paulites.
No damned crooks are taking my country away from the people.
Till the end bro.
Till the end.
.. I thought you had stuff to do? I wouldn't want to keep you from anything important.
If you'd still like to "play", how about this?
You said that if the party changes the rules then it changes the state law also. Notice that the Missouri statute doesn't apply to any specific party and applies to all parties. Are you saying that if the Republican party changes the delegates bound party rules then it changes the LAW for the Democrats also?
research every states laws on delegates and then post the appropriate info instead of arguing all the time? There is a thread on states on RPF and you can post them there for each state.
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent" Thomas Jefferson
My purpose was to get Steve to admit there are civil lawsuit liabilities in states that have "delegates bound" for delegates that decide to or who are cajoled into "revolting" and that they might be sued by both the state and the party.
My purpose wasn't to start a grueling comprehensive project that consumes all of my time for a month. =P
I'm not one of the "positive people" trying to cajole people into "revolting" and feel no direct compulsion to warn people of the consequences. I only do it from a "compassionate observer" perspective. =)
And besides, "revolting" is the OPPOSITE of what Dr. Paul is asking us to do. If only people would spend more time listening to the man, Dr. Paul, instead of others....
Notice I am NOT saying don't become delegates. Dr. Paul is asking us to become delegates. I am saying don't "revolt". One cannot "revolt" unless they are a delegate. It would make no sense to tell a non-delegate to not "revolt".
Dr. Paul wants LONG TERM delegates for the future. That is what he says. You can't "revolt" and be a future delegate.... (=
You have always said that people need to research thier own state and take personal responsibility to verify for themselves....
You have been very valuable in getting out the word to become delegates and the general process ...and it has been very helpful to many!
But now... instead of using your energy on the negative people ...just let the positive people take personal responsibility to take your advice and look into it further!
You are allowing yourself to get sucked into a vortex of negativity that threatens to undo all your positive help!
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent" Thomas Jefferson
... that if the party changes the rules then it changes the state law also. Notice that the Missouri statute doesn't apply to any specific party and applies to all parties. Are you saying that if the Republican party changes the delegates bound party rules then it changes the STATE LAW for the Democrats also?
No i said no such thing but the statute will apply to the GOP against any civil action.
As i said these are special laws pertaining to civil action and if the GOP changes its party rule they must file with the secretary of state and the state chair and thus forces a new statute pertaining to that party and if the DNC does something different to their party rule the same would apply pertaining only their party.
It is the difference between party rule and state law and criminal law is different than civil law.
The reason a statute is put in place is so the state can refer to that statute as to the rule of law that governs that paticular law pertaining to the current law that is in place to enforce civil action.
Look if i am testy it is because i have about 10 people constantly trying to prove me wrong and all it does is divide and discourage people and my phone bill is way over the top addressing meetup groups and every time someone brings this carp up i get 150 emails pertaining to it then i have to call them and explain it and i am tired of it.
If you people were really ron paul supporters you would stop fighting me and trying to prove me wrong and help me get the information out.
statutes are not bills which have been passed into laws. They are essentially city, county or state directorates written by their respective attorney's and truly have no lawful merit.
Changing the party rule would change the statute and would change the law pertaining to the statute thus no civil action can be take for when the party rule changes it must be filed with the secretary of state and the state chairman and goes into effect immedeatly. "
Come again?
Are you saying that the GOP can change party rules to be in conflict with the state law that applies to ALL PARTIES generally and thusly avoid any civil litigation?
That would mean the individual parties could defy at will state laws that apply to all parties in general. Why even have the laws to begin with?
Haha!
******************************************
NOTE: Search for "Missouri Revised Statutes" below for the beginning of this thread chain.
******************************************
No matter how many people get in your way keep on going. This is your country you want freedom you fight for it. You want no war protest it.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, Brave, Hated , and Scorned, when his cause Succeeds however, the Timid join him, for then it cost nothing to be a patriot."
... please be sure and inform "delegates bound" that are planning to "revolt" that they are infringing on both state law and party rule regarding "delegates bound" and that they are PERSONALLY open to civil lawsuits from both the GOP and the individual States...
.. concerning DELEGATES BOUND and how they are apportioned by the results of the primary.
You don't know that primaries are governed by state law!?
=O *shocking*
States have "delegate bound" laws because they want the delegate proportion representing a particular candidate at the national and state conventions to match the proportion of vote for the candidates in the primary results. Sounds REALLY reasonable and fair to me.
Now, if there was vote fraud, which I believe there was, then we need to be focusing on gathering evidence for lawsuits to challenge the vote fraud not "revolting" at the convention and having the "revolters" permanently banned from future GOP work.
If you want to write an article about it go for it!
Yes primaries are governed by STATE LAW as to the voting laws as to how the election will be conducted in that state NOT THE PARTY RULE as to how delegates are selected.
The party portions the delegates not the state based on the party rule that is currently in place and these rules can always be changed.
The following are Missouri Revised Statutes relevant to national convention delegates and delegates bound:
RSMo 1986 - 115.776. National convention delegates and alternates, selection.
6. Congressional district delegates and alternates shall be selected so that the proportion of the total district delegates and alternates that are committed to each candidate or are uncommitted equals as nearly as possible the proportion of the popular vote cast in the presidential primary selection in that district for each candidate and for the uncommitted position; except that votes for a candidate or for the uncommitted position which total less than fifteen percent of the district total shall be counted as uncommitted in determining proportions of district delegates awarded if the sum of all such votes exceeds fifteen percent of the district total.
7. At-large delegates and alternates shall be selected in numerical order from each slate so that the proportion of the total at-large delegates and alternates that is uncommitted or committed to each candidate equals as nearly as possible the proportion of the popular vote for that established political party that was cast as uncommitted and for each candidate in the state at large; except that, votes for a candidate or uncommitted listing that total less than fifteen percent of the total shall be counted as uncommitted in determining proportions of district delegates awarded if the sum of all such votes exceeds fifteen percent of the state total.
RSMo 1986 - 115.780. Delegates bound for two ballots, exceptions-pledge requirements.
1. Each national convention delegate and alternate shall be bound to vote for the candidate for whom he designated commitment, if any, when he was selected as a delegate or alternate until that or another candidate received the party's nomination, two ballots have been taken or that candidate withdraws, suspends his campaign, releases his delegates, or receives less than fifteen percent of the votes cast on the first ballot, whichever first occurs.
---------------------------------------
Have you warned Missouri delegates that they will be breaking STATE LAW if they "revolt" and that they will possibly be PERSONALLY open to lawsuits by the state of Missouri?
According to your source: "Congressional district delegates and alternates shall be selected so that the proportion of the total district delegates and alternates that are committed to each candidate or are uncommitted equals as nearly as possible the proportion of the popular vote cast in the presidential primary" , the State GOP rules are in violation of the law!!
Right now, the Missouri GOP is a "winner take all state". But, now that you have pointed out the "Law" - McCain only gets 33% of the delegates!! Way to go - now smartguy - how do we prosecute the Missouri Republican Party to follow the rules and get 67% Ron Paul Delegates?
Actually, Statute 115.776 has been changed to this in 2007:
--------------------------------- 115.776. Caucuses, delegates for national conventions. The state party organization which is the state organization recognized by the national organization of that established political party shall, after the primary and before the national convention, conduct a series of caucuses culminating in congressional and state conventions. Delegates to the national conventions shall be chosen at the congressional district and state conventions pursuant to rules established by the political parties.
----------------------------------
Which basically leaves everything up to party rules. In this case "winner-take-all" (winner of the primary). Which means all delegates are bound to McCain and can be sued for "revolting" and voting for someone other than McCain.
I'm disappointed I did all that research based on old statutes but even more disappointed that this means there will be no delegates free to vote for Dr. Paul. =|
Thank you for causing me to learn about the updated statutes!
In law, codification is the process of collecting and restating the law of a jurisdiction in certain areas, usually by subject, forming a legal code. http://en.wikipedia.org/w...
Statute law is written law (as opposed to oral or customary law) set down by a legislature or other governing authority such as the executive branch of government in response to a perceived need to clarify the functioning of government, improve civil order, to codify existing law, or for an individual or company to obtain special treatment. (Contrast common law.) http://en.wikipedia.org/w...
Civil law or Continental law or Romano-Germanic law is the predominant system of law in the world. Civil law as a legal system is often compared with common law. The main difference that is usually drawn between the two systems is that common law draws abstract rules from specific cases, whereas civil law starts with abstract rules, which judges must then apply to the various cases before them. http://en.wikipedia.org/w...
---------------------------------
Me thinks you are a bit confused. Statute law is NOT civil law! And civil law isn't codified law either, statute law is.
perceived need to clarify the functioning of government, improve civil order, to codify existing law, or for an individual or company to obtain special treatment. (Contrast common law.)
Right there you idiot
This is based on enforcing civil law due to civil action not crimal law or criminal action HUGE DIFFERENCE get a clue.
here
..... http://www.youtube.com/wa...
Computer programmer tells senators and congressmen he rigged an election. here http://www.youtube.com/wa...
amerika is divided
It's become a place where if you help promote the lies you are accepted but if you stand up for the truth you are suddenly not american. This needs to change.
Christ wept...
Are we trying to set some kind of #%#$ record for SGP ego posts? I come home to yet another one. Steve, you did some really good work getting peopple to understand the basics of Robert's Rules, the delegate process, etc.... then you managed to ride that pony into the GROUND.
This post immediately brought YOU to mind to me.. I had to double-check who the OP was.
Thanks for the work you tried to do.. sorry that you can't manage time very well and I'll be personally tickled if you leave Friday but deeply shocked if you don't show up on a board somewhere Saterday.
Jesus dude, give it a rest....lol.
Still waiting...
Just what was that PhD in, "Dr"?
--------
We don't know how to mind our own business
'Cause the whole worlds got to be just like us
Now we are fighting a war over there
No matter who's the winner
We can't pay the cost
-Steppenwolf 1969
You are..
.. SOOOO patient!
=)
LMAO!!
LMAO!!
Thanks FunchMarter, I try! :)
The longer I don't get an answer, the more curious I get! And from what college did this advanced degree come from? I've never met a PhD that couldn't string a proper sentence together.
Seriously "Dr.", I'm grateful for what good you've done and for the masses that you've sacrificed your time and wisdom for. If you actually helped the r3VOLution one little bit, then I thank you.
I'd use that degree and research the term "modesty", though, you'd go a lot further with your endeavors.
.....
We don't know how to mind our own business'
Cause the whole worlds got to be just like us
Now we are fighting a war over there
No matter who's the winner
We can't pay the cost
-Steppenwolf 1969
Hehe..
.. @ the doubly-layered spoonerism -- "FunchMarter"
Respectfully:
If you do not understand, then here it is in a hypothetical:
"You may all show up and become delegates, even if your state has already selected them. You can write in Dr. Paul on a piece of notebook paper and slip it into a ballot box. Go Ron Paul!" If I were to say these things, it's obvious I'm passionate about getting Dr. Paul elected. However, my facts would be wrong. Someone might ask "how am I supposed to slip a piece of notebook paper into a Diebold machine?" to which I suppose I could respond "you're part of the problem, naysayer. You've already given up."
It sounds silly, doesn't it. I could be offended people are questioning me, or I could use it as an opportunity to either question myself and my facts I'm spreading, or to stand on my own and simply emphasize my correct statements and provide as much backup as is humanly feasible, or I could stop responding if I have a personal problem with the person questioning me.
*I* don't understand why the approach has been: do not question me. Move forward or you are part of the problem. Your cites mean nothing. You are anti-Paul.
I took the time to explain the thing you didn't understand... can you do me a similar courtesy? :/
Why..
.. are you trying to prove Dr. Steve wrong by questioning him therefore dividing America and diabolically preventing Dr. Paul from winning?
Are you even a delegate?
What meetup do even you belong to?
I have very huge phone bills and am stressed out...
haha.. j/k
=|
Because...
And yes I know your post was just kidding :) Actually I was a state delegate, as was my husband, and we worked very hard within Mon County in WV. As you can see from the voting in WV on Super Tuesday, that work yielded results. As reports post-Convention showed, a deal was struck that I can honestly say I was witness to.
I don't belong to a meetup, because I am the official driver for my husband, who runs our city's meetup group. We traveled across the state with paperwork in hand prior to the Convention and got the forms to people who wanted to become delegates to the WV GOP Convention. I have been to several meetings of various Ron Paul groups in our area, and am constantly there to support my husband as he does the more physical side (sign waving, getting out there and meeting people). I am more of a virtual gal... health issues keep me from being able to stand around for 4 hours waving a sign lol.
I have participated in and support various grassroots efforts, and endure the scorn of many people who march past me and are insulted when I don't join with them. I will always march my own way with the same hopes and values in my heart :) History will wash it all over and lump us together anyhow.
I have gotten to shake the hands of some great people, sleep on some comfortable couches, and hear some great DJs strut their stuff on a nightly basis. I am damned lucky that I get to see results near and far on this whole thing! We all can :) I can't wait to see where this all goes from here, and I will continue to help people who want to get involved in local politics here (I'm not running; anyone who knows me knows why).
And I love ya all :P
Thank you..
.. for all the "boots-on-the-ground" hard work! Sounds like you've done more than most...
*hugs*
=)
References please
Private political party delegate behavior is governed by state law???
Do you have any legal citations, law book references or anything whatsoever to back up your assertions? Please provide supporting documentation for all 50 states of the union. These are way too important issues to have or expect people to act on unreferenced assertions.
Maybe you..
.. should read a little bit further down. Search for "Missouri Revised Statutes" in this thread.
SGP said this:
"I have never told anyone to vote for Ron Paul if they are bound for mccain and the very least that would happen is they will never be able to be a delegate again EVER."
and this...
"i have mad that clear on many occasions that there could be civil action should they defy party rules"
Haha Steve..
.. you are FUNNY!
(=
You need to let that thread just die and move on
Here is my opinion..
Most Ron Paul supporters are Ron Paul supporters because they are not followers but leaders and have the tendency to question
the status quo and think outside the box.
So naturally they are not going to follow any one person hook link and sinker.
Steve you got me to check into Robert Rules and take a closer look at my state's GOP rules and I thank you for that.
As far as any other information you are putting out there..honestly I have
not paid that much attention to it. I know how my state works and that is all that really concerns me..because no matter who gets the nomination I will not be casting my vote for anyone else but Ron Paul.
But seriously you are discrediting yourself by posting this thread here and also continuing to fight with the people on ronpaulforums.
Give it up because all it is doing is dividing people that should be coming together to fight for our liberties.
So people that missed the orignal post of Dr Steve
don't think I'm totally crazy posting the above..the original post of this thread was a link to ronpaulforums thread that he created to call out a couple people over there for not agreeing with him...it turned into a nightmare thread.
I'm glad he decided to remove the link and original post from Dailypaul.
I am done here on friday
I am done here on friday anyway.
I am glad you have educated yourself as i have always encouraged everyone to do the same.
I do believe my job is done here anyway for you can pass this information on to everyone and educate from there.
I hav spent too much in the last 3 months and will not continue to spend any more.
Most of my expense has been calling the meetups back i educated in the first place because of people like this and to be honest i have had anough of it.
I may even cancell my interview on friday because i am just burned out.
I have spent countless hours and have not had a good night sleep for months so i could use the break. I just hope the rest of you will continue to fight and educate until i return which may be a month or so from now.
Dr. Steve Parent
Did you know..
.. that most states "delegates bound" "rules" are actually STATE LAWS that apply generally to all parties and that a delegate that "revolts" is breaking state law and can PERSONALLY be open to civil litigation by the State?
If you lose a civil lawsuit you have to pay BOTH SIDES legal expenses AND possibly a large fine.
Delegates who "revolt" can also have civil cases filed against them by the party itself for breaking party rules.
Personally, I think it is important for any person who is advising a delegate to "revolt" to make that delegate aware of this issue. Don't you?
You have lost your mind or
You have lost your mind or you are just trying to piss me off i have not figured it out yet.
THE DNC AND RNC are both private organizations and do not apply to each other.
you facts are bogus and hold no merit in any way.
Go back to your mccain hole and i assure you this is the last time i will even comment to any post you make.
Dr. Steve Parent
I don't have to worry about that in my state
they are not bound by the primary. But yes I did know that for other states.
But it is wonderful to see people becoming delegates and getting involved and taking back the republican party from the neocons. :o)
I agree...
(=
Unbelievable Post! I think only the GOV post here now.
My friend told me they were very worried about popular revolt.
He is in Military Intelligence so shouldn't even be involved in domestic affairs.
He said they were required to protect the people from enemies within so it was OK.
I've now concluded that there will not be an election.
Unlike other Presidents, the Bush administration is still pushing and winning with the house and the senate.
This makes no sense!
One contact said that since the both houses and the Supreme Court were now on board. they couldn't risk anything but a Hillay McCain result and McCain was another good Bush.
So, I'm a RP write in, a supporter to Paulites.
No damned crooks are taking my country away from the people.
Till the end bro.
Till the end.
***************************************************
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
Watch and feel the power!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What happened fartmucher cat
What happened fartmuncher cat got your tongue?
Dr. Steve Parent
Haha..
.. I thought you had stuff to do? I wouldn't want to keep you from anything important.
If you'd still like to "play", how about this?
You said that if the party changes the rules then it changes the state law also. Notice that the Missouri statute doesn't apply to any specific party and applies to all parties. Are you saying that if the Republican party changes the delegates bound party rules then it changes the LAW for the Democrats also?
Please explain...
=)
Mart why dont you
research every states laws on delegates and then post the appropriate info instead of arguing all the time? There is a thread on states on RPF and you can post them there for each state.
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent" Thomas Jefferson
Research..
.. all 50 states? That would suck. =|
My purpose was to get Steve to admit there are civil lawsuit liabilities in states that have "delegates bound" for delegates that decide to or who are cajoled into "revolting" and that they might be sued by both the state and the party.
My purpose wasn't to start a grueling comprehensive project that consumes all of my time for a month. =P
I'm not one of the "positive people" trying to cajole people into "revolting" and feel no direct compulsion to warn people of the consequences. I only do it from a "compassionate observer" perspective. =)
And besides, "revolting" is the OPPOSITE of what Dr. Paul is asking us to do. If only people would spend more time listening to the man, Dr. Paul, instead of others....
Notice I am NOT saying don't become delegates. Dr. Paul is asking us to become delegates. I am saying don't "revolt". One cannot "revolt" unless they are a delegate. It would make no sense to tell a non-delegate to not "revolt".
Dr. Paul wants LONG TERM delegates for the future. That is what he says. You can't "revolt" and be a future delegate.... (=
What you have tried to do
What you have tried to do was important for me to answer and i just want to know why you are so determined to prove me wrong on everything i state?
What purpose does that serve ron paul? What is your goal?
I would really like to know.
Dr. Steve Parent
Dr Steve
You have always said that people need to research thier own state and take personal responsibility to verify for themselves....
You have been very valuable in getting out the word to become delegates and the general process ...and it has been very helpful to many!
But now... instead of using your energy on the negative people ...just let the positive people take personal responsibility to take your advice and look into it further!
You are allowing yourself to get sucked into a vortex of negativity that threatens to undo all your positive help!
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent" Thomas Jefferson
"Negative People"..
.. that would be me of course..
*hugs*
=)
I've never...
.. been "determined to prove me(you) wrong on everything I(you) state"
Just the Trevor Lyman thing, the Alex Jones thing and now the "revolt" and its legal implications thing. Nothing else.
Oh, and it has nothing to do with YOU personally...
You said..
... that if the party changes the rules then it changes the state law also. Notice that the Missouri statute doesn't apply to any specific party and applies to all parties. Are you saying that if the Republican party changes the delegates bound party rules then it changes the STATE LAW for the Democrats also?
Please elaborate on and explain...
This is FUN. The score is about to be 3-0!
=)
No i said no such thing but
No i said no such thing but the statute will apply to the GOP against any civil action.
As i said these are special laws pertaining to civil action and if the GOP changes its party rule they must file with the secretary of state and the state chair and thus forces a new statute pertaining to that party and if the DNC does something different to their party rule the same would apply pertaining only their party.
It is the difference between party rule and state law and criminal law is different than civil law.
The reason a statute is put in place is so the state can refer to that statute as to the rule of law that governs that paticular law pertaining to the current law that is in place to enforce civil action.
Look if i am testy it is because i have about 10 people constantly trying to prove me wrong and all it does is divide and discourage people and my phone bill is way over the top addressing meetup groups and every time someone brings this carp up i get 150 emails pertaining to it then i have to call them and explain it and i am tired of it.
If you people were really ron paul supporters you would stop fighting me and trying to prove me wrong and help me get the information out.
I will not address you again or laurie or jenjemi
Dr. Steve Parent
Not to mention, Steve, but......
statutes are not bills which have been passed into laws. They are essentially city, county or state directorates written by their respective attorney's and truly have no lawful merit.
One last thing (since you're
One last thing (since you're not addressing me)
I wanted to thank you for directing me to the thread about you on Ron Paul Forums yesterday. I sure learned a lot about you, "Dr."
You said..
"OH MY GOD
Changing the party rule would change the statute and would change the law pertaining to the statute thus no civil action can be take for when the party rule changes it must be filed with the secretary of state and the state chairman and goes into effect immedeatly. "
Come again?
Are you saying that the GOP can change party rules to be in conflict with the state law that applies to ALL PARTIES generally and thusly avoid any civil litigation?
That would mean the individual parties could defy at will state laws that apply to all parties in general. Why even have the laws to begin with?
Haha!
******************************************
NOTE: Search for "Missouri Revised Statutes" below for the beginning of this thread chain.
******************************************
BUMP
BUMP
------------------------------------------------
"RON PAUL SUPPORTER SINCE 1997"
RON PAUL 2008 / RE-ELECT 2012
alright
done
Aw, hell ...
Retracted. Tired.
Fight Til the end
No matter how many people get in your way keep on going. This is your country you want freedom you fight for it. You want no war protest it.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, Brave, Hated , and Scorned, when his cause Succeeds however, the Timid join him, for then it cost nothing to be a patriot."
--- Mark Twain
SGP...
... please be sure and inform "delegates bound" that are planning to "revolt" that they are infringing on both state law and party rule regarding "delegates bound" and that they are PERSONALLY open to civil lawsuits from both the GOP and the individual States...
I have explained the
I have explained the consequences many times already.
I HAVE NEVER SEEN 1 STATE LAW that pertains to party rule EVER.
Should i write a article about this martfuncher?
Dr. Steve Parent
State law...
.. concerning DELEGATES BOUND and how they are apportioned by the results of the primary.
You don't know that primaries are governed by state law!?
=O *shocking*
States have "delegate bound" laws because they want the delegate proportion representing a particular candidate at the national and state conventions to match the proportion of vote for the candidates in the primary results. Sounds REALLY reasonable and fair to me.
Now, if there was vote fraud, which I believe there was, then we need to be focusing on gathering evidence for lawsuits to challenge the vote fraud not "revolting" at the convention and having the "revolters" permanently banned from future GOP work.
If you want to write an article about it go for it!
=)
Yes primaries are governed
Yes primaries are governed by STATE LAW as to the voting laws as to how the election will be conducted in that state NOT THE PARTY RULE as to how delegates are selected.
The party portions the delegates not the state based on the party rule that is currently in place and these rules can always be changed.
Dr. Steve Parent
Hmm...
What is this then?
Missouri Revised Statutes is the name for the codified laws of the State of Missouri.
The acronym for the Missouri Revised Statutes is RSMo.
Provided for your perusing pleasure is a searchable online database of the RSMo:
http://www.moga.mo.gov/st...
The following are Missouri Revised Statutes relevant to national convention delegates and delegates bound:
RSMo 1986 - 115.776. National convention delegates and alternates, selection.
6. Congressional district delegates and alternates shall be selected so that the proportion of the total district delegates and alternates that are committed to each candidate or are uncommitted equals as nearly as possible the proportion of the popular vote cast in the presidential primary selection in that district for each candidate and for the uncommitted position; except that votes for a candidate or for the uncommitted position which total less than fifteen percent of the district total shall be counted as uncommitted in determining proportions of district delegates awarded if the sum of all such votes exceeds fifteen percent of the district total.
7. At-large delegates and alternates shall be selected in numerical order from each slate so that the proportion of the total at-large delegates and alternates that is uncommitted or committed to each candidate equals as nearly as possible the proportion of the popular vote for that established political party that was cast as uncommitted and for each candidate in the state at large; except that, votes for a candidate or uncommitted listing that total less than fifteen percent of the total shall be counted as uncommitted in determining proportions of district delegates awarded if the sum of all such votes exceeds fifteen percent of the state total.
RSMo 1986 - 115.780. Delegates bound for two ballots, exceptions-pledge requirements.
1. Each national convention delegate and alternate shall be bound to vote for the candidate for whom he designated commitment, if any, when he was selected as a delegate or alternate until that or another candidate received the party's nomination, two ballots have been taken or that candidate withdraws, suspends his campaign, releases his delegates, or receives less than fifteen percent of the votes cast on the first ballot, whichever first occurs.
---------------------------------------
Have you warned Missouri delegates that they will be breaking STATE LAW if they "revolt" and that they will possibly be PERSONALLY open to lawsuits by the state of Missouri?
Any further comments?
Awesome!!
According to your source: "Congressional district delegates and alternates shall be selected so that the proportion of the total district delegates and alternates that are committed to each candidate or are uncommitted equals as nearly as possible the proportion of the popular vote cast in the presidential primary" , the State GOP rules are in violation of the law!!
Right now, the Missouri GOP is a "winner take all state". But, now that you have pointed out the "Law" - McCain only gets 33% of the delegates!! Way to go - now smartguy - how do we prosecute the Missouri Republican Party to follow the rules and get 67% Ron Paul Delegates?
Hmm...
Actually, Statute 115.776 has been changed to this in 2007:
---------------------------------
115.776. Caucuses, delegates for national conventions. The state party organization which is the state organization recognized by the national organization of that established political party shall, after the primary and before the national convention, conduct a series of caucuses culminating in congressional and state conventions. Delegates to the national conventions shall be chosen at the congressional district and state conventions pursuant to rules established by the political parties.
----------------------------------
Which basically leaves everything up to party rules. In this case "winner-take-all" (winner of the primary). Which means all delegates are bound to McCain and can be sued for "revolting" and voting for someone other than McCain.
I'm disappointed I did all that research based on old statutes but even more disappointed that this means there will be no delegates free to vote for Dr. Paul. =|
Thank you for causing me to learn about the updated statutes!
=)
Mart "Smartguy" Funcher
Do you even know what a
Do you even know what a codified law is?
THAT IS CIVIL LAW.
I can not believe the american people are this uninformed.
No wonder this country has fallen into the black hole.
Martfuncher i know you are trying every thing you can to discredit me and that is ok but please bring me something better than this.
Dr. Steve Parent
Oh wow!
In law, codification is the process of collecting and restating the law of a jurisdiction in certain areas, usually by subject, forming a legal code.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w...
Statute law is written law (as opposed to oral or customary law) set down by a legislature or other governing authority such as the executive branch of government in response to a perceived need to clarify the functioning of government, improve civil order, to codify existing law, or for an individual or company to obtain special treatment. (Contrast common law.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w...
Civil law or Continental law or Romano-Germanic law is the predominant system of law in the world. Civil law as a legal system is often compared with common law. The main difference that is usually drawn between the two systems is that common law draws abstract rules from specific cases, whereas civil law starts with abstract rules, which judges must then apply to the various cases before them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w...
---------------------------------
Me thinks you are a bit confused. Statute law is NOT civil law! And civil law isn't codified law either, statute law is.
Want to try again? I'm ahead 2-0...
(=
perceived need to clarify
perceived need to clarify the functioning of government, improve civil order, to codify existing law, or for an individual or company to obtain special treatment. (Contrast common law.)
Right there you idiot
This is based on enforcing civil law due to civil action not crimal law or criminal action HUGE DIFFERENCE get a clue.
Dr. Steve Parent