My Twitter Feed

April 18, 2014

Alaska Republican Convention Gets Paulverized

I don’t mean to gloat. I’m not generally a gloater. Schadenfreude is not my thing. But if I were going to gloat, now would be the time. Hypothetically.

It seems… how shall I put this delicately… the the Alaska Republican Convention has turned into what their one time golden child Sarah Palin would call – “a cluster.”

@AnchTeaParty on Twitter was kind enough to tweet live from the convention:

17:20 Still no results on election of #Alaska Party Chair. Saying we must leave the hotel ballroom now.

17:21 Chair just declared the convention adjourned with no vote to adjourn and no results.

17:23 Many delegates mulling about room as Parliamentarian is swamped on stage with a crowd.

17:30 Very heated conversation on stage now with many party big-whigs. Most delegates NOT leaving ballroom.#Alaska #Republican Party convention

Hang on. And did they just refer to influential members of the Republican Party as big “whigs?” Awkward. Who shall we get to tell them that particular party went extinct some time in the mid-nineteenth century? Nah… let’s not tell them.

17:39 Parliamentarian bailed. Others slowly starting to disperse but lots of discontent. #Alaska #Republican Party convention

19:10 New #Alaska #Republican chair is Mr Millette, as nominated by the #RonPaul campaign.

Did they say the Ron Paul campaign? But, didn’t Mitt Romney win the caucus in Alaska? Yes, he did. But don’t underestimate the furious devotion of the Ron Paul fans in Alaska. I’ve known a couple of them. I’ve seen them scale a 50 foot high mountain at the snow dump by the highway just to stick a campaign sign at the summit, like it was the Matterhorn.

The following clip from inside the mayhem is titled, “Wanna know what happens when a senator endorses Romney at the Alaska State Convention?”

The description of the video says:

Alaskan Delegates show it’s time for state senator to get with the program after he says “…..and that is why I endorse Mitt Romney.”

And one of the commenters notes:

We’ve got the Establishment shaking in their shoes! Do they really think they can hand us YET ANOTHER mediocre Status Quo puppet without any of us taking a stand?! This is OUR Country, OUR money, OUR Liberty, and we’re taking it back! TO HELL with Romney, Obama, and every other puppet of the Status Quo!

There is only ONE Candidate in 2012 worthy of being called The People’s President: Dr. Ron Paul! It’s Ron Paul or NO ONE at all!

Followed by:

That’s not the half of it !! First we booed and shouted down the RINO Senator Murkowski who introduced Senator Brasso of Wyoming who is the great big ass in this video !! We also won the top slot in the ARP leadership today !!!

They did apologize to Senator Murkowsi the next day.

“It was a little unfortunate last night that perhaps some of our best manners were not on display,” Murkowski says.  “Today we’re back at work.  And what I’ve clearly heard is the expression of an apology that we perhaps hadn’t shown our best face as Republicans, and as Alaskans. And I want to make sure we know we’re all capable of a little more respect.”

Ron Paul was the only presidential candidate to come to Alaska this year. He addressed packed houses in Fairbanks, and at the Dena’ina Center in Anchorage, where I attended after waiting on a VERY long line.

We can bring people together. The issue of the Constitution was designed for all of us – imperfect at the time, but there’s no reason why we don’t have a better understanding of liberty. We should bring people together once again, because we want to all enjoy our freedom – maybe for different reasons – but we become more tolerant, we invite people to come, and to enjoy their liberty as they see fit. Now, you know, it has been said by the founders many times that it doesn’t take a majority to do this. We don’t have to wait until we get 51%. What you have to have is a tireless minority who’s willing to start brush fires of liberty in the minds of men. [Applause]

Paul supporters took that sentiment to heart, and the brush fires have begun. Pop the corn.

Details are still coming in, but the organized and energetic wing of the Republican Party (the Ron Paul crowd) has indeed staged a coup. They now hold the positions of Chair, and Co-Chair of that organization.

This comes at a moment when long time Chair Randy Ruedrich (remember the one Palin caught doing party business on his computer when he worked with her at the AOGCC?) is stepping down. He survived Palin, and he survived an attempted ouster by Joe Miller, Cathy Giessel and crew, but now that he’s leaving under his own steam, POW. The party got Pauled.

Russ Millette, 67, has been elected to replace Ruedrich. In addition to being the heir apparent of the dynasty, he is/was also a “team member” of a group called GiveMeLiberty.org (the We the People project), at least as recently as 2009. One of the other team members is… wait for it… one Mr. Schaeffer Cox, who is currently a disgruntled “sovereign citizen” awaiting trial for plotting to kill federal judges.

But let’s not be totally negative. There may be an upside to all this.”We the People,” is an institution who has seriously championed a cause that everyone should be getting behind in Alaska right about now. Right wing blowhards who have been screaming that progressives are just conspiracy theorists, and want a recount of Anchorage’s botched Municipal election only because they lost – read up on one of the main issues of the group to which the new Republican Party Chairman belongs – the National Clean Elections Lawsuit. Allow me to share.

NO Voting Machines Allowed.  NONE.

Paper Ballots +
Hand Counting 
+
All In Public.
—————————–
= Clean Elections.

 NCEL = Liberty!

“NCEL” is the National Clean Elections Lawsuit to ban, BY LAW,
the use of ALL mechanical and electronic voting machines on the
legal basis that machines, by their nature, count the votes using
secret mechanisms and software, thereby depriving the People of
their Constitutionally protected Right to PUBLIC elections and
to KNOW their votes have been counted accurately.

Given the widespread, officially documented failures of these
machines and the gross potential for error, criminal sabotage and
election fraud on a national basis, nothing less than our Republic
is at stake.

Well, now. Isn’t THAT interesting…

There are also some tantalizing snippets to be found online, but lead to dead links.

we will be holding another sunday meetup for all to come and bring a friend.  Russ Millette. Alaska’s Strict Constitutional Conservatives Founded Jun 2, 2007. Anchorage, [ society for civil liberties - Alaska's Strict Constitutional ... -
The work of the Alaska’s Strict Constitutional Conservative’s will take many forms.  Hosted by Russ Millette, Jeramy-Lee: Baker, Melissa Mcgillis, Gene and Margit. Feb 20 Sat [ Calendar: Past Meetup list - Alaska's Strict Constitutional ... -

There’s also an email that was sent around to various Ron Paul supporters, supposedly talking about the takeover. I cannot vouch for its authenticity, but now the tiny right wing blogosphere has their little fists all balled up, and are blaming… a “leftist” conspiracy for the email. “I do think this could be an attempt by leftists to fan flames within the party,” sayeth one of the bloviators.

“Leftists?” Really?

Please.

Leftists, alas, are not so organized and zealous as this. No, this is all rightist, baby.

Alaska Ron Paul Delegates and Alternates,

We have 48 hours left until the state convention. We have 3 goals over the next 48 hours:

1. Make sure all of Dr. Paul’s delegates and alternates show up at convention.

2. Educate all of our first timers on how to outmaneuver and confuse the Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney delegates.

3. Elect Ron Paul supporters to fill ALL 24 of Alaska’s national convention delegate slots.

There are 3 keys to success

1. This is a numbers game. If more of Dr. Paul’s supporters turn out than any other candidate’s delegates, we control them. If more of our people show up, we take over the state convention, we change the rules, and we take over the Republican Party. Turnout is key.

2. We vote as a block and never deviate from the voting instructions dispensed by our command center. On every vote, we vote together. We will be informing you via text message on how you need to vote on every vote that comes up. If you have not sent us your cell phone number you will have with you on Saturday, please do so right away. The Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney supporters will be splitting their votes because they will not be communicating with each other like we will be doing. Our internal numbers show that if Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney delegates vote as a block, they have a majority at the state convention. So it is absolutely crucial that we use whatever tactics necessary to promote division and confusion amongst their supporters. We promote confusion and division by:

a. Gaining the trust of our opponents’ supporters and taking advantage of their ignorance so that we can gain control of them and tell them how they have to vote. For example if you are talking to Santorum supporters, tell them you are also pro-life and agree with a lot of what he has to say. Tell them you used to support him but now that he is out of the race you are supporting the only constitutional conservative remaining in the race. Tell them whatever they need to hear so that you gain their trust and establish credibility with them. Once you’ve done that you will control them.

b. Deception and Misinformation – use any means necessary to divide and conquer our opponents.

c. Prolonging the convention through parliamentary maneuvers. The longer the convention goes, the better for us. Our opposition will have a majority at the start of the convention but as the day goes on their delegates will have to leave because their baby sitter is only scheduled to watch the kids until 3pm or because they have dinner reservations, or because they just get too frustrated because the convention is taking so long. We will wait them out. We are disciplined and organized while they are weak willed and lazy. So the longer the convention goes, more and more of them will leave. All of a sudden what started out as a majority for them dwindles away and the balance of power shifts to us. We will use every parliamentary tactic in the book to prolong the meeting. Dr. Paul’s campaign has sent national lawyers who will run circles over the local Alaska lawyers. Our lawyers are ready to sue anyone who tries to get in our way.

After we take over the Alaska convention, we will be able to nominate Dr. Paul from the floor at the Republican National Convention. We will have a floor fight at the national convention and when it’s all said and done, Dr. Paul will be the nominee. Despite what the Republican Party wants us to believe, this election is not about beating Obama. This election is about cleansing the Republican Party. The poor excuse for Americans that support Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney need to be run out of the Republican Party. Once we have cleansed the Republican Party and President Paul is elected, we will end America’s wars of aggression, we will put an end to American imperialism, and we will end the Fed!

DO NOT FORWARD THIS EMAIL. The element of surprise is critical. Our opponents don’t know what is about to hit them so they will not be able to defend themselves against our superior convention organization. By the end of the day Saturday, the Santorum, Gingrich, and Romney elements within the Republican Party will be cleansed from the Republican Party and we will deliver all 24 of Alaska’s national delegates to Dr. Paul!

In Liberty,

Mike Cook
AlaskansforPaul@gmail.com

So, in any case, real email or not, the Ron Paul supporters have taken over, and the old school GOPers are none too pleased.

A local TV station described them as “distraught.”

An email I received in the wee hours of the morning simply had the subject line, “BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!” And yes, I knew exactly what it was about.

But after the party delegates’ votes were tallied Saturday evening, a cheer erupted from Paul supporters on the second floor of the Hilton. Others looked crestfallen. Some blamed failed senatorial candidate Joe Miller and his wife, Kathleen, who spent much of their time Saturday huddled with Paul supporters. Miller was largely expected to jockey for a party leadership position, but it was Kathleen who, sporting a Ron Paul sticker, won a seat on Alaska’s GOP Electoral College.

The Millers were nowhere to be found at the party afterwards at Ron Paul’s Alaska campaign headquarters in downtown Anchorage, where both Millete and Brown spoke to supporters.

“They tried every maneuver they could, but God prevailed,” Millete told the crowd, many who were half his age or younger.

To be sure, not all Paul supporters believe in God, but a certain alliance between the tea party and Paulites was necessary for an upset in GOP politics on the Last Frontier, as evidenced by Joe Miller backers aligning with Paul supporters at this weekend’s convention. And so, regardless of religious beliefs, they cheered for Millete.

Russ Millette will not officially take over his full duties until January of 2013. However, he will immediately assume the duties of finance director – which is interesting, because Ruedrich admits to transferring $100,000 out of the Alaska Republican Party’s coffers, and given it to the Capital City Republicans in Juneau for safe keeping, just in case this very thing happened.

So what is the new finance director going to do with his new found …er… lack of finances?  ”We’ll deal with that later,” he said.

In the meantime, farewell to the Alaska Republican Party as you have known it.

Comments

comments

Comments
61 Responses to “Alaska Republican Convention Gets Paulverized”
  1. jojobo1 says:

    I looked very deep into Paul’s message during the last presidential election because I have voted for a third party person before,but I found his message lacking and my thoughts are he is the same as any other politician say anything until he is elected than change his platform.He is one of the politicians that stopped President Obama from doing a lot of his campaign promises along with the TP/GOP people with their just say no to everything no matter what.I also Looked again after the election a year or so because of a young man who was a Paul supporter and nothing had changed.people still have their Guns and can carry them.AS for Paul not accepting Medicare patients I find that unacceptable as well.Just because I don’t support Paul or for that matter Romeny does not mean I cannot get along with the people who do.I have family and friends from all sides and we just stay away from politics when we are together at least when we can

    • Kevin D. says:

      He didn’t turn Medicare patients away. He treated them free of charge rather than bill the tax payers for that individuals treatment.

  2. Haile says:

    True Libertarianism (not the Koch bros kind) wants the smallest least intrusive government consistent with the maximum freedom of each individual to follow his own ways and own values as long as he does not interfere with other individuals pursuing their own freedoms under one central principal – It is immoral to initiate force on anyone else – and the coercive power of the state is immoral in it self. All you need to know, to know that something within the state is either moral or immoral is whether or not it involves the use of force. Ask yourself who espouses peace and civility?

    Step 1 is to end the wars abroad and put down the guns that are pointed at each and every one of us that are forced into the insane systems of empiricism and debt based money.

    Step 2 is getting back to COMMUNITY and get off the wheels of consumerism and find true happiness in each other and sharing ideas through VOLUNTARISM.

    Demand that our government puts down the guns that are pointed at all of us.

    I humbly ask people to look deeper into Ron Paul’s message.

  3. freedomvoicer says:

    I don’t know who supplied this fabricated email depicted in this report, but who ever did has obviously done its deed, You can tell the purpose of this “secret” email is to discredit Ron Paul and his supporters, it is a crying shame all the fraud and dirty tactics used by the GOP,
    I guess they will stop at nothing to try their best to ram Mitt Romney down your throat as the nominee and you must follow and accept without questioning it , They firmly believe you are incapable of thinking on your own and they must choose for you. If you can’t see the cohertion here I am afraid they own your mind, please reflect on the poem below, perhaps it will stir up your unconcious and you will snap out of the stuppor you are in. God Bless

    LIBERTY
    I gave you a voice, for you could be heard…
    I gave you a land of riches beyond belief…
    I was forever vigilant, protected, guided you…
    I sheltered all with open arms, I… comforted you!.

    Now vested of deep sorrow, unnoticed in silence I weep…
    For some of my sons and daughters, to my rape have fallen… deaf and silent….
    For some of you have stood indifferent to this relentless siege….
    Oblivious of those fallen, whose blood for you they have shed….

    As you side with those that wounded me…
    That defecated my flag … degraded my honor….
    In pursuance of false ideals, you have abandoned me…
    I AM YOUR CONSTITUTION, I AM YOUR NATION!!!

    Forsaken by your blind quest…
    filled with your delusional null ambitions…
    I am rendered helpless as you…
    foolishly relinquish… my most precious asset:
    YOUR FREEDOM!!!
    GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES – THE GREATEST COUNTRY OF ALL

    Ron Paul President 2012

  4. Kelly says:

    lol…looks like all the bitter OLD GOPtards in Alaska have decided to chime in on this blog with their bitterness and their sore loserishness lmao!

  5. Hee hee! Couldn’t happen to a better bunch of people.

  6. All I Saw says:

    I was just listening to Dan Fagan’s show in the car. He had members of the CBC Republicans on, who were bragging about having the party machine set up by Jerry Falwell (may he rot in Hell) when Randy Ruedrich took over – who then handed the reins to Prevo.

    My point is this: Ron Paul may be undesirable – but this whole exercise proves what (some) of us have known for quite some time. The CBC has a tenuous grip on Alaskan politics and their power is fragile (they rule by fear and coercion). What I didn’t quite know about that so-called Ron Paul email is that PARNELL is the one who warned the CBC members at the convention about it – that tells me he’s fearful and recognizes the fragility of the CBC grip.

    The only weapon we’ve had for quite some time is “name and shame” and that is not a “polite” or “respectful” tactic. If you play by the CBC rules of politeness at all costs – you’ve just bought into a rigged game.

    And most importantly they are ruling Alaskan policy from the pulpit, and not just any pulpit.

    If the Ron Paul folks can get rowdy for one weekend and seize control of the Alaskan Republican Party from the CBC just think how far and how fast the rest of us (from the not-CBC political spectrum regardless of ideology) can change Alaska for the better.

    I suggest people who dislike Ron Paul politics get to know his supporters. You don’t have to agree on ideology to recognize that your interests are aligned.

    Thanks Jeanne for pointing out Mr. Millette’s affiliation with election integrity. Until that SINGLE ISSUE is dealt with – nothing else matter.

    The thing is, Joe Miller and the Ron Paul folks don’t disguise their true intentions – unlike Lisa Murkowski and Sean Parnell (who didn’t utter a peep about declaring war on ACES during his last campaign).

  7. Blueeyes7594 says:

    This reminds me of what the Republicans are doing in Idaho. In the particular county I left there were multiple factions of the Republicans trying to be more Republican then the other guy. You were either too liberal, or not conservative enough etc. Personally I didn’t care who was more conservative I just wanted to hear their solutions to the problems going on. It is more like bring on the popcorn and watch the fireworks watching them try to outdo each other. It shouldn’t really matter since Idaho will vote for a tree stump if it has an R next to their name.

  8. tallimat says:

    And here I thought the battle between Hammond and Hickel was bad…

    Hubby stopped by the convention on his way down to Homer (where I’m enjoying some painting work). Hubby was disgusted. He kept saying that we all have disagreements, but it seems the Alaska Republicans crowd, or at least quite a few of them, would rather rub sand in any ones eyes if there is a disagreement.

    FINALLY, the hubby is changing his party affiliation. He just doesn’t want to know anymore. He wants no more e-mails or communication from a party that can’t understand the value of manners.

    LOL

  9. benlomond2 says:

    sadly amusing, the goings on up there .. I sometimes wonder if these people just can’t fathom the complexities of today’s world. They seem to merely latch on to ONE theme and support the party that espouses that idea in their platform, regardless if the rest of the planks are total BS…
    pro-life or pro choice… no oversight of business, or regulation to protect the general population, bottomless defense budget or scaled to match the country’s needs, Social support for those in need, or “I got mine, screw the rest of you”… Elected representatives actually governing thru compromise, or mandates from The Oval Office..

    Conservatives are, by definition – those who do not want things to change,,but the world we live in is moving very fast.. and has caught up to the US over the past decade !! Wake -up ! if we don’t move forward, we’ll be left behind.

    • Kevin D. says:

      What do you consider moving forward? Increased debts? Endless wars? Locking up non-violent offenders whom have hurt no one but themselves? Printing more money with no actual value other than a trust in God to guide our economy (reference to “In God we Trust” on our money not a shot at those of you whom are religious)? Limiting civil Liberties? Conservatives can be defined as someone whom is opposed to change, this is true. However, Conservatives can also be defined as people whom seek to limit the amount of power that any one group or government can yield. You don’t think that conservatives welcome change? Well I’m an atheist. I’m pro marriage equality. I’m pro choice. I’m for the legalization and/or decriminalization of “drugs”. I’m also a Conservative. I consider myself a conservative because I am opposed to big government and I’m opposed to an outside group controlling my morality. If you feel that the Republican Party is also a big government military machine that is attempting to control your life through fear and religion well I most certainly agree with you… and so does Ron Paul. If you feel that Democrats are big government money printers that are attempting to control your life by telling you that you can’t survive without their help and their funds then don’t worry I agree with you and so does Ron Paul. You allude to compromise but what good is compromise for the sake of getting something done simply for the sake of getting something done? Especially if what gets done leaves us in a worse situation than we were in the first place. Thank you so much for your input and for having the courage to speak your mind. I hope you continue to do so in this forum as well as others like it. Vote your conscious and never let critics tell you that they know better. We may disagree we may not but that is not of consequence. What matters is that you exercise your right as an individual and for that you have my respect. Thank you again for your contribution to freedom of speech and to this article.

      Sincerely,
      Kevin Davis

  10. Martha Unalaska Yard Sign says:

    The R solidarity is much of their power. The Rs know that, the hijackers coming from all sides don’t want solidarity because they openly disagree. Oops. They are going to be busy for awhile. A long time ago I said Palin was like a virus planted in the Republican party and it would just take time to see the damage wreaked. Maybe that’s not so far off, hee hee.

  11. BeeJay says:

    After reading the alleged email from Mike Cook, I had some questions running around in my head, like where have I read about such disruptive tactics?

    Then it came to me: it’s basically a copy of the tactics used by the Bolsheviks to beat out the Mensheviks and seize control of Russia in 1917.

    This makes a very confusing chain of logic: if the Paulists use Communist tactics to seize control of the Alaska Republican Party, does that mean that the APR is now Communist? ;)

    Seriously though, Ron Paul is just another bigoted old man, with absurd policies. They just nailed the coffin shut…

    • BeeJay says:

      Oops, “ARP” not APR… My bad. Or was it Freudian: Alaska Party of Ron?

    • Kevin D. says:

      You use the political tactics that work. Romney takes tons of donations from the Mormons who are ordered by their prophet on the threat of losing their planet to rule in heaven if they don’t give political contributions to Prop 8 (even though Mormons make up an entirely miniscule population in California). This despite the fact that religions are forbidden from making substantial political contributions upon the threat of losing their tax exempt status. Obama has used “disruptive tactics” and so do other politicians. Ron Paul isn’t doing anything new. His “absurd policies” aren’t unique to him or to this era. Republicans used to be the party of non-intervention. The Republicans were elected to office to end the Korean War as well as the Vietnam War. The intervention platform for the Republicans can be traced back to Reagan in the modern day. If you are a social conservative or someone that supports military intervention in sovereign nations I personally do not believe you can count yourself as a small government advocate nor can you count yourself as a fiscal conservative. This is because of the fact that if you want to make social conservatism law then you are growing the sphere of influence of the government as well as creating the need to fund political organizations to then enforce these “conservative” policies and that funding comes from either printing new money or increasing taxes. If you back an interventionalist platform than likewise the funding for your foreign policy must come from somewhere. You are then forced to borrow, print, or tax our citizens to fund the policies in question. Printing the money is an issue because there is no actual backing to our money. We used to sell shares in our debt to nations like China, Japan, and Germany but all of these nations are now claiming to be done buying our bonds. We also force nations to price oil in our money to give it value but more and more countries are either attempting to or threatening to switch to gold when it comes to oil pricing. This more than anything speaks to the necessity of applying an actual valued good to our money. If you are calling Ron Paul’s polices on marriage equality, the Drug War, the current state of our tax code, or foreign policy absurd than I argue that you need to take a second look at what he’s advocating. He’s arguing that the federal government does not have the right to manage my life or yours. That is the responsibility of the individual and of the state that individual chooses to reside in. If you support Gay marriage as I do or the Legalization of “drugs” as I do than Ron Paul will allow you to vote on those issues in your state rather than imposing your beliefs on the rest of the nation. If you oppose Gay marriage or the Legalization of “drugs” than Ron Paul will allow you to vote on those issues in your state rather than imposing your beliefs on the rest of the nation. I fail to see the problem in that scenario. Maybe I’m just young or out of touch but the worst case scenario I see is that you live in a state that rules against your personal beliefs. But what is really lost in that scenario? If your state votes to keep marijuana and prostitution and gambling etc illegal well then you’re in the same boat you were in prior to the vote. If your state votes to make any or all of these things illegal and you oppose some or all of these things than just choose not to participate in any of these practices and you are doing the same thing you were doing before the vote. And if your state goes against your beliefs then you have a choice. You can either; stay in that state and seek to win the hearts and minds of the other occupants of that state as well as try to get others that share your beliefs to move to that state and vote in the future to change the policies. The other option is to simply move to a state that voted more in line with your beliefs. And if you are opposed to his economic platforms and consider Objectivism as well as free market to be absurd than I would suggest that you again take a second look at the philosophies that you oppose. If you believe that big government is inefficient and problematic then Ron Paul’s approach should be right up your ally. If you differ and thing that government is the best solution then Ron Paul is probably not for you. Though if you feel that way I think you should take a look at some of the writings of Ayn Rand and of Ron Paul along with several other prominent Austrian style economists and see what free market is all about. As always thank you for your input and ideas. I hope you will continue to speak your mind on this and other forums, and remember to always vote your conscious regardless of what people tell you.

      Sincerely,
      Kevin Davis

  12. Mo says:

    We’re trying hard to be voted The Most Ridiculous State in the Union, right?
    First Palin, now the Paultards marching behind a silly old coot.

  13. Alaska Pi says:

    At whatever level I’m amused at the state Republican Party shenanigans , I am more appalled that so many folks are buying the Ron Paul snake oil.
    And that is what it is, snake oil.

    • Thank you, Pi, I am totally with you.

      • Alaska Pi says:

        Thank you too, Linda.
        I don’t care one bit about the even-a-stopped-watch-is-right-twice-a-day things he says that I have some agreement with, he’s a slime, through and through.

        • Joshua says:

          That’s interesting because on foreign policy, a lot of major CIA and military heads agree with Ron Paul. Ron Paul receives THE MOST active-duty military donations over ALL other candidates combined — surely it’s safe to say our boots on the ground in 900+ military bases across 160+ countries have an idea of who should command our military?

          Also interesting that economic experts have called Ron Paul’s plan for the economy as one that would spur the greatest job growth in the history of the world. Forbes even said Ron Paul is one who “profoundly gets it” and should be in charge of economic policy and suggested Romney and others listen to Paul.

          He’s also the only one who has a voting record to be proud of. He’s the only one running who actually defends the constitution and opposed the bills that Robomney signed authorizing your indefinite detention without charge or trial. Silly old kook trying to protect your freedom and individual liberties. I’m not sure very many people even know what individual liberties and real freedom really is these days…

          • Alaska Pi says:

            You may be proud of Dr Paul’s voting record and the like.I am not.
            The thing is Dr Paul is a free market, property rights , exaltation of the individual above the group rightist. I am not.
            The interplay between the individual and the group and the rights and responsibilities of both has shifted dramatically in this country and I think Dr Paul’s notions of taking it even further is foolish.
            The reasons he votes for things matter, the larger picture he places them in matter – his overall picture is so out of balance to me that it makes the votes I agree with mean very little.
            I am a very, very left /left libertarian- very different critter than Dr Paul.
            He’s peddling dreams as far as I’m concerned, snake oil.

        • Kevin D. says:

          So you agree with him on several issues… but because of differences you personally have with Dr. Paul, his platforms, and/or a segment of his supporters you label him slime? Don’t you think that type of attitude is a problem in our political forums? “Bush is a NAZI”, “No, Obama is a NAZI.” This type of rhetoric can achieve nothing for good. You seem like an intelligent person with a lot of input to bring to the table, so why are you resulting to unfounded personal attacks with no actual information to back it up. You claim the reason he votes for things matters. This is true, but do you have a grasp on those reasons? Do you realize that Ron Paul is fighting for your right to live your life? If you have an issue with individualism and Ron Paul wins then you can petition your state officials to put more welfare and food stamps and social security style programs onto your state ballot. “He’s a slime, through and through.” Why? What about him makes him slime? Which of his beliefs make him a Social Darwinist or any of the other things you’ve alleged in your posts? Please post something that supports these allegations. On that note however thank you for posting and for your input. It’s nice to see different opinions on display and I hope that you continue to post and to spread your ideals through forums like this one and others.

          Sincerely,
          Kevin Davis

          • Alaska Pi says:

            A social darwinist accepts and/or facilitates economic survival of the fittest AND accepts that people will die because of unreasonable notions of “personal responsibility” attached to notions of liberty and freedom which aren’t very free in multiple contexts and limited government.
            Please look at Dr Paul’s stated opinions and his voting history in the link I left you above and do some looking round yourself to see what social darwinist thought is and what it has wrought within free market capitalism run amok in the late 1800s and early 1900s in this country alone.
            And in the same vein as all your requests of me- why do you think what he calls freedom is really free? And why do I need Dr Paul to fight for me to live my life?
            I do just fine living my life. I disagree with a lot of things and work hard to change some of those things but that’s the way of life. I don’t want or need what he’s peddling, thank you.

          • Kevin D. says:

            If you believe that charitable giving is the just and moral thing to do and if the act of giving makes you happy than by all means aid those less fortunate. I personally practice giving whenever I can. I encourage others to do so as well. However, there is nothing moral or just about taking earned means from one group and giving those means to others. You can ask people to come to the same conclusion as you have but by using force you are with out a doubt violating those individuals rights.

            And you’re right you can live your life without any one’s help or influence. However, when others in our elected government from both sides of the aisle are taking away more and more of our rights it is good to have some one whom is fighting to keep those rights. I view Congressman Paul to be one of those individuals. You clearly don’t and that is your right. I do believe that what Ron Paul considers freedom to be freedom. This is because Ron Paul’s freedom extends to groups that are covered by the constitution but whom we as a society deem unexceptable. These people no matter how terrible their beliefs still have a right to have them and to express them. The same goes for the wealthy. You and I may believe in helping those whom are less fortunate but if they chose not to that is their choice and their burden. You may call that a Right Libertarian but I don’t put right or left labels on Liberty. It works kind of like a vaccine in my mind. With both liberty and vaccines it’s all or nothing. Liberty either covers every single person across the board or it does not exist. With a vaccine you have to vaccinate the entire world or else the dissease will mutate and re-emerge resistant to the previous medications. Liberty is the same. If you limit liberty and claim economic fairness or political correctness as the reason those attacks on liberty. But that’s one less property right and one less right to free speech that applies to all of us.

          • Alaska Pi says:

            Kevin Davis-
            Please understand that the distinction I made and the link to left libertarian thought I left does not have anything to do with left and right in the way you are using it.
            The difference in how I think about property rights and how you do is huge, as is any notion of what you call charity and what I call responsibility to the group.
            I wish you the best though I disagree with you deeply. If you ever have time to try to understand the differences perhaps you will understand that what I think of as liberty is quite a bit different than what you do.
            I am very, very careful with using words like liberty and freedom because they need full definition in context in my mind. Using them in a general way, without special attention to what is meant, is also a well worn but effective tool of a whole lot of folks who could a squat about yours or mine , ya know?

            Signing off here- AKM will be closing comments soon on this thread.
            AKM- thank you for leaving em open for a few days :-)

          • Kevin D. says:

            I do understand. I promise you I do. We disagree I can’t help but agree with you on that. And I hope you see that I’m not claiming to be correct or asserting my beliefs as fact I am simply stating my interpretation of events and my opinion on the political climate. I would love to find out who you are voting for and prefer to Dr. Paul. Gary Johnson? Obama? Romney? An unmentioned third party candidate? To bad you prob aren’t on here right now. I will be voting for Ron Paul if he runs a third party bid but I’ll be voting Libertarian if he doesn’t. I’ll say this I’d prefer a pro-liberty candidate, even in the sense of your interpretation, to the two party disastor we’re hypothetically facing in November. Thank you for the lively debate and your input.
            Sincerely,
            Kevin Davis

    • bubbles says:

      i love you Pi. you are right on the money Sis.

  14. Martha Unalaska Yard Sign says:

    Speaking of kaabloooey, I recently found the far right TPers/ Palinbots are using GOP and GOPe (elite) descriptions. There is definitely a turbulent time coming for the party. Their solidarity is cracking as they have embraced factions who don’t follow the lead.

    So we have the GOPe who are all about backroom meetings, being influential, and requesting relatively blind solidarity and trust in their lead (therein lies their true power in my eyes), the whack nut evangelicals that don’t want any government unless it’s religious government all for them and no one else, the TPers which are rowdy, uninformed and mostly racist, and now Libertarians jumping in for their whacks and they are rowdier, more dedicated, and more out there than the TPers in my view. Whew.

    It will be interesting, and I’m not sure when everyone is going to stop trying to hijack another party and steer it their way. We don’t really seem to be a two party country anymore but we still have the two party infrastructure that seems to resemble the elephant visiting the living room.

    I got very weary of the blind Republican solidarity. I don’t trust people who don’t question things, while repeating unsubstantiated information like robots. They are aligned, so they let themselves be dragged around by the nose ring for the greater good of the party. Looks like others within are also weary of the blind solidarity.

    I don’t like Miller at all and that part is worrisome, but I’m not surprised that the implosion of change is coming to that party. The Rs resist change of all kinds and this will be unsettling to many. Good. Start questioning your damm beliefs and find out more about who it is telling you what to do, when, how and how often.

    • Martha Unalaska Yard Sign says:

      My recent notice of the new GOPe tag gave me a “Duh!” moment. The Twitty one is always whining about elites and establishment so I’m obviously late to the party. Get it – late to the (GOPe) party? Arrgggh.

    • Kevin D. says:

      You’re right on questioning Republican solidarity. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is that they march in unison with their leadership. That’s the one good thing about the state of our media in this country is that no matter who is in power you wind up having a group of people that are willing to criticize every single decision that they make regardless of the good or the bad of the decision in question. That is excellent. In my lifetime I can only truly remember three presidents. Those presidents were Clinton, Bush, and Obama. In our nation we have two branches of the same tree, the main stream media tree. We have the left leaning branches (CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, etc) then we have the republican branches (Fox News, Fox Business, News talk WSB, and other talk radio networks). And if anyone is curious yes I meant to say left vs. republican because Fox isn’t conservative they’re Republican and there is a difference. But with having these two extremes you can count on at least one group to criticize the leadership no matter what. While some might see this as national weakness I personally see it as strength. This shows at least two of the many, many different opinions that make up this nation. This is also in line with Ron Paul’s platform. We need a freedom of speech and we need new voices and anti status quo opinions to be expressed. The problem with our two party system can be simplified to one basic flaw. These parties wind up speaking for and being led by people that don’t actually belong in the party. Democrats aren’t communist or fascists and Republicans aren’t fascists or racists or anti-Semites etc… The problem is that the parties wind up playing hosts to these individuals and their platforms wind up being influenced. We need to grow our third parties and allow people to know that there is a party that is right for them. The majority of Democrats that I know in my age group are way closer to modern Libertarianism than they are to the modern democratic party they just don’t know enough about Libertarianism to decide that for themselves. The communist party is out there. The Whig party is out there. The Reform party is out there. The Socialist party is out there. The Nazi party is out there. The New Black Panther Party is out there. The Libertarian Party is out there. The Green Party is out there. The Conservative Party is out there. The Labor party is out there. The Workers Party is out there. The Constitutionalist Party is out there. We are NOT a two party system. We need to diversify our political system to represent everyone in this nation. Thank you very much for your input and please always continue to speak your mind in this and other forums.

      Sincerely,
      Kevin Davis

  15. A Fan From Chicago says:

    The early reference to “big whigs” sent me scurring to wikipedia to make sure my understanding of the itended spelling was correct. And it wasn’t a misguided reference to a Colonial political party.

    We who follow the comings and goings of the former Governor certainly know how wig is spelled. Swing and a miss either way.

    IM is suggesting that the icky hand of Joe Miller and his pal, Mrs. Todd Palin, are at work in this behind the scenes, political developemnt.

    Never a dull moment up there.

    • Lacy Lady says:

      I still think there is something in the wind —-brewing . I have a feeling that something is going to happen when the Rep convention time arrives. It’s not over until it’s over. Are all the delegates to the National convention locked in? Why is Gingrich waiting until Wed to announce that he is bowing out? I don’t trust any of them. Pass the Kool Aid!

  16. Mo says:

    …and the cherry on the delicious frosting is Jimmy Kimmel’s comment:

    “Ron Paul looks like the guy who gets unhooded at the end of every Scooby Doo episode.”

  17. Mo says:

    As Bob Cesca says, “Keep going, Republicans, you’re doing great!”

  18. GoI3ig says:

    I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating. Rats eat their own!

  19. Cherosaw says:

    Nice picture at the end lol.

  20. Moose Pucky says:

    kaabloooey!

  21. Jag says:

    I found Paul the most appealing in the least two months, but now that Joe Miller is backing him? He scares me. I was supporting a candidate in a parade with Miller’s people behind us with live ammo in their weapons. Scary freaks.

    • Ron Paul is a racist and a bigot. Nothing else he may happen to be will wipe that away.

      • Alaska Pi says:

        And a sexist and the worst kind of throwback to social Darwinist thought and nothing will wipe all that away.
        Amen .

      • EaSy says:

        Racism and bigotry are not compatible in case of Ron Paul. If he is a bigot, he ultimately supports constitution, liberty and freedom for all – even blacks, hispanics and so on. But If he is a racist he hates them, so no freedom for them. I would say that you are very confused and you know nothing about Ron Paul.

        • Alaska Pi says:

          Actually- one does not need to hate to be a racist. One simply must be be blind to certain things and assume that one is seeing the whole.
          Dr Paul’s history is quite clear that he has no understanding of white privilege and so on as how it affects himself let alone POC.
          Also- the notions of liberty and freedom for all espoused by the part of him that is Libertarian are a rather untidy collection of overlapping notions of Libertarian.
          http://www.iep.utm.edu/libertar/

          • Kevin D. says:

            POC… People of Color? “Dr. Paul’s history is quite clear that he has no understanding of white privilege and so on as how it affects himself let alone POC.” I’m sorry but that statement is just not accurate on any level. If you watched the debates consistently you would have noticed Congressman Paul making several arguments that the War on Drugs in this country puts an overwhelmingly inflated number of blacks and Hispanics in prison. Dr. Paul has consistently held that position as well as that the death penalty and other penalties also target “POC” unfairly. Ron Paul extends similar positions to people’s religions and sexual orientation.

            “The notions of liberty and freedom for all espoused by the part of him that is Libertarian are a rather untidy collection of overlapping notions of Libertarian.” No ma’am. Ron Paul has consistently held his beliefs of individual liberty as the corner stone of his platforms. This traces back to the 1970′s. He has been consistent in applying his beliefs to every living person in this nation and beyond.

            In your later post you claim to be a Left/Left Libertarian. Do you mean a Democrat? A social liberal that is also a for the collective thinker that backs big government and spending one groups money for the benefit of the greater good is called a Democrat. I do NOT intend for that to sound like an insult. I don’t think Democrat or Republican or Libertarian should ever be used as insults. It is just my observation from your word choice and from the tone of your posts that you sound to me like you would find yourself aligned greater with the Democrats then you would with Libertarians.

            “Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on Earth is the individual).”– Ayn Rand.

          • Alaska Pi says:

            1- I mean a left libertarian.
            A left libertarian is a distinctly different critter than a right libertarian. Haven’t see you round here before so if you want a basic breakdown trying searching “Political Compass ” AKM brought it here a few tears ago and it is a useful tool on many fronts.
            I am closest to what is called Steiner-Vallentyne Left-Libertarian
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism
            with some market anarchism tendecies of thought which I reject fully embracing as I am not an anti-statist. I reject Ayn Rand fully as well as Hayek, Friedman and many others Dr Paul was supposedly influenced by.
            The easiest to describe and over simplified differences between left and right libertarianism is right rejects equality of outcome, left does not and vastly different notions of property.
            As per Dr Paul his notions of privatization and lack of acceptance of common -good filter through all of his policy statements and I disagree with WHERE they come from entirely and see many pitfalls if accepted as useful ways to organize ourselves. Putting the things I agree with in context of his larger worldview I find I very much disagree with his reasons and his larger plans to undercut the common good- re his notions of courts, states rights, etc. His ideas about free market environmentalism and privatizing public lands set my hair on fire.

            2-
            Sorry- because Dr Paul shows some good sense about unequal treatment of POC under the law does not mean he “gets it”. He is/was opposed to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which WAS a monumental step forward for women and POC in this country.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul
            I could go on for a week about the blind racism implicit in rejection of the CRA- especially attached to Dr Paul’s idea that it interfered with liberty.
            You are free to feel however you want about Dr Paul but I stand by calling him slime. I don’t indulge in name calling lightly- I never say all the rethuglican, libtard koolaid, blah, blah, blah stuff.
            I disagree Dr Paul’s overall philosphy and I find many of his social stances social darwinist throwbacks to a past I don’t want to see for my grandchildren – strongly enough I feel fine calling the fellow a slime.

          • Kevin D. says:

            Your input on the splintered factions within Libertarianism was very interesting as well as useful. I see the same policy statements, speeches, voting records, etc as you do but I just don’t see the origin issues that you do. When I hear him talk about forign policy I hear him speaking about a return to non-interference, I hear him speaking about returning soverignty to these nations we have intruded upon, and I hear him talking about returning military responsibility and opprotunities to these same nations.

            His rejection of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is not an objection to equality. His objection is to the Federal Government being given the power to decide who has rights and who doesn’t. If the Federal Government can supercede State rights to give a group rights then they have the same oprotunity to take those rights away. An example of this is the current Marijuana argument. Several states have leagalized medical marijuana and have autherized for private business’ to sale and dispense marijuana to those whom have “qualified” for its use. The Federal Government is then coming in and raiding these business. If it’s up to the government to give us rights than it’s as simple as one administration granting the rights and then one administration can then simply take them away again. That is why we have to stick to the constitution and if the federal government wasn’t expressly given the right to do something then we must interpret that as them not having the right to do something. Even if what an administration is doing for the well being of a group it opens the door for a future administration to use those same executive powers to take from another group. If someone doesn’t like something in the constitution then write an amendment or a new constitution and try to get it ratified. Until then we must abide by the current constitution and I personally believe Ron Paul is the candidate that has the greatest understanding of the role of the Federal Government as laid out by that current constitution.

          • Alaska Pi says:

            I disagree with Dr Paul on the CRA- vehemently.
            http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul188.html
            His assumption that the Act did not change race relations is a shaky one.
            His notion that it reduced liberty is poorly thought out – nowhere does he deal with the lack of liberty experienced by so many Americans prior to its passage except to wave his hand airily about society change would happen sometime or other.

            The notion of what are express powers has been argued, litigated, interpreted, legislated, and voted on for over 200 years by millions of Americans. I think the arguments are generally healthy because it means we are actively looking at the ideas behind our beginnings and what we want to keep and what we don’t .
            But I do reject the strict-Constitutionalist view you seem to favor- for too many reasons to hog AKM’s space here any further over.

            To assume all the trouble lies at the Federal level is to ignore outrageous overreach at state levels- which is what the Jim Crow laws were- is silly. States have a nasty history right along with the Fed. We have to pay attention to all of em , all of the time.

    • beaglemom says:

      Ron Paul has a very long and bad history with the most virulent kinds of racists. In addition, considering that he is always complaining about government, he sure has stayed in office for a long time enjoying all of the benefits. He is also one of those who has never seen a regulation that he wouldn’t like to get rid of. Personally I find him disgusting.

      • Kevin D. says:

        “He sure has stayed in office for a long time enjoying all of the benefits.” This is a misconception. Ron Paul has turned down his Congressional Health plan. Ron Paul has also turned down secret service protection on all of his presidential campaigns instead opting in both cases to pay for his own (health insurance and protection). In addition he has turned down his congressional pension plan. Congressman Paul has also stated that he will show unity with the American people by only accepting the average income of an American citizen if he is elected to the office of the Presidency. This is in contrast to the enormous salary that the President traditionally receives. Also, to the charge of him being racist I have several points to make. First you say that he has a history of associating with racists. I would argue that those types of associations would come for anyone that champions freedom of speech to the level that Dr. Paul has throughout his political career. Ron Paul fights for everyone in this country to have their constitutional right to free speech regardless of their message. This is true for all groups including American Nazi’s, The New Black Panther Party, The Ku Klux Klan, Catholics, Mormons, Jewish groups, Protestants, etc… People bring up the Ron Paul Newsletters as a case for his racism as well. Even though the two most recognizable names involved with the newsletter Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell did not write the racial, misogynistic, homophobic, or anti-Semitic articles that ran in the newsletter. The argument against Paul is that when the newsletters existence came to light in the 1996 Congressional campaign he was asked if he wrote them he said that wasn’t important and then he was asked to disavow the comments and admit they were racist. He refused at the time to disavow them after his campaign manager advised him to simply down play the significance. Since then Ron Paul has maintained that he did not write those articles although he did occasionally write for the newsletter. What people don’t talk about is the fact that Ron Paul ran his own medical clinic in Texas for years. While he was practicing he refused to accept Medicare or other government health care providers. Instead he would treat these individuals regardless of their race free of charge. His policies were the same for those without healthcare of any kind. But all of these points are mute when you look at Ron Paul’s platforms. His personal feelings play no role in his decision making. Dr. Paul is devout in his Christian beliefs but the only issue from a religious stand point that bleeds over is his staunch pro-life beliefs. However, he makes the argument from a medical point of view rather than a religious. This is one of the few stances I differ from with Congressman Paul. I may be a pro-life personally but politically I am very pro-choice. My morality plays no role in your morality. This is Dr. Paul’s overall stance on most topics ranging from foreign policy, gay marriage, drugs, gambling, prostitution, and much, much more. Whether you agree with Ron Paul on an issue or not you can still vote for his platform. This is because he will turn over nearly all social issues as well as most fiscal issues to the individual states. This allows you to use your freedom to vote and also allows for that vote to count for more due to the fact there will be less votes in a state election than in a National election thus allowing for your vote to carry more weight. Thank you for your input and I hope you will keep an open mind to Dr. Paul and the candidates he has influenced as well as his supporters.

        Sincerely,
        Kevin Davis

      • Joshua says:

        Actually, Ron Paul has declined the government healthcare and pension programs, did you know that? Did you also know Ron Paul returns a rather LARGE portion of his congressional salary back to the treasury? Did you also know Ron Paul was the ONLY doctor in his town who would treat black families? Did you know he treated MANY of them (with plenty of video testimonies to verify) without charging them? Did you know the “racist newsletters” turned out to be a hoax and Ron Paul was vindicated as having nothing to do with them? Did you also know Ron Paul refused to accept Medicare BUT if that’s all you had, he would treat you for free? Did you know Ron Paul said he would reduce his presidential salary to $39,000 per year (the average wage for the American worker)?

        What about that do you find disgusting, sir?

        • Kevin D. says:

          Excellent points. Thank you for your input and for your support of Congressman Paul. Keep it up and continue to share the message of Peace, Prosperity, Sound Money, and Liberty. Please continue to speak your mind on this and other sites. Have a great day.

          Sincerely,
          Kevin Davis

        • Millie says:

          Plus, he is anti war, which I suppport 100%.

          Since the Alaskan Repub Party is now in a bit of a mess, it’s time the Dems move in – select good candidates and promote voting in November. Remember, Alaska was once a very strong ‘blue’ state!

          • Kevin D. says:

            Since it appears that you support several of Paul’s platforms… would you consider voting for him if he gets the Republican nomination or runs as a third party or are you committed to Obama? I’m only curious because there is a huge number of “Blue Republicans” that are re-emerging and supporting Paul. Not to mention the numerous online groups that has emerged in the style of “Democrats for Paul”. The reason that I ask is that Paul has stood by many Libertarian principles that Obama said he would enact or take steps towards during his presidency. Obama said he would bring back the troops; instead he got us involved in Libya and has executed military operations in Yemen and Pakistan without their government’s knowledge or approval. Obama said he would close Guantanamo bay and end enhanced interrogation, instead we still have inmates in Guantanamo and the only enhanced interrogation tactic that he has gotten rid of is water boarding. Obama claimed he would order the DEA and other federal agencies to respect states cannabis laws regarding medicinal marijuana, instead DEA raids on dispensary’s and state licensed growers have continued. Obama said he would take steps to aid in marriage equality, instead his administration decided that was a political non-starter so they simply moved on, now he’s lost a lot of his homosexual support to Dr. Paul and to Gov. Gary Johnson (expected Libertarian Candidate). Obama has also continued many of Bush Policies such as the TSA, Department of Homeland Security, The Patriot act, and continued to grow the federal government and especially the executive branch. None of what I’ve said has even touched on the Drone policy or the NDAA that were both brought in by Obama. Ron Paul is in a great position to grab up votes from the Democrats whom have become tired of Obama’s social policies and lack of following through on campaign promises.

            At the debates when they asked Ron Paul how he would bring the troops home… his response was simply to march home. We just marched over. We should just march back home.

            Thank you for your input and for keeping an open mind (or at least appearing to) and most importantly for speaking your mind despite your apparent political affiliations. Please continue to do so on this and other forums like it.

            Sincerely,
            Kevin Davis

    • HeathieAnCap says:

      Hey – Filmer of that first video here–

      I can tell you right now that Joe Miller had nothing to do with the RP campaign at the convention. Most of the Ron Paul people – including myself – had not even a clue Joe Miller was there. And I went to all the meetings and was highly involved the entire time. It is interesting being there first hand compared to what the news media says about the events. Its as if they are either completely clueless or just making up drama/stories. I always knew not to trust them – but it’s weird seeing first hand.

  22. whoami says:

    Please provide background on Russ Millette. Never heard of ‘um. But he’s never heard of me, either….

Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying...
  1. [...] makes this disavowal so important is that a number of sources, including Mudflats, seem to think it’s genuine. Syrin seems to think it’s gospel. We need to get the truth [...]

  2. [...] Other Sources Of Interest: A Murkowski flak, Syrin from Wasilla, was at the convention and posted her account. She can barely conceal her adulation for Lisa Murkowski and her disdain for Ron Paul supporters. She brags about paying $2.00 for a pink McCain/Palin pin for sale at the Alaska Federation of Republican Woman’s booth just so she could toss it in the trash and get it out of circulation. Good God — how catty can you get? Mudflats has also published an extended account of the convention. [...]



Leave A Comment

%d bloggers like this: