Republican National Convention Sham 2012

Submitted by: chalket 4 years ago

Such respect for Democracy! Let the rationalizations begin...
There are 55 comments:
Male 7,378
Oh Bilderberg? The other Acorn? You can do better.
0
Reply
Male 1,404
Republican or Democrat figurehead? Your choice. 43% of eligible voters chose to exercise there rights in the last presidential election. That`s a whole lot of disenfranchised citizens.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Ron Paul got F-ed by his own party. From fixed caucus wins across the nation, miscounted votes and down right fraud he`s been treated like an albino stepchild. To say that both party`s are the same is disingenuous. I can`t remember the democrats ever F-ing a candidate by vote fixing and lying. Perhaps one of you right wing loons could inform me but you need to first be honest with yourselves. Your party is a mess, their virtues are now lying, cheating and greed. How can anyone in their right mind support support such nonsense?
0
Reply
Male 2,143
the Nazi/republican party does not care about fair,they`re about money.Period.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]I`ve been saying for years that the 2 party system is a complete cluster f++k.[/quote]
I agree, but though it wasn`t planned that way, it`s a reasonably stable solution to the system set up under the constitution. However, that`s not the real problem. Parliamentary systems with proportional representation and government by coalitions actually produce even worse results in terms of freedom and prosperity. The problem is that we have abandoned the concept of limited government and the rule of law in favor of mob rule, aka, democracy. There is no constitutional authority for the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, or Transportation, nor is there any authority for Social Security, Medicare, or food stamps. Finally, there is absolutely no constitutional authority for drug prohibition. But voters disagree, so here we are, and the constitution be damned.
0
Reply
Male 36,301
[quote]And OldOllie comes in to reinforce MeGrendel`s ignorance. Where is Crakrjak to complete the trifecta?[/quote]
My feelings = hurted!
lolz! Or not.
0
Reply
Male 450
This is just downright drating scary.
I`ve been saying for years that the 2 party system is a complete cluster f++k. We are being steered towards believing there are only 2 choices and now not even those 2 choices are legitimate.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
@Prussia`sFool Once again the point goes flying over your pointed little head. In both cases, the party bosses stepped in to act against the will of a misguided majority in the best interests of their respective parties. In the case of the Republicans, it will be of no consequence. In the case of the Democrats, it will definitely have consequences. It`s simple: God > Ron Paul.

@lauriloo, the fact that some of the boos came from Jew-hating Muslims rather than from God-hating atheists will not mitigate the political damage from this idiocy.

0
Reply
Male 3,445
And OldOllie comes in to reinforce MeGrendel`s ignorance. Where is Crakrjak to complete the trifecta? If you repeat a lie enough times it becomes true.
0
Reply
Male 412
I just want to be clear about something... This has nothing to do with Democracy. This is a non-governmental organization that is acting to nominate a candidate for election to government; it is not an election for government itself. Having said that, yeah - I agree - this was a sham.

And, to those referring to the DNC vote on `God`, two comments...

1. Our government is a secular government. A vast majority of our population may hold religious beliefs, but that has nothing to do with government.

2. As has been stated, the vote to which is being referred at the DNC was not only a vote for the inclusion of language relating to God - but also included the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
0
Reply
Male 1,288
The anti-Paul arguments here are pretty weak. So far the arguments seem to go as follows:
- Paul would have lost anyways, so it`s OK to disenfranchise the delegates
- The Democrats voted on something that sounds anti-God, so it`s OK to disenfranchise the delegates
- I don`t like Ron Paul, so it`s OK to disenfranchise the delegates

Unfortunately, that kind of thinking embodies the Republican party nowadays, and also garners votes. =/ ...which apparently is why it`s OK so it`s OK to disenfranchise the delegates...and minorities...and the poor...etc.
0
Reply
Male 406
omg
0
Reply
Male 4,283
Well you answered my question @MeGrendel. You are not man enough to admit when you are wrong.
0
Reply
Female 1,803
"On the other hand, the MAJORITY of Democrat delegates booed God. "

I believe they were voting for BOTH changes, the Jerusalem one and adding the word "God" back in. Probably why the Arab guy (based on the sign the woman next to him was holding) they had the camera on saying NO makes sense. For some reason, people think saying "Faith" multiple times in the process of talking about supporting religion doesn`t mean God by default.I would think if you were truly religious you would get that it means the same thing. Or maybe some people are just always looking for minutia to make a big deal about.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
Sometimes the adults just have to step in and do what`s right. The Paul delegates, who were a tiny minority at the RNC, wanted to throw a tantrum that wouldn`t have made any difference in the outcome, and the head of the Republican party stepped in and put a stop to it. It won`t amount to a hill of beans, because the vast majority of voters couldn`t care less about Ron Paul.

On the other hand, the MAJORITY of Democrat delegates booed God. Villaraigosa had to be the adult and do the right thing even in the face of an obvious majority of utter fools. Now, even if you`re an atheist, cutting your own throat like that was just plain stupid. It`s going to be played over and over again for the next two months. Unlike the Paul dust-up, though, this WILL amount to something, because the vast majority of voters DO care about God.
0
Reply
Male 2,675
FFS, thanks for posting this. I didn`t think of myself as naive, yet I`m a little surprised how much this terrified me. This is just disgusting.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
` I probably should have said `Amendment one OF WHAT they were voting on.` that would have been more inclusive. I never thought anyone would think that there were separate votes.`

Or you could have not said `And this is different from the Democratic Voice vote on returning God to the platform how?`
0
Reply
Male 2,988
"Give up Paulbots, the Republican party just isn`t that into you."

No, its that real Republicans are just not into Mitt and the bull poo being pulled by the RNC. Actions like these will lead to a divide within the Republican party. Its the far right wing nuts for Mitt, and the moderate right wing people for Ron Paul.
0
Reply
Male 7,329
markust123-"How can you flat out lie about your lie when people can go down to your last comment and see what you said?"

Okay, I see that reading comprehension is not your strong point, I`ll break it down, (and I`ll admit, I didn`t phrase it as clearly as I should have).

"The part about Jerusalem was Amendment two. Amendment ONE that they were voting on was add to the platform the following line" I probably should have said `Amendment one OF WHAT they were voting on.` that would have been more inclusive. I never thought anyone would think that there were separate votes.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
ledzeppeloyd: There are no constitutional rules about how any party can conduct it`s convention.

The Obamacrats did even worse to Hillary`s delegates during the 2008 DNC. They flat out stole the Texas primary election from her.
0
Reply
Male 1,511
This is why I`m not a Republican anymore.
I definitely fit better in the Libertarian party.
Issues that I feel strongly about:
-Spend less, balance the budget.
-End the drug war.
-Stop all foreign wars.
-No class warfare rhetoric.
-Government should not be regulating moral issues like drugs, prostitution, gay marriage, gambling, and big gulps. Those are all personal responsibility issues.
-And abortion of viable babies should not be legal unless the mother`s life is in danger. There`s no argument to counter this one. At the viability point it`s easier to just induce labor and give up the child for adoption than abort it.
-Although, I`ve read through Obamacare, and I think it`s a good thing. Either we don`t treat people at the hospital that don`t have health insurance (or can`t pay for it), or force them all to have health insurance. And the latter is much more humane.

This video made me sad. Ron Paul would have been so good for the country
0
Reply
Female 2,228
What they did was make it harder to pull these delegate poaching shenanigans in the future. That`s it. That`s the full scope of their disciplinary action. The gatekeepers did their jobs.

Give up Paulbots, the Republican party just isn`t that into you.
0
Reply
Male 4,283
"I never said they didn`t." Referring to `They voted on both issues simultaneously`

Here is what you said @MeGrendel, "The part about Jerusalem was Amendment two. Amendment ONE that they were voting on was add to the platform the following line:..." You said amendment ONE that they were voting on. Explicitly capitalizing "ONE". How can you flat out lie about your lie when people can go down to your last comment and see what you said?
0
Reply
Male 2,384
@crakrjak
its not about how ron paul didnt get the vote, its about how they can just "shoo away" deligates if they dont like their choices, its fundementally corrupting the democratic process
0
Reply
Male 787
Crackr Jak were we even watching the same video? You do realize why this is bad don`t you? Not just for Ron Paul but for the future of America if people are going to get away with poo like this? You make me shake my head.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
`The simple fact: Two Amendments, both getting booed.`

Here is your original post that I was correcting: `And this is different from the Democratic Voice vote on returning God to the platform how?`

You then broke it down by amendments, clearly sticking to your guns that they were booing the God amendment.

How do I know that the disagreement was over the Jerusalem issue? Because it`s been acknowledged in the mainstream media, and because I know that in the Democratic party there is widespread disagreement about the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital. It`s simple deduction.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
Why does it *matter* which one was no`d? I woulda no`d for both of them because they`re both ridiculous. The important aspect is that they needed a 2/3 majority and, based on sound, there definitely wasn`t a 2/3 majority. So there was no democracy going on, they chose to approve it despite the votes not meeting the requirements.
0
Reply
Male 7,329
FoolsPrussia-"They voted on both issues simultaneously."

I never said they didn`t. If you saw the actual process, it was obvious that both amendment swere up for vote at the same time. (A clue is a BIG ASSED SCREEN that had both Amendements on it to be voted on.)

So YOU think you can speak for the entire delegation, each and every member, and state `they were booing Amendment II, not Amendment I`. The facts do not support that theory. (Nor does it support they were Booing Amendment I, not Amendment II.)

The simple fact: Two Amendments, both getting booed. If they had been smart (and no one accuses ANYone at that convention of being smart), they`d have voted on each individually so there`d be no confusion. Of course, I believe they intentionally voted on both just so they could say `Oh, we weren`t booing THAT one, just the OTHER one.`
0
Reply
Male 17,512
It`s just Ron Paul whiners whining. Paul didn`t even have 10% of the delegates Romney had. Paul knew this before the RNC and had staged his own convention days before.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
@Markust: Thanks for linking to the video.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
@MeGrendel: They voted on both issues simultaneously. Stop listening to Rush Limbaugh, or whoever you`re getting your "facts" from.

"If you`re going to try and point out someone elses ignorance, make sure you have your facts straight."

Funny.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
And one more thing, they tallied up the votes before all the voiced "Yeas" and "Nays" so there`s nothing to worry about on that front either.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
Is this about that Paul thing? Oh Brother...

Paul won delegates in caucus states which divvy up representation differently than primary states. Paul was never a contender in primary states and primary states are generally winner take all. What the Paul team did was hide under the radar as caucus delegates were chosen in hopes of poaching Romney`s due portion of delegates away. They wanted to do a sneaky "all ur delegates are belong to us" trick and it blew up in their faces and rightfully so. The party did nothing wrong, they disciplined their own for rule breaking.

Even if this ruse actually worked it would never garner him the nomination anyway, there simply aren`t enough votes. There would`ve been a huge floor battle and then a brokered convention, which means a return to the party elders and the days of smoke filled back rooms as they cast the final deciding votes.

This isn`t Democalypse Now, this is Tuesday.
0
Reply
Male 4,283
The person in the crowd they show twice yelling No is next to a lady holding a sign that says Arab American Democracy. It can`t get much clearer than that. Although I would play the video with the sound off since the guy recording the video is a jack ass.
0
Reply
Male 4,283
"The part about Jerusalem was Amendment two. Amendment ONE that they were voting on..."

Here is a video recorded of a TV showing this vote so you can see nothing was taken out of context or manipulated @MeGrendel. Both issues were voted on at the same time. THE SAME TIME. See I can capitalize also. What I said, a lie repeated by a trusted source enough times becomes truth, still stands. The part about Jerusalem is absolutely what people were upset about. It is a huge point of anger for some people. You have clearly been manipulated by opinion media to believe a lie. The question is are you man enough to admit you are wrong?
0
Reply
Female 2,674
MeGrendel, so you`re gonna ignore this and just say "but democrats did it too!"? I think both are atrocious. They need a 2/3 majority (by screaming? odd way to vote imo) to proceed. In both cases, it seemed to be 50/50 and they went with whatever they wanted and ignored the will of the people. It`s disgusting and something needs to be done to prevent this kind of crap from happening in the future.
0
Reply
Male 7,329
FoolsPrussia-"he disagreement on that vote was about making Jerusalem the symbolic capital of Israel, not returning God to the official platform."

The part about Jerusalem was Amendment two. Amendment ONE that they were voting on was add to the platform the following line: "Page 32, Line 48: We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of the God-given potential."

If you`re going to try and point out someone elses ignorance, make sure you have your facts straight.

markust123-"A lie repeated"

You need to get your facts straight, also.
0
Reply
Male 2,513
Said it before and i`ll say it again.

Ron Paul would`ve been our new president if the repubs weren`t such A-holes. So, long live president Obama

Stupid ass repubs
0
Reply
Male 884
I see what they lost by doing that but what, exactly, did they gain?
0
Reply
Male 4,283
"...the disagreement on that vote was about making Jerusalem the symbolic capital of Israel, not returning God to the official platform..."

That is the power of opinion media. A lie repeated by a trusted source enough times becomes truth. What people are stating is opinion but it certainly isn`t theirs. The "opinion" was planted in their heads like so many of the other lies the left and right is brainwashed into believing. I know I`m a broken record with this but it sickens me to see America being divided so bad by partisan politics.
0
Reply
Male 4,283
After the flood of anti-Obama/anti-DNC videos this week and the lack of anti-Romney/anti-RNC videos last week I almost had a heart attack when I saw this title. Thank you. If we`re going to make fun of politics on IAB we need to make fun of both sides. They are both equally worthy of our mockery. And the people who believe a lot of the sensational lies are also equally worthy of our mockery.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
`And this is different from the Democratic Voice vote on returning God to the platform how?`

That was embarassing. A total joke. BUT, the disagreement on that vote was about making Jerusalem the symbolic capital of Israel, not returning God to the official platform. (Contrary to popular opinion here, I am not a Democrat)
0
Reply
Male 1,471
@CodeJockey: They probably won`t.. that would mean that they couldn`t script the result of the "poll" beforehand.. Moving power from the top leaders to the people would be a pretty stupid decision by the top leaders, don`t you think ?
0
Reply
Female 1,515
@ patchgrabber
What i think it means is that the RNC can replace delegates with their own appointed delegates (people with the viewpoint they want). Essentially ensuring that the states are not represented properly (i.e. what the people actually want).
0
Reply
Male 5,608
"they adopt resolutions by `applause -o-meter`?"
Yes. It`s actually normal.
Someday, they will get with the Electronic Age.
By then, humans will be living in the
Age of Interplanetary Exploration and Colonization...
0
Reply
Male 5,608
"And this is different from the Democratic Voice vote on returning God to the platform how?"
Not terribly different but, one hell-of-a-lot more important.
That look of "fu*k you people" didn`t help.
0
Reply
Male 701
they adopt resolutions by `applause -o-meter`?
0
Reply
Male 7,329
And this is different from the Democratic Voice vote on returning God to the platform how?

(Oh, it`s Republicans, so it`s `bad`. I forgot how that works).
0
Reply
Male 5,811
Not surprising. They`ve been ignoring Ron Paul since the Republican candidate debates. Now I`m not a huge fan of some of Paul`s policies, but fair is fair and he should have the same opportunities as whoever the RNC picks as their golden boy. I`m also not quite understanding this veto power thing. Does this mean that someone in the RNC can just veto delegates` votes?
0
Reply
Female 1,515
At first i didn`t know wtf was going on, but damn, that`s messed up. For a country that prides themselves on democracy, the US just seems to be screwing the pooch on that topic.
0
Reply
Male 380
Embarrassing...........
0
Reply
Male 4,746
They`re not even trying to cover it up anymore.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
Not rationalizing here. THAT was total BS
0
Reply
Male 3,894
Mmmmm, what a mess.
0
Reply
Male 2,711
Link: Republican National Convention Sham 2012 [Rate Link] - Such respect for Democracy! Let the rationalizations begin...
0
Reply