Ron Paul's forces quietly plot GOP convention revolt against McCain

Virtually all the nation's political attention in recent weeks has focused on the compelling state-by-state presidential nomination struggle between two Democrats and the potential for party-splitting strife over there.

But in the meantime, quietly, largely under the radar of most people, the forces of Rep. Ron Paul have been organizing across the country to stage an embarrassing public revolt against Sen. John McCain when Republicans gather for their national convention in Minnesota at the beginning of September.

Paul's presidential candidacy has been correctly dismissed all along in terms of winning the nomination. He was even excluded as irrelevant by Fox News from a nationally-televised GOP debate in New Hampshire.

But what's been largely overlooked is Paul's candidacy as a reflection of a powerful lingering dissatisfaction with the Arizona senator among the party's most conservative conservatives. As anticipated in late March in The Ticket, that situation could be exacerbated by today's expected announcement from former Republican Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia for the Libertarian Party's presidential nod, a slot held by Paul in 1988.

Never mind Ralph Nader, Republican and Democratic parties both face ...

... potentially damaging internal splits that could cripple their chances for victory in a narrow vote on Nov. 4.

Just take a look at recent Republican primary results, largely overlooked because McCain locked up the necessary 1,191 delegates long ago. In Indiana, McCain got 77% of the recent Republican primary vote, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, who've each long ago quit and endorsed McCain, still got 10% and 5% respectively, while Paul took 8%.

On the same May 6 in North Carolina, McCain received less than three-quarters of Republican votes (74%), while Huckabee got 12%, Paul 7% and Alan Keyes and No Preference took a total of 7%.

Pennsylvania was even slightly worse for the GOP's presumptive nominee, who got only 73% to a combined 27% for Paul (16%) and Huckabee (11%).

As Politico.com's Jonathan Martin noted recently, at least some of these results are temporary protest votes in meaningless primaries built on lingering affection for Huckabee and suspicion of McCain.

Given the long-since settled GOP race, thousands of other Republicans in these states, who might have put up with a McCain vote, crossed over to vote in the more exciting Democratic primaries, on their own for Sen. Barack Obama or at the urging of talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, who sought to support Hillary Clinton and prolong Democratic bloodletting.

According to a recent Boston Globe tally, Paul has a grand total of 19 Republican delegates to Romney's 260, Huckabee's 286 and McCain's 1,413.

In the last three months, Paul's forces, who donated $34.5 million to his White House effort and upward of a million total votes, have, as The Ticket has noted, been fighting a series of guerrilla battles with party establishment officials at county and state conventions from Washington and Missouri to Maine and Mississippi. Their goal: to take control of local committees, boost their delegate totals and influence platform debates.

Paul, for instance, favors a drastically reduced federal government, abolishing the Federal Reserve, ending the Iraq war immediately and withdrawing U.S. troops from abroad.

They hope to demonstrate their disagreements with McCain vocally at the convention through platform fights and an attempt to get Paul a prominent speaking slot. Paul, who's running unopposed in his home Texas district for an 11th House term, still has some $5 million in war funds and has instructed his followers that their struggle is not about a single election, but a long-term revolution for control of the Republican Party.

So eager are they to follow their leader's words, that Paul's supporters have driven his new book, "The Revolution: A Manifesto," to the top of several bestseller lists.

While Paul has consistently refused a third-party bid, he has vowed not to endorse McCain, a refusal mirrored by hundreds of his supporters who have left comments on The Ticket in recent weeks. And, no doubt, they'll flock back here today to spread the gospel below.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Photos: Associated Press and RonPaul.com

Comments

[RPgirl-Illinois]

Not one word here about the CFR/SPP/NAU plans which anyone of The Three Amigos will implement with your vote, along with the “Amero.” My vote will be for Ron Paul, the only candidate for “We, the People” and against those anti-U.S.A. plans!

[Benjamin Harrison]

This government has grown too big and the speed at which it grows is increasing. Liberty is dead in the United States. Americans won't vote for Ron Paul because they don't remember what it was like to be free. All they know is Big Brother. The tyrant must be brought down.

[RonPaul Supporter]

Let's add it up:

- Anyone who proclaims their enthusiasm for 100 more years of a war (that was sold via massive deception) will NEVER get my vote.
- McCain supports preemptive war, a doctrine which is a danger to the entire world.
- McCain is soft on illegal immigration and therefore does not deserve to be our next president.
- McCain's voting record shows that he does not support the Right to Bear Arms
- A vote for McWarmonger is a sure way to perpetuate the failed policies in Iraq that are hurting our economy and killing the value of our dollar

Ron Paul is the ONLY guy from any party who is talking sense about these and other key issues. It may be a very long-term, generational battle, but those who believe in FREEDOM and returning America to Constitutional principles will never give up. He's got my vote, no matter who else is running...

[Paul]

"World War II ended our ability to be an isolationist country. We are now in a world economy, regardless of what Ron Paul wants. To become isolationist would cause a sever depression, and a collapse of our economy. "

Ron Paul has, time and time again, stated that his policy is trade with every willing country.

"(3) Change our form of government, this is really a pig in a poke. Our country is the only form of government with a constitution where the power rests in the people."

Yes, it was founded to be so but it is not so now- and Ron Paul has said, time and time again, that we need to return to that form of government created and intended buy the Founding Fathers.

Paul

[Warren Wilson]

Hal: Read Ron's book, and then tell me he is a liberal. OK? There is a difference between "ignorant" and "stupid." I want to give you the benefit of the doubt.

[Rexblade]

Its kind of scary to read some of these who think Ron Pauls platform is "just idiotic". What is so crazy about not invading countries under the false pretense of national security? When in the end all we have done is made weapons contractors and foreign oil companies even richer. We now have just about destroyed our dollar and the government has granted themselves more executive power that we are just about living in a police state. And were no safer in fact we are more hated then ever world wide. I think we all have figured out what the Iraq invasion was really all about. And if you haven't figured it out then your listening to far to much Bill-O. The media went out of their way to keep Pauls platform from being publicly discussed. Why do you think no one who has the medias attention is talking about monetary policy? The last time there was any change there was JFK and a few months later he was murdered. Shortly after that the power to print the money was returned to the FED. Guess thats just one of those coincidences probably means nothing right? If people still don't get it then
I hope they are paying attention. Every problem were facing in the United States is only going to get worse and its not liberals and its not conservatives that are causing it. Its these corporations that have monopolized virtually every major news/entertainment source in this country since 1920. Then together with the oil companies and bomb makers and political elites they have decided our foreign policy. If anyone really thinks this is how it should be in America then they should really read the constitution. THE ONLY CANDIDATE WHO WILL GIVE US CHANGE IS RON PAUL. Any of the others will be more government and more of the same. Sure some countries in the world have it worse , does that mean we should wait until it gets that bad before we do something?

TO HAL- the government has been systematically doing away with our constitution. In case you didnt know and that is the problem. Your "careful investigation" was maybe a bit to careful. You seemed to avoid the whole definition of conservative values. 12billion a month to drive a Humvee around, oppress civilians and get blown up by insurgents isnt to conservative. If you think that a country can just invade others or meddle covertly to try to destabilize governments just to gain control of its resources (why do you think Iran is the way it is? We performed terrorist acts on them before Bin Laden was even born. All because the president of Iran at the time would not give BP a monopoly on their oil fields. Then we along with MI6 proceeded to do it all over the world. Operation Gladio look it up) The TV remote is a terrible way to do research. "the Constitution is under threat and Ron Paul wants to change or eliminate the keystone of our freedom." I gotta scratch my head at that do you even know who Ron Paul is? HE IS THE CHAMPION OF THE CONSTITUTION.

[John McSame]

Wow, 30 million bucks for 19 delegates? What a good use of your Paul donations, neo-libs. Keep battling windmills and putting home-made signs on your orange vans. It doesn't matter if you split the GOP, because nobody is going to vote for me or give me money anyway. I am looking forward to everyone seeing my angry side and that voting for me is a vote for a 3rd Bush term.

John McSame.
bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.

[Joe Cruz]

Hey Hal just to note, Paul is not against trading in the world economy. He has stated numerous times that he would rather trade withe a country then bomb them. I think the isolationism you're talking about is his non-interventionist military policy. While America has, and hopefully will continue to prosper from world trade, it now faces economic pressures in the form of a declining dollar and general resentment from other countries like China. I'm not saying the war is totally at fault for the economic downturn we're in. What I am saying is that if our foreign policy did not include wars based on lies, coup de tat's of leaders we don't agree with, and ties with countries that are just as militant as pre 9/11 Iraq then we might have more leverage in the world economy, and would not be at the mercy of the oil barrens in teh middle east who would love nothing more than to see america go bankrupt filling up our cars (not to mention the oil barrens in our own country who pocket our grief).
Your point on earmarking is well said, but if I lived in Dr. Paul's district and knew that my elected official passed up on money that could benefit me and my community then chances are he wouldn't be getting my vote in future elections.
As far as changing our form of government, Dr. Paul has advocated simply following the rules of our government, ie: The Constitution, rather than using its interpretation to validate personal gains of corrupt officials or special interest groups.
The energy crisis is not going ot be fixed by any of the 4 remaining candidates, as it is not in their hands. Short of going Socialist and mandating a set price for gasoline there is no relief in site for us- and setting the price would be short lived as oil companies would still be paying exorbitant prices to the previously mentioned barrons (OPEC). To truly solve the energy crisis we need to settle our in house economic issues such as growing debts to foregin countries and rapid devaluation of the dollar. By doing this America will be able to exert more leverage in international markets.
Finally, the war is more of a matter of opinion than anything, as there is no proof either way to support a sound argument. We now know that the basis for entering Iraq was not founded. The war presents an economic as well as social dilemna for our country as it will continue our plunge into debt and at the same time only further fuel the motivation for future terrorist attacks. I believe Dr. Paul mentioned in the debates something like the following analogy: If China were to invade Mexico for a war on "terror" and put military bases in Texas, would we simply let those bases stand without resistance? While to some in our country the war seems just, those in the MIddle East who were not necessarily terrorists to begin with can udnerstandably see our actions as outrageous and disrespectful. (I have family in the military, I respect the soldiers, I wish them all well because they are doing their jobs and doing damn good for the circumstances so please don't label me as "anti-troops")
While there may be flaws with Dr. Paul, I think the same can be said for each candidate, it just comes down to who you agree with. Just because there are 2 major party candidates does not mean the decision that voting presents has to be dichotomous. I excercise my right to vote by giving it to who I think will run the country the best. I Hope to God everyone else in the country votes for a candidate they truly believe in rather than a vote based on popularity.

[lark]

Mr. Malcolm, how instrumental have you been in informing the citizens of Greater Los Angeles about the insidious, underlying intent... the sad modern-day reality... behind LA Agenda 21 (and the supremacy of communitarian law), I wonder?

Has this subject been beyond your particular purview? A search of the LA Times website for these exact keywords turned up... not a thing... nada... zilch.

I see you are one of the few at the LA Times assigned the task of agitating for GOP dissension within its ranks, while most eyeballs remain focused on this meaningless Democratic Party horse race.

Why do you think that is?

Obama and Clinton are both avowed communitarians beholden to the central planners who claim slave-master status over our government representatives and the U.S. economy. McCain, like the other two, actually likes being led around by his nose, all the while pretending he is a gallant military-political man "of principle." Just ask Senator Lieberman and Mrs. McCain, his wife. Ask Mrs. Clinton and her husband. Ask Mr. Obama who ALL these other candidates MUST pander to in order to secure their Party's nomination.

And these same elite, psychopathic internationalists and warmongers are merely the enablers for the real controlling influences... behind the real-world plotting... of LA Agenda 21, for instance - yet few Angelenos, and few patriotic Americans for that matter, know a cotton-picking thing about it.

This is precisely illustrative of the reason why Big Media puppeteers like the LA Times and their working lackeys doing the dirty work are a clear and present danger to the American Republic and ALL its citizens: They no longer report the impartial news of the day without some pre-determined outcome - a secretive, centrally-planned agenda - already in mind. And they certainly don't dance to the tune of the great unwashed, now do they?

Once the American people learn that Big Media is a CIA asset "owned" by the same people who own these three "anointed" candidates AND "their" monetary system, the quicker they'll realize their Constitution, American sovereignty... their rights and their liberties... are in very grave danger...

... Then the sooner they'll realize who the actual conspirators have been that worked behind the scenes so diligently to enslave them, once and for all.

Which is why I have to ask, "Are you a journalist for The Third Way", or are you a "man of principle" like McCain? Do you have an honest affection for liberty or truth? Or do you think you'll be somehow "protected" too?

Ron Paul and his supporters are not going away, Mr. Malcolm. Their numbers will only increase exponentially in the aftermath of what "our" treasonous central planners are deliberately doing to us, I promise.

Until such time as the Fed is abolished, the power of Big Media is finished, and the monopolists so beloved by communitarians are positively undone... Ron Paul's star will continue to shine... with or without him in the White House.

Perhaps your real job is to help identify the "terrorists" to the status quo "appointees" in Homeland Security and the CIA - would that be the reason you write of Ron Paul being "correctly dismissed" by deliberately dumbed-down voters who still think we live in a democratically-controlled never-neverland run by We, the People?

Is this why you associate terms like "revolt", "plot", and other scary-sounding code words with Paul's clarion call... albeit, practically now silenced by the underhanded mainstream media... for a constitutionalists' simple message... of peace, prosperity, and freedom?

Or is it the case that you and your paymasters merely fear the wrath of the American people once they've finally wised-up to your disgraceful subterfuge?

[Sir Jahmez]

All the anti-Paulites are calling Ron Paul a kook, but never back up their claim. If following the constitution the way it was written is being kooky, then call me and a million other voters kooky. Also, you'll have to call the 1500 students that show up for Ron Paul at every college campus kooks too.
McInsane favors our troops staying in 130 countries, bombing other countries whenever we feel like it, and allowing secretive executive orders to continue from the white house. Torture, secretive courts, secret prisons? No problem..after all we're in the war on terror remember? The 100 year war on an idea?

If you still aren't sold and believe what you've been sold by the MSM or Hannity / Rush, read RP's #1 bestseller 'The Revolution - a manifesto'. If then, you still don't believe, than you should live in a state-controlled society.

Ron Paul 2008

[carl]

I'll be your president!!! I'll put in a fair tax, adoption not abortion, prayer in schools and smack all of the degenerate kids and their parents, feed the poor but not those who simply don't want to work, why can't the government take all of that welfare money-go out into the middle of the country and start factories to sell to wal-mart and use people in the inner cities to populate those towns and give them a chance at being somebody productive? We can unleash the dogs of war in Iraq-get out and dare anyone to mess with us. We can then drill for oil in utah, colorado, south and north dakota, montana...etc. No more corporate welfare or any other handouts to anyone. America has proven itself the world over many times and we need to tell people that we're just not interested anymore in doing that. We can develop our missile shields and defenses and sit back and pray and everything will turn out okay. That is until Armeggedon.

[Mike Hunt]

There are so many pathetically stupid , wrong , distorted and outright lies in the posts above, I don't know where to begin Joesef Goebels would be proud!!

With such fanatical believers, dupes and spinners , it makes me want to start a religion...or sell swamp land or a bridge or sumpthin

[ziggrl]

Live free or die!!! I'm voting Ron Paul. I REFUSE to vote the lesser of evils in this election.

The three that are left are just some paper pushing senators that wouldn't know how to run a kindergarten class.

[Tominellay]

Hal (at 2:14), in my opinion:
Your comment #1 misleads re earmarks, which add $0 to appropriations; Paul supports spending cuts, trimmer government.
Your comment #2 re isolationism misleads; Paul is for non-intervention, not isolation.
Your comment #3 re changing our form of government misleads; Paul is for government according to the Constitution for the United States of America.
Your comment #4 re the energy crisis misleads; Paul has a clear platform issue re dismantling the Department of Energy and allowing the free market to solve the "energy crisis", which can be demonstrated to be a product of unconstitutional governmental actions.
Your comment #5 re war with "Islamic Terrorism" is misleading; Dr. Paul favors capturing and punishing Bin Laden, does not favor nation building in Iraq.

I support Ron Paul for President of the United States of America.

[Eric]

Hal,
1) I haven't heard of anyone who has offered a solution for earmarks. Paul however always seems to vote on bills based on his constitutionalist beliefs though if you could show me a bill he passed that was against his beliefs and mostly because of earmarks, i'd love to know.
2) How exactly did world war 2 start a world economy? Did we sell a bunch of war bonds to foreign countries/citizens that we still haven't paid back? The great thing about the US isn't its freedom or its people, it's its land. We have everything we need to survive and prosper as a country within it. We became a great nation by relying on our own resources not by becoming slaves to foreign entities. But hey if you really want to switch to a world economy why don't we adopt the euro since that seems to be what most first world countries use now not to mention it's much stronger than the US dollar?
3) Who said anything about changing our form of government? Pauls ideas are to stick to the same form of government the founders intended on and which we've had for the past 227 years (just with a lot of the added fat cut out).
4) Actually he has addressed the energy crises. He suggests that the free market sort it out. This is probably biggest concern about his policy however I haven't seen our federal government doing anything helpful about it so maybe he's right.
5) World War 4? What happened to 3? The 'war' with islamic terrorism is far from a world war however. The people in power now and the media would like you to believe that its a world war however many other countries don't see it like we potray them seeing it. Lots of other countries see it as a problem that needs a better resolution, not a war. There would probably even be a resolution at this point if we weren't over there stirring up more trouble. If the US withdrew from the world, we wouldn't be handing it over to the 'bin ladens', we would be letting the rest of the world sort out their problem however they see fit. On a side note however the Bin Ladins are a rich family closely associated with the Saudi Royal family who the US currently not only does business with but protects. There's a big difference between these 'bin ladens' and the nazi's of world war 2. The nazis became the ruling party of a country who then used the country to attack other countries. The 'bin ladens' find random people throughout the world to attack some other piece of the world so that they can become feared and/or respected. They aren't trying to take over the world, just convert it. No they shouldn't be killing anybody but they should have the right to try and convince people that their beliefs are correct (again not through killing people). We americans are doing it, the christians have been doing it for the past 2000 years... it's our right as americans to have freedom of speech which we should hope that the rest of the world has. Now if someone goes and kills someone to convince people of their beliefs, we should work with their local government to apprehend these people or send in a small group of people to capture them. Sending in an entire countries army however is not the way to do it (as we have seen). It's easy to evade capture when you have an entire army attacking the country that you're in rather than a small covert group of people going in to capture someone.

[Al]

I find it funny that people on here who disagree with Ron Paul are talking about how immature and wacko his supporters supposedly are, but you are putting insults in your responses. Think to yourself, how mature is that?

In the beginning people were talking about how miniscule Paul was in the race, but then those same people are talkinga bout how Obama will win if Paul supporters don' tback McCain... Which is it guys, are there not enough of us, or is there enough of us to help Obama win? You can't have it both ways.

I know what it's like to have to just choose between the lesser of two evils and the jealousy that would come against people who actually have someone and something they can believe in.

People can make fun of Paul like children, it won't change the fact that he's the only candidate running who has 30 years to back up his pro-Constitution stance.

[Willy Brown]

Paul & his masses are one sandwhich shy of a full picnic basket.

[ROBIN COMP]

I AM SO DISSATISFIED WITH THE LIKES OF A JOHN MCLAME UNTIL "YES" I WOULD CONSIDER GIVING MY VOTE TO RON PAUL IF HE COULD CONVINCE MITT ROMNEY TO RUN AS VP. THAT IS A TICKET THAT I WOULD VOTE FOR.

[Drew]

three reasons Ron Paul is crazy:

1) His stance on abortion. He thinks that the government should stay out of peoples lives. So would you please explain why the govt should be making such a deeply personal choice for every US citizen?

2) His plan to abolish the IRS, the Federal Reserve, and a great many more agencies. Does anyone really know what will happen if all these controls are removed, especially if they are all removed simultaneously? I think it could easily derail the entire country...

3) Since he is so far out of line with the Republican values that the party is interested in promoting, why doesn't he just be honest with himself and run as an independent? He'd have a better chance in November.

But I support Ron Paul's ideas to some degree. The government and the American people (all of us) have been irresponsible with setting limits on spending, lying to ourselves about programs like social security, and basically just pushing our money problems forwards into the future. And his candidacy does the best job of tackling this issue.

[robincomp]

i would consider voting for paul if he could convince mitt romney to be vp.

[OldHeretic]

Correctly supports Ron Paul

Correctly supports Bob Barr

Correctly Questions Mc Cain

Correctly Opposes GW Bush

Correctly Conservative

[masteryoda]

Anti Ron Paul comments/commentors = ignorant, uninformed fools.

History and economics education you need.

[todd]

The leader of Iran won't attack Israel...that's neo-con FUD.

As far as the military...

http://ronpauldelaware.wordpress.com/2007/07/16/military-favors-ron-paul-over-mccain/

[Duane]

I have a question.

Ron Paul stated he would not tun as a third party candidate so as to not split the Republican vote.

His 'supporters' now say they will vote for him anyway, effectively giving Obama the presidency.

Who was it you were supporting again?

[jackie]

Enemies of the Republic. Are you so departmentalized you think you will not be affected? mindless. unAmerican. Your money will be worthless. You have not right to life, just like all of us. Inform yourselves on what is happening.

Andrew, you forgot the I N on "correctly".