RPVNetwork

Grassroots Network of the Republican Party of Virginia

Problem: The Grassroots Ignored Again. What To Do About It.

These problems do not go away until all concerned understand the importance of maintaining the party's autonomous structure apart from the candidates. One of the primary duties of the party is to be a watchdog to ensure that the candidates stick to our conservative principles.

The candidates and elected officials serve us, the grassroots, the people. We, in the balance, select the party leaders who keep things in check and run the day to day for us from the local committee, to the Congressional districts to the SCC.

If the party officials and representatives are not doing your bidding, then the grassroots have been derelict. There is more to it than just knocking doors, making calls and doing events or blogging. There are accountability standards that must be enforced.

The power flows from the grassroots upward, if you feel you are being ignored, then do something about it, shed the shackles, the grassroots have bound themselves with, through complacency. Tell your representatives at the Congressional District and SCC level to change or be changed.

There are two parts to the equation. Principled candidates alone are not enough. You need the principled party organization to be an effective go between for grassroots and the candidates. If you let the quality of the party organization slide or you fail to hold it accountable at all levels, then it won't be long before the quality of the candidates or the job they do deteriorates.

The good news is that, it can be fixed. Let the candidates know what you expect from them in return for your efforts and start paying attention to your party organization and holding the players accountable. If they won't cooperate, replace them.

The party and the body of elected officials are no different than having two houses in the Congress or General Assembly or the checks and balances built into the Republic. The idea is a fair and balanced representation of the people, the grassroots.

The party being the representative of the grassroots, enforces with the candidates and elected officials that the will of the grassroots is done. Don't forget that the elected official has his own survival at stake and represents all of the voters from his jurisdiction so at times your best interests can be at odds. with his. That is why you need a strong party to protect your interests.

The party(RPV) has forsaken its autonomy and lost its ability to maintain the checks and balances we so dearly need. The result is an ethic where the politicians control the party and feel that we work for them instead of vice versa.

Yesterday the politicians and their supporters won, the grass roots and the party lost!

It is time to throw off the shackles and do something about it. Take party building, as seriously as campaigning for candidates and it won't be long before our house is set right again.

The question of the day is "Who's in charge?". You all know the answer, of course, it is the grassroots! Well, what are you waiting for? Start acting like it.

Views: 43

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

When you say that the majority of the NOVA SCC is representative of the folks in the grassroots, what are you implying? That the recent Convention in the 10th that produced 3 new SCC members was somehow representative of the grassroots up here?
Let's shatter a myth with a little fact, shall we?
Ron Paul supporters/Libertarians-- angry with their candidate's poor showing in the National Primaries, were recruited and showed up in huge numbers to the 10th District Convention, as well as the Richmond Convention shortly after that.

Their three SCC choices from that Convention voted with Jeff.

The group that was assembled at that Convention was not necessarily what I'd call "an accurate reflection of the grassroots" up here. It looked alot more like the who's who of Paul's Libertarians, who were then joined by a large group of local republican conservatives to establish a huge majority of that Convention. I know...because I attended the Convention as was struck by the organized effort to allow Libertarians to influence the Republican path.
TBM- Not only the Tenth which broke 3 for Jeff, 2 against---the 11th broke 3 for Jeff, 1 against--the 8th broke 3 for Jeff, 1 against. I would say the grassroots from NOVA were fairly well represented.

The pro Jeff supporters in the morning at the SCC meeting were 92---The against Jeff supporters were 6.

Does it really matter what shade of conservative folks are, as long as they support and believe in the Republican Creed? Is it Ronald Reagan big tent or what?
Tom, some of these Ron Paul folks will not work with those who don't go as extreme as them. It works both ways.
If their antics give us the laughing stock of the last week in front of voters...and ultimately lose for McDonnell, you and I can see that the alternative is democrats in offices for the next ten years. They don't see that --nor do they offer an alternative if their fanatacism loses.
I'm all for pushing this episode behind us and forging together for McDonnell and Bolling. But evidently, Fredrick is going to drive this bus all the way to the crash.
Those Ron Paul delegates from the last Convention? They're gone. Maybe a handful still around.
Most of the "actual" Republicans who used to support Jeff? Gone (Think Gary Byler , here)
There is no way Jeff comes out in this run, nor is there anyway to save face for the Party by dragging this out.
This is CLEARLY about Frederick's ego...and quite frankly, if he has to drag the whole party thru the mud to stroke that, he needn't call himself a Republican on June 1.


Tom Whitmore said:
TBM- Not only the Tenth which broke 3 for Jeff, 2 against---the 11th broke 3 for Jeff, 1 against--the 8th broke 3 for Jeff, 1 against. I would say the grassroots from NOVA were fairly well represented.

The pro Jeff supporters in the morning at the SCC meeting were 92---The against Jeff supporters were 6.

Does it really matter what shade of conservative folks are, as long as they support and believe in the Republican Creed? Is it Ronald Reagan big tent or what?
The Bullet Proof Monk said-

Tom, some of these Ron Paul folks will not work with those who don't go as extreme as them. It works both ways.
If their antics give us the laughing stock of the last week in front of voters...and ultimately lose for McDonnell, you and I can see that the alternative is democrats in offices for the next ten years. They don't see that --nor do they offer an alternative if their fanatacism loses.
I'm all for pushing this episode behind us and forging together for McDonnell and Bolling. But evidently, Fredrick is going to drive this bus all the way to the crash.
Those Ron Paul delegates from the last Convention? They're gone. Maybe a handful still around.
Most of the "actual" Republicans who used to support Jeff? Gone (Think Gary Byler , here)
There is no way Jeff comes out in this run, nor is there anyway to save face for the Party by dragging this out.
This is CLEARLY about Frederick's ego...and quite frankly, if he has to drag the whole party thru the mud to stroke that, he needn't call himself a Republican on June 1.

TBM your statements above, claiming that the Ron Paul people are gone, shows just how out of touch you are. If you were doing your homework you would see that "The Campaign for Liberty" which has a group on this site, has a Virginia Chapter that claims membership of over 3,000, and they are still very active. I promise you will see many many of them at the Convention. That is a little fact that you have obviously missed. I do not belong to The Campaign for Liberty, nor do I agree with the most of their positions on issues, nor their tactics, but you are dreaming if you discount them. I have heard and seen them come out in large numbers, and have also seen them donate to their "causes" with mega bucks.
Unfortunately, they are about to cost McDonnell in his race, then. This should be over, and we should be uniting behind a conservative and principled Chair who can bring the win for McDonnell above his own desires.
Frederick has a history going back to Ga. college days of "my way, or I'll burn it down".
Brian,

First I would say that it is nice to go to a political blog and actually find someone intelligently and respectfully debating issues and ideas rather than simply derision, name calling and other cute blog verbiage as is the case all too often on the web. I too am a life long Republican, retired military veteran (who still to this day has a McCain sign in my yard to show the world it isnt my fault) who at times wonders when I ceased to be a "true" Republican. Believe me, I've never been accused of being a Democrat as it would have been a quick way to lose a tooth. It always makes me nervous when anyone ever starts labeling anything as "true" because that is a completely subjective definition. I am a national defense hawk, a fiscal conservative who believes in economic development through low taxation, personal responsibility and strong family values. Many of my beliefs in regards to social issues are most likely in line with most others on this board however my belief is that although these issues definitely need to be in the lineup, I don't think they need to always hit leadoff. I have sat in countless county meetings and listened to us discuss these social issues for more than half of the meeting wondering why we are discussing this at the county level. The BOCS is no sooner going to debate the legalities of Roe than it will the closing of an Air Force base in Idaho. We could just as well spend our 2 hours debating nuclear proliferation on the Korean peninsula. Personally, I would rather discuss issues that are germane to the level of government we are dealing with, such as taxes, schools, economic development, roads. It has become apparent however that my attitude towards these things have made me just this side of a communist. I often wonder just how far to the right do we have to drill to find the one true Republican?
The fact is that elections are numbers driven. First one to 51 wins. I would much rather have a Senator, Congressman and Governor that I would agree with on 80% of the issues than Mark Warner, Gerry Connoly and Tim Kaine who I am sure i will disagree with almost 100% of the time. People tell me that "the base", which nobody has been able to adequately define, will simply stay home if they dont like our candidates. Well, in my view that is about the dumbest political philosophy I have ever heard. I suppose my point is, that if you don't think a "RINO" will help push your agendas or views on the direction of our beloved country, wait and see what a Democrat will do for you.
Brian,

Agreed. I think that recently the level of discourse has devolved to the point where if you believe that there are grey areas in life, you have no convictions, no moral principles etc. I simply happen to be one of the people who recognize that there are sometimes grey areas, everything is not always black and white, right or wrong. I wish life was that simple.
I agree there are grey areas in some things. In others I do not believe that there are. The problem is that if you try to step into your shadow the shadow will keep moving. As we move into the grey areas they will keep moving to areas that used to be considered black and white.

About 30 years ago sodomy was illegal in most U.S. states. Through much arguing people agreed that this was a grey area and those laws were eventually overturned. Then allowing homosexuals in the military became the grey area. That became don't ask don't tell and will soon become forced acceptance and legal protection of homosexuals in our military. We will be seeing the first GI's prosecuted for ridiculing gay teammates within 5 years. Then the formerly unthinkable gay marriage became the grey area. We are already see that those standing on the side of what is right and best for our country are being demonized for not accepting this grey area. Once this abomination is forced upon us our schools will begin teaching our children that homosexuality is normal and a choice that they will have to make. The grey area will them become paligomy and incestual marriage. There is after all more religious and historical evidence that these were once the accepted norms in some societies than gay marriage was. We will be demonized for standing against this and the grey area will move to adult child relationships. Sound crazy??? Well if you had told someone in 1950 that a man would be allowed to marry a man and adopt and raise children they would have told you that you should be institutionalized.

Should I get into the grey area on:

The Death Penalty
Gun RIghts
Abortion
Ceding our rights to the U.N.

Thanks, but I understand there are grey areas. It is damn well time for us to make the left step into the grey area so we can get it moving the right way.
Mark,

I do not disagree with you on this issue except to say that the "slippery slope" concept only guarantees that absolutely nothing gets done by either side of the political/moral spectrum. For argument sake, if you had told someone in 1950 that a black American would someday have the right to vote they would have told you the same thing. That having been said, the slippery slope concept (which is not always off the mark) has also kept the left, who we now have allowed to control nearly every level of government from instituting even the most common sensical life intiatives such as parental notification, banning partial birth abortion etc. This concept also keeps us from enacting any type of legislation that would disallow anyone from owning a complete arsenal of RPG's and Stinger missiles (exaggeration noted) because to do so means that eventually I wont be able to have my 308 for deer hunting. It is the rigidity on all sides that keeps things at a stalemate and disallows any type of common sense legislation to move forward. Just my opinion.
Excellent Mark- I love your analogy of grey areas- "If you try to step into your shadow, the shadow will keep moving and get into areas that were once considered black and white." That is what I see as the problem with moderates. As you so correctly have pointed out, there are grey areas in almost everything, if you want them to be there. The Democrats mainly argue the grey areas, which are mostly emotionally driven arguments, and call anyone who disagrees a "racist" or "hate monger" or "intellictually lazy." Hillary Clinton considers herself a "modern progressive" meaning that whatever has been proven by statistics to have not worked in the past, can now be redifined because the Liberal propagadists have successfully infiltrated the minds of many over a long period of years to mean something completely different. The moral values, which at one time made America great have eroded into "grey" areas, such as the argument for abortion. Even Pelosi, claiming to be Catholic, has said that she "really doesn't know when life begins." I have heard the argument that it is only life if the fetus can live outside of the mothers womb. Of course we have Obama now in favor of killing a child of a botched abortion, even though the child was born alive, and forcing medical personnel to perform abortions even though it is against their moral conscience.

Republicans believe in freedom, but, also believe that any freedom comes with personal responsibility, and moral obligations. The founders believed that it was necessary to have a moral society, which comes with a beliefe in a creator much bigger than any person, in order to continue to be free. With the erosion of moral values, abortion and gay marriage for example, we have become a free for all, if it feels good do it population that now has fallen prey to the onslaught of Socialism/Communism that we are rushing into full steam ahead. The Liberals have told everyone that it is OK to question those beliefs that were once not a part of the discussion.

With the onslaught of a dumbed down, liberally educated, morally devoid, class of people, over a long period of years, the "moderate" Republicans have "stepped into the shadow" and are now trying to convince some that "we must move in the direction that the Liberals have taken us into, and agree that the arguments are't settled, in order to "win elections." I'm sure that some of those same "moderates" actually believe that it is the right thing to do, and, only contribute to an ever increasing decline of our once great country. It takes a strong spine to fight against the left's movement, and to have the guts to stand up and say what is wrong and what is right, without having to be Politically Correct, and not to be seen as the party of NO. What is wrong with saying what is right, even if it offends some? The Liberal education indoctrination of our children has taken over at least a generation, and, until the Republicans see that as the main problem in our country today, they will stay in the wastelands. For Bush to have signed the "No child left behind" law, he only exacerbated the problem with Government control over our educational system. It has been proven to have never worked, and has instead created problems within a system it should naver have gotten involved with to begin with.


Mark Collins said:
I agree there are grey areas in some things. In others I do not believe that there are. The problem is that if you try to step into your shadow the shadow will keep moving. As we move into the grey areas they will keep moving to areas that used to be considered black and white.

About 30 years ago sodomy was illegal in most U.S. states. Through much arguing people agreed that this was a grey area and those laws were eventually overturned. Then allowing homosexuals in the military became the grey area. That became don't ask don't tell and will soon become forced acceptance and legal protection of homosexuals in our military. We will be seeing the first GI's prosecuted for ridiculing gay teammates within 5 years. Then the formerly unthinkable gay marriage became the grey area. We are already see that those standing on the side of what is right and best for our country are being demonized for not accepting this grey area. Once this abomination is forced upon us our schools will begin teaching our children that homosexuality is normal and a choice that they will have to make. The grey area will them become paligomy and incestual marriage. There is after all more religious and historical evidence that these were once the accepted norms in some societies than gay marriage was. We will be demonized for standing against this and the grey area will move to adult child relationships. Sound crazy??? Well if you had told someone in 1950 that a man would be allowed to marry a man and adopt and raise children they would have told you that you should be institutionalized.

Should I get into the grey area on:

The Death Penalty
Gun RIghts
Abortion
Ceding our rights to the U.N.

Thanks, but I understand there are grey areas. It is damn well time for us to make the left step into the grey area so we can get it moving the right way.
When I speak of grey areas I merely intend to point out that there are situations in which right and wrong are not clearly, unequivocally defined. I'll give an example. As a veteran and an American, I believe it is wrong to burn the American flag. No excuses, no explanations, it's wrong. I think we all would agree. Unless, and here comes the rub, I follow the US Flag manual for the proper disposition of a flag in which it stipulates burning as the proper method. In essence, it is sometimes the circumstances surrounding an activity which can determine it's relative "rightness or wrongness". Hence, the dreaded grey area.
Im no expert Brian, but I believe education has always been handled at the local level. Not until the federal government started increasing funding for local education did the national government start taking a role in setting curriculum and standards. As in all things the further the control setting gets from the people the more the final product deviates from the will of those people.

Unfortunately our education system is being ruled by two national dictators. The federal government, which is overly influenced by special interest groups, and the teachers union, which is just another union that every year fights for more pay, less work and lower accountability for its workers. The good people of Chesterfield for instance have no say in the school curriculum. They cannot call for a 10% across the board pay cut based on the current economy. They could but the teachers would strike and the schools would be shut down. They cannot pass a town ordinance sponsoring morning prayer time at school because some federal court would put a stop to it. In many places schools have had to greatly pare back religious activity such as Christmas parties and pagents because of court rulings. In Lexington Mass grade school children read a book in the class called "The Prince and the Prince" which was about a Prince who couldn't find Princess so he fell in love with another Prince. Parents were outraged but could not get the book banned. The reason the federal government got involved in local schools in the first place was because schools in minority areas were doing so poorly. Well that just couldn't be tolerated... or fixed... so they made sure they brought the schools in the suburbs down to the same level. The federal government has been meddling in the local schools ever since. No one ever took note of the fact that the schools in conservative areas usually did quite well while schools in the liberal inner city were failing. It was always blamed on other things besides the ideology of those running them.

Well it's time we push to put the running of schools back to counties, cities and towns. Disarm the teachers unions and all unions where people work directly for the public interest. If you choose to take a job as a cop, fireman, teacher etc. you understand that you are doing it because you love the work and want to work as a public servant. This will allow municipalities to get control of their budgets again. Sure maybe teachers will only get 4 weeks a year off instead of the current 4 months. I know that's tough. And teachers may occassionally get fired if half their class fails the course. In the end some school systems would do very well (in conservative areas) and others would continue to do poorly. That's freedom for you.

Brian W. Schoeneman said:
Sandy, so...who handled education before no child left behind?

Reply to Discussion

RSS

****************************

 

U.S. DEBT CLOCK

****************************

 


 

 

(sales help fund this site)

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2021   Created by Tom Whitmore.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service