Bill Dix, ‘gay marriage’ and Christians in Politics

Let me start by saying that I don’t even like the phrase, ‘gay marriage’ — it is an oxymoron.  But, like it or not we lost the battle and the war on this one. Over the years I have been involved in the process of creating GOP platform starting at the county level, all the way up to the national level. So I was saddened to see the Iowa Supreme Court and then SCOTU inflict gay marriage on the states. But the fact is, it was inevitable, we had lost the battle long before the courts stepped in. Remember 2010 when The FAMiLY LEADER stepped up and led the fight to successfully remove three of the justices who had ruled in favor of gay marriage? Well fast forward to 2012 and the attempt to remove more of the offending justices fizzled out hardly any notice.

I am writing this today because the resignation of Senate Majority Leader Bill Dix, after a video surfaced showing him apparently kissing a lobbyist in a bar, reminded me of why we lost the gay marriage battle.

We lost because we were fighting the wrong battle!

We spent so much time trying to make the world more Christ-like that in many cases we failed to be Christ-like ourselves and the world saw our hypocrisy.

If I had a magic wand to fix one thing about marriage in the US, I would not use it to end gay marriage  … I would use it to assure that our marriages,  the marriages of those of us who claim to be Christ-followers actually follow the pattern defined in the Bible.

The problem is that we who claim to be Christ-followers have not been much different than those who claim no faith in the way we treat marriage. I know that Dix had his critics among Christian conservatives but he positioned himself as a fighter for traditional values. Today there have been lots of cries of hypocrisy from those on the left .. and they are not wrong.

While I am not happy about the courts’ decisions on gay marriage, I sort of don’t care. What I mean is that I don’t expect people in the world without Christ to uphold Christian values — why should they? But those who claim the name of Christ — my guys — I hold them to a higher standard.

The real challenge is that I am one of those guys, and I am far from perfect but as one who has voluntarily put himself in the fray — I need to be held to a higher standard as well!

The 2016 State Central Committee Election

The author – SCC Member David Chung (HawkeyeGOP)

To my Republican friends in the First Congressional District. I have had the honor of representing you on the Republican Party of Iowa State Central Committee now for 8  years. There have certainly been challenges during those eight years, but I have also had a number of tangible accomplishments on the committee that I would like to enumerate for you.

Transparency

They say you should never respond to a situation in the heat of the moment, in anger. But that’s why I got elected to the State Central Committee in the first place. Before I joined the committee, elections for chairman were done in secret. Those of us watching from the cheap seats, those who were not on the committee didn’t even know who was running for chair. The SCC voted by secret ballot and even members did not know the outcome of the vote! The last time this was done, the Vauditor, state auditor David Vaudt, counted the ballots and declared the winner without sharing the actual count with the committee. The committee, then voted to make the results unanimous! Out in the counties no one even knew who was running much less the vote totals.

So, when the SCC re-elected Ray Hofmann as chairman after a disastrous election cycle I was so mad that I couldn’t even speak to my friends on the committee. I ran for a seat and vowed to bring transparency to the process. (I still favor a secret ballot.) But in the next election, we had an open process with candidates actually campaigning and meeting with activists across the state. We had an open candidate forum in Des Moines and as soon as the vote was completed, Republicans across the state were able to  see the results on social media. I kept my promise to bring the process out of the smoky back rooms and into the light. I supported transparency before it was cool.

Neutrality

From my very first election I promised that as an SCC member I would not publicly endorse nor accept any money from any candidate or any organization trying to influence the Republican Party of Iowa. Some of you may read this and think that this is no big deal … that’s what we expect from our SCC members. I agree, but that has not always been the case. In the 2012 caucuses, the SCC included three of the top Iowa campaign officials for a single candidate as well as at least one other paid presidential campaign staffer and one or two members had publicly endorsed presidential candidates. Also, during my tenure a party chairman was on the salary of a PAC trying to gain influence in Iowa.

I did not run for SCC as a crusader for neutrality, rather I promised to be personally neutral and have always done so. Every cycle, Iowa’s First-in-the-Nation caucuses are under attack and the impression that the deck is stacked at the state party doesn’t help that. To remain first in the nation, Iowa must remain welcoming to all candidates.

The current SCC is the first one to pledge that all employees, officers and members would remain neutral in caucuses and primaries. I was neutral before it was cool.

The Districts

In one of my campaign speeches for SCC I said:

I don’t want to that guy from Des Moines who comes to your county and tells you what the State Party wants you to do … I want to be that guy from the First Congressional District who goes to Des Moines and tells the State Party what the counties in the First Congressional District want them to do!

For nearly two decades, long before I was on the SCC, I have been fighting to do away with the Friday night nominating conventions for District Delegate to the National Convention. Many of you will remember that every four years the District Convention reconvenes in Des Moines the night before the state convention to elect delegates and alternates to the National Convention. I have long argued, that the proper place to do district business is in the district at the district convention.

You may ask, why did we have these Friday night conventions in the first place? Wasn’t the attendance always significantly lower than at the District Conventions? That is precisely the point. Because many people would have had to take a day off of work and het a hotel room in Des Moines, Friday night attendance was always low. This situation allowed a small highly organized (unnamed here) group to get their supporters out and year after tear they have controlled who gets to go to the National Convention.

I was the first and most consistent voice on the SCC to call for an end to this charade and finally, after eight years, as chairman of the SCC org committee, I have convinced enough members and there will no more Friday night nominating convention!!!! Each congressional district gets to elect three delegates and three alternates to the national convention and those elections will happen at our district convention in Cedar Falls. I supported the districts before it was cool.

[Now, before you get too excited, adding those two elections and an election for District Elector (our representative to the Electoral College) to the convention has the potential to dramatically complicate the district convention, so I am open to suggestions o how to handle this. We are currently considering supporting the districts with some type of electronic voting or reporting system for convention. –DC]

National Delegates

Historically every State Convention committee, rules, platform …, has met in Des Moines the week after the district conventions. Each committee’s report is then published in the State Convention tabloid and mailed to every delegate the week before convention. That is each committee but one … the nominating committee. The nominating committee is the one that puts together a slate of at-large delegates and alternates to the National Convention. With a few notable exceptions, this slate has traditionally been approved by the State Convention without modification.

So how does the nominating committee work? Well, they meet the night before the State Convention, after the Districts do their nominations. Their members are elected that night by the districts and they meet in secret to come up with a slate of candidates. Then the slate is posted in the convention hall and approved the next day.

But let me tell you how it really works — I know because before I was on the SCC the powers that be recruited me to chair this committee and I did so at one of our state conventions.

What really happens is that there is an insiders cabal that recruits national delegates and alternates. Because the nominating committee is elected at the Friday night conventions with much smaller turnouts, the cabal is able to organize and control who is on the nominating committee. the year I chaired it, we met, after midnight, in  a smokey back room and the cabal made their slate. The rules required that it be posted in the convention hall, and it was … one two 8 1/2 by 11 pages in the back of the hall for 2000 convention goers to read. I read the names from the podium and no one really had an opportunity to figure out who these people were or vet them.

This year the nominating committee will meet be elected at the District Conventions. They will meet in Des Moines with the other committees and publish their results in the tabloid before State Convention. Every one will have a chance to see who has been nominated before the vote.

I have been fighting this since the year I was part of the cabal. I was for an open process before it was cool.

[The election of national delegates has been the most contentious part of every quadrennial State Convention. I am pretty sure that this year will be no different. I still have not come up with the right way to do this … but I will always prefer doing things in the light of day than in the dark of night. –DC ]

Support for our Candidates

I get asked a lot about litmus tests for candidates. When I ran for SCC, I promised you that the only candidate litmus test I would have was you … the Republicans of the district that elected me. The litmus test is the primary, vowed to support every candidate that you (we) nominate thought he primary process. I do not know how one could claim to be a leader in the party and not support the choices made by the party’s grassroots.

Before re-districting, when I was in the old Second District, I and others felt that one of our previous National Committeewomen had precipitated un unprovoked attack on our congressional candidate. I announced publicly that I would bring a motion of censure to the SCC. This was difficult because I had personally campaigned for this person at the previous state convention. This turned into a pretty big issue, the blogs and even radio talk shows were abuzz with what was going to happen. There was a raucous crowd at the SCC meeting in Des Moines. Many people wanted this to be a roll call vote and were urging me to call for one. They wanted to use it as a way to put pressure on other members to support my call for censure. I am generally a pretty persuasive guy, had I called for a roll call with the gallery watching I am sure I would have prevailed. But I did not want to pressure other members to take a public stand. I felt compelled to do so personally but I wanted others to be free to vote their conscience. In the end the censure motion passed. The important part of that motion was not even the individual involved, rather it was a statement that the leaders of the party must support, or at the very least not attack those people that the party nominates. Failing to do so is to break faith with the grassroots. I was for supporting our candidates before it was cool.

Party Leadership

Leadership matters. As I wrote in the beginning of this post, I ran for SCC because I was frustrated with the leadership choices made by the then seated committee. In 2012 I was one of only a couple of SCC members not to be swept out of office by a slate of people that took our state party by storm. They managed to stack our national convention delegates and control out state’s vote at the National Convention in Tampa and they affected a near total takeover of the state party. They elected their own officers and hired their own staff.

For two years I was part of the loyal opposition. Finally, I was the first SCC member to publicly, on WHO Radio’s Simon Conway Show, call for our party chairman to resign. Imagine my surprise when he actually did resign! He did not resign as a result of my calling for him to, it occurred some time later 🙂

After this group was swept out of office at the 2014 District Conventions, the lame duck SCC elected chairman that they knew would be unacceptable to the incoming SCC. They essentially dared us to remove them.

As one of the few incumbent members, I helped organize the coup to remove the chair and co-chair. I volunteered to approach them privately and give them the opportunity to write their own exit narratives. Something like,

I was elected to maintain the party during this difficult transition and I am going to step aside and allow the new committee to elect a chairman. I am ready to spend more time with my family … it has been a pleasure to servr.

When in our first meeting the chairman proactively stated that he would not resign, it fell to me to publicly announce that we had the votes and he would be removed.

The current party leadership has far exceeded its fundraising goals, helped repair relationships with the counties and the national party and our electoral success speaks for itself. I was for a change in leadership before it was cool.

Caucus

To be honest with you, the 2012 caucus was successful … right up until the time that we reported the results on caucus night. The results really were too close to call and we should have waited until a canvass of the official forms before declaring a winner. As it was we later had to declare a different winner.

After 2012, I served on the Caucus Review Committee. In particular, I chaired the technology subcommittee. If we are going to remain first-in-the-nation the 2016 caucuses had to be successful. Given the scrutiny we were under, good enough was not going to be good enough.

Almost all of the recommendations of the committee at large and the technology subcommittee were enacted and enabled us to have a hugely successful caucus even with a 50% increase statewide in participation. I was for technology in the caucuses before it was cool.

2016

I am sharing this with you to let you know the results of eight years of your putting your trust in me to represent you in Des Moines. If I have any regrets it is that with the demands of my job, my family, my serving as a deacon and teacher in my church, I have not been able to visit the counties in the district as much as I would have liked to.

With the 2016 Convention season upon us, several people have asked whether I am planning on running for re-election. At eight years, I am the longest serving member of the SCC. I have accomplished much of what I set out to do on the committee. I have always run for SCC as a family values guy — it is time for me to exercise those family values and spend more time with my family. [See, I get to write my own exit narrative :)] Therefore, I have decided not to run for re-election to the State Central Committee.

Thank you so much for placing your faith and trust in me for these eight years, it has been my honor and pleasure to serve.

The Republican Party of Iowa — Time to Declare a Truce

First in the Nation … there is nothing like it. As Iowans, we (Republicans and Democrats alike) love our caucuses. But like many things in life being first is a mixed blessing.

On one hand, FITN gives us the unique opportunity to meet the candidates up close and in person. I have met a number of candidates in small group settings with just a handful of people. I have had the chance to ask difficult questions and look them in the eye as they answer. When Iowans decide, they decide based on an intimate knowledge of the candidates that no other state except perhaps New Hampshire can share.

On the other hand, FITN makes Iowans choose sides and choose them early. The amount of media attention and money showered on the state intensify everything about the process in Iowa. The battle for Iowa is bruising and never ending. In 2008 and 2012, potential candidates were back in the state within weeks of the election losses. Unlike the rest of the country, we fight the caucus battles year round. The recent RPI elections were the final battle in a war that began at the caucuses and continued through our  conventions.

I want to call upon my Republican friends across the state to call a truce. The elections of 2014 are too important to throw away because a particular faction did not prevail in this war

As the IowaRepublican.com speculated, I was one of the SCC members who voted against AJ Spike and an David Fischer. The election didn’t turn out the way that I wanted but I am not going to take my ball and go home. There is too much at stake. 2014 is going to be a critical year with statewide races, the Iowa legislature and congressional seats all up for grabs. We cannot let the 2012 caucuses lead to defeat in 2014.

The RPI Chairman Race

AJ Spiker/Bill Schickel

This Saturday, the State Central Committee will meet in Des Moines to elect a chairman for the Republican Party of Iowa. There are no last minute candidates, at least not yet. The race has come down to two well known, experienced members of the State Central Committee, current RPI chairman AJ Spiker and current co-chairman Bill Schickel. Like the Iowa State bowl game, it is a rematch of the last chairman race when Matt Strawn stepped down. AJ won that contest by a single vote over Schickel.

In a previous post I wrote about the role of the RPI chairman and said;

… the single most important job an SCC member has is to elect a chairman for the Republican Party of Iowa.

The RPI chairman is elected by a majority vote of the State Central Committee. As I prepare to carry out this most important of my duties, I decided to take the opportunity and share some of my thoughts on the issue. I will start by saying that as an SCC member I have gotten to know Bill and AJ and I like them both.

Let me start by stating that as RPI chairman, AJ Spiker is not responsible for the Iowa GOP’s dismal electoral performances in 2012. On the other hand, he and the team he assembled (as well as the SCC) did not exactly lead the party to victory either.

We had the same situation in the recent past with Ray Hoffman when was RPI chair during the electoral train wreck of 2006. When the SCC chose to elect Hoffman to another term, I was so angry that I couldn’t talk to any of my friends on the committee for weeks. The re-election of Hoffman and the secrecy that surrounded it were key factors in my deciding to run for SCC.

Ray Hoffman was not the reason we got swept in 2006 and AJ Spiker is not the reason we got swept again in 2012. But, having lead the party to defeat, it was then and is now, time to search for new leadership.

Therefore, I am publicly supporting Bill Schickel for RPI chairman. My support for Bill is likely a Quixotic effort. I believe that the coalition of evangelicals and libertarians that elected AJ and swept our conventions in 2012 is strong enough to carry the day and re-elect AJ. I guess, it shouldn’t be a surprise, it sounds like the RNC will also re-elect Reince Priebus.

Whatever happened to the captain going down with the ship?

Guns in School — A Perspective

The Newtown shootings have rekindled the national debate on gun control. Some are saying that guns are the problem while others re suggesting that guns (arming teachers) are the solution. Growing up, I personally experienced guns in school but there were never any problems.

It started in 1975, I was a freshman in high school and my friend Bryan and I were making a super-8 movie for a class. It was a humorous short called, A Hillbilly Cleans Up. The film followed a hillbilly who comes to town and eventually ends up in a laundromat. The hillbilly then proceeds to remove his overalls and do his laundry wearing only his red long johns. Bryan was the hillbilly and I was the cameraman. Guns play a part in this story because in his role as the hillbilly Bryan needed a couple of props, a corn cob pipe, a straw hat and a shotgun. We got out of school and spent the whole day walking around the College Hill Business District in Cedar Falls with my 14 year old friend Bryan carrying a double barreled 12 gauge shotgun over his shoulder. I don’t remember if we entered any businesses other than the laundromat but no one thought it at all unusual.

During my high school years, I can remember a number of guns brought to school as part of school projects and while I wasn’t in the class, I think one of my classmates did a reloading demonstration in a speech class.

My junior (or sophomore) year our PE class went out to the local range to do some trap shooting. It was my first opportunity to use a shotgun. If you can believe it, students were allowed to bring their own shotguns and ammo for the day. My friend Doug gave me a ride to school and brought his shotgun. Rather than leave it in his car, we carried in to the  school building and stored it in my unlocked locker! No one thought it was unusual for us to be walking through the building with a gun — maybe because it was in a case 🙂

I have to admit that I was not entirely truthful in my opening paragraph when I said:

… I personally experienced guns in school but there were never any problems.

One incident stands out, and yes, it was a problem. I like to refer to it as The Day Andy Shot The Clock. It was opening night of the play, Dark of the Moon. My classmate Jon and I were working stage crew. Jon was stage manager and I was running the fly loft. I was working about 12 feet above the stage with the crew that ran the curtain and raised and lowered the sets from above.

My friend Andy was in charge of the sound crew and about midway through the play there supposed to be a gunshot. To make it as authentic as possible, Andy was in the unoccupied hallway just offstage. My classmate Jeff  had provided a 12 gauge shotgun along with some blank shotgun rounds. Jeff handloaded the blank rounds himself.

So in the hallway, armed with a 12 gauge and blanks, Andy was supposed to aim the shotgun down the long hallway and fire it on cue from the student director. In rehearsals, the gunshot always went off without a hitch, but on opening day, things were different. When the time came, we heard the gunshot and … the sound of broken glass.

I think Andy was getting bored. Instead of aiming down the hallway,  when the cue came, Andy aimed the shotgun at the IBM wall clock hanging a few feet away on the wall. Since the shotgun was firing blanks he wrongly assumed that there would be no damage. The trouble is that the blank round still has a paper or plastic wadding plus the concussive force of the 12 gauge is still able to  do damage. When Jon and I heard the broken glass, I practically slid down the ladder to the loft and we ran out in the hallway to find Andy sheepishly holding the shotgun amidst a pile of broken glass.

It was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away … it was the 1970’s. I had a leisure suit and platform shoes. It really was a different world, and I am beginning to believe that I am that old guy who doesn’t understand the modern world. It really was a different time, we had guns but no problems … other than Andy shooting the clock 🙂

I guess if Andy didn’t have a gun, the clock would still be alive today.

Miller-Meeks for House

There is a revolution going on in Iowa’s second congressional district. It centers around Republican candidate, Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks or as I prefer — M3 (m-cubed – I did major in math after all).

The picture is of me from about a month ago preparing to walk in a parade with my kids and hand out Miller-Meeks material. When my kids asked me why we were supporting Miller-Meeks, I said, “It’s because she believes in what we believe in.” As a home-schooling family, we are planning a field trip to DC to visit Congresswoman Miller-Meeks sometime next year.

As Krusty points out:

… Miller-Meeks was able to out raise Congressman Loebsack in the last three months of the campaign. Miller-Meeks raised $108,599.26 and gave her campaign $20k putting her total for the quarter at $128,559.26 compared to Congressman Loebsack’s $108,142.10. So even without her personal contribution Miller-Meeks outpaced Loebsack by $417.16. Of his total, Loebsack only collected $36,000 from small donors. Almost all of Miller-Meeks’ total comes from small Iowa donors.

I do not believe that I need to defend my conservative or pro-life bona-fides to readers of this blog. As a member of the GOP State Central Committee, I support all of our candidates. While I support all of our candidates, I naturally spend my personal time and effort working (as a volunteer) for those I really believe in.

We have a great candidate in the 2nd Congressional District. I am excited about the Miller-Meeks campaign. (And my kids are looking forward to that field trip to DC 😉

Obama’s speech — I must be a racist!

I am one of those parents who was concerned about Obama’s speech to school children this week. I was concerned that it would consist of political propaganda at worst or be simply a waste of time. My friend Art Smith over at the Conservative Reader was right — it turned out to be the latter.

My concern was based on reading the suggested learning activities published by the Department of Education before the speech. Among them:

  • Teachers may post in large print around the classroom notable quotes excerpted from President Obama’s speeches on education.
  • Teachers may ask students to think of the following: … How will he inspire us

Since I read the transcript the White House released in advance, most of my concerns were allayed. Other than providing exposure for the president during the middle of a huge fight in congress and on the eve of his address to a joint session and utilizing the bloated, inefficient and unconstitutional Department of Education — the speech was just a waste of time. When schools are concerned about instructional hours and appropriate use of classroom time it seems absurd that this event was considered worthy of the school day. At least Cedar Rapids made it optional.

I did however find out that I must be a racist. One of my childrens’ teachers said that those who were concerned were expressing:

… a mild form of racism.

This form of argumentum ad hominem is often used in lieu of rational debate. Students in our schools deserve better. Perhaps this teacher should have taken the time to explain why people who disagree with the president are racists.

In my speech to the 2nd District Convention last year, I mentioned my Pacific-Islander, Asian and African heritage. I said that I was:

One part yellow, two parts brown and one part black which makes me at least as black as Barack.

So, where does this cracker, honky teacher get off calling me a racist?

My Resignation from the SCC

Dear Second District Republicans,

Fifteen months ago, I was elected to represent the Second Congressional District on the State Central Committee of the Republican Party of Iowa. During my tenure, I have worked to bring openness to the process of electing a State Party Chairman and for the first time in my memory, the candidates and vote totals were published on blogs and tweeted in real time. As a member of State Organization Committee, I have helped place into motion a plan which will make national delegate selection a part of the normal district conventions and do away with the Friday night meetings before the state convention. I have served as head of the Technology Committee that is working to provide a better online presence for the party and better communicate with grassroots Republicans all across the state. Finally I have supported all of our candidates who have passed the most important litmus test of all – they won their primaries.

When I was elected, I promised that I would neither seek nor accept a paid staff or consultant position with any campaign or issue-based organization. I further promised that while serving on the State Central Committee, I would remain neutral and not make any endorsements in contested Republican primaries. I am excited that we have such an excellent field of Republican candidates for governor. It has always been my intent to remain neutral in the upcoming gubernatorial primary and give my full support to the winner.

However, last week everything changed. Last Friday my good friend and fellow Eastern Iowan, Christian Fong announced that he intended to run for governor. I ran for State Central Committee because I  wanted to make a difference, I wanted not just to elect Republicans but to see those core principles defined in our platform enacted. Christian is a social conservative with excellent business and financial credentials; he is a visionary and a leader in our community; he is a husband, a father and most importantly a man of integrity. He is exactly what Iowa needs. With Christian in the race I now believe that I can make the biggest difference for our state, our district, my community and my family by working as a volunteer to help him win the GOP nomination and beat Chet Culver in 2010.

Earlier today, I sent a letter to RPI Chairman Matt Strawn resigning my position on the State Central Committee effective immediately. By resigning now, I hope that the Second District Executive Committee will be able to act quickly and elect my replacement in time for the September State Central Committee meeting. It has been an honor to serve.

David R.Chung
Former Second District Representative
State Central Committee – Republican Party of Iowa

Government is the only thing we all belong to …

This video was featured at the the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte this week. In it the narrator says:

“We are committed to all people. We do believe you can use government in a good way. Government is the only thing that we all belong to. We’re different churches, different clubs, but we’re together as a part of our city, or our county, or our state, and our nation.

I searched for this video after seeing many of my friends Facebook statuses started saying things like “I don’t belong to the government” or “The government belongs to me.”

As I watch this video, I know that the Democrats are not trying to say that government owns us. But what they are saying illustrates a profound difference in philosophy from what I believe. Now, there is no question that I am a Republican partisan. I serve on the Republican State Central Committee here in Iowa and I ran unsuccessfully to represent Iowa on the Republican National Committee. I have chaired my county, district and state platform committee and represented Iowa on the national platform committee in 2008.

Over the years, I have tried to explain politics to my children. In those especially teachable moments I have tried to be fair and to avoid invective. Since I am a Republican, I tell my kids that Democrats are not bad people. For the most part, Democrats and Republicans see the same problems in our country. The profound difference is the approach that they take to solutions.I usually explain it to my kids this way:

Democrats view government as the expression of our better angels, a means of working together as communities and ultimately a nation for the common good.Republicans view government as necessary, but believe that its function should be limited to prevent it from hindering those better angels of our nature acting as individuals and in community.

So when my guys get elected, I want them to rein in spending, and hold the line on taxes but I do not want them to create jobs. I want them (the government) to get out of the way and let the individuals take risks, start businesses, invest, and create jobs the old-fashioned way.

Of course when one of my kids asks, “Daddy, what is a Libertarian?” I tell them that:

… a Libertarian is a Republican who smokes pot 🙂

The pot calling the kettle African-American

I have already weighed in on some of the attempts by the RNC to change the rules mid-stream for the 2012 nominating process. I am equally concerned about some of the future rules changes that have been proposed. I side with the Ron Paul supporters on most of these rule changes, believing them to be unfair in the short run and harmful in the long run. (I have yet to weigh in on binding delegates.) I think that many of the proposals will negatively impact Iowa and other caucus states.

As I have said before, I believe that Ron Paul’s supporters took over the Republican Party of Iowa fair and square. They followed the rules. Even though many of us who were not a part of the revolution felt cheated, but, we could have worked and we could have organized and we would be in the drivers seat today. Good for them. I just wish Paul’s supporters had been gracious winners. At least when the Christian Right was in the driver’s seat, our St. Paul delegation showed some diversity. The voting members of our delegation included supporters of McCain, Romney, Huckabee and yes, even Ron Paul. The Paul strategy was definitely scorched earth, win everything and give no ground.

So it should not be a surprise to anyone that the RNC has decided to come down hard on Paul’s supporters and by association the Iowa GOP. The attempt to change the threshold for nomination was completely legal within the rules. The power grab, giving the campaigns and the RNC more control over the rules and the nomination process, is being carried out within the rules. I hope the convention votes these proposals down, but if they do not, they will have brought about this takeover, within the rules.

Throughout this process, the Paul people have told the rest of us to: do our homework, know the rules, and  organize. After all that’s all they did, if we failed to step up to the plate, it’s not their fault. So, the Romney camp did their homework, they knew the rules and they organized. And now the Paul folks are crying foul.

It may be karma but I didn’t like it in either case.