I find this to be incredibly interesting and instructive about the state of today’s Republican Party. It’s reminiscent of the struggles between Clinton supporters and Obama supporters in 2008. We might call this “the Romney mandate” of the RNC being disputed by Paul supporters. (Catchy phrase, huh?)
The Republican National Committee is brushing off a lawsuit against the party by Ron Paul supporters as “frivolous” but it is nonetheless coordinating a “joint defense” effort to fight the legal challenge, according to an internal RNC memorandum obtained by CNN Tuesday. The complaint, filed in U.S. District Court in California last Tuesday by over 100 self-described delegates to the Republican National Convention in Tampa, alleges that the RNC and its chairman, Reince Priebus, quietly and improperly aided Mitt Romney throughout the GOP nomination fight.
Read the whole thing. (Via Memeorandum.) I think we all know the RNC had their thumb on the scale throughout the primary for Mitt Romney. I mean, if you don’t know that, where have you been? But alas, what court is there that will look at this in all fairness? (Crickets.) You can’t really blame the Paul supporters for trying, though, right?
It’s my understanding that there is a similar effort by Rick Santorum supporters, or perhaps Santorum supporters are joining in this same legal battle alongside Paul supporters. I’m not aware of the details. I just know the legal effort from some Santorum supporters exists.
Perhaps we’ll discuss this on the show tonight. What do you think? Is it okay for people to believe in something so strongly that they refuse to give up on it? I would say that all depends on whether the thing one is fighting for is a Godly principle. Paul supporters believe they are fighting for integrity in the political process. I’d say that’s a Godly principle, wouldn’t you?
Some have referred to Paul supporters as “extremists” and they point to activity like this lawsuit. Um, no, that’s not extremism, folks. Elizabeth Warren has referred to blogger William Jacobson as an “extremist.” (See: Elizabeth Warren loses it, lashes out at ‘right wing extremist.’) I think it’s time we were clear that actual extremism refers to those who would resort to violence instead of what the new popular definition seems to be, that an “extremist” is someone who strongly disagrees with you on something and is willing to work “politically” to oppose you. This is dangerous thinking. Let’s defend the right to disagree and to work through a fair political process. Isn’t that what the Church is fighting for now against the HHS mandate? We have to stand up for the freedom to disagree with others, and to work through the political process to defend Godly principles. Otherwise, America is toast.