As mentioned in my previous post, I believe that a third party fight is good long term strategy, but it cannot be our short term goal. In my opinion, if it is the short term goal… we lose.

Several friends and people who I admire in the movement have suggested that we need to force the GOP to come to us. The reality is… this will never happen. The GOP establishment has no interest in becoming a movement minded Party. It has no interest in embracing our ideas and mentality.

So if the strategy is to force the GOP to come our way… we will lose.

This is something I’ve pondered for quite some time. In my letter to the GOP earlier this year, I even laid out what I thought at the time was necessary to get me back into the party.

I sent that letter to every state chair in the country. Can you guess how many responses I got?

I’ll give you a hint… it’s less than one.

My point here is that the establishment is not going to change on its own. And we don’t have the votes to beat two establishments.

I’m not suggesting we embrace the Republican Party as it currently functions, but I am suggesting we’re going to have to stop acting as if we’ll never have anything to do with the vessel itself again. And we’re going to have to accept the fact that Democrats would love nothing more than to see our movement split the opposing vote, giving them their only chance at survival in 2010.

-Eric Odom

As Republicans, we must not only adopt the new techniques and structure of Internet democracy, but also understand the importance of preserving the open nature of the Net as a policy issue. The tools that are available at low cost to Republicans are only there because of an Internet ecosystem that has managed to remain open, despite the efforts of phone and cable companies.

Republicans need to adopt a lighter approach that will preserve the values of decentralization and freedom — essential conservative values — on the Internet. If we fail to engage in this effort, the Internet service providers, who control the last mile of the tubes into a customer’s house or small business, will choke off the affordable tools available to conservative activists. They have already started exercising their market power to block applications that enable Internet users to distribute information across the Net.

They will make the Internet look a lot more like cable TV, where citizens lack access to every legal channel available and where, consequently, conservative activists get shut out. Taking away these free tools will come at the major expense of the activists and small-businesspeople who are the core of our party’s strength.

I’ve tried to remain quiet on David All over the past few months, but enough is enough. This is just over the top in my opinion. A self-proclaimed 2.0 Free-Market eActivist should never, EVER jump on the “evil corporation” bandwagon! I mean, how can one be for limited government, yet advocate MORE government regulation?

Right now there is a clear difference between Republicans and Democrats. Republicans want (well, SHOULD want, but in many cases do not) less regulation, Democrats want more. David All, however, is asserting that Republicans, if they wish to be a serious player in cyberspace, should begin considering net regulation. Is that not the way this reads?

Good grief.

What’s worse about this Politico column, is that it appears to be a carefully planned attack on phone companies and the telecoms, veiled as a cry for Republicans to “get serious about the online revolution”.

I know my position on Net Regulation is not popular, especially in the tech realm, but my position IS the RIGHT position with regards to free markets and limited government advocacy. While I might not like that I will have to pay a few dollars more to continue getting super high speed connections, I must understand that a business has EVERY right to charge it. If I don’t like it, I don’t have to pay it. That is the way a free society works! It’s called CHOICE.

Yeah yeah, I know. “But Google is fighting for Net Regulation to help us have cheap access to the internet”. Look, Google is a business, and its sole concern is profit. Google profits most when more people are online. Simple.

Calling on the government, in David All’s case the Republicans, to get involved and demand business to operate in a certain manner is just wrong. It’s anti-freedom, it’s anti-American, and it goes against everything Republicans were supposed to be standing for.

So while David All cries for Republicans to support net regulation, he seems to miss the part about Republicans losing elections left and right because they refuse to advocate LESS REGULATION and stand for what fiscal conservatives and libertarians believe in.

The notion that the right is behind online because we do not support net regulation is simply absurd. Note to David All… some of us have made huge surges forward online, and we’re strongly against Net Regulation. You sir, create “instant communities” and online tools that become duds, serve no long term purpose on the movement, and eventually fade into irrelevance.

I’m confused as to why any Republican would give David All the time of day as far as political or new media advice is concerned. From a programming standpoint, David All is a champ, but when it comes to this anti-freedom junk advice…

Unbelievable.

Wired has the full story.

A reader tipped me off to an issue that’s come up with crossover voters in Ohio. It seems that some Republican voters have bragged online that they voted Democratic ballots in the Ohio March 4th primary in order to influence the outcome of the presidential election. Essentially, they wanted to help Hillary Clinton win the Democratic nomination over Barack Obama because they think she’s the weaker candidate and would lose against Republican John McCain in November.

This is where the law comes in to play.

Ohio’s revised election code includes an election falsification clause (Revised Code 3513.20), which says that if a voter who changes parties is challenged by poll workers as to the sincerity of his change of heart and also signs an affidavit stating that he supports the principles of the party to which he’s changing — when in fact he doesn’t support them — then he would be committing election falsification. Election falsification is a felony that is punishable by six to twelve months in jail and a $2,500 fine.

This should be interesting to watch unfold.

Being on Bloggers Row was inspirational as well as educational. The inspiration was brought in by the fact that Mary Katherine Ham sat directly to the right of me, and NZ Bear to the left. To their sides were Rob Bluey, Erick Erickson, Ed Morrisey, My Man Mitt, and several other prominent bloggers.

It was fascinating being with a group of highly successful bloggers at the largest conservative gathering of the year. It was politically educational hearing their thoughts on the sticky GOP situation and the Republican Presidential Primary.

As most of us, if not all of us already know… John McCain should take the GOP win. This became an almost certainty when Mitt Romney dropped out of the race last Thursday morning during his speech at CPAC.

Through CPAC I noticed two groups. 1) Those who are not really “prominent” in the party, but keep close tabs on what goes on and vote every primary, went in to CPAC with arms crossed in refusal to vote for or support John McCain. 2) Those who are prominent, AKA: Pundits, columnists, and bloggers, went in to CPAC supporting Mitt Romney and doing their best to inform the rest of us about McCain’s short comings in regards to liberty and conservative fiscal issues.

Once the announcement came, I noticed group #2 immediately jump behind John McCain and begin pouncing on group #1. I belong to group #1, so I began feeling the heat from #2 almost immediately.

Now, without using specific names, I wish to assert that group #2 is playing a significant role in the current wounds of the GOP. While this group spent the last year telling us how “dangerous” and “reckless” John McCain is, they almost instantaneously jumped behind him when it became clear he would be leading the party in to the 2008 general election.

What does this say to me? Well, in short, it says that the GOP establishment will support anyone with an “R” next to their name.

Think about it… John McCain voted against the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, he attempted to negotiate a deal that would have allowed him to become a Democrat without losing his level of seniority, he worked to create the “gang of 14” to oppose conservative nominees to the Supreme Court, he joined Ted Kennedy and his ilk to push through Amnesty without securing the borders first, and he created one of the most blatant attacks on freedom of speech via McCain-Fiengold.

All of the influential figures on the right new this, and were actively promoting it through their communications with the world. Yet, suddenly, they set it all aside in favor of the “we must get behind our candidate” mentality.

Granted, it’s very difficult to imagine a White House occupied by the likes of Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. But, in my opinion that would actually assist the conservative movement. I mean, wouldn’t it be much easier to point at the Democrats and the left for failing on all political fronts than to try and defend more of our own failures? Because based on the past that is exactly what we’re going to be doing if John McCain becomes President.

In my view, the GOP has become more and more liberal with each new cycle. It seems to be a very patient method of decreasing the influence of the conservative movement, and from what I can tell it’s working brilliantly.

When old establishment power heads know that Republican pundits, media, columnists, and bloggers are going to fold and support their candidate no matter how liberal he or she is… they have the upper hand.

And this is exactly what I witnessed at CPAC. The establishment flexed its muscles for John McCain, and group #2 almost immediately got in the kool-aid line.

Take Citizens United for example. The group ran a VERY expensive TV ad campaign just weeks ago that blasted John McCain as being a replica of Hillary Clinton. Yet, one the shot callers for the group came out a day or two ago saying that now is the time to support McCain for the good of the party.

What? Seriously?

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expected a different result

So, in essence, CPAC helped me discover that I no longer belong with the Republican Party. I used to consider myself a fiscally conservative Republican, but now I consider myself a libertarian minded independent.

The two major parties have completely written me off. There for, I no longer support either of them.

Does this mean I’m finished fighting for a fiscally responsible American government? Of course not! I’ll do everything I possibly can to promote fiscal conservatism through transparency and state based policy. But when it comes to supporting liberal Republicans… I’m done.