Alliance of Candidates Catches Sign Thief on Video

An alliance of conservative grassroots candidates for the position of Precinct Committee Officer in Clark County, WA got tired of their candidate signs being stolen.  They decided to do something about it.

Using scarce campaign funds (they are 95%++ self-funded) the PCO Liberty Alliance purchased a surveillance camera and mounted teams of people on a stakeout schedule.  Their plan worked.  They found the perp, captured him in the act on video, found his stash of signs he had been stealing, and reported him to the police.

You can see the video on their website here:

The local newspaper has written some articles about the organization and this event:

and here:


Sign stealing is a serious offense in Washington, punishable by up to $5000 fine and 364 days in jail PER SIGN STOLEN.  The Sheriff is investigating the matter and the PCO Liberty Alliance believes the perp will be identified soon.

For information about the PCO Liberty Alliance objectives, they are published here:

What is ‘The Establishment’ ???

Recently published on PCO Liberty Alliance:

“What is The Establishment?”

—I believe the so-called “Establishment” is a mentality, a culture, and is not based upon any length of time in positions of party leadership.

Establishment mentality is betrayed by having a primary concern of the preservation of power and/or position, and of winning elections regardless of platform.

Establishment mentality results in the advocacy of principles and philosophies becoming secondary to winning…

Read More….

Establishment on the Hunt, Grassroots in the Crosshairs…

The GOP Establishment is not only unwilling to dance with the people who brought them to the party, it appears they are willing to flat out execute them.

We have repeatedly seen the same scenario — electing people with a mandate to save our country, only to watch them undermine the demands of the people who elected them and continue to sell us out.

Consider these two posts:

Will the Wisconsin GOP Kick Out its Tea Party Supporters Tonight?

Will the Tea Party Fight or Retreat?

Counties in Alaska and Washington and across the country have GOP machines which behave in the same way: using rules, rhetoric and propaganda to lock out the people who threaten to reform the party in favor their Entrenchment Protection Program.

Now it is perfectly clear: the GOP Establishment is the final enabler of big government — and therefore is indeed one of big government’s last firewalls against the grassroots — we the people.  It may be through subversive divide and conquer tactics of pitting one group against another (fomenting fear and ridicule of Paul supporters) or overt lockouts in order to anoint yet another candidate of choice as outlined in the above articles.  But no matter what election victories we have it appears we will never escape the eventual coronations of “our foes, the pro-status quoes” until we have replaced the establishment and the culture it defends.

Just like taxation is “the art of plucking the most feathers from the goose while producing the least amount of honking”, so is the GOP entrenchment program of “producing the greatest number of votes while making and/or delivering upon the fewest number of promises.”

How to solve this?  It absolutely must happen at the local level first, then drive it up through the party.  This is not going to be solved by putting people into public office first – though we still must fight those battles.  Ultimately we must tear down that firewall which can only happen by putting the grassroots in charge of the local party organizations, then the state organizations bolstered by local candidate victories, then by way of those new leaders and the candidates we elect, in charge of the national party.

If we don’t purge the party of the culture which, regardless of the rhetoric and supposed good intentions, has DE-FACTO been a promoter/enabler of big government, there is no number of elected true-believers who can survive that machine.  We need to destroy that big government firewall by changing the culture of the party, and that change begins at the most basic local level.  Mr. Gorbachev didn’t tear down the Berlin Wall, the people had to do it.

And so I say to the GOP: “Mr. Chairman: tear down that wall.”  But, we know you won’t, and so for the sake of our country and our posterity, we must and we will.

It’s time for the people to lead the party.


Libertarian Minded Republican Explains His Differences with Ron Paul’s Foreign Policy

To the friends I have made and am making among the many supporters of Ron Paul:

I wish to explain why I have such disagreement with most of you on foreign policy issues.  Not in an effort to convince you, or in an effort to help you convince me, or to open a lengthy debate during a season in which we have so many other dragons to slay, but solely because I want to help us understand each other better.  I recall when I was younger — and to some extent to this day — certain issues about which I held very strong beliefs.  It was nearly impossible for me to understand why anyone could believe differently given the evidence seeming so conclusive in my mind.  So this post is an effort to help you better understand my point of view, one that is undoubtedly shared by others, as well as the underlying causes of this different point of view.

The major obvious demographic difference I see between Paul supporters and non-Paul supporters within the GOP is age.  With this age difference comes a difference in our first hand experience with world events.  This difference in our experience of world events is, I believe, one primary reason why my differences with you on foreign policy exist.

Again, I’m not trying to convince anyone.  I’m merely trying to explain where I’m coming from so you might better understand me and hopefully we can better accept each others’ differences which will enable us to focus on and fight for the goals we have in common.

Let me put some initial perspectives on these differences:

As a 5th grader in 1975:

  • My “Junior Scholastic” magazine in school was warning me about how our man-made pollution was going to cause an ICE AGE.
  • There was a “Nuclear Clock” warning how close we were to global nuclear war, and it always hovered around 2-4 minutes before midnight.  Its adjustment was a subject of frequent press releases.
  • I was completely convinced that a nuclear war was inevitable in my lifetime, that it was only a matter of what cities would be destroyed.  I lived in Los Angeles at the time so you can imagine the ominous cloud hanging over my childhood as the air-raid sirens were tested once every month.  We didn’t own a bomb shelter, and I didn’t think it mattered anyway.

In the fall of 1984 it was campaign season.  I was 18:

  • I watched Vice Presidential debates between the “war monger” George H.W. Bush and the “voice of reason” Geraldine Ferraro.  She was openly advocating a unilateral nuclear freeze (while the far left was advocating unilateral nuclear disarmament).  The left was openly advocating unilateral surrender in the cold war as both a national security and a campaign strategy.
  • I was being told that the only reason the USSR had so many nukes is because we were war mongering.  If we just got rid of ours they would certainly get rid of theirs.
  • I remembered an old video of Kruschev banging his shoe on a podium saying he would crush us, that we would become complacent and they would destroy us.

In the summer of 1985 I was 19 years old:

  • I think Ronald Reagan was fighting a covert war in Central America by this time, trying to keep it from being taken over by communism.
  • Ronald Reagan was trying to station Minuteman and Pershing II nuclear missiles in Europe.  He said they were a bargaining chip for negotiations with the USSR and Gorbechev.  His opponents loudly proclaimed that he was going to start WWIII.
  • The Berlin Wall was a seemingly eternal fixture in Europe, forever dividing East and West Germany.  We had troops there since the 1940s and it seemed like just a matter of fact they would be there forever.
  • I traveled to Europe on a rail pass for three weeks listening to others in my age group telling me that Reagan was going to start WWIII through his escalation of the cold war.  I hoped that when he said the missiles were bargaining chips, that he was telling me the truth.

As it turns out, President Reagan did bargain away the Minuteman and Pershing II missiles in a process that got serious concessions from the USSR.  ”Trust but verify” was his mantra.

Reagan called on all US Scientists to develop a “Strategic Defense Initiative” to render USSR missiles useless.  The left ridiculed him and called it “Star Wars”.  As it turns out, the research program alone scared the pants off the Soviets.

We entered into an era of “our bank is bigger than your bank” and we won.  Their regime collapsed.  I did not get vaporized into oblivion.  And suddenly, as if out of thin air and with no significant prognostication by all the superior intellect in the media, the Berlin Wall came crashing down.

I know that the US has made some grave errors in our history with regard to foreign folly.  I understand that we have gone to areas we should not have, that we have remained in areas longer than we should have, and that at times our own foreign policy endeavors have brought results against our best interests.  But you see, from my perspective, an aggressive foreign policy saved me and my mom from nuclear annihilation. So any position that says basically NONE of these activities should be happening is instantly seen by me as extreme at best and naive at worst.  When a regime like Iran says they are going to wipe another country off the face of the earth — seemingly with nuclear weapons they are on the brink of developing — I have to take it as seriously as any WWII vet would were he old enough to remember Hitler as a young politician.  I lived through an era where I was certain of nuclear war, that the people who advocated retreating into ourselves were proven completely wrong.  Where flexing American muscle allowed me to grow into adulthood, survive my early years when I knew everything, and become a person who struggles to see things from the points of view of others, even if I vehemently disagree with them.

So, I think I understand your perspective, and I hope this post helps you understand mine.  I feel like the Conservative, Tea Partiers and Libertarians sharing space under the GOP tent have so much in common to fight for, that I hope we can successfully squabble among ourselves while we unite together to fight for the major issues of liberty and anti-establishment we all have in common.

I’m tired of people telling me bad things about you, and characterizing you so negatively.  It is a divide and conquer strategy unbecoming of the GOP.  It is undignified.  The establishment fears your resolve, they fear your vigor, your organizational ability, your dedication, and now, even your strength.  But that doesn’t mean you are immune to their tactics of propaganda.  I’m sure you see it every day and wonder why some in the GOP establishment treat you like the enemy.

I’m here to tell you today: I have your back against this kind of rhetoric.  I will call it out when I see it and continue in my efforts to unite us in our commonalities and garner respect of our differences.  I’m serious about this.  But it will require reciprocation on your part.  Just because someone doesn’t think we should buy a Big Mac with gold coins does not mean they are worthless to your greater cause.  And just because someone is less concerned about a nuclear Iran than I, does not mean we cannot be brothers in arms in so many other areas.  Just because one person thinks we are wasting our time and money in South Korea, and I cannot help but think of the tons of artillery within reach of Seoul, and of the ultimate demise of the Berlin Wall, does not mean we can’t join together in other fights.

With all due respect, I welcome your friendship and our potential to fight the GOP establishment mentality together.  It was once said “We must hang together or surely we will hang separately”, and it is still true to this day.

Yours in Liberty and Freedom,

Christian B.



“You weren’t on the committee ma’am”.. North Dakota offers preview of Establishment Tactics at the WA State Convention?

One of the next bold moves by the GOP establishment here in Washington State may be the construction of the ballot at the state convention.

[editors note: please use the comments section on this post to brainstorm ideas of action which can be taken to avoid having our state convention run by Snydley Whiplash]

In this excellent piece of investigative work by Ben Swann of Fox19 North Dakota, he documents how even though Romney came in third in North Dakota, he got the vast majority of the delegates from that state.  This would be perfectly fine if it was a result of an unprejudiced vote of delegates at the state convention.  But apparently the only ballot circulated was a list of political heavy hitters from the state establishment — Romney supporters — and when a lady in the audience asked why she was there, that she was under the impression she would have a ballot arranged in no particular preference, alphabetically, without preferences, and she asked why she didn’t see a ballot with ALL the names of the candidates for national, she was told by the chair:

“You weren’t on the committee ma’am”

From the story I gather that the convention circulated one ballot with their hand-picked establishment candidates, and only after objections did they display the names of the rest of the candidates on an overhead projector, and that those names changed periodically as time progressed.

We need to educate ourselves IN ADVANCE of the tactics we can expect from the establishment at our own state convention and do everything in our power to assure there are no dirty tricks.  Remember, as we saw at events leading up to our Clark County convention, every time you hear a big-wig in the party accusing someone of dirty trickery, you should rightfully expect that the dirty trick in the works is one THEY are trying to pull.

If you are involved in the State convention in any way, if you are a delegate or you know others who are delegates, please watch this video.  Please circulate it to people in other counties who are going to state convention.  I believe we must put incredible pressure on the GOP apparatus in each county to assure this kind of skull-duggery does not happen at our state convention.  We need anti-establishment conservative and libertarian people on these committees, and we need to start assuring that happens now.

Reality Check: North Dakota Caucus “railroaded” to give majority of delegates to Romney?

Paul/Santorum/Gingrich supporters … we MUST UNITE — our candidates’ times are limited, but our principles are eternal.  We must refuse to let the establishment pit us against each other as a means by which to further their agenda.  These are tactics unbecoming to our party.  The next time you hear someone in the party trying to marginalize a group or characterize them as kooks or zealots, STAND UP for them, DEFEND THEM.  It is time for all of us to STAND UP FOR THE “OTHER GUY” and learn the lesson:  you are the other guy, WE ALL ARE THE OTHER GUY.  We have far more in common than we have differences.  The establishment has only brought us a slower progression toward the same death of debt, taxes and big government.  We must hang together, or surely we will hang separately.

There is no common ground if we each self-identify with a candidate (Gingrich, Paul, Santorum), but if we self-identify by philosophy, suddenly we have so much in common as “conservatives, tea partiers & libertarians”.  We may not have candidates in common, but candidates are fleeting.  We already have many philosophies in common, and if we can translate that into common AGENDA ITEMS we can purge our party of the arrogant sense of entitlement, the propagandistic con of ‘inevitability’ and move our party forward into the century with an agenda of freedom, individual sovereignty, security and prosperity.

Convention Shenanigans from Other Counties

This article outlines other craziness from other county conventions around the state.

Considering the single paragraph dedicated to District 17 (of which I was a county delegate) barely scratches the surface of the larger story, I can only imagine the myriad of gory details from these other districts which the people present are privy to.

And the story specific to clark county is laid out in excellent detail here:

This is just the beginning……  Please continue to pass these links to people who are politically active in our state.


Confronting the Statements of Brent Boger, the Clark County GOP Rules Chairman

I feel a need to specifically address statements made by Brent Boger personally, who happens to also be the CCRP Rules Chairman, as they illustrate so well the disingenuous representation of the convention, the results, and the people who participated.  It is unconscionable for the establishment to use such tactics of marginalizing groups and pitting one group against another, mis-characterizing people because of the candidate they support or the enthusiasm they garner, and furthering myths about the process.  I am going to pull direct quotes from Mr. Boger’s facebook feed and respond to them individually.  I’m going to forewarn you – as I read these comments I became quite furious so my replies to them are quite confrontational and lacking the diplomacy they should probably have.  But right now I don’t really care – candor is my priority.

So as a Santorum delegate to District 17 and supporter of the “Open Convention Slate”, I hope you will find this illuminating:

“Ron Paul Zealots” – Brent Boger

This comment speaks for itself.  A perfect example of marginalizing a well organized, well educated and enthusiastic group of people.

“Ron Paul’s people manipulated the Rules to deny Romney all but a handful of delegates even though he had the highest vote in the caucuses.” –Brent Boger

1)      Mr. Boger later defined “manipulated” in a less negative way, but based upon that definition he could have just as easily said: “Ron Paul’s people operated within the rules in an organized fashion to maximize Paul and Santorum delegates and minimize Romney delegates.”  So why didn’t he say it that way?  Answer: because of the IMPLIED accusation of unfairness and deceit he wanted to convey.

2)      Additionally, there was no “vote in the caucuses”.  There was only a straw poll, with no visible security, checks or balances, and according to the party rules (remember, he is the Chair of the Rules Committee in the County) this straw poll was MEANINGLESS as to the ultimate delegate count, which was only to be decided at the county and state conventions.  This fact was published in the description of the precinct caucuses on the CCRP website!  Why would Mr. Boger try to portray the process of voting by the rules at the county convention as somehow unfair because there is some sort of supposed intent for a caucus straw poll to control the results of the convention?  It is not the technical accuracy of the statement to which I’m objecting, it is the overtly inaccurate message of unfairness it is designed to convey that I find so offensive.

“Anti-democratic practices Paul campaign leadership engage in to further their objectives” –Brent Boger

Mr. Boger, unless you are intending to simply malign and slander, please specifically back up this claim.  Are you referring to the fact that the Paul delegates engaged in VOTING at the county convention?  If there were any anti-democratic practices I would think they would be the lack of motivation on the part of the establishment to mitigate the damage they had done through their mis-management of the convention by extending the convention until voting was complete.  Instead, they gladly let the convention expire without a completion of the voting, to the cheers of the Romney delegates who were present.  I ask you Mr. Boger, which is the “anti-democratic practice” – voting (like Paul and Santorum supporters) or extinguishing the voting process (like the establishment allowed to happen when they in fact were the cause of the “voting crisis”)?  Pray tell!!!

“Paul people got more delegates than they should have” –Brent Boger

Mr. Boger – Please tell me – just how many delegates “should” the Paul people have gotten?  I suppose the amount they got due to the votes at the convention is somehow incorrect or immoral?  If anything, the fact that the voting was not allowed to be completed would be a cause of people not getting the delegates they “should” have, and in that case it was the Santorum and Paul delegates who got FEWER than they should have due to the incompetence of the establishment and then their cavalier/uncaring attitude toward rectifying the problem they had created.  After all, why solve the problem if it works to the benefit of the establishment candidate (Romney)?  We’ll just tell the Columbian it was the fault of the delegates’ infighting.

And please don’t tell me that there is some moral duty toward proportional representation of a straw poll which is completely contradicted by the rules.  We have “winner take all” primary states all around the country and I don’t hear the party establishment lamenting how that is robbing the primary voters of those states of their proportional representation.  We have an electoral college that conveys 100% of the winnings of a state to the candidate who won that state.  We have a long history of elections where a geographical district passes along 100% of its representation to the majority or even plurality winner of that district.  This argument about the fairness of proportional representation needing to mimic some totally informal and insecure straw poll is specious at best and ignorant at worst.  If you don’t want the process to be based upon who can prevail at a county convention, then change the rules.

This argument is even more infuriating when you consider that it was the Romney people who initiated a strategy to completely exclude a candidate from receiving any delegates (the attempted exclusion of Paul delegates).  For them to attempt this exact strategy against Paul then scream disingenuously when it is turned against them should be an embarrassment to the establishment and to all who support them.

(Santorum’s deal) “was a corrupt bargain” –Brent Boger

Exactly what was corrupt about forming a coalition to consolidate the votes of delegates?  This is EXACTLY what the Romney people were attempting to do with their “unity slate” (an Orwellian misnomer if I’ve ever seen one).  You have specifically accused the Santorum people of striking a corrupt deal so I expect you to retract the statement and apologize or back it up with specific examples of corruption.

“I have no doubt if the shoe were on the other foot they would have opposed extending the deadline.  I can take only so much hypocrisy.” –Brent Boger

Mr. Boger – you SPECULATE that the Santorum and Paul people would have opposed extending the deadline.  However, the Romney people ACTUALLY DID oppose extending the deadline.  So are you telling me that because you BELIEVE the other side WOULD HAVE taken such a dastardly position that it was justifiable for the establishment to do so?  And further toward your accusation of hypocrisy – does it really escape you that the Romney people explicitly announced they were trying to exclude Paul delegates and now that they ended up being the ones excluded they (you) are claiming it is “unfair”, “un-democratic”, and even “corrupt”.  JUST WHERE DOES THE HYPOCRISY LAY HERE SIR?

“I was in the bar because I was worn out….”  -Brent Boger

Poor guy, the Rules Chairman had to retreat to the bar during a rules crisis.  I suppose the delegates were lounging around in their lavish rooms sipping on vodka tonics?  No!  You don’t think the delegates were worn out?  We had rooms without chairs, without PA’s, without tables, standing for hours and hours and hours much to the delight of my chiropractor!  What was your responsibility in this matter?  Just sit in the bar and let the process collapse around us to the benefit of your establishment candidate?  That’s leadership!

“The whole nomination process in place is easily manipulated completely within the Rules.  Just because it is within the Rules doesn’t make it right.” –Brent Boger

Exactly what does make it right then?  Should we just have skipped the voting all together?  Would that make you give the process your moral blessing?  Exactly what are you saying here?  Does lobbying voters and forming coalitions translate to unfair manipulation of a process?  By that standard, neighborhood door knocking is unfair manipulation.  We should just allocate votes in the general election based upon Gallup Polls which are about as secure and accurate as the straw polls taken at precinct caucuses.  Oh I get it, every candidate deserves their “fair share” and you and the establishment know exactly what it is!  Forget redistribution of wealth, what we need is redistribution of votes!

“More than 1/3 of the clark county republican caucus attendees are represented by 7% of the delegates.  I guess that doesn’t bother you.”

When a winner take all primary state transmits 100% of its delegates to the national convention in the name of the candidate having not necessarily even a majority, but merely a plurality, have you ever objected to that process?  How is this any different?  This is about who prevails.  If it is so unfair then the rules should be changed.  Don’t complain about the result simply because the EXACT SAME STRATEGY your candidate attempted to employ failed and was turned against him.  Please refer to your previous objections to hypocrisy.


In his posts Mr. Boger also makes the typical establishment argument of ‘just vote for our guy so we can all unite and move on’.  This has come to be intolerable.  This attitude among officials needs to be purged from our party.  If the attitude cannot be removed, then the people purveying it need to go.

The establishment is hammering the nails in their own coffin — and it is about time.


Clark County GOP blames delegates for their own incompetence?

To:       Anyone and everyone who cares about the truth.  Please tweet, post to facebook, call talk radio and write letters to the editors to honestly explain your 1st hand experiences as a delegate to the Clark County, WA Republican Convention!  Please read and comment upon the Columbian article I’ve linked to in this email.

Everyone who was at the county convention knows that ALL the delays in voting were caused by incompetent running of the convention by the GOP officials in charge of running it, and NOT by ANY delaying tactics of ANY legislative delegation during their efforts to vote.  GOP Officials have been quoted in the Columbian as claiming otherwise.

EVERYONE knows that we were not allowed to start voting until the credentials committee reported, and that the credentials committee could not report until the alternates had been seated, AND THAT THE ALTERNATES WEREN’T SEATED UNTIL AFTER 4:00 PM and the credentials report did not arrive until significantly later than that.

I can tell you 1st hand that in District 17 there was not ONE SINGLE EFFORT by ANYONE from ANY GROUP OF DELEGATES to delay ANYTHING.  I cannot vouch for the party officials however, because I was not witness to what caused them to delay voting for 5 HOURS, so I cannot say whether it was done intentionally or simply due to gross incompetence.  I can tell you that I personally spent a major part of my day trying to identify bottlenecks in processes and offer ideas and solutions and a lot of assistance to everyone involved.

I don’t know what the actual hang-up in seating the alternates was because nobody would tell me.  But I know that the seating of alternates and the credentials report were the PRIMARY REASON voting didn’t start until well after 4PM (5pm?).  WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY WAS THAT?  WHOSE FAULT WAS THAT?  CERTAINLY NOT THE DELEGATES WAITING PATIENTLY IN THEIR RESPECTIVE GROUPS!

But EVERYONE knows that the following statement attributed to Brent Boger by The Columbian is UNTRUE:

“Brent Boger, the rules chairman, said late in the afternoon that the process was taking so long because Paul supporters were trying to block would-be Romney delegates, and Romney, Gingrich and some Santorum supporters were trying to block would-be Paul delegates.”

Those were the goals of the respective delegate slates, but had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DELAYS.

<see additional information added at end of article>

Unless Mr. Boger is referring to something going on in the process of seating alternates, this is a completely false statement and everyone who was there knows it.  If Mr. Boger was referring to the process of seating alternates and the subsequent credentials report, then he should not have allowed the lie of blaming delegations to be perpetrated by such ambiguity.  If he was actually unambiguous and it is the Columbian who is creating the “blame the delegates” byline, then we must lash back against the Columbian through comments on this article, tweets and letters.  If he was misquoted by the Columbian, then I want to hear him say so.

But the article certainly seems like the party officials are trying to blame the delegations for the delay.  SHOW ME ONE MOTION ON THE RECORD FROM ANY DELEGATION THAT COULD BE CHARACTERIZED AS A DELAYING TACTIC.  In the 17 District, we didn’t vote on ONE SINGLE PROCEDURAL MOTION the entire time (other than to skip speeches prior to the 2nd round of balloting – a TIME SAVING MOTION), and as a county body the ONE AND ONLY MOTION WE VOTED ON after we broke into our districts was to extend the convention 2 hours SO WE COULD VOTE – and by the way, that extension was opposed by the Romney delegates.  Yes:  An extension of time so that delays caused by mismanagement of the convention would not prevent us from voting was OPPOSED by the Romney delegates.

Please circulate this information with your own comments – agreement or disagreement.  I know there was contention between the Romney people and the other delegations, but for the most part that contention was very respectful.  But we should ALL be concerned about a party whose officers will not take accountability for their own problems and instead blame their delegations.   The Romney people created a slate, and so the other delegations created a slate of their own.  The Romney strategy did not prevail.  That is just the nature of politics – there are winners and losers in any battle and as long as the game is played honestly and forthrightly and by the rules and we are being respectful of each other, then we are still ultimately on the same team.

But when incompetence on the part of the party is covered up by trying to blame the delegation who entrusted them with the process, and when they try to divert the focus from their errors by creating a fictitious blame game between coalitions within their delegations, it sounds analogous to a class warfare tactic more akin to OBAMA than anything conservative republicans should be fomenting.

If GOP Officials will not take accountability for their own actions, its time for them to leave their positions of so-called leadership.  In fact, its just plain time for Establishment GOP Officials to leave and make room for people who will allow the people of the party to dictate their own destinies.

-Christian B, Santorum Supporter, District 17


<additional information – 04/01/2012 – 9:30 pm>

And to additionally clarify, it is well known that the “Open Convention Slate” designed to deny would-be Romney delegates was being supported by a coalition of Paul AND Santorum supporters which is why it proved successful.  Based upon the voting I witnessed, a very significant majority of Santorum supporters joined the Paul supporters in voting the Open Convention Slate which in District 17 elected Santorum, Paul and Gingrich delegates and elected zero Romney delegates.  The Paul supporters were voting the Open Convention Slate and electing Santorum and Gingrich delegates.  I was told that Romney received zero delegates from District 18, and with the exception of the last round of voting in District 49 (the outcome of which is unknown to me), the first three rounds of voting in District 49 also yielded zero Romney delegates.  The denial of Romney delegates is a huge story conveniently omitted from the Columbian article.  Doesn’t it fit with what the establishment wants publicized?