[Hoot Gibson]

I understand those are the RNC talking points meant to smooth down the voter's ruffled feathers in Colorado. One can call it a straw poll or a beauty contest, the voters were still left out. I have seen numerous reporters on TV that say the voters in Colorado were disenfranchised and they say the Republican party bosses decided to whom the delegates were bound.

I saw the man burning his Republican voter registration and I saw the protestors who feel left out. Party rules were changed only last August and the timing looks convenient.

I don't want to get in a shooting match with you, but I've read and heard from several sources that quoted Michelle as saying that Lewendowski attempted to throw her to the ground.

I guess the bottom line is, I hate the way this political race is going because it is literally tearing the thread out of America and our way of life; or at least what we PERCEIVED was our way of life. The only way that I can rationalize this in my mind is to actively pursue the truth, as hidden as it may be. The very last thing that anyone, any party or any candidate needs to do is make up another lie to counter act the lie that was told by the "other side". Lie for lie, action for action and nobody really seems to care.

I don't write my posts based on Republican talking points, Granny. Everything that I have said about the Colorado GOP convention is factual. There was a vote at the 2012 Colorado caucuses, but the results were not binding on delegates on the first ballot. The 2012 delegates were free to vote for whomever they wanted, just as the 2016 delegates will be able to do. If you were a delegate, would you prefer being bound to a particular candidate on the first ballot or free to vote your conscience?

Think about the delegates currently bound to Rubio. As long as he does not officially withdraw from the race or endorse another candidate (rules vary by state), those delegates must vote for Rubio. From a state Republican Party's perspective, I believe that it would be better if Rubio's delegates were unbound.

Would you really want the federal government to dictate to nomination process of the political parties in this country? Because when you say that you have the right to vote for candidates for a party's presidential nomination, federal regulation is the only way you will get that right. Actually, a Constitutional amendment would probably be required to grant you such a right because a law governing the nomination of candidates by private parties would most likely violate our First Amendment right of free association.

I am a small government conservative. Citizens of countries that have "official" parties controlled by the government are generally much less free than American citizens. I am strongly opposed to the federal government mandating any part of the nomination process. I also believe that the parties chose better presidents before presidential primaries became popular.

In addition, I favor the repeal of the 17 Amendment, which requires the direct election of U.S. Senators by voters. The country would be much better off if we still let states select Senators through their legislatures. It would reduce the cost of running for the U.S. Senate and the influence of lobbyists over their behavior.

I am really not trying to be argumentative, but you have no right to vote during the nomination process. The parties are free to allow you to vote in the nominating process, but they are equally free to exclude voters from the process.

One more thing - think about the "winner take all" or "winner take most" rules in some state primaries. If you believe you have a right to vote for a nominee, then should your vote count the same as somebody who voted for a candidate who did not win a majority of votes? Trump won one-third of the votes in South Carolina but was awarded all of the delegates. Were the two-thirds of the voters who voted for other candidates "disenfranchised?" The same goes for Florida, where Trump won less than half the popular votes but was awarded all 99 delegates.

Have you heard Trump whining about the allegedly disenfranchised voters in any of the caucuses or winner-take-all states that he won? Of course not. Trump only whines on behalf of those poor, disenfranchised voters, when he loses an election. He even complains when he loses elections when he fails to campaign for any votes.

I don't know what Fields actually said, but it is not really important to me because, as I said, she is not a candidate nor is she working on a campaign staff. What I do know is that Lewandowski and Trump lied and Trump is running for president. IMO, it is always wrong for politicians and celebrities to use their position to engage in character assassination. Character assassination is a cornerstone of the Trump candidacy.