I was looking up the last Pope who resigned, Gregory XII, in 1415. Without going into details you could look up, Gregory's resignation (or abdication, as he was a temporal ruler as well) came as the light at the (or near the) end of a long, sordid tunnel. In fact, it wasn't over even then, as an antipope on the other side of the political fence from Gregory, Clement VIII, resigned 15 years later. But he didn't count, because of the line of popes that became recognized, and the numbering system for the papal names involved wasn't straightened out for another 400 years. Given all that, it is a blessing that the next resignation was for the sake of the church, rather than for the sake of a man.
|Steppin' down while I still got it.|
He argues at length in his complaint that he should have the domain name -- as well as one for RonPaul.org -- for free because he already has a common law trademark on his name. (FoxNews)
And so, he has gone on the warpath to free his name from his supporters- and he's turning to an old enemy to do it.
The Texas Republican and three-time presidential candidate filed the complaint Friday with the U.N.'s World Intellectual Property Organization... Paul spokeswoman Megan Stiles said the WIPO was need to settle the dispute because the domain-name owners used a foreign registrar (Australian) to get the domain name. (FoxNews)
So let's get this straight. Ron Paul sponsored the American Restoration of Sovereignty Act in 1997. The bill was authored by Ron Paul to effect U.S. withdrawal from the United Nations. It would repeal various laws pertaining to the U.N., terminate authorization for funds to be spent on the U.N., terminate U.N. presence on U.S. property, and withdraw diplomatic immunity for U.N. employees. It would provide up to two years for the U.S. to withdraw. (Wikipedia)
Congressman Paul opposes US involvement in the United Nations and sees the entity as a threat to national sovereignty. He has stated that membership in the United Nations is fundamentally incompatible with American sovereignty and the Constitution. He has repeatedly called for the US to end it's membership in the organization, and has repeatedly introduced legislation to force this act. (PoliGu.com).
And this man is going TO this same organization he says he wants to dismantle to evict his own supporters from the website. What do they think?
The owners of the domain names say they are disappointed by the complaint, considering how many of them -- particularly the young, energetic supporters -- kept Paul’s 2012 run energized through grassroots campaigning and fundraising.
“Like thousands of fellow Ron Paul supporters, we put our lives on hold and invested five years of hard work into Ron Paul, RonPaul.com and Ron Paul 2012,” the owners, who are getting a lawyer and have 20 days to prepare a complaint response, said on their site. (FoxNews)
In addition, they say Paul is falsely claiming they offered to sell him the site- and its extensive mailing list- for $848,000.
What does Chris think? I think there's only one way to describe such a man;