For my own part, after living for 20 years in Texas, I have zero confidence in the Texas GOP.

In addition to a liberty caucus of the GOP, I am very interested in the politics of the Constitution Party, the Libertarian Party, and the Boston Tea Party.

The Constitution Party is having their convention this weekend, in Kansas City. I'm going to try to attend later today. Their site is: http://www.constitutionparty.com/

The Libertarian Party convention is next month in Denver. I'm planning to attend that event, too. Their site is: http://lp.org/

The Boston Tea Party is having our informal convention in Denver, and our formal, online convention in October. Our site is: http://www.bostontea.us/

Here is an answer I wrote recently to the question of "why bother having a Boston Tea party?"

If the LP is ineffectual, why bother with
yet another third party? Here are some excerpts from my reply.

I'm not sure that the LP is ineffectual. It is certainly gaining
some attention now that major party candidates like Mike Gravel
and Bob Barr are attracted to it. However, I think what we saw in
2006 in Portland shows that the LP needs to be "kept honest." I
see the Boston Tea Party as a watchdog for the LP, staying firmly
to the tip of the Nolan Chart, and giving the radical, hard core,
dedicated anarcho-capitalist LP members a place to go if the Reform
Caucus pursues its idiocy.

Like any good student of history, I'm aware that politics tends to
move toward the available center. People compromise. It is in
their nature to cooperate, which is what free markets are all about.
And, in cooperating, they seek common ground.

So, our role as the Boston Tea Party is to hold down the extreme. We
should push further out into the territory of less government, less
restriction, more liberty, greater security for private property, and
more free markets. If the Democrats and Republicans try to compromise
with the LP, they'll find us even more radical and difficult.

So, how are we doing so far?

Here's where the Boston Tea Party stands right now. We have the
following officer core:
Chair -- Jim Davidson
Vice-Chair -- Tom Stevens
Secretary -- Michelle Luetge
At-Large -- Michael W. Reid, Jr.
At-Large -- Alex Fitzsimmons
At-Large -- Rocco Fama

and we have affiliates in NY, NJ, PA & now TN. I would like to
add Colorado to that set. I also have contacts in Kansas, in
Wyoming, and in Texas. I might be able to add Missouri. Dr. Tom
says he may be able to get a team in Louisiana if all goes well.
Joe Black and Bo Shaffer in Colorado contacted me about forming an
affiliate there.

We have a prospective presidential candidate, Alden Link, who
has agreed (tentatively) to modify his campaign to correspond to
the BTP platform and program. And, we have a potential source
of funding for ballot access. I gather that Tennessee and
Louisiana both have fairly easy ballot access.

To give you an idea of who I am in the matter, I would direct you
to this article I wrote very recently:
http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2008/tle463-20080413-03.html

Here is an interview with Angela Keaton asking me about BTP and other
things:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/liberatedspace/2007/12/27/James-Davidison

Regards,

Jim
http://indomitus.net/ -> some more of my writing