All in all, I didn't see any problem with the overall premise for preventing shenanigans.

But this stuck out as a terrible idea:

"Upon sign-in at their precinct caucus, participants will be given a Republican loyalty pledge to sign upon sign-in. This pledge will state that they will support the Republican nominee no matter who it will be.

Any participant who refuses to sign the pledge will be asked to leave the caucus location. No person will be permitted to participate in the caucus without first agreeing to and signing the loyalty pledge."

I'm not aware of anyone from the TEA Party on this side of the state who will go for that.

On top of that, so far, I like what I'm seeing in Herman Cain. Unless something major changes in the next 15 months, he's the candidate I'm backing.

With the notable exception of Willard and Gingrich, this isn't a slight towards the rest of the field. I just feel that they can better help turn our country around if they remain where they're at.

I'm not going to go into minutia like Paul not seeking re-election, but the gist I'm getting at should be clear.

If the goal is to build grassroots involvement, compelling them to potentially support a RINO like Willard will only have the opposite effect.