Ron Paul announces campaign for liberty! The revolution continues...

My 2 Cents

I really worry for my country these days, I worry for my home state of South Carolina, I worry for my people. I've done a good deal of research, and looked into every prospective candidate, and I have to say I agree with Dr. Paul more than anyone else. Having spent time in Iraq and Afghanistan, I have seen the other side of the so called coin. Having grown up in rural South Carolina, I respect hard work and small limited government.

I knew that the media would not let Dr. Paul win. I watched the Republican Convention live, and thought Dr. Paul made, in my humble opinion, some of the best points. Got up to go to work the next morning, and noticed that on the highlights, not once did the media even cover him- it was as though he simply did not exist.

I for one am glad that Dr. Paul is beginning this campaign for liberty, and attempting to organize a voice for those of us Independent Constitutionalists out here. I am glad he is able to concede defeat, but stay true to his core values- never giving up hope. This is how we are taught in the Marines, don't give up. Mental fortitude, I respect it and feel honored to live in a country where men of such a caliber still exist.

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. "
Thomas Jefferson
Click to expand...
 
"In 1964, conservative Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater lost to Lyndon Johnson in the biggest landslide in US history."

And Ron Paul couldn't even get nominated. What would have happened to him in the general election?
 
It doesn't matter. This thread is not about the election. It is about an organization to advance the principles of liberty. You are welcome to join us, but if not, then please "get the hell out of the way".
 
It is about an organization to advance the principles of liberty.
Click to expand...

I gotta ask, "how?"

I went to the website. I still don't get it. What's going to be done? What's it going to achieve? Why?

You know how Obama is all about "hope" and "change" and stuff? But when you really listen, he never really answers some critical things, like, *what* he's gonna change, or why he is your savior.

So what's Ron Paul going to do for liberty? Complain about paper money?
 
From the website: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/mission/
The mission of the Campaign for Liberty is to promote and defend the great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity.

The Campaign for Liberty will carry out its mission through the following activities:

Promoting candidates for public office who share our commitment to freedom.

Gaining a foothold in political life at every level of government by expanding our precinct leader program.

Educating the electorate and lobbying against harmful or unconstitutional legislation.

Encouraging the formation of discussion groups and book clubs at the local level to help people learn more about our ideas.

Establishing a speakers bureau to give presentations around the country about the great principles we champion.

Developing materials for homeschooling families, to help them educate their children in history, sound economics, and related fields.

Featuring written as well as video commentaries on the news and issues of the day.

Additional efforts as time and resources allow.
 
Educating the electorate
Click to expand...

I support Ron Paul but I think we may already be doomed. The old "Horse to Water" adage comes to mind.

There is ignorant and there is stupid. One can be helped and one cannot. Most of the population comprising both parties falls into the second category.
 
Notice how he artfully dodged addressing this?
Click to expand...

I didn't dodge anything. More power to those who work these ideals. However I expect them to do so with a dose of reality. If you can't get the job done, then move out of the way and let someone who can.


So what have the Republicans running things for the last 8 years done for the Conservative Movement?
Click to expand...

Not much. That much is certian. However what they havent done is convey the message to the majority of voters (the uninformed folks who vote based on soundbites) that you need to be looney and fringe to support the constition.


The blind opposition to Paul among many Republicans proves to me there are as many prostitutes in the RNC as in the DNC. Both are full of pigs looking for slop and people more than willing to trample the rights of OTHER people. "Don't regulate my freedoms but tell that group they can't do this or that because I don't like it!" is the hallmark of a party whore.
Click to expand...

In order to oppose someone, they need to be in the race in the first place. And by in the race I mean viable. Paul never was. As I said before, if he was viable I would have given him serious consideration (though his foreign policy and his questionable "social" views were several sticking points). He never was.

Thus, what I oppose isn't Paul or his politics per say, but his refusal to recognize the obvious. His desire to be a fly in the ointment is immature in light of his political history and aspirations. There isnt any other reason for this organization other than it garners Paul donations and time on youtube. Its merely preaching to the choir which is why its net effect will be nothing, just as his campaign was.


And how would McCain would help this? He has a history of violating the Constitution.
And don't tell me that Obama is worse. That's just fear mongering. What would McCain do to ADVANCE the Constitutional cause?
You see, I am looking for positive movement, not the slower negative movement which some of you approve, and even encourage.
Click to expand...

There are some areas where he would help. Firearms, taxes and judicial appointments. There are other areas where he probably wont help. No one here including me is making the argument that McCain is the best man for supporting the constitution.

HOWEVER it is a stone cold fact that McCain will be better for the constitution than Obama. You simply can't dispute this point. A simple look at both of their voting records shows this. You call it fear mongering because you refuse to concede the point. Thats fine. Its absolutely your right to quantify things in unrealistic parameters. You can tell youself that libertarian or other conservative 3rd party candidates won't have an effect on the election.

Yet the bottom line is that in the real world there are only 2 choices for president. Thats it. Its either going to go to Obama or McCain. Both you know it and I know it. The question is which candiate will be better for the country. You can quantify that in any number of ways, but for the purposes of this argument I think we can say that the best candidate will be the one who is closest to the constitution. Thats clearly McCain.

Of course this doesn't even scratch the surface regarding things like honesty, criminal associations, social ideals etc.
 
Thus, what I oppose isn't Paul or his politics per say, but his refusal to recognize the obvious. His desire to be a fly in the ointment is immature in light of his political history and aspirations. There isnt any other reason for this organization other than it garners Paul donations and time on youtube. Its merely preaching to the choir which is why its net effect will be nothing, just as his campaign was.
Click to expand...

Not at all. If he only wanted to be a fly in the ointment he could walk out of the RNC and run Libertarian, taking valuable votes for the McCain with him. He hasn't done that. He has committed to working within the system to change the RNC from within. I never expected him to win the nomination. I did expect him to fight and fight hard in order to make his point. If there have been people who have had their eyes opened to what the Republican party once was and could be again because of this then he did his job. Hopefully he can continue to educate that minority still capable of rational thought.
 
Its merely preaching to the choir which is why its net effect will be nothing, just as his campaign was.
Click to expand...

We'll have to see, but I doubt you are right. Ron Paul's campaign got a whole bunch of college kids interested in his ideas. That will have lasting effects.

In order to oppose someone, they need to be in the race in the first place. And by in the race I mean viable. Paul never was. As I said before, if he was viable I would have given him serious consideration (though his foreign policy and his questionable "social" views were several sticking points). He never was.
Click to expand...

During what period of time was Duncan Hunter viable? ;)

for the purposes of this argument I think we can say that the best candidate will be the one who is closest to the constitution. Thats clearly McCain.
Click to expand...

Your analysis always seems to omit one thing: where you live. What are the chances that Massachusetts electoral votes will go to McCain? As you said above, you have to be viable to even be considered. The ONLY viable candidate up there is Obama. Among the unviable candidates, Paul is better than McCain, IMHO.
 
More power to those who work these ideals.
Click to expand...
Thank you.
However I expect them to do so with a dose of reality.
Click to expand...
"Reality"?! "Reality" is that the Republican party has been run into the ground because they no longer adhere to conservative principles. "Reality" is that promoting more of the same won't fix what's wrong with this party. "Reality" is that that it's folks like you who put us in the position we find ourselves today. I like the statement above better.
If you can't get the job done, then move out of the way and let someone who can.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Step aside.
 
Wow!

Comment re: Reality. How many members needed, before the Campaign for Liberty constitutes reality? 500,000? 1 million? How many, before John McCain decides reality includes accommodating his conservative base, instead of mainly pandering to disaffected Hillary supporters? Pragmatism applies to McCain as much as, if not more than the losing candidates. True leadership involves bringing together disparate blocs under a shared vision; not just saying "Who the hell else ya gonna vote for?" :rolleyes:

Anyway, well done so far on the membership drive, keep it up!:D

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Over 50,000 have joined the Ron Paul Campaign for Liberty

excerpt:

Ron Paul’s Campaign For Liberty has just reached 50% of its membership goal within the first three days and this was a goal set to be reached by September 2, 2008. That’s over 50,000 people who have joined the Ron Paul Campaign for Liberty...
Click to expand...

http://www.onlykent.com/20080616/over-50000-have-joined-the-ron-paul-campaign-for-liberty/
 
Not at all. If he only wanted to be a fly in the ointment he could walk out of the RNC and run Libertarian, taking valuable votes for the McCain with him. He hasn't done that. He has committed to working within the system to change the RNC from within.
Click to expand...

He doesn't need to switch parties to take votes away from Mccain. All he has to do is direct his 'believers' to vote for someone else. He's already done this so running libertarian wouldn't do anything for him.


We'll have to see, but I doubt you are right. Ron Paul's campaign got a whole bunch of college kids interested in his ideas. That will have lasting effects.
Click to expand...

Until they grow up, get a job and don't have their parents money to donate to the campaign and not have all day to wax political. Grassroots campaign are notorious for failure. They fizzle out as quickly as they ramped up.


During what period of time was Duncan Hunter viable?
Click to expand...

He wasn't. And that was the reason that I had to take my support elsewhere.


Your analysis always seems to omit one thing: where you live. What are the chances that Massachusetts electoral votes will go to McCain? As you said above, you have to be viable to even be considered. The ONLY viable candidate up there is Obama. Among the unviable candidates, Paul is better than McCain, IMHO.
Click to expand...

If this were any other election I would agree with you. However I don't think the traditional political paradigms are going to play out. As we have already have seen this is an election of firsts. As such I don't think its a safe bet that the chips are going to fall in their usual place.
 
Exactly. Step aside.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the republican party has won the executive office the last two elections and stands a good chance of winning it this time around. Hardly what I would call not getting the job done.
 
Getting elected is not getting the job done. Getting elected is getting in position to start getting the job done. The opportunity has been squandered and I expect that if McCain is elected he will continue the tradition.
 
In 1990, Bush41 lost the White House after 12 years of Republican control because he went back on his "No new taxes" pledge- he left the conservative reservation.

In 1994, the republicans took control of congress by promising to return to a smaller, less intrusive government with the "Contract with America". In 2000, Bush43 took office, promising the same. A November 13, 2000 article by Edward H. Crane, president of the libertarian Cato Institute, stated, "... the combined budgets of the 95 major programs that the Contract with America promised to eliminate have increased by 13%."

The Republicans squandered their majority by snookering the American public. They spent their time on gay marriage, abortion, and expanding government programs. Instead of making government smaller and less intrusive, they simply made it intrude into different areas.

They didn't get the job done that we hired them to do.
 
The "job" is to get conservatives into office where they can do some good.
Click to expand...

Then Paul is invalidated on that ground as well. After 2 decades in congress he's got nothing to show for it.
 
Well, let's just keep voting for them anyway. I'm sure they will change their ways if we keep voting for them. They surely wouldn't think that we approve of what they are doing just because we support them in what they are doing by voting for them while doing what they are doing. They would surely get the message that we don't approve if we just keep voting for them.

Wow, does that make any sense at all?
 
S2, it takes more than one to get the job done in Congress. The fact that he has stood alone in voting against unconstitutional legislation says only that he needs a lot more support from us in who we send to join him.
 
He doesn't need to switch parties to take votes away from Mccain. All he has to do is direct his 'believers' to vote for someone else. He's already done this so running libertarian wouldn't do anything for him.
Click to expand...

Who has Paul "already" directed people to vote for instead of McCain?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top