Heracles
01-26-2008, 10:38 PM
That is the question. And I pose it in hopes of provoking some deep introspection amongst the Doctor's grassroots support network. Though it is true that we as a group are subject to much unfair treatment, I believe it is time we take a long, hard look in the mirror and see if some of the criticism lobbed our way is not without merit.
Our candidate gets poor media coverage, it is true. And on top of that the coverage he does get is often times unflattering. And what do we do? We respond in turn with a flurry of rabid emails. But is that the answer? Is that the way to go? Have you taken the time to read the type of emails some within our ranks are sending in? I have, and their content is very detrimental to our cause.
It is okay to write in saying something along the lines of, "Hey, I thought your coverage was biased in x regard, and negated the substance of the Doctor's arguments. If you wish to retain my household as part of your viewing audience please be more objective in your future coverage." But it is no way ever acceptable to write in saying something like, "Hey! We're on to you and the NWO! Ron Paul is the most honest politician in the world and your network is a CFR shill!!! Way to show your true colors!"
Believe it or not, there are thousands amongst us who are sending in similar versions of my latter email example. That type of poor, disjointed communication will only help to sabotage our ultimate goal of seeing Mr. Paul in the Whitehouse, because it makes the whole of us seem like a bunch of raving lunatics. The truth is, the majority of us are moderate, and it is time we take charge.
If you honestly care about Paul's message do not misrepresent it. Do not transfer your personal ideas and beliefs to the Doctor. Whether or not you are correct in your deeply held views, it is both unwise and unfair, and even unethical to link them to Dr. Paul if he himself has never articulated such a position.
If you feel he would address your particular grievances once in office, even if he's never explicitly nor implicitly said he would, that's fine. But be polite enough to not parade your inferences as though they were facts with which Ron Paul is in agreement.
If you come across somebody doing this, call them out on it. Tell them, "I support Ron Paul and those are your own ideas, not his." Let others know his platform is being misrepresented by that individual. If you're on a social news aggregator site, downmod the person and explain to them why you did so. Explain it to others. We cannot afford to have our candidate associated with conspiracists and rude people.
Also, it is neither helpful nor decent to disparage the character and intelligence of others merely because they may have another presidential candidate in mind. Every individual is entitled to use their vote as they see fit. It is their right, as it is ours. It is our job to attempt to persuade them in our favor by providing them with facts about our candidate and facts about theirs. We should never, ever insult them nor their candidate of choice, as people make emotional attachments to their decisions. And if you mock their decisions you affect their pride and in turn put them on the defensive. We must work to avoid doing that.
Remember, if it's on the Internet, your dialogue is not a one on one; there's a silent audience out there. Do not distance them with arrogance or rude behavior. When you advocate on behalf of the Doctor be dignified. Be precise. If you don't know the answer to something in particular, acknowledge it. Defer to those who can better articulate what you mean to say. Above all, realize that no matter what, no candidate will ever achieve universal support. And that's okay.
We must also be careful in portraying our candidate as flawless. Not even amongst his supporters does everyone agree with everything Ron Paul has to say. His platform is perfect only in the minds of a very few. Now, it is not our job to actively bring up what we on a personal level might deem policy faults, but if someone else brings them up, acknowledge them. Say, "Yeah, I don't agree with him on that, either. But on a whole I believe him to be the best candidate because of x, y and z."
Also, it would help to reassure progressive voters if we reminded them of the fact that Democrats will be in charge of Congress in 09'. A president Paul would be greatly limited in what he could unilaterally accomplish on the domestic front. He would have to work with Congress on most every domestic issue, and he has many times acknowledged that fact. Given his unmatched record of abiding by the constitutional limits placed on his congressional office, we know he would not abuse the presidency as his predecessors have. We need to communicate that fact with independents and Democrats alike.
This country is at a crossroads. Many of us recognize that. Many Republicans and Democrats recognize that, as well. We need to keep that in mind. We are not the only ones who know it. But we need to lace our comments with optimism, and avoid all tones of fatalism. Instead of saying, "This country is going to hell without Ron Paul", say, "I believe Ron Paul would restore the greatness of this country." And by all means, elaborate as to why. We need to tap into the hope that resides within each of us, not the fear.
In an era when the Constitution is being taken for granted by those who took oaths to uphold it, it is up to us the citizenry to do our best to defend it. One way to do that is to bring into office the one official who's demonstrated the greatest fidelity to the principles in that document. We cannot afford to get this wrong, ladies and gentleman. Reign in your exuberence and passion and go about with reason and determination. Let's be smart in how we conduct ourselves. Let us serve the cause of freedom in the tradition of Madison and Paine. Debate above the fray.
Our candidate gets poor media coverage, it is true. And on top of that the coverage he does get is often times unflattering. And what do we do? We respond in turn with a flurry of rabid emails. But is that the answer? Is that the way to go? Have you taken the time to read the type of emails some within our ranks are sending in? I have, and their content is very detrimental to our cause.
It is okay to write in saying something along the lines of, "Hey, I thought your coverage was biased in x regard, and negated the substance of the Doctor's arguments. If you wish to retain my household as part of your viewing audience please be more objective in your future coverage." But it is no way ever acceptable to write in saying something like, "Hey! We're on to you and the NWO! Ron Paul is the most honest politician in the world and your network is a CFR shill!!! Way to show your true colors!"
Believe it or not, there are thousands amongst us who are sending in similar versions of my latter email example. That type of poor, disjointed communication will only help to sabotage our ultimate goal of seeing Mr. Paul in the Whitehouse, because it makes the whole of us seem like a bunch of raving lunatics. The truth is, the majority of us are moderate, and it is time we take charge.
If you honestly care about Paul's message do not misrepresent it. Do not transfer your personal ideas and beliefs to the Doctor. Whether or not you are correct in your deeply held views, it is both unwise and unfair, and even unethical to link them to Dr. Paul if he himself has never articulated such a position.
If you feel he would address your particular grievances once in office, even if he's never explicitly nor implicitly said he would, that's fine. But be polite enough to not parade your inferences as though they were facts with which Ron Paul is in agreement.
If you come across somebody doing this, call them out on it. Tell them, "I support Ron Paul and those are your own ideas, not his." Let others know his platform is being misrepresented by that individual. If you're on a social news aggregator site, downmod the person and explain to them why you did so. Explain it to others. We cannot afford to have our candidate associated with conspiracists and rude people.
Also, it is neither helpful nor decent to disparage the character and intelligence of others merely because they may have another presidential candidate in mind. Every individual is entitled to use their vote as they see fit. It is their right, as it is ours. It is our job to attempt to persuade them in our favor by providing them with facts about our candidate and facts about theirs. We should never, ever insult them nor their candidate of choice, as people make emotional attachments to their decisions. And if you mock their decisions you affect their pride and in turn put them on the defensive. We must work to avoid doing that.
Remember, if it's on the Internet, your dialogue is not a one on one; there's a silent audience out there. Do not distance them with arrogance or rude behavior. When you advocate on behalf of the Doctor be dignified. Be precise. If you don't know the answer to something in particular, acknowledge it. Defer to those who can better articulate what you mean to say. Above all, realize that no matter what, no candidate will ever achieve universal support. And that's okay.
We must also be careful in portraying our candidate as flawless. Not even amongst his supporters does everyone agree with everything Ron Paul has to say. His platform is perfect only in the minds of a very few. Now, it is not our job to actively bring up what we on a personal level might deem policy faults, but if someone else brings them up, acknowledge them. Say, "Yeah, I don't agree with him on that, either. But on a whole I believe him to be the best candidate because of x, y and z."
Also, it would help to reassure progressive voters if we reminded them of the fact that Democrats will be in charge of Congress in 09'. A president Paul would be greatly limited in what he could unilaterally accomplish on the domestic front. He would have to work with Congress on most every domestic issue, and he has many times acknowledged that fact. Given his unmatched record of abiding by the constitutional limits placed on his congressional office, we know he would not abuse the presidency as his predecessors have. We need to communicate that fact with independents and Democrats alike.
This country is at a crossroads. Many of us recognize that. Many Republicans and Democrats recognize that, as well. We need to keep that in mind. We are not the only ones who know it. But we need to lace our comments with optimism, and avoid all tones of fatalism. Instead of saying, "This country is going to hell without Ron Paul", say, "I believe Ron Paul would restore the greatness of this country." And by all means, elaborate as to why. We need to tap into the hope that resides within each of us, not the fear.
In an era when the Constitution is being taken for granted by those who took oaths to uphold it, it is up to us the citizenry to do our best to defend it. One way to do that is to bring into office the one official who's demonstrated the greatest fidelity to the principles in that document. We cannot afford to get this wrong, ladies and gentleman. Reign in your exuberence and passion and go about with reason and determination. Let's be smart in how we conduct ourselves. Let us serve the cause of freedom in the tradition of Madison and Paine. Debate above the fray.