Fear About Grassroots Future

[libertad16]

So...

I think we all realize that even if this election does not work out that this is an entire MOVEMENT that is only beginning. However, there are a few concerns about this...

We seem to be very divided about the future of this movement. Some say Constitution Party! Others are screaming Libertarian Party! Or some new party or Republican Liberty Caucus, or through a variety of random websites. I think these are where we were BEFORE RP and hopefully we don't just go back to these divided factions AFTER RP because we've proven to be strong when put together.

What are your thoughts on this, how will we unite if we don't have one single candidate again in 2012 to get behind? Besides just the typical "support liberty-loving Congressmen, etc."

SIDENOTE - Ross Perot after 1992 looked like he had begun a movement. He had 19% of the vote and pledged to keep fighting for "reform". He began a party to unite his supporters and it looked like it could be a very legitimate force. Then in 2000, only 8 years later, the Reform Party garnered 0.5% of the Presidential Vote. HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN WITH THE RP REVOLUTION?????????

[JohnM]

Ross Perot after 1992 looked like he had begun a movement. He had 19% of the vote and pledged to keep fighting for "reform". He began a party to unite his supporters and it looked like it could be a very legitimate force. Then in 2000, only 8 years later, the Reform Party garnered 0.5% of the Presidential Vote.

HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN WITH THE RP REVOLUTION?????????

One answer (though not the whole answer) is "Remember that US politics has always been a two party system, and don't begin new parties."

[haigh]

There is no urgency to setting up a movement wide party level strategy.

Much more important is channeling the energy of the movement into these candidates
http://www.paulcongress.com/Candidates.html

The success and failures of these Liberty Candidates will determine whether or not The Message has power and sustainability.

[WilliamC]

As long as Ron Paul is staying in the Republican Party I can't see why those who support him want to quit it for the LP or CP.

Do we actually think Ron Paul enjoys being in a Party that ostracizes him?

Of course not, but he knows the reality that third parties are DOA on the National scene, so it's not like he has any choice if he actually wants to influence the direction our Country is heading in.

So to all you who can't stomach the Republican Party, remember, the local Party is usually nothing like the establishment Republican's in DC and, in most regions of the country, is very small and easily taken over by a dedicated group of Constitutionalists.

Don't fight the system, become the system.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

So...

I think we all realize that even if this election does not work out that this is an entire MOVEMENT that is only beginning. However, there are a few concerns about this...

We seem to be very divided about the future of this movement. Some say Constitution Party! Others are screaming Libertarian Party! Or some new party or Republican Liberty Caucus, or through a variety of random websites. I think these are where we were BEFORE RP and hopefully we don't just go back to these divided factions AFTER RP because we've proven to be strong when put together.

What are your thoughts on this, how will we unite if we don't have one single candidate again in 2012 to get behind? Besides just the typical "support liberty-loving Congressmen, etc."

SIDENOTE - Ross Perot after 1992 looked like he had begun a movement. He had 19% of the vote and pledged to keep fighting for "reform". He began a party to unite his supporters and it looked like it could be a very legitimate force. Then in 2000, only 8 years later, the Reform Party garnered 0.5% of the Presidential Vote. HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN WITH THE RP REVOLUTION?????????

In the past, movements in the United States did not deal with legal tyrannys through irresponsible divisions of conservative versus liberal or Republican versus Democrat; but, legal tyrannys were dealt with through the responsible act of ignoring the legal interpretation of the Constitution, a chaotic view which has no meaning to the majority of Americans, to concentrate more on the civil interpretation of it, a purposeful view which deals with the collective contentment of American citizens.

Imagine if you would that we Americans despise courtrooms because they represent to us the very manifestation of hell. In this hidious persecution of fire and brimstone, we are judged criminal as human beings by a judge while we are treated not like free citizens but more like bound clients by an over educated lawyer. A client by the way is someone deemed insane in regards to their ability to represent themselves in legal matters. Anyway, I say over educated because these kinds of people prosper most by covering the civil purpose designed into our Constitution by our forefathers with countless volumes of legal jargon.

When our ancestors were brought to justice by this type of legal tyranny in the past, their crimes were always that they weren't law makers, judges, lawyers, police officers, prisoners, gang members, hitmen or members of organized crime. For these functions are the ones which prosper best in a legal tyranny while the rest were left without a souls chance in hell because of the more menial function of their civil endeavors.

Juxtaposed to this hell of a legal tyranny, heaven to an American is our pursuit of happiness -- our collective contentment as citizens -- in order that we may build not a perfect Utopia but a more perfect Union. This heaven allows Americans to live primarily not at a legal address, our address in a legal tyranny, but at our civil address. This civil address is a dynamic place where we like to go as free Americans because it makes us happy. Rulers of legal tyrannys find these kinds of places hard to find when they need to tax us.

Happiness to American Patriots today should be having the freedom to choose how we work and serve our society. With the Constitution serving as the real foundation of our wealth, the real gold standard that is, this choice is a civil one and does not depend on the counterfeit money created by Loyalists lost in the legal tyranny that our society has become.

With all this in mind, we need to redefine grassroots. Grassroots should be a movement of both liberals with conservatives and Democrats with Republicans together whose singular purpose is getting society out of a courtroom -- a legal tyranny. Grassroot movements in the past acheived this by bringing government back from Federal chaos towards a more localized purpose on the state and city levels; worked by bringing back power from an Adminstrative tyrant to that of a more representational Congress -- whose jobs are to represent the people; and, worked by electing Judges on the Supreme Court who held the civil purpose of the Constitution -- the collective happiness of Americans -- over that of any meaningless legal purpose that might be argued in hell by the necessary evil of a lawyer.