The March Must Be About The Message, Not The Man. *Please Read*

[humanic]

I started this thread, entitled "The March Must Be About The Message, Not The Man", earlier today. This title may be a bit misleading, and I have had time to edit and better nail down the point I was trying to make. I want to share it with you now, because I think it is important. Here it is in a nutshell:

This march should be, in essence, The March For Freedom, Liberty, and the Constitution, Led By Ron Paul, as opposed to The March For Ron Paul

The following was posted on Daily Paul a short while ago. It was met with the exact kind of passionate division that you would expect, and it illustrates why I feel the way that I do:


How are we going to get the message out to the 9/11 truthers (who mistakenly believe that Paul agrees that 9/11 was inside job), not to carry "9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB" signs at the March? If they carry signs like this, this will be shown on the news and it's what the public will focus us on if this happens. The public will generalize that we all believe that and are lunatics. This could be a nightmare for the Paul campaign.

Paul said at the debate that 9/11 truthers should stay quiet about it and that they hurt the campaign. So, far it doesn't look like they respect that advice.

(This is not a free speech issue. I'm aware that they have a RIGHT to carry such signs. I'm talking about PURSUADING them not to carry the signs, for the best interest of the campaign.)

It is an unavoidable reality that there will be individuals who show up at this march and express controversial points of view. Even if you were able to get every single Ron Paul supporter to agree on which views should and should not be expressed (which will never happen), there will be people who show up who are not even supporters of Ron Paul. Some will even be our enemies seeking to undermine and divide us.

If it is The March For Ron Paul, there will inevitably be some Ron Paul supporters who will try to silence those who express views that they find too controversial (with the good intentions of "protecting" Ron Paul and his campaign). There will division amongst the marchers and a widespread collectivist mentality that is contrary to what Ron Paul stands for.

If it is The March For Freedom, Liberty and The Constitution, Led By Ron Paul, we will not be prone to such division and collectivism. We won't encourage this collectivist mindset where everyone argues about what hurts Ron Paul and what doesn't and who needs to be censored by the majority. Though most of the people there will be loudly supporting Ron Paul (as they should), there will not be a need for one group of people to try to silence another. There won't be a discussion about whether or not "we" should "let" people exercise their first amendment rights. Instead, we can all embrace the fact that people are exercising their God-given right to speak freely, which is a big part of what we are fighting to preserve.

Furthermore, we will show the country and the world that, unlike the supporters of other candidates, we support Ron Paul not because of a cult of personality, but because we share his core values and beliefs. We will demonstrate that we don't just talk the talk of freedom, we walk the walk and practice what we preach.

Thank you for reading, and please keep the discussion on this thread calm, friendly, and civilized.

"The freedom message brings us together; it doesn't divide us"
- Ron Paul

[theantirobot]

How about make signs that require more then one person to carry. Big banner type things. If you see someone with a 9/11 truth sign, invite them to help you carry your gigantic freedom banner and leave there's behind, where someone will covertly dispose of it. We could organize multiple teams to do this.

[Hurricane Bruiser]

Constitution Restoration Rally

Legalize the Constitution

[AlbemarleNC0003]

Drag/leather queens vs gay people.

I know all about this crap. They show the most vocal, fringe people and make the claim that we're all the same.

[Jeremy]

I think Real ID should be a main focus of this too

[boondoggle]

This is definitely a real issue with the march. Remember that, when being there, you are representing Ron Paul. Not yourself, not your personal beliefs, but him. And he wouldn't be carrying a 9/11 truth, white supremacist, or whatever other beliefs people may have that contradict his own.

Now, this isn't to say that it's throwing the focus on Paul, it's actually throwing the focus on Paul and his ethics, morals, and especially his decision to make public decisions when, and only when, they adhere to the Constitution. It's his strict respect for the Constitution that has got him so much respect from me and most people I know, it'd be a mistake not to at least make that a strong part of the march's message.

[acptulsa]

Maybe we should call it The Patriots' March Against the Patriot Act.

[humanic]

This is definitely a real issue with the march. Remember that, when being there, you are representing Ron Paul. Not yourself, not your personal beliefs, but him. And he wouldn't be carrying a 9/11 truth, white supremacist, or whatever other beliefs people may have that contradict his own.

This underscores my point. We should NOT be there representing Ron Paul, the man, and his beliefs on specific issues. We should be there representing the core issues that this country is founded on and which bring us all together. Ron Paul has a diverse group of supporters who strongly disagree on many specific issues (some of which are "hot topics"), but we are united in our support of freedom, liberty, and the Constitution. This is what the march should be about. We do not need people telling other people what to say or do, and this will inevitably happen if it is a Ron Paul march and not a freedom march. We are all united in a fight for individual liberty, and making it a Ron Paul march will lead to a widespread collectivist mentality, the very thing we are fighting against.

[Kingfisher]

Constitution Restoration Rally

Legalize the Constitution

GOOD!!

[chelu]

"The freedom message brings people together, it doesn't divide us." The theme should be the Constitution/Liberty/Freedom/Bill of Rights/Civil Liberties.

To tie in Ron Paul and draw attention to him, I think signs should be Ron Paul quotes. We have a plethora of choices to choose from at RonPaulLibrary.org If it's not part of the Ron Paul platform (e.g. Impeach Bush-Cheney/9-11 Truth/etc.) I think it would better serve us to leave out those messages.

[dvictr]

Marijuana TRUTH

[affa]

I posted this as it's own thread in the March subforum but it never got read and dropped out o' sight.
but it fits in here:
Ron Paul stands for freedom. Pretty much everyone can get behind this idea. This march can be HUGE.

That said, some of the threads going on here give me great cause for concern.

Specifically, we need to understand that Ron Paul attracts people from all walks of life. Not just people like... some of you.

In addition to promoting this March, we need to seriously start pushing forth the truth about Ron Paul. That he is NOT racist. That he is NOT homophobic. Because right now? That's what a lot of people still think.

The last thing we need to do is have Ron Paul's rally be protested by organizations that SHOULD be on our side! We need to clear the air. We need the activists acrtoss the country on our side.

Say what you will (or, actually, maybe don't) about truthers, gay pride advocates, and other 'activists' that some of you ex-Fox News watchers hate with a passion, but they have a lot of experience with rallies. They can all be on our side, promoting RON PAUL.

I am NOT advocating people pushing their own message. What I am trying to get across is that if we do not make a move to include groups like this, we very well may end up being protested by them. And why? Because we failed to truly deal with the misinformation campaign against Ron Paul. Sure, we were satisfied, and it dropped out of the news cycle... but we did not address it as properly as we should have. How do I know this? Because I live in an activist city and people still don't know the truth - they still wonder. And they shouldn't wonder, because Ron Paul is no racist.

Specifically, the following groups have a lot of experience with large protests and/or rallies, and all should be on our side:

1. Minorities.
2. Anti-War
3. Gay Pride
4. Anti-WTO/IMF types
5. Truthers.

All of the groups above want freedom. ALL of them, to some degree, could and would support Ron Paul if they understood his message and were not filled with disinformation (specifically, groups 1,2, and 3 - we probably already have a good portion of 4 and 5).

I can tell you right now - anyone coming across some of these threads that is gay or lesbian, or supports gay and lesbian pride, would be turned off instantly by certain posters thinking that they're being 'funny'. I'm not trying to be a PC cop here - I'm trying to explain something that everyone here really needs to understand - we need everyone behind us. We need unity. We need freedom. And the last thing we need are organized protests against us from people that should be protesting WITH us.


We need to deal with the original smears. We need to reach out to the activist left. We need videos showing Ron Paul in action throughout the 80's, 90's, and 00's railing against the racism found in the War on Drugs (and the War on Terror, for that matter). We need to explain that he doesn't believe gov't should have anything to do with marriage. That he doesn't care what two people do on their own time. We need to get across that he would pardon non violent drug offenders. We need to FOCUS On this - on how many people he would effectively 'free'. This alone is a powerful dismissal of any claims of racism.

To the posters on this board who are homophobic - please, please understand you don't represent all of us. But a single post here or there implicates everyone, and it implicates Ron Paul.

This Ron Paul March should be HUGE. But in order to best accomplish that, we need to reach out to the people that are established protesters and ralliers, and get them behind the Ron Paul message ASAP!

[UKLooney]

Democrats should be invited too, to tell Obama they want some real change...

[affa]

everyone needs to be invited.

and everyone needs to be informed as to why they should support Ron Paul. Yes, right now we are in a Republican primary. But on the larger scale, we're in a fight for the American heart and mind. And we need everyone in this march.

[fedup100]

I think we need to ask Paul if we should march for him or the movement. It was his instruction, he needs to be the final word.

[micahnelson]

March of the Patriots

[affa]

March of the Patriots

my only criticism of this, and it's not one i'm sure that i'll get across correctly, is that thanks to our current US gov't the word 'patriot' carries some negative associations.

that is, using the current media definition of the word, many might think it's people who support our current gov't. Yes, many people on this board know what patriots are and that a proper patriot stands up to his gov't when needed... but this isn't the current definition of the word and it can therefore be misconstrued.

Something like 'March for Freedom' might be better for this reason. We're not supporting the gov't, we're trying to change it.

[RonPaulVolunteer]

Perhaps, but for me this march is about one thing, getting Paul into the White House by showing the GOP all the votes they won't have in November if Paul is not the nominee.

[solrac]

If I see anyone with a 9/11 inside job sign at the march, I'm tearing it down. I don't care who is holding the sign. The sign's coming DOWN

[humanic]

I think Real ID should be a main focus of this too

That is the beauty of a freedom march. People are free to express whatever they want, and many people will express their opposition to Real ID on their own. We don't need a collectivist mentality where the majority tells us what issues this march is and is not about and uses coercion to force compliance. That is the exact opposite of what Ron Paul stands for and exactly the mentality that we are all united against.

[RonPaulVolunteer]

If I see anyone with a 9/11 inside job sign at the march, I'm tearing it down. I don't care who is holding the sign. The sign's coming DOWN

Write a will before you go to the march then...

There's no way we can stop them, there will be THOUSANDS...

[humanic]

If I see anyone with a 9/11 inside job sign at the march, I'm tearing it down. I don't care who is holding the sign. The sign's coming DOWN

Is that because you don't want it associated with Ron Paul or because you don't believe in the right to free speech? If it's the former, that is the whole point of my post-- there will be no need for people to physically thwart other people's exercising of their right to free speech in the name of "protecting Ron Paul and his campaign" if it as a march centered around the message (namely, freedom, liberty, and the Constitution) and not the man. If it's the latter, then you do not understand the message that we are all united here behind.

[Evazan]

+1

I have been strongly advocating this in the subforum. Ron Paul has said it himself, it is not about him, it is about the message. The march should reflect this view point.

[dannno]

I completely disagree with everything in the first post of this thread. I disagree with the poster, the person he quoted who assumes that Dr. Paul would let on that he thought 9/11 was an inside job, then blatantly lied about what Dr. Paul said about what truthers should do.. this reminds of poster RedCard rhetoric.

I personally think this thread should be deleted.

Edit: I do not encourage anybody to bring 9/11 inside job signs to the DC Rally. Bring RON PAUL signs.

[fedup100]

This one says it all. read the history, it is most fitting and there have been many Prophesies about America after the coming correction that says this will be the new Americas flag.

http://www.foundingfathers.info/stories/gadsden.html



"Don't Tread On Me"


Don't Tread on Me
The history of the Gadsden flag and how the rattlesnake became a symbol of American independence


Gadsden Don't Tread on Me flag
[The Gadsden flag:
Don't Tread on Me]


Don't Tread on Me

The Fourth of July never fails to reinspire my patriotism and sense of community with my fellow Americans, even when those fellow Americans are a mob of drunken cretins and teenagers trying to get out of downtown Chicago at 11pm.

I like seeing all the American flags. I do have my complaints about the American government, especially about how intimately the Washington D.C. politicians feel they should be involved in the daily lives of their subjects, I mean, citizens. But the flag isn't just a symbol of the American government. It's a symbol of shared American values -- especially our highest common value: freedom.

When it comes to symbolizing freedom and the spirit of '76, I do think there's a better American flag. With all due respect to the stars and stripes, I prefer the yellow Gadsden flag with the coiled rattlesnake and the defiant Don't Tread on Me motto.

The meaning of Old Glory can get mixed up with the rights and wrongs of the perpetually new-and-improved government. The meaning of "Don't Tread on Me" is unmistakable.

There's also an interesting history behind this flag. And it's intertwined with one of American history's most interesting personalities, Ben Franklin.


American unity

Benjamin Franklin is famous for his sense of humor. In 1751, he wrote a satirical commentary in his Pennsylvania Gazette suggesting that as a way to thank the Brits for their policy of sending convicted felons to America, American colonists should send rattlesnakes to England.

Three years later, in 1754, he used a snake to illustrate another point. This time not so humorous.

Franklin sketched, carved, and published the first known political cartoon in an American newspaper. It was the image of a snake cut into eight sections. The sections represented the individual colonies and the curves of the snake suggested the coastline. New England was combined into one section as the head of the snake. South Carolina was at the tail. Beneath the snake were the ominous words "Join, or Die."

Franklin's Join or Die snake woodcut


[B]This had nothing to do with independence from Britain. It was a plea for unity in defending the colonies during the French and Indian War. It played off a common superstition of the time: a snake that had been cut into pieces could come back to life if you joined the sections together before sunset.

The snake illustration was reprinted throughout the colonies. Dozens of newspapers from Massachusetts to South Carolina ran Franklin's sketch or some variation of it. For example, the Boston Gazette recreated the snake with the words "Unite and Conquer" coming from its mouth.

I suppose the newspaper editors were hungry for graphic material, this being America's first political cartoon. Whatever the reason, Franklin's snake wiggled its way into American culture as an early symbol of a shared national identity.


American independence

The snake symbol came in handy ten years later, when Americans were again uniting against a common enemy.

In 1765 the common enemy was the Stamp Act. The British decided that they needed more control over the colonies, and more importantly, they needed more money from the colonies. The Crown was loaded with debt from the French and Indian War.

Why shouldn't the Americans -- "children planted by our care, nourished by our indulgence," as Charles Townshend of the House of Commons put it -- pay off England's debt?

Colonel Isaac Barre, who had fought in the French and Indian War, responded that the colonies hadn't been planted by the care of the British government, they'd been established by people fleeing it. And the British government hadn't nourished the colonies, they'd flourished despite what the British government did and didn't do.

In this speech, Barre referred to the colonists as "sons of liberty."

In the following months and years, as we know, the Sons of Liberty became increasingly resentful of English interference. And as the tides of American public opinion moved closer and closer to rebellion, Franklin's disjointed snake continued to be used as symbol of American unity, and American independence. For example, in 1774 Paul Revere added it to the masthead of The Massachusetts Spy and showed the snake fighting a British dragon.

Revere's rattlesnake masthead
[Paul Revere's modified "Join or Die" snake from the masthead
of Thomas's Boston Journal, July 7, 1774. Newspaper Serial
and Government Publications Division, Library of Congress.]


The birth of the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps

Georgia $20 bill
[The seal from a 1778 $20 bill from Georgia. The financial backing for these bills was property seized from loyalists. The motto reads "Nemo me impune lacesset," i.e. "No one will provoke me with impunity."]
By 1775, the snake symbol wasn't just being printed in newspapers. It was appearing all over the colonies ... on uniform buttons ... on paper money ... and of course, on banners and flags.

The snake symbol morphed quite a bit during its rapid, widespread adoption. It wasn't cut up into pieces anymore. And it was usually shown as an American timber rattlesnake, not a generic serpent.

We don't know for certain where, when, or by whom the familiar coiled rattlesnake was first used with the warning "Don't Tread on Me."

We do know when it first entered the history books.

In the fall of 1775, the British were occupying Boston and the young Continental Army was holed up in Cambridge, woefully short on arms and ammunition. At the Battle of Bunker Hill, Washington's troops had been so low on gunpowder that they were ordered "not to fire until you see the whites of their eyes."

In October, a merchant ship called The Black Prince returned to Philadelphia from a voyage to England. On board were private letters to the Second Continental Congress that informed them that the British government was sending two ships to America loaded with arms and gunpowder for the British troops.

Congress decided that General Washington needed those arms more than General Howe. A plan was hatched to capture the British cargo ships. They authorized the creation of a Continental Navy, starting with four ships. The frigate that carried the information from England, the Black Prince, was one of the four. It was purchased, converted to a man-of-war, and renamed the Alfred.

To accompany the Navy on their first mission, Congress also authorized the mustering of five companies of Marines. The Alfred and its sailors and marines went on to achieve some of the most notable victories of the American Revolution. But that's not the story we're interested in here.

What's particularly interesting for us is that some of the Marines that enlisted that month in Philadelphia were carrying drums painted yellow, emblazoned with a fierce rattlesnake, coiled and ready to strike, with thirteen rattles, and sporting the motto "Don't Tread on Me."


Benjamin Franklin diverts an idle hour

Franklin portrait
[Benjamin Franklin, portrait by David Martin, 1767. White House Historical Association.]
In December 1775, "An American Guesser" anonymously wrote to the Pennsylvania Journal:

"I observed on one of the drums belonging to the marines now raising, there was painted a Rattle-Snake, with this modest motto under it, 'Don't tread on me.' As I know it is the custom to have some device on the arms of every country, I supposed this may have been intended for the arms of America."

This anonymous writer, having "nothing to do with public affairs" and "in order to divert an idle hour," speculated on why a snake might be chosen as a symbol for America.

First, it occurred to him that "the Rattle-Snake is found in no other quarter of the world besides America."

The rattlesnake also has sharp eyes, and "may therefore be esteemed an emblem of vigilance." Furthermore,

"She never begins an attack, nor, when once engaged, ever surrenders: She is therefore an emblem of magnanimity and true courage. ... she never wounds 'till she has generously given notice, even to her enemy, and cautioned him against the danger of treading on her."

Finally,

"I confess I was wholly at a loss what to make of the rattles, 'till I went back and counted them and found them just thirteen, exactly the number of the Colonies united in America; and I recollected too that this was the only part of the Snake which increased in numbers. ...

"'Tis curious and amazing to observe how distinct and independent of each other the rattles of this animal are, and yet how firmly they are united together, so as never to be separated but by breaking them to pieces. One of those rattles singly, is incapable of producing sound, but the ringing of thirteen together, is sufficient to alarm the boldest man living."

Many scholars now agree that this "American Guesser" was Benjamin Franklin.

Franklin, of course, is also known for opposing the use of an eagle -- "a bird of bad moral character" -- as a national symbol.


Next Page

[literatim]

The march is what Ron Paul says it is. This was his directive and not our idea.

[humanic]

Write a will before you go to the march then...

There's no way we can stop them, there will be THOUSANDS...

Exactly. The only reason that anyone who truly believes in free speech would WANT to stop them is to "protect Ron Paul and his campaign" by keeping the campaign from being associated with people expressing "politically incorrect" points of view. However, as I made clear in the original post, there will be people expressing politically incorrect points of view no matter what you do, sincere or not. If we make the march about the core issues that bring us together (freedom and the Constitution) people can embrace the diversity even if they disagree instead of trying to stamp it out.

[dblee]

Legalize the Constitution sounds a bit oxymoronic, since it is supposed to be the Law. Restore or Save the Constitution sounds much better.

On that note, I agree that it ought to be about the message not the man. If we can focus on the message, then we can extend our tent to include MANY different groups and organizations who are opposed to the blatant disrespect to our constitution, and support the cause of liberty. This has to be bigger than the Ron Paul Revolution. This has to be the second American Revolution.

[humanic]

I completely disagree with everything in the first post of this thread. I disagree with the poster, the person he quoted who assumes that Dr. Paul would let on that he thought 9/11 was an inside job, then blatantly lied about what Dr. Paul said about what truthers should do.. this reminds of poster RedCard rhetoric.

I personally think this thread should be deleted.

Do you care to explain why you disagree with me? Do you even have a reason?

[dblee]

The march is what Ron Paul says it is. This was his directive and not our idea.

It was his idea, but we are not an army of mindless drones. We are a grassroots movement of individuals, and according to Ron Paul himself, we ARE the movement, he's just the messenger.

According also, to his personal philosophy, the free market of ideas and individuals will prevail! :)

[Molly1]

The March is for Ron Paul and everything HE stands for.

He's made his platform very clear.

Ron Paul asked us to march for him.

Let's not muddy the waters.

[austin4paul]

In the meantime, while you debate the March on Washington -- please also consider this. It is more timely and can be the "Shot Heard Round the World" for the Republican Party if we do this NOW!

Please put any replies for this topic is here:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=119387

I'm just posting details here also as I feel this is both timely and very IMPORTANT!

* * *

At a speech given by Newt Gingrich before CPAC last Sunday, he warned that the Republicans face a "catastrophic" election this year unless the GOP changes course. He pointed out that on Super Tuesday, 14.6 million voters took part in the Democratic races, compared to 8.3 million Republicans.

He also pointed out that this upcoming election is about MORE than just the Presidency -- there are 513,000 elected officials in the United States. If the turnout is the same at the general election as it is at the primary and those voters vote down party lines, the Republican party will face a complete WIPE-OUT in the next elections -- not just in the White House, but also in Congress, in the Senate and in every local position in elected politics!

The party leadership is beginning to realize this and a mass panic is emerging within the party ranks. We need to seize this moment of opportunity.

Mr. Gingrich said: "I was in Idaho this last week, and Barack Obama on last Saturday had 16,000 people in Boise. The idea [of] the most liberal Democratic Senator getting 16,000 people in Boise was inconceivable....and every person who cares about the conservative movement and every person who cares about the Republican Party had better stop and say to themselves, 'There is something big happening in this county.' We don't understand it. We're not responding to it. And we're currently not competitive. And if we want to get to be competitive, we had better change and we had better change now."

Where do you think Newt Gingrich got the phrase "Something Big" from? Does this sound familiar?

"There's something going on in this country, and it's big. It's really big! And I happen to be lucky enough to be a part of it!"
- Dr. Ron Paul, CNN/Youtube debate, November 28, 2007

Gingrich sounded the alarm and issued an immediate call for CHANGE within the Republican party: "And let me make this very clear, I believe we have to change or expect defeat."

We have an opportunity, and it is coming up soon -- on February 23rd, Ron Paul will be holding a rally in Austin, TX.

We are already expecting at least 2,000 people to attend this rally, and we've just barely gotten started promoting it.

If we maximize participation at this rally and we can draw 20,000 people to Austin, we can show the Republican Party leaders that Ron Paul is the only candidate in their ranks that has the ability to compete with Barack Obama.

The media will not be able to ignore this. In the aftermath of Gingrich's warning, they are already more willing to speak out against McCain. We can do this -- I know we can. I propose that instead of (or perhaps in addition to) a march in Washington next summer, that we do what only the Ron Paul Revolution has the power and enthusiastic support to do. We need to bring 20,000 Ron Paul supporters to the rally in Austin on February 23rd and send a loud and clear message to the Republican leadership that it's time for change, they need to embrace us and return the Republican party to it's traditional roots -- the views and ideas being promoted by Dr. Ron Paul and his growing army of Republican Revolutionaries.

Following the rally on February 23rd, I call on those who decend on Austin to then join with Operation: Come and Take it and spread out across Texas united as modern-day patriots to united the Republican party behind the only man who can effectively compete with Mr. Obama.

I propose we call this rally SOMETHING BIG. Let's join together and show the Republican Party what SOMETHING BIG really means!

I have reserved the domain name itssomethingbig.com for use in promoting this event. I don't have much talent with web development or graphic design. If someone can help, please PM me. Let's get this going!

[Revolution9]

This is a march for Ron Paul to show the size and power of the remnant. I see clowns here suggesting that 911 truthers may fuck shit up while wholeheartedly endorsing organistations crawling with cointelpro into the organisation phase. Get a grip people. This is RP's rally..or didn't you watch the video. Other than that..who the fuck are you working for or against???

Randy

[1836]

I wouldn't be surprised if the 9/11 nuts were out in force. They never listened, anyway.

And I personally blame them for harming our image in the media in the early days of big fundraising, back in October, November... when every interview Paul had, he was asked about 9/11.

Ugh.

[dannno]

Do you care to explain why you disagree with me? Do you even have a reason?

Yes. Ron Paul SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT HE CANNOT TELL HIS SUPPORTERS WHAT TO DO. Then he repeated it to emphasize. Now the person you quoted is saying the EXACT OPPOSITE.

I'm not going to get into the second part, but if you have 2 cents worth of imagination you can figure it out for yourself.

[affa]

If I see anyone with a 9/11 inside job sign at the march, I'm tearing it down. I don't care who is holding the sign. The sign's coming DOWN

please be careful.

a sign coming down at a portland peace protest was covered by the media as a huge 'brawl'.

what they didn't mention (but raw footage supports) was that:

1. the people who threw the punches were held the sign
2. the sign was one of those 'god hates ****' signs
3. the guy holding the sign was yelling obscenities and derogatory terms at the peaceful protesters. yes, they were yelling back but i think that can be understood given the situation.

Point is - ripping down someone's sign escalates a situation. Please be careful.

[affa]

This one says it all. read the history, it is most fitting and there have been many Prophesies about America after the coming correction that says this will be the new Americas flag.

http://www.foundingfathers.info/stories/gadsden.html



thanks for this link!

[dannno]

The March is for Ron Paul and everything HE stands for.

He's made his platform very clear.

Ron Paul asked us to march for him.

Let's not muddy the waters.

+1



This is a march for Ron Paul to show the size and power of the remnant. I see clowns here suggesting that 911 truthers may fuck shit up while wholeheartedly endorsing organistations crawling with cointelpro into the organisation phase. Get a grip people. This is RP's rally..or didn't you watch the video. Other than that..who the fuck are you working for or against???

Randy

+1



Now can we get some other people who agree to 1-star this thread??

I don't want to get involved naming this thing, but if I were to do it, it would be Ron Paul Revolution DC Rally: March for Freedom

[the_oco]

I agree, this march should be focused on freedom, and of course because it is focused on freedom, there will be plenty of RP signs, but lots of NO IRS signs, no war signs, all the good stuff.If we focus this only on RP, we will only get RP supporters. Focus it on freedom, you'll get gun-rights, free speech activists, and ya, probably some truthers. I'm not a truther, don't agree with what they have to say, but will fight to the death to defend their right to say it. So yes, I agree, focus this on the movement, not the man.

[Shink]

As someone who disbelieves in the government's conspiracy theory about 9/11, I know that regardless, people need to keep the issue away from that march. There will surely be some people who disregard that anyway, provocateurs and honest people alike. One thing to make sure of, though, is to not throw a big bitchfit to anyone unwise enough to take a 9/11 sign. That'll make bigger news than just a 9/11 sign-holder. Stay calm no matter who says what.

[the_oco]

I'll be there swinging a "live free or die sign" with RP on the other

[Revolution9]

Now can we get some other people who agree to 1-star this thread??

I don't want to get involved naming this thing, but if I were to do it, it would be Ron Paul Revolution DC Rally: March for Freedom

I like "Don't Tread On Me" - An American Freedom Celebration for Ron Paul and The Remnant.. May be a bit long though but DTOM s the key phrase. Everybody knows that snippet of history and has seen the flag.

Best
Randy
Long live Ron Paul!

[dannno]

I agree, this march should be focused on freedom, and of course because it is focused on freedom, there will be plenty of RP signs, but lots of NO IRS signs, no war signs, all the good stuff.If we focus this only on RP, we will only get RP supporters. Focus it on freedom, you'll get gun-rights, free speech activists, and ya, probably some truthers. I'm not a truther, don't agree with what they have to say, but will fight to the death to defend their right to say it. So yes, I agree, focus this on the movement, not the man.

I agree, I think we should make the rally about all sorts of different things. It can be a peace rally, a No IRS Rally, most importantly a freedom rally and hopefully we will be able to attract all sorts of interests... but most importantly it is a Ron Paul Rally and we shouldn't try to pretend that it isn't.

[affa]

Ok...

As mentioned, we're going to have all sorts of groups here.
Truthers.
Anti-WTO/IMF types
Pro-gun people
pro-lifers, pro-choicers
etc,etc,etc

Yes, this March needs to be about Ron Paul.

But some of you seem to want this thing to be exclusionary.

Understand, there will be a LOT of people at this event. You will not agree with all of them.

We need to include everyone, or else we will be setting ourselves up to be protested by the very groups that should be supporting us! Freedom is powerful.

EDIT TO ADD:
I am not advocating everyone use this march for their own agenda. Everyone should be there supporting Ron Paul. But we need to understand that others will do as others will do.

[Evazan]

This is a march for Ron Paul to show the size and power of the remnant. I see clowns here suggesting that 911 truthers may fuck shit up while wholeheartedly endorsing organistations crawling with cointelpro into the organisation phase. Get a grip people. This is RP's rally..or didn't you watch the video. Other than that..who the fuck are you working for or against???

Randy

By the time this march happens the primaries will be over. It is not a march for a man, it is a march for ideals. Ron Paul has said it himself over and over, this movement is not about him, it is about the ideals of freedom and the constitution.

If you make this march about Ron Paul it will be doomed to fail. You will have a couple thousand people there waving Ron Paul signs which will do nothing else but to annoy the same people who have already seen Ron Paul signs waved on corners throughout the country.

Ron Paul is a humble man. I don't understand how people can misinterpret his words and think this is a march for him. The point of this march is to gather all freedom loving people into one area to show the government that america still respects the constitution. I do not care if these people are truthers, druggies, anti-war, anti-abortion, or anything else. As long as they stand for the constitution they should be welcomed with open arms, not shunned away.

[tamor]

Which one of these is the main purpose of the march?
1. to get RP elected
2. to demonstrate against the loss of freedoms
3. to get so many people there the msm cannot ignore us
4. other?

[humanic]

Yes. Ron Paul SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT HE CANNOT TELL HIS SUPPORTERS WHAT TO DO. Then he repeated it to emphasize. Now the person you quoted is saying the EXACT OPPOSITE.

I'm not going to get into the second part, but if you have 2 cents worth of imagination you can figure it out for yourself.

Did you read my post? You didn't, did you? I didn't quote that person because I agreed with them. I quoted that person because they were saying the exact same thing that Ron Paul is against, like you said. You seem to be in agreement with me. Please read my post before you criticize it and call for it's deletion.

[dannno]

Did you read my post? You didn't, did you? I didn't quote that person because I agreed with them. I quoted that person because they were saying the exact same thing that Ron Paul is against, like you said. You seem to be in agreement with me. Please read my post before you criticize it and call for it's deletion.

Hmmmmmm..... well I re-read and I'll say I disagree with both of you still for different reasons.

First of all, when somebody says, "this is not a thread to discuss 9/11, I repeat, this is not a thread to discuss 9/11"

then proceeds to quote somebody with fascist tendencies who claims to support Ron Paul I'm going to start out a little upset..

The reason I disagree with the latter part of your post is not because this IS supposed to be about Ron Paul and you make it sound like you don't want it to have anything to do with him because there might be some 9/11 truther signs out there, and you don't want all these different opinions to be associated with him.. but what's the point of doing it at all if we're not going to stand behind Ron Paul :confused:

[Crickett]

Which one of these is the main purpose of the march?
1. to get RP elected
2. to demonstrate against the loss of freedoms
3. to get so many people there the msm cannot ignore us
4. other?

I have a 5th one. I want to March to get back to the Constitution. To me, that covers everything and the Representatives are passing reprehensible laws. Voting for "immunity" of crimes for the president and now telephone companies! They have no authority to do this. Let us march for the Constitution. That is what I thought RP meant.

[humanic]

Hmmmmmm..... well I re-read and I'll say I disagree with both of you still for different reasons.

First of all, when somebody says, "this is not a thread to discuss 9/11, I repeat, this is not a thread to discuss 9/11"

then proceeds to quote somebody with fascist tendencies who claims to support Ron Paul I'm going to start out a little upset..

The reason I disagree with the latter part of your post is not because this IS supposed to be about Ron Paul and you make it sound like you don't want it to have anything to do with him because there might be some 9/11 truther signs out there, and you don't want all these different opinions to be associated with him.. but what's the point of doing it at all if we're not going to stand behind Ron Paul :confused:

You are misunderstanding my post. I am not saying that I "don't want these different opinions to be associated with him." I am stating two facts:

1) There are many people who feel that certain points of view that they find to be "politically incorrect" should not be associated with Ron Paul.
2) There will inevitably be people exercising their first amendment rights and expressing "politically incorrect" points of view at this march no matter what. Some of them may not even be Ron Paul supporters.

Because of these two facts, I suggest that we make this march about Ron Paul's message of freedom, liberty, and the Constitution rather than about Ron Paul the man. Otherwise, many of the people in group #1 above will want to censor the people in group #2, and it will create division instead of unity. We should embrace our diversity and celebrate the expressions thereof, not adopt a collectivist mentality where one subsection of supporters tries to use coercion to suppress the free expression of another based on their subjective interpretation of what is and is not good for Ron Paul's campaign. To do so would fly in the face of the message that Ron Paul represents. What could be a better way to promote his presidency than by showing that, unlike many supporters of other candidates, the supporters of Ron Paul are not a cult of personality, but rather a group of like-minded individuals supporting a candidate who shares their beliefs and values? What could be a better testament to the legitimacy of the movement of which Ron Paul is the central figure than for us to come out and practice what we preach instead of acting like collectivists, and therefore hypocrites?

[Revolution9]

<snip preamble>

If you make this march about Ron Paul it will be doomed to fail. <snip ornamentation>

Whose side are you on pal? RP delivered this message and he asked us to do this march to show OUR number and the size of the REMNANT. You have no idea of our strength and commitment and behind the scenes gambits.

Randy

[Revolution9]

Ron Paul is THE MESSAGE. There is no ego trip in the Man. There is alot of ego tripping disguised as nanny-esque guidance that look all askew to my perceptions judging by my viewing and understanding of ALL that was said and spoken to in his video.

Randy

[humanic]

As someone who disbelieves in the government's conspiracy theory about 9/11, I know that regardless, people need to keep the issue away from that march. There will surely be some people who disregard that anyway, provocateurs and honest people alike. One thing to make sure of, though, is to not throw a big bitchfit to anyone unwise enough to take a 9/11 sign. That'll make bigger news than just a 9/11 sign-holder. Stay calm no matter who says what.

This is what I am saying. People will NOT be able to stop everyone there from expressing points of view that THEY deem to be politically incorrect and detrimental to Ron Paul's campaign. If the march is all about the Ron Paul campaign instead of the message of freedom and the Constitution, there will be those who try to silence them. Not only will this create massive division, it will be a widespread manifestation of collectivism, the very thing we are united against.

[affa]

Ron Paul is THE MESSAGE.

Absolute QFT.

The message and the man are intricately bound together. The man's integrity and lifelong commitment to the message empower an already powerful message.

[ziggrl]

If we go with just the message (and not RP), we can also include the 3rd party people and make it even bigger. Libertarians, Green Party, Constitution Party. All the parties that promote liberty.

After all, RP said that it is not about him, it's about the message. The message is bigger and should include all freedom loving people.

[ziggrl]

A Constitution march would be appropriate. Nobody seems to follow it anymore despite their oath of office.

[humanic]

If we go with just the message (and not RP), we can also include the 3rd party people and make it even bigger. Libertarians, Green Party, Constitution Party. All the parties that promote liberty.

After all, RP said that it is not about him, it's about the message. The message is bigger and should include all freedom loving people.

Exactly. And furthermore, as I've said, what could be a better testament to Ron Paul's ability to lead and unite this country, and to his viability as a candidate, than for thousands and thousands of people take to the streets to promote the very things he stands for? What could be a better testament to the legitimacy of the movement of which Ron Paul is the central figure than for us to come out and practice what we preach instead of acting like collectivists, and therefore hypocrites? What could be a better way to promote his presidency than by showing that, unlike many supporters of other candidates, the supporters of Ron Paul are not a cult of personality, but rather a group of like-minded individuals supporting a candidate who shares their beliefs and values.

[Tina]

I'm going to do my best to be there for the march. This may be one of the most important things we can do for this country right now.

[humanic]

//

[rprprs]

The message and the man are intricately bound together. The man's integrity and lifelong commitment to the message empower an already powerful message.

Let us not forget this.

Now having said that, I gotta say that this whole "What should this march be about?" debate is very problematic. I fully understand the inherent hypocrisy in adopting an exclusionary and/or collectivist stance. But having an "open-arms", "everybody's-welcome" attitude presents its own set of dangers. Unbridled, that option will dilute any meaningful message beyond recognition. Without clear and distinct focus on the message of Dr. Paul, the march will be in danger of deteriorating into one big meaningless mess, a free-for-all party reminiscent of a 60's "Be-In". The concept of having a "Big Tent" certainly has its merits, but this is OUR tent, after all. I see no problem in using some discretion as to whom we welcome in.

[Cooter]

the thing is, there are people like me who are just now getting into the process. sure ive voted, but untill i heard about ron paul, saw all his youtube videos, all the debates, and how he stood on all the issues i coudlnt have told you want a deligate, precinct, or convention was. sad i know, but its the truth. it was ron paul that introduced me to the message so im a little hesitant to support all these groups that i have never heard of. im sure they support much of what ron paul does, but i dont know.

[Mckarnin]

How about having an online pledge that people sign when they agree to march that states that they will behave according to certain standards of decency and professionalism and legitimacy and that they will present themselves properly physically so that they do not reflect poorly on our movement.

[colecrowe]

*EDIT: BOTH--AND NOBODY IN THE WORLD WOULD EVER BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE.

The man. The message is of course more important than the man--BUT he is the brave statesman that has been fighting for us.

He is the only MAN that is about this message anymore.

We could have organized rallies for freedom, etc--but did we and were we doing so before Ron Paul stood up? No!

There is a time and a place for everything. And Ron Paul asked us for our support. If we purposely say: Message is #1 and Ron Paul is #2--then we are sending the message that he is NOT about freedom and the Constitution. But he is--and that is the reason we support him. You will muddy that and send the wrong message if you try to define it one way or the other. And there's no reason for it.

We want to send the message that we are for Ron Paul BECAUSE, AND ONLY BECAUSE, he is for freedom, rule of law, the Constitution, honest government, government of and for the people, and a non-interventionist foreign policy, etc., etc...

THIS IS A FALSE CHOICE. There is, and should not be, a number 1 and number 2. Bring Ron Paul signs, Constitution signs; have Ron Paul speeches, and Constitution speeches--but even better--have signs and speeches that speak of BOTH. Because it about freedom, and Ron Paul--Ron Paul, and freedom.

That is what this event is about. You should have stood up and took the initiative and had people rally around freedom or whatever--but Ron Paul did that, and he being brave and strong and fighting for the presidency--and RIGHT NOW we are having a rally for that, and for him (but we all know it is about 'the message' and about America). It's both, that's all I'm trying to say.

So stop.

[humanic]

How about having an online pledge that people sign when they agree to march that states that they will behave according to certain standards of decency and professionalism and legitimacy and that they will present themselves properly physically so that they do not reflect poorly on our movement.

But that assumes that there won't be people who show up at the march who are not Ron Paul supporters. I think this is inevitable, and not only that, I think people will show up who are enemies of Ron Paul's message and Ron Paul's presidential campaign who will purposely try to divide us by expressing controversial points of view that many people do not want associated with Ron Paul.

[colecrowe]

why not both?

Thank you. So simple and true. Haven't you noticed that Ron Paul's whole campaign has shown that to just happen. The other campaigns talk only about Obama being charismatic and black, and McCain being a war hero, and on and on. We talk almost always only about the Constitution, Freedom, Free Markets, Sound Money, Bill of Rights, etc.--and oh yeah--that's why Ron Paul has our vote and support.

Have you not noticed that every event has tons of home made signs about freedom and Constitution and founders and taxes, etc. Only a few signs with just Ron Paul's name on them??

Have you not noticed that Ron Paul goes on and on about these things--and bases everything he says and does on them??

Stop trying to figure out if it should be one or the other. It is both. (OF COURSE THE MESSAGE IS MORE IMPORTANT! But if you insist on making sure that everyone knows it's Message #1, Ron Paul 2, then you should have organized an event about the message on your own. Did you? NO! Did you think of organizing an event about freedom and taxes before Ron Paul? Did you actually do anything about it? NO!)

BOTH.

[humanic]

*EDIT: BOTH--AND NOBODY IN THE WORLD WOULD EVER BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE.

The man. The message is of course more important than the man--BUT he is the brave statesman that has been fighting for us.

He is the only MAN that is about this message anymore.

We could have organized rallies for freedom, etc--but did we and were we doing so before Ron Paul stood up? No!

There is a time and a place for everything. And Ron Paul asked us for our support. If we purposely say: Message is #1 and Ron Paul is #2--then we are sending the message that he is NOT about freedom and the Constitution. But he is--and that is the reason we support him. You will muddy that and send the wrong message if you try to define it one way or the other. And there's no reason for it.

We want to send the message that we are for Ron Paul BECAUSE, AND ONLY BECAUSE, he is for freedom, rule of law, the Constitution, honest government, government of and for the people, and a non-interventionist foreign policy, etc., etc...

THIS IS A FALSE CHOICE. There is, and should not be, a number 1 and number 2. Bring Ron Paul signs, Constitution signs; have Ron Paul speeches, and Constitution speeches--but even better--have signs and speeches that speak of BOTH. Because it about freedom, and Ron Paul--Ron Paul, and freedom.

That is what this event is about. You should have stood up and took the initiative and had people rally around freedom or whatever--but Ron Paul did that, and he being brave and strong and fighting for the presidency--and RIGHT NOW we are having a rally for that, and for him (but we all know it is about 'the message' and about America). It's both, that's all I'm trying to say.

So stop.


I never advocated not bringing Ron Paul signs or giving Ron Paul speeches, or not associating the two. Quite the contrary, I think everyone here should come out and make it clear that they are there because they support Ron Paul for president because he is the person in the race who is the champion of the message that unites us all . I'm saying it should be the march for freedom, led by Ron Paul, as opposed to simply the march for Ron Paul. I think this will keep us united and show that we support Ron Paul not because of a cult of personality, but because we share his values and beliefs. Is that a more agreeable way to put it?

[Mckarnin]

But that assumes that there won't be people who show up at the march who are not Ron Paul supporters. I think this is inevitable, and not only that, I think people will show up who are enemies of Ron Paul's message and Ron Paul's presidential campaign who will purposely try to divide us by expressing controversial points of view that many people do not want associated with Ron Paul.

There may be "infiltrators"..in particular I could see people infiltrating to try and instigate fighting or aggressive action towards the police to get people arrested (I actually think I have heard of this happening at other RP events) BUT I think there are also plenty of Ron Paul supporters who are not accustomed to behaving as civilly as they should when representing Ron Paul. If we had, say 50,000 courtesy pledged people attend at most there would probably be a few hundred infiltrators. If 50,000 are behaving well and perhaps even wearing a special mark/item of clothing that shows them to be people who actually signed up through the proper channels I think it will really deflate anyone who wants to hurt us by being disruptive.

[the_oco]

Signing a pledge to adhere to somebodies standard of decency doesn't really fly with me. As far as the focus of the march goes, If it is about freedom, lots of people will want to be involved, and you know if it is about freedom, Ron Paul will naturally become the focus. We don't need to tell certain groups they aren't invited because the don't endorse RP. We need to invite everyone, and then once they are there show them that everyone would be best represented by RP.

[the_oco]

...and yes, there will be agent provocateurs. Nothing we do or say will ever prevent that fact. Im sure the major organizers of this event will also find themselves being profiled and watched in the weeks leading to and after the rally. Nothing we can do about that. All we can do is make sure we don't fall into their traps. Check out 'Martial Law 9/11' to get a get yourself prepared for what it will be like. Yes it is a Alex Jones movie, but as someone who isn't a fan of his but was at the RNC I can say safely he gave an accurate portrayal of the way 'the man' looks at and handles these things in this day and age.

[humanic]

Someone tell me why there needs to be a distinction?

The distinction is this: The March For Freedom, Liberty and The Constitution, Led By Ron Paul versus The March For Ron Paul.

There will inevitably be those who show up and express controversial points of view. Some of these people will be Ron Paul supporters, some will not.

If it is The March For Ron Paul, there will inevitably be some Ron Paul supporters who, because they think having such ideas associated with Ron Paul is damaging to his campaign, will want to silence those who express them. This will breed a hypocritical collectivist mentality that is contrary to what Ron Paul stands for.

If it is The March For Freedom, Liberty and The Constitution, Led By Ron Paul, we will not be prone to such division and collectivism. Though most of the people there will be loudly supporting Ron Paul (as they should), there will not be a need for one group of people to silence another for exercising their first amendment rights.

Also, as I said above, it would show the world that unlike many supporters of other candidates, we support Ron Paul not because of a cult of personality, but because we share his values and beliefs. It would also demonstrate that we walk the walk of freedom; we don't just talk the talk.

[Mckarnin]

Signing a pledge to adhere to somebodies standard of decency doesn't really fly with me. As far as the focus of the march goes, If it is about freedom, lots of people will want to be involved, and you know if it is about freedom, Ron Paul will naturally become the focus. We don't need to tell certain groups they aren't invited because the don't endorse RP. We need to invite everyone, and then once they are there show them that everyone would be best represented by RP.


I know it would be tricky. I guess I think that people with diverse opinions can agree to adhere to uniforms standards of decency...no swearing, throwing objects, masks...?

[colecrowe]

The distinction is this: The March For Freedom, Liberty and The Constitution, Led By Ron Paul versus The March For Ron Paul.

There will inevitably be those who show up and express controversial points of view. Some of these people will be Ron Paul supporters, some will not.

If it is The March For Ron Paul, there will inevitably be some Ron Paul supporters who, because they think having such ideas associated with Ron Paul is damaging to his campaign, will want to silence those who express them. This will breed a hypocritical collectivist mentality that is contrary to what Ron Paul stands for.

If it is The March For Freedom, Liberty and The Constitution, Led By Ron Paul, we will not be prone to such division and collectivism. Though most of the people there will be loudly supporting Ron Paul (as they should), there will not be a need for one group of people to silence another for exercising their first amendment rights.

Also, as I said above, it would show the world that unlike many supporters of other candidates, we support Ron Paul not because of a cult of personality, but because we share his values and beliefs. It would also demonstrate that we walk the walk of freedom; we don't just talk the talk.



I think you're absolutely right. About the Title. You made excellent points and I agree with them. I was really worried at first that people were trying to make it ABOUT the message FIRST, then about Ron Paul second. And there is no need to do that--they are one and the same for all intents and purposes--and it would (very needlessly) detract from Ron Paul.

But I agree absolutely that calling it the Ron Paul March, or Ron Paul Rally isn't right. But "Led by Ron Paul" sounds perfect and awesome.

[humanic]

I think you're absolutely right. About the Title. You made excellent points and I agree with them. I was really worried at first that people were trying to make it ABOUT the message FIRST, then about Ron Paul second. And there is no need to do that--they are one and the same for all intents and purposes--and it would (very needlessly) detract from Ron Paul.

But I agree absolutely that calling it the Ron Paul March, or Ron Paul Rally isn't right. But "Led by Ron Paul" sounds perfect and awesome.

Thank you. I understand now how the title and the original post could be misleading, and I've actually gone back and revised the original post to better represent what I am trying to say. I wish I could revise the title, but I can't.

[humanic]

//