PDA

View Full Version : Advanced excerpts of the Ron Paul Revolution: A Manifesto about to be read




tangent4ronpaul
02-24-2008, 10:41 PM
http://rprradio.com/listen.shtml

tune in!

-n

kill the banks
02-24-2008, 10:45 PM
thx

kill the banks

Highstreet
02-24-2008, 10:58 PM
When does it start?

tangent4ronpaul
02-24-2008, 11:00 PM
ARGH! - Steven Vincent sucks!

He's hyped this for like 2 weeks, advertised it for 9pm EST, and leaves us waiting for THREE HOURS! - then reads a frickin paragraph!

What kind of BS is that!

-n

nullvalu
02-24-2008, 11:03 PM
so......i missed it?

Fields
02-24-2008, 11:14 PM
kill the banks

tangent4ronpaul
02-24-2008, 11:16 PM
so......i missed it?

Yeah - and it was a paragraph on return to gold and sliver - if you've seen any of his debates, you've pretty much heard everything that was said. It was a total teaser and waste of time. You didn't miss anything.

-n

Gurran
02-24-2008, 11:23 PM
So how many delegates do we have?

WRellim
02-24-2008, 11:37 PM
I personally doubt that the book has even been written yet.

And if it has, then like the most recent book it is just a collection of essays, and the "manifesto" is then a misleading title.


Has anyone else wondered why this is being published as dead tree media that people will have to BUY?

If it was a TRUE manifesto for a "revolution" then it would NOT be something that one would try to profit from.

If it had TRUE importance to the movement -- a movement OF the internet age -- then it would be published VIA the internet. (Which would also completely eliminate the extra month plus delay in getting it out to people).




Doesn't publishing it as a book seem more than a bit "opportunistic" and an attempt to "profiteer" off of the movement than it does a means of providing something for the movement itself to make use of.


Hell, perhaps I should have CHARGED for the work I did on the ManOfCommonSense flyers. Fool that I was, I thought the campaign and CHANGING THE COUNTRY was more important than making a few bucks off of the supporters. Guess I am not as "wise" as the publisher of this book.


.

0zzy
02-24-2008, 11:51 PM
old book, meh.

tangent4ronpaul
02-25-2008, 12:22 AM
ARGH! - Steven Vincent sucks!

He's hyped this for like 2 weeks, advertised it for 9pm EST, and leaves us waiting for THREE HOURS! - then reads a frickin paragraph!

What kind of BS is that!

-n

btw: the good parts of the show were the pre-releases of the music that people got to sample. There were a lot of songs that haven't been released yet, some still being mixed, that they shared.

On the book angle - adopting the MSM tactics to boost ratings and then give us a 30 second sound bite after playing us for the whole show at the end TOTALLY SUCKED! I'm already totally sick of this exploitation crap from the business interests - it's not a good thing to emulate!

-n

hyoomen
02-25-2008, 02:16 AM
Place your bets on a battle between Goldwater's Conscience of a Conservative and Congressman Paul's Revolution: A Manifesto.

lastnymleft
02-25-2008, 08:40 AM
I personally doubt that the book has even been written yet.

And if it has, then like the most recent book it is just a collection of essays, and the "manifesto" is then a misleading title.


Has anyone else wondered why this is being published as dead tree media that people will have to BUY?

If it was a TRUE manifesto for a "revolution" then it would NOT be something that one would try to profit from.

If it had TRUE importance to the movement -- a movement OF the internet age -- then it would be published VIA the internet. (Which would also completely eliminate the extra month plus delay in getting it out to people).




Doesn't publishing it as a book seem more than a bit "opportunistic" and an attempt to "profiteer" off of the movement than it does a means of providing something for the movement itself to make use of.


Hell, perhaps I should have CHARGED for the work I did on the ManOfCommonSense flyers. Fool that I was, I thought the campaign and CHANGING THE COUNTRY was more important than making a few bucks off of the supporters. Guess I am not as "wise" as the publisher of this book.


.

There is not a single thing that you have written with which I agree. And I think your attitude sucks.

WilliamC
02-25-2008, 08:54 AM
I personally doubt that the book has even been written yet.

And if it has, then like the most recent book it is just a collection of essays, and the "manifesto" is then a misleading title.

Has anyone else wondered why this is being published as dead tree media that people will have to BUY?

If it was a TRUE manifesto for a "revolution" then it would NOT be something that one would try to profit from.

If it had TRUE importance to the movement -- a movement OF the internet age -- then it would be published VIA the internet. (Which would also completely eliminate the extra month plus delay in getting it out to people).

Doesn't publishing it as a book seem more than a bit "opportunistic" and an attempt to "profiteer" off of the movement than it does a means of providing something for the movement itself to make use of.

Hell, perhaps I should have CHARGED for the work I did on the ManOfCommonSense flyers. Fool that I was, I thought the campaign and CHANGING THE COUNTRY was more important than making a few bucks off of the supporters. Guess I am not as "wise" as the publisher of this book.

.

If you have a problem with Ron Paul writing and publishing a book then don't buy it.

Even in the internet age books can still have a larger impact on the general public than a website.

And if you besmirch Ron Paul for being so capitalistic as to try and make some money off of selling a book then you must not be aware of the fact that he has written many books in career, some of which are indeed freely available online.

See here (http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname?key=Paul%2C%20Ron%2C%201935-).

So enough of the negative criticism, and thanks for the ManOfCommonSense Flyers you did.

Oh yes, and my understanding is that the publisher of the book is returning a portion of their profits back to the campaign or to Ron Paul to be used for the movement, there was a thread on here to this effect not long ago.

Bruno
02-25-2008, 08:59 AM
It will reach a much wider audience in book form. We already have a great share of people who use the internets for their information. :-)

NightOwl
02-25-2008, 09:03 AM
I personally doubt that the book has even been written yet.

And if it has, then like the most recent book it is just a collection of essays, and the "manifesto" is then a misleading title.


.

Have you had much experience in the publishing industry? The book would have to have been finished months ago with an April 9 release date. Have you read the preface to the book, which makes clear that this is not a collection of essays? Dr. Paul has a nonprofit organization -- how do you know his profits aren't going there?

Lighten up, man.

NightOwl
02-25-2008, 09:09 AM
Has anyone else wondered why this is being published as dead tree media that people will have to BUY?

If it was a TRUE manifesto for a "revolution" then it would NOT be something that one would try to profit from.

If it had TRUE importance to the movement -- a movement OF the internet age -- then it would be published VIA the internet. (Which would also completely eliminate the extra month plus delay in getting it out to people).
.

A book published by a major publishing house will have a far bigger impact than some Internet "publication." It will get national attention, and the publisher can book Dr. Paul all over the media. No Internet "publication" would get this, period; nor would it be taken seriously by anyone but "the movement."

Obviously, Dr. Paul wants to be read beyond "the movement." That's kind of the point.

I'm sure he'd be delighted to know that you think he's profiteering. And don't give me the "I'm just saying the publisher is profiteering" nonsense, since Dr. Paul chose the publisher.

Revolution9
02-25-2008, 09:37 AM
I personally doubt that the book has even been written yet.<snip a steaming pile of pure bodewash>
.

Whew.. That one stunk.

HTH
Randy

WRellim
02-26-2008, 03:13 AM
Have you had much experience in the publishing industry? The book would have to have been finished months ago with an April 9 release date. Have you read the preface to the book, which makes clear that this is not a collection of essays? Dr. Paul has a nonprofit organization -- how do you know his profits aren't going there?

Lighten up, man.

Actually, publication date is April 30th, not 9th. Won't be in stores until May, and if the pre-order is high enough it will probably consume majority of the first run.

Conversely, if pre-order is too low, the publisher may abbreviate the run assuming a lack of interest. In either case, most stores probably will not bother carrying it at all, and certainly not in a large quantity (hey, it's not a sex or scandal "tell-all" type book) -- so they will likely order quantities (if any) similar to sales of past books by the author (meaning minimal).

As for profits, why would anyone assume anything OTHER than that the author(s) will receive the royalties? (In other words, you are grasping at straws here. When profits are turned over to some other organization or group, publishers always highlight that fact quite explicitly as a "selling point.")


In any case, as far as promotion and publication goes, this is DEFINITELY a "scholarly" or "niche" market book. (It certainly isn't "Harry Potter" so it doesn't need the localization or series-consistency checks, and since it isn't "Sex, Lies, and videotape" it doesn't need a whole lot of time in the legal department, either.)

And the editing and publishing process for these types of books is much quicker than it used to be. (If the process were so long, that would be all the MORE reason for publishing at least a web-summary, or via POD or some other arrangement).


Yes it's a "major" publishing house -- but its under the "generic" house brand and they put out a LOT of niche books that they don't heavily promote.


And yes, I have read the preface. It most certainly does NOT make anything clear as to the source or form of the content. Indeed, MOST of my questions concerning the content of the book COME from having read that preface.

To begin with, having several of RP's previous books on my shelf, I can tell you that my gut reaction to that preface was emphatically that it was NOT written by Ron (the sentence and paragraph structures are too "simplified" and several of the more colorful word and phrasing choices are all completely out-of-character for Ron's writing style*; this preface at least was either written by someone else [though, thank God, NOT Lew Rockwell this time] or it was heavily edited or possibly even rewritten by a ghostwriter to give it significantly more "punch.")

And from the statements IN that preface, it sounds as it the content may very well be an "abbreviated" or rewritten rehash of Ron's previous writings (granted of which a large volume ARE available online for free) essays and speeches on the whole gamut of our Federal government and it's waywardness.

In SOME ways that may be very good. Having a co-author, or ghost-writer, or even ACTIVE editor to help condense, trim and "clarify" the text (plus "punch" it up a notch or two for readability and "impact") would probably be a GOOD thing.

(So as I write this, I am rethinking it... maybe this is *EXACTLY* what is needed to get an improved "manifesto" version of the message out to a wider public (and possibly convince/convert some of the pseudo-intellectuals and media pundits). It could be the equivalent of getting Ron a "speechwriter" to help him polish and clarify the message... the "manifesto" -- and possibly THIS is a result of all the "complaining" that was done to the campaign a few months back about this very problem. Hmmmmm...


* To wit: I mean no disrespect to Dr. Paul's writing abilities by this -- actually the opposite, his writing and speaking style are often VERY formal, sometimes TOO formal and thus "over the heads" of many readers & listeners. No what I mean is that the preface's phrases of "chattering classes", "artificial limitations", and "empty slogans" to say nothing of "inanities" and "fantasy world" are all completely atypical colloquial choices -- the kind Ron Paul does NOT use in his writing. Indeed a search of the Ron Paul Library shows that of the above, ONLY the phrase "fantasy world" has been used, at that in a single instance in a single issue (April 5, 1999) of the "Texas Straight Talk" newsletter (and that that sentence may or may not have been written by Dr. Paul, as the newsletter has had a variety of staffer authored articles over the years in addition to his own work). And what I mean by a "simpler" style is that the preface uses almost exclusively a very simple sentence structure. Virtually NO inferior phrases or clauses, not a single semi-colon in the whole thing. And the paragraphs are also "short and sweet" some amazingly so. And finally, the tense and "voice" is also atypical, especially obvious in the closing sentence: "That is why I wrote this book." In my opinion, it is highly unlike Ron Paul to have written that sentence in that way, and much more likely that he would have typed: "That is the goal and purpose for which I have written this book." (So it was either edited/rewritten and "simplified" or someone else paraphrased from his notes.)

NightOwl
02-26-2008, 09:34 AM
The official pub date is April 30, but it will be in stores April 9. CALL THE PUBLISHER AND ASK FOR YOURSELF. That's what I did. (And again, I'm not sure how much you know about publishing -- a book is *always* in stores by the pub date. The pub date isn't the day the publisher ships it out, it's the day stores put it on their shelves.)

Given that the book won't be out for six more weeks, I'd say it's a little premature to say that the publisher would point out Dr. Paul's donating the proceeds to his nonprofit as a selling point. Maybe so, but would it have done so six weeks in advance? Probably not.

Since the book hit #3 on Amazon and Barnes & Noble on the basis of almost no publicity, I'll bet you $1000 that bookstores are ordering lots of copies.

I for one am confident that this book will be a sales smash. Dr. Paul will presumably have something to say about it at some point in the future, and that will settle our little debate about how new the material is.

Incidentally, "past books by the author" were published by very minor publishers; Grand Central will make a much bigger push. They're not stupid: they know Dr. Paul has a big following and that his people will want to buy this book and promote it.

How about another $1000 bet that he'll get some excellent media out of this? I'll seriously bet you that, though of course then we'd wind up debating what "excellent" means.

Finally, when asking if you'd read the preface, my point was that the preface makes clear that this is a book Dr. Paul wrote with a purpose in mind. He doesn't say, "This is why I assembled these critical speeches from my career." He says, "This is why I wrote this book."

WRellim
02-26-2008, 11:17 AM
The official pub date is April 30, but it will be in stores April 9. CALL THE PUBLISHER AND ASK FOR YOURSELF. That's what I did. (And again, I'm not sure how much you know about publishing -- a book is *always* in stores by the pub date. The pub date isn't the day the publisher ships it out, it's the day stores put it on their shelves.)

Given that the book won't be out for six more weeks, I'd say it's a little premature to say that the publisher would point out Dr. Paul's donating the proceeds to his nonprofit as a selling point. Maybe so, but would it have done so six weeks in advance? Probably not.

Since the book hit #3 on Amazon and Barnes & Noble on the basis of almost no publicity, I'll bet you $1000 that bookstores are ordering lots of copies.

I for one am confident that this book will be a sales smash. Dr. Paul will presumably have something to say about it at some point in the future, and that will settle our little debate about how new the material is.

Incidentally, "past books by the author" were published by very minor publishers; Grand Central will make a much bigger push. They're not stupid: they know Dr. Paul has a big following and that his people will want to buy this book and promote it.

How about another $1000 bet that he'll get some excellent media out of this? I'll seriously bet you that, though of course then we'd wind up debating what "excellent" means.

Finally, when asking if you'd read the preface, my point was that the preface makes clear that this is a book Dr. Paul wrote with a purpose in mind. He doesn't say, "This is why I assembled these critical speeches from my career." He says, "This is why I wrote this book."

Hey if the book is actually a CONCISE and EASY TO READ condensation of the philosophy of Liberty, then it could be a very good tool.

What I sincerely doubt is that he will get "extensive" media out of this; since the media is capable of ignoring a huge ELEPHANT in the middle of the room -- Look over there everyone, Britney Spears fell off her barstool! (There, see, I'm debating just the quantity, and my only reference to "quality" being the media's inherent idiocy and ignorance of quality).


My initial skepticism is more of a "puzzlement" in trying to figure out (once again) what the heck the "campaign" is doing, and what their underlying motives are, as none of the campaign's recent "actions" (or inactions) make ANY logical sense at all unless one drinks from a fire-hose of kool-aid.

Shed
02-26-2008, 11:44 AM
Hey if the book is actually a CONCISE and EASY TO READ condensation of the philosophy of Liberty, then it could be a very good tool.
That is exactly the point, yes.

NightOwl
02-26-2008, 12:12 PM
[B]
My initial skepticism is more of a "puzzlement" in trying to figure out (once again) what the heck the "campaign" is doing, and what their underlying motives are, as none of the campaign's recent "actions" (or inactions) make ANY logical sense at all unless one drinks from a fire-hose of kool-aid.

Fair enough.