CFL - FB - Operate efficently and with the grassroots

[tangent4ronpaul]

Give up on recruiting new members and become performance based. If they focused on doing a few things well, the members and money will come. Stop trying to do everything and operate like a for profit business.

Mashup the site and let the grassroots run a good deal of it – let Daily Paul be the blog.

Use volunteers whenever possible or contract out small jobs. For example, there is no possible way they could occupy a full time flash programmer and 2 have volunteered in the past – but they are trying to hire one!

-t

[tangent4ronpaul]

Really the second item is very important. Not only does it break down the us vs them impression they've left with the grassroots but it comes to the core of why they have thoroughly pissed off a lot of the grassroots.

To elaborate again - Mashup the site and use existing grassroots infrastructure instead of recreating the wheel - then focus on what the grassroots isn't already doing.

Grassroots parts of CFL:
Forum: RonPaulFoums
Blog: DailyPaul
Skills bank and pointing to outside resources: OCH (stop pointing in, point out)
Chat: teamtalk I guess, or another RP chat platform
Broadcast: Revolution radio and break the matrix
etc.

CFL:
educational materials - (well, they are stepping on Freedoms ground's toes here)
precinct leaders program
media PRODUCTION
training
etc.

To do otherwise is a huge waste of time, money and resources. CFL needs to do a few things well, not trying to do everything and ending up doing it poorly. BE that big tent everyone was expecting!

-t

[Austin]

Really the second item is very important. Not only does it break down the us vs them impression they've left with the grassroots but it comes to the core of why they have thoroughly pissed off a lot of the grassroots.

To elaborate again - Mashup the site and use existing grassroots infrastructure instead of recreating the wheel - then focus on what the grassroots isn't already doing.

Grassroots parts of CFL:
Forum: RonPaulFoums
Blog: DailyPaul
Skills band and pointing to outside resources: OCH (stop pointing in, point out)
Chat: teamtalk I guess, or another RP chat platform
Broadcast: Revolution radio and break the matrix
etc.

CFL:
educational materials - (well, they are stepping on Freedoms ground's toes here)
precinct leaders program
media PRODUCTION
training
etc.

To do otherwise is a huge waste of time, money and resources. CFL needs to do a few things well, not trying to do everything and ending up doing it poorly. BE that big tent everyone was expecting!

-t

Hmm. I'm not entirely sure how I feel about abandoning all of the things listed under grassroots. I think an official CFL forum would be good if and only if they break it down to at least the district level. I'm not sure if Bryan and Josh are willing to do something like that for RPFs. Also, pointing everyone from the CFL to come register over here does just that; it requires users to register once again. We'll have to see if the CFL forum requires us to sign up yet another time. Also, in regards to the forum, due to the nature of the activity with the precinct leader program and other features native to CFL, it might be smoother if the forum where these things will be discussed is also native to the CFL.

I guess overall I don't think the CFL should abstain from creating forums, blogs, broadcasting, etc. Let the markets decide :p. But I do agree that the focus should be on education, improving the precinct leader program, media production, and training.

[tangent4ronpaul]

I'm not sure what you mean by abandoning - CFL abandoning or the Grassroots abandoning?

A Mashup is embedding another site or outside resources from another site inside another site. Lets take RPF's as an example: they would still exist here, but if embedded into CFL they would also exist as a seamless part of that site. Josh and Bryan would still run it and CFL could have a disclaimer that they are not responsible for anything on this site.

On the password issues - that could be as simple as RPF's looking for a CFL cookie saying this is my username keep me logged in or as complicated as merging / maybe modifying sql DB's for username/passwd pairs, It's certainly not insurmountable.

-t

[Austin]

I'm not sure what you mean by abandoning - CFL abandoning or the Grassroots abandoning?

A Mashup is embedding another site or outside resources from another site inside another site. Lets take RPF's as an example: they would still exist here, but if embedded into CFL they would also exist as a seamless part of that site. Josh and Bryan would still run it and CFL could have a disclaimer that they are not responsible for anything on this site.

On the password issues - that could be as simple as RPF's looking for a CFL cookie saying this is my username keep me logged in or as complicated as merging / maybe modifying sql DB's for username/passwd pairs, It's certainly not insurmountable.

-t

I don't think the CFL should abandon its current plans to create and maintain some of the thing you suggested by handled solely by the grasroots (blog, forum, broadcasting).

Are you talking integrating RPFs and other grassroots projects into CFL via iframes or something of the sort?

[tangent4ronpaul]

Are you talking integrating RPFs and other grassroots projects into CFL via iframes or something of the sort?

Exactly! - look up Mashups if you are not familiar with them.

At least parts of grassroots resources. They might not want to host the liberty forest, for example, but grassroots central, the state groups, election specific and activist sections - for sure!

-t

[Andrew Ward]

We plan on keeping just about everything in-house to encourage our members to participate in our website and grassroots network. I'm sorry, but I don't foresee CampaignforLiberty.com linking to RPF or DP :(.

[tangent4ronpaul]

We plan on keeping just about everything in-house to encourage our members to participate in our website and grassroots network. I'm sorry, but I don't foresee CampaignforLiberty.com linking to RPF or DP :(.

In that case, I think you are looking at having some SERIOUS COMPETITION!

You consider yourselves "grassroots" - don't make me laugh! - you are ANYTHING BUT!

-t

[constituent]

http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/images/popcorn-big.jpg

[tangent4ronpaul]

http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/images/popcorn-big.jpg

wtf?????????????

[Austin]

In that case, I think you are looking at having some SERIOUS COMPETITION!

You consider yourselves "grassroots" - don't make me laugh! - you are ANYTHING BUT!

-t

Good. The markets will decide. ;)

I'm giving the CFL a month or so to give of its ass and get things done. We've been promised features for ages now, and we've seen next to nothing. The things they do present are unpolished at best.

... If we don't start seeing results soon, don't be surprised if another web site is formed with all of the features of the CFL, except the PL program. Then again, we can use the CFL for just the PL program and do everything else our way (read:the correct way)

That said, I still do not have a stance on whether or not RPFs and other grassroots efforts should be integrated into the CFL directly. I'm more disappointed with the current features of the web site and the lack of seemingly common sense features so far.

[Austin]

wtf?????????????

He's expecting a cat fight. He's brought the appropriate snacks to fully enjoy said fight.

[constituent]

He's expecting a cat fight. He's brought the appropriate snacks to fully enjoy said fight.

naaah, i hate popcorn. it was merely an offering to the gods of forum in the hopes that they may bring a quick and decisive end to any battles that may ensue.

[Austin]

naaah, i hate popcorn. it was merely an offering to the gods of forum in the hopes that they may bring a quick and decisive end to any battles that may ensue.

Ah, my apologies. I hope my words have not tainted the great offering. :D

[Andrew Ward]

You consider yourselves "grassroots" - don't make me laugh! - you are ANYTHING BUT!

We are trying to gear this organization to be grassroots-oriented.


We've been promised features for ages now, and we've seen next to nothing.

A lot of promises were made by people who are no longer with the organization. We'll continue to add to the site and make improvements as time and resources allow.

[Austin]

We are trying to gear this organization to be grassroots-oriented.



A lot of promises were made by people who are no longer with the organization. We'll continue to add to the site and make improvements as time and resources allow.

When you have some time, would you care to go into some detail as to what proposed features have been nixed due to people leaving?

Thanks.

[tangent4ronpaul]

We are trying to gear this organization to be grassroots-oriented.

Then please explain why all links point to you and not out to the grassroots?

Why actions you "support" are dwarfed by your attempts to recruit new members and as such funding for staff salaries?

YOU ARE NOT THE GRASS ROOTS! - YOU EXCLUDE US!

-t

[Andrew Ward]

When you have some time, would you care to go into some detail as to what proposed features have been nixed due to people leaving?

Sure. I know a lot was promised awhile back. The web developers at the time did not deliver on promises, so we moved on. What did we promise we would do that we haven't done with the website?


Then please explain why all links point to you and not out to the grassroots?


We want individuals to spend time networking with local activists on our site which is geared toward activism. You are more than welcome to link to RPF on your CFL profile page and promote RPF through blog posts.

[tangent4ronpaul]

We want individuals to spend time networking with local activists on our site which is geared toward activism. You are more than welcome to link to RPF on your CFL profile page and promote RPF through blog posts.

NOT ACCEPTABLE! - and NOT GRASSROOTS!

BASIC PRINCIPLE: INCLUSIVE - NOT EXCLUSIVE!

-t

[JS4Pat]

Sorry, but what does the acronym FB stand for?

[Austin]

Sorry, but what does the acronym FB stand for?

Feedback

[tangent4ronpaul]

Sorry, but what does the acronym FB stand for?

post number please? - if it was my post, it was a typo....

thanks,

-t

[JS4Pat]

Feedback

Thanks.
FB = Feedback.
Probably should have figured that one out on my own. :D

[ronpaulhawaii]

Grassroots is a very subjective term.

I do not see this forum being suitable for CFL without unacceptable levels of moderation for a large segment of our membership. I see no reason why they should not maintain a blog. I defintely feel that OCH is a treasure that I hope can be brought increasingly into play. Patience is a virtue...

The whole "us vs. them" thing has validity. I think there will be sharp edges dividing us until there is a full airing of our strengths/weaknesses, successes/failures, etc... of the presidential campaign. I think we need to recognize and deal with that, but it is a separate issue to getting the CFL to a state where we are comfortable using it as .url for recruits. I believe both issues can be worked on simultaneously, but feel we should recognize the difference and try to keep the issues seperated and the threads focused and organized.

Andrew is one guy. For the second time, I am stating that I have worked with, had preliminary discussions on these issues with, and trust this man to be "on our side". I have not done what I do just to blow smoke up peoples asses and feel we have a good opportunity for progress and healing.

Patience and camraderie are good things

onward and forward

:)

[JoshLowry]

We plan on keeping just about everything in-house to encourage our members to participate in our website and grassroots network. I'm sorry, but I don't foresee CampaignforLiberty.com linking to RPF or DP :(.

Give love, get love.

You've given love to BreakTheMatrix and many other projects.

RonPaulForums.com is a place where you can share and discuss your ideas, but it is still a grassroots project in itself.

This website has given plenty of love in supporting the Campaign For Liberty.

You can reciprocate or you can go outreach somewhere else.

[constituent]

You can reciprocate or you can go outreach somewhere else.

i think they call that karma.com


or is it .net?


i forget.

[newyearsrevolution08]

Give love, get love.

You've given love to BreakTheMatrix and many other projects.

RonPaulForums.com is a place where you can share and discuss your ideas, but it is still a grassroots project in itself.

This website has given plenty of love in supporting the Campaign For Liberty.

You can reciprocate or you can go outreach somewhere else.

And this is exactly what the problem will end up being. The cfl making sure to recreate or setup the various grassroots efforts and ideas BUT only as long as the cfl is controlling them.

I see that being an issue THAT will remain constant either way. You want grassroots efforts and ideas but once we give them, they want to make sure that only ON cfl would those "ideas" surface and if not, then STILL not link to outside "grassroots" websites who might already have those ideas IN PLACE.

I do see a point in wanting a forum ON the cfl website so they can regulate and monitor things differently. They odds are wouldn't want as much free speech and random rants and raves that are allowed on this forum AND I personally enjoy the free expression that YOU allow here on RPF's.

If they don't want to support the grassroots efforts, forums and online/offline communities then what is the point of pretending the cfl has anything to do with "Grassroots" at all?

[JS4Pat]

What is the difference between what Restore the Republic is doing and what Campaign for Liberty is trying to do?

We have Meetup Groups, Republican Liberty Caucus, The Libertarian Party, The Constitution Party, Campaign for Liberty, Restore the Republic, Daily Paul, Ron Paul Forums etc.

I am all for the spirit of competition and individuality, but there does come a point where duplication and difficulties in communication make the movement inefficient/ineffective. I would be willing to embrace whatever "THE" vehicle is for advancing our ideas as quickly and as effectively as possible, but not only does it not appear as though one is evolving - it seems as though we are moving farther and farther away from one. :(

[JoshLowry]

And this is exactly what the problem will end up being. The cfl making sure to recreate or setup the various grassroots efforts and ideas BUT only as long as the cfl is controlling them.

I see that being an issue THAT will remain constant either way. You want grassroots efforts and ideas but once we give them, they want to make sure that only ON cfl would those "ideas" surface and if not, then STILL not link to outside "grassroots" websites who might already have those ideas IN PLACE.

I do see a point in wanting a forum ON the cfl website so they can regulate and monitor things differently. They odds are wouldn't want as much free speech and random rants and raves that are allowed on this forum AND I personally enjoy the free expression that YOU allow here on RPF's.

If they don't want to support the grassroots efforts, forums and online/offline communities then what is the point of pretending the cfl has anything to do with "Grassroots" at all?

Well said.

If they want nothing to do with RPF unless it benefits them, then I see no reason to allow them to benefit off of the long volunteer hours that I and so many others have been put into this site over the past 19 months.

Give love, get love.

[Andrew Ward]

You've given love to BreakTheMatrix and many other projects.

That was one of our first emails months ago. We don't link to BTM from our website. RPF is not a focused project, it a forum that we do not moderate.


This website has given plenty of love in supporting the Campaign For Liberty.

We recognize that there is a lot of support here. I'm here because we appreciate the strong presence of the freedom movement on these forums. It still would not be wise of us to link to RPF.


The cfl making sure to recreate or setup the various grassroots efforts and ideas BUT only as long as the cfl is controlling them.

The grassroots is made up of individuals. We don't plan on controlling people... If we have the funds and resources to recreate a good idea we will do so in order to advance the movement.


You want grassroots efforts and ideas but once we give them, they want to make sure that only ON cfl would those "ideas" surface and if not, then STILL not link to outside "grassroots" websites who might already have those ideas IN PLACE.

If Henry Kissinger has a good idea we'll "steal" it from him without credit. Otherwise, we try to give credit where credit is due. We get a lot of ideas every day. Many are anonymous. We've linked to grassroots efforts before, see: Question 1 in Massachusetts.


If they don't want to support the grassroots efforts, forums and online/offline communities then what is the point of pretending the cfl has anything to do with "Grassroots" at all?

The grassroots are made up of individuals. Many of them have user accounts at CampaignforLiberty.com


If they want nothing to do with RPF unless it benefits them, then I see no reason to allow them to benefit off of the long volunteer hours that I and so many others have been put into this site over the past 19 months.

Another thread covers why linking to RPF is not in our interest, the interest of RPF, or the movement.

[JoshLowry]

That was one of our first emails months ago. We don't link to BTM from our website. RPF is not a focused project, it a forum that we do not moderate.

And? How are we different?

RonPaulForums is not a focused project? You know, we sure have accomplished a hell of lot for not being a project per your definition... Maybe we're disqualified because we don't have a business plan and turn a quarterly profit?

I wasn't aware that the CFL moderates BTM. Is Trevor a paid staff member of the CFL?




If they want nothing to do with RPF unless it benefits them, then I see no reason to allow them to benefit off of the long volunteer hours that I and so many others have been put into this site over the past 19 months.
Another thread covers why linking to RPF is not in our interest, the interest of RPF, or the movement.

So your non-response confirms that you would not link to RPF no matter how much you are here for your and only your benefit?

Too much freedom of speech to link to that website. Is that irony?

[Andrew Ward]

And? How are we different?

RonPaulForums is not a focused project? You know, we sure have accomplished a hell of lot for not being a project per your definition... Maybe we're disqualified because we don't have a business plan and turn a quarterly profit?

I wasn't aware that the CFL moderates BTM. Is Trevor a paid staff member of the CFL?

At the time we were looking to highlight a media-oriented institution to our membership. We knew that Dr. Paul thought highly of BTM, so we decided to go with them. And that was months ago. We have not emailed anyone about them since. This was way before John Tate became Executive Director (now President). If he was around then we would not have done it.

(Edit: I apologize, I can't speak for John Tate. I should have said: I don't believe we would have sent an email out about BTM if John Tate was around at that time. My point is that we have much more focus now.)


If they want nothing to do with RPF unless it benefits them, then I see no reason to allow them to benefit off of the long volunteer hours that I and so many others have been put into this site over the past 19 months.

We're trying to bring tools and coordination to activists who want to affect change. Linking to RPF from our website does not help this goal.


So your non-response confirms that you would not link to RPF no matter how much you are here for your and only your benefit?

Too much freedom of speech to link to that website. Is that irony?

People here have questions and concerns about Campaign for Liberty. There's even a sub folder called Campaign for Liberty. I'm here to help and communicate with other liberty-minded people about CFL. Think transparency. I believe my presence here benefits the movement.

[tangent4ronpaul]

Since CFL will not even acknowledge the grassroots exists, perhaps grassroots sites should get together and remove any mention of CFL from our sites as well as removing traffic about CFL.

Especially when you are stealing our ideas and duplicating our projects.

Like Josh said: Give love, get love.

-t

[Nate K]

I have a somewhat off-topic question - did Ron Paul appoint John Tate to be president or was it a vote?

[newyearsrevolution08]

Since CFL will not even acknowledge the grassroots exists, perhaps grassroots sites should get together and remove any mention of CFL from our sites as well as removing traffic about CFL.

Especially when you are stealing our ideas and duplicating our projects.

Like Josh said: Give love, get love.

-t

Main reason why I am building a grassroots meetup social networking site as well. I think the grassroots does things best when let to "run free" and let the actual free market decide which projects and efforts are worth supporting or not.

I know most grassroots ron paul sites would happily link to each other. The meetup style site we are currently building will especially link to rpf's and any other ron paul site that is worth linking to and there are PLENTY of them.

Trevor is running this next cfl money bomb and btm is all over the cfl as well so to say that things will run smoother than his previous attempts surprises me some.

I always assumed the cfl was going to be a grassroots ran project and now it seems 100% top down which bums me out a bit.

I think we need MORE grassroots ideas flowing out here, if they go big then GREAT and if some don't then that is fine also. We just have to keep moving forward with our efforts and goals and stop worrying about single groups doing the work for us.

[ronpaulhawaii]

That was one of our first emails months ago. We don't link to BTM from our website. RPF is not a focused project, it a forum that we do not moderate.

Most every successful "focused project" was born/carried out/promoted, right here. What we did here over the last 18 months made the campaign. If not for RPFs, the campaign would have been exactly what RP was expecting, a short duration educational campaign. That fact needs to be recognized. CfL, BTM, and people like myself need to all admit that we would not be where we are today without RPFs... I can fully understand the "give love, get love" sentiments.

While I fully understand the need for seperate forums, many of us are justifiably angry at being treated like crazy cousins, especially by those who have abused our trust...

[Pete]

Just adding my $0.02 on some of the topics in this thread:

---The social networking aspects of CFL are available for FREE. Only precinct leaders have to pony up the $35 membership, which will be well worth the voter list information, in particular.

---In light of the nominal cost of CFL, I think the demands for accounting of all revenues and expenses, salaries and so forth, are utterly ridiculous. Are we demanding such transparency from Josh, for example? Even if CFL were an association with elected officers, that information would be more customary, but hardly required unless the bylaws called for it. Also, such information would serve the opposition very well. Interested parties can always look at Form 990 after the end of the year and at least see what the big numbers are and who gets paid what.

---The 501(c)(4) exemption is a good pick because (1) educating the public about constitutional government and evaluating legislation as to whether it is Constitutional is indeed educational and does not fall into the category of campaigning; (2) nondisclosure of donors can work to our advantage in protecting the identity of 'angels' who may otherwise take a lot of heat for promoting liberty.

---I don't understand why it is so feared that CFL will be 'top down'. From what I have seen so far, the national organization provides tools and offers ideas and suggestions about priorities and methods (e.g., good lists to use for recruiting, how to not waste time in canvassing) but does not dictate anything. We are free to form our own legal entities, to create our own flyers and presentations, to raise money and to spend it as we wish, etc. I expect that the market will bubble up the best ideas among the counties, districts, and states.

---CFL is about education and political lobbying in support of liberty. When it comes to campaigning, the grassroots has lost nothing in terms if influence and importance in GOTV. If CFL does its job, it will make the grassroots' work easier. In my area, CFL has been formed from the grassroots and I'm sure this is true all over. Furthermore, we understand that campaigning is a separate activity, and have talked about forming our own PAC or 527 for campaigning purposes.

---WRT website linking, typically 501 organizations link only to other 501s, to avoid any appearance of impropriety. I know this because I sell a product that is used by schools and other not-for-profits. A directory of self-nominating liberty-oriented organizations, both commercial and noncommercial, should be OK and we can call this a suggestion for future development.

[pacelli]

This was way before John Tate became Executive Director (now President). If he was around then we would not have done it.

(Edit: I apologize, I can't speak for John Tate. I should have said: I don't believe we would have sent an email out about BTM if John Tate was around at that time. My point is that we have much more focus now.)

People here have questions and concerns about Campaign for Liberty. There's even a sub folder called Campaign for Liberty. I'm here to help and communicate with other liberty-minded people about CFL. Think transparency. I believe my presence here benefits the movement.

Thanks for coming. In the interest of transparency, could you please provide a link or list the officers & structure of the Campaign for Liberty. Perhaps officers is an incorrect term, but I'm trying to find a source for where I can see John Tate's title & where he relates to the rest of the Campaign for Liberty staff (if he is president, who is vice president, who is secretary, who is treasurer, et cetera).

Also, why was Ron Paul's name removed from the Campaign for Liberty logo?

Finally, what is Ron Paul's title within the organization? Is he actually a member of the Campaign for Liberty?

[dr. hfn]

i don't think the C4L should have a forum, it will hurt the grassroots

[Andrew Ward]

I have a somewhat off-topic question - did Ron Paul appoint John Tate to be president or was it a vote?

The Board appointed John Tate.



Most every successful "focused project" was born/carried out/promoted, right here. What we did here over the last 18 months made the campaign. If not for RPFs, the campaign would have been exactly what RP was expecting, a short duration educational campaign. That fact needs to be recognized. CfL, BTM, and people like myself need to all admit that we would not be where we are today without RPFs... I can fully understand the "give love, get love" sentiments.

While I fully understand the need for seperate forums, many of us are justifiably angry at being treated like crazy cousins, especially by those who have abused our trust...

Mike, I don't disagree. We appreciate the generally positive, productive activity and innovative thoughts that come from this forum.


In the interest of transparency, could you please provide a link or list the officers & structure of the Campaign for Liberty.

This is what I have available. A new About section will be more detailed.

John Tate, President. Jesse Benton, VP of Public Relations. Debbie Hopper, VP of Membership. Matthew Hawes, VP of Programs. Deborah Wells, Director of Membership Services. Adam de Angeli, Director of Information Technology. Amanda Lee, Assistant to the President. Andrew Ward, Director of Outreach. Steve Bierfeldt, Director of Development. Matt Holdridge, Director of Marketing. Allison Gibbs, Administrative Assistant.


Also, why was Ron Paul's name removed from the Campaign for Liberty logo?

He's a sitting congressman so there's a problem with having his name associated with the 501c4.


Finally, what is Ron Paul's title within the organization? Is he actually a member of the Campaign for Liberty?

He's an honorary chairman. I'm sure he's a member...


i don't think the C4L should have a forum, it will hurt the grassroots

No, it will help activists coordinate activities. We hope to have a forums soon.

[newyearsrevolution08]

i don't think the C4L should have a forum, it will hurt the grassroots

I think that depends on how they manage the forums, some people enjoy the forum here, others go to the many other online communities. I think people will go where they fit in best.

I would still stick on this forum even if the cfl had their own forums simply because I enjoy those who are here and what the grassroots are wanting to do.

I see the cfl forum more as a state by state, city by city for those members to get together and do local, state, national efforts odds are. I don't see it being a place with open conversation, random debates and so forth.

I feel that the moderation will be strong with that one.

[newyearsrevolution08]

We plan on keeping just about everything in-house to encourage our members to participate in our website and grassroots network. I'm sorry, but I don't foresee CampaignforLiberty.com linking to RPF or DP :(.

It makes sense to do this from a business standpoint as well. There really is no point linking to grassroots projects and efforts anyways BUT it never hurts to ask them for all the help you guys need and currently it seems like ALOT is needed. So pretty much get every other site, effort and project helping the cfl but keep it a 100% one way street? Whatever works for the cfl I guess.

[LibertyEagle]

Since CFL will not even acknowledge the grassroots exists, perhaps grassroots sites should get together and remove any mention of CFL from our sites as well as removing traffic about CFL.

Especially when you are stealing our ideas and duplicating our projects.

Like Josh said: Give love, get love.

-t

Oh cripes, people!!! Are you actually reading what you're saying??? :( Is this some kind of competition, or what? Because that is what it looks like when I read some of these threads complaining about the C4L not doing this or that, or not giving someone credit that someone else thinks he deserves, or linking to RPFs, and on and on. And now, tangent, you sound like someone saying they're going to take their marbles and go home. Do you really mean that? Is all this just a game to some of you? Some game, that you can decide to play, or not to play and that if you don't, everything will just be dandy? If you are, I seriously think you need to step back from your anger just a little bit and remember who the bad guys really are. You know, the ones who could throw us into FEMA camps in short order. Yeah, THOSE guys.

Ok, the presidential campaign was not run well. We all know that. And the C4L has not lived up to their promises yet and I'm sure it reminds a bunch of us of what happened with the campaign. Sure, it's hard to trust again. At least for me. So, maybe we don't want to put all our eggs in one basket, but regardless, most of the work that has to be done is at the local level anyway. Right? So why all this anger directed towards Andrew, people? He's just one brave guy who had the intestinal fortitude to come over here and do his best to answer some questions, so that we could move forward. If the way we've treated him here, is how we're approaching people about our cause, no wonder we lost badly in the primary. I mean, seriously. I've not seen such rude behavior since well, yesterday. :p

Come on people, take a deep breath. We used to know we were on the same side.

[tonesforjonesbones]

Well...i can understand those who invested a lot of money..they feel used . I don't blame them. It has been laid out. C4L is a top down effort...there are a few who will come up with a program, and there is no room for any "grassroots" input. So, either you join in and do it their way...or create your own thing. Some people will enjoy being directed and others prefer to direct...nothing wrong with that, different strokes for different folks. I'm sure the people who are great idea people can form their own liberty groups and do just fine locally or regionally. i'm just glad we now know. Tones

[tangent4ronpaul]

LE - do you work for the CFL?

Your responses sure sound like it.

-t

[LibertyEagle]

LE - do you work for the CFL?

Your responses sure sound like it.

-t

Nope.

[JS4Pat]

LE - do you work for the CFL?

Your responses sure sound like it.

-t

With 16,000+ posts - I can't see where LE could possibly have the time... ;)

[newyearsrevolution08]

LE - do you work for the CFL?

Your responses sure sound like it.

-t

Some stand with the cfl and others do not, that is what I like about free will and our ability to choose which path to arrive at the same destination from.

[dr. hfn]

i guess it would be a good idea to have a forum on the c4l for talking with people in your state, county, and district. Good for organizing

[LittleLightShining]

Bump

[MsDoodahs]

nope.

excuse me?

[LittleLightShining]

Just adding my $0.02 on some of the topics in this thread:

---The social networking aspects of CFL are available for FREE. Only precinct leaders have to pony up the $35 membership, which will be well worth the voter list information, in particular. That STILL remains to be seen. Does anyone have that voter list info yet?


---In light of the nominal cost of CFL, I think the demands for accounting of all revenues and expenses, salaries and so forth, are utterly ridiculous. Are we demanding such transparency from Josh, for example? Even if CFL were an association with elected officers, that information would be more customary, but hardly required unless the bylaws called for it. Also, such information would serve the opposition very well. Interested parties can always look at Form 990 after the end of the year and at least see what the big numbers are and who gets paid what. Nominal cost of C4L? Well, we still don't know anything about C4L finances at all.

We don't need to demand transparency from Josh because this is not a non-profit organization which is constantly soliciting donations.

We have yet to see bylaws.

990's are mysteriously missing.


---The 501(c)(4) exemption is a good pick because (1) educating the public about constitutional government and evaluating legislation as to whether it is Constitutional is indeed educational and does not fall into the category of campaigning; (2) nondisclosure of donors can work to our advantage in protecting the identity of 'angels' who may otherwise take a lot of heat for promoting liberty. 501c4 is good for educating, which was the focus when C4L was started. Now the focus is on politics and these "angels" are helping C4L straddle the line between the function of c3 and c4. The invisibility of the "angels" may also cloak the fact that they might actually be demons.


---I don't understand why it is so feared that CFL will be 'top down'. From what I have seen so far, the national organization provides tools and offers ideas and suggestions about priorities and methods (e.g., good lists to use for recruiting, how to not waste time in canvassing) but does not dictate anything. We are free to form our own legal entities, to create our own flyers and presentations, to raise money and to spend it as we wish, etc. I expect that the market will bubble up the best ideas among the counties, districts, and states. Well, folks, what say you in response to this?

The PL program was good, should have been expanded. Other than that I've yet to see a tool that benefits anyone in any tangible way. Again, no voter lists for us. We were free to create our own flyers only with the blessing of national if we planned to use the logo. We can only legally raise money once we incorporate at the state level and affiliate with national. Time and again our ideas (such as 10th amendment resolution in VT and visiting sheriffs elsewhere) were poo pooed. In fact, Rothfeld has put together a list of "approved" activities and projects from which we are "free to choose" what we should focus on.



---CFL is about education and political lobbying in support of liberty. When it comes to campaigning, the grassroots has lost nothing in terms if influence and importance in GOTV. If CFL does its job, it will make the grassroots' work easier. In my area, CFL has been formed from the grassroots and I'm sure this is true all over. Furthermore, we understand that campaigning is a separate activity, and have talked about forming our own PAC or 527 for campaigning purposes. When this was written, yes. But what is it now? C4L hasn't done ANYTHING to help the grassroots here in VT.




I suggest to Josh and Bryan, considering the poor treatment from C4L towards this forum well over a year ago as evidenced in this thread, and the betrayal of the grassroots with this CO debacle that rpf remove the stain of association with C4L by shedding the C4L specific forum.

[disorderlyvision]

I suggest to Josh and Bryan, considering the poor treatment from C4L towards this forum well over a year ago as evidenced in this thread, and the betrayal of the grassroots with this CO debacle that rpf remove the stain of association with C4L by shedding the C4L specific forum.

maybe you should post that in forum feedback and ideas

[pacelli]

A year later, and they still engage in behavior that makes it hard to trust them, and they still haven't fulfilled their promises.

[MsDoodahs]

Wow, I posted in this thread and did not EVEN realize that this original discussion is from NOVEMBER OF 2008!

Same issues ... more than a year later ... wow.

[LittleLightShining]

Wow, I posted in this thread and did not EVEN realize that this original discussion is from NOVEMBER OF 2008!

Same issues ... more than a year later ... wow.

That's why I bumped it. I was researching and came across it in the googles.

[rancher89]

Nice find LLS

[Ethek]

Andrew, I appreciate the responses, I think it shows you do care about the contributions of this forum. Personally I respect the limits the C4l is under and I would encourage people to find a way to leverage whatever they have in promoting liberty.


This forum and the people on it are here becuase we all think outside of the box that was presented to us. Lets not box ourselves in with the two deminsional debate that has formed here.

[torchbearer]

Sorry, but what does the acronym FB stand for?

facebook?
fullback?
first base?

[Jordan]

facebook?
fullback?
first base?

Free basing.

Anyway, I think it would be great to have a fan page that had 1 call to action each day.

For example: "Call your congressman about HR XXXX and tell them you oppose it"

Instead of centralizing it, we should instead make a "Constitutionalists in X district" for each congressional district. That way, we can have the name and number to call about important decisions, as well as both Senators numbers for that state.

[RCA]

Wow, I posted in this thread and did not EVEN realize that this original discussion is from NOVEMBER OF 2008!

Same issues ... more than a year later ... wow.

Lol, this issue is TIMELESS!

[constituent]

excuse me?

do tell...

[LittleLightShining]

Lol, this issue is TIMELESS!
I seriously hope no one has to bump this next year.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Lol, this issue is TIMELESS!

:)