O'Reilly: How Can Ron Own?

[mconder]

I thought I'd start this thread in hopes that the campaign staff reads these forums.

I called the campaign staff this morning and suggested that Ron be prepared for O'Reilly pointing out that Ron wants to abolish the CIA, The Department of Home Land Security, The NEA, The Department of Energy, The FED, The IRS, etc. to make him look like a crack pot. I think Ron needs a better response than bureaucracy makes us less safe. I don't think the average person makes this connection, but it more likely thinking Ron is weak on protecting The U.S. from terror. Ron needs to let the people know who would be gathering intelligence and acting on it in the absence of the CIA and The Department of Home Land Security.

Anyhow, the campaign guy on the phone was somewhat arrogant and asked me, "You don't think we prepare for Ron going into this kind of hostile environment?" I'm thinking to myself, "you certainly don't know all and at least you could listen to your supports ideas without being condescending."

[Flex]

I don't like when Ron says "just come home" or "just mind our own business." It sounds too simplistic, most people seem turned off by these explanations. If he could find another way of describing this, it would be more effective in my opinion.

O'Reilly will definetly be attacking him with all he's got tonight.

[jjschless]

All Dr. Paul has to do is watch a couple episodes of O'Reilly. Bill uses the same tactics ad nauseam.

[goldenequity]

O'Reilly live here
http://affiliates.foxnewsradio.com/Radio/player.html

[LibertyEagle]

I don't like when Ron says "just come home" or "just mind our own business." It sounds too simplistic, most people seem turned off by these explanations. If he could find another way of describing this, it would be more effective in my opinion.

O'Reilly will definetly be attacking him with all he's got tonight.

I like the phrases, because they are memorable, but I agree that he needs to step up and lay out his plan for defending our country. We know it. But, I don't think he has adequately explained it to the American people, yet.

[RP4ME]

YEs I agree. I would hope they would read some of teh suggestions made here- he may be testy with you b/c he prob. gets alot of these calls a day....but hopefully they are reading the suggestions b/c we are the ones watching with a critical eye but a desire to have him win.....

Also I would hope he would reiterate he did vote for us to go into Afghansiatn! He is not against retaliation that will make us safer - but Iraq was never about that. I hope he says that instead of sounding like he is a pacifist b/c he is not!

[Korey Kaczynski]

I thought I'd start this thread in hopes that the campaign staff reads these forums.

I called the campaign staff this morning and suggested that Ron be prepared for O'Reilly pointing out that Ron wants to abolish the CIA, The Department of Home Land Security, The NEA, The Department of Energy, The FED, The IRS, etc. to make him look like a crack pot. I think Ron needs a better response than bureaucracy makes us less safe. I don't think the average person makes this connection, but it more likely thinking Ron is weak on protecting The U.S. from terror. Ron needs to let the people know who would be gathering intelligence and acting on it in the absence of the CIA and The Department of Home Land Security.

Anyhow, the campaign guy on the phone was somewhat arrogant and asked me, "You don't think we prepare for Ron going into this kind of hostile environment?" I'm thinking to myself, "you certainly don't know all and at least you could listen to your supports ideas without being condescending."

They're arrogant? What about YOU??? They're paid professionals who have seen elections and know how to deal with the media. How do you think they feel when you call them up acting like they don't know shit? Look, you want to help, but don't you think it is insulting to give suggestions to people who are far more qualified to handle this type of thing?

[Cowlesy]

here we go...

*puts on helmet and jumps in trench*

[DjLoTi]

What time is it scheduled for?

[Cindy]

Rons got to appeal to Oriellys EGO, and talk in a way where he finds common agreeable ground. Someone at HQ should've spent time studying O'reillys political beleifs so Ron can focus on addressing those that are sympatico to get a favorable interview with him.

Thats how I would play this one.

Sure, Ron can take the opposite approach to create thunder and fireworks and get people talking for days about the explosion.

In the end, Ron may get turned into an entertainment media tool, and not be taken seriously as a presidential candidate, who knows how to negotiate diplomatically and get along with others.

People who run around lighting fires and setting off explosions are ultimately feared is what I am getting at.

Ron needs to keep with his logical reasoning tonight, siting historical references, facts and the Constituion to support himself, along with a warm smile.

I'd also like to see him fianlly spit out something SIMPLE, as far to many vierw him as being too complex.

All he needs to keep saying is,

I am simple to understand if you know the U.S. Constitution and it's history and reasoning. If you hate me, you hate it. If you fear me, you fear it. If you don't understand me, you don't understand it, and if you disagree with me, you disagree with it.

If you agree with me and understand me, you agree with and understand the Constitution. Simple as that.

Oh, and I was REALLY, piqued, when at the SC speech, he said something to the effect of this-

People say the Constitution is old and outdated, along with me and my ideas.

If you look at the History of humankind, most civilizations have lived under oppressive governments. The idea of freedom is still new by comparison. Our country and it's Constituion has only been around for a couple hundred years and we still need to give it and the freedoms it was founded upon a chance.

I'd like to hear him sneak that in more too.

Not so.

[ronpaulitician]

I called the campaign staff this morning and suggested that Ron be prepared for O'Reilly pointing out that Ron wants to abolish the CIA, The Department of Home Land Security, The NEA, The Department of Energy, The FED, The IRS, etc. to make him look like a crack pot.
You don't think the campaign prepares for this?

IMHO, you just took up two minutes of the campaign staff's time.

[goldenequity]

What time is it scheduled for?
Right now.

O'Reilly live here
http://affiliates.foxnewsradio.com/Radio/player.html

[wsc321]

Per FNC, the interview is advertised as "Showdown Over Iraq: Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul goes head-to-head with Bill"

[ThePieSwindler]

O'reilly is on.. but ron paul is on tonight at 8 pmon the SHOW, the oreilly factor, not the radio factor.

[Slugg]

Nevermind

[MusoSpuso]

here we go...

*puts on helmet and jumps in trench*

LOL

[Kregener]

Perhaps some of you are over-complicating it?

The TRUTH has stood well on its own since the dawn of civilization.

[mconder]

but don't you think it is insulting to give suggestions to people who are far more qualified to handle this type of thing?

That's a real bullshit attitude? What qualification does Ron Paul have to comment on the economy and chastise the Fed Chairman? Did he go to school to be an economist or has he ever been employed in the finance industry? Do you know my background? I could have 20 years experience in PR for fortune 500 companies for all you know. It's ridiculous for you to think that I should not be able to call the campaign and make suggestions, especially for what I have put into this.

[BillyDkid]

I don't like when Ron says "just come home" or "just mind our own business." It sounds too simplistic, most people seem turned off by these explanations. If he could find another way of describing this, it would be more effective in my opinion.

O'Reilly will definetly be attacking him with all he's got tonight.He needs to stress how our involvement in Iraq has made us weaker and more vulnerable, has weakened our armed forces and made us more at risk. Bush has all but demolished our military and yet people cling to the idea that he is about a strong military. He needs to stress how bad the Iraq debacle has been for American in myriad of ways. Not to mention that our men and women should not be dying for any purpose except in defense of this country - certainly not to enforce UN sanctions and certainly not force Iraqis to have a democracy they clearly don't want or understand. It is so sickening - the people crying loudest and longest about protecting America and supporting the military are the ones who have put us at the most risk and decimated the military.

[Delivered4000]

I think Ron would do well, Bill O'Reilly isn't the smartest person

[Daveforliberty]

I don't like when Ron says "just come home" or "just mind our own business." It sounds too simplistic, most people seem turned off by these explanations. If he could find another way of describing this, it would be more effective in my opinion.

O'Reilly will definetly be attacking him with all he's got tonight.

I'm not sure I agree. "Just mind our own business" resonates with millions of Americans. And what does RP have to do to OWN O'Reilly? Just open his mouth.

[noxagol]

I'm not sure I agree. "Just mind our own business" resonates with millions of Americans. And what does RP have to do to OWN O'Reilly? Just open his mouth.

Yeah. Whenever Ron Paul speaks, people listen, and people understand how great he will be. The only ones who don't are the ones that think Bush is doing a good job running our country.

[bc2208]

Oh, and I was REALLY, piqued, when at the SC speech, he said something to the effect of this-

People say the Constitution is old and outdated, along with me and my ideas.

If you look at the History of humankind, most civilizations have lived under oppressive governments. The idea of freedom is still new by comparison. Our country and it's Constituion has only been around for a couple hundred years and we still need to give it and the freedoms it was founded upon a chance.

I'd like to hear him sneak that in more too.

Not so.

When people say "The founding fathers couldn't have imagined nuclear weapons or X," all that needs to be said is,

"The Constitution is less than 300 years old. The New Testament is almost 2000 years old. If people in this country can live their lives by the Bible, then surely the Constitution is far from antiquated."

[mconder]

IMHO, you just took up two minutes of the campaign staff's time.

They are obviously not prepared for it, considering the terse and simplistic response he gave in the debates. "Bureaucracies make us less safe," does not make him look any less crazy when he is accused of wanting to abolish practically every federal department ever created. You and I understand this, but the average person thinks this is crazy talk.

[ThePieSwindler]

When people say "The founding fathers couldn't have imagined nuclear weapons or X," all that needs to be said is,

"The Constitution is less than 300 years old. The New Testament is almost 2000 years old. If people in this country can live their lives by the Bible, then surely the Constitution is far from antiquated."

The whole "they couldnt have imagined nuclear weapons" is just a non sequitor fallacy. Nuclear weapons have nothing to do with and do not change the elements of liberty and limited government.

[cjhowe]

I think that Donahue/O'Reilly showdown posted in the other thread gives ample room for RP to have a decent conversation and to spread his message of following the Constitution. RP doesn't even need to be confrontational (unless he just wants to get all of us excited) to do well. O'Reilly has said that he agrees that we didn't need to go into Iraq, that it's been mismanaged.

These talks about giving the Iraqi government more time is what was agreed to back in May. They've had more time, they've done nothing with it. Even in the neocon prism of creating a craddle of Democracy in the Middle East, it doesn't look possible. What does 18 more months of building up the security forces do? Come January 20, 2009 it will either be Ron Paul or a Democrat bringing us home anyway. Why put U.S. forces in harms way between now and then. Why allow Iraq to dominate the 2008 elections and destroy the Republican party. The outcome in Iraq will be the same.

[Misesian]

This is simple, all he has to do is what he does best. That will be respond with facts and with historical evidence. This is what he did to OWN Hannity after the debate interview. It made Hannity ignore everything Ron Paul said which ends up getting noticed.

If you've seen that video on the 1st page of dailypaul.com where he's on a talk show during his '88 race I don't think he will really have a hard time dealing with anybody yelling in his face.

[Patriot]

My 2¢: Bill is a shill for the Bush admin/NWO. I think he will try to make Ron look bad for calling for a troop pull-out. On the positive side this is a very popular show 2.5M+ viewers will get to see Ron Paul and maybe learn more about him. (And maybe he won't be a 'long-shot' or 'second tier' candidate anymore.)

[PaleoForPaul]

The false racism charges will come up, and be pushed by Bill as the 'truth' then the followup smears will come from pajamas media tommorow.

I'm sure they are going to try to 'Buchanan' Ron Paul. I'm thinking they learned their lesson with Buchanan and aren't going to wait until after New Hampture this time.

[Patriot]

Just went to the www.billoreilly.com site. BillO has a poll that leaves out Ron Paul. I'm going to give Bill a piece of my mind and show support for Ron.
oreilly@foxnews.com

[Brasil Branco]

I just drew an awesome picture of O Reilly being beaten down by Ron Paul and a copy of the constitution....

and then my Photoshop crashed.

Coincidence or CONSPIRACY?

[Scribbler de Stebbing]

I just drew an awesome picture of O Reilly being beaten down by Ron Paul and a copy of the constitution....

and then my Photoshop crashed.

Coincidence or CONSPIRACY?

You're right. They are THAT good. ;)

What RP really needs is an earpiece with all of us connected on a conference call shouting instructions. ROFLMAO!

[LibertyEagle]

They're arrogant? What about YOU??? They're paid professionals who have seen elections and know how to deal with the media. How do you think they feel when you call them up acting like they don't know shit? Look, you want to help, but don't you think it is insulting to give suggestions to people who are far more qualified to handle this type of thing?

Maybe; maybe not. I think mconder's suggestions were valid. If he was nice in saying what he said, his suggestions should be accepted in the same manner. After all, he was only trying to help.

Sometimes it seems to me that some of the campaign "advisers" are too close to the situation and don't realize how what is said is being interpreted by the public. If they were so all knowing, then they would know that the American people see him as weak on national defense, because he has not explained adequately what he would do to provide national security. Most of the time has been spent talking about how what we are doing now is not good. Well, that's good, but now he needs to lay out what HE thinks needs to be done.

[LibertyEagle]

You're right. They are THAT good. ;)

What RP really needs is an earpiece with all of us connected on a conference call shouting instructions. ROFLMAO!

:D :D :D

[LibertyEagle]

Right now.

O'Reilly live here
http://affiliates.foxnewsradio.com/Radio/player.html

Huh??? He's supposed to be on the TV show tonight.

[Korey Kaczynski]

but don't you think it is insulting to give suggestions to people who are far more qualified to handle this type of thing?

That's a real bullshit attitude? What qualification does Ron Paul have to comment on the economy and chastise the Fed Chairman? Did he go to school to be an economist or has he ever been employed in the finance industry? Do you know my background? I could have 20 years experience in PR for fortune 500 companies for all you know. It's ridiculous for you to think that I should not be able to call the campaign and make suggestions, especially for what I have put into this.[/The majority of the lyrics reflects and criticizes the harsh reality of life and its perils

What does RP's qualifications in other matters not of his profession have to do with this situation? As I said before, they're prepared for this stuff, and giving them suggestions on something that's fairly obvious isn't going to help the campaign any. And it doesn't matter if you have experience in the matter; they do too, and it comes across as if you don't think they know what they're doing.

[Santana28]

i'm sure Ron is more than prepared to make O'Reilly look like the fool he is :)

[goldenequity]

Huh??? He's supposed to be on the TV show tonight.

Yea....sorry I jumped the gun:o :o

[Cowlesy]

O'Reilly just made a GREAT POINT about Hollywood liberals. He was talking about Mos Def.

He says people get comfortable with the people they're around. THey don't bother to form their own opinions. They think "well if David Geffen says it, and Steven Spielberg says it, and Bill Maher says" -- it must be right.

It's the EXACT same thing with ex-neocons like me. If Charles Krauthammer says it, if Fred Barnes says it, if Brit Hume says it ---- it has to be right. I agree with the people on TV or who are powerful, so I am in the right.

Wow if Ron Paul could use that point and spin it as to why Republicans are turning to him and questioning the status quo --- something Hollywood Liberals should also being doing, that'd be the equivalent of a 9th inning 2 outs 3-2 grandslam in the world series in game 7.

[BrianH]

To me the most controversial thing Ron has said was the 2nd ammendment could have prevented 9-11 by allowing guns on aircraft. Now that's simplistic! MUCH better to say the airlines should be responsible for the safety of passengers, but it sounds too much like the wild west to start a discussion on the relative merits of legalising gun fights on aircraft

[micahnelson]

To me the most controversial thing Ron has said was the 2nd ammendment could have prevented 9-11 by allowing guns on aircraft. Now that's simplistic! MUCH better to say the airlines should be responsible for the safety of passengers, but it sounds too much like the wild west to start a discussion on the relative merits of legalising gun fights on aircraft


Well, are gunfights legal on the surface? No. Then they would be illegal in the air. The airlines may decide to allow people to have weapons on board a plane. I probably wouldn't fly with an airline that allowed passengers to carry weapons, but would prefer an airline that had armed pilots or guards.

Proper locks on cockpit doors and allowing airlines to choose their own security would have prevented 9/11.

The other option would be to invade every country in the world where terrorists live and root them out- bearing in mind AQ is in almost every country in the world to some extent or another...

[Brasil Branco]

http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/2541/untitled1bw4.jpg

[stevedasbach]

I thought I'd start this thread in hopes that the campaign staff reads these forums.

I called the campaign staff this morning and suggested that Ron be prepared for O'Reilly pointing out that Ron wants to abolish the CIA, The Department of Home Land Security, The NEA, The Department of Energy, The FED, The IRS, etc. to make him look like a crack pot. I think Ron needs a better response than bureaucracy makes us less safe. I don't think the average person makes this connection, but it more likely thinking Ron is weak on protecting The U.S. from terror. Ron needs to let the people know who would be gathering intelligence and acting on it in the absence of the CIA and The Department of Home Land Security.

Anyhow, the campaign guy on the phone was somewhat arrogant and asked me, "You don't think we prepare for Ron going into this kind of hostile environment?" I'm thinking to myself, "you certainly don't know all and at least you could listen to your supports ideas without being condescending."

I apologize in advance if the message below seems overly harsh.

I can attest from personal experience that it is really annoying when you are busting your ass working 12-16 hour days 6-7 days a week to have people call in and make blindingly obvious suggestions (as if the campaign would have never have thought of that). My favorite when I worked the Libertarian Party's national HQ was when people would call in with something like "I had this great idea -- you should get Harry Browne on TV".

Duh! Like no one would have ever thought of that. Like we weren't doing everything in our power to make it happen.

You have to realize that the person you talked with fields calls like that every day, all day long, and the vast majority of suggestions are things the campaign is already doing, things they would like to do but don't have the resources for, or things that make no sense at all. You try to remain calm and friendly when answering call after call like this, but there comes a point where the most patient person snaps. You had the misfortune to call and speak to someone who had fielded one too many calls like this, and unfortunately, he took it out on you.

If you think you've got an idea that really might not have been considered, try testing it out here first. If it's good and unique, one of the people who volunteers at HQ will probably pass it on. Or, try sending it in an email. Calling and talking with the person charged with answering the phones is probably the least effective way to get your idea considered.