Ron Paul, Alex Jones, Glenn Beck...?

[Reason]

This was an email conversation I had today with a former college professor that I thought might be an interesting read for everyone here on the forum.

I was doing this from my cellphone while at work btw so that's why my responses were relatively short.

1st Email

He sends me a blank email with this link

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/truther-consequences?page=0,0

My response

The majority of the legitimate liberty movement is not a fan of alex jones and glenn beck, we know alex jones is controlled opposition, he mixes legit with illegit on purpose, glenn beck is nothing more than an attempt to hijack the legit liberty movement and bring it back into the folds of the bs 2 party system.

2nd Email

Chi va dormir con i cani, si leua con i pulici.
He that goeth to bedde wyth Dogges, aryseth with fleas.

Sanforde


So the Ron Paul strategy is to show his utter contempt
for the slimy, indefensible methodology of Jones and Beck,
by repeatedly lending his congressional
gravitas to their credibility-starved shows?

Perhaps I'll register my outrage for the Klan by
doing some volunteer work for them! :)

My Response

You have to realize that paul is a man of principle. He does not care about perceived affiliation. He is like chomsky when he stuck up for the right for a french professor to write a book contesting the portrayal of the holocaust. To him it did not matter what the subject content was, it's about his freedom of speech. He is not the average politician who cares about perceived images because he knows his supporters understand him and what his platform is.

3rd Email

Perhaps.

Perhaps not.

And pursuing a path that preaches to his tiny choir
and tells EVERYONE ELSE, by the hundreds of millions
that he's in league with Alex Jones, etc., strikes you
as a good plan for bringing reform?

Since when was perception not vital to leadership?

My Response

I didn't say I agreed with the approach in regard to those appearances ;-)




~~No further emails as of yet.~~

[Bruno]

Since when was perception not vital to leadership?






Thanks for sharing that.

This is where I fell it is your professor's perception that is wrong. He fails to realize that Ron Paul does not really want to be a leader, he wants to be a messenger.

[tonesforjonesbones]

Tell your prof that TONES says GO GLENN BECK GO! TONES

[Reason]

Tell your prof that TONES says GO GLENN BECK GO! TONES

No thanks, I am not a fan of purposely discrediting our movement.

[Anti Federalist]

College professor links poorly written hit piece, in a left wing mag, on Alex Jones to Ron Paul based on the fact the RP continues to do AJ's show, then makes a Klan reference.

Ask him what, specifically, that is reported in the article that is false.

Yeah yeah, elitist "lefty" intellectuals think we're nuts, got it.

Like I've haven't heard that before.

AF hears ya', AF doesn't give a shit.

[Vessol]

crappy hit piece is crappy

[pcosmar]

That College Professor is living proof that one can be educated beyond their capacity. :p

[Akus]

Thanks for sharing that.

This is where I fell it is your professor's perception that is wrong. He fails to realize that Ron Paul does not really want to be a leader, he wants to be a messenger.

And THIS is why I hardly ever care what goes on in the so-called liberty movement. We are oversaturated with messengers. When will we have a leader? Where is our Moses?

[Vessol]

And THIS is why I hardly ever care what goes on in the so-called liberty movement. We are oversaturated with messengers. When will we have a leader? Where is our Moses?

We don't need one.

We are our own leaders.

[Anti Federalist]

And THIS is why I hardly ever care what goes on in the so-called liberty movement. We are oversaturated with messengers. When will we have a leader? Where is our Moses?

Look in the mirror.

There's your leader.

Stop waiting around for someone else to tell you where to squat and shit.

[Reason]

Stop waiting around for someone else to tell you where to squat and shit.

i loled.


it's true tho,

I told myself this the other day to help stir up some courage to chat up my not so friendly neighbors and offer them a copy of the power of nightmares documentary.

:cool:

[Andrew-Austin]

It sounds like he is just looking for a useful label / collectivist generalization to pin on Paul, in order to demonize/dismiss his ideas without actually addressing them.

This habit is frequent among liberals(as well as anyone stuck in the left/right party crap), especially when they encounter the libertarian perspective and don't know what to think of it until they can find a negative label to associate the ideas with.

Associating Paul with Jones means he is a conspiracy kook, associating him with Beck means he is a typical partisan reactionary or whatever. Ideas are glossed over.

"Paul favors the free market? So did Bush. <insert all Bush-bashing comments here> "

--- its that kind of shit, happening automatically without them realizing it or caring.

[James Madison]

The "slimy, indefensible methodology of Jones"? I stopped reading after this. Seriously, I'm so sick and tired of these "intellectuals" and their elitist, pretentious, head-up-their-ass world view. The guy links to an obvious hit-piece (and a rather poorly written one at that) from a notorious left-wing site and expects me to take him seriously? Let's take a look at the 'ole hit-piece checklist...Mention Nazis [check]...Invoke the phrase "conspiracy theory" in every other paragraph [check]...Label as insane [check]...Take arguments drastically out of context [check]. Yep, looks pretty typical to me.:cool:

[TheConstitutionLives]

Why the hell do we keep having to bring up the topic of AJ on this general politics forum? The dude is poison. Go to infowars' forum and talk about Jones all day long.

[LibertasPraesidium]

those arguments are actually logical fallacies and wiki has the whole list of them to peruse, learn them they help in fights with the uneducated.

One of the most common fallacy's is what the professor is using.

which is the association fallacy, the same was used when Ron Paul received money from a KKK member.

That will always show up but for future reference heres the list

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

Also, a few more links I have found helpful in pushing down my hope for someone to step up and lead us into a new age.

http://www.louisbeam.com/leaderless.htm
http://www.onedollardvdproject.com/DVD-new/Home_files/Leaderless%20Resistance.pdf
^5 page pdf

[Captain America]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2360347#post2360347

[Vessol]

Why the hell do we keep having to bring up the topic of AJ on this general politics forum? The dude is poison. Go to infowars' forum and talk about Jones all day long.

AJ's methods are questionable, but his impact has been nothing but positive in bringing more into the fold, same with Beck.

[Reason]

his impact has been nothing but positive

http://images.smh.com.au/2009/09/16/734452/joewilsonlead-420x0.jpg

[pacelli]

http://images.smh.com.au/2009/09/16/734452/joewilsonlead-420x0.jpg

Seriously!!! "Nothing but positive"??????

That's so funny that I forgot to laugh. Nothing but positive. Wow.

[pcosmar]

Why the hell do we keep having to bring up the topic of AJ on this general politics forum? The dude is poison. Go to infowars' forum and talk about Jones all day long.
If you have nothing to contribute,
Don't
:(

[Elwar]

Tell the professor that you are perceiving him as a non-principled individual...ask him if he was shooting for that image by having higher regard for image over substance.

Also, don't fall for his collectivist arguments. "We" are a bunch of individuals with varying ideas, likes and dislikes.

[Anti Federalist]

Why the hell do we keep having to bring up the topic of AJ on this general politics forum? The dude is poison. Go to infowars' forum and talk about Jones all day long.

Hey, there he is!

It's like a "Where's Waldo?", just type in Alex Jones or "conspiracy" and - boom - TCL will be there, somewhere, with a snide, non productive, remark.

9/11 was an inside job!!!:p

[Deborah K]

This was an email conversation I had today with a former college professor that I thought might be an interesting read for everyone here on the forum.

I was doing this from my cellphone while at work btw so that's why my responses were relatively short.

1st Email

He sends me a blank email with this link

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/truther-consequences?page=0,0

My response

The majority of the legitimate liberty movement is not a fan of alex jones and glenn beck, we know alex jones is controlled opposition, he mixes legit with illegit on purpose, glenn beck is nothing more than an attempt to hijack the legit liberty movement and bring it back into the folds of the bs 2 party system.

2nd Email

Chi va dormir con i cani, si leua con i pulici.
He that goeth to bedde wyth Dogges, aryseth with fleas.

Sanforde


So the Ron Paul strategy is to show his utter contempt
for the slimy, indefensible methodology of Jones and Beck,
by repeatedly lending his congressional
gravitas to their credibility-starved shows?

Perhaps I'll register my outrage for the Klan by
doing some volunteer work for them! :)

My Response

You have to realize that paul is a man of principle. He does not care about perceived affiliation. He is like chomsky when he stuck up for the right for a french professor to write a book contesting the portrayal of the holocaust. To him it did not matter what the subject content was, it's about his freedom of speech. He is not the average politician who cares about perceived images because he knows his supporters understand him and what his platform is.

3rd Email

Perhaps.

Perhaps not.

And pursuing a path that preaches to his tiny choir
and tells EVERYONE ELSE, by the hundreds of millions
that he's in league with Alex Jones, etc., strikes you
as a good plan for bringing reform?

Since when was perception not vital to leadership?

My Response

I didn't say I agreed with the approach in regard to those appearances ;-)




~~No further emails as of yet.~~


Sounds like your Prof is experiencing cognitive dissonance. This means he's feeling the "tug" out of his comfort zone. When they (potential converts) initiate debate, it's usually for one of two reasons: 1. They're in conversion process or 2. They're trying to change YOUR mind.

Only you can determine which it is. Either way, you stand a chance of convincing him that the fight for individual freedom is our only chance. For me, the easiest way to convince people is by helping them understand the difference between individualism and collectivism. If you do it that way though, make sure you have a true understanding of what collectivism is. I've noticed lately that a lot of people on this forum seem confused about it.

Collectivists believe that the group is more important than the individual: the greatest good for the greatest number. Collectivists view the group as an entity of its own with rights of its own. Therefore, it is acceptable to sacrifice individuals if necessary. This begs the question: who gets to choose who will be sacrificed for the greater good? The State does, of course, because the State is the ultimate group. The State is more important than the individual. Collectivists believe that rights come from governments. When governments claim to derive their authority from any source other than the governed, it always leads to the destruction of liberty.

[moostraks]

9/11 was an inside job!!!:p

:D

I love your leadership comment too btw...Direct and accurate as always.:)

[Nate]

Look in the mirror.

There's your leader.

Stop waiting around for someone else to tell you where to squat and shit.

+1