I keep supporting C4L!

[qwerty]

Let´s make a thread like this for a while.

Instead of bullshitting here, you should read this topic and check why are they doing it in Colorado.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=31973&cpg=1#comments

F-word to dramaqueens!

Let´s work even harder for liberty!

:cool:

[qwerty]

With the release of John's statement, I wanted to take a minute to fill you in on what has been happening out here in Colorado.

I have been amazed at the effect the survey has had on other candidates. Several candidates have called and/or emailed me asking to fill out the survey or to tell me they have mailed in the form. This includes some who flat-out refused to fill it out before. Incumbents have also taken notice. Both CO C4L and I are being treated with much more respect now, instead of being written off as far-out "Ron Paulers" (which I proudly am!).

In speaking with Ken Buck last year, I found that he has been "educated" into a complete 180 regarding the Federal Reserve, and he is actively calling out Bennet to co-sponsor S. 604. Yesterday, he also chastised Bennet for his "yes" vote to confirm Bernanke for a second term. With his stance on the war, he is not perfect, but I have learned that he is teachable! He has also been working with three main C4L organizers in CO to learn about what we stand for, and he has read several of Ron Paul's books (The Revolution twice).

Yes, the commercial should have been different, but the survey has already had a great impact out here in CO, and I'm looking forward to continuing to hold politicians accountable for where they stand on our issues.


http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=31973&cpg=1#comments

[qwerty]

Greetings All: I was a little angry at first also. I am aware of Buck's record, particularly about his abuse of the 4th amendment and his stand on foreign policy. I do agree that people, even politicians are teachable. People and politicians make mistakes. This is how we learn. I believe that National and Colorado C4L learns from these mistakes and it makes us stronger in the long haul.It is not going to be easy taking our Republic back from the progressive revolutionaries. To that end we must maintain level heads and help each other. Our common goal here is to educate, inform and get our Republic back.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=31973&cpg=1#comments

[qwerty]

I have been quietly watching this fiasco for the past 2 days. Now that I feel I have a better grasp of what's been going on I am outraged too. Not at C4L National, and not the CO C4L, but at the miriad of C4L members (and now some ex-memebers) who have come out of the woodwork and are bashing C4L over the head over this. I agree that the ad could have been better designed, but as long as we can get some validation that it was paid for by local people in Colorodo and not by C4L national I am perfectly satisfied with what has transpired.

I know we want our politicians to be pure constitutionalists, but that fact of the matter is that that does not always fly in modern America. If Buck is only lacking in ONE of our core principles then he is still a HELL of a lot better than 99% of current members of Congress. If we go around on an inquisition to burn politicians who disagree with us on even one point then we can just end this here and now because we will NEVER get anywhere with that attitude, which can only turn people off and turn others away. We can't afford to be purists and, quite frankly, liberty is not about having a strict ideology.

Besides, as long as he supports sound money and an end to the FED he doesn't HAVE to be for non-intervention. When the REAL cost of intervention is apparent through sound money he will HAVE to be against interventionist adventures, like it or not. I think right now, we really need to focus on politicians who will support sound money and austrian theories of economics first and foremost. After that, the rest of the policy changes that make sense are sure to follow.


http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=31973&cpg=1#comments

[DjLoTi]

Right on.

We should all stay involved with things we think make a difference. Lets all keep up the fight =))))

[DjLoTi]

btw qwerty u do a really good job on these forums ;)

[qwerty]

Right on.

We should all stay involved with things we think make a difference. Lets all keep up the fight =))))

Yes, C4L is great tool to meet your local people!

Only bad thing is that i´m from Europe! :D


btw qwerty u do a really good job on these forums

Thanks bro! :D

[dr. hfn]

I support the C4L. It just needs reformed.

[qwerty]

It´s kind a funny to see so many adults acting like babies here. :D

Grow up and see that people make mistakes. Yes, i agree that the ad could have been better.

I really think that the people who now drop out were not even activists for C4L. why i think so ?

Cause you wouldn´t give up on something which is important to you so easy.

[qwerty]

I support the C4L. It just needs reformed.

Yes, let them hear your opinion loud&clear.

All the adults here can agree that the resigning is not the way to improve things.

[Vessol]

Thanks for another thread.

[qwerty]

Thanks for another thread.

You´re wellcome.

This one will not be hijacked by the people who only want to sabotage things.

[Vessol]

This thread was posted by the kind of people that will ruin this movement.

Those who attack those who dare question anything and those whom do not mind sacrificing their values if it means winning, and thus losing in the process.

[fj45lvr]

This thread was posted by the kind of people that will ruin this movement.

Those who attack those who dare question anything and those whom do not mind sacrificing their values if it means winning, and thus losing in the process.


Compromise is what politicians live for....it also is certain death for the people....when you compromise again and again and again you end up with nothing left.:( This happens all the time....so much that certain elements rely on it, they are so far out there just to move the point of compromise (knowing that the majority of politicians want to pacify factions).

a sick way of being.

[qwerty]

This thread was posted by the kind of people that will ruin this movement.

Those who attack those who dare question anything and those whom do not mind sacrificing their values if it means winning, and thus losing in the process.

I´m ruining the movement when i´m not dropping my support ?

Sounds very adult to me, how old are you ?

We here believe in conversations. If you can´t do that, i guess that the only way to tell what you think is drop out your support.

Btw, the video was poorly made and i think they get the message, but the intention of the video could be very good.

[Vessol]

This is not a forum for ad hominem attacks.

I simply said that I believe that people whom attack people whom ask questions of those who lead our movement and those who accept foregoing core political values we all accept in order to win, these are the people damaging this movement.

This is my opinion.

[qwerty]

Compromise is what politicians live for....it also is certain death for the people....when you compromise again and again and again you end up with nothing left.:( This happens all the time....so much that certain elements rely on it, they are so far out there just to move the point of compromise (knowing that the majority of politicians want to pacify factions).

a sick way of being.

This isn´t about Compromising, this is all about improving.

I think the intention could be good, just the video was bad.

[Vessol]

This isn´t about Compromising, this is all about improving.

I think the intention could be good, just the video was bad.

What was the intention?

And how is this about improving?

[qwerty]

This is not a forum for ad hominem attacks.

I simply said that I believe that people whom attack people whom ask questions of those who lead our movement and those who accept foregoing core political values we all accept in order to win, these are the people damaging this movement.

This is my opinion.

Ofcourse you should ask question and tell everyone your opinion.

I´m talking about spreading helf-truth and that BS, some even attacking Ron Paul over this.

I guess you think that those people are the ones we need. I don´t...

Making a mistake is btw human nature, it´s all about that are you learning from the mistake. If they don´t learn, they are not the right leaders.

Still i think that the survey could be a good way to get these politicians to think out of the box. Just the ad was bad.

When i say that we need conversation, that´s questions and answers. You know... We don´t need insults&half-truths!

:rolleyes:

[qwerty]

What was the intention?

And how is this about improving?

I think that is was a ad for the survey.

Next ad should be better. That´s improving. :rolleyes:

[Vessol]

Well I'll say that I support the CFL still, but not the upper leadership which has given poor response and excuses so far.

I also don't know how anyone can put Ron Paul into this. He isn't and shouldn't become involved in it. This is CFL's mess.

I'm sorry if I come off as attacking or trying to destroy anything, I'm not. I'm frustrated however by the people who make it wrong just to question and think that our leaders and organizations are perfect and beyond fault.

[qwerty]

Well I'll say that I support the CFL still, but not the upper leadership which has given poor response and excuses so far.

I also don't know how anyone can put Ron Paul into this. He isn't and shouldn't become involved in it. This is CFL's mess.

I'm sorry if I come off as attacking or trying to destroy anything, I'm not. I'm frustrated however by the people who make it wrong just to question and think that our leaders and organizations are perfect and beyond fault.

Ok, now we are at the same page!

Yes, we should tell them loud and clear what we think, cause after all organisation people make the C4L not the leadership. This isn´t an organisation which is full of lemmings who can´t think.

What i think is that conversations will improve these things, dropping out is the easy way out and won´t do any good for the movement.

Yes, if you are not happy with something, you should tell your opinion, but no lies,insults or half-truths!

[hugolp]

It´s kind a funny to see so many adults acting like babies here. :D

Grow up and see that people make mistakes. Yes, i agree that the ad could have been better.

I really think that the people who now drop out were not even activists for C4L. why i think so ?

Cause you wouldn´t give up on something which is important to you so easy.

I dont think this is the way you help in this situation. You just come as a C4L cheerleader. Calling people with different opinions babies and dramaqueens its not going to help, and also shows an attitude of not wanting to discuss the issues. It seems like you just want to "rally the troops" so C4L can get away with this.

C4L supported a candidate that supports the wars. Is this going to be now the official policy of C4L or are they going to change? And how can the people now they are for real now? This are things worth discussing and not calling people names.

I am very glad on how the people reacted. I am proud they are for real, and not just people that say one thing and do the opposite.

[qwerty]

I dont think this is the way you help in this situation. You just come as a C4L cheerleader. Calling people with different opinions babies and dramaqueens its not going to help, and also shows an attitude of not wanting to discuss the issues. It seems like you just want to "rally the troops" so C4L can get away with this.

C4L supported a candidate that supports the wars. Is this going to be now the official policy of C4L or are they going to change? And how can the people now they are for real now? This are things worth discussing and not calling people names.

I am very glad on how the people reacted. I am proud they are for real, and not just people that say one thing and do the opposite.

Omg.

First, i´m calling those people who are taking the easy way out (drop out) or are spreading dis-info here.

Secondly, the ad was for the survey. It was just badly done and that shouldn´t happen again.

Third, I´m also glad that people reacted, but it depends on how they react. Are they going to talk about it like adults or start acting like babies. You know adults starts conversations about the things that they would like to change. Babies&dramaqueens are the ones who are here just to sabotage things, they spread half-truths,insults and that´s not productive in any ways. That is what the enemies of the freedom movement would like us to do.

BTW. I have been here a long time and i have seen how this board has changed.

I´m so sure that some people are here just to sabotage this movement we have created. You must choose your side.



United we stand, divided we fall

[revolutionary8]

Omg.

First, i´m calling those people who are taking the easy way out (drop out) or are spreading dis-info here.

Secondly, the ad was for the survey. It was just badly done and that shouldn´t happen again.

Third, I´m also glad that people reacted, but it depends on how they react. Are they going to talk about it like adults or start acting like babies. You know adults starts conversations about the things that they would like to change. Babies&dramaqueens are the ones who are here just to sabotage things, they spread half-truths,insults and that´s not productive in any ways. That is what the enemies of the freedom movement would like us to do.

BTW. I have been here a long time and i have seen how this board has changed.

I´m so sure that some people are here just to sabotage this movement we have created. You must choose your side.



United we stand, divided we fall

I want to know how much of "the truth" people can HANDLE.
i'm not so sure that "ppl" can handle any "truthiness" not included in their own AGENDA.
HOW BOUT THEM APPLES?
(my guess is that this will never be addressed)
AND FUCK ALL Y'ALL SCOTT BROWN SUPPORTERS telling me to quit the CFL.

[hugolp]

Omg.

First, i´m calling those people who are taking the easy way out (drop out) or are spreading dis-info here.

Secondly, the ad was for the survey. It was just badly done and that shouldn´t happen again.

Third, I´m also glad that people reacted, but it depends on how they react. Are they going to talk about it like adults or start acting like babies. You know adults starts conversations about the things that they would like to change. Babies&dramaqueens are the ones who are here just to sabotage things, they spread half-truths,insults and that´s not productive in any ways. That is what the enemies of the freedom movement would like us to do.

BTW. I have been here a long time and i have seen how this board has changed.

I´m so sure that some people are here just to sabotage this movement we have created. You must choose your side.



United we stand, divided we fall

See, this is what I am talking about. People is angry, and rightfully so. Yet, you are talking about choosing sides, instead of talking about what will be C4L future policy regarding the war. If I had to choose side, I would choose the anti-preemptive war side, as would anyone with half a heart. You are trying to dodge the debate and rally the people with rhetoric. Your attitude is going to get people more angry, and with a reason if you ask me.

Lets talk about C4L future policy regarding war, and present actions to support that stand. That is the way to solve this mess, not rhetoric.

[qwerty]

See, this is what I am talking about. People is angry, and rightfully so. Yet, you are talking about choosing sides, instead of talking about what will be C4L future policy regarding the war. If I had to choose side, I would choose the anti-preemptive war side, as would anyone with half a heart. You are trying to dodge the debate and rally the people with rhetoric. Your attitude is going to get people more angry, and with a reason if you ask me.

Lets talk about C4L future policy regarding war, and present actions to support that stand. That is the way to solve this mess, not rhetoric.

Have you seen what TATE said ?


In retrospect, the ad we are running could have been messaged differently to help avoid any confusion on its intent and to better advertise our issue discussion program. Your invaluable feedback will help us correct this in the future and, as a result, strengthen the effectiveness of our program. This is C4L's first foray into launching this kind of national initiative, and we are convinced it has the potential to make a tremendous impact.


They are seeing that the members were not so happy about the way the ad was created.

You are so blinded. If you can´t see that the video was not made to endorse Ken but to get the word out about the survey, which is intended to educate candidates and help them to think out of the box and i think it´s a good idea.

Yes, the ad was bad and they have heard it and will hear for a long time. If they learn from it, i´m fine. If they don´t it´s time to change the people. Mistakes are part of the human nature.

What that video had to do with war ? That´s again a half-truth. I didn´t even endorse Ken.

Why people got impression that it endorsed Ken, cause it was badly done and they know it now!

That war thing is really a non-issue here. We should talk about improving the ads that they won´t give wrong impressions to the people.

You should give us a source where C4L directly endorses war ? If you can´t don´t talk about it, cause it´s not true then.

[hugolp]

^^ The ad was endorsing Ken, a neo-con, using the excuse of the survey as an excuse, because by law they can not directly support a candidate. Everybody that has seen the ad can see that. I dont buy that C4L are stupid. It is very obvious what they were doing.

You dont spend $350.000 in an ad to promote your survey, and randomly choose a guy to appear. Its a lot of money.

I am telling you that trying to doge the question and treating people as if they were stupid is not going to help. Nobody is buying that this was about the survey, it was about the candidate.

C4L should come out, say if they are going to support more war-mongering candidates and react accordingly. Treating people like if they are stupid and trying to force them to believe an obviously lie is not the way to go.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Omg.

First, i´m calling those people who are taking the easy way out (drop out) or are spreading dis-info here.

Secondly, the ad was for the survey. It was just badly done and that shouldn´t happen again.

Third, I´m also glad that people reacted, but it depends on how they react. Are they going to talk about it like adults or start acting like babies. You know adults starts conversations about the things that they would like to change. Babies&dramaqueens are the ones who are here just to sabotage things, they spread half-truths,insults and that´s not productive in any ways. That is what the enemies of the freedom movement would like us to do.

BTW. I have been here a long time and i have seen how this board has changed.

I´m so sure that some people are here just to sabotage this movement we have created. You must choose your side.



United we stand, divided we fall

How about you call people out individually instead of painting with a broad brush. I have been around here a while too. I too recall when the CFL was announced and going to be seeded with remaining campaign money.

In light of this controversy the burden here is not on people who do not advocate empowering other people to spend your money. As an advocate of decentralization and free markets I really don't give credibility to people who want to club other people into believing in central planning and top down organization.

You created a Milton Friedman thread posting an interview video and if you actually listen to him talk about libertarianism it does not do much to support the case for CFL.

To be clear so there is no doubt... here is what I am re-stating. A top down organization such as the CFL was not the appropriate vehicle for grass roots supporters to place all of their eggs and faith in. Especially in light of the campaign and people involved.

Opponents of the formation of CFL at times have been labeled just about everything but a Ron Paul supporter so opponents of this grass roots top down distraction shut up about it. But now that the CFL is establishing validity to the initial criticism of its formation in light of this controversy be mindful of who you call out. If not done with the utmost respect and professionalism it might bite you in the ass.

[qwerty]

^^ The ad was endorsing Ken, a neo-con, using the excuse of the survey as an excuse, because by law they can not directly support a candidate. Everybody that has seen the ad can see that. I dont buy that C4L are stupid. It is very obvious what they were doing.

Ok, we can argue all night long was an endorsement or not. You say it was, i say it was just a bad video which gave from impression.

However that conversation wouldn´t be productive. From my understanding the C4L has allready pulled the ad out ?


You dont spend $350.000 in an ad to promote your survey, and randomly choose a guy to appear. Its a lot of money.

Yes, you don´t. But are from Colorado ? I am asking cause in my understanding they used local money not national.

I like the survey idea. And i think C4L should run ads to get name recognition.



I am telling you that trying to doge the question and treating people as if they were stupid is not going to help. Nobody is buying that this was about the survey, it was about the candidate.

Again wrong accusations. The people who i dislike are the ones who spread insults&lies&half-truths. Not the ones who ask decent questions.



C4L should come out, say if they are going to support more war-mongering candidates and react accordingly. Treating people like if they are stupid and trying to force them to believe an obviously lie is not the way to go.


They haven´t supported war-mongering. That´s a lie.

I asked you to prove and you didn´t so it´s a lie.

[garyallen59]

^^ The ad was endorsing Ken, a neo-con, using the excuse of the survey as an excuse, because by law they can not directly support a candidate.

Nobody is buying that this was about the survey, it was about the candidate..

I believe the video is for the survey.

I have been silent watching this whole thing unfold. I agree with qwerty the CFL has said that the video was the wrong way to go about making a commercial for the survey and would like our input for future videos. If the CFL continues to make videos in that manor for candidates that don't support our values after we give them input and hold their feet to the fire then i will see that the battle isn't worth it and not be involved with the organization. but for now i will support the CFL in hope that all is not lost and mistakes were made, and possibly by the end of it all this survey program will be a great tool for judging the standpoints of politicians.

[LittleLightShining]

Yes, C4L is great tool to meet your local people!

Only bad thing is that i´m from Europe! :D



Thanks bro! :DThen how do you know it helps you meet local people? Frankly, when I was a county coordinator I got a handful of email addresses and street addresses for people in my county and the majority of them turned out to be bogus. We meet people the old fashioned way-- networking with other people, organizing events and collecting our OWN email addresses.


This thread was posted by the kind of people that will ruin this movement.

Those who attack those who dare question anything and those whom do not mind sacrificing their values if it means winning, and thus losing in the process.Thank you.


I´m ruining the movement when i´m not dropping my support ?

Sounds very adult to me, how old are you ?

We here believe in conversations. If you can´t do that, i guess that the only way to tell what you think is drop out your support.

Btw, the video was poorly made and i think they get the message, but the intention of the video could be very good.You're attacking people for asking questions and questioning where they should put their support. Guess what? Campaign For Liberty is not the be all end all of the liberty movement!


Ofcourse you should ask question and tell everyone your opinion.

I´m talking about spreading helf-truth and that BS, some even attacking Ron Paul over this.

I guess you think that those people are the ones we need. I don´t...

Making a mistake is btw human nature, it´s all about that are you learning from the mistake. If they don´t learn, they are not the right leaders.

Still i think that the survey could be a good way to get these politicians to think out of the box. Just the ad was bad.

When i say that we need conversation, that´s questions and answers. You know... We don´t need insults&half-truths!

:rolleyes:I have read (almost) every post on this and I have yet to see anyone attack Ron Paul. People have said that they either want to hear him say something or others (like me) say they want him kept out of it unless he fires people. Where are the half-truths? You seem to nbe implying that anyone who is leaving C4L over this and posting about it here is not being honest about what's happening.


Ok, now we are at the same page!

Yes, we should tell them loud and clear what we think, cause after all organisation people make the C4L not the leadership. This isn´t an organisation which is full of lemmings who can´t think.

What i think is that conversations will improve these things, dropping out is the easy way out and won´t do any good for the movement.

Yes, if you are not happy with something, you should tell your opinion, but no lies,insults or half-truths!Good to see you've begun to come around.


I dont think this is the way you help in this situation. You just come as a C4L cheerleader. Calling people with different opinions babies and dramaqueens its not going to help, and also shows an attitude of not wanting to discuss the issues. It seems like you just want to "rally the troops" so C4L can get away with this.

C4L supported a candidate that supports the wars. Is this going to be now the official policy of C4L or are they going to change? And how can the people now they are for real now? This are things worth discussing and not calling people names.

I am very glad on how the people reacted. I am proud they are for real, and not just people that say one thing and do the opposite.I am, too, hugo. Means we're not a bunch of sheep.


Omg.

First, i´m calling those people who are taking the easy way out (drop out) or are spreading dis-info here.

Secondly, the ad was for the survey. It was just badly done and that shouldn´t happen again.

Third, I´m also glad that people reacted, but it depends on how they react. Are they going to talk about it like adults or start acting like babies. You know adults starts conversations about the things that they would like to change. Babies&dramaqueens are the ones who are here just to sabotage things, they spread half-truths,insults and that´s not productive in any ways. That is what the enemies of the freedom movement would like us to do.

BTW. I have been here a long time and i have seen how this board has changed.

I´m so sure that some people are here just to sabotage this movement we have created. You must choose your side.



United we stand, divided we fallUnited we stand for the PRINCIPLES. The principles are the foundation.

I think you're here just to make sure we keep fighting about it :rolleyes:



How about you call people out individually instead of painting with a broad brush. I have been around here a while too. I too recall when the CFL was announced and going to be seeded with remaining campaign money.

In light of this controversy the burden here is not on people who do not advocate empowering other people to spend your money. As an advocate of decentralization and free markets I really don't give a hoot about people who want to club other people into believing in central planning and top down organization.

You created a Milton Friedman thread posting an interview video and if you actually listen to him talk about libertarianism it does not do much to support the case for CFL.

To be clear so there is no doubt... here is what I am re-stating. A top down organization such as the CFL was not the appropriate vehicle for grass roots supporters to place all of their eggs and faith in. Especially in light of the campaign and people involved.

Opponents of the formation of CFL at times have been labeled just about everything but a Ron Paul supporter so opponents of this grass roots top down distraction shut up about it. But now that the CFL is establishing validity to the initial criticism of its formation in light of this controversy be mindful of who you call out. If not done with the utmost respect and professionalism it might bite you in the ass.
Yes.

[hugolp]

Yes, you don´t. But are from Colorado ? I am asking cause in my understanding they used local money not national.

And this is another thing that it is interesting. Because as far as I know (and correct me if wrong) C4L books are not public and open, so believing that this money came from some local fund raising and not from central is just a matter of faith. People have no way of checking it, C4L is just asking for them to believe (very republocrat).

And there has been Colorado people on the forum saying that they dont know or ahve heard anything about a fundraising.


They haven´t supported war-mongering. That´s a lie.

I asked you to prove and you didn´t so it´s a lie.

Well, if you say the ad was not supporting Ken then they dont. But if you see they did, like me and almost everybody that have seen the video, then C4L has endorsed a warmongering candidate. I think people deserve to know if they are going to keep doing it or not, and how they are going to react to this.

Listen, it is obvious that C4L is trying to dodge the issue. And that is hurting a lot of people that were specting a real honest answer. I am more and more convinced that C4L have decided that they can compromise on some issue to gain more influence in national politics. And if they think that is the best way, fine. But if that was their idea and strategy they should have said so while asking for money, so people can decide if they aprove it or not.

[qwerty]

How about you call people out individually instead of painting with a broad brush. I have been around here a while too. I too recall when the CFL was announced and going to be seeded with remaining campaign money.

In light of this controversy the burden here is not on people who do not advocate empowering other people to spend your money. As an advocate of decentralization and free markets I really don't give credibility to people who want to club other people into believing in central planning and top down organization.

You created a Milton Friedman thread posting an interview video and if you actually listen to him talk about libertarianism it does not do much to support the case for CFL.

To be clear so there is no doubt... here is what I am re-stating. A top down organization such as the CFL was not the appropriate vehicle for grass roots supporters to place all of their eggs and faith in. Especially in light of the campaign and people involved.

Opponents of the formation of CFL at times have been labeled just about everything but a Ron Paul supporter so opponents of this grass roots top down distraction shut up about it. But now that the CFL is establishing validity to the initial criticism of its formation in light of this controversy be mindful of who you call out. If not done with the utmost respect and professionalism it might bite you in the ass.

I got the impression that C4L kills the grassroots (sorry, my bad english) ? Is it your point ?

If it is, let me make few points what i think.

Yes, we don´t need anyone who dictates every move we make, but we need something which will unite us under the same banner if you want to get something done. The point is that if C4L would have half of the americans under it´s banner, the politician would listen very much what they would have to say about the issues.

Secondly, C4L offers you an opportunity to network with like-minded people to change ideas etc etc.

Third, You don´t have to donate your money to C4L if you don´t want to. You can be C4L member and spend your money on your local C4L events or activism.


We have now a network of over 100.000 members and many visitors and you would like to throw that all away, cause of one ad ?

[qwerty]

Then how do you know it helps you meet local people? Frankly, when I was a county coordinator I got a handful of email addresses and street addresses for people in my county and the majority of them turned out to be bogus. We meet people the old fashioned way-- networking with other people, organizing events and collecting our OWN email addresses.

I think it´s pretty logical that when like-minded people gather around in some place, it makes you easier to get to know with them.


You're attacking people for asking questions and questioning where they should put their support. Guess what? Campaign For Liberty is not the be all end all of the liberty movement!

No i´m not.

I´m attacking people who spread half-truths,insults,lies.

I don´t know how many times this must be said. :rolleyes:


I have read (almost) every post on this and I have yet to see anyone attack Ron Paul. People have said that they either want to hear him say something or others (like me) say they want him kept out of it unless he fires people. Where are the half-truths? You seem to nbe implying that anyone who is leaving C4L over this and posting about it here is not being honest about what's happening.


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2517973&postcount=12

Half-truts are for example that C4L is for war, or that C4L endorses Ken.


Good to see you've begun to come around.

If you would only read everything i say before posting...

:rolleyes:


United we stand for the PRINCIPLES. The principles are the foundation.

I think you're here just to make sure we keep fighting about it

We have not broken any prinsiples... :rolleyes:

[LittleLightShining]

Ok, we can argue all night long was an endorsement or not. You say it was, i say it was just a bad video which gave from impression. Somewhere jmdrake did a great analysis of the ad. Of something like 5 points about the candidate only 2 were directly related to the survey and those 2 points were classic GOP talking points. Another way you can analyze the video is to watch it with the sound off.



However that conversation wouldn´t be productive. From my understanding the C4L has allready pulled the ad out ? The question is, did they pull it because we complained or did they pull it because it was an endorsement and they didn't want to get in trouble? I'm asking questions.




Yes, you don´t. But are from Colorado ? I am asking cause in my understanding they used local money not national. They used BRAND NEW LOCAL MONEY. $350 THOUSAND DOLLARS of brand new local money that was earmarked specifically for Ken Buck. How is this somehow any less disturbing than the idea that OUR money was spent.

There's no accountability, we'll never know why all of a sudden this (these) donors decided to drop $350k in C4L NATIONAL's pockets (NOT CO C4L which is NOT organized and can't take $ yet!) to benefit Ken Buck, a war-mongering, hate crime prosecuting, 4th Amendment violating LAWYER.


I like the survey idea. And i think C4L should run ads to get name recognition.
Do you? What makes you think an expensive tv ad campaign for candidate surveys is money better spent than, say, an expensive tv ad campaign targeted around 1207 aired in specific candidate's districts? The 501c4 status allows for unlimited lobbying and doing something like this would never raise an eyebrow. Oh, but that's right! There was a special donation made in CO JUST to benefit Ken Buck.



Again wrong accusations. The people who i dislike are the ones who spread insults&lies&half-truths. Not the ones who ask decent questions.


They haven´t supported war-mongering. That´s a lie.

I asked you to prove and you didn´t so it´s a lie.Name names then. Otherwise you're lying :rolleyes:

[qwerty]

I believe the video is for the survey.

I have been silent watching this whole thing unfold. I agree with qwerty the CFL has said that the video was the wrong way to go about making a commercial for the survey and would like our input for future videos. If the CFL continues to make videos in that manor for candidates that don't support our values after we give them input and hold their feet to the fire then i will see that the battle isn't worth it and not be involved with the organization. but for now i will support the CFL in hope that all is not lost and mistakes were made, and possibly by the end of it all this survey program will be a great tool for judging the standpoints of politicians.

EXACTLY!


:cool:

[LittleLightShining]

I think it´s pretty logical that when like-minded people gather around in some place, it makes you easier to get to know with them.



No i´m not.

I´m attacking people who spread half-truths,insults,lies.

I don´t know how many times this must be said. :rolleyes:



http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2517973&postcount=12

Half-truts are for example that C4L is for war, or that C4L endorses Ken.



If you would only read everything i say before posting...

:rolleyes:



We have not broken any prinsiples... :rolleyes:Dude, you're really being thick headed here. When the people that are running this organization DO NOT AGREE with the non-interventionist PRINCIPLE of the C4L, and when other people running the organization DO NOT CARE if the people teaching the strategy and raising the money don't agree with the non-interventionist foreign policy PRINCIPLE does it not make sense that that principle would be the first disregarded by these people?

I'm gonna tell you something-- The GOP has been suspicious of me because of my involvement with the C4L. Other liberty oriented groups (old-timers) are suspicious of C4L because of the heavy top-down organization and affiliation with the IRS.

I've wasted more time trying to explain to people that we are not partisan, even though national wants us to be, and we are not affiliated, no we don't get funding from national, yes everything we do comes out of our pockets... Sometimes waving a banner hurts more than it helps.

[qwerty]

And this is another thing that it is interesting. Because as far as I know (and correct me if wrong) C4L books are not public and open, so believing that this money came from some local fund raising and not from central is just a matter of faith. People have no way of checking it, C4L is just asking for them to believe (very republocrat).

And there has been Colorado people on the forum saying that they dont know or ahve heard anything about a fundraising.

I don´t know about that.

But you shouldn´t again start spreading things without proofs ?

If you have proofs that they lied on this one. Please show us and let´s think it again after that.


Well, if you say the ad was not supporting Ken then they dont. But if you see they did, like me and almost everybody that have seen the video, then C4L has endorsed a warmongering candidate. I think people deserve to know if they are going to keep doing it or not, and how they are going to react to this.

Listen, it is obvious that C4L is trying to dodge the issue. And that is hurting a lot of people that were specting a real honest answer. I am more and more convinced that C4L have decided that they can compromise on some issue to gain more influence in national politics. And if they think that is the best way, fine. But if that was their idea and strategy they should have said so while asking for money, so people can decide if they aprove it or not.

First, the video was bad cause it really gave wrong impression, how many times this needs to said ? That´s why they pulled it. I really think that they tried to encourage other candidates to take the survey.

Actually i think(From what i have seen) that most of the C4L members are acting like adults here. They are saying that they didn´t like the ad and that shouldn´t happen again. And that´s the right way to do it. This forum is totally different place, you don´t even know are these members even involved with C4L... :rolleyes:


Somewhere jmdrake did a great analysis of the ad. Of something like 5 points about the candidate only 2 were directly related to the survey and those 2 points were classic GOP talking points. Another way you can analyze the video is to watch it with the sound off.

So your point is that ad was bad ? Jiihaa, we agree.

You should read before you post. :rolleyes:


The question is, did they pull it because we complained or did they pull it because it was an endorsement and they didn't want to get in trouble? I'm asking questions.

I think cause of the people. There wouldn´t be C4L without members ?


They used BRAND NEW LOCAL MONEY. $350 THOUSAND DOLLARS of brand new local money that was earmarked specifically for Ken Buck. How is this somehow any less disturbing than the idea that OUR money was spent.

There's no accountability, we'll never know why all of a sudden this (these) donors decided to drop $350k in C4L NATIONAL's pockets (NOT CO C4L which is NOT organized and can't take $ yet!) to benefit Ken Buck, a war-mongering, hate crime prosecuting, 4th Amendment violating LAWYER.

If you are worrying about that you should ask more transparency for C4L, not making accusations here which you have no proof of.

And still i think that the ad was for the survey,


I have been amazed at the effect the survey has had on other candidates. Several candidates have called and/or emailed me asking to fill out the survey or to tell me they have mailed in the form. This includes some who flat-out refused to fill it out before. Incumbents have also taken notice. Both CO C4L and I are being treated with much more respect now, instead of being written off as far-out "Ron Paulers" (which I proudly am!).

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=31973&cpg=1#comments


Name names then. Otherwise you're lying

What ?


BTW, you get a medal for dramaqueening too.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=228877

[qwerty]

Dude, you're really being thick headed here. When the people that are running this organization DO NOT AGREE with the non-interventionist PRINCIPLE of the C4L, and when other people running the organization DO NOT CARE if the people teaching the strategy and raising the money don't agree with the non-interventionist foreign policy PRINCIPLE does it not make sense that that principle would be the first disregarded by these people?

proof ?


I'm gonna tell you something-- The GOP has been suspicious of me because of my involvement with the C4L. Other liberty oriented groups (old-timers) are suspicious of C4L because of the heavy top-down organization and affiliation with the IRS.

I've wasted more time trying to explain to people that we are not partisan, even though national wants us to be, and we are not affiliated, no we don't get funding from national, yes everything we do comes out of our pockets... Sometimes waving a banner hurts more than it helps.

You can allways save your money for the local projects, you don´t have to send it to national if you don´t want to. You know...


And try to post everything to just one post... :(

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

I got the impression that C4L kills the grassroots (sorry, my bad english) ? Is it your point ?

If it is, let me make few points what i think.

Yes, we don´t need anyone who dictates every move we make, but we need something which will unite us under the same banner if you want to get something done.

I can think of nothing that could articulate the matters of unity better than private contract.



The point is that if C4L would have half of the americans under it´s banner, the politician would listen very much what they would have to say about the issues.


If the CFL presently had half of Americans under it's banner I doubt it it's activities are going to be in accordance with the founding principles because half of America does not think in accordance with the founding principles.



Secondly, C4L offers you an opportunity to network with like-minded people to change ideas etc etc.

This was the strongest selling point of the CFL among it's advocates and appears to be in contention at the moment.



Third, You don´t have to donate your money to C4L if you don´t want to. You can be C4L member and spend your money on your local C4L events or activism.

This remains a valid point and is the strongest argument you should be making because it is the best argument advocates of the CFL presently have.



We have now a network of over 100.000 members and many visitors and you would like to throw that all away, cause of one ad ?

I am not suggesting you throw anything away. What happens to CFL is not within my control. I do advocate the merit of private contract and decentralization. Nothing I haven't advocated before. I am not the only person who advocates these ideas. If the merits of these ideas start to gain traction because central planning or top down fails it is not the fault of the people advocating them.

[qwerty]

I can think of nothing that could articulate the matters of unity better than private contract.

Don´t understand the point.


If the CFL presently had half of Americans under it's banner I doubt it it's activities are going to be in accordance with the founding principles because half of America does not think in accordance with the founding principles.

That had nothing to do with the point!

The point was that NUMBERS matter in politics. If your org is big, you can influnce more.


This was the strongest selling point of the CFL among it's advocates and appears to be in contention at the moment.

And it´s logical, usually if 100.000 like-minded people gather somewhere, something will happen.


This remains a valid point and is the strongest argument you should be making because it is the best argument advocates of the CFL presently have.


The point is that we should stay under the same banner.

If we don´t like something we should talk about it and change it.

Not look like a fanatis fools with insults & half-truths.

After all C4L is it´s members.


I am not suggesting you throw anything away. What happens to CFL is not within my control. I do advocating the merit of private contract and decentralization. Nothing I haven't advocated before. I am not the only person who has advocates these ideas. If the merits of these ideas start to gain traction because central planning or top down fails it is not the fault of the people advocating them.

Or course it´s in your control too if you are a member.

I don´t like central planning on everything, but sometimes it´s good. Just look at the Audit the fed-bill.

But it´s all about what you mean about the thing central planning. Somebody needs to organise sometimes, you know...

[qwerty]

I leave, it´s your playground now...

[hugolp]

I don´t know about that.

But you shouldn´t again start spreading things without proofs ?

If you have proofs that they lied on this one. Please show us and let´s think it again after that.

The only one spreading half truth is you here. I am not saying anything, I am just questioning. And it seems weird that since you dont know either you are not asking. Believing C4L without questioning does not help the liberty movement, it hurts it.


Actually i think(From what i have seen) that most of the C4L members are acting like adults here. They are saying that they didn´t like the ad and that shouldn´t happen again. And that´s the right way to do it. This forum is totally different place, you don´t even know are these members even involved with C4L... :rolleyes:

I dont think no-one here should be telling others how to behave, but you telling people to act like adults is specially funny. If you want to have a mature conversation you should drop the name calling, the superiority complex, and more important should stop telling people how they should behave. You are not helping.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Don´t understand the point.

My point lies parallel to the point made in the Milton Friedman thread you started and video you posted.

The person or people (in this case) who own something take care of it best. That is a mechanism of contract. Title and ownership.



That had nothing to do with the point!

The point was that NUMBERS matter in politics. If your org is big, you can influnce more.

I have posted something before about sound strategy and/or tactics:

1. Geographically organize a majority
2. Screw to a majority
3. Convince a majority
4. The majority system implodes

Notice I did not post:

5. Compromise with the majority

I don't think anyone would deny numbers matter in politics. I do think many people, among Ron Paul supporters at least, care about how those numbers are achieved.



And it´s logical, usually if 100.000 like-minded people gather somewhere, something will happen.

But what will that something be and will it be in line with principles Ron Paul has often talked about.



The point is that we should stay under the same banner.

If we don´t like something we should talk about it and change it.

Not look like a fanatis fools with insults & half-truths.

After all C4L is it´s members.

Or course it´s in your control too if you are a member.


The outcome is entirely dependent on the members of CFL and the leadership of CFL. People are talking about it.



I don´t like central planning on everything, but sometimes it´s good. Just look at the Audit the fed-bill.

But it´s all about what you mean about the thing central planning. Somebody needs to organise sometimes, you know...

Organization and central planning are apples and oranges. I doubt anyone would deny the benefits of organization which is something contracts often do... organize intentions. However I find no merit in central planning. Central planning has no remedy. Although under private contract if there is a breach of contract there is remedy, even if the remedy is addressed in the contract it is still there.

[nobody's_hero]

I will continue to be involved with the CFL at the Georgia state-level. A few individuals in Colorado who are implementing a survey for candidates and buying air-time with their own money is about as decentralized as it gets. I mostly likely wouldn't support anything like that here in Georgia, but that's their choice. If I ever discover that the funding came from the CFL national fund in any way, then yes, I will throw in the towel. For that matter, it wouldn't hurt for the Campaign for Liberty to be significantly more open about its use of funding.

For one, I'd like to know how much the guy managing the website is making, because the Campaign for Liberty website takes forever to load on my P.C. in relation to other sites I visit.

I also feel that if someone is willing to volunteer their talents to manage critical tasks for the Campaign for Liberty, and can do a better job than the paid staff, then—no hard feelings—but the paid staff needs to be replaced. Most of the local coordinators do all of the leg-work and yet receive nothing (other than a discount at the CFL store, or CFL events). Money is not a motivator for most of us in the liberty movement.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

A few individuals in Colorado who are implementing a survey for candidates and buying air-time with their own money is about as decentralized as it gets.

:)

[UtahApocalypse]

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
-- Albert Einstein

Good luck with that. Just because I (and many others) have left the Campaign for Liberty does not mean we have given up the cause of liberty. Matter of fact that cause and its principles are WHY I choose to leave. i will not, can not, and never will compromise my values for money or political gain.

[LittleLightShining]

I will continue to be involved with the CFL at the Georgia state-level. A few individuals in Colorado who are implementing a survey for candidates and buying air-time with their own money is about as decentralized as it gets. I mostly likely wouldn't support anything like that here in Georgia, but that's their choice. If I ever discover that the funding came from the CFL national fund in any way, then yes, I will throw in the towel. For that matter, it wouldn't hurt for the Campaign for Liberty to be significantly more open about its use of funding.

For one, I'd like to know how much the guy managing the website is making, because the Campaign for Liberty website takes forever to load on my P.C. in relation to other sites I visit.

I also feel that if someone is willing to volunteer their talents to manage critical tasks for the Campaign for Liberty, and can do a better job than the paid staff, then—no hard feelings—but the paid staff needs to be replaced. Most of the local coordinators do all of the leg-work and yet receive nothing (other than a discount at the CFL store, or CFL events). Money is not a motivator for most of us in the liberty movement.

Colorado C4L is NOT ORGANIZED therefore they cannot take money without national. It has been stated over and over that CO C4L had no idea this was happening. The money went from to donor to national to ad.

[Met Income]

You don't compromise principles of liberty in order to get more liberty. It doesn't make sense.

[qwerty]

The only one spreading half truth is you here. I am not saying anything, I am just questioning. And it seems weird that since you dont know either you are not asking. Believing C4L without questioning does not help the liberty movement, it hurts it.

No problem if you ask really just questions without accusations or half-truth in those.

Of course you are allowed to know about things...

The problem will come when you starting to believe some fanatics here who have very little facts in their posts.

Where the hell i have even said that you can´t ask decent questions ? :mad:


I dont think no-one here should be telling others how to behave, but you telling people to act like adults is specially funny. If you want to have a mature conversation you should drop the name calling, the superiority complex, and more important should stop telling people how they should behave. You are not helping.

Ok, let´s encourage people to keep spreading false info, i guess that´s better in your opinion. :rolleyes:

Again some nice insults. Thank you very much, this is getting more and more productive.

If someone behaves like a children or spreads lies i will point that out, no matter what you say.


My point lies parallel to the point made in the Milton Friedman thread you started and video you posted.

The person or people (in this case) who own something take care of it best. That is a mechanism of contract. Title and ownership.

So everyone should be lone-wolfs then if you shouldn´t have any organisations ?

I think that´s about property. You know volunteer organisation is little bit different. In my opinion and you can allways do that by saving your money to the local events.


I have posted something before about sound strategy and/or tactics:

1. Geographically organize a majority
2. Screw to a majority
3. Convince a majority
4. The majority system implodes

Notice I did not post:

5. Compromise with the majority

I don't think anyone would deny numbers matter in politics. I do think many people, among Ron Paul supporters at least, care about how those numbers are achieved.


Are you referring to that ad ? If you are then why, i didn´t like it.

Why you are acting like i did like it ? :rolleyes:


But what will that something be and will it be in line with principles Ron Paul has often talked about.

I think it will be and it has been. Still the ad was for the survey.

Btw, why are you telling me this ? You should be telling your opinion to the staff of C4L if you really would like to see some kind of change....


The outcome is entirely dependent on the members of CFL and the leadership of CFL. People are talking about it.

Like i said...


Organization and central planning are apples and oranges. I doubt anyone would deny the benefits of organization which is something contracts often do... organize intentions. However I find no merit in central planning. Central planning has no remedy. Although under private contract if there is a breach of contract there is remedy, even if the remedy is addressed in the contract it is still there.

Are you saying that everyone should have just their own ideas ?

Guess what, now days people are busy, they need someone to gather the resources and someone to organize.

If people donate to National level, they say to them that they like what they are doing. That´s totally free-market.

This is VOLUTEER, so you can´t compare it to soviet union style central planning.
Idea that you shouldn´t do something just cause someone is asking is ridiculous.

:rolleyes:


I will continue to be involved with the CFL at the Georgia state-level. A few individuals in Colorado who are implementing a survey for candidates and buying air-time with their own money is about as decentralized as it gets. I mostly likely wouldn't support anything like that here in Georgia, but that's their choice. If I ever discover that the funding came from the CFL national fund in any way, then yes, I will throw in the towel. For that matter, it wouldn't hurt for the Campaign for Liberty to be significantly more open about its use of funding.

How is it central planning IF they funded it by themselves in Colorado ?

I think that they can deside what they do with their money.


I also feel that if someone is willing to volunteer their talents to manage critical tasks for the Campaign for Liberty, and can do a better job than the paid staff, then—no hard feelings—but the paid staff needs to be replaced. Most of the local coordinators do all of the leg-work and yet receive nothing (other than a discount at the CFL store, or CFL events). Money is not a motivator for most of us in the liberty movement.

I agree with this, but i give one chance to paid-staff.

Remember to let your voice to be heard in C4L board too! This statement here won´t do much good.


Good luck with that. Just because I (and many others) have left the Campaign for Liberty does not mean we have given up the cause of liberty. Matter of fact that cause and its principles are WHY I choose to leave. i will not, can not, and never will compromise my values for money or political gain.

Feel free, that´s your right to do so.

I find it very amusing to see how easily people will throw away everything we have reached. Feel free to start again from the zero, i refuse to do that cause of just one bad ad.

Enemies must like this. Everytime when we are getting influence they can easily break us.

However i agree with you on that compromising thing. But i still don´t see where do i need to compromise if i stay in C4L.


Colorado C4L is NOT ORGANIZED therefore they cannot take money without national. It has been stated over and over that CO C4L had no idea this was happening. The money went from to donor to national to ad.

You should have proofs when you say that. :rolleyes:


You don't compromise principles of liberty in order to get more liberty. It doesn't make sense.

Where would i need to compromise if i stay in C4L ?

I really don´t get it.

[qwerty]

Just one question,

If you want new leadership. WHY DON`T YOU DEMAND IT ?

Why you are leaving the ship, not demanding to change the crew ?

Is your motivation to improve C4L or destroy it ?

[hugolp]

Just one question,

If you want new leadership. WHY DON`T YOU DEMAND IT ?

Why you are leaving the ship, not demanding to change the crew ?

Is your motivation to improve C4L or destroy it ?

People have been demanding this from the beggining and C4L has systematically ignored them. Why should be different now? Why should people think that now they are going to react different to how they have been reacting since day 1?

[qwerty]

THIS IS HOW IT`S DONE!

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2520587&posted=1#post2520587

THIS IS THE WAY I`M TALKING ABOUT!

:cool:

[Met Income]

Just one question,

If you want new leadership. WHY DON`T YOU DEMAND IT ?

Why you are leaving the ship, not demanding to change the crew ?

Is your motivation to improve C4L or destroy it ?

If they aren't going to support liberty, then liberty minded people shouldn't support it.

[LittleLightShining]

People have been demanding this from the beggining and C4L has systematically ignored them. Why should be different now? Why should people think that now they are going to react different to how they have been reacting since day 1?

Reminds me of petitioning the king...

Keep on, pamphleteers, keep on!

[LibertyEagle]

If they aren't going to support liberty, then liberty minded people shouldn't support it.

This is our forum mission. Do you consider it "supporting liberty"?


Forum Mission Statement

Inspired by US Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, this forum is dedicated to facilitating grassroots initiatives that aim to restore a sovereign limited constitutional Republic based on the rule of law, states' rights and individual rights. We seek to enshrine the original intent of our Founders to foster respect for private property, seek justice, provide opportunity, and to secure individual liberty for ourselves and our posterity.

[Met Income]

This is our forum mission. Do you consider it "supporting liberty"?

No, because it supports liberty on the State's terms. Unilaterally writing something down on a piece of paper does not make something moral. The Constitution was an expansion of centralized power. It grants power to the government, which contradicts the Declaration of Independence.

[LibertyEagle]

No, because it supports liberty on the State's terms. Unilaterally writing something down on a piece of paper does not make something moral. The Constitution was an expansion of centralized power. It grants power to the government, which contradicts the Declaration of Independence.

Yeah, I didn't think you did.

[Met Income]

Yeah, I didn't think you did.

Correct, I do not support a certain group of people waving guns in my faces if I don't agree with their violations of natural law. And I also do not deny that the Constitution was an expansion of government power. Why would I?

[MelissaWV]

Just one question,

If you want new leadership. WHY DON`T YOU DEMAND IT ?

Why you are leaving the ship, not demanding to change the crew ?

Is your motivation to improve C4L or destroy it ?

People are demanding it. Some people are staying, and some are going. People are doing what's in their hearts to do, though some are perhaps doing so a little rapidly (and will think differently of what they've done once some time has passed).




I think cause of the people. There wouldn´t be C4L without members ?



It would seem, from that post, that you acknowledge the fact C4L losing members does draw their attention to what they did. That, in combination with people writing eloquent letters, and other people making angry phonecalls, and all the various methods that make this grassroots so diverse... has gotten attention and has gotten at least some results.

If C4L thinks, as an organization, that it can use money however it likes (and regardless of what people think, there are laws which govern such things) and simply issue an "oopsie" statement after the fact, it is going to be in for a rude awakening. At such a time, not only will all the donations have been for nothing, but the organization is going to implode and be egg on the faces of everyone involved. That should be avoided at all costs.

You've also fallen back on your "nice insults" retreat a few times in this thread. You opened the thread by insulting people who are pulling their membership. In the quote I posted above, much later in the thread, you seem to realize that people pulling their memberships is a strong message to C4L. It's a bit difficult to convince someone the ship is sinking when it's not. If no one were leaving, would the ship really be sinking? I don't think so.

People will react to this in a variety of ways, and so be it. I hope that it spurs them into action for candidates directly, rather than giving money to an overall organization that isn't giving any real accounting of where those dollars are going. You've stated that C4L is awesome because it allows people to meet, but you haven't got any firsthand experience with it. Well, meetups were happening before C4L, and people involved locally have a knack for involving relevant grassroots people. Events have been put together and executed without C4L.

I was one of the people who didn't like the idea from the beginning, but I absolutely understand why people who have put so much time, money, and energy into something, only to see a commercial come out with a dubious funding trail and an even more dubious candidate... I understand why those people might react by pulling out in disgust. I certainly wouldn't call them babies.

Babies, lazy, dramaqueens... You certainly do like to pitch verbal stones from across the pond. You might want to stop rolling your eyes, too; they're going to stay that way :D