Michael Maresco Responds to John Tate - DailyPaul

[purplechoe]

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/123313


Michael Maresco Responds to John Tate
Submitted by Michael Nystrom on Sat, 01/30/2010 - 09:37
in

* Daily Paul Liberty Forum

Lifted from the comments section of John Tate's "Statement Concerning C4L's Issue Discussion Program"

Mr. Tate,

With all due respect, I must state my utter revulsion of this move. You have punched me in the gut and I am barely able to contain my indignation. I have been biting my tongue and "stepping away from the keyboard" for years now and I have finally had enough. While it would be easy to just delete my membership (and I cannot condemn those who are), I will not abandon ship and am here to tell you that I am fighting mad.

There are festering wounds, HQ has avoided for years, that are about to go gangrenous. Cauterization may be CfLs only hope. While most everyone else is righteously outraged over Mr. Buck's non-r3VOLution war stance, the association with a "thought crime", warrior is perhaps even worse.

And this is to say nothing of what else the dogs will dig up, now that you have riled them with this inconsiderate move.

This organization was sold to the people who donated, (to a presidential campaign), as a bottom up organization. It has been the exact opposite. The lack of transparency and accountability is astounding. This must change.

In consultation with friends, I am here to state that it is time for you all to fulfill your word about creating a "Bottom-Up Organization." We are calling for a proper board of officers elected by the grassroots. We would like to see a timetable for this.

Until such time that these concerns are acknowledged, and action begun upon, I will cease any promotion of this organization and will be stating my opinion that CfL deserves NO support until CfL begins to live up to it's word, and promise.

Sadly,

Michael Maresco

Island Walk
Ron Paul Rider
NH - Operation Live Free or Die
SC, TX, NY - GOTV
r3VOLution March Organizer
Walk For Freedom Organizer
"For Liberty" Consultant/Film Crew/Bookend
NC - GOTV
Liberty Rider
... and still going

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1007/1429795189_627795b1e4.jpg?v=0

[0zzy]

oh snap!

[purplechoe]

...


Thank you Michael
Submitted by Michael Nystrom on Fri, 01/29/2010 - 23:50.

Like you, 'I have been biting my tongue and "stepping away from the keyboard" for years now.'

That time has come to an end for me as well. Silence is sometimes a disgrace.
—

"What is the point of being united, if you don't believe in what you're united behind?" - Ron Paul

[purplechoe]

I like this idea... :)


Maresco for President of C4L
Submitted by sambachico on Sat, 01/30/2010 - 06:30.

[qwerty]

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/123313



http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1007/1429795189_627795b1e4.jpg?v=0

awesome post!

This is the way it´s done! Stop acting like babies and do like Michael!

Respects for you Michael!

[sluggo]

Great post.

[GunnyFreedom]

This is precisely what we need. I'm all for the C4L, but we need to hold a grassroots election for board and leadership. This idea of an appointed leadership over a grassroots leadership org is just a bit outrageous.

[LittleLightShining]

Way to go Michael :)

[SelfTaught]

Okay.

We can bitch and moan, and that's fine. But let's add some free market style competition rather than be pissed at one organization that can't get their act right. People should start up multiple liberty organizations with the size and magnitude of C4L. The one that is most effective and most efficient wins out. Then C4L will be just a fading memory in a few years.

You'll get over it.

[erowe1]

Not a bad idea. But is there supposed to be some way that a bottom up structure would have prevented what happened in CO? It doesn't seem like it to me.

[GunnyFreedom]

Not a bad idea. But is there supposed to be some way that a bottom up structure would have prevented what happened in CO? It doesn't seem like it to me.

I've already suggested it a couple times, but we don't have the coding expertise to make it happen. It's basically a tricameral internet model of the government/convention process based logically on a loose interpretation of Robert's Rules. The comm model is web based, but it answers all of these questions. A bottom-up model that can be efficiently scaled even larger than the C4L while remaining effective.

[GunnyFreedom]

The idea has evolved still further somewhat from the thread posted here:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=157303

but the basics are the same.

[erowe1]

Doesn't "bottom up" mean the local chapters would be independent and allowed to do whatever they want? So if the CO CFL wants to sell itself as a front group for some people who want to fund an ad for Ken Buck, they would have to be allowed to do that.

[GunnyFreedom]

Doesn't "bottom up" mean the local chapters would be independent and allowed to do whatever they want? So if the CO CFL wants to sell itself as a front group for some people who want to fund an ad for Ken Buck, they would have to be allowed to do that.

You'd have a point, if the ad featured the CO C4L and the website pointed to the CO C4L. This came from national, whether it had the blessings of the CO chapter or not.

I can tell you from experience on the inside, as I was a regional/district coordinator until I had to resign to run for State House, that pretty much whenever a local C4L group comes up w something to do, as often as not National steps in to tell them "NO."

If the C4L were truly bottom-up then whatever happened to the promises of holding elections for the national org officers that never materialized?

[erowe1]

You'd have a point, if the ad featured the CO C4L and the website pointed to the CO C4L. This came from national, whether it had the blessings of the CO chapter or not.

I can tell you from experience on the inside, as I was a regional/district coordinator until I had to resign to run for State House, that pretty much whenever a local C4L group comes up w something to do, as often as not National steps in to tell them "NO."

If the C4L were truly bottom-up then whatever happened to the promises of holding elections for the national org officers that never materialized?

Gotcha.

I have noticed that the 912 movement seems to be built on a very bottom up structure where local groups are independent. It seems to be working really well for them. And, like you said, whenever they run ads or anything they use their local designation, so other chapters wouldn't ever have to feel like they're being represented by something they don't approve.

[GunnyFreedom]

The idea has evolved still further somewhat from the thread posted here:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=157303

but the basics are the same.

Seriously, the idea referenced here would do the trick. It could make a truly bottom-up org out of literally millions of members. We just need to bring out an expert programmer to make it happen.

[SelfTaught]

Gotcha.

I have noticed that the 912 movement seems to be built on a very bottom up structure where local groups are independent. It seems to be working really well for them. And, like you said, whenever they run ads or anything they use their local designation, so other chapters wouldn't ever have to feel like they're being represented by something they don't approve.

Yes.

You have to give 912 credit for being able to organize in a very effective way in even a shorter period of time than C4L. They have the right idea when it comes to organizing at the local level. And from what I've heard they discuss a variety of topics that vary from region to region. They allow much freedom in the way the grassroots choose to go about their activism.

[jmdrake]

Doesn't "bottom up" mean the local chapters would be independent and allowed to do whatever they want? So if the CO CFL wants to sell itself as a front group for some people who want to fund an ad for Ken Buck, they would have to be allowed to do that.

Good point. But wading through the pages of posts on this subject it seems like the CO CFL itself was unaware. And the ad was made by national. But yes. This same thing could have happened even with a different structure. Here's the elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about. What are our core values? Are they the 20 point questionnaire? Are they the 4 key principles Ron Paul laid out at the 3rd party press conference? Do some values carry greater weight than others? And how far can a candidate stray from those core values before someone calls them on it? Case in point, hate crimes laws. That's not listed in either core values statement I mentioned. Sure it's something Ron Paul is against, and I think most of us are as well. But it's never been spelled out other than in Dr. Paul's speeches.

The other issue is at what point to politicians who are changing their views earn our trust? From what I've read people in CO have been working on "educating" Ken Buck. The position he has on his website is unacceptable. But say if it had been more vague? What if it didn't say "10 years" and "build up the country" but it did say "I support our men and women in the armed forces'? Let's be honest. We as a whole will give a pass to Rand and Peter not only because their statements were mild by comparison, but because we already trust them. The question is, where to draw the line?

Lastly, we need to develop a strategy that goes beyond politics. Some of us are worried about turning away this potential voter or that potential voter. What about converting potential voters to our way of thinking? We have two types of voters we need to reach. Those on the right that are against the welfare state but support the warfare state and those on the left that are against the warfare state but support the welfare state. Both can be reached. I've personally seen welfare state supporting voters come around and warfare state voters too. Both can be reached through education. But if you pander to one side too much in your politics you turn off the other side.

[torchbearer]

how would one qualify to vote in such an election and how would you qualify to run in such an election.
what would keep the Neocons from putting Dondero on the board?

[LittleLightShining]

Lastly, we need to develop a strategy that goes beyond politics. Some of us are worried about turning away this potential voter or that potential voter. What about converting potential voters to our way of thinking? We have two types of voters we need to reach. Those on the right that are against the welfare state but support the warfare state and those on the left that are against the warfare state but support the welfare state. Both can be reached. I've personally seen welfare state supporting voters come around and warfare state voters too. Both can be reached through education. But if you pander to one side too much in your politics you turn off the other side.It's education! That's what C4L was supposed to be about.

You know what I find ironic? Ron Paul's presidential run was treated as an educational campaign and C4L is being treated as a political campaign.

[jmdrake]

Seriously, the idea referenced here would do the trick. It could make a truly bottom-up org out of literally millions of members. We just need to bring out an expert programmer to make it happen.

This is my first time seeing this. I have the skill set to work on a project like this, but lack the time to do it myself. I'd be happy to be a part of a team effort though. That reminds me of another web project I thought of back in 2007 but never implemented. I called it the "Ron Paul action network". The idea would be for people to fill out a survey of the types of things they'd like to work on and the types of projects they would like to do. If you like phone banking, when you logged in a list of phone banking opportunities would come up. You like sign waving, sign waving efforts would show up by location. You like attending gun shows, speaking at rallies (working on new web projects) etc. Basically a way to help people self organize around action.

[LibertyEagle]

It's education! That's what C4L was supposed to be about.
Educating WHILE DOING political activism. Such as what happened with HR1207.


You know what I find ironic? Ron Paul's presidential run was treated as an educational campaign and C4L is being treated as a political campaign.

“I have many friends in the libertarian movement who look down on those of us who get involved in political activity,” he acknowledged, but "eventually, if you want to bring about changes … what you have to do is participate in political action.” -- Ron Paul
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2008/sep/22/00019/

[LibertyEagle]

Seriously, the idea referenced here would do the trick. It could make a truly bottom-up org out of literally millions of members. We just need to bring out an expert programmer to make it happen.

It certainly sounds interesting. :)

[catdd]

Originally Posted by GunnyFreedom
"Seriously, the idea referenced here would do the trick. It could make a truly bottom-up org out of literally millions of members. We just need to bring out an expert programmer to make it happen."

Sounds great.

[rancher89]

awesome thread, I remember when gunny first brought this up and I'm glad it's resurfaced.

You have my full support gunny, I'll help however I can--as usual! :D

[jmdrake]

Educating WHILE DOING political activism. Such as what happened with HR1207.



“I have many friends in the libertarian movement who look down on those of us who get involved in political activity,” he acknowledged, but "eventually, if you want to bring about changes … what you have to do is participate in political action.” -- Ron Paul
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2008/sep/22/00019/

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. Education and politics is like "yin and yang" in this movement. Overbalancing one hurts the other. I think we've overbalanced politics to the expense of education. And I'm including myself in the "we". We are always fretting over "scaring away potential voters". Well a properly educated voter is never scared. Ever. 2009 should have been the year of education. Instead it became the year of the "tea party". We got excited about thousands of people taking to the streets that "kinda sorta" sounded like us. The July 2nd tea party I attended began with a prayer that God "bless Israel from where our salvation will come from" and had a long speech by someone encouraging everyone to push the same neocon foreign policy that Ron Paul fought so hard against.

Here on the forums I've see people say that it's ok to try to "fool" neocon voters by "throwing them a bone" on things like attacking Iran. While I will support less then perfect candidates, is that really how we want to operate? If we did more to help people understand why countries like Iran really are not a threat, that clears up a host of problems. I don't know what the best balance is or the best way to go about it. I just know it has to happen.

[UtahApocalypse]

You know that things are bad when some of the "top" Grassroots start sounding off. Maresco, Nystrom, and many that have done more for Liberty then most could ever imagine.

[newbitech]

Seriously, the idea referenced here would do the trick. It could make a truly bottom-up org out of literally millions of members. We just need to bring out an expert programmer to make it happen.


I am reading that thread now.

[newbitech]

//

[LittleLightShining]

Educating WHILE DOING political activism. Such as what happened with HR1207.



“I have many friends in the libertarian movement who look down on those of us who get involved in political activity,” he acknowledged, but "eventually, if you want to bring about changes … what you have to do is participate in political action.” -- Ron Paul
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2008/sep/22/00019/

What's your point, LE? You say this to me as if I HAVEN'T been engaged in political activism. You completely missed the point of what I wrote. Not because you didn't understand it but because you intend to obfuscate it.

I've been actively involved in the liberty movement since the fall of '07. I joined the GOP in February of '08 and the C4L as soon as it was officially born. C4L was supposed to be about educating and lobbying, that's why it's a 501c4.

[specsaregood]

I for one would vote for RPH to be on the board. At least with someone like him on the board I'd know we weren't being co-opted and that the money would be spent wisely. And that includes a variety of boots-on-the-ground activists like him. People that come up with ideas and get stuff done.

[ronpaulhawaii]

:eek:

Its was so weird seeing this at the top of DP for two-days. Then seeing it show up here last night...

What continues to piss me off is the distraction. Some things cannot be ignored...

CfL should have immediately issued a statement along the lines of either:


"We obviously made a boneheaded mistake and need to look into the particulars before making a detailed statement. We will work over the weekend, if necessary, to insure that this is posted no later than Monday AM. Till then, please accept my apology for losing sight of our base and hurting/confusing nearly everyone. It is obvious that we have lost touch with you, our bosses, and we will be asking for help in developing a plan to address this in the same statement."

or


"We are sorry that this surprise has angered so many of you but we feel that our strategy is worth losing a few isolationist kooks who don't understand the fact that if you aren't doing/saying/thinking anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about. While we may have slightly miscalculated the fallout of this move, it will not affect our strategy of moving away from the core principles to pander to the tea party crowd where the real money is. Truth is, we never really liked you all to begin with" (Ok - that was a bit facetious :p)

The friggin whitewash was neither. :mad:

3 friggin days... for that???

Speaking of those three days, someone (who sounded eerily like me) sensibly addressed the issue of discretion. In response I posted this:


I do see your valid concern, but I hope you understand that I am fighting to win, and would not have acted had I not seen the need.

When I woke up the third day, a Fri., and was greeted with, "Still NO answer" I shifted gears.

As far as discretion, I talked to CfL multiple times, I called Tates cel. I talked to others (One surprising source told me "transparency would have prevented this") I periodically posted into the growing outcry on RPFs, reminding people that our visible enemies will be laughing at us over this, and not to give them the satisfaction. I stayed neutral. I spent three days telling people to be patient. I watched FB and asked people to back off till the reply came.

It was three days of hell for this here 'root.

The final hours were a trip. (The last thing I ever wanted was to see a headline like what I am commenting under right now.) The outcry was quickly becoming unmanageable, people were being hurt and remaining confused, and the weekend was fast approaching. There was no way I would be a part of asking the grassroots to remain patient over the weekend, even a release past 4:30 EST would have been explosive. Confusion would have engulfed the roots. I repeat - good, solid, people were being hurt, and remaining confused by the inaction of HQ. I waited as long as possible, but was left with no choice.

About discretion in general. I have spent the last three years keeping quiet about the crap I heard and saw over the last few years. And I've heard about every story out there, usually from the participants themselves. Have even witnessed some of it myself.

Those days are over.

I was of the opinion that CfL needed time to get their $#1+ together. They've had enough. (I wonder how many potential friends I blew off in hopes of "discretion"... putting on a united front for the lurkers.)

And while I was doing that, things have obviously gotten worse. I bit my tongue and said nothing publicly when Tate omitted the Non-Intervention Plank at the 9/12 march. I certainly contacted CfL-HQ. I was not satisfied with the answer, but again, buried it...

This was the final straw.

Onward and Forward

Speaking of moving forward, I'm mulling everything I am reading, hearing, etc. I still go back to the idea of a Portal that unites us, rather than additional groups that divide. Not to say other structures/groups will not be valuable, but I wonder that first we should concentrate on a roof. There are a few different existing structures that many here put a LOT of work into, yet languished..., I think we need to resolve the reasons for that before trying again, (and in resolving it we may be able to simply utilize the existing structures...)

A simple immediate solution for CfL would be a grassroots advisory board...

On a kinda side note...

Ya know one thing that REALLY pisses me off. I have always been pretty much of hawk. While I reject standing armies, military adventurism, and foreign meddling, I will probably always lobby for the baddest Navy on the planet with Marine and Air Attachments equal to the task of defending us from multiple threats. While I would love to be in a position where the debate is over keeping Diego Garcia, or not, I would probably take the "keep" side of the debate... I have been arguing and addressing the core foreign policy issue with neo-cons for three years now, and pretty successfully I might add. To see the org we all built sneaking around this issue for 'political expediency" is a friggin embarrassment.

Damn the torpedoes, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!!

[LibertyEagle]

What's your point, LE? You say this to me as if I HAVEN'T been engaged in political activism. You completely missed the point of what I wrote. Not because you didn't understand it but because you intend to obfuscate it.

I've been actively involved in the liberty movement since the fall of '07. I joined the GOP in February of '08 and the C4L as soon as it was officially born. C4L was supposed to be about educating and lobbying, that's why it's a 501c4.

They ARE educating. But, they are leading with political activism and educating in the process. You don't like that fact.

We however are not in disagreement that the ad was a major screw-up. Changes need to be forthcoming. I like the idea of the grassroots having a MUCH greater presence on the board. And that's just one of the things.

[silverhandorder]

This is the last straw. I can understand candidates softening positions but not the damn organization that holds it all together.

Personally I don't have the time to get involved in politics as much as I would like. I am a student and have to worry about my career first. I still manage to give to candidates and CFL. Now they are proving this is a mistake.

[LittleLightShining]

They ARE educating. But, they are leading with political activism and educating in the process. You don't like that fact.

We however are not in disagreement that the ad was a major screw-up. Changes need to be forthcoming.I don't equate political posturing and party infiltration with political activism.

Somebody else besides LE tell me if I'm missing something?

[disorderlyvision]

:eek:

Its was so weird seeing this at the top of DP for two-days. Then seeing it show up here last night...

What continues to piss me off is the distraction. Some things cannot be ignored...

CfL should have immediately issued a statement along the lines of either:



or



The friggin whitewash was neither. :mad:

3 friggin days... for that???

Speaking of those three days, someone (who sounded eerily like me) sensibly addressed the issue of discretion. In response I posted this:



Speaking of moving forward, I'm mulling everything I am reading, hearing, etc. I still go back to the idea of a Portal that unites us, rather than additional groups that divide. Not to say other structures/groups will not be valuable, but I wonder that first we should concentrate on a roof. There are a few different existing structures that many here put a LOT of work into, yet languished..., I think we need to resolve the reasons for that before trying again, (and in resolving it we may be able to simply utilize the existing structures...)

A simple immediate solution for CfL would be a grassroots advisory board...

On a kinda side note...

Ya know one thing that REALLY pisses me off. I have always been pretty much of hawk. While I reject standing armies, military adventurism, and foreign meddling, I will probably always lobby for the baddest Navy on the planet with Marine and Air Attachments equal to the task of defending us from multiple threats. While I would love to be in a position where the debate is over keeping Diego Garcia, or not, I would probably take the "keep" side of the debate... I have been arguing and addressing the core foreign policy issue with neo-cons for three years now, and pretty successfully I might add. To see the org we all built sneaking around this issue for 'political expediency" is a friggin embarrassment.

Damn the torpedoes, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!!

as per usual.... great post mike

LE and LLS get a frickin room. you two hijack every thread with your back and forth bickering cant you just start a thread... oh wait i will

[Travlyr]

:eek:

Its was so weird seeing this at the top of DP for two-days. Then seeing it show up here last night...

What continues to piss me off is the distraction. Some things cannot be ignored...

CfL should have immediately issued a statement along the lines of either:



or



The friggin whitewash was neither. :mad:

3 friggin days... for that???

Speaking of those three days, someone (who sounded eerily like me) sensibly addressed the issue of discretion. In response I posted this:



Speaking of moving forward, I'm mulling everything I am reading, hearing, etc. I still go back to the idea of a Portal that unites us, rather than additional groups that divide. Not to say other structures/groups will not be valuable, but I wonder that first we should concentrate on a roof. There are a few different existing structures that many here put a LOT of work into, yet languished..., I think we need to resolve the reasons for that before trying again, (and in resolving it we may be able to simply utilize the existing structures...)

A simple immediate solution for CfL would be a grassroots advisory board...

On a kinda side note...

Ya know one thing that REALLY pisses me off. I have always been pretty much of hawk. While I reject standing armies, military adventurism, and foreign meddling, I will probably always lobby for the baddest Navy on the planet with Marine and Air Attachments equal to the task of defending us from multiple threats. While I would love to be in a position where the debate is over keeping Diego Garcia, or not, I would probably take the "keep" side of the debate... I have been arguing and addressing the core foreign policy issue with neo-cons for three years now, and pretty successfully I might add. To see the org we all built sneaking around this issue for 'political expediency" is a friggin embarrassment.

Damn the torpedoes, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!!

Michael Maresco - a persistent voice of reason.

C4L's lack of response was a huge blunder exposing a lack of leadership. Much was written about "waiting to find the facts" before reacting. But then no explaination... for DAYS!

Liberty is worth fighting for & Campaign For Liberty has worked pretty well for the cause, all in all. I'm staying in.

Yet, Campaign For Liberty needs to be "Spring Cleaned" and "Reorganized" with a re-dedication to the original mission.


https://kokesh.netboots.net/sites/kokesh.netboots.net/files/imagecache/fullsize/images/Andrew_Sharp/BBlarge.gif (http://www.kokeshforcongress.com/birthday-bomb-february-1st-2010)

[Paulitical Correctness]

Maresco 2012. ;)

[ForLiberty-RonPaul]

Maresco 2012. ;)

i'm in for $20

[DjLoTi]

A simple immediate solution for CfL would be a grassroots advisory board...


I was saying grassroots advisory board way back when the disconnect between the campaign and the grassroots was evident to me after the unraveling of the election.

That was a good solution some time ago, but at this point I'm not sure if that's the solution anymore. It seems to me like the real change is something we haven't created yet. I just don't see C4L starting a 'grassroots advisory board' of the old 2007 presidential campaign.

Ron Paul just needs to run so we can all focus on that and get on with our lives...

[Danke]

Maresco 2012. ;)

He'll need new wheels!

[purplechoe]

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/123481


RJ Harris: We Need to Destroy the Leviathan, Not Remake it in Our Image
Submitted by RJ Harris on Sun, 01/31/2010 - 19:34
in

* Ron Paul Republicans

C4L gives a neo-con $350,000 in campaign assistance while real Liberty Candidates like Jake Towne, Adam Kokesh, Debra Medina and myself (all frequent posters on this site) get nothing from C4L when that much money could win several of these seats for Ron Paul Republicans?! Why is this…because Debra is not connected with the "right" people; Jake is running independent because of the corruption in the PA GOP; Adam is militantly anti-war; and I have the audacity to challenge an incumbent Republican?

Meanwhile the GOP runs a neo-con against Ron every cycle and yet we are to believe that he cannot do what is being done to him? Much has been made about the notion that we should stop drinking the establishment kool-aid and vet/support candidates based on positions actually taken in support of the Constitution, individual Liberty and state Sovereignty.

Are we then to exchange the current establishment for one run by men like John Tate who has now shown that he is willing to give away hard won ground for the cause of Liberty to curry favor with our enemies before our champions can even fully take the field? Fellow patriots the time has come to practice what we preach and to directly support those candidates delivering on their promise to fight for the Republic and give no quarter.

Stop waiting for the John Tates to tell you what to do or to whom to donate. Stop supporting men because of their last name or their fame and instead support candidates because of the consistency and purity of their message and the worthiness of their cause: freedom.

C4L is what it is because we have made it so...because we believed that what was needed was a vehicle with which we could replace the establishment. But my friends, we don’t need to rebuild the leviathan in our own image. WE NEED TO DESTROY IT! We need to vote with our time, money, and votes and we need to get our friends and neighbors to do the same. Our donations and our votes WILL win the day and when they do, these Liberty Candidates will owe their seats to We the People that put them in power, not the parties and not the C4L.

Please stop sending your money to organizations promising you the moon but delivering cheese. Read and vet the candidates yourselves and send them your donations and votes, directly cutting out all the middle men, aka influence peddlers, from the political process. When the office holders fear the people's voting/donating power more than the political influence of disparate political groups, then we shall have our Republic restored.

RJ Harris
Constitutional Conservative Republican
U.S. Congressional Candidate
Oklahoma 4th District
www.rjharris2010.com

[purplechoe]

I love this comment from one of the DailyPauler's:


...The establishment...
Submitted by rogueliberty on Sun, 01/31/2010 - 13:05.

...have taken far too many miles for me to give anymore inches...

[purplechoe]

...

A problem coming for a long time...
Submitted by hroos on Sun, 01/31/2010 - 19:21.

In Florida and across the US, the C4L chiefs in DC* have been appointing state directors and exercising a lot of influence in the state agendas.

The grassroots has been cut off except for the persistent "interim" county officers. C4L is being run from DC as far as I am concerned. Problems like this are happening because there is no one locally involved in such decision making. These people in DC don't bother paying any attention to us in the trenches. The only outreach that ever comes to me is a regular mailer that asks me for money.

Because of such actions of the C4L, I am encouraging other true grassroots organizations like End the FED, YAL, the RLC, and the Tea Parties (what's left of them).

If you are in the South Florida area check out the RLC meeting on the 28th!

*Northern VA is a 15 minute drive from DC. I was born there and I tell you that Northern VA is just an extension of DC.
—

Hector Roos
Miami, FL

Republican Liberty Caucus of Miami: http://rlc.meetup.com/90
Marcus Rivchin for Florida State Representative 117: http://www.MarcusRivchin.com
My personal website: http://www.HectorRoos.com