Since MsD deleted my post in her thread...

[LibertyEagle]

I thought I'd start my own thread with that post. :) What is it she says? Oh yeah --- "You will NOT silence me!" :D


Allow me to clarify:

CFL is a GOP organization as evidenced by Dr. Paul's own statement in the video linked by LFOD.

CFL was never intended to be transparent to the grassroots as evidenced by the failure of CFL to respond to calls for transparency from the grassroots.

CFL was never intended to be accountable to the grassroots as evidenced by the refusal to answer questions and concerns expressed by the grassroots.

CFL was never intended to be a bottom up grassroots organization as evidenced by the Benton response in his interview with LibertyPulse to Maresco's suggestion that a grassroots representative be included on the board of CFL. (For the unaware, Benton dismissed the suggestion and said there will be no grassroots representative on the board of CFL.)

I think you may have forgotten that Debra Medina was a member of the C4L board up until the time that she got all involved with running for Governor of Texas. She was the grassroots rep.

I also think it is a far stretch to say they have refused to answer questions.

Allison has been over here in chat, twice.
Debbie Hopper spent a good part of the day yesterday on our forums.
John Tate issued a statement.
Jesse Benton was on an interview.
Ronnie Paul issued a statement.
Ron Paul called Michael Nystrom to discuss the matter.


This doesn't smack of an organization that doesn't care about us and isn't trying to answer our questions. There are still some they have not addressed, yes, and there may be some they CAN'T address due to legalities and such. At last check, farmer was compiling those to present to them.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

wait, now we have mods deleting each others posts? LOL!

http://cyn.ical.us/media/blogs/mymedia/prophet_lol_cat.jpg


All of you need to get your shit together and move on. This is not about the C4L anymore.

[Original_Intent]

I'd also like to address the "no grassroots representative on the board of CFL.

I have been thinking about that - how would they set that up? Who would get a vote? How much resource and etc would it take to be able to organize a vote among so many? Would they just present people to be voted on or would there be a nomination process and so forth? Obviously anything short than nominations from the grassroots would raise a hue and cry - so what would be the logistics of taking nominations and coming up with an eventual "winner"? Would running an internal election cause a dividing of the CFL into factions? Would people get upset and leave if the person that they were supporting did not win or if there was any feeling that their candidate of choice was not given equal exposure? Given the drama so far is it unrealistic to expect that there would be claims and counterclaims of "insider" tactics and unfairness? In short, from the CFL perspective what are the RISKS, OBSTACLES, COSTS, AND BENEFITS of having a grassroots representative, and taking that into account is it a worthwhile idea to pursue? If you think about it, you can kind of see why he lauched off the idea. (although actually laughing was probably a mistake as that alone pissed some people off.)

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

I thought I'd start my own thread with that post. :) What is it she says? Oh yeah --- "You will NOT silence me!" :D

I think you may have forgotten that Debra Medina was a member of the C4L board up until the time that she got all involved with running for Governor of Texas. She was the grassroots rep.

I also think it is a far stretch to say they have refused to answer questions.

Allison has been over here in chat, twice.
Debbie Hopper spent a good part of the day yesterday on our forums.
John Tate issued a statement.
Jesse Benton was on an interview.
Ronnie Paul issued a statement.
Ron Paul called Michael Nystrom to discuss the matter.


This doesn't smack of an organization that doesn't care about us and isn't trying to answer our questions. There are still some they have not addressed, yes, and there may be some they CAN'T address due to legalities and such. At last check, farmer was compiling those to present to them.

A few days ago I asked Josh to delete my account and posting history. Don't worry it won't be too much longer before this is the official CFL filtered forum. What an exciting prospect it must be to think of the day when all of the remaining forum members are only GOP members of the conservative wing. And think of the forums that will no longer be needed and how much more free time you will have when only the official Ron Paul revolutionaries remain.

But when that eventually happens because the exclusive club is too arrogant to build genuine partnerships with potential allies... consider this. Democrats will be finding new devastating arguments against the "moral" high ground of the right. Because when you peel back all of the rhetoric it comes down to this. If it is moral for the state to steal in order to spend money on boats then it is equally moral for the state to steal to spend money to pay poor people's hospital bills. So the argument is not really one of principle just how to spend stolen money based on words written on a document that has not been followed in 200 years.

[LittleLightShining]

A few days ago I asked Josh to delete my account and posting history. :( I wish you wouldn't.


Don't worry it won't be too much longer before this is the official CFL filtered forum. What an exciting prospect it must be to think of the day when all of the remaining forum members are only GOP members of the conservative wing. And think of the forums that will no longer be needed and how much more free time you will have when only the official Ron Paul revolutionaries remain. :(


But when that eventually happens because the exclusive club is too arrogant to build genuine partnerships with potential allies... consider this. Democrats will be finding new devastating arguments against the "moral" high ground of the right. Because when you peel back all of the rhetoric it comes down to this. If it is moral for the state to steal in order to spend money on boats then it is equally moral for the state to steal to spend money to pay poor people's hospital bills. So the argument is not really one of principle just how to spend stolen money based on words written on a document that has not been followed in 200 years.Truer words have not been said on this forum. Keep on pressing on, LFOD.

[LibertyEagle]

LFOD,

Do not confuse correcting half-truths and innuendos with being happy with C4L. They are NOT one in the same.

[dannno]

A few days ago I asked Josh to delete my account and posting history. Don't worry it won't be too much longer before this is the official CFL filtered forum. What an exciting prospect it must be to think of the day when all of the remaining forum members are only GOP members of the conservative wing. And think of the forums that will no longer be needed and how much more free time you will have when only the official Ron Paul revolutionaries remain.

But when that eventually happens because the exclusive club is too arrogant to build genuine partnerships with potential allies... consider this. Democrats will be finding new devastating arguments against the "moral" high ground of the right. Because when you peel back all of the rhetoric it comes down to this. If it is moral for the state to steal in order to spend money on boats then it is equally moral for the state to steal to spend money to pay poor people's hospital bills. So the argument is not really one of principle just how to spend stolen money based on words written on a document that has not been followed in 200 years.


You don't seem to understand the situation at all.

Nobody in the C4L supports military intervention. What the hell is all this misinformation going around all about??

[rancher89]

I thought I'd start my own thread with that post. :) What is it she says? Oh yeah --- "You will NOT silence me!" :D



I think you may have forgotten that Debra Medina was a member of the C4L board up until the time that she got all involved with running for Governor of Texas. She was the grassroots rep.

I also think it is a far stretch to say they have refused to answer questions.

Allison has been over here in chat, twice.
Debbie Hopper spent a good part of the day yesterday on our forums.
John Tate issued a statement.
Jesse Benton was on an interview.
Ronnie Paul issued a statement.
Ron Paul called Michael Nystrom to discuss the matter.


This doesn't smack of an organization that doesn't care about us and isn't trying to answer our questions. There are still some they have not addressed, yes, and there may be some they CAN'T address due to legalities and such. At last check, farmer RANCHER was compiling those to present to them. :):)

True LE, but there still are legitimate questions that have been raised....that haven't been addressed. (a couple have, thankfully)

[dannno]

:):)

True LE, but there still are legitimate questions that have been raised....that haven't been addressed. (a couple have, thankfully)

Are you sure there are legitimate questions that haven't been answered?

The C4L admitted their mistake, outlined the incident and how they are going to change what they do in the future, they outlined the program in it's entirety which is a GREAT and NECESSARY program that should be a significant focus of C4L. We need to know which candidates CLAIM to be liberty minded, and then we need to hold them accountable and find out which candidates will actually follow their commitments into action. The program is a tool and a metric to be able to determine which candidates we can support in the future. This is a long-term project, they didn't even mean to promote Buck at all, that wasn't the intention, it just ended up that way after all the editing was said and done..

[LibertyEagle]

:):)

True LE, but there still are legitimate questions that have been raised....that haven't been addressed. (a couple have, thankfully)

I don't disagree with that, rancher. Which is why I suggested you start that thread that you did. Remember?

[dannno]

The majority of people who seem to be upset at C4L seem to think that this survey is going to be used as a metric for who C4L supports in the 2010 elections. That is not the purpose of the survey, although it may helps some individuals who have a proven track record of liberty activism and/or support of other liberty minded candidates, it is not a metric for who to support in 2010. There is no need to worry that some candidates might lie on the survey - this is completely expected.

What they are doing is getting base-line data for candidates so that they can measure 2 things - How liberty oriented a candidate is and how honest a candidate is. Knowing these two traits is extremely valuable for the future of C4L and for us as a movement. I can't think of anything more important, actually.

The main reason I am defending C4L is because I looked into this program and was pleasantly surprised that they were actually doing something this great and productive for the liberty movement. I am trying to help others see how great and productive this program could be for us. Honestly there isn't anything more productive that they could be doing in the long-term, imo.

[rancher89]

The 990's are unavailable, still, as far as I know.
I had a personal issue with Rothfeld, Deb has been gracious enough to explain what she knows, (up to when she had to leave to pick up the grandkids)
Some people want a little bit more information on a few points that surfaced during the dustup. No witch hunt, just questions and requests.

go check out my list and tell me what you think there....

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=229633

Attribute, where you can, where you feel the answer has been provided. I'll let you know if, IMHO, it is sufficient to take the question off my list.

AND if you have a better way to frame the questions posed, then please let me know.

I'm still waiting to hear from Angelatc on rephrasing her points in the thread. Like I said, I'm not a CPA so....

[rancher89]

Response to LE: Yeppers, I know, feel free to offer suggestions to the list-- either a question not posed yet or a refinement of an existing one..:)

[Kotin]

for fucks sake you guys...

[ronpaulhawaii]

For me, the answer to the question about Grassroots Representation was all that was needed. CfL seems to have concluded it will be most effective as a beltway institution. I have enough trust in RP that there must be some wisdom in that. I imagine such an ally in DC will be beneficial and refuse to treat CfL as an enemy. I think the r3VOLution needs to solve the "unite or die" issue on its own...

still digesting...

[MelissaWV]

Make mommy and... mommy?... stop fighting!

:(

[torchbearer]

I think the r3VOLution needs to solve the "unite or die" issue on its own...

still digesting...

http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/82/13582-004-22CC081F.jpg

[MelissaWV]

http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/82/13582-004-22CC081F.jpg

You know, someone could do a little PhotoShop with that...

Mods' names
Sites'/Projects' names
Conspiracy names

[torchbearer]

You know, someone could do a little PhotoShop with that...

Mods' names
Sites'/Projects' names
Conspiracy names

these groups need to unite to overthrow the tyrants.

[rp08orbust]

I'd also like to address the "no grassroots representative on the board of CFL.

I have been thinking about that - how would they set that up? Who would get a vote? How much resource and etc would it take to be able to organize a vote among so many? Would they just present people to be voted on or would there be a nomination process and so forth? Obviously anything short than nominations from the grassroots would raise a hue and cry - so what would be the logistics of taking nominations and coming up with an eventual "winner"? Would running an internal election cause a dividing of the CFL into factions? Would people get upset and leave if the person that they were supporting did not win or if there was any feeling that their candidate of choice was not given equal exposure? Given the drama so far is it unrealistic to expect that there would be claims and counterclaims of "insider" tactics and unfairness? In short, from the CFL perspective what are the RISKS, OBSTACLES, COSTS, AND BENEFITS of having a grassroots representative, and taking that into account is it a worthwhile idea to pursue? If you think about it, you can kind of see why he lauched off the idea. (although actually laughing was probably a mistake as that alone pissed some people off.)

C4L is good at accepting donations, so I don't see why they couldn't be good at accepting votes at the same time.

There wouldn't necessarily need to be a separate nominating process. Whoever gets the greatest number of votes from donors over a certain period wins.

[Meatwasp]

http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/82/13582-004-22CC081F.jpg

Is there any snake oil to glue this forum together again?

[axiomata]

for fucks sake you guys...

^what he said

I used to love the passion of this board, back when it was put to good use sharing the message. Now it's just being wasted going after each other for no good reason.

[ronpaulhawaii]

Is there any snake oil to glue this forum together again?

This forum don't need no more glue than the bonds we have forged over these years. IMO - the r3VOLution has strengthened from this. The bedrock foundation of principle was re-inspected and found solid

GO GRASSROOTS :D

[JoshLowry]

^what he said

I used to love the passion of this board, back when it was put to good use sharing the message. Now it's just being wasted going after each other for no good reason.

By now you should be used to the drama that comes in waves every so often. ;)

[constituent]

By now you should be used to the drama that comes in waves every so often. ;)

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_vwt55TQq-3k/SPzK-16Z__I/AAAAAAAADJQ/JfAN3OBtL7A/s320/hunter+thompson.jpg

[Original_Intent]

This forum don't need no more glue than the bonds we have forged over these years. IMO - the r3VOLution has strengthened from this. The bedrock foundation of principle was re-inspected and found solid

GO GRASSROOTS :D

I have to agree - it was unfortunate that we had to pass thru this crucible, and yet I think in the long run it was probably a good thing for all parties concerned. I think it is good that C4L got a 2x4 up side the head letting them know that we will not stand idly by and support them if they abandon their principles. I thinkk on our side some of us learned not to go off half cocked without having the facts (I certainly learned this!) and also a little bit about being manipulated and that even the best of us have our faults and even though we have the best of intentions we can still make serious and costly mistakes.

[axiomata]

By now you should be used to the drama that comes in waves every so often. ;)

True, but it usually is on the periphery; and it usually doesn't involve mods deleting each others' posts and bickering in public. I am not so naive to believe that the mods here will always agree with each other, but I figured that they would all share an interest in keeping such disagreement civil, or perhaps even private.

I think we need a new project.

[MsDoodahs]

I think we need a new project.

I was thinking that some hand made Medina signs might be nice.

:)

[JoshLowry]

True, but it usually is on the periphery; and it usually doesn't involve mods deleting each others' posts and bickering in public. I am not so naive to believe that the mods here will always agree with each other, but I figured that they would all share an interest in keeping such disagreement civil, or perhaps even private.

I think we need a new project.

Agreed. :)

[angelatc]

The 990's are unavailable, still, as far as I know.
I had a personal issue with Rothfeld, Deb has been gracious enough to explain what she knows, (up to when she had to leave to pick up the grandkids)
Some people want a little bit more information on a few points that surfaced during the dustup. No witch hunt, just questions and requests.

go check out my list and tell me what you think there....

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=229633

Attribute, where you can, where you feel the answer has been provided. I'll let you know if, IMHO, it is sufficient to take the question off my list.

AND if you have a better way to frame the questions posed, then please let me know.

I'm still waiting to hear from Angelatc on rephrasing her points in the thread. Like I said, I'm not a CPA so....

Sorry! I forgot. :) The internet distracted me.

[erowe1]

I also think it is a far stretch to say they have refused to answer questions.

Allison has been over here in chat, twice.
Debbie Hopper spent a good part of the day yesterday on our forums.
John Tate issued a statement.
Jesse Benton was on an interview.
Ronnie Paul issued a statement.
Ron Paul called Michael Nystrom to discuss the matter.



You just listed 6 people who all had opportunities to answer our questions and who all very obviously refused to do so. So how does that support your claim that it's a stretch to say they have refused to answer our questions? Sending more people out to say, "Really it was just supposed to be an ad for the survey, it only didn't look like it because of poor execution. But we won't get into the details." only makes them worse, not better.

[LibertyEagle]

A few days ago I asked Josh to delete my account and posting history. Don't worry it won't be too much longer before this is the official CFL filtered forum. What an exciting prospect it must be to think of the day when all of the remaining forum members are only GOP members of the conservative wing. And think of the forums that will no longer be needed and how much more free time you will have when only the official Ron Paul revolutionaries remain.

But when that eventually happens because the exclusive club is too arrogant to build genuine partnerships with potential allies... consider this. Democrats will be finding new devastating arguments against the "moral" high ground of the right. Because when you peel back all of the rhetoric it comes down to this. If it is moral for the state to steal in order to spend money on boats then it is equally moral for the state to steal to spend money to pay poor people's hospital bills. So the argument is not really one of principle just how to spend stolen money based on words written on a document that has not been followed in 200 years.

I would be very sad to see you go.

The issue you seem to be having is with the forum mission statement and if a Moderator moderates to it. The mission of this forum is activism to re-establish our constitutional republic. Anyone and everyone is welcome to help achieve that mission. Beyond that, the Philosophy subforum is available to discuss alternate philosophies.

If you have a problem with the forum's mission, you should take it up with Josh and Bryan.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

I would be very sad to see you go.

The issue you seem to be having is with the forum mission statement and if a Moderator moderates to it. The mission of this forum is activism to re-establish our constitutional republic. Anyone and everyone is welcome to help achieve that mission. Beyond that, the Philosophy subforum is available to discuss alternate philosophies.

If you have a problem with the forum's mission, you should take it up with Josh and Bryan.

The Ron Paul Revolution has lost sight of the ball. If you listen to Dr. Paul he has repeatedly said the most important thing is philosophy. He is on record specifically commenting about the effects of getting a few more congressmen elected versus spreading the philosophy of liberty. And what philosophers does Ron Paul financially support? I follow the same philosophers Ron Paul supports yet it has become one of the least important aspects of the Ron Paul revolution.

[torchbearer]

The Ron Paul Revolution has lost sight of the ball. If you listen to Dr. Paul he has repeatedly said the most important thing is philosophy. He is on record specifically commenting about the effects of getting a few more congressmen elected versus spreading the philosophy of liberty. And what philosophers does Ron Paul financially support? I follow the same philosophers Ron Paul supports yet it has become one of the least important aspects of the Ron Paul revolution.

had ron never ran for president in 2008, this forum wouldn't exist and 90% of the people here would still be stuck in the matrix. it was political action that increased our numbers, not a debate club.
You'd fit in well with some LP committees who's main focus is to bicker over fine points of philosophy, but they don't get anything done and they tend to eat their own for lack of purity. quite a self-destructive group.

[LibertyEagle]

The Ron Paul Revolution has lost sight of the ball. If you listen to Dr. Paul he has repeatedly said the most important thing is philosophy. He is on record specifically commenting about the effects of getting a few more congressmen elected versus spreading the philosophy of liberty. And what philosophers does Ron Paul financially support? I follow the same philosophers Ron Paul supports yet it has become one of the least important aspects of the Ron Paul revolution.

He has also repeatedly said that if you want to affect change, you have to get involved with political activism.

That said, spreading philosophy and political activism go hand-in-hand. As was evidenced by how very many people became aware of the FED and its antics, while we were working to pass HR1207.

It's going to take both for us to succeed. One without the other is a recipe for failure.

[ronpaulhawaii]

It's all about finding balance

http://www.wired.com/geekdad/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/elephant2.jpg

:p

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

He has also repeatedly said that if you want to affect change, you have to get involved with political activism.

That said, spreading philosophy and political activism go hand-in-hand. As was evidenced by how very many people became aware of the FED and its antics, while we were working to pass HR1207.

It's going to take both for us to succeed. One without the other is a recipe for failure.

This is not true. Ron Paul has mentioned other methods and has referred to historic figures such as Gandhi. However, Ron Paul has stated why he has chosen to pursue a path of political activism and he presents a good case for his choice.

Regarding political activism he has said a true revolution occurs when republicans and democrats are both talking about the principles of liberty. He recognizes that this does not require replacing every elected official in the United States but he chooses a course of political activism because he feels that is how he raises the most awareness for the philosophy of liberty. Let us not forget Ron Paul was very skeptical in 2007 because he already spent 30 years following a course of action and never very successful impacting a wide audience. I think an extremely solid case can be made that political activism is not the solution it is one vehicle to spread the philosophy of liberty.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

It's all about finding balance[/IMG]

:p

I have mixed thoughts about a characterization of balance versus priorities and do not have a reply I can articulate without reflection.

For instance, have candidates been funded by grass roots supporters based on their ability to articulate the message or perceived ability to win?

[LibertyEagle]

This is not true. Ron Paul has mentioned other methods and has referred to historic figures such as Gandhi. However, Ron Paul has stated why he has chosen to pursue a path of political activism and he presents a good case for his choice.

Regarding political activism he has said a true revolution occurs when republicans and democrats are both talking about the principles of liberty. He recognizes that this does not require replacing every elected official in the United States but he chooses a course of political activism because he feels that is how he raises the most awareness for the philosophy of liberty. Let us not forget Ron Paul was very skeptical in 2007 because he already spent 30 years following a course of action and never very successful impacting a wide audience. I think an extremely solid case can be made that political activism is not the solution it is one vehicle to spread the philosophy of liberty.

“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/

You may also want to go re-read the Nystrom interview with Ron Paul. Where Nystrom noted that Congressman Paul told him that "The Campaign for Liberty is a political organization (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=229350)." If Dr. Paul doesn't believe in political activism, why on earth would he establish an organization to do it?

If you are looking for organizations and forums whose sole intent is education, there are a variety of them out there. Mises, FEE, FFF, etc.

[ronpaulhawaii]

I have mixed thoughts about a characterization of balance versus priorities and do not have a reply I can articulate without reflection.

For instance, have candidates been funded by grass roots supporters based on their ability to articulate the message or perceived ability to win?

Both, and more...

Is it more of finding a balance within and how to best advance the personal goal of increasing liberty? The fact that such a goal is shared seems incidental and external; something to reconcile inside and find the best way to move forward moment by moment. The group of people I could surround myself -100% in agreement with every moment- would be very small indeed.

I wonder that balance is ever more than just briefly passed over as forces beyond our comprehension act upon reality.

Is cat herding kinda like trying to keep that elephant from toppling as it sways?

much respect for the philosophers, as well as the politickers

Damn the torpedoes, FULL SPEED AHEAD!

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

“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 stand corrected. It is true he has repeatedly said that. I misread your post as if it was the only thing he has acknowledged. I do not disagree he has said it and that is the course of action he has spent a lifetime pursuing.

I would like to point out he characterized them as friends. Ron Paul does not chastise his friends for their views he advocates the merits of his views.



You may also want to go re-read the Nystrom interview with Ron Paul. Where Nystrom noted that Congressman Paul told him that "The Campaign for Liberty is a political organization (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=229350)." If Dr. Paul doesn't believe in political activism, why on earth would he establish an organization to do it?

I think I provided a pretty clear explanation of the CFL in this sister thread during the hoopla before that was written. I do not criticize Ron Paul for making a choice of political activism. I supported his campaign.

CFL is a different matter and I have already articulated my disagreements with the ownership structure. I have not criticized Ron Paul in doing so. I criticized the issue. Let's go back to your quote above. If Ron Paul is correct in that you must participate in political action then why not do it in a libertarian way with ownership? Only through ownership and contract do I have confidence Ron Paul's vision of political activism can work without getting hijacked.

[newbitech]

I listened to the recent speech that Ron Paul gave at the Mises Institute. Paste this in after http://youtube.com/ watch?v=9W6KJRIums4

One thing that really struck me was how much Dr. Paul downplayed the role of getting people elected to Congress is going to play.

If I may paraphrase,

Once the philosophy of liberty has reached a critical mass, people will just ignore the Federal Government. This is the measure of success of the Revolution which is a paradigm shift in philosophy of the electorate. The Federal Government will become insignificant. This is the goal of political activism. It is a self-defeating goal and one must take up activism with great humility in order to have any success.

I get it now, political activism is not the goal and success is not measured by how many Congress people are elected to office.

Success is measured by how insignificant those Congress people become in our lives as individuals.

While this seems to be a huge paradox, the paradox is broken by realizing that one must be willing to sacrifice self (or be self sacrificing) in order to liberate one's self. This realization can be achieved through action (try and fail, try and fail, try and fail, always try always fail, always know you will try always know you will fail) or by deduction.

People like Ron Paul and the activists he is trying to inspire HOPE and PLAN that by giving an example of themselves of trying and failing, this will lead the vast majority to come to the realization that they may also liberate themselves WITHOUT FAIL, through ideology, philosophy, and just really good ideas.

That's my take. So I know I am not perfect, I accept that I will always try and always fail. I also know that I will be liberated as in individual because my ideology, philisophy, and really good ideas will take care of themselves.

IMVHO.

[ronpaulhawaii]

....

People like Ron Paul and the activists he is trying to inspire HOPE and PLAN that by giving an example of themselves of trying and failing, this will lead the vast majority to come to the realization that they may also liberate themselves WITHOUT FAIL, through ideology, philosophy, and just really good ideas.

That's my take. So I know I am not perfect, I accept that I will always try and always fail. I also know that I will be liberated as in individual because my ideology, philosophy, and really good ideas will take care of themselves.

IMVHO.

To me, activism is about building a soapbox, getting up on it, and giving it a try. Doesn't really matter whether the vehicle is electoral, or issue based, it's all about spreading the message...

Elected officials have valuable soapboxes, (at the moment)...

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

To me, activism is about building a soapbox, getting up on it, and giving it a try. Doesn't really matter whether the vehicle is electoral, or issue based, it's all about spreading the message...

Elected officials have valuable soapboxes, (at the moment)...

To me activism is about people. Capitalizing on ordinary every day opportunities to introduce a thought provoking question, idea, or statement regarding liberty. It is nice to support soapbox opportunities but Ron Paul's initial growth in popularity was not from a soapbox. It was word of mouth.

[LibertyEagle]

It's going to take a number of different approaches to win this thing. No one organization, forum, group of people, or approach, can do it alone.

There are plenty of choices for everyone. Pick what works for you and go for it.