PDA

View Full Version : United Liberty: "CPAC was the wrong place to make that statement"




MR2Fast2Catch
02-15-2011, 01:27 PM
I saw this article on United Liberty and really agreed with it. Thought it was worth posting.

http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/7753-cpac-was-the-wrong-place-to-make-that-statement


As libertarians, we are notoriously bad at politics. Partly because we are cynical about things actually changing, but also because we are so principled on certain issues, including opposition to unjustified war and distrust of the Federal Reserve, that we tend to render ourselves irrelevant before we even have a legitmate opportunity to establish our position.

The response is “but it shouldn’t be that way,” and you’re right. But that doesn’t change the fact that this is reality, and sometimes we have to work within the system to achieve a desired change.

On Friday, CPAC attendees were given a surprise as former Vice President Dick Cheney showed up to intro Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense in the Bush Administration, who was set to receive the “Defender of the Constitution” Award from the American Conservative Union.

It was rumored early in the day that several dozen Campaign for Liberty members were going to stage a walkout during the presentation of the award. But I’m afraid the addition of Cheney to the stage was too much for some people to stand.

After a steady round of applause, someone or a group of people - presumably supporters of Ron Paul - began taunting Cheney from the crowd, shouting “war criminal,” calling Cheney “murdering scum,” asking “Where’s bin Laden” and for him to “show us the shekels.”

I was sitting in the Bloggers Lounge at the time watching from the closed circuit TV provided to us. I had hoped that the protest during this time would be limited to the pre-planned walked out. Unfortunately, some had other plans.

I know what I’m about to say is not going to be popular, and frankly, I don’t care. The shouting at Cheney and Rumsfeld was inappropriate and childish. I’m not a fan of either of them, so I’m not debating the substance of what was said. However, it was an exhibition of a complete lack of class.

What exactly did this solve? Sure, the folks that shouted at Cheney may have felt better, but it put a lot of libertarians in attendence at CPAC in a very odd situtation.

Of course, this doesn’t apply to everyone inside the liberty movement. Most self-indentified libertarians that went to CPAC were respectful, courteous and likely added some flavor in their interaction and discussions with other conference goers.

But the sad fact of the matter is that we are viewed skeptically by most conservatives. They don’t know what to make of us, and when a few people who cannot play well with others, it makes the rest of us look bad. Like it or not, this is a case where a few bad apples spoil the bunch.

Ron Paul and Gary Johnson cannot control the actions of their supporters, and they shouldn’t be blamed here. But the bottomline is conservatives are looking for reasons not to take us seriously, and they were given a reason at CPAC.

There is a time and a place for everything, but CPAC wasn’t the place to make your feelings known. If we are truly interested in being taken seriously, there is a certain amount of responsibility that we must shoulder, like it or not, to be included in the dialogue.

Flash
02-15-2011, 01:32 PM
It should be noted that some of the people yelling at Cheney weren't Libertarians or even Ron Paul supporters:

http://board.freedomainradio.com/forums/p/29524/227289.aspx#227289

Elwar
02-15-2011, 01:41 PM
When your government is tyrannical, sit quietly and show some class. Otherwise others might be confused or get a bad impression. This will earn you respect amongst the tyrants.

Or do like the Egyptians and get results.

dannno
02-15-2011, 01:46 PM
What exactly did this solve?

Uhh, it gave us free publicity :confused:

Talk about a Debbie Downer..

dannno
02-15-2011, 01:46 PM
It should be noted that some of the people yelling at Cheney weren't Libertarians or even Ron Paul supporters:


LOL, well they clearly should be..

Bern
02-15-2011, 01:50 PM
... Sure, the folks that shouted at Cheney may have felt better, but it put a lot of libertarians in attendence at CPAC in a very odd situtation.

Too bad the heckling didn't apparently put Cheney in an "odd situation".

Deborah K
02-15-2011, 01:52 PM
It should be noted that some of the people yelling at Cheney weren't Libertarians or even Ron Paul supporters:

http://board.freedomainradio.com/forums/p/29524/227289.aspx#227289

Really?


I took this extremely crowded chance to sell the President Ron Paul 2012 shirts i had made up, with great results. Of course I had amazing chats with so many people, mainly discussing voluntaryism and the natural conclusions of the non-aggression principle. Many people were confused why I'm selling a Ron Paul shirt as an anarchist... I explained I am a anarcho-CAPITALIST, who wanted to cover travel expenses. lol?

This is from your link. What a guy. And he mentions earlier in his post that he bought a 300.00 camera to use at CPAC and then returned it.

Flash
02-15-2011, 01:58 PM
Really?



This is from your link. What a guy. And he mentions earlier in his post that he bought a 300.00 camera to use at CPAC and then returned it.

Making money off of RP supporters doesn't make you a RP supporter. See here:

"The results came in, Ron Paul won the straw poll, followed by Mitt Romney, I instantly knew i would be able to sell more shirts."

"(and yes I felt slightly dirty selling Ron Paul shirts, but not dirty enough to not take the money)"

Deborah K
02-15-2011, 02:17 PM
Making money off of RP supporters doesn't make you a RP supporter. See here:

"The results came in, Ron Paul won the straw poll, followed by Mitt Romney, I instantly knew i would be able to sell more shirts."

"(and yes I felt slightly dirty selling Ron Paul shirts, but not dirty enough to not take the money)"

Yeah, yeah we can all clearly see this guy's an unscrupulous opportunist. But he ain't fooling me. He also mentions that he approached two people bashing RP and his policies, and he spent 30 minutes with them. He's a closet RP supporter. No, he's not even a closet supporter, he's a supporter in denial.

TheeJoeGlass
02-15-2011, 02:24 PM
"I know what I’m about to say is not going to be popular, and frankly, I don’t care. The shouting at Cheney and Rumsfeld was inappropriate and childish. I’m not a fan of either of them, so I’m not debating the substance of what was said. However, it was an exhibition of a complete lack of class."

Blah, Blah, and Blah.

Acala
02-15-2011, 03:26 PM
I wasn't there and so my comments are stictly academic. The people who actually showed up each made their own decisions. However:

The Republican party WILL be split. The true conservatives - the Ron Paul Republicans - are not going to accept, nor will they be accepted by, the war-mongering, deficit-spending neocons. Somebody is going to have to find a new political home. No matter how nice we play. The only question is who will get to keep using the Republican Party name. Ron Paul says it should be the defenders of Liberty and that is good enough for me. So then why not make the neocons uncomfortable? Why not call them on their crimes against liberty and this country? Why not rock the damn boat? Why not shout them down and out of the party? You sure as hell are not going to convert them. Drive them out. In the process you will reclaim many of the disenfranchised.





.

Jeremy
02-15-2011, 03:28 PM
People here congratulated them for doing that too. Why?

Deborah K
02-15-2011, 04:28 PM
I wasn't there and so my comments are stictly academic. The people who actually showed up each made their own decisions. However:

The Republican party WILL be split. The true conservatives - the Ron Paul Republicans - are not going to accept, nor will they be accepted by, the war-mongering, deficit-spending neocons. Somebody is going to have to find a new political home. No matter how nice we play. The only question is who will get to keep using the Republican Party name. Ron Paul says it should be the defenders of Liberty and that is good enough for me. So then why not make the neocons uncomfortable? Why not call them on their crimes against liberty and this country? Why not rock the damn boat? Why not shout them down and out of the party? You sure as hell are not going to convert them. Drive them out. In the process you will reclaim many of the disenfranchised.





.

If you do this without media support, you doom Dr. Paul's chances to win the election. He has asked us to be civil. What happened at CPAC reflects badly on him and the media runs with it every time. They are setting up to marginalize him again and if we give them reasons to hate us, the media-led public will fall in lock-step. It is a losing strategy that failed last time. If we wish to be relevant, we have to re-think our tactics.

I'm not saying there won't come a time when we must speak out loudly at a venue. I was all for shouting down the creeps at the townhall meetings trying to dupe us into accepting socialized medicine. But, when we do it, we should do it independent of Ron Paul and not when we are at an event to represent him.

angelatc
02-15-2011, 04:37 PM
It's a lost cause. We aren't even in the race yet, and we're already proving the points that our critics make about us. It is absolutely surreal to think that people actually think this is a good strategy.

The townhall meetings were a bit different. The audience was actually invited to speak in that venue.

Acala
02-15-2011, 05:00 PM
What happened at CPAC reflects badly on him and the media runs with it every time. They are setting up to marginalize him again and if we give them reasons to hate us, the media-led public will fall in lock-step. It is a losing strategy that failed last time. If we wish to be relevant, we have to re-think our tactics.


I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. I honestly don't know what tactics will work. But this much I DO know: the media will NEVER help. The media will ALWAYS stand in the way. And if they need to, they will FABRICATE the news to pursue their agenda. In fact, if this kind of tactic turns out to be ineffective and Ron Paul supporters stop doing it, the other side will START doing it under a false flag and the media will report it.

We didn't lose in 2008 because Ron Paul supporters misbehaved. We lost because the election is rigged. Not by phony vote counting but by sophisticated public manipulation techniques. I never talked to a single voter who said they didn't vote for Ron Paul because his followers were rude. They either didn't know anything about him (ignored by the media) thought he was a "kook" but not for any specific reason (media manipulation) thought he couldn't win (media marginalization) or disagreed with him on some hot button issue about which he had usually been misrepresented. It had nothing whatsoever to do with grass roots tactics and everything to do with the giant political/media/industrial machine that controls the election.

I get the feeling that some of you think this is going to be a fair fight on a level playing field. It won't. The more success we have the dirtier the tactics will get. Ultimately, there is NOTHING the forces of tyranny will not do to keep power. If we try to play their game on their field we WILL get stomped every time.

So what do we do? I wish I knew. But I am not so sure that breaking out of the mold and NOT playing by the rules set up by the power brokers is a bad idea.

Deborah K
02-15-2011, 05:20 PM
I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. I honestly don't know what tactics will work. But this much I DO know: the media will NEVER help. The media will ALWAYS stand in the way. And if they need to, they will FABRICATE the news to pursue their agenda. In fact, if this kind of tactic turns out to be ineffective and Ron Paul supporters stop doing it, the other side will START doing it under a false flag and the media will report it.


I'm one who tends to believe that the media is the fifth column. They mix lies with the truth on a regular basis. But like it or not, we have to figure out a way to deal with them.



We didn't lose in 2008 because Ron Paul supporters misbehaved. We lost because the election is rigged. Not by phony vote counting but by sophisticated public manipulation techniques. I never talked to a single voter who said they didn't vote for Ron Paul because his followers were rude. They either didn't know anything about him (ignored by the media) thought he was a "kook" but not for any specific reason (media manipulation) thought he couldn't win (media marginalization) or disagreed with him on some hot button issue about which he had usually been misrepresented. It had nothing whatsoever to do with grass roots tactics and everything to do with the giant political/media/industrial machine that controls the election.

I don't think he lost solely because of supporter misbehavior. But the bad press hurt him. I agree with the rest of your statement above, and again, because they are so powerful, they need to be dealt with differently this time. I've suggested putting together a war room to deal with them.



I get the feeling that some of you think this is going to be a fair fight on a level playing field. It won't. The more success we have the dirtier the tactics will get. Ultimately, there is NOTHING the forces of tyranny will not do to keep power. If we try to play their game on their field we WILL get stomped every time.

So what do we do? I wish I knew. But I am not so sure that breaking out of the mold and NOT playing by the rules set up by the power brokers is a bad idea

I don't think anyone believes this will ever be a fair fight. We are up against an entrenched power structure. We have to be more clever, more covert. We have to do things like infiltrate and expose their lies. It won't be easy, but sticking our heads up above the crowds, imo, just makes us easy targets and nothing more.

MR2Fast2Catch
02-15-2011, 05:51 PM
I agree with a lot of what Deborah K has been saying above.

This is why I posted this article here. It frustrates me. I'm a Republican Precinct Committeeman, and recently attended a countywide meeting where a bunch of the Republican officials attended. The newly elected county attorney got up and gave his speech, and talked about how we aren't bogging down Arizona prisons with non-dangerous criminals, and we aren't locking up people for petty drug crimes. Being an employee of the criminal courts, who works in the courtroom every day, I knew this was a bunch of BS. My blood was boiling when he was up there speaking. But I'm not gonna stand up and start heckling and yelling at him. That would just make everyone hate me, and I would have no chance at making any inroads in the party, whether through networking, talking with others, etc. (This doesn't mean we aren't to speak our mind. We just have to recognize the correct time and place to do that, and also the manner we use to bring up our disagreements)

We can't destory our image by being outright jerks to other Republicans. Ron Paul wants us to work within the Republican party like he does. He's going to be running for the Republican nomination. Therefore we have to work within this party and court members of its party. We have to tell them why Ron Paul is right. Why liberty is important and why so many other Republicans have it wrong. We can choose to do this in a hostile manner, and drive the Republicans away from us; Or we can choose to do this in a cooperative/friendly way that will allow us to convert more people to our cause.

That's my 2 cents.

Austrian Econ Disciple
02-15-2011, 06:04 PM
It seems they can boo, shout, and be rude with impunity and expect us to act like angels. I do not support double standards so I applaud all the guys who gave the Statists a dose of their own medicine.

Thomas
02-15-2011, 06:20 PM
stupid anarchists showing up to political events and making us look bad, i'm starting to think we are being sabotaged

dannno
02-15-2011, 06:51 PM
stupid anarchists showing up to political events and making us look bad, i'm starting to think we are being sabotaged

Yes, let's be divisive, that will solve the problem.

MelissaWV
02-15-2011, 06:58 PM
Yes, let's be divisive, that will solve the problem.

The alternative seems to be to act like a moron, and be left with no good defense when people point out that they have to wade through a disturbing tide of rude, boorish, defensive, paranoid kooks in order to go out of their way to get involved on behalf of Dr. Paul. That would "unify" us, no?

I agree with the original article, and the idea that "they started it" so we should all band together and maybe moon them or decorate their stoops with flaming bags of dog poo... ghads it's really frustrating as hell.

It's like trying to sell someone on drinking a really great beverage, when there's a commercial on for said beverage that features Janet Reno doing something naughty with a lollipop then licking it and going "MMMMMM tastes like [name of beverage]." You just are not going to get a lot of people to try it, fighting against that kind of image.

Vessol
02-15-2011, 07:26 PM
stupid anarchists showing up to political events and making us look bad, i'm starting to think we are being sabotaged

Yes, spending my rent money and missing work to go to CPAC so I could hang out with some RPFers and watch speakers speak..it was all part of my nefarious plan, how did you know!?

Deborah K
02-15-2011, 07:30 PM
It seems they can boo, shout, and be rude with impunity and expect us to act like angels. I do not support double standards so I applaud all the guys who gave the Statists a dose of their own medicine.

They do it, so we should do it? Sounds like sandbox mentality...you threw sand first, no you did, no you did....:rolleyes:

Anti Federalist
02-15-2011, 08:38 PM
There is a time and a place for everything, but CPAC wasn’t the place to make your feelings known.

If not at a public, political gathering, then when, seriously?

Any other venue, like say a congressional hearing, and you will be arrested.

A public demonstration? That's no good, you're half a mile away in the "free speech zone".

Maybe a book signing or something like that? Shit, WeAreChange has been doing that for years. People around here would faint dead away if a WeAreChange video popped up with somebody heckling a Darth Cheny while wearing a Ron Paul shirt or something.

So, since I wasn't there, but if I had been, I would have been one of the asshole, idiot, immature shouters, you tell me: where can I exercise my right to air my grievances against government?

Andrew-Austin
02-15-2011, 09:21 PM
The alternative seems to be to act like a moron, and be left with no good defense when people point out that they have to wade through a disturbing tide of rude, boorish, defensive, paranoid kooks in order to go out of their way to get involved on behalf of Dr. Paul. That would "unify" us, no?

I agree with the original article, and the idea that "they started it" so we should all band together and maybe moon them or decorate their stoops with flaming bags of dog poo... ghads it's really frustrating as hell.

It's like trying to sell someone on drinking a really great beverage, when there's a commercial on for said beverage that features Janet Reno doing something naughty with a lollipop then licking it and going "MMMMMM tastes like [name of beverage]." You just are not going to get a lot of people to try it, fighting against that kind of image.

The only morons I see are the knaves who think they can win over the Red State crowd by being "well mannered". As if this stripe had any interest in being "well mannered" themselves, with their intellectually dishonesty, hypocrisy, use of gross fallacies and jingoist rhetoric to explain why they don't even want to think about the ideas Ron presents, vitriolic ad hominem neocons. Being "polite" to these people just means not expressing opinions they disagree with in a public political event. But you can bet your ass Ron Paul would have received a lot more vocal booing if the neocons made up the majority of the crowd at CPAC. Being "rude" then would have of course been okay in their eyes.

Its not just a "oh they did it first, or they would have" argument, fact is these people only resort to bashing the liberty crowd at CPAC because they don't want to consider Ron Paul or give him a fair hearing. I mean that isn't even a ad hominem attack against Ron, its far worse, its attacking Paul's supporters based on ridiculous standards (don't express yourself at a political event or else I might get offended or pissed off because I disagree with you, though I can't and won't debate you), and then bashing Ron Paul through a mystical leap of guilt-by-association. This is pure, dishonest, cowardly, idiotic bullshit... No one travels along that sort of anti-logic unless they didn't want to give Ron a fair hearing in the first place. And these are the people whose 'sensibilities' you are siding with by bashing the pro-liberty crowd at CPAC.

-neg rep, not just because I disagree with you, but it seems ridiculous that you would feel so ashamed of and bitter towards the vocal liberty crowd at CPAC.

Michael Landon
02-15-2011, 09:22 PM
There comes a point where some people feel that "enough is enough" and feel the need to express their discontent with whatever angers them. I've been there and I'm sure others have also, CPAC is an example of that. It happened to me just the other day and I finally expressed my anger towards some teenagers who were throwing snowballs at my mail truck, afterwards I felt that I should have done what I always do when young kids harass me and walk away, but I didn't because I was sick of dealing with these idiots.

I can see both sides of this discussion and they are both correct in their views, at least in my opinion. If I had been there who knows what I would have done. I can see me yelling at Cheney but I can also see me trying to project a positive image to all the Neo-cons in attendance, I guess it would have depended on my mood at the time.

- ML

AZKing
02-15-2011, 09:23 PM
As far as I'm concerned, it was just a matter of disrespect since Dr. Paul asked everyone to be nice.

I hope it wasn't anyone from the forum, because you would have seen his message about being respectful to all speakers. Don't get me wrong -- I don't want to 'bow down' to any tyrants, but if the alternative is disrespecting Ron's wishes, then I just wouldn't show up to those speeches at all.

Flash
02-15-2011, 09:35 PM
stupid anarchists showing up to political events and making us look bad, i'm starting to think we are being sabotaged

I'm a Voluntaryist. And I was also against behavior of RP supporters & others at CPAC. Plus I plan on going to CPAC either next year or year after that. This doesn't have anything to do with anarchists, I was just pointing out that a particular anarchist who doesn't even believe in voting was the one who shouted war criminal. It shouldn't be blamed on RP supporters in all fairness..

osan
02-15-2011, 09:51 PM
The only question is who will get to keep using the Republican Party name. Ron Paul says it should be the defenders of Liberty and that is good enough for me.

Good question. On the one hand I say let the neocons have it. It is a tainted brand just as is "democrat". On the other hand, the mob being as impossibly stupid as it is, ceding the brand to which so large a proportion of the voting nation will adhere even if the ghost of Hitler were to be running is perhaps not the most practical solution. Politics is a sick, disgusting affair. OK, I got that off my chest... I suppose it would be better to drive the neocons out, assuming "republican" as a brand survives the coming two years, which given the start thus far, is by no means assured.


So then why not make the neocons uncomfortable? Why not call them on their crimes against liberty and this country? Why not rock the damn boat? Why not shout them down and out of the party? You sure as hell are not going to convert them. Drive them out. In the process you will reclaim many of the disenfranchised.
.

As is the case with so many other things, this is very much a two-edged sword. I agree with the OP that chanting such things is childish, but that does not mean that calling attention to the issues in question is invalid. At some point one has to shit or get off the pot, which is nigh upon us, yet this nation has done neither. We either get real and start doing things such as the Egyptians have done, or just accept our bondage and stop whining about it. But if we act, doing so childishly is not going to buy anything that anyone really wants - or do we believe that the nation which brought Madison Avenue to the world can do nothing creatively better than chanting silly, if true, taunts and succeeding most likely in appearing ungracious and stupid?

This whole game seems so hopeless sometimes.

osan
02-15-2011, 10:03 PM
If you do this without media support, you doom Dr. Paul's chances to win the election. He has asked us to be civil. What happened at CPAC reflects badly on him and the media runs with it every time. They are setting up to marginalize him again and if we give them reasons to hate us, the media-led public will fall in lock-step. It is a losing strategy that failed last time. If we wish to be relevant, we have to re-think our tactics.

Either such people are so clued-out, morbidly self-absorbed, and plainly stoopid, or they are provocateurs. In either case, attempts such as this to "educate" them is tantamount to pissing up a rope, I am afraid. Perhaps a guideline principle should be set in place: sit down, shut the fuck up, pay attention. If you act like an imbecile we will beat your ass to a semi-coherent pulp and eject you to the gutter. Have a nice day. Just a thought.


I'm not saying there won't come a time when we must speak out loudly at a venue. I was all for shouting down the creeps at the townhall meetings trying to dupe us into accepting socialized medicine. But, when we do it, we should do it independent of Ron Paul and not when we are at an event to represent him.

Good point - OTOH, one must question the thinking that went into the decision to have the likes of Cheney and Rumsfeld at such an event. Why not just resurrect Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pot, and Amin and have them speak as well? Toss in the Shah for good measure.

osan
02-15-2011, 10:06 PM
I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. I honestly don't know what tactics will work. But this much I DO know: the media will NEVER help.

True, but I think it would be a hoot to fuck with them in the worst way by having all the liberty people hold hands and sway left and right while singing "We Are The World". They would take a giant shit on themselves for the loss of words.

MR2Fast2Catch
02-15-2011, 10:16 PM
This whole game seems so hopeless sometimes.


That it does. :( That it does.

osan
02-15-2011, 10:36 PM
So what do we do? I wish I knew. But I am not so sure that breaking out of the mold and NOT playing by the rules set up by the power brokers is a bad idea.


Missed this part. What do we do? Go cellular just like terrorists. Go completely sub-rosa. Organize PRIVATE community-based affairs to get the word out by bringing friends and family only and NEVER EVER let the press in. Can't cut them off completely, but they can be largely choked out. Establish small groups - and I mean SMALL - maybe 20 people tops, all known to each other. As you hit, say, a 30 person population, bud off 10 or 15, reproducing just like yeast and grow each remaining part, then repeat indefinitely. Meet at your houses and discuss issues and strategies for spreading the word and growing the movement. Have videos and books and slide presentations and articles and all manner of educational materials on hand. People need basic education on the fundamental issues. More than that, they desperately need to be deprogrammed. Have small discussion groups with a moderator and no more than 5 other people, preferably of differing knowledge levels. Have a curriculum, an honest to god formal curriculum and teach and discuss on that basis. Use socratic method to guide the fence sitters to their own conclusions. No lecturing, only dissemination of well reasoned arguments and then a journey of discovery.

I would also say to forget about anarchy at this point - it is WAY too big a bite. I would also point out that I have yet to see convincing answers to any of the basic questions that people typically put to ancaps. "Let the market decide" is most decidedly unconvincing. Start with smaller steps. A return to Constitutional governance would be a far better result than remaining where we are, which is precisely what will happen if mainstream johnnies are hit up with talk of anarchy right off the bat. You have to take people as they are and treat them on that basis if success is what you seek and expect.

IMO this movement needs to be quiet yet very active. Open your homes once a week to friends and neighbors you know to be sympathetic or wavering on the fence. Learn the arguments well and in great detail such that you can answer ANY question put to you on the fundamentals and on as many of the finer points as you can stuff into your brains. Use the net - there is so much out there, like "The Philosophy of Liberty" at isil.org as just one excellent example. Deprogram by leading them to gently destroy their own existing belief system with unbreakable logic and truth.

Never let general meetings be much more than 20 people and the small discussion groups be more than6 total. secure ever growing populations of volunteers to help establish more groups - multiply on and on and never let the press in for anything. Be like Jews practicing their religion in a hostile land - SUB ROSA.

By attempting to go very public you are playing into the hands of the masters who control the press who excoriate you at every turn. But if they cannot get much information, no video, then on what shall they report? Make them kill themselves working to get it. Make nothing easy for them. Show them a wholly passive face, though you may want to spit in their eyes inwardly. Give them NOTHING. It will drive them nuts, but more importantly you will be starving the beast.

What would "they" do, were there to be a truly crazy upset for dozens of offices in 2012 that they never saw coming? That is what is needed - covert grassroots operations that freeze out the establishment. Could we exercise any greater power than this? Honestly I think it is the only possible chance. I also doubt it will happen, but at least I can say I put it out there. Put together a site with materials that anyone can D/L and use to teach. Step 1, deprogram. Step 2, teach the real meaning of liberty and show why it is preferable to the gilt cage.

I predict this idea will go nowhere. I dare America to prove me wrong, to make me eat a great steaming pile of crow. I dare you all.

This would take a lot of effort getting new people in, but so what? Go for the fence sitters first and work your way down from there. Use the fence sitters to grab friends of a more disagreeable nature and have "that talk" with them. There needs be a basic argument - a basic presentation for such persons, and I think "The Philosophy of Liberty" may be a good place to start.

I have transcribed the text into a Word-formatted doc if anyone is interested, though I feel the Flash animation is perhaps the better vehicle... though it could really use a voice over.

osan
02-15-2011, 11:01 PM
I'm a Voluntaryist. And I was also against behavior of RP supporters & others at CPAC. Plus I plan on going to CPAC either next year or year after that. This doesn't have anything to do with anarchists, I was just pointing out that a particular anarchist who doesn't even believe in voting was the one who shouted war criminal. It shouldn't be blamed on RP supporters in all fairness..

Fairness? Are you mad? The press will not be fair. RP represents one of the only marginally sane voices in contemporary politics. He will not be tolerated as anything BUT a marginal fringe element. So long as he remains there, he is treated with a mildly snickering dismissal. As he gains popularity his treatment by the press shall become ever more transparently vicious. Part of the campaign to keep him in the narrow margin will be the marginalization of those who follow him. It happens even now - labeled as loons and so forth.

Don't ever use the 'F' word in such a context as this. It is patently insane.

Austrian Econ Disciple
02-15-2011, 11:14 PM
They do it, so we should do it? Sounds like sandbox mentality...you threw sand first, no you did, no you did....:rolleyes:

I have to admit I did chuckle. My point was it is disingenious of them to be critical of a behavior they themselves partake in. Point it out. They have no credibility to call anything rude or boorish. I don't know why more people aren't doing this, there is plenty of video evidence for this.

TheJeffersonian
02-16-2011, 01:02 AM
I was at CPAC and I was a little dismayed at the treatment of Orrin Hatch by a few of our people during a panel discussion he was on. I'm no Orrin Hatch fan but the sarcasm is not helpful to our cause and makes us look like a bunch of college brats. We might see ourselves as Egyptians fighting for liberty here, but the VAST majority of the public is still afraid of even modest budget cuts and are nowhere near embracing Ron. The enthusiasm of our movement is unique to us, I think, in recent American political history and I believe keeping that enthusiasm in the public eye is a good thing... just tone down the sarcasm and wild accusations.

We have to be in this for the long haul... this movement will likely even have to outlast Ron to be successful. He has been harping on these issues for forty years and is just now making headway as the rest of us are waking up to the realities he is talking about. But while he is leading this movement, we should respect his wishes to conduct ourselves with at least some degree of dignity.

Didn't Cheney look ghastly? I don't imagine he has long to go.

Mini-Me
02-16-2011, 01:13 AM
Do you guys know what this reminds me of?
http://i368.photobucket.com/albums/oo130/UnrealMiniMe/endfwars_0.jpg

I understand that behavior that is perceived as "classless" is poor strategy, because it's a shocking turn-off to a lot of people. "You catch more flies with honey than vinegar," and all that. It's probably a good idea to behave "respectfully," even in the face of people deserving of no respect.

However, that doesn't mean we have to like it, and it doesn't mean we should actually pass judgment on blunt, honest people who are fed up with the game and want to openly call a spade a spade. There is an enormous difference between real and perceived classlessness, and all the people on the board sitting on their high horses and calling the hecklers classless, boorish, etc. need to stop and reflect about the sheer obscenity of the monsters they are heckling.

Do you know why people elect the same charming, smug, pathological narcissists and psychopaths to office again, and again, and again? It is because our society - and practically the whole of human civilization - has been taught to value decorum, superficial niceties, and appearance over any and all of the things that actually matter. Almost any politician who speaks openly, who shows genuine human faults, becomes unelectable in the eyes of people smitten by charm and the image of perfection. Every once in a while a straight-shooter will overcome the enormous barriers set against him, and he'll become a folk hero...and that can't be allowed. Out of all the corrupt vampires in Washington, D.C., who was made an example of and sent to prison? Trafficant.

Mike Gravel? He's a washed-up weirdo. Dennis Kucinich? He's from another planet. Howard Dean? Just listen to him yell; he's psychotic! Rand Paul? He wants to kick all the black people out of restaurants. Ron Paul? He's a racist, isolationist kook. You might want him as a crazy uncle or silly old dinosaur of a grandpa, but not as a President! The above people all seem very "different" from typical politicians, and there's a reason for that. The one thing they share in common - which makes them basically "unsuitable" for politics - is that they are ordinary human beings with consciences, and they present themselves plainly as ordinary human beings. The system chews them up and spits them out because of it. The irony is that Ron Paul has impeccable manners...but that's still not enough, because he's too honest, and he's too human, and he doesn't craft sweet-sounding lies for you to swoon over. The ideal still works against him, and that's before even considering the way he is marginalized for association with his supporters (more on that later).

Do you know who's left? The only people "stately" enough to make it in politics - who comprise most of the people who seek power in the first place - are sociopathic narcissists who project a flawlessly "respectable," "professional" mirror-polished image with Oscar-worthy acting talents. They may be the most selfish, short-sighted, or even evil people alive, but they sure know how to say the right thing, shake hands, and kiss babies.

The whole point of cultural ideals like "class" and "respectability" is to drown out forthright honesty and substance in favor of shallow style. For centuries these ideals have promoted class stratification, and in the realm of politics they have long served to promote and mask evil. Manners dictate that you cannot loudly object to injustice or obscenity...and they serve their purpose brilliantly, because most people who recognize the truth are too outraged to adhere to decorum. As such, they become marginalized when they plainly speak the truth in the only public venue they can, and the marginalization extends to anyone associated with them.

Our conditioned obsession with image, decorum, and "class" has been the bane of honest, issues-focused politics and debate in our country. It is why millions of people trust Fox News (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?279757-Busted-Fox-News-CPAC-Ron-Paul-Video-Deception) over smaller, independent publications. It is a large part of the reason why the worst among us receive awards and honors instead of being held accountable for their inexcusable crimes. So, next time you want to criticize people for being boorish, crude, classless, and unrespectable children, you might be right from a strategic point of view...but if you're actually rendering judgment for its own sake, perhaps you should reevaluate the importance and effect (and perhaps engineered purpose) of all those hopelessly shallow and gravely dangerous ideals.

I might agree with the strategy of "class" and "respectability," because it would be much harder to permanently strip the veneer of virtue from these concepts...but the day society shatters these idols and gains a true, proper understanding of virtue vs. obscenity will be one of the greatest days in the history of mankind.

Note: To avoid being taken out of context, I'm not saying it's okay to run around covered in blood and feces and urinate all over the stage. That's just gross. I'm not defending people who act like Yahoos from the Country of the Houyhnhnms. It's also not okay to treat honest, genuine opponents with complete disrespect; decent people deserve consideration even when we disagree with them. Nevertheless, there is nothing inherently wrong with openly shouting the truth about a shameful criminal who helped engineer death and war for profit. However rash and counterproductive it might be to heckle and jeer at him, it holds its own virtue. He deserves it, and much more.

speciallyblend
02-16-2011, 02:59 AM
"I know what I’m about to say is not going to be popular, and frankly, I don’t care. The shouting at Cheney and Rumsfeld was inappropriate and childish. I’m not a fan of either of them, so I’m not debating the substance of what was said. However, it was an exhibition of a complete lack of class."

Blah, Blah, and Blah.

now lets apply that bar you hold to the gop establishment! I bet you can say alot more about that and the gop failures;) let us take that bar and hold the gop accountable!! not an individual supporter!! where are your complaints about the many romney supporters that seemed to chime in and boo whenever they could. the point being is let us hold this same bar to the corrupt gop that bombs and kills people instead of booing! I kinda think the gop establishment surpasses the booing bar to a far greater tragic level of killing and bombing and attacking americans and jailing them!! let us just skip free speech and booing and bring some tar and feathers! i perfer that method over the bs!!

USA USA USA USA USA ,code for screw the us constitution and liberty and freedoms. so it wasn't just rp supporters!!

speciallyblend
02-16-2011, 03:15 AM
I was at CPAC and I was a little dismayed at the treatment of Orrin Hatch by a few of our people during a panel discussion he was on. I'm no Orrin Hatch fan but the sarcasm is not helpful to our cause and makes us look like a bunch of college brats. We might see ourselves as Egyptians fighting for liberty here, but the VAST majority of the public is still afraid of even modest budget cuts and are nowhere near embracing Ron. The enthusiasm of our movement is unique to us, I think, in recent American political history and I believe keeping that enthusiasm in the public eye is a good thing... just tone down the sarcasm and wild accusations.

We have to be in this for the long haul... this movement will likely even have to outlast Ron to be successful. He has been harping on these issues for forty years and is just now making headway as the rest of us are waking up to the realities he is talking about. But while he is leading this movement, we should respect his wishes to conduct ourselves with at least some degree of dignity.

Didn't Cheney look ghastly? I don't imagine he has long to go.

i was there to , but all i saw was a supporter saying he voted for the bailout and then the gop establishment on stage getting mad about the truth! whoopie!! they asked for open questions and orrin was called out on the truth(what i saw is the cpac talking head trying to create drama over the truth),ooo the horror, we must stop the horror of truth! dismayed? orrin hatch and cpac walked right into the buzz saw with an open mic! orrin hatch should live or die on his vote and at cpac he died;)

virgil47
02-16-2011, 12:10 PM
Yes, let's be divisive, that will solve the problem.

Too late the hecklers have beat us to the punch!

virgil47
02-16-2011, 12:16 PM
The only morons I see are the knaves who think they can win over the Red State crowd by being "well mannered". As if this stripe had any interest in being "well mannered" themselves, with their intellectually dishonesty, hypocrisy, use of gross fallacies and jingoist rhetoric to explain why they don't even want to think about the ideas Ron presents, vitriolic ad hominem neocons. Being "polite" to these people just means not expressing opinions they disagree with in a public political event. But you can bet your ass Ron Paul would have received a lot more vocal booing if the neocons made up the majority of the crowd at CPAC. Being "rude" then would have of course been okay in their eyes.

Its not just a "oh they did it first, or they would have" argument, fact is these people only resort to bashing the liberty crowd at CPAC because they don't want to consider Ron Paul or give him a fair hearing. I mean that isn't even a ad hominem attack against Ron, its far worse, its attacking Paul's supporters based on ridiculous standards (don't express yourself at a political event or else I might get offended or pissed off because I disagree with you, though I can't and won't debate you), and then bashing Ron Paul through a mystical leap of guilt-by-association. This is pure, dishonest, cowardly, idiotic bullshit... No one travels along that sort of anti-logic unless they didn't want to give Ron a fair hearing in the first place. And these are the people whose 'sensibilities' you are siding with by bashing the pro-liberty crowd at CPAC.

-neg rep, not just because I disagree with you, but it seems ridiculous that you would feel so ashamed of and bitter towards the vocal liberty crowd at CPAC.

It would appear that you do not recognize bait when you see it. The progressives are simply baiting us so we will do something stupid and rude that can be blown out of proportion in the msm. If we refuse to take the bait and they lie we have the oportunity to uncover and expose those lies but if we take the bait we cannot win.

Vessol
02-16-2011, 01:24 PM
It would appear that you do not recognize bait when you see it. The progressives are simply baiting us so we will do something stupid and rude that can be blown out of proportion in the msm. If we refuse to take the bait and they lie we have the oportunity to uncover and expose those lies but if we take the bait we cannot win.

We've refused the bait many times before and have uncovered and exposed the lies, yet the MSM and the general public still don't give a shit.

Captain Shays
02-16-2011, 03:45 PM
I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. I honestly don't know what tactics will work. But this much I DO know: the media will NEVER help. The media will ALWAYS stand in the way. And if they need to, they will FABRICATE the news to pursue their agenda. In fact, if this kind of tactic turns out to be ineffective and Ron Paul supporters stop doing it, the other side will START doing it under a false flag and the media will report it.

We didn't lose in 2008 because Ron Paul supporters misbehaved. We lost because the election is rigged. Not by phony vote counting but by sophisticated public manipulation techniques. I never talked to a single voter who said they didn't vote for Ron Paul because his followers were rude. They either didn't know anything about him (ignored by the media) thought he was a "kook" but not for any specific reason (media manipulation) thought he couldn't win (media marginalization) or disagreed with him on some hot button issue about which he had usually been misrepresented. It had nothing whatsoever to do with grass roots tactics and everything to do with the giant political/media/industrial machine that controls the election.

I get the feeling that some of you think this is going to be a fair fight on a level playing field. It won't. The more success we have the dirtier the tactics will get. Ultimately, there is NOTHING the forces of tyranny will not do to keep power. If we try to play their game on their field we WILL get stomped every time.

So what do we do? I wish I knew. But I am not so sure that breaking out of the mold and NOT playing by the rules set up by the power brokers is a bad idea.

Damn! That was a GREAT post! Very well stated Dude and my thoughts exactly. So let's get our heads together and come up with something completely out of the box.
I for one am making plans to reach out to Christians who usually vote for Republicans and have been played and hoodwinked in the process. I have a way with them because I know my history, and I know my bible and I know the political system and the tactics they incorporate. Not all but enough to enlighten a LOT of critical people.

One tactic that I use which is VERY effective relative to foreign policy and debt is to point out that our foreign policy was invented by Democrats. That they are the police the world party and their foreign policy is making us hated and costing us too much money and we're a lot less safe for it.
I point out that Democrats were the party in power during the Indian War and Jackson sent the Cherokee on their trail of tears. The 1st & 2nd Mexican Wars, Half the Civil War and they were on the side that wanted to keep slavery. The Spanish-American War, WWI, WWII, which FDR provoked the Japanese into attacking us by cutting off their steel and oil when they were in a bloody war against China, and then Truman nuked civilian populations in two different cities. Korea the first time we entered a foreign war against a country that never attacked us or threatened us and without a declaration of war as per Article I section 8 clause 11 of our Constitution and he said the United Nations Treaty gave him the authority. Vietnam where 57,000 American sons died based on the certified lie of the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. Bosnia, Somalia, Serbia, Kosovo. While Clinton had 30,000 covert troops in Columbia for 6 yrs and sprayed Fusarin on the food of the natives in the rain forest he kept us in Iraq for 8 yrs and bombed the living crap out of them 400 times and killed 1,000 Iraqi's and another 500,000 with the sanctions which Mad Madyln Albright said "it was worth it". They are the party that started the League of Nations and United Nations.

The Democrats also started EVERY federal govt program that has us steeped in over $100 TRILLION in Debt when you combine the $14 Trillion we owe to the corporation THEY gave control of our money supply to with the unfunded liabilities of THEIR entitlement programs from Socialist Security, Socialist Medicare, Socialist Medicaid, Socialist Dept of Agriculture which has our food supply falling into the hands of a few large conglomerates, the Dept of Education where we out spend ALL other countries yet our kids rank #32, Housing, food Stamps and Welfare. Over $100 TRILLION.

Find me ONE republican who would support THAT and I'll find you a neocon. ALL others will support Ron Paul

TomThePatriot
02-17-2011, 02:30 AM
Great, let's just sit quiet, be civilized, and let the tyrants walk all over us! The statements made to cheney were not far from the truth, if not the truth...

Anti Federalist
02-19-2011, 12:25 PM
I was going to edit your reply, and only display the best parts, but they're all "best parts".

Couldn't agree more.


Do you guys know what this reminds me of?
http://i368.photobucket.com/albums/oo130/UnrealMiniMe/endfwars_0.jpg

I understand that behavior that is perceived as "classless" is poor strategy, because it's a shocking turn-off to a lot of people. "You catch more flies with honey than vinegar," and all that. It's probably a good idea to behave "respectfully," even in the face of people deserving of no respect.

However, that doesn't mean we have to like it, and it doesn't mean we should actually pass judgment on blunt, honest people who are fed up with the game and want to openly call a spade a spade. There is an enormous difference between real and perceived classlessness, and all the people on the board sitting on their high horses and calling the hecklers classless, boorish, etc. need to stop and reflect about the sheer obscenity of the monsters they are heckling.

Do you know why people elect the same charming, smug, pathological narcissists and psychopaths to office again, and again, and again? It is because our society - and practically the whole of human civilization - has been taught to value decorum, superficial niceties, and appearance over any and all of the things that actually matter. Almost any politician who speaks openly, who shows genuine human faults, becomes unelectable in the eyes of people smitten by charm and the image of perfection. Every once in a while a straight-shooter will overcome the enormous barriers set against him, and he'll become a folk hero...and that can't be allowed. Out of all the corrupt vampires in Washington, D.C., who was made an example of and sent to prison? Trafficant.

Mike Gravel? He's a washed-up weirdo. Dennis Kucinich? He's from another planet. Howard Dean? Just listen to him yell; he's psychotic! Rand Paul? He wants to kick all the black people out of restaurants. Ron Paul? He's a racist, isolationist kook. You might want him as a crazy uncle or silly old dinosaur of a grandpa, but not as a President! The above people all seem very "different" from typical politicians, and there's a reason for that. The one thing they share in common - which makes them basically "unsuitable" for politics - is that they are ordinary human beings with consciences, and they present themselves plainly as ordinary human beings. The system chews them up and spits them out because of it. The irony is that Ron Paul has impeccable manners...but that's still not enough, because he's too honest, and he's too human, and he doesn't craft sweet-sounding lies for you to swoon over. The ideal still works against him, and that's before even considering the way he is marginalized for association with his supporters (more on that later).

Do you know who's left? The only people "stately" enough to make it in politics - who comprise most of the people who seek power in the first place - are sociopathic narcissists who project a flawlessly "respectable," "professional" mirror-polished image with Oscar-worthy acting talents. They may be the most selfish, short-sighted, or even evil people alive, but they sure know how to say the right thing, shake hands, and kiss babies.

The whole point of cultural ideals like "class" and "respectability" is to drown out forthright honesty and substance in favor of shallow style. For centuries these ideals have promoted class stratification, and in the realm of politics they have long served to promote and mask evil. Manners dictate that you cannot loudly object to injustice or obscenity...and they serve their purpose brilliantly, because most people who recognize the truth are too outraged to adhere to decorum. As such, they become marginalized when they plainly speak the truth in the only public venue they can, and the marginalization extends to anyone associated with them.

Our conditioned obsession with image, decorum, and "class" has been the bane of honest, issues-focused politics and debate in our country. It is why millions of people trust Fox News (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?279757-Busted-Fox-News-CPAC-Ron-Paul-Video-Deception) over smaller, independent publications. It is a large part of the reason why the worst among us receive awards and honors instead of being held accountable for their inexcusable crimes. So, next time you want to criticize people for being boorish, crude, classless, and unrespectable children, you might be right from a strategic point of view...but if you're actually rendering judgment for its own sake, perhaps you should reevaluate the importance and effect (and perhaps engineered purpose) of all those hopelessly shallow and gravely dangerous ideals.

I might agree with the strategy of "class" and "respectability," because it would be much harder to permanently strip the veneer of virtue from these concepts...but the day society shatters these idols and gains a true, proper understanding of virtue vs. obscenity will be one of the greatest days in the history of mankind.

Note: To avoid being taken out of context, I'm not saying it's okay to run around covered in blood and feces and urinate all over the stage. That's just gross. I'm not defending people who act like Yahoos from the Country of the Houyhnhnms. It's also not okay to treat honest, genuine opponents with complete disrespect; decent people deserve consideration even when we disagree with them. Nevertheless, there is nothing inherently wrong with openly shouting the truth about a shameful criminal who helped engineer death and war for profit. However rash and counterproductive it might be to heckle and jeer at him, it holds its own virtue. He deserves it, and much more.