GET IN HERE. When you were a Liberal / Neocon / Apathetic non-voter...

[Matthew Zak]

When you were a Liberal / Neocon / Apathetic non-voter... did Ron Paul wake you up and inspire you by appealing to the mainstream, or by telling you the truth? Think about this for a second, and then realize that tonight, more people than EVER -- that's right -- more people than ever before listened to Ron Paul speak the truth.

Obviously we want everyone to wake up and support Ron Paul, but that isn't realistic. Some people aren't ready to receive that message yet, and the responsibility falls on us to open their minds. We know this is a battle worth fighting, and we know it's a battle that never ends. Even if Ron Paul wins Iowa and New Hampshire that changes absolutely nothing. Even if Ron Paul gets 8 years in the oval office, that changes nothing.

Liberty dies as soon as we think it's secure.

Ron Paul is on stage taking the hits and swimming up stream in order to add a few more people to the R[evol]ution. We need those people a lot more than we need Ron Paul in office. How effective could Ron Paul be if the hearts and minds of Americans were still stuck in a left-versus-right paradigm, wanting war with Iran, and willing to sacrifice liberties for security while tossing money out the window?

It is not easy. If you expected it to be, you expected what never was and never will be.

Buck up. Get back to work.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8BDc5b3vTg

[mstrmac1]

yep

[1stAmendguy]

You've given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later

[newbitech]

Liberty dies as soon as we think it's secure.

+rep

[bunklocoempire]

Former 'lesser of two evils-apathetic-blissfully ignorant' here.

I'm here for the Truth.

It's why we put ourselves through this joy and will continue to do so until our last dying breath. :)

Back to work.

[MrAustin]

Excellent post OP!

When I first heard Paul speak in a debate, I though he was nuts. Now I think he is right. Paul didn't change, I did.

[XorGate]

I used to think that Paul was the craziest person I had ever heard. I swore up and down that Paul was the only candidate that I would never vote for, but once I became so upset with the rest of the field that I took a step back to actually research the candidates, I found that I really believed in what the good Doctor had been saying the entire time.

The thing I like most about Ron is that he never sacrifices his personal integrity for political gain. I know that people may complain about his delivery tonight, but the thing that most voters will inevitably take away is not the specifics, but that Paul stuck to his guns at a time when it would have been much more politically expedient to pander.

[BuddyRey]

OP, you're absolutely right! When I was a raging democratic socialist, Ron's foreign policy views and passion for civil liberties were what hooked me. But he didn't pander to my leftist sacred cows by telling me that socialism and big government would solve everything. Instead, he taught me the error of my ways by defending a consistent freedom message and encouraging me to read Hayek and Rothbard. I would assume that he can accomplish the exact same conversion of neoconservatives by first hooking them with his Constitutionalism and sound economic philosophy, then enlighten them with Robert Pape, Michael Scheuer, etc.

[McChronagle]

THANK YOU! so many people here want paul to pander just like the other candidates to avoid any flack from the establishment war hawks. The only bombs ron drops are TRUTH bombs and if you havent learned this by now i dont know what your waiting for. TRUTH bombs have gotten us this far. they will continue to lead us in the future.

[ronpaulfollower999]

Excellent point. Let's hope mainstream republicans are ready for the truth.

[Matthew Zak]

Help America see the truth by donating everything you got to this money bomb starting at mid night. Tell everyone you know who values freedom to donate to Ron Paul at midnight. Hit the phones tomorrow. Canvas. Whatever you were doing to support Ron Paul before, do twice as much of it tomorrow.

There is no reason to be discouraged. We don't have the luxury of hope. We have the cold hard reality of work ahead of us. It's a burden we didn't ask for. But it's a burden we were born with along with our inalienable rights. We recognize those rights, and we remember because of our own history what it will take to keep those rights.

Are you going to let some smug pundits convince you that those rights are not yours? Are you going to let Frank Luntz and his cherry-picked statist war-machine group convince you that you can't make a difference? Are you going to let all the blood sweat and tears that were shed in the American Revolution be in vain? Are you going to let the general ignorance of the public prevent you from doubling your effort to wake them up?

I didn't think so.

The Hannitys, Limbaughs, Pelosis, Luntzs, O'Reillys, Obamas, and Bushs' of the world don't have the resolve that you and I do. They don't feel the fire of liberty in their hearts as we do. They feel the superficial reward of instant gratification that temporarily fills a gaping hole in their cold, greed-hardened souls.

When push comes to shove they can not stand up against a fierce, determined army of true patriots.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzItWg7VTf4

[EBounding]

You're right OP. Good post!


OP, you're absolutely right! When I was a raging democratic socialist, Ron's foreign policy views and passion for civil liberties were what hooked me.

Conversely, it was Ron Paul's domestic small government policies that hooked me as a "neocon". I still thought the wars kept us safe, until I actually listened closely to him.

[BSWPaulsen]

I posted this in another thread, but it echoes the thread-starter.

**********

I feel like the average uninformed voter that operates on knee-jerk reactions will view that exchange with Bachmann as unfavorable to Ron Paul. The pundits are qualifying Gingrich as some kind of special "idea guy", when as many of us know that Paul's entire platform is interconnected. Debate platforms simply do not favor him as much, and it's an uphill battle - all of us Paul supporters know that it's a matter of comprehension and not aesthetics. Gingrich pulls it off because he gets away with saying everything aurally pleasing, but completely unworkable in reality due to prevailing economic conditions.

We get questions about Iran during debates, but they're myopic enough that connecting them back to the economy doesn't work for people that think of our foreign policy as mutually exclusive. Uninformed voters are inclined to treat these two problems as separate, and to such an end they get this desire to appear strong (hawkish positions), while masquerading as a conservative (small government = more self relience = requiring more responsibility = allusion to images of strength). To that end it's unfortunate that the campaign was unable to work in the emotional appeals necessary to pull sway in debates - ie: appealing specifically to the idea that we're willing to sacrifice our own, and more accurately the visceral horrors of war. We get so many chickenhawks in government because they do not have any clue at all what horrors lie in war - they've never come close to experiencing it, preferring to treat it as an intellectual exercise, ignoring the actual human elements that live and die at their discretion.

Much of the neoconservative movement thoroughly rests on abject cognitive dissonance. These people cannot be won over without an initiative from the individual to put their beliefs through an acid test, and as everyone knows it is very difficult to consider the possibility that what you believed was wrong. What we need to hope comes out of every debate is that Ron Paul says something that makes those people willing to challenge themselves. That's all we can ask - the rest is up to us.

Dr. Paul didn't say anything his supporters aren't already aware of. You know this, I know this, we all know this. We know what we stand for, and we can't hinge on every small thing that happens that may discourage people that may be uncomfortable with his positions for whatever reason.

Do what you can, disseminate information that will inform people. Believe in the ideas he puts forth, and that they will ultimately win out over the ideas put forth by others. More than anything invest your time and resources into spreading that information.

Let it not be said that we did nothing.

[ronpaulfollower999]

Actually, I was pretty hard on Ron tonight.

We are clearly at the fight you stage. This is it. This is the war. They have their lies, we have our wallets. For liber-tea!

[Matthew Zak]

I posted this in another thread, but it echoes the thread-starter.

**********

I feel like the average uninformed voter that operates on knee-jerk reactions will view that exchange with Bachmann as unfavorable to Ron Paul. The pundits are qualifying Gingrich as some kind of special "idea guy", when as many of us know that Paul's entire platform is interconnected. Debate platforms simply do not favor him as much, and it's an uphill battle - all of us Paul supporters know that it's a matter of comprehension and not aesthetics. Gingrich pulls it off because he gets away with saying everything aurally pleasing, but completely unworkable in reality due to prevailing economic conditions.

We get questions about Iran during debates, but they're myopic enough that connecting them back to the economy doesn't work for people that think of our foreign policy as mutually exclusive. Uninformed voters are inclined to treat these two problems as separate, and to such an end they get this desire to appear strong (hawkish positions), while masquerading as a conservative (small government = more self relience = requiring more responsibility = allusion to images of strength). To that end it's unfortunate that the campaign was unable to work in the emotional appeals necessary to pull sway in debates - ie: appealing specifically to the idea that we're willing to sacrifice our own, and more accurately the visceral horrors of war. We get so many chickenhawks in government because they do not have any clue at all what horrors lie in war - they've never come close to experiencing it, preferring to treat it as an intellectual exercise, ignoring the actual human elements that live and die at their discretion.

Much of the neoconservative movement thoroughly rests on abject cognitive dissonance. These people cannot be won over without an initiative from the individual to put their beliefs through an acid test, and as everyone knows it is very difficult to consider the possibility that what you believed was wrong. What we need to hope comes out of every debate is that Ron Paul says something that makes those people willing to challenge themselves. That's all we can ask - the rest is up to us.

Dr. Paul didn't say anything his supporters aren't already aware of. You know this, I know this, we all know this. We know what we stand for, and we can't hinge on every small thing that happens that may discourage people that may be uncomfortable with his positions for whatever reason.

Do what you can, disseminate information that will inform people. Believe in the ideas he puts forth, and that they will ultimately win out over the ideas put forth by others. More than anything invest your time and resources into spreading that information.

Let it not be said that we did nothing.

You're like the smart version of me! :)

[Matthew Zak]

Actually, I was pretty hard on Ron tonight.

We are clearly at the fight you stage. This is it. This is the war. They have their lies, we have our wallets. For liber-tea!

You are right, this is war. It's a war we will always have to fight. Welcome it. It's worth it.