The Libertarian Party has now offered to become a sponsor of Paul Festival. [Archive]

TheGrinch

08-06-2012, 01:54 PM

Ugh. With their recent flag-waving support for gay marriage, I'd rather they just stay out of this.
I'd rather gay marriage not be a government issue, so we have no reason to be at odds with people who share 80-90% of our views.

The government's job is to enforce contracts, and since it seems that a large sticknig point is the word "marriage", I think they need to just enforce all volluntary unions as "civil union" contracts, and then leave it up to churches to recognize what they feel a marriage is.

We have seperation of church and state for a reason, and Judge Napalitano also argued that there is supreme court precedence from an interracial marriage case that said that states cannot deny one's right to marry whoever they choose on the basis of discrimination. If the Supreme Court were doing their job now, then I wouldn't have to care what Cathy or the Libertarian Party's stance is on this demogoguery-laden issue.

Further, how can you be pro-freedom and yet be against someone else to form a union with whomever they choose and have equal rights to tax and other benefits, rights of which don't affect you personally?

aclove

08-06-2012, 02:51 PM

I...what?

Because Palin hasn't been invited to speak either, and by inviting her, it will send the message that the Liberty Movement is welcoming libertarians and Tea Party types, whearas the RNC isn't.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 02:58 PM

The Libertarian Party has now offered to become a sponsor of Paul Festival.

In light of the RNC's snub of Dr. Paul... We WELCOME THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY TO PAUL FESTIVAL WITH OPEN ARMS!

http://www.facebook.com/PaulFestival

then maybe they should change the name.

At this point it doesn't seem like it is really about Ron if an entirely different party is sponsoring it.

Not that I blame the organizers who need funding, but it seems like it has kinda been coopted from my point of view.

TCE

08-06-2012, 03:04 PM

Ugh. With their recent flag-waving support for gay marriage, I'd rather they just stay out of this.

That's only the tip of the iceberg. I am completely with you on this. We should stay far away from the current Libertarian Party that seems to promote Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root as its saviors. I remember the days of Mary Ruwart and Michael Badnarik, but those days are gone now. Getting involved with the LP at this point is bad business.

BSU kid

08-06-2012, 03:05 PM

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 03:06 PM

The problem I have with that is that Ron Paul has made it clear that he is 100% Republican.

Plus how can the libertarian party sponsor what is essentially a large rally for Ron Paul, who is technically still a presidential candidate when they have Gary Johnson.

this

That's only the tip of the iceberg. I am completely with you on this. We should stay far away from the current Libertarian Party that seems to promote Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root as its saviors. I remember the days of Mary Ruwart and Michael Badnarik, but those days are gone now. Getting involved with the LP at this point is bad business.

and I must admit, I feel kinda like this ^^ as well.

I gives a visual that Ron Paul Republicans are big L libertarians, and I can see why the L party would want that but not why we would.

TCE

08-06-2012, 03:07 PM

TCE

08-06-2012, 03:12 PM

and I must admit, I feel kinda like this ^^ as well.

I gives a visual that Ron Paul Republicans are big L libertarians, and I can see why the L party would want that but not why we would.

Ron Paul did far better in a Republican Primary than any Libertarian Party Presidential candidate has ever done in a General Election. The Libertarian Party is smart by attempting to infiltrate the bigger group and take a piece of the pie for themselves.

who is "we"?

Replace "we" with "I."

BSU kid

08-06-2012, 03:12 PM

Like I'm not going to lie, I might vote for Gary Johnson.

BUT

Paul Fest is about Ron Paul, and it seems the libertarian party is trying to hijack it. I'm not cool with that.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 03:40 PM

Like I'm not going to lie, I might vote for Gary Johnson.

BUT

Paul Fest is about Ron Paul, and it seems the libertarian party is trying to hijack it. I'm not cool with that.

^^^^^ding, ding, ding....

(well, not the might vote for GJ part. Pretty unlikely, here.)

CaptainAmerica

08-06-2012, 03:51 PM

LP co-op

Indy Vidual

08-06-2012, 03:58 PM

Paying to sponsor does not equal hijack.

Indy Vidual

08-06-2012, 03:59 PM

Don't blame the LP (see below)

...Keep the focus on Ron, keep it off the LP.

Then why didn't Ron accept his invite to speak at Paul Fest?

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 04:00 PM

Don't blame the LP (see below)

Then why didn't Ron accept his invite to speak at Paul Fest?

they had invited Gary for one thing, but also I think there were security concerns.

Wren

08-06-2012, 04:03 PM

Paulfest is gonna be a Johnson fest. I also mean that literally, with the libertarian support of gay marriage. Marriage, gay or straight, is a non issue.

Indy Vidual

08-06-2012, 04:05 PM

Thanks for the answer.

JellyRev

08-06-2012, 04:15 PM

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 04:33 PM

Gosh darn Free market aligning sponsors and event coordinators for mutual beneficial exchanges, How dare they!!! :p .

Seriously Paulfest needed sponsors and it got some, would you rather have an underfunded Paulfest or no Paulfest?????

I'd rather have the L party not buy a Ron Paul crowd access by partially funding it as sponsor when people had already determined to come to celebrate Ron, but I think the organizers have to make do with what they get. I would change the name though at this point. the Libertarian party running Johnson while Ron is standing in the next few days to be nominated by the GOP, and the L party sponsoring Paulfest just seems off.

Again, this is not aimed at the organizers who need money, but just saying the L party shouldn't be able to buy the appearance of sponsorship by Ron Paul supporters. I'm betting most of the RON PAUL crowd will not be there for them, and I am sorry if there is any visual suggesting otherwise. Ron will be trying to get votes of GOP at the RNC within days after that.

I understand if the organizers need money though.

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 04:37 PM

Paying to sponsor does not equal hijack.

this.
i love how we eat our own.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 04:40 PM

this.
i love how we eat our own.

they may be 'our own' to those who like them, but to those who see them as trying to coopt Ron's supporters (and who don't like them) it looks different. But I am combining it with many other things they have done including all the current articles by GJ supporters stating that he essentially IS Ron Paul, and the articles during the campaign by GJ's PAC saying GJ was 'Ron Paul but a whole lot better', etc.

It is the organizer's event though.

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 04:45 PM

they may be 'our own' to those who like them, but to those who see them as trying to coopt Ron's supporters (and who don't like them) it looks different. But I am combining it with many other things they have done including all the current articles by GJ supporters stating that he essentially IS Ron Paul, and the articles during the campaign by GJ's PAC saying GJ was 'Ron Paul but a whole lot better', etc.

It is the organizer's event though.

FYI, 7 of the 9 major meet-ups that ran Ron's campaign in louisiana in 2008 were led by members of the LP.
those same guys are still leading the charge.
They are OUR OWN.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 04:50 PM

FYI, 7 of the 9 major meet-ups that ran Ron's campaign in louisiana in 2008 were led by members of the LP.
those same guys are still leading the charge.
They are OUR OWN.

there are overlaps. I'm not part of that 'our' but I can see you are. I'm cool with that. It is just not all one and the same thing.

ronpaulhawaii

08-06-2012, 04:51 PM

I think the perception thing went into play once GJ was an announced speaker. I don't think the LP being added as a sponsor amplifies it that much.

While I see valid concerns, I see this as a "blimp has flown" situation and'll do my best to make it as effective as possible.

I'm glad there is the Fest and the Rally. Our grassroots is a very big/wide tent and having to narrow it to fit an actual campaign event would have had it's share of problems. In that sense there is merit in welcoming most all who want to attend/support the greater r3VOLution. I'm not a big fan of the LP, but am certainly not an enemy and know that they are allies (for the most part). These things cost money and allies are appreciated...

Onward

LibertyEagle

08-06-2012, 04:52 PM

Because Palin hasn't been invited to speak either, and by inviting her, it will send the message that the Liberty Movement is welcoming libertarians and Tea Party types, whearas the RNC isn't.

Yes. It would be an incredibly smart move and a huge win if she accepted.

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 04:53 PM

there are overlaps. I'm not part of that 'our' but I can see you are. I'm cool with that. It is just not all one and the same thing.

without these guys we would be no where.
We were holding the banner of freedom when most of the people of this forum weren't even thinking about it.
we were fighting these same battles when there were so few of us nationally that you could literally know everyone.
think how it looks from my perspective when johnny-come-latelys are dissing the very people who were carrying the torch when it really was uncool to be libertarian.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 04:56 PM

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 05:00 PM

I just couldnt care less about cool and do care about some of the stuff some GJ followers did which I considered anti Ron. I'm with someone above who likes Ruwart and some others but just am not at all interested in the Barr/Root nor, now, GJ types. It seems to be falling back from principles imho.

But I might feel differently about a different candidate. I don't have anything against the party, just against being coopted. I feel the same way about the RLC.

listen to 30 years of people saying you are irrellevant because you get no votes in the presidential. then a certain portion of the national delegation will fall for a "name" to get more cred.
Badnarik and Ruwart are more typical of your average member. Barr and Root are not representative. It would be like saying you are a progressive like romney because you are a republican.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 05:02 PM

listen to 30 years of people saying you are irrellevant because you get no votes in the presidential. then a certain portion of the national delegation will fall for a "name" to get more cred.
Badnarik and Ruwart are more typical of your average member. Barr and Root are not representative. It would be like saying you are a progressive like romney because you are a republican.

right but it is the PARTY sponsoring, not some guy off the street who likes Ruwart.

that GJ is their standard bearer doesn't draw me towards them, and Ron is in the GOP. I'm not belittling individual members of the party, but the establishment of the GOP isn't mine, either. I don't consider the establishment LP a step up. But I'm not fighting it, I agree with RPH it seems to be a 'blimp has flown' matter, but I do wonder if we do Ron a service keeping his name on an LP event immediately before asking GOP delegates to vote for him at RNC.

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 05:03 PM

right but it is the PARTY sponsoring, not some guy off the street who likes Ruwart.

that GJ is their standard bearer doesn't draw me towards them, and Ron is in the GOP. I'm not belittling individual members of the party, but the establishment of the GOP isn't mine, either.

Gary Johnson is another "name". he is not a life-long member of the LP.
Ron Paul is a lifetime member of the LP.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 05:05 PM

Gary Johnson is another "name". he is not a life-long member of the LP.
Ron Paul is a lifetime member of the LP.

LOL!

Ok. I don't like the LP leadership 2008 on, I think Ruwart is terrific. I'll leave it at that.

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 05:07 PM

LOL!

Ok. I don't like the LP leadership 2008 on, I think Ruwart is terrific. I'll leave it at that.

Barr,Root,Johnson are not LP party leaders either.
they are powerless figure heads used solely to try and get more people in the mainstream to vote Libertarian in november.
Bandarik and company weren't pulling in the votes.

JellyRev

08-06-2012, 05:07 PM

I'd rather have the L party not buy a Ron Paul crowd access by partially funding it as sponsor when people had already determined to come to celebrate Ron, but I think the organizers have to make do with what they get. I would change the name though at this point. the Libertarian party running Johnson while Ron is standing in the next few days to be nominated by the GOP, and the L party sponsoring Paulfest just seems off.

Again, this is not aimed at the organizers who need money, but just saying the L party shouldn't be able to buy the appearance of sponsorship by Ron Paul supporters. I'm betting most of the RON PAUL crowd will not be there for them, and I am sorry if there is any visual suggesting otherwise. Ron will be trying to get votes of GOP at the RNC within days after that.

I understand if the organizers need money though.

I do not think having it is that big of a deal and I think the L party should be able to buy the appearance, The GOP could easily have. I am much more disgusted with McDonalds Sponsoring the Olympics, which is much more ironic lol.

Big L and Paul supporters do actually intermingle while Athletic perfection and Big Mac's do not.

Then remembering that Dr. Paul was its nominee at one time it could be said that Ron owes them one, It was a great training experience for him to have his later runs. I would would not say that though.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 05:09 PM

Barr,Root,Johnson are not LP party leaders either.
they are powerless figure heads used solely to try and get more people in the mainstream to vote Libertarian in november.
Bandarik and company weren't pulling in the votes.

Yeah, but someone in LP leadership CHOSE them. In fact I remember there was a split over Barr in 2008 and some of the LP leadership (the best ones, from my point of view) left.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 05:10 PM

I do not think having it is that big of a deal and I think the L party should be able to buy the appearance, The GOP could easily have. I am much more disgusted with McDonalds Sponsoring the Olympics, which is much more ironic lol.

Big L and Paul supporters do actually intermingle while Athletic perfection and Big Mac's do not.

Then remembering that Dr. Paul was its nominee at one time it could be said that Ron owes them one, It was a great training experience for him to have his later runs. I would would not say that though.

We aren't a corporatist event as the Olympics are, with the appearance of our endorsement for sale to the highest bidder. At least I would certainly hope we aren't.... I already said my thoughts. I don't need to repeat them.

Then remembering that Dr. Paul was its nominee at one time it could be said that Ron owes them one

Bullshit.

LibertyEagle

08-06-2012, 05:14 PM

Then remembering that Dr. Paul was its nominee at one time it could be said that Ron owes them one, It was a great training experience for him to have his later runs. I would would not say that though.

You should have left it and not said it.

Ron Paul put the Libertarian Party on the map. Not the other way around.

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 05:15 PM

Yeah, but someone in LP leadership CHOSE them. In fact I remember there was a split over Barr in 2008 and some of the LP leadership (the best ones, from my point of view) left.

there is always a split at the convention between the minarchist/anarchist and the GOP-lite crowd.
the minarchist/anarchist crowd dominated the selection every election up to Barrs nomination.
I was apart of those discussion. the complaints were about election outcomes. it was thought that putting purist on the ballot was too big of a jump for those in the matrix and that a more gop-lite type candidate would be more appealing.
I'm glad Barr bombed. if gary hadn't come over, the minarchs probably would have ruled the convention again.

besides, who are you to complain about the LP nominee unless you went through the process of being a delegate and voting at the national convention? it didn't matter that much to you if you didn't go through the effort.

and the guys who left are the best ones, and the LP is suffering from it. i can speak for this state. all the leaders of the LP are now in the GOP fighting for ron and liberty.
people dissing the LP are not helping in the teamwork department.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 05:17 PM

there is always a split at the convention between the minarchist/anarchist and the GOP-lite crowd.
the minarchist/anarchist crowd dominated the selection every election up to Barrs nomination.
I was apart of those discussion. the complaints were about election outcomes. it was thought that putting purist on the ballot was too big of a jump for those in the matrix and that a more gop-lite type candidate would be more appealing.
I'm glad Barr bombed. if gary hadn't come over, the minarchs probably would have ruled the convention again.

besides, who are you to complain about the LP nominee unless you went through the process of being a delegate and voting at the national convention? it didn't matter that much to you if you didn't go through the effort.

and the guys who left are the best ones, and the LP is suffering from it. i can speak for this state. all the leaders of the LP are now in the GOP fighting for ron and liberty.
people dissing the LP is not helping in the teamwork department.

I was only just finding out about RON much less the LP. I just looked at Barr after the RNC. I was hoping for someone like Ron. Or Ruwart.

I'm not on a team that elects Barr and GJ any more than I am with the leadership that pushes Romney. YOU, I'm on a team with.

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 05:18 PM

I was only just finding out about RON much less the LP. I just looked at Barr after the RNC. I was hoping for someone like Ron. Or Ruwart.

well, the story of how things are began furthur back.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 05:20 PM

well, the story of how things are began furthur back.

I know, but that was then, this is now.

NOW the LP isn't doing itself any favors in its candidate selection etc

I'm not making judgments of the future, I'm only speaking about the LP leadership today.

MelissaCato

08-06-2012, 05:21 PM

They better behave themselves, is what I think of it. We all need to be on our best behavior. The Libertarians I know around here disregard all laws .. I distance myself from them when ever possible.

Like at the town halls - they sit on the police cruisers and do stuff even I would never do, they even walk around with beers in the municipal parking lot during a rally. When ever I do see them I take my Ron Paul signs back to the truck and use my default signs. lol

Just saying.

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 05:21 PM

and Ruwart had a problem with something that came out in one of her books that defended child porn. which is one of the things that did her in at the convention.

When discussing self choice in relation to child porn, she had this to say: “Children who willingly participate in sexual acts have the right to make that decision as well, even if it’s distasteful to us personally. Some children will make poor choices just as some adults do in smoking and drinking to excess. When we outlaw child pornography, the prices paid for child performers rise, increasing the incentives for parents to use children against their will.” -Ruwart

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 05:24 PM

and Ruwart had a problem with something that came out in one of her books that defended child porn. which is one of the things that did her in at the convention.

-Ruwart

Yeah, I know although I had been hoping it was less blatant. I disagree with it and share Ron's view that it does take a level of maturity to realistically make a FREE choice. however, it does show she was working from principles, something I simply don't see in their recent and current candidates for president. I wasn't saying ONLY Ruwart would do, but only principles would do, absolutely.

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 05:29 PM

Yeah, I know although I had been hoping it was less blatant. I disagree with it and share Ron's view that it does take a level of maturity to realistically make a FREE choice. however, it does show she was working from principles, something I simply don't see in their recent and current candidates for president. I wasn't saying ONLY Ruwart would do, but only principles would do, absolutely.

I just pointed it out because at the convention the race shaped up three ways- Ruwart, Barr, Root.
ruwart had about 45%, barr had about 45%, and root had about 10% on the first ballot. the child porn statement had a big factor in that outcome.
from there, root made a deal with barr and on the second ballot barr won the nomination.

kathy88

08-06-2012, 05:30 PM

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 05:34 PM

I was a libertarian from 1984 until Ron ran in 2008. I threw up in my mouth a little and switched to R. If the big Ls want to play with us at Paul Fest I'm totally for it, and frankly surprised at the opposition. Ron turned down the invite. Gary didn't. He's their nom. They want to throw some money at it. They support gay rights. WHO GIVES A SHIT. Just because the party doesn't understand it's own platform doesn't mean we shouldn't WELCOME anyone who wants to hang in the Liberty tent. (Literally and figuratively).

It is the fact that it is PAULFEST that gets me and I see it as a cooption play, plus the sponsorship immediately before the RNC which is sure to be highlighted to delegates at the RNC, is not good timing imho. If it had been liberty fest and not played up as a celebration of Ron, or had been somewhere other than in conjunction with the RNC I wouldn't have had the same issues.

But you weren't around here in the beginning of the campaign when Johnson supporters were on here trying to sell us on the idea that somehow Ron was being unfair to Gary by running again, that it was Gary's time to take RON's supporters and organization, and that Ron had various flaws, read newsletters. For example.

rockandrollsouls

08-06-2012, 05:40 PM

That's great and all, but The official campaign, and perhaps Ron, have an identity crisis right now.

On the one hand, they are protesting the GOP, and on the other, they are appeasing with Rands endorsement of Romney and the very light touch on the delegate situation. Am I the only one seeing this? Seems there is a split here and they can't figure out which way to go.... Protesting the GOP and appeasing it at the same time....what else would you expect with Benton.

The problem I have with that is that Ron Paul has made it clear that he is 100% Republican.

Plus how can the libertarian party sponsor what is essentially a large rally for Ron Paul, who is technically still a presidential candidate when they have Gary Johnson.

ClydeCoulter

08-06-2012, 05:44 PM

FYI, 7 of the 9 major meet-ups that ran Ron's campaign in louisiana in 2008 were led by members of the LP.
those same guys are still leading the charge.
They are OUR OWN.

Yea, a lot of that was here in IN too. And I think they will vote for Ron Paul if he's on the ballot in Nov.

MelissaWV

08-06-2012, 05:46 PM

So just change the name, please...

parocks

08-06-2012, 05:47 PM

it would be a great tactic at this point since shes not speaking at RNC

I'd take Palin over almost all of the GOP.

rockandrollsouls

08-06-2012, 05:48 PM

What? So Sailingaway defends Ruwart who, in some ridiculous way, defended child pornography, but she's on a witch-hunt to get GJ?

So, "absurd" principles from a kooky woman (Ruwart is a kooky woman) over GJ who, depending on how you interpret him, might be at odds with Ron on one or two issues? Just pointing out that doesn't make ANY sense to me. But then again, I am a republican...not an anarchist (and LP seems to walk a fine line between Libertarianism and anarchism.) Is it really at the point you're putting Ruwart above GJ....I think that's a bit wacky o_0

Ruwart was/is an anarcho-capitalist....ie, libertarians who support privatization of law enforcement, prisons, the justice system, etc etc. Not only is most of that unconstitutional, it blows my mind many here would bash GJ on privatization and praise Ruwart who wants to privatize the things that are CLEARLY designated as governmental functions by our Constitution. Come on now....the double standards here.

Let the LP throw money at Paul fest if they want. It doesn't mean that the speakers need to support pro-choice arguments or gay marriage or anything.

I just pointed it out because at the convention the race shaped up three ways- Ruwart, Barr, Root.
ruwart had about 45%, barr had about 45%, and root had about 10% on the first ballot. the child porn statement had a big factor in that outcome.
from there, root made a deal with barr and on the second ballot barr won the nomination.

kathy88

08-06-2012, 05:49 PM

It is the fact that it is PAULFEST that gets me and I see it as a cooption play, plus the sponsorship immediately before the RNC which is sure to be highlighted to delegates at the RNC, is not good timing imho. If it had been liberty fest and not played up as a celebration of Ron, or had been somewhere other than in conjunction with the RNC I wouldn't have had the same issues.

But you weren't around here in the beginning of the campaign when Johnson supporters were on here trying to sell us on the idea that somehow Ron was being unfair to Gary by running again, that it was Gary's time to take RON's supporters and organization, and that Ron had various flaws, read newsletters. For example.

You're right, I wasn't around the forums at the beginning of this campaign, so I missed all that Johnson crap, glad I did. To me, though numbers matter, and Paul supporters and Libs (Big L) agree on way more than they disagree on. It is Paulfest. Libertarians sponsoring won't change that. Is it ideal? No. Ron speaking would be ideal. But for whatever reason he's not. So it's evolving. But it is still to me a celebration of all his efforts. That's why I'm going. If I have to listen to Johnson, well, it's another life experience. I won't vote for him. If I hadn't switched to REP I'd be an independent, but that's just as frustrating (primaries, etc...) But the plan seemed to be to go Republican for Ron. So I did. But after all the dirty nasty shit that went on this campaign season I'm embarrassed to be a part of the Rs more than I was in 2008. I did what I had to do. The big Ls suck too, for all the reasons mentioned in prior posts. We're damned if we do, damned if we don't, but if all these Johnson supporters go to Tampa and get to hear Tom Woods and Peter Schiff and all the other fabulous speakers and authors they have planned, maybe our goals and ideas will plant some seeds. We may end up co-opting them. It could happen. In fact, I see that as more plausible then the RP republicans being co-opted by Johnson et al.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 05:49 PM

That's great and all, but The official campaign, and perhaps Ron, have an identity crisis right now.

On the one hand, they are protesting the GOP, and on the other, they are appeasing with Rands endorsement of Romney and the very light touch on the delegate situation. Am I the only one seeing this? Seems there is a split here and they can't figure out which way to go.... Protesting the GOP and appeasing it at the same time....what else would you expect with Benton.

the campaign has not endorsed Romney. Rand has. The campaign is NOT Rand, although I admit they seem confused about that at times.

kathy88

08-06-2012, 05:49 PM

So just change the name, please...

Right, with tickets, literature and advertising all bought and paid for and the event two weeks away. Not possible.

69360

08-06-2012, 05:50 PM

Not my choice, but at this point why turn people away, be it LP or Palin. Whatever.

MelissaWV

08-06-2012, 05:52 PM

Right, with tickets, literature and advertising all bought and paid for and the event two weeks away. Not possible.

Then stick with the original theme, I would hope, but beggars can't be choosers.

PierzStyx

08-06-2012, 05:52 PM

Pretty obvious why

Sure is. They want it to be Johnson Fest.

Miguel

08-06-2012, 05:53 PM

The way to go is help pass the Audit the FED bill in the U.S. Senate

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2

08-06-2012, 05:53 PM

That's only the tip of the iceberg. I am completely with you on this. We should stay far away from the current Libertarian Party that seems to promote Bob Barr

Dunno about Root, but Barr killed them for me. And I bet I put more hours into the LP back in the day than Barr ever has. I was always a little annoyed that LP press releases always read like jokes about shit that wasn't funny, but I always assumed that was just bad leadership. Nominating Barr, former CIA, obvious neocon, on the basis of name recognition - it killed their whole appeal to someone like me.

I'm not saying I could never support them in the future, but I do feel like they made a giant ass barrier for that.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 05:53 PM

What? So Sailingaway defends Ruwart who, in some ridiculous way, defended child pornography, but she's on a witch-hunt to get GJ?

So, "absurd" principles from a kooky woman (Ruwart is a kooky woman) over GJ who, depending on how you interpret him, might be at odds with Ron on one or two issues? Just pointing out that doesn't make ANY sense to me. But then again, I am a republican...not an anarchist (and LP seems to walk a fine line between Libertarianism and anarchism.) Is it really at the point you're putting Ruwart above GJ....I think that's a bit wacky o_0

Ruwart was/is an anarcho-capitalist....ie, libertarians who support privatization of law enforcement, prisons, the justice system, etc etc. Not only is most of that unconstitutional, it blows my mind many here would bash GJ on privatization and praise Ruwart who wants to privatize the things that are CLEARLY designated as governmental functions by our Constitution. Come on now....the double standards here.

Let the LP throw money at Paul fest if they want. It doesn't mean that the speakers need to support pro-choice arguments or gay marriage or anything.

gee whiz, where else have we heard that we should ignore the principled candidate because they are 'kooky'?

.....can't quite put my finger on it...

I am absolutely positive Ruwart was not going to run on a platform of legalizing child pornography what ever her philosophy books said.

Or actually, I can't even go that far because I didn't know her well enough, she was just the only one who interested me. And you know what else I really liked about her? She was absolutely to her bones EXCITED about liberty. You can see it even in her interview on For Liberty. I do not get that impression from GJ, even remotely.

Ive been GOP since I could vote, and now you are trying to call me kooky when I am STILL in the GOP and you are talking about voting LP, and you are using 'being GOP' as a standard of sanity.

Do you even think about what you are writing?

rockandrollsouls

08-06-2012, 05:57 PM

Not referring specifically to the Romney endorsement. Though they did attack every candidate but Romney, have sent emails asking us to play nice, etc etc. Long story short they say one thing (freedom, etc etc) and do another.

the campaign has not endorsed Romney. Rand has. The campaign is NOT Rand, although I admit they seem confused about that at times.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 06:00 PM

Not referring specifically to the Romney endorsement. Though they did attack every candidate but Romney, have sent emails asking us to play nice, etc etc. Long story short they say one thing (freedom, etc etc) and do another.

You specifically mentioned the endorsement, hence my response. I don't see what the campaign has to do with anything.

rockandrollsouls

08-06-2012, 06:05 PM

I'm really not trying to start an argument, but rather make a point. You'd rather support a candidate because they sound "principled," even if their positions are unconstitutional, over a candidate that has done a good job as governor and differs from Ron on maybe 2 positions depending on how you interpret him because you just don't like what you hear in his voice?

Let me say this. Mary Ruwart supported open borders. Child pornography. Privatization of all aspects of government (judicial, law enforcement, law itself, prisons to a far greater degree than GJ ever did, abortion at the federal level [not even as a states rights issue]. These are just a FEW of the issues with this crazy woman. Blatant disregard for the constitution because of her personal favor towards hard anarcho-capitalism.

GJ at least attempts to follow the CONSTITUTION. Mary Ruwart doesn't; she follows the doctrine of anarcho capitalism.

To me, this is akin to saying "Let's support Karl Marx, because he really seems like he believes in what he says!" I just don't follow any logic in supporting Ruwart in ANY capacity, let alone over GJ (if it came to that.)

As a disclaimer - not a post in support of GJ. Merely using him as a comparison to expose the double standard.

gee whiz, where else have we heard that we should ignore the principled candidate because they are 'kooky'?

.....can't quite put my finger on it...

I am absolutely positive Ruwart was not going to run on a platform of legalizing child pornography what ever her philosophy books said.

Or actually, I can't even go that far because I didn't know her well enough, she was just the only one who interested me. And you know what else I really liked about her? She was absolutely to her bones EXCITED about liberty. You can see it even in her interview on For Liberty. I do not get that impression from GJ, even remotely.

Ive been GOP since I could vote, and now you are trying to call me kooky when I am STILL in the GOP and you are talking about voting LP, and you are using 'being GOP' as a standard of sanity.

Do you even think about what you are writing?

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 06:06 PM

I bet I put more hours into the LP back in the day than Barr ever has.

this touches on a previous point of mine. Bob Barr was a republican congressman who lost his election because of an ad the LP ran in Georgia. an add showing a sick person not getting their medical marijuana because of Barr. he lost the election by the margin the LP candidate recieved.
I always thought it was weird that he joined the LP after if banged him out of office. never trusted him.

rockandrollsouls

08-06-2012, 06:08 PM

Bob was as questionable for the LP as Ruwart was. One was a former "republican," if you even want to refer to him as that....who supposedly changed some of his ways. Ruwart was a total anarchist, putting doctrine over the constitution. Both were equally terrible for the LP, but from different sides of the spectrum.

Last I checked, the constitution comes before the party. For the libertarians to nominate someone, like Ruwart, who wants to strip government of functions that it is clearly authorized of in the constitution, makes her just as bad in my book as Barr.

this touches on a previous point of mine. Bob Barr was a republican congressman who lost his election because of an ad the LP ran in Georgia. an add showing a sick person not getting their medical marijuana because of Barr. he lost the election by the margin the LP candidate recieved.
I always thought it was weird that he joined the LP after if banged him out of office. never trusted him.

Carson

08-06-2012, 06:13 PM

Paul Fest should invite Palin to speak too.

She's a great speaker...

But she was picked up by the globalist to shill with that other guy...

But she is an Alaskan and I'm not quite sure they can totally be bought off.

http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/newbegining/3wolfpalin.jpg

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 06:13 PM

Bob was as questionable for the LP as Ruwart was. One was a former "republican," if you even want to refer to him as that....who supposedly changed some of his ways. Ruwart was a total anarchist, putting doctrine over the constitution. Both were equally terrible for the LP, but from different sides of the spectrum.

Last I checked, the constitution comes before the party. For the libertarians to nominate someone, like Ruwart, who wants to strip government of functions that it is clearly authorized of in the constitution, makes her just as bad in my book as Barr.

yes, and you can see that spectrum in full force at the LP national convention. anarchs have a caucus, minarchs have a caucus, gop-lite(my label) have a caucus.
gop-lite usuaully has the smaller group, but in more recent years more former GOPers have joined the LP and the demographic has changed a little.
Badnarik was a perfect candidate, and the way he won the convention was perfect. He was a nobody going into the convention with most of the delegates leaning towards Aaron Russo or Gary Nolan. but at the debate, Badnarik wowed the delegates and won over the votes. A convention who delegates were free to vote their conscious. A convention that had a real debate.

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2

08-06-2012, 06:20 PM

this touches on a previous point of mine. Bob Barr was a republican congressman who lost his election because of an ad the LP ran in Georgia. an add showing a sick person not getting their medical marijuana because of Barr. he lost the election by the margin the LP candidate recieved.
I always thought it was weird that he joined the LP after if banged him out of office. never trusted him.

He certainly deserved that, imo.

I'd say Barr had the last laugh in this case. So tragic, too.

rockandrollsouls

08-06-2012, 06:21 PM

I like and respect Badnarik very much. IMO, embodies what the LP is about.

yes, and you can see that spectrum in full force at the LP national convention. anarchs have a caucus, minarchs have a caucus, gop-lite(my label) have a caucus.
gop-lite usuaully has the smaller group, but in more recent years more former GOPers have joined the LP and the demographic has changed a little.
Badnarik was a perfect candidate, and the way he won the convention was perfect. He was a nobody going into the convention with most of the delegates leaning towards Aaron Russo or Gary Nolan. but at the debate, Badnarik wowed the delegates and won over the votes. A convention who delegates were free to vote their conscious. A convention that had a real debate.

Eire4RonPaul

08-06-2012, 06:51 PM

Ugh. With their recent flag-waving support for gay marriage, I'd rather they just stay out of this.

I don't know what it is with you; nerve or ignorance - perhaps both, but I see you're one of those people that is all for "Liberty and Freedom" as you like to cheer, so long as that "Liberty and Freedom" doesn't extend to anyone else. If you consider yourself a Ron Paul supporter and plan on attending this event, you are in for some shock - I'd suggest bringing lube for the good anal destroying you'll be receiving if you notify the good people attending of your religiously bigotted, narrow-minded and ignorant presumptions. I suggest you keep your embarrassing opinions to yourself - it's beyond me how any true Libertarian can take you seriously.

Good day.

then maybe they should change the name.

At this point it doesn't seem like it is really about Ron if an entirely different party is sponsoring it.

Not that I blame the organizers who need funding, but it seems like it has kinda been coopted from my point of view.

You're one of those people dedicated to the destruction of our philosophy. I can tell you're a newcomer - you have that 'immaturity' about you.

This is a long and hard fought fight - it has been for the last year, for some - the last 4 years, for others (myself included) a good many decade. Nobody is going to give us an inch (I've learned that), and you're playing to their tune by fighting with your fellow men and women over petty differences which could come down to getting a Libertarian into the White House and continuing on with the same shills (all cut from the same cloth) for another 4 years. I support ROn Paul just as much as the next person but I'm not blinded enough to see that there ARE other Libertarians out there that need our help. It's ill-advisable to vote for politicians, instead - vote for policies!

I'm not asking you to cheer for Gary Johnson, but don't rubbish the man or count him out because we need somebody, Paul or the man in the moon...whomever, to represent us on the national debate stage this October. Don't make the mistake in thinking this is about Ron Paul - it NEVER was. This is about personal and economic freedom and we should be supporting whomever is singing that song, regardless of their name on the ballot paper. The fact that the Libertarian Party are willing to throw some money behind this festival is promise enough as to which side they're on - something the GOP have no interest in. The GOP don't like Ron Paul, they never have, they never will and they don't want him anywhere near them good bad nor indifferent. THEY DO NOT WANT YOU. But there is a party that considers you Family even if you don't so don't dismiss them.

We're all on the same team here because we're all working towards the same goal. There will come a time when a decision will need to be made at the ballot box and that day is approaching. If the name reads Humpty-Dumpty on the Libertarian ticket, I know who I'm voting for. So stop with this infighting, you're playing right into the GOPS hands. These viewpoints are not exclusive to Ron Paul, they're shared by millions of us right across the globe. Ron Paul is a messenger. It's not about him, it's about the message. Always remember that.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 07:03 PM

I don't know what it is with you; nerve or ignorance - perhaps both, but I see you're one of those people that is all for "Liberty and Freedom" as you like to cheer, so long as that "Liberty and Freedom" doesn't extend to anyone else. If you consider yourself a Ron Paul supporter and plan on attending this event, you are in for some shock - I'd suggest bringing lube for the good anal destroying you'll be receiving if you notify the good people attending of your religiously bigotted, narrow-minded and ignorant presumptions. I suggest you keep your embarrassing opinions to yourself - it's beyond me how any true Libertarian can take you seriously.

Good day.

You're one of those people dedicated to the destruction of our philosophy. I can tell you're a newcomer - you have that 'immaturity' about you.

This is a long and hard fought fight - it has been for the last year, for some - the last 4 years, for others (myself included) a good many decade. Nobody is going to give us an inch (I've learned that), and you're playing to their tune by fighting with your fellow men and women over petty differences which could come down to getting a Libertarian into the White House and continuing on with the same shills (all cut from the same cloth) for another 4 years. I support ROn Paul just as much as the next person but I'm not blinded enough to see that there ARE other Libertarians out there that need our help. It's ill-advisable to vote for politicians, instead - vote for policies!

I'm not asking you to cheer for Gary Johnson, but don't rubbish the man or count him out because we need somebody, Paul or the man in the moon...whomever, to represent us on the national debate stage this October. Don't make the mistake in thinking this is about Ron Paul - it NEVER was. This is about personal and economic freedom and we should be supporting whomever is singing that song, regardless of their name on the ballot paper. The fact that the Libertarian Party are willing to throw some money behind this festival is promise enough as to which side they're on - something the GOP have no interest in. The GOP don't like Ron Paul, they never have, they never will and they don't want him anywhere near them good bad nor indifferent. THEY DO NOT WANT YOU. But there is a party that considers you Family even if you don't so don't dismiss them.

We're all on the same team here because we're all working towards the same goal. There will come a time when a decision will need to be made at the ballot box and that day is approaching. If the name reads Humpty-Dumpty on the Libertarian ticket, I know who I'm voting for. So stop with this infighting, you're playing right into the GOPS hands. These viewpoints are not exclusive to Ron Paul, they're shared by millions of us right across the globe. Ron Paul is a messenger. It's not about him, it's about the message. Always remember that.

You presume a lot and are very sure of yourself, but are wrong on too many fronts to address.

I don't consider GJ to represent my views and don't care if he is on stage or not, either way they won't be addressed. You are welcome to like him, but I don't.

Eire4RonPaul

08-06-2012, 07:04 PM

You presume a lot and are very sure of yourself, but are wrong on too many fronts to address.

Try me.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 07:06 PM

Try me.

I'm not that interested in your points.

Eire4RonPaul

08-06-2012, 07:09 PM

I'm not that interested in your points.

Logic doesn't work for you, I see.

'To hell with the message, I'm going to make a mess of this no matter what....' is your attitude....fair enough. No wonder this movement is failing big time with such stubborness. You can at least appreciate the money - or would you rather sit in sh*t and do without? Beggers can't be choosers. I'm giving props to an organization not ashamed to call themselves Libertarian.

LibertyEagle

08-06-2012, 07:10 PM

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 07:12 PM

Logic doesn't work for you, I see.

'To hell with the message, I'm going to make a mess of this no matter what....' is your attitude....fair enough. No wonder this movement is failing big time with such stubborness. You can at least appreciate the money - or would you rather sit in sh*t and do without? Beggers can't be choosers. I'm giving props to an organization not ashamed to call themselves Libertarian.

fyi, the movement is not failing. compare the liberty movement from 1971 til today. we are huge and still growing.
disagreements are the growing pains of a successful movement/coalition.

Eire4RonPaul

08-06-2012, 07:13 PM

You make good points, in my opinion. I'd forgotten her stance on open borders.

Just because someone is principled doesn't make them good. It matters what they are principled about.

What about open-border do you oppose? Doesn't the good doctor believe in the Constitution or so he says? Correct, well then I've never heard Ron Paul saying he was against open-borders. How you can call yourself a Liberty lover is beyond me....it seems you want this fantasy land alright, 'but best to keep out anyone else' that may want to join me here.

You're a joke.

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 07:14 PM

You make good points, in my opinion. I'd forgotten her stance on open borders.

Just because someone is principled doesn't make them good. It matters what they are principled about.

in fairness, ruwart is for open borders in the way ron is... ruwarts open border stance is presented in the ideal world with no welfare and free markets. its a philosophical answer. open borders with a welfare state would be horrible. if everyone had to pull their own weight- then the more people producing wealth the better for society. open borders makes sense.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 07:16 PM

I'm really not trying to start an argument, but rather make a point. You'd rather support a candidate because they sound "principled," even if their positions are unconstitutional, over a candidate that has done a good job as governor and differs from Ron on maybe 2 positions depending on how you interpret him because you just don't like what you hear in his voice?

Let me say this. Mary Ruwart supported open borders. Child pornography. Privatization of all aspects of government (judicial, law enforcement, law itself, prisons to a far greater degree than GJ ever did, abortion at the federal level [not even as a states rights issue]. These are just a FEW of the issues with this crazy woman. Blatant disregard for the constitution because of her personal favor towards hard anarcho-capitalism.

GJ at least attempts to follow the CONSTITUTION. Mary Ruwart doesn't; she follows the doctrine of anarcho capitalism.

To me, this is akin to saying "Let's support Karl Marx, because he really seems like he believes in what he says!" I just don't follow any logic in supporting Ruwart in ANY capacity, let alone over GJ (if it came to that.)

As a disclaimer - not a post in support of GJ. Merely using him as a comparison to expose the double standard.

No. If she didn't believe in the Constitution I would have a problem with her. I didn't get to know her that well since she lost, but the others didn't interest me in the slightest, they seemed like the go along to get along GOP I couldn't stand even in a party where it won elections routinely.

Principles are REQUIRED for my support, but they do have to be the right ones. What I knew of her I liked, and I DO believe she was more tuned into liberty than GJ. GJ simply is without any attraction for me, I couldn't care less about him.

Eire4RonPaul

08-06-2012, 07:16 PM

fyi, the movement is not failing. compare the liberty movement from 1971 til today. we are huge and still growing.
disagreements are the growing pains of a successful movement/coalition.

The movement will do what it did in 08 and piss off never to be seen again until another "Messiah" comes to call....

What these new age RP supports that have jumped on the bandwagon fail to realize is that so much can be done right now in the present by accepting other people into their hearts. Some people just don't get that its not about Ron Paul...and they're going to cost us moving forward....

LibertyEagle

08-06-2012, 07:19 PM

I don't know what it is with you; nerve or ignorance - perhaps both, but I see you're one of those people that is all for "Liberty and Freedom" as you like to cheer, so long as that "Liberty and Freedom" doesn't extend to anyone else. If you consider yourself a Ron Paul supporter and plan on attending this event, you are in for some shock - I'd suggest bringing lube for the good anal destroying you'll be receiving if you notify the good people attending of your religiously bigotted, narrow-minded and ignorant presumptions. I suggest you keep your embarrassing opinions to yourself - it's beyond me how any true Libertarian can take you seriously.

Good day.
Here's a newsflash for you. I am not a Libertarian and neither is this movement.

I wonder if you realize you are not helping your cause. Do you? Because you just confirmed that your goal is to do what you can to hijack this movement. Good luck to you, bud. lol.

You're one of those people dedicated to the destruction of our philosophy. I can tell you're a newcomer - you have that 'immaturity' about you.
You're just a rude little sucker, aren't you? You do realize, don't you, that when you started insulting people, you already lost the argument.

This is a long and hard fought fight - it has been for the last year, for some - the last 4 years, for others (myself included) a good many decade. Nobody is going to give us an inch (I've learned that), and you're playing to their tune by fighting with your fellow men and women over petty differences which could come down to getting a Libertarian into the White House and continuing on with the same shills (all cut from the same cloth) for another 4 years. I support ROn Paul just as much as the next person but I'm not blinded enough to see that there ARE other Libertarians out there that need our help. It's ill-advisable to vote for politicians, instead - vote for policies!

I'm not asking you to cheer for Gary Johnson, but don't rubbish the man or count him out because we need somebody, Paul or the man in the moon...whomever, to represent us on the national debate stage this October. Don't make the mistake in thinking this is about Ron Paul - it NEVER was. This is about personal and economic freedom and we should be supporting whomever is singing that song, regardless of their name on the ballot paper. The fact that the Libertarian Party are willing to throw some money behind this festival is promise enough as to which side they're on - something the GOP have no interest in. The GOP don't like Ron Paul, they never have, they never will and they don't want him anywhere near them good bad nor indifferent. THEY DO NOT WANT YOU. But there is a party that considers you Family even if you don't so don't dismiss them.
So, here you are again, confirming that your goal is to hijack for the Libertarian Party. You are dissing Ron Paul's plan of participation in the GOP and interestingly enough, you are doing it here on Ron Paul Forums.

We're all on the same team here because we're all working towards the same goal. There will come a time when a decision will need to be made at the ballot box and that day is approaching. If the name reads Humpty-Dumpty on the Libertarian ticket, I know who I'm voting for. So stop with this infighting, you're playing right into the GOPS hands. These viewpoints are not exclusive to Ron Paul, they're shared by millions of us right across the globe. Ron Paul is a messenger. It's not about him, it's about the message. Always remember that.
No, apparently we are not.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 07:19 PM

torchbearer

08-06-2012, 07:21 PM

Eire4RonPaul

08-06-2012, 07:24 PM

So, here you are again, confirming that your goal is to hijack for the Libertarian Party. You are dissing Ron Paul's plan of participation in the GOP and interestingly enough, you are doing it here on Ron Paul Forums.

No, apparently we are not.

The GOP wouldn't piss on Ron Paul if he was on fire - that's the extent of their hatred for the man. The Libertarian Party represent the Constitution more than the GOP - are you saying you're against the Constitution...I can't understand what you're getting at. Ron Paul is a member of the Libertarian Party. They're not some unknown force from an alien world - they're real people, with similar political and philosophical viewpoints that have, in fact supported Ron Paul from the beginning. It's funny to me, all Libertarians support Ron Paul but the Paul people don't like the Libertarians. Even though the Libs were the base of Pauls support.

They warrant a look and are not to be dismissed.

LibertyEagle

08-06-2012, 07:28 PM

What about open-border do you oppose? Doesn't the good doctor believe in the Constitution or so he says? Correct, well then I've never heard Ron Paul saying he was against open-borders. How you can call yourself a Liberty lover is beyond me....it seems you want this fantasy land alright, 'but best to keep out anyone else' that may want to join me here.

You're a joke.

I believe in national sovereignty. Apparently, that is a problem for you. Tough.

Here is a book I recommend that you read. Your debate tactics are left wanting.

http://i50.tinypic.com/2ry2exs.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671723650?tag=duckduckgo-d-20

Eire4RonPaul

08-06-2012, 07:33 PM

it is about Ron Paul's principles. Give us a thousand other candidates as consistent to those principles and no one will be waiting to take them into their hearts.

Hell, give us ONE.

I understand but you have to accept the fact that this doesn't end when Paul becomes President. Thats what you're forgetting - the challenge at that point, only just begins. How he will ever get something passed through Congress would be harder to contemplate than rocket science...if you think Paul is going to have it all his own way, you're sadly mistaken...

Johnson was a Govorner for two terms - he approaches Libertarianism differently to Paul but we must understand that he has practical experience in that he knows just how far he can take it in the real world and in a real setting. Have you ever stopped to think that perhaps Johnson knows just to what extent you can be officially accepted as a Libertarian to gain public office? He's being realistic. We shouldn't rubbish him is all I am arguing because the pressure is on in that hotseat....Johnson didn't have the luxury to rant and rave from the security of a GOP gaurenteed job like Paul did. The GOP never ran someone against Pauls seat in return for shutting Ron up on votes.

When you're out there making decisions and having the people of your state critic every decision you make, I'm sure you become aware, just as Gary has, to what extent you can 'get away with'....I wouldnt call it throwing away principles.

Eire4RonPaul

08-06-2012, 07:38 PM

I believe in national sovereignty. Apparently, that is a problem for you. Tough.

Here is a book I recommend that you read. Your debate tactics are left wanting.

Ron Paul disagrees with you.

Paul is for open borders.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 07:39 PM

I understand but you have to accept the fact that this doesn't end when Paul becomes President. Thats what you're forgetting - the challenge at that point, only just begins. How he will ever get something passed through Congress would be harder to contemplate than rocket science...if you think Paul is going to have it all his own way, you're sadly mistaken...

I'm not forgetting it. However, what he can do as executive is a whole lot more than anyone else will do regardless. I don't see what that has bearing on in this discussion.

Johnson was a Govorner for two terms - he approaches Libertarianism differently to Paul but we must understand that he has practical experience in that he knows just how far he can take it in the real world and in a real setting. Have you ever stopped to think that perhaps Johnson knows just to what extent you can be officially accepted as a Libertarian to gain public office? He's being realistic. We shouldn't rubbish him is all I am arguing because the pressure is on in that hotseat....Johnson didn't have the luxury to rant and rave from the security of a GOP gaurenteed job like Paul did. The GOP never ran someone against Pauls seat in return for shutting Ron up on votes.

When you're out there making decisions and having the people of your state critic every decision you make, I'm sure you become aware, just as Gary has, to what extent you can 'get away with'....I wouldnt call it throwing away principles.

Gary Johnson and speaking out on important issues only as much as the establishment lets you 'get away with' don't interest me. And that assumes he would act differently if he thought he could get away with more, and I just don't see even the desire to do so.

I find it pretty funny you arguing the GOP 'shut Ron up on votes' when Ron's being far more vocal than GJ is part of what draws me to Ron, and leaves me cold about GJ.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 07:41 PM

Ron Paul disagrees with you.

Paul is for open borders.

Uh, no, not with a welfare state. He is for soveriegnty, ability to control borders, but generous legal immigration, without taxpayer funded benefits.

LibertyEagle

08-06-2012, 07:43 PM

The GOP wouldn't piss on Ron Paul if he was on fire - that's the extent of their hatred for the man.
At one point, he was polling at 20%, so apparently quite a few would. What you are largely talking about are the GOP establishment who are in leadership positions. Those are who we are replacing.

It doesn't really matter whether you face it or not, but only the 2 major political parties get in debates and get media coverage. It wouldn't matter if you had the best candidate in the world running as a Libertarian. No one would know about it. Is the Libertarian Party candidate even on all 50 ballots?

The GOP has the machinery, the lists, the media coverage and we have made huge inroads into getting positioned in leadership slots. In case you missed it, several liberty-minded candidates have been elected in the REPUBLICAN Party or have received the Republican nomination. People such as our own Gunny, Rand, Justin Amash, Kurt Bills, Thomas Massie, Chris Hightower, etc.

The Libertarian Party represent the Constitution more than the GOP - are you saying you're against the Constitution...I can't understand what you're getting at. Ron Paul is a member of the Libertarian Party. They're not some unknown force from an alien world - they're real people, with similar political and philosophical viewpoints that have, in fact supported Ron Paul from the beginning. It's funny to me, all Libertarians support Ron Paul but the Paul people don't like the Libertarians. Even though the Libs were the base of Pauls support.
No, "all Libertarians" do NOT support Ron Paul. I have seen more than a few who absolutely detested him.

Again, Ron Paul asked us to work to get in leadership positions within the GOP and to use it to get liberty candidates elected.

They warrant a look and are not to be dismissed.

To the extent that they present good candidates, I will consider voting for them. Beyond that, I don't pledge allegiance to a political party. Any of them.

Eire4RonPaul

08-06-2012, 07:44 PM

I'm not forgetting it. However, what he can do as executive is a whole lot more than anyone else will do regardless. I don't see what that has bearing on in this discussion.

Gary Johnson and speaking out on important issues only as much as the establishment lets you 'get away with' don't interest me. And that assumes he would act differently if he thought he could get away with more, and I just don't see even the desire to do so.

It means that Johnson is more attractive to the average mainstream voter than Paul is.

He not only has the background of holding a high office, but he has a record of being a limited government guy while in office.

As I said in my first post, I'm not asking you to cheer for the guy....but let's face it, we need all the help we can get. The last thing we should be doing is comparing who is better than who...we're in this together...apart from some of those bigots...

LibertyEagle

08-06-2012, 07:45 PM

Ron Paul disagrees with you.

Paul is for open borders.

Sorry, but nope. No prize for you.

Get rid of the welfare state first and then we'll talk.

Eire4RonPaul

08-06-2012, 07:46 PM

Uh, no, not with a welfare state. He is for soveriegnty, ability to control borders, but generous legal immigration, without taxpayer funded benefits.

RP is for open borders with zero welfare. He's a Libertarian - one of the stronger one's I might add. History proves it.

The Constitution is a nice touch though, I like it. ;)

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 07:48 PM

LibertyEagle

08-06-2012, 08:00 PM

RP is for open borders with zero welfare. He's a Libertarian - one of the stronger one's I might add. History proves it.

The Constitution is a nice touch though, I like it. ;)

Maybe you didn't realize that we do not have "zero welfare". And until that point in time, Ron Paul is very much opposed to open borders.

Carehn

08-06-2012, 08:08 PM

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 08:24 PM

This thread is amazing.

People are bashing the LP for sponsoring Paul Fest and promoting sarah palin as this wonderful person to have speak at said event.

LOL and they say the LP sold out.

Talk about calling the kettle black

are you suggesting the same people are doing both of those things? because I think there are a bunch of different people saying a bunch of different things.

alex_florida

08-06-2012, 08:35 PM

If I am not mistaken, Irwin Schiff who is slowly being killed in his mid-80s in the federal prison is a former presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket. Where're inwin schiffs in the Libertarian Party now?

Carehn

08-06-2012, 08:45 PM

are you suggesting the same people are doing both of those things? because I think there are a bunch of different people saying a bunch of different things.

I guess not. But sarah palin??? She is soooooo not my type, I would stand with the modern LP before her.

satchelmcqueen

08-06-2012, 08:54 PM

no
Paul Fest should invite Palin to speak too.

parocks

08-06-2012, 08:56 PM

She's a great speaker...

But she was picked up by the globalist to shill with that other guy...

But she is an Alaskan and I'm not quite sure they can totally be bought off.

http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/newbegining/3wolfpalin.jpg
2
They didn't know her. Yes, the globalists picked her. If you had a guy trying out for a baseball team who didn't know the rules but could run a 4.2 40 and hit the ball 500 feet, you'll draft and hope to turn them into a baseball player. I don't think she's a globalist. Getting the VP nomination didn't change who she is any more than if Rand got the Romney VP nomination.

We liked her here in 2007. McCain wanted her charisma and everything else she brought, and he got it. George Bush was picked by Reagan. That didn't make George Bush a conservative. It was known as "balancing the ticket" back in the day. Only Ron Paul supporters, it appears, seem to think that being picked as a VP nominee somehow compromises that person. The way it has always worked is that it's basically your duty to accept. People who get offered VP don't turn it down. You have to accept, and because you have to accept, there's no implied ideological match. Same with endorsements. If you say you'll endorse whoever wins, and you endorse the winner, it's meaningless, not something that needs to be analyzed, worried about much, or anything.

It's pretty amazing how worried people can get about things that are just not relevant at all.

This thread is people arguing about whether it's good or bad that the LP has more to do with Paul Festival. Who cares? It's not an official Ron Paul event. There is an official Ron Paul event, right nearby. At the same. Don't worry at all about those little details.

I think it would be good to have a larger LP presence at Paul Fest. Not because of Paul Fest - it's really an irrelevant event, except that it provides valuable, necessary services like Ronvoy and Ron Paul Town - 7 RV days in the parking lot.

parocks

08-06-2012, 10:44 PM

The details about Paul Fest are irrelevant. I've had a question about what people were planning on doing after Tampa.

The "winner" idea really should be to support GJ. Since that, to me is the winner of all the clear options (but not by a whole lot), I would think that it would be good if GJ was there in front of the Ron Paul supporters at Paul Fest saying "hey, Ron Paul supporters. I hope Ron Paul gets the nomination this week. If he does, I will drop out in a second. But if he doesn't win, what are all of you standing here in this field planning on doing for the next 2 months? I would love to have you standing on street corners waving GJ signs. Would be great to see GJ signs on overpasses. I want you to come and help me for 2 months. I'm handing out a survey - what do you want me to talk about for the next 2 months? Would you be enthusiastic about supporting me if I focused on "too much war", or Patriot Act and other police state / civil liberties issues? Or talk about "legalize it"? Or how libertarian / conservative measures can curb Monsanto? I plan on focusing on 9 cities in 9 swing states. Portland/Orono, ME. Durham, NH, State College, PA, Ann Arbor, MI, Madison, WI, Minneapolis, MN, Boulder/Denver, CO, Las Vegas, NV, Portland, OR. And New Mexico. Talk to the people there and explain why I'm better than Obama on several key issues that they care about."

If I'm GJ, I'm going to start to get staffers for the states from that group of people at Paul Fest. If I'm GJ I'm going to hang out the entire 3 days at Paul Festival. Just ride in the Ronvoy to the main event.

I was just at a pretty big Mini Festival type event in Portland, ME. It was basically a Mumford and Sons and Friends type show. One of the parts of this Mumford mini fest - Gentlemen of the Road - was after parties - the bands that played at GOTR went to these after parties and hung out, jammed with the bands that were playing there that night. It was a really good experience. I hung out a while with The Maccabees, great guys, #2 on the album chart in Britain earlier this year. Point being, Gary Johnson can act like The Maccabees and Mumford and Sons and Dropkick Murphys and the rest who hung out at the after parties and the after after party at Port City (that was very cool). Just hang out. Sit on a blanket. Have somebody buy you a PBR. 197K facebook friends is a lot. 3 Million is also a lot, which is Mumfords number, The Maccabees number is 171K, Dropkick is 1.2K. They were all walking around the streets of Portland, going from bar to bar, etc., Gary Johnson, but everyone there big and small, the speakers, the bands, just hung out those days, there is so much benefit from that. Everybody would be loving everybody after that. From a real, practical standpoint, it really just means that the speakers, the bands, should block out a longer amount of time for Paul Fest. Even if it's not 2 days or 1 whole day, hanging out past the time where people are asking questions, and spending some time just hanging out is going to give benefits.

KingRobbStark

08-06-2012, 10:49 PM

Wow. Great post. Every gain we have made is by infiltrating the Republican Party. How the LP can come out of nowhere with their "support" is baffling. The fact that they have Gary Johnson makes it even more confusing. Keep the focus on Ron, keep it off the LP.

It would seem that the LP is skipping the infiltrating step, and is skipping straight to the hijacking portion of the plan.

LibertyEagle

08-06-2012, 10:57 PM

It would seem that the LP is skipping the infiltrating step, and is skipping straight to the hijacking portion of the plan.

Hopefully not. Eire doesn't represent the LP. Thankfully.

Indy Vidual

08-06-2012, 11:01 PM

without these guys we would be no where.
...
...we were fighting these same battles when...

1992 LP Convention (4 years after Ron ran)
The speaker looks out over the audience and says "how come we were all in our 20's when we started, and 'all of us' are in our 40's now?" :o

Indy Vidual

08-06-2012, 11:12 PM

Ron did his best, but was not able to get much attention or gain many votes in '87/'88.
If you believe "Ron Paul put the Libertarian Party on the map" and that makes you happy, then go right ahead and keep believing it.

You should have left it and not said it.

Ron Paul put the Libertarian Party on the map. Not the other way around.

How old are you?
Where do you go to school little girl? :p

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 11:16 PM

Ron did his best, but was not able to get much attention or gain many votes in '87/'88.
If you believe "Ron Paul put the Libertarian Party on the map" and that makes you happy, then go right ahead and keep believing it.

How old are you?
Where do you go to school little girl? :p

NOW and since 2008 he essentially did, just by people associating him with them. I sure wouldn't have looked into them but for Ron, and GJ's entire election seemed based on presenting himself as being like Ron. It isn't that they didn't exist, they just weren't deemed relevant by many not in the party until Ron's 2008 election. I agree with LE on that. They may have been doing fantastic things, but not many outside the LP itself knew about them.

Brian4Liberty

08-06-2012, 11:17 PM

What does the LP get for "sponsorship"? A booth? A tent? Signs? Additional guaranteed speakers? Do they get to set the agenda?

Are there any other political parties sponsoring? Is the Constitution Party going to be there?

Any other orgs like RLC? Freedomworks? Koch Brothers? CFG? JBS?

The Gold Standard

08-06-2012, 11:21 PM

This thread is amazing.

People are bashing the LP for sponsoring Paul Fest and promoting sarah palin as this wonderful person to have speak at said event.

LOL and they say the LP sold out.

Talk about calling the kettle black

+rep

Sometimes these days it is easy to think you accidentally clicked on the Hannity boards instead of Liberty Forest.

Indy Vidual

08-06-2012, 11:27 PM

I understand your point, and have no idea what you will do with mine:

NOW and since 2008 he essentially did, just by people associating him with them. I sure wouldn't have looked into them but for Ron, and GJ's entire election seemed based on presenting himself as being like Ron. It isn't that they didn't exist, they just weren't deemed relevant by many not in the party until Ron's 2008 election. I agree with LE on that. They may have been doing fantastic things, but not many outside the LP itself knew about them.

1) We agree Ron did not "put the Libertarian Party on the map" in 1988.
2) ...since 2008 he essentially did, just by people associating him with them... == Yes now the @#$%&!!! racist newsletters are associated with Ron Paul and the entire Libertarian movement. :(

3) If you don't believe #2, then you need to get out and meet some people who watch TV.

FYI:
Here is a happy thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?266394-the-think-happy-thoughts-thread)
http://cute-n-tiny.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/bunny11.jpg

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 11:30 PM

I understand your point, and have know idea what you will do with mine:

1) We agree Ron did not "put the Libertarian Party on the map" in 1988.
2) ...since 2008 he essentially did, just by people associating him with them... == Yes now the @#$%&!!! racist newsletters are associated with Ron Paul and the entire Libertarian movement. :(

3) If you don't believe #2, then you need to get out and meet some people who watch TV.

FYI:
Here is a happy thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?266394-the-think-happy-thoughts-thread)
http://cute-n-tiny.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/bunny11.jpg

see, that is why I have problems with the LP THEY (you) are the ones perpetuating the newsletters someone else wrote as 'his' 'racist newsletters'. Despite the fact that whomever followed the 'incorporate cultural conservatives' meme was NOT following Ron Paul's lead at the time because his contemporaneous speeches and actions never did. The 'racist newsletters' so labeled were all over Gary Johnson supporter stuff before media ever picked up on them in this election, and GJ's campaign page linked to an article talking about 'RP's racist newsletters'. Yet they of all people know he never wrote them and they were only a handful in a decade of newsletters. Have fun with your party, but perhaps you can see why I don't actually consider the current LP campaign to be brothers in arms with us.

Indy Vidual

08-06-2012, 11:32 PM

see, that is why I have problems with the LP THEY (you) are the ones perpetuating the newsletters...

NO
I'm talking about my neighbor watching CNN in January and now associating me, and Ron Paul, and Libertarians with racism.

2) ...since 2008 he essentially did, just by people associating him with them... == Yes now the @#$%&!!! racist newsletters are associated with Ron Paul and the entire Libertarian movement. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

3) If you don't believe #2, then you need to get out and meet some people who watch TV.

sailingaway

08-06-2012, 11:33 PM

NO
I'm talking about my neighbor watching CNN in January and now associating me, and Ron Paul, and Libertarians with racism.

but your neighbor isn't all over blogs and comment sections posting about them, is he?

newbitech

08-06-2012, 11:34 PM

what is the point in stifling the enthusiasm for the people that want to be involved in this event (for whatever reason?)

parocks

08-07-2012, 12:08 AM

It means that Johnson is more attractive to the average mainstream voter than Paul is.

He not only has the background of holding a high office, but he has a record of being a limited government guy while in office.

As I said in my first post, I'm not asking you to cheer for the guy....but let's face it, we need all the help we can get. The last thing we should be doing is comparing who is better than who...we're in this together...apart from some of those bigots...

Is Gary Johnson better than Ron Paul? is not a relevant question if Ron Paul is not on the ballot. Gary Johnson is running for President. Hopefully, we get the nomination. But we probably won't. And if we don't we have a handful of people who are running for President. Obama is one Romney is one Gary Johnson is one Virgil Goode is one. And those are the people we have to compare.

It's just not a really relevant argument Paul (who probably won't be on the ballot) and Johnson (who will). Johnson vs Goode? That's a good question and no one seems to be talking about it.

I recommend Johnson (for the handful of people who will not be supporting Romney. It certainly appears that you need a pretty big hand for all those people).

The problem with Goode is that his target audience is tea party and tea party is very against Obama.

Johnson's audience - college students - are not as in love with Obama as they were 4 years ago. Gary Johnson can speak over and over again on "Obama Hates Freedom". And grab college student, hipsters, other 18-29s in places like Portland, ME, Durham, NH, State College, Ann Arbor, Madison, Minneapolis, Boulder / Denver, Las Vegas, Portland, OR. That could be quite effective. (Here's a bit of a stretch - Gary Johnson Tour. Gary's on a bus, with good bands on other buses. Charge money. If it was Gary Johnson's Gentlemen of the Road Presidential Tour, and there were 16K people there, that would be a noteworthy achievement. But Saturday it was the Mumford and Sons Gentlemen of the Road Tour without Gary Johnson and there were 16K people there.

And this is not necessarily for Gary Johnson or for right now, but there are certain rock bands who have the popularity to bring a lot of people on board, especially if we're going to call "victory" as the best showing for the Libertarian candidate ever. If I wanted to get votes for a generic Libertarian candidate for President, and I had to choose between the "Libertarian Party" and "Phish" to get me the most votes, I'd choose Phish. And not only Phish. One band, doing free shows? Must register to vote. And maybe promise to vote for the Libertarian, but if not, give us your name address, email, twitter, and agree to be bombarded with candidate info.

Key point is that Phish has the power here. Whatever the Libertarian Party could do (remind Libertarians that they're Libertarians and there's an election and to vote for the Libertarian. Hope to get in debates? They might have some new bag of tricks that pushes the Libertarian to the next level this time, but probably not. It's possible that some big band could just work with the LP or the CP - "you pick this guy, I do x,y,z to push for this guy." If I'm in a big rock band, I'd want to consider whether I'd want to pick the nominee, and then hype the nominee, and then have the candidate be the most successful candidate of that party ever. I'd imagine some would want to do that. Bands with so much money they don't need any more.

Booking this tour, these shows, is something they could do. There are downsides to this, which might make their participation unfeasible. They might not want to
be partisan at all, or they might prefer another party.

If they're concerned that helping GJ would have specific effects that they might not want, they could balance it with something different for Goode. Country stuff in the South and Midwest. Those swing states, VA, NC, OH, IN, IA. Could balance it. Or not.

This is something Live Nation could do. It's unlikely they'd want to do that.

Indy Vidual

08-07-2012, 12:23 AM

but your neighbor isn't all over blogs and comment sections posting about them, is he?
Perhaps you have never walked a mile "in my shoes." I don't like hearing "I never knew Ron Paul was like that, those were terrible things in his newletters", would you enjoy that conversation with a neighbor?

<back on topic>

what is the point in stifling the enthusiasm for the people that want to be involved in this event (for whatever reason?)

Exactly, Ron will not be there. At least others are going to be...

sailingaway

08-07-2012, 12:25 AM

Perhaps you have never walked a mile "in my shoes." I don't like hearing "I never knew Ron Paul was like that, those were terrible things in his newletters", would you enjoy that conversation with a neighbor?

I've had that conversation with many and pointed out why it was nonsense, as I had researched it for myself. It pops like a soap bubble. there is absolutely zero substance as applied to Ron.

People who ask IN GOOD FAITH and not just to call names, always end up agreeing with that.

parocks

08-07-2012, 12:54 AM

Paul Festival is a whole lot of half assed. I wouldn't worry about such things. The relevance of an LP sponsorship at Paul Fest? None. Maybe the significance is a better word. It's money, or something, that Paul Festival needs, and it's a platform for LP to reach the exact people they want to reach. No one is suggesting that Gary Johnson should be voted for if Ron Paul is on the ballot in November. People are talking about what happens if Ron Paul (or any Paul) isn't on the ballot. What should people do? And what "should" happen is that people should support GJ. That's IF there's no Paul on the ballot. GJ would be able to get votes easier than Goode.

There will be an election. There will be a President. There are 4 (at least) candidates on the ballot, and there will be a time after Tampa.

There's no reason why Gary Johnson shouldn't be trying to find enthusiastic sign waving Ron Paul types to help his campaign. He's trying to get the Ron Paul vote. That's exactly what we want him to do.

They aren't coming to Paul Fest to get people to join the Libertarian Party, they're there to hype Gary Johnson. And why not?

People have argued something like "we were just told to take over the Republican Party and now the Libertarian Party is here, wtf?".

The way it works is this - yes, we take over the Republican Party. And then vote for whoever. If we don't like the candidate, don't support the candidate.
(That's one way to look at it.)

Over in Maine, our Ron Paul people (Brakey, Boyer, Tweed, Ryan) are getting pressure about supporting or not supporting Romney and Summers. Many Ron Paul people would like that group to be openly attacking Romney, refusing to support Romney, etc. Many Republicans would like to see them support the Republican. It is not easy to be a state committee person and to refuse to support the Republican Nominee. But a lot of Ron Paul supporters are not on state committee, aren't under pressures, aren't being interviewed and put in the paper. They are free to support whoever they want. Stay Republican, go to the meetings that put the Ron Paul people in place, but if you like the Libertarian more than the Republican, vote for the Libertarian.

Does the Libertarian Party actually think that the informed Ron Paul supporter will think there's any value in joining the Libertarian Party? I doubt they think that, but they think they can get Ron Paul supporters to jump up and down about Gary Johnson when the other major choices are Romney and Obama. And Ron Paul supporters have proven skill at holding signs in intersections, a skill that Ron Paul benefitted from for a few months in 2007 until it morphed into "Ron Paul Supporters Are Annoying"
Gary Johnson needs some of those supporters, and he really should have some. The place for him to get them is Paul Festival.

We aren't a corporatist event as the Olympics are, with the appearance of our endorsement for sale to the highest bidder. At least I would certainly hope we aren't.... I already said my thoughts. I don't need to repeat them.

Bullshit.

Eire4RonPaul

08-07-2012, 04:05 AM

Paul Festival is a whole lot of half assed. I wouldn't worry about such things. The relevance of an LP sponsorship at Paul Fest? None. Maybe the significance is a better word. It's money, or something, that Paul Festival needs, and it's a platform for LP to reach the exact people they want to reach. No one is suggesting that Gary Johnson should be voted for if Ron Paul is on the ballot in November. People are talking about what happens if Ron Paul (or any Paul) isn't on the ballot. What should people do? And what "should" happen is that people should support GJ. That's IF there's no Paul on the ballot. GJ would be able to get votes easier than Goode.

There will be an election. There will be a President. There are 4 (at least) candidates on the ballot, and there will be a time after Tampa.

There's no reason why Gary Johnson shouldn't be trying to find enthusiastic sign waving Ron Paul types to help his campaign. He's trying to get the Ron Paul vote. That's exactly what we want him to do.

They aren't coming to Paul Fest to get people to join the Libertarian Party, they're there to hype Gary Johnson. And why not?

Good point - and I think it's something most people don't pick up on. The people promoting Johnson on this website and others are those people that are so dedicated to the message that they'll go through hell and high water to get a Libertarian (no matter his/her name) into the White House - for others, it's not like that and they'll be happy to tow the Republican Party line because they're loyal to the GOP (these are not the people that will bring about change). They're a hindrance to the movement in the long run. So people are saying that we are supposed to be "infiltrating" the GOP....well, look where that's got us. Short answer = NO WHERE. Besides, there's no rules against being a member of the GOP AND being a member of the Libertarian Party (Ron Paul himself just so happens to be a Libertarian Party life long member) so I don't see the contradiction many people are assuming exists...

I will say one thing though, I am proud to call myself a Libertarian - for that, I believe in civil and economic freedom for every person walking this Earth, not just Americans. I think Ron Paul has done a lot to promote the philosophy but there were people before Paul - Ludwig von Mises, Carl Menger, Murray Rothbard - far too many people to name here that have contributed to classic liberalism and a free world - the point is that there were people before Paul and there will be more after him. This is not about Ron Paul. If he's on the ballot, he gets the vote but - if not, it's every Paul supporters duty to seek out Libertarians. And quite frankly, let me say this, I'm ashamed to share a so called movement with people that like to believe they're all for freedom and liberty but are more than happy to gay bash or deny rights to others that differ from yourself. I'm ashamed to share a movement with religious bigots and kooks, Sarah Palin establishment people and other so called "fuck them *****s" conservatives that have in my opinion ABSOLUTELY NOTHING CONTRIBUTE TO THIS CAMPAIGN APART FROM THEIR IGNORANCE.

parocks

08-07-2012, 04:32 AM

Wait, I think you're missing something. The vehicle for success is the Republican Party. That doesn't mean that you have to vote for Republicans if you don't like them. There's really no reason to join the Libertarian Party. Whether one protest candidate or the other protest candidate gets the nomination doesn't really matter. Whatever protest candidate that the Libertarians want to pick doesn't matter. I'm only arguing that a candidate on the ballot is going to be easier to sell than a candidate not on the ballot.

Ron Paul supporters should be selling Gary Johnson to college students. My rationale for that is simply that in the fall of 2012, Gary Johnson should be able to get a few of them. And I think the sign waving style of Ron Paul supporters would translate to Gary Johnson. Nothing more than that. Ron Paul supporters might simply want to push forward. If Romney won, in 2016 it could be argued to support Goode, because the Left would be pissed at Romney, and unified, and the tea party, the conservatives, would be upset with Romney, and the Constitutionalist might be able to get votes easier than the Libertarian. They're all protest candidates, but it's really only the Ron Paul supporters saying "look what I can do".

On the merits, I'm not arguing that Johnson is superior to Goode, just that the tea party is more anti-Obama than the college students are pro-Obama this year. So, GJ should be attacking Obama to the college students. He can get votes that way. Figure out what things the college students liked the most of what Ron Paul said, and say that, to them, in the college towns in the northern and western swing states.

The Gary Johnson protest vehicle is just going to give Ron Paul supporters who are looking for something to do the best bang for their buck.

If it's the Liberty Movement, and there are many here that call it just that, we'd want Republicans, Democrats, Independents to vote for Liberty.

What we're looking to accomplish here is a story. And one of the stories can be "Obama lied about Freedom in 2008 and lost because of it in 2012." A lot of people thought Obama was antiwar in 2008. Well, he wasn't, and, with the bad economy, he lost college students big time. Obama said he was for freedom, and he wasn't. Bush lost in 1992 in part because of "read my lips no new taxes". What did Obama say in 08 about the Patriot Act? Hammer those college students in those states.

Good point - and I think it's something most people don't pick up on. The people promoting Johnson on this website and others are those people that are so dedicated to the message that they'll go through hell and high water to get a Libertarian (no matter his/her name) into the White House - for others, it's not like that and they'll be happy to tow the Republican Party line because they're loyal to the GOP (these are not the people that will bring about change). They're a hindrance to the movement in the long run. So people are saying that we are supposed to be "infiltrating" the GOP....well, look where that's got us. Short answer = NO WHERE. Besides, there's no rules against being a member of the GOP AND being a member of the Libertarian Party (Ron Paul himself just so happens to be a Libertarian Party life long member) so I don't see the contradiction many people are assuming exists...

I will say one thing though, I am proud to call myself a Libertarian - for that, I believe in civil and economic freedom for every person walking this Earth, not just Americans. I think Ron Paul has done a lot to promote the philosophy but there were people before Paul - Ludwig von Mises, Carl Menger, Murray Rothbard - far too many people to name here that have contributed to classic liberalism and a free world - the point is that there were people before Paul and there will be more after him. This is not about Ron Paul. If he's on the ballot, he gets the vote but - if not, it's every Paul supporters duty to seek out Libertarians. And quite frankly, let me say this, I'm ashamed to share a so called movement with people that like to believe they're all for freedom and liberty but are more than happy to gay bash or deny rights to others that differ from yourself. I'm ashamed to share a movement with religious bigots and kooks, Sarah Palin establishment people and other so called "fuck them *****s" conservatives that have in my opinion ABSOLUTELY NOTHING CONTRIBUTE TO THIS CAMPAIGN APART FROM THEIR IGNORANCE.

Eire4RonPaul

08-07-2012, 04:48 AM

Republicans and Democrats, Conservatives and Liberals alike will NEVER accept Libertarians - they're entirely opposing world views.

I understand that getting on the GOP vehicle was necessary to promote Libertarianism but we're not getting the majority of votes from them because their ranks are largely made up of Hannity/O'Reilly draconian type people through and through - scary. From the get-go, anyone that thought a bunch of Conservatives would of nominated a Libertarian candidate at the RNC was entirely delusional. Ron Paul was NEVER winning from the start - he knew that. If he thought otherwise, then it would be fair to assume the man was definitively incompetent and I don't believe he is.

So we're at a crossroads - it seems that Paul is showing his true colors now and keeping it "in the family". What does this all mean? It means he may very well shut his mouth and let the GOP ride rough shot for the sake of Rands career. My guess is that the GOP will throw Rand aside after this is all said and done anyway so keeping your head down is not the best thing to do IMO (not that Rand is a friend of ours). The amount of money that Ron Paul received from us and the sheer fact that Rand was faceless enough to throw it back in our faces was nothing short of disgusting. Can you imagine what Gary Johnson could accomplish with even quarter of the money Ron Paul got? GJ is operating on a shoe-string...Jesse Benton was paid a higher salary from contribution money than Johnson's entire campaign funds...sickening...

The people were duped. How they can continue to delude themselves shows their desperation that will be their downfall. It's time to move on and by saying that, I mean they should stop throwing aside other Libertarians after Paul has officially been declared absent from the ballot.

parocks

08-07-2012, 05:03 AM

The movement will do what it did in 08 and piss off never to be seen again until another "Messiah" comes to call....

What these new age RP supports that have jumped on the bandwagon fail to realize is that so much can be done right now in the present by accepting other people into their hearts. Some people just don't get that its not about Ron Paul...and they're going to cost us moving forward....

And it's not about Gary Johnson.

And it's definitely not about the Libertarian Party.

The Libertarian Presidential High Water Mark was 1980. Ed Clark 921K votes. 1.1%. Ron Paul and Harry Browne each got 400K or so and .5%. Everyone else, worse.

Displacing the country clubbers with true conservatives in the Republican Party is the proper method.

If Ron Paul is not on the ballot, just spread the liberty message in the way that gets the biggest impact. That happens to be Gary Johnson in 2012.

GJ will have an easier time convincing college students to move away from Obama than Goode will have getting tea party supporters who really don't like Obama.

Look what's happening in Maine, not just 2012 but 2010 as well. The Democrat nominee for US Senate in the 2 most recent polls is getting 7% and 9%. The Democrat nominee for Gov in 2010 got 19%. An Independent (not Libertarian) is expected to win that US Senate seat in Maine this time around. Could Gary Johnson do well in Maine? Might as well try. In Maine, Gary J might want to add an explanation about how big government (not not enough government) is creating Monsanto. They don't like Monsanto on the streets of Portland, ME.

parocks

08-07-2012, 05:17 AM

No, Libertarianism is your thing. It's not Ron Paul. Ron Paul c. 2008-2012 at least appeals to a number of people. He's a true conservative. I can't imagine why anyone would really want to support the Libertarian Party at this point, except that it's good that they're there to gather signatures to get candidates on ballots. It's a protest vote.

Conservatives have been fighting against the country clubbers at least since Taft in 1940. In the Republican Party. Which is where Ron Paul is. Which is where Rand Paul is. Republicans and Democrats are making the laws. We want our guys in there to make help make the laws better. If you're a Libertarian, you don't participate in that process. The endless debate "which of these 2 things that aren't going to happen is better" is pointless.

The Libertarian candidate would be used as a tool to show that Ron Paul supporters are mighty, and need to be listened to. If Obama lies about war, patriot act, marijuana, any number of civil liberties issues, he can be hurt. He loses the support of college students and hipsters in Madison, WI, that's trouble for Obama. Walker was not recalled.

Republicans and Democrats, Conservatives and Liberals alike will NEVER accept Libertarians - they're entirely opposing world views.

I understand that getting on the GOP vehicle was necessary to promote Libertarianism but we're not getting the majority of votes from them because their ranks are largely made up of Hannity/O'Reilly draconian type people through and through - scary. From the get-go, anyone that thought a bunch of Conservatives would of nominated a Libertarian candidate at the RNC was entirely delusional. Ron Paul was NEVER winning from the start - he knew that. If he thought otherwise, then it would be fair to assume the man was definitively incompetent and I don't believe he is.

So we're at a crossroads - it seems that Paul is showing his true colors now and keeping it "in the family". What does this all mean? It means he may very well shut his mouth and let the GOP ride rough shot for the sake of Rands career. My guess is that the GOP will throw Rand aside after this is all said and done anyway so keeping your head down is not the best thing to do IMO (not that Rand is a friend of ours). The amount of money that Ron Paul received from us and the sheer fact that Rand was faceless enough to throw it back in our faces was nothing short of disgusting. Can you imagine what Gary Johnson could accomplish with even quarter of the money Ron Paul got? GJ is operating on a shoe-string...Jesse Benton was paid a higher salary from contribution money than Johnson's entire campaign funds...sickening...

The people were duped. How they can continue to delude themselves shows their desperation that will be their downfall. It's time to move on and by saying that, I mean they should stop throwing aside other Libertarians after Paul has officially been declared absent from the ballot.

Eire4RonPaul

08-07-2012, 05:27 AM

LibertyEagle

08-07-2012, 05:44 AM

Republicans and Democrats, Conservatives and Liberals alike will NEVER accept Libertarians - they're entirely opposing world views.
Conservatives and libertarians have a great deal in common, actually.

I understand that getting on the GOP vehicle was necessary to promote Libertarianism but we're not getting the majority of votes from them because their ranks are largely made up of Hannity/O'Reilly draconian type people through and through - scary. From the get-go, anyone that thought a bunch of Conservatives would of nominated a Libertarian candidate at the RNC was entirely delusional. Ron Paul was NEVER winning from the start - he knew that. If he thought otherwise, then it would be fair to assume the man was definitively incompetent and I don't believe he is.
Apparently, you do not understand the difference between a neoconservative and a paleoconservative.

So we're at a crossroads - it seems that Paul is showing his true colors now and keeping it "in the family". What does this all mean? It means he may very well shut his mouth and let the GOP ride rough shot for the sake of Rands career. My guess is that the GOP will throw Rand aside after this is all said and done anyway so keeping your head down is not the best thing to do IMO (not that Rand is a friend of ours). The amount of money that Ron Paul received from us and the sheer fact that Rand was faceless enough to throw it back in our faces was nothing short of disgusting.

Can you imagine what Gary Johnson could accomplish with even quarter of the money Ron Paul got? GJ is operating on a shoe-string...Jesse Benton was paid a higher salary from contribution money than Johnson's entire campaign funds...sickening...
You are referring to his salary PLUS campaign expense reimbursements. Please get your facts straight.

The people were duped. How they can continue to delude themselves shows their desperation that will be their downfall. It's time to move on and by saying that, I mean they should stop throwing aside other Libertarians after Paul has officially been declared absent from the ballot.
Big L Libertarians refers to the Libertarian Party. Small l libertarians refers to the ideology.

Are you an American citizen, Eire?

parocks

08-07-2012, 06:04 AM

Agree about writing in Ron Paul. I just don't get it. He just isn't on the ballot. If Ron Paul is at Ron Paul Rallies in September, October, and he says "write my name in", that'll be what I do. But he won't be doing that.

The idea I think is to do something that can be measured.

Gary Johnson won't be getting elected this November. But his candidacy can influence the outcome of the race, by targeting the college students in the swing states. NH has Obama ahead by 4 most recent - wis - 3 most recent, MN - 6 most recent - / MI - 6 most recent / PA - 4 to 11 / ME 14, but Obama under 50 and Angus King leading. There is opportunity for Gary Johnson.

Writing in Ron Paul's name is going to get you nowhere.

The people who write in names will not even have their votes counted - why on Earth would you not want your protest vote or your dissent registered? At this point, regardless of whether or not you're a Libertarian or a Constitutional Conservative and you WANT to participate and engage in the political process and your objective is to get such a candidate into the White House this year, then your only concern at this stage (and after the RNC officially for that matter) is a vote for Gary Johnson.

A_Silent_Majority_Member

08-07-2012, 07:54 AM

*Yawn* 14 pages... let me sum it up...

all through this election cycle the media painted Ron as the "Libertarian" candidate while he was running as "Republican".. in the political parlor game of "us vs them" do you really think this didnt hinder some folks in the GOP from giving him a look?

i know i know....
"But but but its bigger then Ron Paul not about Ron Paul" ect.. ect...

Most of us independants dont give a squawk about D, R, L, or whatever party letter you hold up.. we just want someone to do the right thing for a change once elected. not smile and spew the usual BS one second then do the opposite once in office. As eluded to before in this thread, give just ONE candidate regardless of party who can match Ron Paul on record in this regard???

"But paul wont be there, GJ or whoever will...vote for him instead!" maybe we would consider it if you werent so hell bent on promoting them before the perverbial fat lady sings. I see a lot of GJ supporters seeing it as the "Paulites" who are preventing GJ from winning for failing to throw him their support.. but here on the opposite side of the looking glass it seems like the GJ supporters and some of the Rand hats are the ones hindering things holding out for GJ 2012 or Rand 2016 and underminding morale at every turn with all the negativity and pushy vote for Johnson crap or "we'll get Rand in 2016" WHILE RON PAUL IS STILL RUNNING!!!!

for me it comes down to this... 4 years of Obama? how bout 8 years of mitt? 4 years of Ron Paul would be my choice (I doubt he would take a 2nd term once he set things on the right path in his first). As for GJ.. Last i checked it was Ron Paul drawing 10,000 a crowd and growing not GJ.. so to suggest that somehow magically GJ would prevail over the other 2 somehow just dosent make sense.. even if somehow it happened by miracle.. what kind of record does johnson have to lead me to believe he would be any different than the other 2 liars? It is due to Pauls CHARACTER We have made great inroads and can only wonder where we would be if all the negative ninnys hadnt chosen to sit this one out hoping for GJ/Rand all the while underminding the morale and efforts to get Ron Paul in SINCE EVEN BEFORE THE PRIMARIES BEGAN.

Nobody here thinks that if we somehow got Ron in that all would magically be right overnight... BUT we do believe that MORE inroads will be able to be made at a highly faster rate and set the stage more in our favor in 2016.

I called Libertarian Party coat tail riding co-opt months ago... and everthing points in this direction.. again... I myself and alot of other independants dont care about ANY party... Libertarian or otherwise... and no Ron Paul is NOT a savior but he does however speak liberty and and walk the walk.

A lot of the "Libertarian party" pushers (not to be confused with simply those who identify themselves as Libertarian mind you) are still playing the political party parlor game.. for those of who are indys, liberty knows no party loyalty. The record, the positions, the philosophy, the integrity, the exposure... Ron Paul has them all. Given the inroads already made.. wonder where we would be if those holding out for GJ or Rand along with those who hold the "Id vote for Ron Paul if he could win" frame of mind were really on boad all along?

airborne373

08-07-2012, 08:10 AM

If the Democrat Party is compromised and criminal .....

If the Republican Party is compromised and criminal ....

What is the Libertarian Party?

I would rather not see the Libertarian Party and their 23% national income tax being promoted. The only reason I had any support for the Republican Party was to support RP on the ticket. Take away that and I have no interest in Parties. In fact I have shifted my financial support away from C4L, the Paul's to pro - liberty individuals and groups (focusing on activist not political candidates). Although I did donate some money to RNC delegates on this forum as I believe having a presence in Tampa supporting RP's message is a viable strategy.

Elwar

08-07-2012, 08:25 AM

sailingaway

08-07-2012, 09:26 AM

Writing in Ron Paul's name is going to get you nowhere.

The people who write in names will not even have their votes counted - why on Earth would you not want your protest vote or your dissent registered? At this point, regardless of whether or not you're a Libertarian or a Constitutional Conservative and you WANT to participate and engage in the political process and your objective is to get such a candidate into the White House this year, then your only concern at this stage (and after the RNC officially for that matter) is a vote for Gary Johnson.

actually, the number of people who vote and write in President or leave it blank is a tracked figure. They don't report it much but they don't report third party candidates much either. I'm going to vote for a candidate I want, which does not include Gary Johnson. Others here like him, and that is fine for them.

A large number of people who bother to vote but don't find any of the people on the ballot for president acceptable works as a no confidence vote in my mind and far more accurately reflects my state of mind than vote for a candidate I don't want would do.

ClydeCoulter

08-07-2012, 09:45 AM

Could this have anything to do with it?

http://www.prlog.org/11943794-ron-paul-shut-out-of-gop-convention-paul-festival-organizers-respond-with-free-passes.html

parocks

08-07-2012, 10:56 AM

Gary Johnson has been the presumed Libertarian nominee for months. It didn't take a seer, a visionary at all to predict coattail riding or whatever. He's identified a market and he's trying to sell his product to us. Sounds reasonable.

We knew months ago we needed a black swan event to win. It's nice to prepare for a hurricane. It's not smart to plan that there will be a hurricane.
Do we have any food in the house? No. Why? There's going to be a hurricane. No. There's a small chance of a hurricane, but much more likely, no hurricane, and a real need for food.

And it seems like no one has given any thought at all to what happens if Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination.

I'd argue that some here should stop trying to tell people that GJ is superior to Ron Paul.

However, GJ is the guy that should be getting our help if Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination. Other arguments can be made, but on balance GJ wins.

There are a small handful of candidates that are going to be on the ballot in November. GJ is one, and he's trying to get our vote. He's trying to say things that we'll like. He's going to the Paul Festival, or the 2nd tier of people who are asskissing Ron Paul, but aren't invited to the real rally. Now, it matters (at least a tiny bit) what goes on at the real rally. But most people aren't concerned, at all, about the symbolism involved in the "crazy Ron Paul supporters borderline, half sketchy event". It just doesn't matter.

What are people planning on doing after Tampa? Romney will be the nominee unless he's eaten by a shark. Obama, Johnson, Goode will also be on the ballot. What do people plan to do then?

*Yawn* 14 pages... let me sum it up...

all through this election cycle the media painted Ron as the "Libertarian" candidate while he was running as "Republican".. in the political parlor game of "us vs them" do you really think this didnt hinder some folks in the GOP from giving him a look?

i know i know....
"But but but its bigger then Ron Paul not about Ron Paul" ect.. ect...

Most of us independants dont give a squawk about D, R, L, or whatever party letter you hold up.. we just want someone to do the right thing for a change once elected. not smile and spew the usual BS one second then do the opposite once in office. As eluded to before in this thread, give just ONE candidate regardless of party who can match Ron Paul on record in this regard???

"But paul wont be there, GJ or whoever will...vote for him instead!" maybe we would consider it if you werent so hell bent on promoting them before the perverbial fat lady sings. I see a lot of GJ supporters seeing it as the "Paulites" who are preventing GJ from winning for failing to throw him their support.. but here on the opposite side of the looking glass it seems like the GJ supporters and some of the Rand hats are the ones hindering things holding out for GJ 2012 or Rand 2016 and underminding morale at every turn with all the negativity and pushy vote for Johnson crap or "we'll get Rand in 2016" WHILE RON PAUL IS STILL RUNNING!!!!

for me it comes down to this... 4 years of Obama? how bout 8 years of mitt? 4 years of Ron Paul would be my choice (I doubt he would take a 2nd term once he set things on the right path in his first). As for GJ.. Last i checked it was Ron Paul drawing 10,000 a crowd and growing not GJ.. so to suggest that somehow magically GJ would prevail over the other 2 somehow just dosent make sense.. even if somehow it happened by miracle.. what kind of record does johnson have to lead me to believe he would be any different than the other 2 liars? It is due to Pauls CHARACTER We have made great inroads and can only wonder where we would be if all the negative ninnys hadnt chosen to sit this one out hoping for GJ/Rand all the while underminding the morale and efforts to get Ron Paul in SINCE EVEN BEFORE THE PRIMARIES BEGAN.

Nobody here thinks that if we somehow got Ron in that all would magically be right overnight... BUT we do believe that MORE inroads will be able to be made at a highly faster rate and set the stage more in our favor in 2016.

I called Libertarian Party coat tail riding co-opt months ago... and everthing points in this direction.. again... I myself and alot of other independants dont care about ANY party... Libertarian or otherwise... and no Ron Paul is NOT a savior but he does however speak liberty and and walk the walk.

A lot of the "Libertarian party" pushers (not to be confused with simply those who identify themselves as Libertarian mind you) are still playing the political party parlor game.. for those of who are indys, liberty knows no party loyalty. The record, the positions, the philosophy, the integrity, the exposure... Ron Paul has them all. Given the inroads already made.. wonder where we would be if those holding out for GJ or Rand along with those who hold the "Id vote for Ron Paul if he could win" frame of mind were really on boad all along?

qwerty

08-07-2012, 11:01 AM

banner is on their site, http://www.lp.org/

parocks

08-07-2012, 11:17 AM

I like the Libertarian Party, I like Gary Johnson, I set up garyjohnson2012.com and handed it over to him once he announced, I was once the Libertarian Party's candidate for the House of Representatives in Georgia.

But I see how many hurdles that the two party system has put into place which make it prohibitive to get anywhere as a third party. It has come to the point where Ron Paul has opened a door for libertarians to have a chance at actually making changes as opposed to always standing outside of the machine shouting at it as it rolls on.

The Libertarian Party is good for bringing in new people to the political process, letting them know that there are others out there who believe the same things. It is good for getting all of those people on the same page, or as close as you can get libertarians.

I never thought I would say it and I always fought those that said the same thing, but working within the Republican Party is the best way forward. Unfortunately. If enough of us can get into power to the point of opening the door for third parties, then the LP would be a great option. But right now it is what it is.

As for Gary Johnson, I like the guy, I may even vote for him. But more than likely I will write in Ron Paul. I live in Florida and if the votes are close enough where Romney loses by the amount of people who wrote in Ron Paul's name...then they will get the message. If the LP candidate is that difference in votes, then they could just chalk it up as protest votes.

Plus, I support Ron Paul and want my vote to reflect that.

Well, unless Florida reports the write ins, they won't get the message.

We have a message, but with Ron Paul not on the ballot, we have no way to express it.

Am I going to be reading people after Tampa saying that it's anything but idiocy to write in Ron Paul. Is Ron Paul asking for this? You don't think it might make Ron Paul look a little silly, maybe? Just a little? You think it might make Ron Paul supporters look a little detached from reality? Delusional? Maybe a different mental illness?

Ron Paul has given no indication at all that he wants anything to do with a write-in campaign.

Hey, maybe it'll be fun to learn how a different campaign works, find out who manages GJ's campaign and call him an asshole for no reason. GJ doesn't win, it's Besse Fenton fault. Boo Besse Jenton. I mean, GJ is lacking to Ron Paul, but usually the Libertarians have a "who?" running, and not a former Governor with more political experience than the Republican nominee. GJ (again, on the ballot), is trying to kiss our ass. Romney is cheating to get us kicked out of Tampa.

Elwar

08-07-2012, 11:27 AM

Well, unless Florida reports the write ins, they won't get the message.

We have a message, but with Ron Paul not on the ballot, we have no way to express it.

Am I going to be reading people after Tampa saying that it's anything but idiocy to write in Ron Paul. Is Ron Paul asking for this? You don't think it might make Ron Paul look a little silly, maybe? Just a little? You think it might make Ron Paul supporters look a little detached from reality? Delusional? Maybe a different mental illness?

Ron Paul has given no indication at all that he wants anything to do with a write-in campaign.

Hey, maybe it'll be fun to learn how a different campaign works, find out who manages GJ's campaign and call him an asshole for no reason. GJ doesn't win, it's Besse Fenton fault. Boo Besse Jenton. I mean, GJ is lacking to Ron Paul, but usually the Libertarians have a "who?" running, and not a former Governor with more political experience than the Republican nominee. GJ (again, on the ballot), is trying to kiss our ass. Romney is cheating to get us kicked out of Tampa.

I am not sure if Florida reports or records write ins, I am sure I will find out by November.

Like I said, I may vote for Johnson if I do not write in Ron Paul. But my single vote means nothing. And I know that. It is about making myself feel good, not choosing a candidate.

If I really thought that my vote would decide the race between Romney and Obama, I would likely vote for Obama. Though I cannot see myself ever voting for a Democrat. Though, I thought the same about voting for a Republican at one time as well. If Republicans think that it is a little silly to write in Ron Paul, then they would get a shock to find out who I would rather have running the country for the next 4 years.

parocks

08-07-2012, 11:39 AM

I am not sure if Florida reports or records write ins, I am sure I will find out by November.

Like I said, I may vote for Johnson if I do not write in Ron Paul. But my single vote means nothing. And I know that. It is about making myself feel good, not choosing a candidate.

If I really thought that my vote would decide the race between Romney and Obama, I would likely vote for Obama. Though I cannot see myself ever voting for a Democrat. Though, I thought the same about voting for a Republican at one time as well. If Republicans think that it is a little silly to write in Ron Paul, then they would get a shock to find out who I would rather have running the country for the next 4 years.

My concern isn't people writing in Ron Paul, it's a concern that, after Tampa, people will be encouraging other people to write in Ron Paul. I might write in Ron Paul. But that isn't the "right thing to do". And it's not entirely clear that GJ is the right thing to do. But it is the best bang for the buck way to make the statement we want to make.

GJ would get the most votes for the least effort. We want to point so something and say "see, people want Liberty" That's our message. Dipshits standing on street corners with "write in Ron Paul" signs in October is not good. The same thing with Gary Johnson signs is fine.

sailingaway

08-07-2012, 11:40 AM

My concern isn't people writing in Ron Paul, it's a concern that, after Tampa, people will be encouraging other people to write in Ron Paul. I might write in Ron Paul. But that isn't the "right thing to do". And it's not entirely clear that GJ is the right thing to do. But it is the best bang for the buck way to make the statement we want to make.

GJ would get the most votes for the least effort. We want to point so something and say "see, people want Liberty" That's our message. Dipshits standing on street corners with "write in Ron Paul" signs in October is not good. The same thing with Gary Johnson signs is fine.

clearly people have different opinions about that.

NoOneButPaul

08-07-2012, 11:47 AM

clearly people have different opinions about that.

Clearly we do... I for one find it sickening people wouldn't write in Ron Paul even if they aren't allowed to.

Bring a sharpie if you can't...

We should all be voting for Ron Paul out of principle, anyone who votes for Johnson will regret it down the line when they can't say they voted for Ron Paul in 2012.

Peace&Freedom

08-07-2012, 12:07 PM

After the GOP convention, Paul may be endorsing Gary Johnson. I think it would be more reasonable for people to be voting for the national liberty candidate who actually is on the ballot, than to be writing in Paul, against his own indicated liberty choice for President.

PS: The following is my reply to posts through the 19th page of the thread, alleging the LP is trying to 'co-opt' a Republican based movement. It was unjustifiably moved to HT, indicating apparently no debate was desired (or to be tolerated) on the issue, when the charge is a divisive and horrible insult to most independent players in the movement, who arguably outnumber the 'work within the GOP' activists. Disclosure: I am not a GJ shill, and have past stated he is much inferior to Paul, but is a decent liberty candidate for President. No word below was changed, so judge for yourself what, if anything, was objectionable about it:

Just to reiterate the other side of the 'co-opt' issue, many in the grassroots liberty network that unified to support Ron Paul in '08 and and '12, existed apart from and prior to those campaigns, and are operating apart from specific party activity within the GOP OR the LP. From that perspective, it is the "do it all in the GOP" drive that is co-opting the independence of the movement, which is one of its greatest strengths. It is NOT at all established that that 'takeover' concept is the center of gravity of liberty activism, only that its supporters seem to ardently wish that it was.

It is inaccurate and disparaging to label the grassroots as 'coattailers' when they put on a grassroots event, when such events are not official Paul campaign events in the first place. To put the shoe on the other foot, would it be fair for the grassroots sponsors to characterize the Paul campaign/takeover the GOP supporters as 'hijackers' who want every liberty effort, initiative or speaker to be cleared by 'the official' campaign or rEVOLution leaders in order to proceed? Who are these leaders, and where did they come from, to chastise what was/is a decentralized movement?

Let's stop painting this false opposition between the GOP and LP factions, or pushing needless absurdities such as suggesting that major liberty events must exclude Libertarians. The goal should be to encourage the entire movement in its push for liberty, from the ground up, not the 'master plan' top down, both during and after the passing of the Paul campaign.

rockandrollsouls

08-07-2012, 02:29 PM

My understanding was she wanted to open borders immediately (I remember reading something along the lines of "we don't have to wait until.....to open our borders") But even if I'm mistaken, that might be the least of my problem with her :o

in fairness, ruwart is for open borders in the way ron is... ruwarts open border stance is presented in the ideal world with no welfare and free markets. its a philosophical answer. open borders with a welfare state would be horrible. if everyone had to pull their own weight- then the more people producing wealth the better for society. open borders makes sense.

rockandrollsouls

08-07-2012, 02:32 PM

The LP still isn't "on the map" lol.

Ron did his best, but was not able to get much attention or gain many votes in '87/'88.
If you believe "Ron Paul put the Libertarian Party on the map" and that makes you happy, then go right ahead and keep believing it.

How old are you?
Where do you go to school little girl? :p

rockandrollsouls

08-07-2012, 02:40 PM

My thoughts on Paul Fest itself -

I think it's great to celebrate many of the issues and the enthusiasm Ron has helped to push into the limelight. However, I can see how it could undermine our efforts to infiltrate and retake the GOP. It's so close to the convention that I can see how the party could view it as a snub or an effort to detract from the party. (Not that I think that's bad haha, but something to be mindful of in relation to our ultimate goal.) Simply because it has Ron's stamp on it, the festival will be viewed as an effort to further divide the party and will surely be used as ammo against us.

I think they would have been better served to call it freedom fest or something and market it as an event to energize the paleoconservative faction of the party. Keep it away from candidate lines and move it towards the line about issues. Just my 2 cents.

Eire4RonPaul

08-07-2012, 02:48 PM

Carehn

08-08-2012, 08:10 AM

It would be cool to see the Libertarian party get like 5% of the vote.

It would scare the pants off of the other two partys.

Revolution9

08-08-2012, 10:27 AM

Like I'm not going to lie, I might vote for Gary Johnson.

BUT

Paul Fest is about Ron Paul, and it seems the libertarian party is trying to hijack it. I'm not cool with that.

In my experience they like to hijack everything.. If I had bought a ticket I would be pissed..Frankly..I didn't want to go as soon as Kokesh was involved and GJ's presence slammed the lid on me attending.. And Gigi Bowman needs to remember her interaction with me and take me off her FaceBook email crap. I don't do FaceBook and she is a hijacking bitch.

Rev9

Revolution9

08-08-2012, 10:29 AM

Gosh darn Free market aligning sponsors and event coordinators for mutual beneficial exchanges, How dare they!!! :p .

Seriously Paulfest needed sponsors and it got some, would you rather have an underfunded Paulfest or no Paulfest?????

It ain't a PaulFest. So your question is kinda bogus. Is it a Rolling Stones concert if the Smashing Pumpkins play??

Rev9

Eire4RonPaul

08-08-2012, 10:32 AM

In my experience they like to hijack everything.. If I had bought a ticket I would be pissed..Frankly..I didn't want to go as soon as Kokesh was involved and GJ's presence slammed the lid on me attending.. And Gigi Bowman needs to remember her interaction with me and take me off her FaceBook email crap. I don't do FaceBook and she is a hijacking bitch.

Rev9

Whats up with your unhealthy obsession about all things Libertarian Party related? I haven't been here long but you've got a hard on for them - who took the jam out of your doughnut? Don't be rubbishing other liberty candidates and other hard working people that agree on 99.9% of things Ron Paul does - it's not benefiting us.

sailingaway

08-08-2012, 10:34 AM

Whats up with your unhealthy obsession about all things Libertarian Party related? I haven't been here long but you've got a hard on for them - who took the jam out of your doughnut?

we have a lot of people trying to coopt Ron Paul Republicans to support their own hierarchy and we don't much like it, many of us. We each have different trigger points, but coopting us is not the purpose of Ron's campaign subforum.

Eire4RonPaul

08-08-2012, 10:37 AM

we have a lot of people trying to coopt Ron Paul Republicans to support their own hierarchy and we don't much like it, many of us. We each have different trigger points, but coopting us is not the purpose of Ron's campaign subforum.

The Republican Party haven't stood for the Constitution in nearly how long? Thought so...

You have more in common with the LP (also disenchanted with the current parties) than you do the GOP. Why bash them? It's the same political philosophy being discussed here for crying out loud...if a bunch of hardcore Marxists came in here to spin things, then I'd agree with you but come on...the way people regard other libertarians around here, if anyone didn't know better you'd think the LP came from outer space...

Revolution9

08-08-2012, 10:38 AM

Right, with tickets, literature and advertising all bought and paid for and the event two weeks away. Not possible.

Well. I will just chalk it up as another underhanded hijack with a total lack of respect by the LP and SOME of it's members. Tried to do it with my Atlanta RP fest in 08 but I don't put up with crap from anybody. They were told to piss off and it wasn't about them..even though Ike Hall who is LP helped and set up all the tabliing and booths..he understood what was going on. It was about Ron..not the LP.

Rev9

Tudo

08-08-2012, 10:39 AM

Tudo

08-08-2012, 10:41 AM

The only 3rd party candidate who achieved getting on the ballot in all 50 states

Harry Browne - Had He Been Elected
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LcHv6tRRyU

Revolution9

08-08-2012, 10:42 AM

Try me.

Who cares about arguing for a shill who was tossed in by the Rockefellers for a co-opted lead by the nose ring down a dead and alley and to split and compromise the real liberty movement as personified by the efforts of Ron Paul.

Rev9

sailingaway

08-08-2012, 10:42 AM

The Republican Party haven't stood for the Constitution in nearly how long? Thought so...

You have more in common with the LP (also disenchanted with the current parties) than you do the GOP. Why bash them? It's the same political philosophy being discussed here for crying out loud...if a bunch of hardcore Marxists came in here to spin things, then I'd agree with you but come on...the way people regard other libertarians around here, if anyone didn't know better you'd think the LP came from outer space...

I am going to start deleting your comments. This is not the place for that argument. There is an opposing candidate section. This is Ron Paul's campaign section and he is running as a Republican in the Republican presidential primary process and the entire reason our people will be in Tampa is to support him in that process.

V3n

08-08-2012, 10:42 AM

Revolution9

08-08-2012, 10:43 AM

Logic doesn't work for you, I see.

'To hell with the message, I'm going to make a mess of this no matter what....' is your attitude....fair enough. No wonder this movement is failing big time with such stubborness. You can at least appreciate the money - or would you rather sit in sh*t and do without? Beggers can't be choosers. I'm giving props to an organization not ashamed to call themselves Libertarian.

GJ and your gambit will fail as it was designed wholly with that goal in mind.

Rev9

Eire4RonPaul

08-08-2012, 10:51 AM

That's only the tip of the iceberg. I am completely with you on this. We should stay far away from the current Libertarian Party that seems to promote Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root as its saviors. I remember the days of Mary Ruwart and Michael Badnarik, but those days are gone now. Getting involved with the LP at this point is bad business.

The LP has always been radical - throughout the years the radicals nominated Ron Paul among others but in 08 there was some messing around that led to Barr getting the nomination. The only reason Johnson is standing this time around is because he is a familiar face to the electorate and he has a history of holding a high office - namely New Mexico's Governor. If Gary didn't make the switch from the GOP this year, the hardcores in the LP would have dominated again this year and nominated some kind of Anarcho-Capitalist for all we know...

Bob Barr was a shill - a blip that many in the party didn't want, favour or support. Johnson is a good choice though because he has name recognition for the most part. I think he can do well and I don't think he is making it about him. He clearly wants as many Libertarians in the race as possible. He endorsed Ron Paul before and he wouldn't want himself taking votes away from Paul had Paul been the GOP nominee but that is turning out to not be the case with each passing day. Therefore, Gary doesn't go to the White House, we ALL go to the White House. He's appealing to RP supporters to ask what we would like him to talk about in the debates. He's asking for our help and input. I don't think he's challenging Ron Paul - anyone who thinks that needs their heads examined...he's complimenting a great campaign by providing yet another Constitutional perspective. And I think that needs to be applauded rather than ridiculed.

LibertyEagle

08-08-2012, 10:53 AM

Clearly we do... I for one find it sickening people wouldn't write in Ron Paul even if they aren't allowed to.

Bring a sharpie if you can't...

We should all be voting for Ron Paul out of principle, anyone who votes for Johnson will regret it down the line when they can't say they voted for Ron Paul in 2012.

If write-ins are not being accepted in your state, wouldn't writing in his name with a Sharpie, just get your entire ballot thrown out? In other words, everything else that your voted for would also be scrapped.

sailingaway

08-08-2012, 10:55 AM

If write-ins are not being accepted in your state, wouldn't writing in his name with a Sharpie, just get your entire ballot thrown out? In other words, everything else that your voted for would also be scrapped.

I wouldn't do anything to get the ballot thrown out, but they do track how many vote for president vs how many vote for other offices and a bunch who vote and don't vote for President would, I think, be pretty telling.

Hard to spin as 'can't bother to vote'.

Eire4RonPaul

08-08-2012, 10:57 AM

I am going to start deleting your comments. This is not the place for that argument. There is an opposing candidate section. This is Ron Paul's campaign section and he is running as a Republican in the Republican presidential primary process and the entire reason our people will be in Tampa is to support him in that process.

You seem to think I have a problem with you supporting Ron Paul...I don't, I support Ron Paul.

The difference is that I am not willing to follow the blind off a cliff and wallow in my own disappointment when Paul doesn't get the nomination in Tampa - simple as that. I too dream of limited government, and for that very reason I am not going to dismiss other people offering it..

Revolution9

08-08-2012, 11:03 AM

Whats up with your unhealthy obsession about all things Libertarian Party related? I haven't been here long but you've got a hard on for them - who took the jam out of your doughnut? Don't be rubbishing other liberty candidates and other hard working people that agree on 99.9% of things Ron Paul does - it's not benefiting us.

Piss off clown. You have been insulting people and attempting hijacking and yer not even in America. I am grassroots whip and sarge-at-arms. I will fire at who I wish with impunity porkchop. And if I truly engage you you will be immolated and a smoking pile of jellyboned rhetoric looking to pass the gas from your lower fundament that has been causing your postings to arrive in the manner they do on this board. Rubbishing a Rockefeller plant and shill such as GJ gives me great pleasure. Getting yer panties in a knot about that gives me even greater joy. Enjoy your nosering and don't let it tear your nostrils out when you realize the chute you have been cattle prodded into.

Rev9

Revolution9

08-08-2012, 11:04 AM

We would sure have much more success in changing the LP than the gop.

Big dirty rotten deal.

Rev9

sailingaway

08-08-2012, 11:05 AM

You seem to think I have a problem with you supporting Ron Paul...I don't, I support Ron Paul.

The difference is that I am not willing to follow the blind off a cliff and wallow in my own disappointment when Paul doesn't get the nomination in Tampa - simple as that. I too dream of limited government, and for that very reason I am not going to dismiss other people offering it..

no, I have a problem with you trying to coopt Ron Paul supporters in Ron Paul's Republican campaign subforum to the Libertarian party's goals. There is an opposing candidate section that almost might as well be a gary johnson subforum by now and anyone who WANTS to discuss the LP and gary can go there. Those here are not here for that.

sailingaway

08-08-2012, 11:06 AM

Big dirty rotten deal.

Rev9

I'm not intuitively against our own party if RNC turns out to cheat us to the point there IS no point, but there are more of us than there are LP and I don't see why we'd have to go there, in any event. We don't have to take over a party if we ever decide a third party is a good idea, we can be one.

But the reasons why third parties are NOT a good idea is the reason we are trying to work inside the GOP.

Eire4RonPaul

08-08-2012, 11:12 AM

Piss off clown. You have been insulting people and attempting hijacking and yer not even in America. I am grassroots whip and sarge-at-arms. I will fire at who I wish with impunity porkchop. And if I truly engage you you will be immolated and a smoking pile of jellyboned rhetoric looking to pass the gas from your lower fundament that has been causing your postings to arrive in the manner they do on this board. Rubbishing a Rockefeller plant and shill such as GJ gives me great pleasure. Getting yer panties in a knot about that gives me even greater joy. Enjoy your nosering and don't let it tear your nostrils out when you realize the chute you have been cattle prodded into.

Rev9

What are you, 14? Grassroots whip...sounds authoritarian. Shooting? I'll hazard a guess an go say you're some flag waving inbred redneck. I usually leave symbols to the symbol minded. This has absolutely ZERO relevance on whether someone is American or not - absolutely ZERO. Austrian economics is European, and such a philosophy predates Ron Paul by centuries. Who do you think gives you the right to act like judge, jury and executioner or sum up another individuals 'pureness' per se? Is the fact that one of your buddies happened to tell you this old guy wants to legalize pot? This may be news to you, but other peoples families have been involved in campaigns for decades. It's not news to us. This is not about Ron Paul and clowns like you are what is going to destroy this movement. You're not willing to give other people a chance or embrace other candidates offering the same philosophy.

It's dangerous to treat Ron Paul like a martyr. He is not - he's one man. I couldn't give two shiny sh!ts and Ron Paul, Rand Paul or Gary Johnson. I care about only 1 thing - making government miniscule. Now what is the difference who delivers that to us? Aye? The Liberty movement is bigger than Ron Paul - it's been building for decades before even Murray Rothbard wrote Man, Economy and State. It didn't start with Ron Paul and if you think you as a person are who represents the Liberty movement across the globe, then I've got some very disappointing news for you. Cop yourself on.

sailingaway

08-08-2012, 11:16 AM

What are you, 14? Grassroots whip...sounds authoritarian. Shooting? I'll hazard a guess an go say you're some flag waving inbred redneck. I usually leave symbols to the symbol minded. This has absolutely ZERO relevance on whether someone is American or not - absolutely ZERO. Austrian economics is European, and such a philosophy predates Ron Paul by centuries. Who do you think gives you the right to act like judge, jury and executioner or sum up another individuals 'pureness' per se? Is the fact that one of your buddies happened to tell you this old guy wants to legalize pot? This may be news to you, but other peoples families have been involved in campaigns for decades. It's not news to us. This is not about Ron Paul and clowns like you are what is going to destroy this movement. You're not willing to give other people a chance or embrace other candidates offering the same philosophy.

It's dangerous to treat Ron Paul like a martyr. He is not - he's one man. I couldn't give two shiny sh!ts and Ron Paul, Rand Paul or Gary Johnson. I care about only 1 thing - making government miniscule. Now what is the difference who delivers that to us? Aye? The Liberty movement is bigger than Ron Paul - it's been building for decades before even Murray Rothbard wrote Man, Economy and State. It didn't start with Ron Paul and if you think you as a person are who represents the Liberty movement across the globe, then I've got some very disappointing news for you. Cop yourself on.

so you know, if you attack forum members personally, you will end up banned.

And many here think the LP is not a useful tool to effect that goal, that SOME talk the talk but in past lives showed no inclination to walk the walk, and that even were they inclined, they aren't able. Some feel differently. But this is not the forum to discuss that. Check out opposing candidates, or even general politics but NOT Ron's campaign subforum.

Revolution9

08-08-2012, 11:17 AM

What are you, 14? Grassroots whip...sounds authoritarian. Shooting? I'll hazard a guess an go say you're some flag waving inbred redneck. I usually leave symbols to the symbol minded. This has absolutely ZERO relevance on whether someone is American or not - absolutely ZERO. Austrian economics is European, and such a philosophy predates Ron Paul by centuries. Who do you think gives you the right to act like judge, jury and executioner or sum up another individuals 'pureness' per se? Is the fact that one of your buddies happened to tell you this old guy wants to legalize pot? This may be news to you, but other peoples families have been involved in campaigns for decades. It's not news to us. This is not about Ron Paul and clowns like you are what is going to destroy this movement. You're not willing to give other people a chance or embrace other candidates offering the same philosophy.

It's dangerous to treat Ron Paul like a martyr. He is not - he's one man. I couldn't give two shiny sh!ts and Ron Paul, Rand Paul or Gary Johnson. I care about only 1 thing - making government miniscule. Now what is the difference who delivers that to us? Aye? The Liberty movement is bigger than Ron Paul - it's been building for decades before even Murray Rothbard wrote Man, Economy and State. It didn't start with Ron Paul and if you think you as a person are who represents the Liberty movement across the globe, then I've got some very disappointing news for you. Cop yourself on.

I am 55 and the title is one given to me. I consider it a badge of honor and I earned it pal. I am a rock and rolling, game engine coding, long haired pot smoking nature boy with a trophy rack above my mantle proving my mettle against trollage and shillage.. Your first attempted shot fell well clear of it's intended mark. You got any other lameassed bullshit you want to toss out. I like to kick a few ankles first to get the drift of the opponent before I upend their ass to glorious laughter./

Yer Master
Rev9

Eire4RonPaul

08-08-2012, 11:20 AM

I am 55 and the title is one given to me. I consider it a badge of honor and I earned it pal. I am a rock and rolling, game engine coding, long haired pot smoking nature boy with a trophy rack above my mantle proving my mettle against trollage and shillage.. Your first attempted shot fell well clear of it's intended mark. You got any other lameassed bullshit you want to toss out. I like to kick a few ankles first to get the drift of the opponent before I upend their ass to glorious laughter./

Yer Master
Rev9

No mate the only thing I see is a pathetic 55 year old trying his hand at rhyming. Quit while you're ahead - you're embarrassing yourself. Sit down.

Eire4RonPaul

08-08-2012, 11:27 AM

so you know, if you attack forum members personally, you will end up banned.

And many here think the LP is not a useful tool to effect that goal, that SOME talk the talk but in past lives showed no inclination to walk the walk, and that even were they inclined, they aren't able. Some feel differently. But this is not the forum to discuss that. Check out opposing candidates, or even general politics but NOT Ron's campaign subforum.

Well then thats simple enough, but it seems other posters havent got any debating skills whatsoever and reduce themselves to shouting "shill" etc...

And you say Im in danger of getting banned?! :rolleyes:

brandon

08-08-2012, 11:28 AM

Austrian economics is European, and such a philosophy predates Ron Paul by centuries.

This isn't really true. The origins of Austrian economics can be traced back to Menger who was born only about 90 years before Paul. Hardly "Centuries". The formalization of the school didn't really occur until the 20th century, and the most prominent figures were all alive in Paul's lifetime. He personally knew Mises, who lived in the US for a substantial portion of his life as did most of the other 20th century Austrian economists.

Agorism

08-08-2012, 11:29 AM

I'm not opposed if they want to participate

sailingaway

08-08-2012, 11:31 AM

Well then thats simple enough, but it seems other posters havent got any debating skills whatsoever and reduce themselves to shouting "shill" etc...

And you say Im in danger of getting banned?! :rolleyes:

You are attacking personally not positions. There is leeway and you have crossed it. Old time posters where we know where they are coming from sometimes get a longer leash, and pms. We are private property, we don't need to be perfectly fair, although we have a community sense of fairness. What sort of libertarian are you?

Revolution9

08-08-2012, 11:36 AM

No mate the only thing I see is a pathetic 55 year old trying his hand at rhyming. Quit while you're ahead - you're embarrassing yourself. Sit down.

Hehe.. This proves your abilities at discernment are bereft of any cogent intellect. What I see is an Irishman on here trying to get RP supporters to get cattle chuted down the fake GJ feedlot slaughter gambit. You, in your unabashed ignorance think that your herding is of your own volition. I on the other hand stand foursquare behind the ONLY statesman and politician in decades who has the interests of The People in mind and not their own belly swollen, mind boggled ego trip coupled to slush fund payments from the PTB. GJ is simply just another in a long line of shills to lead the unwary down a dead end alley and dissipate their energies. They thank you for participating in their gambit whole heartedly..well... with whatever shred of a frikkin' heart they have left.

So..piss up a rope pal..into the wind. You are playing the part of the puppet.

Rev9

Revolution9

08-08-2012, 11:38 AM

No mate the only thing I see is a pathetic 55 year old trying his hand at rhyming. Quit while you're ahead - you're embarrassing yourself. Sit down.

Just to point out with greater clarity.. There ain't a single rhyme in my reply. This alone put your powers of discernment and ability to parse the written word in question.

Rev9

sailingaway

08-08-2012, 11:39 AM

Hehe.. This proves your abilities at discernment are bereft of any cogent intellect. What I see is an Irishman on here trying to get RP supporters to get cattle chuted down the fake GJ feedlot slaughter gambit. You, in your unabashed ignorance think that your herding is of your own volition. I on the other hand stand foursquare behind the ONLY statesman and politician in decades who has the interests of The People in mind and not their own belly swollen, mind boggled ego trip coupled to slush fund payments from the PTB. GJ is simply just another in a long line of shills to lead the unwary down a dead end alley and dissipate their energies. They thank you for participating in their gambit whole heartedly..well... with whatever shred of a frikkin' heart they have left.

So..piss up a rope pal..into the wind. You are playing the part of the puppet.

Rev9

Rev9, it is hard to tell him to take it elsewhere if you keep engaging the topic. Granted it is hard to let an insult just lie, but I'd like this particular topic somewhere else, than here. It is becoming all about that, and that isn't what this forum is for, imho.

I don't want this as a forum for cooption of those in this forum to network with other RP campaign supporters etc. I'd rather we dropped this.