PDA

View Full Version : First Draft. NH Adv. by LLepard. Comments




llepard
12-18-2007, 02:24 PM
OK, here is where we are right now.

It is long.

It will be full page.

There will be bolding, set outs and text changes.

It is kind of hard to read without all the formatting. I will try to get a pdf up later.

If you have time take a look and make suggestions.

Thanks.

Larry

In particular, do you think I should leave this part in or take it out. It is how I feel. But Linda thinks we lose voters. Thoughts?

. Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.[Linda comment (I’d take it all out and not even go there—assuming your goal is to help Ron get elected. Plus the copy just flows better into your next statement with it out.)

BREAK

Paid Political Message

Why did I spend $85,000 to support Presidential Candidate Ron Paul? Because I care about my children and your children.

Lawrence W. Lepard, American Citizen.


Recently,I reached into my own pocket and placed a full page ad in USA Today supporting the candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul. Why did I spend my hard-earned dollars on such an ad? I will tell you. Because Ron Paul is different from every other individual who carries the title "politician." He is truly a public servant. A "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" type of guy. No vested interest will support him, but I will. (I strongly believe that at this critical time we have a dire need for honest leadership in this country.
As Americans, we stand at an important crossroads in our history. We need to make a decision as to what we want America to represent, and to become. History will record the outcome of our decision. If we make the wrong choice, many more innocent people will die, and history will not be kind. As I say to my closest friends, I do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren that I stood silent as others destroyed this country.
Let me state it clearly. The America that I grew up in
believed in the rule of law, not the rule of men.
The America that I grew up in believed in telling the truth. The America that I grew up in believed in following Judeo-Christian values, and yet made room for those of different faiths and backgrounds. The America I grew up in had a religious flavor, but we were wary of those who wore their religion on their sleeves. The America that I grew up in believed in the golden rule: treat people the way we would like them to treat us. The America that I grew up in believed that you did not lie, cheat or steal. The America that I grew up in believed in the inherent goodness of most men, but recognized that evil exists.
Nevertheless, the America that I grew up in did not believe in an eye for an eye. It believed in protecting oneself from evil, but in the process of doing so we were cautioned not to become what we were protecting against.
In short, the America that I grew up in was a place where one could be proud of one’s country, and thankful to the men and women who had sacrificed so much in the past to give us this heritage.
I wake up today as a 50 year old husband and father of three, and I wonder where that America has gone. I see a President who called the U.S. Constitution “just a piece of paper”. He replaced a President who blatantly lied to the American public. Admittedly, the lie was about something that was none of the public’s business. However, when a country is led by a liar, it lowers that country’s level of discourse and makes lying seem acceptable. It is not. Are these the best leaders this Country can produce? I see that second President’s wife running for President and claiming she will end the war, when she initially voted for the war, and recently voted for a resolution against Iran that makes another war more likely. Do Americans really believe she will act in our best interests given all the money she has received from lobbyists and the military industrial complex? Do Americans really believe she will end the war, as she now has begun claiming in her political advertisements? Or is this just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck. Will her position on the war be like the story she told us about how she traded "cattle futures" so successfully?
I see the U.S. involved in an aggressive, undeclared war against a country that did not represent a threat to us in any way. We were lead into this war on the pretense of false and inaccurate information. The truth is, we are far less safe now than we were before we invaded Iraq. This war has created more emotionally charged enemies who have more reasons to attack us than ever before. Of course, the Administration and the media conveniently assure us that the “surge” is working. No surprise there, given that there is an election coming up.
Ron Paul voted against invading Iraq. Rather than attack an entire nation, he tried to convince Congress and our President to strategically target the terrorists responsible for 9/11. The current Administration has failed to capture and eliminate the criminals who perpetrated this crime against us. Those responsible are still at large, our borders are wide open, and our troops are spread thin all over the globe. We need a leader who will protect us with a strong national defense and keep us out of foreign entanglements that in the end, create more enemies than friends. We need a President who will put the national security of the American people, and the safety of our troops, before the interests of oil companies and the military industrial complex.
To date the outcome of this war is that between 100,000 and 1.0 million innocent people have died. These figures are between 30 and 300 times the number of people killed on 911. Do two wrongs make a right? Furthermore, the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. Not Iraqis. We are allies with Saudi Arabia and yet Saudi Arabia is far from being a democracy. Yet we went to war to create a democracy in Iraq and set an example for the Middle East.
The hypocrisy is staggering. The mistakes that were made are nearly criminal. Why anyone believes one thing that is said by the people who led us into this war is a mystery to me.
“We will be greeted as liberators.” Wrong. “Oil revenues will pay the cost.” Wrong. “A secular democracy will emerge and be an inspiration for other countries.” Wrong. The list of misjudgments goes on an on.
Were the civilian Iraqis killed by our preemptive war “collateral damage” or is that just a euphemism for murder? Has anyone taken the time to look at their pictures on the Web? I wonder how their relatives and friends feel about the United States? I wonder if they are more or less likely to become terrorists as a result of the actions of the United States. I see a country that has violated the Geneva Conventions. I see a country that has violated the Christian Doctrine of Just War. I see a country that has started a war that is illegal under international law. As President Eisenhower said, “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not listen to anyone who seriously talked about such a thing”. I see a flock of Presidential candidates, most of whom voted for this war and many of whom believe “all options should be on the table” in dealing with Iran. For those who are not current on this subject, that language is code for: we should be prepared to attack Iran with conventional or nuclear weapons.
Think about that for a moment. Leaders in this Country are actually talking about using a nuclear weapon preemptively against a country that has not attacked us. Are they insane?
I hear Neocon pundits calling for the beginning of World War III. I see a Country that has suspended habeas corpus. I see a country that has stripped its citizens of the Constitutional protections against an overreaching government. I see a country that has sanctioned “rendition” which is just another term for the kidnapping of anyone, anywhere, throughout the world, and then spiriting them off to a remote location where they can be subject to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which we are told are not torture. Another lie. I see a country that has engaged in torture. Hell, one leading Presidential candidate wants to “double Guantanamo” and thinks his sons’ campaigning for him is equivalent to serving in the military. Of course, he got a deferment to avoid serving in Vietnam. Other candidates for the highest office in this land are not any better. I see a war hero candidate who sings "bomb Iran" to the tune of The Beach Boy's song, Barbara Ann. How can he make light of killing people? Shame on you Senator. Of all people, you should know better. Joking about killing someone is a disgrace in my book. Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.[Linda comment (I’d take it all out and not even go there—assuming your goal is to help Ron get elected. Plus the copy just flows better into your next statement with it out.) ] Furthermore, I see a country where the top advocates of war have never fought in one. Worse yet, they sought and obtained deferments when others were fighting. You cannot make this stuff up. The irony is incredible. If, as I believe, you reap what you sow, - then the ultimate payback for these injustices will be staggering.

I see a Country that thinks that it owns and controls the world. I believe this is ethically wrong.
Furthermore, we cannot afford it, so even attempting to run the world is pointless. I see a country that thinks it should have bases in the Middle East for the next fifty years. I see a country where the dominant political party, the Neocons, believes the world is a dark and evil place. I believe the people who feel this way are projecting their own views onto the rest of the world. They need therapy. I see a country where the Government has adopted the Old Testament view of an eye for an eye. As Ghandi said, if we take this approach we will all end up blind.
In short, I wonder if America has lost its soul. Out of malfeasance, fear, ignorance, or incompetence we have implemented the wrong policies and taken the wrong course. Since this is true, then effectively the terrorists are winning. God surely has a great sense of humor. Irony abounds.
As citizens, each and every one of us is somewhat responsible for the acts of our government. All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing. So, has America lost it soul: yes or no? I would submit that while the current U.S. Administration and the vast majority of the Senate and Congress have lost their souls, the American people have not. Nearly 70% of the American population is against this war, and yet the war goes on. The vast majority of the American people want peace. People know what is right, yet the government does the wrong thing. How can this be? We are supposed to be a government OF, FOR and BY the People. Are we? What do you think? Does our government really represent the American people? Do you think the U.S. government should kill innocent Iraqis or Iranians to make us safer? Would you advocate killing a man who lives down the street because you think he might do you harm in the future, even though he has done nothing to you yet?
I will say it right now, clearly and loud:

The huge disconnect between what a majority of this country wants and what our government is doing is the elephant in the room that no one will discuss.
I cannot in good conscience condone or support the policies of the Neocons, the military industrial complex, or the oil industry. I do not believe in “Full Spectrum Dominance”. I do not believe “We Are The Indispensable Nation”. I do not believe we are “History’s Actors.” I do not believe we can “Make Our Own Reality”. I do not believe we should be an Empire. I think we have great power and military superiority and we should use these abilities to protect ourselves. Furthermore, with these powers come enormous responsibility. We are a Constitutional Republic. I believe there is a power higher than my government and that the Founders drew upon this power when they drafted the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal.” That reads “all men.” Not “all Americans.” The Founders believed, as do I, that All men have God-given rights. Governments are made to protect these rights, not destroy them. Until recently, I believe the American government did a good job of protecting these rights for Americans. For many years now I believe the American government has used a different standard or play book when dealing with foreign countries and foreign citizens. But that is a story for a different essay.
If it sounds like I am mad, you’re right. I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore. (Source: Howard Beale: Network)
I am mad that my money becomes worth less every year because the Federal Reserve can print money out of thin air. I am mad that the U.S. Government inflation statistics are a lie, thanks to Bill Clinton’s changing of the CPI calculation. I am mad that this change and the Federal Reserve have put the economy on a roller coaster leading to boom and bust cycles that benefit financiers at the expense of the middle class, retirees and the poor. I am mad that Wall Street titans and speculators have been rewarded while savers and honest labor have been punished. I am mad that honesty is considered quaint and naive by the political classes. I am mad at the arrogance of those who hold power in Washington, DC. I am mad that the actions of some men in my country have taken away the moral high ground that the U.S. used to occupy. I am mad that my tax dollars are used for weapons rather than for peaceful purposes. I do not want the blood of innocents on my hands. I do not agree with many of Michael Moore’s positions, but his statement “dude, I want my country back” resonates with me. I believe that it resonates with a large portion of the American voter base.
Individual Americans are great people. If 70% of them are opposed to the war, then there is still hope. Of course the mainstream media, the press and the vested industrial and political interests would have us all believe that we cannot make a difference. They say we need to listen to them as they tell us who the next President will be. We have to choose between the two war monger candidates they will serve up to us. We are told who the two front runners are, and we are discouraged from looking elsewhere. Why bother, they say? No one else even stands a chance. Maybe so, maybe not. This time I think they have gone too far. I would submit that the outcome of this election it is not so clear. The establishment dam has sprung a leak. The leak may be small now, but it is growing. It is growing exponentially. The word is spreading. The candidates who represent change are moving up. The candidates who represent the status quo are moving down (Rudy Guiliani and Hillary Clinton). Even Rudy is being forced to talk about what a great religion Islam is in order to soften his Norman Podhoretz inspired:” kill’em all, and let God sort them out message.”
The lines could not be more clearly drawn.
Ron Paul’s message is clear and beautiful and true. It resonates with people. When you hear it you say, “that’s right, that’s what I believe”.
This is why his poll numbers are rising faster than any other candidate. Yet, the media still ignores him or treats him poorly. It is beautiful irony that every attack on him only brings him more attention as intelligent Americans wonder, “who is this guy that everyone keeps attacking … I wonder if there is a reason?” They say he cannot win. They say he is a fringe candidate. They say he will lose big. I disagree. First, I think there is a very good chance he will be our next President. Second, I think he has won, even if he does not win. Why? Because he has put the Freedom message out there. It is like a virus. It is spreading. It cannot be stopped. I believe history will record the Ron Paul Freedom Movement as a seminal event in the history of U.S. politics.
It is an honor to support this man. We should be so lucky as to have him for our President.
Having said that, we could all help history along a little bit by supporting the Ron Paul campaign. My favorite movie is :It’s A Wonderful Life. To me, the message of that movie is that we all make a difference. Individually, none of us have the power of the Neocons and the political classes, but collectively they are supposed to work for us. If we self-organize and unite, we have them badly out numbered. They are terrified, believe me on this. And it is happening. The growth in this movement is amazing. We can and will win this struggle. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a defeatist or is working for the other side. I ran the USA Today Advertisement because I wanted to plant a seed and make a difference. WE ALL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Every conversation, every person converted, every e-mail , every effort; it all counts. The internet is what has made it possible.
What a beautiful thing. The trend is really changing and it is fun to watch the old guard struggle as their fortress crumbles.
So what can you do?
Join our effort to elect Ron Paul as the next President of the United States. Spread the word that we have an opportunity to elect an honest statesman with an impeccable record of voting in line with our Constitution.
Donate to his campaign!
Each contribution represents another American who has said “enough is enough.”
Every contribution helps. $10 is not too little. On December 16th, our collective voices were heard when grassroots supporters for Ron succeeded in organizing the largest one-day fundraiser in political history. Over 58,000 ordinary Americans spoke with their wallets by donating more than $6 million dollars to the Ron Paul campaign in a single day. Together we are proving to be a force to be reckoned with.
Think about it. What is freedom worth? I would submit that it is priceless. If you care about the future of this country, I know that Ron Paul will not let you down. If you care about our troops, then you must vote for Ron Paul. He will bring them home to defend America instead of someone else’s country. Ron Paul has received more donations from active military personnel than any other candidate. Why do you think that is? Have you heard about it from the Mainstream Media? I think not.
This is it folks. A once in a lifetime opportunity. We may never see a candidate with more integrity, with a better message or track record.
Rarely has our country been so far off track. Our Founding Fathers pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honors in order to establish this Nation. Perhaps we have taken for granted the risks they took and the sacrifices they made. But we are being called. We are being tested. How will we answer? Will we meet the test or will we fail? Each of us makes a difference.
So what are you going to do? Are you going to be a Loyalist or a Patriot? Are you going to storm the ramparts or huddle with the bourgeoisie?
Americans are brave people. I believe we can set this country back on the right track and that America will experience a renaissance of Peace, Freedom and Prosperity. Vote Ron Paul for President.
The danger to our Republic
is real. We must act now!
Remember, each one of us makes a difference. Please vote for Ron Paul in your state’s Republican Primary and encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.
You can also learn more at
www.RonPaulLibrary.org
about Ron Paul”s positions on the
issues that most concern you.

Shatterhand
12-18-2007, 02:29 PM
What is the word count?

llepard
12-18-2007, 02:30 PM
What is the word count?

Don't know. Does Microsoft word tell you that? If so, how?

It is 6 pages double spaced. Would be 6-8 columns in 10pt on a full page newspaper.

Erazmus
12-18-2007, 02:31 PM
Don't know. Does Microsoft word tell you that? If so, how?

It is 6 pages double spaced. Would be 6-8 columns in 10pt on a full page newspaper.

It should be under the tools menu.

*edit* yeah, just checked, Tools > Word Count

JoshLowry
12-18-2007, 02:33 PM
Maybe make the letter look like a news article with proper headers.

So it blends in with the paper so to speak?

llepard
12-18-2007, 02:34 PM
3, 481 words per microsoft

Birdlady
12-18-2007, 02:35 PM
Maybe make the letter look like a news article with proper headers.

So it blends in with the paper so to speak?

Yes that is a really good idea.

llepard
12-18-2007, 02:35 PM
Maybe make the letter look like a news article with proper headers.

So it blends in with the paper so to speak?

Absolutely, the laid out version is MUCH better. We are just trying to agree on the text now.

LWL

StateofTrance
12-18-2007, 02:36 PM
Since the ad will be wordy, I suggest that we will have to include "attractive, eye-catching elements" to make lazy, brainwashed people read.

cero
12-18-2007, 02:36 PM
damn... I didn't bother reading it at first....
here I go!

spivey378
12-18-2007, 02:36 PM
thanks llepard

you will be written about in our history books

shadowhooch
12-18-2007, 02:36 PM
Without a doubt.....take out the evolution part completely. Linda is 100% correct.

Ron Paul doesn't believe religion should be a qualification for President of the United States and therefore shouldn't be brought up as one. Take the same road Ron abides by and take the high road. We don't want to be like Huck.

Lord Xar
12-18-2007, 02:38 PM
Maybe make the letter look like a news article with proper headers.

So it blends in with the paper so to speak?

Yes. I suggested this on another thread..

If you make it look like an article, people would be more inclined to read.. with a photo or two of Ron Paul etc....

JeffersonThomas
12-18-2007, 02:38 PM
I agree with Linda on leaving the evolution part out. There was a video about Ron Paul saying he wasn't sure about evolution that made front page of Reddit not too long ago so it could backfire. Whether it was taken out of context or not I don't know, but either way...I'm with Linda. The rest of it is quite good though. YOU ARE THE MAN! thanks!

Fyretrohl
12-18-2007, 02:38 PM
I would drop that one paragraph, unless it is really critical to you. Evolution vs Creation is a battle that can not be won. You will turn off creation believers with such a statement and I don't think you would gain that many evolutionists. While it needs to be strong, it needs to be as all encompassing as possible, IMHO. I will read the whole thing later, but, as a Christian, I would throw out any thought of you making sense when I ran into that part.

To be the 'harsh' critic, it says you can not support someone who has convictions that do not agree with yours. You are saying that Evolution is more important than MANY other critical issues. It is an important topic for people...But, is it enough to throw out a candidate completely? If so, RP's stance on Foreign Affairs will be important enough for people to exclude him. Hopefully, the message is meant to get people to look past those differences.

Erazmus
12-18-2007, 02:39 PM
In particular, do you think I should leave this part in or take it out. It is how I feel. But Linda thinks we lose voters. Thoughts?

. Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.[Linda comment (I’d take it all out and not even go there—assuming your goal is to help Ron get elected. Plus the copy just flows better into your next statement with it out.)

I don't think I'd include that part, at least not as it is currently written. It may alienate the religious community that we are trying to reach.

Shatterhand
12-18-2007, 02:39 PM
What size font for 3,400 words? This is a one page ad, right?

llepard
12-18-2007, 02:40 PM
Without a doubt.....take out the evolution part completely. Linda is 100% correct.

Ron Paul doesn't believe religion should be a qualification for President of the United States and therefore shouldn't be brought up as one. Take the same road Ron abides by and take the high road. We don't want to be like Huck.

I have no problem with religion. I am a Christian. I just object to the fuzzy thinking that allows fundamentalists to ignore science. I believe this thinking is dangerous. Armageddon, end times and all of that. Scare the shit out of me.

LWL

slantedview
12-18-2007, 02:40 PM
first comment, i would just stay away from the evolution subject. no need to really go there, just loses voters.

I agree with Linda.

jmunjr
12-18-2007, 02:41 PM
This is a newspaper ad? Umm, I value your effort but an ad should contain very few words. Get their attention and point them in the right direction. This just seems way too wordy, and no matter how good it may be, many will just pass it up.

Erazmus
12-18-2007, 02:42 PM
llepard, I am currently reading through it. I was just wondering if you could do a quick edit and make some paragraphs with the post. It is difficult to follow the way it's formatted on the forums.

So far, great read though. :)

Paul4Prez
12-18-2007, 02:43 PM
Larry,

Great job. I hope you sign your name in large letters at the bottom, John Hancock style -- big enough for the neocons to read without Lasik, as Hancock signed his, "big enough for the king to read without his spectacles".

JeffersonThomas
12-18-2007, 02:44 PM
here's the video where he comments on evolution at about the 2:40 mark. I hope it doesn't hurt any of you to see it. Personally I'm more concerned on how well i think Ron would run the country rather than what he thinks happened billions of years go.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4af9Q0Fa4Q

uncle saddam
12-18-2007, 02:44 PM
Awesome writing!

Only thing I saw first time through was a missing question mark:
Or is this just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck.

ilovemypitbull
12-18-2007, 02:46 PM
I like this a lot. And I'm for a "wordy" ad - if someone reads through it and agrees, you've got a solid Ron Paul supporter. As some marketing people say, "The More You Tell, The More You Sell"

RTsquared
12-18-2007, 02:47 PM
Larry -

You have to say what is important to YOU. Whether or not it will lose votes or is a political non-sequitir is not important in the grand scheme of things. This is how YOU feel, and when you are paying for the privilege of expressing your opinion, you should do what you feel is right.

That being said, I do have to agree with Linda. I could see that turning some hardcore Christians away from Dr. Paul. If you could replace that passage with something more directly attacking Huckleberry's opinion of the role of religion in American society (has he said anything along the lines of "America needs to be governed by the Bible"? I do not know) as opposed to attacking his beliefs directly. In addition, I think Dr. Paul would approve moreso than he would attacking a candidate's personal religious beliefs (see his statement condemning the need for Romney to make the speech regarding his faith).

Once again, however, it is your money and your message. If it truly expresses how you feel, the minutia is extraneous.

Falseflagop
12-18-2007, 02:47 PM
Larry:

If I may, I would get rid of the EVOLUTION line, just the other day RP discussed this and they would negate, not good. Take it out.

Otherwise the letter rocks!

silverlegacy
12-18-2007, 02:47 PM
I would take out the evolution part, it would alienate some voters. I have a few examples in my family, unfortunately.

Pimpin Turtle Dot Com
12-18-2007, 02:48 PM
This IS A GREAT LETTER YOU WROTE... PUT IT ACROSS NEW HAMPSHIRE AND I BELIEVE WE WILL WIN IT....

Ron Paul Fan
12-18-2007, 02:49 PM
I didn't bother to read it because it's too long, but I would just suggest that you shouldn't listen to what other people say when it's supposed to be an article that is explaining how you feel! Listen to your heart!

Bluedevil
12-18-2007, 02:50 PM
Obviously its your money, but I would stick with the Founding Fathers ad. Thats my favorite ad, and it would peak everyones interest who sees it. I would expect that only a fraction of the readers are going to want to read a 6 page paper on Ron Paul first thing in the morning.

Just something to think about so that you can get the greatest "bang for your buck". Great work though, we all appreciate your efforts.

Mental Dribble
12-18-2007, 02:50 PM
Thats great, but very very long....

dsentell
12-18-2007, 02:51 PM
This is a newspaper ad? Umm, I value your effort but an ad should contain very few words. Get their attention and point them in the right direction. This just seems way too wordy, and no matter how good it may be, many will just pass it up.

It is an ad -- It is genius!!!!!

An ad that looks like a newspaper article!!

Bravo, once again!

PatriotOne
12-18-2007, 02:55 PM
I vote to take this part out. Even though I agree with the statement itself, I recognize that the subject is just too polarizing. Plus it really has no place in a political argument.

Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.

castor
12-18-2007, 02:56 PM
Maybe make the letter look like a news article with proper headers.

So it blends in with the paper so to speak?



You can throw in a picture of paris hilton to get the sheeple reading. You can put a caption under her that says, "In a shocking turn of events, Paris Hilton and Ron Paul both have legs and arms and live on planet earth." Or something less retarded.

gang
12-18-2007, 02:57 PM
I would leave the evolution part out.

I believe in the evolution theory to be true. But it keeps a theory and by my epistemological approach every theory is falsifiable.
Supporting the evolution theory or not should not be a governmental issue. And so it should not be dicisive for appointing the right candidate.

slantedview
12-18-2007, 02:57 PM
Here are my comments. Take them with a grain of salt :)

i would remove or change the "Let me state it clearly." comment towards the beginning. it sounds a bit like preaching/lecturing.

in general, i love and agree with everything stated, but my concern would be that certain statements may alienate readers as opposed to unite them under the ron paul banner. a lot of statements prompt the reader to either agree or disagree with what is being said, and it might be that if the reader disagrees with one or two statements they may stop reading.

Examples of what I am talking about would be:

"The truth is, we are far less safe now than we were before we invaded Iraq."
"This war has created more emotionally charged enemies who have more reasons to attack us than ever before."
"Of course, the Administration and the media conveniently assure us that the 'surge' is working."

I really want to see these thoughts conveyed, but am not sure if they'll be a hangup for some readers if they disagree? Perhaps these thoughts could be phrased differently such as "One could argue that we are far less safe", etc.

Also, regarding this line:

"To date the outcome of this war is that between 100,000 and 1.0 million innocent people have died. These figures are between 30 and 300 times the number of people killed on 911"

I'd be concerned that a reader might see that, disagree with the figures, then get hung up and stop reading. The figures are damning, but maybe a potential hangup?

"Were the civilian Iraqis killed by our preemptive war 'collateral damage' or is that just a euphemism for murder?"

I like this thought, but am wondering if people will find this as an accusation of guilt on the part of the reader, for having perhaps supported the war. Some readers may take it that they are responsible for this euphemism of murder.

"I hear Neocon pundits calling for the beginning of World War III"

Suggest saying neoconvservative here, and everywhere else, instead of neocon (derogatory... even though, I know, that's the point).

Also, I'd again suggest taking out mention of the evolution stuff. No real benefit in having it in.

That's about all I have for now :)

shadowhooch
12-18-2007, 02:57 PM
Paid Political Message

Why did I spend $85,000 to support Presidential Candidate Ron Paul? Because I care about my children and your children.

Lawrence W. Lepard, American Citizen.


Recently,I reached into my own pocket and placed a full page ad in USA Today supporting the candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul. Why did I spend my hard-earned dollars on such an ad? I will tell you. Because Ron Paul is different from every other individual who carries the title "politician." He is truly a public servant. A "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" type of guy. No vested interest will support him, but I will. (I strongly believe that at this critical time we have a dire need for honest leadership in this country.
As Americans, we stand at an important crossroads in our history. We need to make a decision as to what we want America to represent, and to become. History will record the outcome of our decision. If we make the wrong choice, many more innocent people will die, and history will not be kind. As I say to my closest friends, I do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren that I stood silent as others destroyed this country.
Let me state it clearly. The America that I grew up in
believed in the rule of law, not the rule of men.
The America that I grew up in believed in telling the truth. The America that I grew up in believed in following Judeo-Christian values, and yet made room for those of different faiths and backgrounds. The America I grew up in had a religious flavor, but we were wary of those who wore their religion on their sleeves. The America that I grew up in believed in the golden rule: treat people the way we would like them to treat us. The America that I grew up in believed that you did not lie, cheat or steal. The America that I grew up in believed in the inherent goodness of most men, but recognized that evil exists.
Nevertheless, the America that I grew up in did not believe in an eye for an eye. It believed in protecting oneself from evil, but in the process of doing so we were cautioned not to become what we were protecting against.
In short, the America that I grew up in was a place where one could be proud of one’s country, and thankful to the men and women who had sacrificed so much in the past to give us this heritage.
I wake up today as a 50 year old husband and father of three, and I wonder where that America has gone. I see a President who called the U.S. Constitution “just a piece of paper”. He replaced a President who blatantly lied to the American public. Admittedly, the lie was about something that was none of the public’s business. However, when a country is led by a liar, it lowers that country’s level of discourse and makes lying seem acceptable. It is not. Are these the best leaders this Country can produce? I see that second President’s wife running for President and claiming she will end the war, when she initially voted for the war, and recently voted for a resolution against Iran that makes another war more likely. Do Americans really believe she will act in our best interests given all the money she has received from lobbyists and the military industrial complex? Do Americans really believe she will end the war, as she now has begun claiming in her political advertisements? Or is this just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck. Will her position on the war be like the story she told us about how she traded "cattle futures" so successfully?
I see the U.S. involved in an aggressive, undeclared war against a country that did not represent a threat to us in any way. We were lead into this war on the pretense of false and inaccurate information. The truth is, we are far less safe now than we were before we invaded Iraq. This war has created more emotionally charged enemies who have more reasons to attack us than ever before. Of course, the Administration and the media conveniently assure us that the “surge” is working. No surprise there, given that there is an election coming up.
Ron Paul voted against invading Iraq. Rather than attack an entire nation, he tried to convince Congress and our President to strategically target the terrorists responsible for 9/11. The current Administration has failed to capture and eliminate the criminals who perpetrated this crime against us. Those responsible are still at large, our borders are wide open, and our troops are spread thin all over the globe. We need a leader who will protect us with a strong national defense and keep us out of foreign entanglements that in the end, create more enemies than friends. We need a President who will put the national security of the American people, and the safety of our troops, before the interests of oil companies and the military industrial complex.
To date the outcome of this war is that between 100,000 and 1.0 million innocent people have died. These figures are between 30 and 300 times the number of people killed on 911. Do two wrongs make a right? Furthermore, the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. Not Iraqis. We are allies with Saudi Arabia and yet Saudi Arabia is far from being a democracy. Yet we went to war to create a democracy in Iraq and set an example for the Middle East.
The hypocrisy is staggering. The mistakes that were made are nearly criminal. Why anyone believes one thing that is said by the people who led us into this war is a mystery to me.
“We will be greeted as liberators.” Wrong. “Oil revenues will pay the cost.” Wrong. “A secular democracy will emerge and be an inspiration for other countries.” Wrong. The list of misjudgments goes on an on.
Were the civilian Iraqis killed by our preemptive war “collateral damage” or is that just a euphemism for murder? Has anyone taken the time to look at their pictures on the Web? I wonder how their relatives and friends feel about the United States? I wonder if they are more or less likely to become terrorists as a result of the actions of the United States. I see a country that has violated the Geneva Conventions. I see a country that has violated the Christian Doctrine of Just War. I see a country that has started a war that is illegal under international law. As President Eisenhower said, “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not listen to anyone who seriously talked about such a thing”. I see a flock of Presidential candidates, most of whom voted for this war and many of whom believe “all options should be on the table” in dealing with Iran. For those who are not current on this subject, that language is code for: we should be prepared to attack Iran with conventional or nuclear weapons.
Think about that for a moment. Leaders in this Country are actually talking about using a nuclear weapon preemptively against a country that has not attacked us. Are they insane?
I hear Neocon pundits calling for the beginning of World War III. I see a Country that has suspended habeas corpus. I see a country that has stripped its citizens of the Constitutional protections against an overreaching government. I see a country that has sanctioned “rendition” which is just another term for the kidnapping of anyone, anywhere, throughout the world, and then spiriting them off to a remote location where they can be subject to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which we are told are not torture. Another lie. I see a country that has engaged in torture. Hell, one leading Presidential candidate wants to “double Guantanamo” and thinks his sons’ campaigning for him is equivalent to serving in the military. Of course, he got a deferment to avoid serving in Vietnam. Other candidates for the highest office in this land are not any better. I see a war hero candidate who sings "bomb Iran" to the tune of The Beach Boy's song, Barbara Ann. How can he make light of killing people? Shame on you Senator. Of all people, you should know better. Joking about killing someone is a disgrace in my book. Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.[Linda comment (I’d take it all out and not even go there—assuming your goal is to help Ron get elected. Plus the copy just flows better into your next statement with it out.) ] Furthermore, I see a country where the top advocates of war have never fought in one. Worse yet, they sought and obtained deferments when others were fighting. You cannot make this stuff up. The irony is incredible. If, as I believe, you reap what you sow, - then the ultimate payback for these injustices will be staggering.

I see a Country that thinks that it owns and controls the world. I believe this is ethically wrong.
Furthermore, we cannot afford it, so even attempting to run the world is pointless. I see a country that thinks it should have bases in the Middle East for the next fifty years. I see a country where the dominant political party, the Neocons, believes the world is a dark and evil place. I believe the people who feel this way are projecting their own views onto the rest of the world. They need therapy. I see a country where the Government has adopted the Old Testament view of an eye for an eye. As Ghandi said, if we take this approach we will all end up blind.
In short, I wonder if America has lost its soul. Out of malfeasance, fear, ignorance, or incompetence we have implemented the wrong policies and taken the wrong course. Since this is true, then effectively the terrorists are winning. God surely has a great sense of humor. Irony abounds.
As citizens, each and every one of us is somewhat responsible for the acts of our government. All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing. So, has America lost it soul: yes or no? I would submit that while the current U.S. Administration and the vast majority of the Senate and Congress have lost their souls, the American people have not. Nearly 70% of the American population is against this war, and yet the war goes on. The vast majority of the American people want peace. People know what is right, yet the government does the wrong thing. How can this be? We are supposed to be a government OF, FOR and BY the People. Are we? What do you think? Does our government really represent the American people? Do you think the U.S. government should kill innocent Iraqis or Iranians to make us safer? Would you advocate killing a man who lives down the street because you think he might do you harm in the future, even though he has done nothing to you yet?
I will say it right now, clearly and loud:

The huge disconnect between what a majority of this country wants and what our government is doing is the elephant in the room that no one will discuss.
I cannot in good conscience condone or support the policies of the Neocons, the military industrial complex, or the oil industry. I do not believe in “Full Spectrum Dominance”. I do not believe “We Are The Indispensable Nation”. I do not believe we are “History’s Actors.” I do not believe we can “Make Our Own Reality”. I do not believe we should be an Empire. I think we have great power and military superiority and we should use these abilities to protect ourselves. Furthermore, with these powers come enormous responsibility. We are a Constitutional Republic. I believe there is a power higher than my government and that the Founders drew upon this power when they drafted the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal.” That reads “all men.” Not “all Americans.” The Founders believed, as do I, that All men have God-given rights. Governments are made to protect these rights, not destroy them. Until recently, I believe the American government did a good job of protecting these rights for Americans. For many years now I believe the American government has used a different standard or play book when dealing with foreign countries and foreign citizens. But that is a story for a different essay.
If it sounds like I am mad, you’re right. I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore. (Source: Howard Beale: Network)
I am mad that my money becomes worth less every year because the Federal Reserve can print money out of thin air. I am mad that the U.S. Government inflation statistics are a lie, thanks to Bill Clinton’s changing of the CPI calculation. I am mad that this change and the Federal Reserve have put the economy on a roller coaster leading to boom and bust cycles that benefit financiers at the expense of the middle class, retirees and the poor. I am mad that Wall Street titans and speculators have been rewarded while savers and honest labor have been punished. I am mad that honesty is considered quaint and naive by the political classes. I am mad at the arrogance of those who hold power in Washington, DC. I am mad that the actions of some men in my country have taken away the moral high ground that the U.S. used to occupy. I am mad that my tax dollars are used for weapons rather than for peaceful purposes. I do not want the blood of innocents on my hands. I do not agree with many of Michael Moore’s positions, but his statement “dude, I want my country back” resonates with me. I believe that it resonates with a large portion of the American voter base.
Individual Americans are great people. If 70% of them are opposed to the war, then there is still hope. Of course the mainstream media, the press and the vested industrial and political interests would have us all believe that we cannot make a difference. They say we need to listen to them as they tell us who the next President will be. We have to choose between the two war monger candidates they will serve up to us. We are told who the two front runners are, and we are discouraged from looking elsewhere. Why bother, they say? No one else even stands a chance. Maybe so, maybe not. This time I think they have gone too far. I would submit that the outcome of this election it is not so clear. The establishment dam has sprung a leak. The leak may be small now, but it is growing. It is growing exponentially. The word is spreading. The candidates who represent change are moving up. The candidates who represent the status quo are moving down (Rudy Guiliani and Hillary Clinton). Even Rudy is being forced to talk about what a great religion Islam is in order to soften his Norman Podhoretz inspired:” kill’em all, and let God sort them out message.”
The lines could not be more clearly drawn.
Ron Paul’s message is clear and beautiful and true. It resonates with people. When you hear it you say, “that’s right, that’s what I believe”.
This is why his poll numbers are rising faster than any other candidate. Yet, the media still ignores him or treats him poorly. It is beautiful irony that every attack on him only brings him more attention as intelligent Americans wonder, “who is this guy that everyone keeps attacking … I wonder if there is a reason?” They say he cannot win. They say he is a fringe candidate. They say he will lose big. I disagree. First, I think there is a very good chance he will be our next President. Second, I think he has won, even if he does not win. Why? Because he has put the Freedom message out there. It is like a virus. It is spreading. It cannot be stopped. I believe history will record the Ron Paul Freedom Movement as a seminal event in the history of U.S. politics.
It is an honor to support this man. We should be so lucky as to have him for our President.
Having said that, we could all help history along a little bit by supporting the Ron Paul campaign. My favorite movie is :It’s A Wonderful Life. To me, the message of that movie is that we all make a difference. Individually, none of us have the power of the Neocons and the political classes, but collectively they are supposed to work for us. If we self-organize and unite, we have them badly out numbered. They are terrified, believe me on this. And it is happening. The growth in this movement is amazing. We can and will win this struggle. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a defeatist or is working for the other side. I ran the USA Today Advertisement because I wanted to plant a seed and make a difference. WE ALL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Every conversation, every person converted, every e-mail , every effort; it all counts. The internet is what has made it possible.
What a beautiful thing. The trend is really changing and it is fun to watch the old guard struggle as their fortress crumbles.
So what can you do?
Join our effort to elect Ron Paul as the next President of the United States. Spread the word that we have an opportunity to elect an honest statesman with an impeccable record of voting in line with our Constitution.
Donate to his campaign!
Each contribution represents another American who has said “enough is enough.”
Every contribution helps. $10 is not too little. On December 16th, our collective voices were heard when grassroots supporters for Ron succeeded in organizing the largest one-day fundraiser in political history. Over 58,000 ordinary Americans spoke with their wallets by donating more than $6 million dollars to the Ron Paul campaign in a single day. Together we are proving to be a force to be reckoned with.
Think about it. What is freedom worth? I would submit that it is priceless. If you care about the future of this country, I know that Ron Paul will not let you down. If you care about our troops, then you must vote for Ron Paul. He will bring them home to defend America instead of someone else’s country. Ron Paul has received more donations from active military personnel than any other candidate. Why do you think that is? Have you heard about it from the Mainstream Media? I think not.
This is it folks. A once in a lifetime opportunity. We may never see a candidate with more integrity, with a better message or track record.
Rarely has our country been so far off track. Our Founding Fathers pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honors in order to establish this Nation. Perhaps we have taken for granted the risks they took and the sacrifices they made. But we are being called. We are being tested. How will we answer? Will we meet the test or will we fail? Each of us makes a difference.
So what are you going to do? Are you going to be a Loyalist or a Patriot? Are you going to storm the ramparts or huddle with the bourgeoisie?
Americans are brave people. I believe we can set this country back on the right track and that America will experience a renaissance of Peace, Freedom and Prosperity. Vote Ron Paul for President.
The danger to our Republic
is real. We must act now!
Remember, each one of us makes a difference. Please vote for Ron Paul in your state’s Republican Primary and encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.
You can also learn more at
www.RonPaulLibrary.org
about Ron Paul”s positions on the
issues that most concern you.

Just as a start to shorten the article, I'd delete the bolded items. But there is probably more to delete to shorten the article to a concise and readable length for the average reader. And, by the way, great job! This is very inspirational!

castor
12-18-2007, 02:58 PM
On a more serious note, do you think the ad would go further if it was split up into little pieces and displayed in every edition of the paper for a while?

RPsupporterAtHeart
12-18-2007, 02:58 PM
Larry, you are just awesome.


The only word I would recommend a change to, simply because it is most always look at in a negative sense, even in good intentions.....

"virus" especially when you look at synonyms = illness - disease - sickness

I would change that word, even though many people will understand where it's coming from.

Even a simple word such as "fire" =igniting minds, setting ablaze the current standards, sparking a revolution..etc. Even though it can ALSO be attributed to destruction, it can also be used the other way much easier than virus.

These are your words though, so you do it however you feel best. Should should be commended for taking the fight to areas the rest of us can only dream of. I only offer that as food for thought.

jgmaynard
12-18-2007, 03:01 PM
Lawrence, thank you very much for all your hard work.

However, even I as a Ron Paul fanatic couldn't manage to get through that much text without getting bleary-eyed. My experience with advertising is that white space is a very good thing. If it were me, I'd hit just two things for a NH ad - End the Income Tax and End the War. The less people have to read, the more people will read it.

As for the evolution paragraph, I entirely understand what you are saying. And NH is THE state where that would play the best (only 30% of NH residents describe themselves as religious). And it would probably get Ron a boost in the Independent vote here. However, rather than single out evolution, perhaps you could say the same thing, only more generalized: "In an increasingly technological world, where important decisions need to be made about questions about science (including nuclear power, global warming, etc.), Ron Paul will analyze those subjects with reason and logic independent of dogma or political gain." or something like that...

Just a suggestion.

JM

jdmyprez_deo_vindice
12-18-2007, 03:03 PM
I am a RP fanatic but also a Christian. I have talked to a lot of Christians who have come to support Dr. Paul and I sincerely believe that the line about evolution may undo the work that has been done in bringing conservative Christians on board. Everyone is entitled to believe what they want and millions in this country believe in creationism or some form of it and that one part will totally negate all the other points made in the ad.

burningfur
12-18-2007, 03:03 PM
I vote to take this part out. Even though I agree with the statement itself, I recognize that the subject is just too polarizing. Plus it really has no place in a political argument.

Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.

This will greatly offend Christians, real or otherwise.

I believe the world was created according to Genesis, 6 literal days.

If I were to read that and just be a Christian who didn't know much about the candidates, I would throw the ad out and go support Huckabee just to spite you.

I'm dead serious. This does not belong in a political ad. I can not be clearer.



I mean no disrespect to you, you've done a lot of good for the grassroots with all the money you've donated and the USA Today Ad, but you are going to alienate every person who DOES believe in creationism/intelligent design.

austin4paul
12-18-2007, 03:03 PM
The ad will reach Americans that read. Those that don't (majority, unfortunately) will not take the time to read it. I did read it...again, as I'd seen the first draft on the Daily Paul a few days ago.

I agree with Linda. Take out the evolution agrument. Ron is running as a Republican and we don't want to alienate anyone over this, because the rest of your arguments will resonate well.

Other suggestions:

1) I would add under the GWB quote about the Constitution "just a (expletive deleted) piece of paper." -- give the reader a better sense of what was actually said.

2) I would add the names of the other candidates after each veiled reference. Most Americans aren't following the election as closely as we are, and it helps to let people know who you're referring to. Name names.

3) When you talk about having bases in the Mideast for years, perhaps a reference to how many other bases we currently have around the world? As I've mentioned this to people, they really are surprised to hear how many troops we have stationed in Europe, as an example. Do we really STILL need to pay for troops in Germany, or are we just supplementing their national defense at the US taxpayer's expense?

4) I'd also suggest when you mention Americans wanting to end the war, a reference to the fact that Americans overwhelmingly voted in a Democratic congress so they would END the war, and they truly disappointed the nation by instead continuing the war.

That's it for my thoughts. I think you are truly a generous and noble person to give this gift to our country. I - and my children who cannot yet vote -- thank you.

PatriotOne
12-18-2007, 03:05 PM
I would remove the word "nearly".

The mistakes that were made are nearly criminal.

Visual
12-18-2007, 03:05 PM
I'd say for a short answer, jostle around the paragraphs making the most intriguing first. As someone who read's papers and is lazy, if the first paragraph isn't intresting, I won't bother with the rest of the article.

For my lazy tastes, if I wasn't a RP fan, the beginning isn't intresting enough to me to make me want to read the whole thing. A good picture (or better yet, a diagram or chart) and some quoted quips (like newsweek) would help too.

And have a condensed version of what RP stands for in some table or chart just so incase they are too lazy or don't have the time, they can get the general information on RP.

Carole
12-18-2007, 03:06 PM
First of all. Well done. Beautifully done.

I do agree with your wife about the one negative paragraph she suggests you not include. You actually cover it in a much more positive manner in the third paragraph.

"The America that I grew up in believed in following Judeo-Christian values, and yet made room for those of different faiths and backgrounds. "

This definitely keeps the message positive and does not come close to attacking anyone, something that some people might equate to negative television ads. The more positive the better.

When you format it, try to limit each paragraph to a few sentences with proper spacing between the paragraphs for easy readibility. I have always found it difficult to read too many single-spaced lines of type and especially when there are too many sentences or lines per paragraph. The spacing between paragraphs is very helpful also.

I only suggest that one or two of the longer paragraphs might be split into two to help the reader. Looking forward to seeing the final product.

You have written an eloquent letter which, I believe, captures what many, many Americans think and believe, but may not always be able to articulate.

Thank you

slantedview
12-18-2007, 03:09 PM
2) I would add the names of the other candidates after each veiled reference. Most Americans aren't following the election as closely as we are, and it helps to let people know who you're referring to. Name names.

3) When you talk about having bases in the Mideast for years, perhaps a reference to how many other bases we currently have around the world?
These are great suggestions.

Being Ron Paul supporters, we're obviously very familiar with common statements from Ron such as "we're in 127 (or whatever) countries around the world", but most voters will be unfamiliar with these statements. I'd say it would be good to repeat them wherever possible, for the benefit of the un-initiated.

USAF Vet Dan
12-18-2007, 03:10 PM
While I think it is impeccably written, I think it is much, much too long. Its been my experience in writing speeches and articles that paring down a draft such as this often brings clarity. It takes a lot of work to edit it to say the same thing with fewer words, but the reader can more easily stay on point. The impact will be greater.

I'll not speak to the finer suggestions that have been made here as I think they all hit on some good points.

By the way, Llepard, you are one of my heroes in this Revolution. God bless you, Sir.

Exarel
12-18-2007, 03:11 PM
This will greatly offend Christians, real or otherwise.

I believe the world was created according to Genesis, 6 literal days.

If I were to read that and just be a Christian who didn't know much about the candidates, I would throw the ad out and go support Huckabee just to spite you.

I'm dead serious. This does not belong in a political ad. I can not be clearer.



I mean no disrespect to you, you've done a lot of good for the grassroots with all the money you've donated and the USA Today Ad, but you are going to alienate every person who DOES believe in creationism/intelligent design.



Completely agree

nbhadja
12-18-2007, 03:15 PM
I agree with your thoughts on evolution, but unfortunately there are quite a few people out there who don't want to hear the truth and get turned off by it. So because of this I would leave the evolution part off.

DJ RP
12-18-2007, 03:16 PM
Um, hate to break this to you dude, because it annoyed me a bit when I saw it, but there is a video out there where ron paul is asked if he believes in evolution and he says he does not accept the theory.

Judging by your paragraph I hope you still support Ron Paul :( It was definitely the first thing he'd said that made me go "wait... WHAT?" but I still support him because he is so right on everything else and I agree that it is not a political opinion so doesn't affect what he'll do in office.

DrNoZone
12-18-2007, 03:17 PM
In all respect, bad idea. The vast majority of people who see this ad WILL NOT READ IT! Imagery with some text is a MUCH better idea.

Ron2Win
12-18-2007, 03:20 PM
I would change Mr. Smith goes to Washington to "One of us, goes to Washington"
I thought, who is Mr. Smith??


It is long and wordy, and hard to read. But that maybe to the lack of formating.

Anyways, GREAT letter.

and I agree, don't mention the evolution paragraph either.

I would like to donate also to help in future adds. You shouldn't bear the burden by yourself.

burningfur
12-18-2007, 03:21 PM
You speak twice about "eye for an eye", but do you understand what this actually means?


It is compensating someone if you take something from them.



Here's a good explanation of it.



---

"When the Bible says ‘an eye for an eye,’ it encourages us to take the law in our own hands by avenging wrongdoing."

Matthew 5:38 is so often misquoted by the world. Many believe it is giving a license to take matters into our own hands and render evil for evil. In reality, it is referring to civil law concerning restitution. If someone steals your ox, he is to restore the ox. If someone steals and wrecks your car, he is to buy you another one...a car for a car, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. The spirit of what Jesus is saying here is radically different from the "sue the shirt off the back of your neighbor" society in which we live.

---

It is not, taking matters into our own hands and beating someone else up if they beat us up. It is now to forgive the person and turn the cheek.

burningfur
12-18-2007, 03:25 PM
I agree with your thoughts on evolution, but unfortunately there are quite a few people out there who don't want to hear the truth and get turned off by it. So because of this I would leave the evolution part off.

:D:D:D You guys are so funny. I could say the same to you. Watch I'll edit your paragraph.

I agree with Ken Ham's thoughts on creationism, but unfortunately there are quite a few people out there who don't want to hear the truth and get turned off by it. So because of this I would leave the creation part off.


---

See? Wasn't that fun? ;)

---

burningfur
12-18-2007, 03:27 PM
In all respect, bad idea. The vast majority of people who see this ad WILL NOT READ IT! Imagery with some text is a MUCH better idea.

I'll have to admit, I had a hard time concentrating on reading that much text.

Better formatting is a must.

Peace and thanks for doing all this stuff for the campaign! My dad was really impressed when he saw the USA Today ad and even more impressed when he found out that it funded by a single supporter! Needless to say, he's voting for Ron Paul!

Benaiah
12-18-2007, 03:29 PM
I would leave the evolution part out of it.

I'm sure that Dr. Paul believes in Creation.


Darwin said in On the Origin of Species to disregard the theory of evolution if we didn't find fossils of missing links in 100 years. It's been 100 years and we have not one single fossil of a missing link. All we have are a jawbone here, a tooth there, a foot over there.

Yeah, I'd leave the evolution part out.


"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools."

european
12-18-2007, 03:29 PM
my comments:

1. listen to Linda! <-- :D

2. maybe make crucial parts or sentences bold. this is done in many popular magazines or newspapers. a person then easily can chose between reading the full article or just the headlines from within the text.

3. the whole Ron Paul movement is unconventional. putting in an ad with 3k+ words fits in nicely.

EDIT:
i talked about you the other day to some of my friends. they all were amazed that someone does such a thing for his country. they havent seen the ad themselves, but they do wonder why you did it, and do wonder about ron paul. and you are their hero already :D

burningfur
12-18-2007, 03:31 PM
my comments:

1. listen to Linda! <-- :D

2. maybe make crucial parts or sentences bold. this is done in many popular magazines or newspapers. a person then easily can chose between reading the full article or just the headlines from within the text.

3. the whole Ron Paul movement is unconventional. putting in an ad with 3k+ words fits in nicely.


Great points.

No. 3 is awesome, I didn't even think of that. No other campaign is doing this. Unique and powerful. Very cool.

theoddmonkey
12-18-2007, 03:34 PM
Lawrence, I definitely agree that the part about evolution should be taken out. I will come across as too offensive to most christians. Not that I disagree with everything it said, but its too big a can to be opened by one paragraph. I am a christian by the way.

Dave Pedersen
12-18-2007, 03:46 PM
I still think a two minute tv ad is far more effective than something in the newspaper. NH residents have been deluged by politics to an unbearable degree. Expecting them to read something half as long as this is expecting too much.

I suggest two minutes dedicated to:

Ron Paul clearly and thoroughly stating his social security intentions

followed up by Ron Paul's stellar voting record presented by way of enthusiastic testimonials

finishing with video clips of several large out of state rallies.

People in New Hampshire need to see with their own eyes that Ron Paul is a winner across the nation.

Thank You.

Mark
12-18-2007, 03:49 PM
This will greatly offend Christians, real or otherwise.

I believe the world was created according to Genesis, 6 literal days.

If I were to read that and just be a Christian who didn't know much about the candidates, I would throw the ad out and go support Huckabee just to spite you.

I'm dead serious. This does not belong in a political ad. I can not be clearer.



I mean no disrespect to you, you've done a lot of good for the grassroots with all the money you've donated and the USA Today Ad, but you are going to alienate every person who DOES believe in creationism/intelligent design.

I'm a Christian minister and I've never found anything in the Bible or elsewhere
that says God didn't enable evolution as a method for advancing species.

Can you state where you find that God cannot use evolution as a means of development?

All things are possible for God, except to lie.

I have no argument with accepting God's ability to utilize an evolutionary process.

james1844
12-18-2007, 03:49 PM
This is a wonderful idea. I'm very glad that you've considered taking this step.

I am concerned that the add is too LONG. Perhaps we might consider cutting it about 1/10th of its current length?

Otherwise, this is a great effort.

Thanks,

James

Birdlady
12-18-2007, 03:52 PM
After reading it through, the evolution part has to go.
I don't think Ron Paul believes in the theory of evolution.

Ron2Win
12-18-2007, 03:53 PM
I still think a two minute tv ad is far more effective than something in the newspaper. NH residents have been deluged by politics to an unbearable degree. Expecting them to read something half as long as this is expecting too much.

I suggest two minutes dedicated to:

Ron Paul clearly and thoroughly stating his social security intentions

followed up by Ron Paul's stellar voting record presented by way of enthusiastic testimonials

finishing with video clips of several large out of state rallies.

People in New Hampshire need to see with their own eyes that Ron Paul is a winner across the nation.

Thank You.
I thought that also. I was thinking about adds on Movie Theater, but I have no Idea how to do that.

People have no choice but to watch it.

But kudos anyways for doing the letter

JaredR26
12-18-2007, 03:54 PM
OK, here is where we are right now.

It is long.

It will be full page.

There will be bolding, set outs and text changes.

It is kind of hard to read without all the formatting. I will try to get a pdf up later.

If you have time take a look and make suggestions.

Thanks.

Larry


I'm at work right now so I'll read through the whole thing tonight and make comments.

The idea however is genius. An ad that looks like an article. That reads like an article.

It needs graphics. I suggest the graph showing Ron Paul's fundraising vs others(q1-q4) here:
http://thecaseforronpaul.com/images/TC%20Q1%20Q2%20Q3%20Q4.png

If its full page it should have 3 or so images(1 graph, 2 images).

Do you have a paper that will take an ad that looks like their articles?

Some bolded parts/quotes to break it up are essential. It should read easily and quickly- Just like a headline story.

I don't know that a full page is nescessary for this. 2 images(1 graph, 1 RP image) and a half page 'article' would be more than sufficient, and might actually go over better- Reads like an article, isn't imposing like a monster.

JaredR26
12-18-2007, 03:56 PM
I'm a Christian minister and I've never found anything in the Bible or elsewhere
that says God didn't enable evolution as a method for advancing species.

Can you state where you find that God cannot use evolution as a means of development?

All things are possible for God, except to lie.

I have no argument with accepting God's ability to utilize an evolutionary process.

7 days. Stated multiple times and in multiple places with no hint that they might have any other meaning than that of a normal day.

This isn't the place to discuss this. The opinion seems to be that the message about evolution/creation should go. I concur with that- it just isn't a hot topic for many people. Just a joke.

LibertyEagle
12-18-2007, 03:59 PM
Larry, that thing about Bush saying the Constitution was a "piece of paper" was debunked.

PatriotOne
12-18-2007, 04:00 PM
I agree with the "too long" sentiment also. I have a long attention span and might have a hard time getting through it myself. I know this is from your heart and it's hard to edit somethng that is from the heart but.....

I would cut it in 1/2 Larry.

Rob
12-18-2007, 04:01 PM
OK, here is where we are right now.

It is long.

It will be full page.

There will be bolding, set outs and text changes.

It is kind of hard to read without all the formatting. I will try to get a pdf up later.

If you have time take a look and make suggestions.

Thanks.

Larry

In particular, do you think I should leave this part in or take it out. It is how I feel. But Linda thinks we lose voters. Thoughts?

. Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.[Linda comment (I’d take it all out and not even go there—assuming your goal is to help Ron get elected. Plus the copy just flows better into your next statement with it out.)

BREAK

Paid Political Message

Why did I spend $85,000 to support Presidential Candidate Ron Paul? Because I care about my children and your children.

Lawrence W. Lepard, American Citizen.


Recently,I reached into my own pocket and placed a full page ad in USA Today supporting the candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul. Why did I spend my hard-earned dollars on such an ad? I will tell you. Because Ron Paul is different from every other individual who carries the title "politician." He is truly a public servant. A "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" type of guy. No vested interest will support him, but I will. (I strongly believe that at this critical time we have a dire need for honest leadership in this country.
As Americans, we stand at an important crossroads in our history. We need to make a decision as to what we want America to represent, and to become. History will record the outcome of our decision. If we make the wrong choice, many more innocent people will die, and history will not be kind. As I say to my closest friends, I do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren that I stood silent as others destroyed this country.
Let me state it clearly. The America that I grew up in
believed in the rule of law, not the rule of men.
The America that I grew up in believed in telling the truth. The America that I grew up in believed in following Judeo-Christian values, and yet made room for those of different faiths and backgrounds. The America I grew up in had a religious flavor, but we were wary of those who wore their religion on their sleeves. The America that I grew up in believed in the golden rule: treat people the way we would like them to treat us. The America that I grew up in believed that you did not lie, cheat or steal. The America that I grew up in believed in the inherent goodness of most men, but recognized that evil exists.
Nevertheless, the America that I grew up in did not believe in an eye for an eye. It believed in protecting oneself from evil, but in the process of doing so we were cautioned not to become what we were protecting against.
In short, the America that I grew up in was a place where one could be proud of one’s country, and thankful to the men and women who had sacrificed so much in the past to give us this heritage.
I wake up today as a 50 year old husband and father of three, and I wonder where that America has gone. I see a President who called the U.S. Constitution “just a piece of paper”. He replaced a President who blatantly lied to the American public. Admittedly, the lie was about something that was none of the public’s business. However, when a country is led by a liar, it lowers that country’s level of discourse and makes lying seem acceptable. It is not. Are these the best leaders this Country can produce? I see that second President’s wife running for President and claiming she will end the war, when she initially voted for the war, and recently voted for a resolution against Iran that makes another war more likely. Do Americans really believe she will act in our best interests given all the money she has received from lobbyists and the military industrial complex? Do Americans really believe she will end the war, as she now has begun claiming in her political advertisements? Or is this just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck. Will her position on the war be like the story she told us about how she traded "cattle futures" so successfully?
I see the U.S. involved in an aggressive, undeclared war against a country that did not represent a threat to us in any way. We were lead into this war on the pretense of false and inaccurate information. The truth is, we are far less safe now than we were before we invaded Iraq. This war has created more emotionally charged enemies who have more reasons to attack us than ever before. Of course, the Administration and the media conveniently assure us that the “surge” is working. No surprise there, given that there is an election coming up.
Ron Paul voted against invading Iraq. Rather than attack an entire nation, he tried to convince Congress and our President to strategically target the terrorists responsible for 9/11. The current Administration has failed to capture and eliminate the criminals who perpetrated this crime against us. Those responsible are still at large, our borders are wide open, and our troops are spread thin all over the globe. We need a leader who will protect us with a strong national defense and keep us out of foreign entanglements that in the end, create more enemies than friends. We need a President who will put the national security of the American people, and the safety of our troops, before the interests of oil companies and the military industrial complex.
To date the outcome of this war is that between 100,000 and 1.0 million innocent people have died. These figures are between 30 and 300 times the number of people killed on 911. Do two wrongs make a right? Furthermore, the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. Not Iraqis. We are allies with Saudi Arabia and yet Saudi Arabia is far from being a democracy. Yet we went to war to create a democracy in Iraq and set an example for the Middle East.
The hypocrisy is staggering. The mistakes that were made are nearly criminal. Why anyone believes one thing that is said by the people who led us into this war is a mystery to me.
“We will be greeted as liberators.” Wrong. “Oil revenues will pay the cost.” Wrong. “A secular democracy will emerge and be an inspiration for other countries.” Wrong. The list of misjudgments goes on an on.
Were the civilian Iraqis killed by our preemptive war “collateral damage” or is that just a euphemism for murder? Has anyone taken the time to look at their pictures on the Web? I wonder how their relatives and friends feel about the United States? I wonder if they are more or less likely to become terrorists as a result of the actions of the United States. I see a country that has violated the Geneva Conventions. I see a country that has violated the Christian Doctrine of Just War. I see a country that has started a war that is illegal under international law. As President Eisenhower said, “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not listen to anyone who seriously talked about such a thing”. I see a flock of Presidential candidates, most of whom voted for this war and many of whom believe “all options should be on the table” in dealing with Iran. For those who are not current on this subject, that language is code for: we should be prepared to attack Iran with conventional or nuclear weapons.
Think about that for a moment. Leaders in this Country are actually talking about using a nuclear weapon preemptively against a country that has not attacked us. Are they insane?
I hear Neocon pundits calling for the beginning of World War III. I see a Country that has suspended habeas corpus. I see a country that has stripped its citizens of the Constitutional protections against an overreaching government. I see a country that has sanctioned “rendition” which is just another term for the kidnapping of anyone, anywhere, throughout the world, and then spiriting them off to a remote location where they can be subject to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which we are told are not torture. Another lie. I see a country that has engaged in torture. Hell, one leading Presidential candidate wants to “double Guantanamo” and thinks his sons’ campaigning for him is equivalent to serving in the military. Of course, he got a deferment to avoid serving in Vietnam. Other candidates for the highest office in this land are not any better. I see a war hero candidate who sings "bomb Iran" to the tune of The Beach Boy's song, Barbara Ann. How can he make light of killing people? Shame on you Senator. Of all people, you should know better. Joking about killing someone is a disgrace in my book. Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.[Linda comment (I’d take it all out and not even go there—assuming your goal is to help Ron get elected. Plus the copy just flows better into your next statement with it out.) ] Furthermore, I see a country where the top advocates of war have never fought in one. Worse yet, they sought and obtained deferments when others were fighting. You cannot make this stuff up. The irony is incredible. If, as I believe, you reap what you sow, - then the ultimate payback for these injustices will be staggering.

I see a Country that thinks that it owns and controls the world. I believe this is ethically wrong.
Furthermore, we cannot afford it, so even attempting to run the world is pointless. I see a country that thinks it should have bases in the Middle East for the next fifty years. I see a country where the dominant political party, the Neocons, believes the world is a dark and evil place. I believe the people who feel this way are projecting their own views onto the rest of the world. They need therapy. I see a country where the Government has adopted the Old Testament view of an eye for an eye. As Ghandi said, if we take this approach we will all end up blind.
In short, I wonder if America has lost its soul. Out of malfeasance, fear, ignorance, or incompetence we have implemented the wrong policies and taken the wrong course. Since this is true, then effectively the terrorists are winning. God surely has a great sense of humor. Irony abounds.
As citizens, each and every one of us is somewhat responsible for the acts of our government. All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing. So, has America lost it soul: yes or no? I would submit that while the current U.S. Administration and the vast majority of the Senate and Congress have lost their souls, the American people have not. Nearly 70% of the American population is against this war, and yet the war goes on. The vast majority of the American people want peace. People know what is right, yet the government does the wrong thing. How can this be? We are supposed to be a government OF, FOR and BY the People. Are we? What do you think? Does our government really represent the American people? Do you think the U.S. government should kill innocent Iraqis or Iranians to make us safer? Would you advocate killing a man who lives down the street because you think he might do you harm in the future, even though he has done nothing to you yet?
I will say it right now, clearly and loud:

The huge disconnect between what a majority of this country wants and what our government is doing is the elephant in the room that no one will discuss.
I cannot in good conscience condone or support the policies of the Neocons, the military industrial complex, or the oil industry. I do not believe in “Full Spectrum Dominance”. I do not believe “We Are The Indispensable Nation”. I do not believe we are “History’s Actors.” I do not believe we can “Make Our Own Reality”. I do not believe we should be an Empire. I think we have great power and military superiority and we should use these abilities to protect ourselves. Furthermore, with these powers come enormous responsibility. We are a Constitutional Republic. I believe there is a power higher than my government and that the Founders drew upon this power when they drafted the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal.” That reads “all men.” Not “all Americans.” The Founders believed, as do I, that All men have God-given rights. Governments are made to protect these rights, not destroy them. Until recently, I believe the American government did a good job of protecting these rights for Americans. For many years now I believe the American government has used a different standard or play book when dealing with foreign countries and foreign citizens. But that is a story for a different essay.
If it sounds like I am mad, you’re right. I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore. (Source: Howard Beale: Network)
I am mad that my money becomes worth less every year because the Federal Reserve can print money out of thin air. I am mad that the U.S. Government inflation statistics are a lie, thanks to Bill Clinton’s changing of the CPI calculation. I am mad that this change and the Federal Reserve have put the economy on a roller coaster leading to boom and bust cycles that benefit financiers at the expense of the middle class, retirees and the poor. I am mad that Wall Street titans and speculators have been rewarded while savers and honest labor have been punished. I am mad that honesty is considered quaint and naive by the political classes. I am mad at the arrogance of those who hold power in Washington, DC. I am mad that the actions of some men in my country have taken away the moral high ground that the U.S. used to occupy. I am mad that my tax dollars are used for weapons rather than for peaceful purposes. I do not want the blood of innocents on my hands. I do not agree with many of Michael Moore’s positions, but his statement “dude, I want my country back” resonates with me. I believe that it resonates with a large portion of the American voter base.
Individual Americans are great people. If 70% of them are opposed to the war, then there is still hope. Of course the mainstream media, the press and the vested industrial and political interests would have us all believe that we cannot make a difference. They say we need to listen to them as they tell us who the next President will be. We have to choose between the two war monger candidates they will serve up to us. We are told who the two front runners are, and we are discouraged from looking elsewhere. Why bother, they say? No one else even stands a chance. Maybe so, maybe not. This time I think they have gone too far. I would submit that the outcome of this election it is not so clear. The establishment dam has sprung a leak. The leak may be small now, but it is growing. It is growing exponentially. The word is spreading. The candidates who represent change are moving up. The candidates who represent the status quo are moving down (Rudy Guiliani and Hillary Clinton). Even Rudy is being forced to talk about what a great religion Islam is in order to soften his Norman Podhoretz inspired:” kill’em all, and let God sort them out message.”
The lines could not be more clearly drawn.
Ron Paul’s message is clear and beautiful and true. It resonates with people. When you hear it you say, “that’s right, that’s what I believe”.
This is why his poll numbers are rising faster than any other candidate. Yet, the media still ignores him or treats him poorly. It is beautiful irony that every attack on him only brings him more attention as intelligent Americans wonder, “who is this guy that everyone keeps attacking … I wonder if there is a reason?” They say he cannot win. They say he is a fringe candidate. They say he will lose big. I disagree. First, I think there is a very good chance he will be our next President. Second, I think he has won, even if he does not win. Why? Because he has put the Freedom message out there. It is like a virus. It is spreading. It cannot be stopped. I believe history will record the Ron Paul Freedom Movement as a seminal event in the history of U.S. politics.
It is an honor to support this man. We should be so lucky as to have him for our President.
Having said that, we could all help history along a little bit by supporting the Ron Paul campaign. My favorite movie is :It’s A Wonderful Life. To me, the message of that movie is that we all make a difference. Individually, none of us have the power of the Neocons and the political classes, but collectively they are supposed to work for us. If we self-organize and unite, we have them badly out numbered. They are terrified, believe me on this. And it is happening. The growth in this movement is amazing. We can and will win this struggle. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a defeatist or is working for the other side. I ran the USA Today Advertisement because I wanted to plant a seed and make a difference. WE ALL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Every conversation, every person converted, every e-mail , every effort; it all counts. The internet is what has made it possible.
What a beautiful thing. The trend is really changing and it is fun to watch the old guard struggle as their fortress crumbles.
So what can you do?
Join our effort to elect Ron Paul as the next President of the United States. Spread the word that we have an opportunity to elect an honest statesman with an impeccable record of voting in line with our Constitution.
Donate to his campaign!
Each contribution represents another American who has said “enough is enough.”
Every contribution helps. $10 is not too little. On December 16th, our collective voices were heard when grassroots supporters for Ron succeeded in organizing the largest one-day fundraiser in political history. Over 58,000 ordinary Americans spoke with their wallets by donating more than $6 million dollars to the Ron Paul campaign in a single day. Together we are proving to be a force to be reckoned with.
Think about it. What is freedom worth? I would submit that it is priceless. If you care about the future of this country, I know that Ron Paul will not let you down. If you care about our troops, then you must vote for Ron Paul. He will bring them home to defend America instead of someone else’s country. Ron Paul has received more donations from active military personnel than any other candidate. Why do you think that is? Have you heard about it from the Mainstream Media? I think not.
This is it folks. A once in a lifetime opportunity. We may never see a candidate with more integrity, with a better message or track record.
Rarely has our country been so far off track. Our Founding Fathers pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honors in order to establish this Nation. Perhaps we have taken for granted the risks they took and the sacrifices they made. But we are being called. We are being tested. How will we answer? Will we meet the test or will we fail? Each of us makes a difference.
So what are you going to do? Are you going to be a Loyalist or a Patriot? Are you going to storm the ramparts or huddle with the bourgeoisie?
Americans are brave people. I believe we can set this country back on the right track and that America will experience a renaissance of Peace, Freedom and Prosperity. Vote Ron Paul for President.
The danger to our Republic
is real. We must act now!
Remember, each one of us makes a difference. Please vote for Ron Paul in your state’s Republican Primary and encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.
You can also learn more at
www.RonPaulLibrary.org
about Ron Paul”s positions on the
issues that most concern you.

Please don't take offense, we'll have to agree to disagree on this, but if I read that Ad before I knew much about Ron Paul, I would probably NEVER support him. That issue is somewhat important to me and many other Ron Paul supporters, you risk alienating many people with that. I think we all appreciate your sincere efforts.


On a side note, is that first part actually true?
:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(

Birdlady
12-18-2007, 04:01 PM
Another thing I wanted to ask about was this quote,

I see a President who called the U.S. Constitution “just a piece of paper”

The ONLY place that verifies this is Capitol Hill Blue. Now I am not really sure if Bush really said that or not. There's lots of speculation on the internet about it.

What do you all know about Bush saying "It's just a god damned piece of paper"?
It is real or is it made up?

This is the story and only "source".
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml

Sey.Naci
12-18-2007, 04:04 PM
Larry, I’m an acclaimed speaker, writer and editor.

This is a superb letter. I can imagine you presenting it in a large arena and the audience being held spellbound.

Because this letter comes straight from your heart, you must keep it as much as possible in just the way you’ve written it. I’ve only a handful of suggestions for change, but would be happy to fine-tooth the final version if you'd like to send it to me:


To date, the outcome of this war is that between 100,000 and 1.0 million innocent people have died. These figures are between 30 and 300 times the number of people killed on [write out full date - there are Americans who don't know what '9/11' means]September 11, 2001[/date]. Do two wrongs make a right?

Furthermore, the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. Not Iraqis. We are allies with Saudi Arabia and yet Saudi Arabia is far from being a democracy. Yet we went to war to create a democracy in Iraq and set an example for the Middle East. The hypocrisy is staggering. The mistakes that were made are nearly criminal. Why should anyone we believes one thing that is said by the people who led us into this war[delete] is a mystery to me.?

Then spread out these, each in its own paragraph:


“We will be greeted as liberators.” Wrong.

“Oil revenues will pay the cost.” Wrong.

“A secular democracy will emerge and be an inspiration for other countries.” Wrong.

The list of misjudgments goes on an[d] on.

Typo here:


I would submit that the outcome of this election it is not so clear.

Lucid American
12-18-2007, 04:04 PM
Llepard, first off, let me commend you on your spirit and actions. You humble me as a fellow supporter and yet know I would do more if I only could.

As far as this article goes, I'm going to have to go back and read it later. At first glance, it was too daunting for me to pursue -- even as a rabid Paul supporter; I can't imagine what a skeptic would think.

I think it needs to be trimmed down substantially. Please don't take this as a knock against you or your thoughts -- again, I haven't read them yet. But you're paying another good bit of money -- I'm assuming you're not just trying to preach to the choir here.

Short. Powerful. Resonant.

Great work.

Mark
12-18-2007, 04:05 PM
7 days. Stated multiple times and in multiple places with no hint that they might have any other meaning than that of a normal day.

This isn't the place to discuss this. The opinion seems to be that the message about evolution/creation should go. I concur with that- it just isn't a hot topic for many people. Just a joke.

I'm sorry but you've evaded my question.

Where in the mention of 7 days, in the entire Bible itself, or anywhere else,
does it say that God created everything exactly as it is now and didn't implement an evolutionary process?

Rob
12-18-2007, 04:06 PM
Is it true that Ron Paul doesn't believe in evolution?
:(

burningfur
12-18-2007, 04:10 PM
I'm a Christian minister and I've never found anything in the Bible or elsewhere
that says God didn't enable evolution as a method for advancing species.

Can you state where you find that God cannot use evolution as a means of development?

All things are possible for God, except to lie.

I have no argument with accepting God's ability to utilize an evolutionary process.


I'm a Christian minister and I've never found anything in the Bible or elsewhere
that says God didn't enable evolution as a method for advancing species.

Can you state where you find that God cannot use evolution as a means of development?

Genesis 2:17

“In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die”

When they ate the fruit, death entered the world. However, if evolution happened before all this, it would be a contradiction of scriptures. Death would've had to have entered before they ate the fruit. If evolution is true, then my Bible is flawed, corrupt, and I should go to Vegas and get as much sin as possible in.

However, evolution is not part of God's plan, if it was, He would be a most sick and repulsive God for creating this horrible idea of millions and millions of years of death and waste before "getting it right". No, He got it right the first time.

Young-Earth Creation. There's an obvious order, no one gets up and is shocked to see gravity in effect or clouds in the sky. Creation needs a Creator.

BTW to everyone else reading: This is my humble opinion. I'm not trying to run around these forums looking for arguments. I am responding to a question. That is it, I'm not trying to start any wars. Peace.

Sorry it took a while for my answer. If you want more info just google "sin" and "death" in blueletterbible or another bible search engine.

Mark
12-18-2007, 04:11 PM
Is it true that Ron Paul doesn't believe in evolution?
:(

There is such a thing as the theory of Evolutionary Creationism.

"Theistic evolution, less commonly known as evolutionary creationism,
is the general opinion that some or all classical religious teachings about God (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God) and creation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_%28theology%29) are compatible
with some or all of the modern scientific understanding about biological evolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution).

Theistic evolution is not a theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory) in the scientific (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science) sense,
but a particular view about how the science of evolution relates to some religious interpretations.

In this way, theistic evolution supporters can be seen as one of the groups who deny the conflict thesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_thesis)
regarding the relationship between religion and science (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_religion_and_science);
that is, they hold that religious teachings about creation and scientific theories of evolution need not be contradictory."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

Carole
12-18-2007, 04:15 PM
An ad is on television for a few seconds and then is gone. Many people would miss it completely and many people would tune it out mentally if they could hear it if their minds were occuppied elsewhere. Not everyone sits in front of the TV for hours. And many people will use commercial time to go for snacks.

Even for those who hear the ad, one's attention span is very short and one actually retains a minuscule of what one hears unless it is something that really grabs the listener.

Newspapers do still have the one big advantage of being tangible and can be read and re-read at will if one so chooses at one's leisure. I personally like to have hardcopy of something that really grabs my attention and when I find it online, I nearly always print it out for re-reading.

I think it is best to leave the Ron Paul television ads to the official campaign and use the newspapers for letters such as Mr. Lepard has written. I can honestly say that while perusing a newspaper, on occasion I have run across open letters and I am nearly always intrigued enough to read the open letter--at least for a few paragraphs to see what it is about. If it grabs my attention, I tend to finish the letter and even save it to re-read and share.

This aso suggest that written material in a paper needs to be very closely vetted and edited for content and demeanor, simply because it is hardcopy and not fleeting.

Just my thoughts.

burningfur
12-18-2007, 04:16 PM
Larry, I’m an acclaimed speaker, writer and editor.

This is a superb letter. I can imagine you presenting it in a large arena and the audience being held spellbound.

Because this letter comes straight from your heart, you must keep it as much as possible in just the way you’ve written it. I’ve only a handful of suggestions for change, but would be happy to fine-tooth the final version if you'd like to send it to me:



Then spread out these, each in its own paragraph:



Typo here:



I agree. Your writing speaks strongly about how much you care about this country and the best part is that this is UNIQUE.

(I agree with Linda and the quoted post above)

Mark
12-18-2007, 04:17 PM
Genesis 2:17

“In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die”

When they ate the fruit, death entered the world. However, if evolution happened before all this, it would be a contradiction of scriptures. Death would've had to have entered before they ate the fruit. If evolution is true, then my Bible is flawed, corrupt, and I should go to Vegas and get as much sin as possible in.

However, evolution is not part of God's plan, if it was, He would be a most sick and repulsive God for creating this horrible idea of millions and millions of years of death and waste before "getting it right". No, He got it right the first time.

Young-Earth Creation. There's an obvious order, no one gets up and is shocked to see gravity in effect or clouds in the sky. Creation needs a Creator.

BTW to everyone else reading: This is my humble opinion. I'm not trying to run around these forums looking for arguments. I am responding to a question. That is it, I'm not trying to start any wars. Peace.

Sorry it took a while for my answer. If you want more info just google "sin" and "death" in blueletterbible or another bible search engine.

That was Human death, not other animal death.

Do you seriously think that all animals other than Human were immortal before that?

Rob
12-18-2007, 04:17 PM
There is such a thing as the theory of Evolutionary Creationism.

"Theistic evolution, less commonly known as evolutionary creationism,
is the general opinion that some or all classical religious teachings about God (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God) and creation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_%28theology%29) are compatible
with some or all of the modern scientific understanding about biological evolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution).

Theistic evolution is not a theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory) in the scientific (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science) sense,
but a particular view about how the science of evolution relates to some religious interpretations.

In this way, theistic evolution supporters can be seen as one of the groups who deny the conflict thesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_thesis)
regarding the relationship between religion and science (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_religion_and_science);
that is, they hold that religious teachings about creation and scientific theories of evolution need not be contradictory."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

I'm very familiar with that and I know many who believe that, but that doesn't answer my question. Internet searches are yielding conflicting information.

ZenX
12-18-2007, 04:21 PM
I made some suggestions, primarily with grammar and such, using Microsoft Word (the comment ability). Please let me know if you have trouble viewing them, or if you need me to convert to an earlier version. You can download the doc file here:
http://www.shsu.edu/~sak001/suggestions.docx

If anyone wants it or disagrees with anything I have suggested, post it in the thread I guess.

Birdlady
12-18-2007, 04:27 PM
Those of you arguing about evolution, please take it out of this thread. We have a hot topics and general politics section.

You are taking away from getting this ad in a final draft. I don't want to have to sift through posts of a few going back and forth about evolution.

firebirdnation
12-18-2007, 04:29 PM
I think the debating of evolution in this thread shows how divisive this issue can be, and perhaps it would be better to leave it out of the ad.

Mark
12-18-2007, 04:29 PM
I'm very familiar with that and I know many who believe that, but that doesn't answer my question. Internet searches are yielding conflicting information.

Would you please specify exactly what your searching for?

Is your question about the first part that Linda thinks should be left out?

I believe that part is referring to Huckabee, not Dr Paul.

And yes, I agree with Linda and others, controversial and not really necessary.

No need to "go there". Without it the letter is still "gold". I don't see where it adds anything essential to convey.

Probably a mention of keeping religion out of politics would resonate with voters even more.

Probably leaving Religion out of thing like Dr Paul mentions would be wiser.

There are plenty of issues to address Huckabee with other than Religious ones.

Rob
12-18-2007, 04:32 PM
Is your question about the first part that Linda thinks should be left out?

I believe that part is referring to Huckabee, not Dr Paul.

And yes, I agree with Linda and others, controversial and not really necessary.

No need to "go there". Without it the letter is still "gold". I don't see where it adds anything essential to convey.

Probably a mention of keeping religion out of politics would resonate with voters even more.

I would like to know whether or not Dr. Paul believes in evolution.

:(

burningfur
12-18-2007, 04:34 PM
That was Human death, not other animal death.

Do you seriously think that all animals other than Human were immortal before that?

You're right on that according to this...I learn something new everyday!

For more information on this. (http://home.entouch.net/dmd/death1.htm)

I mean no disrespect to you, but evolution doesn't work with the God of the Bible, the two are incompatible. They can't both be right. One has to be right, one has to be wrong. You have one position and I have a different position. We don't seem to be changing our positions any time soon.

I've gotta get back to studying. Blessings.

troyd1
12-18-2007, 04:45 PM
This is great, I can't wait for the final draft! This will help the people that do not have a computer to find out more in depth about Ron. I think you want to highlight more catch phrases than you have. That way they will catch the eye and more people will read farther.

Chase
12-18-2007, 04:45 PM
I hope you don't take offense to this, but I used to be the editor of a computer tech portal and I have a passion for writing. I went through and typed up what you've got, making a few small edits and changes along the way. I may have dropped a few sentences here and there in trying to preserve the flow.

I think your letter is great. I took a half hour out of my day to do this because I'm hoping it might give you some ideas. Thanks for everything you have done!


On <insert date here>, I reached into my own pocket and placed a full page ad in USA Today supporting the Presidential candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul. Why did I spend my hard-earned dollars on such an ad? Because Ron Paul is profoundly different from every other politician. He is truly a public servant - a "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" type of guy. No vested interest will support him, but I will, and I hope you will join me.

We are at a critical time; we have a dire need for honest leadership in America. We need to make a decision as to what America will represent and what our nation will become. History will record the outcome of our decision. If we make the wrong choice, many more innocent people will die and history will be anything but kind. As I say to my closest friends, I do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren that I stood silent as others destroyed this country.

Let me state it clearly. The America that I grew up in believed not in the rule of man but in the rule of law. She believed in honesty and Judeo-Christian values, yet made room for those of different faiths and backgrounds. The America I grew up in had a religious flavor, but her people were wary of those who wore their religion on their sleeves. The America that I grew up in believed in the golden rule: treat people the way we would like them to treat us. The America that I grew up in believed that you did not lie, cheat or steal, and believed in the inherent goodness of men, but recognized that evil still exists. The America that I grew up in did not believe in an eye for an eye. It believed in protecting oneself from evil, but in the process of doing so we were always cautioned not to become what we were protecting against.

In short, the America that I grew up in was a place where one could be proud of one's country, and thankful to the men and women who had sacrificed so much in the past to give us this heritage. I wake up today as a 50 year old husband and father of three, and I wonder where that America has gone. I see a President who called the U.S. Constitution "just a piece of paper." He replaced President who blatantly lied to the American public. Admittedly, that lie concerned matters that were none of our business, but when our leaders have no honesty our discourse is destroyed and it makes lies seem acceptable.

Are these the best leaders our country can produce? I see that second President's wife running for President and claiming she will end the war, despite initially voting in favor of the war, and despite voting in favor of a resolution against Iran seething with the scent of a brand new war. Do Americans believe this candidate will act in our best interests given all the money she has received from lobbyists and the military industrial complex? Do Americans really believe she will end the war, as she now claims in her advertisements? Perhaps this is just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck.

I see the U.S. involved in an aggressive, undeclared war against a country that did not attack us and did not threaten us in any way. This war was bought and sold on false pretenses. The truth is, we are far less safe after Iraq than before. Our invasion has created scores of emotionally charged enemies who have more reasons to attack us than ever before. The Administration and the media conveniently assure us that the "surge" is working, which is not surprising on the eve of a new election.

Ron Paul voted against invading Iraq. Rather than attack an entire nation, he tried to convince Congress and our President to strategically target the terrorists responsible for 9/11. The current Administration has failed to capture and eliminate the criminals who perpetrated this crime against us. Those responsible are still at large, our borders are wide open, and our troops are spread thin all over the globe. We need a leader who will protect us with a strong national defense and keep us out of foreign entanglemenets that do nothing but create more American enemies.

America needs a President who will put the national security of the people and the safety of our troops before the interests of oil companies and the military industrial complex. To date, this war has cost between 100,000 and 1.0 million innocent lives. That is between 30 and 300 times the number of people murdered on 9/11. Do two wrongs make a right? The majority of 9/11 hijackers were Saudis - not Iraqis. We are allies with Saudi Arabia and yet Saudi Arabia is far from being a democracy!

The hypocrisy is staggering. The mistakes that are being made are criminal. Why anyone believes the purveyors of this war is a mystery to me. Consider their pitch: "We will be greeted as liberators." Wrong. "Oil revenues will pay the cost." Wrong. "A secular democracy will emerge and be an inspiration for other countries." Wrong. The list of misjudgements goes on and on.

Were the civilian Iraqis killed by our preemptive war "collateral damage" or is that just another euphemism for murder? Has anyone taken the time to look at their pictures on the Web? I wonder how their friends and relatives feel about the United States. Are they more or less likely to become terrorists as a result of our actions?

America violates the Geneva Conventions and violates the Christian Doctrine of Just War. She started a war that is illegal under international law. As President Eisenhower said, "Preventative war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not listen to anyone who seriously talked about such a thing." I see a flock of Presidential candidates, most of whom voted for this war and many of whom believe "all options should be on the table" in dealing with Iran. That's code for, "We should be prepared to attack Iran with conventional and/or nuclear weapons."

Think about that for a moment. Our leaders are actually talking about a preemptive nuclear strike against a country that has not attacked us. Are they insane? I hear Neocon pundits calling for the beginning of World War III. Our country suspended habeas corpus! Our country stripped its citizens of the Constitutional protections against an overreaching government. Our country sanctions "rendition": the kidnapping of anyone, anywhere, throughout the world, and taking them to a remote location where they can be subject to "enhanced interrogation techniques" we are asked to believe do not constitute torture.

One shameless Republican candidate spoke of his desire to "double Guantanamo". He thinks his sons' participation in his campaign is equivalent to military service. Is it any surprise that he got a deferment when his country called on him and asked for his service in Vietnam? Other candidates for the highest office in this land are not any better. Most have never served in any war. As for one war hero candidate, he sings "bomb Iran" to the tune of The Beach Boy's song, Barbara Ann. How dare he make light of killing people? Shame on you, Senator! Of all people, you should know better.

Our country that thinks that it owns and controls the world. I believe this is ethically wrong. Given that we cannot afford our growing emire, our attempt to run the world is also pointless. Should we have bases in the Middle East for the next fifty years? Is it okay for the dominant political party, the Neocons, to believe the world is a dark and evil place? The people who feel this way are projecting their own views onto the rest of the world. They need therapy. We have adopted the Old Testament view of an eye for an eye. As Ghandi said, if we take this approach, we will all end up blind.

Has America lost its soul? Acting on fear, ignorance, and incompetence we have implemented the wrong policies and taken the wrong course. How's that for not letting the terrorists win? God surely has a great sense of humor; irony abounds. As citizens, each and every one of us bears responsibility for the acts of our government. All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing. I think the administration and the vast majority of Congress have lost their souls, but the American people have not. Nearly 70% of the American population is against the war in Iraq. The vast majority of us want peace. People know what is right, yet the government does the wrong thing. How can this be, in a nation OF, FOR, and BY the People? Does the government really represent our interests? Must we kill innocent Iraqis and Iranians to ensure our safety? Would you advocate killing your neighbor because you think he might do you harm in the future, even if he has done nothing to you yet?

I will say it right now, clearly and loud:

The huge disconnect between what a majority of this country wants and what oru government is doing is the elephant in the room that no one will discuss. I cannot in good conscience condone or support the policies of the Neocons, the military industrial complex, or the oil industry. I don't believe in "Full Spectrum Dominance." I don't believe "We are the inispensable nation." I don't believe we are "aistory's actors." I don't believe we can "make our own reality." I don't believe we should be an Empire. I think we have great power but we should only use that power to protect ourselves.

With our power comes enormous responsibility. We are a Constitutional Republic. I believe there is a power higher than my government that the Founders drew upon in drafting the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution. "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal." Notice the words "all men" - the Constitution does not say "all Americans." The founders believes, as do I, that ALL men have God-given rights. Governments are made to protect these rights, not to take them away.

If it sounds like I am mad, you're right. I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore. I'm mad that my money becomes worth less every year because the Federal Reserve prints money out of thin air. I am mad that our inflation statistics are a lie, thanks to Clinton changing the CPI calculation. I'm mad that we're on a roller coaster of boom and bust cycles that benefit financiers at the expense of the middle class, retirees and the poor. I'm mad that Wall Street titans and speculators have been rewarded while savers and honest labor have been punished. I'm mad that honesty is considered quaint and naive by the political classes. I am mad at the arrogance of those who hold power in Washington. I am mad that our leaders sent us tumbling off our moral high ground. I'm mad that my tax dollars are used for weapons rather than peace. I don't want innocent blood on my hand. I want my country back!

The mainstream media and vested industrial and political interests would have us believe that we cannot make a difference. The only candidates they thoroughly cover are war mongers. They claim the voices that represent real change don't stand a chance. In doing so, they have gone too far.

The establishment dam has sprung a leak. The word is spreading. Candidates that represent real change are moving up. Candidates that represent the status quo are losing steam. Ron Paul's message is clear and beautiful and true. It resonates with people. When you hear it, you say, "That's right, that's what I believe." This is why his poll numbers are rising faster than any other candidate. This is why his forth quarter fundraising is over $18,000,000 at the time I'm writing this.

They say he cannot win. They say he is a fringe candidate. They say he will lose big.

I disagree. We have a great opportunity to make Ron Paul our next President. The avalanche has already begun: the Freedom message is out there and it is spreading like a virus. It cannot be stopped. The Ron Paul Freedom Movement is a seminal event in the history of US politics.

It is an honor to support this man. We should be so lucky as to have him for our President. Individually, none of us have the power of the Neocons and the political classes, but as we self-organize and unite, we have them badly outnumbered. They are terrified! The growth in this movement is amazing. We can and we WILL win this struggle. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a defeatist or is working for the other side.

I ran the USA Today advertisement because I wanted to plant a seed and make a difference. WE ALL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Every conversation, every person converted, every e-mail and every effort; it all counts. The Internet has made it possible.

What a beautiful thing. The trend is really changing and it is fun to watch the old guard struggle as their fortress crumbles.

So what can you do? Join our effort to elect Ron Paul as the next President of the United States. Spread the word that we have an opportunity to elect an honest statesman with an impeccable record of voting in line with our Constitution. Donate to his campaign! Each contribution represents another American who has said "enough is enough."

No amount is too little. On December 16th, our collective voices were heard when grassroots supporters for Dr. Paul succeeded in organizing the largest one-day fundraiser in political history. Over 58,000 Americans spoke with their wallets by donating more than $6 million dollars to the Ron Paul campaign in a single day.

Think about it. What is freedom worth?

If you care about the future of this country, Ron Paul will not let you down. If you care about our troops, you must vote for Dr. Paul so he can bring them home to defend America instead of someone else's country. Ron Paul has received more donations from active military personnel than any other candidate. Why do you think that is?

This is it folks. A once in a lifetime opportunity. We may never see a candidate with more integrity, with a better message or a better track record. Our founding fathers pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honors in order to establish this Nation. Perhaps we have taken for granted the risks they took and the sacrifices they made. But we are being called and tested. How will we answer?

Are you going to be a Loyalist or a Patriot? Are you going to storm the ramparts or huddle with the bourgeoisie? Americans are brave people. We can set this country back on track and experience a renaissance of Peace, Freedom and Prosperity.

Vote Ron Paul for President! Please join us and vote for Ron Paul in your state's Republican Primary and encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same. You can learn more about his positions on the issues that most concern you at www.RonPaulLibrary.org.

Do not count on the media to keep you informed, but if you keep an ear to the street, you'll hear us coming.

jacmicwag
12-18-2007, 04:46 PM
Great piece Larry but I do agree with your editor about the evolution paragraph. I just don't think it belongs in this particular ad. The point you make is valid and true and certainly can be used effectively in blogs, letters to editors and the like.

Thanks for your dedication and hard work.

davidkachel
12-18-2007, 04:48 PM
Absolutely leave out the part about evolution and whatizname. It will not get any votes and will certainly lose some.
Besides, evolution is not "proven". It is only a theory. (One with which I happen to agree, but a theory nonetheless.)

Eagle1
12-18-2007, 04:53 PM
The article is MUCH TOO LONG for the avg person who is addicted to sound bytes on TV. Heck, I know all this stuff and I didn't have the patience to wade thru it.

Might run several ads on different topics.

Take out the evolution part.

jenninlouisiana
12-18-2007, 04:53 PM
I agree with Linda.

Energy
12-18-2007, 04:55 PM
I hope and trust the publisher/designer will make this easy to skim and scan.

Rob
12-18-2007, 04:55 PM
Absolutely leave out the part about evolution and whatizname. It will not get any votes and will certainly lose some.
Besides, evolution is not "proven". It is only a theory. (One with which I happen to agree, but a theory nonetheless.)

Scientific theories are as close as we ever get to any type of accepted "fact." The body of science does not permit something to be called "theory" unless it is overwhelmingly accepted as truth.

The "popular definition" of theory and the scientific one are very different.

You often here people who reject evolution by beginning, "I think it is a theory...."

That's like someone who wants to legalize marijuana, "I think marijuana is illegal..."

It is a very awkward way begin stating you disagree with something, and shows that you don't understand the definition of theory.

Chadd Murray
12-18-2007, 04:57 PM
Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution

His name is Ron Paul.

Perry
12-18-2007, 04:57 PM
OK, here is where we are right now.

It is long.

It will be full page.

There will be bolding, set outs and text changes.

It is kind of hard to read without all the formatting. I will try to get a pdf up later.

If you have time take a look and make suggestions.

Thanks.

Larry

In particular, do you think I should leave this part in or take it out. It is how I feel. But Linda thinks we lose voters. Thoughts?

. Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.[Linda comment (I’d take it all out and not even go there—assuming your goal is to help Ron get elected. Plus the copy just flows better into your next statement with it out.)



Larry

I think you are treading dangerous ground with this portion of the ad.
For the Ron Paul revolution first impressions are everything. I think the fact that Ron Paul rejects evolution is something that needs to be left on the back burner.
In running this ad you will promoting locally yet discouraging invividuals new to Pauls message nationally.
I can easily see this becoming a "hitpiece" on Ron Paul on many talk shows and unfortunately this is one of the debates that in the eyes of the American public Paul will lose. By bringing this issue to the forefront you are asking Dr Paul to respond. Do you really think this will make him look good in the national spotlight?

nathanielyao
12-18-2007, 04:59 PM
Some minor language edits:


Or is this just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck.

Might want to change Obama to "her leading rival." The entire article shouldn't mention any other candidates by name so as not to distract people.

Definitely avoid the evolution thing.


The candidates who represent change are moving up. The candidates who represent the status quo are moving down (Rudy Guiliani and Hillary Clinton). Even Rudy is being forced to talk about what a great religion Islam is in order to soften his Norman Podhoretz inspired:” kill’em all, and let God sort them out message.”

Perhaps "Ron Paul, the candidate who represents change is moving up. The candidates who represent the status quo are moving down."

This will put a more definitive on who is representing change as people might confuse that statement with Huckabee or Obama. Not naming Rudy or Hillary will let people associate who ever they think is the status quo with moving down.

Will also lead in well into the next paragraph.

This is a great thing you are doing.

Nathaniel

Rob
12-18-2007, 05:00 PM
Larry

I think you are treading dangerous ground with this portion of the ad.
For the Ron Paul revolution first impressions are everything. I think the fact that Ron Paul rejects evolution is something that needs to be left on the back burner.
In running this ad you will promoting locally yet discouraging invividuals new to Pauls message nationally.
I can easily see this becoming a "hitpiece" on Ron Paul on many talk shows and unfortunately this is one of the debates that in the eyes of the American public Paul will lose. By bringing this issue to the forefront you are asking Dr Paul to respond. Do you really think this will make him look good in the national spotlight?

I agree. You can look how involved I am with this campaign by looking at my signature.

IF I read that part of your ad before I knew who Ron Paul was, I doubt that I would ever support him. Thankfully I was introduced to him more slowly. Although I'm finding this very hard to swallow.

Mark
12-18-2007, 05:00 PM
I would like to know whether or not Dr. Paul believes in evolution.

:(

Okay, I found a video where someone asked about the debate question where it was asked. (about 2:30 in)

His answer is very eloquent and precise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4af9Q0Fa4Q

Now, you have to keep in mind that Ron is very intelligent and precise in his answers.

He was asked about "The Theory of Evolution" which refers to Darwin's theory of course:

http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification". That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature).

Now, as a Christian who believes in God, I don't believe in Darwin's theory either.

However, that doesn't preclude me from believing that evolution exists.

People even have evolved. Two people of different races that have a child have created an evolved child.

A child different from both of them, a human that's evolved from two separate races into a distinct being that's a combination of the two.

A mule is an evolved creature created from a horse and a donkey.

Follow me?

bluemarkets
12-18-2007, 05:02 PM
Fantastic effort!

That letter is straight from the heart ... it will touch a lot of people!

I think it would be wise though, to leave out the section about evolution.

As a christian reading this, not knowing anything about Ron Paul, this would be an immediate turn off. Faith and religion divides and convictions run deep, deep enough to ignore the issues all together.

The goal is to get them to look into Ron Paul more and his stance on the major issues. (Not if he believes creation/evolution) Ron Paul hits every major issue dead on 9 times out of 10.

I am what you would call a "fundamental christian", but first heard of Ron Paul in a S&P futures chat room and his position on the FED. I did my own research and here I am today on the Ron Paul bandwagon, less than 1 month ago.

Again brilliant piece ...

just my 2 cents

webber53
12-18-2007, 05:02 PM
I would change Mr. Smith goes to Washington to "One of us, goes to Washington"
I thought, who is Mr. Smith??


It is long and wordy, and hard to read. But that maybe to the lack of formating.

Anyways, GREAT letter.

and I agree, don't mention the evolution paragraph either.

I would like to donate also to help in future adds. You shouldn't bear the burden by yourself.

It is a 1939 B&W movie starring Jimmy Stewart about a young impressionable Junior Senator from Oregon that goes to Washington D.C. and discovers the corruption inside the beltway and tries to change the system the only way he knows how. It is a classic Patriotic movie that deals with how corrupt Washington D.C. was even way back then!;)

Rob
12-18-2007, 05:04 PM
Okay, I found a video where someone asked about the debate question where it was asked. (about 2:30 in)

His answer is very eloquent and precise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4af9Q0Fa4Q

Now, you have to keep in mind that Ron is very intelligent and precise in his answers.

He was asked about "The Theory of Evolution" which refers to Darwin's theory of course:

http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification". That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature).

Now, as a Christian who believes in God, I don't believe in Darwin's theory either.

However, that doesn't preclude me from believing that evolution exists.

People even have evolved. Two people of different races that have a child have created an evolved child.

A child different from both of them, a human that's evolved from two separate races into a distinct being that's a combination of the two.

A mule is an evolved creature created from a horse and a donkey.

Follow me?

I don't, and I think that's because you're not using the definition of evolve that science has. Could you clarify? (I wouldn't be talking about this here, but I think this thread is safe from becoming a warzone so I will.)

Chadd Murray
12-18-2007, 05:07 PM
Do you think humans are in the same family of creatures as apes? If you don't, you're just flat out denying the science.

Mark
12-18-2007, 05:08 PM
You're right on that according to this...I learn something new everyday!

For more information on this. (http://home.entouch.net/dmd/death1.htm)

I mean no disrespect to you, but evolution doesn't work with the God of the Bible, the two are incompatible. They can't both be right. One has to be right, one has to be wrong. You have one position and I have a different position. We don't seem to be changing our positions any time soon.

I've gotta get back to studying. Blessings.

No argument friend. :) I posted this already, but a mule is an evolution between a donkey and a horse.

And that's not incompatible with God's ways.

I don't believe in Darwin's theory, but I don't believe that God couldn't use evolution if He wants to either.

Remember, God can do anything, except lie. The Bible even says so. No human knows God's "Mind" so to speak,
so I'm not "going there" in saying what God did to advance His Creation.

Thanks for the Blessings! :)

The Father's Best Possible Blessings to you too. :)

Rob
12-18-2007, 05:09 PM
Do you think humans are in the same family of creatures as apes? If you don't, you're just flat out denying the science.

Humans, according to accepted biology, ARE technically speaking apes. But this guy knows that.

Pure Excess
12-18-2007, 05:12 PM
Thanks! You are an INSPIRATION! Amazing words~!

OferNave
12-18-2007, 05:14 PM
Let's please not get into an evolution debate here. Nothing good will come of it. Stay focused on the ad.

davidkachel
12-18-2007, 05:15 PM
1. Missing closing parenthesis in first paragraph.
2. To be consistent, where you talk about Hillary without using her name, you should also refer to Obama without using his name.
3. Leave this out: "If it sounds like I am mad, you’re right. I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore. (Source: Howard Beale: Network)"
4. Change "mad" to "angry" in succeeding paragraphs.
5. Michael Moore can only hurt you. I would remove this reference and quote.

Lord Xar
12-18-2007, 05:16 PM
Take The Evolution Out Of The Ad.

It Lends Nothing To The Debate And Will Alienate People.

Rob
12-18-2007, 05:16 PM
Let's please not get into an evolution debate here. Nothing good will come of it. Stay focused on the ad.

Yeah you're probably right, I'm just having some big problems now that I realized Ron Paul doesn't believe in Evolution. I suppose I'll deal with those issues elsewhere, I don't want to damage the campaign.

Perhaps we should set the controversial clause to a poll? Or perhaps that it's controversial so be enough reason to not include it?

Mark
12-18-2007, 05:20 PM
I don't, and I think that's because you're not using the definition of evolve that science has. Could you clarify? (I wouldn't be talking about this here, but I think this thread is safe from becoming a warzone so I will.)

Sure, the Precise theory that Darwin expounded, I believe, leaves out the creation of animals in any other method other than being "undirected".
.

"Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification"."

.
The term "undirected" is key, for it presumes no Creator that "directed" the beginning of advanced creatures.

.
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a slow gradual process.
Darwin wrote,
"…Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap,
but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps." [1]
Thus, Darwin conceded that,
"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications,
my theory would absolutely break down."
.

Darwin theorized that no complex organism existed before one evolved from a simple organism.

Thus, it flies in the face of there being a Creator who created complex organisms.

Which in turn, denies the existence of a Creator who formed creatures that began beyond being a simple organism.

constituent
12-18-2007, 05:21 PM
it's beautiful.

how long do you have?

do you want to stick w/ the testimonial voice?

would you like it to sound more or less like reporting?

how much action?

how much zang?

how much pop?

personally, i think we could condense what you've got right now into about 350-400 words.

or....

i'll knock you out an a+ in the next 18-24 hrs. if you need it right away...

if you have a couple days that'd be awesome... assuming that is the case, i'll
get you a draft copy w/in the next day and we'll go from there...

do you need/want my e-mail addy?


...oh yea, and can we sneak a ronpaulnation.com in there somewhere?

davidkachel
12-18-2007, 05:23 PM
OK, now for the general criticism...

In the first few paragraphs (talking about the America you grew up in) you had me, tear brought to the eye, the whole thing. You successfully connected with your audience.
Then it went cold because you started meandering. You should have stuck with that theme, which is a good one and is also broad enough to make all your points fit within it and still be the dominant theme throughout the whole thing.
The way you can get away with a piece this long and still get people to read it is to lead them down a single path... the America you grew up in. All the points you want to make will fit that nicely.

KeyLimer
12-18-2007, 05:23 PM
Read the whole thing. Great. Builds nicely to the climax.

People buy papers not least to get this sort of raw info - to fill the gaps set up by the 15 sec blips they see on TV.

(I just read the whole comments to see if anyone else woulod mention taking out Michael Moore - I would think he's too much of knee-jerk hot button name for traditional Republicans)

I like it because there's nothing woolly about the issues and the facts. Bang bang, These are the problems. bang. Here's the solution.

I also like the fact that James Stewart is finally being connected - evenly loosely - with Dr. Ron Paul...surely the best possible association to make in people's minds.

Very good. Open-hearted and sincere article, I thought.

Mark
12-18-2007, 05:25 PM
Yeah you're probably right, I'm just having some big problems now that I realized Ron Paul doesn't believe in Evolution. I suppose I'll deal with those issues elsewhere, I don't want to damage the campaign.

Perhaps we should set the controversial clause to a poll? Or perhaps that it's controversial so be enough reason to not include it?

I agree with dropping it, but you have to realize,
the concept of Evolution completely denies the existence of a God Who created life beyond anything other than a simple organism,
and it should come as no surprise to you that Ron does believe that there is a God Who created both simple and complex organisms.

constituent
12-18-2007, 05:27 PM
Sure, the Precise theory that Darwin expounded, I believe, leaves out the creation of animals in any other method other than being "undirected".
.

"Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification"."

.
The term "undirected" is key, for it presumes no Creator that "directed" the beginning of advanced creatures.

.
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a slow gradual process.
Darwin wrote,
"…Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap,
but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps." [1]
Thus, Darwin conceded that,
"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications,
my theory would absolutely break down."
.

Darwin theorized that no complex organism existed before one evolved from a simple organism.

Thus, it flies in the face of there being a Creator who created complex organisms.

Which in turn, denies the existence of a Creator who formed creatures that began beyond being a simple organism.


assuming we ignore darwin's knowledge/thoughts on/of hog farmers selectively breeding swine....

...and

"Darwin theorized that no complex organism existed before one evolved from a simple organism."

fact or crap? crap. Darwin was a Christian.

but all this is for another thread

nbhadja
12-18-2007, 05:27 PM
Yeah you're probably right, I'm just having some big problems now that I realized Ron Paul doesn't believe in Evolution. I suppose I'll deal with those issues elsewhere, I don't want to damage the campaign.

Perhaps we should set the controversial clause to a poll? Or perhaps that it's controversial so be enough reason to not include it?

I am an atheist and believe in all of evolution, but it makes no difference if RP believes it or not. He NEVER injects his views into anything he shouldn't, the way it should be.

ggibson1
12-18-2007, 05:28 PM
Yeah you're probably right, I'm just having some big problems now that I realized Ron Paul doesn't believe in Evolution. I suppose I'll deal with those issues elsewhere, I don't want to damage the campaign.

Perhaps we should set the controversial clause to a poll? Or perhaps that it's controversial so be enough reason to not include it?

Its ok to be a religious person that doesnt want to let Science trump god... as long as that person doesnt want to force their view on others then they are a good person. I have religious friends who know that I think their entire belief system is bunk and they think I am totally missing the coming "END OF DAYS" yet we get along just fine because we control our EGOs... just like RON PAUL!!!

davidkachel
12-18-2007, 05:32 PM
Stop the damned evolution discussion!
Larry needs feedback for his ad, NOT a debate over evolution.
The topic I repeat IS NOT EVOLUTION, it is how to edit this ad.

nbhadja
12-18-2007, 05:34 PM
After this line any evolution -creationism talk stops. Violators will be prosecuted.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sandra
12-18-2007, 05:35 PM
Great piece! I would leave out the part about evolution.

Mark
12-18-2007, 05:41 PM
assuming we ignore darwin's knowledge/thoughts on/of hog farmers selectively breeding swine....

...and

"Darwin theorized that no complex organism existed before one evolved from a simple organism."

fact or crap? crap. Darwin was a Christian.

but all this is for another thread

Fact. I included Darwin's own words that say that.

http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/

Thus, Darwin conceded that,
"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications,
my theory would absolutely break down."

Of course, too much discussion of evolutionary theory,
but it serves a purpose in showing how controversial the subject is, and how it would distract from the purpose of the ad.


(edit)
nbhadja (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=4906) , I missed your line because I was already posting, asking for a pardon. New line.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Carl_S
12-18-2007, 05:47 PM
LLepard,

You are a true patriot, thank you!

I strongly recommend that you spend a portion of the funds allocated to this project to hire an advertising agency. They will recommend placement, frequency, layout and prepare the graphics and copy to meet your objectives.

Effective advertising is an art. It takes experience and a unique set of skills that most of us do not have. It is not rational, but instead based on visual impressions and emotional responses.

I believe you will help Dr. Paul the most, if you use the funds that are available to retain skilled people that do this for a living, and then work closely with them to accomplish your objectives.

rasheedwallace
12-18-2007, 05:55 PM
props llepard, can't say enough to thank you. quite an amazing investment.

Birdlady
12-18-2007, 05:56 PM
LLepard,

You are a true patriot, thank you!

I strongly recommend that you spend a portion of the funds allocated to this project to hire an advertising agency. They will recommend placement, frequency, layout and prepare the graphics and copy to meet your objectives.

Effective advertising is an art. It takes experience and a unique set of skills that most of us do not have. It is not rational, but instead based on visual impressions and emotional responses.

I believe you will help Dr. Paul the most, if you use the funds that are available to retain skilled people that do this for a living.

I think this is a good idea too. Rather than taking advice from us where most of us have no idea what we are talking about, hire a professional to tell you exactly what needs done to make this effective.

I personally think it needs shortened.

Consult with someone who does this for a living and is good at it. See what other work they have edited or created to make sure they are really worth the money.

Omphfullas Zamboni
12-18-2007, 05:59 PM
Greetings,

I agree with posts suggesting this letter should be made more accessible to reluctant readers (e.g. formatting changes, trimming its size). If some form of graphic were included, might I propose this image? (It is--almost--as touching as your article):

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s167/Kregener/Freedom%20Posters/ronpaul_hires.jpg

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
Omphfullas Zamboni

jjschless
12-18-2007, 06:19 PM
I like the article and the concept. Couple items though:

You use a sort of bullet list type rundown which is quiet powerful but I think you may do it too frequently, consider structuring one of the lists in a sentence or two to preserve the potency of the technique.


Use the "Big quote" technique to draw in readers. You know, the way the pick a provocative quote and set it in a box in much larger text.


Get some pictures in there, if you are going to take up a full page you certainly don't want to put up a wall of text.






Otherwise thanks for your efforts.

Chaos Unlimited
12-18-2007, 06:30 PM
Larry, first thank you. You're inspiring the campaign.

The piece is too long. I read the editorial section daily but I wouldn't read this whole thing. Some people only respond to visuals, so a mix of image and text hits a wider audience.

I agree with you on the evolution paragraph but I would leave it out.

Mark
12-18-2007, 08:45 PM
This is taking a while, submitting what I have so far:


OK, here is where we are right now.

It is long.

It will be full page.

There will be bolding, set outs and text changes.

It is kind of hard to read without all the formatting. I will try to get a pdf up later.

If you have time take a look and make suggestions.

Thanks.

Larry

In particular, do you think I should leave this part in or take it out. It is how I feel. But Linda thinks we lose voters. Thoughts?

. Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.[Linda comment (I’d take it all out and not even go there—assuming your goal is to help Ron get elected. Plus the copy just flows better into your next statement with it out.)

BREAK

Paid Political Message

Why did I spend $85,000 to support Presidential Candidate Ron Paul? Because I care about my children and your children.

Lawrence W. Lepard, American Citizen.


Recently, <--- missing space

I reached into my own pocket and placed a full page ad in USA Today supporting the candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul. Why did I spend my hard-earned dollars on such an ad? I will tell you. Because Ron Paul is different from every other individual who carries the title "politician." He is truly a public servant. A "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" type of guy. No vested interest will support him, but I will. (I strongly believe that at this critical time we have a dire need for honest leadership in this country.) <--- missing parenthesis

As Americans, we stand at an important crossroads in our history. We need to make a decision as to what we want America to represent, and to become. History will record the outcome of our decision. If we make the wrong choice, many more innocent people will die, and history will not be kind. As I say to my closest friends, I do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren that I stood silent as others destroyed this country.
Let me state it clearly. The America that I grew up in
believed in the rule of law, not the rule of men.
The America that I grew up in believed in telling the truth. The America that I grew up in believed in following Judeo-Christian values, and yet made room for those of different faiths and backgrounds. The America I grew up in had a religious flavor, but we were wary of those who wore their religion on their sleeves. The America that I grew up in believed in the golden rule: treat people the way we would like them to treat us. The America that I grew up in believed that you did not lie, cheat or steal. The America that I grew up in believed in the inherent goodness of most men, but recognized that evil exists.
Nevertheless, the America that I grew up in did not believe in an eye for an eye. It believed in protecting oneself from evil, but in the process of doing so we were cautioned not to become what we were protecting against.
In short, the America that I grew up in was a place where one could be proud of one’s country, and thankful to the men and women who had sacrificed so much in the past to give us this heritage.
I wake up today as a 50 year old husband and father of three, and I wonder where that America has gone.

I see a President who called the U.S. Constitution “just a piece of paper”. <---

mentioned as not completely verifiable, could be replaced with something else just as powerful, for example, "who has ignored the tenets of The Constitution with signing statements that have placed the power of the citizenry given to us by that Constitution, into his own personal hands."


He replaced a President who blatantly lied to the American public. Admittedly, the lie was about something that was none of the public’s business. However, when a country is led by a liar, it lowers that country’s level of discourse and makes lying seem acceptable. It is not. Are these the best leaders this Country can produce? I see that second President’s wife running for President and claiming she will end the war, <---

maybe a mention of the fact of the timeline that has been stated to last until, what, 2013?, before we can begin to withdraw in significant numbers. I think there's even been a mention by Cheney and/or others of "a hundred year war".


when she initially voted for the war, and recently voted for a resolution against Iran that makes another war more likely. Do Americans really believe she will act in our best interests given all the money she has received from lobbyists and the military industrial complex? Do Americans really believe she will end the war, as she now has begun claiming in her political advertisements? Or is this just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck. Will her position on the war be like the story she told us about how she traded "cattle futures" so successfully? <---

I missed that one, it may go over the head of people not heavily involved in investing, though, it could cause them to look into it and see your point.
Maybe it could use a little explanation. A short background as to the circumstances involved in the quote, and where/why it's false.


I see the U.S. involved in an aggressive, undeclared war against a country that did not represent a threat to us in any way. We were lead into this war on the pretense of false and inaccurate information. <---

a mention of the first Gulf war being due to enforcing UN sanctions may be effective for the anti-UN crowd.


The truth is, we are far less safe now than we were before we invaded Iraq. This war has created more emotionally charged enemies who have more reasons to attack us than ever before. <---

maybe a mention of us being over there occupying them as an incentive to attack us as well, military bases all over the Middle East inciting them to attack us ect.


Of course, the Administration and the media conveniently assure us that the “surge” is working. No surprise there, given that there is an election coming up.
Ron Paul voted against invading Iraq. Rather than attack an entire nation, he tried to convince Congress and our President to strategically target the terrorists responsible for 9/11. The current Administration has failed to capture and eliminate the criminals who perpetrated this crime against us. Those responsible are still at large, our borders are wide open, and our troops are spread thin all over the globe. We need a leader who will protect us with a strong national defense and keep us out of foreign entanglements that in the end, create more enemies than friends. <---

good tie-in if there's an earlier a mention of bases in the Middle East ect,
the earlier mention will help define "foreign entanglements" instead of just mentioning them in passing. Us being over there is key in explaining why they attack us. People can easily understand someone invading their house as a reason to attack the invader. Making it clear that us being in their house is a perfectly logical reason for them to attack us, since we're the invaders into the Arab's house.


We need a President who will put the national security of the American people, and the safety of our troops, before the interests of oil companies and the military industrial complex.
To date the outcome of this war is that between 100,000 and 1.0 million innocent people have died. These figures are between 30 and 300 times the number of people killed on 911. Do two wrongs make a right? Furthermore, the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. Not Iraqis. We are allies with Saudi Arabia and yet Saudi Arabia is far from being a democracy. <---

A mention of our tax money being sent directly to Saudi Arabia to "help them" would be effective perhaps. People don't like being taxed so that the government can just give it away, especially overseas like that.


Yet we went to war to create a democracy in Iraq and set an example for the Middle East.
The hypocrisy is staggering. The mistakes that were made are nearly criminal. <---

maybe "perhaps" criminal. "nearly" may imply to people that you believe the mistakes weren't quite criminal enough to be criminal, while it seems to be common knowledge more and more that we were deliberately lied too to start the war for another agenda other than defense of the nation. i.e. to control the region.


Why anyone believes one thing that is said by the people who led us into this war is a mystery to me. <---

fits well with using "perhaps" instead of "nearly"


“We will be greeted as liberators.” Wrong. “Oil revenues will pay the cost.” Wrong. “A secular democracy will emerge and be an inspiration for other countries.” Wrong. The list of misjudgments goes on an <--- missing the "d"
on.


Were the civilian Iraqis killed by our preemptive war “collateral damage” or is that just a euphemism for murder? Has anyone taken the time to look at their pictures on the Web? I wonder how their relatives and friends feel about the United States? I wonder if they are more or less likely to become terrorists as a result of the actions of the United States. <---

perhaps change the last "United States" to "the current administration" or the like to focus blame on the administration and distance blame from the US as a whole.


I see a country <---

again, perhaps use "an administration" instead of "a country" for the same reasons as immediately above.


that has violated the Geneva Conventions. I see a country <--- same again


that has violated the Christian Doctrine of Just War. I see a country <--- same again


that has started a war that is illegal under international law. As President Eisenhower said, “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler.
Frankly, I would not listen to anyone who seriously talked about such a thing”. I see a flock of Presidential candidates, most of whom voted for this war and many of whom believe “all options should be on the table” in dealing with Iran. For those who are not current on this subject, that language is code for: we should be prepared to attack Iran with conventional or nuclear weapons.
Think about that for a moment. Leaders in this Country are actually talking about using a nuclear weapon preemptively against a country that has not attacked us. Are they insane?
I hear Neocon pundits calling for the beginning of World War III. <---

maybe a mention of Bush coming out and directly mentioning WW III based on lies that have been found out now, in terms f them trying to suppress intelligence assessments.



I see a Country that has suspended habeas corpus. I see a country that has stripped its citizens of the Constitutional protections against an overreaching government. I see a country that has sanctioned “rendition” which is just another term for the kidnapping of anyone, anywhere, throughout the world, and then spiriting them off to a remote location where they can be subject to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which we are told are not torture. <---

maybe a mention of "no lawyers, no trials, can be held indefinitely/for life" ect may be effective somewhere around here.

Another lie. I see a country that has engaged in torture. Hell, <---

okay by me, but to avoid a slighty "curse word" may be wise.
Could easily say, perhaps, just as effectively,

"one leading Presidential candidate - even - wants to “double Guantanamo”"



one leading Presidential candidate wants to “double Guantanamo” and thinks his sons’ <--- (son's)

campaigning for him is equivalent to serving in the military. Of course, he <---

perhaps replace "he" with "that candidate" to avoid an instant confusion as to
which person you're talking about, the candidate verses the son.

as in:

"Of course, that candidate got a deferment to avoid serving in Vietnam."


got a deferment to avoid serving in Vietnam. Other candidates for the highest office in this land are not any better. I see a war hero candidate who sings "bomb Iran" to the tune of The Beach Boy's song, Barbara Ann. How can he make light of killing people? Shame on you Senator. Of all people, you should know better. Joking about killing someone is a disgrace in my book.

~~~~~~~~~
Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.[Linda comment (I’d take it all out and not even go there—assuming your goal is to help Ron get elected. Plus the copy just flows better into your next statement with it out.) ]
~~~~~~~~~

Could easily reference Huck with something like "wears his religion on his sleeve", or even now, "mislead people about receiving a Theology Degree" ect ect. Huck has tons of things to mention.


Furthermore, I see a country where the top advocates of war have never fought in one. Worse yet, they sought and obtained deferments when others were fighting. You cannot make this stuff up. The irony is incredible. If, as I believe, you reap what you sow, - then the ultimate payback for these injustices will be staggering. <---

nice, no comment, just wanted to mention that it's powerful and effective.
As a minister I like it. So very true. A point I try to make as often as I think the
perpetrators will see/hear it. Let's not forget, God sees all, and will repay in kind, both the good and the evil.


I see a Country that thinks that it owns and controls the world. I believe this is ethically <--- (include "and morally" perhaps?) wrong.


Furthermore, we cannot afford it, so even attempting to run the world is pointless. <--- "self defeating" instead of "pointless" perhaps?

i.e. we're kind of defeating ourselves, economically for one, by trying to run the world ect.


I see a country that thinks it should have bases in the Middle East for the next fifty years. <---

only 50? Hasn't there been a mention of at least a "hundred year war"?

perhaps use "50-100 years" or "50 to a 100 years" ect.

saahmed
12-18-2007, 08:57 PM
Yes, take out the negative aspects.

CaleeDubya
12-18-2007, 09:15 PM
Larry it's a great, but honestly I don't think people are going to read it. It's too long.

Perhaps if you cut it in half and then said something like... "for more information goto ronpaul2008.com" or something like that.

We gotta give the common person the highlights and then direct them where to get the info.

Actually that makes me thing of a good ad we should run. On one full page we should say...

DO YOU WANT TO END THE WAR IN IRAQ?

Then on the next full page it should say... TO END THE WAR VOTE RON PAUL (ronpaul2008.com)

Anyway thats my 2 cents.

C-Dubya

atthegates
12-18-2007, 09:19 PM
wow that was great. but i too am concerned about the length of the article. this will probably take up a full page in the newspaper. instead of just text i suggest adding some photos and graphics just to draw the reader's attention

JS4Pat
12-18-2007, 09:24 PM
Excellent piece!

Two suggestions:

1. I agree with Linda on the Evolution part.

2. Remove the following because it is too much Hillary - the few lines before it are perfect.


Or is this just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck. Will her position on the war be like the story she told us about how she traded "cattle futures" so successfully?

max
12-18-2007, 09:33 PM
way too long.....this is for the public...not a group of college professors...

why not just rerun your USA today ad?



take that evolution stuff out.

i dont believe in 6 day creation.....but nor do i believe we evolved from ocean scum. The founders were mostly deists and RP is a christian. Why do we even touch this?

why offend 80% of america with dubious evolution ideology?

I am all in favor of attacking Huckster...but not the american people. Mention the Huckabee rape/muder pardon instead....or talk about his tax hikes..

dont bash those of us who believe in a Creator...from which our rights emanate..

For that matter...dont bash the fundamentalists who take Genesis literally.....bad move

Energy
12-18-2007, 09:42 PM
LLepard,

You are a true patriot, thank you!

I strongly recommend that you spend a portion of the funds allocated to this project to hire an advertising agency. They will recommend placement, frequency, layout and prepare the graphics and copy to meet your objectives.

Effective advertising is an art. It takes experience and a unique set of skills that most of us do not have. It is not rational, but instead based on visual impressions and emotional responses.

I believe you will help Dr. Paul the most, if you use the funds that are available to retain skilled people that do this for a living, and then work closely with them to accomplish your objectives.

+1

At least get COPYWRITER and DESIGNER (maybe advertising agencies do it all?)

Copywriter to help craft a compelling, powerful yet succinct message.

Designer to design/format it for maximum effectiveness.

llepard
12-19-2007, 06:10 AM
Hi:

What great feedback. I read it all last night. Some really great ideas. Don't have time to give credit to each author, but THANKS, THANKS, THANKS. I am working on a new version.


OK, evolution, creationism and monkey/scopes are gone. I guess I was just being mischevious. For the record, I am a devoted Christian, yet I think that science goes a long way in explaining many things. I believe that to ignore science is a mistake. I also believe that focusing on an apocalyptic end of the world scenario is dangerous. That was the point I was trying to make. I did not mean to insult anyone or their beliefs. Freedom allows us to all believe as we wish. Who knows what is right? Every day I pray for guidance. We are all just doing the best we can. So if anyone was offended I am genuinely sorry.

With that said, I may not turn the next draft for a day or so.

I will keep you posted. The plan is a full go for NH on Friday, Dec. 28th. I am still considering other alternatives.

Best to all and thanks again, i am honored to be a part of this forum with so many highly intelligent and thoughtful people. Each in his or her own way, like Dr. Paul.

Best, LWL

constituent
12-19-2007, 06:14 AM
If you have the full page, why not create several pieces from several angles.... one an "op-ed," one a report on your charitable giving that sneaks in a reference to the fact that the reader is in the middle of another sorta episode in the story... one a story about some local charity event held by ron paul supporters and another about ron paul doing something really kick azz in congress or something like that.... maybe even a little comic strip/political cartoon?

then we could get really creative w/ layout and name placement.

LibertyEagle
12-19-2007, 06:17 AM
Larry it's a great, but honestly I don't think people are going to read it. It's too long.

Perhaps if you cut it in half and then said something like... "for more information goto ronpaul2008.com" or something like that.

We gotta give the common person the highlights and then direct them where to get the info.

Actually that makes me thing of a good ad we should run. On one full page we should say...

DO YOU WANT TO END THE WAR IN IRAQ?

Then on the next full page it should say... TO END THE WAR VOTE RON PAUL (ronpaul2008.com)

Anyway thats my 2 cents.

C-Dubya

We talked about doing something like that sometime back, although just with 1 ad. I don't know what ever happened to it. It was a great idea then too. I may be mistaken, but I think it was Bryan's idea.

LibertyEagle
12-19-2007, 06:19 AM
If you have the full page, why not create several pieces from several angles.... one an "op-ed," one a report on your charitable giving that sneaks in a reference to the fact that the reader is in the middle of another sorta episode in the story... one a story about some local charity event held by ron paul supporters and another about ron paul doing something really kick azz in congress or something like that.... maybe even a little comic strip/political cartoon?

then we could get really creative w/ layout and name placement.

I don't agree at all. That would totally dilute what Larry is trying to do.

constituent
12-19-2007, 06:22 AM
totally. :rolleyes:

burningfur
12-19-2007, 06:24 AM
I don't agree at all. That would totally dilute what Larry is trying to do.

+1

This is an incredibly unique ad, let's not change the most important aspect of it.

constituent
12-19-2007, 06:26 AM
+1

This is an incredibly unique ad, let's not change the most important aspect of it.

goodness gracious.... no imagination. the page tells the same story, it just segments it into nice neat little bits and keeps the reader involved.

but ehhh, whatever.

burningfur
12-19-2007, 06:29 AM
goodness gracious.... no imagination. the page tells the same story, it just segments it into nice neat little bits and keeps the reader involved.

but ehhh, whatever.

I offer you a cat as a peace offering.

http://valleywag.com/assets/resources/2007/05/no-rly.jpg

constituent
12-19-2007, 06:31 AM
:: sneeze ::

lol, thanks. have a good one!

KirkOlson
12-19-2007, 07:03 AM
You are a true hero llepard.

(And a rich one, I might add ;) )

pikerz
12-19-2007, 07:25 AM
Being long may be irrelevant depending on how its laid out. I'd wait to see that before making any judgements about length.

NH takes its responsibility seriously, so I wouldnt underestimate their desire to read it thru.

While I myself believe in evolution, and agree with your points on critical thinking, I agree with Linda in that it will alienate more people than it will gain.

Sematary
12-19-2007, 07:38 AM
Don't know. Does Microsoft word tell you that? If so, how?

It is 6 pages double spaced. Would be 6-8 columns in 10pt on a full page newspaper.

I think you need to note that the attention span of most Americans is very short.
I like the "America I grew up in" theme. I think that will resonate.
I guess I'll have to see the pdf but right now, it looks too long. Perhaps if each individual concept were encapsulated in it's own section with a bolded "headline" to draw the readers attention it would seem less long and easier to read.

JenaS62
12-19-2007, 07:50 AM
Larry, I think it's wonderful, however, much too long for the average American. We have become "bullet point" readers. I'm afraid that most people will not take the time to read it. I realize that if it's shortened it will lose some of your passion - but you want as many people as possible to read it. Just a suggestion.

Leslie Webb
12-19-2007, 07:54 AM
Larry, what if you did the essay in an interview format? It is such an outpouring of your ideas that it reads as if you are talking. The interview questions in bold would help to break up the text and make it easier to read. For example, something like this:

Larry Lepard On His Support for Ron Paul

On Nov 21 and 22 USA Today ran a one page ad for Presidential candidate Ron Paul. Larry Lepard, a partner in EMA a Boston financial management firm paid $85,000 of his own money for the ad.

Larry, what prompted you to spend $85,000 of your own money for a USA Today ad for Congressman and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul?
Why did I spend my hard-earned dollars on such an ad? I will tell you. Because Ron Paul is different from every other individual who carries the title "politician." He is truly a public servant. A "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" type of guy. No vested interest will support him, but I will. (I strongly believe that at this critical time we have a dire need for honest leadership in this country.)

As Americans, we stand at an important crossroads in our history. We need to make a decision as to what we want America to represent, and to become. History will record the outcome of our decision. If we make the wrong choice, many more innocent people will die, and history will not be kind. As I say to my closest friends, I do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren that I stood silent as others destroyed this country.

Who and what are destroying America? How has it changed?
Let me state it clearly. The America that I grew up in believed in the rule of law, not the rule of men. The America that I grew up in believed in telling the truth. The America that I grew up in believed in following Judeo-Christian values, and yet made room for those of different faiths and backgrounds. The America I grew up in had a religious flavor, but we were wary of those who wore their religion on their sleeves. The America that I grew up in believed in the golden rule: treat people the way we would like them to treat us. The America that I grew up in believed that you did not lie, cheat or steal. The America that I grew up in believed in the inherent goodness of most men, but recognized that evil exists.

Nevertheless, the America that I grew up in did not believe in an eye for an eye. It believed in protecting oneself from evil, but in the process of doing so we were cautioned not to become what we were protecting against. In short, the America that I grew up in was a place where one could be proud of one’s country, and thankful to the men and women who had sacrificed so much in the past to give us this heritage.

How do you see our current plight?
I wake up today as a 50 year old husband and father of three, and I wonder where that America has gone. I see a President who called the U.S. Constitution “just a piece of paper”. He replaced a President who blatantly lied to the American public. Admittedly, the lie was about something that was none of the public’s business. However, when a country is led by a liar, it lowers that country’s level of discourse and makes lying seem acceptable. It is not. Are these the best leaders this Country can produce? I see that second President’s wife running for President and claiming she will end the war, when she initially voted for the war, and recently voted for a resolution against Iran that makes another war more likely. Do Americans really believe she will act in our best interests given all the money she has received from lobbyists and the military industrial complex? Do Americans really believe she will end the war, as she now has begun claiming in her political advertisements? Or is this just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck. Will her position on the war be like the story she told us about how she traded "cattle futures" so successfully?

Tell us a little more about your views on the Iraq War
I see the U.S. involved in an aggressive, undeclared war against a country that did not represent a threat to us in any way. We were lead into this war on the pretense of false and inaccurate information. The truth is, we are far less safe now than we were before we invaded Iraq. This war has created more emotionally charged enemies who have more reasons to attack us than ever before. Of course, the Administration and the media conveniently assure us that the “surge” is working. No surprise there, given that there is an election coming up.

You support Ron Paul for President. What has been his position on Iraq?
Ron Paul voted against invading Iraq. Rather than attack an entire nation, he tried to convince Congress and our President to strategically target the terrorists responsible for 9/11. The current Administration has failed to capture and eliminate the criminals who perpetrated this crime against us. Those responsible are still at large, our borders are wide open, and our troops are spread thin all over the globe. We need a leader who will protect us with a strong national defense and keep us out of foreign entanglements that in the end, create more enemies than friends. We need a President who will put the national security of the American people, and the safety of our troops, before the interests of oil companies and the military industrial complex.

At the end of the day, what have we accomplished with this war? And, what mistakes were made?
To date the outcome of this war is that between 100,000 and 1.0 million innocent people have died. These figures are between 30 and 300 times the number of people killed on 911. Do two wrongs make a right? Furthermore, the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. Not one of the hijackers was from Iraq. We are allies with Saudi Arabia and yet Saudi Arabia is far from being a democracy. Yet we went to war to create a democracy in Iraq and set an example for the Middle East.

The hypocrisy is staggering. The mistakes that were made are nearly criminal. Why anyone believes one thing that is said by the people who led us into this war is a mystery to me. “We will be greeted as liberators.” Wrong. “Oil revenues will pay the cost.” Wrong. “A secular democracy will emerge and be an inspiration for other countries.” Wrong. The list of misjudgments goes on an on.

Were the civilian Iraqis killed by our preemptive war “collateral damage” or is that just a euphemism for murder? Has anyone taken the time to look at their pictures on the Web? I wonder how their relatives and friends feel about the United States? I wonder if they are more or less likely to become terrorists as a result of the actions of the United States.

What about the United States and international law in regard to this war?
I see a country that has violated the Geneva Conventions. I see a country that has violated the Christian Doctrine of Just War. I see a country that has started a war that is illegal under international law. As President Eisenhower said, “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not listen to anyone who seriously talked about such a thing”.

What about the other candidates running for President? What do you think of their positions on the war?
I see a flock of Presidential candidates, most of whom voted for this war and many of whom believe “all options should be on the table” in dealing with Iran. For those who are not current on this subject, that language is code for: we should be prepared to attack Iran with conventional or nuclear weapons.

Think about that for a moment. Leaders in this Country are actually talking about using a nuclear weapon preemptively against a country that has not attacked us. Are they insane? I hear Neocon pundits calling for the beginning of World War III.

How has the war affected civil liberties in this country? And what about torture?
I see a Country that has suspended habeas corpus. I see a country that has stripped its citizens of the Constitutional protections against an overreaching government. I see a country that has sanctioned “rendition” which is just another term for the kidnapping of anyone, anywhere, throughout the world, and then spiriting them off to a remote location where they can be subject to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which we are told are not torture. Another lie. I see a country that has engaged in torture. Why, one leading Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, wants to “double Guantanamo” and thinks his sons’ campaigning for him is equivalent to serving in the military. Of course, he got a deferment to avoid serving in Vietnam.

Well, what about some of the other candidates’ attitudes to the war?
Other candidates for the highest office in this land are not any better. I see a war hero candidate who sings "bomb Iran" to the tune of The Beach Boy's song, Barbara Ann. How can he make light of killing people? Shame on you Senator McCain. Of all people, you should know better. Joking about killing someone is a disgrace in my book.

Furthermore, I see a country where the top advocates of war have never fought in one. Worse yet, they sought and obtained deferments when others were fighting. You cannot make this stuff up. The irony is incredible. If, as I believe, you reap what you sow, - then the ultimate payback for these injustices will be staggering.

Then I guess you believe America does not have a mission of policing the world.
Yes, but, unfortunately, I see a country that thinks that it owns and controls the world. I believe this is ethically wrong. Furthermore, we cannot afford it, so even attempting to run the world is pointless. I see a country that thinks it should have bases in the Middle East for the next fifty years. I see a country where the dominant political party, the Neocons, believes the world is a dark and evil place. I believe the people who feel this way are projecting their own views onto the rest of the world. They need therapy. I see a country where the Government has adopted the Old Testament view of an eye for an eye. As Ghandi said, if we take this approach we will all end up blind.

In short, I wonder if America has lost its soul. Out of malfeasance, fear, ignorance, or incompetence we have implemented the wrong policies and taken the wrong course. Since this is true, then effectively the terrorists are winning. God surely has a great sense of humor. Irony abounds.

What about the American people? How do they come in?
As citizens, each and every one of us is somewhat responsible for the acts of our government. All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing. So, has America lost it soul: yes or no? I would submit that while the current U.S. Administration and the vast majority of the Senate and Congress have lost their souls, the American people have not. Nearly 70% of the American population is against this war, and yet the war goes on. The vast majority of the American people want peace. People know what is right, yet the government does the wrong thing. How can this be? We are supposed to be a government OF, FOR and BY the People. Are we? What do you think? Does our government really represent the American people? Do you think the U.S. government should kill innocent Iraqis or Iranians to make us safer? Would you advocate killing a man who lives down the street because you think he might do you harm in the future, even though he has done nothing to you yet?

I will say it right now, clearly and loud: The huge disconnect between what a majority of this country wants and what our government is doing is the elephant in the room that no one will discuss.

What is your take on the elites that pushed for this war?
I cannot in good conscience condone or support the policies of the Neocons, the military industrial complex, or the oil industry. I do not believe in “Full Spectrum Dominance”. I do not believe “We Are The Indispensable Nation”. I do not believe we are “History’s Actors.” I do not believe we can “Make Our Own Reality”. I do not believe we should be an Empire.

How do you see our government? What kind of government do you think we should we have?
I think we have great power and military superiority and we should use these abilities to protect ourselves. Furthermore, with these powers come enormous responsibility. We are a Constitutional Republic. I believe there is a power higher than my government and that the Founders drew upon this power when they drafted the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal.” That reads “all men.” Not “all Americans.” The Founders believed, as do I, that All men have God-given rights. Governments are made to protect these rights, not destroy them. Until recently, I believe the American government did a good job of protecting these rights for Americans. For many years now I believe the American government has used a different standard or play book when dealing with foreign countries and foreign citizens. But that is a story for a different essay.

If it sounds like I am mad, you’re right. I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore. (Source: Howard Beale: Network)

I take it that you are mad as hell about the economy as well.
Yes, I am mad that my money becomes worth less every year because the Federal Reserve can print money out of thin air. I am mad that the U.S. Government inflation statistics are a lie, thanks to Bill Clinton’s changing of the CPI calculation. I am mad that this change and the Federal Reserve have put the economy on a roller coaster leading to boom and bust cycles that benefit financiers at the expense of the middle class, retirees and the poor. I am mad that Wall Street titans and speculators have been rewarded while savers and honest labor have been punished. I am mad that honesty is considered quaint and naive by the political classes.

I am mad at the arrogance of those who hold power in Washington, DC. I am mad that the actions of some men in my country have taken away the moral high ground that the U.S. used to occupy. I am mad that my tax dollars are used for weapons rather than for peaceful purposes. I do not want the blood of innocents on my hands. I do not agree with many of Michael Moore’s positions, but his statement “dude, I want my country back” resonates with me. I believe that it resonates with a large portion of the American voter base.

But you still believe in the American people, right?
Individual Americans are great people. If 70% of them are opposed to the war, then there is still hope. Of course the mainstream media, the press and the vested industrial and political interests would have us all believe that we cannot make a difference. They say we need to listen to them as they tell us who the next President will be. We have to choose between the two war monger candidates they will serve up to us. We are told who the two front runners are, and we are discouraged from looking elsewhere. Why bother, they say? No one else even stands a chance. Maybe so, maybe not. This time I think they have gone too far. I would submit that the outcome of this election it is not so clear.

Are the people winning against the main stream media and the vested interests?
The establishment dam has sprung a leak. The leak may be small now, but it is growing. It is growing exponentially. The word is spreading. The candidates who represent change are moving up. The candidates who represent the status quo are moving down (Rudy Guiliani and Hillary Clinton). Even Rudy is being forced to talk about what a great religion Islam is in order to soften his Norman Podhoretz inspired:” kill’em all, and let God sort them out message.”
The lines could not be more clearly drawn.

What about Ron Paul? And, what are his chances?
Ron Paul’s message is clear and beautiful and true. It resonates with people. When you hear it you say, “that’s right, that’s what I believe”. This is why his record in straw polls across the country and in fund raising has been so exceptional. He has raised more money from small donors than any other candidate. Yet, the media still ignores him or treats him poorly. It is beautiful irony that every attack on him only brings him more attention as intelligent Americans wonder, “who is this guy that everyone keeps attacking … I wonder if there is a reason?”

The pundits say he cannot win. They say he is a fringe candidate. They say he will lose big. I disagree. First, I think there is a very good chance he will be our next President. Second, I think he has won, even if he does not win. Why? Because he has put the Freedom message out there. It is like a virus. It is spreading. It cannot be stopped. I believe history will record the Ron Paul Freedom Movement as a seminal event in the history of U.S. politics.
It is an honor to support this man. We should be so lucky as to have him for our President.
Having said that, we could all help history along a little bit by supporting the Ron Paul campaign.

How will this campaign turn out?
My favorite movie is :It’s A Wonderful Life. To me, the message of that movie is that we all make a difference. Individually, none of us have the power of the Neocons and the political classes, but collectively they are supposed to work for us. If we self-organize and unite, we have them badly out numbered. They are terrified, believe me on this. And it is happening. The growth in this movement is amazing. We can and will win this struggle. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a defeatist or is working for the other side.

I ran the USA Today Advertisement because I wanted to plant a seed and make a difference. WE ALL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Every conversation, every person converted, every e-mail , every effort; it all counts. The internet is what has made it possible. What a beautiful thing. The trend is really changing and it is fun to watch the old guard struggle as their fortress crumbles.

What can people do?
So what can you do? Join our effort to elect Ron Paul as the next President of the United States. Spread the word that we have an opportunity to elect an honest statesman with an impeccable record of voting in line with our Constitution.

Donate to his campaign! Each contribution represents another American who has said “enough is enough.” Every contribution helps. $10 is not too little. On December 16th, our collective voices were heard when grassroots supporters for Ron succeeded in organizing the largest one-day fundraiser in political history. Over 58,000 ordinary Americans spoke with their wallets by donating more than $6 million dollars to the Ron Paul campaign in a single day. Together we are proving to be a force to be reckoned with.

Think about it. What is freedom worth? I would submit that it is priceless. If you care about the future of this country, I know that Ron Paul will not let you down. If you care about our troops, then you must vote for Ron Paul. He will bring them home to defend America instead of someone else’s country. Ron Paul has received more donations from active military personnel than any other candidate. Why do you think that is? Have you heard about it from the Mainstream Media? I think not.

This is it folks. A once in a lifetime opportunity. We may never see a candidate with more integrity, with a better message or track record.

How would you sum up what you have said today?
Rarely has our country been so far off track. Our Founding Fathers pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honors in order to establish this Nation. Perhaps we have taken for granted the risks they took and the sacrifices they made. But we are being called. We are being tested. How will we answer? Will we meet the test or will we fail? Each of us makes a difference.

So what are you going to do? Are you going to be a Loyalist or a Patriot? Are you going to storm the ramparts or huddle with the bourgeoisie? Americans are brave people. I believe we can set this country back on the right track and that America will experience a renaissance of Peace, Freedom and Prosperity. Vote Ron Paul for President.

The danger to our Republic is real. We must act now!
Remember, each one of us makes a difference. Please vote for Ron Paul in your state’s Republican Primary and encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.

You can also learn more at www.RonPaulLibrary.org about Ron Paul”s positions on the issues that most concern you.

Thank you, Larry.

user
12-19-2007, 08:14 AM
I think it's obvious now that the evolution paragraph has to go, since we don't even know what RP's views on evolution are anymore.

Mark
12-19-2007, 08:46 AM
finished with the initial read-through and comments

heh, ;)

I got this message when trying to post:

The following errors occurred when this message was submitted:
The text that you have entered is too long (30831 characters). Please shorten it to 30000 characters long.~~~~

Paid Political Message

Why did I spend $85,000 to support Presidential Candidate Ron Paul? Because I care about my children and your children.

Lawrence W. Lepard, American Citizen.


Recently,I <--- missing space here

reached into my own pocket and placed a full page ad in USA Today supporting the candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul. Why did I spend my hard-earned dollars on such an ad? I will tell you. Because Ron Paul is different from every other individual who carries the title "politician." He is truly a public servant. A "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" type of guy. No vested interest will support him, but I will. (I strongly believe that at this critical time we have a dire need for honest leadership in this country. <--- missing parenthesis

As Americans, we stand at an important crossroads in our history. We need to make a decision as to what we want America to represent, and to become. History will record the outcome of our decision. If we make the wrong choice, many more innocent people will die, and history will not be kind. As I say to my closest friends, I do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren that I stood silent as others destroyed this country.
Let me state it clearly. The America that I grew up in
believed in the rule of law, not the rule of men.
The America that I grew up in believed in telling the truth. The America that I grew up in believed in following Judeo-Christian values, and yet made room for those of different faiths and backgrounds. The America I grew up in had a religious flavor, but we were wary of those who wore their religion on their sleeves. The America that I grew up in believed in the golden rule: treat people the way we would like them to treat us. The America that I grew up in believed that you did not lie, cheat or steal. The America that I grew up in believed in the inherent goodness of most men, but recognized that evil exists.
Nevertheless, the America that I grew up in did not believe in an eye for an eye. It believed in protecting oneself from evil, but in the process of doing so we were cautioned not to become what we were protecting against.
In short, the America that I grew up in was a place where one could be proud of one’s country, and thankful to the men and women who had sacrificed so much in the past to give us this heritage.
I wake up today as a 50 year old husband and father of three, and I wonder where that America has gone.

I see a President who called the U.S. Constitution “just a piece of paper”. <---

mentioned as not completely verifiable, could be replaced with something else just as powerful, for example, "who has ignored the tenets of The Constitution with signing statements that have placed the power of the citizenry given to us by that Constitution, into his own personal hands."


He replaced a President who blatantly lied to the American public. Admittedly, the lie was about something that was none of the public’s business. However, when a country is led by a liar, it lowers that country’s level of discourse and makes lying seem acceptable. It is not. Are these the best leaders this Country can produce? I see that second President’s wife running for President and claiming she will end the war <---

maybe a mention of the fact of the timeline that has been stated to last until, what, 2013?, before we can begin to withdraw in significant numbers. I think there's even been a mention by Cheney and/or others of "a hundred year war".


when she initially voted for the war, and recently voted for a resolution against Iran that makes another war more likely. Do Americans really believe she will act in our best interests given all the money she has received from lobbyists and the military industrial complex? Do Americans really believe she will end the war, as she now has begun claiming in her political advertisements? Or is this just a tactic to gain anti-war votes now that Obama is breathing down her neck. Will her position on the war be like the story she told us about how she traded "cattle futures" so successfully? <---

I missed that one, it may go over the head of people not heavily involved in investing, though,
it could cause them to look into it and see your point.

Maybe it could use a little explanation.
A short background as to the circumstances involved in the quote, and where/why it's false.


I see the U.S. involved in an aggressive, undeclared war against a country that did not represent a threat to us in any way. We were lead into this war on the pretense of false and inaccurate information. <---

a mention of the first Gulf war being due to enforcing UN sanctions may be effective for the anti-UN crowd.


The truth is, we are far less safe now than we were before we invaded Iraq. This war has created more emotionally charged enemies who have more reasons to attack us than ever before. <---

maybe a mention of us being over there occupying them as an incentive to attack us as well,
military bases all over the Middle East inciting them to attack us ect.


Of course, the Administration and the media conveniently assure us that the “surge” is working. No surprise there, given that there is an election coming up.
Ron Paul voted against invading Iraq. Rather than attack an entire nation, he tried to convince Congress and our President to strategically target the terrorists responsible for 9/11. The current Administration has failed to capture and eliminate the criminals who perpetrated this crime against us. Those responsible are still at large, our borders are wide open, and our troops are spread thin all over the globe. We need a leader who will protect us with a strong national defense and keep us out of foreign entanglements that in the end, create more enemies than friends. <---

good tie-in if perhaps there's an earlier a mention of bases in the Middle East ect,

the earlier mention might help define "foreign entanglements" instead of just mentioning them in passing.

Us being over there is key in explaining why they attack us.

People can easily understand someone invading their house as a reason to attack the invader.

Making it clear that us being in their house is a perfectly logical reason for them to attack us,
since we're the invaders in the Arab's house.


We need a President who will put the national security of the American people, and the safety of our troops, before the interests of oil companies and the military industrial complex.
To date the outcome of this war is that between 100,000 and 1.0 million innocent people have died. These figures are between 30 and 300 times the number of people killed on 911. Do two wrongs make a right? Furthermore, the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. Not Iraqis. We are allies with Saudi Arabia and yet Saudi Arabia is far from being a democracy. <---

A mention of our tax money being sent directly to Saudi Arabia to "help them" would be effective perhaps.

People don't like being taxed so that the government can just give it away, especially overseas like that.


Yet we went to war to create a democracy in Iraq and set an example for the Middle East.
The hypocrisy is staggering. The mistakes that were made are nearly criminal. <---

maybe use - "perhaps criminal," instead?

"nearly" may imply to people that you believe the mistakes weren't quite criminal enough to be criminal,

while it seems to be common knowledge more and more that we were deliberately lied to,
to start the war for another agenda other than defense of the nation.

i.e. the war was begun to control the region.

personally, lying to start a war seems to be quite obviously "criminal" to me .


Why anyone believes one thing that is said by the people who led us into this war is a mystery to me. <---

fits well with using "perhaps" instead of "nearly"


“We will be greeted as liberators.” Wrong. “Oil revenues will pay the cost.” Wrong. “A secular democracy will emerge and be an inspiration for other countries.” Wrong. The list of misjudgments goes on an <--- missing the "d"
on.


Were the civilian Iraqis killed by our preemptive war “collateral damage” or is that just a euphemism for murder? Has anyone taken the time to look at their pictures on the Web? I wonder how their relatives and friends feel about the United States? I wonder if they are more or less likely to become terrorists as a result of the actions of the United States. <---

perhaps change the last "United States" to "the current administration" or the like
to focus blame on the administration and distance blame from the US as a whole.


I see a country <---

again, perhaps use "an administration" instead of "a country" for the same reasons as immediately above.


that has violated the Geneva Conventions. I see a country <--- same again


that has violated the Christian Doctrine of Just War. I see a country <--- same again


that has started a war that is illegal under international law. As President Eisenhower said, “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler.
Frankly, I would not listen to anyone who seriously talked about such a thing”. I see a flock of Presidential candidates, most of whom voted for this war and many of whom believe “all options should be on the table” in dealing with Iran. For those who are not current on this subject, that language is code for: we should be prepared to attack Iran with conventional or nuclear weapons.
Think about that for a moment. Leaders in this Country are actually talking about using a nuclear weapon preemptively against a country that has not attacked us. Are they insane?
I hear Neocon pundits calling for the beginning of World War III. <---

maybe a mention of Bush coming out and directly mentioning WW III based on lies that have been found out now,
in terms of them trying to suppress intelligence assessments.

I see a Country that has suspended habeas corpus. I see a country that has stripped its citizens of the Constitutional protections against an overreaching government. I see a country that has sanctioned “rendition” which is just another term for the kidnapping of anyone, anywhere, throughout the world, and then spiriting them off to a remote location where they can be subject to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which we are told are not torture. <---

maybe a mention of "no lawyers, no trials, can be held indefinitely/for life" ect may be effective somewhere around here.

Another lie. I see a country that has engaged in torture. Hell, <---

okay by me, but to avoid a slightly "curse word" may be wise.
Could easily say, perhaps, just as effectively,

"one leading Presidential candidate - even - wants to “double Guantanamo”"


one leading Presidential candidate wants to “double Guantanamo” and thinks his sons’ campaigning for him is equivalent to serving in the military. Of course, he <---

perhaps replace "he" with "that candidate" to avoid any confusion as to
which person you're talking about, the candidate verses the son.

as in:

"Of course, that candidate got a deferment to avoid serving in Vietnam."


got a deferment to avoid serving in Vietnam. Other candidates for the highest office in this land are not any better. I see a war hero candidate who sings "bomb Iran" to the tune of The Beach Boy's song, Barbara Ann. How can he make light of killing people? Shame on you Senator. Of all people, you should know better. Joking about killing someone is a disgrace in my book.

~~~~~~~~~
Then there is another republican candidate who doesn't believe in evolution, and literally believes the world was created in six days. If we are going to replay the Monkey/Scopes trial at the Presidential level, we are surely lost. Anyone who does not believe in the theory of evolution, as proven by science, is immediately disqualified by me as not being capable of critical thought. I am not saying people are not allowed to think "magically", I am just saying that I do not want one of these people running my country.[Linda comment (I’d take it all out and not even go there—assuming your goal is to help Ron get elected. Plus the copy just flows better into your next statement with it out.) ]
~~~~~~~~~

Could easily reference Huck with something like "wears his religion on his sleeve", or even now,
"misled people about receiving a Theology Degree", ect ect. Huck has tons of things to mention.


Furthermore, I see a country where the top advocates of war have never fought in one. Worse yet, they sought and obtained deferments when others were fighting. You cannot make this stuff up. The irony is incredible. If, as I believe, you reap what you sow, - then the ultimate payback for these injustices will be staggering. <---

nice, no comment from me here, just wanted to mention that it's powerful and effective.
As a minister I like it. So very true. A point I try to make as often as I think the
perpetrators will see/hear it. Let's not forget, God sees all, and will repay in kind, both the good and the evil.


I see a Country <--- perhaps change to "an administration" or the like for previously mentioned reasons

that thinks that it owns and controls the world. I believe this is ethically wrong <--- include "and morally" perhaps?

Furthermore, we cannot afford it, so even attempting to run the world is pointless. <---

"self defeating" instead of "pointless" perhaps?

i.e. we're kind of defeating ourselves, economically for one, by trying to run the world ect.


I see a country that thinks it should have bases in the Middle East for the next fifty years. <---

only 50? Hasn't there been a mention of at least a "hundred year war"?

perhaps use "50-100 years" or "50 to a 100 years" ect.



I see a country where the dominant political party, <---

perhaps use "group" instead of "party" since Neocons are a subset of the Republican Party,

i.e.,"where a dominant political group"


the Neocons, believes the world is a dark and evil place. I believe the people who feel this way are projecting their own views onto the rest of the world. They need therapy. <---

true, but "They need therapy" almost sounds a bit sarcastic.

I like it, but perhaps, not really necessary to include that personal of a statement.

Perhaps something like:

"and they endanger us by it"
"and their viewpoint endangers the rest of us"
"and they endanger the rest of the world,"
"and their viewpoint endangers the rest of the world"
"they need to step back and reassess their position because it only endangers the rest of the world"

.

something about the dangerousness of their viewpoint perhaps?

I agree with your "needs therapy" statement,
but perhaps something less accusatory and more definitive as to why their viewpoint is unsound would be more effective.


I see a country where the Government has adopted the Old Testament view <---

perhaps modify to "has adopted the literal viewpoint of the Old Testament law of equivalency"

since there are valid reasons to believe that the law was not literal,
but rather suggestive of equal punishment or judgment, rather than a literal mandate.


of an eye for an eye. As Ghandi said, if we take this approach we will all end up blind.
In short, I wonder if America has lost its soul. Out of malfeasance, fear, ignorance, or incompetence we have implemented the wrong policies and taken the wrong course. Since this is true, then effectively the terrorists are winning. God surely has a great sense of humor. <---

no comment other than, as a minister, just nice to know someone else believes this way because I do too,
and I rarely hear someone else mention that God has a sense of humor. ;)


Irony abounds.
As citizens, each and every one of us is somewhat responsible for the acts of our government. <---

perhaps also include something along the lines of, "In fact, the Constitution states that "We the people" are the government",

for emphasis that the government isn't some bureaucracy, but, we the people of the United States,
and it's our responsibility to stand up for our rights to be the government,
instead of leaving the governance of the country in the hands of a few politicians and bureaucrats,

i.e. We need to take the power back ect, and it's our responsibility and duty as citizens to do so.


All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing. So, has America lost it soul: yes or no? I would submit that while the current U.S. Administration and the vast majority of the Senate and Congress have lost their souls, the American people have not. Nearly 70% of the American population is against this war, and yet the war goes on. The vast majority of the American people want peace. People know what is right, yet the government does the wrong thing. How can this be? We are supposed to be a government OF, FOR and BY the People.<---

I hadn't read this yet before my last comment, I see that it makes the same point.
(I'm reading as someone who has never see it, and relating my impressions as I go along)


Are we? What do you think? Does our government really represent the American people? Do you think the U.S. government should kill innocent Iraqis or Iranians to make us safer? Would you advocate killing a man who lives down the street because<---

perhaps add the word "just", as in "just because"
to emphasis that preemptive war includes killing innocent people because of 'thought', not fact.

i.e. someone thinks harm is possible, rather than actual harm taking place.

(personally, I think the neocon agenda of preemptive war isn't based on an actual fear of harm,
but rather an excuse used to persuade the American people to go along with their true agenda
to control the Middle East for various nefarious reasons.)


you think he might do you harm in the future, even though he has done nothing to you yet?
I will say it right now, clearly and loud:

The huge disconnect between what a majority of this country wants and what our government is doing is the elephant in the room that no one will discuss.
I cannot in good conscience condone or support the policies of the Neocons, the military industrial complex, or the oil industry. I do not believe in “Full Spectrum Dominance”. I do not believe “We Are The <---

should the quotation mark come before "The" instead of "We"?
i.e. "The Indispensable Nation”

Indispensable Nation”. I do not believe we are “History’s Actors.” I do not believe we can “Make Our Own Reality”. <---

perhaps include "The policemen of the world" since it's a very well known and understood phrase, one that, I believe, Ron has said on various occasions.


I do not believe we should be an Empire. I think we have great power and military superiority and we should use these abilities to protect ourselves. Furthermore, with these powers come enormous responsibility. We are a Constitutional Republic. I believe there is a power higher than my government and that the Founders drew upon this power when they drafted the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal.” That reads “all men.” Not “all Americans.” The Founders believed, as do I, that All men have God-given rights. Governments are made to protect these rights, not destroy them. Until recently, I believe the American government did a good job of protecting these rights for Americans. For many years now I believe the American government has used a different standard or play book when dealing with foreign countries and foreign citizens. But that is a story for a different essay.
If it sounds like I am mad, you’re right. I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore. (Source: Howard Beale: Network)[B] <---

maybe add somehow that "Network" is a movie for further clarification.
i.e. (Source: Howard Beale: Movie: Network)


I am mad that my money becomes worth less every year because the Federal Reserve can print money out of thin air. I am mad that the U.S. Government inflation statistics are a lie, thanks to Bill Clinton’s changing of the CPI calculation. I am mad that this change and the Federal Reserve have put the economy on a roller coaster leading to boom and bust cycles that benefit financiers at the expense of the middle class, retirees and the poor. I am mad that Wall Street titans and speculators have been rewarded while savers and honest labor have been punished. I am mad that honesty is considered quaint and naive by the political classes. I am mad at the arrogance of those who hold power in Washington, DC. I am mad that the actions of some men in my country have taken away the moral high ground that the U.S. used to occupy. I am mad that my tax dollars are used for weapons rather than for peaceful purposes. I do not want the blood of innocents on my hands. I do not agree with many of Michael Moore’s positions, but his statement “dude, I want my country back” resonates with me. I believe that it resonates with a large portion of the American voter base.
Individual Americans are great people. If 70% of them are opposed to the war, then there is still hope. Of course the mainstream media, the press and the vested industrial and political interests <---

perhaps add "economic interests" as well


would have us all believe that we cannot make a difference. They say we need to listen to them as they tell us who the next President will be. We have to choose between the two war monger candidates they will serve up to us. We are told who the two front runners are, and we are discouraged from looking elsewhere. Why bother, they say? No one else even stands a chance. Maybe so, maybe not. <---

perhaps somehow add "but" i.e. "but maybe not", it's more defiant ,
more indicative of an "in your face" attitude to the MSM, fits well with the anger aspect, it's kind of like,

"oh yeah MSM, think again"


This time I think they have gone too far. I would submit that the outcome of this election it is not so clear. The establishment dam has sprung a leak. The leak may be small now, but it is growing. It is growing exponentially. The word is spreading. The candidates who represent change are moving up. The candidates who represent the status quo are moving down (Rudy Guiliani and Hillary Clinton). Even Rudy is being forced to talk about what a great religion Islam is in order to soften his Norman Podhoretz inspired:” kill’em all, and let God sort them out message.” <---

should the quotation mark be after "out" instead of "message"?

i.e. ” kill’em all, and let God sort them out"


The lines could not be more clearly drawn.
Ron Paul’s message is clear and beautiful and true. It resonates with people. When you hear it you say, “that’s right, that’s what I believe”.
This is why his poll numbers are rising faster than any other candidate. Yet, the media still ignores him or treats him poorly. It is beautiful irony that every attack on him only brings him more attention as intelligent Americans wonder, “who is this guy that everyone keeps attacking … I wonder if there is a reason?” They say he cannot win. They say he is a fringe candidate. They say he will lose big. I disagree. First, I think there is a very good chance he will be our next President. Second, I think he has won, even if he does not win. Why? Because he has put the Freedom message out there. It is like a virus. It is spreading. It cannot be stopped. I believe history will record the Ron Paul Freedom Movement as a seminal event in the history of U.S. politics.
It is an honor to support this man. We should be so lucky as to have him for our President.
Having said that, we could all help history along a little bit by supporting the Ron Paul campaign. My favorite movie is : <---

I think, adjust colon 1 space left to "is:"

It’s A Wonderful Life. To me, the message of that movie is that we all make a difference. Individually, none of us have the power of the Neocons and the political classes, but collectively they are supposed to work for us. <---

perhaps add "and represent"

i.e. "they are supposed to work for and represent us."

to emphasize that they aren't the true power, that the American people are.
That the Constitution gives "We the people" the power.


If we self-organize and unite, we have them badly <---

perhaps change to "badly" to "greatly"

i.e. "greatly outnumbered"
for emphasis on the size of "We the people"compared to the small group of people
that comprise the current neocon ruling elite.

Also more "positive" of a word, rather than the more negative "bad" or "badly"


out numbered. They are terrified, believe me on this. And it is happening. <---

perhaps exchange "change" for "it"

i.e. "And change is happening."

change is a political "buzzword" this electoral season, and it's beginning to resonate among the electorate.
Numerous mentions of "change" abound.

Also, the instant I read "And it is happening." I was a bit lost on the meaning of "it".
And lost focus and concentration on the powerful message that had me gripped.

With the word "change" I would have immediately understood your meaning without losing focus.


The growth in this movement is amazing. We can and will win this struggle. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a defeatist or is working for the other side. <---

perhaps use something like "status quo" instead of "the other side".

Everyone understands "status quo", and "the other side" may come off as a bit "conspiratory" or "paranoid"

I don't believe your paranoid, but you know how people are in jumping to conclusions.

Also, again with the previous "losing focus" point.

"the other side" made me pause and think,
where "status quo" would have caused no hesitation due to instant comprehension of your message.


I ran the USA Today Advertisement because I wanted to plant a seed and make a difference. WE ALL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Every conversation, every person converted, every e-mail , every effort; it all counts. The internet is what has made it possible.
What a beautiful thing. The trend is really changing and it is fun to watch the old guard struggle as their fortress crumbles.
So what can you do?
Join our effort to elect Ron Paul as the next President of the United States. Spread the word that we have an opportunity to elect an honest statesman with an impeccable record of voting in line with our Constitution.
Donate to his campaign!
Each contribution represents another American who has said “enough is enough.”
Every contribution helps. $10 is not too little. On December 16th, our collective voices were heard when grassroots supporters for Ron succeeded in organizing the largest one-day fundraiser in political history. Over 58,000 ordinary Americans spoke with their wallets by donating more than $6 million dollars to the Ron Paul campaign in a single day. <---

perhaps as well a mention of the over 25,000 new donors somewhere in here to, for example,
emphasize the "be a contributor" part to the people who have yet to contribute, ect


Together we are proving to be a force to be reckoned with.
Think about it. What is freedom worth? I would submit that it is priceless. If you care about the future of this country, I know that Ron Paul will not let you down. If you care about our troops, then you must vote for Ron Paul. He will bring them home to defend America instead of someone else’s country. Ron Paul has received more donations from active military personnel than any other candidate. Why do you think that is? Have you heard about it from the Mainstream Media? I think not. <---

perhaps use something along the lines of "perhaps not" or "more than likely not" ect.
because there has been some mention of it in the MSM, if not so much expressly by the MSM.

Basically, many people may have heard it, if only in passing,
and use of a less definitive statement than "I think not" may be more effective.


This is it folks. A once in a lifetime opportunity. We may never see a candidate with more integrity, with a better message or track record.
Rarely has our country been so far off track. <---

perhaps say something like in the form of a question,
this may encourage people to come to their own conclusion at this point and begin to really think "He's right" ect.

e.g. "Has our country ever been so far off track?"

It's less of a statement and more inclusive of the reader it seems to me.


Our Founding Fathers pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honors in order to establish this Nation. Perhaps we have taken for granted the risks they took and the sacrifices they made. But we are being called. We are being tested. How will we answer? Will we meet the test <---

perhaps use "this test" instead of "the test"
it may be more slightly more referencing of the previous "We are being tested."

~~~~

no comments past this point, I had to delete the rest of the letter due to the length of the post. :D

Starks
12-19-2007, 09:14 AM
tl;dr
(too long; didn't read)

LSUiLike
12-19-2007, 09:31 AM
Paid Political Message

Why I spent $85,000 to support presidential candidate Ron Paul
by Lawrence W. Lepard

During the Thanksgiving holidays I reached into my own pocket and purchased a full page ad in USA Today supporting the candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul. It was not done at the request of or in association with Dr. Paul or his official campaign. It was done because I've realized and I hoped to convey to my fellow citizens that Ron Paul is unique in the political arena. He is truly a public servant. A "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" type of guy. No interest vested in the status-quo will support him, but I will.

I believe history will show that we, as Americans, stand at an important crossroads. We need to make a decision about what we want America to become, and that is largely affected by who we choose to lead us. History will judge all of us, as a people, on what we allow America to become and how we choose to face the rest of the world. As I say to my closest friends, I do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren that I stood silent as others destroyed this country.

Let me state it clearly.

The America of my youth believed in the rule of law, not the rule of might or majority. It believed in telling the truth. It believed in upholding Judeo-Christian values while making room for those of different faiths and backgrounds. It believed in the golden rule: treat people the way we would like them to treat us.

The America of my youth believed we shouldn't lie, cheat, or steal, regardless of rank in society. It believed in the inherent goodness of most men, but recognized that evil exists. It believed in protecting oneself from evil, but in the process of doing so we were cautioned not to become what we were protecting against.

In short, the America of my youth was a place where we could be proud of our country. We were thankful for our progenitors, the men and women who sacrificed and contributed so much to give us the freedom and heritage we were born into and benefited from.

I wake up today, a citizen all my 50 years, a husband and father of three, and I wonder where that America has gone. I look at the recent string of leaders we've had, and at the candidates clamoring to be next in line, and I wonder, "Are these the best leaders my country can produce?"

I see the U.S. still involved in an aggressive, undeclared war that rages on, even after toppling a sovereign nation that posed no real threat to our national security. Instead of defeating terrorism, I believe our actions, both intended and unintended, are creating new terrorists. How many innocent Iraqi lives have been affected by the unintended consequences of our actions in Iraq?

New reports out of Iraq assure us that the “surge” is working. Assuming these reports aren't efforts to help push the status quo in the upcoming election, is anyone else bothered that a major, long term solution in Iraq's national defense strategy is to work out an agreement with our armed forces to provide continued support?

Ron Paul voted against invading Iraq. He supported a response that would strategically target the terrorists responsible for the tragedy of September 11, 2001, but he did not support an attack on a sovereign nation. When it was clear we were gearing up to go to war, he proposed that Congress actually declare war, as called for in the Constitution, but there was no support for that.

The bottom line is that the current administration has failed to capture and eliminate the criminals who perpetrated this crime against us. Those responsible are still at large, our borders are wide open, and our troops are spread thin all over the globe. We need a leader who will be truly dedicated to a strong national defense, which includes keeping us out of foreign entanglements that in the end create more enemies than friends and more complications than solutions. We need a president who will put the national security of the American people, and the safety of our troops, before the interests of oil companies and the military industrial complex.

I will stop at this point, at least for now. I know I have changed a fair amount of what you wrote, but I believe it is more effective and it captures the essence of what you're trying to say. It may still need to be trimmed (shortened), but I'd be happy to continue editing your article if you'd like me to. I believe keeping references to other candidates out of your article is probably for the best.

Mark
12-19-2007, 11:54 AM
^4_comments

LSUiLike
12-19-2007, 12:10 PM
We have violated the Geneva Convention. We have violated the Christian Doctrine of Just War. We have started a war that is illegal under international law. And most damning, our Congress never declared war.

President Eisenhower said, “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not listen to anyone who seriously talked about such a thing," yet this has since become policy? What is more alarming is that we have a majority of candidates, most of whom supported this war, that want to keep all options on the table when dealing with Iran. With no shame, potential leaders of this country will not take a preemptive nuclear strike against Iran off the table. Iran has not attacked us, and while they should be taken seriously, they pose no immediate threat to our national security.

Even if we could afford to continue our fight with Iran, would it be just? There would be no support from the world for a preemptive strike on Iran and the entire region would rally against us. In addition, the plain truth is that we could not afford it.

Our citizens have seen an erosion of the Constitutional protections against an overreaching government. Our leaders sanction “rendition,” another term for the kidnapping of anyone, anywhere, throughout the world, and then spiriting them off to a remote location where they can be subject to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which we are told are not torture. Another lie.

Yet, for all their tough talk, how many candidates that advocate war have never fought in one? Worse yet, how many sought and obtained deferments while others were serving their country? You cannot make this stuff up. The irony is incredible.

Out of malfeasance, fear, ignorance, or incompetence we have implemented the wrong policies and taken the wrong course. I am sad to say, the terrorists are winning.

As citizens, each and every one of us is somewhat responsible for the acts of our government. All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing. So, has America lost its moral compass? I would submit that while the current U.S. administration and the vast majority of Congress have lost their way, the American people have not.

Our leaders are meant to serve the people, not their party. Nearly 70% of the American population is against this war, and yet the war goes on. People know what is right, yet the government does the wrong thing. How can this be? We are supposed to be a government OF, FOR and BY the People. Are we? What do you think? Does our government really represent the American people? Do you think the U.S. government should kill innocent Iraqis or Iranians to make us safer? Would you advocate killing a neighbor with a different would view because he might do you harm in the future? Have we really exhausted all other avenues?

We may be conflicted between leaving Iraq and abandoning the Iraqi people, but a big reason for the conflict is because many Muslims oppose western intervention. If we leave, that element will no longer have a cause to rally against in Iraq. However, because we decided to topple the existing Iraqi government, a new governmental structure must be formed in Iraq. This structure should be decided upon among Iraqis - we have no moral basis to influence the decision of the people of Iraq. Iraq may suffer growing pains because of this, but we can do little to circumvent that inevitability unless we plan on maintaining a long term presence in Iraq.

I will say it right now, clearly and loud:

The huge disconnect between what a majority of this country wants and what our government is doing is the elephant in the room that no one will discuss.
I cannot in good conscience condone or support the policies of the Neocons, the military industrial complex, or the oil industry. I do not believe in “Full Spectrum Dominance”. I do not believe “We Are The Indispensable Nation”. I do not believe we are “History’s Actors.” I do not believe we can “Make Our Own Reality”. I do not believe we should be an Empire.

I think we have great power and military superiority and we should use these abilities to protect ourselves. But with these powers come enormous responsibility. We are a Constitutional Republic. I believe there is a power higher than my government and that the Founders drew upon this power when they drafted the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal.” That reads “all men.” Not “all Americans.” The Founders believed, as do I, that all men have God-given rights. Governments are made to protect these rights, not destroy them.

In the past I believed the American government did a good job of protecting these rights. Sadly, and for many years now, I believe the American government has used a different standard or play book when dealing with foreign countries and foreign citizens. Furthermore, I see a change slowly spreading domestically in how our government treats its own citizens.

If it sounds like I am mad, you’re right. I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore!

I am mad that my money becomes worth less every year because the Federal Reserve can print money out of thin air. I am mad that the U.S. government inflation statistics are a lie, thanks to Bill Clinton’s changing of the CPI calculation. I am mad that this change and the Federal Reserve have put the economy on a roller coaster leading to boom and bust cycles that benefit financiers at the expense of the middle class, retirees and the poor. I am mad that Wall Street titans and speculators have been rewarded while savers and honest labor have been punished.

I am mad that honesty is considered quaint and naïve by the political classes. I am mad at the arrogance of those who hold power in Washington, DC. I am mad that the actions of some men in my country have taken away the moral high ground that the U.S. used to occupy. I am mad that my tax dollars are used for unnecessary war instead of more thorough solutions. I do not want the blood of innocents on my hands.

I believe that I am not alone and that my views will resonate with a large portion of the American voter base. Individual Americans are great people. If 70% of them are opposed to the war, then there is still hope. Of course the mainstream media, the press and the vested industrial and political interests would have us all believe that we cannot make a difference. They say we need to listen to them as they tell us who the legitimate candidates will be, using unscientific polls as validation. In the end, we'll have to choose between the lesser of two evils.

This time I think they have gone too far. I would submit that the outcome of this election it is not so clear. The establishment dam has sprung a leak. The leak may be small now, but it is growing. It is growing exponentially. The word is spreading. The candidates who represent change are moving up. The candidates who represent the status quo are moving down.

Ron Paul’s message is clear and righteous and true. It resonates with people. When you hear it you say, “That’s right, that’s what I believe”. This is why he is able to raise "front runner money" despite fighting the only message the media feels comfortable sharing with us: "This man cannot win. He is unconventional." If what we've had is conventional, why would we want it?

Intelligent Americans are beginning to wonder, “Who is this guy that I keep hearing cannot win? Is there a reason his name keeps resurfacing? How is this guy able to raise money comparable to the front runners?” They say he cannot win. They say he is a fringe candidate. They say he will lose big. I totally disagree.

I think his message is spreading like wildfire and that there is a lot more support out there than the media is giving him credit for. There is a real chance enough people will risk their vote on a candidate who risks telling us the truth despite being scoffed at by the status-quo'ers. There is a real chance, a chance that is becoming more galvanized by the day, that Ron Paul will be our next President.

But apart from the race for the candidacy, Dr Paul has already won, by spreading the message of freedom, hope, and empowerment. His message is spreading. It cannot be stopped. I believe history will record the Ron Paul Freedom Movement as a seminal event in the history of U.S. politics. We will see more and more candidates for public office with this message of freedom, truth, and a commitment to truth.

It is an honor to support this man. We should be so lucky as to have him for our President.

Having said that, we could all help history along a little bit by supporting the Ron Paul campaign. I ran the USA Today Advertisement because I wanted to plant a seed and make a difference. WE CAN ALL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Every conversation, every person converted, every e-mail , every effort; it all counts.

So what can you do?

Join our effort to elect Ron Paul as the next President of the United States. Spread the word that we have an opportunity to elect an honest statesman with an impeccable record of voting in line with our Constitution.

Donate to his campaign!

Each contribution represents another American who has said “enough is enough.”
Every contribution helps. $10 is not too little. On December 16th, our collective voices were heard when grassroots supporters for Ron succeeded in organizing the largest one-day fundraiser in political history. Over 58,000 ordinary Americans spoke with their wallets by donating more than $6 million dollars to the Ron Paul campaign in a single day. Together we are proving to be a force to be reckoned with.

Think about it. What is freedom worth? I would submit that it is priceless. If you care about the future of this country, I know that Ron Paul will not let you down. If you care about our troops, then you must vote for Ron Paul. He will bring them home to defend America instead of someone else’s country. Ron Paul has received more donations from active military personnel than any other candidate. Why do you think that is? Have you heard about it from the Mainstream Media? I think not.

This is it folks. A once in a lifetime opportunity. We may never see a candidate with more integrity, with a better message or track record. Our Founding Fathers pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honors in order to establish this Nation. Perhaps we have taken for granted the risks they took and the sacrifices they made. But we are being called. We are being tested. How will we answer? Will we meet the test or will we fail? Each of us makes a difference.

So what are you going to do? Are you going to be a Loyalist or a Patriot? Are you going to storm the ramparts or huddle with the bourgeoisie?

Americans are brave people. I believe we can set this country back on the right track and that America will experience a renaissance of Peace, Freedom and Prosperity.

Vote Ron Paul for President.

The danger to our Republic is real. We must act now!

Remember, each one of us makes a difference. Please vote for Ron Paul in your state’s Republican Primary and encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.

You can also learn more at www.RonPaulLibrary.org about Ron Paul”s positions on the issues that most concern you.

As many have said, this is probably too long, but there is a lot of good stuff in there. I think you should tone down the pacifist undertones, which I did. Tone down the "Mass Media is against us" comments, which I started. We want to appeal to as many people as possible and presenting our point of view as pacifist or conspiratorial isn't as effective as it could be.

LFOD
12-19-2007, 12:55 PM
I don't understand the logic on why this would be an effective advertisement. It's too long by a factor of 10 at least. Many people in this forum can't get through it, including myself, and I'm an avid reader. Why would someone who is not currently intending to vote for Ron Paul sit down and read a full page letter from a supporter? I really don't see that as a realistic scenario.

In my opinion, the best bang for the buck would be to take the USA Today ad and run it instead of this one.

james1844
12-19-2007, 01:17 PM
Hi All,

I agree. Its a really first rate idea, but I'm afraid that its too long!

Most people have like a 30 second attention span - its the MTV effect.

Best,

James

tmg19103
12-19-2007, 01:28 PM
Larry,

I suggested this with your USA Today ad, which I thought was great - I think it is a good idea to spend a couple hundred with a marketing consultant who specializes in newspaper ads and who has ideally done campaigns.

I know you are speaking from your heart and since you are spending your money you want to get your own message across in your own way.

I think we all agree with the nessage. The point here is to get RP elected. If I had the money to place a full page ad in every NH newspaper in support of RP, I'd certainly spend the small amount needed to get feedback from a professional marketing consultant.

You don't have to accept everything this consultant has to say, but it may give you ideas on how to better position the ad in a way that satisfies your personal view of what this message should be AND also has the best impact on the reader.

JMHO. Whatever you do, you have my gratitude.

Truth Warrior
12-19-2007, 01:32 PM
"Scientific" theories do not require belief. They require PROOF. You may, of course, choose to believe in all of the SWAG ( Scientific Wild Assed Guess ) theories du jour, as you please.

Linda is correct about the ad.<IMHO>.

Mark
12-19-2007, 07:22 PM
Larry, I’m an acclaimed speaker, writer and editor.

This is a superb letter. I can imagine you presenting it in a large arena and the audience being held spellbound.

Because this letter comes straight from your heart, you must keep it as much as possible in just the way you’ve written it. I’ve only a handful of suggestions for change, but would be happy to fine-tooth the final version if you'd like to send it to me:

I agree, from the heart is best.