PDA

View Full Version : Anything but a Martin Luther King Moneybomb, PLEASE!




Noble
12-19-2007, 03:04 PM
This suggestion is too divisive. If we're arguing about it this much in the Ron Paul forums, its going to be a flop. Please rethink the idea.

I honestly think it will be bad for the campaign, cause controversy where none existed before, and make people argue.

FluffyUnbound
12-19-2007, 03:05 PM
This suggestion is too divisive. If we're arguing about it this much in the Ron Paul forums, its going to be a flop. Please rethink the idea.

I honestly think it will be bad for the campaign, cause controversy where none existed before, and make people argue.

Can you help me to understand what the source of the controversy might be?

tsetsefly
12-19-2007, 03:06 PM
it's like pandering a bit I am iffy on if if people support it I will donate so its not a flop but if people dont support it I wont lose sleep over it...

fortilite
12-19-2007, 03:06 PM
This suggestion is too divisive. If we're arguing about it this much in the Ron Paul forums, its going to be a flop. Please rethink the idea.

I honestly think it will be bad for the campaign, cause controversy where none existed before, and make people argue.

LOL, I guess we should rethink a Glen Beck interview too judging by the forums yesterday.

jamesmadison
12-19-2007, 03:09 PM
MLK is a fraud who plagurized his doctoral thesis, much of his college work, and his "I have a dream" speech.

DJ RP
12-19-2007, 03:09 PM
I'd like the next moneybomb to be the 31st december to give us the biggest quarter boost possible. Just make it a new years eve moneybomb and we'll call it "Prosperity day" to celebrate Ron Paul's desire to make America richer through peace!

Taco John
12-19-2007, 03:10 PM
This suggestion is too divisive. If we're arguing about it this much in the Ron Paul forums, its going to be a flop. Please rethink the idea.

I honestly think it will be bad for the campaign, cause controversy where none existed before, and make people argue.



HORRIBLE!

If people can't accept a money bomb to commemorate the shared vision of Dr. Martin Luther King and Dr. Ron Paul, then they're supporting the wrong campaign.

rollingpig
12-19-2007, 03:11 PM
MLK is a fraud who plagurized his doctoral thesis, much of his college work, and his "I have a dream" speech.

wth r u talking about?

jamesmadison
12-19-2007, 03:11 PM
HORRIBLE!

If people can't accept a money bomb to commemorate the shared vision of Dr. Martin Luther King and Dr. Ron Paul, then they're supporting the wrong campaign.

No, they're just making a decision. What are you talking about?

jamesmadison
12-19-2007, 03:12 PM
wth r u talking about?

http://setanta.unl.edu/mlk/dn_column.html

fortilite
12-19-2007, 03:12 PM
Not everyone will support it. If you don't want to give to this moneybomb, give to the one on the 31st. I will give to both, personally.

rrcamp
12-19-2007, 03:12 PM
We have been over this a million times with people arguing one way or another about moneybombs.

JUST LET THE MARKET DECIDE!!!!!

People will sign up or they won't... this isn't some hugely important debate we need to be having every time somebody comes up with a new idea.

Devil_rules_in_extremes
12-19-2007, 03:13 PM
Can we do something Constitution related?

Noble
12-19-2007, 03:14 PM
if anyone wants to know WHY i think it will cause controversy... just read THIS THREAD
Imagine this on popular news programs, op-eds, discussed by everyone.

It would be damaging.

"Has Ron Paul gone too far? Now he's pimping a dead civil rights hero to rally support for his cause"

Noble
12-19-2007, 03:14 PM
Oh, why don't I set up a white supremacist moneybomb? I mean... if you don't like it, don't donate!

Edit: Yes, thats an awful suggestion, no I don't mean it seriously... it just illustrates the fallacy of your logic.

Edit Edit : If we're going to use a PERSON, we should use one who can CONSENT to having his image and reputation used. Someone who is alive.

Taco John
12-19-2007, 03:16 PM
Oh, why don't I set up a white supremacist moneybomb? I mean... if you don't like it, don't donate!

Edit: Yes, thats an awful suggestion, no I don't mean it seriously... it just illustrates the fallacy of your logic.



Go for it.

PatriotOne
12-19-2007, 03:17 PM
Oh hell no! There is no reason to start a million fricken threads about this subject like the blimp controversary. Feel free to post your brain farts in the existing threads but please don't think they are worthy of their very own thread.

Mods! Don't let this happen again.

ckhagen
12-19-2007, 03:18 PM
I don't like seeing *anyone* use a dead person as the strategy for winning votes or raising money. MLK, Jesus, etc... it's just not cool since the person isn't here to tell us for themselves whether or not they agree. Let's celebrate who they were and what they accomplished, but please don't use them for financial gain.

z7trance
12-19-2007, 03:18 PM
It has nothing to do with whether you like MLK or not, it has to do with the community being divided on whether or not it should happen. A large number of us DO NOT want any more money bombs and would rather bomb the donations consistently from now until election day.

Money bombs were to get media attention, they served their purpose and now its time for the home stretch to the primaries.. If the we're divided then money raised on that day will be low, and press will be nil. Donate what you can spare from now until then each pay cheque, don't save it for another money bomb.

NewEnd
12-19-2007, 03:18 PM
Oh, why don't I set up a white supremacist moneybomb? I mean... if you don't like it, don't donate!

Edit: Yes, thats an awful suggestion, no I don't mean it seriously... it just illustrates the fallacy of your logic.

Edit Edit : If we're going to use a PERSON, we should use one who can CONSENT to having his image and reputation used. Someone who is alive.

Why don't you? Go for it. Then no-one will e er listen to your B.S. ever again.

BarryDonegan
12-19-2007, 03:22 PM
failed moneybombs do not hurt.

we have outraised everyone else. try as many as you like, the ones which are best promoted and have the right attitude will cause money, the ones which dont will fail.

let the market decide.

in fact there is no real harm in any kind of money bomb if we did 1000 that appealed to 1000 different obscure interests, we would have MORE money.

which is what matters.

even a simultaneous MLK money bomb along with a WHITE SUPREMICist tiny money bomb would still result in a net gains in money which is huge. and the ability for the media to spin the campaign which just had a larger MLK money bomb as racist would fail also.

we are the people who come back from behind and take 3 point shots. and we are raining 3s.

stefans
12-19-2007, 03:22 PM
the "natural" date for a money bomb is the end of the quarter, maybe even the official campaign will set up something(they did last quarter).
everything is way too early to decide now(and 21st may be too late for super tuesday anyway)

so stop creating webpages for moneybombs just because you want some of the trevor-lyman-fame.

Noble
12-19-2007, 03:28 PM
Barry: failed moneybombs don't hurt, I agree..

I'm just afraid this one is needlessly controversial because of its theme.

Controversy that can spill over into the mainstream media, who may or may not be eager to crucify the grassroots supporters.

This could conceivably do more harm than good. I mean, people here are getting angry at me for even starting this thread.

I like the end of quarter moneybomb.

Basically, the MLK moneybomb idea is in bad taste.

adwads
12-19-2007, 03:31 PM
Moneybomb Compromise? Check it out:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=60459

constituent
12-19-2007, 03:34 PM
This suggestion is too divisive. If we're arguing about it this much in the Ron Paul forums, its going to be a flop. Please rethink the idea.

I honestly think it will be bad for the campaign, cause controversy where none existed before, and make people argue.

uhhhh.... don't like it, don't give.


bossing people around is divisive...

quit. go canvass. i'm getting off work early today b/c
i just moved to a new neighborhood... as far as i know,
no one has knocked on my neighbors' doors yet....

so yea, it earned me some dirty looks, but some things
are more important, i'll be leaving at 4 to knock on some doors...

until then, rest assured that i'll not be naysaying.

jdmyprez_deo_vindice
12-19-2007, 03:38 PM
I have done quit a few papers on Martin Luther King Jr. and his contribution to spreading communism in this country. I am very anti-King because of the truth that you will not find in text books. With that said, I would still contribute to a money bomb on his birthday because this is about Dr. Paul not King. As much as I hate to say it, the sad reality is that our media would probably pay more attention to a money bomb on that day as opposed to Guy Fawkes day or the anniversary of our Tea Party.

Mark37snj
12-19-2007, 03:40 PM
There is a New Years Eve Money Bomb! :D

BarryDonegan
12-19-2007, 03:41 PM
the OLD MEDIAis not under our control. they do nothing but hit pieces, pretty much 100% hitpieces or they ignore us. we do not cooperate with things that are designed to avoid hitpieces, that is not possible.

in fact, karl rove's successful strategy for promoting George Dubs crazy agendas have REQUIRED negative attention in order to move through the media.

scandal doesn't hurt candidates, its your REACTION to the scandal. huckabees kid is torturing dogs, he wants to quarantine all the gays, he gave illegals free schooling... clinton bill and hill are so surrounded by fiscal scandal, weird suicides, rapes, sexual harrassment suits...

a 500$ donation from a weirdo who has a bad website now and again is literally nothing. in fact, the fact that hillary clinton responds to controversy like that instead of controversy about her husband raping women is because if she responds to those things it draws attention to the minor snafus of taking money from an illegal chinese donor rather than people "comitting suicide" during a major scandal or stuff with stronger more criminal implications.

put it in perspective.

some weirdos give ron paul money, some weirdos not connected tot he campaign make some weird websites about ron paul. but theres 200010230401234 more pieces of info to the contrary. ron paul hasn't aborted any of his sisters or had a financial scandal where every one of his business partners "comitted suicide" or suddenly got into car accidents... his opposition DOES.\

bill clinton did a 60 minutes interview after the superbowl where he apologized for cheating on hillary and THIS IS WHAT ENSURED HIM THE NOMINATION. he was not a household name until this happened. bad news is more exciting to the media than good news, and, likewise, it travels faster. plus, people like defending people. thats the main reason we all like dr paul, is we watched the debates and he was a lone voice and everyone was attacking him and booing him for things that boiled our blood. so we took to the streets to fight.

in that case the obvious hit piece blew up in their face and fired us up.

fortilite
12-19-2007, 03:41 PM
Thing about failed moneybombs, we have had mini moneybombs every week. Nobody noticed, no harm no foul.

Moneybombs are great tools for nudging people who are normally reluctant to donate. There are a lot of inertia heavy folks out there who will only change thier donating habits if an event causes them to. And getting them to donate for the first time puts an investment of theirs into Dr. Paul's election - they become more likely to do other grassroots activities as a result.

speciallyblend
12-19-2007, 03:42 PM
im all for it,so subjecct over,anyone against it,go to hannity forums and post your crap there

FrankRep
12-19-2007, 03:44 PM
The media can say we really are racist when the Martin Luther King money bomb fails.

Ah-ha! That is why Ron Paul didn't give the White Supremacist's money back.


The media can hit a homerun with that one.

Joey Wahoo
12-19-2007, 03:48 PM
MLK was an advocate of federal government action in ways that Ron Paul strongly objects to. MLK's religious faith and commitment to civil rights are admirable, of course. But politically he was anything but libertarian. Below for example is the speech RP gave when he was the only congressman to vote against commemorating the anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. MLK was a major reason this Act was passed.

The Trouble With Forced Integration (from lewrockwell.com)

by Rep. Ron Paul, MD


Last week, Congress hailed the 40th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The heroic Ron Paul was the only member of Congress to vote No. Here is his statement. ~ Ed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to explain my objection to H.Res. 676. I certainly join my colleagues in urging Americans to celebrate the progress this country has made in race relations. However, contrary to the claims of the supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the sponsors of H.Res. 676, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve race relations or enhance freedom. Instead, the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please and to form (or not form) contracts with terms mutually agreeable to all parties. The rights of all private property owners, even those whose actions decent people find abhorrent, must be respected if we are to maintain a free society.

This expansion of federal power was based on an erroneous interpretation of the congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. The framers of the Constitution intended the interstate commerce clause to create a free trade zone among the states, not to give the federal government regulatory power over every business that has any connection with interstate commerce.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society. Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business's workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge's defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife.

Of course, America has made great strides in race relations over the past forty years. However, this progress is due to changes in public attitudes and private efforts. Relations between the races have improved despite, not because of, the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, while I join the sponsors of H.Res. 676 in promoting racial harmony and individual liberty, the fact is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not accomplish these goals. Instead, this law unconstitutionally expanded federal power, thus reducing liberty. Furthermore, by prompting raced-based quotas, this law undermined efforts to achieve a color-blind society and increased racial strife. Therefore, I must oppose H.Res. 676.

July 3, 2004

JaredR26
12-19-2007, 04:04 PM
There's two things to consider.

The 21st is a little late but its close to perfect. Its far enough from dec 31st that people won't hold back before the end of the quarter. Its not too late for the money to make a difference in the campaign.

Second, I don't think MLK's plagarism is as big an issue as you might think. Sure it was bad, but he did make other contributions, and his doctorate was not revoked. Most of the "I have a dream" speech was original.

What we really need is a consensus.

Revolution9
12-19-2007, 04:12 PM
HORRIBLE!

If people can't accept a money bomb to commemorate the shared vision of Dr. Martin Luther King and Dr. Ron Paul, then they're supporting the wrong campaign.

Bullshit. Some of us have studied history and do not just take the tube and media as our sources of information. Take your righteousness and shove back up the fundament from whence it issued.

Randy

Noble
12-19-2007, 04:13 PM
Okay, anyone who can't see the controversy that this would generate if it got some momentum behind it is an idiot.

If you don't agree with me, go to hannity's forums.

I'm the decider.

Revolution9
12-19-2007, 04:14 PM
Can we do something Constitution related?

Jeesh Please..

Randy

Revolution9
12-19-2007, 04:17 PM
im all for it,so subjecct over,anyone against it,go to hannity forums and post your crap there

I would never post there. That being said this s surely a red herring and browbeating of an insipid kind.

Randy

BillyDkid
12-19-2007, 04:18 PM
For the life of me I can't see why this is a bad thing or a hot button issue. For all his flaws MLK was an American hero who stood up against corrupt government. Dr. Paul himself has expressed admiration for Dr. King and for Ghandi. If Dr. Paul is for anything, he is for civil rights. Plus, it do a lot to discredit this whole racism horseshit and show that we stand shoulder to shoulder with those who fight for liberty in the black community.

leipo
12-19-2007, 04:21 PM
MLK is a fraud who plagurized his doctoral thesis, much of his college work, and his "I have a dream" speech.

Oh, the horror! :rolleyes:

Taco John
12-19-2007, 04:21 PM
I would never post there. That being said this s surely a red herring and browbeating of an insipid kind.

Randy


Kind of like saying that if we support this cause, we're supporting communism?

Revolution9
12-19-2007, 04:53 PM
Kind of like saying that if we support this cause, we're supporting communism?

Nope. Another red herring. Shame on you for such stupid tactics. Facts are facts and allusions as you have just done are perceptual illusions. You cannot deny MLK's funding by communists. It is a part of the historical record.


Randy

drednot
12-19-2007, 04:54 PM
MLK was an advocate of federal government action in ways that Ron Paul strongly objects to. MLK's religious faith and commitment to civil rights are admirable, of course. But politically he was anything but libertarian. Below for example is the speech RP gave when he was the only congressman to vote against commemorating the anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. MLK was a major reason this Act was passed.
...

It's important to remember there are two sides to MLK. His early days were all about empowerment, passive resistance to state injustice, and local boycotts to influence private sector behavior.

Only in the last 5 years of his life did he become associated with federal legislation.

r3volution
12-19-2007, 04:58 PM
why do money bombs have to be associated with anything , cant we just pick a dam random day ?

adwads
12-19-2007, 05:01 PM
why do money bombs have to be associated with anything , cant we just pick a dam random day ?

Pick these 5 days:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=60459

ChristopherBearkat
12-19-2007, 05:02 PM
I'd say NO to any money bomb that was associated with Dr. King UNLESS the King Foundation has said "we don't mind"

To do it without talking to them about it first invites backlash

Taco John
12-19-2007, 05:04 PM
You cannot deny MLK's funding by communists. It is a part of the historical record.




It's not that I deny it... It's that I don't care. I also can't deny Dr. Paul's funding by white supremacists. Likewise, I don't care.

B of R guy
12-19-2007, 05:09 PM
The fundamental problem for a MLK money bomb is that Dr. King advocated group rights (and I certainly understand why his movement considered that necessary).

This I believe, ruins the idea. Libertarianism is about unrestrained individual liberty, no color, no creed...