PDA

View Full Version : How 'bout a Money Bomb for ROBERT E. LEE - January 19th?




Politeia
01-03-2008, 02:26 PM
Today I received an email from my local RP Meetup, touting the propose Martin Luther King "money bomb" on January 21. Then I received an email from teaparty.07.com pushing the same thing.

No thanks.

First, the "money bomb" idea is in danger of deflation due to overuse. Once was good, twice worked, but I think three times is about the most it's good for before becoming old hat. And it only works if there's enough time between them to build up a head of steam. One month is not enough. Maybe, if it's used once more, as has been suggested, July 4th might be good.

Two, it's time to take a break and see what has come of the last six months' effort, money bombs and all. Today, and the next week, may change the entire landscape considerably -- may inspire, or force, Ron Paul supporters (including the many new people drawn to our ranks?) to come up with entirely new methods and approaches.

As an old fogey, actually I find myself somewhat dismayed at how fast things seem to change. For instance, I thought the Ron Paul Rally was a great idea (and the mosaics produced from it), but that whole effort seemed to die on the vine right after the first Straw Polls. Well, so be it. So far the RP grassroots has shown no lack of ability to come up with new ideas. That seems to be what really keeps this thing going.

Actually, I thought this idea had died a well-deserved natural death. RIP and all, but it was a poor idea to begin with, for reasons well-explored on this thread:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=60368

Well, okay, if you want a money bomb, I propose an alternative: How about a money bomb for the birthday of Robert E. Lee? After all, it's January 19th, earlier than MLK day.

For the record: For over 300 years, my ancestors have lived in northern (non-slave) states and colonies, and fought for Lincoln in the 1860s. I grew up in liberal California, educated in the public schools, etc., and until recently believed the whole official story of that time (e.g. that the Civil War was fought to end slavery -- in fact, I even used to believe it was a "civil war"), but in recent years have learned to know much different.

And one of the things I've learned is that Robert E. Lee was truly one of the great men of American history, by his intelligence, military genius, integrity and loyalty to principle deserving of a place alongside the Founders themselves. In fact, he was the greatest leader of the last serious effort to preserve the letter and spirit of the original Constitution (check out the Confederate version: a near-copy of the original, except that the Bill of Rights is included within it, rather than appended as an afterthought). I'm not kidding; see:
http://snipurl.com/robteleeatlrc

So why not a money bomb for this great man?

What, you say he's a divisive figure, would lose RP as much support as he would gain?

Well, that's equally true of Martin Luther King. MLK certainly did, or at least stood for, some good things, but he was hardly the unblemished saint portrayed in the official story. And a lot of people know this, especially people in the core Republican constituency that RP needs to attract and keep if he's going to win the Republican primaries.

Apparently, the official hagiography is all that the organizers of this "money bomb" -- one a recent immigrant, the other a 37-year-old who by his own admission has never voted (thus probably has never learned much about history, much less the real history) -- know about MLK. That's not their fault, and I have nothing against these guys, who've done great work for the campaign and deserve much kudos therefor, but here I'm afraid they've strayed unknowingly into dangerous waters.

If you want to associate Ron Paul with Martin Luther King, I suggest waiting until he has the Republican nomination -- especially if he's up against Obama. Now that could be interesting.

For now, let's give "money bombs" a rest. If you want to push for more money for February 5, find some other gimmick, and make it ongoing, maybe a rising crescendo of some kind. But wait until after New Hampshire, at least. Take a well-deserved break.

"It has been evident for years that the country was doomed to run the full length of democracy." - Robert E. Lee (1861)

aspiringconstitutionalist
01-03-2008, 02:27 PM
I smell blowback from a Robert E. Lee moneybomb.

We've already got the Benjamin Franklin moneybomb on January 17th rolling

http://www.BenjaminsForPaul.com / http://www.100forFranklin.com

krott5333
01-03-2008, 02:28 PM
without even reading the thread, I'm going to have to say NO.

its divisive

AggieforPaul
01-03-2008, 02:29 PM
We cant afford any more claims of racism, no matter how unfounded.

JMann
01-03-2008, 02:29 PM
Robert E. Fing Lee? Are you kidding me? We do that and Dr. Paul will be packing his bags for southern Texas.

awitelin
01-03-2008, 02:30 PM
That sounds great, if we really want as-of-yet uninformed voters to start believing Paul supporters are a bunch of racists that didn't want slavery to end.

Of course that won't be what we meant by it at all, but you gotta look at how these things could be perceived.

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-03-2008, 02:31 PM
No more moneybomb planning for now. Let's at least wait until after NH and see where we are at.

yongrel
01-03-2008, 02:31 PM
No. A Bad Idea on so many levels.

Yom
01-03-2008, 02:31 PM
Let's just stick with our mega-bomb Benjamins for Paul on Jan. 17th, and maybe a mini one on the 21st. Other than that, I think we're done with money bombs for a while (until at least after Super Tuesday).

pacelli
01-03-2008, 02:32 PM
No.

xexkxex
01-03-2008, 02:32 PM
No.

EvilEngineer
01-03-2008, 02:32 PM
If you people read the post it's more of a criticism of the MLK day bomb rather than a real proposal for Robert E Lee.

Melissa
01-03-2008, 02:33 PM
i really wish for this one we would pick a day just for Dr. Paul and not use any other day I think his anniversery is in Feb something why can't we do it that day and actually have it Dr. Paul day instead of using other days to do it

RonPaulFever
01-03-2008, 02:33 PM
The free market respectfully declines your proposal.

devil21
01-03-2008, 02:35 PM
The south will appreciate it but itll be the blowback from the Abe Lincoln thing times 10. Bad idea. Money bombs should be themed around something the whole country can get behind.

JMann
01-03-2008, 02:35 PM
If you people read the post it's more of a criticism of the MLK day bomb rather than a real proposal for Robert E Lee.

In honesty I didn't read the entire post because it started off being critical of the bombs. I couldn't imagine the person was serious and though I'm no fan of Dr. MLK political philosophy I don't have any problem with have a Free at Last bomb which is essentially the driving force behind this event.

Melissa
01-03-2008, 02:37 PM
The south will appreciate it but itll be the blowback from the Abe Lincoln thing times 10. Bad idea. Money bombs should be themed around something the whole country can get behind.

I agree that is why I think it should just be a Ron Paul day and no one else's- other peoples days have been used can't we have at least one just for Dr. Paul not on any one else's special day

Cardinal Red
01-03-2008, 02:38 PM
Appreciate your input but lets focus on the Franklin Money Bomb

Dieseler
01-03-2008, 02:39 PM
For the EXACT same reasons I said NO to an MLK moneybomb, I say NO to a ROBERT E. LEE moneybomb.

Do Not Polarize Dr. Paul's Support. He will go down in history in his own right just as MLK and REL did.

I am a Southern man.
I believe Robert E. Lee was a great and honorable man.
I suggest people read his memoirs.

tboss
01-03-2008, 02:40 PM
Already one on the 17th...

Freedom&Reason
01-03-2008, 02:52 PM
The money bombs are about a month apart and all we have done has increased the total on second time around. I say keep doing what works until it doesn't work anymore, then try something different. GO RON, PWN IOWA!!!!

Politeia
01-03-2008, 03:00 PM
If you people read the post it's more of a criticism of the MLK day bomb rather than a real proposal for Robert E Lee.

Bingo! Apparently you're the only one who took the trouble.


Money bombs should be themed around something the whole country can get behind.

Precisely my point. If at all.


Already one on the 17th...

So why am I being dunned for this MLK thing?

Nevertheless, I do think that on the merits, Lee is a much better candidate for such adulation than King; he wasn't any kind of communist sympathizer, and he was (so far as I know) faithful to his wife, just for starters.

In fact, now I think of it, he comes closest in my mind in his character to Ron Paul of the figures I know about in American history.

Read some of the articles I linked at LRC; you might learn something.

Just Come Home
01-03-2008, 03:04 PM
I'm committed to the MLK day moneybomb and will keep my committment, and promote it. I wish the best of luck to everyone on all of the other efforts. I'm sticking with Vijay and Trevor Lyman on this one though.


http://www.freeatlast2008.com

JMann
01-03-2008, 03:07 PM
Bingo! Apparently you're the only one who took the trouble.



Precisely my point. If at all.



So why am I being dunned for this MLK thing?

Nevertheless, I do think that on the merits, Lee is a much better candidate for such adulation than King; he wasn't any kind of communist sympathizer, and he was (so far as I know) faithful to his wife, just for starters.

In fact, now I think of it, he comes closest in my mind in his character to Ron Paul of the figures I know about in American history.

Read some of the articles I linked at LRC; you might learn something.

Except for the little problem he had with it being ok for white people to own black people I'm sure he was a stand up guy. I'll take a communist and wife cheater any day over someone that thinks they have a right to own another human being.

AdoubleR
01-03-2008, 03:07 PM
No.

+1000

Politeia
01-03-2008, 03:11 PM
Except for the little problem he had with it being ok for white people to own black people I'm sure he was a stand up guy. I'll take a communist and wife cheater any day over someone that thinks they have a right to own another human being.

A communist is someone who thinks it's okay (even ideal) for the State to own everyone, black, white, green or purple. That's what Communism is.

Slavery was an abomination, yes; but to extend it to everyone (which is what Lincoln did) is not a solution.

Also, I don't know what were Lee's exact views on slavery, only that his primary reason for going with the Confederacy was that the Union was attacking his own state. I also know that the "Civil" War was not fought over the issue of slavery.

"... he was the first choice to lead the Northern armies when the secession crisis arose. Now think for a moment what a decision this man faced.

"He was by choice a professional soldier, and here he was being offered the highest position a professional could hope for. Furthermore, he thought slavery was a moral evil, and he was opposed to secession. As a professional soldier, he surely knew that if war came, the South would lose. It was outmanned, outgunned, out-railroaded and out-industrialized from Day One. A man who put ambition above all else would have accepted in a New York minute, and no doubt the War Between the States would have been over much sooner. It was Lee's tactical genius that kept the South going.

"But Lee could not bear to make war on his native state of Virginia, where all of his family and friends lived. He declined the offer and resigned his commission." - Charley Reese

Heather in WI
01-03-2008, 03:12 PM
Absolutely not.

dw1345
01-03-2008, 03:16 PM
www.BenjaminsforPaul.com is on January 17th I think. this is the soonest one, lets get behind it.

Johncjackson
01-03-2008, 03:29 PM
I am not making a personal judgment on Robert E. Lee or his fans. However, the idea that MLK is just as divisive as REL has no basis in reality. Unless you are talking about neo-Confederates or Stromfronters.

They both had their flaws and good points- like most people. But I don't think most "regular" folks have that much hate for either. People who go out of their way to oppose are most likely part of a fringe racial agenda.

Jeremy
01-03-2008, 03:30 PM
We have one two days before!

Johncjackson
01-03-2008, 03:33 PM
I would also add the whole "communist" smear should be a non-starter. It reminds me of something a neo-con ( even though they have roots in communism) would say. It is also pretty much a code word for irrational racists to use to smear people who want INDIVIDUAL freedom opposed to the racists' love of collectivism and state-mandated racism. Collectivists calling other people "commies" are idiots.

eyeswideopen
01-03-2008, 03:33 PM
When I was in high school – back in the 70s – my American History teacher … my black American History teacher strove to teach us that the American Civil War was not fought over slavery. In fact, the abolishment of slavery in the southern states was just another attempt by the government to weaken the South. The southern states wanted to keep states rights and the north was already moving toward a centralized government.

For such well informed people I’m surprised you all still fall for this line. Please do our country a favor and research.

I agree the market should decide – feel free to not give on this day. As for me and mine I would be honored to represent states rights in this way.

By the way just as an added tidbit of information for the curious (like my northern cousins) the reason the Civil War is such a big deal in the south is because …. Wait for it ……. The south never surrendered.

Gives a whole new meaning to “Never Surrender” doesn’t it?

We are indeed a varied group of individuals.

mbrebstock
01-03-2008, 03:47 PM
i endorse www.BenjaminsforPaul.com

its very cool with the 100 dollar note!!!

marcus3x
01-03-2008, 03:50 PM
This has to rank as one of the DUMBEST threads on this message board.

Galileo Galilei
01-03-2008, 03:56 PM
Today I received an email from my local RP Meetup, touting the propose Martin Luther King "money bomb" on January 21. Then I received an email from teaparty.07.com pushing the same thing.

No thanks.

First, the "money bomb" idea is in danger of deflation due to overuse. Once was good, twice worked, but I think three times is about the most it's good for before becoming old hat. And it only works if there's enough time between them to build up a head of steam. One month is not enough. Maybe, if it's used once more, as has been suggested, July 4th might be good.

Two, it's time to take a break and see what has come of the last six months' effort, money bombs and all. Today, and the next week, may change the entire landscape considerably -- may inspire, or force, Ron Paul supporters (including the many new people drawn to our ranks?) to come up with entirely new methods and approaches.

As an old fogey, actually I find myself somewhat dismayed at how fast things seem to change. For instance, I thought the Ron Paul Rally was a great idea (and the mosaics produced from it), but that whole effort seemed to die on the vine right after the first Straw Polls. Well, so be it. So far the RP grassroots has shown no lack of ability to come up with new ideas. That seems to be what really keeps this thing going.

Actually, I thought this idea had died a well-deserved natural death. RIP and all, but it was a poor idea to begin with, for reasons well-explored on this thread:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=60368

Well, okay, if you want a money bomb, I propose an alternative: How about a money bomb for the birthday of Robert E. Lee? After all, it's January 19th, earlier than MLK day.

For the record: For over 300 years, my ancestors have lived in northern (non-slave) states and colonies, and fought for Lincoln in the 1860s. I grew up in liberal California, educated in the public schools, etc., and until recently believed the whole official story of that time (e.g. that the Civil War was fought to end slavery -- in fact, I even used to believe it was a "civil war"), but in recent years have learned to know much different.

And one of the things I've learned is that Robert E. Lee was truly one of the great men of American history, by his intelligence, military genius, integrity and loyalty to principle deserving of a place alongside the Founders themselves. In fact, he was the greatest leader of the last serious effort to preserve the letter and spirit of the original Constitution (check out the Confederate version: a near-copy of the original, except that the Bill of Rights is included within it, rather than appended as an afterthought). I'm not kidding; see:
http://snipurl.com/robteleeatlrc

So why not a money bomb for this great man?

What, you say he's a divisive figure, would lose RP as much support as he would gain?

Well, that's equally true of Martin Luther King. MLK certainly did, or at least stood for, some good things, but he was hardly the unblemished saint portrayed in the official story. And a lot of people know this, especially people in the core Republican constituency that RP needs to attract and keep if he's going to win the Republican primaries.

Apparently, the official hagiography is all that the organizers of this "money bomb" -- one a recent immigrant, the other a 37-year-old who by his own admission has never voted (thus probably has never learned much about history, much less the real history) -- know about MLK. That's not their fault, and I have nothing against these guys, who've done great work for the campaign and deserve much kudos therefor, but here I'm afraid they've strayed unknowingly into dangerous waters.

If you want to associate Ron Paul with Martin Luther King, I suggest waiting until he has the Republican nomination -- especially if he's up against Obama. Now that could be interesting.

For now, let's give "money bombs" a rest. If you want to push for more money for February 5, find some other gimmick, and make it ongoing, maybe a rising crescendo of some kind. But wait until after New Hampshire, at least. Take a well-deserved break.

"It has been evident for years that the country was doomed to run the full length of democracy." - Robert E. Lee (1861)

I've always been partial to Stonewall Jackson

Stonewall Jackson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_Jackson

Incidently, regarding Paul's comments on Lincoln the other day, had Stonewall Jackson not been killed in an accidental shooting, the south might have won the civil war, and slavery might have become entrenched for another 100 years.

ionlyknowy
01-03-2008, 04:00 PM
WOW that's awesome Robert E. Lee is my ancestor!!!!!!!!!!!!

FrankRep
01-03-2008, 04:10 PM
No More Money Bombs

Politeia
01-03-2008, 04:10 PM
Incidently, regarding Paul's comments on Lincoln the other day, had Stonewall Jackson not been killed in an accidental shooting, the south might have won the civil war, and slavery might have become entrenched for another 100 years.

No, I doubt it. This is what the liberals want you to believe, why it was necessary to slaughter over 600,000 people to end it -- even though the war was not fought over that issue anyway. Slavery was not economically viable, and had already been abolished most everywhere else. Peacefully, as Dr. Paul points out, bless him.

On the other had, serfdom is definitely alive and well today. That was what Lincoln intended, and accomplished.

eyeswideopen
01-03-2008, 04:13 PM
On the other had, serfdom is definitely alive and well today. That was what Lincoln intended, and accomplished.


Indeed.

Spirit of '76
01-03-2008, 04:16 PM
Except for the little problem he had with it being ok for white people to own black people I'm sure he was a stand up guy. I'll take a communist and wife cheater any day over someone that thinks they have a right to own another human being.

I'll remind you of that if I ever hear you quoting Jefferson or Washington or Madison or...

Politeia
01-03-2008, 04:18 PM
I would also add the whole "communist" smear should be a non-starter. It reminds me of something a neo-con ( even though they have roots in communism) would say. It is also pretty much a code word for irrational racists to use to smear people who want INDIVIDUAL freedom opposed to the racists' love of collectivism and state-mandated racism. Collectivists calling other people "commies" are idiots.

I wouldn't call MLK a communist; but, like many well-meaning but naive people in the 60s (I was there, a draft-dodging peacenik hippie), he tended to be "soft" on communism, mostly on the principle of "the enemy of my enemy must be my friend" -- and because communists are so good at lying about what they really intend.

Already in high school, some 50 years ago, I was aware that there was no practical difference between communism and fascism (the great bugaboos I grew up with); I have never been either a collectivist, a communist or a "neo-con".