PDA

View Full Version : On hold to talk radio now...




WilliamC
01-11-2008, 09:19 AM
About to talk about the debate last night and Ron Paul foreign policy.

host is sayinig ron paul blames america, bashing relentlesly

advice welcome..

WilliamC
01-11-2008, 09:20 AM
need hard hitting statements

Antonius Stone
01-11-2008, 09:21 AM
cite "Dying to Win" by Robert Pape

according to pape, of the 30 terrorists in Hezbollah that did suicide terrorism against US/French/Israeli Forces in the 80s, about 13 or 14 of them were muslims but were actually secular marxists in philosophy and 3 of them were CHRISTIANS- this definitely blows a hole in the whole argument that this is all inspired by crazy jihad religion and suicide terrorism is actually a manifestation of extreme militant nationalism

peznex
01-11-2008, 09:22 AM
Not everyone likes to hear the truth. The Democrat's "change" slogan is the Hollywood way of what Ron Paul is saying straight up.

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
01-11-2008, 09:23 AM
There's no reason to give money to Israel, and then arm their enemies with 3 times that amount of money. We previously supported Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden. How did that work out for everyone? Horribly. No rational person can say otherwise.

WilliamC
01-11-2008, 09:24 AM
these are conservative hosts who think ron paul is a liberal when it comes to the military

Antonius Stone
01-11-2008, 09:27 AM
of the muslim countries that have a high Concentration of Sulafi Believers (Sulafi being the particular sect or brand of Sunni Islam associated with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda) only countries that have US occupation forces breed high numbers of suicide terrorists

The group that has performed the most suicide terrorism is the Tamil Tigers, a Secular-Marxist group of Hindus on SRI LANKA

Swmorgan77
01-11-2008, 10:22 AM
This always works with Neo-COns on the war; Ask them why they want our military to be an enforcement arm of the United Nations, and why the President should be able to take us to war with authorizations that cite the need to enforce UN resolutions like Iraq did.

If Big government solutions don't work at home, they dont' work abroad... bottom line.

hocaltar
01-11-2008, 10:43 AM
This always works with Neo-COns on the war; Ask them why they want our military to be an enforcement arm of the United Nations, and why the President should be able to take us to war with authorizations that cite the need to enforce UN resolutions like Iraq did.

If Big government solutions don't work at home, they dont' work abroad... bottom line.

Haha! I used this just the other day. This guy I know says, "well, Saddam violated U.N. resolutions." Then I said, "Oh, I didn't realize you were a flag waving member of the U.N." The word shocked came to mind when I saw the expression on his face. It was like I could see his thoughts going, "holy shit, did I really just defend the U.N.?"

I am telling you the media brainwashing that has occured is going to take decades to reverse.

micahnelson
01-11-2008, 10:46 AM
Disagreeing with foreign policy does not mean blaming America.

We believe that Clinton's foreign policy towards north korea was a mistake and resulted in his nuclear program. Is that blaming America?

Is it blaming America if we decide it was not wise to arm Saddam or the taliban?

We want America to back off interventionism and only get involved with our military when there is a real threat to our people. Is that so strange?

Minlawc
01-11-2008, 10:54 AM
these are conservative hosts who think ron paul is a liberal when it comes to the military

Say that Ron Paul was against the war before the liberals.;)

Paulitician
01-11-2008, 11:04 AM
Have your own arguments of don't speak.

CountryRoads
01-11-2008, 11:08 AM
Haha! I used this just the other day. This guy I know says, "well, Saddam violated U.N. resolutions." Then I said, "Oh, I didn't realize you were a flag waving member of the U.N." The word shocked came to mind when I saw the expression on his face. It was like I could see his thoughts going, "holy shit, did I really just defend the U.N.?"

I am telling you the media brainwashing that has occured is going to take decades to reverse.

Lol awesome response.

arbnranger
01-11-2008, 11:12 AM
Say that Ron Paul was against the war before the liberals.;)

"Blame America First" - How cleverly was that devised.??
It automatically puts the listener in a defensive position. Me? Us? America? How are we to blame? Anyone that would blame us is either crazy or non-patriotic!!! (textbook knee-jerk)

Well, it is not "blame America". It is called Blame American policy. Huge difference!
It is just like the old cliche' "You can only fix a problem when understand you have one" To simply deny the fact that all the extracurricular activities that our government is involved with has nothing to do with the way the world views us is called ...well.....denial.

To be quite honest, This "denial" and "blame everyone else" syndrome is a big part of the way the average American thinks right now. In addition to that, Americans as a whole are very arrogant, especially when dealing with issues from other countries. Just look at how we act at the mall for example or in traffic.

It is an uphill battle for the Average Joe to wake up. It does work though, especially from a one on one stand point. I really doubt you will be able to convince the masses with the media unless Brittany or Brad Pitt got up and said it was cool.

WilliamC
01-11-2008, 02:05 PM
Well I managed to get on for a few minutes but not long enough to do much good. The host of the show is Ben Ferguson, WREC600 AM out of Memphis. First time I've called into his show. He left early so he had another host, Andrew Clarksenior, whom I've spoken with before. Both of them were heavy on the lies about Ron Paul, saying he hates America, he's dangerous to the Country, he's a kook, and so on. It's hard to know if they are really this ignorant or if they really do know the truth and are pathological liars. Well, I always give folks the benefit of a doubt so I think it's the former.

Anyway's, I did write a follow-up email, and I'll call back again. I'm finally getting in contact with some meetup folks in my area and will stop spending so much time on the forums. One project I want to spearhead is to get more people calling into these shows on a regular basis.

Here's a copy of the email I sent them, don't know if it will do much good. But these guys make some claim at being objective so maybe they will actually read some of Ron Paul's writings, instead of just parroting what Fox News tells them. Maybe not.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


Greetings Andrew,

I very much appreciate your willingness to give people like me with different
views than your own time on your show to express themselves, and realize that
the constraints of time hinder our ability to effectively communicate our
positions.

It is not my intention or desire to "convert" you to Ron Paul, in some ways I
could care less about the man himself; he is not a particularly charismatic
person. But
I am concerned that this administration is about to launch another war against
another country which has not directly attacked us and which does not pose an
imminent
threat to our homeland, and that people of influence such as yourself see
nothing wrong with a President doing this. If, God forbid, war ever does come,
then let it be debated and
declared by Congress so that it can be fought with the full support and
military might of the USA and won quickly so our soldiers can come home.

You claim to admire Ronald Reagan and often hold him up as an example of what
other Presidents should be like. Have you forgotten the Beirut Lebanon bombings
of our Marine and the French Infantry barracks by Hezbollah terrorists in 1983?
What was Ronald Reagan's response? Did he order the invasion of Lebanon? At
first he wanted to, but soon he decided to withdraw the troops instead. If you
are curious as to why please see his own explanation for this change of policy
here:

http://www.ronaldreagan.com/leb.html

Instead of us occupying their country, today the United States are at peace with
Lebanon.

Have you forgotten the bombing of Muammar Qaddafi's compound in Tripoli after
their airforce harassed our ships in the Mediterranean? What was Ronald Reagan's
response? Did he order the invasion of Lybia? No, he ordered a measured response
that targeted the leader who was in charge of Lybia. If you are curious as to
why please see his own explanation of this policy here:

http://www.ronaldreagan.com/libya.html

Instead of us occupying their country, today Libya has renounced terrorism and
has peaceful relations with the United States.

You claim that Ron Paul is weak on National Defense, weak on terrorism, and that
as President he would make this country less safe from foreign attack. You use
your radio show to promulgate these erroneous statements to thousands of
listeners who will never take time to look at a candidates own words for
themselves. Congressman Paul has written extensively on this topic, far more
than any of the other candidates from either party. Yet you and other
Conservative commentators never reference anything specific that he has written.
Instead you seem to base your opinions solely on his debate performances where
he is trying to explain himself in 1 minute timed responses, often while the
other candidates are laughing at him. Sure, he really needs to have better
soundbites, but the problems our Nation faces can't really be solved in 5
minutes during a television interview. If you honestly want to understand
Congressman Paul's positions please try reading what he has written. A small
sample
can be found here:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/?tag=Foreign%20Policy

You say Congressman Paul is too negative and does not have a positive vision for
America. Again, this completely ignores the voluminous writings that he has done
over the years. Sure, he needs to work on his presentation so that it is more
easily grasped by the average person, and he needs to emphasize the good things
that he wants to see happen in our countries future. But how can you claim that
his repeated statements calling for more freedom, more individual liberty, and
more prosperity is a bad thing? Again, if you are at all interested in reading
his own writings, and not relying on second hand information from the media,
please see some of it here:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/?tag=American%20Sovereignty

I am a very average man, one who has never been much involved in politics aside
from voting. But there are 10's of thousands of individuals like me who have
discovered Ron Paul, a Congressman for over 20 years who has never once violated
the oath he swore to preserve and uphold the Constitution. It is not the
personality of Ron Paul that makes ordinary folks like myself motivated to try
and change the direction our Country is headed in. Without his integrity and his
voting record he would be just another politician in DC. It is the realization
that our country and most of it's leaders have strayed far afield from the
guiding principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, the
two documents that together make American Government unique among the Nations of
the world. Ron Paul doesn't just pay lip service to those documents, he follows
them in each and every one of his political decisions. That is why many of his
fellow Republicans mock him, because they know they
cannot challenge his record. For that reason and only that reason he has my
support.

Andrew, I don't know you personally, but I don't ascribe to some conspiracy
theory that everyone in the media is out to get Ron Paul. I do think it is
likely most members of the media just don't care enough to spend an hour reading
what the man has written. Maybe you don't care to either, but if you do I would
really like for you to guide me to some words of his that you think are
dangerous to this country, or which would give you cause to ridicule him as so
many in the media seem to do. And if you aren't willing to do this simple bit of
basic journalistic research, would you at least let your listeners know that
your opinions are based only on your impressions of Ron Paul, and not on any
substantive issues? Are you at least willing to be that fair?


Yours In Liberty,

William C Colley

WilliamC
01-11-2008, 02:43 PM
shameless bump.

29ytsejam
01-11-2008, 02:51 PM
Excellent reply, this should be saved as a form for sending to other media outlets.

skeryl
01-11-2008, 02:52 PM
fantastic email! Im going to use some of those nicely crafted words if you dont mind....

WilliamC
01-11-2008, 02:53 PM
Thanks, I took some time with it.

Feel free to alter/use it for yourselves.