Founding Members Being Enlisted - The Proservative Movement is Born

[RonPaulVolunteer]

I agree for sure with this. But, lets crawl before we walk, that is the idea. We'll cross that "new party" bridge when we get there...let's first just get there, TOGETHER

Ah, that's what I was saying... I was backing you up...

[The Proservative]

OK , right, that's what I thought Was taking a barrage there, ducking from possible friendly fire.

[american.swan]

The problem with 180,000 grassroots organizations without any central leadership is that people lose focus, don't have NEARLY the impact, and don't have the funding.

Impact? http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=118851

Funding? There can be grassroots funding of various projects that the all the committeemen can use, such as slim-jims, newsletters, and videos. My ideas for a media program similar to the evening news using grassroots reports would be great, but has been ignored by the grassroots, it wouldn't cost that much to get off the ground I figure, but I can't do it. My idea of a newsletter that committeemen can print off at kinkos if they want has also been ignored by the all knowing grassroots and again I don't have the resources to do it.

Lose Focus? Are you speaking of the mass exodus from these forums? If a committeemen loses focus he/she needs to be replaced and shouldn't be apart of the movement.

If you want a "group" that is easily taken over by the elite covert operations than that's fine with me. Unless the few, the proud, the hardcore supporters get active in the GOP, no organization is going to work anyway.

[LandonCook]

Hello everyone,

Initial interest group forming for the Proservative movement. Our platform is based ENTIRELY on that of Ron Paul, and will continue to support him and all of our grassroot efforts whether he runs Republican or not.

Future actions include coordinating with various grassroots groups/websites, pooling resources such as contact/voter registration lists, a one-stop shop for tools needed to organize and mobilze grassroots efforts, including a text message notification system and the ability to make phone calls for Ron Paul FROM YOUR HOUSE (think call drive parties).

Again, this is an effort to solidify our Ron Paul Revolution into a collective movement, not just yet a third party. If and when that option presents itself, "We'll cross that bridge when we get there".

--
Anthony Cinelli

Such bad wording... seriously... I know your a good guy, but you picked the worst words...

[lonestarguy]

Please correct this part of your post. Dr. Paul has expressed his wishes concerning a third-party run and you are NOT supporting HIS PLATFORM.

Correct that misconception immediately or I will have to report this thread.

I will NOT support your organization because you are pushing for a third-party run in direct contradiction of his wishes.

SHAME ON YOU!

Anthony (The Proservative),

Don't worry about some of the abrasive types who will try and shame you on your efforts. Thanks for your enthusiasm.

Additionally, you should be aware that Ron Paul is a Lifetime Member of the Libertarian Party. So, if people want to talk up a 3rd party Libertarian or Conservative Party run they are free to, ON THIS FORUM.

Now, if peeps want to re-take the Republican Party, great. But as we are already seeing the Freedom movement is indeed losing steam and will continue to do so if we do not fill the vacuum in the upcoming presidential election that may contain only McClinton or McBama.

I can't believe that the Freedom movement would shun a grand opportunity to introduce, educate, and recruit millions of new converts to the cause by running credible known candidates like Ron Paul, Gary Johnson (fmr NM Governor), Andrew Napolitano (Nation of Sheeple), people of that calibre.

I say the Freedom movement runs presidential candidates and deny the Republicans the White House until they see the light. Ron Paul has clearly stated he will not support the McCainiac anyway.

And Ron Paul could be lobbied to change his mind anyway. So, lets see.

[pacelli]

bump

[nodope0695]

What the hell does "proservative" mean?

Why not "Conservative" party, or how about NO party. I'm a member of the Revolution, and thats about it.

[PauliticsPolitics]

I prefer "Ron Paul Republican" or "Larry McDonald Democrat."
We need both sides.
And yes, you should look into Larry McDonald.

But I approve of any label for a constitutional collective.

[free.alive]

Thruth at Last. You're not hinting at bureaucracy are you?

Whatever groups we create, they must be decentralized, the power must flow from the bottom-up, and we must do our best to prevent the structure of the organization from becoming a large organization.

If an organization is centralized, it is more easily corrupted, and if the power flows top-down, it will most definitely (eventually) be taken over by those who, well, have taken over everything else, and then the only language of the organization will become doublespeak. Also, all large organizations - governments, corporations, charities, think-tanks - become bloated, inefficient, and eventually ineffectual or detrimental to their purpose.

We need (probably many) lean, mean decentralized and bottom-up tyranny fighting machines.

'Nuf said.

[Revolution9]

A quick study of the word you use shows it to be a gimmick n that it appears to be conjunctive of progressive and conservative. This would imply being pro-servative or that which serves. Conservative is counter to serving n this manner as a serf which is another way of saying that which serves one. A Conservator will allow the admiring of artworks for example but they will not be served or tendered for money. Ya oughta rethink this. Canada has a Progressive Conservative party.

Best
Randy

[KnownasTIm]

huh

[nayjevin]

Whatever groups we create, they must be decentralized, the power must flow from the bottom-up, and we must do our best to prevent the structure of the organization from becoming a large organization.

so true. the precinct structure of the existing GOP is a good place to start -- it already has a name, offices, and income from donations.

there's certainly also room for smaller groups as well, if they have a well defined message and goal set, people will join.

1 person = 100% agreement
2 people = less than 100% agreement
3 people = even less
4 people = you get the point

[The Proservative]

We've got a great response, people signing up thus far. Regarding infrastructure, we've been building it for the last few years, just waiting for that "knight in shining armor" to get behind, and Ron Paul is that knight.

The distinguishing feature of our Proservative movement is that we've been planning this for years, registered the domain in 2005. I think it's great other people are getting into the swing of things, putting their heart into it, and am not looking to compete with any of the current grassroot effort. On the contrary, we're looking to fortify these grassroots operations with tools and resources, whatever it takes. If we can assist a worthy candidate, project that is based on the Ron Paul Revolution/Proservative Movement in any way, then by our definition, we will be a success.

[LibertyEagle]

I hate to tell ya, but paleo-conservatives will want no part of anything that has the word, "progressive" attached to it. Progressives are thought to be socialists/communitarians (which is the new "in" name for Commies). Nope, I'm not kiddin'.

[jawrightbiz]

A quick study of the word you use shows it to be a gimmick n that it appears to be conjunctive of progressive and conservative. This would imply being pro-servative or that which serves. Conservative is counter to serving n this manner as a serf which is another way of saying that which serves one. A Conservator will allow the admiring of artworks for example but they will not be served or tendered for money. Ya oughta rethink this. Canada has a Progressive Conservative party.

Best
Randy

I actually pointed this out to my wife, and no I am not kissing butt, but that was the smartest thing I had heard in a while. Who makes arguments like that? Wow

[The Proservative]

The word Proservative could stand for many positive things which we want to portray. Like I mentioned before, we've done some focus groups, all "understood" the general idea we were shooting for, you're argument being one of them:

Proservative = one who is FOR service...and isn't that exactly what we want our elected officials to do, serve our/the public's best interests?

[virgil47]

I am afraid that your new organization is probably going to be off limits for any active duty military or civilian employees of the government. If and when you are able to get this new proservative organization recognized as an actual political party and then and only then will it be ok for the military and government civilians among us to join. If this new organization is in any way seen as a radical anti U.S. movement it will be off limits forever. Just a simple word of caution to my military and government civilian bretheren on these boards.

[The Proservative]

I am afraid that your new organization is probably going to be off limits for any active duty military or civilian employees of the government. If and when you are able to get this new proservative organization recognized as an actual political party and then and only then will it be ok for the military and government civilians among us to join. If this new organization is in any way seen as a radical anti U.S. movement it will be off limits forever. Just a simple word of caution to my military and government civilian bretheren on these boards.

Virgil, its ok to come aboard, we're not conspiring to do anything illegal. And, I assure you this is anything but "anti US". On the contrary, this is what the US is all about. The Proservative movement is not an actual party, just solidifying the Ron Paul Revolutionary base, right now as "Proservative Republicans".

We COMPLETELY adhere to the Ron Paul platform, and seeing how Ron Paul received more contributions from Armed Forces personnel than any other presidential candidate, our Proservative group/movement would be a perfect fit for all of our military and government brethren.

[nullvalu]

A good resource to continue the movement.
http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/

+1

[1836]

Sounds like "preservative."

[The Proservative]

Sounds like "preservative."

as in "preserving the Ron Paul Revolution" ?

[TruthAtLast]

Thruth at Last. You're not hinting at bureaucracy are you?

Whatever groups we create, they must be decentralized, the power must flow from the bottom-up, and we must do our best to prevent the structure of the organization from becoming a large organization.

If an organization is centralized, it is more easily corrupted, and if the power flows top-down, it will most definitely (eventually) be taken over by those who, well, have taken over everything else, and then the only language of the organization will become doublespeak. Also, all large organizations - governments, corporations, charities, think-tanks - become bloated, inefficient, and eventually ineffectual or detrimental to their purpose.

We need (probably many) lean, mean decentralized and bottom-up tyranny fighting machines.

'Nuf said.

By this logic the country shouldn't have a Government at all and I don't think anyone is suggesting that. Certainly Ron Paul isn't.

Yes, organizations can become corrupt but only if there are no checks and balances and no governing bylaws. I've created dozens of companies. Some of the early ones were set up by partners of mine and had poor corporate governance. Others, that I created in the future have run smoothly and efficiently due to the care taken in the initial structure.

You are correct in that big companies can become bloated with bureaucracy. But this occurs when power is more important than purpose. The problem with Government isn't the fact that it is Government. It is the greed, power, and influence that corrupts.

If a decentralized group of random support worked, Ron Paul would be the nominee right now.

We've seen dozens of "side project" grass roots endeavors fail because they didn't get the proper funding or attention they deserve, despite the fact that thousands of people may have had every intention of supporting these projects but never knew about them. The ones that do succeed ONLY DID SO, because of the organized promotion and support of a group of people.

There are too many people moving in too many different directions to make any kind of sustained impact. If 20 people call or email a radio station it does nothing. If 20,000 people are organized, it makes an impact and demands change. Every major Revolution in the history of the world happened because of organization.

People don't say "united we stand, divided we fall" for the heck of it. We will NEVER make the impact that we seek doing what we are doing now. This is not meant to dismiss the effort that so many people have dedicated. On the contrary, it honors these people.

Any organization (including our own Government) is only as good as the skill, integrity, and values of the leadership. That is why we want Ron Paul to be President. Whether we like it or not our organization is already forming. There are leaders and organizers of meet up groups, precinct leaders, district leaders, etc. To provide these supporters a method of communication and delivering on their objectives is only natural.

But... you bring up a good point. We can't have an organization where any person or small group has absolute power. The organization is only used as an instrument to educate, mobilize and focus the people on a single cause. The members must be the ones to truly dictate direction and policy.

The action isn't unlike the fundamental function of this forum, only rather than just facilitating in the discussion of a Revolution, this organization would facilitate in the ACTION of Revolution.

It must be completely transparent (just as our Government should be). It must have equal representation and it must hold true to the defined principals and guidelines set forth by its members.

But this isn't revolutionary. Why do the big parties win elections? They have influence in their numbers and organization. Even the Ron Paul Campaign itself is an organization that people donated to and was created for a single purpose.

Unfortunately, there is no transparency in the campaign committee; there is no representation. They didn't tell everyone what the money was being spent on or what their complete marketing and political strategy was. There was not input into who would be hired and who wouldn't. Yet people donated to that organization blindly because they believed in a single leader.

This is not a third party. This is just the first step of producing the structure that will be REQUIRED if there will ever be ANY hope of overcoming the massive obstacles that have been placed before us.

[me3]

Beautiful website ProServ.

[The Proservative]

Beautiful website ProServ.

Well, it's just basic right now...but was adamant about the "Gold" backing

[The Proservative]

Still going strong...

[andrewk78]

What I would like to see is some sort of symbol. Something that I can make into a patch and be easily recognizable.
One thing that was so great about the primaries/caucuses is you saw someone with RP stuff on and you knew that you were two kindred spirits.

I dunno maybe a bad idea, or maybe good.

[The Proservative]

What I would like to see is some sort of symbol. Something that I can make into a patch and be easily recognizable.
One thing that was so great about the primaries/caucuses is you saw someone with RP stuff on and you knew that you were two kindred spirits.

I dunno maybe a bad idea, or maybe good.

Nope, it's a GREAT idea I have a emblem for the movement, just touching it up. Nothing fancy, just a solid message, visual.

[JoshLowry]

Check out www.RonPaulAmbassadors.com

Maybe you can help that organization out. They are setting up everything as a legal 501 org.

[The Proservative]

Check out www.RonPaulAmbassadors.com

Maybe you can help that organization out. They are setting up everything as a legal 501 org.

The "purpose" on the website is blank....do they have a purpose?

[TruthAtLast]

Check out www.RonPaulAmbassadors.com

Maybe you can help that organization out. They are setting up everything as a legal 501 org.

the RonPaulAmbassadors is decent idea but there are a couple of issues.

1) there is a huge lack of information on the site and no transparency. The "get involved" page just as a link to some web banners. Maybe the site is in development. If that is the case, finish it before you begin promoting it. It is destroying your credibility.

2) I don't like the idea of tying any long-term strategy to any one person's name, including Ron Paul. Yes, we can promote Ron Paul and his ideas but if this is to be a long term political organization what good is the name "Ron Paul Ambassadors" 50 years from now? It also assumes that no other leader arises. This makes the entire organization seem temporary and lacking the ability to make any real impact.