0 votes

Did Campaign For Liberty Give $350,000 to a Neocon?

Sorry if this is in the wrong forum. I don't usually post here, but I am a regular participant at Ron Paul Forums, as well as being relatively active in real life too.

Having said that, I wanted to point out something that has the other forums all a-buzz: It appears that Campaign For Liberty spent $350,000 on a media buy for a Colorado candidate named Ken Buck, who is endorsed by Michelle Malkin and supports the wars in the Middle East.

We're all over there going WTF?




should get you up to date.

We're looking to apply some pressure and we hope some of you will make phone calls to Virginia to make them explain what in the world they were thinking.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

did they give any

to Debra medina?

Freedom is NOT free!

From the bottom of the C4L

From the bottom of the C4L Board of Directors page:

Campaign for Liberty is a 501(c)4 lobbying organization which neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office and claims no responsibility for the actions of individuals or groups of individuals who use the Campaign for Liberty logo or name or who may claim to act as representatives of the Campaign for Liberty without prior written consent of the Campaign for Liberty.

Could this be an instance of "without prior written consent"? I wish they would just clarify.

Yeah, I saw that, too, Gil.

With a red flag already having gone up since they've taken so long to respond, I confess the first thing that went through my mind when I read that last night was wondering if that would be used as a ~get out of jail free card~ in the event someone did try to pull some funny business.

After reading crashproof's comments with the two different stories from C4L, the first one in particular, I have a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach.


Good find,

good point!

come on, I thought we were

come on, I thought we were the ones with the tin foil hats. Surely we can be skeptical of this ad and come up with some sort of conspiracy theory by the neo-cons.

CASS SUNSTEIN may already be invading the BLOGS


CASS SUNSTEIN wants to take TAXPAYERS MONIES and spend it on countless hours and days of invading the PATRIOT MOVEMENT blogs.

Cass Sunstein is on the short list of B.O. for Supreme Court JusticeS. His philosophies are a threat to FREEDOM OF SPEECH,. He believes we should "celebrate TAX DAY". He is fascist in disguise, and need I say more? He came out of HARVARD.

This chain SHOULD BE REMOVED by this website owner. He can control some of this crap & verify "rumors" or "inflammatory" things first before putting it on this website!


I hadn't considered the Democratic Admin and the likes of Cass

Which is why I disagree with your suggestion that this thread be removed.

This is how we here at the DailyPaul get to the bottom of things. Its a process. Here's my take.

My faith is the firm conviction of my own moral obligation and the autonomy which can alone establish that obligation. I rule myself. But I also live in this world.

Problems like this ad, the Smith endorsement, Rand's political positions are just a few things that have been hashed out here at DP.

Between the barking (Steven Pinker's evolutionary explanation of swearing) which establishes an emotional connection or disconnection to the topic; all notions impossible, possible or probable; the knowledge which must be subjectively (true for me) and objectively valid (true for anyone).

Certainty in human knowledge is always a problem. I have found the Daily Paul to be valuable resource for helping me know for sure. Even if that means I know I am not sure. I learn as much for nay-sayers as I do the yea-sayers or even the fence sitters.

That said I appreciate most those who do the footwork and add something to the conversation, as you did in pointing out another possible turd in the puchbowl.

The danger I see is the Bandwagon Fallacy and it is one that the main medias and other knowledge disruptors have used effetively on the Internet. (Rita Skeeter is a literary prototype).

Free includes debt-free!

In my defense, I didn't post

In my defense, I didn't post it here and nor did I pay even much attention to the rumor until I saw that a official CFL spokesperson had affirmed the legitimacy in a Talking Points Memo article.

This is bad for the CFL, but it really emphasizes the need to have multiple forums and venues where we liberty lovers can congregate.

If the CFL has let us down, it doesn't mean we should abandon the philosophy, and it definitely doesn't mean we shouldn't donate money to the freedom candidates, many of whom are banner-listed over there on the right.

And it certainly doesn't mean that the local CFL groups are to blame in any way at all. I think we all know they get little, if any, funding from National.

Link to comment by website owner further below in this thread...

...and partial quote:

"This will stay on the front page until we get a response, at which point, the response will be posted."



Thanks for clarifying...for those who have not read through the entire thread.

The AD is FAKE...note the "wmv" end

We need to not get flustered when things like this happened, as the OPPOSITION is panicing. Look, with an admitted George Soros saying that Copenhagen was a "bust", plus the countries being "under pressure" which keep the elites from going forward at breakneck paces, this is bound to happen.

However, it seems there should be some recourse for C4L in the form of a lawsuit against whoever posted this on YouTube.

I doubt anyone saw this on TV, so there you go! Just bag the worry~~

The elites have overreacted to the PATRIOTS MOVEMENT, as a result of Ron Paul's education during the election and sensational support he received which CANNOT be compared in any way, form, or shape to the miniscule support for B.O.

As a result of this overreaction, the elites are imploding fast!!

Not a Fake

I called this morning and a staffer confirmed it's real, and that it was paid for out of C4L funds, but not general funds...what ever that means. Call them yourself to see if you get the same answer I did.

News for Navigating the Financial Collapse and Dollar Devaluation from an Austrian Economics Perspective


I tend to agree with you but we do need some serious

public communications here from C4L. Though they may be looking into this, we need a public statement from them indicating to that effect just to reassure everyone that this is under some kind of investigation.

I will say if we do not hear anything in the next 10 hours, we know something is terribly wrong here.

What about the 501 C staus of C4L?

"Because of Campaign for Liberty's tax-exempt status under IRC Sec. 501 (C) (4) and its state and federal legislative activities, contributions are not tax deductible as charitable contributions (IRC § 170) or as a business deduction (IRC § 162(e)(1))."

501 (c) organizations
"... are prohibited from conducting political campaign activities to intervene in elections to public office".

How could we be supporting ANY candidate (NeoCon or not) for office?

The Virtual Conspiracy

Because they said so

If you watch the ad, it is actually an endorsement of the CFL survey, encouraging other candidates to send back their surveys, too.

But it appears that not many other candidates have even received a survey, so it isn't clear why Bucks was received and processed so fast.

I find it extremely

I find it extremely disturbing that C4L members posting on DailyPaul and other blogs have so little trust and faith in the C4L organization and its operation. Some want to destroy the C4L based on a rumor without learning the facts. Surely there is a reasonable explanation. What difference does it make if it takes a day or a week to get to the bottom of the problem as long as the truth is known?

If C4L personnel did something wrong then they should be fired and/or prosecuted if theft (kickbacks) was involved. The C4L is coming into its own as a power broker in the coming elections. We cannot allow a mere rumor sabotage the organization. Folks we are playing hardball in the real world where lies are part of the game and dirty tricks are played for sport. As Joe Friday would say "just the facts mam, just the facts".

Charles, see crashproof's

Charles, see crashproof's comments below. C4L was contacted on two separate days, and two different people gave two completely different responses. As for trust, there's very little of it left in people these days. After being played so many times, it's just a matter of self preservation to trust very few people outside of yourself. This is kind of a firestorm that's been burning for a few days now, a direct threat to their support base, yet no official word from C4L. That's what disturbs me.


I can't say it gives me much confidence to have different responses. I do feel the second person I talked to gave a more truthful(unprepared) answer. Not necessarily the PR spin C4L is going to take in trying to do damage control when their statement comes out.

News for Navigating the Financial Collapse and Dollar Devaluation from an Austrian Economics Perspective


I hope a statement eventually

I hope a statement eventually does come out. Do you know if the State GOP is pushing a particular candidate? I've heard Gale Norton's name thrown around, but I've also read that she's being investigated for corruption during her tenure as Interior Secretary under GWB. I'm in CO too, but not on front range.

Exactly right.

Once again, an example of DailyPaul being used to divide and conquer.

Why would C4L risk its tax exempt status to promote some marginal NeoCon candidate?

Answer: It wouldn't.

Its bad enough that there are so many DP usernames willing to nitpick every action of patriots like Ron and Rand Paul.

Would it be asking too much of the posters here to preface their inflammatory rumors with "alleged" or "supposed" or "reported" until the FACTS are known?

The Virtual Conspiracy


And if the truth were told, if people really want to be responsible they can join C4L and improve it instead of criticizing. Its obviously imperfect but its still something.

I urge all of you who think C4L is crappy then get involved and let's see it improve.

Constructive criticism is great, then use it to make motions.

I complain here and at the C4L


Free includes debt-free!

There is nothing like honesty

There is nothing like honesty lol.

Trust the Individual, Distrust the Collective

I would rather see individuals choose which candidate to support than pooling it to any organization including, and now especially, C4L.

Whenever power/money/influence is centralized, be it gov't or private, it becomes an attractive target for the vultures. Cato, Reason and the Libertarian Party are prime examples, and now C4L. It was only a matter of time.

I hate to say it, but Dr Paul wasted his funds seeding this organization.

Is a C4L statement forthcoming?...Today on PA rEVOLution

The Campaign for Liberty is coming out strong in the 2010 elections, this time with a $350,000 ad purchase in Colorado for US Senate Candidate Ken Buck. Based on the Campaign for Liberty candidate survey, the ad highlights the candidates conservative values while trying to put some pressure on front runner Jane Norton.

Our sources at the Campaign for Liberty are telling us that the money used in the campaign came from private donors in Colorado and did not use donor's money or their main coffers of funds. Despite this many involved in the Campaign for Liberty are demanding answers which have many asking what are they donating to....

Read the Rest here: http://www.parevolution.com/newswire/11457-cfl-ad-promoting-...

C4L is not moving quickly to

C4L is not moving quickly to straighten this out. Maybe if they ignore it, it will go away...sounds like a page from the "politics as usual" playbook. They need to be aware that if they're not careful "it" could go away, "it" being their support base.

I called C4L Yesterday

I spoke to Deb Wells Director of Membership Services and she said they only support issues and not candidates due to the fact they are a 501(c)4. She said it would not be legal for them to mention a candidate. This appears to be a fake ad, someone made unauthorized use of the C4L logo to weaken support for C4L as we enter a critical election in November. The establishment knows that C4L and it's members will play a large role in the outcome of those elections and primaries/caucus's by educating it's members to identify liberty candidates based strictly on the positions candidates take on the issues. They know C4L will weaken support for establishment neoconservatives. In my opinion, this appears to be an effort to sabotage that effort. C4L is there to educate us to think for ourselves about issues.

FYI this is at the bottom of the C4L website:

Campaign for Liberty is a 501(c)4 lobbying organization which neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office and claims no responsibility for the actions of individuals or groups of individuals who use the Campaign for Liberty logo or name or who may claim to act as representatives of the Campaign for Liberty without prior written consent of the Campaign for Liberty.

News for Navigating the Financial Collapse and Dollar Devaluation from an Austrian Economics Perspective


Thanks for the update.

Thanks for the update.

I called again this morning...new info!

I spoke to another person today and she did confirm that the ad is real and that they did spend $350k on the ad. She said it was paid for with funds that did not come from the C4L general fund, I am not sure exactly what that means. She said it's over and not running any longer. She also said a press release from C4L is forthcoming, probably today. She also said that the survey ads will be ongoing but that they will be sure to design them so as not to give the impression that they are endorsing a candidate as this ad appears to do. She asked me not to use her name as she is not the PR person.

News for Navigating the Financial Collapse and Dollar Devaluation from an Austrian Economics Perspective