56 votes

"What's wrong with y'all? We got to get behind whoever the winner is!"

I was reading a post tonight about a girl who was sitting next to a man who saw she was a Ron Paul supporter and this man sitting next to her said this: "Whether it is Newt or Romney, we got to get behind whoever the winner is."

I thought about that for a moment and I tried to ponder what you could say to someone who would tell you something like this. It is then that I came up with a question that I would ask anyone who would suggest that to me.

If you were standing in a line for bread with your child, and all the other children and their parents were in front of you and they were being felt up in order to get some bread, would you continue to stand in that line and allow your child to be felt up for the bread that you and he could eat or would you get out of line and get in line with a group of people who would not allow that to happen to their child.

So many times we are lulled into believing that we have no choice but to conform and get in line so we can eat. Thank God for the few men and women throughout history who refused to be another slave in a crowd and chose to fight rather than submit to tyranny. We are at a crossroads in our history and if we don't stand for liberty, our children and their children will curse us for our lack of courage.

This is not the time to give quarter to those who mean to destroy our way of life and even our Country itself, but instead we must stand like men of old who realized there are far worse things than hunger. We are free men and women and by God we will not except anything less than freedom.

It is Dr. Paul or none. We will continue to grow and our voices will get louder and louder over time, but if we give in, we will be no better off than the animals in a Zoo. We will be fed, but at what cost to our children?

Comment viewing options

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

Either way we get soup

If Ron Paul is not elected get ready for the soup line.
If Ron Paul is elected get ready for the soup line.
Only difference is you will get more soup with Ron Paul.
In case you have not noticed this country is completely screwed beyond belief. We are headed down a one way street to a complete collapse of our monetary system. When will it come? No one knows that time for sure but it will come. It would be nice to have RP in office when it does happen.

Dumbass "pundits" want to throw Ron out of the debates

Because he hasn't unequivocally declared that he will support whoever the Republican nominee is jackass "pundits" want him kicked out of the debates. They're nuts if they think the only conservative in the running should endorse these guys who are clones of Obama in every way except for being more anti-welfare.

The way I see it, Ron Paul is the only qualified candidate, and he's trying to save the GOP from oblivion.

During the 2008 race Dr. Paul prognosticated that either an Obama or McCain administration would simply be a continuation of the Bush regime. Good call for Ron, depressing reality for us.

Take back the GOP and Restore America Now.

They can do

what ever but it will do them no good because the RP support has already grown to large. All they can do is sit back and loose the general election.


The "intelligence" of the Republican Party


Give us clear vision, that we may know where to stand and what to stand for - because unless we stand for something, we shall fall for anything.
~ Peter Marshall, US Senate Chaplain 1947

The whole idea of getting

The whole idea of getting behind the winner (in order to defeat Obama) loses meaning when you realize they all have the same basic agenda. So supporting Romney or Newt makes little sense and wouldn't really be a victory in any sense of the word. But many people are still caught up in the two party system, so it's hard to make this argument as long as people believe there is a difference.

This is what I say to them...

Why should I vote for someone I don't like just to prevent someone I like even less from winning?

If someone says I'm a spoiler, I say: How can you spoil something that's already rotten?

If someone says we should have public financing for elections, I say: Why should I be forced to pay to promote a candidate that I would never vote for?

Somehow it always shuts them up...for a little while at least!

Message of Liberty

I hope everybody understands that Ron is just a messenger for Liberty.We can not stop fight, if he is not nominated.We have to stay focused, involved in local politics, elections to spread the message from the bottom. If he is not running 3rd party we can always vote for Gary Johnson.He is as close to Ron as possible.That vote won't be wasted .We will show establishment that we are serious about Liberty not just


ecorob's picture

Waking people up!

...well said, David!

Ron Paul
Give me back my Liberty or give me death!

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

"We will be fed, but at what cost to our children?"

Fed like cattle. Human Feedlots. Sounds like Sheeple. Hmmm Familiar.

One day, I'm gonna' change my name to Dale Lee Paul

Here is another possible

Here is another possible response to that comment:

"If the Republican Party nominates a draft-avoiding, crony-capitalist, anti-gun, pro-choice, socialized-medicine candidate over a strict free-market Constitutionalist who served his country and carries our his political office with integrity, then the Republican party might as well change its symbol from an elephant to a wooly-mammoth now because that party will become extinct."

saw it in this Brevard Times article endorsing RP:

Working for US policy in the mideast that serves AMERICA's interests http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org/

I take Ron Paul's line!

"I don't like absolutes!" It works great!

I hate the title of this post

Even with the quotes it gives me a head ache every time I see it. It's psy ops just to get us to read.

Voting for someone you don't

Voting for someone you don't believe in is the ultimate wasted vote.

They ALWAYS ask ROn Paul

IF he will support the others. But, they don't ask the others if they will support PAUL. What is up with THAT?
Maybe when it's the two-man debates (Paul v. Mittens) they will HAVE to ask the ROmBot. THAT is an answer I'd like to hear.

We had SOME proof, but RNC does not care about Rules n Laws- they just break and then change 'em to suit whomever (not PAUL).

To Be Fair To Wolf Blitzer, He Did Ask This Of Gingrich

And Gingrich said no.

Rothbard: "Bipartisan: both parties acting in concert to put both of their hands in your pocket."

2 points

First, I would ask people like that if they would line up behind Dr Paul if Dr PAul happens to win the nomination. Newt Gingrich has said he would not.

Second, if the time comes around that Romney gets the nomination, I am going to propose that we have actually had a more conservative limitied govt over the past year than when we had a GOP pres, with or without GOP Congress. With a GOP House resolved to stand up for what is right (for whatever underlying motive) we actually have had 12 months of pretty small govt RELATIVE to Obama's first two years AND Bush's 8 years.

I will not vote for someone who doesn't give a lick about limited govt as prescribed in the constitution.

I guess this is a useless poin

but don't worry about Getrich. He nor Sanatorum will get the nomination. They are only staying in to derail Paul.

xlnt point

I hope I'd have the wherewithal to respond to that man's statement with:

"So, what you are telling me is, you will support Ron Paul when he wins the nomination?" :P

Working for US policy in the mideast that serves AMERICA's interests http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org/

GREAT Metaphor!

That is a fantastic metaphor. Getting behind whoever the nominee is, is what we've been doing for DECADES. All that has gotten us is more harm, more wars, less freedom, complete invasion of our privacy and a lower standard of living. Voting for a candidate that will bring us more of that is like subjecting your family members to more ABUSE from the state! Who in their RIGHT mind would do that?

Just an old Canadian here, but,

If Ron Paul doesn't get to run for the presidency, How about running Rand Paul as an independent?


Rand has no interest in a

Rand has no interest in a third party run for himself or is dad and has stated so often. He likes being a part of the Republican Party. I agree with him.

My Response:

Which one do we have to get behind?

-the corrupt, cheating and hypocritical blob of uncooked dough?

-the souless, empty suit for sale to the highest bidder, propped up by wall street and banking donations?

-the religious nut that wants to replace the constitution with a theocracy, to be followed with another crusade against all those "evil muslims and gays"?


The one who's been a consistent defender of individual liberty, sound money, and peace with foreign nations?

After all this, I can't even remember why I even bothered to respond to someone so asinine as to state "no matter who it is, we have to unite behind the winner." People of that mentality deserve the president they get.



does look like a corrupt, cheating hypocritical blob of uncooked dough. RP2012 The Only ONE

9/11 was an inside job .....time to get some answers..RP 2012

My Response...

would be Fuk Dat Shit. The TSA is a total sham, I used to work for the Government with US Customs for 5 1/2 years between 83' and 89' I'd be ashamed to be part of the "TSA" or "Homeland Bufoonery Departments" today. The world has been turned upside down since these bastards got away with 911 they've gotten bolder and more invasive by miles all in the name of "safety". Total BS--They would pin 911 on Iran if they thought they could. Why don't Santorum, Romney and Grinchgrinch pick up a helmet a gun and get out there, they're certainly willing to send others easily. How come these 3 clowns have not one bad thing to say about the TSA? If Ron Paul is not elected the election is as fraudulent as 911. RP2012 Fuck The TSA

9/11 was an inside job .....time to get some answers..RP 2012

if the winner upholds the constitution

they have my vote -Ron is the only one I trust so unless he's the winner somebody has a lot of trust to earn.

Pretty sure there'll be a third party since Dems and Repugs can't seem to do anything except steal our freedom, privacy, and money

Government is supposed to protect our freedom, our property, our privacy, not invade it. Ron Paul 2007

Ron Paul Or None At All


Right on. I said this to

Right on. I said this to someone today who told me to "stop it already" because I posted a story about the Real Newt from Joe Scarborough:

"We have 47 states who have not had a chance to vote yet, and I refuse to stop telling the truth. I would rather stand on principle than support a hypocrite. I would rather be accused of not being a team player than sacrifice my liberty."

The best way to handle this situation ...

... is the Socratic Method. Socrates asked QUESTIONS that were designed to get at the fundamental principles that the person was advocating, and then he used that person's own ideas to show how they were contradicting themselves.

This can make people very angry because most people do not question their own belief system, they just become entrenched. (For a good laugh at politicians getting angry at this sort of thing, check out YouTube and look up Jan Helfeld's interviews of politicians.)

However ...

In a normal conversation, you do NOT want to make the person angry. You want to win them over. The problem is, we don't know if the person is close-minded or open-minded. If they are truly close-minded, then go ahead and offend 'em. ;-)

Most people, though, are at least somewhat open-minded and if you come right at them and tell them why they are WRONG, they will quickly become close-minded.

So instead, make it a two-part process. First, ask them questions to get them to commit to some sort of base principle. Then, show them in a nice way why what they currently think is correct might not be so and that a different idea might be better. Then, leave it up to them to find out more.

It could go something like this:

HIM: We gotta vote for Newt or Mitt, whoever the nominee is.
ME: Why do you say that?
HIM: Because we can't afford another 4 years of Obama.
ME: I agree with you that would be bad, but you and I might agree for different reasons. So, why do you think 4 more years of Obama would be bad?
HIM: Because he is spending this country into bankruptcy with all the bailouts and everything.
ME: That's true, and what else?
[Get multiple reasons before moving on to Step 2.]
ME: So, we agree that Obama is bad because he is spending the country into bankruptcy, do you think that's because he's a liberal?
HIM: Yes, he's a commie.
ME: So, are you in favor of less government spending and less government overall?
HIM: Yes.
ME: Are you in favor of ending all the bailouts?
HIM: Yep.
ME: I agree, but the problem you and I have is that Newt Gingrich has said many times that his favorite president in history is Franklin Roosevelt, not Ronald Reagan. He supported government bailouts of big business, he thinks you should have to pay higher taxes because of global warming, and he has supported government-run health care. Of course when he's running for office, he pretends he never said those things, just like Obama didn't say what he really wanted when he ran, either. And Mitt Romney is no different. He has supported government bailouts, government health care and all the rest. He tries to claim that he is a changed man now, but that's because he's running for office. The more you think about it, the more you realize that both Newt and Mitt are big government Republicans who are really no different from Obama. A vote for them is a vote for more of the same, until the country really does go bankrupt. If you really want someone who will END that stuff, take a look at Ron Paul.

At this point, he might change the subject and say Ron Paul is not "electable," in which case you can go through the same process. If the person is open to new ideas, he will have a real conversation and have real concerns. If he is close-minded, he will just keep changing the subject no matter what you say, and then you can choose to end the conversation or go into "Plan B" and really make him question his own principles, but you might not make a friend if you go there. LOL.

very good ideas LOL

I laugh because this train of reasoning within face to face conversation is very difficult for me! The thought process interferes with the speaking process and synchronizing the two gets tangled up inside all the subsidiary thoughts. I am doing all I can do to maintain my own thoughts. Trying to keep track of the other guy's thoughts and speak my own thoughts at the same time... LOL, LOL

Thanks for your presentation. I cut and paste it into word so I can try to memorize it and keep it handy for later use. I see that you are trying to control the conversation to bring it to the desired outcome and that is a very good "social" skill to have to reach "socialists". :-)