127 votes

Sometimes it is not enough to do our best; we must do what is required.

The title is a quote from Winston Churchill.

In what may have been my most widely-read article, I compared Paul to Churchill in an attempt to put the good doctor, and the efforts of those who support him, into historical context. Doug Wead, one of Paul’s senior campaign advisers went even further in an interview with Cavuto, saying simply “Paul is Churchill”. (*)

As we Paul supporters have failed so far to rack-up a victory in the primary or caucus beauty contests, I have started noticing that some are considering giving in to defeatism.

That is not worthy of Dr. Paul or our cause – and Winston Churchill will show you why.

In 1940, during the Second World War, Hitler’s tyranny had already swept across all of Europe. The score was liberty - zero; tyranny – too many to count.

Only Britain was left standing. And Hitler came for us.

In the Battle of Britain, the British stood alone in the world against a tyranny that had built an empire more efficiently than any had been built in history. This was when Churchill rallied the nation with what many regard as his greatest speech.

“Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few”, he said.

But the British did nothing more than survive. By “winning” the Battle of Britain, what we really did was “avoid losing”. We didn’t push Hitler back an inch. We just ensured that we – a metaphorical beach-head of liberty in a literal island of liberty – would live to fight another day. We were just a moral, if not military, thorn in Hitler’s side, reminding the world what resistance against tyranny looks like when the stakes get high, and what courage can achieve against the odds.

It was obvious to the whole world that the English could not defeat Hitler from our little island. Hitler was content to leave us be if only we would agree a peace with him: Churchill’s acceptance of the new status quo in Europe would have consolidated and legitimized Hitler’s gains. That would have sufficed for Hitler, and for the British, militarily and politically, it would have made a great deal of sense.

And let’s be clear. After the Battle of Britain, for the best part of a year, there was no world war. There was a united Europe, and it was “at peace”, or in equilibrium if you prefer, under the Nazi flag. Hitler’s success was so complete that the standard of living of Germans under Hitler peaked in 1941 – while the British were already on severe rationing with nothing to keep their spirits up except dogged determination and the sense that they were doing the right thing, Goddamnit.

The strategy? Churchill again: “Never give in. Never give in. Never. Never. Never”.

To thousands of people around the world, that all seemed a bit radical or ill-judged. After all, the British moral high ground was not, alas, the kind of useful high ground that provides any military advantage.

But Churchill had a certain clarity.

In his words again,

"If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves."

To all of you liberty-loving, Ron Paul-supporting Patriots, this is why you are fighting today.

Churchill’s conviction subsequently proved to be critical to the eventual victory over tyranny. Even Stalin said that in the war against Germany, “Russia provided the blood; America provided the money, and Britain provided the time”.

Why did he mention the time in the same breath as the blood and the money? Because the time mattered just as much.

Britain’s stubbornness was the moral link between the lost battles fought against Hitler by country after country that he over-ran (c.f. the lost battles fought in this country against the Patriot Act, the NDAA, wars of choice etc.), and the fight-back that would start a few years later. The time the Brits bought enabled enough others to see the stakes for themselves, and to arm themselves for the fight. Those others, of course, included the Russians and the Americans. Certainly, the liberty of the world would not have been saved without either of those powers - but it also would not have been won without the stubborn refusal of the British to admit defeat, buying time, during which they defined the cause against Hitler. In so doing, they provided a spiritual forward position – and a physical infrastructure and base (Roosevelt’s impregnable “aircraft carrier” on the edge of Europe) - from which to launch a counter-attack.

If you haven’t yet gotten the analogy, we – Ron Paul’s supporters, lovers of the Constitution, and activists for liberty – are the spiritual forward position, providing the physical infrastructure – for the retaking of our Continent, too – whenever that time comes.

And if the analogy sounds fanciful, bear in mind that, ultimately, the stakes are the same.

Whatever happens with our candidate’s bid for the Presidency (and those who understand that this is really about delegates know that we are still very much in the game), we have clearly increased our support three or four-fold in four years. That’s our Battle-of-Britain victory. And like the British, we should celebrate the battle won - not upset ourselves with the fact that the War is not yet over.

Tyranny has indeed taken over our land, with the NDAA, Patriot Act, militarization of the homeland, launching of unnecessary wars etc. etc. – but we are finally standing up in large numbers. We have drawn our line, and we have defended it firmly. Unlike the British in the Battle of Britain, we have even gained ground. Our huge increase in support from 2008 to 2012 proves that our metaphorical island of liberty in a continent of tyranny will not be over-run.

And like the British in 1940, we are not going away.

By existing – by refusing to lie down – we buy time. This is the time until the time that the idea whose time has come, comes(!) And meanwhile, again like the British in 1940 and 1941, we inspire others by our resilience, and wait for others to see what we see. When they discover what we already know, they will find us already here on our island of liberty - and they will find that the plans to take back our nation have already been drawn up and that there is already an army for them to join.

Like the British were then, we are now - a significant group who are fighting to regain liberty in a tyrannized continent of hundreds of millions. That was always going to be a long game.

AJP Taylor, one of the most important historians of modern times, ventured that part of Churchill’s steadfastness came from his almost romantic sense that, in their history and in their very being, the British people were a free people, and that in their character, they were strong and resilient.

That was enough for Churchill to believe that if only they held fast in their darkest hour, somehow they would prevail.

He turned out to be right.

Americans have the same in their history and in their blood. Liberty is the conceptual foundation of this nation, and a physical struggle against an attempt to deprive us of it is the physical foundation of this nation.

Bloody-mindedness, conviction and grit were enough to keep the British steadfast against the Blitz and V2 rockets until they found victory. They are certainly enough to keep us steadfast against a few electoral defeats until our victory.

The Brits had to wait five years for their ultimate victory. If we have to wait 20, we will have still had much the easier time of it.

Churchill knew that all the while you are fighting, you haven’t lost. In fact, the one necessary condition for losing is to make the choice to stop trying to win. He was, by the way, half-American.

Churchill was probably right when he said of those who fought the Battle of Britain, “Never was so much owed by so many to so few”.

The good news for us: we are not so few.


(*) Before jumping on the comparisons, please follow the links to understand the very particular ways in which Doug and I were drawing them.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

I don't believe that the author

is saying that Paul and Churchill are the same people or have the same ideology. I think what's being said is that Britain had a very bad time in 1941 and Churchill played a major part in the continuing resistance and defense movement. There is no doubt that he was very much a man with substantially different principles than Dr. Paul. And yes, its quite likely that Paul would have handled things very differently if he had been in the same place. However, you need to put Churchill's actions into perspective. Germany had treated Britain horribly and slaughtered a lot of your British soldiers. I would not be surprised if Churchill operated on an anger budget.
Its kind of funny. Everyone here get's pissed when the MSM call s Dr. Paul a "Randian" because he happens to agree with some of her statements. Along comes the author, stating that Churchill's fight and Paul's fight require similar ideological lines in the sand and he get's lambasted for it. Irony, thy name is...irony?

Touchy, Touchy

Robin Koerner’s site “Watching America” as described by Wikipedia:

Watching America is a website that promotes global opinion about the United States by translating foreign articles from foreign newspapers into English. It was launched in 2005 by founder Robin Koerner. Watching America states its goal is “to reflect as accurately as possible how others perceive the richest and most powerful country in the world.”

The site posts newly translated articles up on a daily basis, along with a link to the original article. The translations are done by native speakers of the relevant languages. It currently translates articles from Arabic, Armenian, Chinese, Croatian, Czech, Dutch, French, German, Hebrew, Hindi, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Norwegian, Persian, Polish Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Spanish, Swahili, Swedish, Turkish, and Urdu.

Watching America is regularly checked out by American intelligence agencies, such as the Defense Department. Koerner states this is ""because we're doing some of their work for them...""[3] It has also been linked by Foreign Policy, The Guardian, Der Spiegel, The Christian Science Monitor as well as cited in various published popular books and academic sources as a source.

Where do I begin? Who is this guy working for now???? Why is his article always listed on the front page as a feature? Is Watching America now “Watching Daily Paul and Ron Paul’s supporters”? That’s just a tad creepy.

Your local NWO advance man will have a British accent because some people think that makes you sound “smart.” Fancy words about liberty don’t cut it for me. I for one don’t trust the Brits or any of their agents. From the redcoats who would’ve hung the heroes of our revolution in a minute to all the intrigue of the past 100 years described in the “Creature”, I don’t trust ‘em. No “special friendship” for me. Aren’t there any blogs in the UK petitioning David Cameron for more peace, liberty, and sound money. I guess not.

I describe myself as a reformed neo-con Republican who still believes in that other “barbarous relic”, nationalism, and who believes Ron Paul would return our country to its first principles. Last I heard, Dr. Paul is in a race to win the Republican Party primary in America. How the hell is that going to happen if this site keeps focusing on foreign, HuffPo writers? Those looking for any reason not to vote for him or to deny him the nomination will just tsk, tsk. Why not replace this guy with something from Lew Rockwell or Mises.org. Just sayin…



Robin Koerner's picture

Feel free to criticize what I wrote - not what I didn't write

To all of you who've posted critical comments, explaining to me that Churchill differs from Paul in his moral character and a million other ways, that the British have a lot of immoral actions on the world stage to answer for, and that huge mistakes - both strategic and moral - were made in the second world war, I get it.

None of them, however, speak to the (I thought, obvious) point of this article that in fights against tyranny, strength of purpose is key, even when things look bleak - and whatever you think about Churchill, he had strength of purpose and to couch it in inspiring ways that that kept an entire nation of people in a fight for their liberty against the odds. (Or should the British have just invited in Hitler on the grounds that their leader, Churchill, wasn't a true lover of liberty anyway..? Of course not. )

Just because two things or people are not the same does not mean that they cannot be compared in specific respects. But even that is not really relevant, because this article does not compare Churchill to Paul: it applies some lessons of one huge fight against tyranny to another, with particular emphasis on the importance of staying strong in a long fight, and many people found that inspiring and helpful.

I have no problem being criticized for what I have written .. but I do have a problem for being criticized for what I didn't write - and having all kinds of inferences drawn from things I didn't even address, let alone say.

If you don't like these kind of articles because you know more history than I mentioned about here, that is fine, but let's not divide among ourselves. It is how we lose. Be glad that many on our side found this inspiring, even if you didn't.

I will let my own record of understanding of Ron Paul and his purpose, and my work on behalf of our cause, and for liberty in general, stand against anyone's.


I will also let the fact that the RP campaign tweeted this article speak for itself. Obviously, they understood it, and thought it useful. If my writing didn't help the cause of liberty, I would stop immediately.

I get that Paul is not Churchill; I get that Churchill is not Paul. I get that Paul has massive integrity and is a man of peace. I've been writing about these things extensively.

And finally, regarding the comparisons referenced in the first paragraph, please READ them before going off on one: they are very particular.

Please don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

(I believe that quote is from Voltaire, not Churchill. I hope he meets the standard of "approved lover of liberty who can be quoted". If he does not, it doesn't make the advice any less good.)

Persuading people of liberty involves getting enough out of our own heads and ideas to be able to understand the points that they are trying to make to us - especially when we disagree with them. Why not practice with articles like this that obviously come from people who are on the same side as you?


Winston Churchill H.S.

I grew up attending Winston Churchill High School here in the states, and believing Churchill to be the bulldog and the cat's meow, even took it upon myself to read his whole multivolume memoirs of WWII. Only with the hindsight of years and experience do I also see a quite different narrative. As reasons to dissociate the freedom loving movement of Ron Paul from Churchill I would just offer a few points of difference and concern. Mr. Churchill was the son on his mother's side of a prominent banking family and on his father's side a career politician who, if I am not mistaken died of syphillis. He was a noted alcoholic with an aggressive if not war mongering political bent. While one may rightly point out that Hitler and possibly even more so "ally" Stalin were demented sociopaths, Churchill certainly did his part in solving these challenges by involving England and much of the world in the most bloody conflict in all of human history. All the great historic Christian nations of Europe once again slaughtering each other door to door like savages, some answer. A past overlooked presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan has recently penned a book, though I haven't read it, looking into whether WW II was not an avoidable war. Pope John Paul II put things more succintly, to paraphrase him, "there are no winners in war, only losers." I have also heard it said "truth is the first casuality of war" so now decades later we know that the massacre of the Polish officer class was not in fact the work of the Germans but of the "allied" Bolshevik Russians. The formal acknowledgement of this by President Putin to be confirmed by a formal apology to the Polish leadership led to yet another tragedy from that war when the whole delegation of the Polish president and leadership died in a mysterious plane crash on the way to the ceremony in Russia.

Almost certainly most henious of all the acts of Churchill was the firebombing of Dresden. This city had no military significance was filled only with civilians and wounded, though the course of the war was decided enough to spend military resources in such a manner. While the final death toll is unknown with estimates ranging from 25-500 thousand it will forever be known as one of the greatest single acts of horrifying civilian murder in history, ordered by Churchill, one of the great despots and sociopaths of that era. May we never see his ilk again, and may we never see all that Dr. Paul has spoken so eloquently about, freedom from bankers' greed and fraud, freedom from oppresive career politicians and from insane warmongerers sullied by reference to such again.

Bad meat for school kids

I just posted this in another location here on the Dailypaul, but I thought it was very important to read, so I'm putting it here too. It's from yahoo news:



Okay I am a Ron Paul supporter I am a huge fan of liberty and Ron Paul will win , but I am kind of getting tired of this Kony thing right about now. I was wondering how come this one man gets all this attention on facebook and twitter smh I know everyone has seen the YouTube video. I looked on YouTube and he has over 38million views has anyone thought of that because I have. What am I trying to say is that all the moneybombs we have had and all the money that we the people have donated we should of have thought about something like the Kony piece. If we can just get a whole 30 minute piece like that man oh man I tell you we would have the establishment gone in a snap of a finger. We can do this guys I know that can be use as an TAKEOVER and we can take back our country ! But it is insane how this one guy can get all this attention and Ron Paul gets any I just do not get it we need make an effort like that I know we can do it I know we the people and the Ron Paul campaign has resources to make this happen! Oh yea I have one more thing to say before I end these thoughts on my about this whole thing I have a child myself a little girl I love her to death! My heart goes out to all the thousands of kids and families that have died and that our still missing really it does but I do not want to think that this whole Kony thing is just a subliminal message and an act of war just to go into Africa my heart says no how sad not but my mind says I do not know I just hope not :(. Please comment and let me know what you think and one last thin we can WIN this !

Comparing Dr Paul to Churchill...

Comparing Dr Paul to Winston Churchill is like comparing Churchill to Thomas Jefferson.
I don't think so.

Good Article, RP needs ppl to take over the GOP!

Is the same as always: he needs people to become active chairmen, delegates, and volunteers in the GOP LONG-TERM.

I keep seeing all these, "What ifs" about the campaign and suggestions, but that is all really moot. Ron Paul's Supporters refused to support him where it mattered.

Money, signs, polls, etc are all secondary to actually becoming a true member of the GOP.

Fight the Ron Paul blackout on the Daily Paul (now 'P AU L'), put his removed poster back as your avatar:

Resistance is victory

Resistance is victory

thx for your clarifications

they were much needed!

When Neocons & Facism go to sleep, they look under the bed for Ron Paul and "WE THE PEOPLE"!

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." M.Mead

ecorob's picture

Very well stated,

...young man.

Ron Paul

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

Revolution 1.0

F the Brits and Churchill. If you read the "Creature" you know they have never had our back. Why would they? Remember the first revolution? Great Britain exemplifies the horrors of the welfare state and "social democracy". Thank Lord Balfour for the mess in the Mideast and our Zionist leaning foreign policy. Get "Robin" off the DP. What a phony!


but you are just a fucking idiot. There are patriots everywhere, not just in your living room drinking a beer and yelling at a basketball game.

Robin Koerner's picture

Quite right too...

Let's purge our ranks of all Ron Paul supporters who say things we don't like.

And let's put down entire nationalities of people while we're at it.

The sure way to victory!


(FTR, have read "Creature", and Britain does indeed exemplify the horrors of the welfare state)

Robin Koerner's picture

The spirit of this article is right here...



Ron Paul is displaying exactly the kind of resilience and sense of greater purpose that I am referring to!

Trust that man.


Giving up.....

I admit that I was down-hearted and angry after Super Tuesday. I admit that I hope that provable charges of vote riggin or fraud will surface, but until then we have to assume that everything has been legit with the voting. I just want to point out to Paulians that this thing could possibly die when he retires. How are we going to continue with his issues? What person or people are out there that we can rally around. What about the future?

I resent being called a "Paulian", or a "Paulite" or a "Paulbot"

because all the MEDIA does is to pidgeon-hole us all & make us look like we're some group of morons and misfits! They don't kid me!

If ANYBODY refers to me in those terms to my face, I will have a thing or two to say back!

Regarding our down-hearted feelings after Super Tuesday, what did we expect? A fair contest? Right! And, some of us actually believe the RINOS played fair ball? Right. In a cold day in hell they did, from Iowa to Nevada to Maine, and then some.

The reason I'm angry with Dr. Paul & headquarters is because they never filed a lawsuit against BIG MEDIA for blatant election engineering and slander, defamation, etc. take your pick. It is for this reason I am not happy with the campaign.

Ron Paul: "My Status as a

Ron Paul: "My Status as a Candidate" 3/8 5:30 PM ET


Britain was not alone!
Canada, New Zealand, India, Australia were all there.

Anti-War. That ought to cover it.

Its all about information and delegates

all this side talk leads nowhere at the moment..

All efforts should be concerned about getting as many people informed as possible about Ron Paul while collecting these juicy delegates!!!

Once people know what the Dr. stands for without the media spinning his message he wins their minds and hearts!

We need to inform the sleeping masses that rely solely on the mass media that blacks out Ron Paul or spins his message.
Espacially the 50+ generation, that is watching FOXCNN all day, is hurting us at the polls. We also have flyers geared for them!
Lets get these flyers out in masses! Its now on US to educate and inform!
If every Paul supporter prints some hundred and puts them in their neighbourhood then we multiply our chances to win the nomination!

These flyers are all free to print:
http://www.mediafire.com/?s4snpbpsts5b3 <- all versions that are available.
- Including flyers geared towards 50+ generation.(If you know a place or neighbourhood with retirees where they might have an impact)

please share links.

Everyone can print them and distribute them everywhere to inform the masses. Mailboxes, windshields, public spaces, voting places, delegate meetings...
+ dont forget to register as a delegate in your state.

Thank You Daily Paulers for

Thank You Daily Paulers for standing up to this article.
More a propaganda piece if You ask me.

Anyhow, the first heroic deed that comes to my mind regarding the Royal Air Force in WWII is this:
The war was basically over and won by the Russians on the Eastern Front.
200.000 civilians were killed, the Semper Opera destroyed.

Would Ron Paul have done that?

Dresden Bombing

I certainly hope that Ron would not have set the world afire in the bombing of Dresden. I certainly hope Ron would not have bombed Nagasaki either. The wars had been won in both cases. And, we were bombing civilians when we should have concentrated upon the factories of war.

Anti-War. That ought to cover it.

What an insult!

"Paul is Churchill"...NO HE'S NOT!

Winston Churchill was a bloodthirty warmonger, a professional politician and a man that sent an entire generation to its death.

Besides being a lousy "statesman" whose actions along with Franklin Demon Roosevelt enslaved millions to the Soviet Union he didn't have much going for him. Frankly, he was a horrible speaker.

Hitler never "came for us". That's a bunch of lies! The Germans never attacked us to provoke us to war.

Of course that stooge Churchill could say "never give up" especially when he used other peoples money and lives as toys.

You are correct

Ron Paul is far above that war mongering, murderous "statesman" in every possible way. Churchill is like Lincoln, one of those "great leaders" lionized in history books and the media by the state because he was able to drag people into wars and re-draw maps of the world to suit the "interests" of fat cats while the people die, starve, are raped, maimed and looted. I am sick to death of wars shoved on us by these sociopaths who have monstrous needs to own everything and run everything. To hell with them and the idiots who listen to them.

Why are there always two camps?

It seems human collectives want to boil any debate/discussion down one of two flawed perspectives.

I enjoyed reading this post, it is very relevant, but ultimately it will be fuel to the notion that if you question the reported results of elections, then you are some how giving up and whining.

On the other hand, some of the voices shouting election fraud are more emotionally driven then driven by a careful examination of facts.

I for one will take the advice in this post to heart, I will never give up. Many of us are in this for the long hall and whatever the outcome now or later, we will fight as long as we have voices and beating hearts.

But I DO believe there has been tampering to our elections by the GOP. We have lots of mounting evidence to point to inconsistencies in protocol which shouldnot be easily excused as "sloppy work".

If there are mistakes then it is the duty and responsibility of the election keepers to right those mistakes. The burden of proof is upon those that run elections to prove they are fair, and not for us to prove the election has been stolen!

If you want to keep your "rights" then you must fight for them and be ever vigilant. So if you bleive that, why don't we all believe the same is true of our ELECTIONS??

If the people don't have a voice (via a vote), then we've lost our ability to wage a truly non-violent revolution. If we stand by and lose our right to fair elections, we will surely see non-violent protesters attacked by fire-hoses, dogs, and tanks.

Because after all: "these whiners had a chance to vote, what are they so upset about? Maybe they should spend a few months in Gitmo to calm them down"

Perception of popular sentiment is powerful, and without transparent elections which reflect the will of the people, the will can be shaped into whatever those in power want us to believe it is.

Question your government, question their elections, do not passively accept the loss of ANY liberty.

Two Camps

This happens in the states because there are only two real parties and the news, such as it is, deals only with two sides. However, Ron Paul does voice a differing opinion.

Also, more than two ideas do tend to confuse some and do make reporting a bit more work. It's much easier to discuss two opinions than it is to discuss more than two.

Anti-War. That ought to cover it.

Well said.

Well said.

thats why..

a bit offtopic but on point:


dont forget to educate the masses no matter where they come from they have a brain..even a small one is enough to udnerstand the implications of these comparisons.

These flyers are all free to print:
http://www.mediafire.com/?s4snpbpsts5b3 <- all versions that are available.
- Including flyers geared towards 50+ generation.(If you know a place or neighbourhood with retirees where they might have an impact)

please share links.

thanks for the education : )

thanks for the education : )

END the FED . END the WARS . END the DRAMA

Keep fighting...........the future is ours. Ron Paul is winning the hearts and mind of the youth.


It's encouraging to see

that many here have not embraced the sanitized version of the life and times of Winston Churchill, or the revisionist public school accounts of World Wars I and II and their disastrous consequences. Imperialistic and Socialistic, Churchill would seem to have more in common with Rick Santorum than Ron Paul. Unlike Santorum and to his credit, Churchill was himself a military man, though by all accounts a rather poor one.

πολλα γαρ πταιομεν απαντες ει τις εν λογω ου πταιει ουτος τελειος ανηρ δυνατος χαλιναγωγησαι και ολον το σωμα

This is the time...

"This is the time until the time that the idea whose time has come, comes(!)"

As the self-appointed Chief of the Internet Apostrophe, Grammar, and Syntax Police, I hereby award you One Commendation for the Most Exquisitely Composed Sentence of the Year So Far Award. :-)

Freedom is my Worship Word!

gaylbaby's picture



reedr3v's picture

Your point of rallying supporter spirit is

powerful. Thank you for contributing your superb gifts as a writer and strategist.

Despite big character flaws of Churchill that many in the thread task, the gritty determination of the Brits was key in holding the line against Hitler. That is the message of your post, and one we all should draw strength from.

Robin Koerner's picture


... for seeing what the real message of this article is!

Obviously, the point of the article is not that Churchill was an angel, or that Paul is in every way like him etc... but that the spirit he displayed in a fight against tyranny - and what he had to say about it - are useful for us. The comparisons drawn between Paul and Churchill, mentioned at the top of the piece, were quite specific. I hope those who commented negatively would look them up (my article and Wead's interview).

It's a shame some can't appreciate where my analogy begins and ends!

I never actually said anything about Churchill's motivations or character... nor did I mention anything about questioning recent election results, but from some of the comments, you'd think I was writing about only those two things!

Live and learn... Can't please all the people all of the time... and other cliches...

Churchill was the lesser of

Churchill was the lesser of two evils.

Nice sentiment, but there's no real comparison

Churchill was gassing Kurds for refusing to accept British imperial rule over the British made state of Iraq long before Hitler came to power.
As far as I'm aware Ron Paul is not a fan of genocide, and he is certainly no fan of empire building.
Still, Churchill was a true patriot (unfortunately to the extent that he believed Britain should control the world - not those pesky Germans) and he knew exactly how to deal with the threat of invasion. How he did it however was by creating what could possibly be seen as the most (if not only) successful communist system in history, by nationalizing all major industries, introducing rationing, curfews etc.
If, in the unlikely event that the USA is ever invaded, who thinks it's likely that Dr Paul, as President, would likewise nationalize industry and restrict personal freedoms?

While there are similarities between the two men, I feel uneasy with such a broad comparison, given that Churchill could more easily be compared to Hitler, or Stalin for that matter.

As a Briton myself, I long for a politician like Ron Paul to emerge on the British political scene. While my fellow Brits might worship Churchill as 'the greatest Briton of them all', I would personally prefer to reserve that accolade for someone who not only does the right thing, but does it for the right reasons.

I agree

Churchill set up the sinking of the Lusitania dragging the US into World War 1. I saw a great documentary on it and could not believe my eyes. He is also disliked here in Australia for planning the botched Gallipoli campaign in WW1 that resulted in many needless deaths. No doubt Churchill stood up to Germany while others gave in to them and this was his biggest triumph.

Lord Acton, Lord Chief Justice of England, 1875 - "The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the People v. The Banks."

ewww churchill was one of the

ewww churchill was one of the worst pieces of filth in history and i am not too fond of this romanticized version of this pitiful excuse for a man that people are accustomed to today

Hear, hear!

Hear, hear!

What is required??

Excuse me but you're clearly unaware of the vote fraud or purposefully ignorant. Tell me with a straight face Ron Paul only garnished 3100 votes in North Dakota. When the week leading up to the primary he had 2000 in attendance at a speaking event there. You shouldn't be writing about defeatism, you should be writing about peace and how to keep it. Because truth be know the people committing vote fraud should be strung up by their goddamn necks. I don't want to just stave off losing my rights. I want them to be intact. Some may feel comfortable knowing we are winning the ideological battle but what good is that when you can't afford food or gas because the bastards who steal elections are pushing us off a cliff into war with Iran.

We really shouldnt be

We really shouldnt be fighting amongst each other. Anyone who expects Ron Paul to set everything straight in 2012 is in for a huge dissapointment regardless if Ron Paul gets elected or not. This is a long fight and for now, not losing is good enough.

Our freedoms is under attack and we must fight of that attack by persisting before we can turn it around and start regaining our rights. I want more rights too, or rather I want my rights that I was born with returned to me from those that stole them. But we have to be realistic here, right now, the little rights we have left are under heavy attack and we need to be patient. We need to stand our ground and when the time is right we make a push, and then another one, and another one. Ron Pauls candicacy is one huge such push. Just imagine how much better off the freedom momvement is today than lets say 10 years ago. This is not through revolutionary change but thorugh persistence and determination.

I would not have been here if it was not for you huys making all the tube-videos. I wouldn't even know about Ron Paul, I'm from Sweden and I don't think I need to tell you that MSM does not mention Ron Paul.

This is a global revolution in ideas, not just an election. Ideas shape the world we live in, the entire world, not just the US even though you have a lot to say. More and more people are waking up to see that liberty is not just good and nice, it is correct and logical as well.

Don't lose hope and keep fighting. We are growing by leaps and bounds every day on a global scale.

reedr3v's picture

Seeing awakened people all over the world

is reason enough for tremendous hope, and even confidence long term.

False optimism

bothers me. Don't accuse me of losing hope. When I see Ron Paul win a brokered convention I'll be happy. Til then I'm not getting my hopes up nor am I going to stop spreading the truth or being a delegate for RP

We are being cheated BIG-TIME

We are being cheated out of the presidency. That's what we are going to fight back on.

Here in Arizona, there is only Ron Paul in anyone's mind. Arizona was rigged. A lecture I have, and dozens of people ONLY spoke of their vote for Dr. Paul.

I am following up on this in a week and will do a straw poll of these people, and WILL get the names of the RP voters.

This is a fight to the finish,and the finish is OURS!!. Will be campaigning all throughout California and Missouri; will keep you posted. It is Super-Fraud, not Super-Tuesday. Youwerewarned is right: listen to him!!!!

I will post a plan; we have to do a Canvas Crew; we have to gather our people and Super-Canvas strategic, forthcoming states. Then, when must use that same trustworthy crew to guard the vote. The pig Zionist regime is destroying and suppressing our only hope. Let's shut them down, now.

A Debt of Gratitude

As Dr. Paul has said,
"May future generations look back on our work and say that these were men and women who, in a moment of great crisis, stood up to their politicians, the opinion-makers, and the establishment, and saved their country."


Well written!!

Good on the never give up/otherwise totally unworthy comparison

Good on the never give up - otherwise totally unworthy comparison of Dr. Paul to an imperialistic ego-driven warmongerer Churchill who wanted to preserve colonization and a slave Empire.

The British Empire was for the occupied and exploited territories/nations not the joyride the here given whitewash could make the history laymen believe.

Look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_British_Empire#Decolonisati... and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:British_Decolonisation_in_... to understand where the British Empire was drawing wealth from - produced by tyranny, oppression and the slavery of colonialism.

If you will (or the author should have) learn(ed) about the Atlantic Charter
you can understand Churchill was not even willing to give up the colonies.
The post WWII era provided much expansion to the US economic grip of the world, that we only see in the failing today. This was forced during the Atlantic Charter talks – where Churchill tried to talk the US into assuming colonies were countries/nations/territories occupied by the Nazis only – the UK being exempt and fine to continue its oppression on the globe - what a farce to a nation that suffered from this and fought for freedom from this and them the hard way!

I do not imply the US is evil, but much of that bankster and corporation scheme has gone way too far and is also destroying freedom and liberty again - lately the Oil has to be secured with armed invasion and important resources like Lithium http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html...
are secured with invasions by the US as the British did.

These few out of thousands of examples available in the history books show British Empires hate for freedom and liberty - and its hunger for power and possession of sovereign nations. To me bringing close the "legacy" of a drunk maniac depressive to the fabulous records of Dr. Paul is a huge FAIL!

Explanation for the use of maniac :

You can search and read up more about it – but obviously the in many respects false folklore/legacy of Churchill is only in the process of creating a sober account of this man's personal history.

The British Empires crimes in many places of the world (ASIDE of the truly horrific German Holocaust crime) are not considered lesser or any better in their tyranny, torture, murders and occupation than the ones of the third Reich.

To compare non-interventionalist Ron Paul with a brutal Empire gofer is baseless and disrespectful to Dr Paul in every aspect. ( atl least to ppl with knowledge of history)

When Neocons & Facism go to sleep, they look under the bed for Ron Paul and "WE THE PEOPLE"!

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." M.Mead