46 votes


Nystrom or mods please delete this thread...

Comment viewing options

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

How do you handle this scenario.

We do exactly as you say, but the duped come back with an argument along the lines that ALL OPINIONS should be equally considered when, clearly, some "opinions" are deliberately planted by agents to divide?

I think i do a decent job with the infiltrator themselves, but it's harder to deal with the otherwise good people whom they have duped.

Any thoughts on effective approaches with them?

Just use reason and logic the

Just use reason and logic the shills get stupid pretty fast.

End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!

Get Prepared!

Yes, The Dialectic Could Well Be in Play

Here is one way that doesn't fit your framework.


Liberty is gaining popularity to whatever the degree. Dr. Paul mounts another run for POTUS and the liberty community is wildly enthusiastic and supporting. There is a real possibility of a massive wake-up and a resurgence of classic liberalism and constitutionalism across a large spectrum of the populous and a wide-introduction of those concepts and that ethic & philosophy to the masses.


A 'failure' of Dr.Paul's candidacy is engineered, via chicanery, fraud, media-propaganda and factually from within Dr. Paul's camp itself. Dare I say that Dr. Paul himself pulled the plug on the effort while there was still some critical effort to be made. The 'created crisis' causes emotive-dejection, collapse-panic and chaos to reign in the 'liberty community' where many 'feel' and 'fear' all is lost.


Enter Rand Paul, a man who carries the 'Paul name' and who talks and sometimes acts in accordance with the 'liberty community'. A man who also embraces much of what the establishment desires and who compromises and 'plays the game' with the system. This man is in a perfect position to co-opt much of the 'liberty community', who have gravitated to him as if he were a life-raft in a stormy shark-filled sea, after the SS Ron Paul sinking was engineered.........Liberty (some of the 'movement') is now under nominal control of the establishment.

See how the Hegalian Dialectic is a two-edged sword?

Think about it.

sharkhearted's picture

And the beautiful thing is....TRUTH wins out

It always does. You can't stop the TRUTH.

After the brainwashing wears off....no joke...and it is powerful.

It deceives even the elect.

But the TRUTH can NOT be stopped.

Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

Hegelian Dialectic was exposed

as mistaken dogma by von Mises and many many others. Reality is very simple. There are people who think rationally most of the time and evaluate information using their own brain (Group A.) These people, on average, are either pro-Israel or neutral. On the other hand, there are people who use emotions, MJ, and beer more often than rational thinking (Group B.) They usually parrot ideas of others without critical evaluations. Rabid anti-Israel folks are found from this group.

The Group B misunderstood Ron Paul's policies regarding Israel and hates Rand Paul, Cruz, Lee and others for the same reason - Israel. Now they are in perpertual dilemma since free-market capitalism would only benefit Israel compared to Sharia Law fans.

sharkhearted's picture

Shut the f-u-c-k up you paid AIPAC shill

Go to HELL.

Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

I don't feel the need to commit.

What I have seen thus far is a Rand that gives me hope one minute, then dashes it the next. He has a couple years to set a steady course, and if he does that I will do my best to discern where that course is headed, and then decide if I am willing to help row that boat or not.
It is not about who is better or best, it is about no one being good enough for me to consent to them ruling over me. I don't get to rule over anyone else, they do not get to rule over me. Now, I do realize that is idealistic and am willing to go to bat for liberty, but.... I am not spending one dime on campaigns to win rigged elections. I am not spending one day on e a corner waving signs - if the "grassroots" cannot come up with a better strategy than that, something crazy like door to door or phone banking... the things the grassroots locally has simply refused to do... I am not wasting my time. If there is not a full slate of liberty candidates for the Congress and Senate, I am not wasting my time.
I played politics, jumped on and gave it a helluva fight, and realized the corruption was too deep. Rand "compromising" for the win feels like a loss to me already, to get me to pour any time, money or energy into politics is going to take something pretty impressive. But he has time. Go ahead, Rand. Impress me, I dare you.

Love or fear? Chose again with every breath.

I am not holding Rand up as

I am not holding Rand up as our savior and my support of him does not mean I am going to spend my money on fixed elections. My point is there is going to be elections anyways and someone is going to be put in there. Might as well be Rand and lets see what he will do. I have my doubts the election fixers will allow him in anyway however I'll take any steps forward the sheep want to take toward liberty. The all or nothing approach has gotten us about as far as we can go for now. We have to work with the masses to get any further as much as it pains us... Like it or not they are the reason things are the way they are and if we can move them toward liberty at all we should don't you think?

I am not faulting anyone for not jumping on the bandwagon I just found it interesting that the neocons are suddenly stepping up the purist vs compromise rhetoric to stir the divide over Rand. It means they are scared IMO.

End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!

Get Prepared!

You've nailed it again hawkiye

The DP would be a much lesser place without your keen vision of things hidden from plain sight.

I too was reeling after the convention and experienced my own reservations about Rand although I was never convinced that Rand was a closet neocon, I felt for a while that he just didn't have the same unyielding dedication to the 'cause' that Ron has.

These last few weeks have been encouraging however, and now I find myself more and more excited about the way he has maneuvered himself through the ugly and infectious political waters surrounding Washington.

To me this recent intensifying of anti-Rand rhetoric is proof that he IS having the effect that we all desire, and IS moving the political football AWAY from those who consider the whole world, even main street America as 'the battlefield'.

Filibustering Brennan while the AIPAC funded and controlled neocon warpigs dined with the dictator WAS, like Krauthammer said a stroke of political genius.

No, stealing McCains thunder while portraying Grahamnesty as a globalist WARPIG was definitely not part of some secret neocon strategy to fool...us

Thanks I appreciate the

Thanks I appreciate the atta-boy!

End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!

Get Prepared!

The Establishment had responded

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With debate intensifying in the United States over the use of drone aircraft, the U.S. military said on Sunday that it had removed data about air strikes carried out by unmanned planes in Afghanistan from its monthly air power summaries.


He's a better choice than we've had in awhile... But...

I am no longer of the opinion that anyone elected under this false corporate government facade will be able to do a GD thing to restore what we were given.

I think the banking interests have killed presidents... WTF do you think Rand could really do?

Ron Paul, Stuart Rhodes, Lew Rockwell and everyone else who has half a brain are correct when they say the sh*ts goin' down!

The monied interest running things are too entrenched in the gov/co.... but when the dollar dies there will be an opportunity to restore the republic... even if it isn't easy.

I figure we'll be in the midst of a WW3 scenario and they'll pull the rug out from under us with the currency collapse (while our military is embroiled overseas, will will simultaneously have massive unrest at home). That's the only way they have the opportunity to create a crisis severe enough to bring everyone to their knees, so people might be willing to accept world/gov/fiat as the solution....

but what do i know... im just your plain 'ol right-wing domestic terrorist that gives Mark Potoc nightmares. HAHA!

Think for yourself......Question authority...

I more or less feel the same way.

I'll vote for Rand, and maybe he's secretly better than he lets on. If not, he'd certainly be better than anyone else, now that his dad has left politics (or "gone straight" as some might say).

But I think it's too late, and if Rand somehow got it and tried to do anything to actually reverse, rather than merely retard, the march towards total collectivism, he'll be eliminated anyway. I am going to focus on general education, which is where the battle will be fought to pick up the pieces. I think there is fertile ground there, and I think we are making enormous strides there. So my activism, as well as my checkbook, will go in that direction (e.g., 10th Amendment Center, GOA, LVM Institute, etc.) rather than a Rand Paul primary run. The beauty of Ron Paul's campaigns, especially the last one, was that they were both educational AND political.

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels

Sorry, I like your intent, but some logic problems.

1. First of all, an actual Neoconservative (Trotskyite/World Empire/Bankster Whore), wouldn't need to bother splitting us - they were successful in the last 8 presidential elections. I don't think they are worried. This latest stunt by the Neocon media heads, Rush, Beck, etc... is just like the Tea Party (or the NWO Circle Jerk Party) that started at almost exactly the same time after the last election - it is happening to make Republican sheeple think they are being "Consitutional" and loving freedom. At the time Rush and Hannity were being spewed all over DP for saying "good things".

2. There is a big difference between "old guard" and "Neconservatives". The old guard is basically old people who will do whatever the RNC tells them to do, the Neocons control the RNC. Most of the old guard has no idea they are communists.

3. When you say "purist", do you mean "Constitutionalist"? I do not expect purity from my point of view. No two people here on DP have the exact same ideas about government and freedom. I disagreed with Ron Paul on some issues. And, I was pretty much with him on Constitutional issues - but even then a couple votes I thought he was wrong. The "purity versus compromise" arguement is used over and over to get the sheep to vote for whomever the RNC Neocons want us to vote for. It was in speeches at my State Convention as a delegate. It was a constant theme on Rush, Beck, Hannity before the last election (Yeah, the same guys you want us to be "with" on Rand), Romney isn't "pure" but we need to "compromise" because he is "electable". Sorry - your arguement is a tool of the ruling elite.

4. Cart before the horse. First of all, I appreciated what Rand Paul did - I was even excited about it for a while. It may have even gotten some talking zombies in the MSM to discuss drones for a couple days. I think it was a positive thing. But, to make this the deciding issue in a coming primary battle is premature, and I'm not sure is even relevant.

5. What did Rand accomplish? Firstly, not much in reality. Secondly, it actually justified drone bombing little brown children in other countries, as long as it is "not on our soil" in the language of the real Neocon shills in the media you want us to join up with. [ooo...just threw up a little bit thinking about shaking Becks hand]

I am not a on the Rand Train yet. I may be in the near future, just not willing to commit yet. But, while I have my personal issues, I will absolutely give him a fair chance. I am not a Neoconservative and I am not an Old Guard Republican/Freedom Hater. Accusing me of that is simply illogical and frankly, insulting.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Rand is spreading ideas of individual liberty.

That is good enough for me. We give too much credit to government and forget about majority of Americans who do not agree with Libertarian ideas. Were Ron Paul elected president in 2012, the current Congress would not pass any of his reforms. Ron would be voted out in 2016 as ineffective.

Finding a topic that unites all Americans is smart. More people would lend their ear to Rand than before.

It's not ok when a Republican spreads ideas of liberty.

Only when big-L libertarians do it.

Don't you get that?



sharkhearted's picture

GREAT points. Agreed 100%

And its funny to see the shills even make comment here.

For them...its another day...another dollar.

Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

I feel the exact same way!

Whenever I see one of their posts, my spidey sense screams "shill, g-man, neocon".

Best to ignore, downvote and move on.

jrd3820's picture

I see it from an opposite view

Over the past few days I have read numerous comments with the thesis of “if you don’t support Rand, you are part of the problem.”Or “you have to get over your dislike of Beck/Hannity/Limbaugh?Krauthammer and just play the game.” But I don’t feel like playing a game, and I definitely don’t feel like playing their game. It is not a game to me.

I won’t be getting on board with ANY politician for the time being. I just don’t trust any of them anymore…. NONE of them. I am not planning on supporting a single candidate for 2016 until at least 2015, and maybe even in 2015 I will decide that I will not be voting. Who knows? I can’t see into the future.

But I can still help promote change. I can still promote free market ideology and sustainable/off grid living, I have been doing that for years anyways. I can still wake people up to blowback and the Fed, and I can do all this without promoting a specific candidate.

“Now I know not everyone dissing Rand is a shill but there are definitely agitators here trying to stir the pot and keep us divided. It has only made me want to support him more if nothing else just to spite them.”

Every time someone tells me I have to support Rand to be a part of the solution I feel the same way you do… I am less inclined to do so. Also, every time I log in and I am bombarded with Rush/Hannity/Beck videos that include Rand interviews I have to check my browser to make sure I am at the right site, because that gets to be so overwhelming and I have to make sure I did not log into the dailyrand. I know there will be articles and interviews about/with him, but… well… I am not here because I want to focus on Rand.

Now as far as the “shills”… I kind of appreciate that there are some people being more vocal about this because I am not always as vocal as I should be here. One of my favorite people in the real world insists on purity so intensely that I think he will be writing Ron Paul in for every election until he dies. I think it‘s cool. I think it is amazing when people are so sure of what they want that they won’t settle for anything less than what they think is the best. And I don’t think people like that are doing more harm than good, they are simply standing by what they believe in, and really…. How often does that happen in this world?

Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That'll teach you to keep your mouth shut. Hemingway

I understand

I understand where your coming from, but you certainly don't have to approve of or accept Beck/Hannity/Limbaugh to support Rand. I think it's great they are willing to give him airtime but they still make me involuntarily vomit a little. Those guys have years of what Ricky used to say to Lucy "You've Got Some Es'plainin To DO"

The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government ... are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it-Andrew Jackson


Been thinking the same thing. When they aren't convincing you they want to turn it into a name calling match, anything to disrupt intellectual discussion.

The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government ... are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it-Andrew Jackson

jrd3820's picture

Thank you

for your calm response to my comment above. It does seem to be the great divide around here. Just to point out though really quick, those of us who have not jumped aboard the rand train just yet get called names also... such as "shill," so we are all being called names here lol.

And yes... the Becks/Hannitys/Limbaughs of this world definatley have some 'esplainin to do.

Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That'll teach you to keep your mouth shut. Hemingway

Thanks for posting your opinion Hawkeye.

Although i do not feel Rand is yet qualified to become president. I would Like to see him keep his job as senator and I hope that he reads my article and I hope that he becomes a better senator because he read my artcle.

Rand isn't qualified?

Well then who else is qualified? Was Kennedy qualified? How bout Andrew Jackson? What makes someone qualified to be president? I was always under the impression that any "Natural Born" citizen that had a normally functioning brain and could get others to support his ideology and vision for the country was qualified.

The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government ... are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it-Andrew Jackson

No, he is not.

He is a two year freshman Senator with zero previous experience. Of course he is not qualified. Obama was chosen by his masters who tell him everything to do and say. Rand doesn't have that. If he does than all of the 'Rand Lovin' shills' (opposite of Rand Hatin' shills) are wrong. He still gets confused with the words deficit and budget. Would an optometrist with two years experience working for Apple be ready to be the CEO?

He did something interesting the other day. But as for the relevance or importance of it, like Zhou Enlai, Mao's second in command, replied when asked what he thought of the French Revolution, "We shall see".

His foreign policy is a disaster. Even when it comes to drones.

Yes, he is.

Sorry for the duplicate post.

Yes, he is.

Is Rand Paul any less qualified than Abraham Lincoln was? I don't agree that you must have a certain pedigree or government experience in order to be "qualified" to be President. John F. Kennedy was nominated to be Vice President on a ticket with presidential nominee Adlai Stevenson after only serving in the US. Senate for 4 years.

The United States is supposed to be a government of the people; not rule by a privileged group whereby only those that attended Harvard Law or if your last name is Kennedy, Bush or Clinton are qualified to be President.

The President makes important cabinet appointments. A Rand Paul Presidency would be a giant leap forward for Liberty and for America.

I just meant experience-wise.

Certainly we don't need a Nepotocracy, rule by pedigree. Lincoln was a super high-power attorney for the railroads (the main industry back then). And there were no oversees wars.

Kennedy was groomed from an early age.

But that was not my point. Rand is just a newbie. He is still trying to figure out the difference between a debt and a deficit. Granted he is smart and learns quickly but, imo, he's too green.

But, it is all a mute point. I think we all know that presidents are just figure-heads. They are backed by massive money. They make no decisions. Every president since Teddy Roosevelt was a puppet of a hidden ruling dynasty. If you are an outsider you they will treat you like they did Ron.

So, consequently all those presidents have backers that make all the decisions. They come from families that have studied 'ruling' for generations. So Rand, only being there for two years, thinking that he has a chance is actually a bit humorous. At least his dad knew this.

If you want the best American political history class EVER, check out Murray Rothbard's
The American Economy and the End of Laissez-Faire: 1870 to World War II
Here are the next twelve lectures.

So, based on experience only,

So, based on experience only, Strom Thurmond was very "qualified" to be President of the United States?

For me, the individual with the strongest ideas are what matters most.


Rand lacks it. Knowledge too.

It's irrelevant. POTUS is not the goal. If it's yours, so be it. I hate to see the liberty movement so obsessed with POTUS. That's where Ron had far more wisdom than Rand. He did not want to be and he knew he could not be POTUS. So he used it for a far effect than he gets credit for. We would not be here conversing with all our accumulated knowledge if it were not for that one man. He is a genius.

It's a revolution of ideas - not presidential terms. Rand 2016ers are being duped.

Rand's ideas are not Ron's ideas. And they certainly are not my ideas. I am quite frankly baffled at how Ron lovers could jump ship so quickly and be Rand lovers: two quite different characters, imo.