7 votes

Will YOUR Candidate Take the Daily Paul Political Courage Test?

Just playing with an idea..


Is 'your' candidate a MAN or a Mouse? Will they take the Test?
(Heh.. this could be fun) Assume for a minute we collaborate.. (I know, I know herding cats etc.) but I SAW it work.. back in the day... on RonPaulForums.com.. 'we' created/developed SEVERAL awesome ads, slimjims etc.

The Goal: to create/distill a 20-30 question Political Courage Questionnaire that stays true to the principles of the good Doctor Ron Paul.

It gets funded/printed/mailed...
or
just remains a site based button..

We invite responses from the 'me too' candidates that the political winds seem to blow our way on a steady basis.

►We publish/display the responses..

Update:
something simply EASY for us to put together... like:

1. (state a Ron Paul quote on an issue... then,)
1= Strongly Disagree 2= Maintain Status 3= Slightly Agree 4= Greatly Agree 5= Absolutely Agree
Other or expanded principles: ___________________________________________________________________
_____________________________

►We WANT to give them 'room' to express.. to be 'different' if they want or need to be... We JUST don't want them to be able to HIDE/AVOID the question...
We would want even a RAND, or AMASH to be able to take the political courage test and be able to agree or disagree.. WE DON'T CARE... just be BRAVE enough to ANSWER the damn question if you seek SUPPORT from the members of this site. :)



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

The Constitution of No

The Constitution of No Authority

by Lysander Spooner

I.

The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living eighty years ago. [This essay was written in 1869.] And it can be supposed to have been a contract then only between persons who had already come to years of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and obligatory contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or asked, or permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give their consent formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead forty, fifty, sixty, or seventy years. and the constitution, so far as it was their contract, died with them.

http://jim.com/treason.htm

My thoughts.

I would prefer a survey that asks their opinions on issues, rather than a courage test based on "how much are you like Ron Paul" I want to know where a Candidate actually stands, the good, the bad, and the ugly. Just because someone does not answer your questions, does not tell you where he stands. It took one guy about a month to finally get around to answering the questions I sent him. He had good answers, so I am glad I did not start talking smack about him just because he had not replied.

For State Candidates in Texas, the main things I want to know are:
1, do they want to abolish property taxes.
2, are they 100% pro gun, open/constitutional carry etc.
3, stance on nullification, 10th amendment, the Constitution in general

If I was running for State House, or City Council, I would probably not want to answer foreign policy questions. BUT, that said, libertycandidates.com does have a broad spectrum survey. But they actually endorse candidates, so there is an upside to answering the questions. And as far as I know, they don't bash candidates for not filling it out. Here it is: http://libertycandidates.com/liberty-questions/

The Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas has a survey for multiple choice survey for candidates. I have reservations about multiple choice surveys, but looking at it might give you some ideas: http://www.fontcraft.com/rlctx/?page_id=1080

Ron Paul on his son Rand Paul:
"he does a lot of things similarly, but I think he does everything better. Than I have done over the years,"

Thanks Stonewall...

I value your opinion/advice....
I know you work your A$$ off for the good State of Texas..
I've seen your posts and they are impressive.. REALLY mean that.
and I understand..
Obviously State candidates do not have to deal with War and Militarism
with Foreign Aid and Monetary policy and so many other issues that amped us all up to rally to the cause of Liberty and follow after Ron Paul.
His impact on the entire WORLD is inestimable at this point... and I do mean GLOBAL impact. I believe (sincerely) that the 'quiet', now getting ready to BOIL rebellion of the Economic Warfare we are about to witness between the Central banks (BRIC vs. 5I's) over Gold/Collapsing Dollar... can be directly attributed to Ron Paul.. he educated more than just the peons. I honestly believe that.
I (also) honestly believe that he IS the 'standard', the acid test by which we SHOULD judge all others.. (and they should judge themselves).
I hold him in that high esteem with no apology.
So... to that end.. this is what it is... not to determine 'electability'.. God forbid.
The Daily Paul was birthed by the BELIEVERS in Ron Paul.. Liberty.com was not... the Blaze was not.. and so on.
Why not be TRUE to who we are? With no apology necessary.
Let's compare candidates with Ron Paul.. it's what most of us do mentally.. why NOT come out of the closet? :)
Freedom is Fun!!!!!!
Love and Cheers to you brother.
G.
and btw... the format I proposed on the front page WOULD draw them out on the issues and allow them to disclose how/why they are different/the same. Surveys simply 'listing' issues gives TOO much room for platitudes and playing with definitions (imo).
And I don't want to 'labor' over trying to setup/frame 'ambush' type trick questions playing 'word chess'.. too hard, too much work.. too much like the MSM's.
Simply a 'quote' by Ron Paul on an issue with room for a 'scaled' response by them seems doable 2 me... Hell, it might even educate THEM (since they're already running for office.)

Yeah.

It would be great if they answered it. And thanks for the kind words, you keep me going.
No apology here either, I stand with Ron Paul on the issues.

But people already have so many questions and criticisms of the Candidates I post here (And that is fine, I just sometimes wish they were directed to the candidate, not me) I can just imagine what it will be like once we require them to respond to a courage test. But on the other hand, we must know where they stand. So hats off to you for the idea.

Once you have a more concrete list of questions, I will weigh in on them. If I think of any good ones, I will post them here.

Good effort! :)

Ron Paul on his son Rand Paul:
"he does a lot of things similarly, but I think he does everything better. Than I have done over the years,"

ha!

I see it repeated over and over as well.. the questions/criticisms.
You know.. I think what I have in mind is really to that end.
What it probably would never achieve...
would be some kind of coveted award, like a Freedomworks 'endorsement'.
That takes BIG money and a targeted organization...
I've no such aspirations and I think with the 'arc' door shut
Michael would just laugh at the prospect anyway (or scream :)
Anyway... I think
that we DO have some impact and SOME eyes are upon us.
We have a great functional site here... even a 'live' Radio broadcast..
There's a lot of potential to play with.
So.. I hope it works too..
cheers,
G.

Research this website.

Research this website. http://www.politicalchips.org/
These people have done something very similar. Their test is based on the post hijacked teaparty, but they have experience creating the nuts and bolts.

thx...

..

General knowledge and broad principles...

..make for better questionnaires than contemporaneous policy.

Towards that effort:
Q: Where does the Constitution guarantee an American citizen's right to vote for President?

Procedural Query: Should we be revealing our answers just yet? We don't wish to enable frauds, do we?

dynamite anthrax supreme court white house tea party jihad
======================================
to be continued

I understand your point...

It's pretty intimidating though (imo)... ha, not that ANY question wouldn't be to a weasel..
but..
I'm not necessarily trying to 'measure' acuity (though important I agree)... would LOVE to develop one for Judicial candidates though so hold that thought :)

I'm thinking something that cuts to the core of Ron Paul's EXPRESSED positions.. what HE had the courage to express in front of millions and what drew a worldwide following..

something simply EASY for us to put together... like:

1. (state a Ron Paul quote on an issue... then,)
1= Strongly Disagree 2= Maintain Status 3= Slightly Agree 4= Greatly Agree 5= Absolutely Agree
Other or expanded principles: ___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________

►I WANT to give them 'room' to express.. to be 'different' if they want or need to be... I JUST don't want them to be able to HIDE/AVOID the question...
I would want even a RAND, or AMASH to be able to take the political courage test and be able to agree or disagree.. WE DON'T CARE... just be BRAVE enough to ANSWER the damn question if you seek SUPPORT/ACTIVISM from the members of this site. :)

You forgot this one:

"Are you dedicated to restoring Constitutional government to the United States of America?"

That question leads the politician though. Maybe this would be better:

"Is it necessary to restore Constitutional government to the United States of America?"

After all, if it's going to be called the "Daily Paul Political Courage Test", then it seems right to mention the idea the site is dedicated to at the top of the screen.

Great idea!

ok...

thanks for responding so far... just going to let this roll for awhile and let it 'breathe'

Obviously the questions can get 'divisive'.. but I'm looking to avoid that..
It would simply address Ron Paul's 'major' constitutional positions... around which this site was inspired. He wasn't 'ashamed' of expressing and standing upon them... Why (tell me!) should WE be?

Militarism and Non-Intervention
Foreign Aid
Monetary Intervention
Private Property Rights
Borders
Welfare / Warfare
and the others.. Privacy... we KNOW what they are...

What have I forgotten?

ok...

thx for responding so far.. just going to let this roll first a little w/o trying to eliminate/steer anything.. looking for some architecture and question 'framing' ideas/thoughts also. Please carry on... I can't even imagine where this might head if it matures. :)

also here's a possible 'type' architecture also:

Afghanistan:
Do you support United States' combat operations in Afghanistan?
Yes ____ No ____
Do you support a timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan?
Yes ____ No ____
Other or expanded principles: ___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________

Asking the candidates to answer

a policy question does very little because they can still lie based on what they think you want the answer to be. The only true test is to test there knowledge of the document they will be required to defend and protect. For instance:

Which of the following, based on original intent, are unconstitutional
(circle all that apply

1. Department of Education
2. Department of State
3. Department of Agriculture
4. Department of Defense
5. Department of Energy

Answer 1,3,5

Or just the one if you wanna get technical.

Presidents prior to Harry Truman did not have Secretaries of "Defense", they had Secretaries of WAR.

Gettin' technical is the pedantic didactic (mostly white) boys' way of keepin' it real!

dynamite anthrax supreme court white house tea party jihad
======================================
to be continued

2)

If coercion and theft are unethical, do you similarly support taxation?

will you revoke all Executive Orders that violate

the Constitution, as well as veto any laws passed that do?

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15