They seem to have a head of steam going here, and are getting a lot of attention from the different unofficial Ron Paul sites. I need to know from the horses mouth whether these guys are legitimate and whether we should be following them? They have great ideas and I think if they are legit, then we should just wind them up and watch them go.....
Robert NW Ohio
"The freedom tree is watered by the blood of both patriots and tyrants alike".........."time to water the tree"..Authors Unkn
There are tons of different Ron Paul groups, all doing their best to organize and effectively promote Dr. Paul. As far as I am concerned, all of them are exactly as legitimate as they are effective. Since the campaign has little central direction, any of these groups could be the one that puts us over the top. As we are promoting individual freedom, this is very appropriate. I say let the ideas flow. The Ron Paul Coalition seems to have a good idea of what kinds of people they are looking for. If you're one of those people, just sign up. You'll know pretty quickly if this is the group for you. Check out ronpaul.meetup.com for more.
As much as I love Ron Paul and would like nothing more than to see him win the nomination, I believe that his points aren't being made well enough during these media interviews. This is his opportunity to really get his message across.
Dr. Paul needs to work on getting his message across in a way that can be presented in the soundbite timeframe that the MSM lives by. Given enough time, Dr. Paul is spot on with his message. However, I agree that when he starts to speak and isn't given enough time, the other side very often confuses what Paul stands for. Once again, this CNN anchor immediately jumped to the conclusion that Paul was an isolationist. I'm glad that Paul had more time to speak and that he refuted that. I'd like to see him start right off with "I'm not an isolationist, but I am a firm believer in a non-intervention foreign policy".
Yes, stating that we should mind our own business and that we would have been better to stay out of the wars in Europe could be seen as a negative. Many Americans still hold these wars close to their patriotic hearts simply because we won them.
Still, I love the ideas and the freshness that Paul brings to the campaign trail. It's so nice to be able to stand firmly behind a candidate and really believe in the person and their character.
That's right! It's a party where all the guests pitch in and make Ron Paul signs. This particular party took place in Pembroke, New Hampshire. The media reports that many people in New Hampshire don't even know that Ron Paul is running for President. Hopefully, all these new signs will help educate the rest of the New Hampshire folks!
Look, most people on this website understanding non-intervention and blowback. But as with this CNN interview, I don't think Ron is doing a good job of convincing your average Republican voter (whom he MUST convince) of his position.
When he states that many great people did not want the US in WWI or WWII, you will IMMEDIATELY lose a lot of people. People think, 'yeah, he's an isolationist. OF COURSE we had to fight Hitler, Hirohito, and Mussolini. He's an idiot if he thinks we did not have to.'
He has got to come up with a 30 second soundbite to counter that 'slam dunk' argument. All of the conservative talk show hosts are using exactly that line of reasoning to discredit him.
I have yet to see Ron do this.
(Having been a campaign worker of his in 1983-1984 when he ran for the US Senate in Texas, there are several other matters I will comment on later, but not now.)
Ron was headed in the right direction when he spoke of terrorism being a tactic, and stated you cannot be at war with a tactic.
He would have done well to follow up by comparing terrorism to some other deplorable tactic, like the use of land mines. This would let him take command of the conversation.
Example:
Terrorism is a tactic. It's just a tactic that the various enemies use. You can't have a war against a tactic.
Let's consider another tactic, to put things in perspective. Let's talk about landmines for a moment.
We could have a "War on the use of landmines", but that would be equally silly. Consider the success of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines. This campaign successfully raised awareness of the damage caused by landmines, and asked countries to recognize that the use of landmines is a reprehensible tactic, because they kill indiscriminately. The Ottawa Treaty has been ratified by 153 countries.
This didn't happen because some politician declared a "War on the use of landmines". That wouldn't have solved anything
The "War on Terror" isn't solving anything either, because it has caused Bush to focus on tactics, not on the enemy.
Now, a "War on Al-Qaeda", that would have meant something, that would have focused the effort in the right place.
I keep falling in love over and over with this great man, Dr. Ron Paul. I can only hope my friends who are fed up with politics, government and the powers that be give Ron a good listen before it is too late. I've learned to say I am not overly optimistic, but so much less pessimistic from my friend Dan. I want that to change in a very real way to absolutely optimistic for Ron Paul as our president in 2008. Maybe it's time for us... and time for Dr. Ron to lead us. But maybe there has to be more pain first. A lot more pain. Something is happening here and surely it's about time. Something wonderful, empowering and exciting. And I am thrilled to be a part of it. Thanks for posting all that you do.
Just watching the involvement and spirit of the young people with their interest in Ron Paul on myspace is really amazing. This is the best news of all.
RACHEL RELOADED . . . That famous video talking head (Rachel) is back and now she reacts to that big "Cat Fight" that happened the other day on daytime television (The View).
Why is ronpaulforum and ronpaul2008 down?
Houston, we have a problem. I can find no one to email.
I believe we are under a cyber attack. Just read on Digg where a server is blocking email from Paul sites.
Please, will someone tells us what is going on.
RonPaul2008 comes in and out.
Update!
I finally was able to pull up ronpaul2008 and did call them. They have not heard of any problems. They could pull up ronpaulforums.
I called my son, he cannot pull up the ronpaulforum.com either. We have the same server.
Is there any one in Wa. State on comcast, or the west coast with comcast experiencing the same problem?
Ron Paul on ABC's 20/20 (from the 1990s)
Here's a clip worth checking out. ABC's 20/20 special with John Stossel from the 1990s: http://www.youtube.com/wa...
*with thanks to the Christians for RonPaul on mySpace: http://profile.myspace.co...
RON PAUL COALITION-PLEASE READ....
Can anyone give me some information regarding the Ron Paul Coalition..
Here is a link..
http://blog.myspace.com/r...
They seem to have a head of steam going here, and are getting a lot of attention from the different unofficial Ron Paul sites. I need to know from the horses mouth whether these guys are legitimate and whether we should be following them? They have great ideas and I think if they are legit, then we should just wind them up and watch them go.....
Robert NW Ohio
"The freedom tree is watered by the blood of both patriots and tyrants alike".........."time to water the tree"..Authors Unkn
As legit as you make them
There are tons of different Ron Paul groups, all doing their best to organize and effectively promote Dr. Paul. As far as I am concerned, all of them are exactly as legitimate as they are effective. Since the campaign has little central direction, any of these groups could be the one that puts us over the top. As we are promoting individual freedom, this is very appropriate. I say let the ideas flow. The Ron Paul Coalition seems to have a good idea of what kinds of people they are looking for. If you're one of those people, just sign up. You'll know pretty quickly if this is the group for you. Check out ronpaul.meetup.com for more.
Sam Marsh
Musician
http://www.myspace.com/sc...
I agree
As much as I love Ron Paul and would like nothing more than to see him win the nomination, I believe that his points aren't being made well enough during these media interviews. This is his opportunity to really get his message across.
Dr. Paul needs to work on getting his message across in a way that can be presented in the soundbite timeframe that the MSM lives by. Given enough time, Dr. Paul is spot on with his message. However, I agree that when he starts to speak and isn't given enough time, the other side very often confuses what Paul stands for. Once again, this CNN anchor immediately jumped to the conclusion that Paul was an isolationist. I'm glad that Paul had more time to speak and that he refuted that. I'd like to see him start right off with "I'm not an isolationist, but I am a firm believer in a non-intervention foreign policy".
Yes, stating that we should mind our own business and that we would have been better to stay out of the wars in Europe could be seen as a negative. Many Americans still hold these wars close to their patriotic hearts simply because we won them.
Still, I love the ideas and the freshness that Paul brings to the campaign trail. It's so nice to be able to stand firmly behind a candidate and really believe in the person and their character.
Ron Paul sign making party
That's right! It's a party where all the guests pitch in and make Ron Paul signs. This particular party took place in Pembroke, New Hampshire. The media reports that many people in New Hampshire don't even know that Ron Paul is running for President. Hopefully, all these new signs will help educate the rest of the New Hampshire folks!
RON PAUL SIGN MAKING PARTY
http://rp2008.blogspot.co...
Ron not communicating his position well
R Harris
Look, most people on this website understanding non-intervention and blowback. But as with this CNN interview, I don't think Ron is doing a good job of convincing your average Republican voter (whom he MUST convince) of his position.
When he states that many great people did not want the US in WWI or WWII, you will IMMEDIATELY lose a lot of people. People think, 'yeah, he's an isolationist. OF COURSE we had to fight Hitler, Hirohito, and Mussolini. He's an idiot if he thinks we did not have to.'
He has got to come up with a 30 second soundbite to counter that 'slam dunk' argument. All of the conservative talk show hosts are using exactly that line of reasoning to discredit him.
I have yet to see Ron do this.
(Having been a campaign worker of his in 1983-1984 when he ran for the US Senate in Texas, there are several other matters I will comment on later, but not now.)
"It's just a tactic"
Ron was headed in the right direction when he spoke of terrorism being a tactic, and stated you cannot be at war with a tactic.
He would have done well to follow up by comparing terrorism to some other deplorable tactic, like the use of land mines. This would let him take command of the conversation.
Example:
Terrorism is a tactic. It's just a tactic that the various enemies use. You can't have a war against a tactic.
Let's consider another tactic, to put things in perspective. Let's talk about landmines for a moment.
We could have a "War on the use of landmines", but that would be equally silly. Consider the success of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines. This campaign successfully raised awareness of the damage caused by landmines, and asked countries to recognize that the use of landmines is a reprehensible tactic, because they kill indiscriminately. The Ottawa Treaty has been ratified by 153 countries.
This didn't happen because some politician declared a "War on the use of landmines". That wouldn't have solved anything
The "War on Terror" isn't solving anything either, because it has caused Bush to focus on tactics, not on the enemy.
Now, a "War on Al-Qaeda", that would have meant something, that would have focused the effort in the right place.
Founding father in the present day...
I keep falling in love over and over with this great man, Dr. Ron Paul. I can only hope my friends who are fed up with politics, government and the powers that be give Ron a good listen before it is too late. I've learned to say I am not overly optimistic, but so much less pessimistic from my friend Dan. I want that to change in a very real way to absolutely optimistic for Ron Paul as our president in 2008. Maybe it's time for us... and time for Dr. Ron to lead us. But maybe there has to be more pain first. A lot more pain. Something is happening here and surely it's about time. Something wonderful, empowering and exciting. And I am thrilled to be a part of it. Thanks for posting all that you do.
Just watching the involvement and spirit of the young people with their interest in Ron Paul on myspace is really amazing. This is the best news of all.
Rachel, Rosie, and Ron Paul
RACHEL RELOADED . . . That famous video talking head (Rachel) is back and now she reacts to that big "Cat Fight" that happened the other day on daytime television (The View).
RACHEL, ROSIE, AND RON PAUL
http://rp2008.blogspot.co...