Angry Paul Caller

[Derek Johnson]

You, sir, did more harm then good with this call, sir. If you hear some shock jock on the radio talk some crazy shit, sir, just turn off the damn radio, sir. Because shock jocks are called that for a reason, to shock you. You did exactly what they hoped, sir, you would do, sir. You've increased this shock jock's ratings, whoever he is, sir. You have also represented all Ron Paul supporters as psychotic zealots, sir. Stop listening to the radio and do something productive to get RP elected, becaue you sounded like a total clown. Were I not a Ron Paul supporter already, I'd dismiss him as a loony idiot because of calls like yours.

Sir.

If you think I blew this election then you're turning someone who is totally not important to someone who is totally important to make your point. This is called a distortion. Shock jocking [as pioneered by Stern and others] is purely about ratings, not to shock someone into compromising a good potentional president's chance, sir.

I am simply not that important, and as I've previously posted, this is rare form for me doing in radio calls. I represented myself as a hot head, if this guy wasn't former military, I really would not have had such an axe to grind...that's what really got to me. He does this daily. I didn't try to cast myself as a typical RP supporter ~ this is far from a monolithic group, but if there are now masses who are dead set against Ron over my call, well that stinks, sir.

Also:

I've represented Dr. Paul professionally many times, sometimes to more than 5 million people at once:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UArPCrwW0ho
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2bQ0PqnlYs

As for doing something productive for Ron, I canvas my precinct, universities and nursing homes on weekends. I've been an advocate for him on his many common sense policies since 2000. I've bombarded many politicians in many states with Ron's legislation for a long time. I've put up hundreds of signs and am co-sponsoring a billboard in Waco. Thank you so much for donating $2300 to Dr. Paul and for whatever else you are doing, sir.

 

[Derek Johnson]

I have a question for those in this thread who believe displays of rage help Dr. Paul's chances in this election:

Do you believe that a majority of 50, 60, and 70 year old mainstream Americans will be inclined to join a movement after seeing or hearing an enraged supporter?

See, I don't think so. I also think that if we alienate this demographic we will certainly lose this election.

Are you more interested in venting your personal rage, or in enticing the largest number of undecided voters possible to our cause?

Enough

 

[phree]

I am simply not that important,

Untrue Derek. You yourself admit to being very active and very visible in this campaign. To the extent that you defend your performance on this call-in you are influencing many GR supporters to do the same.

Enough

I'm sorry Derek, but I can't ignore what I believe is crucial to this campaign. You don't...

 

[NerveShocker]

This is sad.. a thread designed to cause fights and people fall right into it. You have no right to attack him for using his freedom of speech. If he over-reacted then he over-reacted get over it and stop over-reacting yourselves and making a big deal out of nothing. If you truly think this hurts our movement (rofl) then maybe you should stop bringing as much attention to it as possible by bumping it every 2 minutes. Why do so many people want to fight on these forums? Why can't someone just say "Next time try to keep your cool" or be polite about it.. instead you start a big fight between you and other Ron Paul supporters... who are on your side... sigh.. :/

 

[Convert]

Umm

He called the host a liar and the host was being disrespectful?

 

[Derek Johnson]

Untrue Derek. You yourself admit to being very active and very visible in this campaign. To the extent that you defend your performance on this call-in you are influencing many GR supporters to do the same.



I'm sorry Derek, but I can't ignore what I believe is crucial to this campaign. You don't...

What I did during one call to a single market show is far from crucial to this campaign.

You can believe that perception based on one talk show radio call is the difference, I won't. I can believe that face to face interaction on a repeated basis is. We have, at best 300,000-600,000 supporters. About 10 times as many will vote for for either Romney or McCain based on a 30 second sound bite. Get a grip sir.

Did you watch the videos I posted above? Was I yelling and screeming? So why continue this argument with me? I've made probably 1000 calls to talk show radio in about 10 months. I blew my top twice. If you can do better, do so.

 

[Derek Johnson]

This is sad.. a thread designed to cause fights and people fall right into it. You have no right to attack him for using his freedom of speech. If he over-reacted then he over-reacted get over it and stop over-reacting yourselves and making a big deal out of nothing. If you truly think this hurts our movement (rofl) then maybe you should stop bringing as much attention to it as possible by bumping it every 2 minutes. Why do so many people want to fight on these forums? Why can't someone just say "Next time try to keep your cool" or be polite about it.. instead you start a big fight between you and other Ron Paul supporters... who are on your side... sigh.. :/

Really, kill this damn thread! I'm out, and thanks all for your kind words to me everyone. I hope to see some of y'all in the nursing homes.

 

[phree]

What I did during one call to a single market show is far from crucial to this campaign.

You can believe that perception based on one talk show radio call is the difference, I won't. I can believe that face to face interaction on a repeated basis is. We have, at best 300,000-600,000 supporters. About 10 times as many will vote for for either Romney or McCain based on a 30 second sound bite. Get a grip sir.

Did you watch the videos I posted above? Was I yelling and screeming? So why continue this argument with me? I've made probably 1000 calls to talk show radio in about 10 months. I blew my top twice. If you can do better, do so.

I'm not saying your one call will have a major impact. Over 4000 people have read this thread. You have the power to promote what happened in this one call as a good thing or as an honest mistake. Everyone in this thread respects your efforts including myself, but you are a role model and clarifying your position important.

Derek*, please tell us if you will change your approach in the future or if you feel that call was beneficial just as it was.

I'm not trying to make this a popularity contest Derek, I only wanted to see if you considered your call in to be good political strategy.

I have a question for those in this thread who believe displays of rage help Dr. Paul's chances in this election:

Do you believe that a majority of 50, 60, and 70 year old mainstream Americans will be inclined to join a movement after seeing or hearing an enraged supporter?

See, I don't think so. I also think that if we alienate this demographic we will certainly lose this election.

Are you more interested in venting your personal rage, or in enticing the largest number of undecided voters possible to our cause?

I'm not out to discredit you Derek, but these are fair questions for someone who has put themself in the public eye as a RP supporter.

 

[an.old.analyst]

Derek,

Your moral outrage is justified, reasonable and quite frankly, widely needed in our nation. It is time that we all express and act upon our moral outrage using knowledge, genuine human compassion, and civil disobedience. Great job. Thank you.

 

[phree]

Derek,

Your moral outrage is justified, reasonable and quite frankly, widely needed in our nation. It is time that we all express and act upon our moral outrage using knowledge, genuine human compassion, and civil disobedience. Great job. Thank you.

Great. Someone else with 14 posts fanning the flames.

 

[Psych0t]

I have a small question; how did that snowday call make the news and this didn't? lol

 

[Derek Johnson]

Great. Someone else with 14 posts fanning the flames.

Please respect what I sent you via private message, I answered your questions. Trolling in this forum does not further our cause.

Derek,

Your moral outrage is justified, reasonable and quite frankly, widely needed in our nation. It is time that we all express and act upon our moral outrage using knowledge, genuine human compassion, and civil disobedience. Great job. Thank you.

Thank you sir.

 

[phree]

Please respect what I sent you via private message, I answered your questions. Trolling in this forum does not further our cause.

So if you express your beliefs it's noble, and if I express mine I'm a troll? I answered your PM with honesty. Stop trying to censor me Derek. It sounds like the "If you don't vote for the War you aren't a patriot" rhetoric.

I feel strongly that public rage in the name of Dr. Paul is damaging to the greater goal of electing him. I won't be silenced by your accusations that I'm inferior to you for having different beliefs. You of all people should understand this.

 

[Derek Johnson]

So if you express your beliefs it's noble, and if I express mine I'm a troll? I answered your PM with honesty. Stop trying to censor me Derek. It sounds like the "If you don't vote for the War you aren't a patriot" rhetoric.

I feel strongly that public rage in the name of Dr. Paul is damaging to the greater goal of electing him. I won't be silenced by your accusations that I'm inferior to you for having different beliefs. You of all people should understand this.

You're not inferior, sir, but you are well beyond beating a dead horse in this ego-fed pissing match. You can feel however you want and you can keep posting in this thread forever if that's what makes you happy...

 

[Swmorgan77]

That was pretty awesome actually.

"AARRRRRHHHH!!!!!!!! 'cept for Ron Paul."

I love it.


Seriously though, this caller didn't bother me at all. I actually enjoyed listening to him. Callers that do bother me are the ones who call in and insist on detailing every single piece of Ron Paul's resume before asking a question or conversing with the host, even when the host repeatedly asks the caller if they have a question (I catch this every other day or so on C-SPAN in the morning). Please, if you're going to call in, make one or two points about Paul, keep it upbeat and concise, and then say thanks and hang up. If people enjoyed extended, detailed resumes of accomplishments then Bill Richardson would still be running for President....

He was combative, assertive and passionate at first and that didn't bother me at all, but there was a point in the call where really did give into the anger and started going off about his experience with military officers, etc. I don't know what he's been through, but this seems to me to be the point where we lose people and give the picture that Ron Paul supporters are all vitriolic, angry people. Yes, we have PLENTY to be angry about, but its about being effective and finding the balance. He was very well spoken though, and made some good points about how it is not conservative to be funding a mercantilistic protectionist empire.

When addressing the Constitutionality of the war, here is the key: Use the text of the authorization itself. Neo-Cons will say til they're blue in the face that the authorization WAS a Constitutional declaration of war, so you need to know what's in it and exactly why it isn't or you'll just get stuck in a "no it isn't... yes it is" type of exchange. When you get into the text of it, the idea that the authorization for the use of force in Iraq constitutes a declaration is laughable and cannot be maintained. Here are the 2 key points:

1) The authorization for Iraq was an Unconstitutional transfer of Congressional discretion, not a Constitutional declaration.

Previous declarations (Japan, Germany) actually state "a state of war exists with ___ nation". This may sound like a trivialty but it is very crucial to Constitutional law. Justice Thomas M. Cooley wrote in "Principles of Constitutional Law" that the President's powers as Commander-in-Chief are triggered by a State of War. A State of War can exist EITHER when there is a situation of invasive attack by an enemy OR when that State of War is declared by Congress.

In Constitutional declarations, the Congeress is exercising their Constitutionally appointed duty of determining the propriety of war and then declaring the State of War and directing the President to act upon it.

By contrast, the Iraq resolution contains no such language. Instead it is an attempt to GIVE the discretion to the President to use, in the words of the authorization "as he determines to be necessary".

The fact that the Iraq authorization was an unconstitutional transfer of Constituitonal powers, and not a Constitutional declaration is evident in the fact that the President, after it was passed, continued diplomatic efforts for months and did not decide to use military force until much later when he claimed those efforts had failed. Had it been a Constitutional declaration, he would have been bound by the act of Congress to prosecute the war when it was passed.

2) The authorization for Iraq cited, as one of the 2 objectives, the need to enforce United Nations resolutions.

Ask Neo-Cons if they think that our fine military should be made into an enforcement arm of the United Nations. No Neo-Con I have spoken to has had an answer for this... it REALLY stops them dead in their tracks and gets them thinking.

Here are links to the text of both the authorization for use of force in Iraq and the Declaration of War on Japan from WWII:

Iraq authorization: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html

Japan declaration: http://www.hbci.com/~tgort/japan.htm

Anyway, just some thoughts. I want to commend the caller and I think he made some really good points that will hopefully jolt some of those Neo-Conservative listeners into deeper thought and study.

 

[jeffhenderson]

This is great.

 

[phree]

Derek, it's obvious that despite your comments about this event there are many people who think you're a hero for losing it on the radio. All I've been asking is that you clarify that you made an honest mistake and that in that one case you may have turned off more people than you attracted to RP's cause. It's important because 4000 people have read this thread.

 

[Gimme Some Truth]

Derek, it's obvious that despite your comments about this event there are many people who think you're a hero for losing it on the radio. All I've been asking is that you clarify that you made an honest mistake and that in that one case you may have turned off more people than you attracted to RP's cause. It's important because 4000 people have read this thread.

He did so way back in the 1st couple of pages. Please just leave it.

 

[phree]

This is great.

My point, illustrated.

 

[Real_CaGeD]

I support Derek.