CFL Regional Conference - Atlanta - Ron Paul (Jan 15-17 2010!)

Recently I've been thinking a lot of about the things Mike Rothfeld said in MN. Many of the things he warned about there, I've have since been through or witnessed.

I saw him again in PA, but he didn't really go into things like he did in MN. If you get to hear him lecture in depth, I highly recommend it.
 
It definitely makes sense for people to go back through this thread and read it again. I'm not trying to pump myself up here but it's the things I said in this thread specifically that made Debbie Hopper ask my state coordinator to remove me.

When the response to questions is to remove the person asking them you know there's something very wrong.
 
I'm with you on Rothfeld, LLS, he does us no good even if he is a wonderful stratigist/mass mailer.....he's rude and obnoxious. I stressed being nice and polite to my members, even when faced with those who were rude and obnoxious to them (when canvassing or just mingling.) Why should we have to put up with this, nay pay for it, from someone who is supposed to teach us how to do somethng better???
 
Originally Posted by Matt Collins
If you are trying to feed the people broccoli you sometimes must put sugar or salt or cheese on it - it has to be dressed and flavored so that people are willing to try it.
When you are on that slippery slope, it does not take very long to become Frank Luntz, and semantic deception become available but sold as necessary persuasion. Either way, you have joined the ranks of the Ponerized and are only deluding yourself.
 
When you are on that slippery slope, it does not take very long to become Frank Luntz, and semantic deception become available but sold as necessary persuasion. Either way, you have joined the ranks of the Ponerized and are only deluding yourself.
You are confusing policy with electoral politics. The two are not the same, I have come to learn this firsthand.
 
You are confusing policy with electoral politics. The two are not the same, I have come to learn this firsthand.
No, you are attempting to see delusion as truth by employing semantics, while simultaneously rationalizing it to yourself and others.

You're a kid, right? Like in his 30's? Have you ever played at the top of the national stage, with the people who are the behind the puppet politicians? Give me a break young one, take your childish techniques and see if the people on the street corners may buy them.
 
No, you are attempting to see delusion as truth by employing semantics, while simultaneously rationalizing it to yourself and others.

You're a kid, right? Like in his 30's? Have you ever played at the top of the national stage, with the people who are the behind the puppet politicians? Give me a break young one, take your childish techniques and see if the people on the street corners may buy them.

just pointing out- the "i'm older than you" or "you aren't old enough to know anything" argument is weak. as weak as the argument you are countering.
the question should be- who here has either ran a campaign or been a candidate for public office.
they would know more about the difference of the election politics and policies.
if you want i can give you a real world example of how they are different.
 
just pointing out- the "i'm older than you" or "you aren't old enough to know anything" argument is weak. as weak as the argument you are countering.
the question should be- who here has either ran a campaign or been a candidate for public office.
they would know more about the difference of the election politics and policies.
if you want i can give you a real world example of how they are different.
I agree with the bolded part of your statement. I slipped.

But the important point is not about whether one has been part of a campaign, it is about being honest, and explaining things how they are. Not assuming that the people that you are talking to are too stupid to understand, so that one has to 'sugar coat' if for them because the candidate/politician 'knows what is best.'

What is being argued here is the same crap Plato/Socrates argued in Athens, when they tried to destroy Athenian Democracy by claiming that the people were too stupid to govern themselves (see more at this thread).

This is basically what Matt is saying, except he is attempting to disguise it through semantics.... and this is what I have a problem with.
 
No, you are attempting to see delusion as truth by employing semantics, while simultaneously rationalizing it to yourself and others.
uhh... not exactly. :rolleyes:

You're a kid, right? Like in his 30's? Have you ever played at the top of the national stage, with the people who are the behind the puppet politicians? Give me a break young one, take your childish techniques and see if the people on the street corners may buy them.
You asked the question, you answer it first. How old are you - What are your credentials? :confused:
 
Back
Top