CFL Spent $350,000 on a pro-war Colorado candidate

[rancher89]

Wow this is a deal breaker. I think I was wrong about the strategical aspect. I'm starting to believe this is just some way for political hacks-- like this Rothfeld guy-- to further their career and fatten their pocketbook.

Unless I see the rest of the conservative movement magically line up behind Rand Paul, I can only assume that C4L is an employment program for those involved.

"Do not support candidates" any chance there's video out there??

If one has paid and gone to one of the seminars, they have access to all the videos from all the conferences on their dashboard at the C4L site. There's a big notice that the videos are not to be shared......

 

[Mini-Me]

If one has paid and gone to one of the seminars, they have access to all the videos from all the conferences on their dashboard at the C4L site. There's a big notice that the videos are not to be shared......

...which, of course, is the stupidest idea ever, because it wouldn't cost the establishment jack to find out what the CFL is teaching, yet secrecy leaves genuine grassroots activists out in the cold. That is, it's the stupidest idea if your aim is to affect political change. It's a great idea if you're running a racket.

Sorry, I'm just ranting.

 

[rancher89]

If one has paid and gone to one of the seminars, they have access to all the videos from all the conferences on their dashboard at the C4L site. There's a big notice that the videos are not to be shared......

I just looked, they still have not uploaded the Atlanta Conference, I have no idea if Rothfeld said these same sort of things at earlier conferences.

 

[Meatwasp]

You see here the folly of "national" Washington-based organization in control of resources directing it with its Beltway mentality.

The tea partiers did fine in Massachusetts without some national group telling them what they had to do. Stay organized locally and on the state level, regionally and through forums like this. But nationally? If we are decentralists, why do we need "national" organizations?

Let's be a community, not just another special interest group.

You nailed it Badger. Right on

 

[rockandrollsouls]

If you donated even a dollar to Ron Paul's campaign, then you were tricked into funding this "monstrosity" too.

The fact of the matter is I've never willingly donated money to CFL.

Frankly, what the Paul campaign did with the money was downright dirty and illegal and I had no say in it. If you want to say I'm somehow associated for something that was basically theft of my money, then you're out of your mind.

But here's a giant thank you to all of the people that blindly funneled money to CFL. Thanks, by the way, for the mindless trolling and bashing of me when I implored you guys to check who was actually running CFL.

Now I wonder how many of you will wander back after Tate releases a sob statement.....

I'm on the same page as Badger Paul. We never needed a national group.

 

[LibertyEagle]

I am going to say this....

I am not at all happy about the ad AT ALL and want to get to the bottom of this as much as anyone.

But, in my opinion, this has turned into a witch hunt.

I am giving them the day to straighten this out. You do as you please.

 

[MsDoodahs]

There's a big notice that the videos are not to be shared......

lol...

 

[ItsTime]

I am going to say this....

I am not at all happy about the ad AT ALL and want to get to the bottom of this as much as anyone.

But, in my opinion, this has turned into a witch hunt.

I am giving them the day to straighten this out. You do as you please.

A lot of posters that havent been around for awhile coming in to bash the C4L is making me wonder...

 

[LittleLightShining]

I have a document that a got early last year. This document is titled "The Campaign For Liberty Partner Relationship". This document details what the state partners need to do to be affiliated with national and what national will do for the state partners. It ties the hands of the states quite nicely. as I've said before VT has not affiliated.

I want to quote part of this document, the section entitled "State Partner Goals".

Each state partner is encouraged to sek the following goals:

1. A clear growth in membership;
2. development of significant financial support above and beyond membership dues;
3. a program of public outreach;
4. periodic contact with State Partner members through a newsletter or other form of correspondence;
5a State Partner office with a listed telephone number, through which the public can learn about the work of the C4L; and
5. regular contact with elected officials to inform them about the work of the C4L.

Notice how they ordered the goals?

In exchange for states fulfilling these goals they get

* a 20% discount on Campaign For Liberty promotional materials
* Appropriate headquarters services (see below)
* A seat on the Campaign For Liberty Partner Advisory Committee

(***There is nothing "below" to "see" that explains exactly what's meant by this unless what they are getting at is what's in the last quote)

But wait, if you act now there's more! Including:

* Information on ways that Campaign For Liberty (National) and particular State Partners are working together
* Joint membership, marketing and advocacy efforts
*On-going communication between C4L and State Partners
* Forums for interaction and discussion of State Partner leaders throughout the country
* State Partner pages on C4L website
* Campaign For Liberty name and logo, adapted for each State Partner organization
* Opportunities or continued education through Campaign For Liberty conferences and Training Programs

But that's not all! If you act now

Campaign For Liberty (National) has a number of other offices that provide resources to Partners in such areas as:

*Public Relations efforts
* Information Technology
*Legislative Advocacy
*Organizational and administrative support
* Fundraising and financial support; including possible direct contributions from C4L national to State Partners for specific projects and programs

 

[AlterEgo]

i just called cfl and the lady who answered the phone transferred me to someone named andrew (i assume andrew ward). He said that he wasn't at liberty to answer my questions because john tate was going to release a statement about it that i'd be sure to see either today or tomorrow. He also said they were receiving numerous inquiries about it.

thanks for posting this. It needs to be repeated

 

[AlterEgo]

What if there's a secret strategy behind this ad buy that we don't understand because we don't have all the facts, and C4L can't reveal them for now because a) doing so would make the strategy pointless, and b) some of us wouldn't agree with the strategy, even if it has a good chance of working?

If C4L's plan is to take over the GOP (rather than educating the grassroots and the masses) then they will have to make some tough strategic decisions that will be unpopular with many of us. I guess we all have to ask ourselves, which issues are non-negotiable and which ones are we willing to compromise on?

Should we really second-guess every strategic decision they make, as long as they make perfectly clear what principles they stand for and what their political goals are?

But the CFL should not compromise there principals for political gain. Conservatives have done this for decades to achieve isolated victories (Scott Brown anyone?) and government has only gotten bigger in the long run.

 

[Mini-Me]

A lot of posters that havent been around for awhile coming in to bash the C4L is making me wonder...

To be fair, people who were critical of the CFL in the beginning were kind of marginalized. It makes sense that they would have sat on the sidelines and waited for everyone else to come around to their position.

 

[LittleLightShining]

I am going to say this....

I am not at all happy about the ad AT ALL and want to get to the bottom of this as much as anyone.

But, in my opinion, this has turned into a witch hunt.

I am giving them the day to straighten this out. You do as you please.

Well, thanks, LE. It's lovely that you're giving us permission to finally be able to talk about this in the open and do some investigating. Really, thank you so much for allowing us to do this. I know it's hard, but you're really putting yourself out for us and I am deeply appreciative.

 

[AlterEgo]

audit the cfl!:d

+11111

qft!!!!!


Blimp!

 

[Meatwasp]

I am going to say this....

I am not at all happy about the ad AT ALL and want to get to the bottom of this as much as anyone.

But, in my opinion, this has turned into a witch hunt.

I am giving them the day to straighten this out. You do as you please.

Yep, you are right. I am guilty also. Will wait for the verdict.

 

[ItsTime]

To be fair, people who were critical of the CFL in the beginning were kind of marginalized. It makes sense that they would have sat on the sidelines and waited for everyone else to come around to their position.

So everyone is going to shit on them before they release a statement, got it.

If people remember I was pretty critical of C4L and never sat on the sidelines about it.

But having lived in Colorado I know how much an ad like this, helping someone who has no chance to win, will get the attention of many neo-cons and make them wonder what the C4L is about.

 

[Original_Intent]

Well, thanks, LE. It's lovely that you're giving us permission to finally be able to talk about this in the open and do some investigating. Really, thank you so much for allowing us to do this. I know it's hard, but you're really putting yourself out for us and I am deeply appreciative.

Why don't you put your claws away LLS?

I am as pissed as anyone but I am looking forward to what kind of spin C4L puts on this. LE is simply stating that she is taking a 'wait and see" position, anyone else can do what they want. And somehow you found a way to take umbrage at such a common phrase, and twist it that LE is "granting permission" to others to do what they want? It's a common phrase and anyone with half a brain knows it is not equated with "giving permission." Why so hostile?

 

[Peace&Freedom]

"Reduce taxes, control government spending." ---Buck Campaign Ad

The above represents the reason why third parties emphasize their principled platforms to a fault. This 'controlling spending' cant is not the Paul agenda platform of 2007-2008, or that of the Revolution, the liberty movement, the (original pronouncements of) CFL, the Tea Parties, or anything else we thought we agreed on. It is the language of milquetoast GOP hacks everywhere. It's the mantra Monica Crowley used on the McLaughlin Group to describe the basic agenda of the Tea Party movement. It is deliberate misdescription designed to co-opt us. This is why we should keep the old Ron Paul 2008 palm cards handy, to remind us of what the real platform is about:

 

[LittleLightShining]

Why don't you put your claws away LLS?

I am as pissed as anyone but I am looking forward to what kind of spin C4L puts on this. LE is simply stating that she is taking a 'wait and see" position, anyone else can do what they want. And somehow you found a way to take umbrage at such a common phrase, and twist it that LE is "granting permission" to others to do what they want? It's a common phrase and anyone with half a brain knows it is not equated with "giving permission." Why so hostile?

YOU HAVE NO IDEA what the back story is here and out of a spirit of reconciliation I am NOT GOING TO GO INTO DETAIL ABOUT it, but trust me, IF YOU KNEW you would not say that to me. MYOB.

 

[BenIsForRon]

Ok, if we don't get a response by tomorrow we're going to have to take some organized action. This is shocking.