[Doug Wead] Shocker: Ron Paul and rule 40, the new Romney nightmare

Didn't read entire thread, but had to LOL.

Welcome to RPFs of late.
 
Thank you for bringing this back to what the forum used to be. A great example of how you can disagree with someone without being personally insulting. I appreciate how you don't agree with one of my opinions and don't call me names because of it.

Anyway, a scenario I gave in relation to the tyranny argument of Romney was imagining the same scenario with Obama in 2008. What if, for whatever reason, Ron was VP for Obama. He'd still have gone into Syria. Fast and furious would have still taken place. He'd still have spent mercilessly. None of it would have changed, yet no one claiming to support a Romney/Rand or Ron ticket has responded to that analogy.

I'd really like to know how it's any different. :confused:

affa said:
While I don't condone the 'sailingaway' moderation debate/campaign, I completely agree with Rockandrollsoul's overall message.

You can not support liberty and vote for Romney at the same time. It's impossible. It's a compromise that will defeat us in the end, a vote for tyranny and war and debt and pandering.

And I also agree with something else with Rockandrollsoul's quoted message above -- TPTB have had 4 years to plan to infiltrate, undermine, distract, diffuse, confuse, and seize control of this movement. Look how fast the 'Tea Party' was destroyed... now, we're generally pretty good at identifying the obvious trolls, etc, but obviously TPTB want to capitalize on our energy. They will, and have been, angling for our votes for quite some time. And if they can't have our votes, they want to destroy the movement - if they can do both at the same time, all the better.

And that's exactly what a RP vice presidential nod will do to this movement. It's a monkey's paw - a tiny gift from TPTB that is inherently meaningless yet will splinter and destroy us.

If you question this, simply read this or any other thread semi-related to the subject and watch as we define our sides.

Romney will never have my vote. Ever.
Click to expand...
 
Agreed. At least in this case, Ron's presence wouldn't be helping to garner votes to get the dictator elected. I fear strongly if he were VP (which I don't think he'd accept, but may be forced into if nominated from the floor) it'd lead to many so called liberty lovers and others casting a vote for the dictator. Basically, an easy way to co-opt liberty and get the votes Romney needs.

If he were to take a position after the fact, where he could somehow slow the tyranny, I'd be fine with him for that. IE, the sheeple put Romney in, we did our best to stop it, and now Ron could slow it down in a cabinet position (though that will never happen, either.)

Long story short, we definitely shouldn't be trying to nominate him for VP from the floor, even if we could. All that's going to do is make the dictator look more attractive to the weak willed.

Matthew Zak said:
If Ron Paul endorsed Romney, or accepted a VP slot with him, I would toss anything I own that is Ron Paul related, I would delete my 20 Ron Paul videos I've made, I would forget about ever involving myself in politics again, and I would go absolutely 100% anarchist in philosophy and practice.

On the other hand if Ron accepted some other arbitrary position in Romney's cabinet, where he could work independently and actually make a difference in growing our cause, I would be reluctantly ok with it.
Click to expand...
 
rockandrollsouls said:
Agreed. At least in this case, Ron's presence wouldn't be helping to garner votes to get the dictator elected. I fear strongly if he were VP (which I don't think he'd accept, but may be forced into if nominated from the floor) it'd lead to many so called liberty lovers and others casting a vote for the dictator. Basically, an easy way to co-opt liberty and get the votes Romney needs.

If he were to take a position after the fact, where he could somehow slow the tyranny, I'd be fine with him for that. IE, the sheeple put Romney in, we did our best to stop it, and now Ron could slow it down in a cabinet position (though that will never happen, either.)

Long story short, we definitely shouldn't be trying to nominate him for VP from the floor, even if we could. All that's going to do is make the dictator look more attractive to the weak willed.
Click to expand...

Last I checked your posts were all either pro Gary Johnson or anti me or other people who don't happen to like Gary Johnson. I question whether you are unbiased on this point.

however, again, I don't think the question will arise. The nomination is to get the speech and concessions by showing strength. Now if he won, we could deal with it then.
 
How does this post have anything to do with what I posted in mine? I wasn't even speaking to you, yet for whatever reason you choose to continually give me a hard time. Anyway....I'll address it still.

I think you misinterpret my posts: I am pro liberty movement and pro liberty candidates, not pro one person. I might be in the minority here, but I've always felt the more people we have waking up and fighting for liberty, the better, and the more we band together, the better for liberty. They say, strength in numbers.

I've been VERY against those of you trying to divide and dismantle that thought. I think it only hurts this movement. I've been trying for years, before Ron Paul was even running for president, to get a strong group of people together that support liberty. More than one person. Now that we have it, many of you are trying to prevent it. It doesn't make any sense. You can consider that "pro-johnson," I'm considering it a strong step for liberty.

So long story short, I am unbiased. Particularly considering I stated many times prior to this discussion we should exercise our rights and try to get Ron nominated for PRESIDENT from the floor if possible. Putting him in the VP slot for a dictator will only serve to garner that dictator votes he otherwise wouldn't get. I can assure you I'd hate myself and be incredibly disappointed if it were the members of the liberty movement, or at least those that claimed to be, that put Romney over the top and into the presidency simply because Ron would be on the ticket.

sailingaway said:
Last I checked your posts were all either pro Gary Johnson or anti me or other people who don't happen to like Gary Johnson. I question whether you are unbiased on this point.

however, again, I don't think the question will arise. The nomination is to get the speech and concessions by showing strength. Now if he won, we could deal with it then.
Click to expand...
 
rockandrollsouls said:
How does this post have anything to do with what I posted in mine? I wasn't even speaking to you, yet for whatever reason you choose to continually give me a hard time. Anyway....I'll address it still.

I think you misinterpret my posts: I am pro liberty movement and pro liberty candidates, not pro one person. I might be in the minority here, but I've always felt the more people we have waking up and fighting for liberty, the better, and the more we band together, the better for liberty. They say, strength in numbers.

I've been VERY against those of you trying to divide and dismantle that thought. I think it only hurts this movement. I've been trying for years, before Ron Paul was even running for president, to get a strong group of people together that support liberty. More than one person. Now that we have it, many of you are trying to prevent it. It doesn't make any sense. You can consider that "pro-johnson," I'm considering it a strong step for liberty.

So long story short, I am unbiased. Particularly considering I stated many times prior to this discussion we should exercise our rights and try to get Ron nominated for PRESIDENT from the floor if possible. Putting him in the VP slot for a dictator will only serve to garner that dictator votes he otherwise wouldn't get. I can assure you I'd hate myself and be incredibly disappointed if it were the members of the liberty movement, or at least those that claimed to be, that put Romney over the top and into the presidency simply because Ron would be on the ticket.
Click to expand...

the fact remains, your arguments here have not been 'pro Ron' except as a lead in to Johnson, or pro anyone but Johnson, that I have seen except vaguely to say you are pro liberty. YOur ACTIVISM is pro Johnson. Hence of course you wouldn't want people voting for someone running against Johnson, which I do think is your motive here, since nothing about Paul seems to draw you to Ron Paul forums. Nominating Ron for President OR VP will be a speech, a showing, and some strength, but won't turn into party nominations unless an unanticipated number of other delegates who are not Ron Paul backers agree. The speech and showing are worth the nomination on the floor.
 
Last edited:
This is so nonsensical I'm not even going to argue with you about it.

Long story short I had maxed out to the Ron Paul campaign in the last election cycle, before you even joined this board. I've been donating to, canvassing for, and campaigning for liberty candidates before you were even here, yet you have the gall to make that false statement. I've been trying to fight for liberty before Ron even ran for president.

I will remind you once again this forum, though under Ron Paul's moniker, was created to further the idea of liberty. This movement was never about a single person, and Ron himself has said that. To say that 1) I don't support Ron and 2) infer I am not pro liberty is a ridiculous claim and I think you are just showing you have some kind of unresolved grudge towards me.

Claiming I am pro any one candidate simply because I do not support the bashing towards them and, instead, suggest and promote a coalition of liberty minded candidates individuals is short-sighted.

Your entire post shows you may as well not have even read, let alone digested, my previous post where I fully explained my goals, intentions, and beliefs.

You're not only showing you have a complete misunderstand for this liberty movement and the reason for the existence of this forum, but a complete and total ignorance about my support of and struggle for liberty.

sailingaway said:
the fact remains, your arguments here have not been 'pro Ron' except as a lead in to Johnson, or pro anyone but Johnson, that I have seen except vaguely to say you are pro liberty. YOur ACTIVISM is pro Johnson. Hence of course you wouldn't want people voting for someone running against Johnson, which I do think is your motive here, since nothing about Paul seems to draw you to Ron Paul forums. Nominating Ron for President OR VP will be a speech, a showing, and some strength, but won't turn into party nominations unless an unanticipated number of other delegates who are not Ron Paul backers agree. The speech and showing are worth the nomination on the floor.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I did read what you said were your goals, but they conflict with your behavior.

LAST election cycle you maxed out to Ron when Johnson wasn't running. Did you donate to Ron this time? Or do anything for him this time? I'm guessing not or you would have said so. And my 'grudge' against you is based on your behavior here.
 
You could read my previous posts, but I'll remind you. I maxed out before Iowa and put all of my chips in. I've been donating to the PACs since then, in addition to the other liberty candidates and working in meetups and coordinating with other liberty groups.

But that doesn't even matter. I don't care if all someone can do is phonebank so long as they are working towards the cause of liberty. But the fact you question what I've done, when the information was already available and when I've put in my best effort as many others do, and question my motivation, is out of line. Completely out of line.

So this is the job of a moderator, huh? Harass individuals that have been working tirelessly for liberty before they even joined the forum and were given unchecked power. Sad to see how this is going down.

sailingaway said:
I did read what you said were your goals, but they conflict with your behavior.

LAST election cycle you maxed out to Ron when Johnson wasn't running. Did you donate to Ron this time? Or do anything for him this time? I'm guessing not or you would have said so. And my 'grudge' against you is based on your behavior here.
Click to expand...
 
rockandrollsouls said:
You could read my previous posts, but I'll remind you. I maxed out before Iowa and put all of my chips in. I've been donating to the PACs since then, in addition to the other liberty candidates and working in meetups and coordinating with other liberty groups.

But that doesn't even matter. I don't care if all someone can do is phonebank so long as they are working towards the cause of liberty. But the fact you question what I've done, when the information was already available and when I've put in my best effort as many others do, and question my motivation, is out of line. Completely out of line.

So this is the job of a moderator, huh? Harass individuals that have been working tirelessly for liberty before they even joined the forum and were given unchecked power. Sad to see how this is going down.
Click to expand...

The furthest your posts went back they were about Johnson. I don't judge the strength of a supporter by how much they give, you raised that. and only about last time. The fact is I've not seen you here supporting Ron that I recall, nor in your posts. And you took the 'harass' part out of my telling you to quit harassing me in pms. I think it is time you took a break.
 
Ron Paul 2012. That is all.

Thread = derailed.

PS - Don't know if that banning was called for, but i didn't read through his past posts. But you were both going at it here.
 
affa said:
Ron Paul 2012. That is all.

Thread = derailed.

PS - Don't know if that banning was called for, but i didn't read through his past posts. But you were both going at it here.
Click to expand...

Sure. but he has been for days.
 
It is good for all of us to take a break from the forums, the campaign, and all news, from time to time, just to relax and recharge so we don't burn out fighting for freedom.
 
Alright, that was B.S... He didn't drop it like you demanded he do, but a ban when you too were equally part of the argument is too far for me.

Go ahead and delete my account, please. I've given all I have to this movement, and I will continue to outside of this forum.

Admin, thanks gor giving me a place to hang my hat for a while. I'll see some of you at paulfest. If any of you need some transportation assistance once you hit Tampa, email me @[email protected].

Bye.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Occam's Banana
The lessons of Ron Paul
Replies
12
Views
201
acptulsa
acptulsa
Brian4Liberty
  • Featured
Reflections On The Ron Paul Barbecue
Replies
4
Views
229
buck000
buck000
PAF
Immigration Control Threatens the Rule of Law
Replies
14
Views
123
Firestarter
Firestarter
Bryan
Greatest Ron Paul videos
Replies
0
Views
344
Bryan
Bryan
Brian4Liberty
  • Featured
Preparing the Famous "What If" Speech
Replies
7
Views
141
Anti Globalist
Anti Globalist
Back
Top