Help make this go viral: Kokesh on the presidential candidates and supporting the troops

[ClydeCoulter]

Must Watch and Like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlg45UcomRI


Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/TheLoneCoyote/status/196680792028618753



edit: same video as above but uploaded on Kokesh's youtube channel with less offensive title


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_9Hv9ACjgg

 

[Origanalist]

No, I will not.

 

[zHorns]

The title is really bad.

You don't build bridges, by saying people who vote for Obama/Romney "f--- the troops".

To them, they are doing what they believe is right.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

While I don't agree with Adam Kokesh's approach, I appreciate his desire to really support the troops. No, perhaps some will take offense, but will some *think* for a moment while watching it?

 

[mczerone]

The title is really bad.

You don't build bridges, by saying people who vote for Obama/Romney "fuck the troops".

To them, they are doing what they believe is right.

And how better than to convince them otherwise than shocking their senses?

We can't keep playing nice with the people that support indiscriminate violence, violations of people's rights, and general economic devastation. They are f-ing over the troops, and they need to be told so. Tying a yellow ribbon outside your house (or putting a flag magnet on your car) simply isn't supporting the troops. And voting for another big-govt statist is most definitely placing them into harm's way in order to shore up the bottom line of some mega-corporations, all the while further compromising the prospects for peace in the world.

I'm not saying that everyone HAS to get behind this effort - but it seems to me to be a good way to give a nice "shock" treatment to those who are blissfully oblivious to what the establishment choices actually present as options.

 

[dbill27]

Adam actually was a soldier, and sorry if the title might "offend" people, but they can go fuck themselves because hundreds of thousands of innocent lives being lost offends me more than language.

 

[RickyJ]

If he left out the "fuck you" part and inserted something else like "I don't care about you", then I would share this. It is OK except for the "fuck you" part. Some people get really offended at language like that.

 

[zHorns]

If he left out the "fuck you" part and inserted something else like "I don't care about you", then I would share this. It is OK except for the "fuck you" part. Some people get really offended at language like that.

Exactly, try to build bridges with the elderly, social-right and old veterans with that (aka the people we need).

My father in law is a disabled vet. I've worked years trying to convert him to Paul. He likes Paul, other than the foreign policy, even though I've explained in from multiple fronts and in great detail. I wouldn't win him over by telling him he's "f--king the troops."

 

[dalys4peace]

I really like this video. Raw truth. I posted it on Facebook with the title "Excuse me if this offends anyone, but just listen to the whole thing.
WARNING: THIS VIDEO MAY CAUSE YOU TO QUESTION WHAT YOU THINK" and in a comment I quoted mczerone's post up there.

Now is not the time to tip toe around things that might offend. If its the truth, that is.

 

[mczerone]

If he left out the "fuck you" part and inserted something else like "I don't care about you", then I would share this. It is OK except for the "fuck you" part. Some people get really offended at language like that.

And I get really offended by the never ending war.

It's time to offend some people, to rock the g-damned boat, to show people that they are getting raped in the f-ing ass. You don't want to be offended by some little words? Well Fuck you. Fuck you and your thieving criminal "leaders" who constantly offend every sacred fiber of my being with your warfare/welfare state, your collectivism, and your holier-than-thou pharisee-ism.

It's POWERFUL because it's taboo. It's moving because you flinch at it. It's going to recruit more people than it turns off because it's fucking true.

 

[dalys4peace]

Now if I had a different demographic of friends on Facebook I may think twice. I have a lot of young friends who use that language already.

 

[Origanalist]

This video would be a poison pill outside infowars and this site. If you think you're going to get converts with this you're out of your mind. Talk about cutting of your nose to spite your face, give me a break.

 

[zHorns]

And I get really offended by the never ending war.

It's time to offend some people, to rock the g-damned boat, to show people that they are getting raped in the f-ing ass. You don't want to be offended by some little words? Well Fuck you. Fuck you and your thieving criminal "leaders" who constantly offend every sacred fiber of my being with your warfare/welfare state, your collectivism, and your holier-than-thou pharisee-ism.

It's POWERFUL because it's taboo. It's moving because you flinch at it. It's going to recruit more people than it turns off because it's fucking true.

It doesn't matter whether you're right or not.

You don't get the voter base (elderly, women, social-right) that we need by using words and phrases like that.

Even, as we work on this upcoming Moneybomb, we are looking for positive ways of courting Santroum and Newt supporters. We don't win them by saying Santorum and Newt were terrible choices. We find common ground and show them why Paul is the logical next choice.

 

[VBRonPaulFan]

If he left out the "fuck you" part and inserted something else like "I don't care about you", then I would share this. It is OK except for the "fuck you" part. Some people get really offended at language like that.

yeah, the retards that get offended at language like this are usually the 'good, upstanding folk' that support candidates that openly endorse throwing more and more of our kids overseas to die for pet projects that make them rich. but yeah, good point. we definitely wouldn't want to offend those guys

 

[mczerone]

Exactly, try to build bridges with the elderly, social-right and old veterans with that (aka the people we need).

My father in law is a disable vet. I've worked years trying to convert him to Paul. He likes Paul, other than the foreign policy, even though I've explained in from multiple fronts and in great detail. I wouldn't win him over by telling he is "f--king the troops."

Take off the kid-gloves and treat him like a real veteran. A real adult who has seen war. Tell him the unadulterated truth.

You can try to make it softer and nicer - but he's not going to respond. Get in there and use language that by it's very nature wakes him up.

Really, if nothing else has worked at this point, what's the loss in trying? Go in there and tell him that a vote for Romney or Obama is a vote to fuck the troops, fuck the economy, and fuck our chances at peace and prosperity - and let it sink in.

He might be offended, but I guarantee that the conversation will stick with him. He won't be able to dismiss it. He'll not be able to refute it.

It will make him uncomfortable, and rightly so.

Offend him. But make sure that he knows that it comes from a position of love, of respect, of caring. That's what this video does - it shows that we care about the troops, and it shows that the other guys not only don't care, but they expect to be able to use them as disposable heroes to drudge up more conflict and keep entrenched interests rolling in the dough.

Be an adult, and use your big-boy words, and I bet your disabled veteran father-in-law would respect you a whole lot more.

 

[zHorns]

Take off the kid-gloves and treat him like a real veteran. A real adult who has seen war. Tell him the unadulterated truth.

You can try to make it softer and nicer - but he's not going to respond. Get in there and use language that by it's very nature wakes him up.

Really, if nothing else has worked at this point, what's the loss in trying? Go in there and tell him that a vote for Romney or Obama is a vote to fuck the troops, fuck the economy, and fuck our chances at peace and prosperity - and let it sink in.

He might be offended, but I guarantee that the conversation will stick with him. He won't be able to dismiss it. He'll not be able to refute it.

It will make him uncomfortable, and rightly so.

Offend him. But make sure that he knows that it comes from a position of love, of respect, of caring. That's what this video does - it shows that we care about the troops, and it shows that the other guys not only don't care, but they expect to be able to use them as disposable heroes to drudge up more conflict and keep entrenched interests rolling in the dough.

Be an adult, and use your big-boy words, and I bet your disabled veteran father-in-law would respect you a whole lot more.

He and his wife plan to vote for Paul (Kentucky primary May 22), not because of his foreign policy, but because they think he's honest.

I find the best way to win people over is trying to find common ground.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

Exactly, try to build bridges with the elderly, social-right and old veterans with that (aka the people we need).

My father in law is a disabled vet. I've worked years trying to convert him to Paul. He likes Paul, other than the foreign policy, even though I've explained in from multiple fronts and in great detail. I wouldn't win him over by telling him he's "f--king the troops."

I agree, but the elderly are probably not the ones that will be watching this. This might, just might reach some of the Santy youngers?

Ron's foreign policy turns off many, maybe some of them might think for themselves for a moment.

 

[mczerone]

It doesn't matter whether you're right or not.

You don't get the voter base (elderly, women, social-right) that we need by using words and phrases like that.

Even, as we work on this upcoming Moneybomb, we are looking for positive ways of courting Santroum and Newt supporters. We don't win them by saying Santorum and Newt were terrible choices. We find common ground and show them why Paul is a lot like their ex-candidate and is the logical next choice.

Prove it.

If we keep playing the "everyone's great, but our guy's better" game, we're not going to get anywhere - and we haven't gotten anywhere using it. Some of us here on RPFs keep trying to pretend that they know what will win over these "base" voters - but it hasn't worked. Our cross-tabs with elderly, female, and evangelical voters aren't getting better by trying to pretend we know what they want to see from us.

It's past time to drop the act and tell them that Santorum was a horrible choice. Gingrich was a horrible choice. Romney is a horrible choice. Obama is a horrible choice. We're more than willing to open our ranks up to them, but they have realize what we're doing, and what the status-quo is doing. We need to lead and let them follow, not pander and hope we can infiltrate.

We don't need to get a "voter base" at this point. We need to make our own voter base, and point out how fucking cruel it is to be anywhere else.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

It doesn't matter whether you're right or not.

You don't get the voter base (elderly, women, social-right) that we need by using words and phrases like that.

Even, as we work on this upcoming Moneybomb, we are looking for positive ways of courting Santroum and Newt supporters. We don't win them by saying Santorum and Newt were terrible choices. We find common ground and show them why Paul is the logical next choice.

You'll never get the elderly and socons with a libertarian message.

 

[zHorns]

Prove it.

If we keep playing the "everyone's great, but our guy's better" game, we're not going to get anywhere - and we haven't gotten anywhere using it. Some of us here on RPFs keep trying to pretend that they know what will win over these "base" voters - but it hasn't worked. Our cross-tabs with elderly, female, and evangelical voters aren't getting better by trying to pretend we know what they want to see from us.

It's past time to drop the act and tell them that Santorum was a horrible choice. Gingrich was a horrible choice. Romney is a horrible choice. Obama is a horrible choice. We're more than willing to open our ranks up to them, but they have realize what we're doing, and what the status-quo is doing. We need to lead and let them follow, not pander and hope we can infiltrate.

We don't need to get a "voter base" at this point. We need to make our own voter base, and point out how fucking cruel it is to be anywhere else.

Sorry, but that's the wrong approach.

Person 1: "I liked Santorum, who do you like?"
Person 2: "Santorum was a HORRIBLE choice, what are you stupid or something? I like Ron Paul."

Winning.