Helping Code Pink "More Proof Ron Paul Supporters Are Not Conservative"

[PatriotOne]

Y'all, I was actually there as a delegate.

Those Code Pink assholes had GREEN CREDENTIALS. Green credentials = PRESS.

The media set that stunt up. Not Ron Paul supporters.

Hmmmmmm.......I've been sceptical that the report of a Ron Paul supporter giving away their pass to a Code Pinker was even true. Sounded like a set up to me from the start.

 

[acptulsa]

How can we express the idea of a Formerly Divided and Conquered Americans From Both Sides of 'The Aisle' Now United For Peace Party in two words or less?

 

[LibertyEagle]

Some folks here share much in common with rank and file Democrats. Freedom is popular. Your attitude that everyone must behave so as not to step on Republican toes is demanding that your pov takes precedence. Your disgust and shaming of anyone who doesn't support your position is frustrating later dialogue when you might need help.

First of all, how about you stop calling it my position? It was Ron Paul's chosen strategy and what he suggested we do. If you do not want to partake, fine. That's your business.

The Republican RP supporters are going to have to find a way to seperate themselves from those who are on the the other side of the aisle without making such a ridiculous production in places like RP forums where there is a broad spectrum of RP supporters.

That sounds rather ignorant, to me. Why would people need to shut up or compartmentalize themselves who are continuing with Ron's strategy? Does it make you angry or something that some are doing this?

Since the teaparty is an accepted name in Republican circles maybe associating with that label is more beneficial?

Uh, are you honestly suggesting that those of us who plan on keeping our Republican registrations be kicked off this forum? Seriously?

Just tossing around some ideas...We have to get past the labels here if this forum is going to be productive at all and learn to live our beliefs of liberty for all not just those that resemble our own personal lifestyle choices.Easier said than done.

Freedom is popular?

Is it that you want to work within the Democratic Party instead? If so, I will support that. Parties are just mechanisms to get our guys elected, anyway. Once upon a time we figured out how to co-exist, surely we can figure that out again. I personally wish the idea of "parties" would just go away, but as long as we have them, we have to work with the way it is.

 

[LibertyEagle]

How can we express the idea of a Formerly Divided and Conquered Americans From Both Sides of 'The Aisle' Now United For Peace Party in two words or less?

We were referring to everyone as part of the liberty movement.

 

[moostraks]

First of all, how about you stop calling it my position? It was Ron Paul's chosen strategy and what he suggested we do. If you do not want to partake, fine. That's your business.



That sounds rather ignorant, to me. Why would people need to shut up or compartmentalize themselves who are continuing with Ron's strategy? Does it make you angry or something that some are doing this?



Uh, are you honestly suggesting that those of us who plan on keeping our Republican registrations be kicked off this forum? Seriously?



Freedom is popular?

Where in the hell do you come up with the idea I said to kick Republicans off the forum? You efforts to misconstrue are just mindblowing. I was trying to suggest a means by which you can keep your street cred with the Republicans you are so afraid of offending in your elbow rubbing efforts to get liberty candidates in. I am not compartmentalizing, you are demanding people give up their own issues to support only the issues that further your goals because they are embarassing your people. Stop putting words in my mouth. The only person I have seen to constantly be demanding to shut people up on this board is you...

eta...I think it is really funny you cling to Ron Paul picking the Republican party to mount his efforts after the man had left the party to be a libertarian and then returned and then makes statements such as the party is largely irrelevant. I don't think you will ever get it. It isn't about RP. You have picked your postion but you fight for liberty by demanding others concede their right to self determination as a symbol of fidelity as it serves your purpose. He chose his battleground and he wanted people to join his efforts as there is strength in numbers. He was also wise enough to know that not everyone could or would choose to be a republican and he sure wouldn't waste all his energy trying to humiliate those who disagree with his party of choice because true liberty involves respecting others to have their own paths to follow. If we have faith in our convictions that we are on the right path then we also need to realize it will be a stronger movement if we offer our knowledge to everyone not just those who can wear the Republican brand name.

 

[moostraks]

How can we express the idea of a Formerly Divided and Conquered Americans From Both Sides of 'The Aisle' Now United For Peace Party in two words or less?

 

[Pericles]

It was blowback. They crapped on our delegates so the reward was a disruption. It wasn't a blanket endorsement of code pink.

Don't send someone else to deliver a message that you should send yourself. The message will get lost in translation.

 

[Pericles]

You are listing the reasons why clinging to the Republican party like beaten wife is a bad idea. You just do not realize it.

For most of us that are anti-war, you have understand why we are anti-war. This is a moral issue and I (many of us) WILL NOT be quiet about it. It is not acceptable to be pro war. And for that reason I do not belong in the Republican party. The speech McCain gave during the RNC represented the opinions of most Republicans I know, except for our irate minority. He listed off multiple genocides he hopes to accomplish before he dies and sounded like he'd haunt the GOP when he does die to make sure it continues. When McCain was the nominee, foreign policy was considered his strong point by republican voters. This is not the party for me. Ron Paul is an anomaly.

it is possible to get 75% to 90% libertarians elected (see Rand Paul, Mike Lee, etc.). In a rare instance, you can get a 95%+ libertarian elected. Would you think that we will be better off with a senate of 60 Rand Pauls, Mike Lees, maybe some Ted Cruz s, or 60 Hatchs and McConnels?

 

[moostraks]

Don't send someone else to deliver a message that you should send yourself. The message will get lost in translation.

Well the funny thing would be if the pp is correct that it was a press pass. If it was then we can have twenty pages of whether it was a closet RP media supporter or a media conspiracy. I should have put wasn't neccessarily a blanket endorsement as with RP supporters you just never know.

 

[fr33]

it is possible to get 75% to 90% libertarians elected (see Rand Paul, Mike Lee, etc.). In a rare instance, you can get a 95%+ libertarian elected. Would you think that we will be better off with a senate of 60 Rand Pauls, Mike Lees, maybe some Ted Cruz s, or 60 Hatchs and McConnels?

All those you've listed are not good on foreign policy and serve as proof that the Republican party has no room for anti-war people.

 

[Pericles]

All those you've listed are not good on foreign policy and serve as proof that the Republican party has no room for anti-war people.

That is about to take care of itself in one of 3 ways:

(1) The country goes bankrupt. Once the credit card is turned off, no more toys for the Pentagon.

(2) The Army is worn out and can't sustain another conflict. I see the same breakdown occurring as did at the end of Vietnam.

(3) There will be a great deal of unpleasantness in towns close to us, that make fighting foreign wars impractical.

 

[moostraks]

That is about to take care of itself in one of 3 ways:

(1) The country goes bankrupt. Once the credit card is turned off, no more toys for the Pentagon.

(2) The Army is worn out and can't sustain another conflict. I see the same breakdown occurring as did at the end of Vietnam.

(3) There will be a great deal of unpleasantness in towns close to us, that make fighting foreign wars impractical.

2 could be solved through a draft and 3 is being solved by a militarized police force. Our greatest hope is 1 but that is surely nothing anyone wants to happen and I find it difficult to fathom it happening in a manner that would lead to less war and not more war.

 

[Revolution9]

Yeah,, that's not true.. If you were only interested in Winning you would be working for Obama.

The GOP is good at losing all on their own.

Obama just had a 35 million mansion bought under the table by him in Oahu with the move in date being January 2013. You may be wrong in your assumptions.

This is the joint...

http://www.honolulumagazine.com/Hon...een-on-Hawaii-Five-0-Fantastic-Kailua-estate/

Rev9

 

[pcosmar]

it is possible to get 75% to 90% libertarians elected (see Rand Paul, Mike Lee, etc.). In a rare instance, you can get a 95%+ libertarian elected. Would you think that we will be better off with a senate of 60 Rand Pauls, Mike Lees, maybe some Ted Cruz s, or 60 Hatchs and McConnels?

It really does not matter at all if the heads of the party dictate policy,, and if those heads are neither elected nor interested in the opinions of the voters.
As it is now.

It took well over 100 years to get to this point., I have seen over 40 years of that..

We don't have another 40 to get it back,, each year gets exponentially worse.
the last 10 on a truly frightening scale. Romney or Obama make no difference at all,, I see nothing good in the next 4.

 

[Pericles]

2 could be solved through a draft and 3 is being solved by a militarized police force. Our greatest hope is 1 but that is surely nothing anyone wants to happen and I find it difficult to fathom it happening in a manner that would lead to less war and not more war.

You can draft privates, but the breakdown is in the officer ranks, and the NCOs are getting screwed over in the process. The problem is in the organization with institutional structural failure, not in the lack of manpower. You can't draft equipment that is being used well beyond repair and rebuild cycles. That come back to point 1 - medium to large scale war is not sustainable because of the expense of the American way of war.

The thin blue line is really thin. Look at security for the conventions - they import police from several states, look at a major riot, and see how many agencies end up supplying personnel. The system can barely handle one major incident at a time. Escalate that by a factor of 3 or 4 and it breaks.

 

[pcosmar]

Obama just had a 35 million mansion bought under the table by him in Oahu with the move in date being January 2013. You may be wrong in your assumptions.


Rev9

I may be,, true enough.. I am imperfect, and make no claim otherwise.
But if that is so,, it suggests a prearranged changing of the diaper.

so who is winning?

 

[LibertyEagle]

Where in the hell do you come up with the idea I said to kick Republicans off the forum? You efforts to misconstrue are just mindblowing. I was trying to suggest a means by which you can keep your street cred with the Republicans you are so afraid of offending in your elbow rubbing efforts to get liberty candidates in. I am not compartmentalizing, you are demanding people give up their own issues to support only the issues that further your goals because they are embarassing your people. Stop putting words in my mouth. The only person I have seen to constantly be demanding to shut people up on this board is you...

eta...I think it is really funny you cling to Ron Paul picking the Republican party to mount his efforts after the man had left the party to be a libertarian and then returned and then makes statements such as the party is largely irrelevant. I don't think you will ever get it. It isn't about RP. You have picked your postion but you fight for liberty by demanding others concede their right to self determination as a symbol of fidelity as it serves your purpose. He chose his battleground and he wanted people to join his efforts as there is strength in numbers. He was also wise enough to know that not everyone could or would choose to be a republican and he sure wouldn't waste all his energy trying to humiliate those who disagree with his party of choice because true liberty involves respecting others to have their own paths to follow. If we have faith in our convictions that we are on the right path then we also need to realize it will be a stronger movement if we offer our knowledge to everyone not just those who can wear the Republican brand name.

You know, moostracks, if instead of going on the attack and personally insulting me, you would have spent your time trying to clarify what you were talking about, this would have gone a lot smoother. I never realized that you wanted to work in the Democratic Party instead. You should have just said that and I would have understood.

But, what I said in my initial post still stands. If we are trying to get a liberty candidate elected in the Republican Party, then it's not a good idea to carry a Code Pink sign in one hand and that candidate's sign in the other. In the same way, that holding a tea party sign while working for a Democratic liberty candidate wouldn't be bright either.

Is that fair?

 

[Occam's Banana]

Wow...just wow you are being ignorant. It was a matter of making a correlation between something most people find so morally repugnant they would not want to associate with it because they cannot seem to be able to grasp the reaction of those who do not want to associate with the republican party because of how heinous they view the republican partiy's behavior. Stop being so paranoid. I did not say the republican party was the nazi party. Major reading comprehension fail...

I did not say that you said "the [R]epublican party was the [N]azi party."

I said that you "all but explicitly" accused a group of people of being the moral equivalent of Nazi collaborators (and then hypocritically criticized them for being judgemental - a point I notice you have completely ignored).

And that is *exactly* what you did. And you're doing it again here: "It [is] a matter of making a correlation between something most people find [...] morally repugnant [i.e., working within the Nazi party]" and working within the Republican party (whose behavior is "heinous").

You do not get to say that you "correlate" moral revulsion at the idea of working within the Nazi party with moral revulsion at the idea of working within the "heinous" Republican party - and then turn around and say that you are not implying that working within the Republican party is the moral equivalent of working within the Nazi party. That is *exactly* what you are implying, whether you wish to recognize it or not.

You also need to do some serious work on clarifying the antecedents of your pronouns. You use the word "they" three times in the same sentence to refer to two different groups of people. You also use the word "between" without follwing it, at some point, with a conjuction such as "and" (as in "between [something] and [something else]"). In fact, your whole second sentence is a wretchedly jumbled train-wreck of words. (These things make one look rather foolish when one presumes to lecture others on their reading comprehension skills.)

And just for the record: Yes. Yes, I might very well be willing to work within the Nazi party - if I thought I could do anything to mitigate or counteract its evil. Oskar Schindler did. So did John Rabe. So your attempt to play the Nazi card is a fail.

 

[moostraks]

It seems pretty clear to me. In politics, perception is everything. And Republicans, rightly or wrongly, see themselves as being for the Constitution, states' rights, liberty and all the rest. (stop laughing) They see liberals as those people who want big government, more and more handouts and are fine with our country being taken over by the new version of Communism. Which in their mind are the evil islamofascists (sic). They see groups like Code Pink as being a liberal group promoting those concepts and will consider anyone who aligns themselves with such groups as being liberal too.

As long as we are trying to get our liberty candidates elected to office through the Republican Party, our candidates have to appeal to Republicans in order to win their primaries.

If we want to be helpful in getting our guys elected, it's probably not a good idea to associate the liberty movement with known liberal groups.

Talk about misconstruing. You are the king of that.

I don't give a rat's ass about the Republican Party and I have said that like a thousand times.

It is only a vehicle for getting our liberty candidates elected and guess what, it has been WORKING.

What about that do you not understand?

Yes, Ron Paul left the Republican Party once for a very short time, but he came back to it, because he chose it as the best vehicle for him to use.

Your hate for the Republican Party is clouding your eyes. With few exceptions, I don't think anyone here has much love loss for the R Party at all and certainly not after the RNC. What I posted in my initial post in this thread was about STRATEGY. I had the audacity to suggest that for those using the Republican Party, it probably isn't helpful to hook up with Code Pink. How dare I say such a thing!!! omg, omg, omg, omg.....

If you want to use a different approach, GO FOR IT. Nowhere have I said that you needed to follow a certain course. My only concern is that if we split up too much, we won't be nearly as successful. But, people need to do what they need to do. It wasn't too long ago that we were supporting a Democrat on here who had good credentials and that's great. Just spread the message the way you deem best.

I am picking just one post from the multitude to point out where you make your strategy "our" strategy and then you usually proceed to berate anyone who disagrees with you. You have come on a thread that some people have tried to form an alliance of ideas that are different from yours and try to browbeat them over having a different strategy (in this case using liberal groups to force ideas through that we want to get attention). With me I came on this morning in yet another failed attempt to try and provide a suggestion to you over working within your chosen party while trying to work with others and you have jumped my stuff and told me I am trying to silence you.You aren't listening to what people are trying to say and causing people to waste their time try to defend what they haven't said. No wonder your post count is so high!

 

[LibertyEagle]

I am picking just one post from the multitude to point out where you make your strategy "our" strategy and then you usually proceed to berate anyone who disagrees with you. You have come on a thread that some people have tried to form an alliance of ideas that are different from yours and try to browbeat them over having a different strategy (in this case using liberal groups to force ideas through that we want to get attention). With me I came on this morning in yet another failed attempt to try and provide a suggestion to you over working within your chosen party while trying to work with others and you have jumped my stuff and told me I am trying to silence you.You aren't listening to what people are trying to say and causing people to waste their time try to defend what they haven't said. No wonder your post count is so high!

I edited my post, so you may want to go read that. But, I will remind you that this thread was about what may have happened at the REPUBLICAN National Convention; not the Democratic National Convention. So, you coming in here and having a temper tantrum because you do not want to work in the Republican Party is a complete FAIL.