I still think we can accomplish both, a great fundraising day, and avoid 75% of the upcoming trainwreck if we stop marketing this as predominately Guy Falkes day. I don't want to throw in the towel yet. Alot of this can be averted.
Ron Paul Segment Coming Up On Tucker
- Thread starter angelatc
- Start date
I still think we can accomplish both, a great fundraising day, and avoid 75% of the upcoming trainwreck if we stop marketing this as predominately Guy Falkes day. I don't want to throw in the towel yet. Alot of this can be averted.
So it's a conspiracy?
They're all out to get Ron Paul? I can believe a guy like Hannity using this against him, but I think most people are either favorable enough of him or not big enough assholes to make that kind of criticism.In fact, a controversial date may be even better than a politically sound one. Controversy generates a lot more discussion.
There are enough fair-minded people or pro-Paul people in the media to let this get split down and generate a spirited debate. That would be far better coverage than having some mention of "Wow! Look at all that money!"
The Tucker interview was not so bad. Not real good, but not so bad.
I personally have no problem with this Guy Fawkes character, but it was good sense to remove references from the 5th site. This "Guy" plotted to kill an English monarch and a bunch of aristocrats. Did we not fight the soldiers of the decendants of this royalty to win our freedom during the Revolutionary War?
I just don't see it is that big of a deal. If we rasie $2 million THAT will be the story.
"Guy Fawkes appears in the 2002 List of "100 Great Britons" (sponsored by the BBC and voted for by the public), alongside such other greats as David Beckham, Aleister Crowley, Winston Churchill and Johnny Rotten. Cynical Britons are sometimes known to comment that Guy Fawkes was the only man to go to Parliament with honourable intentions."
No doubt Ron Paul has a lot of supporters who are cynical towards the U.S. government (yours included) but that does not mean I'd rather our revolution be a peaceful one.
Tucker is not the end of the world, and neither is Guy Fawkes. I actually think I respect Fawkes more than Tucker.
I personally have no problem with this Guy Fawkes character, but it was good sense to remove references from the 5th site. This "Guy" plotted to kill an English monarch and a bunch of aristocrats. Did we not fight the soldiers of the decendants of this royalty to win our freedom during the Revolutionary War?
I just don't see it is that big of a deal. If we rasie $2 million THAT will be the story.
"Guy Fawkes appears in the 2002 List of "100 Great Britons" (sponsored by the BBC and voted for by the public), alongside such other greats as David Beckham, Aleister Crowley, Winston Churchill and Johnny Rotten. Cynical Britons are sometimes known to comment that Guy Fawkes was the only man to go to Parliament with honourable intentions."
No doubt Ron Paul has a lot of supporters who are cynical towards the U.S. government (yours included) but that does not mean I'd rather our revolution be a peaceful one.
Tucker is not the end of the world, and neither is Guy Fawkes. I actually think I respect Fawkes more than Tucker.
Duckman
Member
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 869
Ok.
A few things...
Call me crazy, but I will go further than others and say this was actually GOOD exposure. Tucker treated Ron Paul very well, I honestly think. Yes, Joel is freaked out by Ron Paul supporters, and doesn't think Ron Paul is interesting (except possibly for non-platonic reasons). Fuck him. But I think even Joel said good things about Ron Paul in this interview, when so many have been 100% negative.
Honestly I see this piece as almost a subdued warning about where we may be headed as Ron Paul supporters. I think we need to think hard about the fact that they DID make it seem that being a supporter of Guy Fawkes (and the anarchism implication) was a bit more extreme than even 9/11 truth.
I don't really care what people interally believe, but EXTERNALLY we need to be civil and understand that we are not going to be able to broadcast whatever message we want and expect to not freak out a good deal of society. Some people who support Ron Paul originally got exposed to libertarian ideas because of the drug war, and they understand that if we tried to win the drug war by showing society alot of people doing alot of drugs it would be counterproductive.
It takes a majority to be elected President, and we all know the majority are squares.
A few things...
Call me crazy, but I will go further than others and say this was actually GOOD exposure. Tucker treated Ron Paul very well, I honestly think. Yes, Joel is freaked out by Ron Paul supporters, and doesn't think Ron Paul is interesting (except possibly for non-platonic reasons). Fuck him. But I think even Joel said good things about Ron Paul in this interview, when so many have been 100% negative.
Honestly I see this piece as almost a subdued warning about where we may be headed as Ron Paul supporters. I think we need to think hard about the fact that they DID make it seem that being a supporter of Guy Fawkes (and the anarchism implication) was a bit more extreme than even 9/11 truth.
I don't really care what people interally believe, but EXTERNALLY we need to be civil and understand that we are not going to be able to broadcast whatever message we want and expect to not freak out a good deal of society. Some people who support Ron Paul originally got exposed to libertarian ideas because of the drug war, and they understand that if we tried to win the drug war by showing society alot of people doing alot of drugs it would be counterproductive.
It takes a majority to be elected President, and we all know the majority are squares.
You respect a guy who planned to commit mass murder? Fawkes is a British icon, so what? Hitler is a German icon. Stalin is a Russian, erh um Soviet icon.
Yeah, well apparently in the UK Guy Fawkes is a hero among anarchists and communists.
Of course, we live in the U.S. where most people don't even know about Guy Fawkes day, let alone make any connection to anarchists and communists. I also seriously doubt you're gonna have CNN, MSNBC, or Fox News making a big deal about the date if it's successful. I mean, if there are $2 million raised in that day, they'll be talking about that and not any bogus connections.
Like I said, only Paul's critics will really make the connection a big deal. A lot of people are more likely to make the V for Vendetta connection.
The worse criticism that can come out of that is everyone being nerds, which isn't nearly as bad.
I think the idea of killing every last politician is actually something that would resonate with voters.
Of course, we live in the U.S. where most people don't even know about Guy Fawkes day, let alone make any connection to anarchists and communists. I also seriously doubt you're gonna have CNN, MSNBC, or Fox News making a big deal about the date if it's successful. I mean, if there are $2 million raised in that day, they'll be talking about that and not any bogus connections.
Like I said, only Paul's critics will really make the connection a big deal. A lot of people are more likely to make the V for Vendetta connection.
The worse criticism that can come out of that is everyone being nerds, which isn't nearly as bad.I think the idea of killing every last politician is actually something that would resonate with voters.
Last edited:
Fawkes is a British icon, so what? Hitler is a German icon. Stalin is a Russian, erh um Soviet icon.
I don't look at him as a mass murderer. I look at him as a revolutionary. By todays standards I guess he would be a terrorist - but then, a U.S. citizen standing up against the government in this day and age could be called a terrorist.
In the 1600's the British monarchy treated their people not much better than Hitler or Stalin did their people. While they did not systematically murder them, they pretty much starved them and left them to live in squalor. Would you have a problem with someone blowing up Hitler and his henchman - as was tried?
I'm just saying this Guy Fawkes character was not going about trying to kill saints. The English rulers of the time were pretty much tyrants.
That said, and as i said, it was best to remove the references from the 5th site.
I think the idea of killing every last politician is actually something that would resonate with voters.
It's fine to joke about, but some people here are anarchists and do think the end justifies the means. And these people, along with the "truthers" are why Ron and we, the other (sane) supporters, are pigeonholed as crazy, batty, freaks.
I think that is a pretty naive assumption considering that a) they are looking for opportunities to discredit us and this comes on a silver platter 2) They are already doing it before 1.00 is raised. when 3 million is raised, they will have to answer the question, why?
.
repost.. lots of pages.. hard to find.. thanks ChooseLiberty
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izgkZHD4pbs
.
That's conspiratorial nonsense. Most trepidation in the mainstream media is due to the fact that he is the black sheep of the group not because they have an agenda against him.
There are some who do have an agenda, but they are not the majority.
TooConservative
Member
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2007
- Messages
- 530
I just noticed the guy from Time who wrote the article said, kind of under his breath while Tucker was talking over him, "Plus, he's adorable" in reference to Ron Paul's popularity.
Yeah, the good doctor is pretty adorable in his quiet dignified way.
Yeah, the good doctor is pretty adorable in his quiet dignified way.
Psyclone
Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2007
- Messages
- 123
I'm the guy with the three corner hat and the bell who was outside the Ames rally that he gives as the prime example of a crazy/nerdy Ron Paul supporter. I actually thought my mental health was within acceptable limits, but now I'm not so sure. Regardless, the mentally ill need a president too.
Similar threads
