The attacks begin against Glen Bradley from the NeoCon faction of the Tea Parties

[dannno]

LOL I know right?

Look, if there was ANYBODY on Earth who outright KNEW whether I am in fact a 9/11 truther or not, it's you guys. What boggles my mind here is how deeply false the allegations are, and where did they come from? At a meeting last week, this lady...a very very angry lady...insisted to my face that I argued with her that 'Bush did 9/11.'

Where in the holy hell did she get this nonsense from? I mean, lol it sure looked to me like she believed it. I can only imagine that she took my arguing of Michael Scheuer's position on Blowback, and just imagined the rest. We saw a LOT of that happening in 2008. This lady is probably going to insist for the rest of her life that I stood there and argued with her that "Bush did 9/11"

So apparently even if we DON'T take that position, and have NEVER believed it or argued it, we are still going to get hit with it merely because we are Ron Paulers. So keep your eyes and ears open, and I will recommend that you have a ready answer at your disposal to avoid suffering what Beck did to Medina.

Part of it is that they believe your non-interventionist foreign policy is anti-American, so whether you think Bush carried out 9/11 or whether his and his party's philosophy and past actions were responsible is irrelevant to these people. They group all of those people in as anti-American, like that Cherry guy who ran against Ron Paul. They are driven purely by emotion, not reason.

 

[sratiug]

Q: "Should your supporters stop talking about 911 truth?"

A1: "Who supplied the explosives for the 1st World Trade Center bombing?"

A2: "Should your viewers stop talking about 911 truth? If X% of your viewers don't believe the official story, should your station be removed from the air? Have you warned your viewers not to investigate 911? Has your station investigated 911 or run stories on investigations of 911?"

A3: "I don't tell my supporters what to do, you must have me confused with a neocon or a socialist, I am an individualist."

 

[osan]

This was only to be expected.

Just keep doing as much of the right things as you are able.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Do you remember back in 2008 when I stood out in Raleigh with a big 4' by 8' sign reading

"No welfare for billionaires, vote the bums out!"
...
Really, it all boils down to me being an unashamed and unabashed Ron Pauler. The more I talk up Ron Paul, the more this poisonous garbage seems to get fabricated and slung.

That was what I was thinking by looking at your pic. He was probably more mad about the backside of the sign (Ron Paul) than the front side.

All you can do is rationally and calmly counter these zombies when they falsely accuse you publicly. No need for long discussions. Laugh and say, "I am not a truther." End of discussion.

Now that Hannity is starting to be friendly with Rand, the smear may wear off eventually. No doubt these people are Hannity fans. Probably no reason to discuss Ron or Rand in most situations anyway.

 

[cbc58]

you're in office... he's not. state your position and move on. we've got your back. bigger fish to fry.

 

[sratiug]

Q: "Should your supporters stop talking about 911 truth?"

A1: "Who supplied the explosives for the 1st World Trade Center bombing?"

A2: "Should your viewers stop talking about 911 truth? If X% of your viewers don't believe the official story, should your station be removed from the air? Have you warned your viewers not to investigate 911? Has your station investigated 911 or run stories on investigations of 911?"

A3: "I don't tell my supporters what to do, you must have me confused with a neocon or a socialist, I am an individualist."

A4: "What is 911 truth?"
Reporter: "You know, people claiming Bush did 911."
Candidate/office holder: "Wow! Do they have any evidence?"
Reporter: "????"

 

[Imperial]

They group all of those people in as anti-American, like that Cherry guy who ran against Ron Paul. They are driven purely by emotion, not reason.

Whatever the case is about this one particular guy in Gunny's district, that would not be the case with Jeff Cherry. He was my teacher my freshman year in high school and a sponsor for a club I ran my senior year. I have to say that I had some of the best foreign policy debates with him I have ever had. People can be driven by reason and come up with a conclusion different from many of us. And at the very least he has honestly considered both sides on foreign conflicts like Afghanistan and Iraq, although I wouldn't know what his exact position is now.

Interestingly, I found a similar situation with another of Dr. Paul's opponents when I met him, Chris Peden.

 

[teacherone]

A4: "What is 911 truth?"
Reporter: "You know, people claiming Bush did 911."
Candidate/office holder: "Wow! Do they have any evidence?"
Reporter: "????"

Perfect

 

[NewName]

Part of it is that they believe your non-interventionist foreign policy is anti-American, so whether you think Bush carried out 9/11 or whether his and his party's philosophy and past actions were responsible is irrelevant to these people. They group all of those people in as anti-American, like that Cherry guy who ran against Ron Paul. They are driven purely by emotion, not reason.

Yep!

Glen, check out this thread, understanding this stuff will help out a lot: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...ncing-or-Converting-Others-(New-Short-Version!)

Studying the NLP stuff leads to some things you could do. "Maintaining your frame": Act like you didn't even hear what they said and respond only to the things that they feel good about. So if they say something like "you think Bush did 9/11!" respond with "I agree with you about the economy, and we agree on ______. We agree that we should do ______(something you know they will definitely agree with), right? I hope we can keep working together to ______." Most people don't care how their legislators vote, they only care that they feel good electing them. So make sure you can make them feel good by talking to them and you should be set.

Theoretically I guess a successful politician would have to have some traits, like being able to make people feel good and having leadership/alpha male traits so people feel safe trusting them. So use good feeling words and images, good posture, eye contact, sociable/talkative, find out what people are interested in and talk to them about that, maintain your frame, etc. You probably have all of this naturally but it can always help to learn and practice more to get better.

The reason they don't like you is most likely that they have an emotional link that "Bush = good" and when you contradict that by saying "Bush = bad" then it makes "you = bad" in their mind, and since most people run on autopilot they act on that and will make up anything to justify their feelings. They will rewrite events in their mind to rationalize their feelings. People can even feel one way about something and recall it correctly, and then if their feelings change they can/will then rewrite what happened to reflect their new feelings and they will appear to completely forget what actually happened before. This is extremely common, it's not just crazy people that do this. I've personally seen this happen several times before, with very normal, intelligent people, and this particular example sounds exactly like it. I had no idea what was going on before, but after studying NLP and psychology and reading lots of scientific studies it's all starting to make sense.

 

[driller80545]

I would just like to say "fukem". I'm just saying..........

 

[angelatc]

Instead of going to the press over this silliness, I think Glen would be much better advised to spend his time talking about his legislative agenda. Move the conversation to the Farmer's Freedom Act, the Firearms Freedom Act, nullifying Obamacare, etc. Not only will that make it clear that Glen is the serious, adult party here, but it'll also help move the ball on the reasons he ran for office in the first place.

Absolutely. You need to control the conversation. Don't let them put you on the defensive. Always make this about your votes.

 

[qh4dotcom]

Gunny, what is the problem? You already won the election and now you're a politician (try finding a politician who doesn't have people speaking out against him/her).
No need to make a big deal about this. People will see you for who you are.

 

[JK/SEA]

People i talk to on 9/11 always frame the debate to their own mindset. Like''oh, you think our government did 9/11, or some other comment like Gunny's detractor. What i do is turn it back on them. I use this line EVERY time 9/11 comes up. ''Anyone who believes the 9/11 commission report, has a screw loose.'' Then i laugh at them, and walk away.

 

[devil21]

Why are you worried about it Glen? You just took office and have two years before you need to win re-election. Ignore those people and be a good Rep for your district and let the rest work itself out. No need and no sense in worrying about the few neo-cons who want to distract you (which is already appearing to be effective) from the job you were elected to do. They want you to spend your time beating back their attacks instead of BEING A GOOD REP THAT CAN WIN RE-ELECTION ON YOUR RECORD. It's easier for them to try to win a future election with a neo-con candidate when you're wasting your time on this instead of your job.

One thing Ive learned about neo-cons is that they want to get into petty distractionary debate/arguments and personal attacks, all to avoid any substantive discussion on issues. Don't fall into that crap and don't waste your time "defending" yourself against every person that wants to feel important by getting your attention. You have to move above the fray now. Im sure it's easier said than done when you're a public figure that's personally attacked but you don't see politicians (even the ones we oppose) taking the time to defend themselves against any and every scurrilous attack thrown at them.

 

[speciallyblend]

the gop will rise or fall on its own merits! It seems they like to freefall!

 

[Elwar]

Don't fall for the collectivism. You are not a "truther", a "Republican", a "libertarian" or anything else.

You are an individual with your own thoughts and ideals.

You may have views that are considered libertarian and be in the Republican party but you are you. Not a mindless subset of a collective.

 

[georgiaboy]

for the record, Gunny, we have your back. NC is fortunate to have you in its statehouse.

As to those attempting to smear you, just continue to be your level-headed principled self and rise above. Above all, when speaking the truth, choose goodwill and kindness in return for these barbs, and it will go a long way for you in the presence of others when you return grace and mercy instead of a harsh counterattack - it's one of RP's best qualities, and one I'm sure you possess, too. It also helps those hearing relax and be more receptive, and help them work through their cognitive dissonance.

Matt 5:43-48 comes to mind for you.

Matthew 5: 34-4843 "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44 But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Lastly, I think there are many well-intentioned GOP'ers like this lady who are just plain scared of the RP revolution because it challenges their political and cultural worldview of what a 'good conservative' looks, feels, and tastes like. It's up to all of us to help these folks see that we're not the enemy, nor are they.

 

[Inkblots]

Again, though, I consider RPF's to be a little different. I want you guys to have the ultimate 'inside view' in any case for several reasons, 1) it helps us with RP2012, 2) it helps us when our membership decides to run for something, and 3) if a random visitor should stumble on my posting history here, I think it is more likely to humanize me than to hurt me.

Thanks, Gunny! We can all learn from your experiences, fighting on the front lines of the battle for liberty. Please continue to keep us in the loop.

 

[jct74]

Thanks, Gunny! We can all learn from your experiences, fighting on the front lines of the battle for liberty. Please continue to keep us in the loop.

Yes, I agree.

 

[dannno]

Whatever the case is about this one particular guy in Gunny's district, that would not be the case with Jeff Cherry. He was my teacher my freshman year in high school and a sponsor for a club I ran my senior year. I have to say that I had some of the best foreign policy debates with him I have ever had. People can be driven by reason and come up with a conclusion different from many of us. And at the very least he has honestly considered both sides on foreign conflicts like Afghanistan and Iraq, although I wouldn't know what his exact position is now.

Interestingly, I found a similar situation with another of Dr. Paul's opponents when I met him, Chris Peden.

Ok, I guess I was confusing Cherry and Peden with their CAMPAIGNS... Did you not see the ads they ran against Ron Paul? I don't give a rats ass how good they are at defending the murder of innocent people, if they aren't able to COMPREHEND what the other side is saying then they don't get my respect. I understand perfectly well what their positions are, all you have to do is talk to people who listen to Fox News all the time.