URGENT! We must kill the "Pacifist" meme

[AuH20]

Ron Paul projects pacificism, though it is not his intent. I can't completely blame these truckers for arriving at this conclusion.

 

[Travlyr]

Ron Paul projects pacificism, though it is not his intent. I can't completely blame these truckers for arriving at this conclusion.

How? By calling out the powers-that-be in broad daylight? By writing "End The Fed?" By constantly calling for rule by law rather than rule by weapon? By not being a draft dodger?

Where do you find pacifism in Ron Paul?

 

[AhuwaleKaNaneHuna]

I think we get it from calling others war mongers. That implies we have a problem with war, when we don't, when/if it is necessary for National defense.

What I think we ALL have a problem with is-

WAR FOR PROFIT.


Insetad of saying war mongers, maybe would should start saying war profiteers.



I realize we also have issue with undeclared wars not approved by Congress.

If that is your biggest beef, start saying those who support Illegal Wars.




Just a thought. They are what I have switched to as of late, to not come across as a pacifist.

 

[Darthbrooklyn]

Can we stop using the word 'Meme"... It's an annoying word.. thanks

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Let them go sign up for the military then. I'm sick of all the people wanting war being the ones NOT going to war. There used to be a time the King/Prince would fight with their military. Obama drinks imported coffee while taking a shit, as he orders drone attacks.

 

[virgil47]

This morning at a trucker round table Ron Paul was unanimously labeled a "pacifist". I have had lots of round table discussions with truckers --- but this pacifist thing has gotten out of hand. Most all truckers tend to lean conservative but the problem is they get ALL of their info from Sean Hannity, Levin, Medved and Limbaugh. It appears that "conservative talk radio" has been trying to create a pacifist meme -- I believe they have succeeded. ***It must be squashed***.

I think Ron needs to make some bold statements in support of violence -- really, I'm not kidding. --- But from a historical perspective.

Republicans NEED to hear Paul say that there is a rightious time and place for violence, like:

The day after Paul Reveres ride --- The day armed citizens stood in solidarity against the British crown in defense of liberty on the Lexington Green -- April 19th 1775. It was the day that the shot was heard around the world.

If he could work this into an interview or the debate -- I think it would do wonders.

Opinion?

TMike

When your truckin buddies make this absurd claim pick out one at your table and ask him if he thinks he can whip a trucker at the next table. Be sure to pick one at the next table that is of smaller stature and weaker demeanor then the guy at your table. When he says yes as he most likely will say well go whip him. If he is a rational human he'll refuse. When he refuses tell him he must be a pacifist. I think the others at the table will get your point.

 

[AuH20]

How? By calling out the powers-that-be in broad daylight? By writing "End The Fed?" By constantly calling for rule by law rather than rule by weapon? By not being a draft dodger?

Where do you find pacifism in Ron Paul?

It's largely his rhetoric. When you routinely sound like Dennis Kucinich, you have major messaging problems that go beyond the media slant. Secondly, when he speaks of the U.S. government's catastrophic foreign policy mistakes, he almost always absolves the other parties of any wrong doing, which is really disingeuous. As ruthless and criminal as the U.S. government is, they aren't the sole source of evil in the world. Ron really should try to strike a balance and more people would respect what he has to say, as opposed to relegating him to the woods as some peace crank. IMHO Ron should declare himself the vigilant candidate as opposed to the peace candidate. The word "peace" has become so tainted over the years, thanks to mischief encouraged by the United Nations.

 

[Travlyr]

It's largely his rhetoric. When you routinely sound like Dennis Kucinich, you have major messaging problems that go beyond the media slant. Secondly, when he speaks of the U.S. government's catastrophic foreign policy mistakes, he almost always absolves the other parties of any wrong doing, which is really disingeuous. As ruthless and criminal as the U.S. government is, they aren't the sole source of evil in the world. Ron really should try to strike a balance and more people would respect for what he has to say, as opposed to relegating him to the woods as some peace crank.

Ron Paul is not disingenuous at all. The media distorts his rhetoric. Foreign policy is driven by monetary policy.

• Honest sound money promotes peace, liberty, and prosperity.
• Dishonest fiat money promotes war, police state, and rich vs. poor classism.

Those are the facts that media shills will not tell.

 

[goldpants]

When your truckin buddies make this absurd claim pick out one at your table and ask him if he thinks he can whip a trucker at the next table. Be sure to pick one at the next table that is of smaller stature and weaker demeanor then the guy at your table. When he says yes as he most likely will say well go whip him. If he is a rational human he'll refuse. When he refuses tell him he must be a pacifist. I think the others at the table will get your point.

Nice one

 

[Butchie]

How? By calling out the powers-that-be in broad daylight? By writing "End The Fed?" By constantly calling for rule by law rather than rule by weapon? By not being a draft dodger?

Where do you find pacifism in Ron Paul?

Unfortunately those clapping seals in the audience rarely, if ever see any of that, they see Newt slap down and reporter and say "Kill Them" and that's tough to them, then Ron get's up there and talks about how Iran is scared and we should understand why they want a Nuke and empathize with the death of the scientists, doesn't come off right in that audience.

 

[AuH20]

Ron Paul is not disingenuous at all. The media distorts his rhetoric. Foreign policy is driven by monetary policy.

• Honest sound money promotes peace, liberty, and prosperity.
• Dishonest fiat money promotes war, police state, and rich vs. poor classism.

Those are the facts that media shills will not tell.

Wars lead to inflationary monetary policy. I don't think you will get any objections from me. However, Ron needs to drop the peace verbiage. There are ways to articulate non-interventionism and sound money & not sound like some dolt from a hippy commune. In the long run, non-interventionism preserves our currency as well as lives. That the logical conclusion that he should stress. Forget about the peace mumbo jumbo.

 

[tennman]

He said that if there was a declaration of war he'd support it and get in, win and get out. That's not a pacifist. A true pacifist NEVER believes in war or violence.

 

[everlasticity]

Ok. Here is a suggestion for killing the pacifist meme. Iran attacks US vessels in the straight of hormuz. Congress votes for declaration of war, Ron Paul votes in favor of declaration. Ron Paul becomes war time president. foreign policy problem solved.

 

[AuH20]

He said that if there was a declaration of war he'd support it and get in, win and get out. That's not a pacifist. A true pacifist NEVER believes in war or violence.

But he's been type-cast as the peace candidate. The republican voters, especially the older ones, think he's George McGovern.

 

[georgiaboy]

I think we get it from calling others war mongers. That implies we have a problem with war, when we don't, when/if it is necessary for National defense.

What I think we ALL have a problem with is-

WAR FOR PROFIT.


Insetad of saying war mongers, maybe would should start saying war profiteers.



I realize we also have issue with undeclared wars not approved by Congress.

If that is your biggest beef, start saying those who support Illegal Wars.




Just a thought. They are what I have switched to as of late, to not come across as a pacifist.

Military welfare for foreign countries is another way of putting it.

 

[sailingaway]

No. He preaches peace and prosperity for a reason - he isn't prone to violence, he's a man of peace.

Like it or not, it's what he is.

It's also not worth trying to scream and bleat about bombing brown people as a pragmatic procedure, because he won't convince mouth breathers like your co-workers, and he'll alienate his base of supporters. It's a losing proposition all the way around.

he was for sending letters of marque after Bin Laden IMMEDIATELY, not waiting until a land war could bog us down and he could get away, and he said of course we had to fight WWII, after Pearl Harbor. He says we need to define the enemy so wars don't go on forever, do the job with all our might and get out. He was against the SAALT treaties in good part because we would have to limit our future missile development yet let the Soviets update theirs.

He's not a pacifist, but he only believes in war under the Christian or Just War Theory.

 

[Travlyr]

Wars lead to inflationary monetary policy.

No that's wrong. Fiat monetary policy is inflationary and leads to wars not the other way around. That is why we couldn't have WWI until after the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. It was important to have the money first.

But he's been type-cast as the peace candidate. The republican voters, especially the older ones, think he's George McGovern.

Yeah, Ron has been type-cast as kooky, Crazy Uncle Ron, extreme, fringe, druggie, pacifist, racist, unelectable... it never ends. It is not Ron's rhetoric doing it.

That is the whole point of this thread. Truck drivers spend hours upon hours bouncing down the road and their main source of information is Rushie, Hannity, Levin, Medved, and whatever other liars have the microphone twisting Ron Paul's words. Do you ever hear them talk about sound money? Ever? Ever hear Ron Paul talk about sound money?

 

[Icymudpuppy]

GURPS (Generic Universal Role Playing System) 4th Edition from Steve Jackson Games.

Chapter 3, Disadvantages.

Page 148 of the Character creation book.

Pacifism (point value variable)

You are opposed to violence. This can take several forms. Choose ONE of the following:

Cannot Kill
You may fight, you may even start fights, but you may never do anything that seems likely to kill another. This includes abandoning a wounded foe to "die on his own". You must do your best to keep your companions from killing, too. If you DO kill someone, or feel responsible for a death, you immediately suffer a nervous breakdown. Roll 3 6 sided dice and be totally morose and useless for that many days. (role play it). During this time, you must make a will save to offer any sort of violence toward anyone for any reason. -15 character points. (Most American Children.)

Reluctant Killer
You are psychologically unprepared to kill people. Whenever you make a deadly attack (e.g. with a knife or gun) against an obvious person whose face is visible to you, you are at -4 to hit and may not AIM. If you cannot see the foe's face due to mask, darkness, or distance, or because you attacked from behind, your penalty is only -2, except in close combat. You have no penalty to attack a vehicle (even an occupied one), an opponent you do not believe is a person (ex. Zombies), or a target you can't actually see such as coordinates on a map. If you kill a recognizable person, the effect on you is the same as for the cannot kill disadvantage above. You have not problem with your ALLIES killing, and may even supply ammo, loaded weapons, and encouragement. You just can't do the killing yourself. -5 points. (Most American Civilians)

Cannot Harm Innocents
You may fight, you may even start fights, but you may only use deadly force on a foe that is attempting to do serious harm. Capture is not serious harm unless you are already under penalty of death or have a Code of honor that would require suicide if captured. You never intentionally do anything that causes, or even threatens to cause injury to the uninvolved, particularly if they are ordinary folks. This trait is especially appropriate for crime fighters, super heroes and the like. -10 points (Most American Soldiers.)

Self Defense Only
You only fight to defend yourself or those in your care using only as much force as is necessary to eliminate the threat. (NO PREMPTIVE STRIKES ALLOWED). You must do your best to discourage others from starting fights. -15 points RON PAUL

Total Nonviolence: You will not lift a hand against another intelligent creature for any reason. You must do your nonviolent best to discourage violent behavior in others, too. You are free to defend yourself against attacks by animals, mosquitoes, etc. -30 points. (GANDHI)

In a high realism campaign, the Game Master might require all PCs to start out with Reluctant Killer or even Cannot Kill to account for their lack of real world experience, thus putting them at a disadvantage against hardened foes.

 

[Matthanuf06]

Posters here need to understand that other posters know Ron's philosophy. The issue isn't what is his philosophy, but rather what the public believes. Far too many posters respond with he obvious isn't a pacifist and proceed to mention what his philosophy is. Well we already know that. The problem is other people, the actual voters in this country, do not know that. How do we close that gap? We have to stop blaming the voters. We have to stop thinking that it is all their fault for not actually doing the research. It is the candidates job to spread the message.

 

[Butchie]

Posters here need to understand that other posters know Ron's philosophy. The issue isn't what is his philosophy, but rather what the public believes. Far too many posters respond with he obvious isn't a pacifist and proceed to mention what his philosophy is. Well we already know that. The problem is other people, the actual voters in this country, do not know that. How do we close that gap? We have to stop blaming the voters. We have to stop thinking that it is all their fault for not actually doing the research. It is the candidates job to spread the message.

You've got that right, this fairytale idea that the voters are suddenly going to "get smart" sometime between now and the next primary states needs to stop, I can only get people to listen to Ron, it's Ron himself that has to drive the point home, I can't do it for him.