Post Paul: What now?

Post Ron Paul: Where do we go now?

Don’t assume that Ron Paul is going to ride off into the sunset, with his cowgirl, Carol, at his side.  He made it clear during his light hearted exchange with Jay Leno that he isn’t finished with us.  And I, for one, am not finished with him either.

If Romney wins, Senator Rand Paul’s trajectory would be on hold and in 2016, Ron Paul, the father, would be the best primary challenger to a Republican establishment president, owned by the FED and the few.

Who else would have the guts to do it?  And the media, who under normal circumstance would pan him, might let him have more than 89 seconds, just to have some fun – and some ratings – in an otherwise boring re-nomination process.  Another run would help educate even more and fatten the Liberty Movement for Senator Rand Paul and the future in 2020.

Besides, this would be the best way to stand up to the corruption and dishonesty of the Republican establishment who runs the party like National Socialists.  To let the abuse of Tampa go unanswered would be a mistake.  “Remember the Maine.”

Is Ron Paul too old?  Not for me.  Konrad Andenauer , Germanys greatest leader of the last two centuries was in power at age 87.  Michelangelo began painting the Sistine Chapel at age 71, he was still at it when he died at age 89.  The Biblical account of Moses has him beginning his long journey, leading the Israelis from slavery, at age 80.  Let Ron Paul lead us out of slavery at age 80.

Here’s a toast to Ron Paul, 2016.

But what do we do now?  And more urgent, how should we vote in the 2012 presidential election?

The good news is that as befits the Liberty Movement, I don’t have to make that decision.  Each one of us will do that as we want.  But here are some of the arguments I am hearing.

1. Vote to re-elect Barack Obama?

The reasoning goes that an Obama win would help bring the Republican establishment to its knees and make them more willing to make room for a Liberty Movement candidate next time.   Isn’t this the best response to their brutal exclusion of the duly elected Ron Paul delegates to the RNC in Tampa?  Haven’t they asked for it?  Hasn’t Bill Kristol and John Sununu made it clear that they do not think they need us and in any case, they do not want us, under any circumstances?

The problem is that Obama’s reelection would likely bring the country to its knees as well.  Even if a manipulated currency created a temporary bubble the long term damage could be catastrophic.  America could go so deep into the sleep of socialism that it might never awaken.  Voting for Obama to create an opening for a Liberty candidate in 2016 might make logical sense to some but it would take the courage of that Utah mountain climber who cut off his hand to get himself free.  Some of us just don’t have the stomach to do it.

2. Vote for Mitt Romney?

If he wins it will delay Rand Paul’s possible rise and may actually end much of what we have accomplished.  Many of our issues, audit the fed, for example, may be co-opted by Romney, who understands the polling data but is owned by the bankers.  Of course, he won’t have a “real” audit but it will appear to address the issue and take the steam out of our cause.  Likewise, the wars may eventually wind down out of financial necessity, as Dr. Paul has said will happen.  For me, voting for Romney is like kissing your sister.  There is just no future in it.

3. Write in Ron Paul’s name?

This was what I was going to do but who would ever know the final number?  It would give me some personal satisfaction, and amuse a few poll watchers, but otherwise mean nothing.  No one would get the message.  There is even a chance that my ballot could be disqualified and all the other viable Liberty candidates I voted for would lose my support as well.

4. Vote for Virgil Goode?

He is the former congressman from Virginia who is running as a candidate of the so called Constitutional Party.  Some say he will get 5% of the vote in his home state.  The Republican Elitist Fascist operation, that worked against us in Tampa, is now hot on his trail, trying to get him off the ballot.  But even if he survives and even if he realizes his most ambitious plans, he will only be on the ballot in 25 states.  What’s the use?

5. Vote for Gary Johnson?

Why not?  No one will know.  A good showing will put the GOP on notice that they had better be respectful to the Liberty Movement and make room for it.  They made it clear they didn’t want us.  Shouldn’t there be consequences?

If the showing is small, well, they were lucky it was Gary Johnson, not Ron Paul.  No harm done.

If Obama wins? Rand Paul can make a run in 2016.  If Romney wins? Ron Paul can challenge him and if the GOP cheats again, and makes it clear they will not allow a free process, he could take on the mantle of the Libertarian Party one more time.  And this time, boosted by bigger numbers and a wider knowledge of the issues, have an impact.

Consider this, if Ron Paul were the Libertarian candidate right now, some polls have him winning 17% of the vote, which would land him in the national debates and change the course of the country.

Bottom line?  I haven’t decided yet but I would like to hear your opinions, without profanity please.  Or join the discussion at: http://www.facebook.com/DougWeadOfficial

Doug Wead and Dr. Ron Paul, backstage at the RNC, Tampa.

About these ads

590 Responses to Post Paul: What now?

  1. buckeyelady65 says:

    Can Rand Paul run as an Independent in 2016 even though he’s got an (R) by his name?

    Also, I do think Ron Paul will be too old in 2016. I’d feel very uncomfortable about that. Old people do eventually start losing their mind and health and it can happen in a snap. If Rand was his VP running mate, said early in the game, I may feel better about it.

    But again, can Rand Paul run Independent in 2016 if there’s a Romney win in 2012?

    At this moment, I was going to Write in Ron Paul – YES, for my own conscious and personal statement, but now I find that in VA there’s no write in where they do electronic ballot. So now, the only vote I can make at this time (IF I even vote) will be for Gary Johnson.

    • mqira says:

      buckeyelady65, Please vote! If you dont…the liberty movement loses a vote. The “establishment” would love that! Gary Johnson is a terrific choice. In my opinion, he is the ONLY choice left. For me, it was Ron Paul, but i feel that a write in is a wasted vote.

      • Josey Wales says:

        Johnson is far from ideal. He supports keeping Guantanamo open. He is not opposed to pre-emptive war. He does not hold the Wall Street bankers accountable for their role in this financial mess. That’s just a few of the problems I personally have with him. Then there is the obvious. He does not have the national recognition to even be considered a threat to Romney or Obama.

      • Benjak says:

        mqira, the establishment doesn’t care who you vote for. Johnson has no chance as a libertarian candidate. Whether you vote for Johnson or you don;t vote at all – it ends the same way. Its better to withdraw your consent by not voting in the circus show all together. Voting = Heads you lose, tails they win.

      • Gary Johnson is not a terrific choice, he supports killing babies who cannot defend themselves, he is a warmonger, he doesn’t know anything about Austrian economics, he supports the Fed and he is a CFR member. The only votes he is gonna get are the legalize pot vote. Besides what made him think he would have a better chance and be a better choice than Ron Paul? He just wants to put a Presidential run on his rich bucketlist, just like climbing Mt. Everest. If he were true to true Liberty, he would have put his money where his mouth is and fully supported Ron Paul. GJ is just a CFR pawn and we will not be voting for him.

      • Albert Meyer says:

        Substitute the name “Gary Johnson” with the name “Ron Paul” in your post and then you’ll have an example of the typical post that the Ron Paul haters posted on the internet the past seven years – full of venom, lies, inaccuracies, innuendos, meanness and vitriol.

        You are either a Romney troll, or you have no idea what the liberty movement stand for. Ron Paul described Gary Johnson as a wonderful man.

        No, he might not live up to the high moral standards of Sunday School teachers like you. For a candidate like that, we must limit our choice from among the likes of George Bush, Bob Dole, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry. If I had any grain of faith left in my body, the likes of you have long dispelled it. Go and worship with your pro-life neo-cons and bearers of false witness.

        Gary Johnson will gladly do without your help or vote. He appeals to the literate and intelligent among us. Bigots, ideologues and those who twist the truth without a blush can go back into their holes and gloat.

      • wes says:

        What is Rodney Martin talking about? Gary Johnson loves The Fed? Is that why he keeps saying he wants to end it? And then he bashes Johnson for not supporting Paul… check the record, he’s supported Paul. He even endorsed him in 2008 and in 2012.

        If Rodney is talking about why is Johnson on the LP ticket and not Paul, it’s because PAUL DIDN’T WANT TO BE ON IT.

    • severinslade says:

      How anyone can continue to support Rand Paul is beyond me. Endorsing Romney, voting for sanctions on Iran, voting for continued financial aid for Egypt…I don’t care if this is a “strategy”, either way, Rand has betrayed the Liberty movement. Also, did anyone happen to catch how his office treated journalists merely trying to ask some questions? Ironic because he just came out with a book about “Washington Bullies.” Funny because he is one himself.

      • Chris says:

        Rude-owski isn’t a journalist. He’s a hack.

      • Joe D. says:

        Please read this response,

        You and every other liberty supporter need to quit being babies (not to offend, just lack of better words) and realize that Rand has done more for the Liberty movement than you or any of us can ever hope, Doug Wead would agree.

        Ron estimated that out of 1000 votes, him and Rand vote differently maybe once or twice. To say that everything he has done in the Senate in just two years means nothing because the ONE vote of sanctions somehow makes him just as awful and dishonest and unappealing as a neocon is absolutely ridiculously stubborn (not to mention unhealthy to the movement).

        Listen, as Wead has stated before, somebody needs to play politics if we want REAL CHANGE and to not to go down with our principals. Ron Paul endorsed tons of “non liberty” candidates for the sake of empowering himself and those (imperfect) candidates in the party. In fact, only weeks after Rand’s endorsement of Romney, Paul endorsed a relatively bland and “normal” republican for his House seat, a message that I couldn’t have taken clearer:

        Endorsing is public announcement of preference, not selling your soul and being chained to do the bidding of the candidate. PLEASE quote me on that.

        As you will see (in either 4 years or 8) Rand is THE greatest asset to the Liberty movement, as has a very VERY delicate and intricate role in it’s future. From a true Paul supporter to another, please dont be one of THOSE Paul supporters.

        By the way, those journalists were badgering Rand about Bilderburg, perhaps the most dangerous (literally) topic to openly have your opinions on published, especially a liberty candidate, and especially if you dont want to piss off the party bosses that, like it or not, could dismantle the entire Liberty Movement just like they did the Tea Party.

        So suck it up and support the man RAISED by Ron Paul. I dont think I would need to tell you that given the choices to vote Rand in 2016 or 2020 (if theres a country left to vote for by that time)

        I apologize if I offended, but I’m doing it out of love for you and the Liberty Movement that is weakened by each and every Rand hater out there that is dividing us, a trait that the Liberty Movement uniquely should NOT have if we want to have a louder voice.

      • humanunit says:

        Filibustering the Patriot Act extension, filibustering the NDAA, campaigning against SOPA/PIPA, domestic drone strikes, the drug war, the Federal Reserve, the TSA, bailouts, subsidies… you’re right, how could someone EVER support him? /s

      • Rhonda says:

        Joe D.,

        What you say has merit to it except for one thing. You are not really responding as you seem to be to Severinslade. Rand Paul’s endorsing of Romney was not playing politics as you put it and as Doug Wead has attempted on smoothly putting out numerous times. Even some reasons he gave out the other week in a 20 minute interview at the convention in Tampa mentioning that Romney would have ruined Ron Paul if he pushed too hard on Romney never included the name of Rand. Therefore it seems all the more rational that Rand did what he did WHEN and HOW he did it to deliberately put a dissension within the movement itself and it worked! All the other things you might say about playing politics no matter how true or so they might be including Rand Paul’s acceptable voting record are separate from his supposed connection within THE movement which even Doug Wead lays claim for him in this post and in other things he has said ever since Rand did what he did WHEN and HOW he did it. That is what Severinslade is referring to.

        The journalist attacks he is referring to and your are defending against might be so if it was just against Luke Rudowski since even though Luke has made headway within the mission of We Are Change, he is an ambush “journalist” and therefore creates distension (or is that dissension?). Severinslade is quite clear in what he is talking about because it only happened once in one particular case. He mentions what Rand Paul’s office did and Rand Paul’s office virtually attacked Abby Martin from R.T. for just asking Rand about why he endorsed Romney and she did not do it under the media claim of R.T., but rather another media she has credentials for, yet Rand sent the Capitol police over to R.T. to create trouble for her, for R.T. and then dragged her into some interrogation room inside of the Capitol Building by coercion.

        RAND PAUL IS A TURNCOAT TO THE MOVEMENT and if he runs for the presidency at any time in the future, all he would be worthy of is getting the lesser of two evils vote. What he has done is not playing politics as Doug Wead and others have consistently attempted to slide into such discussion. Based on Rand’s “promise” statement as to endorsing the winner of the nomination, then we must assume that promise was to do what he did WHEN and HOW he did it. These people are smarter than we are if for no other reason because they are the inside players. They know exactly what they are doing. Rand kept his promise to throw a wrench into the movement if it started to become too powerful and he proved he would turn on millions of people when ordered. No one would have cared if he waited until it became official. Someone being political as Doug says? You decide.

        Yours,
        Rhonda
        September 7, 2012/Friday

    • Sean White says:

      I hope Doug that if he runs in 2016 theres a country left. Second i hope we have a good plan since now we know full well the GOP will do EVERYTHING in it’s power to lie, cheat, and steal a nomination.

    • Scott Karbon says:

      I don’t know why you said that but people don’t lose their sanity just because they’re old. It is NOT normal for someone to lose their sanity – it’s a sign of illness, not part of the aging process.

    • Joe Jared says:

      Did you not watch the Jay Leno show? Ron Paul is obviously going to run again in 2016

  2. David Hinkley says:

    I say vote for Gary Johnson. His views are closest to Ron Paul’s. He will be on the ballot. And a strong tally for him will give a true indication of the Liberty Movement in this country. Perhaps more of the media will take notice that ‘ Liberty is very popular”

    • paul says:

      yes david….. a strong tally will say a lot for Gary and keep Obama in office…… I don’t like the thought of that any more than the next guy.

      • M says:

        Obama is going to stay in office regardless. Voting for Johnson at least demonstrates empirically that we reject the “choices” the establishment has offered us. I plan to write-in Ron Paul pending research into whether my state (CO) allows this. If not, Johnson is getting my vote.

      • Paul, you can’t know for certain that a vote for Gary Johnson will guarantee an Obama win. It may just be that a vote for Gary Johnson may bring a win for Romney instead. Stating that a vote for Ron Paul, Gary Johnson or anyone but Romney will mean a victory for Obama is just plain political chicanery and propaganda with absolutely NO basis in fact. What IS certain is that a Romney win will guarantee that one of two corrupt parties is in the WH. The issue is only BINARY for the weak minded. It is political lies that you promote as fact. Voting FOR someone you can believe IN rather than voting AGAINST someone is ALWAYS the responsibility of an informed and educated populace. Your logic has given us years of corrupt politicians not statesmen. No thanks. I am American first and Republican last not the other way around. If more people voted their conscience we would already have good politicians. The fact that we don’t proves your approach is bad for America. It The ONLY way the GOP will BE good for America is if someone takes them down a peg or three and reminds
        them that 4 years ago they were losers and will be again without the support of the very people they insulted and ignored. The DNC is a lost cause. The ONLY chance the GOP has is to change. That change will only happen when the GOP comes to accept that the PEOPLE are who makes the party not the other way around.

      • Scott Karbon says:

        You know, it’s odd. Some people tell me voting for Johnson will ensure that Obama wins, some people tell me voting for Johnson will ensure that Romney wins. Which side is right?

      • Earl Bandy says:

        @M A couple quick facts: 1. Colorado will not count a write ballot for Ron Paul. 2. Latest PPP polling in Colorado including GJ shows that he hurts Obama a little more than he hurts Romney, though by a statistically insignificant amount. As I recall PPP had GJ at around 5% in Colorado.

      • Rhonda says:

        Nevermorehalleda,

        Well put about Gary Johnson and voting FOR someone rather than the fear context always presented that says that we must vote against someone. Not only is Gary Johnson second to Ron Paul in himself, but voting for him is the best of the 3rd party choices because fortunately he is on all 50 states’ ballots. Not only that, I have heard more than once that Romney, not even Obama, has been making a major effort to get Gary Johnson off of all 50 states’ ballots. If Romney is such a champion, as with Ron Paul, what does he fear so much to attempt such an unusual thing? That alone, should be the biggest sign that voting for Gary Johnson is the only way to go.

        As Gary has said, try him this once anyway. If he gets in and does not do good, then vote him out in 4 years or maybe even convince him to remember that he asked for this to be tried this one time to see what happens and to go from there for the best for the country. Sounds like a winning combination of reasons to vote for him even if our votes are machine stolen from us. In addition to that, we never know, Dr. Paul could have something up his sleeve to combine with Gary yet keep himself out of the main shooting gallery’s target.

        Yours,
        Rhonda
        September 7, 2012/Friday

  3. Janece says:

    Doug, thank you for this. I’m still working out my own answer.

    I was thinking very hard about voting for Gary Johnson, until one of his more ardent supporters over on FB decided to lecture me and then tried to shame me into voting for him. He was saying things like writing in Ron Paul (which I did in 2008) was a vote for the Establishment, and if I didn’t vote for Gary Johnson, see ya! The “revolution” would leave me behind in the dust.

    It was very off putting when combined with some of the other rabid Johnson followers who believe that Dr. Paul and his supporters “owe” our votes to Johnson in the name of Liberty.

    All I know is that I *still* believe in Dr. Pauls’ message, and the Liberty movement, regardless of the outcome of the ’12 election. It’s obvious to anyone paying attention that the game is fixed. And I was so happy to hear that Dr. Paul plans on running in 2016, Lord willing and the creek don’t rise (as my mama used to say! :)…)

    Thank you for all you do to keep us informed in an age of misinformation and incongruency. I guess I’ll know come November 4 which way I’ll be voting. But in either case (write in or Johnson), it will be Dr. Ron Paul who has my continued support.

    • Linda Angst says:

      Janece – I remember cringing at some of the rabid comments by some Ron Paul supporters. It turned them off to Ron Paul. Maybe just ignore immature people’s posts.

      • Janece says:

        That’s what I’m doing, Linda…In fact, I’ve removed myself from all Gary Johnson groups over there just to keep from getting too upset at the radicals :)

    • mqira says:

      Janece, I agree with Linda, and would also ask you to ignore the rabid, immature comments made. I have supported Ron Paul, and have read many harsh comments by Ron Paul supporters, Romney supporters AND Obama supporters! I feel that Romney and Obama supporter are un-informed or mis-informed, and RP supporters are frustrated (and many are young and rant and argue). While it may be distracting…it is not RP’s fault…and also NOT Gary Johnsons fault! Gary Johnson (to me) is currently the only candidate worthy of our vote, and the only one who is fight FOR us…not against us!

      • Janece says:

        Yes, I understand it’s not Johnson’s fault, mqira…I guess after the last several years, I’m weary of the whole thing. I’ll most likely vote for Johnson..and I’ve already removed myself from the GJ groups.

    • Bob in Boston says:

      You have to think for yourself and not get turned off by rabid supporters of any candidate. We Ron Paul supporters had some rabid people too, but hopefully the message sells itself regardless of who’s delivering it.

      I’m personally having a hard time with the issue of who to vote for. I have already accepted the fact that Obama will likely win regardless of what *I* do, so I’m now trying to figure out how best to make a statement that can’t be ignored. I don’t think we’ll get enough Ron Paul write-in votes to be noticed, and even if we did the media would just pretend it never happened like they did with poll results where Dr. Paul was ahead of Romney. But they may not be able to ignore if Gary Johnson gets 25% of the vote, and it becomes apparent that it’s Ron Paul’s supporters who voted Libertarian instead of Republican because the GOP treated them like dirt…

      • Janece says:

        Bob, that is exactly the direction I’m leaning in. Obama will take this home, barring some unforeseen circumstance. So, like you, I’m trying to figure out how to have the most impact. I changed my political party to Libertarian last week, with the thought that I’ll probably toss in my vote for Johnson.

      • James Borden says:

        You know it was us rabid supporters who were delegates we just didn’t sit inside some article or blog and talk about the Revolution, So if you truly love Paul ought to kiss a rabid supporter and thank him for getting us so close. Because while you were expressing your superiority we were fighting for the Constitution. And don’t tell me about what all you’ve done.

      • Bob in Boston says:

        You presume too much, and I *will* tell you what I did, because the only thing you did that I didn’t is go to Tampa – if in fact you actually did. Not only did I call hundreds of people and go door-to-door, personally bringing at least 10 more people to the caucus, but I ran as an alternate delegate. We didn’t win in my district. But while I was at the caucus I was well dressed and respectful and met alot of people who may some day help in taking over the party from inside. If you were one of the “rabid” supporters who wore hoodies to the caucus and yelled out obscenities, believe me – you could have gotten even more votes if you were respectful instead of rabid.

  4. John Morris says:

    I’m actually just excited to hear RP might run in 2016 if Romney wins. That’d be sweet!

    I’ll probably vote Gary Johnson. Seems to be the best way to have enough people to send a message to the other parties… and I like Gary for the most part.

  5. Excellent analysis, Doug. It is a quandary, as you so eloquently pointed out. We’re damned if we do, damned if we don’t. We’re less damned with a vote for GJ, but I’m having a hard time getting on board with him due to his inconsistency with foreign policy.

    He may not be perfect, but I guess a vote for GJ is the lesser of two goods instead of the lesser of two evils.

  6. Joe says:

    Possibly if Gary Johnson polls 17% then he would get in debates. What fun would that be? I am sure they would find a way to keep him out though.

  7. I am probably voting for Johnson. I won’t give another dime to anything that Paul does if Benton is on the payroll though.

  8. Albert Meyer says:

    As a long time supporter of Ron Paul and his campaigns, I’m disappointed that he is not endorsing Gary Johnson. At least he should give us a reason for not doing so.

    If his son can endorse Romney, then I see no reason why he can’t endorse Gary Johnson, or least say that he will vote for Gary Johnson as Johnson’s platform aligns very closely with his own.

    The liberty movement needs Johnson in the debates and a Ron Paul endorsement would go along way in accomplishing this goal. Dr. Paul’s delay in his explicit support for Johnson has left me despondent and disillusioned. Dr. Paul was happy to endorse Ralph Nader and Chuck Baldwin in 2008, so what am I missing?

    • I believe you’re missing Gary Johnson’s wishy-washy understanding of criminal cabal that Federal Reserve is. You’re also missing Gary Johnson’s lack of understanding of Constitutional role in non-interventionist foreign policy, need for Congress to vote on declared war etc. etc.

      Having said that, I’m most probably going to hold my nose & vote for Gary Johnson anyway. I don’t need Ron Paul to endorse him to make such decision. Compared with Rombama & Obamney, Gary Johnson is definitely a superior choice. He wouldn’t have been my first choice mind you, but what other options do we have (as Doug put above).

      • Aaron4liberty says:

        We’re going to have to accept the fact that, even within the Liberty vote, there are differences of opinion. Gary Johnson is the closest thing we have to RP and is on the ballot in all 50 states. He would be the only person who could possible poll high enough to get into the debates. I can take a few of his differing views any day over BO or MR – who is so far off the map we don’t even see the same road.

    • stopthetsa says:

      Johnson is also pro-baby kill.

      • Albert Meyer says:

        As I posted earlier, regarding folk who won’t vote for Johnson:

        The other group are the pro-lifers – the real ones, the ones who are pro-life and anti-war. Nobody is more pro-life that my wife who volunteers at a local Pregnancy Resource Center, saving one mother and one baby at a time. That’s how you fight the evil of abortion (but it takes a true commitment – you can always donate to them, if you don’t have the time), not by withholding your vote from Johnson. She is actively campaigning for Johnson. The pro-lifers gave us the Iraq and Afghanistan war. So, using pro-life as a sole criterion plays into the hands of the establishment, just as the Democrats use the gay issue to scare voters away from the Republican Party. Our country is on the verge of bankruptcy and another full scale war against Iran. Voting for Johnson, says little or nothing about the gay or pro life agenda, but sends a clear message that we want to balance the budget, end these wars and restore our civil liberties.

  9. Nick says:

    It’s Gary Johnson now. Obama will win but at least I know in my heart I voted for someone that many of the same values as Dr. Ron Paul.

  10. Lisa Lawrence says:

    Hi Doug,
    Thank you for all your hard work and dedication to the people and our country, I am honored to be a party for the cause of liberty and the Constitution.
    I will be voting for Gary Johnson!!! I can not in good concience vote for Romney. His underhanded and dishonest tactics prohibit my vote.I also under the present circumstances have little or no faith in Romney to effect any POSITIVE changes to any RELEVANTG issues. Thank you to you and Dr. Paul for not giving up on us, We await further instruction for a vote for Dr. paul or Rand in 2016!!!!! Go Ron Paul!

  11. How can we support Romney after everything we heard during the debates from Ron?

  12. Matt Sterba says:

    If the Libertarian Party gets a lot of votes (1 or 2 percent would be a lot for them) this November that will force the Republicans to become more libertarian and attempt to absorb those votes in future elections.

  13. Janece says:

    I’m not overly concerned that Dr. Paul hasn’t endorsed Gary Johnson. Last election he chose Chuck Baldwin from the Constitution Party. He might decide to endorse Virgil Goode this election.

  14. Gary Johnson. He carries “most” of Ron Paul’s message and has the greatest chance of showing the nation how large the liberty movement is. It’s about the message remember. Our best chance of getting the message out there is with Gary Johnson.

    • James Borden says:

      Let me tell you something Brandon he and Dr Paul disagree on two of the strongest issues for Ron Paul and ones we need to right this disaster we are headed for. He is not opposed to pre-emptive war. He does not hold the Wall Street bankers accountable for their role in this financial mess. Are you serious? You know nothing about Dr. Paul or the Revolution and it is obvious. Your just a guy who jumps the fence because you think some one cares about your opinion. You were never a patriot of the Revolution if so you would know better than to make stupid statements like that.

  15. Matt Sterba says:

    I can understand if he doesn’t want to endorse, but it’s disappointing to me that Ron Paul did not even mention the name ‘Gary Johnson’ during the Leno interview.

  16. Albert Meyer says:

    Endorse someone who is on the ballot in only 25 states – laughable – while there is a candidate with Johnson’s resume whose platform includes:

    Bring the troops home now
    Balance the budget now
    End the war on drugs now
    Get rid of income and corporate tax
    Repeal Patriot Act and NDAA
    No drone strikes
    No bombing of Iran
    Protect our civil liberties

    • donjusko says:

      Thanks Al, Johnson 2012.

    • Rob says:

      You are the man Al, sometimes I think some of our liberty voters are just as venomous and ignorant as establishment voters. Gary Johnson is clearly 1000x better than the big 2 on all of the important issues, and that is enough for me.

      • ___j___ says:

        Rob, methinks we would agree about Johnson being far better on the issues. But perhaps we disagree on the math?

        Specifically, I have a firm prediction #1 that no matter what, dempub-controlled CPD will keep Gary Johnson out of the presidential debates, except possibly the very last one (and if they do, for an ulterior motive, bring him on, they will also allow Jill Stein, and use the moderator to limit GJ to 89 seconds of speaking). I also have a five-nines prediction #2 that GJ will win less than five electoral college votes, with the median number being zero votes, and the next most likely being one vote. So, even if he takes the country by storm over the internet — which, I will point out, both he and Ron Paul and Buddy Roemer and many other strong candidates have been trying and failing to do for years now — he will still *not* be the president in 2013, because only ecVotes matter. Prediction #3: GJ will get more popvotes than Ron Paul 1988, but *way* fewer popvotes than Ross Perot 1992, or even Perot 1996. This third one is more of a leap, but I don’t think a big one.

        This is not to say that I am against voting for GJ. I am very much in favor of doing so. I am also very much in favor of people voting for Virgil Goode (despite the fact that he is ‘only’ on the ballot in 25 states) if they find a personal stance on abortion to be a dealkiller, or if they like him better for some other reason. While I have no illusions that VG can win the presidency, he has just as much a chance as GJ does, which is to say, none at all — see math-prediction#2 above. Along the same line of thinking, I am mostly in favor of surfisher’s plan to get certified write-in slots for Ron Paul, although I worry that those sort of votes will be reported by the states as “other” to hide the count achieved, or that those ballots will simply be invalidated by petty pollworkers or corrupt machine-bosses (precinct or county level).

        The point of voting for liberty-candidates in 2012 is to give a showing of strength, to the people who pay attention to such ‘messages’ closely: republican party insiders, and liberty-movement leaders. The mainstream media will *not* report the message (Swann & Stossel & Stewart & Lionel & other fine journalists are a welcome exception) in a way that more than 1% of their viewers pick up on. But for the insiders, it doesn’t matter *which* liberty-or-semi-liberty-candidate gets the votes. As for the voters themselves, the ability of the liberty-movement to send a strong message at the end of the 2012 election cycle boils down to whether they can grok this straightforward math:

        Part A. if you live in FL NC OH WI VA CO IA and maybe NV NH, then you are a swing-voter, and must decide (for all of us) whether we get 4 years of Obama executive orders with the supreme court and the appeals courts already hanging by a thread, or 8 years of Mitt.

        Part B. if you live *anywhere* else, then the electoral votes for your state are already set in stone. If you stay home, or vote Obama, or vote Mitt, then you are playing into the hands of the people who run this country now. If you vote GJ or where possible VG or maybe write-in RP, then you are helping send a clear message: that the folks in the liberty-movement want liberty in 2016, and will vote for it now, even though their vote now is not going to alter the outcome of the *present* election. If enough of us vote liberty in 2012, we will have a good shot in 2014 and 2016. It won’t change the 2012 results, but to my mind, that has never been the point. After the teleprompter-scripted rules-change in Tampa, the liberty-movement was out of the running for this year.

        There is also, most crucially, Part C. Unlike the other two parts, this one matters beyond 2012. The overriding goal of the cheating in Tampa, and the fake-slate spies in NV/ME/etc, and the trolls on the internet-forums, is clear: to split the liberty-movement into bitter factions. The best outcome for the establishment-powers would be for one third of the liberty-movement to vote Gary Johnson, one fourth to write in Ron Paul, one fifth to put down Virgil Goode, one sixth to to side with abstaining, and the rest to do something else … all the while fighting each other, viciously, albeit only verbally for now.

        If they can make us do that to ourselves in 2012, when we have no chance of winning (see prediction#2), imagine what they can do to us in 2016 and 2020, when we have multiple liberty-candidates potentially running. Gary Johnson, Rand Paul, maybe more (some people consider Palin a semi-liberty candidate). Far more important that who we *vote* for in 2012, is how we treat each other. Campaign for GJ all you want, sure. Point out the downside to VG, or to RP write-in. But be civil about it, rather than attributing venom where none should exist. We must all hang together, or we will all hang separately. We have to think long-term.

        Look at the way the-powers-that-be manipulated the Iowa popvote. Ron Paul was allowed to compete, but fmr gov Gary Johnson and fmr gov Buddy Roemer were kept out, so the lone remaining liberty-candidate would *look* alone. To split the strongly-religious-voters, who would never pick Mitt as their first choice, we had a long series of candidates to appeal to those folks: Bachmann in July, Perry in August (brought into the fray *by* the powers-that-be… to blunt Bachmann), Cain in October (blunted in the next month by the media), Newt in November, and finally, with a huge surge in the last three weeks, Santorum. Sure, his volunteers worked hard. But he started December off with 5% popularity, just like he had back in August. Mostly, therefore, his surge was driven by attack ads against Newt. Where did that money come from?

        As it turns out, the powers-that-be slightly miscalculated: Mitt got 24% as they expected, enough to beat Ron Paul’s 22% (also as expected), but slightly below Santorum 25%. He was only polling 19% the day before the voting. Newt split off 13% of the religious-voters, Perry 10%, and Bachmann 5%. Mitt would have won, as planned, if Newt had held onto his expected 16%, but the attack ads were ever so slightly too strong. By the time 2016 and 2020 roll around, there will be enough support for liberty-candidates that the establishment-types will *have* to let more than one into the debates, or risk losing Iowa to the single strong liberty-candidate. Their way out is obvious, though: simply split the liberty-vote, by running multiple liberty-candidates, and pitting them against each other, with secretly-funded attack ads, fake slate saboteurs, and forum-trolls. All the usual dirty tricks, plus a stalking-horse, too.

        Anyways, to put it all together: vote for who you want in 2012, GJ or VG or RP or whatnot … unless you live in those seven-or-so swing states, in which case you might want to think about strategic voting (but I still recommend protest-voting a liberty-candidate). However, do not *fight* over which liberty-candidate other people ought to vote for. Discuss it, sure. Argue about the merits of the different choices, sure. But no venom, no vitriol, no sniping. In 2012 it won’t matter anyhoo (see prediction#2 ecVote math). But in the long run, our ability to work with each other, to argue without fighting, and to eventually unify on a single liberty-candidate, is the only way we can win the Iowa popvote of 2016 and 2020.

        After 2012 is over, I think we need to spend time converting mainstream-Mitt-repubs over to the cause of liberty (pointing out that Mitt’s staffers cheated and Mitt flip-flops and let them do it). More importantly, we need to spend time converting religious-Santorum-repubs over to the cause of liberty (pointing out that liberty for all and justice for all means the president cannot be *against* any folks even those that have the ‘wrong’ theology … freedom of religion applies to moslems and buddhists and confucianists and jains just as much as to methodists and baptists and catholics and jews). We cannot do either, if we are to busy sniping at each other. I say we should start converting now.

        In the short run (2012), if we are too busy fighting about whether everybody should back GJ, or RP-write-in, or VG, or whatever, then we cannot by definition put a strong focus on spreading a key idea to people who are *outside* the liberty-movement at the moment: namely, the mathematical fact that, for *any* voter living in repub-leaning AK AL AR AZ GA ID IN KS KY LA MO MS MT ND NE OK SC SD TN TX UT WV WY, they can vote for who they want (GJ or VG or RP or XX) and the ecVotes from their state will still go to Mitt, no matter what. Similarly, any voter living in AS CA CT DC DE GU HI IL MA MD ME MI MN MP NJ NM NY OR PA PR RI VI VT WA can vote for who they want; guaranteed, the ecVotes in their state will still be given to Obama. If we focus on spreading this message to everyday voters that only watch TV and have never even realized Ron Paul was running this year, then GJ and VG will get way *more* votes … than they will if we spend our time fighting amongst ourselves about who to unify around.

      • donjusko says:

        Geez _ j_, you may be right. But I’m still looking for a Johnson win. You think everything is just going to continue as it is. I don’t think we can handle the loss of sovereignty, the harm being done to the dollar, the wars, the loss of our Constitution. I do think the power is still in the hands of the voter. Why should we give up on 2012? I don’t see a reason and I’m not going to let the polls or a person tell me how it’s all going to turn out.

        As far as the in-fighting goes, there is none. It’s not about a person, it’s about issues. Obama and Romney are on the wrong side of issues and the majority of voters see that. Now who is going to be the most popular with the issues? Who is going to be standing closest to Ron Paul? Right now it seems like Gary Johnson is. I’ve had it trying to appease the RINO’s and Dems. They lied, cheated and stole votes from us. No, we are not waiting until 2016, the time is now.

      • donjusko says:

        Surfisher, thanks for this great video.

        Open the presidential debates to include 3rd parties.
        This “monitor” issue has been going on for a long time. We don’t need a monitor to ask questions, just a time keeper. The candidates choose the issues they want to talk about. Hell no we don’t want any Commission on Presidential Debates. We don’t want anyone ruling over what can be asked. No pre-planned and agreed on questions and answers. I want my man talking about liberty, I want him to say he signed the pledge that if he, in my/our opinion, doesn’t follow his campaign pledges he will step down.

        I want to end the wars, the Federal Banking monopoly and the pharmacy monopoly. We are not socialistic we are Constitutional Conservatives.

        We don’t want a government “big daddy”. Johnston is fast becoming our man, obama is out because he is not eligible and made treasonous executive orders. Romney is out because he mirrors obama’s Socialist Marxist stance on issues. The joining of state and corporations is out. Ron Paul’s revolution is growing, the people are aware. Corporations are not people.

        The Federal Government should own nothing, follow the Constitution. End the Federal Reserve, we print our own debt free money and will return to a tangible money, that by itself will balance the budget.

        We must find a way to have our own paper trail of our votes, having a certified notary on hand to verify our vote papers seems to be the answer. We must have our own Voter ID’s. Only citizens vote.

      • ___j___ says:

        “still looking for a Johnson win” Yup. Me too. It is never wrong to hope. We do have to pick our battles, and we need to get better at the art of campaigning. The math says Johnson is going to not be the president this year — but I still want him to get a lot of votes, and I want him to educate a lot of people. That itself is a win, albeit not a win of getting elected this time around. And sometimes, predictions are wrong, and polls are meaningless, and maybe Johnson CAN do it. But don’t lose heart if he does not win this battle, since the war is not over until we give up (even if he does win there will still be battles — getting congress fixed is a long-term project for certain!)

        “You think everything is just going to continue as it is” Well, mostly, if by everything you mean dum-versus-dee as the next POTUS. I have high hopes for many of the new senators, and a decent number of folks in the house. Maybe you can get your firebrand Kawika in. 2012 was the year the tides shifted our way, in my book. There are likely reversals ahead, and dirty tricks we will have to overcome, but I don’t intend to quit until we get things fixed. And despite my pessimism about some particular races, I have only optimism about our ultimate chances — unless the earth gets hit with an asteroid or with a WWIII-like collapse of civilization, we *will* win in the end.

        “sovereignty, wimpy dollar, the wars, the loss of our Constitution” Agreed. Every election-cycle that we delay, the urgency of us winning increasing, and the stakes when we are thwarted go up. But we are not yet descending into anarchy or despotism, although sometimes it seems like it. http://youtube.com/watch?v=4QTfNEDgusQ

        “power is still in the hands of the voter” Yes. This is key. I believe too many are still asleep at the wheel — but more wake up each day. Many of them are only general-election voters (no caucus/primary), so even though they disagree with both dee-n-dum, they feel trapped. We can wake the sleepers, and un-trap the November-only folks. It is only a matter of time. And yes — we should not wait! Because even if we try and fail in 2012, that just means we woke more for 2016.

  17. austin sekel says:

    Mr wead. You are a respectable gentleman. I’ve always trusted your word and I honestly believe that you want the liberty movement to move forward. Why? Because you explain yourself unlike john tate and jesse benton. I truly think this campaign couldve had a bigger impact if you had their position. I’m from bergen county new jersey and I’m going to be running for office soon as a republican. I could go on for hours with you about this and that but let’s single this down to this years election. I truly thank you for mentioning all legitimate posibilities for us, though you didn’t mention jill stein, and honestly I don’t really care, sorry jill lol. If the third party- as a body- had any brains they’d put all their campaigning behind one candidate instead of dividing the independent voters by pro life or pro choice beliefs. I was never originally inspired by johnson but now I’m going to vote for him. You read my mind for each candidate. And you point out the best reason for johnson- let’s just see how much he can get, we can test the waters for the libertarian party again. Hopefully ron won’t be just kidding about running in 16 because we need him. There’s simply no other candidate that can get enough attention besides him. All he has to do is campaign atleast once in every state until the convention because we all know that the campaign had the money to do so. Please, for everyones sake, write a book about this years campaign so we can all learn from it. The grassroots will only prevail if were well educated and receieve major support from you guys “the anti establishment establishment” haha. Your a good man doug, stay with us and one day we will prevail- its a long road ahead- maybe even you should consider running for office somewhere, how bout it friend? Please atleast vote for johnson, he knows he won’t win but we need to show numbers in the election and he’s the only man to do it. All we need to do is stop the romney machine. I completely agree that if we dive further into socialism we might never recover, but we both know that romney clearly won’t benefit the country. Hell simply put a smile on as we burn to the ground. Atleast obama will make a nice speech about it without smiling like everythings ok. Mitt romney is the reason we were stopped, not obama. I hate obama just as much as anyone else but we can’t risk a potential 8 years of romney, you know this is true. Please remember me, I’m going to be in office soon.

    • mqira says:

      austin sekel….i too am from BC NJ…we meet on saturday morning at the River Edge Diner on Kinderkamack Rd. (everyother Saturdays), this saturday @ 10AM
      ! If your interested, we are always supporting the liberty movement, and most important…keeping it alive! Many (in my opinion) bail when the election process is over, but we dont plan on stopping! You and others are always welcome!

  18. Paul Shaver says:

    I am Voting for Obama I can deal with a socialist ! Canada is not that bad ! But I can not deal with Fascism that to me is what Romney represents! I want Rand to Run in 2016 !

  19. The way I see it, Gary Johnson is my only logical choice. I refuse to allow either major party to use my vote as a statistical endorsement for their irresponsible behavior and he’s the only other candidate who’s going to be able to garner a 50 state accumulation because of his parties access.

  20. craig says:

    Why are you trying to get people to continue to hold on to the Republican party? They were clear in their message they wanted nothing to do with us. They didn’t give Paul a fair chance this time, why would they in four years? Without endorsing Gary Johnson, you split the liberty vote, essentially helping Mitt Romney.

    The best way for Paul to grow his base without running this time would be to endorse Johnson, and run Libertarian in 2016. We can also forget about Rand until he gives up trying to make people think the Republican party can be saved.

    • Albert Meyer says:

      Seems incontrovertible logic to me, but evidently there are still too many loyalists among us who think they can reform the Politburo.

      Consider that after Reagan, they were able to impose on us Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain and now Romney, despite our best efforts. There are also too many neo-con pastors able to rally the faithful in their mega-churches to oppose the liberty movement and make sure the Ron Paul folk don’t take over the party. You can’t counter religious zeal and their sure weight of numbers. The GOP is a lost cause.

      Also consider that in 2008, 101 million voters (44%) rejected the lesser-of-two-evil candidates. Obama got 69 million (30%) votes and McCain 59 million (26%). There is a large number of discontented voters and Gary Johnson offers them a credible option. I can’t understand the reluctance on the part of Dr. Paul and his movement to throw their weight behind Gary Johnson.

      I know some object to his pro-choice stance. My wife is a volunteer at a Pregnancy Resource Center (saving one baby at a time and the only way to practically make a difference) and she is an enthusiastic supporter of Gary Johnson. A pro life vote for George Bush in 2000 gave us the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, the stripping of our civil liberties and a massive increase in our national debt which dumped us into a depression. We need to get realistic.

      • Rob says:

        The issue of abortion is too split in this country. And really our government should not be the mortal police, its funny how we readily forego the liberties and “sanctity of life” of countless dieing and suffering people around the world for the sake of not getting involved in foreign affairs but this is the one issue people go nuts over trying to get government to control. You can think these 5 month old babies are worth saving, that is your right, but when is government ALLOWED to step in. And when does governments role in that end? Pick a side, there are just certain things in life that you have to deal with. Morally and religously you can think a premature fetus is a person all you want, but at what point does it become a citizen that government can possibly protect? And how much are you willing to sacrifice in terms of candidates just over this one controversial issue?

      • Bob says:

        Abortion is the ONE transcendent issue of our age.

        Maafa21: The Black Genocide in 21st Century America

      • donjusko says:

        You have it Rob, The Constitution clearly says the Federal Government is not there to get involved in our personal choices. Our States can if we want them to.

      • ___j___ says:

        Rob, I don’t have any quick fix for you, but I maybe can help separate out the intertwined issues here a bit.

        People that are against abortion see the unborn as citizens, with an unalienable right to life/liberty/etc, and thus believe nobody should take away their lives, and most especially that the federal government should not be funding any abortion procedures. Back in the 1800s, there was a similar issue, whether or not slaves were citizens. Taking away a slave from their slavemaster was going to infringe on their property-rights, which is why slavery was such a tricky issue (and why the original constitution prior to the 14th amendment was buggy!). Abortion is very similar, though: when you force a mother to carry a baby she does not want, you just took away her liberty for about a year, or twenty years if she must raise it, too. That conflict, between the property-rights of the mother (over her own womb) and the right-to-not-have-life-taken-away of the baby, is why abortion is such a difficult issue. Walter Block proposed a third approach, outside pure pro-life versus pure pro-choice, in his speech at the UCF sun dome during the Ron Paul rally just before RNC 2012. Whether his approach is appealing to you or not, it is worth hearing, because it puts the root-level issues into perspective.

        The other issue you bring up is the wars: many republicans are pro-life and also pro-war, while many democrats are anti-war yet also pro-choice. Ron Paul is anti-war and pro-life, which has an obvious consistency. But those other repubs aren’t being inconsistent; they are pro-life because they see babies as citizens, and pro-war because they do not believe Afghan/Iraqi/etc citizens are protected by Jefferson, so it is okay for them to die, as long as the liberty of US citizens is protected thereby. Dems that are pro-war (like Obama) believe the opposite, which is to say, they believe that the USA should be the policeman of the world, spreading democracy by force, for the greater collective good. They are happy to sacrifice some liberty here at home (and vast amount of lives and treasure abroad) for that rosy vision. Even dems that are anti-war usually follow the same sort of thinking pattern: they believe that Afghan/Iraqi/etc citizens have the right to life, and that our Constitution & Declaration should apply to all humans everywhere … except to the unborn, which they don’t count as being citizens (yet), nor humans (yet).

        So there are two huge philosophical issues here. First, what is a human? Second, what is a citizen-as-protected-by-the-Constitution-and-Declaration? The answers to those questions pretty much determine where you fall on the pro-war/anti-war and pro-life/pro-choice issues. There is a third issue, which is, when property and liberty and life conflict, which one wins?

        The point is, these fundamental questions will *not* be resolved in time to unify behind Gary Johnson. (His position is the same as Ron Paul’s in practical terms: both want to get the federal government out of the business of forcing pro-choice and/or pro-life policies onto the states, and let the states decide for themselves. The only difference is that Ron Paul is personally pro-life, and Gary Johnson is personally pro-choice. But that personal position matters to some folks, because they see it as an indicator of character.)

        Even if we could convince everybody that abortion was a solved problem, the math is against a win by GJ. (See my other reply to you with prediction#2.) There is not enough time to change that. I still say we vote for GJ, or VG, or RP, but not because I realistically expect we will win the presidency that way. Sure, *if* we could reach the 100 million people that abstain from all voting, and *if* we could convince them to all vote for GJ, and *if* we could then actually mobilize them to overcome apathy and get to the voting booth on November 6th, then we would have a lot of popular votes. I suggest we do our best to make that happen!

        But I also say we must be realistic: only ecVotes, not popvotes, win the presidential elections. Therefore, we need not bother to *try* to unify everybody behind GJ, or RP, or VG, because unity won’t change the final outcome. Let the voters we convince pick who they want, of the available candidates. Just get them thinking about liberty, and realizing that they *have* such an option, at all.

        p.s. Which, if you haven’t figured it out by now, means that I am with theChief that we *will* be able to convert the GOP back into the liberty-party it once was. Albert is disappointed that there was cheating in his state-convention. But we have video of that cheating in Louisiana, and in many other places. My own state-convention was reasonably fair, although there was some tension to be sure, so I was bitterly disappointed at the final blatant cheating in Tampa. But that dark cloud has a silver lining: they had to cheat on video. We can show all the nice old ladies that run the county apparatus exactly what they were voting in favor of, and convert them to our goal of fairness, even if we don’t make them vote for liberty. Our undeniable wins in MN NV IA, partial wins in AK VI, and our denied wins in ME LA plus maybe MA OK OR and so on… those are proof that fighting at soul-destroying conventions *can* work.

        Maybe we won’t be able to dethrone the national-level cheaters in 2014, or even 2016. But we will dethrone them. Maybe the county-level cheating Albert saw will be repeated next cycle in his state … but if we give up, that ‘maybe’ changes to certainly. The libertarian party is not subject to the county-machine politics of the GOP, sure, but only because it *mathematically* cannot win — the voting system is two-party dominant, mathematically. The electoral college will *never* give the win to a third party candidate. Look at 2012, after it is over. Look at Perot in 1992. Look at Ron Paul in 1988. Look at the Bull Moose party. We must change the GOP from within — not because it is easy, but by Hobson’s choice.

    • Because we have the numbers.

      They have ALL the money, but they’re some 10 fat men with cigars in a smoke filled room.

      We don’t have their money, but we have the numbers. We have the power to throw them out. With our numbers, this criminal fascist party should not resemble anything like today in 4 more years.

      • Albert Meyer says:

        We don’t have the numbers. I attended my state convention and we were overwhelmed by the neo-cons, predominantly war-vangelicals. I also attended my county convention, to get elected as an alternate delegate. Both events were soul destroying. I could never in future encourage anyone to attend these conventions.

        It is an exercise in futility and even if you win at that level, higher up in the process they just come out a smash you. Facts… lets talk facts… the RINOs took more than 80% of the votes (good grief, the war-vangelicals voted for Gingrich in SC, to cite one amazing result that blew my mind) in all the states and we made a slightly better showing at the delegate level, but the party machinery turned our best efforts into pulp.

        You are dreaming, delusional if you think we have the numbers. Besides, the ten fat men nullified future grassroots efforts. You are spitting against the wind.

      • You seem to be totally ignoring the seismic shift that has happened in state GOP parties in Iowa, Minnesota, Alaska, Nevada. Same is also expected in Maine I think. Party apparatus in Oregon & Washington (state) are spooky scared.

        Don’t you see that defeating the 10 fat men with cigars plan is working in those states? What do you think is going to happen there? Sununu, Priebus, Bill Kristol & Boehner are personally going to go to Iowa, Alaska, Nevada, Minnesota etc. to dismantle those state parties now?

      • Albert Meyer says:

        Good luck…in the end the party machinery will marginalize our best efforts.

        Why not join forces with the Libertarian Party, the party of the youth, the party that will benefit most from Dr. Paul’s campaign among the youth. The party without baggage and all the old farts that strong-arm everyone into submission. Good grief, not even Rand could stand up against them. No, the GOP is a lost cause.

        The Libertarian party is a viable option, especially with a two-term Governor like Gary Johnson on the ballot and he will be on it again in 2016. Rand Paul will not be the nominee in 2016. The party machinery will see to that. Besides, too many of us have finally given up on the GOP. They’ll allow you Reagan and then punish you with Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain and Romney.

      • Right, I get it that they’re our mortal enemies, out to destroy us. But it still doesn’t answer my specific question of those state parties. What do you think is going to happen in those states?

        Is there going to be an all out civil war breaking out in GOP in those states (and I’m hoping many more like don’t ignore New Hampshire as well)? That is a very tantalizing scenario. In fact, I think Dr. Paul set out with exactly that scenario in his mind more than 4 years ago.

        Having Sununu, Priebus, Boehner behave the way they did brazenly is EXACTLY the scenario Dr. Paul had in his mind more than 4 years ago. Bringing out these people’s filth out in the open to an extent they can’t even hide it any more. The whole world has witnessed it on live TV. In a bizarrely twisted way, setting up the GOP civil war is Dr. Paul’s sweet revenge. The fascists might think they have won a worthless battle. But Dr. Paul has won a humongous war.

  21. Bob says:

    First, do no harm. In this context, get rid of those quislings Benton and Tate. Then a rational decision might be taken.

    I heard your excuses for those sorry bums in the RNC interview, but it won’t wash. it doesn’t matter how brilliant Benton is, what matters is what he is actually doing. Come up with a plan that is a stroke of genius, but undermine it as soon as it becomes apparent that it is working, and all of your “brilliance” goes out the window. This is precisely the pattern that Jessie Benton, and to some extent John Tate, followed. Don’t bother coming to the defense of these closet Bilderburgers anymore. It’s a waste of your time and of mine, and of all the others who are trying to determine what our next course of action should be. Wash your hands of them both materially and spiritually, and you’ll be in a much better position to help out, as you have always seemed to want to do in the past.

    As to which course of action to take, all I can do at this point is to take a wait-and-see attitude. Hope something pops up soon. If the Constitution party were on the ballot in Oklahoma, I’d definitely go that route. What I would like to see happen is for the Constitution and Libertarian parties to come together in an alliance to challenge the status quo. That seems unlikely at the moment, therefore my wait-and-see attitude. God bless.

  22. It scares me that you have so much hope in Rand Paul. I’m sure you know him personally, but his remarks toward the war and the use of torture on innocent people really bother me. That is not Liberty at all. I would never vote for Rand….

    • Albert Meyer says:

      Yep, Rand’s endorsement of Romney absolutely floored me.

      • It is obvious he is a sell-out and not a man of principle. I do not trust him.

      • Albert Meyer says:

        I won’t be that harsh, for the sake of Ron and Carol. Rand is a man of principle and integrity, but he wilted when the Politburo twisted his arm, which undermined everything that his dad stood for all his life. It just shows the power that these guys have over the best of us. I have broken all ties with the GOP. Never ever will I vote Republican again or give dime to anyone with an (R) behind his or her name.

  23. Denise Rich says:

    I would personally love to see Ron Paul as the Liberty candidate right now, and be in the debates. I am afraid either of the other two will put our country in too deep to recover, if it’s not there already. Four more years of idiots that are bought and paid for….it just can’t happen. Imagine the excitement and energy there was at the live events Ron Paul had, able to be directed to voting for him as president without people having to register as Republicans, I know a number of people who would vote for him that did not realize the importance of re-registering and voting in the primary, until it was too late. Many, many dems and independents I believe would vote for him, and there would be a very big surprise coming.

  24. mvanwink says:

    The biggest issue with Johnson for some of RP’s supporters is his abortion stance. For me, it’s a moral thing – that’s a don’t pass go, don’t collect $200, non-starter with a candidate. I’m sad hat I can’t go the Libertarian route this go round, but principles are principles as we’ve all learned following the good doctor. And, since I do need to help Ted Cruz join the younger Paul, I too have to be careful not to get my ballot thrown out. I suppose, for me, it will be vote for Romney, vomit, and then then keep helping folks like Rand change the Republican party from the inside

    • Albert Meyer says:

      A vote for pro-life George Bush brought mayhem, death and destruction in a faraway country with rich oil reserves. Votes for other pro lifers have not saved one fetus, rather the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people abroad, not to mention our own soldiers.

      If you really care about abortion, go volunteer your counseling services at your local Pregnancy Resource Center, or donate liberally to their cause. That’s how you save one baby at a time. My wife volunteers at a PRC and enthusiastically supports Gary Johnson.

      The Politburo cares little about pro-life, but has effectively used it to dupe the evangelicals to support their wars and their trashing of our Constitutional rights. The pro-life label is a ruse and anyone who says they won’t vote for GJ because he is pro choice plays right into the hands of the GOP establishment. Their ploy is working. That’s why I don’t go to church, too many hypocrites that believe life starts at conception and ends at our borders, with the neo-con pastors being the cheerleaders for more war, more killing.

      It is time we stop being stupid, because that is what the GOP establishment take us for, too stupid to see past their pro-life ruse.

      • Eric says:

        Albert, I believe you are spot on and have made the same case. I am 100% pro-life and Johnson has given me a major issue that is hard and maybe impossible to overcome. However, a vote for president is different than a vote for governor. If he wants to repeal Roe v Wade and end every dime of funding then he is arguably as good or better than those that pay lip service to pro life without any intention of changing a thing. Yes, I mean Mitt and I mean W and I mean McCain.

    • Tim says:

      I’m pro-life, but have always seen the legal enforcement of it as compromise of privacy and liberty. Even Ron Paul has some limits in that respect. Gary Johnson, in spite of his personal stance, offers the same political opinion as Ron Paul. Let the states decide.

      Republicans pay lip service and haven’t done anything substantive to change it. They are certainly not for states rights.

      There are things we can do legally to reduce abortion, but the real solution is not wagging the dog through the legal system. The solution lies in changing the hearts of men and women.

      For this reason, it is not a deal breaker for me to vote for Gary Johnson. I want to promote the choice for life, but I cannot protect people from their own stupidity. As tragic as the choice for abortion is, I don’t see how jailing someone who is willing to sacrifice their own offspring is consistent with the liberty movement. It’s tragic, but legal means to solve this issue is not a solution consistent with the liberty movement.

      I wish the choice was more black and white, but it just isn’t. It’s a difficult one. One that mankind needs to grapple with.

      At least with the liberty platform, there will always be the freedom to protest and speak out against for the issues and rights for every life. As far as each individual is concerned, we will be held accountable for our actions or inactions when it comes to preserving life. The government’s stance, for or against, will not change that accountability.

    • Tim says:

      I have sworn off voting for the lesser of two evils – will never do it again. I did exactly that in 2008, voting for Obama. He was less evil than McCain. He is less evil than Romney. So if you MUST do the lesser of two evils thing, by all means vote Obama this time…

    • ___j___ says:

      People, please. We must not be fuzzy thinkers. Sure, you want to vote for your 100% favorite candidate. Sure, you want to vote on principle. But does that mean you can ignore the math? Does that mean, because you are worried about your ballot being invalidated, you will vote ‘on principle’ for Mitt Romney, and against Gary Johnson? Because, you imply, Romney has always been the staunch defender of pro-life that you dream of? Please. We have to pay attention to the to the math. We have to look at this election with clear eyes. Here is the math.

      http://www.votexas.org/voting/what

      http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/forms/sampleballot2012.pdf

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Texas,_2012

      Ted Cruz cannot possibly lose. After squeaking into the run-off by the slimmest of margins, and coming from behind for a hard-fought win in the primaries, he is going to win the general election by an utter landslide. He has $9M in funds, with $1.5M remaining. The dem has $0.1M in funds, with $0.03M remaining. Back in April, before the primaries, before the run-off, Ted Cruz 44 versus Paul Sandler 34, with 22 undecided. There are no recent post-primary post-runoff polls, because why, well, because this election is 100% rock solid locked up for Ted Cruz. It will not even be close. You want to vote for Cruz anyways? Do it. On line two of the ballot. Good job.

      Now, you want to worry that Ted Cruz might *lose* in Texas, because what if the write-in section of your ballot is invalidated, or what if the election workers are lazy, or what if the election workers are corrupt, or what if a tornado strikes the polling place, or what if zeus hurls a bolt of lightning when I don’t vote for Romney? Okay, I’ve gone a bit off the handle there. But maybe you get my point: for Ted Cruz to actually lose to Paul Sandler, would require that zeus hurl lightning bolts at on the order of a million Texans, literally. 8M people voted in 2008, with 4.5M for McCain and 3.5M for Obama. Ted Cruz is prolly going to be 5M versus 3M. What happens if your ballot is invalidated? Nothing. The libertarian-guy in 2008 got 56k votes. Ron Paul in 2012 polls way better than Bob Barr in 2008, but even if *every* likely voter in Texas that wanted Ron Paul to be the next president wrote him in, and their ballots were *all* invalidated, Ted Cruz would *still* win, because Ron Paul has only convinced about 18% of everyday-republicans to vote for him in the straw polls, which means Ted Cruz would get 4.1M instead of 5M, and the dem Sandler would still only be getting 3M and therefore losing by a landslide.

      But hey, if you don’t want Gary Johnson, then put down pro-life Virgil Goode. He’s a certified write-in candidate in Texas this year, see the links above. There is a chance that your ballot will be invalidated anyways, because your handwriting is unreadable, or because an election-worker is too lazy to deal with a write-in, or because of fraud. But if you are worried about poor election security, then fix the root cause of the problem, and volunteer to be a poll-worker, or a poll-observer. But don’t tell me you are going to stand on principle and vote for Romney rather than Johnson, because your one single vote might be needed to help push Ted Cruz over the top. Ted Cruz is so far over the top now that he could go on television, and tell everybody it was all a lie, and secretly he has always hated the constitution, and he would *still* get in. Ted Cruz got your help, and won the run-off. Now *I* want your help: start thinking clearly about the math of elections. If you live in a non-swing-state, like Texas, then you can vote your conscious in the presidential race, and send a message. Voting for Romney, because you are worried about Cruz, sends the message that you are not paying attention to the math. That is exactly what mainstream establishment republicans want. You are better than that. Don’t listen to Gingrich. Listen to the data.

      This matters in the long-term, too. When 2016 or 2020 rolls around, and Ron Paul is not the liberty-candidate, and the liberty-candidate is *not* a carbon copy clone of Ron Paul, will you decide that you would rather abstain, and throw the primary-election to the dempub-flavor-of-the-month? Never allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. (Even in the case of Ron Paul we don’t have perfection in my book … he was against the decision in Marbury versus Madison that allows the court to check congress.)

      Anyways, in the short-term, feel free to write-in Ron Paul as an uncertified candidate, if you must, yourself. Prolly your vote for Cruz will be invalidated, but Cruz *will* win. The math is unescapably clear on that. But I recommend that, as a resident of a non-swing-state, you vote for Gary Johnson as a checkbox, or if you prefer, for Virgil Goode as a certified write-in. That move will send a message, if enough people do it. And even if you personally do something besides Johnson&Goode, since you live in a non-swing-state, convince your friends to vote for Goode and/or Johnson, too. As many as you can. You can also sing the praises of Cruz, and other down-ballot liberty-candidates, while you are at it. Everybody you convert in 2012 will be an asset in 2014 and 2016. This advice doesn’t hold for people that live in the swing-states, of course, because they are in the kingmaker slot, and can decide whether we get 4 more of Obama, or 8 of Romney. Texas is no swing-state.

  25. paul says:

    Doug, Before we go hog wild crazy on RP Jr, you need to understand some things. I did not back RP because of his personality or speaking ability, but his reliability and thoughtfulness with regard to the issues and the Constitution. Rand has a few issues he will need to face and explain his actions. I can understand why he decided to smooze with Romney but he hurt the movement greatly as the opposition taunted “even his son doesn’t want to be around him”. And there are other Rand Paul decisions that I still do not understand, He better get his stuff together before he tries to fill his fathers shoes.As far as RP goes, I agree with the fact that the RNC did, under all prejudice, cheat their butts off, but why battle in the voting booth and not in the courts? We have video evidence…… It just seems to me that some ppl only make a big deal of things when it suits them. Making compromises between two undesirable choices is not a choice I favor (romney/obama) and I like some of Gary’s stuff but not others, and I don’t think he has the experience needed for foreign relations so his VP is crucial.

  26. Denise Rich says:

    If you could get Gary Johnson and Ron Paul together, it would possibly have a huge impact……I’d go for that in any combination personally. Paul/Johnson or Johnson/Paul. That might even get some media attention.

  27. Donn Bryant says:

    What I really don’t understand is the Paul reluctance with Gary Johnson? Gary stood up and supported Paul not only in 2008 but even in the debates. I like Rand and think he is playing a political game but in that process Ron seems to be putting family before the importance of the whole country. This stance actually makes me slightly angry. It is correct to let people make up their own mind but in this case, with the slight differences between Ron and Gary I don’t get it. I feel like something is being kept from us. I even feel politics in your words. Why can’t Ron just come out and say he supports Gary Johnson? What is it that holds him back? How will it hurt Rands chances in 2016. If anything a Rand Paul/Gary Johnson ticket in 2016 would be outstanding. If Ron had run with Johnson you could be absolutely sure that Rand would have an open opportunity in 2016. For the first time in the last 5 years I have a feeling that Ron Paul is not telling us the whole truth. If that is the case with me, I am sure it is also true with others in the movement. Did I waste the moneybombs?

  28. Andrew Keen says:

    What a disheartening (if predictable) conclusion to the 2012 nomination process. I’m planning on voting for Gary Johnson, but I’ll admit you made voting for Obama sound a little appealing.

    What am I talking about? I live in Maryland; my vote doesn’t count anyway. May as well vote for Johnson in the hopes of boosting his percentage. No doubt Maryland is going to Obama.

  29. annebeck58 says:

    Well, Doug;
    Let’s rethink these positions:
    1. Vote Obama? Honestly, I think the RNC in cooperation with the DNC, has already figured this is what we would do. I mean, after what Romney and Co. did to us, would we ever give a vote to Romney??
    2. Vote Mitt? Can anyone who really wanted (and truly understood) Ron Paul and his platform adopted and elected, go with Mitt, considering the treatment we all received at Mitt’s hands? I would hope not. I do think anyone that wanted Ron, yet can turn that around in his head to go with Mitt, has a defective brain.
    3. Wait for it..
    4. Virgil Good? Vote Virgil? Considering he’s on the ballot of only one state, Virginia, this is not much of a viable “choice”. Yet, for anyone in Virginia and outside of VA, this can be a protest vote, too. So, sure; if you are in VA.
    5. Vote Libertarian; vote Gary Jonhson. Can you really go with this? Have you found Johnson to be close enough your own ideals to vote for him? Sure, he’s Libertarian, but does he have a libertarian mind? PRO? he’s (thus-far, though Mitt is trying to change this fact) on the ballot in all 50 states. Con? He does not jibe with too many items I hold dear and necessary for me to go Johnson. But; and, maybe another pro(?): If you go Johnson, could be he would garner enough of a percentage of the vote to get the party in debates NEXT TIME (2016). Will it mean anything, this go-round? Probably not.

    So, let’s go back to number-3; write-in Ron Paul. If Ron Paul is still standing for what you believe in, write-in Ron Paul. If you think he changed or that you have changed, enough to go against Paul, do it. Personally, I will vote Ron Paul, via write-in.
    Here’s the kicker. We supposedly create winners, in the US, via our voting process. We have for too many years allowed them, the parties– ahem, to tell us which two are the, “winners”, and it’s never been more apparent than this season. Because of this, I cannot (ever!) vote for Mitt. I do not agree with almost anything Obama has done (and that he is a liar, just like Mitt), so I cannot go with him. I don’t know enough about Virgil Good, and VG is not on the ballot in my state, so I can write him in or not- it will not count. Gary Johnson votes may (MAY) count for something in four years, so if you are a patient guy, go ahead and vote for the Libertarian and hope they choose a better guy next time (work toward creating a better Libertarian choice, 2016?).
    Or, in a manner of speaking, to tell the GOP and RNC to get lost, write-in Ron Paul. If you choose this option, I would suggest doing so via mail-in ballot. If you’re in a state that does not allow for write-ins, this would be the most prudent way to do it. Photograph or videotape your vote as you write-in Ron Paul, and mail it in. Then post the video to the RNC and your local and state GOP, so they know why so many votes did not go their way.
    It’s the only protest vote I think would mean much to the Republicans who fought so consistantly with and against US.

    Thanks, Doug Wead.

  30. Pepper Draper says:

    Doug, I will be doing a write-in for Paul. Richard Gilbert is planning a lawsuit that will allow anyone to do a write-in. Also, write-ins have a much better chance of actually being counted correctly. Having been involved in the process of hand count verification, I can say that at least in AZ, the write-ins have to go to a special board to certify them and therefore I feel much better about that vs a diabold machine

    • Albert Meyer says:

      Who cares if write ins are counted, when nobody ever takes any notice? How many write-ins were there for Dr. Paul in 2008 and give me just one news item that commented on the number. Anyone choosing a write-in option over Gary Johnson has lost his or her marbles.

      • Donn Bryant says:

        I could not agree more! I bet even Ron Paul would tell you the same. As far as I am concerned you didn’t even vote, but I guess that is up to you.

  31. Rob Lilja says:

    Doug, My vote is with Johnson/Gray. Gary Johnson has the best credentials of all the candidates, plus his small government principals make it a no-brainer.

  32. Mark says:

    I think voting for Gary Johnson sends a clear message that the GOP is divided, and I also think 4 more years of Obama is better than 8 years of Romney. If Romney were to win, the economy would gradually get better than it is now, and they would tout that to get 4 more years totaling 8, when in reality, they are almost all but the same.

    I think I’d rather vote Gary Johnson, allow Barack to win, and I think that Ron should run in 2016. Save 2020 for Rand, I just don’t think that Rand has the support Ron does to make a valid run, and I don’t think the establishment would ever back him.

  33. i say vote gary johnson, i think ittl be a win win situation for 2016, weather he wins or not, itll bring more attention to the liberty movement, this country may need to hit rock botom b 4 it changes for the good

  34. Crystal says:

    I feel my best bet right now, regardless of the Presidential outcome, is to make sure other candidates are elected that will hold any President’s or establishments, feet to the fire. That will be my focus. Could you make another post mentioning those who will be our future? We have to remember that we had some great gains in other offices. Their may yet be some future Presidential candidates amongst that group. On the state level here in Texas ( I was a delegate) we saw the most enthusiasm for candidates that appealed to Tea Party and Liberty minded folks. Ted Cruz was one that had a lot of momentum from both groups.

    Spoken from my wise 17 year old daughter yesterday, “At least if Romney is in office, it will take him 4 years to get his plans rolling. Obama’s is already in place, and ready to go.” And, I might add, without any accountability by re-election this time. I may hold my nose and vote after all….Thanks for your honesty and direction and all of your hard work. Some great analogies as well. :) “kissing your sister.”

    • Just as Dubya found it very difficult to get Halliburton Cheney’s plans rolling for illegal invasion of Iraq during his first 4 year term???

      Oh wait….

    • ___j___ says:

      Crystal, you and I are on the same page. I also would like to see a list of candidates that Doug supports (not necessarily the same as ones that Ron Paul himself supports — which is a very elite list indeed).

      For me, Flake AZ, Cruz TX, Mourdock IN, Mandel OH, Fischer NE, Mack FL, seem liberty-leaning. Hinckley RI is okay, but can he win? Kurt Bills MN is endorsed by Ron Paul, but is very far behind in polls.

      There are also some moderate-repubs in the Senate races, like Scott Brown MA, Linda Lingle HI, and Tommy Thompson WI. We should support those in favor of the alternatives (Elizabeth Warren especially), but we want to be clear-eyed that they are more establishment repubs.

      Doug, can you give us a list of liberty-percentages, like Kurt 90% and Scott Brown 40% for starters, and give rough placement of the other candidates in the senate races, and their major opponents? There is a site called LibertyCandidates which does decently at list-making, but it doesn’t have percentage-liberty, nor does it have chances-to-win.

      p.s. Crystal, since you are also in TX, please see my reply to mvanwink, above. While you are out helping Cruz win, please also try to help any down-ballot liberty candidates in your area, and think hard about 2014 and 2016 when giving out advice for the presidential-vote.

      • donjusko says:

        Let’s be perfectly clear. Linda Lingle of Hawaii who is in the Senate race said, “I’m a RINO and proud of it”. Don in Maui.

      • ___j___ says:

        Don, I have no doubt she is exactly a RINO. I can tell you one good thing about her, which is that as gov she tried to veto the NPVIC, that power-grab by CA/NY/IL to try and guarantee a dem prez to infinity, at the expense of DE/HI/etc (plus republicans). Lingle is no Ron Paul, or even Ted Cruz. She’s not even Paul Ryan. She’s prolly like Snowe from Maine, a “repub” that favors obamacare and a strong EPA.

        But I stand by my pragmatic support of Lingle, for the simple reason that she is the better alternative available to us in November. Hirono has been in congress, she has a record, level-8-democrat on spending, and 16% score on following the constitution. Hirono is about the same level as McCaskill MO and Durbin IL. She’s worse than Boxer CA and Casey PA (the guy who beat Rick Santorum). Hirono would be twenty-two senators *worse* than Harry Reid, who spends about the same but follows the constitution a bit more often. Since you are local there, maybe you can give us some more insight; these are just scores from vote-rating groups, and they don’t track the governors. (One good thing about Hirono is she voted against extending the patriot acronym act for another few years… but why did she make that vote? Is she against govt spying sans warrants, or did she want *stronger*?)

        What rough liberty-percentage-score would you give Lingle & Hirono, with Ron Paul at 99% and Kurt Bills at 90% and Scott Brown at 40%? How is Lingle on increasing taxes, and on cutting spending?

        p.s. I guess my larger point is, that in states which are deeply dem leaning, like California, I would rather elect Meg Whitman than Jerry Brown, even though prolly this isn’t a vote for a true liberty-candidate. Pragmatic, although not perfect. Eventually, of course, in ten or twenty years, I’d like to see a liberty-candidate from every state, doing their best to argue on TV about who loves the constitution *more*. Right now, we have moderate dempubs arguing with occupy-leaning dems about the *speed* to shred the constitution. Not a good thing.

        p.p.s. Look on the bright side. Maybe Ron Paul will retire to Hawaii….

      • donjusko says:

        Are you upset that Obama is in the White house and never even showed a Birth Certificate? How can that be, you say? Well let me tell you how it happened. Our Governor at the time of the vetting was Linda Lingle. She is the one responsible for vetting Obama, She saw the birth certificate that Sheriff Joe said was non-existent. She is the reason we have Obama now. She lies like Obama. There is no letting her off the hook. Off with her head said the Queen of Hearts.
        She is no GOP, she’s there to cover dem butts.

        You must know how bad it is here in Hawaii, Sen Inouye was in place for 40 years. Sen. Akaka made all the wrong choices too. Anything to get Gov’t money. Inouye does our “heavy lifting” as the Maui News put it.

        Let me give you and example how bad the Maui News is. Ron Paul won the Maui caucus vote but Romney’s picture was on that Sunday’s front page with out a word mentioned about Paul. You get it? John Carroll was downplayed to give Lingle the GOP nomination. Yes, John Carroll knows how dangerous Lingle is, he gave Hirono his endorsement because she’s the lessor of two evils. Lingle is a lying devil, Carroll said about voting for Lingle, “It’s worse than poor, it’s just dangerous. Looking at Lingle’s decision-making capability and I just don’t see it as being trustworthy. What’s a female devil called beside a rich-bitch or RINO? Yea, Lingle.

      • ___j___ says:

        (Nah, personally I could care less about the birth certificate, I see it as a distraction from war&fiscal. Worrying about her direct involvement though, if it does get proven to be a lie. Prolly swept under the rug….)

        Heh. Pretty sad that one of the republicans flopped on her. Lingle has more facebook-likes, and has a pretty dempub issues-page. She wants to reform-obamacare, loves EPA, and no mention 2nd amend or TSA. Hirono has an almost-bare issues-page, no mention of many big ones. Polls claim that it will be pretty close, with Lingle behind ~3 points. But can you trust her? Sorry, guess you’ll have to pick your poison.

      • donjusko says:

        Hirono is part of the old boys, they don’t have to say anything. They are in and the voters will keep them in. The voters here didn’t get much information, race had a lot to do with it. It’s changing now, there is more communication. The general public except for the younger ones are not on line, so they don’t know the problems Obama is causing and the MSM doesn’t tell them.

        Our schools are 49th in the country and when I got here 30 years ago the schools were still teaching in the pigeon language, that is a mixture of the different races that came here to live. That’s why Inouye has been in for 40 years, he is part of the culture. Lingle is a smooth talker, she was on Maui’s County Council before she was Maui’s mayor, and then the bigger Ohau mayor, and now running for US Senate. She tried to push through a super ferry here on Maui to move troops around the islands but we shut that down, but not before she spent a lot of money to renovate our harbor to except the ferry.

        Mazie is trying to fill the same Senate seat. She doesn’t show her hand much, doesn’t vote unless it’s a good public issue or an Obama issue which she goes for. Her record in Congress is long and she has a lot of friends. She doesn’t lie or try to do sneaky things like Lingle and Obama. So it comes down to who can you trust. I don’t trust smooth talking liars. Maui’s public caught on to her even though both political sides are corrupt and back her. They are the ones we have to get rid of. We were getting sick of the Dems so Lingle jumped parties but still votes Dem.

        R John Carroll backs the Constitution, he was our choice for Senate but the old boys on Oahu backed Lingle. That’s a step in the same direction which is more of the same. I’d rather have Mazie Hirono than Lingle any day if I had my ‘druthers.

  35. There will be 3 candidates on the ballot in New Mexico. Who do you think I will be voting for?

  36. mat says:

    I am voting Gary Johnson! Plus NC doesnt I believe allow write in’s. I pray to God that Gary Johnson picks Ron as VP….That was not discussed. Then we would get our 17% and liberty movement in high gear!!!! All the elitest snipers would be pulling out all stops. Drone attacks, heart attack guns, russian dart guns and radiation poisoning drinks. I ultimately believe its WWIII they will turn too. Depopulation? yes. Make money? yes. Power control takeover? yes. Debt clearence? yes. You wait the Israeli’s will attack Iran, we will follow…China,India and Russia will follow into a quick massive show down. There will be no hesitaion for nukes. China isnt stupid and doesnt display all the war power and shrewdness they have. USA has used nukes prior. A dead give away as to how China will play the game. Their populations and cities are massive. We are but a kernal of GMO toxic corn to their bowl of beautiful bountiful rice! China will win!

    • Albert Meyer says:

      You paint a grim picture, but our best chance of making our voice heard and playing a decisive role in November is to cast a vote for the only credible candidate that opposes war, foreign and domestic. Insertions or staying at home is the pathway to irrelevancy. It is is our own best interest to ensure that Gary Johnson gets as many votes as possible.

      A poor showing by Gary Johnson and the media will declare the demise of the Ron Paul revolution – not true, but the gullible public will buy the story anyway.

  37. The question is do we trust Ron Paul’s strategy of taking over the Republican party from within, or Gary Johnson’s strategy from without?

    Ron Paul’s own run in 1988 showed the structural limitations with an (L) by your name. Plus, real change will require liberty to be an influence at all levels of government, not just from the top down. A turnaround or even a hostile takeover of an industry leader with virtually half of the market share can yield a much more powerful organization at our disposal to have a real, lasting impact, with many more assets and existing communication channels to influence society and government than attempting to build an empty party from the ground up – nationwide and at all levels.

    Voting is a choice about the future – if Gov. Johnson gets 5%, he may well have a chair at the debates in four years, which begs the question – is that what we want? Do we want the quick and easy way? History shows the difficulty of a third party candidate winning, much less having a lasting impact. Even if a third party candidate could win, how successful could they actually govern in practice?

    Ron Paul supporters should be confident that we can continue to grow our movement and continue our success at the state & local levels, in addition to supporting national candidates in the House and Senate, and make a real, sustainable difference to promote and defend freedom, peace and prosperity.

  38. Albert Meyer says:

    “Insertions”… oops.. not sure where that came from… write-ins…

  39. Johnson’s got the megaphone. I’d like to see a unified effort to poll for his inclusion in the Presidential debates. I’m anxious to see how Dr. Paul will spearhead the cause of liberty from outside the abhorrence of politics. As for voting… our government is illegitimate and the system is rigged. You can’t even trust your own flesh and blood these days. Stay vigilant.

  40. I’m writing in Ron Paul, he is the candidate I want. Why on earth would I vote for a candidate I don’t want?

    A vote for GJ is a vote for GJ, not a vote for Ron Paul. If there is a large gap between those who vote and those who vote for named candidates for President, in a PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, that will show rejection of the options, in a vote of no confidence, even if they don’t separately count my vote for Ron Paul — but in a number of areas they will count it.

  41. David Semple says:

    People should not vote for a party or candidate who does not reflect their beliefs. The 2 party monopoly which leads to compromizing libertarian or conservative principles is bankrupt. Loyalty to any political party is wrong. If the Republican Party refuses to stick to the constitution and favors authoritarian statist policies like NDAA, how can a true conservative vote for them? Gary Johnson has a good track record in running a minimal government/balanced budget program, which makes him by far the best candidate running for president. I like governors who veto stupid and ineffective legislation.A vote for Johnson will be a vote against mindless authoritarianism. The larger his vote, the bigger the wake-up call for the Statists in the Democratic and Republican parties. To vote for a Statist authoritarian would be wrong for a true Consevative, a liberal or a libertarian.

  42. PaulofVT says:

    In my home state of Vermont, Obama is going to win in a landslide. Vermont will be the first state to be called. So a vote for Romney is a vote for Virgil is a vote for Johnson is a vote for Paul, electorally speaking. However my popular vote could help Johnson win 5%, which would give the Libertarian Party an estimated $90 Million in Federal matching funds. Imagine if in 2016 the Libertarian party used that money to support a Liberty Republican candidate. That would be an impressive move forward and could help reshape the Republican party, and show that the Liberty movement is a force to be reckoned with.
    Johnson is very tempting for many of these reasons, but I’m still undecided. I think it would depend largely what the demographics of your state are. If I lived in Colorado, where my vote would have a more likely impact on the electoral outcome, I would be a little more concerned about a lame-duck Obama and the “flexibility” he offered Putin. But then again 4 more years of banker-owned president is better than 8.

  43. I want Ron Paul, period. He is the only one who is serious about making drastic spending cuts, and restoring individual liberty to the people. Anyone else will only increase the size of government and encroach upon our freedoms.

  44. AJ says:

    If I thought my write-in Ron Paul vote would be counted I would do it. But as it currently stands we don’t have all 50 states allowing write-in’s. My vote will go to Gary Johnson. He is no Ron Paul. I don’t think we will have another Ron Paul for about 20 years. But we have to come together and show our power. We have to let them know we will not stand by and let them abuse their positions. As I see it the only choice we really have is to vote for Gary Johnson. The movement is bigger than Ron Paul. WE ARE RON PAUL!

  45. Diane Atkins says:

    I would love to see Dr. Ron Paul run as a 3rd party candidate (I even signed a petition seeking to ask him to run as independent), especially after the debacle at RNC. Unfortunately, at this juncture I don’t think it would have the desired impact.

    Voting for others such as Gary Johnson sounds great in theory. To back candidates who’s principles and ideals could have meaningful change and progress the cause of liberty. However, the realty is that any 3rd party candidate would not receive enough votes to become president at this time.

    The absolute scariest scenario to me is having Obama re-elected for another term. He is an immediate and mortal threat to our civil liberties, constitutional rights, economy and American way of life. His blatant disregard for our constitution and rule of law, his executive orders, and bypassing and/or ingnoring congress repeatedly to further his socialist/totalitarian agenda is both disgraceful and criminal. We cannot, on so many levels, afford another term with this person.

    So that leaves the Republican party. I’m not a Republican and don’t agree with all of their platform for sure. In many ways Dem & Rep policies are interchangable. But I feel if elected, this ticket will at least give in a little if they can get enough “Paul” people to vote for them. If we vote for 3rd party candidates thie election, it could detract enough votes to make an Obama re-election possible. I don’t think we can gamble on that possibilty.

    Well that’s my very long-winded opinion (sorry about that), lol. Take care and God bless!

    • Albert Meyer says:

      “The absolute scariest scenario to me is having Obama re-elected for another term.” Romney is much scarier.

      Romney is a big government protagonist. He will roll out a number of government programs, just like Bush did. The Democrats will vote for it. Government always expands more under a Republican Administration.

      Romney does not know how to spell Constitutional Rights. He cares just as much about our civil liberties as George Bush did. Zilch. He comes in the same mold as Bush and Obama: executive orders, by-passing Congress, etc. No, don’t be deluded. Romney will feed the beast, make sure his corporate cronies reap the spoils.

      I will vote for Johnson, hoping he will makes a good enough showing to demonstrate to the Republicans that they can’t win with out us.

      Obama will not accomplish much during his second term. The Republicans, sore after another failed White House bid, will do their utmost to derail his plans, much better than having a Republican big government protagonist in the White House riding rough shot over all our rights to the benefit of his corporate interests.

  46. Linda Angst says:

    I have pretty much decided to vote for Gary Johnson. I cannot vote for either Obama or Romney because they represent all that I detest. Writing in Ron Paul will not do any good at all IMO

    I have no idea what the future holds for the good doctor but I do know that I want my vote to be one that sends a loud message to the RNC.

    I’ve voted Republican all my adult life and I want no more to do with them. If Ron Paul runs in 2016 I will vote for him of course.

    • Linda Angst says:

      I would like to add that I don’t presently see a scenario where I would vote for Rand. He lost all credibility with me when he endorsed Romney while his dad was still in the running and now I hear he’s campaigning for Romney.

      It looks to me like Rand has become part of the machine of the RNC.

      • Steve Holmes says:

        I agree Linda. When Rand did this on the Sean Hannity show I lost any and all respect I had for Rand. All Rand did was to put another feather in Sean hat.

      • Ralyn says:

        I fully agree, Linda – you took the words right out of my fingers, lol – on both of your posts. Can Gary Johnson win? I seriously doubt it, but I want my vote counted and I want them to know that I did NOT vote for establishment corruption. What voting for Gary Johnson can do is give the Libertarian Party a leg up to become a major player in the future. I am a Liberty Republican because of discovering Dr. Paul back in 2006. But never have I voted blind party, I vote for the person not the party.

  47. irtechie says:

    I strongly believe the republicans are the party to back this time around. Considering all our self proclaimed libertarians ran under that ticket.

    http://rightwingbreakdown.wordpress.com/2012/09/02/ron-paul-versus-the-gop/

  48. Michael Polatis says:

    We certainly don’t want to bring the nation to its knees, but that is the perfect position for humble prayer.
    I believe the only logical choice is to vote for Gary Johnson. It would send a clear message to the GOP.
    Any other vote would be a throwaway vote. A vote for Gary Johnson would be the message that freedom matters, that principles matter, the Constitution matters.
    Meanwhile we teach the principles of freedom to everyone around us. and teach them to do the same.
    This will help us have an informed electorate who can vote in principle based local, state and national leaders. Then elect Ron Pual 2016

  49. Ravensara says:

    I watched from the sidelines and supported the ‘liberty movement’ until it became patently obvious that the supporters I found had absolutely no clue how bad totalitarianism can be. My family escaped communism, as have several friends who told me before Obama took office what we were facing.
    To take a chance on losing our country by allowing this administration to go any further is idiocy.
    Personally I thought the liberty groundwork was good, the teaparty has it’s own limited govt stance, and that liberty/limited govt base would either cause a takeover from within if Romney didn’t toe some sort of line, or a 3rd party would emerge by 2016. Republicans as we have known that party are toast…and not because of what they did on the convention floor.
    We will be lucky to get to THIS election. 2016 under Obama isn’t going to happen. No one else can afford to take on these thugs, so it’s ONLY Romney at this point.
    So then we have the Republican machine who has been totally blind to what is occurring in this country and thinks that they can just keep going as usual. Won’t happen. We are behind getting Obama out…..this election. Only.
    So I eagerly sought out what Ron Paul would say … and he seems willing to throw away the country after crafting a really good strategy. Did he really think he’d get much further this time? It’s just the base for the next level….
    One of the strategies from the Obama camp was a 3rd party run and only lately I wonder if RP decided to do that for them willingly. I can tell you I am not sure anymore. But all the good he has done is like sand flowing through fingers right now. We’ve got RP people coming into our groups trying to co op and the RP brand is being damaged tremendously right now.
    I don’t know if he’s just a poor loser or what, but I can tell you I admired him for MANY, MANY years and no longer do so due to how he handled this.
    I will tell you on this list that there is NO WAY your votes to these ‘bound to lose’ candidates mean anything to me, but treason. We are at a place in our country where we face a dictator. If you put a number of votes on whatever ticket, it just shows to me your ignorance of what is happening in this country and your willingness to throw away liberty. But no one will notice. UNLESS that percentage is the one that allows Obama to finish what he’s started.
    We’re not playing checkers folks. It is a chess move that moves Romney to POTUS and then the increasing growth and cohesion of the American people who can shift the next election. It will take several elections, but the process IS enshrined in the constitution.
    Unless you all would like to just give up and go whine while we lose America forever.

  50. Slim Strontem says:

    As you indicate, we may well not survive another 4 of 0.

  51. BTW, just for grins I looked up whoever this Virgil Goode Virgil Dude’s record. I can’t believe people are even mentioning him as a possibility in these circles, just because of Constitutional Party label next to his name. His record reads just like another run of the mill neo-con, basically a CINO (Constitutional in Name Only). He voted for Iraq invasion, touted all basic Islamic Jihadists are out to destroy us by printing word Mohammad on our currency etc garbage. He seems like he would fit in right next to lunatic Michelle Bachmann very well.

    Whoever is planning to vote for him, have you lost your mind?

    • Albert Meyer says:

      Thanks for the enlightenment. Why people even want to think twice before voting for Johnson baffles me. A vote for Johnson is a vote for liberty. The media wants to call the demise of the Ron Paul movement. They would need a poor showing from Johnson to bolster their case. Stick a finger in the establishment’s eye and vote for Johnson. Good grief.

      • erie4ronpaul says:

        This is what I keep telling people. A vote for Johnson will be seen as a vote for Paul. A write in won’t be seen at all. More over a vote for Johnson has benefits beyond the election in terms of ballot access and funding.

      • Albert Meyer says:

        Thanks erie… I figured out that there are two types of people here who won’t vote for Johnson.

        The first are GOP loyalists. They harbor the illusion that somehow they’d be able to change the GOP from within, not realizing that if Johnson does badly, changing the GOP from within will be just so much harder. Why would the neo-cons in the GOP want to move towards liberty when, say, the liberty candidate in November 2012 couldn’t garner more than five million votes? Five million would be less than 5% of the vote, but McCain lost by ten million votes in 2008. So, another 5 million votes might have given him a few swing states. At the margin, if Johnson gets more than five million votes, it would send a huge message to the GOP. You can’t win, not even come close, without changing your ways and nominating liberty candidates.

        The other group are the pro-lifers – the real ones, the ones who are pro-life and anti-war. Nobody is more pro-life that my wife who volunteers at a local Pregnancy Resource Center, saving one mother and one baby at a time. That’s how you fight the evil of abortion (but it takes a true commitment – you can always donate to them, if you don’t have the time), not by withholding your vote from Johnson. She is actively campaigning for Johnson. The pro-lifers gave us the Iraq and Afghanistan war. So, using pro-life as a sole criterion plays into the hands of the establishment, just as the Democrats use the gay issue to scare voters away from the Republican Party. Our country is on the verge of bankruptcy and another full scale war against Iran. Voting for Johnson, says little or nothing about the gay or pro life agenda, but sends a clear message that we want to balance the budget, end these wars and restore our civil liberties.

  52. Holly says:

    Gary Johnson… because I love freedom from control and manipulation.

  53. Vick says:

    Since a Ron Paul write-in probably won’t be counted, I’ll vote for Gary Johnson.

  54. Steve Holmes says:

    “”Consider this, if Ron Paul were the Libertarian candidate right now, some polls have him winning 17%, which would land him in the national debates and change the course of the country.””

    Why didn’t Ron run as a Libertarian? I have wondered about this from the beginning of 2007. Seems to me this would have been a lot easier for Ron with a whole less corruption.

    • If Ron Paul ran as Libertarian in 2007 and/or 2011, millions of people including myself would’ve never heard of him. He would’ve never had more than 10000 kids showing up for his rally in UCLA. He would’ve have remained as obscure figure as Virgil Goode and been forgotten.

  55. bravoranks says:

    I’m saddened to see that Ron Paul won’t be running as a third party, however, Gary Johnson has a promising future in the Liberty Movement, great ads (but no money to get them on tv), and he seems like he would be very likable to most Americans. As one of only 3 people on the ballot in every state I see Gary Johnson as the only choice for my vote in 2012. By the way love the “voting for Romney would be like kissing your sister” hahaha.

  56. Rod Carew says:

    Good morning Doug ~
    Everything we continue to do must be about placing Ron Paul in the White House in 2016.Period.I believe it should start with earnest prayer coupled with personal repentance.Why would God place RP in the WH ? We don’t just need people who know about God and the Bible.Lots of those people…But people who God knows Mt 5 13-23 message bible.Lot to reflect.
    Rod Carew

  57. J Lynn says:

    Peter Schiff makes a great point that at least Mitt Romney believes in Capitalism. While I agree with his point, I think a lot of people underestimate the ramifications of having someone in office who thinks we should have gone to war with Iran, yesterday. I am not confident that he will keep us out of a war with Iran. I am also not confident that if we enter a war with Iran that Russia and China would stay on the sidelines. In a scenario where we go to war with Iran and as a result Russia and China and as a further result a possible WWIII, I am not so sure that Romney would be economically better than the other choice, whether or not he believes in Capitalism. It is said that Romney has 17 (out of 24) of the same foreign policy advisers of the Bush administration. The Bush admin brought us the Patriot Act, DHS, and TSA in an effort to keep us “safe”. That in turn opened the door for the NDAA. I fear what civil liberties we will have left in attempt to make us even safer under a Romney admin. I am not saying either candidate is strong on this issue, but I am saying I don’t think Romney is necessarily going to destroy the country at a much slower rate which has been the argument of some Republican loyalists.

    I will be voting my protest vote for Gary Johnson for 3 reasons. One, I cannot vote for either mainstream candidate and later look the future generation in the eye and justify my vote should that candidate win. Two, I want to use my voting voice to send a message and that message is that Libertarian ideas are gaining popularity. And three, I read in a Reason article that Gary Johnson said if he gets at least 5% of the general election vote, the Libertarian Party would receive $90 million in matching funds. If this is true, it could be a huge asset in moving the Liberty movement forward.

  58. Tim says:

    Scott Horton’s suggestion [at PaulFest] for a Unification Ticket [the AntiWar Party, aka Paul/Kucinich] would be my choice, but time is quickly running out. If it’s going to happen, it needs to happen immediately if not sooner. I have little doubt that if this kind of thing were announced publicly, they would IMMEDIATELY poll high enough to get in the debates. This by itself would almost guarantee ballot access in all 50 states coming very quickly.

    Barring that, i think this whole conversation goes right down the old toilet bowl for me. 2008 showed higher than average turnout and still the non-voters [101 million vs 69 million blue-team and 59 million red-team] were a huge majority. Butler shaffer and company almost persuade me that principled non-voting is the answer, i.e…, withdrawing consent, If this truly worked, it seems to me the federal government would have started shrinking a long long time ago, based on those numbers above.

    I fear the worst no matter which of Doug’s options one chooses. Our votes will be spread to the winds no matter what. Some are going to vote the lesser of two evils; some Libertarian Party; some Constitution Party; some write-ins; some will abstain; others will do something different that I can’t even think of.

    I don’t know what our numbers really truly are. The only way for us to get any idea just how many of us there really are would be for all of us to vote the same way. And that simply ain’t gonna happen.

    Sadly, I remain undecided at this point…

  59. Steve Holmes says:

    Actually I believe we are all fooling ourselves. Does our vote really count one way or the other? With all of the corruption that has gone on this past year leads me to believe that it is not the people’s vote that count, it is in the process of the count. This election has already been determined. We the people have already lost!

    • Surfisher says:

      Steve — spot on!

      Ron Paul vs. HIS BIGGEST ENEMY: Electronic Voting Machines

    • SUSAN E. says:

      You took the words right out of my mouth Steve. The president is selected NOT elected …voting is a sham. The global elites have already chosen their puppet. We the People need to stand up and fight for our country …we need to do exactly what they did in Iceland or we are doomed. The situation is dire …we need to act now …not 4yrs from now! When government becomes destructive …it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.

  60. IWGJ says:

    Ron Paul is a Libertarian. The Libertarian message for small government, fiscal responsibility, a non interventionist foreign policy, individual freedoms and property rights is what made Ron Paul successful. Voting Libertarian is all I can do in good conscious. Although I would love to protest the GOP corruption and write in Dr. Paul, it would be meaningless. Voting Republican or Democrat is simply picking sides in a rigged game.

  61. Christy says:

    Doug, Normally I don’t comment because my voice seems so quite and unheard that my time could be spent on more productive things, but, since you specifically asked, here is my opinion. I was in fact asked just last night who I would be voting for and it is a real dilemma for me. I was disappointed that Paul didn’t mention all the cheating when he was with Jay, not sure if it was censored or not. In getting to my opinion, we all know that Romney is no different than Obama on the tough issues however he may stem the tide on total socialism and that may be worth something. I do believe that Rand has a future and would look forward to him running. Aside from that I am truly torn.

  62. Tim says:

    he wont be running in 2016, he’s made that pretty clear at the moment. You can even hear him say he was “just kidding” to Leno while everyone started cheering. He might change is mind in the years to come, but even if he doesn’t I think he has done a hell of job sparking what needed to be sparked in a lot of people. An American hero.

  63. Dalmazio says:

    I think we have to be careful about over-thinking things and being too strategic. It’s so difficult to predict voter outcomes, and then try and adjust one’s vote accordingly. I think it comes down to this: vote your conscience and principles, always.

    If Ron Paul is not on the ballot, then writing him in will serve no practical purpose. Sure you’re voting your conscience, but nothing can come from it.

    Voting for Romney or Obama is not voting principle or conscience for most Ron Paul supporters. And so, at least in my mind, this is not an option.

    Voting Virgil Goode is not a great option because, in the best case scenario, he’s on the ballot in only half the states. So while it may be a principled vote, it’s not practical.

    Voting for Gary Johnson is the best option for Ron Paul supporters, in my opinion. He embraces about 95% of what Ron Paul believes in, and he’s on the ballot in all 50 states. This choice would satisfy voting for conscience, principle, and also have an impact.

    Could voting for Gary Johnson mean that Obama get’s re-elected? Possibly. But if Gary Johnson is on the ballot he would probably take away a significant number voters from both Romney and Obama, since there are a lot of disgruntled democrats, independents, as well as republicans. This could very possibly level the playing field, truly making it a 3-way race. And even if Johnson didn’t win, something very important might be achieved in this election: the false-choice 2-party system might finally give way to a slightly more honest 3-party system.

  64. bondservant says:

    I still come back to two quotes for John Quincy Adams:

    “Duty is ours; results are God’s.

    “Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”

    Since scripture says that it is God that puts people in positions of authority over us – only He understands His reasons, we can only hope to discern some of that reasoning – the outcome is in His hands. So I can vote for the person who best represents what I believe to be true, and not worry about the results. I’m not responsible for the results – only my duty to be obedient to Him.

  65. Sheila LaFountain says:

    By the sounds of voices who once supported Ron Paul, not knowing where to turn. Dr. Paul should be President, in fact he would be if the RNC hadn’t cheated and because of that, we will all suffer. So we know that a vote for Dem. or Rep. is a vote for evil, I agree….Then, so many say a vote for Johnson will also be a wasted vote because the numbers would still be too low to beat Obama. I’m beginning to feel there is no reason to vote now, with all the cheating and votes not being counted. I have waited my whole life for a man like Ron Paul to run for President, I can not live with myself unless I write him in. Dr. Paul, what do you want us to do? Will you endorse Johnson or are you waiting to see if America will do the right thing and get Romney into prison where he belongs, will this open the door for you then?

  66. Surfisher says:

    DNC=RNC=CCCP

    Great speaker, DNC deserves him: Bill Clinton, who Bombed the Christian Nation Serbia’s Capital Belgrade — killing Christians to save Muslims…?…or his OWN SKIN from the Monika Lewinsky Scandal’s media scrutiny!

    The last time an European Capitol was bombed was in WW2 by Hitler!

    Slick Willy did one better — BOMB them on their Orthodox Easter Sunday! (After all, they were only Christians…so, no-one could Politically Correctly object to Christians getting the shaft, since even having a Christmas Tree was not approved)! The BIG NO-NO was US warring on Muslim Hollidays (OK to kill Christians on Easter, but NOT OK to kill Muslim Terrorists on Ramadan…)!

    http://americandefenseleague.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/apologizing-for-president-bill-clintons-serbia-war-crimes/

    —————————————————–
    Ron Paul — the Greatest American of the 21st Century!

    Dr. Paul started the peaceful Intellectual Revolution — to save our Nation from a false US Government that has FINALLY declared that We, The People, are NOW considered “their Enemy” (not some rag-tag band of crazy Muslims they want us to think have a chance to cross thousands of miles of oceans in… rowboats… to INVADE US)!

    Ron Paul started it — and We, The People, will finish it!

    True Ideas never die — so eventually — Bye, bye, NWO wannabe despots (NOW, We, The People, know WHO YOU ARE…and WILL END YOU)!

  67. Cristina Pertierra says:

    If Ron Paul can pull the 17% numbers stated above, why doesn’t he run with Gary Johnson? Judge Grey has agreed to step aside for Dr. Paul. If Romney wins, Ron Paul runs in 2016; but if Obama wins, Rand Paul runs. I don’t see why we have to wait when Ron Paul can run with Gary Johnson. If they lose, there’s still Ron or Rand in 2016 depending on who wins in 2012.

  68. El says:

    I’m struggling between writing in Ron Paul and a vote for Gary Johnson. I’m having a tough time warming up to GJ, but I keep going back to what Ron Paul has said over and over: The messenger may not be perfect, but the message is. Gary Johnson may not be a perfect messenger, and maybe I don’t agree with his position on everything, but then I also recall that it doesn’t really matter what his stand is on abortion, because like Ron Paul, he doesn’t believe in the federal government imposing his position on you. That is a state power…not for the federal government, and again like Ron Paul said…you have to change people’s hearts. You can’t legislate morals.

    In regard to Gary Johnson’s humanitarian wars…well, I am not completely anti-war. I believe there is a place for war in defending our national security (we haven’t seen that type of war in my lifetime). It is the illegal, unconstitutional nation building that I am opposed to. As long as Gary Johnson believes that war must be declared by Congress, I can live with that.

    In the end, there are more similarities than differences between Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, and I really liked what another poster said…a vote for GJ would be a vote for the lesser of two goods instead of a vote for the lesser of two evils. If RP does not run in 2016…waiting for another person exactly like him may take a century. Rand is certainly not his father.

    I still don’t know what I will do, but I suspect I will vote for Gary Johnson. On November 7, I will be changing my party affiliation after 25 years with the GOP. I am embarrassed and ashamed that my name is on their rolls.

  69. Surfisher says:

    Doug — A-Z:

    A) Mitt Rmoney must NEVER win!
    B) Mitt Rmoney must NEVER win!
    C) Mitt Rmoney must NEVER win!
    D) Mitt Rmoney must NEVER win!
    E) Mitt Rmoney must NEVER win!
    F) Mitt Rmoney must NEVER win!
    ………………..

    G-Z) Mitt Rmoney must NEVER win!

    Is my message clear…or have I missed something — such as:

    Mitt Rmoney MUST NEVER WIN!

  70. violet freedom says:

    Looking for the beginning of a push for ballot reform and the crushing of two party ballot monopoly – it is time, and given the end of an Era we are now witnessing, it will happen – just a matter of when: “REASON the Republican and Democratic parties are so corrupt is precisely because they have excluded the Independents, Constitutionals, Greens, Libertarians, and Reforms from ballot access, while also disenfranchising them through gerrymandering–our corrupt Congress chooses its voters, not the other way around, which is why Peggy Noonan was able to supply Ronald Reagan with the killer saying, “there is less turnover in the US Congress than in the Soviet politburo.” – Robert Steele – ex-government associate

  71. nonrepublicrat says:

    i will either write in ron paul or vote for virgil goode of “the so called constitution party”. very STUPID of wead to alienate a large block of ron paul supporters.

  72. Dan says:

    there once was a horse race to DC
    the contenders appeared different species
    but round came November
    and it seemed the contenders
    both smelled of the same type of feces

  73. Travis Balthasar says:

    If Paul and Johnson teamed up that would get them to the 15% needed to get in the debate.

    • nonrepublicrat says:

      then the moderator will give them 69 seconds of speaking time in a two hour bebate.

      • Albert Meyer says:

        69 seconds, not good, but better than nothing… sets the stage for 2016…

      • Surfisher says:

        “moderator”? — the correct term is orchestrator….

        We need to start e-mailing the MSM networks telling them: “We ain’t gonna watch YOUR Puppet Show…so lose your advertizing dollars”!

      • nonrepublicrat says:

        sunfisher; not only will the puppet show orchestrator give dr. paul only a few seconds of speaking time, the orchestrator will make sure those few seconds are taken up by having to answer a lame question about the ‘newsletters’ or some similar nonsense.

  74. Vic says:

    It’s my understanding many in the military plan to write in Ron Paul. I suggest we all do the same.

  75. Surfisher says:

    RNC=DNC=CCCP

    “The GOP is smarter than we”!

    While, We The People, have hopes of saving our Nation — THEY, the GOP Elite, have none.

    We are idealistic — believers that Truth, Liberty and Justice will eventually prevail, thus saving US from imminent economic collapse and the loss of all freedoms!

    The GOP Establishment has no such illusions — THEY want to assure that ONLY THEY and THEIR OWN have first dibs on the choices pieces of meat, when the carving of the American People starts. THEY do not want rejuvenation of the Republican Party, nor is stagnation enough — PURGING is needed, so THEY are first in line to pick our bones clean when the economic collapse starts. (Same goes for the Dems in power).
    ——————————————————————————-

    We, the Real American People (the producers), are the HOST — and THEY, the Non-Producers, are the Parasites!

    While the Host was strong and healthy in the past — the parasites fed well with little notice on OUR loss.

    But, NOW the Parasites have become GREATER than the HOST — meaning in order to survive, THEY have to suck MORE blood out of US than we can produce for ourselves, let alone THEM.

    Realizing this, THEY are preparing the road ONLY for THEMSELVES and THEIR OWN to strip our carcass clean (after they’ve sucked US dry).
    ————————————————————————

    Now, back to working two jobs Real Americans, so you can produce some more to feed THEM longer…until THEY are finally ready to send you to the glue factory… (“Animal Farm” by George Orwell).

    ————————————————————————————–

    NEVER vote for the Mitt — this creature is an American Destroyer!

  76. ausscyn says:

    Why can’t Ron RUN NOW!!!!!!!!!????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Face it – he’s on a roll. If he was to come out tomorrow & say he was joining the ____________ ticket, the republicrats would poop their pants. I know, I know, no profanity, but poop’s not profane. If Ron REALLY wants to rock the boat & have a GOOD CHANCE at the White House, he needs to change horses & get that Golden Ticket. It’s got his name on it!!!

    Love,
    Cynthia from Nevada

    • nonrepublicrat says:

      i’m as frustrated as anyone right now, maybe it would be better to save the tens of millions of dollars that such a campaign would cost, so that those resources can be used for a very strong 2016 campaign. it’s quite late to get a new campaign started and effective with only 2 months to go. almost impossible to convert miillions of voters in 2 months.

      • Albert Meyer says:

        Correct, hence, Dr. Paul has the perfect surrogate in Gary Johnson. A vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for Dr. Paul, a vote for liberty and it ensures that the movement lives on to fight another day.

    • Jjan says:

      I agree, Ron Paul 2012!!!!!!

    • ___j___ says:

      Hi, ausscyn. First off, thanks for all your hard work. But the answers to your questions are going to disappoint you. I have been with you all this time; I’m not a troll and a naysayer. This is just math. Back in June, when Ron Paul failed to sweep Texas, we knew that he would not win the nominee slot. But you and the rest of us kept fighting, right through convention. Why? To get experience for our dels & alts. To get people involved at the county and state level. To get our planks on the platform (McDonnell was fair… unlike the body-as-a-whole fiasco… Kerby & Kennedy rocked the boat beautifully, without rudeness). Plus, to get Rand Paul his airtime. To get 10k youtubers and 10k in person to the Sun Dome. To remind the GOP establishment that liberty is popular, and if they ignore the issues that liberty candidates support, they do so at their own electoral peril. (As Rand said… if you want to sway independent swing voters to the R column, try putting liberty on the menu, people like it.) But not to sweep the general election. 2012 is not the right historical moment — cf Moon is a Harsh Mistress.

      Status now: we have used the existing (rigged!) rules to gain first-ballot pluralities in a handful of states, and have silent-pluralities in many more states. But that is not enough. Even tho the GOP is responsible for rigging the rules (looooong ago), and even though Romney gobbled up dels in exactly the same way we did, in VI where he lost to Ron Paul, and in a bunch of other states where he lost to Newt or Santorum, establishment repubs are mouthing the narrative that Ron Paul people “cheated” because we’re flash-in-the-pan types that won a few of pluralities, but w/ no stomach for more. (By contrast of course, ND for Mitt was “only right”.) We need to stay in the ballgame, for the long run. We need to run the GOP offices that we are now in charge of professionally. Such as, may I respectfully whine, making sure the volunteer button and the get involved page and the candidate listing page on NV state GOP site functions. This is tedious, thankless stuff. But if we want to maintain the progress we have made, we need to be professional. That does not mean we must sign our souls to Mitt, or even personally vote for him, although many folks on cty cent cmt need to do it (for pledges). It does not mean we must fail to endorse glowingly the non-liberty candidates, just because they have an R. But we must not allow our personal feelings, and our wishes especially, to blind us. We must be fair in our assessment, and give the voters solid info, to make their own decision. *That* is what will truly help the repub party.

      To your specific question, why will Dr. Paul not run 3rd party? Easy, because he said he would not, and is a man of his word. End of story. You want practical reasons? Because doing that would split the party, forever, making all the accusations from unify-round-the-Romineey folks look true, i.e. that paulbots like you and me are hero-worship cultists, rather than practical and pragmatic folk. There is not enough money to win. Getting into the debates is not worth throwing away our credibility, what we have. Sure, some lies are being told now. But we can refute them, with live video of the teleprompter-monitor, and of Louisiana, and of Maine’s fake-slates, and of all the rest. Not if we crack now, though. We must maintain the moral high ground. If none of this has fully convinced you, then simply remind yourself how the presidential election really works: electoral college votes. You are old enough to remember Ross Perot. Look at 1992. Count the ecVotes. Look at 1996 — when Perot was slain. We don’t want that. We want to keep the moral high ground, so we *do* win the primaries in 2016.

      So, to sum up: electoral votes *guarantee* that Ron Paul cannot win on any fill-in-the-blank-here ticket. He knows it too, from experience as L in ’88, and watching Perot in ’92, which is why he stayed in the R camp from that point forward. We win from within. As for rocking the boat, methinks Gary Johnson and Virgil Goode will do that just fine, quite likely giving the win to Obama.

      If you want to vote non-Mitt, and can do so without risking a seat, that is fine. But officially, he is our Romineey, and so are the other repubs on the various state and local tickets. Professional support does not mean wholeheartedly endorsing them yourself, but there must be *somebody* in your local GOP that has such beliefs, so let them write the press releases. Beyond that, give honest advice. Dean Heller is no Ron Paul, or even Rand Paul, but he’s awesome compared to Shelley B, and probably the third or fourth best we have in the Senate now. Tell that story, so we can boot Reid in ’16.

      • ___j___ says:

        (Whoops, brain0. Meant to say, the volunteer button and the get involved page and the candidate listing page on _clark_cty_ GOP site functions… not NV state GOP… which does work.)

  77. Wendilla says:

    Romney was put in place so that Obama can win… Why do you think the same banks backed both and fought so hard against Ron Paul… They knew if Dr Paul was elected they would be exposed for the criminals they are… I’ll write in Dr Paul because that’s who I feel would best represent us and our beliefs…

  78. nonrepublicrat says:

    a write in ron paul or a second party ( not republicrat party ) vote are the only real choices we will have in november.

  79. jeffersonrepublican says:

    No Ron Paul supporter will vote for Romney. It will be reported that Obama’s re-election is due to the Ron Paul supporters not voting for Romney – and this time the media will get it right. The Romney campaign and the current Republican Party took drastic and very controversial steps to keep Ron Paul and his supporters/delegates from influencing the RNC. The Ron Paul movement is making an impact. We will not leave the party but change it. Romney is no Republican and is not that much different from Obama (or Bush). They want a large federal government and large federal spending. The so-called social conservatives and the pro- (undeclared) war people in the current Republican Party need to leave (and they will be replaced with many other smaller federal government anti-intervention people). Get the marriage, abortion, and religious statements out of the national platform – you can’t legislate morality and these are certainly not federal issues. It will still take a few years before the Republican Party transforms back into a small-federal-government party. One size does not fit all. Let the states be the laboratory to find out what works and doesn’t work and stop replicating state government at the federal level. “Obama and the U.S. Congress are running the train a 100 miles an hour off the cliff. Romney may slow it down to 95.”

    I will vote for Gary Johnson and send the GOP a message.

    • ___j___ says:

      I agree. If Obama wins, the MSM will claim (and establishment repubs at county and state level will gossip about and then endlessly irrationally hold a grudge over) that the lack of Red-Team Party Loyalty amongst those naughty Ron Paul folks was the *only* reason that Mitt lost. (Rather than facing the hard truth, that if Mitt is so lackluster that the voters cannot get excited about him even when the alternative is more _Obama_, he prolly didn’t deserve to win.)

      But the only way to keep Mitt from losing is to convince millions of voters in the swing-states to vote for him, and as you say, most of the Ron Paul supporters will not do it, or even help convince the independents. Even if they might have been on the fence before the fairness-fiasco in Tampa, now Mitt is mostly likely all out of luck, unless he make some incredibly convincing flip-flop (not impossible?)

    • ___j___ says:

      On the other subject you mentioned, I disagree. By wishing to kick the social-cons and war-neocons out of the repub party, I believe you are shooting yourself in the foot. Most of the social-conservatives would join a third party group, or go home silent, but many of the war-neocons (a *much* larger group) would change to the dem side. Ron Paul is still for strong defense, after all, which is really what many of the individual everyday republicans that vote for hardline-neocon candidates (as opposed to soft democrats) would be quite happy with.

      Similarly, many of the social-conservatives put their vote down for hardline-theocrat candidates, when they would really be just as happy with a Ron Paul type who would make the feds leave them alone (as opposed to ramming one religion onto everybody). Liberty candidates support strong defense, and will keep the feds out of the business of rewriting the way people run their religions. Why insist that all repubs in the glorious future (when liberty candidates are the norm) must be anti-intervention like Ron Paul and pro-choice like Gary Johnson? There is room for Gary Johnson in the repub party, but there is also room for Sarah Palin, if she’ll stick to guaranteeing freedom of religion for all (contrast with Santorum).

      To be clear, I’m not saying YOU should be pro-life & pro-intervention, I’m saying that you should NOT insist everybody in the repub party with you be pro-choice plus anti-intervention. There is room for both, as long as we let the states decide the abortion issue for themselves (as both Ron Paul and Gary Johnson suggest) & support strong Defense.

      • I think you’re confused about co-existence of neo-con warmongers with liberty/Constitutionalists in one party. There is just no way liberty crowd can stick in the company of people like Rick Santorum, Bill Kristol, Cheney/Rumsfeld etc. Those people are the anti-thesis of liberty.

      • ___j___ says:

        @TheChiefe, yes, of course, there is no way that liberty-minded folks and the actual neocon-warmongers *themselves* can be friends, or cooperate. But everyday individual republican voters that end up casting a vote for neocon-warmonger candidates (of those you mentioned Cheney as VP fits the bill) are the folks I’m talking about.

        My assertion is that those voters, the electorate, do not in fact demand Cheney, or even somebody like Cheney, as their candidate. They would be just as happy to vote for somebody Strong-On-Defense. Many of these folks are in the repub party now, perhaps over half of the party. We both agree that Cheney shouldn’t be a candidate for any liberty voters, but I’m trying to say, don’t drive away the everyday repub voter (even if they voted for Cheney back in the day). There are plenty of people in my county that voted for VP Cheney, but would have been equally content to vote for Sen. Mike Lee as VP, say. Don’t drive them to the dems. The candidate is not the same as the voter.

      • ___j___ says:

        Oh, and strong statements make for fiery forum-discussion, but aren’t helping bring the average voter over to liberty. Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Santorum are *not* the anti-thesis of liberty. Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and maybe Pol Pot seem a lot more qualified. (Santorum barely even counts as neocon, he’s just mad at Iran since he’s a bit theocon-ish.)

  80. Aaron McKeon says:

    The thing I like most about voting for Gary Johnson is that it allows us the best opportunity to quantify the Liberty Movement in the general election. If a vote for Gary Johnson is the equivalent of a vote for Obama, why not vote for Gary Johnson and let them KNOW that it was US? I will certainly not vote for the candidate who repeatedly kicked the sand in our face, and I certainly will not vote for the candidate who has taken us to more wars and eroded more of our personal freedoms.

    More of my thoughts on this at http://www.dailypaul.com/252471/quantify-the-movement-the-case-for-gary-johnson

  81. Jos A Guerra says:

    I feel that writing in Ron Paul name is a mistake, it will not accomplish anything except to fulfill some egos. I do believe Gary Johnson would not be a viable option even when there are some differences with Ron Paul ideology. But we can expect to find Ron Paul clones anyway, so It might be easier to trim the small edges along the road with GJ than Obama or Romney!

  82. joe_liberty says:

    Nice Doug, but by 2016 I would not be voting for Ron Paul as much as I love him. It is time to pass the torch on. Ron educated us all, exposed the establishment for what they are, and launched the movement that will some day return us to liberty. Ron Paul was and is a huge success. I am voting for Gary Johnson and the best to everyone. Thank you.

  83. marion says:

    Doug, you really think the US has 4 more years of life, world reserve currency, etc? I think not!

    • Surfisher says:

      marion — spot on!

      We’ll be done in a few months…not a few years!

      The collapse of the US Dollar is imminent (since either the BO or the Mitt will be in power this Fall).

  84. Clint says:

    I would personally love for Ron Paul to be the Libertarian party’s nominee or at least be a part of the team! I believe It’s the best chance we have at sustaining his message of freedom at this point. His endorsement of the party alone would boost Gary Johnson’s numbers and possibly get him into the debates. Having a person like Johnson making points reflective of Paul’s ideas on heavily televised debates may dramatically continue spreading the message of liberty instead of letting it slowly die out with the GOP convention. This kind of move may also help support the liberty candidate in 2016 whoever they may be. Personally, I will be voting for Gary Johnson this year unless Ron Paul makes some kind third-party related move. I would love to write in his name but I do not believe it will have much of an impact. Overall, I think it’s most important to vote the way you feel is right in your heart and not side with one of two parties because media, family, or friends think you should. If you wish to vote for someone else and are not sure which candidate supports the same ideas as you, please take the time to check out http://www.isidewith.com/. I always knew I liked many of Gary Johnson’s views but was surprised to find I agreed with him a small percentage more than Ron Paul. If you agree with Ron Paul more than any other candidate and believe writing him in is the right thing then be true to yourself and do it!

  85. Tony says:

    Forget about Gary Johnsons stance on abortion. That is decided by the supreme court anyway. Yes I know the president has some influence on it, but lets vote for the president on his executive branch of the government policies. The abortion distraction is a fight between Democrats and Republicans. Anyway,abortion will happen illegal or not (haven’t you read history!

  86. The best thing you can d tyo support either Ron or Rand Paul in 2016 is to vote for Gary Johnson in 2012.

    http://hnn.us/blogs/liberty_and_power/147931.html

  87. daniel says:

    I plan to vote for Gary Johnson for this election cycle…

    Really though, it was such a mistake for the Republicans to go with Romney over a Ron Paul, if you think about it strictly from a strategic point of view… How is a Romney/big business-executive type supposed to overcome the image/narrative established by the democrats that the recession was caused by big business/executive types making bad decisions?

    A Ron Paul could have made the case for a free market solution better, without having the ties to big business that could be used for potential attacks- especially considering he has no relations with corporate lobbyists, whereas Obama does.

    A Ron Paul would have appealed to Republicans, Democrats, and Independents… he’s older, but he’s charismatic and likeable- a grandfather type. Mitt Romney is stiff and seen as something of a rich jerk. The electorate is in many ways mostly familiar with a stereotype character of a Republican these days, and it’s not exactly positive, and Mitt Romney fits it perfectly. Ron Paul doesn’t fit into that same mold, so he would have a greater chance for broader appeal.

    Ron Paul could have attacked Obama on issues and scandles that have been ignored by the media, and that Romney is incapable of using as amunition since he is in the same boat as Obama. As a result, Romney is losing a vast stock of attack material. Just think of what Ron Paul could do to Obama with criticizing the President on the wars, on the NDAA, on assasinating US citizens, on Operation Fast and Furious, on the debt, on spending, etc. Whereas all of this is off-limits to Romney since he’s on the same sides of the these issues as Obama….

    such a waste…

    • wes says:

      “Really though, it was such a mistake for the Republicans to go with Romney over a Ron Paul,”

      No it wouldn’t, for them. They would rather have Obama win than Ron Paul. Ron Paul would actually follow the Constitution, and they can’t have that.

  88. Jose A Guerra says:

    Hi Doug:

    Here is my 2 cent contribution! I feel writing in Ron Paul’s name would be a mistake that would accomplish nothing! In fact, it’s a valuable vote that could be used somewhere else! I feel Gary Johnson would be a viable option even when there are some differences between his and Paul’s ideologies. Truthfully, thou, we can’t expect to find Ron Paul clones anywhere, so It might be easier to trim the smaller edges along the road with GJ than with Obama or Romney! It would also help the libertarian movement in terms of exposure. Always glad to talk to you!

    Best Regard,

    Description: cid:image003.png@01CD2535.F52D6620

    C: 956-290-4648

    H: 956-377-1259

    F: 877-532-1134

    E: jguerra@dr.com

    This e-mail transmission contains information that is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended only for the addressee(s) named above. If you receive this e-mail in error, please do not read, copy or disseminate it in any manner. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. Please reply to the message immediately by informing the sender that the message was misdirected. After replying, please erase it from your computer system. Thank you for your assistance.

  89. Sam Bruce says:

    There is an effort in Alaska to get Dr. Paul on the Libertarian ticket as VP with Gary Johnson. If this happens I will vote for the ticket because of RP even though I don’t agree with the platform. I would prefer to write-in Ron Paul but that seems futile unless the write-ins will be counted. Difficult decision.

  90. Susan Gibson says:

    Doug I thought I heard that Johnson would move aside if RP wanted it. Any truth to that??

  91. nonrepublicrat says:

    just DON’T vote mittens or king obama. that’s all that matters in 2012. a write in for dr. paul, a vote for johnson, or a vote for goode will all serve as a statement of opposition to the corrupt system. i strongly suggest everyone focus on how we can do a much better job in preparation for 2016. start a special savings account today, and put some funds in it every month so we can biggest money bomb ever 3 years from now. we MUST be much better funded, and MUST find better ways to safeguard again election fraud. we MUST have even better stategy for reaching those demographics that we have been poor in reaching. get started preparing for 2016 TODAY. don’t forget how important your state and local elections are too.

    • Surfisher says:

      How STUPID does the GOP Establishment think US to be — not to SEE that “the vote” to pass despotic “rule” 16 (a) (2) WAS ALREADY PROGRAMMED A DAY AHEAD OF THE ACTUAL VOTE—Therefore, their Teleprompter ALREADY “KNEW” the “Aye” vote, BEFORE IT WAS SOLICITED!

      DO NOT VOTE for the Mitt — The Creature that BOUGHT the RNC and GOP!

      Punish this Anti-American by refusing to support IT!

      (pause at 2:00 and advance to 2:05 to SEE This RNC Perfidy) — spread this 2 minute video!

  92. Surfisher says:

    Qvo Vadis America…?

    “Whither goest thou?” — to be reduced to Vote for a Mexican Mormon or a Muslim-trained Kenyan…?

    No Real Americans (that built this Nation)…left…what a “Brave New World”….

  93. Pat Jack says:

    Minor, cosmetic surgery in November of 2014 would take 15 years off of Ron Paul’s face. Some say Mitt has had many tens of thousands of dollars of cosmetic surgery. Hillary is probably approaching $100,000 worth of cosmetic surgery.

    Dr. Paul needs to take a serious look at hiring a public speaking coach, specifically a “breath trainer”. Pavarotti’s career and indeed his life and health, were saved by a “breath trainer”.

    If he approaches “breath training” with the same discipline he applies to many other things he could increase the quality of his public speaking by many magnitudes.

    If he continues to exercise regularly and eat well and treat himself well, he could still challenge Romney to a foot race, or bicycling contest and beat him at age 80. Romney will be close to 70 years of age as well.

    If Dr. Paul can return in some capacity to the medical profession, deliver a few babies, that would be very, VERY good for his media portfolio in 2016.

    I think running as a republican for the ticket in 2015-16 with a switch to Libertarian if he does not get the nomination … that would most likely give a win to the democrats in any scenario and would set Rand up nicely for 2020. And there is always the possibility that the libertarian ticket of Paul/Johnston could win. Looking at it from any perspective, running in 2015-16 will launch a campaign on more solid ground and with support in place at local, county, parish and district levels in the GOP as never imagined before, the dynamic of that would be very worthwhile and would go a long way to enable Rand in 2020.

    And if Dr. Ron Paul does not get the nomination, and the libertarian party waits to select their presidential candidate until after the RNC, (so Dr. Paul can easily move into the slot), and then have Johnston run as his VP would be the logical and most effective campaign for too many reasons to list.

  94. Darren says:

    It’s no struggle for me. Gary Johnson is on the ballot in all 50 states. He is a principled, proven leader who has done by Executive authority what RP has only espouse from Legislative rhetoric. Not only that, GJ is just a cool guy! Beyond the presidential race, however, it is even more important to continue to educate ourselves and others and to expand the voice of liberty from the grassroots on up. GET INVOLVED locally, shout Liberty at every opportunity. Eventually the wave of freedom will have to turn the tide. Immutable law of physics and all. :)

  95. Sean says:

    Not every state allows write ins. A vote for Ron Paul, unfortunately, is a vote that will not yield any results.

    Gary Johnson has my vote, and if he gains more % points in the polls, he can get in the debates.

    We need to put together an effort to have everyone planning on voting for Johnson to show it on one website to show how strong his support is. Doing so might show undecided Liberty people that he is the only logical choice for 2012.

    However, in 2020, I am hoping to once again promote Ron Paul.

  96. Wiseburn says:

    I would prefer if Rand ran for re-election to the US Senate in 2016. We need him there to put a stop on bad bills and debate from a Liberty Position.

  97. Pat Jack says:

    Of greatest importance in considering a run for Dr. Ron Paul in the 2015-16 campaign cycle is that there will be no “Obama Equation”, and if there is a “Romney Equation” then a different set of possibilities and dynamics open up, all equally as effective if pursued with logic and determination. It’s either a run against a sitting Romney, or a run against Hillary.

  98. Surfisher says:

    Vote for anyone but CHEATING Rmoney!

    I’ll be writing Ron Paul IN — knowing they won’t count such votes, but assuring that Rmoney won’t get elected and a Mormon Dynasty with his brood following his SICKENING Steps TO OWN THE GOP and support Israel, instead of Our Nation, will be OVER!

  99. Jim says:

    Mr. Wead hat is your response to one of the faithful shooting a CHP officer in the head?
    “I also contribute significant time to the Ron Paul campaign … and the liberty movement.”

    http://www.insidebayarea.com/news/ci_21471769/walnut-creek-chp-officer-shot-during-freeway-stop

    Anson Chi (bombing attempt), Anthony Graziano (firebombed two New Jersey synagogues), James Von Bruhn (opened fire at holocaust museum), Richard Poplawski (killed 3 police officers during a domestic dispute call) Jules Manson (advocated assassinating President Obama), Jason Todd Ready (killed his girlfriend and her daughter and her boyfriend and daughter and then himself) and now Christopher Boone Lacy joins the growing list Ron Paul supporters who’ve attempted to take the ‘r3volution’ to it’s logical conclusion.

    • ___j___ says:

      Umm, troll? Ron Paul is against murder (and the fed and the irs).
      Ron Paul is in favor your mom (and apple pie and the american way).
      Just because you are a troll, doesn’t mean you cannot *sing* on-key.
      Because a guy likes freedom, doesn’t mean he’s not nuts another way.

      The logical conclusion of a liberty revolution is a limited-government constitutional republic, not bloodthirsty anarchy, as you imply, troll. Anarchists voting is a contradiction in terms. Fascists & communists wishing for massive bloodshed *never* vote for liberty-candidates.

      Doug, can you please install a downvoter for your blog-comments?

      • Jim says:

        Ignoring the phenomenon of Ron Paul supporters becoming violent will not solve the problem. It has been the campaigns policy to do so and the problem has only continued. It will escalate in the next few months to the point where Ron Paul becomes synonymous with violent supporters and all major colleges and universities will have little choice but to ban Ron Paul from spewing his extremist rhetoric on their campuses and bar his books from their libraries.
        Don’t give me your “Dear Leader is in favor of this and that ” nonsense. Dear Leader and his cronies only care about one thing: money. He will go down in history as one of the biggest scam artists of the 20th century. He conned $40 million out of the faithful despite his campaigns own .count in late February that had Romney wining the nomination Listen to Doug Wead’s admission around 16 minutes, when he realizes he let the cat out of the bag and quickly changes subject. Wead by the way has been paid a total of $72,000 (of supporter money) in the last nine months while the current median American income is $26,364 PER YEAR.

        So how many more innocent people will die at the hands of Paul supporters driven by the over-the top rhetoric while guys like Mr. Wead continue to collect their blood money by making claims like “Here’s a toast to Ron Paul, 2016″ to keep the money bombs going and the cash flowing into his wallet? The Campaign’s silence on the violence committed by it’s supporters is is acquiescence.

      • Fascism of US military industrial complex – funded by fascist taxation system upon US population & “rabbit out of a hat” line of credit by treasonous Federal Reserve on display.

        What does US Government of fascist Republican + Democrat party monopoly export to the rest of the world? Missiles, bombs, death & destruction of unconstitutional wars for the profit of bankers / military industrial complex. AND imposing a worthless devaluing currency on rest of the world as reserve currency. This is guaranteed to create a global standoff & conflicts, as other countries will stand up to fascist hegemony of this bogus fiat currency & eventually discard it.

      • Fascism of US military industrial complex – funded by fascist taxation system imposed upon US population & “rabbit out of a hat” line of credit by treasonous Federal Reserve on display.

        What does US Government of fascist Republican + Democrat party monopoly export to the rest of the world? Missiles, bombs, death & destruction of unconstitutional wars for the profit of bankers / military industrial complex. AND imposing a worthless devaluing currency on rest of the world as reserve currency. This is guaranteed to create a global standoff & conflicts, as other countries will stand up to fascist hegemony of this bogus fiat currency & eventually discard it.

      • Fascism of US military industrial complex – funded by fascist taxation system imposed upon US population & “rabbit out of a hat” line of credit by treasonous Federal Reserve on display.

        What does US Government of fascist Republican + Democrat party monopoly export to the rest of the world? Missiles, bombs, death & destruction of unconstitutional wars for the profit of bankers / military industrial complex. AND imposing a worthless devaluing currency on rest of the world as reserve currency. This is guaranteed to create a global standoff & conflicts, as other countries will stand up to fascist hegemony of this bogus fiat currency & eventually discard it.

      • Jim says:

        Really not sure how any of this justifies a Ron Paul supporter killing a CHP officer in cold blood or for that matter, a 77 year old politician continuing to money bomb supporters for 5 months after the campaign’s own count confirms he would lose (can you say soliciting money under fraudulent circumstances? Maybe the FEC should get involved/).

  100. Mark says:

    I have been following Ron Paul since 2007 and will even vote for him in 2016. I believe that our next logical choice this election is to vote for Gary Johnson to gain the numbers for the cause. I believe that Romney or Obama will wake up more Americans over the next 4 years and they will remember that the Liberty Movement had a large showing in Gary Johnson (A Ron Paul Supporter) in 2012. The message will be loud and clear!!

  101. Surfisher says:

    IGNORE the ‘JIM’ creature!

    ‘Jim’ — the troll — (previously banned from posting here as “tex2″ shill) pollutes this forum again with its vitriol.

    Ignore this PERNICIOUS creature — do not reply to it.
    ————————————————————————————

    In case you forgot, this subhuman, like the Bilderberg Gang, wants to see Ron Paul dead:

    (JIM says: July 9, 2012 at 8:07 am “….The good doctor looked really feeble in that last message to the faithful. … Vegas odds say he (Ron Paul) DOESN’T LIVE to see Tampa.”)

  102. Jjan says:

    Hello Doug,

    I will skip to your last paragraph: ” Consider this, if Ron Paul were the Libertarian candidate right now, some polls have him winning 17% of the vote, which would land him in the national debates and change the course of the country.”

    Does that mean a possible 2012 Libertarian run?

    If Dr. Paul agreed to that, I would without hesitation invite him to do so.

    As you said, ” It would change the course of the country.”

    That would answer to all the questions of the other candidates.

    In the vulgar tongue, that is a ” no brainer “.

    If he were not to win in 2012, then 2016 could be thought about when the time comes.

    I personally will not vote for Obama or Romney. They are two sides of the same coin and both bad.

    Johnson and Goode are wasted votes, but if I am going to waste my vote, I will write in Ron Paul and waste my vote on who I believe in.

    Again, if a Libertarian run is possible, then I invite Ron Paul onto the ticket.

    I hope to see him there.

    For Liberty,

    Jjan

    • Surfisher says:

      Jjan — well stated!

      Can you imagine Mormon Mitt winning — and than his 50+ sons (as a Mormon he probably has more than the token 5 showing up at conventions from his claimed only one wife) — taking over our Nation as A Mormon Dynasty… for the next 100+years!

      Kissing Israel’s behind — by supporting any wars Israel demands, to protect them (not the USA Citizens)!

      Questions:

      1) Which one will be Mitt’s First Lady (since Mormons must have two or more wives to be TRUE to their sectarianism)?

      2) Does Mitt Rmoney want to become a God (since Mormon scripture states that ALL true Mormons eventually will BECOME GODS)?

      3) Anyone with the smallest brain from BO’s campaign will devastate the Mitt with this question —
      “Do you, Mitt Rmoney, expect to become a God”?

      No human being will vote for someone that EXPECTS to become a GOD!

  103. Surfisher says:

    Vote for anyone but CHEATING Rmoney!!!

    I’ll be writing Ron Paul IN — knowing they won’t count such votes, but assuring that Rmoney won’t get elected and a Mormon Dynasty with his brood following his SICKENING Steps TO OWN THE GOP and support Israel, instead of Our Nation, will be OVER!

  104. petermag says:

    Gary Johnson. And it is for EXACTLY the reasons you have listed. Before the convention started I was leaning Romney, but then the GOP proved that while they want Liberty minded people’s support, they want it while not giving us a seat at the table.

    The best thing the liberty movement can do right now is focus its efforts on getting Johnson into the debate and getting him a chunk of voters so that whoever loses the election realizes that they must start taking liberty positions seriously.

    Keep going Doug. Don’t stop.

  105. ___j___ says:

    Doug, I’m sorry, but somebody has to remind the internet of this one:

    When the river swirls and the wind blows, and when uncontrollable inflation forces us to revert to the gold standard, and the Federal Reserve bank is exposed as the unconstitutional, neofascist cabal it really is, you’ll see me coming over that hill. But don’t you fret, America. If you ever feel like your government is getting too big or too intrusive, just give a little whistle, and there I’ll be. I’ll be there quicker’n you can spit.
    [Ron Paul, Oct'08, quoted in America's Finest News Source, The Onion.]
    :-) The more things change….

  106. Surfisher says:

    Can you imagine Mormon Mitt winning — and than his 50+ sons (as a Mormon he probably has more than the token 5 showing up at conventions from his claimed only one wife) — taking over our Nation as A Mormon Dynasty… for the next 100+years!

    Kissing Israel’s behind — by supporting any wars Israel demands, to protect them (not the USA Citizens)!

    Questions:

    1) Which one will be Mitt’s First Lady (since Mormons must have two or more wives to be TRUE to their sectarianism)?

    2) Does Mitt Rmoney want to become a God (since Mormon scripture states that ALL true Mormons eventually will BECOME GODS)?

    3) Anyone with the smallest brain from BO’s campaign will devastate the Mitt with this question —
    “Do you, Mitt Rmoney, expect to become a God”?

    No human being will vote for someone that EXPECTS to become a GOD!

  107. nonrepublicrat says:

    buy millions of human beings have voted for barry hussein obama, who thinks he is ALREADY a God.. drop to your knees and worship the almight teleprompter god.

  108. nonrepublicrat says:

    ** but millions of ……………………

  109. Hyun Suh says:

    I would have to say that the best thing to do is knowing when to act and not act. In this quarrel, I would highly suggest to vote for Gary Johnson. Sociologically, people need to know that change has to happen. Changing the popularity in party decisions would make things really big for a sociological movement. In all cases, the vote has to be voted through the electorial college, but if all succeeds, the course of a major party change will make it relevant that people don’t want neo-con, fascist, totalitarian power in the US (say this due to the historical regimes that happen in history). An example of what happened in korea is that President Chun Doohwan was in power and a small percentage of people rebelled for a real democracy instead of living in a coup d’ etat. A small group of people joined together and actively created something that all people were convinced they wanted which was a truely democratic society. Of course this wasn’t perfect but it happened due to a civil society that was willing to fight against the administration. If more people join together or pick up more people on this, this will work. This group of libertarians is becoming more wide known and for that, it can become something greater. If this party wants to be well known, it will have to get together and really rally to get this movement going. So I say act now on voting for Gary Johnson and really show the American people that our votes do count towards true conservatism: To protect our rights and freedoms of this great nation.

  110. MANGOLDS2@YAHOO.COM says:

    Its a No Brainer: VOTE FOR GARY JOHNSON IF YOU WANT YOUR VOTE TO COUNT AND ACKNOWLEDGED.

  111. Damir Prester says:

    Johnson/Paul (or vice versa if possible) is an obvious choice. This could be an awakening combination for regular US citizen

  112. Most RP supporters I know will vote Gary Johnson, but there is a couple that will still write him in, even though the votes dont count in most cases.. Gary and Ron are very close in policy, so we can keep our principles and still vote for liberty.. Ron is retired so this movement has to be about liberty of it ends this year, most people get that and understand getting Gary in the debates should be our prioirty, this is the best way we can promote liberty in the next two months.. And yes if Romney wins we lose most of everything, so unfortunately Obama must win for us to move forward.. Which after what Romney did at theconvention, he deserves no less..

  113. LV says:

    After reviewing the voting procedures in the wonderful state of Illinois (jk) I have found that writing in Dr. Paul’s name would be a wasted vote as it would not count. He would need to register in every single precinct in the state to be allowed on the ballot. More rigged voting procedures from the state of corrupt politicians.
    So reluctantly i will be casting my vote for Gary Johnson. He doesn’t inspire me the way Dr. Paul does and on several items I disagree with him entirely. But at least I can vote with a clear conscious by supporting him. I couldn’t do that at all with the other two phonies. And Godspeed to Dr. Paul. I hope he continues to lecture and give speeches to educate the masses on the principles of real liberty and our constitution. People are beginning to come out of their slumber. I have had more people asking me about Dr. Paul after the Republican convention then ever before. I think what happened down there in Tampa opened up people’s eyes to how corrupted the two party system is. As to Rand running in 2016. Time will tell. I like Rand, but he has always struck me as too much of a compromiser for my taste. I realize this is politics, but I just wish he would stand up to the GOP power structure a little more often. His decision to speak and follow their rules by not mentioning his father by name was disgusting to me. I don’t care how much i would have gained politically, I would never have been able to do that.

  114. David says:

    Ron Paul should run as an independent.

  115. Russ Nelson says:

    I think your analysis is spot on. If Ron Paul were the Libertarian candidate right now there would be a great turn out for the Libertarian Party ticket. If Ron Paul cannot get on the LP ticket I am definitely going to vote Gary Johnson. I would hope that Ron Paul would endorse Gary Johnson at this point so that all liberty revolution supporters would make the move. I hope in 2016 Ron Paul will run again, but on the LP. I feel with all the new GOP rules Ron Paul would not have a chance within the GOP as they would pull the same shenanigans.. If he were to announce support of the LP at this time I think the Libertarian Party would grow by leaps and bounds and would be ready for his 2016 run. Thanks for your asking. Russ Nelson Provo, Utah

  116. RON PAUL OR NO ONE AT ALL!!

    PERIOD!!

  117. didn’t read all the comments, but abstaining is an option. I know that Ron Paul woke up so many from their apathy. But that doesn’t mean I or anyone should feel like they HAVE to obligated to participate in the corrupt system at all.

    I will probably abstain. It really is just like the old days without Ron Paul on the ballot. Depending on which side of the bed I woke on, I may ignore the “process”. I can say what I won’t do, and that’s cast my republican vote for Romney. No way.

  118. Jim says:

    Ron Paul goes on Leno and jokes after running in four years. So for all of you underemployed, unemployed and suffering people who are losing your homes, families and lives (medical access, military suicides) you can wait four more years with a laugh.

    How about this more plausible option. Doug would you please consider running for the office? You have the experience, quick wit, and campaign knowledge to get this grassroots movement running to victory. Why ask Ron to do what you can? Step up to the opportunity to put your experience and passion to work.

  119. Gary Johnson with out hesitation

  120. Wynne says:

    @Jjan who said, “Johnson and Goode are wasted votes”

    A vote for Goode may indeed be a wasted vote, since he is, apparently, on the ballot in only half of the 50 states.

    As many people have said in these comments, Johnson IS on the ballot in ALL 50 states, and if the Liberty Movement supports him, we have a chance of gaining federal funding for the next election, SPREADING OUR MESSAGE EVEN FURTHER (most important!), as well as ‘sticking it’ to the fraudulant and corrupt two party system. Therefore, a vote for Johnson IS NOT a wasted vote.

    I want to call out to Ron Paul and PLEAD with him to join Johnson as VP if this is at all possible (as some have suggested), or take over the Libertarian ticket if Johnson is willing to step aside.

    DR. PAUL YOUR PEOPLE WANT & NEED YOU IN 2012, no matter what it takes! We may not have 4 more years!

    I pray protection and blessings over Ron Paul and his family. He is a true patriot, a hero for Liberty and his work will live on forever.

    • Jjan says:

      Johnson is being attacked now with lame arguments to get him off the ballot in several states. Probably just to try to break his bank with legal fees.

      Looks like the field is narrowing.

      Maybe a vote for Romney is a vote for Ron Paul in the next election. Enough people may wake up by then.

      I’m still writing in Dr. Paul.

  121. Owen says:

    I think RP supporters will find it useful to consider where they live. If you (hypothetically) prefer Romney over Obama, but are torn between voting Romney or alternatively voting GJ in order to shout out Liberty, then perhaps you may want to vote Romney if you live in a battle ground state or a state in which both the winner and the looser may receive some electoral college delegates.
    If you’re pretty confident you’re in a safe Democrat state with winner take all for the electoral college votes then you can be pretty confident that you can vote GJ just to make a point, without affecting the election (you just make Romney loose the state by a wider margin but don’t affect his electoral college tally).
    If you’re pretty confident you’re in a safe Romney state with winner take all in the electoral college, then you could also consider voting GJ. This is a little more risky of a choice than if you were in a solid blue state, because if enough people vote GJ instead of Romney then Romney may loose the state.
    God bless (from an Australian).

  122. American says:

    Ron made a joke of a 2016 run. I didn’t find the joke funny for all those hurting for work, unemployed, those lacking medical coverage, and those deployed overseas. It wasn’t funny. Your question is good but I ask you Doug to consider a run for office, you have the experience, the grassroots awareness and the means. Doug Wead 2012.

    Would others on here support a Doug Wead 3rd party run? Yes I am serious.

    • Heather says:

      American,

      Doug, as great a spokesman as he is, has demonstrated a lack of cognizance regarding everything from Austrian, Chicago school or even Monetarist economics to the 1970s Audit the Fed bill to the down sides of Rand Paul aside from his Romney shenanigans and beyond. While ignorance can be overcome with research, it will take a lot of it for Doug to bridge this gap – Will it be more effective for him to do this and try for public office or stay the smooth spokesman he is? Hard to say – will mainly depend on his own interest and dedication to whichever path he chooses

  123. Heather says:

    This seems like a once in a blue moon opportunity for the Libertarian party to gain more headway, with a record % of independents and both big parties losing members faster than they gain them. What would seem best at this point is for Mr. Gray, in a Lincolnesque move, to step aside for now. Redo the Lib vp vote w/ Ron Paul in the mix and if he gets elected, they would have a real chance to win. They would have great cross party and independent support.

    This would have the added benefit of breaking the spine of the present 2 party system, which is really much more the problem than either big party. (Perhaps the Libertarian party would morph from its present state to something similar to the Rep or Dem party as both of them morphed from roots very libertarian in nature to the behemoths they are now. However, it would be damn nice to have an interim breather.)

  124. wes says:

    What’s the point of Ron running in 2016? He and the campaign already couldn’t bother to attack Romney this year apparently because the counterattack would have hurt “the Paul name,” so the same thing would happen in 2016.

    As for now, we all know what Obama is like, and we now all know what Romney and the RNC are like. I don’t vote for tyrannical, NDAA gun grabbers, so the only one left on the ballot in all 50 states is Gary Johnson. And he’s more liberty than the other two combined.

    Everyone knows it’s next to impossible for Gary to win, but maybe a good showing in 2012 will set up something even better in 2016. Either way, we really need to get him into the debates if for no other reason than the entertainment factor of him debating a couple of bozos.

  125. wes says:

    Doug, feel free to tell Ron he doesn’t have to actually endorse Gary. Just have him say he’d be honored to be considered if Gary says, “If I’m elected, I will offer Dr. Paul the position of Secretary of Awesome.”

    Secretary of Awesome is a serious position with a lot of responsibilities, but if they don’t want to be so serious about it but still make headlines, Gary can say he’ll ask Dr. Paul to be Chairman of The Fed or something.

  126. Cyrus Osena says:

    I was almost convinced to vote for Obama in november after hearing Bill Clinton’s entertaining speech yesterday night and Pres. Obama moments ago. Now i know Mitt Romney has no way of beating Obama because the Democratic Party is solid behind him while the GOP is broken, unruly and unworthy. with or without my vote Obama will be reelected. if doug is right that four more years of Obama would sink the country further into chaos then let it be. Never im gonna vote for Romney who already cheated us in every way possible and to deceive ourselves that he may perform a little better than Obama is just like a fool thinking. So this time i’ll just vote for Gary Johnson not for fun just like what doug mentioned above but rather to show the nation that theres really an ever growing trend for third party candidate.

  127. American says:

    Why was my attempted posts removed twice? I am confused.
    No profanity, no trolling no off topic. You asked for input but when I gave it you appear to delete it.
    Your manner is bewildering

  128. Miguel says:

    If winning primaries and presidential elections is all about money, I say that the Ron Paul 2016 campaign should start as soon as possible. Ron Paul campaign needs many millions of dollars which must be raised by normal people, for no big corporation or bank is going to give no money for the only man who is willing and able to restore America economy to what it should be.
    But it’s not possible for normal people to raise much money in such short period of time as the few months before primaries actually start. So I think it should that in four years time it should be possible to raise two hundred million dollars so that Ron Paul campaign can overcome all the obstacles.

  129. jim says:

    Well, Janence hope things are well. And James, I frankly don’t care what you’ve done. Obnoxious is obnoxious whether you are selling bridges or feeding the poor. You need not suggest what others should do. Free thinkers are quite capable of thinking for themselves and also deciding for themselves who they want to kiss. Grow up.

  130. Jim says:

    The media blackout is over! Cop killing Ron Paul Supporter Chris Lacey featured on ABC NEWS!

    http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/east_bay&id=8799626

  131. Bill Goode says:

    I too plan to write in Ron Paul. He has actually been approved as a write-in candidate in California by the California Secretary of State.

    What are Mitt Romney’s odds of winning California? Somewhere around zero? What if Ron Paul could win California as a write-in candidate? What would that say to the establishment for 2016? What would it do to the outcome of the election on 6 November? It would take 55 votes away from Obama (polls have already awarded California to Obama) and would in all likelihood give the election to Romney.

    This means that any California die hard Romney advocate, that really wants Mitt Romney to win, should write in “Ron Paul” in the hopes that Ron Paul could win California as a write-in candidate. I believe Ron Paul’s write-in candidacy has a better chance of winning California than Mitt Romney does.

    So, to all those die hard “lesser of two evils” advocates in California, “Write in Ron Paul to elect Mitt Romney.” In California, a vote for Mitt Romney is truly a wasted vote.

  132. Mr Wead,

    I have some very concrete answers on what the Paulite/Liberty movement should, and can do over the next number of years. I would like to know where I can send you a private email. Would you be so kind as to send me a quick note at my email as provided so i can follow up with materials I have prepared? I want to personally thank you for everything you do on behalf of what is right and proper. You sir are a patriot.

    William Pixley
    president/Founder
    Yornet.net

  133. Steve says:

    Hey Doug: flawless reasoning, per usual. I’m coming to the same conclusion… it seems I may LIVE FREE with Gary in Nov. Btw, thanks for doing a great job MCing the Tampa rally… it was amazing.

  134. pop.dejazzd.com says:

    This is my comment for the year. I support Paul’s past efforts however I have some resrervation about the timing that would rid America of the FED. Seems to me it would be convenient at this pre collapse point and continuity for the plan that must be done. Now, since the Party is over and we are all Commrads, I was not going to vote, for the first time in 41 years . However, it is now time to screw with the polling figures by voting for any other candidate. The Choices are clear, both being Globalists. Both Parties are of the same agenda no matter what the rehtoric. Conservatives now have to mess with the polling record, when one of the two Communist win. We have to be sure to vote , but vote for any other. We have already been taken over by the deception of 911. It was not the Towers that fell that day. Have a good day, TLF

  135. John says:

    There are some great comments here. I cannot decide whether to vote for Goode, Johnson, or not at all. Write-ins are not counted by name in my state, so voting for Paul is not a viable option. I believe the Republican Party is splitting apart and I thought it would happen this year with Paul running independent. If he is not running I wish he would endorse someone. That would mean so much to people who are still trying to decide who to support.

    • Albert Meyer says:

      What is there about the following that you don’t like?

      Bring the troops home now.
      Balance the budget now.
      Repeal the Patriot Act and NDAA
      No war with Iran, absolutely not.
      Restore our civil liberties.

      A vote for Gary Johnson is vote for liberty.

      If Johnson does poorly, the media will use that as an excuse to tout the demise of the Ron Paul Revolution… and they will be right, because, they will report, “Johnson failed to attract a significant number of votes. Hence, these grand ideas of liberty are not what the people want.” (Goode is a neo-con – judged by his voting record – besides, he is on the ballot in only 25 states.)

      Good grief, what is there to debate? Strike a blow for liberty and cast a vote for Johnson.

      I can tell you, if it were a straight fight between O and R, I would vote for O just to give payback to the RNC. Now I have a much better option, a vote for liberty.

      • John says:

        Good points. I like those ideas. I did vote Libertarian in 2008, but I donated to Paul’s campaign. I guess I’m disappointed that I can’t vote for Paul, but I realize that I should try to make a difference. So a vote for Johnson seems the best.

  136. Dorwin Dow says:

    Romney supporters say a vote for a third party is a vote for Obama.
    Obama supporters say a vote for a third party is a vote for Romney.
    And of course, a vote for a third party is a vote for a third party.
    So if we follow this crazy logic, then we all ought to vote third party, because our vote would then count as three votes, whereas a vote for Obama or Romney only counts as one vote. :>)
    And if there are more than three parties on the ballot, then our vote counts even more! :>)
    Well, it is true that when we make one choice, we do in a sense deselect all other choices. So a vote for anyone other than Romney or Obama would at least be a vote for deselecting the two-party choice.
    Is it wise to keep playing with someone who changes the rules every time you’re about to score a point? Not until there is a change in the way rules are made!

    • Albert Meyer says:

      Brilliant!

    • Miguel says:

      Hey, great comment!

      But I think it’s not even worth go voting. Presidents are elected by electoral votes, not by popular votes. And whatever the popular vote is, the appointed electors will vote whoever they are ordered to vote by the big money. Elections are always rigged.

      • Albert Meyer says:

        Your comment would be valid if Johnson stood a chance of gaining the majority of the popular vote, then electoral votes become an issue. As for now, the object is to get him at least 5 million votes, which were half of what McCain needed to beat Obama and perhaps what he lacked in winning the swing states. Five million votes would send a powerful message to the ten fat men at the RNC that their days are numbered.

  137. Kulbir S. Sandhu says:

    Mr. Wead
    Thank you for doing your best and bringing the best to the Liberty plate,Yes,indeed,Dr.Paul might get a bit older and might or might not do justice to call of the time,I would suggest that time has come for yourself to step upto the cause and make a run for the presidency. Rand Paul might be held back by his contituency or their needs,but we need somebody fearless,bright and intellectual leader who can do the justice to our Pathway and that is YOU today.
    Best of health,wealth n Holiness,
    Kulbir Sandhu

  138. Shirl-NV says:

    Though I was a “late bloomer” to the Liberty movement dedicating myself and time to electing Dr. Ron Paul I became educated enough to understand and move forward with strong convictions. Yes I have leaned towards Johnson, and Goode (Constitution Party) and know that whichever way I vote it will not be for Romney nor for Obama! I am wishing on that star for a 50 state Write In possibility because our state currently doesn’t allow write in.
    I have listened to so many Paul supporters trying “desperately” to get Dr. Ron Paul on the ballot as a third party with Johnson, or even with Goode. The facts are out and these men do not have 50 states, plus Johnson isn’t even willing to give Dr. Paul top seat-Presidential candidate on the ballot. The way I see it is if there was a serious chance to unite and bring a win (wishing on a star again) by having Dr. Paul as VP with Johnson then why wouldn’t Johnson WANT to give the best shot to the Liberty movement by giving the first position to Dr. Ron Paul? Doesn’t he care enough about our country to do EVERYTHING possible to actually bring this win home and save our country? After all this is about our country not the man. Right? I do know that Goode would give Dr. Paul the full ticket to save our country, but again only 25 states, at least his head and heart was in the right place for our country.
    I did some reading and for the same reason I cannot vote Romney, nor Obama, I also cannot vote for Johnson. The ever so slight connection to the CFR and his stance on foreign policy just would not let me go there. In addition if Dr. Paul really thought Johnson was endorse-able he would have stated that he was going to endorse him, but he did not. I know Dr. Paul likes much of Johnson’s policies but I am sure the foreign policy is too serious of a difference to endorse Johnson. I know that in 2008 Dr. Paul endorsed Goode.
    With continued reading and letting my emotions take a back seat to my decision making I know I will pray for the 50 state Write In because that would be the biggest and best protest vote against the RNC’s corruptible behavior during this Presidential process at the county, state and national levels. In addition I will not remove myself from this Old Republican Party! I will continue to fight at the local and state levels for our successful candidates, hoping to get one Constitutionalist into Congress as well. In 2008 the Paul supporters kind of let their emotions get the best of them and it set our state back. I know the ones that stayed and continued fighting for Liberty and I am connected strongly by their side to continue the fight within the NEW Republican Party. I have seen the 14-20% increase in the delegation on the committees this convention. I saw how they actually have gotten quite a few of the OLD Republicans to SEE the Liberty movement in a better light. I first hand have had conversations with Tea Party members that got left behind by the Romney camp and now are supporting us. I will stay the course. It is Liberty or death for me, just not a sit down and be ran over death!
    Come November 6th I will either have my WRITE IN or I will vote for a party supporting our Constitution and that will be Mr. Virgil Goode. (Yes Goode is on my state ballot!) His Party, his convictions, and his willing to promote Liberty FIRST, instead of his name, for the sake of our country will get my protest vote. I just cannot support anyone that believes that any war, undeclared, is ok and why I cannot vote for Johnson.
    A vote for the Write In, or Johnson or Goode is a protest vote so I doubt you need to change your NEW Republican Party to theirs. I say support our Candidates Locally and not change Party is the smartest way to go. The GOP just wishes I would leave and go away, NOT HAPPENING! Stay the course for me and I hope for you. Maybe without our Romney votes and without our monies they will at least think twice about their behavior in the future as we also replace one at a time within. Work on laws that allow all parties into the debates is good too.
    Dr. Ron Paul could easily be strong enough, IF we stay untied, to win in 2016! I see Rand as a 2020 run. I pray, and will continue to believe, we have things happening around us to allow for this time. Continue united, stay strong, lean on the ones with convictions, and for goodness sake remember Dr. Paul has tried for many more years than you have and isn’t wavering, neither should we waver. Every time you have the chance to go to a nearby city to hear him speak over these next few years, BUT this time take 3-4 friends with you. Grow the Liberty movement for the SUPER WIN in 2016 with Dr. Ron Paul!
    Making History is what we are a part of; make history through the next few years. Fill our local offices, our state offices, and DC with as many candidates as possible so that in 2016 Dr. Paul has the support he will need to carry Liberty to all states while shrinking that Federal government! And please consider running for a local office yourself!
    My concentration is on Audit the FED which would clean out some of those bad guys! Election fraud being removed is a huge concentration that we all should be on board with cleaning up this! This will make 2016 much easier too. Thinking without emotions is tough but it yields the best course to follow for Liberty.

    To follow who is on which states’ ballot: http://www.ballot-access.org
    P. S. To all the delegates and alternates, THANK YOU! I was in Tampa and watched much of your hard work. See you again in 2016!

    • Albert Meyer says:

      “… Johnson isn’t even willing to give Dr. Paul top seat-Presidential candidate on the ballot. The way I see it is if there was a serious chance to unite and bring a win (wishing on a star again) by having Dr. Paul as VP with Johnson then why wouldn’t Johnson WANT to give the best shot to the Liberty movement by giving the first position to Dr. Ron Paul? Doesn’t he care enough about our country to do EVERYTHING possible to actually bring this win home and save our country? After all this is about our country not the man. Right?…”

      No, wrong… if only it were that easy. Johnson dropped out of the GOP race, joined the LP and fought a nomination contest within the LP. Party members voted Johnson and his VP on the LP ticket. That’s the process. You can’t change the rules on people… well, you can, if you are the RNC, but we didn’t like that did we?

      Now, your second point: “After all this is about our country not the man.”

      Yes, it is not about Johnson or Paul, at this stage of the game. It is about getting Johnson at least five million votes, as I explained above. Five million votes is more less what McCain needed last time round (and preferably in the swing states) if he wanted to give Obama a decent contest. Five million is the number at the margin that will make people sit up and ask the question, is there a change in public opinion? Did Ron Paul set something in motion here?

      I would not fault the media if Obama gets 69 million (as he did in 2008) and Romney gets (59 million) and Johnson less than five million, and the media interprets Johnson’s poor showing as a clear indication that the country has not embraced Ron Paul’s liberty platform, not even in numbers that threaten the status quo.

      If Johnson gets four million and Romney sixty million, the neo-cons would be outnumbering the liberty lovers by a ratio of 15:1 What conclusion would you come to, other than the above?

      However, if Romney gets 57 million and Johnson 6 million and Obama 68 million, the media will have to admit that Romney got fewer votes than McCain, thus a step backward for the GOP.

      Obama got slightly less, but considering the state of the economy, the unemployment rate, etc. the incumbent always had a headwind against him.

      But the real story of this election is the six million votes garnered by Johnson. Had Romney been successful in winning their votes, through a more fiscally conservative and anti-war platform, he could have come close to beating Obama. That’s the only way we keep the momentum of this liberty movement going. it pains me to have to explain it, as it is self-evident.

  139. Adam says:

    The answer is simple. Vote your conscience and let the chips fall where they may. Don’t vote for the lesser of two evils or try to predict the consequences of a strategic vote. Ron Paul will not win this year. Gary Johnson will not win this year. Virgil Goode won’t even have a showing (no offense intended).
    Two (actually 3) things are certain: 1. America will lose this year. 2. The Liberty Movement will make huge gains this year. 3. I, for one, will be casting a write-in vote for Ron Paul.
    The truth is that the time isn’t quite right for America to return to its Libertarian roots. The good news is that that day is coming–perhaps sooner than most people think.

    • Albert Meyer says:

      ’2. The Liberty Movement will make huge gains this year.”

      McCain lost by 10 million votes in 2008. Five million additional votes in the right places might have given him wins in key swing states. If Gary Johnson gets more than 5 million votes, it will send a message to the Politburo that unless they change course they will never ever win the White House. 101 million voters (44% of eligible voters) did not bother to vote for O or McC.

      If Johnson gets less than five million votes, the gains we made will evaporate. The media will tout the demise of the liberty movement based on facts. “For all their bravado, liberty caucus couldn’t muster five million votes for the liberty candidate, the minimum number required at the margin to start making a difference and to prove their legitimacy,” is what they will harp on.

      One thing I can guarantee, the media will not mention write ins. To do so would be considered by them as a demeaning. If anyone thinks a write-in is an option, they might as well go outside and spit against the wind – an irrelevant meaningless gesture that the media treats with contempt.

  140. Sharon Kuhn says:

    I have pondered greatly over the issue of who I am going to vote for. I do not like either Romney or Obama.

    I found my answer in the Bible in the story of Solomon asked to decide who is the real mother. Solomon said he would cut the baby in half and give half to each woman. One woman agreed to the plan and the other woman said she would rather give up her claim to the baby then see it killed. Solomon ruled that the true mother was the one willing to put the life of the baby first.

    With the projected race so close, I have to say the Romney will have my vote only because I feel that Obama’s reelection will be worse than a disaster for this country. We may NEVER be able to recover.

    Next step is to start a LIBERTY party. It is very clear to me that both sides are into power more than what is right. With the internet and the enthusiastic support of the Ron Paul people I believe we can over time give people a true 3rd alternative.

    Ron Paul himself I believe is to old to run but would make a great spokesperson and educator for the ideals of liberty.

    • Albert Meyer says:

      Romney owns SteriCycle, a company that disposes of the aborted fetus – called hazardous waste in the medical world. Besides, Romney went to Israel to assure them that bombing Iran, which would lead to a full scale war (just what the war-vangelicals want. The Iraq war did not fulfill their pro life blood lust), is very much on the table. Yeah, more killing, more mothers and babies being blown to kingdom come.

      The Bible says blessed are the peacemakers. Do not repay evil with evil. Love your enemies. Bless those who curse you. My friends, who quote the Bible at me, tell me that Mormonism is a cult and Catholicism idolatry. Reconcile that to Solomon’s wisdom and go vote for that ticket.

      (I’m sure I can find you a verse in the Bible to positively prove that you ought to vote for Obama, only on the condition that you will vote for him if I do so. It will take a bit of research. Just thinking of the Hannity’s and Limbaughs: Blessed are yeah, Obama, when men shall persecute you… for righteousness sake… Obama will argue that he is a righteous man… judge not that ye be not judged….)

      The same people voted for Bush because he was pro-life. No, Bush was pro the oil lobby and by George, if killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were required to satisfy his oil interests then so be it.

      Nobody is more pro-life that my wife who volunteers at a local Pregnancy Resource Center, saving one mother and one baby at a time. That’s how you fight the evil of abortion (but it takes a true commitment – you can always donate to them, if you don’t have the time), not by withholding your vote from Johnson. She is actively campaigning for Johnson. Our country is on the verge of bankruptcy and another full scale war against Iran. Voting for Johnson, says little or nothing about the gay or pro life agenda, but sends a clear message that we want to balance the budget, end these wars and restore our civil liberties.

  141. John LiPari says:

    elections are fake. phoney. not real. they only serve you the illusion of an election. the globalists want obama to have a 2nd term. your vote means nothing. they don’t count. romney and obama are funded by the same exact banks and exactly the same on every major issue. there is a reason for this. they both answer to the same bosses. they are both for a globalist, new world order agenda. romney is the guy who is bought off to lose. that is why he was the nominee. he is a patsy. a plant. a “dummy” candidate, propped up by goldman sachs to lose the election. he is there to make sure obama gets handed a 2nd term and nothing more. that is why his criminal, goon squad campaign committed election fraud in every single state and puerto rico, to cheat ron paul out of the nomination. the evidence is staggering. there is no such thing as 2 parties. it is set up that way to control you and limit your choices. please don’t think anyone can “win” by votes. all but 1 of our presidents are from the same bloodline, related to the same king. presidents are selected. you will be getting obama for a 2nd term. romney is going to lose badly and there is nothing ron paul supporters can do about it. even if the election was real, which it is most certainly not and every ron paul republican voted for romney, it’s still not enough. take a look at how many votes obama beat mccain by and tell me where romney is going to make up that margin. people hate him. he is the worst candidate in the history of elections. you are talking about a guy who was averaging 200-300 pepple at his rallies, while ron paul was getting 5,000+ and you think he has the support to get more votes that obama? lol…you have been scammed. independents are the largest voting block at 40% of the vote and they want ron paul. he was the only candidate who drew votes across the board and the only candidate who could have beaten obama in a fair election. mitt romney is a career criminal who belongs behind bars, not running in a race for president. we don’t vote for criminals. gary johson is a pimple on the ass of the globalists. he will have 3-5% of the vote come election time and won’t be in the debates. the elite would never allow that. the last 3rd party candidate to get into the debates was ross perot. he was rich enough to buy his own tv time. then, they threatened his family, so he dropped out. gary johnson has no support and can’t even raise money. gimme a friggin’ break with gary johnson. he’s got roger stone the gop “hitman” running his campaign. the libertarian party has already been co-opted just like the tea party. a vote for gary johnson is the same as voting for mickey mouse. either get ron paul on the top of the ticket with him, which richard gilbert already said he wouldn’t do, after negotiating with his attourney or WRITE IN RON PAUL!!! everyone keeps saying…”a vote for this one is a vote for that one”…lmao…please people….none of your votes matter!!! stop pretending they do.

  142. JPH says:

    I am of the mind that when you are speeding toward the edge of a cliff, slowing down is not good enough.

    If we elect Romney we will surely slow down a bit, but we may also get 8-16 years of Faux conservatism that I fear could put those Americans back to sleep who have been, as of late, finally waking up to our precarious condition as a country. Then after eight years of failed fake conservatism, the backlash will likely be a leftist win. This seems to be borne out by history.

    On the other hand, if Obama were to win, he would continue speeding and perhaps even accelerate the car toward the cliff, but the waking up of Americans would surely continue and perhaps finally reach the sort of crescendo needed to yield us a severe bloodletting of the RINO’s and Leftists in office. In such a scenario, we might get Ron in 2016.

    Said more simply, Romney now equals 8-16 years of RINO trash followed by 8 years of leftist death, but Obama now equals 4 years of leftist death followed by true conservatism.
    So how to vote? I think it’s worth going out of the way to ensure a Romney defeat. If Republicans explicitly reject Romney (regardless of the opposition), it will be a tremendous asset to the excommunication of many sitting RINO’s. The RNC Cabal needs to be told that we are through with these sorts of candidates.

    I wouldn’t be in favor of an operation chaos that seeks to have republicans switch and vote for Obama in two or three swing states (though that would guarantee a Romney loss) because I wouldn’t expect someone to vote for that evil usurper (yes I’m a birther). However, people could vote their conscience with a write-in campaigns or other candidates they can support. If this is done in a few of those swing states, those few percentage points lost to Romney in a couple close states would be enough to take him down.

    Think about it…

  143. kmcr097 says:

    I’m voting for Gary Johnson. It’s the only choice that makes any clear sense, and it’s the right thing to do. I may even buy a bumper sticker.

  144. Robert S. Roe says:

    I’m a bit torn between two possible courses of action. I like the idea of Ron going libertarian to be honest with you. Seeing him debate both Obama and Mitt might get him overwhelming national support because it would show that both Mitt Romney and Oboma are ideologically the same. The country will see both Obama and Mitt in agreement arguing against Dr Paul.

    On the other hand voting for Johnson might not be so bad either. The only thing I might be worried about is if Johnson and his long time supporters would feel like they were getting their toes steped on. I think that would be something for the two camps to talk about privetly.

    If everyone is agreeable, I think Ron taking a shot at running libertarian now would be a great idea. I think it is better to act rather than be acted upon.

  145. Jim says:

    Can you say ‘blowback?’ Resolution to censure Nevada delegates who were bound for Romney yet voted for Paul :

    http://www.muthstruths.com/2012/09/06/taking-terhune-company-to-the-company-woodshed/

    • ___j___ says:

      MuthsTruths is a good site, by a good guy, republican-liberty-caucus type of republican (for liberty in general even if not specifically for Ron Paul in particular). He is hot-headed, and his blog seems over the top sometimes, but he is also smart as a whip, and has good comments on real issues. In this case, the issue of delegate binding.

      The guy mentioned in the blog-post-title named Terhune was the delegation-chair of NV, who decided to report 17 for Ron Paul + 5 abstains (silent Ron Paul votes) + 5 for Romney, because he was angry about the blatant rules-violations in Tampa, documented here:

      http://www.fox19.com/story/19423487/reality-check-rnc-rule-change-starting-a-republican-civil-war

      Now, allegedly, what Terhune did was wrong, according to either state rules or state law or maybe both (I have not looked into the gory details for Nevada yet… and every state is different in how tightly they bind you, so make sure you verify what is what before you jump in on muthstruths.com or whatever). Muth is pointing that out two wrongs don’t make a right. Just because the RNC broke the rules, does not mean that NV dels should do it. I agree with the sentiment: Ron Paul folks must maintain the high moral ground. Whether I agree with the censure or not, would depend on the facts, which nobody seems to be publishing.

      Muth doesn’t say where the censure-PDF is from, but presumably it is from the establishment-types in NV … which does NOT necessarily include Muth, who seems to follow his own mind when making decisions … although again I don’t know any of the folks involved personally so take my comments with a grain of salt… anyways, the establishment-types are presumably trying to regain control of the NV state delegation in 2014 and the NV national delegates in 2016.

      My question is this: what percentage of Ron Paul delegates were morally bound, based on ‘encouragement’ in state-party-of-XX rules? What percentage were rule-bound, based on explicit outright rules found in their state-party-of-XX rules? What about morallly-bound by statute? Legally-bound by statute? And, in all cases, for how many ballots. My understanding in the case of NV is that 8 were bound to Paul, and some superdels were not bound to anybody, but the PDF is trying to censure 13 delegates, 4 who abstained, and 9 who voted for Ron Paul when they were bound otherwise. (The fifth abstention was allegedly from a superdel that wanted Romney but which was allegedly mis-reported by Terhune… superdel former governor Bob List.)

      By my own calculations, the North Dakota group reported 3 votes for Romney that were actually *bound* to Ron Paul (who got 5 not 8). Can anyone confirm or deny whether I am figuring this out properly? Or give some insight into the state&party ND rules for binding?

      There are reports on some Ron Paul forums of delegates that told their delegation-chair they were casting their vote for Ron Paul, and then had the delegation-chair tell them (*after* the roll call of course) that the vote they gave for Ron Paul was switched over to Romney, based on binding. See also, the legal battle over the delegates from MA, and ME, and OR, and OK, and all the other places which had dels stripped.

      Doug’s blog post is about the future of the liberty movement, so this comment-section is probably the wrong place to talk about these questions. I suggest moving over to muthsTruths. And remember, this isn’t just about NV dels from last month… this is going to be an ongoing debate, over whether dels *must* be bound by what primary-voters said, or by what candidates want (Rule 16), or by what elite party bosses demand (Rule 12). We want to figure out the *right* rules here, what they ought to be, going forward.

      • Jim says:

        “the legal battle over the delegates” ? You might want to contact the Orange County Bar Association about Richard Gilbert..His “alleged” case was dismissed WITH PREJUDICE two weeks ago. Read his facebook. He’s a paranoid raving kook egomaniac who is now accusing Gary Johnson of organizing Paul supporters to harass Ron Paul. He also erected a billboard in Los Angeles putting HIS name before Paul (Gilbert/Paul 2012)

      • ___j___ says:

        @Jim, please see my reply to both your comments below.

    • Jim says:

      UPDATE: In Richard Gilbert’s latest video he suggests delegates at the RNC should have overpowered guards and shot them in the head….this is the guy DOUG WEAD HANDPICKED to handle the delegate lawsuit by telling him to ‘”go for it” on a live facebook video chat when he offered his services. No background check (Gilbert has a criminal record) no contacting the bar association to find out what the guys record is.. Just a hearty “go for it.”

      • ___j___ says:

        Jim, simmer down, you’re gonna blow a circuit. I already admitted you are not a troll, and you have good points, but you *do* go off the handle. A simple question about what I meant would have sufficed.

        I was *not* referencing the LawyersForRonPaul dude, the Gilbert that you mention. (Yes, I’ve heard of him. Yes, he seems pretty crazed. No, you are incorrect to imply that Doug Wead hand-picked him, or even has anything to do with him. I watched the Gilbert video; he says, explicitly, “i am doing this without the permission of the ron paul campaign” for the good of the country blah blah. Telling somebody to go-for-it, when speaking of an action they wish to take which you cannot stop, does not imply that you promote their action. Doug’s phrasing could have been, instead, it-is-a-free-country, for instance. Probably he did not use *that* phrase, because it’s a bit of a lie.)

        I was talking about the ‘legal’ battle over the delegates, which although it has not been fought in governmental courtrooms (yet), it has for the most part been fought by lawyers… in front of the “jury” credentials-committee-members… and I predict will soon go into the courtroom, if it has not already. Specifically, the rules-fight over the Maine dels comes to mind; it was spearheaded by Ben Ginsberg, the Romney campaign staffer who is also a duly-elected delegate from DC to Tampa this year. He was *at* the caucuses in Maine, back in Feb or whenever, and was directing various Romney personnel. He was also the very same lawyer that presented Rule#12 to the rules-committee. (He got famous as a lawyer for Bush2nd in the Florida recounts.) Insider knowledge I have none, but I predict that Ginsberg et al will be trying to overturn the Maine NCM and NCW, our youngest ever in the nation by the way, if memory serves. There will also be legal battles fought in Louisiana, over broken fingers. I was sloppy, and lumped all these past committee-battles and predicted-future courtroom-battles into one heap, since to my mind, they are all the same: about control.

        Since you seem to know about courtroom-battles over the delegate-allocation rules, e.g. Cousins ’75, do you have any advice on how we might advance the cause of liberty? That is what you are here for, eh? I agree that Gilbert is out there, but he cited 42usc§1971to1974 in his now-dismissed cases, whereas Cousins was based on 42usc§1983. Isn’t there some way to convince a judge that the nominee of one of the major parties *is* going to be president, with statistical certainty approaching five-nines mathematically, and therefore the RNC leaders ought to be considered federal election workers, and the RNC voting rules ought to be subject to the federal election code? Obama was able to convince 5 of 9 justices that obamacare is not a mandate penalty but a tax, after all — since functionally it is kinda like taxing, if you squint.

      • Jim says:

        Here is more documentation regarding the “go for it” quote (see also the comment section):

        http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/rnc-faces-suit-from-paul-backers-20120619

        Considering Mr. Wead has been paid $72,000 YTD of supporter money (median American income is $24,000 for a full year) is it too much to ask that Wead should have responded to Gilbert by saying something like “send me an email on what you have so I can see it first as well as a link to your website” rather than simply giving a (perceived) green light? Especially since that case pissed off a lot of GOP officials when the goal should have been winning them over to your side?
        The correct name of the case you mention is Cousins v. Wigoda – 419 U.S. 477 (1975) and I do believe it was the Judge who originally cited it in his decision along with Democratic Party v. Wisconsin ex rel. La Follette – 450 US 107 (1981) which was based on Cousins v. Wigoda although i do not doubt Gilbert mentioned it somewhere. As far as going forward I do not think it’s going to happen in the courts especially not with this case as the Appellate court ruled:
        “The petition for writ of mandamus is denied as moot. All pending motions are denied as moot.

        No further filings shall be accepted in this closed case.

        DENIED.”
        The only thing that will happening in the courts is any case brought to it will keep being bounced back to the party. So my advice is to forget about the courts. It’s a dead end as Gilbert found out at the expense of some of the movements credibility. They can’t do anything for you. You need to focus on the party and convincing THEM to change their rules.
        As for advancing the cause of liberty my best advice is the movement police itself a lot better to weed out or at best, keep in check wackos like Gilbert, Kokesh and a few others who only hurt the cause with over the top rhetoric. I’m sure if anyone Ron Paul will agree politics isn’t about pissing people off or alienating them but winning them over to your side. You can’t do that by filing costly lawsuits or threatening that you are taking over. That only pushes people away (it’s human nature).

      • ___j___ says:

        Re: the (perceived) green light, here are the relevant snippets from link you cite: (( Gilbert said he had been in touch with Paul’s campaign, and that while one official urged him not to file suit, another Paul adviser — Doug Wead — told him to go for it. )) That’s the official, somewhat biased, story. In the comments, as you say, Gilbert himself shows up with corrections: (( For the record, I did not say I contacted the Paul campaign. The quote, “Go For It” comes from Doug Wead’s Facebook conference video where in response to question about his thoughts on the lawsuit Doug Wead did say “Go For It.” I was clear that I do _not_ represent the Ron Paul Campaign or Dr Paul. I made it clear I represent the Delegates who are Plaintiffs. ))

        Emphasis added by moi. Not all of the ~123 plaintiffs are official dels, but at least some of them are, per the main article. You could argue that Doug should have tried to Control The Message, or Herd The Activists, or whatnot… some guy named Tom in the comments says Doug should have demanded to review evidence. But, although the MSM spun the story as ron-paul-lawyers-sue-frivolously, knowing full well that most people perceive that as with Ron Paul’s full blessing and secret control (contrast: mitt-romney-lawyers-ram-rule-12-at-rnc). Should the campaign have been more controlling? Should in particular Doug Wead have been more negative? I think what Doug said is ok, even tho I pretty much agree with you the lawsuit was half-cocked.

        Still, half-cocked, and denied by the judiciary branch, doesn’t mean the lawsuit was *wrong* about what happened, just that they did not make their case well enough to convict. (( Plaintiffs allege systematic election fraud [fake slate trick in ME&NV], programming voting machines AZ [any proof of this one?], ballot stuffing [no state given?], falsifying ballot totals ['editing' del lists after precincts... remember seeing reports of that in at least two states], violence [LA&OK], and altering procedural rules to prevent votes being cast for Ron Paul. )) Note that the judge denied the Gilbert case as moot, in other words, the 2012 convention is over now, so toss this one out. Unwilling to rule on *future* conventions being railroaded the same way, sigh.

        We saw proof of that altering-procedures trick, at the *national* level, via Fox19.com … But, as you point out, Cousins v Wigoda sets precedent for that trick being totally “legal”. Nasty, but officially, not illegal. Very difficult to overturn the supreme court. As you say, any case brought by the liberty-movement folks is likely to be bounced back by the elite party lawyers, either because our side is sloppy (Gilbert) or because their side is very well paid to find loopholes and technicalities and win no matter what (Ginsberg).

        Your other suggestion, on whether we should try and purge the Ron Paul movement of wackos, is wrong I think. You are basing your idea on the assumption that the MSM will play fair, rather that give Ron Paul a blackout. You are also assuming that we should try to win GOP officials over to our side, not pelt them with frivolous lawsuits. Imperfect world that this is, we cannot hope that Chris Matthews on MSNBC will play fair. We cannot pretend that Ben Ginsberg from DC will be won over to our side. Wacko lawyers like Gilbert are not much practical help to us, okay. Win-even-if-you-have-to-rewrite-the-rules DC elite-lawyers like Ginsberg are *deadly* to us, and have no place. My position is that we don’t have to worry about Gilbert — trying to keep him silent would not work, and he gives us bad press, but we are going to be getting bad biased-or-blackout press no matter *what* Gilbert does. Maybe his wacko deeds even help, since even bad publicity is still publicity.

        Besides, on the principle of the thing, purges of wackos are just the wrong policy. Ron Paul is a wacko to most people, remember. The fair ones just ignore him, and hope he goes away. Those ones *are* our friends, they just don’t know it yet. The cheaters, who want to keep control of the party at any cost, who realize that they will lose control of the party, as well as control of the pork, are not our friends. We cannot convert Ginsberg to our side, is my guess. (Well, maybe we could… even Vader still had some good in him!)

        Romney we *could* convert, since he just goes with the flow, flipping and flopping to make his customers happy, rule number one for any good businessman — we just need his customer to be James Madison, not Goldman Sachs. Most of the county-level and state-level supporters of Romney, whether just everyday repubs or low-level officials, we can and will convert. But those folks do not control the national party, which is run by Ginsberg et al. Refusing to allow any Ron Paul supporter to sue Priebus, without them being purged from the liberty-movement, so Reince will not be offended, is pointless. He just does what he is told, and scripts the-ayes-win. Hey, if he wants to convert to the good side of the force, fine, we should welcome him with open arms. But he broke rules in Tampa.

        Anyways, this reply is already a novel, so let’s wrap it up. When I was talking about the ‘legal’ battle over the dels, I am *not* worried about the Gilbert lawsuit (half-cocked and now over), *nor* trying to figure out a way to start a new lawsuit (of our own). What I am worried about is *Ginsberg* and friends filing lawsuits in the state of Maine, overturning all the elections we won at the local level. Ditto for NV. Maybe a bunch of other places, too. There was a meeting 9/1 in Maine, where local pooh-bah Charlie Webster tried to get [allegedly] the process shut down, but Ron Paul folks had a two-vs-one majority, and passed their own resolutions, properly.

        Ginsberg can sue them out of their seats, though, if he figures out a way. No doubt he is trying. Does the Cousins v Wigoda ruling, in concert with the recent Rule#12 the-RNCmt-may-rewrite-rules-at-any-time garbage, give him the weapons he needs to retroactively overthrow all the wins we worked for this year? I wish Ginsberg would take your advice, and quit alienating people with his legal finesse! In the long run, it means we will win the war, but in the short run, is there anything we can do to thwart the national-rules-lawyers from trumping state rules (and even state laws!), perhaps even retroactively? Scary.

        So. The reason I mentioned the 42usc§1971to1974 that Gilbert attempted to use, and the 42usc§1983 that some part of Cousins was based on (besides the 1st & 14th Amendments) is simply that they are both nearby in the lawbooks. There are a *lot* of laws on the books, in fact. Gilbert found some in our favor, but was not able to make his case well enough to win. Maybe there are some other defenses (against Ginsberg’s use of Cousins) that we can find in there? Moreover, we do have some liberty-loving folks in Congress, and maybe they could propose some fair election laws? My long-term concern is that, once the liberty-movement does have a strong voice in the direction of the repub party, what rules would we actually want? What rules would be strict but fair? How do we keep some of them from being re-written by the whim of some future Ginsberg-equivalent, fifty years from now? Current system is definitely busted, but what does a good one even look like?

        Example, you and I agree that the 1st & 14th say that some private assembly on private property has the right to exclude troublemakers that out-scream everybody else. But what about private businesses refusing to sell a sandwich to somebody because they are Asian? What about public schools refusing to teach kids with Catholic parents (hypothetically)? What about the group that picks our president refusing to allow ‘members’ that don’t agree with ‘leaders’ based on the leaders saying the group is purely private? Tricky.

        “You need to focus on the party and convincing THEM to change their rules.” Well, sure. But which them, exactly? Up until Tampa, our strategy was to win committee seats, county chairs, delegates, and other low-level and mid-level positions within the party, by the book. We did not have a majority in 2012, but by 2016 or 2020 we will, and (under the *old* rules at least) that would have been enough to ‘convince’ the party to change the rules, because we would have been the majority of the ones voting on the rules. But after Tampa, ‘they’ are trying to assert top-down control, with Rule 12 and 15 and 16. The presumptive nominee is selected, years before the actual primaries. The states goof around, pretending to elect delegates, and pretending to hold primary-voting. But at the end of the day, if the presumptive nominee (and the people behind them — the elite bosses) decides to overturn a delegate or a primary, they can use the new rules to do it. We’re talking about less than 100 people running things, 90% of them elite bosses already, who can easily drown out the vote of Ashley-from-Maine, or sue her.

        Mentioned this before, but there seems to be *no* reason why Ginsberg et al would change the rules back to the old way, unless we can convince tons of avg repubs in many of the states to fight. The new rules seem okay to people from CA and IL, since they already follow that topdown-rules-pattern… but more importantly, they have weak republican base-populations, with relatively few tea party folks, relatively few liberty-minded folks, and a big bunch of moderate-repubs-bordering-on-being-democrats. But to Maine, and Texas, and Virginia, and other places that were mad about rule#12 and so on, using the national party to force Chicago-style rules onto all the states is utter madness. So, how exactly do we fix it?

      • Jim says:

        I think you answered your own question in the line “unless we can convince tons of avg repubs in many of the states to fight.”
        At least that’s would be what I would do. Four years isn’t long but in this day and age of social networking it’s still plenty.

      • ___j___ says:

        Yes, I am leaning that way. But we have had social networking, and had it in 2008. Most people still only believe their TV sets. Dr Paul did triple his popularity this time around, winning the popvote in the Virgin Islands (woo), and pulling of a tie in Maine. Not bad in Iowa either. But his best showing was in VA, when Newt & Sant were kept off the ballot on a technicality, and Ron Paul got 40/60 to Mitt Romney … and based on the exit-polls, I calculated that he would have won at about 52/48 or so … *if* the voters in VA had seen & believed the national polls, which showed Paul-vs-Obama with just as much of a chance to win the general election as Romney-vs-Obama … but voter perception was that Paul could not beat Obama. Fixing that is 2013+.

        I will be watching to see what Gary Johnson is able to manage this year; he has little funding, but many Ron Paul folks are liking him. If you are in a swing-state, FL OH NC WI MO CO VA IA, then you might want to vote strategically for Romney or Obama, and influence your neighbors to do the same. But if you live anywhere else, I suggest you vote Gary Johnson (L), or Virgil Goode (C), or write-in iff your state has certified such things [we want to prove numbers]. Influence your neighbors to do the same, perhaps. Whether or not the media reports it, party insiders will be watching these figures.

        (Exception, if you are on a central cmte for your county or state, you may need to pledge to vote a certain way, or you may wish to be able to honestly tell folks you voted a certain way, i.e. for Mitt. It is quite important to retain the awesome gains we made, to run our elected spots professionally, helping the party grow. So check that out first.)

        Anyways, here’s to wishing us both luck, changing minds in 2013. Remember to give surfisher a bit of slack. Expect the same in return, but if you don’t get it at first, just keep being polite, and you’ll get through eventually. Same process works well with everyday repubs in face-to-face meetings. Go to those weekly meetings, make friends. To in-liberty, and beyond, as the famous spaceman-toy might say.

        Nice working with you on this stuff. :-)

    • Surfisher says:

      IGNORE the ‘JIM’ creature!

      ‘Jim’ — the troll — (previously banned from posting here as “tex2″) pollutes this forum again..

      Ignore this PERNICIOUS shill — do not reply to it.
      ————————————————————————————

      In case you forgot, this human trash, like the Bilderberg Gang, wants to see Ron Paul dead:

      (JIM says: July 9, 2012 at 8:07 am “….The good doctor looked really feeble in that last message to the faithful. … Vegas odds say he (Ron Paul) DOESN’T LIVE to see Tampa.”)

      • ___j___ says:

        Hey there, surfisher. Please read the stuff above — well, er, since there is a lot, maybe just skim some of it — and you will perceive that Jim and I have been engaging in a nice conversation. Stand down, trollhunter. Stand down, I say. Jim is not being a troll here.

        Sometimes, yes, he does get a wee bit over impassioned, and that can be pointed out, without you constantly reposting your troll-alarm post. Especially when you are just posting it without reading what Jim said. Because sometimes he says intelligent things. He *is* reacting badly to you (calling you names like fascist — shame on you Jim — this is the internet where everyone is polite to everyone else!). But that is, I will submit, somewhat understandable, since you keep posting your troll-alarm, all the time. Be civil, surfisher, and watch Jim be civil right back. Both of you lay off the names. Both of you lay off the sniping at each other. We seek the path to liberty here, not forum-flaming. Plenty of that to be found elsewhere. Imagine that the other person is, well, you know, actually a person. And wants liberty. Work together.

  146. donjusko says:

    I just read all of these posts, it took me 3.5 hours. Gary Johnson is the majority, write in Paul is up there but has an equal number of “don’t waste your vote, too many states won’t except them”
    It seems Doug and the rest of the RP team are out. The clincher was poor leadership in not attacking Romney.

    Johnson’s “Bring the troops home now” covers Shirl-NV’s comment “I just cannot support anyone that believes that any war, undeclared, is ok and why I cannot vote for Johnson.”
    wes says: September 7, 2012 at 3:45 am. “What’s the point of Ron running in 2016? He and the campaign already couldn’t bother to attack Romney this year apparently because the counterattack would have hurt “the Paul name,” so the same thing would happen in 2016.”

    “Who’s counting the votes” is a big issue. Of course paper trail voting is the answer but no one brought that up. Nothing counts unless the count is right. Sending our votes to be counted by a Soros foreign country is a lose-lose situation.

    Mutt and O are for the Patriot Act and NDAA and everything else bad, no way should they get in.
    The Dem and GOP are out, liars the both of them, anything for one government, one bank, NWO.

    Logically, to me it seems Johnson is our only hope for Liberty. Why doesn’t Ron Paul support him? He once said he would… Ron Paul would “most likely” throw his weight behind Johnson. “I can’t imagine endorsing anybody else,” he says. Read it at:

    http://reason.com/blog/2010/11/04/ron-paul-on-gary-johnson-i-can

    Johnson’s platform includes: 1. Bring the troops home now. 2. Balance the budget now. 3.End the war on drugs now. Get rid of income and corporate tax. 4. Repeal Patriot Act and NDAA. 5. No drone strikes. 6. No bombing of Iran. 7. Protect our civil liberties.
    Ron Paul and GaryJohnson believe businesses succeed when government stays out of the way … flipper thinks corporations and government should work hand in hand. “Fascism should be called Corporatism because it is the union of corporations and the state.” – Mussolini

    http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/reawakening-liberty/2012/may/15/can-ron-paul-supporters-accept-gary-johnson/

    Johnson secured the Libertarian Party’s nomination for president at its national convention on (5-11-12) Saturday in Las Vegas, winning over 70% of the delegate votes. He wants Ron Paul supporters to know that he represents an opportunity to vote for a lot of the things they believe in. Paul proposes to cut $1 trillion in spending during his first year as president. Johnson sees him and raises him, promising to submit a balanced budget in his first year. That would require over $1.4 trillion in spending cuts. Cut: Medicaid, Medicare 43% and military spending, Eliminate: Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Department of Education (Return education to the states). Johnson has a “non-interventionist” foreign policy” “avoid being the policeman of the world”

  147. Jjan says:

    I usually don’t copy and past, but a little history lesson.

    “Gentlemen, Altho it is not possible to forsee the consequences of human actions, yet it is nevertheless a duty we owe ourselves and posterity in all our public councils to decide in the best manner we are able and to trust the event to That Being who governs both causes and events, so as to bring about his own determinations.

    Impressed with this sentiment, and at the same time fully convinced that our affairs will take a more favorable turn, The Congress have judged it necessary to dissolve all connection between Great Britain and the American Colonies, and to declare them free and independent States as you will perceive by the enclosed Declaration, which I am directed to transmit to you.”

    The rest here: http://www.barefootsworld.net/doi1776.html

  148. Raff says:

    I respect a lot of what Rand does but c’mon, he is a pretty big establishment Republican if you were to compare him with his father. I would have a hard time voting for him. I may consider it. Gary Johnson, definitely worth a vote of support to show that the Libertarian movement is alive even if Ron Paul isn’t running.

  149. Here is something else that can be done to advance the cause of liberty. Sign this petition demanding a real debate including Johnson and Jill Stein: George, It has been created by 2 Gary Johnson and 2 Jill Stein supporters: http://www.change.org/petitions/open-up-the-2012-presidential-debates

  150. Gary Johnson obviously has the remaining momentum of the liberty movement. Even though Gary Johnson’s moral views are slightly different, when comparing actual implementation and policy, his is very similar to that of Ron Paul. Here’s what fascinating! Gary Johnson said he would give up his spot to Ron Paul. I believe Ron Paul should take this opportunity and give Gary Johnson the VP slot and work together. This combination is lethal to the establishment. Gary Johnson is already on the ballot and Ron Paul’s prominence would make a defiant stand not to be trifled with. Then, all of our efforts, resources, and people can finally be united, uninhibited by the corruption in the 2-party system. Rand Paul isn’t inhibited either in the GOP. It also makes it easier for Democrats to support Ron Paul outside of the GOP and amidst poor choices. As Doug mentioned, the country will be devastated if we don’t do something now. Simply voting for Mitt Romney or even Gary Johnson, won’t do quite enough. As far as I can see it, a Gary Johnson/Ron Paul combo is by far the best chance we have at making the biggest third party impact in history. I believe this would exceed the days of Perot. Let me know what you guys think? :-)

  151. First off, why aren’t Sununu and Boehner being charged as felons for what they did at the convention? Since they’re clearly sociopathic, wouldn’t our society be safer with them locked away in blue collar prisons? Why is Iceland the only country in recent times whose citizens have the guts to do something like that? And if there isn’t a way for us to try them criminally, can’t we AT LEAST file a class action lawsuit against the Republican Party for the harm they’ve done to the entire country, the same way investors are filing a class action lawsuit over harm done to them by the mortgage securities scam artists? Next, if we’ve entered some kind of Bizarro World alternate universe in which we don’t have a case against them (but please explain how that can possibly be), then the only workable option – short of a violent overthrow – is to help get Gary Johnson elected this time around, and hopefully get Ron Paul as Secretary of State. If, in 2016, we’re still burdened with one of the usual David Rockefeller/Henry Kissinger Party candidates, then I think Ron Paul SHOULD run for president again – under ANY party that hasn’t already been implanted with Rockefeller/Kissinger agents.

    • donjusko says:

      Christin Nicole Saint posted good. I’ve always thought a class action suit was the answer. There is nothing wrong with voting for Johnson. We just can’t split our vote. I’m starting to lean in that direction, he’s in 50 states.

    • ___j___ says:

      Christin, I also wondered this, and the short answer is, because of the technicalities. Officially, even though everybody knows that you have to be the nominee of D or R, the two dominant parties, to win *any* electoral votes, on paper the DNC and the RNC and their leadership are merely private clubs with private rules. Boehner is also an elected official, and Sununu once was, but somebody like Priebus is not — and none of that matters to a lawyer/judge, because in Tampa, they were acting in their capacity as private citizens in a private club. Therefore, you cannot sue them under the federal election code, since technically they aren’t Election Officials. Clear as mud?

      Even worse, as was explained here by Jim — who is angry and sometimes loses his cool but who is *not* usually a troll despite what surfisher claims — there was a supreme court case from the 1972 DNC where the pooh-bahs that run the national party stripped all the duly-elected dels from Illinois, replacing them with hand-picked cronies (Maine 2012 anyone?). The case went to the supreme court in 72, but was thrown back to lower courts until 1975, when the supreme court ruled that, because private clubs [see para above] such as the DNC are interstate examples of the right-to-free-assembly in the 1st amend, and because the 14th amend gives the feds the power to enforce 1st-amend-rights of all citizens even in contradiction to state law, that the fake-rule-switcheroo the DNC pulled in 1972 to keep the IL dels from being seated (cf Ginsberg keeping Ron Paul from getting his name into nomination with the was-5-now-8 rule switcheroo), was *upheld* despite violating the IL-state-party-rules and the IL election code statutes. Cousins v Wigoda (Jim also posted a 1980 case too)

      So, do you see the trick? RNC behavior is immune from federal election law, they aren’t Election Officials. Also, RNC is immune to state election law, they have the right-to-free-assembly, which according to Cousins v Wigoda includes the right to exclude anybody from their organization (this is not as crazy as it sounds … imagine a synagogue that refuses to allow practicing atheists to get hired as sunday school preachers). And, since the RNC is technically a distinct organization from the state-repub-party-of-Maine (or whatnot), the RNC is immune from the rules of any state party. Thus, in the case of Okla. they can seat the establishment-folks, even tho clearly those romney folks violated the state rules in Oklahoma (using one-man-one-vote rather than weighted-proportional … and letting at least 233 uncredentialed dels and *guests* vote … because that way the Mitt-slate would win 52/48 rather than losing 60/40). Simultaneously, the RNC can refuse to seat Maine, because the Maine folks had guests that were allowed on the floor, even tho nobody actually accused any of the guests as voting. Because the RNC can, legally, make it all up!

      Now, it is possible that a case might be made in court, such as a class action lawsuit as you mentioned, but I am now firmly of the opinion that nothing of that sort will work. We cannot beat the DC lawyers that are pulling strings like rule#12 + teleprompter-scripted vote rigging by taking them to court. (We *do* have to worry about them taking *us* to court — that is their home territory, after all.)

      Violent overthrow is also wrong. We are not a dictatorship. And, we have people in high places that are outraged about rule#12, and will be more outraged about the cheating (which we caught on video), since if nothing else, it makes Republicans look like them darn Chicago Dems! Seriously, though, 90% of everyday repubs would be horrified if they knew about the extent of the cheating, merely to save face for poor old Mitt, giving the illusion of unity by crushing any possibility of dissent — just like Obama and Jerusalem. Show this to people in your county, and put it on your blog.

      http://www.fox19.com/story/19479204/reality-check-dnc-runs-over-delegates-with-scripted-platform-vote

      It is from FOX in Cincinnati, so all right-thinking republicans can trust it, eh? Point being, we need not put Boehner in jail, and take Priebus to court … we just need to get liberty-candidates (or at least *fair* by-the-rules cheating-is-wrong mainstream republicans like Morton Blackwell) put in charge of the national party. Boot the few that cheat, and we will win. Rule#12 isn’t about keeping those darn pauliticians from monkey business, it is really about shutting out the tea party, and shutting out the religious conservatives, and shutting out anybody who is not a moderate-to-liberal-leaning Rockefeller. However, rule#12 is being *justified* as the anti-ron-paul rule. Clearly, it is an anti-ron-paul rule, but it is also anti-anybody-but-DC (to include California and Illinois) republicans. Remember the 9/11 aftermath, when vast incursions into liberty were justified by those scary terrorists, and nobody read those 900 *pre-prepared* pages? Unlike with the patriot-ACRONYM-act, methinks that we can get mainstream repubs to support us in our fight to kill rule#12 & 15. Reach out to them, and build a coalition to preserve the party.

      As for the upcoming 2012 presidential election, my advice differs depending on whether you live in a swing-state or not (WI NC OH FL IA CO). For anybody outside of those states, I recommend we send the pooh-bahs a message, by voting for Gary Johnson repub-running-on-libertarian-ticket, or for Virgil Goode repub-running-on-constitution-ticket (when on the ballot or a certified write-in). Even if you don’t fully support them, they are clearly far better than dee&dum, and pragmatically your popvote behavior will *not* change the electoral votes, since you are not in a swing-state, per above. You can also write-in Ron Paul, *if* he is certified in your state as a write-in, but that carries more risks of your ballot being invalidated, and might hurt down-ballot local liberty-candidates. It will also help the liberty-movement in 2014 if you actively campaign for other folks to make their own choice on Obama/Mitt/Gary/Virgil (by explaining to them that since they are in a non-swing-state their vote is a *message* about 2016 rather than a *determinant* in 2012)

      For folks that live *in* a swing-state, WI NC OH FL IA CO, you have a hard choice, because your vote (and the votes of people you influence) will quite probably decide whether we have 4 more years of Obama’s executive orders & supreme court appointments … the four conservative justices are age 76 78 78 81 … or if you would rather have 8 years of Mitt, with the power of the entire congress at his disposal, not to mention executive orders, and ginsberg at his ear.

      I do not envy your position. I lean towards voting for Johnson or Goode, just like the non-swing-state folks, since having Mitt lose the election *because* he trampled on the grassroots in Tampa is poetic justice … and also because the RNC will be blaming us poor pauliticians for the loss, even *if* we all worked hard for Mitt from now until the election, because they care about power, not truth.

      Final note: if you are in a committee-chair or county-chair spot, and you signed some pledge or something to always vote repub (apparently they do that in CA!) then pragmatically you should cast your own vote for Mitt, to maintain your position so that we can win in 2014 and 2016, even if you may influence others to consider Goode and/or Johnson. One vote for Mitt won’t make a difference, except perhaps in your own mind. Pragmatic behavior like this is not highly esteemed by vocal pauliticians on the internet, as can be seen by the explosion of anger against Rand … but his endorsement of Mitt got the liberty-movement a speech on national TV, and it was good despite being watered down by the censors … which in itself is a backhanded win for the liberty-movement of a perverse sort … we have video proof that Mitt and the pooh-bahs are so afraid of Ron Paul that they forced his own son to give a speech without letting him even say the *name* of that dangerous man with his dangerous ideas … what forbidden fruit *is* that? Hey, isn’t he the same guy they cheated to get de-nominated? Hmmm…

      p.s. Gary Johnson and Virgil Goode cannot be elected, because they don’t have the people casting&counting ecVotes backing them. However, if they were, I would want Ron Paul to be successively appointed as Fed chair, minister-plenipotentiary over the CIA/NSA, Dept of Edu secy, head of the EPA, Dept of Energy director, chief of the IRS, sec Def, and finally as secretary of state (like you said). I’d even recommend retaining Hillary as SecState until then, just so we can watch her face as everything statist is being dismantled.

  152. donjusko says:

    That would be swell. Follow the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. What do you say Ron?

  153. nerdse says:

    I guess I’m an optimist, despite being pessimistic all my life. Or maybe I’m just desperate. Anyway, here goes.
    A person’s religious beliefs DO affect how that person acts/reacts to things. If a person joins a church that calls itself Christian & allows paying members to call themselves Christians but practice any religion they please, then that person likes living a lie. That’s Obama. Jeremiah Wright’s “church” is no more Christian than a Hindu holy man. He just likes money & power. I believe Obama still practices Islam while joined to that church, & that if he moved to a different church, Wright knows he had to distance himself to get elected & isn’t offended. The new church thinks he’s a Christian, because the guy is so used to lying out the wazoo that he puts a slick answer in tothe elders of the new church, & presto! They get the prestige of having Obama on their membership roles & he gets to keep saying he’s something he’s not. If Obama believes standing in a church that claims to be Christian makes him one, then he must believe standing in a garage makes him a car. The Bible tells us in Galatians that we will know true believers by the fruits of their lives. Just for starters, real Christians do NOT support unlimited abortion on demand through the birth process, let alone force it on other countries thru’ the UN, & expect the US taxpayer to pay for abortions world wide to boot. Real Christians abide by the oaths they take. Both Bush & Obama promised to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign & DOMESTIC,” & both have shredded that venerated document using the so-called “Patriot” act. Obama, who wants to hold on to power so badly that it may not matter who wins the election, made sure he forced NDAA through with the martial law sections (31 & 32) intact. All he needs to do now is make up a credible terrorist threat. He’s working on it, IMO. All of a sudden there are nutcases with guns shooting people up EVERYWHERE. Why pick that? 2 birds w/ 1 stone – he can get desperately scared people to back the UN small arms treaty, take guns away (a la his hero Adolph Hitler), & declare that until we are sure there are no lay people with guns, we must have martial law to make sure we are all “safe.” He can do that if he loses, & be President for Life (a la another of his heroes, Papa Doc Duvalier of Haiti). He is already living the high life, with huge staffs for his wife & each of his daughters as well as for him, with elite vacations with an entourage & groupies slavering all over themselves at the chance to see King Barry & Queen Michelle & the princesses, & nearly wetting themselves or swooning at being in the very presence of such royalty. He uses taxpayer’s money & destroys jobs just like a 2-bit Muslim chieftain looking to enlarge his domain – more of his heroes. All he needs to do to live the dream the rest of his life is make sure there are always terrorist threats of some sort from someplace (or, at least, APPEARING to be from someplace else but made in the USA).
    Now, let’s discuss Romney. He’s ALWAYS been a liberal. He sired Obamacare via Romneycare, & had he not gotten a federal grant for the expanded Medicaid to cover people who couldn’t afford to pay the insurance companies for health insurance, he would have bankrupted his state. Estimates range from 3 – 33% uninsured in MA despite the mandate to purchase health insurance; people who aren’t insured have fallen through the cracks because, like Obamacare, Romneycare was NOT a single payor system like in the UK, Canada, & most of Europe. Lines in ERs (which, per the EMTALA, cannot turn people away if they can’t pay but have to at least stabilize them) are 3 times as bad as in any other state, & most people hate the system because it has raised their premiums while decreasing their coverage. Taxachussetts already has decades-long records for high taxes, from road tax to registration taxes to licenses for vehicles, to high sales tax, excise taxes on large items, & personal property tax – where the tax man forces his way into your home (you let him in or you’re carted off to jail for tax evasion so it’s forcing IMO), checks out what you own, assesses its value, & sends you a bill for a tax on what you have in your house. This is plus property taxes for homeowners, & land use taxes in areas where you own your house but not the land it sits on (just like in Europe, where the person who owns the land can raze your house without asking if they want you off their land, & they can evict you with little to no notice & give you insufficient time to try & move your house – yet, you still owe the mortgage on it). I didn’t live there for long, but despite liking the people & the beauty of the state, the roads sucked (so much for deciding what they did with the road use tax…pocket lining, not road paving), all the politicians were uber-corrupt. I don’t know why anyone would live there if they could move someplace else, myself. As high as the taxes were when I was there, they are now probably twice what they were then, all to support, not patient care, but making sure people who don’t buy health insurance go to jail, making sure people “deserve” the healthcare they want, etc. At the federal level, the only way to get true single payor healthcare is to expand Medicare to everyone. THAT would be the Canadian model. Making health insurance companies filthy rich by having the IRS force you to buy one of their policies or go to jail is NOT single payor. It is a pay off to them for campaign funding. BEYOND ROMNEYCARE & LIBERALISM, Mormons are the most secretive cult I can think of right now. They have different levels. To study to get in on the ground level, you have to pass all sorts of tests & background checks to make sure you’re not a “plant.” Then, you have to study for each level & pass a test. You can’t tell ANYONE what’s in those levels except to discuss it with another Mormon who is at that level or higher. If you convert but your family doesn’t, & you marry, you’d better marry a Mormon or force the person you want to marry to convert. They have to reach the level where they’re allowed to marry before you can get married, & your non-Mormon family & friends cannot attend the ceremony. Like 32nd degree Masons, at a certain level Mormons pledge themselves to Lucifer, the Light Bearer (Satan’s – the devil’s – original name). Nothing you do to your wife is illegal, & there are still some Mormon fundamentalists who marry multiple wives (the Muslims do it differently – they don’t marry under our laws, but they set up their wives in different places or even different states, & the wives have to apply for federal aid for themselves & their children, so they don’t even support their multiple wives – WE do – at least the Mormons who marry more than one woman DO support their wives & children). My GGF was a Mormon. My GM told me how he would give his wife only enough money to buy supplies for one meal a day, & he insisted on the best – then ate most of it himself, leaving very little for his wife & 8 kids. My GGM starved herself to give more to her kids, then one day, my GGF made her care for Mormons who’d taken ill with typhoid during an epidemic. He forced her to work days on end without any rest, & without much food. She succumbed to the illness & died, & he turfed all the kids who were still at home to his kids who’d gotten married – except for my GM, who was not a docile, compliant child. She always said he’d murdered her mother as much as if he’d taken a gun to her head & shot her. NOT ONE MEMBER OF HIS FAMILY BECAME MORMON. Now, they spend a lot of time harassing me, friending me (until they realize it doesn’t work, I’m still not going to be a Mormon unless pigs are flying over the lake of fire while Satan is ice fishing in snow gear under them…& probably not even then. I have had to post a notice on my door to keep them, Jehovah’s Witnesses (long story, but they think they own me, too…never, ever ask one of them a question about their religion or you’ll be in trouble if you won’t join up…the one trying to convert me accused me of nursing malpractice leading to the death of a newborn!! Had anyone believed her I’d have been sunk), & anyone else hawking their religion, telling them I was happy with my choice, had no intention of converting, had read up on their faith regardless of what it was or where it originated, * would call the cops if they still tried to knock so I have a chance at putting a restraining order on them. THAT is how persistent – & SECRETIVE – they are…all genealogy sites on the Web & most services pay the Mormons to access their extensive database on genealogy, or they’re run by the Mormons under some shell corporation. Romney is expecting to override Congress with executive orders & has said as much multiple times. He has no problem with the so-called “Patriot” act, nor, apparently, does he realize the power in NDAA sects 31 & 32 won’t be his if BHO uses it to retain power in the event BHO loses. If elected, ROMNEY WOULD BE SO SECRETIVE HE WOULD MAKE NIXON LOOK LIKE HE NEVER DID ANYTHING SNEAKY OR ILLEGAL. Neither BHO nor MR are Christians, tho’ both claim to be; both are secretive; BOTH BELONG TO RELIGIONS WHO BELIEVE IN THE CONVERSION OF THE WORLD BY ANY & ALL MEANS NECESSARY. Trust me, there won’t be any way for me to keep those blood suckers away from me if MR gets into office…& anyone with more than 2 brain cells working knows BHO favors Muslims worldwide. If he really IS the anti-christ, as some claim, he’ll side with Israel, build them a temple after demolishing the Dome of the Rock,,,then, 3.5 yr later, he’ll sacrifice a pig on it & wreck it. For that, we have to wait & see – that’s what the anti-christ is supposed to do (aside from helping to “gel” a one world government first, & leading it).
    OK, so we’ve established that both BHO & MR are pretty much the same, big bank candidates who have their own agenda religiously & will otherwise do what the big banks say.
    So…WHY NOT VOTE FOR GARY JOHNSON? I figure if everyone who says Gary Johnson can’t win but hates the 2 Republicrats so badly that they’d rather not vote, would go out & vote for Gary Johnson, he’d probably WIN. Now, I’m not saying BHO wouldn’t declare martial law & take the election away anyhow, but let’s face it, if a Liberty candidate got that much backing, enough to win & force BHO to use martial law to keep power, don’t you think Libertarians would see a huge increase in numbers once BHO used martial law to take over. Who knows, we might even be able to overthrow him & put the rightful winner in the Oval office.
    THE LESSER OF 2 EVILS IS STILL EVIL. VOTE FOR GARY JOHNSON FOR PRESIDENT. Yeah, I’d PREFER Ron Paul, but Ron Paul said Gary Johnson was a good candidate, a good man, & that’s good enough for me (if I didn’t already know something about him).
    UNTIL WE GET RID OF THE “PATRIOT” ACT & THE MARTIAL LAW SECTS OF NDAA, & RESTORE THE CONSTITUTION, NOTHING ELSE MATTERS. DON’T GET DISTRACTED BY OTHER ISSUES. We can address those once our country is free again.

  154. aurelbarber says:

    Mr. Weed,
    1. I hope from all my heart, that this time, you and all the freedom-liberty minded people in America will take this message seriosly; Y”ve already fought the so called “Communism”, i have an experience that you dont have and hope you wont. What i didnt know, was; hwo was behind the System, now i know. “They” are afraid of you and now this is not the time to fight wars bethween yourselfs, but to UNITE all the FRACTIONS ( VETERANS; 9/11; WEARECHANGE; GRASS-ROOTS; INDEPENDENTS; DEMOCRATS ETC. ) in an ARMY like the Spartans, shoulder on shoulder, the “FALANG”; everybody is equal like Leonidas the King hwo fougt and died for freedom-liberty of his people and all the Greeks; like an Army of ONE. Dr. Paul is the LEADER and all the others are the ARMY OF ONE. The time is “KNAPP” and the GOAL is to WRITE-IN the name RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT ON 6/11/2012. If all the fractions will unite behind this GOAL, RON PAUL WILL BE PRESIDENT OF USA NO MATTER WHAT THEY”LL DO.
    2. File a LAWSUITE against THE FRAUDULENT NOMMINEE ROMNEY. You have TONS OF EVIDENCE AGAINST HIM.
    3. Dr. Ron Paul should spread the message further to all the people in America and throwout the World. This is not the time to QUIT or BE TIRED. They”ve exposed themself, even in PUBLIC ( see RNC/DNC ).
    You have them on the RUN; MAKE NO MISTAKES THIS TIME.
    4. THE GRASSROOTS NEEDS A RON PAUL PEN AND A PIECE OF PAPER TO WRITE-IN DR.PAULS NAME IN EVERY STATE IN AMERICA: I wish i could do more.

    Sincerly yours
    aurel barber

  155. donjusko says:

    I sure agree Aurel. Now is the time. We have the evidence that they are against freedom, we all are the army and we are many. Tuesday Nov. 6, 2012 is the day we vote. Everyone writing in Ron Paul as president is the answer.

  156. dooner brooks says:

    wow, did you even read the article @donjusko? writting in does nothing! It wont even be counted, and doing do will void your vote for everyother candiate you voted for! Gary johnson needs all of our votes, why not UNITE! 2016 is too late, we are already a broke nation. by 2016, we wont even be able to get to the polls to actually vote!

  157. Jjan says:

    Seems like the Republicans are trying to shut out Gary Johnson now. Is this ever going to end? Oh Ron Paul should have run third party they say. They still would have shut him out.

    I don’t think it’s because they are afraid of Gary Johnson. I think they need the Liberty Movement and they are trying to force us to have only two options. I have colorful adjectives for that, but Doug asked to leave those out.

    So it is looking more and more like a write in no matter who you vote for other than Obobney.

  158. bloatedtoad says:

    I will check my state’s rules and if possible I’ll write in Ron Paul.

    Now about those “10 Fat Men”. I don’t see them as the top of the controllers of the GOP. The people who own the Federal Reserve are over them. Aaron Russo, a famous Movie producer became best friends with one of the shareholders of the Federal Reserve Bank. He later broke his friendship for moral reasons. In this interview he talks extensively about this friendship and what he learned about the agenda of the Fed. This includes how they control BOTH political parties. What happened at Tampa seems completely illogical unless you view it from the perspective of those who are the real owners of both political parties. Watch it here:

  159. Danya says:

    I will be writing in Dr. Paul. Anything else might be a good game plan, but I’m only interested in doing what is right by me. At the end of the day, I have to say I stand for what I believe in – and that’s Dr. Paul.

    • ___j___ says:

      Your position is idealistic, but I respect that — after all, the only reason we are here talking to each other is because back in 1976 that certain congressman from Texas refused to do anything that wasn’t right. Vote as you see fit.

      However, I have a suggestion, which is that you do your best to influence other people. You need not *order* them to vote. Merely explaining the math of the situation to them, and showing them that they have more than dee&dum choices if they want to send a message to the pooh-bahs, and that because of the way the electoral college works they pretty much *only* have a chance to send a message (and not to determine the election even a wee little bit) is probably enough to wake some of them up. Even if they end up voting for Obama or Mitt this time around, maybe in 2014 and 2016 they will remember that liberty-talk you gave them.

      What should you tell them? Johnson is not Ron Paul, but anybody Ron Paul calls “wonderful” cannot be all bad, eh? Johnson is not pro-life (but holds the same political solution as Ron Paul which is to return jurisdiction over abortion to the states rather than the feds), but if you or the people you speak to require that, then consider Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party as an alternative to Ron Paul.

      Again, this is not advice that *you* should do anything but write-in Ron Paul, or even that you should tell other people you support non-Ron-Paul candidates. Vote personally in whatever way you decide best serves your long-term interests. Tell people you talk to the truth. But please, spread the message of liberty — people like it. Maybe in the next election, enough people will have heard the message that we’ll sweep the primaries, and get a liberty-candidate all the way there.

  160. Surfisher says:

    The Soviet Union collapsed but didn’t die…moved lock, stock and barrel to America.

    RNC=DNC=CCCP

    2012 — the year when your votes won’t count.

  161. Surfisher says:

    Brilliant observations and conclusions of our current state!

    This is the best interview this year that is a MUST WATCH — see, hear, comprehend and SHARE!

    Doug Wead is absolutely brilliant !!!

    (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbrUPtwIKuk&feature=player_embedded)

    • Jim says:

      I already posted this above. Hmmm you tell everyone to ignore my posts and now you’re stealing from them? Not only are you a little forum fascist ordering everyone around regarding who they should and shouldn’t talk to but you are also a post thief.

      BTW:
      I love what Doug says around 16 minutes about how by the campaigns own count Romney had already won before Michigan (late February), yet he and his cronies continued to milk the rubes, er um, I mean supporters, in order to fill their fat wallets for a few more months (Wead has been paid $72,000 so far this year alone while the average American struggles to get by on the $24,000 PER YEAR median salary).How many money bombs were there after March? 4? 5? Not to mention the emails begging for money to (allegedly) help delegates get to tampa/

      • ___j___ says:

        Surfisher down, Jim down, call off ye attack dogs. Seek ye serenity. Thou wouldst go forth in liberty together, wouldst ye not? No names.

        Work. Together. You both posting the same thing is what is known as sharing-an-interest-in-promoting-liberty. Polite and friendly is the key here. Nobody is getting a prize for being first, except Dr Paul, and it was just a vague tribute-video anyway. (Bonus: his name lives forever as the Nouveau Founding Father.)

        @Jim, yes, Doug Wead makes more money than us. He earns it. You don’t have to send money if you don’t want to. I didn’t, but I worked for the campaign as a del. And thought about how to win. Believe me the moneybombs of April and afterwards were not wasted; I have not seen the budget-sheets, but I have seen the hard results. Sure, it was pretty clear that Mitt was going to win the presidential nomination by about mid-May, even to outsiders. Once Santorum dropped out in mid-April, Romney was pretty much the shoo-in, unless Santorum gave those to Ron Paul (rather than making a back-room deal w/ Mitt). But the point was not *only* to win the presidency, or give up otherwise. The point was speaking at campuses, in front of thousands. Remember, we want to win in the primaries in 2014 and 2016 and every cycle after. Those moneybombs in 2012 are what paid for our success in 2014. Even after they stopped ‘actively’ campaigning for primary-voters in mid-May or so, there were still some speeches (I saw one), and there was work winning delegate-slots. Training future 2014 and 2016 folks so we will win twice as many delegate-slots next time.

        Remember the name-calling. Why say cronies and rubes and fat and begging and allegedly? You are being rude for no reason, because in this case what you are saying is incorrect. Could the campaign have been run better/differently? Sure, in hindsight. I hope Doug publishes a book on how this campaign worked, what went wrong, the war stories of the various states, and how to win next cycle. I’d buy it.

        We did not win the presidential-nominee-slot in Tampa. Nobody paying attention to the math thought we could. Ron Paul said that quite clearly in mid-May, and strongly hinted at it earlier. But that does not mean we accomplished nothing after February. We won pluralities in seven states. We got 10% of the first-ballot delegate votes. We were going to get Ron Paul nominated, and prove how many stealth-delegates we really won, in a way that could not be denied. That would have been a PR coup, helping us in the primaries next year. Instead, we got “totally rogered” according to esquire.com, the RNC started a “civil war” per fox19.com, and we have video proof that not only did the RNC keep Rand Paul from saying his own dad’s *name* on television, they teleprompter-scripted the result of the rules-vote! Which, oh BTW, included the infamous and hated Rule#12:

        One Rule To Wring Them All,
        One Rule To Blind Them,
        One Rule To Bring Them All,
        And To The Establishment Bind Them!

        Sure, it would have been nice to win the nomination in a landslide. But we didn’t have enough money and enough fame to win the primaries in 2012, even though we did have the organization to win delegates. But because of all the success we have had this year, because of that video of the highest elected republican official in the land being ordered to cheat and *doing* what the shady powers behind the teleprompter scripted opinion-of-the-chair-the-ayes-have-it *told* him to do, we are going to have a lot of mainstream Romney repubs on our side in 2014.

        Anyhoo, the point is, lay off complaining about how much money Doug makes. Don’t you believe in capitalism? I’m saving my pennies now so we can hire Doug again next time around. And hey, if you think he made mistakes, sure, point them out. And if you think you can run the campaign better in 2016, well great, step up to the plate and prove it — get me ten Constitutional sheriffs elected and a couple usReps or senators in 2014, in your state. Even if you don’t want Doug’s job, why not focus on working towards getting liberty candidates into the Senate this November, rather than fencing with surfisher? Sure, none of them is Ron Paul, but Flake AZ, Cruz TX, Mourdock IN, Mandel OH, Fischer NE, Mack FL, and with a lot of luck that guy in RI up against Sheldon Whitehouse XIII Esquire … those are solid senate candidates.

        For liberty.

      • Jim says:

        If you believe the money bombs brought all these so-called successes and not the hard work of the grassroots then I have a talking dog who can recite the Constitution to sell you…Either that or you are actually Doug himself trying to save face. I notice you say you haven’t seen the budget-sheets. What’s stopping you? They are available online. If as you claim paying both Doug and Little Jesse more than what an average fireman who puts their life on the line makes in a year is justified please name 3 caucus/state conventions where Doug and Jesse were present to help the grassroots “work winning delegate-slots.”
        PS: I don’t need a regurgitation of Doug’s talking points from the last six months like you did above, just the names of 3 states where they were present helping the grassroots.

      • ___j___ says:

        “If you believe the money bombs brought all these so-called successes and not the hard work of the grassroots”

        You are correct, without the grassroots nothing would have worked. But money helps. Romney had nada grassroots, but look how well he did, purely because he had money. Ron Paul did not have as much money, did not have a pandering media, and did not have support from the county-chairs and the state-chairs and such. Grassroots support is the only reason we even came close, though, and it was almost enough to push us past the obstacles. Almost.

        “I have a talking dog who can recite the Constitution to sell you”

        Hee hee! Okay, actually, I would buy one of those. Hmm. A toy dog, with a Liberty Candidate 2016 doggie t-shirt, it recites the constitution and the bill of rights. We can call it the Constitutional Watchdog, get the thing into stores by this Christmas, and put the money away for 2014. Jim, you are a genius. What breed of dog? We should also sell a donkey that spews the worst of the Obama talking-points, so people *hear*, and another donkey (with a rubber elephant-mask) that says all the moderate RINO things. Not only will we make a bundle, I’ll get to have a constitution-reciting dog. Maybe we can get RFID chips, so that when the donkey and the rino-donkey-with-elephant-mask are near the watchdog, they cry?

        “Either that or you are actually Doug himself trying to save face.”

        Nope, I am not a sock puppet. Sorry to disappoint, but what Doug does, mostly makes sense to me. Well, except for his hangups with categorizing people by their religion, which is pretty yucky. Who cares if Ryan is a catholic? All I care about is that he won’t put the budget into surplus til 2039 (i.e. never). He’s a moderate repub.

        “say you haven’t seen the budget-sheets. What’s stopping you?”

        Ahh, well, I didn’t know they were online… and I cannot find them now? I tried a search for ron paul campaign budget wead benton, but came up with too many hits. Can you give the link please, I’d be interested in seeing how much this stuff costs in detail.

        “please name 3 caucus/state conventions where Doug and Jesse were present to help the grassroots”

        [uh oh ... I feel a bit of a rant coming on ... here you go....]
        Got me there! Or did you…? Do you mean, personally? Turning the cranks, down in the trenches? Or you mean electronically, by providing guidance over the phone and through the internet? Or you mean financially, by providing cash from the main fund to the individual state-level campaigns? I have no list for you, of course. More importantly, I would not *expect* them to be personally going state to state, I expect them to be running the national campaign, which means figuring out a winning strategy. To my mind, that is what they did, and although they *failed* to win the presidency, that doesn’t mean they didn’t earn what Ron Paul paid them.

        I’m very happy, personally, with what was accomplished in 2012. We tripled our popvote, we got plurality in IA MN AK VI NV, we got plurality in ME LA (and maybe OK or even MA) that Romney’s lawyers stripped, which was more than enough to get nominated. They had to cheat to prevent that faux pas, they did, we have video to prove it — which will be extremely valuable in 2014 and 2016.

        As for your complaints about lack of support for the grassroots, I don’t know what to tell you. I showed up at state con knowing about only one other Ron Paul supporter, yet still found a massive group of well-organized folks, with strategy and slates prepared. We won delegates to Tampa, and spots in the state party hierarchy, and it was great. Doug is here, and probably reads these (some! of these) forum posts. Maybe you can get a list of three states he and Benton personally visited. I know that Ron Paul was in a bunch of places, and probably they tagged along sometimes. But assume you are correct, and they never left the campaign HQ down in Houston. Nobody went to rallies to hear Benton speak; we wanted Ron Paul. Nobody went to their county conventions to have Doug hold their hand; just read about it on the internet, see what to do, and do it.

        National campaign staff should concentrate on running the national campaign, and on providing a point of contact for each of the state level campaigns. I looked up the email of my state-level coordinator on the national-campaign-website, but ended up never talking to them, because I figured out what to do on my own, and did it. If there *was* some sort of centralized controlling overlord, that was going to tell me whether I could be a delegate or not, and provide me with forms to fill out for my per diem expenses, and give me a pre-approved set of talking points that I must never stray from in my speeches before the nominations-board, I would throw up. The Romney campaign obviously did just that, sending Ginsberg all over the country to keep the locals in line. Is that what you wanted from the Ron Paul campaign? If so, then we will never agree.

        Or, are you just disappointed that we lost in Tampa? Well, me too. But we are not Obama, who blames anybody but himself. I made mistakes this year, and started at my county-level too late to get on the nom cmt. More importantly, I should have been pounding the pavement since 2008, converting primary-voters one by one, but instead I was busy with my own life. I’ll be knocking on some doors (and commenting in forums) the next few years. You say that Doug made a mistake in not crushing the Gilbert lawsuit, and in not forcing Ron Paul to publish attack adverts aimed at Mitt. You say that Ron Paul made a mistake, in paying Doug and Jesse Benton too much money. Okay, fine, might be true. Point it out, sure.

        But keep your eyes on the prize. Constructive criticism which leads to a better campaign next cycle is helpful. Constantly pointing out that Doug makes more money than a fireman, & thus wasn’t willing to take a bullet through the heart to guarantee Ron Paul’s winning in 2012, seems not merely pointless but counterproductive. Ron Paul makes more money than a fireman too, because he invested in precious metals, and last time I checked was a millionaire. With the inflated money of today, that’s not as big a deal as it used to be, but are you going to tell me that Ron didn’t *earn* that million bucks? That since Ron Paul never showed up at your county convention, he therefore did *nothing* to help the campaign in 2012? Listen to yourself. Capitalism is about keeping what you earn, and earning what you keep. Running a national campaign is *hard* work, and only some people are any *good* at it, otherwise there would be a lot more candidates that were winning popvotes and winning delegates and and writing the platform and winning nominations and winning the presidency.

        *Our* national campaign staff, with help from the grassroots, and money bombs from the grassroots, and zero help from the media, plus negative hurt from the establishment mainstream repubs, got ME and VI popvotes, a very decent result on del-count, some success on the plat, we got cheated out of our nomination (but on national television so we have video), and we lost the presidency in 2012. But we *will* win those things. And we will have triple the number of liberty-senators this year, and even more liberty-reps.

        At the end of the day, we should not spend *all* our time trying to purge the ranks, and criticize the 2012 presidential campaign staff. I understand that you wish we had won, across the board, *this* year. But we didn’t have much chance of doing that, ever, and what we did accomplish was impressive, by my calculations.

        Keep calm & carry on, friend. Point out flaws, but with civility. And send me that link for the campaign budget, so 2014 is better.

      • ___j___ says:

        Thanks, Jim. Actually, I had seen that before, or at least, a re-post of the big numbers from the summary page, but didn’t remember they had an itemized list. (Kinda painful reading through all the $3 charges to get to the $12345 items though!) Anyway, I found some of the raw data that informs me better about the theory we were arguing over.

        These are the federal-filings, though, rather than the *true* campaign budget. This means, for instance, there are a bunch of line-items for airplane tickets, but the “recipient” of the money is listed as United or Delta (rather than the person who was flying somewhere). There is also bundling of tens of thousands of dollars to American Express. Plus all those travel-and-lodging charges; you can tell what state they were in when they bought food or gas or a hotel room, but not who. Which means, even with this level of detail, we still cannot see the set-of-states which national campaign strategy staff personally visited.

        Often, in fact, we cannot tell what state a particular line-item was for, such as the times when we see $3k spent on printing&postage at some graphics-shop in Texas. Obviously, a mailout, but going to what state? Sometimes we *can* tell the target state, such as when their are reimbursement-expenses to somebody whose name I know from TV. The delegates from Minnesota were given $1000 in event-supplies and $1500 in unspecified-expenses-reimbursement on June 4th, I noticed, plus various travel-expenses in MN (not sure whether those were for the folks from MN — or for out of state folks that were helping out). Also, some VA delegates got main-fund monies in June. That does tell us *some* funds go out.

        As for the raw salary-data, I don’t know all the names, and I don’t know how many hours they actually work for their salary, but let’s be *way* conservative and assume they merely work 40 hours a week. There are about 15 high-paying gigs, and 12 okay-paying ones, plus several fieldworkers (there are additionally some office staff in Texas and some frontline volunteers not shown below).

        David Warrington, VA LEGAL, 250/hr, LeClair Ryan (lawyers)
        Baeza Security, #0= FL FIELD WORK, 75/hr, (bodyguards)
        Trygve Olson, VA STRATEGY, 58/hr, * Viking Strat (sr advisor)
        Mike Rothfeld, VA STRATEGY, 58/hr, Saber Comms (C4L training)
        Doug Wead, VA STRATEGY, 46/hr, * Wead Enterprise (sr advisor)
        Tina&Sid Stafford, DC STRATEGY, 44/hr, Stafford Creative
        … (“zero weasels were harmed in the making of this ad”)
        Deborah D Hopper, #1= MO STRAT, 40/hr, (asst c. mgr & events)
        J. Coburn(??), VA STRATEGY, 38/hr, Righters Group LLC
        Primus Tech Consu, VA TECH, 35/hr, (IT)
        K Shelley, #2= OK STRATEGY, 32/hr, (C4L train & sr consultant)
        Fritz Wenzel, #3= OH POLLING, 30/hr, Wenzel Strategies (polls)
        John F Tate, VA SALARY, 30/hr, * (campaign mgr)
        Jack W Hunter, #4= SC STRATEGY, 29/hr, * (official blogger)
        Christopher Younce, VA STRATEGY, 29/hr, Grassroots Strategies
        Gatorworks LLC, #5= LA FIELD WORK, 29/hr, (IT/website)

        Primary Data Sol, VA STRATEGY, 23/hr, (IT/contact mgmt)
        Jesse Benton, #6= TX SALARY, 23/hr, * (campaign chair)
        Deana Watts, #7= TX SALARY, 22/hr, (campaign cmt dir & treas)
        Jonathan Schaeffer, #8= MD TRAVEL, 22/hr, (travel)
        John P McCardell, VA SALARY, 21/hr, (finance dir)
        Arent Fox LLP, DC LEGAL, 20/hr, (lawyer)
        Dimitri N Kesari, VA SALARY, 20/hr, * (deputy campaign mgr)
        Jennifer Ryan, #9= MO TRAVEL, 16/hr, (travel)
        Brian R Gentry, VA SALARY, 16/hr, (?)
        James V Barcia, VA SALARY, 15/hr, (deputy press secy)
        Gary Howard Jr, VA SALARY, 14/hr, (press secy)
        Fernando Cortes, VA SALARY, 13/hr, (DptyCtrlr & HispanicOutr)

        Public Appeal Inc, NY FIELD WORK, 20/hr
        David Wayne Pridgeon, MD FIELD WORK, 18/hr
        Carolyn Schultz Smith, VA FIELD WORK, 16/hr
        P. Chamberlain, WA FIELD WORK, 15/hr
        Reilly O’Neal, NC FIELD WORK, 10or20/hr
        Meghann Walker, TX FIELD WORK, 10or20/hr.
        Drew R Ivers, IA FIELD WORK, 9or18/hr
        Katja N Delavar, WA FIELD WORK, 8or16/hr

        So, that’s a pretty long list, but what immediately jumps out at me is that the salaries seem pretty reasonable, with the exception of 250 and hour retainer for the chief lawyer (and although ‘unreasonable’ even that one is not really unexpected). The next thing I notice is how many people of high rank are being paid as little as they can manage: e.g. deputy press secy makes more than the press secy.

        But the main thing that jumps out at me is the difference between the Ron Paul campaign staff and the Mitt Romney campaign staff.

        204/hr backup lawyer for mitt
        146/hr finance director for mitt
        87/hr finance consultant for mitt
        87/hr opposition researcher for mitt
        73/hr strategy consultant for mitt
        70/hr random state-party official for mitt
        50/hr campaign manager for mitt
        28/hr personal aide for mitt

        These are just the ones I could find on a quick search. Summing up the hourly rates, and ignoring chief lawyers (Warrington for Ron Paul and Ginsberg for Mitt Romney), as well as the bodyguards (since Mitt gets his for ‘free’ from the government coffers), this tiny smattering of eight random Romney employees are getting paid as much as the top 26 staffers on the Ron Paul campaign, which is about 90% of them for those of you keeping track. The difference is clear as a bell: every consultant in the Romney-list is charging 75 to 150 and hour, whereas the *most* that our strategy folks charge Ron Paul’s campaign is 58/hr … less, if they work beyond 40/wk.

        At the end of the day, I think pretty much everybody on the Ron Paul campaign is there because they believe in liberty, first, and in salaries paid in a good free-market capitalist fashion, secondarily.

  162. donjusko says:

    Doug is just kicking the can down the road in this video. I’ve been there and done that. He is still for the GOP even though they made “stupid” mistakes. He doesn’t see them as evil. He though the yea and nay vote was “great” even thought the media was shocked. BS, they weren’t shocked, it went their way just as they expected. He will do nothing about the 10 fat men except make his jokes. He had his chance and passed the buck down/up to his cronies who wouldn’t attack Romney because of a lame excuse.

    He is anything but brilliant, I’ve heard better vacuum salesman talking than him. There is no left or right? That’s old? No Doug if you’re for the Constitution your on the right. After that the video just talked how important is was to keep secrets from us so the opposition would’t know our legal strategy. Considering what we had going into this, he says, and than pats himself on the back. What we had going into this was the largest groups of listeners ever assembled in America, all over the country, thanks to the greatest statesman and politician we ever had and you blew it.

    Doug’s biggest problem was not knowing who he was representing. Romney couldn’t hurt Ron Paul with all the money in the world but that stopped you from attacking Romney and his shredding of the Constitution. Your a bad joke Doug, stay away from Johnson. More sarcasm, “isn’t that great, they are here to protect us with no arm bands”, Doug didn’t any one ever tell you that sarcasm is lying? Yet, ha ha, you resort to it all the time. No wonder the best lost to losers.

    • ___j___ says:

      Whoo you gottsa lotta vitriol there, DonJusko. I am also still for the GOP, in the sense of finishing converting it back into the party of liberty — those stupid mistakes they made are things we can take advantage of to get that job done (see my post immediately above).

      As for the ten-fat-men, Jim and I were discussing that in depth above. Winning the primary, in both popvote and delegates, is the fix. After what happened in the Virginia primary this year, and the video proof of cheating we have from Tampa now, I’m pretty confident we can get wins of both types in 2014 mid-terms and 2016 (but field-dependent).

      Re: left versus right. Search the internet for Nolan chart. See where Obama fits into it, based on his record. See where Romney fits into it, based on his record. Compare them with the location of Ron Paul.

      The largest group of listeners in the USA…? Well, that is wrong, unless you mean *potential* listeners, as opposed to actual ones. We did way better in polls this year, but not better than Mitt, and certainly not better than sitting prez Obama. He in fact has the largest group of listeners — even I sometimes listen — whereas prolly only 20% of people have heard the name Ron Paul and can list one or two of his main ideas. But think about that… one person in five? Wow! Yay!

      As for character-assassination, it is easy to accomplish, if you have a lot of money, and will do anything to win. I submit to you that the Romney campaign had both. Doug, actually, wanted to fight them, but other folks (that I would agree with) decided it wasn’t worth it.

      Speaking of character-assassination techniques… can you tone down your anger-button six notches or so? The best candidate does not always win, even in fair contests, let alone rigged ones. Be fair here.

  163. donjusko says:

    “video proof that not only did the RNC keep Rand Paul from saying his own dad’s *name* on television, they teleprompter-scripted the result of the rules-vote! ”

    And you think you can convert them, It doesn’t look that way to me. Vote Johnson, you can vote Romney if you want but I think you will be outnumbered. I won’t vote for evil and neither will the TP.

    The largest group of listeners in history…
    4-10-12, Ron Paul wrapped up his rock star tour of California last week drawing around 23,000 people between three stops.
    4-11-12, LAKE JACKSON, Texas – attracted a remarkable 3,000-plus supporters and undecided voters to his Texas A&M town hall meeting tonight.
    10-15-11, A recent Harris Poll revealed that Ron Paul would prevail over Barack Obama
    University of Bethel, Minnesota, 2-4-12, 1,600 crowd.
    Nevada, 2-8-1, large crowd, Paul said we are doing well in delegates count
    Kansas City, 2-18-12, 2,000 crowd.
    Iowa Poll by the Des Moines Register, 2-19-12, Paul besting Obama over all other Republican candidates.
    University of Central Michigan, 2-25-12, 1,750 crowd.
    Oklahoma State Capitol. 2-25-12, 1,700 crowd.
    University of Michigan State, 2-27-12, 4,000 crowd.
    University of Illinois, 3-14-12, 5,000 crowd.
    University of Missouri, 3-15-2012, 2,000 crowd.
    3-28-12, Springfield, Maryland, ? crowd.
    University of Wisconsin, 3-29-12, 5,200 crowd.
    4-2-12, Rasmussen Reports poll, Representative Paul bests Mr. Obama in a head-to-head matchup.
    University of Chico State, 4-3-12, 6,200 crowd.
    University of UCLA, California, 4-4-12, 7,000 crowd.
    University of Berkeley, San Francisco, 4-5-12, 8,500 crowd.
    4-8-12, California, Another record breaking crowd of 10,000 at Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty at California’s largest university.
    4-10-12, California last week drawing around 23,000 people between three stops.
    University of Texas A&M, 4-11-12, 3,000+ crowd.
    4-11-12? San Antonio Town Hall, 1,000+
    University of Pittsburgh, 2,300+ crowd.
    University of Rhode Island, 4-19-12, 2,000-plus crowd, Voters to Town Hall Meeting.
    University of Cornell, 4-24-12, 4,500 for Ron Paul in Ithaca.
    4-21-12, Pittsburgh, 2,300-plus (2,600) voters to a town hall meeting in his native city of Pittsburgh.
    4-22-12, Philadelphia, Despite Downpour Ron Paul Draws 4,300-plus to Rally on Independence Mall in Philadelphia.
    4-25-12, Texas, Magoffin Auditorium on the UTEP campus in El Paso, Texas, 1,126 people and it was full.
    University of Texas at El Paso town hall meeting, 4-26-12, Texas – 2012, 1,200-plus crowd.
    University of Houston, Texas. 3,000 crowd
    4-27-12, Austin Town Hall Meeting, 6,000 Voters, count

    So don’t talk to me about being fair, you’re a smooth talker but a phony with facts. I’n going to take just one paragraph of yours and show you why you are wrong.

    “As for character-assassination, it is easy to accomplish, if you have a lot of money, and will do anything to win. I submit to you that the Romney campaign had both.”

    Ron Paul has the cleanest record of any member of congress, ever. And you are going to take him down? With what? Lies? Maybe you know this and maybe your don’t. If you accuse me of a lie I can use it against you and beat you. If you lie about me, you’re dead there too.

    Ron Paul can pick up more money than he needs because we all backed him with our money. Ron Paul received more than $220,000 from military donors from Oct. to Feb. Romney reported $36,108 as of Feb. 29. He can get money just by asking for it. More than he can spend. Doug talked down the money Ron Paul had and could get, he’s a loser.

    “Doug, actually, wanted to fight them, but other folks (that I would agree with) decided it wasn’t worth it.”

    Doug passed the buck up the ladder, he wasn’t responsable…
    Doug is the one we knew about, the man we thought was directing Ron’s campaign. Nooo.. He was just an underdog, a front man taking orders from up above. It’s the old shell game. Well I’m not buying it. All three of them aren’t worth one of Ron’s cuff links.

    Vote Gary Johnson and you guys stay out of his campaign. If your GOP does manage to keep him out of the debates this whole country will write in Ron Paul.

    • ___j___ says:

      “And you think you can convert them, It doesn’t look that way to me.”

      Sure, you are correct. The people in Tampa that forced their scripted rules through, and the people in the Romney campaign that fake-offered Ron Paul a speaking slot if only he would accept censors, those people are incorrigible. But not everybody in the repub party is willing to cheat like that. I would argue that most of them aren’t. My county is not strong on Ron Paul, but they are strong on fairness. There is some petty gossip infighting crap, like with anywhere, but no actual cheating. The nice old ladies around here that think Romney is great will be angry about the cheating in Tampa, because they believe that only democrats use Chicago-style politics. (Did you see the vote on putting God into the dem platform where the DNC pooh-bahs did exactly what the RNC pooh-bahs did to get rule#12 passed in Tampa?)

      I harbor no illusions about bring Ben Ginsberg, the point-man for rule 12, over to our side. But he was elected as a delegate. And he can be unelected, if only we convince all the everyday repubs at the state level that cheating to win is worse than losing. My prediction is that, unless Romney fixes the Tampa fiasco right quickly, he will have lost the swing states he must have, because tea party folks and pauliticians refuse to hold their nose for a guy who won’t call out the cheaters.

      “Vote Johnson, you can vote Romney if you want”

      Yes, I agree, for those not in swing-states. Up until Tampa, I was willing to vote for the romineey … but my state convention was fair. Prolly I will vote Johnson, or maybe Virgil Goode (need more R&D). People (unlike me) that do live in swing-states, and love liberty, have a harder choice, because if they vote Johnson/Goode/RonPaul/whatever, they might swing the election to or away from Romney.

      “[list of awesome attendance-figures for Ron Paul rallies snipped] So don’t talk to me about being fair, you’re a smooth talker but a phony with facts.”

      Well, I guess I don’t understand what you are getting at here. I’m not trying to be phony with the facts. Ron Paul won way more of the popvote in 2012, and got huge crowds. But not enough to beat Obama, if Romney is still in the race. Teddy Roosevelt was more popular than Ron Paul, and his Bull Moose party still lost. Any time you split your repub votes, and the dem vote is not split, then both the repub candidates will lose. Romney is arguably going to lose in November, because Gary Johnson and Virgil Goode are splitting off the Ron Paul folks and the other liberty-loving types, and Romney is doing nothing to try and keep them (quite the opposite!). I’m not saying these things are good or moral, and I’m not trying to say that they are bad or immoral either, I just see them as math. Facts. If you are trying to say that the strong attendance that Ron Paul got overrides these facts, well I’m listening, show me how. But I don’t think rally attendance translates into votes in November, and I do think that statewide-polling does, and in statewide polls Ron Paul (and Gary Johnson and Virgil Goode) have zero chance to win. Polls are often biased, and sometimes so biased that they are phony, but I’m not looking at the super-biased ones; the data is very clear.

      “Ron Paul has the cleanest record of any member of congress, ever. And you are going to take him down? With what? Lies?”

      No, I’m not going to take him down, I like him, and I don’t have billions of dollars and a nasty staff full of lawyers and negative ad experts. But according to Doug, back in mid-February or so, when the attack-ads started getting nasty amongst Romney and Santorum there was a threat to destroy the name of Ron Paul. With lies, sure. But look at the supermarket tabloids next time you walk through. Look at the intelligence of the average voter. Not the ones that come to Ron Paul rallies, or read blogs. The ones that just watch TV, and think that all politicians lie, already, and have never heard of Ron Paul except as ‘that crazy guy’. Would a smear campaign have worked, or backfired? Santorum tried to smear Ron Paul, saying he was secretly in favor of pork-barrel earmarks, during the debate in Arizona, and the audience literally laughed him into silence! Now that was funny. And proof that you are correct, often the truth will set you free. But not always.

      Look at the convention in Tampa. Right now, most people *think* it was completely fair. Maybe 1% have some idea that the RNC and the Romney campaign pulled a few tricks, but they don’t see them as unfair tricks, any more than Ron Paul winning all the delegates from Minnesota this year was unfair. The truth is, Tampa was scripted cheating, and we know it. But we have to get the message out. It will be hard, but not impossible. What a great year for liberty this has been. The point is this: back in February, *before* most of those rallies you list happened, and *before* we had video proof of cheating at the highest levels, my assertion is that an attack campaign *might* have worked. We can argue about whether Doug should have fought harder, or if I am right, or if Romney would have really done this or that, I guess. Actually, I’m in favor of constructive talk about what, in hindsight, mistakes were made, and what, looking to 2014 and 2016, we should use as a strategy.

      “Maybe you know this and maybe your don’t. If you accuse me of a lie I can use it against you and beat you. If you lie about me, you’re dead there too.”

      Yes. Sure. Between you and me. Or, between me and Ron Paul. But that is not the problem. The problem in 2014 and 2016 is, now that we know the establishment will lie and cheat, what do we do about it, to defend against it, and to fix the root problem? (The problem in February 2012 was different because of circumstances.)

      “Doug talked down the money Ron Paul had and could get”

      I don’t have the balance-sheets for the campaign, so I cannot say whether Doug is telling the truth about the money situation, but his explanation seems pretty clear. When you and I donate to Ron Paul we are taking money we earned by working for it. When the folks at Goldman Sachs donate to Mitt & Obama, they are using fiat cash that their friends in the Fed just printed that morning, at no risk to their own pocketbook, and at no actual cost to themselves (the cost to the *taxpayer* is horrendous… but that is not the same as the cost to the too-big-to-fail banks).

      “If your GOP does manage to keep Gary Johnson out of the debates this whole country will write in Ron Paul.”

      Gary might get into the debates, if he can poll above 15% on five consecutive national polls. And if they don’t change the rules at the last second, such as when Ron Paul had plurality enough to be nominated, and the week before convention they changed the rule.

      As for the whole country writing in Ron Paul, that is a rosy picture, and though I would love to be proven wrong, it is just a dream. Keep dreaming big, but instead of assuming that everybody loves Ron Paul as much as you, look at the numbers. Talk to strangers. See if they will vote Ron Paul, or even know his name. Politely convince them to look into it. Help down-ballot folks. Work towards 2014, and 2016. But stay grounded, not in the clouds.

      • ___j___ says:

        One other thing I should also mention, which is that I was *not* being sarcastic when I said that one person in five knowing Ron Paul’s name, and something about his positions, is wow and yay. I am extremely happy about that, because it’s triple what we managed in 2008. And I expect by 2016 it will triple again, and we will have 60% of people that *know* which candidate is the liberty-candidate in the repub primary. We might not win all the popvotes, depending on the particular candidate, and on the mood of the voters, but we will have a real shot at doing it. We have Ron Paul to thank for giving us that:

        The important thing is that I have challenged the status quo, the corruption in Washington, and as a doctor I know that the patient, in this case the country, is responding and now has a good chance of recovery. This is very, very pleasing to me.
        –Ron Paul, January 2012, after getting 2nd in NH

        The country *is* responding to the liberty-treatment. We may yet be cured. But 2012 is not yet the right historical moment, in my opinion. Do not give up, if I turn out to be right, and only 1% of people write in Ron Paul, and 10% vote for Gary Johnson. That will be enough to put us over the memetic threshold, and by 2016 or 2020, we *will* win.

      • donjusko says:

        That was a well thought out post j. But “m not giving in just because, “Facts. If you are trying to say that the strong attendance that Ron Paul got overrides these facts, well I’m listening, show me how. But I don’t think rally attendance translates into votes in November, and I do think that statewide-polling does, and in statewide polls Ron Paul (and Gary Johnson and Virgil Goode) have zero chance to win.” you say Johnson has no chance to win. Rassterman polls have just included Johnson, the Libertarian Super Pac poll said, “Gary Johnson gets 24% in new nationwide poll”

        http://laspac.org/2012/08/15/gary-johnson-gets-24-in-new-nationwide-poll/

        I don’t believe the rigged polls and any poll that doesn’t include Johnson is rigged. If Johnson doesn’t get to debate I’m writing in Ron Paul, I don’t care if it’s thrown away because Hawaii doesn’t accept write-ins. I won’t vote for evil.

      • ___j___ says:

        Yeah, as far as your first point, I agree, do not give in. Spread the word about Johnson. Maybe he can get in the debates. (I’m not positive that would be a good thing in 2016… more on that in a minute. It would definitely be good for 2012, clearly.)

        But for Johnson to win the presidency, from my analysis of the numbers, is pretty much impossible. There are not many three-way nationwide polls, but there is a recent one from Colorado, which is the border-state just north of where Johnson was governor 8 years. Three-way race gives 46 obama, 44 mitt, and 5 to Gary Johnson. Which is none too shabby, considering his advertising budget. (In his home state he gets 12% of the voters in a three-way.) All good for the liberty movement. Those ~10% of folks are willing to buck the media-pressure, and vote for Johnson anyhoo. But time will tell if he can hold onto that ~10%, because as November draws near, Libertarian voters tend to start defecting, and Johnson may only end up with 2%. Especially in Colorado, which is a swing-state this election year.

        As for you in Hawaii, that is no swing-state, vote as you see fit. Do not vote for evil. I recommend you tell your friends to vote for Johnson (whether he gets in the debates or not), as a message to the elite pooh-bahs of the republican party. They can even write in Ron Paul, or maybe Virgil Goode, if they want to send a slightly different message. Obama will get the electoral college votes from Hawaii, true, but I *seem* to remember a certain doctor from Texas won the popvote on the big island this year, got 15% of the first-ballot nominee votes from Hawaii, and who-knows-how-many stealth delegates. Keep up the good work in the pacific for liberty, Don. I like it.

        But back to the debate question, and the poll-numbers. The poll that you linked was two-way *hypothetical* polling, of Gary versus Obama (sans Mitt), and Johnson got 24 whereas Obama got 45. Not bad, but Ron Paul was getting 39 to Obama’s 50 back in mid-April, and Obama has gotten weaker since then. In many statewide-polls, head-to-head contests between Ron Paul and Obama were a tossup, and by my calculations Ron Paul could have beaten Obama, if he had made it through the republican primaries as the leader. Gary Johnson just doesn’t have the name-recognition of Ron Paul, nor the money of Mitt Romney, and even if Mitt wasn’t running, Obama would beat Gary

        Now, can Gary get himself into the presidential debates? Back in the 1980s, Anderson tried. Back in 1996, the first presidential debate was *cancelled* because of the fight over whether Perot would get in (ended up with Perot not in any debates at all). Given what we saw in Tampa, and given that campaign Romney is suing to get Gary off the ballot in at least three states I know of *already* (MI IA OH), and especially given that Gary Johnson is only running on the libertarian ticket cause he was booted from the primary-debates, I think TPTB will never ever let him into the presidential debates this year. This is defeatist, I know, and I will eat humble pie should he manage the feat. Happily. But as you can see at the bottom of the LASPAC poll, the reason they had the poll done is because they are trying to get around the current rules, under which Johnson doesn’t (as yet) qualify.

        Assume my pessimism is justified, and Johnson does not get in the debates. Downsides: we miss a chance for a liberty-candidate to reach a lot of people. We miss a chance for Gary Johnson himself to become more well-known (he might be back in 2016 for the primaries — and debating in 2012 would really help him in 2016). Finally, we miss a chance for Obama and moderate-Mitt to squirm.

        Upsides: well, not many. But I can think of one, pragmatically. What happens in 2016 and 2020? Do we want the libertarian party to have a nominee, perhaps Gary Johnson again, running against the republican party nominee, perhaps Rand Paul or Jim DeMint, for the presidency? Against Hillary Clinton, almost certainly. They would be able to gang up on her in the debates, which would be good, but they would end up defeating each other in Nov’16. This is simple math. Assume the country is finally getting behind liberty as I hope will be the case, and 60% of the voters want to put a liberty-candidate in the whitehouse. 40% are democrats, still clinging to the old statist welfare plan, ready for Clinton The 2nd. Guess what? The math says Rand loses with 35%, Johnson loses again (this time getting 25% rather than 5% however), and Hillary is crowned with her 40%. See the Bull Moose party of TR.

        So, at the end of the day, I predict the RNC will keep Gary Johnson out of the prez-debate, just like they kept him out of the primaries, by tweaking the rules to fit their desire (but only if necessary). However, the good thing about that is, probably Johnson will come back into the republican party primaries in 2016, ready for bear. That way, Rand can stay in the Senate, maybe? It is a long time from now, though, so no point in speculating further. In the short run, I will tell any 2012 robopoller that Gary Johnson is da Man.

        p.s. BTW, speaking of Lingle… how about Condi Rice as CA gov?

      • donjusko says:

        Condi Rice, She’s for war, she’s for Romney. She’s for a One Word Government. She wants us to be the world’s police force. She’s clever at saying two opposing forces as part of her ideals. That only works in speeches. In reality you have to choose. She’s a cleaver diplomat but would make a terrible leader. She’s for big government and protects the obvious lies about 9/11 as part of her patriotism. Like Romney’s stance on the Patriot Act, she’s no patriot.

      • donjusko says:

        “but I *seem* to remember a certain doctor from Texas won the popvote on the big island this year, got 15% of the first-ballot nominee votes from Hawaii, and who-knows-how-many stealth delegates.”

        Here’s the corruption.. Not only did Ron Paul win the Big Island, he won Maui, I was there when the votes were counted. The Maui News had Romney’s picture on that Sunday’s front page and not a word about Ron Paul. He won Kauai also, but you didn’t hear that either.

        We the people love Ron Paul for one reason, he follows the Constitution. So does Gary Johnson, we the people will follow anyone that will follow the Constitution. It’s that simple, switch the names anyway you want and you will still come up with a winner.

  164. DT says:

    Post Paul?

    We can be hopeful that the Liberty Movement will grow and be the future, but I think everything that is taking place in the World is being “orchestrated” for a much bigger event – THE FINAL EVENT. With the “Culture of Corruption” and EVIL spreading all over the World, I think what’s about to happen will usher in the One World Government and give rise to the “Supreme Leader” – the Anti-Christ.

    Because of all the Economic “turmoil” – unsustainable DEBT that can never be paid back – and warring with nations who won’t “get-in-line”, a One World Government will be portrayed as a “solution” to all the problems for the inhabitants of the Earth. And the world’s leaders will be “fooled” into thinking that it will bring about peace and stability. The One World Government with it’s One World Army and the One World Currency will bring “false peace” and stability for a short while, but it will be inevitably be followed by a Great Tribulation.

    The most likely cause to bring about this Great Tribulation would be a worldwide “crisis” which will create a worldwide “panic”. This could be something like a natural disaster, food shortages, pestilences, wars, terrorist attacks, or financial collapse. One or more of these things will be “deliberately” engineered by people wanting to “take over” the world so they can gain power and control for the Anti-Christ. Thus, people won’t be able to “buy or sell” without having his “Mark”, RFID Chip or ID Card.

    Call this “crazy”, but does anything else make sense? The world has gone “completely mad” where Wrong is Right – and Right is Wrong. And the enslaved masses of people in the world have been “lulled” into thinking that all this madness is normal. We’re reaching the breaking point – so keep looking up – for your redemption draweth nigh. (Luke 21:25 – 21:36)

  165. Reblogged this on PaulJohnson2012 and commented:
    I’d vote for Ron Paul 2016. But in the mean time, Doug wonders what our best options are.

  166. Opal says:

    Mr Weed,
    I don’t even pretend to know where you live but there are a bunch of states where WRITE INs will count. Pick the closest one..set up temp residency there.. register to vote and write the good Doctor’s name on the ballot. Do be sure to find out if you need his full name and address or the list of electors – depends on the state. While in that state.. CAMPAIGN your butt off! Advertize that write in’s count there.
    I’m hoping to get a few friends together to do a shared move to a neighboring state.. more bodies.. more votes.

    • ___j___ says:

      Well, this is actually not a very good idea. In many states it is illegal, in the sense that, if you try to move into the state immediately before an election, you still have to vote in the place you lived in before. Used to be a lot of that type of thing, and such tactics were a precursor to the civil war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeding_Kansas

      If you want to have a more powerful vote in the presidential election of 2016, then you can move to a swing-state in the next 18 months or so, and start spreading the message of liberty. But it has to be a permanent move, not a temporary-just-to-vote thing. If you want to do it anyways, the swing-states in 2016 will be the same as the ones this year, chances are good: FL OH and NC, plus maybe IA and VA.

      As for influencing the vote in the current election, you don’t need to move to a state, to influence the voters in that state. Send money to a liberty PAC, or to the RLC, or to individual liberty-candidates, in that state. Write a blog, or buy a banner-ad, for residents of that state. Print out some liberty-literature, jump in your vehicle, and go campaign-your-butt-off there, even (you cannot vote there but meh).

  167. heavystarch says:

    If Ron Paul is on the Utah ballot he will get my vote.
    If Ron Paul isn’t included and Gary Johnson is on the ballot – well my vote goes to Gary Johnson. He’s so very close to Ron Paul on 95% of the issues that it’s a no-brainer.

  168. Surfisher says:

    Ron Paul — the Greatest American of the 21st Century!

    Dr. Paul started the peaceful Intellectual Revolution — to save our Nation from a criminal US Government that has FINALLY declared that We, The People, are NOW considered “their Enemy” (not some rag-tag band of crazy Muslims they want us to think have a chance to cross thousands of miles of oceans in… rowboats… to INVADE US)!

    Ron Paul started it — and We, The People, will finish it!

    True Ideas never die — so eventually — Bye, bye, NWO wannabe despots (NOW, We, The People, know WHO YOU ARE…and WILL END YOU)!

    Time to start organizing to win our country back!
    ——————————————————————————

    Doug — will you advise how to do so here (or just post historical events)?

    • Surfisher says:

      My take:

      First Step:
      Do NOT vote for The Mitt

      Second Step:
      Do NOT vote for The BO

      Third Step:
      Vote your Conciseness (NEVER vote what you consider the lesser of two Evils)!

      Forth Step:
      Get Harry Reid removed from US Senate!
      ——————————————————-

      That’s just the beginning!

  169. Robert Therriault says:

    I’m going Johnson as he’s on all 50 states. it would be nice to have Ron give him a thumbs up, but really both other parties are unethical hacks. If we can get rid of this stupid 15% rule and put him in the debates at least it will make for some interesting politics. Secondly, If Gary can galvanize Ron’s supporters on both the right and left, it could be a very close 33% running race on all fronts.

  170. Surfisher says:

    Doug — no such thing as “Post Paul”…poor choice of Title on your part.

    Ron Paul’s name will be forever lasting as the last True Patriot left in office, that started a peaceful Revolution that’s just beginning to gather strength!

    • donjusko says:

      GOOD RIDDANCE He went along with not attacking Romney.
      “I write to tell you that I will not rejoin Campaign for Liberty’s staff this fall.”

      One down, two to go.

      • donjusko says:

        I don’t know how this got posted here, It was supposed to go under, “Breaking: Jesse Benton resigns from Campaign For Liberty:”

        Sunfisher, you’re right, we are all still behind Ron Paul no matter what Doug says.

  171. Surfisher says:

    The Mitt, orchestrated the takeover of the GOP to assure his nomination without a glitch!

    Thus, his atrocious actions will assure not only his demise as Pres.Candidate, but also the demise of the NOW rotten-to-the-core Republican Establishment.

    How idiotic (does the Mitt even have an INDEPENDENTLY functioning brain…?) was Romoney’s UGLINESS in achieving this (to alienate ALL free thinkers by his PERFIDY, thus assuring his own political demise, and DRAGGING what’s left of the GOP down the drain with him)!

    Democrooks should congratulate the Mitt: “Great job there sport, killing two birds with your own stoned stupidity”.
    —————————————————————-

    Write Ron Paul in — JUST vote your conscience — DO NOT reward Rmoney for his crookedness!

  172. Surfisher says:

    *Logical Repercussions After the 2012 Presidential Selection*

    (listed by the most likely outcome — note: ‘Selection’ since no longer can our votes be termed ‘Election’)
    —————————————————————————————-

    1) The BO wins — and further tries to plunge our Nation under its Socialist Programs aimed to completely destroy our Economy and Liberties. However, most of its teeth have been pulled by the Republicon wins in 2010, and some more of the same in 2012 — so, it is nearly toothless, if it wins the Selection.

    [[Remotely possible worst case scenario --- it, the BO, declares Marshall Law in the near future (under some pre-planned "catastrophe" already home-cooked by it, and its sycophantic staff), thus trying to emerge as the "Benevolent" Dictator of USA to "save US all".]]
    ————————————————————————-

    2) The Rmoney wins — this creature has stated it will support whatever its Money Donors tell it to do! Expect the International Jewish owned Central Banks and Federal Reserve to instruct IT to attack Iran IMMEDIATELY (in order to protect Israel…from a possible, in maybe 10 years, manufacturing a single crude “atomic” bomb).

    [[Viable worst case scenario --- a Rmoney win, along with the expected Republicon wins in Congress and Senate, will give the Mitt a sure boost to attack not only Iran, but Syria, and any other nation IT, the Mitt, wants, to please its Masters that Selected this creature!]]
    —————————————————————————————

    So, for ALL of you that think voting for the Lesser of Two Evils is OK — make sure you figure out which one is “LESS EVIL”!

    JUST VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE — and do not reward these creatures by acknowledging their existence!

    • Surfisher says:

      Great post — spreading it now!

    • Surfisher says:

      Write in Ron Paul is finally online!

      Vote and spread it like wildfire!

      http://writeinron2012.com/writeinBlog/our-mission/

      partial powerful info (read all):

      “…This is a WIN-WIN strategy for all voters. It is the way to address the issues of electronic election fraud. All people desire that their votes be counted. Write-in Elections achieves this by assuring a permanent, verifiable paper trail, which is lacking in the current voting system. This is through the emphasis on the use of absentee ballots, which are photocopied, along with affidavits….”

      • Jjan says:

        Thanks Surfisher for adding a little spice to it. Spread, spread spread. Let’s finish what we started.

        R3VOLUTION!!!

        For Liberty

  173. Surfisher says:

    I see the troll above is still polluting this forum….

    • Jim says:

      According to US News And World Report Ron Paul is rated as the most corrupt member of congress less than 1 day after Benton resigns.

      http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/09/12/ron-paul-one-of-the-most-corrupt-members-of-congress-report-finds

      • wes says:

        The comments at that link speak for themselves. The article’s author even resigned from the Washington Post over ‘Significant Ethical Lapse’.

      • mat says:

        U are a disinformation agent or a Marxist communist pigI I choose both. I hope you are with the sheep during the time of collection.

      • Jim says:

        According to the authors facebook she is still working at the Post, although the author is irrelevant since the report EXISTS and can be read here:

        http://www.crewsmostcorrupt.org/mostcorrupt/entry/ron-paul

        Some excerpts:
        “Over the course of a decade, the Texas Republican routinely billed his member’s representational allowance for travel receipts while receiving reimbursements in identical amounts from either his campaign or one of a handful of libertarian nonprofits, including one where the mother-in-law of one of his daughters was treasurer. After an audit, one group found that Rep. Paul owed a $20,000 refund for double-billed expenses.
        Potential Violations

        Conversion of Federal Property

        Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins or knowingly converts to his use any “record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States or of any department or agency thereof” commits the crime of conversion.25 By billing travel to his member representational allowance after the same travel already was reimbursed by the Liberty Committee, Rep. Paul may have committed the crime of conversion.

        False Statements

        Federal law prohibits members of Congress from making “any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation”26 on “a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch.”27 Committee on House Administration regulations require members to certify and document all expenses before funds may be dispersed from the member representational allowance.28 Further, the Supreme Court has ruled that the False Statements Act applies to false statements, writings, or other representations made to a disbursing officer of the U.S. House of Representatives.29 If Rep. Paul certified vouchers for expenses for which he was otherwise reimbursed, he may have made a false statement. False Claims Federal law prohibits anyone from knowingly presenting a false, fictitious or fraudulent claim to any person or officer in the civil, military, or naval service of the United States, or any department or agency thereof.30 According to the House Ethics Manual, fraudulently submitting vouchers to be disbursed from the members’ representational allowance may violate this statute.31 If Rep. Paul knowingly presented a false claim to a disbursing officer for an expense for which he was otherwise reimbursed, he may have made a false claim against the United States.

        Conduct Not Reflecting Creditably on the House

        House Rule 23 requires all members of the House to conduct themselves “at all times in a manner that reflects creditably on the House.”32 This ethics standard is considered to be “the most comprehensive provision” of the code.33 When this section was first adopted, the Select Committee on Standards of Official Conduct of the 90th Congress noted it was included within the Code to deal with “flagrant” violations of the law that reflect on “Congress as a whole,” and that might otherwise go unpunished.34 This rule has been relied on by the committee in numerous prior cases in which the committee found unethical conduct including: the failure to report campaign contributions,35 making false statements to the committee,36 criminal convictions for bribery,37 or accepting illegal gratuities,38 and accepting gifts from persons with interest in legislation in violation of the gift rule.39 If Rep. Paul was reimbursed with taxpayer funds for expenses for which he already had been reimbursed by others, he engaged in conduct that does not reflect creditably on the House.

    • Surfisher says:

      JIM = tex2 (previously banned here).

      Best to ignore this creature — replying to it DIRECTLY only feeds the Troll….

  174. donjusko says:

    Jesse Benton resigns from Campaign For Liberty:
    Good!

  175. aurelbarber says:

    Mr.Weed,
    the ideea behind WRITE-IN Dr.Paul in every State is, i think, the only one to CHECK OUT the popularity of the FREEDOMS MOVEMENT in America and the impact in other Countrys. I know that its easy to talk, like me, but i”ve already fought a war of attricion without hope. I”m not talking from books or films, but from my expierence. You are now the only one in command of uniting ALL THE FRACTIONS INTO ONE:
    LIBERTY MOVEMENT. Pickets in every electionsprecint to check the PAPER BALLOTS. Dr.Paul cannot ride away with his cowgirl Carol, we need him to speak the truth further, till the END OF NWO, i hope this end will come SOON, maybe in November!
    Sincerly yours
    aurel barber

  176. Surfisher says:

    ‘Jim’ — the troll — (previously banned from posting here as “tex2″) pollutes this forum again with its vitriol.

    Ignore this PERNICIOUS shill— do not reply to it.
    ————————————————————————————

    In case you forgot, this subhuman, like the Bilderberg Gang, wants to see Ron Paul dead:

    (JIM says: July 9, 2012 at 8:07 am “….The good doctor looked really feeble in that last message to the faithful. … Vegas odds say he (Ron Paul) DOESN’T LIVE to see Tampa.”)

  177. donjusko says:

    It doesn’t sound like Tex2, but just in case here’s Tex2′s email address. Tex2 is: TROLL ON DOUG WEAD’S BLOG
    Scott Johnson

  178. donjusko says:

    This blog doesn’t accept the (more-than & less-then angle brackets)

  179. donjusko says:

    Just to let you know because this sounds fishy to me, Michele Bachmann’s and Rand Paul’s sites won’t accept contributions today. Michelle’s Godfather Politics won’t play her recorded audio. These people need our support and we can’t tell we are on their side.

  180. Surfisher says:

    Here is the solution for our troubles to be over:

    Bring the Troops Home, stop all undeclared Wars and Foreign Aid (Israel can protect itself), shut down the alphabet soup of unconstitutional Government Agencies that have sprung up (like the TSA and many more), End the Federal Reserve and peg the US Dollar to its original Gold Standard.

  181. donjusko says:

    Well put Surfisher. Do you agree with all of this Jim? Will you add some more issues?

    • Surfisher says:

      donjusko — looks like the Ron Paul Fan Site is under attack by Mitt’s cyber goons, again!

      Try and go there — http://www.ronpaul.com — and you get nothing but waiting to load ONLY!

      Since the INFO to WRITE Ron Paul IN was posted there — http://writeinron2012.com/writeinBlog/our-mission/ — Rmoney’s Team worried their master won’t win, are pursuing all venues, to shut Ron Paul down, like they did at their OWNED Tampa Convention!

    • Surfisher says:

      donjusko — looks like the Ron Paul Fan Site is under attack by Mitt’s cyber goons, again!

      Try and go there — http://www.ronpaul.com — and you get nothing but waiting to load ONLY!

      Since the INFO to WRITE Ron Paul IN was posted there — Rmoney’s Team worried that their master won’t win, are pursuing all venues, to shut Ron Paul down, like they did at their OWNED Tampa Convention!

  182. donjusko says:

    The House of Representatives just voted 329-91 to pass yet another continuing resolution, funding the government for another six months. Only 91 lawmakers were willing to vote on principle and say enough is enough!
    Jim, will you get the link to expose the Socialist Congressmen?

    • Surfisher says:

      Write in Ron Paul for 2012 President is finally online!

      Vote and spread it like wildfire!

      http://writeinron2012.com/writeinBlog/our-mission/

      partial powerful info (read all):

      “…This is a WIN-WIN strategy for all voters. It is the way to address the issues of electronic election fraud. All people desire that their votes be counted. Write-in Elections achieves this by assuring a permanent, verifiable paper trail, which is lacking in the current voting system. This is through the emphasis on the use of absentee ballots, which are photocopied, along with affidavits….”

      • donjusko says:

        Thanks for the reminder Surfisher, I picked one up today. I haven’t decided on a vote for Johnson or Ron Paul yet. Both are good choices but I want to see which way most people want to do it.

  183. Jjan says:

    My post on HuffPo was moderated out.

    I said it’s a dereliction of duty to elect Romney after his demonstrated lying and cheating in the primary’s.

    He has demonstrated only an unfitness to be the leader of a free people.

    Guess HuffPo mods disagree.

    • Surfisher says:

      Jjan — posting the truth is not allowed…in our Brave New World.

      (great book by Aldous Huxley… written in 1931)

    • donjusko says:

      Huffington Post is not for liberty and the Constitution, they are very liberal. Watch them, keep your friends closer but keep your enemies closer.

  184. Jim says:

    “Rep. Paul has continually called on Congress to audit the Federal Reserve, but apparently somebody needs to take a closer look at his financial records,” CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan said in a statement issued upon the release of the report. “It’s absurd that Rep. Paul was able to engage in this scheme for so long without anyone noticing. The House should conduct a FULL INVESTIGATION to ensure TAXPAYERS are compensated for EVERY DOLLAR HE MISAPPROPRIATED.”

    President of the Liberty Committee David James said his organization reimbursed Paul for trips made to give speeches or attend events in which the congressman supported the committee, some of which Paul made to Washington while congress was not in session. ….
    However, according to an audit CONDUCTED BY THE Liberty Committee, 60 percent of the travel expenses Paul charged to the organization were for trips made between Washington D.C. and his home district for official business, totaling $20,000 in expenses that are legally obligated to come out of his congressional budget, James said.

    James maintains that Paul’s transgression is two-fold, alleging that the congressman used private funding for official business and received dual reimbursements for dozens of trips.

    “For a gentleman that is trying to have the Fed audited and is calling for government accountability, this would certainly be Ron’s opportunity to live up to that and we’re very disappointed that he is choosing not to,” James said. “His response is just as upsetting as the double billing itself.”

    Paul’s office declined to comment on the congressman’s inclusion on the list.

    Read more: http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/article/Group-names-Ron-Paul-one-of-Most-Corrupt-list-3863199.php#ixzz26OzrB1Yz

    • Surfisher says:

      Ignore the above subhuman creature.

      ‘Jim’ — the troll — (previously banned from posting here as “tex2″) pollutes this forum again with its vitriol.

      Ignore this PERNICIOUS shill— do not reply to it.
      ————————————————————————————

      In case you forgot, this subhuman, like the Bilderberg Gang, wants to see Ron Paul dead:

      (JIM says: July 9, 2012 at 8:07 am “….The good doctor looked really feeble in that last message to the faithful. … Vegas odds say he (Ron Paul) DOESN’T LIVE to see Tampa.”)

  185. Surfisher says:

    Federal Reserve quietly begins QE3 amid Mid-East turmoil today!

    As a little jolt to the stock market, the Federal Reserve today announced another round of quantitative easing (printing MORE money OUT OF THIN AIR) in an effort to reverse the rise in unemployment and encourage more home buying. This announcement arrives as the violence is still unfolding in Egypt and Libya among other Middle Eastern countries.

    • Surfisher says:

      END the Federal Reserve — or let us just belly up to the International Banksters controlling them, and declare our Nation officially OWNED!

    • donjusko says:

      Do you know how much this 6 month extension QE3 is going to add to the debt? $240,000,000. A quarter of a trillion dollars of debt ridden fiat money. Our GNP is only $15,000,000, 15 trillion and we are already 17 trillion in debt.

      The Federal Reserve said it will expand its holdings of long-term securities with open-ended purchases of $40 billion of mortgage debt a month in a third round of quantitative easing. What they have done in the last six months failed.

      Here’s how the central banks do it. Quantitative easing (QE) is an unconventional monetary policy used by central banks to stimulate the national economy when conventional monetary policy has become ineffective. A central bank implements quantitative easing by buying financial assets from commercial banks and other private institutions with newly created money. This is distinguished from the more usual policy of buying or selling government bonds to keep market interest rates at a specified target value. Quantitative easing increases the excess reserves of the banks, and raises the prices of the financial assets bought.

      The long term effect inflates our dollar and makes it worth less while increasing our debt driving us farther into bankruptcy.
      Jim has it right, connecting the new money to making wars in the Mid-East. 33% of our GDP goes to the military industrial complex.

  186. Jim says:

    “The House should conduct a FULL INVESTIGATION to ensure TAXPAYERS are compensated for EVERY DOLLAR HE MISAPPROPRIATED.
    …The Liberty Committee still is deliberating whether or not to press charges.”

    http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/article/Group-names-Ron-Paul-one-of-Most-Corrupt-list-3863199.php

    No wonder why Jesse Benton jumped ship.It’s sinking! Doug will be next.

  187. Surfisher says:

    Ignore the subhuman creature posting its hatred above.

    ‘Jim’ — the troll — (previously banned from posting here as “tex2″) pollutes this forum again with its vitriol.

    Ignore this PERNICIOUS shill— do not reply to it.
    ————————————————————————————

    In case you forgot, this subhuman, like the Bilderberg Gang, wants to see Ron Paul dead:

    (JIM says: July 9, 2012 at 8:07 am “….The good doctor looked really feeble in that last message to the faithful. … Vegas odds say he (Ron Paul) DOESN’T LIVE to see Tampa.”)

  188. Surfisher says:

    I’ll repost all the valid posts later — once the subhuman shill is done polluting this forum until it gets banned again (since that’s it’s only goal — paid 30 pieces of silver to post garbage and interrupter all posts of merit).

    • Jim says:

      Now your endless cutting and pasting of the same things over and over is “posts of merit?” My aren’t we a bit vain? Get a clue. It;s over. Take a look at

      http://www.ronpaul2012.com/

      Even Dear Leader has called it quits. His campaign members are seeking employment elsewhere.

      • ___j___ says:

        Well, you are still flaming each other, but at least you are no longer screaming at each other in all caps. Good progress! But not enough, because I want us all working together towards liberty, not flaming.

        Surfisher, pay attention, Jim is not being a troll, mostly. He’s pointing out a serious problem, which is that the mainstream media has gone from blacking out any mention of Ron Paul, to trying to sully his name. Remember the PR-atomic-bomb that Mitt threatened? Now we are getting it anyways, even though the nomination is over, perhaps? The “journalist” who posted the story about Ron Paul being most-corrupt-ever was disciplined fiscally as being biased and a liar, if memory serves, but most people don’t follow the backtrail.

        Jim, usually *you* follow the backtrail, come on now. Do you really believe that RP is a secret racist, just because somebody he indirectly hired once was, or some talking pundit says he is? (Are you sure your dentist has NEVER said anything racist, and if you are NOT sure, why are you supporting them with your teeth-payments? Just firing your dentist AFTER you find out what they said isn’t enough?) Ron Paul believes in liberty and justice for all, my friend. Did you not see his testimonial video from the black guy who was married to a white woman, and only Dr Paul helped? Sheesh. Media attack zero, ignore Ron Paul. Media attack two, pretend Ron Paul is a loon (see the video Doug Wead posted here back in April or thereabouts). Media attack three, paint Ron Paul as a hypocrite, since although he is against welfare, he gets a Social Security cheque (umm… if the govt forces you to pay them for years … and “offers” you some small percentage of your own money back … you should reject your own money? Ayn Rand covered this, long ago.) Media attack four, pretend Ron Paul is secretly corrupt, taking earmarks (Santorum was laughed off the stage when he tried this … but who told him to try it?) Media attack five, pretend Ron Paul is the most-corrupt-member-of-congress-ever. Pfft.

        As for whether it is “over” or not, well, that would depend on which specific thing your pronoun is referring to. The fight to get Ron Paul nominated in Tampa is over. Billion to one odds say that he will keep his word, and not run third-party in 2012. Ten to one he will not run in 2016 either. But just because our very dear leader, which I say with no sarcasm whatsoever, was unable to secure the presidency this time does not by any stretch of the imagination mean the liberty-movement is over. Viva r3V0Jution! There are other liberty-candidates on the ballot in November, such as Kurt Bills in MN. There will be another liberty-candidate (or maybe three of them with luck) in the primary race during 2016, and 2020, and so on. Only a five-km asteroid strike that wipes out land-based organic lifeforms on the planet can stop us.

        We will win. But we must all hang together, or we will hang separately.

        In case the Ben Franklin quote is too subtle: SURFISHER. Quit being a name-caller. Jim is not a troll — stand down. Everyone here ought to defend to the death the right to speak freely. JIM: think before you post — clearly you can. Why be acidic, purges do not help liberty. Freedom of speech carries implicit responsibility to speak wisely and fairly — or else we turn into that which we are trying to get rid of.

        Here’s a tip: if you feel angry, go outside and walk it off, rather than venting through the internet. *After* you have lost your anger, knock on some doors, and spread the message of liberty. Then, if you still have something constructive and liberty-advancing to post…

  189. Surfisher says:

    Ignore the subhuman JIM creature posting its hatred to all that’s good.

    ‘Jim’ — the troll — (previously banned from posting here as “tex2″) pollutes this forum again with its vitriol.

    Ignore this PERNICIOUS shill— do not reply to it.
    ————————————————————————————

    In case you forgot, this subhuman, like the Bilderberg Gang, wants to see Ron Paul dead:

    (JIM says: July 9, 2012 at 8:07 am “….The good doctor looked really feeble in that last message to the faithful. … Vegas odds say he (Ron Paul) DOESN’T LIVE to see Tampa.”)

  190. Surfisher says:

    reposting the meritorious posts (since the subhuman shill polluted this forum again):

    Jjan says:
    September 14, 2012 at 12:23 am

    My post on HuffPo was moderated out.

    I said it’s a dereliction of duty to elect Romney after his demonstrated lying and cheating in the primary’s.

    He has demonstrated only an unfitness to be the leader of a free people.

    Guess HuffPo mods disagree.

    • Surfisher says:

      donjusko says:
      September 14, 2012 at 12:52 am

      Huffington Post is not for liberty and the Constitution, they are very liberal. Watch them, keep your friends closer but keep your enemies closer.

  191. Surfisher says:

    Surfisher says:
    September 13, 2012 at 11:28 pm

    Here is the solution for our troubles to be over:

    Bring the Troops Home, stop all undeclared Wars and Foreign Aid (Israel can protect itself), shut down the alphabet soup of unconstitutional Government Agencies that have sprung up (like the TSA and many more), End the Federal Reserve and peg the US Dollar to its original Gold Standard.

  192. Surfisher says:

    donjusko says:
    September 14, 2012 at 12:18 am

    The House of Representatives just voted 329-91 to pass yet another continuing resolution, funding the government for another six months. Only 91 lawmakers were willing to vote on principle and say enough is enough!
    Jim, will you get the link to expose the Socialist Congressmen?

    • Surfisher says:

      Write in Ron Paul for 2012 President is finally online!

      Vote and spread it like wildfire!

      http://writeinron2012.com/writeinBlog/our-mission/

      partial powerful info (read all):

      “…This is a WIN-WIN strategy for all voters. It is the way to address the issues of electronic election fraud. All people desire that their votes be counted. Write-in Elections achieves this by assuring a permanent, verifiable paper trail, which is lacking in the current voting system. This is through the emphasis on the use of absentee ballots, which are photocopied, along with affidavits….”

      • Surfisher says:

        donjusko says:
        September 14, 2012 at 1:42 am

        Thanks for the reminder Surfisher, I picked one up today. I haven’t decided on a vote for Johnson or Ron Paul yet. Both are good choices but I want to see which way most people want to do it.

      • ___j___ says:

        surfisher, see my Ben Franklin post above. (And by the way, you are filling up my email inbox with this misguided anger-motivated rehashing business of yours — some of us have the post monitored so we can see *new* comments. Maybe you should back off, and admit you are not the moderator of Doug Wead’s blog? Complain to him directly if you feel that Jim is a troll. But as explained above by Ben Franklin, you are wrong on that count. Quit this now please.)

  193. donjusko says:

    It looks like Jim blew it. He, like the link he posted has only accusations. Beaumontenterprise is left wing to be sure.

    “The former presidential candidate, who is set to retire at the end of the year, is one of 13 Republicans and seven Democrats named to this year’s Most Corrupt Members of Congress list.” The “Democrats” above has a link to another of their pages, they are for more war, more bailouts, more gov’t debt. I won’t believe anything from Beaumontenterprise, not that I ever heard of them before.

    Tax2 was a dumb one liner, Jim is a smart lefty. If Ron Paul wants any money for anything, he just has to ask. He can get all the money we have. I don’t believe Paul ever did anything wrong, audit the Fed and stop these unconstitutional wars. They are trying to take our eye off the ball.

    • Surfisher says:

      Mitt on Shalom Bernanke — “doing a good job”….

    • Jim says:

      CREW is by law, non-partisan. The “most corrupt” list includes lawmakers from both parties.As I mentioned to your buddy above, the writer/newspaper is irrelevant because the report exists. His financial disclosure reports are available to the public.
      It’s a true sign of butthurt when one attacks the messenger. What do you think Paul will get? 5? 10 years?

      http://www.crewsmostcorrupt.org/mostcorrupt/entry/ron-paul-report

      • ___j___ says:

        I will not disagree that there is a law which says that some organization is bipartisan. Nor that they should not BE what they say.

        But remember the preamble to the rules of the republican party? BE IT RESOLVED, That the Republican Party is the party of the open door. Ours is the party of liberty… (umm, except for pauliticians in Tampa, we don’t mind cheating our own rules to win in such cases….)

        Jim, have you actually looked at the backtrail? Got the exact violations that were alleged, and decided on your own that they merit the ethical challenge? And, if so, figured out who is *directly* responsible? Until then, speculating that #1 the media report is 100% true and unbiased, #2 that the alleged violation was in fact unethical in reality rather than merely being portrayed as such for political gain, #3 that in fact Ron Paul (as opposed to somebody else!) was-or-likely-was involved directly and/or did-have-or-should-have-reasonably-had knowledge of the alleged violation, then speculating Ron Paul will be jailed is the height of viciousness. Am I getting through? This is why you are accused of being a troll, because sometimes, you act just like one. I will look into this alleged ethics violation backtrail, and I wish you would, also (think first so you can post wisely). Cf: Ben Franklin.

      • Jim says:

        -___j____ Did you do an audit of Paul’s books? I provided a link above for 2012 campaign as you asked. The Liberty Committees books can be found at the same site as can Paul’s Congressional disclosure forms. While the Ron Paul status quo always jumps on the ‘mean media” bandwagon any time something negative is reported about him (which is why pundits call the movement a cult) everything in the report can be independently verified. Have you spoken personally with Liberty Committee chairman David James?
        “President of the Liberty Committee David James said his organization reimbursed Paul for trips made to give speeches or attend events in which the congressman supported the committee, some of which Paul made to Washington while congress was not in session. ….
        However, according to an audit CONDUCTED BY THE Liberty Committee, 60 percent of the travel expenses Paul charged to the organization were for trips made between Washington D.C. and his home district for official business, totaling $20,000 in expenses that are legally obligated to come out of his congressional budget, James said.”

        How do we know Benton wasn’t involved in this? http://libertychat.com/source-jesse-benton-was-fired-from-c4l-ron-paul-is-very-upset
        I think it’s very coincidental that the report came out and 1 day later Benton quit/was fired..

      • ___j___ says:

        Yeah, I looked at the nictusa link, thanks. (Reply in full, see above.) Wouldn’t call my glancing over it an “audit”, since I only looked at the reports for one month of the campaign, and did not even make sure that the itemized numbers added up to the total, but just took them at face value, and then did some calculations to figure out approx how much the campaign staff was making (see results above), and to find whether any of the central fund monies were being sent to state-level campaigns (e.g. MN and VA).

        More importantly, those FEC reports are *not* the same thing as the campaign books — the filings list a bunch of airplane tickets being purchased, but not the person flying, nor the endpoints. It would not be possible to do an audit, from the FEC filings, as opposed to the actual campaign-books (paper ledger or computerized) with full details of what each line-item was used for, as opposed to just a total cost and a recipient ($700 to recipient Delta with HQ in Chicago, is not enough information to audit travel, since we would need to know the city of departure, the passenger[s], and the city of arrival). I am going to guess that the LibertyCommittee data has the same limits, so we prolly cannot discern anything useful about ethics from them, but I’ll see if I can find anything.

      • ___j___ says:

        I agree that there is a mean-mainstream-media meme (now *that* is fun to say) among pauliticians. And, there are plenty of utterly nasty individual journalists, raised on public school pablum, ensconced in lib leaning universities, never talking to anybody *not* drinking the liberal koolaid. Up until last December, I would have put it down to that, an unconscious bias on the part of the biased-on-average-by-upbringing folks attracted to working in the mass media. But I know believe that is incorrect, and side with Doug’s interpretation: the mass media, aka the mainstream media, is OWNED, lock stock and barrel, by the same people that hold Mitt’s leash. This isn’t a conspiracy theory, because there need be no actual meetings, no planning of *how* to make the majority of the media incredibly unfriendly to Ron Paul, because these shady characters are simply acting in their own interests (albeit their own short-sighted ultimately-self-destructive interests).

        I did some research into WaPo, because in the early presidential primary debates, and the early polling, they literally were refusing to mention the name of Ron Paul, let alone his positions. At the most, they would say “Ron Paul also schedules a rally in Arizona” or some non-comittal mouthing. Some of the WaPo journalists were worse than others, but the worst of all was the lady who was the primary full-time “conservative” blogger for WaPo at the time. (I forget her name but I can look it up if anybody cares.) She had a mathematical hatred of Dr Paul, measured in how she went out of her way to refuse to mention him, compared to her compadres at WaPo. The funniest thing was that, when she was blasting Santorum and Romney one day for not *really* being fiscal conservatives, despite their tough talk on the debate stage, she said, and I kid you not, that for a true fiscal conservative, why didn’t the republicans look to Paul? Umm, Ryan.

        At the time, I figured she was just an individual idiot, with a personal hatred of liberty (she never *ever* mentioned Gary Johnson). But now I’m reasonably convinced she was told not to mention the name of Ron Paul, just as Rand was told that, and she was moreover told to mention the name of Paul Ryan, just as with Rand.

        Anyhoo, not all journalists are bad. Ben Swann, John Stossel, sometimes Jon Stewart, and of course Judge Napolitano. There is a reporter from RT. Rachel Maddow does not seem all bad. Tons of great bloggers out there, of course — yay internet. But the idea that the mainstream media is not merely biased, but actively out to get the liberty-movement, I think is pretty much beyond debate. So no, I’m not going to agree that pundits call pauliticians a cult *because* we think the media is mean. That’s putting the cart before the horse. Pauliticans call the media mean, because they call us a cult. (Whereas, for comparison, the most rabid followers of Obama get by scot-free.)

        That does *not* mean, of course, that in this particular case the accusation is wrong. We will have to look into it. Once we do figure out the truth, I suggest we forward our research along to Swann et al

        “spoken personally with Liberty Committee chairman David James?” Nope, but his number is on the web. Let’s call him, after we figure out what questions to ask him, and see what he says.

      • ___j___ says:

        “according to an audit CONDUCTED BY THE Liberty Committee”
        Okay, where is the link to that audit? Are the numbers secret? Was it independent? What did Ron Paul say about this audit? Obviously, if they did an audit of *his* books (as opposed to FEC filings) then he had to give permission.

        “How do we know Benton wasn’t involved in this?” That’s possible, sure. But how do we know Batman wasn’t involved in this?!? How do we know the story is not just a smear? Let us investigate the facts, and to how many decimal places, before we pointlessly speculate. Ok?

      • ___j___ says:

        http://www.rollcall.com/issues/57_90/Records-Show-Ron-Paul-Trips-Paid-Twice-212118-1.html

        This is when the story was first in the media, Feb 6th. The journalist “obtained/reviewed” the printed-on-paper credit-card statement of an AmEx that used to be tied to one of Ron Paul’s political organizations, that went defunct in 2001 (the org not the ccard). They matched the plane-ticket-dollar-amount numbers on the amex statement with the FEC filings, and with the various political groups that contribute to Ron Paul campaigns, and claim double-billing. They don’t mention where they “obtained” the seven-year-old ccard info. (dumpster diving all those years? a leak from a big bank? definitely sans permission)

        The accountant at the time was Lori Pyeatt, who methinks is still the 2012 campaign acctg staff, paid the ultra-low liberty-lover salary of $1k/mo for her service — she is familial-related to Ron Paul somehow, which of course the media portrays as prima facie sinister&unethical.

        When the story came out in February, Benton was the one who talked to the media about it, saying that the obvious explanation for the 8 flights where two tickets were shown is that two people flew, and that if one was Ron Paul he would have charged that to Congress (usually) and the other was a family-member or a staffer he might have charged that to his amex, or to a political organization, or whatnot. Benton also says that the detailed records from those 3-to-13-year-old plane flights were not available, or perhaps just not detailed enough to prove or disprove either way. The article-author alleges they know about 8 flights from the amex records, and uses weasel words to insinuate there are “dozens” more flights that were somewhat suspicious-looking “but the evidence in those cases is not as complete”. They give no actual numbers, dates, or links (at any time) for any of this stuff.

        Anyways, according to Benton, no taxpayer funds were misused at any time, and although there may have been unintentional double-bill instances, they were simply human error, not systematic fraud. More TBD.

      • Jim says:

        Your pretty new to this aren’t you? By “books” i mean Paul’s congressional disclosures. All members of Congress and certain key staffers MUST file financial disclosures. I nor you need “his permission” to see them. They are widely available on places like Open Secrets or Legistorm. As for Liberty Committee they are a non-profit so those records are also public (try Guidestar). But as an apologist for Benton somehow doubt even with all the data in front of you you still will be in denial and inisinuate that David is a liar (again, have you spoke to HIM?) BTW-here’s the video of Jesse quite clearly wearing body armor (watch when he turns around).

      • ___j___ says:

        No, not really new. But financials are complex, and you are misusing the terms. We have access to these reports:

        #1. FEC filings, e.g. Continental, 9999 ave Houston, 2004-06-29, Travel, 323.60 (but no passenger-name, flight-date, or cities)
        #2. COA quarterlies, which after 2009 include *very* little data, and before 2009 not much data
        #3. Quotes from articles talking *about* raw data (itself kept secret), and about business relationships amongst the parties (often vague)

        We do not have:

        #4. corporate-AmEx-ccard statement printout, ‘obtained’ & ‘reviewed’ by rollcall, for years 1999-2005 at least, w/ handwritten notes by a person in Dr Paul’s office (presumably Lori). Articles only reveal partial details about three line-items, in 2004 and 2003 and 2000. Copies of the stuff were denied to the Paul campaign by David James.

        #5. accounting ledger kept by Lori, with information on the business venture in which that ccard plays a role — only these ledgers can be truthfully called “the books” without abusing English — prolly she keeps one set of books for each of the ventures, LibertyPAC, F.R.E.E., HouseCampaign2004, HouseCampaign2006, Prez2008, Prez2012, PersonalFinanceRonPaul, PersonalFinanceLoriPyeatt, and probably many more company-files. None of the writers of any of the articles have ever seen these, and neither have we. This is what I am speaking of when I talk about the books — because these records, and only these records, *might* have the raw data necessary to figure out whether the double-billing allegation has any truth to it whatsoever.

        According to the Paul campaign, they reviewed their records for the times and transactions mentioned by James (he claims 26 alleged violations but has revealed little raw info that I have found — Benton quote characterized it as not much more than a letter demanding $20k), and also methinks for the other 26 ones that rollcall originally reported on, of which they published partial data on 3, claim five more are relatively solid, and the other 18 offer not-enough-for-conclusive-answers. Anyways, for clarity and precision, please quit calling the COA report and/or the FEC filings “the books”, because they are nowhere near as detailed as the actual ledgers. Further, sometimes the particular ledger-company-file makes a difference, so we must speak of the LibertyPAC-books and the HouseCampaign2004-books.

        #6. receipts & transaction-records, such as airline ticket stubs, the very-raw stuff that is summarized on the way into the ledgers, and then put into a filebox or maybe a shredder. Even more important than the accounting-ledgers, these receipts *would* contain most of the gory details about purchases. The ticket-stub would definitely say the name of the passenger, date, cities, price, and prolly the method of payment (last 4 of the ccard or similar). More importantly, stapled to the ticket-stub would be related ancillary data, such as the original AmEx statement (assuming that ccard was used for that purchase), travel schedule, and whether anybody else also flew that day. Maybe. Because, prior to 2005or2006, the FEC & IRS rules did *not* require retention of most of this stuff, and according to the Benton quote, the campaign simply does not have the raw receipts for the 2004 allegation

        #7. last but not least, we do not have access to the corporate databases of the airlines, gas stations, restaurants, and so on. Even without the printed (or maybe electronic) receipts mentioned in #6, we could still figure out a lot from the internal records kept by Continental, or by Texaco, or whatever. Usually they won’t just give such private records out for the asking, to you and me the random internet bloggers, but quite possibly somebody from the Paul campaign could call the airlines and ask them for flight-data tied to his frequent flyer number, or his credit card, or the other payment-methods that have been used over the years. Or not, I don’t know how far back Continental keeps their DB, or whether they would honor a digging-request even from a frequent flyer.

        So what is the point? Simply this. The data to which we *do* have access, the three flights from eight or more years ago, seems notably flimsy. Their number-one complaint was a ticket in 2004, Houston to DC, purchased May 11th on corp-AmEx-ccard, flight date Monday May 17th — congress was in session until Thurs that week according to thomas.loc.gov/home/ds — which cost $323.60 (RollCall pulled these details from the ‘obtained’ ccard printouts).

        RollCall alleges, based on public records from the COA and other public records from the FEC, that this particular airplane ticket was double-billed, with Ron Paul being reimbursed by the House (exactly how is not specified… and it matters… because sometimes the reimbursement goes direct to the airline whereas other times it might be a cheque made out to Ron Paul or a payment to AmEx or whatnot). This reimbursement#1 is perfectly normal and expected, since congress covers travel-expenses, and reimburse#1 happened on either the 21st or the 27th of May (the story is ambiguous about whether it was ten days after purchase or takeoff).

        The evidence for a second reimbursement comes from the FEC filings later that year (which themselves are an extract from the HouseCampaign2004 books kept by Lori). The particular line-item in question is a payment to Continental Airlines [aka OnePass Service Center according to the internet ... which is the frequent flyer program], at 9999 Richmond Ave in Houston, for the same dollar-amount of $323.60, paid to the airline 6/29.

        Now for the flimsy part. As was mentioned by Benton in February, the logical explanation for two reimbursements is that two people were flying that day, most likely Dr Paul (reimbursed by the house) and a campaign-staffer (reimbursed by HouseCampaign2004). The second ticket was not on the ccard-statement-printout ‘obtained’ by RollCall, because it was not purchased on that card, but with some other payment mechanism (likely to keep accounts separate for later ease-of-administration). Benton says the Paul campaign cannot *prove* this hypothetical possibility of two passengers is what actually happened, because the raw receipts for pre-2005 no longer exist, as such receipts were not required to be retained for those years. But rollcall cannot disprove it, either. They have suspicions, but only those.

        From my own analysis, even the suspicions seem quite far-fetched because of the date-discord. The flight was on May 17th, and congress reimbursed Dr Paul (or maybe paid the airline directly… in which case no ethical violation is possible even in principle … but of course RollCall does not tell us this crucial bit … and my own research is stymied because pre-2009 COA reports are not on the internet … maybe somebody in DC will walk over to the Legislative Resource Center located in B-106 Cannon House Office Building). Congress was in session from the 17th to the 20th. The house paid Dr-Paul-or-the-airline on Friday the 21st, or perhaps Thurs 27th.

        We don’t have the actual books for HouseCampaign2004, but we do have the FEC filings derived therefrom, and on 5/25 there was a payout to Continental for 299.60 and a payout to US Air for 287.10, but no other airline tickets. Why didn’t Lori pay for the ticket from the 11th? Later, there is another set of payouts in the FEC filings, which were made as of June 29th, all to Continental, with amounts 323.60 and 382.70 and 651.70 — the CREWS report also alleges that Paul was reimbursed for gas at Texaco and dinner at El Toro’s.

        But this last part just shows they are misreading and cherrypicking the data (to be kind). The payment to El Toro’s on 6/29 could *not* have been for a meal on 5/17, right? Looking at the rest of the FEC filings, there are a ton of other payouts on 6/29 that the CREWS report fails to make any mention of… such as unspecified travel expenses in Utah, two *other* airline ticket payouts, three other gasoline purchases, and some phone bills & subscriptions.

        Most importantly of all … if the AmEx card was used to pay for the allegedly-double-billed-ticket on May 11th, then would not the AmEx payouts in the FEC filings be of some interest? There was a bundle-payment to AmEx from the HouseCampaign2004 fund on 5/25 for a total of 1385.74, then another on 6/29 for 2036.55

        So, at the end of all this, we have relatively little info, and many possibilities. Maybe there were two passengers on the flight, as Benton suggests is the most obvious explanation, with different payment mechanisms. Maybe there were two *flights*, in different months (and possibly with different passengers), that happen to have been the same price … because, just say, they were both tickets from Houston to DC on Continental? The date discrepancy pretty clearly suggests this to my eyes. Maybe the reimbursement#1 from the House was paid directly to the airline, and Dr Paul cancelled his AmEx line-item, but then accidentally paid the airline a second time the following month (in which case the fraud would be Continental’s and not Dr Paul’s). Maybe the House paid Dr Paul, and then Dr Paul paid the airline via his AmEx bill as part of the $1385.74 bundle, and then accidentally paid them again in June (which once again means fraud by the airline not Paul).

        But *maybe* as the presstitute journOlists scream in their lamestream nontroversy headlines, just *maybe* …

        _ Ron Paul
        _ One Of The
        _ Most Corrupt
        _ Members Of Congress,
        _ Report Finds.

        _ by: eflock@usnews.com

        (Look at all the cool new buzzwords I learned today.)

        This smells like a smear campaign to me. I suggest we do our best to document it. Jim, if you want to prove you are not a troll, then instead of regurgitating a long list of Serious Laws which *may* have been broken *if* the allegations based on *unrevealed* datasets which were analyzed as *possibly* indicating unethical behavior that *could* have knowingly been a scam to defraud the taxpayer of a few thousand dollars … for a guy who is already a self-made millionaire in the precious metals market … who moreover is the same guy that returns five times that amount to congress every year as part of the unused portion of his annual budget … then help me dig up the backtrail, and the truth.

        Like this guy:

        http://optimiskeptic.com/2012/09/12/u-s-news-world-report-crew-blow-it-big-time/

        Who is also in the comments of the Elizabeth Flock hitpiece:

        http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/09/12/ron-paul-one-of-the-most-corrupt-members-of-congress-report-finds

      • ___j___ says:

        “Liberty Committee is non-profit so those records are also public”
        Okay, let us find them. I suggest you try this one, and then analyze.

        “inisinuate that David is a liar (again, have you spoke to HIM?)”
        Not yet. I have his number. But let us put together what we can, before we call him up. Even the most cursory look at the internet suggests that he and Ron Paul are not on friendly terms. The article links you provided show that he has a personal financial benefit coming his way, if he can prove this fraud occurred. The fact that he is asking Ron Paul to pay him $20k does not, in and of itself, indicate the guy is a liar… but even you ought to admit that he has a motive for not being forthcoming, and that according to Benton refused to give documentation of his allegations (yes yes not your best buddy … but no need to insinuate that because you dislike him that he is therefore responsible for fraud back in 2004… sigh). Let’s find *out* if David is telling the truth, or telling a half-truth, or what.

        What I am suggesting is that we find the facts, and from them, determine the truth. This should include interviewing David James, and interviewing the Paul campaign, and looking up the records as best we can (perhaps Doug Wead can call Continental for us). If you are not on board with that sort of process, and would prefer just to repost links from folks like Elizabeth, then speculate about hypothetical legal consequences to possible unethical behavior…. come on, now.

      • Jim says:

        Yes let’s get Wead in the mix , a guy who, unlike Benton, is a pariah in most political circles due to his penchant for making secret tapes of people and selling them for profit and the Paul campaign is probably the last job he will ever hold in politics (Paul is either naive or desperate to have hired him to begin with as he’s not the sort you’d turn your back on). Yeah, let’s get him involved so he can make some money under the table putting a spin on this to keep both of us happy. Great plan! (again not sure why Elizabeth keeps coming up- the CORE report exists, David James exists. Maybe you have a grudge against her for what she reported about Mittens? ).

      • ___j___ says:

        Jim, time for you to pick a side: for each little thing you put forth which is constructive, such as the side-mention of Guidant as a place to try and look up the LibertyCmte records, you have ten huge things which are simply angry-whining-bordering-on-trolling. Obviously you are clever, but why expend your energy uselessly?

        1. ‘Wead is a pariah that makes secret tapes and sells them’. (whoa he must be worse than nixon who at least had the decency to burn tapes! oh wait, no link? just bald attack assuming I take you at face value? okay, you dislike him, well, *if* you are interested in the truth about the double-billing-weasel-word-attack-allegations, then pick somebody *else* to get help from, I posted the list of all thirty campaign-staffers, any one could prolly help get us an answer from the airlines … if you *care* about getting answers, and the truth, as opposed to spinning your wheels slinging mud.)

        2. ‘so he can make some money under the table putting a spin on this’ (sure, because the Ron Paul campaign is all about spin, right? right… which leads us to your next point….)

        3. ‘Ron Paul is either naive or desperate to have hired him’ (ahhh, so now your anger-mgmt against Doug spreads to passive-aggressive. Certainly, Ron Paul is ultimately responsible for Doug being on the campaign, and to me that says Doug must be sorta decent, but to you since you disagree with Doug that means *Paul* is now an idiot in your book… sigh.)

        4. “Great plan!” And now, because you dislike Wead, and you dislike Benton, your passive-aggressive anger is spreading to me. Why not be constructive, if you disagree with me, and offer an improved plan? Or *any* sort of useful effort? Regurgitating bile does not count. I am not saying you need to spend your Saturday investigating whether this latest wildly-overblown allegation is true or not… because you can just skim what I posted to see *that*, or if you dislike me, then try the even-more-complete posting by that other guy over at http://optimiskeptic.com/2012/09/12/u-s-news-world-report-crew-blow-it-big-time/

        5. ‘not sure why Elizabeth keeps coming up’ Because, her hit-piece is clear evidence of media bias. Because, as you pointed out, she has a long history of writing hit-pieces, i.e. that Mitt is a KKK Grand Wizard. Because the comments on her hit-piece lead us directly to the investigative backtrail at optimiskeptic.com

        6. ‘the CORE report exists’ Yes, it does. Elizabeth Flock *lies* about the contents, as you surely must agree? Furthermore, my own analysis of the date-stamps of the *actual* contents, which are already disturbingly thin (3 partially public plus 48 secret alleged ones … like Harry Reid and the ‘inside source’ he never produces), shows that the CREW report is likely a smear, not serious work by careful journalists. That’s without even having their secret data! Your only argument that the whole org in general is any good, not even mentioning whether that specific individual report is any good, stems from a piece of paper which *asserts* the place is ‘fair’.

        7. ‘David James exists.’ Yes, and I would like to see what he has to say about this whole story, and whether he is willing to provide copies of the evidence he says he has, and copies of the audit-results he says he did, and copies of the raw data on which he based those results, and if he can explain the logical gaps, the gaping chasm of likelihood, and the mitigating motive-impulse. If he can, fine. As you are so keen on getting his opinion for these issues, can you post what he told you when you spoke with him? Or, are you merely *saying* he must be taken at face value before we, every single person reading this blog and those hit-pieces, have personally and individually had a deep conversation with James on the matter? Even when I talk to the guy, I’m not going to take him at face value. I’m a suspicious person by nature, so I like to dig until I hit the bedrock of truth. Jim, you strike me as also a type of person that is suspicious by nature, but instead of digging deeper, you seem content to re-post outrageously ludicrous claims… and then lash out at *them* when other people call you a troll. Prove you are not a troll: by following the backtrail, to the truth. Which means, you have to put forth some effort, and be productive, and then come back with the fish. I brought some fish to dinner — the flaw in the CREW datestamps when double-checked with the FEC filings — where is your contribution? Not asking for a miracle here.

        8. ‘Benton’ Yes, you dislike him. Yes, he probably had a flak jacket on under his suit in Tampa. Ron Paul hired bodyguards, for $75/hr, to protect him and his key staff. From insane people, whether they are occupy-dems, or mainstream-repubs trying to keep control, or lunatics in the liberty-movement that want to kill off the candidate or the staff. Do you *have* a point, besides trying to insinuate that Benton, not Ginsberg, was somehow solely to blame for the Maine dels getting cut in half, and thus sitting as guests of Iowa and friends of Texas? You saw the cheating over rule#12, so it would have made no difference if Maine dels *were* seated, anyways. Sheesh, you are full of venom for no apparent purpose! Put your anger to use, channel it constructively. Benton also tried to distance the main thrust of the national campaign from what he saw as fringe-elements like PaulFest, or simply from people like Tom Woods, who has a ton of knowledge about the philosophy of liberty, but very little nuts-and-bolts know how for winning a republican primary. The *difficult* part of getting Ron Paul elected president was to become the republican nominee, with all the obstacles of the primary-process in the way. Does this mean Benton handled those folks well? No. Does it mean he was right? Don’t know. Does it mean you hate him forever? Apparently.

        9. Since I *fail* to dislike Benton just as much as you, I am ‘an apologist’ for Benton. You are here, on this blog, because you want to purge wackos from the liberty-movement: Gilbert the freelance lawyer, Benton the campaign manager, Doug the senior advisor, Lori the accountant, me the forum commenter, and even Ron Paul the candidate, whom you refer to as ‘dear leader’ and also ‘naive/desperate’ and other crap. Look, if you want ideological purity, then the Objectivist Party will be happy to have you and your purging-urging. On the other hand, if you want to accept, because of the *math* of all first-past-the-post plurality-based voting systems, that the only way to actually win elections is by fielding insurgency-candidacies in one of the dominant two parties, then you are stuck with the repub party, as the vehicle for advancing liberty, step by step. Please grok that simple fact.

        This is *my* goal here: baby steps towards liberty, across the board, at an ever-increasing pace, until we achieve it. Is somebody like McConnell a liberty-candidate? Nope. But, fiscally solid. And, under the tutelage of Rand and Benton, promised to audit the fed. Will he break the promise, and suck Benton into the maw of the establishment, and thwart the goals of the liberty-movement in 2013? Maybe. Wait and see, before you whine about Benton the traitor. If he does turn around, then be glad in 2014. If he does not, then get organized and find a tea-party candidate to take McConnell out in 2014, just like this year we managed to replace Lugar and Hutchinson, among others. There is risk there, however. Mourdock might lose to the dem from Indiana. Snowe is gone, but she will prolly be replaced with an independent-that-caucuses-with-the-dems. Fighting McConnell has risks, since even if we win, we lose his seniority in the Senate, and whether we win *or* lose we risk a backlash from mainstream repubs, plus we spent money we maybe could have better utilized elsewhere. Fighting for liberty is a risky business, fraught with hard choices.

        Benton’s choice seems wrong to me, because I don’t trust McConnell to follow through on his promises, but I’ll be quite happy if I’m proven wrong. And, I’ll wait and see, not whine. The point is, will *anything* make you happy, Jim, short of being YHWH, able to pick & choose every liberty-movement participant?

        10. Hey, it turns out there were only *nine* vitriolic things you said in your last post, and just one post before that one, you said one good thing. Make your next post a good one, and I’ll be satisfied that you are trying, and I’ll be willing to keep trying as well. But if your next reply is full of complaints and sniping and flaming, with no useful interesting helpful constructive portions to speak of….

      • donjusko says:

        I really like the way you write j, clear and through. That was an excellent job of journilism proving Ron Paul was innocent. Your link was also a great bit of writing by Zachariah Wiedeman. He tore CREW, Roll Call, Jonathan Strong and Elizabeth Flock to pieces for their yellow journalism.

      • Jim says:

        Thanks for the link ____j___ Nothing says unbiased than the word press musings of Illinois “Stump for Ron Paul” Grassroots Coordinator Zachariah Wiedeman

        http://www.dailypaul.com/comment/2064198

        (a 4 year member of Daily Paul btw).

        http://www.dailypaul.com/user/5339). Maybe we should go back to Wead …even tho he’s obviously biased due to his employment with the Paul Campaign at least he has a small shred bit more credibility than a pimply faced kid in Illinois.
        Thanks for the laughs tho…it made my night!
        (btw you are the one claiming Paul’s innocence-so technically it’s your responsibility to provide evidence clearing his name by way of actual financial documentation).

      • Jim says:

        Thanks for the link ____j___ Nothing says unbiased than the word press musings of Illinois “Stump for Ron Paul” Grassroots Coordinator Zachariah Wiedeman

        http://www.dailypaul.com/comment/2064198

        (a 4 year member of Daily Paul btw).

        Maybe we should go back to Wead …even tho he’s obviously biased due to his employment with the Paul Campaign at least he has a small shred bit more credibility than a pimply faced kid in Illinois.
        Thanks for the laughs tho…it made my night!
        (btw you are the one claiming Paul’s innocence-so technically it’s your responsibility to provide evidence clearing his name by way of actual financial documentation).

      • ___j___ says:

        Thanks Don, but I have not proved that Ron Paul is innocent, nor is it likely that I will ever be able to. In fact, most likely neither can Ron Paul, because the necessary proof, the detailed receipts of ticket-stubs and logistics-schedules, was in the dumpster years ago. (After 2006 there are some new FEC rules in place which require keeping those base raw records around longer.)

        What I have proven is that the CREW report, the basis for many of the wild allegations, is pretty obviously cherrypicking from the slimmest of datasets, without any regard to either likelihood of their allegations being true, nor even internally self-consistent with themselves, and then revealing only that which they believe is most damning. They used data from before the new FEC retention rules, likely on purpose. They will not give out their alleged evidence, nor reveal where they got it. They have a vested partisan interest in the matter, despite what Jim claims. Ditto for the David James guy, in terms of revealing his attacks, and having a financial motive. The journalists involved in creating the hyperbolic headlines are either compromised by their paychecks (working for the head of the Bailout Caucus), or by earlier instances of unethical conduct (saying Mitt loves the KKK), or both.

        But none of that *proves* Ron Paul is innocent. That is on purpose. That is the nature of a smear campaign — you make allegations, which assassinate the *perceived* character of the target. For instance, I cannot prove that Ron Paul did not secretly murder hundreds of innocent puppies in his basement in satanic rituals. But I can write an article, claiming that in 1983 there was a check-stub with id#666 from the deputy press secretary of the Ron Paul campaign, with the memo field saying “pet supplies” and signed by Ron Paul himself. Can he prove that he did not write that cheque? Can he prove that he did not intend to sacrifice an adorable puppy that was harming nobody to satan the prince of darkness, and purposely used id#666 for his purchase at walmart that day, which *may* have included chalk to draw a pentagram, and *possibly* he also purchased a butcher knife?

        The reason we need to care about this sort of insanity, in the post-Ron-Paul forum comments, is because I am becoming convinced it will not be getting better. Somebody is pushing these stories, harder than ever. Doug claims that the Romney campaign threatened them with PR-atomic-bomb treatment just before the Michigan primary, which was at the end of February. The primary in Maine, held Feb 4th-11th, was quite likely (in my opinion and with some evidence) decided illegally, officially Romney barely beat Paul by a hair. The first rollcall story, about the alleged double-billing was released on Feb 6th. The next time rollcall released a story was mid-May, when Paul officially stopped active campaigning. The most recent flurry of stories, which are repeats of the same allegations only with more venom, seem to make no sense … unless you posit revenge by Mitt … or, more likely to my mind, unless you posit that Mitt’s leash-handlers are willing to pay cash for these hit-pieces, knowing that Mitt will get the blame. (Maybe they’ve given up on his winning. But since they handle Obama leashes too, they don’t care. But since Ron Paul has no leash….)

        I’d like to find out who is pushing for these hit-pieces. I’d like to find out whether or not there are any leash-handlers, and if so, who. Because I don’t think this’ll be over after November, or in 2016 either. We have video proof that Boehner obeys a leash-handler. But that’s just intra-party political infighting. Who is the handler behind Flock? Call me a conspiracy theorist, fine, but after seeing that teleprompter in Tampa, I’m getting a wee bit jumpy. Yellow journalism is one thing. But this is something different.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism

        The main point is to sensationalize headlines to drive up circulation. But if *that* was all that was happening, then everybody in the country would know Ron Paul’s name. Because no other candidate in the televised republican debates was as easy to sensationalize as Ron Paul. Paul says he doesn’t care if Iran nukes Israel, let them pay for their own defense! Paul says to *eliminate* the IRS! Paul says the best way to regulate medical marijuana is to legalize heroin yesterday (Penn Gillette)! Ron Paul says Obama wastes trillions every year, just like Bush The Second only for worse reasons!

        If my newspaper was having trouble competing with the internet, that is *exactly* the kind of story I would have, in garish color, on the front page, begging people to read me. Then, in the actual articles, I would have serious reporting only, solid facts and then insightful analysis. But instead, we get none of that. Why? My hunch is that this is not yellow journalism, but a controlled press. Whom, pray tell, are the controllers? Inquiring minds wanna know.

      • ___j___ says:

        Yes, I agree that Zach might be biased. And he clearly disclosed his former connection to the Paul’08 campaign, and his current interest in the Johson’12 campaign, and his disagreements with Paul on certain issues. What is clear as a bell is that *nobody* is paying Zach to say what he says, nor ordering him to assassinate a political figure.

        I was pointing out that *you* have less credibility than the pimply faced kid from Illinois (sorry Zach if you are reading this… I’m just quoting the usual venomous personal attacks from Jim). You failed to provide any constructive useful info in your post, and went way past #10 in terms of your antagonistic and pointless attacks.

        But here is where you picked your side, once and for all: “(btw you are the one claiming Paul’s innocence-so technically it’s your responsibility to provide evidence clearing his name by way of actual financial documentation)”

        You are far too clever to believe that. Innocent until proven guilty is the way justice works. Making wild un-dis-provable claims is the way smear campaigns work. The *point* of only making hard allegations about transactions from 2004 and earlier is that financial documents from that era are in the dumpster now. For the smear tactician, once you have an un-dis-provable claim, you enlarge that as much as you think your gullible audience will believe, and then never give out the raw numbers. Bad journalism and bad science are similar. It’s my responsibility, as a supporter of the liberty-movement, and all that is good and right in this world, to seek the truth, and face it boldly. Therefore, I am not claiming Ron Paul is innocent. I am claiming that if you want to attack him, then you need to show evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that malfeasance took place.

        I now consider you a capital-T-troll as well. If at any time in the future, you post three times in a row, with only useful constructive things, and not yellow-journalist smear headlines plus associated cherrypicked quotes, intermixed with personal attacks, then I’ll change my mind. Until then.

      • Jim says:

        Please point out where it says Doug’s blog is a Ron Paul fan forum. Fact is Doug is welcome to other viewpoints and is quite aware of my presence here. It’s the failure of some in the Liberty movements ability to listen to other viewpoints without crying troll (this happens regularly on Paul fanboy sites as well) that is and will continue to be it’s biggest handicap in growing beyond being a fringe philosophy. You don’t win friends by name calling or by putting your fingers in your ears. Hopefully in time you will understand this. I have peers my age (mid 60′s) who unfortunately never do and therefore never accomplish much in the political arena. Yet I have met kids who do understand this and go on to great things (one became a very beloved mayor of his town). You seem to be somewhere in the middle. Closing doors will accomplish very little.

      • Rhonda says:

        Ironically several weeks ago I asked Jim a question three times. He seemed to deliberately not answer me. Since he was already talking to me, the continuation of talking back to him was no more worth it to me since his lack of answering me tempted my impression of him to go in the troll direction. Even so, this statement by him is one that I have to agree with fully. Of course him not answering me three times and my stoppage of chatting with him because of it is a strong indication of my realization that it is almost sad that what he says in this comment of his about too many Ron Paul supporters immediately jumping on virtually anyone who disagrees with them and then jumping on that person with a labeling of being a troll most likely is noticed by others also. Of course there are ones who attempt to explain things to the “troll” and to those explainers, the “troll” is not seen as a troll, but those people are few. It was this way four years ago also which at least indicates that the Ron Paul supporters, if not the liberty movement people as a whole, have something in common.

        Got my peace out,
        Rhonda
        September 23, 2012/Sunday

      • ___j___ says:

        To Jim, but more especially, to other folks who may read this in the future, whether next week or from a galaxy far far away:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet) Person who willfully disrupts discourse, creating controversy via provocative / inflammatory / extraneous / off-topic posts. The intent is to get attention (Flock vs world), to provoke others into emotion-driven responses (Jim vs Surfisher), or simple trouble-making (CommuniTree). Most trolls attempt to pass as legitimate participants that share the group’s common interests, but this is a deception, with an ulterior motive. The most common kind of troll is the junior-high trouble-maker, out to get their kicks by starting fights, disrupting communal trust, or provoking anger/disgust.

        Less common is the concern-troll, often found in a political context, who seek out groups *opposed* to their ideas, then post false-flag ‘concerns’ about the views and/or members. Example: in 2006, a republican campaign-staffer was caught being a concern-troll on various websites of the democrat opponent, posting that he was ‘concerned’ that the repub was unbeatable, and therefore wasn’t donating to the dem just a waste of money, and volunteering for the dem just a waste of time. Arguably, the political-concern-troll is much older: in the 1960s they were called do-nothings, who claimed to be in favor of X, but discouraged any action to achieve X, and always did nothing themselves. Nowadays, concern-trolls are not simply do-nothings: they still discourage all sensible actions, but they also encourage foolish actions (aka give poisoned-apple-advice). In extreme cases, the troll is acting as a saboteur, with the goal of spreading fear/uncertainty/doubt, destroying the target group by forcing them to put up troll-defenses. Potential new entrants to the group will see much flaming and disruption, plus will automatically be under suspicion of being troll-sock-puppets; new users give up and leave (the movement not just the blog-forum).

        During the 2012 campaign, a staffer from the Romney campaign was caught in the Maine caucus, dressed up in a Ron Paul shirt, seeking out actual Ron Paul supporters, then handing out a slate which was typographically identical to the true Ron Paul slate, but with names of Romney-supporters. Unknown whether his superiors ordered him to do this, or merely turned a blind eye to his shirt. There was a similar attempt in NV, by a different person; it is unknown whether they were a paid saboteur, or were acting alone.

        ‘Jim’ claims he is a supporter of liberty, but that he is not a Ron Paul fan. Fine, as far as it goes — many people support liberty, but would not pick Ron Paul as their favorite champion, such as people that have always preferred Gary Johnson, or Virgil Goode, or somesuch. But what other evidence do we have on ‘Jim’? He is concerned that Ron Paul is too old and feeble, plus concerned that he will die before November. He is concerned that Ron Paul is a cult leader, and concerned that Ron Paul fans are all cultists. He is concerned that Ron Paul is a violent revolutionary, and concerned that Ron Paul fans are all murderous fiends. He is concerned that Ron Paul will be banned from campuses, due to his “spewing extremist rhetoric”. He is concerned that Ron Paul is secretly just a money-grubbing con artist, and the same for the entire campaign staff.

        He is concerned that Mitt will win the nomination anyways, and therefore concerned that donations to Ron Paul are a waste of money (cf Tad Furtado). He is concerned that campaign manager Benton may have been fired, and concerned that he allegedly stole donor-lists. He is concerned that senior campaign advisor Doud Wead is paid $46/hr, when the median idiot is only paid $13/hr, and he is concerned that this is blood-money sent in by homicidal supporters. He is concerned the FEC will investigate the Ron Paul campaign for fraud, and offers the poison-apple advice that Ron Paul supporters should worry about that, instead of worry about the wars and the Fed. He is concerned that Ron Paul made some jokes on the Jay Leno show, because how can anybody make jokes when people are suffering from lack of free medical care from their government. He is concerned that the media blackout will be replace with a media character-assassination, and constantly posts links to their worst hit-pieces as evidence of his concerns.

        He is concerned that delegates that voted for Ron Paul will suffer at the hands of the mainstream-establishment-republicans when they return to their home states. He is concerned that legal challenges to RNC cheating will not work because the lawyers which support Ron Paul are not evil enough. He is concerned that various court precedents will make it difficult to challenge the known-to-be-evil-enough lawyers behind the Romney campaign and the RNC. He is concerned that the Ron Paul campaign staff might sometimes have made bad decisions. He is concerned that doing anything to fight corruption at the national level in the RNC will make the current rulers of the RNC unhappy. He is concerned that establishment republicans who currently run the Republican Party will not be happy if we take over. He is concerned that Ron Paul supporters are fascists who hate free speech (his own vitriol of course). He is concerned that Doug Wead is posting under a pseudonym to defend himself against Jim’s constant attacks. He is oh so very concerned that the heads of the campaign strategy were not personally doing grunt-work in every single state simultaneously. He is concerned that Ron Paul campaign staff will go on to work for other Republicans now, and he is concerned that their new bosses will not be as pure as Ron Paul (tho of course Jim is no fan of even Ron Paul… sigh). He is also very concerned their new bosses will pay them money, as if this was a capitalist society.

        He is concerned that Ron Paul is the most corrupt member of congress, and has lamestream presstitute journOlist nontroversy links to ‘prove’ that it is so. He is concerned that Ron Paul supporters are all racists and bigots. He is concerned that Ron Paul is also secretly a racist and a bigot. He is concerned that Ron Paul will be investigated by Chicago democrats in the House. He is concerned that Ron Paul will be sent to jail for five to ten years, but killed by gangs on arrival. He is concerned that Ron Paul supporters will waste their time & money trying to continue supporting liberty, even though Ron Paul cannot now win the 2012 nomination. He is concerned that media bias is just an excuse, and that Ron Paul supporters are really just personality cultists, who will never take the outrageous sensationalist hit-pieces in the media at face value. He is concerned that the heads of the campaign staff are involved in the corruption that oh-so-corrupt Ron Paul has been secretly hiding all these years. He is concerned that the homicidally fanatic Ron Paul supporters will kill the campaign staff, because of all their greed and corruption, as proven by the presstitutes. He is concerned that some campaign staffers may have done bad things.

        He is concerned that Ron Paul is an idiot for ever hiring such people. He is concerned that we will waste time looking into the background of the presstitutes, when we could instead be spinning our wheels trying to counter their un-dis-provable lies (can you prove that Ron Paul did *not* secretly kill an adorable puppy every night before going to bed?!?). ‘Jim’ is concerned that writing in Ron Paul is a bad idea, because it will take some time & money & effort to get him certified as a write-in candidate. Last but not least, we now find out that ‘Jim’ is concerned that we will call him a troll without listening to his viewpoint, and he is concerned that Ron Paul’s philosophy of liberty and justice for all will remain forever merely a Fringe PHilosophy For Fanboys. All this, just from his vicious comments on this single blog-entry!

        Folks, this is the definition of a concern-troll, not uncommon in political discourse. Jim is a troll-with-a-capital-T, until he posts three times in a row something *constructive* and *useful* for the liberty-movement that can be actively pursued — and then himself puts forth clear effort to make it so. Obviously, this category of helpful posts does *not* include false-flag complaining about being called a troll, nor vitriolic fighting with others who are actually *in* the liberty-movement (actively rather than as armchair second-guessers with only discouragement and bile to offer). So, what I’m saying here, is that surfisher was dead on the money about Jim.

        However, just because ‘Jim’ is known to be a concern-troll, what should the liberty-movement do about it? Banning does not help; they just re-register with a different username. Downvoting can help, but Doug Wead has yet to install a downvoting-system for his blog, and even if he did that, sometimes the downvotes are abused (there is a person over on dailyPaul who is clearly a true supporter of liberty, but she gets downvoted because she is *too* passionate about supporting liberty and ends up ordering other people around). Reputation-scoring can help, but once again, if the troll wants a better reputation, they can simply re-register under a new sockpuppet name. Surfisher’s constantly posting a troll-alarm, after everything Jim posts, I also do not see as very helpful, since it clutters the forum, and is subject to the same kind of abuse as downvoting would be.

        So what to do? My constructive helpful suggestion, which I will be actively pursuing, is that we should appreciate our trolls for the value that they provide. Every time ‘Jim’ posts something here, we get a free heads-up on what the latest media-hit-piece is. Rather than posting a troll-alarm, surfisher, we might as well read whatever vicious stuff Jim has posted, and simply correct his lies and insinuations. We don’t have to call him names (oh but ‘Jim’… when someone *is* a troll as proven through abundant evidence … then calling them what they are isn’t ad hominem … so sorry for your ‘viewpoint’ being deprecated in favor of the truth), because why call him names when his behavior speaks for itself. I also believe there may be some value in tracking down ‘Jim’ on other websites and forums, since likely he is trolling elsewhere, and probably cuts and pastes his viciousness again and again.

        But, and this is the most important part of my long posting: just because Jim is a troll, and just because sometimes trolls re-register under another name, does *not* mean that we ought to treat every new username as a likely troll. That is the goal of the troll-saboteur, to sow the seeds of FUD, and to make the forum-environment hostile to new users. Jim is terrified that the liberty-movement will grow and spread. He is ‘concerned’ that people will write in Ron Paul, and take actions to fight the RNC corruption, and investigate the backtrail of presstitutes.

        Therefore, we should do exactly those things. The *known* troll is valuable to us, because they tell us what the mean media is doing, which we can then fight to correct, and because they give us bad advice, which we can then invert. But our most important task is to keep growing the liberty-movement, bringing more and more people on board. At our state convention, there was a lull because a couple districts were having recounts, and our NCM got up to tell us about the best way to grow a movement, while we waited. It was two minutes long, unscripted, but it was the best speech of the whole convention, bar none. He was old enough to remember when democrats controlled the state. He was a Goldwater delegate.

        Over the years, he said, every time the republican party compromised their principles to try and pull in more votes (e.g. Romney the flip-flopper … although he didn’t put it that bluntly), the end result was a loss. The way to build a movement is to stick to your principles, and to make them so strong and attractive and successful that people *want* to join your movement, so they can learn to understand the way you think, and get those good results. The principles of the Republican party are small-government fiscal conservatism first, strong defense second, and traditionalist social values third.

        He didn’t say this part either, but those are in order! Neo-cons put warfare above fiscal values, which is wrong. Theocons put religious conformity above fiscal values, which is also wrong. The *only* thing that the liberty movement needs to add to that list is the zeroth principle, the backbone, that we insist on strictly following the Constition & Declaration, which means true liberty and true justice for all. Even, in this specific case, for trolls — to whom we must also give true liberty and true justice, because we stick to our principles.

        We know that Jim is a troll, but that does not mean we should assume every user that voices concern is a troll — we must assume the opposite, in fact. Even for Jim, we must! This is the *only* surefire way to keep trolls from poisoning the forum, and sabotaging the liberty-movement with FUD. Please, therefore, work with me to keep trolls contained, but be scrupulously polite. Maybe he’ll get tired of being a troll someday — then we’ll have a double-agent!

        p.s. In the 2006 concern-troll example, the troll-candidate lost. Jim is trying to keep the liberty-movement from winning in 2014 and 2016; any bets on whether he will succeed?

        p.p.s. Jim, maybe you really are not a troll — you can easily prove it — make three constructive useful active posts in a row, with zero inflammatory off-topic vitriol. Or maybe you are a troll, now, but want to reform yourself. Ever considered being a secret agent?

      • Jim says:

        Yet another long winded diversion from my request.
        >”make three constructive useful active posts in a row,”
        Setting forth rules of conduct on a blog which is not your own? Not very Libertarian now is it? In fact such behavior is why author AJ Weberman argues the “Liberty Movement” is a front for something more sinister;

      • ___j___ says:

        Troll. Do Not Feed. https://dougwead.wordpress.com/2012/09/06/post-paul-what-now/#comment-31508

        Corrections to this specific most-recent post: correct, Jim. As you are well aware, responding to a concern-troll requires long-windedness and effort (kinda like arguing with a controversial wind-up doll).

        Incorrect, Jim: the rules are not for this blog, the rules are for you to ever regain my trust. As you did in your very first post on this entry, you once again confuse the Anarchist with the Libertarian. The rules for defending against concern-trolls are very clear, and only someone against rules simply *because* they hate rules (anarchists) would be foolish enough to lower their defenses based on your sophistry. Libertarians, and especially libertarian-leaning republicans, believe in strong defense. That goes for internet-forums, just as much as for nations. Whether the blog belongs to me or not is irrelevant; I find it valuable, and thus I will defend it. Similarly, although as a strict proponent of the first amendment, I would defend to the death your right to say your views, that does not mean I will pretend you aren’t both wrong and vicious.

        Which, ah yes, brings us to your most recent concern-trolling work. Last but not least, now you are ‘concerned’ that the liberty-movement is secretly filled with Nazi sympathizers, and moreover ‘concerned’ that Ron Paul is the most dangerous Nazi of all. Oh, sorry, of course *you* are not saying that, yourself, you are just such a big fan of the liberty-movement and are ‘concerned’ that other people will say such things and then, oh no, they will read this blog, and see me persecuting you by calling you an untrustworthy concern-troll, and come to that understanding. Danger, Will Robinson!

        Since your viewpoint is so ludicrous, I’ll go ahead and just flatly assert that your ‘concern’ is yet again mere trolling. Ron Paul is not a Nazi. I am not a Nazi. Ron Paul does not hate Jews/Einstein/gypsies/homeless/etc. I do not hate any of those folks either. Ron Paul is in favor of liberty for all, and justice for all; he is particularly in favor of non-interventionist foreign policy, both because it would save us a ton of money and soldiers, as well as on general moral principles. He is the polar opposite of Hitler.

        Nationalism + Socialism == NaZi. Individualism + Capitalism == liberty-movement aka LiMo. The idea that the liberty-movement is filled with secret nazi-sympathizers, just waiting until they can take control of the government, so that they can start building gas-chambers and controlling the presses, is so silly that I have to laugh. NaZi in the LiMo!

        Of course, maybe the book’s author Weberman really *does* have secret info! Let’s do a quick search to find out. Hmmm… Ron Paul wants to stabilize our currency by eliminating inflation, and he wants to end the Fed, our central bank which prints the fiat-money responsible for inflation. Goldman-Sachs is the biggest beneficiary of both bailouts and Fed largesse, and the biggest contributor to both Romney and Obama. But wait! (Warning: about to fall off the sanity cliff.) Anybody who is against the behavior of Goldman-Sachs is against bankers, and all bankers are Jewish, so Ron Paul secretly hates Jews! Hitler hated Jews, so Ron Paul is a secret Nazi! You laugh, but that is the whole book. Weberman also published a book ‘proving’ that Bob Dylan, the musician, was a secret racist, by interpreting the secret-racist-code-words in Blowin’ In The Wind, which Martin Luther King was *deceived* into singing. I’m not making this up folks — my imagination isn’t *that* good.

        Weberman is either insane, or a hit-piece author (his Ron-Paul-is-a-Nazi book came out in the middle of the primaries … he also wrote an attack-piece on Rudy Guiliani back in 2008, once again during the primaries). Or, I admit, quite possibly he is both. The cover-art, Ron Paul in a Nazi uniform with the Nazi flag, was done by an Occupy-The-World guy, aka ultra-far-leftwing communism-trending. The sad thing is, Weberman himself actually sounds like a Ron Paul voter, if he were not so blinded: he personally supports legalizing marijuana, and repealing gun control laws.

        Weberman is a supporter (or member maybe) of the Jewish Defense League, which advocates *extremely* strong support of Israel; many of the group-members advocate for keeping non-Jews from voting in Israel, and for using military force to expand Israeli borders into Egypt/Jordan/Lebanon/etc. Anybody who is not in favor of such things, or like Ron Paul is in favor of ending $2B/yr foreign aid to Israel (along with $1B/yr to Egypt and $1B/yr to Jordan and $nnB/yr to Iraq and so on) is automatically a jew-hater. During his attacks on Bob Dylan, Weberman made a name for himself by dumpster-diving; maybe he is the one that “obtained” the AmEx photocopies for the other hit-pieces? Anyhoo, don’t buy the book, or the eBook. You can download a PDF from the web, if you want to debunk this in detail. That would be a copyright violation unless the author uploaded it … but from what I can tell, Weberman *is* the one who uploaded the digital freebies … which once again suggests that he is being paid through external channels for writing this hit-piece, and thus could care less if people read it without paying for it.

        Jim, although I realize you are against shooting the messenger, can even you possibly fail to see that the source of an attack is worth considering, when bias is probable? That the date of the attack, and the rest of the surrounding context, is evidence of corruption, not mere coincidence? Hello, harsh reality is calling… anybody home…. Are you “not a fan” of Ron Paul, because you take Weberman and Flock at face value? Then you have been tricked. They are paid assassins, albeit perhaps unwitting ones in the case of Weberman. Wake up.

        You also asked that I respond to your request — did you mean the one where you gave the false-choice speculation, your ‘concern’ as to whether Ron Paul would get 5 years in jail, or 10 years, for the oh-so-most-corrupt-evah allegations? I already told you, but here you go again, the answer is zero. Nobody has even filed charges, ever, in 2012 or back in 2005, neither James nor CREW (founded by lawyers) nor anybody else. All this stuff happened — allegedly — years and years ago. Even the non-judicial non-jail-related committees of the haus long ago passed the statute of limitations. Investigative digging shows the allegations are hit-pieces, most likely very carefully timed so as to influence specific republican primaries. That was the whole point; jail-time was never the goal of the leash-handlers, just character-assassination. Look through the CREW report, and note how D-NY was caught getting bailout kickbacks by D-CA, but now suddenly D-CA is *also* on the list (for proving Obama’s AG Eric Holder lies), with Ron Paul.

        Or, did you mean your request for proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Ron Paul did not secretly murder adorable puppies, since you are ‘concerned’ that might be seen in a bad light, should it be true? The accuser, that would be you, must prove their accusation. So, just to pick one of your ‘concerns’ out of a hat, if you want to claim Ron Paul is a secret nazi, *he* need not prove the contrary, since *your* outrageous claim is (quite by design — based on your ulterior motive of character assassination and causing a disturbance) totally un-dis-provable. For contrast, you *can* prove that you are not a concern-troll, simply by starting to act decently. (Which, in case you missed the logical connection, is also why accusations against Ron Paul by the mean-old-media bought-in-spades-presstitutes fall on deaf ears here: his actions and his words tell the real story.)

        Tit for tat — here’s my request for you. Which of these political candidates do you support, enough to vote for them, and admit you like them?

        Ron Paul L&R-TX,
        Gary Johnson L&R-NM,
        Virgil Goode I&R-VA,
        Jesse Ventura I&I-MN,
        Rand Paul R-KY,
        Mike Lee R-UT,

        Jim DeMint R-SC,
        Jeff Flake R-AZ,
        Ted Cruz R-TX,
        Dan Liljenquist R-UT,
        Richard Mourdock R-IN,
        Dean Heller R-NV,

        Deb Fischer R-NE,
        Mark Neumann R-WI,
        Connie Mack 4th R-FL,
        Josh Mandel R-OH,
        Kurt Bills R-MN,
        Barry Hinckley R-RI.

        Barack Obama D-IL,
        Hillary Clinton D-NY,
        Dennis Kucinich D-OH,
        Mitt Romney R-MA,
        John McCain R-AZ,
        George W Bush 2nd R-TX.

        Should be easy to answer, just type yyyyyy yyyyyy yyyyyy yyyyyy, going with the assumption you like all of them, put N for ones you dislike, or put _ for ones you have not heard of. Feel free to explain your answers, or not. Show some goodwill; put forth a bit of positive effort. Even if you put down purely N-or-underscore marks, as long as you give non-vitriolic explanations then in my book it still counts as positive effort.

      • donjusko says:

        The trolls are getting sneaky. Anybody that calls Ron Paul or associates him with Nazis shouldn’t be on this site.

      • donjusko says:

        Jim Troll said about his video, “What a great endorsement.”
        Your ignoring what Don Black is all about and saying he and Ron Paul are like two peas in a pod. Just because they both like coffee and Ron Paul likes it with cream doesn’t make him a racist. Black is against blacks, Ron Paul isn’t. You are a deceitful troll to say they are the same.

        JT, you have been backed so far into a corner you’re throwing up on yourself. I think you should leave, you smell bad.

        _ j _, this troll isn’t going to say he’s for the same things Obama is for any more than Romney is going to go against any of Obama’s stance on issues. 1. Stop feeding the troll, you’re giving him a platform. 2. Arrest Obama.

      • Jim says:

        More hot air.

        > his actions and his words tell the real story.)

        Like how he voted AGAINST HR9 reauthorizing the Voters Rights Act which protects the rights of minorities?

        http://votesmart.org/bill/3350/20345/296/voting-rights-act-reauthorization#.UFuOqyJeuSo

        Because for Ron Paul, the property rights of white business owners supersedes the rights of African-Americans (or as Paul calls them “fleet footed individuals”).
        He also voted against giving Rosa parks a congressional Gold Medal but voted FOR giving gold medals to white astronauts. He also opposes the Civil Rights Act once again
        because in his world, which is a dying world of old white racists stuck in the 1950′s, white property owner’s trump minority rights (the same argument Paul makes is the same one used by segregationists when the law was passed).
        Indeed his “actions and his words “tell the real story”. Which is why he is supported by avowed racists like Virginia Abernathy, David Duke, Bill White, Don Black, and Jamie Kelso just to name a few.

      • Jim says:

        Stormfront owner NeoNazi Don Black: Ron Paul’s views coincide with ours:

        What a great endorsement.

  194. Surfisher says:

    Surfisher says:
    September 14, 2012 at 1:18 am

    Federal Reserve quietly begins QE3 amid Mid-East turmoil today!

    As a little jolt to the stock market, the Federal Reserve today announced another round of quantitative easing (printing MORE money OUT OF THIN AIR) in an effort to reverse the rise in unemployment and encourage more home buying. This announcement arrives as the violence is still unfolding in Egypt and Libya among other Middle Eastern countries.
    ———————————————————————–\
    END the Federal Reserve — or let us just belly up to the International Banksters controlling them, and declare our Nation officially OWNED!

  195. Jim says:

    Doug Wead writes:
    “3. Write in Ron Paul’s name?

    This was what I was going to do but who would ever know the final number? It would give me some personal satisfaction, and amuse a few poll watchers, but otherwise mean nothing. No one would get the message. There is even a chance that my ballot could be disqualified and all the other viable Liberty candidates I voted for would lose my support as well.”

    Yet Surfisher continues to spam Richard Gilbert’s new money making venture, the ‘write in Ron Paul ‘ website complete with donation box. Are you calling Doug a liar on his own blog, Surfisher? Sure looks like you are.

    • ___j___ says:

      Troll. Do Not Feed. https://dougwead.wordpress.com/2012/09/06/post-paul-what-now/#comment-31508

      Corrections to this specific post: it costs money to get a candidate’s name certified as a write-in, of course. Doug is correct that write-in ballots can be disqualified, or counted as ‘other’, and take votes away from alternative liberty-candidates, Gary Johnson or Virgil Goode. Surfisher is willing to accept those risks, prolly because he lives in a non-swing-state.

      My advice is, in swing-states FL OH NC IA WI (and to a lesser extent VA and CO), voting for *any* write-in or third-party candidate can throw the election by splitting the vote; think hard who you want to be the president in 2013, four years Obama, or eight years of Romney. Those of us living *outside* of those states, should definitely vote liberty-candidate, since nothing we do will change the electoral-college winner in non-swing-states… but voting liberty *does* send a message.

  196. Jim says:

    Jesse Benton Interview !

    BI:you ran Sen. Rand Paul’s campaign in Kentucky in 2010, and Sen. McConnell endorsed his primary opponent. What’s changed since then?

    Benton: What changed was a friendship that we cultivated, both Rand and Senator McConnell and our teams cultivated in the [2010] general election….. I’ve really grown to have quite a bit of admiration for [Senator McConnell ]. So when they asked me if I was interested, it was unexpected, but it was VERY WELCOME

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/jesse-benton-ron-paul-mitch-mcconnell-2012-9#ixzz26Qfi8BnD

    Benton takes with him $72,000 of Ron Paul’s supporters FRN’s, laughing all the way to the bank .

    • donjusko says:

      Thanks Jim, this is very TP of you. I knew Benton was a turn-coat when he didn’t win with the best. His new presence on McConnell’s RINO staff virtually guarantees that the Senate Minority leader won’t face a challenge from the right in 2014 — or a challenge to his leadership in the Senate should the Tea Party’s influence there continue to grow. (We will see about that, the Tea Party is for the Constitution not a party or person)

      Doug said it was Benton that was against Ron attacking Romney. Now Benton’s own words explain his actions.

      “BI: So if you had the chance to address the Ron Paul Universe, how would you address any criticism that you have sold out Ron Paul to take a position with the GOP Establishment?
      Benton: First of all, I absolutely love all of Dr. Paul’s supporters. I admire every single one of them for the different things that they bring to the table.”

      “I view what I want to do is try to work with people who want to take our ideas seriously. I want to try to get as many of our ideas as I can included in the solution.”

      Talk about a split-tongue. This guy has one in spades, He has no loyalty to the Constitution, he goes with the money where ever it takes him. He can always find and issue to push. Opposing issues are fine with him. He loves everybody and leaves the field open for him to play.

      Doug didn’t have very close contact with the grass roots, he said it wasn’t his fault that Ron Paul didn’t attack, Benton said Romney would tear him apart if he did. Doug meekly went along with Benton. Two peas in a pod, both making money at Ron Paul’s and our expense.

      • Jim says:

        Benton wore body armor to a meeting with the Maine delegation (watch the video closely): Guilty conscience?

        http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/08/jesse-benton-wears-bullet-proof-vest-to.html

      • Jim says:

        >This guy has one in spades, He has no loyalty to the Constitution, he goes with the money where ever it takes him.

        Been saying that for a while and get called names like subhuman by Jessie’s number 1 fan Surfisher..

      • ___j___ says:

        Hmmm. I know it’s fashionable to bash Benton nowadays, but I’ve never seen the sense in it. (Of course, surfisher calling people names just because he does not agree with them is *also* something I see no sense in.) I don’t know benton, I’ve only seen him for twenty seconds on a video once.

        I know he offends Tom Woods, because Benton said a rude word once, and because Benton wanted the Ron Paul message to be tailored for winning the republican primary, whereas Woods wanted the message to be philosophically pure. I know Benton had some kind of fallout with Adam Kokesh. I know Benton had some unkind things to say about the organizers of “Paul” Fest (named that way but without Ron Paul actually attending or perhaps even knowing about it), and Benton recommended folks not get involved with that gathering, since Ron Paul already had an official rally going on elsewhere in Tampa. Frankly, though, only one person can run the campaign, and that is Ron Paul — whether he knew and agreed with these moves, or just implicitly trusted that the campaign was well-run, EITHER WAY, he is the one who was responsible at the end of the day for all these sorts of decisions. Were some of them wrong, in hindsight? Sure, probably. But politics isn’t perfect, and you have to pick your battles. (Fact, not excuse.)

        I know that Jim has a big problem with Benton getting paid Too Much at $23/hr, but as I’ve tried to point out, that is awesomely low for a campaign manager. And if Ron Paul thought that Benton was worth that salary, then I would have to defer to Ron Paul’s wisdom, since he’s a twelve-term-congressman, and got third place in 2012. (As for getting more money from McConnell, my hope is that Jesse demands triple or quadruple the salary, but keeps the same lifestyle as before, so that he’ll have a tidy sum saved up for donating to *actual* liberty-candidates during the 2014 campaign. But hey, if he wants to keep it, fine, because we’re capitalists here, and you keep what you earn, as long as you earned it, sans bailouts.)

        What it seems to boil down to is that many people, because they feel in their gut that Ron Paul is a superhero, or because they know in their hearts that the message of liberty is correct, are willing to ignore what their heads tell them, and believe (even now!) that Ron Paul can still somehow pull off a miracle, and take over the whitehouse in 2013. Liberty is not that cheap, folks. We will have to fight for it a bit longer if we are serious about getting it someday — and then we will have to be vigilant, so that we don’t lose it, as happened to us once before. Mathematically, though, Ron Paul’s bid for the presidency was always a long shot, the sort of hail-mary-pass-at-the-end-of-the-football-game tactic. Sometimes that works, don’t get me wrong. But the odds are against it, and this time, we came up short: unable to pull out a win in Maine’s primary, unable to take Iowa or New Hampshire, and then blitzed on super tuesday.

        The backup strategy was to win delegates, enough to get nominated, so we could get primetime coverage, and *that* succeeded, sans last-minute cheating to block it. But in many folks were dead-set on *winning* the nominee-slot, despite the math, Prez Paul Or Not At All. Which was my goal, back in January, but which was unlikely even then, and by May basically impossible. I kept at it, though, and our work paid off, just not as expected.

        Anyhoo, part of the lashing out at Benton, and at Doug, and at Rand, and at *anybody* associated with the campaign really, is mostly based on disappointment. Well, I’m disappointed too, but that doesn’t mean that Benton is a traitor to liberty like Santa Anna, or that Rand is a new version of Ted Kennedy, or that Doug is now J. Galbraith — what nonsense. What is the deal with Benton, now?

        Well, he’s working for McConnell, the dempub. On my own score, from his *actual* voting record, it looks like McConnell is not terrible on fiscal issues, I give him R2#, putting him slightly above McCain. As for constitutionality, he is pretty badly off, scoring 60% liberty-friendly, which is tied with Dick Lugar IN and Kay Bailey Hutchinson TX and other folks that the Tea Party has been able to replace with way more constitutionalist candidates in 2012. But fair is fair: McConnell is dramatically better on fiscal issues than , and his Constitution-respect exceeds 14 republican senators and every single democratic senator. That’s not great, of course. In fact, McConnell is so poor on the Constitution, that one of the democrats in the house scores better than him: McIntyre D-NC#07

        Clearly there is room for improvement. Friends, McConnell is no Ron Paul. He does not stand on principle. Read through that article by BusinessInsider again, and look for the part that says McConnell *supported* Rand after he won his primary, and more importantly, for the part where McConnell has promised to *vote* in favor of S.202 Audit The Fed, if Harry Reid will bring it to the floor. That promise could be a lie — only time will tell. But that is improvement over the alternative, which is refusing to support S.202, right? Remember when darth vader chucked the emporer down the tube? Maybe there is some good in McConnell, even now. But hey, I’m satisfied if he’ll just *vote* like he has good in him, that’s enough.

        While we’re on the subject of actual voting records, as opposed to promises and endorsements and playing politics, the flat out best Senate voting record bar none is Rand Paul for a Constitutionally friendly record. (He usually ties for first with Mike Lee of Utah.) Jim DeMint only gets 85% which is tied with Michelle Bachmann, proving that they are only tea-party candidate, not liberty-candidates BUT THAT IS FINE in my book. Sure, I wish everybody in the house voted like Ron Paul, and everybody in the senate voted like Rand Paul (or even better like Ron Paul), but politics is ugly, and people are stupid, and although TX and KY might elect them, the folks in heavily-democratic places will not (yet!) do so. And for every Rand, there are ten McConnell-types, at present. We *are* changing that. Lugar, Snowe, Hutchinson, and other Romney-ish repubs are now being replaced with tea-party candidates, if not necessarily paulitician-liberty-candidates like Rand.

        Rand is endorsing the nominee now, and has been ever since it became *mathematically* impossible for his dad to win on the first ballot. He is very clear on why he did this: so that he will have pull with the people in charge of the Senate, which is based on seniority, with Hatch UT, Cochran MS, Grassley IA, and McConnell KY at the top of the list as the Majority Leader (no longer the minority!). This is important, if we want to increase liberty during 2013, when McConnell *will* be in charge of the Senate, whether or not the whitehouse changes hands. In particular, the Republican Majority Whip position is going to be up for grabs in an “internal” election, with candidates such as Cornyn TX and maybe Thune SD, Alexander TN, Burr NC. Not mentioned as a candidate, but with the seniority to deserve a shot, is Jim DeMint, third best guy in the senate in liberty-percentage. Also potentially in the race is Ron Johnson from Wisconsin, who scores 80% on constitutionality and is popular with the tea-party-caucus of Rand/Lee/DeMint. *Many* of the new senators in 2013 will also be joining that group.

        Benton is working for another republican now. Yes, not a very pure liberty-repub, and yes, that is not something we should applaud, necessarily. But in this case, that moderate-establishment-repub is the *leader* of the house, and Benton with help from Rand got him to promise to audit the fed … a baby step, to be sure, but a baby step in the direction of liberty is always a good thing.

        Watching their performance is what we should do; why bash now? You want to bash Benton for his mistakes? Ok, fine, but do it with an eye towards the future — give us your plan for doing better next cycle, in detail, or at least for avoiding a repeat of the mistake. You want to bash McConnell for his inability to outscore the *democrat* McIntyre on Constitutionality? Great, fine, but do it with an eye towards saving face: McConnell could easily outscore that dem, if he would simply vote to audit the fed, and then audit the pentagon.

        Baby steps … for liberty.

        Plus, after McConnell wins in 2014 at age 72, he’ll prolly step down at age 78, and the Roaring Twenties Of Liberty will begin (again). This turned out to be yet another humongous post; I hope nobody is bored with them, but these issues are really important methinks. Pertinent wisdom: never let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

      • ___j___ says:

        Arrgh, no edit button. I meant to say, McConnell is better on fiscal issues than 90 other senators. (He’s beaten by Rand Lee DeMint Johnson Coburn Toomey, and tied with Ayotte Inhofe Rubio.)

        Of course, with the new tea-party-folks in the senate for 2013, maybe McConnell will be out of the top ten… or maybe he will fight to keep his reputation as a fiscal conservative, and work to gain a reputation as a constitutionalist. If he does, then we have Benton to thank for it, and if he doesn’t, then I suppose people will blame Benton for it. Sigh!

        Truthfully, though, I hope that a tea-party candidate, or even better, a liberty-candidate, *will* run against McConnell in the 2014 primaries. Even if they fail to unseat him, they will spread the message of liberty further. And, that might help us extract some more concessions from McConnell, some more promises that will look bad if he breaks them. But really, I’d rather that McConnell just remake himself in the liberty mold, rather than being forced to pretend to like liberty. Candidates that really do like liberty have more fun, they say, and sleep better too.

        Campaign *staff* for liberty-candidates, on the other hand, seem to have a much tougher row to hoe. Partly because liberty-grassroots folks are conscientious and demanding … but also, methinks, because we are prone (just like any human) to splash blame, flame, and shame.

        The 2012 campaign was quite good, at the end of the day. We got third, but we scared the boolean algebra out of the establishment’s undies. More crucially, this year, it came clear: liberty *is* our future.

      • Surfisher says:

        ‘Jim’ — the troll — (previously banned from posting here as “tex2″) pollutes this forum again with its vitriol.

        Ignore this PERNICIOUS shill— do not reply to it….
        ————————————————————————————

        In case you forgot, this subhuman, like the Bilderberg Gang, wants to see Ron Paul dead:

        (JIM says: July 9, 2012 at 8:07 am “….The good doctor looked really feeble in that last message to the faithful. … Vegas odds say he (Ron Paul) DOESN’T LIVE to see Tampa.”)

    • ___j___ says:

      (Heh … I had to look up what FRN was … federal reserve note aka fiat money aka linen with a wild starry-eyed promise on it. Perhaps a better acronym is FeRNs, since both are equally weak & transient.)

  197. donjusko says:

    Have you got a cast iron gut? This will still get to you. This is for the new Gary Johnson division. Yes we need our own blog.

    Anyway, everybody that’s a citizen needs to know this. Our gov’t has been buying up corporations because they have the money to do it. We the people have been strapped with bankruptcy but the Federal Government has money put aside, more than enough to pay off the national dept. Our money that they haven’t told us about for 67 years (1945). That’s when they started with two set of books. The annual Financial Reports and the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports. They all keep two sets, your local bank, county, city, state and federal. Comprehensive Annual Reports include it all and you never get to see them. http://www.cafr1.com/ has all the reports and stories if you want to see them, you do..

  198. Jim says:

    Source: Benton was fired:
    “High Level contacts from within Ron Paul’s inner circle who have disclosed on a condition of anonymity, that “Jesse Benton was actually fired from C4L and stole all the lists (C4L, RP12, LPAC) before he left. Ron Paul is very upset.”

    http://libertychat.com/source-jesse-benton-was-fired-from-c4l-ron-paul-is-very-upset

  199. Jjan says:

    On the Electoral College

    “That is why we live in a Republic. Our nation is to ruled by law not the majority.
    You are quite correct, “Democracy is very dangerous”. I challenge anyone to find the word ” Democracy ” in our founding documents. Then do a search and find out what people like John Adams had to say about Democracy. Hint: ” Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. – John Adams (1814)”
    The Electoral College must stay. It is the last door ” We the people” have to prevent tyranny entering office.”

    Someones rebuttal:

    ” The National Popular Vote bill would change existing state winner-take-all laws that award all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who get the most popular votes in each separate state (not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but since enacted by 48 states), to guarantee the majority of Electoral College votes for, and the Presidency to, the candidate getting the most popular votes in the entire country.

    The bill preserves the constitutionally mandated Electoral College and state control of elections. It ensures that every vote is equal, every voter will matter, in every state, in every presidential election, and the candidate with the most votes wins, as in virtually every other election in the country.

    Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in every presidential election. Every vote would be included in the state counts and national count. The candidate with the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC would get the 270+ ELECTORAL COLLEGE votes from the enacting states, and win the presidency.

    National Popular Vote has NOTHING TO DO with pure democracy. Pure democracy is a form of government in which people vote on policy initiatives directly. With National Popular Vote, the United States would still be a republic, in which citizens continue to elect the President by a majority of Electoral College votes by states, to represent us and conduct the business of government in the periods between elections.”

    These folks really can’t see the holes in that.

    Imagine there are two candidates who will without question destroy what is left of our country if elected. Think that the majority of the country has been fooled by education and the media to believe one of these two was the savior and the Electoral College who is smarter then they had no power to intervene. It would be just like the RNC rules this year. Power grab to keep tyranny alive.

    I am so glad we live in a country that has free elections.

  200. donjusko says:

    I like the idea of every persons voting counting. Here in Hawaii, as a State, the only way Ron Paul, or johnson for that matter, could carry the state is if each vote was counted. If democracy gives power to the state and the state counts each vote as one vote, I’m for it.

    • ___j___ says:

      Greetings Don — I have looked into NPVIC. It is a subtle scam, which seems somewhat appealing at first glance, but the details of the mechanism are designed to guarantee that the primary-popvote winner in CA & IL will *always* be the prez, which is to say, that we will have a Democrat whitehouse forever.

      Proving this is reasonably long and drawn out, but in a nutshell, only states with highly-democratic voting patterns (as measured by their dem-vs-repub popvote percentage in presidential elections) have approved NPVIC. The mechanism of shifting power to large cities in large states is at the expense of places like Hawaii, DC, and Vermont … which are the only places with fewer than 6M people that have approved NPVIC in the legislature, and not-so-coincidentally are also the three most dem-leaning in their presidential popvote. Since NPVIC is winner-take-all, small low-population states lose. Since NPVIC shifts power to the big-government-dependent inner cities, Republican candidates lose, and tea-party or libertarian-leaning ones disappear.

      As a concrete example, California would control 12.10% of the votes for president under NPVIC, a decent boost from 10.22% now (electoral college). Hawaii gets 0.44% under NPVIC, down from 0.74% under the EC, which is pretty much cut in half. That’s just for dem-leaning states, of course… NPVIC is unfair to small-pop dem states, whereas it is certain death for repub-leaning ones (though proving this to yourself requires a bit more math).

      Please look it over; the tea party ought to agree with Lingle on this one — and NPVIC can be overturned by the state legislature. (cf. 17th amendment which cannot… it promotes similar mob-rule tendencies.)

      This subject is more than a bit off-topic for the post-Ron-Paul liberty movement comment section, but if you wish I can email you details.

      • donjusko says:

        Thanks j, my email address is djusko@realcolorwheel.com.
        I have to understand why Lingle is the better choice, for now she is a self admitted RINO out to give the Senate to the Dem cause.

      • ___j___ says:

        In the 2012 senate race, Lingle the dempub is prima facie probably a better choice than Hirono the dem, if you are worried about keeping the Senate from being “given to Dems” … because obviously, taking the seat away from Lingle, who will vote with the dems some of the time, simply gives that seat to Hirono, who will vote with the dems pretty much every single time. I understand that Lingle is not the ideal tea-party-favorite candidate, but can she be worse than Hirono? That said, I trust your insight as somebody that has experienced both people in office, more than I trust my pretty-cursory analysis of records. You don’t trust Lingle, is what it boils down to, from what I grok. The question is, do you distrust her enough to give the seat to Hirono?

        There is also the larger question, applicable outside Hawaii. What is the best strategy for the liberty-movement, when we lose a primary to an establishment-candidate? The senate race for Indiana ended up with Lingle-esque Lugar losing, and tea-party Mourdock the nominee. By contrast, in WI the repub primary went to establishment Thompson rather than tea-party-ish Neumann. Another example of a tea-party slash liberty-candidate win over the mainstream was Cruz in TX.

        TX == Cruz tea+liberty vs Sadler dem, not Dewhurst estab
        IN == Mourdock tea vs Donnelly dem, not Lugar dempub
        WI == Thompson estab vs Baldwin dem, not Neumann tea
        HI == Lingle dempub vs Hirono dem, not Carroll tea

        These are existing situations. Clearly, the liberty-movement and the tea party ought to strongly support Cruz and Mourdock. But, we also want the rest of the repubs to support them, too. I would argue that, strategically, we ought to support Thompson and Lingle, rather than the dems they are up against. Us supporting the mainstream repubs like Lingle & Thompson, when our favored candidate lost the primary-race, is contingent on the mainstream repubs supporting candidates they might not love, such as Cruz & Mourdock.

        By that logic, of course, everybody that wanted Ron Paul should vote for Romney. However, the situations are different: Thompson did not cheat, and neither did Lingle. Cruz and Mourdock came from behind, and beat out their mainstream-supported primary-opponents. Whether you blame Romney personally for the cheating, his campaign staffers, and some portion of the RNC personnel, definitely did cheat. We have the video. Now, if you want to be charitable, you could say that they cheated in the primary because they were so worried about winning the general election against Obama… but to me that is no excuse. So, methinks the presidential election in 2012 is an exception to the usual rule: we can break ranks with the party on the presidential slot, and vote for Gary Johnson or Virgil Goode or certified write-in Ron Paul where available, not because we are sore losers, but to protest any form of cheating. Especially blatant evil nationally-televised cheating.

        In the long run, though, I think we need to figure out what sort of general approach we want to take. Consider the five cases above, TX IN WI HI & POTUS. It was the right decision to have Cruz challenge Dewhurst in the primary, because not only did our guy win the repub primary , but he is going to easily win over the dem in November. Indiana was more risky: Mourdock tea beat Lugar dempub, which is seemingly good… but what if Donnelly the dem beats Mourdock? In that case, we made a mistake to unseat Lugar (since *he* would easily have beaten the dem). WI is a dead heat right now, but arguably the general election would have been tough for Neumann. Should we be *glad* that the mainstream guy got the nod in the Wisconsin primary, since an establishment-repub senator is better than a hardline-democrat beating the tea party? Maybe. But in Hawaii, the case seems very clear-cut. Lingle is a self-described RINO, a dempub, and even in a cycle that is going to be terrible for dems, she is still four points behind Hirono. If the tea-party candidate had beaten Lingle, then in that alternate reality I predict that they would have been ten or fifteen points behind Hirono, because the *bulk* of voters in Hawaii aren’t ready for a winning tea-party candidate yet. Is it worth fielding a tea-party candidate, who is only going to lose?

        That’s not a rhetorical question. Consider the campaign for Ron Paul in 2008. He was a liberty-candidate. He was going to lose. But, he kept campaigning, long after the nomination was locked up by McCain. With what result? Well, easy: when he came back in 2012, he tripled his popvote, winning the VI, tying in ME), and got a plurality of delegates willing to nominate him in IA NV MN ME AK VI LA, plus significant support from OK OR VA MA TX WA (maybe more… those are just the ones I saw documented). As for 2016, I expect we will triple the popvote again, as long as we work hard *throughout* the duration of the next four years, winning hearts and minds. Education of the voters is the key to winning. Liberty is such a popular message, it practically sells itself.

        So, would it be better to have Lingle as the nominee, an admitted RINO running against an admitted democrat? Lingle might win, which seems like a good thing. Or, would it be better to have a strong liberty-candidate running for the position, educating the voters of Hawaii, even if they are probably going to lose in the end?

        I think the answer is, we want to have our cake and eat it too. We want to run a liberty-candidate, or at least a tea-party candidate, in every republican primary. Even if we cannot win the primary — so that we educate voters, and have a chance next cycle. On paper, it even seems like we would want to have that liberty-candidate go on to run as a third-party candidate, educating voters right up to the polling-booth of the general election. On paper.

        However, methinks that is a dangerous approach, because we are going to anger the mainstream repub voters. We want them to vote for Mourdock & Cruz, when the liberty-leaning candidate wins the primary, right? We also want them to fund Mourdock and Cruz, so that they have no trouble in beating the dem during the general election, and get maximum opportunity to educate voters (nothing sells like success). Therefore, although it seems tough to vote for and work for and volunteer for somebody like Lingle, unless there are *extremely* good reasons why they should not be supported, such as the rule#12 cheating fiasco in Tampa being a plausibly-valid reason to not campaign for Romney, methinks it is in our long-term interest to help the mainstream candidates that beat us fair & square in the primaries.

        If we do help Lingle to win, then she’ll probably hold that seat for a long time (unseating an incum is difficult… but see Mourdock). We ought to get help from her, though, when we run for the other senate-seat in Hawaii, representative slots, and the governorship.

        What, in general, should be grounds for withdrawing our support? I would mention two. Blatant systemic cheating in the primaries. Strong similarities to Hitler or Stalin or Mao. Anything else? Some others here have mentioned pro-life versus pro-choice as a dealkiller for them, but to my mind, as long as they won’t *force* their personal beliefs on the rest of us, we can be somewhat forgiving.

      • donjusko says:

        Lingle will win, Hirono just refused to debate Lingle here on Maui. She won’t debate, period. She will lose if she debates, she will lose if she doesn’t debate. I said it before, they are both losers with more money than our best choice John Carroll had. Money is now controlling who is elected, like Jessie said in Surfisher’s video.

        Ed Case should have beaten Hirono, at least he would have debated.

  201. Surfisher says:

    When you have the time watch this long video.

    The best explanation of our Money crisis!

    • Surfisher says:

      How the Central Banks (the International Jews and their patsies) STOLE our Free Nation and turned it into a Money Pit — where, We, The People, have become their economic SLAVES!

      Recommended reading — “None Dare Call it Conspiracy” Copyright © 1971 by Gary Allen with Larry Abraham ISBN: 0899666612 & “The International Jew” by Henry Ford (read his ORIGINAL writings from the 1920′s)!
      ——————————————————–

      Some key points from this video: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsmbWBpnCNk&feature=player_embedded)
      ———————————————————

      “The decrease in purchasing power incurred by holders of money due to inflation imparts gains to the issuers of money.”

      St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank, Review, Nov. 1975, p.22

      (minute 22:48)
      ———————————————————

      “The entire world economy rests on the consumer; if he ever stops spending money he doesn’t have on things he doesn’t need, we are done for.”

      (minute 26:22)
      ———————————————————–

      “With the monetary we have now, the careful saving of a lifetime can be wiped out in an eyeblink.”

      (minute 27:27)
      ——————————————————–

      “When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.”

      Napoleon Bonaparte

      (minute 29:30)
      ——————————————————–

      *This has to be the BEST QUOTE VALID for ALL the World that wants FREEDOM and Prosperity — few other can compare to the verity of this one!*

      “I wouldn’t go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.”

      Major General Smedley Butler USMC (1881-1940)
      —————————————————–

      Usury is the norm — the creation of more money from the same amount of money, without the effort of the usurer (now days called Bank LENDER) to produce anything of intrinsic worth.

      (minute 32:51)
      —————————————————

      STUNNING MATH — at 10% interest the Money-Lenders will own ALL REAL Money in 50 years!

      (minute 33:12)
      ———————————————–

      US Dollar has lost over 96% of its value in the last 100 years! How far will it still sink…and does it really matter…since it’s so close to Zero now?!

      (minute 45:51)
      ——————————————————

      Summation of Banksters FRAUD — minute 58:40-101:40

      Shows the exact MO of the International Jews owning the Banks that enslave US!
      ——————————————————-

      At minute 104:05 — the comments are NO LONGER VALID (goes into “virtual” dollar)…thus not respective of the gold standard that needs to be reinstated to save US from economic collapse!

      Gold’s intrinsic value has validity, since it is of a specified limited quantity (being all nearly mined) — while Paper Money can be reproduced by the growth and cutting of many trees, nearly forever!

      “Electronic” Dollars — are just a a venue for a further Big Brother Dictatorship!
      —————————————————

      We need to return to the Original US Dollars (Silver and Gold CERTIFICATES) — the ones guaranteeing that the Dollar Amount on these US Treasury Bills (not some worthless “Promissory Federal Reserve Notes”) are BACKED and PAYABLE IN SILVER (OR GOLD) BY ANY US BANK UPON THE BEARER’S DEMAND!!!

      This is the only TRUE TEST of the VALIDITY of ANY Real Paper Money!!!
      ———————————————————

      minute 108:20 — gets back on track, showing the dead-end Banksters are holding US economic hostages with our government’s approval!
      —————————————————–

      at minute 111:01 — fails for the Second Time by stating the IDIOCY that Nationalized Banking is NEEDED (to solve the problem of Usury)! Then goes on to some other options, such as Localized Community Banking. Neither are valid options if printed Money is not pegged to a Gold Standard!
      ——————————————————-

      Ends sarcastically with the Taxman (the armed IRS goon) pointing a gun at the working people: “We are only doing this to save you. Remember that!”
      ——————————————————-

      Spread it!

  202. donjusko says:

    I’m glad you watched the video Surfisher, I did also. It’s interesting that we both noticed where the video failed.

    Inflation over the years has hurt us to the point that we can’t continue. Real tangent money has no inflation. Audit the Federal Reserve Bank. Debt from created fiat monies created is the problem. With the debt money, if the sales of objects created with tangible raw materials slows down because of inflation, which is inevitable with fiat money, the economy collapses.
    When a bank is bankrupt due to poor investments or any other reason, we have printed them more fiat money through the Fed. That’s the current answer which leads to more inflation. There is no other answer available. We must return to the gold standard and print our own debt free money relating to raw resources. 20% flat rate tax which includes all taxes to start, going down not up will pay for our government, schools, infrastructure and post office.
    Today the average consumer has a $9,205 credit debt and spends $1,300 a year in intrest payments. The banks get this money without spending a cent, if you default, they get the purchased object to resell, still without paying one cent.
    According to The Tax Foundation;

    http://etfdailynews.com/2012/04/12/current-tax-code-24-shocking-facts-about-taxes-in-the-united-states-tza-sds-fas-skf-faz-xlf/

    The average American has to work until April 17th just to pay federal, state, and local taxes. Back in 1900, “Tax Freedom Day” came on January 22nd. When the U.S. government first implemented a personal income tax back in 1913, the vast majority of the population paid a rate of just 1 percent of their earnings.
    Since 1913, one dollar has decreased in value to 2.3¢. The only way to restore the dollar to a dollar is to spend new work energy on a fleeting objects, one that would not be added to the money in circulation. This means War. Bombs and war supplies are costly and are immediately destroyed. Population is reduced so the debt to the population is reduced. War reduces the inflated monies value and debt the public owes for fiat money by taking the debt out of circulation. That’s why we are war aggressors. Obama and Romney want more war. 1/3 of our GDP goes to the Military Industrial Complex, stop the unconstitutional attack wars.
    Obama is adding to our debt daily by spending money we don’t have, the fiat presses are having to keep up with him, the debt is now 16+ trillion and we as citizens can never pay this off. Our GNP is only $14.5 trillion a year. He wants us bankrupt, without food and sick so we will have to join his and the UN’s global banks and government. We have already started this with Nationalized Corporations, the gov’t should not have unions or own businesses, the Constitution does not allow this.
    The last half of this video is false, it calls for a revolutionary change but it’s still just printing promissory notes. Money must be based on tangible raw resources not arbitrary fiat printed notes even if they are backed by the individual.

  203. Tonya Byrum says:

    Gary Johnson

  204. Surfisher says:

    All Real Americans must watch this in ITS ENTIRETY –and spread it like wildfire! You’ll be shocked, disgusted and outraged of what the US Government has already done to Us, We The People, and what it is planning for Us further!

    Award winning documentary from Aaron Russo (producer of such movies: Trading Places, Wise Guys, The Rose). Full Length Documentary Below — Watch, Share, Spread, Discuss!

    *AMERICA — FREEDOM TO FASCISM*

    (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kE8RtL3azDg&feature=related)

    • Surfisher says:

      *The Federal Reserve Has Been Given Police Powers, Glock 22s and Patrol Cars*

      “By mid morning on Monday, September 17, as Occupy Wall Street protesters marched around the perimeter of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, all signs that an FRPD (Federal Reserve Police Department) existed had disappeared. The FRPD patrol cars and law enforcement officers had been replaced by NYPD patrol cars and officers. That decision may have been made to keep from drawing attention to a mushrooming new domestic police force that most Americans do not know exists.

      Quietly, without fanfare or Congressional hearings, the USA Patriot Act in 2001 bestowed on the 12 privately owned Federal Reserve Banks, domestic policing powers.

      Section 364 of the Act, “Uniform Protection Authority for Federal Reserve,” reads: “Law enforcement officers designated or authorized by the Board or a reserve bank under paragraph (1) or (2) are authorized while on duty to carry firearms and make arrests without warrants for any offense against the United States committed in their presence…Such officers shall have access to law enforcement information that may be necessary for the protection of the property or personnel of the Board or a reserve bank.”

      Read full article:

      http://www.alternet.org/economy/federal-reserve-privately-owned-banking-cartel-has-been-given-police-powers-glock-22s-and

      JUST WHAT WE NEED — MORE GOONS WITH GUNS….

  205. Surfisher says:

    LOL — Jesse Ventura makes monkey out of this CNN shill.

    Enjoy this 15 min video

  206. Surfisher says:

    Not sure what the Patriot Act is. Could someone explain it to me — is it like an Act to get rid of Patriots…?

  207. Surfisher says:

    My take:

    This election has been reduced again to voting for the “lesser of two evils” (but which one is the “lesser”?).
    ——————————————————-

    All indicators point that Rmoney is the CHOSEN ONE by the NY and London Banks (the International Banksters that control the Federal Reserve) and by Israel.

    Since their goals are directly opposite to the well-being of our Nation, by deduction this Bought-And-Paid-For-Mitt-Mutton-Puppet MUST NOT win!

    [[Should Rmoney win --- expect the US to start an all out war against Iran to protect Israel from a possible single atomic bomb being developed in...10 years from now...? (certainly not to protect the US from such silly and nonthreatening remote eventuality) within a week of this creature taking office.

    What's even more worrisome, is this Creature's Control of the GOP (forcing a fraudulent "Aye" vote at the RNC convention), thus assuring It won't be opposed to win a 2nd term!

    Eight years of Mutton-Mitt will mean a COMPLETE AND TOTAL DESTRUCTION OF THE USA --- when wars will be started at a drop of an Israeli Hat (sorry, meant to say: yamaka), when the US Constitution will become null-and-void, when the US Dollar will finally become utterly worthless, by a phone call from his Banker Masters (who'll call in their chips).]]
    ———————————————————-

    On the other-hand — the BO Creature will have 4 more years to further plunge us into Socialism and suck us dry through more taxation and further devaluation of the US Dollar and the attempted destruction of our Constitutional Rights.

    This creature will, however, be hampered by some republican wins in both Houses, thus having most of its venomous teeth pulled during its 2nd term.

    [[However, should the BO see itself not as a clear winner, it will assure its reelection by attacking Iran with two weeks to go (mid-to-late October) --- since a "patriotic" War always guarantees the "Commander-and-Chief" a sure win!]]
    ——————————————————

    Conclusion:

    Either subhuman will get us into never ending wars and ever closer to loss of All Liberty, All Prosperity and the eventual Total End of Our Nation as Free People!

    For which “lesser evil” will you vote, now?
    —————————————————-

    I, for one (and my family and friends) will not be party to such infamy! If either of these Horrible Creatures wins, at least we’ll have a clear conscience that we did not compromise our principles by acknowledging their existence in the voting booths!

    We will vote our Conscience — Writing In Dr. Ron Paul!

    A vote on principles is much better than a No Vote — and a trillion times better than voting for what one perceives as the “lesser of two evils”!

    Write in Ron Paul for 2012 President is online!

    Vote and spread it like wildfire!

    http://writeinron2012.com/writeinBlog/about-us/

  208. Surfisher says:

    We Can’t Remake the World with Bribes and Bombs!

    by Ron Paul:

    The attack on the US consulate in Libya and the killing of the US Ambassador and several aides is another tragic example of how our interventionist foreign policy undermines our national security. The more the US tries to control the rest of the world, either by democracy promotion, aid to foreign governments, or by bombs, the more events spin out of control into chaos, unintended consequences, and blowback.

    Unfortunately, what we saw in Libya last week is nothing new.

    In 1980s Afghanistan, the US supported Islamic radicals in their efforts to expel the invading Soviet military. These radicals became what is known to be al-Qaeda, and our one-times allies turned on us most spectacularly on September 11, 2001.

    Iraq did not have a significant al-Qaeda presence before the 2003 US invasion, but our occupation of that country and attempt to remake it in our image caused a massive reaction that opened the door to al-Qaeda, leading to thousands of US soldiers dead, a country destroyed, and instability that shows no sign of diminishing.

    In Libya we worked with, among others, the rebel Libyan Fighting Group (LIFG) which included foreign elements of al-Qaeda. It has been pointed out that the al-Qaeda affiliated radicals we fought in Iraq were some of the same groups we worked with to overthrow Gaddafi in Libya. Last year in a television interview I predicted that the result of NATO’s bombing of Libya would likely be an increased al-Qaeda presence in the country. I said at the time that we may be delivering al-Qaeda another prize.

    Not long after NATO overthrew Gaddafi, the al-Qaeda flag was flown over the courthouse in Benghazi. Should we be surprised, then, that less than a year later there would be an attack on our consulate in Benghazi? We have been told for at least the past eleven years that these people are the enemy who seeks to do us harm.

    There is danger in the belief we can remake the world by bribing some countries and bombing others. But that is precisely what the interventionists – be they liberal or conservative – seem to believe. When the world does not conform to their image, they seem genuinely shocked. The secretary of state’s reaction to the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi was one of confusion. “How could this happen in a country we helped liberate, in a city we helped save from destruction,” she asked.

    The problem is that we do not know and we cannot know enough about these societies we are seeking to remake. We never try to see through the eyes of those we seek to liberate. Libya is in utter chaos, the infrastructure has been bombed to rubble, the economy has ceased to exist, gangs and militias rule by brutal force, the government is seen as a completely illegitimate and powerless US puppet. How could anyone be shocked that the Libyans do not see our bombing their country as saving it from destruction?

    Currently, the US is actively supporting rebels in Syria that even our CIA tells us are affiliated with al-Qaeda. Many of these radical Islamist fighters in Syria were not long ago fighting in Libya. We must learn from these mistakes and immediately cease all support for the Syrian rebels, lest history once again repeat itself. We are literally backing the same people in Syria that we are fighting in Afghanistan and that have just killed our ambassador in Libya! We must finally abandon the interventionist impulse before it is too late.

  209. robertfallin says:

    Gary Johnson’s decision to sue the GOP, DNC and Presidential Debate Commission already demonstrates he is running a better campaign than Ron Paul ever did. I mean, what did Ron Paul’s campaign do for the delegates, cheated, threatened, physically attacked or kidnapped by Romney’s thugs?

    • donjusko says:

      He sounded wimpy at first but now he’s picking up steam. I haven’t heard from his VP yet.

      • robertfallin says:

        Judge Gray at an End the Fed Rally in Boston, where the demonstrators served “notice of eviction” to the Federal Reserve.

      • donjusko says:

        Hi Robert, thanks for the Gary Johnson video, He need his own video crew. Why doesn’t he ask for a money-bomb. A lot of people will and do support the Johnson team.

      • robertfallin says:

        You are well DonJuske. Someone promoted a “Gary Johnson moneybomb” on the DAILY PAUL a few weeks again and it got voted down into oblivion. The sentiment at the DP has changed dramatically since Gary’s commercials, appearances and suit against the Presidential Debate Commission. I think an INTERNET marathon is in order as we could probably get Jesse Ventura, John Stossal and Judge Napolitano to appear.

      • donjusko says:

        It got “voted down”? Only trolls would do that. Why was it put to a vote? It should have just been done. Ron Paul did have a lot of trolls, the biggest guns draw the biggest fire.
        What’s involved in getting money for a video crew for Gary and paying for his TV ads?

      • robertfallin says:

        I have contacted the Gary Johnson site twice about doing an internet marathon to raise money. Jesse Ventura is already campaigning for Johnson and I am sure Judge Napolitano and John Stossel would get involved as well, if their contracts with Fox Business allow this. Jerry Lewis raises nearly $200M with the MD Labor Day Telethon. Even if we raised $10M-$20M, Gary would pick up enough momentum to run a spirited campaign, particularly
        with RP volunteers. Who knows, now that Ron Paul is out of Congress, maybe he would appear.

      • donjusko says:

        It sounds like Gary need someone doing his emails too. Maybe you should call him.

      • robertfallin says:

        Good idea. I may do just that later today.

      • donjusko says:

        Look what I found.. We can make him a perfect candidate.

        GARY JOHNSON 9-25-12 (280 sigs)

        http://libertycrier.com/politics/petition-to-gary-johnson-change-your-foreign-policy-get-the-ron-paul-vote-unite-the-liberty-movement-and-win/

        Dear Gary Johnson,

        We, the undersigned, promise to vote for you if you renounce your pledge to commit U.S. lives and resources to any other nation and if you will adopt a foreign policy stance of; trade and commerce with all nations, no entangling alliances with other nations, and that only Congress has the power to declare war.

        Sincerely,

        And let’s make it interesting. If we can get enough Ron Paul supporters signatures to sign onto this petition by September 30th, and if as a result Gary is willing to change his stance on foreign policy, we’ll throw a moneybomb for Gary Johnson in the first week of October. The money will enter the coffers of his campaign in time to spend for the final push, the time when having money counts most.

      • Surfisher says:

        donjusko — re: your post

        donjusko says:
        September 25, 2012 at 11:34 am

        Gary Johnson should not change his platform (to accommodate us, the Ron Paul supporters) — as a politician (which Ron Paul is not), he, Gary Johnson, knows the reality of what the ignorant masses need to hear in order to garner the most votes.
        Later, he can “amend” his foreign policy (what all politicians do).

        The difference between him and the BO & Perfidy Mitt is that Gary will keep 80% of his campaign promises, while the other two will keep ABSOLUTELY NONE!

      • donjusko says:

        Ok Surfisher,
        Gary did say he would bring the troops home and stop the illegal wars. Promised to submit a balanced budget in his first year. That would require over $1.4 trillion in spending cuts. Cut: Medicaid, Medicare 43% and military spending, He would Eliminate: Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Department of Education (Return education to the states). Johnson has a “non-interventionist” foreign policy” “avoid being the policeman of the world”. He believes businesses succeed when government stays out of the way. He will protect our civil liberties, no gun control.

        Gary Johnson will sue the GOP, DNC and Presidential Debate Commission.
        Johnson is the man “as is”.

      • Surfisher says:

        donjusko — I agree with your (and “robertfallin”) latest posts on basic tactics and strategy for Gary Johnson (and the lack of Ron Paul’s visibility).

        Just need more time to look at all angles to come up with a NEED TO REPLY post by Doug Wead (who is on one-on-one terms with Ron Paul).

        Mulling over several variables (Audit the Feds…how would that be affected by Ron Paul’s possible decisions, alliance with the Libertarian Party (after-all, Ron Paul is a Libertarian, not a professional Republican politician), disassociation from them (or just plain silence), endorsing Gary Johnson, …way too many to list now — but by tomorrow will post my humble thoughts).

  210. ian56789 says:

    Gary Johnson is the pragmatic decision even if you don’t like some of his views/policies. He has 80%+ of the same views as Ron Paul and it sends a message that will be counted, even if MSM want to ignore it (which they will).
    Compared to Romney/Obama which have 0% in common with Ron Paul.
    Write in’s for Ron Paul are even easier to ignore.

    We need to chop the neocon head off the Republican Party snake, before 2016.
    We have 2 chances – 2012 and 2014.

    I don’t think Rand has a chance in 2016, whatever happens.

    Judge Nap would – if he ran and won as a Republican Senate/House candidate in 2014.
    Recent news about the Judge is interesting.
    Up to now he hasn’t been interested in running for anything.
    There is a possibility, although it is slim, of him clearing the decks for a possible run 2014.

    Judge Nap would unite the Liberty people.
    He also has some Establishment credentials, that ordinary voters might respect – the youngest ever permanent NJ Supreme Court judge.
    Could Judge Nap be persuaded to take this option seriously?

    • robertfallin says:

      There is nothing to stop Judge Napolitano running for POTUS in 2016 even he runs for no public office in 2014. However, the Gary Johnson campaign is running better than I could possibly have suspected and he is getting more positive exposure from the MSM than Ron Paul ever did as a presidential candidate. Even now the MSM is having a hard time keeping Romney from imploding. Once Romney’s veneer of “electability” fully evaporates, Johnson actually has a chance of winning. Certainly one of the Johnson campaign’s greatest strengths is Judge Gray. I hope the GJ campaign follows my suggestion and mounts an INTERNET marathon to raise money, as I believe RP supporters would flock to such an effort, particularly if Jesse Ventura, John Stossel, Jon Stewart and Judge Napolitano made appearances. Once elected, I am pretty convinced Gary Johnson would offer Judge Nap the next open Supreme Court seat.

      • ian56789 says:

        According to the latest poll from Zogby Gary Johnson is running at 2%. At best he is at 4 to 5% nationally.
        Gary Johnson needs to change his campaign language and approach if he is to garner more support from ordinary voters. Something like this.

        http://ian56.blogspot.com/2012/09/what-approach-will-gary-johnson-take.html

        And use these

        http://ian56.blogspot.com/2012/09/blame-it-on-fox-news.html

        http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021400937

      • Surfisher says:

        robertfallin — great video above!

        I just spread it as follows:

        Serving Eviction Notice to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston — watch this great video!

        Quote of the month: “The lesser of two evils is still evil” — Jim Gray.

        SHARE!

        (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgJMeJW3TBI&feature=player_embedded)

      • robertfallin says:

        Thanks for the kind words and going viral with the Fed video. We can win this if we work together.

      • ___j___ says:

        “[Gary Johnson running third-party] is getting more positive exposure from the MSM than Ron Paul ever did as a presidential candidate [working from inside the republican party]”

        This is true, to a degree, but mostly because *now* the media sees Gary as a way to get votes away from Mitt, thus boosting Obama’s score accordingly. Remember 2011 when Gary was a two-term governor trying to get into the repub-primary debates, and the media pulled every trick they could to keep him out, but let in Bachmann and Cain and Santorum, plus that one-term-governor Romsomething?

        Just because their behavior seems to differ now, it isn’t because the bias has disappeared. (Sometimes it backfires on them, though — in the PPP poll for CO recently, which borders his homeground of NM, Gary pulled more from Obama than he did from Mitt, giving Mitt the edge over Obama for the first time this year.)

        p.s. I would like Supreme Court Justice Napolitano, as well as Janice Brown. Jim Gray seems okay too. Any other libertarian-leaning judges out there, former or current? As long as they are strong on the strict as-written interpretation of the founding documents, I like them, so often good conservative-republican judges are also good for us libertarian-leaning republican folks, but ones like Judge Nap, bonus.

    • Surfisher says:

      Watch this video from minute 7:28 to 22:20 — (total length 43 min).

      Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and war correspondent Chris Hedges, a liberal, slams Obama (and more)!

  211. John says:

    I think I’ll be voting for Gary Johnson.

    Voting for either establishment candidate lends credence to their actions; enough said.

    At this point I don’t believe that a Ron Paul write-in will be counted or reported. Most states require write-in candidates to file paper work to be counted. I don’t think this paperwork is getting filed. Even if it is we don’t have a means in place to keep them honest in the reported count.

    I don’t think any of the other third party candidates can garner enough votes to be meaningful.

    Gary Johnson may represent a vote for the lesser of three evils in many peoples minds and I’ll admit even to me. But then that is the very nature of politics. Even many of Dr. Paul’s supporters don’t agree with all of his views and/or decisions.

    So in politics we are left with the question, is voting for any of the proffered candidates worth the effort. Is there a potential for actually improving the situation. To be honest I’m not sure there is considering the election fraud and mass media. But to do nothing also lends credence to the (D) & (R) party.

    A third party candidate with >20% of the vote has the potential to persuade some voters to start considering third party candidates, especially if the winner gets less than 40%. I think this is a very real possibility if the votes aren’t stolen.

    Based on his track record as governor I think he may do some good if elected and would throw a money wrench into the (R) & (D) party plans.

  212. Surfisher says:

    “Debates” or Debasement…?!

    Who’s Afraid of an Open Debate? The Truth About the Commission on Presidential “Debates”!

    SPREAD THIS LIKE WILDFIRE!
    ———————————————————————

    Superb exposé on yet another FRAUD perpetrated against the American People:

    (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=1NXhoP5bQ2M)

  213. Jim says:

    Beautiful! I just learned 500 copies of this highly informative book have been purchased specifically to be donated to leading University Libraries across the nation so that young college students (who Paul targets like a child predator) will be armed with the TRUTH in 2016.

  214. Surfisher says:

    Some clever bumper-stickers that should be made:

    Print two — place one on the left side (L) and the other on the right side (R) on your bumper.

    L) “VOTE OBAMA…
    to End our Free Nation”

    R) VOTE ROMNEY…
    to End our Free Nation”

    Wouldn’t this be cute….
    ———————————

    What should go in the middle?

  215. Surfisher says:

    Question all Americans need to be asked in a poll (this will be a revelation):

    Who do you fear as mostly likely to invade your own home?

    A) A single Muslim terrorist..or five.

    or

    B) Our own government’s Policing Forces (too many to list, but here are some — Local Police, SWAT, IRS armed agents, FDA, EPA, Federal Reserve armed agents, ATF, FBI, National Guard, the US Armed forces under NDAA directives, TSA, Am-Track police, State Troopers, etc.; all numbering in the million plus!)
    ————————————————-

    Vote now — and let’s see the tally.

    My vote is B (by simple arithmetic).

  216. jj roon says:

    How about a website, iwouldhavevotedforronpaul.org ?

    Where we all could fill out ballots!

  217. aurelbarber says:

    Ladies and Gentlemen, dont get involved in others issues, like GJ and the others. The only actions are: WRITE-IN RON PAUL 2012 and Complete the TAKE-OVER of the REPUBLICAN PARTY. Join the Campaign WRITE-IN RP 2012 of the Grassroots RP and bring all the FRACTIONS FOR FREEDOM-LIBERTY TOGETHER. Dont waste your time, money, energy, etc on somethingelse NOW! UNITE AND SPREAD THE MESSAGE!

    Sincerly yours
    aurel barber

    • robertfallin says:

      Your strategy has not worked and will not work. The GOP establishment stole the nomination from “Mr. Republican,” Senate Minority (and Majority) Leader Bob Taft at least twice. When Senator Goldwater actually managed to win the nomination, in spite of their thievery, Senate Minority Leader Hugh Scott, Governor Nelson Rockefeller, Pennsylvania Governor Bill Scranton and Michigan Governor George Romney so slandered Goldwater’s reputation, that the ensuing debacle gave the Lydon Johnson veto-proof majorities in the House and Senate. The GOP is rotten to the core. It is best to put it out of its misery and the best way to do that is the rise of another party, just as the Whigs supplanted the Federalists and the Republicans the Whigs.

      • aurelbarber says:

        The time has changed, throu internet, millions of people, like me, had aquired the KNOWLEDGE of what is going on. RP movement controls already 11-12 States and in 2 years maybe 2/3 of all the States. This is the only chance not to become a communist( Faschist ) State.

      • robertfallin says:

        Oh yeah, just like the lawsuits worked and the convention strategy worked. Johnson is actually making an effort to fight the GOP and the Presidential Debate Commission, which is more than Ron Paul ever did. If Ron Paul was leading the effort to have his name placed on the ballot or the write-in effort, I would feel differently. However, you are right about one thing; this is the only chance not to become a communist (fascist) state.

      • donjusko says:

        Aurel, Johnson can control as much as RP and he’s in the race now. It’s about issues not people.
        I liked Robertfallin’s reply. “Romney needs to come in 3rd, and that will only happen if we get behind Gary Johnson. As much as I would to see the GOP decimated at the polls, Johnson could save many endangered incumbents from extinction; and those candidates would be beholding to Johnson and might actually start doing the right thing.” Johnson seems to have a big following and it’s growing.

      • Surfisher says:

        robertfallin — good post, gives food for thought (I’ve been thinking along similar lines, and soon will post my take…directed at Doug Wead).

        GOP = Crooks-R-Us

        On the rotting GOP — actually they’ve become temporarily stronger (since having created a dictatorship within the Republican Party with their CRIMINALLY FALSE “The Ayes Have It” (the whole World saw the print on the teleprompter as the end result, BEFORE the vote was taken (a machine “knew” IN ADVANCE the “final vote tally”))!

        See this infamy here — at minute 1:57 the teleprompter is already starting to show the end result: “In the opinion of the Chair, the “ayes” have it, and the resolution is adopted.”
        Then at minute 1:59 the Chair asks all those opposed to say “no”. And at minute 2:00 you hear a resounding NO till minute 2:03…but why bother to hear the people, when their “ayes” already “won”…before to vote was taken!

        And our media is still SILENT — but all around the world saw it — 2:35 minute video recording that will never go away!

        (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=77W5OKStO5s)

        Since all dictatorships use strong armed tactics to ensure their dead dogma is unchallenged and nurtured, they always prosper historically for a while (especially in the beginning after the dictatorial creation).

        But, eventually their DEAD DOGMA becomes exposed without, and no matter how hard their enforces try to resuscitate it within, it implodes by lack of observable merit. (History is the ultimate litmus test, showing this to be always true, so far).
        ————————————————————————–

        The short term danger is that now The Mitt has dictatorial control over the GOP — and should he remotely succeed in winning the election, his 2nd run WILL BE as THE CHOSEN AND ONLY ONE REPUBLICAN (no other will even be acknowledged as existing — Rand Paul will neutered de facto, and will become persona non grata under this scenario)!

        The beneficial side is that the FRAUDS (upon frauds, and frauds) committed by the GOP to assure this Dictatorial Takeover of the Republican Party has been witnessed and recorded for posterity.
        Should The Mitt lose (and that’s a MUST to save our Nation) — the GOP Elite will take such a beating that the Republican Party will take years to recover (opening the door for a Valid Third Party)!

      • robertfallin says:

        Good comment. I did make one error. Hugh Scott was Minority Whip, not Minority Leader (Minority Leader Dirksen was far more benign in his handling of Senator Goldwater).
        However, a Mitt Romney defeat, however desirable, is not enough, just as a George H. W. Bush defeat in 1992 was not enough. Romney needs to come in 3rd, and that will only happen if we get behind Gary Johnson. As much as I would to see the GOP decimated at the polls, Johnson could save many endangered incumbents from extinction; and those candidates would be beholding to Johnson and might actually start doing the right thing.

  218. aurelbarber says:

    Ladies and Gentlemen, the LAWSUIT against Romney and GOPS was only the beginning of more LAWSUITS that will fallow soon. Its very important to file the Suits in order to have a record of FRAUD.
    Mr. Doug Weed has a very dificult task: TO UNITE ALL THE LIBERTY FORCES FOR 2 GOALS!
    1. WRITE-IN DR. PAUL IN ALL THE STATES.
    2. COMPLETE THE TAKE OVER OF THE REP. PARTY.

    Sincerly yours
    aurel barber

    • robertfallin says:

      Gary is running at up to 8% in some polls. One of Gary Johnson’s biggest obstacles as Ron Paul supporters either clinging to the lawsuit to put Ron Paul on all 50 state ballots or of writing in Ron Paul. It took me at least two weeks after the GOP Convention to decide the best approach was to support Gary Johnson. Others may take considerably longer.

  219. donjusko says:

    This is the first that I heard Doug was in on this write in. I want to see it in his words. Second, do we have Ron Paul’s permission? Will he except the fact that we want to write him in as a country? Gary Johnson is doing pretty good right now.

    http://www.whiteoutpress.com/index.php/?survey_voted=1#survey-form-19038

    Which Presidential Candidate do you support? Vote Now!
    You’ve voted on this survey. 9-25-12
    Question: Which Presidential candidate do you support in the 2012 general election?
    7% Barack Obama (D)
    57% Gary Johnson (L)
    8% Mitt Romney (R)
    11% Jill Stein (G)
    1% Rocky Anderson (J)
    1% Roseanne Barr (PF)
    2% Virgil Goode (C)
    8% Stewart Alexander (S)
    0% Tom Hoefling (A)
    0% Andre Barnett (RP)
    4% Merlin Miller (ATP)
    0% Ed Noonan (AIP)
    0% James Harris (SWP)
    0% Jerry White (SEP)
    997 Votes

    • Jim says:

      Here are Doug’s own words on the subject from the article:
      3. Write in Ron Paul’s name?

      This was what I was going to do but who would ever know the final number? It would give me some personal satisfaction, and amuse a few poll watchers, but otherwise mean nothing. No one would get the message. There is even a chance that my ballot could be disqualified and all the other viable Liberty candidates I voted for would lose my support as well.

      • robertfallin says:

        When I suggest the Ron Paul campaign work with Jesse Ventura (Reform), Ralph Nader (Green), Chuck Baldwin (Constitution) and his own connections with the Libertarians to secure Ron Paul the nomination for EACH of these parties, I was ignored. When I promoted Ron Paul at Americans Elect, I was ignored. When I suggested the campaign sue Bill O’Reilly for slander I was ignored. When I suggested Attorneys for Ron Paul sue over voter and delegate fraud, I was ignored. So, I will certainly ignore Doug Wead when he suggest I write in Ron Paul’s name, PARTICULARLY since Ron Paul is not leading a write-in campaign. Gary Johnson at least fights for a fair deal.

    • Surfisher says:

      robertfallin — below is what I want answered by Doug Wead.

      I agree that time is short and if no response is given, we should confer on the best strategy to support Gary Johnson!

      • robertfallin says:

        Good, reasonable comment. Now I hope you get a better response than we ever got from the Ron Paul campaign.

      • Surfisher says:

        robertfallin — time is of the essence!

        If no response is given by the end of week, let’s confer on the best way to softly start a conversion of my fellow Ron Paul supporters to vote for another fellow Libertarian (and afterwards crank it up some more).

        How does that sound?

      • robertfallin says:

        It sounds perfectly reasonable to me, Sunfisher. Thanks for asking.
        BTW, I find it absolutely amazing how many sanctimonious people at the DAILY PAUL have said to mine and others who have made critical comments, “Ron Paul doesn’t owe you ANYTHING.’” EXCUSE ME, but Ron Paul asked for our help time and again. I posted about 50 videos to YouTube, putting in 40+ hours a week when I retired and at least 20 hours a week before. Others sacrificed much more, just so Ron Paul could let an overpaid jerk like Jesse Benton run a crappy campaign and squander much of Ron Paul’s political capital, leaving an estimated $2M unspent while doing virtually no advertising in key state primaries. I am grateful Ron Paul ran, only because a grassroots movement mobilized behind his words. Otherwise, Dr. Paul should have campaigned for Gary Johnson from the getgo. Sure, I do not agree with Gary Johnson on some issued. However, I do not like the way Ron Paul dumped on “911 Truthers” while admitting to We Are Change that truthers were “on to something.” I was in good company, as both Alex Jones and Jesse Ventura were also able to overlook Dr. Paul’s shabby treatment of “truthers.” Now, the same mindset that tried to get “911 Truth” postings banned from THE DAILY PAUL for over 4 years is dumping on Gary Johnson, because Gary does not agree with Dr. Paul on every issue.

      • ___j___ says:

        Robert, some comments about particular things you brought up. (See also my stossel-video comment below on the more general question.)

        Making suggestions to the RonPaul2012 campaign-staff is fine. I’ve done it myself. But they, as individuals, have to make up their own minds, and then do what they think is best. None of my suggestions were taken, either, and I am 100% perfectly okay with that. Why would I not be? I’m not the campaign-staff. They don’t take orders from me. I wouldn’t *want* them to, either, because this is the liberty-movement, not a force-other-people-to-do-what-I-say movement. If I wanted that sort of power, I would join the dems, or the theocons. By the same token, I don’t want to take orders from Doug, or for that matter Ron Paul; I want liberty, to make up my own mind. You say that you are not going to take Doug’s suggestion, because he didn’t take yours… but, his suggestion is really just that, a suggestion, not an order. He *wants* you to decide for yourself, and in exchange, he wants to be at liberty to make his own decisions, on whether or not to take your suggestions.

        I will also chime in with the others, although perhaps I can be more tactful about it than the DailyPaul folks were, by forming advice as questions: do you believe that Ron Paul owes you his obedience? Or, Doug Wead? Or any other human, with the possible exception of your dependent kids, if you have any, that need an adult guardian until they are independent adults in their own right? Donating time and effort and money to the campaign gives you exactly zero claim on Ron Paul’s positions, actions, and thoughts. That is why they call it donating, aka giving.

        As you point out, Ron Paul asked for our help, and he got it. He didn’t sign a contract that he would thus be our *employee* from then on, subject to changing his mind based on our desires. Anybody who supported him should have understood that he was not for sale, to any kind of “lobbyist” or interest-group, no matter how well-intentioned. Other candidates are clearly for sale, and just as clearly cast their votes and form their positions based on what their leash-handlers say. That is not what we want for the liberty-movement, because that is not what a liberty-candidate does.

        You want a more responsive campaign in 2014 and 2016, run in some different fashion? Fine, then either be a volunteer (or an employee if you prefer) for those future campaigns, or run for office yourself, or pick a candidate who will run for office in a way that you approve of. That is what the liberty-movement is about: dive in and fix it. You want more advertising during the primaries in 2016? Great, start soliciting donations now, or pick a PAC that is already planning to do such things. Make a list of people that are willing to block walk, for your own state, or whatever key-primary-state(s) you have in mind. Why not start block-walking for liberty now, while we’re at it? You want people to believe that 9/11 truthers are right? Then hire some private investigators, and get some hard evidence, or find a whistleblower on the inside. You want Ron Paul to support Gary Johnson, then suggest it to him, with well-reasoned arguments. But a suggestion is merely a suggestion, nothing more… and for my part, I suggest you keep that in mind, please.

      • robertfallin says:

        Perhaps I did not make myself clear. I am not saying I will not follow Doug Wead’s suggestions because the campaign did not follow mine. I am saying I will not follow Doug Wead’s suggestions because the campaign clearly squandered nearly every opportunity to gain Ron Paul the nomination; the result may not have been different had they chose to follow my suggestions; we will never know that, will we? I did not suggest the lawsuit Gary Johnson presently has against the Presidential Debates Commission. However, the Gary Johnson campaign did this on their own, which is, without a doubt, the biggest reason I began promoting Gary Johnson rather than just choosing to vote for him and keeping my choice to myself.

      • ___j___ says:

        That said, I support your push to get more people to vote for Gary Johnson. Especially among folks who live in heavily-dem-leaning or heavily-repub-leaning states … where their vote for the libertarian candidate gives *zero* actual penalty to Mitt & Obama … and thus eliminates both the worry that establishment folks will blame the liberty-movement for their guy losing, as well as makes selling GJ easier to the everyday voters, since we can mathematically show they are free to vote as they wish (the electoral college votes in their state already being set in stone). I think promoting Gary will help the liberty-movement in the long-run, even though I am pessimistic about his chances of success in 2012.

        However, I disagree with you on an important point: the data shows that you are wrong when you claim that his biggest obstacle is lack of support from people that want to write-in Ron Paul, or people that prefer Virgil Goode. In other words, people that are *already* in the liberty-movement. The biggest hindrance to Gary Johnson is that he is in a third party. That means he gets no special favors from the media, unless they have an ulterior motive. It also means he is vastly dramatically outclassed in the funding department. This lack of cash translates directly to poor performance in polls now, and with only 40 days remaining, will be his biggest problem in the ballot-booth. Polls are one way to gauge electability. Another way: Gary Johnson has 265k likes, compared to 234k just a few weeks ago — which is an impressive 13% growth-rate. But… Ron Paul has >1M, Mitt 8M, Barack 29M. Gary Johnson has already blown the doors off Rick Santorum in likeability, and is prolly going to surpass Newt Gingrich soon, but there is only one month left.

        Plenty of people ignore politics until the last second, and get their news only from the mainstream media. That’s not even counting the millions who *entirely* ignore politics, and are too apathetic to vote. And sure, there are plenty of cluefull people that aren’t on facebook, but most of them will never hear about Gary Johnson. The best way to make a massive number of people hear about you is to have the mainstream media in your pocket, but that trick only applies to the two dominant parties. The next best way is to have a ton of money, and a good message, which is how Ross Perot was able to do so well (in terms of popvote … he still got zero ecVotes). Gary has nearly $2M which is four times as much as the Green party and ten times as much as the Constitution Party. But… Ron Paul had $39M, Mitt has $233M, Obama has $356M. This is not even counting ‘issue’ advertising by corporations and unions and PACs, nor all the ‘free’ advertising in the form of media-saturation which the two dominant parties enjoy.

        Those are the facts. But all is not lost. Below is a link to some reasonably-useful polling-data from the beginning of September, where of 798 people, 34 said they would vote for Gary Johnson. That is 4.3%, which, if he can maintain that through election day, would translate into 5M people — an extremely respectable number. Ron Paul got half-a-percent in 1988 aka 0.5M people, and during the primaries in 2012 got 2M people, which if translated to a hypothetical third-party run in November would at least double. Perot got 18% in 1992, about 20M people. If Gary Johnson can get 10M people to vote for him in 2012, which would be ~8% of the votes cast, that would be a major coup for the liberty-movement. http://www.jzanalytics.com/DATA/Crosstabs_JZA_Voters_2way_and_3way_HR_083112.pdf Per that study, at least, Gary pulls about a third of his voters from the tea-party movement, another third from the occupy movement, and the rest from other sorts of people. Point being, why *focus* on converting Ron Paul fans over to Gary Johnson? They will probably convert themselves over, just as you did, by thinking things through in their own good time.

        You will probably get better results if you approach occupy-leaning dems, who are unhappy with the broken promises that Obama made regarding civil liberties and foreign policy and the drug war, and let them know about Gary Johnson. There are also independents, some of whom dislike Obama economic policy, and some of whom dislike Romney social policy, that could be GJ converts. But I think the richest mining is to be found in people that never bother to vote anymore, on the basis that all the candidates are evil, so why bother voting at all — if we can reach those people, and show them GJ really *is* different, we might really tip the scales.

        Block walking, with a one-page-comparison that highlights the similiarity of Mitt and Obama versus the clear difference of Johnson (and maybe Virgil Goode also to appeal to folks for whom abortion is a dealkiller) is the only way to do that. But it’s a pretty cheap campaign tactic, too — just takes volunteers, plus a printer.

      • robertfallin says:

        i, the reason I said the lack of support of Gary Johnson by RP supporters planning to write-in Ron Paul is that RP supporter can strongly influence momentum, particularly in the areas of fund raising and voter expectations. Had the RP campaign not ignored or even harassed the grassroots, Dr. Paul’s influence would have been dramatically magnified. Look at all the “free” publicity Ron Paul received from Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Jay Leno, Judge Andrew Napolitano, Jesse Ventura and Jon Stossel. Had the campaign EXPLOITED that publicity, Ron Paul’s momentum would not have dissipated between the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries.

      • donjusko says:

        Would you have stopped campaigning if you could fill a stadium just by announcing you would be there? Neither would I. Something else happened. Something that stopped him cold.

        Now we have Gary Johnson following Ron’s path. I’m behind the man, it’s issues not the person or party. It’s the Constitution, follow it or be dammed.

      • robertfallin says:

        Amen, DonJ. I was never a “Ron Paul” supporter. I was a Constitutionalist inspired by many of the words and deeds of Ron Paul. Liberty and the rule of law is bigger than one individual.

      • donjusko says:

        Hi RobertF, I just got an email.
        We just spent $20,000,000 to move members/supporters of Hamas, a terrorist organization, to the United States ; housing, food, transportation, the whole enchilada.
        HB 1388 PASSED
        EVERYONE IN THE U.S. Needs to know…. H.R. 1388 was passed, behind our backs. You may want to read about it…
        It wasn’t mentioned on the news… Just went by on the ticker tape at the bottom of the CNN screen.

        Obama funds $20M in tax payer dollars to immigrate Hamas Refugees to the USA . This is the news that did not, and will not, make the headlines.
        By executive order, President Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20..3 million in “migration assistance” to the Palestinian refugees and “conflict victims” in Gaza ..
        The “presidential determination” which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States , was signed and appears in the Federal Register.

        Few on Capitol Hill, or in the media, took note that the order provides a free ticket replete with housing, transportation and food allowances to individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support to the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the parliamentary election of January 2006.

        Now we learn that he is allowing thousands of Palestinian refuges to move to, and live in, the US at American taxpayer expense.
        These important, and insightful, issues are being “lost” in the blinding bail-outs and “stimulation” packages.
        Doubtful? To verify this for yourself:
        http://www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488< http://www.thefederalregister.com/d.p/2009-02-04-E9-2488%3e;

        We are losing this country at a rapid rate, Romney will do it even faster. Vote Gary Johnson.

      • robertfallin says:

        Amen, DonJusko. We really have only three options; elect Gary Johnson, break out the ammo or roll over and die. To paraphrase “The Princess Bride,” “Anyone who says differently is selling something.”

      • ___j___ says:

        Robert, well said. As donjusko mentioned, though, the loss of popvote momentum (i.e. speeches in stadiums) was not due to *incompetent* squandering by the campaigners, but a conscious tactical decision after Something Else happened. Namely, the threat by the Romney campaign of PR-bomb-style character assassination attack adverts (plus Chicago dems in the haus), made in the NE-to-ME primary Feb timeframe. See my other comments here on this blogpost about CREWS and the like, plus the video of Doug Wead just after Tampa, if you want the gory details. We don’t have any firm info, but tentatively I have concluded that part of the reason for not ramping up the speeches post-Gingrich was more secret threats about PR-nukes, although I have only circumstantial evidence (dates of some renewed smear-stories). So…

        “not follow Doug Wead’s suggestions because the campaign clearly squandered..” You and DonJusko are actually on the *same* side as Doug Wead was at the time: keep fighting to win, full steam ahead, torpedos be damned. Let the attack adverts come! Others on the campaign (unnamed but implied to be Benton) argued that with Romney’s money, ties to the media, and nasty lawyer team, any character-assassination attempt *might* have derailed not just the RP2012 campaign, but the liberty-movement itself. I tend to agree with that assessment (and apparently so did Ron Paul), which means I am therefore one of the people who was happy with the Benton/Tate/Kesari delegate-strategy Plan_B, despite fewer speeches after February, and even fewer after May. Yes, the del-strat didn’t end up giving us the win in 2012… but that was always a long shot no matter *what* strategy we used. I wish we had won, but I think we did decently, provided we manage to get rule#12 overturned or neutered (cf my other comments on how).

        “result may not have been different had they chose to follow my suggestions; we will never know that, will we?” Yes, 2012 is over. But there are many other races, in 2014 and 2016. Some of your ideas seem like winners to me, although others sound too aggressive (I am particularly leery of suing left and right — partly because it seems too aggressive a tactic — but mostly because I think the establishment types like Mitt will tend to have ‘better’ lawyers and why fight them on their own ground when we can win more hearts&minds every time they cheat?). You ought to get involved with some candidate in 2014. You have the passion and drive, certainly. If my prediction turns out correct, and GJ doesn’t manage a come-from-behind victory this November, my hope is that he will run for the open NM senate seat in 2014; maybe you can help him with that. Or a candidate in your own state, assuming you don’t happen to live in NM.

        Point being, methinks that your ideas *are* worth trying. We might never know 100% whether they would have changed rp2012, but we can do statistical simulations to be 90% sure, if we try the ideas elsewhere. There are plenty of races in which to experiment, and just like the free market tends to produce the best products and services, friendly competition amongst liberty-minded campaigners will boost our success-ratio. Emphasis on friendly, though; Tom Woods, for example, thinks that Benton & Tate are bad guys. Ditto for Kokesh. You seem to have a beef with Doug Wead, even though from what I can tell you guys wanted the same thing! None of that is helpful, because it is hindsight. I would rather Tom Woods run a campaign of his own, and Kokesh run for office again, than spend time and energy attacking other people in the liberty movement as Sinister Betrayers. What is this, the new era of Joe McCarthy? Are we the liberty-movement, or the Objectivist Party? Look at the guy Jim that I argued with above, who wants to purge the wackos from the liberty-movement… including Ron Paul himself…! Sigh. I’ve seen Tom Woods videos since 2008, and he seems like fine folk to me, but now that rp2012 is over, he has dediced that the best way to advance liberty is airing complaints and accusations and bitterness and conspiracy, rather than making a constructive critique and then moving on to more useful things.

        We can all disagree, but we must be civil about it, especially when we don’t know all the facts (we are still under the fog of politics), and *doubly* especially since the hostile estab-repubs and hostile media are quite happy to watch us spin our wheels on petty infighting. Sure, I have no doubt the rp2012 campaign could have been run better — I don’t mean to imply that *all* criticism is petty — it’s important to criticize our appointed candidates & staff (just like our elected reps). But make the criticism constructive and forward-looking, with an eye to improving the overall success of liberty in the long run. Okay, end sermon. Carry on. [grin]

        p.s. Ben Swann WXIX, Lionel WPIX, and some RT folks should also be on that list of helpful public speakers… add Drew Carey and Penn Gillette and often Clint ‘chairman’ Eastwood. Not to mention GJ and Virgil Goode… Walter Jones, Justin Amash, Rand Paul, Jim DeMint, Barry Goldwater Jr… while we’re having a lovefest, Peter Thiel and John Ramsey et al. Heck, I’ll even put Hillary, despite ulterior motives: youtube.com/watch?v=jJky1akj-Vo At the end of the day, the grassroots volunteers, internet bloggers, the staffers, and the small-dollar donors are what gave the motive power. Musicians! Even tho our guy was unable to become the nominee, I expect to see this liberty-list grow and grow in 2013+.

        p.p.s. I also loved the Constitution (& Declaration, et al) before I knew about Ron Paul — both the candidate, and the authors of the founding documents, strongly & consistently support life, property, liberty, the pursuit of happiness… which is why the liberty movement will continue, despite the Tampa fiasco and CPD. Lives, fortunes, and sacred honor, yeah baby yeah.

      • robertfallin says:

        i, I really do not “have a beef” with Doug Wead, per se. Doug was certainly the best of RP advisers. I am a first hand witness of the “character assassination” campaign used by the GOP establishment against Barry Goldwater in 1964. However, NO ONE can convince me the campaign could have stopped one in its tracks by suing Bill O’Reilly and Fox New for BILLIONS of dollars over O’Reilly slandering Ron Paul for saying EXACTLY the same thing O’Reilly said when O’Reilly interviewed Mitt Romney and debated Iran Policy. While not reported at the time, Rupert Murdoch and News Corp were already in serious trouble in the UK and Fox News would have folded like an accordion. Had the campaign responded to foreign policy smears against Ron Paul, using statements by Colonels Douglas MacGregor and Lawrence Wilkerson and Lt. Colonel Anthony Shafer during the critical period between Iowa and South Carolina, coupled with Ron Paul using a more adversarial approach at the debates (which, I believe, was the big reason for the “Gingrich surge”), Dr. Paul would very likely have done MUCH better in South Carolina (even with the Romney “vote flipping”.) I do not know whether Doug proposed any of these things, but I do feel he is in a perfect position to say so now. Until then, I will continue to have doubts about Doug Wead.

      • donjusko says:

        You have an opinion, that Gary won’t win. I think he will win. They are both just opinions, I think he will win because he’s what the people want. It’s issues not people. Obama and Romney have the wrong side of issues. Now all let’s work together here. If Ron Paul is on the ballot in all 50 states, he’s the man. If not, Gary Johnson’s the man. Nobody votes for Romney.

      • donjusko says:

        _ j_, you mis-quoted me. I said, “Would you have stopped campaigning if you could fill a stadium just by announcing you would be there? Neither would I. Something else happened. Something that stopped him cold.”
        That was after a comment that Romney had money and could stop him. I didn’t agree with that and said so.

        You said I agreed that Romney could do it with..
        “Namely, the threat by the Romney campaign of PR-bomb-style character assassination attack.”

        No way, Paul would never think that Romney could stop him, It was something else entirely that took him of the campaign trail. IMO.

      • ___j___ says:

        Sorry donjusko, didn’t mean to put words in your mouth. I assumed (my bad) that your reference to something-else was talking about the PR-atomic-bomb threat that Doug Wead mentioned in his video, but it seems you have another theory. Back in May there was an email implying that the rp2012 campaign was running short on funds — and that this was the main reason for concentrating on winning delegates rather than seeking popvotes… with the idea that winning popvotes takes massive cash for teevee and the like. Is that the something-else you were speaking of, or do you have another something-else in mind?

        Hmm.. getting a bit hard to form coherent sentences on this topic, so let’s use some numeric identifiers. Theory#1: rp2012 ran short on cash, as the main cause for spending less effort seeking the popvotes (implied in the May emails — but may not explain March & April). Theory#2A&B: rp2012 was worried about long-term consequences of a smear campaign for Rand Paul in particular, or the liberty-movement in general (per report by Doug Wead — who says he was personally in favor of fighting back anyway but the decision didn’t go his way). Theory#3: many rp2012 staffers were sinister betrayers and saboteurs (this explanation seems to be favored by a vocal internet minority willing to make accusations without more than circumstantial evidence — I don’t buy it though). Donjusko, do you have a theory#4, or are you just dissatisfied with the explanatory powers of the listed theories as being the whole story?

        From what I’ve seen, combo #2B and #1 are the explanation. As for poor decisions (theory#3) on the part of staffers at the national level, I’m sure there were some — impossible to run a political campaign without making mistakes. In particular, I would say that the commnet for transmitting strategy and tactics needs to be improved. This is partly the fault of the staff, for not ‘doing better’ at this (again tho: hindsight), but methinks it is mostly the way Ron Paul *is* inherently — he doesn’t like to tell people what to do, he wants them to think for themselves. That is one of his best characteristics. It is, at the core, exactly what a libertarian-leaning politician *should* want, and should act like.

        Still, that doesn’t mean us libertarian-leaning folks that see practical problems with running the campaign in libertarian fashion (everybody do as they wish and nobody ordering other people around) should not take the message of liberty to heart, and work ourselves to fix the commnet for future campaigns. I plan to work on that problem, so that 2014 conventions are better coordinated … but without losing the spirit of liberty in the process. More transparent does not have to mean top-down command-n-control, methinks. There were also some personnel-choices that people were unhappy with — I’ve yet to see any non-circumstantial evidence of the national staff doing things oh-so-badly, but I did see some legitimate complaints about the guy who was appointed as the official rp2012 leader for oklahoma for instance (he was caught sending very rude emails to state party folks … but was not replaced). Maybe that was a commnet thing, though?

      • ___j___ says:

        RobertFallin, you say: the campaign could have stopped one [a char-assassination attack] in its tracks by suing Bill O’Reilly … for slandering Ron Paul. [And,] using statements by Colonels … coupled with Ron Paul using a more adversarial approach at the debates

        I agree with the middle part — obviously public endorsements of the Ron Paul foreign strategy would have helped. As for the other parts, and to some extent the middle part, I think you are trying to suggest things that Ron Paul would not do. This doesn’t mean you are wrong; in particular, being aggressive during debates is a necessary part of the political system we suffer under, which caters to sound-bites and big talk, not to calm rational discussion of important issues.

        But that is not how Ron Paul does things. He’s not overly aggressive. He is calm and rational. He doesn’t sue people for billions of dollars. He turns the other cheek. He doesn’t *seek out* endorsements that will be politically advantageous at crucial junctures. He just waits for the potential endorsees to decide, on their own, when and how to endorse him. Many of these qualities are why we respect Ron Paul, of course. (Remember when in the debates he said he never gives up on his opponents seeing the light, when auditing the Fed started to become popular amongst the presidential hopefuls? That was classic.)

        Anyway, the point is, some of the things you point out can be ‘fixed’, simply by getting a candidate that is willing to sue pundits for slander, actively seek endorsements, and engage in Newt-style attack-debating. But are those fixes going to help the overall picture, in the long-term? In other words, is the cure worse than the disease?

        Lawsuits are a difficult one; even when they work, sometimes you end up shooting yourself in the foot. And even when they fail, they are always expensive and frustrating. Plus, the establishment has access to nastier lawyers. (Harrison Ford, Regarding Henry.)

        Even the seemingly-innocent practice of actively seeking and soliciting endorsements, which sounds so obviously wise at first glance, is risky. There is a lot of scratch-my-back-now-and-I’ll-scratch-yours-later. Obviously, Ron Paul is not susceptible to such corruption — but it can give the appearance of corruption, if he is seen to be *actively* seeking such. Moreover, thinking to the future, we are unlikely to get another guy with as much resistance to corruption as Ron Paul. Think of all those years in congress, the only guy who lobbyists stopped bothering to visit. That is rare and unusual, and we will miss it.

        Attack-debating I have mixed feelings about. Gingrich ‘won’ many of the debates, but he was absolutely fourth place in terms of his electability, as indicated by statewide polls among all voters, as opposed to republicans-only. People respected his skill, but would not vote for him. Romney was first in the polls (helped by the media), with Ron Paul a reasonably close second (and still able to win the electoral college despite many claims that he was unelectable in the general election). Santorum was aggressive, and it won him a lot of popvotes among heavily-republican-leaning states, but he was utterly unelectable in the general election, because most swing-states and all dem-leaning states saw him as a dangerously-aggressive theocrat. Gingrich was *below* even Santorum, which says a lot. By contrast, look at Reagan, for instance. He was not an attack-debater for the most part. When he did attack, it was devastating: Mr Gorbachev, Tear Down This Wall

        Anyways, I guess I will repeat my suggestion from before: find a willing candidate (or be the candidate), and try some of these things out. That way we can all find what works best, in the short-term and the long-term. I’m not sure all your ideas are winners. (I’m particularly leery about suing for slander… why not just show people that O’Reilly said the exact same thing on that specific issue, and is a hypocrite in general, by making a youtube video comparing how Bill treats Mitt versus how he treats Ron Paul?) But I am sure *some* of them are winners, and I think we can find out which ones, via trial by fire.

  220. Surfisher says:

    Doug, are you still Ron Paul’s senior adviser?

    If so, please, have a conversation with Dr Paul, and then inform us what his intentions are. We spent too much effort trying to get him elected, to be left now with just silence on your and his part. We, his supporters, have been left in limbo!

    If he is to utilize the Liberty Movement, that has grown exponentially in numbers, to endorse Gary Johnson (or have us Write In Ron Paul as protest vote)— it needs to be announced ASAP! With only 39 days left, it is negligent to the extreme to allow an election that goes unchallenged by a Third Party with all the support that has been garnered so far in opposition to the BO and the Mitt.

    Awaiting an announcement by end of week!
    ————————————————————–

    Doug Wead, if you are no longer Ron Paul’s adviser, let us now — so we can decide what should be done without adhering to your blog’s intent.

    Thank you in advance,

    Surfisher

  221. donjusko says:

    Neither one is going to answer, no support for the write-in, no support for Johnson, no answer from Doug. That leaves us with Johnson which I’m Ok with. I would love to have us all write in Ron Paul and there has be a motion submitted to a judge to rule that write-ins are guaranteed by the Constitution.

    https://docs.google.com/file/d/1H9GGiLIKUg8fxBL-WVegmvbCnHttrKVcznJj8L7my_e4UpowaU_diesjgXk4/edit?pli=1&fb_source=message

    This is in the United States District Court Central, District of California. Read page 1, jump to page 47, read to page 59.

  222. ___j___ says:

    @Don, Surfisher, Robert: we *already* have our marching orders, from the 31st of August, a month ago. 7 minutes, worth watching:

    http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/index.html#/v/1815715535001/kennedys-view-of-the-rnc/?playlist_id=87530

    Here are the relevant quotes, if you cannot spare the seven minutes.

    Kennedy&Stossel == [when you visited the convention floor in Tampa] What did you tell your delegates? RonPaul == …Thank you, I love your enthusiasm, do your best, that sort of thing — nothing, uh, no particulars.

    Kennedy&Stossel == …fighting for the soul of the party, they want to keep your message alive — how do they do that? RonPaul == Everybody has to do what they think they are best at. Some people may run [for office themselves]. Some people may support other candidates, some– But everybody has to study. And that’s what amazes me, they usually go and study. They study, they read economics! They change their careers and all, I’m amazed at what they do.

    Kennedy&Stossel == Gary Johnson would like to accept the [liberty-movement] baton from you. Is it yours to pass, and are you willing to do that? RonPaul == Nahh, I don’t have any power to pass anything, you know? Kennedy&Stossel == Do you support him? RonPaul == I think he’s wonderful, and I think he’s doing a good job, and people should look at him, and every individual should make up their own mind.

    What conclusions should we draw? Our own. What actions should we take? Our own. This is the liberty-movement. Study. Do your best. Make up your own mind. Then, go for it. In other words, don’t wait for Ron Paul to fully endorse Gary Johnson. If *you* endorse him, then do what you think is necessary to help Gary. (By the same token, Ron Paul and Doug Wead will make up their own minds and do what they think is necessary to accomplish what they want to accomplish.)

    Don’t wait for Ron Paul to give you permission to run a write-in campaign. He’s already stated that he is not going to run third-party this year, because he thinks that taking over the GOP from inside is the best long-term plan for the liberty-movement. Does that mean he will *prevent* you from doing the work necessary to get him certified as a write-in, or *demand* that you not write-in his name? Of course not because this is the liberty-movement, not the authoritarianism-movement. Doug gave you advice about the risks of write-in ballots, in his article. But he’s not going to tell you to take those risks, nor is he going to tell you to ignore those risks. Study, then make up your own mind.

    Kind of like that famous memo the guy from IBM sent out to all 100k employees, one word only: Think. (Ron Paul would add, study.)

    • robertfallin says:

      I agree with you. Unfortunately, many people “did not get the memo,” just as they “did not get the memo” in 2008. Ron Paul ASKED for our support, time and again. Ron Paul is RETIRED from Congress. An official endorsement of Gary Johnson is NOT going to hurt Ron Paul and Rand has already hurt himself as badly politically as I believe possible with his official endorsement and campaigning for Romney / Ryan. Besides, Ron Paul would not be “telling us what to do” with an “official” endorsement of Gary Johnson. However, an “official” endorsement would help those conflicted over whether to write-in Ron Paul or vote for Gary. I was one of those people for almost 3 weeks after the GOP convention. What changed my mind was Johnson’s commercials, appearances and, particularly, his suit against the Presidential Debates Commission.

      • Surfisher says:

        Spot on!

        Let’s have someone crop this video to show only from minute 2:37 till about 5:10 — and post it as an “unofficial” call by Ron Paul to his supporters to endorse Gary Johnson!

        This will give us the long waited direction!

        http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/index.html#/v/1815715535001/kennedys-view-of-the-rnc/?playlist_id=87530

      • robertfallin says:

        How about this, Sunfisher? It is to the point and is small enough to viral email

      • donjusko says:

        That’s a good short video that says Gary Johnson is good by Ron Paul. Good find RobertF.

      • robertfallin says:

        Thanks for the kind words, DonJusko. However, I edited that from a longer Stossel video and posted it to my YouTube Channel. I am also “answerman1949″ and I have made over 100 videos for Ron Paul Grassroots and for Liberty Candidates.

      • donjusko says:

        Well than, you do good (and fast) work RobertF.

      • robertfallin says:

        Thanks, DonJusko. My clients could not believe I could deliver a one minute video two hours after collecting all of the necessary materials, and much of that two hours was waiting for the video to first process in MovieMaker, then upload and document on YouTube. I just wish I had the skills to produce one of the really beautiful ones, such as, “Ron Paul: The Forgotten Wounded”.

      • donjusko says:

        Don’t sell yourself short RobertF. You are already on your way to being a major personality in this play.

      • robertfallin says:

        Thank you, DonJusko. I usually wind up alienating people, because I always speak my mind and I have too much respect for people to tell them what they want to hear. Further, I do not back down, unless I realize I am wrong. Funny; that is the very quality I admire most in Ron Paul, yet I usually wind up making those who make comments on “Ron Paul” blogs pretty mad.

      • Surfisher says:

        robertfallin — posted this.

        The Barack creature = the Mitt creature — do NOT vote for either Puppet!

        Vote Gary Johnson (Ron Paul has “unofficially” endorsed him)!

        Read between the lines of this Ron Paul 20 second video!


        —————————————————————————

        However, this 20 second clip is OK for e-mailing, but it would be better if a longer one is posted to websites (the attention span of the average American is 1:13 minutes…so here is a suggestion to use that time to have the MOST EFFECT)!

        Create one from about minute 2:02 till about 2:38 and 3:35 till 4:27 — make it look seamless.

        Thanks,

        Surfisher

      • ___j___ says:

        RobertFallin, I’ll add my voice as being impressed by your video editing skills — plus unlike the typical journalists nowadays (Stossel et al excepted of course), you were fair in your abridgement, not cutting the clip to give a false impression Ron Paul was endorsing full-out, but just giving the exact relevant portion. Kudos, sir.

        And, uh, if you like flattery, maybe it will get you to do a bit more video editing work? [grin] Here are some links that you could pick and choose from, a few I found myself, some are from surfisher.

        youtube.com/watch?v=ekQSpbwKkdg
        Romney Obama Identical Twins Save For Neil Armstrong (2 mins)
        youtube.com/watch?v=4vWVdOTFs8M
        April 2012, romney and obama, identical
        youtube.com/watch?v=IWDJEc92d38
        Romney Obama the Same (10 mins)

        youtube.com/watch?v=J5VMX2JahrU
        Obama 2012 speech … identical to Obama 2008 speech … perhaps he is learning consistency from Ron Paul … ? (1 min)
        youtube.com/watch?v=fZgQhnNRSuw
        Obama 2012 Obama 2008 same (2 mins — extended version)
        youtube.com/watch?v=UDDRiGIUYQo
        Obama 2010&2011 Obama 2012 same (2 mins — spending clips, different from the above pair)

        youtube.com/watch?v=UErR7i2onW0
        Obama lies in 2008… consecutive for 100 straight seconds…
        youtube.com/watch?v=kg9m1F8B2_c
        Obama 2008 broken promises (12 mins)
        youtube.com/watch?v=EQwrB1vu74c
        Romney 2012 Romney 2008 broken promises (6 mins)
        youtube.com/watch?v=oc52FJOYHlI
        Romney in September 2012: Obamacare & marijuana instaflops
        youtube.com/watch?v=TozhjnIvn9c
        only one priceless bit in this video, but a doozy:
        Romney @ 0:50 == I stand by what I said, whatever it was.
        youtube.com/watch?v=gzbPSirn9ls
        Romney: I know what I stand for… words have meaning

        I put the funny clip first, because I think it’s the best of them all. Politics is deadly serious… but most people will respond better to the gallows-humour than they will to Thundering Super Important Docudrama videos. I suggest you have *fun* with making fun of Mitt and Barack, and then put some brief serious interludes of Gary Johnson in between. If you keep the clip short enough, four minutes tops, then it will have a good chance at viral memetics. Also, I recommend using this for the poster-graphics —

        http://www.explainxkcd.com/2012/02/06/wake-up-sheeple/

        Emphasizing how similar the main candidates are, and how much lying they do, is not truly helpful by itself, in isolation — you also have to interleave that with Gary Johnson clips, that show how dramatically different his stances are (we’ll let the viewer draw their own conclusions on whether he is better!). I’d also suggest emphasizing that, even if GJ doesn’t win in 2012, he’s young enough and tough enough and in excellent shape — he *will* be back in future elections. More importantly, other liberty-candidates will also arise. If you vote liberty now, the candidates will come.

        Send a message by voting for liberty now, in 2012; the only way to *truly* waste your vote this year is by picking the dem-side and/or the repub-side of that false-choice identical coin. Maybe you can make that analogy possible to visualize literally, if you have video-creation skills as well as video-editing skills: show a wooden nickel, with Obama carved on one side, and Mitt carved on the other, flip-flopping and spin-doctoring around. For contrast, put Gary Johnson on a solid gold coin, firmly set, perhaps with Ron Paul on the other side if you wish, or a picture of the Bill Of Rights.

        garyjohnson2012.com/media
        Door #1 — Prez Barry Obama: New-Coke tweedle-dem of IL. Forward Into The Abyss.
        Door #2 — Gov Willy Romney: Diet-Coke tweedle-ree of MA. Believe N America, Inc.
        Door #3 — Gov Gary Johnson: Le-Sardai libertarian of NM. Live Free One Election.

        youtube.com/watch?v=d9DZxAFayok
        Gary Johnson gives the 30-second list of issues where he *alone* is different, from Romney & Obama @ 0:55 to 1:25

        youtube.com/watch?v=t9xx6bjyawg
        Ron Paul, who inspired Gary Johnson to go into politics; soundbites over the course of a couple of decades

      • robertfallin says:

        Thank you for your kind words. Unfortunately, poor health limits my effectiveness as I was just reading your comment. I will act on it, if my health cooperates.

      • ___j___ says:

        p.s. As far as the endorsement-related stuff goes, actually, I still think Rand Paul is awesome. I did at the time of the announcement, too. He endorsed Mitt only after it became mathematically impossible for his dad to win the nominee slot for POTUS. In exchange, he gets his committee slots on the senates, and gets to speak on television as part of his support for Romney… which is always, if you look at the clips, about liberty-issues.

        I certainly agree with you that endorsing Gary *ought* not to hurt Ron Paul, or Rand Paul, or the liberty-movement… but at the moment, the repub party is filled with goose-stepping folk who treat party loyalty as more important than loyalty to country, loyalty to principle, or loyalty to sanity. That doesn’t make the situation right, or good, or desirable, but it *is* the situation on the ground. Anyways, keep an eye on Rand’s voting record, and his stances on the issues; I think you’ll see he’s not some authoritarian lapdog. He’s actually a liberty-wolf, in repub-clothing. I don’t envy him the job; it must be horribly stressful.

        Speaking of goose-stepping, part of the requirements of all speakers and all video-feeds at the repub natcon in Tampa were that the name of Ron Paul must never be mentioned. Kinda like the media blackout of that name during 2011, and to some extent (negative coverage was allowed!) during 2012, eh? I’m sure there’s no connection between these totally separate and unrelated phenomena. Ron Paul was allowed to speak at some state conventions, but clearly somebody was pulling strings and setting conditions, just like Mitt tried to do at the natcon in Tampa with his censored-speech ‘offer’ … for an example of this, Ron Paul gave a talk in Texas at an official republican function that was advertised as: Ron Paul urges “Uniting Republicans and Balancing The Federal Budget”. Ummm, yeah. Here’s a recording of the first portion, skip forward to about 03:00 to get past the intros, the relevant quote is at 04:00 — http://youtube.com/watch?v=uFc3FPpaR3U

        “…I was asked to talk about uniting the party and balancing the budget, and you know, that’s a challenge in itself. (laughter) We’ve been working on that for quite a few years! (laughter) …. Uniting is one thing, and I think it’s very important, but you have to ask, what are we uniting around?” He goes on to list many big-govt things NOT worth uniting around, and then gives a speech on liberty-issues.

        Presumably, in order to get into the primary-debates, or perhaps to avoid some other threat (cf other discussion of coercion in the comments above), it is at least conceivable that Ron Paul promised not to officially endorse any candidate who was non-republican. Whether he would feel bound by such a coercive thing, a promise made under duress, is unknown. And indeed, maybe there was no such coercion, and I’m merely being overly suspicious.

        Beyond the political considerations, though, are the personal considerations; Ron Paul differs from Gary Johnson on various issues, some more important universally than others, but an endorsement is a personal decision for Ron Paul (as I would argue it ought to be!) and he may end up not endorsing anybody at all, or who knows. Part of the benefit of being retired from politics is that you can ignore all the election-frenzy stuff, and just speak when you wish.

      • ___j___ says:

        RobertFallin, sorry to hear you’re under the weather. (sarcasm: Don’t worry though, Romneycare and/or Obamacare will soon make all our health problems a thing of the laissez-faire-capitalist past! Forward to the glorious future of socialized medicine, comrades! Sigh….)

        I’ve never done video-editing; I don’t mind giving it a whirl, if you want to give me an overview of what to do? You mentioned moviemaker, but microsoft claims XP is no longer supported. What software (and what versions) are you using for your youtube-downloads and OS and your editing apps? I can just see that little wooden nickel flip-flopping all over the place…. [grin]

  223. donjusko says:

    Thanks for giving a synopses _ j_. I’d much rather read than watch.

    This just in; CHEMTRAILS. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AykLfHtM_3M
    - 9-26-12 SWEDEN – SKYWATCHERS UNITE. An update on the brave efforts of Swedish Green Party politician Pernilla Hagberg to raise the issue of Chemtrails to the public eye. Facebook group http://www.facebook.com/groups/117763471707274/
    – G.S.O.C. GO SWEDEN ON CHEMTRAILS -
    One of the first politicians in history to publicly address the issue of Chemtrails. Please send messages of support to her at Pernilla.Hagberg@yahoo.com and also show your support for her by emailing the Swedish embassy in your country and the Swedish Green Party.
    I WANT GARY TO BE AGAINST CHEMTRAILS, I think that would put him in first place. (Somebodies got to do it, Obama gave his Ok to spray or they wouldn’t be spraying.)

  224. Surfisher says:

    The Barack creature = the Mitt creature = CCCP — do NOT vote for either Puppet!

    Vote Gary Johnson (Ron Paul has “unofficially” endorsed him)!

    Read between the lines of this Ron Paul 20 second video!

  225. Surfisher says:

    Instead of “debating” — have the BO and the Mitt take an independent IQ test on National TV.

    If their combined total is close to 85…have them fight it out with noises produced by whichever orifice they feel is their most potent one…and after the smell clears, declare the winner as the most productive wind and methane producer (Go Green…).

  226. Hello Surfisher, Is the Ron Paul.com site been hijacked? As far as Gary Johnson, we believe he is controlled opposition. He is the worst of the democrats and the worst of the GOP. We can not vote for him.
    Our Ron Paul state leader sent this to me, but there are so many other reasons to believe he is a globalist posing as a libertarian. His stand on immigration and his flip flopping on foreign policy. Also, other things he has said in the past. I will not be voting for him. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shintKgNP2
    If you read this, I’d really like to know your true feelings about Alex Jones and why he does not confront about Israel’s role in 9/11-sick of the excuse it’s because it would be anti=Semitic or because there’s not enough evidence or what Israel and the prime minister is doing. I don’t agree with French Canadian that it’s because he only shares things that have been confirmed as true. He is totally sensationalistic, but he believes in the guy no matter what he says or does. I don’t put anyone on a pedestal and like anyone, what he does and says need to be scrutinized. Also, what he does not address or say. My husband told me that he hired the guy from Loose Change and when people call and bring up 9/11 and Israel, he tells them they are anti=Semitic and hangs up. Something isn’t right about Alex Jones for us.

  227. donjusko says:

    Robin, If Gary Johnson was controlled opposition he would be in the debates. They are afraid of Gary, just like they were about Ron. They are both for the Constitution. Obama and Romney are not.

    Your link said “This video does not exist”. Alex Jones has shown videos and spoke about 9/11 being an inside job. I saw this video on the web yesterday. http://standdown.net/
    1) The United States Government will spend more on the military in fiscal year 2003, than all the rest of the countries on Earth combined. Current expenditures are 437 billion and our past obligations are 339 billion, this equals 776 billion. Forty-six percent of our Taxes go to the Military Industrial

    Complex: http://www.warresisters.org/piechart.htm
    “This figure doesnt even begin to account for all of the off-budget, black projects, homeland security nor the 40+ billion the United States Government will spend on intelligence in 2003.”
    The following link lists the 7 bases on full alert and the 28 that were within range.

    http://www.StandDown.net/USAFbases.htm

    http://www.af.mil/news/airman/1299/home2.htm (link gone)

    http://www.standdown.net/FAAstandardinterceptprocedures.htm

    What do you think about that?

  228. Surfisher says:

    Ron Paul —heed his words on Foreign Aid: IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL (illegally stealing money from working Americans to give OUR HARD EARNED INCOME to Fat Foreign Despots)!!!

  229. Surfisher says:

    Let not our votes be reduced again to Voting for the lesser of two evils, because the winner will still be Evil.

    Reject the Barrack and the Mitt — do not vote for either creature, each bent on putting the final nail on the coffin of what used to be FREE AMERICA!

    Look to Ron Paul (or Gary Johnson) — or suffer the ignorance of your actions…!

  230. DT says:

    BOYCOTT THE VOTE!

    • ___j___ says:

      DT, the videoclip you posted claims that voter ‘boycotts’ are not the same thing as apathy (aka sloth aka laziness). But while that might be morally true in theory, as far as pragmatic reality is concerned, not voting is simply that: not voting. The videoclip also asserts that, once we achieve 10% turnout, that will prove our elections are unfair.

      Look at it this way. Politicians don’t care if you vote. They prefer it if you don’t, in fact, because that makes it easier for them to get elected without being popular. Almost as important, fewer *actual* voters, and fewer people that actually care about the voting system itself, translates directly into easier voting-system corruption: the less people that bother to vote (regardless of whether they are ‘boycotts’ or lazy or disgusted or forgot or whatever the reason), the more cheating we should expect will occur.

      This has two repercussions for any scheme to ‘boycott’ the vote this year, in the false hope that this action will cause tangible changes in some future year. First, not voting LOOKS LIKE apathy, not like a boycott. Perception, by politicians and their campaign staff, is what drives future changes in the election-campaigns beyond 2012. Second, say that you succeed in getting tens of *millions* of people to boycott the vote, and succeed in lowering actual turnout from the ~60% we see nowadays in presidential elections, down to the ~10% you expect will force changes. Why would the the corrupt politicians you are trying to oust, not simply fabricate additional votes, and put the total back up to 20% or 30% or whatever percentage they wanted? (Saddam Hussein once bragged about an election with 100% turnout. Shockingly, 99% of the populace supported him! The disloyal 1% were presumably rounded up and placed in shallow graves.)

      No, boycotting the vote is doomed to fail. That is not to say that, by voting in 2012, you will get what you want, i.e. good choices today. The two nominees of the two major parties *are* fundamentally identical, on all the crucial issues (the videoclip got *that* part correct). However, your vote in 2012 isn’t wasted, as long as you don’t vote for *either* of the candidates you dislike: neither Obama nor Mitt. Of course, the math of the electoral college, and the money of the two-party system, and the independence-of-clones math of our voting system which helps guarantee two-party-dominance will always continue… all these facts point to a victory in November by one of those folks. So how can I claim that a vote in 2012 isn’t wasted? Easy.

      Just because we’re going to lose this election does *not* mean us liberty-