Dr. Ron Paul and organizer Stephen Vincent
Posted on 12/03/2007 8:05:44 PM PST by jdm
If the CNN GOP debate proved anything, it is that Ron Paul is not going gently into that goodnight, no matter how badly his fellow Republicans wished he would.
Not since the days of Ross Perot has a candidate flown in the face of the American political Wehrmacht. The public response has never been as robust as Paul's supporters, who possess every level of education, variety of profession, and personal value structure imaginable.
The Paul supporters put their money where there mouths are, and the coffers for Paul's campaign continue to swell.
One independent organizer, Trevor Lyman, an online music promoter, was the catalyst behind the Guy Fawkes Day raise of $4.2 million.
The Paul base are tech savvy and know how to network and organize, and their efforts are paying off.
The December 16 anniversary of the 1773 Boston Tea Party protest of taxation without representation is the next big push, as nearly 24,000 people have pledged to donate $100.
Republican candidate, Ron Paul, spoke in a message emailed to his supporters today.
Paul expressed his dissatisfaction with the CNN debate and the bias of limiting his time to speak but he did say that he was happy that McCain launched his premeditated attack toward him.
Paul said, “Mainstream politicians never attack an opponent they think is far behind. The McCain campaign, we've heard, is worried sick about New Hampshire, and they thought a slam at me would help. Ha! Of course, it only strengthened our forces.”
Describing the number of supporters that turned out outside the debate in St Petersburg Florida for the debate, Paul said, “We, on the other hand, had about 500 enthusiastic revolutionaries, plus a boat, a trolley, and two planes towing lighted signs. As I looked out at the crowd, I thought: the establishment has no idea of what they are facing. We have an army of freedom, prosperity, and peace.”
“The British also thought they had no problem with the Americans--until Yorktown.” Paul continued, “Rudy Giuliani walked up to me and said, ‘Oooh, you sure have a LOT of supporters.’ “It’s only the beginning, I told him.”
Paul also said, “The military-industrial complex, the biased media, the big banks, the Fed, the waterboarders, and the IRS don’t like what we’re doing. But every good American is applauding us, and daring to hope for a better future.”
One of Paul's supporters in Los Angeles is Stephen Vincent, who has organized "The Freedom Message" - a live call-in internet talk radio show which chronicles and supports the growth of the Freedom Movement and the campaign of Congressman Ron Paul for President. LINK
This YouTube channel is an outlet for archived programs overlayed with video content, related video productions and Steven Vincent's VideoBlog.
Monsters had a chance to speak with Vincent today.
What turnout are you anticipating for the December 16 "Tea Party" in Santa Monica?
Stephen Vincent: There does seem to be some buzz growing around this and folks are coming from as far away as Santa Barbara, Ventura and Riverside. It’s always tough to call. I would guesstimate 100-125 people.
How and why did you get involved in the Ron Paul movement?
Stephen Vincent: The country is no longer ruled by law but rather by men (and women). There is a corrupt plutocracy ruling over us which disregards the constitution and if we as a people do not take decisive action it will be our near term fate to be subjected to dictatorship, unending war and economic collapse. Ron Paul stands for the rule of law, the Constitution and government of, by and for the people.
Why are both the "liberal" and "conservative" mainstream press so negative towards Paul and his supporters, in your opinion?
Stephen Vincent: The old left/right, Democrat/Republican, Liberal/Conservative political paradigm is breaking down. Both sides of the false paradigm have vested interests in its maintenance. Ron Paul and his message of freedom heralds the new paradigm: Constitutionalist vs. Statist.
Statists, whether of the “left” or “right” varieties believe that the State is the solution to every problem. Constitutionalists believe in the rights of the individual and that rule of law protects the individual and society from the tyranny of the State.
The Ron Paul Revolution is a revolution on a paradigmatic level. The body politic Americana is being radically reconfigured at this very moment and will never be the same.
If Paul is shut out of the GOP convention, will you urge him run as an Independent?
Stephen Vincent: I will support an Independent or Third Party run by Congressman Paul and would urge him to do so in the event that he does not win the Republican Party nomination.
Stephen Vincent: There does seem to be some buzz growing around this and folks are coming from as far away as Santa Barbara, Ventura and Riverside. It’s always tough to call. I would guesstimate 100-125 people.
100-125 people. In Santa Monica? You'd think the number would be much higher, given how liberal that area is!
*snicker*
The what? Does April know what the word Wehrmacht means? I've heard a lot of metaphors for the American politcal establishment but the German army is a new one on me. Were it remotely applicable Mr. Paul would hardly be engaging in political theater, he'd be looking at the world through the barbed wire of a prison camp.
In other words, he is an active member at DU.
Isn’t it amazing how much Paulestinians sound like DUmmies and Kos Kidz?
wow
So I guess one is a white female, 21 & a student; one is a 35 yo black male professional; one is a 55 yo white male on gov’t welfare and the fourth is a 78 yo Hispanic grandma with 3 college degrees raising her 23 grandchildren in her 1 room house? Does that about cover it? ;-)
Ron Paul is a kook.
"Dr" (HAHAHAHAHA!) Paul is not a 'fellow Republican". He's not a Republican at all. He's just a weirdo, like the pot heads that support him.
That's paranoid moonbat talk. What a Maroon!
Theres no real way to gauge Ron Paul’s success, by comparing him to Ross Perot, because Ross Perot didn’t run in Republican Primaries.
Ron Paul is a kook.
Despite the fact that Congressman Paul has the highest rating of all Congressman by the National Taxpayers Union (84%) I can not support him for POTUS because I don't agree with his foreign policy
So, I suppose Eisenhower was a maroon for mentioning the military industrial complex?
And if you think the media isn't biased, then the maroon here definitely isn't Paul.
Here are some Free Republic Blasts From The Past. Seeing how this is an anniversary of Free Republic lets take a walk down memory lane and see what we discover...
Here is a good one posted to the "Wag The War" topic index from 12/98 during the time Clinton was threatening to send troops to Iraq because they had Weapons of Mass Destruction. Titled
it reflected the sentiments of most Freepers back then.
Here is an excerpt:
Its not hard to imagine what child-play of a job it would be to turn the tables on our president's lastest use of the military to deflect efforts to impeach him. If I were Saddam, I would send my lackeys out to the slaughter house for a few gallons of chicken blood, round up the women and children, wrap them in blood-soaked bandages, and liberally sprinkle them through the rubble, and let the cameras roll. Fakery works wonderfully well on television.
Bill Clinton murders the women and children. Imagine what a time this pacifist-turned- hawk, military-hating president would have defending against that one! Alas, Saddam remains one of the most witless enemies this nation has ever had, despite all the crowing about the man's "staying power." For the fact was, and remains, that Iraq is a tinhorn dictatorship overstocked with obsolete and castoff weapons. For all the endless talk of "weapons of mass destruction," since 1991 we are still waiting for the slightest shred of proof that Saddam ever had any. No one can even prove he used them in Desert Storm.
Weapons of mass destruction. How many times, and for how long has that phrase been pounded into the heads of the public? Talk about repetitive conditioning. It proves the point that if only something is repeated often enough, by enough people, the thing said will ultimately become "common knowledge." Even though there isn't a bit of proof that any such weapons exist. Orwell's 1984 is here and now.
Now where did Ron Paul stand on this issue of Clinton's desire to invade Iraq in 1998? Well this Statement of the Honorable Ron Paul in February 16, 1998 titled:
United States Must Not Trample Constitution to Attack Iraq
brought praise from conservatives here. It read in part:
There is absolutely no moral or constitutional reason to go to war with Iraq at this time. To go to war to enforce the dictates of the United Nations, or to play the part of "policemen of the world," opposes the sensibilities of all who seek to follow the Constitution. I refuse to participate in action which would possibly expose even one soldier to risk when there is absolutely no immediate threat to the U.S.
Even worse, the President and others promoting this war are arguing for military objectives which are vague and, according to experts, completely unrealistic. The basic flaw in our foreign policy since World War Ii has been a lack of objectives, mainly because none of the wars have been to protect our nation. Our troops went into battle for political or industrial purposes, rather than to achieve military victory in the face of a real threat. As a result, we saw years of war in Korea and Vietnam drag on, costing thousands of lives with no real success.
Why does the American soldier and taxpayer have to bear the burden of enforcing UN dictates? It is simply immoral for the US to enter into a war which has no objectives other than to kill people with whom we disagree for the sake of looking tough on the world stage. The only moral war is a defensive war to preserve our national security.
Further evidence that Free Republic has only recently become a pro war website can be found in archived articles such as
Time To End Perpetual War-Part III-End
where comments like "To paraphrase Thomas Paine, taxes aren't raised to wage war, rather war is waged to raise taxes. And someone else said, that war is the health of the STATE. Neither said the economy nor its people. We are using Saddam plain and simple to wage war, no matter how despicable he is. Surely others have done worse, Russia and China for example."
Regarding our stand on collateral damage to civilians...well we pilloried Clinton pretty good in this 1999 WhiteWater post entitled:
This post prompted this reply:
There oughtta be a law that takes bombs outta the hands of irresponsible heads of state. There should be background checks, 30 day cooling off periods, and some kinda tracking of the ratio of innocent babies killed to targeted babies killed and stuff like that. These things are dangerous to society and we should get a handle on it before somebody gets hurt bad.
So all this seeming patriotic support for U.S. police action and nation building war adventures all over the world that appear here now in posts seems a little strange to some of us who have been here from the beginning and remember what we stood against.
Many will say that 911 changed everything here but Ron Paul was being cheered here on Free Republic as late as 10/10/01 in this post titled:
Breaking: Ron Paul introduces Marque and Reprisal Bills in House
No one was calling him a nut then. In fact there were almost 300 posts praising him for his Constitutional stances..
So the political stance of Free Republic from its inception was anti war anti nation building adventures. And being a strongly religious website one might wonder what pious Christians think of the fact that over 153 world wide Christian leaders have declared this war to be an unjust war...The Pope condemned this war and did not mince words about the fact that Christian Religion can never condone a preemptive war.
Pope John Paul II calls War a Defeat for Humanity:
Neoconservative Iraq Just War Theories Rejected
In the wake 0f the 1993 WTC bombings Clinton tried to introduce his version of a Patriot Act and conservatives here and in media and print howled. Following is a news clip from that time.
7-30-1996, WASHINGTON (CNN) --
President Clinton urged Congress Tuesday to act swiftly in developing anti-terrorism legislation before its August recess.
"We need to keep this country together right now. We need to focus on this terrorism issue," Clinton said during a White House news conference.
But while the president pushed for quick legislation, Republican lawmakers hardened their stance against some of the proposed anti-terrorism measures.
Sen. Don Nickles, R-Oklahoma, said the country remains "very open" to terrorism. "Will it stop any acts of terrorism, domestic and international? No," he said, adding, "We don't want a police state,
Hatch blasts 'phony' issues "These are very controversial provisions that the White House wants. Some they're not going to get."
"If they want to, they can study the thing" already, Hatch asserted. He also said he had some problems with the president's proposals to expand wiretapping.
Nobody wanted the Executive powers of a Patriot Act in the hands of a Clinton but is was safe in the Hands of a Bush? Keep that in mind as a Clinton continues to lead in the polls.
So where does a life long conservative stand on this issue? William F. Buckley once remarked that the defining element of conservatism is realism—realism about the limits of state power, the nature of human beings and societies, the complexity of international life. Yet many conservatives who believe that the state can do nothing right at home think that it can do nothing wrong abroad. (If things go badly, why, more money, bigger bombs and ground troops will straighten it out.) Many who are scornful of social engineering at home seem sure it will work beyond our borders. They seem convinced that good intentions and a burst of state power can transform the world. How conservative is that?
Ron Paul is the reaction to the big-government conservatism and foreign adventurism of George W. Bush.
Add him and Mike Huckabee together on election day, and you have some idea of how many Republicans are just super-pissed off about how the GOP has bought into the same corporate socialism that Democrats have always backed.
I know that no one wants to hear it, but what you pointed out is so true... there is so much partisanship behind much of the cheerleading here, which blinds people, in a similar way that it caused the Dems to be blinded to Clinton and his actions for 8 years. Thank you for your post.
Republican Party from a Conservative perspective.
Pat Buchanan had his brigadiers on FR too. Certainly there some points that Pat and Paul make that many can support. But as a whole you still have anachronistic whack jobs.
It takes some folks a bit longer than others to see it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.