Well Sir I humbly disagree with you and I’m sorry you took this as a critique of your post. Dr. Paul has made many of the points you have listed during the debates. Perhaps not verbatim, but essentially same the ideas. Perhaps he not yet called Gingrich on the Brookings article precisely but he has stated many of Gingrichs short comings. So for you to say my comments are not correct is a bit disingenuous. He has stated many times that contributions from military and at least implied who Romney’s backers are. As for his “resolve” I have heard him say as much and the same in so many words omn many occasions, in debates as well as news interviews (consistency is the word he used I believe). Perhaps you are not listening as well. My main point was that it is NOT the message but the way it is being delivered and all your grand eloquent rhetoric won’t change that. Dr Paul could memorize every word you have written and still not reiterate it in a speech that would be all that inspiring. It is true that “No one is infallible”, even you and I detect a bit hubris in this reply.  

Mr. Woods please run for something so I can vote for you.  

Videos that actually articulate the message should be similar to a short movie that link together what liberty is and what it isn’t and how it got eroded and how it has and will affect you, using imagery, sound, etc… An ex is putting together a video on Paul’s books using extracts from it in an entertaining and educational way.

What you posted are interviews that non-RP supporters won’t watch or understand. 

An example is the anti-Romney 27 minute video put out by Newt’s PAC.  Although I do not support the negativity or content of it entirely, it gets across the mentality and character of a Gordon Greco type individual and how they loot, implying how they would loot the US if elected into office. 

Hi Tom,
Well done. I’m sure the possition of Secretary of the Press for then Paul administration is yours for the taking.

For some reason your comment software prevents me from doing more than a top level reply from my mobile device and I’m usually replying using it.  I apologize for not keeping up, but I need return home to my desktop and it takes a while to find the thread.

As to fraud, there is a long case made including in the comments here:

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/08/william-black-theoclassical-law-and-economics-makes-the-law-an-ass.html

I try to defend austrian economics and libertarian near the bottom, but from the main post:

(quote)
Fischel & Easterbrook … taught
students that, in the context of securities, we did not need:
1. Any laws against securities fraud

2. The FBI and the Department of Justice

3. The SEC

4. Any rules against fraud

5. Any ability to bring civil suitsFraud is impossible because securities markets are “efficient” and
act as if they were guided by an “invisible hand.” Markets cannot be
efficient if there is accounting control fraud, so we know (on the basis
of circular reasoning) that securities fraud cannot exist.(end quote).Black might be insulting but is not inaccurate in his portrayal of the positions taken by *some* libertarians.  It might not be *your* position but you don’t speak for all.Catholicism has the Pope and Magisterium, but libertarians have nothing with which I can say one is orthodox and another a heretic.The prospectuses and MBS activity of the banksters would even fall under Rothbard’s definiton http://mises.org/rothbard/Ethics/nineteen.asp but I have yet to hear a single call by anyone in the libertarian camp for anyone on Wall Street who said “this box contains chococolates” and instead contained fecal material to be investigated, charged with, and if found guilty, put in prison for fraud.  Even you can’t see any fraud there.  Look harder.  Or William Black is right about libertarians.Some libertarians might not believe that fraud as such doesn’t exist, but some literally believe it cannot occur in a market – that market efficiency is by itself sufficient to cure it and no government (definition, regulation nor enforcement) is necessary to stem fraud in society.  Same with pollution, though usually differently.  China allows pollution.  We buy products with a discount based on the fact they can dump toxic waste directly into the environment.  Does free trade mean we must totally ignore what happens outside our borders – why the merchandise is cheaper – or not?  The only thing I’ve heard from libertarians is “Property rights over there aren’t our problem”.  I.e. stealing is OK as long as it occurs in China as I stated.  If it is wrong and a problem, then what ought to be done?  Or it is a problem, evil, but we should just enjoy cheap products knowing rights were violated but it is too difficult to do anything about.Yes, I’ve read Rothbard on pollution.  So what?  The pollution is occurring in China not here.  So you don’t want to do anything about it.  Not quite, you encourage it as you will not even discourage the purchase of products where rights are violated.China is a human rights nightmare yet you argue total inaction, I don’t get why you expect people in the USA to care about rights, even their own much less yours.  Either liberty is a first thing so we cannot accept its destruction elsewhere, or it is merely another commodity we can trade away.

I suggest we take Newt and Ron into a Frankenstein lab, attach those electrode filled helmets, turn the juice on high, and voila, on one table we will have Ron Paul with his consistent voting record and a liberty message knocked out of the park every time, and on the other table we will have a blubbering idiot whose incoherent message actually matches up with his ideas, all over the place and completely illogical.

Dear Dr. Woods,

My sister said that she was listening to NPR and someone who was in charge of a charity started putting on at the end of their TV ads a suggestion to text in a donation by typing a key word, like this:

http://www.mgive.com/ 

She said that the donations skyrocketed. This makes sense because of how easy it is. For most people, going to a computer and finding the website and filling out their info and credit card is too much work for them. But donating $10 by texting RPSPAC to 50555 or what have you is quick and easy because it just gets charged to their cell phone bill.

Please respond that you got this message. I think it is so important that I have to make sure someone at the SuperPac knows about it as well as someone at the campaign.

Thank you.

I’d like to see (and distribute) a video of someone speaking the words Tom wrote here.

In the spirit of Tom’s “Operation Grandma”, I’ve made a DVD for SuperVoters.  It’s a collection of YouTube videos, mostly addressing Ron Paul’s foreign policy.  Toward the end, it’s got a collection on the other candidates, briefly explaining why they are completely unacceptable options for President.  I’d like to include a video of Tom’s article.

Many older voters don’t use the internet to educate themselves on the
candidates.  This is why they know so little about Ron Paul and his
opponents.  Everything they know comes from TV, newspapers and
“conservative” talk radio.  They’re simply being inundated with
propaganda and find very little truth.  It’s up to us to change
this.  Internet may not be a good medium to reach these people, but I figure they’ve all got DVD players.  That’s why I made a DVD of YouTube videos.

SuperVoters are usually older, often Senior Citizens.  They’re probably one of the most powerful and reliable voting blocks in the electorate.  It has dawned on me that we should be focusing on senior benefits.  This is where the rubber meets the road for them.  They will vote to protect their benefits, even if they have qualms about Ron Paul’s other views.  Ron Paul is the only candidate with a realistic plan to protect Seniors who are dependent on federal programs.  Preventing the collapse of the dollar is central to Ron’s Plan.  The other candidates are themselves dependent on the status quo, unsustainable though it may be, and will allow our flawed system to self destruct before they make any substantive changes.  Seniors need to understand this.  My DVD doesn’t contain anything on this as it’s a relatively new revelation to me.  Some modifications need to be made.

Many conservative SuperVoters care a great deal about our relationship with Israel.  This needs to be addressed thoughtfully.  They’ve been sold a bill of goods by “conservative” talk radio.  They’ve bought into a whole host of lies about Islam and Ron Paul’s view of Islam and Israel.  I’m not sure it’s wise to address this subject head-on at this time, but it does need to be dealt with in the long term.  And it’s helpful if we realize this is what we’re dealing with.  Probably the best approach now is to show that many Jews and Israelis desperately want Ron Paul.

I think an organized, grassroots DVD distribution network may be an ideal way to reach Seniors.  The vast majority of them have DVD players.  They love people to come visit them.  Some of them are quite lonely.  They have lots of time on their hands.  They’ll probably watch these DVDs over and over again.  Many of them participate in activities together, and they love to talk politics.  With a thoughtfully produced DVD, retirement communities would be ripe for the picking.

The DVD I’ve made is pretty rough.  This isn’t my profession, and it was all I could do to convert them from YouTube format to DVD format.  I’m thinking RevolutionPAC has some video pros who could do what I’ve done much better.  If we had members of this network with DVD duplicators in every city, we could change the world.  We could reeducate the American public on all of the civics, polysci & econ they’ve missed out on.  Sounds like fantasy right now.  But we’ve got to start somewhere, and the media certainly isn’t going to help.

Paul has tripled his numbers since ’08. He wins the vote of those under 30. For this we can thank the internet (young people are more plugged into it and haven’t been indoctrinated with goofy mainstream pro-government propaganda for as many decades as the baby boomers and older have.) The future is looking bright for the liberty movement.

He wins the under-30 vote because young people are immature, naive and prone to accepting chest-pounding rhetoric. The fact that “every college kid loves him!” is not something I would lead with. Life is complicated. Nuances matter. Kids grow up, have families, pay taxes and realize that anarchy has its downsides.

And watch this about stuff neo-cons say:

http://youtu.be/bHeTQ-brWzg

Hahahaha! So true!

What we need is Ron Paul – himself, to have 5-10 min infomercial style videos on each issue he stands for to educate the public.

sounds like a lot of panicking going on. I think RP real hit his stride on the last debate. Quite a few commentators who have ridiculed him in the past have grudgingly called him likable and funny. There is a long way to go. If RP wins Maine and Nevada, he is definitely back in the game. I think RP has to hone his easy going likable personality even more, and many more people will make the leap. People understand that those with a sense of humor are not kooks. It takes one with a level head to produce humor with such good rhythm and wit as RP does. People are starting to realize that.

I do think that Tom Woods has some great ideas here. The RP campaign should take heed while still maintaining his sense of humor.

If he would say these statements as many times as he was asked if he would run as a 3rd partty candidate he has the election in the bag.

You wrote: (JUST THINK ABOUT HOW LONG IT TOOK YOU TO FORM YOUR VIEWS ON THESE ISSUES).

So true, Roger, so true. And we all understand the difficulty of trying to explain these things. What’s needed are carefully scripted, well rehearsed, memorized responses ready to roll from the tip of his tongue. 15, maybe even 20 of them. And they need to be repeated, and repeated again.

Agreed. Ron Paul needs to stop playing nice. He doesn’t have to fight dirty, just come out and say the things that need to be said.

I think there’s something to be said when the man’s campaign song contains the line, “You can stand me up at the gates of Hell, but I won’t back down.”

 Doing a better job than President Bush is not enough.  We need someone who understands and applies Austrian economics, who works toward paying down the national debt, who reigns in the destructive monetary policy of the Federal Reserve, and who discontinues military adventurism.  No one here is defending President Bush’s job performance.  Neither, however, are we using it to excuse President Obama’s.