Audit the Fed rally in Raleigh Posted by dhwilliams2007

Posted 09/25/09

I would like to thank all the folks who showed up on Tuesday, September 15th at Senator Hagan's office for the Audit the Fed rally in Raleigh.  We delivered our petitions to the senator's office, and had nearly 40 people waving signs and distributing DVDs and literature.  The John Locke Foundation also showed up to cover the event and posted the video to their Carolina Journal:

http://www.johnlocke.org/lockerroom/lockerroom.html?id=21873

There are now 29 sponsors of S604: The Federal Reserve Sunshine Act, but unfortunately Senator Hagan is still not among them.  Please keep the pressure on!  Call her Washington office at 202-224-6342 and tell her to cosponsor S604.  Ask her to join the 293 members of the House and 75% of the American public in calling for an audit of the Federal Reserve.

Building the Army Posted by ecanup1

Posted 08/06/09

My friends of liberty, allow me to share a few thoughts with you.  My name is Eric Canup (kuh-NUP), and I have recently relocated to the Wilmington area from Charlotte.  I was a County Coordinator in Mecklenburg prior to moving, and seeing the need here in New Hanover, I was glad to step in.  I am looking forward to continuing the fight to restore our Republic from right here on the Cape Fear coast.

As I watch the news, read blogs, and converse with people I encounter in my daily life, I am often struck with two distinctly different thoughts.  On one hand, I am extremely proud and encouraged to be associated with so many people who are passionate about returning our country to its once and former glory.  However, I am also frustrated by the accelerated pace at which our Republic is disappearing, and at the majority of people who still don't know or don't care that this is happening right in front of our eyes.  As energetic as we are, and as well-versed as we are on the talking points of true liberty, we are still but a a small, albeit vocal, minority.

I do not bring this to your attention to dissuade you from our cause.  On the contrary, while our liberties are constantly under attack, our army is growing every day.  The more they steal from us, the more we wake up from our decades of apathetic slumber.  I am guilty of occasionally throwing up my hands in exacerbation, but then I'll reconnect with a fellow Patriot who reminds me that we have a long, difficult fight ahead, but one well worth fighting.

If you are reading this, then you are likely part of the proverbial choir to which I am preaching.  But, you came to the Campaign for Liberty for a reason.  Was it Ron Paul's highly visible Presidential Campaign?  Reading The Revolution?  Perhaps a nagging sense that something is increasingly wrong with the status quo in America?  Whatever it was, think about how you can transfer that sense of duty to others that you know.  Start the conversation, invite them to a meetup, whatever it takes.  We need to grow the army.  The powers-that-be won't pay attention to us until we do.  The voters who show up in the next election won't be awakened to the problems of business as usual until we do.  Real change won't happen until we do.

I strongly encourage each of you to involve at least one more person in our fight.  Maybe you haven't been as active as you could be lately.  Here is your opportunity to re-engage.  If you are a paying member of the C4L, consider becoming a precinct leader, a county coordinator, or even step up to the fill the vacancy in the 7th district.  If you're not a paying member, perhaps the time has come to do more than just be a passive participant.  Anything you can offer helps our cause.

For those not already familiar, please consider joining us at www.meetup.com/wilmingtonliberty.  Again, I look forward to meeting you and continuing the fight to restore the Republic.

The Dangers of US Foreign Interventionism Posted by Spiceman1138

Posted 07/10/09

North Korea is at it again...testing missiles, reviving their uranium enrichment program, weaponizing their plutonium to make nukes, and threatening retaliation against anyone who tries to stop them. Once again the US, through the auspices of more UN resolutions, is attempting to impose its will upon the North Koreans. At this moment and for the mean time in the near future, the Obama Administration is pondering on what to do to get the North Koreans to stop building nukes, stop testing missiles, and come back to the negotiating table.

This international crisis appears to be the test that then-VP candidate Joe Biden referred to on the campaign trail that the world will test President Obama in the first 6 months of his administration. President Obama has said repeatedly that his election brought about change and, presumably, that would mean a change in foreign policy from that of the Bush Administration. While the tone and style of the Obama foreign policy may be an improvement from the hostile approach of the Bush foreign policy, there appears to be no substantive difference. Both of them support some sort of American interventionism on the Korean Peninsula for various military, economic, moral, and macho-grandstanding reasons. In reality, there is almost no real difference between Bush's and Obama's position on the issue because they all involve some sort of interventionism on the part of the United States. In fact, when you compare Bush's and Obama's overall foreign policy stances they both involve heavy amounts of US foreign intervention through various groups like the U.N., NATO, EU, WTO, etc... Both want to maintain the American imperial empire by keeping foreign military installations from the WWII, Cold War, and post-9/11 era including, but not limited to: Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, UAE, Germany, Japan, South Korea, and Italy (about 700 foreign military installations in total). They both include possible military actions inside Pakistan and Iran. They want to maintain permanent WWII and Cold War era military alliances such as NATO and SEATO. They support polices of nation building inside of Iraq and Afghanistan. They both support the use of economic sanctions against nation-states they feel are misbehaving and not cooperating with the US or the UN. Essentially when it comes to foreign policy you can refer to both of these Presidents as O'Bush. Both of them are interventionists through and through.

Neither of the two major political parties, for the most part, has learned any of the lessons of the past when it comes to foreign policy. Foreign affairs is similar to the free-market in the sense that the more the US federal government gets involved in it the more it comes back to bite us in the ass. Foreign interventionism is the bailouts and stimulus packages of foreign affairs; except, we are already paying for it dearly with more to pay still.

Recent and current foreign policy related issues such as: the Iraq War, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, genocide in Darfur, the Gulf War, the Taliban, Iranian hostage crisis, Saddam Hussein, genocide in Iraq, Al Qaeda expansion, Islamic fundamentalism spreading, embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, USS Cole bombing, and even 9/11 can be traced back to one big and illegal foreign policy blunder by the US federal government? I guarantee 99.9% of Americans have never heard about this incident because the government doesn't like to admit its mistakes and when it does things that are illegal and in violation of the Constitution.

The incident I'm referring to happened in 1953, and the incident was the clandestine mission by the CIA called "Operation Ajax" to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran. No, that was not a typo...in 1953 Iran was a functional, albeit young, democracy. Surprised?

Now why would our government, the alleged messengers of freedom and democracy, violate international law and the Constitution by deposing a democratically elected government? Well ladies and gentlemen the answer is simple and not surprising...OIL. Yes, oil was a sticking point in our foreign policy even in the 1940's and 1950's. It's not really much more complicated than that in this case.

Here's a brief background on the geopolitical situation over there:
Mohammed Mosaddeq, the Prime Minister of Iran, led the charge to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, which was a British owned oil company. The move to nationalize the oil in Iran was a very popular thing amongst the Iranian people, but as you can imagine the British were not too thrilled about this move. Iran, until recently then, was a British colony, and the British government wished to maintain their de facto colony inside Iran. The idea to throw a coup d'état in Iran was thrown around the British government, and, originally, the British asked President Truman for aid in this matter but he refused. Then in January 1953 the British caught a break under President Eisenhower with the appointment of John Foster Dulles as Secretary of State.

Now you're probably wondering why this is an American problem since it seems to be a purely British and Iranian affair. Well maybe it is more complicated than just oil after all. We all know that this is the era of the Cold War and that the US was in a political chess match with the USSR with the world as their game board. Iran was a strategically located country for the US because it shared several borders with the Soviet Union (modern day countries of Turkmenistan, Armenia, and Azerbaijan). A cooperative Iran would give the US another potential launch pad and strategic location for a retaliatory strike against any future attack by the Soviet Union or for a preemptive strike by the US. There were a few problems for the US in terms of cooperation from Iran since the so-called pro-Western Prime Minister was assassinated a few months earlier and soon afterward there was a strong demand for nationalization of oil companies in Iran with support from so-called pro-Soviet political party factions within the country.

Now as for the British getting an important ally in US Secretary of State Dulles...Dulles is what you'd call a "hardliner" when it came to the Soviet Union. He was vehemently anti-communist, built up strong support for NATO, and supported countries and groups fighting communists around the globe (for example the French in their war in Vietnam against the Viet Minh). He thought basically in black and white...either you're with us or you're with the communists (sound familiar...?). In his mind, Dulles didn't believe that the situation in Iran was its own unique dilemma but rather a small battlefield in the war against the communists. He jumped on the British offer for regime change in Iran like a kid on candy at Halloween. For the first time in history the CIA would be used to openly topple a foreign government (Guatemala, South Vietnam, and others were soon to follow).

Operation Ajax: The plan was quite simple really. The CIA sent in Kermit Roosevelt Jr. (ironically Kermit was the grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt who many consider the father of American imperialism and interventionism) to bribe military officers and political leaders to support a coup to reinstall the Shah as an autocratic leader. It took only about 3 weeks but they got enough political leaders to support it and enough military personnel and anti-communist guerillas to surround Tehran and seize control of the country. Those 3 weeks would soon prove to be the biggest mistake, in my opinion, in American foreign policy history. It would set off a chain of events that we are still dealing with today and will continue to deal with for at least the next 100 years.

Aftermath: The Prime Minister was deposed and put on "trial" and the Shah was installed as the dictator of Iran. As promised, Iran would ally itself with the US against the Soviet Union and, as a bonus; US oil companies would get more stakes in Iranian oil. In exchange the US provided arms and modernized the Iranian military so the Shah could suppress his dissenters through force. For about 25 years the Shah would become a brutal dictator and create a fertile ground for religious extremists and anti-US sentiment to grow. Eventually that sentiment became too strong for the Shah to contain, so he fled to Egypt and eventually the United States to escape the Iranian (Islamic) Revolution perpetuated by the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979.

The Islamic Revolution would dramatically alter history's course of events. Two immediate and major things happened: The Ayatollah himself said he wanted to spread his Shiite Islamic Revolution around the globe and Iranian students seized the US embassy and took those inside as hostages for 444 days (Ronald Reagan took office the day they were released). Now the latter of those two you'd think would have the greatest impact and it did when it came to immediate US-Iranian relations (US and Iran broke off diplomatic ties and have never been restored to this day); however, it was the former that would have the most severe consequences. The statement by the Ayatollah to spread the revolution to rest of the world scared two countries the most: Iraq and the Soviet Union.

***First lets discuss Iraq and then we'll get back to the Soviet Union***

During this time Iran's neighbor Iraq was going through several transitions and military coups. Eventually a man by the name of Saddam Hussein seized control of the Baath Party (Iraq's dominant right-wing political party) and eventually established himself the dictator of Iraq. Iraq is a country with a majority of its people part of the Shiite or Shia sect of Islam, just like Iran. Unlike Iran though Iraq has a huge number of Kurds (an ethnic group found in modern day Turkey, Iraq, and Iran) and Sunni Muslims as well including Saddam Hussein himself (Sunnis make up about 90% of all Muslims and Shias about 10%). Saddam feared an uprising by the Shia majority in his country inspired by the Islamic Revolution of Iran, so that, along with the weakening of the Iranian military by the Ayatollah, led Saddam to launch an invasion of Iran.

Now this is where the US and the embassy hostage crisis would come into play. Obviously, many here in the United States were a little POed at Iran for taking our embassy workers hostage. They saw the Iran-Iraq war as our chance to get back at the Iranians. President Reagan would send a diplomatic envoy, a man by the name of Donald Rumsfeld, to meet with Saddam to negotiate an agreement between Iraq and the US to help fight the Iranians (the famous picture of Rumsfeld and Saddam shaking hands). To assist the Iraqis, the US would supply Saddam with money, helicopters, artillery pieces, satellite images of targets inside Iran, and probably the most controversial thing...chemical weapons. The Iran-Iraq war would end in 1989 killing over a million people (most of them civilians) on both sides with an inconclusive treaty resulting in essentially no gains by either side. The war left Iraq in massive debt and decimated its military, which was one of the largest in the world.

**As a side note during the 80's Saddam would use the money, choppers and the chemical weapons we gave him to fight the Iranians to commit acts of genocide against his own people (mainly Shiites and Kurds) including the infamous al-Anfal campaign led by Saddam's first cousin Ali Hassan al-Majid aka "Chemical Ali" in which about 200,000 Kurds were slaughtered between 1986-1989 using methods such as chemical warfare and concentration camps**

Saddam would then turn his attention to his neighboring Sunni-dominated Arab countries Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia funded Iraq heavily during the Iran-Iraq war because of the shared animosity towards the Iranian regime. In Saddam's mind, however, he was defending the entire Sunni Arab world from the radical Shia Islamic Revolution and that his neighbors were the ones who owed him a debt that he would make them pay by force. At this point the CIA was sent to Kuwait to assure the government there that the US would support them against any Iraqi invasion (this was due to the large military build-up along the Iraqi-Kuwaiti border). In August of 1990 Iraq would invade Kuwait and would soon make the biggest mistake of the decade...they seized the Kuwaiti oil fields (yes oil rears its ugly head again). This would be the beginning of the first Gulf War. When Saddam launched his invasion of Kuwait the Arab League had asked the UN and other Western powers to stay out of this and not intervene because they viewed it as a purely Arab/Middle Eastern affair. Apparently, the Arab League just didn't know how much influence oil had on US foreign policy. Saudi Arabia, an autocratic repressive monarchy, struck their own deal with the United States to allow American troops on Islamic holy lands to defend the Saudis against potential Iraqi invasion. President George H.W. Bush called "Operation Desert Shield" as a "wholly defensive" campaign against Iraq. Of course this "wholly defensive" mission would soon become very offensive in the succeeding "Operation Desert Storm". Saddam's weakened military would be quickly crushed but not before killing about 300 US soldiers, Saddam firing SCUD missiles into Israel, and the burning of Kuwaiti oil fields by the retreating Iraqi army.

**According the Department of Veterans Affairs about 200,000 US veterans of the Gulf War were rendered permanently disabled (over 25% of the US forces involved in Desert Storm) through various physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual wounds...the unseen casualties of war**

Now there was another serious consequence to our intervention in this purely Arab affair, but neocons will never admit to it. As I said under this US-Saudi pact US troops would set up military bases inside of Saudi Arabia (the heart of the Islamic world with the holy cities of Mecca and Medina located in its borders), and, as neocons are frequent to point out, the US military is mainly made up of Christian soldiers. Now Christianity and Islam historically don't have a pleasant relationship with each other going back to the Crusades starting in the late 11th century and continuing to Western imperialism in the early 20th century. Many Islamic conservatives saw the presence of Western Christian troops on Islamic holy soil as blasphemy, unacceptable, and as a new crusade by the US. Muslims began protesting the presence of US troops on Islamic lands; among them include the wealthy heir of a Saudi construction company named Osama Bin Laden, who had just come back from fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan (another consequence of the Islamic Revolution in Iran that I'll get to in a bit). To this day our bases and troops in Islamic holy lands are a major recruiting tool for terrorists and extremists...being free and prosperous is not!

Now after Iraq had invaded Kuwait, Osama Bin Laden (OBL) had offered his troops, a group called Al Qaeda (Arabic for "the base"), to the Saudi royal family to help them in case of Iraqi invasion. When the Saudis decided to decline his offer and instead rely on US and Western troops, OBL viewed it as an outrage and personal insult. He began publicly denouncing the Saudi monarchy and in 1992 the Saudis revoked his citizenship and deported him to Sudan. In Sudan he began building up his terrorist organization and associating himself with Egyptian hardliners such as Ayman al Zawahiri (OBL's current second-in-command). OBL used Sudan as a staging ground to launch attacks against American interests all over the Middle East and around the world. The United States soon put so much pressure on the Sudanese government forcing them to deport him to Afghanistan in 1996.

**The Arab dominated Sudanese government currently provides the US valuable intel on Al Qaeda's network in Africa and around the world since they hosted OBL during the time he built his militia into a global terrorist organization. Now the Sudanese have threatened to cut off all intel reports and stop cooperating with the US in the War on Terror if the US, UN, EU, or anyone else attempts to stop the Sudanese government from committing genocide in Darfur against ethnic Africans**

Now why would OBL go to Afghanistan? Well Afghanistan is where OBL underwent a transformation from a quiet and pious boy into a rugged Mujahedeen warrior fighting the Soviet invasion. It's where he was educated and mentored in the Islamic art of theology and defensive jihad (an Arabic word literally meaning "struggle" but has become slang for "holy war") by Abdullah Azzam, an influential Palestinian scholar in Pakistan. Most importantly though Afghanistan was under the control of militia group called the Taliban, who had a strict interpretation of the Koran (the Islamic holy book), were oppressive and brutal, and shared OBL's ideology that Sharia law (Islamic law) should be implemented worldwide. The Taliban were led by a man known as Mullah Mohammed Omar, and the Taliban seized control of most of Afghanistan in late 1996. The Taliban and Al Qaeda would join forces and allow another staging ground for OBL to launch attacks against America such as the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, the USS Cole bombing, hotel bombings in Saudi Arabia, and of course...9/11

Wait a second...how on earth did a terrorist group essentially seize control of almost an entire country? Well this is where the Islamic Revolution of 1979 comes back into play...remember when I said that Ayatollah Khomeini's declaration to spread the Islamic Revolution beyond Iran's borders scared two countries in particular...Iraq and the Soviet Union. We've already discussed how it impacted Iraq and the subsequent events that occurred because of it, so now let's get back to the Soviet Union and their involvement in Afghanistan...

In the late 1970's the government of Afghanistan was a quasi pro-Marxist regime making it a natural ally of the communist Soviet Union. The USSR had sent military advisors and equipment to assist the Afghan government because during that time a low level Islamic-orientated insurgency called the Mujahedeen rooted in Pakistan was starting to cause trouble for the Afghan government and in turn the Soviet government. Even before the Islamic Revolution in 1979 the Soviets had been making plans to intervene in Afghanistan on behalf of the government there. At this point in time President Jimmy Carter signed an executive order (extended by President Reagan's administration) to provide funds and arms such as propaganda tapes, stinger missiles, automatic weapons and anti-tank weapons to the Mujahedeen and other anti-government insurgencies in Afghanistan (thus getting the US involved in another conflict). Then the Islamic Revolution occurred in Iran (Afghanistan's and the Soviet Union's neighbor) in March 1979 and in December of 1979 the Soviets decided to invade Afghanistan to prevent the Islamic Revolution from further inspiring militants to join the Mujahedeen. Unfortunately for the Soviets their invasion of Afghanistan ended up doing that anyway and then some. There was a call to arms in the Arab world to fight a defensive jihad against the Soviet invasion. Many young Muslims, including OBL, answered that call after almost a decade the Soviets were eventually defeated and forced to retreat. Incidentally the Soviet failure in Afghanistan has been equated to the US failure in Vietnam because it depleted their resources, bankrupted their treasury and caused regime change to occur in the Soviet Union (some argue that the Afghan disaster is what caused the Soviet Union to crumble). Of course with the Soviets retreating and Afghanistan's government severely weakened there was a huge power vacuum that someone had to fill...and someone would.

Towards the end of the Soviet-Afghan war and for a few years afterwards a group of religious students in Pakistan started a movement, which called for implementation of Sharia Law in Afghanistan and Pakistan and for a strict interpretation of the Koran. This group of religious students would call themselves the Taliban, which simply means "students". Their movement would pick up a lot of steam with a few military victories on the Afghan-Pakistan border against local warlords, who essentially ruled Afghanistan after the Soviets pulled out. In 1996 the Taliban would capture Kabul, Afghanistan's capital, and control all but the northern-most part of the country. The northern-most part of the country was ruled by a man named Ahmad Shad Massoud, the former Defense Minister of Afghanistan, a veteran of the Soviet-Afghan war, and the head of the Northern Alliance (the militia group that controlled the north of Afghanistan). Massoud had fought the Taliban to a standstill in mid-2001 and it looked to be a stalemate between the two factions. As luck would have it though for the Taliban a new ally and his Arab army arrived in 1996 and would provide key support for the Taliban regime. This ally was of course OBL. OBL had been using Afghanistan since 1996 to launch attacks against the US; he had a huge attack planned for which he would require the Taliban's help. He, of course, was planning the September 11, 2001 attacks, and knew that the US would retaliate fiercely if his plan succeeded. Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader, offered OBL a deal: kill Massoud in exchange for protection from US onslaught. OBL agreed and on September 9 (two days before 9/11) two Al Qaeda operatives disguised as TV reporters blew themselves up at a news conference killing Ahmad Shah Massoud.

**After the 9/11 attacks occurred and the US invaded Afghanistan it would be the Northern Alliance that would overthrow the Taliban and assist in the hunt for OBL. Afghanistan's new president Hamid Karzai the next year would declare Massoud to be a national hero of Afghanistan and the day of his death is observed as a national holiday**

Almost 7 years later we still have not captured or killed OBL, Ayman al Zawahiri, or Mullah Omar, and now we are bogged down in a war in Iraq based on false claims of WMDs and a false connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda. We are also now threatening war with Iran (the center of this foreign policy nightmare), which would open up a third front in this conflict and would most certainly bring back the draft. Now why is all of this relevant? Every single crisis and tragedy that I mentioned can be traced back to one event...the CIA's overthrow of a democratically elected government of Iran in Operation Ajax. More importantly it reflects the dangers and disasters that can and will occur if the United States continues a foreign policy of interventionism around the world. The world functioned fine before the US got involved and it will continue to function long after the US disappears. Neither of the two major parties are serious debating reform in our foreign policy to that of non-interventionist (NOT isolationist as many seem to want to falsely call it) instead of this interventionist foreign policy we've had since the late 19th century that has brought us almost nothing except disaster, debt, and death.

I just want to leave all of you something to think about before I wrap this up. This is not my own connections drawn here, but rather these are historical conclusions drawn by better men and women before me that I agree with. All of this in the aforementioned could have been avoided if we had not illegally used the CIA to topple a democratic government inside Iran, a country on the other side of the world and with no issue that was none of the United States' concern, and had instead kept our hands off of a situation we had little to no understanding of. I'm not saying we should become isolationists, but we should learn more about different areas of the world culturally, politically, economically, spiritually, etc. before we start making rash foreign policy decisions like toppling democracies and installing puppet dictators. President Obama should take a step back and realize the insanity of doing the same foreign policy tricks again and again. Perhaps President Obama will focus on a Constitutional foreign policy of self-defense...somehow I doubt it.

H.R.1207 / S.604 - Audit the FED Action Plan Continues!!! Help! Posted by Gary Hardee NC

Posted 06/08/09 Last updated 07/24/09

Congressman Ron Paul has introduced HR 1207 - The Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009.   This bill would allow the Government Accountability Office to audit the Federal Reserve in a way that is currently crippled under the law. The people deserve the full information not just some FED approved "audit".  Let's make history!

H.R. 1207 is getting surprisingly good bipartisan support and thanks to our hard work and dedication, HR 1207 now has 276 cosponsors. There are now 17 US Senators as cosponsors! The companion legislation in the Senate is S. 604.  Get your Senator to cosponsor today!

Now is the perfect time to make our voices known to Congress.   It will still take a massive grassroots impact on Congres to get this "Audit the Fed" bill passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President.

You are encouraged to help by phoning the toll-free congressional switchboard number, 1-877-851-6437, and asking to speak to the offices of the members of the House Financial Services Committee, and then, asking to speak to those representatives who have cosponsored H.R. 1207 to praise and applaud them.

If you want to see if your congressman is already one of HR 1207's cosponsors?  All you have to do is click here and type in your zip code.  Once you do that, your congressman will automatically appear along with an indication of whether or not he is a cosponsor.  The appropriate sample letter will appear below that information.  You can use the sample letter, or you can write your own.  Either way, make your voice heard!   If your representative is already a cosponsor, please offer your thanks and insist he or she fight for a roll call vote on this crucial bill.

If he or she hasn't yet cosponsored, please use the form on our website to send your representative an email right away urging them to support Dr. Paul's bill.  This will be a great way to do your part in supporting our national effort!

The video below is the best one I have found to promote to your friends.   Copy the web URL in the address bar on your browser to an email to all your friends.   DO THIS TODAY!!!   Let's get this to go "viral" and be the biggest outpouring of support in modern political history!  KEEP READING... don't hang up yet, more action info below.

Campaign for Liberty has been on the Hill regularly lobbying congressmen to support HR 1207, Ron Paul's bill to Audit the Fed, and we're pleased to report that the bill's momentum shows no signs of slowing down!

C4L's Jesse Benton has visited well over 50 congressional offices, and reports that "the reception has been unbelievable.... Between our Hill lobbying, the work of Dr. Paul's congressional staff and the work of all the tremendous grassroots activists in our movement, we are making progress unthinkable a few years ago."  Read his report on the C4L blog here.

If the media didn't know what to say about all our "Audit the Fed" signs dominating the Tea Party visual landscape on April 15th, just wait till they see Congress slammed with tens of thousands of C4L petitions!

Make no mistake: We're turning this spirit of freedom into real legislative action.

All C4L members all across America are being asked to take their petitions to their representative's district offices.  Phone calls and emails are powerful tools, but nothing compares to a personal office visit.  (Plan to bring along your cameras! when you turn in your petitions.)  If you want to gather more signatures to take to your non-cosponsoring Congressman, we have a new streamlined petition available here.

Stay tuned to our national home page often for the latest information.

Let's flood their offices with our petitions.  Let's fill their inboxes with our messages.

Your letter, combined with all the thousands of petitions that we are dropping on Congress and across the country, may just start a tidal wave that no one will be able to stop.

We're putting our momentum into action and declaring a National Petition Push.

HR1207 Audit the Fed ACTION ITEMS

• Find out if your Congressman has co-sponsored HR1207 - [ click here]
• Get a complete list of cosponsors for H.R. 1207 - [ click here]
• Find out if your Congressman is a member of the House Financial Services Committee - [click here]
• Download the petition and gather signatures: [click here]
• Deliver signed petitions to your Congressman's district office(s)!
• Take video and photos
• Contact the media, write a blog report, and share results

Montana Nullifies Federal Gun Laws! Posted by MountainDoc

Posted 05/13/09 Last updated 05/10/09

      Anyone who has had the privilege to listen to a lecture from Tom Woods or read Judge Andrew Napolitano knows this is big news. Nullification is one the best weapons in our constitutional arsenal to check the power of the federal government back to its proper levels; although nullification is relatively unknown. Nullification declares a federal law the state feels is unconstitutional invalid within the state passing the nullification law. It goes beyond the language of state sovereignty acts and takes action.

      There is speculation that the Supreme Court would take up the eminent case between the federal government and Montana should an emerging consensus arise with several states adopting similar laws, and overturn the expansion of the Interstate Commerce clause, and in doing so severely tie the hands of congress and the executive branch. The federal government currently uses an expanded and unconstitutional interpretation of the interstate commerce clause to interfere in affairs constitutionally left to the states ranging from guns to what a farmer can grow on his farm for personal consumption. Those looking for more information on nullification should check out the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 penned by Jefferson and Madison respectively or check out this Tom Woods video.

      Montana's nullification action is with regard to gun laws. Montana has declared that federal gun laws are invalid in the state of Montana on guns made in the state of Montana, used exclusively in the state of Montana, and never transported across state lines. This particular law applies to ammunition and gun accessories as well. This is now a law in Montana. It has been passed and signed by the governor.  Similar laws are being formed in Utah, Tennessee, and Texas.  Imagine the impact Campaign for Liberty could have in getting similar legislation passed with local efforts within our states.

The law, included below, says in simple terms the following.

Section 1: Gives a name to the bill
Section 2: States why the state of Montana can nullify a federal law, including references to the 2nd, 9th, & 10th amendments to the US Constitution
Section 3: Sets up definitions for terms used in the bill
Section 4: Nullifies federal gun laws relating to arms built, used, and kept within the state of Montana
Section 5: Sets exceptions to what is nullified
Section 6: Brands Montana firearms
Section 7: Lists where the law goes in the Montana Code
Section 8: Sets application date to October 1, 2009

Text of the New Law
"HOUSE BILL NO. 246
INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON.

AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

Section 1. Short title.. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the "Montana
Firearms Freedom Act".

Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares
that the authority for [sections 1 through 6] is the following:
(1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the
states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government
elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of
Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was
admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of
contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of
the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted
by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the
people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of
Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was
admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of
contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of
the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted
by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the
9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if
not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted
state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an
intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.
(4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the
people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the
time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the
right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and
the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was
agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to
Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of
individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional
protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was
approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists, as it
was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was
agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following
definitions apply:
(1) "Borders of Montana" means the boundaries of Montana described in
Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution.
(2) "Firearms accessories" means items that are used in conjunction with or
mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a
firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines,
flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips,
speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.
(3) "Generic and insignificant parts" includes but is not limited to
springs, screws, nuts, and pins.
(4) "Manufactured" means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition
has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including
but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for
working materials.

Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or
ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and
that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or
federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress
to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that
those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies
to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in
Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the
inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and
insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product
applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and
their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm
accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the
firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is
declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel
and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and
are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms
accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were
actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of
congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include
authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in
Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into
Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as
being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation
under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in
conjunction with a firearm in Montana.

Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to:
(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;
(2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that
uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;
(3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of
chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or
(4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of
the trigger or other firing device.

Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana
under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words "Made in Montana" clearly
stamped on a central metallic part, such as the receiver or frame.

Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to
be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30
apply to [sections 1 through 6].

Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms
accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section
3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009.

Simply Put,  WAY TO GO MONTANA!

Setting Table for a Tea Party Posted by Adam de Angeli

Posted 04/15/09 Last updated 04/13/09

Throughout the month and especially April 15th, demonstrations against taxes will take place across the country. The stated purpose of these efforts is to lobby the government to reduce or eliminate taxes. The true purpose for many of these events will be to benefit the organizations putting on the events and the politicians attending them.

There are many possible scenarios. Perhaps your local Campaign For Liberty group is leading the charge and you are organizing the event yourselves. In Michigan, a group called Americans For Prosperity, an economic freedom lobby, is organizing the event and bringing (sigh) Joe the Plumber. In your state, another organization may be putting on the event, or a campus organization, or maybe a politician is planning an appearance. I'll try to cover a wide range of situations here.

A true story

It was at the very end of August 2007 that a local "peace" organization planned a rally at the University of Michigan. The students were still returning from summer vacation and getting back into school mode. Moveon.org was co-sponsoring the demonstration. By all indications it was to be a tame event where people express sadness, join an email list, and go home and do nothing.

Yet something else happened: 2 dozen people donned 2x3 Ron Paul sandwich boards with messages targeting anti-war college students. They displayed "Ron Paul 2008" in big letters, and beneath that were four bullet points: -Bring the troops Home -Restore civil liberties -Balance the Budget -Stop the World Bank and IMF Several of them carried clipboards and the rest handed out literature.

The peace group had brought speakers, but their sound system wasn't the greatest and they had a table instead of having people mingle with the crowd. Because of the sandwich boards, the Ron Paul supporters were far more visible to the audience (and importantly, to passersby) that it almost appeared as if they hosted the event.

The outcome: The Ron Paul supporters got sheets of contact information. The event set the tone for the upcoming school year. The University of Michigan ran one of the most active campus chapters in the country; airplanes flew Ron Paul 2008 banners over football games and students displayed Ron Paul signs that made it onto ESPN. They got a great deal of campus press, and when Dr. Paul came to U-M the next month, three thousand attended. (Side note: PLEEEEEASE message me if you have a hi-res photo of that event).

The lesson here is that you can get a lot accomplished at an event, even one your group isn't organizing. But you need to plan and prepare, and your whole group must understand the plan going into the event.

Step 1: State the goal and the target

Many people gauge the success of an event strictly by turnout. This is wrong--a small event may be an enormous success (an exciting legislative victory that never makes it onto the news) and a huge event may be almost meaningless (most anti-war demonstrations are).

Set a tangible goal. "This Wednesday in Lansing we're going to recruit 20 Local Coordinators and find someone to be the 5th Regional Coordinator." Great. A fascinating thing happens: from this defined goal, the obvious goal (turnout) becomes obviously not the goal. Given this goal, it is clear that our most important target is not the public, it is the attendees of the event. After all, these are people who care just like we do. They're liable to volunteer, to contribute, and to grow our organization more than the people who stay home. If you have no idea how many people to expect at your event, you may revise your goal when you get to the event, but it's easier to change a number than decide the goal at the event itself.

What about the goal of stopping the next tax increase? That might happen in the future, but it's not going to happen as a direct result of the event. If two thousand people come to the Lansing protest, that still probably won't convince the legislator who sponsored the bill to withdraw it. Changing the law is therefore not the immediate goal of the demonstration. The goal is to expand our network for long-term change.

What about the goal of turnout? Even if the event is led by your local Campaign For Liberty, turnout is secondary to expanding our network. The value of turnout is by how much it expands our network.

It is also important to define your political target. Don't just blame "the government." Decide in advance whether you want to make the target the US Congress or your state legislature. The more focus, the better. You don't necessarily need to have the same target as every other group organizing the event, but within your group, have one target.

Step 2: Choose the message

It's always a pleasure to read the various hand-made signs at a protest. But the pleasure is misleading; it's actually better to have only a few designs with the fewest "unique" signs. There are several reasons:

• The newspaper, seeking an attention-getting photograph that will sell a paper, will print the goofiest sign they shoot
• The slogan most repeated is the slogan most remembered and most likely to appear in TV and Youtube coverage
• An appearance of consistency looks better (both to participants and media spectators) than an appearance of chaos

As in the story above, big signs bearing the Campaign For Liberty name are great, both for conveying the popularity of our organization and for getting people signed up.

Use only one or two slogans for "message" signs. Those slogans should be as short as possible, they should not be mean-spirited (though they can be negative), and should contain no obscure acronyms. "Audit the Federal Reserve." "Inflation IS a tax." Avoid naming politicians, which inflames opposition. Pick a relevant topic, that is, the issue your organization is working on. In Michigan we're lobbying on civil liberties and a sovereignty resolution, neither of which relate (directly) with taxes. So we're pushing for HR 1207, currently co-sponsored by only one of Michigan's fifteen Congressmen.

Step 3: Prepare the literature

Depending on the theme of your event, you may wish to print out materials on our website, or have your group create something specific for the event (if you do so, please make clear that your flier was not created by the Campaign for Liberty). Slim jims are excellent.

You will also need clipboard with signup sheets. Get them printed in advance and bring plenty of them--when you find yourself drawing sloppy gridlines across a white page, you're likely to lose a sheet in the shuffle. Remind them to print clearly. If you are organizing the event or have a booth, and someone in your group has an "air card" (a USB device with an antenna that gives your laptop an Internet connection via cellular networks), have them bring their laptop for registering members on the spot. Have clipboards to get their phone numbers and email addresses so you can contact them later; and have a username field for registered members to sign in. (It's good to have a list on hand of people who have volunteered). Your group should designate one trustworthy person to keep the sign-in sheets after the event and organize a follow-up phone bank. Have plenty of clipboards with signup sheets on hand.

A great way to make a batch of signs is to use discarded cardboard or old campaign signs, paper, and wheatpaste. You can make enough wheatpaste for a dozen sandwich boards with a dollar's worth of flour and water--google a recipe--and they hold up in the rain if they're dry before you go out. Wheatpaste both sides of the cardboard to prevent warping. If you're writing your sign with a marker, take a lot of time to line everything up and trace an outline. If you run out of room on the board your sign will look terrible. Personally, I prefer to get a poster printed at a local print shop--you might get a good deal if the printer supports your cause, and it saves a lot of time if you're making more than a few signs.

Step 4: Train the Team

Now that you've made your plans and assembled the supplies, you need to make sure your team executes the plan with no problem.

Everyone should have a standard line if asked something by the media, so that there's a possibility of our message appearing in the media. It could be something as simple and honest as "We are here to express that we are going to hold Congress and the Federal Reserve accountable for undermining our economy."

Have a designated person, your best speaker, do all the rest of the talking, and others to film important interactions. Click here to view a video that illustrates the value of a team where everyone plays their position correctly. (Action starts at about 2:20)

Have a simple message and keep it relevant. Don't mention Barack Obama--the economic crisis pre-dated his Presidency and if it appears that we're blaming Obama for causing the recession, we'll look ignorant. Keep the blame squarely where it belongs-on Congress and the Fed.

Make it clear that you are not here to confront the group putting on the event. Don't go to a FairTax event with signs that have "FairTax" crossed out and "No Tax" written underneath; you'll be too busy handling enemies to make friends. Your members should be reminded that they are to treat all other demonstrators as fellow activists with only slightly different priorities. You're there to get to know them, not to confront them and not to patronize them.

The event may have counter-demonstrators. Typically a small fraction of demonstrators will take the bait and get in a shouting match. It's unusual at tax demonstrations, but common in large anti-globalism protests, for police and federal law enforcement to pay people to infiltrate demonstrator groups and provoke violence.

Be clear that nobody in the group is to provoke the police or instigate violence for any reason. The police are powerless to disperse a crowd if there's no disorder, and if a provocateur decides to create disorder, let the police arrest him. If the crowd gets enraged the police might riot, but if the crowd seems to be on the side of the law and not the violent protester, the police will protect you and not attack you. It is no coincidence that there was not a single instance of violence at any Ron Paul 2008 campaign event.

Pick a place to meet a few hours before the event for everyone to get hyped up, and pick a restaurant to celebrate at afterward. It's much easier to choose a place in advance.

At the event

The events themselves are really exciting. Expect to be on high alert throughout the event. Time will pass slowly. Talk to as many people as you can, but remember to listen. I cannot tell you how many times at a demonstration an activist has come up to me and, presuming himself an expert, start spouting off all kinds of facts and opinions, telling me what our priorities should be, who I need to listen to, what I need to know about tax policy... often I will interrupt with "yes I've read it" or "yes I know" and yet they just keep right on going. Listen to your listener, find out what they are upset about and relate to them.

Added 4/13, more things to keep in mind at the event

Arrive early.  It is much easier to grasp the dynamics of a crowd when you see it develop from the start.  If you show up and hundreds of people are already there, you're going to spend the first 15 minutes just getting a sense of it.

Keep yourself busy. Don't talk to the same person for more than 5 minutes unless there's a compelling reason to; check in with everybody you know as often as possible; the more you move around, the better.  This way you'll easily keep on top of the situation and meet the most people.

Helping people is the easiest and best way to meet them. Everyone at a demonstration needs help with something--a banner, a camera, finding a person, knowing what's going on, whatever--be helpful and introduce yourself. Once you've helped a person they're obliged to introduce themselves and talk to you. HELP AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN.

At all times:

-Keep engaged

-Remember to listen

-Keep the peace

10th Amendment Resolution Introduced in NC House Posted by Gary Hardee NC

Posted 03/27/09 Last updated 04/05/09

Many critics of politics are like a lot of others.  The comfortable and habitual thing to do is to talk among ourselves and to those who will listen.  It gives us a feeling that we are doing something and even being a part of the solution.  What I have seen lacking is that most important component, concerted action.  When our elected officials do something good we lay back and say, "well, it's about time...". Seldom do we call them and thank them for the good things they do.  We in North Carolina, have just the opportunity we can rally behind.  So let's put our noses to the grindstone and push this baby through.

On March 26th, H849 was introduced by Reps. Cleveland, Justice, Blackwood, and Hilton and now has 27 co-sponsors, all Republicans so far. This House Resolution titled "Sovereignty Under the 10th Amendment" was filed in the House and has now had its first reading and assigned to the Rules, Calendar, and Operations Committee.  Click on the Committee link and communicate with all of the committee members. They, and they alone, hold the key to get it to the floor. 

It is important to understand that this resolution, if passed, will not have the force of law and will not be sent to the NC Senate or to the Governor.  This is strictly a House Resolution.  I spoke directly with the bill's sponsor, Mr. George Cleveland of District 14 in Onslow County.  He says the bill will be stuck in committee unless we can get the Committee Chairman, Bill Owens (Dem) and House Speaker, Joe Hackney (Dem) to move it to the floor for a vote.  Getting a bill out of committee is the major hurdle and must be our focus.  Letters and calls of support for H849 should be focused on the Committee Chairman and the Speaker of the House.  With their support, and only with their support, the measure will find its way to the floor wherein Rep. Cleveland believes it will pass.

 You can see below who the primary sponsors are and the names of the co-sponsors. All links should be "live" links. 

Representatives Folwell and Neumann have come on board since the first reading! Make sure your representative is on the co-sponsors list.

This link is to the overview of the bill with sponsor & co-sponsor info:
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2009&
BillID=H849

Actual Copy of the bill: (PDF)
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/sessions/2009/bills/house/pdf/h849v0.pdf

The easiest way to make sure you keep current on the progress and status of the bill is to subscribe tto the RSS at this link:
http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2009&BillID=H849&
amp;view=history_rss

The entire House membership, with contact information, can be downloaded here and should serve conveniently as your best tool in tracking your efforts to gain support for the measure.  Note all responses from those who gave feedback to your request: http://www.ncleg.net/House/Documents/nchouse.xls

Here is the link to the Rules Committee Chairman: Bill Owens (Dem) 

Here is the link to the NC Speaker of the House: Joe Hackney (Dem) 

As always, keep your fellow C4L members updated with any news you have or find on this issue. If you find links to news articles / videos, etc. on the net or links to major news outlet articles, post it in a comment to this blog. Especially noteworthy to report are any Democrat supporters of this measure in NC or any other state. Democrats supporting similar measures in other states provide an added push for Dems in our state to support the resolution.

What else can we do?

You can start by posting this blog in your C4L personal page.  Post a link to this blog wherever you can think to do so.  Create a mass email to your North Carolina contacts and paste in a link to this blog article and encourage them to consider joining with us here at the C4L.  Promote my blog link on other social networking sites, forums, and on any "conservative" group sites in the state.  Just put it out there, anywhere, everywhere!  Mass exposure is better than no exposure.

We must now start preparing a mini-campaign to get voters calling and writing the right people with right message at the right time.  Plan your work, work your plan.  Form a county group to push each other to stay on task and share ideas if you need to.

This bill has popular support and the timing could not be better!

Gary Hardee
704-560-1776
Interim State Coordinator - Campaign for Liberty

Slim Jim Strategy Posted by Alan Smith

Posted 01/31/09 Last updated 10/30/08

Door to door continues to be my most effective use of time (compared to attending party committee meetings, writing letters and blogs, making phone calls, etc). Any action is good. I'm just saying there are only a certain number of hours in each day, and door to door has proven to me to achieve the most bang for my time.

I have several thousand voters in my precinct. Too many to ring every doorbell. So a few CFL members in my district got together and exchanged strategy ideas. We requested access to "Voter Vault" which is the Republican Party voter database. Then we exported voter lists 4 different ways.

• #2 - Weak Republican - The '2' is how it is coded in the database. #1 is strong Republicans - we did not export '1'.
• #3 - Independent
• NMT Weak GOP -  This is in the attributes field. It's a National Micro-Targeting survey that was conducted by the RNC - the people that don't agree with the current direction of the Republican Party. As a guess, the Democrats and undecideds that are in here may be fiscal conservatives, but not necessarily social conservatives.
• Kinky supporters - Kinky Friedman ran for governor in Texas as an independent in 2006. His supporters likely were unhappy with both major parties. Consider if you have a similar major independent candidate in your state whose supporters you might want to target.

This cut down my walking list 85-95%. By targeting the most likely top 5-15%, I could greet each person with a warm handshake and a friendly smile. If I have extra time, I can always hit the other 85-95% of houses later if there is time (leave the flyer and skip the doorbell).

A CFL member printed up T-shirts with the CFL logo and state flag. I always wore it in hopes of clearly identifying my purpose for being on their doorstep.

I try to be pretty fast with each house. I practiced out-loud at home and refined my 'pitch' to 30 seconds. I have an additional 30 for the rare someone whose body language shows extra interest. 

The opening of my pitch is "Hi. I'm xxx. I'm your neighbor. I live (location) and I'm representing Campaign For Liberty, a new non-partisan political organization. I would like for you to have this handout as an introduction to our organization. It includes our mission statement and some short and long term goals."

My goal with this pitch was to answer their implied questions as quickly as possible: "Who are you and what do you want?" By using the word "introduction", I hope to imply that I'll be leaving soon, but I'll be back.

If I sense I have more time, I let them briefly know that the list is targeted -- "I'm glad to have spoken because surveys indicated our views might be very similar." I like saying this because it gives me a chance to say something about them instead of myself. I believe they are more likely to then be curious and read the material after I am gone.

I also put my name and phone number on each handout. This can by accomplished by customizing the image before printing, or by adding a sticker after printing. The close of my pitch is "I also included my cell phone if you have any questions." I do this for several reasons:

• Conviction - Just like ringing the doorbell, our willingness to put our names and phone numbers adds weight to the message. 
• Strength - It shows we intend to grow within the neighborhood and not go away soon.
• Polite - If I'm going to ask someone to engage in some kind of action, the least I can do is be open about who I am. 

(These are also the reasons my screen name and photo are real.) I hardly ever get a phone call. But I don't interpret that as meaning it didn't add lots of value. 

Door-to-door takes some courage. Even with practice, the first two houses I was nervous. That went away very fast. There is no better way to get over that than by starting. Discussing politics takes some getting used to. I learned that it was ok to come across nay-sayers. I don't need to feel less positive no matter what is said to me. I accept that not everyone will approve of our efforts. Getting knocked around toughened me up; and with practice, actually taught me how to become and stay more friendly.

Many will not answer the door. Most people who answer politely accept materials, and act respectfully. A few people are annoyed, argumentative, or frightened. I do not focus mental energy on that. Every once in awhile, someone recognizes the logo and is already a strong supporter.

When I was half-way through, I wished I had taken better notes: who answered, bumper stickers, anything! It only takes a few extra seconds. With good notes, it would be fun to later call and ask "Did you have a chance to read the... ". It creates another excuse for conversation. (Both Voter Vault and White Pages are sources for phone numbers.)

At no point do I assume there is a "best way". By listening to feedback and other's experiences, and by experimenting and trying different things, a good strategy can always be improved.

The most important thing I am learning is to remain confident and full of action. Like Ron Paul, I will put myself out there, and do it again and again and again. Since truth was on his side, overtime his ideas were proven correct and that's how his credibility took hold. So I shrug off the non-believers and continue to march on.

Ron Paul on "Morning Joe," 1/27/09 Posted by Matt Hawes

Posted 01/27/09 Last updated 01/27/09

Update: Dr. Paul was also interviewed this morning by CNNMoney.com.  Check out that interview here.

The Revolution: A Manifesto, Amazon.com's Most Loved Book of the Year Posted by Anthony Gregory

Posted 12/31/08 Last updated 12/29/08

What exciting news! The Revolution: A Manifesto, Ron Paul's seminal book on the princples of individual liberty, limited government, free markets, sound money and peace, has been rated Amazon's "Most-Loved" book of the year, meaning that among all books sold, The Revolution was "reviewed most positively by Amazon.com customers in 2008."

Thanks to all those who helped make it happen. This is yet another great indication of the continuing success of the Ron Paul Revolution. It is evidence that many people care about these ideas.

Campaign For Liberty Store Open Posted by Adam de Angeli

Posted 12/17/08 Last updated 12/16/08

[UPDATED 12:43pm EST]

Good news and bad news...

Good news: the store is open and the link will appear in the navbar shortly. We have yard signs, logo tee shirts, stickers, books, autographed books, and commemorative Ron Paul 2008 merchandise.

Bad news: additional apparel designs that were promised to arrive yesterday are not in yet. We are hoping to have them available in time to ship for Christmas. More as it develops.

Rally for the Republic DVD update - Thank you again for your patience with the DVD project. At the moment, they are not available for sale because we are negotiating music copyrights, but we hope to have the process completed soon. Although we cannot give a firm date for release right now, stay tuned for updates, as we will make the DVDs available in the store for pre-order as soon as possible.