This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

FOX News Creates Fraudulent Video to Discredit Ron Paul

EB's picture





 

As Paul Joseph Watson of PrisonPlanet writes:

In a shocking act of mass public deception, Fox News attempted to skew Ron Paul’s 2011 CPAC straw poll win by representing it with footage from the previous year’s CPAC event, at which Mitt Romney supporters had loudly booed the result, another example of the continuing dirty tricks campaign being waged against Paul by the establishment media.

 

Congressman Paul replicated his 2010 victory over Mitt Romney by defeating the former Governor of Massachusetts for a second consecutive year at the annual CPAC conference.

 

However, before anchor Bill Hemmer introduced a segment concerning the story, Fox News played a clip of the 2010 announcement of the poll results, during which Mitt Romney supporters had loudly booed Ron Paul’s victory, passing off last year’s footage as representative of this year’s event.

 

Hemmer then proceeded to state, “In the end he was the winner, probably not the reaction he was hoping for,” describing the reaction as “mixed applause and boos,” before directly asking Ron Paul if he knew who was booing him.

Now, watch the video:

 

 

Robert Wenzel comments:

This is the most incredible act of news media deception ever caught in smoking gun style. This video is a must view, and notice how the FOX anchors set up the lie and Bill Hemmer, the anchor interviewing Congressman Paul, brings the LIE right into the interview, in a further attempt to dilute Paul's victory.

 

These boys are scared, really scared. Get this video clip out to everyone and let people know what is going on.

Did FOX News [sic] and Bill Hemmer just have their very own CBS/Dan Rather moment?

Update per Mediaite (ht Cleve Meater)

...Fox News claims it was completely accidental. Mediaite received the following statementfrom Senior Vice President of News Michael Clemente:

 


“We made a mistake with some of the video we aired, and plan on issuing a correction onAmerica’s Newsroom tomorrow morning explaining exactly what happened.”

Update2: Paul Joseph Watson compiles FOX's track record with respect to Paul, providing no fewer than ten eggregious examples.  A sampling:


Was it another “mistake” on behalf of Fox News to #0066cc; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;" rel="noreferrer">exclude Paul from a January 6 2008 presidential forum event because they saw the prospect of anti-war opinions being voiced by the most conservative member of the House as a “threat”?

 

Was it a “mistake” for #0066cc; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;" rel="noreferrer">Fox News to claim that their own May 2007 presidential poll, which Ron Paul won, was unreliable, because online Paul supporters had skewed the result, despite the fact that the survey was conducted via cell phone text messaging and no online votes were taken?

 

Was it a #0066cc; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;" rel="noreferrer">mere “mistake” for Fox News host Sean Hannity to deride the Texas Congressman’s runaway success in the text messaging poll as nothing more than “Paulites” flood voting, when in reality only one vote per cell phone number was allowed? Hannity’s contention that Ron Paul supporters were “were simply dialing in over and over again” was nothing more than a brazen lie intended to dismiss the Congressman’s widespread popularity. No one at Fox News bothered to correct Hannity and no retraction was issued.

 

Was it another “mistake” when#0066cc; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;" rel="noreferrer"> Fox News started editing Ron Paul’s name out of Associated Press stories they syndicated before the 2008 presidential campaign?

(ht ShankyS)

 


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 02/17/2011 - 23:52 | Link to Comment penisouraus erecti
penisouraus erecti's picture

republican=democrat_lite

Ron Paul = different

must destroy Ron Paul...........

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 23:50 | Link to Comment ElTerco
ElTerco's picture

If you cross the movie "V for Vendetta" with the book "1984" the resultant product is "Fox News".  It's a Molotov cocktail of sorts.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 22:33 | Link to Comment NOPOMO
NOPOMO's picture

I am an engineer.  During the whole crisis my standard of living has gone down.  I have remained employed and have restricted spending.  So all the BS about a recovery is misguided.  Orchestrating a market rally in hopes of a real recovery is a big mistake.  This is like giving someone a perfect score on their SAT and then expecting for them to become a genius. 

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 22:41 | Link to Comment NOPOMO
NOPOMO's picture

Fraud is this administrations and our goverments middle name.  Fraudulent claims for Iraq war under Bush, Fraudulent claims on bank solvency, Fraudulent claims on unemployment, Fraudulent claims of recovery, Fraudulent POMO operations to finance the wealthy at the expense of tax payers and lastly Fraudulent claims on the character of a man that could fix this whole mess.

Obama, Bernanke & lets not forget Tim are a complete disgrace to this country.  I will vote for Ron Paul and would not give Obama the steam off my *%it.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 22:16 | Link to Comment Coldfire
Coldfire's picture

Owner of Fox News, Rupert "Kentucky Fried Chicken Head" Murdoch is our age's William Randolph Hearst, minus the ethics. (Ref: google "wiki yellow journalism").

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 22:01 | Link to Comment PulauHantu29
PulauHantu29's picture

Another misleading MSM station. Fox blends in with AP news and the rest of them now.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 22:02 | Link to Comment Papaneuf
Papaneuf's picture

Foxy News!

Ron Paul 2012! Bitchez

Hemmer is a pimple-assed young liar-boy!

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 23:55 | Link to Comment penisouraus erecti
penisouraus erecti's picture

seems if dems and republicans alike are against you, you're probably doing something right!

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 21:04 | Link to Comment JustACitizen
JustACitizen's picture

The shame of Fox News is when Republicans are not acting very conservatively - they don't cover it. From 2000 forward - I kept waiting to see them present a "conservative" point of view - it never happened. Patriot Act - no problem. Dept of Homeland Security - no problem. Foreign wars/entanglements - no problem. Deficet - no problem - until the Dems took over - then it's a problem.

They have "0" credibility - just another corporatist boot licking entertainment channel. The people who believe in that channel as a news source should start thinking for themselves - but it probably will never happen.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 21:01 | Link to Comment Smiley
Smiley's picture

I have serious doubts about the mental capacity of anybody who watches American News and feels there is any truth or value to the gibberish depicted.  I think 90% of my news intake now is from foreign sources.  Our media is full of shit: Straight Up.

 

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 22:05 | Link to Comment Shpreken ZeFUBAR
Shpreken ZeFUBAR's picture

I'm with you on the American News sources. 

Of course, if anyone believes that the vitriol coming from Max Keiser+Press TV (Iranian propaganda) or RT (Russian propaganda) is anything other than BRI(I)C attempts to tear the US down, I have a bridge to sell you in the Mojave Desert. 

SzF

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 20:26 | Link to Comment sellstop
sellstop's picture

That video is just one more example of Obama controlling Fox news.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 21:53 | Link to Comment Shpreken ZeFUBAR
Shpreken ZeFUBAR's picture

are you dyslexic?  Obama is a figurehead.  Murdoch is more of a threat to the US than bin Laden/all of al Qaeda and infinitely more powerful...

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 20:09 | Link to Comment jonjon831983
jonjon831983's picture

Maybe they should have done like Chinese Media and slip in a quick clip "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j2F4VcBmeo

@0:15

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 19:43 | Link to Comment One_Eyed_Pony
One_Eyed_Pony's picture

Welcome to the Corporatist-Fasco 4th branch of the Federal Government, Main Stream Media. Now I know why they call it FAUX NEWS. Establishment doesn't want anyone who may be a threat to the PYRAMID and PONZI schemes of the US Government and the rigged BS @ FINRA/SEC/OCC/CFTC/and all the rest of the Banana Republic's branches of Crone Fascist government. Damn, we would be better off with the MOBSTERS running the country... Oh Wait a SEC!

 

Roger Ailes once admmitted, that, all corporate media outlets senior representatives meet once per week with the Executive branch for their media focus/info   aka  Indoctrination/Propaganda.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 18:47 | Link to Comment KickIce
KickIce's picture

I don't think the Rothchild's could give a rat's ass what the average candidate believes, right or left, as long as they don't threaten the Fed.

They are looking for the next puppet.

 

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 18:02 | Link to Comment ShankyS
ShankyS's picture

Have not read the comments so sorry if this is a dupe -

 

Want more on the Fox/RP issue? Infowars took it a step further today -

 

 

Fox News Dirty Tricks Against Ron Paul No “Mistake” http://www.infowars.com/fox-news-dirty-tricks-against-ron-paul-no-mistake/
Thu, 02/17/2011 - 20:53 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

What amazes me though, Shanky, is that Fox so underestimates the Paul people that they thought they could get by with it.  It is a huge backlash.  When Fox does something in the future against Ron Paul in this presidential campaign, people will use this to hang around its neck. 

Again, these people underestimate the Paul people, and the Internet. Worse yet, Fox pretends to be the conservative alternative to liberal Americans and then entraps their audience to use against the true conservative movement represented by Ron Paul and others.

As Watson asks today in the information you reference:

Was it another “mistake” to omit Paul’s name entirely from a Fox News survey last week that asked who would make the best president? Was it a “mistake” that relative nobodies like John Thune and Jon Huntsman were included in the Fox poll and yet Paul was blacklisted entirely despite his CPAC success two years running?

Was it another “mistake” on behalf of Fox News to exclude Paul from a January 6 2008 presidential forum event because they saw the prospect of anti-war opinions being voiced by the most conservative member of the House as a “threat”?

Was it a “mistake” for Fox News to claim that their own May 2007 presidential poll, which Ron Paul won, was unreliable, because online Paul supporters had skewed the result, despite the fact that the survey was conducted via cell phone text messaging and no online votes were taken?

Was it a mere “mistake” for Fox News host Sean Hannity to deride the Texas Congressman’s runaway success in the text messaging poll as nothing more than “Paulites” flood voting, when in reality only one vote per cell phone number was allowed? Hannity’s contention that Ron Paul supporters were “were simply dialing in over and over again” was nothing more than a brazen lie intended to dismiss the Congressman’s widespread popularity. No one at Fox News bothered to correct Hannity and no retraction was issued.

Was it another “mistake” when Fox News started editing Ron Paul’s name out of Associated Press stories they syndicated before the 2008 presidential campaign?

Was it a “mistake” for Fox News to denigrate the fact that Ron Paul received the most campaign donations from members of the U.S. military by attributing it to “libertarian mailing lists”?

Was it a “mistake” when Fox News attempted to smear Ron Paul for having the audacity to appear on the Alex Jones Show and the nerve to merely converse with people who commit the thought crime of not completely trusting the official government version of 9/11?

Was it a “mistake” when Fox News rigged the structure of their entire May 2007 presidential debate and used it as a vehicle for all the other candidates to viciously attack Ron Paul, while Fox’s pre-screened audience rapaciously applauded calls for torture and warmongering?

Was it a mistake when Fox News directors conspired to censor Ron Paul supporters from appearing in camera shots during the Mackinac Republican Conference on September 22, 2007, when they were caught on film stating, “I don’t want these Ron Paul people, but I need shots of audience”?

Was it a “mistake” for Fox News to ignore a story every other news outlet was obliged to report, the record-breaking $4.2 million in campaign donations that Ron Paul achieved in a single day, while instead choosing to obsess about a man in Texas who sat in a bath tub full of snakes?

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 17:11 | Link to Comment lilimarlene1
lilimarlene1's picture
 May God bless and keep you always
May your wishes all come true
May you always do for others
And let others do for you
May you build a ladder to the stars
And climb on every rung
May you stay forever young
Forever young, forever young
May you stay forever young.

May you grow up to be righteous
May you grow up to be true
May you always know the truth
And see the lights surrounding you
May you always be courageous
Stand upright and be strong
May you stay forever young
Forever young, forever young
May you stay forever young.

May your hands always be busy
May your feet always be swift
May you have a strong foundation
When the winds of changes shift
May your heart always be joyful
And may your song always be sung
May you stay forever young
Forever young, forever young
May you stay forever young.
Thu, 02/17/2011 - 17:10 | Link to Comment Sathington Willougby
Sathington Willougby's picture

The higher the stakes and bigger the threat, the more underhanded the statists will get.

Having a jesus-esque persona is playing in his favor.  It makes me want to kick the shit teeth out of those kleinfelters when they protect their precious crack whore habits of the state solution by attacking this man.

 

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 16:41 | Link to Comment kragsquest
kragsquest's picture

Ron Paul is a rarity an honest politician--this must be quite a shock to the war mongering Republicans. 

As someone said, the only intelligent people who watch FOX are the writers for the Comedy Channel.

 

One problem with the Lew Rockwell writers, Ron Paul and Gary North, not excepted is that they encourage tax protestors which does zero good in an age where the government is getting more powerful tools to nail tax cheats--play by the rules if you are making money folks, it is no fun to be facing back taxes! 

Second problem is that Ayn Rand is exalted as an excellent writer when her contemporaries were quite critical of the low quality of her fiction--Flannery O'Connor said that Rand's writing in "Atlas Shrugged" made Mickey Spillane look like Dostoyevsky in comparison. 

If libertarians and conservatives are to win politically they need to build coalitions.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 17:07 | Link to Comment lilimarlene1
lilimarlene1's picture

Ah, but Flannery believed in redemptive grace. Ayn was an objectivist.

The problem with many on ZH is their abundant despair. While living in a hollowed out south, still Flannery maintained her belief in the thing belivers believe in: the ability to not only endure, but to prosper. Of course, those are the words of faith from another son of the south.    

It will be faith, prayer and action that will overcome these evil times.       

And once again this country will have two kinds of people, about them you will need to say no more, and their word will be their bargain. That is, "he is a God fearing man."

There was a day when that was all you needed to know. I personally don't need to know your flavor of religion, just that you have some however vague;  just that you accept a natural order and a higher order and understand that there are some rules that are ageless and axiomatic.

It is moral relativism that has cooked our collective goose.

Junk on, baby!

Fri, 02/18/2011 - 12:53 | Link to Comment kragsquest
kragsquest's picture

Thanks for your comments lilimarlene1.

 

The southern writers like Faulkner and O'Connor are certainly special and brilliant.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 17:08 | Link to Comment lilimarlene1
lilimarlene1's picture

double post.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 16:39 | Link to Comment rcmullins
rcmullins's picture

When are people going to 'get-it' that there ARE NO Republicans and Democrats.  They are the same party designed to keep the sheeple bickering with one another over ideology that the people in office do not themselves hold dear.  This left-right paradigm needs to be crushed.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 16:09 | Link to Comment Dirtt
Dirtt's picture

Any wonder why Obama needs a Kill Switch?

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 16:34 | Link to Comment Poofter Priest
Poofter Priest's picture

Dig it.

And it's even a 'tri-partisan' bill so that way 'nobody' is to blame.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 16:03 | Link to Comment razorthin
razorthin's picture

To the extent that this accusation goes viral, it is good for liberty and for Dr. Paul.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 15:39 | Link to Comment treemagnet
treemagnet's picture

This is hardly the most incredible news media deception ever caught on video - not by a fucking longshot.  Wrong for sure, but not even close to the bullshit artists at cbs/nbc/abc/cnn and lets not forget the masters of the universe, msnbc.  Get yourself a new ax to grind 'cause this ones not even dull.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 15:16 | Link to Comment robert_paulson
robert_paulson's picture

This is not the first time FOX has gotten caught with its pants down like this.

I am not sure whether this was intentional.  It absolutely could have been.  Or it could have just been sheer incompetence/laziness.  Either way, it's a huge problem. 

I am not a fan of cable news at all, and especially think CNN has jumped the shark with their obsession with high-tech graphics and Twitter posts.  But at least some of the folks at CNN and MSNBC try to do honest reporting.  They may do a terrible job, and the actual news may be subordinated to ratings gimmicks, but at least they're not actively trying to misrepresent the facts (even if they often do).

FOX News, on the other hand, is simply the propaganda arm of the Republican party.  (Or lately, the Republicans are merely the political arm of FOX News.)  They get the story wrong because they are trying to get it wrong, and they do everything they can to undermine outfits that still do actual investigative journalism (like the New York Times, which is still the best paper in the country bar none).

Whether you're a Republican, Dem, or independent - liberal, conservative, or a bit of both - if you rely on FOX News for information and think it's "real news" then you lack any credibility in my opinion.  99% of the people on cable news are hacks, but the FOX people are partisan hacks, which is 10x worse IMO.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 15:13 | Link to Comment Hugh_Jorgan
Hugh_Jorgan's picture

Whatever....

Anything to attack Fox, eh? Why did I know that this article would bring out the "Ron Paul is God" moonbats to protect their messiah. You want to find the small pocket of conspiracy theorists in the new Constitutionalist/Tea Party crowd? Look no further.

Don't get me wrong, I like Ron Paul. I just don't think he is anything particularly special compared to the other handful of people in Congress with a sack.

No one at Fox is trying to sink Ron Paul, least of all Hemmer. Fox is notoriously sloppy with their editing and cueing of video, they should fire some of thier engineers & editors for simple incompetence.

Ron Paul's most devout disciples are the ones endangering his aspirations by showing themselves as the strung-too-tight psychos that many of them are.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 17:04 | Link to Comment Sathington Willougby
Sathington Willougby's picture

FOX is notorious for ridiculing Dr. Paul.

They do that because he's a threat.

Now why people think he's god, I don't know.  Maybe it's because any other man with his credibility would have jacked one of those fuckhead corruption junkies in the face by now.

 

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 15:39 | Link to Comment palmereldritch
palmereldritch's picture

Are you saying that Fox is like the government and not capable of conspiracy and that that good ole chestnut ‘incompetence’ is yet to blame again?  LOL

Why use the word ‘conspiracy‘ ? Is it because its a handy slide word?  How about ‘agenda’??
Fox has an agenda to sell products and obviously Ron Paul is not one endorsed by their
management.

Probability, logic and Fox News’ reputation for professional presentation beg to differ on your explanation.  Sorry but you’re clutching at straw men trying to spin this one with incompetence and simultaneously slander it with conspiracy theorist hype. Facts are facts.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDthMGtZKa4

They don’t call it programming for nothin’...

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 15:21 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

The racing blood in the veins of Paul people grows hotter because of the old political adage: “You can’t beat somebody with nobody.”  The summary of Dr. Paul’s credentials becomes crystal clear. Here at long last is Somebody!!

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 15:22 | Link to Comment Poofter Priest
Poofter Priest's picture

'Any thing to attack Fox'....what...like the truth?

As far as Fox not having it in for Ron Paul, check out his coverage by ALL the media in the last elections.

And nowhere did I say or imply that Ron Paul was God.

Hmmm, sort of a Fox News tactic I'd say.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 14:59 | Link to Comment Poofter Priest
Poofter Priest's picture

That was no "engineering accident".

The dweeb asked Ron Paul if he knew who was booing him.

In the actual footage NOBODY was booing him.

You might say the news dweeb was given the wrong tape also. Does that mean the news dweeb didn't known the percentage by which R.P. won?

Highly highly doubtful.

Wake the fuck up.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 14:58 | Link to Comment palmereldritch
palmereldritch's picture

The arrogance of Fox is a breathtaking admission that they are left catering to only mouth breathing momos who gladly gulp the soothing koolaid of corporatist globalist control.

In this day of alternate media they undeniably reveal themselves as the Foxprop factory that they are...

With Ron Paul's credibility and this exgregious manipulation, if this info is disseminated wide enough it could truly be a shark jumping moment for Fox News shattering the false left-right paradigm that enslaves the viewpoint of many of their drones who have been programmed to believe that Fox is an honest broker of any facts, liberal, conservative or objective.

Great article.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 15:11 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

And great comment! palmereldritch. As to "if this info is disseminated wide enough," interesting that there already are 209,000 results from one mere Google search --  “ron paul fake fox video…” :))

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 15:17 | Link to Comment palmereldritch
palmereldritch's picture

Awesome. I hope it goes viral on many versions to thwart Google's own propaganda/suppression issues :)

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 14:18 | Link to Comment Sathington Willougby
Sathington Willougby's picture

Twelve Steps 

1. We admitted we were powerless over Federal Junkies addicted to our money—that our lives had become unmanageable.

2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.

3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him. 

4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.

5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.

6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.

7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.

8. Made a list of all persons, and became willing to make amends to them all. 

9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.

10. Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it.

11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out. 

12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to others, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 14:06 | Link to Comment SteveBob
SteveBob's picture

Bill Hemmer is a ex-CNN left-winger on Fox to add diversity along with the likes of Geraldo and Greta.  I am sure he is happy to take shots at Ron Paul or any other Conservative/Libertarian.  Would not have happened if Megyn Kelly was still his co-Anchor!

Hemmer is a Lefty who Fox should dump and improve the gene pool at the network.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 13:58 | Link to Comment Pee Wee
Pee Wee's picture

Does that network have ANY credibility?  Watching that network is like watching a dog vomit.

Wake me when the anchors quit while they still have a shred of career left.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 13:49 | Link to Comment dudditz
dudditz's picture

I believe in what both Ron and his son stand for, but I also feel that he should not run for president, for reasons stated above by MrBoompi.  We have a plutocracy with the caveat that we can still vote, but I have no illusions of who really runs this country.  The populace will "speak" by taking actions.  Like it or not, my actions follows Chinas lead by divesting some of my dollars and equities and buying PMs.  "They" do not have the balls to repeat FDRs actions, because it will kill their money making capability.  They will eventually have to come to the table and barter with the public.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 13:48 | Link to Comment jmc8888
jmc8888's picture

Well faux news is *entertainment*

If they really wanted to discredit Ron Paul, they'd just point out THE FACT he is a monetarist.  An austrian monetarist. 

Haven't we learned by now that it is MONETARISM that has failed the question.  Doesn't matter if you're Paul Krugman/Obama Keynesian or Ron Paul Austrian, you're both full of SHIT.

I hate MONETARISM, therefore I hate what about Ron Paul? Just that. Pual Krugman? Just that.

I won't go to bat for Faux news, because they've ALWAYS SUCKED, and it's ALWAYS been apparent. 

But serious what's the difference between Ron Paul and Paul Krugman? They both want to pay off through screwing the people...the bankstas fraudulent debt.  They just go about the screw job DIFFERENTLY.  Oh yes one anal fucks you with a thumb up your ass, the other one doesn't. That's about it.  REALITY, it's a mothefucker.

Now, that doesn't mean I'm 100 percent against Ron Paul...he's right about the fed, but he's not the only want who wants to end the fed.  So I'll support him on that, and not to get into needless foreign wars.  Aside from that, he's a dipshit.  Sure he knows not to print money, but instead he wants to cut to pay off the fraudulent debt, which in reality, makes him a whole lot like Paul Krugman to my eyes.  Same result, different path.  Same failed ideological base...known as MONETARISM.

Better yet, instead of printing or have austerity destroy us, why not just use the good old fashion, tried and true, Glass-Steagall.

Why cut or print when you can Glass-Steagall.  Ron Paul and the austrians are just as much of dipshits as Paul Krugman/Obama and the Keynesians about this.

(not to mention the backstory on austrians...hapsburgs and nazi's....no thanks...the ideologies that allowed those two devils to be as evil as they were..they were following AUSTRIAN mantras)

If I'm willing to go against MY party, you should too.  Because only if we both do it, and pass Glass-Steagall will we survive *by averting* the coming dark age.

So are you going to cut like a fool? Print like a fool? Or use Glass-Steagall on the fools?

Fox news doesn't get anything, and are about 1000 steps behind. Of course they're just bankstas bitchez, and always have been.

Glass-Steagall

 

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 17:48 | Link to Comment akak
akak's picture

Dear jmc,

1) Shut the fuck up

2) Pull your head out of your ass

3) Shut the fuck up

 

Your meaningless babbling would cause you acute embarrassment if you had any sliver of an inkling of a clue what an idiot you are.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 14:56 | Link to Comment Dr. Acula
Dr. Acula's picture

"If they really wanted to discredit Ron Paul, they'd just point out THE FACT he is a monetarist.  An austrian monetarist"

"not to mention the backstory on austrians...hapsburgs and nazi's"

WTF are you talking about?

 

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 13:44 | Link to Comment velobabe
velobabe's picture

i didn't watch the video, i can't stand to see Fox News logo, it is like the whatever.

i did read the initial article that came out with the results. fox is just bummed that sarah palin only received or performed so poorly, like 3% of the votes.

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 13:41 | Link to Comment Doc
Doc's picture

What I never get about the reaction to Ron Paul is even if you disagree with him he seems like the nicest and most polite guy on earth. He's not some kind of firebrand or idealogue in his presentation... so I can't understand for the life of me how people get so vitriolic and worked up about him...

Could anyone explain?

Fri, 02/18/2011 - 00:59 | Link to Comment StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

I HATE BOTH LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES, and for one very simple reason:   Both of them want to restrict personal freedom by criminalizing various  types of behavior which, for all intents and purposes, harm no one
except (possibly) those who engage in them.

IN PARTICULAR, liberals want to take away my guns, my property rights,
my home school, my cigarettes, my fast foods, my unapproved cancer cure,
my Confederate flag, my white-pride sticker, my eagle feathers, my
moment of silence, my gas-guzzler, and my big flush toilet.

FURTHERMORE, they want to keep me from talking about (or making jokes
about) certain racial or ethnic subjects, force me to race-mix, force
me to treat people as equals whether I think they are or not, force me
to mix with people who have weird diseases (and keep me from knowing who they are), keep me from getting a job or promotion so that somebody with a different hue or sex behavior can get it, appropriate my tax money for
their charities and social engineering schemes, and force me to send my
kids to schools I wouldn't send a dog to in order to be indoctrinated in
beliefs which are totally opposed to my own.

LIKEWISE, conservatives want to take away my dope, my rock'n'roll, my
dirty pictures, my birth-control devices, my abortion doctor, my
morning-after pills, my union card, my Harry Potter and evil-lution
books, my flag-burning kit, my Third-World friends, my illegitimate
kids, and my polygamous wives.

FURTHERMORE, they wish to keep me from engaging in certain forms of
intimate behavior in the privacy of my own bedroom, force me to put my
life at risk -- and use my taxes for -- various acts of military
adventurism and political power-seeking that I do not agree with, and
require me to make reverent noises toward various brands of religion
that I may or may not happen to believe in.

AND WHAT IS MORE, both liberals AND conservatives want to tax away my bank account, snoop away my privacy, burn my anti-government literature, and terminate my unfiltered Internet connection.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS: The division between liberals and conservatives is just a trap. It's a trap because when we get mad at one of them for taking away one kind of freedom, then we elect the other, who then
proceeds to take away another kind of freedom. It is time we recognize
that there is no real difference between liberals and conservatives in
the way they behave -- they both want to do away with individual
freedom so they can rule as they please.

IN CONTRAST to liberals and conservatives, there is one group which
supports freedom wholeheartedly -- the libertarians. Isn't it about
time we started supporting them? 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a libertarian writer, my books will undoubtedly offend both the left
and right. The following is a list of the smear terms which are certain
to be applied to me, and why. While most of the opinions expressed below
are either conventionally libertarian or are shared by most
libertarians, a few are not, and one or two would probably spark
libertarians' violent disagreement. But in any event they demonstrate
why both Left and Right are Wrong.

The left will call me a racist because I believe that people should have
the right to live, work, go to school and otherwise associate with
whoever they want to, including those who are exclusively of their own
race. The left will also call me racist because I believe that the
various races are almost certainly different, and that researchers
should be able to investigate these differences and publish their
findings without being shouted down or called nasty names. On the other
hand, the right will call me a race-traitor because "racial purity" is
about as important to me as what I had for breakfast, and because, while
I regard blacks (as a race -- not as individuals) as probably inferior
to whites in intelligence, I regard Jews and Asians as probably superior.

The left will call me sexist because I believe that the sexes are
genetically and non-trivially different in intellectual and emotional
functions, motivation, aggression, and physical capacities. On the other
hand, the right will call me equalitarian because I believe that women
should have the opportunity to be everything they can be, without
arbitrary discrimination in either law or custom against their efforts
to assume non- traditional roles.

The left will call me elitist because I believe that competence should
be rewarded and incompetence discouraged, and that the State has no
business in "helping" its citizens -- whether the poor, the handicapped,
or any other group -- except in a few very basic and limited ways such
as providing the means for elementary education and keeping the streets
free from violent crime. Furthermore, the left will call me heartless
because I oppose the feeding of millions of starving because this will
turn them into billions of starving later. On the other hand, the right
will call me redistributionist because I believe that the accumulation
of wealth and power, particularly over several generations, will tend
toward creating economic and social stratification, where members of the
lower classes will find it impossible to rise irrespective of their
talents; and I believe that ways must be found to make sure that the
cream will always rise to the top.

The left will call me anti-semitic because I believe revisionist
historians have made a very strong case for the proposition that Nazi
Germany did not use "gas chambers" to kill Jews, and in fact had no
policy of "extermination", tho this of course does not change the fact
-- in which the revisionists are in full accord -- that the Nazis
treated the Jews with great brutality. The left will also call me
anti-semitic because I call Israel leftist and racist, and because I
have taken note of the fact that Jews have been the prime movers in
communism, especially in Russia and America. On the other hand, the
right will say I am a Jewish ass-kisser because I believe that the
Nazis, in attempting to remove the Jews from their soil, were probably
acting against the only group which could lay reasonable claim to being
what the Nazis claimed to be, namely, the Master Race. The right will
also say that I am a Jewish ass-kisser because I maintain that, no
matter how racist or socialist Israel may be, it is still several cuts
above the indigenous Arab culture and thus deserves to replace it.

The left will say that I am a Nazi because I believe that America should
be for Americans, and not for every bit of Third-World protoplasm that
washes up on our shores or sneaks across our borders. On the other hand,
the right will say that I am a race-mixer because I am in favor of
admitting to citizenship those of any race having special skills or
other qualifications which would make such persons an asset to American
society.

The left will say that I am homophobic because I believe that
communicable AIDS-associated diseases should be treated as dangerous,
and that, at the very least, healthy people should not be forced to come
into contact with carriers, as seems to be the intent of gay activists
who are promoting "anti-discrimination" laws. On the other hand, the
right will say that I am a pervert because I think that a person's
sexual preferences and behavior, including what sort of partners he has,
what sort of pictures or literature he enjoys, and what type of bodily
orifices he derives sexual satisfaction from, are not a matter of public
concern.

The left will say that I am a religious nut because I believe that
Christianity is an important source of social wisdom, as is explained in
my book The Most Powerful Idea Ever Discovered. On the other hand, the
right will say that I am immoral because my ethics is not based on the
irrational mythology of some religion, and because I say that anyone who
looks at the world's evil and still believes in its Creator's goodness
is nothing but a benighted Devil-worshipper.

The left will say that I am uncaring because I oppose the government's
expropriation of the property of productive citizens for such "good"
causes as the support of welfare parasites, losers, Alzheimeric old
fogies, and other human garbage. On the other hand, the right will say
that I am a pinko because I think Marx was probably right that
capitalism will naturally evolve into monopoly unless there is
government intervention, and that the end result of the evolution of a
capitalist economy may just possibly be (tho will not necessarily be)
what Marx predicted, namely, socialism.

The left will say that I am a war-monger because I believe that the best
way to prevent war is to be militarily strong. On the other hand, the
right will say that I am unpatriotic because I do not like to see
American taxpayers' money used to support crummy Third-World tinhorn
dictators and corrupt billionaire oil sheiks just because they declare
themselves to be America's "friends" and "allies". The right will in
particular call me unpatriotic because I think that most of the wars
America has fought were immoral, including Vietnam, Panama, Iraq, and
most likely World War I and II; and in general that America has no
business involving itself in the affairs of other countries unless its
own existence is threatened.

The left will say that I am cruel because I believe in public whippings
for violent crimes and executions for repeat offenders. On the other
hand, the right will say that I am softheaded because I don't believe
that it is the proper role of government to tell people what substances
they may put into their bodies, irrespective of whether such substances
are harmful to the health but socially acceptable (like alcohol, tobacco
and valium) or are relatively harmless but are condemned as "drugs"
(like marijuana or LSD).

The left will say that I am greedy because I believe that every man has
the right to profit by the sweat of his brow, the force of his
intelligence, and the risk of his capital. On the other hand, the right
will say that I am mushy because I believe that a person who is totally
self-centered and without empathy for others is socially pathological.

The left will say that I am anti-labor because I think that capitalists
have as much right to profit from the risk of investing their capital as
the workers have to profit from the efforts of investing their labor,
and in particular that unions and businesses are just two different
economic interests which should be allowed to slug it out in a free-
market environment without the intervention of government. On the other
hand, the right will say that I am anti-capitalist because I recognize
the danger in any concentration of power, such as is found in big
businesses, which can skew social processes against the interests of the
many.

The left will say that I am a capitalist tool because I condemn the
government's taking of private property without adequate compensation,
including any partial taking such as the imposition of burdensome
regulations on the use of property. On the other hand, the right will
say that I am an eco-freak because I believe that ways must be found to
preserve the natural environment, and while many of these may be able to
be accomplished thru the free market, not all of them can be. The right
will particularly condemn me for my opposition to nuclear power, whose
ability to cause irreversible and irremediable accidents makes it too
dangerous for human consumption.

The left will say that I am heartless because I don't object to wearing
fur coats or eating beef (or eating dogs and cats, for that matter). On
the other hand, the right will call me a foolish sentimentalist because
I wish to stop animal cruelty, particularly of the systematic kind which
is often found in food processing plants and animal research
laboratories. But the right will also call me a baby-killer because I do
not object to the discretionary removal of jelly-blobs from a woman's
uterus.

The left will say that I am a fascist because I believe each person has
the right and responsibility to defend himself against assault, with
deadly force if necessary. On the other hand, the right will say that I
am soft on crime because I believe that someone accused of breaking the
law has rights which the police and courts must respect, and in
particular that Constitutional guarantees must not be disregarded just
because the President is yelling about some contrived War on
Something or another.

And both the left and the right will call me an SOB, because they don't
like to hear the truth. -- John "Birdman" Bryant

 

Thu, 02/17/2011 - 13:58 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

Dr. Paul is an obstetrician but to everyone who knows the current Big Government environment he looks more like a surgeon with a machete. Why?  Because the Big Government/Big Empire/Big Banker establishment sees Dr. Paul the way I do: He intends to cut a little more than a little fat from these ruling criminals; he intends to cut right through to the muscle.

…Right through to the beast’s black heart.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!