This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Where the Heck is Ron Paul?
By Wolf Richter www.testosteronepit.com
It struck me this morning (well, it struck me many times before, but this morning it was just too much). I was listening to NPR's Morning Edition. The report (listen here) on tonight's GOP debate covered just about everything you can cover in four-and-a-half minutes: The debate's focus on the economy, deficit, tax reform, and entitlements; Sarah Palin's and Chris Christie's exit from the race; Herman Cain's from-the-outside strategy; Mitt Romney's 25% ceiling; and of course his “Mormon problem” as raised by Rick Perry—“this is something we're watching,” said Mara Liasson, NPR's national political correspondent. I mean, come on. She also spent some time on how Perry is preparing for the debate to make up ground he lost in the last three debates. OK, great, we need to know this.
But where the heck is Ron Paul?
He is the one who did well in those debates. He won the most recent straw poll. He raised $8 million in the last three months from over 100,000 supporters. He is not some Tom, Dick, and Harry. He is a real candidate, unlike Palin, who dropped out, but he doesn't even get mentioned as a participant.
You don't need to be a supporter of him to be outraged. Even a Perry supporter or an ardent Democrat who listened to this report would want to know that there is a legitimate candidate named Ron Paul who will participate in the debate, and who will, if past record is any indication, do well. A democracy needs accurate news coverage to function properly. And when coverage fails so miserably time and again, we need to ... do more research.
So the Wall Street Journal ran a longish front-page piece this morning, “Debates Take Candidates for a Bumpy Ride.” But Paul is not mentioned. Not even in a side bar. He just doesn't exist.
And the New York Times? Well, it ran a front-page article, “Five Things to Watch for in the G.O.P. Debate.” And only towards the bottom, it forces itself to mention Paul, but in a parenthetical remark between dashes: "Mrs. Bachmann is likely to be joined by the others on the stage — Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum — in assailing Mr. Obama's administration...."
In yesterday's article on the debate, the NYT doesn't mention Paul at all in the text. He is relegated to an info box on the left sidebar under “Participants.”
And when the NYT does mention Paul prominently, it's because there is no way of avoiding it without giving up any pretense of impartiality: “Ron Paul Wins Conference Straw Poll, to No One's Surprise” (article). But rather than discussing his ideas, it describes how that victory was contrived by busing in tons of college students.
And a shocker. On October 5, the NYT reported on the fund-raising status in a fairly long article, published at 9:33 am. It discusses Perry's $17-million haul, other candidates, and even President Obama. Missing? You guessed it.
Somebody must have raised a ruckus. And so at 1:52 pm, four hours and twenty minutes after the original article, the NYT ran a short article on Paul's $8 million he raised from over 100,000 donors. A forced after-thought that must have left the editors a bitter taste in their collective mouths for the rest of the day.
The WSJ and NYT are the largest newspapers in the country, but the list goes on ad infinitum. Why can't they report on Paul's ideas? They report on the ideas of just about all other candidates. Why can't they at least include him in their coverage of our democratic processes? They don't have to praise him or agree with him. Or are they afraid of his ideas?
His opposition to the Fed might be part of it. The heavily leveraged companies that own the status-quo media outlets—Fed-billions recipient GE, Murdoch's News Corporation, the New York Times Company, etc.—must have access to unlimited flows of essentially free money to keep their empires afloat. Whatever their reasons, their boycott further tarnishes what little remains of their reputations as reliable new sources.
Which is a shame. In a democracy that wants to be vibrant, all major candidates deserve the attention of the news media, and not just of the blogosphere.
Running up deficits and printing trillions to monetize them can't create a healthy economy. Yet, inexplicably, it's what the status-quo media continue to propagate: When False Premises Become Economic Policy.
Wolf Richter www.testosteronepit.com
»
- advertisements -
I'm not talking about him personally, I'm talking about proposing to remover ALL CONgressman from a separate retirement. They must be forced live under our Social Security program, our laws.
This notion that they can lead separate lives from the rest of us is the banner hs should, with his maverick status be carrying.
He has DONE nothing.
Done nothing?
How about, as the previous post shows, he walks the fucking walk.
Plain. And. Simple.
Everyone who would critisize Dr. Paul for not doing enough, should 1st take a look at the life of Congressman Louis McFadden. Relentless Fed critic, died suddenly at age 44.
JFK started silver certificates.
There are more examples.
It's a jungle out there in anti-fiat-land.
And each year he returns the unused portion of his office budget to the U.S. Treasury.
the media is confused by someone with two first names.
You mean Rick Perry?
It may run deeper than that... confusion with dead transvestite drag queen RuPaul perhaps?
http://www.bubblestheartist.com/fans/rupaul-autograph.jpg
I like underdogs but they never deliver.
You say that as European. Sometimes the underdog delivers. Did you ever see this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gfD134ED54
Mostly because of that perception
Ron who? The existence of Ron Paul is a conspiracy theory brought by homegrown terrorists and order haters.
I stay better in my box and praise the system witch is providing me food, job, and security.
Anyone notice the irony that this post doesn't seem to show on the main page of ZH? I only found it through the RSS feed but can't locate it on the page anywhere. Maybe I'm just missing it or the cabal against Paul includes Tyler.
psst, hawks, ovah heah. yah, dude, 'cuz you newbie, I'ma tellin' u just this once. Dig? Tylers-they smart, well, almost all of 'em. So they do this clevah thingie. They "separate" the "contributors" from their own excellent stuff. Dig?
this b only the next step, aftah u passed Marlaz entry exam. more b comin'
- Ned
{and, well, those folks who gave u greeniez? they dumber than u}
I think the RSS feeds load quicker. It's at the top of the page now.
Looks like Contributors must get an hour delay between RSS and site. Clears that up.
suggested slogan for his campaigners:
"The reason you've never heard of Ron Paul is the reason you need to vote for him"
The reason you've never heard of Ron PAul is because he doesn't DO anything. He's all talk all the time.
Never has he walked the walk with a bill that could gain traction and bring the peopl to their feet in agreement with him.
END THE FED???
How many people in the united states even know about the FED? What it does? How it affects them?
Paul could do a lot if he truly wanted to but he doesn't.
All you are saying is that the voters are dumb, Paul was a alone voice for a long time....... troll
Everyone who would critisize Dr. Paul for not doing enough, should 1st take a look at the life of Congressman Louis McFadden. Relentless Fed critic, died suddenly at age 44.
JFK started silver certificates.
There are more examples.
It's a jungle out there in anti-fiat-land.
I reserve minus 1 for wet tampons and you.
You're either deaf, dumb or just plain stupid.
this is his last year so he says, if he loses the nomination - just don't worry yourself about him running as an independent - the $8ml and more to come goes directly into his personel retirement account (politicians treasure trove)
life is sweet on the farm?
I'd rather that Americans vote into the House Ron Paul and 434 of his philosophical clones and have them live the easy life, than have the current crop of thieves selling this country down the river piecemeal ***every election cycle***.
Say what? Ron Paul is all talk?
!!!!! LOOK WHO IS TALKING !!!!!
You tell us what YOU have SUCCESSFULLY DONE to implement honesty, ethics, justice, liberty, productivity or individualism.
Yup. NOTHING. Every day Ron Paul risks being assassinated by the federal reserve or other agents of the predators-that-be for his positions. You are simply a purposely disingenuous moron.
Hey ANALY I mean ANONY, now if he is president, could he VETO all these unconstitutional things, get on the state of the Union and tell the Americans how they should fight to get rid of the fed? HMM Hard to be a zebra and tell the other 534 zebras to do something about it, But a LION telling 3oo million SHEEP to do something, watch those sheep do the moon walk;)
What the predators-that-be WILL NOT TOLERATE is someone with the appearance of "authority" or "officialdom" telling the public at large (and world) how the system works, and who controls it, and how.
This is why the predators-that-be and predator-class will stop at NOTHING to prevent Ron Paul from becoming president. I assume Ron Paul understands this clearly enough, which makes him one brave and dedicated man.
The nightmare of the predators-that-be is that Ron Paul wins and declares this:
The wars on all countries is hereby ended. The wars on drugs, poverty, energy-independence, education-excellence and every other lame-ass "war" is hereby ended.
We hereby replace all wars with one single war.
Today, we begin the war to end all wars - the war on predators.
Hey ANALY I mean ANONY, now if he is president, could he VETO all these unconstitutional things, get on the state of the Union and tell the Americans how they should fight to get rid of the fed? HMM Hard to be a zebra and tell the other 534 zebras to do something about it, But a LION telling 3oo million SHEEP to do something, watch those sheep do the moon walk;)
@anony: while I agree with you that RP is all talk, clearly some (and lately, most) of his talk is good, just like Obama's talk was good when he was running for president (end the wars, bring our troops home, accountability in government and finance, etc.).
Ending the Fed is a huge issue we absolutely must deal with ASAP. If few people know about it (and I bet a near majority are aware of it now), then that just means we need to help educate them, regardless of the MSM's efforts to the contrary, 'cos it matters.
Ending the FED is an impossible task. He's our Don Quixote.
There is no way that is EVER going to happen,
While I would dynamite the FED myself, if I had a terminal disease, that is the only way it will disappear. It's not part of government, the potentates made sure to put it outside the purview of government.
However, there are a few things I would like to see him DO. Just one thing would be be fine with me. Like reinstate Glass-Steagall and go to his supporters to beat the drum incessantly until that is accomplished.
So we need to end the Fed, but it will never, ever happen, and the only people talking about it deserve derision? Buck up, Sparky! Dr. Paul is in better shape than you, it's what allows him to tirelessly advocate for truth 100% of the time. He's not only the best we've got by a long shot, he's up to the task, and he's trustworthy. The American people will end the fed if they trust the man who kills it, until then we get toadies and more fiat. Support Ron Paul. He's getting the maximum contribution from me, and if I can afford it, from my family.
Troll.
I recently got in touch with an old friend from my childhood, who fits Dr. Paul's constituency to a tee. After he ranted on for a while about the state of things (he runs his own business, funded by cashing out his 401k from a previous job) I asked him about his opinion of Ron Paul. He had never heard of him.
It will be interesting to see how long they can hide him from the sheeple.
And did you fill your friend in?
A little wordy but spot-on. How about "The best politician money can't buy?"
One may disagree with his politics... but unlike the others he knows the nation's true enemies.
And doesn't, or won't DO shit about it.
Utter hopelessness isn't good for you. Buck up, Sparky!
And who are you voting for exactly?
The thing to realize is that NPR is a joke. For whatever reason, they are an establishment mouthpiece and nothing more. I like their low key conversation and seemingly laid back style, but make no mistake, they are laughable.
When Fukishima happened, about 4 days in, two reactors had blown up and the situation looked dire, from all the alternative sources on the internet. NPR was not reporting the explosions, saying that Fukushima was turning out to be a minor event with hardly any radiation released.
Don't waste your time listening to them. They are the complete opposite of Alex Jones. LOL
Their news is presented without opinion. If we get our news from personalities, it is propaganda. The difference is overwhelming. Are they giving us the real news at NPR? No.
They are better at giving real news. But not by much. And of course, they only report what they see fit. NPR dropped the ball some time ago. Clearly it was no accident. Someone yanked the funding chain and let them know who their daddy was. NPR is just a bitch now - like the rest of the MSM.
You guys made contrary points withen your posts.
Why write about someone you can't influence?
Why write about someone you don't own?
NPR is state-funded bias. In other words, propaganda. Much of which is in the form of omission, insidious in its subtlety.
Or Diane Rehm, who t a l k s... s o... s l o w l y... t h a t... t h e... l i s t e n e r... f a l l s... i n t o... a... c o m a.
I listen to the DR show out of morbid curiousity. One of these days I'm sure I'll get to hear her die on air.
LOL... I tried the same thing. Thought I was actually having a stroke instead. Had to change the station.
And here I thought it was just me...lol.
Congrats, it was just you. You're her only listener....zzzzzz....
Gee Wolf, don't you get it? The fix is in.