Guest Post: Be Honest CNBC - You Are Biased Against Ron Paul
Submitted by Brandon Smith from Alt Market
Be Honest CNBC-You Are Biased Against Ron Paul
Those of us who have supported Ron Paul since his presidential run in 2008 (and some who supported him long before that) have come to expect an astonishing array of mainstream media tricks, lies, and censorship when it comes to the “journalistic” examination of the good doctor. This doesn’t mean, however, that we have ever or will ever come to ACCEPT this consistent trend of deception and disinformation as a forgone conclusion of our political lives. We will never throw up our hands and walk away from the mess the MSM has deliberately created, because that is exactly what they would like us to do; give up, shut up, go home, vote for Romney (an establishment crony with the creepy grin of a pedophile), and watch him lose to Obama (yet another establishment crony) in 2012.
With this stated up front, it was brought to my attention that CNBC was running a poll asking readers who they thought won the recent Republican Presidential Debates in Michigan. Now, as in many polls in 2008, the name “Ron Paul” has been rising to the top of the charts in 2011 despite all efforts by media lapdogs to dissuade the public from even considering such a candidate. CNBC did not fail to play its roll this time around either. Ron Paul won by a substantial margin, and of course, their response was to take the poll down! Here was the explanation given by CNBC Managing Editor and all around bottom feeder, Allen Wastler:
Gamed Poll...So We Took It Down
We had a poll up from our Republican Presidential Debate asking readers who they thought won. One candidate was leading by such a margin that it became obvious the polling wasn't so much a reading of our audience, but of the Internet prowess of this particular candidate's political organization. We have therefore taken the poll down.
Yes, we've gone through this exercise before.
Wastler then provides a link to a rather patronizing statement he made back in 2007 to explain why CNBC dumped polling results then as well:
First of all, let’s be serious, folks! Regardless of what you might feel personally about Ron Paul or his political position, it has become painfully obvious to even the most oblivious subsections of the American populace that the MSM, from supposed “right wing” outlets like FOX, to supposed “left wing” outlets like CNBC, have gone WAY out of their way to ridicule, suppress, or completely ignore him.
Now, you really need to ask yourself, why is that?
If Ron Paul is such a “fringe” candidate with “no chance” of winning, then why all the trickery and subversion? If his political methodologies are so ridiculous or out of sync with the American people, then why not plaster his face on every TV screen in the country and let him destroy his own career? Why hide him from public view?
The answer is simple; because he IS a threat. His position is one of government transparency, limited power, and financial independence. He predicted the credit crisis and the mortgage bubble implosion long before they ever occurred. The guy wants to shut down the Federal Reserve and the cartoonish brute squad otherwise known as the IRS. He wants to end the costly and fraudulent wars in the Middle East and bring the troops home (really bring them home, not make fake statements about bringing them home and then keep them on the ground for another few years). Of course the MSM, a corporately controlled monopolistic sham, is working overtime to keep Paul down!
Think about it. Sit back and consider. If Ron Paul was actually allowed to stand on the same stage as Barack Obama in a fair debate, there would be no half hearted girly-slap pansy sparring going on as there would be in a match between Obama and Romney. Ron Paul would destroy Obama! It would be a massacre of historic proportions! The establishment, which represents a minority of elitists in this country and not the citizenry in any capacity, will not let this happen.
Allen Wastler would call the above statement “conspiracy theory”. All I have to say to Wastler is; prove me wrong! Give Ron Paul fair coverage. Leave your own polls to represent the actual results regardless of whether you like the outcome. But first, answer me these questions, Allen:
1) If your poll was “gamed”, or in other words “hacked”, then I imagine that you and CNBC have some kind of proof of this. Please, do show it to us, so we can better understand your suppression of the poll results. I continuously hear from the MSM that Ron Paul supporters are all master hackers, and that there are only a dozen of us huddled around basement computers posing as millions (and I thought they didn’t believe in conspiracies…), but I have yet to see any concrete evidence to support this notion. Do you have any, Allen?
2) If CNBC’s poll is so easily tampered with, then why continue to run it at all?
3) If Mitt Romney had won the poll by a landslide, would CNBC have suppressed the results then? Or is it only farfetched when Ron Paul prevails in the final calculations? (This is a bit of a rhetorical question, because we all know Mr. Wastler would have danced a jig and sung the glory of Romney over Paul if the roles had been reversed).
4) Why is it that whenever Ron Paul wins a poll, MSM pundits claim the results are unscientific, or that they really don’t represent the true position of the general public? Why is it that a Romney or Cain win brings resounding words of vindication for the nature of the democratic process?
5) What margin of success does CNBC consider “realistic” for a presidential candidate? I mean, is it really necessary for you to punish Ron Paul for being a popular candidate, or to punish his supporters for being well organized and showing up for the vote? Do you not see the half-assed absurdity of your claim that Ron Paul won by “too much”?
6) Isn’t it conceivable that Ron Paul is doing well in the polls because his ideas and views are shared by many Americans? Who are you to claim this is not possible, Mr. Allen?
7) Do you really believe you and CNBC will not be held accountable for misinforming the American people and hiding information pertinent to their political knowledge? The last time I checked, CNBC’s viewership has been in pitiful decline since at least 2009.
8) When are you going to man up, Allen, and admit that you dumped the poll because you are biased against Ron Paul? It’s not as if it is a big secret. Hiding behind superficial excuses such as “hackers” and “poll gaming” is at bottom pretty cowardly. Why not embrace your blatant disapproval of Paul and the considerable movement of Americans surrounding him so that we can have a real discussion, instead of putting on a pretentiously counterfeit smile and talking down your nose at us? Wouldn’t that be more fun?
Let’s bring some honesty, and perhaps finally some true competition, back to the presidential race, and say what is actually on our minds for once. This goes for the staff of CNBC! If Allen Wastler or any other MSM lackey wants to bash Ron Paul, then he should do it openly as a private citizen, not use the CNBC media apparatus as a Hearst-like yellow journalism weapon for misinforming the public, or for indirectly slandering a candidate or his supporters. This should not be a problem for him at all, unless, of course, the corporate owners of CNBC over at G&E play a much greater role in the actions of their news subsidiary than is readily admitted. Then, Allen Wastler’s apprehension in laying out the truth plainly would make a little more sense…
- advertisements -