This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Media Admits To Ignoring Ron Paul
Why? Because if "the unelectable one" were to become president, the financial kleptocratic, oligarchic status quo, which just so happens is the big legacy media's biggest advertising base, would be wiped out overnight. Next up: big media becomes very small media. The clip below from CNN explains it all.
As for the reason why Bachmann took first, one picture speak a thousand words:
h/t John and Travis
»
- 29157 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
The *purpose* of government is to serve the "collective" desires.
Most of the time, government finds a way to pay off very small groups of people. This is where the vast majority of "government assistance" has gone over time. Take a particular industry...like automobiles or the rail system or aeronautics or agriculture...and if you actually look, you'll see that government has spent ENORMOUS sums of taxpayer money solving *their* problems.
Every once in a very rare while, things have gotten so completely shitty for the private individuals who make up 90% of the US population that they have successfully demanded similar payouts. This would include things like SocSec, Medicare, the recent health-insurance subsidization program, etc.
So I'm forced to question everyone's vision of the purpose of "government" in the first place. Some people foolishly believe it has something to do with improving the lot of the citizens--ensuring they have the opportunity for a better existence.
Most right-thinkers (such as the Founding Fathers, among others) recognize that the real purpose of the government is to enable greater and greater wealth disparity to exist between different citizens. If someone isn't starving while someone else burns wheat, you don't have an effective government.
This is the sort of the historical perspective that led me to anarchism. I'm all for a society in which I can eat your children and no one cares because you were just a bastard and they loved me more.
But if you want some external "authority" to exist--some would call it "government"--you have to recognize the bad that comes with the good. For myself, I oppose every single inch of it.
Suck it up.
But that was then....since people are living so much longer and the price of medical care is outrageous....how are we to make up the vast differences. Do you know of any churches that help with medical care? Hell...as many people that are in the poor house now, there is no way charities can keep up. I dont know what the solution is but a lot of folks are already destitute and taking what little they have or what little was promised to them for years, doesn't seem right to me.
On the other hand, I think maybe being a little hungry would help some people wake up and maybe take some action. It might hasten us getting our country back but I hate to think about old men and women going hungry while some bankster flies in his leer to announce more layoffs...
But thats just my take....
Hi Rambo1028.
When we turn to government for solutions, this is kind of pickle we get ourselves into.
The solutions to our problems then, you can wager, are not going to come from the government.
You never said what your vision of right wing politics is.
Care to explain. Private governance is a dangerous game. Oligarchs and neo-feudals thrived on it!
No, he's insane because he thinks he can say that out loud and still be in the race.
let's get together like one of those stadium "waves" and spread the word via internet/twitter etc ONLY and sweep ole Ron into office without him having to prostitute himself on the controlled teevee. Maybe he could go off topic during one of those Berstank grillings in his committee while cspan is tuned in and declare "from thus point forward I will run my campaign exclusively through the internet."
I think social security is fucked anyway but I understand frustration that we're forced to contribute part of our wages and we'll never see a fucking FRN from it.
It's so fucked up that our labor is taxed in the first place, before it even has a chance to work into the equilibrium of our living expenses. I understand and respect taxation when done properly, but social security, medicare, income tax....all that shit that is taken directly out of your paycheck is fucking straight up theivery, or bad math at best.
I am sure that Frau Bachmann, as a former IRS lawyer, will be very receptive to your concerns. The ancient Phoenicians had a word for women like her. I believe it was "cunts".
You know they can't pay what they promised, but you won't vote for anyone who will even discuss how things can be changed to pay you what they can. You will get what you deserve.
I'm guessing that you are a big fan of the MIC, five pointless wars at once, and corporate welfare for billionaires but poor people well fuck them.
edit: btw, i don't need farking social security bud. money ain't my problem, fighting off zombies is going to be my problem if they export all the jobs then start cutting back on social security.
Does anyone else agree with me that the pinnacle of Hollywood moments was when Agent Smith told Morpheas that he came to the realization that human beings were a virus, multiplying and destroying everything in their path?
He must have been studying the Baby Boomers.
Then we spent the rest of the movie cheering on the peeps fighting on behalf of the virus infestation. Nice eh.
That is not Ron Paul's position. He plans to pay off those currently in the Social Security system with money saved by ending our overseas military adventures.
Why do you tell lies about Ron Paul? I suppose that you know that you can't smear him by using the truth.
Oh. My. God. You are so full of crap it isn't even funny. I should bombard you with a hundred links just for being an RTard. Google "Ron Paul Social Security" and READ SOMETHING instead of spewing ignorant second hand koch bros tea farts.
So I'm full of crap because I know what Ron Paul has actually said while you're a smart guy because you can Google the Ron Paul stories on DailyKos and Rush Limbaugh?
If you don't like Ron Paul then why don't you simply argue against his actual positions rather than making them up?
First you would have to provide me with a Ron Paul friendly and CrockettAlmanac approved link which spells out his positions so I don't get accused of making straw man arguments. possibly an unbiased source such as http://www.dailypaul.com/ ? lulz
I posted a comment above in which I stated that DailyPaul does not reflect Ron Paul's views on a variety on matters.
The laugh is once again on you. Are you really incapable of accessing Ron Paul's own words rather than what other people claim he said?
Is Paul still running this scam of letting his name associated to a medium that is supposed not to represent his views?
I though the Ron Paul's letters stuff would have served him a lesson.
Looks like this guy is that duplicitous he can not endorse certain ideas he holds and needs some proxies to express them.
Ron Paul probably thinks that folks are smart enough to know the difference between what a person actually says and what other people say about him.
How about you? Are you smart enough to tell the difference?
What difference? The difference between a man who expresses stances by his own voice and a man who deleguates the expression of certain stances to proxies?
Of course, I know the difference. The latter is probably a US citizen by the way.
So if I claim that you said that you love to wear summer dresses and stroll in the park is that is the same thing as you having actually said it?
I did this entire blog post just for you.
http://missywpp.wordpress.com/2011/08/14/zh-ron-paul-true-love/
Feel free to leave a comment.
So I should "feel free" but I shouldn't actually be able to act freely in the marketplace? Freakin' brilliant.
Bachmans flyer looks like a great Democrat MO....promise something in return for a vote
So promising tax cuts isn't promising something in return for a vote?
No demands compliance for a vote.
If I saw that paper, I would have said fuck you. Mandatory my ass.
Just another reason why the system is broken. The concept of a free press was supposed to keep the politicians on a tight rope. Clearly that is not happening anymore. The MSM is a political advertising agency, a propaganda machine, with a significant conflict of interest that prevents it from doing any kind of unbiased reporting. Even the TV shows are political.
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.
Edward Bernays
The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses.
Vladimir Lenin
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.
Joseph Stalin
you forgot:
Kent Brockman: Reporters used to expose corruption and corporate greed. Now, like toothless babies, they suckle at the teat of misinformation and poop it into the diaper called the six-o'clock news.
BRAVO!
That is fucking classic. Damn, I wish I'd come up with that line, I'd walk around repeating it to everyone I saw.
Omg! That is an awesome quote! Where is the up arrow when you need it!? Lol
How many johnny-come-late Paul fans voted for him last time around? No many, me thinks.
This is not about Ron Paul, it's about the media manipulating the audience and choosing the candidates.... and doing it in an orchastrated manner.
Why do you need to see someone in the media to vote for them again?
I'll grant you it's a raw deal when the little twink doesn't get a seat at the debate table,
but who the fuck decided that boring old men deserve free air-time because they say something
that 3% of the population are interested in hearing?
who decided they don't?
I bet you could find out the answer if you went to Short Hills, NJ.
"This show brought to you by..."
Perhaps not, but you can add me to the total. Dr. Paul is the only candidate I've contributed to and I've given him my vote whenever he was on the ballot. His message is not new, not only that the message coming from him is the same one he's spoken for all his life, but it's a message from old. Basically libertarian in its simplicity.
I'm curious which bankers paid for these entertainers
Koch Bros.
+1
No killing necessary. All the states have to do is keep him off the ballot.
the very definition of bread and circuses
Bankers and media like sex, the more super sexy the more you get media attention. The picture of Michelle B said it all in total contrived innocence.
Ron Paul is like garlic to that sexy image. He smells of good cooking but not of instant junk food. The media love junk food which is sexy and well packaged...
Simple as that, the market is crazy and the media is crazier. Period.
Vote for the statists and you'll get to go to a free concert at the "Fleecing Barn."
lol, indeed. "you do not have to be livestock"
Statism is bad m'kay? - take the red pill - Stefan Molyneux at his best.
It's a little less bad than in 2007. Heck, at least he's got Cavuto, Stossle and Napolitano on Fox rooting for him. But it's still bad.
At least the sheep in Kentucky get it. When Rand Paul was running for the Senate in Kentucky, his democrat opponent argued all the tried and true democratic scare tactics that Rand was trying to kill seniors by taking away their social security and medicare. The dem also trotted out the seniors on their death bed crying for Rand not to gut social security and medicare. Rand calmly campaigned on the fact that the social security age needs to be raised and medicare needs to be reformed - usually the death nail for Republicans. The outcome...Rand beat the Liar by almost 20% points. The sheep in Kentucky "get it". Most of America do not.
stateside
You forgot that first we had to defeat the Decepti-Con RINO Trey Grayson before he could even fight against the other party. I spent many an hour calling Eastern Kentucky and explaining who Rand Paul was and what he was for. Many others like me did the same to help. It was a big effort to defeat Mitch McConnells stooge first.
Then after the election Trey Grayson took his payoff, a job at the JFK School of Government. You know, that bastion of Republicans.
Lee Adler has an interesting liberal rant on RP over at Wall Street Examiner
http://forums.wallstreetexaminer.com/topic/990398-ames-straw-poll-in-iowa-on-saturday/
I want my click back .... what an inarticulate loser that Lee Adler is. What is interesting about it and how is it possible there are members who have suffered there for 11 years??
I am not in the USA but I can tell you that IMO Ron Paul is clearly the only and obvious choice for anyone who still thinks for themselves and wants a representative leader rather than a figurehead. I know the world is fucked because the 'leader' of the free world nations puts up Bachmans and Palins as serious contenders for their pesidency. These placeholders are jokes and are an embarassment to behold.
Forecast: (1) Bachman and Perry will grow increasingly hysterical as they try to out-religulous each other to capture the evangelical vote; (2) Perry and Romney will drag each other into the mud as they try to win the contest of who's got a bigger job-creator; and (3) the Obama campaign will use all its ammo on the mainstream candidate.
Best case scenario: Paul appears increasingly sane to the middle of the road voters as the primaries draw near. Who knows, perhaps someone like Newt will give Paul a surprise endorsement when he finally bows out of the race.
Perhaps Newt would come on board as running mate. Not really a fan, but he would bring some MSM legitimacy to the table. On the plus side, TPTB would have one of their own in place after they take care of Paul.
It was funny to watch Pawlenty forfeit after the coin toss.
Perry and Ron Paul will split the sincere / insincere cons after Bachmann says something even dumber than her usual act and Obama will have an easier campaign than last time.
Michelle Bachmann is Howard Dean with tits.
Biden in "beard" form?
Gah. Such thoughts border on genocide.
Ron Paul is a little like Ross Perot - makes a lot of sense but just can't quite cross the hurdle. Now we got a choice of another 4 years of a failed community organizer or Bachmann. Oh well, looks like we are going to have our first woman President...
Deep state TPTB have a whacky sense of humor: Who will ever elect a black man or a female to be President of the USA ever again ?
Guess again...Palin-lite ain't gonna cut it. You may feel righteous beating your chest here and on StormFront, but that doesn't win elections outside Mississippi.
Ron Paul has crossed the hurdle with support and $, Ross Perot didn't. We don't vote until next year, we have plenty of time to secure Ron Paul as the nominee.
Exactly. What kind of fucking idiot compares Ross Perot to Ron Paul? What a joke. Perot never won a single election. He named Admiral Stockdale as his running mate. He turned himself into a joke. Ron Paul keeps turning jerkwads like this poster into a joke, not himself.
Admiral Stockdale was a good guy. It was unfortunate he got such a bad rap for the teevee appearance.
Stockdale was a stronger candidate than Gore, he just wasn't AT ALL prepared for teevee. And of course, in order to be any kind of decent Prez or Veep, you have to be prepared for teevee.
It IS an entertainment gig, after all.
Within 6 months we'll be dealing with such a shit storm or the shenanigans to postpone the shit storm that the good Dr. is gonna look downright appealing to even the masses.
These numbers are likely more accurate than anything Fox or CNN would ever report:
http://www.topix.com/issue/gop-debate-aug11
My town: 6 paul, 2 gringrinch, 1 corndoggiestyle...zero for the rest of the 'contenders'. LOL
Thanks, great site. Either Paul supporters are plugged in to Topix or he's a far greater force than the MSM realizes, which is the point of the article. Duh. (But whomever suggested Palin as his VP choice, not again please! She brings a busload or two of trouble.)
Why should the media give Ron Paul air-time beyond what he has already received?
If he wants air-time...buy a fucking ad spot!
I guess the "Cal" logo means you are some kind of Commie Muther Fukker. Eat Shite and die...
California Golden Bears. If and when you manage to scrape together a couple neurons, let's talk. Until then, take your monkey ass back to the zoo, bitchlet.
Your little girlie smacks aren't particularly effective at fight club, are they?
I'm sorry. I must have missed when you've ever said anything of relevance here.
That's not all you've missed. It's sad, really.
Keep shootin' those blanks, Tex!
As the only target you offer is an unending procession of straw men blanks should prove to be more than sufficient.
We're not all commies, just the ones in the big cities
-1 I seldom agree with Snowball but I like him. You know exactly where he is coming from and nowadays that is very very refreshing!
Why SHOULDN'T the media give Ron Paul air-time. Shit, they mention Romney every 3 minutes or so and what did he get, like 12 votes? Granted, Romney wasn't there but he received less votes than Perry who wasn't even a bona fide candidate. That's the FRONT RUNNER????
Because no one wants to watch him and that's how "the media" make their money. I'm not saying it's 'right'...but stop expecting journalistic integrity from people that aren't journalists.
It's like some 98lb weakling getting bent out of shape after the cheerleader turned him down for the prom despite his amazing chess club victory.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAyDmJvjxbg
I hear what you're saying. I don't think journalistic integrity exists, if it ever did. Still, I think you put the cart before the horse. The media doesn't make money because people want to watch what the media covers, the media cover what THEY wish to cover irrespective of our wishes and we watch. The media doesn't even offer false choices, they offer no choice at all, they broadcast what they will and you watch what they broadcast. It's simply not the case that they broadcast what they broadcast out of myriad choices because that is what we desire.
No, the media covers what their advertisers tell them to.
And, no, I don't watch what they broadcast...TV costs you IQ each and every time (or,for those with critical thinking skills, higher blood-pressure).
Do you really believe that the 100 or so different advertisers on any given channel in any given day collude together to TELL the media what to cover? With the exception of negative exposés toward their product, advertisers don't care what media broadcast, as long as they have viewers. You're claiming to have enough IQ points to avoid tv, think of your answer here. Mass collusion on a scale unheard of. 100's of advertisers, 100's of channels.
It's quite possible.
You have lawyers chasing after you to sue because of a drug used in surgery or something, you have more commercials placed into your hands to "Talk" to the doctor about this drug or that drug... actually converting YOU into a unpaid salesman to get to the doctor because he or she has managed to keep THEM out.
Some of the drugs are fearsome in it's effects and cost. And the sheep walk in, doctors sign and sheep end up stuck with the results of the own stupidity following the commercial.
Commericals crank up the volume by 50% or more. I consider that a physical act of reaching into my house and flipping a dial while giving me the bird. I have a problem with that.
Want more?
I agree but we're not talking about commercials per se, we're talking about 100's of advertisers colluding with each other in order to dictate what 100's of broadcasters broadcast.
Don't be silly. They don't have to collude.
The media companies get thousands of "little requests" from thousands of advertisers and they fashion that great big wave of corporate sentiment into a content path which is deemed "least likely to create a problem with anyone."
There's no collusion. There's no conspiracy. There's not even any fucking COHERENCE.
The system works this way because it has been determined to be most profitable for our 5 media companies if they provide content of a certain type. They provide that content because it's good business, not because it's good content, or it's good for consumers, or it's true or relevant or entertaining.
Truth, variety, and/or original material are all just way too risky to be attempted.
The good news for the media megopolies is that the majority of people will watch whatever you put in front of them because they're convinced they're too dumb to come up with any better source of entertainment for themselves.
You didn't really follow the whole thread, did you?
If you're confused by something I wrote, I'll try to clarify.
maybe not dumb, but just addicted to believing they are:
Low Alpha Waves
Low Alpha Waves: Causes: Radiant Light
"While watching television, the brain appears to slow to a halt, registering low alpha wave readings on the EEG. This is caused by the radiant light produced by cathode ray technology [CRT, LCDs also?] within the television set[increases serotonin levels?]. Even if you're reading text on a television screen the brain registers low levels of activity. Once again, regardless of the content being presented, television essentially turns off your nervous system."
Television: Opiate of the Masses
"Psychophysiologist Thomas Mulholland found that after just 30 seconds of watching television the brain begins to produce alpha waves, which indicates torpid (almost comatose) [slow] rates of activity. Alpha brain waves are associated with unfocused, overly receptive states of consciousness. A high frequency alpha waves [sic] does not occur normally when the eyes are open. In fact, Mulholland’s research implies that watching television is neurologically analogous to staring at a blank wall.
I should note that the goal of hypnotists is to induce slow brain wave states. Alpha waves are present during the 'light hypnotic' state used by hypno-therapists for suggestion therapy."
I think the producers on those shows know damn well what their advertisers would think of them dedicating more than a soundbite to a guy
who hasn't gotten above single digits in any race outside of Texas and who's basic message is that the viewers should stop consuming.
I'm betting they don't confer with their advertisers on whether or not a biography of John Holmes is a good idea, but they know the answer.
Snowball, why does the corporate media need advertisers when they can count on our government to give them TARP money. Pick 6 against your QB. Line up for extra point.
I must have missed when the corporate media became holding companies and gained access to the discount window and Fed alphabet soup.
Pick 6 as in the lotto?
And does other damages as well.
The Quality has been declining since the days of Romper Room and Schoolhouse rock which were at least bastions of the free world at the time other than the Ballgame.
It's OK though. Once Bert and Ernie get married, everything will be better...
So which is it? Do people not want to watch Ron or do the advertisers not want Ron to be shown? And if people don't like to hear about Ron Paul why does he do so well in Google trends? Why do bloggers write stories about Ron specifically to raise their hit count and advertising revenue?
Try to use those "critical thinking skills" you brag about between your profane outbursts.
Don't forget, he's also breaking Twitter records.
BOTH.
If he's doing so great on Google trends and Twitter, why does he need to be on the idiot box?
For bonus points: why did Gingrich have so many 'friends' on Twitter?
Why do you have to annoy people on the Internet when you irritate more than enough people in real life?
Heel! Good boy!
Your fear of Dr. Paul is palpable.
Of the man? LOL.
Of the aftermath of his policies? Meh, he wouldn't be in control of congress.
I'll have a nice laugh at your expense when he drops out of the race and/or loses after taking your money. Again!
Since you only support "winners" you must love Bush and Obama and all of their wars and bank bailouts. How's that working for you?
Field Goal attempt at the buzzer to win the game grazes off left upright and through for a one point victory. Now go after that cheerleader again!:)
Bishop to E7, checkmate.
No-one wanted to hear from Gandalf Stormcrow either.
But if we ignore it, it will all go away. That's what this little squirrely dude whispering in my ear keeps saying. The flashing box says the same. Must be true.
Was this a personal experience?:)
Flag in your face! Unnecessary roughness. 10 yard penalty. Replay first down.
Dear Dr. Paul...stay away from any public place, as you have a target on you. You are brave beyond belief, and when you are gone, we will all chant something appropirate..."End the Fed"...
I dont know if Id rather have RP steer the ship back a little towards fiscal sanity or roll the dice we ride the status quo till the wheels come off as quick as possible and come out "better" on the other side.
oops
the peons would have never been able to buy physical gold or silver without Ron Paul.
He's worse than Gadaffi to the Black Cube Saturn worshipers.
Look at this shit. They implanted two black cubes in the fucking ground.
"It's the perfect design. its a void." Wonderful. Their point? There's no point to anything.
Give up surrender and be a slave.
Behind-the-scenes look at the 9/11 memoria
http://news.yahoo.com/behind-the-scenes-look-at-9-11-memorial.html
Glad to see they were able to remove all that nano-thermite from the rubble of the twin towers. Beats the hell out of me how those turbined dudes in caves in Western Afghanistan got hold of that stuff in the first place!?
If a candidate doesn't lick Israel's asshole, then forget a podium finish.
Regarding the two black cubes implanted in the ground.
"We're not telling you what happened or what you should think. We're challenging you and making you reflect."
_ Bloomberg
no shit, he said that? fuckin Mikey, dropping hints on the sidewalk like a smoker drops butts.
in other words you better love this fake fucking reality and bullshit democracy or else!
I don't know if I will. ZH does it well when considering how the candidates do the work.
If Ron Paul holds the line and goes through this... we might have something going well enough to drive a wedge between the make believe media and the masses of US Public.
bingo
Some important things to take notice here:
1) Michelle Bachmann gave out 6,00 tickets for nothing to those who attended.
2) The enjoyment of the entertainment was mandatory registration at the Bachmann tent.
3) In order to garner that 150 point vote win over Ron Paul the Bachmann campaign had to come out of pocket to literally rent Randy Travis for a night who is literally one of the top country performers of all time and then hand out 6000 tickets in order to skew their votes. It is safe to assume much of these attendees came for a free Randy Travis concert in Iowa which would be like holding a campaign in Boston offering free tickets to a Ted Williams autograph session in return for a vote.
4) Ron Paul at least charged $10.00 for the $30.00 entrance
5) Pawlenty spent over a million dollars over the past year to attain only 2,000 votes
What is ocurring right now in the media confirmation of what we all know. If Ron Paul had won the event it would have been spun that the Iowa poll was "Losing it's luster" as we heard the entire day in the media as the build up and potential for Ron Paul to win became a threat. This is the best possible outcome because now the poll cannot be disregarded if the establishment wants to retain viability and momentum for their puppets and we can now point to Ron Paul losing by a slim margin without resorting to handing out a free Randy Travis concert.
Also I reco you rewatch the video to show how exposure can influence media because Politico ran the headline as you can see that "Bachmann wins, Pawlenty places 3rd" which is a complete ignoring of Ron Paul place 2nd and actually tying because Politico has since REVISED their headline if you check their website to solely say Bachmann wins.
These guys are on the run and we need to just unlock one mind at a time. Meanwhile Pres O using his star status among the misinformed held a 35k plate dinner the other night with such celebrities as Coldplay's Chris Martin & Paltrow attending and exclaimed "He was just like MLK". They are losing.Just unlock one mind at a time and ask them to do the same.
Coldplay recently supported our enemy in Palestine supported by Iran.
I do not have any enemies in Palestine nor Iran. I am more concerned with those on this side of the Atlantic who want to take my rights to keep my safe from the peace bombs we are dropping in the Middle East on children who only know American occupation ends in the death of their families members so we can spread "freedom".
"I"?
The children being raised by our enemies are already lost and will soon be seen at the corner using a vest or something to kill Americans.
Our children sit in walled gardens known as schools unable to even make a emotional choice and act upon them.
That makes it an enemy. Israel or USA, it matters not. Once it was USSR and USA now it's a whole.... sections of "I"s making war on the USA. Some from within our own borders.
I dont do "I" no offense intended.
Tell that to the people killed by Israel in the King David Hotel and the USS Liberty. Why do you hate America?
+2
+1
In a way he is just like MLK. People forget that by the time he was killed MLK's influence was very much on the downslide. He had gone to the garbagemen's strike and had to retreat in horror. Nobody wanted to listen to him.
Death revived MLK's career. His glory days were already behind him. The world did not really care what he had to say by the time April 4, 1968 rolled around.
WVI, the reason no one was listening to MLK was that he was calling out the USA as an Empire. in 1968. don't believe me, listen to his speeches from back then. a bit similar to what's happening today, don't you think? no one wants to hear the truth so they choose to kill the messenger, then honor him as a "martyr" and conveniently forget the moments when he spoke truth to Power.
the only place O in 2012 is similar to MLK in 1968 is on the surface, which is why it's crucial for those who wish for a society that honors integrity, liberty & compassion to begin to look just a bit deeper than the tone of a person's skin.
he gave a good speech, but it was common knowledge, that he was cheating on his wife, you know, the one he made a sacred vow to. ( pillar of integrity? I think not)
which is why it's foolish to elevate one single individual human being to a status beyond which any human being is capable of fulfilling.
The GOP is going to do worse to Ron Paul if his campaign gains momentum. They are going to do to him what they did to Pat Buchanan in 1996 after Buchanan won the New Hampshire primary. They are going to line up against him and stomp him onto the ground.
Ron Paul has approximately 0.0% chance of winning th GOP nomination. They don't want him, and they won't allow him to win the nomination. Populist candidates get shunned by the major parties.
so roll over and give up? You know fighting for what is right and good is satisfying. Ron Paul works tirelessly, endures ridicule and is consistently being ignored because he isn't a good ol' white-shoe boy ready to compromise his principles for promotion. Just because we're told he can't win or he isn't electable from a bought and paid for media means we should believe them? You know being a lawyer has nothing to with the law is just like watching the propaganda machine to get news. Go ahead and be a docile, gullible automaton.
<<< Go ahead and be a docile, gullible automaton. >>>
Are you smoking something? I never once said I supported Ron Paul for POTUS in the first place. I am not going to roll over. I plan to vote for Rick Perry and celebrate when he is elected POTUS.
Kindly keep your misguided advice to yourself.
perry? You mean bush 2.0? And. You just proved my point. I never implied you support Ron Paul btw. In reading your previous comment I could deduce that you're a vulpes news watcher.
I said Ron Paul had essentially no chance at winning the GOP nomination. You claimed I was rolling over and giving up. Therefore, it would be logical to deduce that you thought I supported Paul yet I didn't believe he could win.
Stop wasting time and space here.
essentially voting for anyone other than Ron Paul is rolling over and giving up... they're all the same, obama, bachmann, perry and romney, the same! I understand you don't get that.
Stop wasting time and space here, perhaps you get this site mixed up with thinkprogressive where if they don't like what you're saying you're comments magically disappear, seems you endorse the same tactics. It is ironic that you say something as silly as you did considering the whole purpose of this thread.
"they're all the same, obama, bachmann, perry and romney, the same!"
Nonsense.
"I understand you don't get that."
I don't agree with it because it is nonsense.
"perhaps you get this site mixed up with thinkprogressive where if they don't like what you're saying you're comments magically disappear"
No, I do not.
"It is ironic that you say something as silly as you did considering the whole purpose of this thread."
You have raised silliness to a new level on this thread. Your comment re. those individuals all being the same is silly.
okay sporto, go ahead and tell me how they're different? obama, bachmann, perry and romney, go ahead. Also while you're at it tell me the corporations, special-interest groups and banksters that have contributed to each of these punchinellos.
You made the initial assertion that they are the same. Explain how they are the same.
I asked first.
In order for your assertion to be true, all of those people must be the same. That means Obumble and Perry must be the same. I have lived in Texas since the mid-1980s, and I have known of Rick Perry for nearly 25 years. Yes, he was once a Democrat. The Democrat Party dominated Texas politics before Ronald Reagan became POTUS and the Republican Party gained prominence in the South. For that matter, Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat himself. Rick Perry is a leader. Obumble has shown no signs of leadership, was he was in no way qualified to be POTUS in the first place. Perry is a social, fiscal, cutlural and religious conservative. Obumble is none of the above. Obumble is a complete fvck-up.
Don't bother with an attempt to paint Obumble and Perry with the same stroke. You are wasting your time.
Your going to vote for Rick "Guardasil" Perry? I guess you don't have any kids for him to experiment on for fun and profit.
I am going to vote for Rick Perry. He is imminently better qualified to lead than the FOOL that occupies the WH today. Ron Paul is a man of integrity, yet he has no realistic chance of winning the GOP nomination. Bachmann is a lightweight. Perry can win the general election. This election matters a whole lot. 4 more years of the current FOOL in the WH is 4 years too many.
What does that mean? If Perry loses to Obama then in hind sight one will be able to confirm that he had no chance but you will have voted for him anyway.
Why are you willing to vote for Perry when it's entirely possible that he won't be able to win?
And do you really believe that Perry will do what's necessary to preserve this country? Will he let the Too Big to Fail banks actually fail? Will he stop spending trillions of dollars on wars which have no realistic chance of success?
It's already being telegraphed in the media, if you pay close attention, that Perry will be the Republican nominee. I'd put money on it. Regardless of who WE want, Perry will get the nomination.
The media also says the economy is recovering. Doesn't make it so.
Romney was their man, their first choice. The reception he received was less than lukewarm. They do not want another 4 years of the great incompetent, so they are drafting Perry into service. He will win the nomination and the general election. I don't think it will even be close.
Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?
The man who lost America's AAA rating!
The fact that they let him announce bin laden's death 18 months before the election speaks volumes. Assume that bin laden WAS killed when they said, it was a top-secret operation to be sure, they were under no obligation to announce it to anyone outside of that room, and yet...
50 years from now, if the nation still exists, our progeny will look back and wonder why we did not elect Paul.
Ron Paul is a man of integrity. However, it is obvious that the GOP establishment does not want him to be the nominee. The GOP establishment obviously did not want Pat Buchanan after he won the New Hampshire Primary in 1996. They stomped him into the ground.
I believe Perry will win the GOP nomination and the general election.
Ron Paul is a man of integrity, something I can finally agree with you on. Why would you not want someone that has integrity as president? I am baffled as to why people have become such masochists in this country.
It is a matter of backing somebody WHO CAN WIN! Ron Paul will not be the GOP nominee.
this is why I assumed you were a docile and gullible automaton. You do what you're told and that is why you will be useful tool in the hands of a very skillful and deliberate demagogue.