Why Ron Paul Will be Media Murdered.

[txaslftist]

I'll make no bones about it, I like Ron Paul. In an era when the two major parties are demonstrating a love of power and growth, either in the direction of more domestic spending or more war spending, he's always said "no" to new spending initiatives he thought were wasteful. Does he have some ideas that will never happen, like returning to a non-inflationary monetary policy and reining in government spending and things of that nature? Sure he does.

But he's anti-war and anti-interventionist. That means a lot. It means he's been consistently for cutting the amount of money we spend on the "defense" (literally Empire-building) of this nation, he's been consistently for cutting what we spend on "intelligence" (literally coup promoting) and he's been consistently against the Iraq war. He was antiwar when antiwar wasn't "cool". He's the guy whose decisions might some day mean that my kids don't have to pay so godawful much in taxes.

He's not a corporate shill, and he's not a feudalist. He's been called a lot of things by people who don't know much about him.

But none of that really matters. He will be murdered in the media, and his candidacy is already stillborn. I watched the Faux "debates" last night, and the moderaters deliberately set out to make Paul look like a flake, including such lovely tactics as allowing Giuliani (the prick) to demand he withdraw a remark he never made and a bunch of other crap. They were mocking him because they don't like hearing what he has to say. What he had to say was real old-line conservative Barry Goldwater style stuff, and they don't like to be reminded that they aren't that party anymore, they're the war party of the neocons.

So we can count on Fox to murder him.

And nobody on the other side is going to come to his defense, are they? Hell no. He is, after all, an anti-abortion Republican. Olberman will make cracks about him, Jon Stewart will laugh at him, Jay Leno will make him a punch line, Sean Hannity will go after him, Rush will go after him and a lot of other folks will make a business out of tearing him down and putting him in a corner where he won't be heard.

I think it's a shame, really, that this man of courage and integrity and principle is never going to get a chance to get out what is really a radical new (or old, depending on your memory) version of Republicanism.

I'm not a Republican, never voted for one, and most likely never will get the chance to. But it would have been nice to see a good one out in front.

[rocktivity]

1. Randi Rhodes says that he's got a date with Glen Beck tonight.

So he's the designated hit man. Hope Paul knows what he's up against. And it's enough for him to make me want to watch the show.

:headbang:
rocknation

[txaslftist]

3. Beck will go after him...

... more viciously than he's ever gone after any Democrat.

[rocktivity]

19. He held his own with Wolf Blizter quite well

Wolf kept suggesting that HE had suggested that the US had caused 9/11, but Paul stuck to his guns--and the suggestion that Rudy read the the 9/11 commission report!

:headbang:
rocknation

[bilgewaterbill]

22. Paul was a no-show on beck. nt

[shadowrider]

2. The media will ignore him

He won't be "media murdered" since he stands no chance of winning.

[txaslftist]

5. Yes they will.

And that's the reason he stands no chance of winning.

In past elections the "maverick" candidate who went against the party/establishment has often made news just because of his being a maverick. Ralph Nader was one such, Pat Buchanan, and others.

Here's a maverick with some real radical ideas, not some flake but a congressman, and even his maverick positions barely make news.

He consistently outperforms or performs competitively against the top three Republicans in post debate polling, and that's pooh pooh'd with some lame excuse like "oh, that's just the internets" or whatever.

[rinsd]

12. Lame excuse? Internet polls are junk.

Show me a primary poll where Paul gets over 5%?

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08rep.htm

[Innkeeper]

13. oops

[butterfly77]

4. I want Paul, Kucinich and Gravel to speak...

as much and as loud as possible, on as many media outlets that they can before they start weeding them o out. These people are speaking about the real issues and the others want to talk about things that won't be brought out in the long run, if they speak now and we speak along with them the media can't ignore the issues that the people really care about and the candidates will have a real debate.

[txaslftist]

6. Kucinich, Paul and Gravel...

Three honest, anti-war candidates.

Sure, they come from different philosophical bases, but they speak to the heart of what is wrong with our nation.

[Innkeeper]

14. Those are my favorite candidates too!!! EOM

[newyawker99]

29. Hi Innkeeper!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[LWolf]

18. A big moment this week

in the Wolf family:

My youngest son, who has been of voting age for a decade and refused to cast a single vote that whole time, asked me about a candidate. He heard a candidate that he would be willing to cast a vote for.

He has refused for a decade because he views the political systems, and both parties, as irreparably corrupt, and believes that the best course for the U.S. would be revolution, replacing the entire system and every last person holding any kind of political or financial power within the nation.

He argues quite well; the only real difference between his perspective and mine is that I hold out hope that the current system can be cleaned up and can evolve naturally.

He asked me about Gravel. He heard him speak, and is considering re-registering as a Democrat instead of an independent to cast a primary vote. I guarantee that his vote will disappear before the general election when one of the mainstreet, status-quo, corporate candidates gets the nomination. So will mine, for that matter. Still, it's good to know that there are votes out there that are ripe for earning, should the party be interested in doing so.

[bluestateguy]

7. He's got nothing to lose

He knows he won't be nominated, or even win a single primary. He is representing the 20-25% of Republicans who think this war is bullshit. He has a role to play in this race. And if Republicans make him angry enough, he just may quit the party and go back to the Libertarian Party again.

[bigdarryl]

8. Put a fork in him he's DONE Rudy smacked that ass UNFORTUNATELY

[rinsd]

9. Geez another person duped by Pauls' anti-war stance

You're a leftist and you have problems with "wasteful" domestic spending? You are aware of what Paul considers wasteful aren't you?

Also do you not have problems with his ardent pro-life stance?

His support for school prayer?

That he does not wish to invest in mass transportation infrastructure and has a dismal environmental voting record?

His stance on Social Security?

[txaslftist]

26. There are things he can do and things he can't.

He can't undo much of the things I support on the left with a Democratic congress (which it will be for the foreseeable future), so I'm not particularly worried about those issues. What he could do is get us out of the war, and take a Clintonesque approach to the federal budget (Clinton was hardly a leftist vis the federal budget). I'm a leftist in the sense that we need to move much further to the left than we are vis the Overton window. I'm not a communist.

[windy252]

10. Mostly agree but I hope Olbermann doesn't do that.

I'd be really disappointed in him if he did.

[OHdem10]

11. I understand your passionate post,

May I suggest one point. Ron Paul is expressing the old
Classic Conservatism. Those other candidates represent
the NeoCon Internationalist Interventionist, most of al
PRE-EMPTION.

Just saw JGibson-Fox News totally twist Ron Paul's Position.
He and Malkin accused Ron Paul as being part of the Truth
Movement, whatever you call it. They tried to say he
was saying Bush ADm was behind 9/11. This is the BIG LIE
on TODAY's BIG STORY.

What Paul was really saying is what former CIA AGENT SHOEN
wrote in his book.

"Why they Hate US.--or why did Terrorist attack on 9/11"

People in the Middle EAst have a struggle internally. They
are struggling against Modernity. Their perceptions are:

US props up what they see as Despot Leaders. ( Saudi Royal Family.
( King of Jordon, Pres of Egypt) This is their perception.

For years, we had military bases in places like Saudi Arabia.
When you are in l2th century mindset, you believe Infidels
are desecrating "hallowed " ground.

They believe we have ulterior motives regarding their OIL Resources.

Our unconditional support of Israel is perceived as being unfair
to Arabs.

These are perceptions held by people in Middle East. As we say
in this country, Perception can be reality in politics.
There are serious people who can understand this as predisposing
young Arabs to dislike US. This does not mean you hate America
One can love America, dearly and recognize it makes mistakes.

Needless to say, the Republicans will do what it takes to get
Paul excluded in Debates.

[Innkeeper]

15. On C-Span, about half the callers said they really liked Ron Paul, after the 2nd debate.

I'm still hopeful that long shots like Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel have a chance at winning. I think the biggest obstacle is that no one thinks they have a chance to win.

I recall reading an article in 2004, which included an interview with a Democratic primary voter, who said he would like to vote for Kucinich. But because he didn't think Kucinich had a chance to win, the primary voter didn't want to waste his vote on Kucinich.

As Kucinich always says, "I will win, if you vote for me."

[Solon]

16. Paul would suck as President, that's just a fact...

However, he would make a great Secretary of State, just keep him away from domestic policy at all costs.

[primative1]

17. Sadly that is the way ...

Lunatics all that dare buck the status quo ....
This is probably the 8th or 9th time I had this sense that this time would somehow be different, that people would wake up ... but really.
I am reminded of this analogy I once heard comparing the trend of district gerrymandering to what we now see in the political party positioning. The political parties have been gerrymandered, they are now set up so we as a nation are divided in such a way that no matter who wins, we lose ... and we don't even see it. Is it any coincidence that we read the exact same comments on supposed right wing boards as we do on left wing boards. Who thought of how to define the wings ... who gained? Find out what we have in common and then look for how neither of us is represented.

[unlawflcombatnt]

24. Amen: None of us are represented

Ron Paul is the closest thing we have to someone who is independent and represents the people, not Corporate America. He really doesn't care a whole lot what other Republicans think. It just happens to be the party he's in.

It's encouraging, however, that he has won both Republican debates according to most polls. In a true democracy, that would suggest he's the leader in the primaries. However, big money influences will try to crush Paul's candidacy.

In Paul's case, however, the adverse publicity the Republitards throw at him may be a plus. He's getting a lot of media attention and name recognition without having any big-money financing. And if the NeoCon-NeoNuts keep attacking him, he may become a household word.

This time I'd say all hope is not lost on Ron Paul. He's certainly becoming known by many, even here on DU.

[unlawflcombatnt]

20. Democrats for Paul

Like most Democrats, I'm just disgusted with Republicans. But Ron Paul is a noteworthy exception to everything that is rotten about the Republican Party. He's outstanding on most of his positions, especially those dealing with the economy.

I'd vote for him for President if he ran. His positions on Trade are better than any Democrat running, except for Kucinich. And his view on Iraq is simple: "We should just withdraw." Amen.

unlawflcombatnt

Economic Populist Forum

[Bullet1987]

21. Ron Paul is NOT a pacifist...

Let's be clear, Ron Paul is no saint or pacifist. Let's not forget that he voted to impeach Clinton. Paul just doesn't want to get into any dumb wars. I like Paul too, but I don't know if I could support someone who is as conservative on domestic issues as he is.

[unlawflcombatnt]

23. Social & Economic Issues

I don't agree with Paul's social conservatism (i.e., abortion, etc.) However, I doubt Paul would support a Constitutional amendment defining marriage (banning gay marriage), simply because it's an infringement on states' rights. I don't agree with his anti-tax policy either, at least not until we have reduced our huge deficit and national debt.

But in my opinion, Paul can't be beat on his positions against free trade and illegal immigration. And Paul is a true civil libertarian as well, and does not support Bush's numerous violations of the Constitution and other laws. And Paul has the very best position on Iraq, which simply put is: "we should just get out."

On non-social issues, I'd describe him as a Dennis Kucinich, but who is a fiscal conservative and who opposes illegal immigration.

And no one has reamed Alan Greedspan more on his idiotic and irresponsible inflationary monetary policies than Ron Paul. Paul truly believes we should return to the gold standard, which I wholeheartedly agree with.

No one is perfect, including Ron Paul. But in my opinion, he's right on more issues than anyone else.

[IronLionZion]

27. I strongly support him in the Republican primaries

can you imagine how easy he would be to beat? I am loving the fact that the freepers fucking loathe their panel of candidates. Many of them even hate McCain, who will definitely be their nominee sinced it's his turn.

[IronLionZion]

25. I so hope the GOP nominee is Giuliani or Romney

it's very important to me to have the Repubs run a yankee elitist Italian-Catholic or Mormon. The thought of voting for the mayor of NYC or the governor of Massachusetts will be enough to make WASP freeper heads explode.

I enjoy these GOP debates for the simple reason that we can beat these rich white guys. McCain will be tough but the others will be completely humiliated. Any of our Dems can beat any of their corporate conservatives. I don't care if it's our woman, our black guy, our elf from Ohio, or even our lunatic from Alaska. We can beat the Republicans in 2008.

[brentspeak]

28. Paul is speaking out against D.C. lobbying and the farce that's "free trade"

Therefore, the mainstream media will attack him mercilessly, at the behest of both the GOP and the DLC-types.

[unlawflcombatnt]

30. Exactly

That's exactly right. All of the rich elite, both Democrats and Republican, generally favor unrestricted free trade. That's because their own personal business interests, as well as those of their big money contributors, are benefited by the labor cost reductions from outsourcing and the resultant American wage suppression.

Paul's actually concerned about the people he represents, both locally and in the United States as a whole. He is unique in both parties in that respect.

That might also be why he's winning in almost every poll taken. Money can't fix those polls.