Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

For all you libertarians out there, dont be scared off by the (R) by his name in Congress. I guess his tussle with Guiliani was exactly what he needed to finally get some interviews on major networks.

http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007...l-media-alert/

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

I didn't watch the debate, how did he do and what was this tussle?

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't watch the debate, how did he do and what was this tussle?

[/ QUOTE ]
They like him in the Legislation Forum too. Linky

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

I didn't see the tussle. I saw the Sean Hannity interview afterwards. Basically, Ron Paul said our interventionist foreign policy in the Middle East may be partially responsible for 9/11. Rudy (captain 9/11) said they were all just pure evil crazies and America shares none of the blame.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

And he's right. Blaming Americans, instead of the terrorists who attacked us, is probably the most silly idea I've ever heard.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
And he's right. Blaming Americans, instead of the terrorists who attacked us, is probably the most logical idea I've ever heard.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

You do realize that people don't generally attack those much stronger than them without provocation, right?

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
And he's right. Blaming Americans, instead of the terrorists who attacked us, is probably the most silly idea I've ever heard.

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that people jump all over the suggestion that part of the resolution of the problem of middle eastern terrorism might involve an analysis of our own policies is downright scary.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And he's right. Blaming Americans, instead of the terrorists who attacked us, is probably the most silly idea I've ever heard.

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that people jump all over the suggestion that part of the resolution of the problem of middle eastern terrorism might involve an analysis of our own policies is downright scary.

[/ QUOTE ]

No don't you get it. America is good, Muslims is bad. They hate us for our freedom.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

Show some support for Ron
http://www.charleston.net/polls/2007/may/debate/

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

I just voted, it had Guliani winning at 34%

LOL @ anyone who thinks Guliani could best Paul in a debate on anything.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

I just watched the exchange between he and Gulliani on the National Review site and I can't believe I finally found someone I agree with on foreign policy. The rest of the candidates in both parties are doing foreign policy via polls.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I just watched the exchange between he and Gulliani on the National Review site and I can't believe I finally found someone I agree with on foreign policy. The rest of the candidates in both parties are doing foreign policy via polls.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, Guliani, like all the other candidates, is nothing more than a rhetorican--notice how is 'exchange' with Paul consisted not in actually countering Paul's argument, but basically in calling it 'ridiculous'. He couldn't possibly say anything negative about past US foreign policy, or at all blemish 9/11--that might cost him some votes!

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

Correction, i think he is going to be on at 5;10 on the situation room or something

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

Why the hell was Giuliani allowed to interject his commentary in that debate? That was BS.

For those that missed it, this article has a good compilation of videos from last night's debate.

http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/...ul_debate.html

Another point, initially Ron Paul was intended to be discluded from the South Carolina GOP debate by FOX. Aaron Russo, the producer of America: Freedom to Fascism helped to get Dr. No included in the debate with this email:
[ QUOTE ]
Fox-TV is denying Ron Paul to be in the South Carolina Presidential Debate----says he is not a recognized, major candidate !!!!!

EVERYONE !!!! call SC GOP Office 803 - 988 - 8440

ask to speak to ROB GODFREY and ALSO ask to speak with

HOGAN GRIDLEY ---SC GOP Chief Executive Officer.

The Republican GOP can put a stop to this !!!!

WE NEED TO HAVE RON PAUL IN THE SC MAY 15th DEBATE !!!!

Ron Paul has paid his the $25,000 registration fee to be on SC Ballot --- He deserves to be in the May 15th debate --- He's a Republican Candidate for President !!!! --- he deserves to be heard !!!! ----

The American people deserve to have the right to hear him in the debate !!!

Are they --- The Republican Party in SC going to allow "Fox-TV" to choose who the American public will hear on May 15th debates?

<--- THEN ---> email Fox news and ask them to include Ron Paul, the only candidate that is FAIR AND BALLANCED.

Flood their computers with messages... all of them.. there is power in the people and we have to let them know we want our candidate to have as much coverage as the rest of them get.

Come on gang this needs to be done.. cross post this list to all your groups and let’s make one big bunch of messages....

WE WERE SUCCESSFUL BEFORE IN GETTING RON PAUL ON FOX WE CAN DO IT AGAIN!

Just copy, paste and send this message to all below:

"As a loyal Fox viewer I ask that you include Ron Paul in the South Carolina Debate. I feel Dr. Ron Paul embodies the true ideals our nation stands for, and his views and plans need to be heard. Please remain the Fair and Ballanced network by including Dr. Ron Paul, otherwise I will find my news elsewhere."

Thank you,
[INSERT YOUR NAME HERE]

TO CALL FOX NEWS CHANNEL:
1-888-369-4762
TO E-MAIL COMMENTS:
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected] [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected] [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]<br />
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

If you'd like to join this list for future emails on how you can help out the Ron Paul campaign, click HERE.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why the hell was Giuliani allowed to interject his commentary in that debate? That was BS.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was a dirty move by Rudy. He keeps playing the 9/11 card and its not going to work. Ron Paul will destroy him and anyone else on that panel in a heads up debate.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
And he's right. Blaming Americans, instead of the terrorists who attacked us, is probably the most silly idea I've ever heard.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems that there's a lot of fuzziness about causation, blame, responsibility, and other such words. Obviously American policies partially caused 9/11. Al Qaeda didn't target us just for fun. It was because we threaten what they perceive to be their interests.

But it doesn't necessarily follow that the US is responsible or to blame. At least in my mind, those terms carry a certain moral element.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]

I just voted, it had Guliani winning at 34%

LOL @ anyone who thinks Guliani could best Paul in a debate on anything.

[/ QUOTE ]
In a post interview, Dr. Paul called Giuliani out on a debate about foreign policy.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

I hope that this interview ends the speculation that the MSM is conspiring to suppress candidates that oppose "the establishment". The media doesn't cover Paul for the same reason they don't cover any of the other 2nd or 3rd tier candidates: no money, no organization and no support.

If Ron Paul was polling at 10%, he'd get plenty of coverage just because of his radical views. The fact that Paul got on CNN because of stupid stuff like that text message poll shows that the media does care what we think and they also care about an interesting story, which Paul certainly is.

As for this whole, "we caused 9/11" thing, I recall an episode of Law & Order. The defense attorney making excuses for his client of all the horrible things the victim did to him. The prosecutor replied "thanks for making my case, that's called a motive".

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Show some support for Ron
http://www.charleston.net/polls/2007/may/debate/



[/ QUOTE ]


LOL Ron Paul votes have almost doubled in 1 hour. from 64 to 117

I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] teh interweb

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I just voted, it had Guliani winning at 34%

LOL @ anyone who thinks Guliani could best Paul in a debate on anything.

[/ QUOTE ]
In a post interview, Dr. Paul called Giuliani out on a debate about foreign policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

HU for rollz?

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
But it doesn't necessarily follow that the US is responsible or to blame. At least in my mind, those terms carry a certain moral element.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the 'US' certainly isn't to blame, in the sense that bombing buildings is wrong and people who do such things should always shoulder much of the blame.

That said, I also hate saying that 'America' of the 'US' helped cause the problem, since such collective terms mask who the real perpetrators are (the individuals composing the US govt who had a hand in authorizing our terrible foreign policy). These people--not the average US citizen, or 'America', or whatever, should face responsibility for all the damge they've cause on other countries, action that provided substantial motivation for 9/11, etc.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

That's a pretty crappy poll, doesn't even use cookies to attempt to limit votes.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why the hell was Giuliani allowed to interject his commentary in that debate? That was BS.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was a dirty move by Rudy. He keeps playing the 9/11 card and its not going to work. Ron Paul will destroy him and anyone else on that panel in a heads up debate.

[/ QUOTE ]

It will work simply because a real heads up debate will never ever happen.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

Though I am not completely disagreeing with you, who gets killed in the Middle East from our policies: leaders or the people? You don't see GW or Saddam out leading the troops--it is done by proxy.

There is an African saying: When elephants fight, it is the grass that gets trampled.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

It amazes me how Republicans mouth off about keeping the Federal government out of people's lives . . . unless they live on another continent.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

He was just on the situation room.

Spoke very confidently and called out guiliani for not reading the 9/11 reports

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
He was just on the situation room.

Spoke very confidently and called out guiliani for not reading the 9/11 reports

[/ QUOTE ]

That was great. Rudy is a fool.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
It amazes me how Republicans mouth off about keeping the Federal government out of people's lives . . . unless they live on another continent.

[/ QUOTE ]


The loveth their war machine.



Wouldn't you?

http://www.fordjefans.com/imagesp/Harm/flag.jpg


http://blogs.allocine.fr/blogsdatas/...g/18467245.jpg

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Though I am not completely disagreeing with you, who gets killed in the Middle East from our policies: leaders or the people? You don't see GW or Saddam out leading the troops--it is done by proxy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the leaders lead the people into war, so the leaders reap benefits while ordinary people (both solidiers and innocent civilians) suffer.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
That was great. Rudy is a fool.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well, the 'US' certainly isn't to blame, in the sense that bombing buildings is wrong and people who do such things should always shoulder much of the blame.

That said, I also hate saying that 'America' of the 'US' helped cause the problem, since such collective terms mask who the real perpetrators are (the individuals composing the US govt who had a hand in authorizing our terrible foreign policy). These people--not the average US citizen, or 'America', or whatever, should face responsibility for all the damge they've cause on other countries, action that provided substantial motivation for 9/11, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a bit of a cop out. The representative leaders are there because "the people" cast the votes. If the people aren't willing to shoulder the blame for the actions of their leaders then they need to vote for someone else.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
As for this whole, "we caused 9/11" thing, I recall an episode of Law & Order. The defense attorney making excuses for his client of all the horrible things the victim did to him. The prosecutor replied "thanks for making my case, that's called a motive".

[/ QUOTE ]

Except your TV example is ridiculous when applied to states whose actions are responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Though I am not completely disagreeing with you, who gets killed in the Middle East from our policies: leaders or the people? You don't see GW or Saddam out leading the troops--it is done by proxy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the leaders lead the people into war, so the leaders reap benefits while ordinary people (both solidiers and innocent civilians) suffer.

[/ QUOTE ]

so what's your point--our government's(leaders lead the people) policies that have led to more suffering (caused is too strong here). In the case of Saddam, we support him when he fought Iran, but ditch him afterwards. The only reason we supported his anti-Iran stance was because Iran had just taken the hostages just prior to the Iran-Iraq war. We knew how brutal Saddam was prior to giving him weapons, including chemical and other "wmd's" and he even attacked his own people with these weapons. What did we do?


Afghanistan is another example of our failed foreign policy--we support them to help kick out the Russians, and then ditch them. From the ruins came Osama and Al Quiada. We should probably throw the Israeli Palestinian conflict in there--our government (or at least AIPAC) has decided that we should support Israel no matter what, and it is us the people that have to suffer through this.

Bottom line--we always look at our interests in regions regardless of how it will look, and we have to live and die by those decisions. Unfortunately, the people who implemented those policies may be voted out of office, but it is us (we the people) that have to suffer because of them.

And you wonder why people in that region hate us--maybe it's because we the people vote for the people in office that implement these policies. Most of them don't have much of a choice.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I hope that this interview ends the speculation that the MSM is conspiring to suppress candidates that oppose "the establishment". The media doesn't cover Paul for the same reason they don't cover any of the other 2nd or 3rd tier candidates: no money, no organization and no support.

[/ QUOTE ]

So on one hand, you admit that the media covers those candidates with big money and support (which both come primarily from the "establishment"), and on the other hand, you think this is proof that the media isn't biased against those who oppose the establishment.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

Is this how most liberals think?
Explains alot

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
And he's right. Blaming Americans, instead of the terrorists who attacked us, is probably the most silly idea I've ever heard.

[/ QUOTE ]

Facing reality is a good thing.

============================================

Michael Scheuer served in the CIA for 22 years and as chief of the bin Laden unit of the Director of Central Intelligence Counterterrorist Center from 1996-1999.

Scheuer stated that "bin Laden has been precise in telling America the reasons he is waging war on us. None of the reasons have anything to do with our freedom, liberty, and democracy, but have everything to do with US policies and actions in the Muslim world."

He goes on in an interview to state, "I think the most basic thing for Americans to realize is that this war has nothing to do with who we are or what we believe, and everything to do with what we do in the Islamic world. Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, Mr. Bush before Mr. Clinton -- they all identified Islamic militancy as being based on the hatred of Western democracy and freedom, and that’s clearly not the case. They surely don’t like our way o life, but very few people are willing to die to keep us from having primary elections or because we have freedom of the press. Universally in the Muslim world, at least according to the most recent polling data, American foreign policy in several specific areas is hated by Muslims. Majorities of 85-90 percent are registered as hating or resenting American policies, towards our support for Israel, our ability to keep oil prices low, or low enough to satisfy Western consumers, our support for Arab tyrannies from Morocco to the Indian Ocean, our support for Putin in Chechnya."

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
It amazes me how Republicans mouth off about keeping the Federal government out of people's lives . . . unless they live on another continent.

[/ QUOTE ]

My father is a staunch republican and part of the religious right. He hasn't touted the keep the govt out of people's lives in ages, but I remember him being much more libertarian leaning when I was a kid 30 years ago (and he was not part of the religious right then, just a republican with libertarian leanings).

We had a blow out about 6 months ago over politics. He's big on the 'saving the country from the liberals' so he needs to vote republican (even though he feels like he's gettin bent over and plowed by an elephant over paying taxes).

We had an argument over immigration. He started spouting a bunch of propaganda and fear mongering about terriorism and illegals not having insurance, etc and I challenged him on these things as I happen to know dozens who all pay taxes and have insurance, etc.

Anyway he tries to get me to say I agree that we need to build a wall to protect the border and not let more in as a first step, indicating I am crazy if I don't agree with this. I asked him if part of his plan was to 'starve out' 20 million people (he didn't like to hear it phrased this way at all lol). I then asked him if he got that plan from Jesus, if that is what Jesus would recommend. He didn't like that one either. lol

All he had to fall back on was 'it's his right to tell the president what he thinks should happen' and 'our current immigration policy is fine' (although he couldn't tell me really anything about what the current policy actuall is lol).

He got so angry and told me "Why don't you run as a libertarian and I will vote for you"


Anyway I didn't really think republicans rallied about keeping the federal govt out of people's lives anymore. I thought they were rallying around 'saving us from terrorism' and a bunch of other 'social ills' and gave up on the small government and keeping government out of people's lives a couple decades ago...

Oh yeah, another aspect of being either a republican or democrat I think is socializing and being socially accepted. These are the 2 common parties, the populare ones. So if you care about 'belonging' you are much more prone to go with one of these parties.

I also think people's draw to politics is somewhat similar to people's draw to sports, being fans.

It's 'us' vs. 'them'.

Have you ever noticed that when people's home team wins a game they refer to this as "We won" but when the home team loses they refer to this as "THEY lost" lol

I think democrats and republicans care a lot about being on popular teams, much more than libs and acers etc..

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I hope that this interview ends the speculation that the MSM is conspiring to suppress candidates that oppose "the establishment". The media doesn't cover Paul for the same reason they don't cover any of the other 2nd or 3rd tier candidates: no money, no organization and no support.

[/ QUOTE ]

So on one hand, you admit that the media covers those candidates with big money and support (which both come primarily from the "establishment"), and on the other hand, you think this is proof that the media isn't biased against those who oppose the establishment.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes I do. The media isn't biased against candidates, they report on the bias. Saying the media is biased implies that it is the media's fault that Ron Paul has no shot. The media merely report on that fact.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yes I do. The media isn't biased against candidates, they report on the bias. Saying the media is biased implies that it is the media's fault that Ron Paul has no shot. The media merely report on that fact.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree--the media is not impartial and is out to sell papers/ratings/whatever. If they reported that everyone were biased, it would be one thing. They are not however, and merely acting on that bias, ie pandering to their audience, and that is a completely different angle. This is why there is so much fragmentation in the media these days --- to pander to those audiences.

Re: Ron Paul on CNN at 7EST tonite (5/16)
 

Let me just add that if the media were biased against Ron Paul, I would say that is a good thing. When I read an MSM source, I want to hear about the most important stories. Since Ron Paul has no shot, he is not an important story.