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

[gonebroke2]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should apply for a job with Fox News. I am sure they will love your thinking.

[richie]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, what an amazing statement. Can you say "statist"?

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, what an amazing statement. Can you say "statist"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, what an amazing statement. Can you say "scoring cheap political points?"

[nietzreznor]

[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are many of us here that didn't vote for Bush, or Clinton, or anyone who has had horrible foreign policies. Or maybe some people who voted for a bad candidate as self-defense against an even worse candidate.
Do I think that it is good to vote for tyrants like Bush? Obviously not. But the bottom line is that these people are making the policy decisions, not 'us'. Too often people refuse to hold authority figures accountable for their actions, or treat a collective entity like 'government' as if it wasn't composed of individuals. In a system where lots of people do vote for someone else, where 49% of the people could vote for someone and get 0% representation, it is ridiculous to act as if the 'people' are responsible for government's actions.

[nietzreznor]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Honestly, I have no idea how this is different than what I was saying, since I wasn't saying that people who vote for bad presidents are doing nothing wrong. But it is silly to adopt a collectivist mindset and someone blame 'people of America' for what amounts to the actions of a small minority, merely because some percentage of them may have voted for some of the members of government, possibly (or possibly not) knowing how these leaders would act.

[Taciturn]

[ 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 ]

uh...

http://www.foxnews.com/video2/launchPage...20Page&News

(Good, sickening, clip - 3 min - I don't see how any rational person could consider this unbiased or accurate: it misrepresents Paul's statements, equating them with 9/11 conspiracy theories such as loose change)

[nietzreznor]

[ QUOTE ]
(Good, sickening, clip - 3 min - I don't see how any rational person could consider this unbiased or accurate: it misrepresents Paul's statements, equating them with 9/11 conspiracy theories such as loose change)

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. Did either of these people even listen to what Ron Paul said? Or maybe they spaced out while he was talking so they wouldn't be dirtied by such a 'cesspool'.
I'm not sure that a single fact or logical argument was given in that entire diatribe--3 minutes of straight ad hominem.
The best part is how Paul's holding a particular view makes him 'unfit to share the stage with other Republicans'. I'm no Republican, but I'm thinking "Hey lady--who the [censored] are you to say who can and can't be a Republican?"

[kidpokeher]

How about this one. Ron Paul scored 2nd in the Fox Poll because "old people don't know how to text."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pz7XsSl3wIg&NR=1

[AlexM]

[ 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 ]

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.

[/ QUOTE ]

To be honest, it doesn't even necessarily follow that the U.S. policies that caused 9/11 were wrong either, although I certainly believe they were. If you call an all in preflop with AA and lose, does that mean you made the wrong move? Obviously not.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, he was just trying to score points with ignorant Americans. Who knows if he actually belives what he said? Of course, responding to Paul at all is rather foolish IMO. If they stop ignoring him, he's gonna become a real thorn in their sides before this is all said and done. Then again, he may anyway.