It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

My thoughts on the Fox/Google Debate

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 10:05 PM
link   
Hello fellow ATSers. I just recently finished watching the Fox/Google Debate. I didn't watch the whole thing I watched alittle after it started. And, as usual, Rick Perry stole the spotlight basically. I mean, Rick Perry just spewed his lies and his false promises on there like it was nothing. What really irritated me was that Ron Paul was barely given a chance to talk about what he'll do in those situations. Instead, he was met with mediocre questions that had little relavance. I was tempted to given this debate the benefit of the doubt; that maybe this wouldn't be a repeat of his previous debates. Boy was I wrong. Ron Paul, in my opinion, has been ignored and ridiculed for long enough. It's about time that Americans vote for a REAL possibility of change within this country or we will see a repeat scenario in this country. Our time is now people!
edit on 22-9-2011 by KySc5 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by KySc5
 


Definitely in total agreement. Ron Paul has been put on the back burner from the beginning. I'm watching the LIVE highlights on Faux right now. They've not said his name once. What a crock.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by DisasterButton
 


Well to be technical they have, but in my opinion they didn't take him seriously as usual from Fox. They didn't even bother to ask him about the serious stuff like the economy.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by KySc5
 


I'm with you bro. They've continued to try to completely ignore him, yet he landslides almost ever poll taken. They can laugh at "Crazy Ol' Uncle Ron" all they want, but soon enough they are going to realize that they're the only ones laughing.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by KySc5
 


Multiple times I've heard them list off the participating members, particularly when they mentioned the strength of each of them tonight. Ron Paul was not mentioned, even in passing. It just makes me so angry and...well...sad. He's the only one out of the bunch without an evil predetermined agenda.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by DisasterButton
 


Yeah. And the ONLY one out of them who actually deserves some attention. Well if Ron Paul gets ignored and doesn't get nominated I'll be sad and at the same time I'll be happy. Wanna know why? Because he may not have gotten to be President, but at least we didn't lose a great man to the evils behind the curtains of this country. Agreed?



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by KySc5
 


You make an extremely valid point. Especially considering the fact that most Presidents elected seem to have been...errhrmm...groomed for the job? But yes, I understand that it wouldn't be a complete loss. I remember being devastated when he wasn't on the ballot. This is his chance, perhaps his last. RON PAUL 2012!



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   
It's pretty obvious MSM aren't going to give Ron Paul the recognition he deserves.

It's going to be up to each and every one of us to spread the word. Mention his name to everyone you meet. Talk to as many people as you can about his vision for America. I do and have for years.

People will laugh and ridicule and maybe even call you names. Don't let it discourage you. Don't give up.

And remember:

"Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy." ~ Winston Churchill (October 29, 1941, Harrow School)



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   
lets not forget that other libertarian that gets mentioned rarely if at all. whats his name again? he didnt get much time. conspiracy. gingrich? not much time

yes Ron does not get the pertinent questions. neither do some others. part of the reason why Perry and Romney got the most attention tonight was because Perry called Romney out and caused a bickering between them so yeah they got the spotlight. Notice though Huntsman and Santorum getting a lot more time today, as well as Cain. I mean, Ron just is not a strong debater. Why? Because he actually answers the questions directly and he's fundamentally right, so it makes it hard to actually debate with him. Remember when he responded simply that he would veto bills that try to supplant civil liberties? So simple and straight to the point, that people were confused and laughed because they expected more from him. Reality is that there was not much else to say about it, and you could see it in Ron's face that he must have thought the same thing when one of the mediators mentioned he had a lot more time to respond.

Ron just isnt the typical politician, in that he does not butter up the bread like the rest, especially like how Perry and Bachman do. and honestly, if you know who Ron is, yoou know his policies already. If you have heard from him once, you know he is right, and don't need him to repeat himself. Ron is popular outside of and in spite of Media reports and he gains popularity exponentially because when a person looks him up they can understand him and they can concur with his conclusions. Really these debates shoud mean nothing to Ron supporter because they are unnecessary to get his ideas across.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by N3k9Ni


And remember:

"Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy." ~ Winston Churchill (October 29, 1941, Harrow School)


And also remember that Ron Paul was actually alive when he said this.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 11:04 PM
link   
One thing about the republican candidates, they truly understand that the country has some serious problems and there is a common bond between them all regarding this.I am not sure what to think about this, I think it is refreshing, is this really proof that people are finally waking up and it filtering into the political arena? With the exception of Perry, Romney and Santoro(sic), whom ever that may be elected as President, I think that there is a good spot on the staff for each of them in some way or another, at least as an outside consultant.

Newt said something that really caught my attention, did he let some info go? When he was talking about Pakistan, his comment along the lines of the world being a much more dangerous place soon and commented that there are over 100 nukes in Pakistan.

Was he giving some sort clue or confirmation into the true nature of the situation over there?



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skewed
One thing about the republican candidates, they truly understand that the country has some serious problems and there is a common bond between them all regarding this.I am not sure what to think about this, I think it is refreshing, is this really proof that people are finally waking up and it filtering into the political arena? With the exception of Perry, Romney and Santoro(sic), whom ever that may be elected as President, I think that there is a good spot on the staff for each of them in some way or another, at least as an outside consultant.

Newt said something that really caught my attention, did he let some info go? When he was talking about Pakistan, his comment along the lines of the world being a much more dangerous place soon and commented that there are over 100 nukes in Pakistan.

Was he giving some sort clue or confirmation into the true nature of the situation over there?


actually, im pretty sure he said exactly "let me tell you the true nature of the situation regarding pakistan,,," and then continued to say what you are referring to haha. of course he is speaking hypothetically. but its highly probable i think that is his point and so creating relations with the government beyond business would be appropriate action.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 08:07 AM
link   
I wonder why none of these republicans noticed there was something wrong when Bush was in there. That's what you need to ask yourself before the election next year. Ron Paul is not going to be there candidate. He is against the war, they won't have that.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by DisasterButton
 


I wonder if this is a tactic by the GOP to hide the real candidate and bring them upfront in 2012?

For now, let the misleading candidates cause the stir in the Democratic party and let the real candidate prevail in November 2012?

Just a thought.




top topics



 
1

log in

join