Fox News: Take Ron Paul Out Of The Republican Debates

page: 1
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   


I know the girl who said, I remember her face
Hard to recognize because of regular fluctuations of makeup quantity on face

People shouldn't jump on Fox News though
You know why?

Because O'Reilly took him out the poll, this woman said take him out of the debates but Judge Napolitano is always pro-ron Paul and John Stossel is also very pro Ron Paul.

Every news organization have their own different types of journalists/reporters/anchormen

It's not like MSNBC is any better or CNN

CNN marginalizes Ron Paul quite a bit, they even said they will ignore him
And cooper was a horrible moderator.

MSNBC is to me worse than Fox News
Because there's nothing but demogaguery on MSNBC, and I hate that

So.... i'm just saying....




posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Using her logic would mean that people should stand behind(support) ideas or beliefs even if you don't believe in them, it makes sense to hear this on Faux news, just confirms that they endorse the sheeple mentality.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
GET HIM OUT OF THERE!

he makes too much god damn sense, we need some corporate pig that will force... err i mean show us how to be obedient slaves to the American governmnet machine, and their corporate masters.

are these people insane?

I dont even capatilize barack obamas name when I type it anymore.


(We could learn alot from George Carlin)



edit on 8-11-2011 by sicksonezer0 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 
Oh, this one pisses me off so much.

The so-called "conservatives" over at RedState have a few posts floating around saying the same thing - "regardless of who wins, we have to support the republican nominee!". Why? Why why why? Why would I support someone who in no way represents me, cares about the things I care about, or diametrically OPPOSED my views?

Why would I make myself complicit in their misguided idiocies that they have effectively ENSURED me they'll work to perform? When none of them even bother to offer any significant change from Obama and in fact are committed to carrying on the bulk of his failed policies (merely continuations of failed policies from earlier administrations, themselves), why would I work to trade the devil I know for the devil I don't know?

Yes, I will say it now. Unless some of these candidates make significant and believable changes prior to any elections, if Ron Paul does not win the nomination and then does not run otherwise, this member of the (likely greater than) 7% will once again be sitting out. If no one I CAN vote for is worth voting for, then they won't get my vote.

And yes, I would lose a great deal of respect for Ron Paul if he welched on what's important to him and endorsed one of these other knuckleheads.
edit on 11/8/2011 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
MSM always inserts bimbos in the comment seats to convey the messages of the elite. That way all the Sheeple males ooh and ahh while the message becomes engrained subliminaly. No offense to the women readers and posters but when was the last time you saw a heinous news woman?



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


I can't watch.


No seriously, even if I could see the video from work, I just couldn't let myself watch any more of this McNews nonsense! I hate them. Seriously, I was raised to never use that word, but I truly HATE the MSM. They have overstepped their bounds. They no longer report, they influence. They are never objective, and they should not be allowed to use the word "news" in anything they do. Journalism is dead, cable TV murdered it.

I wonder what a modern election would look like if they didn't allow any cable news networks to cover it? No polling, no opinions, no spin, just debates, speeches, and candidates stomping the campaign trail. I wonder where the candidates would rank in that world?

If I ever get into any office, I will submit legislation limiting the use of the word "news," and applying very stiff penalties for violations of it!!



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 
Hear hear! I'd like to see the results of no media manipulation as well.

I honestly can't figure out how it's not considered election fraud outright, as the media willfully and CLEARLY works to slant opinion, has openly admitted that they see themselves as responsible for kicking candidates out of the race, and misrepresent themselves as fair and balanced, etc. (the last bit itself a direct violation of the FTC and representation to consumers, I believe).

I would not have a problem with media coverage, if it were always factual and truly fair and balanced (and if the media were FIRMLY held to account for their transgressions of honest representation of the facts). It's so very sad that the media has failed what Kennedy asked of it in '61, and so much more sad that so many are caught unawares by it and duped into whatever the media wishes to frame truth as.

Bah! Faugh! Humbug on all of them!



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Why am I not surprised to hear this come out of one of Fox's Bimbos? That is the little nickname I came up with for Fox's line up of bubble headed goobers who frequently mis-pronounce basic places and names, mistate core facts of a story and really have great fun and humor with story issues I've found absolutely no humor at all in. I noticed Fox starting to turn this direction a year or so before Obama became a household name and they've just kept right on going.

At this rate, Fox has become no better than Dateline or Hard Copy as a source of news. I think Beck's 'Blaze' site functions better, and that is completely unbiased, right?
At last Beck's site has peer review in the comments....Fox News just seems to decide who has a right to be a candidate and who doesn't..all by themselves. So much for a free system and the 4th Estate to keep it honest.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Id like to see Anon do something about this blatant censorship by the MSM on Ron Paul cause this is getting ridiculous. I know Anon doesnt do much, but even DDS attacks is something that tells the MSM people are fed up over this. I honestly dont understand how they can not show more respect for this man, even if they dont agree with him. The clip they showed of Ron Paul actually reaffirmed my beliefs in him when he said that he didnt want to let his supporters down by endorsing somebody that didnt share his principles.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   
He should NOT be taken out of the debates
that would be wrong.

Now if O'reilly makes his own polls
he can put who he wants in it.

I can not see any reason Paul should be taken out of the debates
but the online polls get overloaded with Paul fans it is the truth.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Fox 'news' has always been anti-Ron Paul.

The only complaint I have when it comes to CNN's "anti-Ron Paul" rants is it gets blown out of proportion. Cooper broke down exactly how many minutes were given to each candidate, and even Ron Paul acknowledged it was fair. Much of this "CNN is anti-Paul" sentiment came out after the CNN debates, when someone with the Paul campaign sent out a flyer decrying how he went for 40 minutes without speaking and received much less air time than the other candidates. At least now the Daily Paul is admitting that wasn't true and the claims were made by some staffer and not by Paul and that the claims were "outrageous".

Campaign should clarify/apologize over "40 minute" / Anderson Cooper issue

But overall I find the coverage by CNN of Ron Paul to be MUCH, MUCH better than from Fox. Fox not only doesn't cover Paul but constantly finds subtle ways to belittle him, so that the Republican base which they cater to, and whose voting Ron Paul's fate lies in, will almost certainly not nominate him. CNN has even covered the controversy of Ron Paul's media coverage of lack thereof, something that apparently is taboo on Fox.

Just take this into consideration - it's not just a lack of media coverage that hurts RP, the real damage is coming from Fox's constant put-downs and subtle dismissing of his positions by Fox news anchors and other talking heads. They constantly make the case why RP would be so terrible and then don't have the courage to give RP the air time to defend his positions.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 
You are so correct, journalism IS dead. This is why I'm hoping they aren't able to shut down the internet. If the truth about what's really going is to ever be told, it will have to start on the web. If a group of high profile people start asking the right questions, there's a chance that we can beat these evil bastards. They know that there are way more of us than them, so they won't relax for a second. But, I still believe that they never fully appreciated just how powerful the internet is, or how going 'viral' could spell their doom.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
Someone should build a Boycott Fox Advertisers Facebook page until they agree to be "Fair and Balanced" as their logo says. They don't care a thing about facts or what we think of them, but their advertisers care about dollars, and Fox cares about their advertisers!

There is no recruiting/soliciting on ATS, but with all the Ron Paul support on the internet, someone could surely make a big bang with an organized boycott through Facebook and Twitter! I'd follow it!



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   
If Paul will not support the Party then why should the Party support him by letting him in debates? Lets face it Paul is not going to ever be President and he knows it so he uses election time and the Republican Party to sell his message. Sooner or later the Party is going to take away his free plaform if he is not going to do anything for them. Who would not do the same?



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 


But Paul has a rabid following, and if he runs as an Independent, then the Republicans also have no chance of winning the Presidency! Paul's voters will go with him. This is a sort of ultimatum. The Republicans can quit downplaying him, and give him equal time and equal credibility and let the voters decide in the primaries, OR, they can go ahead and concede a 2nd term to Obama.

If Paul doesn't win the nomination, and he runs as an independent, Obama will win in a landslide.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   
If Paul were to not get the Republican Nomination. I wager to bet he would endorse Gary Johnson.

I have full faith that Paul has a very strong chance of the Nomination.
edit on 8-11-2011 by VAPatriot because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


All the MSM's negative reporting on Ron Paul is totally wrong. Fox news is probably the worst, but CNN is hardly fair to him either. CNN also posted a false poll to hide the fact that Ron Paul swept their own CNN online poll. (none of them even do the GOP online polls anymore, and if they do, they no longer have Ron Paul as an option) The MSM does that all the time, and they never mention straw polls unless someone other than Paul wins, which is rare.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by MrSpad
 


But Paul has a rabid following, and if he runs as an Independent, then the Republicans also have no chance of winning the Presidency! Paul's voters will go with him. This is a sort of ultimatum. The Republicans can quit downplaying him, and give him equal time and equal credibility and let the voters decide in the primaries, OR, they can go ahead and concede a 2nd term to Obama.

If Paul doesn't win the nomination, and he runs as an independent, Obama will win in a landslide.


I love your optimism get ready but I think *they*
already decided Obama is going to get a second term..
Look what there doing to Paul, Cain, Perry, they are tearing
every GOP candidate to pieces..

Were screwed! They way the MSM is treating Obama like God
and the GOP candidates like walking bafoons, there is no chance
in hell Obama will NOT get reelected..

This just goes more to proving that fact as Paul is attacked
from left and right.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by MrSpad
 


But Paul has a rabid following, and if he runs as an Independent, then the Republicans also have no chance of winning the Presidency! Paul's voters will go with him. This is a sort of ultimatum. The Republicans can quit downplaying him, and give him equal time and equal credibility and let the voters decide in the primaries, OR, they can go ahead and concede a 2nd term to Obama.

If Paul doesn't win the nomination, and he runs as an independent, Obama will win in a landslide.


Yep. And tbh, I could care less if Obama beats out the republicans in that case because not one of the GOP candidates besides Paul are any different than Obama and the status quo.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Typical Jersey Shore mentality, people thrive on self-saturated ignorance.
Ron Paul is the only one, withholding Newt, that brings any sort of stature and real discussion to the debates.
Removing him would perpetually keep it in "soap opera" mode.

DOUCHES, DOUCHES, DOUCHES!!!!!

3rd Party is his BEST bet.

America is sick and tired of holding her nose at the voting booth.





new topics
top topics
 
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join