Mainstream media alert: Ron Paul news assault starts

It's a shocking political development, to be sure, but news about Ron Paul and what his determined, fervent bands of supporters call the Ron Paul Revolution is beginning to spread like some kind of wildfire before strong primary winds.

First, there was this.

Then, there was this.

And that produced so many hundreds of Comments on this blog that it caused this later item on the Comments. Which produced even more Comments.

And, in turn,that led to this item on the previous item on another blog.

Supporters of the 72-year-old 10-term libertarian representative from Texas think he has a real shot at shocking the political establishment and snatching the Republican presidential nomination away from all those presidential pretenders like Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, and Fred Thompson with higher numbers in what must be obviously fraudulent polls.

But now comes news that news about Paul is creeping onto television, that great Satan that ....

reaches so many potential voters but normally ignores quiet-spoken grandfathers with radically simple political views such as political power belongs to the people and America should return to following the Constitution. That makes no sense in an age of proliferating political promises.

Now, believe it or not, John Stossel of ABC is interviewing the old guy and giving him more exposure, which is all his supporters ever sought because they think his ideas are so powerful they cast a spell. "With politicians from both sides of the political fence touting their new plans to fix America's problems, Paul, R-Tex., believes that the most effective way that a president can lead is by protecting basic freedoms, and relying on the collective power of citizens to sort out the rest," Stossel writes.

Paul tells him as president he'd eliminate the Departments of Education, Energy, Agriculture, Commerce, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Homeland Security and FEMA. Does that get your attention?  

The trouble with discrediting polls and the mainstream media so much over many months is what do Paulites do when their man's poll numbers start climbing and the same ignorant media start paying attention. Are the polls still frauds and the dim mainstream media still manipulated by evil corporate influences?

All just because Paul supporters gave $4.2 million in one day to enable advertising in New Hampshire. And now with their fundraising guru, Trevor Lyman at the helm of a Ron Paul advertising blimp (really!), the Paul rebels are planning an even bigger fundraising day this coming weekend to mark the Boston Tea Party.

The media will have to pay even more attention if Paul's people set a new one-day online fundraising record Dec. 16. Or, heaven forbid, raise more money in the fourth quarter than any other better-known Republican candidate. Wouldn't that rock some boats? The implausible campaign has a website where the total so far is coming up on $11-million even before Sunday.

With all this mounting attention and success what in the world are Ron Paul's supporters going to rail against now? They'll find something. They have to. Can underdogs still succeed when they're no longer under?

--Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[John]

Andrew, you do support Ron, don't you?

[Max Merkel]

We will always find ways to expose your evil manipulative ways ;)

you are right, the MSM internet (especially campaign trail blogs) is/are beginning to catch up and acknowledge Dr. Paul at least as a candidate. but

* 6 years of fox-news-and-conservative-talk-show-hosts-support-the-troops-brainwashing are not that easy to revert, neither the myth of the big totalitarian welfare government that tirelessly works for the greater good of all people...

* Dr. Paul is still called a long-shot candidate and only gets minuscule amounts of airtime during the debates and normal network news. his minimalistic noninvasionist philosophy of government is not exactly easy to explain in a 30 second sound bite.

* i still miss a long in depth interview on a major network, where Dr. Paul can explain some of his positions in detail to a large audience.

and to finally answer your question, YES, Dr. Paul can still succeed, even if he's not anymore the quirky kooky libertarian OB/GYN long-shot candidate from rural texas who wants to get rid of Fema and Department of Education.

[Michael Cathcart]

You are correct when you say that the polls have been inaccurate, but "frauds" I think might be over doing yet. The problem with the polls is three fold, first they measure those people who are likely Republican caucus/primary voters - as determined mainly by those who voted in the 04 primarys when Bush ran unopposed. Second, the polls measure land lines, and at typically low sample rates. Third, the majority of Polls either leave Pauls name out completely, require you to hit a button to hear "more or additional names," or finally there have been accusations of "dirty" polls, where you would punch in Pauls name, and the next several questions would have to do with your sex life, which would offend many poll takers.

So for Ron Paul to be getting say 9% of the vote among (what were) die hard Bush supporters that is huge, although with the growing number of Republicans who are fed up with Bush, I would actually estimate that number to be atleast 5% higher, if not more. A large contingent of his support comes from Independents and Republicans who may not have voted since 92' or 96' when they may have supported Buchanan or Perot.

A growing population in the U.S. are using cell phones instead of Lan Lines, as their "home" telephone, and pollsters dont call cell phones.

These polls that play "dirty" are leaving Paul's name out, (here is an example: http://69.65.26.137/~ronpaula/AntiPaulPollingIowa.mp3 ). Some of the pollsters will compensate in their results if the numbers seem unusually high for candidates. I read about one poll where Paul had 14% in raw numbers, but the poll showed him at 6%.

I think everyone should be outraged when polling is done (which is going to be made public or used by the media) and it is done unfairly. This can mess up any candidates public perception ( Not just Paul's )

[Tess, California]

Thank you for the article on Ron Paul. He has my vote and support.
http://RonPaul2008.com

[AAAAANDRE]

When underdogs succeed, they become Top Dog! Woof!
Then we'll go after the Democrats.

You gotta admit the Blimp is "Way Cool!"

[Ryan from Philadelphia]

we will win by conquest or consent.

[mketcher]

Another development. Filmmaker Chip Gubera, director of the award-winning anti-war political satire (and zombie-musical), "Song of the Dead," is donating $1.00 from the proceeds of every DVD sold on his web site to the Ron Paul campaign. You can see a scene from the from the film that's a gem of a satire on president and the news media and the war on terror, with horror movie icon Reggie Bannister (Bubba Ho-Tep, Wishmaster) giving a presidential song and dance. Go to:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qQmkkoxSKYw
or
www.songofthedead.com

[Marie]

You gotta LOVE Ron Paul.....HE IS AUTHENTIC....the other candidates should
be afraid.

[ernestruiz.com]

...the ron paul revolution is the evolution of america.

[J.P.]

Is it me, or has Andrew Malcolm's tone about Ron Paul gotten a lot better in the past month? I wouldn't stretch to say we've won a convert but at least he's seeing that this "movement is for real." (Tucker Carlson said that).

Latest convert? My Mom, originally from South America and now an American citizen. Watching the Univision debate she couldn't believe that Ron wouldn't pander to the audience and stated from the gut that Cuban relations need to be normalized.

As Rolling Stone said, he's got "cojones."

[David]

I think Ron Paul supporters know what's at stake. Even when Ron Paul starts to poll in double digits people know it is still an uphill climb. Take one day at a time and lets see where the dust settles after December 16

[James D]

Andrew, you ask:
"(if Ron Paul's poll numbers rise)...Are the polls still frauds and the dim mainstream media still manipulated by evil corporate influences?"

Answer: YES. Just follow the money, Andrew, follow the money. Show me the money and I'll show you political support. The MSM wants money.

Now that Paul dollars are available in big and growing quantities, greed trumps allegience and the MSM would love to take some of that lovely money from him. So, instead of being biased they turn toward neutral reporting - don't want to alienate millions of dollars, can't do that, not likely dude!

[freedomjoyadventure]

There has been much garbage in the MSM regarding Ron Paul. Any decent reporting is greatly appreciated.

Ron Paul has a consistent history of honesty, integrity, and upholding the Constitution. If statesmen were elected on a strict honor/integrity basis, he'd win the vote every time.

[Constitutionalist]

Not sure I understand this....they are still leaving Ron out of polls and reports everywhere even though he'll top $17M this Q.

And yes, the media is still evil, still controlled, even if they are forced to report on the stupendous support that Ron has and the exciting ways his volunteers are supporting him...blimps, planes, walking, riding, money bombs and the rest!

Implausible website? You must be kidding, It's for real buddy!

(No. It's an implausible campaign with a website. Thanks for pointing out that poor phrasing.)

[charyl]

What is the MSM going to do when Ron Paul becomes president, and the federal government is no longer micro-managing every aspect of human life?
"The government didn't do anything today, let's play hardball" doesn't sound very good. The media is invested in having an overactive government so they have something to talk about 24/7.

www.blacksheepnews.com

[Grizzle]

Oh no, Andrew. There's still several stages of epiphany to go for the mainstream press. Here's the hierarchy:

1) Who cares?
2) He believes in what? He's crazy!
3) What? Experts like Greenspan say we can really do all that and have a viable nation? Well, I don't like him anyway...he's a Republican/he's not a real Republican (depending on the media outlet).
4) Ok, ok. I like him. But I won't vote for him and he'll never get elected anyway.
5) Well, I suppose I play a part in him not getting elected, so I should give him a fair shake.
6) He said WHAT at the Fox News/Youtube//Univision debate? Doesn't he know how to pander? Does he always tell the truth?
7) Ok, maybe I'll vote for him, but I had better sound unbiased...I'm a journalist after all...credibility and such.
8) Yeah, I could go a little farther without jeopardizing my career. He's gaining credibility anyway. I'll stick up for him.
9) I wonder if you can hit Romney with a waterballoon filled with tea from a blimp.
10) I endorse Ron Paul!

Wolf Blitzer is a 6. NPR is a 5. Bill O'Reilley is a 3. Andrew Malcolm is...dare I say it? 9?

These are also ordered in levels of astuteness, you know. It's a compliment.

-Griz

(Thanks, I think. Will take your word for it.)

[Kris]

Romney, Guliani, McCain, Thompson, Obama, Clinton, and Edwards are on the front page of the papers every day for every slight change or nuance related to their respective campaigns since they have declared themselves as candidates. Just because some mainstream news organizations occasionally airs Ron Paul pieces (that always discount his candidacy in one way or another) does not mean he is getting anywhere near the same media exposure. He literally has to break records to get noticed. Meanwhile, the media sounds like a broken record when referring to him. "Will you run as a third party candidate?" "Is it possible that your running for the wrong party?" "What are all of the government programs that you'd do away with?" "Would you support a different Republican in the event that someone else won?", and of course, "Since you are bound to lose, what are you really trying to accomplish with your candidacy?"

[Brian]

Ever hear of an "upset?" I see one coming in the Republican primary with Ron Paul taking the cup. For as much as I respect the article being printed in a major newspaper, I think it falls along the lines of deception for trying to say "we didn't give him the time because he didn't have a chance." The reason he didn't have a chance is because the media only shows the top few candidates that have any name recognition or the most $$$. Try giving all the candidates an equal amount of space in your articles and newscast and see what happens. And by the way, if you thought the first "money bomb" was big, this one's going to be a nuclear warhead in comparison. I'm pretty sure most media sources and candidates know this and are running articles like this to "brace for impact."

(Just a reminder, this is an online blog, not a or the newspaper. As for the fundraising, we'll all have to wait and see. Makes a great story, which is what we're about telling.)

[Ralph Z]

Ron Paul support is larger than the man, his ideas are not new. They were what have made this country great. The battle between inalienable rights of man and those of oppressive government. The form of government that tyrannical- over taxes the people and ensnare them in un-payable debt. This is nothing new, it is what the people who founded this country were fighting against. The founders were the radicals.s. God bless America!

[John Dennis]

Ron Paul will shock in both Iowa and New Hampshire.

[Rod Smith]

Very positive and fair piece. Thank you for common sense journalism.

Our main beef with the MSM is that while Ron Paul has earned the media attention in many ways ... fundrasing, placing at least third (if not outright winning) 83% of straw polls throughout the country, more internet support than any other candidate, and huge crowds at rallys everywhere, he still has been labeled by the MSM as "having no chance". Why? Aside from straw polls, not one vote has yet been cast.

Conversely, we have seen Paul excluded from many of these polls. Just this week, MSNBC even went as far as to censor their OWN poll. They lameneted that Guilani was at 9% in Iowa and McCain was at 6% ... and left out the fact that Paul was in a stastical tie for third at 8%!

You wrote:
"Are the polls still frauds and the dim mainstream media still manipulated by evil corporate influences?"
Dunno, ask them. We report, you decide. (Sorry Fox.)

Having said all this, the MSM (as usual it seems these days) has willingly closed it eyes to almost anything that would stray them from their, annointed, course in this election. The real question to have asked at this point is where is all the tangelable support from the, so called, front runners? 38,000 contributors in one day or bundled, pac, contributors and $2,300-a-plate dinners? Did all these signs on the road come from a few spammers out there? Where are all their signs?

The fact is, the signs are out there ... and most can see right through them.

[Darren D.]

Dear Mr. Malcolm and your Malcolmites,

While you like to think we are rallying against everything and anything, we are actually rallying FOR things.

We are rallying for smaller government.
We are rallying to reduce the National Debt so not to hamper our children.
We are rallying for our troops to come home from doing police work in Iraq.
We are rallying for an end to needless war against defenseless 3rd world countries that present no threat to our national security.
We are rallying for securing our borders and an end to the lip service.
We are rallying for our privacy and personal liberties back.

Most importantly, We are rallying for the Constitution and our country.

Our campaign is based on the positive. The media is the negative entity.

[Dale Legan]

We aren't Rallying AGAINST something.

We are Rallying FOR Something. The Constitution and the Principles America was founded on stated in the Declaration of Independence. That the Governed give the right to govern and there are certain rights given by G-d that no government has the right to legislate.

When the MSM and polls become honest because they have no other choice to "keep their heads" the revolution will just keep rolling and growing exponentially.

Clever attempt to try to derail the unstoppable Ron Paul Train.

[KirkH]

I think the main stream media doesn't like Paul because he sounds a lot like Chomsky. No journalists like to hear that they're beholden, one way or another, to their advertisers.

As far as under dog status, we don't fight for the guy because he's an underdog we fight for the idea behind the man. If he climbs in the polls I don't think you have to worry about us giving up because he's no longer behind.

The executive branch is just one limb on a fake plastic tree. Win or lose the constitutionalists you call Ron Paul supporters are awake.

[Nazim]

I don't get all the fiery sarcasm?

It seems Mr. Malcolm either has a hidden soft spot for RP (and uses his column to bring attention to his man. After all any publicity is good publicity).

OR

He has realized that whenever he does his columns on behalf of RP, he gets over 40,000 hits and that for a recently sagging corporation (Tribune & Co.) is good advertising revenue.

Malcolm you clever devil, you!!!!

[M Barnes]

>>>With all this mounting attention and success what in the world are Ron Paul's supporters going to rail against now? They'll find something. They have to. Can underdogs still succeed when they're no longer under?

Sir, I feel that you may have narrowed your vision and personalized this issue.

Ron Paul supporters have scores of issues that they rally for. The oppressive weight of government has given each and every American reason to groan in one way or another.

Americans have gotten to a point where there are so many people, each with so many reasons to groan so loudly, that they are spontaneously joining arms and singing fight songs rather than laying down and living with the pain

The Main Stream Media was a secondary target. A rousing shaken fist at nay sayers as the team rallied. These people's primary objectives are their liberties.

People are getting wiser and savvier and the spin and the political landscape of the nation is shifting. I mihgt ask will the MSM be able to hold up with a rising tide of cynics examining their works for flaw and fallacy?

But the real question is this: Will our editors and journalists be able to live with the realization that something big was happening and it was never on their myopic political radar until it was on top of them barreling down with a ton of angry letters?

(Well, know how much you like to think that. Trouble is, we've been writing about RP dozens of times since we started. In fact, he's the only candidate who has his own Subject category to search on this blog. But keep swinging if it makes you feel better.)

[Daughter of a Vietnam Veteran]

I think most people misunderstand the idea of "doing away with the Department of Education". Ron Paul's idea is to give the Department of Education back to the States! The DOE was created, however, to make public schools allow "colored" children to attend "white schools". That was long ago...it is time to give back the power to the states. That is what makes our "Republic" so remarkable! The states have gradually lost their independence from the government!

www.ronpaul2008.com

[Klutometis]

"With all this mounting attention and success what in the world are Ron Paul's supporters going to rail against now?"

I don't know: how about the LA Time's Soviet-style* coverage of the Miami Republican debate,** where they cut Ron Paul out of the group photo and systematically refrained from mentioning him in the article?

Other than that, you guys are pretty good for status quo Bolsheviki.

-----------
* http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3531641.html
** http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-univision10dec10,1,5450210.story

"Thank you for common sense journalism."

Problem is, Rod, this isn't really an article; it's a ghetto of the LA Times known as the blog.

That's where they deign to refrain from suppressing RP.

[Steve]

As a doctor I can say I respect Ron Paul and his desire to restore the Consitution. If he makes more money than any other republican, than the mainstream media will have no choice but to pay attention to him.

[Mick Russom]

Ron Paul and the will of the people can no longer be suppressed. Its funny to watch the boot licking sheeple like most yellow journalists writhe in pain as the dark empire of thought suppression that rules the airwaves and newspapers of the US is lifted by the internet.

WE ARE WINNING , no army, like the terrorist government that steals your pay from you that is an occupying force in America, can suppress an idea whose time has come!

Authoritarians everywhere shake in your boots.

[Dan]

Andrew,
I think you are encouraging us to be successful on Dec.16
The TeaParty will " Rock some boats" for you, but even it will
be dwarfed by the Ron Paul "Tsunami Fund" that will hit in 08'.
Thank you for the articles.

[blergh!]

yes. paul is getting media attention now! John Stossel has graced Dr Paul with an hour interview... and it never reached those devil machines btw, they decided it was suitable only for the internet, because us toothless kooks who support him dont own tv's i suppose >=/

[jeffrey]

shhh. we're underdogs, we're underdogs.

[JKhutzman]

Shhh, be vewy, vewy kwiet... weo hunting Wepubwicans!

Serious candidates draw serious supporters, "puffball" candidate draw none, and their candidacy exists only in the minds of pundits; Proof? Lookie here, I found you some:
http://www.infiniteronpaul.com/meetupmaps/

Ron Paul may be the "President of the Internet" which is where MOST human beings communicate these days.

Romney is "President of his own Wallet" and Giuliani is "President of the Boob-Tube [or maybe just the Boobs]" -- Huckabee is "President of the REAL wackos!" and McCain... well is he anything but crazy anymore? And as for Fred... Fred Who? Willard? (No that's actually Romney again...)

[Karl]

What you fail to see sitting in your ivory tower is that the masses are getting motivated in many creative ways. We are rising to our call of duty as citizens ready to restore what is ours.
Bottom line the media is owned by a few corporations some with ties to the military industrial complex and others vested in seeing that the status quo continue. Wars generate stories for the MSM and money for banks and the elites who own them. Imagine peace, what would you guys do? Your jobs finally? Like exposing the corruption at all levels of government? Wow wouldn't that be smart since so many of us are being reeducated on what it means to be a citizen.
http://www.ronpaulforpresident2008.com/

[mookrit]

Even pollster Zogby said he expects Dr Paul to pull off between 15-20% in New Hampshire. And that was before the December 16th money bomb and blimp! After these two major events, there's an even stronger liklihood of a top three finish in New Hampshire due to the millions of dollars in free publicity generated.

Although I'm a Paul supporter, I realistically I acknowledge that the front-runners at this point are Mitt Romney, Rudy Guiliani and Mike Huckabee (in that order). But there's still time.

[Christopher Peck]

Hey everyone, check out this site for a Times Square Ad to coincide with the 16 Dec Tea Party Money Bomb. The cutoff is the 12th (I know, not much time), but they only need $50,000.
Great advertising scheme that would reach lots of people.

http://www.ronpaultime.com/

[badmedia]

The polls are manipulated, it doesn't matter what the polls say, and it never has. I vote for the person I think is best for the job.

[Jerry]

Andrew Malcolm has sure turned into a grumpy old man.

Hey Andrew, we will stop coming on to your lawn if you stop driving 20 MPH in the fast lane. OK?

[Louis Lambert]

Another good informative article Malcolm written with some wit and flair, but I have to say Ron Paul is still a long way short of gaining fair mainstream media attention. As you rightly point out to Brian this, Top of the Ticket, is an online publication to which I might add George Stossle’s interview you mention is also only online.

So there's still the great digital divide of the haves and have-nots to cross when it comes to the mainstream media giving Ron Paul a level of exposure commensurate to the indubitable standing he has with people who do know, no thanks to the MSM.

Much of what has been written and aired reveals an undercurrent of unmitigated fear when it is not off topic monotonously droning the same inane misconceptions about his candidacy and stance on governance. You know there really has to be something fundamentally wrong with mainstream journalism when the readers’ comments are more informative in time and time again correcting and educating witless the reporter. Again it only online that there's really the opportunity to do this.

[immigrant]

I don't agree with everything Paul says but there's too much at stake to vote for a democrat. By Democrat I mean Clinton,Giuliani,Edwards,Obama,Romney, or McCain. Im sorry but supporting a war on one hand even though you are pro big govt,anti-gun,pro-illegal,pro-abortion, pro-out of control spending, pro-govt knows best, and anti-fair tax on the other hand does not make you a Republican. It just doesn't work that way. Ron Paul is the only true conservative running. Huckabee is a pseudo-conservative who is soft on illegals and will not cut 1 trillion dollar per year needless spending on forcing America into a global welfarism scheme. Lets face it Paul is the obvious choice.

[Doug Heavener]

We are not rooting for the "underdog", we are campaigning for the only presidential candidate with a real plan to fix our great country. The more people that hear his message of freedom, the stronger his run for president will become.

[Henry K]

Now with our blimp we have air superiority (along with idea superiority). Unfortunately it took segregationist Governor Wallace to reveal the truth that “there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between” Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats willingly went along with the War in Iraq, suspension of Habeas Corpus, detaining protesters, banning books like “America Deceived’ from Amazon, stealing private lands (Kelo decision), warrant-less wiretapping and refusing to investigate 9/11 properly. They are both guilty of treason.
Support Dr. Ron Paul and save this great nation.
Last link (before Google Books bends to gov’t Will and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

[Kevin Hart]

The only poll that counts is when the votes are counted in the primaries. Ron Paul will be on PBS this Friday at 8:30PM Eastern Time. The movement is growing.

[wscollins]

Wow. I'm a bit at a loss here.... Somebody help me if I'm getting this wrong, but am I witnessing a MSM organization no less influential than the LA Times beginning to (a) take Ron Paul's campaign seriously, (b) recognize the unlikely, mind-warping truth that his supporters are actually... (gasp)... regular Americans who love their country and (c) giving Ron Paul's campaign at least a chance to actually succeed? This indeed could upset my psyche... If for some reason Ron Paul began being covered with seriousness and fairness, and the mighty LA Times courageously distinguished themselves from their piers by severing it's contract with Darth Vader to stop pounding "the drum" (you know that drum, just read any article by any other major news outlet and you'll hear them beat "the drum" at least once), then, indeed... all of us must rethink our world views and consider transitional therapy. Thank you, Mr. Malcolm.

[Jim]

Ron Paul is the only candidate that makes sense to me. Yes, he is out of the main stream but that does not radicule him, even just the apposite, it just makes sense. Why is this so hard for you to understand? People love him because he is simply talking strait forward rational.

Know that people get tired of corporate interests, which the biggest one is the goverment and its ties, and writers like you who does not even talk about real issues but just critism to impose their own opinions onto people. Just wake up and join the people. Do not be a part of corrupt system.

[Chris]

It is interesting...

First he was a "bottom tier" candidate...

then he was a "fringe candidate"...

then he was a "flake"...

then he was the "darkhorse" candidate...

now he's the "sleeper" candidate...

When I saw the Ron Paul supporters greet Al Gore at his hotel in Oslo, I knew things were going to change...

MSM: Stand by for something that will blow yor mind!

[Nick]

"The trouble with discrediting polls and the mainstream media so much over many months is what do Paulites do when their man's poll numbers start climbing and the same ignorant media start paying attention. Are the polls still frauds and the dim mainstream media still manipulated by evil corporate influences?"

Well, the polls are still frauds, or at the very least, narrowly focused on 04 Bush primary voters. It will be a big surprise when the VOTES start coming in and show the polls to be inaccurate.

As for the media, it has been our contention all along that the lack of coverage has made it difficult for the general public to hear about Ron Paul. If the media gives him more attention, it is because WE got his name out there and now viewers and readers are asking the media about him, which the media now believes will increase ratings. So, money is the real factor for MOST media orgs. I say most because Fox will still bash him because they are opposing anyone who will end the war. I don't get it either, why does anyone favor this war anymore? Do the 30% that support it, say they support it because they hate Democrats and Democrats voice opposition? I think that's a fair assumption. If Bush says its necessary it must be because God speaks to him. Please.

Can anyone at Fox tell me what a WIN would be? How will we know? What can I do to help us win? I want to win TODAY and bring the troops home. What is a WIN?

[Kate]

Ron Paul...Educator for Americans! He's got my vote!

[Tess, California]

Who's Andrew Malcolm?

Gotta love Corporate Media, Ron Paul Rocks, and he will win!!!! I am curious to see which mainstream media outlet is going to be the first to join the Ron Paul Supporters. Whoever it is will have my advertising dollars when it comes time to advertise for my company. Ron Paul for the win, lets bring our troops home and give Washington a big wake up call.

[Elaine McLellan]

This article is in sharp contrast to the one in the New York Times 12/10/07 "Poll Finds G.O.P. Field Isn’t Touching Voters," Which doesn't even bother mentioning RP. I think Mr. Nagourney should hear from a few INSPIRED supporters.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/us/politics/11poll.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[John]

The only reason MSM gives Ron Paul a little attention is because they actually fear that he might win, they know that if he starts winning in primamries that all their credibility as credible news networks is done. So they give him a little just in case, and can't be accused of totally ignoring him.

[Blair]

Once elected, Ron Paul will still be leading an underdog cause-restoring the republic. We have a long way to go. There are huge obstacles along the way. But it can be done. rEVOLution.

[bkusz-Florida]

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win."
by Mahatma Gandhi.

We are almost in the fight stage folks!

Go Ron Paul!

[Paul Francis]

Hi Andrew,

A relatively fair and informative article, thankyou for writing about Ron Paul. His supporters get annoyed at the 'MSM' because he is often misrepresented and attacked for no good reason, and we can only reason it is through ignorance or sabotage- either necessitates a defensive responsive (and the best form of defense is often offense of course).

Im glad that you appear to be reading these comments and I would be pleased if you could respond to this question. Do you believe that certain candidates and ideologies are pushed by certain media outlets? If you truly do not think this happens please feel free to put this. And if you have the time, do you think its possible for a candidate to poll highly without sufficient 'help' from the media (by means of time and the way there views are represented)?

Thanks again, Paul.

[Dave]

The media not only ignored Ron Paul, they also went out of their way to suggest, "he can never win", "he is considered a flake", "his supporters are only on the internet", etc, etc. These are lies and are designed to hurt his chances. Amercans understand this. If the media begins to support Ron Paul, it's because the majority of America will stop listening to them if they can't be fair. Millions will turn away from the large "News" stations and tune into internet based real reporters, who serve no master. This may happen anyway. Ron Paul 2008

[Tim_Ohio]

What will we do then? Well let me see. We will:

1) Vote for Dr. Paul.
2) Work to fill Congress & the U.S. Senate with like-minded individuals.
3) Continue reading your fine articles (and not snicker too loudly when you write that you "knew it all along" :-) ).

[Elaine McKillop, Esq]

Your piece on Ron Paul was more balanced then most but there is no doubt that there is an orchestrated effort to marginalize our candidate that will not succeed. We know the kind of support our candidate has and it dwarfs every other candidate. Ron Paul is not only king of the internet, he has been voted the winner in every nationally televised debate, he will raise more money this quarter than any Republican, except if Romney writes himself a check. He has more meet up groups more than all other candidate combined, with over 90,000 active members around the world. His grass roots supporters have financed more billboards across the country than any other candidate, he has more utubes, more campaign songs written, by artist ranging from country to rap, he has sold more yard signs, shirts and slim jims than any other candidate. He has won more straw polls than any other Republican candidate even though Romney with the help of the Republican party thugs have been stuffing the ballot box in Tampa, Iowa and elsewhere. ( A lawsuit exposing this is pending maybe then the media will pick it up. ) Ron Paul handily won the recent Herald debate poll after the debate in Miami by 80% after he told the Cubans that he wanted to end the embargo against Cuba. In a World wide poll asking who should be president, Ron Paul won handily. Ron Paul has energetic supporters everywhere he goes. (Rudy has more Ron Paul supporters protesting him then he has supporters of his own.) Ron Paul has over 400 volunteers in New Hampshire spreading his message. Ron Paul supporters have hired a Blimp. We have paid for a full page add in USA Today, and if you want to know why we support him, its the Constitution stupid, the supreme law of the land. Ron Paul is the messenger of freedom who has embodied the fever and passion of our Founding Fathers in their quest for Liberty. We love this man, not only because he has character and integrity, but as Rolling Stone magazine says, "Ron Paul has huge cojones". We as a nation had lost faith and strayed into tyranny and oppression by a constantly expanding and intrusive government, The good doctor has cured our apathy. Liberty is brewing. We are having a Revolution. On December 16th the cry for liberty will be heard around the world!

[Kent]

Huckabee wasn't doing all that well in the polls until the mainstream media decided they wanted to anoint him. Then it turned into a self-fulfilling prophecy. And please, the ether version of the LA Times is about as far from the MSM as you can get. Put Ron Paul in your real paper. Give Ron Paul an hour on Meet The Press like Guiliani. Or any of the non-cable Sunday Morning Shows. Did you know the Iowa Independent (non-ether version) predicts Ron Paul to come in 3rd in Iowa? I trust their prediction over the polls.

[Dennis]

Who's discrediting polls? , Not Ron Paul (Us)...We're just WINNING POLLS, placing 1st in OVER 50 % of them ah hahahaha
See you all in Iowa where the rEVOLution really kicks in!

[scott]

here is what the polls are doing to dr. paul

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSYiUAaBd1U

tell the truth andrew..

[Chris Doyle]

The only poll that counts is the poll on election day. All all other polls are fluff used to manipulate public opinion. The best thing that could happen is for opinion polls to show Ron Paul as not even in the running and having him win the Primary.

[Bill Moore]

I haven't heard of Ron Paul until this article. I went and checked out this Tea Party and I must say...what a great idea. I signed up at http://teaparty07.com

This guy sounds consistent. I hope he wins.

[Barney]

Let's be honest. If McCain, Hunter, Tancredo or any other GOP candidate was to raise the kind of cash that Dr Paul has, draw the size of crowds that Dr Paul draws, overwhelm the straw polls and the post debate polls like Dr Paul does, they would be coronated by the media.

The only thing they have left to use against Dr Paul are some obscure secretive corporate run "national polls". And the people they are calling are from the pool of die hard Bush fans who bothered to show up in the uncontested 2004 GOP primaries, which had the lowest turnout rate in GOP primary history. Even with the cards stacked as such some of these pollsters don't even include Dr Paul as among the choices.

Keep rigging the system. The People are on to you.

[not-a-domestic-terrorist]

"Now, believe it or not, John Stossel of ABC is interviewing the old guy and giving him more exposure, which is all his supporters ever sought because they think his ideas are so powerful they cast a spell."

This is not traditional "exposure". I hate to break it to you sir, but the fact that John Stossel decided to interview Ron Paul, and ABC in their infinite grace decided to air the segments exclusively on the Internet (and only on the Internet) doesn't mean that the MSM is any less biased in their coverage of the candidates or any less controlled by the respective owners and advertisers. Hyping Ron Paul on the Internet is "managed" exposure and you know it. If it's good enough for ABC's website, why not for TV? Didn't you read the circular explanation for why the ABC interview would be web-only: "Despite relatively low poll numbers, Paul has had a big influence on the presidential campaign. That's in part because he's raised a ton of money, and in part because of the passionate following he has on the Web. It's one reason we're posting my interview with Paul only on the Internet, where the debate about Paul is very active. In fact, he's the most Googled presidential candidate."

Please. Not everyone has Internet access. Stop the average Baby Boomer on the street and ask them how much they know about the Internet. Go to ABC's website and search "digital divide". Andrew, don't you find it ironic that the same network that reports on the "digital divide" in this country is also the same network that decided that Stossel's interview with Ron Paul wasn't fit for TV? Just because the MSM (which includes this blog) decides to throw people a couple of bones on the Internet doesn't mean that the MSM is any less controlled or biased–as if linking to a few blog entries and a web-only video series would convince people of the objective fairness of the MSM in reporting on America's candidate Ron Paul - absolutely hilarious!

[A G]

We still have a long way to go but thanks for the vote of confidence, now if we can just get him an equal amount of coverage as the official media approved candidates.

[James in Albuquerque]

No stopping until January 2008...

[Albert Meyer]

Ron Paul is a one-in-a-lifetime candidate. You better believe it! Watch him win the the White House in 2008. Americans are rediscovering liberty. There are just too many of us out there. We are "We the People." Following the Ron Paul campaign is exhilarating.

[RonWho???]

Ron is irrelevant in the race for the presidential office. Just look at his numbers.

[David]

The more I observe in and around this this movement leads me to think we are about to witness something very profound. I keep coming back to the web for the most dynamic source of news and information I can tune into, and it feels like a collective momentum is brewing. Quite energizing to blend with as there is an honest kernel of truth at it's core. I look forward to seeing what elements it's resonance attracts, as it rolls over existing paradigms of belief.

[Charles Held]

Yes, a few of the online versions of MSM outlets are throwing Dr. Paul scraplets of coverage. But, consider:

- ABC does not presently plan on actually airing the Stossel interview.

- Katie Couric's series on Presidential Candidates EXCLUDES Ron Paul.

- The Washington Post's "Front Runners" series EXCLUDES Ron Paul.

- The Des Moines Register's series of candidate analyses EXCLUDES Ron Paul.

- Meet The Press's series of candidate interviews has so far EXCLUDED Ron Paul.

- Incidents where local Republican officials have either cancelled straw polls rather than allow a vote for "fear" that Ron Paul would win (San Francisco, Denver) or physically threatened Ron Paul supporters (Florida) have been ignored by MSM.

- At the YouTube debate, where likely most of the questions were submitted by Ron Paul supporters, the MSM "panel" selected TWO questions for Ron Paul: an irrelevant one regarding the 3rd-party scenario that Dr. Paul has already dismissed, and a planted one seeking to discredit Dr. Paul as an adherent to "conspiracy theories" (note that Dr. Paul's questions were the ONLY TWO where no other candidate was asked to comment - an obvious attempt to isolate him).

Maybe the MSM is ignoring Ron Paul because they prefer scandals like Rudy Giuliani's taxpayer-funded infidelities or Mike Huckabee's numerous Willie Horton moments. But there is no denying that they continue to ignore him (see above), intentionally and definitely with malice aforethought

[Dan]

I love how more and more people like Mr. Malcolm feel the need to attack him and his supporters now. That's not because he's gaining speed and, heaven forbid, going to win the election or anything...right?

[A n]

Nice job of not addressing any quantifiable matter, like oh say # of minutes in 'debates.'
Makes you seem real credible.
; )

[Jennifer]

We know you love us and we love you too. :)

And I love Ron Paul!

I have to admit that I gave money for the blimp. Who doesn't love a blimp?!

[Matt Ritsman]

There is quite a bit of concern about poll results, but I am bothered by the idea in general. I wish people would research candidates and vote for the candidate who they believe has well thought out positions, a consistent record, and the ability to lead the country. Unfortunately, many people spend more time analyzing the polls and a candidate's projected chances of winning.

One of the main things I find appealing about Ron Paul is that I can actually figure out his stances on issues, because he doesn't try to hide them or mask them in rhetoric. It would be great to see each of the candidates have to write several pages about their positions, and then have them published side by side. I would find this quite a bit more productive than a television debate. I can't think of much positive that the medium of television has contributed to political discourse.

I read that the whole "I rule the frigging world" thing was viral to fundraise for RP, but then I see where it's also on rapper sites. What gives?

[Max]

"what do Paulites do when their man's poll numbers start climbing and the same ignorant media start paying attention. Are the polls still frauds and the dim mainstream media still manipulated by evil corporate influences?"

The polls will never mean anything and I seriously doubt his numbers will rise. These are merely historical data that cannot predict future actions of people. Taken into account that only registered likely Republican primary voters with land-lines are polled the data is even more skewed. The good doctor is crossing the political divide to capture the imagination of the hopeful which doesn't include many of the people who voted in the last two primaries.

[George Belden]

I have never felt this way about a candidate. I am going to do everything I can to ensure Ron Paul gets the nomination. He is the ONLY person that can bring this country back to being the great country it is.

Integrity, Freedom, Peace...I pray more people find out who this man is. GO RON PAUL!!!

[underground]

You say we bash the media because they won't cover Ron Paul, but we're not praising them when they do start to cover him (yeah, a whole month before the elections start).

Here's what you have to ask: What did Giuliani do to earn the coverage he got? What did Romney do to win the hearts and minds? Where is Clinton's support coming from, and why can't I find any of her supporters who like her policies beyond "She's not another Republican" or "Anything would be better than Bush"

With all the mainstream candidates, their lead is pre-determined and its the full year of media coverage that is used in a weak attempt to build grass-roots support (that doesn't seem to materialize). This is the very definition of a top-down candidacy and its what the voters are sick of because it doesn't represent our interests.

For Ron Paul to get some coverage, he had to break fund-raising records, meet-up group records, and YouTube records. His supporters had to work diligently on internet chat forums to undo the misconceptions promoted by the press. What candidate has that kind of activist backing? As a reward, he may now get 1 article for every 5 that mentions Giuliani or Clinton.

How is that "fair" in any sense of the word?

[cfountain72]

Thank you for your comments Mr. Malcolm. Your points about media coverage and polls are well-taken: those of us who were so critical of it for so long, must now admit that the Revolution (at least part of it) will be televised. To deserve substantially more coverage, Dr. Paul will need to garner at least 3rd place in Iowa and/or NH.

Ironically, the biggest factor holding Dr. Paul back is not TV or print media, but conservative talk radio. They showed what they are capable of during the recent immigration struggle, and there's no doubt they will have a substantial impact on who gets the GOP nod. Sadly, most of them are, at best ambivalent, and at worst, hostile to tDr. Paul and his 'radical' views of freedom, responsibility, and a foreign policy that excludes pre-emptive war. For him to succeed, he will need at least some support from them.

Peace be with you.

[Ike Hall]

That's a good question. What will the grassroots do when the Good Doctor is no longer a cult phenomenon, but is embraced by tens of millions of Americans fed up with politics as usual, sick of war, inflation, and corruption? In one way it might make our job easier, since no supporter of Ron Paul doesn't become an evangelist for liberty to some extent, but then we have to begin the real work of taking our country back from the neocons of both parties and helping people understand what real patriotism is. And that's going to take a long time and dedicated effort. I'm up for it. How about you?

[CD]

I hope we find out what we do. By watching the TV this week, it seems they (MSM) have gone back to the ignore phase. Thank God I have the internet to keep up my spirits. There are just a few weeks left before the shock hits. Congratulations to you -- you see it coming.

[glenneroo]

Woohoo! Go Ronny! Finally someone who really truly believes in the people! I tried to donate $100 but it won't take donations from over-seas paypal accounts :( very very sad...

[1951Patriot]

I would say that using deliberate trigger words to belittle the message of Ron Paul or those who believe he is the best candidate to address the myriad of complex issues facing the country is essentially insulting to the core American values that both have in common.
The concerns of normal citizens have been ignored to the point that most eligible voters feel it is obviously pointless to participate in such a farce as what has passed as politics as usual for the past century. I know I had no intent of ever voting again as I, like many, had totally lost faith in the political process. That all changed when I stumbled on Ron Paul and his simple message of peace and prosperity being clearly articulate by the man himself. Ron Paul promotes those exact same principles that our Constitution was deliberately written to insure. It is no wonder that he has been called by his own colleagues in Washington "Founding Father material". His integrity has never been challenged. No one dares.
My question to all the Ron Paul detractors and critics is: How did we get so far away from the Constitution that many now feel that historically unequaled document has become almost irrelevant in our wonderful modern socialist inclined, politically correct global community? The things that were paid for in blood by the American Revolution are all but forgotten now, as if Liberty is somehow less desirable now than it was in 1776. We have been told (by those who operate mostly in secret) that it is now critically necessary to quietly give up our Liberty in small degrees in order to insure our safety from those who wish to do us harm. They fail to mention that the reason so many around the world are angry is because of what our "leaders" have been doing in secret for decades using covert operations that benefit only corporations but not citizens. We should believe that a future of endless wars is our only hope for survival? It may well be the only hope for the plutocracy that has hijacked our government but it is the worst world imaginable for the average working American family.
The lines are being drawn. Our survival is at stake as a republic but not for the reasons we are given. We can either slide passively into socialistic servitude or we can fight with the tools our Founding Fathers bequeathed to us. 1984 is already behind us. We now need to decide if we want to be herded into Armageddon next or whether we have the power or right to resist. It really is that simple.
I encourage everyone in America who cherishes our freedom and the nation that has made it possible to take the time to listen carefully to what Ron Paul has to say. Try to ignore what the spin-master servile media tries to project about the man and his message. His popularity is not based on nothing.
Register and vote. We can take our country back. We can enjoy our rightful heritage. We can be free, secure and prosperous but only if we demand it.
Support RON PAUL 2008

[Keith L]

You forgot the biggest cut Ron Paul will TRY (probably not succeed) to abolish the Federal Reserve.

This is an incredibly touchy subject, and most news papers, magazines, tv stations are owned by Hearst era giants, who also have large sums of money invested in the Federal Reserve.

His initiative to Abolish the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 is the main reason I'm voting for him. Why are we letting a private organization (The Fed) control the printing as well as interest rates and inflation? Ron Paul wants return the control of our nations money to the Treasury, where it should be.

Although it probably will never happen, since it would require a massive overhaul of our nations financial infrastructure and heavy inflation in the onset.

The Fed is primarily responsible our wars, recessions and even the great depression. How convenient is it that since the Fed was created we've been in two world wars, the Korean war, the Vietnam war, and two wars in Iraq no including smaller one?

The Fed is also part of a global banking scheme, which will come into effect soon, where nations economies are at stake. In fact 53% of the Federal reserve is from foreign investors!!!!. Ron Paul has been around for a while, he knows that this is bull and that if we want to be a step ahead in this world, we have to keep ourselves independent.

Our founding fathers including Jefferson, Jackson, Adams and even Lincoln all knew about the dangers of a government not directly controlling its money. You do know that the Bank of England (similar to the fed) and their interest rates is the reason we decided to become our own country.

Guiliani, McCain, Clinton, Obama ect. are all poster childs that will agree with the current system. Ron Paul is the only one for change

[Al]

I'm a newly registered Republican and I will vote for Ron Paul. Its time to re-instate the constitution.

[tom]

We will continue to call the main stream media out on its bias when it continues to avert coverage from obvious news of hundreds to thousands of Paul supporters showing up to debates to support their candidte in favor of nothing.
The main stream media does not have to cover Dr Paul, Dr Paul has the people. Though one cannot deny the obvious impact of television on US culture, these revolutionary ideas of constitutional law resonate with the people. Thomas Jefferson spoke about it, but who would have guessed it would take over 230 yrs just to eneact a true representative republic where the rule of law was held above all else.

[Anthony Coralluzzo]

Ron will most likely raise more money than any of the other GOP candidates this quarter. That is significant when you consider the unfairness of the media coverage and lack of corporate support he gets. It's all grassroots support. GIVE HIM SOME COVERAGE NOW. HE DESERVES IT. WE ALL DESERVE IT.

(Well, at least you now know where you'll get some coverage--right here.)

[Thanks MSM]

Thanks, for supporting the cause. The revolution will not be televised.

[Rick]

Mainstream Media Acceptance Stage 1 - Virtual Acceptance - There is an increase of mainstream media paying Online lip service to Ron Paul, as opposed to television and print media. Right now some of the media are paying ONLINE lip-service to appease Ron Paul supporters. Just because you see an online article like this, from the LA Times, doesn't mean it actually gets into the newspaper. Hopefully that will change soon.

(FYI, this is an online blog intended for internet users. However, once a week on Sunday the newspaper does publish excerpts of some blog items including, last week, a Ron Paul item. In addition, our past blog items contain links to the newspaper's Ron Paul stories, which also appear on the website's politics pages.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-ticket9dec09,1,6220311.story?coll=la-politics-campaign

[Andrew]

Hopefully the media coverage will start to pour in, and i hope that it doesn't get skewed and edited to achieve any goals of any news organization. Get him up there, let him talk the truth.

[george]

It is about time. I commend the LA Times for more balanced and fair coverage of the '08 elections than most major media entities.

[catfish182]

Why not support Ron Paul, Stormfront does! Thats right kids one of the biggest hate groups in the world support paul with money and online polls. why shouldn't they? Paul himself has said in his report that 95% of black males in Washington are or will be criminals someday and Paul even was the lone nay vote when congress voted to give rosa parks, the brave civil rights fighter, a medal. Paul did not want to spend 30,000 of the tax payers money on her and said "i will pay for it myself" Well he didn't pay for it himself but he did was 8 million for a wildlife shrimp association in his district that would only benefit the people in his district.
google ron paul White supremacy and see what you get. or image google the same thing and see who Paul has had his picture taken with.

Well i could go on but thats ok. Hey Paulites. you can not digg me down here can you?

[maxwell105]

I have been watching this scene unfold. I have never before seen such an orchestrated campaign on the part of the media to ignore, ridicule, and marginalize a presidential candidate. All the major networks and cable new channels are involved. They are jointly trying to make Ron Paul fade into oblivion. One thing has thrown a monkey wrench into their plans: money. You simply cannot ignore the massive amount of cash that Ron Paul has collected. This leads the average person to ask: If he has raised so much money, why have I not heard about him? More and more people are waking up and seeing that these media outlets are not there to give us information. They are there to manipulate information in order for us to accept their pre-conceived worldview. Whatever their motives are, it is very clear that the mainstream media hates Ron Paul. They don't include his name on polls. They continually misrepresent his positions. They try to cast him as a lunatic. They say he has no chance of winning. But they have made a serious mistake. They have forgotten that it is the people who choose their leaders, not a bunch of fat cat elitists. God Bless Ron Paul!

(Glad you found something here. And a forum to vent.)

[Strother]

Big Change is coming.

[Greg Butko]

What the Ron Paul supporters are annoyed at is the fact that the media continued to ignore Ron Paul as long as they could in order to prevent his message from reaching the millions of Americans who really didn't know who he was. I think that it has been obvious for several months that Ron Paul has a much larger approval than the 1 or 2 % the media were reporting.

The media were reporting the results of polls that filed to list Ron Paul. This is a truly contemptable act for an industry that purports to be reporting the news. The truth is that the management of the major media are in be with the executives who are making billions of dollars on our undeclared wars. In this same bed we find the other candidates for president, as well as the current regime in Washington. Ron Paul was exposing their agenda. Ron Paul was pointing out the obvious. That it is our foreign policy that brought terrorism to our shores.

Ron Paul was exposing the greatest fraud ever perpetuated on the American people, the Federal Reserve. He was exposing the income tax, and the fact that most of the income of the federal government came from other sources.

Ron Paul was showing how 96 cents of every 1913 dollar has been stolen from the American people by our own politicians and their creation, the Federal Reserve.

Ron Paul was showing the American people how the phony "War on Drugs" did little to stop the use of illegal drugs. Rather, it empowered government to create a gestapo to kick in doors, to snoop into people's personal finances and affairs. At the same time, it made these drugs more expensive, creating more crime as addicts turned to crime to obtain the money to buy the drugs. It also made drugs pushers so wealthy that they regularly shot it out with each other over turf wars.

Yes, Ron Paul supporters have a lot to be angry about. Our criminal politicians and their lap dogs in the media.

[John L]

I have to say, maybe the MSM is coming over a tiny bit, but only the smallest amount they can get away with.

Seriously, as many others have pointed out, the exclusions are still egregious. The CNN/youtube "debate" was a farce, and a spit in the eye to acutal YouTube users. Regularly he is completely excluded from polls, or grouped among "other". As he gains in popularity and money, the ommisions only become more offensive and brazen.

[Chris]

I haven't seen anything like this since the "little old ladies in tennis shoes" (all Goldwater supporters were included, and the leftists loved to make fun of us -- until we changed history. Llttle kids it tennis shoes, take note!)

The Ron Paul people are really grass roots. No DC lobbyist in the hot tub dare support him. He'd shut their water off!

My local Ron Paul coordinator is in his 40's, is a mechanic, and hated politics until he saw RP's name two months ago and Googled him.

"I haven't sat down since," he told me, as we hung two huge Ron Paul Revolution signs on my farm fence here in rural Virginia.

Take the tongue out of your cheek, Andy, this is for real.

Merry Christmas,

Chris

[Robert M.]

Once the MSM finally starts giving the warranted amount of attention to Ron Paul after defies all the "respected" polls with top 3 finishes in both Iowa and New Hampshire, the "railing" of his supporters will turn into, "See, I told you so."

[Joe]

Looks like the LA Times is somewhat ahead of the curve.

You snooze...you lose.

[bobv]

RP is a republican. Do some research.

Silly smear tactics, catfish182. Paul is not a White Supremacist, and the White Power folks know it.

[Robert M.]

catfish182, those tired old claims about Ron Paul being a racist have long been discredited. Those words were NOT written by Ron Paul, but another person who was summarily dismissed from writing for his newsletter. And about Stormfront racists donating to his campaign, so what? Should his campaign, or any other for that matter, try to perform background checks on all of their hundreds of thousands of donors before accepting their money? That's absurd. If those idiots want to give their money to Ron Paul for whatever reason, fine. Ron Paul can't be bought - his positions aren't going to be influenced by any amount of money being given from any individual.

[Joe Shepherd]

Catfish182 is an example of Karl Rove disinformation campaigns. Dr. Paul didn't pay for the medal since his colleagues were not willing to chip in but wanted to steal taxpayers' money for something not authorized by the Constitution. If the feds will waste taxpayers' money then Dr. Paul is right to try to reclaim some of it back for his constituents. He has the best record for voting down wasteful spending. But hey, if that is the worst you can dig up on him then you will only convert more people to the R3volution.

[Fed Up]

catfish182,

Read what Ron Paul says about racism, not what a 3rd party wrote in his newsletter: http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst041607.htm

And the last time I checked, in a Free America, anyone can support any candidate they wish to, which has nothing to do with the candidate themselves.

Maybe you don't like the Freedom of Choice you are given by our Constitution and would like to be told whom to vote for. If so, China would welcome you with open arms, and good luck saying what you said on this board about your new leaders in China.

Fed Up

[1951Patriot]

catfish182,
The garbage you are promoting has long since been debunked. Move on to the facts.

[Michael Toth]

It would be the best thing for the country to hear what Ron Paul has to say. He should be taking seriously whether you like his massage or not. I think once you hear his message you'll be hooked.
Dr. Paul cured my hopelessness.

[Geoff]

catfish:

You're talking old news: already covered months ago and Ronny is in the clear. Are you trying to smear?

Andrew: Thanks for being a barometer for the MSM. Its a shame your company can't uphold basic principles of journalism and report on the reality facing America rather than being a mouthpiece for advertisers and the government.

And for those comments that fairly challenge your paper's inactions: your silence speaks volumes.

Thanks for selling out on the dream that was America.

(This is an online blog, not a Letters to the Editor. You got a beef with the newspaper, write the newspaper at: letters@latimes.com. We're dialoguing here about politics and the fascinating Ron Paul phenomenon. P.S. No one has told us what to blog yet. We blog about what's interesting. So aim your conspiracy charges elsewhere please.)

[Rhys]

I love your writing! You're allowed to poke fun, if it's friendly and with style. Take note writers! lol

And to answer your question, the polls will still be skewed when Ron Paul is higher in them. The difference will be, he'll be polling higher among neo-cons or former neo-cons which we will like. Ron Paul people believe, and have proof of, Ron Paul either not getting an option in the polls, or they only poll people who voted for Bush in the 2004 primaries. They use some selector like that.

Therefor, the polls poll the people LEAST likely to vote for Dr. Paul among the GOP. If he reaches double digits, then Rudy McRomney's better watch out.

In such a divided field, I expect Dr. Paul to WIN NH and take second (maybe first) in Iowa.

Then it's on.

[Joseph]

Andrew wrote, "With all this mounting attention and success what in the world are Ron Paul's supporters going to rail against now? They'll find something. They have to. Can underdogs still succeed when they're no longer under?"

I answer, "Don't expect an answer from us, we want to keep it a surprise. You will have to pay close attention in order to scoop the story" to the first question.

To the second question I reply, "Watch the movie Seabiscuit, available on DVD, and you will have your answer." I will allow you to draw your own conclusion and hope for a report on your research. Ron Paul's current media coverage may be small but his message is mighty (listen closely as you watch as this sentence is based on a line in the movie.) There is a minor character in the movie to whom a journalist can strongly relate.

I have a couple questions for you to ponder.

Why has the mainstream media itself failed be defenders of the Constitution? Its behavior hasn't been that of a robust Free Press questioning the performance of those hired by We the People to fulfill an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Its performance has been that of a propaganda bureau spewing the agenda of a Politburo, or if you prefer, a corporate board's business plan. The national news output is now eerily similar to the message heard by employees of a large company when a corporate makeover announces a new strategy or quality improvement plan. A Free Press that includes itself among We the People should primarily amplify the ideas of the citizens, not their government employees. The MSM appears to have it backwards.

Second question, why does the main stream media appear afraid to mention Ron Paul's name, as if he were Voldemort, the villian of the Harry Potter series? The MSM again appears to have it backwards again. Ron Paul is clearly a man of high integrity, well stated principles, and genuine concern for his community. His goodness appears to evoke fear or at least disdain in the heart of the major media. I think the answer is that the citizens obviously respect him more than the other shill candidates that corporate interests have recruited and already financed. The corporate interests want to protect their own investment, the citizens be damned.

I anxiously await your reply.

Something else to consider. Abraham Lincoln served only one term as congressmen before winning the presidency in an election without an incumbent running. Paul has served 10 terms as a congressman. Then it was Honest Abe, now it is Honest Ron. Then the nation had one major issue to resolve, slavery. Now the country has at least 10 major issues to resolve (I could list them but I won't.) It seems to me that history is repeating itself but the main stream media hasn't got a clue. You can take this idea of the strong similarities between the elections of 1860 and 2008 and run with it. Come on Andrew, earn your salary amplifying the ideas of the citizenry.

(Strikes me as unusual that you would choose to attack one of the few msm outlets that has regularly written about Ron Paul, dozens of blog mentions since June, and then ask us to defend the other outlets who you say don't. We won't. Ron Paul and his followers are an interesting story. We write about them and other political stories that interest us. That's what this blog does. We also provide a forum for RP followers and others to make their arguments and then sometimes we even write another item calling attention to the RP arguments. Somebody's reading cause the most recent Ron Paul item is almost No. 1 on Digg right now. And you don't bother to read them or ignore them and attack us. So who's being ignorant here?)

[chrismatthews]

Why not support "catfish182"? The facts dont!! I love abject ignorance. It lets us know you have an opinion, but was told it by someone else.

If you bothered to research any of these issues you wouldnt post them, but the fact that you have your little list of talking points just tells everyone you saw a post on Kos and never applied a second of logic or curiosity to them.

Congratulations on your copy and paste political degree. Please google "integrity" before you waste everyones time next time.

[Dr East]

To A...andre:

Whaddaya mean, "We'll go after the Democrats?" Half of us (not me, I'm a paleo-conservative) ARE Democrats! Democrats aren't stupid, after all. The union democrats want their money to be worth something, and the more edumacated ones see a future totalitarian Bush-Clinton monarchy and shudder.

Let's save the country from destruction first, set up a decent two-party system with a true loyal opposition, and THEN go after each other hammer-and-tongs style. At least we can go back to respecting our opponents then.

Dr. Paul curred my apathy.

I am a republican that has not voted since '92.

I can't wait to vote this year.

[nate]

The insinuation here: will Ron Paul lose now that he's winning? If the media starts to cover Ron Paul favorably, and by that I mean not only reporting on him, but not continuously insisting that he "can't win", then that is not proof that there is no bias in the media, it only means that they are being forced to finally concede that Ron Paul has some support in order to maintain some semblance of credibility.

[jim bolutshi]

Revolution will come before or AFTER the election.

[Kevin]

Ron Paul is such a stark contrast to the other candidates, it seems to me that he sticks out in a big, and very good, way. But here's the problem: Most American voters, while they may claim to want "change," don't really vote that way. It is an emotional issue, and any candidate who promises true change, even if the change appears to be good to most voters, will scare off those voters. Fear may be the biggest motivator in elections in the USA, and frankly, I think Ron Paul scares most voters.

It is truly pathetic to me, that the voters who say they want change, go to the voting booth and push the spot next to a Hillary or a Romney. I will vote for Paul, but let's face it, the repubs are highly unlikely to make him their candidate, if for no other reason than Paul's opposition to the war.

[Mark]

Hopefully Ron Paul can get onto Meet the Press!

And don't forget the huge impact he had by appearing on The View. That was an entertaining conversation.

[Johnny D.]

Simplistic political views? That is laughable. If you think Mises, Rothbard, and Hayek have "simple" views, then you probably are not a credible source of information.

And yes, we do not like the "mainstream media" or dinosaur media as I call it. And yes, I am glad to see that their ratings are plummeting, partially because of the strike and partially because of the internet. Eventually, the internet will be, and in many ways already is, the main source for people to get their news. The status quo is dissolving as you lose your stranglehold on public opinion.

I can see how this upsets you though, since you profit from the establishment. My advice to you is to start swimming REAL hard or you'll sink like a stone, because the times, they are a changin'.

peace,

johnny d.

[James]

What do you mean when you write about "what will the Ron Paul supporters rail against now", now that Ron Paul and the Revolution are gainng ground?

It isn't about an enemy with me. I am voting for Ron Paul and spreading the message because the message speaks for itself. Anyone that can look past the partisan politics and the mainstream media can see the truth. And the truth is that our federal government is doing what is in its own interest, not ours. Facts speak for themselves, and we aren't going to take it anymore. NO MORE!

I love to have the liberties that I do have. Its a crying shame that so many don't realize what they have and how it should be protected.

With Ron Pau's candidacy, it comes down to a simple question: do you appreciate the freedom that you have that so many died for?

I do, and I am voting for Ron Paul. Nothing could BE MORE American.

[Edward Hamel]

Ron Paul supports will continue to rail against the same things that Paul himself has been railing against throughout his campaign, our nations unsound foreign policy, theft of freedom, and poor monetary policy. I believe Paul's support in polls is growing along with his coverage in the mainstream media because the media caters to the same demographic that the polls target. As those people start to hear more complete explanations of his ideas his poll numbers will rise. The mainstream media loves to get sound bites of Ron Paul saying he wants to cut the IRS and the Department of Education because these ideas sound sensationalist, unfortunately it is difficult for many people to understand these ideas without further explanation and the mainstream media doesn't want to give Ron Paul the time to give these explanations.

[rcuomo]

If Ron Paul wins the General Election, he will still "have no chance".

Thank you for your reply, (Strikes me as unusual that you would choose to attack one of the few msm outlets that has regularly written about Ron Paul, dozens of blog mentions since June, and then ask us to defend the other outlets who you say don't. We won't. Ron Paul and his followers are an interesting story. We write about them and other political stories that interest us. That's what this blog does. We also provide a forum for RP followers and others to make their arguments and then sometimes we even write another item calling attention to the RP arguments. Somebody's reading cause the most recent Ron Paul item is almost No. 1 on Digg right now. And you don't bother to read them or ignore them and attack us. So who's being ignorant here?)

Andrew, I apologize for my attack.

I used you as a target for my frustration with the broadast media which may no longer