Top of the Ticket

Political commentary from Andrew Malcolm

« Previous Post | Top of the Ticket Home | Next Post »

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 () | Archives (189)

The comments to this entry are closed.

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

You lose.

RP is a republican. Do some research.

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

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.

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.


Read what Ron Paul says about racism, not what a 3rd party wrote in his newsletter:

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

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

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.


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: 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.)

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.

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?)

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.

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.

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.

Revolution will come before or AFTER the election.

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.

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.

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'.


johnny d.

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.

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.

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 have the impact it used to have on election campaigns thanks to the internet and blogs such as yours. The first couple of primaries will reveal whether the internet rules over broadcast media.

I do appeciate your coverage of the Paul Revolution.

In the future I will more accurately target my attacks.

Can you risk giving an honest answer as a member of the Fourth Estate to my two earlier questions without the fear of losing your job?

I appreciate the fact that this is a question like that put by Henry VIII to Sir Thomas More, "Does Thomas approve of Henry's divorce?" or something like that. Thomas More hoped that his silence would imply consent, but Henry VIII took his silence as dissent. I will be like Henry VIII and assume your silence implies a negative response.

Unlike Henry VIII, I will not wish that your head should roll if you choose silence. I will still appreciate whatever effort you can contribute to the Revolution in the future.

(The changing economics of the newspaper industry, among many others, have removed much job security since I started way back in the 60s. But there are many opportunities for writing in this world, such as books, which I've done, and now one of the greatest being online, which is why I'm here in this exciting, growing place with thousands of readers and able to write about interesting people, events and communicate almost instantly with readers, even if many of them appear very angry. To be very honest with you, I don't worry about job security, unless I was making stuff up. Then I should be canned. In 40 years of journalism, government and politics, whether you believe it or not, for 2 msm, I have never ever been told, ordered, hinted, influenced on what to write. Conspiracies are easy to see or suspect, but much harder to prove. My experience suggests almost all so-called conspiracies in politics, life, etc. are far more likely to involve ignorance or stupidity. Thanks for reading the blog. Hope you return often. And comment too. Apology heartily accepted.)

Male/30/FL/Voted for Bush twice

Andrew, Thank you for keeping an open mind to the Ron Paul phenomenon. After reading comment after comment from supporters here begging for their man to get some *real* exposure, peppered with you comments reminding them that this is only a blog and not the physical paper, I had an idea...

Put your rep where your mouth is - tell your editor you want to do a long-form piece on Ron Paul. Make it as objective as you can, but try to avoid the usual questions. Give him a chance to explain his positions without all the hyperbole and editorializing that is so common with the MSM these days. I'm not asking you to pander to RP supporters, Dr. Paul doesn't - he says it exactly how it is - and look at all of the support he receives.

Make your colleagues look silly - be the first to do it right on a major platform.

(You know, if you go through the items we've written on RP, each of them has links to other blog items and some to other websites and some to LAT stories, most recently one by James Rainey about 10 days ago chronicling the hard work of a RP meet-up group in S. Calif. I know of other stories in the works. There will never be enough stories on each candidate to suit his/her supporters, but remember this parent company is a newspaper, which means something has to be happening, making actual news. Talking still about the Constitution last spring wasn't news, as important as some believe. RP is now making news with his fundraising and poll rises. So he's drawing more coverage. Same as Huckabee, who's now experiencing the downside to greater coverage, closer scrutiny of his past by media and opponents. Gotta be careful what you wish for. RP should expect the same when his numbers get up that high. Thanks for reading.)

Dr. Paul is this elections Howard Dean. Some of his ideas are good, but his stance on healthcare, immigration, education and other things would not be acceptable to the American people.

Get ready for "Shock & Awe" on December 16th, when all previous fundraising records become obsolete!

Join us in Vegas on that historic day for the Las Vegas Tea Party and Paul-A-Paloooza.

For more info, visit WWW.LASVEGASTEAPARY07.COM

I personally would like to see Ron Paul be a serious contender. Just imagine, a libertarian in the white house!

I live in Iowa and over the last few weeks I've seen the Clinton and Obama signs that litter the yards in my small town get over shadowed by hundreds of Ron Paul signs!

We've actually had both Clinton and Obama speak here in my hometown over the last month and you would think that this would make those two candidates the hands down candidates here, but wow, what a difference a few weeks make for Ron Paul

Follow up to prior comment:
Does anyone have any current stats for where Ron Paul stands in Iowa against the other candidates?
I'd like to chat with other Ron Paul supporters to see what's going on in the campaign, you can usually find me in the politics room at OohYa! Chat

Regardless of Ron Paul:
a) do you feel the constitution is still 100% applicable?
b) are there any points in our constitution that should be changed?

I'd respect you if you actually answer these questions.

(No, I've lived, paid taxes, grumbled, voted, etc. in this country under the Constitution for many decades. But it's not my intention to debate others on RP's or anyone's platform. Thanks for reading anyway.)

I know you probably think you're sardonic blog is clever, but it isn't. The fact is, Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate who will make a difference. Fear is the driving force behind his lack of MSM coverage. I never thought I'd see the day when our country was run (and covered) by cowards.

(Thanks for reading it anyway.)

You failed to mention that ABC is refusing to air the Stossel interview. The old media becomes less relevant everyday.

(You may be right. Fact is, as online grows and the "old media" doesn't, more and more stuff will appear in one place and not the other. Another way to look at it is, Stossel's work and ours here is here to be read 24 hrs a day for a very long time. If his was on TV, it would be on a few minutes and gone forever. Same for the daily newspaper, which come tomorrow is lining the parakeet's cage. Know nothing of ABC's decision-making. But it's not bad that Stossel's stuff is where it is.)

Would you please stop mentioning the name Trevor Lyman in every damn article. That man is trying to cheat people by getting Ron Paul supporters to be the venture capitalists in his new venture - an advertising blimp, only unlike other VCs these folks will get nothing. Don't believe me, go look for yourself.

All that man ever did was to be the first one of several who offered to build a website for the idea of the November 5, donation day that others came up with, the majority of the grassroorters supported, and 85,000 donated to.

He is no more a marketing genius than any other guy who pretends he did all the work when all he did was design a website.

Trevor is now cheating people out of money with the Ron Paul blimp, expecting supporters to now pay him a salary, and 7 or 8 other employees are getting the same salary, he is paying thousands for jackets for the whole crew, he his buying his videographer a camera and all the AV equipment needed,all with donations from the Ron Paul supporters who only wanted a blimp with Ron Paul's name on it flying overhead. They didn't want to buy the whole store.

Of course all these disclosures came in after the pledges and the money. Go to ronpaulblimp and look at the transparency page is you don't believe me.

The man is a snake and he had nothing to do with the money that was raised on Nov. 5th. The money raised on that day was raised by people who are fed up with the current administration and the way the country is being run. And don't be so smug about a highway that is being built, I have spoken to people who have seen the plans. The NAU is a real concept developed by the neo-cons and if it sounds nutty so would the idea of Gitmo about ten years ago.

The Patriot Act would have gotten a good laugh 15 years ago and here we are living under it. Shortly after WWII the idea of a National Id card would have brought looks of horror and it should be here any day now. And you smugly ignore a man who has been in Congress for 20 years and pretend you know more than he?

He just tells the truth is all.

(So if we're ignoring the 10-term congressman, why are you here?)

considering the old cliche'....even bad news is good. RON PAUL!!!!!!

I dont know about "evil" MSM BUT .. I would like to remind those that remember of someone by the name ... Edward R. Murrow. He saw what was coming.

In case you haven't heard, ABC is refusing to air the interview that John Stossel conducted.

(See James Babb comment above.)

I think the Ron Paul Revolution is good for America.

Not just because of the ideas or Ron Paul himself. It brings so many different people together in common cause - you won't see this in the other campaigns. And I think this *is* the story. And as the revolution rails against the Old Media and pays advertising for blimps, congregate in meetup groups, work like an army of bees selflessly for something bigger than oneself, and speak of a common idea, etc - that this is what is significant. This is what a Real Nation is - People moving forward together...

In the covering of this election the Old Media has sealed its fate. People are voting with their wallets and thats why newspapers are seeing their end. We the people felt the media stood as the Great Bastion against corruption and to stand for balanced coverage but greed took hold. The People need only to take that responsibility again and reinstate the Dream. The bitter resentment the Old Media is getting in the blogs is from being fed manure for years.

The Ron Paul Revolution is a force. It can change politics as usual, bury the Old Media, and restore the Republic even before the election is determined. America is experiencing, once again, what it feels like for its citizens to move with common cause and towards an idea.

That is what made America great, why the rest of world is taking notice, why the Old Media will be slow to acknowledge it, why polls are increasingly irrelevant, and why the future looks bright. There is movement of People willing to take the future by the horns and deal with it like a Real Nation - united under common cause for Freedom and Prosperity.

Ron Paul will win. I will support him with my vote. I am thinking the reason MSM has not really reported on him because he is telling the truth, and to be honest telling the truth is not popular in American Politics, so there you have it.
No Drama, no junk, just the plain truth is what you get with Ron Paul, and that is why he will get the vote of the true patriots and Americans of this Country.

I thumbed through a recent issue of Newsweek today. It was as if the editors had a bet that they could mention Hillary on every page of the issue.

I do believe they came very close.

This is not atypical of major media outlets. As has been mentioned by other commenters here, the anointed few get overwhelming coverage, while equally worthy candidates get nil.

It's as if the media thinks it has divined the electorate's cumulative mindset. Unfortunately, they have not.

I'm on the fence about Ron Paul, but there's something of which I am absolutely convinced: The mainstream media is a sham; a flock of brainless sheep, sycophants and egoists preening for an ever diminishing audience.

I look forward to the day when honest journalism returns.

"Conspiracies are easy to see or suspect, but much harder to prove. My experience suggests almost all so-called conspiracies in politics, life, etc. are far more likely to involve ignorance or stupidity."

Thank you for your reply from which I include the above excerpt.

I concur that ignorance or stupidity is the more probable factor than deliberate collusion. A good example is the group think that caused the Challenger shuttle disaster. The few dissenting voices were ignored by the group thinkers.

All the more reason for the Free Press to focus on and amplify the voices which oppose the group thinkers.

(Which, it would appear, we are doing with this blog and the hundreds of comments it is eliciting. Thanks for reading.)

What mass media still does not undertsand (or does not want to understand) is that there is a huge potential for this candidate. His supporters are super loyal, super organized and their growth is exponential. It is very likely that 99.9% of the supporters will show up at the election polls.

This is the only candidate who is wants to to end another VIetnam before we reach 60,000 losses.

Join us on December 16 for the Tea Party 2007 to celebrate the record breaking 24-hour donation in history. Learn more:

After Sunday we will see where we really stand with the MSM. Ron Paul's supporters are going to blow away to compitition by showing up in the early primaries in droves. Look at what happened at the LA Rebpulican Straw poll!! They cancelled it because TOO many Ron Paul supporters showed up and the Thompson-biased orangizer was afraid to lose!! Ron Paul is going to sweep this country back to the good old days of liberty and justice for all.

Nice to be able to finally vote for a Republican like Ron Paul, and not feel like I have to take a shower when I leave the voting booth.

Vox populi

I support Ron Paul for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination.
I went to my college's Young Republican and was shocked to realize that had me and my fellow Ron Paul supporting friends NOT gone, I highly doubt Ron Paul would have been mentioned at all as a viable candidate for President.

Support him and read more at his website, get involved. This man has what it takes to win and with our support, it will happen.

Dont choose the lesser of two evils, choose who is Right, Ron Paul.

This is interesting.
So instead of attacking Ron Paul by calling him a kook, crank, or flack or a fringe, Mr. Malcolm instead directs his attention to Ron Pauls' supporters. Just how many other candidates can say there's articles dedicated to their supporters? That's a new one.

Keep it up everyone.

CNN has lots of election coverage, but they don't usually get into specifics of what individual candidates support.

There are candidates with popular names, but how informed is your average Joe on the specific issues their candidate supports?

When people do the research and pick the guy who's views most closely mirror their own instead of the candidate who has the most exposure in the media, do they end up with the same result?

Maybe LA times needs to sample some people with a blind political quiz and see if 40% of the people still pick Clinton based on the issues instead of just the name.

I wish ABC would air their interview with Ron Paul on TV. Huffington Post had an interesting article about it that ended with, "is ABC scared of a Ron Paul presidency?"

I sincerely hope and expect that 2008 will be the year when the stake is finally driven into the evil heart of this endless and hopelessly biased polling that has come to replace meaningful news coverage of the candidates. Any "journalist" who focuses more on the polls (and how many do not anymore?) should hang their head in shame --- they are not journalists, but merely establishment shills. You can only attempt to dumb us down and distract us with meaningless and irrelevant minutia before we either fight back (as in these blogs), or give up altogether on the corporate-controlled media.

I think you finally realize what's going on.
Yes... he's Batman

Wow, good to hear ABC is finally catching on and writing about the canidates we really want to hear about!

paulites can give the excuse for anything they want. the nice thing here is they can not digg me down and people can read it. Can any of you prove that he doesnt feel that way?
My point from the beginning is all candidates are judged many ways including how their supporters conduct themselves and who supports them. Paul backers have a history of not only saying "its not true" but they can not prove it. All they have is Paul's word that its not true. Paulites have never been able to produce real evidence to debunk everything he has said about race. of course he comes back later and says thats not how he feels so then you wonder which is the truth? these people act like he is the only honest man in the race and he isn't. he is like every other candidate, having his own agenda. (o and its not for the people)

second he is looked at by who supports him. He has received money but he has not returned it. Rudy returned money from supporters when he seen it would not look good for him to receive it. Other politicians have returned money from groups that they do not want to be linked with. Paul does not mind. do hate groups have a right to speak? sure. but since when is it ok for people to say "hey i dont mind if a hate group that wants to see races divided" what has happened to this country when we allow for this to be ok. 90% of paul supporters disgust me as they are mindless drones that have no chance to think for themselves. they read what ever paul tells them to and they repeat it like its gold.

you may not like what i feel but i think for myself.

o and this isnt smearing him. this is pointing out the other side since paulites can not seem to acknowledge he has any thing wrong with him. they view him as flawless and expect others to do the same. if you dont they resort to name calling and putting you down.

and i know it burns them that they can not digg down what i say.

« | 1 2 3 4 | »


Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...

About the Columnist
A veteran foreign and national correspondent, Andrew Malcolm has served on the L.A. Times Editorial Board and was a Pulitzer finalist in 2004. He is the author of 10 nonfiction books and father of four. Read more.
President Obama
Republican Politics
Democratic Politics



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: