PDA

View Full Version : Salon.com dismisses Ron Paul, again




DrNoZone
10-05-2007, 08:49 AM
They continue to do so, which infuriates me as a regular and longtime reader. Check out the article here (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/10/05/gop/index.html) and then check out the letters in response to it; at least a few of the pro Ron Paul responses got marked as Editor's picks. I just sent mine in, here it is:

Salon denounces and belittles statesman Ron Paul once again (http://letters.salon.com/news/feature/2007/10/05/gop/permalink/310bf29c81580427456b081dce9645b2.html)

So taking a principled stand on the Constitution, seeing eye to eye with our Founding Fathers, and having the most integrity filled career on the Hill makes one a gadfly?

What is Salon so afraid of that they can't cover Ron Paul with the dignity and respect he deserves? Would your colleagues make fun of you on the playground, not let you sit at their table during lunch break, and paste you with spitballs during class?

A few weeks ago I responded (http://letters.salon.com/news/feature/2007/09/24/mackinac/permalink/90a0a298b08511610186ee6574df4740.html) to another article (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/09/24/mackinac/index.html) and it too got marked as an Editor's pick. So why do they like our responses about Ron Paul, but they refuse to report fairly on him in their articles?

DrNoZone
10-05-2007, 08:54 AM
Here is the authors response to all of the letters he's getting from Ron Paul fans:

The Author Replies

I fear that I will get as many letters over my four-word shorthand for Ron Paul ("anti-war libertarian gadfly") as any other element in the article. So I thought I would spend a minute to illuminate this debate over my use of the word "gadfly," since presumably nobody objects to my calling Paul "anti-war" or "libertarian." Sitting in a hotel room in Manchester, New Hampshire, I have to make do with the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, available through my subscription to the Encyclopedia Britanica Online. It defines gadfly (second definition after a "horse fly") as "a person who stimulates or annoys especially by persistent criticism."

That certainly fits Ron Paul's role, so far, in the Republican debates. He stimulates and annoys by his persistent criticism of the war in Iraq.

Of course, the implication is that I am part of an insidious Beltway conspiracy in treating Fred Thompson and John McCain as more likely Republican nominees than Ron Paul. All I am doing is reflecting the orthodoxy of everyone I have interviewed on the Republican race (from political consultants to random New Hampshire voters), none of whom mentioned Paul as a possible GOP nominee.

Maybe I am completely wrong and a hidden Ron Paul vote will sweep him to victory. If so, I will publicly apologize and re-think my reporting methods to eliminate this sort of bias in the future. All I ask is the same degree of after-the-fact humility from the Ron Paul fans who are currently castigating me, if (as I predict) he proves not to be a major factor in the GOP race.


I've already sent in my letter, but I think someone here should send in one letting him know that the definition of the word specifically means: "an annoying person, esp one who provokes others into action by criticism". Did he conveniently leave off the pejorative connotation of the first part of that definition? This was from the Oxford American dictionary.

kylejack
10-05-2007, 08:56 AM
Why are some names linked while Romney and Paul are not? Odd.

kylejack
10-05-2007, 08:58 AM
He makes a good point.

ButchHowdy
10-05-2007, 09:07 AM
Well . . . I hope this ole 'Gadfly' becomes our next Prez!