On CNN right now, Wolf Blitzer about to do another Ron Paul piece

[RonPaulRevolution!]

On the newsletters. Lets see if our response changes the direction of the attack.

http://www.rentadrone.tv/cnn-live-stream/

[Bruno]

Seems right. It's been a few whole hours.

[bluesc]

Seems right. It's been a few whole hours.

+rep

[Shellshock1918]

Seems right. It's been a few whole hours.

lol sad but true.

If you know Paul did not write them why not do some actual JOURNALISM and find out who did?

[Lord Xar]

lol sad but true.

If you know Paul did not write them why not do some actual JOURNALISM and find out who did?

Because that would stop people from guessing and being unsure. They want the disorientation of "not knowing". They are trying to create a mood, not solve something.

[HOLLYWOOD]

And Wolf Biltzer did all of this garbage back in 2007/2008.

Shows you they are all meat puppets to their CNN masters, paychecks and special interest

[eric4186]

lets hope they show the full video of the Borger interview like they said they would last night.

[WD-NY]

http://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/%40wolfblitzercnn

That's everyone sending @wolfblitzercnn a message right now via twitter

[No Free Beer]

stream?

[runamuck]

stream please

[bluesc]

stream please

http://www.rentadrone.tv/cnn-live-stream/

[Mises_to_Paul]

I can see the promo now...

"What does former Libertarian and potential 3rd party candidate Ron Paul say about the famous incendiary and racist newsletters?"

Stay tuned.

[Shellshock1918]

I can see the promo now...

"What does former Libertarian and potential 3rd party candidate Ron Paul say about the famous incendiary and racist newsletters?"

Stay tuned.

lmao

[runamuck]

Anyone watching this right now...can you say "blowback"?

[SamuraisWisdom]

Well it looks like Iraq is going to the dogs...yikes

[runamuck]

Well it looks like Iraq is going to the dogs...yikes

We've been "gone" all of 1 week and they're saying the country is falling apart already? C'mon now...

[jcarcinogen]

Anyone watching this right now...can you say "blowback"?

Exactly. I guess thats why Fox hasnt been reporting on Iraq. How are they going to go to war with Iran if Iraq is falling apart and now becoming a hotbed of 'anti-american terrorists' pissed off that we destroyed their country.

[HOLLYWOOD]

CNN YELLOW jourNOlism

[mconder]

"Iraqi's don't have a lot of trust in America right now." Can you please play these clips before Ron Paul responds in a debate?

[ross11988]

Im guessing it stilll didnt air

[SamuraisWisdom]

We've been "gone" all of 1 week and they're saying the country is falling apart already? C'mon now...

Well I guess there's been a bunch of new attacks on civilians. Not good no matter how you look at it...

[KingNothing]

Well I guess there's been a bunch of new attacks on civilians. Not good no matter how you look at it...

It's heartbreaking. So much pain. War is a douchebag.

[JK/SEA]

Why is Iraq my problem exactly again?

[SonofThunder]

Ron Paul should object to this unanimous consent

[Paul or not at all]

Did i miss it?

[The Magic Hoof]

Maybe the taxcut thing came up?

[eric4186]

Did i miss it?

i think it's still coming up...it might get pushed aside because of the payroll tax cut deal though

[braane]

CNN is ridiculous.

[SamuraisWisdom]

Why is Iraq my problem exactly again?

Well considering that WE went in there and caused all this chaos, some of the responsibility falls on us. I don't know how to solve that type of political powder keg though and clearly whatever we have been doing didn't work. I hate to say it but it's probably better for them to fight it out.

[eric4186]

what did they say in the promo?

[AFPVet]

Well considering that WE went in there and caused all this chaos, some of the responsibility falls on us. I don't know how to solve that type of political powder keg though and clearly whatever we have been doing didn't work. I hate to say it but it's probably better for them to fight it out.

Well, "we" technically did not... the criminal administration did! We haven't had an official war declaration for a long time.

[jcarcinogen]

Why is Iraq my problem exactly again?

Because we spent over a trillion dollars destroying that country creating anti-american sentiment and idiot republicans still havent learned and want to repeat this in Iran.

[blazeKing]

If Iraq goes into complete chaos, the blowback against us will be immense.

I can just see it now. Iraq goes to chaos. A rogue Iraqi will launch an attack on us. And when we say it's because of our invasion it'll immediately be "YOU'RE BLAMING AMERICA". Sigh.

[George_K]

Why is Iraq my problem exactly again?

Because your nation destroyed Iraq and killed a million people there.

[specsaregood]

Because your nation destroyed Iraq and killed a million people there.
Which nation are you from?

[George_K]

Which nation are you from?

I'm from Syria but living in Austria since 8 years.

[braane]

Haha. They might not get their hit piece in because of congress passing the tax cut extension.

[jcarcinogen]

They passed the extension for 2 months, we got the news. I want to hear them attack Paul or not. CNN is a joke.

[joshnorris14]

Because your nation destroyed Iraq and killed a million people there.

I'm as responsible for that as I am for some random serial killer's crimes.

[braane]

Haha. They might not get their hit piece in because of congress passing the tax cut extension.
#spokeTooSoon

[freejack]

As tragic as the whole thing is, this is sure to help boost Ron's support. I don't think the conditions have ever been so ripe for success.

[Blue]

Here we go.

[afwjam]

ITS ON!

[RonPaulRevolution!]

ITS ON NOW!

[Brian4Liberty]

Digging deeper? Right...

[Shellshock1918]

You know its a smear piece when they keep repeating the same excerpts.

[Brian4Liberty]

They are pretending that they just found some new newsletters. :rolleyes:

[specsaregood]

im slow glad you guys are giving them the attention they want. you are getting trolled.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

They are pretending that they just found some new newsletters. :rolleyes:
We found some new newsletter by Paul's son's friend's father's mother-in-law. Do these newsletters reflect your views congressman?

[afwjam]

They are giving it their all. This is the best they can do.

[jsem]

Yeah. Now he's a top tier candidate, so they have to smear him because they're afraid of his views.

They are fearful about him because he'll actually bring about change.

[The Magic Hoof]

They pointed out how one of the newsletters talked badly of martin luther king, but they edited out the part where Paul was saying MLK was a hero of his in the same segment a few years back. Typical.

[Shellshock1918]

This is not digging deeper. They talk about the fact that he is top tier now and that it he must come under scrutiny. Ok, so why did they air their hit piece in 2007/2008 when he wasn't polling anywhere near the numbers he is now?

[freejack]

LOL The only clip they have of Ron Paul related to the newsletters and he's talking about monetary policy. I love that guy!

[RonPaulRevolution!]

I want to know what that 1995 interview while he was a doctor has to do with anything? They use that interview as a reason that he might have wrote the racist pieces even though all he does is talk about monetary policy? wtf...

[Libertea Party]

Still no coverage of these remarkable statements. Still no credibility for CNN:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLm7Sw402xE

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

They cut the legs out from under their own piece with the commentary afterwards. Paraphrasing: "This is coming out now because he has a chance to win Iowa", "this is coming from Republicans who want to stop his momentum", "this hasn't been talked about because nobody thought he could win".

[KingNothing]

This is not digging deeper. They talk about the fact that he is top tier now and that it he must come under scrutiny. Ok, so why did they air their hit piece in 2007/2008 when he wasn't polling anywhere near the numbers he is now?

But this is fine. They aren't digging deeper because there is nothing else there. All that means is that this will pass, like all other things pass, and we'll come out of it just as strong as we were when it started.

[Sentinelrv]

What exactly did they play that old clip for? I didn't see how it connected with what they were talking about.

[eric4186]

I still want to see the full Gloria Borger interview. What was the question that caused Paul to take off his mic? We still don't know.

[Kords21]

This is so beyond beating a dead horse, it's pathetic. Nothing is going to change on this story. The newsletters came out, had some controversial stuff in them, Ron paul denies having anything to do with those statements beyond lending his name to the newsletter and that's it. Do these pundits think that if they keep talking about this that something about this will magically change? I really don't think it's growing any traction and it will be seen as a desperate ploy to take Paul down, but it'll fail cause there's nothing here.

[Shellshock1918]

But this is fine. They aren't digging deeper because there is nothing else there. All that means is that this will pass, like all other things pass, and we'll come out of it just as strong as we were when it started.

If they wanted to dig deeper they could do some actual JOURNALISM and find out who actually wrote them.

[Shellshock1918]

I still want to see the full Gloria Borger interview. What was the question that caused Paul to take off his mic? We still don't know.

Its all over youtube. She basically asked him the same question over and over again until he got fed up.

[pauladin]

i'm getting desensitized to these attack pieces and now just laugh at how weak and desperate they are. We're winning.

[RDM]

This is a dead issue. It's not gaining traction.

[Endthefednow]

Nothing new just the same old news. To hear CNN call Ron a Top Tier was music to my ears :D

[eric4186]

Its all over youtube. She basically asked him the same question over and over again until he got fed up.

no, the FULL interview. Not what they aired with clips spliced up. You don't even get to see the question that caused him to walk off. Watch it again. It clips to her looking like she had just asked something and then said "but that's legitimate isn't it? it's legitimite. these things are pretty incendiary". then he says "because of people like you" and takes off the mic.

I want to know what the question was and just how many times she pestered him, not this spliced up clip stuff.

[Cyberbrain]

That was a really weak attack, if that's the best they can do then we're in good shape. Also notice how Wolf just outright says "racist newsletters" instead of what he would usually say, something like "Newsletters some are calling racist" or "Potentially racist newsletters"

[Sentinelrv]

What exactly did they play that old clip for? I didn't see how it connected with what they were talking about.

Anyone know this? Maybe I wasn't fully paying attention, but that clip didn't seem to fit with their hit piece.

[hazek]

Didn't Rand also face some alleged racism smear attack because of his position on civil rights act and it didn't hurt him?

[parocks]

I still want to see the full Gloria Borger interview. What was the question that caused Paul to take off his mic? We still don't know.

the video of that is around somewhere. she just kept asking the same question over and over again.

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

Anyone know this? Maybe I wasn't fully paying attention, but that clip didn't seem to fit with their hit piece.No, you are both correct to be confused. I was wondering where the relevant bit was in that clip as well.

[Intoxiklown]

Anyone know this? Maybe I wasn't fully paying attention, but that clip didn't seem to fit with their hit piece.

Because it is him taking ownership of the newsletters. Guilt by association.

*Edit*

They make me want to go outside and hurt small animals.....

[parocks]

I still want to see the full Gloria Borger interview. What was the question that caused Paul to take off his mic? We still don't know.

Some of us know, others haven't seen it. I've seen it. It was on yesterday on CNN at around this time. I think mediaite might have it?

[eric4186]

the video of that is around somewhere. she just kept asking the same question over and over again.

any idea where? i've been looking all over and all I can find is what was aired on Wolf Blitzer. he said they'd play the whole thing later but I can't find it anywhere and never saw it

[sailingaway]

If they wanted to dig deeper they could do some actual JOURNALISM and find out who actually wrote them.

they are pretending that because in the 90s before he knew about the bad comments he submitted some articles himself and said 'read my great newsletters!' he knew all about the bad stuff other people wrote at different times.

Not even logical.

[cdw]

They aren't going to show the full interview Eric. It was never about showing Dr. Paul's full interview, it was a guise meant to trick Paul into talking to her. CNN got an reaction and they set out to use it as much as they could. You're right that there is a portion that looks to be cut out before Paul gets fed up and takes off the mic, but I think we'll never see it.

[StilesBC]

Wow. I'm normally of the mind to say forum members are over thinking the whole "media conspiracy" bit. But this piece was carefully crafted for one purpose - to create a sense of uneasiness - and in the process, to discredit. Journalism is supposed to do the opposite. Clarify, inform.

They intentionally left out any explanation from Ron Paul himself - except, of course, the one where he is pissed off after explaining it so many times. They cherry-picked statements all over the place. Through omission, they intended to leave the viewer with only one conclusion.

This was more like an opponent's campaign ad than journalism. Utterly appalling.

[szczebrzeszyn]

any idea where? i've been looking all over and all I can find is what was aired on Wolf Blitzer. he said they'd play the whole thing later but I can't find it anywhere and never saw it

I think some members are confused as to what you're looking for. I assume you're talking about the full unedited version (or at least minimally edited). I don't think they have ever showed it. The only thing is this spliced up stuff, where you're not even sure what was the questions Ron answered, because of the creative editing. I think there were some dudes on reddit analyzing it in more depth.

[Cyberbrain]

Anyone know this? Maybe I wasn't fully paying attention, but that clip didn't seem to fit with their hit piece.

I think they were trying to connect A to B to C to A or something like that which came off as a huge stretch of logic to me at least.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

they are pretending that because in the 90s before he knew about the bad comments he submitted some articles himself and said 'read my great newsletters!' he knew all about the bad stuff other people wrote at different times.

Not even logical.
Even if Ron Paul came out and said he wrote them, it doesn't matter. His congressional voting record contradicts them. For CNN, it's what you say, not what you do. The statements aren't even racist to begin with. Politically incorrect, but not racist.

[Barrex]

As tragic as the whole thing is, this is sure to help boost Ron's support. I don't think the conditions have ever been so ripe for success.

Sure????? I really cant understand how can so many people say things like that....When I see so dismissive coments my minds starts screaming WHAT???
Imaginary situation:
Hunderts of people are pointing finger at person that you heard about few times saying RACIST! That person says I am not.
Question: How many people who saw that underts of people are pointing finger at 1 person saying he is racist will belive that he is racist?.... as you see this is not that imaginary situation.


People on this forum are assuming that that majority of people are informed and motivated to get informed....but this is not the case. What MSM serves to them they will eat it.

Troll signs out....




P.s.
I am not having a go at you or anyone else on personal level just your statment.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Seems right. It's been a few whole hours.

Brings back memories of Rand Paul's campaign. The media was endless in mid-to-late May with the Civil Rights Act and some 2002 letter to the editor. They reported on it at first, then reported on Rand Paul's response, then the media reported on the DNC and Conway's reponse and Paul's response to their response, then they found "activists" to get quotes from so they could run new articles about that, then they reported on their own (media in general) reporting of the events, and on and on and on.

What stopped it dead in its tracks was a new poll that showed Rand Paul still in the lead. At that point, many here exhaled and it quickly died out.

If/when a new poll comes out, that's clearly been taken after the media's latest antics, and it shows Ron Paul in first place in Iowa, this will end.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Why is Iraq my problem exactly again?OIL and to protect Israel


What exactly did they play that old clip for? I didn't see how it connected with what they were talking about.Oh those CNN producers crafted a very nice graphical hit piece... CGI the Ron Paul letters on screen, displayed parts of letters out of context. backgrounds of Jesse Jackson, MLK, monument, etc. Narrated by the dramatic voice on all the pieces. They worked overnight to put this together and air it


Wow. I'm normally of the mind to say forum members are over thinking the whole "media conspiracy" bit. But this piece was carefully crafted for one purpose - to create a sense of uneasiness - and in the process, to discredit. Journalism is supposed to do the opposite. Clarify, inform.

They intentionally left out any explanation from Ron Paul himself - except, of course, the one where he is pissed off after explaining it so many times. They cherry-picked statements all over the place. Through omission, they intended to leave the viewer with only one conclusion.

This was more like an opponent's campaign ad than journalism. Utterly appalling.Where it's most effective, yet not counted in the viewership / "NEILSON RATINGS" is CNN is broadcasted in every Airport concourse, bar, food courts/restaurants, train stations, Bus Stations, Truck Stops, and Bars across the country.

They waited for East and Central time zones, HAPPY HOURS, commuters, etc to air this... very calculating by CNN producers. This is also to kill RP's polling against Obama. Central and Eastern Time Zones are the heaviest populated for those commutes via Planes, Trains, and Automobiles

[timbo2097]

Because we spent over a trillion dollars destroying that country creating anti-american sentiment and idiot republicans still havent learned and want to repeat this in Iran.

Doesn't she want Iraq to reimburse the USA for getting rid of Saddam, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi women and children and blowing up their country?

I'm sure the trillion dollar check is in the mail! No worries, Michelle!

[pauladin]

incoming attack on MSNBC with al sharpton.

[JK/SEA]

[QUOTE=HOLLYWOOD;3893230]OIL and to protect Israel

hmmm...my question remains.

[UtahApocalypse]

incoming attack on MSNBC with al sharpton.

Al Sharpton is by far more racist then anything in ANY of those newsletters.

[jcarcinogen]

the video of that is around somewhere. she just kept asking the same question over and over again.

He took the mic off when the trick said he said he blamed Israel for the 93 WTC bombing.

[libertyfan101]

Not attacking this head on will be a huge mistake by the campaign. Get Linder and many minority Paul supporters to counter-attack this nonsense. I for one am a minority Paul supporter. I'm going to make a youtube video given my support for Paul.

[pacelli]

Chill out.

[Libertea Party]

They aren't going to show the full interview Eric. It was never about showing Dr. Paul's full interview, it was a guise meant to trick Paul into talking to her. CNN got an reaction and they set out to use it as much as they could. You're right that there is a portion that looks to be cut out before Paul gets fed up and takes off the mic, but I think we'll never see it.

Exactly. Dave Weigel basically called it out as an ambush in his first blog post (http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2011/12/21/ron_paul_is_done_talking_about_the_newsletters.htm l):


Here I thought that serious scrutiny of Ron Paul's brief newsletter-publishing career would come after he won the Iowa caucuses. No, sir. CNN ropes Paul into an interview with Gloria Borger. In her corner: A verite camera (why is it shot like this?) and a bunch of questions about the Ron Paul Survival Report. In his corner: A microphone he can take the hell off.

Cinéma vérité: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cin%C3%A9ma_v%C3%A9rit%C3%A9")


Cinéma vérité (French: [sinema veʁite], "truthful cinema"; English: /ˈsɪnɨmə vɛrɨˈteɪ/) is a style of documentary filmmaking, combining naturalistic techniques with stylized cinematic devices of editing and camerawork, staged set-ups, and the use of the camera to provoke subjects. It is also known for taking a provocative stance toward its topics.

There are subtle yet important differences among these terms. Direct Cinema is largely concerned with the recording of events in which the subject and audience become unaware of the camera's presence. Operating within what Bill Nichols,[1] an American historian and theoretician of documentary film, calls the "observational mode," direct cinema is essentially what is now called a fly on the wall documentary. Many therefore see a paradox created by drawing attention away from the reality of the camera and simultaneously declaring the discovery of a cinematic truth.

[jcarcinogen]

Not attacking this head on will be a huge mistake by the campaign. Get Linder and many minority Paul supporters to counter-attack this nonsense. I for one am a minority Paul supporter. I'm going to make a youtube video given my support for Paul.

A press conference would be nice if its just these newsletters.

[Eric21ND]

A press conference would be nice if its just these newsletters.
That would give it legitimacy. Not going to happen.

[jcarcinogen]

BTW the individual is the smallest minority there is so defending individualism transcends discrimination on any minority.

[KingNothing]

Al Sharpton is by far more racist then anything in ANY of those newsletters.

http://verduci.wordpress.com/2011/12/15/al-sharpon-on-mitt-romney-and-other-things/


Sharpton is a complete scumbag.

[tempest]

A press conference would be nice if its just these newsletters.
No, absolutely not!

There's no need for a separate press conference on the newsletter issue.

The only right time to deal with the newsletter issue is when media hacks raise the topic (for example in an interview or a debate; and believe me they will keep doing that in the coming days unless the following happens:

Namely that there ought to be a very resolute response that (in my opinion) should also be a full scale blasting of the media and it's hypocritical double standard of treating Ron Paul one way and contrasting that with how the same media goons are giving the other GOP candidates a free pass on racial matters. The narrative MUST be re-framed so that every time the newsletter issue comes up Newt and Mitt's racial record also comes up since the media is supposed to be "fair and balanced"

[libertyfan101]

That would give it legitimacy. Not going to happen.

Ignoring it isn't a good strategy either. It will only fester into a bigger problem with the potential of ruining the campaign. This issue needs to be attacked head on. If not the MSM will push and push this nonsense. And regardless of the truth. It will have an impact.

[tremendoustie]

BTW the individual is the smallest minority there is so defending individualism transcends discrimination on any minority.

Yeah, but most people still don't get that ... even 40 years after MLK's entreaty to judge a person not on the color of their skin but the content of their character, we still have politics by groups -- who's going to get the hispanic vote, the black vote, the youth vote, the retiree vote, the middle class vote, the southern vote, the female vote, the male vote, etc, etc, etc.

They even use the singular -- "vote" -- as if everyone in each of these groups is exactly the same and will be casting one vote for president. It's intellectual laziness, and I'm just about sick of it.

[TheTexan]

tube ?

[HarryBrowneLives]

Brings back memories of Rand Paul's campaign. The media was endless in mid-to-late May with the Civil Rights Act and some 2002 letter to the editor. They reported on it at first, then reported on Rand Paul's response, then the media reported on the DNC and Conway's reponse and Paul's response to their response, then they found "activists" to get quotes from so they could run new articles about that, then they reported on their own (media in general) reporting of the events, and on and on and on.

What stopped it dead in its tracks was a new poll that showed Rand Paul still in the lead. At that point, many here exhaled and it quickly died out.

If/when a new poll comes out, that's clearly been taken after the media's latest antics, and it shows Ron Paul in first place in Iowa, this will end.

THIS is Public Relations 101. They will then know it's been discounted and look for something new to attack on. This is the only bullet left in the gun against Paul. SOOOOOOOOOOOOO much more important now that we win IOWA. That destroys the narrative. You are correct. I was there in the trenches. Same thing happened with Rand. What this says from the GOP/MSM Elite is that with Ron's rise in the polls, the attacks on policy against Ron have utterly FAILED. This is all they have. Phone from home!

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

Ignoring it isn't a good strategy either.It hasn't been ignored. It has been brought up and addressed many times. They just don't want to accept his answer. Trying to appease a media that is attempting to destroy you is impossible.

[KingNothing]

Trying to appease the media is like trying to drain the ocean. It can't be done. They'll find a new shiny object to focus on soon. Let this run its course.

[Esoteric]

tube?

[muh_roads]

They're desperate.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rDe7LpHsuU

[PierzStyx]

Doesn't she want Iraq to reimburse the USA for getting rid of Saddam, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi women and children and blowing up their country?

I'm sure the trillion dollar check is in the mail! No worries, Michelle!

Million. You're looking for 1.4 million civilians killed as a direct result of US military operations in Iraq. And that doesn't take into account those who died from activities caused by the occupation, such as people who died in previously unheard of terrorist attacks and such.

[pinkmandy]

This is not digging deeper. They talk about the fact that he is top tier now and that it he must come under scrutiny. Ok, so why did they air their hit piece in 2007/2008 when he wasn't polling anywhere near the numbers he is now?

They waited last time until right before the NH primaries. Paul signs covered the state. He was set to do quite well then this became the story. Then there was the issue with NH primary ballot boxes going missing, being left unattended and having slashes ripped in the sides.

[libertyfan101]

Linder and many minority Ron Paul supporters is the way to go. Making a video with all of them giving support to Paul would be nothing but a positive.

[WD-NY]

Trying to appease the media is like trying to drain the ocean. It can't be done. They'll find a new shiny object to focus on soon. Let this run its course.

Interesting comment I read on an article one Paul's response:


What Borger did was deliberate and is getting the desired results. Virtually all responses promote the misinformation as planned:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/03/AR2007090300933_pf.html

"Research on the difficulty of debunking myths has not been specifically tested on beliefs about Sept. 11 conspiracies or the Iraq war. But because the experiments illuminate basic properties of the human mind, psychologists such as Schwarz say the same phenomenon is probably implicated in the spread and persistence of a variety of political and social myths.

The research does not absolve those who are responsible for promoting myths in the first place. What the psychological studies highlight, however, is the potential paradox in trying to fight bad information with good information.

Schwarz's study was published this year in the journal Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, but the roots of the research go back decades. As early as 1945, psychologists Floyd Allport and Milton Lepkin found that the more often people heard false wartime rumors, the more likely they were to believe them.

The research is painting a broad new understanding of how the mind works. Contrary to the conventional notion that people absorb information in a deliberate manner, the studies show that the brain uses subconscious "rules of thumb" that can bias it into thinking that false information is true. Clever manipulators can take advantage of this tendency.

The experiments also highlight the difference between asking people whether they still believe a falsehood immediately after giving them the correct information, and asking them a few days later. Long-term memories matter most in public health campaigns or political ones, and they are the most susceptible to the bias of thinking that well-recalled false information is true.

The experiments do not show that denials are completely useless; if that were true, everyone would believe the myths. But the mind's bias does affect many people, especially those who want to believe the myth for their own reasons, or those who are only peripherally interested and are less likely to invest the time and effort needed to firmly grasp the facts.

The research also highlights the disturbing reality that once an idea has been implanted in people's minds, it can be difficult to dislodge. Denials inherently require repeating the bad information, which may be one reason they can paradoxically reinforce it.

Indeed, repetition seems to be a key culprit. Things that are repeated often become more accessible in memory, and one of the brain's subconscious rules of thumb is that easily recalled things are true.

Many easily remembered things, in fact, such as one's birthday or a pet's name, are indeed true. But someone trying to manipulate public opinion can take advantage of this aspect of brain functioning. In politics and elsewhere, this means that whoever makes the first assertion about something has a large advantage over everyone who denies it later.

Furthermore, a new experiment by Kimberlee Weaver at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and others shows that hearing the same thing over and over again from one source can have the same effect as hearing that thing from many different people -- the brain gets tricked into thinking it has heard a piece of information from multiple, independent sources, even when it has not. Weaver's study was published this year in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

The experiments by Weaver, Schwarz and others illustrate another basic property of the mind -- it is not good at remembering when and where a person first learned something. People are not good at keeping track of which information came from credible sources and which came from less trustworthy ones, or even remembering that some information came from the same untrustworthy source over and over again. Even if a person recognizes which sources are credible and which are not, repeated assertions and denials can have the effect of making the information more accessible in memory and thereby making it feel true, said Schwarz.

Experiments by Ruth Mayo, a cognitive social psychologist at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, also found that for a substantial chunk of people, the "negation tag" of a denial falls off with time. Mayo's findings were published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology in 2004.

"If someone says, 'I did not harass her,' I associate the idea of harassment with this person," said Mayo, explaining why people who are accused of something but are later proved innocent find their reputations remain tarnished. "Even if he is innocent, this is what is activated when I hear this person's name again.

"If you think 9/11 and Iraq, this is your association, this is what comes in your mind," she added. "Even if you say it is not true, you will eventually have this connection with Saddam Hussein and 9/11."

Mayo found that rather than deny a false claim, it is better to make a completely new assertion that makes no reference to the original myth. Rather than say, as Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) recently did during a marathon congressional debate, that "Saddam Hussein did not attack the United States; Osama bin Laden did," Mayo said it would be better to say something like, "Osama bin Laden was the only person responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks" -- and not mention Hussein at all.

The psychologist acknowledged that such a statement might not be entirely accurate -- issuing a denial or keeping silent are sometimes the only real options.

So is silence the best way to deal with myths? Unfortunately, the answer to that question also seems to be no.

Another recent study found that when accusations or assertions are met with silence, they are more likely to feel true, said Peter Kim, an organizational psychologist at the University of Southern California. He published his study in the Journal of Applied Psychology.

Myth-busters, in other words, have the odds against them."

[musicmax]

lol sad but true.

If you know Paul did not write them why not do some actual JOURNALISM and find out who did?

Lew Rockwell could just phone Wolf. Not saying LR wrote 'em, but he damn sure knows who did. Why he continues to let Paul twist in the wind is beyond me. Isn't this the moment his movement has been waiting 30 years for?

[specsaregood]

Lew Rockwell could just phone Wolf. Not saying LR wrote 'em, but he damn sure knows who did. Why he continues to let Paul twist in the wind is beyond me. Isn't this the moment his movement has been waiting 30 years for?

If there were a number of people contributing; why do you think he knows for sure who wrote specific pieces decades later? Do you remember everything you wrote or said 10 years ago, let alone somebody else?

[icecap]

tubz?

[slamhead]

Take a deep breath. They are pandering to people who don't even know who Ron Paul is. These people will not show up to caucus anyway. RP's support comes from the grass roots.....word of mouth....friends and family. Ron's support grows with education and once you are in you are in for life. Ron's support is much greater than the polls as Ron let on at the last town hall meeting. They have internal polls I am sure that show him 10 points higher because a lot of the polls do not consider the independents and democrats crossing over.

[musicmax]

If there were a number of people contributing; why do you think he knows for sure who wrote specific pieces decades later? Do you remember everything you wrote or said 10 years ago, let alone somebody else?

If I were Mitt Romney I'd bet you $10,000 that Rockwell knows who wrote those particular articles, since they have surfaced in the media multiple times since their publication.

[SpicyTurkey]

I think all this attention on RP is a net positive. This kind of exposure will drive people to research RP, and therefore gain more supporters. Anyone who gets to really know RP will not believe this hogwash.

[SpicyTurkey]

Take a deep breath. They are pandering to people who don't even know who Ron Paul is. These people will not show up to caucus anyway. RP's support comes from the grass roots.....word of mouth....friends and family. Ron's support grows with education and once you are in you are in for life. Ron's support is much greater than the polls as Ron let on at the last town hall meeting. They have internal polls I am sure that show him 10 points higher because a lot of the polls do not consider the independents and democrats crossing over.

You beat me to it.

[notsure]

Rachel Maddow is on now, (9:51) calling ROn on racism and the newsletters.

[Steppenwolf6]

I think all this attention on RP is a net positive. This kind of exposure will drive people to research RP, and therefore gain more supporters. Anyone who gets to really know RP will not believe this hogwash.

That's exactly it.
Also:
What does not kill me makes me stronger.
We can really ,truly come out of this stronger than we are now,believe it.

[Xelaetaks]

I think all the media hacks should watch this video. I've already e-mailed it to Cavuto and CNN. This video probably explains it best that Ron Paul if anything is the anti racist. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMQmInReYlI&feature

[seapilot]

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080202231409/uncyclopedia/images/1/11/Beating-a-dead-horse.gif

[pauliticalfan]

Ron Paul the racist

http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/2304/6234969468d6f96de390b.jpg

There are tons of photos just like this one. Ron Paul NEVER discriminates against anyone.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

I just looked online, and a whole new batch of stories about Ron Paul talking about "the newsletter" on cpsan from 1993, and you click on the link, and it's about the investment newsletter and it has nothing to do with the story. There were a whole bunch of newsletters. But just pointing out all those stories on the wire right now were just made up. I think for anyone that checks facts out, this type of thing works to Paul's advantage.

[Libertea Party]

Rachel Maddow is on now, (9:51) calling ROn on racism and the newsletters.

Not watching but here's what I wrote when she attacked Rand repeatedly (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?277459-Maddow-cluelessly-attacks-Rand-again&p=3088488&viewfull=1#post3088488):



Maddow is not "cluelessly attacking Rand Paul". She's making sure the liberal sheep don't wander out of the Democratic political agenda. Supporting Rand Paul on an issue where principle progressives would agree with a "teabagging Republican" would be hurt the Democratic Party.

Maddow's only role is to pen up the "progressive" activism for the Democratic party. For goodness sakes Obama appeared at a Nutroots convention, said two words, and literally played a propaganda clip of Maddow praising his "accomplishments" while any progressive knows he was a sell out.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=so-Uuooz-Zo

Once you ask "Is it good for the Democratic Party?" you'll realize that Maddow is far from clueless in what she does.

I've seen so many news reports of anti-war liberals dissing Obama (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70800.html) and going for Ron Paul in Iowa. It scares her and the GE-owned MSNBC so much that they'll lose their very very lucrative connections to both sides of DC if Paul catches on. Maddow is trying to plug the holes in that dam before it becomes a rush of liberals leaving the Democratic Party for Ron Paul.

Also pretty funny how she's never going to have to explain why she let a "racist" on her show multiple times without confronting him about this before.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

People are tired of the racism charge. They call everyone they don't like a racist and no one buys that shit anymore. Everyone knows a real racist when they see/encounter one. It's obvious to a vast majority of people that Ron is not a racist no matter what the talking head establishment cronies spew out. Everyone here blows this far too much out of proportion. The GOP base is desensitized to racist charges because they're all called racist all the time by the media establishment lackeys, even though a vast majority are not. This isn't going to hurt Ron at all because it's clear as day he isn't a racist.

[Anti Federalist]

I'm as responsible for that as I am for some random serial killer's crimes.

Negative.

We all, to some degree, bear moral culpability for what government does in our name.

Some, more than others, but we're all guilty.

[Anti Federalist]

Even if Ron Paul came out and said he wrote them, it doesn't matter. His congressional voting record contradicts them. For CNN, it's what you say, not what you do. The statements aren't even racist to begin with. Politically incorrect, but not racist.

This.

[Carehn]

Negative.

We all, to some degree, bear moral culpability for what government does in our name.

Some, more than others, but we're all guilty.

I don't know if I agree with this or not.

[seapilot]

People are tired of the racism charge. They call everyone they don't like a racist and no one buys that shit anymore. Everyone knows a real racist when they see/encounter one. It's obvious to a vast majority of people that Ron is not a racist no matter what the talking head establishment cronies spew out. Everyone here blows this far too much out of proportion. The GOP base is desensitized to racist charges because they're all called racist all the time by the media establishment lackeys, even though a vast majority are not. This isn't going to hurt Ron at all because it's clear as day he isn't a racist.

The tea party was called racist all day long, anyone who disagrees with Obama is a racist etc. This is one hand that has been so overplayed by the media they have destroyed the shock value of it. Some progressives might be appalled by it but most conservatives could care less.

[Athan]

Because your nation destroyed Iraq and killed a million people there.
After seeing this and 2008's election cycle, I have to say we clearly wouldn't have had any choice or say in the matter. The media here is not just relentless, they have no shame or concern of what they are doing. They are in the pockets of the military industrial complex.

Don't get me wrong, I do know there is blood on American hands, but to say we all share the burden is ridiculous. We need to get the HELL out of there and stop fucking killing people. Not find lingering reasons to stay.

[kuckfeynes]

I don't really see how an individual who has never voted and doesn't believe in the authority of the government can be considered culpable of its actions. Perhaps one could argue that he is culpable for not doing more to fight it, but at what point can he then vindicate himself? Martyrdom?