Ron Paul on Time.com front page!

[scoot87]

w00t!
http://i13.tinypic.com/7y56pf8.jpg

[AlexMerced]

Awesome

[CJLauderdale4]

Nice!!!

[walt]

duplicate thread - not awesome

[curtisag]

We're gonna raise 20 million, not 12 million. They're undercutting the estimate by a wide margin.

[literatim]

We're gonna raise 20 million, not 12 million. They're undercutting the estimate by a wide margin.

Better to have them underestimate than overestimate.

[AlexMerced]

Better to have them underestimate than overestimate.

agreed

[promagma]

Keep in mind, when there is a well done article like this, support the effort by clicking on an advertisement. Most of these websites track which articles are generating the ad revenue.

[crhoades]

Also on the front page of http://www.CSPAN.com

[V4Vendetta]

Great News

[angelatc]

Sheesh. I didn't realize Time was so liberal until I read the Swampland comments about the Social Security post right below the Ron Paul comments.

[mrd]

Sure, it's nice that Ron's name is getting some press. But did any of you read the Bloomberg article? Another example of biased reporting.


Nov. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Presidential candidate Ron Paul said he has raised more than $9 million in the past two months and he predicted his campaign will exceed its $12 million fourth-quarter goal.

``It looks like we can't stay under it,'' Paul, a long-shot candidate for the Republican nomination, said in an interview on Bloomberg Television's ``Political Capital with Al Hunt,'' scheduled to air today. Paul said organizers expect a Dec. 16 fundraising blitz to bring in more than the $4.2 million a similar event raised on Nov. 5, an ``astounding'' amount.

Note the very first description Lorraine gives of Paul is a "long-shot candidate." Also note the use of quotes around "astounding" amount - as if the amount may not deserve the praise.


Paul said he has begun ``spending generously'' in key early- primary states. He is competing in New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina and Nevada, and said he expects to have money to campaign through Super Tuesday, Feb. 5, when at least 22 states may hold primaries and decide the nomination.

Paul called his Republican presidential rivals, including frontrunner Rudy Giuliani, ``neo-conservatives'' whom he couldn't support in the general election should his own bid fail.

Sure, the term "neo-conservative" might be commonplace and understood to someone well versed in today's politics, but it comes off as a pejorative to others. Lorraine gives the impression he is name-calling.


``They think we're supposed to spread our goodness through force,'' Paul said. For example, none will pledge not to wage war on Iran, he said. ``How could I support something like that?''

Notice here Lorraine manages not to quote Dr. Paul, instead describing the candidates' endorsement of aggression against Iran using a wordy double-negative that makes Paul come off as simply anti-war.


Terrorists `Just Hoodlums'

The greatest threat to the nation, Paul said, is an overextension of the U.S. military and ``involvement in places we shouldn't be.'' Terrorism shouldn't be fought by waging war on nations, he said. Terrorists are ``just hoodlums and convicts, so to speak, but we incite them with our foreign policy,'' he said.

The insinuation here is all too obvious. Lorraine presents the juxtaposition of 'terrorists' with 'just hoodlums' - planting the idea that Dr. Paul doesn't recognize the terrible threat islamofascists present. Now, I'm not claiming they aren't just hoodlums, but brainwashed Americans need the comparison presented gradually with evidence for it to be accepted as reasonable.


With his campaign rallies drawing fiscal conservatives, civil libertarians, anti-war activists and Green Party members, Paul said the time is right for a third-party candidate. He said that, while his supporters are representative of the nation's voters, he has ``no intention'' of being a third-party candidate.

Lorraine does her best to plant the notion in her readers' minds that Paul is a third-party candidate, and not a worthy Republican contender.


A fierce critic of federal spending, Paul said that even as president he probably couldn't do away with entitlement programs such as Medicare. He would build political support to cut spending in Iraq, he said. ``I would save billions of dollars overseas,'' he said. ``We're taxed to bomb bridges in Iraq, we're taxed to build bridges in Iraq, and we don't have money for our bridges and our levees here at home.''

While we all know Dr. Paul believes in ending the welfare state, Lorraine does him no favors by leaving out Ron's consistent reminders that he would continue support for people who have grown dependent on this. This is a huge turn-off for anyone who does depend on welfare.


On abortion, Paul, a retired obstetrician who says he's personally pro-life, favors leaving policy decisions to the states. ``Our Constitution doesn't allow us to deal with this at the federal level,'' Paul said. As a congressman, he has sponsored legislation to define life as beginning at conception.

OK here Lorraine does an honestly good job of describing Dr. Paul's stance on abortion, and then she goes and smears it by mentioning legislation to define life beginning at conception. Now, your average reader is going to interpret that as an attempt to make abortion illegal for all states. Most people won't recognize the legislation's intention of nullifying Roe vs. Wade and empowering states. This needs to be explained, or people just don't get it.


Libertarian Views

Paul, 72, is a small-government libertarian who inhabits what he calls the ``old right'' wing of the Republican Party. He disdains taxes and regulation, wants to abolish paper dollars and return to the gold standard, and he backs big cuts in federal spending.

Calling the U.S. a ``world empire,'' Paul preaches against entangling foreign alliances such as nation-building and peacekeeping. He has called for immediate withdrawal from Iraq and opposed the Patriot Act.

Notice Lorraine manages to say Ron opposes 'peacekeeping.' And the Patriot Act, while I do believe many people recognize the true nature of this act today, I bet there are still a good number of people that read 'opposed Patriot Act' and are offended. Re-read that paragraph as a person who isn't familiar with the repercussions of our foreign policy, and doesn't know the Patriot Act is a horrible violation of our rights. It's a two-sided coin.


He wants to abolish the Federal Reserve, which he calls a ``secretive bank'' that is ``creating money out of thin air.'' He wants to scrap mercantilism for pure free trade.

Ah, Lorraine does well to make Ron sound like a conspiracy nut calling a 'federal institution' a secretive bank. Face it, most people think it's a federal institution, and they don't understand the fed's role in inflation. This whole sentence sounds kooky to people. Lorraine offers no explanations.


Paul's message has attracted free-market advocates and civil libertarians who transcend generational, geographic and even political boundaries. He is endorsed by Barry Goldwater Jr., son of the former senator and one-time presidential candidate. On Nov. 20, GQ Magazine named Paul its ``Dark Horse of the Year.''

His campaign donors come from every state. Paul has raised money far in excess of his standing in the polls. He brought in $5.2 million in the third quarter and had more cash on hand than Republican rival John McCain, an Arizona senator.

She was doing so well to praise him, then she makes sure to point out his poor standing in the polls. Gee, thanks. Why don't you mention McCain is doing even worse in those polls, eh?


Paul, a 10-term congressman from Texas, first ran for president in 1988 on the Libertarian Party ticket. He won 0.5 percent of the vote that year.

To contact the reporter on this story: Lorraine Woellert in Washington at lwoellert@bloomberg.net .

Nice. End the article with the fact that he won a measly 0.5 percent of the vote in '88.

This is disgusting. I can't believe all of you commented on these time and cspan articles without mentioning how horrible the bloomberg article is. Time and CSPAN just link to the bloomberg article! These people are vicious.

[quickmike]

you know whats even funnier, most of these knucklehead news people dont even have the sense to go to his website, or even realize that hes raised 9 million already. Shows you how little real investigative reporting is done by any of the MSM. They get most of their stories from the AP and copy and paste.

My guess is in about 5-7 years the MSM will have lost all relevance.

[OferNave]

Keep in mind, when there is a well done article like this, support the effort by clicking on an advertisement. Most of these websites track which articles are generating the ad revenue.

I can't believe I'm complaining about this... but I went, and couldn't find any ads to click on. :)

[Mark Rushmore]

I find it hilarious that just as the focused impact of Dec. 16th is on the dilution amongst the grassroots, then appears an article essentially giving us must-hit figures.

[mrd]

Can a moderator move this thread to bad media reporting? This deserves to be preserved there.