CNN just talked on RP

[Peppy690]

Anyone just see the butcher job they did on RP. They kept talking about how everything makes sense then that girl kept switching the subject to Romney...

[Eric21ND]

that Sanchez chick was terrible

[Eric21ND]

you could tell she did not want to talk about Ron. Wolf brought up the word "libertarian" and "isolationists" again....sigh

[Peppy690]

it sucks how they don't treat everyone equally.... they are just throwing him on the backburner saying he'll steal votes away.... i can't wait until we win almost every primary

[Paulitician]

you could tell she did not want to talk about Ron. Wolf brought up the word "libertarian" and "isolationists" again....sigh
So lame...

[werdd]

Lol, at the end the woman was all, well dont forget romney has lots of support. SHill

[BenIsForRon]

I saw it. A lot of disinformation in that piece. Of course Wolf brought up libertarian and isolationism. They can't totally ignore him because they know he will probably win New Hampshire, so they have to talk about him early and shape people's opinions about him before they make up their own minds.

[me3]

Just keep campaigning. It's the only way to make these shills look like what they really are.

[RevolutionSD]

Anyone just see the butcher job they did on RP. They kept talking about how everything makes sense then that girl kept switching the subject to Romney...

That woman is HORRIBLE. When wolf mentioned Ron Paul she burst out laughing! Then Blitzer mentioned of course that RP is a libertarian, and an isolationist (didn't RP clear that up when wolf interviewed him?). Then the other guy said conservatives agree with Paul on most issues but his foreign policy is "too simplistic" and that's where they don't agree with him.

The piece was about which candidates would Paul take votes away from, not that he has a chance.

[Cowlesy]

Email Jack Cafferty and have him set Wolf straight. Actually you probably don't need to email Jack, if he has the chance he always straightens Wolf out.

[constitutional]

That's again, retarded.

They keep making the same mistake over and over again. I think we should email CNN.

[Paulitician]

Then the other guy said conservatives agree with Paul on most issues but his foreign policy is "too simplistic" and that's where they don't agree with him.
I like that "too simplistic" comment. Funny. :rolleyes: It can't be as a whole any worse than shitty one we've had for decades. Oh, but it doesn't matter, "we'll stay the course... forever!" Hmm... would I rather have Ron Paul's non-interventionist polices, or one that looks like an entangled spider web... that's really tough :rolleyes:

[Energy]

Of course Wolf brought up libertarian and isolationism.

Ron needs to end this once and for all by smacking them with the what "isolationist" really means: non-interventionism WITH barriers to all trading and cultural exchange with other countries. Make them fools for ever using the term on him again.

Channel this frustration into more boots on the ground.

[Benaiah]

That woman is HORRIBLE. When wolf mentioned Ron Paul she burst out laughing! Then Blitzer mentioned of course that RP is a libertarian, and an isolationist (didn't RP clear that up when wolf interviewed him?). Then the other guy said conservatives agree with Paul on most issues but his foreign policy is "too simplistic" and that's where they don't agree with him.

The piece was about which candidates would Paul take votes away from, not that he has a chance.

Somebody should put together a video for YouTube with clips of all the journalist laughing at Paul.

[FreedomAndLaw]

...

[kylejack]

Youtube?

[RevolutionSD]

With all the continuous media attacks on Ron Paul I can't help but think it's all a propaganda technique similar to reverse psychology. It's impossible the media is unaware that everytime Ron Paul is attacked his support rises, as well as the amount of attention they draw. The media, unlike government, Is not greatly affected by dissent. If their intentions were truly to trivialize his chances of winning they would stop speaking about, and doing interviews with him all together. The media would probably attempt to redirect potential Ron Paul supporters with the option of another anti-war candidate such as Dennis Kucinich. While i support Ron Paul, the media aspect of this all seems to be more an attempt to trivialize Dennis Kucinich for his media positions, and to form a consensus that something must be done about the money system. I think Ron Paul unwittingly is being used by the media to form a consensus acknowledging something must be done about the money system. While i happen to agree with Ron Paul's stance, I think this is going to be a prologue towards something akin to the anti-christ's currency.

I think the almost zealot-like vocal majority (or minority) of supporters interact as if they are influenced by a media-generated trend. You will commonly find vocal supporters repeating not the message they agree with but words and phrases such as "socialist" "nanny government", almost in the same way Giuliani supporters would repeat like zombies "islomofacists". It's hard for me to believe that those who attack anyone who says something remotely negative about Dr Paul were drawn into their position by his message. Hostile behavior towards anyone who doesn't paint Ron Paul as a messiah seems odd if the message is indeed about freedom. You also frequently see cries that their 'messiah' is painted unfairly by media, yet recycle the same styled attacks the media lays out towards Kucinich (UFO).

I'm not a religious 'nut', nor am I trying to redirect paranoid support towards Kucinich. I'm a Ron Paul supporter, and agree with his stance on the issues. I'm just trying to question the real motives behind the attacks on Dr Paul.

The CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) has members at the tops of every major news organization (as well as most major corps), which is why all msm news looks and sounds the same, and why they will ignore or attack any and all limited government anti-war candidates as much as possible.