Ron Paul and Huckster articles in the new Rolling Stone

[RonPaulFever]

It's the issue with Jay-Z on the cover. The article on Huck is basically a hit piece, calling him a religious kook and whatnot, but the article on Dr. Paul seemed fairly positive. I didn't get to read the whole thing while I was shopping for groceries, but I'll probably go pick up a copy today.

[Jordan]

I'll have to look out for this. Rolling Stone was all over John Edwards, but I'd love to see Ron Paul as the person they chose.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

It's the issue with Jay-Z on the cover. The article on Huck is basically a hit piece, calling him a religious kook and whatnot, but the article on Dr. Paul seemed fairly positive. I didn't get to read the whole thing while I was shopping for groceries, but I'll probably go pick up a copy today.

bout' time he got his :)

[Jaykzo]

I was really disappointed- Each of the last 6 issues of Rolling Stones has had a full report on one of the GOP candidates, each article being at least 3 full pages.

This issue had Huck for 4 pages, then Ron Paul for half a page. It was a good article, but he deserves so much more, especially considering this was the only Republican candidate that wasn't bashed repeatedly throughout the article.

I'm gonna write a letter asking for more coverage, its really pathetic that they'd spend all that time tearing down the GOP but not giving more than a half of a page to the guy who is restoring it.

[me3]

The online version has been posted in the news forum some time ago. If you want to read it, do a search for "Rolling Stone"

[angelatc]

I bought it, because I like to support publications that give Ron Paul coverage.

I also folded the other copies on the shelf so that Ron Paul's face and the article was displayed.

(Huckabee pays himself as a consultant? Wow.)

Here's the Huck hit piece: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/17324246/matt_taibbi_on_mike_huckabee_our_favorite_rightwin g_nut_job

[megasooner]

I bought it, because I like to support publications that give Ron Paul coverage.

I also folded the other copies on the shelf so that Ron Paul's face and the article was displayed.

(Huckabee pays himself as a consultant? Wow.)

Here's the Huck hit piece: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/17324246/matt_taibbi_on_mike_huckabee_our_favorite_rightwin g_nut_job


HOLY CRAP, that's one of the most vicious hit pieces I've ever read...

[AlexMerced]

yeah... he tore him a new one

[Bergie Bergeron]

Somebody PLEASE link this in the Huckabee forums, best. article. ever.

[Visual]

HOLY CRAP, that's one of the most vicious hit pieces I've ever read...

I haven't even gotten past the 3rd paragraph, and god damn this thing is RUTHLESS. DAMN! I thought being callled a terrorist was bad, this is just... I'm really at a loss of words.

and yet... somehow... it's amusing.

[AlexMerced]

someone link the RP article that was in that issue, there's a few I want to know which one got published.

[quickmike]

This issue had Huck for 4 pages, then Ron Paul for half a page. It was a good article, but he deserves so much more, especially considering this was the only Republican candidate that wasn't bashed repeatedly throughout the article.



You know how it is. You tend to write in greater length about something you dont like than something you do like. Takes more words to bitch and vent off about something distasteful.

[AlexMerced]

You know how it is. You tend to write in greater length about something you dont like than something you do like. Takes more words to bitch and vent off about something distasteful.

agreed

[RonFan1776]

Maybe they will have an actual RP article later on? The one that was in the magazine was really just a question-and-answer rather than a true story.

[Libertad2008]

Here's the one they did about the Good Doctor (I don't know if it was in the magazine, but it was on their site):
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/17323345/ron_paul_a_republican_takes_the_lead_against_the_w ar

Both of these articles were simply amazing! Saying that the article bashing the huckster was harsh is like saying that Hugo Chavez is just a little bit crazy!

I personally am a fairly conservative Christian, and I am offended by huckster's demeanor and "in your face" attitude about religion. The last time I checked, there used to be a little thing called separation of church and state. Someone who uses their religion to further their political career needs to reevaluate both their faith and their politics.

Regarding the huckster's spending and massive amounts of favors, he has, at best, a small town, petty, and limited mentality, or is, at worst, a charlatan on the order of the worst televangelists.

The scary thing is that I have a number of friends who support him. :confused:

I was supremely pleased about the RP article for 3 reasons:
1) They actually used a respectable picture of him
2) They asked him good questions, and allowed him to answer them (CNN needs to take notes on this one...)
3) They didn't make asinine post-interview remarks and pick his answers to shreds.

Long Live Liberty!!!

[paulgirl]

I'll take a half page positive piece over a four page bashing any day.

Besides, do you really want a liberal publication explaining RP's beliefs in detail? I don't think they would understand properly anyway. Better whet people's appetites, and then they can discover for themselves what RP is all about.

I wonder how many Republicans read Rolling Stone?