PDA

View Full Version : NYT To Run MASSIVE Hit Piece THIS Sunday!!!!




Electrostatic
07-20-2007, 10:32 PM
Well, here's for everyone who was complaining about the MSM ignoring us... Phase 2 (smearing us) to begin this SUnday as planned.... http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003614862

Spirit of '76
07-20-2007, 10:36 PM
There are several threads on this here, the full text of the article is available, and it is NOT a hit piece.

Overall, it's a good thing.

Electrostatic
07-20-2007, 10:38 PM
Really? I didn't see any.. But the way these people made it sound it would be... (Probably why I didn't notice the other ones where talking about the same thing...)

Sorry if that's true..

Spirit of '76
07-20-2007, 10:39 PM
I'd suggest everyone email the blogger responsible for spinning the NYT piece and let him/her/it know that the article contains a lot more information than just the few little bits he/she/it has taken completely out of context.

Here's the email address:
letters@editorandpublisher.com

Warhawk
07-20-2007, 10:39 PM
It has its good points and its bad points.

Sure not everything is totally positive, but as far as I can tell, the author wasn't pushing an agenda, which is rather refreshing, to tell the truth.

Spirit of '76
07-20-2007, 10:40 PM
Really? I didn't see any.. But the way these people made it sound it would be... (Probably why I didn't notice the other ones where talking about the same thing...)

Sorry if that's true..

No biggie.

Here's a good thread on it:
http://ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=7965&highlight=new+york+times

FSP-Rebel
07-20-2007, 10:42 PM
I love how the JBSers are looked as conspiracy theorists when they are nothing more than truth seekers. They are the true conservatives of our times. Apparently the media has taken over control of the formerly conservative. When will the truth come to life? not in the FoxNoise era/

Spirit of '76
07-20-2007, 10:42 PM
Actually, from reading that blog, it appears that the blogger took his/her/its cues directly from Matt Drudge and never actually read the NYT article.

It's line-for-line a parroting of the Drudge spin piece.

Electrostatic
07-20-2007, 10:42 PM
No biggie.

Here's a good thread on it:
http://ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=7965&highlight=new+york+times

Thank you!

Syren123
07-20-2007, 10:43 PM
It is a good thing.

I was at that meeting he refers to at the end of the article and as much as I'd like to say he's wrong, he isn't...that is exactly how it went down. What I don't agree with is his interpretation of it and depiction that Ron Paul attracts only wackos and fringe. Admittedly, that meeting didn't go as the planners had hoped with the speaker I'm sure, but it certainly wasn't their fault or the fault of the audience. The speaker went completely off topic and into realms completely unrelated to Ron Paul, his issues, the campaign, everything. But...it's an imperfect world populated by people and what happened isn't an indicator of anything.

People are going to interpret the article based on their own set of filters no matter what so I'm glad that overall it was positive and informative.

Green Mountain Boy
07-20-2007, 10:44 PM
The article is already up on the NYT website.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/magazine/22Paul-t.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Wyurm
07-20-2007, 10:44 PM
well, we will just have to wait and see on this. It might not work the way it was clearly intended to work due to the simple fact that the article is HUGE. by the time they get to the last few paragraphs (where it paints us as nuts and says RP definitely won't win) they will likely have already decided either to check RP out or have decided they dont like him. The full text is posted on here somewhere, can't find the thread as threads float by fast here.

nullvalu
07-20-2007, 10:48 PM
Well, here's for everyone who was complaining about the MSM ignoring us... Phase 2 (smearing us) to begin this SUnday as planned.... http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003614862

The only thing that was a hit piece was that bastardization of the story that you posted a link to..

Spirit of '76
07-20-2007, 11:06 PM
Thank you!

No prob. :)

Again, I encourage everyone to contact anybody (such as the blog linked in your original post) to correct them if they try to spin the article to make RP look bad.

michaelwise
07-21-2007, 12:05 AM
I like the next to the last line of the article. How do people usually respond when the are told they can't have something?

foofighter20x
07-21-2007, 12:23 AM
www.dailypaul.com (http://www.dailypaul.com)

I suggest everyone check their news at that website first before racing to post it here.

Take a look at the 5th story down (as of the time of my post).

spacebetween
07-21-2007, 12:30 AM
After reading the actual article published by the NY Times, it is VERY obvious that Matt Drudge wanted to smear Ron Paul. These bloggers are just taking his cue.

Notice that he took it down only thirty minutes later.

Sematary
07-21-2007, 01:14 AM
Well, here's for everyone who was complaining about the MSM ignoring us... Phase 2 (smearing us) to begin this SUnday as planned.... http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003614862

To be honest - THIS piece is MUCH more of a hit piece than the actual article.

JosephTheLibertarian
07-21-2007, 01:17 AM
Is defamation not illegal anymore? Dr. Paul isn't "anti abortion" he's pro life tat believes it should be left to the states... I guess good journalism is too much to ask these days. The words "anti abortion" implies that he would support a federal ban... it's misleading

Sematary
07-21-2007, 01:21 AM
Is defamation not illegal anymore? Dr. Paul isn't "anti abortion" he's pro life tat believes it should be left to the states... I guess good journalism is too much to ask these days. The words "anti abortion" implies that he would support a federal ban... it's misleading

The piece here is done by a blogger - not a news organization. He is completely off kilter.

Devil_rules_in_extremes
07-21-2007, 01:28 AM
After reading the actual article published by the NY Times, it is VERY obvious that Matt Drudge wanted to smear Ron Paul. These bloggers are just taking his cue.

Notice that he took it down only thirty minutes later.

I don't get this Matt Drudge thing... What does Matt Drudge have to do with all this?

TheEvilDetector
07-21-2007, 01:34 AM
That article is a hit piece. Its just an extremely clever hit piece. It uses alot of true details but it omits certain true details or explanations or just even basic honest journalistic impartiality in critical places, to leave negative impressions. The sum of these negative impressions overcome the sum of any positive impressionss, leaving a net negative sum.

The MSM have learned that unsophisticated attacks will backfire, rather than continuing on the same course, they are upping the level of sophistication. Be on the lookout for articles that seem plausible yet leave a bad taste in your mouth.

Here are some things from the NYT article worth considering:

-------------
Example 1:
"In 1999, he was the only naysayer in a 424-1 vote in favor of casting a medal to "honor Rosa Parks. Nothing against Rosa Parks: Paul voted against similar medals for Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II. He routinely opposes resolutions that presume to advise foreign governments how to run their affairs: He has refused to condemn Robert Mugabe’s violence against Zimbabwean citizens (421-1), to call on Vietnam to release political prisoners (425-1) or to ask the League of Arab States to help stop the killing in Darfur (425-1)."

No mention of wanting to give his own money and asking congress to do the same, no mention of the reasons why he doesn't want US to meddle in other countries internal politics (such as advice of the founding fathers and the constitution).

-------------
Example 2:
" “GQ wants to profile you on Thursday,” Benton continues. “I think it’s worth doing.”

“GTU?” the candidate replies.

“GQ. It’s a men’s magazine.”

“Don’t know much about that,” Paul says. "

Nice way of painting him out of touch, even though he is more in touch with the people than the rest.

------------
Example 3:
"According to Dondero, “When 9/11 happened, he just completely changed. One of the first things he said was not how awful the tragedy was . . . it was, ‘Now we’re gonna get big government.’ ” "

Dondero is a disgruntled former employee, you just going to take his word for it? In any case, this makes him look like he doesnt care about US Citizens

------------
Example 4:

"In today’s Washington, Paul’s combination of radical libertarianism and conservatism is unusual."

What is so radical about it? Paints a negative picture on the reader's mind.

-----------
Example 5:

"Paul admires Robert Taft, the isolationist Ohio senator known during the Truman administration as Mr. Republican, who tried to rally Republicans against United States participation in NATO."

Taft was not an isolationist. He supported the Truman Doctrine for example. In any case why were the reasons for him pulling out of NATO not listed? Taft opposed NATO as a provocative and expensive act that would stimulate the arms race and eventually force the United States to send troops to Europe.

-----------
Example 6:
"In the 1996 general election, Paul’s Democratic opponent Lefty Morris held a press conference to air several shocking quotes from a newsletter that Paul published during his decade away from Washington. Passages described the black male population of Washington as “semi-criminal or entirely criminal” and stated that “by far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government.”"

Dirt digging from a long long time ago. Ron Paul said he didnt write these things.

------------
Example 7:
"Morris noted that a Canadian neo-Nazi Web site had listed Paul’s newsletter as a laudably “racialist” publication."

More negative publicity.

--------------
Example 8:
"To hang around with his impressively large crowd of supporters before and after the CNN debate in Manchester, N.H., in June, was to be showered with privately printed newsletters full of exclamation points and capital letters, scribbled-down U.R.L.’s for Web sites about the Free State Project, which aims to turn New Hampshire into a libertarian enclave, and copies of the cult DVD “America: Freedom to Fascism.”"

Nice way of disregarding information by claiming: exclamation points, capital letters, urls, enclave, cult etc..

-------------
Example 9:
" Victor Carey, a 45-year-old, muscular, mustachioed self-described “patriot” who wears a black baseball cap with a skull and crossbones on it, drove up from Sykesville, Md., to show his support for Paul. He laid out some of his concerns. “The people who own the Federal Reserve own the oil companies, they own the mass media, they own the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, they’re part of the Bilderbergers, and unfortunately their spiritual practices are very wicked and diabolical as well,” Carey said. “They go to a place out in California known as the Bohemian Grove, and there’s been footage obtained by infiltration of what their practices are. And they do mock human sacrifices to an owl-god called Moloch. This is true. Go research it yourself.”

What does all that have to do with Ron Paul or his message?


------------
Example 10:
"Guess what! The Spanish company building the highway — they’re gonna get the tolls. Giuliani’s law firm represents that Spanish company. Giuliani’s been anointed a knight by the Queen. Guess what! Read the Constitution. That’s not allowed!” "

Dismissal of valid information by appending something seemingly frivolous

-------------
Example 11:
"Paul is not a conspiracy theorist, but he has a tendency to talk in that idiom."

Either he is or he isnt. The writer wants to imply he is without saying it.

--------------
Example 12:
" Since then it has lain dormant but not dead — waiting, like so many other old right-wing groups, for someone or something to kiss it back to life. UROC endorsed Paul at its spring convention. "

Painting supporters as few and weak

--------------
Example 13:

"That night, Ruffley spoke about her past with the John Birch Society and asked how many in the room were members (quite a few, as it turned out). She referred to the California senator Dianne Feinstein as “Fine-Swine,” and got quickly to Israel, raising the Israeli attack on the American Naval signals ship Liberty during the Six-Day War. Some people were pleased. Others walked out. Others sent angry e-mails that night. Several said they would not return. The head of the Pasadena Meetup group, Bill Dumas, sent a desperate letter to Paul headquarters asking for guidance: "

Guild by association rubbish

-----------
Example 14:

"But what is “Ron’s message”? Whatever the campaign purports to be about, the main thing it has done thus far is to serve as a clearinghouse for voters who feel unrepresented by mainstream Republicans and Democrats"

Dismiss Ron's message as unimportant, focus on supporters.

------------
Example 15:

"The antigovernment activists of the right and the antiwar activists of the left have many differences, maybe irreconcilable ones. But they have a lot of common beliefs too, and their numbers — and anger — are of a considerable magnitude."

Destroy supporters by saying they have to be either anti war left or antigovernment right. There are many ppl behind Ron Paul from all over the political spectrum, because his message unites all people. However, this hack makes it look like anarchists and hippies it also make them all look angry, even though most supporters are happy to have found a good honest candidate.

---------------
Example 16:
"Ron Paul will not be the next president of the United States."

And you didnt think the writer had an agenda? WAKE THE HELL UP



-----------
To summarise: The writer is a pathetic hack, with an agenda and a clever spin.

Don't fall into the new traps MSM puts out.

If you endorse this article you are not helping Ron Paul, for the article is written in a such a way as to be passable as a fair article with plentiful information and yet it is a hit piece plain and simple.

Personally Mr Caldwell, you may think you will get a nice little bone thrown your way after doing a WOOF WOOF and a ROLL OVER for your masters.
Ultimately though, you are stabbing the american people in the back with your political subversion of RPs campaign. Hope you are proud of yourself.

PS. You are not even that sophisticated of a hit piece writer. Although, it is better than before, it is still completely transparent.

RonPaulGetsIt
07-21-2007, 02:02 AM
Thanks for pointing those out. How about the introduction to Dr. Paul as well?

"Thin to the point of gauntness, polite to the point of daintiness, Ron Paul is a 71-year-old great-grandfather, a small-town doctor, a self-educated policy intellectual and a formidable stander on constitutional principle. In normal times, Paul might be — indeed, has been — the kind of person who is summoned onto cable television around April 15 to ventilate about whether the federal income tax violates the Constitution"

Well we know what we are up against. I think all in its still a much bigger plus than minus. Dr. Paul has no skeletons in his closet. They must have looked at every vote he ever cast and sought out every comment he ever made to TRY to put him in a negative light.

People need to hear Dr. Paul speak about the issues. The best defense against a smear campaign is to get on the computer and show people the real man. Let them judge for themselves. All in I think we are batling name recognition more than anything right now so I think the publicity is good regardless.

TheEvilDetector
07-21-2007, 02:13 AM
I am bound to miss a few, but expect more of these coming out soon, especially when Ron Paul begins to get even more recognition.

Ron Pauls meetup support is worth at least $10M per quarter in time and materials (20,000 members * 4 hrs/(wk*member) * 12wk/qrt * 10$/hr ).

Ron Paul is THE TOP TIER if you measure dollar value of his support, not just his bank balance. MSM are using archaic self-serving methods to justify their top tier selection.

Bottom line is this:

Ron Paul's chances are ENTIRELY in your hands. To offset the impending concentrated smear campaign the Meetup activity needs to rev up into high gear. What I mean by high gear is events in 500 - 1000 (as meetup locations grow) cities around the country at least once or twice every week. This kind of visibility will counter and eventually overcome ANYTHING msm can dish out. For when the people see the world around them consisting of TV versus Neighbours, their deprogramming will BEGIN and the illusion will crumble like a house of cards.

Good luck and God Bless.
(I am an atheist, but its such an appropriate line at this point).

aravoth
07-21-2007, 02:21 AM
We knew this was coming, I wouldn't expect some fop of a journalist at the old yourk times to understand constitutional priciple at all. Kinda puts the monolith we are fighting against in perspective now. The internet is our medium, the grassrots is the tip of the sword. Iwoans don't give a shit about the new york times. All we have to do is win the damn primary. I really think we will, Romney is starting to be exposed, rudy is a world class jackass and people are starting to see that.

RP is going to win this, once we place good in iowa the mainstream will have to cover him, And if they don't they'll discover a bug in the broadcast system the hard way.