- Ron Paul does not exist.
-
- Or, maybe we should say, he is a shadowy figure sometimes
seen here and there, but of no consequence in the world of politics and
certainly not in the race for the presidency.
- At least, that's the clear message from the mainstream
media (MSM)
-
- And, no, the fact he is ignored by the MSM isn't breaking
news. Jon Stewart, to his everlasting credit, exposed the "invisible
status" of Ron Paul and the blatant censorship of his campaign
in a very funny monologue, backed by multiple clips proving his point,
a few weeks ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb5aGgQXhXo
-
- But , while it is hard to believe, Dr. Paul's standing
has just grown enormously not as the candidate able to raise millions
in a day from average men and women wanting a return to Constitutional
government, a sound and sane fiscal policy and an end to illegal , immoral,
murderous wars.
-
- No, after the September 8th Republican Presidential candidate
debate, his standing, his remarkable place in history has grown even
more amazingly and powerfully as The Man Who Never Was. He is now, according
to MSM, virtually invisible, if he exists at all.
-
- Ron Paul is not just being ignored but actually
written out of history as it happens. A case in point: according to a
Reuters (disarmingly inaccurately named) FACTBOX column , Ron Paul was
apparently not at the debate and offered no quotes. Here is the
Reuters story with quotes from the candidates who participated in the September
8th Republican debate: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/08/usa-campaign-
- debate-quotes-idUSN1E7861NQ20110908.
- No Ron Paul. Not a quote. Not a mention.
-
- Yep, there are quotes from all the candidates, even Herman
Cain from each and every candidate except the one man who is apparently
invisible and mute and basically doesn't even exist ( except to occasionally
ridicule) to the MSM, Ron Paul.
-
- Despite delivering some of the most out-of-the-box opinions
that one would think would warrant a quote even because they are so different
from the mainstream, he was given not a word, a comment, a mention in this
story "news" story. The censorship, and rewriting of history
as it occurs is Orwellian at worst, lazy and obviously prejudiced deceitful
reporting that cannot even be called "journalism" at best.
-
- An isolated case? Hardly. The British newspaper "The
Telegraph" ran the same list of quotes with a big headline blaring
"Republican presidential race: key quotes from the debate" .
-
- Again, Ron Paul apparently said nothing and apparently
wasn't even there, according to the story.
-
- And get this, at the very end of discussing the performances
of all the candidates, talking heads on MSNBC.com DID mention Paul
in their after-the-debate discussion, but they discussed not ONE THING
he said, not one stand he took, not one idea he expressed.
- No, Paul only existed to boomerang the conversation back
to Rick Perry and how, of course, Perry, manly man is attempting to be,
would strike out at anyone went after him .
- But what specifically did Ron Paul say at the debate
and why? No coverage, no interest No, the conversation simply mentioned
his name in passing as a way to talk about Perry, the now ordained "front
runner", more.
-
- An "LA Times" story spotlighting Rick Perry's
performance also failed to mention the contentious sparks flying
between Perry and Paul at the September 7 debate (and Perry's later
physical grabbing of Paul's wrist and poking a finger at him, caught on
film and published in the "International Business Times"
http://img.ibtimes.com/www/articles/20110908/210639_
- ron-paul-debate-rick-perry-gop-debate-september-7.htm).
-
- Nope. Paul standing up to Perry in the debate never happened.Not
important. (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-perry-debate-20110908,0,1004949.story)
-
- There is an exception to all of the above. "The
State Column" web site, which covers Capitol Hill , the White
House and state politics ,took the daring step to actually mention the
fact that Dr. Paul grabbed first place in the MSNBC debate
poll (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/09/07/7658608-who
- -do-you-think-won-the-republican-debate-at-the-reagan-library)
following the Reagan Centennial debate (a fact MSNBC seems to be trying
to ignore).
-
- By 11am ET on September 8, nearly 134,000 people had
participated and Paul was in first place with 50.3 percent, Romney
was in second place with 17.2 percent and Perry was in third place with
14.3 percent (http://www.thestatecolumn.com/articles/ron-paul-takes-first-in-debate-
- poll-despite-debates-perry-vs-romney-focus/#ixzz1XNZ4IGi5).
-
- Most people would call that a landslide for Paul but
the MSM consider it somehow not a "real" poll. Why? Because
Ron Paul won. After all, he is not a "real" candidate so how
could an invisible man win?
-
- Newsmax did run a story with Paul in the headlines
declaring him the loser in the debate because he honestly answered a question
about how he could not support Reagan's policies when they began to put
the nation in debt. No one else "lost" the debate for their
flubs, meanderings and just plain stupid answers and jingoism.. nope, not
a word covering that, just an attack on Ron Paul for having stuck to his
principles when he felt Reagan was going down the wrong path . (http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/ron-paul-debate-romney/2011/09/07/id/410155).
-
- The Washington Post ran an article ( a column aptly
named "The Fix" because clearly the "fix" is in when
it comes to who will be covered and promoted for the Presidential run..
and it won't be Paul) about the winners and losers in the debate and Ron
Paul didn't even rate a MENTION.
-
- This tale of The Man Who Never Was has little to do with
whom you support or don't. It goes beyond that. It is a glaring,
undeniable example of the virtual death of real journalism in this country
and the lack of any kind of moral compass when it comes to simply reporting
the facts.
-
- Fact: Ron Paul is in this race. Fact: He was at the debate.
Fact: He offered very different, very specific views. Fact: He won the
MSNBC poll after the debate by a landslide.
-
- But the bottom line is, for whatever reason, the man
has been deemed invisible, not worthy of the attention and specificity
of reportage that is usually given any inane story about a minor actress
or criminal. It makes you wonder -- what might happen to him if
he refuses to accept being treated as if he doesn't exist? If he keeps
on speaking out loud and clear. And people listen.
|
