If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reason Magazine)   Ron Paul likely to be excluded from the NH ABC and FOX debates. Dozens of Paul supporters feel a great disturbance in the Force, as if dozens of voices cried out in terror from their mothers' basement and were suddenly silenced   (reason.com) divider line 145
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

769 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Jan 2008 at 4:08 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



145 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-01-02 04:36:44 PM  
7of7: dameron: Tell the pollsters, when they call you, that you support Ron Paul.

Ron Paul supporters can't use phones because they aren't mentioned anywhere in the constitution.


I'll third the motion that, even though I like Ron Paul, that was LOLsome. ;-)
 
2008-01-02 04:39:10 PM  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Presidential_Debates

In 2000, the Commission on Presidential Debates, which was established by the Republican and Democratic parties (following the withdrawal of non-partisan debate moderation by the League of Women Voters due to secret collusion between the Bush Sr. and Dukakis campaigns, the CPD is paid for by corporate donations), moved to block Ralph Nader from participating by stipulating that debaters must poll 15% or more across 5 national polls leading up to the debate date. Ralph did not qualify, sued, lost, and obtained a ticket to attend a screening (as in, on a bigscreen TV in an auditorium near the debate) of the debate from a college student. Although publicly announcing his intention to view the debate (again, remotely, and without disruption), and having not received any comment or complaint from the commission, Nader was halted outside the auditorium by state police who said he was trespassing and that they had orders to arrest him if he attempted to enter. As it was not his style to get busted by the fuzz, Ralph walked away angrily after pointing out the severe bullshiat of the order. Video of the confrontation (around 4:30 mark):

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6VRd3YzOXpI

Hooray democracy!
 
2008-01-02 04:42:32 PM  
Never Trust Robots:
I'm sorry, but didn't the last Democrat in the White House actually have a budget surplus while in office?

from this chart, it would appear that it the Republican Party who enjoys spending the country into oblivion:


The president does not control the budget.
didn't the rep. take over the house and senate in 96.

The budget went down because of the soviet union colapse and it went up after sep. 11

Slick willy and chimpy Mc flight suit didn't make much of a difference.


/just saying
 
2008-01-02 04:42:49 PM  
What kills me about these exclusions are that they're actually counterproductive to the media's pocketbooks, at least on the surface. After all, letting Ron Paul in is bound to make any debate more interesting, which should attract more viewers. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but when you see big media corporations acting against what is ostensibly in their best financial interest, you sort of have to wonder what else is going on...
 
2008-01-02 04:44:31 PM  
Fart_Machine: But he has a blimp...

. . . which will certainly be flying around outside the debate if he is not invited.
 
2008-01-02 04:44:42 PM  
No need for Ron Paul here, everything is going great. What we need are approved, mainstream candidates to vote for, candidates who will continue the great work of the Republican establishment up to this point.

Right?
 
2008-01-02 04:49:05 PM  
Of course the media is going to shut him out. Neither party wants his voice sounded on national television. Both political parties want him out of the race ASAP.

/sadly, they will get their wish
//baaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhh
 
2008-01-02 04:51:06 PM  
7of7: dameron: Tell the pollsters, when they call you, that you support Ron Paul.

Ron Paul supporters can't use phones because they aren't mentioned anywhere in the constitution.


Win.
 
2008-01-02 04:53:42 PM  
Never Trust Robots: Because it would allow people to buy their way into a debate.

Isn't that exactly what Mitt Romney is doing?
 
2008-01-02 04:53:53 PM  
7of7: Ron Paul supporters can't use phones because they aren't mentioned anywhere in the constitution.

that made me chuckle.
 
2008-01-02 04:57:36 PM  
unexplained bacon: I've seen paul supporters all over the place.
they're pretty damn motivated. I respect what they've got goin' good for them.

of course, I still don't agree with many of their candidate's positions so...


yeah, love him or hate him, you have to admit he is inspiring political activism in some of the american populace, which is a good thing.

i'd much rather our political landscape be full of healthy debate than full of apathy and corruption.
 
2008-01-02 04:58:44 PM  
broomballwilson: I love how the same people who say Ron Paul is wacky, think spending the country into oblivion and is ok as long as the candidate will let them have an abortion.

What, no comment on foreign policy either? The candidate also needs to threaten to bomb Iran for weapons that the intelligence community says aren't there, on the basis of a hunch that proved to be a complete failure in deciding to invade Iraq.
 
2008-01-02 04:59:03 PM  
I'd hope Ron Paul knows what the upcoming elections in Pakistan are for. After all, Hillary clearly doesn't.
 
2008-01-02 05:00:24 PM  
Talon: Why? What legitimate reason is there to do this?

Because he seeks the nomination of the Libertarian Party and isn't polling at any significant level.
 
2008-01-02 05:00:36 PM  
Fart_Machine: But he has a blimp...

Don't talk about Mrs. Paul like that. She is a lovely woman with a good personality.

/I actually have no idea what she looks like
 
2008-01-02 05:01:03 PM  
copper1861: Never Trust Robots: Because it would allow people to buy their way into a debate.

Isn't that exactly what Mitt Romney is doing?


Yes, but Mitt is also buying voters, which Mr Paul seems rather inept at.
 
2008-01-02 05:01:26 PM  
. . . another meaningless debate.
 
2008-01-02 05:05:48 PM  
Saiga410: Don't talk about Mrs. Paul like that. She is a lovely woman with a good personality.

/I actually have no idea what she looks like


but you know who's wife we are visually familiar with?

www.foxnews.com
 
MFL
2008-01-02 05:07:44 PM  
overlord_mike The president does not control the budget.
didn't the rep. take over the house and senate in 96.

The budget went down because of the soviet union colapse and it went up after sep. 11

Slick willy and chimpy Mc flight suit didn't make much of a difference.


/just saying



www.heritage.org

Mandatory spending is what will bankrupt us in the long run.
 
2008-01-02 05:10:50 PM  
hej:

Like may others, I only have a cell phone.

Just so that you and all the others who criticize the polls because they use landlines are aware, the affect of cell-phone only participants has a negligible affect on the poll (basically 1 or 2% at most). There was a study on this posted in the last "Waaaahhh! The polls are skewed against Saint Ronnie II cause they won't call us cell phone users!" thread.
 
2008-01-02 05:11:05 PM  
News Corp (faux news) stock takes a nose dive

http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=NWS&time=5dy

People are dumping the stock and boycotting their sponsors.

RP08
 
2008-01-02 05:21:38 PM  
The press routinely ignores Libertarian-leaning candidates, even more than the Greens or other independants. And if the press wants you to think liberty is unimportant, that's what you'll think, biatches.
 
2008-01-02 05:32:25 PM  
sasquatchologist: If the mods/Drew hate him, he HAS to be good.

Drew just has a sense of humor. Link
 
2008-01-02 05:37:37 PM  
MFL: Mandatory spending is what will bankrupt us in the long run.

well, it's only mandatory if you intend to maintain what it pays for.

to use an example i used earlier today, my cable bill is only mandatory if i don't disconnect the cable.
 
2008-01-02 05:39:54 PM  
BrokenDrew: Ron Paul

08!
 
2008-01-02 05:51:12 PM  
I hate on Ron Paul. But Driving on a fool's errand today I was listening to Michael Medved and he had a very good point.

Ron Paul deserves to be there more then Duncan Hunter (and thats a shame Hunter's campaign never got off the ground)
Ron Paul Deserves to be there more then Alan Keyes (HELL Cox deserves to be there more then Keyes)
 
2008-01-02 05:55:55 PM  
img507.imageshack.us


We'll decide for you...
 
2008-01-02 05:56:46 PM  
As a follow up to my Weeners, I kinda like Ron Paul. I really don't like a few things he stands for.

What I really like that he stands for is DIFFERENT ideas. Democrat or Republican, it's all the same bullshiat. I'm sick to death of the same crap being thrown around year after year.

Not one candidate really makes me say "I like what that guy stands for. All of it."

Then again, the only way to get me to say that would be to run with the "Reduce the size of the federal government 60% by my second term" ideal.

I can dream can't I?
 
MFL
2008-01-02 06:18:02 PM  
MFL: Mandatory spending is what will bankrupt us in the long run.

burndtdan
well, it's only mandatory if you intend to maintain what it pays for.

to use an example i used earlier today, my cable bill is only mandatory if i don't disconnect the cable.


If we disconnect social security, welfare, medicare and medicaid we will be just fine then.
 
2008-01-02 06:23:25 PM  
Bildo: Jeb Bush is more electable than Ron Paul

Well, of course he is. He worships Satan.
 
2008-01-02 06:25:20 PM  
Ron Paul.
 
2008-01-02 06:25:41 PM  
farm3.static.flickr.com
 
2008-01-02 06:26:13 PM  
Wow.. another trolling RP thread filled with people who have no ideas themselves about how to move forward.

I've asked this in other threads as well... if RP is such a nut and you aren't voting for him, please enlighten me as to who YOU are voting for this go 'round.

Please let me know why you like EdwardsRomneyClintonThompsonObamaMcCain so much... NONE of them has actually put forth any plan of action. They are nothing but walking talking points and poll spinners.

RP gives the same answers to direct questions no matter the interviewer, the forum, the audience or the polls. No on else in this race on either side can say the same.

/If he's crazy, and folks who are tired of the same old shiat are crazy.. than count me in as crazy too. Whatever that's worth.
 
2008-01-02 06:31:38 PM  
It is obvious that Foxnews doesn't want a man to ruin the Republican pro-war wankfest.

I frankly don't care for him nor think he has a chance, but the polls suggest that he is in this thing, so let him debate.
 
2008-01-02 06:39:39 PM  
skylabdown2008-01-02 06:26:13 PM
RP gives the same answers to direct questions no matter the interviewer, the forum, the audience or the polls.


Yeah, he does have a habit of giving the same answers all the time. Unfortunately, this is regardless of the actual question.

"Ron Paul, should gays be allowed to serve openly in the military, like they do in other countries?"
"I think that anyone who's disruptive should be kicked out, gay or straight."
"..."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to healthcare?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to food safety?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to environmental policy?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to education?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to the my ass?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

etc.
 
2008-01-02 06:39:41 PM  
For all of I'd never vote for the loon (though pvssing off his supporters is fun and easy - I've rarely run into a group that takes its self so bloody seriously or has less of a sense of humor) I think any candidate that can get himself on the ballot deserves his time in the debate. I'm not comfortable with the "powers that be" telling me who is and who isn't a legitimate candidate.
 
2008-01-02 06:40:44 PM  
7of7 [TotalFark] Quote 2008-01-02 02:46:12 PM
Ron Paul supporters can't use phones because they aren't mentioned anywhere in the constitution.

Neither was your mother's ability to crap you out of her rotten stinkhole, but then no document's perfect. Only in your dead soul is the Constitutional adherence a 'bad' thing.
 
2008-01-02 06:41:01 PM  
benlonghair: "What I really like that he stands for is DIFFERENT ideas. Democrat or Republican, it's all the same bullshiat. I'm sick to death of the same crap being thrown around year after year.

Not one candidate really makes me say "I like what that guy stands for. All of it."

Then again, the only way to get me to say that would be to run with the "Reduce the size of the federal government 60% by my second term" ideal.

I can dream can't I?"


THIS!
 
2008-01-02 07:10:33 PM  
schrodinger:

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to healthcare?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to food safety?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to environmental policy?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to education?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to the my ass?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

etc.


Sounds good to me. I'd rather have the market work those things out than trust the government to figure them out.
 
2008-01-02 07:20:30 PM  
Sounds good to me. I'd rather have the market work those things out than trust the government to figure them out.

Well, build a time machine and go back to 1903 then.
 
2008-01-02 07:28:45 PM  
The problem is that the political system that has developed because of the hegemony of the two-party system favors presenting policy choices as if they existed individually in a vacuum. This is how you have people who are pro-life and pro-death penalty. That is how you get to a place where Republicans advocate (though never make progress towards) smaller government but at the same time promote a foreign policy of neo-imperialism so extravagant in its confidence of centralized government control that it has become dogmatic that the United States is able to revert centuries of political opposition in nations that the bulk of the population can't locate on a map. That's the reason Rudy is (was?) a front-runner in the Republican Party even though he is pro-abortion, pro-gun control, and pro-centralized government; he's "tough on terror" (whatever the fark that means) and so the GOP base is able to look past his strongly Democratic positions on almost everything else. It's how Huckabee can be a big-government, tax-raising, felon-releasing governor, but because Jesus died on the cross so that he may one day run for office, he's gaining rapidly in the polls.

Ron Paul, however, isn't about single issues. His positions come from philosophy rather than policy. Everything from his stance on foreign policy to his opposition to almost all federal domestic programs is rooted in a philosophy of a limited centralized government. His opposition to abortion isn't based on his personal opinions, but rather his belief that the federal government doesn't have the authority to decide one way or the other. He's not about fixing this issue or that issue. He's about changing the way everything works. When you take an individual issue out of the overarching context of his philosophy, well, you'd have to be insane to think that it could actually work. His policies would only be plausible if people are willing to look at governance itself as a single issue rather than as a menagerie of individual policies that have no influence the outcome of others.

Unfortunately, it seems the American population isn't interested in discourse. It's easier to listen to 10-second sound bites than it is to objectively look at not only the ramifications of policy decisions but the usurping of the law that allowed them to be put in place. For most people the Federal Reserve, by design, is too convoluted to easily understand - and that's the reason they're able to get away with it. When every action taken by the executive branch is cloaked with the mantle of national security, how can people not think that they have to trust them or risk terrorists/communists landing in rural Colorado, shooting up a school, and placing the entire community under Sharia/Soviet law?
 
2008-01-02 07:28:56 PM  
schrodinger suffers from simplistic myopia. Apparently it's much easier to repeat what you're told than actually research what the real positions are.

Again, who are YOU voting for and why?
 
2008-01-02 07:29:09 PM  
schrodinger:

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to healthcare?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to food safety?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to environmental policy?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to education?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

"Ron Paul, what is your solution to the my ass?"
"Privatize it, and let the free market work things out."

etc.

Jaykzo Sounds good to me. I'd rather have the market work those things out than trust the government to figure them out.


I too trust the Free Market.

gamer.blorge.com

/Andrew Ryan 08
 
2008-01-02 07:31:15 PM  
hej: dameron: Here's an idea.

Tell the pollsters, when they call you, that you support Ron Paul.

Because apparently you guys aren't doing that.

Don't the pollsters have to call me for that to happen? Like may others, I only have a cell phone.


This thing about cell phones is just one of those talking points...they'll call your cell, if that is the number you put down on your voter reg card. If you didn't put that down, and don't have any other number, you just kinda self-selected out of being called. This goes for the people who biatch about getting too many calls as well...don't want to be called? Don't put a phone number down on your voter reg card. Simple.
 
2008-01-02 07:35:47 PM  
SlappyKincaid... well said. Too bad it takes more time to read your post than most folks spend thinking about these issues in an entire year. The useful idiots that are against Ron Paul are scared of actual meaningful discourse... they'd rather parrot what they're told than take a fresh look at our country's situation.

Those folks might as well wear shirts that say, "2008, We want more of the same!!!"
 
2008-01-02 07:39:47 PM  
Bush has a better chance of a 3rd term than ron paul does of winning a primary in any state.
 
2008-01-02 07:59:04 PM  
Ron Paul 2008!
 
2008-01-02 08:08:43 PM  
How are the Republican candidates going to handle Al Qaeda if they won't face Ron Paul?

/Mmm, that talking point feels good on the flipside.
 
2008-01-02 08:48:26 PM  
itchyvelour: For all of I'd never vote for the loon (though pvssing off his supporters is fun and easy - I've rarely run into a group that takes its self so bloody seriously or has less of a sense of humor) I think any candidate that can get himself on the ballot deserves his time in the debate. I'm not comfortable with the "powers that be" telling me who is and who isn't a legitimate candidate.

I know! And what could be funnier than a bankrupt treasury, an illegal war with profiteering out the yin yang, warrant less wire-tapping, secret prisons, torture and all the other types of hilarity we've grown accustomed to under the current lot!

Really, its been a laugh riot all the way. Ron Paul will just end our fun prematurely, the killjoy!
 
2008-01-02 09:25:59 PM  

Sounds good to me. I'd rather have the market work those things out than trust the government to figure them out.


I take it you've ever read a history book...
 
Displayed 50 of 145 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report