Presidential Candidate Ron Paul's Official Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Triumph Dolomite 1300cc said:
But unleash corporations on the world with no oversight? That's about the dumbest ****ing thing I've ever heard.
Click to expand...

You forget that in a free market, the corporations have absolutely no protection from competition. In a free market, companies have no other choice but to please the consumers.
 
Kifimbo said:
You forget that in a free market, the corporations have absolutely no protection from competition. In a free market, companies have no other choice but to please the consumers.
Click to expand...
You forget one of the major rules of competition: if you can't beat them, buy them out. Things as trifle as consumer demand need not interfere. ;)
 
Triumph Dolomite 1300cc said:
I think you know what my beefs are with the Libertarian school of thought, but I'll put it in a nutshell for you- large companies can not be trusted to do the ethical thing, ever. They must be regulated out the wazoo for the good of the consumer.

A lot of what Paul is espousing, or traditional Lib philosophy I'm FINE with. Get out of Iraq? Works for me. Rescind the Patriot Act? Yes please. Legalize dope? I'm down.

But unleash corporations on the world with no oversight? That's about the dumbest ****ing thing I've ever heard.
Click to expand...


Well, I'm no fan of corporate welfare, corporate personhood, subsidies, or bailouts - and that right there is significant. I suppose people could call that anti-corporate, but not really - that's just a truly free market.

But yeah, I believe people can vote with their cash and regulate industry.

You're so anti-corporate and anti-materialism ("you aren't your ****in' khakis") and whatnot that you have to think a lot of this shit people buy is useless junk anyway - so if people have some hardship in holding off, using self control, and wielding market pressure to regulate a company that makes useless widget A, how is that a big problem?

Especially with regards to something frivolous, like our mutually respective past time of videogaming. It can even happen right now, and it does happen all the time. Look at the PS3. Sony makes a product at a very high price point - I and all other likeminded consumers boycott it until they accommodate us with a lower price point by rearranging their business model.
 
JayDubya said:
Well, I'm no fan of corporate welfare, corporate personhood, subsidies, or bailouts - and that right there is significant. I suppose people could call that anti-corporate, but not really - that's just a truly free market.

But yeah, I believe people can vote with their cash and regulate industry.

You're so anti-corporate and anti-materialism ("you aren't your ****in' khakis") and whatnot that you have to think a lot of this shit people buy is useless junk anyway - so if people have some hardship in holding off, using self control, and wielding market pressure to regulate a company that makes useless widget A, how is that a big problem?

Especially with regards to something frivolous, like our mutually respective past time of videogaming. It can even happen right now, and it does happen all the time. Look at the PS3. Sony makes a product at a very high price point - I and all other likeminded consumers boycott it until they accommodate us with a lower price point by rearranging their business model.
Click to expand...
Videogames are not an ESSENTIAL thing to continue living, however.

Energy is. Food is. Medicine, in a lot of instances, is. Clothes are.

Really, all I have to do to shoot down your argument (although I'm sure you'll just see it as a confirmation of how the market does, in fact, work) is to say Wal-Mart.
 
acksman said:
Paul has my vote. Who do you think F. Thompson will hurt more? the mainliners or Ron Paul?
Click to expand...

Mainliners, no question. Paul doesn't have anywhere near what one could call a good chance, but I like him best anyway.

From looking at Thompson's voting record, I find him mostly palatable. More so than Hillary, Edwards, Obama, McCain, Guliani, or Romney anyway.
 
Hitokage said:
You forget one of the major rules of competition: if you can't beat them, buy them out. Things as trifle as consumer demand need not interfere. ;)
Click to expand...

You have to realize that you can only buy someone if both parties agree. It's not always the case, not at all.

Even if it happened, some entrepeneurs will see the profit potentiel and he will enter the market. In a free market, a monopoly is pretty much impossible.
 
acksman said:
Paul has my vote. Who do you think F. Thompson will hurt more? the mainliners or Ron Paul?
Click to expand...
How can he hurt Paul? Paul in polls percentage is normally BELOW 1%. No one in the republican party supports him but like 10 people. His base of internet support are those who can't ironically vote in republican primaries.

Thompson takes away from Rudy McRomney.
 
Kifimbo said:
You have to realize that you can only buy someone if both parties agree. It's not always the case, not at all.

Even if it happened, some entrepeneurs will see the profit potentiel and he will enter the market. In a free market, a monopoly is pretty much impossible.
Click to expand...
Wal-Mart.
 
Triumph Dolomite 1300cc said:
Wal-Mart.
Click to expand...

Thanks for proving my point. Wal-Mart works because it served consumers best interest by offering a wide variety of products in one place and at a cheap price.

Wal-Mart is far from a monopoly, there are a lot of big and smallers stores. Plus, with the Internet, you can buy from pretty much every store in the world. Anybody can live easily without putting a foot in a Wal-Mart.
 
I like this guy.

It's just registered party members who choose their party's nominee for the president right? Or is it done some other way? Excuse my foreigness.
 
Wes said:
I like this guy.

It's just registered party members who choose their party's nominee for the president right? Or is it done some other way? Excuse my foreigness.
Click to expand...

Depends on the state(and sometimes district) you're voting in. Generally most states are closed primaries restricted by party, but some are open.
 
MaestroRyan said:
how does he stand on gay marriage/gays in military/abortion
Click to expand...

Well the others can answer the others but he dodged the gays in the military question in the last debate. He seemed to supprt "Don't ask Don't tell" (which nearly every conservative was against originally btw) but that is not the same as equal rights for gays and straights in the military which is what nearly all the democrats advocate.
 
bob_arctor said:
Philip K. Dick once wrote of a marvelous candy that, when ingested, would essentially trap you in the world of a malevolent god. Ron Paul's candy is named Iraq. :)
Click to expand...

Wasn't Heinlein a big libertarian?
 
CNN - The Ron Paul phenomenon?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/06/07/the-ron-paul-‘phenom’/

WASHINGTON (CNN) — It’s been an exciting week for us at the Ticker – a few days ago, we opened up the comments section of our blog, and since then, we’ve received thousands of responses.

A large number of the ones we’ve posted so far have been from supporters of White House presidential hopeful Ron Paul, R-Texas.

But come Tuesday night’s GOP debate, we were inundated with Paul comments on our ticker post: “Who won the GOP debate?”

Many of the comments we received were supportive of the Texas congressman, while others registered frustration that the flood of Paul posts impeded the general online discussion, likening them to spam.

One thing is for sure: Ron Paul supporters are effective at coordinating and mobilizing online quickly. For the three GOP debates so far, Paul has won or placed high in most of the unscientific online surveys including ABC’s, MSNBC’s, FOX’s, and unscientific polls conducted on a number of blogs.

Paul virtually swept CNN’s unscientific survey after Tuesday night’s GOP debate: not only did participants say Paul won the debate, but also that he knew the most about the issues, had the best one-liner, had the most surprising performance, and got the biggest boost from the debate. (He wasn’t considered the snappiest dresser, however – see Mitt Romney). The topic is getting some play on conservative blogs, too.

These informal polls are unscientific because supporters can often vote more than once, and are not randomly selected, and while they may be useful indicator of a candidate’s ability to organize online, they are not generally an accurate measure of support across the electorate.

The comments section is intended to be informal, of course, but the strain on resources that night prompted us to take down the “Who won the GOP debate” question (though that didn’t stop Paul supporters from commenting; they started adding comments to the “Who won the Democratic debate?” post). The intention was not to censor Ron Paul supporters — right now, you’ll find hundreds of Paul posts on the site.

Given the volume of submissions, we do not post every comment. That said, we will always try to post as many as possible. We know how frustrating it can be to write something thoughtful and never see it published.

Right now “Ron Paul” is among the top-searched terms on Technorati, the popular site that tracks blog posts. According to the community Web site, Eventful, there are more than 16,000 outstanding “demands” for Paul to appear in cities across the country – that’s up 11,000 from just one week ago, leapfrogging him over Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York. Ron Paul video clips get plenty of play on YouTube and there is no shortage of blogs devoted to his support.

What do these numbers mean? How do you reconcile that support with the national poll numbers? In virtually every scientific national poll — generally regarded as the best measurement of public support for a political candidate — Paul registers, at most, between 1 and 2 percent. Do the debate numbers reflect something different than the national polls? Is it too early to tell?

Paul opposes abortion rights, voted to authorize a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexican border, supports withdrawing troops from Iraq, and defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Is he a “true conservative”? If indeed his support is growing, what is it going to take for Paul to break out and challenge the front-runners for the GOP presidential nomination?

We welcome your comments below.
Click to expand...
 
Ron Paul's propaganda posse and spam squad

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cont/node/2529

Ron Paul's propaganda posse is working overtime, generating emails wanting to know why news web sites like Capitol Hill Blue are not wasting more of our valuable space and bandwidth on a political joke that doesn't stand a chance in hell of winning the GOP nomination for President, much less the general election.

They should remember the old Chinese proverb about being careful what you wish for. Even among the extremes of the GOP, Ron Paul's extremism and the sleazy tactics of his followers fail any reasonable smell test.

This is not Paul's first try at the White House. He ran for the Presidency in 1988 as the Libertarian candidate for President and received a whopping 0.47 percent of the vote (less than one half of one percent).

This time around, Paul hovers between zero and 1 percent in public opinion polls - which translates as the bottom of the heap among the crowded GOP field of candidates. Paul is no stranger to losing. He lost his first campaign for Congress in his home state of Texas, then won a special election for a vacant seat before losing his re-election bid and then coming back and winning again. Then over-ambition seized his political agenda and he ran, unsuccessfully, against Texas GOP Senator Phil Gramm in the 1984 primary. He returned to Congress in the 1996 elections.

Despite the bluster of his brigade of zealots, Paul is not the populist he claims to be or the savior they seek. His political record is a study in contradictions as well as an addiction to populist causes and that addiction shifts with the political wind. He claims to support limited role of government but advocates government regulation of abortions. He claims to support serious campaign reform but accepts most of his campaign contributions from outside his home district and his FEC reports show heavy support from fatcat political ideologues and special interest groups. He embraces the fringe, including believers in alien abductions and UFOs along with some 9/11 conspiracy theories.

At best he is a fringe candidate and, like fringe candidates on both sides of the political spectrum he attracts political zealots who ignore his many faults and argue passionately with claims that exaggerate his positions and his chances.

An organized campaign by Paul followers following the GOP candidates 'debate spammed an MSNBC poll and his campaign faithful use those skewed results to trumpet a popularity that doesn't exist. Real public opinion polls taken immediately following the debate show no bump in his popularity and he remains mired at 1 percent.

The dishonest tactics of Paul's supporters are so off-the-wall that even conservative web sites and bloggers see through their smokescreens.Some web sites have removed Ron Paul's name from their online polls after they caught the always small number of Paul's supporters spamming the votes by using different computers and different IP addresses to vote more than once.
Click to expand...

As one of the angry missives from one a Ron Paul zealot started off with the usual collection of obscenities and concluded by saying:

"How can you ignore the growing popularity and improving political chances of Ron Paul? You are missing an opportunity to be part of a real grassroots movement. Everybody knows he's the talk of the Internet."

Britney Spears is also the talk of the Internet. So is Anna Nicole Smith. And American Idol. Candidates like Ron Paul should be judged by the company they keep.
Click to expand...
 
MaestroRyan said:
how does he stand on gay marriage/gays in military/abortion
Click to expand...

I'll do my best. He doesn't see marriage as something the government should be involved in, hetero or homo. There's some controversial votes in there, but most are easily explainable with some tangential information.

I have no idea about his gays-in-the-military stance. I would imagine this is far from a central issue to him. He thinks its none of government's business what you do in private. Frankly, I don't even understand the intricacies of this issue. Chances are, Paul's complete opinion is going to be unique and based on constitutional law.

He voted against some kind of DC gay adoption initiative, but the rationale was due to the federal funding aspect - if you give Paul a bill where federal funding goes to someplace unconstitutional, he'll vote against it everytime, and state that's the reason why.

He doesn't really champion "insert group here" rights. He champions the rights of all individuals and for lack of a better phrasing, the right to be left the hell alone by government.

* * *

He laid out his abortion stance after the second Republican debate on Fox.

Since I had a hand in correctly editing this Wiki entry, and I'm sure this is what he actually said after rewatching it here you go.

"If you can't protect life then how can you protect liberty?" Furthermore, Dr. Paul argued in this appearance that since he believes libertarians believe in non-aggression, libertarians should oppose abortion because abortion is "an act of aggression" against a fetus (which he believes to be alive, human, and possessing legal rights). He also briefly discussed his view of the proper role of the federal government and states in regulating abortion.
Click to expand...

Which is to say he thinks that constitutionally, it is a state by state issue.

My agreement level with this is over 9000%. Okay, that wasn't funny, but neither is the fever I have right now, sooooo, screw it.

My current temperature is over 9000, though. Just saying.
 
Karma Kramer said:
Ron Paul speaking against the invasion of the War in Iraq in October 2002.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OenXhQvgYwo
Click to expand...

Holy christ. Watching that video reminds you of how unbelievably consistent Ron Paul's political beliefs and voting record have really been. It also reminds us of the lemmings who didn't believe in going to war but couldn't "vote against their President", no matter how completely devoid of truth and fact the case for war might have been.

Some people really do need to go to prison for war crimes.
 
CBS - A Texas Libertarian Starts To Make Waves

You can feel it in the air: Ron Paul fever – it's sweeping the nation!

OK, maybe not the entire nation, seeing as Paul, a libertarian congressman from Texas trying to win the Republican presidential nomination, still isn't polling above 2 percent. But of all the minor candidates trying to break into the "Rudy McRomney" elite, Paul may be getting the most attention lately from the press corps. (Well, other than that actor guy.)

And it seems to have as much to do with his ideas – Paul, love him or hate him, articulates a coherent ideology better than many of his competitors – as the fact that he seems to inspire near pathological devotion in his followers. Look at the press coverage: The Washington Post profiled Paul's young campaign coordinator in New Hampshire; CNN.com today posted among its top stories a piece about how Paul's fans inundated the site after the recent presidential debate. He's even winning over Jon Stewart, who had Paul on the "Daily Show" and said to him, "[y]ou have accomplished no small feat, which is, you’re running for President, very much as an underdog, yet you’ve created a nice little buzz going about the Ron Paul candidacy."

When deciding which candidates to pay attention to, members of the press corps usually focus less on what a candidate is saying than how people are responding to him or her. And Paul's ability to inspire passion in his followers – even if they are still an insignificant chunk of the population – is starting to get reporters to take notice. (They don't want to get caught off guard as they did when Howard Dean created a similar buzz back in 2004.) A little attention from the media is probably not going to propel Paul to the nomination, of course. But for a minor candidate, simply getting reporters to notice you is still quite a
Click to expand...
 
Hitokage said:
From what I can tell, Paul is one of those people you can respect even if you don't agree with him, which is nice because I don't on certain things. ;)
Click to expand...
That is how I feel.

Yes, I just posted in a political thread without contributing anything at all. I like this guy a lot though.
 
This is amazing...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

CNN asked for comments on Ron Paul this morning... and so far they have recieved 977 freaking comments!

I love how the media keeps saying its just internet spammers that are supporting Ron Paul...

Well I wonder why CNN? Maybe it has something to do with the fact that you can only really get Ron Paul information on the internet... maybe it has something to do with the fact that CNN and Fox News basically ignore Ron Paul on their networks... He's not generating spammers because people think he is a joke (Sanajaya), he is generating spammers and internet support because his ideas appeal to people. Perhaps if the media actually did cover Ron Paul... he would be leading in the polls.
 
Karma Kramer said:
This is amazing...

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

CNN asked for comments on Ron Paul this morning... and so far they have recieved 977 freaking comments!

I love how the media keeps saying its just internet spammers that are supporting Ron Paul...

Well I wonder why CNN? Maybe it has something to do with the fact that you can only really get Ron Paul information on the internet... maybe it has something to do with the fact that CNN and Fox News basically ignore Ron Paul on their networks... He's not generating spammers because people think he is a joke (Sanajaya), he is generating spammers and internet support because his ideas appeal to people. Perhaps if the media actually did cover Ron Paul... he would be leading in the polls.
Click to expand...

They are playing a dirty trick. On TV they are NOT talking about him, but they will do so on certain sections of their websites which are viewed by Ron Paul supporters, hence making it look like they are talking about him. But most people are not hearing at all about Ron Paul right now. The internet is a closed circuit.
 
Great news!

GOP Ron Paul - Five Million Dollar Man?
http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=43192&fb=1

Congressman Ron Paul’s donations have moved up - not by hundreds of thousands - but by millions as a result of his debate performances and groundswell of support on the Internet and in New Hampshire, observers close to the campaign say.

The move is especially impressive since as of March 31, 2007, he had perhaps $500,000 on hand (see candidate estimates below).

FMNN had previously reported – after the GOP presidential debate in South Carolina - that candidate Ron Paul’s (R-Tex) donations, large and small, had nearly doubled.

http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=42336

Now observers close to the campaign are revealing – with some astonishment – that donations to the campaign in recent weeks have pushed the total up to perhaps $4 or $5 million.

“That’s a huge number at this stage,” says one observer. “That starts to put him in a position where he can compete – state by state, anyway – with the major candidates.”

And this source added, “Of course, it’s hard to tell because the numbers keep changing – and thus nobody at the campaign has a firm count, at least not hour to hour. But the numbers are big. It’s definitely over three, probably over four, and if it hasn’t hit five yet, it will soon.”

At this rate, say observers, Ron Paul could have something like $10 million in his coffers inside of several months, and the total could keep growing – so long as he continues to hit on themes that Americans support – how to return the country to a true, small government, constitutional republic and how to end the war in Iraq.

To be sure such amounts are somewhat speculative. But to put the amount of money Ron Paul is said to have raised recently in perspective, here are the figures of cash on hand for GOP candidates as of March 31, 2007:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/money/gop.html

Sam Brownback
cash-on-hand: $806,626

Jim Gilmore
cash-on-hand: $90,107

Rudy Giuliani
cash-on-hand: $11,949,735

Mike Huckabee
cash-on-hand: $373,918

Duncan Hunter
cash-on-hand: $272,552

John McCain
cash-on-hand: $5,180,799

Ron Paul
cash-on-hand: $524,919

Mitt Romney
cash-on-hand: $11,863,653

Tom Tancredo
cash-on-hand: $575,078

Tommy Thompson
cash-on-hand: $139,723
Click to expand...

But that doesn't mean we should stop donating!

Just watch this video if you want to get an idea why any other Republican would be a horrible president.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rK1EPlk2LQ
 
Wes said:
I like this guy.

It's just registered party members who choose their party's nominee for the president right? Or is it done some other way? Excuse my foreigness.
Click to expand...
It depends on whether the state you live in had open or closed primaries. If it is open independents can vote, otherwise it is only for the party you are registered to.
 
Karma Kramer said:
Great news!

GOP Ron Paul - Five Million Dollar Man?
http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=43192&fb=1



But that doesn't mean we should stop donating!

Just watch this video if you want to get an idea why any other Republican would be a horrible president.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rK1EPlk2LQ
Click to expand...

The money will continue to pour in for Ron Paul and he deserves every single penny of it.

And that video of Republicans voting against Habeas Corpus is stunning beyond belief. You've got a guy like Sam Brownback regurgitating endless platitudes about "pro-life, children of a loving god, every human life sacred" but at the same time voting against Habeas Corpus, the absolute foundation of our Constitution. These people are hypocrites and criminals of the worst order.
 
His Wikipedia entry has some nice tidbits I was unaware of, I bolded the most interesting ones IMO:

He has never voted to raise taxes or congressional pay, and refuses to participate in the congressional pension system.

Paul began his medical practice in Lake Jackson, Texas as a specialist in obstetrics and gynecology, delivering more than 4,000 babies. He took over the practice of a retiring doctor and was busy as the only obstetrician and gynecologist in Brazoria County. Paul said of his time as a doctor, "I delivered forty to fifty babies a month and did a lot of surgery."

Dr. Paul did not accept Medicare or Medicaid as a physician; instead, he would do the work for free or work out a lowered payment for needy patients.

Paul and his wife Carol have five children, Ronnie, Lori, Rand, Robert, and Joy. He also has 17 grandchildren and one great-grandchild. Three of the children, Robert, Rand, and Joy, also became medical doctors. Rand specializes in ophthalmology and Robert specializes in family practice. Like Congressman Paul, his daughter, Joy, specializes in obstetrics/gynecology.[9] Paul supported his children during their undergraduate and medical school years, refusing to allow them to take part in subsidized federal student loan programs. He has not signed up for a congressional pension for the same reason.[8]

Paul delivered babies on Mondays and Saturdays during his entire term as the 22nd District representative.

His Democratic opponent in the fall election, lawyer Charles "Lefty" Morris, lost in a close margin despite running numerous attacks on Paul, including his past votes to repeal federal drug laws in favor of state legislation and portions of old newsletters, assisted by the AFL-CIO. Paul in turn labeled Morris a pawn of trial lawyers and big labor. He raised more money than Morris, with the help of his national network of donors: $1.2 million to Morris' $472,153. Ken Bryan, a Democratic consultant to some of Paul's opponents, has said, "He has one of the largest contributor bases in Congress, outside of the leadership." Most of Paul's contributions are given in small amounts by individuals. That year, he had the third-highest amount of individual contributions of any House member, behind Speaker Newt Gingrich and Bob Dornan.

Along with not signing up for a Congressional pension, Paul's Congressional office returns money to the government each year; in 2000, the sum returned was $50,000.

While some politicians would find it unthinkable to vote against bringing "pork" to their home district, Paul spends time in the district to compensate for "violating almost every rule of political survival you can think of." He sometimes spends three to four days a week in his district addressing constituents' concerns, often accompanied by one of his 17 grandchildren. He attends graduations, civic ceremonies, and Boy Scout honor ceremonies. In an expansive district, it is not unusual for him to log more than 300 miles per day visiting constituents or handling their concerns. He is particularly effective at reaching 14th District voters on veterans' issues, such as procuring medals for war veterans who lost or never received their medals; he holds medal ceremonies for those whose medals are being presented. He has helped senior citizens of the district get free or low-cost prescription drugs through a little-known drug company program. His staff sends out birthday cards to constituents, as well as condolence cards on the deaths of family members.

Unlike many political candidates, Paul receives the overwhelming majority of his campaign contributions (96.8% in 2005–2006) from individuals.
Click to expand...
 
Dr. Paul did not accept Medicare or Medicaid as a physician; instead, he would do the work for free or work out a lowered payment for needy patients.
Click to expand...

Like a lot of libertarians, dude is generous with his money and time. This is how charity care should be done in this country. As charity. Not as entitlements.

He doesn't take government money. Thinks it's wasteful. He has the smallest staff of any congressman. Doesn't take government money to campaign.

So consistent, so principled. <3 <3 <3 A dream politician that is the antithesis of all we're supposed to expect from a politician.
 
JayDubya said:
Like a lot of libertarians, dude is generous with his money and time. This is how charity care should be done in this country. As charity. Not as entitlements.

He doesn't take government money. Thinks it's wasteful. He has the smallest staff of any congressman.

So consistent, so principled. <3 <3 <3 A dream politician that is the antithesis of all we're supposed to expect from a politician.
Click to expand...

Good thing the media isn't chastizing him and they are actually reporting on him with due dilligence on why he is a great leader... oh wait?

:(
 
Yeah imagine if such politicians were much more numerous. Anyway hopefully he will get more donations.
 
Here is simply the best video compilation of many of Ron Paul's beliefs and political views. Extremely well done. Be warned that it may bring tears to your eyes.

Please send this link to anyone you know who is unaware of Ron Paul. This is a message of hope for those feeling hopeless and lost.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=FG_HuFtP8w8
 
Frankly, our mainstream media in Canada arenT really better. Today, in the most credible (!) newspaper in Quebec, Ron Paul is described as the most scary Republican candidate and Gugliani as the most 'reassuring' candidate. The article says that Paul made a huge mistake when he blame USA foreign policies for the 9/11 attack.

They also described him as a puppet of the National Rifle Association because the NRA gave him a perfect 'A' grade.

The funny thing is the media up here all hate George W. Bush and his foreign policies, yet they can't see that Gugliani is not really better.
 
Kifimbo said:
Frankly, our mainstream media in Canada arenT really better. Today, in the most credible (!) newspaper in Quebec, Ron Paul is described as the most scary Republican candidate and Gugliani as the most 'reassuring' candidate. The article says that Paul made a huge mistake when he blame USA foreign policies for the 9/11 attack.

They also described him as a puppet of the National Rifle Association because the NRA gave him a perfect 'A' grade.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Giuliani is so much more assuring, what with the whole "we need to train our troops to be better at nation building" thing, and the whole reserving the right to preemptively nuke Iran thing. Yeah.

Seriously, I'd rather have Bush still in power than see a Giuliani presidency. Bush at least gives lip service to ideas I support. Gules is wrong on virtually everything.
 
Kifimbo said:
Frankly, our mainstream media in Canada arenT really better. Today, in the most credible (!) newspaper in Quebec, Ron Paul is described as the most scary Republican candidate and Gugliani as the most 'reassuring' candidate. The article says that Paul made a huge mistake when he blame USA foreign policies for the 9/11 attack.

They also described him as a puppet of the National Rifle Association because the NRA gave him a perfect 'A' grade.

The funny thing is the media up here all hate George W. Bush and his foreign policies, yet they can't see that Gugliani is not really better.
Click to expand...

Which newspaper is this? Do you have a link to the article?

I would think Canadians would be terrified of a Giuliani presidency for all the obvious reasons.
 
MassiveAttack said:
Which newspaper is this? Do you have a link to the article?

I would think Canadians would be terrified of a Giuliani presidency for all the obvious reasons.
Click to expand...

La Presse. Unless you can read French, I doubt the link will be helpful, but here is it.

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20070609/CPMONDE/706090718/1014/CPMONDE

They are basically trying to identify the 'perfect' candidate for each party.

Like I said, most journalists here have been against the war in Irak since Day 1, yet they seems to think that Giuliani is a good candidate for the Republicains. His reputation is good since 9/11 and our media still described him as some kind of hero.
 
Kifimbo said:
La Presse. Unless you can read French, I doubt the link will be helpful, but here is it.

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20070609/CPMONDE/706090718/1014/CPMONDE

They are basically trying to identify the 'perfect' candidate for each party.

Like I said, most journalists here have been against the war in Irak since Day 1, yet they seems to think that Giuliani is a good candidate for the Republicains. His reputation is good since 9/11 and our media still described him as some kind of hero.
Click to expand...

I read French. That is a terribly shallow article and quite an embarrassment for Canadian journalistic standards. In essence, it's "Ron Paul insinuated that America is the source of the 9/11 attacks and committed a huge error and can't be trusted" but "Rudy Giuliani is the 'Mayor of America' who operates in the spirit of George W. Bush".

Hmmm. Insightful.
 
MassiveAttack said:
I read French. That is a terribly shallow article and quite an embarrassment for Canadian journalistic standards. In essence, it's "Ron Paul insinuated that America is the source of the 9/11 attacks and committed a huge error and can't be trusted" but "Rudy Giuliani is the 'Mayor of America' who operates in the spirit of George W. Bush".

Hmmm. Insightful.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of our journalists are totally uneducated. Even high profile journalists, when it comes to anything happening outside Canada, simply repeat what they hear or think they hear on CNN and other big American news programs. These dumbass journalists are asked to write an article about a subject they don't understand and therefore quickly read a few high profile articles from big US media and use that as a template to write their own (they do the same when it comes to movies or whatever else that isn't Canadian). Their superiors know no better, hence the article passes and the journalist gets a wink & gun and moves on to write about some sitcom or whatever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tron: Ares | Official Trailer
2
75
2K
Miyazaki’s Slave replied
M3GAN 2.0 Official Trailer
30
2K
bitbydeath replied
GAF’s Official Home Improvement and Repair Thread
15
755
dorkimoe replied
Duster | Official Teaser | Max
8
450
Giallo Corsa replied
Olympics 2024: Summer Games in Paris Official Thread
19 20 21 22 23
1K
54K
12Goblins replied
Top Bottom