SIU questions media over Ron Paul

[Medios]

http://media.www.siude.com/media/storag ... storiestab

This article brings up some interesting points about the media lies.

Ron Paul 08

[Tap]

He refuses to go on the Glenn Beck program. The point was made that he has about 2% of the vote mainly due to low publicity. He's been heckled that for someone who wants to get the word out about who he is and what he stands for, he refuses to go on many national radio talk shows due to the fact he has a hard time answering question and during interviews has displayed the behavior of someone being trapped in a corner. I don't know anything about Ron Paul other than the fact he doesn't step up and either acknowledge
or deny his critics. That fact in itself, isn't very re-assuring.

Oh don't worry, I'm sure this post will be removed before too many people get to read it.

[Weasel]

I read it Tap!

[Medios]

Did you actually research any of the polls? The media is clearly trying to bash him. I have watched several of the debates and his ideas are sound. It is amazing to me the way the media covers the candidates. I could tell that Hillary Clinton and Rudy Guiliani had the media support over a year ago. It is obvious if you watch any tv and take third party perspective. The real reason a candidate like Ron Paul won't win is because the bankers will have him killed.

[Weasel]

Since this topic is on it's own thread, I hope it won't be deleted.

I hold the media (as a gross generalization) at about the same level of esteem as a particularly nasty-smelling piece of day-old dog turd on the sidewalk. The media is unbelievably biased, could not tell the truth without distortion or half-truths or out-of-context quotes if their lives depended on it.. and in fact it would seem their lives are on the line economically speaking, which is abundantly clear if you look at NY Times' plummeting stock values. They have waaaay to much ability to sway public opinion, mainly because most of the public have too much faith in them, which is entirely undeserved in recent times. They are bottom-feeding scum. Fortunately people are starting to wake up to this, but way too slowly imho.

/rant.

[blackmore]

I know little about him, other than what I read on wikipedia. However, how much of what he says he believes in are under the authority of the president to enact, especially with a democratic congress and house? Even if republicans managed to take control again, how many of his beliefs would have majority support to get bills passed, so that they can be sent to him to be signed?

[Medios]

Just like presidents before him signed executive orders to get the ball rolling on laws or to just plain enforce something of his own. If the courts do not rule against an executive order it is the same as law. Since the executive branch controls the military it has the power to enforce anything it theoretically wants. Ron Paul wants "sound money". He also wonders why we borrow money from the Central Bank err I mean Federal Reserve. The Dept of Treasury should have the power to print money interest free. He also believes in small Federal Government and more laws being controlled by the States. Its Amendment 10 to the Bill of Rights. Out of all the tyrants he is the only one willing to stand up and fight for less control.

Mike

[Mosaix]

This is a slothmud game website right? Im sure there are forums and blogs for presidental candidates out there. Trying to stir up what maybe 20 people on this crier doesnt serve the candidate much purpose. The question is why does Mike feel the need to play politics on a sloth game website? Dogs got that boring to play?

If I want to be annoyed with the government I can turn on any news channel, left, right, or whomever. It doesnt need to be on this site.
Have some respect for other people Mike.

Most of what you said has value, the candidate appears to have some value, but it just doesnt need to be here.

Would a kind immortal please take a second and remove this entire thread.

[Weasel]

first amendment yo.

Is it really a problem Mos? - I can certainly relate when existing threads are hijacked, but in this case Medios had the intelligence to create a new thread specifically for the subject.. then again, we don't want hundreds of irrelevant (to sloth) new threads jamming up the place either, so maybe you have a point..

meh. up to the admins.

[banedon]

this forum may be for the mud, but look at the section this thread is in - GENERAL CHAT - meaning anything is open for discussion, within the bounds of decency and taste. asking the imms to delete this thread is disrupting and ignoting the very thing americans have fought so hard for so long to preserve, basic civil freedoms, namely the freedom of expression. if you dont like whats in a thread, dont read it. just let the rest of us exercise our rights to talk about whatever we want (within reason) or sound as intelligent or insanely ignorant as we want (*poke* tap)

flame away, im a proud american and i will take the heat to defend our rights, and the rights of anyone using this forum hosted on american soil any day of the week

[osric]

I think Ron Paul might be the only Republican worth voting for, its odd be he seems to actually be a real human being. I checked out his site, I don't agree with the guy about everything but at least he is not some knee jerk reactionary, his stands actually seem thought out. The places we disagree I can't fault him for, I mean I can't expect a guy who delivers babies to be pro choice, it would kinda put him outa work.

[Alberich]

more importantly the man's a firm libertarian. It really doesn't matter if people agree with him, or he with them - not everyones going to agree, the point is, it's not a governments responsibility to pass laws dictating what is and isn't ok, based on a random group getting their panties in a bunch and making lots of noise about it. It shouldn't matter if you agree with a candidates personal beliefs, as those should not be a large factor in their performance - their job is not (supposedly) to impose their own ideas on a nation, or do what they feel is 'best', but to faithfully uphold the Constitution, which is pretty explicit about what the government can and cannot do. Most of the areas where I'd personally disagree with Dr. Paul are moot, as while there may be personal disagreements, he shows no desire to inflict ideas on others through government, which stands out in itself. Not to say I agree with the other running republicans (or certainly any of the democrats) on more than a bare handful of issues, but even where I tend to agree with others, I have problems with their concepts of implementation, which is invariably through more laws, more resolutions, more taxes, more police, more everything that's slowly rotting away at this country.

[mudder]

[quote="banedon":2ghzx0ia] asking the imms to delete this thread is disrupting and ignoting the very thing americans have fought so hard for so long to preserve[/quote:2ghzx0ia]

I'm not an american, can I delete it?

I've no idea who you're all talking about and have no opinions on the matter, but it does always amuse me that you americans seem to have a habit of assuming that the whole world revolves around you, your news and your political intrigues. Frankly most of the world couldn't care less.

[13]

once again I had a whole thing typed up and scrapped it at the last moment.

[Autolycos]

[quote="Weasel":c6c5dioj]Since this topic is on it's own thread, I hope it won't be deleted.
I hold the media (as a gross generalization) at about the same level of esteem as a particularly nasty-smelling piece of day-old dog turd on the sidewalk. The media is unbelievably biased, could not tell the truth without distortion or half-truths or out-of-context quotes if their lives depended on it.. /rant.[/quote:c6c5dioj]

btw Weasel...

there is no real comparison... a turd does not try to influence you to believe that it is not a turd but yet a glimmering diamond on the forefront of tomorrow....