|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 8, 2007 21:10:22 GMT -4
Congressman: Dollar Could Collapse To Absolute Zero
Presidential candidate Ron Paul warns of coming global economic depression
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Monday, October 8, 2007
Presidential candidate Ron Paul has made a dire prediction that the dollar could collapse to absolute zero - precipitating hyper inflation, soaring oil prices and a global economic depression if current policies are continued.
"Once they realize the American people have awakened to the con game that's been going on - I think those people running the banking and monetary system aren't going to be too happy," Paul told the Alex Jones Show on Friday.
The Texas Congressman forecasts that if current policies are prolonged, the dollar could crash all the way to nothing and be forced to start over.
(Article continues below)
"If Bush is foolish enough to start bombing Iran, that might precipitate such a crisis as oil going to $200 dollars a barrel and really dampening the enthusiasm of the whole dollar," said Paul.
"If they continue what they're doing, it's gonna go to zero, we're gonna have runaway inflation, all paper currencies eventually self-destruct and are ruined, and we're in uncharted waters right now - this is the first time in the history of man you've had no solid currencies around the world and this has been going on for 35 years."
Paul agreed that elitists would seize upon a global depression by posing as the saviors and offering more control, police state and big government as the solution.
"This was the whole thing that started in the last depression," said Paul, "Scare people to death instead of blaming the Federal Reserve for the depression and the financial bubble of the 20's, they said 'well capitalism failed, it was that stupid gold standard', therefore we have to have welfare and of course everything they did prolonged the depression."
Paul said his warnings about the impending collapse of the U.S. economy, which stretch back years, were helping his campaign gain credibility due to the unfolding crises in the market and the credit crunch.
"When the people understand how the Fed screws up the economy and causes all the bubbles and all the changes that have to come from that, I'm getting a lot more calls," said Paul.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Internet leader in activist media - Prison Planet.tv. Get access to hundreds of special video reports, audio interviews, books and documentary films. Subscribers will be the first to view Alex Jones' new documentary blockbuster End Game in high quality streaming and download. Click here to subscribe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Congressman also discussed the continued success of his campaign and the establishment's attempts to stifle its importance.
The presidential candidate said the reason that the Democrats and Republicans are trying to speed up the primaries is because they don't like competition from third party and grass roots candidates and are trying to prevent them from gaining traction.
"The move right now is to try to close the primaries - do you think they're sincere when they say they want to have a big tent and invite new people in? They can invite a lot of new people in but they don't want constitutionalists evidently because they want to make it tough to vote in a Republican primary," said the Congressman.
"It confirms the fact that the control of this whole system has been one party so to speak, it's one group of people that control both parties and right now I think the people are getting disgusted with it and they're starting to wake up," he added.
The Congressman stated that the popularity of his campaign outstripped even his expectations and slammed the establishment networks for attempting to skew Paul as a fringe candidate.
"It doesn't discourage our supporters, it enrages them," said Paul, "They always claimed that there were just a few of us out there that cared and that they were bloggers manipulating the Internet - well you can't manipulate to the point where you get 35,000 new donors who average about $40 dollars a piece and raise $5 million dollars and outpace many of the other candidates."
Paul said the other candidates had initially tried to ignore his platform, before ridiculing it, to the point where they are now being forced to adopt constitutionalist rhetoric in order to compete with his burgeoning popularity.
|
|
|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 8, 2007 21:17:38 GMT -4
The Ron Paul Breakthrough
His antiwar message is the key to Paul's burgeoning success
by Justin Raimondo
Ron Paul is breaking through. His call to return to the vision of the Founders, and the principles embodied in the Constitution, is piercing the wall of silence that surrounds the conduct of our disgraceful foreign policy. Andrea Mitchell proclaims him the new Howard Dean, network television takes note of his fundraising prowess and the resonance of his message, and then we have this very favorable piece on CNN, not to mention this, this, and this – all of which points to the appearance – or, rather, reappearance – of a resurgent political movement on the horizon: an anti-interventionist wing of the GOP.
Commentators, including those who most definitely look on Paul's success with a very jaundiced eye, are baffled. Why is this happening? How could a mere blip on the electoral screen, a man nobody thought was worth even a footnote in the story of this presidential campaign, suddenly catapult into prominence?
The answer is illustrated in a recent poll, which shows that the majority of Iowa Republicans want us out of Iraq in six months – a far more radical proposition than any of the major Democrats has yet to offer. It's no accident that Paul's political breakthrough is occurring just as the dissatisfaction of the GOP rank and file over the Iraq war issue reaches the breaking point. As the sole antiwar candidate in the Republican field, it makes perfect political sense that Paul's campaign is in the ascendancy.
Yes, of course, there are other issues in this race: the sellout of the conservative agenda on fiscal policy, a wholesale and unrelenting assault on the Bill of Rights, the immigration mess, the spectacle of a "socially conservative" party with a putative presidential front-runner whose private life is neither private nor an example of Christian virtue. Paul has some appeal to GOPers who can't stomach one – or any – of these ideological anomalies.
Yet most of these issues would not be relevant without the single most important question in this election, the answer to which underlies the basic approach of all the presidential candidates, and that is the war – not just the war in Iraq, but the one to come in Iran, as well as the broader "war on terrorism" that has eaten up so much of our attention and resources since 9/11.
For surely Giuliani would have been considered a long shot for the GOP nomination in a world where 9/11 never happened. What would he have run on, without his status as the vaunted hero of 9/11 to constantly fall back on and refer to? His entire campaign is based on the synchronicity of his being in Gracie Mansion as the Twin Towers fell: without that, he'd be somewhere between Mike Huckabee and Tom Tancredo in the polls.
The massive erosion of our civil liberties, the fiscal crisis staring us in the face, and even the immigration quandary have all been either brought to the fore out of relative obscurity or else greatly exacerbated by the post-9/11 hysteria that has so deformed the national consciousness and, consequently, our politics. Underlying all these disparate issues is the foreign policy question, and only Ron Paul is giving Republican voters an answer quite different from, say, Giuliani's – to take a cartoonishly extreme example of the pro-war view.
The media-anointed "front-runner" has problems other than having to explain himself to social conservatives. After all, how many Americans, even including Republicans, really want to see Norman Podhoretz ensconced in the Department of State? Once they hear Poddy's plea to President Bush to please, pretty please start bombing Iran, I'd venture to say not many.
As for the other GOP hopefuls, McCain has run out of gas, with his campaign stalled and his fundraising in free-fall. Why? McCain has been dragged down by the albatross of his more-royalist-than-the-king position on the Iraq war, his signature issue and the one he – mistakenly – built his entire campaign around. Fred Thompson has proved a dud, even less inspiring than the Stepford candidate, with all of Reagan's vagueness and none of his charm or acumen. The second- and third-tier candidates display an alarming lack when it comes to having either a clear ideological message or any particular brand of charisma (except for Alan Keyes, whose brand of charisma, like his ideology, is so idiosyncratic that it cancels itself out). Huckabee should announce he's running for vice president and be done with it, and the others amount to little more than vanity campaigns. By means of a simple process of elimination, Republicans are left with Ron Paul as the only alternative to ideological bankruptcy and looming political disaster.
The approach the chattering classes have taken to the Ron Paul phenomenon has been classic, rather along the lines of Gandhi's famous aphorism: first they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.
The "let's ignore him and maybe he'll go away" phase ended right after the contretemps with Giuliani over the theory of "blowback." Giuliani's verbal assault on Paul condensed the ridicule-fight-victory process into a single, signal incident. What Giuliani and his enablers in the media failed to realize is that Paul's calm, considered, and thoughtful answer resonated with many voters.
The Iraq war has opened this entire question up as it relates to 9/11, a subject that was previously taboo, as Susan Sontag, Bill Maher, the Dixie Chicks, and any number of Andrew Sullivan's enemies, both real and imagined, learned to their sorrow. The war dramatized exactly what the critics of American foreign policy had been pointing out, to little effect, for years: that hostility toward America and the gathering terrorist threat were blowback from our actions overseas.
Rudy Giuliani is going around the country hectoring audiences with his Podhoretzian message of a civilizational war between the U.S. empire and international Islam: They hate us, he yells, they really hate us for who we are! Yes, but who are "we," exactly? If we're starting with the speaker of those words, then no wonder they hate us, but, aside from that, what's the problem? Is it our obsession with Britney Spears – or is it the bombs raining down on the Arab world, the propping up of killer regimes like Hosni Mubarak's in Egypt and the House of Saud, and our unconditional support for Israeli aggression (and not just against the Palestinians)?
Ron Paul has an answer quite different from the one usually given – or, I should say, the one allowed – by the self-appointed arbiters of political correctness: the debate "moderators," the pundits and television talkers, the "analysts" and "experts" who, like ancient seers examining the entrails of goats, interpret the meaning of political actors and events for us.
We have, however, outgrown such superstitions and no longer need or want the guidance of the gatekeepers, who have traditionally guarded the door to social and political "legitimacy" with jealous vigor. All their vigor and jealousy failed against a technology that simply outflanked them, took them by surprise, and laid siege to their journalistic fortress. These mandarins hid behind the Times-Select wall to the bitter end but couldn't keep it up indefinitely: there is no better symbol of the gatekeepers' fall. It was only a matter of time before that wall came down – and, with it, the whole concept of "mainstream" thought presided over by guardians of the permissible. The leveling of the playing field, made possible by the cybernetic revolution, has ended the intellectual and political monopoly of the elites. It's no wonder that the Paul campaign has such a massive online presence.
Furthermore, the existence of the Internet, far from destroying journalism, as predicted by some die-hard dead-tree'ers, has forced the "mainstream" media to be more responsive and flexible. That's why they're now paying attention to the Paul campaign: Ron is news, big-time political news. He's drawing thousands to his campaign rallies, a boast not many presidential candidates of either party can credibly make. And he's raking in the money. This quarter, he's brought in almost as much as McCain, and he's third – behind Giuliani and Romney – in the cash-on-hand sweepstakes. Money talks – and now they have to take him seriously.
The establishment has fallen back on their second line of defense: they ridicule him as a "kook," a "loon," and even a "bigot" – in short, they're trotting out the same attack strategy they used to target another rebel against the party establishment, true-blue conservative-slash libertarian Barry Goldwater.
Back in 1964, when the electorate was still in thrall to the gatekeepers' media machine, this tactic was quite effective. Today, however, this ploy has the effect of underscoring the depth of Paul's challenge to the political status quo, thereby enhancing his appeal. It works rather like the concept of blowback in the foreign policy realm: just as U.S. military intervention invites an equal and opposite reaction from its overseas victims, so the intervention of our political elites against the rising Paulian grassroots insurgency guarantees his base of support will expand.
Ignore, ridicule, attack – we're about into the third phase, and I expect that will commence shortly. Perhaps as shortly as the next GOP debate, and certainly right after. The neoconservatives have been the target of Paul's scorn on several occasions, and he is likely to receive it back in kind before long. Aside from Jonah Goldberg's ill-informed renunciation of Robert A. Taft and a few bouts of snickering at The Corner, National Review has so far kept its trap shut tight about the Texas troublemaker, even going so far as to exclude him from their daily compilation of stories about the GOP primary campaign. I have the feeling, however, that their silence is about to end, and Ron is about to join the ranks of the "unpatriotic conservatives." After all, the neocons have to somehow stop the erosion of their base at the hands of someone who so clearly understands the role of neoconservatism as a cancer eating away at the heart of the GOP and the conservative movement.
In their view, Paul is falling for the line of the "Left" that America is fighting a futile war against forces it neither understands nor has any hope of controlling, and yet if this was truly a "leftist" idea one would imagine that the Left would come to Paul's defense – but, no. The same "Ron is nuts" meme being spread by neocon snarkers on the right side of the blogosphere is being echoed by the "center" liberal-left. You see, anyone who opposes the system that makes imperialism possible – the mercantilist, state-capitalist system of corruption that enriches the few at the expense of the many – is "crazy."
Maybe he's just crazy enough to think our rulers will let him, or anyone with a major public platform, get away with exposing the full extent of their corruption – and thank God for that.
The Good Doctor is not alone in prescribing a change – a radical change – in our stance toward the rest of the world. You're hearing it not only on the Washington cocktail party circuit, but around the office water cooler: it's time to start disengaging from the mess our interventionist policymakers have created, starting in the Middle East. In carrying this stance into the arena of GOP presidential politics, Ron is a libertarian-noninterventionist gladiator taking on several lions at once. The resulting knockdown drag-out battle, regardless of its outcome, is going to be fun to watch.
|
|
|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 10, 2007 21:33:47 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 10, 2007 21:37:50 GMT -4
According to an MSNBC online poll participated by over 16,000 people, Texas Congressman Ron Paul won the GOP Michigan debate in a landslide. Sister-station, CNBC, who hosted the debate also had an online poll but they, like Pajamas Media, took it down when they saw that the most conservative congressman in office was winning by such a wide margin. When asked who they thought was standing out from the pack, Paul, who favors the legalization of marijuana, the abolition of Income Tax, and for Presidents to be forced to declare war through Congress before bombing and invading other countries, received 83% of the online vote. On the question of which candidate shows the most leadership qualities, the only GOP candidate who agrees with the majority of the US population in saying that the troops in Iraq should be brought home immediately, Paul got 81% of the vote. Critics poo-poo the results claiming that Paul supporters "spam" these polls. Fox News host Sean Hannity, upon hearing that Paul had won the Fox News debate told his viewers that they were cheaters, despite the fact that it was a text poll meaning there could only be one vote per cell phone. But it was CBS who said that it's the millions of dollars he's raised that is making it harder for people to ignore him, but practice makes perfect! Ron Paul has been winning these online polls and straw votes now for months. If he has this organized, underground cabal of Internet geeks - why have none of their scheming emails surfaced? If it's so easy that even Ron freakin Paul can do it, why have none of the other candidates been able to motivate and mobilize their alleged supporters to log on to the computer after one of these debates? Fred Thompson has had months to prepare out of the spotlight and he can only get 505 votes on the MSNBC poll for Leadership Quality? Or is the next allegation going to be that Ron Paul supporters have figured out how to take votes away from other candidates. CNBC should be ashamed of itself for opening up a poll and taking it down when the person who they want to win doesn't look very good on it. That website is a professional site, owned by a media giant. If months into a race, CNBC can't figure out how to run a fair, reliable, accurate poll, they shouldn't put it up in the first place. Make people register for your dumb site if you don't trust em. Weed out duplicate IP addresses. Make them do something that takes several steps like a word verification followed by an email verification bounce back dealie. Sorry you're going to have to work a teensy bit on something as insignificant as to what your readers and viewers think would make the best GOP presidential candidate, but halfassing things isn't attractive. MORE>>> laist.com/2007/10/10/ron_paul_wins_michigan.php |
|
|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 10, 2007 21:44:52 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 10, 2007 22:03:04 GMT -4
My family are life long patriotic people. They consist of doctors, small business owners, tax reps and all of my family served this country. Grandfathers served in WWII, uncles in 'Nam and my father is retired Army. Every single one of them supports Dr. Paul. Im a conservative. More importantly Im an American that believes in America and the document it was founded upon. I dont believe in either 'party'. Neither has done much to protect our liberties or our financial security. Both want more government programs, will find ways to either tax or inflate and more regulations shoved down our throats. Clinton wont say she will pull the troops, Obama wont pull the troops, Richardson just changed his position. You want out of Iraq? ELECT RON PAUL! Who really wants more of the same sh*t? Bush-Clinton-Clinton-Bush-Bush-CLINTON?  ?? You gotta be insane to want to keep this same mess up. The middle class is vanishing, the illegals are pouring into this country, the value of our money is losing and we are going BROKE! Meanwhile, we hear from the Dems that they want to give 'amnesty' under these economic conditions? Instead of dealing with the problem, as Ron Paul proposes, ending birthright citizenship so we dont subsidize and encourage MORE illegal aliens. What a great idea.. dont give them incentive and they probably wont come. I often think that the reason nobody is doing anything about illegal immigration is partly due to the NAU. If America lets the North American Union get a foot in this country, you can kiss the American Dream goodbye. 'They call it the American Dream because you gotta be asleep to believe it.' G. Carlin MORE>>> www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/10/10/antiwar-group-releases-a_n_67822.html |
|
|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 11, 2007 18:51:47 GMT -4
Ron Paul Wins Debate In Another Landslide Congressman comes out on top despite being given least time, least questions and despite CNBC pulling its poll half way through MORE>>> infowars.net/articles/october2007/111007Paul.htm Steve Watson Infowars.net Thursday, Oct 11, 2007 Ron Paul won another debate by a landslide this week despite efforts on the part of the mainstream media to limit the Congressman's exposure and to force Rudy Giuliani down the necks of viewers. According to an MSNBC online poll participated by over 22,000 people, Texas Congressman Ron Paul won the Tuesday night GOP Michigan debate in a landslide. As shown in the screenshot, when asked who they thought was standing out from the pack, Paul received 86% of the online vote. Critics have again charged that the polls were deluged by Ron Paul internet spammers. Recently hacks such as Sean Hannity and others have suggested their own polls have been fixed simply because Ron Paul won them. (Article continues below) In a familiar move CNBC even removed its own poll on Tuesday night just hours after the debate had ended when they realized Ron Paul was winning by such a wide margin. Many Neo-Con blog sites do not even include Ron Paul in their polls anymore because too many people are voting for him! This is not as a result of one person voting multiple times, as in all the online polls only one vote per IP address is allowed, but the operators of the site simply don't like Ron Paul and have chosen to ignore reality and pretend that he doesn't exist. In another poll this week, so called "conservative" bloggers listed Paul as their most hated "person on the right", even though he is the most conservative Congressman in office! In addition to CNBC pulling their poll, and continued attacks on the Congressman, the anchors of the debate on Tuesday night only allowed Paul a total of 5:44 minutes to speak, just over 6.5% of the time allotted in total to all candidates. In addition Dr Paul was only asked 7 questions, where as Giuliani and Fred Thompson were both asked over double that amount. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ALEX JONES' ENDGAME will be released on the WEB OCT. 26 and on DVD on NOV. 1 View High Quality Trailers at www.endgamethemovie.com---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- See opposite for the figures (courtesy Marc Parent) Ron Paul wowed viewers once again both during the debate and afterwards as he slammed the candidates who willingly accepted the idea of striking Iran from the air without the authorization of Congress: "Why don't we just open up the Constitution and read it? You're not allowed to go to war without a declaration of war. Now, as far as fleeting enemies goes, yes-- if there's an imminent attack on us. We've never had that happen to us in 220 years. The idea that Iran could pose an imminent attack on the United States is preposterous. There's no way." "This is just war propaganda preparing this nation to go to war and spread this war not only into Iraq but into Iran unconstitutionally. It is a road to disaster for us as a nation. It is the road to our financial disaster if we don't read the Constitution once in a while." Afterwards the Congressman hit out at the current Administration, describing them as "all big government people" and calling for massive cuts in spending. |
|
|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 13, 2007 23:11:19 GMT -4
Saturday, October 13, 2007 Ron Paul Wins AL Straw Poll By Landslide, Again! mparent7777-2.blogspot.com/2007/10/ron-paul-wins-al-straw-poll-by.htmlFor some reason, news of landslide victories for Ron Paul doesn’t get old for me. This time, I’ve had the privilege of observing the action in person. Today’s straw poll is being held in Jefferson County, Alabama! The results are as follows: Ron Paul - 115 Fred Thompson - 31 Rudy Giuliani - 18 Mitt Romney - 16 Mike Huckabee - 8 Duncan Hunter - 5 John McCain - 3 Cort - 1 Undecided - 1 Sam Brownback - 1 Tom Tancredo - 0 Posted by CRIMES AND CORRUPTION OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER NEWS mparent7777 Marc Parent CCNWON at 11:09 AM Labels: GOP, poll, President 2008, Republicans, Ron Paul 6 comments: Anonymous said... who are the 83 idiots who didn't support Ron Paul? Saturday, October 13, 2007 scott said... wow its amazing how we can fix the polls on the internets as well as the straw polls. grassroots rules!!! Saturday, October 13, 2007 scott said... we control the polls on the internets and now we control the straw polls. boowaahahhaa!! grassroot activism at it's finest! gotta go watch ron paul videos so i can skew the youtube # of hits too... Saturday, October 13, 2007 Anonymous said... I wonder if Ron Paul wins, will he Clean House (both houses) Saturday, October 13, 2007 scott said... wow its amazing how we can fix the polls on the internets as well as the straw polls. grassroots rules!!! Saturday, October 13, 2007 |
|
|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 14, 2007 7:10:15 GMT -4
2008 ELECTION PREDICTION: RON PAUL WILL BE USED TO HELP HILLARY WIN.. HERE'S HOW Posted By: RayelansMailbag <Send E-Mail> Date: Friday, 12 October 2007, 9:11 p.m. From my Blog: Okay, here goes... On the Republican side the nominee will be Rudy Giuliani. He has too many media and Republican insiders in his corner to lose the nomination. Unless he screws up on the campaign trail he will win. He will probably choose Mitt Romney as his VP. This will shore up East Coast support for the Republican Party that is needed to win a nationwide election since the South will lean Republican anyway. The current relationship between Giuliani and Romney reminds me of Reagan and George H.W. Bush before the 1980 election. They verbally tangled a few times, but after Reagan pulled it off he tapped Bush for the VP slot. Same thing here. Fred Thompson is a distraction and won't go anywhere. On the Democrat side Hillary will be the candidate. No question about it. However, I hear many people talking about a Clinton/Obama ticket in '08. Won't happen folks. She will tap either Bill Richardson or Wes Clark, possibly Senator Even Bayh. She needs someone to "balance" her out. Richardson and Clark are part of the "Clinton Machine" and obvious choices. Here is where it gets interesting. On the wildcard side Ron Paul will run as a third party or independent candidate after he loses the Republican primaries. He has too much momentum, supporters and money to stop now. I suspect there are some back-door deals happening that will ensure he runs in the general election. This will hand the election to Hillary Clinton. Watch Paul closely. He is being set up for this now. There will be a phony grassroots movement that will demand he continue after the primaries so the "voice of the people" can be heard. The media will warm up to him AFTER the primaries. Mark my words folks. It's coming. Chad Miles 2006 Republican Candidate 14th Congresional District, MI Phone (313) 690-3010 chad@chadmilesforcongress.com www.chadmilesforcongress.com |
|
|
|
Post by bubbadebubba on Oct 14, 2007 13:53:58 GMT -4
I've never heard so much balderdash in one forum since I've been chatting.
|
|
|
|
Post by shortcircuit on Oct 14, 2007 16:13:48 GMT -4
I've never heard so much balderdash in one forum since I've been chatting.  |
|
|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 14, 2007 20:56:32 GMT -4
Saturday, October 13th, 2007 at 9:08 pm
Ron Paul wins Conservative Leadership Conference Straw Poll
Stephen Fountain
BREAKING NEWS! Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has won the inaugural Conservative Leadership Conference straw poll. Despite not appearing at the conference, Paul won convincingly with 33% of the vote. Mitt Romney, who addressed the conference in a town hall meeting and during a general session, finished second with 16%. Duncan Hunter, who also delivered a major address during the three-day event, finished third at 15%.
The Full Results:
Ron Paul
32.80%
Mitt Romney
16.13%
Duncan Hunter
14.52%
Undecided
11.29%
Fred Thompson
7.53%
Rudy Giuliani
6.45%
Alan Keyes
3.76%
Mike Huckabee
3.23%
Tom Tancredo
1.61%
John McCain
1.08%
Other
1.08%
Sam Brownback
0.54%
|
|
|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 16, 2007 17:41:18 GMT -4
WHAT AMERICA NEEDS-Ron Paul CNBC learns not to 'mess with' Ron Paul, followersDavid Edwards and Muriel Kane Published: Tuesday October 16, 2007 more>>> rawstory.com/news/2007/John_Harwood_After_poll_removal_CNBC_1016.html Print This Email This CNBC Washington correspondent John Harwood asked former Representative Joe Scarborough on Tuesday to tell him what Rep. Ron Paul is really like, because he's been amazed to discover lately that "if you mess with Ron Paul on television or online, you are going to feel the wrath of some serious followers." Harwood explained that when CNBC did an online poll of who won the last GOP presidential debate on October 9, "Ron Paul dominated the debate, and some of my colleagues at CNBC thought that there was something wrong with that and they took the poll down. I want to tell you, my email box, thousands and thousands and thousands of email, like I haven't seen from any other -- you know, followers of Chris Dodd or Bill Richardson or Joe Biden." Two days after the debate, CNBC Managing Editor Allen Wastler posted "An Open Letter to the Ron Paul Faithful" at the CNBC website, in which he accused them of having hacked the poll. Wastler wrote, "You guys are good. Real good. You are truly a force on World Wide Web and I tip my hat to you. ... You folks are obviously well-organized and feel strongly about your candidate and I can't help but admire that. But you also ruined the purpose of the poll." However, the very next day, Harwood himself posted "My Open Letter To Ron Paul Supporters," in which he apologetically stated, "I agree with the complaints. I do not believe our poll was 'hacked.' Nor do I agree with my colleagues' decision to take it down, though I know they were acting in good faith. ... I have no reason to believe anything corrupt occurred with respect to our poll. To the contrary, I believe the results we measured showing an impressive 75% naming Paul reflect the organization and motivation of Paul's adherents. This is precisely what unscientific surveys of this kind are created to measure." Joe Scarborough responded to Harwood's question by saying that Ron Paul has widespread appeal, with signs all over college campuses and traditional conservatives, libertarians, and even people on the far left responding positively to his positions on the war and on civil liberties. He added, though, that in the House of Representatives, "Everybody's thought that he's been crazy for a while, as far as too conservative, too libertarian. ... He's a very independent guy. He doesn't play by the rules." Scarborough further noted that if Paul were to run for president as an independent, it "would be really bad news for the Republicans." He then seemed to think better of his earlier remark about Paul's colleagues considering him crazy, concluding, "He's an extremely impressive man, he's brilliant ... and everybody's excited about this guy." The following video is from MSNBC's Morning Joe, broadcast on October 16, 2007. |
|
|
|
Post by bubbadebubba on Oct 17, 2007 5:46:09 GMT -4
sometimeman-what asylum did Ron Paul escape from?
|
|
|
|
Post by sometimeman on Oct 17, 2007 7:09:19 GMT -4
USA Senate, by way of Texas
|
|
?? You gotta be insane to want to keep this same mess up. The middle class is vanishing, the illegals are pouring into this country, the value of our money is losing and we are going BROKE!
