Ron Paul Upsets Controlled-Media Debate as Clear Winner, VIDEO

[pisshead]

i can understand why the big government, interventionist socialists who claim to be republican don't like ron paul...the constitution threatens their dictatorship that keeps us safe from the freedom hating muslims who really hate freedom...a lot...

Ron Paul Upsets Controlled-Media Debate as Clear Winner
Pundits & Candidates Seek to Exile Statesman from Republican Party-- In Spite of Leading Poll Numbers-- Over His Anti-Torture, Anti-War and Anti-Tax Standpoint

Aaron Dykes & Alex Jones / Jones Report | May 15, 2007 (http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/150507_ron_paul_debate.html)


Congressman Ron Paul shook the establishment in last night's second round of 2008 Republican debates for the Presidency. Not only did his anti-war, anti-torture and pro-liberty platform stand glaring in the face of those political whores dubbed as "top-tier" but he managed to catch the ire of 9/11 criminal Rudy Giuliani for daring to suggest aggressive foreign policy would stir up blowback.
What's worse, Ron Paul interrupted the worship of establishment-selected candidates by winning the debate's own poll and forcing FOX to cover the mere "second-tier" candidate-- a distinction mainstream media have been using to marginalize those outside of direct control.

Ron Paul's performance in his second debate victory-- as moderators repeatedly suggest he doesn't belong in the Republican party
Ron Paul garnered approximately 20 minutes of air-time on Fox alone last night-- including about 10 minutes of debate questions and another 10 minutes composed of attacks and dismissals by pundits, other candidates and an interview with Hannity & Colmes.
Sean Hannity stated his "surprise" that Ron Paul was leading with 30% of the FOX News text-message poll vote, despite that fact that he also won the Republican debates on MSNBC (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/040507ronpaul.htm)-- a fact which the media under-reported and even censored (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/070507ronpaul.htm).
At the time of press, Ron Paul also had a distinct lead-- by a huge margin-- in the MSNBC poll regarding the South Carolina Republican debate (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18661344/).
Alan Colmes probed to understand how Ron Paul could emerge the decisive leader in an otherwise revolting adherence to policies advocating war expansion and unrestrained use of "extreme interrogation tactics" which skirt the damning name of "torture."
Fellow "second-tier" candidate Duncan Hunter attributed Ron Paul's dominance in the FOX text-message poll to his "entertainment value," insinuating that his policies and views (including the controversy generated over 9/11 comments) could not be taken seriously.

GOPAC chairman Michael Steele went so far as to suggest that Ron Paul should not belong to the Republican party, stating that he was "done" with Paul and did not care what the results of the FOX poll were.
Debate moderators pointed out Congressman Paul's distinction as the only Republican candidate who voted against military action in Iraq as they repeatedly demanded that he answer to being in the 'wrong party' or 'not fitting in with the Republican party.' Ron Paul answered smartly-- pointing out that he wanted to lead the country, not the party, and that 65-70% of the country was against the Iraq war and long for an end to the mired conflict.
Regardless, he was attacked for his adherence to non-interventionist philosophy and defamed as some kind of 9/11 heretic-- as various pundits pretended he had faltered in the debates and claimed that anonymous South Carolina Republicans had reached consensus on the idea that Ron Paul "did not acquit himself" and must be discarded.

Ron Paul is defamed by pundits and candidates alike who make
excuses for his poll victory.
One pundit even goes so far to suggest that Ron Paul's success in the poll was due primarily to attention won after Giuliani attacked him on 9/11 statements, as well as organizational prowess amongst text-messaging voters.
Sean Hannity refused to believe Ron Paul won the debate, claiming he didn't have the opportunity to text in his vote.
Yet, as Ron Paul continued to win the debate poll, the live-results format pigeonholed FOX News into ongoing coverage of the winner-- as his only competition in poll results came from Mitt Romney, who briefly led the poll with 27% when Ron Paul had only 26%.
It is continually suggested that "second-tier" candidates such drop from the race and make way for the "first-tier" candidates to shine, though the only vote process at this stage-- polls-- all indicate Ron Paul as a likely winner and certainly a top contender.

During a post-debate interview with Hannity & Colmes, Ron Paul
discusses his differences in foreign policy and much more. Giuliani
elaborates on his reaction to Ron Paul's unsettling statements.
Though they would like to exclude him from future debates, his back-to-back debate victory may force moderators into a position of having to invite Ron Paul-- for the time being.

[pisshead]

Ron Paul: Republicans need Reagan's courage (http://prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/160507Paul.htm)
Audience Applauds As Giuliani, Tancredo Endorse Waterboarding Torture (http://prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/160507Audience.htm)
Romney calls for doubling Guantanamo population (http://prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/160507Romney.htm)
Fox News SPINS Ron Paul's Early Success in Polls 2nd Debate (http://prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/160507SPINS.htm)
Carl Cameron Gives Negative Spin To Ron Paul's Lead In Viewer Poll (http://prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/160507Cameron.htm)

[pisshead]

Ron Paul gains support in second GOP debate Michael Hampton
Homeland Stupidity (http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/05/16/ron-paul-gains-support-in-second-gop-debate/)
Wednesday May 16, 2007
For those who doubted that Rep. Ron Paul was a serious contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, the debate Tuesday night in South Carolina put all doubts to rest. Paul stirred up a firestorm of controversy for suggesting that the Department of Homeland Security made national security even more inefficient after September 11 than before, and especially for his assertion that U.S. foreign policy over the past several decades contributed to the rise of Islamic terrorism.
But viewers at home responded, putting Ron Paul in second place in FOXâ??s own tamper-proof viewer poll (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,272493,00.html).
As opposed to the largely conservative FOX viewers, MSNBCâ??s interactive post-debate poll (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18659382/), with more moderate viewers, puts Ron Paul squarely at the top of the heap among that networkâ??s viewers.
And his assertions are not without merit.
Last week, the Government Accountability Office reported (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07833t.pdf) (PDF) that DHS â??lacks a comprehensive integration strategy with overall goals, a timeline, appropriate responsibility and accountability determinations, and a dedicated team to support its efforts.â?� DHS still doesnâ??t have a plan to â??deal with its many management challenges . . . could have serious consequences for our homeland security.â?�
Paul said during the debate that we had all the dots to put together the 9/11 plot and stop the attackers, but the bureaucracy was too inefficient to connect the dots. So in response, the government created even more inefficient bureaucracy.
Indeed, sharing of intelligence even between federal agencies, let alone with state and local agencies, still hasnâ??t improved that much since 9/11. Another GAO audit (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07822t.pdf) (PDF) last week found that the Homeland Security Information Network, meant to share intelligence with state and local officials, is doing a poor job and is largely redundant, since states and localities have already set up information-sharing networks, which DHS has failed to plug into. Weâ??re little closer to being able to connect the dots, and all we have is a new â??giant bureaucracyâ?� eating up billions of taxpayer dollars to show for it.
Thatâ??s right, instead of real security, weâ??ve gotten real incompetence.
Citing the Central Intelligence Agencyâ??s â??blowbackâ?� principle, Paul explained that U.S. intervention in Middle Eastern affairs over the past several decades contributed to anti-American sentiment and helped create enemies (http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2004/12/05/terrorism-will-get-worse-before-it-gets-better/), some of whom are todayâ??s terrorists. This didnâ??t go over too well with Rudy Giuliani, who seems to know little about U.S. foreign policy for someone who supposedly led his city through the worst international terrorist attack in U.S. history.
â??They attack us because weâ??ve been over there. Weâ??ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years. â?¦ Weâ??ve been in the Middle East,â?� Paul said in explaining his opposition to going to war in Iraq. â??Right now, weâ??re building an embassy in Iraq that is bigger than the Vatican. Weâ??re building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting.
â??They are delighted that weâ??re over there because Usama bin Laden has said, â??Iâ??m glad youâ??re over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.â?? They have already now since that time theyâ??ve killed 3,400 of our men and I donâ??t think it was necessary,â?� he continued.
â??Thatâ??s really an extraordinary statement,â?� Giuliani said, interrupting FOX News panelist Wendell Goler. â??Thatâ??s really an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of Sept. 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I donâ??t think I have ever heard that before and I have heard some pretty absurd explanations for Sept. 11. I would ask the congressman withdraw that comment and tell us that he didnâ??t really mean that.â?� â?? FOX News (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,272594,00.html)
It goes back far before Desert Storm, as Paul pointed out, citing Reagan sending the Marines into Lebanon in 1983, saying â??I will never turn tail and run,â?� and then pulling them back out after realizing just how â??irrationalâ?� they are over there.
The only people who really reacted negatively to this were the handpicked debate audience, who applauded Giuliani for his ridiculous outburst and poor understanding of just what it is weâ??re up against.
While I rarely write about it, I follow the war in Iraq and other U.S. counterterrorism activities very closely. Ronald Reagan was right when he called them â??irrational,â?� and so is Ron Paul. Indulge me for a moment while I quote from possibly the greatest military strategist of all time:
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. â?? Sun Tzu, The Art of War (http://www.chinapage.com/sunzi-e.html)
Sound familiar? The reason weâ??re suffering so badly in Iraq is that weâ??ve failed to know and truly understand our enemy. We failed in 1967, we failed in 1983, we failed in 2001, and we have failed today. The party line is that the Islamic jihadists hate us and our freedom and want to establish a global Islamic caliphate, dominating the world under Sharia law. Some people in this country claim that every Muslim wants this. (This is kind of like saying that the Church of Scientology represents all of Christendom.) The reality is quite a bit more complex than that.
Speaking of which, itâ??s probably more accurate to think of Al Qaeda and their associated jihadists as a religious cult. This is, after all, exactly how they act. We already know how to deal with religious cults, and it doesnâ??t involve long, protracted wars in the desert halfway around the world.
One last thing Ron Paul has been at pains to point out is that itâ??s left-leaning Democrats who have gotten us into the vast majority of conflicts in the last century, and conservative Republicans who have gotten us out of the vast majority of them. We must certainly be ready to defend ourselves (http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/10/01/how-to-win-the-war-on-terror/) from those who would attack us and have attacked us. If Iâ??m around when somebody starts shooting people in a shopping mall, heâ??s getting two to the chest and one to the head. But we should not be picking fights (http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2005/11/17/more-americans-support-libertarian-foreign-policy/), especially with people we donâ??t understand. We should instead open commerce and trade and let other countries sort out their own problems. Thatâ??s been the American way since the beginning, and itâ??s about time conservatives started being conservative again.
Iâ??m apparently not the only person who thinks so; Ron Paul gained 25% of the vote in FOXâ??s more secure viewer poll of largely conservative viewers, coming in just behind Mitt Romney at 29% and far ahead of Guiliani at 19%. Supposed first tier candidate John McCain has fallen to the back of the pack with the rest of the second-tier candidates. Itâ??s going to be much more difficult for the mainstream media to keep up their blissful, deliberate ignorance now.

[Zimzum]

If Ron really wants to win he needs to get his ass on the daily show and colbert report. Outside of the internet he is still a no name.

May 16, 2007
Press Release
Why Hasnâ??t Rudy Giuliani Read the 9-11 Commission Report? (http://www.ronpaul2008.typepad.com/)


May 16, 2007

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

ARLINGTON, VA â?? During the "First in the South" GOP debate in South Carolina last night, one thing was made clear: Rudy Giuliani does not understand how to keep America safe.

When Congressman Ron Paul, who has long served on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, explained how 50 years of American interventionism in the Middle East has helped compromise our national security, Giuliani interrupted saying he had "never heard anything so absurd." This statement is particularly troubling coming from the former mayor who tries to cast himself as a security expert, since Dr. Paul's point comes directly from the bi-partisan 9-11 Commission Report.

"Rudy Giuliani has tip-toed around the issues of abortion, guns and marriage. The only issue he has left is security, and he doesn't even get that right," said campaign chairman Kent Snyder. "It is clear from his interruption that former Mayor Giuliani has not read the 9-11 Commission Report and has no clue on how to keep America safe."

[Psycho4Bud]

I was especially intrigued with his comment regarding Osama Bin Ladens actions/involvement during 9-11.:D

â??They attack us because weâ??ve been over there. Weâ??ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years. â?¦ Weâ??ve been in the Middle East,â?� Paul said:S2:I can just see A.J. stomping his lil' feet under his desk at that one!:S2:

Have a good one!:s4:

[eg420ne]

WoW dude you really are kicking out that me-me....

[Psycho4Bud]

WoW dude you really are kicking out that me-me....

Can't help myself.........the hero of PrisonPlanet openly admits on national TV that Osama and his freedom hating Muslims with box cutters were behind 9-11! CLASSIC!!!:S2::jumphappy:

Have a good one!:s4:

[pisshead]

neo-cons must cringe every time they hear the word constituiton...

Fox News Claim Ron Paul's Online Voters Skewed Text-Message Only Poll!
Limbaugh, Neo-Cons pretend Ron Paul doesn't exist to prevent their delusional soap bubble from being popped Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet (http://www.prisonplanet.com/index.html)
Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Fox News had an explanation for why Ron Paul did so well in their poll even after the deliberate smear job that constituted their presidential debate - online activists were skewing the numbers.
There's only one problem with that claim - the poll was by text message only and no online votes were taken!
Watch the video.

It seems that the Neo-Cons who are hell-bent on destroying anyone other than their Neo-Lib icon Hillary Clinton, for whom Fox owner Rupert Murdoch regularly throws fundraisers (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2006/090506Murdoch.htm), and will go to any lengths to try and dismiss the massive wave of popular support for Ron Paul, including by lying outright in claiming Internet votes swung the vote for Paul when no Internet votes were even taken.
This moron also states that Romney won the MSNBC poll after the first debate! Another total lie - Ron Paul won it (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18421356/) hands down.
Neo-Con blog sites like Little Green Footballs (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=25504_Ron_Paul_Supporters_Spamming_Our_Poll _Again&only) are now removing Ron Paul from their polls 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.

Hillbilly heroin popping walrus Rush Limbaugh also accused Ron Paul supporters of spamming online polls on his radio show. These people do not seem to be able to grasp the meaning of the term "IP address" and how online polls are designed to block multiple votes from one person.
Here's a newsflash to all you chicken hawk fake conservatives - political campaigns and elections are about people getting involved and having their voices heard - this is called the "democratic process". More individuals are motivated to vote for Ron Paul over establishment bootlickers like Romney and Giuliani because Ron Paul actually stands for something and represents the majority view of the people living in the United States.
This is not "cheating" or skewing the vote, it's a reflection of popular opinion and just because it feels good for you to ignore that fact - God forbid it pop your phony little Neo-Con bubble - doesn't mean it's not the truth.

Ron Paul clearly won the debate and heads up every poll taken other than Fox News' suspicious closed-door 3 hour text-message only charade, in which Paul came second behind Mitt Romney after a mysterious sudden swing in the last 20 minutes.
http://prisonplanet.com/Pictures/may07/160507votedotcom.jpg
Vote.com has the Texas Congressman way ahead of the pack on 63 per cent.
http://prisonplanet.com/Pictures/may07/160507WND.jpg
A World Net Daily Poll also shows Paul on top in front of pro-torture "Jack Bauer" acolyte Tancredo at 32 per cent.
Both ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/politics/beseenbeheard/popup?id=3135373&POLL288=4000000) and MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18661344/) show Paul trouncing his rivals again despite Fox News' best efforts to shoot him down last night. Ron Paul is made of sterner stuff and this snowball is only getting bigger!

[pisshead]

this sums it up nicely...even the talking heads in the msm belive their own lies...they just can't believe that a candidate who isn't an establishment that they blindly endorse is doing so well, despite all the smears...

Ron Paul Panics The Establishment Stopthelie.com (http://stopthelie.com/ron_paul_may_15_2007.html)
Wednesday May 16, 2007
It is clear that Ron Paul is continuing to panic the Establishment. How else can one describe the ongoing efforts of all mainstream media outlets to discredit and downplay his surging popularity? Is it they just don't know how else to deal with him? Is it they have no idea what to do when "pushing the fear button" no longer works?
Regarding the clip below, I have just a few questions:
Would the text poll have "counted" if it showed Giuliani or McCain as the winner? If not, (if the poll is as meaningless as these pundits suggest) what was the point of having it at all?
Hannity: You claim you wouldn't "stand for injustice;" that you'd start a war to fight it. But if it was your neck on the line, would you still be so "brave and noble?" Or to put it another way, with so many tyrants in the world, how many have you gone overseas to fight? None? Oh, so maybe some clarification is in order: You "wouldn't stand for it" unless of course it was your ass and treasure on the line.

And last but not least: Is it really crazy to suggest people in other countries resent being murdered, exploited, or "ruled over" by puppet governments? Is it crazy to suggest they resent "our" foreign policy that comes at THEIR expense; a policy created and implemented by a small group of dishonest, self-serving global elites? I don't think so.

[TheBigOne45]

Can't help myself.........the hero of PrisonPlanet openly admits on national TV that Osama and his freedom hating Muslims with box cutters were behind 9-11! CLASSIC!!!:S2::jumphappy:

Have a good one!:s4:Who would you vote for?

[Psycho4Bud]

OMG! NOW it's another prisonplanet conspiracy.......tapes will be available soon for a low, low price of $19.95!

Lets actually try to use a bit of logic on this one:
Here we have a right wing network hosting a Republican debate and an anti-war candidate is getting a comanding lead in the polls withing the first few minutes? THANK YOU ALEX AND FANS.

But how can a shock jock and his followers influence a vote? Remember the influence that Howard Stern had on American Idol by keeping Sanjaya Malakar in the running? He made it to the top 7!

Face it, Ron Paul is the Sanjaya of politics with a nutjob recruiting the kiddy vote. BUT IT'S A CONSPIRACY!!!;)

Have a good one!:s4:

[medicinal]

I doubt he has a chance, Ron Paul, But if enough thinking persons listen to him, he might. When I watch Jay Walking on Leno, I get a little discouraged with the electorate. If that is the intelect of the American voter, it's no wonder Bush won a second term, they are about as smart as him. I hope the college kids come out and vote. I'll bet if Cheney institutes a draft before he leaves office they'll come out. Just remember, you heard it here first, Cheney starts the draft.