How DARE they ignore candidates who have 0 chance of becoming President in a Presidential debate? 

There is a true and undeniable danger in the direction that our monetary and economic situation is slipping, and the roots of the problem lie much deeper than a half-hearted and shallow political gesture can repair. The austere measures that must now be taken due the fact that our parents shoveled their responsibilities and debts onto us in order to skate through life to their retirement, are too immense and must be fixed by thoughtful and pragmatic means.

No solutions have been offered on either side of the isle. The democrats seem to think that spending more of China’s borrowed money and adding to the already horrendous 15 trillion dollar debt is the answer, and the republicans are so attached to their unconstitutional wars/occupations/nation-building in middle eastern countries, war on drugs and personal liberties or the efforts to block all attempts at bipartisan solutions, that there is only one candidate that offers the TRUE SOLUTIONS that all real and true Americans should be able to stand behind.

The ONLY candidate that want to END THE WARS that have our young men and women continually leaving home on 4, 5 or 6 tours of duty without a true sense of victory and offering their families no true homecoming, instead only prayers that they will not loose them this time.

The ONLY candidate that has the economic experience and foresight to have predicted and repeatedly warned congress of the bursting bubbles of the housing market, the dollar and the stock market.

The ONLY candidate that is a protector of you personal and individual liberties willing to remove decision making of issues like abortion, gay rights and the search for personally acceptable medical services and treatments from the federal government and place them on you and your neighbors to decide what works for you.

The ONLY candidate that will remove the overbearing restrictions/taxation that is driving countless American businesses and their jobs/money into international markets.

The ONLY candidate that will limit the Federal Reserve from simply printing money and continually devaluing your hard earned paycheck.

The ONLY candidate that is not concerned with which side of the aisle you are on and only concerned with the country that our forefathers envisioned when they wrote the most important documents to mankind and man’s desire to be free and unshackled by government control.

This isn’t red against blue or me against you. This is fundamentally what is right against what is wrong and which direction we will decide to go. And I stress WE.

There is a unity that attainable when great challenges present themselves. A pride that is seen at a 4th of July celebration, heard in a Strauss composition or felt when we remove our hats and sing our National Anthem at a baseball game. The pill may be bigger than some wish to swallow, but we must not make the same mistake as our parents by foregoing the pinch of a solution for the comfort of relinquishing our responsibly and accountability and merely passing it off to our children and grandchildren.

These are real problems that cannot be circumvented any longer and require action now. Unfortunately red and/or blue have offered you more of the same spending and oppressive debt that lead us into this mess. That is why my candidate is neither red nor blue. He offers me solutions that all Americans should be able to support and is emblazoned with the colors of red, white and blue!

We don’t need a democratic solution, nor a republican solution. We need an American solution! Don’t get lost or mislead by the things being fed to you as true in the media or an opinion formulated by anyone other than yourself. The time has come and the need is urgent.

RESTORE AMERICA NOW!
Ron Paul 2012!

You have to admit that Huntsman is getting way, way more attention than his polling merits. At a minimum, they should let Gary Johnson and Buddy Roemer up on stage if Huntsman is there.

They also ignored Gary Johnson, Fred Karger and Buddy Roemer, all of whom have a much chance of becoming president as Newt, Herman Cain, Santorum and Paul.

So you think that Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman shouldn’t be President? Good to know.

CBS did a poor job with the debate. Not just with time management.

Ron Paul is way too good to be on CBS.  He should boycott them from now on.  If Ron Paul is NOT in a debate, there will be about 1/3 the viewers.

I know I wouldn’t watch these debates if Dr. Paul isn’t there.

This was a horrible, horrible debate on a couple of fronts:

#1 CBS did a miserable job. Questions were often inane. Time-handling ranged from lethargic to draconian. No serious effort was made to control the crowd, so answers were often lost in mindless blabbering, hooting and hissing. In part, CBS may have failed largely by comparison to the CNBC debate earlier in the week, clearly the best debate in the series. Up against the FOX “News” and CNN debacles, CBS might look better, but it still did poorly.

#2 Tollbooth made no particular effort to answer questions asked. He had some answered memorized, and he was going to use them, whatever the question.

#3 Herb was moronic at this debate. “I’ll talk to my advisers.,” works once, but only once.

#4 Willard was even more robotic than usual. The man has no personality, no soul, no spine.

So:

Huntsmann: A-
—– We can trust this man on foreign policy.
Sanitarium: B+
—– At least, he believes what he says.
Paul: C+
—– Substantively correct on most foreign policy issues.
Mad Michelle: D+
—– Loonier by the moment.
Willard: D
—– Wants a war with Iran too badly, or he wants to pander too badly.
Tollbooth: D-
—– What a feather weight.
Herb: F
—— Well, well out of his league when it comes to foreign policy.

CBS: F

Agreed on this in regards to Huntsman and letting the others in. I think there were more than 100 Presidential candidates that had registered. Read that somewhere. Not sure where. Bring ‘em all in.

So you will be voting in the Republican Primary? Good to know.

Bidet, the comment was that the ignored candidates don’t have a chance. That is correct. Publius didn’t tell us who should or shouldn’t be president.

CNBC was the best so far from content and time management.

Yeah, sure, that makes sense, and Krusty The Clown while they are at it.

I watched that debate and all I remember thinking was Ron Paul spoke only 1 time during the first 45 minutes. It was incredible. Worst debate I have ever seen.

it is time for the media to stop picking and choosing our candidates. Give them all the same amount of time and we will decide who is worth considering.

As if any sane person cares what your opinion is.

Taking notes?

What’s your philosophy?
The more clowns the merrier?

No. Prejudicial to Herb, Tollbooth and Mad Michelle.

Supporters of Dr. Ron Paul are used to the old stream media neglecting him, which is why we take the message to other streams.

Hey. That’s Funny!
I am truly Feaking amazed!

So you are taking notes.
Knew it!

Willard will and would say anything to get elected!
Did you ever see the movie Swingvote?

Yes. Eerie, isn’t it?

I am really interested in why they keep asking Perry so many questions because he is no longer a viable candidate.

I understand you’re VERY stupid, but there’s a difference between what SHOULD occur and what WILL occur. 

Socialist. Why do you hate America? Why don’t you just go take up residence in North Korea, where everyone has equality of outcomes? 

And Perry, Bachmann, Aaron Rodgers and anyone else not named Mitt Romney or Barack Obama. 

He sells ads. Are you seriously curious?

You forgot the rest of these GOP lunatics.

This article is ridiculously arbitrary in its methodology.  CBS’s argument is that generally the more viable candidates should be asked more questions.  This article pretends that CBS is claiming to strive for a correlation between a certain set of amalgamated poll numbers and the number of words spoken by candidates.

This silly little list of names and percentages ignores things that informed journalists can’t like Perry having an enormous warchest full of money, Bachman’s only base -the Tea Party- switching their loyalties to Cain, and Ron Paul’s support being completely static.  There are no-name republican candidates who didn’t even get invited, so some of the dark-horses should be thankful just to be there.  If they want to organize their own debate, fine, but if CBS organizes one for its viewers, then they get to try to make sure it is relevant.

Besides the waterboarding question, Robert wanted one of them to answer one that he sent in about an experience he had when living in the Austin Old Hairdressers Home :

“Are you aware that in Senior Citizens’ Homes that residents are routinely checkerboarded?”

I love what Ron Paul says and 99%of  time he is right.  However, the mess in congress has been allow to go on for years.  To undo it in 4 or 8 year term as president frankly is idealistic thinking and not realistic  Besides the president  truely has little power toward changing congress. Until we outlaw lobbiest and special interest groups this will continue as is and “john q” american public will just be along for the ride.   

Think about that next time you elect your senator or representative.  Not what party they belong to, but how are they going to fix Washington. 

Ok, so you are saying that Ron Paul, who has won the most straw polls (17 and counting), gets the most average joe donations, most military (Vet, retired, and active duty), wins almost if not all online polls (You know, the ones that don’t count unless someone else wins them), has no chance?

 Hey stupid, how do you determine from this post that SConservative is a socialist? Ron Paul is the most staunch supporter of capitalism in the bunch.

I do not agree with Ron Paul on many issues but I do respect him.  He has a lot of very good ideas and observations.  Unfortunately bucking the Military Industrial Complex is a big no-no as far as our Corporate Masters are concerned.

Sorry Ron – no soup for you…

Amen! Ron Paul is the ONLY anti-lobby, anti-crony candidate that is running! We have to start somewhere. Let’s not throw up our hands saying “it’s just too hard”. We have to start somewhere. How about HERE and NOW?

Not their choice.

Get it now?

Yes, that is what I am saying.

Dr. Paul has views that are anathema to the GOP base, particularly regarding foreign policy. If he can’t rise about 10 percent in the GOP, he has no chance of winning the Republican nomination.  Why do you think that Paul has any more chance than last time he ran for President, when he also won all the online polls?

That’s actually a fairly accurate representation of what far more people ought to be saying with regard to today’s useful idiot engendering vocal leftists.

Unfortunate that it’s not, and you only use it here to disarm in typical Alynskite fashion.

From a socialist document:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…”

They can ignore Bachmann and Cain as much as they want, but they clearly (Media in general) what they hear from Ron Paul (the truth), hence they behave the way they do. 

Not their choice.

It’s the candidates’ decision on who they will debate.

Its not up to the media to decide who’s president.  There is obviously an agenda that excludes the We The People.  Its the racket in DC.  The media arm is trying to think for the people by showing whatever puke and hiding Ron Paul.  The President goes around Congress to go to the UN and NATO to send Americans to be the hit-men for natural resources.  The Military is well aware of this and that’s why they give Ron Paul the most money.  But this racket soon shall fall.  Wait until the families of the military service personnel hear what CBS did to Ron Paul… wait until they tell their family members on the front lines.  CBS f-ed up and its just creating more strife when they try to control The People’s minds. In the end its just a more refined-less-bloody-and-death Egypt and Syria.

Where’s your spine?

I like Ike.

If Bachmann, Huntsman and Paul had all got equal time nobody would be saying anything, or would have cause to.  That people are saying something informs you that there’s a problem.

The point is that the candidates all agreed to be on the stage to debate each other and have their statements stand in contrast with those of their opponents.  Had the majority of them not wanted to let you also hear Bachmann’s, Huntsman’s and Paul’s various stands, they need not have shown up (which would have the effect of making the debate that much less relevant).  CBS interjects themselves into that process by using what little power granted them as provider of the forum and without cause becomes an active political participant exercising influence and choosing for the public your candidates when they dole out differing amounts of time.  It is the role of a free press to pass on information, report news, and while they have a function with regards to commentary and opinion, they have no authority stated or implied to be actors in creating realities.

The press are not gatekeepers, and damn CBS for thinking to be.

what do you expect–CBS LEFT WING MEDIA

Huntsman, Bachmann and Paul should realize that Republicons really don’t want to hear what they have to say… their time has passed!!

Perry is soon to follow their lead!!

It’s important to see that Paul didn’t get the amount of exposure that he should have gotten, which indicates bias on the part of CBS and also an attempt to influence the political process.  However, what is more important is to see that their bias supports the neoconservative establishment of the GOP – Paul is strongly opposed to the interventionist foreign policy that has made enemies of the US around the globe and has added a tremendous amount of debt to the US.  They ignored him and gave Santorum (who is a staunch supporter of the neoconservative policy of interventionism) and the other neoconservatives the bulk of the time.

Another topic that CBS ignored was the makeup of the crowd.  The majority of the crowd at the debate were Paul supporters, who got there on their own accord.  Outside the debate there were many times more Paul supporters holding signs than all of the other candidates combined.  CBS didn’t give any indication that the other candidates “support” was woefully lacking.  To do that would expose the major split in the party between the non-interventionists and the neoconservatives.  That they ignored this at a “foreign policy” debate shows how far they will go with their bias.

flip the leaders
flip the numbers
Discredited Polls
discredited media

Breakfast in America!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qspbF5owcZk

Said with 100% accuracy.

Because the internet is starting to matter.

 But worry not, fellow Freedom Lovers!

 The people who manage our chains and cages will soon be here to regulate our internet.

 Remember everyone, like Driving, using the internet to be a free, life-loving individual is a Right. Soon, we can be safe from Trolls when the government begins to give TUIs (Typing under the Influence) to people who pester the Correct way of thinking, banning them from internet usage for a Year or Two.

 Our savior is here.

 It’s name is Big Government. Hurrah! ………………………………… I’d rather die.

I assume, because you’re writing it, that this translates to:

“CNBC pleased me with their flashing lights and cool gadgets.”

Translation: I couldn’t care less about reality, so long as I’m being pandered to.

Is this like getting caught with you fly open? CBS shows what a pathetic group of people they really are.

A debate is comparable to an economic model? 

It’s not the media’s privilege to choose who our next president will be. You probably don’t care that the media chose Obama as ‘their candidate’ since he’s on your side … but most people would like it if the media gave each of the candidates equal speaking time and let the viewers decide who’s worthy of his/her vote.

If polls actually meant something worthwhile then we wouldn’t have elections, we’d just solely go by the polls. That’s not how it works and the media shouldn’t play it that way. 

Publius is learning all about politics in the 8th grade, so cut him a little slack.  If the press says you’re not in the race, we shouldn’t question them.  Don’t they tell us the truth about our world.  If Herman Cain is the front runner or Romney, or Perry, or Palin, then that’s who should be our leader.  Isn’t that the point of debates: to find the person that we like the most.  Who cares what they think.  That’s for leftists and socialists.  The only thing that matters, is someone who the press likes, and who thinks the world is only 5400 years old.   

I have sympathy for the WCinW12 position, if de Fino has the assumptions right - 
and that’s where I’m not convinced.The shows mostly follow a CNN gadget format – useless for true debate (Newt’s point) or even getting to know the candidate’s positions. It’s got the worst features of daytime game shows on Telemundo. No politician suddenly thinks up policy & positions & knocks them off with a sound bite like she or he is playing whack-a-mole; policy & positions get developed to reflect:- what the candidate believes or what interests or pressures the candidate wants to represent (Bachmann, Cain, Paul, and Santorum), or - what the candidate wants us to know she or he is willing to give into or thinks will get her or him elected (Perry and Romney).If the formats were geared towards showing what candidates’ policies & positions actually are, as well as what’s behind them, that would serve the viewers watching for the purpose of making an informed choice,  and it would only NOT serve the candidates without any policy positions at all(Cain before 9-9-9, and Gingrich)The only episode that even came close to useful was when the candidates addressed each other & got into dialogues, sort of.If the Telemundo game show format is the way these shows are to go, then it IS unfair to pick ‘likely winners & losers’ based on polling or based on the moderators’ strategic or personal views.But … it turns out it was NOT ABC making the decision on dividing up questions among candidates; that was done by the South Carolina Republican committee sponsoring the show. What John Dickerson’s  email was conveying was from something ABC had been DIRECTED to do, by the SC GOP committee.

My point above. I agree with you that it was terrible for “debate”. But – that was not the choice of ABC: it was the choice of the South Carolina GOP committee who sponsored the show.

There are other ways to do this, but they don’t serve the horse race politics narrative that CNN in particular promotes. One way – just one, there are others – is to set up a lottery to choose two candidates per show to debate, into a round-robin format whereby each candidate gets the same amount of time to debate each other candidate. That would also have allowed for the inclusion of the 3 minor-support candidates we never or hardly ever see, Gary Johnson, Buddy Romer & that gay guy.

You kid, to some extent I expect. But there is a point in here. 

At THIS point, prior to the actual primaries, each candidate is making an equal “offer” to her or his party: here I am, here is WHO I am, here is my argument for why you should pick me, here are my positions on what I think are the relevant issues, here are my policies for how I plan to address them.

That addresses equality of OPPORTUNITY, as it should at this stage. After the primaries start up, the exigencies and rules change.

But here is a big point: the impression is that the media people are controlling this, because some of the media types have brought in their characteristic gadgetry, particularly CNN (which everyone else seems inclined to copy, to at least some extent, even though CNN is the most destructive format & useless news network, the chief promotor of hesaidshesaid & horse race politics). The media types are INFLUENCING the choices being made by the GOP committees that are hosting these shows.

In other words, blame the GOP first, because this is what the GOP wants.

Now – ask yourself why that is, why the GOP wants to show off its candidates in this fashion.

Not capitalism, but instead 19th century laissez-faire robber baron exploitation “capitalism”, money uncoupled from any restraints, the system that brought us dozens of recessions in the post Civil War period up to and included the Great Depression. Ron Paul is promoting African bandit-despot state feudalism.

Created equal – and equal, by choice, when both declare themselves amenable to debate.

Not in between and not at the end, as decided by skill, opportunity and fate – CBS is none of those; they’re folks with a video feed.  It’s for us to decide their fate.

Get it now?

Uh … no. 

CBS is a robber baron capitalism media organization. It is owned by National Amusement, which is owned by Viacom, which is owned by Sumner Redstone, who was a huge supporter of the Bush family and is a life-long Republican, and deeply reactionary in his politics, the diametrical opposite of a liberal or a progressive.

The CBS guys were absolutely the worst moderators of any political debates I’ve ever seen in 40 years….who on earth ever chose them should be fired.  They were surly and most certainly out of their element.  Major Garret was a bit more acceptable but the other one was obnoxious.

The history of the return of our armed forces from foreign wars is mostly disorientation. A few vets, mostly from the officer class, get involved in business and/or politics, but the vast majority fade into obscurity, depression & suicide. A few, a VERY few, become politicized in the way that Pat Tillman did, thus, the two Marines injured in Occupy Oakland, both assaulted & injured by the police, in neither case with any cause. 

There certainly are members of the armed forces who support Paul, but they are not representative. Most armed forces grunts, that is, the not-officer-class types, are from the bible belt, and IF they support ANY politics at all (a big IF), they support whatever sort of politics prevails in the region they grew up in. The officer class predominantly supports Republicans, but not Ron Paul so-called “libertarian” politics. 

You do this almost every thread. Your website is loony, paranoid & pointless. Stop it.

This is fair only in the sense that it’s so open in its advocacy of Ron Paul. But Ron Paul is useless in these times and in the presidential context.

I actually think Paul is completely aware of this, that he runs for president not to win but to promote dialogue from what he sees as the “libertarian” perspective. He is not really a “libertarian” at all, but he does frame his positions, or many of them, in traditional libertarian terms.

Libertarianism isn’t about forming political associations in order to govern. It’s a philosophy of how to approach setting the goals for a democratic republic to pursue. It is not possible for a true philosophic libertarian to govern, because governance requires choosing among competing interests, and libertarianism is about avoiding choosing among competing interests.

Yet, she is pleasing to the eye.
It must be so kind of trick!

You don’t know jack about the Republican base.

Good point about the impossibility of a 4 year or 8 year president having enough time to exercise sufficient influence and power to fix things. But it misses a bunch of points.

Think about how the Constitution is set up, and remember the context in which it was set up. The main concern of the Founders was to avoid setting up a King, just to replace the English King they were fighting to get free from. So, the Constitution sets up a national government that is full of the notion of checks & balances, placing the power in Congress, including the power to get rid of the president. Even the Senate was to be nothing more than a check, providing state oversight over what the House did.

As you must recall, there were no term limits for any federal elected office in the Constitution, until after WWII, when the Republican majority in Congress passed the amendment limiting the office of the president and once two thirds of the states voted for that. I am back and forth on this all the time, because the limit means we lose a highly trained popular even gifted leader every once in a while; but the actual measure is consistent with the Founders’ view of preventing the republic from being taken over by a King.

The larger point is that the office of the presidency is not designed or suit for reform: the need for reform is addressed by the fact that we vote for the full House every two years – IT, the House, is the most immediately responsive body to the will of the people. Sometimes that will is wonky (See the 1994 and 2006 midterms, Newt’s Contract on, er, with America, and the Pelosi uprising), sometimes it’s wacky (See the 1946 mid terms and the precipitous overreaction to the end of actual hostilities in WWII, see the 2010 mid terms and the TP caucus).

The presidency is best suited to directly a national war effort (Washington, Lincoln, Wilson, FDR), and only became useful constitutionally otherwise due to how Lincoln used it to form moral consenus and how Teddy Roosevelt legitimized it as the Bully Pulpit (The term “Bully” referred not to the modern term of overbearing bully, but to Teddy’s own party, the Bullmoose Party, dedicated to turning the presidency into taking on a reformative role, particularly to protect the American commons from the robber barons on Wall Street.).

The fact is that FDR picked up and used the Bully Pulpit to reform our financial and economic systems, because that was the national priority given the Great Depression (only for every president from Reagan to act to break up those reforms, and I do not exclude Clinton and Obama from this trend). The fact is that LBJ picked up and used the Bully Pulpit to reform our racist and other socially repressive systems and traditions, with the Civil Rights Act of 1965 and his War on Poverty (only to be deliberately sidetracked by all the Republican phony wars, particularly on drugs & terrorism.)

We cannot leave it to our reps to reform Washington; WE must reform not just Washington but the entire system, because the entire system is rotted from your town council and school board up. Washington is not the problem, WE are the problem, and ignorance, inequality and poverty are the soldiers of our enemy.

He’s a cranky, distractable old bigot with a few good points that in total don’t make for governance of a nation of 320 millions in a world of 7 billion.

It doesn’t matter though, what I write or say: he’s simply not going to get the nomination. In fairness to him, he knows that, because although he’s got some crazy ideas and he’s a bigot, he is himself not entirely crazy, and certainly more sane that a few of the 11 candidates in the GOP contest.

The only poll that matters is the one on election day which Ron Paul will win.

Again, this is not a media decision, this is a GOP establishment decision. 

The GOP wants one old-fashioned moderate GOP voice on that stage, but not another libertarian (Johnson, who is in fact way more of a true libertarian than is Ron Paul), or a reformer bent on getting rid of Citizens United (Buddy Roemer), or someone who reminds the party faithful of their homophobic bigotry (the gay guy). 

If the GOP did not want Huntsman there, he would not be there. There are strategic reasons that the GOP have for him being there, having to do mostly with the future of the GOP, in particular the 2016 election. Many in the GOP have already written off the ability of the party to take the White House in 2012, and are simply positioning for the next step in the plan to get rid of Obama, impeachment. 

0 chance as decided by whom? You? Because, when the media decides someone is unworthy of becoming president and acts on it, that has measurable results. Think Obama would have gotten elected without media support? I wonder why he got so much media support . . . I wonder why Rick Perry did. Or why Romney does. Now go look at who makes donations to their campaigns and you’ll have your answer.

Don’t do that. If you have a link, then provide it. The idea of 100 or so “registered” presidential candidates is highly misleading, because there are rules in place to deal with all that. You are doing nothing more than setting up a ghost strawman by posting this without a link.

That would be Newt and Cain; the GOP needs more than one Krusty.

Thanks for this. Yeah, the gay guy: Fred Karger.

There’s two ways to look at this question of “have a … chance”; one way is to say they all have a chance, if independents lean to the Republican choice whoever that turns out to be, and another is to say NONE have a chance if independents lean to Democratic incumbent. That sounds mushy, but it’s actually so. Independents in 1964 did not so much reject Goldwater as they rejected how crazy the GOP had become by being taken over to such a degree by the Birchers, and otherwise leaned to the incumbent because he had been in office long enough not to look crazy (when in fact he would go crazy over Viet Nam).

This is a crazy, crazy time, crazier than at any time I can recall in my life, certainly since 1964. If you consider what happens in presidential elections in crazy times, then what happens typically is that a reform Democratic candidate wins – but a Democratic president is already in place, so that muddies the picture. Further muddying the picture is that the Republican idea of “reform” this cycle is to double-down on doing the things that made for this crisis, not actual reform.

I agree: the simple answer is Yes, he has no chance.

You are a deeply ignorant person, and you are a slave to memes brought to you by ad men. “Government is not the solution, government is the problem” was a slogan that ad men came up with and put into the mouth of a media spokesperson, which is all the actor Ronald Reagan ever was.

I think they did a great job of TRYING to deal with the demands of the SC GOP committee that organized this mess.

Yeah but the format is just stupid. CNBC has a remarkably stupid format, so was best equipped to deal with a stupid format.

This is the wrong approach. The entire exercise was pointless and resulted in the least memorable Show of the bunch so far. It was and is completely forgettable. The one takeaway is that Perry proved he is unpredictable as to when he might gaffe.

A debate with too many candidates would be too boring for most and take too much time. The top in the polls is the only way to go.These candidates are or were running for president, but were not invited to the debates.
Former Governor Gary Johnson of New Mexico 

Perennial candidate Jack Fellure of West Virginia,

State Senator Stewart Greenleaf of Pennsylvania.Political consultant Fred Karger of CaliforniaPerennial candidate Andy Martin of IllinoisU.S. Representative Thaddeus McCotter of MichiganPerennial candidate Jimmy McMillan of New YorkFormer Governor Buddy Roemer of LouisiannaPerennial candidate Jonathon Sharkey of Florida,

That isn’t true. If he was truly obviously not viable, then the Romney-Rove group would not have sent Jon Karl on to This Week to talk about his fundraising in October. The RRR team (Romney, Rove and the Republican establishment) continue to be more concerned with Perry than either Cain or Gingrich, because both Cain and Gingrich are loyal party tools and will lay down for Romney as directed – indeed, that have shown exactly that inclination in every Show. But Perry is trying to win – not very effectively, at least so far, but trying in his own weird but ruthless way, and he has no upside in rolling over for Romney – or at least the RRR team has not come up with a way to devise an upside for him yet. Perry likes to run in election campaigns, because to him he always wins them. You and I may say, he’s being delusional if he thinks he can win this one; and maybe that is so, but he wouldn’t be the first delusional politician to win a nomination or even an election (and here, I will resist giving into Godwin’s Law).

This LOOKS sort of rational, but it’s founded on a false premise: it was not a CBS decision that John Dickerson’s email was deferring to, it was an SC GOP committee decision that he was trying to make clear to CBS personnel.

Again: nice thought, but wrong premise. The SC GOP committee made this decision, and ABC was simply going along with it, having no choice in the matter.

Amen! I hear ya! WE need to be WAY MORE active and thoughtful in the election of our house representatives and senators. It is ABSOLUTELY more important to the volume of the People’s voice than the Presidential election. Electing Ron Paul would merely be a shifting in direction and more of a symbolic representation of the will of the people. It would cement the intention to move from big banking, big lobbying, big government, crony influence on the US political system and a huge stride toward taking control of our debt and curbing the out of control spending in the name of militarism and bailouts. One vote for president wont change everything. We are voting for a change in ideology.

The network of Edward R. Murrow has disintegrated into a steaming pile of yellow journalism. William Randolph Hearst would be proud.

“cranky” – LOL! Yeah, I would be too!

“distractable” – His absolute consistency over the years would suggest otherwise.

“bigot” – I would love to see examples of his bigotry. Really! Please.

“crazy” – For presenting different views than your own?

Your ad hominem attacks appeal to feelings and prejudices rather than intellect and are simply an attack on Paul’s character rather than an answer to the contentions I previously stated.

I have a great suggestion: let’s test Romney’s theory by giving members of Congress vouchers for health care to use with private insurance companies. Even better: let’s just take away health care for members of congress and let them find health care on their own. They’re always saying it’s up to people to take care of themselves, right? Well, virtually every member of Congress is in that upper 1%, so if anyone can do it they can, and if they can’t, then no one else should be expected to.

99% is GREAT! That’s almost 100% I would vote for Paul if I were you. Unless you have a 100% candidate.

I could care less what lazy thinkers believe is boring, and neither should you factor for it.  Most of those won’t vote anyway, or learn of their world, to their own detriment (and ours).  It’s not for entertainment value that we should want to watch.

The only importance of debate is the value a person assigns to their own ideas; whether he can adequately state them that they gain traction and defend them against questioning.  Should the whole body of candidates believe there are too many voices, they can come to any arrangement which suits them which allows their ideas to receive an audience; whether that means they agree to debate individually or with a limited, rotating number of people or with freezing out those they consider unworthy of their attention, that’s their decision.

If Mitt Romney won’t agree to a debate with himself and Jimmy McMillan on the same stage, that’s information we ought to know as we can make a value judgement with regards to Mitts own assessment of his and McMillan’s candidacy.  If he does agree to it and the latter is asked no questions, allowed no response time or has the lights above his podium shut off, that’s not Mitt Romney’s assessment, that’s someone else getting in the way.

Rex the Wonder God:  You’re pretty much saying the opposite of what the empirical evidence shows; Ron Paul gets THE MOST military donations than ALL other presidential candidates combined including Obama!
You have 0 evidence on your opinion.

ABC(you mean CBS)?  SC GOP?  None are ultimately relevant to whom candidates are willing to debate.  Nor is that the issue.  The above candidates all agreed to the same format.  Yet candidates were denied the equal access to which they all agreed not for the negotiations of the press or the party but by the CBS’s unequal application of its unrepresentative power.

Jim Lehrer in recent retirement stated the measure of success for a debate’s host should be valued by how much more post-debate focus is given to what candidates said or did rather than how he interacted with them.  With regard to this debate, CBS failed utterly – and knowingly.

Ron Paul is the only one who speaks the truth and is consistent. We need real change. An upset in Iowa is coming…

http://www.whatthehellbook.com/the-book/

RRE – Publius essentially said that RP and JH will not be President. Good to know.

RRE, please address me as Bidet #2 if you’re going to keep messaging me like the stalker that you are. I will say it again, you have said that you will NOT talk to me. You continue to do so. Please stop. I don’t mention you when possible. Entertain yourself without using me as a vehicle to do so.

Publius likes the free-market style in debates, but he dislikes it in the actual real world.

On?

I was working and it’s not advisable to write while driving.

As I said, then send Santorum, Paul and Huntsman off the stage period. Bachmann even. Perry too.

Would you like to tell me where you went to undergraduate and graduate school?

Stop talking to me. You add no value to this site. If you like writing so much, then go author a book.

I don’t take notes on people that write on comment threads. That’s weird. And anyone that would even think of that idea is assumed to be weird too.

No, you would assume wrong. :)

Translation: I don’t know what I’m talking about, but I’m going to comment anyways.

Seriously, you add little to threads. I am glad people like you left the GOP.

“Dr. Paul has views that are anathema to the GOP base”

Actually he doesn’t.

Who tells you what the “GOP’s base views” are?

Why, the media does of course.

The very same media that repeatedly endlessly “we can’t wait for the final proof to come in the form of a mushroom cloud”.  The same media that was telling you that there was no housing bubble in 2005.  The same media that coined the term “new economy” in 1999.  The same economy that is trying to convince you that Ahmadinejad is going to be developing a nuclear weapon any day now (that’s actually been going on for over 20 YEARS now).

 Government is the problem.

You don’t even know how many trillions of dollars have been given over to the financial industry.  Nobody was prosecuted there either.  Whose fault is that?

Whose fault is it that we’re now in 3 wars?

Whose fault is it that we have a 14.8 trillion dollar debt, and are expected to bring in about 2.36 trillion dollars in taxes next year and spend over 4 trillion?

Whose fault is that?

Whose fault is that Jon Corzine is going to WALK, he’s not going to jail.  He stole money from customer accounts to make bets in Europe.  Whose fault is it that he’s not going to be prosecuted?

What – you want MORE incompetent, stupid government to sit on their BUTTS and do nothing?  You want to continue paying for that?  There’s NO SEC.  I can see phantom bids all the time, this is when bids are made on a stock to manipulate it, the bids are never put up with the intention to buying or selling – this is illegal, and it’s not prosecuted.  You pay for the SEC to exist, but they don’t do their job.  Oh sure, once in while some guy that made $10,000 on an insider bet gets put into prison but Franklin Raines didn’t go to jail when he lied about Fannie Mae’s profitability for THREE YEARS.

Government is the problem.  They’re mostly criminals now.

Socialism is great, if you have a population that actually pays attention to what is going on. You people don’t.  You’re too lazy and too uneducated.  You idiots want socialism, but you don’t want to deal with the responsibility of having such a system, that’s continual oversight by the population to make certain the government isn’t acting as a criminal.  You refuse to do that.

LOL

Lighten up.
 It’s a joke!

It’s always hilarious to read the comments left by paulbots. “Oh poor Dr. Paul–as if calling a Dr. is going to make him seem more important—-everyone hates him because he is GOD,Jesus, Buddha, Zeus and all other GODS combined.” Oh please, he’ll NEVER be President of anything outside of a mental ward!

Ron Paul and Buddy Roemer are the best. The powers that be will  not allow buddy to debate.  Too bad. Our uber-lords in the media feed us pablum.

And this translates as:

“You shouldn’t assume, it makes an ASS out of U and ME.”

Jokes are supposed to be funny. Therefore you wrote a statement. :)

That added no value, but I’m sure the site appreciates the website hit.

They made it a slogan because it was true you brain dead idiot.

He trying to show how smart he is and he is on Mediaite 24 hrs. a day. I don’t know when this fool sleeps or spends time with other humans.

America would be much better when we get rid of these two political party dictatorships. Every time I vote almost all the candidates have democrat or republican in front of them. To me they are both the same, they become puppets and say things we the people want to hear and say things that can get them elected and once they get in all they do is play politics and greed. If people could just think with open minds and not vote for someone just because of the party they belong to. If Barack Obama was a republican do you really thing they GOP would be saying the things they are saying about him now. If George Bush was a democrat the GOP would find so many things to criticize him about, but because these politicians play this big political game than we are not going to get honest debates and nothing is going to change. The system will continue to be broken as long as we keep electing people who continue to register themselves as democrat or republican. The only sane one from either democrats or republicans is Ron Paul but because he doesnt follow the status quo of the other politicians the media will just continue to say he doesnt have a chance. Our media has failed us our politicians have failed us and we have failed ourselves. People need to wake up and not play into politics like we are now. Imagine how democrats would criticize Obama if he did everything hes done up till now if he were a Republican and imagine how the GOP would talk about Obama if he were a republican president. I guarantee it would not be the same.

Murray Rothstein, looks like you have some ‘splaining to do!

Evening all,

HEADLINE:

CBS’s Flagship Show, “60 Minutes”, Caught In Cover Up On Democrats Insider Trading Scandal!

A new book exposes Congressional reps for using closed door government policy meetings to profit personally from in the market.

70% named were Democrats – 60 Minutes, in a “create a false narrative to the general public” strategy, reported on five Republicans and one Democrat!

Spread the word to ALL YOUR CONTACTS – “Expose & Undermine!”, that’ll be the operation to destroy the media’s credibility, at least to insure ridding the country of the community-organizer.

When Romney, Cain, or Newt speak for an hour, nothing is said.
When Ron Paul speak for 90 seconds, he makes history.

Even though I agree with many of his issues.  Some of the things he wants to do are a bit radical for me. As an example doing away with the federal reserve is dangerous and could be reckless. Pushing most everthing down to the state level could result an  imbalance in our societyand many redundant efforts thourhout the 50 states. This is just a few examples.  As for lobbyist and special interest in Washington he is right on the money.  Run them out of town.

I never made such a representation, Bidet, and I would not do so.

Its sad that you think this way. So you are saying that its the job of the media or any other corporate institution to pick and choose, and decide for the people in important matters affecting their lives? Rather than, you know, their job? Which is to inform. Good to know you don’t care much for democracy or the once great role of the press as informers, and being the Fourth Estate.

Agreed to bringing Johnson and Roemer into the ring. Its sad on the media’s part that they for the most part refused them coverage from the start. Their qualifications are surely there being former Governors.

The explanation CBS and the MSM in general gave as to the reason why these people, specifically Ron Paul, are asked the least amount of questions is because they rank so low in the polls.
Of course rational minds know that is complete bullshit.
For the longest time, Ron Paul was/is ranked 3rd in the polls and he’s asked very little questions in the debates.
I believe this is a clear case of the MSM silencing those who they disagree with.

“An email from a CBS producer who predicted that Bachmann would not receive many questions from moderators Scott Pelley and Major Garrett.”
 The email is not a “supposed smoking gun” It proves that CBS intended their anti-Bachmann bias to do what they in fact did: ask Bachmann fewer (60%) questions than asked of Romney and Gingrich.
When you predict what in fact you do, then it proves intent, in this case intent of bias.

Of course, this was so obvious from the first 20 minutes on.   
Believe me, I do NOT support any Republican, but this was totally unfair to these candidates.
I would have liked to have heard Miss Bachmann, Mr. Huntsman  and Mr. Paul more than we did.

CBS, shame on you! 

testing

I am tired of the media Bias people should start picketing all these bias stations with big signs. Your really pissing me off media.

Thanks for shedding light on this. You sure as hell don’t hear the mainstream media reporting this BS.

Is that why he is tied for first in Iowa right now? and wins every straw poll they run. The primary is just that 1 big ass straw poll. He’s going to win that one too. There are a very small amount of people that actually vote in the primary and I promise you all the Ron Paul supporters WILL be there voting.

It’s ironic how you keep telling me that I add little to these discussions, and yet you can’t help yourself responding to my comments.

And believe me, no one is more relieved that I left the Republican party than I am. I couldn’t bear to be associated with these dimwits a day longer.

REX you are smearing and defaming him with attacks.  He’s not distractable, his message is very consistant, he’s not crazy, again his message is very consistant, cranky? I think you are cranky, Bigot? a smear job. Rex you should probably wait until you have something reasoned to say, instead of posting ad hominem attacks

libertarians can govern, they govern by quelling attempts at excess government.  Yes at the extreme end where you advocate their view is, you have anarchy or stateless society, many libertarians distinguish themselves from this, they believe government is there only to do what individuals cannot do for themselves such as protect citizens from other countries (military), protect citizens from each other (police) promote trade by providing a sound currency. Ron Pauls message is that government has gotten too big, that there is a debt crisis do to extreme spending. S&P downgrading the US supports this

Hi Everyone,

The RNC has been complicit in the marginalization of Dr. Paul, as well as the media blackout. We all know this. I have set up a little website to bring attention to this fact and to help Dr. Paul. It is not the kind of thing he would do (in fact he couldn’t even acknowledge it without being summarily expelled from the GOP), but it IS the kind of thing I would do, ESPECIALLY after the last debate where Dr. Paul got a whole 90 seconds to speak. This must stop and by God it WILL stop, and YOU’RE going to help me stop it!

Go to http://RonPaulPromise.com and sign up please, and spread the word. I set up the site myself it has no ads and no profit, just a labor of love in defense of Dr. Paul.

Here is the debate in short form:

Romney: We should attack Iran
Gingrich: We should attack Iran secretly without telling anyone.
Perry: We should attack 3 countries, Iran, Syria, and … I forgot the other country.
Cain: We should attack China before they get nuclear technology,
Bachman:  They don’t call me batshit crazy for nothing.  We should attack every country that starts with an “I”.
Ron Paul:  We should listen to the US Constitution and have a strong military for DEFENSIVE purposes only.

You are a mis-informed idiot. Put down the coloring books and stop eating crayons.

What is “robber baron capitalism”? Do you mean crony capitalism?
What Does Crony Capitalism Mean?
A
description of capitalist society as being based on the close
relationships between businessmen and the state. Instead of success
being determined by a free market and the rule of law, the success of a
business is dependent on the favoritism that is shown to it by the
ruling government in the form of tax breaks, government grants and other
incentives.

Also Bush is a liberal. A big government new world order liberal.  so….

Agreed, for a middle aged woman, she is not bad at all.

The unfettered printing of money by the Fed isn’t dangerous?

On 11/16, Congress holds hearings on the first American Internet censorship system.

This bill can pass. If it does the Internet and free speech will never be the same.

Join all of us on the 16th to stop this bill.
http://americancensorship.org/

You are talking about conventional wisdom, the ecomony issues today are not conventional.  Yes printing money runs the risk of inflation, but deflation could be just a damaging and elogate time to recovery. 

“but deflation could be just a damaging”

Unless prices deflate to what they actually should be.

The Fed has caused every boom and bust, recession and depression since its inception.

They need to go.

Romney, Cain, and Perry have 0 chance of winning.

Wow, that was easy. I see what yo mean.

Sorry. the brainwashing tactics don’t work on me, even if they worked on you by media.

It suprises me to hear people say Thomas Jefferson’s ideas were radical.

That’s the problem. Polling shouldn’t merit anything. Polls are NOT REAL. It’s ONLY a very small percent, and most keep changing their mind. It isn’t polling that decided this. It’s main stream media personal views that decide this. They USE polling as their excuse.  You should not allow the media to string you along like a puppet.

What? All circuses require clowns. I don’t get your point.

 Brainwashing is dangerous. It’s BOTH. Both sides will brainwash you into believing it was the OTHER side.

 By what I am reading from you guys. The GOP base is brainwashed and doesn’t have a mind of it’s own. Sorry, I don’t want to be a BORG. I’m a human, I have my own views, and you nor them can brainwash me into thinking blowing up everyone around the world that hates us will make us safer. And borrowing money leads to prosperity. And bailing out ponzi schemers is a good idea. Sorry. But to believe THIS is the GOP way, then I’ll stick with being Libertarian, or even convert to a Liberal. But in my opinion, I am the republican, and you are a hijacking neo-con republican. Thomas Jefferson would agree with this. Though he probably wouldn’t call you a republican at all. Maybe a Federalist.

 You are REPEATING media, not him, YOU are the slave to the media masters. YOU are their puppet. Tell me what YOU think. Not what the media TOLD you to think.

I don’t consider those who hijack a philosophy from those who practice it as a republican. You are neocons trying to tear this country apart by using OUR Republican party to FORCE your neocon views on others. Thomas Jefferson would be ashamed of you.

Yes it’s simple. Watch me.

Ron Paul will win and the rest will lose.

See… I said so…… So it will be. :)

 Agreed. I already know what the rest of them are going to say. Pretty much the same thing. We have to blow up everyone around the world that doesn’t “like” us. And we must FORCE our morale views on others. And we must bankrupt our country. How many times to I need to keep hearing these same old answers?

 I would vote for Huntsman if Ron Paul wasn’t in it. I do like him more than any of the others.

 Ditto on your opinion. Isn’t life grand.

Sorry, even if you are willing to hand our country over to the Military Industrial Complex, I AM NOT.

Neocons hate logic and the Constitution.  They are starving for killing people all over the world. I say let them starve.