This is evident by the record money he has received from donations...He is also the person who our very own military has donated the most money to.
So, WHY? Are they scared? Did Merdock tell them to do this?
To me this is even MORE of a reason to support Ron Paul...there has to be something honest there for the elite not to like him!
2007-12-28 07:11:23 · 14 answers · asked by Fedup Veteran 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
This just came out. It is the future FOX debates that will be held directly before the NH primaries.
2007-12-28 07:24:14 · update #1
Moody...the white supremacists was a rumor started via the NY Times...which they have retracted.
2007-12-28 07:27:16 · update #2
Moody...I DO know where he stands on immigration and Iraq. Right along with what the US SHOULD be doing.
2007-12-28 07:28:18 · update #3
If they feel the need to censor him then clearly he represents a threat to the corrupt established order. I think this will only increase Ron Paul's support amongst true US Patriots.
2007-12-28 07:36:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Barred from the debates? Past ones, or future ones? I saw him on the past ones.
My best friend (who was killed in Iraq in 2005), his parents, his brother, and sister, are full Ron Paul supporters. Saw them again during the holidays, hadn't met them for a year, and had never talked to them about this.
Upon doing further research through google news (you had me angry for a second there)
" Story retracted
Marty Eels
Published 12/27/2007 - 10:25 p.m. EST
This story has been retracted. We've been told that the original story that this article was based on may not be correct."
and "It was a rumor started by two liberal bloggers"
and "Page not found" for some other sites that had linked to what you asked in the summary link. Pheww!
2007-12-28 15:21:38 · answer #2 · answered by ThomasS 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sigh, first the military number the Paul supporters like to throw around is highly manipulated. Yes, he did receive more money from military civilians than other candidates however the number is derived from those that identified their employers as the U.S. armed services or retired from the armed services that does not mean he is receiving the endorsement of the current active duty soldiers. Ron Paul has been on Fox News several times and there is no reason to bar him from the debates other than the fact he is a 3rd tier candidate. I believe someone has given you false information, again.
2007-12-28 15:27:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
I am certain that Fox News did not bar Ron Paul from being on the broadcast. I would love to peruse this article, could you provide a link?
Perhaps before you vote for Ron Paul, you may like to check his voting record. I believe the Washington Post to be fairly reputable.
Also What is with Paul and White supremest?
What is his stance on Immigration, Iraq and security.
What about our military?
I think you should know these things before throwing your vote away.
Hillary also received record donations from the Chinese! I am certain that I would want to know where these donations came from.
.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/p000583/votes/page1/
Edit: I was referring to Ron Pauls newsletter in 1992 where he made racist remarks and this is the reason white supremacists are attracted to Paul. Ie; stormfront.org has endorsed Paul. Worldwhitenews.com has also given their blessings to Ron Paul.
.
2007-12-28 15:24:05 · answer #4 · answered by Moody Red 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I continue to be amused by the Paul supporters who insist on blaming the media for their candidate's lack of national support. The media, of course, gives more coverage to candidates who are the leaders in national and state polls(NOT STRAW POLLS) for a very good reason. They are the candidates the American people favor and want to hear more about. It's really that simple. It would be nonsensical for them to give more coverage to candidates who have no chance at the nomination, rather than those who do. In order to be considered a serious contender he would need to be able to gain more than the 8% (and that's generous) he's managed to reach in the national polls. Whose fault is that? Paul for not having the message that most Americans want to hear or the media for not pretending he's a serious contender?
2007-12-28 15:28:23 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
probably because fox gets their marching orders from the GOP. the GOP has already decided that Paul will not be their nominee, no matter what. so why waste official airtime and money on him, all while possibly detracting votes from the preordained GOP candidates?
i don't care if Ron swept Iowa and NH (which he will not) he would STILL not get any mainstream recognition. because he wants to be the GOP candidate...but the GOP doesn't want him.
2007-12-28 15:21:56 · answer #6 · answered by Free Radical 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Fox never barred Ron Paul.
2007-12-28 15:18:07 · answer #7 · answered by iooioiioo 2 · 5⤊ 4⤋
Because Fox and Murdoch are stooges for Bush and therefore fearful of Ron Paul
2007-12-28 15:18:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 5⤋
Support him all you want. He'll be dropping out of the race after Iowa and New Hampshire primaries.
2007-12-28 15:15:15 · answer #9 · answered by Pancakes 7 · 6⤊ 4⤋
Ron Paul is at like 4% in every poll, not what I would call a serious contender.
.
2007-12-28 15:13:54 · answer #10 · answered by McClintock 4 · 7⤊ 6⤋