Dissing Ron Paul
How the media and the Wrong Right put him down
by Ron Burcham
 Neoccon Treachery
Predictor of transparent and evil intentions of the neo-con talk show hosts:
Am I prescient? Do I know my Conservatives and establishment Republicans or what? Another arch neo-con Sean Hannity interviewed Ron Paul after the Sioux City Republican debate tonight and tried to get Ron Paul to discuss the allegations of racism about his newsletter raised in the 2008 campaign. Hannity was concerned because Dr. Paul hadn't made his position clear on the matter.
Dr. Paul didn't take the bait but made the statement that he had a record of being the greatest defender of individual rights and anti-discrimination in the Congress. Now why would Hannity ask that question now? Who will be the next "Conservative" talk show host be to rise to the occasion and try to torpedo Dr. Paul's campaign with questions about the "racist" newsletter?
Ron
"Faith is believing in things when common sense tells you not to."
— Maureen O'Hara to a very young Natalie Wood character in the movie, Miracle on 34th Street.
Mark the Shark
Ron Paul is becoming a contender in Iowa and that is dangerous to the establishment Republicans and the neo-conservatives. Mark Levin, an arch neo-con, is beginning the attack on his radio station and Website. Since he cannot torpedo Dr. Paul on his politics he is dredging up the "racist newsletters" that surfaced in 2008 that torpedoed Ron Paul's campaign then.
I thought that the newsletter issue had been settled in 2008 with an explanation and an apology by Dr. Paul, but no, now that Newt's in danger in Iowa, Levin has got to do something about it so he is dragging out that old issue and trying to breath new life into it to sink the Ron Paul campaign and save Newt's. What next, is Rush going to resurrect his charge that Ron Paul is destroying the Republican Party? Maybe he is destroying the Republican Party, if it is the Establishment Republican Party ol' Limburger was talking about.
The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth.
— H.L. Mencken
Is Ron Paul Getting the Coverage He Deserves?
Question:
Reason staffers Mike Riggs and Katherine Mangu-Ward were on the television yesterday to discuss the media's response to what might be called "The Riddle of Ron Paul": Why do major newspapers, broadcast shows, and cable news outlets seem hell-bent on ignoring a 12-term GOP congressman who came in a tight second in the Iowa Straw Poll?
www.topix.com/forum/post/reply
Burcham's reply:
The Republican debates are how the media control the Republican presidential slate and are supposed to insure a big government RINO like Romney or Gingrich gets the nomination. Establishment Republicans are hand in glove with the media on this.
The liberal media, MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS etc., (neo)-Conservative talk radio/TV; Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, O'Reilly, Wallace, Medved, et al., have allied with establishment Republicans and are all trying to marginalize Ron Paul again just as they did in the 2008 election. If Ron Paul had gotten the nomination in 2008 he would have cleaned Obama's clock because he is not an Obama clone like McCain. McCain v Obama was Tweedle-dee v Tweedle-dum or watered down Fascism v Marxist Communism. Ron Paul would have upset the Washington, D.C. establishment and that couldn't be allowed to happen. Washington power and money is always number one with the establishment Democrats AND Republicans. America is never number one.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who is a real threat to the establishment Republicans and the big government the media loves. No other candidate is touting balancing the budget in 2013 with a $1.5 trillion dollar reduction in spending. Establishment Republicans want to maintain the status quo, not reduce government spending. If Ron Paul is elected what happens to the cushy, bloated federal contracts for establishment contractors like Halliburton, Bechtel, General Dynamics, Grumman and others who are supporters of both Democrats and Republicans? It would be drastically reduced and the establishment can't have that. No defense contracts, no campaign contributions either. The establishment doesn't care which party is in Washington as long as it approves of the candidate slate.
Keeping foreign aid flowing to Israel is a given with every candidate except Ron Paul. Israel doesn't want to lose 2.5% of her GNP. Criticism of Israel is not tolerated in the media. It invites the career ending charge of anti-semitism. The Jewish lobby has tremendous clout in Washington and supports establishment politicians with big money contributions. None of that money is flowing into Ron Paul's campaign.
The lesser of two evils is the option the Establishment sticks us with in nearly every election so that it really doesn't matter who is elected, a Republican or a Democrat; the Establishment still wins. If any Republican other than Ron Paul gets the nomination the Establishment wins. A pretend battle to repeal Obamacare will occur under a Republican administration but Obamacare won't be repealed. It may be watered down but it won't be repealed under an establishment Republican and the wars will go on with no reduction in DOD spending. The fight will continue between the Dems and the Reps to "balance" the budget but without any real reduction in the size of government. Ron Paul wins, America wins, Establishment wins, America loses.
Reagan won landslides in elections on Ron Paul/libertarian platforms. He didn't deliver but he did win. Reagan got the nomination because the establishment knew he wouldn't reduce spending where it mattered to them.
Liberals are going to save the world no matter what it costs and the rich are going to pay for it. Guess what! If you've got a job, you're the rich.
— Ron Burcham 2011
###
2011 December 26
Copyright Ron Burcham, via The Coffee Coaster™
Ron Burcham | Ron Paul | Media Blockade of Ron Paul | Politics 2012 |
