Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Ron Who?

If you haven't yet seen this clip from the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, then take a look.

In essence, after Ron Paul's second place finish at the Iowa Straw Poll just a few weeks back, the media shuns him. Coming in less than 200 votes behind winner Michele Bachman, Ron Paul received hardly any credit from the major media outlets nationwide. Even though Jon Stewart and Ron Paul reside on opposite ends of the political spectrum, Stewart still criticizes the media for not fairly educating the public and illuminating Ron Paul as a potential 2012 GOP contender for the nomination.

As the ABC anchor says, "We are in the business of making or breaking elections". And with that sort of responsibility, the media has to remain objective and unbiased, lest they seek to push their own agendas. Amirite??

Hmm. Ron Paul, a self-proclaimed libertarian and defender of individual rights is not your typical establishment Republican -- or politician, for that matter. He has voted against the Middle-Eastern wars since the very beginning. He wants to end the war on drugs, bring our troops home, and slowly phase out the Federal Reserve system. I can understand why liberal news outlets like CNN and MSNBC would benefit from censoring and obscuring Ron Paul: they are attempting to prevent democratic voters from switching their support to Paul. But why does Fox News ignore him? He's a republican. He's been in Congress for over a decade. He participates in all major televised debates. So what gives?

Is he too extremist for the Republican party to adopt  him? If you answered yes, then take a look at Michele Bachmann or Rick Perry. Still think Paul is the extremist one?

Unelectable, you say? With 4,000 votes and a stunning second-place finish, that is a claim without substance. If he is unelectable, then the media has nothing to lose. Who in their right mind thinks Herman Cain is going to win the nomination? But he still gets media attention.

What do YOU think? Why is the media shunning Ron Paul? What are their motives?


  1. Ron Paul goes against the agendas of big media conglomerates and huge corporations. That's the problem. Many companies profit from war, including media. They have many more stories to write, and the readers are intrigued by them, while contracting companies and defense companies make bank when there is a war. And that's just one small part of the equation. He goes against a lot of big business and is trying make radical change. People don't like change.

  2. It is more that Ron Paul does go against them. Like Damian said. But it doesn't matter if they shun him, I know a lot of people who are going to vote for him, and I think even without any media coverage he has a very good chance.

  3. I thought this post was about Ron ...aldo.

  4. Ron Paul does get coverage, I watch a great deal more FOX news than you do (proven because I have seen him talked about,) He gets as much as any of the candidates that are expected to drop out in May (excluding Bachman and Palin).

    Jon Stewart is simply trying to cause arguments among Conservatives, but seeing as approval for Obama has dropped into the thirties I believe that we should be able to pull together no matter what some two-bit comedian who thinks he's politically accurate says.

  5. Is more who is going to be more corrupt and profitable for the great corporations, banks and financial institutions than who really deserves the place.

  6. Ron Paul defiantly has my vote, even if he's being shunned

  7. Hmm, very interedasting. Although I don't really like Ron Paul. I would re-elect Obama if I voted.

  8. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvahywQKeFc

    I like ron paul just for this video