This past weekend witnessed the 482nd debate between the GOP candidates for 2012. Though the focus of the debate, foreign policy, would seemingly give the moderators the opportunity to expose Ron Paul as a quack completely out-of-step with his party (he is, and quite frankly many Americans are grateful to have someone with a rational voice in the argument), the moderators and CBS gave Paul a whopping 89-seconds to respond to questions throughout the evening.
Color me shocked.
There’s been little explanation for the media’s shunning of Ron Paul.
Just yesterday this poll showed Paul in a statistical tie in Iowa with Romney, Cain & Gingrich, but Fox News, propaganda arm of the GOP, gave significantly more credence to a Public Policy poll that allowed them to laud Gingrich for crawling his way back into the race with surging poll numbers.
So why the continued ostracizing of Ron Paul?
DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz attempted to portray him as a far right nutjob who turns off most of the country after the Iowa debate in August, but then, DWS managed to elicit some tremendous venom from Dylan Ratigan regarding healthcare reform, witness the head of the DNC provoking an MSNBC host into a Mt. St. Helens-like eruption.
I’m not so sure the DNC is the voice of reason regarding the GOP debates. In fact, I would suggest the DNC wants someone like Romney to run against Zero as the majority of Independent, Undecided, Unaffiliated and minor party voters won’t be able to form a discernible opinion on what separates Romney’s flip-flopping from Zero’s agenda of mediocrity.
Regardless of how the DNC views the GOP candidates, the reality is the issues of choosing presidents are no longer red or blue but, rather, green. I have utterly no delusions about the Republican Party’s feelings toward Ron Paul as a possible president. Truth be told, the entity of the party would rather see the current president reelected and preserving the power structure, specifically the overseas wars and Federal Reserve autonomy, than run the risk of having a Ron Paul presidency interfere with their half of the choke hold on the power.
Here’s a scenario to ponder, the Republican Party contacts the major media outlets and says, in no uncertain terms, we cannot guarantee how much money we will have to spend on advertising revenue with your channel should Ron Paul win the nomination for the party. It’s going to take nearly a billion dollars in fund raising to win the general election, and if he wins, we just won’t have the ability to purchase that much ad revenue from you as our primary contributors would benefit more from the current president staying in office.
Is that scenario difficult to believe at all? If so, how about the media deciding the funding is the issue on their own? Is that anymore legitimate an act by the so-called fourth estate? My understanding, admittedly, I’m a Journalism major so all I know is theory, but I’m relatively certain they’re supposed to report the facts. The primary season is supposed to allow the candidates the opportunity to bare their souls for the people to see.
Which souls are the media supporting? Well, I already felt the reality was Mitt Romney was sans-soul, a thought he’s done little to change as he changes positions more often than an epileptic crackhead trout swimming in a triple-espresso in the midst of an Earthquake atop a stand resting on a J-ello mold. Consistency in advocacy? Mitt’s about as consistent as a schizophrenic with Tourette’s. And that’s an insult to both schizophrenics and those suffering from Tourette’s. Behold, the Romney advocacy:
Lest we forget, the media has also given increased coverage to Herman Cain, a business man, former member of the Federal Reserve board of Kansas City, recently we learned of past questions regarding appropriate behavior in the workplace and of course, 9-9-9. But, don’t think for an instant the Godfather may not know what he’s talking about. He’s absolutely determined to carefully and cautiously mine his way to the center of any question asked by the press before giving his lucid and reasoned response. As a great man once said, “Give me ten men like [Cain] and I could destroy the world.”
Wow Herman. One has to believe at this point, were you to find yourself in the White House, it would take three and a half weeks to explain your responsibilities should you need to use the bathroom.
Then there’s this week’s front runner and media darling Newt Gingrich. I can’t help but shake my head with both the support he’s gaining in the polls and the coverage he’s receiving in the media. Never mind his philandering whilst impeaching Bill Clinton for doing the very same thing; but haven’t we had enough of the neocon warmongering already? The majority of the country is tired of war and Newt’s among the several advocating further intervention in Iran. Oy.
Iran and North Korea? Newt’s comments about the tension existing since 1979, however, the problems in Iran started in 1953 when the CIA assisted the Shah in overthrowing their democratically elected Prime Minister who had nationalized the oil reserves. The Shah was overthrown by the Ayatollah’s the theocracy presently in charge. Never mind the Iran/Iraq War of the 1980s, that only led to the debacle we’re currently mired in around the Middle East.
But still Ron Paul gets little to no coverage from the media and the only possible answer to such an effective and efficient blacking out of a candidate’s message, is money. Someone stands to lose a fortune if Ron Paul attains a legitimate presence among national politicians.
Personally? I’ve had enough of party before platform. The entire GOP field, minus Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, represents a continuation of the path of the two party system as currently designed. Things have gotten systemically worse economically and for individual freedoms under these two parties, yet we’re told, again, that the “electable” candidates are those who represent the status quo. I, for one, have had enough. I will not be forced to choose between two party candidates who have no dedication to principles outside of election and reelection. Mitt Romney is no more dedicated to making things better for America than he is to disproving Mormonism.
Unfortunately, this is the type of candidate the two parties have shoveled onto our plates for the last 80 years.
We can do better than the Clint Webb’s of the Republican Party.