Ron Paul Supporters Lash Out At Fox News

Cable Channel Invited Just Five Candidates To GOP Forum In New Hampshire This Weekend

(AP)  ABC and Fox News Channel are narrowing the field of presidential candidates invited to debates this weekend just before the New Hampshire primary, in Fox's case infuriating supporters of Republican Ron Paul.

The roster of participants for ABC's back-to-back, prime-time Republican and Democratic debates Saturday in New Hampshire will be determined after results of Thursday's Iowa caucus become clear.

Fox, meanwhile, has invited five GOP candidates to a forum with Chris Wallace scheduled for its mobile studio in New Hampshire on Sunday. Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson received invites, leaving Paul and Duncan Hunter on the sidelines.

The network said it had limited space in its studio - a souped-up bus - and that it invited candidates who had received double-digit support in recent polls.

In a nationwide poll conducted Dec. 14-20 by The Associated Press and Yahoo, Thompson had the support of 11 percent of GOP voters and Paul was at 3 percent.

Paul was tied with Thompson for fifth in New Hampshire in the most recent Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll, each with the support of 4 percent of likely voters. Among all New Hampshire voters, Paul led Thompson 6 percent to 4 percent, but that was within the poll's margin of error.

Jesse Benton, Paul's spokesman, said it was a "big mistake" not to include his candidate, especially given Paul's recent success in fundraising. He said the campaign has been trying to reach Fox News to explain the decision, but its calls had not been returned.

"There very well might be some bias," Benton said. "Ron brings up some topics that aren't very popular with Fox News, as in fiscal responsibility and withdrawing from the war in Iraq ... that does leave us scratching our heads a little bit about whether it was deliberate. Based on metrics, I don't see how you can possibly exclude Dr. Paul."

Some livid Paul supporters are distributing e-mails calling for a boycott of Fox advertisers.

A Fox representative did not immediately return calls for comment about the complaints.

Paul has been invited to a GOP forum that Fox News is sponsoring in Myrtle Beach, S.C., on Jan. 10, Benton said.

To participate in ABC's Saturday night debate, Republican and Democratic candidates must meet at least one of three benchmarks: place first through fourth in Iowa, poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four major New Hampshire surveys, or poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four major national surveys.

ABC News anchor Charles Gibson said the criteria were actually quite inclusive. He defended the network taking the initiative in effectively narrowing the field at a point when no actual voters had cast a ballot, except for Iowa caucusgoers.

"You will have had a year's politicking," he said. "You will have had, I think by count, about 641 debates. You will have had national polls and state polls and one state's vote. I think that's pretty indicative."

Gibson said ABC explained the rules for participation in a conference call with all the campaigns and "nobody said, 'How dare you!'"

Gibson is moderating both debates, each 90 minutes long, with a brief intermission between the two.

[lnardozi]

The dollar slid across the board on Friday as data showing a 9 percent decline in sales of new U.S. homes last month heightened concern about the economy, putting the greenback on track for its worst week in more than a year.
The housing report, which was weaker than economists had expected, also bolstered the case for more Federal Reserve interest rate cuts in 2008. Earlier this week, the S&P/Case-Shiller index showed a record decline in U.S. home prices in October.

This is what''s happening to YOUR house. All the ''money'' and ''equity'' you thought you had saved - eliminated! The equity through falling house prices - and the money because we are DEBASING OUR CURRENCY. That low fed rate you''re reading about gets created by printing money and lending it to people. With more money, the money YOU have is worth LESS. So your money is worth less and your property is worth less - where can you turn to keep ahead of inflation? I think you BETTER turn to Dr. Paul. He''s the ONLY one running that has a HOPE of being able to deal with this.

[gkc99]

*** News, as a mouthpiece of the Neocon Fascist Party of the U.S. (formerly the Republican Party), certainly doesn''t want anybody who doesn''t do exactly what Massah Bushit say on the ticket.

Even Huckleberry Hound will be slammed and disregarded by Murdoch''s Minions at *** for daring to point out that the Darth Bushit regime has a "arrogant bunker mentality", a fact that is blatantly obvious to anybody with an IQ over room temperature.

The puppeteers who control Howdy Doody don''t want anybody, even an upstart like Ron Paul, upsetting their little apple cart.

[aheadofcrowd]

If you cherish your freedoms and want to keep this government from becoming any more fascist, then you need to look at what Ron Paul is saying. You don''t need to vote for him but listen to the alarms he''s sounding.

[cbville72]

Great job Fox News. If we need another idiot that doesn''t have a shot at winning, then they can include Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton....or maybe another democrat.
John Kerry????

[cbville72]

*** News, as a mouthpiece of the Neocon Fascist Party of the U.S. (formerly the Republican Party),
Posted by gkc99 at 12:32 PM : Jan 01, 2008

You mean like how this site is a mouthpiece for liberal/democrat POV.
Keep up the good work FOX NEWS

[classicdoc]

I wish my fellow Paul supporters would keep the tone down a bit. We can complain about Fox without using nasty language and making threats. We are in pretty good shape. Paul will do better in Iowa and NH than the polls indicate, for demographic reasons we all know--many of his supporters haven''t voted before, many don''t have landline phones. If Fox really does keep him out of the forum, Fox will look bad all on its own, without invective from us. Relax--Paul has the money, his supporters aren''t going anywhere else, more people will be drawn in as they hear the message, and yes the message is getting out.

[itchyb-2009]

Would anyone expect this to be a surpise from Faux News? Neocon slimeballs, the lot of them.

[homespunlady]

Pretty obvious WHY they moved the Primaries up so far ahead of the election and started this race RIGHT AFTER the 2006 election.

There were ALREADY cracks in controlling the voters and too much information was "leaking" concerning VOTE FRAUD through every means from Paperless voting being hackable and unsecured to "forgotten" ballots in districts that might not vote for the "media approved" candidate.

Can''''t let THAT happen so we get the timetable moved up to BEFORE the VOTERS might catch on to the pervasiveness of the DECEPTIONS going on.

It''''s either fool them or "crack down" crunch time for the powers that are in charge.

The irony is that this entire nation is about to be BLINDSIDED by some particularly nasty disasters.

Our ECONOMY is teetering and the current WAR BUDGET has pushed the US past several CRITICAL TIPPING points.

Coupled with the Housing Tulip-mania Bubble that''''s bursting at an "unexpectedly" (pre-election) rapid rate and the related "ripples" that will affect areas as remote as considered "safe" pension funds, foreign manufacturing and previously "invulnerable" financial groups; the REAL issue for the 2008 election will soon turn to WHO will provide a WORKABLE plan to RESCUE our National economic Titanic.

We''''ve HIT the Iceberg folks.

[elz523]

Really, if Fox had wanted to eliminate any candidate based on their chances of winning, there wouldn''t be a Republican in the studio!

[homespunlady]

The REAL question we should be asking is WHICH candidate will work to SALVAGE and SAVE the American people and WHICH candidates will waste time and resources rearranging deck-chairs while blindly IGNORING the OBVIOUS?

The self-centered FRAT party is over. More mature and concerned Americans want an ADULT in charge.

We''re in for some difficult times even IF the damage done by the current administration is reversible.

Let''s hope we''re up to the task and can clean up the MESS that''s been left to us and our children.

It''ll take DRASTIC measures and sacrifice from ALL of us not just the poor and middle class this time while the spoiled elitists "rig the system" for their benefit and SHIFTING the COST onto the REST OF US.

[homespunlady]

elz123
I agree with your comment with ONE EXCEPTION.
The TOTAL irresponsibility on the Hill and Whitehouse the last few years is APPALLING.

The baby boomers just MIGHT be growing up and the following generation(s) are beginning to see the writing on the wall.

The Philosophy of "looking out for Number One" is a social and ethical FAILURE that has endangered both peace and overall prosperity.

The nations that have emulated recent American Political Games and deception are having an even more violent Reaction - Kenya and Pakistan are the most recent example.

There''s a growing unease among some of the top people that''s translating into a strange form of "social conscience" where their wealth is being transferred into "charitable trust funds". I find THAT a curious development and suspect the "motive" behind it would prove to be VERY interesting.

[bud28dy]

C''mon, this is a no-brainer. Any person can file the paperwork to run for President but that doesn''t guarantee them a national television spot to air their loony views. Paul is a lunatic fringe candidate with 3% of the vote. My mother would probably have the same poll numbers. The line has to be drawn somewhere and double digits is reasonable. Paul wouldn''t even make a 5% cut-off. This allows the viable candidates more time to air their views and ensures the debate isn''t turned into some farce as evidenced by the inclusion of perennial political nobody Alan Keys at the last debate. I also can''t imagine that Fox news is real worried about a boycot by the Paulbots, since they represent a statistcal pimple. This man''s 15 minutes of fame are long since over.

[homespunlady]

bud28dy

For a "Statistical Pimple" he sure can garner a AWFUL LOT of DONATIONS - MUCH MORE than many of his "media approved" rivals.

Besides I don''t see WHO YOU are supporting being mentioned as a viable candidate and why in your post - just an arrogant "we own the media AND will CHOOSE FOR YOU" attitude.

That kind of attitude USED to be called by other less complimentary names like dictatorship, fascism, elitism, etc.

Cut the arrogance, LOOK and LISTEN - you may mot see them in your Ivory Tower but I''m seeing Paul supporters EVERYWHERE lately.

Myopic Ivory Tower Syndrome is what got this nation into SO MUCH political, financial, international and environmental DANGER in the first place.

We need FRESH ideas to help this nation from becoming ANOTHER example of FAILURE and a footnote in history under foolish emulators of the Roman Empire fall.

[cs4466]

Ron who?

[apolloknowsa]

His supporters attack everyone.

I will now become their latest punching bag...bring it on.

I met Dr. Paul, he is a nice man. Congressional, not presidential.

[merlgrey]

a lesson in buying the white house

"ABC News'' John Berman Reports: Mitt Romney continues to pour millions into his bid for the White House but refuses to say how much.

Speaking to reporters in Johnston, Iowa, Romney, R-Mass., acknowledged he is "sure" he has put more of his own personal wealth into his campaign but would not provide an exact figure.

In the first nine months of 2007, Romney, who made a fortune in private business, contributed roughly $17 million dollars to his own campaign. He has spent at least $7 million of that figure in Iowa on a massive media campaign that includes a barrage of attack ads against his chief rival, former governor Mike Huckabee, R-Ark."

[standlee5]

What! No Ron Paul! He''s the only one with something to say. He''s the only interesting candidate.

[standlee5]

By Presidential does that mean someone who sells out every aspect of America and it''s citizens.

[undermyboot]

ANY LEGALLY QUALIFIED CANDIDATE with a pulse must be included until the PEOPLE DECIDE. It is too early in the process to eliminate candidates. It is NOT for MEDIA to eliminate candidates.

Voting has yet to start, and every candidate should be included until the VOTERS decide. How can it be otherwise? It doesn''t matter what YOU as an individual think of a candidate (i.e. "They have no chance"). It only matters what the DEMOCRATIC PROCESS determines. That has yet to even begin. That is- unless you WANT the MEDIA and the PARTY ESTABLISHMENT to make the decision for you. Do you?

[homespunlady]

From a recent speech by Congressman Paul:

"All this death and destruction. We blow up their bridges, we''re taxed for that. Then we''re taxed to rebuild their bridges and our own bridges are falling down," he said, drawing a connection between the war and unmet needs in this country.

Paul''s vision of the nation''s economic future is not pretty. "When empires go too far their currencies are ruined because all wars are fought through inflation," he said. "That means the trillion-dollar operation that we have (overseas) is coming to an end. I want to bring it to an end gracefully, not wait for a dollar collapse."


Guess FOX and its followers think this much COMMON SENSE is too much "lunatic fringe" thinking. Doublethink apparently is the FOX norm. Bad is good, national bankruptcy is wealth, creating worldwide hatred against us through empire building is peaceful, cooperative diplomacy....

Yeah and media moguls like FOX have sold a LOT of Brooklyn Bridges to the suckers.

Better just stick to video games about WAR being "good for the nation" than grow up and be Adults that think about things like the "common good" and "fiscal responsibility".

This nation is in serious trouble and our Presidential candidates can only play trite political GAMES.

WHERE ARE THE SOLUTIONS to our SERIOUS problems??

[elz523]

Look what Paul has to say about social programs. If you are ready to leave your parents without social security or medicare, your college students without financial aid, vote for Ron Paul.

Libertarians have some very good ideas, unfortunately they also have some very poor ideas. Most of their good ideas are concerned with personal liberty (hence thier tag). Their poor ideas are premised on a philosopy that holds that their liberty is diminished by every dollar that is used to help someone less fortunate.

Check it out and look deep into Paul''s ideas on these issues.

[undermyboot]

This particular issue is not about Ron Paul or any specific candidate. This is about the MEDIA trying to be a GATEKEEPER and limit CHOICE for the VOTERS of AMERICA.

The real reason behind FOX blocking Paul is likely because of their control by the Republican Establishment. Some other media outlet may have their own political agenda in omitting a candidate. The point is that it is NOT their PLACE to do so. PERIOD.

[bud28dy]

Homespun --

The number of contributions only indicates that the "statistical pimple" has a lot of cash. If Mitt Romney had only one supporter, himself, guess what? He would still have the best financed campaign. Sorry lady but it is the number of people who vote for you that matters, not the number of dollars raised.

I don''t identify which candidate I''m supporting because it is irrlevant to the post and the article. The issue was whether Paul should be included in the debates, and who I support has nothing to do with that. I know it''s really hard for you Paulbots to focus on the arguments presented wihout just spilling out your programmed arguments, but you give it a try.

[bud28dy]

BTW homespunloony, it''s amazing the conclusions you jump to from my simple post. Somehow I am in an Ivory Tower, which if true would be really nice. Maybe you can also tell my favorite color and what food I had for dinner last night from the post. You''re paranoia seems to have gotten the best of you.

And trust me homsepunloony, it''s the types of postings you are making on here that have hurt Paul so much. His negatives are at 45% and his positives only 23%. That number is amazing considering that he has not been vetted or criticized by the media (in fact they''ve ignored him as they well should), and he has also been ignored by his fellow candidates. The other candidates never mention him much less criticize him. That means the only info the public is getting about him is from the candidate and you folks, which is probably the most favorable info possible. And yet with no one publicly saying bad things about him, 45% of the population has a negative opinion. In other words Paul''s own positions and the unfortunate manner in which many of his supporters have been rabidly presenting his case has hurt him tremendously. The same thing happened to Howard Dean. His own supporters were often his worst enemy.

Anyway, given the tenor of your posting and your inability to argue facts, I won''t be responding to any more of your tirades. I''ll let you rant in peace.

[cfin5]

It is disturbing what Fox is doing. Likewise a radio show that Mark Levin hosts which I used to like because of the constitutional theme in regards to my country absolutely hates Ron Paul, the very kind of candidate that Mark touts should behave like,.....what''s with that? Does he think that we all hate Israel or something because some dang Nazis somewhere donated some money to Ron''s campaign? Anybody that has read some of my posts regarding Israel should be thoroughly unconfused about how I stick up for them. But hey, the man that we see according to his voting record, and with whom we have to do because of that, started with "We The People" without ANY MEDIA SUPPORT AT ALL and look what we have done in so short of time! Therefore I say we should continue doing what we''re doing and not rely on any TASS like news network to do our work for us. If we get some, so be it. I will keep pulling the line for the best AMERICAN candidate that I have ever seen run for the Presidency,.......and yes that means Ronald Reagan too. Ron Paul has re-enthused my patriotism so much my head is up, my jaw is squared, my shoulders are back and chest out! And I will bend my back and IQ pulling that line with all the strength of my LOVE FOR AMERICA!.....Ron Paul, proven public servant of the Constitution in 2008! GO USA!!!

[p-syrus]

The real reason behind FOX blocking Paul is likely because of their control by the Republican Establishment. Some other media outlet may have their own political agenda in omitting a candidate. The point is that it is NOT their PLACE to do so. PERIOD.

Posted by UnderMyBoot


Actually it is terribly amusing to see a Paul Supporter state this position.

Given that broadcast media are no longer governed by the "broadcast fairness doctrine" precisely as a result of the rush to deregulate commercial corporations as a result of adopting "free market" principles.

This push to eliminate regulation & restraint of corrupt corporate practices is something which libertarians in general and Dr. Ron Paul specifically have been quite vocal in promoting since it''s inception during the so-called "Reagan Revolution".

As a result of deregulation which has occurred over the last 3 decades in the telecom industry, Fox News does in fact have EVERY RIGHT to exclude whomsoever they choose from access to campaign coverage.

Afterall, it''s "their" broadcast bandwidth. They "own" it. It was "given" to them by the FCC with few limits on what they can do with their "property".

Perhaps, some of the more thoughtful Paulbots will give a bit more consideration as to why so many of their fellow citizens tend to be a bit sceptical of "free market" rhetoric & the rush "to end government regulation". :-)

[jimpurdyokla]

It''s very sad that the debates are excluding the candidates of both parties who are anti-war: first Senator Mike Gravel, then Congressman Dennis Kucinich, and now Congressman Ron Paul. The networks are injecting themselves in the political process inappropriately.

[jimpurdyokla]

It''s very sad that the debates are excluding the candidates of both parties who are anti-war: first Senator Mike Gravel, then Congressman Dennis Kucinich, and now Congressman Ron Paul. The networks are injecting themselves in the political process inappropriately.

[jimpurdyokla]

It''s very sad that the debates are excluding the candidates of both parties who are anti-war: first Senator Mike Gravel, then Congressman Dennis Kucinich, and now Congressman Ron Paul. The networks are injecting themselves in the political process inappropriately.

[jimpurdyokla]

It''s very sad that the debates are excluding the candidates of both parties who are anti-war: first Senator Mike Gravel, then Congressman Dennis Kucinich, and now Congressman Ron Paul. The networks are injecting themselves in the political process inappropriately.

[jimpurdyokla]

It''s very sad that the debates are excluding the candidates of both parties who are anti-war: first Senator Mike Gravel, then Congressman Dennis Kucinich, and now Congressman Ron Paul. The networks are injecting themselves in the political process inappropriately.

[jimpurdyokla]

It''s very sad that the debates are excluding the candidates of both parties who are anti-war: first Senator Mike Gravel, then Congressman Dennis Kucinich, and now Congressman Ron Paul. The networks are injecting themselves in the political process inappropriately.

[david1737]

Didn''t you get the memo.

The fix is in.

[bud28dy]

It''s the types of postings Ron supporters are making on here that have hurt Paul so much. His negatives are at 45% and his positives only 23%. That number is amazing considering that he has not been vetted or criticized by the media (in fact they''''ve ignored him as they well should), and he has also been ignored by his fellow candidates. The other candidates never mention him much less criticize him. That means the only info the public is getting about him is from the candidate and you folks, which is probably the most favorable info possible. And yet with no one publicly saying bad things about him, 45% of the population has a negative opinion. In other words Paul''''s own positions and the unfortunate manner in which many of his supporters have been rabidly presenting his case has hurt him tremendously. The same thing happened to Howard Dean. His own supporters were often his worst enemy.

BTW, I posted this several times to counter a previous poster who posted his over and over hoping to wipe all negative Paul comments off the first page.

[bud28dy]

It''s the types of postings Ron supporters are making on here that have hurt Paul so much. His negatives are at 45% and his positives only 23%. That number is amazing considering that he has not been vetted or criticized by the media (in fact they''''ve ignored him as they well should), and he has also been ignored by his fellow candidates. The other candidates never mention him much less criticize him. That means the only info the public is getting about him is from the candidate and you folks, which is probably the most favorable info possible. And yet with no one publicly saying bad things about him, 45% of the population has a negative opinion. In other words Paul''''s own positions and the unfortunate manner in which many of his supporters have been rabidly presenting his case has hurt him tremendously. The same thing happened to Howard Dean. His own supporters were often his worst enemy.

BTW, I posted this several times to counter a previous poster who posted his over and over hoping to wipe all negative Paul comments off the first page.

[bud28dy]

It''s the types of postings Ron supporters are making on here that have hurt Paul so much. His negatives are at 45% and his positives only 23%. That number is amazing considering that he has not been vetted or criticized by the media (in fact they''''ve ignored him as they well should), and he has also been ignored by his fellow candidates. The other candidates never mention him much less criticize him. That means the only info the public is getting about him is from the candidate and you folks, which is probably the most favorable info possible. And yet with no one publicly saying bad things about him, 45% of the population has a negative opinion. In other words Paul''''s own positions and the unfortunate manner in which many of his supporters have been rabidly presenting his case has hurt him tremendously. The same thing happened to Howard Dean. His own supporters were often his worst enemy.

BTW, I posted this several times to counter a previous poster who posted his over and over hoping to wipe all negative Paul comments off the first page.

[bud28dy]

Hey tuckerndfw --

Nice to see another voice of reason on here. I didin''t know a great deal about Paul when I went to a street fair here in LA in Sept. Several candidates had booths where they were calmy talking to people who stopped by. However, the Paul supporters walked through the crowd, basically getting in people''s faces. Folks who did stop and chat and raised questions about Paul''s positions were loudly called socialists, etc. One older woman asked about Paul''s wanting to abolish Social Security -- amazingly the supporters response was that she should rely on friends and stop mooching off young people like him. Needless to say they alientated far more people with their methods than they won over. Their rants in all of the blogs are essentially of the same tone and character. Unfortunately Paul''s message is being ruined by his messengers. I have no doubt they are largely responsible for his 45% unfavorability rating.

Case in point -- just look at the rabid postings which this will engender.

[Netterz]

The Media gives comment and support to the candidates who spend the $$$ to buy there time, promote there rants, raves and faces, and alienate the others who dont want to give them millions for a few moments in a 2 yr campaign process, which personally to me, is insanely far too long. Simply put, media advertise what sells, & will cast unfavorable shadows on the ones who refuse to spend there campaign $ on biased (bought&paid for) media outlets. Any smart voter would ignore all the media frenzy, do there own research on what each candidate has acomplished, what positions they have consistantly stood for, what there actual TRUE past says. The garbage that gets tossed out there now, is the same lies and garbage that ALWAYS gets told to get elected.

[classicdoc]

bud28dy--I''ve heard that it''s mostly the new Paul supporters who are a bit rowdy, and they tend to settle down after awhile. Of course, new supporters keep flocking to the cause, and a lot of them are young. As a 60-year-old whole voted for Paul in ''88, I''m kinda settled. Anyhow, on Paul as an obstructionist--well, standing up for what''s right also means standing against what''s wrong, no? After all these years I''ve come to the conclusion that we''re better off the less Congress does. That may have something to do with why the 90s weren''t so bad. With gridlock between Clinton and the Republicans, we didn''t get too many new spending programs, the economy straightened out, debt got paid down.... Maybe the best thing Paul could do, after bringing home the troops, is veto every spending bill so the only spending that gets through is agreed to by a supermajority.

[bud28dy]

Hey classicdoc --

You are the first Paul supporter I''ve seen in any blog who is calm, rationale, and in control of himself. Too bad more supporters aren''t like you, which I think would help Paul greatly in his campaign. The rants by supporters like Veteran 71 just posted is a perfect example. Is anyone going to read that and a) vote for Paul and b) think this guy isn''t several fries short of a happy meal? OMG the Criminal Fascists are here !!!!!!!! Unfortunately his type is the prevalent one online.

[goldenkee]

How to fix an election 101 by msm.

[classicdoc]

bud28dy--we get some abuse too, y''know! Catch you later. --Doc

[bud28dy]

LOL. Now veteran71 thinks I''m a flaming neocon Bushie. Wow!!! Maybe I''m hiding under your bed too along with all of the other boogeymen in your head. BTW I served for seven years in the military and also don''t support the Iraq War. I''m also gay and an agnostic, so there goes the flag burning, bible, gaay marriage argument. But don''t let that diminish your hysteria. I hope for Paul''s sake you are not on the streets spouting this kind of nonsense at his rallies or his negatives will rise any further.

On a serious note -- I will assume that you are a veteran. Buddy go get some help at the VA. You''re very angry for some reason and you know talking to somebody might help. And the VA is free. I''m sorry my postings get you all agitated so I won''t personally respond to you in the future because I don''t want to make it worse. Good luck.

[bud28dy]

OK, "Veteran",even though I know it will just infuriate you more I think I''ll fill u in on a few more things.

I voted against Bush and Cheny in both elections and consider them both to be one of the worst things that have ever happened to America. I know you have a vivid imagination but I didn''t voice support for either one of them in any posting I have ever made anywhere, anytime.

So let''s see- so far youv''e incorrectly labeled me as a neocon, a flag supporter, a Bushie, anti-gay, Bible loving, and an Iraq War supporter. So far you''re 0-6. And the amazing thing is I have not voiced an opinion on any of those subjects in any of my posts in here, so obviously you''re just grasping at labels. I''m sure you have more in your little box.

Instead of just trying to label me, how about address the only point I''ve made here -- which is that Paul''s supporters are some of his own worst enemies. You quite obviously fall in that category. So instead of ranting about flag burning and Bushies and ***, how about try to stay on subject?

Now I am going to do what everyone else apparently has long since done and abandon this blog. You Paulbots have once again succeeded in alienating everyone around you. Have fun.

[homespunlady]

bud28dy I Missed your repeated name-calling and desperate deliberate attempts at creating an uproar to draw attention to yourself - I have a life and several people outside these commentaries to help and take care of.

I consider Rude name-calling an indicator of a certain lack of informed knowledge, poor communication skills, and limited social ability so I won''t participate in it with you.

Glad to see from one of your final rants that we at least agree on the Bush/Cheney Administration being a disastrous fiasco for this nation.

If my observations concerning the teetering US economy are too frightening to you Please avoid reading the recent commentary that former Fed Chairman Greenspan and any number of top economists and international bankers are making - you might mislabel them as "Paulbots" also.

Personally, I''d LOVE to see ANY form of Fiscally Responsible plan to AVOID what is getting to be an OBVIOUS economic downturn for this nation out of ANY of the other candidates but so far all I''ve seen is smoke and mirrors avoidance of the subject.

No other candidate seems to take our Economy seriously enough to give it more than a sound-byte''s worth of mention and then there''s no substance to back their remark.

They keep handing out exorbitant spending promises with NO explanation as to how to pay for all of it. In my book that''s called a fraud or "con job".

If you have any information that refutes that observation I would enjoy reading about it.

[hwy71so]

Hmm, Ron Paul - Ross Perot, Ron Paul - Ross Perot, R.P. - R.P...

[hwy71so]

Did any of you see when the two Fox reporters were trying to twist Huckabee''s words and even put words in his mouth? Hannety and something or other like that. A couple of typical liberal reporters trying to distort the truth just like the rest of the media.

People, you can NOT trust the media to present the candidates to you in an unbias light. Research them on the web as well as other sources.

The media wants Hillary.

[simonsez40]

Fox has liberal reporters? Fox is the most Religious and Pro-Bush news organization - I refuse to ever watch Fox because they love some Bush and Right Wing conservatives.

[hwy71so]

The person Huckabee was talking to was a Democrat. I''ve heard him claim it over and over as well as his support for Hillary. Try watching instead of just making an assumption.

And yes, the media wants either Hillary or Obama. Why? Because they would make history as neither of the other candidates will just in them being who they are. Its job security for the media.

That skinny guy, I don''t know his name since I don''t watch Fox much (maybe 10 minutes a week), has backed Hillary anytime her name was mentioned the few times I''ve watched. The other guy, the more plump one, seemed to be more open minded toward Huckabee, yet not quite supporting him.

What does this have to do with Ron Paul? Simple, the media likes a juicy story. What does Ron Paul have to offer the media? Nothing. He''s a doctor from Texas that''s served in congress; end of discussion. What does Hillary have? "She". Huckabee? Preacher. Tabloid. That''s what the media is after. They want the juice. They don''t want real news. If they were to support reality, Duncan Hunter would be one of the leading candidates today. He''s got the best platform and has the most to offer.

[gunownerdan]

Ron Paul is not a prostitute like the rest of the candidates. Only prostitutes get a fair shot from the mainstream corporate-owned media.