FOX News Bars Drug Policy Discussion From the Republican Debates by Excluding Ron Paul
Looks like FOX News is trying to put a lid on Ron Paul:
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 Rep. Ron Paul.
…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. [CNN]
Notwithstanding the arbitrary decision to use a bus that doesn't fit everyone, their selective use of polling data doesn't tell the whole story either. Paul is at least as popular as Fred Thompson in New Hampshire, where the debate is to take place:
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.
One effect of keeping Ron Paul out of the debate will be to ensure that drug policy is not discussed at all during the event. Paul is surely the only republican candidate that would ever voluntarily mention drug policy during the debate. He wants to end the drug war, while the others want to keep the lights turned off and pretend that everything is going splendidly.
I'm not saying FOX News is trying to stifle the drug policy debate specifically. Paul's views on drug policy aren’t the only reason his candidacy is controversial. But to whatever extent his unique views on this issue contribute to his frequent designation as a "fringe" candidate, that's a shame.
Whether or not Paul's views on drug policy are a primary source of concern among his critics, this is certainly one issue that is attracting supporters to his campaign. All of this stands to demonstrate that opposition to the drug war is energizing voters on the right as well as the left, and that's why it's disturbing to see the appearance of bias against him in the media. If anything, Paul's fundraising success should demonstrate that many republicans want more discussion of drug policy, not less.
Growing support for Paul's campaign may ensure that his views can't be censored as easily as some would prefer. If he bests any of the FOX Five in Iowa or New Hampshire, it will become that much harder to deny him a place at the podium. And the odds of a top five showing aren't looking too bad.
As the comment section of this post will soon reveal, people really like Ron Paul.
Update: It wasn't my intention to start a debate over Ron Paul's candidacy in the comment section. We don’t endorse or oppose candidates. We just report on their drug policy positions and reflect on the implications of presidential politics for our movement. This isn't the best place to debate the rest of Ron Paul's platform.
But it is interesting to note the intensity of sentiments both for and against Paul. He's generated a significant buzz, which will hopefully help to illustrate the viability of drug policy reform as an asset on the campaign trail.
Update: FOX News pundits question their own network's decision to exclude Ron Paul in light of his strong showing in Iowa.
(This blog post was published by StoptheDrugWar.org's lobbying arm, the Drug Reform Coordination Network, which also shares the cost of maintaining this web site. DRCNet Foundation takes no positions on candidates for public office, in compliance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and does not pay for reporting that could be interpreted or misinterpreted as doing so.)
digg
reddit9.99%
Comment posted by Anonymous on Fri, 01/04/2008 - 9:35pmRon Paul got 9.99% in the polls for the Iowa caucus.
Huckabee won with 34.29%, which I thought was pretty weird. He apparently had a massive boost in popularity for some odd reason.
bad news
Comment posted by mlang52 on Sat, 01/05/2008 - 11:28amI am a charismatic Christian, and I can't even see having a Baptist preacher as president. If they would research him, they might be less impressed. But, sad to say, many don't look at the candidate' views. People who vote for him, because they are evangelicals, are the sheep following him to slaughter! I think things will be different in the more progressive states with more independently thinking voters. They can see through the "Christian" label. Some Christians are smarter than that.
THIS is what's important!
Comment posted by Anonymous on Tue, 01/01/2008 - 11:46pmThe 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.
Ron Paul No Friend of American Values
Comment posted by David Dunn on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 12:11amFor a starter consider the following:
http://www.dailykos.com/main/2
Ron Paul is Still Nuts, That's Why
by MissLaura
Thu Dec 13, 2007 at 10:15:40 AM PST
Ron Paul has been attracting support from some unlikely quarters, mainly due to ignorance of his positions on anything much but Iraq. You may know the man is crazy, but convincing others is the task.
So, without further ado, here (greatly condensed from the definitive take-down at Orcinus) are some concrete positions he's taken to cite when you want to push back against your Paul-bot in-laws, co-workers, and assorted acquaintances:
• Ron Paul wants the US to withdraw from the UN or at least from UNESCO.
• Ron Paul has authored legislation saying that life begins at conception, to prevent federal money from being spent on family planning (that would include contraception), and has tried to amend the Constitution to "guarantee the right to life."
• Ron Paul has tried to repeal the Occupational Health and Safety Act, to abolish the minimum wage, and to eviscerate Social Security.
• Ron Paul wants guns in schools.
• Ron Paul has tried to repeal the Davis-Bacon Act to guarantee employees of federal contractors the prevailing wage and wants to make it easier to decertify a union.
• Ron Paul wants to amend the Constitution to end birthright citizenship.
• Ron Paul wants to dismantle the Federal Reserve and prepare for a return to the Gold Standard, which would destroy the economy.
This is just the tip of a very big, very crazy iceberg. See the rest at Orcinus. http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-pauls-record-in-congress.html
Update 2: Ron Paul was one of 8 people to vote against the FTC being allowed to establish a do not call registry.
Then there's this, which I find disturbing:
I have kept quiet about the Ron Paul campaign for a while, because I didn’t see any need to say anything that would cause any trouble. However, reading the latest release from his campaign spokesman, I am compelled to tell the truth about Ron Paul’s extensive involvement in white nationalism.
Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review, and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, usually on Wednesdays. This is part of a dinner that was originally organized by Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis and Joe Sobran, and has since been mostly taken over by the Council of Conservative Citizens.
This is from a letter purportedly signed by a Bill White, Commander American National Socialist Workers Party.
There's more from this web site: http://orthodoxanarchist.com/
Ron Paul is not fond of American Constitutional values. His values are more in line with the failed articles of Confederation.
Paul's "less government" philosophy would give corporate welfare queens and robber barons free reign to continue their rapacious plundering and pillaging of the American people.
The Enrons, Big Oil, Big Coal, Pharmaceuticals, sub-prime lenders and the coming exposé of the ARMs--Adjustable Rate Mortgages--all would have a free license to continue their destructive acts against Americans and American communities as well as suppress all competition.
That's bad news for hempsters.
"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
— Thomas Jefferson
American Values
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 12:26amDavid Dunn, you are a liar.
You have not fully stated
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 12:27amYou have not fully stated Ron's positions and I often see the same or similar post where ever the keyword Ron Paul is listed. The people know the truth so no need to waste my time.
people know the truth??
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sat, 01/05/2008 - 4:00pmReally ?? because as well heeled in anything politic,I don't even know the real truth on Ron Paul and I've hit every blog,editrial,pro/con debate etc etc I can find on the man ,if he were all you wish or propose than why is he not way up on top!....If there is one un- truth in this country it is that ''the people know the truth''
Want to really know Ron Paul and his principles?
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sun, 01/06/2008 - 3:47amJust go here and you can get it all in his own words:
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org
And then go here for information about his candidacy:
http://www.dailypaul.com/
The reason he is not on top is because the powers that be see him as a fly in their ointment. They know his agenda will screw up their plans for a one world government, where the US will just be one more 3rd world nation, and they will be the top of the world heap. And the mainstream media are in that plot up to their eyebrows; so they refuse to give Dr. Paul any positive publicity, when they give him any coverage at all they marginalize, criticize and denigrate him. Notice they (the media) didn't even mention him on the news tonight even tho he did better than 10% in Iowa (not 9.9% as someone above posted); however, they did mention Rudy who only scored at 3% in the Iowa caucus.
Dude...
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 12:52amDrug policy reformers are used to seeing this same kind of brainwashed, non-logic. It's used by drug warriors a lot. You're targeting the wrong crowd here.
MissLaura (Laura Clawson)
Contributing EditorPolitics were always an important part of Laura's life - her early memories include a strike picket line, a gay pride march, and untold Democratic Socialists of America potluck dinners
And it's not worth the trouble to debunk your distorted list.
As far as "hempsters", he's introduced a bill twice to legalize hemp. It never got up for a vote. Where were all the lovely liberal Congressman then?
I think we have 2 choices: a) Vote to keep the corporate fascio-socialists in charge, or b) vote for Ron Paul.
misrepresentation by D. Dunn
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sat, 01/05/2008 - 1:17amYou have purposely misrepresented Dr. Paul's views and actions. If I were to describe things the way you do, I could say that a doctor who vaccinates children is simply someone who likes to stab babies. At least get it right if you're going to bother writing anything. The New York Times had to apologize for the white supremacist story it wrote because it turned out TO BE FALSE. In fact, the single act of ending the drug war will do more for minority civil rights than anything else. Does that sound like a racist?
Furthermore, Dr. Paul is the only honest candidate out there. Even if he is wrong on some things or fails as a president it will be nice to have four years of knowing that all of the crooked bastards who usually run the show won't be in power.
Vote for freedom
Vote for the constitution
Vote for Ron Paul
Ron Paul vs Fox News
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 12:20amI have been a GOP member for over 20 years. Sadly, I have voted party line with the exception of the recent senate run. The recent senate run I wrote in a constitution party member for the senate. In addition I'm not just a participant of the GOP party but the party views my donations as a large donor of over $50,000 for major election cycles.
I find the exclusion of Ron Paul, Duncan Hunter and Allen Keyes from the Fox news forum to equate to a negative controlling aspect of which I have not personally witnessed before in former election cycles.
Fox news obtained it's license from the FCC to present news, etc. I would suggest the FCC revoke Fox news license for manipulation of the political process. All good American's regardless of your presidential choice must oppose Fox news decisions to ban the mentioned candidates.
If a GOP member can raise nearly $20,000,000 for the 4th qtr then I want to hear what the man has to say even though I don't agree with every view. Allen Keyes always offers his firm conviction and for some GOP members who have never meet Allen well you do so at your own disservice. Duncan Hunter seems to be sincere and more trusting then Rudy but he seems to want finish the fence so let his speak.
I did notice a news alert today which implied that Fox news stated the issue was up to the NH GOP. However, the NH GOP presented a press release encouraging Fox news to invite and not exclude so it appears for the moment that we don't know which source to trust.
In closing I will never donate my cash to the National Republican party again. As a Ron Paul supporter I further claim I'm a Ron Paul Republican.
I will contact my lawyer in the morning to see if Fox news is in violation of any FCC issue regarding the presidential debate or election cycle and I hope Ron Paul's office has done the same. If this isn't resolved and Ron doesn't appear at the fox forum then I will cancel my local advertising plans with my local fox affiliate for my small business and will spend the ad budget elsewhere.
David Dunn
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 12:40amIts very tiring fighting the disinformation that people spew. While I must thank you for being one of the few even give links in support of your statements, the things you present are often distorted.
Simply put, do not post information that is not 100% true.
History from a unbiased sources:
http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=BC031929
http://www.opencongress.org/people/show/400311_ronald_paul
Speeches, writings, and so on, unedited and unskewed:
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/
Hint: Next time don't post something like http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-pauls-record-in-congress.html
I'm not familiar with the history of some of the other url's, but dneiwert is well known for spewing lies.
Vote Ron Paul
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 1:04amI registered Republican to vote for Ron Paul in the primary.
FAUX FIASCO
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 1:06amTHE LATEST ON THE FAUX FIASCO!
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/281/boards/view/viewthread?thread=3986042&page...
SOLUTION TO THE FAUX FIASCO (IF WE ACT FAST)
Fox News – Boycott them and deliver the truth
http://howtheneoconsstolefreedom.blogspot.com/2008/01/fox-news-boycott-t...
wrong
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 1:10am• Ron Paul wants the US to withdraw from the UN or at least from UNESCO.
Absolutely. I agree with him 100%.
• Ron Paul has authored legislation saying that life begins at conception, to prevent federal money from being spent on family planning (that would include contraception), and has tried to amend the Constitution to "guarantee the right to life."
He's an OB/GYN who has delivered over 4,000 babies. Hardly a man for women to fear. Life does begin at conception, when the heck do you think it begins? No, federal money should not be spent killing babies. It take a whole lot more than a congressman or a president to amend the Constitution to "guarantee the right to life." He made that proposal to show that there wasn't any support for a constitutional admendment.
• Ron Paul has tried to repeal the Occupational Health and Safety Act, to abolish the minimum wage, and to eviscerate Social Security.
In 2001, he voted for zero-funding for OSHA's Ergonomics Rules, instead of $4.5 billion. So he's a bad guy for voting against $4.5 billion in wasted taxpayer money on enforcement of
Ergonomics Rules. O...K...
States have their own minimum wage laws. There doesn't need to be a Federal one. Why show a Senator from California get to decide what Oklahoma has to pay as a minimum wage?
Paul has never voted to spend one dime of the Social Secuirty funds.
• Ron Paul wants guns in schools.
Well, that is a little misleading to say the least. He has said legal gun owners with concealed permits should be allow to have guns when they are on school grounds. How many people died in VA that didn't have to because permit holders weren't allowed to have their guns on campus? Certainly didn't stop the bad guy now did it?
• Ron Paul has tried to repeal the Davis-Bacon Act to guarantee employees of federal contractors the prevailing wage and wants to make it easier to decertify a union.
More fereral gov't "guarantees". You are actually argueing for companies like Haliburton. Nice.
• Ron Paul wants to amend the Constitution to end birthright citizenship.
Oh no, no more anchor babies from illegal immigrants. What a terrible thing.
• Ron Paul wants to dismantle the Federal Reserve and prepare for a return to the Gold Standard, which would destroy the economy
LMAO, now you are just making me laugh. So our economy is based on a centralized private banking entity that can print money at will, and it would be destroyed by actually placing a value on our worthless paper dollar.
Either this is just a cut-n-paste troll job, or you really have some twisted views.
Ron's Record
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 2:54amHe has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.
Ron Paul
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sat, 01/05/2008 - 4:16pmSomebody said that if Dr. Paul were elected,he'd bring home all our troops from Iraq,you know 'bout those huge ''permanent'' bases built by the 'burtons over there w/all that money,? think they're just going to pick up stix and leave,?? JFK, RK, MLK. were all good men and all were assasinated for their beliefs,you really think Paul could pull off anything like he claims w/o too feelng the bullet,,from texas I like Kinky Freedman for Gov.which never happened,as for RP.? don't like him for pres. at all ....so far!....posted by donl
Misunderstanding Dr. Paul
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 10:58pmDavid Dunn: You are either a poophead or you are trying to fool people more knowledgable than yourself. I recommend that you work towards your G.E.D. or find another hobby.
RON PAUL, I LOVE YOU.
Comment posted by Anonymous on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 9:45amlets elect ron paul and let freedom ring. ron paul, you are the answer to my prayers.
Stupid oor Stoned?
Comment posted by Anonymous on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 11:47amPossibly Fox has decided to only include candidates with a chance of being nominated. I am sure that the author is far too busy rolling a joint but there are about 20 people running for the presidency not including those who will be written in on Election Day maybe they should get them all on TV. Stupid or stoned?
Almost makes sense
Comment posted by Anonymous on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 5:06pmWhat you say woudl make sense, except that Paul is polling better than Giulianini and Thompson in some New Hampshire and Iowa polls. Paul is at least as serious and viable candidate as either of them at this point. Thompson will drop out after New Hampshire, if not after Iowa, but Paul has the money to keep going for some time.
I am not saying that Paul is the answer to all of our problems (though he is the only one serious about ending the drug war), but he is not a "fringe candidate" any more.
Get 'em all on tv???
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sat, 01/05/2008 - 4:27pmBoy what a novel idea,an equal chance for all poss.press.candidates to say their say ,and not just the filthy rich ones!!,would that be fairminded or what? can't have that,gotta have loads of money prove you're successfull in life,..I really liked JFK for press.he was from lots of money ,but was it his success? or Joe Kennedy? and we all know where he got his money !...posted by donl in case you wish to throw stones!
Ron Paul DOES have a chance to be nominated
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sun, 01/06/2008 - 4:26amHe'd have an even greater chance if the media would stop ignoring him. The message of freedom, both personal and economic, is popular. The more who get to hear that message of freedom, the more who will support him. But, of course, that is exactly why the media ignores him.
Actually, evey single person who is running for president, should be able to make his bid before all the American people, even the obscure ones everyone thinks will never get more than a few votes. It is the job of the media to present all the candidates to the American people, it is then up to the American people which ones are chosen to go on to the final ballot. It should not be the media who decide for us who will be the candidates we get to choose from for that final ballot.
P.S.
Comment posted by Anonymous on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 11:51amoor is spelled like that on purpose stupid or stoned?
Sorry about the double post,
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sun, 01/06/2008 - 4:29amSorry about the double post, don't know what happened, I only clicked once on the button, honest.
Elect Ron Paul
Comment posted by Anonymous on Sun, 01/06/2008 - 10:29pmIf the responses to this topic are any indication, Dr. Paul has a chance of election...
Yes I do!
Comment posted by Anonymous on Tue, 01/01/2008 - 11:35pmI do like Ron Paul! It's going to be very interesting to see what Fox does if he finishes well in Iowa. Yes, the war on drugs most certainly will not be a topic of discussion--heck, there weren't even any questions about healthcare or education in the CNN/YouTube debate. It's very upsetting, yet I am surprised by few of the media's tactics these days.