Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Rufus_1611, Mar 23, 2007.
Rep. Ron Paul on War, Peace, and the News Media
Freedom is also the answer to war.
As our National Anthem says, "then conquer we must, when our cause it is just." Most of our wars, especially through WW2, were most certainly just. The line blurs after that. In order to have just wars, one must have just leaders. Our present fighting men and women and the veterans that preceded them always have done a magnificant job, and we owe our very freedom and liberty to them.
Anyone who thinks that the news media just repeats what the president says and doesn't ask tough question is hopelessly out of touch. The more I read from Ron Paul the less credibility he has.
How can anyone take someone seriously when they make stupid statements that so obviously wrong?
Maybe he just doesn't watch enough TV. I'll forgive him.
Maybe you can point out the errors of Ron Pauls' ways to us, Pastor Larry.
Let's look at some of the reasonable statements by a person who's supposed to be credible. To keep it fair and balanced.
Topic, Creation of a North American Union
Opening statement by an un-credible person...
And now reasonable statements from a credible person...
Credible reasonable statements that totally debunks once and for all the un-credible persons wild conspiracy theory, right?
Click Here to read what some other lunatics are saying.
What is that about poncho? What does the fact that you can posts quotes from people prove?
If anyone (including Ron Paul) says that the media just parrots the Bush administration and doesn't ask tough questions, then they are hopelessly out of touch. Having your TV on for fifteen minutes on any news station is a prima facie case against the comments of Paul. How can Ron Paul pretend to be a serious candidate when he is unaware of what is going on in the news media? They do not repeat the administration. They do ask tough questions (many of them absurd or politically driven, as with any administration). Their business is news, not truth.
Not only do they parrot the Bush administration but they even use the administration vernacular. In times past, when additional troops were sent to a theater of war, this was known as a "troop escalation". In today's parrot world the Bush administration calls this action a "surge" and the media goes "squawk it's a surge, squawk".
Then you are not watching news either. It is referred to very often as an escalation of the war. There are many questions being asked and even answered by the news media and pundits hired by them.
It is patently absurd to say that the administration is simply be parroted and given a free pass. Such a charge cannot be made by anyone who is even remotely aware of hte current news cycles, unless they have little integrity.
To agree with the news media is one thing. To say that the news media is simply a parrot that doesn't ask tough questions is absurd on its face.
Turn on CSpan one day around noon and watch Snow's news briefing. It is clear that there is no love lost between the adminsitration and the news media. Turn on anyone from Olbermann to Carlson, from Mathews to OReilly ... It is clear that the news media is not parroting the administration and is asking tough questions (or at least making tough charges ... I say that because some like Olberman and OReilly just make brash and often absurd statements against the administration, giving answers without benefit of asking the questions).
Is it not just to attempt to defend our nation against enemies that have warned us in word and deed that they intend to convert us or annihilate us? I fear that people blur this notion in their misguided hatred for GWB. GWB is about just a leader as we've had.
Just keep on drinking th kool-aid, hillclimer. :laugh:
In light of the fact that this administration was planning an invasion of Iraq long before 9-11, that's a bit ironic. A pre-emptive strike against a country that had not made an aggressive move is not defensive. It has long since been proven that Iraq and Saddam had no connections to Al Qaida.
Ron Paul's statement about the media parroting the Bush administration's policies is a political one. He knows his supporters and their biases pretty well. He's playing to the persecution complex that the religious right has developed about itself regarding the media. You don't think he really believes that, do you?
I suppose you can prove that statement , or...
would you rather state it as your "opinion", rather than a simple declarative fact?
It's hard to deal with people that have so contemptuous a view of truth.
:laugh: I was drinking a Pepsi when I read this and it almost sprayed and came out my nose.:laugh:
Think I'll make some grape cool-aid today, and I'll use less water, cause I want it strong. Some of the grand's are coming over to swim, and they'll love it.
If it came from GrandPa , it's gotta be good.
P.S. Save some for Carpro.
Now we know who is serving all tha Kool Aid.
Nothing at all PL. That's why you're trying to change the subject and make it about me, again. It's what's said in the quotes and the facts presented within the article that tend to back up Ron Paul's (IYO "absurd') assertion that it's about.
You can lead a neo-neocon to all the documents but you can't make him read them. C'mon, It's becoming common knowledge, put down the Propaganda Times Digest and have a look at the real news for a change.