GazeboflossUK

Is Ron Paul Electable? (1/17/08) That is the question that Carl Cameron asked Ron Paul in last Thursday's Fox News debate in South Carolina. How did Ron Paul respond? Well, you wouldn’t be able to find his answer if you watched the rebroadcast of the debate, because Fox News cut Dr. Paul’s response!!! But don’t worry… Thanks to the wonders of YouTube, you can see Ron Paul respond below or here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlacFmRGPgI RON PAUL'S ANSWER IS FANTASTIC And for what it's worth, the charge that Ron Paul is somehow unelectable in the Republican party sounds awfully similar to the charges levied against Ronald Reagan in 1980. As this Time Magazine article shows, another Republican -- Gerald Ford -- branded Ronald Reagan as "unelectable" as late as March of 1980. Read more about Fox News' censorship in Daniel McCarthy's post on the Daily Dose Blog.

Hahaha... That was a fun little scuffle. "Have some respect!" t-shirts seem the obvious choice. Or remixing the video to include the Aretha Franklin smash hit "R E S P E C T"

All this anger over some names?? Fair enough..... "Leftrightleftright!!!???.....Cemeteries Of London!!!!!???!!!!!!??? .....they've gone shit!!!" A bit of an overeaction I'd say. Some people have got very bizarre worries in their lives...haha. Most of the song names are fine, I guess. You'd base a review, in which you call a band "shit", on some song names?? Fuck me.....how backwards.

Votes cast in New Hampshire's Democratic and Republican presidential primaries will undergo a hand recount, after two candidates who garnered little support here questioned the results. The state is now required to conduct a full hand recount of the nearly 240,000 ballots cast in Tuesday's Republican primary and the more than 285,000 ballots cast in the Democratic primary.

Citing "serious and credible reports, allegations and rumors" about the integrity of Tuesday's results, Congressman Dennis Kucinich is backing a full recount of ballots for the Democratic contest in New Hampshire, meaning that both party's primaries may now both be cast into doubt.........However, vote fraud expert Bev Harris has warned that it could all be a trap to validate Diebold electronic voting machines.

CNN Mention of Possible Vote Fraud Finds Memory Hole http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcwdKBVt_Ew This CNN section aired about 5:06am ET. CNN repeats their "News" segments all the time. However - all the other times Bill Snyder came on to repeat this segment, he never mentioned anything about possible fraud. Just this one, early in the morning. ""All the pollsters are unlikely to have made the same mistake so what could have happened? Something must have happened," Bill Synder Hmm, indeed. Media Struggles To Whitewash Clinton Vote Fraud Suspicions Other Stories. Clear Evidence Of Widespread Vote Fraud In New Hampshire http://prisonplanet.com/articles/janu... Ron Paul Votes Not Counted In New Hampshire District http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/... C-SPAN: Possible Sutton County, NH vote fraud 1/8/0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBfmks... New Hampshire District Admits Ron Paul Votes Not Counted http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1601 Viewer Records NH VOTE FLIPPING from Ron Paul to McCain! http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=774 Bev Harris: Iowa Caucus Had Vote Fraud http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1579 NH RESIDENTS: What you can do to help with the recount http://www.dailypaul.com/node/23684 Ron Paul Class lawsuit Former FBI IOWA Fraud http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUJZnK... Voter Fraud Against Paul Confirmed in Sutton, N.H. http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1587

New Hampshire. Well, we will see. I'm being told that there is work going on to attempt to get a recount. It's looking to cost around $67,000 if the Paul campaign decide to go ahead with that but it might be worth it. There's probably a fair bit going on over there and Bev Harris at Black Box Voting is doing a great job. She has even found out information that a convicted felon was in charge of some areas I believe - but I don't think it's best to pass precise info on that around because documents are being looked over at present to confirm everything clearly. Plus, since the results showed that Ron Paul got zero votes in more towns - there is more investigating to be done.

Breaking news actually... After major pressure on "officials" at polling stations more Ron Paul votes have now been confirmed after he was originally reported to have got zero in some areas... Caught red handed. Now, this might get big. But I'm sure most places will ignore this.

Major allegations of vote fraud in New Hampshire are circulating after Hillary Clinton reversed that mammoth pre-polling deficit to defeat Barack Obama with the aid of Diebold electronic voting machines. While there are other cases of confirmed votes for Ron Paul in the Sutton district that were not even counted. I'm sure this will not be the last we here of this....

Here...wonderful. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKKBp8oYaao Oh yeah. He wont change his stance for money. Some people are really trying to hurt Ron Paul by spreading some very bad stuff. Really taking quotes out of context and trying to tie his name to everything bad. Seriously, you'll no doubt see them (the establishment) going after Paul. They want him silenced.

This got me really mad and these Paul supporters show that they too are livid about the way Luntz is attempting to sway things. Who is he working for? Plus - it's not the first time Luntz has been called on his "polling" techniques. Exposure Of Fox Pollster Betrays Media Slant Against Ron Paul Congressman's supporters confront Frank Luntz Frank Luntz, a political pollster who regularly appears on Fox news' presidential race analysis and has been heavily criticized for his manipulative methods and slanted coverage, has finally been exposed for the fraud he is after it emerged that his "randomly selected" and “undecided” focus groups, that constitute the figures for his news features, are being populated by the same people months apart from each other. Watch the following video for the evidence: (some bad language in parts of the clip) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFL-LubDF9c The same man appeared twice, four months apart, as part of Luntz's and Fox's post-GOP debate "random" focus group! Luntz describes his profession as “testing language and finding words that will help his clients sell their product or turn public opinion on an issue or a candidate." He has won hundreds of polls for private corporations and lobbying groups but is better known for his work with Republican politicians. In a January 9, 2007, interview on Fresh Air with Terry Gross, Luntz redefined the term "Orwellian" in a positive sense, saying that if one reads Orwell's Essay On Language, "To be 'Orwellian' is to speak with absolute clarity, to be succinct, to explain what the event is, to talk about what triggers something happening…and to do so without any pejorative whatsoever." He attracted a great deal of attention after the Penn and Teller piece, featured in the video above, further exposed his manipulative methods of "getting the right answers". Luntz has been accused of skewing research results to reflect more favorably on specific clients. In 1997, he was reprimanded by the American Association for Public Opinion Research and in 2000 he was censured by the National Council on Public Polls. Given that the Luntz's plant is first seen to be endorsing McCain and then four months later Romney, it cannot necessarily be said that Luntz is attempting to sway public opinion toward one particular GOP candidate. However, he and Fox News are undoubtedly concerned with shifting the focus away from one candidate. Ron Paul. Between Fox ejecting Paul from the debate in New Hampshire just two evenings before perhaps his strongest chance of a result, and Luntz's "random" focus group singing the praises of Mitt Romney, these two artisans of fairness and balance have done a sterling job in shifting some of the focus away from a snowballing Ron Paul revolution. Luntz previously attracted the attention of Ron Paul supporters after it was reported that he spent the entirety of one 'focus' group ridiculing the Congressman in front of the 29 people in attendance. Last night Luntz was confronted by Paulites outside the Merrimack Restaurant, the site of his focus group, on the main street of Manchester, across the street from the Radisson Hotel where protesters also confronted Sean Hannity last night. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HJaxDt0EbY The supporter who filmed the confrontation also claims he managed to infiltrate Luntz's focus group and secretly taped the whole show. Chris Brunner blasted Luntz for again allegedly making negative remarks against Ron Paul during the meeting, and has vowed to publish the video on his website. Paul’s supporters had been yelling in the window and formed a constant flow of signs parading back and forth, to which Luntz responded by calling them “mean.” “We’re mad because the Fourth Estate has been taken away from us,” a voice yelled out to Luntz. “You are ignoring America’s savior!” shouted another. As Luntz walked away he shouted “I don’t owe you guys anything."

To be honest, seeing Paul jump around would be wrong, just plain wrong. haha. You can see the emotion in their faces if you are close - plus, Daniel is always on the move...and Carlos is often pulling some awkward, protracted shapes.

No!!!! You can't vote Dem!! hahaha. Don't do it. :laugh3: Hilary and Barack are both establishment backed horses. Not that the Republicans are any better.....all except Paul there are pure trash.

Yes, Ron is exactly what a president should be and all the other candidates really fear speaking along side him. They can't keep up with Ron either. The rest of the pack just attack Ron Paul because they can't even understand the issues he raises. The rest are power loving, cheap talking puppets - in it for fame and status. ALSO!! RON PAUL ON JAY LENO TONIGHT!! - GREAT EXPOSURE JUST BEFORE THE N.H CAUCUS!!!

ALL of RON PAUL’s replies @ ABC/N.H. debate on 1-05-08 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZ7CRYsoB6E http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7paYyU0WrE What happened was this: Ron Paul pointed out that the neocon emperor has no clothes. He has always done that, but the past debates were organized and moderated to marginalize him and silence him. Last night, he was in the thick of things, and therefore he showed up his opponents as scared and hollow men. The regime is based on lies; it can't stand the truth, so last night was an historic moment; the regime began to crumple.

Ron Paul A Man Among Boys at ABC Debate John Armstrong Nolan Chart Sunday January 6, 2007 At the ABC Debate on Saturday night, the moderator asked the Republicans about how they would address an issue truly affecting nearly every American almost daily--rising gas prices. The other candidates talked about things like alternative fuels, getting us off the dependence on foreign oil, increasing investment in technology. They also "addressed" the issue of gas prices by talking about global warming and greenhouse gases, how the oil companies were paying more to protect themselves in lawsuits than on research, and how high gas prices helped fund terrorists. I'm sorry, but what in Obama does this have to do with actually fixing the problem of surging gas prices? Ron Paul was a doctor for many years. In that career he could have lost his job or killed a patient if he failed to accurately diagnose and actually address the real problem. The devotion and dedication he demonstrated to each individual patient in the past is much the same as the commitment he shows to each individual American and their rights now. His previous job experience and this devotion has made it impossible for him to dodge diagnosing and addressing real issues even today. Which is why when he was asked about the gas price problem, instead of engaging in ridiculous political speak, he quoted the Wall Street Journal. The Journal ran an article showing that gas prices weren't rising anywhere else in the world. Only in America. Why? You see, the cost of gas isn't rising, the value of the dollar is decreasing. Like I explained to my dad, the value of oil hasn't increased, it just takes a lot more dollars to buy the same amount because the dollar is worth less. This issue isn't discussed openly because it doesn't resonate with voters the way issues like "free health care" or "securing our borders" or "protecting us from terrorists" do. How many Americans even realize that the U.S. dollar is worth less than a Canadian Dollar? Using the Canadian Dollar as the benchmark, how many people know that after the terrorist attacks on 9/11 the dollar was stronger than it was in 2000? How many people realize that in 2002, when the war in Iraq began. the value of our dollar began to decrease? It hasn't stopped its decline since, and is now reaching historical lows. As the data in the chart below indicates, it wasn't the attacks of 9/11 that destroyed our dollar, it was our response to them. Historic Exchange Rates How many Americans fail to see the connection? How many people in our country don't seem to understand why this matters? And most imporantly, how many presidential candidates are even discussing this issue? Ron Paul's economic and monetary ideology are typically a punchline at best among political pundits with the level of sophistication along these lines: "Ron Paul wants to go back to the gold standard. What's next? Reducing dependency on foreign oil by getting rid or our cars and riding horses?" These pundits are also starting to claim that Ron Paul offers a lot of ideology, but no practical real world solutions to the problems facing America. These blanket statements influence common voters tremendously in a time when "practical real world solution" has become synonomous with "government entitlement program." These very real solutions Ron Paul supports are hard to grasp for the typical American who has little understanding of economic theory, monetary policy, or interest of anything foreign outside of why Europeans insist of calling soccer "football." They were probably watching football when this debate was on. These same people are depending on Social Security for retirement and are scared to death that when they hear these political experts tell them that "Ron Paul wants to end Social Security." Below is my humble attempt at explaining this complicated issue in a way the person I just described can easily understand. Once understood, this person will also be able to see that the sky may indeed be falling, and that contrary to public opinion Ron Paul is the only candidate running on a platform that would SAVE Social Security until our country was healthy and prosperous enough that it was no longer needed (which very likely would not be during Paul's administration even if he were to become a two term president). Monetary Policy and Consequences For Dummies (like me) Let's assume that everyone in America could print their own money. Or to make it easier, they could just go online to their personal checking account, type in whatever dollar amount they wanted, and that would be how much money had in the bank. How much would a dollar then be worth? This is easy. It would be worth next to nothing because what $1 once bought, it would now take millions to purchase the same good or service because there would be so many dollars. But let's change the scenario a little. Let's say that this creating of money out of thin air was introduced state by state in alphabetical order. In other words, only residents of Alabama could print money for the first month, then Alaskans could join in a month later, then Arizona residents and so forth. Who would benefit the most? The Alabamans would. By the time Wyoming got into the mix, it probably wouldn't even be worth the bother. In other words, the people who benefit under a system like this are the people who get to use the newly created money first. Individuals in our country can't print their own money, but there is a private bank that can. It's called the Federal Reserve. And they do. And then they lend it to our government with interest. There are nearly 26 dollars in circulation now for every 1 dollar in circulation in 1959. And the rate of printing this money is increasing. Just this year we printed more dollars than the total amount that existed in 1963. While the number of dollars has increased 26 fold, the population hasn't even doubled over that same period. Of course this works out fine for the government. They get to spend the money first. And it works out well for the special interest contractors who receive the money. They are like Alaskans in our example. The people are Wyoming. To bring this down to simpler terms which also illustrates the long term consequences of this issue, when many families receive a new credit card in the mail, they feel as if they have "free money." So they spend it. And then get another credit. Then they max out that card too. And so it goes until they can no longer meet the minimum payments or get a new card. When the creditors come calling, there are three ways they can pay off the debt. One is to raise income. But that is very difficult for an individual to do. Another is to borrow money from grandma. The third is to cut spending on things that the kids really loved and that may have seemed "necessary" when the "free money" was rolling in, but suddenly doesn't seem as much so when the family is facing losing its car or home. If they can't get more money, get it from grandma, or cut enough spending to pay the debt, they are forced to go bankrupt and then lose everything that really was important to them. What is the connection here? The government has a never ending stream of "free money" printed by the Federal Reserve. As you hopefully now understand, this "free money" hurts the individual citizen by devaluing his dollar. Eventually this debt has to be repaid. How can this happen? Unlike the individual citizen, the government can raise its income rather easily. This is accomplished by raising taxes. The second is to borrow from Granny. The name of the Federal Government's most benevolent Grandmother is China. Although Granny may claim she expects the money back, China actually does--with interest. What happens when Granny cuts us off and wants her money back? Well, the individual's granny doesn't have nukes to help her collect like our Government's Granny does. The third is to cut spending on things we just can't afford. No matter how much the "kids" may like things like supporting foreign countries, propping up dictators to make us "safe from terrorists", testing children annually to make sure they aren't left behind, providing Federal grants to send people to college, or the idea of free health care; if we don't give those things up we won't even be able to afford the things we really need--like Nukes to shoot when Grandma comes calling. Ron Paul is the only candidate to offer a solution to this problem. The first step is to stop activating all of those new credit cards. This is why he would end the Federal Reserve and offers radical ideas like making sure our dollar is actually worth something. The second is to cut out spending no matter how unpopular it is or how much the kids may cry about it. None of this may seem like a major issue right now. In fact, it doesn't seem bad at all. We are living the high life. The "leading" GOP candidates are like the dads who earn 60,000 (fiat pre-tax) dollars who live in the suburbs, live in a house with an interest only adjustable rate mortgage, and "own" two import SUV's while mom stays at home because it's "best for the kids." There is nothing that they can't afford for their family as long as the credit cards keep rolling in. They just smile and nod and keep promising more. This doesn't seem like a big deal either. They are living the high life. At least until the cards are all maxed; the collection agencies start calling; their credit score goes down; the interest rate gets adjusted upward; they can't afford the mortgage; the bank forecloses; and mom leaves with the kids to go live with grandma and grandpa in the house they paid off in 7 years because they didn't believe in being a mooch and borrowing money. Can you say "mortgage crisis"? Ron Paul is that wise old grandpappy who kept getting laughed at and called an old-timer who didn't understand how the modern world worked when he repeatedly told his daughter her family needed to learn to live below its means. The best way to prevent foreclosure is foresight. Ron Paul's foresight would not only help us get lower gas prices by restoring the dollar's value, it would help us stave off bankruptcy or a nuclear attack by China. When you grow up and understand this issue, it kinda makes the "major issues" like national healthcare and terrorism seem about as significant as that pimple you had on prom night doesn't it? Your fellow American, John Armstrong

Ron Paul: Fox News Is "Beyond A Joke" Presidential candidate slams decision to exclude him from forum Presidential candidate Ron Paul commented on the controversy surrounding his exclusion from a Fox News January 6th presidential forum by encouraging supporters to keep up the pressure on the network to reverse their decision and slamming the network's claim of being fair and balanced as "beyond a joke". "People are outraged and a lot of them are coming to our defense including the Republican Party up there so we haven't heard the last word about that yet," said Paul. The Congressman identified the main reason for his exclusion as Fox News' fear that he would express strong anti-war opinions, which they see as a "threat" when coming from the most conservative member of the house. "They have to realize that what the numbers are and if it's hurting them, if it's not in their interests I think they're in a bind, I don't think they have any easy way out and they dug themselves into this situation so hopefully they wake up and realize that they have to come around to be much more fair and balanced, it's gone beyond a joke for them to advertise they're fair and balanced when they're just the opposite," said the Congressman. Discussing the broader success of the campaign, Paul said, "Everybody's upbeat and they wanna win but they are also very realistic to know what is the future regardless of what's gonna happen....how can we keep working this, how can we keep our group together....I think we've really opened the eyes of a lot of people so there's reason to be optimistic," said Paul. The Congressman added that the New World Order must be defeated not with weapons but with ideas and that the movement which he is now the figurehead for is much larger than he ever dreamed it would be. "Most people thought that you'd have to be part of the establishment to get money and support but the supporters have proven that not only will they work hard and go out and do the legwork that is necessary but they'll also send in the money and they'll also be very creative," added Paul. Click here to listen to the MP3 of the interview.

Actually is was - because all the 'polls' and mainstream media suggested he was at 2 or 3 percent in Iowa and it turns out he went way beyond that and beat Giuliani by almost twice the votes. And yet Fox News are still not allowing Ron Paul to join a upcoming debate event on Jan 6th, calling him all sorts of names - yet are still asking Giuliani who Ron Paul beat. Even ABC news changed their mind about Paul and now have him on their debate show....yet Fox News still are to exclude him. It's all because they are scared about Pauls truth message getting out further. Having said this - the Iowa winner is always blown out of proportion. Fox have a vested interest in keeping Pual out and it's dirty play.

What the hell? I'm pretty sure that people wont like this.

Yeah, but IOWA isn't the big deal the media make it out to be. Sure, it's the first stop on a long journey for all but it's more about TV ratings than anything else. I mean Giuliani (the dirty rat he is) was the national frontrunner yet he finished 6th out of 7 on the GOP side. And Reagan didn't even win IOWA. However, it is interesting to see the reactions of all the candidates.

Then look at this... http://in.news.yahoo.com/071019/139/6m5uk.html " The rabbit hole deepens...... Bhutto fingered Bin Laden's executor as Omar Sheikh, who had given himself up to Shah, who was in charge of her security at the time she was killed and who had been Osama bin Laden's handler. Hmm! I guess Shah (amongst others) was feeling the icy cold breeze of being exposed and arrested if Bhutto became Prime Minister. "

Bhutto actually told David Frost that Omar Sheikh had killed Bin Laden....(which is going to get you killed when you become really popular) In this interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIO8B6fpFSQ with Sir David Frost on Al Jazeera TV, Benazir Bhutto reveals (or claims) that Omar Sheik, the former MI6 agent now in a Pakistani prison appealing his sentence after being found guilty of killing Wall Street journalist Daniel Pearl, killed Osama bin Laden. She makes the revelation in an off-hand remark at about 6m12s and thereafter into the interview. Sheikh, according to Wikipedia: "was arrested and served time in prison for the 1994 abduction of several British nationals in India, an act which he acknowledges, he was released from captivity in 1999 and provided safe passage into Pakistan, apparently with the support of Pakistan and the Taleban (the hijackers were Pakistanis) in an Indian Airlines plane hijacking. He is most well-known for his alleged role in the 2002 kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. Sheikh Omar Saeed was arrested by Pakistani police on February 12, 2002, in Lahore, in conjunction with the Pearl kidnapping, and was sentenced to death on July 15, 2002 for killing Pearl. His judicial appeal has not yet been heard. The delay has been alleged to be due to his reported links with Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence. Pakistani President, Pervez Musharraf, in his book In the Line of Fire stated that Sheikh was originally recruited by British intelligence agency, MI6, while studying at the London School of Economics. He alleges Omar Sheikh was sent to the Balkans by MI6 to engage in jihadi operations. Musharraf later went on to state "At some point, he probably became a rogue or double agent". On October 6, 2001, a senior-level U.S. government official told CNN that U.S. investigators had discovered Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh (Sheik Syed), using the alias "Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad" had sent about $100,000 from the United Arab Emirates to Mohammed Atta. "Investigators said Atta then distributed the funds to conspirators in Florida in the weeks before the deadliest acts of terrorism on U.S. soil that destroyed the World Trade Center, heavily damaged the Pentagon and left thousands dead. In addition, sources have said Atta sent thousands of dollars -- believed to be excess funds from the operation -- back to Saeed in the United Arab Emirates in the days before September 11. CNN later confirmed this." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Omar_Saeed_Sheikh So did Bhutto sign her own death warrant for making public on November 2 this year that Bin Laden was not only dead (thereby exposing the CIA-orchestrated conspiracy behind all the phony Osama videos) but also killed by the same former MI6/SIS agent who had, on the orders of former ISI director-general Lt-Gen Mahmud Ahmad, wired $100,000 to Mohammed Atta a short time before 9/11 (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1454238160.cms) and who is currently in a Pakistani prison? Was she killed by the ISI in order that she would not reveal further the involvement of Pakistan (=ISI=CIA) in terror attacks? Was she a loose cannon who could expose the truth - or at least Pakistan's involvement in it? Careless talk costs lives - in this case her own, perhaps?

Sadly, this event was only a matter of time. Lamb to the slaughter.

Ron Paul Owns Neil Cavuto http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqPhrqllHzY Ron Paul is side swiped with a question of campaign donations. Ron Paul hits back. How low will they go to try and take Ron Paul down...... Ron did a great job there.

Exactly. But I think there is going to be a lot more votes for Paul than people think. Lot's of young, first time voters who will have never been asked in polls yet because they don't sit at home all day and a lot just have mobile phones, and just use land lines for Internet only. But yes, Paul would be killed....sad to say but that might be pretty true. Plus - there would be terror attacks created and Ron Paul would be blamed for allowing it.... It's a super terrible situation but spreading the right message to people is vital and I think the current real revolution (which the media are ignoring) is probably unstoppable.....it's just how long do we have.