I did recon last night, and expected to see articles on the Republican "debate" on Fox.
Nothing!
Incredible!!
Nothing!
Then I find out that RON WON, and that I HELPED HIM!!!
I DID TEXT last night, and it was accepted! R6: Paul!
First, the shit corporit press:
"Republican Candidates Make Thompson a Target" by MICHAEL LUO and MICHAEL COOPER
DURHAM, N.H., Sept. 5 — The Republican presidential candidates clashed Wednesday night in their most contentious debate of the campaign, in pointed exchanges over immigration, the war in Iraq and who among them is the best prepared to be commander in chief.
One of the evening’s most heated moments came during a prolonged exchange over the war between Representative Ron Paul of Texas, the lone antiwar candidate on stage, and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee.
Mr. Huckabee found himself mounting a rousing defense in support of the war:
“When I was a little kid, if I went into a store with my mother, she had a simple rule for me: If I picked something off the shelf at the store and I broke it, I bought it. I learned I don’t pick something off the shelf I can’t afford to buy. Well, what we did in Iraq, we essentially broke it. It’s our responsibility to do the best we can to try to fix it before we just turn away.”
But Mr. Paul argued: “The American people didn’t go in. A few people advising this administration, a small number of people called the neoconservatives hijacked our foreign policy.”
Mr. Huckabee responded: “Congressman, we are one nation. We can’t be divided. We have to be one nation, under God. That means, if we make a mistake, we make it as a single country: the United States of America, not the divided states of America.”
[Well, 70% of the UNITED STATES is AGAINST the WAR, so WTF you talkin' bout, Huck?!?!
What the stink Times wouldn't continue with is that Paul said that THE PEOPLE WHO MADE the MISTAKES should PAY FOR THEM, not the American people!!!]
"Republicans, Paul clash over Iraq war" by Libby Quaid/Associated Press September 5, 2007
DURHAM, N.H. --Republican presidential contenders voiced support for the Iraq war Wednesday night despite a warning from anti-war candidate Ron Paul that they risk dragging the party down to defeat in 2008.
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee shot back former "Even if we lose elections, we should not lose our honor, and that is more important to the Republican Party."
Huckabee was in the majority, Paul very much in the minority on a University of New Hampshire debate stage when it came to the war.
[NOT ACCORDING TO CROWD REACTION, shitstinking liar!
And notice it is "very much in," not just "in."
That's the kind of skew I'm always talking about!]
The politically unpopular conflict has emerged as the dominant issue of the 2008 race for the White House. The debate unfolded several days before Gen. David Petraeus is scheduled to deliver an assessment of President Bush's wintertime decision to commit 30,000 additional combat troops to the war.
Sen. John McCain, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Giuliani all stressed support for the war, at times even competing to show their commitment.
Romney, referring to the increase in troops: "The surge is apparently working."
[Despite the rise in Iraqis dead! But it's working!]
That brought an instant rebuke from McCain: "The surge is working, sir, no, not apparently. It's working."
[Right, you lying piece of fossilized diarrhea!]
Alone among the contenders, Paul, a veteran Texas congressman with a libertarian streak, made the case for withdrawing troops. That drew a sharp challenge from Chris Wallace, one of the debate questioners, who asked whether the United States should take its marching orders from al-Qaida.
Paul shouted back, pointing his pen at Wallace for emphasis:
"No! We should take our marching orders from our Constitution. We should not go to war without a declaration by Congress."
Occasionally interrupted by applause, Paul doggedly stuck to his point during his exchange with Huckabee:
"We have lost over 5,000 Americans over there in Afghanistan, in Iraq and plus the civilians killed. How long -- what do we have to pay to save face? That's all we're doing, is saving face. It's time we came home."
[See how they SKEW? Thought he was "very much in the minority," and now I'm told "occasional applause?"
Sick of LYING STINKFUCK PRESS!!
And OMITTING STINKFUCK PRESS!
These stories NOT IN MY PAPER!
Oh, are the rulers of this country in for a RUDE AWAKENING SOON!!!!
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King [George] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States."
[You are PUSHING US THERE, shitters, as long as you KNOW THAT!!!!!!]
One man, Mark Riss, chastised Romney for comparing the service of men who have fought in Iraq with his own sons' support for his campaign:
"I know you apologized a couple of days later ... but it was wrong sir, and you never should have said it."
Romney agreed: "Well, there is no comparison, of course."
Now the REAL NEWS!
" Hannity Lies To Discredit Ron Paul After Debate; Claims "Paulites" flood voted to skew text poll, yet only one vote per phone number was allowed" by Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet Thursday, September 6, 2007
"Fox News and Sean Hannity tried to discredit Ron Paul last night after the latest debate by claiming the Texas Congressman's runaway success in the subsequent text messaging poll was due to "Paulites" flood voting, when in fact only one vote per phone number was allowed.
Ernest Raposa, a viewer in New Bedford, MA, decided to text in his support for Ron Paul and received a message back stating, "FOX News UVOTE: Thank you for voting! Watch Hannity & Colmes for the results."
"As the show progressed, it became obvious, as we have seen previously, that Ron Paul had the most support, hovering around 33 per cent," writes Raposa. "Around 11:25pm EST Hannity declared that though Ron Paul had DOUBLE the support of the tied for second place Giuliani and Huckabee it was clear that the "Paulites" were simply dialing in over and over again, devaluing his lead."
Aiming to test Hannity's theory, Raposa attempted to text in a second vote for Ron Paul from the same cellphone. He received a message back saying, "You have already voted on tonight's debate. Thank you for your participation." Only one vote per cellphone was allowed, therefore Hannity's contention that Ron Paul supporters were "were simply dialing in over and over again" was nothing more than a brazen lie intended to dismiss the Congressman's widespread popularity. No one at Fox News bothered to correct Hannity and no retraction was issued.
Debunkers continually claim that Paul's success in text message and internet polls is merely a result of a small group of supporters zealously "spamming" or "flooding" the polls when in fact votes are limited to one per IP address and one per cellphone number.
Such dirty tactics from Neo-Con stooge Hannity and Fox News were merely a continuation of Fox's policy to attack Ron Paul throughout the broadcast.
Despite the fact that the New Hampshire audience broke out in spontaneous wild applause at almost everything the Congressman said, Fox News deliberately boosted the microphones of the other candidates when Paul was speaking, making sure the snickers of Giuliani, Romney and the rest were clearly audible.
Establishment darlings were once again afforded shed loads more time and even nobodies like Huckabee and Brownback got twice the amount of questions compared to the Congressman. Paul got the chance to answer just three direct questions in a 90 minute debate.
Fox News moderators weighed in with glee in an attempt to ruffle, smear and sidetrack Ron Paul. His first question revolved around a purposeful misquote of the Congressman's position on allowing pilots to be armed and it only went downhill from there.
"The second question though revealed the unbelievable bias of Fox News," writes Anthony Wade. "In response to a question about Iraq and troops, Paul reiterated that we needed to pull the troops home, period. He has consistently said that we need to address the entire foreign policy and start protecting our own borders and our own country. In response to the false notion that there would be a “bloodbath” if we just pulled out, Paul quickly reminded everyone that the same people speculating that there would be a bloodbath are the same people who said Iraq would be a “cakewalk” and a “slam dunk.” He then correctly pointed out the faulty logic that says we need to stay for stability when it is widely reported that our presence on the Arabian Peninsula is what prompted the attacks of 911. The response from Chris Wallace was to pose his own follow up question which was, “So you are saying you would take your marching orders from al Qaeda?”
"Are you kidding me? The inherent bias in the question was disgusting during a debate forum and Chris Wallace revealed himself as nothing but a whore for the machine and not a credible newsperson. Thankfully, Dr. Paul was up to the task by responding that he would take his marching orders from the Constitution."
The last question was another manufactured "hypothetical" in which Iran had nukes and was threatening to use them on Israel. Fox News were sure to go to Ron Paul first in order to have the other candidates gang up on him after.
As soon as the debate was over, Giuliani and Hannity were busy attempting to mock Congressman Paul with more sophomoric barbs.
The desperation of the Neo-Cons and the establishment to ridicule Ron Paul again highlights the sheer terror that they are experiencing in light of the fact that a real candidate communicating about real issues is putting the rest of the shills to shame.
By continuing to smear, lie about and dismiss the Congressman, Hannity, Fox and their ilk are nervously praying that they can keep the lid on the Ron Paul Revolution and prevent the Texan from breaking into the vaunted "top tier" and obliterating the bought and paid for competition.
Copyright © Prisonplanet.com. All rights reserved.
Printed from: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2007/060907_hannity_lies.htm
Here are MSNBC's poll results at 9:50 a.m.
"
| Who stood out from the pack? * 44431 responses | |||||
| Sam Brownback 0.9%  | Jim Gilmore 0.5% | ||||
| Rudy Giuliani 7% | Mike Huckabee 2.9% | ||||
| Duncan Hunter 0.9% | John McCain 4.8% | ||||
| Ron Paul 72% | Mitt Romney 7% | ||||
| Tom Tancredo 2.2% | Tommy Thompson 1.7% | ||||
| Who showed the most leadership qualities? * 44063 responses | |||||
| Sam Brownback 0.8% | Jim Gilmore 0.7% | ||||
| Rudy Giuliani 7.9% | Mike Huckabee 2.3% | ||||
| Duncan Hunter 1.1% | John McCain 6.4% | ||||
| Ron Paul 70% | Mitt Romney 7.7% | ||||
| Tom Tancredo 1.7% | Tommy Thompson 1.6% | ||||
| Who was the most convincing candidate? * 43868 responses | |||||
| Sam Brownback 0.9% | Jim Gilmore 0.6% | ||||
| Rudy Giuliani 7% | Mike Huckabee 2.9% | ||||
| Duncan Hunter 1% | John McCain 5.1% | ||||
| Ron Paul 72% | Mitt Romney 7.3% | ||||
| Tom Tancredo 1.9% | Tommy Thompson 1.6% | ||||
| Who had the most rehearsed answers? * 43232 responses | |||||
| Sam Brownback 2% | Jim Gilmore 1% | ||||
| Rudy Giuliani 41% | Mike Huckabee 2.2% | ||||
| Duncan Hunter 0.9% | John McCain 18% | ||||
| Ron Paul 8.2% | Mitt Romney 23% | ||||
| Tom Tancredo 1.3% | Tommy Thompson 2.6% | ||||
| Who avoided the questions? * 42929 responses | |||||
| Sam Brownback 2.6% | Jim Gilmore 1.5% | ||||
| Rudy Giuliani 47% | Mike Huckabee 1.9% | ||||
| Duncan Hunter 1.2% | John McCain 14% | ||||
| Ron Paul 6.1% | Mitt Romney 21% | ||||
| Tom Tancredo 1.7% | Tommy Thompson 2.7% | ||||
| Who had the best one-liner? * 42405 responses | |||||
| Sam Brownback 1.4% | Jim Gilmore 1.2% | ||||
| Rudy Giuliani 12% | Mike Huckabee 6.2% | ||||
| Duncan Hunter 1.7% | John McCain 7.2% | ||||
| Ron Paul 54% | Mitt Romney 5.2% | ||||
| Tom Tancredo 6.4% | Tommy Thompson 4.8% | ||||
And here is a Democratic blogger's view:
"Wednesday, September 05, 2007
THEY LIVE. This is the first GOP debate I've watched, as opposed to relying on transcripts. Tell me: are all of these things animated Ralph Steadman cartoons? Maybe the glaring police-interrogation lights amplify the animal freakishness of these people, but damn. After hearing National Review compare Huckabee to Kevin Spacey, I wasn't prepared for the squint-headed, bug-eyed monster that actually raves under that name. And nearly all the rest of them are just tubes of meat that, when squeezed, emit a display of polished teeth and psychotic ravings.
The only human beings on the stage are Ron Paul and John McCain. McCain, God bless him, carries on a noble campaign for his own idiosyncratic version of insanity, which I admire because his is a recognizably human affliction, inculcated by years of torture followed by years of having to consort with greedy politicians who were certainly his inferiors. His quiet lunacy is very different from the noisy, slavering power-madness evidenced by the rest of these guys. He's like King Lear standing among (but not of) a pack of Pavlov's dogs.
And Paul, of course, stepped out of the 18th Century to defend the Constitution from these nuts. The Fox News scumbags sigh and giggle, but you can tell they're pissed that they foolishly allowed a debate to take place in New Hampshire, where a free man will always command an audience's respect.
The rest are humanoid pus:
Duncan Hunter: We treat our torture victims too well. Someone should drive a stake through this one's heart and bury him in unconsecrated ground. Thank God his spot-welded body, movie-monster eyebrows, and Queeg-like manipulation of his pen removes him from serious consideration.
Mitt Romney: Heh, heh, heh. Heh, heh, heh, heh. Civil liberties are nothing compared to my desire to be become a real boy! He's like a robot who, between 1994 and 1996, tried to follow his dream of becoming America's first animatronic Baptist preacher; didn't make it but, when called upon to pretend interest in the affairs of us puny mortals, often falls into the old evangelical cadences.
Tom Tancredo: Waterboarding? Torture? Where'd you get that? Oddly, when you close your eyes, he sounds like Spalding Gray with hydrophobia.
Rudolph Giuliani: You forget that, while people were criticizing me for flaunting my mistress, I cut taxes 37 times. I think even Fox has given up on him. His head is swiftly turning into a memento-mori AS YOU ARE, I WAS -- AS I AM, SO YOU WILL BE dessicated skull. Someone obviously told him the jig is up about 9/11 -- now he brags endlessly about what a prick he was running New York. Listen close, death's-head whorefucker: no one in Bumfuck -- and, you know, all America is Bumfuck -- gives a good goddamn.
And... oh, fuck this shit. I'm never getting out of the boat again. Next time I'll read the transcripts and lay out pictures of the Isely Brothers and pretend that's what they look like.
UPDATE. The National Review guys are devoted to denying reality. Andy McCarthy enjoys that the incredibly sleazy accusation by Chris Wallace that Ron Paul defers to Al Qaeda drew applause, but seems to have been out of the room when the crowd rallied to Paul's defense. Kathryn J. Lopez seems to think the New Hampshire crowd's obvious disgust with the malignant Giuliani is a baseball thing. Okay, K-Lo, have it your way: fuck the New York Yankees, fuck Rudolph Giuliani, and fuck you.
UPDATE II. Ron Paul is winning the Fox phone poll; Sean Hannity is looking around for a civilian whose head Fox will allow him to gnaw in frustration. I have reformed my views: the whole world should see how these people operate.
