ron paul, big friendly giant

dont get me wrong i support his views..but..
i dont get it, many people have had his frame of mind for many decades now. there no new ideas, but they are new to congress..
isnt it a bit of a coincidence that someone like him gets spotlight now, at a time where america is facing an uncertain future.. or is it just that majority of public opinion has shifted

one thing ive learnt is that not much happens by accident, i cant see why this is going to be different

what happens if the msm pulls the old 'pick your president' stunt again
or what if they find a smarter way to rig the entire elections again?
would we stand up and revolt?
countries have been invaided for less then having a rigged election. i think theres a great potential this could happen again

do you really think that the rich would really have done all they have just to let some smart guy who sees there lies ruin it all

what happens if the msm pulls the old 'pick your president' stunt again
or what if they find a smarter way to rig the entire elections again?
would we stand up and revolt?

They will rig it and are every time a poll doesn't include Paul... every debate that he only gets asked about school lunch. He is simply not taken seriously by the media and thus is not electable.

No one will revolt. We will continue down the same path and people will keep falling in line with the puppet masters.

*I hope I am wrong... but doubt it*

What does the MSM gain by not covering Ron Paul? Isn't it more likely that they are going to spend time covering people who are more popular in order to sell more of their product?

It's a nice conspiracy but very short on facts.

reply to post by Silentkiss


Put on a good show, entertain the crowd, tell them only what they want to hear, and you're all set to go.

Time people realize they are being duped by nothing more than used car salesmen.

Originally posted by Silentkiss
What does the MSM gain by not covering Ron Paul? Isn't it more likely that they are going to spend time covering people who are more popular in order to sell more of their product?

It's a nice conspiracy but very short on facts.

The others represent big lobbying interests. Paul doesn't bring money to the table. The media likes two things: 1)what makes advertisers happy and 2) what makes the stock price of big media conglomerates go up. Cranky, tin-foil-y doom doesn't do either. Lots of sunshine and roses and BS is perceived to do both, so the funnel of money gets pivoted in that direction. Media figures who can sniff out which way the money funnel is blasting get promoted and get perks. Those that stand against it lose their jobs and are no longer media people.