During this debate season, Fox News decided to add "cell phone voting" to the post-debate analysis. After the first debate, Ron Paul won the cell phone vote, much to the displeasure of the Fox News pundits (youtube video from that debate here.)
The second Fox News debate was no different. Pundits Hannity and Colmes assure the audience that Ron Paul is winning the poll simply because people are redialing. What is the point of having a poll if people are able to abuse it? Ron Paul supporters, a bit tired of being beaten down by the media, put together this video to debunk the Hannity and Colmes "redialing theory."
I am curious to know if Fox News viewers would like to see each candidate treated fairly, or if they prefer that the newscasters go as far as lying to make some candidates look worse than others.
Reader Comments ( Page 3 of 5)
31. Yeah, frank and honest...funny.
If that was the case, it would be Ron Paul vs. Dennis Kucinich which would be the best thing that has happened in this great country since President Clinton was in office.
Unfortunately...Too many people are just too damn stupid and backward for that...status quo here we come!!
jgberc at 11:40AM on Sep 7th 2007
32. Dr. Paul is the only GOP candidate I could possibly vote for. Honesty and integrity are in short supply in politics these days. And Fox News is BECOMING a laughingstock? Naw, it's BEEN one.
verneuker at 11:43AM on Sep 7th 2007
33. Hannity says that he will educate Ron Paul? Now that would be a good debate: Hannity vs Paul (mental midget against the Protector of the Constituion). I challenge Hannity to step and take on the challenge. He can even have that bush leaque hack of a moderator Wallace modrate it since he is so "fair and balanced" (wink! wink!)
Larry at 1:07PM on Sep 7th 2007
34. Ron Paul seems more like a Libertarian to me. I'm just finding out about him and I like what he stands for. He seems the closest thing we have had to a happy medium between Democrats and Republicans in a long time. His views are based on common sense and would resonate with more people if more people were aware of him. I hope he gets the exposure he deserves soon.
Michelle G at 11:58AM on Sep 7th 2007
35. Mel,
Ron Paul does not want to "put prayer back in schools". He recognizes that the Constitution says "Congress shall make no law...prohibiting the free exercise thereof (Religion)." He think that decisions like school prayer should be decided by the local community - not Washington.
Ron Paul does not want to "cut off free trade with Canada". In fact, he disagrees with the term "free trade" because it is misleading because the "free trade" movement is controlled by governments and not by individuals and the market. Ron Paul wants people to be able to trade as much as possible with Canada. Also, Ron Paul is opposed to the superhighway that goes through Canada, the US and Mexico (all part of the "free trade" movement).
He wants to abolish the UN for many reasons, including the fact that they consistently advocate a direct tax on the United States.
I hope this clears up any confusion you may have about Ron Paul and Libertarian principles. Please consider learning more about the freedom message.
Kelly O at 12:18PM on Sep 7th 2007
36. I understand that he wants it to be state legislation to decide whether there is prayer in schools; however, that is a ridiculous platform for several reasons:
1. It will segregate the states more then likely between liberals and christian conservatives. I know I'd move. (Recall the last big fight over states' rights? I think it was called the Civil War)
2. As President he has no authority to do that. The Constitution and therefore the seperation between church and state is interpreted by the Supreme Court, not the President, so it's all just rhetoric anyway.
3. Since when is a state government not a government? Or is the local government not government? What he's doing is passing it on to a different part of the government, not deregulating it so to speak.
He wants to withdraw from the WTO too. There's a reason individuals can't just trade willy nilly and it's not the US Government stopping them (alone). It's the EU, The Candadian government, etc. That's why the WTO exists. I think it's annoying, but that doesn't mean that individuals can just waltz up to the leaders of OTHER countries and do what they want. The US cannot legislate for other countries.
It's not that I dislike Ron Paul. I'm a Texan and have heard him talk for years. He's a great guy. He just has ideas that will not work in practice in my opinion.
Mel at 12:44PM on Sep 7th 2007
37. I haven't paid much attention to Ron Paul as I am a devoted Duncan Hunter fan. But it is clear the media is shutting Duncan out and since Ron Paul is gaining steam I am going to look into him. We need a strong constitutionalist if this country is going to be preserved for future generations and I would love to hope that Ron Paul is that man. I hope and pray he is not a Bush-style wimp or a Rudy Giuliani-style fake.
Kassie at 12:48PM on Sep 7th 2007
38. I think it's important to keep in mind that Ron Paul's ideas about down-sizing government are directed specifically at the federal government; not all government. So when he suggests that we could do without the Department of Education, he is not saying that there should be no governmental involvement in education; just not at the federal level.
How bad do things have to get before people even start entertaining the possibility that the federal government is not always the best tool for the job, and those who make such suggestions are not simply dismissed as "crazy people".
The establishment really has us conditioned, don't they?! Come on, people, do some thinking for yourselves!
Grant at 6:09PM on Sep 7th 2007
39. Mel-
I don't think "segregation of states" would be a bad result of reducing the power/size of the federal government. I think that's a negative way of looking at this. Not everyone in this country is the same, so why do we have to have the same rules/communities/lifestyles in every town and in every state in our country? Why can't we all be a little different but still all live in the same country. I personally would like being able to go to a different part of the country that is more in line with my beliefs. I don't want to live in a morally conservative place, but some people do. Since you can't legislate morality and force people to live the same way you do...why not give people options. That, to me, is what makes America great...freedom. And that is done best with less power in a central government.
StlJayhawk at 1:11PM on Sep 7th 2007
40. "I understand that he wants it to be state legislation to decide whether there is prayer in schools; however, that is a ridiculous platform for several reasons"
This concept is widely misunderstood. Getting rid of the Dept of Education has nothing to do with prayer in schools. It has to do with removing socialism and restoring the right of the parent to choose how their child is educated. Right now you are forced to pay for public education (through taxes), whether you want your child to have it or not. In addition, the federal government decides what is in the curriculum and what can and cannot be taught. This should be up to states (or, preferably, localities) to decide, as the Constitution does not give the federal government this authority.
"It will segregate the states more then likely between liberals and christian conservatives. I know I'd move."
That's the whole point. If the states write and enforce their own laws you *can* move. If the federal government enacts a law, you have no choice at all. Everyone complains about how divided the US is right now. The reason is because of how much power the federal government has consolidated. People in Texas don't want to be governed the same as people in New York. If you let New York decide policy for the whole country, Texas gets angry, and vice-versa. People need to be able to govern themselves at a more local level - while, at the same time, not overstepping the rights of individuals as guaranteed in the Constitution.
"As President he has no authority to do that. The Constitution and therefore the seperation between church and state is interpreted by the Supreme Court, not the President, so it's all just rhetoric anyway."
Again, the idea of getting rid of the Department of Education has nothing to do with separation of church and state.
"Since when is a state government not a government? Or is the local government not government? What he's doing is passing it on to a different part of the government, not deregulating it so to speak."
He isn't passing anything on. The Constitution is, according to the 10th Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
"He wants to withdraw from the WTO too. There's a reason individuals can't just trade willy nilly and it's not the US Government stopping them (alone). It's the EU, The Candadian government, etc. That's why the WTO exists."
That is NOT why the WTO exists. The WTO exists to manage trade between nations. If I want to buy some lumber from Canada, the US Government should have no say in how much I pay, which supplier I buy from, how much I get, etc. WTO and NAFTA are NOT free trade, they are managed trade, overseen by the US Government.
Grant at 1:11PM on Sep 7th 2007
41. Anytime the the liberal media can slam Foxnews they love it, can't stand Foxnews ratings they can't control and the fact Fox tells it like it is. Liberal media only gives the bad news side, as long as it is against Bush and our troops
Jane at 1:22PM on Sep 7th 2007
42. Its so sad that they have to resort to this. you know, I wonder how they feel going home at nights to their family to look them in the face after saying those lies on the air. we get the point that you don't want him to win but the irony of it is that he is fighting to keep their rights and freedom alive but here they are bashing Ron Paul.
I hope that they wake up and see that they are not only hurting themselves but the future generations that need a good leader like Ron Paul. keep up the good work Dr. Paul, at least we know definitely that you are doing good because u still have haters hating you. Ron Paul 2008!!!!!
kenisthaman2005 at 1:23PM on Sep 7th 2007
43. I DONT THINK FOX HATES PAUL, THATS HARSH. I THINK THEY JUST DISMISS HIM, AS I DO. FOR A MAN RUNNING FOR THE PRESIDENCY TO SAY HE WANTS TO BE RID OF THE CIA, THE FBI, AND HOMELAND SECURITY...WELL, ITS HARD TO TAKE HIM SERIOUSLY. HE HAS SOME GOOD IDEAS BUT THIS ISNT ONE OF THEM. WHERE WOULD HE GET HIS INTELLIGENCE FROM? HOW WOULD HE BE NOTIFIED THAT A TERRIORIST ATTACK IS BEING HATCHED IF HE DIDNT HAVE THESE ORGANIZATIONS? THE MAIN JOB OF THE PRESIDENT IS TO KEEP THE HOMELAND AND ITS CITIZENS PROTECTED! SOMETHING I DONT BELIEVE THIS MAN IS CAPABLE OF DOING IF HE REALLY BELIEVES WHAT HES SAYING HERE. ITS JUST NUTS, AND SO YOU HAVE TO LAUGH...
MARY at 1:37PM on Sep 7th 2007
44. Ron Paul believes in 100% free trade with every nation.
Pulling out of the UN and NATO will keep us out of the entanglement of foreign affairs like Arabs hating us for Defending Israel from Palestine... etc.
By the way, Switzerland wasn't in the UN until 2002, and nobody hated them.
I am a registered republican, formerly registered independent, who will vote for Ron Paul.
William at 2:53AM on Sep 8th 2007
45. Mary-
Our intelligence agencies did a FANTASTIC job before 9/11 with all those billions of dollars, didn't they? All of the intelligence about the attacks..and nothing was done. Meanwhile, over the last fifty years, our CIA has overthrown governments, installed dictators sympathetic to the US money machine, and assassinated foreign leaders. Why would you want to keep that? And, the Dept. of Homeland Security is just more red tape. Why can't we change that? Why is that laughable? Wouldn't it make more sense to have a different federal agency like the CIA where they actually gather intellegence and interpret it correctly? Instead of overthrowing government and assassinating leaders? How about enforcing the 2nd ammendment and letting the people take care of themselves...along with our LOCAL law enforcement. Washington's job is not to take care of us from cradle to grave. Ron Paul in 2008!
StlJayhawk at 9:44PM on Sep 9th 2007