What’s the point of ganging up on a candidate in an attempt to embarrass him, then removing his response from future broadcasts of the debate? It kind of defeats the purpose of showing him as a blubbering incoherent wreck. Unless – wait – he wasn’t a blubbering incoherent wreck, and actually answered the question better than anyone at the South Carolina Republican Debate could.
I’d like to draw your attention to Jason’s excellent analysis of Ron Paul’s treatment, which reveals just how afraid the establishment is of him. And, of-course, the fact that Fox News has cut off his response to their question on his ‘electability’.
Sorry Fox News; better luck hiding the truth next time. And to Ron Paul, excellent job at that debate – you remained cool, took everything they threw at you, and dished it right back at them.
Oh, and something new – if you’re interested in this, take a look at gillard’s compilation of Ron Paul’s responses in the same debate, well worth viewing.
- Nish
January 12, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Glad to finally see someone else talking about this. I compiled a few clips of Paul’s best responses in the debate and an example of where Fox is now cutting them out here: http://gillard.wordpress.com/2008/01/11/fox-news-censors-debate-re-runs/
I hadn’t see that analysis you mentioned, thanks.
January 12, 2008 at 8:20 pm
This is a further indication of what Olberman has been saying all along– Fox is nothing but a Noise Channel. They have no commitment to reporting the facts and are merely a platform for ranting so-called newscasters.
Thank you for pointing this out!
January 13, 2008 at 12:13 am
thanks for the link gillard, that’s a good collection! post duly updated. and hfamom, you’re right, this is just one more reason to take fox off the air.