digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

GOP Debate II: Fox Goes After Ron Paul

crooksandliars.com — Paul: "You-you have to realize that the base of the Republican Party shrunk last year because of the war issue, so that percentage represents less people. If you look at 65-70% of the American people, they want us out of there, they want the war over."

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • LopsidedZebra, on 10/11/2007, -14/+34so i guess "bushie" and republican are synonymous now...
    • understudy, on 10/11/2007, -15/+72

      Aren't the questions supposed to be unbiased?

      What happened to the integrity of debate moderation?

      _

    • FlaG8r, on 10/11/2007, -11/+110^Yes, we were all very shocked to see a lack of fairness on Fox News
    • aliengoods, on 10/11/2007, -8/+75Wow. A republican who makes sense. Thank god Fox is trashing him, or he might have a chance in the next election.
    • donwilson2, on 10/11/2007, -34/+11Didn't know you guys held Fox News in such a high level that they have the ability to sway an entire country's decision.

      Interesting. I thought you guys didn't like "Faux" News.
    • dave11980, on 10/11/2007, -9/+94The powers that be are scared of Ron Paul and trying to end him. They are scared because with the internet they no longer control the whole of the communication and that power we wield to openly discuss him is causing fear. More fear than even the most armed populace could generate. Fear of and idea, and the idea is freedom for the people through a return to our founding values.
    • aliengoods, on 10/11/2007, -6/+23@donwilson2

      I don't hold Fox in high regard. But there is no denying the influence they have over the religious right, which consists of 25% of the voters in this country. In fact, they're the only people still behind Bush (28% approval rating). If Fox trashes a Republican candidate, it will be next to impossible for them to get the nomination. I would love it if I were wrong, but I'm not.
    • derkaas, on 10/11/2007, -5/+15@understudy

      "What happened to the integrity of debate moderation?"

      Apparently Wendall Goller.
    • davbmn68, on 10/11/2007, -14/+6It was better than the innane questions brought by Chris Matthews. I thought the question posed was a very good one. While Mr. Paul stated that 70% of Americans want out of Iraq, he is not running in a general election. His positions are more closely aligned with a few other parties than they they are with the Republican party.

      In response to fair moderation, I would rather see pointed questions than some lap dog moderator questioning the candidates. This is an idea lost on most of the Democratic candidates. It seems that the Democrats are deathly afraid of someone like Chris Wallace asking THEM questions. Think what you want of Fox News Chris Wallace has never made some of the biased remarks about Democrats that Chris Wallace has about Republicans. The Republicans didn't cancel their debate because of Mr. Matthews moderating either.
    • EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -5/+33A debate and audience like that really makes me reconsider the idea of a voter IQ test. I'm not entirely serious, but damn! With the exception of Ron Paul, those boys are dumb. I'd rather watch a row of doorknobs tell me how shiny smooth they are. And yes, the question to Paul on the war was phrased in a really obnoxious way -- totally inappropriate, not that the Fox audience would get why.

      Colbert was joking recently about wanting a weapon where we could blast an enemy and destroy knowledge of, say, nukes--kind of like the neutron bomb, but for ideas.

      I sat there watching my TELEVISION, wondering if we hadn't already perfected it.
    • CkMaverick, on 10/11/2007, -1/+22I just hate how certain candidates take up so much more time than other candidates. Not going on a pro Paul and Gravel tangent, it is basically outrageous how the smaller candidates are treated on all debates. They are overlooked by the media which is supposed to be reporting straight up what happened unbiasedly and they are not asked nearly as many questions or given even close the same amount of time as the top tier candidates. This is the most important job in the entire country and they are not going to allow their employers (the American people) to adequately view all the candidate's resumes. As long as they are in the race they should be given the same chance as anyone else... That is the American Dream is it not? It just doesn't seem American to count people out before the campaigns have even really begun and start to kick them out of race by questionable polls and narrow opinions.
    • DeucesWild, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16Seeing how Paul won all of the web polls after the first debate I wonder if Fox switched it to a text vote for this one to try and prevent Paul winning. After the first debate they only said he won because of his internet support. Now he's won by phone support (I don't count them rigging it at the end for Romney). Whats next a mail-in poll? No polls at all after debates because Paul is going to win?

      Face it people we don't actually elect who runs this country. The only two candidates have been chosen for us long before we get our chance at the polls, not that that really matters either.
    • enlightenme, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13The next debate poll will be conducted through rotary phones only.
    • brundlefly76, on 10/11/2007, -14/+6ron paul commitee spam buried
    • EminemsRevenge, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1GW and JESUS used to by synonyms..."Republican" and "mindless" is more approptiate...although THEY have to be credited with *some* intelligence since they'll be assassinating Ron Paul by the primaries.
    • wakananda, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2It's time to stop treating mainstream media fake "News" like they were anything but the PR arm of the handful of corporate powers they represent. They are shills, whores - the "profession of journalism" itself has been made a fraud by corporate/industrial/military censorship and outright deception. Unless you are blogging, or can demonstrate independence from the MSM, you are a used car salesman, a professional liar. Please stop dignifying this river of garbage and lies with the hope that it will improve, or somehow rediscover the standards and ethics that have been systematically hounded out of it by corporations that are now nothing more than crime organizations. We ought to mourn the DEATH of "News" in America, and move on to strengthening alternative media, moderated by We, The People (sites like digg), and safeguarding them against any incursion by liars, thugs and drones.
  • greenamp, on 10/11/2007, -19/+66***** Faux news.
    • moin1097, on 10/11/2007, -30/+8You do realize that word you're using is pronounced "fo"?
      I'm sure they feel the same about you.
    • BassCadet, on 10/11/2007, -50/+10I wish Ron Paul's supporters would spend as much time and energy researching the stances of the viable candidates as they do spamming blogs, internet forums, and digg with Ron Paul propoganda.

      I am not a Republican, I am a Democrat. I have no interest whatsoever in who wins the GOP nomination because any of them will lose to Clinton or Obama.

      As a neutral observer of the debate, Ron Paul came off very, very poorly. His responses ranged from the ridiculous (get rid of the Dept. of Education?) to the fantastical ("the United States has been bombing a Muslim country for 10 years").
    • sibhod, on 10/11/2007, -4/+32Ron Paul is a libertarian. Of course he wants to get rid of the Dept. of Education.
    • BassCadet, on 10/11/2007, -21/+6"Ron Paul is a libertarian. Of course he wants to get rid of the Dept. of Education."

      Libertarians don't want to tell American women what to do with their bodies.
    • greenamp, on 10/11/2007, -4/+19@ moin1097:

      faux |fō| adjective [ attrib. ] artificial or imitation; false : a string of faux pearls.

      I understand how it's pronounced thnx.
    • goatspanka, on 10/11/2007, -22/+3So by using the term Faux News, you are somehow implying that you are a creative person who can come up with unique terms? Keep the creative juices flowing. We're all proud of you.

      Digg me up fellas, I said Faux News!
    • greenamp, on 10/11/2007, -6/+16@ goatspanka: I can't take credit for the creation of the term, but I think it adequately describes the type of spin and propaganda that Fox passes off as credible news, to which I have strong disdain. Hence my comment, "***** Faux News."

      So there ya have it.
    • kinghajj, on 10/11/2007, -2/+21@basscadet

      Actally, many Libertarians still debate abortion. It comes down to whether fetuses have rights. Some, like Ron Paul, think that fetuses have rights; others don't. The point is, don't generalize and say that all Libertarians are pro-choice.
    • praxisseizure, on 10/11/2007, -3/+26@ basscadet

      You're totally missing the point on why we're supporting Ron Paul.

      It's not that he's Republican or Democrat. In our view, THEY'RE BOTH THE SAME UGLY MAN WITH TWO FACES. Yet we understand America won't vote for anyone outside of those two parties. (Shame as it is)

      If you are so ignorant as to be able to take sides in the partisan politics of our country, then my condolences on your inferior brain.
      We know the game. We are choosing our best option, and an option like Ron Paul hasn't come around in the Presidential scene since Reagan. (and I don't speak for everyone, but evidence shows, most of us here are able to think for themselves)

      Now no props to Reagan, he renegged on his promises, but with Paul's track record, we believe he will do some shaking up of the Federal Government. Doesn't mean he will solve all our problems, but it's a HUGE step in the right direction. He still has to deal with the lame duck Congress and looking at their recent track record, they're gonna give him a run for his money as far as policy is concerned.

      But that's another point. It's GOOD that the branches of government fight. It's GOOD when they work slowly and argue often. That means that things are getting done in a fair and balanced way through deliberation. It also means new laws will be more closely scrutinized rather than steamrolled through without even the Congress's batting of an eye.

      All of this is positive. If you can't see that, then please stop commenting. You look like an idiot.
  • NymphoChik, on 10/11/2007, -14/+134The REPUBLICAN audience clapped:

    1) When the other candidates attacked Paul

    and

    2) When one of the candidates said he wished for a "Jack Bauer" to help America (Jack Bauer is a fictional TV character)

    We. Are. Doomed.
    • vatosplace, on 10/11/2007, -16/+38You mean the republican party is doomed...
    • Dumbledorito, on 10/11/2007, -20/+3Why are you digging VatosPlace down? You think there were any democrats allowed within 15 miles of Fox News studios?

      As for being "bought and paid for," I thought Libertarians didn't like campaign finance reform. How would things be any better under the lifting of restrictions regarding money spent for political gain?
    • uptown, on 10/11/2007, -5/+8which candidate cited bauer?
    • GettinReal, on 10/11/2007, -11/+10Those same ***** who clapped are the real suicide bombers.
    • vatosplace, on 10/11/2007, -9/+7@uptown - Tancredo, http://digg.com/politics/Giuliani_Tancredo_Endorse_Waterboarding_Torture

    • derkaas, on 10/11/2007, -7/+18"Please, please, please......forget party."

      Seriously. If you live in a state with open primary, please vote in the Republican one.
    • dipdog21, on 10/11/2007, -9/+10All of them...
      P- pandering
      O- obnoxious
      L- liar
      I- imbecile
      T- turncoat
      I- irrational
      C- coward
      I- insane
      A- a**hole
      N- nonsensical
    • ronpaulpeople, on 10/11/2007, -7/+22But the people in there don't represent US, I have never voted in my life and I am this time, and I am not the only one. Ron Paul will win, just don't stop pushing, and when they attack him, we attack them........find the Guliani video of him talking about building 7, post it every where, post their comments about a national ID card everywhere.........Fight People, this time it is for keeps!!!! Please")
    • praxisseizure, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6@ vatosplace
      no. if this goes the way it has for the last 20 years. ( perhaps even, 60 - 70 years) we're all irrevocably doomed.
    • Corrosionx, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@Dumbledorito:
      "Campaign reform" actually made it more difficult for 3rd party to participate in elections, because with all the hoops the candidates have to jump through, only Reps and Dems have enough money to manage it.

      Ironically, total liberty in campaign financing would be more efficient in promoting democracy than the stupid unmanageable rules and walls the established parties have erected around them.
    • wakananda, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2That audience was heavily vetted. It was carefully arranged theater.
  • samschoice, on 10/11/2007, -19/+50The Republican Party is now the Republican Army. Ron Paul stands alone for liberty.
  • NymphoChik, on 10/11/2007, -10/+51Oh and BOO-YAH!! to Ron Paul for providing specific examples of CONSERVATIVE, REPUBLICAN administrations of the past that had the courage to END war.
  • buddyw, on 10/11/2007, -12/+74There were a lot of loaded questions tonight, and as bad as Ron Paul's comment about our occupation of the middle east causing 9/11 sounded. He was absolutely right. That is why the middle east hates us.
    • vsujohn2, on 10/11/2007, -9/+27Exactly, it is our misunderstanding of unconventional politics in the region. We can't sit back and be all wholesome saying 9/11 just happened to us, if you dont look at history you are doomed to repeat it. And if we continue this dangerous foreign policy we will be attacked and we will be looked down upon in the world, our economy will eventually suffer as our currency loses value. Very dangerous path, i pray that this does not happen.
    • nosecohn, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18"as bad as Ron Paul's comment about our occupation of the middle east causing 9/11 sounded. He was absolutely right. That is why the middle east hates us."

      He WAS right, and it didn't actually sound bad. It's just that Rudy saw an opening to attack and he went for it. Anytime you can tell Americans that we're not at all to blame and we should be kicking ass and taking names, they'll applaud.

      Rudy claimed that it was part of their RELIGION to attack us! How perverted and racist is that?? He neglected to mention the last few centuries when they WEREN'T attacking us, before we had an oil-based, world-domination foreign policy. Now all the sudden they've had a religious revelation? I think not.
    • CkMaverick, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14I was pretty shocked actually after the debate listening to Giuliani say that 9/11 was caused because we are free and our women were free etc... That is absolutely ludicrous. It is weird to say but they are actually making Islamic radicals sound crazier than they actually are. It is not a lie that they dislike our culture/lifestyles etc... because they can go against their beliefs but they are certainly not trying to kill us and hate us just for that. America has been completely involved in the Middle East for nearly a century. WE have been making political choices for them such as dictating country borders, placing political leaders of our choosing as heads of their state, and imposing our own philosophy on them. Essentially what I got out of the Senator was that since they reject what we are trying to impose on them we should assume they hate America and freedom and that is why they attacked us. Sounds like a moronic kid who runs around torturing animals by forcing them to do things and getting bitten in return having it put to sleep because it didn't want to be forced to it's master's will and was then deemed dangerous. This is in no way justifying the attacks of 9/11, they were monstrous and a strong, well-informed, and precise retaliation was necessary. But in no way should we be naive and ignore what the terrorists themselves are saying and believe for a second that they just attacked us randomly because they didn't like the way we lived.
    • Skycypher, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1HATES THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION!
  • TLG4Freedom, on 10/11/2007, -10/+51 I wish Americans would just research our last 50 years of Foreign and Military policy. Along the way you would realize that people do not forget. If they're family or country have been wronged by another governments clandestine operations..they will remember. Radicals will exploit these occurrences and pursue their vision of revenge aka "blowback". That was Ron Paul’s point, but it was obviously taken the wrong way.

    • Elranzer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5"Along the way you would realize that people do not forget."

      We have Civil War buffs in the south to remind us.
  • abitarecatania, on 10/11/2007, -15/+31Ron Paul won the first debate and anyone who watched the debate knows it.
    MSNBC Lying:
    http://buenosairesenglish.blogspot.com/2007/05/why-is-msnbc-lying.html http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/ron_paul_demolishes_other_republicans_in_online_polls/
    ABC tried to hide Ron Paul victory also:
    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/BeSeenBeHeard/popup?id=3135373
    CSPAN Has Ron Paul victory:
    http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=103899
    Youtube first GOP debate Ron Paul:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peBGJwE9NXo
    • ghindo, on 10/11/2007, -5/+20Regarding the YouTube video:

      A lot of what Paul said in the debate was sort of ho-hum for me, but when he started talking about the internet I literally sat upright.

      I really support this guy, if nothing else for his stance on that.
  • abitarecatania, on 10/11/2007, -11/+41FOX NEWS just showed Ron Paul winning the second debate 22066!
  • TLG4Freedom, on 10/11/2007, -10/+57Holy ***** Ron Paul 30% in poll!!
    1st place
    • bgraves20, on 10/11/2007, -9/+53And Fox went straight into spinning why he isn't really in first.
    • Herkimer56, on 10/11/2007, -52/+17I can tell you why he isn't really in first place. His followers are spamming the polls again. He - clearly - got his ass handed to him tonight. He made himself look like an absolute fool. The Ron Paul campaign is over.
    • AmzngSpidey, on 10/11/2007, -9/+13tyrannysucks, did you just agree with Herk?
    • ZachtheKnife, on 10/11/2007, -7/+20Hilarious that once the text message poll was over and Ron Paul was basically tied for the most votes, Hannity and the other conservative talking heads completely dismissed the poll as flawed and in effect, pointless.
    • argoff, on 10/11/2007, -4/+16Holy *****!
      Ron Paul is gone from the polls again. For chrissake, how many times are going to have to deal with this.
    • Rickler, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3HELLY ***** POST A LINK.
    • polyGone, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6http://www.njection.com/fox_ron_paul.jpg

      :)
    • Herkimer56, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3That's not the way it ended, is it?
  • smoothmedia, on 10/11/2007, -10/+49Ron Paul is leading.....and Fox News is POed
  • Guitarzan, on 10/11/2007, -9/+24Hes winning! We need to keep it up. This is the best thing on FOX News, ever.
  • FuzzyNaval, on 10/11/2007, -8/+50I never participated in any text voting before, but I had too once I saw Ron Paul at 30%. Fox is pissed.

    SMS to: 36988
    Ron Paul: R7
    • Stochio, on 10/11/2007, -8/+23Same here. This is my first time EVER texting anything ever to a person that isn't in my contact list. Used my phone. Used my girlfriend's. Get YOUR vote in!
    • ronpaulpeople, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2Me too")
  • AmzngSpidey, on 10/11/2007, -24/+9Lol - you guys are going to trick that poor old man into continuing to run even though all of America hates him now.
    • sentime, on 10/11/2007, -12/+5Kids hate their parents when they get tough love. But they still respect and love them.
    • Fhionnlaoch, on 10/11/2007, -8/+13This is one of the few men who is and will be a good politician. Even though I'm Canadian, I would vote for him if I had the opportunity to do so.
    • GettinReal, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7go back to your comics kid...
  • Stochio, on 10/11/2007, -9/+15Text 36988 with a message of R7! Go! Go! Go Ron Paul!

  • HongQi, on 10/11/2007, -20/+13I certainly didn't hate the guy but you people might find a little more sympathy if you didn't sound like some sort of cult. Have to agree with Herkimer, that comment hurt his campaign. Most people hear that "blowback" comment and know it is same as saying the rape victim had it coming. Sorry, but true.
    • HongQi, on 10/11/2007, -16/+9See try to help ya out but...no, you don't get it. Blame the US for the attacks of 9/11 and you don't get elected. Simple. Like I said didn't hate the guy but not real freakin' fond of his supporters.
    • ronpaulpeople, on 10/11/2007, -7/+6In the first place 911 was not done by terrorists, Ron Paul should have said that, but we know what happens to people who dare to do that.......ask Rosie!
      It comes down to this my friend, you either stand for the Truth or you don't, if you don't like us Ron Paul Cult people,..........leave. We don't need you and we will get him to be our next Prez with or without you!
    • Visnik, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4"See try to help ya out but...no, you don't get it. Blame the US for the attacks of 9/11 and you don't get elected. Simple. Like I said didn't hate the guy but not real freakin' fond of his supporters."

      You are missing the point. Lets role play. I'll be a bully and beat you up, everyday, you hit me back and I'll scream and cry very loudly, than I'll expect my classmates, teacher and parents to blame you. Good logic there. Though I will give you the majority of Americans do have their head in the sand that's why bush got elected a 2ND term, so we will see.
    • GhostCow, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9Not at all. He wasn't saying that Al Qaida was right for attacking us, he was saying that our foreign policy has made us a target. Giuliani says they attacked us because we love freedom and give women rights, but Britain had a female prime minister for years and was never attacked, most western European countries have about as much social freedom as we do and are as strong on women's rights and many have had leading female politicians, but they haven't been as big a target as the US. Why? Because most of western Europe isn't as involved in the Middle East as we are, and when they are involved it's usually at our request and under our leadership.

      Admittedly Ron Paul could have given a much better explanation. We used to fund and support Al Qaida in Afghanistan, now we're fighting them there. We funded and supported Saddam Hussein in the 1980s when he was at war with Iran, and have gone to war with him twice and bombed him many times since then. When the leaders we support don't turn on us, they're often overthrown, as happened in Iran, and we're now facing the possibility of a war with Iran. We've supported a Saudi monarchy that doesn't even have basic democratic rights, and we're surprised when the majority of the 9/11 hijackers are Saudi Arabians who are fighting us here because we make it hard for them to fight their government back home.
  • jchanc04, on 10/11/2007, -7/+41I hate fox news as much as the next guy but I will say this debate was better run then the MSNBC debate.
    Here they at least sometimes followed up when the candidates tried to dodge the questions.

    The MSNBC debate was a joke filled with softballs.

    Go Paul for having the guts to stand up to Rudy "Remember me on 9/11" Guliani
    • jcm267, on 10/11/2007, -6/+21Exactly... and between stuff like this and the Imus thing Fox isn't looking all that bad.

      Plus, the Fox debate actually got me to join the Ron Paul camp...
  • jae1227, on 10/11/2007, -6/+36I think Guliani attacking Paul will be to Paul's advantage. Guliani showed that Paul is a viable candidate by addressing his statement. Either this will kill him or propel him into the first tier. I believe it is the latter.

    Paul 2008!!!!!
    • beneathbrooklyn, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I think he handled himself well and he was able to have the last word within the confines of the debate except for the cheap shot later by that other candidate (i think it was tancredo). when it comes to this there is no such thing as bad publicity, everytime his profile is raised even if it is from a fascist like giuliani trying to knock him down its a good thing. people can see he is sharp and can hold his own and has some sort of perspective on the world and our history. not to mention a respect for the constitution and our rights as citizens. A great debate, I was sorry I missed it live but just watched it on fox's website.
  • crzslady, on 10/11/2007, -9/+32It's heartbreaking to me that so many Americans are unwilling or unable to look at the history of American foreign policy over the past 50 years and realize the truth and wisdom of Ron Paul's statement. Our government sends billions of dollars each and every year to Israel who has made hundreds of thousands of Muslims refugees. Ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity, we should not be financing it.
  • jackelsmack, on 10/11/2007, -8/+10I love how in every Republican debate the main thing candidates are competing for is the "Who's got the biggest balls" award.
    • patr84, on 10/11/2007, -9/+39Ron Paul had the biggest balls for speaking the truth in the face of 9 neocon warmongers, the neocon audience, and the neocon Faux News Channel.
    • Urusai, on 10/11/2007, -10/+5No doubt, those balls are slapping against your perineum. That's the "taint" for you youngsters.
    • Herkimer56, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3They may have been competing for the biggest balls but Ron Paul clearly won for being the biggest dick.
  • sentime, on 10/11/2007, -8/+23Fox should just call themselves the Mousolini Facist News channel.

    HUGE balls Ron Paul for speaking truth to the blood + torture + facist crowd. I can just see their audience selection.

    Are you scared?, yes? you're in!
    Do you love torture?, yes? you're in!
    Do you love dictators?, yes ?you're in!

    Do you love freedom and America?, yes? you're OUT!
    • GettinReal, on 10/11/2007, -8/+15I can tell you really hate this country. Statements like yours give Al-Qaeda hope and strength and take freedom away from the Iraqi children. I am reporting you the Department of Homeland Security for providing emotional support to terrorists. I cant believe you said those things. Its statements like that that prove our constitution is a flawed document and needs to be rewritten by a presidentially appointed commission. I would recommend Guilliani, Kissinger, Gingrich, Perle, Wolfowitz, and Ahmed Chalabi headed by the patriot of patriots, the great tactician, the inventor of liberty...Dick Cheney. Thats right.

      Let me tell you a story. The other day while I was at a goat *****....
    • apophisitis, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8@gettinreal
      Hahaha! For a moment there, I thought you were being serious.
    • Visnik, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6@gettinreal

      I was about to call you an idiot till i read this "Let me tell you a story. The other day while I was at a goat *****...."

      I think a lot of people missed that, it is to funny
  • donroy, on 10/11/2007, -6/+36Ron Paul also wants to abolish the privately run, ripping-us-off Federal Bank. I agree with his stance on smaller government and protecting our privacy by getting government out of our wallets and private information...
  • thatsmyaibo, on 10/11/2007, -7/+222 things to say here. First off, I have to say I'm loving Paul more by the day. As a registered Republican, it's someone like him that can bring the party into a modern era and maybe respark some people's faith in government. He has my vote as of now (mind you I'm against partisan parties in the first place). Second, Digg should really put like a warning or something when people submit stories from extremely biased websites.
    • Cerebral, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2and by party... you mean COUNTRY right?

      You are on the right track but you are not there yet young padwan.
  • FAT_PIGGY, on 10/11/2007, -7/+11What did you expect it's a NeoCon network.
  • swavalier711, on 10/11/2007, -7/+8Ron Paul killed by popular media.

    And America sighs....
    • wakananda, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The girls are sighing. Those who are willing to fight for their country are growling, and putting on their war paint...

  • Look4Truth, on 10/11/2007, -5/+15It's the candidates that the NWO push that we need to watch out for. Will America wake up in time and vote for Ron Paul? For the love of God, I hope so...
  • Nismobeach, on 10/11/2007, -7/+15***** Sean Hannity and his 2 bit hack of an attack on Ron Paul. The only reason Ron Paul started losing the poll in the end was because Hannity made Ron Paul look like he didn't care about genocide and wouldn't give him time to make a response.

    Ron Paul for the mother ***** WIN!
  • YixilTesiphon, on 10/11/2007, -6/+17From Wonkette:

    "10:05 Rudy demands Ron Paul retract saying that the USA should maybe quit invading and occupying any country with oil. Ron politely calls him a bitch."

    About right.
  • mattsw84, on 10/11/2007, -18/+5I do understand why people are bashing Fox but no one made Paul shoot himself in the foot that was all his own crazy coming out.
  • thrallie, on 10/11/2007, -5/+14The GOPAC Guy dismissed the poll off by saying it doesn't matter, everyone except Colmes agreed. This makes me think a couple of things, #1: This guy has a lot of power and Hannity, and even the democrat there kissed his ass. #2. Colmes disagreed but didn't say anything, this makes me think the GOPAC guy somehow funds Fox News, and Colmes was scared of the guy.

    I should say Fox News touted the poll as great and revolutionary, "democracy at its finest", BUT ONCE it said the freedom oriented candidate won they went ape ***** on their own channel.

    My republican parents, who were bushies, are now not only voting for Ron Paul but are completely disowning fox news. They really see now how biased they are, and it took a candidate they support being bashed for them to realize this. I basically turned them from a bushy into a libertarian type conservative, so it can be done.
  • Foodstamp81, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5Does any site post a transcript of these debates anywhere? I wouldn't mind reading it in my spare time.
  • nadocollin, on 10/11/2007, -5/+9If you watch the debate, you'll find that Fox really did ask fairly pointed questions to several of the candidates, especially McCain and Giuliani, looking to hound them about deviations in their records on social issues (obvious and unaplogized-for "deviations" on the part of Giuliani, more subtle on McCain's part).

    While Ron Paul had a fantastic showing in the first debate, he was thoroughly taken advantage of by Giuliani during this second one, who got the biggest round of applause that night when he angrily asked Paul to take back some comments he made on the reasons behind the 9/11 attacks. Frankly, I think that Fox was not to blame for Paul's poor showing in the debate—he's amongst a group of people who believe something very different than he does, and while he may or may not be right, he's in the company of people who are not going to take his opinions on the war lightly. While I believe Paul is a spirited and dedicated man with honest opinions (many of which I absolutely agree with), he lost this debate with flying colors in the eyes of the audience because, honestly, he IS a bit out of place. He may be right, but he is most certainly out of place in the modern Republican party.
    • Dou6, on 10/11/2007, -5/+18I highly disagree that Paul had a bad showing. If anything, it shows that Rudy is cheaping 9/11 by using it as a political crutch. If anything, Rudy really helped out Ron Paul, because his name is now making headlines on all the major news sites.
    • Look4Truth, on 10/11/2007, -5/+21Fair questions lol? They asked Ron twice if he was in "the right party". Give me a break. They also cut him out of three segments while tossing a few softballs to their chosen candidates. Fair and balanced? I think not...
    • JigoroKano, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11Hopefully, the modern Republican party is out of place with America.
    • nadocollin, on 10/11/2007, -7/+7Look, I'm not in support of the war and Rudy's attacks on Paul were, in my opinion, unjustified. All I'm saying is that it becomes clearer to me every day that Paul has no shot whatsoever at the Republican nomination because of how erroneous his beliefs are compared to the rest of the party's.
    • Look4Truth, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7Did you ever stop to consider that his views are different because the NWO bought and paid for candidates are wrong? Geesh, think for yourself for a change. I mean really, if you're going to hang your hat on what the "news" media tells you then just go watch Idol...
    • sa9e, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2It's more than that. There just wasn't any excuse for 9/11, and Ron Paul appeared to be finding one.
    • Look4Truth, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7Watch "Freedom to Fascism" and you'll see what Ron Paul really thinks about 9/11:

      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173&q=freedom+to+fascism&hl=en

      "Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation for 'tis better to be alone than in bad company." - George Washington
    • nosecohn, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6"He may be right, but he is most certainly out of place in the modern Republican party."

      I think he knows that. But he's hoping that the "modern" Republican party is just an aberration, so he's running as a "traditional" Republican. The fact that the other 9 candidates and the network sponsoring the debates are all neo-con (artists) makes it a very hostile environment for him. I just hope the "true" Republicans stick with him.
  • CptBuck, on 10/11/2007, -14/+5Ron Paul thinks that 9/11 was the result of Clinton bombing Iraq while it was under sanction.
  • JigoroKano, on 10/11/2007, -5/+11Even though I do not plan to vote for Ron Paul because I don't share his views on a variety of issues like his stances against public education and the separation of Church and State, I just had to text my vote for the man after what he said about foreign intervention and then the manner in which Rudy, the Republican crowd, Steele, and Hannity treated him afterwards. The Republican base just sickens me right now. I haven't seen so much fascism since the Red Scare.

    I fear that Dr. Paul's votes were a bit exaggerated by the mobility and youth of his base, and that Romney has taken a decisive lead. Paul was speaking of unpleasant truths and Romney spews feel-good *****. I would vote for _any_ of the democratic candidates over Phony Romney. I bet that piece of ***** will turn back pro-choice after he wins the nomination.
    • geronimo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Keep in mind Steele lost his last election. How many elections must they lose before they get it?
    • JigoroKano, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@geronimo

      Oh I had the luxury of voting against Steele.

      He was a well spoken black person in a location with many black voters.
      He was the Lt. Governor under a popular Governor (Erlich was popular even though he lost, he just lost to someone extremely popular. Erlich was a good Governor).
      His commercials were good, really good. (Not informative mind you, just entertaining and expensive)
      I honestly thought he would win, he had everything going for him.

      Except that he was a piece of ***** candidate on the issues (one of the worst on the whole ticket), so he still managed to lose.
      I am not surprised to see him working at FoxNews with all the other scumbags.
  • dbassam, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9Republicans are going to lose this election badly. ITS ABOUT THE WAR STUPID!!!! 70% of the American public are against the War and want it to end and 9 out of 10 of these numbskulls dont get that and are already talking about the next war. 2008 will make 2006 look like a walk in the park for the Republicans. They are going to get SPANKED and they DESERVE IT for not listening to what their voting public is telling them. If RP doesnt get the nomination then why even bother voting? Our choices will be the WARFARE party vs the WELFARE party. I'd rather get a root canal than endorse either of those philosophies with a vote.
    • PeppermintPig, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5If Ron Paul is continually rebuffed by the Republican establishment, I don't think any Republican has a chance of winning. They're going to have to bite this bullet or fail.
    • nosecohn, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4I think you're forgetting something: the Republicans control the war. My guess is that the President will declare some kind of victory and announce the beginning of a troop withdrawal about 2 months before the election, thereby taking the Democrats' main issue away from them. It won't be a "real" withdrawal, but it'll be enough to keep some anti-war Republicans from defecting. If the Dems are smart (doubtful), they'll stop running the last election and they'll start talking about how Bush has totally screwed the country in other ways than the war, like making us LESS safe, putting us into huge debt, taking away our civil liberties, etc.
    • PeppermintPig, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4They call this controlling the war?

      It's narrow minded to think that the Republicans have it in the bag if they start pulling out before elections as there are many more issues on the table. Assuming the Democratic party can pick a candidate, they have good odds at winning... well, maybe not with Hillary.

      Plenty of people out there who will not vote Ron Paul because he's a 'Republican', but plenty still who will vote Ron Paul despite a party label, despite whether he wins the Republican ticket.

      Let's not fall into the same rut of picking the person we think is more likely to win. Best choice is better than lesser evil vote strategy any day. Vote on principle, or stay home. XD
    • YixilTesiphon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Note how McCain responded to anti-war public opinion by saying that he'd rather lose this campaign than the war. Republicans know they're going to lose.
  • thatguyernie, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Was odd how many questions the 'first tier' candidates got while the 'second tier' peasants were relegated to deal with fewer overused questions and answers. I really wish they would let the candidates attack each other more, that at least was interesting and it prevented those horrible pre-fabricated answers we constantly hear from our future rulers. Did like how Guiliani tried to steal the thunder away from Ron Paul's anti-war stance, may just have worked...
    • beneathbrooklyn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4yeah, speaking of pre-fab answers and overused questions. the worst i think was mccain fishing for "wit points" recycling that joke about drunk sailors being more fiscally responsible than congress. YAWN.
    • Pssdoff, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Your only first-tier if you accept money from Pfizer.
  • sa9e, on 10/11/2007, -19/+6Diggers are making Digg.com look marginal by being a place for fringe-candidate-fanboys to congregate.

    It's as if this site is overwhelmingly populated by naifs that really don't understand how utterly stupid it was for Ron Paul to give intellectual credence to Al Qaeda's grievances. Ron Paul became an Al Qaeda apologist in three sentences.

    (Which means he's stupider than Bush.)
    • JigoroKano, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14This conflation you, Rudy, and Hannity are making is pure *****. Paul never said that their actions were morally justified (or not). But those are the reasons, or at least those are the reasons that the terrorists themselves give and that make sense.

      To think that they attack us because of our freedom... there are many countries with even more freedom than us that didn't get attacked, that aren't getting attacked, and that will never get attacked.
    • spoonyinc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"...stupider than bush"?

      That's all there is to say about that.
  • danconia, on 10/11/2007, -6/+13Apparently Paul handled himself well after the debate when talking to Hannity and Colmes.

    I want to see a Rudy vs Ron FACE-OFF!

    Join our largest Facebook group for Ron Paul here:
    http://usc.facebook.com/event.php?eid=2449552186
  • interpaul, on 10/11/2007, -6/+15How can Fruity Rudy possibly know anything about true foreign policy? He was just a former mayor...not even one now. He also married his second cousin (Regina Peruggi) and is a known crossdresser on several televised occasions. How is this relevant? It's not. haha. But would you vote for an incestuous tranny? I sure as hell wouldn't.
  • enlightenme, on 10/11/2007, -4/+27What's the problem people?
    9/11 is a direct result from our occupation in the middle east.
    Does that bother you?
    Well it bothers Ron, and I'm falling in love with him.
  • drfutzz, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10I predicted this ***** over an hour ago in the rosie wtc7 blog, I wanted to make sure I got my post up before the end of the debate!! Fox Sucks!!!!! Hannity should be fired for the way he treated Ron Paul, this is a god damn debate, what an unfair prick!! I have seen it all now, I am done with FNC. I am so PISSED!!!
  • AMS4G63, on 10/11/2007, -28/+5Ron Paul showed up to the REPUBLICAN debate and proceeded to reveal how un-republican he really is. He is not a Republican and definitely not a conservative, he is a liberal. I assume this is why you all like him. How do you think Romney would be treated if he showed up at the democrat debate?
    • Stochio, on 10/11/2007, -8/+10Correction: he is a *classical* liberal.
    • wolphkaat, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14"How do you think Romney would be treated if he showed up at the democrat debate?"

      like a retard at a mensa meeting

      so i guess i can see your point, Ron Paul looked like a genius at a retard convention. somewhat out of place. But I'm sure the democrats would be much more cordial and get Romney a ball or something to play with.
    • siska1, on 10/11/2007, -2/+27Paul is....
      small government, anti federal reserve, pro guns, pro life, anti UN, non-interventionist...

      If you think that's liberal you're a perfect example of the modern brain washed mainstream media watching American.

      Restore The Constitutional Republic!!! Vote Ron Paul
    • Nefelia, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12It seems Republicans have forgotten their core values. Or more accurately, they abandoned them in favor of of one issue (War), in which they seem to be out of step with the majority of the American people.
  • sentime, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11Democrats will end up with 70%+ of the House, Senate and the 2008 Presidency unless the Republicans get in touch with the American public. We could very well be looking at the end of the Republican party. They can thank Bush, Rove, and Fox News and the 9 warmongers running for prez besides Ron Paul.
  • mrrandom, on 10/11/2007, -6/+38Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate for President -- all the rest are running for Emperor.
  • zoid, on 10/11/2007, -16/+6Don't comment if you didn't watch it. Ron did good on many issues but as soon as he said that 911 was the result of the US and we need to talk to them and find out why they did it (yes he did say that) he really blew his whole campaign.
    • enlightenme, on 10/11/2007, -5/+17I know what you mean Zoid. I hate it when people speak the truth and the truth bothers me.
      I'll just ignore it like you.
  • dagamer34, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5The goal of non top tier candidates is not really to get themselves elected (because it probably won't happen) but to instead challenge other candidates to get their act together. Democrats can clearly use whatever Ron Paul says as ammo without turning it into a slingfest since he calls himself a Republican.

    In any case, I think sily debates like these are just puppet shows with preferred candidates getting all the glory. Sometimes I want to watch them, other times I feel like throwing up.
    • greenamp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+24Who the ***** decides which candidates are "top tier" and which are not? The media? The last time I checked they were all running for candidacy in a democratic election and are therefore all "top tier."

      This tier ***** is just political propaganda.
  • DigitalDud, on 10/11/2007, -16/+3Oh yeah cause Americans can really relate to Ron Paul's ideas, like completely OPENING the borders.

    Why is he even in the debate? Everyone knows he's a mole.
  • RedShirtNumber2, on 10/11/2007, -13/+5All the polls said Alan Keyes won the republican primary debates in 2000 and nobody voted for that lunatic. Nobody is going to vote for Ron Paul either.
    • Saccharin, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3Let them have their fun. As long as their little circle jerk is on Digg and not out in the real world it's not hurting anybody.
    • apophisitis, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10Dugg down for calling hope a circle jerk.
  • el33tpenguin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16No such thing as bad publicity.

    I would not worry too much about this debate. The next one will be held in New Hampshire on June 5th, and I get the feeling that Ron Paul will be very popular there.
  • CptBuck, on 10/11/2007, -14/+1@golack So? Its a ridiculous statement to say that 9/11 was the result of bombing Iraq. The fact that Ron Paul did not withdraw that statement when Rudy called him on it is totally absurd.

    Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, even George Bush had to fess up on that one. That Ron Paul made that statement is bewildering.
    • greenamp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12Bin Laden SPECIFICALLY stated the reasons for 9/11, one of which was our invlovment in middle eastern affairs, including our history of dealings with Iraq. We were meddling with Iraq long before the 2nd Gulf War.
    • ronpaulpeople, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6No, 911 had to do with Bush and "Rudy" don't you read much, last time I checked, molten metal a month later takes a little more than jet fuel and plastic and paper? Hello.............Ron Paul understands that their is a price to pay in ***** with other countries, I am not sure he is convinced that 911 was a NWO project, but if he does, he held back and I can even understand that, because that one will get you fired at this point in the game.........
    • Nefelia, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9It is true that the Iraqi government had nothing to do with the planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks.

      But the 10+ year bombing of Iraq and the brutal sanctions that are responsible for the deaths of 300,000 Iraqi children were among the greivances that has radicalized many Arabs and led them to take up arms/terrorism.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 96 of 96 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.