So now Ron Paul gets mentioned, albeit only slightly, in an article on the front page of the New York Times yesterday by John M. Broder, whose theme is that all GOP candidates bash the EPA. Well, not quite in Ron Paul's case. But let's not let a good headline be spoiled by a detailed study of things...
It is almost true, given that Bachmann and Perry want to either padlock its doors or impose a moratorium on environmental regulation. So good news for idiots who want to pollute America.
Herman Cain disappoints me in that he is ready to have independent commissions which would include oil and gas execs. Why not let child abusers run the schools while you're at it.
Broder, not wishing to spoil his own headline, did not bother to mention that Ron Paul is supporting a hemp initiative...see it on http://www.hempforvictory.blogspot.com/ Recently one of his contsituents sent him a letter and he replied, it is up there. Broder and his mates at the NYT can check it out. Or just write simplistic articles, which is much easier.
But I have to admit the GOP is the party that scares me when it comes to the environment; remember the joke, how much energy does it take to destroy all America's forests? Just one watt...an allusion to James Watt, Secretary of the Environment in the Reagan days...back then they figured that trees caused pollution. Watt went after trees and falconers with a vengeance, trying to get them framed (the falconers, not the trees) for smuggling in one of the biggest legal farces in US history. He did not like their pro-environemntal stance. Ultimately he, and not a single falconer, went to prison.
So there are lots of falconers in redneck states who are not going to vote GOP that easily, even if they are hunters. If the GOP is going to overcome its image as treekillers, it better get in Ron Paul.
And then there was an article on the back page of the paper, which said a lot of good about Ron Paul without bothering to mention him, but rather by NOT mentioning him; this one by Frank Bruni. Personally, of all the NYT political hacks, I like Bruni the best; I will forgive his ommission in regards to Dr Paul as his article was on GOP loonies, titled "Heroes, Until They've Arrived." It started off with Mr Mouth, Rick Perry; then made its way to mention Sarah Palin (the quitter), Chris Christie (of very little political experience), Paul Ryan ( Paul who?), Rudy Giuliani (of whom he notes: Some Republicans never learn), Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich (as the blue-eyed Grinch who stole Grandma's Boniva) and Marco Rubio (Marco who?).
So there you have it; that leaves us with Ron Paul and Herman Cain, even if the latter does have some less than perfect ideas about the environment.
Friday, August 19, 2011
Thursday, August 18, 2011
New York Times on lack of Ron Paul coverage
Ron Paul was in yesterday's New York Times for the fact that he was not mentioned in the NYT - after coming in a close second in the straw poll; see previous post for details. Michael D. Shear writes:
'Is Representative Ron Paul getting a raw deal in the news coverage of his presidential campaign?
Jon Stewart, the host of "The Daily Show", thinks so. And so do many fans of Mr. Paul, who have taken to e-mail and Twitter to vent their frustration that his strong second-place finish in the Iowa straw poll is being largely ignored.
"It's absolutely horrendous and despicable the lack of media coverage Ron Paul is getting," one of them wrote on Twitter.
Readers of the New York Times expressed their views on its coverage of the straw polls in a flurry of e-mails. Mr Paul, a 12-term Republican congressman from Texas, lost to Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota by only 152 of 17,000 votes cast.
"We live in a democratic republic, where the votes of the people deserve to be reported by the media, not editorialized into obscurity, wrote Matthew H. Harder.
Richard Timm wrote that "Ron Paul's second-place finish merited much more attention in your article."
"Even if you don't believe he can win the nomination," Mr. Timm wrote, "don't you think it's worth given the only antiwar Republican worth a little more emphasis?"
But some skeptics have pointed out that Mr. Paul's strength at the straw poll seems outsized when compared with his popularity across the country, at least as measured by opinion polls.
Of course, Mr. Paul's followers would say that his low standing in the polls is a result of the failure of the news media to adequately report on his successes at events like the straw poll.
I called the NYT - 212-556-1234 to get to talk to this reporter, but the voice recognition machine either did not have him on as a reporter or sent me to other people. The NYT phone maze is hard to navigate, it's as if they want to write hit-and-run articles and then hide from the general public; once a reporter contacted me about a stash of stolen art I was privy to, and when I told him there were Picassos, he was so arrogant the refused to believe me; then it turned out there were Picassos - which had been stolen by the movers, who tried to sell them stupidly in NY.
The NYT has to learn to listen and it would be a better paper; it reports on Michele Bachmann, who got a write up yesterday again for her stupidity - when she remarked on it being Elvis' birthday - it wasn't - and on Rick Perry - again, for his stupidity - and he got a much lengthier column for saying something that sounded like a threat towards a government official. All the papers covered it, and even right-wingers like John Podhoretz were forced to note how wrong it was.
But when someone acts presidential, reporters ignore it.
I did get through to Jeff Zeleny, who is also covering the debates, and had to call his other number - 202-862-0401. I told him I'd been reading the paper for over 40 years and that they ought to listen to the people who pay their salaries. Next I will email him at zeleny@nytimes.com
So let's see...they missed the Picasso story, even when they were the ones to contact me, hopefully they will not miss the Ron Paul story as well.
'Is Representative Ron Paul getting a raw deal in the news coverage of his presidential campaign?
Jon Stewart, the host of "The Daily Show", thinks so. And so do many fans of Mr. Paul, who have taken to e-mail and Twitter to vent their frustration that his strong second-place finish in the Iowa straw poll is being largely ignored.
"It's absolutely horrendous and despicable the lack of media coverage Ron Paul is getting," one of them wrote on Twitter.
Readers of the New York Times expressed their views on its coverage of the straw polls in a flurry of e-mails. Mr Paul, a 12-term Republican congressman from Texas, lost to Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota by only 152 of 17,000 votes cast.
"We live in a democratic republic, where the votes of the people deserve to be reported by the media, not editorialized into obscurity, wrote Matthew H. Harder.
Richard Timm wrote that "Ron Paul's second-place finish merited much more attention in your article."
"Even if you don't believe he can win the nomination," Mr. Timm wrote, "don't you think it's worth given the only antiwar Republican worth a little more emphasis?"
But some skeptics have pointed out that Mr. Paul's strength at the straw poll seems outsized when compared with his popularity across the country, at least as measured by opinion polls.
Of course, Mr. Paul's followers would say that his low standing in the polls is a result of the failure of the news media to adequately report on his successes at events like the straw poll.
I called the NYT - 212-556-1234 to get to talk to this reporter, but the voice recognition machine either did not have him on as a reporter or sent me to other people. The NYT phone maze is hard to navigate, it's as if they want to write hit-and-run articles and then hide from the general public; once a reporter contacted me about a stash of stolen art I was privy to, and when I told him there were Picassos, he was so arrogant the refused to believe me; then it turned out there were Picassos - which had been stolen by the movers, who tried to sell them stupidly in NY.
The NYT has to learn to listen and it would be a better paper; it reports on Michele Bachmann, who got a write up yesterday again for her stupidity - when she remarked on it being Elvis' birthday - it wasn't - and on Rick Perry - again, for his stupidity - and he got a much lengthier column for saying something that sounded like a threat towards a government official. All the papers covered it, and even right-wingers like John Podhoretz were forced to note how wrong it was.
But when someone acts presidential, reporters ignore it.
I did get through to Jeff Zeleny, who is also covering the debates, and had to call his other number - 202-862-0401. I told him I'd been reading the paper for over 40 years and that they ought to listen to the people who pay their salaries. Next I will email him at zeleny@nytimes.com
So let's see...they missed the Picasso story, even when they were the ones to contact me, hopefully they will not miss the Ron Paul story as well.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Missing: Real News
The press in New York must not like Ron Paul; oddly for this city, it is lavishing its print space on Rick Perry, Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann. Michael Barone in the Post (owned by Rupert Murdoch) writes: 'Some candidates did mention intelligent policy initiatives in the debate.' But does he mention Paul? No. He praises Romney and Bachmann; who are not going to get many votes among New Yorkers. Then he goes on to talk about Thaddeus McCotter (excuse me, Thaddeus who?) for promoting debt-for-equity swaps.
Is McCotter on the House Banking Committee? Did he suggest the fed stop borrowing from the fed and by so doing reduce the debt in a single swoop? Where was Barone when Ron Paul put this forward? Or any of the rest of the press, for that matter?
The New York Times turns a lens on the press when it said in Sunday's paper the following: 'If politicians exhibited some silliness in Iowa, do did reporters. Like hounds to a whistle, they swarmed to Sarah Palin when she dropped by the state fair on Friday, again rewarding her coyness about the presidential race with extra-rapt attention. She dithers; we drool.'
And you are fools. You mislead the public, whether by accident or by design. The front page of yesterday's NYT one might call an out-and-out lie; it has a line in large print reading: 'Top 3 Contenders Set Sights on Obama and One Another.'
Top 3? Ron Paul was #2 in the straw poll, and only a point behind Bachmann - see the post before this to see why; some would say Bachmann's votes were bogus. But granting her first place, how is the runner-up completely forgotten the next day by so large a news outfit as the NYT? Or are the reporters lost in their silliness, drooling over Ms. Hotlips from Alaska?
The other two contenders they talk about are Rick Perry - who was not even present at the straw poll, and Mitt Romney. And Romney did not come even near to 2nd place. So how is he a top contender?
As to Perry, I think we are in real danger; he was Bush's vice-governor. Not a good sign. He is rather against gun control, having signed measures to make it easier to carry a concealed weapon - he has a permit for this himself.
But as the NYT reporters Jeff Zeleny and Michael Shear noted in yesterday's article, quoting Senator Charles E. Grassley - 'This is a very fluid situation right now. From here on, you are shooting with real bullets.'
Is McCotter on the House Banking Committee? Did he suggest the fed stop borrowing from the fed and by so doing reduce the debt in a single swoop? Where was Barone when Ron Paul put this forward? Or any of the rest of the press, for that matter?
The New York Times turns a lens on the press when it said in Sunday's paper the following: 'If politicians exhibited some silliness in Iowa, do did reporters. Like hounds to a whistle, they swarmed to Sarah Palin when she dropped by the state fair on Friday, again rewarding her coyness about the presidential race with extra-rapt attention. She dithers; we drool.'
And you are fools. You mislead the public, whether by accident or by design. The front page of yesterday's NYT one might call an out-and-out lie; it has a line in large print reading: 'Top 3 Contenders Set Sights on Obama and One Another.'
Top 3? Ron Paul was #2 in the straw poll, and only a point behind Bachmann - see the post before this to see why; some would say Bachmann's votes were bogus. But granting her first place, how is the runner-up completely forgotten the next day by so large a news outfit as the NYT? Or are the reporters lost in their silliness, drooling over Ms. Hotlips from Alaska?
The other two contenders they talk about are Rick Perry - who was not even present at the straw poll, and Mitt Romney. And Romney did not come even near to 2nd place. So how is he a top contender?
As to Perry, I think we are in real danger; he was Bush's vice-governor. Not a good sign. He is rather against gun control, having signed measures to make it easier to carry a concealed weapon - he has a permit for this himself.
But as the NYT reporters Jeff Zeleny and Michael Shear noted in yesterday's article, quoting Senator Charles E. Grassley - 'This is a very fluid situation right now. From here on, you are shooting with real bullets.'
Monday, August 15, 2011
Ron Paul soars ahead in Iowa
So now Ron Paul is on the front page of the New York Times, where he belongs. Jeff Zeleny writes that he came in second to Bachmann, but only by a point - leaving others way behind. He also notes that Bachmann got her votes by investing heavily, paying the $30 fee for her voters, giving them free accommodation, free food and a free concert. He asks parenthetically if that is how we elect our presidents? Rick Perry did not bother to show, but did announce his candidacy. Yeah, right. Like America wants a guy who holds stadium Taliban style religion shows...Or did he announce his candidacy for president of Texas - which is a possibility - the NYT mentioned that in his race for governor the issue of state secession came up.
One thing that ought to be clear when Perry takes credit for anything good in Texas is that he has been in office there much less time than Ron Paul, and it is Ron Paul's 14th district that is doing well - it is called the 'Golden Crescent.' Perry has little to show for his terms in office.
So expect to see more of Ron Paul on the front page of all the papers...and not for holding immense prayer meetings, gay bashing or being MIA at the podium...like his rivals.
One thing that ought to be clear when Perry takes credit for anything good in Texas is that he has been in office there much less time than Ron Paul, and it is Ron Paul's 14th district that is doing well - it is called the 'Golden Crescent.' Perry has little to show for his terms in office.
So expect to see more of Ron Paul on the front page of all the papers...and not for holding immense prayer meetings, gay bashing or being MIA at the podium...like his rivals.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Ron Paul's reply to Mina Hegaard, his constituent in Texas
This summer Mina Hegaard contacted Ron Paul about his hemp bill - she supports it and has run a made in the USA hemp business for years - Minawear.
Sincerely,
Ron Paul
Here is his reply:
Dear Mina:
Thank you for contacting my office regarding allowing farmers to grow industrial hemp.
I have introduced my bill HR 1831, the Industrial Hemp Farming Act. Please see below my speech announcing the introduction of HR 1831.
HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
BEFORE THE US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Statement Introducing the Industrial Hemp Farming Act, HR 1831
May 11, 2011
Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Industrial Hemp Farming Act. The Industrial Hemp Farming Act requires the federal government to respect state laws allowing the growing of industrial hemp.
Nine States--Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, Vermont, and West Virginia--allow industrial hemp production or research in accord with state laws. However, federal law is standing in the way of farmers in these states growing what may be a very profitable crop. Because of current federal law, all hemp included in products sold in the United States must be imported instead of being grown by American farmers.
Since 1970, the federal Controlled Substances Act's inclusion of industrial hemp in the schedule one definition of marijuana has prohibited American farmers from growing industrial hemp despite the fact that industrial hemp has such a low content of THC (the psychoactive chemical in the related marijuana plant) that nobody can be psychologically affected by consuming hemp. Federal law concedes the safety of industrial hemp by allowing it to be legally imported for use as food.
The United States is the only industrialized nation that prohibits industrial hemp cultivation. The Congressional Research Service has noted that hemp is grown as an established agricultural commodity in approximately 30 nations in Europe, Asia, North America, and South America. The Industrial Hemp Farming Act will relieve this unique restriction on American farmers and allow them to grow industrial hemp in accord with state law.
Industrial hemp is a crop that was grown legally throughout the United States for most of our nation's history. In fact, during World War II, the federal government actively encouraged American farmers to grow industrial hemp to help the war effort. The Department of Agriculture even produced a film "Hemp for Victory'' encouraging the plant's cultivation.
In recent years, the hemp plant has been put to many popular uses in foods and in industry. Grocery stores sell hemp seeds and oil as well as food products containing oil and seeds from the hemp plant. Industrial hemp is also included in consumer products such as paper, cloths, cosmetics, carpet, and door frames of cars. Hemp has even been used in alternative automobile fuel.
It is unfortunate that the federal government has stood in the way of American farmers competing in the global industrial hemp market. Indeed, the founders of our nation, some of whom grew hemp, would surely find that federal restrictions on farmers growing a safe and profitable crop on their own land are inconsistent with the constitutional guarantee of a limited, restrained federal government. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to stand up for American farmers and cosponsor the Industrial Hemp Farming Act.
Sincerely,
Ron Paul
Ron Paul crowds in Iowa
Wow! The New York Times has mentioned Ron Paul again...which is rare, as he does not do anything weird or strange that reporters love to mention. What they wrote was this:
Ron Paul, who has been drawing crowds that often rival or surpass many of his rivals, asked for his supporters to send a message to the party establishment, which has paid little attention to his candidacy. He has logged more days in Iowa than almost anyone else, an investment that he hopes will lend a sense of legitimacy to his campaign.
Sending a message to the GOP is part of my purposes with this blog - to tell them that Ron Paul has the broadest base of support while being a real conservative that most GOP voters will embrace.
Ron Paul also snagged the best space for his tent, paying $31,000 for the space adjoining the Scheman Building where the votes are cast. Sarah Palin paid nothing...but then she is not an official candidate. She just hangs about. Getting the press to pay attention to her hairdo and illegitimate grandchildren and anything else that has nothing to do with an ability to run the country.
Ron Paul, who has been drawing crowds that often rival or surpass many of his rivals, asked for his supporters to send a message to the party establishment, which has paid little attention to his candidacy. He has logged more days in Iowa than almost anyone else, an investment that he hopes will lend a sense of legitimacy to his campaign.
Sending a message to the GOP is part of my purposes with this blog - to tell them that Ron Paul has the broadest base of support while being a real conservative that most GOP voters will embrace.
Ron Paul also snagged the best space for his tent, paying $31,000 for the space adjoining the Scheman Building where the votes are cast. Sarah Palin paid nothing...but then she is not an official candidate. She just hangs about. Getting the press to pay attention to her hairdo and illegitimate grandchildren and anything else that has nothing to do with an ability to run the country.
Herman Cain leads the gang
OK, this is not a blog to get Herman Cain in as president, but he did lead the procession of candidates and gave a very good answer to those who tell him he does not understand who Washington works...he tells them, " Yes, I do. It doesn't."
He chose to attack his fellow candidates for being politicians. Which he is not. But would be if elected. So then how would he stand? I like the guy but realistically, he has no political experience, and that is essential here. But as I have noted previously he could be VP.
Then he'd know firsthand who Washtington works...or doesn't.
He chose to attack his fellow candidates for being politicians. Which he is not. But would be if elected. So then how would he stand? I like the guy but realistically, he has no political experience, and that is essential here. But as I have noted previously he could be VP.
Then he'd know firsthand who Washtington works...or doesn't.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)