Friday, March 18, 2016
2015/16 PRESIDENTIAL RACE HILLARY CLINTON SPEECHES RALLYS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/
http://www.c-span.org/search/?sdate=&edate=&searchtype=Videos&sort=Most+Recent+Airing&text=0&tagid%5B%5D=275&tagid%5B%5D=331
http://blog.4president.us/2016/hillary-clinton/
https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton
20-15/16 BERNIE SANDERS SPEECHES RALLYS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders_presidential_campaign,_2016
https://berniesanders.com/press-release/sanders-campaign-statement-on-ohio-voting-rights-case/
http://www.c-span.org/search/?searchtype=Videos&sort=Newest&personid[]=994&tagid[]=275
http://blog.4president.us/2016/bernie-sanders/
https://twitter.com/SenSanders
https://berniesanders.com/press-release/sanders-campaign-statement-on-ohio-voting-rights-case/
http://www.c-span.org/search/?searchtype=Videos&sort=Newest&personid[]=994&tagid[]=275
http://blog.4president.us/2016/bernie-sanders/
https://twitter.com/SenSanders
2016 DEMOCRATIC DEBATES AND TOWNHALLS
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KAHei_IidEs?list=PLxV9EFFavPteGcnUcgwKLuaVNHiSvDR6_" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Published on Mar 13, 2016 CNN Democratic Town Hall Bernie Sanders & Hillary Clinton 3/13/2016 CNN Bernie
CNN Democratic Town Hall
Bernie Sanders & Hillary Clinton
3/13/2016
https://youtu.be/eEfxalQNwKY
BERNIE SANDERS vs HILLARY CLINTON Democratic Presidential Debate In Flint Michigan (FULL DEBATE)
Monday, November 19, 2007
Address by Mayor Ross C. “Rocky” Anderson on October 27, 2007
Submitted by davidswanson on Mon, 2007-10-29 16:45. October 27 2007 reports
Salt Lake City, Utah --
Today, as we come together once again in this great city, we raise our voices in unison to say to President Bush, to Vice President Cheney, to other members of the Bush Administration (past and present), to a majority of Congress, including Utah’s entire congressional delegation, and to much of the mainstream media: “You have failed us miserably and we won’t take it any more.”
“While we had every reason to expect far more of you, you have been pompous, greedy, cruel, and incompetent as you have led this great nation to a moral, military, and national security abyss.”
“You have breached trust with the American people in the most egregious ways. You have utterly failed in the performance of your jobs. You have undermined our Constitution, permitted the violation of the most fundamental treaty obligations, and betrayed the rule of law.”
“You have engaged in, or permitted, heinous human rights abuses of the sort never before countenanced in our nation’s history as a matter of official policy. You have sent American men and women to kill and be killed on the basis of lies, on the basis of shifting justifications, without competent leadership, and without even a coherent plan for this monumental blunder.”
“We are here to tell you: We won’t take it any more!”
“You have acted in direct contravention of values that we, as Americans who love our country, hold dear. You have deceived us in the most cynical, outrageous ways. You have undermined, or allowed the undermining of, our constitutional system of checks and balances among the three presumed co-equal branches of government. You have helped lead our nation to the brink of fascism, of a dictatorship contemptuous of our nation’s treaty obligations, federal statutory law, our Constitution, and the rule of law.”
“Because of you, and because of your jingoistic false ‘patriotism,’ our world is far more dangerous, our nation is far more despised, and the threat of terrorism is far greater than ever before.
It has been absolutely astounding how you have committed the most horrendous acts, causing such needless tragedy in the lives of millions of people, yet you wear your so-called religion on your sleeves, asserting your God-is-on-my-side nonsense – when what you have done flies in the face of any religious or humanitarian tradition. Your hypocrisy is mind-boggling – and disgraceful. What part of “Thou shalt not kill” do you not understand? What part of the “Golden rule” do you not understand? What part of “be honest,” “be responsible,” and “be accountable” don’t you understand? What part of “Blessed are the peacekeepers” do you not understand?
Because of you, hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, many thousands of people have suffered horrendous lifetime injuries, and millions have been run off from their homes. For the sake of our nation, for the sake of our children, and for the sake of our brothers and sisters around the world, we are morally compelled to say, as loudly as we can, ‘We won’t take it any more!’ ”
“As United States agents kidnap, disappear, and torture human beings around the world, you justify, you deceive, and you cover up. We find what you have done to men, women and children, and to the good name and reputation of the United States, so appalling, so unconscionable, and so outrageous as to compel us to call upon you to step aside and allow other men and women who are competent, true to our nation’s values, and with high moral principles to stand in your places – for the good of our nation, for the good of our children, and for the good of our world.”
In the case of the President and Vice President, this means impeachment and removal from office, without any further delay from a complacent, complicit Congress, the Democratic majority of which cares more about political gain in 2008 than it does about the vindication of our Constitution, the rule of law, and democratic accountability.
It means the election of people as President and Vice President who, unlike most of the presidential candidates from both major parties, have not aided and abetted in the perpetration of the illegal, tragic, devastating invasion and occupation of Iraq. And it means the election of people as President and Vice President who will commit to return our nation to the moral and strategic imperative of refraining from torturing human beings.
In the case of the majority of Congress, it means electing people who are diligent enough to learn the facts, including reading available National Intelligence Estimates, before voting to go to war. It means electing to Congress men and women who will jealously guard Congress’s sole prerogative to declare war. It means electing to Congress men and women who will not submit like vapid lap dogs to presidential requests for blank checks to engage in so-called preemptive wars, for legislation permitting warrantless wiretapping of communications involving US citizens, and for dangerous, irresponsible, saber-rattling legislation like the recent Kyl-Lieberman amendment.
We must avoid the trap of focusing the blame solely upon President Bush and Vice-President Cheney. This is not just about a few people who have wronged our country – and the world. They were enabled by members of both parties in Congress, they were enabled by the pathetic mainstream news media, and, ultimately, they have been enabled by the American people – 40% of whom are so ill-informed they still think Iraq was behind the 9/11 attacks – a people who know and care more about baseball statistics and which drunken starlets are wearing underwear than they know and care about the atrocities being committed every single day in our name by a government for which we need to take responsibility.
As loyal Americans, without regard to political partisanship -- as veterans, as teachers, as religious leaders, as working men and women, as students, as professionals, as businesspeople, as public servants, as retirees, as people of all ages, races, ethnic origins, sexual orientations, and faiths -- we are here to say to the Bush administration, to the majority of Congress, and to the mainstream media: “You have violated your solemn responsibilities. You have undermined our democracy, spat upon our Constitution, and engaged in outrageous, despicable acts. You have brought our nation to a point of immorality, inhumanity, and illegality of immense, tragic, unprecedented proportions.”
“But we will live up to our responsibilities as citizens, as brothers and sisters of those who have suffered as a result of the imperial bullying of the United States government, and as moral actors who must take a stand: And we will, and must, mean it when we say ‘We won’t take it any more.’”
If we want principled, courageous elected officials, we need to be principled, courageous, and tenacious ourselves. History has demonstrated that our elected officials are not the leaders – the leadership has to come from us. If we don’t insist, if we don’t persist, then we are not living up to our responsibilities as citizens in a democracy – and our responsibilities as moral human beings. If we remain silent, we signal to Congress and the Bush administration – and to candidates running for office – and to the world – that we support the status quo.
Silence is complicity. Only by standing up for what’s right and never letting down can we say we are doing our part.
Our government, on the basis of a campaign we now know was entirely fraudulent, attacked and militarily occupied a nation that posed no danger to the United States. Our government, acting in our name, has caused immense, unjustified death and destruction.
It all started five years ago, yet where have we, the American people, been? At this point, we are responsible. We get together once in a while at demonstrations and complain about Bush and Cheney, about Congress, and about the pathetic news media. We point fingers and yell a lot. Then most people politely go away until another demonstration a few months later.
How many people can honestly say they have spent as much time learning about and opposing the outrages of the Bush administration as they have spent watching sports or mindless television programs during the past five years? Escapist, time-sapping sports and insipid entertainment have indeed become the opiate of the masses.
Why is this country so sound asleep? Why do we abide what is happening to our nation, to our Constitution, to the cause of peace and international law and order? Why are we not doing all in our power to put an end to this madness?
We should be in the streets regularly and students should be raising hell on our campuses. We should be making it clear in every way possible that apologies or convoluted, disingenuous explanations just don’t cut it when presidential candidates and so many others voted to authorize George Bush and his neo-con buddies to send American men and women to attack and occupy Iraq.
Let’s awaken, and wake up the country by committing here and now to do all each of us can to take our nation back. Let them hear us across the country, as we ask others to join us: “We won’t take it any more!”
I implore you: Draw a line. Figure out exactly where your own moral breaking point is. How much will you put up with before you say “No more” and mean it?
I have drawn my line as a matter of simple personal morality: I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who has voted to fund the atrocities in Iraq. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who will not commit to remove all US troops, as soon as possible, from Iraq. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who has supported legislation that takes us one step closer to attacking Iran. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who has not fought to stop the kidnapping, disappearances, and torture being carried on in our name.
If we expect our nation’s elected officials to take us seriously, let us send a powerful message they cannot misunderstand. Let them know we really do have our moral breaking point. Let them know we have drawn a bright line. Let them know they cannot take our support for granted – that, regardless of their party and regardless of other political considerations, they will not have our support if they cannot provide, and have not provided, principled leadership.
The people of this nation may have been far too quiet for five years, but let us pledge that we won’t let it go on one more day – that we will do all we can to put an end to the illegalities, the moral degradation, and the disintegration of our nation’s reputation in the world.
Let us be unified in drawing the line – in declaring that we do have a moral breaking point. Let us insist, together, in supporting our troops and in gratitude for the freedoms for which our veterans gave so much, that we bring our troops home from Iraq, that we return our government to a constitutional democracy, and that we commit to honoring the fundamental principles of human rights.
In defense of our country, in defense of our Constitution, in defense of our shared values as Americans – and as moral human beings – we declare today that we will fight in every way possible to stop the insanity, stop the continued military occupation of Iraq, and stop the moral depravity reflected by the kidnapping, disappearing, and torture of people around the world.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28179
Submitted by davidswanson on Mon, 2007-10-29 16:45. October 27 2007 reports
Salt Lake City, Utah --
Today, as we come together once again in this great city, we raise our voices in unison to say to President Bush, to Vice President Cheney, to other members of the Bush Administration (past and present), to a majority of Congress, including Utah’s entire congressional delegation, and to much of the mainstream media: “You have failed us miserably and we won’t take it any more.”
“While we had every reason to expect far more of you, you have been pompous, greedy, cruel, and incompetent as you have led this great nation to a moral, military, and national security abyss.”
“You have breached trust with the American people in the most egregious ways. You have utterly failed in the performance of your jobs. You have undermined our Constitution, permitted the violation of the most fundamental treaty obligations, and betrayed the rule of law.”
“You have engaged in, or permitted, heinous human rights abuses of the sort never before countenanced in our nation’s history as a matter of official policy. You have sent American men and women to kill and be killed on the basis of lies, on the basis of shifting justifications, without competent leadership, and without even a coherent plan for this monumental blunder.”
“We are here to tell you: We won’t take it any more!”
“You have acted in direct contravention of values that we, as Americans who love our country, hold dear. You have deceived us in the most cynical, outrageous ways. You have undermined, or allowed the undermining of, our constitutional system of checks and balances among the three presumed co-equal branches of government. You have helped lead our nation to the brink of fascism, of a dictatorship contemptuous of our nation’s treaty obligations, federal statutory law, our Constitution, and the rule of law.”
“Because of you, and because of your jingoistic false ‘patriotism,’ our world is far more dangerous, our nation is far more despised, and the threat of terrorism is far greater than ever before.
It has been absolutely astounding how you have committed the most horrendous acts, causing such needless tragedy in the lives of millions of people, yet you wear your so-called religion on your sleeves, asserting your God-is-on-my-side nonsense – when what you have done flies in the face of any religious or humanitarian tradition. Your hypocrisy is mind-boggling – and disgraceful. What part of “Thou shalt not kill” do you not understand? What part of the “Golden rule” do you not understand? What part of “be honest,” “be responsible,” and “be accountable” don’t you understand? What part of “Blessed are the peacekeepers” do you not understand?
Because of you, hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, many thousands of people have suffered horrendous lifetime injuries, and millions have been run off from their homes. For the sake of our nation, for the sake of our children, and for the sake of our brothers and sisters around the world, we are morally compelled to say, as loudly as we can, ‘We won’t take it any more!’ ”
“As United States agents kidnap, disappear, and torture human beings around the world, you justify, you deceive, and you cover up. We find what you have done to men, women and children, and to the good name and reputation of the United States, so appalling, so unconscionable, and so outrageous as to compel us to call upon you to step aside and allow other men and women who are competent, true to our nation’s values, and with high moral principles to stand in your places – for the good of our nation, for the good of our children, and for the good of our world.”
In the case of the President and Vice President, this means impeachment and removal from office, without any further delay from a complacent, complicit Congress, the Democratic majority of which cares more about political gain in 2008 than it does about the vindication of our Constitution, the rule of law, and democratic accountability.
It means the election of people as President and Vice President who, unlike most of the presidential candidates from both major parties, have not aided and abetted in the perpetration of the illegal, tragic, devastating invasion and occupation of Iraq. And it means the election of people as President and Vice President who will commit to return our nation to the moral and strategic imperative of refraining from torturing human beings.
In the case of the majority of Congress, it means electing people who are diligent enough to learn the facts, including reading available National Intelligence Estimates, before voting to go to war. It means electing to Congress men and women who will jealously guard Congress’s sole prerogative to declare war. It means electing to Congress men and women who will not submit like vapid lap dogs to presidential requests for blank checks to engage in so-called preemptive wars, for legislation permitting warrantless wiretapping of communications involving US citizens, and for dangerous, irresponsible, saber-rattling legislation like the recent Kyl-Lieberman amendment.
We must avoid the trap of focusing the blame solely upon President Bush and Vice-President Cheney. This is not just about a few people who have wronged our country – and the world. They were enabled by members of both parties in Congress, they were enabled by the pathetic mainstream news media, and, ultimately, they have been enabled by the American people – 40% of whom are so ill-informed they still think Iraq was behind the 9/11 attacks – a people who know and care more about baseball statistics and which drunken starlets are wearing underwear than they know and care about the atrocities being committed every single day in our name by a government for which we need to take responsibility.
As loyal Americans, without regard to political partisanship -- as veterans, as teachers, as religious leaders, as working men and women, as students, as professionals, as businesspeople, as public servants, as retirees, as people of all ages, races, ethnic origins, sexual orientations, and faiths -- we are here to say to the Bush administration, to the majority of Congress, and to the mainstream media: “You have violated your solemn responsibilities. You have undermined our democracy, spat upon our Constitution, and engaged in outrageous, despicable acts. You have brought our nation to a point of immorality, inhumanity, and illegality of immense, tragic, unprecedented proportions.”
“But we will live up to our responsibilities as citizens, as brothers and sisters of those who have suffered as a result of the imperial bullying of the United States government, and as moral actors who must take a stand: And we will, and must, mean it when we say ‘We won’t take it any more.’”
If we want principled, courageous elected officials, we need to be principled, courageous, and tenacious ourselves. History has demonstrated that our elected officials are not the leaders – the leadership has to come from us. If we don’t insist, if we don’t persist, then we are not living up to our responsibilities as citizens in a democracy – and our responsibilities as moral human beings. If we remain silent, we signal to Congress and the Bush administration – and to candidates running for office – and to the world – that we support the status quo.
Silence is complicity. Only by standing up for what’s right and never letting down can we say we are doing our part.
Our government, on the basis of a campaign we now know was entirely fraudulent, attacked and militarily occupied a nation that posed no danger to the United States. Our government, acting in our name, has caused immense, unjustified death and destruction.
It all started five years ago, yet where have we, the American people, been? At this point, we are responsible. We get together once in a while at demonstrations and complain about Bush and Cheney, about Congress, and about the pathetic news media. We point fingers and yell a lot. Then most people politely go away until another demonstration a few months later.
How many people can honestly say they have spent as much time learning about and opposing the outrages of the Bush administration as they have spent watching sports or mindless television programs during the past five years? Escapist, time-sapping sports and insipid entertainment have indeed become the opiate of the masses.
Why is this country so sound asleep? Why do we abide what is happening to our nation, to our Constitution, to the cause of peace and international law and order? Why are we not doing all in our power to put an end to this madness?
We should be in the streets regularly and students should be raising hell on our campuses. We should be making it clear in every way possible that apologies or convoluted, disingenuous explanations just don’t cut it when presidential candidates and so many others voted to authorize George Bush and his neo-con buddies to send American men and women to attack and occupy Iraq.
Let’s awaken, and wake up the country by committing here and now to do all each of us can to take our nation back. Let them hear us across the country, as we ask others to join us: “We won’t take it any more!”
I implore you: Draw a line. Figure out exactly where your own moral breaking point is. How much will you put up with before you say “No more” and mean it?
I have drawn my line as a matter of simple personal morality: I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who has voted to fund the atrocities in Iraq. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who will not commit to remove all US troops, as soon as possible, from Iraq. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who has supported legislation that takes us one step closer to attacking Iran. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who has not fought to stop the kidnapping, disappearances, and torture being carried on in our name.
If we expect our nation’s elected officials to take us seriously, let us send a powerful message they cannot misunderstand. Let them know we really do have our moral breaking point. Let them know we have drawn a bright line. Let them know they cannot take our support for granted – that, regardless of their party and regardless of other political considerations, they will not have our support if they cannot provide, and have not provided, principled leadership.
The people of this nation may have been far too quiet for five years, but let us pledge that we won’t let it go on one more day – that we will do all we can to put an end to the illegalities, the moral degradation, and the disintegration of our nation’s reputation in the world.
Let us be unified in drawing the line – in declaring that we do have a moral breaking point. Let us insist, together, in supporting our troops and in gratitude for the freedoms for which our veterans gave so much, that we bring our troops home from Iraq, that we return our government to a constitutional democracy, and that we commit to honoring the fundamental principles of human rights.
In defense of our country, in defense of our Constitution, in defense of our shared values as Americans – and as moral human beings – we declare today that we will fight in every way possible to stop the insanity, stop the continued military occupation of Iraq, and stop the moral depravity reflected by the kidnapping, disappearing, and torture of people around the world.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28179
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Saturday, October 13, 2007
fight in australia
The International Murdoch Media Smearing Of Ron Paul Begins
YOUR NEW REALITY | October 12, 2007
Darryl Mason
The Rupert Murdoch media in the United States mostly pretends Ron Paul doesn't exist, or simply doesn't matter. As hard a myth that is to maintain, Murdoch is clearly backing Giuliani and Billary and no-one else for the White House in 2008. Like most American elites, Murdoch doesn't care if it's Billary or Giuliani, just as long as it isn't Ron Paul in the White House come 2008.
In Australia, now that Ron Paul's infamy is spreading fast, and his reputation as one of the more credible and interesting Republican candidates is taking root, the Murdoch media has decided to kill off the story of a real presidential underdog before it excites too many journalists down under.
The first shot from Murdoch's Australian media claims that Ron Paul's impressive dominance of internet campaigning is merely the result of a "fake online campaign."
Wait. Here's the full headlines from news.com.au :
Republican Ron Paul In Possible 'Fake Online Campaign'
In the story , journalist Mark Schliebs makes a fistful of accusations of online fraud, based on little more than his own opinion and the strategic use of words like 'possible' and 'may'. If the headline wasn't bad enough, check out the opening paragraph :
A candidate for the US presidency is being buoyed by a massive online campaign that may be a fake grassroots movement organised by party staff.
It gets worse, and far more dubious :
YouTube footage of Texan Republican Congressman Ron Paul, whose candidacy has been overshadowed in the media by competitors Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson and John McCain, has been viewed by tens of thousands of people in the last week.
As of 11am (AEST) today, a compilation of different clips of Dr Paul was the �Top Rated� video of the past 24 hours.
The clip had been viewed nearly 60,000 times since it was uploaded yesterday.
But it was not the only clip of the Congressman receiving kudos from Youtube users, with another 10 videos appearing in today's list of the site's 100 "Top Rated" recordings.
Of the 11 featured clips of Dr Paul, only one user uploaded more than one of them in the last 24 hours.
Just one of the 11 clips in the list was actually featured in today's top 100 "Most Viewed" videos.
Head of Flinders University's Department of American Studies Don De Bats told NEWS.com.au that it �sounded like� an astroturfing campaign.
Astroturfing is the term used to describe a fake grassroots campaign, where members of an organisation create the illusion that �ordinary people� are behind the movement.
Professor De Bats said that for a relatively unknown candidate like Dr Paul to have so much prominence online was suspicious .
�I would not put any credibility on those results,� Prof De Bats said.
�I find it terrifically surprising and unlikely (that Dr Paul would attract that level of response).�
Earlier this week, the Republican's campaign team issued a press release that said: �Dr Paul's video channel has been viewed 4.5 million times by supporters who embrace his message of freedom and limited government, making him one of the most-watched presidential candidates in internet history.�
Those figures were only based on clips uploaded by one user, RonPaul2008dotcom, who didn't have any clips in today's 100 Top Rated list.
What the hell is this guy talking about? Can anyone make sense of this nonsense? The RonPaul2008 channel is an election channel, which every presidential wannabe who is seriously pursuing an online audience also has, including Billary, Giuliani and Barack Obama.
It's an online campaign, so of course Ron Paul supporters or Ron Paul's own office is going to post clips, just as the teams behind Giuliani, Billary and Obama are now also doing.
Similar claims of 'astroturfing' have been made about Ron Paul's extraordinary showing in online polls after Republican debates, where he often heartily trounces higher profile candidates like Rudolph Giuliani. Despite the fact that most major media organisations only allow one vote from each IP address for such polls, the smear campaign continues to claim that Ron Paul staffers, and a small pool of supporters, are stacking the polls.
So when there is clear evidence that Ron Paul is making a deep impression with hundreds of thousands of Americans online, via impressive viewing numbers for videos on YouTube, a Murdoch journo tries to claim that this is merely yet another example of astroturfing?
There's many reasons why it is in the interest of the 'establishment' media to try and discredit Ron Paul every chance they get. Here's one reason why - Ron Paul talks like this about the international Murdoch media campaign to ramp up support for a War On Iran:
"Why don't we just open up the Constitution and read it? You're not allowed to go to war without a declaration of war. Now, as far as fleeting enemies goes, yes-- if there's an imminent attack on us. We've never had that happen to us in 220 years. The idea that Iran could pose an imminent attack on the United States is preposterous. There's no way."
"This is just war propaganda preparing this nation to go to war and spread this war not only into Iraq but into Iran unconstitutionally. It is a road to disaster for us as a nation. It is the road to our financial disaster if we don't read the Constitution once in a while."
No wonder they want to shut him up, and shut him down.
What the Murdoch media journo also failed to point out is how miserable the YouTube viewing numbers, and online poll results, are for presidential wannabes like Giuliani, who is supposed to be the chief Republican contender for the White House, and is "electrifying" the Republican heartland, if you believe what you hear on Fox News.
Tens of millions of Americans spend more than three or four hours online every day, but how many of them are drawn to check out Giuliani videos on YouTube? Not many. This Giuliani YouTube video , where he espouses on one of his key platforms, attracted a measly 370 viewings after a week. The clips where Giuliani scores tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of viewings, are the ones where he and Ron Paul are going at each other during Republican debates.
Here's Giuliani on free trade (94 viewings), on combating internet predators (113 viewings), and on energy independence for the US (120 viewings) - at the time of this blog posting.
But when an anti-war Republican, who personifies the core values of real American conservatism, and who 'courageously speaks the truth' , finds a massive online audience who flock to each new video in their hundreds of thousands, it's all supposed to be fake?
If Ron Paul supporters are so easily stacking YouTube viewing numbers, and online polls, then why aren't Giuliani supporters doing the same?
The Australian Murdoch media story on Ron Paul is a beat-up, hack work, nasty and vindictive and a standard example of the kind of insidious propaganda that gets flung at anyone who hits the American heartland talking of changing the status quo of an American in deep, deep trouble.
The Murdoch journalist also failed to mention the biggest Ron Paul story of the last few weeks - the fact that he has managed to raise $5 million in only a few months, with the vast majority of donations coming in small amounts from tens of thousands of supporters, as opposed to Giuliani who gets a handful of checks worth hundreds of thousands of dollars each instead.
The 'Fake Online Campaign' story has gone up on News Limited's central media website for Australia, and it is likely to filter out into city newspapers across the country tomorrow, and also become fodder for talk back radio. Remember that Rupert Murdoch controls 70% of all Australian newspapers. That's some distribution system for propaganda like the Schliebs story.
The lies propagated by Mark Schliebs will stick, and the rest of the Australian media will follow the Murdoch media line : that Ron Paul's remarkable grassroots support base is nothing more than a fake campaign, organised by his staffers, instead of a revolutionary change to the way Americans elect their presidents, or at least hear what they have to say and what they stand for.
Another voice of rational American politics, which could help change the blood-stained international reputation of the United States, has been maligned, and discredited in Australia today.
If more Australians, Europeans, Asians and Russians heard what Ron Paul had to say, the horrific international poll results showing anti-American dissent is soaring across the world might level off a bit.
This Ron Paul video (and remember this is a video clip about politics , not Paris Hilton nude or skateboarding dogs) has been viewed an extraordinary 472,000 times .
Astroturfing? They wish.
YOUR NEW REALITY | October 12, 2007
Darryl Mason
The Rupert Murdoch media in the United States mostly pretends Ron Paul doesn't exist, or simply doesn't matter. As hard a myth that is to maintain, Murdoch is clearly backing Giuliani and Billary and no-one else for the White House in 2008. Like most American elites, Murdoch doesn't care if it's Billary or Giuliani, just as long as it isn't Ron Paul in the White House come 2008.
In Australia, now that Ron Paul's infamy is spreading fast, and his reputation as one of the more credible and interesting Republican candidates is taking root, the Murdoch media has decided to kill off the story of a real presidential underdog before it excites too many journalists down under.
The first shot from Murdoch's Australian media claims that Ron Paul's impressive dominance of internet campaigning is merely the result of a "fake online campaign."
Wait. Here's the full headlines from news.com.au :
Republican Ron Paul In Possible 'Fake Online Campaign'
In the story , journalist Mark Schliebs makes a fistful of accusations of online fraud, based on little more than his own opinion and the strategic use of words like 'possible' and 'may'. If the headline wasn't bad enough, check out the opening paragraph :
A candidate for the US presidency is being buoyed by a massive online campaign that may be a fake grassroots movement organised by party staff.
It gets worse, and far more dubious :
YouTube footage of Texan Republican Congressman Ron Paul, whose candidacy has been overshadowed in the media by competitors Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson and John McCain, has been viewed by tens of thousands of people in the last week.
As of 11am (AEST) today, a compilation of different clips of Dr Paul was the �Top Rated� video of the past 24 hours.
The clip had been viewed nearly 60,000 times since it was uploaded yesterday.
But it was not the only clip of the Congressman receiving kudos from Youtube users, with another 10 videos appearing in today's list of the site's 100 "Top Rated" recordings.
Of the 11 featured clips of Dr Paul, only one user uploaded more than one of them in the last 24 hours.
Just one of the 11 clips in the list was actually featured in today's top 100 "Most Viewed" videos.
Head of Flinders University's Department of American Studies Don De Bats told NEWS.com.au that it �sounded like� an astroturfing campaign.
Astroturfing is the term used to describe a fake grassroots campaign, where members of an organisation create the illusion that �ordinary people� are behind the movement.
Professor De Bats said that for a relatively unknown candidate like Dr Paul to have so much prominence online was suspicious .
�I would not put any credibility on those results,� Prof De Bats said.
�I find it terrifically surprising and unlikely (that Dr Paul would attract that level of response).�
Earlier this week, the Republican's campaign team issued a press release that said: �Dr Paul's video channel has been viewed 4.5 million times by supporters who embrace his message of freedom and limited government, making him one of the most-watched presidential candidates in internet history.�
Those figures were only based on clips uploaded by one user, RonPaul2008dotcom, who didn't have any clips in today's 100 Top Rated list.
What the hell is this guy talking about? Can anyone make sense of this nonsense? The RonPaul2008 channel is an election channel, which every presidential wannabe who is seriously pursuing an online audience also has, including Billary, Giuliani and Barack Obama.
It's an online campaign, so of course Ron Paul supporters or Ron Paul's own office is going to post clips, just as the teams behind Giuliani, Billary and Obama are now also doing.
Similar claims of 'astroturfing' have been made about Ron Paul's extraordinary showing in online polls after Republican debates, where he often heartily trounces higher profile candidates like Rudolph Giuliani. Despite the fact that most major media organisations only allow one vote from each IP address for such polls, the smear campaign continues to claim that Ron Paul staffers, and a small pool of supporters, are stacking the polls.
So when there is clear evidence that Ron Paul is making a deep impression with hundreds of thousands of Americans online, via impressive viewing numbers for videos on YouTube, a Murdoch journo tries to claim that this is merely yet another example of astroturfing?
There's many reasons why it is in the interest of the 'establishment' media to try and discredit Ron Paul every chance they get. Here's one reason why - Ron Paul talks like this about the international Murdoch media campaign to ramp up support for a War On Iran:
"Why don't we just open up the Constitution and read it? You're not allowed to go to war without a declaration of war. Now, as far as fleeting enemies goes, yes-- if there's an imminent attack on us. We've never had that happen to us in 220 years. The idea that Iran could pose an imminent attack on the United States is preposterous. There's no way."
"This is just war propaganda preparing this nation to go to war and spread this war not only into Iraq but into Iran unconstitutionally. It is a road to disaster for us as a nation. It is the road to our financial disaster if we don't read the Constitution once in a while."
No wonder they want to shut him up, and shut him down.
What the Murdoch media journo also failed to point out is how miserable the YouTube viewing numbers, and online poll results, are for presidential wannabes like Giuliani, who is supposed to be the chief Republican contender for the White House, and is "electrifying" the Republican heartland, if you believe what you hear on Fox News.
Tens of millions of Americans spend more than three or four hours online every day, but how many of them are drawn to check out Giuliani videos on YouTube? Not many. This Giuliani YouTube video , where he espouses on one of his key platforms, attracted a measly 370 viewings after a week. The clips where Giuliani scores tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of viewings, are the ones where he and Ron Paul are going at each other during Republican debates.
Here's Giuliani on free trade (94 viewings), on combating internet predators (113 viewings), and on energy independence for the US (120 viewings) - at the time of this blog posting.
But when an anti-war Republican, who personifies the core values of real American conservatism, and who 'courageously speaks the truth' , finds a massive online audience who flock to each new video in their hundreds of thousands, it's all supposed to be fake?
If Ron Paul supporters are so easily stacking YouTube viewing numbers, and online polls, then why aren't Giuliani supporters doing the same?
The Australian Murdoch media story on Ron Paul is a beat-up, hack work, nasty and vindictive and a standard example of the kind of insidious propaganda that gets flung at anyone who hits the American heartland talking of changing the status quo of an American in deep, deep trouble.
The Murdoch journalist also failed to mention the biggest Ron Paul story of the last few weeks - the fact that he has managed to raise $5 million in only a few months, with the vast majority of donations coming in small amounts from tens of thousands of supporters, as opposed to Giuliani who gets a handful of checks worth hundreds of thousands of dollars each instead.
The 'Fake Online Campaign' story has gone up on News Limited's central media website for Australia, and it is likely to filter out into city newspapers across the country tomorrow, and also become fodder for talk back radio. Remember that Rupert Murdoch controls 70% of all Australian newspapers. That's some distribution system for propaganda like the Schliebs story.
The lies propagated by Mark Schliebs will stick, and the rest of the Australian media will follow the Murdoch media line : that Ron Paul's remarkable grassroots support base is nothing more than a fake campaign, organised by his staffers, instead of a revolutionary change to the way Americans elect their presidents, or at least hear what they have to say and what they stand for.
Another voice of rational American politics, which could help change the blood-stained international reputation of the United States, has been maligned, and discredited in Australia today.
If more Australians, Europeans, Asians and Russians heard what Ron Paul had to say, the horrific international poll results showing anti-American dissent is soaring across the world might level off a bit.
This Ron Paul video (and remember this is a video clip about politics , not Paris Hilton nude or skateboarding dogs) has been viewed an extraordinary 472,000 times .
Astroturfing? They wish.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Print USA Daily Forum Email
Ron Paul Defying the Odds Larry Fester
Published 10/11/2007 - 10:20 a.m. EDT
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul continues to defy the odds and the media produced polls demonstrating support based on issues and ideas.
The cult of Ron Paul is truly a cult of individuals emanating from all walks of life. Still mostly Republican, Paul’s base of supporters includes many Independents and a growing number of Democrats.
Ron Paul has muscled his way just barely making it into the top tier of candidates by drawing large crowds at rallies across the country and raising 5 million in the third quarter. That number is five times what Mike Huckabee raised and leaves Paul with almost a couple million in cash above what John McCain has.
While the GOP frontrunner Rudy Giuliani has 16 million in cash, Ron Paul has 5.3 million on hand. Still far behind Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, Paul’s campaign must be encouraged by the success.
In fact, if the current trend of fund raising and spending were to continue by the candidates Paul could possible end up with as much cash in hand as the frontrunners by the time of the New Hampshire primary. Paul’s campaign is running a lean machine living off the land.
In some respects Ron Paul’s campaign is making history with his online fund raising efforts. The Ron Paul campaign true to free market form is letting it all hang out so to speak by showing online donations in real time on its website.
The move is bold and daring but it shows a growing confidence in a campaign that believes it can win the Republican nomination. While the GOP nomination is up for grabs one thing is clear, Ron Paul can win it.
Broadcasters and reporters that say he has no chance at all of winning are spinning. The New Hampshire primary usually predicts the party nominee and Paul’s chances of running away with New Hampshire are very strong.
Paul is being fueled by his support of immensely popular issues.
Ron Paul clearly says he’s not a pacifist and believes in a strong national defense, but he is a non interventionist and the antiwar candidate in the campaign. Right now that is a very popular position. Unlike Hillary Clinton, Paul voted against the war which would make a potent weapon in a general election.
Still, as the New Hampshire primary is concerned, the Republican field is divided of mostly pro war candidates on one side and Ron Paul on the other.
Paul’s call to eliminate federal income taxes is immensely popular in GOP politics as well.
Another very popular issue Paul has championed is defense of constitutional liberties and opposition to a growing police state in the U.S. Every time a story surfaces where the CIA kidnapped and tortured someone in a secret prison or the government searches private persons and property without a warrant Paul’s opposition to the Patriot Act and defense of the constitution seems to have been wise.
The GOP field is littered with candidates that have weak records on border security and illegal immigration. Paul is one of the few candidates running that is credible on border security. Policing the borders is more popular with voters than creating a police state is.
Former Mexican president Fox admitted on television that he supported a North American Union and to of having joint goals in the past with President Bush of establishing a regional currency. Paul is ahead of the curve on this issue and has already stated opposition to a North American union.
It appears that the reason Paul is defying the odds is simply because he’s on the popular side of many issues.
The ideas of peace, freedom, and prosperity are very potent and may cut across party lines. (Discuss the election on www.usadaily.net
Ron Paul Defying the Odds Larry Fester
Published 10/11/2007 - 10:20 a.m. EDT
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul continues to defy the odds and the media produced polls demonstrating support based on issues and ideas.
The cult of Ron Paul is truly a cult of individuals emanating from all walks of life. Still mostly Republican, Paul’s base of supporters includes many Independents and a growing number of Democrats.
Ron Paul has muscled his way just barely making it into the top tier of candidates by drawing large crowds at rallies across the country and raising 5 million in the third quarter. That number is five times what Mike Huckabee raised and leaves Paul with almost a couple million in cash above what John McCain has.
While the GOP frontrunner Rudy Giuliani has 16 million in cash, Ron Paul has 5.3 million on hand. Still far behind Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, Paul’s campaign must be encouraged by the success.
In fact, if the current trend of fund raising and spending were to continue by the candidates Paul could possible end up with as much cash in hand as the frontrunners by the time of the New Hampshire primary. Paul’s campaign is running a lean machine living off the land.
In some respects Ron Paul’s campaign is making history with his online fund raising efforts. The Ron Paul campaign true to free market form is letting it all hang out so to speak by showing online donations in real time on its website.
The move is bold and daring but it shows a growing confidence in a campaign that believes it can win the Republican nomination. While the GOP nomination is up for grabs one thing is clear, Ron Paul can win it.
Broadcasters and reporters that say he has no chance at all of winning are spinning. The New Hampshire primary usually predicts the party nominee and Paul’s chances of running away with New Hampshire are very strong.
Paul is being fueled by his support of immensely popular issues.
Ron Paul clearly says he’s not a pacifist and believes in a strong national defense, but he is a non interventionist and the antiwar candidate in the campaign. Right now that is a very popular position. Unlike Hillary Clinton, Paul voted against the war which would make a potent weapon in a general election.
Still, as the New Hampshire primary is concerned, the Republican field is divided of mostly pro war candidates on one side and Ron Paul on the other.
Paul’s call to eliminate federal income taxes is immensely popular in GOP politics as well.
Another very popular issue Paul has championed is defense of constitutional liberties and opposition to a growing police state in the U.S. Every time a story surfaces where the CIA kidnapped and tortured someone in a secret prison or the government searches private persons and property without a warrant Paul’s opposition to the Patriot Act and defense of the constitution seems to have been wise.
The GOP field is littered with candidates that have weak records on border security and illegal immigration. Paul is one of the few candidates running that is credible on border security. Policing the borders is more popular with voters than creating a police state is.
Former Mexican president Fox admitted on television that he supported a North American Union and to of having joint goals in the past with President Bush of establishing a regional currency. Paul is ahead of the curve on this issue and has already stated opposition to a North American union.
It appears that the reason Paul is defying the odds is simply because he’s on the popular side of many issues.
The ideas of peace, freedom, and prosperity are very potent and may cut across party lines. (Discuss the election on www.usadaily.net
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)