Defeat the Media Clones
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
DIGG THIS
So how
does the Establishment deal with a Ron Paul candidacy? What else
did you expect? By ignoring him as much as possible.
The Reuters
headline following the May 3 GOP debate: "2008 Republicans
back war."
All right,
you say, perhaps that’s just a crude summary. A headline can’t say
everything, after all, and the article itself will surely disambiguate
the candidates. It’s certainly newsworthy that a nine-term Republican
congressman had been a fierce opponent of the war from the beginning,
and made his antiwar position clear time and again during the debate.
Naturally this will get some play.
But not even
a hint of that in the Reuters article by John Whitesides. I mean,
hey, didn’t you read the headline? The 2008 Republicans back war!
Here’s the
entire coverage of Ron Paul: "Also participating were Kansas
Sen. Sam Brownback, Reps. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, Ron Paul of
Texas, and Duncan Hunter of California."
Well, that’s
just a smash-up job there, Mr. Whitesides.
That wasn’t
an isolated case. On the Liberty and Power blog, David Beito reports:
"Later that night, CNN's post-debate spin segment sank to an
even greater low. The panel included Arianna Huffington and some
neo-con guy from The Weekly Standard. Nobody mentioned Paul's
views. The ever-insufferable Huffington, who either did not watch
the debate or lied about what she saw, self-righteously proclaimed
that all of the ten candidates supported the war. Nobody challenged
her. Are we to be spared nothing?"
The creepy
Dick Morris is in a category all his own. First, he declared John
McCain the winner. Now anyone who watched the debate had to be wondering
if McCain’s, well, weirdness was meant for laughs. At the same time,
you almost had to admire how he could be at once stilted and robotic,
and yet also crazed and menacing.
But back to
our subject: Morris ignored
Paul altogether. Now he managed to find time to mention Jim
Gilmore, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, and Tommy Thompson
– heck, he mentioned every other candidate besides Ron Paul,
even listing specific winners and losers. Since a candidate like
Ron Paul isn’t allowed to exist in Dick Morris’ world, he apparently
couldn’t win or lose.
Now we have
the phenomenon of Yahoo News inexplicably excluding Ron Paul from
its list of GOP candidates. Yet right
there are Mike Huckabee and Duncan Hunter, whose combined support
in the polls trails Ron Paul’s.
Stunned, I actually called Yahoo and left a voicemail message for
their chief communications officer, and included my email address.
In their emailed reply, I was told: "According to the latest
FEC filings, it is our understanding that Congressman Paul has not
officially entered the 2008 Presidential race, but has only gotten
to the stage of forming an exploratory committee."
Huh? Unannounced candidates are allowed into the debates? Can't
possibly be true, I thought. So I simply went to the Federal Election
Commission website, and after three seconds of searching I found
Ron Paul's filing statement, dated March 12. (That's funny: I was
told Yahoo had consulted "the latest FEC filings.") Well,
here are Ron Paul's documents right
here.
To Yahoo's credit, after I sent them this documentation I was told
that they would have a page for Ron Paul up within a week.
But apparently it's going to take persistence and vigilance to
ensure that Paul is treated fairly. As of yesterday, for example,
ABC News began deleting and banning
posts about Ron Paul, as well as posts complaining about this deletion
policy. See this article.
Since that
post was written, ABC has begun blocking all comments about
Ron Paul.
The same media
establishment that bought the Iraq propaganda package and then claimed
to be oh-so-sorry is now trying to keep out of the limelight the
one presidential contender who has actually bucked the establishment
and does something other than parrot government/media slogans. But
that’s what the mainstream media’s purpose is: to define the nature
of our political debate and make sure no fundamental questions are
ever raised.
No,
I don’t mean that the heads of these organizations held a special
meeting and after exchanging the secret handshake pledged to keep
mum about Paul. My point is that no such meeting is necessary. As
shills for the establishment, they think alike on everything that
matters. While marginal debate is to be permitted here and there,
truly independent voices are to be demonized, drowned out, or, better
yet, ignored altogether. (Ask Amy Goodman of the left’s Democracy
Now! program why she doesn’t close up shop and just let ABC
and Fox give us our news.) The media establishment likes the status
quo just the way it is.
This
is all the more reason for people interested in Ron Paul to talk
about him, write about him, and light up the Internet about him.
(I wrote this
piece as a quick intro to Paul so people could quickly and easily
show their friends what made him so unusual and admirable.) Not
only will you serve the cause of genuine political debate in this
country – if we wind up with Rudy and Hillary, what on earth will
they have to debate about? – but you’ll also tick off the race of
clones who give us only the news they think we need. That’s reward
enough, isn’t it?
May
10, 2007
Thomas E. Woods, Jr. [view
his website;
send
him mail] is
senior fellow in American history at the Ludwig
von Mises Institute. His
books include How
the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization (get a free chapter
here),
The
Church and the Market: A Catholic Defense of the Free Economy
(first-place winner in the 2006
Templeton Enterprise Awards), and the New York Times
bestseller The
Politically Incorrect Guide to American History.
Copyright
© 2007 Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
Thomas
Woods Archives
|