The Most Important Thing I Have Ever Written

The Beginning Of The End - The New Novel About The Future Of America By Michael T. Snyder
Kindle Version Of The Beginning Of The End
Survive After Collapse
The Mystery Of The Shemitah
Blood Moons Mark Biltz
Soul Deceiver
Power Companies HATE This Man...
Power companies are scared that people will learn how to slash their bill and beat Obama's electricity monopoly using this 47-year-old patriot's "weird" trick. See how before they shut it down.
The End of Obama? Approaching Obama scandal could change the White House Administration and our country overnight... Click Here
Gold Buying Guide: Golden Eagle Coins

Archives

Young Living Thieves Oil Spray

Mathematical Proof Of Dramatic Media Bias And Favoritism During The Republican Debates

It should be evident to anyone with half a brain that the recent Republican presidential debates have been incredibly slanted in favor of certain candidates.  The candidates that the mainstream media favor are receiving far more talking time than the other candidates during the debates.  It is hard to defend the legitimacy of our political system after watching what a farce the race for the Republican nomination has become.  First, the major news networks dedicate thousands of hours of “programming” to telling us that candidates such as Mitt Romney and Rick Perry are “top tier” and that nobody else has a legitimate chance.  Then, once the poll numbers are skewed by that relentless coverage, they use those polls to justify giving the “favored candidates” more questions during the debates.  The funny thing is that even if support for a favored candidate drops off dramatically (such as with Rick Perry), that candidate will still be given extra time during the debates.  What you are about to see is mathematical proof of dramatic media bias and favoritism during the Republican debates.  After reading this information, it will be hard to keep believing that our political system is fair.

It seems like the bigger the media outlet, the worse the bias and the favoritism becomes.  For example, the Republican debate on CBS the other night was a total sham.  During the nationally televised portion of the debate, Rick Perry got more than five times as much talking time as Ron Paul did.

The funny thing is that according to Real Clear Politics, Rick Perry and Ron Paul are nearly tied in national polls.  As I write this, Rick Perry is averaging 9.8 percent in national polls and Ron Paul is averaging 8.2 percent.  You would think that both candidates should be treated at least somewhat equally.

But instead, favored candidates such as Mitt Romney and Rick Perry were given huge amounts of talking time during the CBS debate and candidates that the mainstream media has disdain for such as Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann were virtually ignored.

The following is how one blog broke down the talking time for the Republican debate on CBS on Saturday night….

Rick Perry 7:45

Mitt Romney 6:30

Newt Gingrich 6:00

Herman Cain 5:45

Rick Santorum 5:15

Jon Huntsman 3:30

Michele Bachmann 3:15

Ron Paul 1:30

Does that look fair to you?

Even the candidates on the very bottom of the national polls were given more time than Paul and Bachmann.  Rick Santorum is averaging 1.5 percent in national polls and John Huntsman is averaging 1.0 percent in national polls.  Yet both of them were given more time than Bachmann and both of them were given more than twice as much time as Ron Paul.

Look, if they are going to distribute questions based on polling data, then they should at least be consistent about it.

The fair way to do it would be to ask all of the candidates an equal number of questions.  That way each candidate would have an equal opportunity to present his or her case to the American people.

But instead, we have a system that greatly favors certain candidates over others.

The following is a statistical average of the talking time during the six major Republican debates there have been hosted by CBS, MSNBC, CNN, Fox News and CNBC during the months of September, October and November.  The raw data for this analysis was originally compiled by We Occupy The Web and Wes Hemings.  Jon Huntsman only has data for five debates because he boycotted one.  As you can see, Mitt Romney and Rick Perry have received much, much more talking time during the debates than the other candidates, and Ron Paul has gotten the least talking time of all….

Mitt Romney (6:30 15:11 14:47 12:09 10:56 11:57) – 11.91 minutes

Rick Perry (7:45 11:01 07:25 11:10 13:54 14:59) – 11.03 minutes

Michele Bachmann (3:15 09:58 06:50 6:13 8:35 9:05) – 7.32 minutes

Newt Gingrich (6:00 07:53 09:10 5:44 7:32 6:53) – 7.20 minutes

Jon Huntsman (3:30 07:54 7:41 7:50 8:52) – 7.16 minutes

Herman Cain (5:45 09:06 08:23 6:23 5:42 5:41) – 6.83 minutes

Rick Santorum (5:15 09:50 05:25 7:06 7:06 6:11) – 6.81 minutes

Ron Paul (1:30 10:05 07:27 4:33 7:34 9:19) – 6.75 minutes

So why is Ron Paul on the bottom of this list?

Is it because he has been on the bottom of the national polls?

No, the truth is that he has been bouncing around between 3rd place and 6th place in national polls.  If his talking time truly reflected his poll numbers then he should be somewhere in the middle of the pack.

How can we explain this discrepancy?

Well, the reality is that the big networks have their “favorites” and the other candidates are going to be ignored as much as they can.

On Saturday, proof of this was revealed to the world.

An internal CBS News email got accidentally sent to an official with the Bachmann campaign on Saturday.  It was an email that contained a discussion between CBS News senior producer Caroline Horn and CBS News political director John Dickerson about Michele Bachmann.

In the email chain which is reproduced below, Horn mentioned that there was a possibility that Dickerson may be able to interview Bachmann following the debate….

“I was just speaking with Alice Stewart, cc’d here, about the Congresswoman or a senior member of her staff joining you for the webshow.”

In response, Dickerson made the following very revealing statement….

“Okay let’s keep it loose since she’s not going to get many questions and she’s nearly off the charts in the hopes that we can get someone else”

The communications director for Bachmann’s campaign, Alice Stewart, believes that this email shows that there was a “planned effort to limit questions to Michele Bachmann at tonight’s CBS / National Journal Debate.”

You can read this shocking email for yourself below….

Now, whether you plan to vote for Michele Bachmann or not, the reality is that all of us should want a process that is fair and balanced and that gives the American people a legitimate opportunity to decide for themselves who they want the Republican nominee to be.

But instead, the mainstream media relentlessly pushes some candidates in front of us at the expense of others.

Why in the world should CBS News give Rick Perry more than twice as much talking time as Michele Bachmann and more than five times as much talking time as Ron Paul?

Support for Perry is dropping like a rock.  A brand new NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey shows that support for Rick Perry has dropped to four percent in recent days.

CBS News should be absolutely ashamed of how they handled that debate.

Needless to say, the Paul campaign and the Bachmann campaign are quite steamed today.

Ron Paul campaign manager John Tate has written the following about the lack of time Ron Paul was given during the CBS News debate….

90 seconds.

That’s how much of the first hour of tonight’s GOP debate was given to Ron Paul. 90 measly seconds out of 3,600 seconds.

The remaining 3,510 seconds were spent with the other major candidates:

** Declaring their desire to start wars in Iran, Pakistan, and Syria;

** Rehashing their support for torture;

** Agreeing that President Obama has the right to unilaterally assassinate an American citizen without a court conviction;

** Explaining their plans to continue nation-building, policing, and occupying countries across the globe.

Whether you agree with Ron Paul or not, the truth is that you should at least want him to get a fair shake.  Tate said that he actually felt sick as he watched the blatant favoritism during the debate….

It literally made me sick watching the mainstream media once again silence the one sane voice in this election.

But if you can believe it, the mainstream media does not even acknowledge that there is a problem with bias and favoritism.

Just check out what CBS News had to say about Ron Paul’s debate performance….

The polls suggest Paul’s brand of hardcore libertarianism has a limited appeal with GOP primary voters, and he remains a serious longshot for the Republican presidential nomination. But his goal is also to get his ideas into the public sphere, and on that front this debate was an unqualified success for him.

What in the world?

First, notice that they are once again reinforcing the notion that he is a “longshot” to win the nomination.  Secondly, they actually have the gall to claim that the debate was an “unqualified success” as far as getting “his ideas into the public sphere” when they only gave him 90 seconds to speak.

What a joke.

It has been shameful how much bias and favoritism there has been by the media during this campaign already.

Time after time, the mainstream media has been caught taking down online polls if the “right candidate” is not winning.  You can see one example of this phenomenon documented right here.

Not only that, the truth is that the mainstream media devotes far, far more coverage to the candidates that they like than they do to the candidates that they do not like.

For example, one scientific study found that between May 2, 2011 and October 9, 2011 Ron Paul received the least news coverage of any of the Republican candidates that are running for president.

In the end, what all this means is that the Republican Party is going to nominate yet another “establishment candidate” for president and we will be faced with the “lesser of two evils” once again in November 2012.

At best, Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain and Rick Perry are political moderates with deep, deep ties to the establishment.  Mitt Romney is so liberal and has such deep ties to the establishment that it is truly remarkable that the American people are not able to recognize him for what he really is.

If anyone out there actually believes that things will be much different if one of these “establishment candidates” is elected in 2012, they are seriously deluded.

The reality is that not much changed when Barack Obama took over for George W. Bush.  And not much will change if one of the “top tier” Republican candidates takes over for Barack Obama.

The American people keep sending new faces to Washington D.C., but they keep on getting the same results over and over and over.

It is time to wake up and realize that these “establishment politicians” are leading this country straight down the toilet.

So do you believe that there is a chance that the American people will wake up and send someone that is not an “establishment candidate” to the White House in 2012?  Please feel free to leave a comment with your opinion below….

Instantly Add To The Conversation Using Facebook Comments

comments

  • http://www.planorperish.com Gutter Economist

    “So do you believe that there is a chance that the American people will wake up and send someone that is not an “establishment candidate” to the White House in 2012?”

    NO POSSIBLE CHANCE

    In addition to time management, Americans are being subjected to other forms of mind control.

    Obama won the Presidency with the use of Neuro Linguistic Programmed Speeches with “walking hypnosis” technology on how the brain works to bypass the logical (left side) thinking mind for the impulsive, emotional right side of the brain.

  • Gary2

    Michael-the media is so conservative biased it is not watchable. What really bothers me is your conservative bias, although you are getting better at coming to terms with it.

    I again say this as a friend.

    • Malcolm Reynolds

      “the media is so conservative biased it is not watchable. ”

      You’re mentally handicapped aren’t you?

      ..not an origianl thought in that defective mind.

    • Filippo

      Could you please point out which portion of this article is conservatively bias?

  • Gary2

    Michael-there are a lot of Ron Paul supporters in the OWS movement.

    • Bone

      No kidding! The majority of people support Ron Paul’s traditional conservative messages.
      Ron Paul is farr from Ron Reagan, IN A GOOD WAY

  • mark

    We will not get a candidate that the country needs. I have said this before, too many are receiving government checks and will not vote for the good of the country, but will vote for their own short term gain in their pocketbook. Ron Paul has a lot of good ideas, yet he has a stance on two positions that will not allow him to be elected. His stance on Iran will not work. Iran’s leaders are nuts and are dangerous. Sanctions will not stop them from building a nuke. I do not favor nation building and staying in a country. I can accept taking out their ability to research and produce a nuke and then leave them alone until they try again. I do not like this choice but all the other choices are useless. The other position of Paul’s concerns Israel. Cutting some funding is OK, but Paul seems to want to go father. At least he comes across that way. The news markets are into making money. They are not here to be fair. That is why there is a market for Blogs such as this one. Michael can write what he wishes and you and I can write our comments about the topic. This is fair. Something else I have said before is to lighten up a bit on Romney. If you Romney haters pile on and on, Obama will be the last guy standing for the voters. He will destroy this country with rule changes that we will not see coming until it is to late. Romney is not what this country needs, but the voters will not go where we need to go. He is a better choice than Obama by far. He is not a socialist or worse. He has a lot of executive experience to run the executive branch. This is better than a community organizer that has no real world experience in business or anything. Wall Street might have many problems, but that is what we have. We can make some changes with tax laws on goods made outside the US so that there might be more profit with keeping jobs here. Remove some of our regulations that cost too much and more jobs might happen here. The coverage on Perry might be the news people hopeing for more dumb mistakes. He seems to be good for a laugh and that is good for ratings.

    • RPJ

      Our current leaders are nuts and dangerous. We have been messing with Iran since 1953 when we overthrew their democratically elected leader and installed the Shah. Now we want to continue the immoral and illegal doctrine of pre-emptive warfare? The war propaganda is piling up because the military industrial complex which obviously controls the US Presidency is itching to make more money. Iran is threat to us. However, all the money and resources we will spend over there breaking the law, creating more radicalized enemies, and bankrupting the American taxpayer is HUGE threat to our nation.

      Current US policy is a threat to Israel. They would be a lot better off if we left them alone. We give them some aid, but it makes them dependent on us. It undermines their sovereignty. They have to go to us and ask permission to defend themselves. They don’t need our help. They have hundreds of nukes. Furthermore, we give about 3 times more aid to their enemies. Israel would be much better if we weren’t meddling in its affairs.

      • RPJ

        (I meant that Iran is NO threat to us). I’m sure you got that by reading the following sentence.

    • REED RICHARDS

      mark,

      Seriously? That simple, eh? Just bomb their facilities and wallah? No nukes for Iran, just “leave them alone until they try again” and most importanlty, NO RETALIATION FROM IRAN OR ITS PROXIES like Hamas and Hezzbollah. If I had a dollar for every stupid thing posted, It would exceed the combined wealth of every billionaire on this planet……….

      • mark

        Reed, I am sure Iran or their proxies would enjoy doing damage to our country anytime they can. It would be worse if they have a nuke to use. You seem to enjoy trying to put words in others mouths that are not said. No one claimed this problem is simple. This seems to be your M.O. quite often. Instead of throwing bombs at others ideas, try offering solutions sometime. It gets old when you are just rude.

        • REED RICHARDS

          mark,

          DON’T RUN FROM WHAT YOU WROTE:

          I don’t put words into others’s mouths. I merely take what they say or write and then logically conclude what the consequences or fallout will be. If you don’t want what you say analyzed or put under scrutiny, then don’t post it here or anywhere else.

          For a little history lesson, do some research into how many countries that IRAN HAS INVADED IN THE LAST 100 YEARS OR SO AND THEN COMPARE THAT LIST TO THE NUMBER OF COUNTRIES THAT RUSSIA, CHINA, AND ALL WESTERN POWERS COMBINED, (U.S., U.K., FRANCE, ALL OF EUROPE)

          • mark

            I do not look to where they have invaded, instead we need to listen to the current leaders in Iran as they have told the world that they wish to destroy the Jews and the US. They would try do this with a nuke. To develop this takes a lot of infrastructure that can be damaged with bunker buster bombs. Their form of Islam is nuts and very extreme. To do nothing after Iran has told us their intentions is foolish. Reed, as you say you logically conclude what the consequences or fallout will be. Well if Iran has nukes, there will be a lot of fallout in some parts of the world when they use the bomb.

    • Gay Veteran

      “…Iran’s leaders are nuts and are dangerous. Sanctions will not stop them from building a nuke….”

      yeah, remember all those WMD in Iraq (eyeroll). The neo-conservative war mongers are lusting for a war with Iran. And no one mentions the dozens (and possibly 100s) of nuclear weapons that Israel has.

      “…[Romney] has a lot of executive experience to run the executive branch….”

      He certainly has more experience laying off American workers.

      • mark

        Well, Romney sure could use that experience laying off a lot of useless Federal employees. That is a start to a smaller government. Iraq was not handeled well. Nation building does not work. Israel is not giving speeches that they want to destroy Iran as the leaders of Iran do on a regular basis.

  • Tyson A. Holder

    thank you for the nice article. It’s nice to know that there is someone that isn’t going to regurgitate the same talking points given to them by the establishment. RON PAUL or no one.

  • Gary2

    Here is what these ass clowns need to say:

    If wealth was the inevitable result of hard work and enterprise, every woman in Africa would be a millionaire.

    Many of those who are rich today got there because they were able to capture certain jobs. This capture owes less to talent and intelligence than to a combination of the ruthless exploitation of others and accidents of birth.

    Tax the rich and spread the wealth!

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/07/one-per-cent-wealth-destroyers

    • Malcolm Reynolds

      “Many of those who are rich today got there because they were able to capture certain jobs. This capture owes less to talent and intelligence than to a combination of the ruthless exploitation of others and accidents of birth.”

      So, anyone that has made any type of money (because you commies never define rich) stole it? They didn’t do a damn thing to get it?

      If taxing the rich isn’t working in Europe or china (Who has a greater rich-poor income gap than we do), why do you wanna do it here?

      LMFAO! This is me laughing and pointing at you.

    • knightowl77

      Accidents of birth? What is history but an accident of birth…That someone is born to rule and another born to serve…Without such an accident of birth you could’ve been born into a 3rd world hell hole where you wouldn’t even have the laptop you are typing on…Gary you could’ve (should’ve) been born in Cuba or the USSR and you’d be a happy little Marxist today…

      Forget taxes, deal with what God gave you to work with and quit crying that it ain’t fair…Life never was and never will be. You are here to do the best you can with what you have…Make something of that….

    • Filippo

      Sir, if you wish to live in a socialist state please feel free to move to one.

      • Gilbertofiowa

        I love how every defensive or offensive comment is made out of assumption of what somebody has said and meant, and not made directly against or for the words said by another.

        i.e. “Many of those who are rich today got there because they were able to capture certain jobs. This capture owes less to talent and intelligence than to a combination of the ruthless exploitation of others and accidents of birth.”

        So, anyone that has made any type of money (because you commies never define rich) stole it? They didn’t do a damn thing to get it?

  • mark

    Sorry, I forgot to add. If we want to make real changes, they need to come electing to Congress small government types. People that are willing to just stay for one term and make the cuts that are at least if not deeper than Ron Paul’s plan. The President can lead and fill positions in the executive branch, but spending starts in the House.

  • When’s Dinner?

    this is why i dont vote

  • expatriot

    Disgusting filth is what the media are. They’re talking puppets for gigantic corporations who control many things, including what they say. It’s the same this year as it was in 2007 when it comes to Ron Paul. The cleptocrocy that is the media knows they have weak spots and are vulnerable. That’s why they give so much time to a babbling incoherent drunk like rick perry. They let the candidates speak who won’t disrupt the status quo. The only candidate out of all of them who poses a threat is ron paul. It’s nothing new though we are dealing with very ignorant people, who instead of maybe questioning their beliefs they do the old gulag tactic and silence the opposition.

  • Bullet5

    This is BS!! F U Communist Broadcasting System!!!! Great jobs guys in exposing the fourth branch of Gov here in the land of the, “free”.

  • Justa Guy

    “The American people keep sending new faces to Washington D.C., but they keep on getting the same results over and over and over.”

    All of the “top-tier” candidates may have different faces, but they’ve all been pre-programmed with the same message by their puppetmasters, the same deceptive message they’ve been using for decades, and stupid, lazy Americans have been voting based on it for as long. The message never gives specifics, just words like hope, change, read my lips. Most of us don’t know how to read lips. I wonder if someone who knows how to read lips actually saw him saying something other than “no new taxes”?

  • Justa Guy

    Oh, and you can cut out the middle-men if you just vote for Cain, since he was one of the puppetmasters in the Federal Reserve…

  • John

    Once again I must say: politicians are “selected”, not “elected”. The whole system is rigged. Ron Paul is the only candidate that would make the US take it’s medicine. He would probably be *************** if he were president.

  • RPJ

    Our current leaders are nuts and dangerous. We have been messing with Iran since 1953 when we overthrew their democratically elected leader and installed the Shah. Now we want to continue the immoral and illegal doctrine of pre-emptive warfare? The war propaganda is piling up because the military industrial complex which obviously controls the US Presidency is itching to make more money. Iran is no threat to us. However, all the money and resources we will spend over there breaking the law, creating more radicalized enemies, and bankrupting the American taxpayer is HUGE threat to our nation.

    Current US policy is a threat to Israel. They would be a lot better off if we left them alone. We give them some aid, but it makes them dependent on us. It undermines their sovereignty. They have to go to us and ask permission to defend themselves. They don’t need our help. They have hundreds of nukes. Furthermore, we give about 3 times more aid to their enemies. Israel would be much better if we weren’t meddling in its affairs.

  • William

    There is NO chance for legal and good governance in America today. The mere fact that we are over TEN years past 911, which was carried out by very high levels of the US government and Israel, and STILL have the LIES clearly indicates that America is DOOMED.

    • Malcolm Reynolds

      l.u.n.a.t.i.c. 9.1.1. t.r.u.t.h.e.r. a.l.e.r.t.

      • Bone

        Screw ^ this guy.
        T.R.U.T.H.E.R.
        B.I.R.T.H.E.R.
        P.A.N.A.M.A.
        Ron Paul or G.T.F.O.

  • Rowell

    Let me preface this comment with open disclosure: I am not a conservative, I am not a republican.

    With that said, I have to agree with Michael here. From the start of the republican campaigning and debates, it was blatantly obvious that the media was being completely biased to the candidate that had the loudest, most controversial talking point. The media would report on their pick of the top tier candidates, pick who was currently number one, and who the direct contender was….despite polls and surveys that completely contradicted the articles being written.

    It was glaringly obvious that Ron Paul was purposely being left out of any reporting, as well as Huntsman. It wasn’t the fact that the person being left out of the article was Ron paul that bothered me. It was that reality was being reshaped and then reported to portray a story that only sensationalized the event. The reality, the importance of the debates were tossed aside so the “kingmaker” media could sell their brand; get more readership/viewership.

    It has been time for a while now that we understand that the news media is no longer that. They do not believe in true journalism or fact reporting. It’s all about ratings, spinnning the story in order to garner the most viewership, to sell more advertising. Given a choice between boring real news, or sensationalized useless information….news organizations will almost always forego the real news. Mainstream media is part of the problem and simply can’t be trusted.

  • Donald Wilson

    The electoral college not the people elect the president.

  • jed

    Ron Paul 90 seconds
    Gary Johnson O seconds

    Gary who?
    Oh that’s right. You have to be at a certain level in the polls to be included in the debates. Kind of hard to reach a certain level if your name is not included in the polls.

    Even Donald Trump, whose only accomplishments have been to not squander the fortune given to him by his father, to know how to be amusingly obnoxious and to have a peculiar hairdo, was given major media coverage – but he is hugely entertaining.

    The main problem is that network news is just entertainment – you give airtime to whoever is most likely to bring in viewers. Look at Sarah Palin – a mediocre leader/politician who, like that mediocre singer Lady Gaga, is an absolute genius at self-promotion and at stirring up the viewership with cleverly crafted soundbites.

    At the moment, the media is dying for a revenue-generating Romney-Perry slug-fest, so they do whatever they can to promote it.

    Ron Paul and Gary Johnson (as well as Rick Santorum, who lets hope never becomes president of anything) are not entertaining. They will never get traction unless their supporters can generate a huge grassroots movement. Occupy Broadcast TV, anyone?

    By the way, for an accurate wrap-up of the CBS debate, check out the Guardian.co.uk blog on it. It is a withering (and slightly snotty, overbearing) review of the leading candidates’ responses. But the real disdain in the blog is reserved for CBS.

  • http://goto.glocalnet.net/pdn/ Perdavid Nygren

    Yeah Yeah, Michael… everything is going to HELL!!! Satisfied now?!!! Michael, you are a Clown of Doom, look at the movie called “It”.

  • Anonymous Coward

    In a sense the problem is that the brainwash works too well. Case in point – we’re all up in arms over which rightwing fruitcake gets to put their finger on the button.

  • REED RICHARDS

    Michael,

    THE AMERIKAN PEOPLE ARE GETTING WHAT THEY VOTE FOR:

    No doubt that Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann are getting short-shrift. However, Michele Bachmann is a fool of sorts, not to mention Sara Palin on steroids. No dice there with the queen of the stepford wives. I personally like Ron Paul’s positions on foreign policy and the FED. Excellent stuff. Ron Paul is a statesman, unlike the rest who are essentially warmongering buffoons who, if given total leeway and all keys to the amerikan nuclear arenal, would create the scenario in which every Arab/Muslim man, woman, and child would be dead before lunch.

  • ConcernedCitizen

    Good article! It does appear the mainstream media is incredibly biased and is not giving Congressman Paul or Congresswoman Bachmann a fair shake. Their reporting of the news also appears very flawed. It’s much more propaganda than news.

  • D

    This is nothing new – the media is owned (literally) and controlled by the financial elite and oligarch bankers. Mainstream news is worthless and a perfect recipe to fool the precious sheeple.

    We all seen this coming in regards to Ron Paul anyway. It’s simple. He wants to end the fed. The fed fears he might brew something up. Therefore, they are nipping it at the bud.

  • Gay Veteran

    “…At best, Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain and Rick Perry are political moderates….”

    They can only be considered “moderates” when you consider how far to the extreme right the GOP base has gone.

    • Malcolm Reynolds

      “They can only be considered “moderates” when you consider how far to the extreme right the GOP base has gone.”

      Not so much. It’s just that the democrat party was co opted by maoist communists. In other words, check yourself for anti-Americanism you pole smoker.

      • Anonymous coward

        Check yourself while you’re at it, you homophobic POS. Whatever happened to “support our troops” and “you wouldn’t have your freedoms without our brave boys”, ya flippin’ HYPOCRITE?

  • A Dodgy Bloke

    The MSN is rigging the Republican debates (I am wearing my shocked and appalled face). What’s the old saying Republicans are stupid and Democrats are evil? The MSN is dying but some people are at least waking up to the fact they’re being lied to. The bad news is to many lemmings get their news from the boob tube because it’s too hard to read and think. Please don’t tell me anybody is surprised?

  • jed

    Just an idea.
    Maybe Ron Paul has less talking time because he just says what he needs to say and then he shuts up. He doesn’t ramble on or showboat.

  • mondobeyondo

    The mainstream media already have their “pretty boys” lined up: Romney, Perry and maybe Gingrich. They’ll try to spice things up a bit by making Bachmann or Cain their “flavor of the week”. But it’s pretty much said and done.

    Notice how the MSM tends to avoid talking about Ron Paul though. He’s too “radical”…

    • mondobeyondo

      By the way, who are Huntsman and Santorum?
      Good question.

      Ahhhhh… now you’re beginning to see the (flash)light.
      The whole election process is so heavily skewed.

  • mondobeyondo

    It’s getting to be a charade anyways.

    The very minute after the elected President makes his/her inaugural address on Jan. 20th, 2013 (whether it’s Obama or his GOP challenger), the MSM will immediately conduct polls on the 2016 presidential campaign.

    Expect NBC or CNN or whoever to say, “Let’s look at the 2016 challengers, shall we? Sarah Palin has 28 percent of the vote for 2016, Al Gore has 12 percent… can Gore catch up in time? And here comes Chelsea Clinton, who has a 23 percent approval rating, although she hasn’t announced her candidacy yet”… Good grief. The election is four years away!! There hasn’t even been an inaugural ball yet!

    Yep, that’s where we’re heading, I’m afraid.

  • Joe Johnson

    Is this the most unfair aspect about this “democracy”, the fact that one loon receives less speaking time than another. I suggest that all of these people are part of the establishment, and therefore part of the problem. They are all representitives of a two party monopoly of our government. But even if you think there really is a difference in candidates, none of them will be in control. We all should be aware by now that banking and big business control the economy and government. It is simply a matter of which party gets to parse out the “political favors for cash” to continue getting reelected.

  • A.S.

    What chance? I give Obama a 95% chance of winning another term no matter who wins for the Republicans. We are SOOOOO DOOOOOMED!