digg

Join DiggAbout

Cut from re-air! What Fox News doesn't want you too see. watch!

youtube.com — Watch the Ron Paul response at the South Carolina debate which Fox News cut out during the re-broadcast.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Spectre74, on 01/11/2008, -21/+977Yes. Because this was the best rebuttal in my opinion. I missed this in the original air and thought he may have slightly lost the debate for a few (irrelevant in the big picture) reasons. After seeing this I thought he owned them all. This proves their agenda because that is the effect it will have on a great number of people IMHO. The ding ding from the bell almost sounded like "shhhhh... shut up your revealing our lie" to me.
    • clarionhaze, on 01/11/2008, -113/+23This clip was not cut from re-air.
      • Spectre74, on 01/11/2008, -44/+4It was cut from my brain, but cool I am glad it wasn't. Maybe they don't have an agenda.........
        • YourMothersMilk, on 01/11/2008, -7/+93This WAS cut from the re-broadcast. I watched the debate late and listened to every word while noting the advertisers. If I hadn't seen this video HERE, I wouldn't have heard this. Thanks so much for posting. Get'm Ron!
          • Spectre74, on 01/11/2008, -20/+6O.K. Okay! Okay! Geez...............lol I was being sarcastic about the agenda anyway. Thanks.
          • erasedgod, on 01/11/2008, -3/+29I saw it on Youtube first and tried to point out this response to my wife when we watched the re-air. It never came.
          • nospinhere, on 01/11/2008, -48/+2Funny I didn't see any Ron Paul stories today hit the front page today. Could the Paultards be avoiding attention so nobody brings this up: Ron Paul newsletters: Racist rants

            http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsle ...
          • EditorResponse, on 01/11/2008, -30/+1Poor Ron Paul. Booo Hooo.

            digg.com/2008_us_elections/Leave_Ron_Paul_ALONE_3
          • Spectre74, on 01/12/2008, -3/+10@nospinhere2
            Please repost this in every RP thread and submit it. HURRY! GO! POST! POST! POST! Get it overwith!
          • MindStalker, on 01/12/2008, -0/+16The link doesn't work anymore, Fox had it pulled. Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8TkmE5t1Pk
            You can google video search for ron paul 1-10-08 for these clips as well
        • LeeSoong, on 01/12/2008, -0/+17Fox News clearly is collectively an Enemy Combatant
          constantly working against the people and the freedom of the United States of America.
          • nospinhere, on 01/12/2008, -9/+3@spectre
            That's the plan because if this was any other canidate this story would have had multiple submissions in the top 10 on the front page. Somebody's got to be the ying to the yang.
          • Spectre74, on 01/12/2008, -6/+3@nospinhere
            I have no problem with yings, or yangs for that matter. And I actually appreciate it. Anyone can be fooled, and I very well may be. The sooner I am not the better. But, you have allot of work to do. I don't like "spam" either really.
      • JimSwarthow, on 01/11/2008, -29/+28yep, I saw it on re-air as well. - innit great how people dugg you down for calling ***** on the headline?

        /not voting for him but I agree w/ everything RP said
        • janeuner, on 01/11/2008, -10/+83"not voting for him but I agree w/ everything RP said"
          Baffling.
          • JimSwarthow, on 01/11/2008, -38/+11really? you're "baffled"? that doesn't say a lot about your aptitude. sorry but it's true. - I've listened to Obama on a couple of occasions and agreed w/ everything he said for a 2 minute stretch too.. not voting for him either. -- what about the nature of a sound-byte/snippet is so confusing to you?
          • thecoolestguy, on 01/11/2008, -17/+42well Obama is going to lead the nation to national bankruptcy, as all status quo candidates will:

            www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGpY2hw7ao8

            But keep letting opportunistic politicians promise you more government services that the nation simply can't afford.

            America needs to be making deep and drastic cuts right now to avoid economic collapse, and Ron Paul is the only one talking about that.
          • Spectre74, on 01/11/2008, -7/+13He is still cleaning the "sleep" out of his eyes.
          • janeuner, on 01/11/2008, -4/+40Jim:
            I wasn't commenting on my aptitude, I was commenting on yours. In this segment, Ron Paul criticized foreign intervention and big government. No other republican candidate challenges foreign intervention. No democratic candidate would dare mention reducing the size of government. So to say that you agree with Paul but won't vote for him is, frankly, baffling. You are either negligent for failing to stand up for your opinions, or deceptive by misrepresenting your views to fit in with this crowd.
          • clarionhaze, on 01/11/2008, -6/+13Maybe he's not a U.S. citizen?
      • Jammer, on 01/12/2008, -20/+5Ron Who?
    • arplayer2k, on 01/11/2008, -7/+96I don't think anything better could have been said. Great job Dr. Paul.
      • EditorResponse, on 01/11/2008, -30/+2Poor Ron Paul
        digg.com/2008_us_elections/Leave_Ron_Paul_ALONE_3
    • MRintheKeys, on 01/11/2008, -9/+75There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.
      • Bulletbillx, on 01/11/2008, -5/+8Dugg up for transmet quote.
        • guybrush3000, on 01/11/2008, -2/+20Fear and Loathing quote. But Spider was heavily based on Hunter S. Thompson, so it's not surprising there would be a few stolen lines.
          • newauraxx, on 01/12/2008, -0/+10Hunter would of had a field day with this years election.I think he would of bee an Ron Pau l guyl. Get them neo cons, them bastards!!
    • stumbles047, on 01/11/2008, -6/+123RPWNED
    • GeorgeClayton, on 01/11/2008, -4/+146I thought the moderator's "question" (statement) was exceedingly rude, a direct stab a Ron Paul trying to thwart votes. That was a most excellent rebuttal!
      • pseudononymist, on 01/11/2008, -4/+23actually it gave Dr. Paul an excellent opportunity. Great idea to ask that question.
        • mickyg, on 01/11/2008, -1/+28That didn't go well with their plans... Good to see aggression from the Mahatma... he needs that once in a while to explain economics 101 to these sorry asses.
    • theblt, on 01/11/2008, -6/+102***** YOU CARL

      What a total lack of respect for a man who has touched so many lives. As a conservative I do watch Fox News, but this was so disrespectful and unprofessional.
      • CabesMojo, on 01/11/2008, -8/+42It would have been hilarious if that was RP's response, ***** YOU CARL
        • UNL1M1T3D, on 01/12/2008, -3/+23No the real response was much better. ***** you carl would have made him look like a 13 year old.
          • CabesMojo, on 01/12/2008, -1/+5Good lord lighten up nancys, while I still think it would have been hilarious its not like I don't realize a response like that would totally shaft him. Learn to laugh a little people.
          • JasonDJ, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Worked for Cheney...
        • rockinjoe, on 01/12/2008, -9/+10It's comments like yours that take credibility away from the Ron Paul supporters.
        • Spectre74, on 01/12/2008, -1/+14On SNL, done by an actor, yes. ***** hilarious. There, epic disaster.
      • asforme, on 01/11/2008, -0/+35I was watching the other Ron Paul responses because I missed the debate. In part 2 he gets pretty close to telling him to ***** off and let him address a real issue.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-lxZmrqLxU
      • rarson, on 01/12/2008, -1/+17So it's every good conservative's duty to watch Fox News?

        I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Fox News isn't conservative, it's neoconservative. How can you even stand to watch that ***** anyway? Wouldn't you want to watch some kind of real news?
        • theblt, on 01/12/2008, -1/+2Just because I said I watch Fox News doesn't mean I limit myself to their network. They just happen to have the most conservative news out of the rest. I also watch CNN and MSNBC to avoid the FN bias.

          I agree that some of the programs on Fox News are done some Neocons, but many of them are not. Also, I don't watch Fox News because they cover the conservative candidates more than any other network will. I don't care for the liberal bashing or most of what Bill O'reilly has to say. Just a preference.
          • rarson, on 01/12/2008, -1/+6Why are you looking for a conservative slant on your news? You know Fox News is biased and you watch it anyway? It doesn't make any sense to me.

            Mainstream media isn't liberally biased as is the popular belief.

            I don't watch Fox News because half of what they say is ***** and the other half is sensational crap that they try to pass off as news. You're better off reading a random blog for news than watching Fox. It's completely useless for informing yourself. I'm just saying...
    • sangosimo, on 01/11/2008, -4/+61Along with this they used their "focus" group at the end of the debate to say that Ron Paul lost. This "debate" made me cringe; Ron Paul was painted as a delusional economic nut obsessed with recession. Fox is also shifting their Romney focus to Thompson because he looks and sounds more presidential. Ron Paul, is the only republican that would have a shot of winning the general election if America knew what he was about. If the neocons continue to undercut America's prosperity so many more will suffer with each economic stutter; Don't let these people steal your dream so many people are here because of that dream. The world wants to love America again.
      • catfish182, on 01/11/2008, -49/+5dude look, paul is going to lose and he never had a chance. so what every excuse allows you to sleep is fine.
        I agree that things are not good and fox news was not being very respectful to Paul but what do you expect? take away the online world of paul and what do you have? also you and other paul people may feel good that he doesnt cater to the ignorant but he does not respond very well. He responses seemed geared towards pointing the blame and that doesnt look well. The other republican's seem to be douches but at least they are camera friendly.
        • ThndrShk2k, on 01/11/2008, -4/+32take away the online world of paul and what do you have?
          Someone who would be out of the race already because of the opinions of the mainstream media? Frankly RP being this popular WITHOUT the MSM helping him is almost baffling alone. The online world is changing how we get our information, and to discredit the Internet as a viable means of media and the candidates supported on the internet is at least foolish.
          The only reason he's not going to win is people would rather vote on what they feel is right, not what they know is right. Truthiness to the end. The only way to break that cycle is not to give a damn that he may have a very very very slim chance, and go all for it. Put all the effort you can in supporting him, get his message out. Don't scare off people, but be compassionate and explain gently why what he says is best for this country.
          To blame issues on the US isn't a bad thing, to blame others constantly is a sign of ignorance and refusal to adjust to the world. The US needs humility now more than ever, and if you don't want to convince others of that, and you don't want to have a person who wants what is truely best for the country, I would have to say that you should at very least not try to induce doubt and fear into people who, most of them, would disregard anything you would have to say about their chances. Most of the advid and knowledgeable supporters are optimistic realists, because they agree with the humility of taking responsibility for our actions.
        • catfish182, on 01/12/2008, -7/+21- i am not discrediting the internet. you interpret that but i never said that. So far for all the support we have seen for Paul online it has not translated to much in the polls.
          What you say on how a candidate conducts themselves to get his message out i agree with you. I have to say though that 90% of the paul supporters i have dealt with online have been immature quick to judge and if you disagree with them you are just stupid and have the wool pulled over your eyes. That is not how to gain people to support your candidate. you can disagree all you want with that statement but we can go back and look at the first paul posts here on digg when all i asked were simple questions about him.
          the thing that is interesting for paul is he sticks to his guns. He has a idea he will not change. Thats not a bad thing but can he be really that shocked when MSM will not show him any respect? getting elected means MSM supporting you and having to cater to many different types of people. to not do that will not win you a election. wanting change is fine but it has to come with a understanding of the world we live in and the ability to interact with it. Paul has not shown me the ability to interact with many different types of people. Has he done it before? I dont know but lets say he has. Why cant he do it now? I live in Ohio and no one here seems to know who he is. (obvious i have not asked the whole state but people in my city i have asked) so thats why i ask. Take away the online world of paul and what is there?
          • ThndrShk2k, on 01/12/2008, -0/+8Already answered that question in my original post ;D

            Anyway, as I previously said you would have a candidate that would have not gotten the support he has today, and would only be conisdered a fringe candidate, probably looked towards like Kucinich or Mike Gravel. Although Gravel had some internet support, it didn't translate as well for him because the same people went to Ron Paul first.
            Catering to all people is impossible for some candidates, and usually try to cater to the larger group of people. In specific state campaigns, catering different people in commercials by focusing on the local issues. Ron Paul does this too, focusing on immigration in the south, gun control(which is a logical and constitutional view), and our economy. His message is actually broad enough to cater to anybody, citizen or not. That is not the problem with going to the MSM, the media itself does not want Paul as a viable candidate, when if you base it on fundrasing and poll numbers, even FOX NEWS TXT Polls, he seems to be a VERY viable candidate. Granted this is only because of his internet support carrying him this far, and lets hope it's only the beginning of the official campaign strutting on their own two feet.
      • Slayback, on 01/11/2008, -3/+27***** you Frank!
      • johnnykwest, on 01/12/2008, -1/+10"The world wants to love America again.".

        Oh where oh where has America's humility gone? Could it just possibly be that America wants the world to love it again?
      • chaosium, on 01/12/2008, -13/+1"Ron Paul was painted as a delusional economic nut"

        I wonder why that could be.
    • theguz4l, on 01/11/2008, -23/+342200 Diggs, and 700 views on the youtube video. The power of Ron Paul on Digg...
      • amoirae, on 01/11/2008, -34/+6Throw enough spam against the wall and some of it is bound to stick.
        • mickcn, on 01/11/2008, -1/+9Of coarse, I mean, just look at the history of our great country. Fortunately, we have finally been given the gift of freedom and liberty in our spam. Along with that, it couldn't kick you in the ass any harder, the fact that their is only one republican candidate that doesn't support WWIII.
        • LeeSoong, on 01/12/2008, -1/+947,611 and growing . . .

          http://www.ronpaul2008.com/about
        • onestarleft, on 01/12/2008, -2/+3A-*****-men.
      • TwoFootAfro, on 01/11/2008, -2/+43YouTube doesn't update views in real time.
      • sixstringbandit, on 01/11/2008, -1/+33The following dupe had already made the rounds and has 20,000+ views; people probably aren't watching the above one to the end.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8TkmE5t1Pk
        • rarson, on 01/12/2008, -0/+9Thanks for posting that. The other video stopped loading halfway through and when I refreshed, it said the video was removed due to a violation of terms of service or something.
      • t3soro, on 01/11/2008, -0/+8i dont think embedded videos count
      • catfish182, on 01/13/2008, -1/+1excuse the comment abuse but i would like to get some people to do this.
        http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/How_Dare_NBC_Pre ...
        go to the site and make your voice heard!
    • mjl5629, on 01/11/2008, -22/+10Here's the REAL unedited version:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsR0yjebKxs

      /not rick roll. promise.
    • jakefloyd, on 01/11/2008, -28/+2Yes it was a good rebuttal and everything. But, what happens around 1.55 when he says "Used to say get rid of the department of education." A little slur of words there? Heh.
    • digitalhair, on 01/11/2008, -0/+15I think an easy to remember URL linking to Ron Paul's entire Youtube channel should be included with that campaign video.
      Youtube, google video, and digg have revolutionized my perception of what is true and what is not simply by making it available for ME to decide whether the story is SPIN-friendly or not.
      In fact, rather than argue with my friends and family about events, I have resorted to using the GMailThis extension in firefox (thanks LifeHacker! http://lifehacker.com/software/gmail/lifehacker-co ... to send them links to video, and they have all finally started to "get it" without hurting our relationships based on party politics, which is what party politics is designed to do - confuse voters about what is true, effectively preying upon our susceptible egos.
    • TnTBass, on 01/11/2008, -2/+17I really hope everyone gets out there to vote. Voter turnout should be at its all time high.

      If not, learn to be more like Morbo:

      Human female: "The sheer drama of this election has driven voter turnout to
      it's highest level in centuries, six percent."
      Morbo: "Exit poll show evil underdog Richard Nixon trailing with
      estimated zero votes."
      Human female: "The time is 7:59 and the robot polls are now opening. And
      robot votes are now in. Nixon has won."
      Morbo: "Morbo congratulates our gargantuan cyborg president. May death
      come quickly to his enemies."
    • dbizzell, on 01/11/2008, -34/+2Ron Paul is a gypsy stick.

      And just so you know, a gypsy stick is a dildo made out of a frozen turd.
    • zackmario, on 01/12/2008, -0/+6http://digg.com/politics/Ron_Paul_on_TheRealNews
    • More4, on 01/12/2008, -17/+1in-depth article on Dr Paul in the prestigious journal 'The New Republic' - A MUST READ! http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397 ...
      • roger7611, on 01/12/2008, -1/+7"Prestigious journal"? lol

        TNR is a laughingstock, and has been for years.
      • thecoolestguy, on 01/12/2008, -0/+7It's a smear article written by a 21 year old Giuliani supporter. Here is Giuliani's recent extremely racist campaign ad:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2iFhGtKO-Q
        • More4, on 01/12/2008, -9/+1It's not true because he is 21 years old. I understand now.
          And Dr. Paul isn't a racist, because some else is? All is clear.
        • thecoolestguy, on 01/12/2008, -0/+4I don't give a ***** about the ***** article. 4,000 young Americans and 1,000,000 Iraqis are dead because of the war.
    • Muslim4Life, on 01/12/2008, -1/+4http://digg.com/world_news/UN_irked_by_Bush_dismis ...
    • dougmwpsu, on 01/12/2008, -1/+8did rupert murdoch just C&D all the ron paul videos from this debate? i mean i know they probably retain the rights to this, but how dare they? this is corporate censorship at it's worst!
    • dougmwpsu, on 01/12/2008, -0/+10did rupert murdoch just C&D all the ron paul videos from this debate? i mean i know they probably retain the rights to this, but how dare they? this is corporate censorship at it's worst!
    • jguy584, on 01/12/2008, -0/+89Sorry to hijack but not surprisingly fox has claimed a copyright violation on the video.
      Here's a re-post:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mffpkCH-PJw
      • tommy7154, on 01/12/2008, -0/+15DIGG THIS UP it's the question Fox edited out of the re-airing. I'm downloading all these videos before Faux can take them all down.
        • brad3378, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1Too late for me.
          They removed this video from youtube before I had a chance to see it.
      • ChoiceMad, on 01/12/2008, -0/+6"Another question about electability...-their way-...Do you have any sir?"
      • todu, on 01/12/2008, -0/+6I'm hosting it for as many people that want it. My provider gives me 200 GB per month. Right-click on the file and choose "save as":
        http://d.neo101.org/1/rp/
      • kaelyiesta, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1Thanks guys. Glad to see you all helping to keep this video up.
    • ryzor, on 01/12/2008, -0/+6www.newscorrupt.com for the video
    • madrid, on 01/12/2008, -1/+17For some reason, this has lost around 200 diggs in the last 10 minutes... are the Faux news *****-asses and the neo-con ***** trying for a cover-up? WTF?
    • styleomatic, on 01/12/2008, -0/+11 Fox news and the rest of the pricks on that stage are merely shells of men driven by power and greed. Pussies. Here's a link to the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMuvqD5Xp48
    • Branyers, on 01/12/2008, -0/+11Notice how they've turned down Paul's ear piece so he can't hear what's being said? An attempt to make him appear deaf and nuts?? ***** pricks.
      • brad3378, on 01/14/2008, -0/+2I noticed that too
        Brilliant (yet highly unethical) move on Fox News' part.
    • smartguy911, on 01/12/2008, -0/+12http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8TkmE5t1Pk
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mffpkCH-PJw
      http://youtube.com/watch?v=QKjhNa6PGLk
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ_Z_XG0L2c
      http://youtube.com/watch?v=pZ_Z_XG0L2c
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VPz7TYNM-A
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6nnp_Yt7AM
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPouHwIQmHI
    • NoWayDude2, on 01/12/2008, -0/+3This rebuttal pretty much lays out what is wrong with the Republican party and most of it's candidates. Now that it's been removed from Fox replays, now from YouTube, I beg ALL of you to send a msg to DrudgeReport about this. If Drudge puts this Fox's travesty of "reporting" on his page and puts it in the light of day, this will blow Fox out of the water!!!
  • chupavacas, on 01/11/2008, -17/+585Wow that was great. Truth hurts. The neocons up there must have been stinging.
    • diggit83, on 01/11/2008, -3/+141ya, for once Ron Paul sounded as pissed off as hes entitled to be after all the crap they put him through.

      This made my day
      • offspring06, on 01/11/2008, -1/+86Fox News is throwing a lot of crap at Ron Paul. They must be threatened by him if they are picking on him this bad.
        • heypetray, on 01/11/2008, -4/+8I think it's Rupert, Not 'Fox News', that cares.
        • LadyKofNYC, on 01/12/2008, -1/+7Rupert IS Foax News. He pulls the strings on all his dancing monkeys.
      • Tarl, on 01/12/2008, -1/+8Mr. Paul will "steal" votes. Not steal in the sense that Mr. Bush (the younger) stole them but in the way Mr. Perot did. THAT is what they fear. The wild card to this is Mr. Paul is running AS a republican. There will be a major upheaval in the republican primaries if he gets too many votes.
    • Nosnevets02, on 01/11/2008, -3/+127The laughing is unacceptable for a debate. Absolutely childish.
      • diggcensored, on 01/11/2008, -43/+22Especially John McCain's fat face. Dude shoulda been ***** and killed as a POW to spare us the evangelical holy roller agenda he is promoting.

        Thank you and good day.
        • jon30041, on 01/11/2008, -6/+21... Wow. Way to trivialize POWs.

          I don't agree with McCain on anything but his stance on torture, but that doesn't mean I wish him ill will. That's just dick as hell.
          • diggcensored, on 01/11/2008, -13/+12ok, I was a little harsh.. not killed..

            just *****, because I hated his smug look on his face last night and how his reply to ron pauls comment was "we have been in south korea for the last 50 years, this other country for 30 years, that country for 30 years." as if it should just be commonplace that we occupy all these countries for long period of time. No other country does this like the USA.

            I can't stand the idea of an Iran invasion, and if you did'nt pay attention to another comment he made when ron pau ensentiallyl said "We should talk to everyone with open dialog, with our friend and enemies, trade with everyone, end embargos, because that is the only way you can achive stabiliy and peace."

            Mccains response was "I won't trade with Al qaeda , all they want to trade at Burkas", which to me was a direct insult to the Islam religion and not Al qaeda, because Burkas have nothing whatsoever to do with Al qaeda.

            Then he said he did'nt want to invite them to talk with dialog for peace, because "Al qaeda only buys 1 ways tickets" to the USA. A man with this much ignorance will never achieve any peace on this planet and YES I CONCLUDE HE DESERVES AN *****
        • Duositex, on 01/11/2008, -17/+9Yeah.. buried and blocked for bashing war veterans. Real classy dude.
        • riggs32, on 01/11/2008, -6/+18yeah dude i hate McCains as a candidate but i don't wish an ***** on anybody. keep your politics and your emotions separate
        • asskey, on 01/11/2008, -4/+13@riggs32
          Just like Hilary.
        • phenry50BMG, on 01/11/2008, -0/+6Damn, and I thought I was harsh.
      • my8bird, on 01/11/2008, -2/+28They couldn't help but laugh at their own parties problems.
      • CannedMango, on 01/11/2008, -2/+35These people don't show any respect for anyone.

        Yet we're supposed to believe that they are good, honourable people. A truly honourable person will hear arguments that they absolutely disagree with and still treat that person with respect.
        • silverlinkx2, on 01/11/2008, -33/+4Just like you ***** Paul morons? You bunch of loons are the biggest bunch of disrespecting, despicable, laughable stock of human beings in the political process today. The way you hunt down news correspondents and pick on Frank Luntz even though he polled your piss poor candidate correctly sickens me. Just drop the ***** out and move to some Nordic country and set up your Libertarian utopia there.
          • CannedMango, on 01/12/2008, -2/+11Wow, you showed me a thing or two about respect.
          • waynetheman, on 01/12/2008, -0/+9"hunt down news correspondents and pick on Frank Luntz"

            Well, there went your credibility.

            We in America are supposed to like freedom. So instead of us moving, how about you move to some Soviet country and set up your Facist/Socialist utopia there?
      • Jpesci, on 01/11/2008, -1/+25I totally agree. Every time I see these other republican candidates laughing at Paul when he's debating, I have to wonder: If these guys can't even respect their fellow presidential candidates, how on earth can we expect them to respect Americans, let alone other countries?
        • newauraxx, on 01/12/2008, -0/+6The Neocons our dangerous for America.
        • waynetheman, on 01/12/2008, -0/+6Listen to them talk. They DON'T respect other countries. Oh, they're polite to ones who we've allied with (or who we've coerced into allying with us), but any other nation? Or a former ally that no longer does what the U.S. government demands? They'll just mock them as if they're a bunch of stupid Neanderthals. Or worse, they'll vote to bomb them.

          None of the other Republican candidates (with the possible exception of Alan Keyes) have a shred of character. And before you Blue Team fans start cheering... most of the Democrats lack character just as much as those Repubs.
      • darkcooger, on 01/11/2008, -0/+11And these are people who think they should be chief diplomats for the United States.
      • doronster195, on 01/12/2008, -0/+3Sorry, I've only started following politics this year. Could someone tell me if this kind of blatant lying, propaganda, has occurred before? You have to be brainwashed to not see right through Fox News these days.

        P.S. I used to be a Fox News watching, bush-supporting neo-con. I'm glad I was able to break out of the brainwash (with the help of Digg of course!)
    • zeejay, on 01/11/2008, -2/+111That rebuttal, unedited, should be his TV ad.
      • CannedMango, on 01/11/2008, -2/+32I agree... it'll be hard for Fox to explain their editing when RP plays it for everyone loud and clear.
      • digitalhair, on 01/11/2008, -0/+5I think an easy to remember URL linking to Ron Paul's entire Youtube channel should be included with that campaign video.
        Youtube, google video, and digg have revolutionized my perception of what is true and what is not simply by making it available for ME to decide whether the story is SPIN-friendly or not.
        In fact, rather than argue with my friends and family about events, I have resorted to using the GMailThis extension in firefox (thanks LifeHacker! http://lifehacker.com/software/gmail/lifehacker-co ... to send them links to video, and they have all finally started to "get it" without hurting our relationships based on party politics, which is what party politics is designed to do - confuse voters about what is true, effectively preying upon our susceptible egos.
        • APerfectTool59, on 01/12/2008, -0/+3Which videos do you send? I've been considering doing that but I don't even know where to start. I think it's a great idea.
    • reubensandwich, on 01/11/2008, -2/+43Even though I'm a registered Republican, when people ask my party I simply respond "Conservative". Why? I went to see a conservative speaker in college sponsored by the college republicans and basically all they did was cheap shot the democrats/liberals. I went home and my parents and family look at this primary as not who's the best Republican candidate but who can keep Hillary out of the White House.
      There's nothing conservative about the Republican party anymore and any Republican with half a brain can notice that. Just because you aren't with them, doesn't mean you're against them but don't tell the sheep this.
      • nakani, on 01/11/2008, -3/+21Man, ***** the baby boomer generation. With 30 years on us they're still too stupid to understand America's Constitution and its democratic process. And now our generation is stuck cleaning up their mess.
        • cswake, on 01/11/2008, -0/+20Don't forget that we'll be funding their retirement...
        • LeeSoong, on 01/12/2008, -0/+13and their mistakes,
          repaying the Chinese loans,
          with interest.
        • kcmedic, on 01/12/2008, -1/+6@ nakani,
          That's what the baby boomers said 30 years ago.
        • waynetheman, on 01/12/2008, -1/+6@kcmedic

          Yeah, they did. Many of them fought the glaring errors of their time--racism springs to mind immediately. Yet they missed the forest for the trees. Their solutions to their problems often meant involving the guns of government (such as anti-discrimination laws and racial quotas.) The sad result: they helped those very problems they fought against limp along far longer than they should have.

          We will obviously make mistakes, but today we finally have the tools and the access to information to reduce the error rate. And we've found the key: government is force, and force is not something you should be using to solve social and political problems. We're not just targeting racism... we're targeting the very concept of collectivism.

          And as soon as they stop fighting us, and just step out of the way, we'll continue their work.
    • rlahiff, on 01/11/2008, -18/+5@chupavacas Not only are you dumb enough to think that all conservatives are neo-cons but your dumb enough to forget ron paul is a conservative himself.
      • edjenkins234, on 01/11/2008, -3/+20No but some of the candidates on the stage ARE neocons, which is a very different thing from being a CONSERVATIVE.
        Please refrain from comments you can't understand.
        • kcdstudios, on 01/11/2008, -2/+15Agreed. PLEASE. if you don't know what you are talking about STFU. Conservatism is a political philosophy (small governement). The GOP used to represent that. They have since been infiltrated by neocons, a borderline cult, obsessed with the moral cleansing and second coming of christ.
          /rant
    • mt066, on 01/11/2008, -35/+3Is this different from how you guys were fighting tooth and nail to keep his racist newsletter off digg? Or is that kind of censorship OK? I mean, you would be able to defend his actions anyways in the comments section if you disagree. So why is it only OK for Ron Paul supporters to censor things?
      • hypertension, on 01/11/2008, -2/+29This issue has been addressed time and time again.
      • Spectre74, on 01/11/2008, -3/+9I completely agree with showing EVERYONE those papers and I am a strong RP supporter. I would present them myself on here, but not submit them. So, it is OK. What is not okay is to bury all of the RP "spam" stories then expect no consequences for that.
      • lamey, on 01/11/2008, -2/+16yes please show the world those news letters, then show the world the facts behind them. the NY times reported on them AGES ago. it's been pointed out MANY time that Dr. Paul did not write them. if you know otherwise please show me your sources.
      • waynetheman, on 01/12/2008, -1/+2Hey, this video addresses that!

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7FwULXnM_E
    • _skin_, on 01/11/2008, -3/+38Sir, your opinions differ from the other candidates. How do you think you will win when your not saying the same things as the other guys?

      We like our candidates to all sound the same don't we American idiots?
    • biotch, on 01/11/2008, -0/+7They're not stinging. They've sold the concept of the Iraq war to the republicans. They've sold the idea of tax cuts mixed with consecutive massive increases in spending and borrowing from China in the name of "spreading democracy", "fighting terrorists" and "patriotism". The vast majority of republicans have swallowed the whole enchilada and are poised to swallow more of it.
    • thinsoldier, on 01/12/2008, -0/+12dugg video taken down
      this is still up
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8TkmE5t1Pk
    • ShokDoktor, on 01/12/2008, -1/+4This video has been removed due to terms of use violation.
    • More4, on 01/12/2008, -4/+2Dr. Ron Paul UNCUT! http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=74978161 ...
    • waynetheman, on 01/12/2008, -2/+2@mt066 - This video addresses the allegations of racism:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7FwULXnM_E
  • jimbabb, on 01/11/2008, -20/+615The pitcher aimed at his head and he still knocked it out of the park.

    This is war against every Fox advertiser!
    • _skin_, on 01/11/2008, -2/+24Then they hurry up and cut to commercial.
    • ncrep, on 01/11/2008, -44/+4if you actually watched the debate it was aired on tv
      quit making false statements just because you dont like fox news
    • Pritchard, on 01/11/2008, -1/+3Who knows? Maybe they thought that the Ron Paul supporters would rebel at them for even asking that question, so they cut it out? Doubtful, given that it's Fox and the question itself was asked in a "you suck" kinda way - But it doesn't seem like anyone can win with us at times, unless they're waving a Ron Paul flag high in the air.
    • mattbdavis, on 01/11/2008, -1/+8War against Fox advertisers? Since when are we at war with Viagra, Cialis, and Enzyte?
      • waynetheman, on 01/12/2008, -0/+4Right now, if we're smart and want to hurt Fox.

        The lifeblood of a broadcast company is its advertisers. Targeting them is the best way to either change the company's policy or ensure it's failure.

        That is, other than pointing the guns of government at them... and fortunately, good libertarians don't go for that kind of violence.
      • juventus1, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2war on drugs.....?
        ***** the war on drugs
    • xdcc, on 01/12/2008, -1/+3We should become a Fox advertiser on this coming Super Bowl Sunday.

      Ron Paul Super Bowl Ad Money Bomb!!!

      http://www.digg.com/2008_us_elections/RON_PAUL_SUP ...
      http://www.SuperMoneyBomb.com
    • androothebear, on 01/12/2008, -7/+1really makes you sad that he has 0% chance of becoming president, doesn't it?
    • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -7/+1You ron paul fanboys are ***** retarded. I opened this page when it was at ~3500 diggs, clicked the link, and it said "This video has been taken down." So now I come back, the video is *still* down, and now it's at 6800+ diggs?! Is the Digg community really *this* dumb?!
      RTFA RTFA RTFA RTFA RTFA RTFA RTFA RTFA RTFA RTFA RTFA RTFA RTFA!!!!!!!!!
  • Cyberdactyl, on 01/11/2008, -431/+30The problem with this digg submission is an example of Ron Paul's problem. . or I should say his followers. This was NOT cut from the debate. I and EVERYONE else who watched saw this part. This could have been a good submission, by blatantly lying is not gonna help Paul.
    • Pebcak, on 01/11/2008, -7/+371Yes, it was in the debate, because the debate was live. When they reran it afterward this part was missing.
    • neopolaris, on 01/11/2008, -7/+273What part of "cut from re-air" don't you understand?

      Hell, wtf else don't you probably understand?
      • romistrub, on 01/11/2008, -74/+16He misunderstood one thing. Everything thereafter hinged on his single mistake. Don't be a dick, we all make 'em.
        • my8bird, on 01/11/2008, -4/+61The guy was dick so he had it coming.
        • vade79, on 01/11/2008, -3/+41One thing? It was the sole point of his comment and it was misunderstood.
        • purzzzell, on 01/11/2008, -2/+37Then isn't he a dick for commenting without RTFA?

          I DIDN'T read the article, I read the HEADLINE on Digg (the one at the top of this page) , and I understood it....
    • malakite33, on 01/11/2008, -10/+141You are a ***** idiot, It was cut from the rebroadcast of the debate. I saw it happen and that what the title says, jackass
    • fahrenheitlf, on 01/11/2008, -6/+106The problem with this user is his reading and comprehension skills.
      • rrasco, on 01/11/2008, -4/+27The same problem with the rest of the anti-Paul crowd. Looking for any reason to attack and make it seem like if you are supportive of Paul that you are a conspiracy theorist tinfoil hat wearing liar.
    • dagnome1984, on 01/11/2008, -9/+37Cyberdactyl = Moronic neoconservative
      • raithetarkon, on 01/12/2008, -1/+3WTF? It sounds to me like he just didn't watch the re-airing.

        Note to dagnome1984: Calling someone a neoconservative whenever they do something you don't like is retarded.
    • Bilabrin, on 01/11/2008, -2/+47Sorry, you are wrong about that one. The RE-air was edited.
    • Scaryclouds, on 01/11/2008, -2/+39Fail.
    • CannedMango, on 01/11/2008, -1/+42Read the headline before you post.
    • RaidVan, on 01/11/2008, -61/+7Before you crazy nutjobs go and bash this guy.. PLEASE PROVIDE PROOF. I would LOVE to see where you are getting this idea that this was "cut from the re-air."
      And no "because I saw it" does not fly whatsoever.
      I love Ron Paul, but I agree with this man, lies will not help him AT ALL.
    • bolognium, on 01/11/2008, -12/+21and you're ***** up here is a good example of people who don't support Ron Paul - they don't pay attention to detail.. it's "fight or flight", "fight them over there so we don't fight them here".. sub-par mentality.
    • plc1, on 01/11/2008, -0/+18Cyberdactyle, are you daft?
    • Kishoba, on 01/11/2008, -1/+21I urge everybody to look at Cyberdactyl's profile. OMG!
    • mcmlxxii, on 01/12/2008, -18/+3I hope being damnably unpleasant about someone making a stupid mistake makes you feel good.
      • NinjaJoey, on 01/12/2008, -2/+4It happens on every comment thread. This is Digg.
      • Solis, on 01/12/2008, -0/+3Oh, it does. Why shouldn't it?
    • wyldeman007, on 02/02/2008, -0/+0Owned
  • Groovemaster, on 01/11/2008, -28/+340Maybe a few years after the mainstream media guides Obama or Clinton into office, the USA will collectively look back on the time when they had a chance to elect someone who was primarily concerned with the welfare of the average American, instead of the abundance of corporate profits for the military-industrial complex.

    Maybe they'll finally learn that prevention is better than cure, especially when there's no longer a cure available.
    • BigW, on 01/11/2008, -8/+22Well, if they guide Clinton into office you won't be able to look back like that. If you think she's concerned about anything but herself she's really got you fooled. She views the unsuspecting masses as the key to her power.
      She's also very made that the masses voted for Obama in Iowa. Thats why she was crying.
    • drakke1, on 01/11/2008, -12/+24Before you become too optimistic about Obama, realize that all the viable candidates are owned by the NWO. Obama is a member of CFR, and his foreign policy adviser is the "woodpecker", Brzezinski, a major neo con. Sorry
      • fuzzmeister, on 01/11/2008, -13/+5Please, define "NWO". Does it actually mean anything, or is it just a catchall term for things you don't like?
        • gameforge, on 01/12/2008, -2/+3"New World Order". Have you honestly never heard of it or do you simply believe it's just a conspiracy and "not as bad as it sounds"?
    • thecoolestguy, on 01/11/2008, -5/+17@drakke,

      Brzezinski is not that bad, he's quite critical of the new aggressive US policy in the middle east.

      But I agree, only someone ready to apply the cure, someone like Ron Paul, can save America. America needs to go cold turkey, while the status quo politicians are promising more injections of the spending/borrowing drug.

      Remember the entitlement deficit is about $2 trillion a year. This is a figure no one talks about and wants to deal with (except Ron Paul).

      www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGpY2hw7ao8
    • anillop, on 01/11/2008, -11/+5Kind of like that what we should be doing with Ross Perot.
    • crimson117, on 01/11/2008, -11/+3@Groovemaster

      You were talking about Kucinich, right?
      • betterth, on 01/12/2008, -2/+3Unfortunately Kucinich is very pro-Federal government, pro government-welfare and supports the idea that the government should take care of us cradle to grave. That concept might be the only thing more expensive than the Iraq war. Kucinich is still my #2, however.
    • diggsahole, on 01/11/2008, -1/+6Well put. Thanks!
    • FunkyWitDaSysTm, on 01/11/2008, -4/+5you really think it's going to get better before it gets a whole lot worse? pshh. good luck with that.
    • tryptamine, on 01/12/2008, -10/+3He may be against the military-industrial complex, but Dr. Paul has corporate interests near the top of his agenda. He's strongly anti-labor and pro corporation.. As mentioned, a strong fiscal conservative.
      • jibbityjab, on 01/12/2008, -2/+5You're being sarcastic, right?

        If not, who dresses you in the morning? There is no way you could be stupid enough to believe a comment like that and still be smart enough to put your own pants on.
      • rarson, on 01/12/2008, -2/+6You don't know what you're talking about. I hope you were joking.
      • waynetheman, on 01/12/2008, -1/+4Do you not know the first thing about libertarianism? Or heck, about corporations? If Ron Paul is as strong a libertarian as I suspect he is, he's probably of the personal opinion that corporations (essentially file folders granting special government privileges and immunities) shouldn't even exist!

        I suppose this is that same old public-school-promoted myth that the biggest, greediest corporations just love deregulation. Which doesn't explain why, for a local example, other, established restaurants are the first ones to suggest new regulations to keep new, upstart businesses from upsetting their apple carts.

        Start here to really learn about the phenomenon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
    • LeeSoong, on 01/12/2008, -0/+9When future children are in History class, learning of the collapsed countries U.S.S.R. and U.S.A.
      - they will wonder in amazement how could people be so backwards and naive to think those failed countries could grow through Empire building?

      They will ask, 'didn't the people in the Early 2000s learn anything from the fall of the Roman Empire?'


      Empire building always fails because the costs of building an Empire is far greater than the profits / resources gained from the Empire. Once the tipping point is crossed, social collapse is the only possible outcome.
    • theDrizzle, on 01/12/2008, -0/+5I don't know why people are calling fox bad journalism. Fox News was never intended to be journalism. It is, and will probably always be, a campaign for all those that Murdoch and his henchman Roger Ailes want in control of the country. It's meant to brainwash people into keeping the country polarized. Think about it, in the last 10 or so years, how often have you heard the term "red and blue states" mentioned.
      • betterth, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2"Fox News was never intended to be journalism"

        Now, the name of the network is "Fox NEWS"

        "News is any new information or information on current events which is relayed by print, broadcast, Internet or word of mouth to a third party or mass audience. The reporting and investigation of news falls within the profession of journalism." - Wikipedia

        The mere name implies that it is attempting to be journalism.
    • thinsoldier, on 01/12/2008, -0/+6...what is this..."look back" of which you speak?
      - United States of Amnesia
    • elliotys, on 01/12/2008, -4/+2Ron Paul has good foreign policy, but his views on separation of church and state, big business, and education scare the ***** out of me.
      • cmackattack, on 01/13/2008, -2/+2Complete a thought, state why, or be dugg down.... -1

        The constitution scares the ***** out of elliotys....sigh....not following the constitution scares the ***** out of me....
      • elliotys, on 02/02/2008, -0/+1I just figured Paul supporters would know his stance on these (he is anti sep of church and state, anti regulation of big business, and anti federally funded education.) and figure I had to think the opposite.
  • extratwice, on 01/11/2008, -57/+315
    Cyberdactyl
    "The problem with this digg submission is an example of Ron Paul's problem. . or I should say his followers. This was NOT cut from the debate. I and EVERYONE else who watched saw this part. This could have been a good submission, by blatantly lying is not gonna help Paul."

    From title: "cut from re-air".

    Well, at least no one will accuse us Ron Paul supporters of not being able to read.
    • Hayaemsay, on 01/11/2008, -4/+72I'm curious as who the illiterate are voting for.
      • bigjoeportagee, on 01/11/2008, -18/+73Huckabee
        • whoaohh, on 01/11/2008, -4/+23Seriously. I was at my high school today and was hearing a bunch of kids talking about how they were all going to vote for Huckabee. And then they started saying "Hucka-owned" and "that's Hucka-tight." Several of them admitted to liking him just because of his name.

          This nation is *****.
          • brad3378, on 01/14/2008, -0/+1I think you meant to say:
            This nation is Hucked
        • rarson, on 01/12/2008, -0/+5You should've slapped the ***** out of those idiots and told them what a bunch of dumbasses they are. Seriously... "Hucka-owned?" That's retarded.
      • WiseWeasel, on 01/11/2008, -7/+41Whoever their church tells them to...
      • Drax0n, on 01/12/2008, -0/+7You dont have to know how to read to understand .. 9 11
        9/11
    • evan2024, on 01/11/2008, -9/+79It wasn't cut from the live debate. It was cut on the re-run.
      • Dubbsacc, on 01/11/2008, -3/+18No, really?
      • Renton, on 01/11/2008, -0/+9That's what he was saying, he just didn't know how to use the reply button.
    • jimithng23, on 01/11/2008, -10/+11hahahahahahaha! ROFL!!!
    • rickbauls, on 01/11/2008, -2/+42They vote for whoever diebold wants them to vote for.
    • Sifl, on 01/11/2008, -0/+10Anyone have video from the re-air?
    • solistus, on 01/11/2008, -2/+7Well, we might accuse you of not being able to read that little line under each message that says "Reply to _____'s comment..." Honestly, are you just fishing for diggs by rehashing the things people said in reply to cyberdactyl in your own top-level comment?
    • timf, on 01/11/2008, -23/+54This is how they re-aired it:
      http://youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU
      • dawgma, on 01/11/2008, -2/+24son of a bitch. that's twice today...
      • Sifl, on 01/11/2008, -2/+13If that's the case then I don't see what the problem is.
      • dezmo, on 01/11/2008, -5/+1nice, didn't even check the url
      • trancemin, on 01/11/2008, -1/+3bastard!
      • Scira, on 01/11/2008, -6/+1I fall for that every time. But I don't get it but i havn't watched the whole video.
      • Kakemonster, on 01/11/2008, -1/+8IMO not the right time to do that, bury me if you like.
      • jbennett1128, on 01/12/2008, -1/+2Dammit. Rick roll'd again.
      • peteweird, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2thanks, I needed that!
      • reel2real, on 01/24/2008, -0/+0That was hilarious... thanks for the laugh.
    • forgedfour, on 01/11/2008, -0/+4make sure you READ what the headline says before you make a comment.
    • mike17032, on 01/11/2008, -2/+5Use the reply button *****.
      • KillerJoy, on 01/12/2008, -5/+0STFU-A$$HOLE...something like that, right? replied
    • R1ng00, on 01/12/2008, -0/+3They did edit it out in subsequent showings (replay) of the debate. There not showing it anymore on the news either.
  • Look4Truth, on 01/11/2008, -12/+178Faux is a pathetic joke of a network. Their immorality and bias is so apparent that they're going to implode soon enough. The brain dead zombies have been brainwashed by them for a long time but one by one people are waking up to their scams.
    • objbuilder, on 01/11/2008, -2/+43Yep. I used to defend them because they are the *only* conservative opinion on TV and it's good to get all sides of the issues. However, it's not worth it anymore... I can no longer pretend they are a real news organization - even a right leaning one. They are simply an evil propaganda distributer.
      • solistus, on 01/11/2008, -1/+14They're hardly the only conservative voice on TV. These days, nearly every network has some pundit who devotes most of his time to talking about the "illegals" and every network has embraced the insipid notion that the role of the media is to parrot what the two parties are saying without critically evaluating either side's claim. Hell, the entire MSM was on board with Iraq for years.
      • stillanovice, on 01/11/2008, -0/+6I'm starting to think that CNN is better now. at least they have Lou Dobbs and Glen Beck. I am by no means says that they are always right, but they are much better then Bill Oreilly or Sean Hannity.
    • toekneebullard, on 01/11/2008, -24/+12"Faux is a pathetic joke of a network."
      Yes it is. Almost as pathetic as calling it "Faux"
      • rspeed, on 01/11/2008, -10/+9Agreed. I cringe every time I see someone say that. It's worse than "Micro$oft" or "Crapple." Faux isn't pronounced anything like Fox.
        • rezonq3, on 01/11/2008, -3/+10I don't think the point is in the pronunciation... I think it has more to do with 'Faux' having an F at the beginning with an x at the end, making it the closest looking word to 'Fox' that has the French definition of hollow, insincere, or untruthful.
          http://www.wordreference.com/fren/faux
          • rspeed, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Every time I read it I hear "fo" in my head and the sentence falls apart. It's clever, but doesn't work.
        • lowmagnet, on 01/11/2008, -2/+1Why not Fux? I know it's not a word, but it works too.
        • waynetheman, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1Which is why it works online, where we can read it and get the joke.
      • SSUK, on 01/11/2008, -3/+2I agree with rspeed... Kind of. Name calling is what children do. Stop it.
        Other than that, take stabs at Fox in any way possible.
    • HerrEisenheim, on 01/12/2008, -1/+6Not quite. It's a strategic move. They want to try and bury Ron Paul as much as possible so he doesn't run as an independent, because if he does, the Democrats win. IMO, they are just making it worse for themselves. It's going to backfire in their face.

      Look, the reality is that Ron Paul can not win the Presidency. He just can't. Majority of this country is older, and they don't really want change. They don't care about spending. Some of them want to hear the word "change," but they are quite satisfied with how things are going. This is a country of old people, and it's getting older by the minute. They don't care if they bankrupt the country, because they'll be dead. We have to pay for it, and yet they have the voting majority.

      But if Ron Paul runs as an independent, he could actually do quite well. I could see him actually stealing 10-15% or the Republican vote. Who knows, maybe more. If he does that, then the Democrats only need 40% of the electoral votes to win. That's something they can easily do.

      That's *why* Fox is doing what they are doing. They want the Republicans to win. They want to just make Ron Paul disappear. Problem is, every time they pull some ***** like this, they increase his exposure. He's going to run as an independent and ***** them over big time. And you know what? I hope he does.
      • jibbityjab, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Murdoch would be plenty pleased with Hillary Clinton in the White House. In fact, I bet she is his second choice behind Rudy.
      • waynetheman, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2I agree with jibbityjab... the money behind Fox News wouldn't mind one bit if Hillary won.

        That said, I will note that many of the Republicans that Fox News panders to DO think that way... they just want Dr. Paul to disappear. And yes, their support of these tactics will backfire big time.

        "Look, the reality is that Ron Paul can not win the Presidency. He just can't. Majority of this country is older, and they don't really want change. They don't care about spending. Some of them want to hear the word "change," but they are quite satisfied with how things are going. This is a country of old people, and it's getting older by the minute. They don't care if they bankrupt the country, because they'll be dead. We have to pay for it, and yet they have the voting majority."

        Quoted For Truth. Ticks me off to think of how easily people will sell their own children down the river.
    • rarson, on 01/12/2008, -0/+3Fox sounds more like a bunch of total assclowns the more they try to tear down Paul. I'm surprised they even let him finish his answer. Then again, they did cut it from the re-airing, which is no surprise.
    • RepublicansSuck, on 01/12/2008, -0/+0It's owned and run by neocons, obviously it's going to suck.
  • lostangelonline, on 01/11/2008, -27/+131Ron Paul Rulez!! there is nothing you can say to this man to knock him down!
    • shaka776, on 01/11/2008, -51/+18Calling him a racist sure took some of the wind out of his sails...
      • noahhoward, on 01/11/2008, -3/+28Did it? I can't imagine why idiotic slander would have an effect on the man.
      • heynoop, on 01/11/2008, -2/+25no, it didn't.
      • BigW, on 01/11/2008, -35/+3I don't know. They're quoting printed newsletters with his name on them. I think the evidence is pretty credible. And its a shame to because he had some viewpoints.
        I know one ardent Paul supporter that gave up on him when news of this came to light. I'm surprised more diggers haven't given up on him too.
        • Arahail, on 01/11/2008, -2/+25Probably because further reading tells you that he didn't write it himself, but some people aren't big readers these days.
          • BigW, on 01/12/2008, -1/+2Yes, but he allowed it to go out with his name on it. I'd really like to believe that Paul had no part in it, but its really hard to do that.
        • smacksaw, on 01/11/2008, -4/+11BigW Busted In Dateline Molestation Sting

          NBC - Digg user BigW was busted by Chris Hansen in a sting today for Dateline NBC. He had made plans to meet a young boy at his house and came dressed wearing only a Sponebob Squarepants costume and his fully erect penis. This is true because I put his name on it.

          I'm Chris Hansen, and I'm totally credible because I used BigW's name.
        • smacksaw, on 01/11/2008, -9/+7BigW Busted In Dateline Molestation Sting



          NBC - Digg user BigW was busted by Chris Hansen in a sting today for Dateline NBC. He had made plans to meet a young boy at his house for hot loving and came dressed wearing only a Spongebob Squarepants costume and a fully erect penis. This is true because I put his name on it.

          I'm Chris Hansen, and I'm totally credible because I used BigW's name.
      • solistus, on 01/11/2008, -17/+5No, it doesn't. He just denies all responsibility for the point of view he allowed his staffers to publish under his name. Personal responsibility is HARD!
        • hypertension, on 01/11/2008, -2/+12*rolls my eyes*

          He took moral responsibility for this TEN YEARS AGO!!!!
        • gameforge, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Personal "responsibility" is easy. Personal "accountability" is what's hard. But that's not important right now. You're REALLY hoping Ron Paul doesn't get elected aren't you? So, who signs YOUR paychecks?
      • ljmunz, on 01/11/2008, -1/+15The story was originally printed by the LA Times and retracted after all the facts were discovered. But that 'fact' certainly didn't stop the MSM from running with it
        • forgottenhope, on 01/11/2008, -1/+12The problem is they are not running with it because they know its *****, some smuck came on the tucker show with it and even the msm tucker was saying he didnt buy it.

          if this is all you have, hillary clinton is a self recorded felon. ***** you
      • rarson, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1You wish.
    • saltinekracka20, on 01/11/2008, -34/+12He's old.
    • Adgeman, on 01/11/2008, -35/+9How about: "He hasn't got enough votes" or "10% isn't enough"?

      I don't mind the guy too much and thing he speaks a bit of sense but I'm getting so freaking bored of the zealots on here that I'm slowly starting to dislike the guy. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
      • FluffyWolf, on 01/11/2008, -0/+27Giuliani has had less votes than Ron Paul so far, Thomson also has less votes, and they are both still running without anyone questioning them about it.
        • WilliamDavis, on 01/11/2008, -1/+12They are scared... and getting more scared. If they can't make Fred do well in SC, he's done. Rudy, Huckabee, and McCain are all broke. That leaves Romney and Paul. I'm pretty sure I know who winds that debate, and fake focus groups can't spin it.
          • LeeSoong, on 01/12/2008, -4/+4Rudy, Huckabee, and McCain WILL Drop Out - they have no purpose, shouldn't have wasted people's time running in the first place, and they will be gone.

            Then through a process of elimination - Ron Paul will take the lead.

            They keep trying to foist the ''Chosen Ones'' on people with false information, lies, fraud, and manipulation .

            '1st tier' '2nd tier' - B.S. propaganda.
            - WE DO NOT NEED CORPORATE MEDIA TO CHOSE FOR US!
      • feebie, on 01/11/2008, -1/+25So let me get this straight. You are starting to dislike Ron Paul, because the RP people on digg are zealots that make you bored?
        That is a really skewed way of thinking. How about instead, you dislike zealots on digg. If Ron Paul makes "a bit of sense" and you don't mind him, why don't you consider him rather than using the "digg zealots" as scapegoats?
        • Adgeman, on 01/12/2008, -6/+2In the end he's still a Republican and therein lies the fault.
        • jibbityjab, on 01/12/2008, -0/+4RE: Adgeman

          I love your objective reasoning. You say Paul makes sense but the two reasons you can't support him are: (1) you don't like his supporters and (2) he has an "R" next to his name on the ballot.

          I hope the only reason you're not embarrassed to say something like that is you're anonymous on the internet. If not, I hate to tell you but, most of the people you talk to in the real world probably walk away thinking you're an idiot.
        • Adgeman, on 01/12/2008, -4/+1I said that 'some things' he says make sense not everything he says makes sense. He does have some good policies e.g. putting the country back into glorious isolation but there are a lot of areas where his opinions on matters such as same sex unions, abortions etc vary significantly from my own - opinions traditionally shared by Republicans. I like the concept of getting a change from the standard politically system where big business and lobbyists have control of the system but Obama will help me with that hopefully.

          I"m not sure you needed to fall back on personal abuse; I was stating a opinion - we happen to disagree about that opinion; it happens every day.

          By the way; people quite like me when they chat to me. Don't worry; I can't even vote :)
        • jibbityjab, on 01/12/2008, -0/+4RE: Adgeman

          It appears you many have been misinformed about Paul. That can happen if you read too many liberal websites (or neocon websites for that matter). Check out the interview linked below. The gay marriage part is about @ the 2 minute mark but you might as well watch the whole clip.

          http://youtube.com/watch?v=UJz81lAwY0M

          Paul's position on these issues is that the Constitution does not authorize the federal government to deal with abortion or drugs or marriage. I have a variety of other personal differences with Paul (I'm pro-choice for one) but I know he would govern according to the Constitution and that's what I want my President to do. I'm not looking for someone to hang out with.

          Obama might mean well but his solution is more government. And big business will eventually use those very same powers for their benefit. That's why big business supports Obama (check his top 20 donors) and not Paul (check his top 20 donors). They prefer regulations (even when aimed at them) over a free market any day. Any regulatory power you give government will be used by big business. It's been happening since the New Deal and Obama isn't going to change that. He also has a interventionist foreign policy (of the Bill Clinton style) and his record on the Iraq war isn't too great either. RP is the only acceptable candidate in the race.
    • zachlac, on 01/11/2008, -26/+7I just get worried that people flock to Ron Paul without listening to the real message. While he makes some very good points, and he is the only Republican smart enough to speak out against the war, some of his actual agenda is not so obviously good. The constitution is a very good document, and one we should definitely follow, but the founders created it to be slowly adapted. I don't know about you, but I don't want my country run like it's 1776.

      And yes we all know Fox News is biased...so don't watch it.
      • Arahail, on 01/11/2008, -1/+17That is why we have amendments, to adapt. You remind me of Bill Russert asking if Ron Paul was so pro Constitution, why did he support certain amendments to the Constitution...well, I hope you know the answer.
      • chesterogilvie, on 01/11/2008, -1/+16How would the country be run like it's 1776 if we respect the constitution? There have been numerous amendments made since 1776. You should check some of them out some time. Preferable before voting.
      • WilliamDavis, on 01/11/2008, -1/+12"but the founders created it to be slowly adapted."

        Right. It's stated clearly in the "slow adaptation clause." Wait... uh... no, it's not. There's an amendment process. Do you know what amendment means? They laid out the mechanism of change very obviously for everyone to see. Whoever told you this lied to you, and now you run around looking silly as a result of it.
    • Derrekito, on 01/11/2008, -4/+29Unless you do not agree with all his conservative views. Which I do not. He is the best CONSERVATIVE candidate, however. I still support Mike Gravel.

      Another thought: Paul's position on cannabis is right on the money.
      • betterth, on 01/12/2008, -2/+6***** Paul's position on cannabis. Paul's position on the "war on drugs" is right. What a waste of money.
    • AntwonRock, on 01/11/2008, -22/+0Dr Paul looks like Marshall "Herff" Applewhite - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Applewhite The Paultards are starting to act like Applewhite's "flock". Herff was a smart guy too....
    • wardrox, on 01/11/2008, -16/+2What about his support for people carrying guns, he is completely pro-life, yet pro-choice regarding "freedome" of the internet, the fact he thinks having gold and silver as legal tender is a good thing and his opinions regarding tighter border controls.

      Those are a few things I would say to knock the man down a peg or two, but hey, that's just my opinion.
      • woodrail, on 01/11/2008, -1/+12I heard that he's not pro life, he just wants to take control of abortion away from the feds and give it to the states cuz it's such a hot issue and it gives the feds too much power.
      • chesterogilvie, on 01/11/2008, -2/+18Are you saying that you want to do away with the Second Amendment? You should rethink that idea as the Second Amendment is what protects our rights.
      • Scaryclouds, on 01/11/2008, -1/+11Their is no evidence that increasing the legal right to carry a gun increases crime, in fact the opposite is true. As for the pro-choice, personally he is, but he will send the abortion issue to the states, per the 10th amendment.
        • jibbityjab, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2You can't increase the natural right of self defense, you can only restrict it.

          Your statement should read, "There is no evidence that restricting a persons right to self defense decreases crime. In fact, the evidence suggests the opposite."

          Personally, he is pro-life just like, personally, he is anti-drug. However personal opinions mean nothing. Paul is a Constitutionalist and the Constitution does not give the federal government any authority over abortion laws nor drug laws. I have completely different personal opinions than Paul does but I don't care because I know, as he has since the 70's, govern according to the Constitution.
      • Arahail, on 01/11/2008, -1/+12All fiat money in history has failed, and while in theory, nothing would cause it to fail, it fails because of corruption or ignorance. Backing a currency with gold and silver is law under the Constitution I believe, so I think that's why Paul is sticking by that. By backing a currency, it is more like a law to deter the free printing of money that causes inflation. In the form of lower interest rates, this cause inflation, and through the credit market, it creates a preferential policy to distribute more to the rich. Perhaps that's why left wing socialists don't care about interest rates so much, a lot of them are fairly well off, so they are either evil or ignorant. It's one of the reason why we have increasing disparity among the rich and poor. So you think a person would get knock down for trying to make an economy fair for everyone? What has this world come to these days where people feel like they are entitled to other people's hard earned money? Also, he is pro-life, but according to the Constitution, those choices should be left to the states, and he'll advocate it as such until the people living in this country think it's about time to make it federal or leave it as is. In any case, he won't do anything if California wants to make their state pro choice. So maybe you should try to read further in what he says, instead of just listening to what seems to make sense from others who don't know themselves.
      • corneliusJones, on 01/11/2008, -0/+10and as far as the gold/ silver standard for the dollar, have you been following the monetary situation? The dollar is losing value every day due to the Fed essentially printing money out of thin air, lowering interest rates (allowing banks to borrow more money that does not exist prior). Our fiat money is skating on thin ice and it is only a matter of time before the system crashes completely.
    • holzp, on 01/11/2008, -3/+12He is a Ob/Gyn by trade, obviously he is bought and paid for by BIg Baby, oh when is America going to have an honest politician!
  • d03boy, on 01/11/2008, -9/+290If someone hasn't seen this, they need to. This is the kind of crap Fox pulls on the average American every day and they have no clue. Ron Paul spun their dumb question and spit it in their face.
    • tman84, on 01/11/2008, -0/+38When Hillary or Guiliani speak I get douche chills, when Ron Paul speaks I just get the chills.

      This 90 second speech he gave was pure gold, I don't understand how someone could not be inspired by this. Real candidate with no corporate interests and someone who would lead us by the rule of law. It doesn't get any simpler.
      • waynetheman, on 01/12/2008, -0/+5It was platinum:

        "Let me see if I get this right. We need to borrow ten billion dollars from China, and then we give it to Musharraf, who's a military dictator who overthrew an elected government, and then we go to war, we lose all these lives promoting democracy in Iraq. I mean what's going on here?"
    • More4, on 01/12/2008, -6/+2words of wisdom from Dr. Paul http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=74978161 ...
      • betterth, on 01/12/2008, -1/+6Oh shut the ***** up. Ron Paul has personally talked about this multiple times in the past few days.

        We know they're there. We know what was said. And we forgive the good doctor for what happened. He put his name on something without reading it, without being the editor, and allowing others full control over content attached to his name. It's a mistake, and when you're a busy politician, it's an easy mistake to made.

        He accepts moral responsibility for the issue and asserts that he does not feel that way. Fortunately, his actions as a politician and a human being completely refute that trash, and we have no reason to doubt him.
  • LeeJunFan, on 01/11/2008, -9/+100If I had been there I would have been tazed when he asked him that question.
  • Ragecloak, on 01/11/2008, -10/+156You know what this means: MORE EMAILS!! Do NOT stand for their censorship!
    • lostangelonline, on 01/11/2008, -25/+2revolutionaries needed! where are the spammers when you need them? :)
    • chesterogilvie, on 01/11/2008, -0/+12I think a "media" boycott is more appropriate. I felt like garbage watching the debate on Fox last night knowing the kind of organization they are but I just had to see what ***** they tried to ambush Ron Paul with.
      • Westermeyer, on 01/12/2008, -2/+0Yes, jesus christ, please stop watching FOX so all the RP08/FOX is ___, we should _____ posts can STOP. Just stop watching them and stop whining about them.
    • hlcno, on 01/11/2008, -0/+8yep email the ***** out of them
    • anillop, on 01/11/2008, -1/+12More emails that the will promptly ignore. If you want results email the advertisers, they are the only people that matter to networks.
      • SSUK, on 01/11/2008, -3/+2Why should they care? If the network is doing malicious things then it's the network who gets called out, not the people who advertise on their network. As far as they care, they wont get any repercussion from any of this and as a result, wont give a ***** what the network is doing so long people watch the network and they're getting their money's worth of air-time.
    • Identity4, on 01/11/2008, -2/+4Emails...lol... How about notes taped to bricks? Im all about going the low-tech way.
      • fuzzmeister, on 01/11/2008, -2/+4But that's actually, you know, illegal.
      • thinsoldier, on 01/12/2008, -1/+1Bricks properly packaged in a box labeled "bricks" with an invoice for the purchase and shipment of the bricks and whatever you have to say to them scribbled on the back....?
        • Spectre74, on 01/13/2008, -0/+1With a spring, like a jack in the box.
    • chingy1788, on 01/11/2008, -5/+2Goatse them
      so who are we emailing? Fox?
      well just send screens of 2girls1cup
      • Ragecloak, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1You know that's actually a thought...you can ignore words but when you've got a gaping goatse staring you in the face, it will be scared into your retina
    • zackmario, on 01/12/2008, -0/+1http://digg.com/politics/Ron_Paul_on_TheRealNews
  • MrLazySmurf, on 01/11/2008, -32/+17I was tuning in and out of the debate. Everytime i tuned in i just saw idiots, the two bastards i couldn't stand were 1. Guiliani (a-hole reminded me of Bush the way he used hand gestures and face expressions, same answers as the next idiot) 2. McCain (this guy is a jackass, Corporate scum written all over his face). 3. Thompson doesn't seem to know whats going. 4. Hucklebee - this guy isn't all that bad from what i saw. 5. Paul (he seems like a good guy with good intentions, but they make him seem like a crazy old man) I personally wouldn't vote for any of them, i'd vote Elephant if Paul won the primaries. But after seeing these guys it seems like the jackasses got there number.
    By the way, didn't the guy asking the questions look hilarious. I couldn't stop laughing when i was watching the re-air, you know where your dead tired and just find the smallest thing funny.
    • slapded, on 01/11/2008, -3/+11you forgot romney, the rich jackass.
      • MrLazySmurf, on 01/11/2008, -2/+5Ahh.. I guess i did, well i was channel surfing during the commercials.
    • Archer007, on 01/11/2008, -10/+3Capitalize your "i"s. Buried.
    • stillanovice, on 01/11/2008, -2/+5Vote for the good Doctor in the primaries and if he doesn't we look for another country that will still offer some form of freedom.
  • seks03, on 01/11/2008, -7/+61Let them know that we're spreading the word about this yourcomments@foxnews.com
  • scootscr15, on 01/11/2008, -9/+73Nine
    Eleven
  • colberrep, on 01/11/2008, -83/+20ron paul isn't a neocon. but he is a far right extremist. his policies are great for militia nut jobs and corporations looking to get rid of environmental and labor regulations.
    • dsmx, on 01/11/2008, -9/+15No Ron Paul would try and create business evironments were you couldn't do that, at present with only a few companies in each market your forced to regulate them as there is no true competition. Ron Paul wants to create competitive market places made up of many companies forcing true competition, if a company does something bad then no-one will buy there product and go to another company, you just can't do that at the moment with many services.

      As for militia nut jobs that was what the military was supposed to be when this country was founded, if the country got invaded the nilitia would hold up the invader while the government organised the army.
      • colberrep, on 01/11/2008, -27/+12You are a naive free market fan boy. With your theory, there should be no companies that do bad things thriving now. We don't need a libertarian in office to let people know they can boycott products. That doesn't work. When do you have time to go inspect a corporations factory plant and make sure they aren't polluting or exploiting workers or leaving lead in products?
        You also conveniently leave out that paul is against anti-trust law, and would allow corporations to merge as much as they please.Wow thank god paul already lost.
        • haniam, on 01/11/2008, -8/+24And you are a naive government regulation fan boy. You seem to think the government should spend all its time playing nanny to the consumer and protecting idiots from themselves. This only serves to weaken society. Strong private property rights backed up by the state courts can deal with polluters and shysters. Throwing money at the federal government in the name of regulation is a case of the cure being worse than the disease. After we finish building up the government to protect us from the big bad corporations, who is going to protect us from the government?
          • colberrep, on 01/11/2008, -10/+3ever heard of elections? who do you think corporations answer to? majority share holders. take a civics 101 class fan boy.
      • chaosium, on 01/11/2008, -19/+5"Ron Paul wants to create competitive market places"

        No, Ron Paul wants the "truly free market" which is not for competition, but monopolistic action.
        • Magnolit, on 01/12/2008, -1/+2Oh my ***** god. You are a moron. Go study some books.
    • ELCad, on 01/11/2008, -7/+11Water is great for racist too. That doesn't mean water is bad.
      • chaosium, on 01/11/2008, -7/+3"Water is great for racist too. That doesn't mean water is bad."

        How old are you? Seriously, if you think that's at all comparable you are some manner of simpleton.
        • waynetheman, on 01/12/2008, -0/+2Actually, it is that simple. What Dr. Paul is offering benefits everyone except bankers and people profiting from the state. Yes, racists will benefit too (although their racism WON'T.) That doesn't mean liberty is bad.
    • mooseontheloose, on 01/11/2008, -3/+13Which is why all the big corporatio