Ron Paul takes the lead in Iowa.

[HalfLotus]

Why are you objecting to people attempting to see the item in context?

I didn't object you numbskull, I'm eyerolling because you have admittedly gone this entire media/campaign period choosing to read nothing other than "Republicans are crazy".

And when confronted with media that shows clear bias against Ron Paul, you immediately and conveniently go into fair and balanced mode, and insist that other people explore a different viewpoint and "show context".

And this is AFTER accusing Paul supporters of being narrow minded. It's rank hypocrisy, and borderline stupidity.

I would have suggested you find the clip yourself, it would have been good practice for someone who is obviously media challenged.

But Felch did your homework for you, and your extremely thin argument was shown to be wrong. Guess you can go back to regurgitating BBC talking points.

[HalfLotus]

Right. Anyway, I don't get much news here, but if Huntsman's getting extra attention it's probably just because he's one of the few candidates who haven't already been covered to death--they like to cover new stuff every once in a while.

So despite the GOP's stated intent to derail the Paul campaign, corporate media's stated intent to do the same, and overwhelming evidence that those strategies are in full play, you cling to the Coincidence Theory. Right.

[Wezil]

In this day and age "coincidence" is much more likely than "conspiracy".

[Dinner]

Did he name his son after that terrible woman?

That terrible woman was born in Tsarist Russia so after learning about her, reading bits of her books, and seeing some old video interviews she did in the 1950's... Well, I could totally understand why regular Russians wanted to kill people like her in the revolution. I mean she's a serious ***** who would actually claim the best thing to do is to leave a child to die in the snow rather then help him/her because helping anyone encourages laziness.

[HalfLotus]

In this day and age "coincidence" is much more likely than "conspiracy".

When exactly did rich/powerful people stop abusing economic and political systems to increase their own wealth and power?

[Elok]

So despite the GOP's stated intent to derail the Paul campaign, corporate media's stated intent to do the same, and overwhelming evidence that those strategies are in full play, you cling to the Coincidence Theory. Right.

What 'stated intent?' What 'overwhelming evidence?' And if the media and GOP were colluding to beat Paul, wouldn't it make more sense to beef up Romney consistently instead of backing one candidate after another, especially someone like Huntsman who has little chance of winning himself but could cut away hunks of Romney support?

The media and GOP ignore Ron Paul mostly because his views differ by a wide margin from their own and from those of the bulk of the USA. He's proposing a whole lot of radical changes and backing them up with references to a particular school of economics, which makes him an unusual combination of "seems crazy" and "frightfully boring." The GOP largely rejects him for being the wrong kind of crank; the media reject him for being unsettling, but not really entertaining. He offers them nothing in terms of ratings. Why should they pay attention to him?

[Wezil]

When exactly did rich/powerful people stop abusing economic and political systems to increase their own wealth and power?

You are confusing "conspiracy" with good old-fashioned "self-interest".

[HalfLotus]

You are confusing "conspiracy" with good old-fashioned "self-interest".

When more than one person cooperates in self-interest and for less than noble reasons, it's a conspiracy by definition.

[Wezil]

That's a pretty loose definition.

[HalfLotus]

That's the dictionary definition, bro. More than one guy doing bad things together = conspiracy.

[Wezil]

The dictionary mentions something about "secret"...

[Wezil]

Paul is at odds will all sorts of Republicans for all sorts of reasons. He's not considered nutty by accident.

I'm not surprised to see a libertarian getting a rough ride from the Big Government establishment nor does it surprise me that large media are also not fans of the small government contender. I see lots of self-interest but not a conspiracy in that there is no "secret plot" afoot. It's all quite transparent.

That said, I'd probably vote for Paul were I an American Republican (little-to-no chance for either in this lifetime). Unfortunately I think you do for Ron Paul what Kid does for christianity in the other thread - You're not helping the cause by being nutty about a candidate many people already see as nutty.

[HalfLotus]

A transparent conspiracy, then. And yes, I'm trying to tone it down. Hyperbole is just so much fun.

[Uncle Sparky]

They should stage an annual Hyper Bowl game, where politicians played football.

[Imran Siddiqui]

When more than one person cooperates in self-interest and for less than noble reasons, it's a conspiracy by definition.

Capitalism, It's a Conspiracy!