2012 United States Presidential Election

[Y]

Paul is a racist, arch-conservative lunatic.

Also, with regards to the point earlier about media coverage on Paul and CNN, in no sense of the word "liberal" (either the globally accepted definition of the word or the perverse American usage of it) is a major news network "liberal". CNN, along with every other major news outlet, is pro-business, authoritarian and slavishly devoted to pimping the status quo. Can anyone be so delusional that they think a multibillion dollar news agency is serving the interests of leftist hippies? Are you genuinely so stupid that you dare to parrot talk radio horseshit about the "Clinton News Network"? Seriously fall back trying to play that shit with me.

[Sapphire]

Paul is a racist, arch-conservative lunatic.

What is racist about him?

[rockmanj]

What is racist about him?

Coates put it better than me, but if your headache ever subsides, you should read that piece. I am not going to summarize it. And the news orgs. (well, most but FOX) only seem to be "liberal". The more accurate word to use is "moneyed". They all represent moneyed interests, but some do occasionally have a "liberal bias". Often the news gives two sides of a story in the name of objectivity, when sometimes there really is something unequivocally good or bad about a story.

An example of this is the current congressional gridlock. Everyone that keeps up with politics knows that a lot of important measures and bills are being actively blocked by republican senators and reps, but the news usually reports it as a general congressional problem.

[Animeniax]

Coates put it better than me, but if your headache ever subsides, you should read that piece. I am not going to summarize it. And the news orgs. (well, most but FOX) only seem to be "liberal". The more accurate word to use is "moneyed". They all represent moneyed interests, but some do occasionally have a "liberal bias". Often the news gives two sides of a story in the name of objectivity, when sometimes there really is something unequivocally good or bad about a story.

An example of this is the current congressional gridlock. Everyone that keeps up with politics knows that a lot of important measures and bills are being actively blocked by republican senators and reps, but the news usually reports it as a general congressional problem.

It is the will of the people since they voted the Republicans back into power in Congress. The people want nothing done, they like gridlock. That's why democracy doesn't work.

[Animeniax]

Paul is a racist, arch-conservative lunatic.

Also, with regards to the point earlier about media coverage on Paul and CNN, in no sense of the word "liberal" (either the globally accepted definition of the word or the perverse American usage of it) is a major news network "liberal". CNN, along with every other major news outlet, is pro-business, authoritarian and slavishly devoted to pimping the status quo. Can anyone be so delusional that they think a multibillion dollar news agency is serving the interests of leftist hippies? Are you genuinely so stupid that you dare to parrot talk radio horseshit about the "Clinton News Network"? Seriously fall back trying to play that shit with me.

It's very well known that CNN represents the liberal agenda and FoxNews represents the conservative agenda. To dispute that is to be ignorant of reality.

[Y]

It's very well known that CNN represents the liberal agenda and FoxNews represents the conservative agenda. To dispute that is to be ignorant of reality.

Yeah it's "very well known" by people who are stupid as fuck.