By: Nick Bernabe
San Diego, CA —Former congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul has unloaded a harsh criticism of the 2016 presidential election. Appearing on RT’s Boom and Bust show Thursday, Paul commented on the media’s control of the U.S. electoral process, Donald Trump’s candidacy, and the stock market. Some of his harshest comments came when Ron Paul was addressing the media’s role in the 2016 presidential elections:
“I think some of this stuff in the presidential race is orchestrated by the major media — and it’s entertainment.
Former Congressman Ron Paul, who ran for president in 2012, has some first-hand insight into the media’s role in the electoral process. In one of the 2012 Republican presidential debates, Paul famously received only 89 seconds to speak throughout the duration of the discourse. Paul’s candidacy — despite massive grassroots support — was mostly ignored by the mainstream media, reinforcing his assertion that the media “orchestrates” the election.
Proof comes from history, and as we look back at the 2012 Republican primary for answers, one simple fact slaps us in the face: One candidate was shown overwhelming favoritism while another candidate was essentially silenced.
According to a research paper from the University of Minnesota’s Smart Politics,
“… Mitt Romney received nearly five minutes more speaking time per debate above his proportional share [in the polls], while no other GOPer ended up with a net bonus of even one second for the debate season.”
The paper continued,
“Despite frequently polling in third place (and sometimes as high as second) during this period under analysis, Paul received less than his equal share of speaking time in 14 of the 17 debates conducted from September 2011 through February 2012.”
The table below shows the 2012 candidates in full, comparing their allowed speaking time at the debates to their standing in the polls.
All of this information further reinforces Ron Paul’s recent statements on the election. Mitt Romney was seemingly chosen in advance to be the Republican nominee and was given a disproportionate share of face time at nearly every debate, despite not being the “front-runner” until much later in the primary process.
These stunning statistics call into question the integrity of the United States’ electoral process now more than ever as the next piece of 2016 “entertainment” is underway. In 2012, Ron Paul was repeatedly painted as unelectable by the corporate media (despite being the best-polling candidate in a head-to-head race against incumbent Obama). Contrarily, Mitt Romney was showered with speaking time at the debates and given positive media coverage until be became the nominee.
For 2016, two more candidates are receiving the “Ron Paul treatment”: Democrat Bernie Sanders and Republican Rand Paul (Ron’s son). Each of these candidates inspires a large grassroots support base and small donor fundraising network, even though they are repeatedly victimized and deemed unelectable by the corporate media. This is to say nothing of the third party candidates who, as far as the TV is concerned, seemingly don’t even exist.
Are presidents truly elected based on public opinion, or are they selected in advance by the corporate media and its interconnected board of oligarchs? What do you think?
****************
TLB recommends you visit the Anti Media for more pertinent articles and information.
Someone, maybe Rand Paul, should bring a complaint to the FEC that news media are coordinating with some Presidential campaigns and giving them unfair advantage. Why are news corporations exempt from campaign law? Why is it ok for them to coordinate with a candidate’s campaign but illegal for grass roots organizations to do the same?
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
The FEC is an independent Federal Agency that exists to enforce unconstitutional regulations that abridge citizen’s rights to print, speak and assemble. And these unconstitutional regulations are unequally applied, prior restraints that discourage and control participation by the electorate.
One example is the political crime of coordination. How has coordination become a political crime and by what logic do campaign laws make it one?
“When a person decides to make independent political expenditures, he opens himself up to two potential burdens under the Act. The first burden is to report those independent expenditures in excess of $250.00. See 2 U.S.C. § 434(c). The second is to defend against allegations that the advocacy was somehow authorized by or coordinated with a candidate which, if true, would lead to still greater limits on the persons political activity. See 2 U.S.C. § 431(17). Respondents can spend substantial sums defending themselves against such allegations, and this possibility will cause many speakers to avoid engaging in what ought to be constitutionally protected speech.”
Even if the commission finds no violations, the entity filing a complaint weakens their opponent whose staff must spend many hours and dollars answering the charges.
Where does the 1st Amendment say citizens and candidates forfeit their First Amendment rights to coordinate their efforts when we participate in our nation’s politics?
On Wikipedia lookup the words:
“Assembly”: “Freedom of assembly, the individual right to come together and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests.
“Association”: “Voluntary associations, groups of individuals who voluntarily enter into an agreement to accomplish a purpose.” 501(c) non-profit organization is given as an example.
“Coordination”: “Coordination is the act of coordinating, making different people or things work together for a goal or effect to fulfill desired goals in an organization. Coordination is a managerial function in which different activities of the business are properly adjusted and interlinked.”
In sports the lack of coordination leads to lost games. In orchestras the lack of coordination results in dissonance. Choreography without coordination lacks grace. Lack of coordination in business results in lost profits.
Uncoordinated political campaigns are good training for political candidates that will work in our corrupt and dysfunctional government.
Despite the fact the 1st Amendment forbids Congress from writing laws that abridge our freedoms of speech, press and assembly, unconstitutional campaign laws and the “Independent” FEC abridge all three!
“We the People” need to declare our “independence” from unelected bureaucrats that get paid to trample the plain words of the Constitution they swore to uphold!