Giuliani demands MoveOn’s New York Times ad rate
By Sam Youngman
September 13, 2007
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) said Thursday that he is asking The New York Times for the “same heavily discounted rate they gave MoveOn.org” for his campaign to run an ad in Friday’s paper.Giuliani, calling MoveOn.org’s
controversial “General Betray Us” ad “abominable,” said his campaign is
asking the paper for a comparable rate for an ad to run following
President Bush’s speech on Iraq.
The former mayor said his ad “will obviously take the opposite view” from
MoveOn.org, which argued in its ad that Gen. David Petraeus is “cooking
the books” on Iraq and cherry-picking facts that support his
recommendation to keep a large number of troops in Iraq for some time.
Giuliani continued to include Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) in his
criticisms for her comments that it would take “a willing suspension of
disbelief” to accept at face value Petraeus’s report on the situation
in Iraq. Giuliani interpreted Clinton’s remarks at a hearing earlier
this week as questioning the general’s integrity.
“We think that her attack on Gen. Petraeus was a follow-up to the MoveOn.org/Times attack,” Giuliani told reporters in Atlanta.
Giuliani reiterated that he agrees with Petraeus’s assessment of the
Iraq war, and called MoveOn.org’s ad attacking “an American general in
a time of war” unprecedented.
“It's time for Americans to really insist that American politicians move
beyond character assassination,” Giuliani said. “And this is exactly
what they tried to do with Gen. Petraeus. Well, it’s one thing when
politicians do it to each other. It’s another thing when it’s done to
an American general who has put his life at risk to protect us.”
update
Giuliani campaign spokeswoman Katie Levinson in reference to attacks by Adam Gadahn's favorite website Moveon.org, "Being attacked by the Democratic character
assassination machine MoveOn.org is something Rudy Giuliani will wear
as a badge of honor."
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
This will annoy some folks here...
September 16, 2007 - 00:15 ET by sarcasmo(I know, what's new, it's me posting, but...) the NYT, like it or not, is a privately owned business. If they want, they can charge Moveon.org $5.00 for the same ad-space they charge Rude Rudy $5,000,000,000,000.00. That's capitalism, and like it or not, Rudy has no right to "demand" that they do anything different with their private property. That's what's known as property rights, and the principle helps conservatives on occasion, too, but this one's about principle with me. I have the ultimate disdain for both Rudy and the NYT, so it's easy for me to be the ref and call both sides jerks. :)
Property rights dictate that I do just that, right now. Rudy can ask, as the story says, but he has NO RIGHT to "demand" as the headline says, and there's an important distinction here... If Rudy wants control of the NYT's policies, I'd suggest he purchase the paper (meaning Pinch's preferred stock, since other shareholders are by definition screwed) at market rates if he can. Then, if he wants, Rudy can charge 'moveon.org' whatever he wants to charge them. Until then, the ad space isn't Rude Rudy's to "demand" anything about, IMO.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Homerun for Rudy?
September 16, 2007 - 11:09 ET by third eyeWell you see my friend, this is how the game is played, when it is played well. You might want to take notes. Rudys' campaign, recoginizing this as a win/win situation demanded the same rate as Moveon.org, and guess what...they got it. Even if they hadn't, they would make sure we the people knew about it. Either way, Rudy is the only one willing to step up to the plate and actually do something, instead of just talking about doing something.
Now the douches over at Moveon.org are running attack ads aganist America's mayor. The only thing that would be better, IMO, would be if Hugo Chavez started running ads aganist him.
I don't need
September 16, 2007 - 18:37 ET by sarcasmoTo take any notes to know all about capitalism 101, which this is. Rude Rudy got the low rate because the NYT decided to give it to him, but the NYT has a right to charge whatever rates they want to whoever they want because of exactly what I said above, like it or not and take-notes or not.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
capitalism 101 meets George Soros?
September 16, 2007 - 19:21 ET by third eyeI beg to differ. In theory, I see your point, they should be able to charge whatever price to whomever. Its quite a bit more complicated an issue than that. Why not selectivily price all goods? Why not charge rich people more for a good because they can afford it? Or charge fat people more at McDonalds? I see this as a campaign contribution from the NYT to their allies.
"But to simplify it, if you get a discount, you surrender one of two
things. Either the placement spot in the newspaper or the time. In
other words, it runs whenever there's an opening. For this ad to have
run in the top spot in the newspaper to run on the exact morning that
MoveOn.org needed it to run and then for them to get on top of that a
60 percent discount, it makes it very, very suspicious. This looks to
be an in-kind contribution." Brent Bozell
Here is another link from one of Noel's posts
http://www.spectator...
Fine, but my point about Capitalism 101 fully stands...
September 16, 2007 - 19:36 ET by sarcasmoIf you and/or Brent Bozell think there's evidence of a FECal violation of some in-kind sort, then take it to the FEC. I'm talking about the NYT's rights and capitalism (and believe me, capitalism has almost nothing to do with the FEC!). That means Pinch's property rights rule, because as I explained above, all other NYT shareholders are screwed by Pinch's shares' attributes, and they all know that and choose (for reasons I can't explain or fathom) to own NYT stock anyway. Property rights remain property rights.
As for George, he's done a remarkable job at seeing government manipulations of certain fiat currencies' prices to become a rich man, and now looks to be trying for the same thing again with gold, a "commodity" flavored currency whose manipulation -- despite the lamestream media's deafening-silence regarding it -- is becoming a bit obvious to some of us. Should we blame George for trying to make even more money off of government stupidity & manipulation? I think not, even though I disagree with him on a great many issues, George's money is his, and he's betting on the future of metal, not paper. Seems like a good, solid, capitalistic bet to me, but I'm admittedly biased-as-hell.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Riddle me this
September 16, 2007 - 20:43 ET by third eyeFor a moment lets put aside the issue of property rights. So the Moveon.org ad didnt bother you? It didn't cross any lines in the Sarcasmo code of conduct? Because it did in mine. How does this not constitute media bias? One more thing, will you concur that fat and/or obese people should pay more for food at McDonalds? Because the lines get pretty long sometimes...
Ok, hard as it is...
September 16, 2007 - 22:02 ET by sarcasmoLet's try to ignore property rights. I said absolutely-nothing about the ad, codes of conduct, etc. on this thread. You care about this issue, obviously, much more than I do. I care about Sean's & Alan's recent repeated lie about text-messaging polls much more than you do, but it doesn't entitle me to say things like "so, third eye thinks lying's ok when it's done by a media outlet you like against a candidate you obviously don't?" That would be jumping to a very stupid conclusion on my part, wouldn't it? Get the point? I said NOTHING about the text of the ad here. Nothing at all. (But on other threads I've said it's dimwitted, as if that matters!)
It's not about the text of the ad for me, and frankly I'm unable to put-aside property rights, I'll have to just admit that up-front. Property rights, even Pinch's property rights, are too important to ignore for me. I have disdain for Rudy's rudeness (which, by the way, would have FLUNKED any halfway-decent highschool debate-class!) and I have disdain for the NYT, and I have disdain for Pinch Sulzburger, and I have disdain for "moveon.org." I'm able to experience disdain for a LOT of entities these days, and just because I don't recite each & every disdain does not change any of my extreme disdain for those who deserve it.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Oh boy sarc is really annoyed
September 17, 2007 - 00:11 ET by SportPoliticsGosh I didn't think that Rudy annoyed you so much.
Rudy is a smart guy, he made a public demand, and the Pinch was in a pinch, and decided for capitalism's sake (meaning his special stock) - he had better bone up a page at the price Rudy demanded, or suffer the inevitable consequences.
Sure he could have said no, but he didn't, and that's where the power of the DEMAND kicked in, We the People made Pinchy quake and shudder, and cave in.
Otherwise, Rudy could have "made the demand" over a private capitalist phoneline and never told a soul about it.
Aww, well, all's well that ends well in sarc having a raging annoyance blowout.
Aren't you glad we the people pressured mr pinched capitalist enough that he caved in before the FEC came a storming to the rescue ?
Cheer up stumpy !
I think he is annoyed that
September 17, 2007 - 00:17 ET by Conservative VoiceI think he is annoyed that it makes Rudy look better than Ron Paul.
Huh??
September 17, 2007 - 00:24 ET by sarcasmoIn what way?? He's buying an expensive ad from lefties at the NYT. So what??? How does this reflect on anyone but Rude Rudy???
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Nope.
September 17, 2007 - 00:17 ET by sarcasmoYou're obviously unfamiliar with what I just said. I'm not in any way "annoyed" at having to teach capitalism 101 by now. I'm used to it...But Rude Rudy's debate behavior remains something that would flunk any decent highschool debate class, as I've repeately-said, and as the news media has repeatedly-ignored. Facts are facts.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
lol- the smackdown! Still burning inside sarc?
September 17, 2007 - 00:25 ET by SportPoliticsWow, ok, lol
Rudy paraphrased to R.l.P. : " I've heard a lot of things said about 9-11, but I don't think I've ever heard that before. ..."
Reportedly the winning quote of the entire debate! rofl - whoo hoo.
I get it, it still stings, it's burning inside - yes "rude" Rudy looks better than R.on l.ibertarian P.aul .
rofl -sarc R. l. P.
Jumping subjects again, I see.
September 17, 2007 - 00:28 ET by sarcasmoDoesn't matter, even if you don't respond to my post, you look silly. And if there was such a smackdown, how come we keep winning un-spammable polls in spite of Sean & Alan's lies I busted with you?? :)
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
You ignored my answers yesterday ?
September 17, 2007 - 02:11 ET by SportPoliticsAs I said, it's pretty easy to determine who does "texting". The teeny boppers with their cellphones who fear a draft, and the perverts who "text 555 to Cindy". Add in the insane kossers and huffers who watched it just to hear their anti-war hero -
I'm mean duh, how stupid do you have to be sarc ?
Those "texters" voting aren't going to the poll for Ron Paul, they're playing out their "hate Fox TV and the republicans" fantasy, as they insta-poll vote for another antiwar loon. When most of them get to a voting booth, they'ell take their coke blade or crackpipe reamer and make sure the chad gets dislodged, even if they can't see straight to the butterfly dem names.
Nope.
September 22, 2007 - 16:04 ET by sarcasmoNobody knows who does the texting, but everyone wants to pretend to know -- with an agenda, hence my smackdown.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Delegates, please
September 21, 2007 - 23:34 ET by UnsaneKeep on winning "un-spammable" POLLS.
(Last time I checked, straw polls required a FEE to participate, and that is all.)
How many delegates has Paul won for the Convention???
WWPD?
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Then check again.
September 22, 2007 - 16:03 ET by sarcasmoThe Texas one was QUITE restrictive, go read about it. Anyway, nobody has won any delegates, so why ask? Why not wait and honestly let the real polls do the talking?
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Illustrating my point
September 23, 2007 - 18:41 ET by UnsaneAnyway, nobody has won any delegates, so why ask? Because, your answer "nobody has won any delegates" illustrates my point. To constantly celebrate every damn straw poll victory like a walk-off home run has been hit in the seventh game of the WS in extra innings by your favorite baseball team is ABSURD. Why not wait and honestly let the real polls do the talking? Again, thanks for iullustrating my point.
Just in case your precious straw polls are wrong, and Ron Paul gets kicked right back to Brazoria County to toil in obscurity forever, why don't we ALL just SHUT UP and go ahead and HOLD THE ELECTIONS, just to make sure he IS as beloved as you say he is?
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
sarc,
September 16, 2007 - 11:40 ET by AgnosticI wholeheartedly agree and if this were an attempt to get lower ad rates I would leave it at that but it seems quite obvious this is a polical ploy and an attempt to draw attention to the policies of the NYT. Maybe he can come up with something outrageous to put into his ad about media bias and force Pinch to run the ad considering the NYT is also on record stating that they don't edit such ads.
Rudy
September 16, 2007 - 23:33 ET by Conservative VoiceSarc, you surprise me, because Rudy does have a right to demand...but the NYT doesn't have to listen. Its called freedom of speech.
You would have a case if Rudy was using the courts to force the NYT do give him the better rate. Government is not involved, Rudy made a demand as a citizen. The NYT made a business decision to give Rudy the same rate...that is they used their property rights to do what they felt was necessary.
Demand
September 16, 2007 - 23:49 ET by sarcasmoImplies more rights than Rudy has. I have a right to "demand" wild sex with Pamela Anderson & the entire cast of "Baywatch" by your same logic, but it's clear what's likely to happen if/when I ever even ask, much less "demand"! Demand implies property rights Rude Rudy simply does not own. And yes, the NYT exercised their property rights to get Rudy the same rate, but it was the NYT's property rights, not Rude Rudy's first amendment rights, that were exercised in this case, as I've outlined from post-one.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
You can demand it sarcasmo,
September 16, 2007 - 23:54 ET by Conservative VoiceYou can demand it sarcasmo, just as it is her right to ignore you or say no thanks. It crosses the line if you were to grab her and rape her, that would be force. Rudy didn't use force, he demanded. The NYT was under no obligation to follow through with his demands, hence were not forced, hence their property rights were not violated.
It's just annoying for sarc Conservative Voice
September 17, 2007 - 00:18 ET by SportPolitics'Cause when RuPoo "demands" he be given equal network time, he never actually uses that word(supposedly, I'm not going to suffer through his quaking yuotube cries to find out), nor does he recieve his feminine request. He kind of whines like a gay person in a high pitched granny voice, and then doesn't "win" his case, the network time he wants for free, being the freeloader that he is.
That's all it is. Sarc is having a fit, it's just not fair...to RuPoo.
You have...
September 17, 2007 - 00:21 ET by sarcasmoQuite an imagination, since I never mentioned fairness or Dr. Paul on this thread. But thanks for showing us all just how mature you are, again. :) Does anyone else hear echos of a recent moveon.org ad, or is it just me? :)
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Sure sarc
September 17, 2007 - 00:27 ET by SportPoliticsDon't forget to erase your tag sig next time.
lol - burned again ! toke one for the gipper !
Huh??
September 17, 2007 - 00:28 ET by sarcasmoWhat are YOU on??? Pills?
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
sarc
September 17, 2007 - 00:45 ET by SportPoliticsNo, nothing actually, sorry. I had a non diet Pepsi a bit ago, so sugar and caffiene. You can count 2 generic tylenol about 2 or 3 weeks ago, and an occassional maalox if I have a nasty cup of coffee. Other than that, my bloodstream has been clear for decades my friend. You ought to try it sometime. No operations ever, no health issues, no nothin. Nothin. I guess novacaine at the dentist five years ago was the last controlled substance. I'm a freaking ROCK my friend.
How about you ? How high are ya ? Aww, who cares. I don't.
Try it sometime?? Huh???
September 17, 2007 - 01:06 ET by sarcasmoI'm on nothing but a pair of good beers right now! And for one who constantly BS-accuses me of the opposite, you sure have a funny way of showing you supposedly don't care what I do!
Situation: Normal, your words now belie your previous recent accusations, so you're still unintentionally-amusing. And the part of you that's a rock needs to learn sometime about the importance of telling the truth about me. Try it sometime.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Did you HAVE to bring up
September 17, 2007 - 01:12 ET by RESTLESS 1Did you HAVE to bring up beer? Sigh, going to the fridge now.
Hey your the one who whines sarc
September 17, 2007 - 01:57 ET by SportPoliticsLike yesterday when, or even today if it was, "drug warriors like you".
So you're only drunk. I guess somehow that ...lol- roflmao.
Then when I rip your lie apart with your own sig, and tell ya to celebrate with your doobie, you get all touchy.
Let's face it, when you put up your kookball legalize it cops video a year ago, I outlined all the dozens of lies in it by the (ex)cops themselves. I'm sure that still burns you.
I've told you a single thing on your legalization complex - get a simple easy to do field test on the dope of your choice, then legalization can occur. That's why we've got legal alcohol - they've got a simple way of indicating intoxication, scientifically verified. I'm sure you had a fit when cops had breathalizers built into their hand held flashlights.
I expect some group who demands less government and supports individual exceptionalsim to come up with the potalizer and the cocalizer, and whatever else you goofballs need ( the methalizer?)to be even remotely capable of having a chance of implementing.
I guess " High Times" and all the rest of you are too stoned (or drunk) off your gourds to do it. I have absolutely no "sorrow" for you until you fools produce the minimum science neccessary - an equivalent of the breathalizer.
You'd be wise to listen, and realize how pathetic the movement will be until it happens.
Uh, nope-again...
September 17, 2007 - 06:40 ET by sarcasmo2 beers doesn't render an over 200 pound like me "drunk." It just gives you a slightly-better chance in the argument you'll still lose. Tell me how I'm wrong if you think so, but I can even play both sides of this one for the crowd and save you some typing. Our arguments generally go like this:
Me: "This doesn't seem like a good way to spend $5 Billion (that's thousand-million) dollars of taxes, does it? The blow's now PURER and CHEAPER than before despite inflation, and corruption's still rampant because of the tax and spend drugwar both internationally & here!"
You: "Duh, you smoke pot!!!" (Ok, I'll admit, I tossed in the "duh," but it seems to fit your "argument" all-too well!)
It's called ad hominem, and it's a way to flunk any halfway-decent debate class around me (just like blatant rudeness, come to think of it!) because like it or not I'm not the topic of that conversation; failed, stupid-ass, tax-wasting policies drug warriors like you support despite facts such as my link cited above are. And note, in the link it's a REPUBLICAN Senator (or at least RINO!) who is accusing the Bush administration of spinning drugwar numbers.
How 'bout let's change the tune and start discussing the issue, instead of eachother? I'll quit with the "duh" if you quit with the BS-accusations -- which ruin your credibility, anyway. Deal?
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Discussing the issue
September 17, 2007 - 20:44 ET by SportPoliticsBut you do your own change of topic since you're slayed every single time.
Read it:
I've told you a single thing on your legalization complex - get a simple easy to do field test on the dope of your choice, then legalization can occur. That's why we've got legal alcohol - they've got a simple way of indicating intoxication, scientifically verified. I'm sure you had a fit when cops had breathalizers built into their hand held flashlights.
I expect some group who demands less government and supports individual exceptionalsim to come up with the potalizer and the cocalizer, and whatever else you goofballs need ( the methalizer?)to be even remotely capable of having a chance of implementing.
I guess " High Times" and all the rest of you are too stoned (or drunk) off your gourds to do it. I have absolutely no "sorrow" for you until you fools produce the minimum science neccessary - an equivalent of the breathalizer.
You'd be wise to listen, and realize how pathetic the movement will be until it happens
"That's why we've got legal alcohol"
September 20, 2007 - 07:43 ET by sarcasmoOnce again you lose the debate, because once-again you're historically full of BS. Control-freakery and drug tests (Carter's Drug Czar" Carlton Turner didn't end up on the board of a pee test company by accident!) have not stopped the growth of government in this area. ONLY a fiscal crisis will do that, as history shows, but your spenders and the Democrat spenders are workin' toward fiscal collapse, so thanks!
Face it, my comment above may be a parody of you, but it NAILED your favorite 'argument' here perfectly, to the point that you fell into the same ad hominem again in your reply. :) And no, I don't care and therefore didn't have any fit about breathalyzers in flashlights, so you're batting 0.0000 again. Thanks for playing.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Oh the poor accused Ron Paul
September 17, 2007 - 02:19 ET by SportPoliticsHoward Kurtz WaPo
" Gibson is right that the debates are absurdly early, but they are, undeniably in my view, making news, and shaping initial impressions -- even if it's just among the politically attuned -- of the candidates.
The biggest moment by far, even bigger than McCain essentially calling Mitt a flip-flopper, was Rudy smacking down Ron Paul.
The good news: Giuliani went on the offensive on his signature issue, 9/11, and got everyone buzzing.
The bad news: He was beating up a guy no one had ever heard of.
In fact, Congressman Paul may get more of a bump out of this than America's mayor. The exchange must have lifted him to at least 1 percent name recognition.
In our soundbite-driven, YouTube world, what may matter most is that Giuliani seized the moment with a Reaganesque "I paid for this microphone, Mr. Breen!"
Cheer up stumpy, if it wasn't for the real winner Rudy, noone would know who R.l.P. is.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/05/17/BL2006051700448_pf.html
So THAT's why
September 17, 2007 - 06:44 ET by sarcasmoThe former HEAD OF THE CIA'S Bin Laden unit participated in the "educating Rudy" press conference the next day? Yeah, sure, quite the smackdown...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
RuPoo stupid again sarc
September 17, 2007 - 07:21 ET by SportPolitics" It's like saying I'm blaming the murder or the rape victim.One always tries to find motives in a crime."
Uh, yes, it is frankly. You claim the murder or the rape victim(NYC USA) did thus and such (foreign policy) which caused the murderer or rapist to murder or rape. You have suggested, even demanded, the USA change it's behavior so it doesn't get raped or murdered anymore.
Yes, but somehow RuPoo, you forgot even that in your simpleton assessment covered in a lie.
Should I even watch anymore sparky ? How many more utter stupidities will I have to bear ? Be a man RuPoo , not a lying mousegirl.
So the CIA and the 9/11 report are wrong?
September 17, 2007 - 08:49 ET by sarcasmoWow. That's news to me.
And like it or not, Dr. Ron Paul didn't invent the term "blowback," but it's a term we see a lot lately for a reason. And I love how you manage to defend Bill Clinton's very provocative 8 years of failed foreign policy here, which was Bin Laden & Al Qaeda's best recruiting-tool until Bush gave 'em the Iraq War...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
You put up a video sarc
September 17, 2007 - 20:50 ET by SportPoliticsAnd the idiot Ron Paul made a gigantic mistake by 2:14 into it.
I pointed out that gigantic mistake.
That's what happened, not your fantasy.
You've been defeated again by your own stupid linked youtube video.
Druge dealers and their associate criminals "blowback" on the cops as well. Something you morons haven't figured out yet. I see your problem, though, and why you think binny isn't a criminal.
Sure glad this thread didn't
September 19, 2007 - 00:07 ET by RESTLESS 1Sure glad this thread didn't get derailed.
LMAO, someone complaining
September 17, 2007 - 15:19 ET by DontTreadOnMeLMAO, someone complaining about maturity who goes around calling the candidate "Rude Rudy"
Way to practice what you preach their Rev. Sarc. How long did it take you to come up with that clever nickname for Rudy?
Oh, wait, Ive got one for Ron Paul,,, how bout Racist Ron!
There ya go, that fits a whole lot better than Rude on Rudy.
I'm not the candidate...
September 20, 2007 - 07:47 ET by sarcasmoAnd you need to face it. Like it or not, Rude Rudy's tactics would lose any highschool debate, period. And you don't have any proof of the racism charge, but since you're preachin' at me, too, perhaps you should consider some practicin' yourself?? At least Rudey's rudeness is provable on video. Give me video/audio/text to prove your allegation, or slink.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
Clarify?
September 23, 2007 - 18:45 ET by UnsaneLike it or not, sarc, he seems to have a very severe problem with Israel. Since you are his biggest disciple, perhaps you can clarify for the rest of us his thoughts on Israel. I, for one, wholeheartedly support them, as I see them being to the Middle East what West Berlin was to the Eastern Bloc.
WWPD?
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
we're on the same wave
September 17, 2007 - 00:25 ET by Conservative Voicewe're on the same wave length :)
Semantics
September 17, 2007 - 00:17 ET by RESTLESS 1Sarc, as you stated above, the headline says Rudy demanded. The article, however, (bias anyone?) says he simply "asked". That should be the end of the debate right there. If indeed Rudy simply asked the NYT for the discount, then this whole argument is irrelevant, as he was not claiming any "property rights" of the NYT as his.
Exactly-right.
September 17, 2007 - 00:20 ET by sarcasmoIt's quite possible we're seeing headline-writer bias here, which is why I said what I said the way I said it, but needless to say, I stand by ALL my words again.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.