Ron Paul

In a Thursday morning post setting the table for last night’s Republican presidential debate in Orlando, New York Times chief “Caucus” blog reporter Michael Shear became the latest Timesman to falsely finger the Tea Party audience at a CNN debate last week as cheering on the prospect of letting a hypothetical man die for lack of health insurance.

Shear listed six things to watch for in Orlando last night. The last item:

During a prerecorded commentary on CBS Sunday Morning, left-wing CBS commentator Nancy Giles complained about the "bloodlust" of GOP audience members who applauded Texas's use of capital punishment at the recent MSNBC debate and a small number of audience members who applauded at Monday's CNN debate after moderator Wolf Blitzer asked if someone who chose not to purchase insurance should be allowed to die.

CBS played a clip of the exchanges but notably left out Rep. Ron Paul's answer to Blitzer's question as he argued that organizations like churches used to help provide health care before Medicaid existed, leaving Giles to give the impression that Rep. Paul had been unconcerned about the uninsured dying. Giles:

It sure didn't take HBO's Bill Maher long to make his first hateful remark about the religious right.

Roughly one minute into his opening monologue on Friday's "Real Time" the host said, "In today's Republican Party there's a term for people who hate charity and love killing - Christian" (video follows with transcript and commentary):

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough on Friday said the people in the audience at Monday's Republican presidential debate were "applauding the death of a young man without health insurance" and therefore were like the John Birchers "that Bill Buckley kicked out of the conservative movement in the mid-1960s."

Unfortunately, the host of "Morning Joe" has, like so many others in the media, badly misinterpreted what occurred when Texas Congressman Ron Paul was asked what should happen to a voluntarily uninsured man who falls into a coma (video follows with transcript and commentary):

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman just can't stop offending of late. Krugman confounded even liberals with his ill-timed blog post on the morning of September 11 decrying President George W. Bush and New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani as “fake heroes” in the aftermath of the World Trade Center attacks. In his Friday column “Free To Die,” he suggested Republicans would prefer people die for lack of health insurance, using as evidence the dubious claim that the audience watching CNN’s Republican debate “erupted with cheers” at the prospect of a (hypothetical) man dying for being unable to afford intensive care. Has Krugman actually watched the clip?

Back in 1980, just as America was making its political turn to the right, Milton Friedman lent his voice to the change with the famous TV series “Free to Choose.” In episode after episode, the genial economist identified laissez-faire economics with personal choice and empowerment, an upbeat vision that would be echoed and amplified by Ronald Reagan.

But that was then. Today, “free to choose” has become “free to die.”

“NBC Nightly News” is the highest-rated daily news show in the morning or evening. In mid-August, this show had been ranked number one for 100 straight weeks, pulling an average of 7.7 million viewers. This makes Brian Williams the king of the TV-news hill. To be sure, it’s obviously a smaller hill than the Walter Cronkite era, but in political terms, Williams, like Cronkite, is E.F. Hutton. His newscast can set the tone across the rest of the  “news” media.

But all that royalty evaporates in the presence of Barack Obama. The contrast was jaw-dropping between Williams roaring like a lion against Obama’s Republican challengers at the Reagan Library on September 7, and then bowing gently like a lamb at the White House three days later.

Rachel Rose Hartman's Tuesday item for Yahoo! News's "The Ticket" blog carried a misleading headline ("Audience at tea party debate cheers leaving uninsured to die") implying that the majority, if not all, of the audience at Monday's GOP presidential debate thought that the critically injured who are uninsured should be left to die. In reality, only a handful cheered and/or laughed in response to Wolf Blitzer's question.

Despite this headline, Hartman did acknowledge in her lede that "if you're uninsured and on the brink of death, that's apparently a laughing matter to some audience members at last night's tea party [sic] Republican presidential debate." She then recounted how Blitzer, who moderated the joint debate with the Tea Party Express organization, turned to Rep. Ron Paul and "asked a hypothetical question...about how society should respond if a healthy 30-year-old man who decided against buying health insurance suddenly goes into a coma and requires intensive care for six months."

Exactly how do anchors on MSNBC get away with routinely stating complete falsehoods without any repercussions?

On Tuesday, Chris Matthews wrongly accused Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul of saying during the previous evening's debate he would let a critically ill person die if the patient didn't have health insurance (video follows with transcript and commentary, file photo):

CNN anchor Kyra Phillips asked her "Political Buzz" panel Monday if GOP candidates Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann are "ready for the big office" given their unusual views.

"Ron Paul saying that we should get rid of FEMA. Michele Bachmann says the storm and earthquake are signs from God," stated Phillips. "Okay guys, are these candidates ready for the big office?"

[Video below the break.]

In two separate interviews of Republican presidential candidates, CNN's Piers Morgan exhibited an obvious contempt of Tea Party politics as well as a double standard toward moderate and conservative presidential candidates.

In Monday's interview with Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, CNN's Piers Morgan baited the moderate candidate to criticize the Tea Party for its unwavering defense of its principles. In contrast, Morgan used the same rhetoric the week before to put Tea Party champion Ron Paul on the defensive.

[Video below the break.]

Contrary to the media myth that none of the Republican presidential candidates can beat President Obama next fall, a new Gallup poll suggests that the top four GOP candidates would actually all have close races with Obama if the election were held today.

Mitt Romney polled 2% above Obama, 48% to 46%, Rick Perry was tied with Obama, at 47%, Ron Paul lagged polled 2% below Obama, 45% to 47%, and Michele Bachmann polled 4% below Obama, 44% to 48%. What do you think of the latest poll results? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

It might not be surprising to see someone sit in the rarefied liberal air of a PBS set and dismiss the undignified palaver of talk radio and Ann Coulter, but on Friday's PBS NewsHour, this line was coming from former Bush speechwriting chief Michael Gerson, and the target was Gov. Rick Perry.

Gerson and liberal Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus were sitting in for David Brooks and Mark Shields. (In other words, Gerson was in the "I agree with Mark" chair.) Both agreed that Perry really gaffed in suggesting Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke was "treasonous" if he shoveled more dollars into the economy before the election:

Editor's Note: What follows is NewsBusters publisher Brent Bozell's thoughts on who won, who lost, and who should just pack it all in following last night's Republican presidential debate in Ames, Iowa.

Gingrich: The winner. Wasn't even close. Showed why Obama would pee in his pants having to debate this man.

Santorum: Also a winner. Showed most passion, and took on and beat up other candidates. But was it enough to keep him alive?

Last night, nine Republicans and five Democrats broke with their parties on the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act, which would require a balanced budget amendment if the debt ceiling were to be raised. Two of the Republicans who voted against it were presidential hopefuls: Rep. Michele Bachmann (Minn.) and Rep. Ron Paul (Texas), both of whom believe the act doesn't goes far enough.

Bachmann instead offered her own version of the act which would include a repeal of ObamaCare, while Paul argued for even greater cuts to entitlement and military spending. Check out what they had to say after the break, and let us know if you think this will bode well for their 2012 campaigns in the comments.

In a feature entitled "Don’t Know Much About History: Epically Wrong Politician Accounts of Yesteryear," Time magazine's Swampland blog crew promised to break down "nine egregious examples of the type of revisionist flub you can expect in 2012," starting with Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) arguing John Quincy Adams was a Founding Father.

Time made sure to toss in President Obama and Vice President Biden in the mix, the list was predominantly comprised of Republican 2012 presidential hopefuls. On some counts, Time was spot on, but in others the magazine was either inaccurate, patently unfair in its criticism, or both.

Deriding Sarah Palin for her inartfully-put account of Paul Revere's midnight ride, Time.com echoed MSNBC's Chris Matthews by snarking that she was shoehorning a pro-gun rights talking point into her later explanation of the historical event:

Did New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller really sign on to a proposal by G.O.P. libertarian candidate Ron Paul? Yes, though it had nothing to do with the gold standard, abolishing the Federal Reserve, or lowering taxes, but a possible conservative compromise position on gay marriage which would give Republicans "a chance to avoid being on the wrong side of history."

In the wake of New York State’s vote to allow gay marriage, Executive Editor Bill Keller’s supportive column for the July 3 Sunday magazine, “Solving the G.O.P.’s Gay Marriage Problem,” was rushed up online almost a full week early.

Even before New York passed its law last week, the move toward legalization of same-sex marriage in America had become inexorable. It may feel excruciatingly slow for those who are waiting their turn, but it’s just a matter of time until the country lives up to what it believes.

On Wednesday's All Things Considered, NPR's Ari Shapiro let The Daily Show's John Oliver and The Washington Post's Dana Milbank cast aspersions on some of the declared 2012 Republican presidential candidates and their surrogates. Oliver mocked the talking points of a Ron Paul spokesman as "pointless" and "meaningless," while Milbank derided the candidacy of Herman Cain.

Host Melissa Block introduced Shapiro's report about the White House correspondent's first visit to a post-presidential debate spin room, and gave a hint of its overall mocking tone: "The spin room might be a good name for an amusement park ride or part of a fun house. That makes it a perfect fit for a presidential campaign, which can get a bit wacky even in these early days."

Gallup released a new poll this morning asking who GOP primary voters support sans Huckabee, Trump, and Daniels. And it turns out...the race for the GOP nomination is still very undecided, with almost everyone gaining a little more support. Check out some of the poll's findings below the break and give us your thoughts in the comments.

The depths the shills on the Left will go to impugn their enemies knows no bounds.

On Sunday, the George Soros-funded organization Think Progress falsely accused Congressman Ron Paul (R-Tx.) of comparing Social Security and Medicare to slavery (video follows with transcript and commentary): 

Last year, MSNBC and other so-called "news" outlets mercilessly attacked Kentucky Senatorial candidate Rand Paul for giving an honest libertarian answer to Rachel Maddow concerning the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

On Friday's "Hardball," Chris Matthews tried the same tactic on Paul's father Ron, but the elder Texas Congressman was ready for the question and ended up making the host look rather silly for asking it (video follows with transcript and commentary):

Given the issues Ron Paul speaks out on, it seems likely that subjects such as raising the debt ceiling or taxes would come up as questions for an interview. However, Good Morning America's George Stephanopoulos didn't ask the 2012 Republican presidential candidate a single question on those topics.

Instead, Stephanopoulos pressed Paul on flooding: "Celia from Springfield, Ohio wants to test how just how far your libertarian principles take you. She asks, 'Do you think everyone should just be responsible for themselves and if a flood washes your house away, no FEMA? Sink or swim?"

The host then prompted the Texas Congressman on just why he hasn't bolted the Republican Party: "Why not run as an independent, given your differences with the Republicans on so many issues?" 

On Monday's American Morning, CNN's Kiran Chetry indicated that individual liberty and the pro-life movement weren't compatible. During an interview of Congressman Ron Paul, Chetry stated, "Freedom to make your own decisions...giving people the ability to make their own decisions, and the right to life movement don't always go together."

The anchor interviewed the libertarian-leaning Republican at the bottom of the 6 am Eastern hour. Midway through the interview, Chetry claimed that Paul is "not a huge social conservative," and then asked about his recent speech at CPAC: "This is one of the largest social conservative gatherings and you're a libertarian. What do you think your appeal is among some of the young social conservatives?"

 On ABC’s World News Saturday, correspondent John Hendren filed a report marking this year as the first time since 1947 that no members of the Kennedy family will hold public office in Washington, D.C. The piece began:

JOHN HENDREN: The sun has set on the Kennedy era. When Congress reconvenes next week, it will be the first time in 64 years that there has not been a Kennedy in office.

KATHLEEN KENNEDY TOWNSEND, DAUGHTER OF ROBERT F. KENNEDY: I think it's sad. I think that we need a Kennedy.

Hendren went on to recount the death of former Senator Ted Kennedy, "the Lion of the Senate," and the decision of Rhode Island Representative Patrick Kennedy to retire, as well as the shuffling of office space with the arrival of newly-elected Republicans. The ABC correspondent also noted that Tea Party-backed Rep. Ron Paul and Senator-elect Rand Paul are the only family members serving who will be serving concurrently in Congress.

Hendren concluded by offering a ray of hope for those would like to see the Kennedy family in government again:

On NPR's Morning Edition on Monday, anchor Steve Inskeep welcomed a regular guest, Wall Street Journal economics editor David Wessel (from the liberal news side, not the conservative opinion-page side). The new Congress is already too "shrill" and "ugly" with libertarian argument against Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke's printing money to buy government bonds:

INSKEEP: Rand Paul is a name that got a lot of attention in the election this past Tuesday. He won a Senate seat from Kentucky. But, of course, his father, Ron Paul, ran for president a couple of years back, is still in the House, and it looks like he's going to chair the committee that oversees Ben Bernanke's Fed.

WESSEL: That's right. Ron Paul, who wrote a book called "End the Fed" - so you know what he thinks ought to happen. He'll definitely give Mr. Bernanke a hard time, but he's really seen as something of an outlier. He's a Libertarian. He doesn't believe in paper money. And I don't think many of the other Republicans are quite comfortable with that view. But it will be interesting to have him in the House and his son, a senator from Kentucky, taking a seat that was vacated by another shrill critic of the Fed, Jim Bunning. So, it will be a lot of fireworks there, I'm sure.