Iowa caucus-goers are paying attention to Ron Paul, even if the media won't

Iowa caucus-goers are paying attention to Ron Paul, even if the media won't
Published: Tuesday, November 15, 2011, 10:33 AM     Updated: Tuesday, November 15, 2011, 3:15 PM
By Paul Mulshine/The Star Ledger


Check this poll of likely Iowa caucus attendees. The results amount to a statistical dead heat, but in pure numbers only Herman Cain is ahead of Ron Paul.

And Cain's support is noticeably soft. In all likelihood, he will be a non-factor in the caucuses as voters figure out he is not a serious candidate.

Paul, by comparison, has the most committed supporters in a caucus process in which commitment is the most important value.

Regardless of who wins the caucuses, Paul will be a major factor. That makes it even more inexcusable for the major media to shut him out of the debates.

And then there's the fact that only Paul has a realistic concept of how the U.S. should conduct foreign policy. If you doubt that, read Pat Buchanan's comments on the insane foreign policy espoused by the candidates not named Paul.

In that South Carolina debate, Ron Paul, the one person there proven right on Iraq, was given less than 90 seconds to speak.

Under the Constitution, said Paul, no president has the right to launch an unprovoked attack on Iran without congressional authorization.

Before America goes to war with Iran, let Congress, whose members are forever expressing their love for the Constitution, follow it, and vote on war with Iran. And before we go to the polls in 2012, let's find out if the GOP is becoming again the same old War Party that bankrupted the nation.

And then there's Richard Viguerie's observations on the media's ignroance of the constitutional principles espoused by Paul:

Saturday's CBS/National Journal Republican presidential debate on foreign policy once again showed the limits of the establishment media's grasp of constitutional principles and how the Constitution, as the law that governs government, should instruct our foreign policy.

During the entire event, the questions seemed to assume that the President is unconstrained in his or her ability to act in matters of national security -- and that the role of Commander-in-Chief is tantamount to being a military dictator.

Unfortunately, with the exception of Congressman Ron Paul, the Republican candidates for President generally joined this shallow analysis and skipped-over the Constitution in their answers to the questions raised by their establishment media interrogators.

And while we're on the subject of liberty-loving candidates, just why is Gary Johnson being kept out of debates that are open to such dubious characters as Rick Santorum, Jon Huntsman and Michele Bachmann?

http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2011/11/iowa_caucus-goers_are_paying_a.html