"Screw Folks' Constitution Rights" politician!

According to this video, this politician who says "screw folks' constitutional rights" received ZERO coverage from the mainstream - lame stream media.

Pope Benedict's Unidentified German Jumper

Three days after a man jumped the Pope's "Popemobile", there are over 800 news articles.

Yet I can not find "who" or "why": aka the jumper's identity, nor the reason for why he did it.

All I can find are various Vatican supplied references to this man being "deranged" or "insane", but no name or anything to back up such Vatican claims.

The man was a 27-year-old German who showed signs of ''mental imbalance,'' said the Rev Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman.

''His aim was not an attempt on the pope's life but to attract attention to himself,'' Lombardi told reporters.

The man, whom Lombardi declined to identify, was interrogated by Vatican police and then taken to a hospital for psychiatric treatment, he said.

OK. But what about some basic information, such as his name?

Should not this information be included?

What are they so afraid of?

What might be this unidentified man's political cause?
Perhaps a righteous cause that is continually blacked out by our apostate-controlled media?!

Who knows?

Again, why would the Vatican fear revealing the man's identity, let alone his cause?

Inquiring minds would like to know.

Ron Paul, Alberto Gonzales and The New York Times

Good coverage of the domestic surveillance scandal.

Excellent editorials about the domestic surveillance scandal.

But terrible coverage -- from such a supposed perspective of concern over the mis use of domestic surveillance -- of the campaign for the 2008 U.S. President. Considering their news coverage of the issue of domestic surveillance, where's its discussion as a campaign issue?

And what about their terrible coverage of the likeliest candidate to be pro civil liberties: Ron Paul? From their editorials, one would suppose that the New York Times would give an in depth reporting on this as a campaign issue, including with articles on Ron Paul's positions. Yet so far they have not.

People need to ask why the supposedly liberal New York Times about their appalling lack of coverage of domestic surveillance as an issue for the election of the next U.S. President; instead they promote the distraction of the idea that the problem is primarily one man -- U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales -- and not something far larger that has subverted the U.S. Constitution.

FOX Poll: Ron Paul at 30%, Romney 26%, Giuliani 16%

I saw these figures just now on FOX television, along with the pundents expressing their allegiance to the criminal shadow government by declaring something negative about Ron Paul.

Do they realize how they are ultimately damaging their credibility -- and that of the lamestream media -- to a growing percentage of the U.S. population?

ABC/MYSPACE Censorship of Ron Paul Cries Out for Scrutiny of Media Conspiracy

A review of the ownership and the persons in positions within such lamestream media entities involved with the censorship and marginalization of Ron Paul and his supporters, is critical to a better understanding of the criminal shadow government that we the people have allowed to run this country.

That we have allowed such a criminal entity to run things is better spotlighted by the obvious coordination amongst the lamesteam media. This is what I encountered last year with domestic surveillance being used against me, in violation of the 1st and 4th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, for writing about a story they refused to report on the desecration of the Nation's Capital, Washington, D.C.

Ron Paul #1 Technorati Search

He gets more search engine requests then even a Paris Hilton facing jail!

Top Searches

1. ron paul
2. youtube
3. myspace
4. galilea montijo
5. sarkozy
6. paris hilton
7. joost
8. web 2.0
9. michael buble
10. lileks

More in popular »

Evidence of Lamestream Media Conspiracy to Ignore Ron Paul

Such a degree of coordination amongst the lamesteam media reminds me of how they ignored the desecration of the Nation's Capital, Washington, D.C. that I dared to write about.

The following is from http://www.stateofbrain.com/ronpaul.php

Mainstream Media - Crime In Progress

The 2008 elections for the President of the United States of America is fast approaching. One of the greatest countries in the world is going to elect their leader. However, three news agencies are interfering with this election by deceiving their viewers ever so lightly. It is nothing short of a crime though for a news agency to purposely deny coverage to a presidential candidate based on the networks' agenda. They should report a United States Presidential Election fairly and without bias. The following photos and descriptions are evidence of how Republican candidate Ron Paul has been censored by three large online news providers.


Guilty Party #1 - MSNBC.com - via: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18421356



Take a look at the image. Why would MSNBC.com not link to Ron Paul's profile in the bottom right hand box labeled "Picking the Presidents". He does have the highest approval rating at 40% on their own poll. Instead they write zero articles about him and declare Romney the Conservative's choice. You sure that wasn't your choice MSNBC?


Guilty Party #2 - Yahoo.com - via: http://news.yahoo.com/fc/US/Presidential_Election_2008



Yahoo.com just flat out lies here. First, they call their election section "Full Coverage" and then provide you a link to see "All Republican Candidates". The second photo shows this page, except once again there are no links to Ron Paul's web profile to be found. He didn't make Yahoo's top six that they pulled out of thin air and he isn't in the pull down tabs in the sidebar either. Nice "Full Coverage" Yahoo.


Guilty Party #3 - ABCnews.com - via: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/BeSeenBeHeard/popup?id=3135373 (This poll now includes Ron Paul)



ABCnews.com decided that they would have a poll as well, they just happened to leave one guy out of their poll. Any guesses...?

People realized Ron Paul was missing, and contacted ABC via email and phone. The poll was left sans Ron Paul for over 36 hours after the debate despite email and complaints in that time period. The screenshot was taken May 5th and they finally fixed the poll later that evening.

I personally called MSNBC.com and talked to a website news employee who knew the status of the situation. I asked if he would put Ron Paul in the poll so I could vote for him and I quote his response, he said "We'll see." What are you going to do, debate if you should include him? MSNBC also decided to delete the comments asking why he was not included in their comments sections. Way to censor not only Ron Paul, but your registered users as well.

News agencies, your job is to report the news, not decide the news. Ask yourself, is this kind of reporting fair and trustworthy?

It is so fitting that in the debate Ron Paul was asked if he trusts the mainstream media and he responded "I trust the internet a lot more..." I don't think I could of said it better myself.

Lamestream Media Marginalizes Ron Paul

Ron Paul wins the polls but the lamestream media apparently could not care less. How much more obvious must it be to realize the DEGREE to which our lamestream media is centrally controlled by the treasonous.

It's interesting how the lamestream media fawns over the other candidates which say about nothing about the threat of domestic surveillance being abused for political purposes to undermine the 1st amendment guarantees of free speech and against the establishment of a theocratic state which gets away with desecrating the planning of Washington, D.C.

From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TruthAGAINSTtradition/message/50600

The conspiracy to ignore and marginalize presidential candidate Ron Paul is not a theory. In this case, a jury would have to conclude a conspiracy against Dr. Paul by the corporation- controlled media exists.

First, MSNBC reported that Ron Paul scored the highest positive votes in both Republican debates he attended. That means he beat out Romney, McCain and Giuliani. There was no mention of these poll results in the major media.

Dick Morris, political pundit and former Clinton buddy, wrote an opinion piece that appeared in many media publications 5/7/07, in which he claimed John McCain had won the debate, and I could find nowhere in his piece that Ron Paul had even attended.

CNN's Glenn Beck, an alleged conservative (my fanny) ran a tiny clip on his show that tried to make Ron Paul look like a blithering idiot. He then went on to ask, "How did this guy get in the debate at all"?
Even WorldNetDaily, a prominent, conservative Internet news provider, has largely ignored Ron Paul's candidacy.

When a candidate wins two debate polls in a row that are reported by the likes of MSNBC on its own web page, that is news, especially since the winner of both polls allegedly had no chance to win the nomination. The media normally jumps on that kind of news, because people in America love underdogs, but not this time. No, this is a concerted effort.

Please review below what Representative Ron Paul stands for, and far more importantly, what he has done. Among other things, Ron Paul is the only congressmen who got up and demanded Congress declare war before attacking Iraq.

Carl F. Worden

About Ron

Brief Overview of Congressman Paul's Record

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.

He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.

Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) is the leading advocate for freedom in our nation's capital. As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dr. Paul tirelessly works for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies. He is known among his congressional colleagues and his constituents for his consistent voting record. Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution. In the words of former Treasury Secretary William Simon, Dr. Paul is the "one exception to the Gang of 535" on Capitol Hill.

Ron Paul was born and raised in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He graduated from Gettysburg College and the Duke University School of Medicine, before proudly serving as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force during the 1960s. He and his wife Carol moved to Texas in 1968, where he began his medical practice in Brazoria County. As a specialist in obstetrics/gynecolo gy, Dr. Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He and Carol, who reside in Lake Jackson, Texas, are the proud parents of five children and have 17 grandchildren.

While serving in Congress during the late 1970s and early 1980s, Dr. Paul's limited-government ideals were not popular in Washington. In 1976, he was one of only four Republican congressmen to endorse Ronald Reagan for president.

During that time, Congressman Paul served on the House Banking committee, where he was a strong advocate for sound monetary policy and an outspoken critic of the Federal Reserve's inflationary measures. He was an unwavering advocate of pro-life and pro-family values. Dr. Paul consistently voted to lower or abolish federal taxes, spending and regulation, and used his House seat to actively promote the return of government to its proper constitutional levels. In 1984, he voluntarily relinquished his House seat and returned to his medical practice.

Dr. Paul returned to Congress in 1997 to represent the 14th congressional district of Texas. He presently serves on the House Committee on Financial Services and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. He continues to advocate a dramatic reduction in the size of the federal government and a return to constitutional principles.

Congressman Paul's consistent voting record prompted one of his congressional colleagues to say, "Ron Paul personifies the Founding Fathers' ideal of the citizen-statesman. He makes it clear that his principles will never be compromised, and they never are." Another colleague observed, "There are few people in public life who, through thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles. Ron Paul is one of those few."

May 05, 2007 Ron Paul Wins MSNBC Debate Poll
Highest Positive, Lowest Negative
In the MSNBC.com rating window of 72,419 votes at 8:10 PM EDT, Friday, May 4, Ron Paul not only had the highest positive rating:
32% Paul
30% Romney
26% Giuliani
21% McCain
14% Huckabee
9% Brownback
9% Tancredo
8% Hunter
8% Thompson
6% Gilmore

...but he also had the lowest negative rating:

29% Paul
35% Romney
37% Huckabee
40% Giuliani
42% McCain
43% Gilmore
43% Hunter
45% Thompson
45% Tancredo
46% Brownback
Posted on May 05, 2007 at 10:57 AM | Permalink

May 04, 2007
Press Release
Ron Paul Wins MSNBC Debate Poll
Ron Paul steps into national spotlight
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

May 4, 2007
ARLINGTON, VA - Congressman Ron Paul finished first in the MSNBC poll following the GOP primary debate last night held at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California. Dr. Paul received 43 percent, beating the second-place finisher by five points, and crushing the rest of the field.

"Last night, Americans met Ron Paul and loved what they heard," said Ron Paul 2008 campaign chairman Kent Snyder. "Dr. Paul's message of freedom and limited government resonates with Republicans hungry for a return to their party's core values."

"Ron Paul is the only true conservative in the GOP race. Americans saw that last night," continued Snyder. "The campaign looks forward to further debates and opportunities so even more Americans will discover Dr. Paul's message of freedom, peace and prosperity."

The Total Lack of Media Coverage of this Church-Mall conflict

This blogger can’t find a single mass media news report of anything regarding a possible opposition by Roman Catholic Church officials to moving St. Vincent de Paul Church, nor a decision to accede to such a position.

All of the newspaper reports about the South Capitol Street re-development somehow get around even mentioning St. Vincent de Paul Church despite it being by far that corridor’s nicest building. Remarkably this includes both The Washington Post and The Washington Times.

This lack of media coverage differs from previous such instances of conflicts which the newspapers did report. I found these examples in my work as public internet historian of Washington, D.C.’s un-built highways as creator of the Takoma Park Highway Design Studio web site at http://www.HighwaysAndCommuities.com.

Two such examples involve different segments of I-95 through Washington, D.C.: its northernmost segment from the 1960 engineering study’s proposed route through Catholic Sisters College, and the downtown Center Leg’s routing north of K Street in the vicinity of New Jersey and New York Avenue, re-designed with a tunneled curve to the northwest to avoid the Bibleway Church.

1960 I-95 Northeast Freeway at Catholic Sisters

I-95 (I-395) curve to avoid Bibleway Church

Although I could easily see this reason for this curve, I found newspaper accounts of public pleas from named people at Bibleway Church confirming his, as I did with that regarding Catholic Sisters College. Both The Washington Post and The Washington Star (which ended publication in 1981, one year prior to the 1982 introduction of The Washington Times) did their expected jobs, unlike later with the non-reporting of the South Capitol Mall, its opposition and demise.