Quote:
Originally Posted by tuff bob
what was wrong with the question?
|
There have always been longshots hanging around in presidential races. I've never once seen them disrespected like that. He's a longshot, everybody knows that, Carl Cameron knows it, Paul knows it, the other five know it, you know it and I know it. So, why all of a sudden, after the NH Republican party had to withdraw their support for Fox's last debates for their refusal to let him participate, why does Carl Cameron have to underscore what we already know, the man is a longshot. Ask him about his opinions about the issues, we don't need debate moderators implying that he doesn't even belong there.
I forgot one more incident of Fox's bull****, trying to get him to condemn the 9/11 Truthers. Paul handled it masterfully, he denied belief in the conspiracy theories and then pleaded for and took the opportunity to speak about economic issues, which had been the subject at hand.
Do you care that Fox has been opposing this man's campaign? Is that what you want from a media outlet that professes to help YOU to decide? Can you put your own opinions and preferences on the back burner and look objectively at the issue of fairness? He's a longshot. Why not let the process deal with unpopular candidates? Why accept the heavy hand of Fox tampering with an all important institutional process?