Ron P, Rick S, and Mitt R pick up 6 delegates each in Iowa

Given how the corporate media savaged him for about the past month, as a Ron Paul supporter, I'll take it:

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/IA-R

Rick Perry is probably done. Bachmann got no delegates in her home state and is likewise probably done.

 

I almost puked when that lowlife Santorum almost won yesterday, of all the candidates he is by far the biggest piece of shit out there, and he is basically the definition of a chickenhawk neo con, Mitt may not be my first choice, but atleast if Ron Paul isnt going to win i would prefer that someone who can beat Obama wins.

 

i am hoping paul does well enough in the next few states to give him the courage to run third party.

 

It just goes to show the ridiculous amount of power our corporate media, and specifically Fox News wields. Santorum got the Fox bump just in time for the caucus, and without any time to really have him torn apart.

Let's see what happens in NH because Santorum has no ground game to speak of there.

 

Having Fox News on your side certainly helps



http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/02/taking-to-twitter-murdoch-endorses-santorum/



Taking to Twitter, Murdoch Signals Support for Santorum





The media mogul Rupert Murdoch signaled his support for Rick Santorum on Monday evening, calling him the “only candidate with genuine big vision” for the United States.

His comments were significant not only because Mr. Murdoch controls Fox News Channel and The Wall Street Journal, but also because they were made on Twitter, a Web site that allowed for his support to be forwarded far and wide on the eve of the Iowa caucuses. Mr. Santorum was a paid analyst for Fox News before he announced his bid for the presidency last year.

Mr. Murdoch seemed to stop short of an outright endorsement. “Can’t resist this tweet,” he wrote, “but all Iowans think about Rick Santorum.” It was unclear if he was saying that all Iowa voters are thinking about Mr. Santorum, or should be thinking about him.

Mr. Murdoch started to post on Twitter on Saturday, surprising some of the tens of thousands of people who have followed his account since then. The account, @rupertmurdoch, was labeled as verified by Twitter, a step taken by the company to indicate when celebrities and politicians are the owners of accounts. When asked on Monday if Mr. Murdoch — a computer neophyte — is indeed on Twitter, his top spokeswoman, Teri Everett, said, “Oh, yes.”

One of Mr. Murdoch’s first messages on Twitter praised a Wall Street Journal op-ed by Ron Paul as “great.” “Huge appeal of libertarian message,” he added.

On Sunday, he singled out Mr. Santorum for more specific praise. “Good to see santorum surging in Iowa,” he wrote. “Regardless of policies, all debates showed principles, consistency and humility like no other.”

In the past the editorial pages of The New York Post and, more recently, The Wall Street Journal have been perceived to be Mr. Murdoch’s platforms for supporting (and sometimes punishing) political candidates. Twitter, of course, gives him a new and much more personal forum to do so.

Mr. Murdoch’s arguably most influential media outlet, Fox News, employed Mr. Santorum for years, but suspended him in March when he was considering running for president. The suspension was made permanent in May after Mr. Santorum agreed to attend a Fox-sponsored debate for Republican candidates.

Despite being a former Fox employee, Mr. Santorum has spoken critically of the network a few times, including as recently as Monday morning. Speaking to the radio host Mike Gallagher, Mr. Santorum said the media had “completely tried to shape this race.”

“It’s not just the liberal media, I mean, it’s even Fox News,” Mr. Santorum said, adding, “You know, Bill O’Reilly has refused to put me on his program.”

On his Fox News broadcast on Monday night, Mr. O’Reilly acknowledged Mr. Santorum’s recent rise in the polls and said, “We have invited Rick Santorum to appear on Wednesday.”

 

It didn't seem to help Hilary Clinton. Rupert supported both her and her husband.

 

You know Max, I'm going to disagree with you here. Maybe this will be my new years resolution this year since I couldn't think of one. LOL. I don't agree with Santorum's views, but he is about as far from a POS as I can think of. I actually think he is a pretty decent human being. I don't think he has any chance of winning because of his social views, but I do respect the guy. I think he is a decent person. He is one of the few people, like Paul, that will hold unpopular opinions and will not waiver. He knows his social views will keep him from winning, but I'll bet you a dime to a dollar he won't change them. I respect that.

 

Did you know he was listed as one of the most corrupt politicians back when he was in the Senate?

http://www.citizensforethics.org/in...nual-most-corrupt-members-of-congress-report/

I agree with the fact that he is not afraid to hold unpopular views. For that he gets a gold star.

 

A list with all republicans? LOL. OK, that list has a lot of credibility. DAS, we've had this conversation before. Both Jack Kennedy and Bill Clinton were terribly corrupt and I think both were good Presidents. Corrupt is a pretty ambiguous word these days just as calling Ron Paul a racist because of things that were printed in his newsletter.

 

I agree it is subjective and tbh I am not familiar as to WHY they labeled him as such. In fact, I really don't know much about him at all except that he hates gay people so much that they Google bombed his last name into the word for frothy anal sex juice (eesh).

I shall have to take a closer look because I had pretty much written him off.