Des Moines Register EXCLUDES PAUL

Lets put a one page ad in this newspaper on the same day all about Dr Paul and what he stands for. That will get them. Don't get tough get even.

My e-mail to them, and below that their reply.

On 12/2/07 4:50 PM, "Glen" wrote:

Truly un-democratic not to include Dr. Paul.
Always some lame excuse to not include Dr. Paul.
Dig your moat deep and wide around your Ivory Tower cause we're coming to get ya with our votes and delegates.

Glen

-------------------------------------------
Just acknowledging I have received and read your message.
The decision turned largely on time spent in Iowa.
Do realize that the package prompting your e-mail didn't appear on a news page; it's editorial commentary, where we do make judgments.
Dr. Paul has received significant news coverage in the Register.

C'mon people. Speak out against this blatant disregard for "civil liberties"!

After reading your highly engaging editorial post regarding civil liberties, I was immediately taken aback from your (or your boards) collective decision on excluding Ron Paul from a potential profile page. I was intrigued as to why such a decision was taken in the first place, especially given the fact that Ron Paul not only has enjoyed the highest fourth quarter contributions (monetary value) but also has sign a significant rise in support in both polls and the Iowa Caucuses. Much to my chagrin, the readers were given the rationalization that the reason some candidates were omitted was owing to the fact that Ron Paul did not make as many appearances in Iowa as the other candidates.

This is severely problematic. While I do concede that Ron Paul may have made the least amount of campaign stops in Iowa, the very fact that he is ahead in the polls (notwithstanding yours as well) of those who have committed more time in Iowa (read Tancredo, McCain) is a testament to the fact that his influence and vision is real. Also, to base your decision on the "magnitude" rather than the "quality" of campaigning in Iowa is a gross oversight and a profound oversimplification of what is at stake.

More importantly, its is beneficial for your newspaper and the residents of Iowa to entertain and reflect on a contrasting view that Ron Paul so eloquently provides, something clearly lacking in some of the other candidates you decided to profile.
Please reconsider this decision and kindly give this man the time and attention he so rightly deserves. To do so otherwise would be a travesty.

Regards,
(name)
Seattle.

Here's an email I just dashed off to the paper:

To: Carol Hunter - Des Moines Register, Editorial Page Editor

Dear Carol,

I heard online today that you intend to exclude Ron Paul from your month-long examination of 6 Democratic and 6 Republican Presidential Candidates. If that is true, please consider the following:

You must have dug pretty deep in the list of criteria to come up with an excuse for eliminating Ron Paul.

1) Money raised? Nope, can't eliminate him based on that! He's raised going on $20 million this year!

2) Ranking in the polls? He's 4th or 5th in both Iowa and New Hampshire and steadily moving up! Tied with McCain in one and ahead of Thompson in the other.

3) Number of volunteers throughout the country, including Iowa? Heck no, he's #1 in that department with nearly 100,000!

4) Service in our military? Naw, I guess even a Vietnam-era Air Force Flight Surgeon qualifies!

5) Attendance at his rallies? Can't use this one. 5,000 people in Philly and at least several hundred to a few thousand at most others keeps him in the mix in this category!

6) New media popularity? Get real! He's #1 on internet support and Google searches and #1 in almost every new media poll.

7) Experience and service to our country? Elected to Congress 10 times should qualify him in this department.

8) Visits to Iowa? Hey boss! I found a way we can keep Ron Paul on the outside looking in! He's only been able to find Iowa 17 times this year! (How about making the criteria the number of visits to Washington DC since that's where the action really is. In that category Ron Paul is probably #1 also.)

You call yourself a journalist? You're a joke! Ron Paul was Front Page above the fold in yesterday's Los Angeles Times. And it was objective, fair, almost complimentary article.

Have fun with your little paper.....

I was very dissapointed in your choice to exclude Ron Paul. Your paper has lost money because of this and we will gain more momentum because of it. Hopefully next time you will learn from this and embrace the revolution.
Troy Molde

Irritating, but as long as Thompson is excluded (as per their "top 6" criteria), then I won't get too steamed over it.

Besides, Iowa is a big-government subsidies state. They are a lost cause.

The fact that they included McCain, who has come out against subsidies, seems to suggest that they are applying their own criteria evenly.

---Signature---
Liberals want to be your Mommy. Conservatives want to be your Daddy. Libertarians want to treat you like an adult.
---
Stop the Thought Crimes Act (H.R. 1955) with one click: http://capwiz.com/jbs/issues/alert/?alertid=10528846

The farmers have kids too.

These "reasons" of the number of times a candidate has visited the State are a meaningless criteria for their qualification to be President of the USA. The only thing the number of visits represents is the amount of cash spent. The register, by making this the bar to be included is essentially saying that the viability of the Candidate is irrelevant. Hence Tancreado is included. So it appears that although Iowa professes to have active, engaged and educated voters, it really is all about the MONEY! Excluding a candidate who is leading in polls and fund raising in favor of the absolute bottom of the pile shows that maybe Michigan, South Carolina, Florida, etc are right in challenging their First in Nation position. They obviously don't deserve it anymore.

Dear Ms. Hunter,

I'm sure you have already received numerous e-mails about this subject, but I just thought I'd add my two cents, since I also have an opinion.

When you listed the 8 issues that will be addressed, you said, "It's appropriate to start with civil liberties." With that in mind, I can only come to two possible conclusions.
1) Your editorial board is completely ignorant about what the candidates believe or 2) you board has chosen to be in opposition to civil liberties.

You have chosen to exclude Congressman Ron Paul even though he has proven time and again to be the most ardent supporter of civil liberties for ALL people. This type of exclusion is not only unacceptable, it makes your entire editorial board look like a bunch of uneducated fools to anyone who has actually studied the beliefs and records of the candidates. Since I seriously doubt that your newspaper would hire people that ignorant, I have no choice but to believe that you are in favor of taking away our civil liberties.

It's time to stop the propaganda and start making honest choices, even in your "opinions" section. Just because it's an "opinion" section does not excuse blatant misinformation.

The fact that Dr. Paul has made so few visits to your state (in your opinion), and yet continues to rise in the polls, should be a sign that you are obviously missing something that thousands of others are seeing. I'll give you a hint: It starts with "L" and ends with "berty." I think you can fill in the last letter. When you talk about civil liberties being the most important issue and then ignore the one candidate who is defending them, you show yourself to be ignorant at best.

I would strongly suggest that you review ALL of the viable candidates, and let the people make up their own minds rather than trying to influence them to choose your preferences.

Sincerely,

(My Name)

that Ron Paul is at 29% and that Huckster is at 7% these self proclaimed political masterminds would do anything to make sure Dr. Paul is always down at the bottom.

There poll reminds me of Texas when 100's of Ron Paul supporters were turned away from voting and also that Ron Paul supporters voted with a pencil of which can be erased instead of a PEN.

Polls are a joke and I believe the American people are seeing right thru them.

GO DR.NO GO !!!!!!!!

Remember, this is the same paper that covered a Ron Paul speech at Iowa State University that had to be moved to a bigger location because of the crowd, in which he dealt with foreign policy, monetary policy, immigration and infrastructure with an article titled Paul says he wouldn't make run as independent.