43 votes

Ending the Media Prejudice Against Ron Paul

The 2008 Ron Paul Campaign was effectively sabotaged by media bias.

The 2012 campaign is starting out the same way, with most discussions of GOP candidates simply ignoring Ron Paul.

We must change this. But we can't do it by simply complaining. I think we need to fight back in a way that the media conglomerates will understand. Dollars.

Boycotts4Paul.com allows Ron Paul supporters to report newscasts and shows that fail to fairly cover Ron Paul. Once the shows are identified, their sponsors can be contacted with the promise of a lifetime boycott of their goods and services.

Imagine that you are a sponsor of the CBS Evening News. A story about the GOP field runs ignoring Ron Paul and the next day you receive 1,000 e-mails from Ron Paul supporters who promise to boycott your business for life unless 1) CBS News makes immediate corrections or 2) The advertiser pulls its sponsorship of CBS News. This might be followed up by picketing of businesses that don't see the light.

Most businesses assume that for every complaint they get, there are 10 or even 100 people who haven't written. 1000 emails in a day would set their hair on fire. One reason this tactic can be particularly effective is because most businesses are operating on the razor's edge of ruin as a result of the economic collapse. Even a small change in their gross income can make the difference in success or failure. In other words, we have leverage.

At this point, the web site is up and running - but not all features are implemented.

So what do you think? Would you commit to boycotting sponsors who support biased shows/newscasts? Do you think this is an effective approach? How many emails/letters are you willing to write each week to make this happen? I can imagine other tactics - such as dropping off receipts from competing businesses with a note saying, "I would have spent my money with you, but you support unfairness in campaign reporting". I'm sure the Ron Paul community can come up with even better ideas.

I invite discussion here. And be sure to sign up at http://boycotts4paul.com



At this point, it appears this topic has been fairly thoroughly covered. Many of the recent posts are simply rehashing items already addressed and are generally of the form of:

1) That won't work. (No reason given - just a negative opinion.)
Response: You're entitled to your opinion. Now go away - you're not helping.

2) Media has unlimited money and cannot be hurt by boycotts.
Response: That's why they have entire departments to round up sponsors and why they run so many ads. Because they don't need the revenue.

3) Why don't you do X instead?
Response: Why don't YOU do X? Seriously, if it's such a great idea, go ahead and DO it. We can get hundreds of people to stand around and say, "Somebody ought to do X" and they're collectively not worth the powder to blow them up. You want to count for something? YOU go do something.

4) This is a really great idea! I love it! Let's do it!
Response: Thanks. Just remember to follow through. And tell your friends.

5) I have a question about how this works? or I have an idea to make this even more effective.
Response: GREAT! Please let me know at kurt@boycotts4paul.com I can use all the help I can get!

Any further inputs of types 1-2... Save your virtual ink.
Type 3? Write up all the details of your idea, get people involved and get the project working - on another topic thread.
Type 4-5: Welcome aboard! And THANKS for the help!

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Public Access Channels??

Used to live in Oregon. That cable network had A LOT of PAC's. Maybe if there were shows on Ron Paul & the Constitution that could get time slots, folks would tune in more there than on regular news. Goodness knows, it's alternative media that led to RP & the grassroots R3VOLution.

Obama = O.ne B.ig A.ss M.istake A.merica

Another Great idea...


I've seen this pattern before - In the 2008 campaign. Lots of good ideas that nobody does anything about. This time around, we need to get behind the ideas that are EASY to do and will have a large effect.

You have to picture it from the perspective of an advertiser or a media manager - if they start getting 1000 emails complaining about unfair treatment of a presidential candidate, it's going to get their attention. When sponsors look at 1000 emails and think, "we could be losing business from 10,000 people or more", it will make them think. If we get 10,000 RP supporters sending emails and letters complaining to sponsors and threatening a lifetime boycott, we will get RESULTS.

All it will take to turn the media around is about 20 minutes a week of your time AND you spreading the word to everyone you know.

With the ret of the week - do whatever you want - including making videos to air on public access channels (which would be pretty cool). Heck, you could help out with THIS effort by creating videos of the media reporting unfairly on Ron Paul.

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at

Emailing re: Ron Paul media bias

Many of us are already doing that now - however, it's disjointed and sporadic. I think we'd be more effective if we had a centralized location on this site to post links to offending articles with contact emails plainly posted - folks could go there, and efficiently do their 20 minutes per day emailing.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

We must understand what we are up against

If not we will be surprised and depressed every time this happens.

The reason is very simple; there is a very small elite running and owning the entire world. This may sound unlikely to some but that is a fact that can be proven.

They also own and control all MSM, all main political parties and all main politicians. In fact they control almost everything most people know except very, very little - like Ron and Rand Paul, this site etc.

When one understands this one will know what we are up against and can plan accordingly.

The system cannot be changed by some tactic or strategy or by selecting and supporting one organisation rather than another as all main organisations are controlled by the same controllers. They use these organisations to play us out against each other and waste our time. The two parties are one, all the MSM is one. They just make it look different to mislead us and to keep us divided.

Ron Paul has always said it is about educating the people. Only when the people are educated and understand the message of freedom and liberty can and will the system change.

Go educate people - anywhere and everywhere. We have huge momentum and "traction" to use a good old Greenspan expression. We cannot be stopped if we continue to spread the message. It may take longer than we would like but look at Ron Paul. He has been doing this mostly all alone for decades without tiring.

We have to do it ourselves, educate our neighbour - the MSM will fight us all the way, that is the task they have been given by the controllers. Don't be disappointed, learn to accept the odds we are up against and keep spreading the message everywhere and whenever people will listen.

The blackout from the MSM is a great eyeopener. They cannot be trusted. As long as people trust their TVs we cannot win. Show people why they need to turn off their TV's and make up their own opinions.

Keep up the good work and keep the revolution going!


I think this is a fantastic idea and joined up. I hope you get the needed 1000 people to join because I would love to see the proposed website become a reality.

“I have joined your revolution and I’m proud to be part of what you want to do.” - Ron Paul

1000 People to Change the Face of Politics...

Thanks! The biggest thing we need now is for people to TELL THEIR FRIENDS. Get other people to sign up.

We had a burst of people sign up at first. Then the rate dropped off a bit. Now it's starting to pick up again... no doubt because some of you ARE telling your friends. But we need MORE. LOTS MORE.

This is one of those cases where we can achieve millions of dollars of benefit in exchange for a few minutes a week of effort. Think how important fair media coverage is to the Ron Paul campaign. Every time a news show promotes all RP's opponents, but doesn't mention him? Every time some media jackass dismisses RP as "crazy" without bothering to explain why they say that? They should be punished.

Now, don't get me wrong. If someone has the opinion that RP is crazy, and they will explain the reasons why, I'm all for it. That's free speech. If they don't like that he supports a balanced budget, ending foreign wars, reducing taxes, increasing freedom and getting the government out of our lives - let them say so. Because, if they do, then who REALLY sounds crazy?

So, thanks for signing up, and be sure to tell everyone you know!

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at

Check out the POLL!

I put up a poll on who people might vote for if the election were held today.

Anyone who gives the matter some thought knows that a poll is only as meaningful as the next poll. That is, if last week's poll shows Ron Paul with 90% support, and today's poll shows him with 10% support, the conventional wisdom is that his support is down from 90% to 10%. Just as likely, people will challenge the validity of the poll - challenge who conducted it, how honest they were with the results and whether the "ballot box" was "stuffed" by a special interest group. Cognitive dissonance theory says a person with any stake in the issue will accept the results of the poll if it reinforces their prior belief, and dismiss it otherwise.

So if you're a Ron Paul fan, and you see a poll listing Ron Paul #1, you believe it and celebrate. If you're a Romney fan, and you see the SAME POLL, you dismiss the results as incorrect and ignore it.

In either case, the results of the NEXT poll will effectively obliterate any effects of the prior poll. So polls are unconvincing and ephemeral - and there's no guarantee that they're honest.

That's just one reason why I think rushing off to win "polls" is a waste of time.

But I was curious. You see, I put up a project that has a REAL chance to make a REAL impact on the Ron Paul campaign http://dailypaul.com/165850/ending-the-media-prejudice-again... . It only requires about 20 minutes of time per week, is easy to do, and could make a HUGE difference in the election. Would people get involved?

The preliminary answer is, "A few. And it's like pulling teeth." After 5 days, less than 100 people have signed up.

How, I wondered, does their desire to do something substantive to help the campaign compare to their willingness to do something utterly trivial and nearly meaningless?

So I put up a poll. And I counted the number of people who said Ron Paul was their FIRST CHOICE for president. It's not a real poll, in the sense that I don't even tabulate totals - because that data is meaningless. But I did count 25% more people taking the poll in ONE DAY than have signed up to try to change the media bias against Ron Paul in the past FIVE days.

In other words, the average person here on the Daily Paul seems to be 32 times as motivated to do something symbolic and meaningless with an immediate but pointless response (maybe you move the total in the poll by 1) than they are to do something that requires their effort over a period of weeks to achieve a REAL response that may result in Ron Paul winning the election.

All you people who rushed off to "vote" in the "poll" but who haven't signed up to challenge unfairness in media need to do some soul-searching. Are you really supporters of Ron Paul? Or just cheerleaders engaged in jumping up and down and screaming - and accomplishing nothing?

Think. Plan. Act.

Ron Paul needs your help. But it will take more than clicking on some buttons on poll pages. It might even take (*gasp*) twenty minutes of your time per week.

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at

Front page

It might help if one of the site moderators placed your article on the DailyPaul homepage...

Put this on the homepage...

I'm not sure how all that works. Do people have to contact the moderator and ask? Or do they look at the article scores and just move it up? (Thanks to all the people who have clicked on the "plus" sign.)

I'm for whatever works. Right now we need people to read about this, think about it, and join us.

You know, I can't wait for us to reach 1000 people, to have some smart ass on television do what they've been doing right along (ignoring Ron Paul) and unleash A thousand emails to his sponsor threatening a lifetime boycott of their product.

Better yet, send out a press release at the same time, announcing the boycott project and its first target. Get some of the other national media to feed on the first one. Watch our recruitment soar. And the next time it happens, send TEN THOUSAND emails.

First we break their pocketbook. Then we break their will. And finally, we get fair reporting.

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at


Here ya go ==> http://www.dailypaul.com/user/1 Just click on the 'contact' tab to email site moderator and founder Michael Nystrom.

Or better still

A permanent link on the main page.

“I have joined your revolution and I’m proud to be part of what you want to do.” - Ron Paul

Very much agreed.

I hope we can get the ball rolling here...but I'm afraid Dr. Paul will be subjected to a media blackout again this election.

Ron Paul Subject to Media Blackout? Let's CHANGE that!

No doubt it will all be a repeat of 2008... unless we get this project off the ground.

I mention 1000 people as the "entry point" for this project. But you know what? That 1000 could easily swell to 100,000.

Ron Paul received well over 1 million votes in the 2008 primaries... and that was WITH the media trying to hide his existence.

Imagine if just 1 in 10 of those who voted for him in 2008 were to sign up and send emails?

If a sponsor were to receive 100,000 emails in week, they'd have to handle just shy of 10 emails a minute, 24 hours a day, for the full week. IN other words, if they assigned 3 people, full time, to do nothing but screen emails, they'd have to handle one email every 6 seconds for 8 hours a day seven days a week.

This is the larger goal. 1000 people is just a beginning!

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at

I signed up

I wouldn't mind if there was a way to register as a member of a site - and simply allow flyby members to support by avoiding companies/organizations/sponsors/etc--- while others gathered information and sent emails on behalf of the members. The site would show how many people registered.

Many people want to help but have trouble with commitment, but wouldn't mind simply avoiding things and pledging that as support, which is really where the power is. Letting companies see how many "members" there are would bring a nice message, especially if RP supporters can easily sign up and reference a page with information on who to avoid/etc.

just throwing out ideas I haven't read through all the comments here.

Sorry, but anything worthwhile takes commitment.

Not that 20 minutes a week is much of a commitment. I daresay that the average person on the Daily Paul spends that long sending meaningless text messages or looking in the mirror, or even trying to find matching socks.

In short, on an individual basis, 20 minutes a week is a meaningless commitment.

But collectively, it can be sufficient to win a huge victory for the Ron Paul campaign.

Understand, any company threatened with a boycott is going to be dubious. They've probably been threatened a hundred times before. It only counts if you can bring the pain - and to do that, we have to have numbers - the more the better - who will make small contributions of their time.

If we DON'T have that, then we've already lost. All the 20 and 30 somethings might as well hang it up right now. Someone like Obombya or Romney will be elected, and the next 30 or 40 years of your life will be one short slide into a living hell. You won't find jobs (or you'll lose them), your money won't buy anything. Anything the government used to supply will evaporate and you'll get to live out the rest of your so-called life in a police state. If someone were kicking down your front door, would you spend 20 minutes to defend yourself? Well, guess what? The government IS kicking down your front door. And it's going to take everything you've got and enslave you for years to pay to bail out a bunch of Wall Street Gamblers, welfare recipients, foreign countries and war-mongers and leave you with nothing but the bill.

One would think that would be motivation enough. But it seems the horizon for those under 30 is only about as far out as "where's the party tonight"?

I'd love to be wrong about this. But I fear I am not.

So, the idea of collecting a bunch of "flyby" names is pretty pointless. I can auto-generate a list of names. http://otown.com/fakenames.htm Let's just call them "flyby" members. How important are they?

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at

Why The Media Prejudice? We Need Ammutition

We all see it, its obvious, the media hates Ron Paul. I have followed this guy for about 5 years now and Austrian economics since the later 1970s. I have never heard of any impropriety, any scandal, Ron Pauls character is impeccable. In every interview I have seen he is polite, professional, and respectful, almost to a fault, but still the MSM continues to misquote and disrespect him. What is the reason for this? Anyone know why? If we understood the reason for the prejudice maybe that would give us some defense or a good offense against the onslaught against him.

Prejudice against Ron Paul...

I think all you have to do is follow the money.

GE, for example, makes all kinds of stuff for war. No wars, no market for their war stuff.

What GOP candidate do we know of who has been consistently anti-war?

Hmmm. Hold that thought.

Now what about drugs? One of the Republican candidates favors letting people put into their own bodies whatever they choose. Of course, if drugs were legalized, courts, cops, prisons would all have about a million fewer prisoners, loss of power and less reason to pervert the Constitution - thus diminishing their authority.

Part of it comes, I think, from a lack of imagination. The powers-that-be at the major networks can't conceive of a day when they won't get a million dollars for a 15-second Super Bowl ad. They don't want to believe in austerity, because that would cut into discretionary spending, and thus, hurt their advertising bottom line. Anyone know of a candidate who keeps talking about the collapse of the dollar? Hard times ahead? If people actually listened, they'd be buying the things they'll need when things go south and not wasting their money on whatever the media types are pitching to them. If everyone ignores the problem - why then, it's not a problem, right? The media can continue to suck up advertising dollars right up until the collapse.

Now to put a bit finer point on the question, you have to understand that in most elections it doesn't really matter whether it's the democrat or the republican who gets elected. That's because your real choices are in the primaries - and the average American voter is too... well... stupid (and lazy), to know when he's being gamed. The average American wakes up once every four years and goes out to vote for whoever his party has put up as a candidate - most often knowing NOTHING about the candidate. It's a fact that about 90% of the voters in a general election will simply vote for "their" party's candidate.

So companies have a vested interest in "helping" to make the primaries selection.

For example, in the last presidential election, a whole host of McCain/Obombya clones were running. Among the republicans, only one candidate favorered more freedom, less state surveillance of citizens, reducing government spending, ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and stopping the "War on Drugs". So once that candidate was eliminated, it didn't really matter who WON the nomination. And it didn't matter who won the presidential election. All the major differences between candidates were winnowed out during the primaries by people with lots of money. And one way they did it was to make sure everyone knew about the candidates of which they approved - and heard nothing about Ron Paul.

The same thing is set to happen again, because the media is already ignoring Ron Paul. It goes on ad nauseum about non-candidates like Trump - but ignores Ron Paul. The average idiot at home doesn't even notice. He's too busy texting meaningless gibberish to his friends, filling up Facebook with more useless crap, trying to find a job and wondering how he's not going to lose his house. He won't take 5 minutes to sign up to help this effort because, well, the election is a LONG way away, and it doesn't really matter yet. Of course, by the time they think it DOES matter, it will be too late. The crap you get on TV, the unemployment and housing crises, all the other day-to-day problems in life have a purpose - to distract you from what matters and to hand the choice of candidates to those who plan ahead on how best to rape America for their own benefit.

Ultimately, on election day, the voters get a choice: Do you want to be stabbed? Or do you want to be shot? The choice for real change was left behind in the primaries.

That's why it's critical to jump on changing the media approach NOW. Sadly, it appears that even most of the Ron Paul "supporters" are sitting at home eating microwave burritos and watch reruns of "Friends". By the time they wake up and actually DO something, it will be too late... again.

Now if you've read this far, and you don't tell everyone you know to help with this effort - at least you know that you are part of the problem. When it all falls apart, the American voter really has no one to blame but themselves. With a little attention, some critical thought, early intervention - they could have stopped it.

Sadly, I don't think they will, and America, as we know it, will die.

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at

blonduxo's picture

RT knows how RP feels

See http: //rt.com/usa/news/rt-mainstream-media-war/

They are fair.

I think your idea has merit, boycotting that is.

Did you sign up to help Ron Paul win?


Did you sign up?

Have you told your friends?

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at

Big bump

for activism.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

I dunno. The RP supporters seem pretty apathetic.

It doesn't look like we're going to reach the goal of 1000 soon enough to make a difference. I guess people really don't care that much about whether Ron Paul can get fair treatment from the media. Or maybe they think 20 minutes a week is too much effort?

I'll bet there are people who spend 20 minutes a week on the Daily Paul - who haven't bothered to sign up, figuring someone else will do it for them, or they'll jump on the bandwagon when there are already a lot of people involved.

I'd even be willing to bet there are people reading this post right now who haven't bothered to mention this project to anyone else. Not on Facebook. Not by email. Not in a text message.

I've said from the very start that I cannot do this without lots of help - a little bit of help from lots of people. Well, it doesn't look like that help is coming. I can't justify putting in hundreds of hours of work on a project that other people can't even be bothered to sign up for, let alone support.

I appreciate the "bump". But I'd much rather you contacted 30 other people and hounded them until they signed up.

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at

Have you thought of...

...posting your idea on Ron Paul's facebook page? Ron Paul has over 350,000 likes. Not sure if people will see it on there or not.

Put this idea on Facebook!

Once again, I can't do this alone. If YOU think it's a good idea to put this on Ron Paul's Facebook page, go ahead and do it!

That's what "spread the word" means!

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at




for exposure.

One Concern I Have About This Project

I fear that if any broadcaster is effected by our boycott they, and other broadcasters might be shy about reporting on RP at all. Nobody wants to be bullied; the targets of the boycotting efforts must be guilty of egregious or frequent injuries to our cause. I've visited the site and added my email address to be part of this. If done prudently, this could be an effective campaign.

A valid concern... but misplaced.

When a newscast reports on the Romney campaign, the Palenty campaign, the TRUMP campaign (even though there isn't one, and never was) the Gingrich campaign, and IGNORES the Ron Paul campaign, they know exactly what they're doing. They are not reporting news. They are being politically partisan and must be called to account for their failure to report fairly.

We will make them EAGER to report on Ron Paul - if only to avoid the axe.

They may not like being "bullied" - but they've brought it on themselves. If they report fairly, there will be no problem. If they deliver biased reports, they no longer deserve to be on the air.

I'm not even saying that the coverage of Ron Paul necessarily needs to be laudatory. Surely there are elements of his platform that people may take exception to. And that's fine. Let's get them out into the open and discuss them.

Here's an example: Ron Paul wants to end the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Put the neocon view that we need to be the world's police force up against Ron Paul's position that it's unconstitutional and we cannot afford the trillion dollar a year tab, and let the people decide which makes more sense. THAT'S the role of the media.

I remember in the 2008 campaign when FOX decided to have a GOP candidate roundtable. They invited the 1-3 finishers, and IIRC, the 5-7 place finishers in the New Hampshire primaries. But they left out Ron Paul. Their excuse? The studio was too small.

Sorry, but that won't wash. Ron Paul doesn't take up that much space, and if you're going to bump someone, it should be someone further down the totem pole - like #7.

When a news program talks about people who haven't even announced their candidacy (Trump) but ignores those who have - time to crush them. This isn't "The Apprentice". It's not infotainment. If someone's running, cover them. If they're just dicking around, ignore them.

Another thing we all need to remember - the press was CRUEL to Ron Paul in 2008. They published lies, distortions, or simply ignored him. If we put a few news stations OUT OF BUSINESS, it's no less than they deserve for NOT DOING THEIR JOBS.

I don't know about you, but to me, the role of a news organization is to IMPARTIALLY report the news of IMPORTANCE. If they're not impartial (refusing to cover Ron Paul) or can't figure out what's important (covering Trump -who was never going to be a candidate), and they can't learn to do better, they deserve to DIE, fail, go out of business. About that, I have no remorse. And if you think about it, neither will you.

Finally, we WANT to KILL at least a few shows. That will strike fear into the hearts of other shows who will learn that not doing their jobs will get them unemployed in a tough economy. What better warning than to hang the scalps of a few offenders on the tip of our battle lance?

This isn't a dance. It's not a game. It's a war. The future of your country, your life, the freedom of your children and grandchildren is all at stake. And this may be your last chance. It's no time to go soft on the enemy.

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at


So far, I've seen some really good ideas, and noticed a lot of enthusiastic feedback.

I've also noticed that there are a few people whose main function seems to be to say, "That won't work" or "let's do something else".

I'd like to remind the latter group that your comments really are off-topic and do not belong here. THIS topic is about things we can do to make the media "play fair" with regard to the Ron Paul campaign. If you have ideas how to make that happen, or want to help, thank you and please join in.

If your idea is to nay-say this approach, or try to create some other kind of group for some other purpose, feel free to do that - somewhere else.

I grant that there may be LOTS of GREAT ideas for other ways to help the Ron Paul campaign. And if you are motivated to pursue them, then I say GO FOR IT!

But not here.

My goal is to gauge interest in pursuing tactics that can be done by anyone in a few minutes a week to turn around the media bias against Ron Paul, and, if there is sufficient interest, to create tools to turn that interest into action and results.

This forum is only for discussion of ideas on how to make the media play fair. Anything else is off-topic.

Thank you for your cooperation.

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at

Status Update

So far, using the model of each person getting 3 other people to sign up, we're actually a little ahead of schedule.

Keep up the good work!

Tell your friends to read this thread and be sure to sign up at http://otown.com/boycotts4paul.html

Ways you can help:

  1. Put a link on your Facebook page
  2. Send an email with a link to all your friends.
  3. Get family members to sign up
  4. Tweet about this cool new way to help Ron Paul

Thanks for the help!

End media prejudice against Ron Paul in 2012.
Signup at http://boycotts4paul.com
or discuss at

Amnesia! Google/Trends Omits all Ron Paul Media Trends & News

Google/Trends is blatantly omitting all media references & news articles related to "Ron Paul."

And to think, in the 2008 presidential campaign, the Ron Paul blimp advertised, "Google Ron Paul." How soon they forget. Note: 783,000 views; comments are blocked.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul