Final speaking times

Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:49:47 GMT

FINAL AMERICAN LISTINING TIME 0 MINUTES.

Final speaking times

John Foster — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 04:15:31 GMT

They should all be allowed equal time. Otherwise it is a complete farce.

CNN should be ashamed.

Final speaking times

Jason, San Diego, CA — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 04:17:48 GMT

Final speaking times

framecop, Raleigh, NC — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 04:18:31 GMT

Undecided Republican voter in forum live on CNN says she didn't like any of what she saw tonight, and she'd likely vote for John Edwards if the Democrats nominate him.

Hilarious.

Final speaking times

Steve A Jonesboro IN — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 04:20:40 GMT

So ther was a total of 7 minutes 43 seconds of reason, honesty and sanity for a 2 hour circus clown show.

Final speaking times

Bradford Morris, Seattle, WA — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 04:30:31 GMT

1 hr, 11 min and 27 seconds of bickering, allegations, trading jabs, flip flopping and political grandstanding versus 7 min 43 seconds of sound, reasonable and honest debate.

Final speaking times

James, Alden New York — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 04:42:00 GMT

What a joke, nevermind how CNN treated Paul. The fact that F. Thompson got more time then Huckabee is a joke.

Final speaking times

Shelbi, Dallas, TX — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:00:27 GMT

Its obvious who the media wants the nomination to go to on both sides.
Why don't you give the candidates equal time, then we'll see who the real winner is.
Americans and their opinions don't matter.
It's all about money & who the media wants.
This wasn't a debate.
It was just more airtime for Guiliani.
Hopefully Ron Paul gets some more exposure, he's the best man for the job.
I guess the world isn't ready for an honest politician though.

Final speaking times

Dewayne, Alabama — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:09:29 GMT

The debate proved to me just what a total joke Ron Paul is and I'm truely glad that he has NO chance at winning or this country would go down the crapper extremely quick.

Final speaking times

Donna Rode — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:14:06 GMT

A few words of a righteous man availeth much (Dr. Ron Paul on tonight's debate) Many are the words of a fool and they profit him nothing (the other candidates)

Final speaking times

Jacob Lyles, Arlington, VA — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:19:58 GMT

It's a shame that the one unique candidate, Ron Paul, got so little time to speak. America needs to hear his message. As long as he is ignored, we will continue to take that message to them without the mainstream news if necessary.

Final speaking times

Brian Noe, Lafayette, IN — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:27:44 GMT

So far, PBS is the only station to allow equal time for all candidates (well, atleast the ones that cared to show up), and had all candidates answer the same questions.

The rest of the "debates" have been biased, big corporation propaganda.

Final speaking times

For Fairness — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:41:54 GMT

Critize CNN all you want, but the debate there was head and shoulders above the MSNBC disgrace with Crackpot Chris Matthews and Timmy "Gotcha" Russert along with whimpy little Williams.

The moderator did not try to personally attack any candidate. It seemed fair.

I think NO candidate from either party should ever agree to a debate on MSNBC unless a true professional like Keith Obermann is the moderator.

If unwell Chris Matthews or Russert are anywhere near it before, during, or after...all candidates except
Chrissie's pet Rudy should decline.

Multimillionaire, woman hating, Social Security hating
Matthews is a closeted Republican who is a bottom feeder...doesn't deal with the issues but instead focuses on vicious below the belt non issues like a candidates' laugh, clapping, ears, clothes, manhood,
whether he'd like to have a beer with them or not,
their private parts, if they are a big beefy man's man...well you get the picture of a man who needs help, meds, or an intervention.

Why does the Democratic party and liberal editors of any media source NEVER, NEVER auestion,m complain about, or profile this unwell man's jealous, vicious behavior? It goes on night after night after night, yet we meek little Democrats sit mutely by.

He totally trashed Al Gore...for two years. He went after John Kerry and he will turn on a guy like Obama if he gets the nomination and of course his jealousy of the Clintons fuels his nightly attacks.

Why? Why? Why do people like Joan at Salon, go on his program and sit there and smile or agree with rantings so vile and immature that even a junior high mean girl wouldn't put up with?

Could it be multi-millionaire wannabees?

What happened to serious, unbiased, fair journalism?

So, thank you CNN for your debate.

Final speaking times

Jerry — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 06:12:41 GMT

Obviously, the last poster doesn't realize that this country is already beyond the crapper! It's already in the sewer, and all the 'top' contenders want to do is try to convince us of how nice it is. Only Ron Paul can remove the clothespins from the noses of the citizenry and expose the stench that we're drowning in. And that's no joke!!

Final speaking times

Randy, Woodbridge, NJ — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 06:14:28 GMT

Too late, Dewayne. We're on the express train to hell already and Ron Paul, while by no means a perfect individual, is the only guy in this bunch that has a shot at throwing on the brake. Everyone else spouts the exact same thing. A pro-war candidate isn't beating Hillary.

Final speaking times

Rory — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:39:13 GMT

Shame on CNN for what they are passing off as a "debate". I would ROFL but it's not funny.

Final speaking times

Corey Walsh, Marshall, Arkansas — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:51:48 GMT

So much for a fair debate... I wanted to hear more of Dr. Paul. The OBGYN who doesn't deliver babies, he reads them the bill of rights and they crawl out on their own in eager anticipation of their freedom!

Final speaking times

bluestateken — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:23:07 GMT

I cannot imagine any of these idiots becoming president. what a dismal display!

Final speaking times

Travis, Louisville, Ky. — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:58:07 GMT

This debate wasn't a debate in my opinion. A true debate allows equal time for all candidates; however, if you look at the results here, there was hardly any equality between the candidates. I am especially disappointed with how little time Ron Paul got. Considering his views are so different from norm, you would think he would get equal time on the subjects so voters can get a better idea of his differing views!

So, according to your views, we're now onto the 4th debate that wasn't a debate. Why is it that everytime someone's favorite comes out the loser in a debate, it was biased and unfair? Last one wasn't a debate, because it was clear the loved Hillary and asked stupid questions. First off, you don't think they favored Guiliani intenesely over everyone else? Secondly, what do the RepuG debates worth anyway? The Republican LOSER in the general won't even recieve as many votes as the Democratic LOSER for their primary in this upcoming election. Hillary 08, jump on before it's too late.

Final speaking times

Chris — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:58:12 GMT

Only good parts were from ron paul. Frankly with all the flip flopping i've seen done by candidates I'm afraid to vote for any of them, but Ron paul has been a rock as far as dependability goes. You know if you vote for him that he'll do everything in his power to do what he says

Final speaking times

Lauri Laitinen, Espoo, Finland — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:02:31 GMT

It is quite alarming to follow the US elections. The elections in Russia are very unfair and no one questions that. However, US advertises herself as a beacon of democracy in the world, but the elections seem to be unfair there as well. People should be much more consered about that. In both countries the media manipulates people's opinions the way it wants.

Final speaking times

Brian, NY, NY — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:40:18 GMT

Dewayne,

Correction, If anyone but Ron Paul wins the country is going down the crapper. Ron is the only candidate with clear honest opinions, Direct answers, and the record to back it all up. The rest of them are all full of hot air and over inflated egos.

Final speaking times

Andy, Flint Michigan — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:44:53 GMT

Which media conglomerate do you work for Dewayne?

Final speaking times

robert novel — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:49:05 GMT

Don't these people on both sides realize the world is watching and how incompetant they all apear. I've seen high school debates with mor substance than these people. Can't they talk about the state of our country and the world instesd of spending there time taking cheap shots at each other. We need an inspiering courages leader.

Final speaking times

Joseph Blow, AB — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:54:31 GMT

Not a vote has been counted, yet the media establishment - this time in the form of Anderson Cooper - decides that a presumed "top tier" candidate (Giuliani) should get 4 times more speaking time than the lowest tier. Cooper's bias and prejudices were written all over this inane spectacle. Rather than YouTube it should have been called CooperTube. Churchhill said that in democracy you get the government you deserve - does that go for the media too?

Final speaking times

Ron Becker, Belleair Fl — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:55:21 GMT

I have been a Republican for 52 years and the only one I would consider voting for is Ron Paul! His only problem is he is a Republican and I will no longer suport a party that has betrayed its Jeffersonian heratige.

Final speaking times

Ariana Henderson, Atlanta, GA — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:11:28 GMT

I tried to watch the whole debate, but this obsessive coverage of Romney and Giuliani was just to hard to take... I eventually opted for the Youtube video that just gives Ron Paul's airtime. So much better time spent.

Final speaking times

Marcus, Temecula, CA — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:35:05 GMT

MSM, please listen!

We want to see equal time for all the candidates to answer every question.

We're done asking! Now we're demanding!

Final speaking times

James Brown, NYC — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:46:16 GMT

This debate was a joke and just further cements the FACT that these morons on CNN are about as far from journalists as you can get.

MSM are all shills for big corp

Final speaking times

Cat B, Austin, Texas — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:57:54 GMT

I just can't understand how people can watch and accept how obviously distorted this "debate" was. How are we as Americans going to make informed decisions when we are being purposely duped by big Media Moguls?

RON PAUL 08! I love to hear that man talk.

Final speaking times

Jody, Vienna, VA — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:15:23 GMT

I agree. Only when media becomes more open and interactive will we have a shot at evening out this political playing field. Not for a few elections yet I'm afraid.
As for now, the farces will continue.

Final speaking times

Ally Kendall — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:20:52 GMT

I'm quite impressed with Paul. The media try to paint him as some sort of extremist, but in fact he just wants to restore the rule of law. Of course to those who thrive on corruption, that seems extreme.

Final speaking times

Colin — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:24:42 GMT

What a pathetic bunch of candidates

Ron Paul- Ultraconservative Lunatic
Ron Huckabee- Doesn't believe in evolution
Romney- Flip flops like a fish out of water
Rudy- Won't even win his home state if he goes up against Hillary
McCain- Dinosaur

Final speaking times

Dave Dragon, Tampa Bay, Florida — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:28:24 GMT

The CNN YouTUBE format could be a positive tool for public debating. Too bad they mixed in the bull shit videos and songs to waste time that could have been used to actually debate a topic.

Final speaking times

Dot, Illinois — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:43:52 GMT

Lauri Laitinen, Espoo Finland

I am interested in your comment about the US elections being unfair. I would like to hear more of your reasons. Our system is not perfect, but our media is free to write/say what they choose and voters are free to believe what is said or not. We don't take what we read and/or hear in the media as absolute truth. We make up our own minds. I know I will listen to what the candidates say, and will then make up my mind on which of them to support based upon whose postitions on the issues most clearly match my beliefs.

Final speaking times

Mike Kwak — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:44:09 GMT

The whole thing was a farce. CNN should've just come out and said at the beginning, "we want either Mitt or Rudy to win so we're going to give them the most time." I can't believe how low CNN has fallen.

Final speaking times

Dan, Detroit, Michigan — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:18:29 GMT

CNN is a complete joke. I used to have a little respect for this network, but I will never watch it ever again. I just called my local cable service provider and told them to shut it off immediately. The only legit source of info can only be found on the internet. I thought that because this debate was in the youtube format, it would be a little more balanced, but it was exactly the opposite. They used the notion of a user submitted debate to make it seem fair, but they cherry-picked the questions and didn't even give the Republican's ONLY chance of winning (Ron Paul) any airtime.

Does CNN really think we are that stupid? I am actually kinda glad that it turned out the way it did. They're just making it very clear to the American people that they have no interest in helping us make a n informed decision, or giving the people what they want. It's really clear who they are working for.

Final speaking times

Dennis R, Richmond, VA — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:28:21 GMT

I would have really like to see more of Ron Paul. Why was he not given more time?

Final speaking times

Dot, Illinois — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:07:02 GMT

After every debate, the times each candidate spoke are given and they show that the "front runners" always are given much more time to speak than the other contenders. Viewers and/or voters express their displeasure that the "second tier" candidates weren't given equal time.

My question is, is anybody in the media listening? Shouldn't they be getting the hint by now that voters want a more level playing field in the debate format and that they want fairness in the amount of time given to each candidate to speak? That should not be such a diffucult thing to accomplish. All that is needed is a moderator who is sincerely interested in being fair and objective.

Final speaking times

Jason, Salt Lake City, Utah — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:30:51 GMT

This is ridiculous. Why wasn't equal time given to all of the candidates. Why were questions being framed to portray Ron Paul and his following as conspiracy theorists?

I dont understand the idea of having American people submit questions if you are just going to pick the ones that advance your MSM agenda.

Final speaking times

D Paterson, Ontario, Canada — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:38:53 GMT

Considering the fact that in recent years, CNN seems to have specialized in covering white trash such as Anna Nicole Smith in great detail, their biased coverage of the white trash "frontrunners" of the Republican party isn't suprising.

Final speaking times

Tim, Austin, Texas — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:50:16 GMT

I have never SEEN a real debate between presidential candidates. A debate is a forum where the candidates can ask EACH OTHER questions. This CNN nonsense is somewhere between TMZ and the Mickey Mouse Club.

One of the most famous DEBATES of all times was the Lincoln-Douglass debate. Which started the tradition of L-D debating, a type of debate still studied and practiced in Debate classes and clubs.

In that type of Debate you challenge your opponent with questions, there is no AUDIENCE questioning! there is no MODERATOR questioning! You question him/her, he/she answers.

I want a REAL debate!

Final speaking times

Al Terwelp, Overbrook, Kansas — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:53:49 GMT

I agree with the many postings stating that there was unfair airtime. All these debates need to work on this and make it fair. There is a large disparity and that leads to suspicion. I don't know them, but Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee seem to be men integrity. But you can't put faith in people. What you can believe in and trust is an idea. I believe in the original Constitution. The greatest advocate of that idea is Ron Paul.

Final speaking times

JoeB — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 18:02:47 GMT

Geesh Colin, what's so ultraconservative and lunatic about the US Constitution?

Final speaking times

Kenny Grimm, Phoenix, Arizona — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 18:27:59 GMT

Almost every single post here is a person furious with the biased and corrupt political system and the media and in complete support of Ron Paul. THIS is the voice of the American people, we are not sheep and we can see through all these attempts to marginalize the only candidate that is for the people! Does anyone actually believe that we have "freedom" and "democracy" in this country anymore(the reason why the middle east all hate us, right, our freedom to elect the candidate that we are force-fed?). How much does this differ from Putin or Hussein being "elected" every year, just because it isn't the same person or party doesn't actually mean that we have a choice. The "Ron Paul Revolution" may eventually need to be a REAL REVOLUTION.

Final speaking times

Kriss Cantore, Portland, OR. — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 18:44:57 GMT

I love the fact that anyone using a tivo would have missed Ron Paul's Campaign Commercial. I'm sure this was done on purpose. CNN is a bunch of COWARDS. I for one am more motivated by the Bias they showed toward Ron Paul. The Candidate which happens to have more YouTube Friends than any other candidates. YouTube debate Pfft.

Final speaking times

Mike, Hermosa Beach, CA — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 19:12:09 GMT

This debate was farcical. The time limit was very promptly enforced on Ron Paul while Rudy Giuliani, for example, responded to his heart's content.

I think this debate boosted Huckabee and Paul, kept Romney, Giuliani, and McCain where they are, and did little or nothing for Thompson.

http://truthalert.net/Republican%20Presidential%20Candidate%20Rankings.htm

Final speaking times

DasBling, Savannah, GA — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 19:22:57 GMT

Mitty and Guiliani are both from the same mold. Voting for one of those guys is just as good as voting for the other. IMO they are both sleeze bags. The only one with a visiona and record good enough to be President on that stage is Ron Paul. Huckabee? Are you kidding me? We need to get away from church and state interaction not electing another bible-thumper into office!

Final speaking times

Al Doyle, Oshkosh, WI — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 19:32:46 GMT

We're tired of the lamestream media trying to shove crossdressing Rudy and metrosexual Mitt down our throats. I'm a Ron Paul supporter, but I believe the other candidates also deserve their fair share of air time.

Final speaking times

NDG — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:08:11 GMT

Vote Ron Paul!
Ron Paul 2008!

Final speaking times

Lauri Laitinen, Espoo, Finland — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:19:37 GMT

Dot, Illinois

I said unfair because I have the impression that media influences a lot on which candidate is given the most media time. Also, the more money a candidate has, the more he/she gets advertising time and can affect on the media companies. It's exaggarating to compare American elections to Russian, but there are some similarities

Final speaking times

Chris H, Washington, DC — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 00:02:36 GMT

I have heard other folks talk about it, but after visiting a few other sites to confirm for myself, I am now sure. Ron Paul fanatics have conspired to go to any and every political oriented website, and do their best to completely monopolize all discussion.

I hate to lower the level of political discourse any further than where it already is, but....
Ron Paul is a flaming FOOL, and would be the most disastrous President that we could EVER have.

Why?

Well, as my grandpa used to say, "That boy don't believe that pig crap stinks, and that fat meat is greasy!!"

It doesn't matter whether you believe in Isolationism, or Non-Intervention. BOTH OF THEM WON'T WORK. Ron Paul essentially wants us to stick our heads in the sand, and say, "Uh Uh. We don't have a dog in that fight. Not our business. We are going to just mind our business. You folks go ahead and do whatever you want to do, while we sit here on the sidelines."

Ron Paul is an intelligent man, I will give him that. But when it comes to dealing with REALITY, he doesn't have a clue. Ron Paul should enroll at the Institute of World Politics. http://www.iwp.edu/about/pageID.90/default.asp

Educational Philosophy

As a professional school specializing in the art of statecraft, The Institute of World Politics teaches the use of the various instruments of power. The Institute, however, recognizes that power, like liberty, can be misused and abused, and therefore its use must be accompanied by responsibility. As Theodore Roosevelt observed, "To educate a man in mind but not in morals is to educate a menace to society." Thus, the Institute’s educational philosophy is guided by a recognition that education in ethics and civic virtue is a necessary prerequisite to the responsible conduct of statecraft.

The Institute’s philosophy proceeds first from a recognition that peace and security are the essential prerequisites for all functions of civil society, and that nothing in our public life – neither domestic governance, commerce, the exercise of civil liberties, nor organized charitable work – is possible without them.

Following from this, the Institute believes that current and future leaders must be educated so as to have deep understanding of the nature of peace. The Institute does not have a utopian view of peace. It recognizes that the achievement of peace requires an understanding of the structure of human communities and how such structure must take into account the realities of human nature – especially the human capacity to commit wrongs against one another. It is for this reason that laws are needed in human affairs, as well as instruments of coercion to enforce those laws. In a culture that has largely abandoned the serious study of tragedy and the human frailties that underlie it – in both history and literature – the Institute teaches that the conduct of statecraft must take these realities of the human condition into account.

However much this realism in assessing the worst side of human nature is necessary for effective efforts to achieve peace, on its own it can produce an excessive focus on the instruments of force while ignoring other tools of statecraft. Thus, a truly realistic view of human behavior must include a proper recognition of the best side of that nature: man’s capacity for truth, justice, and that love of neighbor that transcends the requirements of justice. It is this view that will incline the integrated strategic thinker to incorporate diplomacy and other instruments into national strategy before resorting to coercion.

The Institute recognizes that opposing concepts of human nature and the perfectibility of man also lie at the root of different political philosophies, and that the American system is explicitly based on the concept, articulated by James Madison, that if men were angels there would be no need for government. Implicit in this concept is that men are not about to become angels.

Proceeding from this premise of a moral quality to human nature, the Institute’s curriculum is based on recognition of the necessity for education in natural law – deriving from the Western, Greco-Roman, Judeo-Christian moral tradition. Thus, the Institute, above all, is dedicated to, and encourages, the search for truth. This means that the Institute recognizes that there is such a thing as truth and that truth is not relative. It thus recognizes the existence of historical facts that are true regardless of the perspective of observers of those facts.

A corollary to this principle is that the Institute is dedicated to, and cultivates, the understanding of objective moral standards and believes that justice and respect for human rights, as prerequisites for peace and security, cannot logically exist without the existence of these underlying standards.

Another corollary of this perspective is the recognition of the intrinsic dignity of the human person, no matter what his or her background or condition. The Institute believes that recognition of this inherent dignity militates against treating other human beings either as cogs in the wheel of some ideological system, as faceless enemies, or as less-than-human objects that can be manipulated, exploited, or destroyed.

In light of this recognition of ethical standards and human dignity, the Institute cultivates civic virtue as part of its larger mission of moral leadership. This stands in contrast to a national cultural trend where questions of virtue and honor are over-shadowed by utilitarian formulae for success.

The school’s curriculum is also based on the premise that representative democracy with equality before the law is rare in human history, that it is worth defending, and that statecraft in service of democracy requires special educational preparation that is distinct from education in service of non-democratic forms of government.

Another underlying premise is that one cannot effectively defend a country and civilization that one neither understands nor appreciates. Hence, the Institute’s students are educated in: the American founding principles of representative democracy, including human rights and the rule of law; the principles of Western political economy, particularly those that explain economic success; the underlying historical and philosophical bases for those principles; and the role of those principles in U.S. foreign policy. While the Institute is an American school, dedicated first to the education of Americans, it encompasses within its vision the mission of educating non-American students to be effective in the defense of "decent civilization" even if it is not American or Western.

Finally, the Institute attempts to cultivate a spirit of service and civic duty among its students. It seeks to inspire them to recognize that there are causes higher than oneself, and that service to others and to a cause such as peace with freedom and justice is an honorable and ultimately fulfilling career path.

Final speaking times

Dot, Illinois — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 00:46:07 GMT

Lauri Laitinen

Thank you for your response. I agree with both of the points in your post. Our media seems to want to proclaim certain candidates as the front runners and as such, these candidates are given more attention than some of the others. I have mentioned this in some of my own posts--the media does need to make an effort to be fairer in the amount of coverage given to all of the candidates. Sometimes, however, the media gets it wrong--2004's Democratic primary is a good example.

And you are correct that the more money a candidate has, the more ads he/she can buy, the more attention he/she gets, etc. Money, and the need to raise large amounts for their campaign funds, have become an overriding concern for our politicians. Those who don't have wealthy supporters, who can't raise huge amounts of money, are at a real disadvantage in campaigning. We desperately need campaign financial reform in the country--we talk about it during every campaign, yet it never gets done.

So, in those areas there is some unfairness. But all in all, I would still say that our system is a good one.

Final speaking times

John Doe Seattle, Wash. — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 02:38:01 GMT

Chris H,

Have fun in your police state buddy, when you lose all your freedom in the name of 'terror' -- But I don't think you will. Because when Ron Paul wins we will restore the constitution.

Why don't they ask Dr. Paul if waterboarding is torture, I bet he could give them a one word answer.

Final speaking times

Joe — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 03:48:38 GMT

The fact that Huckabee is on the same stage as Paul is a joke. Huckabee is nothing but a tax and spend liberal. He reminds me of Gubber, but Gubber had a higher IQ.