Did anybody see Ron Paul on The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell tonight? What is your opinion?

What say you?

10 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    From what I have seen, O'Donnell is a fair interviewer, but he did a bad job here. He was completely partisan, unlike when he had Dobbs on, and played gotcha like he was out to "bag" Ron Paul.

    He missed an opportunity to ask two much more germane questions. First, he ought to have asked if Ron Paul would favor cutting the defense budget not just to close bases in the US and abroad and bring all US military personnel home, but also if he favors ending the permanent stimulus program ramped up by Reagan that creates jobs through the quasi-public (like FannieMae and FreddieMac) corporations like The Aerospace Corp, Mitre Corporation, Lockheed-Martin, General Dynamics, Boeing Defense, McDonnell-Douglas, Raytheon, L3 Communications, SAIC, Northrup-Grumman and the host of companies that feed from their scraps. These companies make their money with programs no one needs that are funded by the government with printed (oops, borrowed) money to create jobs. (Note that significant money is spent on paper studies, not hardware or software; I know, having been in that mill.)

    The second question he should have asked would have been how Paul viewed the Supreme Court ruling that extends the legal fiction of a corporation being an individual under the law, a superhuman if you will, and allows corporations to fund election campaigns without limits of any sorts (including foreign control). Paul has ideas on Constitutional issues that are out of kilter with almost any mainstream interpretations of the Constitution (ie, that the Constitution requires a gold or other hard commodity standard for money) and it would be interesting to know his stand on this one.

    Instead, O'Donnell wasted Paul's time and the viewer's time with gotcha questions that do nothing to clarify what Ron Paul stands for and how he differs differs substantively from a significant portion of tea party issues that I have seen clarified. (His arguments with some tea party supporters like Palin and Beck regarding the military have been voiced openly.) I turned him off after that interview and will no longer watch him. I have already written off Maddow and find Olbermann less and less amusing. Of course, Fox Noise is a joke through and through, so I might pitch the tellie. It is on only a few hours a week in any case, and will be on almost not at all once baseball season is finished.

  • 1 decade ago

    Wren, Ron Paul's position is considered quite extreme. The idea that the "free market" and private property rights will cure all ills (including the apartheid of the southern US into the middle of the 20th century) and guarantee freedom for all is quite extreme, a form of anarchy (some who hold this believe there is no need for ANY government of any sort; they are called libertarian anarcists). Ron Paul is supported in many of his ideas by ONLY the most extreme elements of US society, both on the right and on the left (note that he works well with Barney Frank but not with any moderate members of either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party). It seems you have not examined his ideas well or you have a bizarre take on what is mainstream. Social security is a mainstream idea and Ron Paul is against it, for example. The idea that the Constitution requires a gold standard or other hard commodity for currency is also quite outside the mainstream of law and Paul believes this, but Paul does have his own interpretation of the Constitution.

    I challenge you to give an operational definition of a "free market" (an example of an operational definition is square root: a number x is the square root of a number y if x multiplied by itself equals y; everyone can agree when they have one, since they can perform an operation. If you cannot give such a definition, then your word or phrase has no meaning outside you). And also to explain how there can be free markets in a society controlled by large corporations (can you say oligopoly?). Note that the fundamental theorem of microeconomics is that under perfect competetion (the freest of markets) it is IMPOSSIBLE to ever make a profit.

    Source(s): For the theorem on free markets and no profit, any economics text that thoroughly covers microeconics, like say Ralph Pfouts Elementary Economics, A Mathematical Approach or David M. Kreps, A Course in Microeconomic Theory.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I constantly have to remind myself that it is only the extreme elements of both the left and right that despise Ron Paul. The moderate left and right are drawn to his message in a way that is unique because both philosophies are unified by a principled American statesman with a track record under his belt and it's why he garners the most support from independents like myself. Extremists have ruined this country.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    What? The AP misreported. It is the job of the media to report. Did Fox report it correctly or accuse for reporting the truth? The AP was paid to lie? Maybe? That is news in this Koch Brothers Corrupt attempt to purchase the Military.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Poor poor Lawrence O'Donnell ~

    just following his AIPAC orders for a paycheck.

    Source(s): eyes ears brain
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Ron Paul is cool and would make an excellent president.

  • 1 decade ago

    Well considering only 4 people watch msnbc. All 4 of them

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Cool story, bro.

  • 1 decade ago

    I rarely bother watching TV News and if I do it's not MSNBC.

  • What say I? I say "Get ye to YouTube, and bring a link hither".

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.