Il n'y a pas de commentaires associés a cet article. Vous pouvez réagir.
Le député Ron Paul est un outsider, un marginal, aux opinions parfois étranges pour l’establishment de Washington. (On se rappelle notamment son discours de février 2006 sur la fin de l’hégémonie du dollar.)
On a vu par ailleurs qu’une intervention de Ron Paul sur les causes de l’attaque 9/11 a attiré l’attention sur lui, et a été reprise par un commentateur de CNN. A l’inverse, l’essentiel de la presse MSM a joué dans cette occasion son rôle habituel de censure. On trouve une analyse de ce comportement sur le site MediaMatters.com, le 16 mai.
Il apparaît assez probable que cet ostracisme de la presse MSM mesure surtout la crainte nouvelle dans l’establishment washingtonien (républicain) à l’encontre de Ron Paul, anti-guerre, anti-Washington, adversaire du gouvernement fédéral puissant et ainsi de suite. Diverses indications montrent la popularité montante du marginal du Texas, qui tend à le rendre de moins en moins marginal. Sur le site Huffington.net, en date du 17 mai, Mark Jeffrey donne une mesure de la vraie popularité de Ron Paul.
«Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul is far and away the most popular on the Internet. Yet, despite his massive online lead, the mainstream media has barely managed to cover him at all.
»On 5/14 and 5/15, Ron Paul was the #1 most-searched-for term on blog search engine Technorati. On post-debate polls on ABC.com and MSNBC.com, Ron Paul was voted the winner of the debate by a wide margin.
»In the past week, Ron Paul's website received more traffic than those of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards (Obama only recently took the lead by a hair). His videos are among the most-viewed on YouTube and popular social news site Digg.com is literally choked with Ron Paul-themed articles and comments.
»So what's going on here? Why is there such a disconnect between the Internet and the mainstream media? Whether you are a fan of Mr. Paul or not, his apparent non-coverage is an extraordinary story just by itself.
»The so-called professional media has failed us miserably in recent years. The White House Press Corps — with a few notable exceptions — has shown a distinct lack of vertebrae in holding our leaders accountable. Instead, it has been the voices of the Internet that have stepped in with courage and fearlessness and demanded real answers. Blogs (like HuffPost and others), YouTube videos, podcasts and other media are already more trusted by many than mainstream media outlets. It is interesting that all of these are seeing something in Ron Paul that CNN, Fox, MSNBC, ABC and others are glossing over.
»If the Internet is any sort of democratic media organ, Ron Paul is not a marginal figure. Instead, he is (gasp) a frontrunner. That's right: he's apparently got more cred online than any other candidate. Remember, You were Time's Person of the Year, largely because You blogged, You uploaded videos, and You decided that you were a media mogul also, every bit as important and credible as the mainstream media. And You are speaking loudly that this Paul guy interests you, that he is in fact more important than Hillary, McCain, Giuliani or even Obama.
»At the very least, the mainstream media ought to cover him more than they have. There's something going on with this guy, he's touched a nerve out there. We ought to hear more about him.»
On ajoutera ce commentaire venu d’un partisan de Ron Paul, commentaire fait à un texte de Steven C. Clemons, sur TheWashingtonNote.com, le 17 mai. Robert Morrow met en ligne ce commentaire le 18 mai :
«I am down here in Austin and helping to promote and organize a fund raiser for Ron Paul this Saturday and I can tell you it is going absolutely gangbusters the last few days. Thank-you attacks from establishment GOP — like manna from heaven.
»Ron Paul is a real threat to the establishment GOP not just on his anti-Iraq war position, which is quite popular, but also because he is anti-tax, anti-federal government and pro-USA national sovereignty. These folks would not be attacking Ron Paul if he were not gaining support.
»Ron Paul is the GOP's strongest candidate and ironically the leadership is trying to marginalize or destroy him. Ron Paul is the GOP's best possible candidate against Hillary. He has very strong appeal to independents. The libertarian vote deserted the GOP in 2006 and they would come back if Ron Paul is at the top of the ticket. I think Ron Paul would be a much stronger candidate than Rudy Guiliani, who is our liberal sell out option to nominate.»
Mis en ligne le 20 mai 2007 à 11H35