Posted on 05/19/2007 1:09:38 AM PDT by roger55
Petition Against Ron Paul's Inclusion in Future Republican Presidential Debates Created by Lee Garnett on 16 May 2007 @ 8:13:24 AM
We the undersigned believe that Congressman Ron Paul of Texas, Republican candidate for president, does not represent any significant constituency within the Republican Party and has proven to serve only as a distraction from the serious issues confronted in candidate debates.
The paucity of Paul's support among registered Republicans, the support he draws from external parties which are aggressively opposed to the GOP, as well as his fundamental opposition to many core principles of our party and his apparent inability to understand even simple geopolitical realities, make his continued presence in future debates undesirable.
Congressman Paul's self-confessed belief that President Clinton and “50 years” of United States foreign policy on Iraq and Iran was responsible for provoking Al Qaeda to attack the United States on September 11, 2001, are views which are totally inimical to Republican Party principles and are gravely offensive to the vast majority of registered Republicans.
We Republicans do not wish to be associated such views, have a party platform provided for their propagation, or allow them to distort and damage the substantive content of future presidential debates. By forcing the other candidates to confront his unsound and grotesquely anti-American positions on equal terms, Paul lowers the quality and relevance of any debate and thereby does a substantial disservice to Republicans seeking a nominee for their party.
It is not our belief that Congressman Paul isn't entitled to his views, or to have them publicly heard and addressed. But we object strenuously to them being presented in the context of a Republican party presidential debate, for which they are entirely unsuited and broadly unwelcome. They will be better served in a debate over a party's nomination where they are shared by the party membership, such as under the Libertarian National Committee.
Therefore, we the undersigned request Ron Paul's exclusion from invitation to future Republican presidential debates by the Republican National Committee and any relevant media organizations, including Fox News Channel, MSNBC, CBS, CNN, ABC, NBC, PBS or any party which intends to organize, host or televise future debates between the candidates for a presidential nomination, under the Republican Party's name.
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/AgainstRonPaul
But, geez, this idea stinks.
IBTZ
Are you in favor of Ron Paul being excluded from future debates?
What is this...censorship of a candidate because he far right? This is the republican party which stands by the constitution which clearly states freedom of speech. He is by far up to the task and with with a little luck and the help of god we will get him into office and turn America into the country it can be.
censorship...where are we; communist china?
Like for example, limited government and abiding by the strictures of the Constitution. As the man said...
Sheriff John Brown always hated me,
For what, I don't know:
Every time I plant a seed,
He said kill it before it grow -
He said kill them before they grow.
...
I do not support this petition. I say let the election process work.
How about the petition to the RNC to keep Ron Paul in the debates, currently about 13,000 in just two days. http://www.petitiononline.com/RPRNC08/petition.html
Censorship is prohibiting Paul from speaking. Saying he should be speaking somewhere else (like in the Libertarian Party) is a different matter altogether. Free speech and obligation to provide a platform for that speech are different things.
I am in favor of Paul’s exclusion. Not because his ideas have no place in politics, but because they have no place in the Republican party.
As a contrast, I’d submit that saying 9/11 was the fault of the United States in a Republican debate, is equivalent to responding to a question about civil rights violations and saying “those blacks had it coming.” We wouldn’t tolerate that, why should we tolerate this?
Actually, I’m not a noob. I’m empirekin768 from way way back, but my pass won’t retrieve. So, new account.
This is disgusting. This is almost as bad as Fox News not wanting anyone under one percent to be part of the debate. Ron Paul regardless if you agree with him or not (He is not my pick) should be part of every debate until HE decides to either sit them out or drops out of the race.
I don’t like or support Ron Paul either.
But, the Republican Party shouldn’t be about censorship.
I don’t like the guy, I don’t respect his views — but barring him from the debate is absolutely anti-conservative. After all, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. You may not like what he has to say, but he isn’t preventing any of the other candidates from expressing their opinions.
This is just juvenile.
Anyone up there can say anything they want. One of those guys made blatant anti-2nd Amendment comments. Another one dodged direct legitimate questions. Should we start a petition to eliminate them too?
Which purge did you not survive?
Prior to the last debate I would have readily agreed with this. In fact I did. But suggesting that the United States is culpable for its own punishment on 9/11 from Al Qaeda is as near a disqualifying position as one can adopt. It’s little different from blaming Jews for the Holocaust. It’s a grotesque and unacceptable position for the GOP to provide a forum for.
Yea, we want robots.
Ha. One I wasn’t around for. Actually, I just don’t have the email addy I signed up with for that account any more. I didn’t see a way to change it easily.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.