The Ron Paul news blackout, and other news blackouts

I am glad that Ron Paul raised between $2 million and $3 million from his super-bomb tied to the news blackout against him. On this, I agree with Ron Paul, very strongly. I have certainly not blacked out Ron Paul, and while his supporters like some of my columns and not other columns, I have always tried to give him the attention he deserves, and explore various aspects of his philosophy, especially some commonalities between Ron and Occupy Wall Street on certain issues.

It is amazing that Paul, who has serious ideas and a serious following, has received comparatively little attention compared to, say, Donald Trump. He is right about this, and I am glad he raised money in response to this.

I have been a critic of much major media on various levels. For today, here is another example.

On the "Meet the Press" this past Sunday there was a discussion of Occupy Wall Street that included panelists Jack Welch (obviously no friend of Occupy), David Brooks (who has attacked Occupy) and the man billed as former Democratic Rep. Harold Ford (who has various relationships, almost never disclosed to viewers, with Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Bank of America and Goldman Sachs).

You get the idea. Three voices on one side, while the other side, the Occupy Wall Street side, is blacked out in this panel on "Meet the Press" without even fair disclosure of the financial interests of Harold Ford, who in my view represents what is wrong with the Democratic Party.

I could go on.

For now, I think Ron Paul has a valid complaint. I think there are dramatic biases in far too many places in the media. I think some voices are blacked out while others are promoted every day. I think this is wrong whenever it occurs, by whomever the culprit.

I would not give money to Ron Paul myself, but on this matter he is right. If others choose to give him support to give their viewpoints a greater voice, I say:

Bully for them. I get it.