Email Howard Stern to Host Ron Paul

[Sesshomaru]

Howard Stern mentioned Ron Paul today, email the show here to Ron Paul be interviewed:

http://www.howardstern.com/contact.hs


Heres the clip where hes talking about the candidates and later in mentions Ron Paul:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaHB00ew-sA

 

[BOOMSHAKER]

It's a good intention. But I wouldn't want Ron P to get there and be asked a few straight questions for a minute or two and then Howard starts in with the sex referrences and bullshit like that! Going on the Stern show can make or break a person. Right now I don't think Ron wants to be associated with the likes of Howard. (I could be wrong but hey, why chance it)

 

[Sesshomaru]

It's a good intention. But I wouldn't want Ron P to get there and be asked a few straight questions for a minute or two and then Howard starts in with the sex referrences and bullshit like that! Going on the Stern show can make or break a person. Right now I don't think Ron wants to be associated with the likes of Howard. (I could be wrong but hey, why chance it)

Did you watch the clip? I think Howard would be respectful, especially because he likes Paul. It would be like voting Sanjaya in American Idol.

Also, Ron Paul has clearly stated that he is not in the business of dictating how people express their freedoms. This is why hes been on so many shows on TV and radio.

 

[rotty]

Not gonna happen...Howard won't have him on for the simple reason, there is a law that says if you have to give equal time to everyone. So if he has someone on that he likes, he then has to give the opportunity to hte rest of the candidates. I don't think he is going to want to have to take the chance of having a bunch of politicians on the air even though I'm sure most would decline. Howard wouldn't have the balls to be a dick to all of the Presidential hopefulls because someone is going to win and he got a ton of shit from the politicians/government for the whole Janet Jackson thing which he had nothing to do with, if he was an asshole to the future President he might as well move out of the country. He would be fucked

 

[rotty]

It's a good intention. But I wouldn't want Ron P to get there and be asked a few straight questions for a minute or two and then Howard starts in with the sex referrences and bullshit like that! Going on the Stern show can make or break a person. Right now I don't think Ron wants to be associated with the likes of Howard. (I could be wrong but hey, why chance it)

Howard Stern isn't going to make or break anyone. He may have a decent following but he isn't going to influence a national election

 

[LEX]

Howard Stern isn't going to make or break anyone. He may have a decent following but he isn't going to influence a national election

8 million loyal listeners that have been well versed in how the govt can fuck up a good thing like his show on reg radio. Not saying you are totally wrong but his like Paul and had him on the show it would open alot of eyes.

 

[Sesshomaru]

Not gonna happen...Howard won't have him on for the simple reason, there is a law that says if you have to give equal time to everyone. So if he has someone on that he likes, he then has to give the opportunity to hte rest of the candidates. I don't think he is going to want to have to take the chance of having a bunch of politicians on the air even though I'm sure most would decline. Howard wouldn't have the balls to be a dick to all of the Presidential hopefulls because someone is going to win and he got a ton of shit from the politicians/government for the whole Janet Jackson thing which he had nothing to do with, if he was an asshole to the future President he might as well move out of the country. He would be fucked

There is, an equal time law that does require stations giving air time to one candidate to give air time to opponents. Nevertheless, Congress has carved out several exceptions to that rule, including candidate appearances on newscasts, most interview programs, and in debates. Consequently, a station or network could have some candidates on in those formats but not all of their opponents. So if a station chooses not to cover - or even mention - one candidate on its news, it is entitled to do so. Similarly, it can exclude whatever candidates it wants from candidate debates. The equal time rule is largely aimed at paid political advertising, such that if one candidate purchases time on the air, his opponent is entitled to buy an equal amount of time.

Anyway, heres an update:

***********************(from DailyPaul)******************
I called campaign HQ
On January 7th, 2008 fringeNOT says:

They said that they have heard of the offer from Howard Stern.

The person I talked to (Mike) said that he did not know whether they had responded. Couldn't get any more details.

Told Mike I would post the information that "they know".

The ball is in their court, hope they act on this great opportunity for a wider audience.

 

[buschris]

Well, I'm calling BS because Fox left him out, I think HS should do a one man debate. lol

 

[BOOMSHAKER]

Did you watch the clip? I think Howard would be respectful, especially because he likes Paul. It would be like voting Sanjaya in American Idol.

Also, Ron Paul has clearly stated that he is not in the business of dictating how people express their freedoms. This is why hes been on so many shows on TV and radio.

Understood, my point is Stern makes his living off of being a jack ass. Do I think he is funny? Absolutly! Do I think Howard is intelligent? Absolutly! Do I also think Howard makes his money from the sponsors that pay him to be a ratings grabber by any means neccesary? ABSOLUTLY! It would be a matter of time before Howard started in with his same old shit, and the media from there on forward would run sound bites or printed materials(newspaper) from this interview and try to smear his good reputation he has built so far. That was the only point I was trying to make.

 

[BOOMSHAKER]

Howard Stern isn't going to make or break anyone. He may have a decent following but he isn't going to influence a national election

I respectfully disagree. Look what he did for governor Pataky(?) Look at what he also did for Mayor Juliani(?) Look at also what he did for Governor Christie Todd Whitman a number of years ago. Just to name a few. He himself is a nobody, but he himself has enough followers to help influence the vote for certain people he chooses to help or not to help out by voicing his dislike for that person.

 

[rotty]

I respectfully disagree. Look what he did for governor Pataky(?) Look at what he also did for Mayor Juliani(?) Look at also what he did for Governor Christie Todd Whitman a number of years ago. Just to name a few. He himself is a nobody, but he himself has enough followers to help influence the vote for certain people he chooses to help or not to help out by voicing his dislike for that person.

Ok...look at what I said "influence a national election." Governor of New York and New Jersey are not national elections. Do I think he could influence a race in a major market in the Northeast, absolutely. His biggest following is going to be major markets. I can almost guarantee that his listeners cannot do much in a national election. You can rule out the entire bible belt, south, mid-south, mid-west. He's not that big in those areas so his influence in less than negligible. As far as his influencing NY, its a lost cause. NY votes Dem, almost exclusively. If Paul was a Democrat he could swing him that state. I don't know how good Howards following is in Cali but I would say he could probably help there. Mass is out of the question, it's another Dem state. There are very few swing states which is why I hate our current system of electing President. Scrap the electoral college!!! Go to a national popular vote!!!!!

 

[rotty]

There is, an equal time law that does require stations giving air time to one candidate to give air time to opponents. Nevertheless, Congress has carved out several exceptions to that rule, including candidate appearances on newscasts, most interview programs, and in debates. Consequently, a station or network could have some candidates on in those formats but not all of their opponents. So if a station chooses not to cover - or even mention - one candidate on its news, it is entitled to do so. Similarly, it can exclude whatever candidates it wants from candidate debates. The equal time rule is largely aimed at paid political advertising, such that if one candidate purchases time on the air, his opponent is entitled to buy an equal amount of time.

Anyway, heres an update:

***********************(from DailyPaul)******************
I called campaign HQ
On January 7th, 2008 fringeNOT says:

They said that they have heard of the offer from Howard Stern.

The person I talked to (Mike) said that he did not know whether they had responded. Couldn't get any more details.

Told Mike I would post the information that "they know".

The ball is in their court, hope they act on this great opportunity for a wider audience.

I remember years ago when Arnold was running for governor of Cali they couldn't have him on because of the equal time thing. He was a big fan of the show and was on many times prior to his running and I remember BABA Booey saying that was why Arnold had to cancel his appearance

 

[rotty]

8 million loyal listeners that have been well versed in how the govt can fuck up a good thing like his show on reg radio. Not saying you are totally wrong but his like Paul and had him on the show it would open alot of eyes.

8 million out of roughly 250 million people of voting age? Where certain states won't elect him no matter what because he's a Republican. 2 of his biggest markets are Boston and New York, almost guaranteed that they will vote Dem in the national election