And what more would you have done in my place if you'd see someone saying it's banal for something like Fox to censor someone like RP?
"Whining" is just a convenient way to dismiss a lot of things on forums, regardless of whether they're pertinent or not. E.g. in the quotes you've refluffied, you don't include the real context, that is, that a national media fixture like Fox is playing with politics to the point of censorship of national elections debates.... And you say it's normal. You say it's arguable that some candidates are less worthy of free speech, you equate preference for a candidate's policies to his or her right to campaign. You equate impartiality with some biased bull**** media company.
The two have nothing to do with one another. There's no comparison. The real bull**** here is RP's censorship, it's saying people who denounce that censorship are whining, it's saying politics in the US are just a joke for the biggest money and influence mongering clown with the best looking suit and best poker face can win, as opposed to the candidate most fit to satisfy PRESIDENTIAL functions.
Thompson didn't do as well as Paul, and yet he's invited. How do you excuse that one? It's bias and double standard, and calling it for what it is isn't whining. No more than Paul's a limp wristed egghead.. By your previously stated criteria, the only electable candidate is not one that knows his stuff (e.g. the freakin Constitution), but one that can look good doing whatever the poop they do in the white house.
Delirium - that was sarcasm.
