I didn’t see the whole debate, but I noticed that a lot of the mainstream media picked up on an exchange between Rudy Giuliani and Ron Paul. You can read a more detailed analysis on Brian Berkey’s blog, and in many other places, including YouTube, but I’ll give a short synopsis.
Ron Paul spoke against US interventionist foreign policy. The moderator asked him whether 9/11 changed things. Paul then said something obviously true – that US interventionist policies cause others to hate us, and that increases their interest in attacking us (these are my words, not his).
The moderator asked him if he was saying we invited the 9/11 attacks, and he responded by providing a further explanation.
Rudy Giuliani jumps in, attacking Ron Paul and calling for him to withdraw his remark that we had invited the attack. Paul did not withdraw the remark, but then again he did not make that remark.
The mainstream media then decided that Giuliani won the debate by going after Paul on this.
So let me see if I got this right. Ron Paul says something that’s obviously true. Giuliani attacks him for saying the truth. And the mainstream media applauds him for attacking the truth.
What a disconnect.