In the latest GOP debate, shown on Fox News, Thurs., January 10th, familiar themes were seen. Rudy has virtually morphed into Mr. 9/11, since there is nothing else he can possibly run on within the Republican party. Fred Thompson is trying to wake up from his hibernation, because he has been a no-show thus far. John McCain is beginning to tout his experience and promoting his war mongering proudly. Mitt Romney… well, what can you say about him? He continues to change positions. If a flip-flop counter was stationed at every debate and a performance at the debate was judged by one’s ability to increase the numbers at the counter, then Mitt Romney would win every single debate, which would change nothing. Mike Huckabee is slowly beginning to get marginalized by the Republican establishment, since his religiosity is too much even for them. And of course there is the blasphemous Ron Paul, the only anti-war GOP candidate, whom the Neocons hate, but whose anti-war message is resonating with only the majority of the population. Yet the “liberal” paper of record, the NY Times, won’t even mention his name in their article, in which they discuss the debate’s rhetoric and fresh, qoutable soundbytes. But of course, as usual, there is not a mention of issues beyond the regular, frequently heard talking points.

What was observed at the debate, however, and obviously ignored by the mainstream media, let alone Fox News, is the utter contempt directed at Ron Paul by the Fox News questioners. On one occasion Ron Paul was asked about his stance towards the “9/11 truthers” and their conspiracy theory, to which he replied that he doesn’t agree with them and then pleaded to be allowed to participate in the more serious part of the debate, to which the Republican audience gave him a loud applause. Of course, this was not over for Ron Paul.

In a later segment of the debate, the candidates were asked if they agreed with the passive decision taken by the navy commanders in response to the latest so-called crisis in the Iranian Strait of Hormuz, in which 5 Iranian boats allegedly “threatened” the US navy. Pastor Huckabee, unsurprisingly, invoked a Biblical term in his response to the situation, threatening that “Iran should be prepared to face the gates of hell”. Predictably, the rest of the Republican candidates “patriotically” got behind the navy commander, and then followed it up by threatening Iran, in an apparent case of clear paradox. The exception was Ron Paul who urged to exercise caution when dealing with Iran and suggested to tone down the war rhetoric towards Iran. This reaction was not met well by Brit Hume, one of the questioners at the debate and a regular anchor at Fox News, who mockingly asked Ron Paul “what he was responding to”, since all the candidates agreed with the navy commanders to take a passive approach. The message was clear: all candidates are allowed to be elaborate in their response to a question, with one exception: Dr. Ron Paul

But even that was not the end to the humiliation of Ron Paul. In another segment of the debate, Fox News’ big shot reporter, Carl Cameron, asked Ron Paul about his “viability” as a candidate, in a laughing and unprofessional manner. But that’s not even the core of this story. According to one source this segment was banned by Fox News when it was later re-run on their channel. So much for freedom of speech and spreading of democracy that Fox News so proudly stands for.

If there is one message that appears very clearly, it is that anyone that is willing to stand up against the core of the Republican Party’s establishment, will inevitably get excoriated by Fox News and their ideological affiliates. Of course this sort of censorship is pervasive not only within the Republican circles and debates, but also among the Democrats. That was clearly seen when Dennis Kucinich, a staunch anti-war presidential candidate, was asked about UFO’s at the Democratic debate. Meanwhile Mike Gravel is not even allowed to participate in the debates.

The tendency to suppress the voices of dissent by the mainstream media has become so pervasive that what Noam Chomsky refers to as the “manufacture of consent” has become a fact rather than just a theory. The intent is clear: to marginalize the public and democracy in an attempt to prevent the people from participating in their own government. This is done consciously by the mainstream candidates themselves, who simply refuse to talk about the issues; and is successfully magnified by the mainstream media who deliberately ignore and marginalize the voices of dissent. Democracy as a word has become a tool of propaganda, while the concept itself has all but vanished.