Posted on 04/10/2015 10:44:23 AM PDT by Citizen Zed
Republican senator Rand Paul walked out of a live interview with the Guardian on Friday, in the third testy exchange he has had with a journalist since launching his campaign for president three days ago.
Paul, who said during his campaign launch on Tuesday he would like to see “any law that disproportionately incarcerates people of color is repealed”, responded awkwardly when asked which specific piece of legislation he would repeal.
In a live broadcast via the smartphone app Periscope, Paul said he had “a host of bills” that would amend or repeal part of the statute.
Midway through his answer, he added: “Let me answer the question, you complain I don’t answer the question … I am giving you the specifics.”
Paul spoke about the various pieces of bipartisan legislation he has brought to reform the criminal justice system, but did not point to a specific criminal law that he would repeal.
In his final question, he was asked about research showing that white Republicans do not agree with his view that the criminal law is applied in an unequal fashion.
“I think your premise is incorrect,” he said. “Actually I think I can take that message into a white evangelical church anywhere in Iowa and give exactly the same speech and be received well.”
When the reporter attempted a follow-up remark quoting a Washington Post-ABC poll about Republican views on criminal justice, Paul walked off camera.
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
I’ve seen all three interviews. He looked like a guy dealing with an ambush/gotcha style interview in all three.
In this one, the “journalists” question was akin to “have you stopped beating your Wife”...
Good point. Reagan didn’t have to deal with THIS Leftist of a media.
Even at it’s worst back then...
Yes. It was the end of the interview anyway when Paul took "one more". He answers it, then the reporter rushes in another question, Paul smiles and mumbles something about "one more" and walks off.
My guess is that you were in absolutely 100% agreement with
Doctor 2Brains, on everything.
Of a choice of 3 candidates Paul is like my 5th choice. That said i think this video interview warrants an uproar.
Happens every election cycle. Pretty sure a few are GOP-e insiders protecting the John McCains and Jeb Bushs from any or all competition.
Now to the issue. The libertarian view of incarceration is based on faulty facts and runs contrary to 25 years of criminal justice experience in this country. It is simply not true that people are in jail for minor drug offenses. Vast vast majority of drug offense terms are in conjunction with other more serious offenses, probation violation and/or prior convictions.
Although the USA has higher incarceration rates, it is also true that crime in the US has declined for 25 years. Why, because 25 years ago, the NYC/Giuliani model moved to law enforcement i.e., criminal justice instead of root cause i.e., criminology. We have forgotten that the USA almost gave up on lowering crime because we believed crime was the result of income disparity and lower education.
Many will argue that crimes associated with the black community carry higher prison terms than white crimes. The example is that crack crimes have heavier punishments the cocaine. THIS is true. But, what is also true that in the 1980's when crack came on the scene, the penalties were lighter than cocaine. At that time racism was charged because crack hurt the black community and thus white lawmakers did not care about the black community. The black community push for tougher sentences to get crack out of the black communities.
I don’t think it warrants an uproar.
Maybe my definition of walking out is different than Paulbots.
I watched the video and I saw a smirk, testy Paul walk out.
If you are unprepared for the biased MSM, why agree to an interview?
So ? It comes down to Ted Cruz supporters vs Rand Paul supporters here .
Ted Cruz is the real conservative here.
Rand Paul can join Hillary Clinton’s ticket as VP.
The Rand Paul supporters haven’t give a good explanation of what he means to have laws that dispportionately incarcerates blacks need to be repealed.
What exactly does Rand Paul mean ?
It’s a simple question.
And why just whites in Iowa that he believes this message will appeal to ?
I think it’s racist what your friend said. I don’t even know which races were chosen. Intelligence begats intelligence; its all in who you mate and the economic conditions around the child thereafter (food quality, leisure time). It has nothing to do with bone structure. In genetics there are simply degrees of similarity, usually tied to geography, not actual races. There are three different classifications of bone structure, which are not perfect categories either.
Paul looks unprepared and nasty.
You can blame the MSM all you want.
It was Paul’s decision to accept these interviews.
Paul and Cruz have an awful lot in common looking at their positions on various issues.
Both are pro-2A, pro-life, pro-Constitution/smaller government, etc...
Major differences appear to be foreign policy and government spending. Paul wants to spend less than Cruz and be less involved in areas of the world we have no business being in. Cruz wants to keep doing those things, but wants to do it smarter, and more in line with other conservative Presidents.
And? This suddenly means Paul would be a running mate with Clinton?
I have my own reservations about Paul, but I can make my point without making myself look like a hyperbolic jackass.
You opinion. IT looks to me like he's trying to softball these idiots while handling some seriously effed up questions.
Yup, that’s why we support the only true conservative : Ted Cruz....
No he is not. You are a complete idiot. Rand Paul is giving back to a liberal media and you are too blind to see it.
My my, personal insults, yeah, that shows class..
CLEARLY ALL the races are all 100% equal in all respects, and most certainly that applies to intelligence. All the races are clearly the same everywhere, and they live the same, act the same, and are indistinguishable from each other in every respect. The writers of “The Bell Curve” are retarded racists pigs who got it all wrong, and the ONLY reason that certain groups in this country (I won’t say who) always outperform certain other groups (I wont’t say who) in all things academic, intellectual, and mental is because that “dominant” group is composed of racist pigs who hold the other group down. And that “held down” group spends a LOT more time in prison, because, as you say, they don’t have good leisure time.
It was all a lie. In the video, you’ll see Paul tells the reporter he only has time for one more question. Once that question is asked and answered, the reporter presses on. And there’s nothing wrong with that. I do it all the time in interviews.
Paul, however, had an interview scheduled with CNN’s Dana Bash. So he walks off. There’s also nothing wrong with that. Abruptly cutting off an interviewer pushing the time limit happens all the time. It’s happened to me. You don’t know that, though, because I’m a professional. I don’t crybaby about it or try to sucker punch my interview subjects by making an issue out of a non-issue.
It also turns out that it was CNN who shut off the lights, probably to optimize whatever lighting set-up they had in place for their own Rand Paul interview.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/04/10/guardian-caught-lying-about-rand-paul-walking-out-of-interview/
Would they have won if they hadn't given good interviews?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.