Posted on 04/11/2015 4:46:32 PM PDT by Kaslin
Although I'm extremely excited for the 2016 election even without having a particular GOP candidate in mind as my hoped-for annihilator of Hillary Rodham, Rand Paul really ticked me off this week. I mean REALLY ticked me off.
It looks like he is not going to play ball with the press. And that's a huge mistake.
So what happened?
He tussled with Savannah Guthrie, the 'Today' host, over her editorializing rather than simply questioning him. She was pressing him on whether or not he'd changed opinions on foreign aid to Israel and he not only objected to her talking over him and rendering an opinion in the process, he also gave her a suggestion as to how better to interview him.
He also had a couple of irritation-revealing interactions with journalists over questions about abortion. In both cases, the journalists were unhappy with the way Paul responded and Paul was even more unhappy with their reactions to that.
He even had the temerity to question the assumptions behind the interviewer's abortion question, saying:
“Here’s the deal — we always seem to have the debate waaaaay over here on what are the exact details of exemptions, or when it starts. Why don’t we ask the DNC: Is it okay to kill a seven-pound baby in the uterus? You go back and you ask Debbie Wasserman-Schultz if she’s okay with killing a seven-pound baby that is not born yet. Ask her when life begins, and you ask Debbie when it’s okay to protect life. When you get an answer from Debbie, get back to me.”
It was as if he didn't even respect their importance and influence enough to respond the way they wanted. How in the world can he expect to win their approval that way?
He attempted to explain himself several times, firstly to Wolf Blitzer in a television interview on CNN, then to Megyn Kelly on Fox News, and finally on Mark Levin's radio show, by acknowledging that he does get short-tempered and doesn't like it when simple direct questions aren't asked of him. He even went further on Levin's show, stating that he (and other conservatives) get tough questions whereas people like Hillary get asked how their vacations were or if they recalled being at a party together in the Hamptons.
What a strategic error he is making.
Doesn't he understand that pleasing the media should be his number one priority? Being someone they like and with whom they agree is the way to get the "What's your favorite color?" questions. Maintaining principle and attempting to dictate the rules of the game may please the masses and scratch an itch conservatives have had for years, but it certainly won't win friends and influence MSNBC people. And how else will he win their votes?
There are lessons that can be learned from the past and he'd do very well to study them.
Imagine, for a moment, had Mitt Romney spent time wooing and gaining the approval of Candy Crowley. Would she have been so energetic in her defense of President Obama during their debate? Perhaps she'd not have incorrectly opined in the middle of their discussion and that could've made a difference in the election.
Consider if John McCain had made a sufficient impression on Chris Matthews so that even an inspiring speech by Barack Obama wouldn't have sent a thrill up his leg. Would Matthews have spent so many countless hours beating the drum in support of the President had Republicans spent more time being what Matthews wanted them to be? It might be a completely different political world.
One might consider thinking it would be wise to directly fight to the media. But that would require recognizing they're as much of a political opposition to conservatives as are liberals and Democrats. Before going down that lonely road, it would have to be realized that such an approach won't get you invited to Andrea Mitchell's cocktail party or a big thumbs up from Rachel Maddow. And that would be a tragedy, wouldn't it?
BS. with what the media threw in diabolical wickedry reminiscent of seething pharisees, Rand did excelent in my book.
Cruz doesn’t get rattled and does handle the media well. I did hear him a few months back give the Cuomo clown on CNN a well deserved spanking.
Newt was excellent at handling the media, too. He had his own technique, more abrasive than Cruz’s. Rand’s approach is more like Newt’s than Ted’s.
Whatever their personal styles, Cruz, Paul, and Gingrinch have done a real service not backing down to the Dim media.
bookmark
You can settle. Stop being so stupid. We can maybe but he needs our support also. Learn the one thing the Democrats do right. They support the people that can run and DO NOT TELL ME HE CAN’T WIN. That is bull s^&t.
The author doesn't mean it. Put on these glasses (pulls a set of decoder glasses from his pocket and proffers them).
It's actually a pretty funny piece because it isolates that very assumption in order to spatter it with derisive laughter (ours). The delicious part is that 1) Liberals and RINOs won't quite get it, since they believe that's really the number-one priority, but notice that it looks naked and silly stated so simply; and 2) Conservatives get to snigger at the self-importance of the pseudo-journalists, who think they are the real story of this election, and of American and possibly world history.
I can’t believe it took 11 posts to figure that out.
/s
So you expect someone to run for President of the United States that is NOT a politician? Good luck with that. Have a nice evening.
I’m INFURIATED too with Rand Paul. Particularly when he calls for a huge PRISONER RELEASE and essentially calls conservatives that support Voter ID RACISTS.
So me and this reporter are in the same boat.
I do like it that both he and his father are pro-life, so many libertarians aren’t. And the dad is an obstetrician, isn’t he?
No, I don’t act that way. He may very well be aware of their biases but as he stated in real time during the interview, at the very least he should have the reasonable expectation of being asked a question and given a chance to answer. As before, Guthrie was off on her own little monologue which, whatever our opinion of her and/or Paul, was not the purpose of his appearance.
A categorical term such as ‘forced’ ignores the reality of the situation i.e. any presidential candidate is going to have to interact with the press including the major networks. ‘Get out of the kitchen’ may be an appealing cliche but it’s hardly a media strategy that will carry him through the next 18 months.
Oh, and that he calls us neo-cons. That’s a slur and a veiled anti-Semitic one too.
Candidates have been successful at outing the liberal press. Usually it is done with humor but sometimes with confrontation. Laughing and saying to Guthrie “that was a great DNC editorial” before jumping in addressing all her charges, would have been more effective than the snippiness Rand walked into. Rand’s personality is snippy and without great wit. He’s not much of a showman.
Remember when Reagan laughed and said “There ya go again” to a liberal during the debate and he made the whole audience laugh? I saw a clip of it on youtube. It was great.
Paul should take some anger management classes
And do a better job who he interviews with, for starters.
I want a Republican to just once respond with a question like: “Didn’t President Obama change his mind on gay marriage”? Didn’t he change his mind on Executive Orders?”.
I agree, that’s why Ted Cruz shows amatures how to deal with the media...
Democrats demand a list of questions a head of time. Democrats demand that they will have the final say on any questions and “answers”.
It is going to brutal campaign for Republicans with the media. Hillary will of course, be able to charm and make them giggle, as she eats the heart out of a small child on stage.
I really like the aggressive approach. Call out all the Democrat suck-ups in the media, and refuse to answer them until their questions are really questions rather than Democrat talking points.
This is an absurd expectation. There are only two responses the press want from Paul: either one that gives the press means to destroy him or one that caves to the Democrat position. So what does this idiot expect?
Jesus man, don’t you have something real to worry about? Like another Democrat like Clinton in the White House?
The Republicans biggest problem isn’t the ideologically vacant Democrats they run against (because they CAN be beaten), but pointing the cannons straight down, at their own keel rather than the enemy ship (dems)...
Who is the real enemy here??
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.