Posted on 12/21/2011 6:55:21 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Via Mediaite, the same bit jumped out at me as jumped out at Ace:
Borger: “These things are pretty incendiary.”
Paul: “That’s because of people like you.”
Really? Only liberal/media types should find the newsletters offensive? He can’t mean that because he keeps saying that he disavows the content. I think he means that the newsletters are water under bridge which everyone rightly should, and would, never mention again if not for the media repeatedly bringing them up. Which is interesting for a few reasons. One: Every other candidate’s dirty laundry has been aired and re-aired over the past few months and no one else has enjoyed an “asked and answered” defense. How many thousand times has Perry been pressed to apologize for his dumb debate remark about immigration hawks being heartless, for instance? Two: As Dave Weigel notes, Paul actually hasn’t answered all the questions asked about the newsletters. He won’t say who wrote them or whether he still associates with the author. All he knows is that none of this is fair game anymore, which goes even further than Obama did when he tried to dismiss an obnoxious association of his own.
Three: Until this week, when his odds of winning Iowa suddenly started to look real, Paul’s gotten an almost total pass from the media on this. Partly that’s because he used to look like a longshot who wasn’t worth bothering about and partly it’s because the media admires him as a Republican who hates other Republicans, especially when it comes to foreign policy. By the end here, in fact, Borger seems almost apologetic in having had to ask about it. Would any other conservative, save possibly Huntsman, have drawn that tone from a reporter in a line of questioning about racism? And four: To echo a point Ed made a few days ago, if Romney or Perry or Gingrich had these newsletters on their resume, they’d be dead on arrival. Even if primary voters believed their “didn’t write ‘em, never saw ‘em” explanation, they’d be perceived as unelectable against Obama and therefore un-nominatable. Paul, ironically, gets some leeway from people on this, I think, because he’s already perceived as unelectable and un-nominatable (except by his core supporters, of course). Why beat him up over an old disgrace when he’s about to have a moment in the sun in Iowa and then fade?
For what it’s worth, his answer here tracks perfectly with the reactions I typically see from Paul fans in blog comment threads whenever the newsletters come up. It’s never a matter of “yes, they’re disturbing and absolutely fair game, but we need to elect Paul anyway because we desperately need his fiscal discipline.” Rather, it’s always a case of “Meh, old news. This again?” Good luck in the general election, guys. Exit quotation from Philip Klein: “Ron Paul transparency: Bradley Manning is a hero for leaking classified info, but don’t dare ask who wrote my newsletters!”
Update: Ed e-mails to ask if I can recall another presidential candidate walking out of an interview with a mainstream news outlet. I’m sure it’s happened, but I honestly can’t think of an example. Anyone?
Update: A reader e-mails that it looks to him like the interview was already over when Paul started pulling his mic off and that Borger simply kept asking questions, i.e. that he didn’t actually walk out. Hard to tell, but duly noted. Either way, Paul’s displeasure is obvious.
He’s a flipping nut. He’s not grounded enough to be a Nazi or anything else that can be categorized.
He’s being taken seriously by too many. Because of inflation and bankers being associated w Jews. He’s being proven to be a real threat to not just the political process but societal order.
I guess racists don’t like being asked about their racists beliefs ... especially when he has been using the excuse that he didn’t read what other people were publishing over his signature making him either a fool or having no more talent than an illiterate.
I never thought I’d find FReepers so “concerned” about racism. Did Jesse Jackson take over the website from JimRob? Did Kweisi Mfume sign up?
What a fascinating change in outlook. It couldn’t be an orchestrated effort to trash a political opponent, could it? After all, only the ‘rats and the msm do that.
(/s)
“He’s being proven to be a real threat to not just the political process but societal order.”
And a grave threat to the gop establishment. Oh the horrors.
Do ya think the lame brains that follow paul are sufficient in number to get past maybe a 2nd place in the Iowa buy-a-vote cheatathon? After Iowa he will fall on his face in any real Primaries.
If Iowa was a real Primary, actual voters would run from Paul and he would not be a subject for discussion.
“Stick a fork in him, he’s done.....”
Until he runs a third party challenge.
Agreed. But what gets me is to see all the “I’m voting for CAIN because he’s an outsider and a businessman”, now embracing ole Newt.
The ultimate insider life long POL, government money whore/Lobbyist.
Humm seems we have a few with Multiple Personality
disorder roaming the Web.
“Do ya think the lame brains that follow paul are sufficient in number to get past maybe a 2nd place in the Iowa buy-a-vote cheatathon? After Iowa he will fall on his face in any real Primaries.”
Yeah, he’ll get enough votes to do OK in early primaries, especially those in open primary states. Then his star will probably start to fade with the inevitable pile-on to secure the coronation for mittens. But that doesn’t much matter, the objective of Ron Paul’s gop campaign will have been accomplished.
Then he starts the third party run.
“Rino’s or paul? I’ll pass. They’re both scum in their own imitable way.”
You forgot barky. He’ll be your third menu choice.
probably not worse than Rev Wright and our present president.
Supporting third party candidates on principle sounds great in theory; in reality it sucks!
“It’s Ron Pauls turn to get “Cained” now.”
Unlike Cain, Paul has been doing this for years. He never backs down and never apologizes. He stonewalls the press and eventually they get tired of asking the same questions. Voters either don’t care or don’t notice. The same thing happened when Rand Paul stonewalled the press on racial issues.
bookmark
“He never backs down and never apologizes. He stonewalls the press and eventually they get tired of asking the same questions. Voters either don’t care or don’t notice.”
Interesting observation. Maybe there’s a lesson for conservative candidates?
RE: some poorly published newsletter that he didn’t write.
CNN’s badgering aside...
If Ron Paul really disavowed its contests ( the newsletter has HIS NAME on it and people associate it WITH HIM ), he should have KNOWN about its contents and put a stop to it long ago.
That he did not act at all sows doubts in people’s minds and I can’t blame them.
This kind of disavowal smacks of Obama sitting on Rev. Wright’s pew for many years and then telling us that he never heard him spout his anti-America rhetoric even once.
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.