An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Ron Paul Cuts Off CNN Interview When Pressed About Incendiary Old Newsletters
CNN’s Gloria Borger asked Rep. Ron Paul some tough questions about some old newsletters that had some extremist and racist assertions — newsletters that were under his name but he says he did not write. Paul cut the interview short (not quite walking out since he said good bye and had his body mike taken off him. She was pressing him as to whether he read the disavowed newsletters under his name:
On the other hand, some like Mediaite columnist Alex Alvarez wonder what’s going on since another CNNer had grilled Paul about the same newsletters recently and also was featured in a segment later on.
Some thoughts:
12 Responses to “Ron Paul Cuts Off CNN Interview When Pressed About Incendiary Old Newsletters”
Seems like he did answer it, but she wouldn’t take his answer.
His answer is not good enough simply because he did practically nothing over the years to PUBLICALLY separate himself from these newsletters.
He didn’t try hard enough and he is a screwball if he thinks people are not going to bring it up when running for the most powerful office in the world.
CNN’s questions are legitimate and I thank CNN for asking them, because I didn’t know. Now I do.
He should have known that those letters were going to dog him– that’s public evidence of his professed beliefs that he signed– regardless of who wrote them. Besides why should we believe him when he says he had nothing to do with putting them out or with their content??
Look at how much was made of Obama’s association with Ayers even though he was 8 when the guy was a domestic terrorist.
Yes, of course he knew that they were (and will still) continue to dog him about the issue, which is why he answered the question more than once (probably more, we don’t know what they cut out at the 00:38 mark, and I can’t find an uncut version of the interview).
What I take exception to is “Good candidates handle it and then move on.”, when the reporter just continues to repeat the same question in different words. She was the one who couldn’t handle the answer and move on.
I don’t think that Ron Paul has handled this issue well at all.
As to Dr. Paul’s accusation that CNN has been “pestering” him with regards to this issue–I agree that the media tends to spend to much time focusing on trivial matters; however, the existence of newsletters with clearly racist language being published under your name is hardly a trivial matter, and whether Ron Paul agrees or not, it’s going to be considered by the wider public as a legitimate news story.
It is true that Dr. Paul has address this issue before–both during the current presidential campaign and the 2008 presidential campaign. But what Dr. Paul has got to understand is that–despite his more than 20 years in congress and his steady rise in the polls–there are still a lot of Americans who are not particularly informed about politics and thus still have no idea of who he is. And even among those who know who Ron Paul is, there are plenty of people who have still not heard about the racist newletters (despite the wide amount of attention they received in January 2008) and plenty of people who have not heard Dr. Paul’s side of the story.
When it comes to politics, I believe that sunlight is the best disinfectant. If Ron Paul did not write the racist articles in question and had no knowledge of them when they were written, then he should be willing to dilvulge what he knows and not get so defensive over this issue.
Well, I don’t think the media is going to change — and I don’t know that I’d want them to. They’ve dogged Herman, Gingrich and Perry about past issues– that I’m sure they were tired of addressing. It comes with the territory — but its obvious that Dr. Paul isn’t used to it. Walking off in a huff isn’t the answer either as Cain found out.
I’m not sure we’re getting the whole truth about those letters, and I have to say it would make me very uncomfortable to have a president in office who had published them and profited from them. He raised money from all kinds of white supremacists, and still has ties to the John Birch society. I guess I don’t see the attraction- altho some of his positions make sense to me– ending wars of aggression, ending the pointless war on drugs, decriminalizing drug users. But the rest is just too bizarre.
Prof-
Paul knew and even wrote several of those racist, wack, right wing nutcase newsletters. Paul is lying when he says “he didn’t know”
NO POLITICIAN, or anybody for that matter, will allow other people to write crap like that in their name. Paul had to knwo and had to aprove. No other way around it because he didn’t even try to stop it. Nothing.
First off, I am for Huntsman and certainly not Paul. However, this seems a little old and he said he had not read them and disavowed the contents. Unless there is new info, it has been asked and answered. That being said, he should issue a statement clearly stating again whatever he wants to say and then refer to the statement and read it to any new questioner.
Isn’t it interesting that no matter who floats to the top of the GOP candidate bottle, there’s always something with which to push them back down. Only Mr. Romney keeps bobbing back up to the top. I wonder why that is.
One wonders what is in Mr. Huntsman and Mr. Santorum’s past that will surface when/if they rise to the 20% sphere. And if they will be asked questions ad infinitum about it – whatever it is.
One also wonders what is in the past of the Tea Party freshmen that is waiting to be explored. True they are not running for President – yet – but perhaps we should find out since they seem to be the bottleneck of current legislative processing (which may be more important than running for President).
I like to think I am a “moderate liberal” and, consistent with that not. I wanna like Ron Paul. I really do. I am intrigued by his take on limiting federal government intrusion in our social and economic lives, and completely support his realist assessment and criticism of our military interventionism. But he has, in my view, some far-out ideas (on the Federal Reserve, monetary policy, the environment, etc.)that I cant align with, and in the end probably can’t support for the presidency. But still… I wanna respect him as a consistent straight shooter and would love to see him pull the Republicans toward reality on the military, federalism, and social policy. Unfortunately this ugly and downright stupid racist crap from past years… that’s a real deal breaker for me. He has to do more than refuse to address. I hope he explains and renounces. If not, he’s not the man I hope he could be.
@Keelaay
He has explained and renounced on several occasions, including the day before on another CNN interview.
Here’s CNN’s take in 2008, and Paul’s response.
This is the full un-cut CNN interview. You will find the interview was edited to fit the CNN reporters Narrative
(Uncut Ron Paul Interview – CNN Gloria Borger – On YouTube)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLonnC_ZWQ0&feature=pl%20ayer_embedded%EF%BB%BF