Paul and the Media

[Peter1469]

Paul and the Media (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/04/10/no-rand-paul-didnt-storm-out-of-an-interview/)

Unsurprisingly the MSM and the Fellow Travelers are into an extreme makeover of the facts when it comes to Rand Paul and the media. All thinking people can see that the MSM is doing what it typically does: lie.

But we will not allow the Forum to be mislead by the dishonest opponents of Candidate Paul.


Rand Paul gave an interview to the Guardian's Paul Lewis on Friday about criminal justice ... and abruptly walked off when Lewis tried asking an additional question. Here's video of the end of that interview, so you can see for yourself (the full video is also available now on Lewis' Periscope account):

***


You'll notice that both Paul and Lewis agreed to one more question, and Paul left when Lewis asked a second "last question." But that Paul walked off quickly and that the lights were turned off made it look that he left in the middle of it. Optics!

[Howey]

Paul has frequently seemed annoyed by questions he gets or at least not agreed*with the premise of them, which is fine for him to express. But the problem comes in his*delivery; the shushing and the talking-over and the walking out abruptly doesn't do him any favors. His tweet might have diffused the micro-controversy, but a "thanks for your questions, but I have to go to my next interview," would have gone a long way. Just saying.

In this case he may get a pass, but overall? Can't get along in class.

We don't need a hothead president with his hands on the trigger.

[Peter1469]

In this case he may get a pass, but overall? Can't get along in class.

We don't need a hothead president with his hands on the trigger.

We don't need any representative of the establishment.

Paul would be a relief.

[Green Arrow]

In this case he may get a pass, but overall? Can't get along in class.

We don't need a hothead president with his hands on the trigger.

Yet you support Hillary, who also has a feisty relationship with the press.

[Howey]

Yet you support Hillary, who also has a feisty relationship with the press.

The difference is anger. Hillary has a love/hate relationship with the press, but she is open with them, particularly in private. Rand? Nope.

I expected y'all to say I was toting the party line on that comment about Paul. Never heard it before until after I posted that. On FOX. So if there's questions about his judgement he needs to be vetted.

After all, Savannah Guthrie? I mean, she's great and all that - and an accomplished attorney - but for him to have a meltdown his first interview? Not good.

[Peter1469]

The difference is anger. Hillary has a love/hate relationship with the press, but she is open with them, particularly in private. Rand? Nope.

I expected y'all to say I was toting the party line on that comment about Paul. Never heard it before until after I posted that. On FOX. So if there's questions about his judgement he needs to be vetted.

After all, Savannah Guthrie? I mean, she's great and all that - and an accomplished attorney - but for him to have a meltdown his first interview? Not good.

That is a joke. Hillary uses the press. And the press lets her.

[del]

lol at paul being different

just lol

carry on

[Mac-7]

If I were rand Paul I would not give private interviews to the lib news media.

Talking over them is better than fighting with them.

[Peter1469]

Paul could go far by refusing "journalist" access. Theme: journalism is dead in America.

Americans would eat it up.