Paul withdraws from energy forum

[Agora]

Houston Chronicle News Services

Politics
Paul withdraws from energy forum
WASHINGTON — Ron Paul, a Republican presidential hopeful, on Friday bowed out of the Greater Houston Partnership's energy forum.

Organizers of America's Energy Future: Houston's Presidential Summit — scheduled for Thursday at the George R. Brown Convention Center — had hoped presidential candidates would debate how the nation can best improve its energy security.

But only Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton and Paul, a congressman from Lake Jackson, had agreed to attend the event. And rather than debate, the candidates were to speak separately hours apart.

"Since it's no longer a debate, Ron is going to stay in Washington and make his votes," Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said.

Clinton, as of late Friday, was still scheduled to attend.



http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/5563703.html


Smart move.

 

[JS4Pat]

His speech was going to be TELEVISED by the MSM - What the hell is his campaign thinking?????

Do they just want to stay marginalized?

Do they think appearing on C-SPAN is going to better advance this movement?

 

[H Roark]

I still see this event on the official site

Feb 28
Address to Houston Energy Summit
Houston, TX
TBD

If the campaign backed out of this opportunity they are freaken retarded.

 

[satchelmcqueen]

Im sorry but I just dont understand this move. Imagine him speaking uninterupted about energy. This would be a huge way to talk about our dependancy on oil and the Iraq/Iran situation. and more.

 

[satchelmcqueen]

hopefully this is untrue and just another wrong story printed. it is still on his site.

 

[Mister Grieves]

I hope this is disinformation.

 

[tgts2000]

If it's true then that's a horrible decision.

 

[Kotin]

ugh..

 

[Fox McCloud]

don't jump to conclusions here, maybe he got wind of something he didn't like....for example, maybe the whole thing is more about the rabid environmentalists and "global warming", which, as Ron's campaign has progressed, Ron seems to have taken a stronger and stronger stance against (particularly global warming).

 

[snpage]

If this is true, then ron deserves to lose.

 

[Agora]

we'll see. I see the points for making such a decision, but he for sure knows more details...

 

[pacelli]

I wonder if there are any related votes coming up on the 28th?

Ron gets to blast bernanke again:

2/27/2008 Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy
2/26/2008 Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy

http://financialservices.house.gov/hearings_all.shtml

 

[WilliamC]

Where does it say that it was going to be covered by the MSM?

If all it was going to be is another speech to a small audience that wasn't going to be televised or covered, what would be the point?

Don't assume we know everything about this that the campaign does.

 

[Sey.Naci]

don't jump to conclusions here, maybe he got wind of something he didn't like....for example, maybe the whole thing is more about the rabid environmentalists and "global warming", which, as Ron's campaign has progressed, Ron seems to have taken a stronger and stronger stance against (particularly global warming).

QFT.

The point about speech vs debate is a good one too. Don't doubt that he'd have been delighted to take on Clinton. However, remember the other recent event on CSPAN? The one that wasn't televised after McWar & Romney had spoken? The one in which RP spoke after those two? The campaign could have been thinking this was going to be the exact same thing, particularly given the report that RP and Clinton would be speaking hours apart.

At this stage, what RP must weigh is doing a speech on CSPAN that likely won't be aired - and if it is, won't be aired to key targets - vs using the time to better purpose.

 

[JS4Pat]

Where does it say that it was going to be covered by the MSM?

I read in another thread that MSNBC was going to televise both Hillary and RP's speeches.

 

[WilliamC]

I read in another thread that MSNBC was going to televise both Hillary and RP's speeches.

But would they have?

If it were a debate that would be one thing, but a speech?

I'm guessing they would either decide not to run it or probably just put it online and not on TV.

Again, I'm guessing the campaign knows better than I how important this really was in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Bruno]

If this is true, then ron deserves to lose.

Nice attitude. See ya.

I'm sure there is are good reasons for this decision, and it probably has to do with two factors:

A different article I read the other day said because the debate turned into a speech, it would be televised locally, with the option to carry it nationwide. As previously mentioned, we know what they did with the CPAC speech that Ron Paul delivered. It was an amazing speech, and they instead chose to rebroadcast McCain's speech.

Also, there are votes that he instead will make in Washington. That has always been a priority for him to remain loyal to his constituents.

 

[wfd40]

But would they have?

If it were a debate that would be one thing, but a speech?

I'm guessing they would either decide not to run it or probably just put it online and not on TV.

Again, I'm guessing the campaign knows better than I how important this really was in the grand scheme of things.

they might have, if RP actually stepped up his "rhetoric" against Clinton/Obama-type energy plans, but he hasn't so they wont...

Its all about headlines.. and Paul slamming Clinton and Obama's plans using his conservative line of reasoning might have been headline worthy...

Then again.. I can really think of only a couple times in this entire campaign where Dr. Paul actually called someone out by name (facisism line about Hucks, and McCain not being a conservative.. but the latter was after super tuesday, so no real deal ..), so why start now when its pretty much pointless and more certainly not gentlemanly...

 

[fairverona]

If this is true, then ron deserves to lose.

Overreacting much? Ron Paul deserve to lose the race for President because he has chosen to vote in the House rather than attend a probably largely ignored energy forum? I disagree.

 

[seeker1]

The official site doesn't change that quickly

I still see this event on the official site

Feb 28
Address to Houston Energy Summit
Houston, TX
TBD

If the campaign backed out of this opportunity they are freaken retarded.

Another item on the "what are you doing" list.