Video update - Ron Paul on Fox News w/ Megyn Kelly 1/13/12

[MsDoodahs]

LOL @ all the 2011/12 join dates freaking out.

Yeah, I just noticed that!

lol

 

[LisaNY]

He did great at pointing out how it was a terrorist act to set off that car bomb and we should not be involved in it.... Great job again by RP

WOW, he said that? BRILLIANT.

Car bombs ARE terrorist acts, why on earth would we condone that?

 

[luctor-et-emergo]

LOL @ all the 2011/12 join dates freaking out.

Thanks, .

I'd like a Tube very much as I missed this... Did Ron Say; Iran could be wiped off the map by either Israel or the US ? Or was that a comment someone in this topic made ? As this seems like a truthful statement that also makes a lot of sense...

 

[MsDoodahs]

A recent join date doesn't mean that we don't know how the average American thinks.

doesn't mean you do, either.

Just sayin....

 

[bluesc]

LOL @ all the 2011/12 join dates freaking out.

You need to drop that shit already.

 

[undergroundrr]

LOL @ all the 2011/12 join dates freaking out.

As another poster on this thread might say -
This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This

 

[ohgodno]

He continually falls into their traps on these questions on Iran.

"What would you do if Iran followed through and shut down the Straits of Hormuz?"
The question isn't would they - or could they (we all know they can't) - the question is IF THEY DID.

She's asking that precisely because he'll give the reality of the situation (and thus falls into the trap) - which makes him seem to the FOX viewer to be weak and appeasing to Iran. It's all about perception - the people watching FOX don't respond to facts - they respond to perception.

He's got to respond to the hypothetical - regardless of how batshit insane the hypotheticals are:
"If Iran trained an army of spider monkeys to choke Americans and released them in the U.S., killing 1,500 people, what would President Paul do?"

He'd have to respond as if the evidence proved Iran did it - "I'd go before congress and ask for a declaration of war against Iran."

All people want to hear is that he'd defend the country, that is all.

 

[IterTemporis]

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

That didn't go well. Hopefully the way he answered it won't get picked up and the media just moves on. She even asked him the perfect question about what he would do if they closed the straits of hormuz and he fluffed it, he knows the answer and he's delivered it perfectly before so why did he change it?

He already answered the Strait question:

Paul, one of the leading contenders to win next week's Iowa caucuses, said Iran would be justified in responding to the sanctions by blocking the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz. He compared the western sanctions to a hypothetical move by China to block the Gulf of Mexico, which Americans would consider an act of war.

He also said he would not respond militarily to keep the strait open—because he would not consider it an act of war against the U.S. But if he were president, he would report to Congress on the issue, leaving it up to lawmakers to declare war if they wanted.

"I think we're looking for trouble because we put these horrendous sanctions on Iran," Paul told a midday audience at the Hotel Pattee in Perry, Iowa.

 

[jct74]

//

 

[Bama Boy]

WTF. Ron Paul takes up about 1/4th of the screen, while they run file footage of the "boogymen" in the other 3/4. That is some bullshit.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

He continually falls into their traps on these questions on Iran.

"What would you do if Iran followed through and shut down the Straits of Hormuz?"
The question isn't would they - or could they (we all know they can't) - the question is IF THEY DID.

She's asking that precisely because he'll give the reality of the situation (and thus falls into the trap) - which makes him seem to the FOX viewer to be weak and appeasing to Iran. It's all about perception - the people watching FOX don't respond to facts - they respond to perception.

He's got to respond to the hypothetical - regardless of how batshit insane the hypotheticals are:
"If Iran trained an army of spider monkeys to choke Americans and released them in the U.S., killing 1,500 people, what would President Paul do?"

He'd have to respond as if the evidence proved Iran did it - "I'd go before congress and ask for a declaration of war against Iran."

All people want to hear is that he'd defend the country, that is all.

Questions surrounding Iran are not hypotheticals, they are propaganda. Giving an answer would be giving legitimacy to that propaganda.

 

[rgampell]

Well, he tried ...

He tried to make the point that the average Iranian is currently against the anti-American government, but not for long if outside forces keep interfering. It's a good point, and hopefully he can work with his team on a better version of this answer.

My feeling is that he really is dumbfounded that people don't already agree with him. (If he understood it better, his voice wouldn't rise in incredulity and exasperation every time he talks about this.) Maybe someone can get him some numbers showing that most Americans think Iranians are Arabs, or something, and then he might understand the depths of ignorance he's facing.

 

[Kevin Smyth]

Questions surrounding Iran are not hypotheticals, they are propaganda.

But it is propaganda that the Fox audience largely believes in.

 

[rachmiel]

I wouldn't get bent out of shape over an unextraordinary interview at 2:30 on a weekday afternoon. Megyn Kelly is just your typical FNC asshat singing the familiar tune.

 

[musicmax]

The whole point of that interview was Fox trying to prove that Iran can threaten America but Ron Paul won't do anything about it.

And unfortunately RP said nothing to refute that point. He needs a strong "when the national security of the United States is threatened I will work in concert with the Congress, the military, and our allies to eliminate that threat with swift, decisive and overwhelming action in accordance with the Constitution."

My opinion - which is worth exactly what you are paying for it - is that this interview was a net negative.

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Absolutely Absurb, NICE HIT PIECE by Scott Rasmussen. "The POLL FIXER"

You know this is bullshit, when even Ron brought up other polls have him tied against Obama. Ron Attracks Dems, Indies, and Cons... so we know Scott Rasmussen has another fixed hit piece against RP... just like NH & Iowa.

I've called this clown out on Twitter... ALL his polls are so biased against RON PAUL

 

[Dublin4Paul]

As another poster on this thread might say -
This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This This

I really don't think anyone is "freaking out." As I said in my post, this interview isn't going to somehow destroy us, we're fine and doing well for now, but in the long term, consistent answers like that do scare people away. We have to remember which party it is that we're dealing with here. The neo-conservatives aren't as influential as they once were, but we're kidding ourselves thinking we can secure the nomination at the end of the day without winning over some of the "softer" members of their ranks, and the consistant fox news viewers who are simply manipulated by their point of view. There's more time to do so, it's just that, the window is closing.

Oh, and I sorta quoted the wrong person, but too lazy to fix it now.

 

[Darthbrooklyn]

Can someone please make a tube of all the interviews where suddenly they have to go to a commercial when RP is giving a good answer?

 

[DGraham]

He already answered the Strait question:

I know. He'd go to congress, ask them what they think, if they declare war he sends in the military to end it swiftly and come home with no nation building. A perfect answer to the totally hypothetical(and unlikely) scenario. He didn't say that though in this interview when he had an excellent oppotunity to do so.