Rand Paul's condescension
by digby
Joan Walsh discusses his most recent hissy fit when a woman journalist had the nerve to ask him tough questions:
After a few pleasantries – Paul claimed he was too interested in sports, “academics and reading” to ponder a career in politics when he was younger – Guthrie asked him his position on the “framework” of an Iran nuclear deal announced last week by President Obama. Paul said he thought only Congress can lift the sanctions it imposed. That’s a controversial view, but widely shared. Fair enough.
Then Guthrie asked about three ways he’s changed his “unorthodox” foreign policy views in recent years: He once said Iran wasn’t a threat, he opposed foreign aid to Israel and he favored defense cuts; he’s flipped on all three.
Before she could finish the question, though, Paul interrupted her: “Before we go, before we go, before we go through a litany…why don’t you let me explain before talking over me, ok?”
“Sure,” Guthrie said. But Paul continued to berate her.
Before we go through a litany of things you say I’ve changed on, why don’t you ask me a question, ‘Have I changed my opinion on it?” That would be sort of a better way to approach an interview.
OK: Is Iran still not a threat?
No no no no no no no no; listen, you’ve editorialized, let me answer a question. You ask a question, “Have my views changed?” instead of editorializing and saying my views have changed. OK, let’s start out with regard to foreign aid.
Then he simplistically and condescendingly walked her through the world according to Rand, with one more peevish “let me answer the question” about his evolving position on aid to Israel.
Walsh reminds her readers of this earlier back and forth between Paul and a female interviewer:
If all this sounds familiar, it should: Paul had a similar tantrum with another female interviewer, CNBC’s Kelly Evans, just two months ago. You’ll recall: Evans asked Paul about his odd statements questioning vaccine policy in the wake of a dangerous measles outbreak. The Kentucky senator not only bristled, he rudely shushed the news anchor, literally, with a finger to his lips. “Let me finish. Hey, Kelly, shhh. Calm down a bit here, Kelly. Let me answer the question.”
As she points out, both of these were tough interviews for Paul since they questioned him closely on his hypocrisy and inconsistency. And this is an old trick conservatives use because "attacking" the so-called liberal media is ever popular with their followers. But he does seem to have a particularly nasty approach with female interviewers, talking down to them like children in a way that stands out even among right-wingers. The last time I saw anyone do it quite so blatantly was when a drunk-appearing Dick Armey said to Joan Walsh on Hardball that he was glad he wasn't married to her and forced to hear the sound of her voice every day.
Chuck Todd nervously told Andrea Mitchell this morning that Paul may want to take a look at a video of these exchanges to see how looks. It was the closest I've seen any mainstream male journalist come to saying that Paul is acting like a sexist prick when he does this. Progress ... ?
Update: Brad Friedman made another interesting observation about the exchange which was obscured by Paul's nasty demeanor:
While it's true Paul appears to have trouble dealing respectfully with female interviewers and is now wildly reversing many of his previously strongly held foreign policy positions in hopes of wooing GOP voters, it's the mindset behind Guthrie's opening question which disturbs me far more. And it's one that we've seen before in the supposedly "mainstream" media...
"You seem to have changed over the years. You once said Iran was not a threat, now you say it is. You once proposed sending foreign aid to Israel, you now support it, at least for the time being. And you once offered to drastically cut defense spending and now you want to increase it 16 percent," Guthrie asked in her initial question, touching off Paul's obfuscating interruptions, before she added: "So, I just wonder if you've mellowed out?"
In other words, setting aside Paul's bluster and objections to be confronted with his past positions, the increased militarism of saber-rattling with Iran, sending more military aid to Israel and increasing an already wildly bloated U.S. defense budget is, in the eyes of Guthrie (and, quite representative of the mainstream corporate/media/political elite here) akin to having "mellowed out".
Of course. Being a warmonger is the default normal mainstream position. The radical weirdo position is being for peace.
.