Paul Presidential Campaign Crashes and Burns As Rand Melts Down On NBC’s Today

rand paul lectures savannah guthrie

Sen. Rand Paul lasted less than four minutes on NBC’s Today before he had a meltdown and crashed and burned his entire presidential campaign.

Video:

Paul made it roughly halfway through the interview, before he fell apart.

Today’s Savannah Guthrie said, “You’ve had views in the past on foreign policy that are somewhat unorthodox, but you seem to have changed over the years. You once said Iran was not a threat, but now you say it is. You once proposed ending 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 sixteen percent, so I just wonder if you’ve mellowed out?”

Sen. Paul went into meltdown mode by attacking Guthrie, “Why don’t you let me explain instead of talking over me, ok? 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? That would be sort of a better way to approach an interview. No, no, no, no, no. You’ve editorialized. Let me answer a question. You ask a question and say have your views changed, instead of editorializing and saying my views have changed.”

Rand Paul lasted less than 24 hours as a presidential candidate before he threw his first Randtrum. (A Randtrum is defined as a Rand Paul temper tantrum brought by anyone who dares to point out Paul’s flip-flops and ideological inconsistencies.) Media editorializing in questions is something that deserves to be despised, but Guthrie wasn’t editorializing.

She pointed out specific examples of issues where Rand Paul has changed his position. Sen. Paul has been flip-flopping in every direction on every issue because he is trying to make himself an acceptable candidate to Republican primary voters. Guthrie asked Paul, in the most gentle morning show way possible, if his positions had changed. She wasn’t putting him on the defensive. She was giving him a chance to explain away inconsistencies.

Sen. Paul may have bigger problem than his inability to answer simple questions if he doesn’t understand that lecturing Guthrie, who is a former White House correspondent and accomplished journalist, reeked of sexism and begged one to wonder if Paul would have spoken to a male reporter in the same way.

Rand Paul confirmed his reputation as a political lightweight who can’t handle any heat on Today. Rand Paul can’t defend his flip-flops, and he can’t maintain the slightest appearance of being the kind of human being that voters should feel comfortable with sending to the White House.

Sen. Rand Paul has crashed and burned.

232 Replies to “Paul Presidential Campaign Crashes and Burns As Rand Melts Down On NBC’s Today”

  1. He reminds me of Sharon Angle from 2010.

    The Press Should ‘Ask The Questions We Want To Answer’

    Rand did the same exact thing to the female reporter on CNBC a few weeks ago.

  2. just ‘Dr’ Paul mansplainin’ and demonstratin’ to the little ladies why there is no war on women…

    and no respect…

  3. And yet, tomorrow he will still be on the road campaigning, and next week he’ll be in Washington politicking, and next year he’ll still be on the primary ballots collecting votes.

    Saying that he’s “crashed and burned” just makes you folks look like the lefty version of Fox News commentators, engaging in wishful thinking, and desperately trying to spin the facts into something that simply isn’t true.

  4. Good for Ms Guthrie. Like Katie Couric in 2008, she did us a big favor. If more TV interviewers framed questions the way she did, fewer Republicans would be showing up on camera.
    Here’s a campaign ad for Rand’s rivals. The screen is dark while a soundbite of Guthrie’s question is played, a light goes on and as a clip of cockroaches running for cover is shown, Rand’s ‘answer’ is played over the clip.

  5. Kind of silly. Summation of interview style; “Why are you a fail at life?” “When did you stop beating your wife”
    What’s he supposed to do, agree?

  6. Rand has joined a long list of Republican presidential wannabes who feel that members of the news media should act as though they are working for the candidates’ public relations departments, only asking them the questions that they WANT to be asked.

  7. Actually Paul didn’t crash and burn at ALL. SOunds like Politicusa just wanted a misleading headline to increase hits.

    He actually schooled that ‘anchor’ on editorializing and framing her ‘gotcha’ questions, in the manner of “are you still beating your wife.”

    I’d be angry at these networks having their lightweights do this too. Rachel would never have done that. Nor Wolf, Nor Koppel, nor any of the Meet the Press genre. LIke O’Reilly, Hannity and Matthews, these people aren’t journalists, they’re entertainers. You’d think they were in Chicago trying to start a fistfight before a studio audience!

  8. POLITICAS and Savanah Guthrie show the worst form of sensationalist journalism to characterize this interview with “–crash and burn.” Not so, what Rand Paul did was not respond to an idiotic question that had no bounds or basis other than looking up his positions on wikileaks. Paul was right to correct Guthrie with her framing the questions in such a way that would impose any answer from Paul being void of accuracy or truth. Putting him in a box and asking him to describe it. I’m a Democrat so it’s not like I favor Paul. But the trend to have interviewers set up themselves up as authorities on the candidates as Guthrie did is an insult. To the candidate, to the listener and certainly sensationalism. Politicas should have edited the title of this article, it does not reflect the content.

  9. I see another right winger that doesn’t even know the meaning of editorializing. But that doesn’t take me by surprise. Asking if a man said what is on video to see is not editorializing, Fox News does that even when they attempt at telling the truth, they editorialize with ten second clips taken and twisted out of context.

  10. Wow denial is strong with you people. Now I know you don’t what his positions are but they were legitimate questions. Randbo did the same thing with Guthrie that he did when he went on Rachel Maddow show. When caught like the lying idiot that he is he refused to answer. A real profile in courage

  11. Asking a presidential candidate why he has changed his position on some things is hardly “gotcha” questions. If he has changed his position, then he needs to explain why.

    You say Rachel wouldn’t do this? Bull pucky.

    Several years ago Paul appeared on TRMS and she cornered him on his position of the Civil Rights Act. Paul had stated, in the past, that he believed a business should be allowed to determine who they would offer services to. Rachel pressed him to give a yes or no answer. He hemmed and hawed and finally admitted that yes he did. Paul has refused to ever again appear on her show.

    You sound like a Sarah Palin apologist. Poor Sarah was sooo picked on, now you are doing the same thing for Paul. If he cannot answer fair questions in a straightforward manner he doesn’t deserve to be POTUS.

  12. Rand Paul says the stuff he said before is now off-limits
    In two interviews, Rand Paul has declared that what Rand Paul used to say is now off-limits. It’s not fair, Paul testily claims, to ask him about stuff that he said before he decided to be a presidential candidate. Because that was before, or “a long time ago.” As long ago as 2009, when he was a Senate candidate.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-04-08/in-fox-news-interview-rand-paul-declares-his-old-quotes-off-limits

  13. It is after all just the headline of an opinion piece. No need to get yourself worked up. I for one agree with your assertion that he’s not done campaigning. I do think though, that he has crashed and burned in the interview.

  14. Should the interview have gone more like,”What specific softball questions would you like me to ask which will stroke your ego and make you look good”? That will be the Fox “News” interview later in the week. It’s nice to have some real journalism for a change.

  15. The culture of the broken Washington system will not be fixed until “restricted terms are applied to members of Congress and Senate”. Just like the President these members of House/Senate need to have only two terms (8 years); DO THE JOB THEY WERE ELECTED and GO. The “old men” of Congress/Senate need to STOP making this their lifetime job and $$$ become millionaires doing a job that never gets done with their state for the voters effort. We need to change the system, so the culture changes FOR the taxpayer! Restricted Terms is the way.

  16. Horsefeathers.

    Your assertion is horsefeathers. What he was supposed to do was answer the question(s) in an adult manner to explain his changing stances and why we should vote for him because of such. If he could simply explain those switches that makes sense- then no sweat.

    The fact that he was so childish about it indicates to me that he’s a spoiled brat and has no business being in the White House other than as a guest.

  17. If he can’t handle slow pitch softball then just wait till he tries to play in the majors the next few months lol

  18. I disagree. He did crash and burn in the interview. He showed that he can’t take the heat. I agree she should have asked the questions one at a time, but each was a valid question that deserved an answer. To lose your cool during an interview is to crash and burn.

  19. I’ve noticed that both Convicts and Conservatives are not too concerned about ‘what they did in the past’.

    I’ve stepped in puddles that had more depth than Rand Paul.

  20. I’ve noticed that both Convicts and Conservatives are not too concerned about ‘what they did in the past’.

    I’ve stepped in puddles that had more depth than Rand Paul.

  21. You are so right. When he was running for senate in “10”, he threw a shit fit of epic proportions when Jack Conway mentioned it. The righteous indignation was way over the top. Hillary will destroy him in a debate if he would ever attempt to talk down to her.

  22. These Republican candidates are finding out that it is easier to blame Obama than it is to answer questions regarding statements they have made in the past. Rand Paul is like a hot air balloon that is slowly deflating.

  23. …snorting laugh through sinuses exiting nostrils wry smile and left and right movement of cranium around axis and sigh of pity…Peggy dear..you poor poor moron..

  24. Paul has his hard line followers that refuse to admit that the man has been caught on numerous occasions. He has been plagiarizing,lying and flip flopping on so many various stated positions that he has only one real position. He will say and do anything that he feels will get him elected. He will throw anyone under the bus to gain support. The real question for you supporters of Paul is, how can you trust that your cause will not be the one of many that Paul changes on, if he ever was elected? It is called reality folks Paul is untrustworthy and unworthy as a Presidential Candidate.

  25. Rand Paul. Another disgraceful teabagger loser. Goodbye and good riddance! Can’t say we’re sorry to see you go. Just hurry and leave. NOBODY wants you in our government.

  26. Rand Paul would never behave like this if he was being interviewed by Fox News or some other Conservative, Evangelical RW news source. If Paul can’t even hide his contempt & disrespect for women and/or any Democratic, Liberal-Leaning, Progressive, objective news source and/or anyone who thinks differently than he does, it’s going to be a painfully long campaign.

    Guess what Rand, when you run for president you open up your life in both past & present to be examined ruthlessly; and you don’t get to control the way the media portrays you.

    It sure was a short honeymoon.

  27. I can’t wait for the rethug debates. I want them all there. What a roundup of losers, grifters, thumpers, smug little shits, the mentally challenged and criminals. This is an all star lineup. If any one candidate possesses all of these qualities, he just might get the nomination!

  28. This makes me even more excited for Survivor: Republican Clown Car 2016 edition. It’s going to make my life as a comedian so much easier.The jokes write themselves.

    He is one of the MOST condescending twits out there, I cannot wait to see him crash & burn. It is going to be spectacular.

  29. Jon Stewart skewered Paul’s Presidential announcement last night — amateur to the nth degree.
    What the righties have never quite figured out is that everything — and I mean everything — that they have said or done over the last 15 years is subject to eventual exposure. When media folk actually do their research, as Guthrie and her team obviously did, all that Randy-boy could do was call her out for it. Gotcha questions? Nope, not at all. And the (probably) paid rightie trolls on this site and others can blow it up their noses!

  30. Mainly because he wouldn’t be asked such “tough” questions on FAUX Noise.

    Frankly, I’m waiting for someone to ask him about the blatant hypocrisy of his offering to help fund Kentucky changing their primary to a caucus solely for the purpose of circumventing the law that states a candidate can’t run for two offices – president and senator – on the same ballot.

  31. Not letting your views be subverted by someone with an agenda to marginalize you is hardly crashing and burning.

    His father Ron Paul played nice while the politicos and partisan press (from both sides) painted him and his views into a corner and prevented him from talking about his principles. Rand saw this and refuses to allow the press to do the same to him without calling them on their biased b.s.

    Perhaps if we had more honest reporters instead of hatchet-job talking heads we might here for once that someone has principles they are standing for instead of “positions” they are taking on an issue.

    People know the truth when they hear it, and they know the difference between an interview to learn about a candidate and a hostile interview intended to smear and relegate a candidate into irrelevance.

    The very fact that there has been so many attacks in the last 36 hours on Paul shows how strongly both the left and right are worried about his prospects!

  32. NO!! The number of lengthy, loaded questions we see today from journalists and citizens at news conferences and speeches is RIDICULOUS! Her question was much, much too long, to the point of being rude. I was at a Bernie Sanders event recently, and what people DO when they get a microphone to ask a candidate is they never ask a succinct, direct question. Rather, they preface it with a policy statement that goes on for paragraphs!!! Please, let’s have some linguistic discipline, people! Let’s keep our questions direct and brief and manageable. I’m no fan of the Republicans, but my god the mile-long questions have gotta go!!!

  33. Lets see…you have a choice…

    In a five minute or less interview you can either let the biased talking head spend 90% of it misconstruing your ideals and principles in a negative light by framing the conversation to her own narrative…

    or

    You can call her (and every other ambush journalist) on it and try to make the interview about principle and discovery of views and thoughts. Which would be, an actually informative interview about a non-annointed candidate striving to make change.

  34. Does he think changing his title from senator, to Dr.Paul will give him added credibility? He should probably start with a makeover, and get rid of those whatever Happened to Baby Jane eyebrows and that nest on his head. Then maybe people will stop staring in a WTF way.

  35. You’re an idiot who doesn’t understand that you can’t plagiarize in a speech unless you are lifting the whole thing and trying to pass it off as your idea. He never did so, your talking point is irrelevant.

    He hasn’t lied that I’ve seen, and I’ve been following and watching for years.

    As for flip-flopping every time I’ve witnessed something that seemed incongruent or inconsistent it was a matter of not understanding his underlying principle, or not agreeing that the situation had changed enough to make the application of the principle different.

  36. Don’t worry. Sheldon Adelson will soon be there to pat him on the head and say “there, there, Rand, it will be alright.”

  37. Emmm…no. Plagiarism does not have to be of a whole body, nor does it have to constitute one. A single unattributed quote can qualify as plagiarism.

  38. You are right. Thank you for describing in the most accurate way what we have in the GOP line-up.[WINK]It is as though we went out into the street and picked up gangsters and gave them campaign donations.

  39. Actually, I think given the circumstances he was proper in the way he handled it.. she was condemning him, so he stood up and said, lets tackle this one issue at a time, which he did and what he said made sense..I’m Canadian, I don’t give a horse crap whether its democrat or republican..as he said, both parties are to blame and change needs to happen in the USA to stay the dominant world player, especially regarding banking and fiscal policy…if the USA doesn’t change its ways it going to get interesting…as you see by the rest of the G8 signing on to be players in the new AIIB dev bank off the SWIFT system of petrol dollar settlements in Sept 2015…change is afoot and old Glory needs to do some soul searching and you need to get rid of the lobbyists who are messing your country up…worse part is this cancer is starting to affect Canada as well..its horrible to watch.

  40. The media has a way of using words like meltdown and tantrums which grossly exaggerates what is in actuality. I am no fan of Paul but he didn’t throw a temper tantrum either. He does and will continue though…to contradict himself….”that was 2007…that was a long time ago when I was working on someone else’s campaign. I wasn’t running for President then.” So now he is running for President and he’ll say whatever he has to say to win approval of voters. I’m still reminded of the ridiculous assertion by media, the Republican party and even some within the Democratic party…when Howard Dean yelled “yeah” after his concession speech in 2004! The media enjoys embellishing and political parties rally around what is perceived to help with their own agendas carrying on with their own ranting diatribe for months after an event occurs lest the public too quickly forget what it is politicians ‘want’ them to remember!

  41. But gangsters actually have to deal with real life, fight their own battles and hustle to make a living. Paul and his ilk have never had to clean under their own toenails.

  42. Ha ha thats funny. I think Pres. Obama and libs are still blaming bushy. By liberal standards I think its okay to start blaming Pres. Obama.

    And speaking of hiding from comments in the past. I believe Pres. Obama said signing EO on immigration would be unconstitutional. I also think Obama was against raising the debt ceiling under bushy also. Pres. Obama changing his position on gay marriage just before the 2012 elections.

    I’m assuming your comments was tongue and cheek.

  43. I never thought Paul got off the ground enough to crash and burn..

    And I say that as an informed and educated connoisseur of campaign rhetoric and marketing.

  44. Did I miss something? Where was the meltdown? The only advice I’d give Sen. Paul would be to just get to the point and say, “Yes. I have changed some of my views over the years as events have evolved. Next!” Yet another example of how the media – this interviewer, and THIS blog – cannot abide the idea of someone coming into office that might have some Libertarian leanings.

  45. If someone is reluctant to regale you with tales of their good deeds and professional triumphs while running for office, there should be a big red light flashing in your ‘trust me’ reflex.

  46. Chad she pointed out facts and asked him a question> You righties just cannot handle a challenge or the truth.

  47. In other words, Guthrie didn’t kiss his ass, therefore you see that as being misconstrued.

    If Rand wants to get treated with kid gloves and never be held accountable for his constant flip-flopping, there’s a network that’s right up his alley.

    But here in the real world, Americans want more than a fluff piece, and if he can’t hack it with Savannah Guthrie, his political future doesn’t look too bright.

  48. After reading the first paragraph or two, I played the event in question. At first I did not think it was too bad and thought you were over the top in you view. Then I read the rest of your article and you know what, your right.

    He is a lightweight, did he not expect the question, and expecting the question. Getting agitated and defensive was the best he has for a response. Knowing it was coming, I would have expected a well thought out, short and quick response. It was not an “ambush”, the interview might have been a little annoying with 3 different examples, prior to letting him respond. But for a man running as president, it should have been a cake walk. Instead it is the headline of the day, too bad RP. Your a lightweight and you will never get my vote, unless it is you or Hilary. I would rather vote for Satan himself than Hilary.

  49. LOL “a non-anointed candidate” I see where you are trying to go with this. This rightwing manipulation won’t fly. It sounds to me like you see him as anointed and a can do no wrong kind of guy. You right-wingers are so funny with your twisting and machinations.

  50. He felt one way about defense spending, and Iran. And then things changed when he decided to run for the Republican nomination, and now he feels the opposite of what he was for.

    That’s called flip-flopping.

  51. I wouldn’t view that as a melt down. His views and others views change over time. I don’t support or share Mr. Paul’s views but to call it a melt down is over reaching.

  52. Watch for it… sometime today Fox will support what occurred in favor of Paul. Then in a day or two, Jon Stewart on the Daily Show will show examples of how Fox handles stuff like this and compare it to how Savannah handled the questions. Should be fun…

  53. AP Interview: Paul won’t spell out abortion ban exceptions

    Campaigning in New Hampshire on Wednesday, Paul told the AP that people get too tied up in these details and it’s his conviction that “life is special and deserves protection.”

    Paul entered the GOP race Tuesday and is this week campaigning in the first four states to vote in the nomination contest.

    Exceptions in any abortion ban are a politically sensitive topic for Paul and some of his rivals. They want to nudge the party away from a focus on such social issues, but know that winning the nomination requires some backing from religious conservatives who press for strict, if not absolute limits on abortion.
    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/5b4bc674db064a1d9f1a50e39c4a66bd/ap-interview-paul-wont-spell-out-abortion-ban-exceptions

  54. LOL hostile interview? You chastised and called liberals out earlier accusing them of blaming everything on Bush. Then you turn around and blame Rand Paul’s ineptness on liberals and the media. The fact that you believe that Rand Paul Never lied just shows your lack of intelligence and objectivity. PS.. Most of the things going on now are Bush’s fault. It’s called a residual effect. People don’t create chaos and then it just magically disappears when the leave office.

  55. Only two things wrong with what you say. First, there is very little to “blame” Obama for. Second, what you believe and what the facts are are two different things. He never said an EO on immigration would be unconstitutional. He has acknowledged that there are certain things he couldn’t do in an EO because they would be unconstitutional, and that is why he didn’t do those things.

  56. How exactly was she condemning him? She actually asked about his changing views is a very polite way, even giving him an opportunity to explain why they had changed. This was not a gotcha question and those that compare it to a “When did you stop beating your wife” type of question are delusional, at leats in this regard.

    Did shemention things where Paul has said almost polar opposite things? Yes. Did she say he was a hypcrite or anything like that? Not at all.

    Anybody who says that she had no right to ask the question are saying that what a politician has said or done in the past is irrelevant and shouldn’t be mentioned. BS.

  57. I notice all the brilliant minds here ignore the policies being discussed. Oh we don’t like him cause he wasn’t nice to the interviewer. I hope the Iran negotiators have more sense.

  58. It amazes me that frauds like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz can fool any people to vote for them. These guys are not even fit to be in congress. They despise the American People and only care about there own family.

  59. I see the point you are making, but these interviews are not about “ambush journalist” but about informing the people. His answer did not do that. He looked like an ass an avoided answering the question. Its a lose lose for him. Besides asshole ambush journalist are something the president will need to deal with, failing to do so here just makes him look week.

  60. I fail to see how Paul did anything wrong here.

    The interviewed accused him of changing his views. Rather or not he did (he may have regarding Israel, but his view on Iran seems to adjust depending on current events which should not be viewed negatively), an interviewer should only be questioning, not accusing. Asking his views on a certain thing, then asking about a previous statement.

    The problem with modern politics is illustrated well here. Those who do not want Paul or a Republican to win will say he did something wrong here by countering her accusation when in reality, we all should stand with those who don’t want to be accused of something they did not do, or at least give them a proper chance to defend themselves. So rather you’re voting for Hillary, Rand, Jeb, or Cruz… let’s still expect all interviewers to look for the full truth and not go on the offensive.

  61. Sweetheart, she was doing her job by asking him about his change in position. That’s not an attack; it is good journalism. Whatsamatter, you afraid that Aqua Buddha won’t get elected and legalize pot?

  62. you are right. Fox news to the rescue. Probably a nice cozy fluff interview on that idiot show Fox and Friends next week.

  63. Congrats to the doctor!!! He now qualifies for membership in Palin’s Victims of Gothcha Journalism club!!! I expect that membership in this group will be expanding–a lot!

  64. Oh my, that awful woman “ambushed” him with a question he didnt have the Koch-scripted reply yet. Hes a twitchy strange flip flopper. Not Presidential material. Hes nowhere near ready.

  65. He was not going to allow “Gotcha” tactics. Yes, Faux does this to the lefties as well. People are so polarized. The GOP and Dems hate this guy because he is a threat to the power they have nested for many years. He actually wants term limits for Congress. What politician has the balls to say that these days? Rand. Quit trying to justify your cemented dogmatic ideologies.

  66. Chad in reality on this earth. Your the idiot who doesn’t know or understand plagiarism. Get a dictionary.(I’m old school)

  67. Ambush?

    I watched this whole interview. She didn’t ambush him. He would not let her finish the question – HE ambushed HER.

    There was nothing inappropriate about the question she was trying to ask, nor in the manner in which she asked it.

    He was wrong. Period.

  68. Do you ever just want to jump through your tv screen and choke the living shit out of someone? Everytime he does an interview with anyone other than POX, he has a problem. Especially if they’re women. I think he got weaned off the breast too soon, and he just wants to be a titty baby. By the way Chad, I live in Kentucy also. The Courier-journal did a poll, and the majority of Kentuckians don’t support his presidential run. Carpetbagger comes to mind.

  69. I agree with Mary. All Savannah was try to do was echo what a lot of political pundits have been saying about Paul and his changing of positions on many issues such as the middle east(Iran in particular), gay marriage rights, and immigration. He could have handled it better and not lost his cool but at the same time it’ll all be forgotten in a month so.(If he doesn’t keep repeating the same mistake) I think this editorial saying he crash and burned his campaign is kind of a reach. I agree with Paul on a few issues he hasn’t changed his tune on. like easing back all the foreign aid we give out and spending that money here in the USA. But on most of the other issues he’s way off of what myself and a majority of people in our country think and I don’t feel this interview help sway any votes his way. If he continues to do this Ala Palin bashing the media blitz it will crash and burn his campaign eventually. If he can’t then he should stay on the fair and balanceLMAO network.

  70. You call that a “gotcha” question?

    She never got to finish her question and there was nothing “gotcha” about it.

    He’s a flip-flopper. He changes his opinions more than a newborn gets his diaper changed. She wanted to ask him about it. He didn’t want to let her.

    Now you’re pulling the Sarah Palin “gotcha question” card. Give me a break. There was nothing “gotcha” about that question.

    I’m not going to excuse his bad behavior or his bad policy positions just because he’s in favor of term limits and says so. Term limits appeals to the “outsider” label he’s trying to claim for himself. That’s all.

  71. She did not “accuse” him of changing his views. She doesn’t have to. She was trying to ask him about it because – guess what? – he DOES change his views.

    His views change depending on the audience, the time of day, what color socks he has on, etc.

    His problem is this: He doesn’t have just one position on an issue – HE HAS THEM ALL.

  72. I agree, and it’s Savannah. I think it’s time for Rand Paul and others to stand up to these so called reporters who set up their questions as accusatory, or in this case, opinionated remarks.

  73. Au contraire.

    I’m not ignoring his policy positions at all.

    There’s just one teeny, tiny problem. He doesn’t have just one position on a policy – he has all of them. Depending on the day of the week, who knows where he stands on something? He changes it day after day after day.

  74. It’s a long campaign, and Rand Paul certainly didn’t crash and burn by expressing frustration with this interviewer. She was a bit ham-handed in her attack, but Paul’s fans and those indifferent toward him won’t think any the less of him for this one kerfuffle with one interviewer.

  75. I thought he acquitted himself well. She was being rude and a terrible reporter. She never asked a question just made statements.

  76. She never asked a question she just made accusations and blurted out several in a row. This is why liberal journalism is dying. She was trying to beat him up. O’Reilly can do this as well so she is not alone.

  77. In a courtroom, her form of question would be called “leading the witness”… She did not ask open-ended questions. She basically made statements, putting words in his mouth, and said “isn’t that true?” Poor interviewing, but trying to mislead the viewer. He is a smart man and called her hand on this.

  78. Emmm…no. It’s only “leading” if you are coaching your own witness while he is on the stand. As a cross-examination technique, it’s quite permissible. Even an L1 knows that.

  79. LOL Y’all are pretty desperate here. It’s clear that you are saddened that Rand Paul knows how to shut down the false narrative programming and inject truth. Media goons have been using this tactic since the 70’s and it’s growing more prevalent.

    You will find that a vast majority of Americans can recognize it, have grown impatient with it, and will find Senator Paul’s reaction refreshing in a world gone mad.

    Sorry about raining on y’all’s parade. Not really though.

  80. Is this a joke? Did you actually watch the interview? She was trying to box i=him into a corner with deliberately misleading questions and he wasn’t taking any of it. He shut her down and it was awesome!

  81. I’m not a Paul supporter, but agree with his statement. I thought she was the one who looked foolish trying to shout him down even after she posed her “question”.

  82. I remember when y’all were calling Keystone XL a conspiracy theory. Now they are snatching up Lakota lands like candy, for pennies on the dollar and at gunpoint. Oops.

  83. She stated facts, then asked if he cared to explain. He ruined a good opportunity, as the article notes.

    Is your issue that she stated too many facts in succession, perhaps should have asked about his opinion change on each issue in separate questions?

    She had a point (he has flip-flopped) and stated facts that illustrated her point. Then she asked him about it.

    And he freaked. How embarrassing.

  84. In favor of term limits? What’s the limit? He supported Mitch McConnell’s *6th* term for a total of 36 years. I ask again, what’s the term limit he supports?

  85. She asked him to explain facts. It reads as “gotcha” bc his inconsistencies make this question hard to spin.

    He should have taken this question in a “I’m so bipartisan and open to change” direction but instead he had a hissy fit, and looked like a sexist asshat on national TV, for the second time in recent memory.

  86. I fail to see how this was a “crash and burn” scenario. Granted, RP has little patience with multiple questions asked at once with an ideological bias (admittedly, he needs to get over that- it’s par for the course with the MSM, left and right) but this was far from a temper tantrum or meltdown.

  87. I can’t wait to see Hillary in debates with him and the other Republican candidates. It will be some of the best entertainment we’ve seen in a long time. She’ll reveal them for what they are…uninformed lightweights.

  88. He rather (as efficiently as possible) politely tells her that instead of making assumptions about his stances she needs to ask, which would not only be good interviewing, but common decency.

    I personally would like to know what he believes rather than what she believes he believes.

    This is the kind of person we need in office, one with a backbone who won’t let the media dictate how he’ll be portrayed. Use common sense people, to give a litany of accusations without letting him address them one at a time is something that should not be tolerated in a professional interview. He rightly pointed this out

  89. Rand, Take note, this is mild example of slant, attack,
    agenda “journalism”. You better go erase your Email server before the campaign, your words are now lib entertainment.

  90. Wow. Now THAT is an impressive fantasy-land you live in Chad. I wonder, in this land of yours, what he can do to have you think he did something wrong? He could drown a sack of puppies, and you would probably think the puppies deserved it.

  91. I disagree, this is exactly why he will be the next President. We need someone who will not put up with loaded questions that assume half truths. No Presidential candidate should put up with an interviewer trying to slander his name by making false accusations. He did a perfect job explaining how she was wrong for doing so and now I support him even more. RAND PAUL 2016!!! Our next President who won’t take any crap!

  92. Paul Duane, he will never respond in the way you suggest – his colossal ego won’t permit that. Not now, not ever.

    To reply as you suggested would imply that he a) thinks and b) considers ideas other than his own. This, he cannot ever do. So instead of appearing able to change his views based on new information, he is left with pretending that he never actually said the things that he actually said.

    Of course, he can’t tell the actual truth – that he’s pandering to the loons in the hope of hoodwinking them into supporting him. That would be giving away the game.

  93. I sit here thinking where is this Melt Down I saw so boldly printed? Then I realized that this post is about trying to derail people’s idea of Rand as a viable candidate for president. It isn’t about what he stands for, it isn’t about what he intends to do, it isn’t about what he has done in his career, it most certainly can’t be about how much this country needs him and his new non quid-pro-quo politics. But as normal the jokers that are pulling the strings don’t want new blood in the office. So they post a big head line about his “MELT DOWN” and hope the sheep only read the headline before making anything resembling an opinion. Because when people look a little deeper and actually see or hear what this is about, they might just see that he is the only real chance that (WE THE PEOPLE) have!

  94. Why should he take crap? He is crap. Anyone better would not have had to hire a bunch of fifty-centers to defend him around the Internet.

  95. Right. Poor Rand was “ambushed” by a journalist during an interview he knew he was going to have. He was presented with a number of opinions he’s expressed from different sides… and that’s suddenly “gotcha” journalism.

    “Gotcha” journalism is apparently any time a member of the GOP is confronted by something they can neither lie nor truth their way out of.

    This whiner can’t handle a member of the press. How can he be expected to handle international leaders?

  96. I watched the interview. Guthrie tried to ask him a question about his flip-floppiness and he didn’t want to wait for her to finish – nor did he want to answer her points. Probably because he CAN’T answer it.

    He knows he flops around like a fish out of water and he doesn’t want to be questioned about it so he gets his knickers in a twist and tries to turn it into some “gotcha” question.

    Please. He can’t go around running for president not expecting any scrutiny from the national media. He’s getting as good as any presidential candidate gets. He is trying to paint over his past positions, hoping none of his supporters will notice it.

    Well, take a good, hard look at Rand Paul and you’ll not like what you see. In fact, his entire political philosophy can be summed up quite nicely: Liberty for me but not for thee.

    It can be his campaign slogan. That’s the only slogan that’s authentic when it comes to him.

  97. First, I am a Ted Cruz supporter. However, I listened to this on the way home thinking that to be fair, I owe it to each person to hear what they have to say. I don’t see a thing wrong with what Paul did or the way he did it. He was being yelled over by a pushy leftist who doesn’t want to hear what he says but instead wants to set the basis for the story by screaming her thoughts first. The left has done this and gotten away with it for the past 7 years. Sorry fools, but America is awake and we are sick of your LACK OF CLASS and JOURNALISM. I’m still backing Cruz, but Rand Paul was a class act, taking control of a situation and honestly answering questions…not merely defending himself from a loud mouth.

  98. So, she should be more like the real journo’s on FOX, like good ol’ Bill O, who is always pleasant and polite to all his guests…? Like that kid whose father died on 9/11 who Bill lovingly and tenderly told to get the hell off his set and that the kids’ dad would be ashamed of him…? Ah, the love that only a true journalist can show… It’s not ambush journalism if it’s abuse, right? Only if it’s using those pesky facts to illustrate a point…

    She pointed out facts, and, like any good conservative, Rand treated facts as an attack and reacted in a way he felt was appropriate, which does highlight why he is not presidential material.

  99. Nobody likes randy
    NRA snubs Rand Paul
    The National Rifle Association’s annual convention will be missing a pair of prominent tools when it convenes this Friday.

    Neither Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky nor New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie was invited to address the NRA’s Leadership Forum, NRA officials confirmed to The Tennessean.
    “We have a really lengthy program and we have the longest list of potential presidential candidates to speak at the Leadership Forum this go-around, and we just could not accommodate everyone,” Jennifer Baker, director of public affairs for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, told the Nashville paper.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/chris-christie-rand-paul-nra-leadership-forum-nashville-tennessee-116754.html#ixzz3WjsfbXju

  100. Completely inaccurate. He schooled Mz Gutherie and she deserved it. He didn’t melt down, wasn’t rude, just wasn’t going to take her bullying and loaded questioning. But no, I’ll still never vote for a libertarian!!

  101. PLEASE DONT FORCE ME TO PICK BETWEEN A BUSH OR CLINTON AGAIN. If we are really going to move forward as a nation we ALL need to understand that this isnt about whos right and whos wrong. Dems and GOPs are all so out of whack. Listen to Rand on your own and form your own judgements. I dont care what you decide either way. But dont trust a website that clearly draws party line favorites.
    ….
    Enlightenment is a new URL away.
    ….
    BOTH PARTIES ARE WRONG. Rand had to pick one party to align with to even be on a ticket somewhere, but he actually has a lot of great ideas.
    [Edited for length]

  102. He explained himself very clearly. As he said, his views haven’t changed but he made his earlier comments while helping someone else run for office. In other words, he was lying then. Or he’s lying in what he’s saying now. Or maybe he’s lying in saying his views haven’t changed. It has to be one of those three, because no other combination is logically possible. Whichever, he’s made it clear that he lies in his political statements to the US public.

  103. Well, Obama’s changed his views on Iran’s nukes too! From “Not on my watch” to “let ’em have at it!” He changed his views on gay marriage from “marriage is between a man and a woman” to whatever it is today and NOTG ONE media type asked the Barry [Snip]
    [Lost us at “Barry”, and then it only got more cretinous]

  104. It just amazes me how much these totalitarian loving progopaths enjoy twisting an interview to their liking by using their not-so-skilled tactics of liberating tolerance.

  105. Let me needlessly weigh in on the most
    divisive and pressing issue of the day.

    Stop squinting real hard and dancing around an interview.

    Just come out and say it if you don’t like Paul’s political ideology and be done with it.

    That’s all I got.

  106. Ok, now this might be a minor point but what was all that about “then he was trying to help somebody else” and “now he is campaigning for himself????

    So his position changed from then to now, because he was working for a different candidate? Sounds like a flip flopper to me.

  107. Thanks Common sense.It’s sad to see the spin cycle gearing up so early in the game. The way Rand handled that interview gave me a lot of confidence in the man. He won that round.

  108. I’m glad RP’s supporters showed up to defend the indefensible. It just goes to show that normally rational people can, and will, defend someone if they “like” him/her. RP will never be POTUS. He’s not prepared, and once more Americans get a chance to see how easily he gets ruffled, it’s lights out for RP as far as being sworn in as POTUS in 2017. His supporters will have to realize that what sells in KY and on the far right doesn’t sell on a national stage. They also need to be made aware that there are some GOPers who won’t vote for him because they know he’s not presidential material. Hell, he’s not senatorial material. Just because he’s an ophthalmologist doesn’t mean he’d make a great POTUS. If he can’t stand to be questioned about anything and needs his “crew” to defend him, he’s a weak candidate. He’s a small fish trying to jump from a pond into a shark-filled ocean, and he’s already failing and his supporters are already playing defense. Pitiful.

  109. Not following how this interview will make his campaign “crash n burn”….I’m sure he will be applauded for standing up against the “liberal” media. I watched anticipating much worse because everyone knows that there are some crazies out there……….if you ain’t crazy you aint right

  110. Here we have three liberal news sites two negative one turning it into a sexist thing (witch will probably go over most liberals head!) Also we have one even though liberal calls it like it is, a liberal host in a rant and Paul takes control (I don’t even like either Paul but I can see that)!

    Jason Easley & PoliticusUSA
    Paul Presidential Campaign Crashes and Burns As Rand Melts Down On NBC’s Today
    IJReview
    Rand Paul Has Brilliant Retort for ‘Today’ Host Who Goes Off on a Rant Instead of Doing Interview

    Addicting Info · com
    Rand Paul Mansplains Things To A Female News Anchor, Again

    It’s just like the Netanyahu thing we have 4 sites reporting on the approval rate of him coming although one site worded it approval of congress inviting W/O Obama’s approval! One site leans right, two lean far left, and one is very neutral (other wise they would be out of business)! The two that are very close to one and another (by 2pts. Or less), are the two true polls, the two th…

  111. ideological inconsistency seems to be the requirement to run in the first place these days (together with an allergy to facts), but changing you opinion should not in itself be a bad thing. If you are presented facts and figures that show you’re wrong, you *should* change your stance on things.

  112. Paul, the meltdown occurred when he lost his cool and interrupted her before she finished and then accused HER of talking over HIM. I agree that when she was finished listing the subjects where he seemed to change his views, that he then should have explained if or why he changed those views. Should she have asked them one at a time instead of listing several? Probably. He lost his cool right at the top of the interview. That is a meltdown.

  113. Paul agreed to the interview, and must know that journalists are going to frame questions in ways he doesn’t like, that he feels are misrepresentative, or rapid-fire. While I think it would have been a better approach by Ms. Guthrie to ask about one topic at a time, Paul simply can’t have this type of reaction. It looks “unpresidential”.

  114. This is crash and burn Jason? LOL….no, it called not laying down and letting the interviewer paint one into a corner with gotcha questions, the left’s forte’.

  115. I think it’s time people who keep voting for these morons like Rand be given aptitude and comprehension tests before allowing them to vote. It’s more than obvious rose mary you wouldn’t know a journalist if one bit you in your posterior. So please do the rest of us a favor and don’t bother going to the polls to vote until you know the difference between a journalist and a fox news hack. Your grandchildren and MY grandchildren will thank you.

  116. And you obviously don’t have a clue about what a free press means and you don’t understand the most rudimentary clause regarding free speech and a FREE PRESS please bypass the polls this year and do the rest of us a favor and don’t vote. But you will take your insipid brain to the polls and cast a vote that will continue to rob the middle class of oversight the government is supposed to provide Americans from rapacious corporations whose only motive is PROFIT period. Corporate entities Paul mindlessly supports at the continued expense of Americans like you who apparently are too blind either to see or understand what fascism is. Corporations who have gotten a free ride now for almost 40 years thanks to the likes of Paul and his dad and of course the great business liberator Reagan who sold his snake oil to small business in 1980 and today the results are obvious with most small business being just about dead in the US. Do us all a favor please don’t vote until you know what fascis…

  117. I don’t side with Rand Paul, but this kind of blowing out of proportion that he had a “meltdown,” trying to delegitimize him as unstable, writing a whole article about it, etc. are tactics that children use on the playground and in fact works against you by delegitimizes any counter arguments you might have. The newscaster was bulldozing him and he was simply trying to gain a bit of control (that’s independent of whether you agree with him or not). Wouldn’t anyone do the same? I didn’t see a “meltdown” of any kind except the meltdown of fair and honest methods of critique in favor of simply slandering based on emotion. You can disagree with him, but c’mon, grow up people. This is why we are all so polarized – demonizing each other.

  118. Dear CS – Ah! How do I start? Oh! Let’s see Savannah provided or least tried to give him a series of issues that he has changed his mind on or at least it seems he has changed his position on (that is called context) and before she could say can you explain he went into a temper tantrum of how dare you ask me those questions mode.

    It is the JOB of a journalist to ask the hard questions not soft ball any potential candidate. Good Ugamooga – all you GOPPER apologists are the same. “Don’t upset my candidate, but please tear into his opponent – especially if they are of the opposing party.” Time to stop treating all of you right-wingers with kid-gloves.

  119. Sorry, I disagree. When interviewing a potential Presidential Candidate all questions about inconsistencies need to be front and center. If the Candidate cannot explain why they changed their mind or at least put forth a credible explanation for the change then its a fail.

    Demeaning the interviewer is just bad form. Also, wanting a per-interview approved questions of what will be asked is bad. That is called scripting and when a interviewer goes off script and the candidate fumbles that means that they are really not ready for prime-time.

  120. Sounds like a Faux question lobbed to a liberal who calmly replies” I haven’t started beating my wife and probably never will” then the Faux reporter tries to lie about the interview!
    C’mon you ran sites! Admit it, you hate it when a liberal gets a spine! Especially if the liberal is in a dress!

  121. She gave him the Elizabeth Warren treatment! There were no gotcha treatments, he got himself! Rand Paul and the elitists hate us liberals because we know better than to let you folks brainwash us with your cemented dogmatic nonsense! We know what a bully looks like!
    It must be our eight years with the other bigot!

  122. He correctly called her out on how to do a proper interview, ideally one that is unbiased (something the media seams incapable of doing on both sides) He did not have a “meltdown” as it is so exaggeratedly stated in the headline here, and when actually asked a question, answered it quite well, which is probably what so many people here are actually afraid of.

  123. What was the question he couldn’t answer? His point is that he should be asked an actual question, not just have accusations thrown at him.

  124. Any more unpresidential than our current president taking selfies? Rand Paul just demanded respect and courtesy, something missing from our politics for years now.

  125. Agree, bad journalism not only on the part of The Today Show, but also in this article. As I always tell my children, with exaggeration, you lose integrity.

  126. Why has your position on Iran has changed? Simple question. A softball question if you ask me. The ratfucker should have been ask about his budget which would cut peoples social security by 40% eliminate Medicaid and Medicare or his position on the judiciary. The Supreme Court’s infamous ‘Lochner era’ ended in the 1930s. Rand Paul wants it back. During this “Lochner era”, which spanned several decades, the Court struck down several minimum wage, labor, and other regulatory laws for unduly interfering with this liberty of contract. The justices interpreted the Constitution “in such a way as to protect businesses from regulation, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1901-1939/1904/1904_292

    Or his playing footsie with the religious Reich. See you dumbasses fall for that rat tail on top of his head not whats inside his brain if you want to call it that.

    BTW he fooled your idiot ass again. Rand Paul Opposes The Legalization Of Marijuana

    Rand Paul’s position on drugs like marijuana is “not to legalize them.” He stresses that smoking marijuana is “a bad thing to do.” Paul’s view is that instead of legalization, penalties for drug use and possession should be reduced.

    Reason, a libertarian magazine, is not impressed: “He wants to keep everything illegal, but institute gentler penalties. That’s not remotely libertarian.”

  127. “I agree with my original statement from years ago…” Wow – that’s a ringing endorsement for yourself!

  128. “2007 was a long time ago. It was a time when I wasn’t running for office, I was helping SOMEONE ELSE run for office.”

    So, you’ll say anything if someone from your party pays you enough or promises you favors, even if it’s not what you believe, Mr. Paul? Good to know.

  129. @ogreim…Seriously? For a FOX “news” watcher, you sure seem to miss how they CONSTANTLY talk over and shout down anyone they don’t agree with. Though, admittedly, FOX “news” doesn’t even ask questions. So, I guess in some perverted way you are right. They would NEVER hold a Republican to task on things he said since they agree with everything a Republican would say.

  130. He was at an interview where he is “asked” questions and answers them. She just listed a number of items that she said he changed on. That is not asking questions. He interrupted her to get her to ask some thing. When he tried to answer she tried to keep on listing things so yes he had to just to be able to answer before moving on.

  131. Chad you are right. He should not let her state so called fact out of context. He was there to answer questions not to sit and let her rant. She had a melt down not Rand. Like giving aid to Israel. He didn’t say we shouldn’t give aid to Israel but that we should not borrow from China to give aid to anyone. That is out of context.

  132. Till he interrupted her she was not asking any questions at all. She would of had to ask a question before there could be any thing wrong with the way she asked.

    Yes it was an Ambush.

    You can’t put a question mark on end of a list and make it an question it is still just a list.

    Going by his answers he did not flip-flop. She didn’t ask a question till he got her to ask one then she wouldn’t let him answer it.

  133. No, the deficit doesn’t go on, no matter Ds or Rs. He’s forgotten, or doesn’t realize, that when Clinton was president, the deficit shrank every year for the first 6, and that in the last two, the US had a budget surplus.

  134. You call this a crash????? OMG Politicus…you are more dramatic than a 12 yo girl that didn’t get a Bieber album for Christmas….lol

  135. Just shows how stupid you are. Bieber? You have no idea of what a buffoon this idiot really is. But then again living in that trailer you think he going to legalize your drugs so that’s a winner winner chicken dinner for you

  136. “How dare she speak like that to someone so clearly above her station? Little Lord Randleroy will not suffer a simple woman creature addressing his God given position in such an insolent manner.” [WINK]

    I’m not the least bit surprised would behave like this. He sees himself as entitled to everything he has and the dirty masses should bow to the majesty of his privileged birth.

    Classic Libertarian. Those who never wanted for anything (but more power) jabbering on about how the rest of the world should fight over the remaining scraps while they build a system by which they cannot lose their wealth no matter how truly unworthy they are.

  137. Amazing how two people can see the same thing and come to completely opposite conclusions… I thought Rand Paul did an amazing job in this interview…

  138. That’s the problem with you people you don’t think. Can you name one policy of Randy you find noteworthy?

  139. Never mind that meaningless encounter, pay attention to stuff like this:

    Rand Paul concedes he will cut Medicare and Social Security to pay for tax cuts.

    Continue on to the rest of his beneficial ideas

  140. You are right. The question was much too long. Rand Paul is too damn stupid to be able to remember what his flip-floppy answers to a question like that would be. Keep right on apologizing for this piece of bellybutton lint.

  141. You consider that a crash-and-burn? I see that as a great candidate who refuses to have his positions misrepresented by a liberal talking-head. I LOVE Rand’s fire and applaud his boldness!

  142. I just watched the entire interview – How did Rand Paul actually have a “meltdown” – I am in no way a fan of his, however it looks like he pretty much put the interviewer in her place while she went on some kind of belligerent rant at the beginning of the interview. He answered her questions plain and simple – Please explain the Crash & Burn and Meltdown part.

  143. Just in case you are interested, Bill O’Reilly has an impressive educational background. He is not a Republican, either. He is an Independent. Education: Boston University, Chaminade High School, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Marist College, Queen Mary University of London.

  144. First off He did not have a melt down. He was correct in stating she was editorializing. she really did not ask a question or really want an answer.

    So he should just sit there and take it. She was already on a rant to paint him and did state that he was changing his opinions without even giving him a chance to explain. Ask a simple question and let the person answer without trying to put more questions into the equation.

  145. Sounds like the usual boiler room quatsch. Why not post it? Too much of this stuff in the trashcan already.

  146. Libertarians are in a no mans land when it comes to politics. Their policies contradict and conflict depending on whether they are liberal or conservative Libertarians.

  147. The media…BOTH SIDES, LIBERAL AS WELL AS CONSERVATIVE, have GOT TO STOP repeating news while continuing to call it “Breaking News”. This video is a couple days old now and is NOT breaking news. Now I am a liberal, know Rand Paul to be not the libertarian he claims but straight out on the right, and I am as happy as any other liberal to see him shooting his campaign in the foot….but…liberal media….play the fking game standing upright…[WINK]

  148. Why Rand Paul is Ridiculous

    If he were better at this, he’d be very dangerous.
    I think Rand Paul is a buffoon.
    I don’t just want to dish ad hominem attacks, but I truly believe that the starting point for discussing Rand Paul is to understand that he’s a fool.

    Once you understand this, you can proceed to analyzing how well he is carrying on the neo-confederate legacy of his father and the family’s legions of fanboys. I know he had to fire the Southern Avenger, but let’s not forget that he hired him in the first place and initially defended him with the vociferousness of Dick Cheney.
    Read More
    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ten-miles-square/2015/04/why_rand_paul_is_ridiculous055018.php#

  149. I have seen just as many inconsistencies from Fox as with any other news media. It is always easy to say it is one way without really seeing both sides.

  150. Rand, or any conservative will get the business every time. The liberal press is not interested in the responses given. It’s basically “hang em high”, and that’s about it,,,

  151. I see you have never read any of his positions other than the weed which if you ever read anything he is not for legalizing it

  152. Randal signed the rotten Cotton letter, Nate in Raleigh.
    So we can all relax and rest assured that our Iran
    negotiations are being condcted by treasonous idiots
    like this POS![WINK]

  153. I’m about as liberal as they come and as much as I would have relished the sight of another conservative shooting himself in the foot, I have to disagree with the writer’s assertion that Senator Paul actually did “crash and burn” or have a “tantrum”. Maybe these questions were a little loaded, but I don’t believe they were necessarily inappropriate. Perhaps Paul didn’t handle it with the level of grace and professionalism expected of a presidential candidate, but the description of events in the article is grossly exaggerated. The account of this interaction seems like another partisan magic show meant to distract us from the real problem, which is the overly polarising effect of subjective partisan media. What will save this country is constructive dialogue and teamwork, not the overemphasis on party versus party. That said, there is some satisfaction to be had in seeing conservatives get a dose of their own medicine as far as loaded questions and exaggeration of their faults go.

  154. Half of communication is listening, which Rand Paul does not like to do. The other half is giving clear and concise answers, which Rand Paul does not like to do. The bottom line: Rand Paul is a terrible communicator.

  155. Take a look at the condition of the state of Kentucky…40% of the adults can’t read…33.2% of the adults are obese…17.1% families live in poverty…30.2% of Kentucky’s population smokes-the highest in the nation and their public education system has been ruled unconstitutional by their own state supreme court and they’ve done little to reform it thus far…I could go on and on but WHATEVER RAND PAUL IS SELLING-I’M NOT BUYING AND OUR NATION WOULDN’T BENEFIT BY IT EITHER!

  156. Really? I didn’t see any melt down, but I did see a bitch slap on his part. You people don’t get it. Try as you may, you got nothing. No wonder why you have no viewers

  157. Clearly he’s inherited Mitt Romney’s Etch-A-Sketch and John McCain’s bad temper and combined them with the intellect and wisdom of Sarah Palin.

  158. Dear Rand,

    Presidential politics are for grown ups. You need to brush up on things before doing interviews, especially your on own positions.

  159. I have zero political opinion of this guy. But “Meltdown Mode”? “Crash and Burn”? Umm… Exaggerate much? This article title is clearly click-bait.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.