Dana Bash: Ron Paul Supporters 'A Little Scary' In Their Emails (VIDEO)

CNN's Dana Bash found herself the target of Ron Paul supporters once again this week.

Bash's name has become mud among many Paul fans after she was filmed telling husband and colleague John King that, "I'm sure you talk to Republicans who are worried as well, just like I am, that Ron Paul will continue on long into the spring and summer." CNN has defended her strongly, saying that she was clearly referring to the Republicans talking to both her and King about their worries. The Paul campaign also had no quarrel with the statement, giving Bash an exclusive interview after the New Hampshire primary.

However, other Paul supporters seized on the remark and have held Bash up as an example of mainstream media bias against their candidate. One of those supporters filmed footage of Bash being confronted by angry Paul backers in New Hampshire after Tuesday's primary. (The footage was uploaded on Thursday.)

One by one, people came up to Bash to criticize her and her network. "I used to be a CNN person," a woman told her. "Aren't you worried about the Federal Reserve ripping off our children? I'm not a kid...you don't speak like that about my president on CNN. Shame on you."

"That was a terrible, terrible piece," another man told Bash, referring to a different segment about Paul. "I'm sorry you feel that way," Bash responded.

A different said that Paul was being slandered by CNN. Bash firmly denied this, of course. The cameras also caught Bash speaking to a guest she was preparing to interview about the trouble Paul supporters were giving her.

"You should see the emails," she said. "It's actually, like, a little scary. There's probably nobody as fair as I am. I actually say it's like the Arab-Israeli conflict. They don't see anything else."

(h/t Johnny Dollar)

Also on HuffPost:

GOP candidates on the issues.

Comments

[spyker1]

09:10 PM on 01/20/2012

Ron Paul 2012

[Charles W Noble]

01:48 PM on 01/20/2012

People have commented on multiple issues in this posting:
1. Ron Paul is Weird
2. Ron Paul's supporters are Weird
3. Dana Bash is not (or is) objective

The issue isn't the weirdness of Ron Paul when it comes to this article. Dana Bash seems to dislike Ron Paul. That has been established through her comment here as well as other comments you can read in you tube. If a candidate is outside the norm, that can be opened up through asking insightful questions that will show the differences. But under no circumstances should the reporter report in a way that is designed to move our votes one way or another. That is what is at stake here. Dana Bash screwed up and she need to be held accountable. The fact that she didn't own up to her "mistake" shows that she intends to continue it. And that ruins her credibility as a journalist. And in an age when journalists already suffer from low credibility we could really use some objective journalists who can stay above the emotional fray and simply discuss and enlighten us without persuading us.

[rob arne]

11:16 PM on 01/18/2012

When we look back on this years from now, if we last that long, we all know the people that treated Ron Paul so unfairly. It's really hard to believe, how in this day and age the propaganda is so great.

It reminds me of the Nazi's on how they treated the Jews.
Only difference is, the MSM are the Nazi's, and the American people that want change are the Jews.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kbl7XzG4CIo#!

She will be known along with others, how they were responsible for creating riots and turmoil within the US, possibly even civil war here if they try and rig the vote.

We already seen them rig the Iowa vote by 8 votes for Romney.

Okay, I am done venting. :)
The better of this is the story below:
Ron Paul Super PAC Calls for Removal of Dana Bash, Revolution PAC condemns bias of top CNN Political Corespondent.

http://www.revolutionpac.com/2012/01/ron-paul-super-pac-calls-for-removal-of-dana-bash/

[ZoolRoom]

06:58 PM on 01/18/2012

Dana turns up the heat and then when she gets burned, she cries.

DANA, IF YOU CAN'T STAND THE HEAT, GET OUT OF THE KITCHEN!

[ZoolRoom]

06:55 PM on 01/18/2012

Pooooorrrrr widdle Dana. I feel her pain. It tickles.

[AEX7]

10:58 AM on 01/18/2012

CNN shill does hit piece on Ron Paul and she is surprised at the backlash?

funny

[boonik]

07:56 AM on 01/18/2012

If Ron Paul were to (big, big if!) become President and attempt to touch the Federal Reserve he'd go the same way as each orf the other leaders who tried to fiddle with the bankers grip on the economy...Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy...Paul?

[themiddleistheproblem]

07:27 AM on 01/18/2012

Ron Pauls problem is he's a republican and they can't stand him. He would do a little better as an independant in the general election. He was booed as much as Juan Williams was in the last debate.

[nancy kriescher]

04:06 PM on 01/18/2012

He can split off anytime."

[ZoolRoom]

10:02 PM on 01/18/2012

Paul wasn't booed, the GOLDEN RULE WAS BOOED! And guess what kind of people were booing. Yeah, you only get ONE guess!

[themiddleistheproblem]

07:24 AM on 01/19/2012

Ironic, isn't it?

[media4me2]

11:52 PM on 01/17/2012

Scary paulbots.
So what did R Paul say back in the day about MLK day.
This brotha' is a bit offended since I saw RP's opnion about MLK day on L.O.D. show tonight.
See ya Paul. You kind of flamed out at the debate last night also.

[Isnt that special]

04:40 PM on 01/18/2012

Paulbots... that’s cute. My suggestion to you is that you do more research. MLK was a HERO to Ron Paul. As a matter of fact, and this is as per Ron Paul, Rosa Parks is one of his heroes (1999 House speech praising Rosa Parks for her courage), Martin Luther King is his hero, because they practiced the libertarian principle of civil disobedience and nonviolence…. You should be offended, but you’re barking up the wrong tree- it’s not Ron Paul you should feel this way towards. As far as "flaming out" on Monday night's debate- hey man, the truth hurts.

[SmolderingRuin]

09:48 PM on 01/17/2012

Dana Bash and her husband, John King have always been biased republicans, completely unfair to any Democrat, and now they are obviously out to get Ron Paul any way they can. There are others doing the same on cnn, and I'm sure they have orders to do it. Doubtless, she meant to have the cameras on when she claimed Paul supporters were a "little scary". I watch cnn by necessity, but I hate them. I see how they slant things constantly. Dana Bash isn't a bit scared of her email from Ron Paul supporters. It's just another attempt to make him and anyone who listens to his ideas look nuts. She's probably going to bat those big camel eyes and claim it's domestic tewwowism next. She's obviously a prima donna, defined as: a temperamental person; a person who takes adulation and privileged treatment as a right and reacts with petulance to criticism or inconvenience (dictionary.com), and her being "objective" is the best joke I've heard all day. She meant exactly what she said about being worried Ron Paul would "continue on long into the spring and summer". And her very extreme upset about some perfectly reasonable questions, just because they dared to criticize her and cnn, bordered on the pathological. Princess Dana doesn't like to be confronted or criticized. Her replies were curt and rude. Her facial expressions as well as her vicious dissing and paranoid accusations at the end of the tape tell it all.

[A dean89]

08:54 PM on 01/17/2012

Ron Paul is brave

[media4me2]

11:57 PM on 01/17/2012

He's a racist.

[ta2t2o]

01:46 AM on 01/18/2012

But he's a brave racist. Actually - he's not really. If he was a brave racist - he would have stood behind the racist comments in his newsletters.

[RobH413]

03:49 AM on 01/18/2012

You haven't done your homework on this issue.

[HunterHikes]

02:37 PM on 01/17/2012

Ron Paul is the radical right's version of Ralph Nader or maybe Dennis Kucinich.

None of them are realistic, yet it's important that we have someone who carries the voice of "crazy" so the zealots have someone to embrace. Now that Sarah Palin is all but gone, Ron is their savior.

[RobH413]

03:59 AM on 01/18/2012

Oh, boy, is that ever wrong. First of all, Ron Paul and Sarah Palin are drawing support from completely different constitutencies. I doubt there is more than a smattering of Palin fans among Paul's supporters. Conversely, I will bet there are MANY Paul fans, myself included, who regarded the Palin selection and candidacy as an insult to our intelligence and a dangerous proposition for the country.

Second, it was Martin Luther King who observed, and I am paraphrasing here, that all progress in the human condition is forced by the dedication of the maladjusted creative minority. I'm sure there were people who were told that their efforts to end slavery, or to secure equal rights for minorities were "unrealistic" because those objectives were, at one time, unrealistic. Obviously that did not mean they were wrong, nor did it mean that their efforts were wasted.

The marriage equality issue is one that demonstrates just how quickly an "unrealistic" cause can become the law of the land. We're not there yet, but in less than a generation, the country has gone from overwhelmingly opposed to majority support. Hearts and minds can change faster than you think, and that changes what is "realistic".

[HunterHikes]

12:42 PM on 01/18/2012

1) I disagree. I hear some of the same zealots from the Sarah Palin supports advocating for Paul. Granted, some advocate for other candidates. Still, they all seem to be nutty as can be.

2) Do not try to compare Martin Luther King, Jr. to Ron Paul or his nutty supporters. It's an insult to all that Dr. King worked to achieve for humanity. Ron Paul's views on blacks over the years fills me with absolute disgust. To use Dr. King in your analogy is poor decision.

3) What's unrealistic? That we treat all human beings as human beings, or that the notion that your "sanctity" of your marriage can be threatened by by the idea that two people of the same sex can be married? I don' know about you, but my wife and I were both raised in Christian households. Neither of us think our marriage is threatened is our male neighbor wants to marry another man or a female co-worker marries another women. If you are that bothered by someone else's relationship or you think God will strike you down because of something another couple does, you have some issues that can't be resolved through legislation, that's for sure.

[HunterHikes]

12:44 PM on 01/18/2012

Oh, and you need to do more research. Half of American now support gay marriage according to almost every major research poll released in the last year. Not ready? I think half of American are, so don't try to speak as if homophobes are a majority in this country.

[reviewingthesituation]

12:38 PM on 01/17/2012

Ron Paul's ardent young supporters are already rationalizing their candidate's lack of, um, universal appeal. He wasn't really running, just wanted to be sure important issues were raised, they're saying. Or, he isn't really a Republican anyway.(The last makes him a big fat liar or his supporters complete stooges.)

In any case, he's one of the reasons this race has been so darn much fun.

[HunterHikes]

02:36 PM on 01/17/2012

Have you noticed that Ron Paul is the GOP's Ralph Nader?

The fans are just as crazed in their zealotry and sadly uninformed and lacking in pragmatic intellect.

The sad thing about the Libertarian party is that they are perhaps the most foolish of all the loopy third parties out there. Sure, the Greens couldn't smoke their way out of a drum circle and the Peace & Freedom people are too busy working in their gardens to vote, but the Libertarians haven't even the first clue about how politics actually works and how absolutely ridiculous and unrealistic their ideas truly are.

[RobH413]

04:08 AM on 01/18/2012

Whereas your views are perfectly reasonable and entirely correct and will save the country? I'm a Libertarian. You want to challenge me about how politics "works"? You want to challenge me about how politics and government often DON'T "work"?

Do you want to talk about Republicrat ideas like pre-emptive wars, mass incarceration of our citizens under modern prohibition, trillions in deficit spending, trillions in corporate welfare, trillions in zero-interest loans to banks, government authority to arrest and detain even American citizens indefinitely without charges? These are just a few of the ideas that Democrats and Republicans advance with a straight face. And you want to suggest that Libertarians, most of whom oppose all of those policies, have "absolutely ridiculous and unrealistic ideas"? Seriously? Are you paying attention?

[Try the truth]

07:21 PM on 01/17/2012

All they have are deflection and excuses!

[Pdubya]

04:35 PM on 01/18/2012

bring up an issue, i'd be glad for some intelligent discourse.

[Ergon]

12:01 PM on 01/17/2012

Whatever Ron Paul's personal views on a subject are, most of them require a constitutional amendment that will never be passed. Yet the punditocracy never stops trying to scare us. 

Ms Bash knows she has to pretend to be objective, so she can't say she doesn't like Ron Paul. Instead, it's his supporters who 'scare' her. 

CNN is actually getting to be worse than Fox News, if such a thing were possible.

[CKA2010]

01:50 PM on 01/17/2012

Ergon - that is not possible.

[RobH413]

04:14 AM on 01/18/2012

What are you talking about? It's the other candidates who have been out there arguing for phony, unrealistic constitutional amendments. Paul's assertion is that the government has been acting outside the constitution, not that it needs to be amended. While Paul's positions often differ from case law interpretation of the Constitution, the only issue I can think of that would require a constitutional amendment is his belief that the power to regulate abortion should be a matter of state law. This would require a constitutional amendment, which will NEVER happen, but it could also happen with a reversal of Roe v. Wade, which reversal would not outlaw abortion, as many seem to assume, but merely return that issue to the states for regulation.

[westreal]

09:31 AM on 01/17/2012

Disclaimer: I'm no Ron Paul fan.

My opinion: She deserved every bit of it she got because that was the stoopidest question I have heard asked of a Presidential candidate. And she does consistently call Ron Paul unelectable. It's clear to me that CNN has an agenda and I'm glad these folks spoke out about it.

CNN = Circumventing News Now

[BritishColumbian]

11:55 AM on 01/17/2012

I agree. CNN "reporters" have bought into their hype of being the "best political team"and believe they are above approach. Glad to see people pushing back.

[Sophist FCD]

02:01 PM on 01/17/2012

Ron Paul is running as a Republican. Ron Paul wants to eliminate all aid to Israel.

Whether you think that is a good idea or not, isn't that pretty much the dictionary definition of "unelectable"?

[BullPucky2]

08:59 PM on 01/18/2012

This makes no sense!