I can just imagine how frustrating this must be for our beloved anchor, and it really showed at the end of the first segment of Wednesday night's show, called
. Rachel had a lot of fun with the first part of the show because she introduced a new digital book called,
. The entire segment is transcribed and appears below the fleur-de-orange, I just want to point out that when you watch or read the first section of the segment, notice how as she digitally turns each page of the book and explains the candidate on the page and points out how they obfuscate and refuse to answer direct questions from reporters, that when Rachel talks about each reporter, she says, the persons was a
.
President Obama grants interviews to a wide-range of media outlets, while the Mitt Romney campaign ... not so much. Last week I titled a diary,
Wednesday night, knowing she will never be granted an opportunity to interview Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan, Rachel Maddow asked reporters that do get those interviews to do their job and ask serious, probative questions. At the end of the segment, Rachel pleads her case:
Behold! A Child's Treasury of Politicians Refusing to Answer Very Simple Questions. Very simple questions about their own records. We're not like the other networks. We don't have a magic wall in particular. We just have a wall, but you sort of get the idea, right? You ready? Behold a Child's Treasury [Knocks on wall, book opens]. Ha! It works! Ha! Alright, this is Mike Coffman.
Mike Coffman is a Republican congressman from the great state of Colorado, and he at one point was flirting with the whole birtherism thing. Mike Coffman told a group of donors in Colorado in May that he was not sure where Barack obama was born, but that Mr. Obama, he said quote, is just not an American. Now a great reporter from the local NBC affiliate in Denver decided to ask Mike Coffman about that, right? The questions that the reporter asked were totally reasonable questions. They were questions about Mike Coffman and something Mr. Coffman had done in public. But Mr. Coffman's answers to those questions earned him a very proud place in our Child's Treasury of Politicians Refusing to Answer Very Simple Questions about themselves. Watch.
Reporter: After your comments about the President, do you feel that voters are owed a better explanation than just I misspoke?
Coffman: I think that ... um as I stand by my statement, that I misspoke and I apologize.
Reporter: Okay, and who are you apologizing to?
Coffman: You know, I stand by my statement that I misspoke and I apologize.
Reporter: I apologize. We talk to you all the time. You're a very forthcoming guy. Who's telling you not to talk and to handle it like this?
Coffman: I stand by my statement that you have and I misspoke and I apologize.
Reporter: Was it that you thought it would go over well in Albert County where folks are very conservative and you'd never say something like that in the suburbs?
Coffman: I stand by my statement that I misspoke and I apologize.
Reporter: Is there anything that I can ask you that you will answer differently?
Coffman: You know, I stand by my statement that I misspoke and I apologize.
Reporter: Thank you, Congressman.
Coffman: Thank you. [dashes off quickly]
That was Republican congressman Mike Coffman of Colorado. Obviously, he stands by his statement that he misspoke and he apologizes. Is that clear?
Right around that same time period, earlier this year. [Knocks on wall, page turns] Yeah! I love it! A Republican candidate for Congress in Arizona, this guy, Jesse Kelly. He earned his place in the Child's Treasury of Politicians Refusing to Answer Very Simple Questions about themselves. And he did so in a way that was so amazing it made onlookers at the time (his own supporters who were standing right next to him while he was doing it); it made his own supporters laugh along audibly as it was happening. A great local ABC reporter in Arizona was asking Jesse Kelly very reasonable questions about whether he intended to accept a controversial endorsement that he got from an anti-immigrant group. Listen.
Reporter: Do you plan on accepting that endorsement this time?
Kelly: Our campaign is going to stay focused on lower gas prices using American energy, lower taxes and creating jobs.
Reporter: Do you plan on accepting that endorsement?
Kelly: Our campaign is going to stay focused on lower taxes, lowering gas prices using American energy and creating jobs.
Reporter: So is that a yes or a no?
Kelly: Our campaign is going to stay focused on lowering gas prices, creating jobs and lowering gas prices using American energy.
Reporter: Right, so no comment?
Kelly: Our campaign is going to stay focused on lowering gas prices, creating jobs and lowering taxes.
Reporter: Alright, thanks, Jesse.
Kelly: Thank you.
Thank you. I don't know if they're laughing at you, but if you're not laughing by definition they're laughing at you. Jesse Kelly, ladies and gentlemen. Can you believe that he lost that election? Yeah.
Today we got a couple of new entries. [Knocks on wall, page turns] Yes. The gentleman that's shown right here in our book. His name is Josh Mandel. Josh Mandel is a Republican running for the United States Senate from Ohio. He's the guy who's running against Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown. Now Josh Mandel was pressed this week by a very sharp local NBC Reporter in Dayton, Ohio about whether Mr. Mandel would have supported the auto bailout. Very specific question, and Mr. Mandel's amazing answer earns him a page in our Child's Treasury. This is so great.
Voiceover: He blasted those, including Senator Brown, and Republicans who supported the Wall Street Bailout, but refused to say what he would have done with General Motors.
Mandel: I have a vision for taking the Dayton area, taking some of these auto plants and former ... factories and fill them back up with Dayton area workers to make pipes and tubes and fittings for new manufacturing jobs here in the Miami Valley.
Reporter: Josh Mandel, I appreciate what you're saying, but would you have supported the GM Bailout?
Mandel: Again, I will do everything I can as United States Senator to protect auto jobs and grow auto jobs, and we've talked quite a bit throughout the state of Ohio about all the great plans we have for protecting auto jobs here.
Reporter: You're not going to answer it, are you?
Mandel: Great seeing you.
Great seeing you. Here's a very simple question about yourself. Would you have supported this policy? Yes, it is great seeing you. What happened, hmm ah?
Then there's the ongoing controversy this week, of course, over Republican congressman Todd Akin of Missouri, and his remarks in the past few days that rape cannot cause pregnancy. That has turned into a political nightmare for a whole bunch of conservative politicians who have cosponsored legislation with Todd Akin about rape and pregnancy. Or who at least, share his political beliefs that if a woman does get pregnant when she's raped, the government should force who to give birth against her will.
So [Knocks on wall, page turns] one of the politicians who's kind of in trouble over the Akin thing is the Republican candidate for Senate in Washington State. His name is Michael Baumgartner and he earned his place in our Child's Treasury of Politicians Refusing to Answer Very Simple Questions about themselves and their records, when a local Seattle reporter interviewed him about whether he really did agree with Todd Akin that rape victims should be forced to by the government to give birth against their will. Asked about that policy position, which is in fact his policy position, a Washington Republican senate candidate Mike Baumgartner's response was this, and I quote, Go F... Yourself. That's what he said to the reporter, except he did not say F. Mr. Baumgartner actually put it in print. He put it in an email [See Republican US Senate Candidate Baumgartner: “Go Fuck Yourself”, Seattle Met PubliCola blog, August 21, 2012]. My favorite part of this entry in our Child's Treasury, is the reporter's response to getting that email from the senate candidate. The reporters response was quote ? Is this really Sen. Baumgartner? Yes. Yes, it was. But he does not want to answer any questions about how much he is like Todd Akin on that policy.
And of course, neither does the brand new star of our Child's Treasury of Politicians Refusing to Answer Very Simple Questions about themselves and their records. And that of course would be [knocks on wall, page turns] the guy with the dogeared page. Yea, the Republican vice presidential candidate, Paul Ryan. The Todd Akin controversy this week has earned Paul Ryan a special place in the Child's Treasury because of a local interview that Paul Ryan just gave to a CBS reporter in Pittsburgh. Now Paul Ryan, as you know, has the exact same position as Todd Akin when it comes to abortion; when it comes to pregnancy and rape and how much sway the government has over your decisions in those matters. Both men think that rape victims should be forced by the government to bear their rapist's child against their will. But when Paul Ryan was asked that position by this local reporter in Pittsburgh, he did everything he could to not answer for his own positions. It was amazing.
Ryan: His statements were outrageous. Over the pale. I don't know anybody who would agree with that. Rape is rape. Period. End of story.
Voice over: Ryan, like Romney, distanced himself from Akin's remarks, but in Congress he joined Akin in opposing abortions even when a woman has been raped.
Reporter: Should abortions be available to women who are raped?
Ryan: Well, look. I've ... I'm proud of my pro-life record. I stand by my pro-life record in Congress, but Mitt Romney is the top of the ticket and Mitt Romney will be president and he will set the policy of the Romney administration.
(cut in tape)
Reporter: You sponsored legislation that has the language forcible rape. What is forcible rape as opposed to ...?
Ryan: Rape is rape. Period. End of story.
Reporter: So that forcible rape language meant nothing to you at the time?
Ryan: Rape is Rape, and there's no splitting hairs.
Rape is Rape, and there's no splitting hairs. The problem for Paul Ryan is that he has been splitting hairs, legally, on what rape is. His entire career he's been doing that. Paul Ryan cosponsored a bill last year with Todd Akin to redefine rape in in Federal law. It was H.R.3. The third bill introduced by the Republican majority when they took control of the House in 2010. That bill initially tried to redefine what rape is. It created a new category that they called forcible rape [See Bill Text, 112th Congress (2011-2012), H.R.3].
Why do you need that new category? You need that new category to distinguish that kind of rape from other kinds of rape to single out a sub-class of rape that would allow you to still make a decision on your own pregnancy while victims of other sub-types of rape would not get that privilege in Paul Ryan's America. Paul Ryan was an original co-sponsor of the bill to redefine rape to make it harder on rape victims who wanted to get an abortion. As our own Kelly O'Donnell reported today, Paul Ryan also attempted to redefine rape a year earlier offering another piece of legislation that allowed for abortion in limited circumstances, quote ...unless the pregnancy is the result of an act of forcible rape or incest [See Ryan backed more than one 'forcible rape' abortion bill, NBC News, August 22, 2012]. You know, the real kind of rape, not that fake kind of rape. That doesn't qualify. But now, when Paul Ryan is asked about his own record on this, his own record to redefine what rape is.
Reporter: You sponsored legislation that has the language forcible rape. What is forcible rape as opposed to ...?
Ryan: Rape is rape. Period. End of story.
Reporter: So that forcible rape language meant nothing to you at the time?
Ryan: Rape is Rape, and there's no splitting hairs.
That's amazing. That is amazing. I mean it's amazing if you're some senator or some congressional special election candidate, but when you're a vice president ... I mean, you sponsored legislation to do X. Well, I believe Not X. But you sponsored legislation to do X. Yes, and I proudly believe Not X. Also, I'm very proud of my record. There is a broader issue here. This is a test for the American media. This is a test for the press. Paul Ryan's record on abortion is just about identical to Todd Akin's record on abortion. But Paul Ryan not only does not want to talk about that, he's trying to rewrite history about it. And good on that local reporter in Pittsburgh for asking about this. I mean, Paul Ryan obviously needs to continue to be asked about this until he actually gives a straight answer about it. This is a test for the press. And some of the press, a lot of the local press, actually, has turned out to be great in asking these questions and doing it in a dogged way; doing it in a really hard-nosed way that shows that they've done their homework before the interview. The conservative beltway press on the other hands, not so much.
Sean Hannity: There's been a lot of attacks already against you. But you kind of experienced this beforehand? (cut in tape)
Sean Hannity: What is your relationship with President Obama? (cut in tape)
Sean Hannity: Explain how reforming the tax code would help people. (cut in tape)
Sean Hannity: Do you think Obama wants trillion plus deficits every year? (cut in tape)
Sean Hannity: Tell us about your foreign policy experience. (cut in tape)
Sean Hannity: Alright, your kids and wife having a good time out there?
Paul Ryan: Yeah, they're doing great. They're doing fine.
Sean Hannity: Looks like they're having on stage with you.
Paul Ryan: Yeah they do. They like it.
Sean Hannity: Congressman, great to see you again [shaking hands] Thanks so much for your time.
Paul Ryan: Great.
In the midst of the whole Todd Akin, Paul Ryan rape controversy, not even a question about Todd Akin or rape when you've got Paul Ryan sitting right there? In the same hour, they dealt with the Paul Ryan, Todd Akin rape issue using correspondents and other discussants, but not the actual Paul Ryan. Why would you ask him about it?
Not everybody in the press has to be that bad at this. Again, this is what Paul Ryan now says about the issue of rape and pregnancy.
Ryan: Rape is Rape, and there's no splitting hairs.
So we still need a straight answer from Paul Ryan on this. What about all the times you personally tried to split hairs on what constitutes rape? Is there going to be an apology here? Did you not mean it when you did that in Congress more than once? Have you changed your mind about it? But while we are working on what the appropriate follow up questions here need to sound like, with Paul Ryan running for vice president now, don't just stop at the splitting hairs about rape nonsense. Oh, there's more.
Ryan: His statements were outrageous. Over the pale. I don't know anybody who would agree with that.
I don't know anybody who would agree with that. Todd Akin said something that nobody has ever espoused. I've never heard that. Nobody believes that. That crazy guy. Let's get rid of him and that will take care of our problem. You know it's not actually true to characterize Todd Akin in that way. Todd Akin himself has been citing somebody by name in explaining where he came up with this cockamamie theory that your body when you're raped can distinguish that the sperm in question is from a rapist and should therefore be rejected as opposed to other sperm. Todd Akin cited an anti-abortion doctor named John Willke in making this case [See Pro-life doctor John Willke, linked to Akin’s ‘forcible rape’ claims, endorsed Romney in 2007, New York Daily News, August 21, 2012].
Think Progress posted audio from a conservative talk show interview with Todd Akin today, in which Todd Akin repeatedly references this Dr. Willke by name [See Akin Clarifies ‘Legitimate Rape’ Comments: Women Make ‘False Claims’ About Being Raped, Think Progress, August 21, 2012].
Akin: You know, Dr. Willke has just released a statement and part of his letter, I think he just really stated it very clearly.
Well who is Dr. Willke who Todd Akin is citing as the source for his crazy theory that has now captivated all of American politics? Who is Dr. Willike? It's Dr. John Willke, a former Mitt Romney presidential campaign surrogate. A guy important enough to Mitt Romney that the 2008 Mitt Romney campaign put out a stand-alone solo press release headlining his endorsement [See Press Release - Dr. John Willke, A Founder Of The Pro-Life Movement Nationally & Internationally, Endorses Gov. Romney The American Presidency Project, October 20, 2007].
So Paul Ryan doesn't know anybody who would agree with Todd Akin's comments? He says. Have you talked to your running mate about it? London's Daily Telegraph newspaper is reporting tonight that this Dr. Willke, the guy who convinced Todd Akin that you can't get pregnant if you're raped; The Telegraph is reporting that he says he personally met with Mitt Romney as recently as this past October. So, not the last time Mitt Romney ran for president, but this time. From The Telegraph, quote Dr Willke told The Daily Telegraph that he did meet Mr Romney during a presidential primary campaign stop in the doctor's home city of Cincinnati, Ohio, in October last year. Local news reports at the time noted that the candidate held “private meetings” during the visit. Here's the quote from Dr. Willke, “He told me ‘thank you for your support – we agree on almost everything, and if I am elected President I will make some major pro-life pronouncements’,” Dr Willke said in a telephone interview on Tuesday [See US election: Mitt Romney met Todd Akin doctor Jack Willke during 2012 campaign, Daily Telegraph, August 22, 2012].
Now, caveats here. This is The Telegraph here, which is a) the British press, which is not what it used to be, and b) it's the The Telegraph, which even for the British press is not exactly all that confidence inspiring. But, it is supposedly, not a paraphrased quote, but a direct quote from this person who's very, very important in this national issue right now. And it would be good to hear directly from the Romney campaign if this is true, or if they're denying that this meeting took place. So far the Romney campaign is refusing to answer any questions about this. We asked the Romney campaign yesterday, whether Mitt Romney has met with Dr. John Willke to discuss these issues given how important Mr. Romney said he was to his campaign the last time he was running for president.
So far the campaign has not responded to any of our questions. They have not said, no. They have blanked us. But these are questions that deserve answers. I mean you're throwing Todd Akin essentially out of the Party for this, but he's your guy too? The Romney campaign is also refusing to make Paul Ryan available for an interview with us. Surprise! But for any of my colleagues in the press, who do get an interview with Mr. Ryan, can I suggest, asking him about the rape is rape comment, no need to split hairs? Obviously. Definitely. Ask him about that. There's no explanation for that that makes sense.
But also ask him about this whole Dr. Willke thing. Really? You guys have never heard anybody espouse this, that has no connection to your campaign? And while we're at it, Paul Ryan also said, quoting from the same interview that he did today, Nobody is proposing trying to deny birth control to anybody. We're going to be dealing with that particular whopper a little later in the show, but the broader issue here is this. This is a test for the American press.
Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney are actively trying to rewrite and distort their own record on the issue of abortion and rape and pregnancy at a time when the country is focused like a laser on this issue, and the Republican Party is trying to distance itself from its own members and their policy positions on this subject. This is just like the Medicare issue. Paul Ryan said he wants to turn Medicare into a coupon system, and even when some other people in the Republican Party primary had issues with that, at least for a second, I'm talking to you Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney said that he would sign the Paul Ryan Plan to end Medicare as we know it. He said he would sign it into law. Voucherizing Medicare? Yeah, I'd sign that into law.
And now Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are trying to run for the White House together by saying that they are the ones who are committed to protecting Medicare. The guys who committed on tape to ending Medicare. This is a test of the press. Do you just write down what they say? Do you report on what these candidates say their record is, or do you report that, but also compare it to what their actual record is? And then badger them when there is a difference between those two accounts? It's not what they say. It's about what they've done, and when what they say is some distance from what they've done, that distance is the story. This is what the press is for. This is the good stuff. Time to do our jobs everybody.