Ron Paul Discusses His Run in with Sacha Baron Cohen's 'Bruno'
Sacha Baron Cohen tries to seduce former presidential candidate Ron Paul in his upcoming film Bruno. Paul talked about the incident with radio host and Guardian Angel founder Curtis Sliwa:
"I was expecting an interview on Austrian economics. So, that didn't turn out that way. But, by the time he started pulling his pants down, I, What is going on here? I ran out of the room. This interview has ended. When this all gets out, I'm probably going to have to apologize to my supporters because I think most of them are going to figure out why in the world didn't I sock this guy in the nose?"
I screencapped the shot above from the recently released trailer.
Listen to Paul talk about why he doesn't enjoy such nonsense, AFTER THE JUMP...
Posted Apr. 15,2009 at 7:05 PM EST by Andy Towle in Film, News, Sacha Baron-Cohen | Permalink
In the middle of a planetary financial meltdown, why does Sacha Baron Cohen try to embarrass the one American politician who has correctly diagnosed the problem? Is Bruno gaily zapping Paul on behalf of the banksters and their being first in line for funny money?
(Can Cohen really be hetero, either? Bruno is too much for a mere character actor!)
Posted by: Antonio | Apr 15, 2009 7:11:50 PM
Umm, yeah Antonio, he can be hetero. It's called acting. That's like asking if he can really be a Jewish man from Britian, since he played an antisemetic Kazakhstani. Do you actually know a lot of gay men who act like Bruno?
Ron Paul has really gotten down the easy, "I'm a good guy" banter even as he spouts the same old tired crap. Oh, you don't like taxes? REALLY? Tell us more!
And don't forget to tell us about the horribly hateful, racist, beyond homophobic diatribes you wrote or sponsored in your newsletters for years!
Posted by: Paul R | Apr 15, 2009 7:58:14 PM
Ron Paul wasn't aware of what was being printed in his newsletter for years. But now that he knows, he has denounced it and distanced himself from it. So it totally doesn't count at all.
Oh, sorry, that was the Obama/Reverend Wright story. My bad.
Seriously, Ron Paul reminds me of Ross Perot...some good ideas, but with an uncomfortable amount of squirreliness attached.
Posted by: paul c | Apr 15, 2009 8:14:22 PM
Ron Paul is always about as honorable as it gets and "Paul R" your posting is wrong about homophobic diatribes written by Ron Paul is reference to a SMEAR campaign against him. Fox News and the media in general is NOT giving him a free pass. Its because he is one of the only true voices of dissent and reason on either the Left or the Right. The "diatribes" you speak of were not uttered by him. He is steadfast about freedoms including freedom of speech and allows people to speak for themselves and the newsletters you mention included comments un-edited by him. And "Antonio" is right Ron Paul is pretty much the ONLY politician who diagnosed the mess we are in and the honorable and liberal Dennis Kucinich is one of his closest allies in the house, and that says a lot. We have to drop the left and right blinders. When you bad mouth an honorable person, humanity is further divided and conquered.
Posted by: Jason Thome | Apr 15, 2009 8:50:50 PM
Okay, let's examine the evidence. During the campaign, it came to light that there were homophobic and racist articles printed in the past in Ron Paul's newsletter. And now, he seems to think an appropriate response to 'Bruno' would be to "sock him in the nose". Glad I did not support this homophobic bastard.
Posted by: peterparker | Apr 15, 2009 9:08:15 PM
Jason, when a person allows dishonorable things to be published in a newsletter with his name on the masthead, that means he isn't honorable. Sure, it's free speech, but it's not a partisan issue.
Defend him all you like. And answer a simple question: would you allow the "Jason Thome Newsletter" to denounce minorities in a hateful, violent way? If so, I don't have much to say to you.
It's one thing to be a gay libertarian; I'm one on many issues. It's another to embrace someone who hates you, then backpedals and makes lame excuses when called on his crap. I find nothing honorable about that. It's not a SMEAR campaign if it's true.
Posted by: Paul R | Apr 15, 2009 10:24:10 PM
For what it's worth, here is a recent interview in which Paul comes across as genuinely pro-gay, at least for a Republican who's been outspoken about his religious views. I was pleasantly surprised to hear his words. (Unfortunately, the man interviewing him is truly hateful and disgusting.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIeW0DY64bE
Posted by: DCN | Apr 15, 2009 10:34:05 PM
Ron Paul should be President, if it wasn't for his total lack of charisma. He was the only candidate on either side of the aisle who dared to tell the truth about finances, international relations, this country's military engagements, etc. He calls it like it is and that is refreshing in the age of spin-doctored politicians.
Twisting every issue back to "GAY" is juvenile and just plain dumb and BORING. Gay, gay, gay, gay, gay, gay. Get over it. Just be who you are and stop whining. Some people need to feel "accepted" by everyone and want constant affirmation. Those people are called pussies. I don't need Ron Paul to love me, I just need him to RESPECT THE CONSTITUTION and my individual liberties. Let's see how hard Barry works for "gay rights". Where were all the gays BEFORE Prop 8 passed? Sipping and twirling in the Castro, because it's fun to be gay! (BTW- Prop 8 was passed by traditional liberal voters - blacks and hispanics who came out in droves to vote for BO, but hate the gays. Hmmm maybe time to re-think your political alliances boys).
Have you seen my new car? It's gay! I live in the gayborhood, and tomorrow night we're going to a gay restaurant and then a gay movie. I love gay clubs that play gay music. So gay.
And Sacha Barron Cohen....is so gay. It was funny for 2.2, but then when he came over here and started making fun of America it got real old. His Jew ass would be charcoal if it wasn't for them dumb-ass Americans he loves making fun of.
That's my gay 2 cents.
Posted by: Mike | Apr 15, 2009 11:22:54 PM
Sacha Baron Cohen is totally pro establishment and pro Jewish elite. He mocks what those elites want to have mocked: Former Soviet states (i.e. proxies for Russia), and now Ron Paul (a sole politician who's anti-banker and anti-financial elite scamsters).
What's next for Mr. Cohen's bigoted mockery, something Chinese?
Posted by: David | Apr 15, 2009 11:41:21 PM
Mike: Internalized homophobia is a bitch. Might want to work on that.
By the way, Ron Paul is such a huge fan of states' rights to do whatever the fuck they want, he even thinks they should have the right to outlaw consensual gay sex.
Ron Paul and his moronic supporters don't want a unified country, they want a disjointed collection of states, all with different laws and different standards for treating their citizens.
Why even have a country? Let's splinter off into fifty smaller ones. In this one, you can get married. In the one over you get arrested for having sex in the privacy of your own home.
And on top of that I have not yet met a Ron Paul supporter who was right in the head.
Posted by: Eshto | Apr 16, 2009 12:50:44 AM
'Ol Ron seems to have very little sense of humor, to match is lack of understanding of modern culture (modern meaning anything not 50 years old or so.) This is quaint and charming if you had to visit a relative like this a few times a year and get an antique coin or some classic advice from, but relevant as a politician? Please. He is successful mostly because people support who they think he is or want him to be. And he floats through the adulation like Peter Sellers did as Chance in "Being There." Except Peter Sellers the actor did know what was going on... Seriously - KEEP THOSE WITH NO SENSE OF HUMOR AWAY FROM ANY POWER - especially political power. I was enamored of Utopian Libertarianism in youth. As I learned of the actual world, and the realities of getting along with the way people realy are and the necessity of a government, and a well run government - the fact that Ron Paul gets Religion and gets it late in life, what does that say? Elders are supposed to get more wise, not more batty. As an Elder, and a politican with a record, that record is supposed to have good things in it and consistency, or at least not bad things. In short he's a charming (fucking, or not-fucking as the case may be) FRAUD. 'Apologize to supporters for not socking him?' That comes from a different world. And if it comes from a desire he truly had then it's from a one where he's a coward for not doing so and saying it now, and also so clueless he does not know that that is what he is communicating. He's borderline. Thanks Bruno / Sacha - I am sure it will be fingernail-on-chalkboard hilarious.
Posted by: JamesR | Apr 16, 2009 1:15:17 AM
Can we discuss Paul's campaign manager who had the bad luck of dying mid campaign due to AIDS & having NO health insurance?
Posted by: mike shackleford | Apr 16, 2009 6:22:28 AM
Ron Paul left one minor detail out of the story... he doesn't mention that when he runs out of room, he calls Bruno "queer."
He does, however, admit that he regrets not physically assaulting Bruno. Despite that, some commenters here still think he's not a homophobe?
That's the whole point of Borat/Bruno. He exposes people's true colors.
Posted by: crispy | Apr 16, 2009 9:25:23 AM
@eshto - Are you familiar with that piece of paper called the "Constitution"? We used to use it to run this country for a while.
Now we just hold a popularity contest between the two gangs...er..parties and let the winner make up rules as he sees fit.
But just for shits and giggles, try reading the Constitution some time and see if you can understand how this country of united states is actually supposed to work.
Posted by: paul c | Apr 16, 2009 9:57:44 AM
Hi all:
Because there's no new posting by Andy this morning for a while - I thuoght I would post this comment left by Matthew earlier about the IL anti-gay hate video.
Here it is:
Andy and all,
The video Andy posted yesterday from the IL anti-gay hate group was removed by the user and then put up again. Please go to the new location and flag it. Ratings have been disabled.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9d38EoQ9pg
Please flag it - and encourage others to do so.
Posted by: Michael | Apr 16, 2009 11:46:40 AM
I do think that you fellows are getting this all a bit out of proportion. Baron Cohen is essentially an entertainer who uses the "straight" world as a foil to produce his comedy. Sometimes it may seem tasteless or inappropriate but overall it is nothing more than candid camera taken to a different level. It should not be taken too seriously except by media studies students who should be using their time more usefully anyway. Just enjoy it as a bit of modern charivari (hope I spelt that right..)
Posted by: arch | Apr 16, 2009 12:34:47 PM
You boys need to get your panties out of a bunch. I haven't seen this clip, but my guess is that Cohen would have done this same routine to any politician that would have let him. Mr. Paul was probably the highest ranking one he could get that was too stupid to have his staff vet who he gives interviews to.
In this post DAILY SHOW media world, you'd think people at his level would maybe be more thorough.
Posted by: Timmy | Apr 16, 2009 2:18:21 PM
Cohen is trying to outdo Andy Kaufman, but Kaufman also did stuff that was just completely wacky, like coughing/laughing for an hour on-stage while his audience squirmed in their seats. Ron Paul is a tad old-fashioned and doesn't seem to have much of a sense of humor. It would have been funnier to try this with Bill Clinton, but I doubt Bill would have been fooled.
Posted by: anon | Apr 16, 2009 3:35:21 PM
To you boys who have your panties in a bunch, do you know that Ron Paul's 2008 Presidential campaign manager, Kent Snyder, was gay and recently died of AIDS? I didn't think so.
Instead of calling Ron Paul a homophobe, you might try actually finding out about the man.
Posted by: logicprobe | Apr 16, 2009 3:41:04 PM
Sure he probably liked the guy who made his candidacy possible, then presented him with a complex issue to address. Left unaddressed. Save for the meme "his family left with $400,000.00 in medical expenses. LIARS. Regardless who made the decision to not insure the campaign (Kent Snyder himself) and regardless any debate on that wisdom, lack thereof, etc.. AND what apparently is not public knowledge but that any death purportedly from 'AIDS' and pneumonia immediately brings to mind - that it would be most likely PCP and INCREDIBLY PREVENTABLE in this day and age if one had been taking care of themselves, like getting insurance... Privacy issues will probably prohibit the nosy from evey finding out, and it is not necessary but they are the ISSUES his death bring up. $400,000.00 - who is going to pay that? The "family?" PLEASE. They probably do not have it, and ARE IN NO WAY LEGALLY OBLIGATED TO PAY IT. It is NOT their debt. Real Libertarians know this. Why are people going on about it like it's the family's responsibility? Could it be to deflect the fact that it will be the TAXPAYERS who really pay? Golly, I wonder. http://ronpaulsurvivalreport.blogspot.com/2008/07/ron-paul-campaign-manager-dies.html
And: http://atomicgaywonk.blogspot.com/2008/07/kent-snyder-libertarianterry-dolan.html
"you might try actually finding out about the man." - by his actions / non-actions we all do.
Posted by: JamesR | Apr 16, 2009 5:12:41 PM
Let's get some facts straight. Paul's campaign manager did not die of AIDS. There is no evidence for that. On the other hand, the newsletters that were printed were edited at Ron Paul's offices, they were published by his campaign manager. Ron was one of the owners of the newsletter. Another was Lew Rockwell, Paul's friend and the author of the racist/homophobic rot. Rockwell is still Paul's good friend. Ron's wife and daughter were paid staff members of the newslettter. The garbage was printed for at least a four year period. Paul was widely challenged on the content of the newsletters at the time by various libertarians. It is absurd to say, with all that, that he didn't know about it. He knew. Paul is no libertarian. He's a social conservative with a voting record that backs it up.
Posted by: w.m. | Apr 17, 2009 5:32:59 AM
Speaking of social conservatives who defect to the all-too-accepting Libertarians, it's too bad Bruno didn't hit on Bob Barr, they'd have ended up fucking. Damn - maybe they did and it was cut. We'll all have to wait for the DVD.
Posted by: JamesR | Apr 17, 2009 7:28:38 AM
All I need to know about Ron Paul is that he voted NO against the Iraq War authorization-before it was politically convienient. The most important vote he has ever made. Against his majority party-1 of only 2 republicans? Against his party's President.
Posted by: MM | Apr 17, 2009 4:34:15 PM
I don't like the newsletters either but he did 1.) admit to them 2.) Admit they were a mistake/bad judgement/wrong and offensive 3.) Accept responsiblity 4.) Apologize How many people do that? What else do you want him to do? Is there an example of his ACTIONS proving he's a raging racist/homophobe? And please don't use this Bruno incident. How would you act if someone (regardless of sexual orientation) exposed themselves and blocked your exit (allegedly)?
Posted by: MM | Apr 17, 2009 4:41:32 PM
To the people who states he's not a libertarian but a social conservative: If your going to make such blanket statements please educate yourself-his views are often misunderstood/misquoted even misrepresented. He's called a "social conservative" because he's prolife (he's a MD/Obstetrician) and wants the issue decided at the state level (like it was before Row vs Wade and was legal in 21 states and counting). But he's not lockstep with the Religious Right. Do social conservatives want to end the Federal Drug War? He voted against the Federal Marriage amendment. He stated that he would like the "don't ask don't tell" policy changed. He's been out front on the FISA/Civil liberties stuff. He voted NO on the Patriot act. I don't agree with him on many issues but he does not fit into the left/right paradigm.
Posted by: MM | Apr 17, 2009 4:49:09 PM