Adopted Huntsman daughters at center of video controversy

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • CougarBlue Heber City, UT
    Jan. 8, 2012 5:16 p.m.

    This attack add is classless, UnAmerican, shameles, hateful and bigoted. And those are only the nice words I can say about the person, or persons who put this ad together. How disgusting politics has become. No wonder so many don't become involved because of the low-life people who sponsor such attacks.

  • cindyacre Shelley, ID
    Jan. 7, 2012 8:25 p.m.

    It is said that the Obama campaign was active and alive and well during the Republican caucuses. Do you think his team did this? Really dumb.

  • The_Kaiser Holladay, UT
    Jan. 7, 2012 6:28 p.m.

    Do you know Robert Taft? A recent politician that was dubbed by his colleagues and other politician as being "Mr. Republican." This guy was the embodiment of the republican party, and was praised and memorialized for it.

    Do you know that Ron Paul espouses all of the ideology and the platforms of Robert Taft? And yet he is ostracized as "dangerous" and "extreme".

    Liberty and the Constitution can be extreme to many people.

  • fresnogirl Fresno, CA
    Jan. 7, 2012 2:38 p.m.

    We have no idea WHO posted this or who they actually like in the Primary. For all we know it could have been someone who is not even a citizen. That is what is silly about this article and so many of the emotional comments.

    Yeah, it was a garbage thing to do. The person posting it probably KNOWS that -- which is why they cowardly did not use their OWN name while doing it. The only thing this particular incident reveals is that some people hide behind anonymity to live out their lowest impulses.

  • fresnogirl Fresno, CA
    Jan. 7, 2012 2:31 p.m.

    Truthseeker

    I'm not sure why you are focusing on me. I neither endorsed nor disparaged any candidate in my comment. I merely suggested that Heidi (and any other voter, for that matter) should not decide who they will or won't vote for based on a comment some unknown person attributes to them.

    I'm surprised that someone who has chosen "Truthseeker" as their name would have a problem with me advocating to Heidi that she base her vote on something more substantial than an emotional response to some third party's comment.

  • Aggielove Junction city, Oregon
    Jan. 7, 2012 12:42 p.m.

    Ron paul wouldnt do this.
    And im not voting for paul.

  • A1994 Centerville, UT
    Jan. 7, 2012 11:32 a.m.

    Some of the comments here are amazing. The Paul campaign comes out and says "We didn't do this. We find it in extremely poor taste." But nope. It was a carefully crafted attempt (in the minds of some) to torpedo the man who is currently in FOURTH OR FIFTH PLACE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE! It was a wing-nut supporter. Every campaign has its wing-nut supporters.

    But at least I can say that the GOP is doing a much better job of vetting its candidates than the Democratic party. Ultimately, I think Romney is going to get the nomination and win the presidency.

  • 3grandslams Iowa City, IA
    Jan. 7, 2012 7:14 a.m.

    Goodbye Ron Paul. Your followers have always been ecentric, but this goes to far. It crosses the line of racism. Now if we could corrrect the bigots who attack Romney.

    Racist and bigots in the repbulican party, who would have guessed it. We expect that from the Dems (cling to their guns and bibles), but this isn't acceptable, really from any american.

  • My2Cents Taylorsville, UT
    Jan. 7, 2012 5:12 a.m.

    Ron Paul is the only candidate to get this country united and back in order. All the other candidates promote illegal aliens in american jobs as scabs to keep prosperity under control and unattainable by the American people. If American's choose to be oppressed and welfare dependents, then keep Obama in power, he's as good a socialist as Republicans.

    About Huntsman's loyalty, he has declared that he 'prefers' to give american jobs and industry to China, they are now better equipped as an industry created by Corporate America for this very purpose. His loyalties are to business and profit in foreign countries, not in America for the American people.

    Most republicans want foreign occupation by Mexico to ensure the destruction of hope, prosperity, and independence by American's from government control. Illegal foreign nationals are our country and home wreckers and its time for them to go.

    Ron Paul is the only one with the guts to drop the wrecking ball on Wall Street, banks, corporate profiteering, and debt to restore the economy to one that will grow and make jobs by itself. Government can't create jobs, only well paid workers and prosperity can create jobs and reduce debt.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Jan. 6, 2012 11:34 p.m.

    Re: Pagan | 3:41 p.m. Jan. 6, 2012
    "Let me ask, if it is 'wrong' to target Huntsmans daughters...why was it 'acceptable' for Glenn Beck to target Obama's daughters?"

    Answer: Instead of focusing on a non-issue decent people are giving the Huntsman family two thumbs up for their unselfish efforts in adopting two children who now have a family. My estimation of Huntsman just went way up.

    No wonder President Obama admires Mr. Huntsman and his wife.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 11:26 p.m.

    USAlover,

    The reason why the "Are corporations people?" dispute is worth attention is because of it's impact, not the principle behind it. Of course, there are people behind corporations who are affected directly by what affects the corporation. But whether a corporation should have the same freedom of a human being, free speech, political donations, and so on- these things are an entirely different issue. All of our opinions aside, this issue is certainly relevant and an important one.

    I personally can see this both ways. I look at big corporations I don't like, the influence they have, and so on. This makes me very uncomfortable. Why? Because they're big? No. Because I disagree with them. I am just as uncomfortable with how much of the youth today support Marijuana. I can't stand that at all really.

    On the other hand, if I owned a small business, it's 100% mine. I believe I have the right to use my possessions, resources, etc. how I see fit and for what causes, charities, ideals, and community efforts that I desire to support.

    There are two sides to every coin; one needs compromise and the will to listen to see both.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Jan. 6, 2012 9:30 p.m.

    re:USAlover
    Who was affected by Enron's fraud? Not just the employees and shareholders who trusted Faustow, Skillings and Kenneth Lay but also every Californian who saw their utility bills skyrocket, and suffered power outages. Enron cost California $40 billion in 2000-2001.

    Corporations employ people. They are not people.
    If CEOs of corporations have legitimate business interests in what laws are enacted, let them publically make their case, to the American people. But they should not be covertly buying presidents, congress or manipulating elections.

  • WHAT NOW? Saint George, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 8:48 p.m.

    I am not a Republican.

    My comment does not reflect partisan feelings toward John Huntsman

    "...Huntsman responded to the video by saying, "It's just stupid. If somebody wants to poke fun of me for speaking Chinese, that's OK. What I object to is bringing forward pictures and videos of my adopted daughters, and suggesting there is some sinister motive there...".

    Two beautiful, innocent young girls rescued by a loving family from a life few Americans could ever imagine.

    Thank you John Huntsman and Family.

  • USAlover Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 8:34 p.m.

    Corporations ARE people, Mr. Huntsman and here's why.

    Who was affected by Enron's collapse? Computer hard drives? Machines? No...people lost retirements and savings.

    If Ford were to collapse, who would be affected? Windshields? Pistons? No..people would lose pensions and savings.

    Corporations ARE people! Get over it...

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 8:18 p.m.

    Ron Paul can deny it all he wants but he has a proven track record of being a bigot.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 6, 2012 6:51 p.m.

    I find it totally dishonest of these candidate to not take some level of responsibility for what people do in their name. From Romney's pack run by his best bud that has been running attack ads, to Paul and his followers, these are prime examples of candidates running from responsibility for these actions. It was wrong to target Palin's kids, it is wrong to target Obama's kids, and it is equally wrong to try to make adoption something "wrong".

    Is winning really worth dragging our society that much further into the gutter.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Jan. 6, 2012 6:42 p.m.

    Let us not forget the robocalls targeting McCain in the So. Carolina primary in 2000 stating "Mr. McCain's current wife, Cindy, was a drug addict and that the couple's daughter Bridget, adopted from Mother Teresa's orphanage in Bangladesh, was a black child Mr. McCain had fathered out of wedlock."

    The Washington Post reported "The advocacy calls for George W. Bush's campaign that became an issue in this year's South Carolina GOP primary were developed by Feather, Hodges, Larson & Synhorst."

    Of course, then in 2008 McCain's campaign engaged in outrageous robocalls against Obama.

    Political contests--a race to the bottom.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Jan. 6, 2012 6:14 p.m.

    re:fresnogirl

    What about the racist nature of statements in Ron Paul's past newsletters?

    His newsletters didn't come from some PAC or unknown source. Apparently he was comfortable with them....

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    Jan. 6, 2012 6:08 p.m.

    A Ron Paul spokesperson has said that this is not from the Ron Paul campaign and would not have been made/posted by anyone who truly understands Ron Paul.

    To a certain extent, that is probably true.

    But Ron Paul needs to come out loud and clear and immediately to denounce this "ad."

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 5:43 p.m.

    I honestly am not a Huntsman supporter.

    HOWEVER, is it not more American of him to welcome people into his home, even his family, who need a home? I'm sorry, but whoever thought of the "American vs Chinese" slogan may not have as "American" of values as they think they have.

  • Joshua Steimle Draper, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 5:39 p.m.

    Pagan - Here's one other major difference between the two situations--Huntsman didn't introduce his daughters into the news cycle, whereas Obama did. It was Obama who first told the story about his daughter asking him if he had plugged the hole yet.

    'When I woke this morning and I'm shaving and Malia knocks on my bathroom door and she peeks in her head and she says, '"Did you plug the hole yet, Daddy?"' he told a press conference.

    If politicians want to keep their children out of the media, they shouldn't introduce them to it. That doesn't excuse this random YouTuber or Beck or anyone for their actions, but for the politicians it's theater. As FDR said "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way."

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 5:39 p.m.

    1) Ron Paul should not be a GOP candidate at all. He's a Libertarian trying to hijack the process by pretending to be mainstream.
    2) Why would anyone attack Huntsman at this point? He's no threat to anyone and the attack can backfire.
    3) Candidates cannot control their supporters.
    4) Sometimes candidates take advantage of #3 above and take shots at other candidates knowing they have deniability.
    5) Delta Fox @3:50 pm puts the matter in true perspective.

  • Joshua Steimle Draper, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 5:35 p.m.

    Pagan - To be fair, Beck (although I thought it was Rush, not Beck) wasn't "targeting" Obama's daughters. To "target" a person is to make them the focus of an attack. No one was attacking Obama's daughters in the statement you provided. And to be fair again, no one is targeting Huntsman's daughters. However, both Obama's daughters as well as Huntsmans were used in attacks on those two men. What makes the attack on Huntsman despicable is that the race of the daughters is referenced. Children whose race doesn't match that of their parents have to deal with enough without it being brought to national attention. In the case of Obama no characteristic of his daughters was used as part of the attack. There was no reference to their race, intelligence, hair style, or anything else. The attack on Huntsman effectively says "Huntsman has daughters who are Chinese, where do his allegiances lay?!" That is offensive to Huntsman and his daughters. The attack on Obama was saying "Obama has a daughter and here is something she could have said!" That is hardly offensive, unless you're offended by anyone bringing up the fact that Obama has a daughter.

  • Joshua Steimle Draper, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 5:33 p.m.

    Heidi, for all we know a Huntsman supporter put up the video to make Paul look bad and to get Huntsman some positive press.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Jan. 6, 2012 5:32 p.m.

    re:fresnogirl
    This is not new to Ron Paul.
    Here are a few examples of past statements in Ron Paul newsletters:

    "Given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

    "We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational."

    After the Los Angeles riots, one article in a newsletter claimed, "Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks."

    One referred to Martin Luther King Jr. as "the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours" and who "seduced underage girls and boys."

    Other newsletters had strange conspiracy theories about homosexuals, the CIA, and AIDS.

    In 1996 when the Texas Monthly investigated the newsletters, Paul took responsibility for them and said that certain things were taken out of context. (exactly what context would make these statements acceptable?)

    We are seeing another aspect of Ron Paul.
    It isn't acceptable.

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Jan. 6, 2012 5:23 p.m.

    'American values? Or Chinese?' the ad asks, ending with 'Vote Ron Paul."

    One would think a Doctor knows best when it comes down to a human being. Right?.

    Those PaulBots are as bad as OWS hey?. In China they do have a "one child only law", a boy.

    Huntsman's other adopted daughter was left to die on a roadside in India the day she was born. Jon Huntsman, who often speaks of his adopted daughters from China and India while on the campaign trail. Aaaaaah soooooo, poor baby rich guy, if the heats to bad then get out of the kitchen. Face it he's a 'Manchurian candidate' that's all. Huntsman is speaking Chinese to his daughters, but English to Mitt Romney. To show us his tax returns.

    Huntsman adopted daughter, but one thing here, his daddy can't buy him The White House. That belongs to me and it ani't for sale.

  • washcomom Beaverton, OR
    Jan. 6, 2012 5:07 p.m.

    The smearing of candidates by unknown sources - PACs, fans of one political base vs another - is nothing new. But it is really low to bring in a candidate's family into the picture and to smear them, when it is no fault of their own as to what country of origin they are from.

  • fresnogirl Fresno, CA
    Jan. 6, 2012 4:55 p.m.

    Heidi T.

    Please go back and reread the article before basing your vote on the assumption that Ron Paul is a racist. He had nothing to do with the video-- someone just slapped his name on it. If you don't like him as a candidate then OK. But base it on something better than this, please.

  • Heidi T. Farmington, Utah
    Jan. 6, 2012 4:49 p.m.

    Not that I have decided to vote for Jon Huntsman, but whatever thought I had regarding a vote for Ron Paul has disappeared. His unfair and uneducated assumptions followed by condemnation and judgment are disappointing to me. Is this his model of assessment for a democratic government?

  • On the other hand Spanish Fork, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 4:34 p.m.

    The creator of this video is entitled to free speech, but he/she doesn't deserve all the free publicity. The Paul campaign even finds it offensive. Let's not draw attention to stuff like this, DN.

  • rogerdpack2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 4:31 p.m.

    wow people care what some random youtube user posted about ron paul? huh? seriously.

  • Heffy Kaysville, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 4:30 p.m.

    This is not something Paul would ever do. Its the opposite of what he believes and professes. He believes in an open society, and that we should try to be friends with other nations. It is either the work of one supporter who Paul cannot control, or it is a dirty smear tactic from a supporter of another candidate.

  • A1994 Centerville, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 3:54 p.m.

    @cjb

    Did you even read the article?

    "Kate Schackai, Ron Paul's New Hampshire spokeswoman, also derided the online ad. "The video was utterly distasteful and no one who actually supports Dr. Paul's principles would have made it."

    The identity of YouTube user "NHLiberty4Paul" is unknown, and no other videos have been uploaded to YouTube from that account."

    This is a rotten thing to do, but it wasn't done by the Paul campaign. This has nothing to do with Ron Paul. Using this dope's YouTube video to paint Ron Paul as a racist or xenophobe is a irresponsible as the post itself.

  • DeltaFoxtrot West Valley, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 3:50 p.m.

    Neither Hunstman nor Paul have a snowball's chance of winning the nomination, so anything they say is irrelevant.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 3:41 p.m.

    "An online ad posted by 'NHLiberty4Paul' includes video footage of Huntsman with daughter Gracie when she was an infant," the Associated Press reported. "It also shows Huntsman holding Asha shortly after she was adopted from India. 'American values? Or Chinese?' - Article

    This is not new.

    A persons CHILDREN have been the subject of scrutiny for awhile now.

    As exampled by:

    **'BECK: (imitating Malia) Daddy? Daddy? Daddy, did you plug the hole yet?'
    - Glenn Beck transcript for the Glenn Beck radio show, 05/28/11

    This can also be found on:

    **'Glenn Beck smears Obama's 11-year-old daughter' - by Simon Maloy - Media Matters - 05/28/11

    I think both examples are shameful.

    Let me ask, if it is 'wrong' to target Huntsmans daughters...

    why was it 'acceptable' for Glenn Beck to target Obama's daughters?

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 6, 2012 3:40 p.m.

    Ron Paul is a throwback to an earlier era. Back in the 30', 40's or 50's his attitude would have been accepted without a second thought. As disturbing as it may be, it is also interesting, like steping into a way back machine.