See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: Partial Transcript of Ron Paul @ GOP debate at Reagan Library
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/30/GOPdebate.transcript/
Published: Jan 30, 2008
Author: transcript
Post Date: 2008-01-30 21:50:35 by angle
Keywords: None
Views: 280
Comments: 16
This is the transcript of the GOP debate at the Reagan Library Wednesday January 30, Ron Paul ONLY. (CNN) -- ANDERSON COOPER, CNN: The first question is actually a question that will go to all of you, but I'll start with Governor Romney. During a 1980 debate, he suggested Americans determine who to vote for by asking themselves, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" So tonight, in terms of the economy, are Americans better off than they were eight years ago? COOPER: Congressman Paul, 61 percent of Americans think there is a recession already -- 61 percent of Americans say there's already a recession. Are we better off than we were eight years ago? TEXAS REP. RON PAUL: No, no, we're not better off. We're worse off, but it's partially this administration's fault and it's the Congress. But it also involves an economic system that we've had for a long time and a monetary system that we've had and a foreign policy that's coming to an end and we have to admit this. The Republicans were elected in 1994 to change direction of the country, because people sensed there was something wrong, we were going the wrong direction, but we didn't do anything. In the year 2000, we did, also. We were elected in the year 2000 to have a humble foreign policy and not police the world, and yet what are we doing now? We're bogged down in another war. We're bankrupting our country and we have an empire that we're trying to defend which costs us $1 trillion a year. And the standard of living is going down today. It's going down and the middle class is hurting because of the monetary policy. PAUL: When you destroy a currency, the middle class gets wiped out. Poor countries don't even have middle classes. We used to have one, and they're on the ropes right now. But it has to do with a fiscal policy, monetary policy, and foreign policy of way too much spending, but it took a lot of years for us to get here. The people in this country have been begging for a change in direction, and they haven't had it. It's time we gave it to them. COOPER: Congressman Paul, do you agree with Governor Schwarzenegger on this one? PAUL: Yes, I think California should do what they want, and we all recognize that. But one thing that hasn't been emphasized here that should be emphasized when we're dealing with the environment and gas house -- you know, greenhouse gases is property rights. We neglected during the industrial revolution property rights, and governments and big corporations got together and colluded. And that's what has to be reversed. You have to emphasize the property rights. But I would like to take one minute, since I didn't get a chance to answer this discussion on conservative versus liberal. COOPER: We're going to have -- I promise you we're going to have -- you're going to have another opportunity to do that. I promise you, coming up in like two minutes or two questions. PAUL: Well, you know, the governor says that you have to borrow for a handout of a check from the Chinese. Where are you going to get the money to build the highway? Same old thing. We have a foreign policy where we blow up bridges overseas and then we tax the people to go over and rebuild the bridges overseas and our bridges are falling down and our infrastructure is falling down. So, yes, this money should be spent back here at home. We have a $1 trillion foreign operation to operate our empire. That's where the money is. You can't keep borrowing from China. You can't keep printing the money. We have to cut some spending. That's what nobody here talks about. Where do you cut spending if you want to spend some money? We need lower taxes, less regulations, and we need to free up the market. We can't expect the government to do everything. We have to faith and confidence that the market works, but you can't do any of that unless you look at the monetary system. MORE When Posted...
COOPER: Congressman Paul?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
COOPER: Yes or no, Congressman Paul, was Sandra Day O'Connor the right choice? PAUL: I wouldn't have appointed her, because I would have looked for somebody that I would have seen as a much stricter constitutionalist. ___________________________________________________________ COOPER: I want to go to Jim VandeHei with a question for, I believe, Congressman Paul. VANDEHEI: Congressman Paul, this comes from Jay Majumdar (ph) from Roswell, Georgia. And he wants to know if you agree with Senator McCain's statement that the United States might need to have U.S. troops in Iraq for as long as even 100 years? PAUL: I don't even think they should have gone, so keeping them for 100 years, where's the money going to come from? (APPLAUSE) You know, the country is in bankruptcy. And when I listen to this argument, I mean, I find it rather silly, because they're arguing technicalities of a policy they both agree with. They agreed with going in; they agreed for staying, agreed for staying how many years? And these are technicalities. We should be debating foreign policy, whether we should have interventionism or non-interventionism, whether we should be defending this country or whether we should be the policemen of the world, whether we should be running our empire or not, and how are going to have guns and butter? You know, the '70s were horrible because we paid for the guns and butters of the '60s. Now we're doing the same thing. And nobody even seems to care. The dollar is crashing, and you're talking about these technicalities about who said what when? I mean, in 1952, we Republicans were elected to stop the war in Korea. In 1968, we were elected to stop the war in Vietnam. And, tragically, we didn't stop it very fast: 30,000 more men died. So when I talk about these long-term stays, I think, "How many men are you willing to let die for this, for something that has nothing to do with our national security?" There were no al Qaeda there. It had nothing do with 9/11. And there was no threat to our national security. They never committed aggression. It's unconstitutional. It's an undeclared war. And we have these silly arguments going on about who said what when. I think it's time to debate foreign policy and why we don't follow the Constitution and only go to war with a declaration of war. (APPLAUSE) ___________________________________________________ COOPER: Congressman Paul, what makes you capable of being a leader both on the economy and the military? PAUL: OK. The Constitution is very clear that the president is commander in chief of the military, but the president is not the commander in chief of the economy or of the people. And when we get reflection of conventional wisdom, but of a lot of lack of understanding of how the economy works. The president is not supposed to manage and run the economy. The people are supposed to do this. The government is supposed to give them sound money, low taxes, less regulation. The people are supposed to run it. But here, we're assuming that the president is supposed to run the economy. We're not supposed to manage. We're not supposed to manage the people's... COOPER: What role do you think the federal government should have -- I mean, does the federal government in your opinion have a role in stimulating the economy? PAUL: Yes, by lower taxes and less regulation. They could do a whole lot by having sound money, where we don't print the money out of thin air. That causes the business cycle. That causes your bubbles. We're always dealing with the symptoms of the disease and never saying, "how did this come about?" You know, it comes about because we have a Federal Reserve that creates money and prints it out of thin air. There is a lot of malinvestment. That's the most important thing to understand about the inflation of the monetary system, is the malinvestment. Then, later on, people suffer. You wipe out the middle class. But the evil of it all is the vehicle for financing wars that we shouldn't be in and a welfare state that we shouldn't be doing. So, yes, we have a role to play, but it's a negative role. We want the people to be free. We don't want to manage the people and tell them how to live. And we need a commander in chief. But the most important thing as a commander in chief is not moving troops around, as much as it is having a wise foreign policy that doesn't get us involved in so many things that we get trapped in and we linger year after year. We've been doing this for so long. And I like President Bush's argument that we have a humble foreign policy when he ran in 2000, and that we not be the policemen of the world. __________________________________________________________________ COOPER: Congressman Paul? PAUL: I supported Ronald Reagan in 1976, and there were only four members of Congress that did. And also in 1980. Ronald Reagan came and campaigned for me in 1978. I'm not sure exactly what he would do right now, but I do know that he was very sympathetic to the gold standard, and he told me personally that no great nation that went off the gold standard ever remained great. And he was very, very serious about that. So he had a sound understanding about monetary policy. And for that reason, I would say look to Ronald Reagan's ideas on money because he, too, was concerned about runaway inflation and what it does to a country when you ruin the currency. And that's what's happening today. The dollar is going down and our country is going to be on the ropes if we don't reverse that trend. (APPLAUSE)
"There are indeed two political parties in the US. The state-lovers and the freedom-lovers." - ghostdogtxn
After reading Paul's commentary I can see why he got so little time. He wiped the floor with them.
"There are indeed two political parties in the US. The state-lovers and the freedom-lovers." - ghostdogtxn
Ron Paul CNN Debate Footage 01/30/08
GREAT GREAT GREAT!!!!!!! HE WAS MARVELOUS.
"There are indeed two political parties in the US. The state-lovers and the freedom-lovers." - ghostdogtxn
On video 2 - Check out the knowing look exchanged between McCain & Romney...very telling.
"There are indeed two political parties in the US. The state-lovers and the freedom-lovers." - ghostdogtxn
After listening to the first video, it's apparent why the MSM doesn't give him much air time, as it's obvious that if given the chance to speak as long as the others, he'd win the election, and they certainly don't want that to happen.
well, you know, he needs to dig in there and take the chance. by golly, had he been forceful, he would have galvanized his supporters once again. have you watched the movie Man of the Year with Robin Williams? ;)
The only solution to this mess is to dig a hole big enough to nudge them all in and cover quickly
ALL of RON PAUL’s replies @ CNN debate Jan. 30, ‘08
He is very courageous to be up there ready to take the heat. He speaks plainly and is principled in his position. His position carries enough weight and doesn't need force. That comes through very clearly to many people.
"There are indeed two political parties in the US. The state-lovers and the freedom-lovers." - ghostdogtxn
Thank you.
"There are indeed two political parties in the US. The state-lovers and the freedom-lovers." - ghostdogtxn
Excellent! RP kicked everyone's butts and Mitt and McCain are very little men. Smirks and grins show no respect for Dr. Paul, no respect for the people's own intelligence, and no respect for the audience. What utterly stupid bought and piad for whore fucks they are.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition "Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." © IndieTx i watched 1/2 hr of the debate. 1/2 an hour too much. dr. paul was given very little time. i'm sickened by the future the other 3 people offer to americans and hence the world. imo it is one more indication of an empire with a cancer spreading within because of its misdeeds. the cancer has spread to the republican party as well. maybe time for ron paul to get out. it's time for him to go 3rd party.
AGREED! He has used the party for EXPOSURE and it has worked, regardless of the media snubs...his independent run will now have credibility and he could actually win the general election IMO in a 3 way race with 2 facist clowns with D and R after their names.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition "Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." © IndieTx Yeah, nobody likes the look or the stench of the rotten corruption that our government has become. But, that's why we're throwing out the occupiers in the White House and replacing them with the Ron Paul r3VOLution.
"Only the educated are free." ~ Epictetus
When given a moment to speak, RP did very well and has begun to assert himself.
"Give us liberty and give them death" ... noone222 1-10-08
He didn't have to say a damn word about the inequality. Everyone who watched those deabtes with an open mind saw what happened. He was invited. He is a gentleman and a proper guest. His being in this position to begin with is a testament to his courage, conviction and staying power. C'mon, christine...we need champions of the r3VOLution. He can't be what he isn't. We embrace him and the message for what they are; THE ONLY BEST HOPE to protect our country, our birthright and our children's heritage. Certainly we're not going to stumble now.
"Only the educated are free." ~ Epictetus
#2. To: All, robin (#0)
#3. To: angle, FOH, FormerLurker, Original_Intent, critter, wudidiz (#1)
#4. To: TwentyTwelve (#3)
#5. To: TwentyTwelve (#3)
#6. To: TwentyTwelve (#3)
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#7. To: FormerLurker (#6)
#8. To: FormerLurker, all (#6)
#9. To: christine (#7)
had he been forceful
#10. To: TwentyTwelve. ALL ---VIDEO OF RP'S CNN PERFORMANCE (#8)
#11. To: angle, all (#0)
(Edited)
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#12. To: IndieTX (#11)
#13. To: BrentFromCanada (#12)
it's time for him to go 3rd party.
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#14. To: BrentFromCanada (#12)
i'm sickened
#15. To: angle (#0)
#16. To: noone222, christine (#15)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest