Ron Paul draws stark contrasts with GOP peers

It was billed as a Republican presidential debate. And this time Fox News allowed Ron Paul to participate.

And, as if it was scripted, the 72-year-old, 10-term congressman from Texas provided some of the sparks and the starker contrasts to his more orthodox Republican buddies. "I don't think we're fiscal conservatives anymore," he said at one point. "Look at what we've done over these last 10 years. We finally got control of the government and we became big-government people. Our deficit's out of control and we no longer are opposed to new entitlements.

"We're entitlement people. And then we turn around and we talk about liberty. And we've undermined the 4th Amendment and personal liberty and personal privacy.

"In the year 2000, we won the election by condemning the Democrats for nation-building and ....

policing the world. And now, what are we doing? We're policing the world. We're involved in all these countries around the world and threatening going into Iran and in Pakistan and on and on.... So no wonder our coalition is breaking up. We actually have lost our way."

Paul urged U.S. disengagement from the Israeli-Palestinian situation. "It would be much better to have a balance by being out of there. And I think it would be a greater incentive for Israel and the Palestinians and all the Arab nations to come together and talk because I think we get in the way too often. And besides, it's costing us a lot of money and it's costing us lives now.... We're out of money. We can't do it any longer."

At another point Paul asked, "Why do we arm the Arab nations and they're the enemies of Israel? But we continue to do that."

Fox's Carl Cameron noted Paul's numerous differences with Republicans and asked, can you "actually win the Republican nomination, sir?"

"Well," Paul replied, "we've only had two little primaries so far. So it's pretty premature to decide which one is going to be the candidate.... Are you suggesting the Republicans write me off because I'm a strict constitutionalist? I'm the most conservative member here. I have voted, you know, against more spending and waste in government than anybody else. (Applause)

"So you're suggesting that I'm not electable and the Republicans don't want me because I'm a strict fiscal conservative, because I believe in civil liberties? Why should we not be defending civil liberties and why should we not be talking about foreign policy that used to be the part of the Republican Party?

"Mr. Republican Robert Taft didn't even want us to be in NATO, and you're saying now that we have to continue to borrow money from China to finance this empire that we can't afford? Let me see if I get this right. We need to borrow $10 billion from China and then we give it to Musharraf, who is a military dictator, who overthrew an elected government. And then we go to war, we lose all these lives promoting democracy in Iraq. I mean, what's going on here?"

At one point it did seem Paul lost his way. Asked about the recent naval incident in the Gulf of Hormuz, where Iranian speedboats menacingly circled American warships, Paul said:

"I would certainly urge a lot more caution than I'm hearing here tonight. It reminds me of what happened in the Gulf of Tonkin. We went to war there, then, later on, found out there was a lot of false information.... We have five small speedboats attacking the U.S. Navy with a destroyer? They could take care of those speedboats in about five seconds. And here we're ready to start World War III over this?"

A puzzled Brit Hume noted that, in fact, the other candidates had also applauded the destroyer captain's cautious response. "I just wonder what you're reacting to?" the moderator asked the congressman.

"Well," replied Paul, "I didn't hear that."

For a complete debate transcript, click here.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[D.L. Mitchell]

On the Iranian issue, I think it was Brit Hume who lost his way. Prior to Paul's response, Huckabe had just said:

"I think we need to make it very clear, not just to the Iranians, but to anybody, that if you think you're going to engage the United States military, be prepared not simply to have a battle. Be prepared, first, to put your sights on the American vessel. And then be prepared that the next things you see will be the gates of Hell, because that is exactly what you will see after that."

And Thompson had just said:

"I think one more step and they would have been introduced to those virgins that they're looking forward to seeing."

So I agree with Paul. I didn't hear the other candidates talking about caution either.

[william henry childers]

Dr Paul is the only republican running for POTUS who is contrastly different from his other republican co-candidates who are nothing but red-state draped versions of the democrats running for the same office. They all support or refuse to deny support for the usual big gov't keep'em in office platforms: tax and spend, more entitlements to be paid by our posterity, more imperialism abroad, more unfunded immigration laws that leave the borders as useful as a sieve plugging a hole in a dam, more infringements on the Bill of Rights, just to name a few. The debate is about Restoration of the Rule of Law by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. We won the Revolution, don't forget that. Our corrupt elected officials have chipped away at the Constitution, or have tried, since G Washington swore his first oath of office, Thanks to Jefferson, Adams, Madison, and Jackson, those efforts were thwarted until the beginning of the 20th century. Uncertain constitutional amendments and late night, holiday congressional sessions created laws that have robbed us of our due rights, and have led us to the dismal economic, domestic and international policy crises, which is, in reality, nothing more than facets of a greater constitutional crises. And Ron Paul is the only candidate addressing, of any party, the constitutional crisis we are experiencing. Thankfully, he is in the debate. At least a few of us can proudly say that we did not stand by and stick our collective heads in the sands of willing ignorance, and allow the people's only success story against oligarchic and monarchic tyranny to go down without a fight. I am, sincerely, William Henry Childers

[Adam]

The fact of the matter is, the other candidates said we would blast the Iranians back to hell, and introduce them to "those virgins they've been promised" if they had the opportunity to do it. The most memorable quote was "We don't want to trade with them, they are only interested in Burkas and one way tickets"

Ron Pauls "peers" as you call them, only provided ignorant sound bytes, one-liners and chuckles for one and other. They completely failed to take this seriously. There is an easy explanation for that, the American people want to be entertained by their next president, not inspired.

[Republican]

Fox news tried their best to treat Ron Paul like a red-headed stepchild. Ron was able to get his message out despite what seemed like attempts by the moderators to marginalize and ridicule him.

Net effect? He showed that his views not only make the most sense, but the other 5 guys on stage are just pre-packaged neocons all spewing the same lines (hatred for muslims, world war 3 and bigger government).

[Retrocon]

I was only able to watch the debate for an hour last night before I had to report for work. I talked about how angry I was about the comments regarding Iran (Dr. Paul was the only candidate who knew the latest details regarding the incident from ABC news...these incidents happen routinely by the way), and the other treatment Ron Paul took, and after explaining what the questions were, my comrades were annoyed...but we were proud of his reaction to that slimeball "9/11 truther" question from Cameron. I am active duty military, and most of my brothers and sisters I have spoken to embrace Dr. Paul's foreign and economic policies. The problem is that we are strictly limited as to what we can do regarding political campaigns. I'm so very frustrated. We aren't even supposed to discuss politics at work, but we do. We are SICK AND TIRED of warmongers and neo-cons like McCain, Romney, Giuliani, et al attempting to speak on our behalf, and furious with their willingness to commit us, and our children's children's lives to these overseas adventures. They talk easily about it like they are discussing what they are going to have for dinner, or the weather! They know absolutely NOTHING about foreign policy, or what motivates and drives people in other countries. These same neo-cons are willing to risk our lives, and waste our national treasure to support dictatorships around the world, while claiming to be involved with building democracy and spreading FREEDOM?! The hypocrisy! They should be ashamed, and they need to study our history...starting with the Declaration of Independence, and our Constitution. McCain was unlucky enough to be shot down over Vietnam and held prisoner, but that does NOT mean he should be deferred to in all matters relating to the military. Dr. Paul also served...no one else up there did. No other candidate on that stage had the wisdom and courage to discuss Pakistan and Dictator Musharraf honestly. I wish that we could openly campaign, and that I could have been there to speak about some of these things on Dr. Paul's behalf, I would have wiped the floor with them. Rest assured we'll continue to support the campaign with our hard earned money.

The Retrocon
Hope for America, Ron Paul for President in 2008!

[Brad Smith]

This was clearly Ron Paul's best debate performance. He made it starkly clear that a vote for him would be a vote for peace. A vote for any of these other war mongers would be just that a vote for more war, and more war, and more war.

He also seems to be the only candidate that has a clue about economics, including the reason for the crash of the housing market and the dollar. Again a vote for anyone else is is a vote for more of the same and an invitation to a depression rather than a recovery.

[Anthony]

That's reporting... the facts. Ron did go off on that one point, but he was talking about the "bigger picture" not the specific incident. Interesting enough, other candidates who ramble on for 5 minutes aren't called out on their statements... I guess Ron Paul needs to be corrected by the moderators though... we all know he is the "outsider".

[Michael Toth]

I am a Ron Paul supporter and I must sadly say after hearing the focus group after the debate, America will never elect Ron Paul.
I can't believe the utter stupidity of most people including Brit Hume when it comes to what Ron says. It's quite obvious that the Republican Party and the current administration want to attack Iran, yet they refuse to admit it. Ron Paul has the only real understanding of the issues and the only sane solutions. Ron keeps winning the after debate voting, yet the Republicans don't vote for him in the primaries. When will the Republican Party understand no Republican can win because of the war except Paul. I know it's hard to run as a third party, but that may be his only chance. Maybe we should start the "write-in Ron Paul" campaign now because that's the only way we can get him elected.

[Don]

Fox doesn't want Dr. Paul in the debates because he doesn't follow the RNC script for their candidates...he tells the truth.

The RNC doesn't want Dr. Paul in the race for the very same reason.

[andrew]

Ron Paul was the clear winner of last nights debate. He is the only practical and realistic candidate - who really cares about our country. Every other democrat or replublican will just continue this spending out of control nightmare our country is in until we are bankrupt. Well, maybe not Romney - he might actually audit Washington like the corporate turnaround guy he is. However I do not like how Romney talks down to Paul and made fun of him after Paul defended Romney on Jay Leno.

[steve a]

The author is confused about the Iranian discussion. Paul did say "I didn't hear that," but he was talking to Hume because he couldn't hear his question. Hence, "I didn't hear that."

The point is, Hume was wrong. The other candidates were obviously very hostile toward Iran; and they obviously thought invasion would be a good idea. Huckabee and Thompson both personally threatened Iranians that they would be seeing "the gates of hell" and "those virgins" they've been wanting if the Iranians dared to threaten American ships that are there to intimidate Iran.

Paul's larger point was that Iran couldn't hurt us (without committing suicide) and indeed they WOULDN'T hurt us for this reason. But everyone's always looking for an excuse to invade, even though we don't have the troops or the money to do so.

[TJ]

This wasn't a debate, it was a Fox News propaganda exercise. Gladly, the cell phone pollers were able to see through the Fox smoke and mirrors.

The FCC should pull their license.

[Raphael]

Thanks for your good summary.
I'd wish if more journalists would focus on real issues like this one.

[Rebecca]

How refreshing! Andrew has told the readers what Dr. Paul actually said and is letting them decide what they should think about it.

[LiberalsVSConservativesDOTcom]

Paul obviously won this debate as well as any others he had with these clowns. They all say the same thing. I can't believe they were arguing over "who supported the surge."

They also were denying we were in a recession. So scary that one of these people might be our future president. If they are, I will move out of USA.

[TJF]

Ron Paul continues to be the only Republican candidate that impresses me. He is the only one that understands the economy and the looming crisis caused by our monetary policy and government spending.

That said, I too cringed at the Iranian speedboat question. It reminded me a little of ADM Stockdale in the his vice presidential debate. Is Ron Paul hard of hearing or was there some issue with the sound system? I would not put it past FOX News to set it up where Ron Paul copuldn't hear Brit Hume - just so he would look a little lost. They certainly rigged their focus group of voters again, like they do everytime. Watch the Penn and Teller video on you tube exposing FOX News' lackey and political hit man Frank Luntz.

[jack]

This article points out the important ideas that Ron Paul has been stressing, while the other 5 candidates recite 25 year old republican delusions (Referring to Reagan years and strengthening the military and 'foreign national interests' . In Mr Paul's response to Brit Hume regarding the action of the naval commanders, Ron Paul was correctly changing the discussion to whether what happened in the event was actually falsified or blown up to create a 'Gulf of Tonkin' like fabrication that got us in the Vietnam war. Bush and his war machine created lies to go Iraq in the beginning and they have been itching to attack Iran ever since. Ron Paul may be the last hope for the economy - we are bankrupt. The dollar is set for hyperinflation - we have over $40 trillion in short and long term unfunded debt and the only way out is the destruction of the currency. This war is sham - and a fools errand. Ron Paul is about Americans - not American Politicians and their wind mills. Thanks for a fair shake for Ron Paul. Fox did its very best to insult and belittle the candidate last night and throughout the campaign.

[Rick D]

Ask yourself this, IS congressman Paul wrong on these issues? or could he in fact be spot on?.
Regardless of who you believe should become the next President, I believe it's time we all wake up and see whats right in front of us...
"elected" Comptroller General David Walker is attempting to warn us about these same issues, have a look people...

[Shawnee Bluesman]

Andrew, I must disagree with your characterization of Ron Paul's answer as "losing his way" while responding to Brit Hume's question about the incident in the Strait of Hormuz. What Paul was rightly responding to was the extreme bellicosity of the answers given by Huckabee, McCain, Thompson and Giuliani right before Brit Hume asked him his question. Each of those men threatened war against Iran, and in fact they seemed eager for such a war.
Thank goodness the American commanders never fired upon the five speedboats. And from the accounts coming out over the last day, the evidence points at an attempt by the Bush Administration to make a mountain out of a molehill. We already know that the Bush Administration lied through their teeth about Iraq seeking to buy yellowcake uranium. And they are lying to us now, trying to drag our country into another war. We're fighting two wars just now, isn't that enough?

[Azzuth]

Thank you Andrew. I think Dr. Paul had a strong showing last night and got many of his platform ideas out there for the public. It is a shame that he was having trouble hearing, so the last slip-up cost him a little, but all in all I think he might have opened up a few new eyes!

On another note, perhaps we need to look into the New Hampshire election fraud allegations. An article on that might help show some more of the public the hackability of the Diebold machines and help return the voice to the people.

Ron Paul 2008!

[J.C.]

It's refreshing to hear a candidate who actually gives answers to the questions asked instead of dancing around the question with political rhetoric. Ron Paul has been excluded by the media and the Republican party and I do not understand why?

[Dave]

So many states to go, and he's winning debates not only consistently, but w/ increasing decisiveness! The applause and the text polls don't lie...those of us who have to live long enough to pay for the irresponsibilities of our current administrations' waste are waking up to that fact! The Neo-Cons and the super elite are living high on the hog and handing the bill to the next generation! The more Ron Paul talks, the more sense he makes. You just can't argue w/ plain logic. It's like arguing that the Earth is flat and the Sun rotates around us. No matter how much you don't like it, he's still stating easily-provable facts. I can't wait to vote for him...and I'll stay to make sure my vote got counted to avoid what happened in NH.

[Akston]

Mr. Malcolm,

Thank you for your reasoned, yet tough and provocative posts. I'm a strong Paul supporter who appreciates that even though your views are not often complimentary to Paul, they are reasonably objective and devoid of the distortions offered as actual news reporting in many other quarters.

I was impressed by Ron Paul's showing at this debate. He stepped into the Fox Fiction Floorshow and offered cogent, forceful reasoning that regularly seems to evade the other attendees. I saw him near the top of his game, Brit Hume's antagonistic provocations aside.

In a format where nebulous advertising slogans are given in lieu of thoughtful historical assessment, Paul's appraisal of America's current position and his vision for America's future was the only fiscally responsible and constitutionally aware option present.

Fox News is hardly a meaningful venue in terms of rational discourse. They still prefer to leave mikes open and refrain from discouraging childish snickering by candidates who are purported to be well past adolescence and vying for the Presidency of the United States. They slant "public opinion" focus groups and polls to match Fox executives' agendas, and have demonstrated complete indifference to any standards of objectivity.

This is why I appreciate your example of how to disagree or question Paul without resorting to the kind of tactics which Fox employs regularly. I'm sure I just imagine it, but I occasionally think I see a tiny kernel of admiration for Paul lurking under that objectivity. Of course, that's probably just my bias towards Paul talking.

We Americans will deserve the President we choose. I think we deserve fiscal responsibility, an end to American global military intervention, and liberty. So I choose Ron Paul.

[C. Baker]

Lost his way? I did not hear it either..it is true that no one fired on he speedboats as some info they were getting (the voice) sounded fishy, (the Iranians came out with a video of their own refuting ours), but the MAIN thing was that the warships were what seemed like a split second away from firing on these speedboats. They didn't, but the only one that was truly relieved at that, was Dr. Paul. ALthough the others said they supported the decision not to fire, it wasn't because they were afraid of starting a war, and these were tiny speedboats. I love Ron Paul..

[Jim Lore]

Ron Paul owns in debates but the smear campaigns and lack of coverage equates to low votes.

[Deeperkyo]

"At one point it did seem Paul lost his way."

Actually this is incorrect. All the candidates except Ron Paul were talking about blowing people up. Please reference Huckabee's "Gates of Hell" comment and Thompson's "See those 72-virgins they talk about so much". All of this rhetoric is just a way to nudge us into a war with Iran, and this is what Ron Paul was responding to.

[Ginger Partington]

I wonder what comments Ron Paul was referring to? Let's see: "Gates of hell." "Meet those 72 virgins."

When making a comment about pursuing diplomatic talks with Syria and Iran, if I remember correctly, McCain jumped all over Ron Paul saying, "I'm not interested in trading with Al Qaeda. The only thing they have to offer are burqas. The only traveling they do is usually one-way."

A lot of blustering came from the other candidates, and I wish Ron Paul could call them out on their misguided cowboy diplomacy which amounted to a pandering to the American people's justified fears and, worse, a quantum leap forward in global and unsustainable militarism.

[Linda I]

Thank you for the transcript. It is appreciated.

Mr. McCain truly enjoys spewing war propaganda (lol), as do all the other Republican candidates, except Ron Paul, whose rational explanations and lack of rhetoric are a breath of fresh air.

It is my opinion that America's $9 Trillion debt combined with the continuance of the half billion dollar per year War in Iraq will bring us to to same end as Russia. Bin Laden is using the same techniques the CIA taught him when the US became covertly involved in Afghanistan's War with Russia.

Corporate military interests are slowly bleeding us of our assets. War is not a growth industry.

Wake up, America!

http://www.islandwebdiva.com/WorldWideMilitaryExpenditures.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Khut8xbXK8&NR=1 (non-profit educational)

[Jason]

I did not think Dr. Paul articulated himself well through the Iran dialogue, although I believe he was reacting to the comments of Huckabee and Thompson. After they both said they agreeed with the decision of the Naval Commander given the circumstances, Huckabee said if the situation escalated, He'd send them to the Gates of Hell, while Thompson said I'd introduce them to those virgins they've been seeking. Both comments were extremely immature and unpresidential and Dr. Paul's explaination that the party seems to be looking for a reason to attack Iran is consistent with the overall theme of their comments.

By the way, I thought this was Dr. Paul's best performance in a debate thus far. Thank you for including some of his remarkable comments in your blog.

[RAM]

Dr. Paul certainly has a good grasp of the current problems that the United States is facing...

Too bad the media is out to get him. If you google "Bilderberg conference," an organization that Paul has been quite vocal about criticizing, you will see just how many media members like David Frum and Mark Steyn take place in these secretive meetings...

[Bob C]

Why do we give money to a dictator in Pakistan so we can "promote democracy in Iraq?

Now that dictator in Pakistan, Musharraf is telling us he won't play nice and be our bitch anymore...time to get a new Puppet! Hi ho hi ho off to Pakistan we go...Hi ho hi ho !!

[Dave Reader / Columbus, NM]

At this point in time I am an undecided voter. I really believe Ron Paul is correct in his analysis of foreign policy (historically and presently). However, I am afraid that it may be too late to implement it. It's a shame that he was not elected President years ago.

[Jimmy]

When he said he "didn't hear that" he was referring to the fact that he couldn't hear the follow up question from Brit Hume, NOT the other candidates' responses.

His point was that even though the other candidates supported the commander's decision, they seemed to willing to say that if the commander had ordered an attack, they would have supported that decision as well!

Pay attention!

[michael hoggan]

finally someone with the courage to print the truth. when raul paul "lost his way" i think its obvious that he didnt hear the question properly

anyways--way to go whoever was allowed to write this!

A concerned canadian

mike

[Dorothy]

Mr Malcomb, I heard Dr Paul say to Hume "I can't hear a word you're saying " not "I didn't hear that". Paul looked rather disgruntled at the petulant question from Brit Hume, who routinely lets the others ramble on without regard to the questions asked. Paul made the point that Hume pretended not to understand, that the Navy ship was there as an assertion of power that drew a hostile response from Iran. These rude episodes seem to energize Paul's supporters. They certainly reveal the arrogance of some other individuals.

(But Dr. P's claim of not having heard the question belies the answer he had had just given, which indicated he thought the others had been provocative when, in fact, they said they totally agreed with the ship's captain's passive non-attacking response, but warned that if they had been attacked, the response would have been overwhelming. Dr. P made it look like he hadn't really been listening and then claimed he couldn't hear, which made it worse because he'd not mqade that claim when first asked the question. He's not a smooth public speaker, which is why some people like him for his genuineness, but the reality is it hurts a "presidential image" he's presumably trying to build around his candidacy.)

[Jack]

Thanks for the posting of Dr. Paul's eloquent words. Compare this to the other septuagenarian vet, military aristocrat descended McCain, and it's like truth and lies. Why liberals are singling him out for abuse with a prehistoric newsletter by Texas bigots shows the level of American politics, devoid of nuance or substance. Unfortunately, the country need a younger man as its symbol..

[Doug D]

Ron Paul just reignited the Revolution last night.

Republicans have lost their way. Why are they (the other candidates and the moderators) ridiculing the one candidate who has stood firm in his beliefs?

Ron Paul is the most electable Republican running. He's against the Iraq war, against illegal immigration, for smaller government, and for protecting civil liberties.

Since when did conservatives start thinking it is okay to violate our civil liberties and spy on the American people? Do they want to turn this into East Germany, with our own Stasi style secret police? Is it not conservative to defend the 4th Amendment and the 6th Amendment, as well s the 2nd?

[Griz]

Thanks for another good post Andrew. I would love for Paul to win, but I'd rather he tell the truth to these jokers. I am amazed that Giuliani, Romney, and McCain make such half-witted rebuttals to Paul. I suppose that secures the half-witted vote though. Since every intelligent conservative left the party in the last ten years, that alone could carry the nomination. They'll get spanked in the general, but they'll have the honor of bing nominated.

[ron paul revolution!]

he really drew a contrast to his opponents by doing so poorly in the vote in New Hampshire (a "libertarian" state) and the Iowa Caucuses!

[Jarrod]

"A puzzled Brit Hume noted that, in fact, the other candidates had also applauded the destroyer captain's cautious response. "I just wonder what you're reacting to?" the moderator asked the congressman."

More like an idiot Brit Hume.... Ron Paul was responding to the aggressive tone and language the others were using... the idiotic flag waving rhetoric... You know like the "gates of hell" and "send them to see their virgins" crap some of the others responded with.... Is the neo-con Hume so accustomed to this kind of talk he didn't know what Ron was referring to? I can truly say I despise these pundits and Fox News.

[Syphax]

From LewRockwell.com Blog:
-------
Here's what Dr. Paul was "reacting to."

HUCKABEE: I'm going to trust that the president, with the information that he had and that those commanders had, made the right decision. I think we need to make it very clear, not just to the Iranians, but to anybody, that if you think you're going to engage the United States military, be prepared not simply to have a battle. Be prepared, first, to put your sights on the American vessel. And then be prepared that the next things you see will be the gates of Hell, because that is exactly what you will see after that.

... but we'll make it clear that if they do, there'll be a severe price to pay for engaging us.

THOMPSON: Yes, I think so. I think I agree with the governor on that. You can't take the judgment like that out of the hands of the officers on the ground there. I think one more step and they would have been introduced to those virgins that they're looking forward to seeing."
------

See the full post here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/018517.html

Ron Paul also expressed doubts about the Pentagon's version of the incident when he said

"And now, guess what, today, the Navy commander of the Fifth Fleet was on ABC and announced that, you know, that voice might not have come from those vessels. So what does that mean? Was there a rush to judgment on this, ready to go to war?"

these doubts seem to be buttressed by the following:

"The list of those who are less than fully confident in the Pentagon's video/audio mashup of aggressive maneuvers by Iranian boats near American warships in the Strait of Hormuz now includes the Pentagon itself. Unnamed Pentagon officials said on Wednesday that the threatening voice heard in the audio clip, which was released on Monday night with a disclaimer that it was recorded separately from the video images and merged with them later, is not directly traceable to the Iranian military."

(Then if he heard all these answers so clearly, why would Dr. Paul then suddenly claim to have not heard the question, making himself look older than necy?)

[Fives]

Andrew,
Your anti-Ron Paul bias shows through. Why don't you start analyzing the situation objectively?

(And your ignorance is showing through too. This isn't an objective news column. Nor is it a Ron Paul chatroom. It's an independent blog. We have opinions here. We make statements and arguments and people reply and we have a dialogue about interesting topics. And if you think this is an anti-RP item, you need better glasses. Don't think you'll find anywhere else on a major political blog such an extensive presentation of Dr. P's statements this evening. So thanks for reading. But read it right.)

[Bill in Montgomery]

I thought it was Paul's best debate performance. Andrew reports some of Paul's best comments, which do show the stark difference between his views of what U.S. governments role in world should be and his opponents.

They are perpetual nation builders and believe in having troops stationed around the globe indefinitely. We really cannot afford it.

As usual, it seems the L.A. Times - at least on this site - seems to be treating Paul's campaign with the respect his ideas deserve.

So thanks.

[Jason Robinson]

As the DNC said in ‘96 ‘It is the economy stupid’.

Our Nation produces 13.1 trillion dollars of wealth each year, and of that the government takes 2.4 trillion dollars and spends 2.6 trillion dollars. Since the government spends more than it takes, it has developed a debt, which is currently 10 trillion dollars. We have promised to make future expenditures above and beyond what we are currently spending, to an amount of 58 trillion dollars between 2017 and 2040. This works out to an average of 2.5 trillion dollars a year. In addition to this, 4 trillion dollars of the debt will also need to be paid back without any additional sources of revenue, although existing taxation can be increased.

To put this in perspective, imagine that you work for a company that earns $131,000 of annual revenue, they pay you $23,000 a year, and your budget is $26,000 for the year. At the same time you have $64,000 on the credit cards and $46,000 that you have borrowed from your 401k, and just signed a 30 year mortgage for your parent’s house for $580,000, but the property is condemned. And this is all okay because you have $6.59 in the bank. Your parents are going to give you $1,000 a year until 2017, and then they need you to start paying them back.

We have established significant control over air travel, but our boarders are open, illegal immigration is not under control, our ports are not secure, and our visa system has not been updated. If the government thought that terrorism is a serious problem, they haven’t done anything to stop it, yet they have stripped our rights and liberties under the banner of terrorism since October of 2001. Although we haven’t plugged any of the holes in our system, there hasn’t been a terrorist attack on U.S. soil for over 6 years. The government spending and the economy will destroy this nation in less than 33 years.

I believe that Ron Paul is the only candidate from either the Republican or Democratic parties that will even attempt to fix this.

(Numbers have been obtained from the CIA Fact book.)

[Alexisnexus]

The Point of No Return

Over 234 years ago the Boston Tea Party took place.
http://familyforest.wordpress.com/2007/12/16/the-point-of-no-return/

Could it happen again???
Listening to the debate and what is going on
with our US elected officials it seems very likely.....

[Eric]

Ron didn't lose his way. If you heard the other candidates using angry and often racists statements of beligerance, you'd know what Paul was talking about.

McCain: I don't want to trade, all they have are burkas. I agree with Rudy. Maybe the Iranians think we're weaker because of the NIE. Maybe the Iranians aren't really slowing their export of most lethal explosive devices into Iraq.

Huck: Be prepared, first, to put your sights on the American vessel. And then be prepared that the next things you see will be the gates of Hell, because that is exactly what you will see after that.

Thompson: I think one more step and they would have been introduced to those virgins that they're looking forward to seeing.

RUDY: (who never complimented the navy for being passive, as the moderator claimed) Iran certainly shouldn't be seen as benign, as some people saw it when they tried to spin the NIE, as suggesting that maybe we were being too serious about Iran. It would seem to me that this incident should wake a lot of people up.

I think that Paul's response was on target, it was the pause because Ron couldn't hear the question that got the laughter.

RON: I would certainly urge a lot more caution than I'm hearing here tonight. It reminds me of what happened in the Gulf of Tonkin. We went to war there, then, later on, found out there was a lot of false information.

I think this episode was being played into another false case for war.

Now, with the ominous "you will explode" audio seen to have been spliced into the video, we need to watch even more closely.

[George P. Burdell]

Ron did not loose his way on the issue of the speed boats, instead he missed a chance to point out the hypocracy of the other candidates and Fox. Yes, the other candidates supported the actions of the sailors, but then in the very next breath continued with the "Iran is evil, a threat, is causing hair loss and Global Warming...." You can not have it both ways, but that is how the other candidates handle it, our sailors did the right thing, but next time I am going to bomb Iran. This double talk is not about seeking peace, but more war. It is high time the country woke up, because both parties do it all day long, just like they did about Iraq.

[Tess]

"Ron Paul draws stark contrast with GOP peers"

Do you know why? Let me tell you why. It is because they have all lost their way, with the exception of Ron Paul. These other Gopers no longer fiscally conservative, or follow our Constitution, nor do they believe we can have Strength through Peace. The other GOPers especially McCain, Guiliani, and Huckabee are bunch of profiteering, warmongering, Anti-American people candidates.

All the these candidates have at one time, or another taken an Oath to follow and defend our Constitution of the United States of America but Ron Paul is the only one out of these GOP candidates that has kept his Oath to this country, and our Constitution by not supporting this so-called war in Iraq. That one fact alone is why I will be casting my vote for Ron Paul. This man is so extremely knowledgeable about our economy and is not sugar coating our demise as a nation if we do not make the necessary changes to our foreign and monetary policies as soon as possible. He is electable, and after last nights debate on Fauxnews, he is even more credible on the issues that really face America, and it's people as a whole. We have to stop spending, we have to cut taxes, we have stop warmongering and start all of this process by bringing our troops home now, and stop this costly debt. Our Country is broken, and our government is broke. Wake up America!!! We have a chance for some real change, a good change for our Country and it's people.

http://ronpaul2008.com

[some dude]

How did Ron Paul do in the post-debate Hannity & Colmes interview? That's right. They forgot to interview him. It must have slipped their minds.

[EotS]

Not only did Huckabee and Thompson make aggressive chickenhawk comments about the Iranian issue, don't forget that Giuliani urged that the US and the rest of the world impose sanctions on Iran - an act of war.

Then he can tell the world that it was "worth it."