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

[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."