Ron Paul Would Ignite the Debate If He Said This

It’s now or never. Reignite the excitement of the Revolution by stealing the show.

(1) “The Tea Party’s key issues have been bailouts, debt, and spending. Mitt and Newt both supported the TARP bailouts. The whole people were against those bailouts, and the elites were for them. When the chips were down, Mitt and Newt sided with the New York Times and the cable news networks against you. Do you expect them to behave differently next time?

“I have opposed every bailout, every time. Does anyone here doubt my resolve? Given my consistent record over three decades, does anyone doubt those bailouts will stop cold under a President Paul?

“Newt boasts of his great accomplishments. But the Brookings Institution had it right when they said his Contract with America in 1994 was a lot of piddling around the edges, and represented no real threat to the status quo.

“You want a real threat to the status quo? You’re looking at him.

“On spending, everyone pretends to want to cut spending. How many times are we going to let them get away with fooling Republican voters? Who else on this stage has laid out a specific, line-by-line budget showing $1 trillion in savings in the first year? If you want to be lied to about spending cuts that never come — as has happened repeatedly under Republican rule, I am sorry to have to point out — and if you don’t care that your country is going bankrupt, don’t vote for me. Vote for one of them. But if you want someone who isn’t some slick talker, and who won’t ever back down, our campaign welcomes you with open arms.”

(2) “We can’t afford the knee-jerk intervention overseas anymore. And I am unconvinced that this policy is motivated by protecting us from radical Islam. Nobody seemed to mind that our party’s last nominee favored interventions in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Russia on behalf of Islamic forces. How about staying out of these conflicts, given that our government’s crazy foreign policy has succeeded only in cultivating radical Islam everywhere it has touched?

“Our campaign has received twice as much money in donations from active-duty military than all other Republican candidates combined, and I’ve been endorsed by the former head of the CIA’s Osama bin Laden unit, who says the other candidates are feeding you propaganda instead of the truth.

“Mitt Romney’s top donors are Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse, and Morgan Stanley. Mine are the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force.

“I don’t know what part of ‘we are broke’ my opponents do not understand, but their grandiose plans to remake the world, which are the very opposite of what a conservative would propose, are even crazier when we’re on the verge of bankruptcy. Newt thinks bankruptcy is a actually good time to outfit a mission to Mars. Now I admit that might be worth the investment, but only if he wants to take Congress and the president with him.”

(3) “Tonight the media would like to entertain you with another episode of the Mitt and Newt Hour. Each will accuse the other of deviating from conservative principles, and each will be right. The fact is, these two are so close in philosophy you can hardly slide a credit card between them.

“It will be obvious during this debate, given how much time to speak these two men will receive, that the media has already decided what your choices for president should be. Since when do you trust the media with deciding who should be president? The very fact that they obviously favor the two gentlemen to my left is reason enough to hold them in suspicion.

“I am the one they fear. I am the one who will shut down the federal gravy train once and for all. They know I mean business, and that I’m not just giving pretty speeches. That’s why they ridicule and ignore me.

“And that’s exactly why I urge you to support me.”

Geezerjoe

I turned 50 yesterday. Most of my fiends support RP. You youngsters should know that, and find a way to push his message up the age brackets. I Try and focus his message to people 5 or 10 years older than me, and ask them to do the same.

The way I see it, eventually, RP’s generation will see the he best rep for their generation.
http://www.facebook.com/nibarger John Nibarger

Dr. Woods does everything he can to assist the Ron Paul Revolution. Campaigns can be fickle and personalities in campaign management don’t always see help where it exists.

Dr. Woods has nothing to apologize for.
Edirmeyer

Tom Woods in 2016!!
Senko1224

For the last question of the FL debate tonight, Ron Paul should have just simply stated: “I can beat President Obama because I have get the most independent voter support than anyone else, I get the most young voter support, by far, more than anyone else, and I have the most support from active duty personnel than anyone else. I understand economics and the business cycle and being a physician I also understand the healthcare system. I have the most consistent voting record of anyone on this stage, never voted for any bailouts, higher taxes or legislation that undermines civil liberties or the Constitution.” He would WIN every debate…agree???
Mike

I think he needs to talk about liquidating the debt.

Just kidding.
sirbourbon

Tonight’s debate (Jacksonville,Florida) was 40% Ron Paul talking points:
1) The Constitution is to defend “God -given rights.”
2) Be an example to the world by leading by example
3) The Declaration of Independence states that rights emanate from the Creator; they are for all Americans and for everyone else in the planet. What no bombing them “over there?”
4) Too much government in the private sector particularly in healthcare.
5) Lots of agreement with doctor Paul. I think Santorum was the only one not saying something along the line like: “doctor Paul is correct,” “I agree with doctor Paul,” and I would just like to expand on doctor Paul on a few points.” What! they were nice to congressman Paul! Are these the same guys that were attacking him at debate number one thru- 17and 18?
6) Let the politicians go to the moon. I dont want to use tax dollars to go to the moon. Let the private sector hire Floridians to work at private sector jobs related to national defense.
7) Newt complimented doctor Paul on his private enterprise freemarket approach.Paul looked toward Newt’s direction and nodded with a visible “hmm” gesture.
8)Paul was given credit for having the funniest line by the after debate pundits. Well, we can’t expect the media to admit that Paul softened everyone except Santorum on not bombing the world!
http://www.facebook.com/biker4ronpaul Thomas Attwood

Dr Paul needs to do this to keep people engaged
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001534940042 Sherry McMillen

My favorites are:

“I have opposed every bailout, every time. Does anyone here doubt my
resolve? Given my consistent record over three decades, does anyone
doubt those bailouts will stop cold under a President Paul?

“You want a real threat to the status quo? You’re looking at him.

“On spending, everyone pretends to want to cut spending. How many times
are we going to let them get away with fooling Republican voters? Who
else on this stage has laid out a specific, line-by-line budget showing
$1 trillion in savings in the first year? If you want to be lied to
about spending cuts that never come … and if you don’t care
that your country is going bankrupt, don’t vote for me. Vote for one of
them. But if you want someone who will do what he says and who
won’t ever back down, our campaign welcomes you with open arms.”

“Our campaign has received twice as much money in donations from
active-duty military than all other Republican candidates combined, and
I’ve been endorsed by the former head of the CIA’s Osama bin Laden unit,
who says the other candidates are feeding you propaganda instead of the
truth.

“Mitt Romney’s top donors are Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse, and Morgan Stanley. Mine are the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force.

My final line would be: “I promise to be dangerous to the status quo! I am Ron Paul and I want your vote!”
jaffi411

Chomp, chomp…. What have we here? Somebody who when they first posted their comment that it was toward the bottom of the page, so they chose the highest rated comment to reply to to ensure that their comment is at the top of the page? Not only that, but also linked to their blog in the process.

Come on, man. That’s just shady.

Plus, who the heck wants to expend more labor. The goal isn’t to work more, it is to work less with a higher quality of life. This can either mean a higher income or more leisure, either way it requires more capital. I think that Ron has been very good at explaining that we need more capital to flow into this country.

Sure, cutting government spending and regulation will cause more capital to flow into the country, but the goal of this isn’t to create more work, it is to create less work at a higher quality of life. That’s what capital does.
EdisonosidE

Ron Paul has said this time and time again..
Theendbeganin1913

Hey Tom!

I realized that what I wrote was way out of bounds! I want to apologize if it seemed like I was implying that you haven’t done everything in your power to promote our ideas and to promote this campaign! That was not my intent in any way!!! It’s just that you have such an elegant way of putting things such that the average American, who doesn’t spend much time thinking about this things, is forced to think and really reconsider his or her positions.

I don’t know your circumstances, I don’t know what your day to day life consists of, and it was incredibly selfish and arrogant of me to make such a request!

There have been incredible strides made towards liberty, sound economic policy, and sanity with respect to our foreign policy among other things all due to your tireless efforts! I am forever in your debt, because without you and the institute, I would be lost. Jesus saved my soul while you and many others, saved my mind!

Regardless of what happens in 2012, (and I know some people are talking about Rand in 2016) I’m gonna keep pestering You, Peter, and or Jeffrey Tucker to make a bid for the Presidency in 2016!!! Just kidding…. but SERIOUSLY. You know you want to see a man who wears a seersucker and a bow-tie in the White House!

Once again my apologies,

Rog
Theendbeganin1913

This is a little off subject, but they read one of my tweets on C-SPAN this morning! The question was, “Should the government have bailed out the auto industry?”

I wrote in 140 characters… “Those that believe the bailouts saved jobs in the auto sector, don’t see the jobs lost elsewhere due to the reallocation of capital”

Thank you “Economics in One Lesson” and Dr. Woods
http://www.facebook.com/people/Debbie-Rosen/100000890416751 Debbie Rosen

Dr. Woods, if you were to run, I’d campaign for you. You would be such an awesome spokesman for the cause of liberty. You would decimate a Newt, Mitt or Sanctimonious in a debate. It would be a joy to behold. At minimum, the campaign desperately needs you to coach the good doctor before the debates. I pray they read your blog posts!
Theendbeganin1913

I totally agree with you that so many just don’t want to listen. I’ve experienced this within my own family! For many of people, in order for them to support Dr. Paul, it would require them to admit that they’re wrong about many things!
Ach11b

Great article! It was dead on and I got a good laugh from it. I laugh Bc it would never happen and if it did I might die laughing looking at those jackasses faces!
Theendbeganin1913

The debates are driving the other candidates to success (especially Newt). Debates are free advertising to millions of people across the country!
Theendbeganin1913

Good point!
Theendbeganin1913

He can’t contact Dr. Paul or the campaign in any way because of his involvement with Revolution Pac.
JOhn

I think he did in Jacksonville! RP was relaxed, resolute, bold, clear and in front of the pack the whole time, thanks in no small part to a fair and balanced Moderator in wolf’s clothing. Sounded like your practical suggestions were taken into account.
Theendbeganin1913

TOM WOODS 2016!!!
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=686606849 Don Wilson

I dig. Except for: “if you don’t care that your country is going bankrupt, don’t vote for me.” Confusing syntax and passive aggressive.
Anonymous

All good stuff! I noticed Ron did make a remark about sending politicians into space last night! I wonder if he got that from this blog!!!

I think a good point to include on his answer about government pushing the cost of health care up would be a point I have heard Peter Schiff make before. It goes like this; look at the medical procedures where the government are not involved, say laser eye surgery or cosmetic surgery. The cost of these things have reduced drastically over the years. Getting your eyes zapped used to cost about £20000. Now you can get it done for about £1000. Why shouldnt this be the case for all medical procedures?

A response like this would take the argument out of the realm of abstract economic theory into the realm of a real world situation that people can easily relate to.
Lou Bjostad

That’s absolutely right. Gingrich and Santorum only managed to get in late and then stay in because of their SuperPACs. The SuperPACs have leveled the political landscape. And probably most of all for Ron Paul, who is the most different from the other 3 who are still in. A reminder, Ron Paul SuperPAC at http://www.revolutionpac.com/
Anonymous

Meh. Real conservatives will vote for Santorum. Libertarians and neo-anarchists can have Paul.

The truth is Paul has said these exact things a number of times. It hasn’t resonated with anyone outside the hivemind. In 2008, Paulites claimed that he didn’t win because he got no airtime. This time, he gets load of airtime (including non-stop TV ads from his campaign) and yet he hasn’t won anything. He’s fourth in delegates, he’s the only candidate to not have a primary or caucus and isn’t going to win FL either. Outside of a convention fight, he has no chance of winning. He poll numbers have never surged once, from the beginning. Those that like him, love him. Everyone else is scared of his goofy foreign policies.

If he really wanted to surge, he ought to lay aside his foreign policy and stick to economic issues. He should publicly state that he’ll ignore foreign policy and focus ALL OF HIS TERM on the economy and eliminating one gov. agency after the next. If he did that, he’d surge immediately. The problem is – he can’t really do anything on the economy because that’s Congressional purview and he has no friends or coalition in DC to help him. The only thing he can really have a big impact on is foreign policy, exactly what conservatives don’t like about him. As Santorum once said, “everything that conservatives like about Ron Paul’s economic policy, he’ll never be able to do. Everything they hate about his foreign policy, he’ll do on day one.”

Mark Levin for President! (just threw that in to stoke the fire)
Lou Bjostad

Those videos exist, Jay. Here’s a list:

youtu.be/wE3pObEhor8
youtu.be/w-26c7WxaiE
http://austrianrationalist.wordpress.com/2012/01/12/why-every-republican-should-vote-for-ron-paul/
youtu.be/xBhjdX61nqo
youtu.be/FCm4oO_n68A
http://ronpaulflix.com/2011/08/1970s-ron-paul-campaign-video-epic-consistency-1970s/
youtu.be/CX8DvivnBH0
youtu.be/Un8gyJfRUDA
youtu.be/FdxhbePRdIE
youtu.be/qXBswFfh6AY
youtu.be/22Mj7z3VHGs
Delita

I thought Ron Paul’s speech in Florida was good. He didn’t attack anyone, he sympathized with the OWS crowd, he talked about crony capitalism, and how the welfare state benefits the rich at the expense of the poor. Of course the Fed perpetuates the crony capitalism we currently live under. Ron Paul can point out that Romney gets donations from Goldman Sachs, but I don’t know if that can get the attention with voters. He’s in last place in Florida. It’s going to be tough.
Lou Bjostad

Just got a new computer with a 1080p screen, and my first high-res experience was Ron Paul South Carolina CNN Debate (1080p HD) 1/19/2012 youtu.be/wefrj6gCxGg Truly excellent.
Lou Bjostad

So do I. Or does that somehow violate SuperPAC rules?
Lou Bjostad

I’ll donate, too. It would be my 3rd RP donation over the last month.
Perfect for RP

I am a Democrat and I thought you nailed it. I think a Paul Presidency would be fun as hell. But I wouldn’t elect him over Obama who has actually done, on balance, a pretty good job. Major upgrade from his predecessor who couldn’t find his way out of a paper bag.
Xango43

I TOTALLY AGREE!!!
http://www.facebook.com/dkompes David Kompes

I thought Ron was more forceful, persuasive and relaxed then in previous debates. He needs to have punchy and concise points which can captivate in the limited time he generally is allowed in these debates.

“the jihadists under beds” was perfect. I have not heard him use it before but I thought it very effective. Sadly Live TV debate formats are not conducive to expansive answers.

I too feel Ron needs to have more succinct arguments for why government intervention in all aspects of the economy, health, and fiat money fails. In this short TV format he comes across often with waffling answers..
Rob Nabakowski

On balance? So, you’re big on outrageous deficits which leading to crippling debts. I see. You’re also big on new and improved wars, I see. No, Obama is in that paper bag with Bush. Different sides of same coin.
summeredgington

Don’t trust the media or our government…I TRUST RON PAUL!!!! I hope he starts interjecting and adding his thoughts on key issues when they try to skip him over….ALL CANDIDATES SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO ANSWER EVERY QUESTION IN AN ALLOTED TIME..NONE OF THIS CRAP BS BICKERING….Ron wants to talk about real issues with real people…so can we get more RON PAUL? Ron has proven he can say more in 30 seconds than the others can say in 10 minutes of arguing….give me a break…..
Anonymous

Dixit Tom:

“We can’t afford the knee-jerk intervention overseas anymore. And I am
unconvinced that this policy is motivated by protecting us from radical
Islam. Nobody seemed to mind that our party’s last nominee favored
interventions in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Russia on behalf of Islamic forces.”

Yes, yes, yes!!!

That’s what I’ve been arguing all along: find a way to defend and promote a non-interventionist foreign policy, without helping the neo-con enemy to set up their favoured booby-trap (you know, something about “supporting Bin L.” or “blaming the US for 9/11,” yada yada..).

This line of reasoning, advanced by Tom Woods, is the way to go. Also love that radio-fragment where he said something like: “If we have more [foreign interventionist] victories like these, the Caliphate will have been restored pretty soon.”

If I recall correctly and paraphrase it somewhat awkwardly (Dutchie-style), this is how the entire argument went (more or less):

Adversus Neo-Progressivimus (= neocons/liberals)

Let’s look at the track record of the representatives elect, fielded on behalf of the neo-Wilsonian, bi-factional one party State, the US (est. 1913):

In the nineties we have this McCain wing of warfare state progressivism with their support for sending ground troops into the Balkan wars. US involvement was instrumental to the establishing of an Islamic state there. Some in that camp advocated bombing Serbia over Kosovo when Albanian Muslims were torching orthodox churches. They sided with the Muslims against the Serbs and thus didn’t pass the Serbia-test.
Then the US progressivists got rid of Saddam, who was bad enough, but the point is that he was a secular dictator. They demolished the regime’s infrastructure, and now that he’s out they’ve got Shiites who are friendly with Iran under an Islamic “constitution”. Then there’s bringing “democracy” to Libya, so now we’ve got Islam on the rise there. No need to talk about Egypt, which is going to be a disaster, while Afghanistan already is. So these are the bipartisan welfare/warfare state progressivists, who are going to save us from Isla-, pardon.. “Terror”? If we have more victories like these, the Caliphate will have been restored pretty soon Think about that when you claim to be serious about fighting Islam, while habitually applauding this neo-Progressivist, debt-dumping, nation building US foreign policy ideology.

Kind regs from / Amsterdam (clip) /, Holland,
Richard
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JVCHBN5Z5S5YQ3MXTQH6TSET4A Mand M

Bingo!!!
Laura

When Ron first came out, he must have been feeling shunted by the Media already, as he walked slowly to his “place”. It must be an awful feeling to always be disliked. He looked weary and lonely as he stood there at the podium, and I think, weary of all our comments on Daily Paul asking and pleading with him to do better, be more forceful, etc. I sensed in his face he felt he was letting us all down. It was sad for me to see that look. He looked sad.

But, I noticed he picked up with the detection of his “supporters” in the audience and began to feel a little better. DR. PAUL is THE ONE who has the PEOPLE’s HEARTS, not Romney or Grinch or Santorum who have the Media and the Fed elitists. We have an incredibly intelligent man, so brilliant a historian he is, and so kind-hearted and good and decent! Yes, he knows he’s not the most eloquent spokesman, BUT WE “GOT IT”~~~why can’t the rest of Americans “get it”, I think to myself. And, then, I think, it can’t be that Gingrich had to cancel and event due to low turnout, and Ron had over 1,000 people. It CAN”T be that the GOP who hates Ron would manipulate their vote totals? And, then, I hear the discontent of so many of our baby boomer friends, and those who have turned to Dr. Paul, and I think, in this government, that they would do anything short of murder to get their way.

We may not win the nomination, unless there is divine intervention, but we WILL win more and more hearts and minds all the way to the end. And, I will support this movement, regardless of the torment and anguish the power elite money changers put Dr. Paul through. If he can stand this, then, I shall!
Luke W.

On foreign policy I would add:

If we want to spread democracy we need to be trading goods not bullets.
My way we make money with these foreign engagements. Their way we make enemies.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Nan-Kovar/100000701568797 Nan Kovar

You forgot:
NDAA signed into law on New Years eve that allows detention/ torture/killing, no judge/jury/trial, just BO’s say-so
Announced to Congress that the President has the authority to unilaterally authorize the assassination of American citizens.

Made recess appointments despite Congress being in session.
Bailouts, bailouts, bailouts (Soyndra, GM, banks, bankers, WS, etc., etc.)
Taking directives from the UN, bypassing Congress continually
and on and on
http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/video/viewVideo.php?video_id=13669&title=obama-has-done-a-horrible-job-and-he-is-dishonest—marc-faber-on-bloomberg-01-25-11
http://twitter.com/JasonSWalls Jason Walls

Sounds like the Big Dog ad in action
http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

I was not referring to your comment. Note the stacking.
Carl Cress

Tom the problem is that Dr. Paul is not a bold speaker. He can articulate the message, no doubt, but face it – he is not a dynamic orator. He has essentially delivered the topics you have suggested many times, but he only ignites passion in those who already know it or are ready to hear it. His style of speech making is such that a listener has to “wade through” his hesitations, jumbled phrases and misspoken terms (filling in the left out words) to get it (the message). This is difficult to do for someone who is new to the concepts, and easy to criticize for someone who is against them. We all love and appreciate him for being the messenger, but we have come to accept his oratorical limitations. We know it’s the substance not the style that matters. Ron does rise to the heights on occasion but in general his speaking is of the level of someone who is not comfortable talking to large crowds (i.e. like stage fright, even though he keeps at it), which as most people who have ever tried it knows is a most terrifying experience (although you seem to have a affinity for it).
Carlc55

Tom the problem is that Dr. Paul is not a bold speaker. He can articulate the message, no doubt, but face it – he is not a dynamic orator. He has essentially delivered the topics you have suggested many times, but he only ignites passion in those who already know it or are ready to hear it. His style of speech making is such that a listener has to “wade through” his hesitations, jumbled phrases and misspoken terms (filling in the left out words) to get it (the message). This is difficult to do for someone who is new to the concepts, and easy to criticize for someone who is against them. We all love and appreciate him for being the messenger, but we have come to accept his oratorical limitations. We know it’s the substance not the style that matters. Ron does rise to the heights on occasion but in general his speaking is of the level of someone who is not comfortable talking to large crowds (i.e. like stage fright, even though he keeps at it), which as most people who have ever tried it knows is a most terrifying experience (although you seem to have a affinity for it).
Sanderson13

This is so good.
CarlC55

Rog – Dr Woods was replying to that George idiot. I think your post was rather eloquent.
Mark_henry15

I just wish Ron Paul would listen to this advice and use it to a tee. Nice!!
CarlC55

After reading most of these replies it seems to me that these posters have not been listening that closely to RP during these debates. He HAS been saying essentially everything Dr. Woods has listed above at some point during these debates, maybe not everything, every time, but he has essentially raised each of these points. It seems that maybe the way he expresses these ideas during the debates don’t actually register even with listeners that substantially agree with him, as people here keep imploring him to state these points, all though he has many times. If you are looking for a talking points type of delivery from him, I don’t think you are going get it. That is not his style. He generally speaks “off the top of his head”, as the saying goes.
http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

This is not correct. I wouldn’t type up something he’d already said.

He has not compared his top 3 donors to Romney’s.

He has not come out and said the media is trying to choose a president for us.

He has not made the point — with examples — that the much-vaunted foreign policy he’s savaged for criticizing has made things worse even from the neocon point of view (assuming they don’t want fundamentalists taking over the Middle East, and I guess we can’t assume that).

He has not mentioned his endorsement by the head of the CIA’s bin Laden unit.

He has not cited Brookings to prove Gingrich’s record is a lot of hot air.

He has not ever said anything like, “Look at my record — do you doubt my resolve? Do you doubt that those bailouts will stop dead under a President Paul?”

No one is asking him to speak in talking points. Nothing I wrote is a talking point. He should be crushing these idiots. They should be terrified of debating him.

No one is infallible. The fact that this post has been viewed more than any other post in the history of my website indicates there is a hunger for this kind of thing, and it can be done.
Jamezelizondojr

Thats easy to answer, Free Markets create jobs, less government to, less regulations on businesses, less Monsanto taking everyone out of business for example, Since RP advocates free markets then thats how it will happen
http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

How about calming down?

They’re all going to say the same things about jobs. The average person will not be able to distinguish what Ron says about jobs from what the other candidates do. I have no problem with a Ron Paul jobs comment, but that isn’t going to differentiate him from the others, who will say by and large the same things about jobs.

See, we need to differentiate him. Otherwise, people will say, “They all promise jobs, so why not just support the guy in the lead?”