40 responses to “Ron Paul on Larry King Live (Hosted by Jesse Ventura)”

  1. Jeux Educatif

    Hi, every time i used to check webllog posts heere in the early
    hours in the morning, because i enjoy to gain
    knowledge of more and more.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Sebrina Pasch

    Nice post. I was checking continuously this blog and I’m impressed! Extremely helpful information particularly the last part Uœmiech I care for such information a lot. I was seeking this certain information for a long time. Thank you and good luck.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Brandon Bazzell

    Our Website hassomething in mind for every one when it means looking into Apple Cider Vinegar. If our clients need any information on Apple Cider Vinegar and Honey then we are the right resoce you need.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. psoriasis

    hi,hello im dave from forum-psoriasis.com just like be sure I could to post your article on my site regards

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. hotel via veneto

    Really enjoyed this update, can I set it up so I get an email sent to me every time you publish a new article?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. nike free run

    Good day! This is my first comment here so I just wanted to give a quick shout out and tell you I genuinely enjoy reading through your articles. Can you suggest any other blogs/websites/forums that deal with the same topics? Thanks!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. öáøåâïïê

    Hmm it appears like your blog ate my first comment (it was extremely long) so I guess I’ll just sum it up what I wrote and say, I’m thoroughly enjoying your blog. I too am an aspiring blog writer but I’m still new to everything. Do you have any tips and hints for novice blog writers? I’d definitely appreciate it.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. Barry Davis

    Hi Jesse:
    No review…….it is because the main stream media are controlled by the NWO and you are against the NWO as I am. Just recently David Rockefeller
    thanked main stream media for ruling 40 years of keeping the media quiet. He
    went on to say, the NWO would have had a very hard time to do their dirt without the media being quiet.
    I find this every day in my fight against Chemtrails….the media will not even acknowledge that I live.

    Barry Davis, atms/cl,
    Vancouver, BC.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. greg

    “thinking that you can spread democracy or stop opium farming in afghanistan is beyond naive. we can’t even control the the drug problem in our own country.”

    the drug “war” is another one of those not to be won, but to be controlled because of the interest and management of the money influx of it. reasons are so “worn on the sleeves” and “telegraphed”, i find it hard to believe that an adult can raise a child, identify that child’s attempts at manipulating them, but with this capability to identify a child’s shenanigans, cannot display this very skill outside of their front doors toward the manipulations of politics.
    in children’s story books and in real life, the societies of these tales are all driven by the premises of being “leader” driven. were indoctrinated to fear. be it religion or living being or thing.
    how can this be in the age of “Ipads”, “solar power” and personal compact computers? why don’t our fears evolve with our science?
    I read somewhere that the automobile, as we know it today, is still basically, the same invention the model “T” was. why do we think this is? and don’t tell me about no “fuel injection” or “power brakes”!
    the human being, capable of reason is failing at monitoring “self pitfall”.
    we all more or less, operate like arcade games, uhm excuse me, wii games, like we have 3 more lives left and that we can just turn the console off and play life another day.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

  10. Hogskin

    Very good talk with Ron Paul. I think Jesse Ventura did a lot better than Larry King. The girls were a little chatty, but was monitorated well by Jesse. The main message is that it is neither left or right, but a determination to do more of the same. And with endless war that we can’t afford, we must find someone that is gonna “Walk the talk”. Someone like Ron Paul or either “Ron Paul” himself! Plain and simple……he is the only one for the role!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1

  11. Timmy Timmons

    Thank you for deleting Tiger… wish you would have deleted the whole interview all together. That is unless you’re using “Tiger Woods” in your keywords to get people to actually look at the constitution.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. Lindsey

    Paul/Blogoievich 2012??? Could it be???????

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    1. Ryan

      LOL
      The thought alone makes me laugh out loud.
      Talk about a tough sell to the people.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  13. Dave

    [Draft Rand Paul! (Into the armed forces, I mean)]

    You go directly to the heart of the matter.

    U.S. Constitution Amendment XIII Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

    The draft is clearly and unambiguously involuntary servitude for citizens who are not being punished for a crime. It is therefore clearly and unambiguously unconstitutional. Since our government has done it it shows their blatant contempt for the Constitution which they took an oath to uphold and defend. As a veteran, you Ben, also swore to defend the Constitution so I hope that you were joking.

    That is why I support Ron Paul. He is one of the so very few who ever mention the Constitution when arguing before the Congress, let alone consults it for decision making.

    And feel free to describe an achievable victory in Iraq and Afghanistan…

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

  14. Dave

    [Oh, it’s for revenge now?]

    That’s all it was ever about for most Americans who initially bought into it.

    [What we’re doing now is fighting al-Qaida and the Taliban]

    If a foreign power successfully invaded America (yeah, I know, it ain’t gonna happen) and occupied us would you fight them? I would. What makes an Iraqi of Afghani any different than you or me? Do you believe that everyone shooting at American troops are Al-Qaeda or Taliban? None, if not most, of them are just trying to kick a foreign occupier out of their country???

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1

  15. Ben

    Draft Rand Paul! (Into the armed forces, I mean)

    His father voted to send other people’s kids to die in an illegal, unconstitutional,. undeclared war to kill third worlders. Why isn’t Rand Paul on the front lines? What a chickenhawk that Congressman Paul is.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9

  16. Ben

    And finally, Sean–

    “All of the 9/11 terrorist were from Saudi Arabia and attacked us from within the United States.. The only reason we are in Afghanistan is because they supposedly hid Osama Bin Laden there.. There was no proof of this and I would like to meet someone who actually believes Bin Laden stuck around after we invaded..”

    All of the people who attacked us on 9/11 also DIED on 9/11. Don’t you get that it’s bigger than nineteen men?

    Yes, I believe that bin Laden hightailed it out of there sometime early in the war. He was probably there in December 2001, thought we may never know. It’s interesting that you mention this because I used to tell people that exact same thing whenever they used the old good war/bad war chestnut about Iraq. You know, it always went something like this–”Why did we divert all of our resources to Iraq when bin Laden’s in Afghanistan? Don’t you know that we would have captured him already is we hadn’t taken our eye off the ball?”

    My response to that was that by the time we invaded Iraq (March of ’03), bin Laden was probably gone from Afghanistan. He was probably gone in December of ’01, actually.

    So, I agree with you on that point. He could be in Sudan right now, or Iran. Heck, he could be in London, Paris, or Dearborne. But here’s where you’re wrong–the mission in Afghanistan is not simply to catch one man. The mission is to:

    “use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons [the President] determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any further acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”

    And that is exactly what we’re doing. It’s a very noble cause.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 9

    1. Sean

      What are people from Afghanistan going to do? Throw a rock and hit us? Fly over here on Afgan Airways??… The Taliban weren’t even responsible for the war. They didn’t plot against us, Al-Qaeda did.. The funny thing is, we aren’t even fighting Al-Qaeda or the Taliban. We are fighting Afghanistan civilian recruitments. We didn’t wage war on a specific group of people, we waged war on a country, and not even the country where all 21 hijackers came from.. It is pointless to be there. There are 22 million Muslims in Afghanistan and they are attacking us one by one. By this rate we will never leave.. At first we were considered liberators, but now the Afghan people don’t want us there, and would rather have the Taliban for their government.. We are pushing more people to join them and fight us the longer we stay.. So the longer we are there, the worse it is going to get for there abroad, and here at home. Not just after this war, but for the entire future to come.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  17. Giovanni

    Ben:

    Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

    9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq.

    Iraq and 9/11 have nothing to do with each other.

    Do you understand yet?

    As far as your intellectually cheap comment about Ron Paul not supporting the troops: he’s not the one who sent them in the first place. He didn’t vote against the money for the war because he doesn’t support the troops. He voted to not send money so that they can come home. No one is going to send troops or keep them overseas without the money to do so. What a cheap shot.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1

  18. Ben

    Let me continue.

    Dave–”If it’s revenge for 911, we bombed the hell out of them and killed tens of thousands. We got revenge, what are we doing now?”

    Oh, it’s for revenge now? What we’re doing now is fighting al-Qaida and the Taliban, which is exactly what we’ve been doing the whole time and exactly what Ron Paul voted for. I don’t understand your confusion on this point. I think you’re purposly trying to obfuscate the issue.

    “We are playing into their hands, spending ourselves into oblivion, giving up liberty, and acting like a bunch of gutless sheeple.”

    War is expensive, no argument there. I personally think it would be over already if we were actually fighting to win. Nonetheless, military spending is actually part of the constitution, unlike Ron Paul’s unconstitutional earmark pork projects for his district. Considering we’ve spent so much, I’d like to win this thing. We aren’t losing liberty, and all the gutless sheeple I know voted for Obama and Paul.

    “Having a son in combat doesn’t give anyone a pass.”

    John McCain isn’t asking for a pass. If you looked at the context of statement, you would see that I was responding to a comment that said that there is nothing conservative or libertarian about sending other people’s children to die in an unjustifed war while your own stay home. This is funny for two reasons–first, because that’s EXACTLY what Ron Paul did when he voted for the 9/14/01 resolution, and second because there are some members of congress who actually do have children in the armed forces. McCain was the first example that sprang to mind, and I don’t even like John McCain. So, Ron Paul must be a real scumbag for sending other people’s children to die in Afghanistan while his kids sat it out at home. Am I right?

    “You don’t actually think that the government actually cares about the troops do you? Do you think that they intend to win?”

    Heavens NO! And that’s the problem. I think that a large number of politicians in Washington are so invested in defeat that nothing else will satisfy them. That’s where Paul fits in. The other half is fighting this according to the ACLU rule book. Nobody takes this mission seriously any more, and that’s the whole problem! I consider it a betrayal, and I want to run those bums run out of town on a rail, starting with Paul. I’d like to elect real men of character who would do this thing right and quit pussyfooting around.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6

    1. mtnmgb

      Dear Mr. Paul,

      I have been an American for 50 years now. My parents taught me how to take care of myself, and I have. I have never been so disgusted with the ignorance of our great country that my father and his father fought for, since I have been alive. You, Mr. Paul, are the example of the American we all should be. Your honesty, integrity will never be questioned by me. I thank you for this. If there is anything that I may you do to help you give this great free country back to the people, please contact me.

      Sincerely and Proudly yours,

      OneAmericanCitizenThatCares

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1

  19. Dave

    Ben, define victory. How can it be achieved? What will it cost? How will it benefit America? What will make it worth the cost?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

  20. Ben

    I’m so glad to have the opportunity to rip all of your arguments to shreds.

    I can’t believe that you’re still using the chickenhawk argument. I am a veteran of OIF. I volunteered once. It’s someone else’s turn. Any other questions?

    SS–I don’t want to see any bodies of innocents piled up. And don’t call me ‘son’.

    Gander said–”ron paul voted to invade afghanistan 9 years ago to punish those who were responsible for 9/11. the afghan gov was ousted, many terrorists killed. after that the mission changed to spread democracy and hunt opium farmers. that is why we should leave.”

    Here we go, let’s read what he actually voted on:
    http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/useofforce.htm

    That the President is authorized to use
    all necessary and appropriate force against those nations,
    organizations, or persons HE determines planned, authorized,
    committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on
    September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or
    persons, in order to prevent any further acts of
    international terrorism against the United States by such
    nations, organizations or persons. (emphasis mine)

    That’s pretty broad, yes. You might even call it a blank check. The blankest check ever handed to any president, signed by Ron Paul. Furthermore, it authorizes force against those who planned the attack (al-Qaeda) and those who harbored them (the Taliban). Both of those entitites still exist in Afghanistan and we are still actively engaged in the fight against them. The mission hasn’t changed. How many times do I have to debunk the myth that Ron Paul approved a very limited war within very defined perameters? he always tells his blind f0llowers tall tales about what he voted ‘yes’ on, and they alwasy believe him.

    Are we spreading democracy? Sure. I don’t see a problem with that either. I don’t think that leaving Afghanistan a broken country is a good plan for anyone’s security. Are we hunting opium farmers? Uh huh. There has been a good debate about whether anti-narc operations should be part of the military’s mission, but at the end of the day the reason we’re doing it is beacause opium is how the Taliban funds itself. If you want to defeat an enemy, you have to cut their financial legs out from under them.

    “and you imply with a child’s logic that if funding were cut that you would not have enought beans to eat and no protection. hyperbole. if funding were cut the military would simply be forced to bring the troops home.”

    How is that a child’s logic? They would be forced to bring them home…in defeat. Furthemore, have you ever read what happened to our forces in Vietnam when their funds were cut? It was an absolute disaster. No, they didn’t just “come home”. They were stranded without the tools they needed to do their jobs.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5

    1. gander

      thinking that you can spread democracy or stop opium farming in afghanistan is beyond naive. we can’t even control the the drug problem in our own country. and you make the illogical conclusion that just because he voted to authorize force he is responsible for every action the president takes. that is like saying that you are personally responsible for everything obama has done in office because you voted for him. your arguments lack some logical basics. ron paul has is right to say that the war has been ill fought and that the only logical option is to come home even though he voted to authorize force.

      you seem to be obsessed with the idea of defeat. we have already lost. just like in vietnam, this was a war that we were never truly ready to win. when we fought in wwII did we try to win hearts and minds? we dropped bombs, intentionally killing their women and children until they were completely physically, morally and emotionally destroyed. unfortunately, no one in america has the stomach anymore for that kind of fight and that is why we will never win. that means that coming home now is the only sane option.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

  21. Bottomline

    The truth of the matter is we have been lied to that a bunch of Iraqis and Afghans attaked us on 9/11. Ben is one of the few War mongerers who still believe in the lies of this administration as well as the prior one to think that we should keep spending money on these two pre-mature wars. If you think that we should keep spending money on these two. Then Ben be my guess and enlist in the military and get the rest of our men and women out of harms way, if you’re so tough and brave.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

  22. Sean

    All of the 9/11 terrorist were from Saudi Arabia and attacked us from within the United States.. The only reason we are in Afghanistan is because they supposedly hid Osama Bin Laden there.. There was no proof of this and I would like to meet someone who actually believes Bin Laden stuck around after we invaded.. We aren’t fighting an organized group, but rather recruitments from a 3rd world country who are fighting off the invaders as any civilized or uncivilized culture would.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

  23. Dave

    What did Iraq have to do with 911? I wanted heads on pikes as much as anyone after 911 so I went along with the idea of going into Afghanistan (They tricked me too for a time). If it’s revenge for 911, we bombed the hell out of them and killed tens of thousands. We got revenge, what are we doing now? We are playing into their hands, spending ourselves into oblivion, giving up liberty, and acting like a bunch of gutless sheeple.

    The strategy is to send us the way of the Soviet Union; spend ourselves into oblivion. It’s working, we are loosing big time. We are in danger of monetary collapse. For what? Winning battles doesn’t mean that you win the war. The last fifty years is ample proof of that.

    Jane Fonda went to North Vietnam and sat in a AAA seat for a photo. Somebody could have dropped a bomb on her. That means that she has more time in combat than the aggregate for Bush II, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Obama, Biden, Gonzalez, Clinton, Perleman, Abrams, Kristol, Feith, Podhoretz, Krauthammer, George Will, Dershwitz, and Gates. Yes, I have contempt for neocons. Having a son in combat doesn’t give anyone a pass.

    As for sending troops to the field without proper equipment, you’ve got to be kidding. The whole purpose of the war is for money to flow to the war suppliers. You don’t actually think that the government actually cares about the troops do you? Do you think that they intend to win? Give me a break.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1

  24. Ben

    Dave said: “When did being a coward who sends someone else’s kid off to fight wars of profit for the few which have nothing to do with defending America become a conservative or libertarian virtue?”

    I’ll answer that one. It’s real easy. Neither the war in Iraq nor the war in Afghanistan “have nothing to do with defending America”; I trust you’ve heard of a thing called 9/11. Remember that?

    But I knows that when you refer to “wars of profit for the few which have nothing to do with defending America” you’re talking about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do you know who sent other people’s sons to fight there while his own stayed here? Ron Paul, that’s who!

    I’m no fan of John McCain, but two of his sons are USMC veterans of Iraq. Sarah Palin’s son is also an Iraq War veteran. Ron Paul, on the other hand, sent men to die in Afghanistan (apparently, according to David, solely to profit a few) while his boys stayed home. Chickenhawk!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8

    1. SS

      Son, take it from someone that left a few pieces in SE Asia, we are done in the ME.
      Just wondering, how many dead innocents would need to be piled up before enough was enough?

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

  25. Ben

    I’m so glad you asked!

    Two brave Paulbots have responded with the assumption that I have never been in a war, and one has responded by assuming that I am a Republican!

    Actually, I have been in a grand total of one war. It’s called Operation Iraqi Freedom, and it’s something I’m very proud of. I have debated Paulbots and liberals on this topic many times and I have held my own every time. I also would have gladly gone to Afghanistan if my unit had been called, but it was not.

    Since 2003, Ron Paul voted to cut off funds to the troops. That would be ME. Not some nameless, facelss, individual. A real soldier who never, ever thought that his leaders would deprive him of beans and bullets to make a point. I never thought that an actual US Congressman would use the “starve them out” method of “ending” (losing) an American war. I always thought that if we were ever sent to war, our leaders would have our backs a hundred percent. I am no longer so naive.

    Oppose the war if you want, but don’t leave soldiers unfunded in the field. Also, base your case on facts and logic. Don’t lie, and last of all–DON’T SEND THEM TO WAR IF YOU AREN”T SERIOUS! That means you, Ron Paul! September 14, 2001–your scummy name was on the blank check that Congress gave to President Bush!

    By the way, blind followers of Paul–can any of you form a single sentence without using the term “chickenhawk” or “neo-con”? Your argumentation is cheap and show a certain lack of sophistication.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8

    1. gander

      yo meat head ben,

      ron paul voted to invade afghanistan 9 years ago to punish those who were responsible for 9/11. the afghan gov was ousted, many terrorists killed. after that the mission changed to spread democracy and hunt opium farmers. that is why we should leave.

      and you imply with a child’s logic that if funding were cut that you would not have enought beans to eat and no protection. hyperbole. if funding were cut the military would simply be forced to bring the troops home. they wouldn’t let you starve and the occupation would be over. i say occupation because the war was over long ago.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1

  26. Alan Williams

    Ben…this is what happens when you do not question your own party’s “line.” Republicans have and will lead us into marxist spending ($12B per month) on unjustified and unsustainable wars. Their as bad as democrats on spending..just love B & B> (blood & bullets). It will require Paul’s unpopular “nationalism” 2 stop the spending, balance the budget, return national, international, & monetary authority 2 congress & hopefully give us a few more yrs of prosperity. Dempublicanz & Republicratz (spending) can’t do it…Fed Reserve owns them!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2

    1. walt

      the money spent for the war isnt what will break the bank…alot of the spending feeds to economy and tech advances are made also…the money spent for social programs ..and cheap chinese goods from abroard and cheap mexican labor will….as for the dems and repubs….nixon put forth a health insurance overhaul..much like this one..and kennedy led the fight to defeat it{ted},go figure..so much for conservatism

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Fred the Protectionist

        Tech advances huh.

        Spend enough money and you can fit rockets on a first rate Ship Of The Line, but I wouldn’t call that a “tech advance”.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  27. Tony

    Good god people, beg Ron Paul to run in 2012
    It’s our last hope of survival dont not only Americans
    but the entire world see this????

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2

  28. Dave

    Well, Ben. When did being a coward who sends someone else’s kid off to fight wars of profit for the few which have nothing to do with defending America become a conservative or libertarian virtue? Your idea that people who claim different labels must disagree on all issues sounds mindless. Have you got any ideas of your own or just the ones provided by neocon chicken hawks?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

  29. Tom

    Ben,

    since the democrats have had a majority in Congress + a democrat president for over a year, how can you say they are not “pleased as punch” with the wars? Has there been any saber rattling from the left or has the war in Afghanistan been elevated? And just wait and see if Iraq doesn’t blow into another mess before we withdraw.

    BTW Ben, exactly how many wars have you been in?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

  30. Ben

    “…the potential for an anti-war coalition of principled progressives, libertarians and constitutionalist conservatives…”

    I don’t know what “constitutional conservatives” or libertarians (REAL libertarians, I mean) would have in common with progressives. But it does appear that the Paul-wing of the Republican Party (the pseudo-libertarian constitutional fakers) have a lot in common wth progressives. I can see why they’d hit it off like Romeo and Juliet.

    Will someone tell Ron Paul to quit flirting with progressivism? He keeps telling us that “real” Republicans and “real” conservatives would oppose the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. How does that work? Real Republicans and real conservatives would hop into bed with Marxist radicals like Dennis Kucinich? If the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan represent a betrayal of conservatism, then why aren’t the liberals pleased as punch with them? Can anyone explain that to me in rational terms? I’d really like to hear this.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 10

    1. SS

      War mongering is Leftism. Not a damn thing conservative about it.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2

      1. Fred the Protectionist

        Actually in history there are lots of Conservative war mongering.

        There are just as many conservative warhawks as there are liberal warhawks. Warhawkishness/pacifism has nothing to do with liberal or conservative labels.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1