Ron Paul: I’m Running for President!

Date: 05/13/2011

George Stephanopoulos: Congressman Ron Paul joins us now from New Hampshire. Good morning, congressman. You ran in 1988, you ran in 2008. Are you running in 2012?

Ron Paul: I am. Today, at this moment, I’m officially announcing that I am a candidate for president in the Republican primary.

George Stephanopoulos: Why?

Ron Paul: Because time has come around to the point where the people are agreeing with much of what I’ve been saying for 30 years. So I think the time is right.

George Stephanopoulos: Well, this is a big step for you, Congressman. Congratulations. And as you said at the beginning, you’re not afraid to cause controversies. You seem to be doing it again. Right now, just yesterday, we showed it in John Crow’s piece, you came out against the way that President Obama conducted that raid against Osama Bin Laden, while more than 90% of the American public support it. Why are you against it?

Ron Paul: Well, I was talking about the procedure. You know, I endorsed the whole idea of going after him, I supported going in to Afghanistan. I thought we blew it then. We had them cornered and we let them get lose, and we then went and invaded Iraq. We’ve spent a trillion dollars, we’ve lost 5000 American lives, we’ve killed many, many innocent people. So the process has being very bad. So I have no qualms about getting him, I’m delighted he’s gone. But the whole thing is we could have done it differently.

George Stephanopoulos: How could we have done it differently?

Ron Paul: And besides , ignoring the Pakistani government doesn’t help us at all. It looks like we’re trying to be more antagonistic towards the Pakistanis. They have helped us in the past to catch many terrorist, and I don’t see any reason why we can’t do that.

George Stephanopoulos: But you would have taken risk?

Ron Paul: I think the process is definitely different. If you compare what we did after World War II, think of the worst Nazis who committed the holocaust, you know, we arrested them, we tried them and we hung them. I don’t know why we have to embark on a whole new system just because the people get rattled up. The politicians can rattle the people up. And after the dust settles, they might say, “Well, you know, there could have been a better way”. The other thing is, to make a decision on this whole process is a little premature. Every day we hear a different story about exactly what happened. So I was asked whether I could do it differently, and I said yes, and I think that the goals and the results would have been better. But I’m really worried about building this animosity with the Pakistanis right now. I’m all for cutting the foreign aid, I would have never given them any money, but I’m afraid that we’ve already expanded the war in to Pakistan. We’ve been bombing them, and at the same time wee bomb them, we give them foreign aid. So I think that the whole process now is to build up the enemy in Pakistan so that we have a massive invasion there and spread the war.

George Stephanopoulos: Let me turn to some issues here at home. Celia from Springfield, Ohio wants to tell us just how far your libertarian principles take you. She asks, “Do you think everyone should just be responsible for themselves, and if a flood washes your house away, no FEMA? Sink or swim?”

Ron Paul: No, I think that’s the way a free society works, and that’s the way the constitution mandates. I’m on the Gulf Coast, I have a house on the beach, or had one recently. And I don’t think somebody in New York or New Hampshire or Iowa has to pay for my flood on the Gulf Coast.

George Stephanopoulos: So how far would you go?

Ron Paul: So I bet insurance is an old fashioned way of doing it: buy insurance. And if insurance won’t sell it to you, it means it’s too dangerous. If it’s too dangerous, why dump the responsibility on the tax payer. It doesn’t make economic sense, it doesn’t make good moral sense, it doesn’t constitutional sense.

George Stephanopoulos: John showed in his piece that you would also give states the rights to legalize heroine if they wanted to. And you’re at odds with your Republican Party on so many issues: on foreign policy, on domestic policy, on social policy. Why not run as an independent, given your differences with the Republicans on some of the issues.

Ron Paul: Well, I would like to qualify a little bit about the drugs, but the question is why not I run as an independent. Because we don’t have true democracy in this country. We lose lives going overseas spreading our goodness and our great democracy, and we orchestrate elections and if we don’t like them, we avoid them, we ignore them, so we get the people that we support and the people in the CIA supports. But running as an independent here is just about impossible unless you’re a Billionaire like Ross Perot. You don’t get on debates. If I was in independent, George, you would not have me on this program this morning.

George Stephanopoulos: I’m not sure about it.

Ron Paul: I’ve been a Republican for all these years, I was elected to Congress as a Republican, my family is Republican. And I was out of the Republican Party for one year. There’s nothing wrong with nudging the Republicans to a true constitutional position to stick to their guns on fiscal conservatism.

George Stephanopoulos: Congressman, we only have a few seconds left. Last time around, you bet me everything I had in my pocket that you would win the presidency. It didn’t quite turn out that way. How do you define success this time around, in 10 seconds.

Ron Paul: My success is, I always win, you know, because the victories are one thing. But we win elections when people said we never could win elections. So I define by doing very well, I believe right now that me coming in No.1 in the Republican primary is an absolute possibility. Many, many times better than it was 4 years ago. Our troops, our supporters, the grassroots are enthusiastic, more so than they ever were. I was impressed, I’m super impressed now with the enthusiasm that we’re getting.

George Stephanopoulos: Okay. Well, good luck, Congressman.

Ron Paul: Thank you.


  • mrswartz

    i am voting this year only for this guy

  • GodsItalianStallion

    How long is the line to slap to George Stephanopoulos? (I’m certainly willing to wait in it).

  • Tom

    Obama’s speech on Israel going back to ’67 borders is a fantastic opportunity for Ron to earn political capital amongst Democrats and Republicans.
    Our current ‘parenting’ of Israel through $3.3BN annual military donations has forced Israel into a very dark corner. Dr Paul’s ‘hands-off’ approach – validated by his support of Israel’s 1981 attack of Iraq’s nuclear facilities – is the only viable long-term option for a post-Egypt, post-Libya Isreal.
    US taxpayers will happily and willingly use their recovered tax dollars to privately fund Israel’s survival and enhancement.
    What choice does Israel have?
    1 – It can take a left turn down Obama Avenue and go back to 1967 borders.
    2 – It can go straight-ahead down the Fox News / Dock Morris road to indebted military slavery
    3 – It can become an independent, free nation with its own security, intact borders, financial freedom (including US taxpayer voluntary support) and a guaranteed future following the Ron Paul route.

    This is the greatest opportunity to secure the pro-Israel, Jewish vote. And at the same time win a great deal of influence within the beltway. How long can Israel be expected to endure the bi-polar politics of mainstream Democrat / Republican politics?

  • jira40

    that “reporter” is a condescending prick

  • Strateg68

    In Sweden we have insurance. Works just fine.

  • zeta517

    george is a little fuck!

  • HowlingWolf518

    I say this as a pro-gay, socialist, part pro-choice, agnostic anti-war Canadian:

    Go for the White House you magnificent freedom-loving son of a b-tch!

  • crakadocious

    Unless you sell your soul to AIPAC and Israel you have no chance of being successful in the Political Scene. Because of this, Dr. Paul does not stand a chance. Needless to say, I voted for Dr. Paul in 2008 and I will be voting for him in 2012. Reality is that Americans are much to ignorant and lazy to actually vote for someone other than who the tv tells them to vote for.

  • herbieshirby

    This guy wont win!


    There’s hope in politics after all.

  • snakebyte72

    If there is a GOD this man will be president!

  • TheGoalSetter

    Why did Ron Paul make this announcement with George Steppy?

    Last time, Steppy unjournalistically flat out told Paul he couldn’t win. Steppy is clearly against Paul.

    In this video, Steppy used video/audio tricks and confrontive questions to totally demean Ron Paul and this announcement.

    What another wasted opportunity.

  • TheGoalSetter

    Paul is associated with racist orgs and gold-selling scum.

    Sadly, compared to other politicians, Paul is STILL heads and shoulders above everyone else.

    I can’t believe there are so few great men in the world.

  • George Washington

    If I may please;

    Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate who would cut enough spending to avert a debt crisis. Only he will restore constitutionally sound money. And, only he will strengthen our national defense by bringing our troops home and putting an end to the nation-building that is draining our country.
    Watch Dr Paul question Ben Bernanke if you doubt Paul understands even subtle aspects of the economy. Imagine Palin or Romney doing that?
    Other candidates speak flowery words and tell nothing of how anything will get done. Mr. Paul is very different.
    Constitutionally, legislatively, and morally, Ron Paul has no equal. His 22 year voting record speaks for itself.
    Please help give America back Her Constitution.
    Ron Paul for President in 2012.
    Thank You

  • urdisturbing

    Ron Paul is bad for America. According to Princton political scientist Larry Bartels, American politicians on both sides of the floor only respond to the highest-income voters. Ron Paul is do different, he’s on the Koch brothers payroll. His policies will literally destroy the middle class.

  • lilsm555

    RON PAUL 2012 if you are smart!

  • Cloudy2Clear

    Here’s hoping we can elect a constitutional congress along with Ron Paul. He will need more support in the political arena. Congress could demand an indictment of the fed & Paul would not veto it. Freeze the fed’s assets & and upon conviction of treason, could return the assets from where it was stolen…the people. Banksters days would be ended. Back to the constitution – no NAFTA, no UN, no lobbyists, no FDA (corrupt), no M’santos & patenting seeds…wtf? We’ll earn our constitution back!

  • Zoonofski

    GMA has never been shy about promoting their dislike of ron paul in the past. In 2008 they came straight out and told him his bid for election was a joke. They always bringing up the heroine issue, Ron paul didnt even mention heroin.. He simply said people should be allowed to do watever They want to do with their own bodies. How is it justifiable to say that if you smoke a plant, the government can throw u in a cage full of murders and rapists for 20 years. has the world gone completely mad?

  • djh215

    Those costs are only so high because of past govt regulations, mandates, and dictates. Jesus wouldn’t have supported the Roman govt’s use of force to “help” people. He believed everyone should help each other directly. Quite the opposite of our tax system

  • Equity213

    Ron Paul may be the best option we have but come on. The reason the war is wrong is because the congress fairys didnt bless it with their wands? Give me a break.