“I would like to congratulate Michael Steele for his leadership on one of the most important issues of today. He is absolutely right: Afghanistan is now Obama’s war. During the 2008 campaign, Obama was out in front in insisting that more troops be sent to Afghanistan. Obama called for expanding the war even as he pretended to be a peace candidate.

“Michael Steele should not resign. Smart policies make smart politics. He is guiding the party in the right direction and we are on the verge of victory this fall. Chairman Steele should not back off. He is giving the country, especially young people, hope as he speaks truth about this war.

“I have to ask myself, what is the agenda of the harsh critics demanding this resignation? Why do they support Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama’s war?

“The American people are sick and tired spending hundreds of billions of dollars a year, draining our economy and straining our military. Michael Steele has it right and Republicans should stick by him.”

Event: Southern Republican Leadership Conference
Location: New Orleans
Date: 04/10/2010

Transcript:

Ron Paul: No questions?

Question: Well, I’ll start. Representative Paul, I’m Ed Morrissey from Hot Air. And you’re here at the SRLC, it’s a leadership conference. Did you feel the need to deliver a message to Republican Party leadership? I heard a little bit of your speech. Are you concerned about the direction that the leadership is going in right now?

Ron Paul: Well, if you ask about delivering a message to the leadership, yes, I delivered the same message to everybody who listens. And I’ve been doing the same message for 35 years. So yes, the point I make was that the Republicans have lost credibility because they speak a good game but they don’t act very well. 1980 occurred, and there wasn’t much change, 1994 happened, nothing changed. Year 2000 happened, nothing really changed. And yet we’re the party of limited government and individual freedom. So I would say that my message was that we should practice what we preach. And right now it’s absolutely necessary, because people are so disgusted they’re leaving both parties. They’re getting out and they’re on their own and they’re upset and the country is bankrupt. So, to me, there is a fertile field out there for a message that I believe is deeply needed.

Question: Dr. Paul, I’m Ed Armstrong at the Austin Capital Times. Let’s get the obvious question out of the way: have you given thought about running for 2012?

Ron Paul: No, I haven’t thought about that. I don’t have any plans to do that. It’s a long way off. I’m wondering if I’m going to have enough energy to go back to DC after these last two weeks that we had on medical care, and we go back on Tuesday. That’s what I’m thinking about. But I was delighted to be here today and participate in this function.

Question: Dr. Paul, this is Michelle with WGSO. I’m wondering about Senate bill 3081 by Lieberman and McCain in which they asked for detention of American citizens classified as belligerents. I don’t know if there is a companion bill introduced in the House, and if so …

Ron Paul: And what would be the consequence of that?

Question: …it’s called the Enemy Belligerent Detention and Prosecution Act.

Ron Paul: For putting people in indefinite detention?

Question: American citizens.

Ron Paul: American citizens, and also, I don’t know if it’s in that bill, but that same idea is to allow our government to assassinate American citizens.

Question: Correct.

Ron Paul: Totally outrageous, horrible. And yet that is the mood that we’re in. But that’s been going on not for one and a half year, it’s been going on for ten years now in the general direction. So whether it’s indefinite detention, no habeas corpus, whether it has to do with torture, or even targeting American citizens for assassination with no charges made and no due process.

But these are bad guys, they say. And you know what the definition is? One person in the administration can determine that that individual is a threat. If that person is determined as a threat, then they can take him and put him on that list. The understanding I have now is that they have 3 or 4 Americans. They say, “They’re just a few, and we know they’re really bad people”. Well, someday they might make a mistake and put a very good person on that list, like they do on those lists at the airports. Some very good people get listed and then you get thrown in jail forever?It’s a bad trend; that’s the type of big government that not only conservative Republicans, liberal Democrats and all should be very, very upset about, instead of the two coming together.

Question: I’m from Louisiana News. Dr. Paul, you propose ending the Fed. Let’s say we end the Fed, then what? What would happen?

Ron Paul: Depends on how we do it. I mean, if you ended the Fed tomorrow, it would be very chaotic and there would probably be no benefit to it. The Fed, though, might end itself by the destruction of money. We have runaway inflation; the Fed is game over. That’s what happens when Zimbabwe has runaway inflation, Mexico, Central America, Germany. I mean, it’s been known and we’re capable of doing this. And we’re approaching that rapidly because we’re printing so much money.

But my proposal is to legalize competition to the Fed. And that is for you to have the constitutional right to use sound money, gold and silver currency. If you do that today, you’ll be arrested even though you would be correct constitutionally, they will put you in jail for that. So, my idea is to legalize that, get rid of the legal tender laws, and people who like the Fed, like paper money, fine. If others like to deal in silver or foreign currency, or gold currency, they should be allowed to do it.

Question: Daisy Mason, [...] of America. At this point who would you put your support behind for 2012?

Ron Paul: 2012? Well, I don’t have a choice. I mean, I picked nobody. I guess I have lot of choices out there. I haven’t given that very much thought. It’s very early. Just like when they ask me who would I appoint on the Supreme Court, I don’t have a choice about that either.

Question: I am James from the Daily [...]. There was some heckling during your speech. There were some Huckabee supporters who seemed to boo for almost the entire first half of your speech. Do you have anything additional that you didn’t say in the speech, that you would say to Republicans who just don’t seem to like you or your policies?

Ron Paul: Oh, I guess I’ve had that happen few times. But one thing I notice is I’ve been saying this same thing for 35, 40 years. And really since 1971 when I recognized that we were going to destroy the economic system – and we are, we are in the process of doing it. So nobody listened then. It’s a lot better being noticed, it used to be that they didn’t think I was worth booing. Now that they’re worried that the status quo establishment corporate-military-industrial complex is going to be challenged, a few of them might boo. But I heard more cheers.

You know, politicians tend to not what to hear those, but I heard more cheers when I talked about the freedom philosophy, individual liberty, and personal choices, bringing our troops home, sound money. This is what they really cheer, and this is what the campuses are cheering. So if one or two or three or four boo because they don’t want to disrupt the status quo and they think they can change the world or change our party or change this country, I don’t deal with that too much because I just think they’re mistaken and I try to persuade them differently.

Question: On another topic, do you have any predictions on how far your legislation repealing the insurance mandate will get in the House? You think it would get to the floor?

Ron Paul: Well, I would think I could get as many Republicans on it as I got for Audit the Fed. And I got every Republican on that bill. So I would think I could repeal the mandate if I’m energetic and ask. You know, you just don’t throw it up and everybody comes to signs on it. You got to work and get signatures, and we did that with Audit the Fed. And there’d be a lot of Democrats that might like to sign it. We had lot of Democrats sign the Audit the Fed bill because it was less partisan. This one would be tougher for the Democrats, even the ones that voted against the bill. I don’t know, they might feel like they don’t want to take on their leadership. Sometimes they do things politically in Washington.

Question: Do you think the Republican leadership moved back the bill, or do they have another…?

Ron Paul: Well, they might have a bigger bill, and I was trying to narrow it down and make it very simple. What I want to do is get rid of the mandate and preserve people’s right to get out of the system and not pretend that I can reverse the tide of what’s happening in Washington today. The economics of it all will reverse the tide, because we can’t afford it. Just like I argued that foreign policy won’t be reversed all of a sudden just because they listen to my speeches. It’s going to get reversed because we’re broke. So the medical thing will be reversed because it won’t function. People will have to get their medical care elsewhere. And our system will break down.

Question: Representative Paul, along those same lines, Medicare is an entitlement disaster that’s coming, Social Security to a lesser degree. What should Congress be doing now to either reform or quickly narrow down Medicare or Social Security in order to avoid the entitlement collapse that’s coming?

Ron Paul: You can’t do anything without cutting spending. I have a couple of bills that sort of preserve Social Security. Matter of fact, I take Social Security income and I set it aside and buy some negotiable treasury bills, and you can’t touch it. Nothing could be spent on general revenue; and your account would be assigned to you. They say, “But there’s no money in there,” so it’s a pretty tough job. You’d have to have big, big cuts. And I argue, like I did in my speech, that the only place this country will ever come around to cutting spending is those boondoggles overseas. It’s the earmarks for billion dollar embassies around the world, and troops in Korea. I mean, we could save hundreds of billions of dollars doing this, and I am absolutely convinced that we will not be less safe, we’ll be more safe.

Question: Congressman, some of the younger folks our here didn’t necessarily seem particularly interested in the Republican Party, per se. A lot of them didn’t identify that way. And I’m just curious, what do you tell those folks…?

Ron Paul: The point you make probably has validity to it. But the question you should ask is why is the Republican Party not interested in them. That is what they should be doing, because we can get crowds with this message around the college campuses. 1000, 2000 people will come at a time wanting to listen to this message. And they’re open to it. And a lot of them will join the Republican Party, and they will. But a lot of them have been excluded and they have been uninvited; they don’t want them. But the numbers are out there, and I have to say, I visited with Chairman Steele today, and he indicated that he’s open dialog for this; for me to let him know what we’re doing. Because I think he understands that there’s a large number of people out there.

But when they ask me personally and pin me down, “What should I do?” I tell them, “Do what you want to do, it’s up to you. Stay a Republican, be a Libertarian, be an Independent, be a teacher, even be a journalist”. You know, “Even be a journalist, do something, get on the internet.” But, first off, study hard, understand the issue, know what the freedom philosophy is all about, and why personal liberty is our salvation and not the destruction of mankind. Thank you.

Show: Dylan Ratigan Show
Host: Eliot Spitzer
Date: 4/9/2010

Transcript

Eliot Spitzer: Joining us now is Republican congressman Ron Paul of Texas. He addresses the crowd tomorrow night at the SRLC and could set an upset in the conference straw poll. Congressman Paul is with us via Skype. Congressman, thank you so much. First of all, to go to the biggest news of the day, Justice Steven’s retirement, will the Republicans in the Senate fillibuster the President’s nominee, whomever that may be?

Ron Paul: Oh, I have no idea, I don’t think they would have a rule and say we’re gonna fillibuster no matter who it is, but they certainly have a right to debate it. They shouldn’t just went along to get along and appoint or endorse the guy that was appointed, that wouldn’t be anything. Their job is to investigate, if they don’t like him, they’re supposed to vote against him, I don’t see why there’s such a big deal over that.

Eliot Spitzer: Well, no question that they have the right to inquire and ask good probing questions of course. But let me ask you this, if Justice Stevens were renominated, go back 30 years, if he were 30 years younger, if he were nominated today with his record, do you think the Republicans in the Senate would vote for him?

Ron Paul: I have no idea because I can’t look into their minds. What we should look at is for a man who understands the Constitution, or woman, and somebody that would protect civil liberties, will understand property rights and if they don’t and that’s what you believe in, you’d have an obligation to your constituents not to endorse somebody that you say you disagree with.

Eliot Spitzer: Congressman, let’s jump now to the SRLC, where you’re going to be making your presentation and there will be a straw poll. Will you pull a big upset and win that straw poll just as you did at CPAC?

Ron Paul: I have no idea, I was pretty surprised about CPAC, I didn’t expect that.

Eliot Spitzer: Do you think what Governor Romney is doing where he is apparently, there are reports that he is buying tickets for people only if they were voting for him, is that fair play in this context?

Ron Paul: Well, it’s not fair but I guess it’s legal and I guess that’s the way it’s been done in the past so I’m much more pleased to get enthusiasm and that’s certainly what I have been able to get from the young people, especially the young people in colleges because they are enthusiastic about me arguing the case for civil liberties, a different foreign policy and free markets. That’s what encourages people, so I wouldn’t get much satisfaction. If I were as wealthy as Mitt Romney and I bought some votes, I wouldn’t get any satisfaction.

Eliot Spitzer: Let me jump on to an area where you and I actually agree which may surprise some folks. We have both been intentionally critical of the Fed and the role that the Fed played over the past many years in the creating the bubbles that crashed, caused the cataclysm in our economy. Why when you look at the current bills before the Senate and bills that passed the House, there’s virtually no fundamental governance reform at the Fed. Can that be changed and what would you do to the Fed right now?

Ron Paul: Well, I mean if I had my druthers, I’d just get rid of it, but the first step is to at least know what they’re doing. I have 319 co-sponsors of a bill that would audit the Federal Reserve. The Senate won’t go along with that so we’d have to fight it out in conference. But just to find out what they’re doing, this power that they have to create $2 trillion and are so arrogant, “Oh yeah we can take care of our buddies and we don’t have to answer any questions.”

Eliot Spitzer: Congressman, with the enormous political sway and popularity you have across America, why have you not led the charge to force the Fed to release all the emails that it has with AIG, with Goldman Sachs? Now let’s begin a popular crusade just as you in effect created the tea party on a specific issue of transparency of the Fed, so that we, the taxpayers can understand what the Fed thought, what they did and why they did it. Do you think there’s any possibility of success there?

Ron Paul: Well, I think we’ve actually accomplished that by getting such as strong endorsement for auditing the Fed. But you know when you’re asking for narrow records, I see looking at all the records so I’ve taken a broader brush. I want to know everything about it, I want to know who they loan the money to, like foreign governments and foreign central banks and international financial institutions, all the private things, the things that you mentioned are absolutely right and correct. But I’d [want to] know that plus more. What they’d like you to do is look at some of these lending agencies and they’ll say “Well, I guess we better give you some of that information and that’ll satisfy everybody.” We need much broader investigation.

Eliot Spitzer: Just so it’s clear, I agree with you. I begin sometimes with that specific questions, I think narrowing it so we can begin and get there and then let’s go out broader than that as we work forwards. Thank you so much for joining us, Congressman, and good luck in the straw poll and have a good time down there at SRLC.

Show: Morning Joe
Channel: MSNBC
Date: 03/26/2010

Transcript

Joe Scarborough: Let’s bring in Ron Paul right now. I don’t think that matters a whole heck of a lot right now. Obviously, the 2012 election is far off. But Ron Paul, how will this healthcare debate shape the election that’s coming up in November in 2010?

Ron Paul: Well, I think it certainly will. I think a lot is yet to happen, because more people are going to understand this bill and how bad it really is. I think 2010 seems to be such a long way off. I think, you know, a lot more can happen. But I definitely think it is going to make a difference. I think it is going to help the Republicans and they’re going to come close to taking over the House.

But, to me, the whole thing is a huge mess. You know, they had this big excitement over 20 words. Well, it was good that they’re trying to follow the rules, but coming from my viewpoint where I can’t even find out where there is authority in the Constitution for running medical care. And 2,000 pages? I think they’re all wrong. And now we’re going to worry about 20 words? Well, I guess its good they’re worried about 20 words, but I’d like to have them worried about the 2,000 pages.

Joe Scarborough: Well, let’s talk about both of the parties, because when I go out and talk, it’s not just people concerned about the Democratic Party. They’ll say, “Yes, were concerned about how the Democratic Party is expanding the government’s footprint in our life when it comes to healthcare. But you Republicans”, they will say to me, “passed a Medicare drug benefit plan that had a cost of 7 trillion dollars”. If you look out there right now, Ron, it doesn’t look like Americans have a real good choice if they’re small government conservatives. They’re getting it from both parties, they’re getting it from Bush, now they’re getting it from Obama.

Ron Paul: And thank goodness the people are waking up. You know, the people can have an influence when they finally wake up; and they are on this issue. And you make the very important point, because when the Republicans were in charge they were were doing the same thing; running up deficits, expanding the role of government, and expanding the Department of Education and the whole mess. So the people are catching on. But the reason they’re catching on is because they’re realizing our government and our country is bankrupt. And nobody believes that they can give 30 million new people medical care and not charge them and lower the deficit. I mean, it is astounding that they do this with a straight face. And everything is just so much partisan bickering. And like you point out, they’re saying the same thing, but it’s partisanship; it’s who gets to favor their friends the most, who’s going to run it and who gets the power.

Joe Scarborough: And that’s what’s so fascinating to me: the harsh partisanship in Washington DC. When you look at the arc of the federal government over the past decade, there is just not a lot – and this drives partisans on both sides crazy when I say it, but when it comes to the size of government, there is just not a real difference between Republicans and Democrats – how Republicans acted over 8 years when they we’re in power, and how Democrats are acting now. They’re both spending money we don’t have. Pat Buchanan, do you have a question for Ron Paul?

Pat Buchanan: Sure. But you’re right, Joe, George W. Bush was a Great Society Republican. But let me ask Ron this: “Repeal and Reform” sounds like a good message to run on, and I think it’s got real credibility with the American people. There are some aspects to that bill they may like, others they may detest. But as a practical matter, the president’s got a veto pen, you’d have to have 2/3rds of both houses to override his veto. As a practical matter you can’t repeal and reform, can you?

Ron Paul: No, not under these circumstances. Maybe someday when the country goes bankrupt and we rebuild the whole society, we’re going to have to reform. But right now there is no chance of this happening. I would like to preserve and save something. You know, in this whole medical debate, they talked about the public option for a long time. I wondered why they never said, “Why can’t we preserve a private option?” To me, one of the worst things they’ve done with this bill is take away a private choice. They undermine the health savings accounts, giving a person to opt out. But they don’t want you to opt out. Matter of fact, this time they’re forcing everybody to go in and buy government mandated insurance. So they’re moving in the wrong direction. At least in education, as bad as it is, with public education and what they’ve done to it, you know, you can opt out. You could teach your kids at home and you could still go to private school. But now, in medicine, you can’t opt out. And that is why the medical care quality is going to deteriorate, and why the cost is going to escalate and eventually everybody is going to be a lot more unhappy.

Joe Scarborough: Pat Buchanan, I want to go to your point, though, about repealing this bill, or portions of it, if Republicans take control of the House of Representatives. The one thing that we knew in 1994 when we got elected is, even if the liberal Republicans in the Senate didn’t go along with this, even if Bill Clinton didn’t go along with this, you look at the Constitution and the House of Representatives has the checkbook. Nothing gets paid for unless the House of Representatives says it gets paid for. So you have a lot of programs that could be defunded by a conservative House in 2011 and 2012. Nothing passes, nothing gets done unless the House says it does. And that seems to me, Ron Paul, like an opportunity. If you ask me, “Do you want Republicans to take over the House or the Senate?” I’d’ say let them take over the House, because you can’t spend a dime unless the House says, “You can spend a dime”.

Ron Paul: That’s the way it’s supposed to be. But that’s not the way it happens. The Congress, for decades now, has given up their prerogatives to the executive branch. We’ve had Republicans who loved a strong executive. Still today the executive can go to war without a declaration, the Federal Reserve can spend $2 trillion without appropriation. The other day what did Obama do? When the Congress couldn’t do something, they’d welcomed, “Oh, write an executive order, it’s the force of law”. So the executive branch writes laws constantly, the judicial system writes laws constantly. You’re absolutely right about what the House should do. But we have strayed so far form that responsibility. The House be able to control the whole process through the purse. But they give up on it too easily. And it is astounding to me that the Congress has giving up so much of their authority and responsibilities.

Joe Scarborough: Let me ask you this, Ron, in 2006 and 2008 there were a lot of small government conservatives that helped Ronald Reagan get elected in 1980, that helped people like me get elected in 1994, that said, “Why do I want to make phone calls for the Republicans? Why do I want to knock on doors for the Republicans, because if they win, they’re not going to be conservative. Can you tell small government conservatives today in 2010 that if Republicans take control of the House next year, that they have learnt their lessons? That they’ll be any different than they were the last 8 years they controlled the House? Will it be different this time?

Ron Paul: Oh, I don’t think so, unless you get a new crop up here; you have to have different people up here. And I think the frustration that you’re expressing is the fact that the two parties are very similar, and therefore there aren’t any choices. We don’t really have a democratic process here, because if you try to do it as a third party, all the rules are biased against you. You can’t get on ballots, you can’t get in debates, you’re dismissed by the media. So we do have one party and all they fight over is power and influence. They do not fight over philosophy. So if you want that, if you want to see a change, the Republicans have to change their image. Right now they’ve gained a whole lot, not because people are convinced of the Republicans, but they are convinced that the Democrats are so bad and they actually are now worse than what they remember the Republicans to be. So we have a long way to go to straighten this mess out.

Joe Scarborough: Pat Buchanan?

Pat Buchanan: A quick question, Ron. Look, the Ron Paul, Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney agree 100% the bill shouldn’t have passed on healthcare. On foreign policy, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Ron Paul and Sarah Palin are on opposite sides completely. And each has your point of view can prevail in the Republican Party on foreign policy, or is that hopeless?

Ron Paul: No, it’s not hopeless. We’re making progress and this is where I’m excited. Not on the House floor yet. But the people’s minds are being changed. Tomorrow night I’ll be at Boise State University in Idaho, and believe me, we’ll have a large crowd and they are going to endorse the views of non-intervention, coming to our senses, we’re bankrupt, and we can’t police the world. We’re broke here in this country. Why are we spending a trillion dollars a year managing an empire that is unmanageable and only gets us into trouble? That attitude is changing. The next generation will know we have to change that policy.

Mika Brzezinski: Yeah. That’s actually Congressman Ron Paul echoing what you said at your speech at CATO last week.

Joe Scarborough: Well, there are a lot of people. And Ron Paul’s exactly right; there are a lot of people that are saying we’re bankrupt and what are we doing trying to rebuild countries a decade after we went into Afghanistan, and how much longer are we going to be there. We have got to narrow our focus, we have got to show restraint at home, we have got to show restraint abroad. And the party that does that, Ron, I think is going to start winning elections.

Mika Brzezinski: Yeah.

Ron Paul: Yep, that’s it, and we need the influence of these independent-minded people, but unfortunately they don’t have another party, so they’ll have to influence both parties.

Mika Brzezinski: He says we need a new crop. Ron Paul, thank you very much.

Joe Scarborough: Thanks, Ron.

Ron Paul: Thank you, good to be with you.

Channel: CBS News
Date: 03/03/2010

Transcript

Bob Schieffer: First, let’s go to Capitol Hill where Congressman Ron Paul is standing by. Well, it’s been a big couple of weeks for you, Congressman. Here two, three weeks ago you were chosen by CPAC as their candidate for President, now you won re-election to your congressional seat. I guess a lot of people are wondering, are you going to make another run for the presidency in 2012?

Ron Paul: Well, whenever that’s decided I’m going to tell myself. I have no idea, I don’t have any plans for it. It’s still, as far as I’m concerned, a long way off. Lots of things can happen from day to day so I haven’t made any decision.

Bob Schieffer: Let me just ask you about the situation in Texas. If I’m correct, all of the Republican candidates who were running last night for Congress who had Tea Party candidates, all of the incumbents prevailed. I think there was one runoff, where there is a Tea Party candidate still in the race. All this, you had a Tea Party candidate, all this talk we’ve been hearing about the Tea Party candidates, it didn’t seem to bear much fruit last night.

Ron Paul: Well, I think that the incumbents do have an advantage over any challenger. Yet I don’t think it diminishes the fact that a lot of people are very upset. And they’re upset with Republicans and Democrats. I think the old saying that they can get pretty upset with Congress but they still like their Congressmen because they get to know that individual. But I think it’s going to be hard to root out a lot of incumbents, but there will be more this year than usual.

Bob Schieffer: You had a Tea Party candidate in your primary. I guess I would ask you, how can someone as conservative as you are, unabashedly conservative, how could you get somebody who thought you weren’t conservative enough?

Ron Paul: I think they thought maybe because the environment, that they’re going to throw out all the incumbents and they would just see if they could get free ride, but politics requires a little bit more than that. You have to be organized, you have to have supporters, you have to have campaign, and you do have to have some money to do it. So it’s not as simple as just being upset.

Bob Schieffer: Congressman, I want to ask you about a recent hearing that you took part in. The Financial Services Committee had the Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke come before them and you asked a question that had to do with had the federal government, if I understand this correctly, funneled money through the Federal Reserve to the Watergate burglars and also to Saddam Hussein. Chairman Bernanke seemed taken back by that question. What basis did you have for asking that question?

Ron Paul: My real purpose was if it’s true, and there’s a lot of people who think it’s true, that it gives you a good reason to audit the Federal Reserve, it was still back to the transparency issue. But recently, Robert Auerbach, who worked for the Fed and worked for Henry Gonzalez, was very much involved in these investigations. And he felt like the Federal Reserve always rolled them and didn’t give them the information that they’ve asked for. But it wasn’t something like it was brand new. If anybody goes to the Internet now, a lot of my supporters did this after that question, and after Bernanke became outraged, this is the “most bizarre thing” he’s ever heard, then all of a sudden you go look at the news, it’s all over the place. It was back in there, it was a discussion. I do remember the discussion but this book, this section about the Fed by Auerbach, really goes into details and shows what was going on at the time and what the Fed actually did to prevent the people from getting this information.

Bob Schieffer: But Congressman, I mean, in all fairness, one can go to the Internet and find anything one wants to find there. There’s no guarantee that it’s true or even bears any resemblance to the truth, some of it. Did you have any basis to believe that the Fed somehow funneled money to the Watergate burglars? I mean, what would be the basis of that?

Ron Paul: Well, they facilitated it. It just goes to show that it’s a very political organization and…

Bob Schieffer: Who facilitated it? And how much?

Ron Paul: Well, I mean if you had a president like Nixon who wanted to cover up and he had to get the money and somebody could do it, why wouldn’t they be able to do this? But it was in the news, it wasn’t like it was some sinister plot or somebody having with a wild conspiracy, it was average news back then. News reports. But really, the individual that has the most credibility on this is Auerbach. He was involved in this discussion and he was involved in going to the Fed to get this information along with Gonzalez and other Fed chairman to try to get transparency of the Fed.

Bob Schieffer: But you’re not saying they found anything?

Ron Paul: No, they’re hiding the information. And this was my whole point with Bernanke. I’m not making an accusation. But isn’t it to our advantage, the Congress, the Federal Reserve, and the people, to allow us to know what’s going on so that you can settle these arguments once and or all? And that was my point, it wasn’t like, oh yes, why did you do this and the Fed this and that? I want the air to be clear.

Bob Schieffer: Don’t you feel, is it any way irresponsible to make an allegation like that?

Ron Paul: No, I think it’s irresponsible to ignore what the Fed does in secrecy. That’s where the irresponsibility is, to allow things if there’s a slightest chance, why don’t we clear the air on this? So I think the irresponsibility falls on the Congress for ignoring the Fed, no oversight, they literally create trillions of dollars, they pass it out through the discount window, they make deals with foreign banks, foreign central banks, and foreign governments?

I mean, this to me is so irresponsible and that’s why we had our financial crisis and that’s why we’re going to have a dollar crisis, is because we’re derelict in our duties. The Congress pays no attention because, and I said this in the hearings, it’s because Congress has a cozy relationship with the Fed. If the Fed didn’t exist, we couldn’t run up these deficits. They would end, because the Fed monetizes that debt. If you couldn’t monetize debt, the Congress would be limited and they would balance the budget.

Bob Schieffer: This would be our last question. What you’re saying is that what the Fed does, it does much of it in secret. You’re not saying that you have any proof that they somehow funneled money to the Watergate burglars or the other allegation you made that they funneled money to Saddam Hussein?

Ron Paul: That’s not, I don’t think that’s a secret. Matter of fact, they explain it that it came out of, the Treasury explained that it came out of a particular fund when they sold oil and what not. But my point is, it wasn’t appropriated by the Congress. No, that is no secret. I think nobody’s going to deny that $5.5 billion dollars went to Saddam Hussein when we were his friends and his buddy and of course this fits my position that it’s why we have such a disgusting foreign policy. Because one time we’re giving money to Saddam Hussein, and we help him and his war against Iran, and the next time we’re fighting Saddam Hussein. One time we’re a friend of Osama Bin Laden, and then the next time we’re his archenemy. The insanity of our foreign policy is connected with our monetary policy and the Federal Reserve facilitates it in several ways.

Bob Schieffer: All right, well thank you very much Congressman.

He said that if the GOP wants to be a major party they must return to constitutional conservative values and work on ending the wars, balancing the budget, guaranteeing civil liberties, and auditing the Fed.

Ron Paul also invited progressives who are concerned about civil liberties and warmongering to join his growing movement.

Show: Dylan Ratigan Show
Host: Dylan Ratigan
Channel: MSNBC
Date: 02/23/2010

Transcript coming soon

Show: Morning Joe
Channel: MSNBC
Date: 02/23/2010

Show: Rick’s List
Host: Rick Sanchez
Channel: CNN
Date: 01/20/2010

Transcript

Rick Sanchez: Alright, joining me now are two congressmen who’ve had some of the most colorful quotes, to say the very least, on this story so far. Republican Ron Paul of Texas, Democrat Anthony Weiner of New York. My thanks to both of you.

I’ve been trying to figure out what happened last night at Massachusetts, just like both of you have. And I’m wondering whether this really was a repudiation of Democrats and an embracing of Republicans.

Ron Paul, I want to ask you first, congressman. First of all, do you see yourself as a Republican or more as a Libertarian? I’ve never been able to figure you out.

Ron Paul: Yes. I think both. You’re allowed to be a conservative Republican, you’re allowed to be a liberal Republican, why can’t you be a libertarian? Libertarian just means you’re a constitutionalist.

Rick Sanchez: I’m not taking anything away from you. I’m just thinking that you’re in a unique position to try and define for us whether these folks in Massachusetts last night were saying, “Look, we don’t care, we don’t like either of you, and we’re tired of the same old stuff. And we’ll vote you out no matter who you are”. Or whether they were really saying, “We don’t like Barack Obama”, as the Republicans are telling us today that they are. What’s your take?

Ron Paul: Well, my take is that I’m apolitical and I think right now that’s very popular: the people that say they’re independent. I’ve never thought a whole lot of the political parties, though some of my legislation gets as much support from the Democrats as they do from the Republicans. So no, I think the issue is whether you’re right or wrong. And I happen to believe strongly in transparency and privacy and lot of liberal democrats will support me on that. And they will support me on foreign policy as well.

Rick Sanchez: What are Democrats like Anthony Weiner wrong about that cost them Massachusetts last night? What are the Democrats wrong about right now? What’s Obama wrong about?

Ron Paul: Well, I don’t know whether I’ll use the word ‘wrong’, but I think where they’re missing it is that what the people are upset about is that the government no longer can function because it fails. They’re incapable of doing this, they take on too much.

It isn’t who’s going to manage the right way or the wrong way, it’s just that’s its unmanageable. It’s sort of like directing traffic for every single person in the country. It doesn’t work. Markets work better than government.

Government bureaucrats and politicians tend to be political and they tend to mess things up and prices go up and become inefficient. So the process is wrong and I happen to believe in the marketplace; that they’re more capable. I’d like to see people at least consider delivering medical care like we deliver cell phones. Prices go down and quality goes up. But no, when the government does it, the opposite happens.

Rick Sanchez: Alright, Anthony Weiner, you heard that. That’s an interesting analysis he provided you with, giving you perhaps some information you could use as a Democrat. What’s your take?

Anthony Weiner: Well, the only problem with that is if you look at the places the government has entered, we’ve actually done, in many cases, a better job than the private sector. You ask people whether they like Medicare, 96% of people on it say they like it. It has an overhead rate of 1% compared to the private sector, which has an overhead of about 30%. And in terms of containing costs, actually we’re doing a better job on Medicare despite the fact that they’re all senior citizens.

Look, the problems the Democrats have had recently is that we’ve kind of gotten away from the things that we know work and the people like. You know, we’ve made compromises to get rid of the public option, and that would have been competition, more choice going in the direction that Congressman Paul wants to go into. We jettison that on the altar of getting 60 votes from our senators, and we forgot that the American people are pretty smart. They watch these things and they say, “What is it exactly that the Democrat healthcare plan is supposed to be about, if not something like the public option or expanding Medicare?” That, I think, is the mistake we’ve made.

You know, Congressman Paul is one of the rare, truly consistent guys in Congress, and we all respect him for that. I mean, sometimes I’m not sure he’s in touch with the mother ship on some of the things he proposes, but he’s always consistent. But in this case he just happens to have it wrong.

Rick Sanchez: Go head, Congressman Paul.

Ron Paul: On the Medicare: Yes, some people are satisfied with Medicare. But what he failed to say is that it’s bankrupt. The end stages are there, you just can’t whack away like they propose taking away some of the Medicare benefits. Take the housing, you can say public housing is great; everybody gets a wonderful house, we made interest rates low, we give them no down payments, and everybody is happy, until they lose their house and we bail out Wall Street and big banks. So it’s a failed system.

Rick Sanchez: Congressman Paul, you don’t want government in anything?

Ron Paul: Yeah, I do. I want them to play an important role. They should be enforcing contracts. We’re in charge at the federal level on bankruptcy, for instance. We bail them with the money from the people that were successful. So we have everything turned upside down.

Rick Sanchez: That’s a good point, sir. Anyway, Anthony Weiner, how do you argue with the fact that maybe we try and manage too much, which is his principled point?

Anthony Weiner: Well, perhaps that’s right. But I got to tell you, the schizophrenia of our Republican friends when it comes to Medicare… they believe it’s terrible to have government run healthcare, except for this healthcare plan, which covers about 45% of the American population. They don’t like healthcare, but when you try to mix it to get some waste out of Medicare, they scream.

Look, the fact of the matter is you can’t just simply say, “Government is good or bad.” There are some things we do well, some things we don’t do as well. But healthcare is a case that we know the free market is never going to be able to solve every the problem, because they’re never going to cover sick people.

Rick Sanchez: We’re going to have to leave it there, gentlemen. Congressman Ron Paul, Congressman Anthony Weiner. You guys are great.

Ron Paul: Up until 1965 they did.

Rick Sanchez: Thank you both. There you go. That’s Ron Paul, getting a last shot in. We appreciate both of you.

Show: The Rachel Maddow Show
Channel: MSNBC
Date: 1/6/2009

Transcript

Rachel Maddow: There’s Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, whose daily schedule now consists of waking up, eating breakfast, and then getting censured by his own state party. After already getting censured by the Charleston County Republican Party back in November, Mr. Graham has now been censured officially by the Lexington County Republican Party this week. They voted to censure Mr. Graham for his work on Cap and Trade legislation. The official resolution reads in part,

“U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham has repeatedly demonstrated contempt and belligerence towards those members of the Republican Party who support freedom, a constitutional government, and the Republican Party platform.”

For his part, Lindsey Graham is not taking this censure sitting down. He knows who’s responsible, saying,

“You have these Ron Paul guys show up and try to take over the party. They are not reflective of the Republican Party, and I hope this serves as a wakeup call to Republicans that they need to get involved.”

Mr. Graham there referring to the author of the censure resolution against him in Lexington County, a man named Talbert Black, who is the interim South Carolina state director for Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty.

Joining us now is Republican Congressman Ron Paul of Texas. Congressman Paul, thanks very much for coming back on the show, it’s nice to see you.

Ron Paul: Thank you, Rachel. Nice to be with you.

Rachel Maddow: I have to ask your reaction to Senator Lindsey Graham saying, “Ron Paul guys are not reflective of the Republican Party.” What do you think?

Ron Paul: Well, in a way that might be good. The Republican Party isn’t exactly the top party in the country right now. But I think Lindsey is giving me way too much credit. But if he wants to give me a lot of credit that I now control the Republican Party in South Carolina, I consider that rather amazing.

But no, I don’t think you can talk about the tea party as a party. It’s made up of a lot of different people and I don’t even see them as being Republicans. I think they’re unhappy; they’re unhappy with the establishment party, and that’s made up of the Republicans and the Democrats. I mean, think of the factions in the Democratic Party. The base of the Democratic Party that would have liked to see a change in foreign policy and less war, not expanding the war in Afghanistan, they’re disgruntled. Some anti-war people do come to some of the tea parties; at least the tea party types that I have. You know, the original tea party was held in the campaign; we had a lot of anti-war people there.

So, in many ways the people are speaking out. They’re very, very angry and upset. They’re upset with the establishment; they’re upset with the Republicans and the Democrats. But I think this is a natural consequence of the insolvency of the country. That’s really the basic problem. The politicians are used to promising and just passing out favors, taking care of the military-industrial complex, or any domestic need at home, and not have to live up to the responsibility of paying for it. And it’s coming to an end.

So we’re facing a bankruptcy, and that’s why I think you’re seeing this anger and hostility and this fighting and bickering. But I do not think the real fight is between Republicans and Democrats. I see the establishment Republican and the establishment Democrat as being one because the foreign policies don’t differ, and the monetary policy doesn’t differ. And you put Republicans in office to balance the budget and promote personal liberty, and they don’t do any of that. You put the Democrats in to protect civil liberties and wind down the war and not have any secret rendition. Things don’t change. And the American people are just catching on.

Rachel Maddow: Congressman Paul, I think that you’re right that there is a bit of an insurgency happening on both sides. But it seems to be manifesting differently in the two parties. The base seems unhappy and a lot of people unaffiliated with either party seem unhappy with both parties right now. But on the Republican side, that’s translating into censures at the county party level for sitting senators. It’s translating into primary fights in places like Florida, upstate New York and other places. As somebody who’s run for president, both as a Libertarian and as a Republican, do you thing the fights within the right right now are a danger to the Republican Party’s future strength? Or do you think it’s going to ultimately make the Republican Party stronger?

Ron Paul: It all depends. I thing in some areas with the right candidates it will help. But, quite frankly, I don’t think about the strength of parties. I don’t worry about these strength or the weakness of the Democratic Party. I don’t thing about the strength or the weakness of the Republican Party. All I thing about is trying to get people to accept certain ideas, and these ideas permeate both parties.

You know, we had a Keynesian revolution in economics where everybody is a Keynesian. We had Woodrow Wilson make the world safe with democracy. He was the first neocon. We’ve been living with that. So that’s the only thing that counts. This fighting; I’m sorry I can’t enter into these really partisan fights, but really the fight is more philosophic. And I think this is a distraction. Sometimes I think it’s deliberate. Because, you know, when these races come up: Obama versus McCain – a big difference. And they both run off and vote for Bush’s bailout. And the people are catching on to this.

So as frustrated as you might get or think how poorly the tea party people act, they get frustrated, they act out and sometimes they act too angrily, and it doesn’t come off well. And the answer to your question is, if they keep doing that, yeah it might not necessarily build the party, but the important thing is we change the ideas in this country that we have sound money, balanced budget, live within our means, take care of ourselves, and protect civil liberties.

If we don’t think that way, and we narrow it down to this contest between one candidate against the other one, we won’t really see any changes because the party leaderships all supporting the same issue, this country will continue down the road of bankruptcy. And then the big revolution will come. I mean, when a dollar crisis comes because we can’t afford this, then we will have major social and political changes and we’re on the verge of this. Within several years I can conceive of this coming, and we ought to be aware of this and this partisan bickering about candidates one versus the other; I think that’s a side show.

Rachel Maddow: In terms of people who have legitimate, I think, grassroots ideologically driven followings on the American right (very broadly defined) I really think that’s it’s you, and I think that it’s Dick Cheney. And the former vice president Dick Cheney has really made a name for himself being declared Conservative of the Year by one publication at the end of the year, on national security and foreign policy issues and issues of war making. You, obviously, have been a leader on issues of fiscal policy, you’ve really brought a lot of your party’s leadership and your rank and file around on fiscal issues.

Do you think there is a coming battle between fiscal conservatism and foreign policy perspective that Dick Cheney represents, in terms of what the future is going to be of the Republican Party, the conservative movement? Which direction things are going to go? Are you guys at loggerheads?

Ron Paul: Oh, I think so, not personally. Because I have never had a discussion with him. But I go to the campuses. I think all revolutions, all significant changes occur with young people. And I go to the campuses. Liberal or conservative, I can get large crowds out, and the foreign policy issue is the very big issue. The money issue is a very big issue, and that’s a popular issue because if you’re for the Federal Reserve and all the shenanigans, you’re for big banks and big businesses and the military-industrial complex and the deficit.

But the young people aren’t for these things. They want personal liberty, they want to change foreign policy, and they want to look into the Fed’s secrecy. And if the Republicans don’t catch on to that, they can’t build their party. And they’re not interested. I mean, Lindsey Graham, I have to give him credit. He’s rather typical of most Republican establishment. They don’t want to have any part of what I am doing, because they don’t want an answer to that, because they don’t want to have to go to the campuses and explain why we have to have more kids go overseas, or why we might need a draft and why military spending is okay, but spending money on child healthcare, that’s bad, and we have to stop that.

The kids see this, young people, and they’re inheriting this mess. And that’s where I get excited and enthusiastic when I go to the campuses. Because, believe me, the young people are responding very favorably to this message.

Rachel Maddow: Republican Congressman Ron Paul of Texas, consistently one of the most intriguing and interesting and unique people in American politics. It’s always a pleasure to talk with you, sir. Thanks for your time.