On Saturday evening ABC presented a GOP debate live from Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa. The debate was sponsored by ABC News, Yahoo! News, WOI-TV, the Des Moines Register and the Republican Party of Iowa. This was the first debate held since Herman Cain ended his 2012 run leaving just 6 candidates on stage to field questions. Jon Huntsman did not meet the polling requirements set forth by ABC to participate in this debate.
Here is the entire 1 hour and 30 minute debate video via YouTube:
(Video fixed)
You can also view the full video directly from ABC News available here.
Original Air Time: Saturday, December 10 at 9pm ET / 8pm CT / 6pm PT on ABC
Participants: Romney, Perry, Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum, Paul
Report from ABC News:
With the Iowa caucuses looming, six Republican presidential candidates clashed tonight over their conservative credentials and personal histories in a Des Moines debate that saw resurgent frontrunner Newt Gingrich battling attacks by his rivals from all sides.
But it was Mitt Romney who stole the spotlight for a $10,000 bet with Texas Gov. Rick Perry over what he wrote about the individual health insurance mandate — then removed — in subsequent editions of his book, "No Apologies."
"I read your first book and it said in there that your mandate in Massachusetts should be the model for the country. And I know it came out of the reprint of the book," Perry said. "But, you know, I'm just sayin', you were for individual mandates, my friend."
Romney disputed the claim, challenging Perry to a $10,000 bet over who was right.
"I have not said, in that book, first edition or the latest edition, anything about our plan being a national model imposed on the nation," Romney said.
"I'm not in the betting business, but I'll show you the book," Perry replied.
In the first version of Romney's book, a line referring to a universal health care mandate reads: "We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country, and it can be done without letting government take over health care."
In the later paperback version, the line was changed to: "And it was done without the government taking over health care."
I think each candidate performed well with, perhaps, the exception of Mitt Romney who was knocked a little off his game. Santorum, Paul, Bachmann and Perry all came off quite strong in this make-or-break debate. Newt Gingrich seemed to get by fairly unscathed as he was mostly able to explain away or dispute any lines of attack. I say "mostly" because I think some may have brought him down a peg.
This could open the Iowa field and give Santorum, Paul, Bachmann or Perry a chance to improve in the caucus polls and maybe pull out a win. Iowa can be unpredictable and the ground game efforts of Santorum, Paul and Bachmann, most notably, can't be underestimated despite the "front runner" status of Ginrich and/or Romney.
Overall a good debate, quite informative, substantive and entertaining.
Auto-Generated Tags:
- abc debate video
- watch abc debate
- abc gop debate video
- abc presidential debate video
- iowa presidential debate video
- iowa gop debate video
- abc iowa debate video
- abc republican debate 2012
- abc iowa gop debate
- abc news debate video
- abc presidential debate 2012
- watch republican debate december 10
Thanks for the website, I otherwise would not be able to see any of these debates!
Everything you people are saying about Ron Paul sounds beautiful! But we live in a different world now.. Paul wants to just leave everyone alone while nuclear weapons are being produced and planes fly into buildings. His hands off \ mind our own business approach is extreme when we have so many issues going on right now.. We need a Balanced and firm approach to resolve the issues we face in this complicated world. I believe we need Newts experience and intellect to get that done!
Disney does not want this debate re-viewed freely.
It was reported that the "ratings" of the debate was the highest of all the debates so far. An astonishing 7 million views across the country.
Out of 300+ million people in America, only 7 million viewers is actually microscopic.
Even the comments on this website is by the same, small number of people.
Realistically - no one cares about politics. They know it's all a sham.
And without Ron Paul, that number would be even less.
The typical "voter" as exemplified here by posters "Michael" and "B Anderson" would much rather live in a failed economy as long as they get a leader who appears strong.
These voters are the typical scared little kids who need a strong "father figure" in the house - even if he's a drunk abuser.
These voters cannot stand living in a healthy household with a "frail" father figure. (Ron Paul)
These voters have been abused and are acclimated to the abuse to the point to where they cannot understand a society or economy that is healthy. They join the abuser mindset.
Ron Paul is too independent for their psyches to handle. They would rather a Romney/Newt/Obama who exemplify the strong father leader who makes "everything (appear) okay" by shoveling more sh*t under the rug.
It's all perception as usual.
The independent intellects perceive Ron Paul to be a good leader.
The dependent children perceive Romney/Newt to be a good leader.
James! What a GREAT POST! Probably a "Best Of". Kudos to you!
By the way, at the beginning paragraph of the page it says "Jon Huntsman was unable to attend due to ABC's polling requirements"
Looks like Disney is not only able to remove the debate from millions of viewers, but they can actually prevent candidates from attending altogether.
The "illusion of choice" that George Carlin pointed out.
When it comes to ice cream and candy - The People get 250 flavors to choose from.
But when it comes to politics.. The People are not allowed to see/hear/speak of Jon Huntsman.
Nor are The People allowed more than 2 political parties.
Nor are The People allowed free-markets.
Land of the Cartels
Home of the Enslaved
James… You shave issues
Michael - this is what I'm talking about. I raise key points about not only politics, but the psychology of it as well. You respond with only a "You have issues". And you make a typo at that. Haste makes Waste mike.
The key to debating (like everything in life) is patience and understanding. Your response clearly contained neither.
But that's my point - you would rather have a President with debate lines such as your own.
Example (for the sake of humor):
Ron Paul: "The American Economy cannot be fixed by Keynesian economics. Only Free-Markets allow an economy to work efficiently"
Newt Gingrich: "RonPaul… You have issues"
That's an unwillingness to debate, or even discuss which sides have the right or wrong issues and opinions or facts why. How did I know my post would bring out your true colors? Because I understand human psychology and you're an easy example. Now you can keep your out-dated mindset or you can try to work towards gaining an understanding of why your colors show easily, and why I can get you to show them.
I have props for Rick Perry for doing just this. Instead of insulting Ron Paul, like you have me, Rick Perry now publically thanks and embraces Ron Paul's "END THE FED" motto of economics. He stated it in this video (that Disney removed) It took Rick Perry years of attempting to gain this understanding, and he probably only got it from upset voters. Maybe that's the only way you will get it. When the food riots come to your home. =(
James
I agree that most voters will not wake up until there's a catastrophic economic event or a crisis of some sort. You hit the nail on the head. I wouldn't put it past Obuma to stage something to get himself "appointed" to another term. Just kidding…
Off Topic….have you seen the Video Alex Jones put out interviewing the Demon of Jon Corzine of MF Global? Hilarious!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0HVLMioqKs
Too bad Disney doesn't own the copyright to that Alex Jones video or they would remove it as well.
Sorry Disney - there is still a middle class that produce & consume our own information, entertainment, food, products, etc.
I am still watching this debate video again. I never closed my browser and the video is still loaded (Whoops, sorry Disney.. I can still watch it!) Somebody better call the police - because I am a citizen able to re-view the GOP Presidential Debates myself without Disney's ABC confounding my judgment by only airing Mitt Romney's $10,000 bet.
Who pulls out a $10,000 bet at a Presidential Debate? It's fun & games to the candidates like Mitt Romney and Rick Perry. There's a part in the video where the Host asks the candidates how they could possibly understand middle-street and low-street Americans when the candidates were all born into Wealth?
Good question! How is Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich going to understand a broken Economy when they got much of their wealth because of riding the (insider knowledge?) booms of the poisonous inflationary bubbles introduced into the Economy by the Government's Keynesian Economical Mal-Practice.
The real question everyone must answer to ourselves: How do we fix The Great Recession of the Economy that was caused by Keynesian Economics of The Federal Reserve? Do we keep spending? Cut Spending? Print Money & try to balance The Market's business cycle (growths and recessions) ourselves? Or do we let the Free-Market handle it? Which Federal Regulations harm the economy VS which ones help prevent Monopolies? How to minimize corruption in Washington DC? How to illegalize Corporate Lobbying? How to return the Freedom of Independence of both the Economy and Foreign Policy to the Individual and not some distant "central government" that is the universal link between The Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and Fascist America"?
I support Ron Paul
Ron Paul is a man of conviction with the guts to speak out and stand up for the protection of our civil liberties under the Constitution. He is highly educated, a military veteran, charitable, moral, honorable, experienced and knowledgeable in government, intelligent and well-informed about the policies he either supports or condemns as unconstitutional, harmful, government policies. He is a loyal Husband, married to his wife Carol Wells since 1957. A committed pro-life Christian who will not legislate in order to favor or impose his personal Christian religious beliefs on the people because it is unconstitutional. A Medical Doctor who refused to take Medicaid or Medicare but instead treated needy patients for free or low fees. Experienced in business operating a medical practice since 1968. Author of numerous articles and books about the economy. Congressman for 12-2yr. terms in the House of Representatives who still returned to his practice on Mondays and Saturdays. He turned down his Congressional pension that he would be entitled to in order to avoid receiving government money, saying it would be "hypocritical and immoral. and also declined to attend junkets. He believes in and proposed term-limit legislation multiple times. A Republican, Conservative, Constitutionalist, Libertarian and a man who has lived his life, worked and legislated staying true to his convictions.
As a Constitutionalist he has "never voted for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution" and as such doggedly represents the interests, welfare, civil rights and liberty of the people, not the state or lobbyist beneficiaries of the state.
Economics: Ron Paul alone diagnosed the cause of America's economic problem, then he raised the peoples consciousness and blew the whistle on the Federal Reserve as the chief culprit behind the economic crisis. He is the only candidate to seek an Audit of the Fed which revealed 14 Trillion dollars in secret loans. He continues to press for a full audit and currently is the only candidate who predicted and warned against the economic crisis, who understood and explained the reasons for it, and who offers a viable solution. "Auditing the Fed is only the first step towards exposing this antiquated insider-run creature to the powerful forces of free-market competition. Once there are viable alternatives to the monopolistic fiat dollar, the Federal Reserve will have to become honest and transparent if it wants to remain in business" Representative of Texas's 14th congressional district he serves on the House Committees on Foreign Affairs and Financial Services, and on the Joint Economic Committee.
He is the chairman of the Financial Services Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology
and he is the only candidate who is serious about slashing spending. He consistently advocates for smaller government, lower taxes, fair trade and eliminating unnecessary bureaucracies. Paul argued against the $700 billion bailout proposal during the economic crisis of 2008. His vote was among the majority of "nay" votes cast to defeat the initial measure in the U.S. House of Representatives. The House passed a "sweetened" version of the bill, against which Paul voted a second time, later in the week.
International organizations: Ron Paul advocates withdrawing U.S. participation and funding from organizations he believes override American sovereignty, such as the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, the Law of the Sea Treaty, NATO, and the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.
The World Trade Organization: Paul states that the WTO is a barrier to free trade and Tariffs are taxes that penalize those who buy foreign goods. If taxes are low on imported goods, consumers benefit by being able to buy at the best price, thus saving money to buy additional goods and raise their standard of living.
International trade: Ron Paul is a proponent of free trade and rejects protectionism, advocating "conducting open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations". He opposes many free trade agreements, like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), stating that "free-trade agreements are really managed trade" and serve special interests and big business, [corporations] not citizens. He voted against the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), holding that it increased the size of government, eroded U.S. sovereignty, and was unconstitutional. He has also voted against the Australia–U.S. FTA, the U.S.–Singapore FTA, and the U.S.–Chile FTA, and voted to withdraw from the WTO. He believes that "fast track" powers, given by Congress to the President to devise and negotiate FTAs on the country's behalf, are unconstitutional, and that Congress, rather than the executive branch, should construct FTAs.
Borders and immigration: Ron Paul considers it a "boondoggle" for the U.S. to spend much money policing other countries' borders (such as the Iraq–Syria border) while leaving its own borders porous and unpatrolled; he argues the U.S.–Mexico border can be crossed by anyone, including potential terrorists. During the Cold War, he supported Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, intended to replace the "strategic offense" doctrine of mutual assured destruction with strategic defense. He believes illegal aliens take a toll on welfare and Social Security and would end such benefits, concerned that uncontrolled immigration makes the U.S. a magnet for illegal aliens, increases welfare payments, and exacerbates the strain on an already highly unbalanced federal budget. Ron Paul believes that illegal immigrants should not be given an "unfair advantage" under law. He has advocated for a "coherent immigration policy", and has spoken strongly against amnesty for illegal aliens because he believes it undermines the rule of law, grants pardons to lawbreakers, and subsidizes more illegal immigration. Paul voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, authorizing an additional 700 miles (1100 kilometers) of double-layered fencing between the U.S. and Mexico mainly because he wanted enforcement of the law and opposed amnesty not because he supported the construction of a border fence. He believes that mandated hospital emergency treatment for illegal aliens should be ceased and that assistance from charities should instead be sought because there should be no federal mandates on providing health care for illegal aliens. Paul also believes children born in the U.S. to illegal aliens should not be granted automatic birthright citizenship. He has called for a new Constitutional amendment to revise fourteenth amendment principles and "end automatic birthright citizenship", and believes that welfare issues are directly tied to the illegal immigration problem.
Foreign Policy: Ron Paul is the only candidate who really means it when he says he wants to bring our troops home and scale down our unsustainable and unreasonable empire. His stance on foreign policy is one of consistent non-intervention, opposing wars of aggression, covert activities and entangling alliances with other nations.
He advocates bringing troops home from U.S. military bases in Korea, Japan, and Europe, among others. He also proposes that the U.S. stop sending what he deems massive, unaccountable foreign aid.
In an October 11, 2007 interview with The Washington Post, Ron Paul said, "There's nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today… we could defend this country with a few good submarines. If anybody dared touch us we could wipe any country off of the face of the earth within hours. And here we are, so intimidated and so insecure and we're acting like such bullies that we have to attack third-world nations that have no military and have no weapons.
Ron Paul has the b***s, determination and weapons to protect our country if he needs to!
Terrorism: Letters of marque and reprisal
Calling the September 11, 2001, attacks an act of "air piracy", Ron Paul introduced the Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001. Letters of marque and reprisal, authorized by article I, section 8 of the Constitution, would have targeted specific terrorist suspects instead of invoking war against a foreign state. Paul reintroduced this legislation as the Marque and Reprisal Act of 2007. He voted with the majority for the original Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists in Afghanistan. In April 2009, following the Maersk Alabama hijacking, he proposed issuing letters of marque to combat the problem of piracy in Somalia.
Ron Paul has enough commonsense and knowledge to use the correct legal process to go after terrorists.
Iran: Ron Paul rejects the "dangerous military confrontation approaching with Iran and supported by many in leadership on both sides of the aisle". He claims the current circumstances with Iran mirror those under which the Iraq War began, and has urged Congress not to authorize war with Iran. In the U.S. House of Representatives, only Paul and Dennis Kucinich voted against the Rothman-Kirk Resolution, which asks the United Nations to charge Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with violating its genocide convention and charter.
Ron Paul intelligently advocates to let the U.N. do the job we are paying it to do.
Israel: Ron Paul argues that if the United States cares about Israel, the U.S. should allow them to be more independent. He states that "the surrounding Arab nations get seven times as much aid as Israel gets and also a recent study came out that showed that for every dollar you give to an Arab nation it prompts Israel to spend 1.4 dollars." Paul would not stop Israel from defending its interests in any way it saw fit.
Habeas corpus: In the first Republican debate (2007) in California, Paul stated that he would never violate habeas corpus, through which detainees can seek relief from unlawful imprisonment. This is also a pledge in the American Freedom Agenda signed by Paul.
Internet: He believes the internet should be free from government regulation and taxation, and is opposed to internet gambling restrictions and network neutrality.
Prayer: Paul believes that prayer in public schools should not be prohibited at the federal or state level, nor should it be made compulsory to engage in.
Airport security: Following the 9/11 attacks, Paul "opposed the federalization of airport security, the creation of the DHS and increased police state measures, but did propose legislation that would allow airline pilots to begin carrying firearms in cockpits", on the theory that "it's much harder for terrorists to commandeer an airplane when pilots can fight back.
Gun Rights: The only 2008 presidential candidate to earn Gun Owners of America's A+ rating, Paul has been a lead sponsor of legislation in Congress attempting to maintain individual Second Amendment rights. He has also fought for the right of pilots to be armed.
PATRIOT Act: Paul broke with his party by voting against the PATRIOT Act in 2001; he also voted against its 2005 enactment. He has said, "Everything we have done in response to the 9-11 attacks, from the Patriot Act to the war in Iraq, has reduced freedom in America." He has spoken against federal use of what he defines as torture and what he sees as an abuse of executive authority during the Iraq War to override Constitutional rights.
REAL ID Act: Paul voted against the REAL ID Act of 2005, an Act to create federal identification-card standards, which has been challenged as violating the Constitutional separation of powers doctrine, and other civil liberties.
Domestic surveillance: Paul has spoken against the domestic surveillance program conducted by the National Security Agency on American citizens. He believes the role of government is to protect American citizens' privacy, not violate it. He has signed the American Freedom Agenda pledge not to violate Americans' rights through domestic wiretapping and to renounce autonomous presidential signing statements, which rely on unitary executive theory. In December 2007, he stated his opposition to the US House Resolution 1955, arguing that it "focuses the weight of the US government inward toward its own citizens under the guise of protecting us against violent radicalization."
Conscription: Ron Paul is strongly opposed to reintroducing the draft. In 2002, he authored and introduced a resolution in the U.S. House of Representatives expressing that reinstatement of a draft would be unnecessary and detrimental to individual liberties, a resolution that was endorsed by the American Civil Liberties Union. In the 110th Congress, he has proposed a bill which would end Selective Service registration.
Eminent domain: Paul opposes eminent domain. He wishes to "stop special interests from violating property rights and literally driving families from their homes, farms and ranches". He opposes "regulatory takings … Governments deprive property owners of significant value and use of their properties—all without paying 'just compensation'".
Social Security: Ron Paul will protect Social Security for those who depend on it. He has given 12 updates on his Texas Straight Talk archive on the issue of Social Security. Paul says that Social Security is in "bad shape … The numbers aren't there"; funds are depleting because Congress borrows from the Social Security fund every year to fund its budget. He considers himself the rare member of Congress who has voted for such little spending that it has never required borrowing from existing Social Security funds. To stem the Social Security crisis and meet the commitment to elderly citizens who depend on it, he requires that Congress cut down on spending, reassess monetary and spending policies, and stop borrowing heavily from foreign investors, such as those in China, who hold U.S. Treasury bonds. Paul believes young Americans should be able to opt out of the system if they would not like to pay Social Security taxes, in order to protect the system.
Affirmative action: In 1997, Ron Paul voted to end affirmative action in college admissions. Paul criticizes both racism and obsession with racial identity: Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans strictly as members of groups rather than individuals. Racists believe that all individuals who share superficial physical characteristics are alike: as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their obsession with racial group identity is inherently racist.
Prostitution: In a South Carolina Republican Presidential Candidate debate in May 2011, Paul affirmed his belief that the Constitution grants American citizens the right to do "controversial things" as long as they do not hurt or defame other people and that the federal government should not infringe on those right.
Same-sex unions: Ron Paul opposes all federal efforts to define marriage, whether defined as a union between one man and one woman, or defined as including anything else as well. He believes that recognizing or legislating marriages should be left to the states, and not subjected to "judicial activism". He has stated that he supported the right of gay couples to marry, so long as they didn't "impose" their relationship on anyone else, on the grounds of supporting voluntary associations.
Drug prohibition: Ron Paul contends that prohibition of drugs is ineffective and advocates ending the War on Drugs. "Prohibition doesn't work. Prohibition causes crime." He believes that drug abuse should be treated as a medical problem, "We treat alcoholism now as a medical problem and I, as a physician, think we should treat drug addiction as a medical problem and not as a crime." The Constitution does not enumerate or delegate to Congress the authority to ban or regulate drugs in general. "Speaking specifically about Drug Enforcement Administration raids on medical marijuana clinics Paul said, "They're unconstitutional", and went on to advocate states' rights and personal choice: "You're not being compassionate by taking medical marijuana from someone who's suffering from cancer or AIDS … People should have freedom of choice. We certainly should respect the law and the law says that states should be able to determine this".
Ron Paul favors the right to use marijuana as a medical option. He was cosponsor of H.R. 2592, the States' Rights to Medical Marijuana Act. He is currently a supporter of the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults Act of 2008. Paul has joined prominent Progressive Democrats in urging that states be allowed to permit farmers to grow industrial hemp, which currently is defined as a controlled substance. He contends that this would help North Dakota and other agriculture states, where farmers have requested the ability to farm hemp for years.
States' rights: Ron Paul's positions on civil liberties are often based on states' rights, certain rights and political powers that U.S. states possess in relation to the federal government. He comments on the Tenth Amendment, "States' rights simply means the individual states should retain authority over all matters not expressly delegated to the federal government in Article I of the Constitution." For instance, the lack of federal murder statutes makes murder a state and local offense.
Education: Ron Paul has asserted that he does not think there should be any federal control over education and education should be handled at a local and state level. He opposes the federal No Child Left Behind Act, voting against it in 2001 and remaining opposed to it as an ineffective federal program. Paul has proposed the use of education tax credits, included in his bill the Family Education Freedom Act (H.R. 612), which provides a $3,000 tax credit to families to choose their own schools. He has also introduced the Education Improvement Tax Cut Act, which would provide for a tax credit for up to a $3,000 donation to the public or private school of the taxpayer's choice, which would provide accountability and more money to America's schools from a local level. Paul has also proposed tax credits of $5,000 per year for each family, which could be used for any school-related expenses, whether the children of the family attend public or private school or are home-schooled.
Health policy: Ron Paul has called for passage of tax relief bills to reduce health care costs for families: He would support a tax credit for senior citizens who need to pay for costly prescription drugs. He would also allow them to import drugs from other countries at lower prices. He has called for health savings accounts that allow for tax-free savings to be used to pay for prescriptions.
H.R. 3075 allows families to claim a dollar-for-dollar tax credit for health insurance premiums.
H.R. 3076 provides a dollar-for-dollar tax credit that permits consumers to purchase "negative outcomes" insurance prior to undergoing surgery or other serious medical treatments. Negative outcomes insurance is a novel approach that guarantees those harmed receive fair compensation, while reducing the burden of costly malpractice litigation on the health care system. Patients receive this insurance payout without having to endure lengthy lawsuits, and without having to give away a large portion of their award to a trial lawyer. This also drastically reduces the costs imposed on physicians and hospitals by malpractice litigation. Under HR 3076, individuals who pay taxes can purchase negative outcomes insurance at essentially no cost.
H.R. 3077 creates a $500 per child tax credit for medical expenses and prescription drugs that are not reimbursed by insurance. It also creates a $3,000 tax credit for dependent children with terminal illnesses, cancer, or disabilities.
H.R. 3078 waives the employee portion of Social Security payroll taxes (or self-employment taxes) for individuals with documented serious illnesses or cancer. It also suspends Social Security taxes for primary caregivers with a sick spouse or child.
Paul voted for the Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act, which would allow the government to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies to get the best price for drugs provided in the Medicare Part D prescription drug program.
Paul rejects universal health care, believing that the more government interferes in medicine, the higher prices rise and the less efficient care becomes. He points to how many people today are upset with the HMO system, but few people realize that HMOs came about because of a federal mandate in 1973. He also points to the 1974 ERISA law that grants tax benefits to employers for providing insurance but not individuals; he prefers a system which grants tax credits to individuals. He supports the U.S. converting to a free market health care system, saying in an interview on New Hampshire NPR that the present system is akin to a "corporatist-fascist" system which keeps prices high. He says that in industries with freer markets prices go down due to technological innovation, but because of the corporatist system, this is prevented from happening in health care. He opposes socialized health care promoted by Democrats as being harmful because they lead to bigger and less efficient government.
Paul has said that although he prefers tax credits to socialized medicine, he would be willing to "prop up" the current systems of Medicare and Medicaid with money saved by bringing troops home from foreign bases in places such as those in South Korea.
He opposes government regulation of vitamins and minerals, observing that the Codex Alimentarius proposal would even require a prescription for basic vitamins.
The Constitution is Ron Paul's divining rod and he adheres to it more than any other candidate. The proper order for governmental authority he gave is; individual, community, state, federal, and last global….if at all. The Constitution is the American people's only protection, Ron Paul knows it and he want's us to know it and recognize, that we are participating in the end of our country if we continue to permit it's circumvention for personal agenda's. There is only one Ron Paul he is campaigning for America and us and there is only one candidate who can beat Obama this is why I and millions of Liberty loving individuals support Ron Paul and only Ron Paul's nomination as the Republican Party nominee and President of The United States.
Ron Paul 2012 America
You tube no longer has this video uploaded. Is there another link somewhere? Help!
The link above does not seem to be working. Stupid Disney. I can't watch it on the ABC website because I'm not presently in the US and they restrict all of the videos to US viewers only. Any other suggestions for how to watch the latest debate?
Thanks
James,
What's the point in debating with you? I stated my opinion and I'm sorry you don't agree.. It's obvious you're goal is to be rude and push Ron Paul on everyone. Sorry, I'm just not sold on the guy and don't have any interest in debating with closed minded nut jobs such as yourself. I've watched every debate and Paul is just not that impressive, especially in the Thanksgiving forum. Honestly, this is the most I've ever paid attention to the debates and it was because of Ron Paul at first. I really wanted to like him but he's too extreme and obviously not the guy. Newt's past does scare me and was at the bottom of my list when the debates started but I'm listening to what he has to say and so far he makes the most sense. He has a more logical approach when it comes to the issues we face today.. State your opinion and move on! You're probably a conspiracy theorist who thinks 911 was an inside job and like I said before, people like you are a waste of time to talk to.
Michael
I have friends and family, like you, who say the same things you do about Ron Paul. They are Gingrich supporters, but very luke-warm toward him. All I can tell you is what I tell them. Just give it some time. You'll eventually see that Ron Paul is the only one "Qualified" to be President. When they think about it from the "Qualification Standpoint", they wind up saying to me that they are "warming up" to Ron Paul because it's True.
All it takes is a little research, watching some speeches/youtube videos, watching debates and reading Ron's website to discover that the "Establishment" Democrats and Republicans are ALL the SAME. Ron Paul has distinguished himself as the only Candidate who stands out from these Politicians and WILL NOT FOLLOW "The Party", but he will follow the Constitution.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PDsooQs9uY
Awkward echo, but it has the entire debate.
Darryl,
Excellent response! Like I said he had my attention at the beginning and lost it. I'll take your advise and continue to pay attention to him.
[...] his campaign), but he's earned the gratitude of Newt Gingrich. Instead of the stories from the Saturday debate analyzing the attacks on Newt over his infidelity to his wives and conservative philosophy, the [...]
Hey, do you remember Newt saying that nobody should be involved with Fannie and Freddie? Do you recall Newt saying the politicians should be sought after before the corrupt Corporations? Do you recall Newt supposedly advising Fannie and Freddie and he quoted saying they didn't even take his advise. They paid him all that money to not accept his advise, Please! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out he is clearly lying. He is a hypocrite. These are quotes he said and facts. After he left the House how convenient of him to get $30,000 a month to advise. If you are that gullible… Newt is full of himself and lies. You say who cares about lobbying and advising? We pay politicians to do the right thing and in our best interest. We are talking about the housing industry not some light weight issue. He said he can't disclose any further information he was sworn into a confidentiality with Fannie and Freddie, oh interesting? Mr. $1.6 million ADVISOR!!? I'm sticking with Paul, he is not extreme!! Just because he is a Constitutionalist and follows rules and regulations. Our government is lacking guidelines, dude. Our founding fathers would be smacking us upside our heads right about now. You have the audacity to ridicule me, this country needs change, not the same old same liars. We do need to audit this Fed. Do you know the repercussions to just print more money? Look at all the predictions Paul has made, unfortunately the housing bubble the corrupt Fed happened,is happening.
So you can stand behind a fraud just like Obama, I'll stand behind the extremist. I know it won't be easy for him, but at least he has a strong record of consistency including trying to audit the bogus Fed.
[...] the Iowa Republican Debate debate Perry said “I read your first book, and it said in there that your mandate in [...]
The Federal Reserve directs the printing of our currency and charges interest on it as soon as it distributes it. Paying back the original amount doesn't pay it back. To pay it back, the Fed has to print more money and lend it out. Hence the cycle endlessly repeats. This is the biggest and longest running Ponzi scheme of all time!! Ron Paul wrote a bill to abolish the Fed, unfortunately it got ZERO support in Congress. Then he wrote a bill the audit the Fed that garnered much support but then it got watered down as people were pressured by bankers, the Fed, and Obama as it passed hands. It's at about it's 3rd try now. Hopefully it will get passed. However, this cannot stop there. The Federal Reserve must be abolished and no other form of it must be resurrected. All the other issues need to take a back seat because this has been brewing since 1913 and this bubble is about to burst. All the other issues of foreign policy, job creation, individual liberties, etc. are all tied in to this bubble. America needs to wake up and pay attention to what the Dr. is telling them! He's been around long enough to see how this country's changed, while the rest were probably still in their diapers!
The United States of America was established after the oppressed and over-taxed English colonist's had enough, sent a letter to King George in England announcing a Declaration of Independence and their intention to break with English rule. Freedom from English rule was hard fought but won.
To unite the communities of people and form a unified nation, the colonies sent representatives to a Constitutional Convention, these respected men were tasked to create a new model for a self-governing people, a model which would bind separate communities of people together for the greater good of the Republic while protecting the freedom and individual rights of all people to thrive in the way they chose. This was a delicate and difficult balance, so our founding fathers created a system, they called it “checks and balances.” A system that would automatically check itself so that government would not become oppressive to the people it was created to serve.
The Constitution of The United States and the peoples Bill of Rights were ratified and a new Republic began. Our government then is society’s attempt to form a union and a rule of law that protects individual civil rights and restricts a group's ability to use government's might to oppress individual's to the grave.
But they also knew that if the people themselves did not monitor and work these “checks and balances”, eventually the elected and appointed representatives, could be corrupted and would use the checks and balances against the people. The checks and balances have worked to a certain extent on their own for over 200 years, but slowly the rich and powerful elite with the help of paid corrupted elected representatives, appointed officials, their paid mainstream news propagandists and power broker lobbyist's, worked to turn the checks and balances against the people.
Ben Franklin is supposed to have answered when asked what kind of government the Constitutional Convention had created: “A Republic, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT.”
The people must work to keep the republic and if the people don’t work at it, it will not last; we will not be able to keep it.
Those who shift the balance of power for their own profit or push an agenda "for our own good", or push a group's right to special protection, eventually oppress the people. Government can be very useful, it has the force of law and the threat of punishment and is a very effective tool of oppression. And so if elected representatives are permitted to supersede the protections of the individual for any reason, government becomes a heavy boot that tramples all of us.
We must pay attention and evaluate all good intentions, validate and judge it's legitimacy by using the tool we were given to protect us, the rule of law outlined by the Constitution. Good intentions pushed by groups and made into law, erode and override the individual rights of all others, and eventually our rights are usurped by rich powerful groups and result in a tyrannical government.
We must learn to be informed and vigilant, we must insist standards are upheld. FIRST, the candidate's proposals should be judged to be legitimate and valid according to the rule of law, the Constitution. SECOND what are the candidates qualities,virtues capability, allegiances, experience, leadership, principles, integrity and honesty, etc. THIRD in importance are the proposals and the plan, a candidate who meets the first two criteria is most likely to have a good plan and be a good leader for the people and the country, after that it becomes a matter of peoples choice.
Any elected representative who legislates in a manner that circumvents our constitution must be recognized and removed from office. Our government leaders must be held to those boundaries because if we don’t it will destroy us. Without adherence to the Constitution we will be in a constant struggle resisting those who will and seek to oppress us.
What we have to do at such times is reign our leaders and the government in. This is a very difficult task because entrenched power is difficult to resist and remove. When we have leadership that compromises our freedom, then we are subject to the oppression of the strongest among us and when the most oppressive among us becomes our government, we will suffer oppression beyond endurance. When government becomes oppressive, we must resist our government itself in order to be free.
So what happens when government becomes the source of oppression? We all know very well indeed, we are experiencing the very oppression that government is supposed to restrict, from government itself. We are seeing that struggle happening right now. The ruling class are in control, directing this Republic against us and they have usurped our constitution and our civil liberties for profit and power.
Horrific acts of murder, committed by terrorists, was used to justify the government to launch and engage in never ending acts of war in the middle-east oil-producing countries, paid for with our taxes, our future debt, and our young peoples lives, whether we want to or not. We and our lives and our children's future have been made the pawns of big business. The media is paid and controlled by rich corporate-sponsors, so the media taking heads must stifle honest unbiased reporting.
The current Presidential candidates offer tokens and adjustments to make government domination and oppression of our rights tolerable, and using fear tactics they tell us that we have no other choice but to continue this way indefinitely, they claim the adjustments they offer will make it doable and someday we will know success. They say we will spread democracy to these countries even though our freedoms and prosperity and happiness and our future are the price we pay, disappearing daily for the good of all, all but the American citizen. We've seen it before, Republican, Democrat. Republican, Democrat. Regardless of party the goals of the entrenched elite never change and will continue to move forward with the election of any of these candidates.
Only one Presidential candidate offers change. He is the one candidate who is already qualified to act in the terms I described, First it must be constitutional, Second he has the qualities and experience and Third he has the plan to take America back from the power brokers. He is the one who identified and brought the source of our problems to our consciousness, he told us what would happen and the loss of freedom we faced and he is the one and only candidate who single-handedly brought the dialogue to the debates. Ron Paul knows what needs to be done and how to correct it. Ron Paul is determined to stop the shift of power to the rich and powerful elite and return America and our civil rights to the people.
If the people want to keep a Republic, we must work, we must sacrifice self and agendas to keep and protect it. That takes a lot of effort as well as and more importantly it takes self-denial. And so we have to decide.
Wow!! Good one Wind. Boy, our founding fathers are probably turning over in their graves right about now. I hope America is smart and chooses the only president that will even attempt to go after the corruption within Congress and the Fed, Ron Paul. Something fishy is going on over in Capital hill, every president ignores this and we don't like it! What I fear is that Ron Paul is our only last hope for DRASTIC change for a long to come. This is why he needs to win. I know people are against his foreign policy, but there is a lot more at stake than the enemy, innocent Iranian lives are at stake, rebuilding land after we destroy it. We need to communicate with these countries, we should be using war tactics as a last resort. Should more people get shot and killed by police officers, because they look suspicious and are suspected to have guns and weapons? We better make damn sure there are no weapons be for we go in bombing. Look at Bush going in and Saddam had no weapons, this kind of rationality just creates a more hostile environment around the world. As China and Russia kick back and become stronger and stronger within their own walls. These are two countries we should fear, while we are pussyfooting around the world instead of concentrating on national security and defense if anything. All these lives lost were due to an insignificant agenda…What is this, because it sure ain't war, it's more like a dog chasing it's tail. I can't believe all this training and aid we have given these countries all to turn around and stab us in the back. Israel is not a burden on our pockets,the president and Congress is a burden, because they have their own agenda, it is pathetic. I'm all for Democracy, but some of their human rights demonstrations over in Israel are so violent makes me sick. We are spoiling Israel by aiding and fighting some of their battles, come on, Israel is very well capable of defending themselves. America is so gullible to believe all this nonsense why we are stationed all over the world, I do not trust anything the media or these politicians tell us. Ron Paul has told the truth and history backs him up since the 80's, I back him. At first I was skeptical about his foreign policy, but I researched into Israel becoming so depended on the US that if this continues we will be the part of making them weaker and failing. We are bullying Israel with our own agenda, Israel would like to run things differently than the United States for a change, but being the dogs we are we will not allow this. The US gives them two options; you run it our way or you can run it our way. Israel is a rich country with a strong military they are very well capable of fending for themselves.
I find it extraordinarily surprising how much support Ron Paul has gotten within the public and yet the news claims that Newt and Romney are in the lead! I have already seen multiple Ron Paul bumper stickers, shirts, skateboards, and even a large banner nearby a local Walmart. It is quite evident that Paul has the public's support. One of the things that scares me though is that he seems a little TOO radical at times. Sometimes subtle changes work best and I have a feeling he will make multiple huge changes very quickly if he wins (but I guess in this case, Congress will prevent that from occurring). Another issue I have a hard time accepting is the abolishing of medical and medicare. I understand not giving out free checks to the lazy people who don't work and just sit around with twenty kids but this is not that kind of issue. I am one of the people who would like to have medical coverage but cannot qualify for it (so I just don't have any). Many citizens rely on these programs not because they are lazy or have grown dependent but because their incomes simply can not cover such expensive medical bills. Other than this topic, Ron Paul seems to be the most rational man in this campaign so it is pretty shocking that Romney and Gingrich are getting the spotlight!
The idea behind removing medicare is that other things are going to be put in place to help. Or, better put, things may be removed that will help everyone progress.
Although States will still tax you, the Feds will take exceptionally less. That means more for everyone and while you may think "ya but it never trickles down" - you're right - that's because all our little regulations, restrictions, and controls absorb it all.
Remove it, more hits the bottom. More money for you = more money for investment in your life = insurance for yourself = happiness.
The idea is the Government should merely make you sure can do all this stuff but that's it. Beyond that they can stay away but they don't.
I agree, like I said before I don't believe in all his policies either but Paul has shown his honesty, consistency, trustworthiness over and over again throughout the last couple decades.
If medicare were abolished I thought I saw somewhere there would still be some type of program for senior citizens. Wouldn't it be nice if the government were a smaller non-corrupt government and we were to get more money in our paychecks and finally be able to buy things again and not only that but to save and keep all of our interest earned. How bout the confidence to invest in Corporations knowing all profits earned would be our own and not the governments. We people take a change and invest in Corporation in turn boosting the economy with the expectation of Corporation expansion. Some are against lowering taxes on Corporations, but look how many companies we have lost over seas due to all these tax burdens. And the Federal Reserve, enough said just but mentioning the name.
All these changes happening at once is a pipe dream anyway, but cutting back a trillion dollars from the deficit is a persuasive strategy that must be brought before Congress soon. Unlike Obama, Paul will veto all nonsense bills. He is a strong believer of the Constitution and he believes laws should be made to protect and not burden the people with excessive tax increases or other crazy ideas. Paul puts fear in the eyes of a lot of politicians, because they know he will interfere with their free ride on our(American People) dime. Everybody knows it will be a long time in h*ll before a candidate of this nature comes around again.
http://abc.go.com/watch/abc-news-specials/SH559036/VD55157229/republican-debate-in-iowa-2011
I have watched the last few debates. Each time it gets worse. My opinion I don't want to see finger pointing I want to see what they intend on doing to straighten things up! One thing I have noticed has been that Rick, Newt, and Mitt all change what they say in various ways at each debate, but Ron Paul has stayed consistant with what he says.
I am not an Obama fan but everyone had made a big deal about his birth certificate and him not being a US citizen, Mitt had said at the last debate his father came from mexico. Is he an american citizen? Where is his birth certificate?