Imagine President Romney standing next to the First Lady, the Second Lady, the Third Lady... or, should we call them all "First Lady"? Oh, I'm so confused!
ROFL - Just another Crony-Corporate Robot from the 'libertarian' tea party nonsense. What gibberish; Ron Paul or nothing... otherwise they are just all the same.
1:22 Even Medicare Actuary Richard Foster knew these Medicare "cuts" contained in ObamaCare were illusory. They have NO intention of actually cutting Medicare, they "scheduled" a cut, but only as a smokescreen to keep ObamaCare deficit-neutral, when everyone knows it isn't and won't be.
Does anyone know why Romney is so popular? I thought for sure that Santorum would have come far ahead because of his "ultra conservative" views. Not that I like any of them (I'm more for Ron Paul), but I have yet to find a site that isn't funded by Mitt's campaign or his pacts.
I can find a lot of positive on Santorum and every other candidate in forums and Youtube, but nothing on Romney. I honestly can't figure out how he's even winning.
Alright Matt Welch!! And credit must be given to Neil Cavuto for giving the opportunity for this side of the argument to be heard! We are making progress people!!
@Sondre7 Our massive debt is the number one issue and Mitt Romney has no credible plan to cut the debt. No one lacking such a plan is a serious candidate and only Ron Paul has a detailed and realistic plan to balance the budget(He would do it in 3 years).
So this guy wants the GOP to do his job of putting up a strong candidate to challenge Obama, but will weaken them (by not voting) if he's not perfect? How about YOUR party put up a candidate who doesn't smoke pot and who has a grasp of the world as IT IS, not what your WISH IT TO BE?! I would LOVE to live in the Libertarian world; where terrorists leave us alone if we leave them alone - Exactly what liberal teachers tell kids while the schoolyard bully beats them up every day! "Liber(al)tarians"
@Stammreich4Senate Your strawman critique of Paul is transparent. Classical liberalism is Libertarianism so the ad hominem "liberal" label is stupid. causal relationships are beyond you, except when you need to change the argument with ad hominem attacks that, as I stated are ... fuck look up logical fallacies yourself. Empty ass arguments from an empty mind. Suck a chainsaw please.
@Stammreich4Senate The GOP has running for president several candidates--only one of whom(Ron Paul)has a serious plan to deal with this country's number one issue--the debt. In Neoconland you people believe that if we bomb and occupy other people's countries,impose tyrants over them and generally intrude where we don't belong that everybody will looovve us. It's one thing to fight the bully in a playground where you belong and it's another to occupy someone else's backyard.
@Stammreich4Senate As a Marine veteran and Libertarian, I can tell that you have no sense of the history between the US and the middle east. Did you know that our CIA helped throw out an elected Iranian president who was replaced by the Shah. And don't forget that Sadaam Hussein was handpicked and groomed for his position by the CIA. It has taken decades to get these things public, so just imagine what they are doing right now. Do you think we are really leaving them alone?
The likelihood of any of these helping the nation is incredibly low.
And god damn this host is annoying. This guy tries to simplify politics to two parties. That's just not right. Two parties couldn't possibly represent the US voters opinions. Same with most other systems that have more parties, but it's atleast better.
You see how they're talking about making up a plan to cut this crisis? These people don't believe it will magically solve itself, they must be retarded.
The Occupy Forces as a third party could become a reality with months. Look at the election in: Slovenia party led by Zoran Jankovic. No fewer than 40% of the new parliamentarians represent parties which did not exist a few months ago.
@HyperMediaNews There is one GLARING PROBLEM that I see with the "occupiers", and that is that they are for larger gov't and regulation of capitalism. If an "occupy" party did solidify and any got into office, that would be like putting a supercharger on the 454 that is already dragging us to hell in a hand basket. The Libertarians on the other hand would be like draining the oil from that engine and soon it would overheat and come to a grinding halt. Occupiers are wrong.
Occupy theoretically would be in favor of destroying lobbying and tax evasion from wall street and hence demand more accountability for taxpayer revenue. Corp fraud is what fuels gov instability and inefficiency, so OWS, Tea Party and Libertarians need to get on the same page and vote out all the millionaire crooks and replace them with people that demand accountability!
@HyperMediaNews Gov't fraud not Corp. There is no incentive for a Corp to commit fraud, none. There is incentive to 'regulate' your own industry through lobbying to gain market share and "earn' subsidies. Need to make insider trading for congress illegal. Make public service a sacrifice for country, not a ticket to easy street. But that'll never happen as it is.
@HyperMediaNews OWS is in favor of putting further regulation on business via gov't action but they completely miss the reason why it even exist in the first place. The gov't is too large and thinks it can do too much with the money it "legally" steals from the citizens. OWS does nothing to counter this and in fact wants to make welfare and taxes even higher. This will not lead to prosperity or equality. They are diametrically opposed to their own goals.
OWS has many clowns and idiots within their cause, but that can be said of the Tea Party, Libertarian/GOP people like Ron Paul, but how does society move away from the destruction and fraud from the Bush and Obama Decade? What forces needs to align to realistically change the way things are? I hope a third party unites people against the GOP and Democratic abuses.
@thatlogicalguy Go fuck yourself. You are obviously not one who believes in human rights and Liberty. If only one of the genocides in the last 2 centuries had been perpetrated by Libertarians and rid the world of people like you. But sadly, all those genocides were perpetrated by people like yourself. Go to Hell.
No one wants Iran to attack us,but i suggest that we cross that bridge when we get to it,to jump the gun and provoke military war with Iran it could launch years of real wars ahead of us.If their intentions are to destroy us we need to explore these allegations through diplomatic means for as long as possible,make every opportunity for peace available.This tit for tat taunting can only lead to war,that may draw china and russia into the mix too.
@redray53064 You're right. Russia has already announced basically "mess with Iran, & you're messing with us". And Russia is economically a puppet state of China. That's why people are talking about WWIII. Mitt Obamney, Santorum, etc want to keep pissing in Iran's sandbox & shoving them around, while further driving our economy into the ground. Check out costofwar (dotcom). Not exactly a plan for peace and prosperity. It's insane.
I will not vote for Romney under any circumstances--he is every bit the socialist that Obama is, and (as Mr. Welch pointed out) has shown no inclination towards cutting government spending. Perhaps losing our vote to a third party candidate will teach these establishment Republicans that they shouldn't expect Libertarians to "vote for the lesser of two evils" every year. I will no longer be forced into this false choice between a socialist donkey or elephant: give me Ron Paul or nothing.
@watertonrivers I don't like the NDAA or the Patriot Act, but at this point I am choosing the lesser of two evils. I don't like Ron Paul's positions on Foreign Policy and especially Iran. In effect I view Paul's and Romney's position on the economy as equal even though Paul tends to be more philosophical with regard to free market policy. I don't want to trade security for liberty and would like to see the NDAA and PA gone but Iran is a country that wants to harm the world and our allies
ron paul is not "naive" on foreign policy, he knows more about foregin affairs than the rest of the candidates combined, the people who say he's "naive" are warmongering racists who hate muslims and want to see the continuation of bombing them, they are the naive ones.
You know what IS naive ? thinking you can bomb/invade/occupy/starve foreign countries and expect no blowback from it, THATS NAIVE! you'd think blowback would be an easy concept for so called conservatives to grasp.
If it comes down to a choice of Obama or Romney, that is NO choice at all. Both are big government statists who will continue the same Fed policies, the same deficit financing, and both will ride the US ship to the bottom. If that is the choice, then yes we absolutely do vote 3rd party and if it pulls votes away from one of the big government statists, it makes no difference at all. And frankly, if the US ship sinks, I would rather it be clearly a socialist at the helm when it does.
@sjustinb With all due respect a Libertarian does not vote for Romney, who refuses to talk about repeal of the Patriot Act or the NDAA. If you believe in the Constitution then you cannnot vote for Romney and call yourself a Libertarian, you are in fact a Neo-Conservative!!
A choice between Obama version 1 or Obama version 2 is not much of a choice. I don't understand how republicans can be so easily blind sided by Romney and think that he is any different than Obama. You really have to be a spineless person to say "I'm voting for Mitt because I think he can beat Obama." WHO CARES. He IS Obama.
@anryth I don't think that most republicans like Romney. The problem is that the non moderate-non Romney vote has been divided amongst several candidates.
Cavuto is such a media whore sometimes, glimpses of good from time to time only - I guess you can tell when he has been threatened with his check for bootlicking.
@rockymountainprep Maybe that is so, but I would like to acknowledge that it was Cavuto that stood up for Ron Paul when the media was almost unilaterally dismissing him--saying that it was not the media's job to decide who the public should be choosing, merely that they should report the facts. That took a lot of guts, and it is worth respecting.
The conventional wisdom is voting 3rd party is a vote for Obama. Well, in my mind, voting for Romney is not that different from voting for Obama. The overall goals are the same, except Republicans may like what gets funded, and not feel like their ox is being gored. The problem is the agenda leads to the same fiscal/economic catastrophe down the road. Not a great choice.
MMI: I agree. I don't want a 2nd Obama term, but perhaps the GOP needs to be punished for nominating another big-govt "conservative (if Mitt is indeed the nominee)." Those who don't like Romney and aren't involved in their caucuses/primaries should be ashamed. Too many Republicans just act like zombies and vote for the guy with the "R" next to his name. What if the guy with the "R" is a central-planner?
It's more than that. What it indicates is that most of the politically active people in America want bigger government. I think it's America that needs to be punished. I mean, I know that includes us (duh!), but the way I see it, the worse punishment we get, sooner, for having mistaken ideas about what we want government to be, the better, and I think Obama is just the man to give it to us. Make it too easy, and the frog cooks to death without putting up a fight.
My frustration with the Republican candidates (except Paul) is they all have records of either pushing their social agenda, which grows government, or "working with Democrats to get things done," which grows government. In my mind they're not that different in their overall goal of growing government. Santorum seems like Paul Ryan in the sense that he's admitted the error of his ways, but he still gives hints that he likes government imposing his social agenda. Both parties are statist.
I'm still waiting for Onion to make a video about people who make it a point to vote for the most suspicious, most corrupt possible candidate because that's the type of guy that wins elections.
Ron Paul, or someone with the same message, won't get elected until we have a Greek-style crisis. Unfortunately, people just don't see that far ahead. It's is too easy to spend now and worry about it later.
I've never heard what Ron Paul would do after shutting down The Fed; what's the plan, other than chaos? Also, what does Paul think about corporate tax evasion?
Ron Paul is the only canidate who is not dangerous.
"The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."
James Madison
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
who gives a shit if he's 'electable'? electing mitt romney will make NO DIFFERENCE. what's the point in nominating a guy who basically agrees with Obama on every single issue? is it so you get to vote for a person with a red tie instead of a blue? someone with a cute elephant on their lapel instead of a donkey? what?
Matt does an excellent interview here. Normally I like Cavuto, he's pretty fair, but here he was kind of being a bit pigheaded with that stupid hypothetical.
The Republican Party is a huge organization. It's like a large ship, it takes some time for it to start moving in a new direction when you shift the rudder.
Don't give up! Even if Ron Paul doesn't make it this time, it's not the end. We can get some libertarians on a Romney Cabinet, while grooming Rand to take up his father's banner.
"....and hand the election to President Obama." Typical conservative guilt tripping. "Vote for our thug because he's better than the liberal" What a joke
The Libertarian Party is on the ballot in all states. The "What if there were only two choices" scenario is just dumb. In fact there are dozens of alternatives to D and R.
Ron Paul IS NOT dangerous or naiv. He believes in diplomatic negotiations and not just obeying The Industrial Military Complex that Obama anf the rest does.
Ron Paul forms great coalitions. He is responsible for the auditing of the central bank, the fed reserve. He is responsible for the tea party. He is the leader of constitutional government and free market economics in the party. He does not lie and he's never wrong. I'm sick of seeing santorum, romney and Newt parrot him. They are liars and snakes. They work for the anglosphere mercantile banksters that own the fed reserve. Ron Paul works for liberty.
Fox News is the worst of them all. They spread the message of being right wing, freedom loving news and the second Ron Paul comes into the picture it's "OH HE CAN'T WIN". With the exception of John Stossel and possibly Cavuto (from what I've seen he interviews Ron Paul relatively frequently) the rest might as well be MSNBC.
@longlivecrow there's also the judge, and red eye, etc. Fox is far from the worst. Though I agree, it's disgusting to see them marginalize the only guy saying what they've been preaching the last 4 years.
Why do they say Romney doesn't have a credible plan to cut spending? Ron Paul has no support in the GOP to get a spending bill passed, let alone in both houses. Ron Paul can no more get spending cut than Barak Obama can pass a bill to end Obamacare.
@swampfaye Can you cite a "spending bill" that Paul has introduced?
Is it possible that the bills he's introduced are not popular with his colleagues because they threaten to take away the goodies that they enjoy so much?
Exactly - Romney vs Obama ? Screw it i'd rather have a Obama who will discredit liberals with his terrible leftist policies then to vote for mr. flipflop big goverment Romney who will discredit Conservatism with ... with his terrible leftist policies.
Ron Paul is a novelty and nothing else. He's not the first and won't be the last. There's almost always been one in almost every election... Ralph Nader, Lyndon LaRouche '76-'04, Bob Richards in 1984, Ross Perot in 1992 and '96. All of them have small dedicated groups of support, mostly young people. None pose a serious challenge. There is a common denominator among most of them... that is they're all nutty as fruit cakes. I wonder who will be next.
@NAGGERNUTZ Well what a shame that Ron Paul has a pretty good chance to win - according to 5 days old CBS poll - Ron Paul vs Obama. Paul would get 47% of independents (obama 40%). He is 1% away from obama when you add republican and democratic voters.
@MrJigssaw1989 - Dude, come on. This is an almost carbon copy of Ron Paul's 2008 campaign. He has a small, dedicated support base of mostly under 30's white males. He raised over 6 million dollars in one day, an amazing amount by anyone's standard, but he still never won a single state and finished with a paltry 4% of the vote. He'll finish this campaign with 8%. And I'm giving him 4 points over '08.
Here's the thing. If your candidate isn't the party nomination, don't think for one moment you are forced to vote for the "lesser of two evils". There is, on EVERY state ballot for president, a WRITE IN slot. A few presidents have won primaries with write in votes. If you don't vote because you don't like either candidate, get a clue and write in your vote. Otherwise, don't complain.
@Amyls64 It isn't like he's going to pull the plug on medicare immediately, he's only going to try to begin to ween the people off of it until it can safely be done away with in favor of more effective options. Ron Paul has no intention of leaving anyone high and dry except the establishment.
@Maat922 Well I can tell you this. Id like to hear what his plan Really is. Because the facts are old people get sick and they need help because they dont have income. .. SO if he cuts medicare they will all just end up going on MEdicaid. Trust me. The whole thing is a joke. THe real issue that needs to be addressed is HEALTH care.ID much rather pay for preventive measures then intervention when it comes to healthcare. IT would be a lot cheaper too in the long run.
@Amyls64 the sniors will be dead before anything is enacted. Timetables are what are key here. Everyone thinks plans are always immediately implelmented. It's more about culture change before policies are voted in.
I wish i when one of these talking heads starts trying to push their toe the party line agenda someone would just come out and say "Romney? I'm not voting for that leftist, big government piece of crap under any circumstances."
I like Matt Welch just fine. I'm good with the Tea Party, too. But Matt Welch doesn't speak for the Tea Party, even if we were to concede that the Tea Party has a single voice, which it doesn't. In New Hampshire, Romney got a larger share of those voters who claimed to be sympathetic to the Tea Party than the venerable Mr. Paul (if I'm not mistaken). I'll bet it will remain that way throughout the primary season, Mr. Welch.
It's so ironic that the candidate who has show more consistency in the defense of liberty than anyone else is the same candidate that the Republican establishment and networks like Fox say is unelectable. Only goes to show how far away from the root American principles these organizations have become. "The Constitution? Nah, people will never vote for that. So when's the next war?"
@duhg599 With Iran or with China? Iran is gonna hit 2013 and China will be 2015...save up some money and you may be able to buy some price-inflated popcorn for $19.97 per kernel.
@robm425 A third party would be great. Currently the two parties just prevent eachother from doing anything, some people like that of cause but it's ridiculous what people do just to get power.
If I lived over there I couldn't give either party my vote just because they don't support democracy. Because what is a democracy if you won't compromise?
@SnoweyMan111 Democracy is not a synonym for compromise. Sometimes not compromising is the very essence of democracy. Let's start with not compromising on basic human rights for starters!
@greyed Don't act stupid. Yes of cause it's not a synonym for compromise, nor is it something that should happen in every decision a democracy makes. BUT, the current state of US politics is one side says that something is good, other side says that it sucks, and nothing happends. So that the current majority holder (of votes) look bad.
And suggestion obama makes, good or bad, will be rejected. Same for the republicans have presidency next time.
@SnoweyMan111 No. But you might consider that you're commenting on a video from a libertarian source and might just have libertarian people reading, and replying, to said comments. IE, try to imagine how silly it is to say that government inaction is a *bad thing* to a libertarian; someone who believes that our current government has far overstepped it's bounds.
Hint, we would be rejoicing if only our government were so deadlocked as you claim it is!
@greyed How can you even say that? Regardless of their opinions not changing anything is a bad idea. Republicans can stop pretty much anything they want actually. If they just come to a consensus to disagree with the proposal.
I'm not even a US citizen, it's not my place to meddle, but from my Swedish point of view, when the government can't lead a debate and come to some sort of consensus and vote accordingly it's terrible.
Also, I can't take Fox news seriously in any situation anymore..
@SnoweyMan111 Change in and of itself is not desirable. Doing anything simply for the sake of not doing nothing is counter productive. Again, you're not grasping that libertarians want to reduce government involvement. So when the Democrats what to do bad thing A and the Republicans want to do bad thing B we just see the choice as being between bad and bad. In that situation NOT TAKING EITHER ACTION IS THE SANE ACTION.
@SnoweyMan111 Nope, that's not what I said at all. Yes, it's broken. But doing *anything* is not the same as doing *the right thing*. Furthermore government is not always the answer. So sometimes the best way to fix the problem is to get government out of the way. You can't do that with compromise between two parties who both want to expand the scope of government. In that situation what's the best you can hope for? That they deadlock and government doesn't expand. It's not a hard concept.
I just keep thinking "My God, what a wasted opportunity..." The establishment Republicans are actually going to nominate another McCain, another Bush, another statist. Question: do you vote pragmatic and "join the team" or principle and vote for the best candidate without regard to the status quo partisans?
If the Republicans shoot themselves in the foot AGAIN....
they've lost me for good and next election, the immoral statist wins.
Imagine President Romney standing next to the First Lady, the Second Lady, the Third Lady... or, should we call them all "First Lady"? Oh, I'm so confused!
astrofrk 3 weeks ago
Cavuto - would you stab your mother or father in the neck? C'mon, I'm being hypothetical - but go ahead and tell the world your answer.
stevemcgee99 1 month ago 2
Fuck Nicki Haley. Send that illegal whore back to India!
Shonenut213 1 month ago
ROFL - Just another Crony-Corporate Robot from the 'libertarian' tea party nonsense. What gibberish; Ron Paul or nothing... otherwise they are just all the same.
thebigoneisbig 1 month ago
1:22 Even Medicare Actuary Richard Foster knew these Medicare "cuts" contained in ObamaCare were illusory. They have NO intention of actually cutting Medicare, they "scheduled" a cut, but only as a smokescreen to keep ObamaCare deficit-neutral, when everyone knows it isn't and won't be.
UTubekookdetector 1 month ago
Good to see Welch has taken a break from writing hit pieces on Ron Paul so he could come on the show.
StatelessEuphoria 1 month ago
Does anyone know why Romney is so popular? I thought for sure that Santorum would have come far ahead because of his "ultra conservative" views. Not that I like any of them (I'm more for Ron Paul), but I have yet to find a site that isn't funded by Mitt's campaign or his pacts.
I can find a lot of positive on Santorum and every other candidate in forums and Youtube, but nothing on Romney. I honestly can't figure out how he's even winning.
nanciesweb 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Ron Paul will need to run on a third party ticket! He needs to move away from the Republican party ASAP!
psurge38 1 month ago
Alright Matt Welch!! And credit must be given to Neil Cavuto for giving the opportunity for this side of the argument to be heard! We are making progress people!!
fender7802 1 month ago
Mitt Romney is much more business friendly, more more free trade and cant be much worse then Obama on other issues. Mitt got my vote
Sondre7 1 month ago
@Sondre7 Our massive debt is the number one issue and Mitt Romney has no credible plan to cut the debt. No one lacking such a plan is a serious candidate and only Ron Paul has a detailed and realistic plan to balance the budget(He would do it in 3 years).
sleedolfine15 1 month ago
No. Ron Paul is the only one who can do it. We need him more than he needs us.
5that1dude5 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
So this guy wants the GOP to do his job of putting up a strong candidate to challenge Obama, but will weaken them (by not voting) if he's not perfect? How about YOUR party put up a candidate who doesn't smoke pot and who has a grasp of the world as IT IS, not what your WISH IT TO BE?! I would LOVE to live in the Libertarian world; where terrorists leave us alone if we leave them alone - Exactly what liberal teachers tell kids while the schoolyard bully beats them up every day! "Liber(al)tarians"
Stammreich4Senate 1 month ago
@Stammreich4Senate Your strawman critique of Paul is transparent. Classical liberalism is Libertarianism so the ad hominem "liberal" label is stupid. causal relationships are beyond you, except when you need to change the argument with ad hominem attacks that, as I stated are ... fuck look up logical fallacies yourself. Empty ass arguments from an empty mind. Suck a chainsaw please.
x2f01mick 1 month ago
@Stammreich4Senate The GOP has running for president several candidates--only one of whom(Ron Paul)has a serious plan to deal with this country's number one issue--the debt. In Neoconland you people believe that if we bomb and occupy other people's countries,impose tyrants over them and generally intrude where we don't belong that everybody will looovve us. It's one thing to fight the bully in a playground where you belong and it's another to occupy someone else's backyard.
sleedolfine15 1 month ago
@Stammreich4Senate As a Marine veteran and Libertarian, I can tell that you have no sense of the history between the US and the middle east. Did you know that our CIA helped throw out an elected Iranian president who was replaced by the Shah. And don't forget that Sadaam Hussein was handpicked and groomed for his position by the CIA. It has taken decades to get these things public, so just imagine what they are doing right now. Do you think we are really leaving them alone?
dlstb 1 month ago
subscribe to Reason Magazine
TransylvaniaTapes 1 month ago
Go Ron Paul!!!!!
freemarketswork 1 month ago
This year Conservative is the New liberal. Libertarian is the new conservative. Anti-Mormon is the new Christian and Ron Paul is the new Reagan.
irynadearina 1 month ago
The likelihood of any of these helping the nation is incredibly low.
And god damn this host is annoying. This guy tries to simplify politics to two parties. That's just not right. Two parties couldn't possibly represent the US voters opinions. Same with most other systems that have more parties, but it's atleast better.
Also, @greyed.
You see how they're talking about making up a plan to cut this crisis? These people don't believe it will magically solve itself, they must be retarded.
SnoweyMan111 1 month ago
The Occupy Forces as a third party could become a reality with months. Look at the election in: Slovenia party led by Zoran Jankovic. No fewer than 40% of the new parliamentarians represent parties which did not exist a few months ago.
Same thing will happen here!
HyperMediaNews 1 month ago
@HyperMediaNews There is one GLARING PROBLEM that I see with the "occupiers", and that is that they are for larger gov't and regulation of capitalism. If an "occupy" party did solidify and any got into office, that would be like putting a supercharger on the 454 that is already dragging us to hell in a hand basket. The Libertarians on the other hand would be like draining the oil from that engine and soon it would overheat and come to a grinding halt. Occupiers are wrong.
dlstb 1 month ago
@dlstb
Occupy theoretically would be in favor of destroying lobbying and tax evasion from wall street and hence demand more accountability for taxpayer revenue. Corp fraud is what fuels gov instability and inefficiency, so OWS, Tea Party and Libertarians need to get on the same page and vote out all the millionaire crooks and replace them with people that demand accountability!
HyperMediaNews 1 month ago
@HyperMediaNews Gov't fraud not Corp. There is no incentive for a Corp to commit fraud, none. There is incentive to 'regulate' your own industry through lobbying to gain market share and "earn' subsidies. Need to make insider trading for congress illegal. Make public service a sacrifice for country, not a ticket to easy street. But that'll never happen as it is.
x2f01mick 1 month ago
@HyperMediaNews OWS is in favor of putting further regulation on business via gov't action but they completely miss the reason why it even exist in the first place. The gov't is too large and thinks it can do too much with the money it "legally" steals from the citizens. OWS does nothing to counter this and in fact wants to make welfare and taxes even higher. This will not lead to prosperity or equality. They are diametrically opposed to their own goals.
dlstb 1 month ago
@dlstb
OWS has many clowns and idiots within their cause, but that can be said of the Tea Party, Libertarian/GOP people like Ron Paul, but how does society move away from the destruction and fraud from the Bush and Obama Decade? What forces needs to align to realistically change the way things are? I hope a third party unites people against the GOP and Democratic abuses.
HyperMediaNews 1 month ago
Ron Paul for president!
RonPaulKicksAss 1 month ago
@RonPaulKicksAss Fuck Ron Paul
thatlogicalguy 1 month ago
@thatlogicalguy Sorry buddy, I think he's straight. I am sure he would be flattered to know you have a man crush on him though.
st4ticblu3 1 month ago
@thatlogicalguy Go fuck yourself. You are obviously not one who believes in human rights and Liberty. If only one of the genocides in the last 2 centuries had been perpetrated by Libertarians and rid the world of people like you. But sadly, all those genocides were perpetrated by people like yourself. Go to Hell.
dlstb 1 month ago
@thatlogicalguy Fuck the Project for the New American Century, the Foreign Policy Initiative, CFR, and AIPAC! Go away, troll!
RonPaulKicksAss 1 month ago
@RonPaulKicksAss I'll second that!
dlstb 1 month ago
No one wants Iran to attack us,but i suggest that we cross that bridge when we get to it,to jump the gun and provoke military war with Iran it could launch years of real wars ahead of us.If their intentions are to destroy us we need to explore these allegations through diplomatic means for as long as possible,make every opportunity for peace available.This tit for tat taunting can only lead to war,that may draw china and russia into the mix too.
redray53064 1 month ago
@redray53064 You're right. Russia has already announced basically "mess with Iran, & you're messing with us". And Russia is economically a puppet state of China. That's why people are talking about WWIII. Mitt Obamney, Santorum, etc want to keep pissing in Iran's sandbox & shoving them around, while further driving our economy into the ground. Check out costofwar (dotcom). Not exactly a plan for peace and prosperity. It's insane.
Booofrthefirst 1 month ago
I will not vote for Romney under any circumstances--he is every bit the socialist that Obama is, and (as Mr. Welch pointed out) has shown no inclination towards cutting government spending. Perhaps losing our vote to a third party candidate will teach these establishment Republicans that they shouldn't expect Libertarians to "vote for the lesser of two evils" every year. I will no longer be forced into this false choice between a socialist donkey or elephant: give me Ron Paul or nothing.
AlienProphecy 1 month ago
Dude all I have to say is A.B.B.O. 2012
Mitt is better than obummer, he might not be a libertarian but he's still not Obama.
rockinandout 1 month ago
@watertonrivers I don't like the NDAA or the Patriot Act, but at this point I am choosing the lesser of two evils. I don't like Ron Paul's positions on Foreign Policy and especially Iran. In effect I view Paul's and Romney's position on the economy as equal even though Paul tends to be more philosophical with regard to free market policy. I don't want to trade security for liberty and would like to see the NDAA and PA gone but Iran is a country that wants to harm the world and our allies
sjustinb 1 month ago
@sjustinb wake up man, iran is not stupid enough to pick a fight with the whole world
Hegurt4114 1 month ago
ron paul is not "naive" on foreign policy, he knows more about foregin affairs than the rest of the candidates combined, the people who say he's "naive" are warmongering racists who hate muslims and want to see the continuation of bombing them, they are the naive ones.
You know what IS naive ? thinking you can bomb/invade/occupy/starve foreign countries and expect no blowback from it, THATS NAIVE! you'd think blowback would be an easy concept for so called conservatives to grasp.
HuxleyWasRight 1 month ago
If it comes down to a choice of Obama or Romney, that is NO choice at all. Both are big government statists who will continue the same Fed policies, the same deficit financing, and both will ride the US ship to the bottom. If that is the choice, then yes we absolutely do vote 3rd party and if it pulls votes away from one of the big government statists, it makes no difference at all. And frankly, if the US ship sinks, I would rather it be clearly a socialist at the helm when it does.
Panpiper 1 month ago
I am a libertarian and I am voting for Mitt who definitely believes in less regulation and close to free markets
sjustinb 1 month ago
@sjustinb With all due respect a Libertarian does not vote for Romney, who refuses to talk about repeal of the Patriot Act or the NDAA. If you believe in the Constitution then you cannnot vote for Romney and call yourself a Libertarian, you are in fact a Neo-Conservative!!
watertonrivers 1 month ago
Trump 2102!!
pseudonominous 1 month ago
Obamney 2012
TheSavageGospel 1 month ago
A choice between Obama version 1 or Obama version 2 is not much of a choice. I don't understand how republicans can be so easily blind sided by Romney and think that he is any different than Obama. You really have to be a spineless person to say "I'm voting for Mitt because I think he can beat Obama." WHO CARES. He IS Obama.
anryth 1 month ago
@anryth I don't think that most republicans like Romney. The problem is that the non moderate-non Romney vote has been divided amongst several candidates.
sleedolfine15 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think it's kind of funny that people think that Romney could beat Obama in an election.
DarkwingScooter 1 month ago
Comment removed
DarkwingScooter 1 month ago
It's like watching two people speak two different languages.
CountArtha 1 month ago
stretch to compare kerry to Romney? Cavuto should know kerry would have spread war. increased debt just as Romney will.
BillyThorton68 1 month ago
Cavuto is such a media whore sometimes, glimpses of good from time to time only - I guess you can tell when he has been threatened with his check for bootlicking.
rockymountainprep 1 month ago
@rockymountainprep Maybe that is so, but I would like to acknowledge that it was Cavuto that stood up for Ron Paul when the media was almost unilaterally dismissing him--saying that it was not the media's job to decide who the public should be choosing, merely that they should report the facts. That took a lot of guts, and it is worth respecting.
AlienProphecy 1 month ago
Stop deflecting Cavuto! Acknowledge the real situation, not some what-ifs.
whatisphreeon 1 month ago
The conventional wisdom is voting 3rd party is a vote for Obama. Well, in my mind, voting for Romney is not that different from voting for Obama. The overall goals are the same, except Republicans may like what gets funded, and not feel like their ox is being gored. The problem is the agenda leads to the same fiscal/economic catastrophe down the road. Not a great choice.
mmille10 1 month ago
MMI: I agree. I don't want a 2nd Obama term, but perhaps the GOP needs to be punished for nominating another big-govt "conservative (if Mitt is indeed the nominee)." Those who don't like Romney and aren't involved in their caucuses/primaries should be ashamed. Too many Republicans just act like zombies and vote for the guy with the "R" next to his name. What if the guy with the "R" is a central-planner?
UTubekookdetector 1 month ago
@UTubekookdetector
It's more than that. What it indicates is that most of the politically active people in America want bigger government. I think it's America that needs to be punished. I mean, I know that includes us (duh!), but the way I see it, the worse punishment we get, sooner, for having mistaken ideas about what we want government to be, the better, and I think Obama is just the man to give it to us. Make it too easy, and the frog cooks to death without putting up a fight.
mmille10 1 month ago
MMI: Interesting viewpoint and I largely concur. That's why I won't vote for Mitt or Newt, period.
UTubekookdetector 1 month ago
My frustration with the Republican candidates (except Paul) is they all have records of either pushing their social agenda, which grows government, or "working with Democrats to get things done," which grows government. In my mind they're not that different in their overall goal of growing government. Santorum seems like Paul Ryan in the sense that he's admitted the error of his ways, but he still gives hints that he likes government imposing his social agenda. Both parties are statist.
mmille10 1 month ago
I'm still waiting for Onion to make a video about people who make it a point to vote for the most suspicious, most corrupt possible candidate because that's the type of guy that wins elections.
Emidretrauqe 1 month ago 3
The gop has lost me Ron Paul is my man!!!
1inkdaddy 1 month ago 3
Ron Paul, or someone with the same message, won't get elected until we have a Greek-style crisis. Unfortunately, people just don't see that far ahead. It's is too easy to spend now and worry about it later.
danswim11 1 month ago 2
How mainstream media deal with reality: in hypotheticals that have no basis in reality.
ForOrAgainstUs 1 month ago
I've never heard what Ron Paul would do after shutting down The Fed; what's the plan, other than chaos? Also, what does Paul think about corporate tax evasion?
HyperMediaNews 1 month ago
Ron Paul is the only canidate who is not dangerous.
"The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."
James Madison
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
Patrick Henry
peaceliberty4all 1 month ago 28
who gives a shit if he's 'electable'? electing mitt romney will make NO DIFFERENCE. what's the point in nominating a guy who basically agrees with Obama on every single issue? is it so you get to vote for a person with a red tie instead of a blue? someone with a cute elephant on their lapel instead of a donkey? what?
joffeloff 1 month ago 21
Matt does an excellent interview here. Normally I like Cavuto, he's pretty fair, but here he was kind of being a bit pigheaded with that stupid hypothetical.
MrUnicorn1995 1 month ago
that's not extreme you idiot, he IS kerry.
joffeloff 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Mark your dollar bills with "Ron Paul 2012" thought this was a great idea and am passing it along.
LANDSHARK7130 1 month ago
Why don't they just vote for Paul and be done with it , what is their problem. This would certainly make the world a better place.
johnnycmajor 1 month ago
The Republican Party is a huge organization. It's like a large ship, it takes some time for it to start moving in a new direction when you shift the rudder.
Don't give up! Even if Ron Paul doesn't make it this time, it's not the end. We can get some libertarians on a Romney Cabinet, while grooming Rand to take up his father's banner.
AngrySkeptic 1 month ago
"....and hand the election to President Obama." Typical conservative guilt tripping. "Vote for our thug because he's better than the liberal" What a joke
chevydriver1123 1 month ago
The Libertarian Party is on the ballot in all states. The "What if there were only two choices" scenario is just dumb. In fact there are dozens of alternatives to D and R.
PissedFechtmeister 1 month ago
Ron Paul IS NOT dangerous or naiv. He believes in diplomatic negotiations and not just obeying The Industrial Military Complex that Obama anf the rest does.
MadjidKhan 1 month ago 3
40 cents on the dollar? Are you absolutely sure? Seems to me it's more like 97 cents on every dollar!
TheeBudGuru 1 month ago
@TheeBudGuru I think it's actually 43. At least that's the number Gary Johnson has been throwing out.
PissedFechtmeister 1 month ago
Republican version of John Kerry! LMFAO!! Good One!
TheeBudGuru 1 month ago
"if some one held a gun to my head..."
makes me think of
southparkstudios (dot) com/full-episodes/s08e08-douche-and-turd
informative, and funny.
dayvidiot 1 month ago
Sorry Neil, but we always have a 3rd choice! It's called a "write in"...
johannas58 1 month ago
can't wait for the next election
vonGleichenT 1 month ago
Ron Paul forms great coalitions. He is responsible for the auditing of the central bank, the fed reserve. He is responsible for the tea party. He is the leader of constitutional government and free market economics in the party. He does not lie and he's never wrong. I'm sick of seeing santorum, romney and Newt parrot him. They are liars and snakes. They work for the anglosphere mercantile banksters that own the fed reserve. Ron Paul works for liberty.
dd00hli 1 month ago
If it was between the 2, I would do the same thing I did last election...Write in Ron Paul...
OlGreyWolf58 1 month ago
1:09 - Was there something cut from that?
MooseOfReason 1 month ago
Fox News is the worst of them all. They spread the message of being right wing, freedom loving news and the second Ron Paul comes into the picture it's "OH HE CAN'T WIN". With the exception of John Stossel and possibly Cavuto (from what I've seen he interviews Ron Paul relatively frequently) the rest might as well be MSNBC.
longlivecrow 1 month ago
@longlivecrow there's also the judge, and red eye, etc. Fox is far from the worst. Though I agree, it's disgusting to see them marginalize the only guy saying what they've been preaching the last 4 years.
daPlumber702 1 month ago
@longlivecrow He has another supporter in Judge Napalitano!
johannas58 1 month ago
Look what if you had to choose, i mean realistically, do you want McDonalds or Burger King?
FreakMan2k 1 month ago
@FreakMan2k neither!
johannas58 1 month ago
At the very end: "Are they going to try to accommodate those views, that is the real question"
HAHAHAHAHA.
I don't care if politicians accommodate views. I care about when politicians say they will do something and then they lie! OBAMA!
Ron Paul 2012
linagee 1 month ago
I will consider voting Romney ONLY if I feel he genuinely promises to be far more fiscally responsible than Obama, but I am not holding my breath.
takerdust 1 month ago
Why do they say Romney doesn't have a credible plan to cut spending? Ron Paul has no support in the GOP to get a spending bill passed, let alone in both houses. Ron Paul can no more get spending cut than Barak Obama can pass a bill to end Obamacare.
swampfaye 1 month ago
@swampfaye Can you cite a "spending bill" that Paul has introduced?
Is it possible that the bills he's introduced are not popular with his colleagues because they threaten to take away the goodies that they enjoy so much?
johannas58 1 month ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul South Carolina Moneybomb happening NOW January 14!!!! Donate at ronpaul2012 (dot_com)
Goal 6 million to win!!!
AliceInWonderlandSyn 1 month ago
Don't miss out on this exclusive information about Mitt Romney: watch?v=EQwrB1vu74c
GalneGunnarTV 1 month ago
Exactly - Romney vs Obama ? Screw it i'd rather have a Obama who will discredit liberals with his terrible leftist policies then to vote for mr. flipflop big goverment Romney who will discredit Conservatism with ... with his terrible leftist policies.
MrJigssaw1989 1 month ago 5
i havent met one person who likes Romney... maybe they are fucking with us...
iAshtonss 1 month ago 3
Ron Paul is a novelty and nothing else. He's not the first and won't be the last. There's almost always been one in almost every election... Ralph Nader, Lyndon LaRouche '76-'04, Bob Richards in 1984, Ross Perot in 1992 and '96. All of them have small dedicated groups of support, mostly young people. None pose a serious challenge. There is a common denominator among most of them... that is they're all nutty as fruit cakes. I wonder who will be next.
NAGGERNUTZ 1 month ago
@NAGGERNUTZ Well what a shame that Ron Paul has a pretty good chance to win - according to 5 days old CBS poll - Ron Paul vs Obama. Paul would get 47% of independents (obama 40%). He is 1% away from obama when you add republican and democratic voters.
MrJigssaw1989 1 month ago
@MrJigssaw1989 - Dude, come on. This is an almost carbon copy of Ron Paul's 2008 campaign. He has a small, dedicated support base of mostly under 30's white males. He raised over 6 million dollars in one day, an amazing amount by anyone's standard, but he still never won a single state and finished with a paltry 4% of the vote. He'll finish this campaign with 8%. And I'm giving him 4 points over '08.
NAGGERNUTZ 1 month ago
I am WAY tired of holding my nose while I vote!
TheBuilderguy1 1 month ago
i HATE when media does hypothetical shit to discredit people.
ammoniha 1 month ago 4
Here's the thing. If your candidate isn't the party nomination, don't think for one moment you are forced to vote for the "lesser of two evils". There is, on EVERY state ballot for president, a WRITE IN slot. A few presidents have won primaries with write in votes. If you don't vote because you don't like either candidate, get a clue and write in your vote. Otherwise, don't complain.
gothnate 1 month ago
Fox shills are worthless. What if? What if? The what if question comes up only to try to score moron points.
tomperanteau 1 month ago
See hes not about getting O out of the white house.
Amyls64 1 month ago
ok So Ron PAul wants to cut medicare. THats not good if he wants to get senior votes.
Amyls64 1 month ago
@Amyls64 It isn't like he's going to pull the plug on medicare immediately, he's only going to try to begin to ween the people off of it until it can safely be done away with in favor of more effective options. Ron Paul has no intention of leaving anyone high and dry except the establishment.
Maat922 1 month ago
@Maat922 Well I can tell you this. Id like to hear what his plan Really is. Because the facts are old people get sick and they need help because they dont have income. .. SO if he cuts medicare they will all just end up going on MEdicaid. Trust me. The whole thing is a joke. THe real issue that needs to be addressed is HEALTH care.ID much rather pay for preventive measures then intervention when it comes to healthcare. IT would be a lot cheaper too in the long run.
Amyls64 1 month ago
@Amyls64 the sniors will be dead before anything is enacted. Timetables are what are key here. Everyone thinks plans are always immediately implelmented. It's more about culture change before policies are voted in.
bsevans007 1 month ago
@bsevans007 good point. so then why vote at all
Amyls64 1 month ago
I wish i when one of these talking heads starts trying to push their toe the party line agenda someone would just come out and say "Romney? I'm not voting for that leftist, big government piece of crap under any circumstances."
Buffalo122333 1 month ago 32
I like Matt Welch just fine. I'm good with the Tea Party, too. But Matt Welch doesn't speak for the Tea Party, even if we were to concede that the Tea Party has a single voice, which it doesn't. In New Hampshire, Romney got a larger share of those voters who claimed to be sympathetic to the Tea Party than the venerable Mr. Paul (if I'm not mistaken). I'll bet it will remain that way throughout the primary season, Mr. Welch.
NOLAMarathon2010 1 month ago
It's so ironic that the candidate who has show more consistency in the defense of liberty than anyone else is the same candidate that the Republican establishment and networks like Fox say is unelectable. Only goes to show how far away from the root American principles these organizations have become. "The Constitution? Nah, people will never vote for that. So when's the next war?"
duhg599 1 month ago 52
@duhg599 With Iran or with China? Iran is gonna hit 2013 and China will be 2015...save up some money and you may be able to buy some price-inflated popcorn for $19.97 per kernel.
Ravengaurd6 1 month ago
@duhg599 Soon.
Panpiper 1 month ago
Seriously the 2 party system in out country is SO SO FLAWED. We need a 3rd party but unfortunately establishment doesn't want that
robm425 1 month ago
@robm425 A third party would be great. Currently the two parties just prevent eachother from doing anything, some people like that of cause but it's ridiculous what people do just to get power.
If I lived over there I couldn't give either party my vote just because they don't support democracy. Because what is a democracy if you won't compromise?
SnoweyMan111 1 month ago
@SnoweyMan111 Democracy is not a synonym for compromise. Sometimes not compromising is the very essence of democracy. Let's start with not compromising on basic human rights for starters!
greyed 1 month ago
@greyed Don't act stupid. Yes of cause it's not a synonym for compromise, nor is it something that should happen in every decision a democracy makes. BUT, the current state of US politics is one side says that something is good, other side says that it sucks, and nothing happends. So that the current majority holder (of votes) look bad.
And suggestion obama makes, good or bad, will be rejected. Same for the republicans have presidency next time.
Should I have to explain this really?
SnoweyMan111 1 month ago
@SnoweyMan111 No. But you might consider that you're commenting on a video from a libertarian source and might just have libertarian people reading, and replying, to said comments. IE, try to imagine how silly it is to say that government inaction is a *bad thing* to a libertarian; someone who believes that our current government has far overstepped it's bounds.
Hint, we would be rejoicing if only our government were so deadlocked as you claim it is!
greyed 1 month ago
@greyed How can you even say that? Regardless of their opinions not changing anything is a bad idea. Republicans can stop pretty much anything they want actually. If they just come to a consensus to disagree with the proposal.
I'm not even a US citizen, it's not my place to meddle, but from my Swedish point of view, when the government can't lead a debate and come to some sort of consensus and vote accordingly it's terrible.
Also, I can't take Fox news seriously in any situation anymore..
SnoweyMan111 1 month ago
@SnoweyMan111 Change in and of itself is not desirable. Doing anything simply for the sake of not doing nothing is counter productive. Again, you're not grasping that libertarians want to reduce government involvement. So when the Democrats what to do bad thing A and the Republicans want to do bad thing B we just see the choice as being between bad and bad. In that situation NOT TAKING EITHER ACTION IS THE SANE ACTION.
greyed 1 month ago
@greyed "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".
That's a terrible idea if you want progress.
And that is all I'm ever going to say to you.
SnoweyMan111 1 month ago
@SnoweyMan111 Nope, that's not what I said at all. Yes, it's broken. But doing *anything* is not the same as doing *the right thing*. Furthermore government is not always the answer. So sometimes the best way to fix the problem is to get government out of the way. You can't do that with compromise between two parties who both want to expand the scope of government. In that situation what's the best you can hope for? That they deadlock and government doesn't expand. It's not a hard concept.
greyed 1 month ago
republicans beware of the LIBER-TEA PARTY!
doctaedwards 1 month ago
LOL 3rd party
JESTER588 1 month ago
I wouldn't call that pragmatism, I would call it embracing hopeless debt.
TheAetherspeak 1 month ago
FUCK YOU MITT RMONEY.
iChanging 1 month ago
Ron Paul 2012
andrew807x 1 month ago
LOL he even looks and acts like John Kerry, watch his facial expressions lol. Mitt Kerry
satinspringsarabians 1 month ago
Yes, I would sit the election out if it were only the two.
ZombieX13 1 month ago
@chornyikot You a Stefan Molyneux fan? :O)
Rcwatson83 1 month ago
I just keep thinking "My God, what a wasted opportunity..." The establishment Republicans are actually going to nominate another McCain, another Bush, another statist. Question: do you vote pragmatic and "join the team" or principle and vote for the best candidate without regard to the status quo partisans?
If the Republicans shoot themselves in the foot AGAIN....
they've lost me for good and next election, the immoral statist wins.
ChornyiKot 1 month ago 2
Great interview Mr. Welch. You should do more speaking out for Ron Paul. Try and get on the Fox main network and tell those neo-cons what's up.
ryankinda 1 month ago