At least in most countries in Latin America, slavery was criminalized (in my country around the 1950s), rather than having the government buy the slaves from slave-owners. Paul's method would be considered completely racist here, as it would've encouraged slave-owners to refuse to sell their slaves in the hope of increasing their price. And refusing a good or service to someone on the grounds of race would be considered completely unacceptable, from both a moral and legal standpoint.
@FreedomForUsAll yeah because that's how things work. that's what the constitution enables us to do. you do realize some folks just bypass this process, and some just ignore the constitution altogether.
Hmm. Only Ron Paul could make opposing the Civil Rights bill seems plausible. Still not sure what he was talking about as far as property rights were concerned. Was he saying that store owners should be allowed to have "No Blacks" signs in the store window?
I guess I can see his point. If I was black, Id rather the racist people were open about it.
@dghansen85 Yes that is what he is saying as far as PRIVATE business runs. If I run restaurant and says "no blacks" then no one has legal power to stop me from doing it. But they can tell people about this through talking, internet forum and etc... and people who doesn't like racism will not use my NO BLACK restaurant and I will lose more customers and later I'll close down.
the punishment comes automatically by me failing my business. There is no additional law require for this.
@dghansen85 first I like to see the evidence you're talking about. it was consider successful because gov killed the time that require for free market to work w/ civil rights.
and if the "NO BLACK" sign restaurants kept doing well and succeed then it worked because their business model apparently works. I personally don't believe racism is not right. But I can't force that opinion on someone. whatever business model it may be if it doesn't hurt somebody directly then it's ok.
@Pledius fixed-I mean to say I think racism is not right. I had double negative there in first post.
cont. I think racism will go away through more people getting education. We still got racism. People don't say it loudly but it's still there and it happens. it only "shrunk" racism through fear. unless we make people UNDERSTAND why it's wrong, racism will never go away.
@Pledius The "evidence" was just my generalized statement that "prior to the civil rights act many successful southern restaurants had "NO BLACK" signs." This is undisputed, so I am using it as evidence. It also runs antithetical to your notion that racist businesses would fail. They clearly did not.
Then you claim that the government didn't give the free market enough time. Yet, there were approximately 100 years between the American Civil War and the Civil Rights acts.
@dghansen85 generalize statement does not equal evidence then. what % was so call "many successful southern restaurants" if you don't know the % how do you know so many succeeded ?
let's see, the whole north side of America VOLUNTARILY getting rid of slaves and VOLUNTARILY helping slaves from south to escape was force? civil rights act only started 1964, so I don't think it was force at all. this is undisputed; I mean this thing is taught at middle school level. Free market was clearly working
@Pledius I'm sorry I can't continue this debate. You're pro-free market, and pro-Ron Paul, so you have good instincts, but your arguments are just very, very sloppy. Good luck.
@dghansen85 Segregation was the law at that time. That isn't any more free market or respectful of property rights as it is to mandate who property owners may not discriminate against.
Erm, no. Business owners are not legally allowed to do that, so it goes far beyond business owners being open about it. If Ron Paul had his way, business owners would be able to deny services to people based on their race. That sits well with whites and Paultards in general, but it doesn't sit well with those who would likely be effected. This nonsense about the system working itself out in the end -- doesn't help the people being discriminated against in there here and now.
Lol, Russert fails so much in this part when he talks about the Constitution. He somehow thinks it's unconstitutional to amend the constitution... fail
@webran61 He was speaking in the context of the Civil War years. He was suggesting that buying and releasing the slaves would have been a better alternative to war; not that anyone should get "compensated" today.
@webran61 He was speaking in the context of the Civil War years. He was suggesting that buying and releasing the slaves could have been an alternative to war; not that anyone should get "compensated" today.
what hes doing in planned guys Tim is intentionally forcing Ron Paul to knit-pick over meaningless B.S. so he has less time to inform the american people about his policy the corporate media has thought this through very well.
Rand Paul ate his words on the Civil Rights legislation just like his father did here. It is ridiculous for public or private businesses to openly discriminate against the public based on characteristics they cannot control.
To compare it to cigar smokers being banned is equally ridiculous. Rightly or wrongly smoking bans were put in place to benefit the health of the fellow patrons and workers. Last time I checked being black or disabled wasn't a health risk to the public.
@route99 You're missing the point dear. It's a property rights issue. You wouldn't say the government can say you have to allow anyone into your home. Why should a privately-owned, funded and operated business have to?
I wouldn't go to a business that didn't allow someone in based on their race. I don't know anyone that would. do you?
What if it's the other way around? If there's a lesbian bar that wants to say no men can come in? I would support that bar's rights to allow who they chose.
@BurningOrchids It is not only right to property, it is also freedom of association and the fact that commercial transaction must be voluntary. It is amazing how leftists can be against all these things and then support them for the Ground Zero mosque. We need to be consistent to have an equal society.
@route99 Wrong. Mandating integration is equally unconstitutional as mandating segregation. We, theoretically, at least live in a free country where we have inalienable rights to our property and can freely associate with whoever we want. DO you think the Muslim's building a Mosque near ground zero should have rights to property. If so, then you must be consistent in allowing racists to have those same rights. Lastly commercial transactions in a free society must be voluntary and qualified.
First off I am a HUGE fan of Ron Paul Good on Russell for making him work hard on those answers... I wish he would do the same for Democrats but well done... First time I have ever seen Ron Paul work hard... Still have a TON of respect for him.
The constitution is like the bible, some good, some bad things in it, alot of it not clear and confusing.
It's a false ideology to follow something 100% because you believe it's the be-all-end-all.
Too many people cite the "constitution" to justify something they want done just like people use the bible to justify something whether it's good or bad.
come one he works for msnbc. Keith olbermann would have named him the worst person in the world if that happened. But this is great, because he didnt softball ron paul, ron paul gained more respect from the viewers. Bc. obama was softballed, he prolly didnt get the same effect, bc. he wasnt asked the tough questions.
Wow. All of you are such idiots. God rest Tim Russert's soul. His untimely death was a tragedy. However, I wish he would've had some balls and asked people like the ever so great B. Obama questions in just a slanted and shit way as this. Our entire media is a joke. A bunch of manipulative idiots trying to push through an agenda. Sounds like American politics for the past 80 years.
"You say you're for the constitution but you say you want to amendment it. Can you explain this?" "That's constitutional" ROFL Russert wasn't ready for that.
Was the point of this interview seriously just to find any flaw Ron Paul has and try and expose him? I doubt Russert treated any of the other nominees this way.
End Birthright Citizenship for Illegal people. Go look around for a Paul video, it is very obvious. You only have Birthright CITIZENSHIP if you are born in the USA UNDER the USA JURISDICTION! If you come here ILLEGALLY you are not under JURISDICTION! YOU ARE ILLEGAL!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"illegal people"
The Paultards actually think there are "illlegal" human beings? Do you have any shame? There is no such thing as an illegal person you racist, cold-hearted Pauleocon. You don't even know what ending birthright citizenship is halfwit? Ending birthright citizenship would make the children of undocumented immigrants criminals for simply being born on a certain portion of land. BTW - Don't even write in all caps ever again. You look kind of crazy.
Okay. So, you're a true "nature is law" kind of person right? As in, there is no such thing as law, because Nature Creates Law. Man doesn't. In that aspect, suree, there is no such thing as an illegal human being and no such thing as borders and no such thing as owning something.
I am 100% for the "Native American" way of life. If you can get that into the congress and ban all man made things, I am with you. But, as of now, we are supposed to live under the Constitution. Supreme Law of the USA.
Right they are undocumented. They trespass. They are illegal. We are supposed to PROTECT private property. If I own land and you enter it, you are illegally entering my domain. In your case, I can't own land since land isn't owned by anyone. It wouldn't make the children criminals, they just will not get a USA citizenship. The parents should be responsible for their actions.
So anyone who walks on "your land" should be deported is your thinking? You know it's also illegal to smoke pot. Am I an "illegal" person for doing so? There is the laws and morality dictated by the state and there are own personally standards of law. Land is a gov granted right not a natural one. I personally am an anarchist and devout anti-statist. I should be allowed to secede from gov and still live in the U.S. Deportation is statism and anti-individualist.
You still don't understand... Ending birthright citizenship would take away the citizenship of a U.S. born child of undocumented immigrants. They already have this right from the Constitution. Paul wants to change the Constitution and spit on individual rights moreover.
No no. I do understand. The Constitution GRANTS it to people who are in the USA UNDER Jurisdiction. Someone who enters illegally, is not under jurisdiction of the USA. I realize you are anti-laws by man, but under this system this is how it works. Believe me, I wish we lived in simpler times as well... Just nature and us.
No but under the Constitution and man made "laws", there is property granted to people. You are correct, it is not a natural one, for NO-ONE can OWN land. If you smoke pot, yes you are breaking the law. Of course, the Constitution doesn't allow laws like that to be made on a Federal Level and in all reality, I would imagine most states would regulate it, if the Federal Govt. wasn't so harsh on it.
Dude, what's not to get? There is a proper way to enter the US. People have to wait for their names to be drawn from lotteries all over the world for a green card and then wait for however many years for citizenship. Why should people who basically jump to the front of the line (even if it's for their children) be rewarded?
It's simple. You prefer statism and I do not. I think living things should be able to wonder freely without restraint, and you believe in segregation. I hold the libertarian position.
No I do not prefer statism. No I do not believe in segregation. Idiot. Living things should be able to WANDER freely? If you think so, you should be a vegetarian, if not vegan. Second of all, the US is one country. Why should people be able to come here freely? People shouldn't be able to travel from country to country without restraint. That's basically the New World Order. Who knows what kind of havoc that can wreak?
I am vegan. I also oppose zoos, and caging animals for human pleasure. I'm for global anarchism in the long run. So I do think EVERYONE and everything should be able to wander freely. Call it the NWO is you want. It's an empty term. Just old "us vs them" argument from the right.
Tim Russert for part of the time did a good job asking tough(but honest) questions to Ron Paul. The other part of the time, he acted as if it was a debate and took things out of context. The biggest part of Russert taking things out of context wer for so called "earmarks." The bills he did call for funds were from the existing congressional budget. They were for local funds such as where the post office in their community would be.(that bill passed)
<3 Ron Paul. That guy is just so damn adorable. I have one question though: How is he still in office? You'd think that with his kind of brilliance, he'd have been thrown out by now for actually being truthful.
John C. Freemont plan to get rid of slavery was much better then Abe's. The Reason why the Confed. Secede was because they knew what Abe was going to do. The other victum in the Civil War was States Rights. I'm not a racist but the moment I say "states rights" BAM the racist label get's put on me.
The fear was that freeing the slaves would shoot down the S. Economy. Abe didn't perpose that nor even after. I respect Abe but there are things that he did that have had huge ramafacations on the US now. Green Backs, States Rights, Draft ect.
there is no way either of you are going to prove you annual income...not only that you are being extremely racist when you assume that this guy colects welfare...i see his name and it is clearly inaccurate..but 2 wrongs do not equal a right
russert needed to go so does o'rielly, hannity, coulter, and that anoying shit on "red eye". I would say we needa get rid of a lot of other incompetent news reporters in the mainstream media.
Govt, media & academe absolutely adore big railroad's boy Lincoln. America's 1st bonafide dictator, Lincoln suspended habeas and saw killed 600,000 Americans under his command - that was 1 in every 5 men, or SIXTY MILLION of today's population.
Thats more than Stalin, Hitler, Mao & Pol Pot murdered combined!!!!
Govt suckup Russert thinks that cost less than buying the slaves freedom. Yeah - Right - typical govt groveler for fame & fortune!!!
Russert was just another CFR pro-welfare-warfare statist scumbag cheerleader.
See how the scum did their all to marginalize the ONLY candidate telling the truth, while they all lavish praise on CFR/NWO member puppets Hillary, Obama & McCain - where WE LOSE no matter who gets elected among the three.
Write in Ron Paul.
You suck Russert - just as hard as all yer media lackey pals against freedom do too.
Screw him. Now I am ashamed to be from Buffalo too.
And tinky, you calling Russert a neocon who is just out to get Paul is ignorant.Paul is fairly intelligent and I cherish his ability to think openly and differently, but you should appreciate the fact that Russert is giving him the ability to voice those thoughts.Just because Russert takes a certain side or stance on this show doesn't necessarily mean that is his personal opinion, he just needs to support the opposite view so Paul can give an educational answer that expresses his views properly.
Dartrad, The American Way of life was changed to get to this point where we have become dependent on these things. Change is inevitable, your view should be(as an American, who is free to think and who's fate is in his own hands)to embrace it and hope to influence and provoke change.
Dr. Paul's proposals of cutting military spending, getting rid of the welfare state, and abolishing the income tax is like saying "let's change the American way of life". These ideas are "radical" not in the sense that they are new, but that they threaten how big government is perceived and what its role is in serving the American people. Read the U.S. Constitution and you'll realize how far we've strayed. We are no longer a country of free will, but an enslaved population in endless debt.
Paul does have a point. But one point is not enough to be president. As soon as you go into the details, for example the amount of money that can be saved by a different foreign policy, Paul needs to pass. His point of view about the constitution is basically: "It´s constitutional if we change the constitution." That´s where all his other arguments collapse.
The problem is that he is not saying that he will protect the constitution, as he would have to as a constructionist. Instead he says that he will change the constitution to meet his demands - it´s the other way round.
In a way he does make sense, but it´s because of pragmatism, not because of his principles. He can´t really say that government spending is wrong, because the counterargument would be: Well, then just change the constituion to make it right.
hes not changing the constitution. where in the constitution does it say we have to spend money on keeping troops overseas and that we must have a cia? in fact, we were built on limited gov't therefore limited spending
Go ask John McCain how many troops we have overseas. Ask him the amount of money it takes to run our foreign policy overseas. I bet he's just FULL (of sh*t) of answers...
I'd like to commend Russert for getting into the issues that aren't found in debates and actually getting to the bottom of them; but then he takes a shot at Dr. Paul and then changes the subject before he can defend himself. I'm having a hard time seeing where Russet is coming from. Does he really want people to know about Dr. Paul? Or is he trying to make the Dr. look like a fool?
I agree with you 100%. I made a similar comment on part 2 of 4. I have never seen Tim Russert treat any guest like this. Then again, Ron Paul is frequently abused by nearly every host that has him as a guest. It is painfully obvious that these hosts are issued orders to try to ruin this man. It is unfortunate because he's about as close to an American hero as you can get.
I think Russert (and most of the Bipartisan establishment) doesn't know what to think about Dr. Paul. He is arguing positions that haven't been argued for 20, 30, and even 40 years. People can't fathom some of his ideas.
Exactly...neither did i want to fathom those ideas...then the more youtube vids i watched, the more i realised how hopelessly enslaved and preconditioned we r to big govt. It's like the Matrix, everything you were told was true turns out to be an illusion...thank God Dr. Paul unplugged me!
Russert you are such an ass hat! Shut your mouth and listen to sense emanating from Ron Paul's mouth. These liberals and neo-cons (who are liberals that believe in entitlements and have warmongering tendancies) hate the Constitution and want to turn our country into a socialist welfare state (we're halfway there already). Ron Paul for VP!
There's a national media blackout of presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul. There's no other explanation when you study his campaign accomplishments. You probably didn't hear it on the news, but he finished second in Maine, Nevada, and Louisiana and won 25 percent of the vote in Montana, 21 percent in Washington and North Dakota, 17 percent in Alaska, and 16 percent in Minnesota, and in a few of these contests he beat McCain. This clearly qualifies him as a serious candidate.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Why do morons still believe Ron Paul can win? He doesn't have ANY delegates or states. John McCain needs 100 delegates to whin the Republican nomination. Do you people even know the election process?
You're posting this same message on all his videos. Why then are you even watching these videos is my question? You would think you would at least correct "whin"
Bite me, u propagandized moron! DO YOU know the election process? Those delegates "won" by McNut r not bound. They have 2go thru 2more rnds of conventions; 1st disctrict/county, then state(nominate National delegates.) Nothing funnier than a moron calling more informed citizenry, morons. Listen dumbf*ck neoKUNT, scandals will implode McNut. O-bomb-a Hitlery? NewsFlash, they BOTH voted FOR extension of PatriotAct & EVERY increase in warfunding. & R4 preEmptiveNuking of Irn,Pkstn. Really, change?
This guy Russert is such a douchebag! "You say you love the constitution so much, so why do you want to change it?" And Ron Paul is just bewildered at the ridiculousness of that comment. Love it.
Wow, these people really hate what Ron Paul stands for. Which means they really hate the constitution and Americans. He is exposing the media and money men and politicians for what they really are. A bunch of twisted dictators that just want to control our lives.
War is the answer when reasonable men stop acting reasonably. Only in America did we have to kill each other to free slaves. Says something about our ability to think and reason doesn't it?
We can be better, we can do this thing called government better, especially if there is less of it in our lives, our pocketbooks, against our freedoms.
Elect RON PAUL and let's start an upward, not downward spiral.
Loss of civil liberties, corporations/military industrial complex in control, wars just to make business, have no moral purpose, bankrupting America. Want to have war, fine, but let Congress declare it as stated in the Constitution, not skirt responsibility for 60 years, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq.
McCain? 100 more war years, more fascism.
Vote IN RON PAUL, and every coward in Congress, OUT.
ANG9967, gotta have amnesty for illegals, how are you going to get around those pesky 14, 15, & 16 amendments? What nerve!, freeing slaves! What's next? Exporting "good" jobs to India because India'a cheaper? Sure you can't pick lettuce without being there, but the good jobs are all virtually computer based anywhere! Soon we'll have nothing to do here but watch Warren Buffett make zillions.
im pretty sure lincoln didnt start the civil war. confederates started the war. and he didnt call for troops to "get rid of the original intent of the republic." he did it to preserve the union.
and am i lost or did this guy just admit that he opposes the civil rights act in favor of the holy rights of private property?
Is that idiot really naive enough to believe that the civil war was about Slavery? You have got to be kidding me! I hate Slavery as much as everyone else. But that war like every other war was about economics.
Here's how OBAMA would fix the economy (serious, I copied this from today's Democracy Now)
" Instead, we should pull the country together to get this economy back on track. That's what I intend to do as president of the United States of America."
Yeah, that's gonna do it!
Ron Paul- The ONLY Candidate with a clue, instead of double speak.
Yeah, I can't believe this Tim Russert guy has this job. The way he blithely stated that, if not for the Civil War, "Then we would still have slavery." What?! Does he really think the federal government is the sole moral body in the entire nation?! He actually thinks he would still have slaves today, if not for good old Abe Lincoln! This is laughable!
HAHAHA this interviewer is dangerously stupid. He thinks that amending the Constitution is unconstitutional, when the Constitution was amended FROM THE BEGINNING to include the bill of rights.
He is ignorant. 99% of Americans are ignorant of their own rights and obligations as described by our founding document. We can thank public schools and obstinant parental giudance for that.
China would never be STUPID enough to attempt to put a base in Canada. If they attempted to, the base would not exist very long. Your argument amounts to Moral Equivalence, which is the most naive and deluded ideology in existence.
China is a one-party state, the US is a free democracy, get a grip already.
The only reason a country attacks or goes to war with another country is to win. Why would Iran and North Korea dare attack US knowing that we have over 3000 nuclear weapons. Tell me a reason why they would attack us?
If two Ron Paul supporters went to your house and took a couple of rooms and were telling you what to do, while your parents were paying a couple hundred bucks a month for rent for them. You wouldn't get mad?
I understand it perfectly, if I were in Iraq's situation, I would be glad to have as an ally the only Superpower left in the free world. The only Great power that wanted my country to be a free democracy. Easy to understand.
Your analogy is absurd. North Korea and the US are still at war, no treaty has been signed. North Korea knows it is under no threat from America's Nukes, it presses the potential to overrun Seoul with a 1.3 million-man army. South Korea is a sovereign nation, we do not control them, therefore your silly analogy does not apply at all.
he attacks him for wanting to amend the constitution? jesus christ. was he this combative with the other republican candidates that went on this show?
Ron Paul haters=Spamers I'd rather have this moron advertising some sex site than telling every Paul supporter to give up. What a philosophy, give up.
u fuck face..how is he weakninig national security if he wants bring all the troops home from germany korea saudi..if anything hes making us strong...
scared..thats funny..americans don't believe in logic and the truth no more..bush got yourhead so fucked up...im in the military ive been korea and germany and iraq...we aint doing shit..go ron paul ill vote for him becuase he wants to money in pocket instead arabs and kbr contractors overseas
At least in most countries in Latin America, slavery was criminalized (in my country around the 1950s), rather than having the government buy the slaves from slave-owners. Paul's method would be considered completely racist here, as it would've encouraged slave-owners to refuse to sell their slaves in the hope of increasing their price. And refusing a good or service to someone on the grounds of race would be considered completely unacceptable, from both a moral and legal standpoint.
CoonAndFriends2 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
w w w .change.org/petitions/cbs-news-60-minutes-get-ron-paul-on-60-minutes
bluev2srt 1 month ago
russert gets schooled on the amendment issue
garbear38 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RON PAUL IS A RACIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
13stevejohnson 8 months ago
Ron Paul is the best!
Donttr3adonm3 9 months ago
The criminals fear Dr Ron for good reason.
ryanshaunkelly 9 months ago 6
hold 3
LaserGummyBear 9 months ago
5th May 2011 Debate day money bomb
wellingtonian 9 months ago
You call yourself Constitutional but you want to AMEND the Constitution... Ha ha ha ha!. Smart guy that Tim Russert..
FreedomForUsAll 10 months ago
@FreedomForUsAll yeah because that's how things work. that's what the constitution enables us to do. you do realize some folks just bypass this process, and some just ignore the constitution altogether.
theeonionbagel 6 months ago
Hmm. Only Ron Paul could make opposing the Civil Rights bill seems plausible. Still not sure what he was talking about as far as property rights were concerned. Was he saying that store owners should be allowed to have "No Blacks" signs in the store window?
I guess I can see his point. If I was black, Id rather the racist people were open about it.
dghansen85 1 year ago
@dghansen85 Yes that is what he is saying as far as PRIVATE business runs. If I run restaurant and says "no blacks" then no one has legal power to stop me from doing it. But they can tell people about this through talking, internet forum and etc... and people who doesn't like racism will not use my NO BLACK restaurant and I will lose more customers and later I'll close down.
the punishment comes automatically by me failing my business. There is no additional law require for this.
Pledius 1 year ago
@Pledius The evidence shows otherwise. Prior to the civil rights act many successful southern restaurants had "NO BLACK" signs.
dghansen85 1 year ago
@dghansen85 first I like to see the evidence you're talking about. it was consider successful because gov killed the time that require for free market to work w/ civil rights.
and if the "NO BLACK" sign restaurants kept doing well and succeed then it worked because their business model apparently works. I personally don't believe racism is not right. But I can't force that opinion on someone. whatever business model it may be if it doesn't hurt somebody directly then it's ok.
Pledius 1 year ago
@Pledius fixed-I mean to say I think racism is not right. I had double negative there in first post.
cont. I think racism will go away through more people getting education. We still got racism. People don't say it loudly but it's still there and it happens. it only "shrunk" racism through fear. unless we make people UNDERSTAND why it's wrong, racism will never go away.
Pledius 1 year ago
@Pledius The "evidence" was just my generalized statement that "prior to the civil rights act many successful southern restaurants had "NO BLACK" signs." This is undisputed, so I am using it as evidence. It also runs antithetical to your notion that racist businesses would fail. They clearly did not.
Then you claim that the government didn't give the free market enough time. Yet, there were approximately 100 years between the American Civil War and the Civil Rights acts.
dghansen85 1 year ago
@dghansen85 generalize statement does not equal evidence then. what % was so call "many successful southern restaurants" if you don't know the % how do you know so many succeeded ?
let's see, the whole north side of America VOLUNTARILY getting rid of slaves and VOLUNTARILY helping slaves from south to escape was force? civil rights act only started 1964, so I don't think it was force at all. this is undisputed; I mean this thing is taught at middle school level. Free market was clearly working
Pledius 1 year ago
@Pledius I'm sorry I can't continue this debate. You're pro-free market, and pro-Ron Paul, so you have good instincts, but your arguments are just very, very sloppy. Good luck.
dghansen85 1 year ago
@Pledius
There were civil rights acts long before 1964. One was passed soon after the civil war was ended, if I'm not mistaken.
The North didn't voluntarily get rid of slaves. Northern politicians used their power (force) to pass laws that prohibited slavery.
MasterfulInsane 4 weeks ago
@dghansen85 Segregation was the law at that time. That isn't any more free market or respectful of property rights as it is to mandate who property owners may not discriminate against.
dutch1999 11 months ago
@dghansen85
Erm, no. Business owners are not legally allowed to do that, so it goes far beyond business owners being open about it. If Ron Paul had his way, business owners would be able to deny services to people based on their race. That sits well with whites and Paultards in general, but it doesn't sit well with those who would likely be effected. This nonsense about the system working itself out in the end -- doesn't help the people being discriminated against in there here and now.
MasterfulInsane 4 weeks ago
I am glad that Tim Russert is dead.
DanielDamascusKimery 1 year ago
Lol, Russert fails so much in this part when he talks about the Constitution. He somehow thinks it's unconstitutional to amend the constitution... fail
Willredd94 1 year ago
No, Tim Russert makes himself look like an ass 0:00 to 7:18.
typebhero 1 year ago 2
liberals are such fucking morons, the government is the end all be all for existence, why "anything black people have is due to government"
mikeboosh 1 year ago
12/23/1913 <-- The most dreadful day of modern man.
MrCone223 1 year ago
I smiled when Tim Russert died. That is all.
Hapafull 1 year ago
"...buy the slaves and release them."
So Ron Paul would have been for COMPENSATING slaveowners for their "loss." Great.
webran61 1 year ago
@webran61 And the Reconstruction didn't compensate them?
syghur 1 year ago
@webran61 You would rather see 600, 000 americans die then?
BurningOrchids 1 year ago
@webran61 He was speaking in the context of the Civil War years. He was suggesting that buying and releasing the slaves would have been a better alternative to war; not that anyone should get "compensated" today.
officerdownco 1 year ago
@webran61 He was speaking in the context of the Civil War years. He was suggesting that buying and releasing the slaves could have been an alternative to war; not that anyone should get "compensated" today.
officerdownco 1 year ago
what hes doing in planned guys Tim is intentionally forcing Ron Paul to knit-pick over meaningless B.S. so he has less time to inform the american people about his policy the corporate media has thought this through very well.
RunFasterPussycat 1 year ago
Rand Paul ate his words on the Civil Rights legislation just like his father did here. It is ridiculous for public or private businesses to openly discriminate against the public based on characteristics they cannot control.
To compare it to cigar smokers being banned is equally ridiculous. Rightly or wrongly smoking bans were put in place to benefit the health of the fellow patrons and workers. Last time I checked being black or disabled wasn't a health risk to the public.
route99 1 year ago 5
@route99 You're missing the point dear. It's a property rights issue. You wouldn't say the government can say you have to allow anyone into your home. Why should a privately-owned, funded and operated business have to?
I wouldn't go to a business that didn't allow someone in based on their race. I don't know anyone that would. do you?
What if it's the other way around? If there's a lesbian bar that wants to say no men can come in? I would support that bar's rights to allow who they chose.
BurningOrchids 1 year ago
@BurningOrchids It is not only right to property, it is also freedom of association and the fact that commercial transaction must be voluntary. It is amazing how leftists can be against all these things and then support them for the Ground Zero mosque. We need to be consistent to have an equal society.
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
@route99 Wrong. Mandating integration is equally unconstitutional as mandating segregation. We, theoretically, at least live in a free country where we have inalienable rights to our property and can freely associate with whoever we want. DO you think the Muslim's building a Mosque near ground zero should have rights to property. If so, then you must be consistent in allowing racists to have those same rights. Lastly commercial transactions in a free society must be voluntary and qualified.
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
Good riddance to Tim Russert
sdflksdfkfh 1 year ago
Ron Paul is amazing.
haterdrinkinhaterade 1 year ago
First off I am a HUGE fan of Ron Paul Good on Russell for making him work hard on those answers... I wish he would do the same for Democrats but well done... First time I have ever seen Ron Paul work hard... Still have a TON of respect for him.
Foundingfatherfollow 1 year ago
The constitution is like the bible, some good, some bad things in it, alot of it not clear and confusing.
It's a false ideology to follow something 100% because you believe it's the be-all-end-all.
Too many people cite the "constitution" to justify something they want done just like people use the bible to justify something whether it's good or bad.
cupocity303 1 year ago
Russert's arguement from 2:30 is pathetic. Of course you can amend the constitution. Wonder what his civic's grade was in high school?
BUBBASIMS 2 years ago
lol that was hilarious...
Akidnameddroo 2 years ago
Tim Russert's a moron... it's not constitutional to amend the constitution??? Gimme a break.
TheExRepublican 2 years ago
man, I used to think Tim was fair, all he does is snipe and change the subject when Ron comes out with an answer
nochtis 2 years ago
ron paul did a great job in this
heatersens 2 years ago 4
the more I listen to Ron Paul, & the more I UNDERSTAND issues
I thought I previously understood, the more I admire this man, he truly is a champion of our CONSTITUTION & LIBERTY!
sirTittytwister 2 years ago 8
"oh come on Tim"...classic...I love Ron Paul.
slurppypurr 2 years ago 4
fuk tim russet
pdhahan 2 years ago 6
Tim Russert makes himself look like an ass from 2:29 to 3:00
ItzMeea0 2 years ago 26
agreed
wilcox71 2 years ago
@ItzMeea0
yeah not allowing children to take part in economic opportunity is a good thing....
13stevejohnson 1 year ago
@ItzMeea0 hahaha, darn right
garbear38 6 months ago
This is waht I call a fu**en honest person... All the best for Ron Paul.
joseoliverjg 2 years ago 7
I wonder if Russel attacked Obama the same way...on all his flipflopping and ridiculous philosophy?
AStarSpangledGirl 2 years ago 10
come one he works for msnbc. Keith olbermann would have named him the worst person in the world if that happened. But this is great, because he didnt softball ron paul, ron paul gained more respect from the viewers. Bc. obama was softballed, he prolly didnt get the same effect, bc. he wasnt asked the tough questions.
nader85021 2 years ago
Wow. All of you are such idiots. God rest Tim Russert's soul. His untimely death was a tragedy. However, I wish he would've had some balls and asked people like the ever so great B. Obama questions in just a slanted and shit way as this. Our entire media is a joke. A bunch of manipulative idiots trying to push through an agenda. Sounds like American politics for the past 80 years.
malibu0715 2 years ago
"You say you're for the constitution but you say you want to amendment it. Can you explain this?" "That's constitutional" ROFL Russert wasn't ready for that.
rjtoten 2 years ago 3
Was the point of this interview seriously just to find any flaw Ron Paul has and try and expose him? I doubt Russert treated any of the other nominees this way.
cmm06h 2 years ago 3
i think we should end birth-right citizenship, but only for mexicans.
FishlegsJones 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ending birthright citizenship? Ron Paul spits on the Constitution like it's his job.
Vote3rdParty 3 years ago
not if its an amendment.
CommSense 2 years ago 4
End Birthright Citizenship for Illegal people. Go look around for a Paul video, it is very obvious. You only have Birthright CITIZENSHIP if you are born in the USA UNDER the USA JURISDICTION! If you come here ILLEGALLY you are not under JURISDICTION! YOU ARE ILLEGAL!
Paulintheoh8 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"illegal people"
The Paultards actually think there are "illlegal" human beings? Do you have any shame? There is no such thing as an illegal person you racist, cold-hearted Pauleocon. You don't even know what ending birthright citizenship is halfwit? Ending birthright citizenship would make the children of undocumented immigrants criminals for simply being born on a certain portion of land. BTW - Don't even write in all caps ever again. You look kind of crazy.
Vote3rdParty 2 years ago
Okay. So, you're a true "nature is law" kind of person right? As in, there is no such thing as law, because Nature Creates Law. Man doesn't. In that aspect, suree, there is no such thing as an illegal human being and no such thing as borders and no such thing as owning something.
I am 100% for the "Native American" way of life. If you can get that into the congress and ban all man made things, I am with you. But, as of now, we are supposed to live under the Constitution. Supreme Law of the USA.
Paulintheoh8 2 years ago
Right they are undocumented. They trespass. They are illegal. We are supposed to PROTECT private property. If I own land and you enter it, you are illegally entering my domain. In your case, I can't own land since land isn't owned by anyone. It wouldn't make the children criminals, they just will not get a USA citizenship. The parents should be responsible for their actions.
Paulintheoh8 2 years ago
So anyone who walks on "your land" should be deported is your thinking? You know it's also illegal to smoke pot. Am I an "illegal" person for doing so? There is the laws and morality dictated by the state and there are own personally standards of law. Land is a gov granted right not a natural one. I personally am an anarchist and devout anti-statist. I should be allowed to secede from gov and still live in the U.S. Deportation is statism and anti-individualist.
Vote3rdParty 2 years ago
You still don't understand... Ending birthright citizenship would take away the citizenship of a U.S. born child of undocumented immigrants. They already have this right from the Constitution. Paul wants to change the Constitution and spit on individual rights moreover.
Vote3rdParty 2 years ago
No no. I do understand. The Constitution GRANTS it to people who are in the USA UNDER Jurisdiction. Someone who enters illegally, is not under jurisdiction of the USA. I realize you are anti-laws by man, but under this system this is how it works. Believe me, I wish we lived in simpler times as well... Just nature and us.
Paulintheoh8 2 years ago
No but under the Constitution and man made "laws", there is property granted to people. You are correct, it is not a natural one, for NO-ONE can OWN land. If you smoke pot, yes you are breaking the law. Of course, the Constitution doesn't allow laws like that to be made on a Federal Level and in all reality, I would imagine most states would regulate it, if the Federal Govt. wasn't so harsh on it.
Paulintheoh8 2 years ago
Dude, what's not to get? There is a proper way to enter the US. People have to wait for their names to be drawn from lotteries all over the world for a green card and then wait for however many years for citizenship. Why should people who basically jump to the front of the line (even if it's for their children) be rewarded?
Shahn718 1 year ago 2
It's simple. You prefer statism and I do not. I think living things should be able to wonder freely without restraint, and you believe in segregation. I hold the libertarian position.
Vote3rdParty 1 year ago
No I do not prefer statism. No I do not believe in segregation. Idiot. Living things should be able to WANDER freely? If you think so, you should be a vegetarian, if not vegan. Second of all, the US is one country. Why should people be able to come here freely? People shouldn't be able to travel from country to country without restraint. That's basically the New World Order. Who knows what kind of havoc that can wreak?
Shahn718 1 year ago
I am vegan. I also oppose zoos, and caging animals for human pleasure. I'm for global anarchism in the long run. So I do think EVERYONE and everything should be able to wander freely. Call it the NWO is you want. It's an empty term. Just old "us vs them" argument from the right.
Vote3rdParty 1 year ago
@Vote3rdParty ok lets send the illegals to your house to wander
bi0dude42O 1 year ago
Tim Russert for part of the time did a good job asking tough(but honest) questions to Ron Paul. The other part of the time, he acted as if it was a debate and took things out of context. The biggest part of Russert taking things out of context wer for so called "earmarks." The bills he did call for funds were from the existing congressional budget. They were for local funds such as where the post office in their community would be.(that bill passed)
FATToney12 3 years ago 3
<3 Ron Paul. That guy is just so damn adorable. I have one question though: How is he still in office? You'd think that with his kind of brilliance, he'd have been thrown out by now for actually being truthful.
kylatruther 3 years ago 3
Russert was a blow hard and had not even a basic understanding of the Constitution or constitutional process!
MySexLifeOfCrime 3 years ago 2
John C. Freemont plan to get rid of slavery was much better then Abe's. The Reason why the Confed. Secede was because they knew what Abe was going to do. The other victum in the Civil War was States Rights. I'm not a racist but the moment I say "states rights" BAM the racist label get's put on me.
DinoDude06 3 years ago
What did the south believe Abe was going to do?
narutofan1108 3 years ago
The fear was that freeing the slaves would shoot down the S. Economy. Abe didn't perpose that nor even after. I respect Abe but there are things that he did that have had huge ramafacations on the US now. Green Backs, States Rights, Draft ect.
-Daniel
DinoDude06 3 years ago
Thanks for explaining.
narutofan1108 3 years ago
he is so wrong on the civil war. the war was started by lincoln's election which caused the confederacy to secede.
sol3dg3 3 years ago
Lmao @ 2:30, Tim gets owned lol.
chefevild 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Tim crushed the old guy over and over, at 2:30 and repeatedly thereafter. Thansk for the ass-whipping, and rest in peace.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 years ago
you must be scared that yor welfare checks are gonna stop comming
deezenutsbiatch 3 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Not on welfare. Make way, way more money than you.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 years ago
there is no way either of you are going to prove you annual income...not only that you are being extremely racist when you assume that this guy colects welfare...i see his name and it is clearly inaccurate..but 2 wrongs do not equal a right
GullyMac 3 years ago
paul eats obama for breakfast.
snowtrot 3 years ago 40
& for lunch and dinner 8D
narutofan1108 3 years ago 2
and he gets michelle for dessert
Ele3tricEye 2 years ago
@snowtrot ....and then shits out a big steaming pile of Bernanke!
delanogaston 9 months ago
"That doesn't sound pretty radical to me that sounds like a reasonable approach."
toshzpelta 3 years ago
tim needs to let ron paul finish his thoughts, he's horrible
lakewood51 3 years ago 7
was pissing me off.
nidzodzoni 3 years ago
russert needed to go so does o'rielly, hannity, coulter, and that anoying shit on "red eye". I would say we needa get rid of a lot of other incompetent news reporters in the mainstream media.
Tackleqb 3 years ago 5
you're an idiot. show some respect.
cooley79 3 years ago
Govt, media & academe absolutely adore big railroad's boy Lincoln. America's 1st bonafide dictator, Lincoln suspended habeas and saw killed 600,000 Americans under his command - that was 1 in every 5 men, or SIXTY MILLION of today's population.
Thats more than Stalin, Hitler, Mao & Pol Pot murdered combined!!!!
Govt suckup Russert thinks that cost less than buying the slaves freedom. Yeah - Right - typical govt groveler for fame & fortune!!!
Ted Kennedy dances well to the CFR/NWO beat?
marxbitesall 3 years ago 5
Shut up, redneck idiot.
bighondo77 3 years ago
Russert was just another CFR pro-welfare-warfare statist scumbag cheerleader.
See how the scum did their all to marginalize the ONLY candidate telling the truth, while they all lavish praise on CFR/NWO member puppets Hillary, Obama & McCain - where WE LOSE no matter who gets elected among the three.
Write in Ron Paul.
You suck Russert - just as hard as all yer media lackey pals against freedom do too.
Screw him. Now I am ashamed to be from Buffalo too.
marxbitesall 3 years ago 2
get a life.
cooley79 3 years ago
And tinky, you calling Russert a neocon who is just out to get Paul is ignorant.Paul is fairly intelligent and I cherish his ability to think openly and differently, but you should appreciate the fact that Russert is giving him the ability to voice those thoughts.Just because Russert takes a certain side or stance on this show doesn't necessarily mean that is his personal opinion, he just needs to support the opposite view so Paul can give an educational answer that expresses his views properly.
bocaj327 3 years ago
you are stupid
scientistwriter 3 years ago
incessant mud-slinging!
lazarus8989 3 years ago
It's constututional to amend the constitution! Geeze Russert!
Ron is a genius, Russert was a neocon out to get him.
tinky1878md 3 years ago 4
Dartrad, The American Way of life was changed to get to this point where we have become dependent on these things. Change is inevitable, your view should be(as an American, who is free to think and who's fate is in his own hands)to embrace it and hope to influence and provoke change.
bocaj327 3 years ago
Dr. Paul's proposals of cutting military spending, getting rid of the welfare state, and abolishing the income tax is like saying "let's change the American way of life". These ideas are "radical" not in the sense that they are new, but that they threaten how big government is perceived and what its role is in serving the American people. Read the U.S. Constitution and you'll realize how far we've strayed. We are no longer a country of free will, but an enslaved population in endless debt.
dartrad7 3 years ago 5
Paul does have a point. But one point is not enough to be president. As soon as you go into the details, for example the amount of money that can be saved by a different foreign policy, Paul needs to pass. His point of view about the constitution is basically: "It´s constitutional if we change the constitution." That´s where all his other arguments collapse.
GCReptile 3 years ago
GCReptile:
Where do they collapse? He makes sense to me.
sidrosteel 3 years ago
The problem is that he is not saying that he will protect the constitution, as he would have to as a constructionist. Instead he says that he will change the constitution to meet his demands - it´s the other way round.
In a way he does make sense, but it´s because of pragmatism, not because of his principles. He can´t really say that government spending is wrong, because the counterargument would be: Well, then just change the constituion to make it right.
GCReptile 3 years ago
hes not changing the constitution. where in the constitution does it say we have to spend money on keeping troops overseas and that we must have a cia? in fact, we were built on limited gov't therefore limited spending
SonicYouth5469 3 years ago
Go ask John McCain how many troops we have overseas. Ask him the amount of money it takes to run our foreign policy overseas. I bet he's just FULL (of sh*t) of answers...
se36959 3 years ago 2
it is constitutional to change the constitution if you get an amendment. ever heard of prohibition?
rapsody 3 years ago 2
Russert doing a hit job on Paul, because Russert benefits from this corrupt system as well.
RSnelli 3 years ago
Not anymore, ah ah ah!
hazballs09 3 years ago 3
love rp's response about amending the constitution!
sharpie311 3 years ago 3
I'd like to commend Russert for getting into the issues that aren't found in debates and actually getting to the bottom of them; but then he takes a shot at Dr. Paul and then changes the subject before he can defend himself. I'm having a hard time seeing where Russet is coming from. Does he really want people to know about Dr. Paul? Or is he trying to make the Dr. look like a fool?
Skybox911 3 years ago 6
I agree with you 100%. I made a similar comment on part 2 of 4. I have never seen Tim Russert treat any guest like this. Then again, Ron Paul is frequently abused by nearly every host that has him as a guest. It is painfully obvious that these hosts are issued orders to try to ruin this man. It is unfortunate because he's about as close to an American hero as you can get.
fsujag54 3 years ago
I think Russert (and most of the Bipartisan establishment) doesn't know what to think about Dr. Paul. He is arguing positions that haven't been argued for 20, 30, and even 40 years. People can't fathom some of his ideas.
gpromeo54 3 years ago
Exactly...neither did i want to fathom those ideas...then the more youtube vids i watched, the more i realised how hopelessly enslaved and preconditioned we r to big govt. It's like the Matrix, everything you were told was true turns out to be an illusion...thank God Dr. Paul unplugged me!
mido191cm 3 years ago
excellent observation
LLroomtempJ 3 years ago
Amen Skybox911
sidrosteel 3 years ago
Russert you are such an ass hat! Shut your mouth and listen to sense emanating from Ron Paul's mouth. These liberals and neo-cons (who are liberals that believe in entitlements and have warmongering tendancies) hate the Constitution and want to turn our country into a socialist welfare state (we're halfway there already). Ron Paul for VP!
1993CorradoSLC 3 years ago 3
It would seem Abe had the idea to buy the slaves and release them as well. At least based on his letters. Dr. Paul was right, again.
Check out the recent release from Rochester University
Aphelion29 3 years ago 6
There's a national media blackout of presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul. There's no other explanation when you study his campaign accomplishments. You probably didn't hear it on the news, but he finished second in Maine, Nevada, and Louisiana and won 25 percent of the vote in Montana, 21 percent in Washington and North Dakota, 17 percent in Alaska, and 16 percent in Minnesota, and in a few of these contests he beat McCain. This clearly qualifies him as a serious candidate.
MMadmike 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why do morons still believe Ron Paul can win? He doesn't have ANY delegates or states. John McCain needs 100 delegates to whin the Republican nomination. Do you people even know the election process?
MJamal15 3 years ago
You're posting this same message on all his videos. Why then are you even watching these videos is my question? You would think you would at least correct "whin"
Sinnombre0000 3 years ago 5
Bite me, u propagandized moron! DO YOU know the election process? Those delegates "won" by McNut r not bound. They have 2go thru 2more rnds of conventions; 1st disctrict/county, then state(nominate National delegates.) Nothing funnier than a moron calling more informed citizenry, morons. Listen dumbf*ck neoKUNT, scandals will implode McNut. O-bomb-a Hitlery? NewsFlash, they BOTH voted FOR extension of PatriotAct & EVERY increase in warfunding. & R4 preEmptiveNuking of Irn,Pkstn. Really, change?
RosenKrantz666 3 years ago
This guy Russert is such a douchebag! "You say you love the constitution so much, so why do you want to change it?" And Ron Paul is just bewildered at the ridiculousness of that comment. Love it.
zakgreene 4 years ago 4
Wow, these people really hate what Ron Paul stands for. Which means they really hate the constitution and Americans. He is exposing the media and money men and politicians for what they really are. A bunch of twisted dictators that just want to control our lives.
almetcalf 4 years ago 4
man you can almost see the puppet strings on russerts mouth.
pacman99x 4 years ago 6
Ron Paul's comment to Tim on the Civil War was the intellectual equivalent of a nuclear bomb. Tim was annihilated.
pbcinla 4 years ago
War is the answer when reasonable men stop acting reasonably. Only in America did we have to kill each other to free slaves. Says something about our ability to think and reason doesn't it?
We can be better, we can do this thing called government better, especially if there is less of it in our lives, our pocketbooks, against our freedoms.
Elect RON PAUL and let's start an upward, not downward spiral.
Yourdeadmeat69 4 years ago
Loss of civil liberties, corporations/military industrial complex in control, wars just to make business, have no moral purpose, bankrupting America. Want to have war, fine, but let Congress declare it as stated in the Constitution, not skirt responsibility for 60 years, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq.
McCain? 100 more war years, more fascism.
Vote IN RON PAUL, and every coward in Congress, OUT.
We've had enough of this shit.
Yourdeadmeat69 4 years ago 2
Yourdeadmeat69, On McCain you forgot AMNESTY for illegals. VOTE RON PAUL.
ang9967 3 years ago 4
ANG9967, gotta have amnesty for illegals, how are you going to get around those pesky 14, 15, & 16 amendments? What nerve!, freeing slaves! What's next? Exporting "good" jobs to India because India'a cheaper? Sure you can't pick lettuce without being there, but the good jobs are all virtually computer based anywhere! Soon we'll have nothing to do here but watch Warren Buffett make zillions.
I wonder if he'd drive a Chevy made in Mexico?
Never mind, they're made in Canada anyway.
Yourdeadmeat69 3 years ago
im pretty sure lincoln didnt start the civil war. confederates started the war. and he didnt call for troops to "get rid of the original intent of the republic." he did it to preserve the union.
and am i lost or did this guy just admit that he opposes the civil rights act in favor of the holy rights of private property?
and he is supposed to be "progressive"?
quitecontrary23 4 years ago
Is that idiot really naive enough to believe that the civil war was about Slavery? You have got to be kidding me! I hate Slavery as much as everyone else. But that war like every other war was about economics.
Leveer13 4 years ago 4
I would like someone to show me a war that was NOT about economics!
pbcinla 4 years ago
I'll be sending £15 from Britain!
Without a war leader, our troops will pull out too :D
Threepwood23 4 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Here's how OBAMA would fix the economy (serious, I copied this from today's Democracy Now)
" Instead, we should pull the country together to get this economy back on track. That's what I intend to do as president of the United States of America."
Yeah, that's gonna do it!
Ron Paul- The ONLY Candidate with a clue, instead of double speak.
poysfxom 4 years ago
How is he so smart?
Threepwood23 4 years ago
paul has to lower his IQ level to communicate with Russert...
migo53333 4 years ago 10
Flexible
Threepwood23 4 years ago
Yeah, I can't believe this Tim Russert guy has this job. The way he blithely stated that, if not for the Civil War, "Then we would still have slavery." What?! Does he really think the federal government is the sole moral body in the entire nation?! He actually thinks he would still have slaves today, if not for good old Abe Lincoln! This is laughable!
kylebstiff 4 years ago 5
Russert didnt even understand what ammendment means..did you see Pauls face on this ..He looked at Russert like what the fuck??
migo53333 4 years ago
ron paul bitch slapped him
rich232399 4 years ago
HAHAHA this interviewer is dangerously stupid. He thinks that amending the Constitution is unconstitutional, when the Constitution was amended FROM THE BEGINNING to include the bill of rights.
Aechronia 4 years ago
He is ignorant. 99% of Americans are ignorant of their own rights and obligations as described by our founding document. We can thank public schools and obstinant parental giudance for that.
PropagandaPolice 4 years ago
China would never be STUPID enough to attempt to put a base in Canada. If they attempted to, the base would not exist very long. Your argument amounts to Moral Equivalence, which is the most naive and deluded ideology in existence.
China is a one-party state, the US is a free democracy, get a grip already.
tharnax 4 years ago
My comments were in reply to Tharnax, and they may be in reverse order. The first one begins with Define 'working in Iraq'. Read upwards. Thanks!
StudentsforPaul 4 years ago
Everyone should donate the Stimulus Package tax rebate to help elect Ron Paul for President.
I will.
jdw2001a 4 years ago
Good job Ron. Russett isn't any better than his potato brothers.
cpmcmah 4 years ago
haha amending the constitution is constitutional. Killed him
Masterhobo 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
yo guys, start writing "ho is Ron Paul?" or "Google: Ron Paul" on your dollar bills.
smal groups of people, that do that constantly will have a unbelivable effect ! !
life FREE or die FIGTHTING
MOGZH86 4 years ago
How has he lied?
feeknocks 4 years ago
Tim Russert is an impatient tool. Under that kind of rapid fire loaded questioning...well done Dr. Paul, well done.
sensorship 4 years ago
Ron Paul is way to damn smart. He really knows his shit.
anthrofinn 4 years ago
He is the most prolific candidate --- check out ronpaullibrary dot com. mises dot org is another great site that his articles appear on.
jasondeckerr 4 years ago
Backing away from North Korea, and backing away from Al Qaeda and Iran, great idea....
WHy not just tell them you're a scared bitch while you're at ?
tharnax 4 years ago
Tharnax,
The only reason a country attacks or goes to war with another country is to win. Why would Iran and North Korea dare attack US knowing that we have over 3000 nuclear weapons. Tell me a reason why they would attack us?
If two Ron Paul supporters went to your house and took a couple of rooms and were telling you what to do, while your parents were paying a couple hundred bucks a month for rent for them. You wouldn't get mad?
joepvang 4 years ago
This is the very idea many Americans don't understand. We forget to put ourselves in their shoes and see how it's like if we were in their situation.
mdrd66 4 years ago
I understand it perfectly, if I were in Iraq's situation, I would be glad to have as an ally the only Superpower left in the free world. The only Great power that wanted my country to be a free democracy. Easy to understand.
tharnax 4 years ago
Your analogy is absurd. North Korea and the US are still at war, no treaty has been signed. North Korea knows it is under no threat from America's Nukes, it presses the potential to overrun Seoul with a 1.3 million-man army. South Korea is a sovereign nation, we do not control them, therefore your silly analogy does not apply at all.
tharnax 4 years ago
For F R E E D O M !! free at last 2008 d o t c o m
Another big day if you can't afford $100 that's cool.
$5 from 200,000 people is a $1 million
$15 from 200,000 people is $3 million
truthfocused 4 years ago
he attacks him for wanting to amend the constitution? jesus christ. was he this combative with the other republican candidates that went on this show?
natedogg1835 4 years ago
Russert's a fucking idiot. Thanks.
SgtCrom 4 years ago
Nail on the head every time. That's all I have to say.
Alamo1744 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ron Paul crushed, one primary at a time.
A nice guy though!
Let his defeat be a lesson: NEVER run weak on National Security.
I kept trying to tell you guys, don't waste your money on this guy.....Should have bought some DVD's with that money....
tharnax 4 years ago
Ron Paul haters=Spamers I'd rather have this moron advertising some sex site than telling every Paul supporter to give up. What a philosophy, give up.
apocalyptichybrid 4 years ago
u fuck face..how is he weakninig national security if he wants bring all the troops home from germany korea saudi..if anything hes making us strong...
a2thezy 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Backing away from North Korea, and backing away from Al Qaeda and Iran, great idea....
WHy not just tell them you're a scared bitch while you're at ?
tharnax 4 years ago
scared..thats funny..americans don't believe in logic and the truth no more..bush got yourhead so fucked up...im in the military ive been korea and germany and iraq...we aint doing shit..go ron paul ill vote for him becuase he wants to money in pocket instead arabs and kbr contractors overseas
a2thezy 4 years ago