Powell Gammill

Fascist Nation

More About: Eugenics

Ron Paul — Rudy Giuliani exchange in the second debate watch for yourself


The Washington Post posted the video of the Ron Paul — Rudy Giuliani exchange in the second debate. . . sorta ;-)  It was really a 'make Rudy look courageous and tough' moment, which was why Rudy did it.  And the MSM was only too happy to oblige:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/32pvwv

Now, a liberal online media source, Raw Story, gives you the entire video exchange, in context, so you can make up your own mind (go all the way to bottom of page for video):

http://preview.tinyurl.com/24nuwy

See the difference?  See why the Internet is killing the corporate media?  See why intelligent people are getting their news from online, and making up their own minds . . . which is why government MUST get control back.

For now you can watch the entire debate for yourself at the MSM outlet who hosted the debate, Fox News:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/2fq548

Or you can read the transcript here, courtesy the New York Times:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/2yovdl

An excerpt of the above exchange:

MR. [Fox News' Wendell] GOLER: Congressman Paul, I believe you are the only man on the stage who opposes the war in Iraq, who would bring the troops home as quickly as -- almost immediately, sir. Are you out of step with your party? Is your party out of step with the rest of the world? If either of those is the case, why are you seeking its nomination?

REP. PAUL: Well, I think the party has lost its way, because the conservative wing of the Republican Party always advocated a noninterventionist foreign policy.

Senator Robert Taft didn't even want to be in NATO. George Bush won the election in the year 2000 campaigning on a humble foreign policy -- no nation-building, no policing of the world. Republicans were elected to end the Korean War. The Republicans were elected to end the Vietnam War. There's a strong tradition of being anti-war in the Republican party. It is the constitutional position. It is the advice of the Founders to follow a non-interventionist foreign policy, stay out of entangling alliances, be friends with countries, negotiate and talk with them and trade with them.

Just think of the tremendous improvement -- relationships with Vietnam. We lost 60,000 men. We came home in defeat. Now we go over there and invest in Vietnam. So there's a lot of merit to the advice of the Founders and following the Constitution.

And my argument is that we shouldn't go to war so carelessly. (Bell rings.) When we do, the wars don't end.

MR. GOLER: Congressman, you don't think that changed with the 9/11 attacks, sir?

REP. PAUL: What changed?

MR. GOLER: The non-interventionist policies.

REP. PAUL: No. Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East -- I think Reagan was right.

We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we're building an embassy in Iraq that's bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (Applause.)

MR. GOLER: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?

REP. PAUL: I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, "I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier." They have already now since that time -- (bell rings) -- have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don't think it was necessary.

MR. GIULIANI: Wendell, may I comment on that? That's really an extraordinary statement. That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.)

And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean that. (Enormous Applause.)

MR. GOLER: Congressman?

REP. PAUL: I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. When we went into Iran in 1953 and installed the shah, yes, there was blowback. A reaction to that was the taking of our hostages and that persists. And if we ignore that, we ignore that at our own risk. If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem.

They don't come here to attack us because we're rich and we're free. They come and they attack us because we're over there. I mean, what would we think if we were -- if other foreign countries were doing that to us?
 

1 Comments in Response to

Comment by Powell Gammill
Entered on:
The MSM response? Ignore Ron Paul, but report on Giuliani**Q**s couragoeous interuption. Don**Q**t believe me, read for yourself:

Bloomberg

Congressional Quarterly

AFP


Reuters
(did include Ron Paul comment out of context)

AP

New York Times

Taken from the Washington PostChris Cillizzi**Q**s spin:

WINNERS

Rudy Giuliani: The former New York City Mayor had nowhere to go but up after his showing in the first debate earlier this month when he struggled to answer questions concerning his position on abortion -- a failure that led to a renewed scrutiny of where he stands on the issue. But even with those lowered expectations, Giuliani stood out. Debates are all about definining moments, and Giuliani delivered the most memorable one of the early campaign season. Following a comment by Rep. Ron Paul (Texas) that insinuated the United States had provoked terrorists into launching the Sept. 11 attacks, a visibly angry Giuliani interrupted to question that **QQ**extraordinary statement**QQ** and asked Paul to recant it. An eruption of applause followed. It was a rare moment of genuine emotion amid the heavily scripted answers offered during much of the debate, and it stood out. Giuliani also found his footing on abortion, focusing on his desire to reduce the frequency of the procedure and pointing to his successes in New York City at doing just that. Abortion will never be a winner for Giuliani in these debates, but he effectively neutralized it for a night. [sic- He provided a link to the Washington Post video clip that started my **QQ**editorial.**QQ** Deliberate propoganda to prop up Rudy:-D]

LOSERS

Ron Paul: Paul**Q**s straight-talking nature won him some kudos from folks following the first debate. But he strayed into very dangerous waters last night with what sounded to many like a suggestion that America had provoked the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. **QQ**They attack us because we**Q**ve been over there,**QQ** Paul said. **QQ**We**Q**ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years.**QQ** Giuliani demanded that Paul rescind his comment, which he refused to do. Say what you will about Paul, but the suggestion that America is to blame for Sept. 11 is simply not a winning position in a presidential race, no matter what party you represent. Any good he did for his candidacy in the first debate was immediately erased with those comments last night.

[Powell -- Based upon online polling, they just don**Q**t get it ... or they hope it goes away.]


Join us on our Social Networks:

 

Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network:

http://freedomsphoenix.thinkpenguin.com/