Author Topic: WOW: Transcript of missing FOX debate video here  (Read 863 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
WOW: Transcript of missing FOX debate video here
« on: January 13, 2008, 06:12:32 am »
WOW: Transcript of missing FOX debate video here
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/25288
Posted January 13th, 2008 by MichiganJack

Dr Paul's passionate statement on electability is here. Its power comes through even without video. Excerpt is followed by link to entire transcript. Thank you State of South Carolina! (PS - I heard the rebroadcast, not the original, and this was definitely missing. But a portion that came later, regarding immigration, remained in the rebroadcast.)
----------------------------
(APPLAUSE)

CAMERON: Congressman Paul, yet another question about electability.

Do you have any, sir? There's always the question as to whether or not...

(LAUGHTER)

... you are, in fact, viable. Your differences with the Republicans on the -- with the rest of the Republicans on this stage has raised questions about whether or not you can actually win the Republican nomination, sir.

PAUL: Well, we've only had two little primaries so far. So it's pretty premature to decide which one is going to be the candidate. But, you know, when you think about it, if you measured everything I've ever said, every vote I've ever taken against the Constitution, you know, I'm a strict constitutionalist.

Are you suggesting the Republicans should write me off because I'm a strict constitutionalist? I'm the most conservative member here. I have voted, you know, against more spending and waste in government than anybody else.

(APPLAUSE)

So you're suggesting that I'm not electable and the Republicans don't want me because I'm a strict fiscal conservative, because I believe in civil liberties? Why should we not be defending civil liberties and why should we not be talking about foreign policy that used to be the part of the Republican Party?

PAUL: Mr. Republican Robert Taft didn't even want us to be in NATO and you're saying now that we have to continue to borrow money from China to finance this empire that we can't afford?

Let me see if I get this right. We need to borrow $10 billion from China, and then we give it to Musharraf, who is a military dictator, who overthrew an elected government. And then we go to war, we lose all these lives promoting democracy in Iraq. I mean, what's going on here?

(APPLAUSE)

And you're saying that this isn't appealing to Republicans? Where did this come about? I think this is the Republican message. I defend the platform. It used to say we'd (inaudible) the Department of Education. It doesn't say that now.

We, as Republicans, went and doubled the size of the Department of Education, so where have we gone? I think we've lost our way. And then the insinuation that I am less Republican because of that?

HUME: Congressman, thank you very much.

We have to take one more break. We'll be right back, with one of the most contentious issues of the day. Stay tuned.
----------------------------

http://www.thestate.com/presidential-politics/v-print/story/281494.html
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately