Rep. Ron Paul: "Liberty Defined"
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-05-03/rep-ron-paul-liberty-defined
Congressman Ron Paul is very popular among libertarians and Tea Party conservatives. He recently announced he is forming a campaign exploratory committee and will make an announcement about a possible White House bid by June. The newly elected chairman of the House Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy joins Diane to discuss the meaning of the term "liberty" and how it is the seed of America.
Guests
Rep. Ron Paul
physician and twelve-term congressman from Texas
Video Extra
U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) says that the U.S.'s killing of Osama bin Laden "raises as many questions as it answers." Paul says that "right now" would be a good time for the U.S. to withdraw forces from Afghanistan and that he believes "the connection between foreign policy and our financial problems is very significant." Paul also believes the government should release some proof of bin Laden's death. "Why does our government invite conspiracy theories all the time?" he said:
U.S. Rep. Ron Paul talks about his views on abortion. "If you don't have high respect for human life, you can't have respect for liberty," he said:
Program Highlights
Rep. Paul on bin Laden's Death
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) spoke with Diane about everything from the U.S's killing of Osama bin Laden to his thoughts on how abortion policy relates to the idea of "liberty" as he defines it.
Paul said that in spite of the pleasure most Americans felt upon hearing of bin Laden's death, the event "raises as many questions as it answers."Paul said that "right now" would be a good time to get out of Afghanistan, emphasizing that one of bin Laden's stated goals was to get the U.S. to bankrupt itself through its involvement in Afghanistan.
Paul also had doubts about the U.S.'s ability to confirm that it was, in fact, bin Laden they had killed. "To my knowledge, I didn't know they could do DNA proof that quickly," he said.
Defining Liberty
"Liberty for me recognizes the fact that each individual has a right to his or her life and that the government is not allowed to coerce them into trying to mold their economic life or their personal life. It's the absence of coercive force by government and a rejection of coercive force by any individuals," Paul said.
Diane asked Rep. Paul about the place of regulatory agencies in protecting the public, especially people like miners who work in dangerous situations. "They don't do a very good job," he replied, citing the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig last year in the Gulf of Mexico.
When Diane suggested that there would be even more disasters if we didn't have such regulatory agencies, Paul responded that "...too often, the government gets in bed with big business, and that's where our tragedy comes from."
Abortion
"You believe in smaller government, but you think government should put a stop to abortion," Diane said.
"What I'm most interested in is the recognition of the value of human life," Paul said. "If you don't have high respect for human life, you cannot have respect for liberty, and that's what I'm interested in," he said.
Paul added that constitutionally, the federal government is "not supposed to be enforcing any kind of regulations or laws like that."
"There are strong reasons to believe that the unborn has legal rights."
Scaling Back Government
Diane closed the interview by asking Paul which specific parts of the government he would eliminate if he was elected president.
Paul's list includes: the Department of Education; the Department of Energy; the Food and Drug Administration; and deep cuts to the Pentagon's budget.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Ron Paul the most honest man in politics and it seems he is always right on the issues as well. Best of luck to you and your son.
I want to know how Dr. Paul views his ambitious and heavy-handed approach to freedom and deregulation in light of the history of the Industrial Revolution? Shouldn't he concede that most of our regulations exist because of prior abuses? What kind of balancing does he do between social improvement and liberty?
Liberty without justice is like half a yo-yo. Ask Doc about Ayn Rand. Didn't he name the eye doctor Senator after her? It has recently come to light that she was a crank idolizing child murderer William Edward Hickman (diaries). I can't believe a good old guy like Congressman Paul can't understand how equality is no longer possible between the typical working person and the Oligarch or corporation. Doesn't he realize that if he remains isolationist on war his life is endangered by arms and mercenary interests? Can't he see how helpless individuals have become in a corporately controlled environment where people depend on shopping for everything and can no longer access open land or resources. Today, only well-off landowners like Alice Walker can raise chickens, and they chase you out of the condo association over one tomato plant. You have to have clear credit to work retail these days but you can't afford normal bills on the pay. At a time when existence is becoming untenable Paul's free market delusions would unleash ruthless unlimited predation. As long as there are corporate charters and a wealth and income gap regulation is imperative. Anything else spells cascade failure because this economy depends on living wages. Even Walmart admits they are running out of customers. (see Truthdig) Let the people who have benefited from corporate welfare and the MICC pay the national debt. If he mentions a flat tax I'm turning off the program because that is cuckoo crazy.
"Didn't he name the eye doctor Senator after her?"
No.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD-R_OeP6tU
There seems to be more mis-information about Dr. Paul than the birther nonsense about our president (son named for Ayn Rand, etc). As the organizer of Ron Paul 2012 CNY, I am struggling with how to communicate his message so that present day Americans can clearly understand it. Many Americans now have such a corrupted understanding of the concepts of freedom and liberty that it is difficult to even get to first base with them. Our modern collectivist concepts of fairness and morality have nothing to do with the true meaning of those terms. I am hoping you will make a visit to Syracuse, Dr Paul. We'd love to have you in central NY!
Fed Reserve Chairman Bernanke had long resisted providing information to the public about the Fed's deliberations.
Now that Congressman Paul chairs a House subcommittee with oversight of the Fed, Bernanke is holding news conferences.
I think we owe Ron Paul a debt of gratitude for opening up the Fed.
Dear Diane,
Thank you for all of your good work and for having Congressman Paul on your show today.
Dr. Paul,
You have mentioned a "transitional plan" which involves getting Americans, including us progressive types, used to the libertarian way by making substantial cuts in our excessive military, homeland security and overseas commitments. If you can build and persuade a coalition of libertarian Republicans and progressive Democrats in congress to enact these reductions, how much savings do you think we can get over 4 years time and how much of that savings would you allow to be invested in domestic programs and projects such as health care and green energy? I am a life long liberal Democrat who proudly voted for President Obama in the 2008 primary and general election. I do not agree with you on economic policy but I see the whole progressive agenda going down the drain if we don't find the money to fund it. I think your transitional plan, with more specifics, offers us a way toward less federal government, reduced debt and more funding resources to build a peaceful green economy while getting America out of the empire building and maintenance business. Is my hopeful assessment in harmony with what you believe our country needs to do over the next 5 five years?
Thanks for your time.
Cornelius
Given that he faces opposition from many mainstream forces due to some of his libertarian ideals, would Rep. Paul consider signing a pact promising not to take some of the more "extreme" measures that libertarians are known to advocate. As a libertarian myself, I dont feel the country is currently mature enough to withstand the legalization of drugs such as Cocaine & Heroin; if the rep. signed a pact promising not to decriminalize their USE, I think his viability as a nominee would skyrocket.
Wouldn't you have to concede that it is the industrial revolution that created the middle class, and increased the overall living standard of those nations that accepted liberty, freedom, and the fundamentals of capitalism? This is nothing new. Look at those nations that accept capitalism (albeit a bastardized form of it) and those that do not. Where capitalism is accepted you will find more freedom, more equality, and liberty- plain and simple.
Freedom and liberty mean absolutely nothing to those without human rights. The human rights accepted by our constitution, religions, and the U.N.'s Declaration of Human Rights do not have a price tag. They define the dignity of man. The Paul's, Rand and Ron, would have man return to the dark ages of slavery and wars, and their human costs.
Ron Paul - you are the voice of reason crying in the wilderness, but here are some "devil's advocate" questions for you:
1. Do you really think you have a chance to be president in 2012? For one thing, some will say you are too old. (But I'm glad you'll be in the debates to get the libertarian voice heard out there) I have seen bumper stickers: "Ron Paul was right"
2. You and many republicans say most people are smart enough to lead their own lives well enough that government need not intervene so much. For example, take social security: The smart ones with good habits and values will save for their retirement, but there are so many without the necessary intelligence, values and habits. Therefore
many people think that we need social safety nets because without them, too many WON"T take care of themselves, then we'd have massive social unrest and riots in the street without government taking care of them.
3. In the 1800s children worked in factories like slaves, until government stepped in and we got child labor laws. People say pure unfettered capitalism allowed this. Comment?
4. I think that socialism is a "knee jerk" easy reaction to the societal ills people see around them. For one thing, we're so used now to government intervening in all aspects of our lives that it's most people's "mindset". Therefore, I think we are doomed to keep sliding into socialism. The majority today do not have the critical thinking skills and the inclination to study various arguments in order to arrive at libertarianism. (Actually, a kinder opinion of them is that they don't have the time to study these things because they are so busy working and trying to put food on the table.)
Dear Diane and Dr. Paul,
Why have most politicians and the mainstream media tried to marginalize and ignore Dr. Paul's repeated warnings about our weakening economy and our interventionalist foreign policy? In a speech before the US Congress on Feb. 2, 1999, Congressman Paul warns about the increasing military involvement in Iraq after passage of the "Iraq Liberation Act" in 1998 leading to overt aggression and war there. In the same speech Congressman Paul talks about the dangers of a financial bubble that had developed due to our fiat money and CREDIT EXPANSION and warns of an impending recession/depression.
This was 1999 and he saw our problems then! Why do people continue to ignore him and the truth? Do we Americans not want to face harsh reality?
Anthony C.
A Libertarian in Oneida, NY
Yes, the robber baron capitalists expressed their freedom and liberty requiring 12 hour work days in a life hazardous workplace environment, a small step from slavery. The blackened buildings of Pittsburgh were an indication of the liberty and freedom to utilize the resources of clean air, water, coal and iron. They did provide libraries. That is, the workers did.
A bit off-topic, but I noticed that Diane's voice is so much clearer today than last week, bringing to mind her show from a couple of weeks ago discussing treatments for spasmodic dysphonia.
I wonder whether she received Botox last Friday.
Ron Paul is 75 years old.
He would be more than 80 years old by the fourth year of his term in office if he were elected in 2012, older than even Reagan was at the end of Reagan's first term.
Given the realities of the electorate's prejudices (specifically, its strong age-bias), he must realize that he stands no realistic chance of being elected.
So what is really behind his possible plans to run for the presidency?
Hubris? The money he'd be able to generate?
A combination of both?
I cannot believe this man is getting any airtime. He is a complete lunatic!
Please inform Dr. Paul that DNA testing can be performed in a matter of hours. The long time span is more a result of commercial testing facilities capacity than an inherent need for an extended testing period. Even back in 2006 Saddam's DNA tests were performed in less than 12 hours and the testing technology has come a long way since then.
Richard
Monkton, MD
We see all too often that some people's personal lives cause harm to others, whether it be through murder and robbery or fraud and deceit. Where is the line between the government exerting power to mold citizens' lives, and upholding the public safety?
I don't doubt that Mr. Paul believes in what he is saying, but he, like all libertarians I know, sound very angry - mad at the world.
I'm curious what Mr. Paul feels about situations as in Libya, where we have a pro-democracy uprising against an oppressive government with superior weaponry. Do we have a responsibility to intervene to help others who are struggling for their own liberty, or are we bound to stand aside and let them be killed?
Dr. Paul assumes the rational actor argument with respect to capitalism. Capitalism follows the golden rule: "those with the gold make the rules".
Please don’t allow Congressman Paul to slide out of answering questions about the horrors of the Industrial Revolution by changing the subject to the emotive topic of the bailouts. Does he support the regulating of child labor; the creation of safe working conditions; the banning of payment in kind instead of cash wages; the payment of overtime; the safeguarding of the environment from patently toxic substances? Please ask him if he has read Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle. Does he oppose the regulation of the food supply and of medical practice and the supply of drugs?
Please ask for unequivocal answers.
Isn't the difference between the government and corporations, that government is, at least in concept, made up of representatives of the people, whereas, corporations are private institutions with their own ambitions? I would say that's why some people have more faith in government regulation than not...
Ask Congressmember Paul why his concept of liberty and non-coercion forces women who become pregnant under any and all circumstances to continue their pregnancies. How can limited government and freedom outlaw abortion?
Dr Paul's approach to government is nuanced and principled. How refreshing!
In the "free market" banks took ridiculous risks to make incredible profits. And yet if we had allowed them to fail it could have crashed the entire global economy & put us into another Great Depression. Doesn't that reveal how the free market works when left to its own devices?
Also, how do you feel about Elizabeth Warren and the new Consumer Protection Agency which is designed to level the playing field so consumers can see clearly what they are signing up for.
Is the Constitution now simply an idealistic document when the nation is subject to draconian legislation such as the Patriot Act? Who is really being protected? Is it not based on presumptions from the events of 9/11. Wouldn't the nation mature from an independent investigation into 9/11? Or are we more concerned about the nation's respect for its government based on what might come to light? America's media, that should be digging into such questions, plays dumb regarding 9/11, as though there are no questions about hidden agendas. The nation appears to be living the big lie with much contentment. How sad.
Excellent points. Let's press Diane to hold Mr Paul's feet to the fire on these questions.
Whenever I hear about someone like Ron Paul talk about small government, personal freedom, and deregulation for business, they use examples such as prohibition or a small business owner mired in regulation rules. What about issues such as the environment, where one business can effect the environment in such a way that it prohibits other businesses from thriving, or individuals to suffer health damages? For instance, a large hog farm that pollutes the nearby water supply so that a local fisherman cannot work, or a factory that pollutes the air and causes children to asthmatic. Shouldn't some things be regulated?
It sounds like Ron wants it both ways, no government yet abortion is regulated!
That doesn't sound like a "libertarian" to me.