ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Ron Paul on Meet the Press

Posted: Sunday, December 23, 2007 2:54 PM by Mark Murray

From NBC's Lauren Appelbaum
On Meet the Press this morning, Paul called the American Civil War a mistake, criticized Ronald Reagan as a "failure," and refused to rule out a third party run.
 
Paul repeated his claim that Abraham Lincoln should not have started the Civil War to get rid of slavery. "Six-hundred-thousand Americans died in the senseless Civil War," he said. "No, he should not have gone to war. He did this just to enhance and get rid of the original tenet of the Republic," he told NBC's Tim Russert.
 
"Slavery was phased out in every other country in the world," Paul continued, responding to the question if America would still have slavery had there not been the Civil War. "The way I'm proposing that it should have been done is do it like the British Empire did -- you buy the slaves and release them. How much would that cost compared to killing 600,000 Americans?... I mean, that doesn't sound too radical to me. That sounds like a pretty reasonable approach."

Paul also criticized Reagan for not reducing the government to a "constitutional size." But Paul also is using Reagan's picture in his brochure. "He ran on a good program," Paul explained. "His idea was limited government ... and a strong national defense."
 
In 1987, Paul resigned from the Republican party. Now he's running as a Republican. "I represent what Republicanism used to be. I represent the group that wanted to get rid of the Department of Education, the part of the Republican Party that used to be non-interventionist overseas. That was the tradition, the Robert Taft wing of the party. There was a time when Republicans defended individual liberty and the constitution and decreased spending."
 
While Paul never voted for a bill with earmarks, he has included earmarks for his district in bills. "I put them in because I represent people who are asking for some of their money back," he explained. "But it doesn't cut any spending to vote against an earmark. And the Congress has the responsibility to spend the money. Why leave the money in the Executive Branch and let them spend the money?"
 
"It's like taking a tax credit," he continued, on why he doesn't refuse the money. "I'm against the tax system, but I take all my tax credits. I want to get their money back for the people."
 
Russert also asked Paul to explain his positions on abolishing agencies such as the FBI, CIA, and IRS. After listening to Paul list the reasons for abolishing the IRS, Russert asked the Republican presidential hopeful how much money would be lost without the IRS.
 
Paul replied that it would be "a lot" of lost revenue. Russert told him it would be "over a trillion dollars." Paul did not seem phased and said "the goal is to cut the spending."
 
"If you brought our troops home, you save hundreds of billions of dollars," Paul said, explaining how he would make up the lost revenue. "You can start saving immediately by changing the foreign policy and not be the policeman of the world."

Finally, Paul refused to rule out a third party run, saying he has "no intention of doing that." He previously ran for president in 1988 as the Libertarian Party's candidate, but is now running for the Republican nomination. "I can be pretty darn sure that I have no intention, no plans in doing that. And that's about 99.9% of a chance," he said. "I don't like people who are such absolutists -- 'I will not ever do this' or 'I will win' or 'I'm going to come in first.' I don't like those absolutists terms in politics."

Click here to go to the 'Meet the Press' Web site to watch video of Paul's appearance or to read the transcript.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Paul was amazing in the way he turned every attack on his record from Russert into a lesson on economics and/or  limited government. I was thinking when the interview started that Russert would be able to discredit Paul, and he did his best to do so, but I was very impressed with Pauls handling of the plethora of tough questions dug up by Russert's staff. Kudos to Ron Paul!
Ron Paul is a nut case and anyone who supports him is either ignorant or nut cases themselves.
Can you say "taken out of context" or what?
Thank God Paul came along.  Dr. Ron Paul for President!    I real human being!
Greetings from Australia

It is good to see Ron Paul get some reasonable attention in the 'mainstream media' for a change.  As an outside observer it is clear to me that htere is a tremendous groundswell for Ron Paul and and the corporate media is doing its best to ignore it.  This only makes the media look more like a commercial puppet.  Sad really!  However, on the up side, Ron Paul seems to take the simple premise on which the USA claims to have been founded and gives them new currency - excuse the pun.  We live in interesting times

e-regards

Jack
Great! I think this synopsis was actually better than the original interview. Tim fired questions so fast I could hardly think straight enough to listen..
It was an intense interview.  I think Paul did a solid job of explaining his ideological positions, and a very poor job of pandering for votes (which is fine by me).  The discussions on foreign policy and social security were excellent, and Paul made a very solid case for having to work within the system (earmarks) while fighting to change it for the better (voting against earmarked bills).  He still have to do his job as a representative of constituants; there's more then just ideological debate to being a Congressman.

I think Paul fared as well as, if not slightly better, then the last couple candidates Russert had on.  I get the impression that Paul, at least, spread his message instead of just defending himself the whole interview, which is a very good thing.
It must really frustrate the media when you have such a straight talking candidate. I never thought about paying for the slaves and setting them free. It would have saved thousands of lives. The civil war left a hatred to this day. Slavery is a terrible part of American history.

Reagan did have a huge deficit so unless you like big spending it would be hard to argue with Congressman Paul.

The truth be told this Website, MSNBC and NBC Universal are owned by GE which is part of the Industrial Military Complex that makes money off of wars. So maybe you have a dog in this fight.
Pauls comments all make sense. Some of what he proposes make me a little nervous, but change can be scary, however it is absolutely necessary or we are going to lose a lot of freedoms with national ID's and national checkpoints (yet an open border), "papers please", illegal immagrants draining our money taking all of our free handouts.

Paul is right on. Like it or not, it has to happen and we need real and drastic change. It may not be ez, but it needs to be done. Its the direction and a vote for anyone else is a vote for the wrong direction. At this time the direction should be less government, less government spending, no more of these crazy endless wars, like the war on drugs which is unwinnable and a blackhole of spending.

RON PAUL 2008
99.9% is not ruling out running for a third party.  Would 99.99% have cleared things up a little?

Why wowld anyone ask that question of the leading revenue earning presidential candidate?

Russert said that he would ask the other candidates but I doubt it.  We'll see.

You guys stick to your scripted questions.  I'll get my political news from YouTube and the bloggers.

I like a candidate who stick to his guns.
Tim Russert is really something. He investigates OTHER people back to what they said 20 years ago, but does Mr. Russert disclose his OWN conflicts of interest? No, instead he silently plans his character assasination attempt. Well, you kind of have to expect that type of hatchet job from someone who in bed with the status quo. I did my OWN little fact checking expedition and found the advertisers for Meet The Press.

GE lists 824 items regarding defense contracts on their website for 2007. http://www.ge.com/search/index.jsp

Boeing lists 72,200 items regarding defense.
http://tinyurl.com/2nm5y8

Fidelity Investments - tax and 401k services, need I say more?

Hummer - child company of AM General the company that makes all the HMMWV's for the Army

UBS - Another banking company, certainly they have nothing to fear from Dr. Paul, right?

Toyota - makes cars which are CURRENTLY cheaper to make in Japan (and then assemble here).

Aleve - you think Bayer Pharmaceuticals has a reason to fear Ron Paul - who wants to allow yound adults to opt out of SS and Medicare and is vehemently opposed to socialized medicine?

ABE - (shill for coal companies) do they have nothing to fear from Ron Paul's desire to deregulate nuclear power so we have safe, clean unlimited power?

CVS - A Pharmacy whose bread and butter is insurance and Medicare. Dr. Paul wants to remove the incentives for hospitals to overbill us.

Xerox - another defense contractor. Here's a link to their defense contracts of 2006.
http://tinyurl.com/2wjzbb

MasterCard - Huge banking coop.

Why didn't Mr. Russert let us know that he had a HUGE conflict of interest BEFORE THIS SEGMENT AIRED? When half of your advertisers are in defense, the other half split between banking and Big Pharma doesn't that constitute NEWS? I mean, Mr. Russert dug back 20 years or more on Dr. Paul to try to find "dirt". Why not look in your own mirror? I find the FACT the Mr. Russert did NOT disclose this relationship highly disturbing.
20 years ago Ron Paul resigned from the Republican party and they bring this us.  This "interview" was just hit pieces of sound bites.

Ron Pauls "earmarks" for a cancer hospital and intercoastal waterway that he requested but then vote against the bill.  It would be like if someone robbed you at gunpoint and then gave you an opportunity to get some of the money back and you didn't take it back because you didn't approve of robbery.  This is stupid.

GE really is working overtime to smear DR. Paul.  They will lose big $ when we stop policing the world in their defence contracts.  

Every single point in this article is skewed as a hit piece and not balanced with the facts.  

The IRS, if we cut the DOE end the Policing the world we could cut spending enough to end the IRS.  Since that is a long term goal and not a immediate goal of Dr. Paul the question was a non-sequitor and a ad hominem attack, a red herring.  

What we have seen today is intellectual liars at their best paid for by GE.  Who stands to lose billions if Ron Paul is elected.
Are you saying that Ron Paul hasn't been a Republican since 1987?
Tim Russert had to *read verbatim* each and every question.  He even stumbled over asking the questions.  Could this not be his attempt to tell the watching Media, "Hey, I am being forced to ask all these media smear questions"  Not one positive thing was asked of Dr. Paul - but he succeeded in throwing each and every question BACK AT TIM RUSSERT in a most positive and professional manner.  I liked Tim's warning to Paul in the last few seconds of the interview, be careful on your Campaign Trail... another warning from Tim THE CORPORATE MEDIA FASCISTS want you out of the way!  
Ron Paul's parting comment about corporate fascists read them the riot act, and called MSN out on what they were trying to do.  SUPER JOB MR. PAUL AND *DO* BE CAREFUL.. the revolution is brewing!!!
I'm pretty sure when I watched this interview that I heard it differently than Lauren did. I heard Paul say he seriously doubted that he called Regan a failure and asked for the origin of the quote as he believed it was incorrect.

Regan promised as did George Bush to reduce the size of government and both did exactly the opposite of their promises that's the point of his criticizing Regan and Bush.

I wonder, has the author seen the documentary Freedom to Fascism? Does the author realize that the majority of the money collected from the income tax is spent on the interest and for the creation of this backless currency? Does Mr. Russert realize this as well? I'm thinking no. For if it was a realization then the trillion dollar figure would be reduced dramatically for of the trillion dollar figure that Russert offered the actual worth after paying the fed to create the money is pennies on the dollar. The willingness to  portray Ron Paul as an unrealistic or uninformed economist is negligence on the reporters behalf to be informed with regards to the actual operations of the IRS and the Federal Reserve. Do your homework before you spout off about things you do not fully understand. For all our sakes.
paul, his hatred of blacks and all women continues to show.

remember , he believes a fetus is more important than the woman carrying it.
He'd have the woman die, and the fetus live
The interview with Ron Paul on Meet the Press was very informative.

I was not sure before who to support for president, but this interview made up my mind.

His answers were very clear and straight to the point.

Ron Paul clearly knows what is best for America.

He is the only politician for the people by the people and not for himself.

Thank you
Pressure Pressure and more Pressure.
A very difficult interview for sure.
There was no clear I got ya for Tim and he was looking for one.
Paul although did well in that many questions were from left field and deep in the past.
Many were also so called newspaper quotes. Lets see now A recent debate Paul said to McCain does not know the difference between Interventionism and isolationism yet the news didn't quote that quite right did they?
They softened it up quite a bit. How can a person run for president if he doesn't know the difference between these two different things.
Why on earth would someone dig that type of stuff (You called Bush a bum) up at all?
Would he have asked the then President at the time NYC was in deep trouble you said to NYC Drop Dead as the Headlines read?
He didn't ask Paul if this article was accurate!
Wasn't there once a news article saying the Clintons said they tried drugs when they were young?
I doubt you will see that question surface.
I would say this type of interview was slanted. There is no being prepared for such a type of attack such as this.
The question of taxes for instance was dismissive in intent. The question implies you can't do away with the income tax so why would you say something like that. This was not the type of interview that a Clinton or any other candidate the Media is pulling for would face at all.
But this is what they do - it's America or what has become of it.
Where defending wrong is hip in the news.
Maybe Tim would think differently if they decided to outsource his job. I kinda doubt it though.

Vin
How refreshing! A candidate for President who goes on Meet the Press and gives honest, unspun answers to every question. Paul is right -- we need to dramatically shrink the federal government. He has my support -- and my vote.
When the majority of the people see MSNBC lying and spinning stories like they did with the RON PAUL meet the press interview, they only hurt themselves.

MSNBC you wont talk about the Lakota indians declaring independance and taking their land back here in the usa,

You wont talk about BUSH SR buying 98,000 acres of "SAFE HAVEN" land in paraguay where they think they can hide.

MSNBC is NOT news, its propaganda
Russ is such a tough guy when he is questioning a candidate who is not supported by the military/medical/industrial/media/corporate complex and such a lamb when he questions Clinton, Bush or Cheney.
He is not a journalist.
He is a pawn in their game.
Went the primaries start, ron paul will have the last laugh.

Im even volunteering to stand watch and make sure none of the evil ones try and cheat the diebold machines.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who restore America's respect globally and return this country to what it was meant to be, not a sham run by elitist swine.

The Ron Paul Revolution
http://www.prezronpaul.com
Ron Paul stands for freedom, liberty and the american way.

As President he cannot do 99% of the things he would like to, because of checks and balances.  He can bring the troops home though, and that is why he has my vote
The War of Northern Aggression (Civil War) was a HUGE mistake and brought on a hundred years of hatred and lead to the race problems.  Slavery was on it's way out because of the industrial revolution and there were plans to buy the slaves and set them free.  The truth is Abraham Lincoln wanted to send the Africans Back to Africa.  Abraham Lincoln was racist.  

600,000 Americans dead and the years of economic problems and racial tensions could have been avoided and the slavery issue solved harmoniously.  Race relations would have been much more "European" where the Government did not wage a aggressive war against their own people to free slaves.  

Reagan did fail in his overall goal of a smaller government.  He ran on that platform and I voted for him on it.  But, the Govt grew.

Ron Paul will have a STRONG military and national defence.  How is having your troops spread all over the world good?  We could spend that money on a strong Navy.  Our military right now is weaker than it has been in decades.  

If you want a draft and WW3 don't vote for Ron Paul.  
Hillory won't end the war, she will say it is over but leave the bases and troops there.  
Sounds like a reasonable candidate- Ron Paul's got my vote :)
FIRST!!!11
A pretty fair assessment of the interview, Lauren.

I know the remarks about the Civil War will be unpopular, but I think Paul is spot on with that.
I don't agree with some of his positions, namely abortion(I wish Russert had questioned him on that),but he's right on the most important ones (Iraq, immigration)  

A lot of people want to try to paint him as a kook, but I think he is a sincere and honest kook, and he will receive my vote.
One might find a lot of things to disagree on with Ron Paul, but his explanation of the history of terrorisam as well as his call to a modest foreign policy has a lot of reach.

His reading that all empires end because of a collapse in the currency is extremely ominous.
You're trying to win corporate/media america.  We know the owners of MSNBC, CNN, FOX, etc, are the same people who own the war machine.  You didn't count on the internet as a democratic part of our fight against you, and it shows in the funds pushed through congress on your behalf to combat the net neutrality issue.  Always remember, a top-down approach is always destroyed by a bottom down approach.  There are MANY of us, and few of you.  I see you getting scared..change is happening...positive, healthy change.  Elitest ruling is tyrannical, and although it has been around for the majority of history, there will come a time when that part of the human condition will cease to exist, because natural selection won't allow for it.  We....won't allow for it.  So guess what.  We're educating ourselves, and then we're going to the voting booths (all of which we are fighting fiercely to return to paper ballots counted out in the open) to vote for a man who will come to power.....then destroy that power.  We know, we understand, and we're doing something about it.  We're taking this country for everyone that lives here, our familes, our friends.  You can't have it.  We won't let you.
RON PAUL is proving that MAIN STREAM MEDIA has become IRRELEVANT so much to the point where it's predictable.

RON PAUL 2008

A vote for anybody other than Ron Paul is a vote for bigger government, less privacy, and less individual liberty.   It is time to change our thinking about what the role of government ought to be.  This is a once in a lifetime opportunity.  A vote for anybody other than Dr. Paul is a blow to liberty and is a vote for a traitor.
anything positive to say?
A+ for Ron Paul and a big fat F for you Mr. Russert.
Great article except for the beginning.   Did somebody add that first sentence after the fact so it wouldn't seem like you were giving it too positive a spin or something?   As your article implies, Paul was brilliant and brutally honest on MTP this morning.   I can't wait to vote for him.
Ron Paul is the only candidate with the stones to tell it like it is. That alone is worth my vote.
He did not resign from the Republican party in 1988, he remained a member.  Please get your facts straight.
Thanks for interviewing Ron Paul. I think I just found who I will vote for on Super Tuesday.  The questioning was tough, but I've come to expect and appreciate this from Mr. Russert.  If this is the worst he could find, Ron Paul must be a very honest man.
What Tim Russert proved is that he had to go back nearly 20 years to find a flip flop in Ron Paul's virtually impeccable record. I would venture to guess that you'd only have to go back a few days for most recent flip flop by the rest of the candidates, Republican or Democrat. Ron Paul is still the man.
Thank you Tim.  My support for Ron is now firm and I will donate him.  You did a cheap hit piece on him.
This interview convinced me!  The powers that be--powers I both fear and loath--don't want this Ron Paul elected and the MSM is very obviously in cahoots. Indeed, by a man's enemies you shall know him.  Thanks Tim Russet and First Read for showing me the light.  I too,like apparently tens of millions of others across the globe, have now joined the Ron Paul R3VOLUTION!
Meet the Press is a joke!  There asking a presidential candidate about the civil war, but don't ask one question about the dollar crisis going on in this country?  It seemed to any person watching the interview with half a brain that Russert was more concerning into smearing the person he was interviewing then actually talking about topics that concern the american people.  Tim Russert has not journalistic integrity that I can see.  A perfect example is the Sinclair Lewis quote.  Lewis did make that quote.  It is not very hard to google Sinclair Lewis and see many references to the exact quote that Paul referenced.  Pretty sad that this is television network is considered to be a source for information.
I am voting for Ron.  He is the only candidate that addresses the national debt and wants to dramatically cut spending.  What do you think will happen in future if the national debt continues to spiral out of control?  Everyone agrees that that situation will be real bad for USA so lets all vote for Ron and start trying to fix it now before it is too late!!!
Ron Paul is a NUT.  He believes in freedom and personal liberty.  He thinks that printing money out of thin air to finance war and huge domestic spending programs will hurt our economy. He thinks it is wrong to force people that are morally opposed to abortion to pay taxes for them! He thinks the states and local governments could do a better job of educating the children than Washington!  What a KOOK!  His supporters are obviously wasting their time and money supporting him since every Old Media outlet says he has no chance!
What I love about the numerous attacks on Ron Paul is this:   After the twisted attacks......the comments come.....anyone who cares to post a comment can.....why are only Ron Paul Supporters posting?.....if what the "controlled media" is trying to make every American believe was true, then there would be numerous comments from concerned citizens backing the reports....BUT NO....only comments from the people (the true American People)...we are waking up to see the biased lies that the media continues to feed us every day.
Russert just got rwned!
Thanks to the media for "explaining" what Ron Paul told us....it was an interesting spin on the facts.  The most illuminating aspect of the Ron Paul run for the presidency to me has been learning the absolute level of contempt that the elite media and their masters have for the American people.  The 18th century British elite had the same level of contempt for the average American citizen prior to the Revolutionary War.  The 21st century American elite, as their 18th century British counterparts, are about to learn their own hard lesson.
reagan was a racist male supremists.
A horrible president who created our great divide.
Another try by the MSM to smear Dr. Ron Paul. When Russert's negetivity didn't work, NBC continues with Appelbaum. Did she even watch the interview, because her summery above certainly does NOT reflect the essence of the interview. Wouldn't it be nice is Mr. Russert was so forceful with the other candidates. I can think of a "million" questions I would have liked Russert to ask Mr. Gulli. and in the same manner he asked Dr. Paul. Istaed of the softballs he lobbed at him. Same goes with the truth evading Romney. Very disappointing NBC.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=532376

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google