Skip to main content

tv   Road to the White House  CSPAN  May 15, 2011 6:30pm-8:00pm EDT

6:30 pm
looking to congress for a break is probably the wrong place to look. >> compare what the senate is trying to do on energy, possibly this week coming up with what the republican-controlled house did last week and plans to do on energy legislation. >> the republicans have three bills they passed that would open up offshore drilling. they say the obama administration has put the gulf of mexico drilling in a stranglehold with its regulations after the bp oil spill last year, so those bills would speed up the permitting process. the trouble was, in the senate, there is almost no support for it. >> it sounds like none of these bills are going to the president's desk. what is the future of energy policy? >> senator bingaman said the
6:31 pm
people in the obama administration are going to be working with congress to push for a better package of energy. i think we will see it -- the people i'm talking with are saying we will see about next year. >> there is a potential for a small potatoes deal, maybe some of it ending up in the larger deficit talks. one of the center said what if we give you more land to drill and you give up your tax break and he said i'm not here to negotiate, but there is the potential for some compromise -- you give up some tax breaks and we open up some regulations and make it easier for you to drill. where there's a will, there's a way in congress.
6:32 pm
the one wild card out there is the public. people watching this show. if they have for dollar a gallon gasoline, that will keep the pressure on them to do something. the only bipartisan things i hear about on the hill are things like speculation. senator collins from maine, senator kent well from washington, they're working on trying to make it harder for some buying of oil contracts but is never going to use it and is just speculating on it, they want to clamp down on that, and that could be the kind of thing that gets some bipartisan support, at least to write letters. as far as anything that passes congress, it's a lot tougher. >> thank you very much for being part of "newsmakers.
6:33 pm
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> our road to the white house starts with rep where -- with former speaker of the house newt gingrich. after that, senator ron paul from texas. >> how did they become transformed? how did become terrorists and kill hundreds of thousands of people? >> in his new book, he looks at the architect of the 9/11 attacks. >> this is the guy who really mattered and understanding him is about understanding the future of the war on terror. now that osama bin laden is dead, this is what we have to fear. >> inside the mind of a terrorist, tonight on "q&a. you can download a podcast of one of our many signature interview programs online. >> on c-span3, a discussion
6:34 pm
about medicare and the trustee'' report. panelists will debate what it means for seniors and taxpayers and what action congress is likely to take after the president's reaction. the american enterprise institute hosts this live events on c-span3. later, the chief actuary of the social security administration talks about the economy's impact on social security and what can be done to ensure the program's long-term liability -- and ends long term of liability. live coverage at 2:00 eastern on c-span3. >> newt gingrich was a guest on "meet the press today. david gregory asked the former speaker whether incidents in his personal life would impact his presidency. >> all i can say to every
6:35 pm
american and every american has the right to ask these questions is i have made mistakes, have had to go to god for forgiveness and today, i look at the strong marriage i have and the close relationship i have with my two daughters and the husbands, look at the loving relationship we have with our grandchildren and decide whether or not today i am a person they believe could leave the country and save us in a time of enormous problems. i think the problems we face require a leader who could bring together millions of people so that collectively we can get this country -- a >> but before you go there, becomes a electability issue. you were 55 years old at the time these things were going on, hardly a young man. and just this year, you talked about what was going on in your life that time. this is what she told the christian broadcasting network. >> there is no question that in
6:36 pm
times of my life, partially driven by how passionately i felt about this country, that i worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate. >> should people take that as a serious act of contrition -- you're so patriotic they you cheated on your wife? >> that is 15 seconds out of a 20 minute interview. i will repeat what i said -- i have clearly done things that were wrong and i have clearly had to seek god's forgiveness. i believe people have to decide whether or not what i have said and what i have done are real and if people watch me and talk to me and get to know me, my hope is a majority of americans will decide i can help the country get back on track in a way that no one else can and if they decide that is true, we will have a very successful campaign. but people have every right to ask the tough questions and measure someone personally. >> particularly conservative
6:37 pm
republicans say -- >> i understand people's questions. we will see over time if i am somebody they can support or as many people say, they watch how i operate, i really do think you can help america -- i have a large number of social conservatives who support me because as we have talk this through, they reached a different conclusion about what america needs and what i can do in trying to fill that role as leader. >> on friday, newt gingrich was in georgia and spoke to the republican convention. this is just under 40 minutes.
6:38 pm
>> i'm delighted to be home and back to be among friends and go back a long way. i was reminded of how long have been doing this when i went into the american solutions office and there was a nice young intern there and i said to him, he looked very familiar, have we met? he said no, but my father was a page for you. [laughter] so, i looked out at a lot of friends here. i go back for a very long time, i walked in and saw someone and was reminded that we first started campaigning in 1973 together. the only thing that would disagree with -- excuse me, have allergies. i would disagree with the generation introduction -- i suspect most of the ones don't think of me as mr. speaker. i think most of them think of me as new and we got to keep it
6:39 pm
that way. -- think of me as newt. i don't know if we can elect a speaker gingrich, but i think we can elect newt. i decided after long consultation with the family and spending a year thinking about it that i would run for president. [applause] we made that decision for the most profound reason -- the united states of america is in trouble and it needs every possible citizen to come to its aid if we are to remain the great center of freedom, the great developer of prosperity, and the provider of safety to
6:40 pm
our citizens and friends around the world. the challenges we face are so large that it requires leadership of an unusual kind. i do not believe that any one person in the oval office can make a decisive difference. i believe there are 300 million americans to have to be recruited, educated, convinced, led to work together so that all of us putting our shoulder to the wheel can make a decisive difference. i believe the gap between where the people in this room and the vast majority of the people of georgia who would take america and where president obama would take america is so enormous that this will be the most consequential alexian since 1860. i believe we are at a crossroads. [applause]
6:41 pm
down one road is a european, centralized, bureaucratic socialize welfare system in which politicians and bureaucrats define the future. down the other road is a proud, solid reaffirmation of american exceptional ism and insistence that we hold these truths to be self-evident, a commitment we are all equal and we are in doubt by our creator with certain unalienable rights. [applause] this is the boldest, most radical statement about political power in human history -- our founding fathers asserted in the declaration of independence, literally that power comes from god to each one
6:42 pm
of you personally. you are personally sovereign and you, loan power to the government, the government does not loan power to you. [applause] so the first grade choice will be between an obama administration which believes politicians define the future, that bureaucrats implement the future and we are merely subjects who are supposed to do what the government instructs us to do and a gingrich administration which asserts probably that we are americans, that we are a free people. that the power starts at home, is vested in the citizen, that we are going to enforce the 10th amendment, that we're going to shrink government in washington
6:43 pm
dramatically and return to a country that believes in the work ethic and opportunity in freedom and every american having a chance to pursue happiness without being dictated to by bureaucrats, politicians and judges. [applause] we believe in the so deeply that we have launched three parallel projects. we have just completed the movie -- a city upon the hill, which outlines in detail what american exceptional as a means. on june 14th, i will have a book coming out called "a nation like no other, which outlines for historians, for people who want a deep, and that's understanding of what american exceptional as an is, how you would apply it in policy terms. in september, a life is bringing out a book for first and second
6:44 pm
graders called sweet land of liberty, which is an elephant introducing children to american history by taking them to key events, starting with the pilgrims. the reason we're doing these is we want to make clear to the news media which would desperately like to avoid this debate, that we are prepared to take on the pseudo intellectuals of the left on the core definition on the nature of america and we're going to do it not based on conservative ideology, not based on philosophy, but on the accurate, historical representation of the founding fathers and that we hold these truths to be self evident. that's a key center point of our campaign. if you believe in america as a unique place, then we want you to be on our side and we want to
6:45 pm
work with you to make sure we continue to be a special place. at the same time, we are going to say if you think a european model where you are passive, dependent on politicians, limited by the political structure, you have a party. and you should be for obama, because that is what he believes. if you listened earlier, you got a sense of this. i would urge all of you when you go home tonight, go on facebook or twitter and tell all of your contacts around the country to go to one of the sections we're going to rollout is a section for first-generation americans. i find everywhere i go in the country, some of the people who
6:46 pm
best understand american exceptional as more people who have come here for the very first time because they have lived at the contrast between american opportunity and what the rest of the world was like. we are thrilled -- i hope he will be one of the folks to help us launched first generation americans talking about american exceptional as some so that our children can learn. folks often talk about immigration and i say to become an american citizen, immigrants should have to learn american history. [applause] but maybe there should be a standard that to vote, as a native-born american, you should have to learn american history. [applause] do you realize how many of our high-school graduates because of the education system could not pass a citizenship test?
6:47 pm
america is a cultural memory. it is only one generation deep. so, we stand at a crossroads. if we lose this fight, and we have four more years of radical left-wing values imposed from washington, this country will be dramatically weakened, our economy will be weakened, and we will be in deep trouble. but, if we finned -- if we win this fight on a principle basis, the american people, faced with these two choices, decisively choose a future of american exception was and, decisively choose a future of greater opportunity, choose a future with a work ethic, we will do very well. back home tot georgia. what would a program of jobs for georgians look like?
6:48 pm
well they've program for jobs for americans look like? the reason we have to focus on this is very straightforward. because we are a free society, america only works when americans are working. people have to have a job [applause] . the most important social welfare program in america is a job, and nothing replaces it as the center of how you get to it as a healthy country. [applause] i started the day talking to art laugher's conference in washington. he says there's a point in taxation worries are losing revenue because your raise taxes too much. i was released track -- he, jack kemp, and a number of other people in the 1970's developed
6:49 pm
was called supply-side economics, which is a return to general economics in the pre keynesian model. part of what this said it was if you want economic growth, you incentivize it. if you want more jobs, you incentivizes. if you want to encourage people to take risk, you incentivize it -- incentivize it. it was a straightforward model. in 1980, ronald reagan campaigned on that. we were rationing gasoline every day based on the last number of your car license tag and we are sliding into a recession. at that point, ronald reagan came along and all the left-wing intellectuals wanted to do more of the stuff that was making us sick. at that point, ronald reagan came along and he had a program that is very simple -- a dramatic reduction in taxes to
6:50 pm
incentivize people economically, dramatic reduction in regulations to make it easier to create jobs and being proud, happy and positive about business owners, whether they're small -- big business owners or start-ups, saying if you go out every day and take the risk and create a job, i'm probably. this is the opposite of the obama economic model. this was demonstrated when he went to brazil -- having stopped all american drilling for oil and gas offshore, he had the nerve to go to the brazilians and say i'm proud you are developing oil and gas offshore. i am proud we have learned to several billion dollars to buy equipment for a company owned by eight george soros. then he said we want to be your best customer. he has a model a says we're
6:51 pm
going to borrow from the chinese to pay the brazilians. that model is not going to work economically. we president who goes from the world and says i want you to be our best customer. we need a president who says i want to sell you american products. [applause] i outlined this warning, and it will be presently be posted online, an entire economic program. i'm not going to go into it in detail, but i want to share the tax component with you. first, we freeze the current taxes so nobody is faced with taxes going up and in 2013. [applause] if we do not freeze the taxes, we will get to an investment freeze in june of next year as everybody waits to see what the tax code is going to be and we will increase the likelihood of going into a second, deeper
6:52 pm
recession. if we go into a recession with 9% unemployment, we will have real problems. there are four tax cuts. i'm looking forward in october to debating president obama about it. i'm happy to have a long- distance debate about it with the white house. i stand for tax cuts designed to increase the number of jobs in the united states by incentivizing the people who create jobs. [applause] president obama believes in america, we should make the rich pour by leveling down. i believe in making the poor rich soviet quality by getting everybody up. that's a fundamental difference. my goal is to get back to are wary were when i left the speakership. because we cut taxes and we had the largest capital gains tax cuts -- the largest capital
6:53 pm
gains tax cut in history, we got from 5.62 under 4% employment after left office. if we move from 15% which is the current number of unemployed and to acquit looking for work, if we get them back into the job market and got to 4% unemployment, the number of people you'd take off food stamps, off of unemployment, off of medicaid and you would put them back to work earning a living, paying their own way and paying taxes, that is the biggest single step toward a balanced budget you can take because your lowering costs and raising revenue simultaneously. [applause] that's the first that of moving back to dramatic economic growth. i would have four major tax cuts -- one, the correct capital
6:54 pm
gains tax rate is zero. [applause] just think about it. everybody tells you are in a world market, and we are. all over the world, there are people with capital. they want to build something, they want to create a new company or build a factory. if they woke up one morning in the u.s. capital gains tax rate was zero, could you imagine how much capital would flow into the united states and order to create new jobs? [applause] second, the correct corporate tax rate is the irish tax rate of 12.5%. [applause] the reason goes back to the laugher curve. we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. that means corporations don't pay it. theoretically, this is terrific
6:55 pm
and obama is up there, socking it to the big companies. he is so effective at socking it to the big companies that general a electric paid zero. why did they pays zero? because of its 35%, it would work -- it was worthwhile to hire 375 tax lawyers to get up every morning and say what are the loopholes to allow us to avoid taxes? i don't blame general electric. i blame a tax code that is so destructive that rewards the behavior of not paying the tax. [applause] : to find a corporate tax rate at which they would lay off the lawyers and pay off the government. it would be cheaper to pay a tax that would be to avoid it. third, we must go to 100% expensing for all new equipment. this is a big deal for farmers and business. you should be able to write off
6:56 pm
all new equipment every year in 12 months. [applause] the goal was very straightforward. we want the american worker to be the best equipped, most modern and productive worker in the world. we want the american industry to have every incentive to be the most modern and effective in the world. here is a great shot -- germany pays 50% more for manufacturing and labor than we do and they have the lowest unemployment rate in 19 years. that's because they have a government that works on exports. that government that favors jobs. at the government want to go to work. one of my pledges is kelly will appoint a trial lawyer to vote -- by pledge is we will appoint a trial lawyer to fly to beijing looking for a fight. [laughter] we want to teach the chinese,
6:57 pm
glad you came into the big leagues, now we're going to show you with the big leagues are really like and we're going to fight for every sailor on the world to maximize american industrial production of american job production. [applause] phosphor finally, -- finally, the fourth tax changes to eliminate permanently the death tax. [applause] one of the things that has always surprised me about the republican leadership in washington as they have never been able to understand that for my entire adult lifetime, eliminating the death tax is an 80% issue. people who are never going to pay it, hate it and they hated for the deepest of cultural reasons. most americans believe it's wrong to require someone to visit the irs and the undertaker
6:58 pm
in the same week. they think it's grotesque. americans deeply believe if you work all your life, you save all your life, you did everything right, and your twin brother or twin sister did everything wrong, there's a big fundamentally wrong with the government reaching into your wallet and taking half of your money and giving it to your sister or brother in a government program. you earned it in your lifetime, you keep it. [applause] there is also a practical, job- creating part of this. you get some great entrepreneurial figure and they create hundreds of jobs. when i was teaching at west georgia college, one of the great joys of my life was getting to meet roy richards, one of the great entrepreneurs
6:59 pm
in georgia history. hugo or on the state, great entrepreneurs. i'd -- you go around the state, great entrepreneurs. i want them focused with their attorney and tax avoidance. i want them growing a bigger company to hire even more people to be even more productive and that is fundamentally what we have to give back to. [applause] we will get back to dramatic economic growth. i want to summarize this in an easy way for you to tell by your friends and neighbors. all of you can take this to every neighborhood of every ethnic background in your county. it's very simple. walk up to the door or go to a local grocery store and just say to them, would you rather have food stamps or a paycheck? if they tell you they would rather have food stamps, don't
7:00 pm
worry, we know there are liberal democrats. [laughter] but i bet you in almost every neighborhood in america, people will say at want a paycheck. i want my kids to have a >> now, why is this important? president obama is the most successful food stamp president in american history. [applause] more people are on food stamps today than at any point in american history, and he's proud of it. i would like to be the most successful paycheck president in american history. [applause] and i'd like the voter, the last thing before they vote, one of the things you ought to ask yourself just before your vote and one of them is going to be, do you want a future of paychecks or a future of food
7:01 pm
stamps? and i believe we win that argument dramatically. if you really want economic growth, you have to have an american energy policy producing energy in the united states. the fact is, when we develop drill here, drile now, pay less, we were right, they were wrong. and if they had drilled here, drill now, paid less in 2008, we'd be paying less in 2011. it's not an accident. [applause] which gets me to one of the central themes of this campaign. my theme is going to be "together we can win the future." the right policies lead to the right results. and i'm going to argue that in fact president obama represents losing the future, because the wrong policies lead to the wrong results. and the easiest two examples
7:02 pm
are detroit and texas. if you want to study job creation, prosperity and a better future, start with detroit, which, through three generations of bad politicians and bad policies went from a mill one 300,000 people per capita and dropped to less than 7-,000 people last year. over half the houses in detroit are unoccupied. it is a ca at that time trophy comparable to a war. it wasn't a tsunami, it wasn't a flood, it wasn't an earthquake, it was politicians. this is a city destroyed by bad policies. on the other hand, rick perry -- and i can tell all of you that we're very fortunate. our campaign has rob johnson as its campaign manager. rob was rick perry's campaign manager last year, an perry started the year 27 points behind senator hutchinson and ended the year 21 points ahead. i'm not promising you a
7:03 pm
48-point swing against obama, but it's a nice model to start thinking about. [laughter] in texas, where they've had litigation reform, lower taxes, a brewer rock crease that actually encourages businesses to move in, what have they done? in two of the last four years, over half the private sector jobs in america have been to one state, texas. do you think anybody in washington has studied in texas? it has all the wrong things, small government, a legislature that meets only every other year. imagine a congress where they were only allowed to come to washington every other year. [cheers and applause] so part of my summary about economic policy is simple -- if you want a party that's going to try to learn from texas how to create jobs in america, the gingrich campaign would love to have your help. if you want to do for all of america what it's done for detroit, the obama team needs
7:04 pm
your help. it's that big a gap. that fundamentally different. let me take just a minute and talk about the third big problem. we'll talk about the economy, getting to a balanced budget, controlling spending, reforming the entitlements. the third thing i want to talk about is national security and homeland security. and let me say about foreign policy -- we should have one. [applause] >> but i'm going to go a step further. we should have an american policy based on american interests, doing what's right for america. [applause] when the president of the united states goes to the national defense university and makes a major speech explaining
7:05 pm
libya by citing the united nations and the arab league eight times and the u.s. congress once, you know that he does not have a clue about how to lead an american foreign policy. and let me be very clear -- you know, you think about this. he cites the arab league. have any of you looked at what makes up the arab league? it's mostly dictators and monarchs. now, they're important to recognize in the sense of dealing with the realities of the world, but they're not exactly authority figures. i mean, if you run into me and say the king of this and the sultan of that and the duke of this and the prince of that have come together and decided we should do x, i have less interest than if you tell me what five random people at the local grocery store said. why would we take seriously a
7:06 pm
self-serving group of people who want to manipulate us and use us for their reasons? and then you cite, well, but the u.n. said. have you looked at the united nations? i looked at the united nations. the truth is that george mitchell, former senate majority leader and i, chaired a united nations task force. the general assembly is a totally corrupted institution. the bureaucracy is totally corrupted. and the idea that an american president would take seriously the directives of the united nations is a sign that he just doesn't understand the real world. so i think we have to fundamentally reset our homeland security and our national security policies building around american interests to protect american lives, working with those countries that are truly our allies. finally, i think all of us need to realize that one of the side effects of the killing of bin laden has to be a real exploration of our relationship with pakistan.
7:07 pm
[applause] i don't know about the rest of you, but when i learned that after paying $20 billion since 9/11, they had been housing him in pakistan for the last 9 1/2 years. i was trying to figure out what the word ally meant. i know what the word "sucker" meant. [laughter] i mean, there is a point where you have to say to people around the world, how stupid do you think we are? is there any person in this room who believes that bin laden was living in that place, in a town that size for that long, and nobody in the pakistani government knew it? it's an absurdity. so i think we need a thorough re-appraisal of what our policies are and what we're trying to accomplish. now, let me close by -- if my
7:08 pm
good friend, sue, will let me here. long before she became an important statewide figure, she was the chair of my teachers advisory group in the sixth district of georgia when i was speaking. so we go back a fair distance. let me just say -- [applause] let me just say really candidly, when i first ran in 1974, as randy pointed out and it was the middle of watergate and people said i couldn't win, and it turned out they were right -- [laughter] but i got 48.5%. i came back and ran in 1976 and jimmy carter was running for president as a democrat. had a huge turnout. people said i couldn't win and they were right. i got 48.3%. i finally came back and won in 1978. what i want to drive home for a minute, because it relates directly to how i hope our presidential campaign will work
7:09 pm
, if we hadn't had the republican women opening the office, we would not have been able to campaign. if we had not had the spaulding county republican women opening the office, we couldn't have campaigned. if we hadn't had young republicans show up from all over the state on the weekends and help us out, we couldn't have campaigned. i realize in trying to get from here to the nom naugs, that i'm faced with some very fine people and that at least three of them could personally write checks for $60 million or more and not notice it. well, i want to report to you that while we've had a good few years out of office, they ain't been that good. [laughter] and furthermore, the kind of campaign i want to run isn't about somebody writing a giant check. the kind of campaign i want to run is getting every neighbor, every friend i can to tweet, email, telephone, facebook,
7:10 pm
walk their neighborhood, talk to their friends at church, chat with friends that they meet with on saturday morning for coffee. and so i would like to just directly say to each one of you, people i work with and the creation and the growth of the georgia republican party and lieutenant governor, i'm so grateful that this has happened, commissioner, we go back a long warkse my friends from the congress who i've served with for so many years. jack kingston and i did a lot of good work together in the 1990's, and it's an honor to be here with him. ought tin scott was doing a great job. was elected president of the freshman class. [applause] represents my old district. the nice thing, so often in the old days, i have so many friends representing so many districts that i used to represent. speaker murphy used to keep trying to get rid of me saying if he didn't get rid of me there would be too many republicans. he was right.
7:11 pm
i just want to say that when we began the campaign we were very honored. senator zell miller commited that he would help lead the campaign and be one of our co-chairs. governor purdue signed up and said he would help lead. governor diehl signed up and said he would lead. i'd ask each of you to become a leader not only here, but across the country, helping us reach out. i want to make this the most fun, interesting, idea-oriented campaign in history. this is something i learned from reagan years ago, and i'll close with this. he use you had to -- used to get attacked by "the new york times" and the news, and it didn't seem to bother him. i was a very junior member and occasionally i would meet with the president and i was fascinated with him. he said, look, i represent the vast majority of the american people. i represent the key principles that have made us a great country. i represent the ideas that actually work. why wouldn't i be happy?
7:12 pm
they represent a bitter minority whose ideas are really destructive and they have no future. why would they be happy? so when they're mean and miserable spirited, it tells you who they are, not who we are. and i'll close with this. walk around your neighborhood and say everybody who's like to be a classic american seeking opportunities, pursuing happiness, having a great future, everybody who would like to have a paycheck, everybody who would like to have an american energy policy, you have a chance to have a great happy 18 months and then, after we win, we'll be even happier. thank you all very, very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]
7:13 pm
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> thank you very much. and he's right. it is a turning points for our country. we've got to take it back. but before we adjourn, i've got to come up with a few housekeeping rules that we always have to do. the first one is, please do not take the center pieces. we need them for breakfast. [laughter] the meeting will begin at 8:30 in exhibit hall b. after you go to the prayer service, then you'll go over to the marriott to the victory celebration featuring the band, which is very well known in this part of the world. and you can dance all night, if that's what you want to do and anything else you'd like to do over there, we'd be happy to see you there. our food is free. drinks are on you.
7:14 pm
i just say i look forward to seeing you tomorrow morning at the breakfast honoring governor and mrs. nathan diehl. it starts at 7:30. so if you all set your alarm to 5:30, you'll be there right on time. so good night, have a good evening, and thank you. [applause]
7:15 pm
♪ >> thank you, thank you. ♪ >> thank you, thank you. ♪ >> thank you, thank you very much. we're on a schedule, you know. that was very nice. jim, i certainly want to thank you. i'm pleased they called jim senator, that is great. and, chris, thank you for your efforts. i want to acknowledge our special guests behind me, thank you all for attending. i am so delighted to see you involved in our revolution! [cheers and applause]
7:16 pm
i have one update about the revolution. the revolution is spreading and the momentum is building! [cheers and applause] >> the momentum is here today not because of what i have done. i happen to have been in an important place and energized some. but it is necessary that the grass-roots people understand what the issues are. a generation of people need to know, and i am delighted that the young people are with us in this revolutionary spirit that we have. [cheers and applause] but a lot of other work has been done. it's been the intellectual
7:17 pm
work. i am convinced that a nation does not change just for partisan, political reasons. what has to happen is there has to be an intellectual revolution to energize people and get people to understand the problems from economic and political terms as well as foreign policy. that is what has been happening now for quite a few decades. there's quite a bit of difference about attitudes, about economics and foreign policy today than there was in 1976 when i was first elected. there's a big difference, and it involves a lot of work from a lot of people. and now that so many people in this country have come to understand that government so far in its pretense that it can take care of us from cradle to grave and police the world, it is so evident to this growing number of people that government isn't the solution. government really has created the problem. [cheers and applause]
7:18 pm
now, what our opponents so often like to do is say, oh, you people don't want any government. but you know, in our society, with our constitution, there is a role for government. but the constitution was written explicitly not to restrain your behavior and your life and the way you spend your money. it was written to restrain the federal government. [cheers and applause] but because of the educational effort and the work that so many have done, but also, the strong evidence that there is a failure out there, especially since we saw what happened with the housing bubble, and that was a predictable event that the housing bubble would burst,
7:19 pm
it did as the austrian free market had predicted. and because of all this they have come together and people are now listening to this revolutionary spirit that is spreading across this country. [applause] it's great that i am able to announce in this state, a very special state, because there is so high respect for the spirit of liberty here, so i am very, very pleased that i am once again able to say that i am a candidate for the presidency in the republican party primary. [cheers and applause]
7:20 pm
>> there are many who would like to belittle this effort. but let me tell you, there is an old saying, three's a charm. [cheers and applause] the conditions have certainly changed even from four years ago when i think back over the first year. must have been at the end of 2006, 2007, the atmosphere was different. there was an 2006 election, an 2008 election, and did not make those of us who believe in liberty all that happy. but, boy, will's tell you what, there has been a significant change. the people have awoken and they have sent a message, elected a lot of new people to your state
7:21 pm
legislature, and i'll tell you what -- i will convinced that the spirit of liberty is alive and well in new hampshire. [cheers and applause] you know, there's a lot of talk about what you should seek in a president. and i'm not one that is prone to talk about, i do this, i will do this. but i can talk generically what i think a president should be able to do and should do. one thing the american people want -- and i agree with them -- they want a strong president. there is no doubt about that. but the question you should ask , where should those strengths be directed? should the strength of a president be directed toward building the t.s.a. and homeland security and policing the world? no. the strength and the character of the individual should be directed towards standing up
7:22 pm
for freedom, standing up for liberty and restraining government. that's where the strength should be. [applause] >> there's been a lot of challenges already today, and yesterday and this last week because of certain positions. i find one very fascinating and something other candidates may well deserve. and that has to do with the drug issue. because it is so symbolic of understanding what liberty is all about. when you think of my position, my position is that you have a right of freedom of choice with your bodies. that i believe is the basic principle of liberty. what does that mean? if you have civil liberties and the right to your life and the right to your property. well, it means that you can make very, very important choices. for most of these, most
7:23 pm
americans agree with it. they say, yes, the most important thing in my personal life is that i and my family and others, we make our decision about our spiritual life and about our salvation, which cannot be done by government. and we have to provide the maximum amount of freedom for individuals to make those decisions. so the government should always butt out of our spiritual lives. [applause] also intellectually we're fairly good at that. the political correctness movement has tried to undermine it, but basically most americans believe in the first amendment and say that we have a right to talk about controversial issues. as i have often said, the first amendment wasn't written for us to be able to talk about the weather. [applause] out's written so that we can
7:24 pm
discuss controversial issues and actually read very controversial and very dangerous literature, especially the literature that promotes big government and welfarism and socialism and all the mess. so we recognize that to be the case. but all of a sudden people have lost respect for liberty, the understanding of liberty, and we have conceded way too much to the government to decide what we put into our own bodies. if we can control what goes into our spiritual and intellectual lives, why should we concede to the government that they decide everything that we do with our own bodies? [cheers and applause] i take a strict constitutional position. and the government has very little authority to get involved in our economic or our personal lives.
7:25 pm
so that excludes the federal government from being involved if and when we become strict constitutionists. but that should not prohibit the states from doing some of the things that they do. even though we might disagree with it under the national law and the constitution states the states have more prerogative and more choices, but if we looked at education, as an example, the constitution gives no authority for the federal government to run our educational systems, and they shouldn't be doing that. [cheers and applause] but at the state and federal level, what we should be guaranteeing is the protection of freedom of choice. we should always be aware of the fact that it's very important that individuals who want to opt out, whether it's
7:26 pm
opting out of obama care or opting out of the educational system, we have to protect the right of individuals to homeschool and go to private schools as well. [cheers and applause] now, this freedom of choice should lead to other choices about what we put into our bodies. for instance, your right to take things into your body, such as nutritional substances, should never be regulated by the federal government and absolutely never regulated by the united nations. [cheers and applause] and i don't know what's so bad about getting the federal government out of the business of regulating unpast rised milk. now, that's a real radical
7:27 pm
thing. why should we be so intimidated? if they want to use the issue of somebody using hard drugs as the reason for us to give up all our freedoms, it's wrong. it's better to defend the position that says you do have freedom of choice for what you do with your body, but you also have to have responsibility for what you do, and if you do harm to yourself, you can't go crawling to the government to penalize your neighbor to take care of you. [cheers and applause] i see this position of the government controlling all these decisions as detrimental to progress in medicine. so often there are alternative treatments for cancer and other diseases that are not approved for years and years and years because we have to have the f.d.a., which is controlled too often by other drug companies, deciding when and what we can do. we as individuals making decisions with their own physician ought to decide about
7:28 pm
all alternative care as long as people are up front and tell you the truth and tell you the risks and can't defraud you. [cheers and applause] so in all that i just explained about personal choices and everything i've done in politician, i've never introduced a bill in washington, d.c. to emphasize heroin. so they take all of what i said and turn it around and say who would legalize heroin? well, you know, the plain truth is is that heroin at one time in our history was legalized, and there was essentially in abuse of it. and it's only in our recent history. and there was a long time in our history that marijuana was legalized. i happen to have a personal real disgust with the abuse of drugs. but it's all drugs, those that are considered illegal, and i
7:29 pm
think physicians prescribe way too much medication and get too many people addicted. [cheers and applause] now the line that caught a little bit of attention down in south carolina was when this came up and they wanted to paint me as this monster about heroin. i didn't get a chance to say, well, i've never mentioned that word. i talk about liberty and freedom. but the interpretation -- and it is correct that i do want people to make choices. so in my less than 30 seconds left to make my point, i said, all right. if it would happen to become legal, how many of you would all of a sudden be using heroin? you'd all become heroin addicts. no, people make decisions and they make good decisions for the most part. what i don't like is when the government makes the decisions
7:30 pm
and it violates the principles of liberty. it's a blanket decision. it affects us in everything that we do to the point where you don't even know if you're allowed to drink the milk that you can buy from your neighbor farmer. [applause] >> so when they challenge you and say that -- and want to paint a negative picture, stick to your guns. defend liberty. defend the free choices. defend our constitution. defend states rights, regulations if they are necessary, and they are. there are a few regulation ns this state in alcohol. it is different in different states, but at least there are different states that handle this. and children are generally protected. in alcohol, the kids in high school today can get hold of marijuana easer than -- easier than they can get hold of
7:31 pm
alcohol. it is not like you turn it loose and dump it out there in the streets. but even that doesn't solve the problem. what really solves the problem is good family relationships. families that teach their kids what's right and wrong. [cheers and applause] >> now because of my understanding of the constitution and economic and moral policy, i have taken a position for as long as i can remember, since i have been in congress, since 1976, so it is nothing new, and that is i don't like the federal agencies breathing down our neck and regulating our property even under the guise that they are there to take care of us and help us. so for this reason i have opposed the federal government's insurance programs because they cause moral hazard. the one they quizzed me on today was the insurances that take care of everybody in the midst of a natural disaster.
7:32 pm
well, natural disasters are very, very bad, and they are very, very damaging, and i believe that they can be taken care of without the federal government going further into debt. but through this system of liberty and separate governments and state government. the point was about flood insurance. i live very near the gulf of mexico. i used to have a house right on the beach. you can't buy private insurance because it is dangerous there and too expensive. they have to tax you in north carolina so i can have a beach house in texas. then house gets blown down and the tax payers pay. they want to turn that into saying you don't care about the people suffering from a natural disaster. free mark economics and law helps us sort these things out. if you want to build a house on the beach, and you love it, yes. can't buy insurance. that is giving you a very
7:33 pm
important economic lesson in saying it is dangerous to live on the beach. [cheers and applause] but the people that don't live on the beach shouldn't have to pay for those of us who take the risk and live there and get a guarantee from the government. in our ways our society and country has been great. we have been very generous. when people really get hurt, not only in this country do we go to help people, but around the world. when there are earthquakes and other things, we as a people have been very generous. that is going to end was our economic policies in this country is destroying our wealth. we are not going to have money to take care of ourselves, let alone help the world. [applause] i am convinced that if you think things through, you can
7:34 pm
figure out how the free market, south economic policy, morals and the constitution will help us. does that mean no government? no. they should be providing a sound currency and enforce contracts. they should not be destroying your property rights. they should be protecting your property rights. plays -- [applause] obviously one of the most important property rights we should defend is the right to own a weapon to defend ourselves. [applause] other questions that have come up this week have to do with foreign policy, and it should be expected. i am so radical that i want to go back to the constitution and have a foreign policy which is a pro american foreign policy and not do the things that we are not authorized to do.
7:35 pm
but because the status quo, including many republicans in the past, has drifted over to the assumption that we have to be the policemen of the world. i don't think the american people ever fully endorsed that idea. in recent history our candidate in the year 2000, he ran on a humble foreign policy, not going intonation-building. of course that is what i am running on. but let me tell you. i believe it, and we should do it. [cheers and applause] >> a lot of people would like to label us who are into that. you are a bunch of isolationists. if you believe in freedom of choice, you believe in trading with other people, believing that you have the right to buy goods from anybody you want. it is your money, why can't you
7:36 pm
by the cheap goods? it means we stay out of the internal affairs and all of the conflicts, and the civil wars, and the religious civil wars especially going on in the middle east. i don't believe we have to be involved in that. i believe we make more enemies for it, and it is bringing us down financially. therefore, we need to reassess it and have a new foreign policy. [cheers and applause] i guess it is a little tricky here. when bad policy brings bad things on ourselves, such as 9/11, it is easy to say if we hadn't had the foreign policy we had, we wouldn't be under such attack. you cannot handle that, that easily because we have been attacked. there are limits. no matter how many mistakes we
7:37 pm
have made in the past, when a cup is attacked, a president and country should respond. for that reason i voted for the authority in 2001 to go after the individuals involved and responsible and get the al qaeda and gave that authority. but, what happened was the authority was abuseed. as a matter of fact, it was abused and ignored. the sorority to go after bin laden -- authority to go after bin laden was ignored. they said there is al qaeda, and there are nuclear weapons aimed at us. so we have to go in and fight this war in iraq. so what did we end up with? 10 years. 10 years of thousands of our people being killed, tens of thousands wounded with serious injuries. believe me, there is information coming out now that the persian gulf war syndrome with the first persian gulf
7:38 pm
war, which took them a long time to acknowledge, is going to have a mass any of -- massive number of people with those coming back. we have a big, big problem on our hands that is going to cost trillions of dollars, to go off a group of people who deserve to be gone after. but the cost as far as i am concerned was way too high. [applause] though i supported that authority, i had deep reservations and fear that it would be misused. therefore, i was looking around for another option. that is when i reviewed what i've learned about the constitution, and they have a provision in the constitution that maybe we can have a narrow defined war.
7:39 pm
since we can't declare war against a government when it is a band of criminals attacking us, that is when they provided the principle of a letter of mark and reprisal. target the enemy, go after them and get them. a good example of how this might work is what ross perot did. he had some of his employees taken who is tank in iran, he didn't go in to the federal government and say attack them. he got some special forces, his people in there. he went in, got them out and brought them out. [applause] now if this principle had been ingrained in our system and used it, we could have well paid $500 million or $1 billion to capture the individuals responsible. of course we didn't do that.
7:40 pm
that would have been cheap compared to the trillions of dollars we are involved in now. not only do i see some of that as a conflict and not doing well. every time we occupy a country, every time we kill a civilian. when we lob these bombs into pakistan, civilians get killed, too. they get angry. what would we do? they say there may be taliban in there, and we have to go in there and get them. the taliban is notted al qaeda. the taliban is a group of people that are very determined that they don't want any foreign occupation. that is their religious and political belief. we joined them when they were annoyed with the soviets occupying afghanistan. we were on the side of those who said no occupation. it shouldn't be unusual for us to come to the conclusion that if we are involved over there, that we wouldn't turn on us, and that is certainly what happened. if you one to demonstrate the if you tilt of our foreign policy, think about pakistan.
7:41 pm
we are lobbing bombs into pakistan. insent people are getting killed. maybe a taliban member gets killed who is only arguing he wants his countries back. at the same time we give them billions of dollars. we give them money. i used to say that our problem in this country is we have only two foreign policies. if they do what we tell them, we give them money, and if they don't do what we tell them, we bomb them. in this case we are doing both. there is room for a sensible, common-sense foreign policy. it goes back to the constitution. but not only is this a detriment to us militarily and for our national security, it is a great detriment to us economically. you can't ignore these dollars that we are spending. besides, i see politically the real opportunity is cut hundreds of billions of dollars out of the military industrial
7:42 pm
complex that doesn't help our national defense. [cheers and applause] and then we don't have to take this politically unpopular stand that many have on our side and say what we need to do is cut medical care for the children. that is not a good point to make. i think all the programs should be cut. i don't vote for them because they are unconstitutional. i still think emphasizing big cuts overseas, you could alleviate some of these problems in a political way that would be more acceptable. but this is going to be worked out. in congress today they are trying to figure out whether we should raise the national debt. they are arguing once again, like if we didn't come to the rescue and bail out all the reach giss in 2008, there would have been a twregs depression. sure, there would have been a depression on wall street, but
7:43 pm
the depression was dumped on the people instead. [applause] so instead of making the correct economic policy changes like lower taxes, less regulations, sound currency, property rights, paying off the debt, a few things like that, what did we do? we have had all these problems from too much spending, too much taxing, regulation and borrowing. now we are in trouble. the bubble has burst, so we have to pump harder. we have to put more money in, spend more money, borrow more, tax mo and regulate more. guess what? we are not out of the recession. we are still in recession, and it is going to get related. the foreign policy is related because it is a significant amount of our spending. the printing of money. there is going to be a lot of talk about inflation because inflation is here. it is very important that we
7:44 pm
define inflation the way free market economists do. inflation is when they increase the money supply. the consequence of inflating a monetary system will be higher prices. unpredictable where the money goes, when it happens and to what degree because there are a lot of elements built in. nephew babblely, when you did he value currency, there is inflation. they say we have to volt for the debt increase. and by the way, i am not going to vote for the debt increase. [applause] their argument is it would be a disaster if we defaulted. well, it is a disaster if we are default, but we are in the midst of a default. we have done it before. we have done it from the beginning of our history. we defaulted with the
7:45 pm
continental dollar, the green backs, we defaulted in the 1930's when the american people were denied their gold from their gold bonds that they held and the gold was confiscated. in 19 1, the promise of foreign holders of dollars could repatriate them for gold. we said we are broke and can't do it anymore. so we default constantly. they are talking about there won't be enough cash. that is not the default to worry about. the default is on you. they are going to print the money, the national debt will be raised. that means they are going to devalue your dollar, and they are defaulting on you. if you have a savings account are a treasury bill, and you have $1,000 in it, prices are going up 10% a year, in one year you could lose $100. that is a default, but they don't count it that way.
7:46 pm
that is just price adjustment. it is a deliberate policy of the federal reserve to degrees yate the currin -- to degrees yate the currency. that is why it has devalued and the reason why we ought to get rid of the federal reserve. [cheers and applause] >> now there are a lot of reasons why we shouldn't have a central bank. it isn't authorized in the constitution. it devalues currency and bad economic policy. but the one issue that really is dangerous to our cause of liberty is that it allows the expansion of government.
7:47 pm
if we did not have a fed to buy the debt, the moral hazard provided by congress, because ultimately the federal reserve would keef the interest rates from going up. they will print the money and keep interest rates low. it is always there to do that. that facilitates the growth of government. whether it is growth of government to fight wars we shouldn't be in or providing a cradle to grave entitlement system. we cannot solve our problems without looking at the monetary issue. [applause] the great thing about what has happened in the last four years is all of a sudden, the federal reserve and monetary policy has become an issue out on the table. that is a great victory, and i thank so many of you who have helped. [cheers and applause]
7:48 pm
but we did not get our fed bill passed. it was passed in the house, but it wasn't passed in the senate. but a lot has happened. we got a partial audit, and some core cases have been beneficial. we are getting more information. it is astounding. as much as i have anticipated it would be very bad, but more thanned a -- a third of it went to overseas banks, not to the americans who are losing their mortgages. one bank that was bailed out, gaddafi was one-third owner in the bank, and we bailed them out. this is the reason that we should direct our interests to the preservation of liberty, to the people in this country and taking care of ourselves. be prosperous, set a good example, and others will want to emulate us.
7:49 pm
we cannot spread our goodness with a gun, and using a gun violates our goodness. [cheers and applause] liberty should be our cause. i believe for myself that all political activity is for the promotion of liberty, with a deep conviction that liberty and freedom is not perfect. it will not solve our problems. but it will do more good than all the government intervention in the world. a lot of times terms are thrown around, conservative, libertarian, liberal and all. i like the word intervention. i don't like to have a government that is an intervenor, that the government doesn't come in and tell you what to with your life or money, and we don't tell other countries what to do with their problems either. that is the -- [applause]
7:50 pm
in mean ways, i believe a good president would work in the direction of saying that i want to do less. but i want to firmly and courageously stand up to those who want to do more. they use an author taryne -- authoritarian approach, and everything they do undermines your liberty. we were never a perfect nation. we don't have a perfect document. but i tell you what. we had the best. we were the most prosperous ever. and there is still a lot of spirit left in this country. so we are now in a struggle. we are in a struggle against those who are saying, are angry, we want more, don't cut our benefits, to our group is saying we have had enough. what we want is our freedom back.
7:51 pm
the reason i worked so hard for personal liberty is a very important reason. it is for myself, my family, friends, neighbors and our country. i believe if we did have our liberties, we would have more prosperity. it is truly a humanitarian argument because the other side , they do not produce. but more importantly, i think a free society offers tremendous opportunity. it really releases us, gives us the time and the wealth to release more creative energies. it is in these creative energies, then we did deal with our problems, whether it is our personal habit, whether it has to do with economic conditions and helping other people, or whether it is deeping with other -- dealing with other countries. with this effort, then we can work on our own impour fedexes to improve -- imperfections and
7:52 pm
to improve ourselves. this is the society i want to live in. so from the very beginning, regardless of what happens, the goal is a very important goal. i am so pleased to see what is happening in the country, not only the interest in the federal reserve and the foreign policy, but the interest and understanding of liberty. where i go, the numbers are growing. where i really get excited is when i go to the university and talk to the young people. they understand what they are getting, and they understand that something different has to be done. and they also understand that whether they are in high school or college, the burden will be falling on them. no matter what happens in the next election, this cannot be changed immediately. it can only be changed -- one individual can't do it. it can only be changed if the people endorse the changes and that our representatives understand it and do it. that is where i think we are making great progress.
7:53 pm
when i first started, i had difficulty in the 1950's even finding the literature. i had an inclination to study and read, but it took a long time. there was no interment and books were hard to find. today it is so great to use the internet to find out what is going on. more think tanks are happening. if i need a book now, i can get it in five or 10 seconds from amazon. so big things are happening, and we have to take that and use it for a just cause. and that just cause is promoting the greatness of america and promoting individual liberty in our done. thank you very much. [cheers and applause] >> good to see you.
7:54 pm
>> yep. >> excuse me. >> nice to meet you. >> good to meet you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> dr. paul, can you sign mine and take a photo? >> thank you. >> have your camera ready.
7:55 pm
>> hey, dr. paul. good presser. >> all right, good. >> who's next? >> thank you, sir. >> thank you. >> energy and what to do. really that is one thing over the coming months. i know. i will watch out for. >> one quick question. do you have a message for students who are interested in
7:56 pm
politics? >> study hard. don't set your goals to become a politician, set your goals to understand economic and political ideas, and then it will happen for you. >> they are requesting that you do the interview on the second step right here. they want to set up over here. can you live with that? >> i can do it. >> all right. >> thank you very much. you have awakened our thinking. >> there you go. >> ok. >> hello, mr. president. >> hello, there. how are you? >> much success to you, sir. >> thank you. >> you are helping me out here.
7:57 pm
>> i came and got your book to i could read it. >> thank you. >> good luck. >> thank you. >> thank you, thank you. >> there you go. >> thank you. >> hello. >> nice to meet you. we met you in charleston in 2008. >> great.
7:58 pm
>> i want to do a fundraiser. how do i do it? >> over here. >> thank you. >> hello. >> hi, how are you? >> hello. >> things are good. how are you? thank you very much for what you are doing. you are the best voice for liberty that we have. good luck. >> thank you. [inaudible]
7:59 pm
>> tonight on c-span, ququ -- "q & a", with richard miniter. and later, british "prime minister's questions" with david cameron. >> you're watching c-span, bringing you politics and public affairs. every morning it is "washington journal," our live call-in practice with the news of the day, connecting you with news makers, policy efficiency and journalists. week days watch live coverage of the house, and week nights, policy forums and supreme court orel arguments. orel arguments. on


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on