This was awesome. Ron Paul vs Ben Stein!

[Thickasabrick]

In this specific discussion - I agreed with everything Paul said. Stein's an idiot....but what else is new.

Transcript via CNN.

KING: Ron Paul, you want to respond first to the congresswoman and then Ben.

PAUL: Yes, I do.

KING: Go ahead.

PAUL: One thing that is missing here is never asking the question what is the motive? He said why he was -- he did it. He said it was because we bombed Yemen two weeks ago. That was his motive. Osama bin Laden said that he has a plan for America. First, he wants to bog us down in the Middle East in a no-win war. He wants to bankrupt this country, demoralize us, as well as have us do things that motivate people to join his radical movement.

It seems like we've fallen into his trap. Why is it off base? Today, when the gentleman indicated that he did it because of the bombing, you know what the administration said? They dismissed it. It can't possibly be so. If you dismiss motivations for why they hate us, we can never resolve this. There's hate on both sides. You have to ask the question, why do they hate? And they usually come up with a reason. And we're foolish not to take that into consideration.

KING: Ben?

STEIN: Well, that's -- I have never heard anything quite like that in my whole life. What he's saying, basically, is we are doing something wrong by defending ourselves. Look, if these terrorists are trying to kill the government of Yemen, we've got to help defend them. They're our friends. We can't just let al Qaeda run wild. If we try to stop them --

PAUL: Why?

STEIN: Why should we stop them? Because they are terrorists and murderers and they're very anti-American.

PAUL: Why are they terrorists?

STEIN: Surely congressman --

PAUL: Why are they terrorists?

STEIN: They're terrorists and murders because they are psychos.

PAUL: They're terrorists because we're occupiers.

(CROSS TALK)

STEIN: No, we're not occupiers. That's the same anti-Semitic argument we've heard.

PAUL: Now that is a vicious attack. You --

(CROSS TALK)

STEIN: It's not a vicious attack.

Video and rest of transcript at C&L:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/ron-paul-vs-ben-stein-dust-terrorism

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. Ron Paul gets it right every once in awhile

But more often, he is wrong.

[C_Lawyer09]

9. How is Ron Paul usually wrong?

I ask this question, because as many on du support Ron Paul as it pertains to his anti-imperialistic views, most on du are in disagreement relative to any of his fiscal views. My question is, why? Is auditing the Fed, not a good idea? If not, why not? Additionally, should we not reform the tax code? It is surely broken. Is massive government spending the way out of our current debacle? If it is, should we not be concerned with the deficit? Just as our knee jerk foreign policy adds largely to our current predicament, so do unpredictable govt. programs, like cash for clunkers. Much of what Ron Paul stands for is attacked for its supposed simplicity. I say, printing more money, may well be an invisible tax on the poor, as the poor people are not the first to access the money flow. I'm not in favor of gutting govt. agencies such as Dept. of the Interior, or the EPA, but we must realize how much waste is included within govt. programs which do not do that which they were intended. If I were to borrow from some of your previous posts, you would include the troops to teachers program, which you proclaim devalues wages for the "real educators" in favor of giving "scrubs" a leg up. A free market, which we truly do not have, nor would we have, under the leadership of the Republicans, is far from what we have now. If we examine what was the catalyst for the mortgage securities debacle, we would notice that the beginning was an instrument of govt. involvement, Cisneros, Cuomo, et. al. I bridle at the contention that Paul is so off base, when his major stances have sought to level the playing field in a real way. Which is to say, the pigs at the trough mentality which we have experienced first hand, moreso over the last twenty years of govt. is more a product of interventionist policies and lobbyists than a product of free market, "Austrian School" economic policies.

[WeDidIt]

10. When he befriends white supremecists is one example of when he's wrong

He's wrong 99.9% of the time.

[sendero]

12. We don't cotton to..

... Libertarians 'round these he-yar parts even if we agree with them on some things.

Libertarians are right as rain until you bring up business or economics, then they go bat shit insane.

Ben Stein OTOH, is already bat shit insane, and stupid as a bag of hammers.

[C_Lawyer09]

27. What is wrong with auditing the fed or the CIA budget

or reforming the tax code so corporations can't abscond with 100-200b of tax revenue for listing off shore po boxes?

[sendero]

36. Nothing is wrong with those ideas..

... its most of the rest of libertarian economics I can't stomach.

If libertarians had their way, eventually there would be one company running everything.

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. His racial views are not the least bit progressive; he is anti-choice

and his proposed solutions for reforming the tax system are simplistic as well as unrealistic.

[C_Lawyer09]

28. Aside from his states rights stance on abortion

How is he anti-progressive racially? Why are his tax system opinions unrealistic? The tax code should be way more simplistic. If it were, everybody would have to pay their taxes.

[PeaceNikki]

44. He's insane.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/5/193414/2787

[rantormusing]

15. +1

Thanks, you saved me some typing.

[troubledamerican]

30. You asked for it: "Too much regulation on banks" says Ron Paul

at 2:32 into this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5lb0l3sYBo

"Too much regulation"?

The October 2008 economic meltdown was caused by TOO MUCH REGULATION??

TOO MUCH REGULATION?

You gotta be fucking kidding me.

And his "Keynesian socialist welfarist" blah blah blah boilerplate Friedmanite bullshit (and your "we don't really have a free market") is nothing but more Reaganist codespeak for "Free Market is a self-correcting magical God" and "Privatize Social Security" and "Fuck the Poor".

According to "Austrian School" magical fundamentalism, all Social Security is "Communism".

According to "Austrian School" magical fundamentalism, CHILD LABOR laws are "anti-free market" regulation.

According to "Austrian School" magical fundamentalism, collective bargaining (a.k.a. labor unions) are "anti-free market".

According to Ron Paul, "we haven't had capitalism" and "TOO MUCH REGULATION" on banks is the problem?

I stopped posting on DU months ago, but your sinister right-wing mendacity brought me out of retirement. Congratulations.

[C_Lawyer09]

31. You must not have watched the clip you provided

Ron Paul was for not bailing out the banks. They should have been allowed to fail. As should many subsidized entities within govt. purview. Go ahead and look at the catalyst for the mortgage securities debacle, and the HUD, govt. push vis a vis Cisneros and Cuomo. We do not have a free market, and we have bought politicians that are responsive only to monied interest. Property rights? Look at imminent domain. One trillion plus dollars on imperial overstretch? Three strikes, and other silly drug laws that don't address violent criminals? An unaudited Fed, which by the way, Arlo Guthrie stands behind. An opaque CIA budget, and a 25% opaque DOD budget. Knee jerk govt. programs that don't stimulate any long term growth because they are temporary programs that don't support any long term savings deposits? The regulation Paul is talking about is the stimulus given to them. Don't subsidize garbage on the taxpayer dime. I'm glad my post got you off your ass and out of retirement. If you are going to make a valid argument, don't do so with a clip that undermines your point.

[troubledamerican]

40. Ron Paul always comes back to pro-deregulation, pro-tax cut Reaganism, and

and his other disinfo in that ciip (amidst the entirely sane but POSEUR calls for dismantling the Fed and stopping the bailout) include:

- his BS statement that there was a "depression" in 1920 that self-corrected (it was not a "depression" or "panic" on the scale of 1929)

- his multivarious pro-Friedman statements about the Great Depression and implicit anti-New Deal propaganda

- his (and your) codespeak implicitly itching to gut Social Security as "socialist welfarist"

There's even more I could pull apart but I'm not going to spend more time on someone who's disingenuous to my face about Ron Paul's Friedmanism and naked deregulation record. His statements about deregulation in that clip and elsewhere were NOT about the bailouts -- an outrageous lie on your part -- and his Reaganist deregulatory record shows that.

Not to mention, for someone who wants us all to believe you're a LAWYER, you cannot even spell EMINENT domain.

For all of Paul's alleged posturing toward anti-Fed, anti-drug law, anti-imperial policy, he sponsors very few actual bills and takes almost no action to put his money where his mouth is.

His (and your) implicit harmony with Far Right Neocons who wish to eliminate Social Security is the MOST telltale sign of toxicity. That alone shows that Ron Paul's antiestablishment views are purely Neofeudal. Ron Paul's America would look like feudalism, Lords and Serfs and plantations, in the end.

Where are the elderly and disabled going to find help in Ron Paul's America when Social Security is dismantled? Texas churches?

[C_Lawyer09]

51. I don't want you to believe I'm a lawyer

It's a play on words, as in: "Sea Lawyer" which is a troop in the Marine Corps that always reads rules and regs in an attempt to get over. I just always found the term funny. Thanks for the spelling lesson.

[naaman fletcher]

54. to be fair...

While Paul is pro-deregulation, that position (which I disagree with)is premised on the idea that if the banks screw up they go under and the stock and bondholders lose everything, and the employees and officers lose their jobs.

The Reagan/Bush 1/Clinton/Bush 2/Obama policy is deregulation where the banks take massive risks, earn the profit from those risks, and then put the losses onto the taxpayers.

I prefer regulation, but would rather have the Paul system than the current one.

[Political Agnostic]

57. You are on the money

[cali]

he's a religious right wing nut who wants a constitutional amendment

declaring that life begins at conception and any liberal that supports the racist, misogynist creep is no liberal.

[LeftishBrit]

34. 'Is massive government spending a way out of our current debacle?'

YES, if done sensibly. Of course, waste goes on within government. But if you want to see the effect on poorer people of *lack* of government spending on public services - read Dickens' novels about 19th century England, or any history of the time. Or accounts of people's lives in the Great Depression, e.g. in America before the New Deal. Or of poor people in Latin American countries, especially before the leftward move of many of these countries during the last 20 years.

Paul does not just oppose *waste* in public spending; he considers welfare benefits to be 'theft' and states that it is an error to think that just because someone needs medical care, they are entitled to it. Anyone, especially a *doctor*, who holds such a view, is a MONSTER, even if he does happen to be right in opposing the war.

[seeinfweggos]

58. he's right on the iraq war and the drug war and nothing else i know of

he cozies up to hate groups and would dismantle completely what little social safety net this country has. ben stein AND ron paul are basically a couple of libertarian shitheads.

[Mari333]

2. My brother loves Ron P

I like some of what he says, but in this case he is right and Stein is an idiot.

[David Zephyr]

3. I'm no fan of Ron Paul, but at least he spoke the truth about the motives of the bomber.

The why behind the bomber's failed attempt.

We bombed Yemen and it appears we killed children in doing so.

That is terror.

[Thickasabrick]

6. I know....why couldn't a democrat say it first? Sheila Lee was part

of the conversation but her contribution was mainly just sticking to defending the administration.

[David Zephyr]

14. It's truly amazing how the "why" is not discussed.

Shit, I imagine that the idiotic "Homeland Defense Department" will now be increased even more. All because we, as a nation, can not deal with introspection, can not look "at that man in the mirror" and ask "why?".

Why would a young lad (Christ, he looks all of 16) want to take his life and that of others? Why? What motivated that act? What was going on in his young head? What took him to make such a horrible decision?

We bombed his country. And it looks like we killed some kids in our "mission".

James Cameron's Avatar is indeed timely. I just wonder if even 10% of those watching it can even get the blunt message he delivers. Imperialism is a sickness.

[laughingliberal]

4. Good on Ron Paul. It needed to be said.

Bet that raised a few eyebrows in right wing circles.

[Thickasabrick]

8. Is he still a puke or an indy now? nt

[laughingliberal]

18. Republican

which makes his comments all the more shocking

[sabrina 1]

5. Ron Paul has bee right from the beginning

about America's foreign invasions. As soon as he began to be effective, he like everyone else who is a threat to the war machine, was demonized. And Democrats on progressive boards, helped with that demonization.

Ben Stein is a warmonger. He's on again tonight, attacking this administration for not stopping the latest incident. Blaming Democrats for what is Bush's National Security program.

Democrats shoot themelves in the foot everytime they go along with the attacks on people who actually tell the truth. Stein knows the talking points to use against anyone opposed to our ME 'policy'. And he just tried to use it against Ron Paul. And many 'lefties' will help him do it. No wonder this country is the mess it is .

[Thickasabrick]

7. I have no idea where Stein got the anti-semitic crap from but it always

creeps in there whenever he speaks.

[sabrina 1]

20. He's using smears as they all do, to try to deflect from

what was being said. He can't defend the war machine's invasion of the ME, so he resorts to personal attacks. With Scott Ritter, as soon as he became effective, they smeared him with child molestation charges. Kucinich with being a 'wacko' and on and on. And it works because people allow themselves to be distracted. Good for Paul for accusing him of a 'vicious attack' because that is what it was.

Ron Paul is right and I'm sure he knows that the Afghanistan war is being expanded to other countries. And he is right that if the US keeps killing people overseas, there will be consequences. And as long as the US believes they have a right to bomb innocent civilians in foreign countries and not even apologize for it, they have to accept the consequences and stop whining about it. Otherwise, they need to leave these countries alone. That is simply common sense.

[walldude]

11. Not a fan of Paul.. but he was asking the right question.. WHY, WHY, WHY

and Stein couldn't come up with an answer so he called him Anti-Semetic. Moron.

[TomClash]

16. "STEIN: No, we're not occupiers. That's the same anti-Semitic argument we've heard."

Anti-Semitic? Huh? Oh, please. :eyes: :puke:

[TheWatcher]

17. Ron Paul is like an Antique Broken Clock Stuck On 3 AM.

He is right twice a day.

The rest of the day, not so much. :)

Looks like it was 3 AM again. :)

[The Gunslinger]

19. Wow! First government mandates to buy health insurance is supported,

Now there are pro Ron Paul threads. I may agree with him on this issue, but he is a far right Republican wacko like the rest of them. Where is this liberal media bias I hear of???

[Thickasabrick]

21. How many democrats have you heard ask this question? It's like

there is an elephant in the room and no one can see it except Ron Paul.

[sabrina 1]

24. Exactly ~ Democrats do not have the guts to

stand up and tell the truth. I have yet to hear one of them, other than Kucinich, dare to question our war-mongering. But Ron Paul has never allowed the attacks on him to stop him from telling the truth. They worry a lot about him because he puts it simply and people get it when he talks. Imagine of all Democrats were doing what he is doing?

Whenever I see people try to dismiss what he has to say, I wonder about their motivations. I hope that people watching that show learned something at least.

[C_Lawyer09]

29. Have you read End the Fed or The Revolution?

There is a big difference between right wing politics as usual, and the supposed controlled free market, versus what an actual free market would be.

[Thickasabrick]

43. No...but I'm putting it on my "read" list. Thanks

:hi:

[Canuckistanian]

22. It's like watching squirrels fight

You have absolutely no interest in the outcome, but it gives a brief amount of amusement.

And you wonder if they'll ever evolve into sentient beings.

[StarfarerBill]

23. Personally, I enjoy watching rightwing cannibalism.

[Cleita]

25. Damn! I was thinking the same thing.

Right winger vs. right winger.

[Hugabear]

26. Given your topic line, I was hoping for a cage fight armed with razor blades

They can both suck shit for all I'm concerned.

[JoeyT]

33. In a swimming pool full of lemon juice.

To many a merry scream of "Socialist!" and "Anti-Semite!"

[JoeyT]

32. I'm not even sure why anyone would even attempt to argue with Stein about anything.

He'd accuse someone of being anti-Semitic for beating him at a game of checkers.
Best I can tell he thinks the phrase means "Disagrees with Ben Stein".

Besides, aren't the people Stein insists we should go kill Semites too?

[voc]

35. Entertaining , yes Awesome , no.

Watched this "exchange".
The best that can be said is I hope they at least got paid.

Both screamed at each other like school children and any gravitas
that was to be gleaned from this"conversation" was lost in testosterone and ego and ad hominems.

Unimpressed.
The question nor the answer are new.

[parts]

37. say what you like about ron paul,

He is intellectually honest.

(pretty squeaky voice, though, why is that?)

[cali]

38. no he's not. for all his faux libertarianism, he wants all abortion illegal on

religious grounds.

[Political Agnostic]

42. it may be blasphemy, but I like Ron Paul

@Cali:
You need to get your facts straight. Ron Paul is personally pro life, but he believes that abortion rights should be left up to the State ...not The Federal Government. It goes back to the rights of the states. Just like in California and their weed/pot situation. Federal government says it is illegal, but California as a state is flexing their rights to have it available to anyone with a prescription. Ron Paul believes that abortion should be dealt with in that same fashion. We have to come to grips that there are people in this world that believe that abortion is murder. Nothing we can do to change their mind, it is what they believe (like religion). If they all happen to live in one state, and they happen to pass that law... as a state they should have the right. The same goes if it were the opposite situation.

@everyone else
I would also like to add, that cheering Ron Paul with one hand and then smearing him with another is complete BS. If someone has good ideas and is brandishing the truth, we shouldn't really care if is coming from the left or the right. The truth is the truth, and Ron Paul has been spreading it for some time now... and lets be honest, as of late, neither party has been doing anything impressive, other than take money from lobbyist and screw up health care reform for the rest of us.

I may not agree 100% with Ron Paul's politics (certainly not in the health care dept), but he usually goes across party lines to work on legislation that both parties usually agree on (Auditing the fed, legalization of MJ)....and he is one of the only politicians talking the straight truth. Also, if I remember correctly, it was the conservatives who were the first to go after Ron Paul and try to smear him because he is not in line with the stale talking points of the Republicrats. Hence, Ben Stein's anti-semite smear... which is pretty ironic as his old boss Nixon was known to say things that are much more anti-semitic than criticizing foreign policy.

[Thickasabrick]

45. Very well said. Thanks nt

[PeaceNikki]

46. He's completely insane.

He's right on a couple of issues, but SO VERY wrong on so VERY many important issues.

Immigration
Gay Rights
Church-State Separation
International Relations
Worker rights
Campaign finance reform
Universal health care
abortion law
against public funding of schools, head start, college assistance, medicare, medicaid.
against social security.
for unfettered gun control.
and Privatizing everything

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/5/193414/2787

[SemiCharmedQuark]

48. Yay for the racist piece of shit Ron Paul!!!

:eyes:

[SemiCharmedQuark]

50. There are people in this world that believe desegregation is wrong. Nothing we can do to change

their mind, it is what they believe (like religion). If they all happen to live in one state, and the happen to pass that law, as a state they should have that right.

:eyes:

[Political Agnostic]

52. States Rights...if you don't like it, move to another State.

There is a big difference between believing that abortion is taking a life away and believing that people are not equal due to the color of race/religion... but I see where you are taking this. You are obviously taking the negative spin, but to bring you back into reality if it weren't for state rights the Gay Marriage movement would have been dead in the water. Places like Massachusetts, Oregon, and New Hampshire flexed their state rights to make it happen.... and look, now you have D.C. following step.

States right is a double edged sword, you just can't take the good. Like freedom of speech, you can't pick and choose what you are going to censor if "freedom" is in the equation. That is why the ACLU gets so much flack...they have to protect the rights of people we may not like so that our rights are protected.

So Yes, if a state of evil racist were to ever arise and the majority voted for segregation...it would probably be the state's right to do so. Obviously, they would be at odds with the federal government and neighboring states. It would also isolate themselves from the rest of the country (Political suicide)... so I doubt your "dream" utopia would happen.

As for Ron Paul being a racist, I thought that has been cleared up. Guilt by association.
http://reason.com/archives/2008/01/16/who-wrote-ron-pauls-newsletter
...besides he is from Texas (If you ever lived in Texas, all you have to do is throw a rock and you will hit a red neck.) I don't think this justifies what was written under his name, or if it makes things right, but you are talking about an "old school" country boy who seems to have changed his way and has accepted moral responsibility for what was printed under his name. At least with everything that he has been preaching and with the things he has voted for or against, you cannot easily pigeon hole him simply as a racist or a crazy. The only thing crazy about him is he speaks the truth without any fear of political repercussion.

[PeaceNikki]

53. He's a fucking nutbag.

He's wrong on:
Immigration
Gay Rights
Church-State Separation
International Relations
Worker rights
Campaign finance reform
Universal health care
abortion law
against public funding of schools, head start, college assistance, medicare, medicaid.
against social security
for unfettered gun control
and Privatizing everything

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/5/193414/2787

[Political Agnostic]

56. like I said..

I don't agree with his politics 100%... but I certainly do not agree with the ad hominem slant on the Daily Kos from a blogger known as phenry.

How is he wrong about International relations? That is one of the few things most Progressives agree with him on. What is wrong with Anti-war/Anti-Imperialist stance?

Also, where are you getting that he is wrong on separation of church and state? He is a Christian but he has pushed no laws that mixes Jesus and our gov.

I disagree with him on most of the points you mention, but it certainly has nothing to do the daily kos, and it does not take away from the truth that has been spilling from his mouth about our foreign policy...which if you haven't noticed sucks!

[SemiCharmedQuark]

47. What, exactly, is intellectually honest about being an anti-choice libertarian?

How can someone be an anti-equal rights libertarian?

[howard112211]

39. Suggesting that the United States is an occupier is anti-semitic??

What kind of insane bullshit is that?

Even if you assume that the statement that the United States is an occupier is false, there is a strong lapse in logic here.

[4_TN_TITANS]

41. wtf qualifies Ben Stein

to even fart in the general direction of this subject? Since all his economic advice has proved wrong over the years, have they moved him to foreign policy advisor?

[David Zephyr]

49. K&R.

How sad that no one from the Left will publicly ask the question Ron Paul asked.

[Geek_Girl]

55. I think Ron Paul is right about this

I don't agree with Ron Paul on many of his political views but I agree with him on the issue of Afghanistan and Iraq. We are occupiers, and our wars and occupying of other countries are radicalizing these extremist. We are in for scary times.

[parts]

59. libertarian - anti-choice dichotomy

If you think it's murder - and it's not, but many on the right think it is - then it's not a woman's rights issue, it's a right to life issue. There's not necessarily a contradiction there.

Paul is misguided on almost all issues, but he deserves respect for his honesty.