Did Tim Russert destroy the Ron Paul myth this morning?

Question

On "Meet the Press" this morning, Tim Russert did not expose Ron Paul as a fool. Rather, he asked the questions that let Paul expose himself -- as I predicted he would. Russert called Paul on his tax policy, and asked him how much revenue would be lost. He asked Paul how much money would be saved if he withdrew troops from Europe and the Far East. In each case, Paul admitted he didn't know. He acted as though he didn't care if North Korea invaded South Korea. Russert called Paul on his lie that he never supported abolishing public schools. Russert proved Paul a hypocrite on pork, as he'd earmarked big-time for his district; and on term limits, which this 10-term Congressman had campaigned on. Paul's own words made him look completely ridiculous. How can anybody who saw this man, exposed as not having a clue on economic or foreign policy, still support him? Can we now close the book on the Paul legend?

Answer 1

I kind of thought he was all talk! He scared me when he admitted that public schools should be closed and private ones take their place. If he has been in Congress for 10 terms then what should limited terms be?
12? 14? He has spent his life bellied up to the public trough eating just as big as any other pork spending politician. Look at the committees he has served on, research his positions, and you will see that he loves politics and will do anything to keep this lifestyle alive for himself. Unfit for any other position in society, he sees the Presidency as his last grab. Pathetic!

Answer 2

Sorry The Book Is Still Wide Open!!!!!!!

The truth is, Tim Russert was out to discredit Ron Paul by asking math questions that nobody could answer off the top of their head without a calculator.
Dr.Paul answered truthfully...I don't know....He Didn't Know the Answer To The Math Problems!

Does Anybody Know the Answers to these Math Problems??????The Answer is NO!!!

So, I see the Meet The Press Show as a contest to discredit candidates they might not support..........And I'll bet anybody that anybody could ask questions that have no answers.....like how much change do I have in my pocket right now?

In my opinion Dim Russert Potato Head discredited himself.

RON PAUL IN 2008!!!!!!
**********************************************************

Answer 3

I don't think Paul was destroyed at all. But I suspect people who don't understand the system may be confused by all this. Honestly, politics can be pretty screwy. And they can't be addressed quickly in a volley of rapid-fire questions that jump all across the board.

Tax policy - Cannot be explained in under a minute. It's too complicated and has to be balanced with other changes. I'll admit, I don't even understand it all and I've been looking into it for a while. The codes need to be simplified, and I think Paul is trying to do this.

Money saved by withdrawing troops - Of course he wouldn't know exactly how much. Does anyone? We're not even sure exactly how much has been spent on the war to begin with.

North Korea & South Korea - Paul always comes across as being uncaring, but the fact is that it wasn't really our fight to begin with. It was a border dispute between those two countries. The philosophy he takes is sound though - you don't spend all your time trying to get your neighbors to stop fighting while your own house is in trouble. Paul's not interested in earning a global Good Guy badge, he's interested in making his own country sound and secure.

Abolishing public schools - I think words were taken out of context there, probably in reference to the federal Department of Education. He wants to eliminate that department. It would not eliminate public schools (which are state-run.) It would free the public schools from a lot of unnecessary national guidelines that often hinder education, such as the "No Child Left Behind" program that wrecked havoc in the schools.

Earmarks - People need to understand that as a congressman, Paul was elected by and serves a district, and the people in that district have their needs and wants that he is obligated to address. (I notice that you did not also mention the fact that he voted against his own earmarks.)

Term Limits - Since he is allowed to serve, I see no fault in him serving. He knows how to play the political game. I have no doubt that if a term-limiting bill was passed, he'd step down immediately. Maybe that makes him a hypocrite, maybe he believes he can do more good by staying in the game since he's allowed to anyway.

Economic and Foreign policy - I've seen footage of Dr. Paul talking in great detail about these subjects, and he seemed to have a pretty good grasp on them. Then again, he wasn't being pressured to answer within 60 seconds at the time either.

So no, I do not believe that Tim Russert destroyed the Ron Paul "myth" this morning.

Answer 4

I didn't see the interview in question, but what myth exactly are we talking about? Whether you support RP or not, you have to admit a lot of people are sick and tired of the status quo in Washington. This is where his support comes from, people who are sick of the same old, not normal political people. Is that where the hatred comes from? While yes, I admit RP supporters can be annoying at times, of which I certainly have been. While we may go about things differently or the wrong way, but at least we care about what is happening now. Or would you rather have us soundly asleep, allowing the highjacking of America by the corrupt officials to continue unabated.

And another question, if Mike Gravel or Dennis Kucinich(the other two"off the wall" candidates) would be getting the attention instead of RP, would you be hating them just as much, or is this a personal thing against RP?

Jeffrey: You are confusing RP with someone else. He doesn't want to replace income tax with a sales tax, we wants to abolish it and replace it with nothing. I don't think homeowners would complain about not being able to deduct mortgage when they aren't paying anything at all.

Answer 5

If basic questions like Russert's expose Ron Paul as a "myth" then what does that say about Rudy and Mitt? One is a liberal with a trail of scandals behind him and the other is a mormon who can't decide what he supports and what he doesnt. It will be great to watch Russert dissect Huckabee as a liberal leaning jesus freak that pardons murderers and rapists next week. So in perspective, I think Ron Paul has handled Russert much better than any other candidate. They have no real dirt on Paul.

Answer 6

Ron Paul is someone I be proud to vote for as president one he is against abortion we kill 49 million babies when we can give them up for adoption. We have unwanted babies that be abused in orphan and froster homes. I believe he would save a lot money on taxes and he does not have earmarks but a lot of them do.

Answer 7

I don't really support Ron Paul, and I have mixed feelings about him, for various reasons. Also, my first choice is Kucinich, and my second is Gravel. But, Ron Paul is the ONLY conservative candidate that I would ever consider voting for. And, I definitely agree with Shrieking Panda, and all the points she made in her answer! *sm*

Answer 8

Please feel free to give me as many thumbdowns as possible, I'd rather thumbdowns than Ron Paul as president. It's the safer of the two.

I'm watching a re-air of the Meet The Press interview right now. I know that he's got a lot of supporters but I'm sorry, I think he's scary. I don't see too many homeowners voting for Ron Paul knowing that he wants to get rid of income tax where they can't deduct their mortgage. His national sales tax will destroy the poor and elderly. The poor will end up spending more in taxes a year on a national sales tax than they currently pay in income tax. Remember Hoovervilles? If he's elected there will be Paulvilles populated by the poor and the elderly with no or low incomes. Right now he's waffling about his past stands on various topics. He definitely isn't a republican but probably closer to a party from the 1770's, like a Federalist or something. He's scary and despicable!

Answer 9

It's clear you have no insight into what happened on "Meet the Press". I suggest you go to this C-Span analysis of Ron Paul on Meet the Press:

http://www.c-span.org/rss/video.asp?MediaID=33971

Let them help you get the facts straight. It's about an hour.

Answer 10

Nope, can't close the book yet.

First, I didn't like that he didn't have all the facts either. Truth is, though, to have every fact about every topic that could have come up would have been impossible. That said, I'd have liked him to have the facts on the top issues.

But here's why we can't close the book yet...

1) Taxes - In 2006, the government flushed over $29 BILLION bucks down the tubes with wasteful spending. Do you think if we cut $29 BILLION from the budget and changed our foreign policy we could remove the income tax? You betcha!

2) Regarding Korea, he talks about when we got out of Vietnam the country united but we've stayed in Korea and that's a mess. He's not saying he doesn't care, he's saying that most of the time the people closest to the issue are the ones who should resolve the issue. But it's not up to the U.S. to police the world.

3) He doesn't support abolishing the public schools. Russert was putting words in Paul's mouth. He supports privatization of the public schools. He doesn't want to get rid of the schools, but improve them. Privatization = better quality at a lower cost.

4) Hypocrite on pork. Maybe you didn't understand. With Katrina, people were getting federal money from tax money paid by people all over the United States. That money was largely mis-spent and helped the true victims very little. In Houston, it was about returning money those people had paid in. He was trying to explain it but Russert kept interrupting him. It's the difference between getting welfare vs. a tax refund.

5) Foreign policy - his foreign policy is simple - build relationships wherever you can and go to war only as a last resort.

Illegal immigration - remove the carrot. Period. If there is no reason for a person to come to America illegally, they won't. Makes perfect sense.

6) Economic policy - also simple. Increased personal freedom, increased personal responsibility. You get to keep your paycheck but if you decide to spend it all gambling, the government isn't going to bail you out. The job of welfare should be to put itself out of business - it should help the poor get on their feet.

If you believe that you can do a better job running your life than the government can, Ron Paul is the man to vote for.

Answer 11

Tim Russert is a tool.

The American public views hesitation and nuanced arguments as a weakness. Unfortunately they prefer well-rehearsed slick candidates to candidates that actually have something to say but may not be the most telegenic.

Let's see Russert come down equally hard on the big guys.