"Face the Nation" transcript: November 20, 2011

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well--

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL (overlapping): I mean, in America you're supposed--

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. But-- yeah-- all right.

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL (overlapping): --to be able to criticize your own government. You're supposed to be able to criticize your own government without saying you're un-American.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Of course. But what's your--

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL (overlapping): And that's the implication is.

BOB SCHIEFFER: But what-- what you are saying it-- it was the government's fault. That-- that basically is what you're saying. Let me move on to-- from something else.

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL: I'm saying the policyma-- the policymakers' fault--

BOB SCHIEFFER: The policymakers fault.

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL (overlapping): --contributed to it.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right.

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL (overlapping): Contributed to it.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Let me ask you this. Am I correct that your idea of how to discourage Iran from building nuclear weapons is to be nicer to Iran's leaders? Is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL: Well, I-- I-- no. I think to be-- you know, we have twelve thousand diplomats, I'm suggesting that maybe we ought to use some of them. But just think of how we prevented a nuclear war with the Soviets when the Soviet mi-- missiles were reported in Cuba. We didn't say we're going to attack you. Kennedy and Khrushchev talked and they made a deal. You take your weapons out of Cuba, we'll take them out of Turkey. That's the kind of talk that I want. I don't-- I think the greatest danger now is for us to overreact. And this is what I'm fearful of. Iran doesn't have a bomb. There's no proof. There's no new information regardless of this recent report. And for us to overreact and talk about bombing Iran, that's much more dangerous. We got the--

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well--

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL: --we got the Libyans to-- to-- we got the Libyans to get rid of their nuclear power and their nuclear weapons. And look at what happened to them.

BOB SCHIEFFER: I-- I--

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL (overlapping): So--

BOB SCHIEFFER: Mister Paul--

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL (overlapping): We got to understand that.

BOB SCHIEFFER: May I interrupt just for a second. No one has suggested in the U.S. government that we are going to bomb Iran. What they have said is that we're going to impose--

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL: Ah.

BOB SCHIEFFER: --very tough sanctions. You are against sanctions on Iran, is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL: Yeah, be-- because sanctions are the initial step to war. I was opposed to all the sanctions for ten years in the bombing that was occurring with Iraq as I said it would lead to war. But if you say nobody is suggesting it, why don't you listen to the debates? I mean listen to--

BOB SCHIEFFER: Mister-- Mister Paul.

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL (overlapping): --the some of the other candidates.

BOB SCHIEFFER: May I correct you. I am listening to the debates. I know there have been some candidates who've talked about that including Mister Romney. The United States government--

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL: Right.

BOB SCHIEFFER: --has not said we're going to bomb Iran. I mean that-- that's just a prank.

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL: No, Bob, actually they haven't said-- obviously, they haven't said that. But the implication is-- is nothing is off the table. You've heard those statements.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, yes. All right. Let's move on then. Do you think there is any place in the world where United States forces should be stationed? You've talked about bringing them home from Afghanistan, from-- from Iraq. Is there any place where you think it helps us to have U.S. forces stationed?

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL: No. Other than the fact that I think a submarine is a very worthwhile weapon. And I believe we can defend ourselves with submarines and all our troops back at home. This whole idea that we have to be in a hundred and thirty countries and nine hundred bases; now they've just invented a weapon that can hit any spot in the world in one hour.

BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): So you would--

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL: I mean, what's this idea? This is old-- this is old-fashioned idea that you have to keep troops on nine hundred bases around the world, makes no sense at all.

BOB SCHIEFFER: How--

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL: Besides we're bankrupt. We can't afford it any longer.

BOB SCHIEFFER: So you would-- you would-- if you were President, you'd bring home the troops from Japan; you'd bring home the troops from South Korea? You would. Okay.

• « Previous Page
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next Page »

[eddy_4]

Disgusting interview. The hostility Mr. Schieffer showed towards Ron Paul was awful. You have lost all respect I had for you.

[KrisBurk]

I have always held a great deal of repsect for Bob Schieffer but I was disgusted with the way he handled the interview with Ron Paul. He attempted to twist things about 911. Paul never blamed the U.S. for 911, he merely stated the facts which are that our intervention all over the qworld is why so many are against the US. Shame on you, Bob. He also cut him off on more than one occasion becuase he didn't like Paul's comments about our governement's decisions.

[peteblack]

Mr. Schieffer should be ashamed. If he can't keep his personal biases out of the picture, it's time for him to leave the picture.

[jeenious]

The Republican Congressmen who claim they would be violating a signed promise not to vote for "NEW" taxes must think all U.S. voters are stupid.

First of all: The Republicans in the Congress voted for the declaration of the Afghanistan War WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY WAY TO FUND IT. They voted for the declaration of the Iraq War WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY WAY TO FUND IT. Putting two and two together, they are saying they voted for a war with no intention of paying for it. How honest and responsible is THAT?

Secondly, these Republican Congresspersons who signed an agreement with a lobbyist... a LOBBYIST... are saying, in effect, that they locked out the will of the U.S. voter/taxpayers, by making a commitment to a LOBBYIST! How honest and responsible is THAT!

Thirdly, they are saying the agreement they signed with said LOBBYIST promised they would not vote for any "NEW" tax. What part of simply ALLOWING the expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts is voting for a "NEW" tax. And if they want to argue that NOT to pass new legislation would be tantamount to voting for a "new" tax now, then that is the same as saying that back when the Bush Tax Cuts were passed with their assenting votes, they THEN broke their promise. I mean,hey, if VOTING, at the time of passage of the Bush Tax Cuts that they would EXPIRE,then they ALREADY broke their agreement with that LOBBYIST. All they would be doing NOW, by letting the expirations occur, would be not voting at all. The expirations were originally in the laws they passed to MAKE those temporary cuts, and each time the Congress has voted to forestall those expiration dates, that has not had anything to do with a "NEW" tax. They don't have the guts to just admit they either lied at time of passing the bills PROVIDING expiration dates, or they are lying now in saying they would be voting for a "new" tax. Take your pick. Lied then, or lied now. Either way they are LIARS, just once more, in a string of lies by way of TWISTED WORDS that defy logic... on a daily basis. So they sure as hell cannot logically plead that their INTEGRITY is at stake. WHAT integrity?!!!

Last of all, how about the issue of the argument the Republicans are offering to the effect that any increase in taxes NOW would negatively impact the U.S. economy. Isn't it a fact that the George W. Bush administration inherited a HEALTHY ECONOMY, low unemployment, high consumer confidence??? And isn't it a fact that the Bush Tax Cuts were passed and, subsequent to the passing of them, OUR ECONOMY CRASHED... DURING AND UNDER the George W. Bush administration? Damned right it is a fact.

Okay, then: If lowering taxes HELPS an economy, then just exactly why the the U. S. economy CRASH during George W. Bush's administration, with a majority in both houses of the Congress?

It also is a fact that the Housing Market crashed horrendously under and during the George W. Bush incumbency and domination of both houses of the Congress by the Republicans. It also is a fact that members of the Congress were INFORMED that there was fraud going on ON THE PART OF SEVENTEEN OF THE LARGEST U.S. BANKING CORPORATIONS... and nothing, nothing, NOTHING was done to investigate, charge, prosecute or imprison the CORPORATE MANAGERS of those banks. And it was Bush who pushed for TARP. Remember?

And even after the crash, and TARP, when the public finally found out that TRILLIONS had been stolen by the corporate managers of those mega-banks, the Republicans used their influence to SQUELCH any talk of PROSECUTION and PRESSURED the various Attorney Generals of the U.S. and of the chartering states of those corporations not to prosecute but, rather, to sue the corporations civilly, not even NAMING the criminal perpetrating human corporate officers. Why? You know as well as I do why. Because those corporations, at the behest of their corporate managers were FUNNELLING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS INTO "COOPERATIVE" POLITIIANS CAMPAIGN FUNDS.

And what's so great about being sued, rather than imprisoned?

Those mega-banking corporations are being allowed to pay only PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR of what they STOLE through blatant, flagrant intentionsl CRIMINAL FRAUD. A settlement of two billion offered by Bank of America is a mere slap on the wrist in light of the fact they raked off TRILLIONS by fraud.

Why to Congresspersons become multi-millionaires, and twist their lies as if the voters are too stupid to see what's going on?

You tell me. Are they simply aware of a FACT, the fact that we are too stupid and too lazy to do our homework and see through the kind of fools they take us for? Are we lazy and stupid? Do we only gripe about OTHER voters' so-called "representatives" in government, and perceive our own to be exceptions to the rule that very few of them are NOT corrupt and NOT in the pockets of the corporations whose managers commit crimes they know about and lie about and protect?

[DFerreira75]

It's obvious you have no idea what you're talking about.. I'll break down the REAL FACTs about the economy.
Bush inherited an unhealthy economy that was in the middle of a recession (dot com bust ring a bell).. He implemented these tax cuts after 9/11 to help stimulate the economy, which it did. The economy grew under the Bush administration every single year. So where your supposed "facts" come from is questionable.
Next. Housing crisis.. This had nothing to do with taxes. In Fact this had everything to do with government intervention in the housing market. The loans that the government backed via Fannie and Freddy were the reason the housing price went up so high. Artificially low interest rates coupled with easy money allowed people to make higher bids on houses than what they were really worth. This problem continued to escalate for years.. Eventually the people who really couldn't afford their payments eventually defaulted due to their rising interest rates (which were caused by their ARM loans).. When these homes started to go into foreclosure values began to decline and consumer confidence was lost. People stopped buying homes.. This caused problems in construction industries, cement companies, timber companies, paper companies, plastics, copper, steel, lights figures, ceiling fans, and on and on and on.. Builders were left with unsold homes, they closed up. Supply companies were left with surplus, they stopped buying. Companies were left with fewer and fewer consumers, they began layoffs. People lost their jobs, they stopped purchasing and eventually went into foreclosure, further perpetuating our problem.
Taxes will not get us out of this mess. People who make $50,000 a year and spend every penny of that cannot afford another $400 a year in taxes.. It would mean the difference of paying their bills or paying their government.. Odds are extra expenses, like new shoes, would be put on hold.. End result.. Shoe stores would start layoffs.. Less money would go back into the economy and less money would be given tot he government..
The mere idea that Bush caused the housing crisis is lost on me. Bush asked for oversight and regulations against Fannie and Freddy to prevent the bubble and prevent the eventual pop of said bubble.. It was, in fact, the Democrats that denied his request.
If you want to blame someone for the housing crisis blame Bill Clinton.. he had more to do with it than Bush.. Look up community reinvestment act - housing crisis.. That should be enough information for you to begin understanding how we got in this mess and how we can get out of it.
Good day.

[jaycubs]

Thank you Dferreira75, you said it great! jeenious,please continue to post, we can help you yet. so long as you truly see logic and not just opinions. Fact: You Spent all that time typing and really didn't say or prove anything. You repeated everything we know already, but twisted Ron Paul in with ideas he has never supported. You are wrong to put Ron Paul in with the rest of the republicans. He is unique, and all the information you seek on what he believes is on his site. www.ronpaul.com Should you not choose to do your homework, be prepared that people will be more informed than you. Information is power, lies destroy themselves in the light of truth. I'm not saying Ron Paul is a saint, but he is a man of principle. Stop letting drive by news give you your only facts. Do your research, form your opinion, share with us. In that order works best. I'm interested in your thoughts, just trying to find a common language.

[WTPatton]

Shieffer claimed Paul said we should be "nicer to Iran?" Did a third grader write his questions for him?

Have we re-written the history books to teach that Japan bombed Pearl Harbor because "they hated our freedom" too? (nothing to do with our steel embargo and opposition to their militaristic expansion through Asia).

[sleetish]

Ron Paul has said some questionable things before, but this is ridiculous.

This wasn't an interview, it was a blatant attack.

I think Paul could have answered the national parks question better though, so I'll answer it for him.

What would we do with the national parks if the federal government wasn't involved? I don't know... I'm pretty sure most of those parks are in STATES aren't they? Would it be fair at all to let California take care of/manage Yosemite?

[WTPatton]

Or, Paul could have said that the parks would be better off because they could hire three actual park rangers to work onsite for the salary of one, $180,000 per year bureaucrat at work at the Department of Interior in D.C.

[revolutiontime73]

CIA Bin Laden Chief Michael Scheuer explains that we were not attacked
because of the way life is lived in the West, but instead due to the
activities of our government and its allies the Middle East.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udz5_FdoFGU

[AmericanGran]

Could it be any more obvious that Bob Scheiffer is no fan of Ron Paul? I guess when it's your own show, true journalism flies out the window. Ron Paul handled himself well, he is right on when it comes to foreign policy and the need to cut back on bloated governmental agencies. Time for a REAL change America!

[LogicalUtilizor]

Bob Schieffer begins the interview with accusing Ron Paul for blaming americans for the 9/11-attacks, then disregards Paul's perfectly valid counter-arguments in order to push the Iran war-propaganda. When that failed towards the end of the interview, he spammed Paul's "eliminations list" so that we wouldn't have any real answers at all.

What a complete piece of s***. What an OBVIOUS hitpiece.

[ChaosTheoryBob]

Couldn't agree with you more, LogicalUtilizor, I watched this interview this morning on CBS and was just disgusted by Schieffer's attack mode and total disregard for the honest answers Paul was giving. Ron Paul has half the '08 Obama votes from people who have become enlightened and educated - if Paul doesn't make it into the final nominations we'll know who fixed the polls.

[revolutiontime73]

"For over half a century, Muslims in Palestine have been slaughtered and assaulted and robbed of their honor and of their property. Their houses have been blasted, their crops destroyed. And the strange thing is that any act on their part to avenge themselves or to lift the injustice befalling them causes great agitation in the United Nations which hastens to call for an emergency meeting only to convict the victim and to censure the wronged and the tyrannized whose children have been killed and whose crops have been destroyed and whose farms have been pulverized " - Osama bin Laden May 1998
"The International Islamic Front for Jihad against the U.S. and Israel has issued a crystal-clear fatwa calling on the Islamic nation to carry on jihad aimed at liberating holy sites. The nation of Muhammad has responded to this appeal. If the instigation for jihad against the Jews and the Americans in order to liberate Al-Aksa Mosque and the Holy Ka'aba Islamic shrines in the Middle East is considered a crime, then let history be a witness that I am a criminal." - Osama bin Laden May 1999
"We swore that America wouldn't live in security until we live it truly in Palestine . This showed the reality of America, which puts Israel's interest above its own people's interest. America won't get out of this crisis until it gets out of the Arabian Peninsula , and until it stops its support of Israel." -Osama bin Laden, October 2001
A German friend of Mohammed Atta(the hijacker pilot who flew into WTC) is quoted as describing him as "most imbued actually about Israeli politics in the region and about US protection of these Israeli politics in the region. And he was to a degree personally suffering from that."
These facts point to a motive for attacking the WTC in 2001 that is consistent with the motive expressed by terrorists in a letter sent to the New York Times after the 1993 bombing attack of the WTC, "We declare our responsibility for the explosion on the mentioned building. This action was done in response for the American political, economical, and military support to Israel the state of terrorism and to the rest of the dictator countries in the region."