54 votes

Concord Monitor (NH) Declares: Ron Paul Galore! Includes 1hr Video Interview

[Note: The Concord Monitor requires registration to see these articles]

Concord Monitor Editor By Felice Belman writes:

...our plan for this morning’s edition [is] a virtual Paul-a-palooza: two front-page stories, a photograph and an editorial. On www.concordmonitor.com, there is a video from Paul’s Thursday interview with the Monitor editorial board. Additionally, Sunday’s Viewpoints section will include more outtakes from the interview – and a terrific new caricature of Paul by longtime Monitor cartoonist Mike Marland.

Continue: Ron Paul Galore!

Here's the video of that hour long interview:


Paul: Limit Military to National Defense

Supporters Like Steady Views

Monitor Editorial: Paul's Candor Should Set Standard

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

That was an awesome

That was an awesome interview...

Loved to watch this

Loved to watch this interview. Ron Paul understands and explains so well. Just great.

Loved it

I really enjoyed this interview. I thought Paul did a great job. He got asked some tough questions.

By tough

By tough you mean they don't understand what our ideas are because they have been teach solly on this keynaism idea. I mean the guy was like will we are paying our bills...? Really with what...we have to bought 40% of every dollar everyday now. That's like in negative figures everyday.

well those ones weren't

well those ones weren't "tough" lol. They were more about educating a viewpoint.

Id say the lowering taxes bit where he named Kennedy as an example of lower taxes spurring growth. Ha.

Also his conviction on not compromising on slavery, recognizing that the country would have been better off if we did not compromise at that point and time.

Finally able to watch it in

Finally able to watch it in its entirety. That was pretty amazing how solid he is in his convictions.

Will they use this same camera on other candidates?

Ron Paul really means what he says. He doesn't change what he is saying, even in front of a small group or off camera.

That's honesty and integrity.

education of the masses.

People need to understand... Ron is not talking about short term fix.. He is saying people need to recognize the system is broken and its policy needs to be changed in a big way to avoid total collapse. Once the faith in the dollar is not recognize by the other countries, we will be in big trouble cause printing more money will not matter cause no one else will accept it.

It is like a monopoly game. There is limited amount of property just the land on Earth. You are playing monopoly and then someone lands on Broadwalk (or anything that cost more than they could afford) but do not have the money to buy it. That player then just goes and counterfeit (print money) a few hundred dollars and puts it into the game and buys the property. Should the other players object to this? -It is not hard people, think freely and think in terms of the big picture.

And Ron Paul was Kung Fu fighting - Hwaaaah!

The upside about battling the public educations of these numbskulls is that their questions are the same basic questions that public educated (and private school educated) drones have across the nation. Might as well plant a little cognitive dissonance that will rattle around in the brains of all who behold it but can't quite wrap their heads around it yet.

Tough, tough interview!

Unrelenting. And bravo - bravissimo! until 1.17. But what a lousy ending that was (to me personally). Poor, poor minorities being singled out for the death penalty ooo.

I'd like to see a similarly tough, tough interview with the hard right wing - how about Jared Taylor who would say that the people being "singled out" are THE ONES COMMITTING THE CRIMES!

Yea, and what about some hard, hard questions from, say, oh, I don't know .. Jesse Jackson? David Duke?


Uncompromising Interviewers: Principles must be compromised!

Ron Paul explained the difference between Coalition Building and Compromise of Principle. The interviewers who seemed to be in their own inner mental gridlock (uncompromising on their Principle that Principles must be compromised) missed entirely the perfect example of how holding onto Principle and Coalition Building would in practical terms work: Social Security is broke and even if nominally held onto cannot provide for the frightened people who depend on it. Ron Paul suggests the very practical and popular idea of bringing the troops home and closing all foreign bases, take half the money and pay down the debt, then take the other half of the money to sure up those addicted to Entitlement Programs who would otherwise face starvation on the street, and allow young people to opt out of Social Security which could then quietly pass into the bin of failed socialist experiments. This creates a Coalition that takes care of the Principles of all parties concerned and moves towards an increase in Freedom. Principle of Liberty held intact. Coalition without Compromise of Underlying Principle.

northstar's picture

Good therapy!

I laid down on the couch, got relaxed and listened to the whole interview. America, you don't even have to watch, just listen. Try it, you'll like it :-)

Real eyes realize real lies

We want our country back

Every year is a year for Ron Paul!

great interview, liberal nut panel

wow, great interview. Sad to see how IGNORANT this panel of people truly were. wow .... So much for the 'Live Free or Die' motto. These folks' motto is "Live under big government propaganda and failure, then die."

I was taken about at first

I was taken about at first too, but then I remembered that they have the public school system and no child is left behind in NH too.

Ayn Rand

She also knew how to put Jesus and all of that socialist New Testament crap in its place.

The Pagans Called The Followers Of Christ.."Christians"

It Would No Different For Us That Believe in The Ideas of Freedom, Prosperity and Peace To Be Called "Libertarians" or Those That Believe In Life, Liberty and Property Rights..To strive for Excellence and Virtue in a "Free Society" Composed of loosely confederated States based on Limited Government as enumerated in the Constitution and confirmed and written in The Federalist Papers...by such authors as Jefferson, Madison and Hamilton..

The difference between Jesus and Socialists

Jesus is not a Socialist. Socialists believe in using force to take from one group to give to another group. Ron Paul is a Disciple of Jesus and also does not advocate the use of force to take from one group to give to another group. True compassion acts on its own and compels by example. Ron Paul does not wear his spiritual beliefs on his sleeve, but it is clear by his compassion and concern for us, as well as his dignity and humility that he is setting a good example for Christians who take their Faith seriously and have more than a superficial understanding of the New Testament.

What a great educational tool this interview is!

This is such a valuable interview as it gives so much information on his arguments concerning the issues. It allows us to see how good his arguments are, how principled and intelligent he is and what a good person he is in his beliefs. This is why we need real debates as opposed to the so called 'debates' they have held so far on television. Thank you so much for posting this.

Excellent Interview

Exactly right gibson, this is the way the debates should be done. Intelligent questions followed with enough time to give thoughtful answers. Have any of the other candidates given interviews with this much in depth detail? I continue to be amazed at Ron Pauls depth of knowledge and his clear understanding of history, economics and our constitutional principals.


Wouldn't every voter benefit if all those running gave this type of interview. I want so badly to see Ron Paul given the chance to debate anyone this way, there would be no need to worry as he speaks from the heart as well as from history and an incredible amount of knowledge and against Obama he would do incredibly well, I have no doubt.

Yes, you then have to ask, why not?

This type of debate forum would benefit the voters and would be much more informative. Your point brings up the question, why not have a much more open forum for discussion? From what I have seen in the media and with the candidates, neither side wants to have a more open forum debate. The media wants to limit the questions to maintain their control and their self important appearance of influence. The candidates really don't want the exposure to actually have to answer a detailed question, because they have to be constantly aware not to say the wrong thing that would offend a special interest group. So the debates are reduced to ridiculous questions and short sound bite answers. No detail or specifics, and the guy with the best sound bite wins. Its really sad. The good news is we have Ron Paul who is answering in specifics and is just not another stump speech sound bite candidate.


I couldn't agree more.

Refreshing to see Paul challenged...

Paul REALLY shines when he's challenged on his views, even though the challenges were offered by largely ignorant interviewers. I think may have gained 4 new votes in that interview...

Take the Red Pill at www.redpillphilosophy.com New Videos, Articles, and More!

Principles of Macroeconomics

These reporters have zero knowledge or acknowledgement of the fundamental principles of macroeconomics. Ron Paul understands not only economic theory, but the pragmatic wisdom of having lived through many periods of United States history. He should definitely be our next president. Take time to explain his viewpoints and you can't help but win rational people over.


awesome interview, I like how

awesome interview, I like how the guy was more on the offense with Ron giving Ron the opportunity to REALLY debate (like they should on tv)

Slam dunk

Clearly the questions came from knee jerk positions without the historical, economic, monetary or constitutional knowledge to argue their position or adequately contest his.

But don't be surprised when his critics say he fumbled and lost all arguments. They have a way of twisting these things...kinda like the Emperors clothes.


"broke". Define "counterfeit".

These journalists had little to no clue what Ron Paul was talking about! He put on a clinic on free market economics. I hope they were paying attention...for their own personal betterment if anything.

Ron Paul for President in 2012!

Clearly the Concorde is a

Clearly the Concorde is a liberal paper, but at least Paul was able to speak, despite their biased arrival.

This is part of what they wrote:

"Such qualities make him a delight to be around, but they won't make him president, nor - if elected - would Paul be able to govern. His fidelity to his many deeply held principles allow him to build coalitions with people who share his beliefs but forbid him from making the compromises that are necessary to achieve a majority."

They are still hung up on getting the majority vote. However, despite Paul's explanation on compromise they still insist that this is a must. But one have to wonder if they would compromise on their beliefs. They believe in mob rule. So if 51% of Americans don't want gay marriage, si that okay with them? If 51% of americans want to outlaw abortion, is that okay with them?

How did we get where we are today? Through compromise, but its a mess. I.e. incrementalism.

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

The Presidency is a bully pulpit

He is already leading the debate, and the Presidency would be a good position to further that debate. I think he would be more effective as President. Also, he truly can work with all kinds of people.

I guess these interviewers think that passing endless legislation is what we want from a President? Why do so many people think that passing legislation, especially the horrid stuff we've been getting for years, is what we want?

Yeah, the guy who was

Yeah, the guy who was obsessed with asking about compromise clearly did not understand anything Dr. Paul said. Sailed right over his head.

Also, though I'm not a Randian, I really like how Ayn Rand summed it up; to paraphrase: What do you get in a compromise between food and poison?