Audio of Dr. Paul's Speech at Johns Hopkins Nitze School

Thank you bcmiller for this link to the audio: Scroll down the page a little. Here is a direct link to the audio.

Also, a great story from ABC news on the speech: Paul: U.S. Has 'Dug a Hole' for Itself in Iraq

While several of his 2008 rivals spent the sixth anniversary of 9/11 in congressional panels debating the future of U.S. involvement in Iraq, Texas Rep. Ron Paul, Republican presidential candidate, declared at a policy forum that the United States has "dug a hole for [itself]" in Iraq.

Paul described Iraq as a "preemptive war" saying it was a "planned invasion and occupation" of a "country that was no threat to us whatsoever."

Part of the reasoning behind invading Iraq, Paul said, was "to have another excuse to keep the military industrial complex going."

Paul Labels Petraeus Hearings 'Politicking'...

(Thanks to nugget / Garrett for the link)

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

I just love the last

I just love the last question. I'm just thinking, "Are you seriously going to second guess Ron Paul on sound monetary policy? It's like second guessing Steven Hawking on theoretical physics. You will not win."

...But that kid is smart enough to run the economy and our lives

He thinks getting rid of fiat money is "irresponsible" since we'd be giving up an important "tool" to manage the economy!

DUH!!!! That's the point, kid!

I'm always amazed at the arrogance -- usually by left-wingers, but neocons as well -- of people who think they're smart enough to manage everyones' lives. They think they can pull out their slide-rules and tell us what to do all day long. Ron Paul is absolutely right -- end fiat money!

ABC article...and RESPONSE

Take a look...a LONG LOOK at the ABC article. Then after you pick your JAW UP off the floor (given how positive it was) read on in the comments section. Now we all know that Ron and crew dominates the internet for anything that calls for a "response" . However, the thing about this particular string of responses is the message this is sending to ABC. Make no mistake, folks, they are in the business of increasing their RATINGS over their competition in the MSM. That pie is getting sliced more thin every day. They are starting to see how RP converts into "viewers" and "respondants" (i.e. potential ratings bumps). We need to keep hammering away at these folks, but PRAISE THEM when they do a good, fair, unbiased piece. We're not asking them to throw Ron softballs, we all know the man can handle himself when allowed to (a) respond and (b) respond FULLY. That's all we're asking them for...but let's keep asking as the message seems to be getting through (via potential viewers to their network ).

Great Observation...

Almost everywhere there is an article about Ron Paul stance on issues, the resulting comments are overwhelmingly strong in his favor. That is very encouraging. The more media outlets see this, they'll have to accept it, and I believe JeffnDallas is right, they're after ratings, so they'll need to be respectfull. Fox is just a demented tool for the warmongors......and that old tune is getting worn out. Now that Ron has done the O'Reilly show, I'd let it be known that he's not accepting any more invites onto bombastic shows.... Only civil, intelligent discussion forums........that'll make headlines. The guilty know who they are without calling any names.

alan laney

Dr. Paul schooled the last guy... ask a question. It was from a student who tried to show everyone in the room how smart he was. He basically told Ron Paul that it was a bad idea to get rid of the inflationary power of the Fed because the government would lose the ability to regulate the economy. The guy got his butt handed to him. Dr. Paul very handily stated his case and made it obvious that he understood the subject matter better than most people and certainly far better than that snarky kid.

"Give me ambiguity, or give me something else..."

"Give me ambiguity, or give me something else..."

What I learned about Dr. Paul

I downloaded the MP3 file and am still listening to the Q & A. It's a good talk, and gets better as he goes along. He loosens up and appreciates the respect and intelligence of the Hopkins audience. This is worth the time to put on a CD, by the way.

Ron Paul is a man of peace, of quiet, rational conversation, of thoughtful debate. He can be tough; watching his CSPAN performance in the Senate Banking Committee with the FED chairman was enormously satisfying. He knew his stuff and he laid it out.

But Dr. Paul does not thrive in hot confrontation. He rallies and makes good points, but is not comfortable, particularly when the adversary makes insinuations or baseless accusations. Dr. Paul is refined and thoughtful, not a street fighter. That was the case with Bill O'Reilly, and, to some degree, in the recent Fox debate. Other candidates like the heat and intensity of a shouting match; it invigorates them. It drains Dr. Paul. This was noted after his exchange with Sean Hannity in the SC debate.

Dr. Paul does not have the luxury of always having pleasant forums such as Hopkins; the debates---and there will be more of them---are rough and tumble. That is why I think he might consider getting a coach. He has all the answers, but sometimes his attackers get to him and that, I think, can be anticipated and prepared for in the future.


I'm afraid I don't have the time to listen to this speech, but will someone please post here if there is a transcript released of what was said. I'd love to read it.

Great Speech

Great speech at JHU, listen if you have the time.


My Sword is Yours

I've been critical of Congressman Paul recently. I wasn't happen with his performance in the last debate. I wasn't happy with his O'Reilly interview. Both times I thought that he missed the mark and failed to act on opportunities to articulate the issues we face in foreign policy.

This SAIC presentation just brought back my faith. The case Congressman Paul made was bulletproof - clear, concise, and glorious in its logical consistency. He answered tough questions with a host of examples from a variety of foreign policy theaters. If he ever had an hour to go mano a mano with another GOP candidate on the issue, I think he would absolutely destroy them.

Ron does great!

I'm afraid I have to disagree with Nathan Hale and say that Ron's last debate was great! He came through with flying colors as usual. O'Reilly tried to run him over but Ron held his own-- super and then some. Don't forget how rude O'Reilly is but Ron stood up to him super.


But he is not good at sound bites

Or flag waving, or pandering. He has a high pitched voice that gets a little higher, and shows his age just a little. My 16 year old listened to a speech, and commented that if he looked and sounded like Obama, he'd easily win the election.

Of course, that doesn't make him wrong, but it does make it difficult for him to do as well in the formats where quick sound bites and image carry the argument.

I looked at the last debate, and the O'Reilly interview as defensive - the neocons most powerful MSM organization going after him. one gaff, and you know it would have been replayed over and over again like Howard Dean's scream - really what did that odd scream have to do with any policies? Dr. Paul did not shine, but he did not get beaten either. Basically he held his ground, which is all he had to do. He's still standing. THe JHU speech is his turf, and if it gets out, will go a long way to turn more people to his side of the argument.

How This Helps

Regarding Paul's debate performance, I don't think that he did terribly, but he missed many opportunities. He didn't articulate himself well against Huckabee (though IMO he did edge out the Huckster in that exchange), and most of his other answers were pretty sub-par. That's why I didn't like his debate performance. His answers lacked specific references and concise posits - which upsets me because, as this speech and Q&A shows, he knows quite a few, and he articulates many of them in less than a minute.

Also, Calm Ron Paul is better than Fiery Ron Paul. A little occasional fire is just fine, but the man barely smiled for the entire Fox Debate, and certainly not during the Factor interview. In both instances his rhetoric was sloppy (especially on O'Reilly, where he actually ducked a question to my shock and horror), primarily because he was trying to appear angry. He should be calmer when in contentious exchanges. More people respond favorably to a controlled grandfatherly minute of education than a minute of Gravelesque yelling and ranting.

Under the circumstances

Regarding Nathan Hale's statements pertaining to Ron Paul's speeches and O'Reilly's show. First of all Ron stood there for 35 minutes in the last debate before they approached him with a question and then it was a misquote of his that he told them about. Remember that Ron Paul has been the low man on the totem pole with the MSM and has had to prove his ability and credibility to which he has done quite well. It is not Ron Paul's style to rant and rave but he carries out his point and states it in a way that takes notice--in a very good way. On O'Reilly's show he tried more than doing his best answering questions and trying to talk although Bill was his very rude self and cut him off several times when he was talking. How could he stay there and smile while being attacked? I wish more people had Ron Paul's patience and mannerism which is just a few of his great qualities. Ron Paul has remained too calm long enough and it's about time he shows a little emotion, especially when being attacked constantly. What a great man and President he is going to be! DO RUN RON !!



The link you provided didn't work for me, try this: