[Video] Ron Paul Interview On Fox News Sunday

[Immortal Technique]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94VFW_KHqYU


Airing Date May.15, 2011

Ron Paul Interview On Fox News Sunday
Tea Party Nation Disgusts me!
Yeah i said it !!

[rp08orbust]

Dude, you should be immortal.

rep++

[zerosdontcount]

Seriously you always have the interviews, thanks again.

[rp08orbust]

Wow, that was a truly awesome interview. Possibly the best performance by Ron I've ever seen.

[rolle]

Ron sure knows how to close out an interview. Well done!

[sailingaway]

On social security, a huge point right now, this is bad, it let them paint him as 'pulling out social security from under those who paid in'. He didn't say that, but that is the impression Fox, even the Judge, have been giving uniformly to GOP primary voters. YOu have to know Ron's views to know he ISN'T saying that. Ron tried to address that at one point but Wallace interrupted and deflected him. Ron has to watch out for this, they are doing it on purpose.

Tea party nation is not the tea party. It is a group with 'tea party' in its name for marketing purposes.

[Wren]

Damn that was fast. I didn't like the social security answer though, he didn't get enough time to explain how he would transitionally phase it out. I fear he may have scared all the old people :(

[Chester Copperpot]

i dont know what everybody is bitching about.. I thought that was a tough but fair interview...

Chris gave paul plenty of time to explain and articulate....

[maqsur]

Yeah, I liked that interview actually. Nothing wrong with being challenged, that's where a person reveals their true principles (which Dr. Paul has many). Good stuff, he has definitely improved a lot over the past few years. I guess that's what happens when you're in the public eye much more than in the past.

[sailingaway]

Damn that was fast. I didn't like the social security answer though, he didn't get enough time to explain how he would transitionally phase it out. I fear he may have scared all the old people :(

It isn't the old people, it is the baby boomers and those immediately following who are 40+ and have paid in for 20+ years while being told their equity in their houses was what they should retire on, and are seeing it all go at once when they 'followed the rules'. It is also everyone YOUNGER being told they will have to continue paying into a system those over 55 will get more out of than they ever will, who now know the govt can't be trusted to fulfill its promises. RonPaul is actually the ONLY one with a plan to address funding social security shortfalls, and it also makes people very practically assess the actual value to them of staying in Japan, Afghanistan, etc, since pulling from there would be what Ron sees as funding the programs for those who have paid in while still letting those who want to opt out do so.

The program would end because anyone in their right mind who wasn't massively invested in the plan would pull out if they had the option, given the government's record of 'money management'. Not because Ron would 'end it'.

[RonPaulCult]

AHHHHHHHHHHHHH HAHAHA Johnny Come Lately! Oh man he's on fire lately!

[TXcarlosTX]

Ron Paul laid it down dirty at the end!!!

[TheTyke]

I am just amazed at his interviews lately. He is getting soo good at this, and has been doing a smashing job despite all the attacks. Best I've ever seen. And he's bringing new and great points such as his military experience.

To be even better he should incorporate SailingAway's point that he's the ONLY one with a plan to keep social security solvent, and maybe try the line that President Paul would have gotten bin Laden earlier. Out-hawk the warmongers on ntl security, and divide the opposition!

[Agorism]

Was a decent interview.

[IDefendThePlatform]

Holy shit that was awesome.

"If you're going to use him as a spokesperson for the tea party, he is a johhny come-lately who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about..."

Another home run by the world's best spokesperson for liberty.

[rp08orbust]

I loved his invocation of George W Bush in defense of his OBL capture policy. I wonder if he read http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?292419-HotAir-Paul-Killing-OBL-%E2%80%9Cabsolutely-was-not-necessary%E2%80%9D-Nice-knowing-you.&p=3269878&viewfull=1#post3269878

[YumYum]

Social Security is a "tax". For people who have been paying into it, they think the government owes them something; the government owes them nothing. We have been duped into thinking that we are paying into an insurance program that is saving to supplement our retirement. We have been lied to. All we have done and are doing is paying a tax which the government takes and spends on other programs rather than paying into a fund.


Benefits are funded by taxes imposed on wages of employees and self-employed persons. As explained below, in the case of employment, the employer and employee are each responsible for one half of the Social Security tax, with the employee's half being withheld from the employee's pay check. In the case of self-employed persons (i.e., independent contractors), the self-employed person is responsible for the entire amount of Social Security tax.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_%28United_States%29#Taxation

[ronpaulitician]

Ron Paul Interview On Fox News Sunday
Tea Party Nation Disgusts me!
Yeah i said it !!
Ah, man. I totally thought you were quoting Ron.

[pauladin]

ron is doing better in interviews today than he did in 2007-2008!!

[TheDriver]

Ron's biggest problem: he is letting the hacks control the "issues discussion." He needs to turn every question back toward reckless spending to put the focus on the economy--no matter what. They can't beat us on that field--don't play on the other fields.

[pauladin]

anybody know if ron will have more interviews today?

[rp08orbust]

Social Security is a "tax". For people who have been paying into it, they think the government owes them something; the government owes them nothing. We have been duped into thinking that we are paying into an insurance program that is saving to supplement our retirement. We have been lied to. All we have done and are doing is paying a tax which the government takes and spends on other programs rather than paying into a fund.

Good point, and this reminds me of a quick way of ending the debate about whether it's constitutional: It is part of the unconstitutional income tax

[crhoades]

Link for all us mobile users : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94VFW_KHqYU
Please consider including the actual link when embedding the videos.

[ronpaulitician]

As an in-studio guest, he gets a lot more respect from the interviewers. I realize it takes a large chunk out of his already-busy schedule, but he should definitely take Wallace up on his offer to come back.

[randomname]

On social security, a huge point right now, this is bad, it let them paint him as 'pulling out social security from under those who paid in'. He didn't say that, but that is the impression Fox, even the Judge, have been giving uniformly to GOP primary voters. YOu have to know Ron's views to know he ISN'T saying that. Ron tried to address that at one point but Wallace interrupted and deflected him. Ron has to watch out for this, they are doing it on purpose.

Tea party nation is not the tea party. It is a group with 'tea party' in its name for marketing purposes.

Wallace did the same with the Bin Laden thing at 9:36, Ron even went LET ME EXPLAIN, and Wallace deflected again.

Still, looks like edited the heck out of the interview and aired the parts that would turn off people the most, if this is the worst they could find he must have done pretty well :D

[pacodever]

My impressions:

Dr. Paul needs to be CRYSTAL CLEAR about the OBL issue. A lot of people, who would otherwise be interested, are still not getting it. I know Dr. Paul often speaks broadly from his philosophical principles, but on this issue he needs to explicit why he disagrees with how the OBL operation was conducted and how he would have done it. Then transition into the obvious (not so, for some) contradictions of our foreign policy.

As for the heroin issue, I think a lot of people who were initially shocked are now understanding his point of Americans having freedom of choice. Speaking about drug addiction as a medical problem and not a criminal one is right on. Dr. Paul should never fail to point out that is the more compassionate and effective way to combat drug addiction.

Finally, it didn't come up in this interview, but Dr. Paul's opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act is another topic that makes me cringe just thinking about how is going to be spun. This is another one that needs to be nailed down. I don't believe dismissing it as "ancient history" is the way to go (like on the Chris Matthews interview), but addressing it head on as a property rights/1st amendment issue. Continue to drive those points home.

[rp08orbust]

Finally, it didn't come up in this interview, but Dr. Paul's opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act is another topic that makes me cringe just thinking about how is going to be spun. This is another one that needs to be nailed down. I don't believe dismissing it as "ancient history" is the way to go (like on the Chris Matthews interview), but addressing it head on as a property rights/1st amendment issue. Continue to drive those points home.

What do you think of this: "There would be less racism today without the 1964 CRA restricting freedom of association. A free market would allow us to identify, shun and boycott racists more effectively. Instead, racism persists in more subtle forms."

[Maximus]

Thought that was a great interview, I think Wallace gave him more respect than I expected.

[YumYum]

What do you think of this: "There would be less racism today without the 1964 CRA restricting freedom of association. A free market would allow us to identify, shun and boycott racists more effectively. Instead, racism persists in more subtle forms."

Ron Paul answered the question regarding the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by pointing out that the Act, out of necessity, was passed because it was our government and state governments that imposed segregation and Jim Crow laws. Had the government never created laws allowing segregation and discrimination, we wouldn't have needed a Civil Rights Act. Government creates the problem, then government tries to undo the damage with more laws.

[rp08orbust]

On social security, a huge point right now, this is bad, it let them paint him as 'pulling out social security from under those who paid in'. He didn't say that, but that is the impression Fox, even the Judge, have been giving uniformly to GOP primary voters. YOu have to know Ron's views to know he ISN'T saying that. Ron tried to address that at one point but Wallace interrupted and deflected him. Ron has to watch out for this, they are doing it on purpose.

Yeah, when asked if Social Security was Constitutional, he said, "Technically it isn't, but I also wouldn't... [Wallace interrupts with a tangent on the general welfare clause]", which I'm guessing was going to continue with something like "... start balancing the budget by throwing old people dependent on Social Security in the streets." But overall I don't think it did much damage because it quickly became an argument about the general welfare clause, which the average old person probably ignored as esoteric.

[thehighwaymanq]

WOW!

Ron Paul killed it. His attitude is completely different than 2007.

[RileyE104]

Dr. Paul did perfect. Even when Wallace tried to twist his words and make him look certain ways, RP turned the entire discussion around about brought the debate right back to his corner.

I especially liked how he said "What's wrong with doing it the way George Bush did it?" in response to catching terrorists. I believe this will score him big points in the Republican Party if people haven't fallen too in love with their big government, democratic president Barrack Obama, who does not respect international law unless it fits his agenda (I.E. his war in Libya).

[sailingaway]

Yeah, when asked if Social Security was Constitutional, he said, "Technically it isn't, but I also wouldn't... [Wallace interrupts with a tangent on the general welfare clause]", which I'm guessing was going to continue with something like "... start balancing the budget by throwing old people dependent on Social Security in the streets." But overall I don't think it did much damage because it quickly became an argument about the general welfare clause, which the average old person probably ignored as esoteric.

No, the average old person follows this topic like a hawk, but in the 'cures' being proposed, it is those under 55 who are at risk, and they are also following it.

[Peace&Freedom]

It's great that Paul at last penetrated BROADCAST TV on a Sunday show with this interview. Meanwhile on Meet the Press, NBC was back to its old tricks. Another "exclusive one hour interview with Newt Gingrich," oh please NO! This, coming in the heels of Paul announcing his candidacy? MTP even started with an emphasis on Gingrich, compared to "the rest of the GOP field announcing" where Paul was only mentioned in passing, then omitted from a group shot of the candidates with a voiceover announcing "so who are the viable candidates?" Fighting this kind of soft blackout or de-emphasis of Paul by the regular TV shows needs to be job one for the grassroots this time.

[IDefendThePlatform]

What do you think of this: "There would be less racism today without the 1964 CRA restricting freedom of association. A free market would allow us to identify, shun and boycott racists more effectively. Instead, racism persists in more subtle forms."

I think thats a great point. I wonder if it might be a little too subtle for most voters though.

I definitely like pointing out that the government institutionalized racism for most of our history as a nation.

[pacelli]

I have to say, Ron is starting this campaign much stronger than he did in 07-08. I hope he can keep it up. I liked his closing comment to the tea party guy. That was a nearly perfect soundbite.

[S.Shorland]

Reagan Fulfilled! I think he can make that claim! He was close enough to Ron to state that he knew his mind? I would say. Maybe talk to Nancy first?

[zacharyrow]

While Ron did great again at defending himself against the slam artists, at some point they need to ask him fair questions. Ones that allow him to explain his positions, especially on the economy.

They're not giving him a chance. They don't do that with every other politician who comes on. Every single question was an attack question.

[AuH20]

Chris Wallace was really defending FDR's court fiasco with Social Security? My head spun when he said this.

[AuH20]

Ron should use this if they ask him again:

"With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." --James Madison

[sailingaway]

Ron should use this if they ask him again:

"With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." --James Madison

It isn't just that. It is basic contract law interpretation that if you have a lengthy list of things allowed even if you say 'such as', really the list limits what is allowed. Further, MODERN law is more lenient on this than law was then. Any contract would be interpreted differently than the SCOTUS interprets the 'general welfare' clause.

[Fermli]

Paul should really try to remember KSM's name.


Damn that was fast. I didn't like the social security answer though, he didn't get enough time to explain how he would transitionally phase it out. I fear he may have scared all the old people :(


Ron's biggest problem: he is letting the hacks control the "issues discussion." He needs to turn every question back toward reckless spending to put the focus on the economy--no matter what. They can't beat us on that field--don't play on the other fields.

Well, he has to answer the question given to him. If the interviewer is forceful like Wallace or Spitzer, they will persist with the original question when Paul tries to talk about a transition period or economic consequences. I'm sure Paul would have The Fed and the economy at the top of his list if he could talk about anything. Sadly there's hardly ever any direct questions about those issues. The interviewer has a great deal of control, Paul can't do much about that.

[Fredom101]

Didn't like this interview.
I hate Chris Wallace' rapidfire style. I prefer back-and-forth conversational interviews.
He definitely tried to slam RP and make him look bad.

Also, I didn't like Ron's use of the word "liberal". The "liberals think..." etc. It's polarizing. What we are wanting is freedom. Many people who consider themselves liberal would also consider themselves to be pro-freedom. Maybe he did this because it was conservative Fox news. But I still don't like it.

[AuH20]

Didn't like this interview.
I hate Chris Wallace' rapidfire style. I prefer back-and-forth conversational interviews.
He definitely tried to slam RP and make him look bad.

Also, I didn't like Ron's use of the word "liberal". The "liberals think..." etc. It's polarizing. What we are wanting is freedom. Many people who consider themselves liberal would also consider themselves to be pro-freedom. Maybe he did this because it was conservative Fox news. But I still don't like it.

But the liberal or progressive are the ones who specifically set up this slave state. Both the "general welfare" clause as well as the "interstate commerce" rule is where they draw all their authority from. You have to address these violations if you're serious about shrinking the government.

[Fredom101]

But the liberal or progressive are the ones who specifically set up this slave state. Both the "general welfare" clause as well as the "interstate commerce" rule is where they draw all their authority from. You have to address these violations if you're serious about shrinking the government.

And the liberals and progressives will never come around if they feel polarized. What then? Force them into our system kicking and screaming? Pretty sure Ron is for the non-aggression principle.

[QueenB4Liberty]

That was a great interview!!

[TheDriver]

I'm sure Paul would have The Fed and the economy at the top of his list if he could talk about anything. Sadly there's hardly ever any direct questions about those issues. The interviewer has a great deal of control, Paul can't do much about that.

Sadly I noticed in his New Hampshire speech, he started with the toxic issues--instead of the economy.

[awake]

The last 30 seconds of this interview should be proof of what the establishment will be doing with the Tea party - dividing and painting Ron Paul. His response was lightning in a jar.

[AuH20]

And the liberals and progressives will never come around if they feel polarized. What then? Force them into our system kicking and screaming? Pretty sure Ron is for the non-aggression principle.

Our system? They're been ruling things with an iron fist for roughly a 100 years. We have a long way to go.

[jclay2]

I still can't believe how much the msm is coming out firing against Ron just 2 days after announcing. I guess I should expect the extent of rp's interviews to be about prostitution, heroin, marijuana, OBL raid, and the 1964 CRA. Good lord, I hate the media.

[Texan4Life]

awesome! he really nailed it at the end!!!

[Tim724]

I thought it went pretty well. I do wish it was longer and more in-depth, giving Dr Paul more time on each answer.

If I could change a couple things:
- As others noted, I wish he had a chance to give his full rap on the transition out of social security and medicare and the risk of meltdown where no one gets anything if we don't reform. (On the upside, this is a common point of discussion that he frequently repeats in other media appearances.)
- In reference to OBL, I wish he would have said he is glad OBL is dead and our failure is that we wasted so much money nation-building in Iraq and Afghanistan driving us to bankruptcy. I don't think his point about Pakistan sovereignty is a very good thing to emphasize, and definitely not in a rapid-fire interview like this when you have limited time and have to pick your battles. I feel like Dr Paul sounded great about OBL after it first happened, but has since digressed somewhat into getting overly nuanced and emphasizing aspects that won't sell too well (e.g., violating Pakistan sovereignty).

Despite that, I thought it was pretty good appearance overall. I do feel like Dr Paul is showing great energy and is really out to do his best.

[TruckinMike]

Only one thing wrong --- He constantly acts as if his supporters are all 18-25. Folks older than that couldn't give a hill of beans that a bunch of adolescent men-boys/women-girls are his supporters. It makes him appear that "mature" adults that have experienced life have no respect for him.

I'm his supporter--- I'm almost twice that age. And a life long self supporting entrepreneur to boot. How many others over 25 are there? I bet over half of this forum is over 25, with 1/4 being over 30.

TMike

[speciallyblend]

Only one thing wrong --- He constantly acts as if his supporters are all 18-25. Folks older than that couldn't give a hill of beans that a bunch of adolescent men-boys/women-girls are his supporters. It makes him appear that "mature" adults that have experienced life have no respect for him.

I'm his supporter--- I'm almost twice that age. And a life long self supporting entrepreneur to boot. How many others over 25 are there? I bet over half of this forum is over 25, with 1/4 being over 30.

TMike

43 but i do not take it so personal when he explains it. In our county the older folks were glad ron paul supporters stood up and joined and volunteered for positions!! They were ready to hand it over basically:) they consider 43 young in our county hehe:) so if i am young to republicans so be it:)

[hillertexas]

Ron just needs to remind them that the general welfare clause is what the global warming fetishists use to justify cap and trade.

[Bodhi]

Overall I thought it went well. I like that RP is not taking any sh#t this time.

What I would like to see is RP take a breath and get his thoughts together before he speaks. His comment at the very end was fantastic
and had great delivery. Unfortunately through most of his interviews he talks so fast and references things that people outside of
this forum probably won't get.

He knows what sort of questions are going to be asked. I wish he would do a better job beforehand preparing a clear and concise answer
suitable for mass consumption. It hurts to see him stumble on his words. You can just see that he has so much information he wants
to share that he has trouble getting it out sometimes.

I would love to see him speak as well as he did at the end of the interview all the way through an entire interview. That would
get him elected.

[pcosmar]

I'm his supporter--- I'm almost twice that age. And a life long self supporting entrepreneur to boot. How many others over 25 are there? I bet over half of this forum is over 25, with 1/4 being over 30.

TMike

54 this summer.
Old redneck, hippie, outlaw farmer thing here.

[tpreitzel]

Ron, please try to stop stumbling over your comments. However, I liked your responses to Wallace's obvious distortions of your positions. Overall rating of Ron's performance: 3.5 out of 5 (very good)

[romacox]

Ron was also right about the welfare clause:


I have been criticized for my voice in this video, but perhaps someone could take the information and make a better video for all of us to use...I would be glad to help if someone wants to do it. (it explains the meaning of welfare now and when the Constitution was written) :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1YL8Cbu9Q4&feature=player_embedded

Here is the online dictionary that backs it up.
http://machaut.uchicago.edu/?resource=Webster%27s&word=welfare&use1913=on&use1828=on

TruckenMike, I am not young myself

[nate895]

Ron, please try to stop stumbling over your comments. However, I liked your responses to Wallace's obvious distortions of your comments.

He looked calm and collected to me. He stumbled a bit, but I really don't think that's going to be fixed. He came off as very Presidential as a whole, however. He never got angry or off on much of a tangent. Tangents don't come off well, that's his number one problem as far as rhetoric goes.

[nate895]

Ron was also right about the welfare clause:


That goes without saying. I can't believe any moron would interpret the Constitution that way when it would simply eliminate the purpose of the proceeding 17 clauses, making only the necessary and proper clause somewhat relevant to any legal discussion. You might as well say Article I, Sec. 8 is ink on paper.

[romacox]

That goes without saying. I can't believe any moron would interpret the Constitution that way when it would simply eliminate the purpose of the proceeding 17 clauses, making only the necessary and proper clause somewhat relevant to any legal discussion. You might as well say Article I, Sec. 8 is ink on paper.

They (like the reporter) interpret it that way because that is what our school system has been teaching them. When I show them the different definitions, they get it.

The reporter also misunderstood the Supremacy Clause, and the role of the Supreme Court, as do many these days (thanks to our educational system)...Here is how the Tenth Amendment Center explains it:
the 10th Amendment Center. The article is about the Supremacy Clause in reference to the Patriot Act and the TSA http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/05/14/in-public-statement-...

We understand what Ron Paul was saying because we know the whole story behind the sound bites, but he is speaking Greek to many because they have been taught different definitions to the very words used in the Constitution.


Example: Welfare
Welfare defined today: "Government assistance due to poverty"

Welfare defined in 1828

1. Exemption from misfortune, sickness, calamity or evil; the enjoyment of health and the common blessings of life; prosperity; happiness; applied to persons.

2. Exemption from any unusual evil or calamity; the enjoyment of peace and prosperity, or the ordinary blessings of society and civil government; applied to states.


Democracy
from the 1913 edition:Democracy (Page: 388)

2. Government by popular representation; a form of government in which the supreme power is retained by the people, but is indirectly exercised through a system of representation and delegated authority periodically renewed; a constitutional representative government; a republic.

from the 1828 edition:

DEMOCRACY, n. [Gr. People, and to possess, to govern.] Government by the people; a form of government, in which the supreme power is lodged in the hands of the people collectively, or in which the people exercise the powers of legislation. Such was the government of Athens.

[bwlibertyman]

I was waiting for RP to say "So you support Obama's healthcare plan because it provides for the general welfare?" I think that would have topped it off. From an educated position it looked like Wallace only supports the general welfare clause when it suits the programs he likes. Too bad ron missed it.

[smithtg]

I loved how he ended this and there was no stupid comeback by the fox msm guy. He got a bit excited in the middle, but had a good comeback to beat back the whole war on drug things and non violent crime loading up the prisons. Treat the addicts as diseased, not criminals. If they shoot someone, then they are criminals

[TruckinMike]

43 but i do not take it so personal when he explains it. In our county the older folks were glad ron paul supporters stood up and joined and volunteered for positions!! They were ready to hand it over basically:) they consider 43 young in our county hehe:) so if i am young to republicans so be it:)

Its not about me --- its about what others think out there in the voting world. Its about Ron Paul's target market.

Concerning the non-activist typical voter:

People are like fish, they swim in schools, old people aren't going to naturally vote for folks that the younger crowd will. But they are naturally inclined to vote for folks that other old folks do vote for. RP needs to talk about all the professional, retired, military, Christian, and blue collar folks that are his supporters.

TMike

[Bodhi]

RP needs to talk about all the professional, retired, military, Christian, and blue collar folks that are his supporters.

TMike

I agree, yes he gets a lot of support from the youth but his comment in the interview could alienate people. Would have been nice to see him mention that last time around he received more donations from those serving in the military than any other candidate.

[specsaregood]

He did strong and closed with an excellent statement.

[steph3n]

I really didn't like this interview at all.

[Romulus]

Ron kicked ass.


Ron's biggest problem: he is letting the hacks control the "issues discussion." He needs to turn every question back toward reckless spending to put the focus on the economy--no matter what. They can't beat us on that field--don't play on the other fields.

THAT my friend is the Golden Ticket.

[Dave Aiello]

My dad just watched this interview.. will see what he thought as an "outsider". He's only heard me preach about Ron - He doesn't use the internet lol.. will report back.

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

I liked the way Dr. Paul made Wallace paint himself as a liberal. :D That's the least he deserves for his repeated interruptions.

[tremendoustie]

And the liberals and progressives will never come around if they feel polarized. What then? Force them into our system kicking and screaming? Pretty sure Ron is for the non-aggression principle.

Since when is defending yourself against muggers a violation of the non-aggression principle?

However, I do agree that it's better to diss specific historical figures, like FDR, than "liberals" in general. Or, use a different term, like "those who want limitless federal government"

Also, every time any pro-liberty person, including Paul, is accused of being heartless or selfish because they don't support theft as a means to charity, they need to immediately explain their support for voluntary charity -- that they believe the right thing to do is to reach into their own pockets to help people -- not to extort money from their neighbor for that purpose.

A political candidate may need to use softer words -- but this should be the response. We should help our neighbors ourselves - not force other neighbors to help them.

[Qdog]

Ron sure knows how to close out an interview. Well done!

That was KILLER! I want to see more of Ron like that...