tv Senator Rand Paul R-TX Campaign Rally in Des Moines Iowa CSPAN October 18, 2015 9:36pm-10:02pm EDT
it is not yet clear that we can them. i notice that len mccluskey now supports our position. guarantee a secure ballot. i do not think it is too much to ask people who are potentially going to go on strike to fill out a ballot paper. maggie throup: recently, i received a letter from transport for london, informing me that in the last year it has spent more than £1.4 million with suppliers received a letter from transport including progress rail , which is fantastic news for our local economy. does he agree that this government have re-energised manufacturing and engineering, safeguarding our economic security? prime minister cameron: my honorable friend makes an important point. big infrastructure decisions, wherever they are made, can benefit every part of the country with jobs and manufacturing. in the last five years london
has seen huge investment because of crossrail, the biggest infrastructure project anywhere in europe -- but i think we will see a better balance in the coming years, not least with the massive electrification and other programs around the country. it is vitally important, but you cannot have infrastructure investment without a secure and strong economy, and that is what we will be delivering. marion fellows: recently i have been contacted by a number of constituents who are facing real hardship as a consequence of the current payment of child support. it is not compulsory for parents to declare changes that may impact on the amount that they should pay, and if is found that a parent did not make their altered financial circumstances known, there are no penalties and no requirement to make backdated payments. what action will the prime minister take to close these loopholes, which have a detrimental effect on vulnerable families in motherwell and wishaw and beyond? mr. speaker: we are extremely grateful to the honorable lady, but questions and answers must be somewhat briefer.
we are making much slower progress than in the last parliament. much slower. prime minister cameron: the honorable lady raises something that we have all seen in our constituency surgeries and the problems with the system, and we know that the old system with child-support agency, it had imperfections as well. we have tried to introduce more voluntary arrangements and to encourage parents to seek ways to ensure that fair payments are child-support made, but i will look closely at the question she asks. >> you have been watching prime minister's questions. question time is live on 7:00 a.m. eastern and re-airs at 9:00 p.m. on c-span. you can watch online at www.c-span.org. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] long, c-spangn
takes you on the road to the white house with unprecedented access to the candidates, news conferences, rallies, and speeches. we take your comments on twitter and by phone. every event we cover is available at www.c-span.org. republican presidential candidate rand paul recently made a campaign stop in des moines, speaking to students at drake university. he spent half an hour talking about foreign policy, national debt, and the rights of lgbt employment. mr. paul: drake let you guys out of class today. how many of you are registered for the draft? the secretary of the army said today they will start registering women as well, or he thinks they may have to. my question is, why do you think
the government registers you at all for a draft? we do not have a draft. they have your social security number. why do they want you to register? i think maybe they want you to admit your submission, admit that you will go wherever they tell you whenever they tell you. but you get a choice on who you elect to run the country on whether or not you will go to war or not. this is the issue of the day right now. it is becoming more profound and more imminent. why is it an issue? because you have virtually every other presidential candidate saying, we must have a no-fly zone. we must tell russia they cannot fly over syria or iraq. what do you think that means? right now, russia is already flying over syria and iraq. why? because syria invited them. iraq invited them.
if you announce, as carly fiorina or hillary clinton have, that we will enforce a no-fly area where people are already flying, what do you think that means? that means we are going to shoot down russian fighters. we spent 70 years trying to avoid an altercation with russia , trying to avoid an altercation with another superpower that has nuclear weapons. who are the people that tried to avoid war? ronald reagan. even though he is not always depicted this way by the liberal media, ronald reagan did not shut down communications. he opened communications with the russians. we have people on the republican state saying, we should not talk to putin. that is a recipe for disaster. we will be flying our jets in a hundred 20 square mile area and will not have a discussion with putin? that is a recipe for disaster.
how many have read "all quiet on the western front"? the headmaster encourage them to go to war. they were supposed to be excited to go to war. it was supposed to be so patriotic and such a great thing, world war i. people today still dispute why the hell they fought the war. 7 million people died. for what? war is a terrible thing. does that mean we should be defenseless and not defend our country? absolutely not. it means we should not be eager or reckless. war should be the last resort, not the first resort. when war comes, you will be the generation that fights it. it may not be a volunteer army. it may will be conscription. it may be a draft again. everyone of you, man and woman, may be sent. but you have a choice. you have a choice of your leaders will be.
been a good, has it thing, our involvement in the middle east? war, 400-4000 soldiers died in the iraq war. they cost a trillion dollars. didn't accomplish something good? are we better off that saddam hussein is gone? iraq seems stronger. medam hussein was an and or of iran and to me, he was the , standing in the way of the shiite government of iran. who is iran's best ally? there are iranian troops in iraq. who is the next best ally? russia. who invited russia? iraq. recently, russia flew troops and equipment into syria.
who invited them? syria invited them. is a terriblessad person and we must do something about terrible people. but what if it is a variation of evil on one side and the other? people.ssed his if he were walking down the street, i would not feed him. we should not give arms or food to assad. but who is on the other side? isis. they came to congress in 2013 and asked for weapons for the rebels fighting assad. --sked the same question will it not be a great irony if the weapons we give to the , we are back in two your later fighting against our own weapons? that is what is going on. where did isis get its weapons?
from august, from our allies, saudi arabia. $1 billion worth of u.s. humvees. u.s. humvees. they pay their soldiers with $1 billion of u.s. cash they stole as well. they have antitank weapons we gave to other rebels that were snatched up by isis. you say, how did all these u.s. weapons wind up with them when we were giving them to moderate rebels in syria? analyst put it this way -- the only thing moderate about the rebels in syria is their ability to fight. so we gave them these weapons, and they were ineffective and immediately snatched up by isis. they have our tanks, our antitank weapons. it is completely insane. in the last debate, they said, what will you do about defeating
isis? maybe we should stop arming them. the war over there is a complete disaster. but there are evil people on both sides. are you willing to go and fight assad, fight to the death against a dictator in syria, but to fight for islamic rebels who also hate us? --s obviously hates everyone christians, particularly infidels, by their thinking. are you willing to fight or die for that? is there something over there you can conceive of that is worth waiting your life down for? perhaps there is a variation of evil on either side. when we have been involved in the middle east, it has often backfired. hillary's war in libya -- good idea, bad idea? we topple gaddafi. but what did we get in his
place? we got the arab spring. that turned into the air of winter. era winter -- arab winter, we got chaos. one third of syria pledges allegiance to isis. you have egypt in there with weapons and a civil war once again. neither side probably likes america. of the 1500 groups fighting in syria, do you think any of them would recognize israel? i do not think there is one that recognizes israel. do you think they like us? we try to get them to fight isis, but they really want to fight assad. there are 2 million christians trapped in the middle. there are more christians in syria than any other place in the middle east other than egypt. but ask a christian in syria if ory would rather have assad
isis, the barbarians there getting to know. everyone one of the christians in syria would say assad. yet, we are bombing both sides. there are people in the republican party, who want to bomb both sides. completely insane. we need better leadership. you say, is one party better than the other? sometimes, they are the same. you have hillary clinton wanting a no-fly zone and republicans wanting the same thing. the same nonsense, same bad planning. the same thing that dragged us into the first iraq war. who voted for the first iraq war? hillary clinton. she later backpedaled. once she finds out something is unpopular, she flips to the other side. in syria, we said we will fund and train syrian moderates. we spent $250 million to train 60 of them. over $4 million per fighter.
you know what we did? we sent them back into battle five at a time. hussein's in an army of five people? captured and stripped ,f their weapons by al nusra another name for al qaeda. people said, why would we be fighting with al qaeda? they tell us, that is what we must do. we must fight with al qaeda against isis. s ay are very ands -- variant radical islam. weren't they the people that attacked us on 9/11? we will have a big group hug afterwards? they will kill us when we turn around. maybe there is no answer. there is another war in yemen. rebels, and iran is supporting them.
you have sunni rebels, and saudi arabia is supporting them. everyone beats the drawn and says, we have to get involved in yemen. the iranians are killing al qaeda. maybe we should by popcorn. just sometimes, we shouldn't be involved. retreat andan we get behind our fortress and do nothing? i think we need to be engaged, diplomatically engaged. it is funny how people use these terms. some people say, you're talking about isolationism. no, it is not. they are talking about diplomatic isolationism. is talking to putin diplomatic isolationism. but you will have a choice, and a lot of this is up to you. you fight the war. hard aboutand whether you are ready to volunteer for another iraq war.
think about whether it will be good for america and whether you are up to the task. your vote will make a difference. it is also very expensive. people say, it is just the democrats' fault we have this surrender this debt. republicans will to you we have an $18 trillion debt and it is the democrats' fault. it is both parties' fault. they pertain to disagree. we need more civility in washington. "kumbaya."and sing the problem is the opposite. we have too much holding hands. the right says we need more money for the military. the left says we need more money for domestic welfare and spending. what happens? they always get together and raise spending. .t is both parties' fault
who are they stealing from? they are stealing from your future. some say the debt is costing us one million jobs a year. of this to be aware because this is your future they are borrowing from. i think we need a different way. i think we need a way in which the government does not look at your phone records, the government does not put you in jail for nonviolent things like marijuana. and the government does not send wars thats that -- to do not have purpose. do your republicans talking about the second amendment. i defend it as well. do not come into my house. but i also defend the fourth amendment, which says the government cannot come in your house without a warrant. i also defend the fifth and sixth amendment. it says the government cannot take your property without due process. by regulatory fiat, president
obama is taking your land. iowa is underd in federal jurisdiction. how do they justify this? a migratory bird could have landed in the great lakes. your backyard is connected to the great lakes. we can regulate every parcel of land we want. did congress approve of this? no, he is doing it on his own. that is the greatest problem we have in our country -- the collapse of the separation of powers. branch isive consuming all this power and representatives do not get any vote. the sixth amendments as you have a right to a trial by jury. possibly give us that? it goes back to greek and roman tron -- times. we had a debate in 2011 over this on the senate floor.
we debated back and forth over whether an individual american citizen accused of a crime in the united states could be indefinitely detain without a trial, without a lawyer. i was incredulous. i do having this debate -- not like to name names, but it was a senator from arizona -- i said, you mean an american citizen can be sent to guantanamo bay without a trial, without a lawyer? he said, yes, if they are dangerous. i thought to myself, my goodness. who would give such responsibilities one person? it begs the question, who is that person? who is the person that gets to decide who is innocent, who is guilty? i thought at that moment of the times when we have gotten it wrong. when we incarcerated 100,000 japanese during world war ii because of the way they looked. the phones ofpped
civil rights leaders in the 1960's and those who protested the vietnam war without due process, without approval from a judge. and we got it wrong. i thought of the time when richard jewell was accused of being a bomber back in the 90's. you do not even remember the 1990's. he was accused of bombing centennial park in atlanta. the olympic bomb. everyone said he did it. everyone said he was guilty. in hours, his name was plastered everywhere across the country. he was guilty because he fit the profile. he wore glasses, had a backpack -- i see a few backpacks -- he was solicitous to the victims. he was thought to be a bomber because he was kind after the bombing. he fit the profile, but he did not do the bombing. that is why we have the bill of rights. well hadif richard je
been a black man in the south in the 1920's. , the trial byghts jury, protects minorities. you can be a minority because of the color of your skin or the shade of your ideology. you can't be a minority because you are an evangelical christian -- can be and minority because you are an evangelical christian or atheist. the bill of rights is about defending those who have an all orthodox -- unorthodox idea. it is not so much for the high school quarterback or the prom queen. the bill of rights is for the least among us, the least popular among us. it is an amazing thing. we cannot give up. we cannot say, take our liberty. make us safe again. some people say, well, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. kind of a step down from innocent until proven guilty.
we have to decide whether or not our freedom is precious enough to defend, whether or not it is precious enough to fight for. you are think necessarily fighting for your freedom if we go back to iraq. but there is an intellectual battle here for the way your country goes. i will leave you with one last story. also saysamendment you have the right to a speedy trial. browner was a 16-year-old kid from the bronx. he was sent to rikers island. he spent three years there without a trial. no trial, never convicted. two years he spent in solitary confinement. guards,eaten by gangs, and tried to commit suicide. he was released but could never get over the experience. never convicted. he was convicted by -- accused
by someone who is in the country illegally. he committed suicide a few months ago. that is not the country i believe in. that is not the kind of country i want to represent. i do not want to represent a country that cannot obey the bill of rights, that is putting young people in jail for nonviolent crimes, sometimes without a trial. none of you would have been left in jail. your parents would have figured out a way, but this was a cooler from theblack kid bronx. i want to be a different party than we have been in the past. i want to defend everybody -- rich, pool were, black, white. says, io be the one who defend the second amendment. but i want to have the greater passion to defend the sixth amendment, justice for all, no
matter where you came from. thank you for coming out today. [applause] mr. paul: i have a plan to get, but i will try to get to a couple of students. [inaudible] mr. paul: not familiar with it. what is in it again? i do not know what those are. we have some for-profit stuff in the prisons that is a problem. people cannot afford ankle bracelets they have to get. , they havethat
longer prison sentences because they cannot afford the punishment given to >> the corruption of transnational corporations, i know it is a big topic. any ideas how to control and regulate national corporations? senator paul: the question is whether or not corporations have too much power in our political world. this has been coming back and forth from long time. and people talk about it in terms of campaign finance reform, how can we try to get special interests out of our government. one of the important things remember is that the reason people purchase influence, whether it is donald trump giving millions of dollars to democrats and republicans, he told us this in the wall street journal. he said i buy politicians because i wanted to do whatever the hell i tell them to do.
the government has power, i think it has too much power. so the more powerful government gets, the more likely people are to likely purchase the influence of government. one of the answers is a more broad answer, we need to make government smaller so no one was to purchase influence so much. the other answer, though, is i think there could be some rules -- i think i'm better off with this. can we go back to this? i want to go back to just the tie. the other thing about special interests that i think we could do, we tried passing limitations on contributions. it has been deemed unconstitutional. i agree with that. i don't think you should limit people's speech. there is one way you can do a constitutionally. if you're a contractor for a government and you get a $1 billion contract, you are being given money, i think you should make a condition of the contract that you sign that you will not