# Liberty Movement > Rand Paul Forum >  Eliot Spitzer Interview

## pdavis

This is not the full interview.
http://parkerspitzer.blogs.cnn.com/2...specific-cuts/

----------


## jct74

YouTube - Rand Paul "Your Personal Agenda Is Getting In The Way Of You Being A Good Broadcaster"

----------


## Immortal Technique

lmao
i watched this live, Rand destroyed client #9
AWESOME!

----------


## low preference guy

> YouTube - Rand Paul "Your Personal Agenda Is Getting In The Way Of You Being A Good Broadcaster"


jct74 deserves some +reps. he's been posting a lot of interviews very shortly after they occurred.

----------


## low preference guy

wow! Rand is tough!

----------


## MRoCkEd

lmao! Go Rand!

----------


## Inkblots

Geez, I knew Elliot Spitzer was a jerk, but wow does this interview drive that point home.  I'm so glad Rand is able to stand up to blowhards so well!

----------


## libertythor

> Geez, I knew Elliot Spitzer was a jerk, but wow does this interview drive that point home.  I'm so glad Rand is able to stand up to blowhards so well!


He didn't even give Spitzer a chance to ridicule!  This is how all liberty politicians need to be with these douchebags.

----------


## sailingaway

That was WONDERFUL!!! Each of those turds see themselves as the next 'Rachael Maddow' as if it would be a good thing to distort his positions to the country, when what the country needs is solutions.  What does SPITZER plan to do about China dropping our rating from AA to A+?.  Rand was brilliant.  Spitzer looked really sick at the end, did you notice?

----------


## sailingaway

> jct74 deserves some +reps. he's been posting a lot of interviews very shortly after they occurred.


indeed!

----------


## cswake

I heartily enjoyed the part when Spitzer couldn't respond to Rand's statement that Spitzer should stop reading the liberal bloggers.

----------


## low preference guy

this is like a dream. it's amazing that Rand was elected and all this is happening.

----------


## axiomata

"Do I want to go into your personal past?"

No, Rand, you really don't want to go there.  *Shiver*

----------


## Harald

It seems like at the end of the interview, Rand's mike was cut.
He seemed to be saying something several times, but no sound went through.

Jump to 11:55 and watch last few seconds

----------


## Jeremy Tyler

> It seems like at the end of the interview, Rand's mike was cut.
> He seemed to be saying something several times, but no sound went through.
> 
> Jump to 11:55 and watch last few seconds


Yeah he was definitely trying to say something.  Either was a malfunction or they cut his mic.

----------


## Libertea Party

> "Do I want to go into your personal past?"
> 
> No, Rand, you really don't want to go there.  *Shiver*


Since Spitzer went there with Rand he should have gone there. Could have said something like "Well Mr. Spitzer perhaps your viewers should now question the integrity and motives of a man who was the Chief Executive and past Chief Law Enforcement Officer of a state yet broke the very laws he was charged to enforce and had to resign in disgrace. Is that the type of person that makes an earnest interviewer?"

----------


## MsDoodahs

That was great, thanks for posting it!

----------


## low preference guy

One of the consequences of having tense interviews with the media is that you unify people in the right behind you.

Check out the reaction at Hannity forums.

http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?p=82510691

----------


## EndSlavery

Echoing the sentiment of another poster - this really is a dream come true.  Nothing is more gratifying than watching Rand get on television and absolutely destroy these intellectually dishonest windbags.  Not once have I ever seen this man resort to an ad hominem.  I hope he can keep doing this sort of thing, but also that he doesn't grow weary.  There's only so much shouting that he can do into the non-rational progressive ocean.

----------


## Nate-ForLiberty

> It seems like at the end of the interview, Rand's mike was cut.
> He seemed to be saying something several times, but no sound went through.
> 
> Jump to 11:55 and watch last few seconds


yeah, it was cut. but the interview was over. It wasn't like they turned the lights out on him like Bill-o

----------


## ronaldo23

I really wonder what Rand said at the end, when it cuts away then comes back... I bet Rand had a great one-liner or something that Elliot didn't want to play...

----------


## amisspelledword

wow... i hate when they start talking at the same time. dizzying.

----------


## sailingaway

> I really wonder what Rand said at the end, when it cuts away then comes back... I bet Rand had a great one-liner or something that Elliot didn't want to play...


Spitzer clearly wanted the last word in that little lecture he gave, and I agree, I think Rand's mike was cut.  He looked like he was laughing inside, and Spitzer, despite saying they had loads of time, was rushing to get his rant in, knowing Rand was just going to get up and walk out at some point.

----------


## Dreamofunity

I thought Spitzer was on MSNBC?

----------


## bighairycaveman

Oh my god that interview just made my night.  Rand completely destroyed spitzer.  

Totally RWNED.

----------


## TheDriver

> I really wonder what Rand said at the end, when it cuts away then comes back... I bet Rand had a great one-liner or something that Elliot didn't want to play...


The clip appeared edited in several spots....

----------


## ronaldo23

> The clip appeared edited in several spots....


yeah it did. Spitzer also ends with "I know I've had a career in politics" before it cuts, and I can imagine Rand making some witty comment about the way in which Spitzer left politics...

----------


## ronaldo23

another thing to consider is this show is getting atrocious ratings. It is sinking CNN even further overall, and so he's trying to be controversial so that he has a job for a few months longer...

----------


## yatez112

That "previously scheduled interview" part had me rolling. :P

Thanks for the post.  Loved it!

----------


## torchbearer

bwahahahahaaha!
can't wait for january.

----------


## cswake

And here's a different perspective:
http://www.democraticunderground.com...ess=385x523838

----------


## FSP-Rebel

Rand is definitely money well spent.

----------


## Theocrat

Spitzer's facial expressions betrayed his true motives. He had a sinister smirk on his face during most of the interview. All he was trying to do was catch Rand Paul in his words or vilify his position on where he would make budget cuts. Thank God Rand was able to stand his ground.

----------


## BenIsForRon

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha  hahahahahaha




pwnt

----------


## DeadheadForPaul

Bwahaha

Rand has been on a roll

I like Rand's smirk when he was accused of filibustering on the show - it was half true.  But he HAS to take over the interview and get in on his terms.

I think he learned a lot from the Maddow interview

Glad he stuck it to Spitzer.  I seriously LOLed when he said the  "well if we want to get personal..." thing.

Spitzer is a creep

----------


## Bman

> I think he learned a lot from the Maddow interview


YouTube - Bush "Fool Me Once..."

----------


## Gage



----------


## BamaFanNKy

>

----------


## Bman

> 


Dammit.  Stop cropping photo's!!!

----------


## BamaFanNKy

> Dammit.  Stop cropping photo's!!!


That's what she said...... yeah, doesn't work as well.

By man law: http://gone-hollywood.com/2010/04/as...photos-leaked/

----------


## Inkblots

> Oh my god that interview just made my night.  Rand completely destroyed spitzer.  
> 
> Totally RWNED.


Rwned?  I'm going to need to start using that...

----------


## tsopranos

Rand tore him a new a$$hole

Thanks for the tube!

----------


## Reason

I think our bias might be getting in the way of seeing how the general populace might view this interview...

I think Rand did a good job but should have been more specific about what areas he wants to cut specifically.

----------


## RonPaulCult

This interview gave me my very first Randgasim.

----------


## jrskblx125

these morons know he cant possibly know SPECIFICALLY where to cut yet. i mean for starters, TARP, healthcare... those two are pretty big. but like he said thousands of items are in the budget. theyre trying to paint him as horrible before he even makes a single vote lol. that democrat underground site has some looneys i tell ya. it amazes me how we think were right about economics (which we are via logic and reason) but they read the other side of economics and think theyre right. its mind boggling really

----------


## low preference guy

> I think our bias might be getting in the way of seeing how the general populace might view this interview...
> 
> I think Rand did a good job but should have been more specific about what areas he wants to cut specifically.


i thought only a leftist hack would "miss" the point that the process is as important as the specifics

----------


## Live_Free_Or_Die

> I think our bias might be getting in the way of seeing how the general populace might view this interview...
> 
> I think Rand did a good job but should have been more specific about what areas he wants to cut specifically.


I agree.  I don't think Rand made good points and it just made for the Randgasm that has occurred evidenced in the thread.

Rand stated he was not prepared to respond to a line by line budget inquiry, he will be preparing a budget, and nothing was off the table.  I think he could have appealed to a broader audience had he emphasized those points more than most of the BS that occurred in the interview.

----------


## tuco.sargent

> Yeah he was definitely trying to say something.  Either was a malfunction or they cut his mic.


Yeah, I think so too.





> That's what she said...... yeah, doesn't work as well.
> 
> By man law: http://gone-hollywood.com/2010/04/as...photos-leaked/


And thank you very much for revealing these revealing photos about his mistress. I'll have to use them for future.........reference...........

----------


## devil21

This is where Rand apparently differs from his father with interviews.  Ron is gracious and allows his interviewer to get into the gotcha lines.  Rand obviously learned from the Maddow interview not to let the interviewer get a foothold into a line of gotcha questioning and to rather state the positions as clear as possible and take up as much time as possible.  Ron doesn't do this well at times.

Rand owned that interview and I lol'ed when he threw Spitzer's past back in his face.  "You don't want me to get into your background now, do you?"

----------


## purplechoe

> And thank you very much for revealing these revealing photos about his mistress. I'll have to use them for future.........reference...........

----------


## psi2941

I wish rand paul said something like, "one budget i would love to cut is the fund that allows politicians to use government money for high end hookers."

----------


## Philhelm

> I wish rand paul said something like, "one budget i would love to cut is the fund that allows politicians to use government money for high end hookers."


That would have been Randtastic!

----------


## Brooklyn Red Leg

> And here's a different perspective:
> http://www.democraticunderground.com...ess=385x523838


Shows how utterly disingenuous some of them are by resorting to ad hominems. I guess the 'cut all Federal worker's pay by 10%' isn't specific enough. Nor is it enough for him to say that the defense budget isn't off the table. Just more 'Rah-rah, Democrats do no wrong' BS.

----------


## dean.engelhardt

I saw the interview live.  The John asked Rand to name 1 specific budget cut.  Rand named 3.  Right after the interview the John said Rand could not name one specific budget cut.

----------


## TheDriver

> I saw the interview live.  *The John* asked Rand to name 1 specific budget cut.  Rand named 3.  Right after the interview* the John* said Rand could not name one specific budget cut.


LMAO.. THey should change the name of the show to that...

----------


## RM918

Wow, I'm surprised he said that thing at the end to Spitzer. That's probably what made them end it.

Certainly not used to taking on the media that bluntly, not sure if it's a good or a bad thing.

----------


## Natalie

//

----------


## sailingaway

> Wow, I'm surprised he said that thing at the end to Spitzer. That's probably what made them end it.
> 
> Certainly not used to taking on the media that bluntly, not sure if it's a good or a bad thing.


He's just supposed to let them use him for a tackling dummy?  Actions have consequences.  You don't interview in a remotely fair fashion, don't expect an interview.

----------


## Cowlesy

I love it when Rand pushes back on these dopes.

I can't wait to see Rand's budget when he rolls it out.  Eat it, Paul Ryan. bwahahahaha

----------


## TheDriver

> Wow, that was awesome!  Spitzer is a moron.  So he instead of balancing the budget, he wants to keep spending us into more and more debt?  Does he even hear himself?  Sheesh.


YouTube - Jack Conway Supporters Scream More Government, More Government

Was "the John" with these Conway supporters?

----------


## TheState

I sent them a nice message voicing my displeasure over Sptizer's attempts for a "sound-bite" response, saying it isn't helpful to the political discussion. 

http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form4.html?156

----------


## TheDriver

> I love it when Rand pushes back on these dopes.
> 
> I can't wait to see Rand's budget when he rolls it out.  Eat it, Paul Ryan. bwahahahaha


He is going to have to gut Medicare and/or Dept of Education (plus no telling what else)........


I mean... the drastic cuts that will have to be made should made Big Government supporters scared.


But... it's not like Rand Paul is President... just because he wants to gut some programs doesn't mean Congress or the President will do it.   Does the Left know this?

----------


## TheDriver

> I sent them a nice message voicing my displeasure over Sptizer's attempts for a "sound-bite" response, saying it isn't helpful to the political discussion. 
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form4.html?156


Ah.. m2...

----------


## Michigan11

me3... just sent an email to CNN also.

----------


## Sola_Fide

> YouTube - Rand Paul "Your Personal Agenda Is Getting In The Way Of You Being A Good Broadcaster"


Rand-handled!!!

----------


## DeadheadForPaul

> Rand-handled!!!


LOL

BTW, just dropped by CNN.com, and the title of this video is "Rand Paul Grilled"

LOL: "Things heat up when Eliot Spitzer pushes Kentucky Senator-elect and Tea Party favorite Rand Paul to name specific cuts"

How about "Spitzer Rwned"

----------


## Jordan

I'm in love.

----------


## TheDriver

> Rand-handled!!!


Rand Paul Rand-Handles Eliot Spitzer On CNN
http://capitalistbanner.com/2010/11/...pitzer-on-cnn/

----------


## sailingaway

> He is going to have to gut Medicare and/or Dept of Education (plus no telling what else)........
> 
> 
> I mean... the drastic cuts that will have to be made should made Big Government supporters scared.
> 
> 
> But... it's not like Rand Paul is President... just because he wants to gut some programs doesn't mean Congress or the President will do it.   Does the Left know this?


He's not going to 'gut' medicare, he's going to make it sustainable.  The impact on medicare is in future years, not this one, so next year's budget cuts will mostly be elsewhere.

----------


## TheDriver

> He's not going to 'gut' medicare


If he is going to introduce a balanced budget in a few months - he is going to gut medicare (or he is going to gut everything else), see George W. Bush's rapid expansion of the program for a BIG reason why.

----------


## sailingaway

> If he is going to introduce a balanced budget in a few months - he is going to gut medicare, see George W. Bush's rapid expansion of the program for a BIG reason why.


Oh, you mean part D.  I thought you meant traditional medicare.  Part D is only 25% funded by the medicare fund, so if he doesn't cut it (and I think he won't next year) he is going to cut elsewhere pretty drastically.  However, his one year budget won't pass.  It is just important to have to start from and to show it can be done without the world ending.

----------


## TheDriver

> Oh, you mean part D.  I thought you meant traditional medicare.  Part D is only 25% funded by the medicare fund, so if he doesn't cut it (and I think he won't next year) he is going to cut elsewhere pretty drastically.  However, his one year budget won't pass.  It is just important to have to start from and to show it can be done without the world ending.


The President's budget for 2010 totals $3.55 trillion. Percentages in parentheses indicate percentage change compared to 2009. This budget request is broken down by the following expenditures:
Mandatory spending: $2.184 trillion (+15.6%)
$677.95 billion (+4.9%) – Social Security
$571 billion (−15.2%) – Other mandatory programs
$453 billion (+6.6%) – Medicare
$290 billion (+12.0%) – Medicaid
$164 billion (+18.0%) – Interest on National Debt
$11 billion (+275%) – Potential disaster costs
$0 billion (−100%) – Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)
$0 billion (−100%) – Financial stabilization efforts


US receipt and expenditure estimates for fiscal year 2010 (in billions, not trillions).
Discretionary spending: $1.368 trillion (+13.1%)
$663.7 billion (+12.7%) – Department of Defense (including Overseas Contingency Operations)
$78.7 billion (−1.7%) – Department of Health and Human Services
$72.5 billion (+2.8%) – Department of Transportation
$52.5 billion (+10.3%) – Department of Veterans Affairs
$51.7 billion (+40.9%) – Department of State and Other International Programs
$47.5 billion (+18.5%) – Department of Housing and Urban Development
$46.7 billion (+12.8%) – Department of Education
$42.7 billion (+1.2%) – Department of Homeland Security
$26.3 billion (−0.4%) – Department of Energy
$26.0 billion (+8.8%) – Department of Agriculture
$23.9 billion (−6.3%) – Department of Justice
$18.7 billion (+5.1%) – National Aeronautics and Space Administration
$13.8 billion (+48.4%) – Department of Commerce
$13.3 billion (+4.7%) – Department of Labor
$13.3 billion (+4.7%) – Department of the Treasury
$12.0 billion (+6.2%) – Department of the Interior
$10.5 billion (+34.6%) – Environmental Protection Agency
$9.7 billion (+10.2%) – Social Security Administration
$7.0 billion (+1.4%) – National Science Foundation
$5.1 billion (−3.8%) – Corps of Engineers
$5.0 billion (+100%) – National Infrastructure Bank
$1.1 billion (+22.2%) – Corporation for National and Community Service
$0.7 billion (0.0%) – Small Business Administration
$0.6 billion (−14.3%) – General Services Administration
$19.8 billion (+3.7%) – Other Agencies
$105 billion – Other



From wiki..



He has to suggest cuts of over one trillion dollars....    How can you do that without touching medicare or ss?

----------


## ctiger2

The media is trying so hard to discredit Rand as having integrity like his father. The good thing is he's well aware of it. This is going to be fun to watch. Rand = Ron

----------


## Sola_Fide

> The media is trying so hard to discredit Rand as having integrity like his father. The good thing is he's well aware of it. This is going to be fun to watch. Rand = Ron



Rand equals Ron.

The haters are learning this very fast

----------


## Matt Collins

> Rand equals Ron.
> 
> The haters are learning this very fast

----------


## revolutionary8

> this is like a dream. it's amazing that Rand was elected and all this is happening.


I know.   I killed my TV during Ron's run because of how the MSM treated him, how they didn't listen to A WORD he said, they just kept pumping their sound byte meme. I remember getting soooooo frustrated with Ron Paul at times, because he DIDN'T go after anyone personally even after they attacked his person.   Now, I am watching Rand Paul be every bit of the counter attacker that I wished Ron would be. It's crazy.  Is it actually _possible_ for me to admire another political leader as much as I respect and admire Ron Paul???  We will see, but what I didn't think was possible, just might be possible. 

If Rand Paul hadn't taken up for himself, and challenged the hypocracy of Elliot Spitzer the way that he did, if he hadn't INSISTED that he was interpreted correctly, then this interview would have been the pride and glory of the left, spread farrrrr and wide- instead, the left is being surprisingly conservative when posting this interview as an attack on Rand Paul. Of course the huffpo and wonkers twist and spin it, but in reality, I think they dread the day when Rand Paul comes out with his different budgets and asks Client #9 to come in for a follow-up visit.

----------


## sailingaway

> The President's budget for 2010 totals $3.55 trillion. Percentages in parentheses indicate percentage change compared to 2009. This budget request is broken down by the following expenditures:
> Mandatory spending: $2.184 trillion (+15.6%)
> $677.95 billion (+4.9%) – Social Security
> $571 billion (−15.2%) – Other mandatory programs
> $453 billion (+6.6%) – Medicare
> $290 billion (+12.0%) – Medicaid
> $164 billion (+18.0%) – Interest on National Debt
> $11 billion (+275%) – Potential disaster costs
> $0 billion (−100%) – Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)
> ...


I'd slash the state dept (not eliminate it) eliminate DHS, dept of energy, allow competitive bidding out of state for drugs under medicare ($100 billion -- this does not mean a 'cut' in medicare, it is an efficiency.  When I speak of cuts I am discussing benefits.  Rand's changes in BENEFITS would only be for those 55 and under.) I don't know where all the cuts would be because I would have to unpack the numbers and see what they contain, particularly department of defense.

----------


## Brett85

Rand should come out in favor of abolishing the Medicare Prescription drug bill.

----------


## TheDriver

> *I'd slash the state dept (not eliminate it) eliminate DHS, dept of energy, allow competitive bidding out of state for drugs under medicare ($100 billion -- this does not mean a 'cut' in medicare, it is an efficiency*.  When I speak of cuts I am discussing benefits.  Rand's changes in BENEFITS would only be for those 55 and under.) I don't know where all the cuts would be because I would have to unpack the numbers and see what they contain, particularly department of defense.


All of that [highlighted text] is roughly 200 billion (less than 20% of the needed cuts).

If you cut the dep of defense in half (which no one will do) - you're still at roughly 500 billion.     You are maybe halfway and look at that controversial agenda and the enemies you just made....

And Rand doesn't appear to be even remotely suggesting some of the things you mentioned you'd cut. He has hinted at military cuts, but not slashing the military budget in half.

now time to move on to entitlement cuts.....     We still need another 500-700 billion gutted out of Big Government to balance the budget.



I like the discussion...    Maybe we can present a grassroots-balanced-budget-plan....lol

----------


## sailingaway

> All of that [highlighted text] is roughly 200 billion (less than 20% of the needed cuts).
> 
> If you cut the dep of defense in half (which no one will do) - you're still at roughly 500 billion.     You are maybe halfway and look at that controversial agenda and the enemies you just made....
> 
> 
> 
> I like the discussion...    Maybe we can present a grassroots-balanced-budget-plan....lol


Yeah, but my $200 mill was off the top of my head.  Rand also said he'd repeal Obamacare with ITs costs.... but he said he wouldn't hit ss or medicare benefits for those over 55.  I'm using HIS criteria.

----------


## BamaFanNKy

http://www.freemaninky.com/2010/11/c...y-senator.html

Did this last night but, didn't put out till today.

----------


## TheDriver

> Yeah, but my $200 mill was off the top of my head.  Rand also said he'd repeal Obamacare with ITs costs.... but he said he wouldn't hit ss or medicare benefits for those over 55.  I'm using HIS criteria.


You're in denial. 

You can't balance the budget without slashing entitlements!

----------


## sailingaway

> You're in denial. 
> 
> You can't balance the budget without slashing entitlements!


I'm saying what he said.  Talk to him, not me.  Those are Rand's criteria for the cuts.  The cuts to medicare and ss will be for the future, not for those 55 and above so that in itself will not hit the budgets he will introduce in January.

----------


## Austrian Econ Disciple

Medicare sustainable? No socialist policy is ever sustainable. What a load of horse-patooty.

----------


## sluggo

"Well, Elliott, we could start by denying public officials access to certain accounts since they often blow taxpayer money on hookers."

----------


## AParadigmShift

The budget(s) he intends to propose should be interesting to hash through - and that he intends to put before the Senate _one_, among several, that would reign in gov't post haste, the reactions from his "conservative" colleagues will be telling as to how fiscally serious they imagine themselves to be.

With that said, Rand was cucumber cool during that interview - he looked confident and self-assured, all without being smug.

And Spitzer? _Ugh_...

----------


## sailingaway

> The budget(s) he intends to propose should be interesting to hash through - and that he intends to put before the Senate _one_, among several, that would reign in gov't post haste, the reactions from his "conservative" colleagues will be telling as to how fiscally serious they imagine themselves to be.
> 
> With that said, Rand was cucumber cool during that interview - he looked confident and self-assured, all without being smug.
> 
> And Spitzer? _Ugh_...


Oh, he looked just a _lttle_ smug at the end when I think they had cut his mike and he knew there wasn't a damned thing they could do about his just getting up and leaving.....check out the smile trying to fight its way out....

----------


## fletcher

John: What are you going to cut?
Rand: Across the board cuts.  Everything is on the table.  I will have a detailed budget that you can look at when I get to the Senate.
John: You won't be able to do it! Give up before you even try!  You have failed before you have been sworn in!

LOL.  John is such a tool.

----------


## TheDriver

> Oh, he looked just a _lttle_ smug at the end when I think they had cut his mike and he knew there wasn't a damned thing they could do about his just getting up and leaving.....check out the smile trying to fight its way out....


I heard the actual interview lasted for roughly 20 minutes...

----------


## specsaregood

> I heard the actual interview lasted for roughly 20 minutes...


If he isn't already, Rand needs to make sure to do his own recording of all interviews from here on out.  To release if necessary.

----------


## TheDriver

> If he isn't already, Rand needs to make sure to do his own recording of all interviews from here on out.  To release if necessary.


I would imagine whatever studio he uses tapes each one. I'm sure you could request it. But, yes, I agree.

He better get to working on those budgets.... hahahaha...

----------


## vita3

income really coming from his patients GOV programs?

----------


## TheDriver

> income really coming from his patients GOV programs?


According to this, the state shorted Rand 1/4 million bucks....   



Rand is an eye-surgeon - older adults, who are mostly on Medicare and/or Medicaid are generally the age group needing eye-surgeries.   

Rand Paul has also run a low-income eye-clinic for those patients that don't have insurance and/or can't afford service, basically doing their surgeries for free.  Of course, you won't here that mentioned by the liberal hacks.

----------


## obijuan

> income really coming from his patients GOV programs?


I'd imagine so.  KY is a relatively poor state (Medicaid), and the population of people with significant eye/vision issues skews heavily toward the elderly (Medicare). 

My dad is a family practitioner in Barren County, and a huge percentage of his practice is Medicare/Medicaid, in large part because he's one of the few doctors who will accept new Medicare and Medicaid patients.  Cutting doctor reimbursement would have a huge impact on his income and likely cause him to retire early, leaving many of his patients without alternative care save the hospital.  This is the problem with simply cutting reimbursements...you actually end up denying care (which the programs are supposed to prevent), and long-term costs go up because the ER is comparably expensive (I dunno what the Medicare reimbursements are for ER visits...but if it's low, it drives up costs for the rest of us).

----------


## TheDriver

Hmmm.. I can't get it to play but it appears CNN has uploaded a 38 minute interview of Paul vs Spitzer:
YouTube - Spitzer hammers Paul for specific cuts

----------


## sailingaway

I can't get it to play, either.

----------


## low preference guy

i can't get it to play either

----------


## RonPaulCult

> I can't get it to play, either.


Mine says:  "An error has occurred.  Too much truth has slipped out over the airwaves.  People are starting to reject big government.  People are starting to turn against the two-party system.  ABORT.  ABORT.  ABORT"

----------


## TheDriver

> I can't get it to play, either.


I'm thinking it may just be an error. They have the video posted on CNN.com with the same title and the length is 10 minutes something.

It would be nice to see the unedited interview.  These liberal tools need to be exposed.

----------


## TheDriver

> mine says:  "an error has occurred.  Too much truth has slipped out over the airwaves.  People are starting to reject big government.  People are starting to turn against the two-party system.  Abort.  Abort.  Abort"


lmao!>>>>!  :d

----------


## jct74

> Hmmm.. I can't get it to play but it appears CNN has uploaded a 38 minute interview of Paul vs Spitzer:


CNN also posted a 38 minute video on cnn.com, but I can't get that one to play either, I get this message:

_The video timed out attempting to play. Please ensure that you do not have any Flash or JavaScript blocking plugins active._

Maybe it will work for someone else, here is where it is located:

go to:http://www.cnn.com/video/
click the "ON TV" tab
click Parker/Spitzer on left hand side
it will be the first video posted, 38:00 minutes long

EDIT:  Now the video has disappeared

----------


## jct74

> go to:http://www.cnn.com/video/
> click the "ON TV" tab
> click Parker/Spitzer on left hand side
> it will be the first video posted, 38:00 minutes long


is this working for anyone?

----------


## low preference guy

> is this working for anyone?


no

----------


## Maximus

Spitzer was so intellectually dishonest.  Anyone watching can see that Rand intends to cut spending.

Spitzer thinks, hey to balance the budget you have to cut 25% across the board, this must mean Rand supports cutting everything by 25%.  

That's not what Rand is going to do.  He is going to cut some programs by 100%, 75%, 15% or not at all.  The total cuts will be at least 25%, but not everything will be.

Spitzer is a tool, and Rand is awesome now that he isn't in campaign mode.

----------


## Tinnuhana

From the Hannity site responses to the interview:

Then why in the world would you dislike Rand Paul? 

I don't have such a huge problem with them, God save us from their followers. On monetary policy, they're pretty sharp. It's all the other notions they have on things like foreign policy that I have a sharp divergence. I find their ideas remarkably naive.

Hannity blogging himself?

----------


## BenIsForRon

> Spitzer is a tool, and Rand is awesome now that he isn't in campaign mode.


He's still in pseudo campaign mode.  He can't say anything too radical because he still needs friends like DeMint to help him push the budget cuts.

----------


## BamaFanNKy

> Mine says:  "An error has occurred.  Too much truth has slipped out over the airwaves.  People are starting to reject big government.  People are starting to turn against the two-party system.  ABORT.  ABORT.  ABORT"


I got the same damn thing then just pictures of Ashley Dupre.

----------


## DeadheadForPaul

> income really coming from his patients GOV programs?


Medicare screws doctors BIG TIME.

My father is a physician and the Medicare payouts have drastically dropped.  He's thinking about refusing to accept Medicare altogether

BTW, ophthalmologists see a lot of elderly individuals - especially ones with diabetes.  They also tend to be at lower income levels than the average person, so they are often on state or federal healthcare programs

----------


## sailingaway

> Medicare screws doctors BIG TIME.
> 
> My father is a physician and the Medicare payouts have drastically dropped.  He's thinking about refusing to accept Medicare altogether
> 
> BTW, ophthalmologists see a lot of elderly individuals - especially ones with diabetes.  They also tend to be at lower income levels than the average person, so they are often on state or federal healthcare programs


The Dems don't want to drop medicare reimbursements and tried to get that PERMANENTLY changed but would have had to 'recognize' too great a cost up front. The problem is doctors won't see medicaid now, that is why they wanted to raid medicare to beef up medicaid, seeing medicare as just a fund of money that doesn't belong to anyone.  But cutting payments means doctors don't want those patients, either.  

As it is Rand said for his practice it would work better without the administrative costs if doctors just gave medicaid service for free, and took a tax deduction.  Which should give you some idea of how below market reimbursement is.  Dems are just demagoguing this, because they know it well.

----------


## lukeman

> My dad is a family practitioner in Barren County, and a huge percentage of his practice is Medicare/Medicaid, in large part because he's one of the few doctors who will accept new Medicare and Medicaid patients.


Are you from Barren County originally? I grew up there but left for college and never went back. Graduated from Barren County in 2002.

----------


## dmitchell

I don't get it: what was good about this? Spitzer wasn't asking Rand to name _every_ program, _just one_. Why wouldn't he do that?

----------


## sailingaway

> I don't get it: what was good about this? Spitzer wasn't asking Rand to name _every_ program, _just one_. Why wouldn't he do that?


He named a bunch.  10% of federal wages across the board, return the TARP funds and stimulus funds, future Social Security entitlements reform, etc etc AND said he'd give a full budget with all the thousands of programs within a few months.  Which is more than Obama has done in 2 years, and the left was happy to let him through with just a 'we'll go through the budget line by line'.

He was just badgering Rand.  And Rand didn't sit still for it.

----------


## dmitchell

> He named a bunch.  10% of federal wages across the board, return the TARP funds and stimulus funds, future Social Security entitlements reform, etc etc AND said he'd give a full budget with all the thousands of programs within a few months.  Which is more than Obama has done in 2 years, and the left was happy to let him through with just a 'we'll go through the budget line by line'.
> 
> He was just badgering Rand.  And Rand didn't sit still for it.


Maybe. But why did Rand keep pretending that Spitzer was asking him about thousands of programs? He wasn't--he was just asking for one. That annoyed me.

----------


## cswake

You have to understand the programs that Spitzer was going to list were chosen by him.  He was going right into the "sacred cows" of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid that are gigantic programs that are enormously complex and generate massive amounts of negative publicity.

Rand did give him "smaller" stuff that he is safer speaking about without actually doing research on what could be cut.  He was honest IMHO.

----------


## devil21

> Maybe. But why did Rand keep pretending that Spitzer was asking him about thousands of programs? He wasn't--he was just asking for one. That annoyed me.


And Rand named at least three different programs.  The difference is Spitzer wanted to go down the laundry list of 3rd Rail issues to catch Rand in a "gotcha" so Spitzer can proudly proclaim, "I got Rand Paul to say he would kick elderly out into the street!".  Why would Rand get into that sort of nonsense?

----------


## sailingaway

> Maybe. But why did Rand keep pretending that Spitzer was asking him about thousands of programs? He wasn't--he was just asking for one. That annoyed me.


Because every time Rand gave him one, Spitzer said 'just give me one, you can't mention any' as if he hadn't.  He clearly wasn't going to consider it enough unless Rand showed him then and there exactly how to balance the budget in toto which was ludicrous.

----------


## misconstrued

> I heard the actual interview lasted for roughly 20 minutes...


Interesting. It was pretty obvious they edited it.

----------


## dmitchell

> You have to understand the programs that Spitzer was going to list were chosen by him.  He was going right into the "sacred cows" of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid that are gigantic programs that are enormously complex and generate massive amounts of negative publicity.





> And Rand named at least three different programs.  The difference is Spitzer wanted to go down the laundry list of 3rd Rail issues to catch Rand in a "gotcha" so Spitzer can proudly proclaim, "I got Rand Paul to say he would kick elderly out into the street!".  Why would Rand get into that sort of nonsense?


You are both exactly right about Spitzer's intentions. Yet this "What _specifically_ would you cut?" line of attack has been ubiquitous in liberal media and the blogosphere. For once I would like to see someone like Rand Paul or Jim DeMint actually be prepared for it and be ready with a list of _specific cuts_, the more obscure the better.

One thing you have to give Spitzer credit for is bringing some numbers to the table. The other day when Conway was on Hardball and Matthews was grilling him on how he would reduce the deficit and renew the Bush tax cuts, Conway listed a bunch of cuts that added up to like 5% of the deficit. Matthews didn't call him on it because apparently he isn't a numbers guy. At least Spitzer had the numbers in front of him.

----------


## cswake

Eh, I wouldn't call it credit - he obviously did the research to try to "gotcha" Paul rather than to actually have a discussion.  Even if Paul did a "safe" play and said that defunding PBS was on the table due to their inappropriate use of funds (Juan Williams fiasco), he would already have a bullseye on him and it wouldn't be conducive for getting allies on the Democratic side.  I personally believe all his recent TV efforts were to get other Congressmen on both sides of the aisle to consider working with him since he sounds reasonable.

Let Rand do the research, start his term, work with other Congressmen, and then make the proposal(s) on how a balanced budget could be achieved.  Hopefully he brings some of the authors he quoted to assist him with the effort to put together the options.

----------


## William R

> You are both exactly right about Spitzer's intentions. Yet this "What _specifically_ would you cut?" line of attack has been ubiquitous in liberal media and the blogosphere. For once I would like to see someone like Rand Paul or Jim DeMint actually be prepared for it and be ready with a list of _specific cuts_, the more obscure the better.
> 
> One thing you have to give Spitzer credit for is bringing some numbers to the table. The other day when Conway was on Hardball and Matthews was grilling him on how he would reduce the deficit and renew the Bush tax cuts, Conway listed a bunch of cuts that added up to like 5% of the deficit. Matthews didn't call him on it because apparently he isn't a numbers guy. At least Spitzer had the numbers in front of him.


Defense and Entitlements have to be cut.   That's where the money is.  Rand Paul said we have to compromise.  There are Democrat deficit hawks that want to cut defense , but don't want to cut entitlements.   And there are Republican deficit hawks that want to cut entitlements but don't want to cut defense. 

So Sleazball Spitzer on his BS TV show with no ratings goes personal.

----------


## devil21

Every program is a sacred cow to liberals since cutting spending in any form, and therefore reducing the size of government, is unacceptable to them.  Name a program and they'll find a way to make it about the children.  Or the elderly.  Or the artists.  Or some other collectivist group clamoring for their piece of the gov't pie.

----------


## JohnEngland

Wow, Rand is awesome! What other politicians are able to deal with such media BS? All other Republicans should copy his example.

----------


## sailingaway

Check out the comments: http://nation.foxnews.com/rand-paul/...-personal-past

----------


## teacherone

the ending is obviously cut

i think spitzer's rant was rehearsed after the fact and then edited to a split screen with paul post interview

----------


## mello

The part where Spitzer's rebuttal of Obamacare will save a Trillion pissed me off. I can't think of
any big cost bill that didn't end up costing 2 times as much or more. Can anybody?

----------


## TheDriver

> The part where Spitzer's rebuttal of Obamacare will save a Trillion pissed me off. I can't think of
> any big cost bill that didn't end up costing 2 times as much or more. Can anybody?


Also much of the ObamaCare's alleged "savings" comes from *gutting* Medicare.   

Removed $500 billion from an already bankrupt program to fund a new one "that won't cost anything."


This reminds me of Bill Clinton using the SS surplus to pay for government spending we couldn't afford, then saying we had a balanced-budget (after robbing SS).

Programs like ObamaCare, Medicare, SS, etc.. should have "lock boxes" and if they can't make it, they should be forced to "ration" benefits.   Might as well fight socialism with socialism.

----------


## jmdrake

> Also much of the ObamaCare's alleged "savings" comes from *gutting* Medicare.   
> 
> Removed $500 billion from an already bankrupt program to fund a new one "that won't cost anything."
> 
> 
> This reminds me of Bill Clinton using the SS surplus to pay for government spending we couldn't afford, then saying we had a balanced-budget (after robbing SS).
> 
> Programs like ObamaCare, Medicare, SS, etc.. should have "lock boxes" and if they can't make it, they should be forced to "ration" benefits.   Might as well fight socialism with socialism.


This.  Also Spitzer slipped in the "over the next 10 years" disclaimer.  If Obamacare is allowed to go through it will save trillions over 10 years *because a lot of older people will die sooner rather than later thus saving medicare and social security dollars*.

Here's Bill Gates advocating the "death panels" idea.

YouTube - Bill Gates: End-of-Life Care vs. Saving Teachers' Jobs!

And here's Robert Reich on what a candidate would say if he was telling the truth about healthcare.  (Admits death panels)

YouTube - Robert Reich: What An Honest President Would Say About Health Reform

And here's Robert Reich being dishonest.  (Disclaiming death panels).

YouTube - Robert Reich on Health Care Reform October '09

----------


## parke

Stellar. Rand handed him his ass. Anybody got the whole interview?

----------


## Eric21ND

> You are both exactly right about Spitzer's intentions. Yet this "What _specifically_ would you cut?" line of attack has been ubiquitous in liberal media and the blogosphere. For once I would like to see someone like Rand Paul or Jim DeMint actually be prepared for it and be ready with a list of _specific cuts_, the more obscure the better.
> 
> One thing you have to give Spitzer credit for is bringing some numbers to the table. The other day when Conway was on Hardball and Matthews was grilling him on how he would reduce the deficit and renew the Bush tax cuts, Conway listed a bunch of cuts that added up to like 5% of the deficit. Matthews didn't call him on it because apparently he isn't a numbers guy. At least Spitzer had the numbers in front of him.


Conway is a moron, nuff said.

----------


## Live Free or Die

Client 9?

----------


## Tinnuhana

I know this is a long URL, but still haven't got the hang of posting photos, besides, this is pretty cool. Apologies if it's already been posted.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...26tbs%3Disch:1

----------


## teacherone

here ya go

----------


## Tinnuhana

Thanks. Can't access Flicker, etc. at work to do this sort of thing. Has he gotten any on-air ribbing about the Paul interview since then?

----------


## Tinnuhana

Then there's this!
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...26tbs%3Disch:1

----------

