I would be a different kind of person. I wouldn't be looking for more power. Everybody wants to be a powerful executive and run things. I as a president wouldn't want to run the world. I don't want to police individual activities in their life style and I don't want to run the economy. So that's an entirely different philosophy but it's very, very much in our tradition and in the tradition of our Constitution. Welcome back to Sue's City Iowa tonight. The GOP presidential hopefuls took to the stage and they were outlining their visions for getting America back on track and joining me now is the man you just heard from. That's Texas Congressman Ron Paul. How are you? Good to see you. Good to see you. Good to see you. Thanks for being with us. I noticed you never gave a full answer to, as he was making Kelly's question, will you promise if you don't win this nomination and you're doing very well here in Iowa that you will support the Republican nominee and not run third party? Well, I'll give the same answer I've given about 39 times now that I have no intention of doing that. I plan to do my very best and see what happens in the next two months. So I'm not making any changes. I don't want to make it. I don't want to push it too hard but when you say no intention it leaves the door open. So you're leaving the door open. I don't like absences. I don't like to say I absolutely will never do such a thing. So I'm just avoiding the absolutely support the U.S. Constitution. Yeah, that's true. That's true. That's a little bit different than pledging due politicians. But the thing is you know that if you ran third party and I think why people are looking for an answer you would probably siphon off some of the anti-Obama vote. I don't think there's any doubt about it. But wouldn't it be fair to ask the moderate Republicans that are competing to ask the same question? I've been asking John Anderson that you know, pro-Prote John Anderson dropped that and ran and that's a significant difference. But no intention means the door is open. So you saying tonight that the door is open a little? Well, the door is I cannot conceive of it. You can't conceive of any sort. I cannot. I cannot since he got absolutely no plans that thoughts of doing it. All right, a lot came up tonight. Got very heated on the issue of national security and a ran. Let me ask you this question. With a ran killing Americans in Iraq you argue we shouldn't have been there in the first place. But they're also fighting proxy wars through Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations. They were planning an assassination of a Saudi ambassador on our soil. They clearly have said they want to wipe Israel off the map. Why do you think it wouldn't be dangerous if they got that nuclear weapon? Well, I don't want them to get the nuclear weapon. It would increase the danger. But I don't think we should deal with that. But as far as thinking that that should be the whole whole issue, I think you're losing the point because there are a lot of nuclear weapons around the world. In fact, those quotes about wiping Israel off the map. Just as a favor to me, look it up and check the real interpretation. They talk about getting rid of the regime. Those people in the back of New York. He is saying white people eliminate the state of Israel. Wipe them off the face of the earth. He says getting rid of the regime and removed from the pages of time is a lot different than Israel's Holocaust denier. Okay. Now, I think they're acting in self-defense. Barack, you know, he had Barack. He said that they're acting logically. They're acting in their self-interests. And if he was an Iranian, he would probably think the same way. So they have a lot to contend with. And the rocks said they were surrounded by nuclear missiles. Why wouldn't they have a natural? But there is. There's a gross distortion. That they're on the verge of a nuclear weapon. There is no evidence that they're on the verge of a nuclear weapon. And we shouldn't be ready to get it to war. You talk about a declaration of war. I've read the Constitution. It doesn't say you have to use any exact words. And George Bush got the authorization for the use of force. If you're going to use force, that seems to me to be to meet that definition. Yeah, but it was explicit that they go after those responses from Donald Revin. And I voted for it. I voted for that. Did I hear you say tonight and I wrote it down? And I wasn't sure the context because I will admit my attention was diverted. That we killed millions of Iraqis. There was estimated, when you know, when Albright was asked that, you know, the subject that when we were bombing during the 90s, they said there were 500,000 Iraqi children died because of our bombing and sanctions and blowing up their water plants and all. And she says, with that's the price to pay, we have to. So for 10 years, we were bombing them. And you don't you think we would be annoyed if somebody bombed us for 10 years? So in comparison, they can say that we have killed a lot of people. We dropped drones, you know, in Pakistan. What do they do to us when we be annoyed? You know, it's not self-defense. I believe that no country has shed more blood in defense of freedom for Muslims around the world than the United States. Nor has there ever been a country that has accumulated more power and abused it less than us. I got to get this final question. This came up in 2008 when you ran. And I've asked every question of New King Rich involving his background, his controversies, everything. Same with Mitt Romney. And I brought up, and I really admire your fear supporters, but. When I brought up the issue of your newsletters from the early 90s, and some really outrageous things that have been written in there, and you had gone on record saying you had no idea what was in them. That kind of surprised me. Why do you not take responsibility for the things that were in your individual newsletters? Well, in 2002, the Texas Monthly reviewed that, and they wrote a long, long article, and that's a real liberal newspaper. So you read that, you'll find out. I read this in magazine, which is libertarian. I did not write it, and I do not support those views. And their opinion does make me think that, you know, I'm a racist or something. There was a great racial thing in there. I'm the greatest defender of civil liberties, especially when it comes to the inequities in our judicial system, you know, with blacks, the imprisonments for the drug wars, the number of blacks who get to get the death penalty. So, let me ask you one last question. Do you know who did write it, and do you refute what was in your newsletter? I do not, and I don't believe anything of that stuff that they've quoted. Okay. How about tomorrow? Remember December 16th, the anniversary of the Tea Party. Very important date, that is when the Tea Party movement was started four years ago. That's the modern Tea Party movement. And for all your supporters, I ask every other candidate questions of controversy as well. Good to see you, Mr. Paul.