Policy Quotes

1186 quotes from 350 authors

Policy quotes by author

Selected policy quotes

  1. Justice should be cheap but judges expensive.

  2. The Assault Weapons Ban deals with a fictional distinction. You have guns that are exactly the same guns as are banned, in function, that were banned because of the way they look. And you know, that's the whole truth of this policy: it's to make politicians look as if they are doing something, when in point of fact, they are doing nothing.

  3. The answer to crime is not gun control, it is law enforcement and self-control.

  4. The release of atomic energy has not created a new problem. It has merely made more urgent the necessity of solving an existing one.

  5. The wisdom of man never yet contrived a system of taxation that would operate with perfect equality.

  6. Peace, above all things, is to be desired, but blood must sometimes be spilled to obtain it on equable and lasting terms.

  7. If you suspend the Geneva Conventions, give the green light to anything that will get intelligence, round up thousands all over the globe with reckless disregard for guilt or innocence, you are effectively and knowingly issuing orders to seize innocent people and torture them. Any president who decides to do that and then says it was not his intention to do that is a fraud or a fool.

  8. If freedom is to be saved and enlarged, poverty must be ended. There is no other solution.

  9. Six imams removed from a US Airways flight from Minneapolis to Phoenix are calling on Muslims to boycott the airline. If only we could get Muslims to boycott all airlines, we could dispense with airport security altogether.

  10. We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.

  11. I think there should be a literacy test and a poll tax for people to vote.

  12. This is the way addled liberals really think. Even as they champion sucking the brains out of little babies, they think of themselves as indelibly compassionate because they favor an overweening, behemoth federal government.

  13. It is proper that we acknowledge the overwhelming weight of international opinion against the juvenile death penalty.

  14. The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.

  15. There is just no sensible, logical reason why we would not make use of stem cell research.

  16. We will submit legislation to the United States Senate which will...authorize the Congress to undertake judicial review of those signing statements with the view to having the president's acts declared unconstitutional.

  17. American credibility in the war on terrorism depends on a strong stand against all terrorist acts, whether committed by foe or friend.

  18. As a matter of traditional and sound constitutional doctrine, an amendment to the Constitution should be the last resort when all other measures have proved inadequate.

  19. Heart disease continues to be the number one killer; cancer, the number 2 killer, not far behind. The tragic aspect of these deadly diseases is that they could all be cured, I do believe, if we had sufficient funding.

  20. The fundamental purpose of government is to protect its citizens.

  21. There is no doubt that our nation's security and defeating terrorism trump all other priorities.

  22. It's amazing how much research has gone into making some of the worst decisions.

  23. In a democracy, every little wrong idea may grow up to become national policy.

  24. A good compromise, a good piece of legislation, is like a good sentence; or a good piece of music. Everybody can recognize it. They say, 'Huh. It works. It makes sense.'

  25. Laissez Faire was very good sauce for the goose, labor, but was very poor sauce for the gander, capital.

  26. Those who forget good and evil and seek only to know the facts are more likely to achieve good than those who view the world through the distorting medium of their own desires.

  27. They used to be seen as insane or unthinkable acts of madmen. But if they take place they'll be called 'war' too. And there will still be no conventional war.

  28. While the collateral consequences of drugs such as cocaine are indisputably severe, they are not unlike those which flow from the misuse of other, legal, substances.

  29. The extravagant expenditure of public money is an evil not to be measured by the value of that money to the people who are taxed for it.

  30. Experience has shown that the trade of the East is the key to national wealth and influence.

  31. Many of the points made by the antiwar movement have been consciously assimilated by the Pentagon and its lawyers and advisers. Precision weaponry is good in itself, but its ability to discriminate is improving and will continue to improve. Cluster bombs are perhaps not good in themselves, but when they are dropped on identifiable concentrations of Taliban troops, they do have a heartening effect.

  32. I don't think the war in Afghanistan was ruthlessly enough waged.

  33. There is no reason at all why there aren't enough people to guard New Orleans and to help stabilise Baghdad.

  34. I feel it's so easy to condemn this country [the United States]; but they don't understand that this is where the mistakes are being made - and made first, so that we're going to get the answers first.

  35. But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.

  36. We are at war, and our security as a nation depends on winning that war.

  37. I think the word of the United States has been as good as gold in its international dealings and its agreements.

  38. I think there are many times when it would be most efficient to use nuclear weapons. However, the public opinion in this country and throughout the world throw up their hands in horror when you mention nuclear weapons, just because of the propaganda that's been fed to them.

  39. See, when the GOVERNMENT spends money, it creates jobs; whereas when the money is left in the hands of TAXPAYERS, God only knows what they do with it. Bake it into pies, probably. Anything to avoid creating jobs.

  40. The choice is not between drugs and no drugs, but between illegal drugs and legal drugs. Until the 1920s drugs were legal, why not now? Lots of people are on drugs anyway - it is called medication.

  41. Old-fashioned values may count when conservatives appear on the stump, but once conservatives are in office the only old-fashioned situation they care to revive is an economic regimen of low wages and lax regulations. Over the last three decades they have smashed the welfare state, reduced the tax burden on corporations and the wealthy, and generally facilitated the country's return to a nineteenth-century pattern of wealth distribution. Thus the primary contradiction of the backlash: it is a working-class movement that has done incalculable, historic harm to working class people. The leaders of the backlash may talk Christ, but they walk corporate. Values may 'matter most' to voters, but they always take a backseat to the needs of money once the elections are won. This is a basic earmark of the phenomenon, absolutely consistent across its decades-long history. Abortion is never halted. Affirmative action is never abolished. The culture industry is never forced to clean up its act.

  42. Voodoo economics.

  43. Cyberlaw is global law.

  44. Economic racism.

  45. It cannot be denied that a state of great national prosperity is quite consistent and compatible with legislation in favour of the protection of native industry. That proposition, years ago, was denied; but with the experience we have had of France and the United States of America-the two most flourishing communities probably in existence-it is now incontestable. Well, my lords, many years ago-nearly 40-this country, which no one can say for a moment did not flourish with the old system of protection, deemed it necessary to revise the principles upon which its commerce was conducted...The scheme that was adopted was this-that we were to fight hostile tariffs with free imports. I was among those who looked upon that policy with fear. I believed it to be one very perilous. ...reciprocity is barter. I always understood that barter was the last effort of civilization that it was exactly that state of human exchange that separated civilization from savagery; and if reciprocity is only barter, I fear that would hardly help us out of our difficulty. My noble friend read some extracts from the speeches of those who had the misfortune to be in Parliament at that time, and he honoured me by reading an extract from the speech I then made in the other House of Parliament. That was a speech in favour of reciprocity, and indicated the means by which reciprocity could be obtained. That is to say-I do not want to enter into the discussion whether the principle was right or wrong, but it was acknowledged in public life, favoured and pursued by many statesmen who conceived that by the negotiation of a treaty of commerce, by reciprocal exchange and the lowering of duties, the products of the two negotiating countries would find a freer access and consumption in the two countries than they formerly possessed. But when he taunts me with his quotation of some musty phrases of mine 40 years ago, I must remind him that we had elements then on which treaties of reciprocity could be negotiated. At that time, although the great changes of Sir Robert Peel had taken place, there were 168 articles in the tariff which were materials by which you could have negotiated, if that was a wise and desirable policy, commercial treaties of reciprocity. What is the number you now have in the tariff? Twenty-two. Those who talk of negotiating treaties of reciprocity...have they the materials for negotiating treaties of reciprocity? You have lost the opportunity. I do not want to enter into the argument at the present moment; but England cannot pursue that policy.

  46. Economic and monetary union...is incompatible with independent sovereign states with control over their own fiscal and monetary policies. It would be impossible...to have irrevocably fixed exchange rates while individual countries retained independent monetary policies...such a system could never have the credibility necessary to persuade the market that there was no risk of realignment. Thus EMU inevitably implies a single European currency, with monetary decisions...taken not by national Governments and/or central banks, but by a European Central Bank. Nor would individual countries be able to retain responsibility for fiscal policy. With a single European monetary policy there would need to be central control over the size of budget deficits and, particularly, over their financing. New European institutions would be required, to determine overall Community fiscal policy and agree the distribution of deficits between individual Member States...It is clear that Economic and Monetary Union implies nothing less than European Government...and political union: the United States of Europe. That is simply not on the agenda now, nor will it be for the forseeable future.

  47. Ron Paul: ...a few years back, in the 1980s, in our efforts to bring peace and democracy to the world we assisted the freedom fighters of Afghanistan, and in our infinite wisdom we gave money, technology and training to Bin Laden, and now, this very year, we have declared that Bin Laden was responsible for the bombing in Africa. So what is our response, because we allow our President to pursue war too easily? What was the President's response? Some even say that it might have been for other reasons than for national security reasons. So he goes off and bombs Afghanistan, and he goes off and bombs Sudan, and now the record shows that very likely the pharmaceutical plant in Sudan was precisely that, a pharmaceutical plant... As my colleagues know, at the end of this bill I think we get a hint as to why we do not go to Rwanda for humanitarian reasons... I think it has something to do with money, and I think it has something to do with oil... they are asking to set up and check into the funds that Saddam Hussein owes to the west. Who is owed? They do not owe me any money. But I will bet my colleagues there is a lot of banks in New York who are owed a lot of money, and this is one of the goals... Dana Rohrabacher: This resolution is exactly the right formula... Support democracy. Oppose tyranny. Oppose aggression and repression... We should strengthen the victims so they can defend themselves. These things are totally consistent with America's philosophy, and it is a pragmatic approach as well... Our support for the Mujahedin collapsed the Soviet Union. Yes, there was a price to pay, because after the Soviet Union collapsed, we walked away, and we did not support those elements in the Mujahedin who were somewhat in favor of the freedom and western values. With those people who oppose this effort of pro democracy foreign policy, a pro freedom foreign policy rather than isolation foreign policy, they would have had us stay out of that war in Afghanistan. They would never have had us confronting Soviet aggression in different parts of the world... Mr. Speaker, the gentleman does not think it is proper for us to offer those people who are struggling for freedoms in Iraq against their dictatorship a helping hand? Ron Paul: Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I think it would be absolutely proper to do that, as long as it came out of the gentleman's wallet and we did not extract it from somebody in this country, a taxpayer at the point of a gun and say, look, bin Laden is a great guy. I want more of your money. That is what we did in the 1980s. That is what the Congress did. They went to the taxpayers, they put a gun to their head, and said, you pay up, because we think bin Laden is a freedom fighter. Dana Rohrabacher: Well, if the gentleman will further yield, it was just not handled correctly. Ron Paul: Mr. Speaker, again reclaiming my time, the policy is flawed. The policy is flawed.

  48. Question: You wanna gut that safety net... Ron Paul: But the safety net doesn't work. Question: Tell me why it doesn't work. Ron Paul: It does work for some people, but overall it ultimately fails, because you spend more money than you have, and then you borrow to the hilt. Now we have to borrow $800 billion a year just to keep the safety net going. It's going to collapse when the dollar collapses, you can't even fight the war without this borrowing. And when the dollar collapses, you can't take care of the elderly of today. They're losing ground. Their cost of living is going up about 10%, even though the government denies it, we give them a 2% cost of living increase. Question: So do you think the gold standard would fix that? Ron Paul: The gold standard would keep you from printing money and destroying the middle class. Every country where you have runaway inflation, there's no middle class. Mexico, there's no middle class, you have a huge poor class, and a lot of wealthy people. Today we have a growing poor class, and we have more billionaires than ever before. So we're moving into third world status... Question: Who is the safety net that you're speaking of, who does benefit from all those programs and all those agencies? Ron Paul: Everybody on a short term benefits for a time. If you build a tenement house by the government, for about 15 or 20 years somebody might live there, but you don't measure who paid for it: somebody lost their job down the road, somebody had inflation, somebody else suffered. But then the tenement house falls down after about 20 years because it's not privately owned, so everybody eventually suffers. But the immediate victims aren't identifiable, because you don't know who lost the job, and who had the inflation, the victims are invisible. The few people who benefit, who get some help from government, everyone sees, 'oh! look what we did!', but they never say instead of what, what did we lose. And unless you ask that question, we'll go into bankruptcy, we're in the early stages of it, the dollar is going down, our standard of living is going down, and we're hurting the very people that so many people wanna help, especially the liberals...

  49. In the end, nothing happened. Basically, the night of the debate, I was down there, and I reacted to what I perceived Ron Paul to have said, which is basically to blame America for the attacks of 9/11. The next day, everybody talked about it, the reports came out, people read the transcripts, and he didn't actually say that. He said, he was talking about American policy, and the effects of American policy there. And the reality is, we never introduced any resolution, there was never a petition, and that morning we basically just dropped the subject. [...] I've invited Ron Paul, I've invited all the candidates. Every candidate has been invited to come to Mackinac, if he's available and he can make it, we'd love to have him. [...] Actually I'd argue they ought to make me the honorary national co-chairman for the Ron Paul campaign, because what I've probably started doubled his name ID and got him more exposure that he'd have ever gotten on his own. So from that regard you guys ought to be sending me flowers rather than nasty emails, give me a break. [...] Whoever the Republican nominee, I'll be out there supporting him, and if it's Ron Paul, I'll be front and center.

  50. ...he is arguing for and in fact defending the 9/11 terrorist attack, by finding a plethora of faults in our foreign policy, and in the way we handle the war on terror here in the home front and in the Middle East which he believed justified the terrorists' attacks killing thousands of innocent Americans... If we examine the reactions of pro-Paul haters of America to the published article I have mentioned, we find no brain, only emotional kicks... Another fan of Paul thought Paul was the smartest candidate because unlike the other candidates, to defeat the enemy, he wants to study and know first the enemy. No, talking of who is smart and who is not, he is not even a shadow of his nemesis Rudy Giuliani. A scatterbrain does not compare to Giuliani who is surging ahead in the polls without looking back. Sorry to disappoint a rabid fan... Paul claims to be the only enforcer of the U.S. Constitution. His followers are duped into believing that he is. He is not - he is a defiler if not a violator of the Constitution... Note that under this Act, our financial obligations to the UN, the sending of troops to troubled spots in the world at the call of the UN are, among others, mandated by the Constitution... My initial advice to him at this distance and I hope his handful of followers will get it too is, don't be a glutton for public scorn even if you thirst for public accolade as champion of the taxpayers by attacking the United Nations in violation of the Constitution. It does not make a hell of sense.

  51. It is complex

  52. American Foreign Policy (1964)

Also writing on policy