• With: Ron Paul

    This is a rush transcript from "Your World," August 20, 2013. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

    NEIL CAVUTO, HOST: To Ron Paul, who is not here to say, I told you so.

    But, Congressman, you did tell us so, that no good deed or good amount of U.S. aid goes unpunished. In the case of the Saudis, despite the fact that we keep buying their oil to the tune of $360 billion worth over the last decade.

    So, Congressman, you have been warning about this. What do we do now?

    RON PAUL, R-FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN: Well, we should think about the American taxpayer.

    It was just mentioned that they don't know which side to be on, the side of the military dictator that took it over with a coup, or the Muslim Brotherhood. What about the American people? And we have been in there too much.

    Just 60 years ago, we did the same thing over in Iran and it's still going on, that problem. We overthrew an elected leader, Mossadegh. And we're still in a problem with the Iranians.

    But, no, Saudi Arabia gets a lot of benefits. Not only do they get our money, but they get our support and we protect them, we provide for them their military protection.

    But the American people suffer the most. They pay all the bills. This idea that we can pick one group over another and think it's going to work out -- and radical jihadists, I don't like them any more than anybody else, but we have to understand what radicalizes people, what makes them want to kill us.

    And it precisely is because we get involved under-throwing and over -controlling the government. How long did we support Mubarak? Decades. Billions and billions of dollars. No wonder there was a Muslim Brotherhood resenting it, and the popular uprising comes and we join them and say, yes, we have had enough of this Mubarak. So, we will throw him out and have an election. Such hypocrisy. They have the election, we don't like him, so we throw him out. And we go back.

    (CROSSTALK)

    CAVUTO: Well, now, by the way, Hosni Mubarak is being -- in the process of being released. So, we don't know how that is going to go.

    (CROSSTALK)

    CAVUTO: But I have to ask you this, Congressman. If the Saudis are going to fund the gap with the Saudis -- with -- that is, the Egyptians, that we're taking away, then why don't they always do that? Then why can't that be a litmus test? All right, well, you each look after yourselves, we're out of here?

    PAUL: If we were out of the region, and we weren't giving any benefits to the Saudis, which we do, if that were the case, I would say, let them do what they want. It's their neighborhood.

    They -- the Saudis aren't going to come over here and tell us to deal how with our -- our own borders here with Mexico or something. We don't want foreigners coming here, so why would we be over there picking and choosing? They have more of a justification to deal with what they want over there than we do.

    (CROSSTALK)

    CAVUTO: So, you're not worried, Congressman, about the Chinese or the Russians who might try to fill the void and work this against us?

    PAUL: I really am not. I think that there's always that chance. But, right now, the Russians are pretty weak and that's not the Chinese traditions. The Chinese tradition the last 10 years or so is to work hard, save money, and buy up oil interests, not only in Iran and other places, but they're acting like capitalists.

    That's why they have the edge right now, not because they have sent troops out. They haven't done what we have done. We have troops in all these countries, bankrupting our country, trying to pick and choose these leaders. And we always mess up. And we -- we go back and forth. That's what is so ridiculous. And you mentioned Mubarak being released.

    Ironically, people say, hey, maybe Mubarak was better than the rest. Maybe we made a mistake by throwing him out, which I'm being very facetious, but that's how silly it gets.

    CAVUTO: Right. Right.

    PAUL: So, I think the policy of neutrality, minding our own business, staying out of the internal affairs of other nations, having a strong national defense, it's pretty good advice.

    And that's about what is authorized in the Constitution. And I think it's sad that we get so involved in this mess and it's endless, and it's almost like, if you don't agree with those who say, well, pick sides and bash the Brotherhood and do these things, that we're un-American or that we're not patriotic or something, well, I think a true patriot would defend America and defend the American taxpayer, and defend a policy that doesn't invite us to get into the middle of all these battles and have the administration after administration flip-flopping all around.

    Not only do we have this problem in Egypt right now, but what about Syria? Iraq is in shambles. Afghanistan is...

    (CROSSTALK)

    CAVUTO: No, no, you're quite right, but, Congressman, the most vociferous within the Republican Party and about what will really define the Republican Party going forward as to, to support these type of democracy movements, whatever you want to call them, fairly elected governments, again, this back and forth about who you support.

    But Chris Christie was in Boston last week saying that Republicans have over-intellectualized this. Quoting from him speaking to some fund-raisers, "I think we have some folks who believe that our job is to be college professors." He goes on to say that, "For our ideas to matter, we have to win, because, if we don't win, we don't govern, and if we don't govern, all we do is shout into the wind."

    I think he was making a veiled swipe at your son, Rand Paul, if not you. What do you think of that?

    PAUL: Well, I think he was very precise.

    He said you have got to win first before you can do anything. Otherwise, in other words, say anything, do anything, get elected first, and deceive the people in order to get elected.

    You know, Grover Cleveland was one of my favorite presidents, and he had a saying that said that, if you win an election or get re-elected by saying anything, what good is it? He says it has no value whatsoever. So Christie to say, oh, well, we got to get elected and then become principled, we have been doing that for too long.

    It's not the Republicans. It's the Republicans and Democrats. They all say whatever they think they have to say, but the time, it's coming to an end. The foreign policy is in shambles. The foreign policy of intervention is coming to an end. This fiscal policy is out of control. The numbers just don't add up. And also the banking system and the Federal Reserve system, it's all coming to an end.

    So, they can't keep saying these things. The American people are waking up to the reality that something has to give, and it certainly isn't by saying, well, say anything you can. Let's get elected and then we as Republicans will straighten this mess out.

    (CROSSTALK)

    CAVUTO: I'm sorry. We're tight for time. But you seem to be saying then, just to be clear, that you would rather lose an election with a Chris Christie on the ticket than win under those compromised principles with him on the ticket?

    PAUL: Well, it's irrelevant. It wouldn't motivate me to get too excited.

    It's sort of like asking me about who should be the Federal Reserve Board chairman.

    CAVUTO: Yes.