Presidential Candidates Debate, Oct 16 | Video | index-art.info
Barack Obama went on the offensive over foreign policy in the third and final Going into the debate at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, Obama had an inbuilt advantage on foreign policy and security. This video is no longer available. . Bobi Wine attacks Kanye West over Museveni meeting. While foreign policy became an unexpected pivotal point in last President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney meet Monday night for their final. President Barack Obama and Republican candidate Mitt Romney meet in the third and final debate prior the presidential election. And the s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War has.
It also allowed us to refocus on alliances and relationships that had been neglected for a decade. And Governor Romney, our alliances have never been stronger, in Asia, in Europe, in Africa, with Israel, where we have unprecedented military and intelligence cooperation, including dealing with the Iranian threat. But what we also have been able to do is position ourselves so we can start rebuilding America, and that's what my plan does.
Making sure that we're bringing manufacturing back to our shores so that we're creating jobs here, as we've done with the auto industry, not rewarding companies that are shipping jobs overseas. Making sure that we've got the best education system in the world, including retraining our workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Doing everything we can to control our own energy. We've cut our oil imports to the lowest level in two decades because we've developed oil and natural gas.
But we also have to develop clean energy technologies that will allow us to cut our exports in half by That's the kind of leadership that we need to show. And we've got to make sure that we reduce our deficit. Unfortunately, Governor Romney's plan doesn't do it. We've got to do it in a responsible way by cutting out spending we don't need, but also asking the wealthiest to pay a little bit more.
That way we can invest in the research and technology that's always kept us at the cutting edge. Now, Governor Romney has taken a different approach throughout this campaign. Both at home and abroad, he has proposed wrong and reckless policies. He's praised George Bush as a good economic steward and Dick Cheney as somebody who's -- who shows great wisdom and judgment.
And taking us back to those kinds of strategies that got us into this mess are not the way that we are going to maintain leadership in the 21st century. I've got a policy for the future and agenda for the future. And when it comes to our economy here at home, I know what it takes to create 12 million new jobs and rising take-home pay.
And what we've seen over the last four years is something I don't want to see over the next four years. The president said by now we'd be a 5. We're 9 million jobs short of that. I will get America working again and see rising take-home pay again, and I'll do it with five simple steps.
Number one, we are going to have North American energy independence. We're going to do it by taking full advantage of oil, coal, gas, nuclear and our renewables. Number two, we're going to increase our trade. Trade grows about 12 percent year. It doubles about every -- every five or so years. We can do better than that, particularly in Latin America. The opportunities for us in Latin America we have just not taken advantage of fully.
As a matter of fact, Latin America's economy is almost as big as the economy of China. We're all focused on China. Latin America is a huge opportunity for us -- time zone, language opportunities. Number three, we're going to have to have training programs that work for our workers and schools that finally put the parents and the teachers and the kids first, and the teachers' unions going to have to go behind.
And then we're going to have to get to a balanced budget. We can't expect entrepreneurs and businesses large and small to take their life savings or their company's money and invest in America if they think we're headed to the road to Greece.
And that's where we're going right now unless we finally get off this spending and borrowing binge. And I'll get us on track to a balanced budget. And finally, number five, we've got to champion small business. Small business is where jobs come from. Two-thirds of our jobs come from small businesses. New business formation is down to the lowest level in 30 years under this administration. I want to bring it back and get back good jobs and rising take-home pay.
Well, let's talk about what we need to compete. First of all, Governor Romney talks about small businesses. But, Governor, when you were in Massachusetts, small businesses development ranked about 48th, I think out of 50 states in Massachusetts, because the policies that you are promoting actually don't help small businesses.
And the way you define small businesses includes folks at the very top. And they include you and me. That's not the kind of small business promotion we need. But let's take an example that we know is going to make a difference in the 21st century and that's our education policy. We didn't have a lot of chance to talk about this in the last debate. You know, under my leadership, what we've done is reformed education, working with governors, 46 states.
We've seen progress and gains in schools that were having a terrible time. And they're starting to finally make progress. And what I now want to do is to hire more teachers, especially in math and science, because we know that we've fallen behind when it comes to math and science. And those teachers can make a difference. Now, Governor Romney, when you were asked by teachers whether or not this would help the economy grow, you said this isn't going to help the economy grow.
When you were asked about reduced class sizes, you said class sizes don't make a difference. But I tell you, if you talk to teachers, they will tell you it does make a difference.
And if we've got math teachers who are able to provide the kind of support that they need for our kids, that's what's going to determine whether or not the new businesses are created here. Companies are going to locate here depending on whether we've got the most highly skilled workforce. And the kinds of budget proposals that you've put forward, when we don't ask either you or me to pay a dime more in terms of reducing the deficit, but instead we slash support for education, that's undermining our long-term competitiveness.
That is not good for America's position in the world, and the world notices.
Libya, Iran likely to be main points of contention in final debate - CNNPolitics
Let me get back to foreign policy. Can I just get back Well -- well, I need to speak a moment We have every two years tests that look at how well our kids are doing. Fourth graders and eighth graders are tested in English and math. While I was governor, I was proud that our fourth graders came out number one of all 50 states in English, and then also in math.
And our eighth graders number one in English and also in math. First time one state had been number one in all four measures.
How did we do that? Well, Republicans and Democrats came together on a bipartisan basis to put in place education principles that focused on having great teachers in the classroom. And that was -- that was -- that was what allowed us to become the number one state in the nation. But that was 10 years before you took office. And then you cut education spending when you came into office. The first -- the first -- the first -- and we kept our schools number one in the nation.
They're still number one today. And the principles that we put in place, we also gave kids not just a graduation exam that determined whether they were up to the skills needed to -- to be able compete, but also if they graduated the quarter of their class, they got a four-year tuition- free ride at any Massachusetts public institution of higher learning.
That happened before you came into office. That was actually mine, actually, Mr. You got that fact wrong. Let me get -- I want to try to shift it, because we have heard some of this in the other debates. Governor, you say you want a bigger military.
You want a bigger Navy. You don't want to cut defense spending. What I want to ask you -- we were talking about financial problems in this country. Where are you going to get the money? Well, let's come back and talk about the military, but all the way -- all the way through. First of all, I'm going through from the very beginning -- we're going to cut about 5 percent of the discretionary budget, excluding military. But can you do this without driving deeper The good news is inaudible.
I'd be happy to have you take a look. Come on our website. You look at how we get to a balanced budget within eight to 10 years. We do it by getting -- by reducing spending in a whole series of programs. By the way, number one I get rid of is Obamacare.
There are a number of things that sound good, but frankly, we just can't afford them. And that one doesn't sound good and it's not affordable. So I'd get rid of that one from day one. To the extent humanly possible, we get that out. We take program after program that we don't absolutely have to have, and we get rid of them. Number two, we take some programs that we are doing to keep, like Medicaid, which is a program for the poor; we'll take that healthcare program for the poor and we give it to the states to run because states run these programs more efficiently.
As a governor, I thought please, give me this program. I can run this more efficiently than the federal government and states, by the way, are proving it. States like Arizona, Rhode Island have taken these -- these Medicaid dollars; have shown they can run these programs more cost-effectively.
I want to do those two things and get this -- get this to a balanced budget with eight -- eight to 10 years. But the military -- let's get back to the military, though. That's what I'm trying He should have answered the first question. Now, the math doesn't work, but he continues to claim that he's going to do it. Now, keep in mind that our military spending has gone up every single year that I've been in office. We spend more on our military than the next 10 countries combined; China, Russia, France, the United Kingdom, you name it.
And what I did was work with our joint chiefs of staff to think about, what are we going to need in the future to make sure that we are safe? And that's the budget that we've put forward.
You say that you're going to pay for it by closing loopholes and deductions, without naming what those loopholes and deductions are. And then somehow you're also going to deal with the deficit that we've already got. The math simply doesn't work.
But when it comes to our military, what we have to think about is not, you know just budgets, we've got to think about capabilities. We need to be thinking about cyber security. We need to be talking about space. That's exactly what our budget does, but it's driven by strategy. It's not driven by politics. It's not driven by members of Congress, and what they would like to see.
It's driven by, what are we going to need to keep the American people safe? That's exactly what our budget does, and it also then allows us to reduce our deficit, which is a significant national security concern. Because we've got to make sure that our economy is strong at home so that we can project military power overseas. I'm pleased that I've balanced budgets. I was on the world of business for 25 years.
If you didn't balance your budget, you went out of business. I went into the Olympics that was out of balance, and we got it on balance, and made a success there. I had the chance to be governor of a state. Four years in a row, Democrats and Republicans came together to balance the budget. We cut taxes 19 times and balanced our budget. The president hasn't balanced a budget yet.
I expect to have the opportunity to do so myself. I'm going to be able to balance the budget. Let's talk about military spending, and that's this.
Our Navy is old -- excuse me, our Navy is smaller now than at any time since The Navy said they needed ships to carry out their mission.
We're now at under We're headed down to the low s if we go through a sequestration. That's unacceptable to me. I want to make sure that we have the ships that are required by our Navy.
Our Air Force is older and smaller than at any time since it was founded in We've changed for the first time since FDR -- since FDR we had the -- we've always had the strategy of saying we could fight in two conflicts at once. Now we're changing to one conflict. Look, this, in my view, is the highest responsibility of the President of the United States, which is to maintain the safety of the American people.
And I will not cut our military budget by a trillion dollars, which is a combination of the budget cuts the president has, as well as the sequestration cuts. That, in my view, is making -- is making our future less certain and less secure. Bob, I just need to comment on this.
First of all, the sequester is not something that I've proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen. The budget that we are talking about is not reducing our military spending. It is maintaining it.
But I think Governor Romney maybe hasn't spent enough time looking at how our military works. You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonetsbecause the nature of our military's changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.
And so the question is not a game of Battleship, where we're counting slips. It's what are our capabilities. And so when I sit down with the Secretary of the Navy and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, we determine how are we going to be best able to meet all of our defense needs in a way that also keeps faith with our troops, that also makes sure that our veterans have the kind of support that they need when they come home.
And that is not reflected in the kind of budget that you're putting forward because it just doesn't work. And, you know, we visited the website quite a bit and it still doesn't work.
A lot to cover. I'd like -- I'd like to move to the next segment: Would either of you -- and you'll have two minutes -- and, President Obama, you have the first go at this one -- would either of you be willing to declare that an attack on Israel is an attack on the United States, which, of course, is the same promise that we give to our close allies like Japan.
And if you made such a declaration, would not that deter Iran? It's certainly deterred the Soviet Union for a long, long time when we made that -- we made -- we made that promise to our allies. First of all, Israel is a true friend. It is our greatest ally in the region.
And if Israel is attacked, America will stand with Israel. I've made that clear throughout my presidency. So you're -- you're saying we've already made that declaration.
I will stand with Israel if they are attacked. And this is the reason why, working with Israel, we have created the strongest military and intelligence cooperation between our two countries in history. In fact, this week we'll be carrying out the largest military exercise with Israel in history, this very week. But to the issue of Iran, as long as I'm president of the United States Iran will not get a nuclear weapon. I made that clear when I came into office. We then organized the strongest coalition and the strongest sanctions against Iran in history, and it is crippling their economy.
Their currency has dropped 80 percent. Their oil production has plunged to the lowest level since they were fighting a war with Iraq 20 years ago. So their economy is in a shambles. And the reason we did this is because a nuclear Iran is a threat to our national security, and it is a threat to Israel's national security.
We cannot afford to have a nuclear arms race in the most volatile region of the world. Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. And for them to be able to provide nuclear technology to non-state actors, that's unacceptable. And they have said that they want to see Israel wiped off the map. So the work that we've done with respect to sanctions now offers Iran a choice.
They can take the diplomatic route and end their nuclear program or they will have to face a united world and a United States president, me, who said we're not going to take any options off the table.
The disagreement I have with Governor Romney is that, during the course of this campaign, he's often talked as if we should take premature military action.
I think that would be a mistake, because when I've sent young men and women into harm's way, I always understand that that is the last resort, not the first resort. Well, first of all, I want to underscore the same point the president mad,e which is that if I'm President of the United States, when I'm President of the United States, we will stand with Israel.
And if Israel is attacked, we have their back, not just diplomatically, not just culturally, but militarily. Number two, with regards to Iran and the threat of Iran, there's no question but that a nuclear Iran, a nuclear-capable Iran is unacceptable to America. It presents a threat not only to our friends but ultimately a threat to us to have Iran have nuclear material, nuclear weapons that could be used against us or used to be threatening to us.
It is also essential for us to understand what our mission is in Iran, and that is to dissuade Iran from having a nuclear weapon through peaceful and diplomatic means. And crippling sanctions are something I called for five years ago, when I was in Israel, speaking at the Herzliya Conference. I laid out seven steps, crippling sanctions were number one.
And they do work. You're seeing it right now in the economy. It's absolutely the right thing to do, to have crippling sanctions. I would have put them in place earlier. But it's good that we have them. Number two, something I would add today is I would tighten those sanctions.
I would say that ships that carry Iranian oil, can't come into our ports. I imagine the E. Not only ships couldn't, but I'd say companies that are moving their oil can't, people who are trading in their oil can't.
I would tighten those sanctions further. Secondly, I'd take on diplomatic isolation efforts. I'd make sure that Ahmadinejad is indicted under the Genocide Convention. His words amount to genocide incitation. I would indict him for it. I would also make sure that their diplomats are treated like the pariah they are around the world. The same way we treated the apartheid diplomats of South Africa. We need to increase pressure time, and time again on Iran because anything other than a -- a -- a solution to this, which says -- which stops this -- this nuclear folly of theirs, is unacceptable to America.
And of course, a military action is the last resort. It is something one would only - only consider if all of the other avenues had been -- had been tried to their full extent.
Let me ask both of you, there -- as you know, there are reports that Iran and the United States a part of an international group, have agreed in principle to talks about Iran's nuclear program. What is the deal, if there are such talks? What is the deal that you would accept, Mr. Well, first of all those are reports in the newspaper. They are not true. But our goal is to get Iran to recognize it needs to give up its nuclear program and abide by the U.
Because they have the opportunity to reenter the community of nations, and we would welcome that. There -- there are people in Iran who have the same aspirations as people all around the world for a better life. And we hope that their leadership takes the right decision, but the deal we'll accept is they end their nuclear program. And I'm glad that Governor Romney agrees with the steps that we're taking.
You know, there have been times, Governor, frankly, during the course of this campaign, where it sounded like you thought that you'd do the same things we did, but you'd say them louder and somehow that -- that would make a difference. And it turns out that the work involved in setting up these crippling sanctions is painstaking. We started from the day we got into office. And the reason is was so important -- and this is a testament to how we've restored American credibility and strength around the world -- is we had to make sure that all the countries participated, even countries like Russia and China.
Because if it's just us that are imposing sanctions -- we've had sanctions in place a long time. It's because we got everybody to agree that Iran is seeing so much pressure.Obama vs. Romney: Complete 3rd Presidential Debate - Election 2012 - The New York Times
And we've got to maintain that pressure. There is a deal to be had, and that is that they abide by the rules that have already been established. They convince the international community they are not pursuing a nuclear program. There are inspections that are very intrusive. But over time, what they can do is regain credibility. In the meantime, though, we're not going to let up the pressure until we have clear evidence that that takes place.
And one last thing -- just -- just to make this point. The clock is ticking. We're not going to allow Iran to perpetually engage in negotiations that lead nowhere. And I've been very clear to them. You know, because of the intelligence coordination that we do with a range of countries, including Israel, we have a sense of when they would get breakout capacity, which means that we would not be able to intervene in time to stop their nuclear program.
And that clock is ticking. And we're going to make sure that if they do not meet the demands of the international community, then we are going to take all options necessary to make sure they don't have a nuclear weapon. I think from the very beginning, one of the challenges we've had with Iran is that they have looked at this administration, and felt that the administration was not as strong as it needed to be.
I think they saw weakness where they had expected to find American strength. And I say that because from the very beginning, the president in his campaign four years ago, said he would meet with all the world's worst actors in his first year, he'd sit down with Chavez and Kim Jong-il, with Castro and President Ahmadinejad of Iran. And I think they looked and thought, well, that's an unusual honor to receive from the President of the United States.
And then the president began what I have called an apology tour, of going to various nations in the Middle East and criticizing America. I think they looked at that and saw weakness. Then when there were dissidents in the streets of Tehran, a Green Revolution, holding signs saying, is America with us, the president was silent.
Libya, Iran likely to be main points of contention in final debate
I think they noticed that as well. And I think that when the president said he was going to create daylight between ourselves and Israel, that they noticed that as well.
When every vote counted, closest U. It marks the closing note of the debate season, one that landed Romney a much-needed boost after his widely applauded performance -- and Obama's derided one -- in the first debate. The second matchup was considered more of a draw, with Obama edging Romney in several polls of debate-watchers.
From the campaign trail Photos: From the campaign trail From the campaign trail — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney and his running mate, Rep. Hide Caption 1 of Photos: From the campaign trail From the campaign trail — Romney boards his campaign plane in Bedford, Massachusetts. The Romney camp has decided to continue campaigning on Election Day.
Hide Caption 2 of Photos: Obama's speech included references to his campaign and his victory in the Iowa caucuses, which helped catapult his political career. Hide Caption 3 of Photos: From the campaign trail From the campaign trail — The president and first lady Michelle Obama embrace Monday in Des Moines at his last campaign rally before the election. Hide Caption 4 of Photos: Hide Caption 5 of Photos: From the campaign trail From the campaign trail — Romney and his wife, Ann, greet supporters at a rally late Monday in Manchester, New Hampshire.
Hide Caption 6 of Photos: From the campaign trail From the campaign trail — Ann Romney wipes away tears during her husband's campaign rally Monday in Manchester. From the campaign trail From the campaign trail — Romney reaches out to supporters Monday in Columbus, Ohio. From the campaign trail From the campaign trail — A Romney fan shows her support at Monday's rally in Columbus.
Hide Caption 9 of Photos: From the campaign trail From the campaign trail — Obama, lower left, speaks during a campaign rally Monday in Madison, Wisconsin.
Hide Caption 10 of Photos: From the campaign trail From the campaign trail — Workers put up signs Monday for Romney's election night event in Boston. Hide Caption 11 of Photos: Obama and Romney darted from swing state to swing state, trying to fire up enthusiasm among supporters and win over any last wavering voters before Election Day.
Hide Caption 12 of Photos: Hide Caption 14 of Photos: From the campaign trail From the campaign trail — Obama arrives at a campaign rally in Dubuque, Iowa, on Saturday, November 3. From the campaign trail From the campaign trail — Romney supporters attend a rally in Englewood, Colorado, on Saturday.