Presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-Texas) argued in Iowa today that while many are calling for bipartisanship to help resolve the fiscal crisis, bipartisanship is precisely what caused federal government spending in the first place.

"My argument is we've had too much bipartisanship, because it's the bipartisanship that we've had that has endorsed all our problems," Paul said at the Iowa State Fair. "If we elect Republicans to shrink the size of government, they go and double the size of the Department of Education and get us involved in a bunch of wars. So we elect the Democrats who say they won't go into wars, and they expand the wars.

"So it's always this compromise," he added. "There are the big spending conservatives and the big spending liberals, they get together, and they don't have to worry on the short run."

But Paul said Americans are waking up to the idea that Washington needs to "drastically shrink the sizes of our federal government," especially since Washington has only been allowed to expand through deficit spending.

"The miracle pill is that you just print the money when you need it," he said.

"All our problems in the last 40 years came from the fact that big government is subsidized and taken care of by the printing press of money," Paul added. "But right now, the American people have awakened and they're starting to realize it has a lot to do with our monetary system."

Paul said the best way to control spending is to reduce overseas spending by ending military action and cutting back foreign aid. He also rejected the notion that this view can be seen as un-American because it seeks to cut back on military spending.

"All this militarism doesn't help us, it doesn't make us secure," he said. "People won't vote against it, because if you vote against a military budget ... they claim and they accuse you of being un-American and not caring about the military."

Paul noted that his current campaign and his last presidential effort collected more money from people in the military than all other candidates put together.

"We should be able to defend a non-interventionist foreign policy just on principle, moral principle, that you don't start wars, you don't initiate wars," Paul said.