<p>I thought we needed a thread to discuss the Republican debate tonight.</p>
<p>Well unfortunately I missed it - I need to keep up with politics more, but work and classes tend to get in the way a bit too much. I’ll watch as much as I can when it hits youtube.</p>
<p>I’m interested to hear how Ron Paul did. I agree with most (but certainly not all - he does have some odd ideas) of his positions, such as gun control (very little, if any, needed :)), limited government, and strict protection of the privacy of its citizens. Government exists to protect the rights of its people, and it has no rights of its own. Its nice to finally see a strict constitutionalist conservative who understands this. I’m not entirely sure how Giulliani calls himself a republican. On the other hand, I can’t stand the Christian right (i.e. Brownback and company).</p>
<p>I’m looking forward to see who drops out first. At first I thought Paul wouldn’t last long, but he has been gaining incredible momentum from this debates.</p>
<p>Paul was one of only two white male Republican candidates tonight who didn’t jump up and down and scream, “More torture! More torture! More torture”.</p>
<p>Romney is so enthusiastic about more torture, he wants to double the size of Gitmo. According to Mitt, Muslims don’t deserve lawyers.</p>
<p>McCain said that the only thing that kept him going when he was being tortured was the belief that Americans would not torture prisoners. The crowd was very quiet when he said he was against torture. They whooped and hollered when the others said, “more torture”. The Republican base. They did give him a round of applause when he said he’d changed his mind and now thought it was great that the Confederate Flag is flying again on the grounds of the State House in South Carolina. So much for the black vote. I guess the Repubs have just written that off.</p>
<p>Guiliani wants to reduce the budgets for the Department of Homeland Security and the Defense Department (along with all other federal agencies) by 5% to 20% – a goal that seems to be at some odds with his support of the President’s long-term escalation in Iraq and his professed desire to combat terrorism. He continues to invoke Reagan, so maybe it’s some kind of new voodoo economics.</p>
<p>Tancredo says that if we don’t torture Muslims, we won’t be able to save Western Civilization. Thompson had a dead ferret on his head; probably just trying to get a rise out of Rudy.</p>
<p><a href=“Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos”>Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos;
<p>All in all, a pretty scary bunch.</p>
<p>I would certainly agree with that - unfortunately, they’re not much less scary than the democrats they are running against, who would institute a virtual nanny state in the name of “safety”</p>
<p>Someone needs to tell the GOP that the Gipper is dead.</p>
<p>
I guess based on your second post, you don’t really want an honest discussion of the debate - just an opportunity to distort what was actually said.</p>
<p>
Not nearly as scary as those who would distort the truth for political gain.</p>
<p>Sorta like yellowcake?^^^</p>
<p>Or Swiftboating?</p>
<p>I must admit to a certain curiousity about what rank and file Republicans are thinking of this field of candidates. I mean, they were so hard on Kerry for supposedly being a flip flopper, and, obviously there are more than a few flip-flop issues here. Also, really, many of these candidates don’t seem to line up very well with the typical GOP party lines re: abortion, family values, etc.</p>
<p>Sort of leaves me wondering, what are the real issues for Republicans these days?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Show me one place where I distorted the views expressed during the debate.</p>
<p>OK, you got me. Truth be told, Mitt Romney didn’t say “Toture, Torture, Torture!”. He really said: "Enhanced interrogation techniques! Enhanced interrogation techniques! Enhanced interrogation techniques!'</p>
<p>The whole crew sounded like Slim Pickens in Dr. Strangelove.</p>
<p>Notably, during the foreign policy/defense portions of the debate, not a single candidate mentioned regional diplomatic efforts.</p>
<p>“Sort of leaves me wondering, what are the real issues for Republicans these days?”</p>
<p>I’ll answer for myself, but as a member of several republican organizations, I know I’m not alone. I’m not in love with any of the candidates and haven’t yet decided which to support, which is odd for me. My issues are: (1) terrorism, (2) border security, and (3) taxes.</p>
<p>
None of the candidates are perfect. But for me, the ultimate issue is national security. I will never again for for a Democrat based on this issue.</p>
<p>^Sound reasoning if folks want to kill you and your family just because you’re there.</p>
<p>parent</p>
<p>I agree. If the Republicans can frame the election around the issue of national security, they are going to win. Democrats will try to frame the debate around issues other than that. For example, If Rudy is the Republican guy, it will all be about his flip flopping on abortion. But if it’s national security that people are focusing on, the Dems will go down hard.</p>
<p>How the election is framed will determine the winner. A majority of the American people know that the Dems are soft on terrorism so if the debate is framed around that the Dems lose. </p>
<p>The Dems just don’t want to talk about people who are trying to kill us.</p>
<p>Go Huckabee!</p>
<p>(God forbid McCain should be captured in his next visit to Indiana…oops, I meant Baghdad - he won’t have anything left to keep him going. Fortunately, he won’t do it without Dick Morris’ suicide death squads around him.)</p>
<p>To quote a great American, “wasted lives”.</p>
<p>The American public has lost its patience with this neverending war. After all, after over $300B and 3500 lost lives, most Americans have had enough.</p>
<p>The “War on Terror” will be THE deciding issue in the '08 election. At the moment, Bush’s legacy in this war may prove to be a real handicap to the Republican candidates.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If your ultimate issue is national security, how can you vote for a party that is systematically destroying our military? Do you listen to the generals? The Pentagon is more than concerned about the state of readiness of our defenses. Nine of the ten Republican candidates support the President’s long-term escalation of troop strength in Iraq. Our military cannot support that. We are bleeding the military to depth, not for lack of funding, but because we are over-extended entering the fifth year of a mission the military is not designed to perform – a permanent hostile occupation. Our miltary is designed as a quick strike force. Get in and get out.</p>
<p>Ironically, the candidate in the race most attuned to the thinking of our military commanders is Hilary Clinton.</p>
<p><a href=“http://jcgi.pathfinder.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1619574,00.html[/url]”>http://jcgi.pathfinder.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1619574,00.html</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Amen. I think the country is ready for a fundamentalist religious leader who doen’t believe in evolution. We could have our own Ayatollah!</p>
<p>But he could teach us all how to lose weight, and that’s more than we’ve gotten from the current ding-dong.</p>
<p>I don’t know about that. I feel like upchucking every time I listen to Bush on the boobtube. Oooh…such a visual. ;)</p>