8mm
Posted on 05/03/2007 10:54:45 PM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
MSNBC's Republican presidential debate with candidates: Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kansas);the former Virginia governor James Gilmore (R-Virginia); the former New York City mayor Rudolph Giuliani; the former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee; Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-California); Senator John McCain (R-Arizona); Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas); the former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney; Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado); and the former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson. Moderated by Chris Matthews with questions by John Harris, editor in chief of politico.com and Jim Vandehei, executive editor of politico.com. At the Ronald Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California Transcribed by the Federal News Service, a private transcription agency.
(Excerpt) Read more at iht.com ...
Like the list. I would add one more item dealing with NO PORK!
Paul's answers were correct, Constitutional, and spot on each and every time.
He made this statement in context of the government not interfering with the internal workings of the church. In that sense, he was returning to the original intent of the First Amendment and the statement in Thomas Jefferson's letter. He was not supporting the idea of liberals using the First Amendment to attack religion or religious practice. I think this statement made him look better.
REPLYING TO YOUR QUESTIONS:
(1) I’ve always gotten the drift that Paul IS a type of isolationist. I’m not sure which type...yes, there’s more than one.
Not only that, but he thinks Scooter Libby shouldn’t be considered for a pardon - not because he agrees with the jury verdict necessarily, or even the indictment per se, but because Libby was part of an administration that allegedly misled us into war with Saddam.
Simply a mind boggling statement!!
(2) Pakistan is a powder keg. Much more dangerous to try to control than Iraq, and you see how difficult Iraq has become. The Paks have nuclear weapons. Musharraf is always hanging onto power by a thread. The alternative to Musharraf would be an Islamic fundamentalist government (think Taliban).
Also, the tribal regions where Bin Laden went are the wildest, most impenetrable topography in the world. Beyond the imagination to conceive of unless you were there to see for yourself. But the locals do know the land. And they support Bin Laden with their lives and everything they have.
Thanks for the ping.
Romney should have asked Matthews if he had secret service protection first before answering. ;-)
That Pakistan is a powder keg with nukes seems to make you think we SHOULD have gone in.
My point is for THAT very reason we did NOT want to go in. Musharraf could be ousted at any second, I think we believe. If ousted his replacement would be Taliban with their hands on nukes.
Pakistan has a huge population, mostly radicalized young people “educated” in the Madrassas. It would never remain just a war between our soldiers AND the tribal region and bin Laden. The whole of the country would freak out if we were KNOWN to be in that country causing HECK for the jihadists and tribesmen who are hosting them.
Also, we haven’t always thought we knew where bin Laden disappeared to after Tora Bora. It was quite a bit later that we seemed to settle on Waziristan. We didn’t have a trail on him as he fled Tora Bora...if we had, we would have taken him out with a drone hellfire missle.
transcript self ping for later
THANKS!
A bunch of FReepers heard Duncan Hunter say that we should “err” on the side of life re: Terri Schiavo, but for some reason, it wasn’t included in this transcript:
http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?id=5562636
MR. MATTHEWS: Okay.
Let me ask you a question which has grabbed a lot of Americans personally, the Terri Schaivo case. Again, it was a question of whether the United States — the U.S. Congress should have intervened and passed a law to advise the appellate court whether to act or not in this case, the district court it was. Terri Schaivo, should Congress have acted or let the family make the decision, the husband?
MR. ROMNEY: I think we should generally let the family make a decision of this nature. In the case —
MR. MATTHEWS: The husband should have decided?
MR. ROMNEY: Generally we should make that decision.
In the case here, the courts decided that — what they thought was the right thing to do, and then I think Jeb Bush and the Florida legislature did the right thing by saying we’ve got a concern. They looked over the shoulder of the court. But I think the decision of Congress to get involved was a mistake.
MR. MATTHEWS: Okay.
MR. ROMNEY: I think that Congress’s job is to make sure that laws are respecting the sanctity of life. But to actually adjudicate a case like this, better done at the state level by the governor, the legislature and the court.
MR. MATTHEWS: Senator Brownback, should Congress have gotten involved in that personal case?
SEN. BROWNBACK: Yes, it should have, and it gave her the right and the family the right to take that appeal to the court. That’s what the Congress did.
And her life is sacred. Even if it’s in that difficult moment that she’s in at that point in time, that life is sacred. And we should stand for life in all its circumstances.
MR. MATTHEWS: Senator McCain, was Congress right in intervening in that case?
SEN. MCCAIN: It was a very, very difficult issue. All of us were deeply moved by the pictures and the depiction of this terrible, tragic case. In retrospect, we should have taken some more time, looked at it more carefully, and probably reacted to hastily.
MR. MATTHEWS: Mayor Giuliani, was that a good thing for Congress to do, to get involved that weekend?
MR. GIULIANI: The family was in dispute. That’s what we have courts for. And the better place to decide that in a much more — I think in a much fairer and even in a deeper way is in front of a court.
Please see my post #53.
Having Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann and David Gregory provide insight and commentary on a Republican Presidential Debate is like asking a vegetarian his opinion on a steakhouse.
REP. HUNTER: You know, Bill Clinton cut the U.S. Army by almost 50 percent. In this war against terror, he's the wrong guy to have in there.
And incidentally, on the Schiavo case, you know Ronald Reagan said on the question of life, when there's a question, error on the side of life. I think Congress did the right thing.
“I found it:
MR. MATTHEWS: Okay. Congressman, Bill Clinton back home.
REP. HUNTER: You know, Bill Clinton cut the U.S. Army by almost 50 percent. In this war against terror, he’s the wrong guy to have in there.
And incidentally, on the Schiavo case, you know Ronald Reagan said on the question of life, when there’s a question, error on the side of life. I think Congress did the right thing.”
Thank you!
It looks like even though Hunter wasn’t directly asked the question, he wanted to make sure his stand was known later on.
8mmMauser, please see posts 56 & 58, fyi, and thanks to Gelato!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.