Posted on 11/29/2007 9:26:18 AM PST by nsmart
Arizona Senator John McCain tried to resuscitate his ailing campaign for the Republican presidential nomination by attacking Texas Congressman Ron Paul's anti-war stance during Wednesday night's CNN/YouTube debate.
But, as in previous Republican debates where leading contenders have stumbled in their attempts to attack the renegade congressman, it was Paul who ended up drawing the cheers of the crowd.
Playing his Thanksgiving visit to Iraq for political points, McCain tore into Paul for arguing -- as part of a discussion about spending -- that bringing the troops home from Iraq would save "a trillion dollars."
Just as former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani tried in an earlier debate to buff his national-security credentials by attacking Paul's suggestion that misguided U.S. foreign policies increased the likelihood of terrorist attacks, McCain attempted to burnish his image as a champion of the troops by attacking Paul -- and, by extension, all critics of the war.
Invoking memories of the American First movement's opposition in the late-1930s and early-1940s to preparation for the fight with Hitler and Mussolini, McCain declared, "it's that kind of isolationism that caused World War II."
That rhetorical flourish drew hisses from the Republican crowd that listened to the debate in St. Petersburg, Florida
But Paul did not need the audience to protect him.
(Excerpt) Read more at thenation.com ...
We rained it down on them, too. They got over it.
Collateral damage sucks, but it's a war and that happens in wars. War is about killing people and breaking things and is most assuredly not for the squeamish. Innocent civilians were never targeted.
Well, except by al Qaeda and the Sadr Thugs, but I guess to a Paulie, that's OK?
As for whether shock and awe was justified, that's a matter of opinion. Every time I hear new personal horror stories about Saddam and his henchmen, I reinforce my opinion.
Buh bye, troll.
Those of us who support RP are not thrilled with Don Blacks donation of 500. RP and the campaign were unaware who he was just like millions of others till it was disclosed that a donation was made.
The Campaign, after being informed who DB was, stated RP did not believe in his views and if DB made a donation, than it is his lose. Maybe not the best retort, but the money goest to good use.
His donation gave him the spotlight he has been desperately seeking since his support of GWH in 2000, which is when I first heard about him.
I could go on, but it would be rehashing the same points made in earlier threads. Bet DB has made a lot of money off his 500.00 donation which I am sure was his intent.
With regards to the “New Black Panthers”, they are held in high regards by many and to say anything negative about them will get the “racism” card pulled on you. So be careful, this is a PC world.
I would give the money back as well. We recognize not a couple of idiots will distort what over 100K plus other regular everyday american people have given to the campaign. It’s the same for all the candidates.
This time around, I cannot support anyone other than RP, Hunter or Tancredo, maybe Fred.
You are a moral idiot, and are an enemy of this country and of the health and safety of myself and my family.
An example of America's greatness is that you are allowed to live and breathe and express such vile opinions - despite the fact that your opinions tend to contribute to this country's ultimate destruction.
You are beneath contempt. You are now mercifdully forgotten.
You may be loudmouths here on FR where the attrition rate of Paul supporters is high. But in the real world you are just pathetic dupes. A minority. Real Moonbats you are. And hateful ones at that.
While I'm sure that most of the people who choose to voluntarily socially interact with you offfline are probably the neo-Nazis, Truthers, goldbugs and other human detritus that comprise Ron Paul's following, it doesn't mean that people who do not choose to socially interact with you are the "minority."
Come November 2008, you might want to check the numbers and see how many Americans voted for the GOP nominee - who will be a supporter of the war effort - and how many voted for Paul and whichever other loser he chooses to run alongside him on this third party ticket.
If Paul voters are only outnumbered 15 to one, it will be an accomplishment.
BTW, Caroline Glick's melodrama will never determine my analysis. She's a syndicated columnist looking to sell papers. Perhaps you think in headlines. I don't.
“...and a declaration of war by congress is required by the Constitution.”
You want to cite the portion of the Constitution that ‘requires a declaration of war’?
Don Black is yours. You're wearing him, not me.
No, retiree’s and DOD civilians are donating to paul.
The rank and file military hate his guts.
Did CNN pull an Indianapolis by feeding background noise of the tinfoil hat crowd through the PA system?
“You have no rights under islamic-fascism.
Remember RP doesn’t thinks its an issue or one that can be solved by submarines.”
Don’t forget a few beat cops and trial lawyers since paul thinks that terrorism should be a law enforcement matter.
“Are you really that afraid of a few terrorists? If you are, then they have won.”
No, the terrorist will win if paul or a democrat gets elected.
Crap.
There is nothing to apologise for here.
If Those @$$#oles think that their donations to Ron Paul's campaign think that it bought them something, they need look no further than Paul's district in Texas to be disabused of that notion.
What it does buy them is notoriety from people like wideawake who play into their hands when he or she protests about these people doing what every American Citizen has a right to do: Support the political candidate of their choice for any reason they see fit,(whether real or imaginary), or no reason at all.
The Ron Paul campaign is doing the right thing, laughing it off, cause the racist @$$#oles aren't worth the worry.
Shhhh you're going to confuse the poor lad :D
Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution:Powers of Congress
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
Then look to Article II Section I:The President, and tell me where he is given the power to declare war absent a Congressional declaration?
“After 9/11 Ron Paul submitted a bill to immediately send an attack force after Bin Laden. End of Story!”
And we’re still going after him
“By using terrorism as a fear-factor,”
Terrorism is not a “fear factor” used as a tool, it is a legitimate threat.
“get some new material.”
Pull your head out of the sand
Let me tell you something CAV, my boy is in 2/506th PIR, 4th Brigade, 101st Airborne. Lots of people in his particular Company (withheld) are supporting Paul. The reason is simple, The man best supports the Constitution that they take an oath to support against all enemies foreign and domestic.
So i guess that you're not as plugged in as you seem to think.
Of course it's a free country, so you can believe all the lies you want.
“To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;”
Where does it say ‘requires’?
“Then look to Article II Section I:The President, and tell me where he is given the power to declare war absent a Congressional declaration?”
You look back into Article 1, Section 8 and post the required format and content of a Declaration of War.
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.