Posted on 10/20/2006 2:18:37 PM PDT by WinOne4TheGipper
SAN ANTONIO — In a debate telecast statewide, Republican U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison repeated her call Thursday for the United States to maintain its commitment to stabilizing Iraq rather than "cutting and running because times are rough."
Hutchison, a senator for more than 13 years, also said she would not have voted for the United States to invade the country in 2003 if she'd known there were no weapons of mass destruction there.
Barbara Ann Radnofsky Democratic challenger says Texas needs fresh leadership.
Scott Lanier Jameson Libertarian says labeling enemies incites challenge.
Responding to a reporter's question, Hutchison said: "If I had known then what I know now about the weapons of mass destruction, which was a key reason I voted to go in there, I would not vote to go into Iraq the way we did.
"And I have to say I don't think the president would have asked for that vote either," Hutchison said, saying President Bush was "trying to make sure that America was not hit with another 9/11, with a weapon of mass destruction."
Democrat Barbara Ann Radnofsky seized on Hutchison's reflection, suggesting that Hutchison was among senators who failed to read intelligence information that would have illuminated the likelihood that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction.
"What a telling, telling comment from my colleague," said Radnofsky, who favors setting a timetable for taking U.S. troops out of Iraq.
Hutchison said it would be irresponsible to withdraw because Iraq has become "a terrorist breeding ground." Referring to Radnofsky, she added: "This is a very big point of difference between us."
The hourlong debate was historic from its start because this year marks the first time two women represent the major parties in a Texas U.S. Senate race. The pair met for the first time Thursday in the lobby of KLRN-TV, where the debate co-sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Texas was taped shortly before being broadcast statewide on public TV stations and C-SPAN.
The two were joined by Scott Lanier Jameson, 40, the Libertarian nominee who closed with a plea to voters to consider all Libertarian candidates.
Jameson expressed discomfort with the U.S. government labeling other nations such as Iran as enemies.
"It makes us sound like we're developing a checklist of who we're going to take on next," he said. "It's almost as if we're challenging them."
Hutchison, who has been the front-runner, fell into no outright gaffes in the nine-question event, with the only surprise being her hindsight on Iraq.
She and Radnofsky, a Houston lawyer making her first bid for elective office, vigorously spelled out differences they have aired during the campaign.
Radnofsky criticized Hutchison for voting to build what she dubbed an impractical 700-mile fence along stretches of the U.S.-Mexico border. She said that, unlike Hutchison, she favors revising a law creating a prescription drug benefit for senior citizens so the government can negotiate lower drug prices with manufacturers.
Hutchison defended an immigration proposal she has outlined with Rep. Mike Pence, R-Indiana, that envisions the government establishing a more secure border before launching a system requiring illegal immigrants to leave the United States and apply at out-of-country centers for permission to return to work here. She called it a "starting point" toward compromise in Congress.
Jameson said that if a wall is going to be built, it should be around flood-prone New Orleans.
Hutchison, 63, filled the Senate seat long held by Lloyd Bentsen in 1993. She won election to her first full term a year later.
The former state treasurer and Texas House member has frequently said her dream is to serve as Texas governor, although she has passed up chances to run, including last year when she yielded to Gov. Rick Perry, who is seeking re-election next month.
Hutchison said last month that she decided to seek one more term only because of her seniority on the Appropriations Committee and within the Republican Party ranks.
"I've been able to do many things for Texas that would be hard to accomplish as a junior member," Hutchison said. "But this is certainly going to be my last term."
Hutchison conceded that she has backed off on a pledge in the early 1990s to serve no more than two terms, but said she still supports amending the Constitution to hold all senators to limits.
"I want to do what I think is best for Texas," she said.
Radnofsky, 50, left her partner position at Vinson & Elkins to campaign. Eclipsed by Hutchison in fundraising, she's tried to make up for the gulf by enlisting volunteers, having a frequently updated Web site and stressing a 40-page comparison of her positions on issues to what she considers Hutchison's poor record.
Radnofsky, who wore a purple blouse, said: "What this country needs for Texas is leadership that's new and fresh, that stands about 5-foot-9 and looks good in purple."
Do you really think the period from 1945 to 1990 was completely uneventful in terms of U.S. involvement in the Middle East? Or that the events that unfolded in the Middle East from 1945 to today have no relation to each other?
She's full of crap, WMDs were FOUND!!!
Oops -- that last post was intended for you, not me.
To not vote for her is to vote for defeat in Iraq. Defeat is not an option.
She screwed up but to allow her opponent to win her seat is bad for our country. Anyway, it's her last term.
The Statement of Principles put out by by The Project for the New American Century clearly outlines their plans. I personally think Hanson and his buddies in the White House are wrong. Iraq is proving the opposite of their projections. Democracy may not, after all, be compatable with all cultures.
She's running for Prez.....put her finger up in the wind and out came that statement.
The only reason to go into Iraq is to protect the U.S. from WMD's and a ruler who has proven that he is fully capable of using them. Without WMD's I cannot imagine a legitimate reason to go to war with Iraq.
That's just it. Every Texas FReeper could vote against her and she'd still win by a comfortable margin. I am not giving this seat to Radnofsky. If i thought she could win, I'd vote for KBH, but it isn't going to happen.
I can. Hussein's firing on our planes patrolling the No Fly Zone was reason enough, and he should not have been allowed to stay in power after the attempt on the life of former Pres. Bush.
Another loser heard from -- who advises her? John Dean?
So now is her seat in play? HOW STUPID!!
Who said their were no WMDs?
Nobody said they weren't moved in the 11 months of UN debates.
Hutchinson is going retarded.
their = there
So...do you know for SURE she said what they are saying she said?
I keep reading stuff like this, but when I hear context and tone discover that huge portions of the information are being left out.
Her information is factually inaccurate. WMDs WERE found in Iraq (nuclear and chemical) and people who are able to research it can find documentation to back it up. We have all read about 500 or so chemical shells, but how about the nuclear material that was moved in late '03 early '04?
Here is a link from the BBC...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3872201.stm
Sorry folks I certainly don't mean for this to be a thread hijack but the "no WMD' myth has been perpetuated (even here) for far too long.
I agree with her.
Did you read anything else in the article?
Honestly, from a conservative standpoint, the danger of WMDs was the only factor significant enough to justify the war. The point of a war is to counter a serious threat to national security (which WMDs would have been), not to build a democracy in another country.
Ah, you're one of the conservative purists who looks for any excuse to punish a Republican who doesn't meet your exacting standards by voting for a person who represents your views even less.
This is logical in your world. Pity.
Not if her reason for supporting the war in the first place was the danger of WMDs. Any person who took that position would only be remaining consistent by saying what she said.
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.