Posted on 08/05/2007 3:26:00 PM PDT by Reaganesque
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - Republican presidential contenders sparred over abortion on Sunday but generally agreed the United States must remain in Iraq as part of the war on terror.
"Just come home," countered Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the lone dissenter on a debate stage when it came to Iraq. He said there had never been a good reason to go to war in the first place.
"Has he forgotten about 9/11?" interjected former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
But it was Romney forced on the defensive on the issue of abortion, when Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback defended automated phone calls his campaign had been making that highlight his rival's one-time support for pro-choice policies.
"It's truthful," Brownback said.
Romney called it "desperate, maybe negative," adding moments later, "I get tired of people that are holier than thou because they've been pro-life longer than I have."
The debate unfolded on a Drake University stage, hosted and carried live by ABC, five months before Iowa caucus-goers begin winnowing the field of White House contenders.
Arizona Sen. John McCain, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Romney, the most prominent contenders, agreed the United States must remain in Iraq.
"I firmly believe that the challenge for the 21st century is a challenge against radical extremism," McCain said. He forecast a battle in the Senate in September in which anti-war critics will try to cut off funds.
"We will win that debate because the American people understand the consequences of failure," he added.
Giuliani saved his sharpest jabs for Democrats. "In four debates, not a single Democrat said the word, 'Islamic terrorists.' Now that is taking political correctness to extreme," he said.
Romney, too, was eager to criticize Democrats. His chosen target was Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, who said recently he would be willing to meet with the leaders of Cuba, North Korea and Iran in his first year in office, and declared in a speech he would order military action to capture terrorists in Pakistan if that nation's president did not.
"I mean, in one week he went from saying he's going to sit down, you know, for tea, with our enemies, but then he's going to bomb our allies," said Romney. "I mean, he's gone from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove in one week."
Polls consistently show the war in Iraq to be the issue uppermost in the minds of the voters. But abortion is a constant concern in Republican presidential contests, particularly in Iowa, where caucuses attract the most fervent party activists.
Moderator George Stephanopoulos opened the debate by asking Romney about Brownback's automated phone calls. Moments later, he asked the former Massachusetts governor about having said last spring that Giuliani was "pro-choice and pro-gay marriage and anti-gun, and that's a tough combination in a Republican primary."
Romney deflected the question, saying, "I'd rather him speak to his own positions rather than me speak for him."
Giuliani said he supports the Second Amendment, which provides for the right to bear arms, and believes marriage should be between a man and a woman.
"And I believe the best way we can have common ground in this debate that you're hearing is if we put our emphasis on reducing abortions and increasing the number of adoptions, which is something that I did as mayor of New York City."
But former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson said, "Any candidate that's pro-choice is going to have a difficulty with the party faithful. ... the Republican Party is a party of pro-life."
Great line.
But after watching several of the cable news shows........ Ron Paul won the debate hands down, interesting spin by the so called political/news experts (LOL).
Bump
Gotta admit...that is one helluva good soundbite.
Romney was obviously waiting to use that line. In any event the guy is personable, bright and articulate. The more exposure he gets will only help him.
I know, there are issues....
Whether there was originally a good reason to go to war, the fact remains that the decision for war was taken long ago. Whining about what might have been is a pastime for losers, not leaders.
Likewise, politicians who start a sentence with "If had had known then what I know now . . . " only show that they are not ready to lead. (Are you listening, Mrs. Clinton?) Waiting until one has all the possible information before acting is a formula for paralysis.
He's in the debate because he's a candidate. He has many supporters who are willing to keep sending him money and keep voting for him in online polls. He'll never win a primary and never win another election, but his supporters can keep him in the debates until whoever sponsors the debate limits participation to people with a certain percentage of support. The problem with imposing that limit is that several other candidates would be excluded as well, and at this point in the game, many of the people most interested in seeing a debate are the supporters of the other candidates.
When a few more candidates drop out of the race and the field starts to narrow, debate sponsors will be in a position to drop some of the candidates who don't have much chance.
Bill
replay of the debate on CSPAN at 6:30 pm Pacific time (9:30 ET)
That was quite possibly the best line I have ever heard in a debate.
I also liked it when rudy took the questioner to task asking about “is it time to raise taxes to fix the infrastructure” in talking about the bridge collapse. Rudy told the poor guy — hey, that is nothing but a liberal democrat point of view, we get more revenue when we lower taxes, not raise them. The guy asking the question (who was with stephie but whose name i cannot remember) got pretty snippy about it also. This is one area where Rudy really excells in the debates, he is always questioning the media and the democrats. He gets high praise from me for constantly doing that. I hope more of the candidates start criticizing the press.
My thought's exactly. Heck, Romney wasn't even on my radar but I'll give him another look on the quality of that zinger along. Do you McCain could come with something that good in a million years?
I agree and I also thought that Duncan Hunter gave some really great answers. All in all it was an excellent debate.
Didn’t get to see the debate but it sounds like Mitt did well.
C-Span site shows “error” on the TV schedule. Anyone know if they will be airing it?
The reason is quite simple: the difference between a "liberal" and an "objective journalist" is a job in the MSM - neither more nor less.
It’s on now.
Thanks....I just got back on the net and got your post!
You’re welcome. They came out swinging at Mitt but he handled them well.
He seems to doing well! I wish they would cut the field so we can spend time on the major candidates.
Bump
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.