Facebook

Stumble Upon

Digg

Email

Republican presidential candidates Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani and Ron Paul await the start of the debate aired on FOX News on Thursday. (AP Photo)

The Republican candidates returned to their respective outposts on the campaign trail Friday, hours after appearing in a vigorous debate that focused on national security and America’s role in the world.

The conversation began when the candidates evaluated the U.S. response during a recent incident in the Strait of Hormuz between a U.S. Navy ship and five Iranian speed boats.

Five of the six candidates on stage at the Myrtle Beach Convention Center in South Carolina applauded the commanding officers for responding with restraint when they did not fire on the speed boats even though a radio call claimed the U.S. ship was going to explode in minutes.

“You can’t take the judgment like that out of the hands of the officers on the ground there. I think one more step and they would have been introduced to those virgins that they’re looking forward to seeing,” Fred Thompson said, earning laughter from the audience at the debate hosted by the South Carolina Republican Party and aired on FOX News.

“I think we need to make it very clear, not just to the Iranians, but to anybody, that if you think you’re going to engage the United States military, be prepared not simply to have a battle. Be prepared, first, to put your sights on the American vessel. And then be prepared that the next things you see will be the gates of Hell, because that is exactly what you will see after that,” South Carolina front-runner Mike Huckabee said.

“I think an incident like this reminds us that we shouldn’t be lulled into some false sense of confidence about Iran. We have to be very focused on the fact that Iran should not be allowed to become a nuclear power. We should make it very, very clear that we’re not going to allow that, and we should go to every country that we can think of to impose serious sanctions on Iran,” said former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, himself a former Navy ship captain, said he was pleased that President Bush had warned Iran after the incident that the U.S. will “preserve the fundamental principle of freedom of the sea.”

“But don’t think that this wasn’t a serious situation of the utmost seriousness in one of the most important waterways in the world, because of so much of the world’s oil goes through there,” McCain said.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said the incident showed that Iran is “a very troubled nation.”

“I believe it was designed to test our defenses. I believe it was also designed to rattle a sword to the Arab neighbors to see that they could go after the Straits of Hormuz. I believe, as well, that it was a diversionary tactic for them to consider other actions in other places. And so I believe it was a very serious act. And the Iranians continue to take acts like this, it points out that we have in Iran a very troubled nation,” he said.

“We’re going to have to have a comprehensive strategy with our friends and others who we need to pull into our circle of friendship to put extraordinary pressure on Iran,” Romney said.

Of the six candidates, only Ron Paul said he thought the incident was being blown out of proportion.

“Let’s put it in perspective. We have five small speedboats attacking the U.S. Navy with a Destroyer? They could take care of those speedboats in about five seconds. And here we’re ready to start World War III over this? … You know there are people in this administration and in Washington, D.C., that are looking for the chance” to bomb Iran, the 10-term Texas congressman said.

“I’m worrying about the policy of why we’re looking for a justification. … I mean, we’re already, with our CIA, being involved in trying to overthrow that government, and we don’t need another war. And this incident should not be thrown out of proportion to the point where we’re getting ready to attack Iran over this,” Paul said.

Romney responded to that claim by saying, “I think Congressman Paul should not be reading as many of (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad’s press releases.”

National security issues dominated discussion for a good portion of the debate. Paul’s laissez-faire view of international relations led to many sore points among the candidates, who bickered over whether the U.S. is getting it right in Iraq, Pakistan and the Middle East.

Thompson said the U.S. should recognize that Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf may not behave as some in this country would like, but it would be irresponsible to call for his resignation or cut off aid to that nuclear nation.

“Our national security interest and whose hands those nuclear weapons are going to be in is an overriding interest of ours. We need to make sure that there is stability of that country, to the extent that we can do anything about, and certainly in the short-term, anyway. That involves supporting Musharraf,” he said, adding that Musharraf could do more to help locate Usama bin Laden.

“We need to put the pressure on him, keep the pressure on him, but let’s not ever kid ourselves,” Thompson continued.

Huckabee said that after spending $12 billion to help the Pakistanis fight terror on and within its borders, the U.S. should get a rundown of what it bought.

“I think we now are in a position more than ever that we should ask the Musharraf government for a better accounting. And it also ought to buy us some leverage with the Musharraf government,” he said.

Romney argued that even if the U.S. gets Musharraf to help, it should be looking for other allies who can help convince Islamic nations to reject extremism.

“Today, foreign policy is no longer like it was in the last century, which was more like a game of checkers that was our side and their side. We tried to get friends and allies and go after each other. Now foreign policy is more like three-dimensional chess, where we have to understand all the players throughout the world and develop strategies to help move the world towards more stability and safety for ourselves,” he said. “We need to think more broadly than just those hot spots and come together with other developed nations … and develop an effort to help move the world of Islam towards modernity.”

“But it’s that kind of interference that has caused the mess in the Middle East,” Paul said. “By funding both sides — Arabs and Israelis — and getting in the way, the U.S. has created an unstable and uneven situation.”

Asked about whether he would disavow his supporters who suggest that the United States is somehow complicit in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Paul said he doesn’t speak for his supporters.

“I can’t tell people what to do, but I’ve abandoned those viewpoints. I don’t believe that, and that’s the only thing that is important. And so I don’t endorse anything they say,” he said without officially asking his backers to cease that type of rhetoric.

“Well, it doesn’t do me any good, so if they care about me, they should. But the only thing I have control over is what I believe and what I say,” Paul said.

But he did lambaste a U.S. policy that he says leads to choosing allies unwisely — including at separate times supporting both Saddam Hussein and Usama bin Laden. Paying for weapons has created a situation in which the U.S. is only ensuring its continued interference between sides, and its own financial downfall, he charged.

“We’re out of money, we can’t do it any longer. We’re going bankrupt,” Paul said.

But McCain responded that he disagreed with Paul’s approach. “I am not interested in trading with Al Qaeda, all they want to trade is burqas. I don’t want to travel with them, they like one-way tickets,” he said to shouts of approval.

Paul later suggested that McCain is bent on maintaining a presence in the region at all costs, including in Iraq where nearly 4,000 U.S. troops have been killed.

“He thinks we should be there for a 100 years if necessary. How can he commit the young people of this world, five more generations, to be in Iraq as necessary. I say it’s time to come home,” Paul said to loud applause.

McCain argued that the surge that was put in place one year ago is working, and U.S. forces will be able to come home soon as a result.

“I’m telling you, it’s succeeding. And these young people are going to come home. But it’s not going to be decided by any politician in Washington. It’s going to be decided by the man that should have been Time magazine man of the year, General David Petraeus. That’s who should decide when American troops come home,” he said, also earning applause.

The other candidates also ganged up on Paul, saying his plan for reducing the U.S. presence in the Mideast would leave Israel out to dry. “We’ve got one true ally in the Middle East. That’s Israel. It’s a tiny nation … for us to give the world the impression that we would stand by if they were under attack and say it’s not our problem, that would be recklessly irresponsible,” Huckabee said.

“The defense of Israel is of critical importance to the United States of America and it goes much deeper than just tactical,” Giuliani said. He said that while President Bush is in Israel working on a Mideast peace, he should extract pledges from the Palestinians to prevent terrorism in what would become their land.

“First of all, to make it clear that (the Palestinian Authority) will accept the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state. Number two, to forgo terrorism, first as a statement of policy, and then in reality. Something that has to be tested,” Giuliani said.

Paul responded that he does “not see any purpose in not treating Israel in an adult fashion” and U.S. national security would be enhanced by giving that country responsibility for its own security without U.S. input.

“In many ways, we treat Israel as a stepchild. We do not give them responsibility that they deserve. We undermine their national sovereignty. We don’t let them design their own peace treaties with their neighbors. … We need to recognize they deserve their sovereignty, just as we deserve our sovereignty.”

Back in the U.S. …

Stopping the housing crisis, cutting taxes for the middle class, becoming energy independent and investing in research and development are the methods Romney said he would use to stop the country from sliding into a recession.

“Recessions hurt working families and people across the countries,” Romney said. “It’s time for us not just to talk about improving the economy, we have to do the hard work of rebuilding our economy and strengthening it.”

Concerns about the economy have increased recently with mixed numbers showing additional strains. The unemployment rate to 5 percent last month from 4.7 percent a month earlier, the highest one-month jump since 2001.

McCain said he doesn’t think the U.S. is heading into a recession, despite the fact that states like Michigan and South Carolina are losing jobs — Michigan’s unemployment rate was 7.4 percent in November, South Carolina’s was 5.9.

Images of the candidates carved in the sand greeted debate-goers
on Thursday in Myrtle Beach, S.C. (AP Photo)

McCain proposed additional education and training courses at colleges to “meet the needs of this information technology revolution that we are in” and keep the U.S. competitive.

“I believe the fundamentals of this economy are strong and I believe they will remain strong. This is a rough patch, but I think America’s greatness lies ahead of us,” the Arizona senator said, adding that he would make permanent President Bush’s tax cuts, which he voted against in 2001 and 2003.

Huckabee said he hopes the U.S. economy isn’t headed into recession, but four factors are creating challenges for the economy — sub-prime mortgages, health care and education costs and fuel prices.

“When gasoline gets as high as it is, and oil goes to $100 a barrel, it impacts the way people live. It may not impact people at the top, but people who barely make it from paycheck to paycheck know that it doesn’t just affect the fuel going to and from work,” the former Arkansas governor said. “Everything they reach for on the shelf of their store costs more because it took more money to transport it to that store.”

Giuliani said tax cuts would stimulate the economy, and discussed his proposal for tax cuts unveiled on Wednesday.

“If you cut something like the corporate tax at 35 percent, you bring it down to 30 percent, you will get more revenues from that cut, because our corporate tax is the second highest in the world. If you cut some other tax, you might not get those kinds of revenues. So, the question is: What tax are you cutting? Is it anti-competitive?

“You also have to cut spending as significantly as you cut taxes. You have to be willing to impose cutbacks on each one of the federal agencies, the civilian agencies. I would do that the way I did as mayor of New York City, the way Ronald Reagan did it as president of the United States,” Giuliani said.

Paul said he does believe the U.S. is in a recession.

“I think it’s going to get a lot worse if we continue to do the wrong things that we’ve done in the past, that it’s going to be delayed, just as what happened in the Depression,” Paul said.

Paul said he would not use the government to appropriate money to prevent a recession, but he would support a reduced tax burden. He added that the Federal Reserve propping rates helps create and prolong recessions, and is responsible for the housing market “depression.”

“Artificially low interest rates is the artificial stimulus which causes the bubble, which allows the inevitable recession to come,” he said. “So what we need to do is deal with monetary policy and not pretend that artificial stimulus by more spending is going to help. That won’t do you one bit of good.”

Thompson said that speeding up the depreciation schedule for businesses, making more credit available and deducting capital expenses rather than capitalizing them could help businesses more accurately foretell their ledgers and stimulate the economy. He added that the economy also needs some certainty.

“We would all be a lot better off if people knew that these tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 was not going to expire in 2010,” he said.

As usual in any Republican debate, Ronald Reagan was paid ample homage, and a lively argument ensued when the candidates were asked whether they agreed with Huckabee campaign manager Ed Rollins’ suggestion that the Reagan coalition — one that supported limited government and strong national security — is probably gone.

“I think, in some respects, that the Reagan principles and philosophy and practices we’ve gone away from,” McCain said. “I’ve said a number of times we came to power in 1994 to change government, and government changed us. Spending was one of those. … We have to return to those principles of less government, lower taxes, strong family values, strong national defense and those that made us the Reagan revolution that brought about a new dawn of a new day in America and helped us immeasurably in bringing down the Iron Curtain.”

Paul too said that Reagan’s principles have been abandoned because Republicans have lost their way.

“We finally got control of the government and we became big government people … we turn around and talk about liberty and we’ve undermined the Fourth Amendment and personal property and privacy,” he said.

Thompson accused Huckabee of ignoring the principles of Reagan.

“This is a battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party,” Thompson said, adding that going the way of Huckabee would endanger Reagan’s formula for a strong U.S.

“He would be a Christian leader, but he would also bring about liberal economic policies, liberal foreign policies. He believes we have an arrogant foreign policy … he believes that Guantanamo should be closed down … he believed in taxpayer-funded programs for illegals, as he did in Arkansas. He has the endorsement of the National Education Association, and the NEA said it was because of his opposition to vouchers.”

Huckabee responded that if Reagan were governor today, he’d be lambasted for raising taxes in his first year as governor of California. He also suggested a way to return to a strong coalition and strong GOP.

“Make sure that people understand that when we lower taxes, when we cut spending, when we have a strong national defense, when we stick to our principles on the sanctity of human life and the primacy of traditional marriage. And we also unapologetically hold to the idea that the Second Amendment is just as precious as the First Amendment.”

On the question of whether any of the candidates could change Washington, Romney said he has the know-how to fix organizations that are broken.

“I know how to bring change. And I will change Washington. I will take it apart and put it back together simpler, smaller, smarter,” he said.

While Thompson said he was able to change Washington from the inside as a senator who worked on welfare reform and helped generate balanced budgets, Huckabee argued that as a governor, he implemented the laws created in Washington.

“It’s easy to be in Congress and pass a bill that maybe will change some mandates to the states, but those of us who had to govern at the state level were forced with something that members of Congress didn’t have to do. They actually had to make it work,” he said.

Giuliani said it’s no feat to make changes for the sake of change.

“Change is either good or bad. So I think people have to focus a little bit more carefully on, what is it that we’re promising, and what are we trying to do. Now, if the change is in the direction of lower taxes, less spending, giving parents choice over education, energy independence, these are things that are going to make a brighter future and a better America. But just the word ‘change’ doesn’t connote good or bad. You’ve got to get one step beyond that and start looking at the changes,” he said.

McCain said he thought he was the man to beat the nominee put up by Democrats because he is known as “the sheriff” on the Appropriations Committee.

“I have never asked for or received a pork barrel project or earmark for my state. But I have known how to change things. And we have changed a lot of things. … And, if I can change the things that I was able to as a senator, I’m looking forward to the changes that I can make when I’m the president of the United States,” he said.

Asked about his viability, Paul took umbrage with a question about whether he is electable as the GOP nominee.

“Are you suggesting the Republicans should write me off because I am a strict constitutionalist? I am the most conservative member here. I have voted, you know, against more spending and waste in government than anybody else,” he said.

“You’re saying now that we have to continue borrowing more money from China to finance this empire we can’t afford. Let me see if I get this right. We need to borrow $10 billion from China, and then we give it to (Pakistani President Pervez) Musharraf, who is a military dictator who overthrew an elected government, and then we go to war, we lose all these lives, promoting democracy in Iraq. I mean what’s going on here? And you’re saying (I am) not appealing to Republicans?” Paul asked.

This entry was posted on Friday, January 11th, 2008 at 1:20 am and is filed under Fred Thompson, John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Rudy Giuliani, Top Story. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.