Posted by
Sammy Davis on Friday, January 11, 2008 2:58:22 AM
by Sammy Davis, Independent Writer
10:00 PM PST, 10 January, 2008
MYRTLE BEACH, S.C. - I was excited about the likelihood the South Carolina Republican Debate might lead me to some distinctions about who is who in the race for the GOP nomination. Instead, I found myself scratching my head in confusion about the "front runners", while witnessing another Republican gathering turned into an elementary-school-yard Ron Paul beat down.
One of the main topics of the debate was each candidate's views regarding the recent deployment of 30,000 extra troops to Iraq. All of the candidates (except Ron Paul) strongly confessed their support of the troop surge. Interestingly enough, each of those same candidates (Romney, Thompson, McCain, Guliani, and Huckabee) made strong comments regarding their desire to manage the national deficit. A problem for Romney, Thompson, McCain, Guliani, and Huckabee is each of their support for the War in Iraq. What we don't know is how they propose to decrease spending and balance our budget while continuing to fund the War in Iraq. We also don't know how much more funding Romney, Thompson, McCain, Guliani, and Huckabee plan to give to countries like Pakistan, Afganistan, the Palestinian Authority, and Israel. Although they are all passionate about cutting taxes, each still plan on funding a larger war machine in each of those countries; except for Ron Paul of course.
Romney, Thompson, McCain, Guliani, and Huckabee all stated their intention to create a larger Border Patrol Agency to end illegal immigration through Mexico. Guliani said the approximate number of Border Patrol Agents in the field was just 14,000; an amount he considered to be "not enough." Each candidate (except for Ron Paul) intends to increase the size of our Homeland Security Department; where they will get the money to pay for that growth is still a mystery, especially since each candidate intends to decrease taxes.
When asked about Iran, each candidate had the opportunity to respond. Romney, Thompson, McCain, Guliani, and Huckabee each sited Iran as a serious threat to national security. When asked about a recent US Naval incident that included 5 rogue Iranian speed boats, Romney, Thompson, McCain, Guliani, and Huckabee where confident that if it were to happen again, the Navy would be justified in destroying the "threat." When Ron Paul was asked about the incident, he said, "... common, 5 speed boats against 3 US Naval Vessels, 1 of which was a destroyer.... it would take all of 5 seconds to eliminate those little boats..." Of course, Paul's comment only gathered resentment and laughter from his "colleagues" on the stage. At one point, Romney even poked a joke saying Paul had been reading too much of Iranian President Ahmadinijad's press releases-- a comment that Paul responded to by saying, "Go ahead, make fun buddy." Obviously, Ron Paul's opinion about Iran was not popular with the other GOP contenders, even though a Fox News poll gathered by text messaging placed Paul as the debate winner. Perhaps Ron Paul just has it all wrong, and he should just get in line with the others in their effort to managing the deficit while funding a third war in the middle east and sending more American Soldiers to their death.
At the end of the debate, Fox News featured a small focus group of South Carolina Republican voters; many of which had the opportunity to discuss the way the debate impacted their own personal opinions. Then, Fox featured a second to second analysis of the groups reaction during the debate which indicated the average approval or disapproval of the debaters on a moving graph. The groups approval ratings shot to the top of the graph when Huckabee talked about destroying the Iranians and sending them to the "gates of hell", but fell to the "lowest ratings in Fox history" when Paul talked about using caution and diplomacy with Iran; obviously the South Carolinians enjoy a good war, or three.
It is apparent that Ron Paul thinks he is a modern version of Ghandi who said, "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." Something tells me that Ghandi would have never made it in American politics... or would he?