Wednesday, November 28, 2007

11/28 GOP Debate Review: Romney Scores Big

Tonight, the Republican Presidential hopefuls gathered in front of a Florida crowd and answered questions from ordinary people via YouTube. With the Iowa caucus just a few weeks away, the candidates went all out to differentiate themselves from each other, and most of them were successful.

From the very opening of the debate, the fight was on between the two GOP frontrunners, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney. It was in that opening exchange, on the topic of illegal immigration, that Romney got the upper hand and set the tone for the rest of the night. To put it simply, agree with him or not, Romney creamed Giuliani. From that point on, Giuliani was mostly on the defense for the rest of the night, while Romney was red-hot. Romney is often called a "flip-flopper", but tonight he actually appeared the most socially conservative candidate. While I might strongly disagree with Romney's positions, his statements tonight were right on point with the right wing of the GOP. Romney was unquestionably the winner of the debate and I am even more confident in my earlier prediction that Romney will be the Republican nominee.

Two other candidates who I thought had a great night were John McCain and Mike Huckabee. McCain gained major points in my view for standing up to the other candidates and the traditional Republican view that waterboarding is okay. McCain made it clear that waterboarding is indeed torture and is indeed illegal and indeed should never be practiced by the U.S. On that issue I have major respect for McCain. Huckabee, yet again, was the most charming candidate on the stage. He is consistently able to make his point and state his positions without appearing negative. He also had the best line of the night when he said that Jesus was too smart to get involved in politics.

As far as the losers, I would say that there were two big ones. The first loser was Sen. Fred Thompson. Thompson needed to re-establish his frontrunner status, but he utterly failed. I have yet to see Thompson come out firm on a single issue. His debate style is also lacking to say the least. Thompson has a problem with taking long, odd pauses during the middle of his responses or taking several seconds to stare into space while trying to think of a response. If anyone is wondering why Thompson is doing so poorly, just watch this debate and you'll quickly realize why.

The biggest loser of the night, however, was Rudy Giuliani. This was Rudy's worst debate performance. Romney completely destroyed Rudy during the immigration debate early on and also later when it came to Rudy's pro-gun control stances. With Romney gaining on Giuliani in Iowa, New Hampshire, and now leading in South Carolina, tonight was Rudy's chance to gain back some of that support. He didn't though. If anything, Rudy did more to lose support to Romney than he did to win it.

I am going to point out one thing that was said that I take absolute exception to. Duncan Hunter said that the majority of people who join the military are conservative. I take great exception to the claim that liberals don't stand up to serve their country. The fact is that the military is just as diverse as America is as a whole. To imply that liberals don't serve their country is disgraceful and frankly Rep. Hunter should apologize.

The tide is turning on the Republican side. I think in the coming weeks we're going to see the decline of Rudy and the rise of Romney. Romney will win Iowa, win New Hampshire, win South Carolina and then have enough momentum to propel himself through Florida and beyond.

Diplomacy: Democrats Force Realty On Bush

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, in a lecture at Kansas State University ,said that the U.S. must improve its diplomacy.  He is asking for an increase in not only his department's budget but also the State Department budget.  Gates said we must focus our energies beyond the guns and steel of the military and that there is a need for dramatic increases in spending on the civilian instruments of national security.  That is an astounding statement coming from someone in this administration.  (Diplomacy has always been a part of Democratic administrations concerning national security.)
 
Gates pronouncements is an admission of Mr. Bush's failed foreign policy that has been based on the U.S.'s military might which led to the war and occupation in Iraq over WMD that did not exist.  The people realized long ago that diplomacy was abandoned by Mr. Bush.  Gates has followed the same path with the surge and continuation of the war in Iraq.  They are both trying now to salvage what is left of their reputations.  Gates wants more money for his department even as spending for his department is at record levels and that does not include the billions spent for the war.  That money could be better used for more important issues.  Diplomacy for one.
 
Mr. Gates supported the military option in Iraq over diplomacy.  We know from his and Bush's statements that they want a permanent U.S. presence in Iraq.  Will they define that as military diplomacy?  The civilian instruments of national security would be a better choice.  The Democratic position on diplomacy through many past presidents have served our nation well and kept our country safe.  They answered the military call when it was necessary to protect our national interest but never was in fear of using diplomacy.  They also kept our country free of such a massive foreign terror attack as occurred on 9-11.
 
Mr. Bush's arrogance, reckless behavior and lack of true diplomacy lost him the moral mantle of world leadership that America was known to possess.  Diplomacy could have saved the lives of thousands of Americans and Iraqis in the war in Iraq if Mr. Bush had used his responsibility as a leader with wisdom.  America's role in the world today has been tainted by the President's reckless behavior.  If he and Gates are ready to use diplomacy as an admission of their failure, let them start with Iraq and bring this war to an end with diplomacy.  It is not to late.