Ron Paul Asks: How Many Americans Have to Die so the Neo-Cons Can Save Face?

Huckabee answers Ron Paul's question:  It doesn’t matter.

For those of you that watched the rigged, biased, deplorably hosted debate on Fox News on September 5, 2007, you saw a bunch of men on stage engaged in fantasy by insinuating that the Iraq war can have a happy end to it by golly, no matter how many deaths of other people’s children we have to lose.  The one catch:  we have to stay there until pigs fly, and Iraq miraculously puts itself right again and we can leave claiming victory.  Only Ron Paul seemed to grasp reality and understand that at this point Iraq is Humpty Dumpty and no matter how many horses and kings men we sacrifice, the country will never be put back together again. 

Mike Huckabee got into a heated exchange with Ron Paul over the issue saying that no matter what it took we must leave Iraq with honor.  Translated that means with honor for the Neo-cons so they can be proven right.  John McCain seemed to have the same position.  Well I have a question for you sirs…what if that goal is unattainable?  We have been there for five years.  We were told it would take five weeks.  It is costing us trillions of dollars.  We were told it wouldn’t cost a cent, it would all be paid for with oil revenues.  How many times do you think we are going to fall for it?  The entire stage seemed to be filled with one man after another dedicated to sacrificing our over-worked and over-used soldiers to continue this war until we achieve “victory” – no matter what that means.  It seems to mean that our soldiers will not be leaving Iraq anytime this decade and a draft will be necessary and imminent. 

Ron Paul was the only man with enough sense to say that if we made a mistake then you don’t compound it by staying until every last person is dead, you leave, you get out, you own up to the fact that this is not working.  What did they expect with a war against a battle tactic anyway?  War on terrorism…it would be a joke if they weren’t serious about it.  Why not just call it a war against really angry people and see how far you get with that.  You can never win a war against a battle tactic.   Why do you think they named it that?

The vast majority of Americans do not want a never ending presence in Iraq.  They want this war and the killing and the maiming and the psychological ruin to end.   Moreover, let’s not forget that this war is completely illegal and was never declared by Congress.  That fact seemed to be ignored by everyone but Ron Paul.   Makes you wonder what other parts of the Constitution they don’t mind ignoring.

Rudy Giuliani brought up his record of being a mayor so many times I was sure he was getting a plug from Monster.com.  He seemed to be hawking resume’s more than any kind of national policy or plan for the country.  

As for the rest of the debate, the candidates acted like children and snickered whenever Ron Paul, who is leading all of them in straw polls across the country, spoke.  They were so disrespectful I wanted to call a time out and send them to a corner.  Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney were clearly heard outright laughing at Ron Paul every chance they got.  Well I have news for you gentlemen, that is no way for a head of state to behave.  You showed every bit of class you have:  none.  What does that show the rest of the world?  That the Republicans can’t muster the manners of any decent six year old?  To heck with it, I will say it:  Rudy, Mitt, go sit in the corner and take a time out and don’t come back until you have learned how to act with respect. 

And a special shout out to Chris Wallace:  how dare you Sir?  You call yourself a news man?  Your blatant bias was despicable, your demeanor demeaning and overall you conducted yourself like a neo-con puppet.  How dare you call yourself a newsman?  Oh, that’s right.  That title doesn’t mean anything anymore.  News casters no longer have any integrity or the need to tell the truth.  The first question asked of Ron Paul was based on an un-researched misquote that was obviously designed to take up time from the answer for Ron Paul to correct the questioner.  Meanwhile, that first meaningful question did not come until 34 minutes into the debate.  Let’s see if I can do math…8 people on stage, one minute per question each, how many times do the other candidates get to answer questions before Ron Paul is asked even one? 

Continue Here >>>>