By Kenneth J. Theisen, 5/8/07
On May 3, 2007 ten Republican candidates for president met for a “debate” in
Simi Valley, California.
The setting was the Ronald Reagan Library which was more than
appropriate as their political views were as simplistic and reactionary as the
former president’s “morning in America”
ideas. The candidates included Senators John McCain and Sam Brownback; former
governors Mitt Romney, Tommy Thompson, Jim Gilmore, and Mike Huckabee; former
mayor Rudolph Giuliani; Representatives Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter and Ron
Paul.
This collection of Neanderthals expressed views that should frighten any
thinking person. The first question asked was actually “how do we get back to
Ronald Reagan’s morning in America?” (Now there is something to aspire to if you
want to go backward.) Giuliani answered,
“We get back to it with optimism…And what we can borrow from Ronald Reagan”is
that great sense of optimism that he had. He led by building on the strengths
of America, not running America
down. You will lead from hope, and we should never retreat in
the face of terrorism. Terrible mistake.” Translation: Think positive, believe in
American imperialism and continue to prosecute the so-called “war on terrorism”
in order to dominate the world.
The next question was addressed to McCain asking what he would need, as
commander in chief, to win the war in Iraq? McCain expressed his general satisfaction with
the war when he replied, “We have a new general; we have a new strategy. That
strategy can succeed”I believe that if we bring about stability in the
neighborhoods in Iraq and have the Maliki government govern, you are going to
succeed”We must win in Iraq”Now I think it’s on the right track. The war was
terribly mismanaged”But we have a new strategy and a new general.”
On the Iraq
war, with the exception of Ron Paul who voted against the war, they all were
fine with the initial invasion. Many of
them had problems with how the war has been conducted since then however. Mike
Huckabee was asked to give the Bush administration a grade for its handling of
the Iraq
war. But after more than four years of
war, Huckabee said it is too early to give a grade as the war is not yet
complete. (Maybe in ten to twenty more
years we can give the regime a grade.) All
the candidates that addressed the war expressed the view that the U.S. must now
win.
The candidates appear to have drawn no lessons from the Iraq war and how it should impact U.S. policy toward Iran.
Senator Brownback stated, “Iran
is the lead sponsor of terrorism around the world. And we’ve got to be very
confrontational and very aggressive there.”
McCain echoed this view. In one
of his answers he said, “Iran
is a state sponsor of terrorism. We all know that. Iran continues their efforts to
build nuclear weapons. Iran
is now exporting lethal IEDs and jihadists and suicide bombers into Iraq,
killing American soldiers. The Iranians encouraged Hezbollah to attack Israel from Lebanon recent. Iran poses one of the greatest threats to the
security of the world, and in the Middle East”At the end of the day we cannot
allow Iran
to acquire nuclear weapons.” He did
everything but declare war on Iran.
Did I hear him singing “Bomb, bomb, bomb
Iran”
to the tune of a Beach Boys song again?
And what did Giuliani say about Iran? “”the reality is, the use of
military force against Iran
would be very dangerous. It would be very provocative. The only thing worse
would be Iran
being a nuclear power. It’s the worst nightmare of the Cold War; isn’t it? The
nuclear weapons in the hands of an irrational person, an irrational force.
Ahmadinejad is clearly irrational. He has to understand it’s not an option; he
cannot have nuclear weapons. And he has to look at an American president and he
has to see Ronald Reagan. Remember, they looked in Ronald Reagan’s eyes, and in
two minutes, they released the hostages.” I guess Giuliani will engage in a stare down
contest before he attacks Iran. And I am afraid of thousands of nukes in the
hands of the Bush regime with its “no options off the table” approach to
diplomacy.
On the subject of abortion all ten of the male candidates were in agreement
that the government should have the right to choose for women. They were asked, “would the day that Roe v.
Wade is repealed be a good day for America?” Romney answered, “Absolutely.” Brownback said, “It would be a glorious day
of human liberty and freedom.” Gilmore stated, “Yes, it was wrongly decided.” Huckabee said, “Most certainly.” Hunter
answered, “Yes.” Giuliani stated, “It would be OK.” Tancredo was enthusiastic, “After 40 million
dead because we have aborted them in this country, I would say that that would
be the greatest day in this country’s history when that, in fact, is
overturned.” In essence, none of these
candidates would be any different than Bush on the right of choice and we could
expect more Supreme Court nominees like Roberts and Alito.
One question was asked of Tommy Thompson about the right of a private
employer to fire a gay worker for being gay.
Thompson answered, “I think that is left up to the individual business.”
In other words – let them be fired. Since only Thompson was asked this question we
do not know any of the other candidate’s views on the subject. But none of them tried to interject a contrary
view.
The moderator asked Giuliani, “Has the increased influence of Christian
conservatives in your party been good for it? His answer, “Sure. The increased influence of
large numbers of people are always good for us.” And Giuliani is the supposed “liberal” among
this set of candidates.
And speaking of the influence of Christian conservatives, at one point the
moderator asked, “is there anybody on the stage that does not agree, believe in
evolution?” Brownback, Huckabee, and
Tancredo raised their hands signaling that they did not. Elect any of these
clowns if you wish to see a replay of the famous 1925 Scopes “monkey trial.”
Most of the candidates expressed opposition to expanded federal funding for
stem cell research. McCain said he would support such research and Guiliani
indicated some support if, “We”re not creating life in order to destroy it, as
long as we”re not having human cloning, and we limit it to that.” The others
viewed stem cell research as akin to abortion.
During the debate we also learned that John McCain was delighted to have
Roberts and Alito on the Supreme Court. He
also believes in hell as he said he would follow bin Laden to the gates of
hell. He did not say why he would stop
at the gates. A truly dedicated patriot
would continue the pursuit I think.
The candidates fell over each other in their support for tax cuts. They all
want to “defend the borders” and are against “illegal immigration”. Most of them like fences and other border
protections. It appears that most of the
candidates think immigrants should only get work as scapegoats for right-wing
politicians. During the debate they all
indicated that they did not want Bill Clinton in the White House even as a
spouse of the president.
At no time during the debate did any of the candidates mention torture,
secret prisons, the stripping away of
constitutional rights, the firing of U.S. prosecutors, the massive spying
operations of the Bush regime, the destruction or neglect of New Orleans, or
the myriad of other issues that negatively impact millions here in the U.S. and
elsewhere.
As to foreign policy little was said other than what I indicated above. Like most of their counterparts in the earlier
Democrat debate, they showed no concern for the suffering of the people in Iraq or Afghanistan as a result of the Bush
regime’s wars. It is clear that if most of
these candidates succeed George W. Bush they will continue to expand U.S.
imperialism at the expense of the world’s people.
In the last couple of weeks both parties have held “debates” of their
contenders to succeed Bush. While the
Republicans openly offer us pretty much more of the same, the Democrats pretend
to offer a new direction. But the
reality is that we can not afford to buy into any of this. We can not wait until 2009 when a new savior
takes office to remedy the previous eight years of the Bush regime. For one thing, that “savior” is not among the
18 or so candidates offered up by the established parties. For another, in what kind of world will we
live if the regime is allowed to continue in its fascist direction for the rest
of its term.
If the tens of millions that wish to stop the horrors of this regime now are
sucked into thinking that the “next election” will fix it all, we will lose our
chance to drive the regime from power now. Remember we just had an election in
November 2006. Did that stop the
regime? Impeachment can be
accomplished. Massive resistance can
make it happen. Join and help mobilize that resistance before it is too late.