The GOP and Iraq Posted by Michael Cohen

In my effort to get past my earlier self-masochism, I slept in on Sunday morning and skipped the GOP debate from Iowa. From what I can tell I didn't miss too much! However, I've been struck by one key aspect of the post-debate press coverage - with the sole exception of Ron Paul, no Republican candidate has dared issue a position on Iraq that runs counter to the President.

Am I the only person who finds this a bit mindboggling? I understand that the GOP base is generally supportive of the war, but you know one of these guys is going to have to run in a general election at some point. And when you have 70% of the country who disapproves of the way Bush is managing the war well you would think that one of the candidates would make some effort to put light between themselves and Bush, if even tepidly.

Of course, it's not just on Iraq. Not one of the candidates in the debate on Sunday even came out in support of the SCHIP bill on children's health insurance that Bush is threatening to veto. That seems like a no-brainer from a political standpoint, particularly since Iowa Senator Grassley is the guy pushing the bill. But again, the GOP walks with the President. The only issue on which GOPers are attacking the President is on immigration - and only because of the xenophobic base of the Party.

What a sad moment for a once great political party. It used to be that Republicans actually had serious debates on the presidential campaign. In 1912, you had progressives vs. conservatives; in the 30s and 40, it was the internationalists vs, the isolationists, culminating in the Taft/Eisenhower battle in 1952. In 1964 and 76 and even 92 it was the Eastern Establishment vs. the conservatives. Now, it's just a question of who can pander more aggressively to the social conservatives. The similarity of views among the major GOP candidates is a sad statement on the extraordinary power that this narrow segment of the American populace has on the Republican Party. We've become so used to GOP uniformity that it doesn't even surprise us any more or spark real attention.

Now I know some will argue that the pro-choice Guiliani represents a moderate option for Republicans, but aside from abortion try finding one specific policy position, particularly related to Iraq and the "war on terror," where he disagrees with the President. I couldn't do it; maybe you can, here's his website:

The paucity of views in the GOP is even more stark when you look at the Democratic side of the equation. There you have a really healthy debate with a number of the candidates making innovative policy proposals. You have Biden's confederation strategy; if you support immediate withdrawal, Richardson is your man; if you want to refocus on Al Qaeda and take the war to Pakistan if need be, Obama has a good speech you should read; and if you want to start bringing the troops home, but don't necessarily want to set a specific withdrawal date than Hillary Clinton is your candidate.

That's what should be happening on the campaign trail. Even though the Democratic base is increasingly liberal, it's hard to argue that primary voters are not being presented with some real options for the direction of the party.

On the other hand, if you're a Republican who thinks America needs to begin drawing down troops from Iraq; if you think the war on terror is being waged poorly; if you think the government has an ever so slight responsibility to provide health care to its citizens, you're pretty much up a creek.

That's only bad for Republicans, it's bad for the country.

Comments

[James]

Michael,

I hear you. If you want low taxes and peace, your options are pretty limited. In fact Ron Paul is only guy who offers these two together.

Best,

James

[Dan Kervick]

Well, I want peace, but also higher taxes. So Paul is out for me.

[Scott McDonnell]

"Redeployment" does not equal "Bringing the troops home." What's interesting is that the democratic citizen has somehow attached the whole 'end the war in Iraq' and 'bring our troops home' to the Democratic candidates without them even expressing it really themselves. Somehow, the average democratic voter just assumes these are their positions. They did this in 2006 as well. Did they bring the troops home? Did they impeach Bush? They never said they would. You just assumed it and projected it onto the party.

You'd think you people would learn. Neither of the top tier from either party is talking about bringing the troops home. Not one.

Ron Paul is EXTREMELY clear about this. There is no doubt what he will do. The President is the ONLY one that can do it as commander-in-chief. So, keep playing your silly little games with yourselves thinking the democrats are going to change anything.

They are going to latch on to all that power that Bush generated and use it to expand even more power. Both top-tiers will do this. Make no mistake. You will get nothing you want and when you complain, they will point out that they never promised you anything, you just assumed.

[peace]

The Republican party seems to have to become much more conservative since the nineties.This was probably due to the fact that most of the newly elected congressmen in 1994 came from the south, and they somehow managed to make the Republican party conform to their ideological point of view. It appears that the southern strategy that Nixon intially implemented is now straightjacketing the Republican party.

[Raymond]

"Well, I want peace, but also higher taxes."

you want higher taxes ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

[Tom Jefferson]

Do not be fooled by the old two party scam. The top tier candidates on both sides are owned by the same group of special-interest. The only hope for America is to dig deeper for candidates not owned by the power elite.

A big problem with our electoral process is that the old media generally supports the richest candidates (who got their money from special interest). Those are the worst candidates because they are owned by special-interest and lobbyists. Hopefully the internet will help restore balance and choice.

The American people are against those in Washington starting illegal preemptive unnecessary wars, spying on the American people, and spending money they do not have. That is why disproval ratings of Congress and President are at historic lows. Americans want change! Americans want a leader who actually believes in the Constitution, which is incredibly rare in Washington these days.

Ron Paul voted against the Iraq War from the beginning. He voted against the Patriot Act.

Dr. Ron Paul is not owned by special-interest, military-industrial-complex, corporations, bankers, lobbyists, etc. His 20 year voting record proved this very clearly. Fix the system and vote Ron Paul. And tell everyone you know. Now is the time to set ourselves free.

70% of Americans want us out of Iraq and want change. Ron Paul is only republican candidate against the war. Ron Paul only needs about 30% vote from republicans sick of the war and abuse of powers to win in republican primaries. And in most states democrats can also vote for Ron Paul in primaries.

This means we actually have a chance to get an honest person not owned by special interest into the White House. This strange situation is a once in lifetime event. We need to take advantage of it.

Ron Paul can win.

Ron Paul has over 30,000 registered volunteers. More than all other candidates combined (maybe more than any candidate in history). And more registering now at Meetup.com.

Ron Paul places 1st or 2nd in every straw poll, debate, and active participation survey. Of all the candidates, Ron Paul is 1st on YouTube, Meetup, MySpace, Technorati, Alexa, Clickz, Google, etc. The old media is just too slow to realize what is happening.

Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were doing about the same in the 'Scientific Polls' at this stage in their elections. 'Scientific Polls' at this stage only measure name recognition. Over the next six months Ron Paul will gain name recognition. Most people who learn about Ron Paul become major supporters.

Visit YouTube and search Ron Paul to learn more...
Join the Revolution -- Vote Ron Paul!