Thoughts, essays, and writings on Liberty. Written by the heirs of Patrick Henry.

“I'm in favor of legalizing drugs. According to my values system, if people want to kill themselves, they have every right to do so. Most of the harm that comes from drugs is because they are illegal.”     Milton Friedman

September 5, 2007

Ron Paul vs. Mike Huckabee On Iraq

by Doug Mataconis

I didn’t watch tonight’s Republican debate, but, from this description, it sounds like Ron Paul stuck it to Mike Huckabee on Iraq:

(CNN) — Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee made a dramatic statement regarding Iraq at Wednesday night’s GOP presidential debate, declaring, “We bought it because we broke it.”

The comment came in perhaps the most compelling moment of the Republican debate so far, when the Arkansas Republican directly confronted Texas Rep. Ron Paul on his position for an immediate withdrawal from the country.

“Congressman, whether or not we should have gone to Iraq is a discussion for historians, but we’re there. We bought it because we broke it,” he said. “We’ve got a responsibility to the honor of this country and the honor of every man and woman who has served in Iraq and our military to not leave them with anything less than the honor they deserve.”

Amid loud cheers, Paul responded, “The American people didn’t go in. A few people advising this administration, a small number of people called the neoconservatives, hijacked our foreign policy. They are responsible, not the American people.”

Huckabee quickly fired back: “Congressman, we are one nation. We can’t be divided. We have to be one nation under God. That means if we make a mistake, we make it as a single country.”

As the crowd roared louder, Paul answered, “When we make a mistake, it is the obligation of the people — through their representatives — to correct the mistake, not continue the mistake. We have dug a hole for ourselves and we have dug a hole for our party. We are losing elections, and we are going down next year if we don’t change it.”

Huckabee replied loudly, “Even if we lose elections, we should not lose our honor.”

Losing elections, not important. Losing lives, apparently not important either. Losing international credibility, heck who cares.

Honor ? Have the Neocons turned into the Klingon Empire ?

YouTube clips coming if and when they’re available.

Update: Check out the clips, basically, Ron kicked ass under some heavy fire from the Fox News crew.

TrackBack URI: http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/05/ron-paul-vs-mike-huckabee-on-iraq/trackback/
Read more posts from
• • •

77 Comments

  1. Mike “Governor Busybody” Huckabee was clueless as my governor and he is still just as clueless now.

    Comment by Ken Hamilton — September 5, 2007 @ 10:10 pm
  2. Doug, if you think that Ron Paul came out ahead of todays debate, you really have drunk the kool aid.

    All he has done is reinforce the opinion that the 97-98% of the country who don’t support him have: Ron Paul wants us to lose.

    The fanatical 2 or 3 percent are giving each other high fives right now, taling about how “Ron scored a major victory”; as they are completely oblivious to the opinions of the rest of America.

    Pretty much everybody else is thinking “Look, here’s Fred Thompson, I don’t actively HATE him”.

    Comment by Chris — September 5, 2007 @ 10:16 pm
  3. Please include Ron Paul’s answer to the “honor” comment which was: “how many lives are we willing to sacrifice in order to save face?”

    Comment by Ben — September 5, 2007 @ 10:23 pm
  4. Ron Paul has 35% of the Fox post debate poll and has a huge lead over Giuliani at 17%!

    Comment by Jake — September 5, 2007 @ 10:24 pm
  5. Chris,

    Paul’s not suddenly going to change his stance on the war. If only 2-3% of the republican base is against the war, then’s there’s not much Paul can do, if there’s more, then he’s getting better at articulating his point.

    If Paul ever gained a substantial following (say 5-10%), Guliani’s doomed because he’s actively ridiculing Paul for no reason other than to puff up his own ego. I guarantee you, I’m a billion percent more likely to vote for Mr. Romney or Mr. Huckabee than Guliani, regardless of his stances because he sits there and just insults people that support Paul.

    Comment by Greg — September 5, 2007 @ 10:26 pm
  6. you can take my honor, my money, my home, my car, if I could have the 3700 Us service men back. Honor would be a small price to pay.

    Honor is not important, saving lives is.

    We may or may never get attacked again, no one can tell the future, but I will tell you this for sure, more US men will die in Iraq if we stay.

    Comment by Robert Micheal of the Saints — September 5, 2007 @ 10:27 pm
  7. Continuing in a quagmire without a clear exit strategy is NOT in America’s national security intrest. The Iraqi people have to fight for their own government and we should get out of the way.

    Comment by 4 Ron Paul — September 5, 2007 @ 10:29 pm
  8. Mike Huckabee won this debate.

    Comment by Sandy — September 5, 2007 @ 10:29 pm
  9. agree this was huge part of the debate, after afterwards family members called he to that they feel Dr. Paul nail it.
    After Huckabee said, “Even if we lose elections, we should not lose our honor.”
    Were is the HONOR for those going to die from this endless Iraq war.

    Comment by Travis — September 5, 2007 @ 10:30 pm
  10. “Ron Paul wants us to lose.”

    We won years ago. Our troops deposed Saddam Hussein and handed the Iraqi people a representative form of government on a silver platter paid for with American blood and treasure.

    I am tired of people who claim that they support our troops downplaying what our troops have accomplished in Iraq.

    Comment by Ken Hamilton — September 5, 2007 @ 10:31 pm
  11. Who’s honor is Huckabee talking about? He is talking about the honor of the men and women who sent our troops into battle (Bush/Congress). We are not talking about the honor of the troops. They are interested in their own honor.

    Comment by Andy — September 5, 2007 @ 10:31 pm
  12. If Mike Huckabee had any honor he would stop embarrassing my state of Arkansas and drop out of the race.

    Comment by Ken Hamilton — September 5, 2007 @ 10:32 pm
  13. Ron Paul definately won, and i accidently voted mccain and tried to vote for paul and it said u could only vote once….it was not spam

    Comment by kevin — September 5, 2007 @ 10:32 pm
  14. FOX analyst said that Huckabee won the exchange according to the dials. Maybe he did, but he did it on rhetoric alone. Paul was arguing with substance, and Huckabee was arguing on rhetoric.

    Ron Paul is currently well in the lead with 33%.

    Hannity has already accused the “Paulites” of serial dialing; you’d think a network like FOX would limit voting to one-per-number. He’s already said he’ll be grilling Paul during their upcoming interview. Am I the only one who can’t stand Hannity? He’s the FOX Stephanopoulos…

    Comment by Jonathon — September 5, 2007 @ 10:35 pm
  15. It is crazy how biased Fox news is against Ron Paul. The ” You Decide” slogan is a joke. And when Fox showed some kind of T.V screen recording the support during the Huckabee and Paul argument made me laugh! What on earth was that? Ron is winning the poll right now so I don’t know what Fox news is smoking.

    Comment by Mike — September 5, 2007 @ 10:35 pm
  16. Doug, what you need to ask yourself do I believe in the war enough to join the military and go over there myself to protect the Iraqs?

    Do I believe enough to send my father, mother, brother, sister, etc over there to fight this war?

    Would you be able to look them in the eye and tell them they are staying untill they have earned your honor back?

    Comment by SB — September 5, 2007 @ 10:35 pm
  17. Who cares what Frank Luntz’s neo-”con” leaning focus group thinks?

    Comment by Ken Hamilton — September 5, 2007 @ 10:37 pm
  18. BOTH CNN and Fox news left out Ron Paul’s final response when recounting the exchange:

    “We have lost over 5000 over there in Afganistan and Iraq. How many more do you want to lose? How long are you going to be there? How long? What do we have to pay to save face? Thats all we’re doing is saving face. Its time we come home.”

    Comment by Mike — September 5, 2007 @ 10:39 pm
  19. Honour, is the evaluation of a person’s(nation’s) trustworthiness and social status based on that individual’s(nation’s) espousals and actions. Honour is deemed exactly what determines a person’s(nation’s) character: whether or not the person(nation) reflects honesty, respect, integrity, or fairness…

    History will judge President Bush as it sees fit. Mr. Huckabee is absolutely correct that this nations Honor can be upheld in the aftermath of mistakes with diligence in Iraq. Mr. Huckabee’s position on Iraq is the correct one in that he plans on mending fences with nations in the Aribic region that can provide positive support in Iraq. Also, mending fences with the EU could bring about troop withdrawls by making up with troops of other nations. This can become a world effort again… and not a US effort. I believe Mr. Huckabee has the qualifications to mend these fences. Look at his position on other issues. He is the only candidate who is bringing truely fresh ideas to bear. He can do it in Iraq as well…

    Comment by Thurston Collins — September 5, 2007 @ 10:48 pm
  20. HA! In your face Hannity! Ron Paul debates with Hannity again and is victorious!

    Comment by ML — September 5, 2007 @ 10:48 pm
  21. Hannity is an embarrassment to the conservative movement. Ron Paul schooled him just like he schooled Mike “Governor Busybody” Huckabee tonight.

    Comment by Ken Hamilton — September 5, 2007 @ 10:50 pm
  22. “saving face”? Leaving Iraq, just as progress is being made with our soldiers there safer, Al Qaeda in Iraq diminishing, and bridges between formerly warring factions are being build is “saving face?”

    Sounds like a cowards way out to me… We need to finish what we started- and if we made a mess clean it up. Then we can leave.

    Huckabee was right and once again offered a completely unique perspective (like he does about everything, which is why I like him): This is about honor. Honoring our country and the men and women who serve by finishing what we started.

    As far as the neocons: they haven’t donated to Huckabee, big oil hasn’t donated to Huckabee, and he hasn’t been in bed with them the last 8 years. Lets all be honest- that is a completely baseless accusation.

    Comment by Jeff Mapson — September 5, 2007 @ 10:51 pm
  23. CNN and Fox News BOTH left out Ron Paul’s final response when recounting the exchange:

    “We have lost over 5000 over there in Afganistan and Iraq. How many more do you want to lose? How long are you going to be there? How long? What do we have to pay to save face? Thats all we’re doing is saving face. Its time we come home.”

    Comment by JR — September 5, 2007 @ 11:12 pm
  24. Mr. Mapson, I believe that your characterization of our status is Iraq to be overly optimistic. Certainly the great bulk of information coming out of Iraq shows that things are going rather badly there.

    Comment by Chepe Noyon — September 5, 2007 @ 11:12 pm
  25. My wife accidently voted for McCain after the debate when she meant to vote for Ron Paul. She tried to vote for Ron Paul and it would not let her. That is proof that We Ron Paul supporters are not spamming the poles and that we truly are letting our voice be heard. I would also recommend that you include the come back Ron Paul said after Huckabee’s last argument to him in there little debate inside a debate and that is: “how many lives are we willing to sacrifice in order to save face?” I am willing to lose my life for this country but not for Pres. Bush and those who do not care for myself, my family and especially the people of this great country! Go DR. Ron Paul! Don’t let them shut you down no matter how hard they try!!!

    Comment by Justin K — September 5, 2007 @ 11:12 pm
  26. Huckabee is a good and honorable man and has made a career of coming in and fixing terrible situations. He had to repair a state government that was in shambles after the governor was indicted for his business dealings with what you might consider shady characters.

    Ron Paul’s plan has been tried once before and it resulted in disaster. We left Germany in WWI with a void in leadership and did not “pay for what we bought”. Hitler stepped in and took control and boy did the world pay for it.

    If we leave without making sure the elected government is secure, you can bet Iran will be more than happy to help people put the people they are helping now
    in power. In case you forgot the president of Iran led the “students” who attacked and held hostage our diplomatic staff in Tehran.

    Comment by Jeff — September 5, 2007 @ 11:14 pm
  27. It’s about time we had some debate in this country. “You can’t have democracy without debate.”

    Comment by Spud — September 5, 2007 @ 11:15 pm
  28. Jeff,

    You don’t understand the irrationality of middle east politics or the mind of the Muslim Jihaadist. Staying over there does nothing but inflame the Islamic world.

    Tells us how Huckabee is allegedly going to withdraw us with Honor? A man who advocates a federal ban on smoking is telling us about honor? Right.

    If it was wrong to go into the war, then why in God’s name, is it honorable to stay there and perpetuate this nonsense.

    Comment by Chris Kachouroff — September 5, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
  29. Jeff,

    Ron Paul’s plan is not to be confused with wilsonian crap. He’s not a progressive and the end of WWI was the result of the treaty between France and Britain suppressing Germany and rubbing it in.

    Ron Paul is advocating the same thing as Ronald Reagan in Lebanon. Reagan withdrew with no reprisal because he wasn’t stupid.

    Comment by Chris Kachouroff — September 5, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
  30. The important unstated point here: In the post-debate wrap-up, Alan Colmes pointedly ask Ron how he could win the republican nomination considering the current make-up of the party, and Ron replied by saying he could bring over independents in states with open primaries.

    Translation:

    1. After tonight’s debate, his slim chances of the Republican nomination have vanished.

    2. Ron is aware of that. He cannot possibly be NOT thinking of an independent bid at this point. This disconnect between the other candidates and the party at-large is just going to become more and more obvious. Can he pull over enough independents to make an independent run? Considering it is a certainty Mr. Paul will stick to his guns, and with the GOP and Dems possibly nominating Rudy and Hillary (two new york liberals), the 2008 presidential race could get VERY interesting.

    Comment by Anthony — September 5, 2007 @ 11:22 pm
  31. I would love to see Ron Paul leave the losers in the Republican Party and be a fusion candidate for the Libertarian and Constitution Parties and other pro-liberty parties in 2008.

    We need a choice in 2008, not an echo.

    Comment by Ken H — September 5, 2007 @ 11:28 pm
  32. Jeff,,,why was WW2 started?? 2 Reasons

    They Stripped land from the COuntry of Germany.

    The Treaty of Versailles absolutely stripped Germany of any form of self reliance and defense.

    Why is this true ? Because Hitler said it!!!

    BLOWBACK!!!!

    Unplug yourself from the Borg Collective.

    Comment by Robert Micheal of the Saints — September 5, 2007 @ 11:34 pm
  33. Huckabee was right and once again offered a completely unique perspective (like he does about everything, which is why I like him): This is about honor. Honoring our country and the men and women who serve by finishing what we started.

    Comment by Jeff Mapson — September 5, 2007 @ 10:51 pm

    Are you going to “honor” our country and fighting men and women by suiting up and heading to Iraq?

    Comment by js290 — September 5, 2007 @ 11:36 pm
  34. jeff, I hope you didn’t pay money to whomever taught you history, because you got ripped off.

    First, it is quite clear that had the U.S. not gotten involved in WW 1, Hitler would have never seized power.

    Secondly, British and French interference with U.S. approval in Germany, specifically in order to plunder as much wealth as they could in the form of “reparations for starting the war”, wrecked the German economy and made the people willing to listen to some guy who had crazy theories as to how “jews had stabbed them in the back and that’s why we lost the war.”

    The U.S. is making Iraq less secure. 90% of Iraqis want us to go away. The entire U.S. strategy can be summed up by the phrase “we’ll win eventually, if we can just avoid losing.” Hell, one of the reasons why common Iraqis hate us so much is that U.S. troops keep shutting down black markets that compete with state industries. Apparently the “freedom” we’re bringing is the sort that the Russians gave so generously to Hungary and Poland. Aren’t you glad your fellow citizens are dying or getting their limbs blown off to make the world safe for state socialism?

    The thing is that by every measure this ex-Navy officer can think of, the U.S. government is losing the war. They control less territory today than they did a year or two ago. The no-go zones are getting larger. When you adjust for seasonal variations, the body counts keep inching up. The shortages in man-power and equipment keep getting worse. The U.S. Army is now letting in people with criminal records in order to meet recruiting goals. Did you know that several L.A. gangs now are encouraging members to join up to get weapons training?

    At this point the tab for the war is what, 1.3 trillion dollars? A few more years of this triumph, and we’ll be the ones carting wheelbarrows full of money to the grocery store to buy a loaf of bread.

    Comment by tarran — September 5, 2007 @ 11:37 pm
  35. Tarran,,

    People Like Miss whoever Alabama can’t even find the US on a map,,never mind Germany or Iraq,,

    Thats who we have to deal with,,,

    Comment by Robert Micheal of the Saints — September 6, 2007 @ 12:06 am
  36. I agree. Mike Huckabee won this debate. Ron Paul looked foolish, and he did not do the cause of liberty any favors tonight.

    Comment by Robert Standard — September 6, 2007 @ 12:31 am
  37. Robert,

    Seriously,

    You have got to be kidding me.

    Unless Huckabee is competing for the head of the Klingon High Council, his appeals to “honor” in continuing to fight a war that can’t be won are either insane or hypocritical.

    Take your pick.

    Comment by Doug Mataconis — September 6, 2007 @ 12:34 am
  38. The reason Ron did not win the ‘dials’ with Huckabee is, I was in the room with the 28 others turning those dials and there were only 3 of us turning it in favor of Ron.

    HOWEVER that is 10%….

    Also, they were 100% in favor of getting out of the UN and 100% were disappointed in the whole debate and about 90% want another Ronald Reagan….

    So who do they think would actually GET us out of the UN? Who do they think is most like Ronald Reagan? They don’t have a clue because Paul was denigrated and attacked even by the pollster running this focus group. The media doesn’t want them to know.

    This whole night was a scandal.

    Comment by Anon — September 6, 2007 @ 12:38 am
  39. anyone who thinks huckabee won the exchange is insane. he is saying its ok that we continue to allow soldiers to die as long as we’re united.

    thats bullshit and he knows it. ron paul as well as the majority of this country want our men and women in uniform home with their families.

    stop trying to say we’re cowards because we want our soldiers back.

    Comment by Danny — September 6, 2007 @ 12:39 am
  40. Jeff,

    Ron Paul voted to go into Afghanistan to get Bin LAden. He never voted to go into Iraq because there was no vote. Bush decided that he would make the decision without the congress. Please, know the whole argument. THe man is sincere and has never voted against the constitution. How much more conservative can you get?

    Comment by Rey — September 6, 2007 @ 12:49 am
  41. Huck ….Your an asswipe! What a frickin moron! You proved you’re as dumb as Rudi the cross dresser! Ron Paul tosted you’re ass!

    Comment by JOE — September 6, 2007 @ 1:14 am
  42. Tarran: you might want to reconsider your remark about the anti-Jewish position being no more than ‘crazy theories’.

    From the easily downloadable ‘Witness to History’:

    “THE JEWS IN GERMANY
    After the great war (1914-18) had come to an end, the distress prevalent in Eastern Europe, coupled with other causes, induced large numbers of those of Jewish race to cross the German frontiers and to take up residence in Prussia, where a Herr. Badt — himself a Jew — managed to obtain an official position authorising him to control all matters relative to immigration and naturalisation. He saw to it that those sharing his race secured easy access to Germany, whilst at the same time the West European and overseas countries imposed far-reaching restrictions on immigration. These newcomers began to concentrate themselves in the major cities and organised from them the systematic infiltration and control of the German nation.
    A few statistics may be helpful to show the extent to which these non-Germans gradually succeeded in spreading their influence upon important professions and in various allied domains.
    In reading these statistics it is important to remember that those of Jewish race formed just 1% of the total population.
    UNIVERSITY TEACHERS
    BERLIN and GOTTINGEN:
    Medicine 45% Jewish, Mathematics 34% Jewish, Medicine 34% Jewish
    BRESLAU:
    Arts 40% Jewish, Law 47% Jewish, Arts 25% Jewish, Medicine 45% Jewish.
    KONIGSBERG:
    Law 48% Jewish, Arts 7% Jewish, Law 14% Jewish, Medicine 25% Jewish.
    JEWISH LAWYERS (1928)
    DORTMUND 29%, HAMBURG 25%, STUTTGART 26%, DUSSELDORF 33%, ARLSRUHE 36%, BEUTHEN 60%, FRANKFURT 64%, STETTIN 36%
    JEWISH LAWYERS (1933)
    BERLIN 55%, BERLIN CHAMBER OF ATTORNEYS 66%, BRESLAU 67%
    JEWISH MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS (1928)
    WIESBADEN 20%, KARLSRUHE 26%, COLOGNE 27%, MAINZ 30%, GOTHA 31%, BEUTHEN 36%, BERLIN 52%
    BERLIN HOSPITALS IN JEWISH HANDS
    MOABIT 56%, FRIEDRICHSHAIN 63%, NEUKOLLN 67%
    THE THEATRE AND FILM INDUSTRY
    “1931, of 234 theatre managers 50.4% were members of the Jewish race. In Berlin the figure rises to 80%. Jews wrote not less than 75% of all plays prior to Hitler’s election. In the film industry too, the Jewish influence predominated.” (The periodical ‘Schönere Zukunft’ — A Brighter Future — February, 3rd, 1929)
    This was the period when Berlin had an international reputation for theatrical seediness, debasement and pornography. In Mein Kampf Hitler stated:
    “The share of Jews in the modern film industry is so decisive that a very slight percentage is left available for non-Jewish undertakings.”
    “One needed only to look at the posters announcing the hideous productions of the cinema and theatre, and study the names of the authors who were highly lauded there in order to become permanently adamant on Jewish questions.
    “Here was a pestilence, a moral pestilence from which the public was being infected. It was worse than the Black Plague of long ago.
    “And in what mighty doses this poison was manufactured and distributed. Naturally, the lower the moral and intellectual level of such an author of artistic products the more inexhaustible his fecundity. Sometimes it went so far that one of these fellows, acting like a sewage pump, would shoot his filth directly in the face of other members of the human race. . .
    “It was a terrible thought, and yet it could not be avoided, that the greater number of Jews seemed specially designed by Nature to play this shameful part.” (Adolf Hitler. Mein Kampf. Ibid.42)
    “The fact that nine-tenths of all the smutty literature, artistic tripe and theatrical banalities, had to be charged to the account of people who formed scarcely one per cent of the nation — that fact could not be gainsaid. It was there. It had to be admitted.” (Adolf Hitler. Mein Kampf. Ibid.42)
    THE STOCK EXCHANGE
    COMMITTEES ON THE BERLIN STOCK EXCHANGE
    Stocks and Shares 69%, Metal Exchange 83%, Produce Exchange 75%, Futures 83%, Administration 80%, Official List 87%
    In 1928, it was revealed that just fifteen Jews between them had occupied 718 board positions. Of leading positions in industry there were ten Jews to every five non-Jews.
    LEADING POSITIONS IN COMMERCE (EMPLOYED AS WORKERS)
    BERLIN: 49.4% (2.4%)
    FRANKFURT: 48.9% (1.9%)
    COLOGNE: 49.6% (2.9%)
    BRESLAU: 57.1% (1.8%)
    POLITICAL INFLUENCE:
    Of the Social Democratic Party’s 39 Representatives, 38 were of Jewish race. The Workers Educational Institutes comprised 81% of Jewish. Karl Marx (real name Karl Modecai Levi) and Friedrich Engels, the godfathers of Communism were Jewish, as was Leon Trotsky (real name Lev Bronstein).
    GOVERNMENT:
    In November, 1918, Jews had seized control of the following states; Hirsch, (Haase and Herzfeld. Prussia), Eisner (Bavaria), Lipinsky and Gradnauer (Saxony), Heymann (Wurttemberg) and Haas (Baden).
    The Government of the Revolution included among others, Haase, Cohn, Herzfeld, Schiffer, Bernstein, Cahen and Preuss. The latter was given the task of drawing up the new German Constitution.
    “The German nation, moreover, was rapidly falling under the control of its alien elements. In the last days of the pre-Hitler regime there were twenty times as many Jewish Government officials in Germany as had existed before the war. Israelites of international attachments were insinuating themselves into key positions in the German administrative machine.” (The Daily Mail, July, 10th, 1933)
    JEWISH VOICES:
    Dr. Manfred Reifer, the well-known leader of the Jews in Bukowina, published an article in September, 1933 (Czernowitzer Allgemeine Zeitung) in which he wrote:
    “Whilst large sections of the German nation were struggling for the preservation of their faith, we Jews filled the streets of Germany with our vociferations. We supplied its Press with articles on the subject of its Christmas and Easter festivities and administered to its religious beliefs in the manner we considered suitable. We ridiculed the highest ideals of the German nation and profaned the matters which it holds sacred.”
    Dr. Nahum Goldmann, President. World Zionist Organisation:
    “No Jewish minority in any other country, not even that in America could possibly compete with the German Jews. They were involved in large-scale banking, a situation unparalleled elsewhere, and, by way of high finance, they had also penetrated German industry.
    “A considerable proportion of the wholesale trade was Jewish. They controlled even such branches of industry, which is in general not in Jewish hands. Examples are shipping or the electrical industry, and names such as Ballin and Rathenau do confirm this statement. I hardly know of any other branch of emancipated Jewry in Europe or the American continent as deeply rooted in the economy, as was Germany Jewry.
    “American Jews of today are absolutely as well as relatively richer than the German Jews were at the time, it is true, but even in America with its unlimited possibilities, the Jews have not succeeded in penetrating into the centre spheres of industry (steel, iron, heavy industry, high finance, shipping) as was the case in Germany.”
    From Mein Leben als Deutscher Jude (Goldmann) we read:
    “Their position in the intellectual life of the country was equally unique. In literature, they were represented by illustrious names. The theatre was largely in their hands. The daily Press, above all its internationally influential sector, was essentially owned by Jews or controlled by them.
    “As paradoxical as this may sound today, after the Hitler era, I have no hesitation to say that hardly any section of the Jewish people has made such extensive use of emancipation offered to them in the nineteenth-century as the German Jews. In short, the history of the Jews in Germany from 1870 to 1933 is probably the most glorious rise that has ever been achieved by any branch of the Jewish people.”
    HITLER:
    “If the question is still asked why National Socialism combats the Jewish element in Germany so fanatically, the answer can only be, because National Socialism wishes to establish a real community of the people. Since we are National Socialists, we cannot permit an alien race to impose itself upon our working people as their leaders.” — Adolf Hitler
    “Nearly all Bolshevist agitators in Germany and elsewhere were Jews.” (Adolf Hitler)

    Note that many of the quotes are from informed, contemporary Jewish sources.

    Hitler’s favourite bodyguard for many years was a Jew, and they got on very well. His stance was purely political. Also, much of what we have heard is postwar propaganda. More Jews immigrated into Germany in 1938-9 than into Poland. And don’t forget that the 10,000,000 Ukrainian holocaust was orchestrated by a regime whose leadership had far higher percentage of Jewish leadership than the ratios presented above.

    This sort of perspective, though very un-PC is valuable because the same sort of propaganda-based distortions drive contemporary events as in days of yore. I dislike both mainstream parties, but Paul and Gravel, though caricatured as fringe loonies by establishment lackey press and their dupes in the Comment sections, are by far the most accomplished authentic candidates in the field. If only a real Independent run were feasible!

    Comment by tharpa — September 6, 2007 @ 1:24 am
  43. Huckabee lost my vote!!

    THERE IS NO HONOR IN SACRAFICING OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS!!

    I belive that ron paul is honest and hes got my vote.

    Comment by Nick — September 6, 2007 @ 1:48 am
  44. Honor? Who the hell is Huckabee to say that if American soldiers don’t return victorious they return without honor?

    Comment by JD — September 6, 2007 @ 1:48 am
  45. Honor? Who the hell is Huckabee to say that if American soldiers don’t return victorious they return without honor?

    Someone vying to be commander-in-chief so he can make sure they stay until they earn their honor… It’s going to hurt him more than it does the soldiers… really…

    Comment by js290 — September 6, 2007 @ 2:13 am
  46. Mr. Huckabee’s position on Iraq is the correct one in that he plans on mending fences with nations in the Aribic region that can provide positive support in Iraq. Also, mending fences with the EU could bring about troop withdrawls by making up with troops of other nations. This can become a world effort again… and not a US effort.

    QUOTE FROM MIKE HUCKABEE

    Q: Pres. Bush said in his second inaugural address, “It is the policy of the US to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture.” Has Pres. Bush’s policy been a success?

    A: Well, the problem is, sometimes when you get what you want, you don’t want what you get. And this is a great case of that happening. I don’t think it’s the job of the US to export our form of government. It’s the job of the US to protect our citizens, to make us free and us safe, and to create an enviable kind of government and system that everybody else will want.

    Q: So it wouldn’t be the core of your foreign policy?

    A: Absolutely not, because I don’t think we can force people to accept our way of life, our way of government. What we can to is to create the strongest America, freedom internally, secure borders, a safer nation. That makes a whole lot more sense to me than spending billions to try to prop up some government we don’t even like when we get it.

    Huckabee refers to our saving out honor correctly. The comments stating that he is inferring that US solders would not have any honor returning without victory, or that it is honorable to sacrifice our brothers and sister are twisted and ill-informed. Those of you making these statements are hypocrites when talking about people and their hidden agenda. Open your eyes and dont get so emotional… be professional and do your research.

    Comment by Pearl Harbor Sailor — September 6, 2007 @ 3:10 am
  47. Sounds like a flip flop then – he is saying that he doesnt think its the job of the US to export our form of government (which I totally agree) but in the debates he intimates that the armed forces have to stay until our form of government is in Iraq.

    What are his standards for success is Iraq? How do you meansure honour? Wait until 5,000 troops are dead? Is it honourable to establish democracy in Iraq if it costs 10,000 troops? 20,000? Sounds like a ridiculous standard to judge the success of a military action.

    Comment by Daniel — September 6, 2007 @ 4:01 am
  48. Ron Paul won big tonight the phone polls prove it. You can only vote once per phone so don’t even claim it was was a conspiracy you tin foil hat wearers. Huckabee should get with the program and run as ron paul’s vice president.

    It’s not our responsibility to build iraq’s government for them. It’s in their best interest to self govern in three independent states. If they choose to become a threat to us we will blow them to hell. I think they should ask the candidates if they had ever met Reagan. Ron Paul led four Republicans to attempt to oust Ford as their candidate in ’76 and run Reagan instead. They almost suceeded. Perhaps Ron Paul should mention all the great things Reagan has said about him in.

    “Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.” –U.S. President Ronald Reagan

    I wish he would emphasise his time spent learning from Reagan.

    Comment by Reaganluver — September 6, 2007 @ 5:40 am
  49. QUESTION TO HUCKABEE SUPPORTERS:

    How many of our boys must die so that you all can leave with honor?

    Comment by Chris Kachouroff — September 6, 2007 @ 6:13 am
  50. Way to go Doug!! You hit the nail on the head!!!! We are living under the Klingon Empire. I think Huckabee is probably a nice guy, but he has bought into the Klingon’s Manifesto, hook-line-and sinker.
    My problem with him is his “hypocrasy”. Every time I hear someone like him talk about killing human beings in an unjust war, and then tell me they are a “man of god”, it irritates me like someone running there fingernails over a chalkboard.

    Comment by DanO — September 6, 2007 @ 7:56 am
  51. Pearl Harbor Sailor:

    Your assertion of Huckabee’s position only means one thing to me. If Huckabee is elected, that means we’re going to have yet another foreign policy, completely different from the current one, which is completely different from the foreign policy positions during the Clinton administration.

    Does it occur to you at all that these radically different foreign policies ever work at cross-purposes? And therefore contributes to instability abroad?

    That’s one reason why Dr. Paul’s foreign policy position is so necessary now. We don’t get involved in foreign nations’ internal affairs; we trade openly with all; we have dialog with all; and we bring all of our military personnel home.

    Comment by rho — September 6, 2007 @ 8:29 am
  52. Hi Doug,

    Nice post and good points!

    Mike Huckabee who is a pastor simply lost my repect.

    How can anyone confuse honor with lies? Mike suggested we should stay in Iraq due to Honor which is a cheap sell and for few days it may keep someone waving the flagg… But true honor comes from honest actions and the ability to see the trutch. Ron Paul understands the wisdom of action and has seen the folly of our actions….

    Again Doug good post…..

    Comment by Darel99 — September 6, 2007 @ 8:46 am
  53. “…Huckabee quickly fired back: “Congressman, we are one nation. We can’t be divided. We have to be one nation under God. That means if we make a mistake, we make it as a single country…”
    ____________________________________-

    Everyone seems to be jumping on Huckabee’s comment concerning honour. I think this quote above is even more revealing and shows how Dr. Paul is so much diffrent than any canidate from either party, including Fred Thompson.
    I wish Dr. Paul would have had the presence of mind to call Huckabee on this comment. We are not simply one nation but rather a Democratic REPUBLIC of 50 soverign nation states joined together IN UNION. Huckabees comment points to the struggle taking place within this nation since even before the Constitution was ratified, namely the Federal (central) government vs. each individual State (nation). “The nation” did not make the mistake as Dr. Paul pointed out. How could it have? After all, I do not remember a vote of “We the people” through their elected representatives in Congress being taken that would have given an up or down concerning a declaration of war, does anyone else? For me, Huckabees comment above reveals just how much the spirit of STATISM (worship of the State) and COLLECTIVISM has infiltrated the Republican party. Orwell’s 1984 anyone?
    * just in case anyone did not know, the author of our nation’s pledge was a devout socialist. This in it self should tell you something.

    Comment by chrisconlin — September 6, 2007 @ 9:34 am
  54. Last night Ron Paul lost my vote. I’m now voting for Mike Huckabee!!!

    Comment by Mortimer — September 6, 2007 @ 10:01 am
  55. Ron Paul in response to a highly loaded question (nothing new there): “No, I am saying we should be taking our marching orders from the Constitution.”
    __________

    The most intresting (and disturbing) part of this was not Dr. Paul’s good response, but the BOOS IT RECIEVED FROM SOME IN THE AUDIENCE. This for me said it all and further solidified my vote for Dr. Paul. This nation is in serious need of a few lessons on CONSTITUTIONAL liberty, and Dr. Paul appears to be the most qualified to do that.

    Comment by chrisconlin — September 6, 2007 @ 10:14 am
  56. I notice a great many references to honor. I will warn all that honor is really a euphemism for pride. Making policy on the basis of pride is a sure way to screw up. War is not a football game, there are no winners and losers, and those people who want to cheerlead should be contemptuously ignored.

    Comment by Chepe Noyon — September 6, 2007 @ 10:36 am
  57. Chepe,

    Hear, hear.

    Comment by UCrawford — September 6, 2007 @ 10:38 am
  58. “After tonight’s debate, his slim chances of the Republican nomination have vanished.”

    That’s strange, because I remember hearing Fox News analysts declare after the May 15th debate (with the Rudy exchange) that Ron Paul was “done” and had no chance.

    In the following weeks, Paul’s fundraising, name recognition and support skyrocketed.

    Comment by Derek — September 6, 2007 @ 10:53 am
  59. The only people donaing to Ron paul are pot heads….. what is he doing with the money? he’s still polling at .0001%

    Comment by Pot Heads — September 6, 2007 @ 11:08 am
  60. Last night made me realize how overzealous I was in calling Ron Paul to be over after the TX Straw.

    The phone poll is to be scoffed at, I know. But in reality that poll was pretty tight and he blew that away.

    Oh and Huckabee’s little fight w/Paul? lmao!! Paul threw Huck in the dumpster.

    BTW guys- how interesting is this– Look at Huckabee’s %18 on phone poll…. %18 !! He beat out both Romney and Ghouli JUST BECAUSE he decided to get into a fight w/Ron Paul. This right here should give you strong reassurance that TV’s audience last night considered HIM to be a sort of ultra-front-runner status.

    Comment by bromonation — September 6, 2007 @ 11:46 am
  61. Appreciation for Ron Paul requires thinking. His logic is sound, knowledge of history impecable, he references the Constitution accurately (and appropriately)and has proven his ability to do so under fire. His voting record proves his integrity, his years as a physician proves his humanity and his personal life his morality.
    WHEN IN HISTORY HAVE WE HAD A BETTER QUALIFIED MAN?
    Helen (*-*)

    Comment by Helen — September 6, 2007 @ 12:37 pm
  62. Huckabee: One nation under Hillary.

    We will lose to Hillary honorably!

    Is this what passes for the Republican battle cry these days?

    Comment by Bill Moore — September 6, 2007 @ 1:48 pm
  63. I really thought last night was a break-out performance for Ron Paul. Just as before when Guiliani attacked him about blowback and Paul was later proven to be right, when people reflect on the exchange they will no doubt side with Ron Paul. Having Americans die and American families suffer while we go bankrupt day after day is not worth ‘saving face’.

    “President Paul” – get used to it.

    Comment by Bhayl — September 6, 2007 @ 3:20 pm
  64. I posted this in the other debate discussion but I thought it was more relevant here:

    I couldn’t believe the words that were coming out of Huckabee’s mouth. We broke it so we buy it? Since when did an entire country full of people become a piece of property? What if they DON’T want us to “buy” them?

    To me a better analogy would go like this:

    I think you’re about to hurt me so I attack you and now in serious medical trouble.

    I feel bad so I try to get you better. After years of trying to “fix” you, you’re not getting any better – actually it’s possible the treatment I’m giving you is making you worse.

    You get tired of me trying to help while making things worse, and say: JUST LEAVE ME ALONE!

    No, I won’t leave you alone, I’ll keep “fixing” you to save my “honor.” I’m so honorable that I’m going to ignore your pleas, ignore the fact that my “fixing” is making things worse, and continue dictating your life.

    Some honor.

    Comment by Joon — September 6, 2007 @ 3:36 pm
  65. Ron Paul won the exchange with Huckabee, and the debate. The publicity he is getting over this debate is dwarfing the boost he got in the South Carolina exchange with Giuliani, because way more people are paying attention now.

    Comment by Doug — September 6, 2007 @ 8:02 pm
  66. 3.1 million viewers watched the debate. The most yet by far.

    & Ron Paul doubled up the second place finisher in Fox’s post-debate poll.

    Hannity needs to begin practicing dropping his pants in support of Ron illegalizing the IRS, NAFTA, CAFTA, warrantless phone searches, hidden torture prisons, FED RES bailouts, Republican party hacks whoring the Democratic agenda, hookers, hot tubs, & borrowing $2,000,000,000 a day from Communist China in support of big government Republican style…etc, etc.

    I look forward to seeing Mr. Hannity’s fanny waving around in a true conservative’s wind farting in his face…

    Comment by Montana voter — September 6, 2007 @ 8:47 pm
  67. Montana voter,

    I share much of your animosity towards those in a position of influence that ignorantly dismiss Dr. Paul, but we, as an extension of his campaign, have to remember what’s at stake.

    The last thing we can afford to do is make our job harder by showing a lack of decorum. If we wish to be seen as an intellectual reform movement, we need to be Jackie Robinson-esque in our restraint.

    Otherwise, we’ll simply feed into the myth that we’re a bunch of crybaby crackpots.

    Comment by Jeff Molby — September 6, 2007 @ 9:15 pm
  68. Blatant deception from Fox News!

    Original text vote results:
    Paul 33%
    Huckabee 18%
    Guiliani 15%
    Romney 12%
    results posted on http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,272493,00.html

    Romney 29%
    Paul 25%
    Guiliani 19%
    Huckabee 8%
    total votes cast : 40,000

    Guess we now know who Fox News is rooting for!! Huckabee supporters, you should be just as upset with this!!

    Comment by chrisconlin — September 7, 2007 @ 2:26 pm
  69. ” News Analysis

    Confounding critics who deride his international policy approach as naïve or simplistic, the prestigious Johns Hopkins Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) in Washington, D.C., has invited Ron Paul to make a keynote policy address on September 11.

    Ron Paul will be speaking on “A Tradtional Non-Intervention Foreign Policy” – topic that has likely languished in most US international schools and think tanks in the modern era. Says one source close privy to the negotiations surrounding the invitation, “This school is engaged in a 20th century, interventionist, foreign policy approach. For them to invite him to make a major address like this shows how seriously his views are being taken by the educational establishment and by the political establishment in general,”

    And he adds, “This election has come down to Ron Paul versus the rest of the Republican candidates. He has set the party on its ear, and anyone who thinks that he is a so-called fringe candidate at this point is not grasping reality.”

    The announcement reads as follows:

    “A Traditional Non-Intervention Foreign Policy”
    11 a.m. to Noon – Kenney Auditorium, Nitze Building
    Ron Paul, Republican congressman and 2008 presidential candidate, will discuss this topic. For more information and to RSVP, contact cpfr@jhu.edu or 202.587.3237. Media who want to cover this event should register with Felisa Neuringer Klubes in the SAIS Communications Office at 202.663.5626 or fklubes@jhu.edu…”

    Comment by chrisconlin — September 7, 2007 @ 2:45 pm
  70. I don’t think Ron Paul responded as well to Huckabee as he might have, and I’m not convinced that he got the better of Huckabee. But that is immaterial. Huckabee and Paul both benefited from the exchange because they stole the show from the front-runners. Both have gained valuable and much-needed publicity because it is their exchange that will be broadcast and re-broadcast and talked about on the MSM.

    Huckabee initiated the exchange (and probably planned it well ahead of time), but Paul benefits as well. In fact, Paul may benefit more than Huckabee because he is taking the anti-war position and the war is very, very unpopular in New Hampshire even among Republicans. Now, many more people know RP’s position on the war than did before and it’s being spread around the MSM.

    Now, why won’t Ron Paul, himself, make it the signature issue of his campaign? Why won’t he settle on 3 or 4 key issues and give his campaign some focus and meaning for ordinary voters who aren’t really into strict constitutionalism and don’t know what it means anyway?

    And why doesn’t he focus his campaign on Iowa and New Hampshire where a majority of Republicans are against the war and he’s the only candidate against 8 others who support it?

    I simply don’t understand what the RP campaign is doing. They have him all over the country when he should be focusing on Iowa and New Hampshire.

    Comment by rob — September 7, 2007 @ 6:38 pm
  71. Lets just say for debate that Ron Paul loses the Republican nomination (but he is going to win) and Huckabee wins. Earth to all the Huckleberry supporters the Democrats are going to Crush you come election time. 70% of the American people want out of the Iraq war, 8% are undecided about the issue – whats left for the Republican Party maybe around 22%. So who would you rather have pulling us out of Iraq? Hillary Clinton who hates our troops and the military. I think I would rather see Ron Paul pulling our troops out and congratulating them as they walk back on to American soil and telling them all what a great job they did. I would rather have Ron Paul that will protect our borders from illegal immigration (your buddy Huckleberry is weak on that issue) I would rather see Ron Paul get rid of the IRS or at least make them irrelevant, I would rather see Ron Paul protect the unborn, I would rather see Ron Paul put the nation back on track with sound money, I would rather see Ron Paul get us out of the UN, NAFTA, WTO etc.

    There are so many things I would rather see Ron Paul do as President rather than Hillary, and Ron Paul is the only candidate they cannot use the War issue to win, because thats all they got is the War and Ron Paul has the higher moral ground because unlike Hillary, Edwards etc, Ron Paul voted against the war. So you are wasting your vote by voting for any Republican War Candidate, they will get Crushed In November.

    Comment by Joe Lawson — September 8, 2007 @ 10:30 am
  72. Food for thought, Joe… When you’re trying to persuade someone to switch candidates, you would probably be more effective if you didn’t mock their candidate in the process.

    Comment by Jeff Molby — September 8, 2007 @ 10:40 am
  73. I simply don’t understand what the RP campaign is doing. They have him all over the country when he should be focusing on Iowa and New Hampshire.

    It’s still early, Rob. If he spent even half of the next five months in IA and NH, they’d get sick of him. So instead, they spend most of their time traveling the country and raising fund. Then come December, they’ll switch gears and talk to the early states.

    Trust them… they’re pros. We just need to focus on doing whatever we can to supplement what they’re doing.

    Comment by Jeff Molby — September 8, 2007 @ 10:44 am
  74. why won’t Ron Paul, himself, make it the signature issue of his campaign? Why won’t he settle on 3 or 4 key issues and give his campaign some focus and meaning for ordinary voters who aren’t really into strict constitutionalism and don’t know what it means anyway?

    He pretty much has. What have you ever heard him talk about at a big forum?
    - War
    - IRS
    - Monetary Policy
    - Civil Liberties

    But aside from that, he’s not a typical candidate and he doesn’t want to act like one. He’s not just taking random positions on issues that he will later justify. Instead, he needs to teach everyone what it means to be a strict constitutionalist and you basically do that by ending every answer with “…because that’s what the constitution says”

    By the time the primaries roll around, I promise you everyone will know that Ron Paul “gets his marching orders from the Constitution.” :-)

    Comment by Jeff Molby — September 8, 2007 @ 10:50 am
  75. Guess we now know who Fox News is rooting for!! Huckabee supporters, you should be just as upset with this!!

    Does anyone know how many votes were cast as of the first count? If not, can someone do the math to figure it out?

    It’s possible that both sets of numbers are valid. I’m sure we Paul voters were watching intently and all voted in the first 20 minutes, whereas the others could have trickled in.

    Comment by Jeff Molby — September 8, 2007 @ 10:55 am
  76. I was there at the debate. Ron Paul had the support of AT LEAST a third of the audience.

    The people that were cheering for Huckabee were the same ones cheering for the rest of the neo-conservatives.

    Comment by Kelly Halldorson — September 9, 2007 @ 9:44 pm
  77. Hello. KSDFUW5 [url=http://www.tKSDFUW3.com] KSDFUW6 [/url] Thanks

    Comment by KSDFUW4 — September 18, 2007 @ 2:40 pm

Comments RSS

Subscribe without commenting

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by: WordPress • Template by: Eric • Banner #1, #3, #4 by Stephen Macklin • Banner #2 by Mark RaynerXML