THE TYGRRRR EXPRESS

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair came to Los Angeles yesterday to give a lecture within driving distance of my home.

I had every intention of going, but due to being flooded my first day back at work, by the time I picked up the telephone to call the people putting on the event, they had left (several minutes early I might add). So I did not meet Prime Minister Blair, and I did not directly hear him speak.

I have had such bad luck with the Blair family. I attended a conference in 2006 where his wife Cherie Blair was speaking, and I saw and met every speaker except her (caught in traffic, I am not a morning person).

A dear friend of mine attended Tony Blair’s speech, and he transcribed the event specifically at my request. Although he is (like me) a fierce partisan, I asked him for 100% description and 0% analysis. Based on his integrity, I can say that Prime Minister Blair’s remarks below are accurate, and in their proper context.

In March, I will be going with this same friend to hear Australia’s former Prime Minister John Howard. For that one, I will be there in body, not just in spirit.

There was a question and answer session afterwards, but due to length, that will be covered later in the week.With that, I bring you the comments of Prime Minister Tony Blair .

“Good evening

It’s a pleasure to be with all.

This is an important time for the United States.

There are challenges to Global Security

This week I was in Oman, had dinner with the Sultan, then Jerusalem, then London, then I took the Eurostar train to France, and then a plane to LA.

There are 100 languages spoken in LA. It represents the world today.

I tried to do a press conference in French. I once meant to say I liked many positions
of (former socialist leader) Lionel Jospin. Instead I said that I desire the French Prime Minister in many different positions. This brought a new meaning to “entant cordial (cordial intent).”

In the world today,  We all live our lives in an increasingly global community.

a)  There is increasing interdependence. The U.S. subprime mortgage issue can lead to a Euro recession.

b)  The internet. I never had a mobile phone while in office. I got one day after I left office.
I sent my first text message to a friend. “Who are you?,” they asked.

Changes happen fast. Genetics, science…revolutionary diagnoses for treatment of disease…healthcare will change.

The scale of globalization is changing. The pace is ever increasing.

Politics has not yet caught up.

There are 6 challenges the world faces today.

1) Global terrorism–

Post September 11th, we still do not yet understand the depth of extremism. Not just the Taliban and Saddam. This situation will not resolve itself. This will take a generation or more to remove.

Iran, Iraq, Pakistan…it is all of them. All of the issues are related. Madrassas in Pakistan    reach one million plus children, who aretaught all day strict Koran instruction and nothing
else. Extremism is now quite deep.

The Execution of a teacher in Afghanistan for teaching girls recently is another occurrence.

They frame the debate on terrorism as Islam vs. the West 

Modern and moderate people vs. the extremes is our frame.

How do we take on the challenge?

We fight military against military.  We must not back away from threats.  We must
be prepared to fight. Yet we must also fight the ideological battle of ideas. The level of ideas we must fight.

As the special representative for the Middle East…if we can create a lasting peace…Israel secure and Palestine democratic and indepedent….that peace will symbolically express a coming together.

There is vital importance to the Middle East peace process. I enjoys being there and working the issue. The Holy Land is extraordinary. Jericho is exciting. Where are the walls?  They fell down! 

2)  Poverty

In Africa and elsewhere ,3 million children die a year from famine  conflict or disesase. This is preventable, and to prevent it is amoral imperative. Extremists are exploiting poverty.

Education about preventing disease and  conflict is in our self interest. Africa is important therefore. We should not just donate money. We need partnership and responsibility and better governance.

3)  Climate change

Precautionary principles are the keys to protecting the planet.

Kyoto expires in 2012.  Only a few countries met their targets.

The world needs the U.S. and China. They will only each do it if the other gets into it.

The G8 plus China, India, Brazil, South Africa and Mexico totals 75 percent of emissions.

Our energy dependence on unstable parts of world hurts our security.

This is a huge challenge. We need a global deal on climate change within 2 years.

We must cut greenhouse gas emissions…rollback…give the planet a chance for sustainable
growth.

4)  Immigration

This is a big issue everywhere.

With globalization, growth in the global economy drives climate change and economic migration. 200 million people every day are on the move. The West cannot absorb all the numbers. Asia and South America face this too.

Massive patterns of migration lead to tensions. Immigration plays a beneficial role in the world economy, but also needs to be controlled, not unlimited.

Ellis Island is great but must be controlled too.

5)   The global economy and trade.

This is linked to oil and energy.

How do we improve trade? World trade talks are now stalled.

People fear workforce displacement…economic downturns…oil wealth…sovereign wealth
funds…Arabs buying the world. How do we open up global trade?

Are we able to succeed or not is key. The last world trade round helped the global economy.

6)   China

The scale is tilting towards China and India. Each will have a population greater than the  USA and Europe combined and doubled.

Behind the numbers lie creativity. Shanghai is 1st world. Southern India’s bio tech industry is first world. The USA is 4 percent in agriculture.

China has 65 percent of their work force in agriculture…we need to figure out how to get them all into industry.

How do we deal with them on climate change? China has doubled their consumption of coal. Every 4 days a new coal plant is being built. Will China development be benign ?

Solutions will require collaboration. Partnerships will be required Unilateral action is ok if necessary but multilateral action is needed for solutions.

There is hard action and soft action. Hard action is people using their military to protect their self interest. Soft action is people using diplomacy to achieve peace through economic investment.

We need a muslular multilateralism. We need republican minds and democratic means.

The United States and Europe must work together. The world needs this.

We need the hard and the soft, based on certain values.

The only way to solve problems is through our superior way of life, our convictions and beliefs, that the people will choose freedom,  democracy,  justice,  and fairness.

We are in it together.

The world is interdependent and moving fast.

We need values based solutions.

We need to be optimistic about our opportunities. What a world of possibilities can be opened up to our children.

We must move past constainsts and prejudices to make the world a better place.

The Good Friday accord came about only because we were relentlessly optimistic. The Irish are people great—the world is better because of this.

Are you open to the new world?”

eric 

Politics is broken. This is agreed upon. The solution to this problem cannot occur until the problem itself becomes crystallized.

The primary process is in tatters. Primary season is becoming shorter ans shorter, and general elections are getting loner and longer. In 2004 America had an 8 month general election. In 2008 it is expected to be 9 months. We spend more time campaigning than governing, and the candidates that win the nominations are often not vetted.

The blame for this falls on the political parties. For some reason, grown men are scared to tell people in Iowa and New Hampshire to shut up, sit down, and quit acting like they matter. The reason they matter now is because the parties are too gutless to tell them otherwise.

Large states such as California got tired of being left out in the cold until June, when nominations were already decided. So they moved their primary up to March a couple election cycles ago. Other states, not wanting to be left irrelevant by California, “leapfrogged” ahead of them. Two days after celebrating the ball dropping into the new year, voters were caucusing. This has got to stop.

Iowa is not representative of America. Neither is New Hampshire. Both of these states are overwhelmingly caucasian. Yes, Nevada and South Carolina have been given some prominence to pacify Hispanic and black voters, respectively, but many candidates have dropped out before these contests. For republicans, Iowa is simply a place for Christian activists to nominate whichever candidate promises to ban abortion and gay marriage. That is how Pat Robertson can do well there, and Ronald Reagan can lose. If only these Christian activists understood that in the other 49 states, the War on Terror, the War on Terror, war in Iraq, and the economy are important. Shouting in the town square about culture wars is all it takes to win the Iowa caucus.

New Hampshire’s state constitution requires that it be the first primary in the nation. Why should the other 49 states be bound by that? In 1996, Delaware tried to have a primary four days after New Hampshire, which demands 7 days space. The candidates boycotted Delaware. This year it was Wyoming that got ignored. Why should Delaware and Wyoming be any less important than New Hampshire and Iowa.

Some say the answer is tradition. That is garbage. Traditions become obsolete. This is why slavery no longer exists, and animal sacrifices are virtually nonexistent. The reason Iowa and New Hampshire get to go first is pure political cowardice. California, New York or Texas should simply break the rules and dare the parties to challenge them. This will destroy the system for good.

This is what Florida is doing now. They are daring the parties to punish them. The parties say they will, but I suspect the parties will back down under fear of losing the state in a general election.

This brings us to Rudy Giuliani.

For the sake of full disclosure, I am backing Mayor Giuliani for President. I believe he is the right man for the job. The fact that he can help destroy the primary process is icing on the cake.

Rudy Giuliani has decided to ignore Iowa and New Hampshire, and bet all his chips on Florida, which holds its primary January 29th. His strategy is that winning Florida will give him momentum going into Super-Duper-Tuesday on February 5th, when large states such as New York, New Jersey and California hold their primaries. All of those states have strong moderate streaks, which benefits him.

This is a risky strategy because it has never been tried before. To simply ignore Iowa and New Hampshire is seen as suicidal. Exceptions can be made, such as in 1992 when Iowa Senator Tom Harkin ran a favorite son campaign. As a general rule, snubbing these states is usually a death sentence.

Some will argue, quite correctly, that Giuliani refused to compete because he knew he could not win. This analysis is completely correct, but it misses the big picture. What does it say when the national frontrunner, ahead in major states with diverse populations, cannot win in Iowa? It says that Iowa is out of wack, not the candidate. Iowa elects Popes. Giuliani is not a Pope. Mike Huckabee, who cannot compete anywhere else, gets a victory in Iowa, simply because he is a religious Christian. If anything, this is borderline bigotry. It is also foolhardy to ignore the War on Terror simply because several thousand people care more about the lives of the unborn to the citizens alive today facing terrorism.

It is not just Huckabee. Pat Robertson’s strong finished should have invalidated the Iowa Caucuses a couple decades ago.

Primaries cater to the extremes. General elections cater to middle America. Giuliani is a general election candidate. He puts states in play that republicans could never win with a candidate such as Mike Huckabee. This forces democrats to spend money defending states they would normally win automatically.

In the past, candidates that have tried to argue that competence was more important than ideology have gotten their heads handed to them. Ideology does matter. On foreign policy and economic issues, Giuliani is a conservative. Yet on social issues, the activists refer to him as a RINO (Republican in name only), which is ironic given that nobody outside of Iowa asks their opinion.

So Giuliani chose to refuse to compete in a state that he knew he could not win. This is much better than trying to compete and losing, which is why the Mitt Romney campaign is supposedly imploding. Romney came in second in Iowa and New Hampshire, yet his not winning was seen as losing, even though he lost to a different opponent in those two states. This is nuts.

With the democrats, Hillary Clinton is inevitable (I still believe she is), then she loses Iowa, then Barack Obama is inevitable, then Hillary wins New Hampshire, and now Hillary is back on top. 48 states have not even decided yet. John Edwards may be the strongest general election candidate, but if he loses South Carolina he is done. This is where he was born, but if not for Iowa and New Hampshire, South Carolina may not be his very last chance.

I want Giuliani to win because I believe he would be the best man for the job, although John McCain and Fred Thompson are both good men. My reasons for supporting him are based on policy issues, not politics or strategy.

Yet political strategy could be forever altered if Giuliani wins the nomination. More candidates will have the guts to to tell Iowa and New Hampshire to go to hell.

This does not mean big states should trample small states. Retail politicking is important. However, it should be rotated, so that other small states like Maine and North Dakota get a fair chance to choose a President. Alabama can be the first southern state instead of South Carolina. Missouri can be first instead of Iowa.

Rudy Giuliani is engaging in a bold and risky strategy. If he fails, the media pundits will only proclaim the ever important relevance of two irrelevant states. They will cite John McCain as proof. McCain is an American hero, but the only reason he is elevated in this race is due to his winning New Hampshire eight years ago.

I want the primary process in its current form to be destroyed. In 1996, Pat Buchanan won New Hampshire with 27%. Bob Dole had 26%, and Lamar Alexander had 23%. By coming in second, Dole was able to have everybody rally around him to head off Buchanan. Alexander was pressured to drop out, even though he finished only 10,000 votes behind Dole at most. Dole even stated that had he come in third in New Hampshire, he would have dropped out, and perhaps Alexander would have taken his flannel shirts to the White House.

The field is littered with cerebral general election candidates that could not appeal to the hard core activists. The democrats had Paul Tsongas and Bob Kerrey in 1992, and Joe Biden and Bill Richardson in 2008. The republicans had Dick Lugar, Pete Wilson and Lamar Alexander in 1996, and any one of them would have been formidable general election candidates.

If Rudy Giuliani wins the nomination, and then wins the general election, it will be interesting to see how Iowa and New Hampshire vote electorally. Will they be that petty and spiteful regardless of actual issues? Time will tell.

If Rudy Giuliani becomes President, the democrats will start campaigning to defeat him in 2012 before he even takes the Oath of Office. Then the real challenge will be if these democrats have the courage to try to fire him without shoving their heads up the hides of Iowa and New Hampshire.

Primary season used to start in earnest in March and continue through June. Then the summer was a time to relax, and the campaign began after Labor Day, and lasted 10 weeks. Even with an all news all the time cycle, Americans should at least attempt to put the genie back in this political bottle.

Support Rudy Giuliani to win the republican nomination for President. Regardless of ideology and affiliation, it would be a victory for political moderates and a potential death sentence for two small states that have blackmailed politicians for decades.

Rudy Giuliani has stood up to terrorists and won. Now we shall see if standing up to Iowa and New Hampshire activists can be done without committing political hara kiri. For those in the other 48 states, I hope so. I do not trust people to stand up to Islamic lunatics if they cannot stand up to a few thousand middle aged white men who think that God gives them a divine right to choose the leader of the free world, with zero input from the rest of America.

eric

Iowa is irrelevant. New Hampshire is useless. New York City is what matters, since that is where the giant crater exists along with the memories of 3000 murdered new Yorkers.

I am working out of my firm’s Wall Street office this week, and there is a television and a computer here in the break room, allowing me to watch the Fox news republican debate while blogging about it.

Just around the block is the New York Stock Exchange, where people can no longer go on the trading floor as guests. Those days are long gone.

I just got back from Ground Zero several minutes ago, or 15 minutes before the debate began. It is one thing to read about it. it is another thing to be there. I was walking with my friend, who was right there when it happened in 2001. He said a prayer to God that he would live, and he did.

I well up with rage every time I see the memorial. I will never forget.

The republican debate is not about gay marriage, stem cell research, African American vegeterianism, or any other narrow issue that affects a select few disproportionately.

Let the democrats debate nonsense.

The republicans need to spend time eplaining how they are going to kill every animal that is even remotely connected to the barbarians that took down the towers.

We have made significant progress, but there is more to do.

With that, I bring the 2008 republican debate from South Carolina.

While we are watching television, Al Queda is plotting more murders.

Here is the recap Between Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Fred thompson, Mike Huckabee, and another fellow I will mention when necessary.

Brit hume, Carl Cameron, Wendell Goler, and Chris Wallace were the moderators. The first question dealt with whether we were in a recession, and what should be done.

Romney reiterated his record. At the Federal level, he mentioned the housing crisis, lower taxes, gas prices, and research and development in science and technology. he got in a jab at McCain by saying that the Senator stated jobs in Michigan were gone forever, which Romney disagreed.

McCain stuck to his guns, saying some jobs were gone forever. He mentioned going to community colleges and designing new training programs. He does not believe we are headed into a recession.

When asked about short term government fixes with regards to a slowdown, and would he be ok with adding to the deficit, he mentioned cutting spending, and using Detroit to develop technologies to reduce foreign oil dependency. He said he would make the authors of earmarks famous.

Huckabee was asked about his short terms stimulus package. He spoke of four problems, that being fuel prices, subprime mortgages, health care and education costs. he mentioned the fair tax.

Giuliani was asked about his wanting to cut taxes despite others saying that tax cuts do not pay for themselves. Giuliani cited Ronald Reagan, President Bush, JFK, and the Club For Growth. We have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. He spoke of cutting federal agencies, and regulatory reform. overtaxing, spending, regulating and suing must be stopped.

McCain agreed, but stated that we have to cut spending as well. He wants to make the bush tax cuts permanent.

When asked about a government program to stimulate the economy, Ron Paul said that recession is predictable. He stated that the housing market is in a depression, and that we had artificially low interest rates are a mistake by causing a bubble and then a bust.

Thompson stated that Rudy’s tax plan was one he proposed a couple months ago, and that the tax cuts always bring in more revenue than the experts say. The entire housing market is hurting, not just subprime. Credit is getting tighter, and we have two handed economists because nobody knows. We have to count on the Fed, possibly speed up depreciation schedules. We have to consider a low income stimulus like in 2001, but a rebate would not work because the poor do not pay taxes.

Huckabee was asked what part of the Reagan coalition was gone, based on comments by Ed Rollins. He disputed that being said, and started talking about abortion and gay marriage, in addition to the Second Amendment. He stated that that was a part of the Reagan Coalition.

McCain stated that republicans have drifted from Reagan, especially since 1994. He mentioned the bridge to nowhere, and then mentioned Teddy Roosevelt and climate change.

Romney covered abortion services in his Massachussetts plan for health care. He stated that was a court order. He stated that Reagan’s principles are still valid today, and his optimism was vital. We need a strong military, strong families, and a strong economy. our economy is still the envy of the world.

Thompson went after Huckabee. He would be a social conservative but economic liberal. he mentioned gitmo, and the NEA endorsement. He mentioned huckabee wanting to ban smoking, which violates Federalism. It was a sharp attack, and the crowd roared.

Huckabee stated he is under attack because he is the target. He mentioned thst Reagan raised taxes, which is true, but not an excuse for being a tax raiser.

Giuliani was asked why he was the complete conservative. He mentioned peace through strength, and lower taxes specifically to empower people. He supports a strong national defense. We must devolve power to the people. Disagreements about social issues should not trump being competitive in 50 states, including states we do not even try to win any more. We need a broad outreach.

Ron Paul was asked about the 9/11 truthers, and whether we were responsible 9/11. He said he disagreed with them, but would not ask them to stop. he is now officially Rupaul for good. He stated we are no longer fiscal conservatives. We are big government people. We are entitlement people. We have undermined the Fourth Amendment. he has never voted to spend a penny of the social security fund.

Huckabee was asked by our passive response to Iran with regards to not shooting our ships this week. He stated they would “face the gates of hell,” if they tried to shoot, but that he trusted the current president’s decision not to attack. Brit hume delved further, but Huckabee stood his ground and said he trusted the generals.

Thompson agreed with Huckabee on this one, and that one more step and they would have “been introduced to those virgins that they were looking forward to seeing.” the crowd roared. Thompson brought up the british military hostage crisis, and said that if Iran crosses the line, they will be destroyed. He also offered some red meat to the crowd by pointing out that “You can tell that the news coming out of Iraq is good, because you read so little about it in te New York Times.”

Giuliani quickly rejected the NIE report stating that iran was benign. He mentioned that iran was collapsing economically, and that we should push them further.

McCain was asked what he would do if he were the captain of the ship, and he refused to armchair quarterback despite his naval experience. He agreed with Giuliani that people think Iran is seen as less of a threat due to the NIE report, which is a major mistake. Like the other candidates, he supported President Bush’s decision.

Rupaul urged caution, brought up the Gulf of Tonkin, and said we were ready to start World War III. Some in the administration are looking for the chance, and that there have been no attempts to avoid war.

Hume stated that the other candidates agreed with the passive response, so what as he upset about?

He responded that we were itching to bomb Iran.

(I hope he is right…we should)

Romney claimed that Rupaul should stop reading Armageddonijad’s press releases. The crowd roared, and the Rupaul supporters booed. He backed Bush, and stated that we need new sanctions against Iran.

McCain was asked about the surge working. McCain shined at this point. He ordered Hillary to retract her comments about General David petraeus, who should have been Time’s man of the Year. Only when we win can men come home with honor.

Giuliani was asked about how to prevent a Palestinian state from being a haven for terrorism. First they must recognize Israel’s right to exist. Then they must renounce terrorism. Then there must be a period of time. Giuliani politely disputed McCain’s claim that he was the only one to support the surge. Giuliani said neither of them have wavered. McCain stated that only he condemned the Rumsfeld strategy, which is a separate issue.

Rupaul stated that the USA gets in the way with regards to Israel and the Arabs, and that we should cease giving foreign aid to all nations. Israel can handle its own problems.

McCain got tough, saying that he did not want to trade with AL Queda, all they trade is burkas. He does not want tot ravel with them, they only want one way tickets.

Rupaul went ballistic, and i wa slooking for the German subtitles. He said mcCain wants us to be in Iraq for 100 years.

McCain replied that we have dramatically reduced casualties, and that we should support the troops, not condemn them. We have been in korea for 50 years, but nobody is dying. It is prescence, not casualties.

When asked about how we can side with Musharraf when 2/3 of the people want him gone, Thompson responded, “We can’t go against polls.” The crowd laughed. Leadership is not giverning by polling. He stated that calling for Musharraf to step down or cut off aid was irresponsible. He nailed it perfectly. We should pressure Musharraf to help with finding Osama bin laden, but not kid ourselves into trying to replace him without consequences. We also needed to secure the weapons.

Romney stated that foreign policy is now 3 dimensional chess, not checkers.While Romney mentioned various hot spots, he spoke coolly,while Thompson seemed much more passionate. Romney did mention getting Islamic countries away from Wahhabism, and helping their economies.

Huckabee, whena sked about accounting showing money was missing, reiterated that pushing Musharraf out was not the solution. Huckabee forgot that he was the one who advocated replacing him to begin with. Huckbee then admonished Rupaul over Israel, and promised to defend the Jewish state.

Rupaul stated that we undermine Israeli sovereignty, especially by arming Arab nations. We should treat Israel like adults, and that he defended the israeli decision to bomb the Osirak reactor in 1982. he stated israel is a stepchild of the USA.

Rudy ripped into Rupaul, and stated that the defense of Israel is smart for the USA. They are one of our staunchest reliable allies. As for Pakistan, we should work with musharraf.

Thompson stated that Huckabee mentioned our aid to the Pakistani military. Thompson said that is what the money is for, that we should support the Pakistani military.

While anybody ripping into Rupaul was on target, Thompson ripping into Huckabee was highly effective. The battle for social conservatives is between these two, and Thompson shredded him, without much of a counter response.

Romney was asked about change, and whether voters preferred experience. Romney replied, “nope.” he repeated that “Washington is broken,” and that nothing gets done. He then rattled off several examples, and stated that his career has been about change. “He would take Washington apart and bring it back together.”

When asked about Romney stating that McCain is Washington, McCain stated that “the answer was obvious.” McCain said his biggest change was to support the surge in iraq. He went after the democrats on Iraq, not Romney. He then mentioned going after Washington insiders such as Jack Abramoff, and the Defense Department’s bloated budget.

Huckabee was asked about higher taxes and more government while being a governor. He replied that “he got the job done.” H ethen ofered an incredibly rehearsed line about how what he raised was “hope.” he became Barack Huckabee Obama. He stated that Arkansas did not have falling bridges because he took care of them. People in Minnesota might be offended by that.

Thompson was asked how he differed from Huckabee. He pointed out that Huckabee signed the tax pledge only under pressure. Fred then focused on his own record, including passing five tax reductions. He mentioned his 100% pro-life voting record, but that does not differ from Huckabee.

Huckabee pointed out that Congress passed welfare reform, but Governors had to implement it.

Giuliani was asked about McCain’s comments that 9/11 is not foreign policy experience. he started out by saying that the change the democrats want is the change coming out of our pockets. Socialized medicine, and pulling out of Iraq were negative changes. Change itself can be good or bad. As for foreign policy, Giuliani was on a terrorism task force when Gerald Ford was President. He then reiterated throwing out arafat and snubbing the Saudi prince’s blood money. Senators are one out of 100, executives are leaders.

McCain praised Rudy as a person, but stated that it was McCain himself who has been a part of every foreign policy situation in the last 30 years.

Huckabee was asked about supporting an ad in the paper asking women to obey their husbands. Huckabee claimed that he was getting all the religious questions. it is because he keeps bringing it up. He got folksy and praised his strong wife. He then stated that his personal beliefs were not how he would govern. We should all submit to the lord. Marriage is 100/100, not 50/50.

Rupaul, with regards to electability was asked, “Do you have any?” The crowd loved Carl Cameron’s question. Rupaul repeated his beliefs, and cited Robert Taft. He did have a moment of sanity by stating that we doubled the NEA, which he wants to abolish. He stated that he is a Constitutionalist, and a true republican.

When asked about immigration, the crwod clapped before the question itself was asked.

McCain was asked about his failed plan. He replied that the plan failed because the American people have lost their trust in government. He reminded people that he is from a border state. He said he would not deport the wife of a serviceman missing in action. We would not reward law breakers, but we must be compassionate.

Romney was asked about his plan, and the moderator pointed out that McCain dodged the question. Romney stated that the difference was between the current 12 million illegal immigrants. He felt that a pathway to citizenship was special treatment. All 12 million should be given time to get their affiars in order, and then leave.

Thompson said we need to be a nation of “high fences and wide gates, and we get to decide when to ope it and close it.” We have to crack down on employers and sanctuary cities. He said you cannot deal with each immigrant individually. We could have enforcement by atttrition if we cut off funding to sanctuary cities. He then went after Huckabee’s immigration stance, which he portrayed as soft.

Rupaul was asked about his immigration stance. He focused on the economic issue, saying “if you subsidize something, you get more of it.” he stated the problem was “welfarism.” We should pull people from Iraq to guard the border.

Huckabee was asked about how to convince Hispanics that the GOP was not against them. Huckabee accurately replied that many Hispanics are against illegal immigration. He then offered lofty preacher rhetoric about light and darkness. We should assume everybody here is legal, so nobody feels shame.

Giuliani was asked about refusing to deport illegal immigrant whistleblowers. He correctly reported it would be absurd to deport them, and that his policies reduced crime more than any city in the history of America. He defended allowing children of illegal immigrants to go to school, and that letting 70,000 kids be criminal victims or perpetrators was wrong.

The night was a chess match, with different candidates going after each other for strategic reasons.

Rupaul is a nut. He did the worst, and nobody else had to be asked if they were viable. All five other candidates went after him, because the 90% of sane republicans like it. Romney actually backed off because he realized it was too easy, and could be seen as gratuitous.

Romney blended into the backgorund. nobody attacked him, because he is seen as falling apart. He did nothing wrong tonight, but did not distinguish himself.

Giuliani and McCain sparred because they are fighting for moderates. They were both so polite and respectful of each other, because they genuinely do respect and like each other, and wish they were not both running. Therefore, their exchanges were so civil that it was a stalemate. This benefits McCain because he is ahead. Rudy did not knock him off. The man who acts decisively hesitates around McCain, and if Rudy does pass him, it will be interesting to see how McCain reacts.

Rudy did slightly better than mcCain when they were not sparring, especially on the immigration and Israel issues.

The fieriest exchanges were between Thompson and huckabee. Thompson mopped up the floor with his fellow Southerner. Fred knew he could not move to the right of huckabee on social issues, but his attempts to show huckabee as an economic leftist, especially on taxes.

Fred thompson won this debate, and he won big.

As I prepared to leave my office and head home, I knew that while South Carolina was going to be a distant memory in a couple weeks, Ground Zero will be seared into my bloodstream forever.

I passed by it again on the way home, and I can still again barely suppress my rage.

The Iranian ship question would not even be asked in a democratic debate.

Forein policy questions must be asked. The War on Terror must be asked in every debate, and often.

For the sake of honoring 3000 dead New Yorkers, we must go balls out and win.

Winning means letting soldiers scorch enemy Earth. It also means government has to be better on every level. This starts with the various levels of government in New York. The construction workers are fine people. They are the best of the best. the bureaucrats need to get out of the way, and let the towers be built stronger, tougher, and higher than ever before.

I am tired of seeing that hole in the ground.

eric

Chris Wallace got things off with a bang.

Mitt Romney was asking about his raising of taxes as Massachusetts Governor. Romney stated that those were fees, he wants lower taxes, and that McCain opposed the Bush tax cuts. He contrasted his own record with Huckabee’s. Romney wants 0% capital gains taxes on those making less than $200,000 per year. This is an excellent proposal.

McCain emphasized that tax cuts have to be offset with spending cuts to keep the deficits from ballooning. He announced his support from supply sider Jack Kemp.

When Wallace challenged that America rebounded from 9/11 and Katrina, mainly due to tax cuts, McCain again emphasize spending cuts, and promised to eliminate earmarks. He also mentioned Jack Abramoff, saying he would fight corruption, which helps taxpayers.

Romney stated that he cut spending when he was Governor, and cut taxes 19 times.

Huckabee was asked about his net tax raising as Governor. He stated that he cut taxes 94 times, and eliminated the marriage penalty. He entered with deficits, left with surpluses, and raised teacher pay. He stated that a 3 cent gas tax went to pay for roads, and the people voted for it. The purpose is to govern, not just keep taxes low.

Huckabee and Romney then sparred. Romney stated, “You make up stuff faster than you speak, and that says a lot.” Romney insisted that he supported the Bush 2002 tax cuts. When pressed on whether or not he raised taxes net, Huckabee refused to answer, dancing around the matter. Neither won that exchange.

Wallace stated that Rudy Giuliani had some tax cuts pass over his objection.

Rudy responded that he proposed 64 tax cuts, and got 23 passed. He stated that the overall tax burden went down 17% during his Mayoralty. He cited a George Will column praising Giuliani as the most conservative leader in the last 50 to 60 years. He insisted he is a supply sider.

Fred Thompson was asked about cutting social security benefits, and how he would react if the democrats blocked such a proposal.

Thompson stated he never said he would reduce benefits. He would allow individual accounts where government would match funds. Initial benefits should be indexed to inflation, not wages. The Cola (cost of living adjustment) would still increase, but less. As republicans understand, slowing the rate of growth is not a cut.

Romney claimed that Thompson’s plan was a mistake, with regards to benefit reductions.

McCain praised President Bush for trying to tackle Social Security in 2004. He praised the 1983 deal between Reagan and Tip O’Neill.

Huckabee was asked about his economic populism on the campaign trail. He denied that Romney was the focus of such rhetoric. He said that if his rhetoric was populism, then he was guilty. He worries about jobs going overseas.

Romney said he was offended by attacking corporations that provide jobs. He spoke of his private sector success.

Huckabee said we should eliminate all taxes including on death.

Thompson jokingly asked if Huckabee was trying to get rid of death, or just the death tax.

Huckabee responded that in his old profession (Minister) he tried to eliminate death.

Thompson responded that it did not work very well. It was a lighthearted exchange that they both laughed during.

Giuliani stated that he had the most experience with bringing people out of poverty, getting poor people off of welfare, and reducing unemployment. He acknowledged that republicans do a bad job of explaining to poor people why republican policies are better at getting people out of poverty. He spoke of fighting the ACLU to get people off of welfare and on the job.

Thompson wants a flatter tax, and the goal is to get things passed, not just pass feel good legislation that will be stopped cold.

Wallace brought up to McCain his being a creature of Washington, and how he is better to bring about change than Romney.

McCain responded that he supported the change from the Rumsfeld Iraq strategy to the Petraeus Iraq strategy. He stuck by his support for campaign finance reform, and his support for the line item veto, which was ruled unconstitutional.

Romney passed up the chance to directly attack McCain, sticking to his own record. The system is broken, and a Washington insider cannot change things from the inside out. Romney even positively cited Giuliani as an example of executive leadership. Romney emphasized that he himself is an outsider.

McCain pointed out he had experience in leadership, not management. He led for patriotism, not profit. He led a squadron. He stated that change was important, but security comes first, and he is best equipped base don his history to understand how to keep America secure. He promised to get Osama.

Thompson stated that change is the buzzword everyone heard from Iowa, and change is the buzzword for every election unless you’re an incumbent. He said leadership is more important than change, and leadership involves being truthful. He cited the length of the war, and social security, as examples of how we have to level with the American public.

Giuliani explained that change can be good or bad, and the democrats want to raise taxes, and pull out of Iraq regardless of consequences, both negative changes.

Romney was asked about his being a leader, not an expert, contrasting himself with McCain during a meeting with voters. He stood by those comments. He replied that unexpected events such as Tsunamis require a President, not a General, and that temperament matters. He stated that the Clintons endorsed McCain’s immigration plan.

McCain stated that Governors do not always bring results. That joke fell flat. Reagan understood national security policy, and such knowledge was vital. He stated that he opposed sending marines to Beirut back in the 1980s. When asked what he meant by saying that Romney was “staring at his shoes” during the Iraq debate. McCain replied that Romney never questioned the Rumsfeld strategy, and said the surge was “apparently” working.

Romney stated that he was “running a state at the time.”

Huckabee was asked about his lack of foreign policy experience given his various flubs on issues such as Pakistan and the NIE Iran report. He responded that he had been to 41 countries. He cited his 10 1/2 years as Governor, which I am not sure in any way relates to foreign policy. He rambled about domestic issues, ducking the question.

Wallace insisted on bringing it back to foreign policy, at which point Huckabee said he slipped on comments, but not with the truth. He then rambled some more, this time offering tough talk. It was not a good moment for him. He did praise McCain by saying he did not think being a Senator disqualified somebody from being President.

When asked if 9/11 actually had anything to do with foreign policy given that he had never been to Iraq, Giuliani explained that he was responsible for the safety of millions of people. He was the only one that had to directly deal with an Islamic terrorist attack. He negotiated with governments while at the Justice Department. He worked on a terrorism task force during the Ford administration. He has been to 35 countries, and went after the Mafia. He banned Castro and Arafat from U.N. celebrations, and gave back money from a Saudi Prince. “The DNA of New York involves you in foreign policy because the U.N. is there.”

Thompson got in a great line saying that “Mitt (Romney) believes expertise is important in every area except national security.” He mentioned his being on the Intelligence Committee. He was a republican floor manager for the Homeland Security Bill. He disagrees with Huckabee not due to missteps, but due to his comments about closing Guantanamo Bay. If they came here they would have rights here they do not deserve. He also mentioned that Ted Kennedy endorsed Romney’s health care plan. Thompson was very effective at offering contrast without taking cheap shots.

Huckabee tried to say that he felt Gitmo should be closed because it was too good for prisoners, a nonsensical assertion.

Thompson pointed out that if they came here they would get Habeas Corpus rights. It was a very polite exchange, but Thompson clearly won the argument that it does matter where they are.

McCain was asked by Wallace if he really meant it when he said he could get Bin Laden, and he implied that he would, and that he needed sound intelligence reports. He then had a great line that it was his life experience, not his Senate experience that mattered. Under captivity, “My time away from America, I grew to love her.”

McCain was asked how his immigration plan was not amnesty. McCain reiterated his plan in lengthy detail, and emphasized that border security was important, but so was compassion.

Romney questioned how we could know that 2 million out of the 12 million were criminals, and that granting amnesty is unfair. He also claimed that in 2002, McCain used the word amnesty himself, and was in favor of it.

McCain claimed that Romney in 2005 stated that McCain’s plan was not amnesty.

Huckabee was asked about allowing the children of illegal immigrants to go to college, followed by his tough plan forcing everyone to leave, which would punish children. Huckabee reiterated that the children of illegal immigrants should not be punished for the actions of their parents. Huckabee then got testy with Romney, looking very flustered, stating that he would answer Chris Wallace, but that Romney was not the moderator. It was brief, but a mini temper tantrum. Huckabee also praised Giuliani, stating that you cannot throw children on the street. Laws do not allow it.

Giuliani was asked about 1994 comments regarding illegal immigration that were softer than his current views. He again brought up his three exceptions…schools, emergency medical care, and whistleblowers. He is very good at explaining that New York City is not the entire country, and different circumstances require different actions. Adaptability is key, and he handled things in a humane way. He also stated that we are not doing any favors by letting illegal immigrants come here and be second class citizens. It hurts them.

Thompson said one concern was that our next generation was at risk, and that illegal immigrants also risk being thrown into a truck, and being beaten and raped. Their own methods of trying to get here risks American lives and their lives. It was a fascinating point, as was the one Rudy brought up just before him.

McCain was asked if Romney was lying about his record with regards to attack ads. McCain insisted that he was running a positive campaign, and that what mattered was his qualifications. He also added that “politics aint beanbag.”

Huckabee was asked about his comments that Romney was running a desperate and dishonest campaign. He then brought up his stunt refusing t run his own negative ad. To remind people of his own flub is odd. He then stated that he won Iowa because of it, forgetting that abortion was why he won Iowa.

When asked why he spent so much on negative ads, Romney stated that he offered many positive ads. He also spoke of the difference between an attack ad and an ad contrasting the records of various candidates. Romney brought up the threat by Ed Rollins (managing Huckabee) to kick Romney’s teeth in, and that he just did not want his hair messed up.

Huckabee laughed and stated that Chuck Norris (backing Huckabee) was waiting outside. Thompson chimed in and stated that he would have John Wayne take care of it.

The lighthearted moments were gone when Huckabee then cited the New Yoek Times review of a Romney ad calling the ad untruthful. It may have been, but relying on the Jayson Blair Times is not the answer for republicans.

Romney was asked about whether he thought the other candidates flip flopped as much as he did. He stated that changing a position on an issue is acceptable, as opposed to being stubborn. He changed on abortion, and apologized for his previous position. He then contrasted his giving out zero pardons with Huckabee giving out over 1000 pardons.

Giuliani was asked about Bernie Kerik and the controversy over Judy Nathan’s secret protection. Giuliani admitted a mistake regarding Kerik, and that the New York Times totally cleared him regarding his wife. Again, relying on the New York Times is not helpful, but he then attacked the paper for putting the correction on page 37. He acknowledged that nobody is perfect, we all mistakes, an those who have not, have done nothing.

When Wallace brought up that the Kerik matter was still open, Giuliani unequivocally stated that nothing regarding Kerik will come out to hurt him. He apologized, took responsibility, and said it would not happen again because he does not make the same mistakes.

McCain was asked about his age, and whether he would promise to serve only one term. He said no because “you become a lame duck quacking on inauguration day.” He stated that he is “older than dirt, more scars than Frankenstein, but learned a lot along the way.” He cited Reagan’s successful second term.

Wallace then asked all the candidates to explain why they were the best person for the job of President. It was a softball, but overall Wallace did fine.

Giuliani stated that he had been tested, and then went over his record again. He emphasized that America currently is not moving in the wrong direction, and people who feel that it is are wrong.

Thompson stated that he was the only one at the table that never lost an election. He mentioned fighting for strong conservative judges and a 100% pro-life voting record.

Huckabee brought up the issue of living an ordinary American life, supporting the Second Amendment, states rights, and letting families run their lives, and not Government. “Americans are not looking for ideology. They want practical solutions.” That reminded me of Michael Dukakis and the competence argument.

Romney simply mentioned a bunch of issues, and reiterated his private sector success.

McCain mentioned leadership, and restoring trust in Government. He also said we needed to reenergize the base, which is ironic given that he has fought with the base more than the others.

I did not see a crystal clear winner, but Huckabee came across as petulant. He lost this debate hands down.

The other four candidates all did well enough. It very well could have been a four way draw. The real winner was the average republican voter, who got to see a discussion free of distractions and nonsense.

eric

FINALLY, debates the way they are supposed to be done. Charlie Gibson made it clear the moderator would not be the focus. The candidates were sitting around the table, with interaction encouraged. Except for the useless presence of Rupaul, this debate was well done in terms of questions and answers.

The first question was excellent. The candidates were asked if they would run on or away from the Bush record. This question separates which candidates are too cowardly to stand with the President when the media is against him. The issues of arrogance and a bunker mentality, which Huckabee had said in the past, were brought up.

Huckabee’s answer was nonsense. He bashed Donald Rumsfeld.

Fred Thompson nailed it, by again reminding America about the global struggle against radical Islam.

Rudy Giuliani stated that President Bush got the big picture right. He stated that Bill Clinton slashed the military.

John McCain stated that he supported the Bush Doctrine. McCain has been critical of the President, but he gave the President credit for keeping us safer. He did state that he was the only one who disagreed with the Rumsfeld strategy several years ago, but that the President deserves credit for “one of the finest military leaders in American history” in David Petraeus. McCain praised Giuliani’s handling of 9/11, a classy gesture.

Ron Paul sounded very normal when stating that he disagreed with preemptive war. He stated that 3rd world nations are not capable of hurting us. Rupaul sounded normal until he went off the rails by stating that all religions have violent elements.

Mitt Romney immediately laced into Rupaul by stating that he did not understand the threat of radical Islam, and then effusively praised President Bush. He then stated that we have to get to the Madrassas so young Muslims can be educated away from radical Islam.

Thompson coolly explained that preemption was an issue thought of during the Cold War, and explained that preeemption has to be kept.

Giuliani went after Rupaul, and explained that Rupaul’s thinking was why Giuliani returned the check from the Saudi Prince. He said that our foreign policy is irrelevant to why they hate us. They just hate us.

Rupaul continued to try and argue the devil’s advocate position.

Romney said to Rupaul that we should read their writings but not espouse their propaganda.

Rupaul said we were occupying, and the other five candidates wanted to verbally pound him into the ground.

Huckabee claimed that he supported the President early on and Romney did not.

Romney disputed Huckabee’s assertion and his own position, and Huckabee cracked “which one?” It was a cheap shot. Romney reinforced his support for the surge.

Rupaul continued to rail, and Romney cracked, “They are not attacking Luxembourg.”

Rudy shined by bringing up London, Bali, Leon Klinghoffer. He is magnificent when he does this. He explained that on 9/11 itself, he did not blame all Muslims for a few evil people.

Thompson joked to Charlie Gibson, “You brought this up.”

The next question dealt with a video of President Bush on December 20th, 2007, saying that the next President must have principles, and not be led by polls. The candidates were asked what their principles are.

McCain went back to his Naval career at age 17 to protect and defend America, restore confidence and trust in government. He stated he has been involved in every major national security issue that has occurred since then. He never wavered on the surge, and that had we done what the democrats wanted, Al Queda would have been trumpeting their victory over the USA.

Romney spoke of his family, but offered little else. He stated the importance of the family. Keeping America strong through families, the economy, and our military was paramount.

Giuliani spoke of leadership. He spoke of his 12 principles that he wrote about on the internet and distributed. First was staying on offense in the War on Terror.

When the moderator mentioned how all the candidates had altered something somewhere, Giuliani responded that you have to stay true to the big things. Views can change, but your central philosophy must stay the same.

Huckabee got pious by saying that policies were not principles. He then babbled about the history of America. He then said policies are not positions.

Thompson stated that our first principles must be based on the U.S. Constitution. He stated the 10th Amendment, and related that to tax policy and personal responsibility.

Rupaul railed. Rudy then decked him in the face and said Osama was next. Just kidding. Rupaul stated America was being a bully.

The debate then turned to health care. The candidates were asked how we could afford a trillion dollar war without covering everybody.

Giuliani stated that privatization is key, and that more government intervention would make things worse. We should provide tax incentives and health savings accounts. Large consumer markets improve quality.

McCain stated the problem is inflation, not quality. He mentioned the young people developing diabetes and obesity, and that fitness programs should be emphasized.

Romney mentioned his plan that covered all people in Massachusetts without raising taxes. He claimed that 300,000 more people in his state were covered.

Rupaul blamed the war on the health care issues in America. Rupaul claimed Americans are going to India to get heart surgery.

Thompson ridiculed Rupaul. He was honest when he stated we would never get total coverage because some people refuse to buy coverage.

Romney stated he liked certain types of mandates, at which point Thompson said, “Yeah, the ones you come up with.” Romney then stated that people who refused to buy insurance had to pay their own expenses if they got sick.

Thompson and Romney tussled, and Thompson got the better of the exchange.

When pressed about Federal mandates, Romney was flustered.

Huckabee stated that our entire model was upside down. We focus on disease cures instead of prevention. 80% of the spending is on chronic diseases.

Giuliani stated that health savings accounts would be a way to implement what Huckabee was talking about. Huckabee gave a general statement, but Giuliani offered specifics.

McCain spoke of outcome based treatment, and that 5 major diseases are 75% of costs. He spoke of an Arizona plan giving incentives for providers to keep people in home care settings rather than long term care facilities. He then bashed greedy pharmaceutical companies that prevent drugs coming in from Canada.

Romney chided McCain for bashing the drug companies, stating that they create drugs that save lives. McCain bashed them again, but Romney won this exchange.

McCain was asked about his illegal immigration plans. He reaffirmed his support for the guest worker program, said border enforcement was important but that the illegal immigrants were “God’s children.”

Romney talked tough and stated that guest worker programs amounted to amnesty, but that he welcomed legal immigration.

Giuliani was asked if illegals currently here need to leave immediately. He spoke of border enforcement, but none of the candidates advocating deportations of those currently here. Giuliani stated that you cannot throw them all out, but we should throw out the ones that commit crimes. He slyly hinted that Romney might try to remove them all. He stated that taxing and fining those that are caught was not amnesty.

McCain stated that 2 years ago, Romney praised McCain’s plan. Romney acknowledged that he had some reservations, and McCain disputed that. The exchange was heated, but McCain told Romney “you could spend your entire fortune on attack ads, that would not make them true.” It was a great line, but McCain smiled too quickly. McCain then stated that Romney gets misquoted because he keeps changing his positions.

Giuliani stated that Reagan was for amnesty, and even as the hero of our party, Reagan would be in one of Romney’s negative ads. He stated that fines and conditions and then allowing people to stay is not amnesty.

Thompson stated if you’re allowed to stay, it’s amnesty. Giuliani stated penalties remove it as amnesty, but Thompson respectfully disagreed, that anyone staying has amnesty.

This was a brilliant point in the debate, because they could both be right. It is a very interesting point worth debating. If somebody faces penalties, but get to stay, have they “gotten away with it?” I honestly do not know. Giuliani and Thompson both contributed a major discussion point, the whole point of debates to begin with.

Giuliani stated that it was inhumane to deport children of illegal immigrants and kick them out of school, to refuse emergency medical services, and to give breaks to whistleblowers of crimes who happened to be illegal.

Huckabee added nothing. He said people can leave, but did not say how we make them leave without some “help.”

Rupaul spoke about the runaway welfare state, and spoke about the incentives for people to break the rules.

Romney praised legal immigration in a suckup moment.

Romney was asked why Barack Obama is not the right man for the job. Romney stated that Obama’s health care plan is a government run plan. Romney reaffirmed his credentials as a businessman, his Olympics experience, and as a Governor.

Thompson simply stated that Obama was a liberal down the line. He pointed out that Obama speaks in generalities, and that the real change we need is to go to Constitutional principles, which means not taxing and regulating to death. Obama would increase the welfare state and weaken us militarily.

McCain got in another dig by saying Romney was the candidate of change (because he keeps changing). McCain then said he has more experience than Obama on national security issues.

Romney expressed his agitation with McCain’s barbs.

Giuliani stated that Obama has no executive experience, and that not all change is good. Higher taxes and withdrawing from Iraq, are negative changes.

Huckabee stated Obama is wrong on the 2nd Amendment, 10th Amendment, life issues, national defense, same sex marriage, etc. Huckabee this time stuck to policies, and it was his best answer of the night because of that. Huckabee praised Obama for being likable, and that republicans had better be for things and not just against them.

Rupaul compared himself to Obama favorably, they are both antiwar from the beginning, and supported by young people. He eventually stated that Obama supports the welfare state, and would not abolish the income tax. Overall, he spoke like Obama’s campaign manager.

The candidates were asked if high oil prices were here to stay, and we should level with the American public.

Rupaul correctly pointed out that the value of the dollar is what is hurting us, but then blamed the War in Iraq for the high prices. Rupaul is dead right on economics and dead wrong on the war.

McCain stated we must reduce foreign oil dependence and reduce greenhouses. He mentioned other technologies.

Thompson stated that oil companies have profits, but they also face lawsuits, and taking profits was not the answer. He perfectly explained that the issue was supply and demand, but that demagoguing the oil companies was wrong. He mentioned the refinery problem.

Giuliani stated that talking is not doing. We need to give alternative energy the same attention that 30 years ago we gave to putting a man on the moon. He mentioned that France is 80% nuclear, and China is building 40 nuclear plants.

Huckabee stated we can be energy independent in 10 years. It was pie in the sky rhetoric.

Romney stated we cannot do it in 10 years. Corporations spent more money on defending tort lawsuits than on research and development. This is upside down.

Rupaul was a nut as always. The Fox News debate without him will be a welcome change.

Huckabee proved he is a one trick pony, and cannot communicate effectively outside his narrow realm of social issues.

Romney got beaten up badly, and McCain got in some very effective shots at him regarding his veracity.

McCain was clever, but he needs to deliver his jabs witha serious face. His wide grin after each zinger reminded me of George W. Bush getting criticized for “smirking” in 2000. McCain did look smug, which is not him. Also, his lines were rehearsed, which is usually what Romney gets criticized for.

Fred Thompson looked Presidential, and he spoke in a crisp, calm manner. He does not always elaborate, but then again some situations require brevity. His words are solid in terms of quality.

Rudy Giuliani bounced back in a big. When foreign policy is discussed, he is virtually unbeatable. He still remains the only candidate to relate the War on Terror all the way back to the 1970s. It mystifies me why the other candidates do not. He does not just mention leadership. He gives examples, such as being principled in returning the Saudi blood money.

Fred Thompson came in a close second, but Rudy Giuliani won this debate.

Charlie Gibson was spectacular as the moderator, and must be brought back.

eric