“Republicans, Ron Paul clash over Iraqi war,” shouts a Fox television affiliate. Yahoo! News echoes the sentiment. In essence, while all other Republican presidential candidates are proud of their bloodthirstyness…
Sen. John McCain, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Giuliani all stressed support for the war, at times even competing to show their commitment.
“The surge is apparently working,” said Romney, referring to the increase in troops.
That brought an instant rebuke from McCain, who said, “The surge is working, sir, no, not apparently. It’s working.”
…Ron Paul is standing firm against our involvement in New Halliburton.
“No! We should take our marching orders from our Constitution,” Paul shouted back, pointing his pen at Wallace for emphasis. “We should not go to war without a declaration” by Congress.
Occasionally interrupted by applause, Paul doggedly stuck to his point. “We have lost over 5,000 Americans over there in Afghanistan, in Iraq and plus the civilians killed,” he said during his exchange with Huckabee.
“How long — what do we have to pay to save face? That’s all we’re doing, is saving face. It’s time we came home,” Paul said
Cool. But what’s the Democrats saying about Iraq? According to this from the Iowa Debate, Ms Clinton said:
…and, of course, end the war in Iraq.
According to the same transcript, Obama dodges the issue and Edwards side-stepped it by morphing the Iraq issue into a “No Nukes” statement.
So while Hillary give lip service to a major Democratic platform item, Ron Paul is building his campaign with the same wood. Just when I though this whole election cycle was going to be as dusty as a west Texas ranch, things start looking interesting. At least one person is.