Yesterday, Ron Paul held a news conference to give it a try anyway.
The controversy started at the second Republican debate.
Rep. Paul said that the the attacks on the United States on September 11th were “blowback†from the American government’s interventionist foreign policy. Giuliani, insisting that they hate us for our “freedom,†demanded Paul retract his statement – which Paul refused to do.
Yesterday, Rep. Paul presented a reading list to Rudy of several books (as well as a “Cliff Notes” version in case Rudy lacks the time and attention-span) to educate him on the causes of 9/11.
Michael Scheuer, the former chief of the CIA’s bin Laden Unit, appeared at the event to support Paul’s candidacy and support his position on the causes of 9/11.
If everything goes according to plan the House and Senate will vote today or tomorrow to give President Bush the funding that he has requested for Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill contains no time-tables for withdrawal and no binding conditions. Though obscured by empty rhetoric over “bench-marks,” the Democratic leadership is caving into the White House. However, across this country antiwar advocates are raising their voices and telling their Representatives and Senators this is unacceptable and the only principled vote is a “NO” vote.
This invaluable web-site is filled with tragic news every morning. Before imbibing today’s potion of sorrow, hopefully all readers will call the Congressional switchboard 202-224-3121 and express their outrage over the contents of the 2007 Supplemental. And then call five friends and ask them to do the same.
There are only two ways, this war will end. The President will change his mind or the Congress will use its “power of the purse” to compel the withdrawal of troops. If Congress fails to act, there is little reason to hope that a Democratic President will exhibit any greater boldness in 2009. And of course many more Americans and Iraqis will have died in the interim.
To resurrect the wisdom of our former Secretary of Defense: we must end the war with “the Congress we’ve got.” But these officials will never act if the millions of Americans who deplore this catastrophic war don’t send a strong message. This morning. 202-224-3121.
Carolyn Eisenberg is a professor of U.S. foreign policy at Hofstra University and Co-Chair, Legislative Working Group, United for Peace and Justice.
Republicans have a message for Ron Paul: don’t mess with us.
Since Tuesday’s debate, Mr. Paul’s supporters have flooded the phone lines and e-mail servers at South Carolina State Republican Party headquarters with complaints. A mild annoyance, to say the least. So the party is struck back, sort of. They have Mr. Paul’s mobile phone number, and they invite all complaint callers to leave a message on it. Call it blowback.
I talked to Rob Godfrey, the communications director of the Republican Party of South Carolina this morning. He was quite surprised to hear of the National Journal item.
Godfrey said neither part is true. He said they have not received any complaints since the debate and have not given out anyone’s personal phone number. Godfrey said the debate was a very positive affair that helped to build the South Carolina party and that they had only received compliments about the event.
The second part of the National Journal blog entry is true:
Undaunted, Paul-ites soon moved to another target: outspoken Michigan Republican Party chairman Saul Anuzis, who publicly called for Paul to be banned from further debates. The Michigan Republican Party has been deluged with incoming missives, some inviting Anuzis to go become the Republican party chair of Cuba. They’re even calling his home. Anuzis won’t give him and still plans to circulate a petition.
I guess this second part makes Ron Paul look good compared to the GOP, so they had to make up the first part.
Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R-Md.) is no stranger to war. He signed up with the Marines in 1964 and went to Vietnam in the grimmest, bloodiest days of the war. He survived a shot to the chest, and spent the decades afterward studying foreign policy, history, and why nations go to war.
Gilchrest supported the 2002 authorization for war against Iraq: “Blessed are the peacemakers who freed Europe from the yoke of Nazism,” he said in a floor speech. “Blessed are the peacemakers whose save people of Kuwait from Saddam Hussein. It is not a matter for us as peacemakers of if we go into Iraq. It is a matter of when we do it, how we do it, and who we do it with.”
Within two years of that vote, after taking multiple trips to Iraq, Gilchrest repudiated that decision. He has become a member of the small but vocal antiwar Republican caucus in Congress.
The usual (and often scary) drivel spewed forth from the likes of Hillary and Barack, both trying to outdo each other in a show of superiority and arrogance. Most of the candidates gave their ideas for how they should run the lives of Iraqis and for how long it should continue. Only two came out for immediate withdrawal, Rep. Dennis Kucinich and former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel.
Kucinich took a fairly strong antiwar position, as always. But I do have a problem with his call for other nations to take over the occupation of Iraq. Calling for continued occupation of Iraq by any foreign nation is not only wrong, but it can be easily used to justify continued US occupation if other nations are unwilling to do so. I also feel his delivery and persona are unimpressive and getting quite stale. (I know I will get some letters from fans, but that’s my opinion.)
Gravel, on the other hand, got the issues of war and peace exactly right.
“Some of these people [the other candidates] frighten me. When you have mainline candidates that turn around and say “there’s nothing off the table with respect to Iran. That’s code for using nukes, nuclear devices. I’ve got to tell you, if I’m President of the United States, there will be no preemptive wars with nuclear devices. In my mind, it’s immoral, and it’s been immoral for the last 50 years as part of American foreign policy.”
Moderator Brian Williams then asked Gravel who on this stage worries him so much. Gravel said the top tier candidates worried him.
Gravel first took aim at Joe Biden:
“Joe, you have a certain arrogance, you want to tell the Iraqis how to run their country. We should just play ‘get out.’ It’s their country, their asking us to leave, and we insist on staying there, why not get out. You hear the statement, ‘the soldiers will have died in vain.’ The entire deaths of Vietnam died in vain. You know what’s worse than a soldier dying in vain? More soldiers dying in vain.”
Gravel slammed fellow Democrats’ approach on continuing to fund the war:
Well, first off, understand that this war was lost the day that George Bush invaded Iraq on a fraudulent basis. Understand that. Now with respect to what’s going on in the Congress, I’m really embarrassed. So we passed – and the media’s in a frenzy right today with what has been passed. What has been passed? George Bush communicated over a year ago that he would not get out of Iraq until he left office. Do we not believe him?
Gravel’s alternative:
How do you get out? You pass the law, not a resolution, a law making it a felony to stay there.
Make the illegal war actually illegal. That’s the ticket!
But the best moment came after Barack Obama said that Iran having nuclear weapons will be a major threat to the US: “They are in the process of obtaining nuclear weapons. I don’t think that is disputed by any expert.” (At this point, Kucinich interrupted that it is disputed.) Barak continued: “They are the biggest state sponsor of terrorism, with Hezbollah and Hamas.” Kucinich continued to interrupt. Obama then talked of the risk of nuclear weapons reaching the hands of terrorists.
Gravel (who happily was next in line) confronted Obama:
“We’ve sanctioned them [Iran] for 26 years. We scared the bejesus out of them when the President said they’re ‘evil.’ These things don’t work. We need to recognize them.”
Gravel continued:
“You know who the biggest violator of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty is? The United States of America! We signed a pledge that we would begin to disarm and we’re not doing it. We’re expanding our nukes. Who the hell are we going to nuke?”
“Tell me, Barack, who do you want to nuke?” Obama replied, “I’m not planning on nuking anybody right now (emphasis added). Gravel joked “Good, then we’re safe for awhile.”
Gravel also attacked the whole idea of a “war on terror.”:
“We are mischaracterizing terrorism. Terrorism has been with civilization from the beginning and will be there until the end. We’re going to be as successful fighting the war on terror as we have been with the war on drugs. It doesn’t work. What you have to do is to begin to change the whole foreign policy.” “This invasion brought about more terrorism. Osama bin Laden must have been rolling in his blankets, how happy he was, our invading Iraq.”
On another note, Obama totally reversed the impact of his recently quoted statement: “Nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people.”
He explained that he had been quoted out of context.
“What I said was ‘Nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people from the failure of the Palestinian leadership to recognize Israel, to renounce violence, and to get serious about negotiating peace and security for the region.”
Candidates were not given equal time, and the allocation seemed to be based on their standings in the polls. Clinton and Obama got the most. Gravel got the least amount of time, but used it well.
Gravel represented Alaska in the US Senate from 1969 to 1981. He was one of the most vocal Vietnam War critics.
In 1971, Gravel embarked on a one-man filibuster against legislation renewing the military draft. Using various parliamentary maneuvers, Gravel was able to block the bill for five months before President Richard Nixon and Senate Republicans agreed to allow the draft to expire in 1973.
Also in 1971, Gravel introduced most of the Ellsberg-leaked Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record after the White House got an injunction against the publication of them in the New York Times. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that Gravel did not have the right and responsibility to share official documents with his constituents.
I spent some time with Gravel 36 years ago and was very impressed. I was happy to see him on the podium after so long. Kucinich is great (and of course Ron Paul is my hero), but Gravel was a wonderful surprise. I hope they keep him in the debates through the end.
CNN, along with the local media co-sponsors, have announced that Mike Gravel will not be invited to their planned debate June in New Hampshire. Fox News has also announced that Ron Paul will not be included in their upcoming Republican debate.
As an audience member asks a question, John McCain blows his nose long and hard.
It seems he lost a little gray matter on the kleenex. When asked when the US military might “send an air mail message to Tehran.” He responded by attempting to sing a revision of the Beach Boys song “Barbara Ann”:
“‘Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.”
McCain then added, “Iran is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. That alone should concern us but now they are trying for nuclear capabilities. I totally support the President when he says we will not allow Iran to destroy Israel.”
