|
|
Presidential Candidates on Iraq: The Republicans
listen:
  The second in a two-part special this week on the Iraq war and the presidential race! We look now at the Republican candidates…who have been mostly supportive of going to Iraq in the first place, but critical of how the war has been handled since. Their positions run the gamut from immediate troop withdrawal to staying the course to a three state, one country solution to a gradual draw down of troops in favor of more Iraqi responsibility and involvement. Our guests will flesh out the differences and similarities of the candidates in the Republican field. Guests
Web resources:
|
Support FromHighlightsNavigationUser login | ||||
If America (American Citizens) are not CONSTITUTIONALLY AWARE, and they clearly are not; a fact which the political establishment views with devilish glee; then America tends toward Amerika.
Ron Paul is the ONLY Congressman who filters all potential bills that appear on his desk through the lens of the Constitution of the United States. (Constructionist View, meaning one believes the Founders were correct in their philosophy concerning government)
Please do not paint Congressman Paul as 'anti-war'. He is not. He IS simply
staunchly CONSTITUTIONAL. He is known on 'The Hill' as Dr. No. Why? Because he will not sign a bill that he deems UNCONSTITUTIONAL. America is no longer America because the voters are no asking the proper question of their representatives, which is simply: " Will you Mr/Mrs potential representative, give more than lip service to the Constitution of the United States and of your own State " period.
If the Citizens of the United States are not educated, nor take the time to educate themselves (see Emerson on Self-Reliance) as per THEIR GOVERNMENT, then to paraphrase at least one of the Founders...we will get what we deserve.
Sadly, we are sliding toward being a Fascist(as an economic system), Oligarchic Fiefdom, rather than a phony version of a democratically elected Federal Republic.
To all potential American Voters: "IT'S THE CONSTITUTION, STUPID."
I agree with much of what Cato says here. However, he/she is very much mistaken when stating that Rep. Paul is the ONLY Representative who filters all bills he votes on through the Constitutional lens. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, a Democratic presidential candidate who has as much difficulty getting his views aired as Rep. Paul, also carries a copy of the Constitution in his pocket at all times, and also views all potential legislation through that Constitutional lens. This is why he voted against, and spoke eloquently against, the resolution to give George Bush the authority to take military action against Iraq. He understood very clearly, as does Rep. Paul, that it is unconstitutional for the chief executive to commit troops to battle without a Congressional declaration of war. This is why the Korean conflict, the Vietnam conflict, the Grenada incursion, the brief invasion of Panama, the use of American forces in Kosovo, the invasion of Afghanistan and both the first and second Iraq invasions have been unconstitutional. In none of these cases did Congress declare war. The same will be true when Mr. Bush decides to attack Iran. Also, the US Senate adopted the UN Charter as a treaty. The Constitution makes all treaties adopted to be the SUPREME law of the land. That means that neither Congress nor the chief executive may violate that treaty. The UN Charter specifically forbids the use of force by one nation against another nation that has not actually attacked the first nation. Again, each of the aforementioned actions by the US was completely illegal and unconstitutional. Did NPR ever even entertain any serious discussion on this subject? Of course not. It, too, is a captive of the corporate elites, and would not dare to air such a provocative, albeit critically necessary, discussion. That is why I support Dennis Kucinich, and why I won't give a dime to NHPR or NPR until they free themselves of their corporate shackles.