Comments on Oct. 9 GOP Debate in Dearborn

As expected, Fred Thompson loomed large in the GOP debate in Dearborn, Michigan Tuesday afternoon. After skipping out on all previous debates, given that he was not yet a candidate, the fact that Thompson has skyrocketed to a statistical tie with Rudy Giuliani meant that all eyes were on Fred.

Thompson even occupied the center stage in the debate, which inadvertently served to further highlight his looming stature, figuratively and literally.

Chris Matthews asked Thompson the first question of the debate. Thompson seemed to lose his train of thought at one moment during his answer. But after a rusty first shot out of the starting gate, the candidate proceeded to show that he can stand toe-to-toe with the big guys on the national stage.

Thompson's answers were down-to-earth, folksy, and exhibited his vast knowledge of legal and Constitutional issues after spending decades as an attorney.

While Thompson may not have lived up to the unrealistic expectations of those who expected him to be someone he is not, such as Ronald Reagan, the candidate nonetheless established himself as one who can hold his own with rivals who have been on the stage now for months.

Duncan Hunter also posted a strong performance, particularly on the issue of how the Chinese have taken advantage of U.S. trade policies to come back and hurt us.

The question was asked of all the candidates if they would go on record as supporting whoever wins the GOP nomination for President. Several candidates hedged, including Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, and Sam Brownback.

Mr. Paul insisted that his litmus test was the War in Iraq and whether or not the GOP nominee promises to get us out. Clearly Mr. Paul knows that several top-tier GOP candidates, one of whom is likely to be the nominee, clearly do not share his views on Iraq. Does this mean that he will support Hillary? Or perhaps turn to a third Party?

If this is the intent of Mr. Paul, surely he knows that such a move will hand the election to Hillary. And if he follows through and does such a thing, he not only will lose all of my respect but be relegated to the ash-heap of political history along side of the likes of Ross Perot.

Perot's misguided and laughable campaign as a third Party candidate in 1992 is the single reason Bill Clinton was elected President. If Ron Paul does a similar thing, he will hand the election to yet another Clinton.

And this raises a serious political question. In terms of campaign strategy, when a candidate uses tactics that he/she knows at the start will help elect a sworn political opponent, does this not mean that the candidate in question in actuality supports the opponent who benefits from those tactics?

After all, every single Democratic candidate has pledged to 'get us out of Iraq.' Since this seems to be the Paul litmus test, I suppose he would rather support Hillary or Kucinich than a member of his own Party.

Not a single GOP candidate can be described as a European-styled Socialist. Yet most if not all of the Democratic candidates are exactly that.

But who cares? At least they will 'get us out of Iraq.'

Mike Huckabee, as always, posted a fine debate performance this evening. It is easy to see why many refer to his 'rising star' status within the Republican Party with his quick wit and thoughtful answers.

With regard to the rest of the field of candidates--McCain, Giuliani, Romney--all did well and provided thoughtful answers to a range of questions on Social Security, healthcare, open markets, taxes, and government spending.

Based upon the answers given in this afternoon's debate, The Liberty Sphere will rate each of the GOP candidates based upon our exclusive 'liberty scale' which focuses on these key issues: taxes, gun rights, abortion, immigration control, national defense, the War on Terror, and U.S. foreign policy.

Here are the ratings (10 is the highest score):

Fred Thompson--10
Mike Huckabee--10
Duncan Hunter--10
Tom Tancredo--8
Ron Paul--7
Sam Brownback--7
John McCain--7
Mitt Romney--6
Rudy Giuliani--6

McCain's movement from a 5 to a 7 is due to the candidate's movement on the issues. We believe, at least at this point, that he has heard the outcry from the citizens about illegal immigration. His willingness to be flexible is a big point in his favor.