Ron Paul Vs. Rudy Giuliani

Congressman Ron Paul has commandered the Straight Talk Express since John McCain isn't using it.

Here we are, almost six years after the start of the "War on Terror," and a Republican Congressman running for president has the balls to say that honestly look at the causes of terrorism. Don't expect him to last very long on the campaign trail.

In a May 15 Republican debate, Ron Paul (R, Texas) had this exchange with Rudy:

PAUL: No. Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there; we've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East -- I think Reagan was right.

We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we're building an embassy in Iraq that's bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (Applause.)

[Debate moderator Wendell Goler]: Are you suggesting we invited the 9-11 attack, sir?

PAUL: I'm suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we're over there because Osama bin Laden has said, "I am glad you're over on our sand because we can target you so much easier." They have already now since that time -- (bell rings) -- have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don't think it was necessary.

GIULIANI: Wendell, may I comment on that? That's really an extraordinary statement. That's an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I've heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.)

Whoa. Do you see how fast and hard the Republican establishment pounced on him for "blaming the victim?"

Let me be clear about one thing: No sane person in this world could fail to see those who died on September 11, their families, and those who were injured and displaced, as completely innocent victims of a stupendously evil crime. That crime, though, is in response to an American foreign policy that has valued access to oil and strategic interests over human life and national sovereignty for more than 60 years.

Most of this country, however, want to see our 9/11 dead as martyrs. Some would like to see us kill a dozen for each person who died that day (conservative estimates show we have already done that and more; many of as innocent). Giulianni and his ilk would like us to continue trying to stomp out a swarm of flies using a boot. The boot industry would like to see that, too.

As horrible as September 11 was, it pales in comparison to the misery we've brought to Iraq. It eclipses even the horror of Hussein's brutal rule, if you use violent deaths and infrastructure collapse as a measurement, which this administration never has.

The Republicans will continue to use 9/11 in their campaigns, warning us that we should never forget what a group of 19 men and probably a dozen planners did to us and yet never once ask why. "They hate us for our lifestyle." That's bullshit. They hate us because we defile their holy land with our presence. They use terrorism as a way to leverage our strength and size against ourselves. We could no better "War" Al Qaida out of existence than war a virus out of our body.

The turmoil won't end until we leave Iraq.

Why Gay Marriage Was No Threat in 2005

Gay marriage was a big issue in 2004, and is starting again to be in 2006, but why was it no issue in 2005? I bet you've already figured out this conundrum. The answer is there were no national elections in 2005.

When a politician says that gay unions is a threat to the institution of marriage, they really mean that everything but gay unions are a threat to their majority:

The Iraq war	Osama bin Laden	The federal budget deficit
The U.S. trade deficit	NSA's warrantless wire- tapping of U.S. citizens	FEMA
Oil prices	Darfur	The Valerie Plame affair
Global warming	New Orleans	The Jack Abramoff scandal

Bill Frist thinks Christians are suckers

With all these difficult, unresolved problems keeping good, honest, hard-working Americans awake at night, Senate majority leader Bill Frist pushed this amendment to the floor for debate today even though he knew he was nowhere close to the 66 votes needed to pass. Rather than doing something for America, he's decided to waste the Senate's time with this odious, overtly political gesture. That's the power of the Senate majority leader.

You see, he wants to make sure that conservative Christians come out and vote for him and his ilk despite the grand-scale larceny of his tenure and the Old Testament-style bloodletting of the Iraq war. If they really cared at all about gay marriage, wouldn't they have been working on it since the last time they talked up this amendment?

Sadly, it might work for him, but I hope that Jesus helps people see right through his evil, self-serving motive.