Lindsey Graham vs. Jack Hunter
The South Carolina senator squared off against TAC‘s own Jack Hunter on WTMA radio last week in a discussion of war, Ron Paul, libertarianism, earmarks and much more. Here are the highlights:
And here’s the stream for the full audio of Senator Graham’s interview with Hunter and WTMA “Morning Buzz” host Richard Todd.
Jack, you should have hit him with this.
“In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believe the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today.”
http://orangepunch.ocregister.com/2006/07/21/reagans-wisdom-on-the-middle-east-leave/
Lindsey Graham is frightening. Based on this interview, it seems that he:
1) Wants to keep troops in Iraq forever.
2) Wants to keep troops in Afghanistan forever.
3) Wants to start a war with Iran.
4) Wants to give the federal government the power to suspend the Bill of Rights for anyone who is accused of being a terrorist (and the definition of “terrorist” is being broadened to such an extent that it will soon include just about everyone).
5) Wants to attack Yemen and Somalia.
Graham is an unapologetic, imperialistic authoritarian. I hope Jack manages to get him in the studio for a longer interview.
I was impressed by the way Jack Hunter took the battle to Lindsey Graham, but I was surprised by the skill with which Graham responded. Graham might be a duplicitous hack who is wrong about almost everything, but he is not a weak debater. He seems to have both training and inborn talent as a rhetorician. I hope the people of SC overwhelm him with opposition, because that is what it will take.
In many ways I respect Graham. He is an active reservist and he votes with his party most of the time. I could forgive him for voting for Sotomayor but he really turned me off by voting for Kagan. I do not understand why he did that. If my senator had done anything like that I would raise so much you know what that he would wish he were dead. Graham has brought a lot of criticism on himself.
I thought Graham’s response to Hunter was also a surprise. I disagree with most of his political views, but I thought this exchange proved that he is a good thinker with political potential. I also believe Graham will face much criticism among his constituents. He has a chance to take the oppositon constructively and be a REAL representative of his people. If he does, he could have a change to be an example to many of his colleagues established in the republican party.
Wow! Really. Really? Hard to imagine a greater threat to liberty than this Mr. Graham. He really believes that “we’ll fight ‘em there so we don’t have to fight them here” nonsense? So how does he explain the Times Square bomb attempt? Or the Christmas Day bomb attempt? By his rationale those should not have occurred on our shores. Does he even understand their rationale for these attacks? Does he understand we only encourage more of these attempts with his preferred foreign policy?
His ignorance on Iraq is truly breathtaking (and un-American.) How anyone with an IQ above room temperature can think this $700 billion ‘experiment’ (his word!) was worthwhile is beyond me.
Peace be with you.
This has caused me to re-examine some of the habits I have fallen into. Just as I helped let politicians “take care of us”, so too have I begun to let the “libs” and the “hippies” that work for some major conservative cable news network, “predigest” the soundbites that have been fed to me. For example, Lindsey Graham is always shown as the greasy opportunist. While I hate Graham’s politics, I came away from this interview respecting the man more.
And Jack Hunter, EXCELLENT interview. You were SUPER-knowledgeable, without allowing your purpose to be to demonstrate your own prowess. You did an excellent job of drawing out Graham and showcasing HIS views, and showing them in contrast to your own, without needing to expound your side of the arguments.
Hats off to the pros, on both sides, who gave us this interview. I will also have to re-examine my previous tendency to dismiss Jack Hunter “out of hand”.
Pro’s like Graham are killing the Constitution and killing innocent people. I’ll take amateurs with common sense and not paid off servants of Mordor.
I think Bemjamin Franklin had people like Graham in mind when he talked about giving us a republic, if we can keep it.
With people like Graham in power the republic is a dead letter.
We’re all free to disagree, but so what? As above, good ole’ boy DG needs to read the constitution instead of motor-mouthing along and interrupting the interviewers like your typical Dim/Repug airhead. IOW DG ain’t got a flipping clue even if he is sincere as the day is long and coffee is black.
For one, if they’re enemy combatants, you need to declare war. But you can’t declare war against a tactic.
Further once somebody gets tagged with the terrorist label, it’s all over. You can get thrown in prison and they throw away the key. And we know who FEMA and the Missouri Fusion boys deemed terrorists: anybody who voted a third party candidate, pro-life, returning vet. etc. Funny how Islamic terrorists got left out. Just how did that happen anyway?
Neither can Congress neglect its responsibilities by delegating the call to go to war to the commander in chief. All that does is aid and abet the centralization of power. IOW the classic definition of a tyrant is one who holds all the reins. It makes no difference where they’re from – Texas or Chicago/Hawaii/Indonesia – or whether they’re named Julius Caesar or DG.
IOW Mr. Graham not only holds a despicable and stupid position, he arrogantly assumes all parties are on par and whoever can push the hardest wins, whatever the constitution says. Thanks, pal. Sounds really principled to me. For a minute I thought we had a fascist right wing war-monger on our hands, but I have been reassured.
Addendum
Anybody who talks the talk like DG did and then votes Sotomayer AND Kagan is either self deceived or a hypocrite/liar.
Hint, I don’t think DG is stupid. If the review is any indication, he seems a quite capable and voluble opportunist.