The Debate Part I -- Full Transcript

Correct our errors!

Cc:
Subject: GOP Debate -- Part One
Attachments:
View As Web Page

REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES PARTICIPATE IN A
DEBATE SPONSORED BY MSNBC, SIMI VALLEY, CALIFORNIA

MAY 3, 2007

SPEAKERS: SEN. SAM BROWNBACK, R-KAN.

REP. DUNCAN HUNTER, R-CALIF.

FORMER GOV. MITT ROMNEY, R-MASS.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, R-ARIZ.
REP. TOM TANCREDO, R-COLO.

FORMER MAYOR RUDOLPH W. GIULIANI, R-NEW YORK CITY

REP. RON PAUL, R-TEXAS

FORMER GOV. JAMES S. GILMORE III, R-VA.

FORMER GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE, R-ARK.

[*]
MODERATOR: In the NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, just 22 percent
believe this country is on the right track.

Mayor Giuliani, how do we get back to Ronald Reagan's morning in
America?

GIULIANI: We get back to it with optimism. The same situation
that I faced in New York City; when I became mayor of New York City,
65, 70 percent thought New York City was going on the wrong track.
And what I did was, I set policies and programs of growth, of moving
people toward prosperity, security, safety.

And what we can borrow from Ronald Reagan, since we are in his
library, is that great sense of optimism that he had. He led by
building on the strengths of America, not running America down.

And we're a country that people love to come to, they want to
come to this country with a shining city on the hill. So we should
solve our immigration issue, including illegal immigration, from our
strengths, not our weaknesses.

We're a country that has the greatest health care system in the
world. It's flawed, it needs to be fixed, but we should fix it from
our strengths. We shouldn't turn it into socialized medicine.

Those are the things that Ronald Reagan taught us: You lead from
optimism.

GIULIANI: You will lead from hope, and we should never retreat
in the face of terrorism. Terrible mistake.

MODERATOR: Senator McCain, most of the public pessimism today
has to do with Iraq. What would you need, as commander in chief, to
win the war in Iraq?

MCCAIN: I would need the support of the American people. I
would need to be able to show them some success in Iraq, both on the
battlefield as well as with the Maliki government. We have a new
general; we have a new strategy. That strategy can succeed.

The young men and women who are serving are the best of America.
I believe that if we bring about stability in the neighborhoods in
Iraq and have the Maliki government govern, you are going to succeed.

My friends, when the majority leader of the United States Senate
says we've lost the war, the men and women that are serving in Iraq
reject that notion.

And, if we lost, then who win? Did Al Qaida win? When on the
floor of the House of Representatives they cheer -- they cheer -- when
they pass a withdrawal motion that is a certain date for surrender,
what were they cheering?

MCCAIN: Surrender? Defeat?

We must win in Iraq. If we withdraw, there will be chaos; there
will be genocide; and they will follow us home.

MATTHEWS: Do you need anything, beyond what the president has
now, to win the war?

MCCAIN: Now I think it's on the right track. The war was
terribly mismanaged. The war was terribly mismanaged and we now have
to fix a lot of the mistakes that were made. Books have been written.

But we have a new strategy and a new general. And these young
men and women are committed to winning.

MATTHEWS: Governor Thompson, if you're commander in chief and
you want to win this war in Iraq, what do you need to do to win it?

THOMPSON: First, you have to support the troops. There's an
undying bond in America that, any time an American soldier is in
harm's way, we have to protect him.

Beyond that, there are three things that I have laid out. Number
one, I believe the al-Maliki government should be required to vote as
to whether or not they want America in their country.

If they vote yes, it gives us a legitimacy for being there. If
they vote no, we should get out.

THOMPSON: Secondly, there are 18 territories in Iraq, just like
we have 50 states in America. I would require those territories to
elect governments, just like we do in our states.

And if you do so, the Shiites will elect Shiites. Sunnis will
elect Sunnis. Kurds will elect Kurds. And you won't have this
internecine civil war.

Third, I would split the oil reserves: one-third to the federal
government, one-third to the state governments and one-third to every
man, woman and child. If every man, woman and child is getting part
of the oil proceeds, they're going to have a vested interest in their
country.

They will be purchasing goods. They will be investing in small
businesses. And they will be building the country on democratic
grounds in Iraq.

MODERATOR: Congressman Hunter?

HUNTER: Yeah, very briefly, Chris, the key to winning in Iraq is
standing up the Iraqi military. There are 129 battalions in the Iraqi
army. We need to make sure that every one of those battalions moves
into an operational setting, gets a three- or four-month military
operation in a contentious zone.

At that point, they can move into the combat field.

HUNTER: They can start displacing American units. And America's
heavy combat units can rotate out. That's the right way to leave
Iraq.

MODERATOR: Governor Romney, in that same NBC-Wall Street Journal
poll that Chris mentioned, 55 percent of Americans say victory is just
not possible in Iraq. They've made up their minds on this war.

Why shouldn't they have a president who will listen?

ROMNEY: Well, if you wanted to have a president that just
followed the polls, all we need to do is plug in our TVs and have them
run the country. But that's not what America wants. It's not what
America needs. We need leadership that's strong and that shows
America what we can do to lead the world.

Ronald Reagan was a president of strength. His philosophy was a
philosophy of strength: a strong military, a strong economy and
strong families.

With regards to Iraq, there are a lot of people that say, let's
just get out. I want to get our troops home as soon as I possibly
can. But, at the same time, I recognize we don't want to bring them
out in such a precipitous way that we cause a circumstance that would
require us to come back.

ROMNEY: Because if we leave in the wrong way, the Iranians could
grab the Shia south, or Al Qaida could play a dominant role among the
Sunnis, or you could have the border with Turkey destabilized by the
Kurds -- and, as a result, you could have regional conflict develop.

But with that occurring, you could have our neighbors get
involved, our friends get involved around Iraq, and we could have to
come back again.

That's why it's so essential for us at this critical time to
support the al-Maliki effort to bring strength and stability to
Baghdad, to Al Anbar. Hopefully they're good signs that we're going
to see increasing, and we'll be able to bring our troops home safely.

MODERATOR: Time, Governor.

Let me to go to Senator Brownback with the next question. Recent
polls in the Islamic world reveal a sea of hostility toward the United
States, feeding what General Petraeus calls the central front of Al
Qaida in Iraq.

How do we win this war if every dead terrorist is so easily
replaced?

BROWNBACK: I think we win the war by standing up for our values
and working with those who will work with us.

BROWNBACK: I think you have to remember that while we're in a
war on terrorism, there are a number of people that are with us, that
work with us around the world, and also in the Islamic world. We're
partnering with a number of moderate Muslim regimes.

And that's something I think we need to convey into the Muslim
world as well, that these are groups -- the Al Qaida group, the
militant Islamic fascists -- they're trying to unseat moderate Muslim
regimes.

And I think we need to engage those regimes -- regimes in
Pakistan, regimes in Egypt -- as long as we also confront those
regimes, like in Iran, that are the lead -- Iran is the lead sponsor
of terrorism around the world. And we've got to be very
confrontational and very aggressive there.

So it's to engage those that'll work with us, contain and
confront those that won't, and convey that to the Muslim world.

MODERATOR: How do you deal with the problem revealed in a recent
Zogby poll that in countries that are mentioned you mentioned, like
Jordan, Morocco, Turkey, another Islamic country, 10, 12 percent of
the people support us, the rest are angry at us? Doesn't that create
a sea of recruitment opportunity for our enemy?

MODERATOR: And I'm just asking: Do we have to reduce that
temperature of hatred before we win the war, or simply continue to
fight the terrorists?

BROWNBACK: Well, I think we have to do both, Chris. I mean, you
have to engage in those countries. We have to engage in Jordan, and I
think we need to engage with all the tools of state that we have:
economic tools, along with foreign relations, diplomatic and military
tools as well.

But at the same time, when we do that, you've got to confront.
You've got to confront those that are coming after us. And they've
been doing this for over a decade -- coming at us -- from before 9/11.

We cannot be weak on this whatsoever.

MODERATOR: Governor Huckabee, I'd like to get your views about
how you balance loyalty and accountability. Would you have fired Don
Rumsfeld before last November?

HUCKABEE: I think I would've done that before the election. I
certainly wouldn't have said that we are not going to do it and then,
right after the election, done so. But that's the president's call.

Clearly there was a real error in judgment, and that primarily
had to do with listening to a lot of folks who were civilians in suits
and silk ties and not listening enough to the generals with mud and
blood on their boots and medals on their chest.

HUCKABEE: Those generals told us, early on, it would take
300,000 troops to successfully go in and stabilize Iraq. Instead we
gave them a limited number of troops and a budget and said, you have
to do it with this.

I think that's something, now, we understand was a mistake. But
rather than simply walking away and leaving the Middle East in a
complete disastrous chaos that will spread to the region and to the
rest of the world, it's important that we finish the job, that we do
it right, rather than have to go back and some day do it over.

MODERATOR: Why don't we start with Governor Gilmore there, and
ask you a general question, as people who are political and know the
mood of the country, starting with you -- you've been a military man.
You were in Army intelligence.

But on this general question, the Rumsfeld removal was perhaps
timed to the election. Do you think a general shake-up in this
administration's Cabinet, right now, would be good for the
administration?

GILMORE: I think there have been a lot of changes in the
administration over the last number of years.

GILMORE: We've seen those changes.

But the fundamental point that we have to remember is this has
been coming on for quite a long time. Decades this has been coming
on. And I think we got distracted at the end of the Cold War, when we
were thinking about the end of the Soviet Union and the fall of the
Berlin Wall, thanks to the president in whose name this library is
named. And, instead, we didn't pay attention sufficiently to the
entire Middle East.

And I see this Iraq problem as part of an entire Middle East
issue, and it's sort of a fundamental problem that we're going to have
an honest conversation with the American people about. We're going to
have to engage in the Middle East, and we're going to have to do it
for an extended and a long period of time.

It isn't just an Iraq issue. This is an issue of the challenges
that we're facing between the Palestinians and the Israelis, the
challenge between Sunnis and Shiites -- the problem with people on the
street not even agreeing with their own regimes.

There is a great deal that has to be done, and the president is
going to have to bring the American people forward into a major
commitment in many areas -- one is foreign policy -- and there will
have to be a new commitment to the Middle East.

MODERATOR: Congressman Paul, you voted against the war. Why are
all your fellow Republicans up here wrong?

PAUL: That's a very good question. And you might ask the
question, why are 70 percent of the American people now wanting us out
of there, and why did the Republicans do so poorly last year?

So I would suggest that we should look at foreign policy. I'm
suggesting very strongly that we should have a foreign policy of non-
intervention, the traditional American foreign policy and the
Republican foreign policy.

Throughout the 20th century, the Republican Party benefited from
a non-interventionist foreign policy. Think of how Eisenhower came in
to stop the Korean War. Think of how Nixon was elected to stop the
mess in Vietnam.

How did we win the election in the year 2000? We talked about a
humble foreign policy: No nation-building; don't police the world.
That's conservative, it's Republican, it's pro-American -- it follows
the founding fathers. And, besides, it follows the Constitution.

PAUL: I tried very hard to solve this problem before we went to
war by saying, "Declare war if you want to go to war. Go to war,
fight it and win it, but don't get into it for political reasons or to
enforce U.N. resolutions or pretend the Iraqis were a national threat
to us.

MODERATOR: It's time.

This is a question for Senator McCain. It's along those lines of
intervention. Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson said that Iran
has already committed acts of war. Do you agree?

And, secondly, as part of that, what's your tripwire for a U.S.
strike in Iran?

MCCAIN: Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. We all know that.
Iran continues their efforts to build nuclear weapons. Iran is now
exporting lethal IEDs and jihadists and suicide bombers into Iraq,
killing American soldiers.

The Iranians encouraged Hezbollah to attack Israel from Lebanon
recent. Iran poses one of the greatest threats to the security of the
world, and in the Middle East.

MCCAIN: I believe the Iranians have got -- we have got to bring
greater pressures, diplomatic, economic, political, join with our
European allies who still fear greatly the effort of the cutoff of oil
from -- into Europe.

We have to work together. If the Russians and the Chinese are
not helpful to us, then we had better figure out a way to put
additional pressures, encouraging democracy and freedom without Iraq,
which is a very cultured -- within Iran, which is a very cultured
society.

At the end of the day we cannot allow Iran...

MODERATOR: OK.

MCCAIN: ... to acquire nuclear weapons.

MODERATOR: Let me follow up a little bit, Senator.

MCCAIN: Sure.

MODERATOR: What is your trip wire? Is it the building of a
nuclear weapon? The threat to use a weapon once built? A delivery
system? Is it preemptive or preventive?

MCCAIN: My greatest fear is the Iranians acquire a nuclear
weapon and give it to a terrorist organization.

MCCAIN: And there is a real threat of them doing that.

The trip wire is that if they acquire these weapons -- and our
intelligence tells us that this is a real threat to the state of
Israel, to other states in the region.

But I want to emphasize, Chris, there's lots of additional
efforts that can be made and must be made before we consider that
option. There's lots of things we can do.

That is the, ultimately, final option. And I don't think we can
exercise it at this time.

MODERATOR: OK.

Congressman Tancredo, along those lines, imagine you're president
of the United States and this is a likely or possible scenario,
certainly plausible: You get a call from the prime minister of Israel
-- who's now Ehud Olmert -- saying Israel is about to strike Iran's
nuclear sites and he wants U.S. help.

What do you say?

TANCREDO: I say that, look, when we -- if you look at this issue
and stand back for just a second and say, there are two kinds of Irans
that we are going to have to deal with here: one headed by a
gentleman who believes that he is going to be responsible for the
coming of the 12th imam and a guy with a bomb, that should put us in
the position of saying that anything we can do to stop that is
imperative.

TANCREDO: And if Israel is put in that position, and we need to
be involved in order to protect both ourselves and the Israelis, then
of course we respond in the appropriate fashion.

MODERATOR: If the prime minister asks you for help, you say you
will say yes?

TANCREDO: Well, there are conditions, of course, under which we
would say yes. But I'm telling you that if they are -- if there is a
threat to the existence of Israel, which is, by the way, I think a
potential threat to the existence of the United States, then you have
to come to that -- the aid of Israel.

MODERATOR: Mayor Giuliani, on that point?

GIULIANI: It really depends on what our intelligence says. I
mean, the reality is, the use of military force against Iran would be
very dangerous. It would be very provocative. The only thing worse
would be Iran being a nuclear power.

It's the worst nightmare of the Cold War; isn't it? The nuclear
weapons in the hands of an irrational person, an irrational force.

Ahmadinejad is clearly irrational.

GIULIANI: He has to understand it's not an option; he cannot
have nuclear weapons. And he has to look at an American president and
he has to see Ronald Reagan. Remember, they looked in Ronald Reagan's
eyes, and in two minutes, they released the hostages.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

MODERATOR: Governor Gilmore of Virginia, when speaking about
Osama bin Laden last week, Governor Romney said, quote, "It's not
worth moving heaven and Earth, spending billions of dollars just
trying to catch one person."

Senator McCain called that naive.

Who's right?

GILMORE: You know, I think -- well, I think we do have to do
everything that we can do to get this guy, and the reason is because
he is a symbol to the people who believe, as a matter of faith, that
they have a right and a duty to destroy Americans and Western
civilization.

The bigger, however, issue, is this: The Americans have to lead
against the sea of hostility that was referred to earlier.

This is a serious challenge.

GILMORE: We can't allow a situation where everyone, all the way
from Morocco, all the way through the Middle East, all the way to the
Philippines, believes that the United States does not have their best
interests at heart.

During the Cold War -- and I served as...

MODERATOR: If I would, is President Bush partly responsible for
that, in your view?

GILMORE: This is what I think we have to do: What I think we
have to do is to use all of our abilities, diplomatic and economic and
military, above all things, put ourselves on the moral high ground,
and let people across the world know that we are in the same shoes
that we were in during the Cold War.

During the Cold War, we represented the aspirations of people
everywhere in the world in good faith. And that now must be our
policy, so that we in fact do deny those kinds of people and resources
to the people who we can't deal with diplomatically. And that, of
course, is the Al Qaida type of fundamentalists.

MODERATOR: Governor Romney, respond to the mentioned reference
to you...

ROMNEY: Well, of course, we get...

(LAUGHTER)

MODERATOR: ... by Senator McCain.

(LAUGHTER)

ROMNEY: Thank you. Of course we get Osama bin Laden and track
him wherever he has to go, and make sure he pays for the outrage he
exacted upon America.

MODERATOR: Can we move heaven and earth to do it?

ROMNEY: We'll move everything to get him. But I don't want to
buy into the Democratic pitch that this is all about one person --
Osama bin Laden -- because after we get him, there's going to be
another and another.

ROMNEY: This is about Shia and Sunni. This is about Hezbollah
and Hamas and Al Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood. This is a
worldwide jihadist effort to try and cause the collapse of all
moderate Islamic governments and replace them with a caliphate.

They ultimately want to bring down the United States of America.

This is a global effort we're going to have to lead to overcome
this jihadist effort. It's more than Osama bin Laden.

But he is going to pay, and he will die.

MODERATOR: OK. Thank you, Governor.

We now go to our interactive round of questions that were
submitted and voted on by the users of Political.com.

Jim VandeHei will read these questions to the candidates now, who
will have 30 seconds to respond. And if a rebuttal is necessary, that
will also be 30 seconds.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Chris.

Senator McCain, Sara from Arlington, Virginia, wants to know if
you would be comfortable with Tom Tancredo, a stanch opponent of
illegal immigration, as head of the Immigration and Naturalization
Service.

(LAUGHTER)

MCCAIN: In a word, no.

(LAUGHTER)

On the subject of Osama bin Laden, he's responsible for the
deaths of thousands of innocent Americans. He's now orchestrating
other attacks on the United States of America. We will do whatever is
necessary. We will track him down. We will capture him. We will
bring him to justice, and I will follow him to the gates of hell.

MODERATOR: OK. Let me ask you a question regarding immigration.
One of our prized guests here today, Governor Schwarzenegger --
looking this man in the eye, answer this question -- I'm going to go
down the line, starting with Governor Romney.

Should we change our Constitution, which we believe is divinely
inspired...

(LAUGHTER)

... to allow men like Mel Martinez, the chairman of your party,
born in Cuba, great patriot, the senator from Florida, and Arnold
Schwarzenegger, to stand here some night?

Governor Romney?

ROMNEY: Never given that a lot of thought, but with Arnold
sitting there, I'll give it some thought, but probably not.

MODERATOR: No?

ROMNEY: No.

MODERATOR: Yes or no?

(UNKNOWN): I love the Governator, but...

MODERATOR: We got two noes.

(UNKNOWN): I think there are other ideas that we should...

MODERATOR: Governor Gilmore. Two noes. We're moving here.

GILMORE: No, I don't intend to want to amend this Constitution
in a variety of different ways, and this would be not a good start to
do it that way.

MODERATOR: So that's a no. Three noes in a row.

HUCKABEE: After I've served eight years as president, I'd be
happy to change the Constitution for Governor Schwarzenegger.

(LAUGHTER)

MODERATOR: Three to one.

Congressman?

HUNTER: We haven't seen his endorsement yet, Chris.

MODERATOR: OK. Three to one to no-show?

HUNTER: That's a no.

MODERATOR: OK. Four noes to one.

Governor?

THOMPSON: No.

MODERATOR: Five to one.

Senator?

MCCAIN: Depends on whether he endorses me or not.

(LAUGHTER)

He and I have many similar attributes, so I have to seriously
consider it.

MODERATOR: OK. We've got an overwhelming vote against you,
Governor, in your own house.

(LAUGHTER)

Congressman?

PAUL (?): I'm a no, because I am a strong supporter of the
original intent.

MODERATOR: Oh, God.

OK, Mayor Giuliani?
GIULIANI: When he called me up to endorse him, he got me on the
phone, he said, "Will you endorse me?", and I was too afraid to say
no.

(LAUGHTER)

MODERATOR: OK.

Congressman Tancredo -- is it no or yes?

GIULIANI: I would say yes.

MODERATOR: Yes.

TANCREDO: Intimidating as he might be, I'm saying no.

MODERATOR: OK. We've got two yeses here.

MODERATOR: Mayor Giuliani, Bradley Winters of New York would
like to know if there's anything you learned or regret during your
time as mayor in your dealings with the African-American community?

GIULIANI: There's a great deal that I learned and a great deal
that I regret during the time I was mayor, and a great deal I was
very, very satisfied with. I tried very, very hard to treat everyone
in New York City the same. We reduced crime by 67 percent. Some of
the biggest beneficiaries of that would have been in the poorer
neighborhoods of New York City, not necessarily the African-American
community but a lot of the communities of New York City.

And I worked very, very hard to try to move hundreds of thousands
of people out of welfare.

GIULIANI: We actually followed Tommy Thompson's program, and we
had the most successful welfare-to-work program in the country. We
moved 660,000 people off welfare. And I think one of the reasons that
crime is still down in New York today...

MODERATOR: That's the time, Mayor.

GIULIANI: Thank you.

MODERATOR: Governor Romney, Daniel Duchovnik (ph) from Walnut
Creek, California, wants to know: What do you dislike most about
America?

ROMNEY: Gosh. I love America. I'm afraid I'm going to be at a
loss for words because America for me is not just our rolling
mountains and hills and streams and great cities. It's the American
people.

And the American people are the greatest people in the world.
What makes America the greatest nation in the world is the heart of
the American people: hardworking, innovative, risk-taking, God-
loving, family-oriented American people.

It's that optimism we thank Ronald Reagan for. Thank you, Mrs.
Reagan, for opening up this place in his memory for us. It is that
optimism about this great people that makes this the greatest nation
on earth.

MODERATOR: Governor Huckabee, this question comes from Curtis
Waldman (ph) from Boca Raton, Florida.

MODERATOR: Thousands of reputable scientists have concluded with
almost certainly that human activity is responsible for the warming of
the Earth. Do you believe global warming exists?

HUCKABEE: The most important thing about global warming is this.
Whether humans are responsible for the bulk of climate change is going
to be left to the scientists, but it's all of our responsibility to
leave this planet in better shape for the future generations than we
found it.

It's the old boy scout rule of the campsite: You leave the
campsite in better shape than you found it.

I believe that even our responsibility to God means that we have
to be good stewards of this Earth, be good caretakers of the natural
resources that don't belong to us, we just get to use them. We have
no right to abuse them.

MODERATOR: Congressman Tancredo, David Diamond (ph) from Memphis
writes in, "Do you have a plan to solve the shortage of organs donated
for transplant?"

TANCREDO: Well, I don't believe that the government of the
United -- that the president of the United States should be putting
forth a plan to do such a thing.

TANCREDO: The reality is that technology and the advancement of
technology in a variety of areas is going at a pace where I believe we
can look forward to cures -- we can look forward to a variety of
things that will allow us to cure diseases that today we do not have
cures for.

But the idea that I think is inherent in this question, that
somehow we should be growing these things, somehow we should be
cloning people for the purpose of using these kinds of their
attributes...

MODERATOR: That's time, Congressman.

TANCREDO: ... is ridiculous. I absolutely would not support it.

MODERATOR: Congressman Hunter, Maggie from Highland Park,
Illinois, wants to know if you consider yourself a compassionate
conservative, like President Bush.

HUNTER: Answer: Yes. And let me take the rest of my time on
Iran. You know, right now, right now, Iran is moving equipment into
Iraq that is being used to kill Americans. Iran has crossed the line,
and the United States has absolute license at this point to take
whatever actions are necessary to stop those deadly instruments from
being moved across the line, being used in explosives, roadside bombs,
inside Iraq.

And lastly, you know, we don't -- we should not get to the edge
of the cliff on this enrichment of uranium.

HUNTER: And plutonium to be used for a nuclear weapon in Iran --
the United States needs to move very quickly...

MODERATOR: Thank you, Congressman. That's time.

HUNTER: The United States needs to move very quickly.

MODERATOR: Congressman Paul, Pete from Rochester Hills, Michigan
wants to ask you this. If you were president, would you work to phase
out the IRS?

(LAUGHTER)

PAUL: Immediately.

(LAUGHTER)

MODERATOR: That's what they call a softball.

PAUL: And you can only do that if you change our ideas about
what the role of government ought to be.

If you think that government has to take care of us, from cradle
to grave, and if you think our government should police the world and
spend hundreds of billions of dollars on a foreign policy that we
cannot manage, you can't (ph) get rid of the IRS; but, if you want to
lower taxes and if you want the government to quit printing the money
to come up with shortfall and cause all the inflation, you have to
change policy.

MODERATOR: Time.

We now go to the next segment. We're going to talk about values.
Let's go down the line on this just like they did with the Democrats
last week on some of these trickier calls, but they do have clear
answers.

Starting with you, Governor, would the day that Roe v. Wade is
repealed be a good day for America.

ROMNEY: Absolutely.

MODERATOR: Senator?

BROWNBACK (?): It would be a glorious day of human liberty and
freedom.

MODERATOR: Governor?

GILMORE (?): Yes, it was wrongly decided.

MODERATOR: Governor?

HUCKABEE (?): Most certainly.

MODERATOR: Congressman?

HUNTER (?): Yes.

MODERATOR: Governor?

(UNKNOWN): Yes.

MODERATOR: Senator?

MODERATOR: A repeal.

MODERATOR: Mayor?

GIULIANI: It would be OK.

MODERATOR: OK to repeal?

GIULIANI: It would be OK to repeal. It would be also if a
strict constructionist judge viewed it as precedent and I think a
judge has to make that decision.
MODERATOR: Would it be OK if they didn't repeal it?

GIULIANI: I think the court has to make that decision and then
the country can deal with it. We're a federalist system of government
and states can make their own decisions.

MODERATOR: Congressman?

TANCREDO (?): After 40 million dead because we have aborted them
in this country, I would say that that would be the greatest day in
this country's history when that, in fact, is overturned.

MODERATOR: We're looking for nuance here. Governor Gilmore, you
have said in the past that you believe in the first eight to 12 weeks
of pregnancy that the woman should have the right to have an abortion.
Do you still want to stick with that exception?

GILMORE: I do, Chris. My views on this, my beliefs on this are
a matter of conviction. And they've always been the same, and they've
never changed, the entire time that I've been in public life.

However, my record as governor of Virginia, I think, has been one
that the pro-life community, of which I'm a part, would be very proud:
passing a 24-hour waiting period, passing informed consent, passing
parental notification, signing the partial-birth abortion law in
Virginia.

So I think the record is there. But my views -- my views are
strongly and fundamentally believed and been held that way.

MODERATOR: Governor Thompson, do you have any nuance on this?
Or are you just happy with the repeal of Roe v. Wade?

THOMPSON: I believe it should be left up to the states. That
was what was originally implied, and the Constitution was changed when
the Supreme Court made the decision.

I, like a lot of people up here, have made a record of pro-life
for a long time, signing the partial-birth abortion, pre-notification
for parents and so on.

THOMPSON: I think it's an important imperative that states have
the responsibility for making these laws.

MODERATOR: Governor Romney, in recent months, you've said you
were, quote, "always for life," but we've also heard you say you were
once, quote, "effectively pro-choice." Which is it?

ROMNEY: Well, I've always been personally pro-life, but for me,
it was a great question about whether or not government should intrude
in that decision. And when I ran for office, I said I'd protect the
law as it was, which is effectively a pro-choice position.

About two years ago, when we were studying cloning in our state,
I said, look, we have gone too far. It's a "brave new world"
mentality that Roe v. Wade has given us, and I changed my mind.

I took the same course that Ronald Reagan and George Herbert
Walker Bush and Henry Hyde took, and I said I was wrong and changed my
mind and said I'm pro-life. And I'm proud of that, and I won't
apologize to anybody for becoming pro-life.

MODERATOR: Governor, with respect, some people are going to see
those changes of mind as awfully politically convenient.

ROMNEY: You know, I told you that I'd studied at great length
this issue. When I ran, I -- for the very first time, I told you that
I was personally pro-life but that I would protect a woman's right to
choose as the law existed.

ROMNEY: And that stayed the same until two years ago, as I
indicated.

And at that time, as a result of the debate we had, the
conclusion I reached was that we had gone too far, that cloning and
that creating new embryos was wrong, and that we should, therefore,
allow our state to become a pro-life state.

I believe states should have the right to make this decision, and
that's a position I indicated in an op-ed in the Boston Globe two
years ago.

MODERATOR: Senator Brownback, this is an important issue for
you.

BROWNBACK: It is.

MODERATOR: Could you support a nominee of your party who is not
pro-life?

BROWNBACK: I could, because I believe in the Ronald Reagan
principle, that somebody that's with you 80 percent of the time is not
your enemy, that's your friend and that's your ally. And this is a
big coalition party. And it's a coalition party that's governed for a
number of years in this country.

BROWNBACK: And it governs because it governs with a coalition of
economic and social conservatives, and people that want to be strong
for the United States.

But I want to emphasize, I believe life is one of the central
issues of our day, and I believe that every human life at every phase
is unique, is beautiful, is a child of a loving God, period.

MODERATOR: That's the time.

Let me go back to Governor -- Mayor Giuliani, because I want to
give you a chance on this.

You became very well known for standing up against the use of
public funds for what many people considered indecent exhibits at the
Brooklyn museum and places like that.

Why do you support the use of public funds for abortion?

GIULIANI: I don't. I support the Hyde amendment. I hate
abortion. I wish people didn't have abortions.

MODERATOR: So you're not for funding at all?

GIULIANI: I believe that the Hyde amendment should remain the
law. States should make their decision. Some states decide to do it.
Most states decide not to do it. And I think that's the appropriate
way to have this decided.

MODERATOR: Should New York, when you were mayor of New York,
should they have been paying for -- the state should have been paying
for...

GIULIANI: That's a decision New York made a long time ago.