Giuliani Tops in Thompson's Debate Debut

Democratic candidates' debates are a zero-sum game. However much one wins, others have to lose by an equal amount. For Republicans, it's not such an exciting exercise in forensic accounting. All of them-well, almost all-are growing on us. It's not "The Waltons" or "MASH," but we're getting accustomed to seeing these guys in our living rooms.

In Tuesday's economics debate in Dearborn, Mich., former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson won, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney lost by a little and perhaps a few points were stolen from the Democratic front runner, Sen. Hillary Clinton (N.Y.).

If Republicans learned anything from the Dearborn debate, it's that they have to prepare the media battlefield before every major event. The biggest problem they faced-MSNBC's chief Clinton cheerleader. Chris Matthews-behaved almost like a professional journalist.

That result was obtained because the conservative media (online and on the radio) first embarrassed his cohorts into keeping him in line. Both CNBC star Larry Kudlow and Matthews' co-moderator and CNBC reporter Maria Bartironio had publicly hinted that they'd keep Matthews in check.

And he was, for almost the entire show. When Matthews cracked wise at Thompson about a long answer, telling him he "should have stopped with 'no,'" Thompson gently smacked him down, saying. "That's your opinion, Christopher." Let's hope we'll find similar moments in future debates.

Though the debate was supposedly on economic issues, much of the two hours was spent on other topics such as the war, Iran and how a nuclear crisis with Iran necessitating military action would be handled by each of the candidates. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee homered, Thompson hit a triple and Romney managed to strike out on only one pitch.

Matthews did a good job trying to corner the candidates on a question that Hillary punted away in the last Democratic debate; Would you take military action to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons? Sen. Clinton huffily declined to answer because it was a hypothetical. The mere fact that almost every question in these debates is hypothetical didn't phase her a bit.

Aiming at Romney, Matthews asked if the former governor would take military action against Iran and added a new wrinkle: Do you need congressional authorization to do it?

Romney, flummoxed, reverted to corporate type and said that he'd convene a meeting: You sit down with your attorneys and they tell you what you have to do. Making it worse, when Matthews repeated the question - do you have to get Congress's approval?-Romney said he'd let the lawyers sort it out. Fanning a third time on the same fastball, Romney retreated into the "we'll do everything possible to avoid that" crisis stuff. It was bad and was made much worse when the other candidates sounded off on the same question.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (Calif.), with more military expertise than anyone on stage (except for Arizona Sen. John McCain) didn't hesitate. He'd take military action immediately if the targets were "fleeting" (I presume he meant only briefly exposed) and go to Congress if there were time.

McCain, in his comfort zone, said that, if time permitted, he'd seek congressional approval but would do what the situation demanded. And he added, such a nuclear crisis with Iran was a possibility much closer to reality than the discussion recognized.

Asked if he'd take military action against Iran, Huckabee said, "I'd do it in a heartbeat." He said that the President "has to do what's necessary to protect the American people." When Matthews demanded of him whether congressional approval was required Huckabee said that, if there's time to do it, congressional approval should be sought. But Matthews raised the stakes, asking what he'd do if Congress denied permission. Huckabee took a full swing and hit it into the center field bleachers.

If Congress said no, Huckabee said, you have to do what's necessary and suffer the consequences. Think about that. This is someone who-up front-is willing to take a persona) risk to do the right thing. That does not mean the others aren't, but he is the one who said it loudly and clearly. And he meant it.

Thompson scored well on this question, too, emphasizing that no one running for President should give up the President's constitutional powers preemptively. Thompson, like Huckabee, Hunter and McCain, agreed action should be taken and Congress consulted if time permitted.

Most of the candidates-except Hunter-didn't seem to mind if foreign governments or companies bought American companies. Hunter insisted he'd object to the Dubai ports deal again because they allowed transshipment of nuclear triggers to (possibly) the A.Q. Khan network. The others said that if national security and safety concerns were satisfied, they'd not oppose such deals.

The economic issues supposedly comprising the agenda gave the candidates the chance to ventilate some ideas and became Giuliani's platform to chew up Hillary.