Republican Debate In Iowa: Contenders' Sniping Could Leave a Mark

Contenders tried to remain above the fray during arguably one of the most confrontational debates of the campaign. A major flaw in each potential winner was exposed, as the seven hopefuls were subjected to various conservative litmus tests administered by moderators, as well as pointed jibes from opponents.

Heading into the debate, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas enjoyed a late surge to end up tied in an Iowa poll with newly minted frontrunner Newt Gingrich. The duo comprised a new two-headed hydra of candidates du jour ahead of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

Follow us

And so the familiar play resumed, as the lesser candidates took turns jabbing at the new not-Mitts, armed with ammunition that comes with a prolonged campaign's continuous vetting.

Paul largely pulled off his usual act of amiably pushing through questions with his typical dose of muted ire. He started off with the zinger of the night. When asked who else on stage he'd support if he does not get the GOP nod, Paul responded, "Fortunately for the Republican Party, I think everyone on this stage can beat Barack Obama."

Republican presidential candidate, U.S. Representative Ron Paul (R-TX), speaks as former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (L) looks on during the Republican Party presidential candidates debate. REUTERS/Jim Young

But unfortunately, the debate did not play to Paul's libertarian streak. Gone were Paul's potshots at the Federal Reserve and national debt. In their stead were long discussions on red-meat conservative issues: social issues; government in disorder and foreign policy. The congressman loses his appeal in all these fields, going wildly astray from neoconservative dogma.

When asked about his own propensity for getting earmarks for his district while vocally denouncing them in general, Paul demurred.

"You should include in your question, 'You have never voted once for an earmark,'" he said at the onset adding, "I think this whole this is out of control on the earmarks." Fumbling for an explanation, he pointed to unused funding ending up in the president's hands. "I think Congress has the obligation to earmark every penny. It's the whole principle of budgeting that is messed up."

A plan to bring federal judges before Congress to explain themselves after a controversial decision -- Gingrich's nod to the perpetual complaint of activist judges -- was met with resounding approval by the debate's live audience. Yet Paul didn't go along with the slam-dunk promise, saying, "To subpoena judges before Congress, I'd think twice about that. That's opening up a can of worms for us and leading to trouble."

But Paul's greatest dive came when the subject of disarming Iran came to the forefront. Here, his mantra of "It is not America's job to act as the world's police force" becomes a detriment among Republicans. His attempts at promising strong diplomatic efforts left him sounding like a dove in a crowd of hawks. When asked repeatedly what his approach would be, should Iran gain a nuclear weapon, he eventually reverted to using a Democratic president, John F. Kennedy, and his handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis, as a model.

But for good or ill, Paul did not cave in to what was clearly a partisan crowd and selection of moderators. The same could not be said for his competitors.

Gingrich largely ducked or countered allegations that he was not consistently conservative, or not conservative enough to win the nomination. He also downplayed questions of his own personality deficiencies, cracking jokes about his tempestuousness.