NYT: G.O.P., Tea Party Less United on Foreign Policy

By the Left Coast Rebel

Reading an interesting piece at the New York Times this morning addressing the grassroots paradigm shift re: foreign policy.

The piece echoes a lot of thoughts that have been bouncing around in my head for some time and is pretty good (although echoing the "isolationist" fallacy in describing those that question American foreign policy).


The shift, while incremental so far, appears to mark a separation from a post-Sept. 11 posture in which Republicans were largely united in supporting an aggressive use of American power around the world. A new debate over the costs and benefits of deploying the military reflects the length of the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, the difficulty of building functional governments and the financial burden at home in a time of extreme fiscal pressure.

The evolution also highlights a renewed streak of isolationism among Republicans, which has been influenced by the rise of the Tea Party movement and a growing sense that the United States can no longer afford to intervene in clashes everywhere.


Four years ago, Representative Ron Paul of Texas was the only Republican presidential candidate raising concerns about the cost of the war and urging a drawdown in troops. His positions, embraced by libertarians, are still outside the mainstream of many Republicans, but he is no longer standing alone in his call for a new stance toward foreign policy.


As noted above, I addressed the foreign policy topic in the Tea Party Age last month at American Thinker, "Ron Paul's Controversial Statement Exposes Foreign Policy Rift"

Via Memeorandum.

1 comment:

  1. Could it that foreign policy is an issue a bit less important than JOBS?! $14 trillion debt?!?!


Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.