The problem with that is the definition is so broad. It basically amounts to him deciding what is worth intervention and what isn't it, which is what every President is responsible for deciding anyway.Ron Paul is not an isolationist, he is a non-interventionist, as in Jeffersonian non-interventionism.
The problem with that is the definition is so broad. It basically amounts to him deciding what is worth intervention and what isn't it, which is what every President is responsible for deciding anyway.
Fair enough. My fault.That's fine, but do not misrepresent him as an isolationist. That definition carries with it specific connotations that do not apply to him; the most important of which is an adherence to protectionist economic policy.
No ...The problem with that is the definition is so broad. It basically amounts to him deciding what is worth intervention and what isn't it, which is what every President is responsible for deciding anyway.
Exactly.......And who decides where we have a vested interest? Many people feel that we had a vested interest in invading Iraq. Many didn't. It is the President's decision to make.No ...
It means the US will not intervene where we do not have a vested interest in doing so. That is how he decides what is worth intervening in and what isn't.
Actually, as it breaks out with Paul, the non-interventionism basically means not starting a war and not being part of foreign alliances. We would attack if we were attacked first, but never throw the first punch.Exactly.......And who decides where we have a vested interest? Many people feel that we had a vested interest in invading Iraq. Many didn't. It is the President's decision to make.
So he's an isolationist........(militarily anyway)Actually, as it breaks out with Paul, the non-interventionism basically means not starting a war and not being part of foreign alliances. We would attack if we were attacked first, but never throw the first punch.
So an isolationist........
"Isolationism" is non-interventionalist foreign policy plus economic protectionism.So he's an isolationist........(militarily anyway)
He may not qualify as an isolationist as it is defined by Websters, but any man who takes a stance of not creating or upholding allies in the world believes in isolation, at least from a foreign policy perspective. When you throw in the "not being part of foreign alliances" part, you go beyond non-interventionism."Isolationism" is non-interventionalist foreign policy plus economic protectionism.
Stuart Smalley will fit right in with all of the other clowns polluting the halls of congress. Does anyone really believe this guy Al Frankin will make a good senator?
based on what?Yes, I'm quite sure he will.
based on what?
The only 2 things in that list that are relevant are his intelligence and grasp of the issues, which are debatable. Not saying you're wrong, just that I disagree.His intelligence, his grasp of issues, his commitment to those issues, his demonstrated commitment to the troops through his contributions to the USO, his lack of affiliation with PACs and corporate backing. Franken has demonstrated his serious interest in politics for years with his radio show and books. Sure there were plenty of jokes along the way, but he is not kidding now, and should be taken seriously.
The only 2 things in that list that are relevant are his intelligence and grasp of the issues, which are debatable. Not saying you're wrong, just that I disagree.
He is a far left ideologue. Naturally, I don't believe he will be a good Senator. Yes, I am familiar with him and have read some of his work. You can be very condescending for someone who bailed out of our last discussion so quickly.Do you actually know anything about him other than his work on SNL? He's been a senator for 8 hours, what is there about his record that you dislike?
He is a far left ideologue. Naturally, I don't believe he will be a good Senator. Yes, I am familiar with him and have read some of his work. You can be very condescending for someone who bailed out of our last discussion so quickly.
Do you actually know anything about him other than his work on SNL? He's been a senator for 8 hours, what is there about his record that you dislike?
The only 2 things in that list that are relevant are his intelligence and grasp of the issues, which are debatable. Not saying you're wrong, just that I disagree.
Apparently they do. He's the winner and you, obviously, are a loser. GO AL!!
My main problem with him is that he is the liberal Anne Coulter.
Jimmy Carter had the highest IQ of any President in the last few decades. What's your point?Franken was a math wiz who graduated Havard with honors where he majored in Political Science.
He actually is good enough and smart enough.
The fact is that Bush ran as a conservative and governed as a liberal, at least fiscally. And looking back on it, I would have still voted for him again. A lot of people voted GOP to prevent Al Gore and John Kerry from reaching the presidency.
Oops, I guess that was bull****.... his lack of affiliation with PACs and corporate backing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?