the US needs to bear the responsibility of protecting our allies in Europe, Asia, and other parts of the world." --- says the interventionist.
providing military and financial support to foreign nation's is not our government's job. On Mar 21, 9:33 am, Bruce Majors <[email protected]> wrote: > Rand Paul won the presidential straw > poll<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/16/rand-paul-wins-cpac-straw...> > at > the recent Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), but he appears > to have won the debate on drones by an even larger margin. > > A poll of CPAC attendees found that 86% opposed the use of drones to "kill > US citizens," while 70% were against using them to "spy on U.S. citizens". > More strikingly, 50% of respondents at America's largest gathering of > conservative activists agreed with the following statement: "Nearly 70 > years after the end of World War II, it's time for our European, Asian, and > other allies to provide for their own defense." > > Only 34% agreed with this statement: "As the world's only superpower, the > US needs to bear the responsibility of protecting our allies in Europe, > Asia, and other parts of the world." Another 17% didn't know, weren't sure > or preferred not to say. > > The wording of the questions certainly made conservatives more likely to > give non-interventionist responses. One simple edit in the drone questions > –changing "US citizens" to "terrorists" – might have elicited a somewhat > different answer. Nevertheless, the momentum definitely appears to have > shifted. Gone are the days of Americans supporting anything in the name of > US security. > > This latest libertarian surge on the American right began with Kentucky > Senator Paul's 13-hour filibuster over domestic > drones<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/06/rand-paul-filibuster-dron...>. > Paul posed a simple question to the Obama administration: Do they believe > the president has the legal authority to kill a US citizen on American soil > with a drone? > > In what originally appeared to be a quixotic crusade, Paul won the support > of the top two Senate Republican leaders, many of his GOP colleagues, the > chairman of the Republican National Committee, the National Republican > Senatorial Committee, and grassroots conservatives all over social media, > who began tweeting > "#standwithrand<https://twitter.com/search?q=%23standwithrand>". > He also got the Obama administration to cry uncle on the question of > domestic drone killings, though some mysteries remain. > > For Republicans who had never particularly cared about drones or > extrajudicial killings before, the Paul filibuster was great fun. It > allowed them to hit liberal hypocrisy on civil liberties, seldom in shortly > supply when Democrats are in power. It gave them the opportunity to engage > in a messaging war with the White House and actually win. And for the first > time in quite a while, the GOP was able to rally the conservative base > without irritating anyone else. > > Almost anyone, that is. The Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol said that > Paul<http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/sound-and-fury_706660.html>was > leading the "Code Pink faction of the Republican party." John McCain > groused about "wacko birds" > <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/07/rand-paul-drones-policy-f...>and > libertarian kids sitting in their dorm rooms. > > In the not-too-distant past, jibes like these might have been devastating. > Not this time. Tea Party rising star Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz wore > the "wacko birds" sobriquet like a badge of honor. Kristol's Code > Pink-baiting was mostly ignored. > > The tough on defense hawks appeared to have the upper hand as recently as > the Chuck Hagel confirmation hearings. Now Paul was getting conservative > Republicans to question something more fundamental than drone strikes: > whether a permanent war without geographic or temporal limits – that is, > the neoconservative framing of the war on terror – is really compatible > with limited government. > > Paul pointed out that if the American homeland is considered part of the > battlefield, then the Bill of Rights goes out the window. And if the > president can commit troops to whatever country he wants based on the > authorization of force most Americans understood as pertaining to > Afghanistan, congressional war powers are the next part of the Constitution > that must be jettisoned. When put that way, that's further than many > Republicans want to go, especially when there is a democratic president. > > Paul isn't alone. Not only does he have allies in the Senate like Cruz of > Texas and Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee, another Tea Party darling, but > there is now a cadre of libertarian-leaning Republicans in the House of > Representatives: Justin Amash (Michigan), Kerry Bentivolio (Michigan), > Thomas Massie (Kentucky), Raúl Labrador (Idaho), and Tom McClintock > (California) to name a few. > > There are now thousands of libertarian activists working within the > Republican Party, especially through organizations spawned by Rand Paul's > father, Ron, who ran for president in 1988, 2008 and 2012.Campaign for > Liberty <http://www.campaignforliberty.org/> and Young Americans for > Liberty <http://www.yaliberty.org/>are the largest. The Pauls' message is > even starting to gain traction among members of more established fiscal > conservative groups, like FreedomWorks <http://www.freedomworks.org/>and > theClub for Growth <http://www.clubforgrowth.org/>. > > The "liberty movement" is now a bona fide wing of the Tea Party and an > increasingly active part of the GOP. But its supporters are not 100% > beholden to the Republicans, either. These voters helped swell 2012 > Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson's vote totals to a > record-breaking > 1.2m<http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gary-johnson-ran-most-successful-l...> > last > November. > > Foreign policy and civil liberties may be where these activists have their > biggest impact, and Paul has shown the way. The filibuster isn't the first > time he has isolated the neoconservatives from the rest of the party. While > many Americans are only learning about Rand Paul for the first time, he has > a track record of succeeding against the usual GOP crowd. He managed this > feat in his 2010 Senate primary, when Dick Cheney and Rudy Giuliani > endorsed his opponent. And again two years later when his ally Thomas > Massie won a congressional primary in northern Kentucky. > > It's easy to see how this libertarian moment could be undone: elect a > sufficiently hawkish Republican president and much of this sentiment on the > right could recede. It's also possible that this wing of the party tries to > rise too fast for its own good. If Justin Amash were to run for Michigan's > open Senate seat next year and lose, followed by Rand Paul pushing forward > with a competitive but unsuccessful presidential campaign rather than > running for senate reelection in 2016, the movement could be without its > two most prominent elected leaders. > > For now, that's a problem libertarian Republicans are happy to have. > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, March 20, 2013, Steve S. wrote: > > ** > > > "When I die I hope to go to heaven -- whatever that is -- and I want to be > > able to afford the price of admission." **** > > > *--- Ayn Rand* **** > > > ** ** > > > __._,_.___ > > Reply via web > > post<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Individual-Sovereignty/post;_ylc=X3oDMT...> > > Reply > > to sender Reply to group Start a New > > Topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Individual-Sovereignty/post;_ylc=X3oDMT...> > > Messages > > in this > > topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Individual-Sovereignty/message/299359;_...>(1) > > Recent Activity: > > > Visit Your > > Group<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Individual-Sovereignty;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMDU...> > > Report any problems, suggestions or abuse to > > [email protected] > > > [image: Yahoo! > > Groups]<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkZWtlbjk0BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycEl...> > > Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of > > Use<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>• Send > > us Feedback > > . > > > __,_._,___ > > > > image001.gif > < 1KViewDownload -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
