The apple does not fall far from the libertarian tree.
The one thing that is the biggest negative in ever considering Rand Paul as PotUS is that he shares the same isolationist/non-interventionist scrawny foreign policy beliefs as his father.
Is Rand purposely trying to alienate a segment of the Republican base before primaries by commenting on Dick Cheney’s foreign policy in wake of the release of a new book:
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) criticized former Vice President Dick Cheney on Thursday, calling nearly all of his foreign policy decisions spanning the last three decades a “disaster for this country.”
“I think Dick Cheney has probably been wrong about almost every foreign policy decision over the last 20 or 30 years,” Paul told conservative talk show host Laura Ingraham. “The only time he was actually right about something in foreign policy is when he advised the first George Bush that taking Baghdad would lead to chaos, civil war and destabilizing a region. That’s ultimately what happened. ”
Cheney, who served as vice president under President George W. Bush, published a new book on Tuesday with his wife, Liz, in which they blame the rise of the Islamic State on the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq.
“President Obama’s decision not to leave any U.S. forces behind created the space and the conditions for the rebirth of al Qaeda in Iraq, as well as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, ISIS,” the Cheneys wrote in their book, titled Exceptional: Why the World Needs a Powerful America.
The former Darth VP is correct.
Paul, a libertarian-leaning conservative with critical views of the Bush administration, told Ingraham that Cheney misread the situation in Iraq by insisting that American troops would be greeted as “liberators” in the country.
“I think what Dick Cheney promotes has been a disaster for this country,” Paul said.
Cheney said Wednesday that he had “no apologies” with respect to his administration’s decision to invade Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein.
Critics love this video:
But there is a difference in the situation and objectives of the first Gulf War in 1991 that Cheney describes in interview 3 years later; from that of the 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom.
What changed? 9/11.
Under the Bush Administration, it was determined that in a post-9/11 world, it was too dangerous to allow a wmd-loving rogue regime like Saddam’s Iraq to continue its status quo of deceit and defiance of UNSCR mandates with the possibility of Saddam utilizing Islamic terrorists as proxy to deliver a wmd attack against a mutual enemy- the United States.
What would a Rand Paul foreign policy look like? How would his approach to dealing with Islamic terror differ or remain the same from that of President Obama and President Bush?
While driving home from work Thursday night, I listened to Hugh Hewitt’s radio program as he played a clip of Donald Trump accusing Hewitt of attempting to ask him “gotcha” questions.
Knowing Hewitt and his obsession over asking guests if they’ve ever read The Looming Tower or understand the belief in the coming of the 12th Imam, he was not looking to embarrass Trump with “gotcha” questions.
The “Palin moment” is being exploited by the liberal rags:
Trump fumbled the question even worse, and in general, dismissed Hewitt’s inquiries as “gotcha questions.” He told Hewitt that he didn’t need to be able to identify the leaders because “by the time we get to office, they’ll all be changed. They’ll all be gone.”
The real estate mogul also claimed that there was no reason for him to know them because he has never met them in person.
“As far as the individual players, of course I don’t know them. I’ve never met them. I haven’t been, you know, in a position to meet them. If, if they’re still there, which is unlikely in many cases, but if they’re still there, I will know them better than I know you,” he said.
To Fiorina’s credit, she was able to provide answers to most of Hewitt’s questions, and instead of outright dismissing the questions, admitted that it was important for a presidential candidate to know about foreign policy — which, at the very least, involves naming some terrorists.
“I don’t think they’re ‘gotcha questions’ at all. The questions you’re asking are at the heart of the threat that we face, that our ally, Israel, faces, that the world faces,” she told Hewitt. “It is critically important that America lead again in the world. It is critically important that we have a leader in the White House who understands the world and who’s in it and how it works.”
I don’t expect a president to know minutiae to every topic of concern; and I do understand Trump’s statement about surrounding yourself with smart advisors with expertise in given fields. But his defensive response to not knowing key terror figures- how he reacted to the “Quds/Kurds” confusion, with a feeble attempt to bring it around to talking about the Kurds- a topic which he had some level of superficial study and felt more secure about- it was embarrassing. Again- not so much his not knowing, but in his defensive reaction.
Hewitt is a co-moderator for the next GOP debate:
Hewitt will also co-moderate the second GOP primary debate with “The Lead” host Jake Tapper on CNN Sept. 16.
Responding to a question on whether he is familiar with Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah since 1992, Trump protested that by the time he takes office, the major figures in the military landscape will have changed.
“I think by the time we get to office, they’ll all be changed. They’ll be all gone,” he said. “Those are like [a] history question – do you know this one, do you know that one?”Hewitt said he was not trying to ask “gotcha” questions.
“Well it sounds like ‘gotcha,’ you’re asking me names – I think it’s somewhat ridiculous, but that’s OK, go ahead,” Trump responded.
Late in the interview, Hewitt asked: “So the difference between Hezbollah and Hamas does not matter to you yet, but it will?”
Trump replied: “It will when it’s appropriate. I will know more about it than you know, and believe me, it won’t take me long.”
What a thin-skinned, egotistical blowhard.
I want the next PotUS to be a believer in flexing a strong foreign policy when it comes to dealing with political Islam and Islamic terror. I want someone serious about it. Dick Cheney- right or wrong on policy- took national security absolutely seriously.
That will most likely not be the forte of a Rand Paul presidency. Trump….I can’t even.