|Filed Under:||US Politics / Conservative|
|Posts on Regator:||4463|
|Posts / Week:||15.9|
|Archived Since:||June 16, 2009|
No one should ever take anything Cruz says on foreign policy (or on anything else) seriously.
Republicans have underperformed in Senate races in the last two elections and could do the same thing again.
A party can neglect its core supporters for only so long before they give up and move on to an alternative.
"Nation-building" is a wasteful, optional exercise on the part of our government that shouldn't be repeated in the future.
Pretending that the U.S. has a "special" relationship with one of its clients is a mistake.
Sen. Paul is talking about the war against ISIS as if it were still the "limited" operation that Obama claimed it would be at the beginning.
Obama may want to try causing Netanyahu some political headaches of his own.
The Reagan Doctrine was one of the least impressive parts of Reagan's record, and it inflicted enormous damage on the countries where it was put into practice.
Starting a war against Iran wouldn't prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Perry's latest foreign policy remarks are tone-deaf and foolish.
If Americans need to be reminded why his party can't be trusted on foreign policy, these comments from Boehner should do the trick.
Israel has few "friends" to start with, and can hardly afford to antagonize the few that it has.
Paul's statements about the wars America shouldn't fight don't square with his support for the current war against ISIS.
One needn't pretend that the U.S. can "become Switzerland" to insist that the U.S. must stop trying to be the micro-manager/overlord of the rest of the planet.
We already know the election results aren't going to change the balance of power in Washington very much.
This is the president that escalated one war, committed the U.S. to another unnecessary conflict in Libya, and launched yet another military campaign on his own authority.
When Congress should assert itself and when it shouldn’t. Paul Pillar compares …
The fixation on Warren as the hoped-for progressive challenger to Clinton underscores how few prominent elected doves there are in the Democratic Party today.
Neither party has much incentive to tone down its attacks on the other over foreign policy and national security.
Romney's failing wasn't that he was too vague on foreign policy, but that he demonstrated how little he knew by making detailed criticisms that made no sense.