PDA

View Full Version : Sen. Lindsey Graham urges GOP presidential candidates to avoid isolationism




tsai3904
04-06-2011, 02:33 PM
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/154279-sen-graham-urges-gop-12-crowd-to-avoid-isolationism


He urged GOP candidates to support foreign aid to Middle Eastern countries and said they should be ready to criticize President Obama if he fails to force Moammar Gadhafi to vacate power in Libya.

Graham, one of his party’s most forceful voices on foreign policy, warned that presidential candidates will encounter a “war-weary” public that wants to troops to return from Iraq and Afghanistan. Candidates also will find that pitching increases in foreign aid to key Middle Eastern nations like Egypt “goes over like a lead balloon.”

The reason such public sentiments worry Graham is “because it doesn’t take long before the [Republican Party] finds a war-weary nation and exploits it.”

An evolving “unholy alliance” between “the far right and far left” led by Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) could fan the flames of an isolationist GOP foreign-policy platform during the 2012 election, Graham said.

The usually hawkish senator urged Republican presidential candidates to take a long-term view on Washington’s economic, political and military relations with nations like Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Egypt.

sailingaway
04-06-2011, 02:34 PM
When he avoids using the term isolationism to refer to noninterventionalist, or stops being a squish, whichever occurs first.

acptulsa
04-06-2011, 02:38 PM
'The usually hawkish senator urged Republican presidential candidates to take a long-term view on Washington’s economic, political and military relations with nations like Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Egypt.'

We are, Graham. And we envision a time when you psychos leave us like the Soviet Union--fallen and able to be pwned by the very people we used to step on.

low preference guy
04-06-2011, 04:52 PM
Sen. Lindsey Graham urges GOP presidential candidates to avoid isolationism

*laugh heartily*

low preference guy
04-06-2011, 04:54 PM
An evolving “unholy alliance” between....

more laughs

Stary Hickory
04-06-2011, 04:54 PM
God yes this "isolationism" is killing us! It's bankrupting the nation! Those cursed isolationists!

Matt Collins
04-06-2011, 04:55 PM
Who cares what this guy says? He's about to be primaried by Jack Hunter

sailingaway
04-06-2011, 04:57 PM
Who cares what this guy says? He's about to be primaried by Jack Hunter


I sure hope so!!

AGRP
04-06-2011, 04:59 PM
"Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto." -Thomas Jefferson

Matt Collins
04-06-2011, 04:59 PM
I sure hope so!!
He has publicly promised that if Ron wins the nomination, he'll run against Graham.

Brett85
04-06-2011, 05:03 PM
He has publicly promised that if Ron wins the nomination, he'll run against Graham.

What does Ron winning the nomination have anything to do with whether Jack will run?

Anti Federalist
04-06-2011, 05:04 PM
What a piece of shit.

NewRightLibertarian
04-06-2011, 05:09 PM
This man is scum, and the perfect example of what a 'nonpartisan moderate' looks like in Wash D.C.

Brett85
04-06-2011, 05:17 PM
Lol. Read the comments below the article.

Anti Federalist
04-06-2011, 05:27 PM
Lol. Read the comments below the article.

Isolationism used to be common place in the early years of the Republic. We need to remember the Monroe Doctrine and other policy that doesn't get us caught up in unjust wars. Ron Paul supports bringing the troops home, and gettting rid of overseas bases in different countries.
Lindsey has already sold his to to Amesty agenda. Selling out the very people he was elected to serve! If that ain't TREASON, then what is?

People in Congress, don't have to pass through TSA check-points. There is a double-standard, and discrmination against other American citizens! The Elite Class, basicly see's us as "cattle" that can die for any war, or be used as gennie pigs.

The funny thing is people who support the Rulling Elite. They actually think they will be "saved" by them in the end. That they might be accepted in the Ruling Elite. But they are wrong!

Once a person is used, for a cause. They can be replaced by another "wannabe" who thinks they are God, and better than the Unwashed Masses…

BY Swamp Foxx 20-Eleven on 04/06/2011 at 19:04

Brooklyn Red Leg
04-06-2011, 05:32 PM
I think Lindsey needs to stick to sucking cock (which I have no issue with) cause he pretty much stuffs his foot in his mouth instead.

sailingaway
04-06-2011, 05:35 PM
What does Ron winning the nomination have anything to do with whether Jack will run?

I think he is saying either if the people are in the mood enough to nominate Ron they'll be in the mood enough to elect Jack. If so, he's wrong. Bob Conley got over 40% last time, and he ran as a Dem, where Lindsay got the endorsement of the state Democratic party, because Bob was more conservative, even if he had managed to win the Dem primary....

ItsTime
04-06-2011, 05:41 PM
There is nothing more isolating than mass killing innocent women and children.

Matt Collins
04-06-2011, 06:11 PM
What does Ron winning the nomination have anything to do with whether Jack will run?
I dunno, ask Jack.

Aratus
04-07-2011, 08:37 AM
is sen. lindsey graham sorta afraid J.C is returning, and shall soon ressurect
WARREN G. HARDING, whose war weary pitch in 1920 won him an election?

Aratus
04-07-2011, 08:40 AM
right now... it's occuring to SOME of the anti-war Democrats that our
noble potus is nowhere near the peacenik sen. eugene mcCarthy was!

jmdrake
04-07-2011, 09:10 AM
Use this video to destroy Lindsay Graham with conservative paleo or neo.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC-JNUOjWXQ

daviddee
04-07-2011, 02:12 PM
...

Icymudpuppy
04-07-2011, 03:54 PM
Isolationism = Shogunate Japan. No international trade, no admittance of foreigners, no treaties, no foreign contact if possible.

The USA has never even come close to it. Nor has any candidate I've ever heard of suggest it.

lester1/2jr
04-07-2011, 05:01 PM
If the audience is war weary and talk of foreign aid is going over like a lead balloon, wouldn't that be a cue to PROMOTE the so called isolationist wing of the party??

low preference guy
04-07-2011, 05:07 PM
If the audience is war weary and talk of foreign aid is going over like a lead balloon, wouldn't that be a cue to PROMOTE the so called isolationist wing of the party??

No, because it would mean that Lindsey won't be able to fulfill his fantasy of blowing up brown people.

TIMB0B
04-07-2011, 05:08 PM
Sen. Lindsey Graham urges GOP presidential candidates to avoid isolationism

And Ron Paul agrees with him, because he's not an isolationist!

What incompetent elected officials we have!

TIMB0B
04-07-2011, 05:10 PM
Perhaps someone should buy Graham a copy of Revolution: A Manifesto.

devil21
04-07-2011, 05:11 PM
I wish Graham would run for President instead of throwing bricks and hiding. I'd love to see Ron skewer him on the debate stage and expose Graham as nothing but a tool of the Israelis.

FreedomProsperityPeace
04-07-2011, 06:27 PM
I'm so sick of this creepy weirdo. He need to go away ASAP.

LibertyEagle
04-07-2011, 06:36 PM
This is why I really think we need to come up with a slogan to define us. Something like America-first. Because it seems to me that this would level these little pukeheads. Because they DON'T put our own country first. They are frickin' globalist world government traitors.

Either we define ourselves, or they will continue to define US.

Brooklyn Red Leg
04-07-2011, 08:00 PM
This is why I really think we need to come up with a slogan to define us. Something like America-first. Because it seems to me that this would level these little pukeheads. Because they DON'T put our own country first. They are frickin' globalist world government traitors.

Either we define ourselves, or they will continue to define US.

Pre-made and perfect for us: Liberty in our Lifetime.

Legend1104
04-07-2011, 09:10 PM
Man I am so tried of ignorance.

Anti Federalist
04-07-2011, 09:26 PM
Fan Those Flames

Posted by Lew Rockwell on April 7, 2011 03:42 PM

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/84941.html

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-Weirdland) has warned that any Republican presidential candidate better swear allegiance to perpetual war against the Muslims in the Middle East, and to massive foreign aid. Why, why, otherwise, there is a danger that “an evolving ‘unholy alliance’ between ‘the far right and far left’ led by Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) could fan the flames of an isolationist GOP foreign-policy platform during the 2012 election, Graham said.” (Thanks to Antiwar.com)

Humanae Libertas
04-07-2011, 09:27 PM
Perhaps someone should buy Graham a copy of Revolution: A Manifesto.

He needs to read the Constitution first, then Ron Paul's book.

Anti Federalist
04-07-2011, 09:31 PM
Graham said he would be among the first to applaud President Obama if he can ink new accords with Iraqi and Afghan leaders. Iraq needs U.S. troops to stay there for a few more years to ensure security, Graham said, while Afghanistan needs Washington as a political and economic ally to help transform itself.

Graham also called for ramping up U.S. aid to Egypt, despite likely public opposition.

“Any Republican who says the U.S. shouldn’t be spending money in Egypt right now doesn’t understand the benefits,” he said during a morning talk at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS).

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/154279-sen-graham-urges-gop-12-crowd-to-avoid-isolationism

acptulsa
04-07-2011, 09:35 PM
The benefits.

Know what Graham? Republicans used to place great value on those benefits. But then came the day when you bastards not only stopped letting the benefits trickle down, but you let the blowback fly right on in while Cheney played Northwoods shit. So if you want the benefits, go kill the brown people your own damned self.

AdamT
04-07-2011, 10:34 PM
God I hate this putz.

nate895
04-07-2011, 10:42 PM
God I hate this putz.

Forgive him. He's just upset that he got a girl's name and that he's a closet homosexual, so he pretends to be masculine on the whole war thing.

Anti Federalist
04-07-2011, 11:55 PM
Forgive him. He's just upset that he got a girl's name and that he's a closet homosexual, so he pretends to be masculine on the whole war thing.

http://www.easttennesseepost.com/img/upload/lindsey_graham.jpg

LibertyEagle
04-09-2011, 02:50 AM
Pre-made and perfect for us: Liberty in our Lifetime.

I don't like that, because I do not think regular people will understand it.

We were, and will be, constantly called isolationists, rather than non-interventionists. Which in turn puts us in defensive mode. We are also denounced because supposedly we don't understand that we live in a global environment now. That also puts us in defensive mode. We are also viewed as being weak on national defense, when in reality we are very strong on national defense. We are against nation-building. Once again, we are put on the defense.

There is no reason for it. At least from where I stand.

If we called our position as putting America-first, or something like that, what leg do the globalist pukes have to stand on? What are they going to do, argue that we shouldn't put America first? That would be a big fail with the American people. Then, it's not us on the defensive, they are. Make them have to explain to the American people WHY America and Americans should be on the back burner.

Southron
04-09-2011, 07:00 AM
I don't like that, because I do not think regular people will understand it.

We were, and will be, constantly called isolationists, rather than non-interventionists. Which in turn puts us in defensive mode. We are also denounced because supposedly we don't understand that we live in a global environment now. That also puts us in defensive mode. We are also viewed as being weak on national defense, when in reality we are very strong on national defense. We are against nation-building. Once again, we are put on the defense.

There is no reason for it. At least from where I stand.

If we called our position as putting America-first, or something like that, what leg do the globalist pukes have to stand on? What are they going to do, argue that we shouldn't put America first? That would be a big fail with the American people. Then, it's not us on the defensive, they are. Make them have to explain to the American people WHY America and Americans should be on the back burner.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e9/Am1logo.jpg

Theocrat
04-09-2011, 07:06 AM
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/154279-sen-graham-urges-gop-12-crowd-to-avoid-isolationism


He urged GOP candidates to support foreign aid to Middle Eastern countries and said they should be ready to criticize President Obama if he fails to force Moammar Gadhafi to vacate power in Libya.

Graham, one of his party’s most forceful voices on foreign policy, warned that presidential candidates will encounter a “war-weary” public that wants to troops to return from Iraq and Afghanistan. Candidates also will find that pitching increases in foreign aid to key Middle Eastern nations like Egypt “goes over like a lead balloon.”

The reason such public sentiments worry Graham is “because it doesn’t take long before the [Republican Party] finds a war-weary nation and exploits it.”

An evolving “unholy alliance” between “the far right and far left” led by Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) could fan the flames of an isolationist GOP foreign-policy platform during the 2012 election, Graham said.

The usually hawkish senator urged Republican presidential candidates to take a long-term view on Washington’s economic, political and military relations with nations like Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Egypt.

I agree with Graham. GOP Presidential candidates should avoid isolationism. It's a good thing Congressman Paul is a non-interventionist and not an isolationist! [lol]

Occam's Banana
04-09-2011, 07:46 AM
If the audience is war weary and talk of foreign aid is going over like a lead balloon, wouldn't that be a cue to PROMOTE the so called isolationist wing of the party??

Of course not, Citizen! Doing such a thing would imply that Graham, et al. are our Servants, rather than our Masters - and that is just silly!

I mean, really, Citizen! What's come over you? You're not thinking clearly!

That's alright, though. I'm sure it's only due to your understandable distress over the terrible plight of our comrade Citizens in Libya, Iraq & Afghanistan.

Once Lindsey Graham and our other wise Masters have endowed our brother & sister Servants in the Middle East with the blessings of democracy, foreign aid, central banking, etc., I am confident you will recognize & correct the obvious errors in your thinking.

Occam's Banana
04-09-2011, 08:00 AM
We were, and will be, constantly called isolationists, rather than non-interventionists. Which in turn puts us in defensive mode. We are also denounced because supposedly we don't understand that we live in a global environment now. That also puts us in defensive mode. We are also viewed as being weak on national defense, when in reality we are very strong on national defense. We are against nation-building. Once again, we are put on the defense.

There is no reason for it. At least from where I stand.

If we called our position as putting America-first, or something like that, what leg do the globalist pukes have to stand on? What are they going to do, argue that we shouldn't put America first? That would be a big fail with the American people. Then, it's not us on the defensive, they are. Make them have to explain to the American people WHY America and Americans should be on the back burner.

"America First" has already been tried - more than once. It was (unfortunately, in the case of the America First Committee) a fail.

If we use it again, the PTB will just use history to throw the label "isolationist" (or worse) at us even more vigorously than they already do.

See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_Committee

and here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_Party_%281944%29

Demogogues on the left would LOVE a shot at linking us with the original America First Party.
Especially with respect to this asshole:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_L._K._Smith

Brooklyn Red Leg
04-09-2011, 08:56 AM
If we called our position as putting America-first, or something like that, what leg do the globalist pukes have to stand on? What are they going to do, argue that we shouldn't put America first? That would be a big fail with the American people. Then, it's not us on the defensive, they are. Make them have to explain to the American people WHY America and Americans should be on the back burner.

We'll be called Ultra-Nationalists which will lead to us being labeled as Nazi's due to that monkey-wrenching asshole from Stormfront that decided to get his yuks in by posing for a pic with Dr. Paul (who would no more have known that clown from an ape).

LibertyEagle
04-09-2011, 09:26 AM
"America First" has already been tried - more than once. It was (unfortunately, in the case of the America First Committee) a fail.

If we use it again, the PTB will just use history to throw the label "isolationist" (or worse) at us even more vigorously than they already do.

See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_Committee

and here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_Party_%281944%29

Demogogues on the left would LOVE a shot at linking us with the original America First Party.
Especially with respect to this asshole:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_L._K._Smith

Ok. Come up with another slogan that means the same thing, if "America First" has been used in the past. My point is that I do not think the notion of putting America first is going to have the same problem as it was twisted by the globalists to mean. When I was a kid, if you DIDN'T care more about your own family and country, you were considered an idiot and not too great of an American. To say the least.

People are getting pretty scared and as it gets closer to the reality that their way of life is going to have to drastically change to keep on starting these damn wars that have absolutely nothing to do with our national defense and handing out foreign aid, they are going to be much more interested in making sure our own country is cared for FIRST.

We need someone much better at marketing than I to come up with something here. The alternative is to let the globalists keep on driving the bus, while we are kept from putting our own position forward, because we are too busy playing defense. We have tried that before and it did not work. I am not interested in doing it again.

When the time comes that there is something wrong or shameful to care about my own damn country and my own damn family and friends, before some other country half way around the world, I hope I am long dead and buried.

If we do not position ourselves, someone else will do it for us.

If we frame this right, it will be the globalists who will be the ones dancing, whilst the American people are shooting at their feet.

Occam's Banana
04-09-2011, 09:55 AM
Ok. Come up with another slogan that means the same thing, if "America First" has been used in the past. My point is that I do not think the notion of putting America first is going to have the same problem as it was twisted by the globalists to mean. When I was a kid, if you DIDN'T care more about your own family and country, you were considered an idiot and not too great of an American. To say the least.

People are getting pretty scared and as it gets closer to the reality that their way of life is going to have to drastically change to keep on starting these damn wars that have absolutely nothing to do with our national defense and handing out foreign aid, they are going to be much more interested in making sure our own country is cared for FIRST.

We need someone much better at marketing than I to come up with something here. The alternative is to let the globalists keep on driving the bus, while we are kept from putting our own position forward, because we are too busy playing defense. We have tried that before and it did not work. I am not interested in doing it again.

When the time comes that there is something wrong or shameful to care about my own damn country and my own damn family and friends, before some other country half way around the world, I hope I am long dead and buried.

If we do not position ourselves, someone else will do it for us.

I agree with your sentiments %100. Unfortunately, I can't think of any slogan or 'branding' to replace "America First" with, either.

But the substantive point you make is very important & should be pressed home vigorously & even aggresively. We should go on the offensive with this - instead of waiting to be called "isolationists" and then defensively trying to explain the difference between isolationism & non-interventionism.

acptulsa
04-09-2011, 10:20 AM
Peace in our Time.

georgiaboy
04-09-2011, 10:36 AM
Friends to the World, the World's Friends, The Friendly Nation

FreedomProsperityPeace
04-10-2011, 12:26 AM
Let's get our house in order -- that's the phrase that has been thrown around lately.

Show how far down the list we are in every category compared to other countries in the world, and link that to how much of our money we're giving away in foreign aid (monetary and military).

Theocrat
04-10-2011, 01:43 AM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e9/Am1logo.jpg

I don't like that slogan very much. It sounds too nationalistic, and it also reminds me of John McCain's campaign slogan from 2008:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_YGLQQZTHoU0/SMCq5F2GpJI/AAAAAAAAEDc/h5YzfvhEsIY/s400/john_mccain_country_first.JPG

Suzu
04-10-2011, 09:12 AM
Lindsey has already sold his to to

Sold his to to?


Amesty agenda.

What does "Amesty" mean?


basicly see's us as ... gennie pigs.

Do you mean "basically sees us as ... guinea pigs"?


Once a person is used, for a cause. They can be replaced...

I think you meant to write: "Once a person is used for a cause, they can be replaced...."

You're welcome!

LatinsforPaul
04-10-2011, 10:00 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR6BdyYkgCI&feature=player_embedded#at=21

Freedom 4 all
04-10-2011, 10:13 AM
No, because it would mean that Lindsey won't be able to fulfill his secret fantasy of blowing up brown people.

Fixed! Sorry, couldn't resist.

tangent4ronpaul
04-10-2011, 10:22 AM
Graham, one of his party’s most forceful voices on foreign policy, warned that presidential candidates will encounter a “war-weary” public that wants to troops to return from Iraq and Afghanistan. Candidates also will find that pitching increases in foreign aid to key Middle Eastern nations like Egypt “goes over like a lead balloon.”

An evolving “unholy alliance” between “the far right and far left” led by Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) could fan the flames of an isolationist GOP foreign-policy platform during the 2012 election, Graham said.

http://www.animateit.net/data/media/106/wrstp09.gif

acptulsa
04-10-2011, 10:32 AM
And an unholy alliance of the Graham-McCain Right types and the White House-led Schumer Left types could bankrupt us financially, morally and completely.