Special Report with Brett Baier's "All Star Panel" discusses "isolationist trend"

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

They began with playing Mitt's comments about bringing our troops home from Afghanistan, and how people were e-mailing each other about what he meant by that, etc. Then they played an old statement by him and contrasted it with what he's saying now.

Then Mara Laisson said there is a trend of isolationism in the Republican Party, "it's not just Ron Paul anymore", and she mentioned Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, and Brett included Huntsman.

Krauthammer agreed with her and even went as far as saying isolationism was traditionally on the right rather than on the left. *ding* Something big is happening, folks!

Hopefully, they'll upload this clip later so I can link it...Here it is:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/995296285...ylist_id=87937

[Southron]

I would have liked to have heard that segment.

[evilfunnystuff]

nice

[flightlesskiwi]

that's fine and all... but when will these idiots actually admit that it's not isolationism Paul supports, it's non-interventionism. there's a whole world travel and trade of difference between the two.

[AGRP]

We really should please Fox News and the rest of the government/corporate media.

Let's nuke the entire world.

/sarcasm

[Chester Copperpot]

they call it "isolationist" because its derogatory and nobody wants to be called an "isolationist"// and then when you explain its non-interventionism they rephrase it as "military-isolationist"


because they have to keep putting that word in there to try and dissuade people


kinda like how 4 years ago they would keep calling Ron Paul the "libertarian"... ooh spooky word there.

we need to retaliate the same way... the same $#@!s who call us isolationists we should retort with something equally disparaging.. maybe call them Obama Republicans... somebody think of something snappy... maybe itll wake some sense into the brain dead ones

[ravedown]

Krauthammer hates having to answer questions about Ron Paul or his policies. You can see the resentment in his eyes and voice...its pretty funny. I look forward to more of it.

[Theocrat]

It's so sad when political experts cannot even understand the difference between isolationism and non-interventionism. Congressman Paul has stated repeatedly that he is not an isolationist. He is a non-interventionist. Either those people who accuse him of being an isolationist are stupid, or they are deliberately lying to get some agenda across to the public about Dr. Paul.

[flightlesskiwi]

they call it "isolationist" because its derogatory and nobody wants to be called an "isolationist"// and then when you explain its non-interventionism they rephrase it as "military-isolationist"


because they have to keep putting that word in there to try and dissuade people

right, i get it. isolationism = pearl harbor, dec. 7, 1941. this is the key, isn't it?

maddening.

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

kinda like how 4 years ago they would keep calling Ron Paul the "libertarian"... ooh spooky word there.

They're still pulling that one, even more than before IMO. It's code for "not a real Republican".

we need to retaliate the same way... the same $#@!s who call us isolationists we should retort with something equally disparaging.. maybe call them Obama Republicans... somebody think of something snappy... maybe itll wake some sense into the brain dead ones

I had the same thought before, and just settled on "interventionist". Maybe tack on "big government".

Because that's what they are: Neocons, former Democrats who want to apply big government intervention to foreign policy, in the the form of military force and foreign aid (bombs and bribes) to make people do what they want. They're not happy with just bullying American citizens, they want to bully the world.

[evilfunnystuff]

they are deliberately lying to get some agenda across to the public about Dr. Paul.

this

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

To further drive the point home, we should compare the Neocons to Democrats through the economy. Democrats foolishly think they can put their hands in there and manage the economy, only to have it blow up in their face. Neocons thought they were wise enough to stick their hands into ME affairs and manage that, and it certainly is blowing up in our face now.

[Southron]

Would withdrawing from the WTO, and repealing NAFTA be considered isolationist? If so I embrace it.

I guess in our Wilsonian world, national interests are second to global interests.

[Theocrat]

Would withdrawing from the WTO, and repealing NAFTA be considered isolationist? If so I embrace it.

Our federal government gets us involved in all these world organizations and world wars, which often violate our own rule of law (the Constitution). Then when someone says, "We have no authority to be involved in this," that person is labeled an isolationist? That's just not right. They're the ones who force us into these global affairs and alliances, and then they have the audacity to call some of us "isolationists" when we tell them they're wrong for doing so.

If anything, they're the true isolationists. They isolate themselves from the American people by kowtowing to global interests, and they isolate the American people from the information about what exactly these globalists plan to do in the world, using American dollars and resources.

[White Bear Lake]

we need to retaliate the same way... the same $#@!s who call us isolationists we should retort with something equally disparaging.. maybe call them Obama Republicans... somebody think of something snappy... maybe itll wake some sense into the brain dead ones

Just call them progressives. That's what their foreign policy is.

Don't use the word neocon. That will just piss them off and they'll blow you off as some liberal. Instead explain to them that they're cowtowing the same progressive foreign policy that the granddaddy of all progressives, Woodrow Wilson, developed and championed. Then contrast that with Senator Taft and President Coolidge's positions. It should atleast get them thinking.

Using neoconservative implies that they're just a different kind of conservative. They aren't. They aren't conservative at all. They're nothing more than progressive Republicans.

[flightlesskiwi]

Just call them progressives. That's what their foreign policy is.

Don't use the word neocon. That will just piss them off and they'll blow you off as some liberal. Instead explain to them that they're cowtowing the same progressive foreign policy that the granddaddy of all progressives, Woodrow Wilson, developed and championed. Then contrast that with Senator Taft and President Coolidge's positions. It should atleast get them thinking.

Using neoconservative implies that they're just a different kind of conservative. They aren't. They aren't conservative at all. They're nothing more than progressive Republicans.

+rep
this has been my strategy. (although i use the term progressive conservative-- an oxymoron, that's why i use it).

[RileyE104]

Such bull$#@!.

I know damn well these "educated" people took an economics course in college.
Whether or not it's Keynesian economics, it is ALWAYS taught that isolationism is when a country prevents FREE TRADE, TRAVEL, ETC with other countries.

Just because you don't want to intervene militarily with other countries doesn't mean your an isolationist. It's a purely economic term.

[LibertyEagle]

They began with playing Mitt's comments about bringing our troops home from Afghanistan, and how people were e-mailing each other about what he meant by that, etc. Then they played an old statement by him and contrasted it with what he's saying now.

They also said when they questioned Mitt's campaign about it, they said he misspoke.

[flightlesskiwi]

They also said when they questioned Mitt's campaign about it, they said he misspoke.

that's quite a fumble!!!!

[LibertyEagle]

that's quite a fumble!!!!

I don't think he did at all. I think his campaign just doesn't know what to do. They were caught off-guard, I think.

[flightlesskiwi]

I don't think he did at all. I think his campaign just doesn't know what to do. They were caught off-guard, I think.

sorry... i was being sarcastic..

but, in the football sense of the word, he did fumble-- he let go of his previous stance (the "ball"). we'll see if his team (and he) recovers.

[KramerDSP]

I don't think he did at all. I think his campaign just doesn't know what to do. They were caught off-guard, I think.

Ron Paul has got to stop perfoming those Jedi mind tricks. Romney was about to say "and we need to End The Fed" before snapping back into the answer.

[Thomas]

we really need to get them to stop saying isolationism, i don't think they're doing it out of ignorance, but out of calculation

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

Don't use the word neocon. That will just piss them off and they'll blow you off as some liberal.

Yes, I agree. I didn't mean call them that to their face.

[Brett85]

The truth is that many people use the word "isolationist" to decribe people who really aren't isolationists, and many people here use the term "neocon" to describe people who really aren't neocons. There's really only a small number of people who are truly "isolationists" or "neocons." Most people are somewhere in the middle.

[Cutlerzzz]

Yet these guys support tariffs with every nation on Earth, sanctions, refusal to recognize foreign governments, and hate the UN(good in that case)...

[COpatriot]

I call all the drug warriors and marijuana prohibitionists "nanny state 'conservatives'". They HATE that. The people have turned on the neoconservatives for the most part though, and that's starting to come out in the GOP debates. They have blown trillions of our dollars and gotten a lot of people killed and it's starting to catch up with them. They're losing their grip and now they're getting defensive and possibly even desperate.

[White Bear Lake]

Two days after a GOP debate and the biggest story on almost every media outlet is how conservative candidates are returning to being anti-interventionist. Couple this with the stories of congressional Republicans going after Obama on intervening in Libya. It realistically couldn't have turned out much better in my opinion. I think this debate is turning into a big win for the movement. Even if Paul doesn't get a huge boost in polls, the GOP coalition is beginning to splinter on foreign policy which really needs to happen if we want future success after 2012.