It should be noted that she diverges from the “Neocons” on domestic and social issues. Her foreign policy is pro-freedom, “hawkish” (in the good sense), anti-Putin, anti-terrorist and would be called by some “Neocon”. That’s a good thing. If there was something right about “Neocons” it’s foreign policy. She’s no isolationist, non-interventionist paleo.
Just to avoid confusion over where she stands.
The term “neocons” seem to convey the image of liberal RINOs who seek and expanded federal govt. Anyone else see the similarity?
A lot of people would question that, and not just "isolationist, non-interventionist paleos."
They made some really serious miscalculations that hurt the country.
One reason not to get so enthusiastic about Palin is that, like Bush, she'd simply defer to the neocons on foreign policy.
Maybe if they really irritate her (and "they" is a confusing term here since the people who write about foreign policy and those who deal with domestic policy and social issues aren't the same people), that won't happen, but I wouldn't count on it.
>She’s no isolationist, non-interventionist paleo.
We shall see...
“I am not talking about some U.S.-led ‘democracy crusade.’ We cannot impose our values on other counties. Nor should we seek to. But the ideas of freedom, liberty and respect for human rights are not U.S. ideas, they are much more than that.”