Posted on 04/18/2006 7:04:54 PM PDT by Jean S
The most recent poll by USA Today clearly marks the end of the era of international focus and energy triggered by the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. Now, forgetting the lessons of that day, Americans are again turning inward and rejecting involvement with the rest of the world.
To most politicians, pundits and journalists inside the Beltway, American voters can move to the left or the right on foreign-policy questions. But the voters themselves perceive a third option: to step backward.
Isolationism, a largely ignored theme in our politics, is growing rapidly in the wake of the sacrifices we are making in Iraq. It is this feeling of wanting the rest of the world to go away, not any leftward drift, that is animating the drop in President Bush’s approval ratings as the war drags on.
On April 7-9, USA Today asked a national sample of voters if the United States “should mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along as best they can on their own.” Almost half of all Americans, 46 percent, agreed with the statement, while 51 percent differed. These results are almost the same as the pre-Sept. 11 polling of January 2000, when Americans broke 46-50 on the same question.
In the interim, of course, came Sept. 11, when the nation found out why foreign affairs were vital to domestic peace. In the aftermath of the attack, only one-third of Americans thought we should “mind our own business.”
Interest in foreign affairs fluctuates in the American psyche. After the Korean War, we turned inward but were awakened by JFK’s challenge to assume the responsibilities of freedom. Vietnam drained us, and we entered a period of isolationism that did not end until Ronald Reagan shook us out of it in the 1980s. With the collapse of communism, we stopped paying much attention to events beyond our shores until Sept. 11 brought home the reality that there was no longer a real division between domestic and foreign issues.
But now the bloodshed in Iraq and the peace from terrorism at home have brought us back to something more like our self-involved introversion — what President Warren G. Harding called “normalcy.”
This withdrawal from globalism is a predictable consequence of the quagmire of Iraq. Bush has spent the constructive energies unleashed by Sept. 11 on his bid to make Iraq a stable democracy. Whether he has squandered our national vigor or simply invested it wisely will only become apparent in the next few years, but what is glaringly obvious is that our patience is over.
Republicans criticize Democrats for not proposing new solutions to the Iraq war, but the GOP misses the point that their opponents don’t have to do so. The wind of isolationism is at the Democrats’ back, propelling them onward to the likelihood of massive victories in 2006 and 2008.
The metaphor with Jacques Chirac’s France is interesting. Opponents of the Chirac-Villepin regime, like Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, all surely realize that freeing the labor market of ridiculous constraints on firing workers is a vital necessity for France to compete in the world economy, but there is no reason for Sarkozy to say so. He can just ride the disillusionment Chirac and Dominique de Villepin have left in their wake with their failed efforts at reform.
The Democrats don’t have to recommend any alternative to Bush’s policy. All they need to do is attack it. The wind of isolationism will do the rest for them.
Isolationism is so discredited with insider opinion that nobody dares articulate its rationale in public. Like racism, it has been dismissed as a legitimate opinion by the elites, but not yet by the voters themselves. Defeated in the Democratic Party by Pearl Harbor and in the GOP by the Eisenhower 1952 defeat of Sen. Bob Taft, it retains its grip on about half of our country’s voters.
After Korea, isolationism helped the Republicans. After LBJ, it helped the GOP. After Nixon, it helped drive the Carter victory. In the 1990s, it permitted an exclusively domestic politics that allowed foreign-affairs novice Bill Clinton to get elected. Now it is undoing the Republican majority.
Woe to the politician, like Bush, who arouses the genie, and woe to his party that tries to win in its wake.
Morris, a former political adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Condi vs. Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race.
Good analysis by Morris. He's exactly right--Americans are tired of fighting. Unfortunately, we don't have the luxury of choosing to stay "uninvolved"--September 11, 2001 "involved" us.
Dick's way off base.
And woe to those like Morris who think politics is all about having no principles and being only interested in elections. Maybe he should rethink what obstructionism got Tom Daschle, and he might also add immigration to the mix before he pontificates.
Don't get "stuck on stupid", Dick.
Iran is COUNTING on us to decide foreign policy based on public opinion polls!
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/67114.htm
Can anyone name a time this toe sucker has been right about anything?
(crickets)
In their sick, pathetic twisted minds, these bastards are willing for more American GIs to die by supporting our enemies for their own political gain. And that really pi$$es me off.
Kerry and a host of others should have been tried for treason and shot.
Further, half the Senate does not believe in the Rule of Law in this country. Even W condones illegal aliens by proposing amnesty for outlaws.
And I've been a staunch Conservative Republican since I first voted for Barry Goldwater in 1964. In '08, I'll probably vote for the Constitution Party (and I know the Perrot analogy).
IMOHO /rant
Kevlar and Nomex on...
Saying Iraq is a "quagmire" doesn't mean we could have done things differently - or better. It just means that having committed to a certain course of action, we can't now change our minds and leave. The American public was soft-pedaled on the amount of time and effort and money it was going to take to stabilize Iraq. There might have been good reasons not to dwell on the potential downside (keeping the Democrats quiet and forcing them to act halfway pro-American for a change being the main ones) but the non-Free-Republic-reading American public feels they have been conned and just wants to turn their backs on the whole spectacle.
This is precisely what the Marxist Media worked to achieve.
I try not to agree with Dick Morris too often, and I am not sure he is right about who was helped by isolationism since the 1950s, but there is little doubt Americans are leaning toward isolationism. As this happens, domestic issues will certainly become more important to Americans. As we know, the Democrats speak the language of domestic programs fluantly. The political picture for conservatives is not rosy. Just my two cents, not my wish.
There are other times it is necessary to engage. This is the time for America to engage. If left to themselves, Muslim countries' terrorist impulses would just grow and no other country besides the US would have what it takes to take them on.
Engaging them in war when necessary and/or trade and dialogue is essential. I believe the Bush administration is doing it right.
That should be modified for Dicky.
Don't get "stuck on toes", Dick
.
NEVER FORGET
The Man Who Predicted 9/11 and his own demise at the hands of muslim fundamentalist extremists on that Day of Infamy: RICK RESCORLA, ..R.I.P.
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24361
9/11 Lifesaver RICK RESCORLA's Statue joyfully unveiled - Ft. Benning GA
http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1608896/posts
NEVER FORGET
.
Same
Morris is wrong, it's not isolationism rearing it's ugly head, it's cowardess encouraged by the Dems.
your right. I have often felt that although we need to be on top of what other countries are doing, it seems that The U.S.A. is always footing the biggest bill for any international dealings. We ship out tons of money to other countries who do nothing for us. We are imploding here at home and apparently our politicians can't deal with international problems AND national problems at the SAME TIME!
It seems as though our politicians are more worried about some poor aids riddled fool in deepest darkest third world country than the tax paying, law abiding citizen down the street who has lost his job, has no health insurance and has to pay 3$ a gallon for gas and is losing his home!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.