Posted on 05/03/2011 8:24:13 AM PDT by Hawk720
Sarah Palin has parted ways with the neoconservative foreign policy advisers who had been writing speeches and advising her on policy since she joined the McCain campaign.
An aide to Palin, Tim Crawford, confirmed that Orion Strategies' Randy Scheunemann and Michael Goldfarb are no longer working for her PAC. They parted, both sides said on good terms.
"Randy flat out said, 'We can't give you the time,'" Crawford said.
(snip)
Crawford said they've been replaced by Peter Schweizer, a writer and fellow at the Hoover Institution who blogs regularly at Andrew Breitbart's Big Peace.
The personnel shift carries an ideological charge. Scheunemann, the former executive director of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, is a longtime neoconservative stalwart, as is Goldfarb, a former reporter and protege of Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol. They crafted for Palin a policy platform and voice reflecting an eagerness to use American force. The pair, who helped Palin with press and debate prep in 2008, were also something of Palin's last link to Washington's political establishment.
But Palin parted ways with that aggressive internationalism in a speech yesterday, condemning U.S. involvement in Libya and laying out a more cautious philosophy of the use of force. Schweizer has articulated a more skeptical view of the use of American force and promotion of democracy abroad.
"Egypt does a lot of things wrong, but they have also been pro-American on a lot of levels," he wrote of Obama's support for protesters in Egypt -- which was being roundly criticized by neoconservatives for being insufficiently vigorous. "When protests broke out in Iran earlier during his tenure in the White House, Obama was not willing to openly back them, at least until he came under considerable fire. But now he is supporting them in Egypt?"
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Hyperbole? Not at all. Heck, she thought that Obama should intervene MORE in Libya...that is before she was against his intervention.
Since when is calling a spade a spade, “out there.” You disagree. Well then answer this question: Can you name ONE, just one, war Palin has opposed? Heck, her original stand on Libya, that’s before she was against it, was that Obama was not doing enough to intervene.
And, in that interview she advocated ground troops AND regime change.
Well...better late than never.
I was surprised when she came out with McLame to shouting for another war - this time on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood “protestors” for “democracy.”
She had rinoitis. She caught it from McLame and his nasty spawn. Maybe she’s healing up and getting control over her brain again.
“Palin is moving toward Ron Pauls position. Good! However, I prefer the real thing.”
Insanity and anti-Americanism in not a foreign policy, nor something that Palin is heading for.
Nobody knows where “Palin is heading for” not even Palin. One day she’s a super hawk on Libya and the next she thinks Obama had done too much. I suspect she’ll change her position a few more times.
She didn’t support ground troops in the interview, and a coupe day later she reaffirms that on the Judge Napolitano when she repeated explicitly that she does not advocate ground troops in Libya
Ron Paul gives you nutbags certainty.
Certain to enable terrorists, because it’s America’s fault.
Certain to never defend America or use enhanced interrogation.
Certainty in getting his usual 3-5% of the vote.
Baloney. Even Moses had advsors. Gimme a break....
Have to agree with Bigtigermike. I saw that video too. The words on paper do come out like seeing the video. She was clearly expressing a reluctance to go the direction of committing our troops to ground combat when objectives were not clear. But she did think there needed to be air cover as a way to protect civilians from senseless genocide. And her timing was much better than Obama’s. Had he acted as quickly as that, the situation might not have degenerated into the present mess it now is. Read the Art of War. Timing is critical in military conflicts, whether youre a Reaganite, a neocon, a liberal/libertarian, or an amateur golfer trying to play president in your spare time.
So you're one of those Ron Paul nutcases. Now I see the reason for your illogical posts.
PS - Sarah Palin will never be a surrender monkey like Ron Paul. To suggest that shows you're as much of a cook as Ron Paul.
Not really. Lots of sane people dont want to start wars they dont have to. That doesnt make them Libertarian. Reaganism and Paulism are fundamentally irreconcilable. Reagan believed, as Palin does, in being loyal to our allies through thick and thin, including Israel, because it is America's best interests to do so. Not Paul. Reagan believed, as Palin does, that its important to identify and soundly defeat America's real enemies, whether foreign or domestic. Not Paul. And neither Reagan nor Palin would compromise US sovereignty to the demands of the modern illegal immigration movement. Apparently Paul is shifting to a weaker position on immigration. But as for me, Ill take Reaganism, in heels if necessary, over that Libertarian mishmash any day of the week.
According to the article, they dumped her, because they didn't have the time for her. But it said it was amicable, so I didn't think it meant they had a problem with her or vice versa.
I think it makes sense to look at who she hired to replace them, but it doesn't make sense to interpret their leaving as part of a plan, unless you find some other article that suggests that she initiated it.
Some of the most viscious anti-Semitism came to light when Madoff's thievery surfaced: that Jewish thief Madoff fleecing Jewish thieves (via his affinity Ponzi) was the definition of a "victimless crime."
H-o-r-r-i-b-l-e stuff was going around.
It took the wisdom of Holocaust Survivor Elie Weisel to put it in perspective (Weisel was also fleeced by Madoff).
Weisel said that thieves can imagine themselves committing crimes but innocent victims cannot imagine anyone would commit crimes against them.
Amen.
That says it all.
How much did Madoff swindle, anyway?
SJB, you must know that what you do is mouth the words and spare your brethren the caterwauling.
I wish Yoko Ono would have done this. LOL
Local Yokel? I never could understand that relationship. Lennon must have been a nutjob.
$63 Billion-—but some say Madoff stole more.
In France, the names of the victims was dubbed, “The Pigeon List.”
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.