Posted on 01/22/2012 6:08:56 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
There are few things the liberal media like more than a Republican renegade. David Stockman has made a career out of strutting his independence from the GOP. So little surprise that he was an honored guest on this morning's Up With Chris Hayes on MSNBC.
That Stockman repaid his hosts by attacking Republicans was utterly predictable. Even so, the absurdity of Stockman's particular assertion was breathtaking. The former Reagan budget director actually claimed that the notion of American exceptionalism, a focus of Newt Gingrich's campaign, is nothing less than . . . "neo-con code" for an aggressive foreign policy.
View the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
You’re right on the details. I should have been more specific.
I did, three times. (;
Before Stockman was a GOP junior Congressman chosen to be Reagan’s Budget Director, Stockman had been an activist in Students for a Democratic Society (Tom Hayden, Bill Ayres, Bernardine Doehrn, Mark Rudd, et al.) and naturally, he betrayed Reagan as budget director before being canned. Ten he moved to Greenwich, CT to be a stockbroker. His wife has been a major pro-abort as a past Chairman of the “Republican Majority for Choice” (translation: a few pretentious spoiled brat “Republicans” who want poor babies slaughtered generally and the babies of their peers slaughtered when their moms find them inconvenient).
You can’t say things like that here - it’s still WWII rules and no matter what our political class decides to do with our military, it’s absolutely and unquestionably necessary. :)
Are you hallucinating that Barack Hussein Obozo is some sort of, ummmm, "neo-con?" I hope that yor family members are honest enough to exercise an appropriate degree of shame over your views.
Conservatism is interventionist in foreign policy and not a pack of lily-livered Neville Chamberlain/George McGovern/Code Pink cowards, weeping for "trade" and "friendship" with our sworn enemies. Sean Penn is no conservative and neither is the Galveston crackpot.
These wars would be a lot more popular if we concentrated on striking with overwhelming force, worried not a whit about nation-building and extracted every nickel of costs from the enemies responsible for their own devastation. Wherever possible, this should be accomplished by death from the sky and not boots on the ground in a matter of days and not years.
Nationally syndicated conservative Cincinnati talk jock Bill Cunningham ranted last week that we should make a list of the twenty largest cities in any enemy country to be attacked, give two days notice, and if the enemy fails to comply with demands, the twenty cities become history. I would add, present a bill for the destruction and, if not paid in one week, eliminate the resistant rest. Do one enemy (Iran?) like that and you will be surprised at how few wars we will have to fight thereafter.
What you call globalists might instead be those who run major businesses which profit massively from ridiculously prolonged land wars.
Oh, and no more wars under the UN, NATO or any other treaty organization. We intervene without anyone's permission. We don't curtsy. We don't bow. We don't prosecute our service personnel either for killing the enemy relentlessly and breaking their things. It is their job.
Globalists run the UN. We should quit the UN and kick it out of New York. If we stay in the UN, we should cast a Security Council veto against absolutely everything they do. We won't have to worry about co-operating with globalists thereafter.
Hardly. I am saying he watches ESPN, throws parties, takes trips, plays golf and gets his M.O. from others. He's just fairly confident it'll all shake out, as Saul and Ayers filled his head, as it should.
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.