Senate Foreign Relations Committee endorses Mike Pompeo

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted in favor of Mike Pompeo's nomination for Secretary of State 11-9-1 on Monday, thanks to Sen. Rand Paul who flipped from opposing to supporting his nomination.

Why it matters: At one point, it appeared that Pompeo did not have the votes for a favorable recommendation from the committee, which would have marked the first time in nearly 100 years they voted against a Secretary of State nominee. But with the endorsement in tact, Pompeo's nomination is now headed to the Senate floor for a full vote, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ensured a smooth approval.

I know there are many well-intentioned, principled folks, many here on FR, who are rightfully skeptical of our tendency over the last few decades to get dragged into globalist-driven wars that drain our military and finances for questionable gain. I remember myself how I felt very uncomfortable with the first Gulf war and how our military seemed to be being used as the enforcement arm of the “New World Order.”

That said, however, I think this sensible attitude sometimes gets stretched to the extreme where it veers into dogmatic isolationism. I generally really like Rand Paul. He is a strong advocate for defending the Constitution and staying true to its original intent, but his Libertarian leanings often cause him to see a so-called “neocon” behind every tree and to risk doing considerable damage to our cause by prioritizing his pet crusade over often more relevant and important concerns.

I’m glad he came to his senses at the last minute. Mike Pompeo will be an excellent Secretary of State, and his experience and no-nonsense approach will be crucial in dealing with North Korea and others (Iran?) in the future. If our diplomatic corps was populated with isolationists like Rand, we would have no chance of negotiating favorable outcomes with regimes that only understand power and force.

[The Hillary Papers]

Sounds like a great title for a moxie.

I want a supporting role. Doesn’t even have to be credited.

I can be Parking Lot Attendant #3. Or one of the guards escorting Hillary in her orange jumpsuit.

I can also say: “It’s Enrico Palazzo!!” from the stands.

Oh, I need a cool $5 million for the idea, LOL.

Works for me, brother.

Of course, I wanna ride in the Dodge just once. We can go to In and Out for a cheeseburger and fries. Don’t scare me though - that sounds like a lot of horsepower!

I’d say Pup and Taco but I think they went out of business.

Right now, I have to have In and Out vicariously through Yaelle. Never went though I should have when I was in Torrance in the mid-1990’s (visiting) / vacation.

“....tendency over the last few decades to get dragged into globalist-driven wars...”

The sad reality of politics is that everyone has a boogyman that they want the government to protect them from.

The Left fears mega corporations and the “greed” that they think motivates free enterprise, and they want more government “solutions” - like regulation and wealth redistribution. They are quick to trade away individual liberty for their sacred cow.

The Right has their boogiemen and sacred cows too - most notably national security. Conservatives seem just as quick to trade away Liberty to give the government awesome power in the name of protecting national security - but once given, the power is not easily taken away.

The Founders had one single sacred cow - and that was individual liberty. They sought to place limits of the power and scope of government via the constitution. Central government was their boogeyman.

Rand Paul often seems to be the only politician who has it right - but he pays a price - every time he champions the founding principle of limited government - he threatens somebody’s sacred cow.

I became a very early supporter of Trump when I realized he was a fighter and a pragmatist - I figured his pragmatism would lead him to the same conclusion that the original pragmatists (the founding fathers) came to - that an overreaching central government is the real threat.

Trump has in no way dissapointed - but before I supported Trump the pragmatist, I supported Rand Paul the constitutionalist.

Rand Paul is NOT an “attention whore”, a “prima Donna”, or an isolationist. He’s a conservative in the real sense of the word - a limited government constitutionalist.

Rand Paul will never compromise his core principles enough to build a coalition and win a majority in a general election - so we will never see him as POTUS. But when Rand Paul makes a stand on something, it’s always worth stepping back a few paces and rethinking it. He’s a bellwether - he’s always got his eye on the horizon and knows the true threat - our own federal government.

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.