Rick Perry... sounds great -- ha ha ha!

[Ben]

Rick Perry, ‘Hawk Internationalist’ Or is that "internationalist hawk"?


by Justin Raimondo, August 12, 2011


The idea that the Republican party Establishment was going to tolerate a takeover of their party by a rag-tag bunch of insurgent "tea partiers" was never very convincing, and Rick Perry’s entrance into the race as the "Teastablishment" candidate – to the hosannas of the neocons — should put that delusion to rest.

For months, the media and the Republican mandarins have been anointing one candidate after another as the chief competitor to Mitt Romney, presumed by many to be the frontrunner. First it was Tim Pawlenty, and after he went nowhere fast it was Jon Huntsman, who has about as much chance as Gary Johnson of winning the race. Now it’s Texas Governor Perry who’s going to unite the various Republican factions around a post-Reaganite, post-Bush conservative consensus. The only problem with that is Perry has aroused the ire of Texas conservatives, who noted the Governor’s Texas Transit Corridor highway project made liberal – if you’ll pardon the expression – use of eminent domain. The TTC proposal put him on the other side of the barricades from most Texas conservatives – and also put him at odds with Rep. Ron Paul, another fast-rising GOP presidential contender, who introduced legislation to block federal money for the scheme. I’ll leave it to others to expose Perry’s RINO credentials on domestic issues, and focus instead on his hostility to the Tea Party when it comes to foreign policy.

At its inception, the Tea Party, as an inchoate movement with no real national leaders, and a fervently single-issue focus, had no foreign policy agenda. As time went on, however – that is, as the bills continued to stream in for our wars in the Middle East – that began to change. It changed because no one can address the fiscal crisis at the core of our problems without facing the question of how to cut the misnamed "defense" budget. It soon became apparent to the tea partiers that a military tasked with policing the world – instead of actually defending this country – accounted for a good chunk of change. Under the all-inclusive rubric of "defense" we spend more than a trillion dollars a year, as much as for so-called entitlements. The rest is "discretionary" spending – you know, like running the actual government.

In any case, the tea partiers, confronted with a bloated Leviathan, soon discovered that the military budget is among the holiest of the federal budget’s sacred cows, and that this reverence is bipartisan: neither the GOP Establishment nor the Democrats would sign on to any real cuts in this sector. The result: a budget deal that relegated possible cuts in the military and overseas budget to the final "tranches" of the budget-reduction process, to go into effect only if the "Super-Congress" fails to reach an agreement.

In short, they’ll yank your grandmother off her life support system, and cut your Social Security – which you’ve been " of empire.

The tea partiers, most of them, find this galling, to say the least, and the rumbles of discontent with this Americans-come-last policy provoked a response from the Establishment: the tea partiers, the neocons cried, are a modern manifestation of the dreaded "isolationists," and the Obama cultists joined in the hand-wringing, defending the Dear Leader’s Libyan adventure against Republican "isolationists" like Michelle Bachmann, Ron Paul, and George Will.

Undeterred, tea party activists are pushing ahead with their campaign to cut back Big Government on all levels – including the international level. As The Hill reports, tea partiers are putting pressure on Republicans appointed to the "Super-Committee" to wield the budget knife unsparingly:

"’Nothing should be sacred, and everything needs to be evaluated and cut as much as it can be,’ said Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of Tea Party Patriots.

"Tea Party activists say defense programs should come under the same knife as any other taxpayer-funded programs, and that massive national security budgets were not exempt from their definition of ‘big government.’

"’The liberty movement is about the fundamental limitation of government, and that doesn’t have departmental boundaries with regards to this principle,’ said Chris Littleton, co-founder of the Ohio Liberty Council."

The tea partiers aren’t "isolationists" – that smear word doesn’t really describe anyone in American politics outside of the labor unions and other advocates of economic protectionism. They’re nationalists, albeit not of the all-too-familiar militaristic variety, in that they want a foreign policy that puts America and American interests first, and last. As opposed to the traditional European conception of nationalism as warlike and expansionist, theirs is a Amazon.com: Ain't My America: The Long, Noble History of Antiwar Conservatism and Middle-American Anti-Imperialism (9780805082449): Bill Kauffman: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51KoTFKgxLL.@@AMEPARAM@@51KoTFKgxLL that is inward looking and increasingly anti-imperialist.

This is in radical juxtaposition to the views of Señor Perry, who has been characterized by one of his top aides as a "hawk internationalist." This is a good indication that the much-ballyhooed Perry bandwagon began going off the rails before it ever got started. Do the Perryites really believe they can sell their candidate to crusty conservative Republicans as an "internationalist"? Does Phyllis Schlafly know about this?

Just look at who’s been giving him foreign policy advice: according to Josh Rogin, over at Foreignpolicy.com, he’s been in meetings "sometimes for hours" with the likes of former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Doug Feith, former NSC "strategy guru" William Luti, and a host of other neocons from the last administration, many of whom were instrumental in lying us into war in Iraq. Feith and Luti were the nexus of a disinformation network which fed false "intelligence" to the Congress, the White House, and the public to justify a disastrous invasion which we are still paying for in lives and treasure.

Oh, and what a surprise: it turns out the Perry-neocon lash-up was brokered by disgraced former Defense Secretary Donald "Known Unknowns" Rumsfeld.

Another Rick Perry's Texas A&M Transcript Texas Governor surrounded by the same Praetorian Guard of conniving neocons who led us down the road to imperial overstretch and fiscal ruin last time around – isn’t that just what the GOP needs right now?

The neocons have anointed their candidate, and it’s clear they have some sense he’s swimming upstream:

"’He will distinguish himself from other Republicans as a hawk internationalist, embracing American exceptionalism and the unique role we must play in confronting the many threats we face,’ one foreign policy advisor with knowledge of Perry’s thinking told The Cable. ‘He has no sympathy for the neo-isolationist impulses emanating from some quarters of the Republican Party.’"

Perry is being sold as the one candidate who can bridge the gap between the tea partiers and the old line "mainstream" Republican Establishment, but those fault-lines are turning into a chasm, as Senator McCain’s anti-Tea Party eruption the other day confirms. When it comes to cutting "defense" – and, more broadly, redefining America’s proper role in the world – Perry and his neocon advisors are going to have to demonstrate how "American exceptionalism" means we’re an exception to the laws of economics. [.pdf] Empires are expensive: a foreign policy of perpetual war costs not only cash but lives. Aside from the fiscal aspect, for most Americans the death of Osama bin Laden has drawn the curtain on the threat from al-Qaeda – especially for those increasing numbers who face the far more immediate threat of financial insolvency. At a time when the homes of so many Americans have gone into foreclosure, Perry’s neocon "experts" are going to have a hard time coming up with a convincing pitch for more military spending, more wars, and more "internationalism."

In trying to sell this warmed-over Bush-ism, the Perry camp is setting itself on a collision course with the tea partiers. Having been sold out by the Republican congressional leadership and its too-little-too-late budget deal – which authorized over a trillion to feed the maw of the Welfare-Warfare State, and only cut the rate of spending growth – the libertarian-constitutionalist wing of the GOP is in no mood for compromise. In a primary season in which the Tea Party is widely seen as the kingmaker, Perry the "internationalist" may see his coronation delayed indefinitely.

The Perry trial balloon was inflated with a lot of hot air when it was first floated in the media, but he may well turn out to be another Fred Thompson – in the last presidential go-round, and I have a sneaking suspicion – or is it a hope? – the Perry campaign is headed for a similar destiny.

[Ben]

The above copy and paste didn't work out that well. Too many vids, etc.
Here is the link to the above piece by Justin Raimondo:

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2...ernationalist/

[Ben]

And the always entertaining (albeit sometimes over the top -- ha ha) paleoconservative Alex Jones. (PS: Notice how heated he gets -- ha ha!)

[Ben]

Paleoconservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Blue_flag_waving.svg" class="image" title="Blue flag"><img alt="Blue flag" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/17/Blue_flag_waving.svg/70px-Blue_flag_waving.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/1/17/Blue_flag_waving.svg/70px-Blue_flag_waving.svg.png

[Stavros]

Paleoconservatism....and we were struggling with defining the left and the right....

[onmyknees]

Paleoconservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ben....the average American isn't at all interested in your inane posting about Neo Cons and Paleo Cons. It's not that they're not
sophisticated...they neither care, and don't have the time to discern the difference between all those sub categories. Here's what they care about...their families, their jobs and leaving their kids a better country than they were given. If Perry can speak to their anxieties and fears in a rational way.....he'll be successful. If he can't....he wont. It is now, and has always been about the economy stupid. Obama was able to do that in the campaign and the rest is history as they say. But.......Had Obama focused on and perused economic policies that began to put Americans back to work in a gradual, coherent . methodical way, he would have waltzed into a second term and then could have begun to initiate all his social agenda , and probably could have gotten most of it...but Americans aren't all that tolerant of any President's social policies if they ain't working and providing for their families. Witness the 2010 mid terms. All those brilliant strategists surrounding Obama failed to realize that. They went for the gusto....went for broke on Health Care, a liberal dream for decades.. in a tortured 12 month debacle , sleezy deal making, vote buying, reconciliation process, 12,000 page bills, and finally a rammed through vote in the early morning hours. ...and it may cost them their legacy as the Supreme Court may strike down the individual mandate just as the 11th circuit did recently....and all that for what??? . Because they believed if they could control 1/6 of the economy, they could transform the nation. They got it...but it has, and will continue to cost them dearly. Call it impatience, ideology, miscalculations, or flat out political naivety .

They'll be tens of thousands of articles by pundits and observers about who Rick Perry is and how he thinks...and it won't matter a fucking bit because the average guy ain't reading all that. It's about having solutions, and communicating those to average folks, neither of which the current President has mastered.

[flabbybody]

I watched Perry's speech announcing his candidacy. 5 minutes into it he was sweating like a stuffed pig.. much worse than Nixon, who's upper lip was always dripping wet during TV appearances.

I don't want to sound shallow. There are enough real reasons to hate this prick and his holier than thou brand of fake Christian values bullshit. But watching him svich under the hot lights was extremely amusing. All Perry will accomplish is to split the wacko right wing vote with Michele and make it easier for Romney to lock up the nomination.

[onmyknees]

I watched Perry's speech announcing his candidacy. 5 minutes into it he was sweating like a stuffed pig.. much worse than Nixon, who's upper lip was always dripping wet during TV appearances.

I don't want to sound shallow. There are enough real reasons to hate this prick and his holier than thou brand of fake Christian values bullshit. But watching him svich under the hot lights was extremely amusing. All Perry will accomplish is to split the wacko right wing vote with Michele and make it easier for Romney to lock up the nomination.

Why is it that anyone you lefties disagree with is "wacko" ?? It's so fucking tiresome and weak. You sound like one of these gurls on here whose panties are always in a knot about something. You fucking hypocrites are the first ones to scream racism when somebody disagrees with Obama, but you throw the pejoratives around pretty freely goin' the other way...You want an intellegent political discourse? Try disagreeing without being an asshole...otherwise bend over and take the return volley like a man.

[Silcc69]

Why is it that anyone you lefties disagree with is "wacko" ?? It's so fucking tiresome and weak. You sound like one of these gurls on here whose panties are always in a knot about something. You fucking hypocrites are the first ones to scream racism when somebody disagrees with Obama, but you throw the pejoratives around pretty freely goin' the other way...You want an intellegent political discourse? Try disagreeing without being an asshole...otherwise bend over and take the return volley like a man.

Butthurt eh!? The only republican that has any sense is Ron Paul and he seems to be viewed as a wacko by your party. Oh the irony..............

[trish]

Why is it that anyone you lefties disagree with is "wacko" ??

There you go again making ridiculous generalizations. Liberals have disagreed with each other as well as with conservatives without considering those with whom they disagreed "wackos". The real question is, "Why are there are so many wackos politically conservative and conversely why are so many conservatives these days wacko?" Do the contradictions within the conservative philosophy just drive believers over the edge or what?