General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhere is the 'progressive' outrage at Paul undermining Obama's Foreign Policy?
According to Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), he recently traveled to Central America where he, among other things, met with Guatemalan President Otto Perez Molina for 45 minutes and discussed politics with the foreign head of state. By his own account, the senator not only condemned President Obama for the recent humanitarian crisis along the U.S./Mexico border, Paul also hoped to undermine U.S. foreign policy during his discussion with Molina.
For reasons I dont fully understand, this generated very little attention in the political world. American norms dictate that U.S. officials, when traveling abroad, dont trash the United States while on foreign soil. For that matter, the notion of an American elected official conducting his own freelance foreign policy, working against the U.S. position while meeting with a foreign head of state, seems ridiculous on its face.
According to Rand Pauls office:
* Elected American politicians can go abroad to undermine U.S. foreign policy so long as the politicians believe what theyre saying is the truth.
* Republicans may have considered it scandalous for Americans to travel abroad and condemn U.S. policy from foreign soil, but now only career politicians and political parties care about such traditional American norms.
* Using prosecutorial discretion to allow Dream Act kids to avoid deportation is evidence of shredding the Constitution.
* Border security has improved to levels unseen in modern American history, which serves as evidence of the abdication of responsibility for securing our border.
If theres any policy coherence to Rand Pauls take on this, I cant find it.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/rand-pauls-curious-defense-undermining-us-foreign-policy
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Ie, why are you poking a stick specifically at progressives, as opposed to everyone else? Paul's a complete idiot. I don't waste my time being outraged at the stupidity of Virginia Foxx or Louie Gohmert either. I just know they're total idiots.
Does everything you post have to be used as a poke at the people you sneer at as being 'progressive'?
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)... I would expect at least a little grumbling from 'progressives' after their amazing display of faux outrage at Hillary Clinton's Atlantic interview.
But no, as many suspected, the content of that interview wasn't the real issue - it was that Clinton had given the interview and we know how anything she does is viewed
under a microscope in progressive attempts to score electoral brownie points.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)A dangerous tool, but a tool nonetheless, so I'm not at all surprised he's trying to undermine the Pres. It's a favourite pastime of people like McCain, Graham, and so on.
I had to go read the Atlantic to find out about what you were referencing Clinton. Now that I have, I'm not sure I'd say I'm 'outraged' - it was just more Clinton sabre rattling, nothing new there. Everybody already knew she wanted to keep the MIC in business.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Ever occur to you that a lot of people here are looking for a DEMOCRATIC candidate besides Hillary that fits their stance on issues? Instead you are just mad as hell that others don't agree with you so you try to paint them as Rand Paul supporters.
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Laelth
(32,017 posts)It's a little more puzzling coming from HRC.
-Laelth