Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
John Bolton and I somehow snuck another piece on to the editorial page of the New York Times opposing Senate approval of the New Start Treaty. It's nice to be the Louisville Slugger and not the ball, once in awhile. We think that the agreement limits nuclear warheads at too low a level, undermines our global conventional weapons programs, and makes the grand mistake of linking missile defense to arms reductions (something Reagan and every American president since has rejected). The larger question is why the Obama administration is still stuck in the Cold War mindset of reaching arms control agreements with Russia when our real concerns should be maintaining international peace and combating the proliferation of nuclear weapons among our opponents and rivals.
This all got me to thinking about what the Tea Partiers think of foreign policy. Their success has come from focusing on domestic policy. But I have no strong sense how tea party members would come out on Iraq, how long to stay in Afghanistan, and how aggressively to pursue terrorism. Now that Republicans have won the House and improved in the Senate on their support, they should develop their views on these issues. My sense, just based on personal anecdote, is that many tea partiers were once part of the Reagan coalition, and so would support a strong missile defense and a robust armed forces capable of carrying out a vigorous foreign policy overseas. On the other hand, some tea partiers might prefer to cut spending on the military, withdraw from our foreign commitments, and even pull back on aggressive counter-terrorism measures.
What do Ricochet members think the tea party approach to foreign policy should be, and how would it come out on the tough questions of the day?
- Comment (48)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
Honestly, I don't want to know what the Tea Party thinks of foreign policy.
As soon as they start defining themselves and they see how divergent their views are from each other, they start to break up into us and them. It doesn't matter if 75% think one thing and the other 25% is split among different views. It will create a division.
Don't get me wrong, it will happen, and maybe even soon. It will be a test of their resolve to get past their differences and stay united.
Do you really want to be the one who asks the Tea Party to define their Gay Marriage policy? Or their abortion policy?
Don't go tempting fate, John...
Oct '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
I am not sure, but I hope it would be along the line of advice given by George Washington:
"The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connexion as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop." (From his "Farewell Address" to the nation 1796)
Wisdom then, wisdom now.
Jul '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
@John Yoo: "My sense, just based on personal anecdote, is that many tea partiers were once part of the Reagan coalition, and so would support a strong missile defense and a robust armed forces capable of carrying out a vigorous foreign policy overseas. On the other hand, some tea partiers might prefer to cut spending on the military, withdraw from our foreign commitments, and even pull back on aggressive counter-terrorism measures."
That pretty much sums it up for me. Build missile defense, maintain a capable military, stop wasting money in places like Germany and Korea and get out of Afghanistan.
@ Concerned Canadien: The split in opinion will be along social issues lines. But that's not going to destroy the coalition unless self-serving politicians who portray themselves as "leaders" of the TP are able to whip up division. Sadly, Jim DeMint already seems to be headed in that direction, with his fatuous assertion that, "You cannot be a fiscal conservative unless you are a social conservative."
And then you've got guys like Tony Perkins and Gary Bauer, desperate to avoid irrelevance, who are busily trying to scheme some way to force their pet issues into the movement.
Edited on Nov 10, 2010 at 10:45amFeb '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
@Kenneth, you're pouring gas on the fire with the dismissive and condescending comments toward social conservative leaders. If you truly want to avoid destroying the coalition as you seem to imply, please recognize that it's OK for everyone to have their own agenda, but as long as our agendas overlap to a significant degree, we should agree to disagree where we differ, but just leave it at that. We'll get a lot more of our common agenda accomplished that way.
In other words, you may not agree with DeMint, but don't do what he's doing if it divides us against each other.
Edited on Nov 10, 2010 at 11:08amJul '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
The Tea Party doesn't have leaders. But it is the target of usurpers.
Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint and their ilk need to be instructed that the People are the leaders in this movement and they are welcome to work with us as faithful public servants but no more than that.
Jul '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
Busy System Admin:
In other words, you may not agree with DeMint, but don't do what he's doing if it divides us against each other. · Nov 10 at 11:06am
Edited on Nov 10 at 11:08 am
You don't find it offensive and arrogant for him to instruct the people who just returned his party to power as to what kind of conservatives they can or cannot be?
I would find it equally offensive if he had said you cannot call for Federal legislation in favor of social issues and call yourself a conservative.
Clearly, the guy sought to put his stamp on the Tea Party (thanks for O'Donnell, Jim) and now that he thinks he has, his first run out of the gate is to say he's gonna "lead" us to social conservatism.
He doesn't speak for us. We've proven we can speak for ourselves.
Feb '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
Kenneth
Busy System Admin:
In other words, you may not agree with DeMint, but don't do what he's doing if it divides us against each other. · Nov 10 at 11:06am
Edited on Nov 10 at 11:08 am
You don't find it offensive and arrogant for him to instruct the people who just returned his party to power as to what kind of conservatives they can or cannot be?
I didn't say I agreed with DeMint.
I intended to refer to the way you belittled Tony Perkins and Gary Bauer. The last line in my comment refers to DeMint, but what I was really trying to point out is that you just did something similar to what you complain about DeMint doing-- dividing up the conservative coalition, in this case by belittling certain leaders (as "irrelevant" and "scheming") and by implication the causes ("pet issues") and people they represent.
But we're getting off topic in this thread.
Edited on Nov 10, 2010 at 11:57amOct '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
My Tea Party credentials include financial support for candidates like Miller (who is still badgering me for money. It's dead, Joe. Move on.) and Angle and being at the 9/12 March on Washington.
I've never got a sense that there was any sort of common Tea Party foreign policy preference. The movement has struck me as very focused on the ruling class' financial mismanagement and unconstitutional nature.
That's probably just as well because that provides a necessary bit of flexibility when it comes to issues like foreign policy and social policy. I don't see how it really helps to write people out of the Tea Party because of those sort of disagreements.
I think as long as it stays focused on transforming the current democratic oligarchy we find ourselves in back to a constitutional republic, it should continue to be a viable and reasonably broad movement.
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
The Tea Party's biggest concerns are the volume of government spending and the wastfulness of that spending.
Let's not pretend that military/defense spending is immune from waste. In high school I had a government teacher who had retired from the military where he administered a multi-million dollar yearly budget. He attested to the enormous amount of waste that resulted from the pressure to spend every cent of the budget so as to prevent reductions to the budget the next year. Tea Party leaders in Congress need to have the boldness to examine the military and defense budgets to strip away the waste.
Removing troops from Europe and Japan might be a good place to start. Let these places begin to pay for their own defense.
Jul '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
@BSA: "But we're getting off topic in this thread."
True, but no one is rushing in, so indulge me.
My anger was sparked by a shot Tony Perkins presumed to fire across the Tea Party's bow back in March:
"The groups coordinating (the Tea Parties) eschew social issues, and a new Contract From America, has become an article of concern on the social right.
The contract, sponsored by the grass-roots Tea Party Patriots as well as Washington groups such as FreedomWorks and Americans for Tax Reform, asks supporters to choose the 10 most important issues from a menu of 21 choices that makes no mention of socially conservative priorities such as gay marriage and abortion.
“They’re free to do it, but they can’t say [the contract] represents America,” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, a veteran of the Christian right. “If they do it they’re lying.”
He went on to threaten to smash crockery unless the Tea Parties bent to his will.
So, according to Tony Perkins, if we don't shill for him, we don't represent America.
Yeah, I have a problem with that.
Jul '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
What's wrong with nuke and pave?
Rubble makes no trouble.
Edited on Nov 10, 2010 at 12:19pmFeb '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
Publius: ...I don't see how it really helps to write people out of the Tea Party because of those sort of disagreements.
I think as long as it stays focused on transforming the current democratic oligarchy we find ourselves in back to a constitutional republic, it should continue to be a viable and reasonably broad movement. · Nov 10 at 12:03pm
I agree. I am a social conservative first-- but DON'T assume that means I want the government to impose my social values on society.
The Tea Party turned me off a bit at first because my initial impression was that many Tea Partiers were dismissive and unfriendly to social conservatism. Nevertheless as I learned more, I pretty much got on board, because I support returning to Constitutional rule and limited government. These values are also an important part of my conservatism.
But ultimately, I view our problems as deeper than just what form of government we have. Our society's biggest problems, such as the brokenness of families, is as much a cause of government growth as they are a symptom. It's all interrelated, but I view our social problems as the deeper root cause.
Edited on Nov 10, 2010 at 12:32pmAug '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
I still recall the day Rick Santelli called for a "tea party", and the electricity in the air afterward; which affected Glenn Beck after a phone call from a woman in the Midwest who was in tears, pleading for a sense of direction. He then and there created the '9/12 Project', and the rest was history.
Tea Partiers I know share some common ideas about foreign policy: Strong support for Israel and every other country that is throwing off the yoke of tyranny; military intervention only in cases of clear national threat; avoidance of 'nation building'; deep skepticism about the U.N., E.U., IMF, and godless "new world order" schemes that will destroy our sovereignty
A large majority of Tea Partiers, myself included, see politics as only one facet of a crystallization of many fundamental ideas regarding human freedom and our roles in the world. These are the concepts that have inspired humankind for 5,000 years; from Deuteronomy to Job to ancient Israel, to Greece, Rome, Britain, and the European Renaissance and then to America, and our Founders. Like a golden thread that weaves through human history, it's indestructible and destined to triumph in the end.
Feb '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
Kenneth: "The groups coordinating (the Tea Parties) eschew social issues, and a new Contract From America, has become an article of concern on the social right.
“They’re free to do it, but they can’t say [the contract] represents America,” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, a veteran of the Christian right. “If they do it they’re lying.”
I don't know the context for this, but my immediate reaction is that regardless of how artless he may have been in saying it, he has a valid point. If the top 21 issues on a menu don't include social issues, it doesn't represent what [many] Americans value. I'd be wary (and was wary) of a movement claiming to represent conservatism but that appeared to push social conservatism to the sidelines.
How would you like a movement claiming to represent conservatism that marginalized your most important conservative issues?
As to smashing crockery, without hearing the context, it seems a bit extreme to say he was demanding the Tea Party must "bend to his will" and "shill" for him. Sounds more like he's trying to make his (social conservatives') voice heard in the Tea Party.
Feb '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
Foreign Policy.
I won't claim to speak for all Tea Partiers, but as a part of the coalition I'd say I supported the Iraq and Afghanistan wars but we certainly haven't executed them flawlessly. In hindsight, knowing what we know now, I'd be more hesitant to go into both wars.
I'm in favor of free trade, but only when it's truly free. If other countries aren't playing fair, I don't object to countermeasures.
I'm a green conservative. I believe we depend far too heavily on oil-- period. It impacts foreign policy; because we import over 70% of our consumption, we are basically "over a barrel" in dealing with certain countries. It also greatly affects our trade deficit. "Drill baby drill" would realistically put only a small dent in that. We need to aggressively seek out the next energy source, and leave oil behind, as a matter of national security.
I believe we should be a "shining city on a hill" in this world. But like our founders, I don't believe we can live up to that without a population that largely derives its moral values from God.
Edited on Nov 10, 2010 at 12:48pmMay '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
I don't see how anyone interested in economic policy and fiscal restraint cannot have an opinion about foreign policy. Much of our debt is in the hands of foreign creditors like China. I also think it would be a very bad idea to close most bases outside of the US, as the military actually uses them. I dare say that our presence in the Middle East would not be possible without our forces in Germany, particularly when it comes to treating and evacuating casualties. When a service member gets injured, how do you think we get him back to the States!? Japan and Korea want and need us there. We need to be there. I've made mention of it here before, but the Navy has a saying that an aircraft carrier is 100,000 tons of diplomacy. I'd support a strong missile defense and strong armed forces. It would also help if we had qualified diplomats managing the State Department. As in, not Hillary Clinton. A way to reduce waste and redundancies within gov't is to engage with new chairmen of House committees and subcommittees. Make them do the job they were elected to do.
Edited on Nov 10, 2010 at 1:14pmMay '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
Prof. Yoo,
Is the Tea Party a one-note song that will exist for the next few election cycles to enforce fiscal responsibility on Washington and if that happens, recede back into the dispassionate electorate or is it a watchdog organization here to stay and check either party, opposing government largesse and control.
If the Tea Party is here to stay, I would hope that the Tea Party membership would support a strong foreign policy with regard to defense to go along with their limited government views. I think that would include aggressive counter-terrorism operations, but I don’t know if missile defense would have the support of a majority of Tea people as it may be seen as an expensive luxury that doesn’t seem to meet our current threats.
As long as the current crop of leaders(from any party) ignore domestic spending problems, the Tea Party will exist, exerting pressure to elect fiscally conservative candidates who will likely have traditional conservative ideas about foreign policy and social issues.
Jul '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
Good Berean: I am not sure, but I hope it would be along the line of advice given by George Washington:
"The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connexion as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop." (From his "Farewell Address" to the nation 1796)
Wisdom then, wisdom now. · Nov 10 at 10:38am
I am with you. As so often, the principles enunciated by the Founding Fathers still serve us well in the present day.
Aug '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
My admiration and love for George Washington is equal to anyone's, and what he said in 1796 was wise and true. But there's no way we can return to that point and withdraw from the world. Distances have shrunk to nothing, air and satellite warfare have demolished borders, and technology moves forward at lightning speed.
Kenneth
Good Berean: I am not sure, but I hope it would be along the line of advice given by George Washington:
"The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connexion as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop." (From his "Farewell Address" to the nation 1796)
Wisdom then, wisdom now. · Nov 10 at 10:38am
I am with you. As so often, the principles enunciated by the Founding Fathers still serve us well in the present day. · Nov 10 at 1:02pm
Jul '10
Re: Tea Partiers and Foreign Policy?
River: My admiration and love for George Washington is equal to anyone's, and what he said in 1796 was wise and true. But there's no way we can return to that point and withdraw from the world. Distances have shrunk to nothing, air and satellite warfare have demolished borders, and technology moves forward at lightning speed.
Nov 10 at 1:16pm
I don't mean to be overtly glib, but...so what? Why can't we?