-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
View all comments (42) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/04/29/hawks-circling-rand-paul
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
C Bowen| 4.29.10 @ 4:14PM
By Hawks, I guess we mean liberal Republicans?
Margie| 4.29.10 @ 4:27PM
Thank God for Hawks!
William R| 4.29.10 @ 4:46PM
After Rand wins in a blowout I think it will be time to start purging the NeoCons. Obama is President today because Bush listened to Cheney instead of old warrior Colin Powell.
Margie| 4.29.10 @ 6:35PM
Doves are lame at purging. They scare easily.
Dean| 4.30.10 @ 9:08AM
You are too much of a black and white thinker, Margie. Just because someone is opposed to empire building and preemptive war does not make them a "dove". Enough with the playground name calling.
Margie| 4.30.10 @ 12:24PM
wow~ what a lightweight! I get called much worse by you nonnies, and I can take it. LOL.
A dove is a beautiful thing, is it not?
Mike| 4.30.10 @ 12:34PM
Hey Margie - Dean didn't say he was going to cry because you implied he is a dove, he just thinks, as do I and many other rational adults, that is sounds trite and silly. Kind of like the cheesy little cliche "Cut and run".
Just because people think that hugely expensive wars fought for no good reason are bad ideas, doesn't make them doves.
Margie| 4.30.10 @ 1:38PM
Awww. Well, I love being called a Hawk. And I love Hawks. In fact, I will vote only for Hawks.
The Hawks,
All the Hawks
And nothing but the Hawks
So help us, Lord.
Hawks have wonderful eyesight, did you know that?
As you watch this video, just replace the words, squirrel, rat, mouse, cat, etc. with the word Terrorist. That is what Hawks do~ they kill the enemy. With stealth and precision. They're awesome!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5fESGUC9ms
Publius| 4.29.10 @ 6:50PM
Thanks for proving once again the commonality between Libertarians and Liberals. Cheney is a conservative. Powell is a solid democrap. Pro-abortion, pro-affirmative action, pro-illegal immigration, voted for Karter, Klinton and Obumba.
William R| 4.29.10 @ 7:26PM
No, when it comes to Foreign Policy Colin Powell is the traditional conservative. Cheney is a big government NeoCon hack. Deficits don't matter Cheney sees no problem spending trillions of dollars nation building. President Eisenhower warned the American people about people like Cheney.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY
Publius| 4.29.10 @ 8:46PM
Like I said, Libertians (big L) are no less moonbats than Leftists, re: Cheney vs Powell. Your insinuation that Mr Cheney was for big government would only mean something if democraps weren't figured in the equation. In regard to Eisenhower, if you knew your history, you would know that he was NOT a conservative. Thus his admonitions regarding the military industrial complex are understandable, and repugnant to a conservative. However, he was not a coward, so he was also not a contemporary Libertarian.
William R| 4.29.10 @ 10:01PM
You're not the sharpest knife in drawer that's for sure. You are right about Eisenhower. He was considered a moderate Republican. In 1952 Eisenhower won the Republican nomination over Mr Conservative Robert Taft .
http://www.independent.org/pub.....e.asp?a=37
Taft would be considered a Ron Paul Republican today.
Spending trillions nation building in the Middle East isn't big government??
ZerObama| 4.29.10 @ 11:44PM
Did you vote for Obama like Powell did, moron?
Makes you a liberal in case you didn't notice.
Mike| 4.30.10 @ 12:45PM
Publius - are you seriously implying that if you don't support the "military industrial complex" then you are not conservative? Are you insane. The military industrial complex is the biggest recipient of corporate welfare and waste in the entire federal government.
If knee jerk support for every stupid,pointless war and mindless submission to the M-I complex is what conservatives are then count me out. The country is broke. We can no longer afford 300 million dollar toys for the Pentagon.
Publius| 4.30.10 @ 2:24PM
Mike, expenditures for national defense or waging war against our enemies is Constitutional. Specific Welfare is NOT. Entitlement spending is NOT. Even much of discretionary spending is unconstitutional. If we were abiding the Constitution on those things, we would not be worrying about expenditures for national defense.
Actually, Libertarians opted out of the Conservative Movement years ago and joined wingnut loonies like Puke Bucanan, Lew Rockwell and Ron Paul. You are now a fringe moonbat group with your only power being in improving democrap electoral prospects.
William R| 5.1.10 @ 1:16PM
And you are no conservative. Just another big government hack.
C Bowen| 4.29.10 @ 8:03PM
Umm--Cheney is pro-gay marriage, pro-lesbian artificial insemination, pro-gays in the military, pro-bailouts and on and on and on...pray tell, who informs you?
Publius| 4.29.10 @ 9:17PM
"Umm--Cheney is pro-gay marriage, pro-lesbian artificial insemination"
And this has to do with...what? I don't know if he is or isn't, but it's neither here nor there. Are you a bigot? Or just a grade schooler. I would say Mr Cheney is a good family man and his daughters are the apple of his eye. Probably a good Christian. I believe Mr Cheney was a proponent of 'Don't ask, don't tell'.
You accidentally forgot to mention Halliburton. All good wingnuts mention Halliburton while mentioning Mr Cheney's name. And you forgot to mention the Iraq war isn't about Terrorism, it's about OIL. OOPS..I see you had those things covered under: ...and on and on.
But alas, this argument wasn't about Mr Cheney's shortcomings, real or imagined. It was about Mr Cheney's conservatism vs Colin Powell's liberalism. Silly stuff aside I think the record is very clear on that. To argue that Cheney is less conservative than Powell is to set yourself up for a big fall. Powell got to where he's at today through affirmative action, which he readily admits he supports. He was promoted beyond his personal qualifications by republican presidents, which he didn't hesitate to stab in the back. Only nitwit irrelevant Libertarians would be worrying about spreading democracy, and exaggerating the cost, while not realizing the benefits (kinda like marxists worrying about the rich getting richer faster than the poor are getting rich), and claiming that Cheney would cause larger deficits than Karter, Klinton and Obumba, all socialists/marxists who Powell supported and voted for.
C Bowen| 4.30.10 @ 11:26AM
Powell and Cheney are both liberals where I come from, and your use of the bigot card is noted, Leftie.
Mike| 4.30.10 @ 12:36PM
I don't know that I would call Dick a liberal but I will call him a disgusting creep who shafted this country and gave us Obama.
Dean| 4.30.10 @ 9:10AM
"Than God for Hawks!"
Then you should thank God for Obama too. His war policy changed none from his predecessor. He simply uses less hawkish language. Yet, he receives a nobel PEACE prize. Ridiculous.
Pingback| 4.29.10 @ 5:07PM
Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Hawks Circling Rand Pau links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Margie| 4.29.10 @ 8:13PM
Here is a partial definition of a "Neo-Con Hack"
Neo-Con = (Me & others of my "ilk")
1. One who votes Republican even though the candidate isn't pure, ie., perfectly conservative.
2. One who DARES to state that Israel is our ally, and that the Palestinians are the trouble-makers.
3. One who doesn't believe in Non-Interventionism and Isolationism.
4. One who likes Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham and other "Neo-Cons".
Anyone else want to add to that?
William R| 4.29.10 @ 10:02PM
Like I said, you're the epitome of a NeoCon hack.
ZerObama| 4.29.10 @ 11:41PM
And you're an unhinged fringer.
Dino| 4.30.10 @ 9:04AM
uh, yeah. I'd like to add something.
5. One who masks Imperial Hubris as "patriotism"
6. One who believes being loyal to (Republican) government more than country.
7. One who follows cults of personality (ie, Bush, Cheney, Palin etc) regardless of their actions.
8. One who will sell out every principle that conservatism stands for in order to be loyal to the Republican Party.
Mike| 4.30.10 @ 12:54PM
8. One who will sell out every principle that conservatism stands for in order to be loyal to the Republican Party. - You nailed it.
Blind loyalty to the Bush/Cheney idiots gave us this current mess.
Perhaps I too am an unhinged fringer because I saw my country dragged into a war that has cost us trillions and cost my Republican party it's credibility.
Mike| 4.30.10 @ 12:50PM
Make that an "un-informed neo con hack". Or perhaps that is a redundant term.
I think Beck has seen the errors of the neo con ways. I don't hear the others talking about foreign policy much. They know it is a loser.
Publius| 4.30.10 @ 2:01PM
Actually Margie, their use of the term Neo-Con is a testiment to their anti-semitism.
Sean| 4.30.10 @ 2:32PM
Nice one we haven't heard that one before. How original did you come up with that one yourself?
Margie| 4.30.10 @ 3:29PM
I'm well aware. The Paul-bot fanatics refer to us as "Israel-Firsters."
In fact, I have yet to meet a Paul-bot who does NOT refer to me as such.
Publius| 4.29.10 @ 9:31PM
5. One who believes in the principles of Christianity and/or Judaism.
6. One who believes that for the most part the U.S. Constitution was inspired by the tenets set down in the Holy Bible.
7. One who believes that almost all of the Founding Fathers were men of religion and almost all of those were Christians. Based of course on the voluminous record the Founders left.
8. One who isn't prone to conspiracy theories about dose 'Jous' and 9/11.
9 One who doesn't think we went to war against terrorism in Iraq, among other places, for OIL.
10. One who thinks that capital punishment for both pushers and users would end the drug problem.
I'd better stop and let someone else name a few.
Robert| 4.29.10 @ 11:42PM
Actually, the Neo-cons are (or more accurately, were) former democrats who became alarmed and disgusted with the abject appeasement mentality of the party during the cold war and quit to become republicans. See Jean Kirkpatrick, etc.
Crusader| 4.30.10 @ 6:18AM
You can't be for "limited government" while at the same time be for an imperial government. The two are diametrically opposed.
That being said, by no means do I take the elder Paul's stand that islam attacked the US because we re "over there." That is utter nonsense and while I am with the LIbertarians on about 98% of the issues I can't be with ya on this one. If this were the case how do you explain islam's bloody, violent 1400+ year history? A history that includes attacks on a young united ("u" purposely left lower case) States of America long before the country had global reach or troops stationed in God knows how many countries, let alone any in the ME?
The problem is a problem I have come to realize that infects more than just our dealings with the ME and islam. The problem is a Truth deficit. Reading the quotes from Cheney where he describes "radical islam" is dismaying. Again, if someone can please point out for me how the jihadists are twisting mohammed's words and example I will buy into the "radical islam" argument. Until then, we have an islam problem, not a "radical" islam problem just plain old islam problem.
Islam has declared war on the West and we still think we need to kill off Al Queada. We are fighting a war on "terror," which is just a symptom of the bigger problem of islam. Until the West realizes this and opens its eyes to the true nature of islam we will ALWAYS have this problem.
Wake up, America.
Mike| 4.30.10 @ 12:55PM
The neo con hack in Kentucky is going down. Cheney, Guliani, etc. will not help him.
Pingback| 4.30.10 @ 2:02PM
Paul Baier vs Trevor Bruess 10/24/09 | Binghamton Senators AHL Announcer links to this page. Here’s an excerpt: