Pops wrote:What the hell does gay rights have to do with New American Doctrine six? or Surveillance or much of anything?
Off topic, but just saying, if he actually runs for president I'm just surprised. Because he'll have to address that issue.
He seems to be trying to move left, on that issue, versus where he's been on it in the past.
We all already know his American Doctrine views, are just old school Republican. Interventionist. Red lines. HW Bush, Reagan, and W. Bush.Which I actually agree with oftentimes! Strategically, a Lyndsay Graham is right, it's just good generalship. But at what cost, how many trillions of dollars. And then, to what benefit, to the actual nation here at home.
So much lately, I take a step back and think "well wait a second though, why are we so involved overseas but ignoring everything at home."
I'm being told lately that domestic policy issues aren't connected to foreign policy, but really, they are. If Lindsay Graham or Obama is beating a drum to do something abroad then it's fair to say "well okay yes you sound right, but you're not doing anything here at home around the house so you need to do something on that before we can all go to Syria to do something."
I just think it's relevant (domestic policy in general, not whether he is closeted and used to vote against gay rights).
There's a demarcation line somewhere there, when a Lyndsay Graham foreign policy does not seem like it benefits someone that's in the 99%. Is global policing just to enrich the 1%, or is there something in this for the 99%, it's actually a very relevant question in a democracy.
This is what is causing America to be more isolationist, abroad. If global cop stuff is just for the 1% and corporations, then the 99% won't be for it. The 1% have to make that american doctrine work for the 99%, too.
So -- more on topic -- I do lsiten to a John McCain and a Lyndsay Graham and they want to help people in Ukraine and Syria so much and they're almost in tears about it sometimes (and I agree on Ukraine), but then lately I am just thinking.. WHERE ARE HIS TEARS for working and middle class, here at home? Why care so much just about Syrians, where is the caring for Americans?
(am I sounding like a radical noam chomsky lately? I swear to goodness I'm not for that, they need to just raise the darn minimum wage for christ sake and then expand the ACA and then do some debt free college, then okay let's go to war and defeat ISIS -- you guys know I'm a neocon warhawk at heart, I'm for a strong america too, but it has to be strong at home too that's all I'm saying, and a Lyndsay Graham is just all foreign policy but he ignores domestic and doesn't seem to care about the homefront, ya know?)
edit:
Just to clarify, I believe in Reaganist foreign policy too, short of major wars but just how Reagan used to do things, but it's just that we cannot do that if we are ignoring domestic policy. Strong at home, strong abroad, you can't have one without the other.