Good Morning!
Mitt Romney looks like Ken doll
Top Topics:
Foreign Policy:
- President Obama visits Puerto Rico
- GOP sings a different tune on Foreign policy
- Boehner sends Obama a letter about the Libyan intervention
- U.S. has concerns about connections between Al-Qaeda in Yemen and Somalia
- Military increases airstrikes in Yemen
- Meet the new commander in Afghanistan
- Gates predicts congress will side with Obama on Afghanistan plan
- $649 billion approved defense spending backed by House panel
- Romney’s confusing Afghanistan statement
Politics:
- Bachmann comes out strong after debate
- Obama must be jobcentric for 2012
- Sen. Tom Coburn – the agitator of the senate?
- Federal Court upholds Prop. 8 ruling
- Romney heads to California for fundraising
- Bernake calls for an end to politics on debt ceiling
- July 4 new deadline for debt ceiling agreement to be written
Figures of Note:

Opinions of Note:
Eugene Robinson discusses Romney’s predicament
Todd Graham offers debate analysis
David Brooks protests covering this next election cycle- but will anyway
My First Thought: The Foreign Policy Shift
I will confess now, I did not see the foreign policy section of the debate. I was busy working on some computer issues. Although, from the statements I have been reading, it was the most exciting part of the debate. Most are talking about the change in tone with the GOP. Suddenly, the Bush-era nation building strategy is out and good ole’ fashion neoisolationism is back in! The trend is not surprising. People are mad that the economy is in bad shape + the war has been going on for ten years = a political opportunity for the right. Attacking the war is not a new strategy. The Democrats did it in 2006 and 2008 with great success. Republicans have also attacked Democrats for past positions on needless intervention, remember the attacks on Clinton about Somalia and Balkans nation building?
Foreign policy has more wiggle room now than it ever did. The truth is, both parties have shifted significantly on military action in foreign lands. At different points, both parties become the “interventionist party.” Right now, the Democrats are it. My take is that no person can say he or she would not intervene in a scenario. Lots of problems come up during a presidency that could require the use of U.S. intervention. Unlike the economy, interventionist foreign policy is not unique to any one party. So therefore, the shift makes it a very fluid political topic with a potential win for Republicans and a pain in the side for Democrats. That would be irony, if Obama lost the election on one of the very issues he was elected to change.
Photo Credit: Rolling Stone
Figures from Gallup and the Economist