From The Archives -- The Tea Party Is Dead! Long Live The Tea Party!
As we were entering into the shank of primary season a few weeks back, I wrote an article discussing how the political world would view the gains and losses of the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party. Since that time, we have seen the Tea Party lose many big races, and spectacularly win at least one race. Today, voters in Mississippi are going to add another chapter to this saga, as they decide the runoff election between sitting Senator Thad Cochran and his Tea Party challenger.
Throughout it all, we've heard the predictable storyline that the Tea Party is either deader than the dodo, or successfully continuing its takeover of the Republican Party. Tea Party challengers burned out in many races (North Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, and others), leading to headlines declaring the Establishment Republicans had won. But then an earth-shaking primary in Virginia saw the defeat of the first sitting House Majority Leader in history in a primary. The headlines quickly changed to state the Tea Party was on an upswing.
Tonight's Mississippi vote will doubtlessly lead to a new wave of one or the other of these storylines. If Thad Cochran loses, Tea Partiers will celebrate. If Cochran wins, it'll be seen as a big victory for the Establishment Republicans. Which is why I decided to re-run this earlier column, because it attempts to look a little deeper than the easy headlines that will be written tonight. Because I don't think things are as simple as some are trying to portray.
[Note: I revisited this subject right before the initial primary vote in Mississippi, so if you're interested in what I initially said about the Cochran race, you can check out the article "Will The Tea Party 'Strike Back'?" for further reading.]
Originally published May 7, 2014
Today's article title is meant as commentary on the media's overreactions to the first big round of primary election results (announced last night), and not any sort of supportive call to arms. Just to be clear up front, in case anyone was expecting a very different sort of article. It really should read "The Tea Party Is Dead / Long Live The Tea Party," since it represents a clear dichotomy in how pundits reacted to the primary results. Since the Tea Party candidates didn't do very well (and even that's putting it charitably) in this first big round of primaries, many are now proclaiming total victory for the Establishment Republican faction of the Republican Party, and an absolute rout of the Tea Party faction. The second way of interpreting the results warns that rumors of the Tea Party's death are premature, and that what really happened was that the Tea Party's takeover bid for the entire Republican Party is now a complete success. The Tea Party won, this way of thinking goes, because they have now become the Republican Party.
Which is it? Is the Tea Party dead? Or is it enjoying ever-increasing vigor because it has so successfully co-opted the Republican Party itself? The answers aren't really clear, mostly because the Tea Party itself is rather nebulous and hard to pin down (it always has been) and also because the Tea Party faction isn't really all that new in the Republican Party (although they do now have a catchy new name). There has been an intraparty feud between ultra-conservatives and merely-staunch-conservatives, after all, since at least the 1960s (see: Goldwater, Barry).
Tea Party groups have evolved over time. Initially, they were supposed to be grassroots, libertarian, and spontaneous; but there were many who almost immediately attempted to grab the Tea Party mantle and turn it into their own giant political machine. Even now, there are squabbles within the Tea Partiers over who best represents the purity of the initial movement. So while it may be impossible to generalize about "all Tea Partiers," it may instead be more instructive to look at whether some of their key organizing ideas are alive or dead.
First and foremost, the Tea Party was anti-tax. It's right there in the name, which was originally an acronym: "Taxed Enough Already!" This idea is alive and doing quite well in the Republican Party, but that's not saying all that much because it has always been a core Republican belief. Grover Norquist and his pledge were around a long time before the Tea Partiers made the scene, to put this another way. Republicans have never championed tax increases, and have punished their own whenever they've strayed from the "lower taxes" path of purity (as George H. W. Bush discovered after breaking his "No new taxes!" promise). So while the absolutist anti-tax idea is alive and well, it always has been -- and, therefore, cannot really be used as any measure of Tea Party strength within the Republican Party.
The Tea Party was also, from the beginning, anti-government. Again, this has been a Republican refrain since at least F.D.R.'s time. But the Tea Party took it a step further in 2010. Just being anti-government wasn't enough for the Republican base, they preferred candidates who were absolutely untainted by government because they had never held any elected office. Call it the ultimate version of "throw the bums out" -- any experience in Washington (or even, at times, state or local government) was seen as almost a disqualification by the Tea Party base. The Tea Partiers felt that Republicans currently in Washington had sold out on some core ideas and needed to be purged.
The idea that government is to be fought against and feared is still alive and well within the Republican Party. Once again, though, it always has been to some degree or another. The party itself swung much more absolutist on the subject in 2010, but since then have seen the results of demanding "pure" candidates, untainted by such things as knowing how not to say stupid things on the campaign trail. At least five or six Senate seats have been lost by such Tea Party candidates in the past two election cycles, after all. The Tea Party base would score a big victory by nominating a political neophyte, only to see them crash and burn in the general election. The big news from last night is that the Republican base voters seem to now be of a more critical mind when vetting candidates for important offices. Wacky candidates already prone to gaffes were given a mighty cold shoulder from the Republican voters yesterday -- not only did all the big Tea Party challengers lose, they didn't even manage to force a runoff in the North Carolina Senate race (more on that in a moment).
The next key Tea Party rallying idea was anti-spending, or what Europe calls "austerity." This was the most potent fighting point within the Republican Party, because when Republicans held both houses of Congress in the early Bush years, they racked up quite a bit of debt. So this truly was an insurgent movement within the party. Republicans had always given lip service to cutting spending, but they had (according to the Tea Party) "lost their way" when they were in power in Congress. This one has to be scored as a major victory for the Tea Party, because they have certainly refocused Republicans in Washington on budget-cutting. Austerity was the way to go for congressional Republicans, ever since the Tea Partiers were so victorious in 2010. But even this seems to be cycling back. In the first place, the Tea Partiers overreached badly in their tactics. Even when offered 90 or 95 percent of what they were asking for, the Tea Partiers dug in their heels and demanded all or nothing. This led to fiscal cliffs and government shutdowns. Which the public soon tired of.
The public is also getting tired of the austerity calls. Back when we were running $1.4 trillion deficits and 750,000 people were losing their job each month, austerity was a political winner. But since that time unemployment is down from 10.0 percent to 6.3 percent, the deficit has been more than cut in half, and calls for belt-tightening no longer seem as relevant to the public. Even House Republicans seem to realize this, as this week they'll be voting on several tax cuts which are not paid for -- adding hundreds of millions of dollars to the deficits. By prioritizing more tax cuts and not even attempting any simultaneous budget cutting, Republicans seemingly have come full circle on extra spending for their priorities. So the Tea Party did yank the Republican Party towards austerity for awhile, but they seem to be back to offering little more than lip service (and an occasional symbolic Paul Ryan budget document) to the idea any more.
The last idea associated with the Tea Party (fairly or not) was being against all sorts of social issues. Anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-immigrant, anti-minority, even anti-science -- there are a lot of things Tea Partiers are perceived as being against. Now, to be fair, some of the Tea Partiers (including some of the originals) insist that they were always only about fiscal issues, and had never taken a stand on social issues. Nonetheless, individual Tea Party candidates have indeed shown that there is a wide streak of caring about social issues among those who call themselves Tea Partiers. At least two Senate seats were lost by anti-abortion comments that were perceived as being too extreme. But, once again, this can mostly be chalked up to extremely inept candidates. There has always been a wide swath of the Republican Party who cares deeply about social issues of all types, at least as far back as the rise of the Christian Right in Ronald Reagan's time. The gay marriage battles were fought for over a decade before the Tea Party ever existed. Abortion has been a flashpoint since 1973. There have always been many "one-issue voters" within the Republican Party on all manner of social issues. So the Tea Party's influence on them was likely pretty negligible in the first place, especially when you consider how deeply-held some of these beliefs are. The Republican Party as a whole, though, is beginning to show some tiny cracks on some of these issues, as more and more in the party realize how stances such as being against gay marriage are losing them millions of young people each year. But, whether the party is evolving at all or not, the Tea Party probably didn't have much to do with it either way.
The Tea Party faction within the Republican Party has been around for a long time. Ultra-conservatism is not exactly a new thing. They flexed their power enormously in 2010, but weren't as successful in 2012 during an election year. In 2014, they seem to be losing their base of popular support -- as measured by Tea Party candidates losing all the big races yesterday. But perhaps the voters are simply tired of being tripped up by the "I'm the pure candidate because I've never worked in politics before" candidates who have gone on to lose important general elections.
While some are portraying this as total victory for the Establishment Republicans, others point out that the candidate who won in North Carolina -- the guy who was supposed to be the "centrist" fending off all the Tea Partiers -- is not all that different than a Tea Partier himself on the issues. Meaning the Tea Partiers have completely co-opted the Republican Party -- to the point that even the "Establishment Republican" candidate is nothing more than a Tea Partier. The party as a whole has been driven so far to the extremes that it now cannot be distinguished from the Tea Party -- a total victory for the Tea Party, not the Establishment Republicans.
Or, to put it another way: either "The Tea Party is dead!" or "Long live the Tea Party!"
Both are probably right, to some degree. If the Tea Party candidates continue to be routed in the next few primary elections, one thing will be clear: the threat incumbent Republicans most fear, of a Tea Party primary challenger (or "getting primaried" as it's now called) will recede somewhat. This could mean the party as a whole might begin to actually ease away from Tea Party extremism, as more Republican House and Senate members decide to vote for things they would have shied away from previously (such as, perhaps, immigration reform). Tea Party influence may wane, but then it just may surge again as we get nearer to the 2016 nominating contest. But the Tea Party can't be said to be dead within either the Republican Party or within it's base voters. It'll have an influence for years to come, most likely. But this has always really been the case -- there have been conservative extremists within the Republican Party for at least half a century now. Perhaps the catchy label "Tea Party" will become a thing of the past at some point, but it won't change the intraparty Republican struggle for power much, because it's been going on a lot longer than the "Tea Party" label has been around.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Looks like the Tea Party influence is on the wane..
That's good news, right?? :D
Michale
Idunno. In many ways I empathize with the Tea Partiers. At least they seem to understand how corrupt Washington is.
Erick Erickson wrote the following in Red State today:
I continue to oppose a third party. I’m just not sure what the Republican Party really stands for any more other than telling Obama no and telling our own corporate interests yes. That’s not much of a platform.
http://www.redstate.com/2014/06/25/the-marionettes-remain-uncut/
In many ways, this matches how I feel about many Democrats (Rahm Emmanuel, Andrew Cuomo, to name a few).
Even though I completely disagree w/ the direction the Tea Party wants to take, I share their anger at the corruption.
-David
p.s. This may be the only time I've ever agreed w/ Erick Erickson
p.s. This may be the only time I've ever agreed w/ Erick Erickson
I'de like to think I am rubbing off on you.. :D
Michale
David -
Dang, Erik Erikson said that? Wow. I agree -- there's a first time for everything, because I actually agree with the "you've got to stand FOR something" idea, too.
-CW
I'de like to think I am rubbing off on you.. :D
Heheh :).
So the question is, do you think there will ever be a way for people to cooperate against corruption in Washington?
I find it really interesting that both Dems/Reps seem to be experiencing similar frustrations. Frustration w/ corporate influence of government.
It seems the roadblock is that Dems and Reps each fear that somehow the other side would gain an advantage. So no one pushes any serious reform. It's getting really old though.
Interested in any thoughts. Sometimes I feel like we, the people of America, should just call a truce in the silly Democrat/Republican game, throw everyone out of government, and just randomly pick new representatives. I think we'd get better results.
-David
So the question is, do you think there will ever be a way for people to cooperate against corruption in Washington?
Not as long as people put Party loyalty before anything else...
It seems the roadblock is that Dems and Reps each fear that somehow the other side would gain an advantage. So no one pushes any serious reform. It's getting really old though.
Exactly.. SOMEONE is going to have to take the first step...
Michale
Exactly.. SOMEONE is going to have to take the first step...
And, since "everyone" knows that Republicans are evil, war-mongers, terrorist, hostage-taker criminal scumbags, the task of being the "bigger" person falls to Democrats..
Wanna lay bets on whether or not Democrats will step up to the task??? :D
Michale
David -
There's a famous quote about "I could pick a better Congress at random from the phone book"... um, Noam Chomsky? Maybe Bill Buckley Sr.? Someone like that [I'm too lazy to look it up]
-CW
There's a famous quote about "I could pick a better Congress at random from the phone book"... um, Noam Chomsky? Maybe Bill Buckley Sr.?
Wow. I was hoping for Chomsky but it looks like Bill Buckley Jr. Nice guess, CW!
"I am obliged to confess I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University."
Oh well, I'll take Bill. He might have been the last conservative I admired.
And, since "everyone" knows that Republicans are evil, war-mongers, terrorist, hostage-taker criminal scumbags
Huh?
I would say conservatives are good people who've bought some bad ideas (trickle down economics being at the top of the list).
Exactly.. SOMEONE is going to have to take the first step.
I think it's going to have to be people.
For the reasons we both talked about it's unlikely to be either of the two major political parties.
But I think the time is ripe for it to happen. And this is encouraging.
-David
I would say conservatives are good people who've bought some bad ideas (trickle down economics being at the top of the list).
Oh I know, YOU do.. But you are the minority here in Weigantia who thinks that..
Most here think that Republicans are evil incarnate...
Trying to get those people to look at Republicans as fellow Americans who simply have different beliefs (as I have tried to do time and time and time again) is like trying to thread a needle with a sledgehammer..
But I think the time is ripe for it to happen. And this is encouraging.
Unfortunately, the time has been "ripe" for the last few decades... And things have gotten worse rather than better..
I can point to a dozen things that are happening right now that are BAD for this country.
But none of the "people" will step forward and call a spade a spade for fear of bucking the Party line..
The solution is easy...
Implementing it is hard...
Michale
Trying to get those people to look at Republicans as fellow Americans who simply have different beliefs (as I have tried to do time and time and time again) is like trying to thread a needle with a sledgehammer.
Perhaps a different tool ... ?
:)
-David
Perhaps a different tool ... ?
M-16??? :D
Michale
Joking, of course... :D
But until everyday Americans like you and I ignore Party loyalty and hold our leaders accountable for when they frak up, NOTHING is going to change...
Michale
For example. Obama made "recess" appointments to the NRLB when the Senate was still in session..
Ya'all backed Obama on that, simply because it was Obama..
Obama was wrong. Obama frak'ed up..
Supporting leaders, even when they frak up, simply guarantees that we will get more frak'ed up leaders..
What ya'all SHOULD have done was say, "Screw Party loyalty.. Obama frak'ed up. Obama is wrong"
It's attitudes like THAT which will insure that leaders shape up..
Or else they will be shipped out...
Michale
What's happening on our southern border is another perfect example of poor leadership...
It proves beyond ANY doubt that what is needed on the border first and foremost is SECURITY...
Michale
Ya'all backed Obama on that, simply because it was Obama.
Because Republicans in Congress took a "block everything and play politics" position.
If it were possible to work with Congress, things might be different.
I applaud Obama for this action because he did what was right.
-David
I applaud Obama for this action because he did what was right.
Yea???
And look at our southern border now??
How can that be "right" by ANY stretch of the definition??
Because Republicans in Congress took a "block everything and play politics" position.
Or MAYBE... Republicans in Congress are doing what THEY think is right...
You can't have it both ways, David...
If it were possible to work with Congress, things might be different.
It IS possible to work with Congress...
But Obama doesn't WANT to work with Congress... Obama has proven time and time again that he simply CANNOT be trusted..
The southern border mess is proof positive of that...
Michale
But do you see what I mean??
Until people can forgo Party Loyalty in favor of what's right for the country, everything will always be like it is now...
Michale
Republicans in Congress are doing what THEY think is right.
I know they do.
The problem is that what they think is right is getting 100% of what they want and still saying Democrats won't compromise.
That's not a group you can work with. It's a religious group that has to get it's way or throw a temper tantrum.
It IS possible to work with Congress.
How?
Democrats have submitted legislation that is 90% conservative. Me personally, I think this was insane, but that's what they did.
Democrats were ready to cut social security and extend massive tax cuts for the wealthy.
Republicans still said "no".
Not only that but they scream about how getting 90% of what they want is capitulation.
This is a group of people that has gone off the deep end. All they seem to care about is screaming about liberals. And the country is suffering for it.
If Obama came out tomorrow and said he wanted to repeal all taxes, what would Republicans do? The same thing they always do- call him a socialist and scream that Democrats don't compromise.
I hate to say it, but the Republican party is looking more and more like a bunch of selfish a-holes.
And I'm sorry, Michale. I know you believe Democrats are this way too. But when a party is willing to offer a 90% compromise the other way, you can't say that they're not trying to work w/ conservatives. You could say they "bent over forward" for conservatives. But you can't say they're uncompromising.
The problem is, the only way to work with conservatives anymore is for conservatives to get everything they want and be in power.
-David
Until people can forgo Party Loyalty in favor of what's right for the country, everything will always be like it is now.
Who determines what's right for the country? You?
I believe this should be determined by democracy. Not money.
Is democracy something that interests you?
-David
Who determines what's right for the country? You?
How about common sense??? How about taking into account the rights and freedoms of those Americans who DIDN'T vote Democrat??
Don't they count???
Is democracy something that interests you?
Very much so..
But Obama taking actions as if he were King is as far from Democracy as one can get..
We broke away from England BECAUSE of the kind of "leadership" that Obama practices...
You want to fix what is broken about America??
Lose the Party Loyalty. Lose (AND FIGHT AGAINST) the "It's All The Rebublicans Fault" mentality..
Until you can do that, you are part of the problem and not part of the solution..
Michale
The problem is that what they think is right is getting 100% of what they want and still saying Democrats won't compromise.
And Democrats do the exact same thing..
Yet you only blame Republicans for that...
And I'm sorry, Michale. I know you believe Democrats are this way too. But when a party is willing to offer a 90% compromise the other way, you can't say that they're not trying to work w/ conservatives. You could say they "bent over forward" for conservatives. But you can't say they're uncompromising.
Yes I can..
And the difference is that *I* have facts to back up what I say..
Take Immigration... Republicans are willing to compromise on Amnesty...
They just want security first..
But Obama and the Democrats refuse to compromise because the goal is to mint fresh new Dem voters fast...
I can point to time and time again where Democrats refused to compromise..
Where's the TORT REFORM in TrainWreckCare??? Non-existent..
Once again.. The DEMOCRATS ARE ALWAYS RIGHT AND REPUBLICANS ARE ALWAYS WRONG attitude is part of the problem. NOT part of the solution..
Unless you can concede that Democrats are not perfect and have not operated in good faith, then the problem will still exist..
You have a PERFECT opportunity to address the problem in the latest http://FTP....
Michale
The problem here is that ya'all and Democrats have defined "compromise" as "Do it our way. PERIOD"..
I am further constrained to point out how difficult it is to negotiate with a hysterical faction that refers to their political opponents as "terrorists", "arsonists", "hostage-takers" and "war-criminals"...
Now, I ask you..
Would YOU want to "compromise" with a bunch of hysterical lunatics that called you those names???
I mean, honestly...
Michale
Any comments on the debacle on our Southern Border, David??
Isn't that indicative of how lawlessness can HURT American citizens and American interests??
Forget Democrat/Republican for a momemnt... Just comment on the catastrophe...
Michale
Republicans in Congress are doing what THEY think is right.
I know they do.
OK, so we're agreed..
Democrats are doing what THEY think is right for the country and won't compromise and Republicans are doing what THEY think is right for the country and THEY won't compromise..
So, how does this make Democrats any better than Republicans??
I swear, seeing Democrats and Republicans going at it is like the bad old days of the Catholics and the Protestants in Ireland.
Both think that god is on their side and that the opposing group is Lucifer incarnate..
What makes Democrats right and Republicans wrong??
Shouldn't the litmus test for such a determination be the good of the country??
How good a shape is the country in now after almost 6 years of Democrat rule??
Economy in the toilet and a bull's eye on every American overseas and here at home...
The proof is in the pudding, my friend..
Democrats were given the country to lead and they failed...
"Failed! Failed! IMPRESSIVELY Failed!!"
-Doctor, ARMAGEDDON
Let me ask you...
Do yo HONESTLY believe that Democrats will prevail in the upcoming mid-terms??
Michale
Democrats are doing what THEY think is right for the country and won't compromise and Republicans are doing what THEY think is right for the country and THEY won't compromise.
Sorry. That's simply not reality.
Democrats have been perfectly willing to compromise. In fact, they'd go far beyond compromising. They pretty much let Republicans/corporations have everything they want.
Much to my chagrin btw. They should be much better negotiators for people.
This doesn't change the fact, however, that it's impossible to work with Republicans. Even Republicans can't work with Republicans anymore.
How do you work with a party whose platform is "we hate government"?
When you hate government, what incentive do you have to make it better? The more you f*ck it up, the more you win. (Of course the country loses but you don't care.)
What makes Democrats right and Republicans wrong?
First of all, once again, I don't give a rat's ass about Democrats and Republicans.
The problem is a philosophy. It's a philosophy of trickle down economics. This philosophy says that if you give to the rich, the benefits will trickle down. This philosophy looks like tax cuts for the wealthy and tax increases for everyone else. This philosophy has been supported by both Democrats and Republicans.
Trickle down theory hasn't worked. Giving tax breaks to the wealthy has only made the wealthy much wealthier and everyone else in the country poorer.
It's wiping out the middle class.
Look around you, Michale.
Our country is falling apart. It's falling apart because those at the top decided they no longer want to pay for our country. They just want gifts and handouts.
Gifts and handouts provided by both parties.
Shouldn't the litmus test for such a determination be the good of the country?
Yes.
The problem is that trickle down economics doesn't work.
I will vote for anyone who is against trickle down economics. Republican or Democrat.
The problem is that there simply aren't that many people willing to take this stand.
Why?
Because of all the money in politics supporting handouts for the rich.
When the return on investment for lobbying is x20 or even x100 (that is, you get 100x back in tax breaks what you spend on lobbying dollars) we're very unlikely to see reform.
Do yo HONESTLY believe that Democrats will prevail in the upcoming mid-terms?
Do you honestly believe the economy would be any better if we elected Republicans and gave the wealthy some more tax handouts?
I can understand why you don't like Democrats, Michale. I share your disdain for many and the party in general. What's hard for me to get is why you seem to think Republicans would do a better job when all they're offering is more war and more trickle down economics .
Instead of bashing Dems and Obama, tell me how Republican land would make things better. From everything I've heard, I don't think it would.
-David
Take Immigration... Republicans are willing to compromise on Amnesty.
Hahahahah ... now that's funny. Since when?
You yourself said this is what cost Eric Cantor his house seat.
"Immigration reform’s slow but steady failure exposes how an ideologically diverse and powerful network of supporters couldn’t bend the one group that mattered: House Republicans."
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/how-immigration-reform-died-108374.html#ixzz361vRRQOQ
Once again, Republicans, the one group unwilling to compromise.
This, from Politico, a conservative website.
-David
So, you are going to avoid the issue of Border Security all together..
THAT is the ideological problem..
You are convinced that AMNESTY is the ONLY solution...
That is where you are wrong, as the current debacle on the southern border PROVES beyond any doubt...
Michale
You are also going to avoid the question of if Democrats will prevail in the midterms..
We both know that they won't...
Which should indicate to you how bad Democrats have screwed up the country...
It's for damn sure that Republicans can't do any worse..
At the VERY least, the GOP knows Foreign Policy...
Our Whiner In Chief can't do Foreign Policy to save his life....
Michale
The point is that, before we can agree on a solution, we have to agree on where the problem lies..
YOU believe that Obama and the Democrats are blameless regarding the policies of this country..
You believe that, if the Republicans would just go along with Obama and the Democrats, everything would be peachy keen wonderful..
You believe this, despite ALL the facts to the contrary...
IRS, Benghazi, DOJ, FAST/FURIOUS, etc etc etc..
ALL of these are DEMOCRAT screw-ups that occurred DESPITE GOP running interference...
It's not rocket science to figure how much worse things would be if Obama and the Democrats had total free reign....
This country would be in a worse shit-hole than it already is right now...
Democrats are NOT the answer to this country's problems..
Republicans may not be the best candidate for domestic issues, but at least they know how to run a Foreign Policy....
Democrats are ABYSMAL at Foreign Policy..
So, half a loaf is better than no loaf....
Michale
http://nypost.com/2014/06/28/why-democrats-insist-on-lying-about-how-poor-they-are/
Comments???
Michale
I believe the problem is trickle down economics.
I will vote for anyone who wants to end tax handouts to the rich.
This is the first step towards a working economy . All these other things that you keep bringing up don't interest me as much.
I won't vote for Democrats who believe in trickle-down economics. I won't vote for Republicans who believe in trickle-down economics.
-David
I do think it's funny though that you believe the GOP knows foreign policy.
They have one answer to every problem: WAR!!!!!