Rand Paul Filibusters John Brennan, old school style

[Scipio]

Man, that's one incompetent PR department.

Remember, we elected the smart one.  Twice.

[Phillip V]

[Sheilbh]

I'd be surprised if we're still talking about drones & whatnot a year from now.  But there are some deep differences between neocons and non-interventionists, that's for sure.

Maybe not drones, but possibly something like that. I've seen hawks praise Paul while also suggesting they're rather uneasy with the substance of his point.

But as you say there's some big differences between the Bolton and the Paul wings of the party and I don't really see many in the middle. In addition both seem to be getting or feeling stronger. The neo-cons feel they've a strong critique of Obama 'leading from behind' not taking an aggressive enough stand in the world. Similarly it looks like the non-interventionist wing also feel strong pointing to terrorism in Libya and the general worries about who's winning the Arab uprisings. Because of all that I think, unlike tax/spend or social issues, this feels like something where there could be a big argument and I think it'll be an interesting one.

I would also note that in the last election I think the Republicans more or less ceded total control of foreign policy as an issue to the Democrats which was a huge mistake.