This week brings another entry in my ongoing look at where the GOP presidential candidates – and potential candidates – stand on the issues. My latest column for National Review Online looks at the candidates on foreign policy, defense, and homeland security. Rand Paul, of course, is the most dovish of the candidates, though nowhere near as noninterventionist as his father (or as he’s often portrayed in the media). After Paul, its various shades of hawk, but there are surprising nuances among the candidates. Marco Rubio, for instance, seems to take the pure neocon line, intervention everywhere, while Ted Cruz falls somewhere between Paul and Rubio.
Start here
Latest Posts
-
Some Thoughts on the War with Iran
All these things can be true at once. The Iranian leadership were/are bad guys. For decades they have slaughtered their own people, sponsored terrorism, threatened…
-
TRUMP YEAR ONE
It has been a year since President Trump was sworn in for his second term as president, time to step back and evaluate what he…
-
Political Violence is Unacceptable
The assassination of conservative political activist Charlie Kirk is more than just a crime – it is a tragedy. It is a tragedy obviously for…
-
What Now?
The election is over and the candidate that I voted for lost. That happens in a democracy (in my case, most of the time). What…
TannerOnPolicy 