- The South Korean massacres in the Vietnam War Hoang Do, Diplomat
- It’s time to democratize the workplace, too Ingrid Robeyns, Crooked Timber
- Inheritance, marriage and swindle: the three ways to the top Branko Milanovic, globalinequality
- The specters of comparison Michael Rothberg, Latitude
I’ve been behind on links to my RealClearHistory columns. So, without further adieu:
It boils down to foreign policy. President Obama has proved more competent than Bush in this area, but being a more competent beehive whacker does not take a whole hell of a lot of work. Most of Rep. Paul’s domestic policy proposals would have to go through that beautiful, awe-inspiring labyrinth of constitutional checks-and-balances created by the Founding Fathers of this great republic. However, Presidents have much more leeway when it comes to foreign policy. This is something that Ron Paul has talked about checking, but it is also something that could convince independents on the Left to vote for Ron Paul.
Think about it: he would (unfortunately) have a tough time getting some of his domestic policy proposals passed, but as President he commands the military, and he wants to bring our troops home.
My main concern upon writing this little blurb is the Right’s reluctance to embrace Ron Paul’s foreign policy of freedom, commerce, and honest friendship. The following is meant to convince those of you on the Right who would otherwise vote for Ron Paul if it weren’t for his foreign policy views.
The reluctance on the Right to yield to both superior reasoning and common sense on the issue of American foreign policy stems from three basic points: Continue reading