Filed Under Foreign Affairs on May 23
I received this note from a good friend who’s a heckuva lot smarter than I am. (I’ve been trying to talk him into running for office for years.)
Agree or disagree with his idea?
You know, if the Republicans wanted to get out in front on the issue of Libya, they would draft up an approval for President Obama and the actions in Libya.
And they would name it something like, “America’s Defense of Freedom and Democracy in Oppressed Libya”…
And they would have the preamble says something like, “Given the avowed support from American Presidents past and present for the spread of liberty and freedom, and given the sacrifice of the American in giving the blood of their sons and daughters to give this freedom to the peoples of Afghanistan and Iraq who have served as a beacon of hope for those throwing off the chain of the oppressors in this Arab Spring, and given that we are starting to see blossom the first fruits of the Bush Doctrine’s tenant that so eloquently stated, ‘that freedom is the right of every person and the future of every nation. The liberty we prize is not America’s gift to the world, it is God’s gift to humanity,’ we hereby blah, blah, blah boring authorization language…”
And close with something along the lines of, “And we further encourage President Obama to recognize that the spread of freedom and democracy as first started by President Bush in those two oppressed countries, and now spreading from Tunisia to Egypt to Libya by your administration, should be the first priority for America’s foreign policy… blah, blah, some kind of language shaming him over Syria but not authorizing him to do anything yet…”
1) The Bush Doctrine is the right thing to do. It was right when JFK said, ” Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty… To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required…”
2) They put the President in the unenviable position of accepting their support for his foreign policy, coming from his opponents and sheathed in language that is a bitter pill to swallow.
3) They can turn the election to the fact that Obama found Bush’s foreign policy to be the realpolitik that is actually needed by an American president. They can throw “hope and change” right into his face and make him run far to the left, alienating the country for the next few media cycles. And they can tout how he is a “constitutional scholar” and how they agree with his policy… he knows that this is the right thing to do.
4) They’re “bipartisan”. Hurray. Everyone hold hands. And every Sunday news show they can say, “look — when it counts for the big issues outside our country’s borders, we’re one nation and we support our president,” and watch his own party (except Hillary) hold their noses and vote.
If I had someone I knew up on the Hill, this is what I’d advice them to do…