I’ve written about this before, but why are the only supposed non-isolationists the ones who want to drop bombs on multiple countries and further irritate the rest of the world? Ron Paul is supposedly an “isolationist” because he doesn’t want to rush to bomb more Muslim countries, enrage more Muslims, and inflame more terrorism. Yet the neoconservative crowd that has been consistently wrong about everything in Iraq is supposedly our moral authority on all matters military and are the ones who are going to properly engage the rest of the world. Please. Real isolationism is never-ending warfare and belligerence, embargoes, tariffs, and domestic economic and monetary policies that weaken the U.S and its dealings with the outside world.

I don’t think I have to point out which candidate is the ONLY one who isn’t for any of the above nonsense and who would truly engage the rest of the world in a more productive and efficient way. Talk about global involvement (while still respecting the constitution, U.S sovereignty, and other countries’ sovereignty)! But in today’s warped world of modern conservatism, the only “internationalists” and non-isolationists are the ones who can’t wait to bomb Iran and who knows where else. The Paul campaign needs to play this up and define what “isolationism” really is and who the real isolationists really are. It would be a mistake not to.