(Photo: Reuters/Jim Young)
While Texas Congressman Ron Paul has enjoyed a rise in poll numbers lately, his rivals and the media have turned their attention to his foreign policy philosophy, which is considered to be his weakness among conservative voters.
Washington Post editorial writer Charles Lane made an unusual analogy about Paul’s foreign policy, which is likely to not bode well for the congressman. In an appearance on Fox News Sunday, Lane said:
“Well, I think one of the amazing things that this all shows that this is the Republican Party might be about to crown the winner of the Iowa caucuses, somebody with the foreign policy views of Jeremiah Wright,” Lane said.
“Remember that? I mean, Ron Paul goes around blaming the United States for 9/11, etc., etc. So it is obvious he’s not going to be the nominee.”
Wright was President Obama’s controversial pastor in Chicago who was criticized by Republicans for allegedly preaching racism towards whites and hate for America.
While Paul’s foreign policy perspective cannot necessarily be summed up by saying “he hates America,” it is true that the congressman takes a vastly less hawkish attitude in international relations than many of his conservative counterparts. He has openly opposed the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and has implied that he would be lenient with Iran in regards to its desire for nuclear warheads.
His foreign policy views are so different from mainstream conservatism that his former staffer, Eric Dondero, felt compelled to speak out against his candidacy. Dondero published an article on Right Wing News on Monday, calling Paul’s foreign policy “sheer lunacy.”
According to Dondero, Paul is: anti-Israel.
“His view is that Israel is more trouble than it is worth, specifically to the America taxpayer. He sides with the Palestinians, and supports their calls for the abolishment of the Jewish state, and the return of Israel, all of it, to the Arabs.”
-an extreme isolationist
“[Paul] strenuously does not believe the United States had any business getting involved in fighting Hitler in WWII. He expressed to me countless times, that ‘saving the Jews,’ was absolutely none of our business.”
“Ron Paul was opposed to the War in Afghanistan, and to any military reaction to the attacks of 9/11.” He also “expressed no sympathies whatsoever for those who died on 9/11, and pretty much forbade us staffers from engaging in any sort of memorial expressions, or openly asserting pro-military statements in support of the Bush administration.”
Paul was so anti-war, in fact, that he had planned on voting “no” on the resolution to go into Afghanistan. According to Dondero, Paul inexplicably changed his vote at the last minute.
Dondero ends his article by saying Paul should be slammed by the media for his “simply outrageously horrendous views on foreign policy, Israel, and national security for the United States. His near No vote on Afghanistan. That is the big scandal.”
Paul’s campaign manager, Jesse Benton, shot back at Dondero in a released statement saying the former aide was “disgruntled” and had been fired by Paul for “performance issues.” Benton went on to say that Dondero “has zero credibility and should not be taken seriously.”
Regardless, Dondero’s statements have been picked up by several media outlets and seem to be echoing conservatives’ concerns about a Ron Paul presidency.