Greg Scoblete reacts to Kevin Drum’s dismissal of Ron Paul:
But here’s the thing, if you support a non-interventionist foreign policy (or more precisely, a less interventionist one) what do you do? As Andrew Sullivan notes, there is literally no other candidate in either party that represents your views.
Since we’re talking about presidential candidates, this is correct. It’s true that there are some Democratic politicians with a strong record of opposing unnecessary wars, but none of them is running in this cycle, and back in 2008 there were arguably only two (Kucinich and Gravel). Obama isn’t opposed to all preventive wars, and Drum should remember that his administration started another war just a few months ago. Paul isn’t the only person to oppose preventive wars, but in the Republican Party he was among the first to do so.
As it happens, it’s true that “non-interventionism has no other significant voices except Ron Paul” in the current presidential election, and probably the only other nationally-known Republican figure who would be able to match him is his son. The amusing conceit in all of this is that Paul has been or will be bad for non-interventionism. Far fewer people paid any attention to these ideas just five years ago. Non-interventionism has gone from being a more or less marginal position to one that is starting to receive a lot more attention and at least a little serious consideration. It’s impossible to ignore that this wouldn’t have happened had it not been for Paul’s last two presidential campaigns.
Aaron in Israel 
BarryD 
Quite honestly (and speaking as a lifelong Republican), the notion that we shouldn’t have bases all over the world, or that there’s such thing as blowback, or that US foreign policy isn’t always about Truth and Justice never occurred to me before Ron Paul hit the national scene. The US foreign policy consensus was pretty much like gravity to me: it just ‘was’. I never knew the story behind why the Iranians hated us so much back in 1979. I didn’t know about the reasons for OBL’s declaration of war on America. And, in my previous life, I probably would have supported the US military involvements throughout the Middle East. And I don’t think I am alone in this. Like the saying goes, Ron Paul cured my apathy (along a few other folks like Daniel).
What I find strange about Drum’s article is, imagine if RP wasn’t on stage to mention the motivations of 9/11? What if he wasn’t there downplaying the Iranian ‘threat’? What if he wasn’t there explaining how the Military Industrial Complex is driven by the unlimited borrowing capacity provided by the Fed? What if he wasn’t there reminding America what a disaster Iraq was? Who would even mention the term ‘non-interventionism’ to begin with? Who else, in either party, could defiantly discuss these ideas, in the face of withering criticism, and still garner 20+% in the Iowa caucuses? Anyone?
Peace be with you.