Posted under Election 2012 & Interventionism & Republican Party
There has been a lot of speculation about Chris Christie running for President despite his repeated denials. So where does Christie stand on foreign policy? The answer is probably better than most hawkish interventionists Republicans, but not where non-interventionist conservatives would like. He recently gave a speech about “American Exceptionalism” (an intreventionist buzz phrase).
Here is Jim Antle’s take on the speech.
Here is Daniel Larison’s take.
Here is the comment I made below Antle’s post. The fact that interventionist don’t entirely like Christie’s speech is positive.
If Mr. Smith doubts Christie’s commitment to the “War against Islamic Radicals,” then as a conservative non-interventionist I find that hopeful. The first paragraph you excerpt strikes the right note. The later babble about world leadership and not turning our back on the world, less so. (The authentic conservative wants his country to tend to its national interests and otherwise mind its own business. The crusader wants his country to “lead.”)
What this probably means is that Christie is more of a “realist.” He likely takes mainstream foreign policy assumptions about America’s role in the world for granted, but is less of a crusader and fearmonger than many interventionist Republicans. That’s an improvement, but it isn’t authentic conservative non-interventionism.
Christie strikes me as a moderate that conservatives like because he won a blue state and is whacking away at his state budget, but one thing I like about Christie is his persona. He comes off, like we discuss about Putin below, as an alpha male*. He doesn’t come off as slick or packaged.
* see my discussion in the comments below
Walter on 29 Sep 2011 at 8:35 pm #
Christie, however, is unacceptable on immigration.
New Jersey’s Chris Christie—Bad As Bush On Immigration
By Washington Watcher on April 1, 2011
http://www.vdare.com/articles/new-jerseys-chris-christie-bad-as-bush-on-immigration
http://www.vdare.com/posts/on-chris-christies-f-from-numbersusa
RedPhillips on 29 Sep 2011 at 8:41 pm #
I wasn’t aware of Christie’s problem on immigration. Good to know.
Chris Hewlett on 29 Sep 2011 at 9:44 pm #
Dr. Phillips, you do know about Dr. Ron Paul’s problem on immigration, do you not?
Kirt Higdon on 29 Sep 2011 at 11:36 pm #
Red, how easily you fall for media image. It doesn’t occur to you that those who come off as a “man’s man” have been slickly packaged to create that very public persona.
RedPhillips on 30 Sep 2011 at 5:04 pm #
Chris, we discussed Paul’s very problematic book chapter on immigration at length here. IMO, Paul’s ghostwriters were trying too hard to please both Paul’s right-wing populist and libertarian ideologue base.
But Paul should get credit for being one of the first and few to be against birthright citizenship. I am also very confident Paul would never sign any kind of amnesty.
RedPhillips on 30 Sep 2011 at 5:18 pm #
Sigh. Kirt is being contrarian again. Although I don’t think man’s man was really the best term to use for the point I was trying to make. I wasn’t suggesting that he is regularly out driving fence posts and skinning a deer. That would better describe our old buddy Dale Peterson. It would probably better communicate what I was trying to get at to call him an alpha male. Yes I agree that people can be slickly packaged, but no amount of packaging is going to make Woody Allen into an alpha male. It is the kind of thing you know when you see it. (Our Darwinians would suggest that it is highly adaptive to be able to discern such things readily and that the ability to make such discernments are built into our genetic code.)
Walter on 30 Sep 2011 at 6:00 pm #
It may be just rhetoric, but Christie is at least now trying to sound tough on immigration. If one talks the talk, who knows, he may walk the walk. But if one gives immigration restrictionists the finger (as Rick Perry has), you know he won’t do anything.
Kirt Higdon on 30 Sep 2011 at 7:25 pm #
Red, when you were growing up, was it the fat kids who talked big who were considered the alpha males? That wasn’t at all the way it was at the schools I went to. But I agree that Chris Christie is more of an alpha male than Woody Allen; that’s not a very high bar.
RedPhillips on 30 Sep 2011 at 8:28 pm #
Actually Kirt, Christie comes off as an alpha male in spite of his weight, not because of it.
Sempronius on 01 Oct 2011 at 12:08 am #
“…no amount of packaging is going to make Woody Allen into an alpha male.”
Good one Red. I’m laughing my you-know-what-off!
By the way Christie is a lousy governor. He gave away $180 billion in tax cuts to big business and goes around saying “we (we!) don’t have any money” when it comes to working people.