[SeekAndFind]

RE: What is so horrible about paleolibertarianism? What exactly is palelibertarianism?

for one thing, many people have a distinct impression (right or wrong) that the Paul’s (Both Rand and Ron ) have an isolationist streak in them. The impression is that they do not want America involved in any military conflict (even when a country like Afghanistan is sheltering a terrorist who was responsible for killing 3,000 people on our soil ).

[Count of Monte Fisto]

The impression is that they do not want America involved in any military conflict (even when a country like Afghanistan is sheltering a terrorist who was responsible for killing 3,000 people on our soil ).

Oh the horror.

Our homosexual military and our intelligence services are at this very moment arming Al Qaeda terrorists that are slaughtering Christian villages in Syria. The Pauls, those wacky kook isolationists, are against this, too.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

Even the paleocons and paleolibertarians were in favor of going into Afghanistan to find and kill Bin Laden.

Fewer and fewer people are in favor of continuing to stay in Afghanistan hoping against all hope that we can bring that 10th century country, the "graveyard of empires", into the 21st century.

[TBP]

for one thing, many people have a distinct impression (right or wrong) that the Paul’s (Both Rand and Ron ) have an isolationist streak in them. The impression is that they do not want America involved in any military conflict (even when a country like Afghanistan is sheltering a terrorist who was responsible for killing 3,000 people on our soil ).

Which is a wrong impression deliberately fueled by left-wingers and neocons.

I think they're of the Pat Buchanan school -- we should get involved when we have a vital national interest, but otherwise, generally stay out of other countries' business. As Buchanan wrote in a column, "Conservatives are at best reluctant internationalists."