On his blog The Washington Note, Steve Clemons has praised Sarah Palin's recent change of foreign policy advisors, writing that she has turned away from "neocons" who support "interventionist crusading" against Libya, toward "realists" and Libya intervention skeptics. (Read here: Palin Getting out of Neocon Business? - The Washington Note)
He writes that this move has alienated the affections of key Palin backer Bill Kristol, who says that Palin is moving towards an "Obama-Lite" foreign policy. Clemons writes:
This wedge between pugnacious nationalists who disdain international deal-making, and more realistic, national-interest driven assessments of power and costs is a key one. If Sarah Palin is about to become a realist, well, I may have to put some of my problems with her aside ("some" of my problems).
Lord knows that Bill Kristol's views on foreign policy are worthy of criticism, but isn't it sad that a commentator with Clemons' reputation has lowered himself to characterizing the NATO action in Libya as an interventionist crusade? He should have to explain that view to the innocent Libyans who Qaddafi had massacred for staging peaceful protests for reform. Qaddafi's crimes against his own citizens are what precipitated NATO's intervention, not, as Clemons would have it, a desire by "neocons" to "crusade".
I can see why now professes a newfound respect for Sarah Palin. Both seem to be searching for easy answers to complex problems.