Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Congressional 2007 Scorecard on National Security; Christopher DeMuth; Leon Wieseltier; Nicholas Ebe

Print Friendly

FEATURED ARTICLE

Congress and National Security in 2007
By John Isaacs | December 28, 2007

Although Congress failed to extract the United States from the mess in Iraq or to significantly alterthe administration’s bellicose approach to Iran, it did make progress on other national security issues,particularly nuclear ones. Even Republicans who salute Bush’s military policies are silent, publiclyopposed, or active participants in the rebellion against the administration’s nuclear weapons plans. Read full story.

FEATURED PROFILES

Christopher DeMuth
One-time Nixon staffer Christopher DeMuth has served since 1986 as the president of the AmericanEnterprise Institute, the informal headquarters of the neoconservative political faction.

Daniel McKivergan
A John McCain campaign adviser, McKiverganserved as a writer for the neoconservative WeeklyStandard and the Project for the New AmericanCentury.

Leon Wieseltier
The longtime literary editor of the New Republic, Wieseltier’s staunch support for Israelhas led him to endorse several neoconservative foreign policy goals.

Nicholas Eberstadt
A scholar on Asia at the American Enterprise Institute, Eberstadt supported action against Iraq and hasbeen something of an alarmist on issues concerning North Korea.

LETTERS

IRC encourages feedback and comments. Send letters to rightweb@irc-online.org. IRC reserves the right to edit comments for clarity and brevity. Be sure to include your full name. Thank you.

If you would like to see our variety of free ezines and listservs, please go to: http://www.irc-online.org/lists/.
To be removed from this list, please email rightweb@irc-online.org with “unsubscribe Right Web.”

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Rep. Illeana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), former chair of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, is a leading ”pro-Israel” hawk in Congress.


Brigette Gabriel, an anti-Islamic author and activist, is the founder of the right-wing group ACT! for America.


The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), one of the more effective U.S. lobbying outfits, aims to ensure that the United States backs Israel regardless of the policies Israel pursues.


Frank Gaffney, director of the hardline neoconservative Center for Security Policy, is a longtime advocate of aggressive U.S. foreign policies, bloated military budgets, and confrontation with the Islamic world.


Shmuley Boteach is a “celebrity rabbi” known for his controversial “pro-Israel” advocacy.


United against Nuclear Iran is a pressure group that attacks companies doing business in Iran and disseminates alarmist reports about the country’s nuclear program.


Huntsman, the millionaire scion of the Huntsman chemical empire, is a former Utah governor who served as President Obama’s first ambassador to China and was a candidate for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

AIPAC has done more than just tolerate the U.S. tilt toward extreme and often xenophobic views. Newly released tax filings show that the country’s biggest pro-Israel group financially contributed to the Center for Security Policy, the think-tank that played a pivotal role in engineering the Trump administration’s efforts to impose a ban on Muslim immigration.


Print Friendly

It would have been hard for Trump to find someone with more extreme positions than David Friedman for U.S. ambassador to Israel.


Print Friendly

Just as the “bogeyman” of the Mexican rapist and drug dealer is used to justify the Wall and mass immigration detention, the specter of Muslim terrorists is being used to validate gutting the refugee program and limiting admission from North Africa, and Southwest and South Asia.


Print Friendly

Although the mainstream media narrative about Trump’s Russia ties has been fairly linear, in reality the situation appears to be anything but.


Print Friendly

Reagan’s military buildup had little justification, though the military was rebuilding after the Vietnam disaster. Today, there is almost no case at all for a defense budget increase as big as the $54 billion that the Trump administration wants.


Print Friendly

The very idea of any U.S. president putting his personal financial interests ahead of the U.S. national interest is sufficient reason for the public to be outraged. That such a conflict of interest may affect real U.S. foreign policy decisions is an outrage.


Print Friendly

The new US administration is continuing a state of war that has existed for 16 years.


RightWeb
share