<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ABR?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2011/11/19/abr/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2011/11/19/abr/</link>
	<description>A First Things Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:09:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen P</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2011/11/19/abr/comment-page-1/#comment-15472</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2011 19:19:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=4608#comment-15472</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s not really accurate to call Ron Paul an isolationist, which requires both non-interventionism and economic protectionism. On military matters, he&#039;s a non-interventionist: he doesn&#039;t think the U.S. should use military force in countries unless we&#039;ve been directly attacked. However, he&#039;s not protectionist, as he is about as pro-free trade as any politician out there.

I agree that the non-interventionism will bar him from winning the full support of the Anyone-But-Romney crowd—as long as a substantial portion of the Republican Party clings to the belief that our national security is served well by nation-building, they&#039;ll refuse to support him.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s not really accurate to call Ron Paul an isolationist, which requires both non-interventionism and economic protectionism. On military matters, he&#8217;s a non-interventionist: he doesn&#8217;t think the U.S. should use military force in countries unless we&#8217;ve been directly attacked. However, he&#8217;s not protectionist, as he is about as pro-free trade as any politician out there.</p>
<p>I agree that the non-interventionism will bar him from winning the full support of the Anyone-But-Romney crowd—as long as a substantial portion of the Republican Party clings to the belief that our national security is served well by nation-building, they&#8217;ll refuse to support him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
