Where Does Didier Stand on Defense?

Nothing better illustrates the paradoxical dilemma of Washington Republican U.S. Senate candidate Clint Didier than Sarah Palin's speech at last Sunday's Freedom Fest in Norfolk, VA:

Something has to be done urgently to stop the out of control Obama-Reid-Pelosi spending machine, and no government agency should be immune from budget scrutiny,” she said. “We must make sure, however, that we do nothing to undermine the effectiveness of our military. If we lose wars, if we lose the ability to deter adversaries, if we lose the ability to provide security for ourselves and for our allies, we risk losing all that makes America great! That is a price we cannot afford to pay.”

Palin has endorsed Dider, calling him a "patriot."  However, Didier also enjoys wide support from members of Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty (which cannot officially endorse any candidate.)  Didier even urges visitors to his campaign website to sign a declaration of support for the Campaign for Liberty.

The Campaign for Liberty states:

With our Founding Fathers, we also believe in a noninterventionist foreign policy. Inspired by the old Robert Taft wing of the Republican Party, we are convinced that the American people cannot remain free and prosperous with 700 military bases around the world, troops in 130 countries, and a steady diet of war propaganda. Our military overstretch is undermining our national defense and bankrupting our country.

Didier's foreign policy tab on his website originally reflected this non-interventionist philosophy, even echoing Ron Paul's call for "letters of marque and reprisal" (i.e. mercenaries) to be used to fight terrorists.  This foreign policy statement was later modifed slightly, with Didier telling me at the recent Washington Republican Convention in Vancouver that he appreciated me pointing it out and said that it in no way reflected his true feelings.

It should be noted that Palin has also endorsed Rand Paul, Ron Paul's son, for U.S. Senate in Kentucky.  The younger Paul has softened his stance on non-interventionism somewhat to appeal to the Tea Party and Sarah Palin. Didier has simply engaged in misdirection to keep everyone confused as to his real stance is on national defense. No one is really sure (maybe not even Didier himself ) what that is.

The hawkishness of Sarah Palin and the isolationism of Ron Paul mixed with tea are making for an interesting election season.