Could it be that those who represent the isolationist impulse are not overwhelmingly popular? That Americans actually believe in all that 'empire for liberty' claptrap? Apparently.

For the past couple of weeks, we have been debating whether the GOP presidential field was slipping into isolationism. However, President Obama made clear that if his Republican challengers want the "come home America" vote, they'll have to wrest it from him.

The failure of any Republican candidate to make the case for vigorous American leadership in the world during last week's Republican presidential debate has sparked a debate in Washington: Is the Republican Party becoming increasingly isolationist?

In anticipation of the upcoming vote on the War Powers Act resolutions in the U.S. House of Representatives, the following AEI Scholars are available for comment:

Looks like the isolationist wing of the Tea Party movement has gotten a little traction on the question of war powers. Yesterday, the Senate voted to table a motion--introduced by Sen. Rand Paul--to declare as the sense of the Senate that "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."

AEI foreign policy and defense experts react to the AEI/CNN/Heritage GOP debate:

The lessons of Pearl Harbor are many, as is the responsibility to honor the heroic dead of that day.

The world usually turns out to work differently from what American presidents expected when they were campaigning.