Internationalism and isolationism are two different and opponent political principles. Internationalism advocates that countries and nations of the world should have strong and constant cooperation in economy or politics. It has its roots in both socialism and liberalism. On the other hand, isolationism preaches that it is best choice for one nation to stay as far as possible from affairs of other countries. Isolationist think that involvement in international problems can draw nation into dangerous conflicts, and therefore should be avoided.
I think it is an important part of U.S. democracy because it contributes the the U.S. in a major way. The creators of the U.S. Constitution worked to ensure the military would be under civilian control. When they wrote the Constitution they separated the responsibilities for the military, placing the responsibilities firmly in civilian hands. Congress has the power to declare war and to make the rules for governing the military. There are some disadvantages, though. The American Civil War of 1861-1865 was the period of greatest danger to civilian control of the military. As the war progressed, more and more people called for a military dictatorship. Military officers stayed away from politics and many even refused to vote, feeling that this would somehow influence their service.
It was showed as a surplus because it was a surplus when it came to the budget. The problem behind it that for the first time in a while, the United States budget worked with a surplus after the year ended even though it was not the idea of a surplus that the people believed.
The surplus disappeared because it never really existed. It was a surplus but it didn't mean that the country was not in debt. The country had a huge amount of debt to other countries or to companies or to any other institution such as a bank. The surplus was eaten up by the debt accumulated over the years. There was a surplus, but the debt was not reduced.
Looking at all of the options available, only 2) is a criticism. The media sometimes ignores opposing views.
Saying the media is unbiased is not criticism, neither is saying they research their stories or use a variety of sources.
I hope this helps! :)
