From a political science professor (and avid blog reader):
No. No. And No. Or at least no more than having a policy inevitably means official Washington will back that policy and debate about small variations in that policy, rather than fundamental questions. Is the China debate being "stifled" since we don't discuss anymore whether or not to economically shun China due to their human rights practices? Was the nuclear weapons debate "stifled" in the Cold War -- or did most people just agree that it was good for the US to have a big nuclear arsenal given the threat from the Soviet Union?