In case it hasn’t been made clear in elections past, we don’t like former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
At all.
He’s a whiny RINO in our book, as well as the fakest, most hypocritical politician we’ve ever had the displeasure of providing commentary on – which is saying something, people. We live in a state that’s literally chock full of fake, hypocritical politicians.
Anyway, as much as we loathe Romney, we feel obligated to point out that his assessment of U.S. President Barack Obama’s foreign policy – delivered Monday during a speech in San Diego – is right on the money.
From The Atlantic:
(Romney’s) world is unipolar: America is the single major force for good — and there are numerous threats and many potential rivals. Romney’s America remains the beacon of hope. He mocks Obama as wanting “[a] world in which America is more attuned to the approbation of the United Nations than to its ally Israel is a world in peril …”
“If the U.S. Government engages tyrannies and autocracies – countries like Iran and North Korea, Syria and Russia, Sudan and Zimbabwe – based on the conviction that we are dealing with common interests more than competing interests, it will not end well.”
How would Romney engage Russia? He wouldn’t. Indeed, he implies that China and Russia threaten “liberty and peace.”
“Russia is returning to its authoritarian ways, fueled by its energy stranglehold on Europe. China has married the power of free enterprise with the oppression of Communist rule,” he said.
“When Poland and the Czech Republic are humiliated by us, they lose confidence in America’s support for them, and they may decide that they must incline more toward Russia,” he said of the decision to change gears on missile defense in Europe.
Alright, alright … it’s not quite our approach, but Romney’s getting there.
As we’ve said previously, foreign policy is (or at least should be) pretty simple, people. America needs to seek peace with nations that support individual liberty and free market reforms, while opposing nations that seek to suppress individual liberty and free market reforms.
When America or one of its allies is attacked, however, there is no (and never will be any) virtue in appeasement, inaction or even a “proportional response.”
As Sic Willie says, we should “blast them into indiscernible particulate matter,” rinsing and repeating, if necessary.
By Wade October 19, 2009 at 5:04 pm
I read where Obama has eased restrictions on exportation of sensitive missile technology to China.
Why would any American-lover want to arm China?
By funnygirl October 19, 2009 at 5:10 pm
The UN.
Wasn’t that one of Bush’s favorite projects too?
Laura reestablished ties with UNESCO, remember?
By Mab October 19, 2009 at 5:55 pm
:)
By Matt October 19, 2009 at 6:30 pm
Watch out Sic, you’re gonna upset the Ron Paul people with that talk of a strong and engaged foreign policy.
Too bad they don’t realize that real conservatives are for pro-growth free market capitalism AND a muscular foreign policy that doesn’t appease our enemies.
By Hey, nonny, nonny October 19, 2009 at 6:39 pm
“In case it hasn’t been made clear in elections past…”
Stop it, Will! Why do you feel the need to offer a disclaimer before every post on Mitt Romney? We get the picture, already….Jeez! It’s clear that you hated Romney’s guts (or at least Terry Sullivan’s) during the last primary campaign, although Romney was probably the most fiscally conservative Republican candidate.
Why not give the Mittster a clean slate? Sullivan is gone–getting it handed to him in Texas. Mitt’s policy positions haven’t become any less fiscally conservative, and his national name recognition continues to rise. What’s not to love? I mean, Tom Davis was a Democrat before he became your “free market man-pal.” Why not give Romney a second look?
By madcock October 19, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Romney, whose foreign policy experience consists of avoiding the draft during Vietnam, said nothing as the Bush administration ignored for six years the requests from its commanders on the ground for more troops in Afghanistan.
Now, that the Obama administration has sent 15,000 more troops to Afghanistan and is waiting for the Joint Chiefs and the National Security advisor, General Jones, to complete their analysis of requests for more troops before making a final decision, Romney is obsessed with the issue.
Typical cowardly, hypocritical, transparent Republican. Playing politics with national security and doing it sloppily.
By Bill October 19, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Romney needs to get the neocon vote. Let’s see who is on our bad boy list now? Russia, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan,North Korea, Somalia,and China – oh shit and don’t forget Venezuela too.
If these guys dont come around soon favoring “liberty and peace ” we might just have to go bomb the crap out of their innocent civilians for a decade or so.
Saudi Arabia- where most of the 9/11 terrorists came from never makes the neocon list- they got too much oil to piss off too much.
I wonder how countries like Canada and Australia, both liberty loving countries, always manage not to go to war and sacrifice their blood and treasure.
Honestly, I do not see how we can afford to go to war with every country the neocons want to invade.
By neil October 19, 2009 at 10:05 pm
You guys really shouldn’t pick on Romney. The guy is Mr. Fix It, he turned around a corrupt and bankrupt Olympics and turned it into a winner (with no pay) turned around struggling Fortune 500 Co’s like Domino’s and Staples. And turned a deficit in Massachusetts into a surplus. You can say all you want about the “abortion” issue and the fact that he was an independent, but Romney is a winner, everything he touches turns to Gold except the 2008 presidential primary.
And Romney reminds me of Reagan in the sense: Both switched parties, Reagan raised taxes in CA due to revenue shortages and Reagan signed a bill into law that tripled abortions in CA and regretted that decision.
Romney was Independent and switched to GOP, he was elected GUV in a most liberal state, was pro choice and then became pro-life. Can’t fault him for changing his mind when it comes to side of life. Married to wife Ann for over 30 years, smart, business man. That’s just what we need in DC.
By Liberty For Me October 19, 2009 at 10:24 pm
We dont need to bomb anyone….We need to mind our own business.A lot of the mess we are in is because of the crooked Busch tactics.Bring ALL the troops home and let people live the way they want..Some countries want socialism.If we trully believe in liberty then we act that way.
By drayton October 19, 2009 at 11:23 pm
Bill,
The only countries on Obama’s “bad boy” list are: Israel, England, France, Czech Republic, Poland, Romania, and Hondorus.
Get with the program, dude!
By Romneythedouche October 20, 2009 at 2:31 am
Last Spring, Rose Gottemoeller, an assistant secretary of state and Washington’s chief nuclear arms negotiator, asked Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel refused.
The United Nations passed a resolution calling on Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to submit to inspections. Israel refused.
The IAEA asked Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to submit to inspections. Israel refused.
Iran’s formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod facility underscores that Iran is playing by the rules of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which Iran has signed.
Iran allows IAEA inspections of all its facilities.
The United Nations has just released the Goldstone Report, a scathing report which accuses Israel of 37 specific war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza earlier this year. Israel has denounced the report as “Anti-Semitic (even though Judge Goldstone is himself Jewish), and the United States will block the report from being referred to the War Crimes Tribunal at the Hague
By Robert Lampley October 20, 2009 at 8:42 am
Romney is wrong. Israel is not an ally of America.
Iran is not a threat to America
By CL October 20, 2009 at 8:53 am
“Iran allows IAEA inspections of all its facilities.”
That is just too precious for words. I also hear Iran is a land overflowing with unicorns and leprechauns.
Ahmadinejad also claimed Iran does not discriminate against homosexuals because it does not have any. I am sure you bought that one too.
Actually, I am not surprised by your naivete. Anyone who would cite a report authorized by the “Human Rights” Council is an idiot. Even the UN is embarrassed by this band of thugs, as evidenced by the decision to disband the previous Human Rights Commission. Unfortunately, nothing has changed but the name, and the same murderous tyrants still presume to lecture Western democracies about human rights.
By Cooter Brown October 20, 2009 at 9:05 am
Mista Matt seyz:
“Too bad they don’t realize that real conservatives are for pro-growth free market capitalism AND a muscular foreign policy that doesn’t appease our enemies.”
Boy, ye is az green as a dern raw collard!
We ain’t now, nor unda Buusch or Regan or eben Teddy Roosavelt had no free market capitalism! We gots stale Linconian mercantilism at best, strait-up fascism at worse (as ye know, I am quite sho, fascism iz th’ merger ov bitness an’ gob’mint witch sounds a hole lot lik whut weeze got an’ had since da wahr ov northern aggressun!).
If’n ye reallie wants t’ flex yer policy muskles, den why naught fite th’ enemies ov freedom werkin rite here in da USSA—especialie dem scalawags in Warshingtun an’ Columbia! Ye gots more enemies in dem two places dan in all ov Europe, Asia, o’ da Middle East put togetha.
Th’ empire done done a job on ye—yer bein’ played. Dis aint no dern game ov Risk.
By dirtbogger October 20, 2009 at 9:16 am
Romneythedouche, I agree 100% and would like to add, that our hard earned tax dollars are paying for the bombs that the worst terrorist nation on earth use to bomb UN schools full of innocent children! Isreal uses no discretion!
By Wade October 20, 2009 at 10:19 am
UN resolutions are meaningless.
By Mab October 20, 2009 at 10:41 am
Lampley — your lampley shineth notly…
By Mike October 20, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Romney = Fiscal Conservative??? REALLY???? Last I checked he socialized medicine in Massachusetts…which is failing miserably…notice he hasn’t directly come out and criticize democrats on their national plan because there are quite a few similarities. Not too mention he claims to be this “ultra-conservative/neo-con” in one breath and a middle of the road moderate in the other. I’d have more respect for him if he just picked one and stuck with it! Be the Democrat your record makes you out to be! At least then I wouldn’t have to worry about his hypocritical, flip-flopping face in 2012. (Oh and I love how he has conned so many into thinking he is this all-star conservative, LOOK AT HIS RECORD!)
By Crooner October 20, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Sic:
So you’d oppose all of the nations that have supplies of oil? How do you think that would work out? Especially since you’re not in favor of government subsidies for alternative energy.
Good think you’re just a blogger.
By Ed October 20, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Let’s change how we do war from now on. First, let’s have Congress declare war, like it states in the Constitution . That puts each Senator on record so he or she can get voted out of office in the next election. Second, let’s pay for war as we go via new taxes on the population as needed. If Afghanistan is a war of necessity, let’s tax everyone an additional 30% and go “win” the war( if anyone can coherently define a “win”) in a hurry. Third, let’s quit using private contractors for our wars. It puts too much taxpayer money into the slimy hands of war profiteers. If we need more bodies,let’s have a mandatory draft and make sure people like Mitt have their sons fighting on the front line just like everyone else.
These sensible changes will drastically reduce military spending and keep us from entering unnecessary conflicts.
By hampton October 20, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Crooner,
We have ample supplies of oil off our coasts. The DEMOCRATS repeatedly refuse to let us tap these resources.
The DEMOCRATS insist that we remain shackled to foreign oil.
The DEMOCRATS will not permit America to be energy-independent.
By Jerry October 21, 2009 at 9:18 am
Hampton,
We do not have enough oil off our coasts to run 10 years. That is a fallacy being pushed by mindless minions. There are no facts to support your statement. If you disagree , please supply a link showing any facts about this vast supply of oil off our coasts . You know if there was abundant oil off our coasts, the oil companies would have paid off Congress and be drilling it already.
And there is not one ounce of difference between a democrat or republican energy policy. Neither party has done anything to implement energy independence.
By Darth October 21, 2009 at 9:38 am
While Obama has the incompetents at foggy bottom indulging their own anti-American (and in violation of their oaths) agendas, it is simple for Mit or Mike or Sarah or Alan or even Algore to take a tack on foreign policy that is correct.
My caution against Mitt is his part in creating the Taxachussetts Health care plan that is going bankrupt and seem to have more flaws that Sundquist’s Tenncare that pitched a RINO out for a Dem in a reasonably reliable Red state…
By Jed October 22, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Mitt 2012!
By nancy wankier April 28, 2011 at 6:40 pm
hypocritical? are you serious? Mitt Romney is a loving, responsible, honest, faithful, dependable, trustworthy, good lookin, family loving, god loving, america loving m a n. oh yeah!!!!!