E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Mitt Romney set the stage for his impending foreign policy tour with a speech leveling sharp criticism of President Barack Obama, accusing his administration of having weakened America's standing on the international stage.
In a speech before the Veterans of Foreign Wars national convention, the presumptive Republican nominee accused the administration of leaking classified intelligence information for political reasons, and demanded that automatic defense cuts included in last summer's debt ceiling agreement be undone before taking effect in 2013.
The former Massachusetts governor's alternative, he said, would amount to an "American Century" in which the U.S. wouldn't flinch from a leading international role.
Justin Sullivan / Getty Images
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney speaks during the 113th National Convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars on July 24 in Reno, Nevada.
"This is very simple: if you do not want America to be the strongest nation on earth, I am not your President. You have that President today," Romney told VFW members gathered in Reno, NV.
The speech was Romney's last official event in the U.S. before embarking on a key journey abroad intended to bolster his foreign policy credentials versus Obama. The trip will take Romney to the United Kingdom, as well as two other nations he name-checked in the speech, Israel and Poland.
Tuesday's speech, along with the trip, comes amid new data in the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll that shows Obama with a 10-point advantage over Romney on the question of which candidate would serve as a better commander-in-chief.
To that end, Romney sought to weaken Obama's standing on national security issues by highlighting the recent controversy over leaks of classified information - including details of the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden and covert subterfuge meant to slow Iran's nuclear progress - that many Republicans believe were orchestrated by the White House for political gain.
"This conduct is contemptible. It betrays our national interest. It compromises our men and women in the field." Romney said."Whoever provided classified information to the media, seeking political advantage for the administration, must be exposed, dismissed, and punished. The time for stonewalling is over."
Romney also attacked the planned cuts to the defense budget agreed to in a bipartisan debt deal as "wholesale reductions in the nation’s military capacity," and laid full blame at the president's feet. He also linked the cuts to care for veterans - the singular issue in which many in the crowd said they felt the greatest personal investment.
"Mark my words: These cuts would only weaken an already stretched VA system and our solemn commitment that every veteran receives care second to none," Romney said. "If I am president of the United States I will not let that happen."
Romney opposed the deal that congressional Republicans struck with the White House to raise the debt ceiling, though the former Massachusetts governor hasn't specified how else he would have structured such an agreement.
Romney name-dropped two nations that he will visit on his foreign tour, beginning tomorrow, as part of his attack on President Obama by accusing the president of "abandonment" in the case of Poland, which had planned missile defense sites pulled, and of "shabby treatment of one of our finest friends" in Obama's treatment of Israel.
Also notable was what Romney did not say in this major address. He never mentioned Al Qaeda and made only passing reference to Iraq. Two new policy details, flagged by aides to his campaign, were buried in a speech heavier on red rhetorical meat than policy details.
In a fact sheet released during the speech, the Romney campaign called for all future military aid to Egypt to be tied to that nation's upholding of a peace agreement with Israel, and future civilian aid would be linked to good governance measures.
On the prospect of a nuclear Iran, of which Romney said there is "no greater danger in the world today" he pledged yet again to employ "every means necessary to protect ourselves and the region" from the dangers of a nuclear Iran. The fact sheet released by the campaign made clear that this included making sure any negotiated agreement with Iran ascribe to the international "redline" on nuclear enrichment -- that no deal would be considered without Iran fully halting its enrichment activity.
Leave a Comment:
Hope Willard loses his passport!
I listened to the entire speech, it was heavy on heated rhetoric, reminded me of old McCain & his little Bomb...bomb...bomb...Iran diddy!
*yawn*
If you want endless war, then Willard is YOUR guy!
Telling an audience how much you love America 24 x's makes one wonder, if he's trying to convince himself or them..?
PSSST... WE heard YOU the first time!
Well at least he loves America, not like Obama who clearly hates America.
Look at all the Obama gaffes on foreign policy. The only things he did right was to follow GW's strategy in Iraq, and then copy it in Afghanistan. I guess he was also able to use the information gathered by the enhanced interrogation techniques to get OBL.
You guys crack me up. Whatever you do, don't try to run on Obama's record, just keep running away from it LMAO
No wonder your name is Fisty.
RedSox - when you post your lies and stupidity - why should anyone even bother with you?
You are backing a moron but I guess you see so much of yourself in this inept politician that you just have to follow him. How pathetic you choose to follow an empty suit! But it is perfect for you!
However, your backing of Romney shows you clearly despise this country!
Obama/Biden 2012
Keep seeking Sanity because you are clearly still Insane!! LOL
Don't let facts and truth get in the way of your opinion, just like the other Libbys here.
LMAO
RedSoxRule
Let's assume you are right - which you are not - that the only reason why Obama got Bin Laden is because of the Bush intelligence. Doesn't that make Bush even that much more incompetent? I mean why didn't Bush use the Bush intelligence to get Bin Laden - IN ALMOST 8 YEARS???? And Obama did in what, 2 years?
Any ideas?
What is so amazing about libs is how they so quickly realize and acknowledge demented individuals and evil such as that manifested in Aurora .... yet utterly fail to understand that it exists outside the borders of the United States - that the same evil, an exponentially greater threat exists in the leadership of Iran and Syria and elsewhere.
There are 4 million assault rifles in America and one demented pos uses 1 to kill 12 innocent people every decade or so and they call for the ban of all 4 million assault rifles, all while they mock and ridicule those who strive to stop the evil from getting a nuclear weapon .... while tens of thousands are slaughtered in Syria .....
You guys are something ....
and that ain't a reference to intelligence or rectitude.
This was the most despicable speech I have heard since the days leading up to the Iraq War. And to top it off, Mitt went and purposely misquoted the man from Australia. And he's running for the presidency of the United States. It's like Cheney and Rumsfeld all over again. Only worse. Mitt isn't an independent thinker by any stretch of the imagination. He believes in nothing which makes him dangerous. He is reading a speech today written by the neocons. War. War. War.
Mitt proves one thing over and over and over everytime he opens his mouth- we are a nation of liars. And Mitt is right at the top.
Pay close attention to the Repubican Party. They don't give a hoot about democracy. They just want you to become disgusted with politics while they're stealing us blind. Voter suppression is example #1. They don't want you to vote. They want to just steal the election for the war mongering liar Mitt. They are not through putting their hands in the till.
Horrendous, irresponsible speech today. Sentiments I heard all day here. From both Democrats & Republicans.
You must all get involved in this campaign for our future is at stake. Mitt's advisers are the freakin' neocons and corporate America who have no interest in job creation. Their only interest is wealth creation for themselves. And then hiding their money. In foreign countries.
Mitt has no stake in America. His only stake is in himself.
RedSox - you show every day that, no matter how much I seek sanity in the GOP, there is none to be found.
bayllie - I think it's very telling that Romney states that under him "the US wouldn't flinch from a leading international role" - in other words, he'll start any number of wars if it puts money in the pockets of his supporters - Bush III.
Luckily we have a President who has not flinched at all when it comes to being a leader internationally.
How sad the far right is willing to kill more and more of our brave men and women to put money in the pockets of the Haliburtons.
bob- as usual with your ignorance and arrogance. We do not need you to tell us anything of the dangers that lie outside of the US. Unlike you, we aren't stupid and know that we cannot send troops everywhere just to keep money in the pockets of those like Haliburton. See we actually value the lives of the men and women who volunteer to defend us. Unlike you!
You should NEVER talk of intelligence to anyone since you are sorely lacking in that area.
Obama/Biden 2012
Bayllie -
The same intelligence assets, the same military, the same protocols developed / used by Bush were the same used by Obama.
It was just a matter of time.
Obama and libs can crow all they want about Obama getting bin Laden ....
The roosters can crow all they want about the sun coming up ...
And regardless of what libs and roosters think, the reality is that Obama had about as much to do with getting bin Laden as the roosters have to do with the sun coming up.
That simple.
bob - you certainly are simple but as usual - and knowingly - wrong.
Our President said - from the day he was inaugurated - that getting Osama bin Laden was a top priority so he increased the intelligence on him. Unlike Bush who declared getting bin Laden was not important.
When he gave the order to go in after bin Laden - he was advised against it because they were not given certainty it would work and it would have been bad for him had it failed. He made the hard choice - one Bush and definitely Romney would not have had the spine to do.
His orders are the reason we got bin Laden. You can lie and convince those like yourself - who only want to believe the worst about our President - of your stupid convictions but that is all they are - stupid and idiotic.
But, clearly they are simple - like you.
Obama/Biden 2012
SeekingSanity
first of all, it's not under Romney, but under whoever paid Romney's bills.
second, Bush II tried the who war thing and it didn't work out for him so why would Romney want to follow in Bush shoes?
The Senate Intelligence Committee pretty much called Bush a liar and incompetent, and the world hated the Bush/Cheney duo. To some, being hated is a badge of honor, I guess, but I personally don't like people who like to push around their neighbors/friends/classmates/weak, etc., and I don't think it's a good way to co-exist. It doesn't make us any better than the terrorists we pretend to fight.
Seeking Sanity, no Republican supporters have any intelligence. That's why it's so easy to fool them with lies and fear mongering.
They like the macho macho candidates who are nothing but a bunch of rich empty suits; the aristocrats who will never do a damn thing to make this a better world.
It's why they listen to Limbaugh. He has a big mouth and likes nothing better than to find someone to blame instead of himself for all the lies over the years. And the GOP candidates are so weak, so unbelievably weak in mind, that they allow themselves to be bought and pushed around by Limbaugh, a college drop out with a history of drug problems.
The big story today - the GOP's job bill won't create jobs. That shows you just how incompetent they STILL are.
bob-1805084
and yet Bush couldn't do it...I guess the same military/same protocols just needed a real Commander-in-Chief...
7 years was not enough?
yup, President Obama got the person who was responsible for 9/11. PRIORITIES bob, PRIORITIES. But we all know - from Bush himself - that Bush did not care about catching Bin Laden. Isn't that right, bob?
Pat - and that just about sums up the party! Well said!
Mittens is accusing President Barack Obama's administration of having weakened America's standing on the international stage????
What a joke!!!
The first thing R-money needs to do is ask himself who killed bin Laden, Anwar al-Awlaki, the treasonous American born terrorist who recruited Al Queda operatives, stopped Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian "Underwear Bomber", killed other Al Queda operatives in the field, and the Somali Pirates.
It is time for Willard "Myth"R-money to repudiate his myths and tell us more about his taxes, Bain, and destroying the hard drives on the computers as Massachusetts governor.
PS: Romeny needs to check what the rest of the world thinks of our President v himself.
Romney is bi-polar in that he thinks we still live in a bi-polar world between Russia & USA.
Give credit to Obama for killing this bad guy.
But if you do, you also have to give credit to Bush for toppling the entire fundamentalist theocracy of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Their iron grip on the country was brutal, especially against women. Bush changed that.
Changing the entire government of a country is, by any measure, a far more significant accomplishment than killing one aging straggler from the organization that President Bush defeated. Then Obama crowed that it was the "high point in my presidency!"
In fairness, I agree with him – it was the high point in his otherwise-failed presidency.
And now Obama is undoing Bush's accomplishment by allowing the Taliban to, once again, drag Afghanistan back into the dark ages.
Hey SeepingStupidity -
Got that quote "from the day he was inaugurated?"
Top priority?
Well gosh that is stupid to make revenge against an old man sitting on a concrete floor watching old videos of himself - no real threat - your top priority .... not actually winning the war in Afghanistan .... not the economy, not jobs ... not even healthcare, huh?
So what specifically did Obama iniate, what agencies, what protcols, what actions etc. did he use that weren't Bush's?
And gosh, isn't it Obama always wanting to cut defense ... the defense dept that gave him his only success as a president .... if you can even call it that?
Btw - need a reference and source .... no problem right?
Obama advised against the mission?
Yea .... by BIDEN ... I had no idea you had such a great sense of humor.
Admiral McRaven had it all worked out ... and Obama had a letter from Panetta even pinning it on McRaven if things went doo-doo.
Enough wasted time on you - see ya.
Kannin
I would agree with you only if:
a)we went into Iraq for that reason instead of reasons based on lies, ignorance, greed, arrogance, mistakes and failures
b) we treated all dictators the same way instead of the ones that have access to oil
bob-1805084
so you got nothing. that's what I thought.
Just admit it, Bush couldn't/wouldn't (take you pick) do what Obama could and did.
So, Romney travels overseas in a veiled attempt to undermine a sitting American President...
Why does the GOP hate America?
Mitt the Zitt is to inspect the sweatshops he invested to build in other countries, to make more profits by avoiding American environmental and union standards if these jobs are kept in the US
"Romney also attacked the planned cuts to the defense budget..."
God, I hate this sort of crap. The defense budget could be slashed by 25% and we would still outspend the next 10 countries combined. The sprawling military-industrial complex with which we are currently saddled, and against which President Eisenhower warned us, is the country's largest entitlement program. As long as the Republicans don't get us involved in yet another foreign war, we would be well served by a military that is much smaller than the giant military machine that we have right now.
http://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.asp
DailyKos:
Vice President Joe Biden:
“Today, Governor Romney had an opportunity to fulfill a long-standing promise by laying out his foreign policy vision and agenda. He had a chance to say how he would lead as Commander-in-Chief. Instead, all we heard from Governor Romney was empty rhetoric and bluster. He reflexively criticizes the President’s policies without offering any alternatives. When he does venture a position, it’s a safe bet that he previously took exactly the opposite position and will probably change his mind again and land in the wrong place – far out of the mainstream. Or he mischaracterizes our record to create a non-existent contrast.”
“When it comes to Russia – which he recently called “our number one geo-political foe” – Governor Romney remains mired in a Cold War mindset. We have serious disagreements with Moscow, but our cooperation has made the American people more secure. Russia cancelled the sale of cutting edge radar to Iran and joined us in imposing the toughest sanctions in history on Tehran. Together, we negotiated a major nuclear arms reduction treaty – New START – that virtually the entire Republican foreign policy establishment supported but Governor Romney and a very small group of Cold War holdovers opposed.
“On the eve of his trip to Poland, the Governor is either profoundly misinformed – or misinforming the American people. He asserts that the President abandoned a missile defense system in that country. President Obama asked me to secure Allied support for a new missile defense plan for Europe. Who did we ask to host its main components? Poland, along with Turkey, Romania, Germany and Spain. These countries and all of NATO embraced our approach because it protects more of Europe more quickly than the old plan.
***************
I have needed a great deal of help in putting together my trip to Russia. I cannot begin to say how helpful, professional and kind the Russians have been to me. I found the same when I traveled to Poland. People from both these countries have shown a deep warmth and friendship to both me and Americans everywhere.
Someone needs to tell Romney. He's not helping. But then when you don't have sound leadership skills, it helps no one. Either here in America or abroad.
The guy is clueless and I don't say this lightly. Romney really is clueless.
Using the same logic...
If Obama killed Bin Laden.....
then....
Obama pissed on dead enemy soldiers.
In reality...
Obama did neither.
You can't claim he is responsible for success, while simultaneously saying the failures are not his to own.
Alil Common Sense
Obama MADE THE DECISION to send in the team that night. Obama DID NOT make the decision to send his team to piss on dead soldiers.
a little common sense, I guess you don't have any...
Obama was presented with an opportunityto get Osama and gave the go ahead order to take him down. One good decision he should get credit for, but are was Bush given the same opportunity? More important does anyone think Romney or McCain would not have made the same decision Obama made? It was a no brainer call and I'm suppose to bow down to his "great" leadership? Any president (except maybe Ralph Nader) would of made the same call. So good for Obama for making one good decision. As far as everything else, the majority of Americans do NOT favor the health care bill, do NOT favor stimulus going overseas, think the country is going in the wrong direction, and believe the economy is not recovering. I will even agree Obama was given a bad economy by Bush, but this has been the worst recovery in history and Obama and the democrats take no responsibility for the current condition we are in. The "buck stops here" unless you're talking about jobs, and job creation.
I reiterate -
You CANNOT own the successes
If you do NOT own the failures.
That's just common sense bailey.
Just as Obama did not personally piss on dead enemy soldiers,
Obama did not personally get Bin Laden.
Obama's amateur, fumbling attempts at diplomacy have been an embarrassment to himself and to the US.
First, he publicly and loudly affirmed his support for a Palestinian state, even going so far as to demand that Israel should return to their pre-1967 borders! This had the predictable effect of encouraging the Palestinians to seek their own separate state. Then, he had to order his Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, to veto any UN resolution that might create an actual Palestinian State, in order to salvage the Jewish vote.
Most presidents (not all) have had sense enough to be consistent in the messages they send to the international community. Reversals, like Obama's, only create an atmosphere of uncertainty and distrust. One can easily imagine how Obama's blundering could have started a violent increase in Middle East hostilities.
The push for statehood recognition by the Palestinian people that President Obama, Russia, most of the UN, and the EU opposed was backed by the Arab nations in an effort to put international pressure on Israel to cede lands and control to the Palestinian government. It had nothing to do with peace talks or negotiated settlements.
It also would have opened up the opportunity for the Palestinians to charge Israel with war crimes in the international courts. Since the "Palestine state" is recognized only as an "observer" and not as an offical state by the UN, it currently has no legal standing to place such charges. Evidence validating this offical status statement was reported just a few months ago @ http:/ /latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/04/icc-rebuffs-palestinians-war-crimes-case-against-israel.html
President Obama's statement on 9/21/2011 explained his political position very well.
(quote) "One year ago, I stood at this podium and called for an independent Palestine. I believed then – and I believe now – that the Palestinian people deserve a state of their own. But what I also said is that genuine peace can only be realized between Israelis and Palestinians themselves. One year later, despite extensive efforts by America and others, the parties have not bridged their differences. Faced with this stalemate, I put forward a new basis for negotiations in May. That basis is clear, and well known to all of us here. Israelis must know that any agreement provides assurances for their security. Palestinians deserve to know the territorial basis of their state."
(source: .guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/21/un-obama-speech-palestine-live )
I fully agree that politics related to protecting Israel were involved in the decision to block Palestinian statehood. However, to date the international actors involved (Palestinians and Israel) are still shooting, still bombing, still assassinating and still sending out computer viruses.
We ALL recognize that a territorial and religious conflict that has been going on for generations here. For anyone to assume they can fix it in a couple of years is ridiculous because powerful groups within Israel and the Palestinians refuse to compromise.
The statement "genuine peace can only be realized between Israelis and Palestinians themselves" is a consistent and accurate one.
Willard's plan is to cut social programs in favor of boosting defence, which will aid his 1% buddies immensely. As for the rest of us, we will watch social programs seniors count on, education and infrastructure crumble. Willard will see that the Bush tax cuts continue, drastically underfunding the government and stalling the economy for years to come. Great plan Romney!
The only foreign policy Romney know is how to hide money off shore. To help the Chinese economy with our jobs. I am certain that Osama bin Laden would still be alive today if Romney were president.
I have no doubt that Romney will make us proud to be his fellow Americans on this trip. Romney will command far more real respect overseas for his accomplishments than Obama ever did for any of his bungling.
I'm sure the bankers in London and Switzerland will love him as one of their own.
Wm - you have to excuse Kannin - he's too enamored with Mitt to understand how little he thinks of the US. But, he'll follow him to the Cayman Islands and back - unless Mitt decides to stay (we should all be so lucky if he did).
Obama/Biden 2012
A separate Palestinian state is and has been US policy for some time. Clinton was within a few hundred yards/acres of this reality, but Arafat got cold feet and backed out. The '67 borders have always been the starting point - Israel recognizes that it occupies conquered territory, not it's legal borders. But what Israel wants in exchange is defensible borders, although when missiles can be launched from almost anywhere, I'm not sure that has any meaning. But in this world of Byzantine court etiquette, the demand that Palestine recognize the state of Israel must always be mentioned first.
Kannin - if you're proud to be American because of Romney, you are sorely lacking in character and integrity.
I am proud to be an American - in spite of the fool Romney and the damage he is doing as he makes his trip. However, we are so fortunate to have a President who has raised the country's image from the damage done by Bush.
Luckily we'll have another 4 years for President Obama to continue to help our image abroad.
Obama/Biden 2012
"Obama arrived in office afire with the ambition to create a Palestinian state within two years. But his diplomacy was based on a twofold misunderstanding: that the key to successful negotiations was forcing Israel to stop all settlement construction — and that the United States had the leverage to make that happen.
Veterans of the Middle East “peace process” shook their heads in wonderment as what at first appeared to be a rookie error evolved into a two-year standoff between Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. There was only one possible explanation for this persistence in futility: The president himself was fixed on it." Washington Post
Let's see - life under W was so much better - aircraft carrier stunts, the fabricated stories of Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman, yellow cake, Valerie Plame, vehicles without sufficient armour, using terrorism for political advantage, "if John Kerry is elected, we will be attacked," and yet no Middle East peace. And Romney would divide us by appealing to a very discrete, but zealous religious minority to dictate America's foreign policy toward the entire world community.
Obama said he was determined to “engage” with U.S. adversaries such as Iran, North Korea, Syria and Venezuela. Obama promised “direct diplomacy” — even one-to-one meetings — with the likes of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Kim Jong Il.
Obama sent two letters to Khamenei. He shook hands with Hugo Chavez. He launched a “reset” of relations with Russia’s Vladimir Putin and dispatched envoys to reason with Bashar al-Assad in Damascus. He delivered a sweeping address to the Muslim world from Cairo.
What happened? Khamenei spurned the U.S. outreach. Relations with Putin warmed for a time but now have grown cold again. In Egypt and across the Middle East, the president’s popularity is lower today than when he gave his “deep Muslim roots” Cairo address.
Another total failure by this inexperienced bungler.
Kannin - inexperienced bungler - pretty much sums you and your post up!
Oh what a devastating retort SS! I can just see you with your lower lip quivering saying, "Wuh ... wuh ... wuh ... well you're one too!"
Kannin - the likes of YOU would never even make me blink. You're just a small-minded Republican. 'nuff said!
Kannin, the last international poll I saw on this topic was done by the BBC in 2010. In that poll it suggested that the world viewed the US better under President Obama than under President Bush.
That would seem to indicate that overall his performance has improved relations which does not qualify him as a "bungler."
(source: .bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/8626041.stm )
Do you have any sources to the contrary?
No Matthew, none to the contrary. But I have many friends overseas, especially in the UK, and have some insight as to the reason for that disparity. The image of the US presented by the overseas press tends to be two-dimensional and antiquated: wild west gunslingers, lynching in the deep south, etc. The idea that the US might actually elect a black man to the presidency was, in itself, sufficient reason to celebrate. That viewpoint has been perpetuated by the BBC and would tend to explain their apparent fondness for Obama.
Additionally, speculation only, there may be many who simply see Obama as better for their countries, even if he is detrimental to the US.
Kanin, I have friends overseas also (Europe, Asia, Australia). Their overall opinion is that the USA is seen in far better light now than it was 5 years ago.
Of course a couple of friends in Israel are a bit biitchy because they don't accept that any American should or can say that the Palestinian people are entitled to a homeland in THEIR Israel.
So what I gather from your response to my post is that it is only some folks in the US that perceive President Obama to be a bungler on the international stage and not the international community at large.
And please note that the BBC poll involved questioning people from other countries so the issue of "fondness for Obama" shouldn't be a concern in this case.
Since you offhandedly dismiss an entire country, who are the "Palestinian people" Matthew?
Currently? Gaza Strip and West Bank people descended of Arabic ancestry and culture self-defined as "Palestinians." Mostly Sunni Muslim.
If I recall correctly, the word "Palestine" as a geographical definition was first used by Rome however to my knowledge there has never been an official state named "Palestine."
And no sir, I never "offhandedly dismiss an entire country." My reference to my Israeli friends was stating their position and repeating their statement.
So, what is the average of "better light" and "bit bitchy"? (BL+BB)/2?
Actually, I'd like to get back to the primary issue here. Even if it were true that "the world viewed the US better under President Obama" that does not equate to superior diplomacy (as an instrument of national power). Even if the world views us as a wonderful fluffy happy place, other world leaders are concerned with improving their countries' well-being in the competitive environment of the international arena. Obama has hurt us by his ineptitude!
I think the answer to the "average of" question is "I need more beer."
What measure are you using to say that President Obama has hurt us? You threw out a statement with no validating criteria.
Economically we are dominant, militarily we are dominant, power generation we are dominant.
.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/8844646/World-power-swings-back-to-America.html
.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=United-States-of-America
.world-nuclear.org/info/inf41.html
I'd also suggest (although I haven't looked for sources) that as far as innovative technology goes, we are dominant (Apple, HP, IBM), communications we are dominant (satellite technology and implementation), and the individual rights and liberties accorded to all US citizens through our Constitution makes us dominant in the area of human rights. Our infrastructure (although somewhat deteriorated in some places) is still the best in the world.
The single primary place I can think where we are not dominant is mass transit and that has sucked since Henry Ford first started manufacturing automobiles.
Hi Matthew - Just got back. I'm going with your "more beer" advice. Let's pick this up again at a later date. Hold that thought, and have a good evening.
Come on Willard, tell us your foreign policy positions. Don't hide behind that tired old "giving my opponent information to use against me" excuse that you always use. Lay out your policies and let the American people decide. For starters, you can showcase your expertise on global trade by telling us how you pioneered outsorucing jobs to China and India. You can dazzle us with your national security credentials by telling us how you hid in France during the Viet Nam war.
Your secret policies remind me of Nixon's secret plan for peace to end the Viet Nam war. Nixon took that secret to the grave.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said last week that she was not offended by protesters who threw shoes and tomatoes at her motorcade in Alexandria, Egypt.
The protesters also chanted "Monica, Monica, Monica," a reference to Monica Lewinsky. They were telling Hillary that “Monica took advantage of you, and now you want to come to Egypt and do the same to the Egyptians.”
Naturally NBC treated this as a “so-what”
But now, when a few of the usual raggedy left wingers inevitably show up at a Romney venue, just watch as NBC blows it up to mountainous proportions.
So as part of setting the stage for his foreign trip will Gov. Romney apologize to Australian Foreign Minister Carr for misrepresenting his statement about America?
(quote) "But after Romney’s remarks made headlines, Carr’s spokesman suggested that the foreign minister did not intend to wade into a major ally’s presidential debate.
He said Carr had only meant to express his confidence in the U.S. economy and not undermine it.
“That interpretation is not correct,” the spokesman said of Romney’s comments to the National Times of Australia."
(source: http ://www .nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/mitt-romney-australian-official-disagree-comment-u-s-decline-article-1.1119912#ixzz21aCUP9WN )
Or, if Gov. Romney does not apologize to the Minister, will he at least publically correct his erroneous interpretation and his public statement ""And this idea of America in decline, it was interesting [Carr] said that; he led the talk of American being in decline," Romney said at the fundraiser"
(source: http: //nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/23/12899340-foreign-leaders-see-america-in-decline-australian-foreign-minister-tells-romney?__utma=154396583.1576978273.1336218384.1340575727.1340575878.104&__utmb=154396583.8.10.1340575878&__utmc=154396583&__utmx=-&__utmz=154396583.1340575727.103.51.utmcsr=dell.msn.com|utmccn=(referral)|utmcmd=referral|utmctr=obama%20new%20rule%20for%20green%20cards|utmcct=/&__utmv=154396583.|8=Earned%20By=newsvine%7Cnewsvine=1^12=Landing%20Content=Original=1^13=Landing%20Hostname=matthew2771918.newsvine.com=1^30=Visit%20Type%20to%20Content=Internal%20to%20Original=1&__utmk=87625304 )
Matthew, can you believe what Romney said. He just out and out lied. What an embarrassment. He's part of that rich old boy network who have no shame other than to lie through their teeth with no thought as to who they throw under the bus.
Even if it's a citizen of one of our closest allies.
He doesn't care. Mitt respects no one except the neocons.
In Romneys vocabulary, BAIN AKA [ Romneys word for Bankruptcy]will be utilized by Romneys government if he ever has the chance to do the impossible, for him.
Is there any other kind?
Based on his remarks to the VFW, it appears we have yet another iteration of Mr. Romney to deal with: Bizarro Romney. Just like in the old Superman comics, everything in Bizarro world is the opposite of Earth, and the inhabitants are... well, dullards.
The 'bain' of Romney's existence
I'm not even sure what Romney was trying to accomplish with this speech. It feels like he just lined up a bunch of negative remarks and started throwing them at the wall to see what would stick. He should be more careful, most vets are anti-war. They've been there, they know what it costs, not in dollars, but in human pain and death. (This is something Romney wouldn't know about since he never served.) Most vets are proud of their service, but no vet wants to send his sons off to war, particularly not if it is a war with no clear goal and no end in sight. Vets remember Viet Nam. They have seen how Iraq has become another quagmire just like Viet Nam. A candidate that stands up in front of them and promises to go to war with Russia, Iran, Syria, and the like, is going to be viewed with a certain amount of skepticism. Any candidate so eager to declare war without exploring all other alternatives first, is unlikely to win their hearts or their votes. I've been spending several hours a week at a nearby veteran's hospital. I can promise you that no one I have spoken to believes that war is a glorious declaration of patriotism. For the most part, they believe that politicians are far to eager to send someone else's sons off to die.
While listening to Romney’s inane neocon saber rattling babble today, I came to the realization that he is consumed not by a call to serve, but an endless appetite for power. Hopefully he realizes, on an intellectual level, that “leader of the free world” is a rhetorical construct, but on an emotional level I think he prefers to believe that to become the president would elevate him to the role of de facto supreme world leader.
Romney’s “foreign policy” would be shaped by such arrogance, and the archaic cold war era view that the United States deserves carte blanche to exert it’s will on sovereign state governments through military force. Oh, and throw in a patronizing religion-based (which one?) superiority complex as a catalyst.
We may have good intentions at heart, but many outside the US that have our military bases nearby may not necessarily agree. To many, the US is essentially perceived as a bully. The problem going forward is that bullies eventually and invariably get beat up themselves . . .
And, as we learned from Romney’s past, he has experience as a bully. Literally, through the abuse and humiliation of a classmate in high school, and financially, through the systematic dismantling of companies for profit. Bullies really don't change with time: they remain bullies at heart.
Give a bully access to nearly unlimited power and the nuclear football? No thanks.
Foreign friends (& enemies!) don't believe a word this corrupt Republican corporate political puppet, ex ETCH-A-SKETCH says! It was HIS CORRUPT REPUBLICAN financial corporates that brought on your GLOBAL ECONOMIC COLLAPSE! Our illustrious President Obama had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the U.S. & GLOBAL ECONOMIC COLLAPSE! And, the CURRENT corrupt Republican Congress have done NOTHING to help our president amend all their corruption! They are NOTHING but "HAND-PICKED" POLITICAL PUPPETS that have INFILTRATED our Democratic government & MADE SLAVES OF THE 99% American People!
Watch exlax ETCH-A-SKETCH closely & not only will you hear his lies but you can see it on his face! And, always holding up ONE FINGER when trying to tell one of his lies, A TRUE SIGN OF A LIAR! We, the 99% American People don't like him & can't stand him, NOT EVEN TO LOOK AT!
The American People are voting 100% STRAIGHT DEMOCRATIC to rid our selves of this corrupt Republican corporate MONARCHY that has STOLEN our American way of life!
Boo this jerk right off your podiums & help the American People rid themselves of this corrupt Republican political puppet! OUR NEWS MEDIA is SLANTED REPUBLICAN, so don't believe a word YOU HEAR OR READ from them!! These corruptors STOLE OUR NEW MEDIA TOO!
Agree. Well said, their stealing of the media is critical.
We need freedom from selfish interest.
Well funded GOP PAC money beat the drum. The media is intimidated by them.