PDA

View Full Version : Romney to give defense of Neoconservative Foreign Policy at VMI




Cowlesy
10-08-2012, 08:59 AM
I detest Obama and his policies.

Romney is much better than Obama on domestic policy.

But if Romney is going all-in for neoconservatism in foreign policy, he does not have my vote.

I cannot vote for an individual who will recklessly and carelessly, based on the cries and whines of neoconservatives, send our soldiers off to these dirt-farms to fight trolls in caves.

I can't do it. I will vote third party, even though I want to vote for Romney. I can't have a YEA vote for neoconservative foreign policy on my conscience.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/8/romney-to-slam-obama-on-warfare/

Lucille
10-08-2012, 10:10 AM
Hard to believe the neo-Trots are still in charge, and that GOP voters nominated another neo-Trot after the epic failures of the Bush admin. and its disastrous Islamic Theocracy-building misadventures. I guess "conservative" voters forget it was the the neocons who made Obama's win possible.

The Monster That Wouldn’t Die
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2008/02/13/the-monster-that-wouldnt-die/


The neocons, we were told, had been "marginalized," and their dreams of "benevolent global hegemony" were pronounced dead. Yet, not much more than a year later, the beast has reawakened; the corpse is animate. Frankenstein lives! As Jacob Heilbrunn, a senior editor at The National Interest, a former neocon himself, and author of They Knew They Were Right: The Rise of the Neocons, put it the other day, the idea that the neoconservatives are finished "could be the biggest whopper of them all."
[...]
"The truth is that the neocons have been repeatedly declared dead before – and, to the chagrin of their enemies on the left and the right, bounced back. At the end of the Cold War, the arch-realist George H.W. Bush relegated them to the sidelines; then the triangulating Bill Clinton seemed to deprive them of their biggest foreign and domestic policy issues. If they came back from that, they can come back from anything. Now that Robert Kagan, William Kristol (who seems not to be discredited in the eyes of the New York Times, which just made him a columnist) and a host of other neocons have hitched their fortunes to McCain, the neocons are poised for a fresh comeback. If they make a hash of foreign policy by 2011, perhaps the familiar cycle of public scorn and rebirth might even start all over again."
[...]
Like vampires risen from the dead each night, these creatures who shun the light and feast on pain and suffering, are refreshed and ready to take wing again. What they seek is what makes them feel alive and energizes them to want more, and that is war. They are the War Party, and they are Democrats and Republicans. They are columnists and publishers and academics, as well as politicians and publicists. They don’t have much of a mass base: they prefer to work in the shadows, manipulating rather than inspiring. By such Machiavellian means have they managed to stay viable, in spite of the disasters they have wrought through the years – giving them more scope for fresh disasters yet to be imagined.

Lucille
10-08-2012, 10:16 AM
There's a poll at your link. Pathetic, ineducable, perpetually afraid chickenhawks:

Poll: Which presidential candidate do you think is better able to handle foreign policy issues?

Obama 149(7%)
Romney 1734(90%)
Undecided 17(0%)
Other 52(2%)

I am the 2%!

AGRP
10-08-2012, 10:22 AM
There's a poll at your link. Pathetic, ineducable, perpetually afraid chickenhawks:

Poll: Which presidential candidate do you think is better able to handle foreign policy issues?

Obama 149(7%)
Romney 1734(90%)
Undecided 17(0%)
Other 52(2%)

I am the 2%!
If you polled the same people they would overwhelmingly support nuking every square inch of land mass outside of the US.

Cowlesy
10-08-2012, 10:28 AM
There's a poll at your link. Pathetic, ineducable, perpetually afraid chickenhawks:

Poll: Which presidential candidate do you think is better able to handle foreign policy issues?

Obama 149(7%)
Romney 1734(90%)
Undecided 17(0%)
Other 52(2%)

I am the 2%!

Me too (no pun intended).

It's sad, that so many misconstrue a "strong national defense" with neoconservative foreign policy. Neoconservatives are the jedi-masters of pulling the emotion strings of "strong amurican pride" and calling themselves "national security conservatives", when, in fact, they do nothing but get our boys needlessly killed, and make us LESS SAFE.

Cowlesy
10-08-2012, 11:20 AM
Romney's full remarks.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/mitt-romneys-speech-on-foreign-policy-at-the-virginia-military-institute-prepared-remarks/2012/10/08/4b2665c2-115d-11e2-be82-c3411b7680a9_story.html

Anti Federalist
10-08-2012, 11:35 AM
Romney is much better than Obama on domestic policy.

I won't vote for a gun banner or the creator of the "individual mandate" idea of government regulation.

Obama didn't do either one of those.

They are just as bad as each other, across the board, on every issue, I think.

jmdrake
10-08-2012, 11:41 AM
I detest Obama and his policies.

Romney is much better than Obama on domestic policy.

But if Romney is going all-in for neoconservatism in foreign policy, he does not have my vote.

I cannot vote for an individual who will recklessly and carelessly, based on the cries and whines of neoconservatives, send our soldiers off to these dirt-farms to fight trolls in caves.

I can't do it. I will vote third party, even though I want to vote for Romney. I can't have a YEA vote for neoconservative foreign policy on my conscience.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/8/romney-to-slam-obama-on-warfare/

I can't believe anybody actually wants to vote for Romney. He's domestic policy is every bit as bad as Obama's. And Obama is every bit the neoconservative that Romney is. They both play rolls to appeal to their respective constituencies, but that's it. Romneycare = Obamacare. Both support the NDAA, TARP, no audit for the fed, the TSA, the Patriot Act etc. The only possible difference is that Obama wants to raise taxes on the rich.

CaptainAmerica
10-08-2012, 12:06 PM
I detest Obama and his policies.

Romney is much better than Obama on domestic policy.

But if Romney is going all-in for neoconservatism in foreign policy, he does not have my vote.

I cannot vote for an individual who will recklessly and carelessly, based on the cries and whines of neoconservatives, send our soldiers off to these dirt-farms to fight trolls in caves.

I can't do it. I will vote third party, even though I want to vote for Romney. I can't have a YEA vote for neoconservative foreign policy on my conscience.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/8/romney-to-slam-obama-on-warfare/ The soldiers don't even fight trolls in dirt caves, they kick down doors and invade family homes and shoot the wrong people because they are forced to do these missions after enlisting and becoming G I property. I hear you on the Romney foreign policy...I will never vote for someone who advocates that shit.

Lucille
10-08-2012, 12:39 PM
Romney Offers Vague Rhetoric in ‘Major’ Foreign Policy Speech
Romney tried desperately - but failed - to differentiate himself from Obama on policy towards the Middle East
http://news.antiwar.com/2012/10/08/romney-offers-vague-rhetoric-in-major-foreign-policy-speech/


Romney didn’t mention the fact that Obama’s interventionist foreign policy – including imposing regime change in Libya, bombing Yemen and Pakistan with drones on a weekly basis, surging in Afghanistan, and continuing to prop up dictatorships across the region – is what is driving al-Qaeda’s growth. Instead, Romney’s remedy is a vague prescription of American “power,” as if it has been dormant for the last four years.

COpatriot
10-08-2012, 12:57 PM
Disgusting speech.

Lucille
10-08-2012, 01:01 PM
Mitt Romney's vapid, misleading foreign policy speech
Obama has made some big international mistakes, but Romney seems incapable of honestly critiquing them
http://theweek.com/bullpen/column/234468/mitt-romneys-vapid-misleading-foreign-policy-speech


The failings of Romney’s foreign policy arguments are not entirely his. Boxed in by his party’s hawks and most Republicans’ unwillingness to acknowledge Bush administration blunders, Romney’s script was to some extent written for him before he became a candidate. Not being in a position to lead his party in a new direction on this or any other issue, he had already embraced the worldview that he found among Republican hawks in an effort to become acceptable to them. Unfortunately for the country, Americans could have used a credible opposition party and presidential candidate to hold the administration accountable for its real mistakes.

via http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/romneys-speech-at-vmi-and-obamas-biggest-foreign-policy-mistake/

Lucille
10-08-2012, 01:05 PM
Romney’s Foreign-Policy Speech: More War, Bigger Budgets
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/romneys-foreign-policy-speech-more-war-bigger-budgets/


Mitt Romney’s speech at VMI today confirmed every realist’s and non-interventionist’s worst fears about him: not only is his foreign-policy vision indistinguishable from that of George W. Bush — except that it may be more utopian and Wilsonian — but there’s no indication that any realist has the slightest influence on his strategic thinking.

That includes political realists: anyone who might convey to Mitt what a price the GOP paid for Bush’s wars in 2006 and 2008 — the price it will pay again in 2012, the way Mitt is going. Romney promised military Kenyesianism and was as demagogic as the best-paid Pentagon lobbyist in claiming “our defense spending is being arbitrarily and deeply cut.”
[...]
This was not a speech he had to make — a speech distracting from the ground Romney had recently made up by refocusing his attention on the plight of America’s middle class. And if he had to make a foreign-policy speech, it did not have to cater to the neoconservatives and pork hawks already on his team. Nothing in this speech appeals to a war-weary and economically troubled people. It’s politically damaging. But he gave this speech anyway, and the only reasonable explanation is either that Mitt really believes — zealously — what he says, or else he’s entirely compliant to the ideological demands of right-wing Wilsonians. I suspect the latter is the case, and that portends a Romney presidency that would repeat all the errors of his Republican predecessor. The issue here is not even a reckless foreign policy versus a domestic policy that may give Republicans grounds for hope: a foreign policy like this will not permit much of a domestic policy at all. It will consume a presidency, just as it consumed George W. Bush’s.

P.S. Romney didn’t take Danielle Pletka’s advice: even the chief hawk at the most neoconservative think tank warned beforehand that “Mr. Romney needs to persuade people that he’s not simply a George W. Bush retread, eager to go to war in Syria and Iran and answer all the mail with an F-16″ and “Criticisms of Mr. Obama’s national security policies have degenerated into a set of clichés about apologies, Israel, Iran and military spending.” I suspect a new tune will be sung now that the speech has been given, but it’s telling that Romney has outdone AEI itself in pushing an unrelenting “Long War” line.

dbill27
10-08-2012, 01:25 PM
Romney can not be allowed to win. He's officially worse than obama.

AuH20
10-08-2012, 01:30 PM
Disgusting speech.

It's just a speech. Ahmajinedad talks the same way (vaporize Israel yadda yadda) and we all know he's full of it. Both sides are scared shitless of a war because of the dire implications it entails. Secondly, as POTUS Romney wouldn't have the revenue nor the military capabilties to implement the aforementioned. He's just kissing AIPAC donor ass. There will no war under Romney or Obama. Write that down. I'm not advocating for anyone to vote for Romney but many of the assured conclusions amount to fearmongering.

LibertyEagle
10-08-2012, 02:04 PM
I seriously cannot deal with the neocons again. It gives me shivers to even think about it.

Cowlesy
10-08-2012, 03:13 PM
It's just a speech. Ahmajinedad talks the same way (vaporize Israel yadda yadda) and we all know he's full of it. Both sides are scared shitless of a war because of the dire implications it entails. Secondly, as POTUS Romney wouldn't have the revenue nor the military capabilties to implement the aforementioned. He's just kissing AIPAC donor ass. There will no war under Romney or Obama. Write that down. I'm not advocating for anyone to vote for Romney but many of the assured conclusions amount to fearmongering.

We may not have the revenue, but that didn't stop Bush.

In fact, we can borrow for 10 years at 1.6%. That pretty much gives him carte blanche to do whatever he wants.

Lucille
10-08-2012, 03:15 PM
It's just a speech. Ahmajinedad talks the same way (vaporize Israel yadda yadda) and we all know he's full of it. Both sides are scared shitless of a war because of the dire implications it entails. Secondly, as POTUS Romney wouldn't have the revenue nor the military capabilties to implement the aforementioned. He's just kissing AIPAC donor ass. There will no war under Romney or Obama. Write that down. I'm not advocating for anyone to vote for Romney but many of the assured conclusions amount to fearmongering.

Sure there will be. It's all part of the plaaaan:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzXtccjUGrs

Brett85
10-08-2012, 03:42 PM
I detest Obama and his policies.

Romney is much better than Obama on domestic policy.

But if Romney is going all-in for neoconservatism in foreign policy, he does not have my vote.

I agree completely. I'd like to be able to vote for Romney, and was starting to consider voting for him. But I just can't go along with this either. His terrible views on foreign policy cancel out his good views on domestic policy.

Brett85
10-08-2012, 03:46 PM
I won't vote for a gun banner or the creator of the "individual mandate" idea of government regulation.

Obama didn't do either one of those.

They are just as bad as each other, across the board, on every issue, I think.

Romney supports repealing Obamacare at the federal level and would never try to ram through federal gun control bills with a GOP Congress in control. Like Cowlesly said, Romney is considerably better than Obama on domestic issues, but seems to want to make it impossible for any paleo-conservative to vote for him, due to his hardcore neo-conservative foreign policy views.

AuH20
10-08-2012, 04:04 PM
We may not have the revenue, but that didn't stop Bush.

In fact, we can borrow for 10 years at 1.6%. That pretty much gives him carte blanche to do whatever he wants.

But that was the first extended muck-it-up campaign since Vietnam. Afghanistan and Iraq have helped to drain the treasury along with horrible fiscal mismanagement. And the U.S. recently eclipsed the point-of-no-return 100% debt to GDP mark. Secondly, we're dealing with a highly reluctant Pentagon on the account that their troop force is literally unraveling. I don't think the U.S. could take over and hold Cyprus for a few months, never mind Iran.

mickey mouse joy division
10-08-2012, 04:07 PM
FUCK this guy. I'm sick to my stomach that he might win. Seriously, I'd take five Obamas over someone with a bunch of Bush-era NeoCon foreign policy advisers. You think things are bad now. Just you wait. Keep shifting our foreign policy to the land of Neocon hysteria and we'll be ruing the day any of us considered Romney might be a little better than Obama.

AuH20
10-08-2012, 04:08 PM
Sure there will be. It's all part of the plaaaan:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzXtccjUGrs

The U.S. and Iran have been pitted in a proxy war for over 30 years. The Iranians use their surrogates, whether it's Hezbollah, Hamas or whomever. And the U.S. trains and supplies their own surrogates. Both sides are reluctant to embark down the conventional warfare route because they understand the implications. The fact that the CIA is behind the scenes manipulating the status of the Rial tells anyone with a functioning brain that the U.S. is not ready to go to war. She's incredibly weak as exhibited by all these two-bit games.

mickey mouse joy division
10-08-2012, 04:13 PM
I'm going to cry. I hate these people so much. They're so evil.

Cowlesy
10-08-2012, 04:16 PM
But that was the first extended muck-it-up campaign since Vietnam. Afghanistan and Iraq have helped to drain the treasury along with horrible fiscal mismanagement. And the U.S. recently eclipsed the point-of-no-return 100% debt to GDP mark. Secondly, we're dealing with a highly reluctant Pentagon on the account that their troop force is literally unraveling. I don't think the U.S. could take over and hold Cyprus for a few months, never mind Iran.

Perhaps not, but we could B1-B Lancer and B-2 them into the stone age, and I am sure the debt markets would happily finance those ordinance purchases.

And we'd create a few million new sworn enemies in the name of 'national security.'

AGRP
10-08-2012, 04:19 PM
The U.S. and Iran have been pitted in a proxy war for over 30 years. The Iranians use their surrogates, whether it's Hezbollah, Hamas or whomever. And the U.S. trains and supplies their own surrogates. Both sides are reluctant to embark down the conventional warfare route because they understand the implications. the fact that the CIA is behind the scenes manipulating the status of the Rial tells anyone with a functioning brain that the U.S. is not ready to go to war. She's incredibly weak.

We should go to war as soon as we can. We have to defend ourselves from Hezbollah and Hamas.

Anti-Neocon
10-08-2012, 04:21 PM
FUCK this guy. I'm sick to my stomach that he might win. Seriously, I'd take five Obamas over someone with a bunch of Bush-era NeoCon foreign policy advisers. You think things are bad now. Just you wait. Keep shifting our foreign policy to the land of Neocon hysteria and we'll be ruing the day any of us considered Romney might be a little better than Obama.
Well said! Obama 2012.

As for those who think that Romney would actually repeal Obamneycare at the federal level or oppose gun control, dont be one of these:
http://lab.osixs.org/Portals/4/images/lollipop-3468.jpg

AuH20
10-08-2012, 04:21 PM
Perhaps not, but we could B1-B Lancer and B-2 them into the stone age, and I am sure the debt markets would happily finance those ordinance purchases.

And we'd create a few million new sworn enemies in the name of 'national security.'

There would be no financial markets after the Strait was locked down with Iranian gunboats and Russian made sunfire missiles. European fuel would cease to flow and the shaky dominoes would fall in a very violent fashion. Iran needs to be taken down discretely, not with guns blazing. It's far too risky for the elites.

Anti Federalist
10-08-2012, 04:22 PM
Romney supports repealing Obamacare at the federal level and would never try to ram through federal gun control bills with a GOP Congress in control. Like Cowlesly said, Romney is considerably better than Obama on domestic issues, but seems to want to make it impossible for any paleo-conservative to vote for him, due to his hardcore neo-conservative foreign policy views.

Obama says he's for gun control.

Romney signed a gun ban into law.

Romney is worse than Obama on this issue, which is, to me, one of the most important to me, it is, in fact, the reason I got involved in politics 30 years ago.

I won't be supporting or voting for a gun banner.

Brett85
10-08-2012, 04:28 PM
Obama says he's for gun control.

Romney signed a gun ban into law.

Romney is worse than Obama on this issue, which is, to me, one of the most important to me, it is, in fact, the reason I got involved in politics 30 years ago.

I won't be supporting or voting for a gun banner.

I'm not saying you should vote for Romney. I'm just saying that Romney's neo-conservative positions on foreign policy issues seems to be a better reason not to vote for him than the fear that he would push for additional federal gun control laws. What additional federal gun control laws is Romney currently proposing?

mickey mouse joy division
10-08-2012, 04:29 PM
Well said! Obama 2012.

As for those who think that Romney would actually repeal Obamneycare at the federal level or oppose gun control, dont be one of these:
http://lab.osixs.org/Portals/4/images/lollipop-3468.jpgDon't get me wrong. I don't like Obama. But this is just beyond the pale for me. I know Obama's foreign policy is AWFUL and that's why I'm disturbed there's someone who wants to pretend it isn't, so let's make our foreign policy TWICE as awful.

Anti-Neocon
10-08-2012, 04:32 PM
Don't get me wrong. I don't like Obama. But this is just beyond the pale for me. I know Obama's foreign policy is AWFUL and that's why I'm disturbed there's someone who wants to pretend it isn't, so let's make our foreign policy TWICE as awful.
I don't like Obama either, but yes compared to putting neocons in charge, Obama is quite a bit less frightening.

Out of 10, Obama's a .5, and Willard's a flat zero.

Feeding the Abscess
10-08-2012, 04:35 PM
I'm not saying you should vote for Romney. I'm just saying that Romney's neo-conservative positions on foreign policy issues seems to be a better reason not to vote for him than the fear that he would push for additional federal gun control laws. What additional federal gun control laws is Romney currently proposing?

What gun control law is Obama currently proposing?

AuH20
10-08-2012, 04:36 PM
Can anyone honestly see Romney putting people in FEMA camps? I don't. Obama could care less.

Brett85
10-08-2012, 04:37 PM
What gun control law is Obama currently proposing?

The UN small arms treaty.

Feeding the Abscess
10-08-2012, 04:38 PM
Can anyone honestly see Romney putting people in FEMA camps? I don't. Obama could care less.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?392074-Mitt-Romney-promoted-Fusion-Centers-set-them-up-in-Massachusetts

Feeding the Abscess
10-08-2012, 04:39 PM
The UN small arms treaty.

I missed that. Admittedly, gun issues aren't on my radar. But in any event, I appreciate the correction.

Cowlesy
10-08-2012, 06:02 PM
I am probably naive to not worry about Romney trying to do national gun control. I can't see him ever touching that, not because he doesn't want to, but because he'd never in a million years get re-elected.

But this foreign policy stuff, the neoconservatives are making a big fucking gamble that people hate Obama so much, that they don't need a large portion of Ron Paul's votes.

Cowlesy
10-08-2012, 06:11 PM
Romney’s Foreign-Policy Speech: More War, Bigger Budgets
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/romneys-foreign-policy-speech-more-war-bigger-budgets/

Thanks for posting this one up. Dan McCarthy always gives both barrels when it comes to foreign policy. Great that he is the Editor of the Magazine.

Also, $10 subscription anyone?

https://ezsub.net/i/f.dll/main.sv.run?FIRSTNAME=&LASTNAME=&ADDRESS1=&CITY=&STATE=&ZIP=&SCNTRY=USA&JT=B2&ALIAS=ACMPRN2&STAGE=N&SOURCE=INET&DBG=F&x=61&y=12

Brian4Liberty
10-08-2012, 06:13 PM
Was that John McCain in the background singing a Beach Boys song?

Anti Federalist
10-08-2012, 08:12 PM
Can anyone honestly see Romney putting people in FEMA camps? I don't. Obama could care less.

Yes, in a second.

Either one would do it, no questions asked.

Especially after another false flag attack that kills 30,000 people this time.

angelatc
10-08-2012, 08:25 PM
Can anyone honestly see Romney putting people in FEMA camps? I don't.

Seriously? The convention didn't change your mind about the kind of man he is? Because it changed mine, a lot.

AuH20
10-08-2012, 09:13 PM
Seriously? The convention didn't change your mind about the kind of man he is? Because it changed mine, a lot.

I trust him more than Obama because he's (A) Mormon (Mormons typically march to a different drum) and (B) the TPTB have much more faith in Obama in carrying out their plans. In fact, it has been verified from numerous sources that they are suspicious of Romney and don't trust him.

AuH20
10-08-2012, 09:32 PM
Too many people in here don't know Romney. He's still considered an outsider and he's not allowed to win for that very reason:

http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2012/10/07/joel-skousen-romneys-first-win-the-kingmakers-may-have-to-voter-fraud-romneys-defeat-which-may-actually-may-be-best-because-the-conservative-movement-suffers-under-republican/


ROMNEY’S FIRST WIN

I’m no fan of Romney or his constant attempts to please the establishment, but I’m even more disturbed by the establishment’s manipulation of polling numbers in order to make sure Obama wins reelection. First the establishment went undercover to illegally record Romney’s remark about 47% of Americans being “victims”, and then boosted Obama’s polling numbers in order to make this silly attack on Romney have an effect. Yes, the constant drumbeat about Romney’s unlike-ability and elitism has taken a toll, but Obama is still very much at risk of losing – especially after Wednesday’s debate where Obama, sans teleprompter, stumbled badly. Ultimately, I think the course of this election will be decided by vote fraud in key swing states where establishment political machines have a history of boosting election rolls with illegal aliens and altering electronic voting records. […]

In order to reelect Obama, the PTB are going to have to order up another round of electronic vote fraud, which is increasingly easy to do, even if there is a paper trail for these voting machines. That’s because state officials and judges almost never allow a recount based upon that paper trail. But there are limits to how much they can change the vote electronically. Because of exit polling accuracies, political machines can only get away with changing the electronic vote tallies up to about a maximum of 8-10% —otherwise the manipulation is too obvious and people become outraged. If they keep the difference below 10% they can always explain it away by “margin of error” —just like in polling manipulation (which can often exceed the 4% margin of error by double).

With Romney’s big win in the debate this week, it appears the PTB are going to have to really alter the electronic vote toward Obama to ensure his win. Politico.com, a left-wing site had to admit that “Each candidate leads in states considered safe for their party. In safe GOP states, Romney leads by 8. In safe Democrat states, Obama leads by a massive 22 points. But, in the more numerous and more important swing states, Romney leads by 4 points, hitting the critical 50% threshold, nationwide”. Even the liberal press had to admit that Obama lost badly. Of course there was little substance in either candidates statements, but debates are won on speaking ability and how you come across to voters. […]

All this is more evidence that the PTB intend to reelect Obama. The constitutional right continues to assert that Romney is an insider and just as much controlled by the PTB as Obama. I continue to explain, for the sake of new subscribers, that this isn’t true. The kingmakers wouldn’t have tried so hard to stop him from getting the nomination in 2008 and 2012 if he were one of them. In fact, he’s not an insider, and they resent anyone trying to get into the race with their own money, bypassing their vetting process. Even more than that, they fear what an outsider may see about illegal operations inside the White House that they might not be able to keep from a president who is no dummy. Lastly, they never pick insiders or puppets who aren’t morally compromised or blackmailed, and Romney doesn’t fit that mold.

But that isn’t to say Romney would save us from much of the Obama agenda. He’s already sending messages that he would retain most of Obamacare even if repealed. Romney’s problem is that he has too much ambition and is trying desperately to please the establishment. He has hired virtually all establishment and neocon advisors. I hope he loses—not because I want Obama back, but because the conservative movement suffers under Republican presidents who do the establishment bidding while convincing conservatives it’s the “right thing to do.” It’s not.


Republicans are sending out mass emailings aimed at Ron Paul supporters trying to convince them that they ought to vote for Romney rather than a third party alternative in order to ensure that any new Supreme Court nominees are appointed by a Republican rather than Obama. But that strategy has never produced good results. The Senate confirmation processalways blocks any strict constructionist, like judge Robert Bork, from being nominated—refusing to pass on anyone except those controlled by the establishment. All of the justices confirmed during Republican presidencies have turned out to be compromised–like Justice Roberts, who just betrayed conservatives on Obamacare.

Peace Piper
10-08-2012, 09:55 PM
What does Rand think about this?

Shane Harris
10-08-2012, 10:27 PM
Too many people in here don't know Romney. He's still considered an outsider and he's not allowed to win for that very reason:

http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2012/10/07/joel-skousen-romneys-first-win-the-kingmakers-may-have-to-voter-fraud-romneys-defeat-which-may-actually-may-be-best-because-the-conservative-movement-suffers-under-republican/

Son of George Romney? Been in the establishment since birth? Idk he smells just like the rest of them to me.

AuH20
10-08-2012, 10:43 PM
Son of George Romney? Been in the establishment since birth? Idk he smells just like the rest of them to me.

Mormons aren't part of the WASP 'club.' Look throughout American history, and they were treated like dogs, run out from state to state until finally landing in Utah.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=98SMtOVJ_58#!

AGRP
10-08-2012, 10:46 PM
I dont do drugs, but no amount could make me think of anything AuH20 continually peddles.

AuH20
10-08-2012, 10:51 PM
I dont do drugs, but no amount could make me think of anything AuH20 continually peddles.

Because you are deadset in believing Mitt Romney to be Satan Incarnate and no amount of facts are going to change that.

Think for a second...Why in 2007 did Huckabee collude with McCain in West Virginia and other states to stop Romney??? Why did earlier this year noted NWO lapdog John Huntman go out of his way to assail and attack Mitt Romney???? Why have noted neocons like William Kristol publicly expressed displeasure with Romney??? Many preferred Newt Gingrich to Romney. It's not as simple minded as stating that Romney is some dark agent. He isn't. He's a wildcard who wants the presidency and who knows what he wants to do.

In closing, don't vote for the lesser of two evils, but many people are simply wrong about Romney completely misunderstanding his bloodline, motivations and faith.

Anti-Neocon
10-09-2012, 02:12 AM
Too many people in here don't know Romney. He's still considered an outsider and he's not allowed to win for that very reason:

http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2012/10/07/joel-skousen-romneys-first-win-the-kingmakers-may-have-to-voter-fraud-romneys-defeat-which-may-actually-may-be-best-because-the-conservative-movement-suffers-under-republican/

The kingmakers wouldn’t have tried so hard to stop him from getting the nomination in 2008 and 2012 if he were one of them. In fact, he’s not an insider, and they resent anyone trying to get into the race with their own money, bypassing their vetting process.
I gave your blogspot a chance, then I came across that heaping pile of pure bullshit. If the premise of the argument is based on "kingmakers trying to stop (Romney) from getting the nomination", then whoever wrote that blogspot is delusional at best, or otherwise just a blatant liar.

devil21
10-09-2012, 06:04 AM
Because you are deadset in believing Mitt Romney to be Satan Incarnate and no amount of facts are going to change that.

RNC proved that he actually is Satan Incarnate and he's a control freak to boot.



Think for a second...Why in 2007 did Huckabee collude with McCain in West Virginia and other states to stop Romney???

Because Romney was a more formidable candidate in 2008 than McCain was and McCain and the GOP knew it. However, McCain had been promised his chance at the ring and Romney could have fouled that up. Romney did drop out way before the race was decided, in case you forgot. He was directed to and promised the 2012 nomination in exchange.


Why did earlier this year noted NWO lapdog John Huntman go out of his way to assail and attack Mitt Romney????

Because Huntsman was polling like 3% and that's what you do when you're polling at the bottom.



Why have noted neocons like William Kristol publicly expressed displeasure with Romney???

Because he's still not a great candidate and we see why all the time. He can't beat Obama.



Many preferred Newt Gingrich to Romney.

What's your point and who is "many"? Insiders or voters?



It's not as simple minded as stating that Romney is some dark agent. He isn't. He's a wildcard who wants the presidency and who knows what he wants to do.

He was promised the nomination and he got it. Now he's parroting the same old, same old neocon lines. He's been bought and paid for just like the rest that win the nominations in modern times.



In closing, don't vote for the lesser of two evils, but many people are simply wrong about Romney completely misunderstanding his bloodline, motivations and faith.

Wasn't it already confirmed that he's Obama's and Bush's cousin?

In closing, I see that you're just running interference for Romney on this forum since the RNC but Im pretty sure most here see right through it. I do. Romney is officially making himself 100% unelectable, at least to non-intervention advocates, and to the general public by going all in on war rhetoric and selling out to the neocons and AIPAC. Im likely voting for GJ but with a foreign policy like Im hearing from Romney, I'd consider Obama before Romney if it looks close in my state. Romney's FP scares the hell out of me.

Bastiat's The Law
10-09-2012, 06:10 AM
[QUOTE=AuH20;4678772]Mormons aren't part of the WASP 'club.' Look throughout American history, and they were treated like dogs, run out from state to state until finally landing in Utah.

For being criminal charlatans yeah.

Travlyr
10-09-2012, 07:00 AM
Yes, in a second.

Either one would do it, no questions asked.

Especially after another false flag attack that kills 30,000 people this time.

In a heartbeat. It would be the best thing that could happen to us. The end of the day is not going to be this year according to James Baker. It is going to be next year.


"And then frankly there are those who are saying the best thing that would happen to us is to be attacked by somebody. Just bring it on because that would unify us; it would legitimize the regime." - Secretary of State of the United States of Amerika ... Hillary Rodham Clinton

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/122392.html

nobody's_hero
10-09-2012, 07:18 AM
RNC proved that he actually is Satan Incarnate and he's a control freak to boot.


Remember the Maine (delegation)!

libertygrl
10-09-2012, 08:37 AM
Romney can not be allowed to win. He's officially worse than obama.

Let's call it what it is, and no longer be afraid to say it. It's the Zionist foreign policy. Neo-cons are Zionsists and the more I read about the support Romney's getting from them and the cadre of Zionist advisors behind him (like Bush Jr.), the more I feel he's going to get in. The whole system is rigged and the powers that be will put in the candidate that will best serve their interests. That's why Ron Paul was attacked and censored so much in the media. It was his foreign policy of non-intervention and ending the Fed that scared them the most.

Based on the following connections, we are really going to be SCREWED. Romney's foreign policy is going to be EXACTLY like George W.Bush's only worse, if that's possible! As Lucille pointed out, The Zionist plan as stated by Gov. Wesley Clark, is to have us invade 7 countries in 5 years time!

Connections:

Romney and Netanyahu are long time friends:

The relationship between Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Romney — nurtured over meals in Boston, New York and Jerusalem, strengthened by a network of mutual friends and heightened by their conservative ideologies — has resulted in an unusually frank exchange of advice and insights on topics like politics, economics and the Middle East.

When Mr. Romney was the governor of Massachusetts, Mr. Netanyahu offered him firsthand pointers on how to shrink the size of government. When Mr. Netanyahu wanted to encourage pension funds to divest from businesses tied to Iran, Mr. Romney counseled him on which American officials to meet with.

The ties between Mr. Romney and Mr. Netanyahu stand out because there is little precedent for two politicians of their stature to have such a history together that predates their entry into government. And that history could well influence decision-making at a time when the United States may face crucial questions about whether to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities or support Israel in such an action.

h ttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/08/us/politics/mitt-romney-and-benjamin-netanyahu-are-old-friends.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ideologically, Mormons, perhaps even more than other Christian faiths, feel connected to Israel. Elder Jeffrey R. Holland said during a 2007 trip to the country that "Jerusalem ... constitutes the scene, the setting and the circumference of our religious heritage," in part because the Book of Mormon teaches that the Tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim, two of the 12 tribes of Israel, migrated to the United States and are the ancestors of many Mormons. (There is also a belief that the Native Americans were descended from Israelites.)

The Church of Latter-Day Saints' ties to Israel are almost as old as the church itself. Early Mormon leaders such as Orson Hyde campaigned to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem -- in part because he believed it would usher in the second coming of Christ. Additionally, the church supported the creation of the state of Israel, and Brigham Young University established a campus in Jerusalem in the 1980s.

h ttp://www.ibtimes.com/mitt-romney-and-mormon-israeli-connection-734144

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mormonism is a Trojan Horse of global Zionism, and Mitt Romney is the perfect tool of Zionist interests.

In 2009, five rabbis toured the Draper, Utah LDS (Mormon) Temple. One of the rabbis, a 75-year old who has been doing interfaith work for 50 years, removed his yarmulke (skull cap) while in the celestial room and said, it was the holiest place he had ever been in. Things like that are happening all over the world... There is a genuine Mormon-Jewish connection... Mormons who deal with Jews really have a profound appreciation for their own doctrines, temples, etc.”

- Mark Paredes National Outreach Director, Zionist Organization of America (A Jew and a Mormon) Deseret News (Jan. 7, 2011)

h ttp://www.texemarrs.com/052012/rabbis_love_mormons.htm

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

They (Mormons) believe that Zion will be built upon the North American continent at a place specific in Missouri and that Mormon leaders will become vice Regents of Christ ruling earth [The law shall go forth from Zion (in America) and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem] !

The church in fact has taken steps to implement that concept beginning as early as 1843 when it sent an emissary, Orson Hyde, to Palestine to dedicate the land for the return of Jews.* Expecting it to happen soon thereafter, they were disappointed when it didn't, later sending emissaries several times to re-dedicate the land.

The biblical prophesies of such an event being fulfilled is central to Mormon doctrine and essential as a catalyst to propel it toward a delusional destiny of becoming the civil/theocratic world government.

h ttp://www.opednews.com/articles/3/9-11-AND-THE-MORMON-MOSSAD-by-Doug-Wallace-090330-647.html

Meatwasp
10-09-2012, 09:15 AM
Maybe we should all vote for Obama if Mitt keeps getting high poll numbers. He may be easier to beat if Rand runs.
I hate Obama with a passion but at least he isn't kissing Bibi ass.
Actually a pox on both men.I am wringing my hands,"What to do? what to do?"

AuH20
10-09-2012, 11:57 AM
RNC proved that he actually is Satan Incarnate and he's a control freak to boot.

More like Reince Preibus and the RNC.




Because Romney was a more formidable candidate in 2008 than McCain was and McCain and the GOP knew it. However, McCain had been promised his chance at the ring and Romney could have fouled that up. Romney did drop out way before the race was decided, in case you forgot. He was directed to and promised the 2012 nomination in exchange.

Huckabee is one of the most duplicitious frauds in the entire American political system. He's an evangelical CFR agent. And he despises Romney and went out of his way to destroy him. This act of vengeance was extremely telling.


Because Huntsman was polling like 3% and that's what you do when you're polling at the bottom.

It's a lot more deeper than that. Huntsman, former ambassador to China in the Obama Admin and overall globalist stooge reserved all his vitriol for Romney. And he also went after Ron Paul.



In closing, I see that you're just running interference for Romney on this forum since the RNC but Im pretty sure most here see right through it. I do. Romney is officially making himself 100% unelectable, at least to non-intervention advocates, and to the general public by going all in on war rhetoric and selling out to the neocons and AIPAC. Im likely voting for GJ but with a foreign policy like Im hearing from Romney, I'd consider Obama before Romney if it looks close in my state. Romney's FP scares the hell out of me.


I'm not running any inteference for Romney. I'm not voting for him. But I have to laugh when I read that Obama and Romney are on equal terms in terms of potential damage. Obama has significant baggage in his personal life which makes him controllable to the nth degree. Romney is a boring family man with no immoral behavior to exploit. In other words, he's dangerous to the establishment. It's already been confirmed through EU officials that no fiscal tremors are to take place in Europe until after November 6th. Unlike Romney, Obama is experiencing no internal pressure to stop the gravy train of debt.

Secondly, Romney is a member of Church of LDS, a group of individuals with an unique perspective on the restoration of the U.S. Constitution. In fact, Romney had the late Cleon Skousen as one of his professors at BYU. These type of relationships along with his relationship with the Pauls worry the elites. Multiple choice Mitt is viewed as major liability to the power structure because they don't know where his true intentions lie. Give me a Mormon over a fake, compromised evangelical every day of the week.

puppetmaster
10-09-2012, 12:57 PM
Because you are deadset in believing Mitt Romney to be Satan Incarnate and no amount of facts are going to change that.

Think for a second...Why in 2007 did Huckabee collude with McCain in West Virginia and other states to stop Romney??? Why did earlier this year noted NWO lapdog John Huntman go out of his way to assail and attack Mitt Romney???? Why have noted neocons like William Kristol publicly expressed displeasure with Romney??? Many preferred Newt Gingrich to Romney. It's not as simple minded as stating that Romney is some dark agent. He isn't. He's a wildcard who wants the presidency and who knows what he wants to do.

In closing, don't vote for the lesser of two evils, but many people are simply wrong about Romney completely misunderstanding his bloodline, motivations and faith.


I trust him more than Obama because he's (A) Mormon (Mormons typically march to a different drum) and (B) the TPTB have much more faith in Obama in carrying out their plans. In fact, it has been verified from numerous sources that they are suspicious of Romney and don't trust him.


yah...mormons march to the beat of a different drum......huntsman is a mormon. You misunderstand the person(s) that "say" they are mormon. In any religion, bad people can join and usually do. Then they excel on the stupidity of thier religious mass.

You are selling tainted goods.

AuH20
10-09-2012, 01:23 PM
yah...mormons march to the beat of a different drum......huntsman is a mormon. You misunderstand the person(s) that "say" they are mormon. In any religion, bad people can join and usually do. Then they excel on the stupidity of thier religious mass.

You are selling tainted goods.

Do you know that Mormons consider the U.S. Constitution to be a holy document? In fact, they consider it their moral duty to restore this heavenly inspired document to it's former glory. Joseph Smith stated in 1940, “Even this nation will be on the very verge of crumbling to pieces and tumbling to the ground, and when the Constitution is upon the brink of ruin, this people will be the staff upon which the nation shall lean, and they shall bear the Constitution away from the very verge of destruction.” So you think that a LDS high priest like Mitt Romney isn't aware of his chief luminary's philosophy as well as integral Church doctrine?

Secondly, your point about Huntsman is correct. He and Reid have both strayed. But generally Mormons are fiercely independent people who will go out of their way to help their neighbor. They even got along with the Native Americans.

devil21
10-09-2012, 01:37 PM
Are you a Mormon AuH2O?

AuH20
10-09-2012, 01:43 PM
Are you a Mormon AuH2O?

No. I'm more of a deist. Nevertheless, I trust the Mormons far more than the evangelical hierarchy in this country. The evangelicals have already been caught redhanded trying to promote subservience with Romans 13.

Cowlesy
10-09-2012, 01:46 PM
Bill Kristol called Mitt Romney a "kinder, gentler neocon."

http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/romneys-new-freedom-agenda-draws-praise-from-bush

Brian4Liberty
10-09-2012, 02:13 PM
Bill Kristol called Mitt Romney a "kinder, gentler neocon."

http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/romneys-new-freedom-agenda-draws-praise-from-bush

Yeah, a small amount of praise to encourage Romney's hardcore neo-conservative rhetoric. But wasn't Kristol calling for Romney to resign from the ticket a couple of weeks ago?

puppetmaster
10-09-2012, 02:27 PM
Do you know that Mormons consider the U.S. Constitution to be a holy document? In fact, they consider it their moral duty to restore this heavenly inspired document to it's former glory. Joseph Smith stated in 1940,“Even this nation will be on the very verge of crumbling to pieces and tumbling to the ground, and when the Constitution is upon the brink of ruin, this people will be the staff upon which the nation shall lean, and they shall bear the Constitution away from the very verge of destruction.” So you think that a LDS high priest like Mitt Romney isn't aware of his chief luminary's philosophy as well as integral Church doctrine?




Secondly, your point about Huntsman is correct. He and Reid have both strayed. But generally Mormons are fiercely independent people who will go out of their way to help their neighbor. They even got along with the Native Americans.

I believe he is aware of the teachings, and I also believe that just because you are involved in the LDS does not mean you follow the principles that are taught. There are many in the church who are NOT principled and honest with the church. Religions have always been a magnet to unethical people and I believe that romney is one of those people.

I am also and LDS member, and I will not vote for Romney.

mickey mouse joy division
10-09-2012, 04:32 PM
I despise Mitt Romney. I wouldn't vote for him if he ran against Hugo Chavez.

Shane Harris
10-09-2012, 05:29 PM
Mormons aren't part of the WASP 'club.' Look throughout American history, and they were treated like dogs, run out from state to state until finally landing in Utah.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=98SMtOVJ_58#!

His daddy was a Rockefeller Republican Governor who ran for President. Mitt has always been establishment. I'm not speaking for all Mormons.

farreri
10-09-2012, 05:39 PM
I detest Obama and his policies.

Romney is much better than Obama on domestic policy.
Fascism is better than Socialism? I think they both equally suck.