Obligatory
Posted on 05/24/2012 1:40:35 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Ignore what the candidates say they'll do differently on foreign policy. They're basically the same man.
If Barack Obama is reelected, he ought to consider making Mitt Romney his new secretary of state. I propose this far-fetched howler not because I'm trying to get into my own Dumb Idea Hall of Fame, or because white-male secretaries of state seem to be going the way of the dodo at Foggy Bottom (we haven't had one since Warren Christopher departed in 1997), or because I believe deeply in bipartisanship. (Although I do; it's been a long time since we've had a secretary of state who was from the opposing party, and it would be great idea.)
I raise the idea to drive home a broader point. Despite his campaign rhetoric, Romney would be quite comfortable carrying out President Obama's foreign policy because it accords so closely with his own.
And that brings up an extraordinary fact. What has emerged in the second decade after 9/11 is a remarkable consensus among Democrats and Republicans on a core approach to the nation's foreign policy. It's certainly not a perfect alignment. But rarely since the end of the Cold War has there been this level of consensus. Indeed, while Americans may be divided, polarized and dysfunctional about issues closer to home, we are really quite united in how we see the world and what we should do about it.
Ever wondered why foreign policy hasn't figured all that prominently in the 2012 election campaign? Sure, the country is focused on the economy and domestic priorities. And yes, Obama has so far avoided the kind of foreign-policy disasters that would give the Republicans easy free shots. But there's more to it than that: Romney has had a hard time identifying Obama's foreign-policy vulnerabilities because
(Excerpt) Read more at foreignpolicy.com ...
place marker
Thinking like this will get us all killed. Obama is seeking our nuclear disarmament. He didn’t encourage the Green revolt in Iran, but he immediately pushed Mubarak out of power. He cancelled our long range missile defense program, he has stopped Israel from taking out Iranian nukes, he left Iraq 100% with no presence to deter Iran. Afghanistan is now declare false victory, negotiate with Taliban and get out. The list goes on. McCain even would have done otherwise.
Understood. I get it. And when it comes time to vote I’m pulling the lever for Romney. I gave to Herman Cain, backed Newt with cash, neither worked out. We need this pathetic excuse for a human being OUT of the WH! End of story.
Don’t bother reading it. There is no supporting clear argument. Worse than a high school thesis.
Romney may very well be a CFR globalist in the Dewey/Nixon/Ford/Rockefeller/Bush family mold. But he doesn't hate America.
Even now, the task of finding a candidate to primary against Romney in 2016 should start. We need to start playing chess two moves ahead, instead of being cornered. The compliant GOP-e needs to be reminded we are watching. It’s too late for 2012, so let us get to work now, I know our enemies are. They are probably done with 2016 and on to 2020. How about us?
Second to say that Iraq has been a failure, and Lybia a success is crazy. The current state of affairs in Iraq may not be ideal, but it's far better than if Saddam, who was gaming the UN sanctions were still in power. As for Lybia, had a relatively harmless Qaddafi, who had voluntarily stopped his WMD programs and helping against Al Qeada, and replaced it with unknown radicals with links to Al Qeada. As for Egypt, Obama’s distaserous blunders simply have not come home to roost—yet.
See, I am a rebel at heart and I would rather primary a Republican with some cajones rather than a third party candidate. History is our greatest teacher.. and historically third parties are losers. However, if Adams, Franklin and Washington are to be trusted, two party systems deny democracy. When has a third party candidate won? Now, who has the nards to primary against someone in their own party?
Obligatory
I personally won’t vote for Romney at all but I’m just pointing out that there will be no GOP challenge to Romney.
The evidence of that is all through Free Republic in the panicked screeching of those who desperately try to protect “our” candidate no matter how bad he is.
Not that long. Colin Powell was a real democrat.
So then you are wanting Obama to win by not voting to try to stop him. .....interesting.
Remember that incumbent Obama would have lost the W. V. and Kentucky primaries if he had had a semi serious opponent.
“So then you are wanting Obama to win by not voting to try to stop him. .....interesting.”
Exactly!
In the same way I want Coke to win everytime I buy a Vitamin Water instead of a Pepsi.
“So then you are wanting Obama to win by not voting to try to stop him. .....interesting.”
Exactly!
In the same way I want Coke to win everytime I buy a Vitamin Water instead of a Pepsi.
************************
That is it precisely. Everyone knows that not drinking Pepsi is exactly the same as drinking a Coke. Thus, when you drink the vitamin water you are in fact drinking Coke. It just makes sense.
Mmmm, lets see now, who is more of a "threat" to the safety and security of the United States among these 2?
And of these 2, which is more dangerous to our survival?
I especially welcome comments from those who (claim) that Mittens is 10 times worst than Dear Leader and thus, we shold all stay home or vote for someone else come November.
How's about any of you who have been disparaging the Mormon Religion (and no, I'm Catholic and thus do not necessarily support what Mormons advocate) provide ANYTING printed or advanced by Mormons which is even close to what many Muslims and specifically, the Muslim Brotherhood (which Obama supports and defends) do?
The Muslim Brotherhood Creed: “Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Quran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”
The Muslim Brotherhood Agenda as outlined in 1991 in Phildelphia:
The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a "Civilization-Jihadist" process with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" their miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who choose to slack.
The Obama administration has greatly exacerbated the penetration of the U.S. government achieved during the George W. Bush administration (thanks in no small part to the TRAITOROUS, SEDITIOUS, BOTTOM-FEEDING, RAT-BASTURD, ISLAMIC-JIHADIST-SUPPORTER, PHONY "PRETEND" CONSERVATIVE, GROVER NORTQUIST) and anyone who wants to debate this....please, "bring it."
The precedents, personnel and policies promoted during the George W. Bush administration have metastasized dramatically under his successor.
Some individuals with close personal and professional ties to the Muslim Brotherhood have been appointed to senior and influential positions in the Obama administration. Others have been given access in more informal advisory roles.
Six of this Islamist cohort are profiled in the course: Special Envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation Rashad Hussein; Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Huma Abedein; Presidential advisor Dalia Mogahed; FBI Citizen’s Academy graduate Kifah Mustafa; Homeland Security Advisory Committee Member Mohamed Elibiary and Homeland Security Countering Violent Extremism Working Group Member Mohamed Magid.
Such individuals have clearly had an impact on U.S. policy under President Obama in ways that advance the Muslim Brotherhood’s civilization jihad and the efforts of other Islamists to compel our submission to shariah.
All it takes for .....
..... to triumph is for good men to do nothing.......!"
....you know, like staying home or writing in someone's name which is the same thing as affirmatively, voting for the closest most of us will ever come to WITNESSING PURE EVIL while still alive...Barack, Barry, Hussein, Soetoro, Obama.
"Oh yeah, we'll stand on 'PRINCIPLES' and show them what's what, then in 2016, we will really, REALLY, work to elect a true Conservative....."
Yeah, right, provided there is still a United States of America left as we used to know it.
THEM: Oh, don't worry, we will keep the House and take the Senate and that way, we will keep Dear Leader in check.
Oh course you will with the Weeper of the House (Bone-er) and wuss, RINO extraodinaire and he who is afraid of his own shadow, Mitch McConnell leading the charge.
Mmm, mmm, mmm!
The only thing that I believe about Romney is that he does not hate America. Other than that, he is basically Obama with an R after his name. He was a complete liberal in Mass and will be the same as President. Virgil Goode would make a wonderful President and I hope smart FREEPERS will vote for a conservative instead of the liberal twins Obama and Romney.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.