Mitt Romney to threaten war against Iran during trip to Israel as he tries to restore his foreign policy credentials after gaffe-prone London visit
By JAMES NYE
Mitt Romney will threaten war with Iran if he is elected president as he seeks to bolster his foreign policy credentials following his gaffe-filled visit to London.
Arriving in Israel today, the presumptive Republican presidential candidate will reiterate his commitment to the preservation of the Jewish state in the face of what it sees as an existential threat from a nuclear-armed Iran.
Describing that scenario as ‘the greatest threat to the world’, Romney’s official line is in marked difference to President Obama and is characterised by the ex-Massachusetts governor as ‘If you want peace, prepare for war.’
U.S. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is seen during the Opening Ceremony of the London 2012 Olympic Games at the Olympic Stadium on July 27, 2012 in London
Avoiding a traffic jam, Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney walks down Grosvenor Place in London to meet Ireland’s Prime Minister Enda Kenny at the Embassy of Ireland in London
'Governor Romney has made it clear he doesn't think that Obama's policies have been sufficient,' a foreign policy adviser to the Republican candidate told The Daily Telegraph.
'The President thinks that a nuclear Iran can be contained and deterred. He is clearly wrong.'
Hoping to gain the backing of the powerful and influential Jewish vote in the United States following his visit to Jerusalem, Romney hopes to draw attention to the fact that President Obama has yet to visit Israel since his term of office began in 2009.
However, the bellicose language comes after Romney’s error strewn visit to Britain on the first leg of a three country jaunt that was meant to boost his foreign policy credentials.
U.S. Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney is recognised by pedestrians at Grosvenor Place in London
Criticising London’s readiness for the Olympic Games which opened with a colourful opening ceremony last night, politicians from both sides of the Atlantic slammed the Republican for his conduct over his two days in the British capital.
Harry Reid, the Democratic Senate leader said that it 'was not good for us as a country' to 'have somebody that's nominated by one of the principle parties to go over and insult everybody.'
Publicly rebuked by British Prime Minister David Cameron, Romney also drew the ire of Carl Lewis, the U.S. Olympian who won nine track and field gold medals during his career.
He is reported to have said, 'Seriously, some Americans just shouldn't leave the country.'
Users of Twitter in Britain declared the visit to be the ‘Romneyshambles’, which is a variation of ‘omnishambles’, a phrase first used in a popular U.K. political satire series called ‘The Thick of It’.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu opens the weekly cabinet meeting at his office on July 22, 2012 in Jerusalem, Israel
Mr Romney was careful not to complain on Friday after heavy traffic caused him to walk through the streets of London to the Irish Embassy to meet Taoiseach Enda Kenny.
Using the visit to Israel to show his steadfast support, Romney took to a Jerusalem newspaper to pledge to 'treat Israel like the friend and ally that it is.'
He added that ‘I cannot imagine going to the United Nations, as Obama did, and criticising Israel in front of the world.’
The nuclear enrichment plant at Natanz in central Iran
Inspection tour: Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad inspects Natanz in 2008. The facility, seen in an aerial photo above right, has been repeatedly hit by malware
President Obama's dealings with Israel have cooled since he announced his support for a return to the 1967 borders following any eventual agreement with the Palestinians.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lectured him publicly about this stand on a visit to the United States.
Despite his comments, Romney raised $2 million at two fundraisers for American expatriates at London’s Mandarin Oriental hotel late on Thursday.
The Massive Ordnance Penetrator is nearly five tons heavier than any other bomb in the military’s arsenal and is made to pulverise underground targets
Senior bankers, lawyers and former ambassadors paid up to $75,000 to mingle with the candidate.
It has also been revealed today that the United States Air Force has perfected a 30,000 pound bunker-busting bomb.
The world's largest conventional bomb, the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) is 20ft long and Micahel Donley, the US Air Force secretary said it is available 'today'.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2180168/Mitt-Romney-threaten-war-Iran-trip-Israel-tries-restore-foreign-policy-credentials-gaffe-prone-London-visit.html#ixzz221WJLk2P
Romney is willing to drag the US into another ME war in exchange for 31% of the American Jewish vote. That is 1% more than he would get if he didn’t attack Iran.ReplyDelete
…Though an early supporter of the Vietnam War, Romney avoided military service at the height of the fighting after high school by seeking and receiving four draft deferments, according to Selective Service records. They included college deferments and a 31-month stretch as a "minister of religion" in France, a classification for Mormon missionaries that the church at the time feared was being overused. The country was cutting troop levels by the time he became eligible for the draft, and his lottery number was not called.
President Barack Obama, Romney's opponent in this year's campaign, did not serve in the military either. The Democrat, 50, was a child during the Vietnam conflict and did not enlist when he was older.
But because Romney, now 65, was of draft age during Vietnam, his military background -- or, rather, his lack of one -- is facing new scrutiny as he courts veterans and makes his case to the nation to be commander in chief. He's also intensified his criticism lately of Obama's plans to scale back the nation's military commitments abroad, suggesting that Romney would pursue an aggressive foreign policy as president that could involve U.S. troops.
A look at Romney's relationship with Vietnam offers a window into a 1960s world that allowed him to avoid combat as fighting peaked. His story also demonstrates his commitment to the Mormon Church, which he rarely discusses publicly but which helped shape his life.
Romney's recollection of his Vietnam-era decisions has evolved in the decades since, particularly as his presidential ambitions became clear.
He said in 2007 -- his first White House bid under way -- that he had "longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam." But his actions, Selective Service records and previous statements show little interest in joining a conflict that ultimately claimed more than 58,000 American lives.
Still, he repeatedly cites his commitment to public service and the nation’s military while campaigning for president.
Time to look at New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson.ReplyDelete
I've ben saying that for quite a while.Delete
That's where I'm putting my mark. Others may do as they will, but I'd not vote for either Obama nor Romney. Neither have exposed a course for the country which I can support, electorally.
Both are "Big Government" supporters.
Both are a danger to 2nd Amendment Rights.
Neither are "The Solution"
Both represent different proponents of "The Problem"
Johnson can't win, but if he could drain 3 or 4% from Romney it would keep old "magic pants" out of the White House.ReplyDelete
Winning is not what matters, rufus.Delete
Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still voting for evil.
Vote your Conscience.
In your heart, you know he's Right.
Actually, I'm okay with Obama, Rat. He's anti-second amendment, but he can't do anything about it. He's okay on biofuels, and very good on Wind, Solar, Geothermal, etc.Delete
I support him 100% on Healthcare, and tax policy, and like his, in general, anti-war stance.
I won't waste my vote, and make it easier for Romney to get elected.
As I say, rufus, others may do as they will.Delete
But anyone living in California, New York, Idaho or Texas can vote their Conscience, and not effect the outcome.
But could change the course of things to come, if the "outsider" scores above the 3% projected.
Yeah, actually my vote doesn't matter, either. Romney will carry Mississippi by God only knows how much. That said, Johnson could, just possibly (super longshot for sure) hurt Romney in states like Colorado, or New Hampshire.Delete
Romney is honest about Iran. Obama's leading from behind, IF israel attacks he can either take credit for the success or blame israel for the failure..ReplyDelete
Iran is on the warpath. They have tripled the centrifuges in the last 2 years. Sanctions and talks have completely failed to slow the Iranian plan to be a nuclear power (weapons) To somehow think Romney is "dragging us" to another war is foolish. We are already at war with Iran. You just don't want to be honest about it.
Maybe America should draw down it's troops in Afghanistan, Europe, Asia and the other 127 bases scattered across the world if your concerned about American overreach.
As it stands now, Israel is not asking for American troops. It's begging for America to stop throwing roadblocks up.
IF America did not want a war with Iran we could have had real biting sanctions, something Obama has refused to do since day one. Writing exemptions for 11 nations (china, india, turkey among them) does not force Iran to do shit...
America, under Obama, has sent a green light to the IRanians to behave any way they wish.
That will cause a HOT war with iran...
As it stands now, Israel is not asking for American troops. It's begging for America to stop throwing roadblocks up.
If Israel believes they can achieve a permanent solution to the Iran nuclear issue on their own they are batshit crazy. IF there was a solution to the problem, it would, at a minimum, require US active participation in providing air cover, ordinance, and logistics, if not full scale participation.
The only way Israel could stop Iran on their own would be to go full scale nuclear and even Benji isn't that stupid.
One good reason for reelecting an incumbent is he doesn't have to keep a bunch of stupid promises in order to get a 3rd term. He can't serve a third term.ReplyDelete
Romney, on the other hand, will come into office beholden to the same war-mongering, oil, and coal companies that got him elected, and will have to carry their water for four years in order to keep their support for the next election.
War-mongering coal companies.....heh, that's a good one.Delete
Exxon, Arch Coal - Samey, Same, to me. They both want to keep us hooked on fossil fuels, and away from Clean energy.Delete
Obama has pulled all the troops out of Iraq, is drawing down Afghanistan, and has taken two combat brigades out of Europe.ReplyDelete
We are, however, in the process of beefing up our presence in the S. China Sea. Make of it what you will (Hint: there seems to be an emerging consensus that there's a lot of oil there.)
Those mountains behind Natanz would seem to make a good echo chamber for a nuke.ReplyDelete
Oh, now you want a Nuclear War, eh?Delete
I'm not the one enriching uranium and promising a world without the great and little Satans.Delete
I want to go fishing in peace myself.
But if Israel wants to use it nukes it's fine by me.
Oh, so now you want Iranian nuclear missiles pointed at LA from Venezuela, eh?
We have anti-missile systems; Venezuela doesn't. I think we're safe.Delete
Excellent set of propaganda pieces you put up today, Deuce.ReplyDelete
Exactly what part of that piece was wrong?Delete
Basically it makes Romney out to be a chicken shit warmonger without ever coming to grips with the seriousness of the problem, Ruf.Delete
Then you throw in that non sense about the war mongering coal companies.
That is original. Never heard that one before.
:) Okay, disregarding the warmongering Coal companies, Romney doe come across to me as a chickenshit, draft-dodging, warmonger that would do exactly as Deuce said, "get us involved in another shooting war in the middle east" (this time with a huge country with skills) to no discernible good, and a lot of bad, to American interests.Delete
Report: US sees Israeli strike on Iran in OctoberReplyDelete
Sunday, July 29, 2012 | Ryan Jones
A senior and widely respected analyst with Israel's Channel 2 News said in Friday's pre-Shabbat newscast that top American officials have become convinced that Israel will launch a military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities in October, just one month before the US presidential election.
Ehud Yaari had just returned from a trip to Washington, where he told viewers that he had met with "the people one needs to talk with about this matter," and that "my impression is that the Americans are convinced that there is very high chance that Israel will decide to attack in Iran before the elections in the US."
According to Yaari, American officials see an Israeli strike on Iran as almost a foregone conclusion, and are focusing on their response to the possible outcomes of such an action.
Israel's Ha'aretz daily newspaper reported on Sunday that the Obama Administration had recently briefed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on its own back-up plan to bomb Iran should ongoing international diplomatic efforts fail.
An unnamed American official cited by the newspaper suggested that the Obama White House was increasingly seeing the futility of the diplomatic tug-of-war between Iran and the international community, and was working feverishly to put together a viable attack plan.
That source said that Netanyahu had received a detailed overview of the developing American attack plan and the weapons that would be brought to bear on Iran's nuclear facilities should it be enacted.
Last week, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak stated that as much as both Israel and the US may want to avoid striking Iran, attacking its nuclear program now would be far less costly and deadly than dealing with a nuclear-armed Iran in the future.
"It is perfectly clear to me that dealing with this challenge when it matures, if it matures, will be inestimably more complex, inestimably more dangerous and inestimably more costly in human life and resources," Barak said during a ceremony for the graduating class of Israel's National Defense College.
Rufus IISun Jul 29, 12:12:00 PM EDTReplyDelete
Obama has pulled all the troops out of Iraq, is drawing down Afghanistan, and has taken two combat brigades out of Europe.
Obama tripled the troops in Afghanistan, changed the rules of engagement (only to cause more American injury and death) and then "draws" down a few...
Let's all bow and give him praise... Maybe the 90 thousand troops still in Afpak will cheer?
Rufus's comments remind me of snake oil salesmen...
Yeah, he put the extra troops in. Then he killed Bin Laden. Now, he's ready to accept the Victory, and call it a day. What would You do?Delete
My horse picture won't come up again, I'll go back to adding my b.ReplyDelete
Anyway, no one here knows what is really going on, and maybe no one anywhere does, other than a handful of Iranians.ReplyDelete
It seems hard to believe they don't have enough highly enriched uranium by now for a handful of bombs. If not, their scientists seem not to be up to international standards.
Lacking knowledge about the real state of affairs, I'm not getting my fur up, and maybe Deuce is right, they can be deterred.
I just don't know. But I can understand why some people are worried, especially the Israelis.
THat they do not have the enriched to weapons grade uranium may not be an indication that their scientist are incapable. It is just as likely an indicator that the Iranians are not on a path to deploying a nuclear weapon, but are trying to develop those 23 nuclear reactors that the US and GE were going to sell and build for them, back when Dick Cheney was SecDef and signed off on the project.Delete
Bibi claimed the Iranians were three years away from nuclear capacity, back in the 1970's. That timeline seems to have remained a constant, as has their bombastic rhetoric, for almost forty years, now.
In Olympics news, Saudi Arabia threatens to withdraw over judo hijab ban.ReplyDelete
In fact, if you read this thread carefully, you see the rationale for Iran wanting a nuclear weapon. There would not be all this loose talk about bombing and killing Iranians if Iran had a nuclear deterrence.ReplyDelete
This will not end with US security improved. It will end with more dead Iranians and their families bound and determined to take revenge. It will make us poorer and less safe.
In fact, if you read this thread carefully, you see the rationale for Israel wanting an Iran without nuclear weapons. There would not be all this loose talk about bombing and killing Iranians if Iran wasn't seeking nuclear weapons to rid the world of the great and little Satans, and instead give up the insane theology and join the larger world community as a peaceful member state.ReplyDelete
Unless something is done, this will end with Israeli and American security greatly reduced, and perhaps millions of dead Israelis, Americans, and Iranians.
ObamaCare to make doc shortage worse -
Massachusetts has plenty of Doctors, and they've had Obama/Romneycare for, what, five years now?Delete
I agree with DR and am no longer buying the bull shit of the lesser of two evils. Neither party is capable of change. They set the rules and compromise between them. If you want to get sick, look at the jobs party hacks get when they leave office.ReplyDelete
Is Corzine in jail yet?
I want both parties destroyed and do not see how that will ever happen if keep picking the less objectionable of the two. There is something seriously wrong with this country. It is undeniable and both parties have brought us here. The American people deserve better. Washington is a cesspool of corruption. Neither party has the will or the power to clean it up. It needs a political wrecking ball with power shifted back to the states.
Power shifted back to the States is good, but the idea of a brand new party not getting immediately corrupted too is, well, there is human nature to be dealt with, and no one has figured that out yet.Delete
None of this stuff matters a whole lot. None of it is ever going to deal with the 'grave and constant' in human life, meaningful relationships cut off by death, sufferings of all sorts immune to any solution.
The best we can hope for is not to make things worse. Alas, with ObamaCare and the rationing of medicine the elderly are going to be looking at constantly going to an early grave, rather than the grave and constant in life.
There is no panacea, and the lesser evil is at least the lesser evil.
Job one: get rid of Obama, somebody said.
What a selfish old bastard you are. You would let children die just so you wouldn't have to wait an extra week to see the doc. Pitiful.Delete
I have to agree with the Deuce and the rat. If you can vote for a national candidate you believe in that’s fine but if you can’t why be hypocritical.
Romney is a cipher, a pig in a poke, you have no idea what he will say or do, he has changed his positions too many times. While you get the feeling some of his answers when off the cuff are honest, he has shown he is neither a tactical nor a strategic thinker and definitely not well versed in diplomacy.
His foreign policy experience seems to be on a par with that of Palin when she was picked as VP; yet, he is still willing to shoot from the hip with his comments and possibly with his actions. His stance on Iran and the military are troubling and he could well lead us into another war with the a-holes in the ME.
On the economy, he has given us nothing so far. His talking points reflect the GOP base that he is trying to win to his side. He offers us nothing and appears willing to offer us the same-old-same-old we have struggled with for the past decade. He is a friend of big business and the banks. He is beholden to them for campaign finance. He appears to be merely another tool in their pockets. His biggest complaint being that government regulations are stifling business' ability to screw the rest of us.
His biggest accomplishments so far, making money and running an Olympics committee. Good grief.
One would like to think that in the decades that have passed since the Sheamus incidence he would have achieved some common sense; yet recent events seems to indicate otherwise.
The man is just another good old boy along the lines of GWB who thinks he is qualified to be president. One more dick in a long line of dicks.
And then you have Obama, a pro-Obama democrat, a liar, a cheat, a dick. He will do whatever it takes to remain president. It is all about him and no one else.
In four years, he has done nothing to seriously improve the economy. His total effort amounts to blaming everyone else for his inability to do the job he was elected for. While failing to bring the economy out of its current funk, he has still managed to put us further trillions in debt.
Right now he is blasting big business, the banks, the rich, people who pay low taxes. Yet, his actions are at odds with his rhetoric. He and Geithner at treasury have the banks back. They receive the same contributions from big business that the GOP does. Merely, add in the big unions. He has failed to do anything about taxes in four years other than add additional tax breaks. Despite the rhetoric, anyone who really thinks much will change after he gets reelected is fooling himself.
On foreign policy, he and Hillary have shown they are clueless. He has proved that like GWB he is willing to lead us into unnecessary war; although, unlike Bush who used a legal process, Obama merely did it using fabrication and euphemisms. Everything he is doing right now wrt Iran is all a charade to get him elected. What he will do after the election is anyone’s guess, but you can be sure that whatever he does is because he feels like it.
Being president, he can take credit for getting OBL and passing Obamacare. However, in the first instance he merely took advantage of a four year effort that happened to culminate during his presidency, and on Obamacare he is taking credit for a disrupted effort that accomplished neither of its stated goals, cost containment nor universal coverage.
Worst of all, he has expanded on GWB's contempt for the rule of law and the constitution. He has expanded presidential power at the expense of the basic human rights of American citizens.
He is a statist and an elitist. He is a Fabian Socialist. Most important, he is an egoist. In a word, he is a dick.
How anyone can vote for the man as the ‘lesser of two evils’ is beyond me.
Dispiriting images of rows of vacant rows at football stadiums, Wimbledon, the aquatic center and beyond has angered Britons who tried and failed to buy tickets in the buildup to the Games having been told they had sold out.ReplyDelete
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/07/the_mystery_of_the_olympics_empty_seats_at_sold_out_venues.html#ixzz2225d9l7R
Romney was perhaps right in his statement about the Olympics.
I heard the question as well as the answer.
There was nothing wrong with the answer other than it being unscripted and honest. It was also true. The response in the UK shows the thin skin of a diminished people who have put a lot of effort and money into a monumental project.
That being said, the statement shows once again that Romney is not ready for prime time. True or not, there was absolutely no reason for Romney to give that answer. There was no real upside no matter what he answered. If the answer was positive, it would have been expected since he is a guest there, mere common courtesy. To start throwing up negatives could only cost him.
Well! We certainly don't want a politician who gives an unscripted true and honest answer to a question. That way lies perdition, and ruffled feathers.Delete
What we need is a scripted teleprompter to answer all the questions, giving a diplomatic false, misleading and soothing answer. And if someone should, say, send the bust of Churchill back to the English, we should later say we really didn't do that, there were two busts of Churchill, etc. it's all a misunderstanding.Delete
Don't be stupid, Bob
How many times have you lied to your wife merely because it was common courtesy? How many times have you told someone they look great when they didn't?
There was zero upside possible from Romney's negative comments. The Olympics were ready to launch. What was the UK going to do, rush out on a day's notice and bring in another 1000 security guards or troops based on Romney's comment that he was troubled? If something did happen, was Romney going to be blamed for saying something courteous and expected about his host and their efforts? Hardly.
The comment was a shot from the hip similar in many ways with his previous comments about supporting the Syrian opposition, based merely on news stories. That's easy for you and me to do but it's hardly the within the purview of a serious politician. The comment was honest but stupid.
I never lie to my wife, and it is a big fault of mine, and has gotten me in big big trouble I can tell you.Delete
Sometimes though I just don't mention stuff.Delete
Lies of Omission.Delete
Sometimes not mentioning something is the best course.
A lesson learned for Mr Romney, no doubt.
Rufus, you've changed on a lot of stuff. It's time for you to flip over and embrace global warming. It would give you a whole new angle of attack against the warmongering coal companies, and big bad oil.ReplyDelete
I just calls'em as I sees'em, Bob.ReplyDelete
Like it or not the middle east is an important issue.ReplyDelete
Syria is a perfect example of why America should be concerned.
Not that anyone in here gives a shit about the 20,000 syrians who have been murdered, because no one really does. But it is an indicator of the syrians (read it as hezbollah and iran also) would do to their own people (they have) let alone israelis, christians or Americans.
It has been well documented that the syrians, Iranians and syrians are on the tip of the point for terrorism. IF Iran went hot with nukes please tell me how that would enhance the USA in the world.
Hang in their WiO. You may yet see US involvement in Syria.
Assad has granted the Kurds autonomy in northern Syria. This is something you should be happy with since you have on numerous occasions suggested that the Kurds be given independence.
The problem is, of course, that Turkey has threatened to retaliate. And Turkey, a NATO country, unlike Israel has treaty obligations with the US. Of course, the PKK and other Kurdish groups have indicated that if Turkey invades Syria, they will fight them.
Then of course you have Russia.
If you're lucky, within a few months you could actually have the major ME conflagration you have been waiting for.
I don't want US involvement in SYRIA... I want the Syrians to murder one another for months and months more..Delete
every tank, anti-tank rocket, .45 round, ak-47 used is one less in the world.
As for the Kurds. I do advocate the Independent Nation of Kurdistan.
As for Turkey? They are about to go over a fiscal cliff, and if they think an invasion of syrian kurdistan is a "easy pickens" well it might just be the undoing of the modern nation of Turkey.
Things are in flux. If you wish a blog post on the pros and cons of a kurdistan? I'd think that would be quite interesting.
Turkey would also make an interesting post... it's debt is exploding, it's secularists are fleeing and the islamists are rising... Hundreds of secular generals are arrested... and not a peep out of the msm....
As for NATO fighting for turkey? don't bet on it...
NATO is under NO obligation if Turkey launches a war of conquest on syria...
But I think it would be VERY interesting to watch...
ALl of this avoids the other issue.... Iran.... oh and the other issue.... Gaza and Hamas and it's new open border with the islamists of cairo!
ph and let's not forget the 100,000 refugees now fleeing to jordan and let's not ignore the gulf states talking about iranian meddling in their nations.. oh yeah don't forget lebanon!
and it's only JULY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
pass the popcorn!!!!!!!!!
may those that have supported, trained and funded the terrorists that have murdered Israelis and Americans have their societies burn to the ground....
The Alawi are not Muslims, they are "their people" to the Muslim Brotherhood nor the Shiite Persians.Delete
There is a tribal/religious dispute/civil war underway in Syria.
Mr Assad's regime is not Islamic. It is neither Sunni or Shite. If Danial Pipes is to be believed, they're mostly Christians.
They may observe some Christian festivals seems to be about the extent of it.Delete
Pipes reported they were more Christian than Muslim.Delete
That is the extent of it, glad we agreed.
"While most publicly traded companies are solidly red or blue, there are four or five major corporations that are complete tossups right now, and any one of them could prove decisive come November," said Nate Silver of The New York Times, noting in particular that Procter & Gamble, a traditional bellwether for the country as a whole, remained a "total wildcard." "Both candidates will have to focus almost exclusively on these swing businesses in order to gain the upper hand."ReplyDelete
"And given how close this race is, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing comes down to undecided executives at Dow Chemical or Disney," Silver continued. "Let's not forget 2000, when Philip Morris International single-handedly put George W. Bush into office."
According to polling data, the president's favorability has fallen steadily among independent-leaning multinationals, a demographic that effectively carried him to victory in 2008. Additionally, the latest figures suggest that even some reliably Democratic strongholds, such as Google, may now be in play, buoying hopes within the Romney camp that the GOP challenger could take the White House with an unexpected victory in a key tech boardroom.
Recognizing the importance of these closely contested conglomerates, both Obama and Romney have made frequent campaign stops at swing corporations in recent weeks and delivered speeches aimed squarely at these pivotal companies’ interests, with both candidates blasting each other as out of touch with the issues that truly matter to real American CEOs.
"As president, I promise to stand up for you in Washington and always put you first," Romney said earlier this week, addressing an audience in the battleground boardroom of Time Warner during a barnstorming tour through the communications sector. "All of you good, hardworking . . . . .
4 or 5 Swing Corporations could Swing the ElectionReplyDelete
Romney's chicken hawk squawk is an embarrassment. The draft-dodging, mealy-mouthed bishop of money should stick with managing his Swiss bank account, the only skill he has. Romney is Bush III. Bush was Cheney's mouthpiece, Romney spews for Koch/Adelson. Would a bishop take money from a casino? Bishop Rmoney would, did and will continue to line his pockets with Adelson payoffs. Most of that dough will end up in the bishop's Swiss account, but nobody's looking right?ReplyDelete
Not to worry, retro, Michelle feels your pain -Delete
but not your jealousy.
American politics at its finestReplyDelete
Romney’s tour of Israel will end Monday after a closed-door fundraiser in which he is set to receive cash from a crowd of mostly Jewish Americans living in Israel. The fundraiser is set to take place in a Jerusalem hotel, and the campaign has not given any reasons as to why the press will be excluded from the event.
Not only do we have illegals voting, we also have foreign cash from who knows who.
You're worried about foreign cash for Romney?Delete
Good Lord, man, Obama was notorious for it last time around. Even rumored he got money from the Chinese but no one followed it out much. After all, it was the Obama who could do no wrong at the time to the msm.
The Chinese already have contributed to the GOP. They used their shill from Macau, Sheldon Adelson, to funnel the money.Delete
Over $10 million so far, I do believe, has flowed to GOP candidates this cycle from that casino in Macau.Delete
Which employs and pays off Chinese officials, which is being investigated for violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
Macau represents a sizable chunk of Mr Adelson's cash flow.
SIEGEL: How big a chunk of Sands business nowadays does Macau represent? Do we know?
BERGMAN: We know it's at least two-thirds of their income. And that's true of almost all the U.S. publicly traded gaming companies that are operating in Macau. It is the mother lode for gaming operations internationally.
That Charlie Chi-com has made such great strides in corrupting the US political system, since they were busted using those monks to channel money to Al Gore, just another chapter in Charlie's ability to climb up the learning curve.Delete
Deuce, wrong again...ReplyDelete
Those are AMERICANS giving money to Romney
Sorry if those AMERICANS CHOOSE to live in Israel.
Now if you had any balls (which you do not) you'd be reporting on the phone banks for Obama that were done illegally from the Gaza strip in the last election... But you won't...
Or you could be talking about the actual foreign cash obama's raising in England but you won't...
Just Jewish money pisses you off...
There are over 150,000 Americans living in Israel who have every right to vote in our election. And they can give money too, if they choose.Delete
What US State are those ex-pats in Israel or London residents of?Delete
Most States do have residency requirements for voting.Delete
Recall the uproar over in conservative circles when Rahm Emanuel went back to Chicago, from DC, and claimed he'd never left Chi-town.
Recall all the Conservative consternation about voter fraud, photo ID's and residency requirements.
Where's th outrage, now?
If you do not live in a State, there is no inherit right to vote in it.Delete
Military service members do not give up residency in their home States when they are in the service of the country. A situation not at all applicable to ex-pats living abroad.
So, while the ex-pat has every right to donate money to political candidates in the US, they may not have a right to vote for them.
Save your hmmm for your normal draw of the race card. You have no clue as to who is donating. How could you.?Delete
Hey deuce let me ask you this...ReplyDelete
Why do you hate the Jews so much?
give it some thought....
A new report from the Union of Concerned Scientists found that the thirteen biggest utilities in California, representing 87 percent of all retail electricity sold in the state, generated 30 percent of their electricity from renewables and large-scale hydropower in 2010.
While renewables are growing fast across California, solar power is set to grow exponentially in the Golden State. PG&E, the state’s largest utility expects solar to jump from one percent of its total renewable portfolio to a staggering 40 percent by 2020.
“We’re about to see solar on a project scale larger than almost anywhere in the world,” said Aaron Johnson of PG&E. “There’s no way to get from here to there (33% RPS) without solar.” A similar jump is expected in Southern California Edison’s territory, which forecasts solar to grow from six percent of its total renewable mix to 40 percent by 2020.
But even as more and more solar comes online, the state’s grid operator is proving . . . . .
Clean Technica (http://s.tt/1jlYr)
The Republican's Real Enemy
The money line from the article.
With so many renewable energy projects in flux due to inconsistent and uncertain incentive policies, California stands as a model for states and the federal government to demonstrate the massive impact an ambitious and steady set of renewable energy policies can have on the economy and environment.
Whether it's California or Germany the key driver in the growth of solar (and other renewables) involve mandates and subsidies. Also, you end up with a two tier rate, a lower one for those residents that can afford to install solar and a higher rate for everyone else.
There is no free lunch and it isn't easy being green.
Renewables advocates aren't looking for a free lunch, Q. They're just trying to make sure there Is a lunch.Delete
Romney on London: 'I Tell People What … I Believe'ReplyDelete
By Emily Friedman
JERUSALEM - Mitt Romney shrugged off the suggestion he would like a do-over on his controversial comments about the London Olympics, stating that he says what he "actually believes."
He added, however, that after two days of events the games' organization has been "picture perfect."
In a wide-ranging interview with ABC News, Romney talked about his bumpy trip through London as well as assessing his prospects for debating President Obama and his moment at the Western Wall.
So far the roughest moment on the Republican presidential candidate's road trip came after he said that some things about the Olympics were "disconcerting." That angered Brits, including the mayor of London.
"You know, I was referring to press reports before I even got to London that suggested that the organizing committee was having some challenges," said Romney.
"I was there for two days," he added. "The games were carried out without a hitch. So, as far as I'm able to tell, despite the challenges as any organizing committee faces, they were able to organize games that have been so far so good, picture perfect."
"I tend to tell people what I actually believe," said Romney when asked if he would want to change his words if he could go back and answer the questions again.
Romney trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.....but we know this, if elected Winston will be back in his proper place in Washington, D.C.
Why is the White House the "proper" place for a statue of a foreign leader?Delete
Union of Concerned Scientists? Please.ReplyDelete
Ruf is now just an inch away from embracing global warming.Delete
Watch for it.
I'm not particularly concerned about global warming, Bob, because, while it's true that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, I understand the logarithmic function of said gas, and I don't think there are enough fossil fuels left to warm the earth a lot, much less "fry it."Delete
"You didn't build that" ad --ReplyDelete
A close look inside an Afghan hospital --ReplyDelete
Mr. Netanyahu invited Mr. Romney and his wife, Ann, to his home for a private dinner and lauded the former Massachusetts governor, who worked with him at the Boston Consulting Group briefly after both men finished business school.ReplyDelete
"We've known each other for many decades, since you were a young man," Mr. Netanyahu told Mr. Romney. "You've been a personal friend of mine and a strong friend of the state of Israel."
Mr. Romney spent much of the day in meetings with officials, but on Monday he is scheduled to be at a fundraiser, where U.S. citizens—including casino owner Sheldon Adelson and New York Jets owner Woody Johnson—will pay at least $50,000 to attend.
I was beginning to buy into global warming there for a time, then found out all the data had been fudged, big time too, so now I haven't a clue. Maybe we are saving ourselves from a coming ice age, who really knows?ReplyDelete
Rumor has it that if Elizabeth Warren is chosen as the Keynote Speaker at the Democratic convention, the Cherokee are going to picket and protest.ReplyDelete
Not all the regime troops managed to get away – around 20 were captured. "We were woken up at three in the morning and told to hurry, we were leaving the camp" said Sergeant Alla Abu Warda, one of the prisoners.ReplyDelete
Their rebel jailers were unimpressed. " You," said one, pointing at 19-year-old Mohammed Mussa Shibli, "are from Al-Bab, you were firing on your own people, civilians, there is no one to blame for that but yourself."
Mustapha Agel recognised another soldier as one who had fired at a mosque where he had gone to pray with his elderly mother: "You will face judgement for all you have done... you will not get away from justice."
“If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”ReplyDelete
President Obama’s statement sure has incited controversy. His opponents, including Mitt Romney, are using it to brand Obama as—at best—out of touch and—at worst—an un-American collectivist.
In a campaign spot Obama says, “What I said was that we need to stand behind them [business people] as America always has. By investing in education, training, roads and bridges, research and technology.”
So who’s right? Let’s go to the videotape. And here’s the transcript of the relevant section (emphasis added; the full speech is here):
But you know what, I’m not going to see us gut the investments that grow our economy to give tax breaks to me or Mr. Romney or folks who don’t need them. So I’m going to reduce the deficit in a balanced way.
Was Obama saying the owner of a business did not build his business or did not build the aforementioned “unbelievable American system” and “roads and bridges”? Under the principle of charity, I give him the benefit of the doubt, but you can decide for yourself.
Angry Singapore woman squeeze boyfriend balls -Delete
In absolute terms, however, smartphones are expected to keep driving Samsung's profit upward for the rest of the year.ReplyDelete
Hanmag Securities analyst Y.B. Oh said he expects the telecom division to post an operating profit of 4.8 trillion won in the current July-to-September period, up from 4.2 trillion won in the just-ended quarter, as sales of Samsung's flagship Galaxy S III smartphone accelerate from the May to July launch and ramp-up.
Analysts forecast Samsung's overall operating profit will exceed 7 trillion won for the current quarter, likely driving the company to another quarterly net profit record.
And then came the killer line. At the end of his sermon, the bishop gave his blessing to all Syria's "civilians, officials and soldiers".ReplyDelete
The "officials", of course, were Bashar's officials. And the soldiers were the regime's soldiers.
But a Lebanese Christian writer got it right when he suggested that Syria's Christians were probably following the advice of Saint Paul (1 Timothy 2:1): "Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made to all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life…" And who but Bashar, for now, is the "authority" in Syria?
Romney demonstrated a lack of tact and diplomatic skills in London.ReplyDelete
He has been more successful with his former Wall Street peer and friend in Israel. Romney and Netanyahu have been friends since they were Wall Street Traders at the Boston Consulting Group in Boston in the 1970's.
Any success Romney has in Israel would show more that Wall Street peers stick together than any real diplomatic skills. Most people can get along with those they have worked with and known for over 30 years.
(Note to self: Romney is backtracking his support for an attack on Iran as being reported in this morning’s news.)
Diplomats build bridges and working relationships with those they don't know and have little in common with.
Romney has yet to demonstrate that skill.
Romney is Palin in disguise!ReplyDelete
Not even close!Delete
You are being too harsh. It is Romney’s turn after all.ReplyDelete
JERUSALEM — In a 6,000-mile reach for evangelical and Jewish voters in the presidential election, presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney said Sunday that the U.S. should “employ any and all measures” to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, arguing that it is the nation’s most pressing national security issue.ReplyDelete
With the Tower of David in the Old City of Jerusalem as a backdrop, Mr. Romney said that “we recognize Israel’s right to defend itself,” but stopped short of reiterating the words of a foreign policy aide who told reporters that the Republican would “respect” a unilateral Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities.
“We must lead the effort to prevent Iran from building and possessing nuclear weapons capability,” Mr. Romney said in a speech in which he focused on the shared interests of the U.S. and Israel.
He said stopping such a development is “a solemn duty and a moral imperative.”
“We should employ any and all measures to dissuade the Iranian regime from its nuclear course, and it is our fervent hope that diplomatic and economic measures will do so. In the final analysis, of course, no option should be excluded. We recognize Israel’s right to defend itself, and that it is right for America to stand with you,” he said. _ WASHINGTON TIMES
…Mr. Romney, on the other hand, has attempted to showcase an acquaintance with “my friend Bibi” going back to the 1970s when they were both consultants at the Boston Consulting Group, though Mr. Netanyahu has downplayed the relationship as distant.ReplyDelete
“We didn’t know each other that well,” he told Time magazine in May. “He was the whiz kid. I was just in the back of the room.”
Mr. Netanyahu on Sunday used Mr. Romney’s well-choreographed visit to argue in a news conference that diplomacy and economic sanctions on Iran have failed.
“All the sanctions and diplomacy so far have not set back the Iranian program by one iota,” he said. “We need a strong and credible military threat coupled with sanctions in order to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.”
In one of his most pointed hints yet of an Israeli strike, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said last week that dealing with a nuclear-armed Iran “would be many times more complex, dangerous and costly, both in terms of human life and resources, than a pre-emptive strike.”
If you would love another war, Romney is your guy.