Romney running for office in Israel?

[Silcc69]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-would-support-israeli-attack-on-iran-to-stop-nuclear-weapon-capability-adviser-says/2012/07/29/gJQA34luHX_story.html


http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/29/us-usa-campaign-romney-idUSBRE86Q1DO20120729


http://news.yahoo.com/israel-romney-declares-jerusalem-capital-162843104.html

Republicans sure love to kiss these guys ass save Ron Paul.

[NYBURBS]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/2449575/Barack-Obama-uses-Israel-visit-to-reassure-Jewish-voters.html

That is from 2008 when then Sen Obama made a campaign trip there. Unfortunately, both republicans and democrats are like little lap dogs when it comes to the Jews and Israel, so a thread about just the republican candidate going there kinda misses the point.

[trish]

Saw a montage of interviews the other night in which a New Yorker retired and living in Florida expresses her deep misgivings that Obama never visited Israel in all the years he was in office. In the words of Kurt Vonnegut, "So it goes."

[Stavros]

Now that Romneyshambles is on record saying that he would support an Israeli strike on Iran, the questions to ask him are: 1) How does he think Iran will retaliate, and who will its target be? Because, if he has any political credibility -maybe even advisers who know something about the Middle East- he knows that Iran will retaliate. 2) What would he say if asked Does Israel possess nuclear weapons? Probably best not to ask him about Syria on the basis of the two questions posed.

In London Romneyshambles said the UK was probably not prepared for the Olympics; and when meeting Ed Miliband, leader of the opposition Labour Party, he couldn't remember his name and called him 'Mr Leader' which caused much laughter over here. We are not quite North Korea, but maybe Romneyshambles thinks we're headed that way...

[Prospero]

Romney is playing to the wavering Jewish voters in the US who think that Obama has not been sympathetic enough to Netanyahu's right wing israeli agenda. Since the undecided voters will be the ones who decide the election its a canny move.

[flabbybody]

aside from some wackos in my family who think Obama is an anti-semetic Moslem socialist, American Jews vote overwhelmingly Dem in presidential elections. Romney is wasting his time there. and frankly his entire trip is making him look like an a__hole

[Prospero]

Flabby.... I know of plenty of US Jews who will flip if they believe the Republican is a better friend to israel than the Democrat. Sad.

[Stavros]

My impression is that the strategists are crunching numbers in key states and among key voting blocks, but as far as issues go, the election will be won or lost on the economy. If Romneyshambles were to offer the USA an austerity programme lasting until 2020 (Cameron's prediction) with 0.5% growth as a positive goal, he would be laughed all the way to political oblivion -yet this is what the merchants of austerity have delivered in the UK.

[Willie Escalade]

aside from some wackos in my family who think Obama is an anti-semetic Moslem socialist, American Jews vote overwhelmingly Dem in presidential elections. Romney is wasting his time there. and frankly his entire trip is making him look like an a__hole

What's an a__hole? You mean ASSHOLE, right?

I hate cen***ship...

[flabbybody]

yes. wanted to maintain some civility on the political forum.

as far as American Jews who don't like Obama.... The Obama Administration's Middle East policy is essentially a continuation of previous presidents. His top advisors are mostly Jews, many from New York. Jews didn't like Nixon, even though he provided Israel with vital military aid in their conflict with the Arabs.
you just can't win

[broncofan]

There's very little swing here anyways. A minority of Jews vote Republican and the argument that Obama isn't sufficiently pro-Israel has not gained traction. Those Jews who vote Republican didn't need much persuading anyway and I'm not sure their vote was really determined by their stance on Israel like they pretend.

I am not strongly pro-Israel myself except in the sense that I don't wish its destruction, which is often enough to warrant a label of zionist, but I never understood Republicans who are not pro-Israel. I see Israel's aggressive foreign policy as being right up the Republican's alley.

And I agree that neither political party should pander when it comes to Israel, a foreign country. But why should politicians not pander to Jews? Afterall, we are like anyone else their constituents and we tend to live in battleground states. Pander away. We're not a fifth column for taking an interest in political issues, up to and including Middle Eastern politics. It's just that the Republican's claim that Obama is anti-semitic is 100% smear and has no basis.

BTW, LMAO at the statement that Ron Paul doesn't kiss the Israelis' collective ass. He also doesn't kiss the ass of the disabled when he recommends shredding social programs supporting them, nor the ass of the poor, nor the ass of chronically ill despite being a doctor.

[broncofan]

Romney is playing to the wavering Jewish voters in the US who think that Obama has not been sympathetic enough to Netanyahu's right wing israeli agenda. Since the undecided voters will be the ones who decide the election its a canny move.
I think it's a smart move too in the sense that a Republican is unlikely to lose votes by taking such a stance and so it's at least a risk-free position. I just don't know that it wins too many votes, but it's worth a shot. My experience is that the Jewish individuals who vote Republican are not recent converts to the party but ideological perverts and those who vote Democratic aren't wavering over trivial differences such as the Republicans' more full-throated panders.

[nina_lisa]

aside from some wackos in my family who think Obama is an anti-semetic Moslem socialist, American Jews vote overwhelmingly Dem in presidential elections. Romney is wasting his time there. and frankly his entire trip is making him look like an a__hole

I read some where that most american Jews did not speak Hebrew, visited Israel, or even voted in the elections based on the US middle east policy.


when polled about Israel, only 4% of American Jews cited it as their priority in the election

This said Romney might not be targeting Jews voters in the USA with that move, but more the far right, religious people in the bible belt.

[onmyknees]

Now that Romneyshambles is on record saying that he would support an Israeli strike on Iran, the questions to ask him are: 1) How does he think Iran will retaliate, and who will its target be? Because, if he has any political credibility -maybe even advisers who know something about the Middle East- he knows that Iran will retaliate. 2) What would he say if asked Does Israel possess nuclear weapons? Probably best not to ask him about Syria on the basis of the two questions posed.

In London Romneyshambles said the UK was probably not prepared for the Olympics; and when meeting Ed Miliband, leader of the opposition Labour Party, he couldn't remember his name and called him 'Mr Leader' which caused much laughter over here. We are not quite North Korea, but maybe Romneyshambles thinks we're headed that way...

LMAO...well then that certainly disqualifies him to be President. How dare he forget some Brit's name? We don't care what you all think....how much clearer can I make that? Fortunately you have no say in our elections....but you still no comment on Obama's Falklands gaffe....or the returned Churchill bust? But Don't feel bad.....there's plenty of left wngers here that have a highly tuned selective memory as well, so you're certainly among like minded sycophants.
Look....it's a perfectly acceptable position to not agree with Romney on substantive issues , but when you make foolish points about forgetting someone's name, it reveals more about you than it does Romney. Kinda desperate....are we?

It's funny to us how Obama's inexperience never seemed to cross your minds in '08, but it crossed mine......and since we're living with the consequences of that inexperience, and the record after nearly 4 years...many of us ( including Bill Clinton ) refer to him as "The Amateur" , so please don't lecture us on the seriousness of forgetting someone's name. That's asinine.

BTW...here's a fact for you....last month more Americans got approved for disability than got jobs.....so excuse me if I'm not all broke up because Romney forgot some Brit's name. He was probably utterly forgettable anyway.

[Prospero]

And I wonder when dear old Mitt will start to tell us he can see Russia from his house..... he GOP really does host some remarkably daft folk. I think the point about forgetting or not knowing someone's name is about courtesy pinhead. As a diplomat he is one big failure.

You are a despicable ignorant propagandist OMK and your clearly racist hatred of Obama seems to know no bounds.

[Stavros]

LMAO...well then that certainly disqualifies him to be President. How dare he forget some Brit's name? We don't care what you all think....how much clearer can I make that? Fortunately you have no say in our elections....but you still no comment on Obama's Falklands gaffe....or the returned Churchill bust? But Don't feel bad.....there's plenty of left wngers here that have a highly tuned selective memory as well, so you're certainly among like minded sycophants.
Look....it's a perfectly acceptable position to not agree with Romney on substantive issues , but when you make foolish points about forgetting someone's name, it reveals more about you than it does Romney. Kinda desperate....are we?

It's funny to us how Obama's inexperience never seemed to cross your minds in '08, but it crossed mine......and since we're living with the consequences of that inexperience, and the record after nearly 4 years...many of us ( including Bill Clinton ) refer to him as "The Amateur" , so please don't lecture us on the seriousness of forgetting someone's name. That's asinine.

BTW...here's a fact for you....last month more Americans got approved for disability than got jobs.....so excuse me if I'm not all broke up because Romney forgot some Brit's name. He was probably utterly forgettable anyway.

1) In the UK the US has always been suspect on the Falkland Islands/Malvinas, and the record does not show that the Reagan squad was 'full-square' behind Britain from the start, but that Jeanne Kirkpatrick and Alexander Haig were either hostile to the UK or waverers, and that really it was only when they realised that the UK could actually mount a military response and win it that the Reagan Presidency fell into line -and the US benefited more from the British victory than it would have done otherwise.

So Obama called the Malvinas the Maldives, and I bet that hurt; but if you were to ask most Brits to point to the Falklands/Malvinas on the map I wonder how many would find it. 2/10 for drawing attention to this gaffe.
educate yourself:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303816504577313852502105454.html

http://britainandamerica.typepad.com/britain_and_america/2007/04/americas_role_d.html

2) Why should there be a bust of Winston Churchill in the Oval Office? Churchill was an effective leader of the wartime coalition, but he was not a great Prime Minister, constantly interfering in military decisions he was not qualified to make -he stood in the election in 1945 comparing his former coalition colleagues in the Labour Party to the Gestapo, and lost. You need to ask why the bust of any foreign leader is in the Oval Room; I wouldn't put a bust of Churchill in my toilet. If you read Peter Clarke's recent biography you will be introduced to a man of whom it was said: he wrote a history of the cosmos and it was an autobiogaphy; a man who made most of his money from journalism and screwed his publishers several times over; and so on. You don't get brownie points for idolising Churchill -read his opinions on people with skin darker than his own, and feel your own skin crawl with embarrassment.


3) Inexperienced politicians are now becoming the norm -apart from career military men, few politicians in the UK have ever fought in a war, run their own business, been Mayor or Council leader in the provinces before entering Parliament- too many are lawyers, or left university, joined a think-tank biased one way or the other, got a job as a research assistant to an MP, or worked as a researcher for a tv company: they are all jobs, of course, but the real problem is the dominance of the visual media and the need for high-level candidates look good and sound good on tv, sounds pathetic but that is often a clincher -ever since Nixon with five 'o clock shadow looked like a crook when compared to the angelic JFK on tv...

4) The leader of the Labour Party could be the next Prime Minister, his name is Ed Miliband, son of Ralph Miliband, a life-long Trotskyist who wrote a book called Parliamentary Socialism in which he ruthlessly picked apart the origins and development of a party which he argued would never bring socialism to Britain (he was right).

Imagine a contender for the top job in the UK who has never heard of Nancy Pelosi and addresses her as 'Mrs Leader'; imagine the incompetence of a team around a Presidential candidate who can't be bothered to put together a briefing pack with profiles of the people he is scheduled to meet. I have seen it done, in a major corporation where the CEO was given a briefing pack for China with photos and profiles of all the Yu Wi's and Wi Yu's he was going to meet. Or maybe there was a briefing pack and he didn't read it; or he did but is just a bit dim.

Its called Romneyshambles because that's what his trip to Europe and Israel has been.

[Prospero]

Nina Lisa - I think you are right about targeting the votes of the religious right. Many of the furthest out wackos support Israel because they see its continued existence necessary for it to be the setting for Armageddon. You really could not make up how insane the ultra religious are (and i include in this ultra orthodox jews, muslim fundamentalists, Hindu nationalists as well as the wonderful Christian right).

[nina_lisa]

Nina Lisa - I think you are right about targeting the votes of the religious right. Many of the furthest out wackos support Israel because they see its continued existence necessary for it to be the setting for Armageddon.

Exactly, when it comes to Israeli/Jews they are in the middle of the storm, if something happen, so they are not crazy to have 100% of them support the right wing agenda.

Religion does play a huge role in American politics, it is hard for someone to become a president, without going to church, and showing how is a deep believer etc. Even Obama that is hate by the far right, had many times to say he was religious.

[broncofan]

That's right Nina Lisa. Obama has had to point out how religious he is. John Kerry did the same thing in 2004 when he was asked about abortion in a town hall style debate. The woman said that as a Catholic she believed abortion was murder and John Kerry then went on to talk in length about his Catholicism and his understanding of her belief. He never once mentioned the words secularism, or pluralism, and only sort of obliquely referenced these concepts by saying the President must be a representative for everyone (yes, the gdless, the Jews, the Muslims). He basically was afraid to give the woman an honest answer about how it was settled law on the basis of Roe v. Wade.

But I really do not believe that we will have a president who is an atheist for quite some time. In fact, I don't think we will have a non-Christian President in the United States for decades.

I want to point out that the Republicans really are going for a few thousand votes here and there that could make the difference in a close election. The Evangelicals wouldn't vote for a Democratic candidate if he were running against Lucifer. The ultra-Orthodox Jews are definitely decided. As are the real liberals in the Jewish community. But I suppose going back to Trish' post, you have grandparents in Florida who are gullible and easy to scare. Perhaps you have morally confused people who are convinced that by unwaveringly supporting militarism and intransigence the Republicans are pro-Israel.

Though the Democrats do not come out and say it is not in Israel's best interest to be told that they have no obligations with respect to their neighbors. It's not in their best interest for a Presidential candidate to feed the grandest delusions of the Likud party or to tell them that our aid is unconditional. However, if one is a Republican, then you probably believe that since this is how we've handled our own business this is how they should handle theirs. But Democrats don't believe such rigid, aggressive, and uncompromising tactics should be the basis of American foreign policy. So why should it be the blueprint for Israeli foreign relations? Israel faces more immediate threats but that only makes their imperative to do the right thing greater so that they can stand on a moral high ground when they assert their right to defense.

[trish]

Romney claims culture is everything. Jared Diamond replies, "Mitt Romney may become our next president. Will he continue to espouse one-factor explanations for multicausal problems, and fail to understand history and the modern world? If so, he will preside over a declining nation squandering its advantages of location and history. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/02/opinion/mitt-romneys-search-for-simple-answers.html?smid=pl-share

[Odelay]

Fast and Furious describes how Mitt was moving his ass back to the USA after all the embarrassment abroad.