Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Romney on Iran: "Unalloyed Evil"



Former Gov. Mitt Romney condemned the Obama Administration's approach to Iran in a speech today. Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) condemned the Obama Administration's approach toward Iran, a republic he described as "unalloyed evil" and controlled by "ruthless and fanatical" leaders in a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee today in San Diego.

"Stop thinking that a charm offensive will talk the Iranians out of their pursuit of nuclear weapons," said Romney. "It will not." Later in the address, he punctuated that sentiment by noting: "Once an outstretched hand is met with a clenched fist, it becomes a symbol of weakness and impotence."

Romney's speech comes on the same day that negotiators from the United States, France and Russia meet with Iranian officials in Vienna to discuss the country's controversial nuclear program.

Republicans -- and even some Democrats -- have been roundly dismissive of the Obama Administration's approach to Iran since he unveiled a willingness to engage in direct talks with rogue nations during the 2008 presidential campaign.

The American public remains supportive of Obama's approach to Iran, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. Fifty-two percent approved of the job he was doing in regards the country while 39 percent disapproved.

The numbers divide sharply along partisan lines. Seventy-one percent of Democrats approve of Obama's handling of Iraq while 69 percent of Republicans disapprove. Independents are more closely divided with 51 percent offering approval and 41 percent expressing disapproval.

Romney's attack on Obama, then, is smart politics for the former governor who is clearly angling toward a 2012 bid for president. Republicans are broadly skeptical of the foreign policy approach adopted by President Obama and Romney's call to meet force with force in Iran is likely to be well received by a GOP primary electorate.

The former Massachusetts governor isn't the only 2012 GOP hopeful to hammer Obama on foreign policy, however. Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) raised the specter of appeasement toward Europe Russia in the wake of the Obama Administration's decision to suspend a missile defense shield.

By Chris Cillizza  |  October 19, 2009; 1:00 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2012  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Post Endorsement and Creigh Deeds
Next: The Most Important Number in Politics Today

Comments

"And who are we to tell a country they cant have nukes when we are the only country in the world that has used nukes? and used them against an enemy that was going to surrender. Japan had already signaled that they wanted to surrender but what did we do? we went ahead and nuked them not once but twice.
Talk about an arrogant nation"

An example of leftist controlled education as written by an arrogant leftist receiving numerous benefits from said arrogant nation.

Posted by: leapin | October 20, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Mitt Romney is kissing up to AIPAC. What a surprise.

There is something ironic, given the history (e.g. 1953 coup, 25 years under the Shah, SAVAK, etc), of any American official characterizing the Iranian government as one of "unalloyed evil".

The current Iranian government is, in nearly every important way, a direct reaction to what WE helped to do to THEIR country, beginning in the middle of the last century. The "Mullah-tocracy" is a somewhat dingy system, dominated by religious conservatives, but there are far worse regimes in the world (Zimbabwe, Sudan, Burma, to name only a few)... Iran has never launched a war of aggression against another nation, as others have (including us), its soldiers and warships aren't all over the globe, as ours are, and Iran isn't busily trying to tell every other country on the planet what to do, and how to do it, as our officials constantly do. And THEY never subverted OUR government to install a puppet ruler, amenable to THEIR interests, as we did to them. As I said...ironic for our officials to be calling theirs "evil".

Posted by: Iconoblaster | October 20, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Romney is right! Obama should follow the same strategy that George W Bush used to stop the North Koreans from developing nuclear weapons. Obama should bluster and sabre-rattle and refuse to negotiate with them. It did stop North Korea from develpoing nukes, right?

Posted by: AdrickHenry | October 20, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

More than one person here has posted quotes from John Kennedy's saber-rattling, cold war inaugural. More relevant would be Kennedy's later speech at American University after he had been through events like the missile crisis that taught him something of the limits of power and the consequences of large power belligerence: "No government or social system is so evil that its people must be considered as lacking in virtue."

Posted by: DennisCMyers | October 20, 2009 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Romney should know about the unalloyed evil of the Taliban since he represents the American Taliban.
We need to practice our anti-Taliban tactics in Utah since their "government" is just as Fascist, Repressive and anti-American.
Utah is actually proud of their shadow government. Local headlines document the iron fist of Mormon leadership on the Legislature and Federal statistics bear out the very negative social impact of "Mormon" politics.
Romney does have nice teeth though.

Posted by: gregorylowrey | October 20, 2009 12:49 PM | Report abuse

I don't blame Obama because the situation regarding Iran is so complex. The Brit. SS and the CIA are committed to destabilising Iran at whatever cost; the Bush administration has turned 51% of American against Iran by decrying that this country sponsors state 'terrorism' when in fact the CIA/SS is known to support terrorists groups in Iraq and Pakistan with money and training to chip away at circumference of Iran by terrorist acts against the Iranian army.

Thus Obama must use one hand outstretched and the other hand clenched into a fist in his deliberations with the Iranian government.

Until the new head of the CIA starts to boot out the torture element and the American justice system punishes the 'top level' proponents, there will always be chaos and confusion in American foreign policy.

Posted by: coiaorguk | October 20, 2009 11:07 AM | Report abuse

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
This much we pledge—and more." John F. Kennedy.

Obama dithers and obfuscates. Iran will get the bomb unless Israel stops them. Obama is an appeaser of the Neville Chamberlain class and is afraid of the far left morons who never saw an enemy they didn't want to surrender to.

Posted by: mharwick | October 19, 2009 9:00 PM | Report abuse
-------------------------------------------
And the far right a**holes never met an enemy that they wouldn't send YOUR kid to fight. While theirs are safely ensconced in a business school somewhere.

You have a lot of nerve making a statement like that when the last right wing regime, made up almost entirely of draft dodgers and chickenhawks, with a DESERTER in charge, started a war with the wrong country.

Israel will NEVER start a war with Iran. They don't have the balls. They just have people like Kristol to try to get US to do what they're afraid of. And what great allies they are, having spied on us and stolen our weapons secrets.

Remember Romney's statement about his boys looking good in khaki, only NOT Army khaki ? Yeah, we need some more of that, don't we ?

Posted by: dennissuper | October 20, 2009 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Romney knows who will butter his bread with his latest speech.
He's nothing but a blowhard.
If he's stupid enough to instagate a war with the Russians to appease the Jews he needs to be turned completely off by the American population.
If the Iranians were as dangerous as the Jews we would have a problem. Their not attempting to build a defense because the Jews and their allies were sending them olive branches.

Posted by: kimkimminni1 | October 20, 2009 9:39 AM | Report abuse

I am convinced (and I admit that I don't know much) that the superpowers have weaponry that makes nukes a -- weapon of past destruction..

The Irag war was about oil.. the Iran war will be about something else.. we always use this same WMD argument (it always fails to sway the public)...

Posted by: newbeeboy | October 20, 2009 7:08 AM | Report abuse

Second liberal in two days calling out the ongoing idiocy of cf8.

If only Muslims would comply.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 11:46 PM | Report abuse

The only person who can be lower than Bush is one who lends his blind support to AIPAC, without realizing what this has done to the interests of the US. All in favor of the ungreatful nation of Israel. We do not need another religious knott job running for president.

Posted by: bdavoodi1 | October 19, 2009 11:03 PM | Report abuse

Unalloyed evil. Axis of evil. 6 of one. Half a dozen of another. Everyone knows we're not invading Iran, so let the chicken hawks squawk.

With regarding to comments on comments, topping your u with an umlaut so you can get vulgar comments through the filters is juvenile.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | October 19, 2009 10:58 PM | Report abuse

I'm intensely skeptical that Iran *getting* nukes is any worse that North Korea and Pakistan *having* nukes.

Quiz: who was president when the undeniably whack North Korea detonated its first nuke, and what did he do about it?

Posted by: nodebris | October 19, 2009 9:56 PM | Report abuse

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
This much we pledge—and more." John F. Kennedy.

Obama dithers and obfuscates. Iran will get the bomb unless Israel stops them. Obama is an appeaser of the Neville Chamberlain class and is afraid of the far left morons who never saw an enemy they didn't want to surrender to.

Posted by: mharwick | October 19, 2009 9:00 PM | Report abuse

In Obama I trust. Do not think for one minute that Obama would not act decisively and surgically if the situation arose. It is just that he does not act like most Republicans, i.e. get the first punch in then shake hands afterwards.

Posted by: MichaelConte | October 19, 2009 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Superpatriot "Malis" once did a serious psychological analysis of 37thandO's idiotic, deranged posts that shamed him into oblivion.

From the Fix archives (deep underneath the Palm Restaurant), the Strange Case of 37thandO:

"Update: A Study on Motivation and Societal Impact of the Extremist-Obsessive Blog Poster
Subject: “37th” (shortname for subject using approximately 20 different variations of a userID containing the root phrase “37thandO”)

Subject’s postings (through Jan 2, 4:56pET) to the string “Best House Campaigns of 2008” were previously collected and classified in four defined categories. This entry appends subject’s additional posting.

As of Jan 3 10:17aET, 37th owned 14 (+3) of 64 (+6) total entries, raising the subject’s percentage of total postings to this string from 19% to 22%.

Number and percentage of on-topic postings: 0 and 0%

1) Simplistic insult of individuals and groups: 22 (+2)
2) Paranoiac accusations: 6 (+1)
3) Rote repetition of fantasy scenarios 19 (+4)
4) Projection (accusing others of behavior exhibited by the subject) 9 (+2)

Subject has initiated posting to two additional strings. Data currently being collected and analyzed. When sufficient data has been collected results will be posted to those strings.

Posted by: malis | January 3, 2009 2:30 PM"

Posted by: broadwayjoe | October 19, 2009 7:45 PM | Report abuse

And who are we to tell a country they cant have nukes when we are the only country in the world that has used nukes? and used them against an enemy that was going to surrender. Japan had already signaled that they wanted to surrender but what did we do? we went ahead and nuked them not once but twice.
Talk about an arrogant nation.

Posted by: bluebee8 | October 19, 2009 6:51 PM | Report abuse


ahhh, you're just pivoting off my nom de plume'. I'm a cartoon for goodness sake. If you had a spunk load of political acumen you would know this and not getting caught in word snot.

Anger is a gift.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Angriest_Dog_in_the_World

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Gnawed on ... too funny. It must kill you guys on the hard left and right when moderates like Snowe drive the agenda for the country.

Best of luck on that anger management thing :)

Posted by: fjt123 | October 19, 2009 5:32 PM |
=================================

yes it does bother me, but it is not a killer app.... and thank you for your best wishes. May the fleas of 1000 hippies infest your nether regions.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Gnawed on ... too funny. It must kill you guys on the hard left

==

"hard left?"

In the USA?

I call troll.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 5:49 PM | Report abuse

1. Beating and jailing women for not having their hair fully covered. 2. Jailing journalists and shutting down publications that dare to repeat anything but government propaganda (and note how many prisoners unexplicably die in the first few years of incarceration. 3.Spending billions on weapons and influence to destabilize Iraq and Lebanon and support Hamas and Hezbollah. 4. An entire government run by corrupt "religious" leaders who continually pocket millions while the people of Iran suffer. 5. "predictions" that Israel will soon be wiped off the map. 6. Undisclosed non-civilian nuclear weapons program. 7. Largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. 8. A mass purge of university professors who were even slightly suspected of not supporting the regime 100%. And on and on. The people of Iran themselves believe their government to be evil, who are we to disagree? Romney calling Iran evil is hardly newsworthy.

"Once an outstretched hand is met with a clenched fist, it becomes a symbol of weakness and impotence." So true!

Posted by: sam38 | October 19, 2009 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Dude, if you really think that everyone on the right hates their country, then there is something wrong with you because there are alot (most!) of moderate republicans who don't feel this way.

==

I didn't say that. If that's what I meant then I would have taken pains to add "every single last ..."

Rebutting straw men arguments is another of those things I elect to walk away from.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 5:42 PM | Report abuse

============================================
I think you like to get gnawed on like everybody else. Like my
mom used to say, it only hurts when it is true... use it or lose it.
Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 5:18 PM
============================================
Gnawed on ... too funny. It must kill you guys on the hard left and right when moderates like Snowe drive the agenda for the country.

Best of luck on that anger management thing :)

Posted by: fjt123 | October 19, 2009 5:32 PM | Report abuse

"Iran is not going to nuke Israel"

You must be in Imadinnerjacket's inner circle. Does he just publicly state his plans for genocide after you whisper in his ear?

Posted by: leapin | October 19, 2009 5:30 PM | Report abuse

===========================================
Do you really believe ever single republican REALLY believes that?

==

Oh god now he's on the generalization dodge.

Grow up. We already have one autistic trolling here.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 5:10 PM
===========================================
Sadly, this is the first time I've had to go to this level of discussion with someone who is of the democratic persuasion.

Dude, if you really think that everyone on the right hates their country, then there is something wrong with you because there are alot (most!) of moderate republicans who don't feel this way.

I think that Obama is doing a good job. Most people would consider me to be a democrat to say that but I'm not.

If you feel the need to pick a fight with me, then gosh, I don't know ... perhaps the issue is on your side because I get along with people on both sides of the spectrum.

Best of luck.

Posted by: fjt123 | October 19, 2009 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Calling them stupid and saying your job is done seems to me to be short sighted.

==

Fine, you spend six months trying to bring each idiot you run across into the light, and after six months of listening to the idiot recite his slogans and talking points you can move on to the next recalcitrant.

Me, I'd rather ration my time a little better than that.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 5:20 PM | Report abuse

I think you like to get gnawed on like everybody else. Like my
mom used to say, it only hurts when it is true... use it or lose it.
On another thread, JakeD is saying he is leaving the blogs forever if
anyone calls him a name. Now THAT is childish. BTW, when you
get home you may not recognize your wife, I shave her back. It'll
grow back.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Attention Roz Mazer, John Brennan, Jim Jones, Eric Holder, Robert Gates, Janet Napolitano, Hillary Clinton, John Panetta, Robert Mueller:

HOW U.S. SPY OPS CENSOR WEB POLITICAL SPEECH

• Note the last (most recent) comment to this article

http://groups.poynter.org/members/blog_view.asp?id=190108&post=77511


JUVENILE/VENAL POLITICAL BLOG-SPAMMING TO WA-PO, POLITICO, DAILYKOS: SPAWN OF TAXPAYER-FUNDED 'PSY OP'?

http://nowpublic.com/world/govt-fusion-center-spying-pretext-harass-and-censor

Posted by: scrivener50 | October 19, 2009 5:17 PM | Report abuse

That said, how do you convince them of another position unless you listen to them and point out the foolishness of their philosophy?

==

You must be really new at this.

Short answer: when you discover someone as brainless as a creationist you walk away. You don't waste your time trying to bring the electively stupid into the fold of the educated and intelligent.

Ditto for every other fetalization like supply-side economics or pre-emptive invasion. If people have the information they need to make rational judgments but elect to ignore the information and make whatever dumb judgments they prefer instead, you walk away.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 5:16 PM | Report abuse


===========================================
It's good to listen to other people's point of view.

==

Always? Want to take back that move?

If you are willing to sit for two hours and listen to some illiterate Creationist explain how Darwin's tryin' t'make monkey outa yeeeew, then you aren't being open-minded, you are unable to manage your time productively.

Whatever point you're trying to make with this series of posts, I think you've made as much of it as you're going to.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 4:58 PM
===========================================
I think creationist are foolish and narrow minded.

That said, how do you convince them of another position unless you listen to them and point out the foolishness of their philosophy? Calling them stupid and saying your job is done seems to me to be short sighted.

Posted by: fjt123 | October 19, 2009 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Do you really believe ever single republican REALLY believes that?

==

Oh god now he's on the generalization dodge.

Grow up. We already have one autistic trolling here.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

When the NeoCom Statists have a better solution than let Iran nuke Israel

==

Iran is not going to nuke Israel. Israel needs some credible opposition because it behaves badly and insists of provoking the conflicts in the Middle East by building settlements on other peoples' land. I don't know why we refer to Israel as an ally, they cause us a lot of political grief and don't provide any benefit.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 5:09 PM | Report abuse

=============================================
Republicans are openly hoping for calamity to befall the USA as a way back to power, if you want to try to call that "love of country" then I think I'll apply PgUp to you too.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 4:53 PM
=============================================
Do you really believe ever single republican REALLY believes that? I don't. I'm sure that there are some true Republican fools who believe that but to paint every republican this way hits me as being, well, foolish. I've spoken to my republican friends and seen the indecision when you bring up a good point; they can be convinced if you treat them with respect.

I fully stand behind my earlier three points about people who insult one another.

1) They have a poor argument and by insulting people they try to make their point through aggression.
2) They are angry small people who feel better when they put other down. It's all about them ... not trying to convince other of their point.
3) They are cynical people that are trying to manipulate others away from the point of the discussion.

The funny thing is that right now most people would consider me to hold Democrat positions. Back in the 80's most poeple would have called me a republican. My positions have not changed ... it's the politics around me that have changed ... when the country moves hard to the right I look like a democrate, when the country moves hard to the left I look like a republican.

Posted by: fjt123 | October 19, 2009 5:07 PM | Report abuse

calamity to befall the USA as a way back to power

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>...

too late. did you miss the last election?

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

When the NeoCom Statists have a better solution than let Iran nuke Israel and then we will deal with the resulting chaos and shutoff of the Middle East oil supply...then people will then view the NeoComs as something more than a sinking ship.

Posted by: leapin | October 19, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Just another right wing war monger...shoot first, ask questions later.

==

He thinks he can spend the next 2.5 years riling up the GOP base with hate speech and then at the last minute try to come off as a moderate and win the general election.

Needless to say, all his troglodyte rhetoric will be recorded and played back later when Romney tries to sound like a real candidate.

Maybe he should stick to the "businessman" shtick. The GOP eats that crap up.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 5:01 PM | Report abuse

It's good to listen to other people's point of view.

==

Always? Want to take back that move?

If you are willing to sit for two hours and listen to some illiterate Creationist explain how Darwin's tryin' t'make monkey outa yeeeew, then you aren't being open-minded, you are unable to manage your time productively.

Whatever point you're trying to make with this series of posts, I think you've made as much of it as you're going to.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 4:58 PM | Report abuse

===========================================
Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 4:45 PM
eat my shorts.... I grew up on Beevis and Butthead and I'm a
better carbon unit than you because of it. The future... we will
be able to assemble in 2nd Life and throw rotten vegetables at
each other as we stand on our soapboxes. Freedom of
expression. If you are a maroon, why can't I call you a maroon?
===========================================
You can call me whatever you want but I think you only prove my point.

Grow up angriestdogintheworld ... or have you already became an adult and this is the best you can do.

One of the things that happen when you become an adult is that you realize you don't have all the answers. Other people often have key points that you never though of. It's good to listen to other people's point of view.

I think Beevis and butthead are funny ... but I don't live my life that way. Only someone who never figured out the lessons that the rest of us learned in 2nd grade keep going back to that place ...

Growup and join the rest of the adult world.

Posted by: fjt123 | October 19, 2009 4:55 PM | Report abuse

There is alot of animosity on both sides Republicans and Democrats. As an independent, I truly believe that both sides love their country

==

This middle of the road crap gets real old. "Both sides do it" is not sagacity or fairness, it's misguided naïvite.

Republicans are openly hoping for calamity to befall the USA as a way back to power, if you want to try to call that "love of country" then I think I'll apply PgUp to you too.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Just another right wing war monger...shoot first, ask questions later.

Posted by: pumor | October 19, 2009 4:52 PM | Report abuse

As a former governor and a failed presidential candidate, Mr. Romney has no responsibilities, and therefore has the luxury of speaking irresponsibly.

Thankfully, US international relations are in the hands of people with a little more sophistication than to call our adversaries "evil" in the press.

Posted by: mikenmidland | October 19, 2009 4:51 PM | Report abuse

There is alot of animosity on both sides Republicans and Democrats. As an independent, I truly believe that both sides love their country, they simply need to figure out how to have a civil debate else the people who win are those who hate the US and those who want to play us off against each other (think big business though I'm pretty pro business in my own way).

If people are being jerks through nasty comments then simply make your point and then get back onto your point and make it well.

As and independent, I sincerely believe that both sides have excellent points to be made. Call out the other side and make your counter point. People will read your posts and make their own decision.

Posted by: fjt123 | October 19, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse


angriestdogintheworld, again, name calling reminds people of when they where in second grade. Most people have grown past that point ... perhaps you have not.

Grow up. Make your point - but make it with respect. You want to be a jerk ... do it somewhere else on someone else's time.

Posted by: fjt123 | October 19, 2009 4:32 PM
====================================

eat my shorts.... I grew up on Beevis and Butthead and I'm a
better carbon unit than you because of it. The future... we will
be able to assemble in 2nd Life and throw rotten vegetables at
each other as we stand on our soapboxes. Freedom of
expression. If you are a maroon, why can't I call you a maroon?
The problem is the moderator choosing one name caller over
another. Anyway, below I've pasted a link to the future....
obviously we will have to pay for the right to kick the poo out of
each other, but.... well, I'd pay.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PROCT1JpZnA

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse

angriestdogintheworld, again, name calling reminds people of when they where in second grade. Most people have grown past that point ... perhaps you have not.

Grow up. Make your point - but make it with respect. You want to be a jerk ... do it somewhere else on someone else's time.

==

"name calling" isn't the problem here, never was.

The problem here is "trolling."

Snowbama is just dripping with hate and venom and seems unable to contain himself. JakeD does the same six posts all day long, over and over.

The problem is that discussions have to take place in the interstices of the volumes of troll posts.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Romney seems to forget Bush was president for eight years and did not resort to force against Iran. Obama has been president for less than a year. Romney is not using "smart politics,' most people are intelligent enough to know the Bush regime did not use force, so his speech will be correctly dismissed by most people as pandering to the Israeli lobby in this country.

Romney shows he lacks any more than a simplistic, right-wing perspective on the world, especially the complicated Middle East. Right wingers should nominate Romney in 2012 for president. Obama will easily win with at least 55% of the popular vote.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | October 19, 2009 4:35 PM | Report abuse

===========================================
Name calling as part of a retort is the revealing pivot most times as biting around the edges of political tea reading is nothing more than a Weegie board.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 4:13 PM
===========================================
angriestdogintheworld, again, name calling reminds people of when they where in second grade. Most people have grown past that point ... perhaps you have not.

Grow up. Make your point - but make it with respect. You want to be a jerk ... do it somewhere else on someone else's time.

Posted by: fjt123 | October 19, 2009 4:32 PM | Report abuse


Here is why CC, I think your analysis of Romney's position here is wrong.

"Iran, a republic he described as "unalloyed evil"

Sure it's obvious. Sure anyone on the right running for Prez will take this Belligerent Cowboy approach, because the base eats it up. They, like Mao, beleive that all power comes from the barrel of a gun, and that violence is the 'solution' to every problem.

But once, you get into the general, you have this:

"The American public remains supportive of Obama's approach to Iran, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. Fifty-two percent approved of the job he was doing in regards the country while 39 percent disapproved."

Romney is evoking Bush II, using almost the same words, and look how popular he is. Romney is saying the entire country of Iran is evil -- who really beleives that? Most americans know that most Iranians are friendly toward the US. And once you say, a whole country is 'evil' aren't you suggesting this 'evil' should be destroyed?

Do you really think americans as a whole want to get into yet another war? I seriously doubt it.

Posted by: drindl | October 19, 2009 3:59 PM
=====================================

Bush the Jr. did not have magic underwear...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

I think Romney's point makes good sense from his point of view ... but as an independent, I'm willing to give Obama a chance. We've had 8 years of aggressive name calling with the Bush administration and it made no progress.

Do I think Obama will be able to shut down the Iranian Nuclear program ... no I actually don't. If Iran is dead set focused on getting nukes they will get them at some point - the key is to make it so painful that they won't want to keep them. The only way to truely stop Iran from Nukes is to go to war with them and that is a poor option.

I would like to point out that the US has survived and in the end won with much graver threats with a nuclear armed USSR during the cold war.

I think there is good value in going down the path Obama has chosen. What Obama is doing is strengthening our relationship with key allies in Europe and shows the rest of the world that the US are reasonable people. Yes the Iranians are fools and dangerous ... and that is why we need to get countries like the USSR and China on board as best we can. Once these countries see their best interest served by confronting Iran, they will squash that miserable government with sanctions.

BTW, good post drindl :)

Posted by: fjt123 | October 19, 2009 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Cillizza, the problem is not the name calling it is you taking sides. I semi-enjoy JakeD's monotone inanimate zingers and G & T's counter or new pivot. Let it go. It does not inhibit any regular posters, that is just ridiculous. Name calling as part of a retort is the revealing pivot most times as biting around the edges of political tea reading is nothing more than a Weegie board. Nobama and a few others have become so predictable that the only interesting part of their post is a personal attack on another poster. But when you silence one side you do inhibit because I'm not part of your repuglican fan base so it makes me read your junk with a jaundiced eye. No, I did not steal that from Shakesphere, the Vagina Monologues actually. Maybe it was yeast infection eye. See, we can't help it.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Neda was evil too, they are all evildoers.
Mitt can be The Decider, just look at his his finger and the mock-serious expression on his face. Also, I want that touch of grey when I get to be his age. It looks very intelligent or something, but I think I better get out the Just for Men, just like Mitt.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 19, 2009 4:10 PM | Report abuse

So Mitt Romney is accusing the American people of supporting evil? Way to get elected!

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | October 19, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Here is why CC, I think your analysis of Romney's position here is wrong.

"Iran, a republic he described as "unalloyed evil"

Sure it's obvious. Sure anyone on the right running for Prez will take this Belligerent Cowboy approach, because the base eats it up. They, like Mao, beleive that all power comes from the barrel of a gun, and that violence is the 'solution' to every problem.

But once, you get into the general, you have this:

"The American public remains supportive of Obama's approach to Iran, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. Fifty-two percent approved of the job he was doing in regards the country while 39 percent disapproved."

Romney is evoking Bush II, using almost the same words, and look how popular he is. Romney is saying the entire country of Iran is evil -- who really beleives that? Most americans know that most Iranians are friendly toward the US. And once you say, a whole country is 'evil' aren't you suggesting this 'evil' should be destroyed?

Do you really think americans as a whole want to get into yet another war? I seriously doubt it.

Posted by: drindl | October 19, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

I keep forgetting one big strategy for Liberals is to keep changing names, keep changing definitions, keep flip flopping around.

I don't think you are fooling anyone any more.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Moslem bashing at AIPAC, well that sure isn't original.

Questioning Obama's sexuality? (everyone knows what an outstretched hand met by a FIST means, right Mitt? Too obvious; whats next, Obama accused of having a wide stance?). How about Obama is not black enough, now that is original. No wait Andrew Young did that first, and he threw in the small # (I won't say paucity) of black women he did too.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 19, 2009 3:45 PM | Report abuse

===========================================
The name-calling....please.

Although this plea may well be in vain (since past pleas have been roundly ignored), I will make it once again.

PLEASE do not resort to name-calling and thread-jacking. It robs people who would like to engage in an on-topic discussion from participating.

"koolkat_1960", "drindl", "snowbama", and "GoldAndTanzanite" this means you.

Posted by: Chris_Cillizza | October 19,
=============================================
Funny, this reminds me of second grader with some folks taking on the role of the class jerks/punks ... didn't your mothers teach you better? Or did you simply grow up to be hoodlums/jerks as an adult.

Why do some resort to name calling. It certainly can't be because they are trying to influence others. Don't know about you but I get turned off by folks even if they have a good point when they can't act like an adult.

I think it has to do with one of three things:
1) They have a poor argument and by insulting people they try to make their point through aggression.
2) They are angry small people who feel better when they put other down. It's all about them ... not trying to convince other of their point.
3) They are cynical people that are trying to manipulate others away from the point of the discussion.

Too bad we don't get to find out more about these people, I suspect they have a hidden agenda. Also, too bad we don't have an ingore button. Love to turn some of these cheezy people off. :)

Posted by: fjt123 | October 19, 2009 3:42 PM | Report abuse

So what is Romney going to run on?

"I'm a businessman! Bottom line!"

And center his tie to the screaming of gooper fans excited into delirium by his suit.

And then he can brag about all the jobs he's managed to ship offshore and promise to ship a lot more.

Winning ticket!!

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 3:39 PM | Report abuse

You need a better dictionary.

"Paucity" refers to a "fortuitous lack," not a "detrimental lack."

A paucity of new flu infections, a lack of flu vaccine.

Not that I expect much in the way of correct grammar from a guy in a mental hospital.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 3:37 PM | Report abuse

pau⋅ci⋅ty  /ˈpɔsɪti/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [paw-si-tee] Show IPA
Use paucity in a Sentence
See web results for paucity
See images of paucity
–noun 1. smallness of quantity; scarcity; scantiness: a country with a paucity of resources.
2. smallness or insufficiency of number; fewness.


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

Origin:
1375–1425; late ME paucite < L paucitās fewness, deriv. of paucus few; see -ity

do you ever get tired of provably not knowing anything???? you have not gotten one dictionary definition correct on this blog. If it were possible, I would say you have made more of a fool of yourself.

your paucity of intellect is obvious.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

He also looks closely at Bill Ayers' two public statements averring (supposedly in jest) his authorship. His dissection of the journalistic commentary on the statements is sophisticated and compelling.
==================================

good Lord..., not sure it Acorns or astroturds, but you got something caught in your Ayers.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Fraud is ultimately revealed, showing the paucity of liberal accomplishment.

==

You need to look up "paucity," it doesn't mean what you think it does

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Ohh, and everyone of us should be concerned about the "fallout" of dropping a crude nuclear bunker buster nuke smack dab centered in the most earthquake prone region on the planet (next door to China and Russia no less. If the Ruskies were intimating that they would like to drop such a nuke on the San Andreas fault would we want even an economic impact statement? Maybe an environmental impact statement? Anyway, Isreal will say they felt threatened but it will probably be to late for the planet.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 3:23 PM | Report abuse

He also looks closely at Bill Ayers' two public statements averring (supposedly in jest) his authorship. His dissection of the journalistic commentary on the statements is sophisticated and compelling.


This is an important essay in the further development of the biggest literary scandal in history.


Also notable today is a column from the brilliant writer Spengler in Asia Times, which in passing mentions:


It now seems well established that his autobiography Dreams of My Father was ghost-written by the former Weatherman Bill Ayers, now a professor of education in Chicago. Long rumored, this allegation is confirmed by celebrity journalist Christopher Anderson in his new book, Barack and Michelle: Portrait of an American Marriage. Jack Cashill at the American Thinker has been on this trail for a year, comparing Ayers' attributed writing to Dreams, and in my view made a strong case even before Anderson's book appeared. Ayers never repudiated the bombs he planted in public buildings during the 1960s.


Ridicule is the current strategy to obscure the strong evidence that the president lied about writing his own autobiographical book. But the questions will not go away as long as serious people like Jack Cashill, Spengler and Tom Lipscomb have the courage to speak truth to power. Barack Obama supplies daily confirmation that he cannot live up to the image manufactured for him.


Fraud is ultimately revealed, showing the paucity of liberal accomplishment.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 3:18 PM | Report abuse

I'd like to remind everyone that although the world press has focused on so-called "enriched uranium".. it is actually the trigger that should be the pivot, or even a missil with the ability to go where you point it. Otherwize it is a up and down mortar with the potential of a "dirty" bomb. The trigger would need to implode simultaneously to initiate a reaction, timed just above the place where you want it to go off. The Iranians do not have anything close to that ability. And until they join the west are not going to be able to get near technology that sophisticated. Again, Weapons of Mass Distraction is being used to disable any criticism of the zionist Apartheid regime.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 3:17 PM | Report abuse

AP - many U.S. jobs lost during the recession may be gone forever and a weak employment market could linger for years.


not the CHANGE you were HOPING for? blame Liberal leadership

==

Liberal leadership wasn't responsible for this mess, and everyone but you teabaggers knows it

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Well to be serious for the first time today, the next Republican President is neither pushing foreign policy on Facebook nor on AIPAC. S/he will be rising through the ranks at the local level, if and only if s/he has novel ideas on how to grow living wage jobs.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 19, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

AP - The Obama administration was elated a month ago when the Russian president said sanctions against Iran for its nuclear program could become "inevitable." Washington's reaction may have been significantly premature.


More example of failed Liberal "leadership".

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

AP - many U.S. jobs lost during the recession may be gone forever and a weak employment market could linger for years.


not the CHANGE you were HOPING for? blame Liberal leadership. look where they are taking us.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 3:09 PM | Report abuse

obviously we better start paying attention to the Rominator before he puts one of his kids in a "airship".

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 3:08 PM | Report abuse

But off the national media radar, there are plenty of other smaller elections -- special elections for state legislative seats -- which already show serious political problems for the Democrats.


State/District
GOP Vote 11/08
GOP Vote 2009 Special Election
Change

Maine House (89)
33%
66%
GOP +33%

New Hampshire Senate (3)
50%
68%
GOP +18%

South. Carolina House (30)
45%
54%
GOP +9%

New Hampshire House (4)
49%
62%
GOP +13%

Pennsylvania House (124)
68%
70%
GOP + 2%

Alabama Senate (7)
34%
67%
GOP +33%

Delaware Senate (19)
0%
63%
GOP +63%

Florida Senate (28)
62%
77%
GOP +15%

Tennessee House (62)
45%
67%
GOP +22%

Oklahoma House (65)
0%
56%
GOP +56%

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Hooray. Now that Iran is 100% pure Evil, we can drop nukes and murder every man, woman, child and evil little baby in the country. And we'll be doing Good!! And God will reward us with eternal life and send those wicked Iranian girls and boys to hell! Yay!

Posted by: bigbrother1 | October 19, 2009 3:00 PM | Report abuse

People, don't make CC use the word roundly again.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 19, 2009 3:00 PM | Report abuse

says the perv who rents a family from the schoolyard.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Is an outstreched index finger a symbol of a desire to prove something about one's manhood by blowing up some rag heads and sand fleas?

I wonder if Mitt knows McSame/Palin already reran the Bush/Cheney ticket.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 19, 2009 2:55 PM | Report abuse

In rock paper scissors, the outstretched hand is a winner. I just don't get Republican sexuality.

==

What's to get? The party is loaded with closet cases defiantly screaming their reverence for "the family."

Anyone who lives in real life knows that families are overrated.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Consider the incumbent:

Obama-Osama

We can consider what's left amongst the rubble after four years of extreme anti-americanism.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Palin-Romney 2012!!!

==

This is a wet dream ticket for everyone who wants to see the GOP remain out of power.

Oh yes bring it OWN

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Ok back on topic.

When Mitt talks about battling impotence, I get all squishy. Oooohh Mitt, you are so virile (swoon).

"Once an outstretched hand is met with a clenched fist, it becomes a symbol of weakness and impotence."

There is an ancient tradition of conflating martial symbols and male sexuality (the obelisk, obviously), but the outstretched hand = impotency, when met with a clenched fist? Hmmm.

Why, because the fist might have Cialis inside? Fists look more like a "nob"? Karate chops are for girly men?
In rock paper scissors, the outstretched hand is a winner. I just don't get Republican sexuality.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 19, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

the limits of liberal intelligence and expression are easily reached.

==

says the mental patient whose palette is limited to calling me a pedophile

go bother the nurses, zouk, they get paid to take it

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

I like name calling... does not bother me. These posts are made to be read and when someone retorts AND calls you names, you know you have had your beads read.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

comments that include profanity or personal attacks >>>>>

just the same recycled sh*t. drivl


like fück it means me. CF8

the limits of liberal intelligence and expression are easily reached.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 2:39 PM | Report abuse


Palin-Romney 2012!!!

Posted by: JakeD | October 19, 2009 1:18 PM
|===============================

Little early but as a former repuglican I support your Moose and Squirrel ticket.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Well it's pretty clear how Romney plans to play it .. rerun of 2004 and 2008, running as George Allen, playing to the 19-percenters.

These guys never learn.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

CC - can't you tell by now that drivl and MoldandManzImnot are much better qualified to run your blog than you are. they see the enemy that you don't. they understand the stakes. they are able to process information that you are missing. they can ignore their own idiotic posts.

It is time for you to hand over the reigns to the two looniest, most vicious posters you have. Any fool can see it. As you are now aware, the fools indeed do see it.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 2:32 PM | Report abuse

someone didn't get their Viet boy fix.

==

barn's over there, champ

Why don't you post about your fellow patients in D ward you probably know more about them from daily group meeting than you know about anyone here.

Hey, Chris, pay attention to who's doing to disruption here.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 2:31 PM | Report abuse

someone didn't get their Viet boy fix.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

CC, I started this thread with a straight post, on topic. You will notice that what folowed was a barrage of insults from 'snowbama/kingofzouk'. You will notice how often he posts, and how every post is off topic.

And notice his response to you.

If you look at threads early in the morning before he comes on, you will notice there are no such problems. But when he starts insulting people, they will fight back.

If you really want discussion, you might want to think about banning the one who dominates/destroys every thread.

Posted by: drindl | October 19, 2009 2:26 PM | Report abuse

The name-calling....please.

Although this plea may well be in vain (since past pleas have been roundly ignored), I will make it once again.

PLEASE do not resort to name-calling and thread-jacking. It robs people who would like to engage in an on-topic discussion from participating.

"koolkat_1960", "drindl", "snowbama", and "GoldAndTanzanite" this means you.

==

like fück it means me.

You're not paying attention, Chris.

You have JakeD and snowbama trolling this place to complete sh|t and you're calling out as offending someone who barely even posts here anymore.

Until you ban JakeD and snowbama this forum is going to be crap and your scolds are not to be taken seriously. To call out me and drindl and not Jake? Total garbage.

And quit it with the "name calling" crap. I'm not doing it a dn it ISN'T THE ISSUE HERE.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Sham Wow.... got hos magic underwear all in a bunch over another religion now. Now if it was the Muslims that set-up Vegas as a gambling and prostitution Mecca, he might actually have something. But... it was the Mormans.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | October 19, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

PLEASE do not resort to name-calling and thread-jacking.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

that essentially eliminates the three stooges as posters here.

Imagine that they post something about how well Obama is doing, how effective his policies are, how he is winning the war, fixing the economy, passing legislation, his popularity soaring?????

without insult, crickets ensue. Watch.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Note the applause and laughter at the president's petulant, petty, and infantile bad-faith insults against his critics. "That's a socialist mop." Really, Mr. President?

No wonder Ken Duberstein and Ted Sorenson are worried that the president cannot move beyond campaign mode.

sound familiar?

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

The name-calling....please.

Although this plea may well be in vain (since past pleas have been roundly ignored), I will make it once again.

PLEASE do not resort to name-calling and thread-jacking. It robs people who would like to engage in an on-topic discussion from participating.

"koolkat_1960", "drindl", "snowbama", and "GoldAndTanzanite" this means you.

Posted by: Chris_Cillizza | October 19, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

LOL -- laugh of the day. The guy whose only life is posting 200 times a day on this board calls himself 'normal.'

Posted by: drindl | October 19, 2009 2:00 PM | Report abuse

So what would Mitt have us do that has not already been tried by Bush and Obama

Posted by: ModerateVoter | October 19, 2009 1:59 PM | Report abuse

CC - looks like the loons have taken over again. between drivl, who never met an intelligent idea she didn't dismiss, and Loud and dumb and Moldy notaman, you seem to have struck liberal gold - all mouth and no thought.

As you see, all the normal bloggers have fled as a result.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Well I see the Two Stooges are typing frantically and this thread is now sewage.

IN the Rightwing Lexicon/Alphabet Primer

'L" is for "Liberal"

Repeat, children, repeat.

Posted by: drindl | October 19, 2009 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Is drivl still sore about being left off the moobat troll of all time list, for which she is immenently qualified?

==

Why don't you spend a little less time posting this BS about other posters that nobody wants to read.

Queue JakeD taking "issue" with "nobody" in another play of his autism troll.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 1:52 PM | Report abuse

"Pure evil," the simplemindedness of a third grader.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite


Exploring the outer reaches of liberal intellectual acumen.

yap, yap, yap.
the result of liberal "nuance":

Vienna - Iran signaled ahead of international talks Monday that it will not meet Western demands for a deal that would move most of its enriched uranium out of the country, delaying its nuclear enrichment program. (Snip) Iran's state-run Press TV cited unnamed officials in Teheran as saying the Islamic Republic was looking to hold on to its low-enriched uranium and buying what it needed for the Teheran reactor abroad.

Maybe another apology or surrender will have different results?

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 1:51 PM | Report abuse

"Pure evil," the simplemindedness of a third grader.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 1:44 PM | Report abuse

aka Loud and Dumb, which was rather precise.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 1:42 PM | Report abuse

And the sewage spews. now every known kook is present. IQ average value dropping like a stone.

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 1:41 PM | Report abuse

"do all Liberals change their names about every two years."

That's pretty funny coming from the Idiot king_of_zouk now posting as snowbama.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 19, 2009 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Is drivl still sore about being left off the moobat troll of all time list, for which she is immenently qualified?

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Why should anyone pay attention to Mitt Romney?

He'll say anything to get attention.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | October 19, 2009 1:38 PM | Report abuse

do all Liberals change their names about every two years.

CF8, Loud and dumb and claudia long have all come back as a different person. Is it the voices inside your head?

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 1:37 PM | Report abuse

WE all know that koolkat. He also has no life but this board. But then, who would want to talk to him in real life?

Posted by: drindl | October 19, 2009 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Joked must be tripping on some incredible LSD today. Not only does he see Palin take the presidential oath of office in 2013, he sees Romney as agreeing to play second banana to her.

Joked is seriously deranged.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 19, 2009 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Wow, insightful commentary from Willard "Mittens" Romney (R-Dog on Roof).

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 19, 2009 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Palin-Romney 2012!!!

Posted by: JakeD | October 19, 2009 1:18 PM | Report abuse

finally someone said the truth. when will the ditherer get a clue?

Posted by: snowbama | October 19, 2009 1:08 PM | Report abuse

"Romney's attack on Obama, then, is smart politics for the former governor who is clearly angling toward a 2012 bid for president. "

No, it's just a cheesy redux of Bush II 'Axis of Evil.' Yawn. Please. These cheap shots, this neocon blustering cowboy approach is just the same recycled sh*t. When a single R has some actual solution to an actual problem rather than just 'nuke em,' now, that would be worth hearing.

But we aren't hearing it, and we won't.

Posted by: drindl | October 19, 2009 1:07 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company