I know it is late in the game, but I say we replace this Mitt Romney fella with this other guy who kinda looks and sounds like Mitt but gives detailed hard answers to questions. I think I like this fella more.
Mother Jones has released a new video with other Mitt speaking about the foolishness of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. The other Mitt says things like…
“the Palestinians have no interest whatsoever in establishing peace”
and…
If you give the weswt bank to the Palestinians then what? “And I don’t have a map here to look at the geography, but the border between Israel and the West Bank is obviously right there, right next to Tel Aviv, which is the financial capital, the industrial capital of Israel, the center of Israel. It’s—what the border would be? Maybe seven miles from Tel Aviv to what would be the West Bank…”
and…
“There’s just no way.” And so what you do is you say, “You move things along the best way you can.” You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem.”
and he said this on Iran….
If I were Iran, if I were Iran—a crazed fanatic, I’d say let’s get a little fissile material to Hezbollah, have them carry it to Chicago or some other place, and then if anything goes wrong, or America starts acting up, we’ll just say, “Guess what? Unless you stand down, why, we’re going to let off a dirty bomb.” I mean this is where we have—where America could be held up and blackmailed by Iran, by the mullahs, by crazy people. So we really don’t have any option but to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon.
and this on Obama’s foreign policy…
The president’s foreign policy, in my opinion, is formed in part by a perception he has that his magnetism, and his charm, and his persuasiveness is so compelling that he can sit down with people like Putin and Chávez and Ahmadinejad, and that they’ll find that we’re such wonderful people that they’ll go on with us, and they’ll stop doing bad things. And it’s an extraordinarily naive perception.
September 18, 2012 at 1:00 pm
Wow, that wins the "Finding the Silver Lining" Award of the Year. Or maybe even the "Ignoring the 10-Ton Elephant in the Room" Award of the Year. Gee, at least you could say, "I know he's a plutocrat who has open disdain for most of the population, but at least he like embryos, and I love embryos. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it."
September 18, 2012 at 1:04 pm
Governor Romney is a mensch — as a Catholic I suppose I should say "vir," but either way, an admirable man.
September 18, 2012 at 1:04 pm
elblogdelpelon: I think you're thinking of the other Mother Jones video of Romney, the one about 47% of the people don't pay taxes and he isn't concerned about.
September 18, 2012 at 1:06 pm
Yeah, sorry, I'm "off topic". And you people have Stockholm syndrome. Thank you, sir, may I have another.
September 18, 2012 at 2:27 pm
@elblogdelpelon: Not only are you cripplingly ignorant you're impolite about it, too.
September 18, 2012 at 2:38 pm
I'm almost in shock. Romney has actually run to the right after securing the nomination, and has shown a resolve that frankly seemed to have been absent for most of his political career up until this point. I have to agree – this Romney is a lot better than the old Romney.
September 18, 2012 at 2:55 pm
Romney has finally started speaking the truth. I know this will drive the kool-aid drinkers insane. They after all, are in the 47% who have been plugging their ears and humming for the last 4 yeas. Yes, Mr. Romney is right that those who want and receive money from the government are unlikely to vote for someone who will take away the gravy boat. Yes, the Palestinians want what they want when they want it. What they want is Israel gone, forever. Romney is finally speaking the truth. "elblogdelpelon" must be in the 47%. (Yes, your slip is showing!)
September 18, 2012 at 3:01 pm
http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Brooks-Romney-not-making-any-sense-3872791.php
I'll just leave that here. Toodles!
September 18, 2012 at 3:43 pm
Wow – David Brooks. You really nailed the case now.
Or not.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/322409/mitts-gettysburg-moment-michael-walsh
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/322424/social-compact-andrew-c-mccarthy
Sayanora.
September 18, 2012 at 5:53 pm
So, Roney stated the obvious and MJ took it as an admission of pathology on his part? Sounds like a MJ thing to do. No surprises. Only surprised that MJ thought the public would share its hardcore extremist point of view, putting its name on the video so big, as if it were a mainstream news logo.
So, why do the far left think the 47% figure is so wrong? Is it because last year they were thinking they were the 99%?
And now they're implying that Romney doesn't care about 47% of America, because he acknowledges their likely loyalty to the government that thrust them into poverty to begin with but then fed them? Talk about Stockholm syndrome. I care about the government-dependent so much I want to see them become tradespeople, entrepreneurs and inventors, myself.
September 18, 2012 at 5:53 pm
Alright, try this one then:
http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/283265
"There are many things to worry about in this world. The number of people paying income tax isn’t one of them."
We can do this all day until we find one that sticks.
September 18, 2012 at 7:24 pm
Eh, I had a pair of aces and you threw down the five of clubs. But, alas, I suppose we could do this all day, so I will say so long, farewell, auf wiedersehen, goodbye.
September 19, 2012 at 10:48 am
@elblogdepelon: Even if Romney were "a plutocrat who has open disdain for most of the population", Obama is a technocrat who has open disdain for the entire population.
"Meritocracy"—which always means rule by a "wise few"—is the worst possible basis for a system of government. Because it won't really exist, kindly notice that there isn't a political party in the world, no matter how allegedly democratic and egalitarian, that's not dominated by wealthy people with prestigious degrees. But a person, however much he actually lucked-into or outright bought his post, who is ideologically allowed to pretend he earned it, will come to believe that he wouldn't have power if he weren't better than other people. No plutocracy in history has been as brutal as the supposed meritocracies of Neo-Confucianism, if you knew the history of East Asia you'd have much less faith in scholar-ideologues.
Aside from that all "meritocracies" will A) just be plutocratic anyway and B) become spiritual oligarchies whose members think they're better than other people, there is a third flaw. Namely, "meritocracy" implies that one's post is not a gift or a privilege, but a reward and a right. You can abuse, and thereby lose, a privilege, and a gift implies an obligation to the one who gave it. But you can use your wages how you like, and you can't be deprived of your rights.