I’ve been reading more about Romney’s pathetic stabs at sounding statemanlike on foreign policy. At The American Conservative, Daniel Larison takes Romney apart in two posts, Romneyâ€™s VFW Speech and Romney and the Cult of Resolve. Both are well worth reading.
Romney’s VFW speech is a chilling thing. Except for not mentioning September 11, it sounds like it was cribbed from old Dubya talking points. Here is a representative snip:
Like a watchman in the night, we must remain at our post â€“ and keep guard of the freedom that defines and ennobles us, and our friends. In an American Century, we have the strongest economy and the strongest military in the world. In an American Century, we secure peace through our strength. And if by absolute necessity we must employ it, we must wield our strength with resolve. In an American Century, we lead the free world and the free world leads the entire world.
If we do not have the strength or vision to lead, then other powers will take our place, pulling history in a very different direction. A just and peaceful world depends on a strong and confident America. I pledge to you that if I become commander-in-chief, the United States of America will fulfill its duty, and its destiny.
The whole speech is full of that kind of crap which, as Larison says, sounds fine as long as you don’t think about what it really means.
President Obama’s speech was full of specifics about what he has done for veterans and what he still intends to do. Romney’s speech amounted to a tribal aggression display — verbal spear waving and chest-thumping, delivered (quoting Larison) “in that strained, almost incredulous-sounding tone he uses when he wants to convey emotion.”
As Charles Pierce said,
Well, he’ll “use every means necessary to protect us and the region” from Iran, because that’s what all the neocon retreads who are teaching him which end of Persia is up are telling him to say. (New wars!) He also talked tough about Russia, China, and Venezuela. He criticized the president for withdrawing the missile shield from Poland and Czechoslovakia, leaving those two nations naked before the Red Army and the aggressive territorial ambitions of Soviet Premier Malenkov. The rest of the speech was an aria of elaborate dick-waving because, frankly, on these difficult issues, that’s all Romney has. His experience in foreign policy is decidedly limited to finding new places to hide his fortune.
The New York Times also points out that Romney’s speech offered nothing persuasive or even coherent. Parse all you like; any indication of what Romney might actually do regarding foreign policy is not forthcoming. You’d probably get better information about what Romney actually thinks from a ouija board.