Maybe if we pretend the war in Iraq doesn’t exist, it will go away
Mitt Romney is delivering a major policy speech today in which the former governor will present his “Comprehensive Strategy For Winning The War On Terror.” His campaign leaked a 600-word excerpt from the speech, but it didn’t include a single reference to the war in Iraq. What’s more, Romney’s stump speech reportedly ignores Iraq altogether.
Iraq is the most pressing issue for U.S. policy makers, it’s the number one issue on the minds of Americans, it is sure to be the biggest challenge facing the next president, and Mitt Romney doesn’t want to talk about it?
As it turns out, Romney’s not the only top-tier Republican candidate avoiding any discussion of the war like the plague. Josh Marshall put together a fascinating video piece showing Rudy Giuliani — signature issue: national security — going to almost comical lengths to avoid discussing Iraq policy.
The fact that Giuliani blew off the Iraq Study Group renewed interest in the subject, but TPM started doing a little digging and noticed that “Giuliani somehow, under the radar, has consistently been ducking the issue of Iraq — what to do about Iraq, how important Iraq is, almost everything about Iraq — consistently, over the course of the last year.”
It sounds implausible — how can a leading GOP presidential candidate avoid talking about the dominating issue of the day? — but take a look at the video montage TPM put together. It’s striking just how much Giuliani will dance to avoid talking about war policy.
From Josh’s clip:
Let me give you a few examples: a short time ago Rudy published what he called his 12 commitments. These are a series of bullet points – the things he’ll do as president, the promises he’ll make to the American people. Iraq doesn’t show up once on the list. And actually the New York Times asked him about this — Iraq’s such an important issue, how can you not address it in your twelve commitments?
Well here’s what he said: “Iraq may get better; Iraq may get worse. We may be successful in Iraq; we may not be. I don’t know the answer to that. That’s in the hands of other people. But what we do know for sure is that the terrorists are going to be at war with us a year, year and a half from now.” So Iraq — hard to say, we may win, we may lose, I can’t tell you. That’s a really funny thing for a presidential candidate to say, but it turns out it’s what he’s been saying pretty much consistently when the Iraq issue comes up. It’s basically a two-pronged talking point he has: the first is, Iraq isn’t actually that important, it’s just a small piece of the war on terror. And what will happen in Iraq? Well, that’s hard to say and I cant make you any promises.
In some ways, Giuliani and Romney seem to be carving out a “third way” rhetorical approach to the war. On one side, we have supporters of the war, who insist that the future of civilization is dependent on our success in Iraq. If we fail (if we haven’t already failed), the region will ignite in a massive conflict, terrorism will reign, and the U.S. and its allies will face even greater threats.
On the other side, we have opponents of the war, who insist that national security demands that we get out of the middle of this conflict. It’s creating more terrorism, making us less safe, and weakening our military.
Giuliani and Romney seem to be taking a different tack altogether: Iraq? No biggie.
How anyone takes these guys seriously is a total mystery.
“How anyone takes these guys seriously is a total mystery. ”
But with the miracle that is known as the MSM, a.k.a. ‘liberal media,’ is it really a total mystery?
They are in a box of the right’s making. If they come out against the ‘war’ the wingnuts will ditch them and they’re toast in the primaries. If they come out for more war the rest of the country will tell them where to park it in the general election. Not a one of them are delivering anything of substance. They simply can’t. They are tiptoeing around the most important issue of the day, with the sole objective of avoiding soundbites that will haunt them later. At the risk of sounding like Roger Ailes at FOX, how can we trust them to take on al qaeda, when they are too terrified to speak with the American people?
Come on CB hon, the MSM takes them seriously because they smell Presidential, or something like that. And have big broad Presidential shoulders, and have Presidential cajones……. I’m sure all thses various presidential parts also smell good and manly too
New Newsweek poll has Bush down to 26%. Yet somehow his power seems somehow inverse to his popularity. I don;t thisnk that is how it is supposed to work.
I don’t know how any of these candidates can be taken seriously if they are going to imitate ostriches and stick their heads in the sand on the war. You simply cannot talk about national security without addressing it, not when we are spending billions of dollars, stretching the military to the breaking point, leaving the states without sufficient equipment to meet disasters, all of which leave us vulnerable to any additional foreign or domestic threats or events.
It seems to me the question is: “Since you have remained constructively silent on the war, should be assume that you have nothing to say about it and have accepted the current policy and intend to continue it if you are elected?”
And the additional question for Rudy is: “Membership in the Iraq Study Group presented you with an opportunity to study and learn and brainstorm on the interrelated nature of politics, culture and religion in the region, and yet you did not attend any meetings and were asked to resign that position. Your response was that membership would present a conflict as you considered a run for the presidency, but it is not clear to anyone how increasing one’s knowledge and understanding of a situation that confronts us would be a conflict. How can the American people trust that you will not walk away from other commitments you make, and how will you counter the appearance that it was less a conflict about the campaign than it was about it interfering with your ability to raise money for that campaign?”
It would sure beat them being asked what kind of aftershave they use…
With apologies to the King… Suspicious Minds Iraq Style
We’re caught in Iraq
I can’t speak out
Because I want votes much too badly
Why can’t you see
What this is doing to me
When I can’t speak about Iraq today?
We can go on together
With denying Iraq
And we can get more votes
By denying Iraq
So, if George Bush you know
Drops by to say hello
Would you still see me and him in the photos?
Here we go again
Asking what I’ve said
I can state my support was fake
I’m denying
We can go on together
With denying Iraq
And we can get more votes
By denying Iraq
Oh let the war survive
To see the stars in my eyes
Let’s pretend a bad war’s gone
When honey, you know
I’ve never lied to you
Mmm yeah, yeah
I just realize that these little video compilations Josh Marshall at TPM is putting together now on a regular basis with the hardcore news analysis that is so noticeably absent from mainstream sources, is exactly the kind of content I had envisaged for Mr Carpetbagger’s ‘New Infotainment Channel’, when the time comes.
Can we allow ourselves to believe that herein may be discovered the incipient embryonic beginnings of the new corporate/rethug-free MSM? I, for one, gladly dare to hope so: Mighty oaks from tiny acorns grow. [Unfortunately, some ‘mighty oaks’ could well be done without. Oh, life is such a paradox.]
I’m reading my internet news and glance at the TV. Wolf is talking to Tom Delay. WTF! When I see Delay on TV, I automatically hit the mute button, but again, why is anyone talking to Delay? The only time I would not hit the mute when he is on is if he was wearing an orange jumpsuit and pounding rocks into smalleer rocks. Now for that I would increase the volume. Here’s another question. Why does anyone have Newt on their show? And they wonder why fewer and fewer people are watching. Hey Chris, even though I sometimes smell bad, sometimes I smell good. Can I be on your show?
To thing that I agree with Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani — the War in Iraq has nothing to do with the War on Terror.
Dammit. Three tries to post that, and a typo in the second word.
What Steve H. said. If Romney is not spending any of his 600 words conflating the war in Iraq with the war against al Qaeda, that’s fine by me.
Oh please give me a break Anne**** Ask these guys a serious question? On Air America yesterday Rhandi Rhodes couldn’t stop laughing after a spoof was played relating to Guiliani’s SC campaign manager and the 500 grms of coke bust, to his being an expert on terror, to hiring Bernie etc. and laughing out that he picks his campaign team out of police line-ups, and to then say people were running as fast as they can away from the partys…I just had to stand back and look and say what a joke these republican guys are and they’re running for President? You can’t take any of them seriously.
omney’s a slicked down phony, McCain’s insane, Guiliani is Rudy tootey-fruity cross dressing cutie…..Presidents???? All I can do is laugh. They are like a comedy routine on SNL …”Commander McCain, Miss Rudy Tootey, and Slick Mitt, welcome to the show”.