Romney Advistor 'Mitt Doesn't Want To Really Engage' On Foreign Policy Issues Until He's President.

[applegrove]

Romney Advistor 'Mitt Doesn't Want To Really Engage' On Foreign Policy Issues Until He's President.

By Ben Armbruster on May 14, 2012 at 4:10 pm ThinkProgress

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/05/14/483510/romney-doesnt-want-to-engage-foreign-policy/

"SNIP............................................


The New York Times published two articles this weekend highlighting the disarray that is Mitt Romney’s foreign policy positions. Romney not only appears “out of touch,” for example, on his Russia policy and “all over the map” on the war in Afghanistan, but also, the former Massachusetts governor has demonstrated a “perplexing pattern,” the Times reported, of being at odds with many of his own foreign policy advisers.

Moreover, seeming to concede President Obama’s dominance of national security issues this campaign season, a Romney adviser told the Times that Romney isn’t interested in talking about foreign policy. “Romney doesn’t want to really engage these issues until he is in office,” the adviser said.

And there’s good reason. Romney’s inexperience on foreign policy and national security issues has dogged his campaign with confusion, ignorance and private and public disagreements among Romney’s campaign advisers and surrogates:

AFGHANISTAN


Romney has been “all over the map” on Afghanistan. As the Washington Post reported late last year, Romney “has not explained what he thinks the U.S. mission in Afghanistan is at this point and what would constitute success.” And keeping with his adviser’s above statement, Romney said in a major foreign policy speech that he’d wait until becomes president to “order a full review of our transition to the Afghan military.”

....................................................SNIP"

[Proud Liberal Dem]

1. I sure hope people don't want to elect a complete "cipher" to run the world's remaining hyper-power

We need to know................

[monmouth]

2. He doesn't seem very smart. Would love to see his school transcripts. n/t

[chollybocker]

3. Sounds like McCain's plans to get Bin Laden.

"It's a secret. Uh, next question."

[liberal N proud]

4. You never kow what your gonna get with an Etch-A-Sketch

[JNelson6563]

7. Wrong. I unfailingly got stairs.

That was all I could ever draw with those things.

Julie

[KansDem]

5. Try this at a job interview...

How do you see yourself contributing to this organization?

Hire me first, then I'll tell you...

Yeah, right...

[JNelson6563]

8. And not just any position but the Head Honcho.

WTF?

[yellowcanine]

12. Good point. We ask people to do a presentation outlining their plan.

The ones who clearly did not bother looking up some specifics about the position and speak in generalities don't get a second look.

[thelordofhell]

6. So I guess this means he's not going to engage on foreign policy matters

Since there's no way this assclown will become President

[musical_soul]

9. So, Mitt Romney will NEVER share his position?

Seeing as how he wants to wait until he's in office and it's never going to happen, I think he should talk now.

[Ghost of Tom Joad]

10. How will he survive the debates, there are always foreign policy questions.

Oh I know the moderators will give him a pass after some lame ass non answer.

[sofa king]

16. I think he's going to try to weasel out of them.

I think that by the time the debates roll around, Romney is going to have at least three contradictory positions on every major issue and it seems unlikely to me that voters will be willing to accept whatever new lies Romney brings to the table on those days.

His best chance is going to be to evade the debates entirely.

I wouldn't be too surprised to see President Obama agree to let him off the hook. Romney is through--half of all voters, women, support President Obama by twenty-two points. Add in a similar level of support from all minorities, everyone who stands to benefit from a middle-class tax cut extension, everyone who lost a home and everyone who managed to keep one, and so on, and it's shaping up to be one of the bigger landslides ever.

President Obama, however, has a second objective of almost equal importance to getting himself reelected, which is to knock as many Republicans as possible out of Congress so that he can get something done. He may find it expedient to focus instead on tossup congressional districts and Class 1 Senate elections, rather than preparing for a debate in an election that is already a foregone conclusion.

So I won't be surprised to see both sides mutually agree to skip the debates, because one side only stands to lose worse by having them, and the other side stands to win bigger by focusing on other things. The irony of it may turn out to be that by avoiding the debates, Romney will actually be helping along an overwhelming defeat in Congress, too.

[yellowcanine]

11. I guess he won't be engaging, then.......

[FSogol]

13. He's telling us that he'll just hire experts and won't do the work of understanding ANYTHING himself

Typical 1%

[liberalnationalist]

14. 'Mitt Doesn't Want To Really Engage' On Foreign Policy Issues Until He's President

code for: "we are going to start another big war"

[WI_DEM]

15. Poor baby. Is he going to insist no debate on foreign policy?

[Bake]

17. Then he NEVER will

Because he's never going to be President.

Bake

[CTyankee]

18. Oh, please.

"Just let me become President and you'll find out what I'll do."

Really?

[LetTimmySmoke]

19. Like with everything, Mitt only shares the details of his plans to his Wall Street donors.

[applegrove]

20. We had conservatives running for election in Canada a year ago and all they would say is that they

were for a 'strong, stable, national government'. They said little about their policies. In fact they went into detail hardly at all. And they won. Could Romney be doing the same thing? Because he knows his policies would be unpalatable with the American public?

[grantcart]

21. So Romney loses his gay Foreign Policy spokesman and loses his voice on foreign policy.

Quite a deep bench you have their Mitch, you might not want to lose too many more of the valuable people who actually want to work for you.