« "Looper" a review (or maybe revue) by Alan Farrell | Main | On Ole Tailgunner Joe... »

10 October 2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Clifford Kiracofe

As I indicated earlier, it may be that the intervention of Mrs. Romney and the eldest son are having a significant impact on the foreign policy area. Normal experienced Republicans have been moved into positions of authority in the transition team such as Zoelleck and Williamson.

Williamson, 63, is a serious player. Princeton, University of Virginia Law, attorney with the old line law firm Winston Strawn in Chicago, former chair of Illinois Republican Party, former Asst Sec State IO, Ambassador for Sudan issues, and so on.

...."Romney’s campaign won’t acknowledge any official shift, but recent press reports have noted the rising prominence of Richard Williamson, a senior foreign policy adviser and veteran diplomat viewed as a relative moderate in Republican foreign policy circles. Williamson led a call with reporters before Romney’s speech on Monday and appears to have had a hand in his recent change of tone. Rhetorically at least, the role of neo-conservative advisers – such as former George W. Bush administration officials Liz Cheney and Dan Senor – seems to be waning.

In an hour-long phone interview on Wednesday, Williamson denied any shift – or division – within the Romney campaign. But he presented a far more nuanced version of Romney’s approach to the Middle East than displayed on Romney’s trip to Israel in July. The Israel trip was organized by Senor, the neo-conservative former Bush administration official."....
http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/10/11/romneys-extreme-foreign-policy-makeover/

There are many normal experienced and authentic Republican policy experts who would work in a Romney Administration should the anomalous Neocons be firmly shown the door.

RetiredPatriot

r whitman
SecState = John Bolton
SecDef = Paul Wolfowitz

RP

Jane

Here's why the obsession with Fox:

In these pieces, I identified 6 separate studies showing Fox News viewers to be the most misinformed, and in a right wing direction--studies on global warming, health care, health care a second time, the Ground Zero mosque, the Iraq war, and the 2010 election. I also asked if anyone was aware of any counterevidence, and none was forthcoming. There might very well be a survey out there showing that Fox viewers aren't the most misinformed cable news consumers on some topic (presumably it would be a topic where Democrats have some sort of ideological blind spot), but I haven’t seen it. And I have looked.

In other words, why are Americans so divided today over reality and what is factually true? There are surely many causes—but one is that a news network with a powerful sway is constantly sowing right wing misinformation, and an army of followers are watching and believing it.

Kunuri

steve g,
You are correct, I do live outside US and am in contact with a small expat community of academics and artists, who are higly educated and intelligent. My sampling of opinions is not indicative, I realize that. I used to think like you, maybe I forgot. Thanks for reminding.
But still, I just don't see how Romney can win-as it is obvious now that Obama will carry the senior, black, women, Latino, youth, anti Mormon and immigrant votes. And strongly contest the remainder...

Tyler

So who are the most capable viewers then? And what's the 'right' viewpoint to have, as it were, and who is deciding what the relevant facts are?

Remember, Reverend Wright pretty much dropped into a memory hole because Sarah Palin's wardrobe costs were a lot more relevant to the MSM. Bringing up Reverend Wright, or Bill Ayers, or Eric Holder's time in a militant black student union that occupied a ROTC building with rifles gets handwaved often with "that was proven untrue a million years ago and you're awful for bringing it up".

So drop some 'studies' on me, because the people who cite them are often the same ones who are going to tell me the sky is green and race is a social construct.

r whitman

Do you see Jon Huntsman having any significant influence in a Romney administration?

turcopolier

r. whitman

My impression (possibly incorrect) is that huntsman is not taken seriously as a Mormon in top LDS circles. pl

r whitman

How about in Republican foreign policy circles. His family is well respected in the chemical business.

turcopolier

r. whitman

IMO his political fate depends on the eventual outcome of the civil war inside the GOP. pl

Siun

Amber is an interesting reporter - I follow her on Twitter for her info on Occupy etc and I really respect her efforts around Bahrain. The Infowars site is Alex Jones' group who are ...less than reliable to say he least but not as much Fox as tin foil IMHO.

Amb's own site is here: http://amberlyonlive.com/

She is gutsy no matter what you think of her politics.

Clifford Kiracofe

optimax,

The White Horse Prophecy was attributed to Joseph Smith after his death by a prominent LDS member. The gist is that sometime in the future the US Constitution would "hang by a thread" and Mormons would join in with others to save it.

The White Horse appears to be a symbolic reference to the LDS community.

Back in the 1840s era, there were a number of sects developing here in the US which were not mainstream. Millennialists like the Millerites are an example. Back in that day prophecy and interpreting scripture linking it to contemporary conditions was popular. Today, this is standard fare with the Fundamentalists.

Back then sectionalism was a problem in the US and the slavery issue was looming threatening the Union. Perhaps this is what Smith's followers may have had in mind.

Who knows as they themselves are not agreed about it. Within the LDS church, the prophecy does not appear to be taken as "canonical" because there is debate about its authenticity and interpretation. That there is debate within a church on theological matters is not unusual.

On the other hand, some LDS members feel strongly that it impels them to defend the US Constitution in troubled times. Both Romney's father and Romney are on record endorsing this type of interpretation.

Some years ago I had an LDS friend and colleague who was quite conservative. An academic and a lawyer, he was very strongly pro-Constitution interpreted from a traditional Madisonian perspective. And he was quite strongly interested in the Federalist Papers and so on. His views seemed in line with general non-LDS conservative thinking and I detected no hint of a theocratic perspective.

It seems to me reasonable that members of any religion in our country who find special reasons or spiritual inspiration to support the Constitution are within their rights. Proper support and civic activity may well be a positive thing. One problem, of course, would be if they took this idea in a theocratic direction as that itself would be unconsitutional.

Naturally, Americans do not want a situation in which someone who became president thought of himself as a prophet of some kind. The closest we have come to this IMO was Woody Wilson, a delusional and easily manipulated type. GWBush seemed to be in this category also.

Presently, the Fundamentalists espousing "Dominionism" have the clearest agenda to impose theocracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism

As Col. Lang has said, our country faces a real dilemma given the two candidates.

If Romney is elected and does not dump the Neocons, then it will be more of perpetual war for perpetual peace. If Obama is elected, IMO it will be the same.

Charles

Professor,
Thanks for the link to the article. I have never heard of Kovner and his link to the AEI. I fear for the Republic given the concentration of power and wealth that he and the neocons weld.

We were on vacation in New Mexico and may retire there in a year or two. I love the stark beauty of the landscape and the green chile dishes.
Regards,

William R. Cumming

Most pollsters now expecting almost 60% of elgible white voters to support Romney in November! WAPO reports that 57% supported McCain in 2008!

Is there any common understanding for why the above is a fact of political life in 2012 USA?

turcopolier

WRC

My "common understanding" is that racism is largely the cause of the amplitute on the support for MR among my group. pl

Tyler

Why is it a point of contention that 60% of whites support Romney, but its to be expected that 98% of blacks support Obama?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

March 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        
Blog powered by Typepad