Apparently Republican Presidential Candidates Live in a Time Warp

image

The Romney Campaign seemed to have walked straight out of the cold war era into a phone conference intended to stress Willard’s foreign policy creds.  The results were, well, a little weird.  Kinda like Willard come to think of it! 

In comments that were eerily reminiscent of John McCain’s frequent gaffes in regards to Czechoslovakia, Romney’s surrogates warned of the “Soviet” threat and Obama’s failure to protect the free world:

Obama is “withdrawing from leading the free world in maintaining stability around the world,” Lehman said. “What Obama calls ‘leading from behind.’”

One of the worst examples, according to Lehman, is happening at the top of the world.

“We’re seeing the Soviets pushing into the Arctic with no response from us. In fact, the only response is to announce the early retirement of the last remaining icebreaker.”

Prosper warned Obama was abandoning America’s eastern European allies — some of which haven’t existed for decades.

“You know, Russia is another example where we give and Russia gets and we get nothing in return,” Prosper said. “The United States abandoned its missile defense sites in Poland and Czechoslovakia, yet Russia does nothing but obstruct us, or efforts in Iran and Syria.”

The conference call, which was apparently timed to rebut Veep Biden’s speech today touting Obama’s actual foreign policy successes, didn’t do a whole lot to increase my confidence in Willard’s potential foreign policy leadership.  But no doubt Snowflake Snooki will be all over that push by the “Soviets” into the Arctic!

Posted by marindenver on 04/26/12 at 02:46 PM • Permalink

Categories: PoliticsBarack ObamaJoe BidenBedwettersBushCoElection '12MittensWar In ErrorSkull Hampers

Share this post:  Share via Twitter   Share via BlinkList   Share via del.icio.us   Share via Digg   Share via Email   Share via Facebook   Share via Fark   Share via NewsVine   Share via Propeller   Share via Reddit   Share via StumbleUpon   Share via Technorati  

Maybe they’re just playing to their audience. The teabaggers are the mooks who’ve been pooing themselves about “commies” for three years now.

At least it’s better than the time when McCain railed against the perfidious Spaniards in Cuba.

They’re only trying to protect us against the Hapsburg Empire.

The Cold War, in some ways, was the defining theme of what US conservatism meant, because all things not deemed adequately conservative were labeled “pinko” or “commie”. Reagan was the past master at converting regular American things to communism—Medicare was totally Communist. Taxing the rich? Communist. Bush the Elder referred to Dukakis as a “card-carrying member of the ACLU”—echoing the McCarthy Era “card-carrying Communist” phrase. (And don’t get me started on the attempts by today’s cons to re-imagine McCarthy as a hero—most notably Ann Coulter.)

Anyhow, the Cold War, because of nukes, had an existential narrative—an apocalyptic war of good v evil. It resonated with reactionaries because they had something big to react against.  And yet—given another something big—like killing or capturing Bin Laden, Romneybot 2008 was like “Whevs.”  Also, too, someone should ask Romney when, exactly,  Obama ever apologized about America. Romney = the worst.

I’m just gonna leave this here, y’unz can discuss the retrograde ... I’ll be next door

Comment by HumboldtBlue on 04/26/12 at 11:39 PM

Yep, the Soviets are all up in our Arctic and the Ottoman Empire is in turmoil.

If we’d all just pay a little more attention to Allen West’s Communiques from Bedlam, we’d know that while we were all sweating Mooslims in our midst, COMMUNISTS were surging apace to infiltrate the highest offices in the Free World!  In the face of current developments, Republicans would be remiss if they did not deftly pivot to a foreign policy that addresses the highest goal of keeping Reds from our Beds.  Besides, Caucasian villains are just so much more vulnerable to our superior diplomacy . . .

According to the Fool on the Hill, it all started with Woodrow Wilson . . . yes, that Woodrow Wilson, who craftily repackaged “Communism” as “Progressivism” to make it more, well, American.

West admonishes the rest of us for not having his superior grasp of American History while skating right past the fact that Woodrow “Pinko” Wilson expressed his nefarious Communist agenda by doing these things:

■Wilson imprisoned and deported communists, socialists, and leftists for just generally holding views he found subversive.
■Wilson threw American Socialist Party leader Eugene V. Debs, who had garnered nearly a million votes running against Wilson in 1912, in prison for speaking out against the imprisonment of anti-war leftists.
■Wilson sent American soldiers to support Czarist forces against Bolshevik revolutionaries during the Russian civil war in 1918.
■Wilson appointed A. Mitchell Palmer as his Attorney General. The iconic 1920 Palmer Raids resulted in mass arrests and deportations of suspected leftists of all stripes.

As Adam Serwer, of Mother Jones put it, regarding Wilson’s latent Communism:

A lot of people would disagree with this — notably actual socialists and communists in America at the time.

West’s real beef is a lot simpler than all of this historical scholarship would suggest . . . in West’s own words:

It’s about this idea of social and economic justice. And you hear that being played out — you know, now with fairness, fair share, economic equality, shared sacrifice, ad nauseum, ad infinitum.

Ad nauseum, indeed . . .

Maddow mentioned that 17 of 24 of Rmoney’s foreign policy advisors are Bush necon retreads. I guess Rmoney really will be Bush’s third term.

I read a book called The Great Influenza (or something close to that title) a few years ago; it was the history of the Spanish Flu Pandemic of 1918-1920, and Wilson was president during it.  According to the author, it mutated into it’s most deadly form in the US, probably Kansas, and then spread throughout the entire world because of troop movements related to WWI, and the general increase in worldwide trade and travel.  It killed an estimated 50 to 100 million (3 to 6% of the world population at the time) all over the globe, mostly young adults because their immune systems were at their strongest, and most over-reactive; older and younger people mostly survived it. 

I bring this up because Wilson was president during that time, and reading about the authoritarian, totally un-democratic crap he pulled to (1) control civil society, and (2) keep prosecuting the War absolutely stunned me.  Progressive my pasty white ass.  It can easily be argued that the deaths due to the Spanish Flu had more to do with the end of WWI than just about anything else, and while WWI is still prominently mentioned, the Spanish Flu pandemic is not.  You could accuse Wilson of some communist leanings only because he took some remarkably Stalinist measures because of the pandemic. 

This concludes today’s history lesson.  When you read about the 1918-1920 period that isn’t directly about the great pandemic you’ll be surprised at how rarely the pandemic is even mentioned.

you’ll be surprised at how rarely the pandemic is even mentioned

Possibly because it was so damn scary everyone wants to forget about it.  The reactions to the “swine flu” of the 70’s and the recent “bird flu” reflect that flu fear is still buried deep in our psyches.  Our family has always been well aware of the pandemic because my husband’s grandfather died from that flu when his (my husband’s) father was only 2 or 3 years old.  His grandmother collapsed emotionally as a result and my father-in-law ended up being raised by relatives.

Page 1 of 1 pages

Sorry, commenting is closed for this post.

<< Back to main