Yes, Willard “Mitt” Romney really does (and the worshipful, fawning Jennifer Rubin cheers him on):
I condemn in the strongest possible terms the attempted North Korean missile launch. Although the missile test failed, Pyongyang’s action is another blatant violation of unanimous U.N. Security Council resolutions and demonstrates once again that Pyongyang is committed to developing long-range missiles with the potential of carrying nuclear weapons. Its weapons program poses a clear and growing threat to the United States, one for which President Obama has no effective response. Instead of approaching Pyongyang from a position of strength, President Obama sought to appease the regime with a food-aid deal that proved to be as naïve as it was short-lived. At the same time, he has cut critical U.S. missile defense programs and continues to underfund them. This incompetence from the Obama Administration has emboldened the North Korean regime and undermined the security of the United States and our allies.
This is crazy, not to mention wildly irresponsible, not to mention factually inaccurate, on so many levels it’s hard to know where to start. It’s also ahistorical, as the Bush Administration had the same issues – and much of the same approach – with North Korea. In reality, any administration – even, god forbid, a Romney administration – would, because North Korea is a brutal dictatorship, armed with nuclear weapons, and also with the capability of doing enormous damage to South Korea and possibly Japan if they decide to lash out militarily (perhaps because they feel their backs are against the wall and their regime threatened with destruction?). So what does Willard “Mitt” Romney, with zero foreign policy experience (but with foreign policy advisors who should make your hair stand on end), advocate? As one commenter on Rubin’s drooling, fawning (what else is new from her?) Kaplan Post article points out:
This is the argument that brainless partisan hacks like Rubin love to make: criticize with all the bluster you can muster, without admitting that you have NO idea for an alternative approach. What’s Romney going to do, Rubin? Name one thing he’d do different.
The food aid deal was a good idea; it allowed us to test the new regime at no risk to us. The worst case scenario from such a deal was that a few hundred thousand starving people got food. Not a horrible outcome. Romney’s alternative to that deal would have been status quo – no change from the U.S. policy of the last 60 years, which is not going to stop the DPRK’s ambition of a nuclear arsenal. So if Mitt has a better idea, he had better speak up.
But of course, “Mitt” does not have a better idea on North Korea. Or Iran. Or Russia. Or the economy. Or the budget. Or women’s health. Or anything. So he lashes out. Unfortunately, we’d better get used to it, as there are many more months of this garbage to come, including god knows what from Big Liar Karl Rove and his $100 million (or $200 million) in attack ads. Ah, U.S. politics, gotta love ’em huh?
P.S. Another great comment:
Another formulaic Rubin column:
Step 1 – something happens somewhere on earth.
Step 2 – slam Obama for his ineffective response to Step 1.
Step 3 – praise all the right-wing nutcases who also slam Obama for his response to Step 1.
Step 4 – repeat.