Home 2012 races Mitt Romney’s VMI Speech: If You Liked the Bush Foreign Policy Record…

Mitt Romney’s VMI Speech: If You Liked the Bush Foreign Policy Record…


As bad as Romney would be for the middle class, and in general on domestic matters – the economy, energy, the environment, women’s rights, GLBT equality, immigration issues, etc. – he’s be an un”Mitt”igated (sorry for the pun) disaster on foreign policy. Surrounded by a bunch of chickenhawk, neoconservative advisers from the George W. Bush administration, if Romney (god forbid) ever becomes Commander in Chief, let’s just put it this way: if you liked what Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld did, then you’re going to LOVE a Romney administration on foreign policy.

The reason I bring this up now is that this morning at the Virginia Military Institute, Romney gave what he billed as a “major” foreign policy address. To read the transcript, which is filled with outright lies, distortions, and implications that it would be “bombs away” in a Romney administration, click here. Also, check out the following video, which argues (correctly) that “Time and time again Mitt Romney has failed the Commander-in-Chief test, from “calling Russia, not Al Qaeda, our number one geopolitical foe, to saying that the withdrawal from Iraq was ‘tragic,’ to not even mentioning Afghanistan in his convention speech.” Finally, I’ll be dialing in to a conference call shortly with former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who will be responding to Romney’s VMI address. I’ll let you know what Secretary Albright has to say.

  • I just got off a conference call with former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Obama for America’s National Press Secretary Ben LaBolt, responding to Mitt Romney’s remarks a little while ago at the Virginia Military Institute.  A few comments by Albright jumped out at me:

    *She watched the speech with great interest, trying to figure out what Romney’s foreign policy ideas really are, but came away even “more confused” than ever.

    *Romney’s flip flopped on numerous positions, such as being FOR Libya intervention before he was AGAINST it.

    *It’s unclear where Romney is on Syria, he sometime seems to be saying he’d arm the rebels, other times that he’s just kind of do something or other to help them.

    *For someone who’s spent her whole life in foreign policy, there’s a lot of rhetoric with Romney, but when we get to specifics, Romney doesn’t seem to have a plan for the U.S. role in the world in the 21st century.

    *Romney advisers are comprised of neoconservatives, a few realists – exactly the people who brought us the Bush administration’s foreign policy, the adverse consequences of which we’re still living through

    *In many ways, this was a speech that might have sounded pretty good to those who aren’t really into foreign policy, but basically it’s full of platitudes. Exactly what would Rommey do differently?

    *Some of his facts are just dead wrong. On trade, President Obama has negotiated and signed three trade agreements, now is working on a trans-Pacific agreement.

    *The Romney campaign just asserts things that are simply not true.