Peter Gelzinis: "No roadside bombs to annoy Romney boys in Iowa"


Peter Gelzinis

Boston Herald Columnist




 No roadside bombs to annoy Romney boys in Iowa
 By Peter Gelzinis
Boston Herald Columnist

 Friday, August 10, 2007 - Updated: 10:29 AM EST

 Perhaps if Mitt Romney wasn't such a rubber stamp for every blunder George Bush has made in Iraq, then the question he was hit with in Iowa the other day could be viewed as out of bounds.

But when your presidential campaign strategy of meticulous pandering has you beating the war drums, talking about "surges of support," and God has blessed you with five strapping sons - none of whom has chosen to wear the uniform of this country - it's only reasonable to expect that someone would ask: Why not?
  1. They were all married and had children before the war began.
  2. Romney was not a "rubber stamp for every blunder George Bush has made in Iraq"
  3. You don't have to support the war, to support the troops. Romney's "surge of support" has nothing to do with supporting the war, it has to do with supporting the families of solders.
  4. Chelsea Clinton was 19, unmarried and had no children when Clinton sent troops into Yugoslavia. We still have troops there and none of these liberals never asked how Bill Clinton could send women into Iraq, when his unmarried, daughter never went. True, people never made as much of a sacrifice in that was as they did in Iraq, but it's a stupid question. We have a volunteer army. Not everyone is a warrior.
Here is some of the stuff Romney has said about Iraq. He does not have a rubber stamp, but he doesn't pretend, like the Ass-hole columnist for the Boston Globe, Peter Gelzinis, that he knows what would work better than the Generals in the field.

Iraq Questions for Governor Mitt Romney

George Stephanopoulos


    1. Do you keep Bush or let him go?
    2. But how do you explain why all that planning wasn't done?
    3. Yet, you support the president's decision to send more troops right now?
  2. Are you confident the surge is going to work?
  3. Bill O Reilly
    1. Would you agree that we can't stop the Iraqi from killing each other ?
  4. Tom Bevan
    1. What's your impression of the job Rumsfeld did?
    2. Do you believe it's still fixable at this point ?
    3. What happens if Iraq is not successful?
  5. Chris Wallace
    1. Where do you disagree with Bush on Iraq ?
  6. Wolf Blitzer
    1. Do you have a time frame in mind?
  7. Hugh Hewitt
    1. Do you support sending more troops into that country?
  8. Robert B Bluey
    1. Do you think right now the US is losing the war in Iraq?
  9. Katherine Jean Lopez
    1. What did you make of the Iraq Study Group?
  10. Mary Katharine Ham
    1. What do you think about Harry Reid saying the war is lost ?
  11. Greta Van Susteren
    1. Would you have gone into Iraq?
    2. Do you think enough questions were asked in March of 2003 ?
  12. [1st Debate
    1. Should we be in Iraq when the American people do not victory is possible?
  13. ''2nd Debate''
    1. Can you foresee any circumstances under which you would pull out of Iraq without leaving behind a stable political and security situation?

Governor Mitt Romney on Iraq

ABC'S GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: "National security, you're a management consultant again. You've come into the United States looking at the commander-in-chief. Do you keep him or let him go?"

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, you have to look at Iraq and Iraq was superbly executed in terms of taking down Saddam Hussein's government. But I think everybody recognizes, from the president to Tony Blair to Secretary Rumsfeld that post the period of major conflict, we had major problems in the way we've managed the war in Iraq, and that has contributed to much of the difficulty we have today. It was under-planned, under-prepared, under-staffed, too low a level of troops, under-managed."

STEPHANOPOULOS: "But how do you explain why all that planning wasn't done? President Bush is a Harvard MBA, too."

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, everybody has their own management style and their own approach and I respect enormously the approach other people. Mine is just different. And if you read "Cobra II" and "Assassins' Gate" and "Looming Tower" and some of the reports of the events leading up not only to 9/11, but to the conflict itself, there's a sense that we really weren't ready for the post major conflict period. And that has resulted in a blossoming of the sectarian violence, of insurgents within the country and from without, and a setting which is a very troubled, difficult position."

STEPHANOPOULOS: "Yet, you support the president's decision to send more troops right now."

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Yeah."

STEPHANOPOULOS: "How much time do you give it to work?"

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, it's not years. I think you're going to know within months."

STEPHANOPOULOS: "Mayor Giuliani said the other night he's not confident it's going to work. Are you?"

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, you know, I think it's hard to predict whether this troop surge will work, but I'm absolutely confident it's the right thing to do."

Press Releases

Quotes

2007

  • "She can do what she likes – but I take exception to her conclusions. I don't think we should run our foreign policy based upon elections, election schedules or anything of that nature. We should look at the interests of America and our friends and our citizens and our solders and do what it's our collective best interests. This president has taken action which he believes is calculated to make America a safer land. We should not make decisions based on an election schedule...I would not move to those choices unless we were convinced there was no prospect of success with the current strategy...A number of mistakes have been made and those mistakes have contributed to some of the challenges we now face...I'm glad we're seeing a change in strategy. I'm glad we're adding to the mission of our military the protection of the safety of citizens in and around Baghdad., I don't know how you could rebuild a country and an economy if you have your capital city is literally all covered by what we call a red zone. You know you've failed if you have a red zone. The conduct of our policy in Iraq has been fraught with a number of mistakes."
    • Governor Mitt Romney, Adam Nagourney, The New York Times, January 29th, 2007
      • In Responce to Hillary Clinton, who said that President Bush needed to resolve the war he started before he left office and not hand it off to his successor

2006

  • "I wouldn't presume to present a plan different from that of the President. But I believe he was right to take on the war on terror on an aggressive front rather than a defensive front. We toppled the government ... walking away would mean a humanitarian disaster. We're there and we have a responsibility to finish the job." Response to Bill O'Reilly Sept, 27 2006

"I agree with the President: Our strategy in Iraq must change. Our military mission, for the first time, must include securing the civilian population from violence and terror. It is impossible to defeat the insurgency without first providing security for the Iraqi people. Civilian security is the precondition for any political and economic reconstruction.

"In consultation with Generals, military experts and troops who have served on the ground in Iraq, I believe securing Iraqi civilians requires additional troops. I support adding five brigades in Baghdad and two regiments in Al-Anbar province. Success will require rapid deployment.

"This effort should be combined with clear objectives and milestones for U.S. and Iraqi leaders.

"The road ahead will be difficult but success is still possible in Iraq. I believe it is in America's national security interest to achieve it."

Here are some vidoes of Romney talking about Iraq:

Governor Romney On Iraq
In Bettendorf, Iowa, that someone was Rachel Griffiths. She is an antiwar activist whose brother, an Army major, is also an Iraq veteran. When this 41-year-old woman asked our prettiest former governor why none of his picturesque sons have opted for the front lines, Mitt flashed that 10,000-watt smile and proceeded to blow her off.

(No he didn't. Here is the exchange. Why lie about it? Why not link to the video? Why would you lie, when you can link to the video? Why would you lie when you can link to the video)

Romney Applauds the Service, Dedication of U.S. Troops

"The good news," Mitt said, "is that we have a volunteer army. My sons are all adults and they've made their decisions about their careers, and they've chosen not serve in the military."

If he had left it at that, Mitt might not have made it to the top of Jon Stewart's hypocrisy hit parade on "The Daily Show" Wednesday night. But Mitt couldn't resist the invitation to get cute.

(How about you, Peter Gelzinis, can you resist the invitation to get cute? Latter in this article you bring Mitt's family into it by calling his sons, "As for Tag, Biff, Zip, Bud and Lex" very classy, you jack-ass.

Mitt eventually told Rachel Griffiths that Tag, Biff, Zip, Bud and Lex were serving America by canvassing the cornfields of Iowa in a Winnebago, "showing support for our country (by) helping me get elected because they think I'd be a great president."

Once again, you don't need the MSM any more. Listen to the whole exchange here:

Romney Applauds the Service, Dedication of U.S. Troops


He should have just kept his mouth shut. Getting smarmy about such a question only confirms what many of us already know, and the rest of the country is bound to find out: Mitt is one very attractive and empty vessel.

(What does that mean, exactly? He is somehow an empty vessel because he thinks we can prevent more American deaths by winning this war rather than walking away? He is somehow an empty vessel because he didn't force his kids into the military?)

Was Rachel Griffiths' question fair? "Absolutely, it was fair," said Eddie Contilli, who sent his only two sons off to war in Iraq, the youngest when he was barely 17.

"What Romney should have said is, 'Hey, that's an individual question. Go ask them.' I mean, his kids are out there on the stump, campaigning for their Dad, right? So, why can't we put the question to each one of them?"

(Why should Romney have said that? Is that something people didn't know? People didn't know that Mitt Romney does not make decisions of what their kids do? People do not know that Mitt Romney's married kids, all with Children are individual?)

Better yet, why couldn't Mitt Romney - whose money and TV time has placed him on top in Iowa - chosen to scrape up a bit of humanity? The answer is obvious: There is none.

(How should Romney have "scrape up a bit of humanity"? There is no humanity in Mitt? If you punch him he does not bleed? If he is not a human you can shoot him right? Is Romney a cow? If he does not have a "scrape of humanity" what is he? Is he a devil? Is he a monkey? Do we really have to demonize those whom we disagree? Romney is not a member of humanity according to this f-ing Peter Gelzinis of the Boston Herald.

Like Mitt Romney said, the "good news" of an all-volunteer military has spared the five Romney boys any soul-searching about wearing a uniform. But we still don't know if Mitt and his progeny ever even discussed the prospect of military service.

(I like how Peter Gelzinis has the magic ability to see into the souls of the Romney boys. Pretty awesome hu?)

I have watched that fascinatingly ridiculous Christmas card/ campaign video Mitt and his family prepared from inside their mountaintop palace in Utah. To watch Mitt's sons in that 13-minute video - still making its rounds through cyberspace - is to know that military service was never part of the Romney boys' career options. Other people could do it.

As for Tag, Biff, Zip, Bud and Lex, they just thought it would be really neat to see Dad and Mom in the White House.

There's nothing wrong with Mitt's sons working to help their father realize his dream. But both father and sons should understand that if the candidate wants to keep calling for "surges of support," if he chooses to continue parroting the Bush administration at every turn, and applauding the blood spilled and sacrifice made by the sons and daughters of other fathers, there are bound to be more questions fired at Mitt Romney by people like Rachel Griffiths.

LISTEN ASS HOLE. YOU CROSS A LINE WHEN YOU SAY THAT ANYONE "APPLAUDS BLOOD SPILLED". NO ONE APPLAUDS THE LOSS OF LIFE IN IRAQ. The question is weather it was better for Bush to remove Saddam Hussein now, or his sons (who ran the torture and "rape-rooms") 30 years from now.

Pandering on Iraq is a little bit different than pandering on abortion, or gun control, especially when you have five sons. Other candidates have watched their sons volunteer to fight a war they now oppose. Unlike Mitt Romney, they have a flesh-and-blood stake in the issue. Instead of Winnebagos, their sons have canvassed Iraq in under-armored Humvees.

(Peter Gelzinis says outright that Mitt Romney has no shred of humanity. Then he infers that Mitt Romney won't care about the loss of life, unless his son's life are on the line. Abraham Lincoln understood the loss of life of those who's lives were on the line for the survival of the country. He wrote the following letter to Mrs. Bixby)

Executive Mansion,
Washington, Nov. 21, 1864.

Dear Madam,--

I have been shown in the files of the War Department a statement of the Adjutant General of Massachusetts that you are the mother of five sons who have died gloriously on the field of battle.

I feel how weak and fruitless must be any word of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But I cannot refrain from tendering you the consolation that may be found in the thanks of the Republic they died to save.

I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.

Yours, very sincerely and respectfully,

A. Lincoln

Peter Gelzinis, in trying to say that Mitt Romney is not a member of humanity, and has betrayed his own membership in this exclusive bunch of animals. Hitler tried to say, just like peter, that Jews weren't really humans. It is Peter who says of Romney, " why couldn't Mitt Romney chose to scrape up a bit of humanity? The answer is obvious: There is none."

Our humanity is the ability to have regards, even for those who are not members of our family. And Lincoln's greatness was his ability to empathize with those who suffered, but have the strategic vision to know that their suffering promised the greater good. We are going to have to appeal to this type of reason, to put into power the type of person who can do the most amount of good for our country, instead of responding to primal instincts, and just installing Cindy Sheehan as POTUS, because she has lost a child in this awful war.
Posted by

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)