[Peace-discuss] Is a Vote for Romney a Vote for War?

[Carl G. Estabrook]

This is quite right. In attacking "nation-building," Bush was  
criticizing the Clinton-Gore war against Serbia.

People forget that Bush was elected as the peace candidate in 2000 (as  
Nixon was in 1968).

And as Obama was in 2008. (After the Democrats were given control of  
the Congress in 2006 to end the war - as they recognized - they had to  
lie about it for two years, in aid of Obama's co-option of the antiwar  
movement - an important ingredient in his election.)

"Most of the population did not take the year 2000 presidential  
elections very seriously. Three-fourths of the population regarded the  
process as a game played by large contributors (overwhelmingly  
corporations), party leaders, and the PR industry, which crafted  
candidates to say 'almost anything to get themselves elected,' so that  
one could believe little that they said even when their stand on  
issues was intelligible. On most issues citizens could not identify  
the stands of the candidates - not because of ignorance or lack of  
concern; again, the system is working. Public opinion studies found  
that among voters concerned more with policy issues than 'qualities,'  
the Democrats won handily. But issues were displaced in the political- 
media system in favor of style, personality, and other marginalia that  
are of little concern to the concentrated private power centers that  
largely finance campaigns and run the government. Their shared  
interests remained safely off the agenda, independently of the public  
will. [For data on the elections..., see Ruy Teixeira, American  
Prospect, December 18; Thomas Patterson, head of the Harvard  
University Vanishing Voter Project, op-eds, NYT, November 8, Boston  
Globe, December 15, 2000.]" <http://www.chomsky.info/articles/200104--.htm 
 >


On Dec 27, 2011, at 4:41 PM, E. Wayne Johnson wrote:

> George W Bush specifically claimed that he would not engage in  
> nation building but he did.
> He claimed to support a humble foreign policy while the alternative  
> was the
> aggressive foreign policy supported by Gore.  Bush was sincere,  
> whether
> he meant it or not, and Bush won the election because of his call for
> a humble foreign policy.
>
> Romney is a face man, a political actor, Silly Putty.
> He can fully be expected to be a puppet of the neocon warmongering  
> establishment.
> In regard to war, Romney is the same think as a John Bolton, John  
> McCain, or a Bloody Bill Kristol.
>
> The military industrial complex and the banksters will be equally  
> satisfied with
> Mitt Womney, Wick Pewwy, or Obomba.
> They are all stamped from the same die.
>
>
> On 12/28/2011 2:31 AM, Robert Naiman wrote:
>> Do you remember that time during the 2000 presidential campaign, when
>> George W. Bush made clear to the American people that if he became  
>> the
>> next President of the United States, he would take the country to war
>> with Iraq -- a war that would kill 4,484 Americans, "wound" 22,490,
>> give hundreds of thousands of Americans head injuries and
>> post-traumatic stress, not to mention killing hundreds of thousands  
>> of
>> Iraqis?
>>
>> You don't remember that? Me neither.
>>
>> Shouldn't the fact that the Iraq war was a consequence of George W.
>> Bush becoming president, although that consequence was not apparent  
>> in
>> 2000, inform how we judge the likely consequences of Mitt Romney
>> becoming president?
>>
>> No one can say that a war with Iran would be a certain consequence of
>> Mitt Romney becoming president. Some of Romney's war-mongering could
>> be campaign bluster. President Bush engaged in a lot of saber- 
>> rattling
>> towards Iran, but he never attacked Iran. Maybe a President Romney
>> would be the same.
>>
>> Who wants to roll the dice?
>>
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/is-a-vote-for-romney-a-vo_b_1171099.html
>>
>> --
>> Robert Naiman
>> Policy Director
>> Just Foreign Policy
>> www.justforeignpolicy.org
>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss