As everyone knows, Mitt Romney is a moderate Republican, not a conservative. On domestic issues, he professes moderate/liberal views on most issues, and he’s the author of the prototype of the Obamatax.
But on foreign and defense policy, and only on these issues, he is, or at least used to be, rock-solid. He has always supported a strong, well-funded defense, a tough policy towards Russia and China, and opposes the New START treaty and nuclear disarmament. Most of his foreign policy advisors agree with those views.
But now, it looks like Romney may flip-flop even on these issues, in the liberal direction, and thus remove the only reason we conservatives may have for supporting him.
Yesterday, the Washington Times reported that Mitt Romney is considering a laundry list of pro-appeasement, pro-nuclear-disarmament, pro-LOST RINOs as candidates for his Secretary of State. That list includes the current Deputy Secretary of State William Burns (Hillary Clinton’s deputy).
Meanwhile, the Drudge Report, and following it, Politico reported that former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, a RINO, is now “the frontrunner” to be Romney’s running mate.
It turns out that weeks ago, in the week of June 24th, there was a meeting at Romney’s private retreat in Utah, attended by Rice and many other VP candidates as well as other invited guests and Romney donors, at which Rice impressed the easily-impressed attendants with a nice speech and they left the meeting impressed and with her name on their lips.
This is terrible news. Condoleezza Rice is a strident leftist who supports the New START treaty, the LOST, nuclear disarmament, and the appeasement of Russia and China – policies she supported as Bush’s secretary of state and still supports today. She also says that Hillary is a good Secretary of State. She’s a RINO, and nominating her would not only inoculate Obama from any foreign policy criticism, it would also be a huge insult to the memory of Ronald Reagan. How can Romney credibly criticize Obama for the New START, the LOST, nuclear disarmament, and the appeasement of Russia and China if he selects a veep who supports all of these policies? He can’t, and Obama will have abundant resources with which to make that point.
The policies Rice supports are wrong for all the reasons I’ve listed here over the years, yet Obama continues to pursue them and Rice continues to support them.
If she’s selected, she will inoculate Obama from any criticism on foreign and defense policy, and if, by some miracle, she and Romney are elected, Rice will likely sway Romney’s mind in the liberal direction on these issues, and thus will see to it that Obama’s twin policies of unilateral disarmament and appeasement are preserved. And of course, the bipartisan pro-disarmament, pro-appeasement lobby in the federal government will be alive and well, and will continue to reign supreme. Pro-Russia, pro-China officials who naively believe that Russia and China are not hostile to the US and can be appeased by surrendering Eastern Europe and Taiwan to them will be making America’s foreign policy and will fill the Department of State and the Pentagon.
Last but not least, Rice voted for Obama in 2008, congratulated him tearfully, and said she was “extremely proud” of his win! Proof: http://im41.com/archives/10392
Let me be clear: if Rice is selected, conservatives should boycott the election, because it won’t matter who is elected. It would actually be far better to have a Democrat continue to destroy America’s defenses and appease Putin and the Chinese Politburo than to have a Republican President doing this. If Obama is reelected and continues to pursue these policies – as he certainly will if reelected (“This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility”), he and the Democrats will get the blame and will be opposed and blasted by Republicans. If Romney and Rice are elected, they and Republicans will get the blame, and Republicans won’t oppose Romney and Rice out of party loyalty (“how dare you criticize our own party’s President and Vice President!”). I know, because similar policies were pursued by Bush (while Rice was his NS Advisor and then Secretary of State), and virtually no Republicans offered resistance to any of them. Worse, when I told them that they should, and that Bush’s appeasement policies towards Russia and China and his nuclear arsenal cuts were wrong, they lambasted me. How dare I criticize the impeccable President Bush!
So, folks, if you really care about foreign and defense policies, and if Romney does select Rice, boycott the election.