In an interview with John Roberts of CNN, potential vice presidential nominee Mitt Romney dismissed Barack Obama's bipartisanship accomplishments as being achieved on liberal issues.
Hmmm... John Roberts found that perplexing, as did Richard Lugar. Roberts writes:
McCain hopes to paint Obama as a politician who puts party and self-interest above the needs of the nation, claiming that Obama has "never been a part of a bipartisan group that came together to solve a controversial issue."
Romney faithfully repeated that charge Thursday morning.When I pointed out that Obama reached across party lines to work with Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Indiana, on a nonproliferation measure, and with Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Oregon, on increasing gas mileage requirements, Romney shot back, saying that, "Actually, on both cases, you're talking about two liberal positions, nonproliferation as well as the gasoline mileage."
It struck me as rather odd -- having covered five years of the Bush administration as a White House correspondent -- that the governor would view nonproliferation as a "liberal" issue. I seem to recall a little ditty called the "Proliferation Security Initiative," launched by President Bush on May 31, 2003.
The aim of the initiative is to enlist the nations of the world to "stop trafficking of weapons of mass destruction, their delivery systems and related materials to and from states and non-state actors of proliferation concern."
Whether the program is a success is very much in question (though the administration claims it is), but I've never heard anyone call it a "liberal" position.
So what about the Lugar-Obama measure -- conceived as an adjunct to the Proliferation Security Initiative? Did it qualify as "liberal?"
Here's how Sen. Lugar's office described it in a press release: "The Lugar-Obama initiative enhances U.S. efforts to destroy conventional weapons stockpiles and to detect and interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction throughout the world."
Lugar has a bit of a middling score from the American Conservative Union (a lifetime rating of 78.02 on a scale that goes to 100) and has been called a "moderate' from time to time. But "liberal?"
I asked Lugar's press secretary, Andy Fisher, about it Thursday morning.
"National security is not liberal," he told me, "at all."
Exactly.
Mitt is a dummy. He continues to run against his own contradictions.
While trying to out-macho one another during the televised GOP debates, Romney accused Patrick Fitzgerald of abusing "prosecutorial discretion" for sentencing Scooter Libby, after being found guilty on 4 charges of perjury and obstruction of justice prompted a letter from several former CIA veterans:
[...]
"We believe that Republicans and Democrats alike must commit themselves to upholding the rule of law and refusing to use clandestine CIA officers as a political football. In this regard we find that the recent comments by Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney sadly wanting and unworthy of the highest elected office in the United States."
[...]
Individuals, politicians and civilians alike, unwilling to keep intelligence and the law free from political influence to protect the country and ensure justice is done, respectively, present a real danger to the country. This is why Romney should never be put in the halls of power nor anyone else willing to continue Bush's policies.
De-politicizing the justice department, national security agencies and the intelligence community requires a commitment and courage of conviction from all Americans to move beyond partisanship.
Yesterday on CNN yesterday someone had to remind a republican strategist that Mitt Romney may not be such a good running mate for John McCain, since Mitt Romney was once a corporate raider who made his fortune by raiding companies which then had to execute massive layoffs, and put thousands, and thousands of Americans out of work.
Mitt Romney doesn't understand the working American at all, Mitt Romney made his money off their misfortunes.
Interesting... very interesting.
Well, that, and handing them a stick and going out drinking while the Democrats beat themselves stupid over who's more far left, then wonder why the rest of the country won't vote Democrat.
Just another Stupid Partisanship Nonsense Talking Point !!!
***Newsflash***
Mitt Romney still thinks the World is Flat........
Dumbo !
BTW National Security is NOT a liberal issue and is certainly is NOT a conservative issue either. Its an American issue. Democrats in the past just cower and fold and then it becomes an issue with which conservatives beat them over the head. When someone look weak the American people isnt going to want that person in a position of power to defend them. Thats why democrats should NEVER concede ANYTHING to republican not even red states or religion which they end up warping for their own purposes.
Carol