Wednesday, September 06, 2006
Romney
Perhaps an early indirect preview on Romney's foreign relations approach - his position on state-funded security for Khatami visit (see here). Kudos to Romney for taking the stand he did; if "private" groups are interested in inviting Khatami to speak, let them pick up the tab for his security.
Labels:
2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Always sniffing for the truth
Contributors
Links
- Love and Lunchmeat
- Long Island Prepper
- Fredo's Mets Blog
- Continental Sausage
- Human Events
- Maker's Mark
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Newt Gingrich
- NRO
- Pro Ecclesia
- Ralfy's Whisky Reviews
- Red Albany
- Res Publica et Cetera
- Sour Mash Manifesto
- Straight Bourbon
- Taki Mag
- The American Conservative
- The American Spectator
- The Anchoress Online
- The Politico
- The Weekly Standard
- Wild Turkey Bourbon
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(167)
-
▼
September
(26)
- Newt on Terrorism, before it was chic
- Extremely interesting interview with Newt
- Some positive news from Germany
- Olbermann continues his descent
- The Pope Stands Alone
- C-it-go
- Time to place your bets
- Mid-terms
- Hugo Chavez jumps the shark
- More calls for the West to cease its self-destruct...
- The religion of peace
- B & E
- Internet Straw Polls
- (Deflated) Air America
- Saddam
- Bloomberg
- This doesn't taste like victory
- Allen in '08?
- WSJ pours me a bourbon, neat
- NY State of Mind
- How the blogosphere left and right respond to 9/11
- Why Mitt and Rudy are different
- Romney
- Cabinet re-facing
- OK, I admit it.
- Joe Wilson is the definition of unpatriotic
-
▼
September
(26)
3 comments:
Typical ivory tower nonsense. The sheer gall to invite a terrorist to the country for "dialogue," while thousands of widows without husbands and children without parents have to sit through the 5 year anniversary of the death of their loved ones.
And then they're able to muster that ole' time elitist attitude to say, we're disappointed with the governor's decision. Even if Khatami is evil and supports the murderers of Americans, we're civil enough to share tea and crumpets with him, unlike our savage Republican governor. Oh, BTW, I'm paraphrasing.
I wonder if they'd be taking the same approach if the terrorists had hit Harvard square?
They're self-loathing enough that they probably would.
You might be paraphrasing, but not much. If not what they stated publicly, it's certainly what's in their private thoughts.
The Boston Globe predictably attacked Romney for his position today. Unpredictably, there may be some merit to his position.
Enyclopedia Britannica offers this brief blurb on the former Iranian President:
In the 1997 elections Khatami was one of four candidates to run for the presidency and was the most moderate on social issues. With strong support from the country's youth, women, and intellectuals, he was elected by almost 70 percent of the vote. Some of the moderates he appointed to the cabinet were controversial but nonetheless were approved by Iran's conservative Majles. Tension between the president and conservatives grew, however, and, beginning in 1998, a number of key Khatami supporters were prosecuted and harassed as a result. He advocated increased contact with the United States, but his domestic opponents hindered rapprochement between the two countries. Khatami was reelected in 2001 by an overwhelming majority of the vote.
If Khatami rebuked terror and had an affirmative record of "rapprochement" with the U.S., this action could make Romney look quite foolish. If competence is Romney's calling card, it's important the he knows the difference between terrorists and Muslims who denounce terrorism.
I don't necessarily trust the characterization of Khatami as a "moderate", but I can't disprove it either (I've spent about 5 minutes running web searches, and that's all I'm willing to commit to the effort). If it turns out the characterization is true, my reactive post above will have been as presumptive as the governor's actions.