|
Neocon WaPo Editors Endorse Obama
The neoconned editorial board of the Washington Post, famous for always calling for more wars, endorse Barack Obama as president for another four years.
The first reason they give is Obama's plan to cut Social Security:
He did not end, as he promised he would, “our chronic avoidance of tough decisions” on fiscal matters. But Mr. Obama is committed to the only approach that can succeed: a balance of entitlement reform and revenue increases.
The second reasons are more wars.
Obama has not yet delivered all the wars the WaPo editors want, but he has waged enough, he introduced "kill lists" and a "disposition matrix" to eliminate whoever is though to be a "terrorist" including all the bystanders and he has shown no consciences. The editors hope for more of that.
While Mitt Romney has lots of neocon foreign policy advisers he himself is not one and there are concerns that he might actually turn out to be a realist:
The sad answer is there is no way to know what Mr. Romney really believes. [..] At times he has advocated a muscular, John McCain-style foreign policy, but in the final presidential debate he positioned himself as a dove.
Imagine that. A possible dove in the oval office. There is no way the WaPo editors would allow for that.
Romney is a consummate salesman, says jawbone @ 11.
He is a *bizniss* man, out for profit, control, admiration, adulation, in circles and circuits he himself does not understand or control. (Unlike the local Mafia boss in Naples. Or for a higher ex., Putin.)
Just grandstand and go for the profit. In that sense, he might hold any stance, following the day’s briefings:
> a dove: war, not enough return, too expensive, wasteful, detrimental to trade, collaboration, bad for US image, needlessly destructive, not good for biz (e.g. selling T shirts and meds and tech to Iran) etc.
> a hawk: feed the military, dominate commerce, keep red states quiet with defense contracts, act tough on China and other BS, defend corporations – their hold on resources – with bombs, up the aggro, the US is tops and must stay so, attack Iran – oops no! – some other place?
On a social issue:
> for abortion: better family life, less social service expenditure, better education for all, easier schooling, women’s rights, family choice (as his children have done)
> against, as per religious grounds or even personal conviction, or vote trolling, plus keeping those minorities chained to multiple children as the upper class has always done as a method of control, to amongst others, feed the security and prison industries…
and so on.
Mitt’s flip-flops are kinda normal when the State or more generally political-social-economic direction is lost in the wilderness and captive to corporate, faction, lobby interests, and barely surviving on symbolic vestiges of common-good respectability. All is presented as in yo face pop contests by the media, as that is how they make *their* money..
Posted by: Noirette | Oct 26 2012 18:04 utc | 21
|
