Romney connects Iraq, 9/11

August 5, 2007

This morning’s Republican presidential candidate debate in Iowa was a relatively low-key affair, but this was one of the more unusual exchanges of the event. Following a question about ending the war in Iraq:

“Just come home,” dissented Texas Rep. Ron Paul, the lone advocate of a quick troop withdrawal on a presidential campaign debate stage. He said there had never been a good reason to go to war in the first place.

“Has he forgotten about 9/11?” interjected former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

Romney didn’t make clear why the attacks of Sept. 11 justify the war in Iraq, but he seemed oddly pleased with himself for making the comment.

It helps make clear why poll results like these are not at all surprising.

…Iowa GOP voters are expressing limited enthusiasm for the field of current and potential aspirants, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. Their views appear to be a microcosm of GOP sentiment across the country and point to a wide open battle for the nomination.

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has emerged as the early leader in the campaign for Iowa. But his support is both soft and shallow, suggesting that the Republican race in the state, as nationally, remains extremely fluid.

Just 19 percent of likely GOP caucus attendees said they were “very satisfied” with the field of candidates — far below satisfaction levels among Iowa Democrats — and poll respondents were badly fractured when asked to rate the candidates on political and personal attributes.

Republican voters have plenty of candidates, with various ideologies and temperaments, to choose from, but at least in Iowa, the vast majority looks at the GOP field and says, “Is this it?”

It helps explain why “none of the above” does so well among the GOP faithful.

Romney will not only make the 9/11 – Iraq link, he will conflate all Islamic foes, real or imagined:

“But I don’t want to buy into the Democratic pitch, that this is all about one person, Osama bin Laden. Because after we get him, there’s going to be another and another. This is about Shia and Sunni. This is about Hezbollah and Hamas and al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. This is the worldwide jihadist effort to try and cause the collapse of all moderate Islamic governments and replace them with a caliphate.”

For more, see:
“Romney’s Love-Hate Relationship with Hezbollah.”

  • Here’s my beef

    It sucks though that Stooofinopolus didn’t give the ONLY doctor on stage a question about healthcare, or better yet, giving a tax question to the ONLY man on stage that is advocating abolishing the income tax/IRS and replacing it with nothing. Going to be an uphill battle for the good doctor.

    http://www.ronpaul2008.com

  • It helps explain why “none of the above” does so well among the GOP faithful.

    maybe down the road you might be saying the same thing about the Democratic slate.

  • 911 and Iraq are connected, just like stu and pid are connected. Say it one more time:

    When you say 911 and Iraq are connected then you, like our current President, are stupid.

    “I thought I was missing something here,” I vented. “Having been attacked by al Qaeda, for us now to go bombing Iraq in response would be like our invading Mexico after the Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor.” Richard Clarke, White House Antiterrorism Coodinator

  • Hey, fundies – why aren’t you apoplectically rioting in the streets over your good Christian leaders debating on a Sunday morning, failing to keep the Sabbath holy when they ought to be in chuch, kneeling before God, instead of playing kissy-face with the MSM? Blasphemous! Evil, evil men!

  • Mitt’s not a hater. Not due to virtue, but indolence. Cherishing real odium is a chore.

    The GOP will, ceteris paribus, nominate the hater — this is Nixon’s legacy to his party. They deviate from this — Bush père — they lose.

    This time around, it’s Giuliani.

  • He can’t possibly believe in the Iraq-911 connection, can he? It’s the same old lying bullshit, but if you are deep in a hole what do you have to lose? Having not a leg to stand on keeps you balanced but with limited capabilities.

  • 9-11….9-11….9-11….9-11….heel sheep! 9-11…9-11….9-11….kneel before your master! 9-11….9-11….9-11….

  • Where did this “caliphate” nonsense come from and why isn’t anyone debunking it? The idea that all Arab muslims, let alone the Persian muslims, would set aside their differences and then relinquish their power and dismantle their governments in favor of being ruled by a caliph – to be chosen by who? – is the height of ignorance.

    Although ignorance is the Republicans’ best friend, the popularity of “none of the above” suggests that the electorate may finally be wising up.

  • Mitt Romney doesn’t have to meet a very high threshold, when there are media outlets that contend he should be the next president just because he is so handsome. Well, at least there’s one category where Rudy Giuliani can’t bullshit his way to the top.

    It’s fairly easy to convince a significant number of Americans that Iraq had something to do with 9-11, because THEY WANT IT TO BE TRUE. These people, and you see them pop up now and again on this blog as well as the comments sections in WaPo, just enjoy seeing the U.S. kick some little country to death – but it needs to be justified with at least a thin veneer of reason. After all, what’s the point of having the world’s most powerful military (theoretically) plus the world’s biggest nuclear arsenal, if you’re not prepared to use them whenever it’s a slow day and there’s nothing good on TV?

  • Pat Buchanan writes another good op-ed piece today and basically calls both major parties ” the War Parties”, when I see ron Paul and Pat Buchanan both on the traditional right calling for a change in our military directed foreign policy I keep wondering where is the Democrat’s? a link below to pat b. article.

    http://www.theamericancause.org/

  • Romney sez… “I’m JUST like Bush?”

    But hey isn’ that kind of McCain’s problem? We know why Fred can’t raise any money.

    AND at 28% is such a good idea to try and LOOK more Bush like? I won’t think so but then if you’re going to heart Bush, and let Bushism frame anything and everything that Repugs can do, can be – there where is there to go but down. Stange campaign tactics – are Repugs really THAT stupid?

    Bush ran on “I’m a uniter – not a divider” and yet dividing and isolationism is his whole policy content – soTODAY’s Repugs dare not stray from the “we hate all liberals” and “attack the liberals” as if Rovism BS is dead yet, a format that placed the house and senate under Dem control in the last voting cycle? Todays Repugs are lobbying to the 28% of Bushism hard core but THEN how do they change their tune to get other voters in country after the primaries???

    How do you flip-flop without looking like a complete liar? Repugs appear to be campaigning to lose with the “I’m more like Bush” game they are playing right with the 28%ers. Winning the primary is simply going to be a waste of time since role reversal would leave the 28% radical wing-nuts completely traumatized if indeed the Repugs try to woe liberals even just a little bit. AND when September rolls around – at some point The US will have that break down in our US military operations – what then? AND does Rudy really think NY will choose him over Hillary?

    These guys are setting the stage to NEVER leave Bush’s side – and gosh, it looks like a death wish on the Repug party to me. It seems so completely strange to me that Repug candidates running for office worry only about the mere 28% who still think Bush is the icon of right-wing conservatism. What are they hoping for – another terrorist attack – for Bush to NOT listen to another August intelligence briefing?

    For diebold to really skew the numbers?

    Are they really this short sighted in their campaigns? How does 28% land them in the Whitehouse? ARE Republican really this retarded?

  • “Has he forgotten about 9/11?”

    The fact that Clark Willard “Romney” Griswold would make this slur is obviously intentional. In the form of a question, it is designed to disguise its true nature — a psychological attack upon the American Public to manipulate and exploit fear and prolong the psychological trauma upon the American Psyche brought about by 9/11.

    But the fact that there is so little discourse in this country on this subject –that the true nature of 9/11 was as much, if not more, a psychological attack (aka terrorism) as it was a physical attack upon the Good People of America– enables street ReThugs like Rupaul McRompson to somewhat successfully peddle their snake-oils.

    Not to diminish the loss of life on 9/11, but just think for a moment about what our fatalistic society endures each year — 40,000+ vehicular fatalities. But you don’t hear about a Global War On Aggressive Driving (because that would be illogical). But after some 3,000 deaths on 9/11, we have an oxymoronic Global War On Terror (or Terrorism) –what the hell sense does it make to declare “war” upon a psychological state or a nefarious tactic? It is a broad Loyal Bushie Brownshirt Cabal stroke to perpetuate infernal, interminable war and associated looting of the treasury at its say-so, not to mention to advance the vulgar practice of intimidating political dissent.

  • Where did this “caliphate” nonsense come from […] — Dennis – SGMM (@10)

    I don’t know where it came from but it seems to be a fairly common concept among the Repubs, esp. the less educated ones. Our Fallenwoman (whatever happened to her?) used to mention it and I hear it “down heah” (south-west VA) fairly often.Somethime, I think they’re simply in love with a new word; it sounds as if it were straight from the 1001 Nights (sorry, can’t rember the English title of the cycle)… Reality has little to do with fairy tales.

  • “Caliphate”

    Y’see? It done got the word HATE in it. Them Muslims hates us for us freedoms! [/knuckledragging]

    Talk about the caliphate reminds me of similar talk about the other Radical Christianist boogey: The Vatican.

    As I’ve said before, your average Talevangical isn’t known for his ability to form an original thought so the idea that members of other groups follow the orders of a leader without question makes perfect sense to them.

    Projection anyone?

  • Projection anyone? TAiO, @16

    Oh, but when we’ve slayed all the infidels (at home and abroad), we won’t call it a “caliphate”…

  • The 9-11 Commission concluded only that there was no official connection between Saddam Hussein and 9-11.

    There were, of course, al-Qaeda terrorist training camps and al-Qaeda terrorists (al-Zarqawi being one) who not only resided in Baghdad but videotaped beheadings (Nicolas Berg) there shortly afterwards.

    But, correct, Saddam never had al-Qaeda under contract with his government. It appears he let them freelance, and apparently this is an important distinction only to liberals and Bush haters.

    • Comments are closed.