Ok… that title is a bit tongue in cheek. Most of the folks supporting Mitt Romney do not believe President Obama is a secret Muslim, they think he is openly Muslim. Further, the meaningless neoconservative pablum that serves for Romney’s foreign policy does not really offer support to the state of Israel. But I like the title anyhoo.
The LA Times reports on Romney’s appearance before the “Faith and Freedom Coalition”. Check out this example of Romney’s comprehensive and detailed position on America’s relationship with Israel:
[Romney] responded with ridicule when asked what he would do, if elected, to strengthen U.S. relations with the Jewish state. “I think, by and large, you can just look at the things the president has done and do the opposite,” Romney said, to laughter and applause from members of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, an evangelical Christian political organization.
Laughter and applause from the gathered audience… There is no better example of a completely meaningless (perhaps even moronic) statement about a crucial issue of our times being greeted as some sort of pithy pronouncement, deserving of applause by the deluded sect of know nothings serving as the base of the Republican party.
Evidently Romney would not do the opposite of the President when it comes to Iran. Romney said:
I would make it very clear that for us, as well as for them, it is unacceptable for Iran to become a nuclear nation and that we’re prepared to take any and all action to keep that from happening,” he added, applause drowning out his next line.
That rhetoric echoes what President Obama has said repeatedly about Iran developing Nuclear weapons. (I could throw 50 links on this page with separate quotes & observations by Obama saying Iran developing a nuke is unacceptable and taking no option off the table, but it grows tedious.) Yet somehow when Romney says the precise thing as Obama the audience goes so wild with applause they step on Romney’s next line. Try to find any statement by President Obama which expresses willingness to tolerate allowing Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. All you’ll find in your search are implications and speculation by those who oppose him at every turn, even as they echo his rhetoric.
Perhaps when Romney says it is not acceptable for “Iran to become a nuclear nation” he is referencing nuclear power generation. That bird flew the coop in the 1950’s, with American assistance to set up Iranian nuclear power plants. Romney has shown a penchant for trying to scare up controversy over bugaboos from the cold war, so perhaps he really is determined to stop the Shah of Iran from developing nuclear power, by hook or by crook.
This speech was the latest effort by Romney to shore up support with evangelical Christians. Many conservative evangelicals will (mistakenly) consider this the first presidential election in American history where no christian is on the ballot. They will largely vote for Romney, a leading figure in what they consider to be a cult. Those votes will be the ultimate proof that their outlook on politics is not guided by religious or moral conviction. They can vote for someone they believe is a cult leader if that politician just tells them what they want to hear. If nothing else, Romney is the living definition of a politician willing to tell his audience what they want to hear.