Looking back: remember that debate between Romney and Obama about Russia?
Here’s something I wrote around the time of Putin’s Crimea grab in 2014:
Why was our intelligence community caught flat-footed about Putin’s moves? That’s a question being asked on Capitol Hill, and in Politico…
The tone was set by our president and his entire administration, followed slavishly by most liberal journalists, who have spent a great deal of time and effort saying what a pussycat Putin is, and ridiculing as outdated (Obama to Romney: “the 1980s are calling to ask for their foreign policy back”) anyone who might say otherwise. This began in 2008 with mockery of Sarah Palin, and reached a crescendo with Romney during the 2012 campaign.
To take any other scenario seriously would mean giving credence to those troglodytes Palin and Romney, agreeing with them instead of mocking them, and admitting that the world hadn’t turned into the fantasyland that suited Obama’s, Democrats’, and the MSM’s own rhetorical and political purposes.
A day prior to that, I had written a post that quoted this Slate article as follows (written by David Weigel, not on the right):
Romney was right. Why was Obama wrong?…
Romney really did maintain a more cynical long-run view of Russia than Obama did. Obama saw Russia as a declining power that he could do business with, as he did with the New START treaty. Romney, as he laid out in his pre-campaign book No Apology, saw Russia as a recovering power. Its “rediscovered ambition for superpower status,” he wrote, “is fueled by its massive energy reserves.” This wasn’t as sustainable as China’s free-enterprise empire strategy, but it was an empire strategy, and that was enough to get spooked about.
Say what you will about Romney. He’s been a bitter disappointment in many ways, but when he’s right, he’s right.
It wasn’t that hard to see at the time that he was right, either. But Democrats and the MSM praised Obama highly for his sophomoric snark. And that’s even more common today, isn’t it? Sophomoric snark passing for wisdom among our “elite.”
And that’s on their better days.
Romney claimed that Russia was ‘our number one geopolitical foe’.
It perhaps won’t come as a surprise but at that time I don’t think that Romney was correct, in that China was at that time a far greater geopolitical threat.
Currently the potential for nuclear conflict with Russia does elevate them to our number one geopolitical concern because rather than making efforts to deescalate the conflict, the Biden administration with the full cooperation of Congress is escalating the conflict.
Geoffrey, tell me who has been threatening the west with nuclear weapons in the last few weeks?
I shouldn’t have to give you a hint.
Your assertion is particularly “droll” given Brandon’s statements and actions prior
to the invasion
}}} Why was our intelligence community caught flat-footed about Putin’s moves?
Now we know…
They were already spending all their time investigating Obama’s opposition. :-/
Geoffrey Britain:
The transcript of the debate is here. Let’s look at what Romney said. This was right after Obama and Romney were talking about the threat that Middle Eastern terrorism represented to the US:
The context of that part of the debate was vs. the Middle East. China was not part of the discussion.
So, what did Romney say in that earlier statement that Obama was referencing? It wasn’t a speech; it was an interview with Wolf Blitzer:
That’s what Romney meant by geopolitical foe. He didn’t mean economic foe or cyber foe. The following was the context [emphasis mine]:
Romney was right.
I think it’s always a good rule of thumb, when discussing a quote, to research the details of the quote.
Geoffrey Britain:
It’s also so interesting that you place the blame for Putin’s aggression escalation on Biden and Congress’s reaction to it.
Although I suppose that you may be correct that if we had just said to Putin “sure thing, take what you want and we won’t try anything to stop you because we’re afraid of you,” Putin would have been less violent. Although I actually don’t think he would have, because the Ukrainians probably still would have mounted armed resistance.
We’ve discussed the difference between your evaluation of Putin’s aims and my evaluation of those aims, so no need to go over that again at the moment.
We probably agree, however, on the fact that Biden’s weakness and his energy policy emboldened Putin to attack Ukraine NOW.
It’s too bad McCain isn’t alive for his apology. He once said that the only thing he saw when he looked in Putin’s eyes was three letters: K G B. He was right.
When I look at the debate footage it seems very much like a prepared line from Obama. I’d bet $100 that it was scripted for him in advance and he was told to work it in if possible. When you watch how Obama delivers it and right after Obama seems a bit directionless, unsure what to say next. It does not appear off the cuff at all.
And it is a good line. We all remember it.
A personal view from Poland; how Poles are responding. They remember. Poland is not a rich country either.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CGzFbzZI2TU
The Eastern European prospective. Vlad’s paranoia and despotism has a human cost Geoffrey.
It turns out to be a good thing that the news media providing us a view into the situation is able to find so many local people who speak English. They don’t have to rely on translators, who may be unavailable, inaccurate, or have their own agenda. And that some of these people can and do go on line to provide a “straight scoop”, per om’s example above. A great many more eyes and ears allowed to see and hear what is happening – unusual until recently with cell phones, etc. Still requires skepticism in what we view, but beneficial overall.
If we were to allow Russian news people free rein here to interview people [and I suspect that we do, but … ], they would find very few who can speak Russian or Ukrainian, by comparison. [setting aside the Russian media being so controlled to maintain a pro-Russian message.]
Rufus T. Firefly:
I remembered that line of Obama’s, all right. But in my case, I remembered it not only because it seemed planned in advance, but because it was puerile and snarky and sounded like something from “Wayne’s World”.
Obama’s snarky reply was “the 1970s called they want their foreign policy back”.
BrooklynBoy:
The quote is not what you say it is, although close. It is this:
The problem with Romney‘s campaign amongst many others was that like George W. Bush he was a punching bag and would never fight back. The first debate which was October 3, 2012 he turned in a magnificent performance. He seemed calm, intelligent, well spoken, and presidential. Chris Matthews of MSNBC was apoplectic about how out debated Obama was. The next debate was the presidential debate and the talking head Paul Ryan allowed Joe Biden to just ridicule him while Eraser Head Ryan droned on about “Dodd Frank“. The next debate that Romney and Obama had, Obama had Candy Crowley run interference for him.
Neo
Yes, I made a typo and forgot to proof read.
BrooklynBoy:
I don’t know whether you were reading this blog yet when that 2012 debate happened where Candy Crowley intervened to help Obama. But you might be interested in my take on it at the time, here and here.