Daniel Larison is a sane and sensible conservative voice. He is thoroughly disgusted with the lying, amateurish, belligerent foreign policy pronouncements that have been made by Willard and his hyper-aggressive team of Neo-Con chickenhawks, and he sums up the issue nicely here:
The broader criticism of Obama regarding treatment of allies and adversaries is unfounded, and so are the specific attacks that Romney and his allies have been making for years. I have made a point of challenging these attacks for the last few years mainly because they are inaccurate and/or dishonest, but it’s also clear that the even more hawkish alternatives favored by these critics would be that much worse for the U.S. Even if the criticism happened to be correct in this instance, [the embassy attacks] which it wasn’t, hawkish critics have made so many similar, baseless attacks over the years that it would have been easy to dismiss this as just more of the same. As it happened, the criticism this week wasn’t just inaccurate, but also thoroughly dishonest. In addition to all of that, there was the display of spectacularly poor judgment in immediately attacking on Tuesday night. Romney had made false claims before (“abandoning” missile defense, “betraying” allies, etc.), but he had not attempted to make political hay out of an ongoing crisis before now. When he did, his habit of saying untrue and unfounded things about Obama’s foreign policy record came back to bite him. Considering how long he has been able to make misleading and dishonest accusations on these issues before now, it is about time.
Yes, indeed it is. Romney would be a DANGER TO THE WORLD were he (God forbid!) to become president. He and the chronically dishonest foreign policy hacks he employs would plunge us right back into Bush's disastrous bull-in-a-china-shop regime. And does anyone doubt that Willard wants a WAR WITH IRAN, a war with potentially tragic consequences?
We HAVE to vote against this reckless, lying amateur. Our world's future could be at stake here.