Red meat Mitt: We need an alternative to the UN

posted at 2:04 pm on October 18, 2007 by Allahpundit

There’s not a lot on which he and Hitchens agree, I’d imagine, but this is one example and terrorism is another and that ain’t a bad place to start. I’m a little suspicious of Mitt’s redder-than-red-meat message push lately — the jihad ad, the “real Republican” rhetoric, the easy crowd-pleasing UN-bashing — but he’s making a play for the base and this is certainly the stuff of which such plays are made.

“The United Nations has been an extraordinary failure of late,” Romney said in response to a question at a pancake house along the coast of early voting South Carolina. “We should withdraw from the United Nations Human Rights Council.”

Actually, the United States doesn’t have a seat on the human rights council, which it has been boycotting.

Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom later clarified the remarks.

“The governor believes we ought to withdraw completely from the U.N. Human Rights Council, and that means ending our financial support in addition to not seeking a seat on the council,” Fehrnstrom said. “We should not legitimize the council, either with financial or diplomatic support.”

Romney also said he would support a new “coalition of the free nations of the world and bring those nations together so that we can act together.”

It’s just a tad curious to watch him stake out the most rock-ribbed Republican positions across the board knowing that he ran as a moderate for senate against Teddy in Massachusetts. Rudy’s guilty of the same thing, of course, but with a very notable exception in abortion; oddly enough, his steadfastness on that issue makes his pandering on things like gun rights and immigration seem ever so slightly more genuine by comparison, since it suggests that he’s willing to stick to his position if he really believes in it. In Mitt’s case, you almost have to wonder: When does a video of him endorsing the UN circa 1994 surface?

Here’s his latest ad, yet another nod at the base and a clear dig by implication at Rudy and Fred. Whoever the nominee is, I’d be perfectly happy with Ann Romney as First Lady.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I could live with that.

DaveS on October 18, 2007 at 2:06 PM

eyebrow raise. Me likey.

LtE126 on October 18, 2007 at 2:07 PM

Good. Go Mitt go!

NTWR on October 18, 2007 at 2:07 PM

Thank you Mitt!
Have a new UN with democratic countries only – Israel, Japan, Taiwan, Australia, some of the African nations, most of Europe, our allies in South America. And to become a member you have to espouse and practice democratic principles

Defector01 on October 18, 2007 at 2:08 PM

Well, I guess he’s in it to win it.

Can’t say I’m sold on him in the least, but he’s certainly running with it.

Editor on October 18, 2007 at 2:10 PM

good ad

frreal on October 18, 2007 at 2:12 PM

oddly enough, his steadfastness on that issue makes his pandering on things like gun rights and immigration seem ever so slightly more genuine by comparison, since it suggests that he’s willing to stick to his position if he really believes in it.

I wholly agree with that. And Ann Romney seems like a wonderful person, based off her interview with Bennett and the work she’s done with his wife.

Nice ad.

Spirit of 1776 on October 18, 2007 at 2:13 PM

Good. Someone had to say it. Pandering? Nah….just smart.
Face it, all these fellas have pet agendas and dealing off your votes for policy considerations is how the game works.

Mitt has grown on me. I really didn’t like him at first but the more I hear him speak, the more I like the guy.

Limerick on October 18, 2007 at 2:15 PM

The United Nations has been an extraordinary failure of late

Of late?

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on October 18, 2007 at 2:19 PM

And the sky is blue

gmoonster on October 18, 2007 at 2:19 PM

If I could trust him not to rinomorph once he’s in office he would have my vote.
But so far I just can’t.

ChrisM on October 18, 2007 at 2:19 PM

ISnt this similar to McCain’s “league of free nations” ?

William Amos on October 18, 2007 at 2:23 PM

The thing is, Romney’s had some great stuff like this for a long time that just wasn’t reported. He made a great speech against Iran several months ago–in Israel, as a matter of fact.

People forget that he fought the gay marriage thing in Mass. for a long time, and saved the country from that issue for a while. This ad is fantastic, and is perfectly in line with his core religious beliefs–the LDS church strongly, strongly emphasizes the family.

Look, the idea of a gathering of nations is good. The UN is just not that gathering. I wish, Allah, that you could give someone credit.

After all, isn’t the POINT of conservatism to gain converts? If all people do is bash them because they’ve not been 100% conservative their entire life, why would people join up for that?

Vanceone on October 18, 2007 at 2:23 PM

rinomorph

I salute you for that one :-)

Did you coin that one?

Ochlan on October 18, 2007 at 2:23 PM

The U.N. should be removed, housed in a circus tent, and placed in any of the various and sundry human disasters that scar the face of this earth – and which the U.N. does nothing about.

2007 – The circus tent should be located in Darfur.
2008 – The circus tent should be located in Chad.
2009 – The circus tent should be located in Somalia [again].
2010 – [You get my drift].

The U.N. is a joke, because it is filled with a bunch of hacks who don’t give a damn about anything – other than hearing themselves yap and protecting their own job status. It’s much like our Congress.

OhEssYouCowboys on October 18, 2007 at 2:24 PM

Mitt has grown on me. I really didn’t like him at first but the more I hear him speak, the more I like the guy.

Limerick on October 18, 2007 at 2:15 PM

Limerick, you are a friendly witness. This is what I’ve been saying from the start. Mitt will be fine because the more people learn about him, the more they will like him. At the begining of the process his name recognition was thought to be a major anchor on his campaign. I don’t think that will be a case for precisely the reason you seem to be expressing here.

Zetterson on October 18, 2007 at 2:24 PM

If I could trust him not to rinomorph once he’s in office he would have my vote.
But so far I just can’t.

ChrisM on October 18, 2007 at 2:19 PM

I trust him and Fred more on that issue then Rudy or McCain(esp). Looking at the news (Russia, China, Iran), McCain’s little bomb in the last debate that an attack is more likely then most people think, well…..I believe these guys realize what is on the line here. As far as the Dems go it is business as usual….wheel, deal, and squeal.

Limerick on October 18, 2007 at 2:25 PM

Look, the idea of a gathering of nations is good. The UN is just not that gathering. I wish, Allah, that you could give someone credit.

What makes you think I don’t think it’s a good idea? I said even Hitchens agrees with it, didn’t I? It’s not a controversial proposition.

Allahpundit on October 18, 2007 at 2:25 PM

I said even Hitchens agrees with it, didn’t I?

Heh. Is that the litmus test?

Spirit of 1776 on October 18, 2007 at 2:27 PM

Is that the litmus test?

No, just a way of showing that even people who disagree on much can get behind this idea.

Allahpundit on October 18, 2007 at 2:27 PM

Did you coin that one?

If I knew how to do the trade mark thingy I would have.

ChrisM on October 18, 2007 at 2:28 PM

No, just a way of showing that even people who disagree on much can get behind this idea.

Yeah, I know. It’s self-evident, I just giving you a hard time since apparently no political post goes up without complaint.

Spirit of 1776 on October 18, 2007 at 2:29 PM

Romney said in response to a question at a pancake house along the coast of early voting South Carolina.

That would be the Applewood Pancake House in Pawley’s Island. Excellent Sunday brunch!

KelliD on October 18, 2007 at 2:30 PM

At least when Mitt spouts off with his “talking points” it doesn’t usally end up costing me more taxes. Unlike the Hilbeast. She can’t wait to spend mine and yours money.

SPIFF1669 on October 18, 2007 at 2:32 PM

What is it with you and Hitchens AP? He’s just an atheist Taliban without the actual power to do as he pleases (thank Darwin).

Darth Executor on October 18, 2007 at 2:32 PM

LOL, what I meant about giving Mitt credit is that you seem skeptical that Mitt really means any of this stuff–that he’s pandering to the base, not saying what he means. Sorry for my confusing wording of the comment.

have you read Mitt’s Stronger America booklet? It contains most of his positions, and I’d say they are conservative. :)

Vanceone on October 18, 2007 at 2:32 PM

As for disagreeing with Hitchens, well, I do too. I like Hitchen’s spirit, but seeing what he said about my faith, and knowing that what he calls LDS beliefs and LDS history isn’t what we actually believe (I.e. he’s attacking strawmen) doesn’t make me like the guy much.

Vanceone on October 18, 2007 at 2:35 PM

Of late?

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on October 18, 2007 at 2:19 PM

That’s what I thought too…

Actually, the United States doesn’t have a seat on the human rights council, which it has been boycotting.

I bet if I went trolling on Kos or DU, I would find that that’s the part they’ll be focusing on. (Sorry, just don’t have the stomach to pay them a visit today.)

lan astaslem on October 18, 2007 at 2:36 PM

have you read Mitt’s Stronger America booklet?

I have not. When was it written, just this campaign season? Have a link? I’ll read it if you do.

It’s a catch-22 to me. I think Mitt is less genuine (or, uh, flexible) than Rudy, but I also think Mitt is more likely to keep his campaign promises then Rudy.

Spirit of 1776 on October 18, 2007 at 2:37 PM

Okay, if Mitt promises to select John Bolton as his VP running mate, I might consider voting for him. ;-)

aero on October 18, 2007 at 2:39 PM

Vanceone on October 18, 2007 at 2:35 PM

What do you like about Hitchens’s spirit so much? The fact that he’d love to participate in an American civil war so he could kill religious people?

Darth Executor on October 18, 2007 at 2:40 PM

LOL……at myself…
reading thru this thread it is pretty obvious that my man better get in the headlines quick. This is shaping up to be a two man race faster then I thought it would.

Here is to the hope of gobsmacking the donks in Nov! Cheers!

Limerick on October 18, 2007 at 2:41 PM

That shot of him with 15 kids around him reminds me of my cat when she had a huge litter.

AlexB on October 18, 2007 at 2:41 PM

USA out of the UN
UN out of the USA

Implode the building at turtle bay and turn the property into an amusement park. As the real estate consultants love to say at zoning hearings: “This is the best possible use of the property in question.”

georgej on October 18, 2007 at 2:54 PM

I think you are right on this one AP, Mitt is just making a play for the base. Look for a new message on the 2nd Ammendment soon. He is getting desperate at this point.

He should have rolled out these ideas from the beginning, then perhaps he would not be in third place now.

conservnut on October 18, 2007 at 2:55 PM

Here’s the link to Romney’s Stronger America booklet. Yes, a new piece of campaign lit this year.

About Hitchens? I like the fact that he’s not afraid to take on Islam. Otherwise, I don’t like him at all.

Vanceone on October 18, 2007 at 2:57 PM

This is fine by me. Any of the Republicans would be acceptable to me.
Anybody but a democrat.

Iblis on October 18, 2007 at 3:00 PM

At least when Mitt spouts off with his “talking points” it doesn’t usally end up costing me more taxes. Unlike the Hilbeast. She can’t wait to spend mine and yours money.

SPIFF1669 on October 18, 2007 at 2:32 PM

So he says, but he’s also come out in favor of corporate welfare for the auto industry, ag subsidies, and bailouts for homeowners facing foreclosure- and that’s just in the last debate. Tack on his support for government health care programs and I’m not sure that the big government spending he supports jives well with low taxes.

Hollowpoint on October 18, 2007 at 3:07 PM

Remember that Mitt ran and won in a state that is strongly Democratic- he had to represent all of the people. He is the strongest business person running- government should be run like a business with a good CEO. We must remember anyone is better than a democrat. I am appalled that people think his religion matters to the point they would rather vote for a democrat than a republican- he lives his principles of family values. He has a lot to offer and I think if people will get to know him, he could possibly win!

nnaus on October 18, 2007 at 3:09 PM

government spending he supports jives well with low taxes.

One of the benefits of lower taxes is, actually, increase government revenue.

Spirit of 1776 on October 18, 2007 at 3:09 PM

Too bad Mitt didn’t know that we were not on the U.N. Human Rights Council when he called on us to withdraw from the post, we’ve been boycotting it for years.
He just doesn’t get it, he is just a light weight in heavy weight politics.
Mitt has too much to learn to be a real conservative. He should state what he really believes, and not what he thinks his potential voters believe. In other words, be true to thine self.

right2bright on October 18, 2007 at 3:10 PM

Romney also said he would support a new “coalition of the free nations of the world and bring those nations together so that we can act together.”

Well, if it includes France and other such free but bedwetting nations, I question whether we’d be so much better off.

The UN is a failure, but we already have an organization similar to what Mitt is proposing- it’s called NATO. Adding yet another international organization isn’t going to help- the answer is for countries to independently form treaties and alliances as they see fit, without the need to get the blessing from an international overlord council.

Hollowpoint on October 18, 2007 at 3:12 PM

It is entirely possible – it’s even very likely – that thinking people like Mitt and Rudy would change their positions over time, and that – as thinking people – they would evolve in a more conservative direction. The automatic scepticism is uncalled for. As long as they make sense, I’ll accept their words as sincere.

Halley on October 18, 2007 at 3:14 PM

He’s right, except that we don’t need an alternative to the U.N.

I wish we would recognize the U.N. for the failure it is, and be done with it. Cut off the cancer from our soil.

Hawkins1701 on October 18, 2007 at 3:15 PM

This is also a slap against Hillary. Ya know, with the claims that she didn’t really raise Chelsey and all.

- The Cat

MirCat on October 18, 2007 at 3:17 PM

One of the benefits of lower taxes is, actually, increase government revenue.

Spirit of 1776 on October 18, 2007 at 3:09 PM

To a point, yes- but it has to be coupled with low spending to be sustainable over economic cycles. Plus the increased revenue tends to lag behind the tax cuts by quite a bit. Reduce taxes 99% and the GDP will improve, but not enough to make up for lost tax revenues.

Increasing spending in response to increased revenues has proven all too easy, but cutting spending in response to economic downturns has proved impossible- in fact the opposite usually happens, with the government trying to spend it’s way out of a recession.

Hollowpoint on October 18, 2007 at 3:18 PM

I want a live feed when the buses pull up outside of the UN building.

Mitt isn’t waiting for polite conversation, not standing on ceremony and going for it is a sign of good leadership.

Mitt might in front except for the hate Mormons excuse.

Maybe because he has to fight for it is a good thing.

Speakup on October 18, 2007 at 3:18 PM

The automatic scepticism is uncalled for. As long as they make sense, I’ll accept their words as sincere.

Halley on October 18, 2007 at 3:14 PM

Your first election cycle, is it? This happens every time- the Republican candidates shift right for the primaries, then back to the center for the general election- and usually staying there if not moving even further left.

How many broken campaign promises (both in the primaries and general election) will it take for people to question the sincerity of what certainly looks like campaign season pandering?

Hollowpoint on October 18, 2007 at 3:21 PM

After this and the jihadi ad, Mitt has pretty much earned my vote should he get the nod.

MadisonConservative on October 18, 2007 at 3:22 PM

Hollowpoint–do you even know that Mitt has said he’d veto budgets that are over CPI-1%? He’s taken a strong stand on cutting government spending. He did it in Massachuesetts. Was it a perfect job? No, but he did it.

Of course, Mitt Romney could demonstrate his new cure for cancer which he would give away for free to everyone, and you, Hollowpoint, would reject it.

Vanceone on October 18, 2007 at 3:28 PM

Hollowpoint–do you even know that Mitt has said he’d veto budgets that are over CPI-1%? He’s taken a strong stand on cutting government spending. He did it in Massachuesetts.

Good point. Thanks for the link btw

Spirit of 1776 on October 18, 2007 at 3:35 PM

That would be the Applewood Pancake House in Pawley’s Island. Excellent Sunday brunch!

KelliD on October 18, 2007 at 2:30 PM

Really??? Oh man, I LOVE that place!! My In-laws live in the Reserve back behind there on the IC waterway…when we go there on weekends we eat there and at Pastaria at LEAST once. Applewood’s brunch ROCKS!

TheGoblinKing on October 18, 2007 at 3:51 PM

I disagree with the “of late” part of Mitt’s statement – unless that he means “since about 1952 or so”.

thirteen28 on October 18, 2007 at 3:52 PM

I am not sure why so many take exception to Mitt’s maturation of more conservative positions and beliefs. I would suggest it is the norm for most individuals as they grow older and wiser and deal with the issues of living, they better understand and embrace conservative beliefs.

So with arms wide open I say “Welcome and best wishes in your endeavor to become President”.

MarkB on October 18, 2007 at 3:59 PM

oddly enough, his steadfastness on that issue makes his pandering on things like gun rights and immigration seem ever so slightly more genuine by comparison, since it suggests that he’s willing to stick to his position if he really believes in it.

He’s not really pandering on gun rights. If you recall, Giuliani said he was right to sue gun manufacturers, and just does not agree with some of the (unnamed) “twists and turns” the case has taken. But he still says he was right to sue legally operating businesses to achieve a political goal, just like a liberal. Watch the video here regarding this question at his NRA speech last month.

jaime on October 18, 2007 at 4:02 PM

Hollowpoint–do you even know that Mitt has said he’d veto budgets that are over CPI-1%? He’s taken a strong stand on cutting government spending. He did it in Massachuesetts. Was it a perfect job? No, but he did it.

Of course, Mitt Romney could demonstrate his new cure for cancer which he would give away for free to everyone, and you, Hollowpoint, would reject it.

Vanceone on October 18, 2007 at 3:28 PM

So he says- but he says he also supports increased spending on various programs. Does not compute. He wants to pander to various groups with promises of government spending to further their interests, but he also wants to portray himself as fiscally conservative.

And since I don’t have cancer, so yeah- I’d probably reject taking a cure. I’ve no problem with agreeing with a candidate I don’t support when they’re right, but I don’t necessarily have to trust them to follow through, either- especially if their record doesn’t jive with what they’re now proposing.

Hollowpoint on October 18, 2007 at 4:04 PM

I am not sure why so many take exception to Mitt’s maturation of more conservative positions and beliefs. I would suggest it is the norm for most individuals as they grow older and wiser and deal with the issues of living, they better understand and embrace conservative beliefs.

MarkB on October 18, 2007 at 3:59 PM

The problem is that his conservative epiphany didn’t occur over a span of years, but just so happened to coincide with his decision to pursue the Presidency. It reeks of cynical opportunism, furthered by some of the rather slick, blantant pandering he’s done.

Hollowpoint on October 18, 2007 at 4:07 PM

oddly enough, his steadfastness on that issue makes his pandering on things like gun rights and immigration seem ever so slightly more genuine by comparison, since it suggests that he’s willing to stick to his position if he really believes in it.

Here’s Giuliani supporting amnesty.

I believe you when you say he’ll stick to his positions. That’s really the problem, isn’t it?

jaime on October 18, 2007 at 4:08 PM

USA out of the UN
UN out of the USA
georgej on October 18, 2007 at 2:54 PM

I had that written on the back of a sign I was holding protesting Ahmadinejad’s visit to Columbia. It wasn’t my main point that day; just something for the people behind me to read. Anyway, this guy from Spanish (from Spain) television begins to interview me. I figured he was going to ask me my opinions about Columbia or Ahmadinejad but those comments about the UN freaked him out totally. He we SHOCKED that ANYONE could POSSIBLE have those sentiments about the UN. He thought I was out of my mind. I tried to tell him that a lot of Americans dislike/distrust the UN but he wasn’t having any. I prob. made freak-of-the-day on Spanish television.

JiangxiDad on October 18, 2007 at 4:09 PM

I would have no problem with Mitt as president either. As for his stands in MA, he would have had no choice many times. In order to get any thing accomplished there he would have had to give on some points to accomplish others. Pretty straight forward politicking I think. Not such a bad approach at the Fed level either. In fact, I’m beginning to wish that something, anything, stood out with either Mitt or Rudy that would help me decide between them. The fact that Mitt might be turning more conservative on many issues might be that thing?

jeanie on October 18, 2007 at 4:14 PM

Wouldn’t this be more accurately Pandermania?

ronsfi on October 18, 2007 at 4:43 PM

Given his religious background and how he tried to do things in MA, I would say conservatism are his true stripes. If anything, libby voters in MA should feel disillusioned with him, because he did not give them a true picture of who he is. I think conservative voters should consider Mitt the best shot at getting someone they want in office. And he’s just so pretty too!! ;-) (not that I’m “teh ghey” as they say around here)

sweetlipsbutterhoney on October 18, 2007 at 4:50 PM

the site of the UN should be a memorial to all the tragedies of the world that this UN-organized bunch of robbers and blowhards has failed to address.

madmonkphotog on October 18, 2007 at 5:29 PM

madmonkphotog on October 18, 2007 at 5:29 PM

Nah…the steel needs to be put in the fence.

Limerick on October 18, 2007 at 5:30 PM

Given his religious background and how he tried to do things in MA, I would say conservatism are his true stripes. If anything, libby voters in MA should feel disillusioned with him, because he did not give them a true picture of who he is.
sweetlipsbutterhoney on October 18, 2007 at 4:50 PM

You’re suggesting that he was dishonest about his values then, but not now? Forgive me if I’m a bit skeptical- his religous views certainly didn’t prevent him from maintaining a pro-choice stance.

After the way the Republicans have behaved as late, I’m not in a mood to gamble on someone who’s true views and political philosophy remain in question based on their record. In previous elections, I might have been OK with someone like Mitt, Rudy or McCain who at least act the part for now, but not this time.

Hollowpoint on October 18, 2007 at 5:45 PM

Of late?

Think 2003.

aengus on October 18, 2007 at 7:09 PM

I am not sure why so many take exception to Mitt’s maturation of more conservative positions and beliefs. I would suggest it is the norm for most individuals as they grow older and wiser and deal with the issues of living, they better understand and embrace conservative beliefs.

MarkB on October 18, 2007 at 3:59 PM

Exactly. It’s not as if he says one thing on Monday, then changes his mind on Tuesday and again on Wednesday. He has moved steadily to the right and that makes perfect sense.

Moreover if you look at his life story, it’s hard to say that he’s a stealth liberal.

Buy Danish on October 18, 2007 at 7:25 PM

We need an alternative to the UN

Whoooa! Finally someone is saying it. Now he’s got my attention.

petefrt on October 18, 2007 at 8:13 PM

2007 – The circus tent should be located in Darfur.
2008 – The circus tent should be located in Chad.
2009 – The circus tent should be located in Somalia [again].
2010 – [You get my drift].

The U.N. is a joke, because it is filled with a bunch of hacks who don’t give a damn about anything – other than hearing themselves yap and protecting their own job status. It’s much like our Congress.

OhEssYouCowboys on October 18, 2007 at 2:24 PM

But, how will they conduct the “important business” of criticizing the US and Israel and making apologetics for dictators whose countries don’t even meet the standards of their own HRC if they aren’t in the complete safety of New York, racking up parking violations they never have to pay because of “diplomatic immunity.”

BKennedy on October 18, 2007 at 9:48 PM

I am not sure why so many take exception to Mitt’s maturation of more conservative positions and beliefs.
MarkB on October 18, 2007 at 3:59 PM

Those are mostly the Fred “What’s a dollar?” Thompson wackadoodles.

If “What’s a dollar?” said that the groupies would claim he was just straight talkin’. Of course he couldn’t do that in an unscripted venue. He can only do it with a rehearsed pre-canned speech.

csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 12:49 AM

Those are mostly the Fred “What’s a dollar?” Thompson wackadoodles.

If “What’s a dollar?” said that the groupies would claim he was just straight talkin’. Of course he couldn’t do that in an unscripted venue. He can only do it with a rehearsed pre-canned speech.

csdeven on October 19, 2007 at 12:49 AM

What’s the significance of “What’s a Dollar?” Personally, my new preferred name for the South-talk Express is Fraud! Thompson. It takes the ancient messianic Fred! label we were all hearing before he even got in the race and with but 2 letters it turns it into the degree and urgency with which he is a fake and liar.

Fraud! Thompson ’08. “Thanks a bundle, folks!”

BKennedy on October 19, 2007 at 8:16 AM

That shot of him with 15 kids around him reminds me of my cat when she had a huge litter.

AlexB on October 18, 2007 at 2:41 PM

LMAO… Too funny!

But I wish ALL the Reps running would say the same thing about the useless u.n. I like the idea of a “League of Free Countries.”

Texas Nick 77 on October 19, 2007 at 8:59 AM

This is also a slap against Hillary. Ya know, with the claims that she didn’t really raise Chelsey and all.

- The Cat

MirCat on October 18, 2007 at 3:17 PM

Nope, “The Village” raised her. What a success stoty. /snarc off.

Old joke:

Q: What do you get when you cross a crooked politician with a crooked lawyer?

A: Chelsey.

Texas Nick 77 on October 19, 2007 at 9:09 AM