Mitt Romney Proves He is Unqualified to Be President by Demonstrating a Frightening Lack of Knowlege
Timothy Sexton
June 11, 2007
“If Saddam Hussein had opened up his country to IAEA inspectors, and they'd come in and they'd found that there were no weapons of mass destruction...we wouldn't be in the conflict we're in."
Those were the words of Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts, and currently campaigning for the Republican nomination for President. The words were the opening answer to the Republican Presidential debate. Just in case you aren’t grasping what Romney is saying, let’s put in a little more understandable English. What Mitt Romney is saying if that the US and the world had only known that there were no WMDs in Iraq for sure on the basis of weapons inspections inside the country, there would not now be a war going on there. Okay, he’s also saying something else. Mitt Romney, a man who feels he is qualified to be the President of the United States, is saying that there were no weapons inspectors in Iraq and that is why we could not get assurances that no WMDs existed there.
Mitt Romney wants to be your President even though he apparently never opened a newspaper during the run-up to the Iraq invasion. In fact, Scott Ritter was going around telling everyone that he had found no evidence of WMDs in Iraq. Scott Ritter had been inside Iraq. His feet were actually touching the sand there, but instead of relying upon him, Pres. Bush and Dick Cheney and Condi Rice relied on evidence from satellites miles above the earth. Hans Blix was in Iraq. Hans Blix and his team of over 200 weapons inspectors were inside Iraq looking for WMDs. They released a report that said they could find no evidence of any. Dick Cheney intimated that perhaps Blix and his experts were actually in league with Saddam Hussein to hide the information. Dick Cheney apparently believes everyone lacks a moral compass in the same way he does. Dick Cheney and Pres. Bush both saw the reports given them by Scott Ritter and Hans Blix. They both looked over these reports by people who had actually been inside Iraq and they tossed them aside in favor of satellite images taken from miles above the earth. The result was that Americans continue to die because our “experts” determined some aluminum pipes were weapons. Meanwhile, the real experts at finding weapons had found none and were not only ignored, they were ordered out of Iraq.
And here’s where it gets interesting. Those weapons inspectors—the same ones that Mitt Romney apparently believes never existed—were kicked out of Iraq not by Saddam Hussein but by George Bush. If you get the chance to offer a follow-up question and you aren’t a flaccid and utterly useless bag of bones like CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, I urgently insist you to ask why Mitt Romney labors under the impression that there were no weapons inspectors in Iraq reporting that no WMDs were there. I also would love for you to ask that since it was George Bush and not Saddam Hussein who kicked the weapons inspectors out, does that mean that Bush should be the one we blame for the war instead of Hussein?
The lack of interest in Mitt Romney’s truly stunning ignorance of the most important issue in the campaign is almost as shocking as Romney’s ignorance itself. I wonder what the outcry would be if, say, Barack Obama had made such a statement. He would be torn asunder by the conservative press for the fact he is obviously unfit to be President. I mean if Mitt Romney can’t even get as simple a fact as that weapons inspectors were inside Iraq as late as three days before the war began, telling anybody who would listen that no weapons were to be found, then how on earth can anyone take him seriously. His statement is tantamount to saying that Hitler wasn’t the leader of the Nazi party in Germany. Or, to put in a context than today’s kids can understand, when Mitt Romney said this war wouldn’t have taken place if only weapons inspectors had been allowed inside Iraq and consequently reported that none were to be found it would be the same thing as saying that whoever won this year’s American Idol would never have won if Paula Abdul had been allowed to be a judge. You can’t get such a factual error wrong unless you are just totally not paying attention.
Haven’t we had enough of a President who isn’t paying attention?
Those were the words of Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts, and currently campaigning for the Republican nomination for President. The words were the opening answer to the Republican Presidential debate. Just in case you aren’t grasping what Romney is saying, let’s put in a little more understandable English. What Mitt Romney is saying if that the US and the world had only known that there were no WMDs in Iraq for sure on the basis of weapons inspections inside the country, there would not now be a war going on there. Okay, he’s also saying something else. Mitt Romney, a man who feels he is qualified to be the President of the United States, is saying that there were no weapons inspectors in Iraq and that is why we could not get assurances that no WMDs existed there.
Mitt Romney wants to be your President even though he apparently never opened a newspaper during the run-up to the Iraq invasion. In fact, Scott Ritter was going around telling everyone that he had found no evidence of WMDs in Iraq. Scott Ritter had been inside Iraq. His feet were actually touching the sand there, but instead of relying upon him, Pres. Bush and Dick Cheney and Condi Rice relied on evidence from satellites miles above the earth. Hans Blix was in Iraq. Hans Blix and his team of over 200 weapons inspectors were inside Iraq looking for WMDs. They released a report that said they could find no evidence of any. Dick Cheney intimated that perhaps Blix and his experts were actually in league with Saddam Hussein to hide the information. Dick Cheney apparently believes everyone lacks a moral compass in the same way he does. Dick Cheney and Pres. Bush both saw the reports given them by Scott Ritter and Hans Blix. They both looked over these reports by people who had actually been inside Iraq and they tossed them aside in favor of satellite images taken from miles above the earth. The result was that Americans continue to die because our “experts” determined some aluminum pipes were weapons. Meanwhile, the real experts at finding weapons had found none and were not only ignored, they were ordered out of Iraq.
And here’s where it gets interesting. Those weapons inspectors—the same ones that Mitt Romney apparently believes never existed—were kicked out of Iraq not by Saddam Hussein but by George Bush. If you get the chance to offer a follow-up question and you aren’t a flaccid and utterly useless bag of bones like CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, I urgently insist you to ask why Mitt Romney labors under the impression that there were no weapons inspectors in Iraq reporting that no WMDs were there. I also would love for you to ask that since it was George Bush and not Saddam Hussein who kicked the weapons inspectors out, does that mean that Bush should be the one we blame for the war instead of Hussein?
The lack of interest in Mitt Romney’s truly stunning ignorance of the most important issue in the campaign is almost as shocking as Romney’s ignorance itself. I wonder what the outcry would be if, say, Barack Obama had made such a statement. He would be torn asunder by the conservative press for the fact he is obviously unfit to be President. I mean if Mitt Romney can’t even get as simple a fact as that weapons inspectors were inside Iraq as late as three days before the war began, telling anybody who would listen that no weapons were to be found, then how on earth can anyone take him seriously. His statement is tantamount to saying that Hitler wasn’t the leader of the Nazi party in Germany. Or, to put in a context than today’s kids can understand, when Mitt Romney said this war wouldn’t have taken place if only weapons inspectors had been allowed inside Iraq and consequently reported that none were to be found it would be the same thing as saying that whoever won this year’s American Idol would never have won if Paula Abdul had been allowed to be a judge. You can’t get such a factual error wrong unless you are just totally not paying attention.
Haven’t we had enough of a President who isn’t paying attention?
Print
Email
