Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Romney Says Will Sting Iran And America

Romney won big last night and the time has come to examine him closely. No, you got it all wrong, dear reader. It is not that Mitt Romney promises to sting Iran like a gadfly would sting or that he promises to sting that country as a bumble bee would sting. It is that he says he will do what Ronald Reagan did. The trouble is that there is the historical fact as to what Reagan did, and there is the Romney understanding as to what Reagan did.

The historical fact is that Reagan worked with Israel to supply Iran with shoulder-fired anti-aircraft Stinger missiles in return for freeing the American hostages. Given the circumstances at the time, this may well have been the best course to take. History has not yet passed a final judgment on this. As to what the Romney understanding of that historical fact may be however -- well, that's something else.

Romney expressed his views on this subject in an article he wrote under the title: “How I would check Iran's nuclear ambition” published in the Washington Post on March 5, 2012. Since he has never been President of the United States and since he has never dealt with Iran before, we can begin to formulate an idea as to how he will proceed to fulfill his promise only by analyzing his words and by studying his performance in another field of endeavor. This would be his understanding as to how an economy works. I'll come to that in a moment.

Before we embark on that study, let us look at the promise he made to deal with Iran as he explained it himself in the article. He writes that while US diplomats were held hostage “America's feckless president, Jimmy Carter, fretted in the White House.” The truth is that President Carter ordered the military to mount a rescue operation. An attempt was made but the operation ran into difficulties and was aborted. To say that the American President was feckless and that he fretted in the White House is to be fickle like only a flip-flopping Romney can be. And this alone casts doubt as to whether or not he is fit to occupy that White House. But there is more.

Romney goes on to say: “...Reagan made it crystal clear that the Iranians would pay a very stiff price.” But the fact is that they never complained about receiving the Stinger missiles or about letting the hostages go. So where is the stiff price, Mitty boy? The truth is that in return for bribing the Iranians with Stinger missiles, the Reagan negotiators had asked for a reciprocal gift which they fretted when it came to calling it a bribe. They asked that the hostages be let go on January 20. It's okay with us, said the Iran negotiators but out of curiosity, why January 20? Ron's birthday? asked the Iranians. No, inauguration day, said the Americans. Oh, that little thing you call democracy, remarked the Iranians. Yes, yes. And they all exploded in laughter. The American negotiators drank whiskey and the Iranians drank orange juice. I made up this last part.

Having understood history in his little screwy manner and in the big swaggering manner that his Jewish advisers have explained it to him, Romney continues like this: “...Reagan was serious about turning words into action.” Indeed he did; he chose life over death by thinking of the hostages and their families, and by doing the best that he could for them rather than display his phony manhood the way that they do in the Yiddish culture. In the end, Reagan got the Americans home from a foreign land and into the arms of their loved ones. In the end, Romney will send American boys and girls to die in foreign lands so as to please the Jewish donors of his electoral campaign.

Having engaged in this display of intellectual pornography, Romney advises the reader of this: “America and the world face a strikingly similar situation today; only even more is at stake.” You think for a moment that he is going to admit America is held hostage by the Jewish lobby at every electoral cycle, and that he will do what he can to break from this demonic tradition thus end it once and for all. But this is not what he promises. Instead, he says that feckless Barack Obama “has declared such an outcome unacceptable, but his rhetoric has not been matched by an effective policy. While Obama frets … the Iranians are making progress...”

To elaborate on this, he takes a few paragraphs to froth at the mouth the filth that is usually leveled against Iran, the Middle Eastern types and Islam. He then promises that as President, he would move America in a direction where its “...foreign policy will be the same as Ronald Reagan's.” At this point you wonder if he will offer to give the Iranians more Stinger missiles but then, you come to think that the Israelis will probably not cooperate this time around, and that the Iranians might not want such a deal given that they now make their own missiles. Luckily and to your relief, that's not what Romney promises. What he does is promise to say and do exactly what President Obama is now doing with one exception: “I will demonstrate our commitment to the world by making Jerusalem the destination of my first foreign trip.”

This puzzles you because it is recognized both in international law and in American law that Jerusalem is Palestinian territory. Does he intend to visit Palestine to demonstrate commitment to Israel? Or is he advocating a one state solution? Or is he advocating the ethnic cleansing of the West Bank of the Jordan to facilitate the annexation of that territory by Israel? It looks like Romney has flipped on this question. It will be interesting to see if he will flop as well.

This being a good question, he does not leave you without an answer. But he waits till the end to give it to you. Here is the last sentence in his article: “Either the ayatollahs will get the message, or they will learn some very painful lessons about the meaning of American resolve.” This is the manner he employs to pretend that his resolve is American resolve which, as we may expect, is to flop every time he flips. No, Romney is not a gadfly or a bumble bee, but he is a bumbler, alright. What he will do is not supply Iran with Stinger missiles but sting America and its people with the sharp tongue of the language of insults that is inculcated in him by his Jewish handlers. This is the Yiddish language and the culture that sprung up around it.

All of this point to a mental deficiency which you also see at work in the way that he understands economics. What should be emphasized here is that builders of nation know that an economy is made of two parts. There is the first part which consists of producing wealth like tangible goods and useful services. And there is the second part which consists of speculating and gambling, a game by which someone can accumulate the wealth created by other people. It is necessary to have these two parts in a capitalist system because risk taking is an important component of it. An economy that flies on these two wings is a dynamic economy that usually does very well.

The thing is that you can have an economy that flies on the wing of the first part only. It will be a stagnant economy but it will fly, however sluggishly as it has for thousands of years on Planet Earth. What you cannot have is an economy that flies on the second wing alone. Indeed, what happens to economies that start out well then fall off is that they lose the wing of the first part and try to rely only on speculation and gambling. It never works.

Yet, this is what Romney promises to bring to America. He never created wealth; he only accumulated what others have created. This is economics according to the Yiddish mentality. This is what is now breaking the back of America. To let Romney take over is to call on the executioner to deliver the coup de grace to America. It will be the sting of death.

The ayatollahs will survive the Romney sting, America may not. Watch out, people of America, someone is trying to gamble with your lives and with your livelihood to please his Jewish bank-rollers and his Jewish advisers.