As part of his campaign to paint Newt Gingrich as crazy, Mitt Romney has focused on Newt’s statement that the Palestinians were an “invented” people. Romney argued at the Drake University debate Saturday night that Newt had used “incendiary words” which would “create extraordinary tumult” and said “I’m not a bomb thrower, rhetorically or literally.”
Romney and his campaign have continued to hammer that point, calling Newt’s comments “erratic outspokenness.” Virtually the entire conservative media has joined in the Romney campaign’s complaint.
Yet Romney takes a very different position as to incendiary words regarding China’s currency policy, calling China a “currency manipulator” and a “cheat,” and saying he would slap tariffs on Chinese imports his first day in office:
Romney may be right on Chinese currency manipulation (although he likely is wrong on using the WTO to address the issue).
Much as Newt’s comments angered the Palestinians, Romney’s comments angered the Chinese:
China’s Foreign Ministry said on Monday that attacks by leading U.S. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Chinese trade and currency practices were irresponsible, and urged him to stop blaming others.
Romney last week threatened trade sanctions against China if the world’s No. 2 economy does not halt what he said was currency manipulation, unfair subsidies and rampant intellectual property theft.
Romney’s tough stance comes as he has sought to stake out differences with President Barack Obama and tap into the U.S. public’s rising concern over China’s economic and military growth.
“We think that that sort of frequently blaming others, looking for scapegoats and even misleading the public, is an irresponsible attitude,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Weimin, Liu told a regular news briefing….
In September, the official Xinhua news agency called Romney’s remarks on the value of the yuan currency an “absurd” attempt to play on U.S. voter fears.
Romney likely is correct about China and does not hesitate to speak the truth even at risk of disrupting the current U.S. administration’s diplomacy with China, yet he calls Newt a “rhetorical bomb thrower” for pointing out the truth about the Palestinians.
So I guess you could say Romney was for rhetorical bombs before he was against them.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Ron Coleman
Comments
Wasn’t Savage a full blown communist? And Beck a raging alcoholic? And didn’t Krauthammer think Obama was the most intellegent creature on earth, after himself of course? He may have even voted for him. Would they like to be judged on their past both light years previous and even as far back as 2008?
Now they align themselves with the Brooks and Noonans of the world, not to mention the corrupt Democrats and MSM to hail Romeny and flail Newt. A good enough reason to vote for Newt. Hope he can stay standing after this brutal beating.
The actions of the Krauthammers in the media may be tied to one primary concern – accessibility. I’ll guarantee Dr. K can get the very top Romney aides on the phone in less than 30 seconds, if not Mitt himself, and the same with any of the GOP elite approved candidates or officeholders. If a Gingrich or Perry takes over the White House, and therefore the GOP, I’m guessing that phone call goes unanswered.
Hey, Professor, you’re twisting yourself into knots to run interference for Newt. The difference here is that there is broad agreement on the simple fact that China manipulates its currency — that being the biggest current bone of contention in US-China relations.
Whereas, Newt’s Palestinian remark was pointless and incendiary — a half truth that is not helpful to Israel, however long Newt has known Bibi.
China’s not the only country that’s been manipulating its currency.
Obama’s been manipulating the dollar since he took office. He’s been devaluing at the rate of $75 billion per month.
The Eurocrats have been messing with their currency as well – the time-honored method for profligate states to deal with their debt is to devalue their currency.
What does the IMF think? They actually recommended the US do this. In their terms, it would allow us to ‘float out of debt’. When debt is denominated in your own currency, its very tempting to devalue to cut the real amount you owe. In the history of the world, every nation with debt levels similar or worse to what the US has now has devalued.
Of course, this has disastrous consequences for the citizens of those countries.
Leave a Comment