The 2010 elections have been won, but even so the next battle for control of this nation’s future is already underway. With dozens of new Republicans prepared bring the voice of the people to Washington in only a few weeks, the outgoing rejected Democrats are attempting to hijack the government away from the voters through a blatantly arrogant lame duck policy session in the final months of the year. Compounding the problem, this abuse of power also threatens our nation’s defense, as one of the travesties Democrats are attempting to thrust upon us is the New-START treaty that benefits Russia at our expense. Knowing that the disastrous agenda of the past two years is in danger of meeting its much needed end, Harry Reid is attempting to jam through a few more ideas, including START while he still has five more Senators backing him.
Since this past summer, Mitt Romney has been among the leaders of the fight to halt the ratification of this treaty. He continues this effort today, with another Op-Ed available at the Boston Globe in which he once again outlines the many liabilities of this agreement. After chiding this runaway Congress for this final attempt at damaging our nation, Romney argues:
A treaty so critical to our national security deserves a careful, deliberative look by the men and women America has just elected. The president is in a hurry for the same reason he has been in a hurry before: he knows that if his vaunted treaty is given a thorough review by the Senate, it will likely be rejected. And well it should be.
Afterward, Romney asks key questions that reveal the many problems with this agreement, including once again the failure to address the massive Russian advantage in tactical nuclear weapons, and the fact that it forces concessions from our strategic position while providing loopholes that allow Russians to threaten American strength with multiple warhead missile bombers and submarine launched cruise missiles.
It is a brief piece, but to the point and well worth reading. Follow the link.
Well, its Saturday morning and how are supporters of New START doing? Not so good, according to the Heritage Foundation.
The first link is regarding a poll from earlier this past week by Rasmussen Reports surveying 1,000 American adults on various national security issues, many of which would be severely affected by the ratification of New START. The President is attempting to lead the country down a path advocated by the far-left since the early ’80s and the American people have no desire to see this. As Iran joins the ever-growing list of nuclear powers in the world, our defense needs to be stronger than ever. Unfortunately, we have a weak administration in D.C.
On top of this, or possibly because of it, the second link shows that weak administration pulling back the efforts to pursue ratification of the treaty. With a treaty so misguided that reasoned persuasion could not possibly lead to ratification, supporters of New START attempted to tear down opponents of the treaty with personal attacks. The latest reports show that this method has not exactly won the hearts and minds of many Senate Republicans seeing a bipartisan solution to this issue. Of course, it is still not yet time to relax and score a point for Romney over the Obama agenda. If the last nineteen months have taught us anything about the administration’s methods, it is that horrible defeated legislation too often manages to rise from the dead.
Governor Romney has unleashed another volley of well organized criticism, this time through a National Review Online editorial. Within, Romney argues a point by point case addressing the many faults of the treaty, from discussing in detail its limitations on American missile defense, to the advantages that Russia will be able to maintain in tactical nukes, multiple warhead bombers, MIRVs, and the weakened accountability to their stipulations of the treaty. The piece clearly shows how the proposed treaty benefits Russia in such a lopsided manner to the detriment of our national defense and the protection of our allies. Romney’s detailed analysis easily refutes the points that Kerry and Lugar attempted to make in favor of the treaty in their rebuttals to Romney’s first op-ed.
The treaty really is a failure in negotiation on the part of the U.S. State Department and further poor leadership by the Obama administration.We only need 34 Senators to unify against this train wreck. Conservatives nationwide need to fight to see that this treaty is unable to be ratified by the Senate.
Beyond this, there is not much more that I can say on it that Romney has not already argued more strongly in his piece. So go ahead and click the link, already. It is really a very worthwhile read.
Not a whole lot new today, and rather than post about golf again, I will instead link to an interesting page over at the Heritage Foundation regarding the troubling New-START treaty. Governor Romney’s remarks last week set the tone of the national conservative opposition to this potential threat to our defense and the defense of our allies. Now the Heritage Foundation is developing a strong organized opposition to the treaty, with the goal of creating a Senate coalition to reject ratification.
The page features quotes from many top leaders of our government, including Senators Kyl, Inhofe, DeMint, McCain, Sessions, Corker, Barrasso, Lieberman, former Senator James Talent of Missouri who has been taking a strong leadership role with the Heritage Foundation, and of course an excerpt from Governor Romney’s op-ed. The quotes, which categorically highlight the many problems with the treaty are an interesting read, and anybody who wishes to learn more or actively join the fight for the rejection of New-START would do well to head over to the Heritage Foundation.
Anyway, the link – New START’s Many Problems: What the Experts Say
The editors of the National Review have joined the New-START debate with their opinion piece strongly backing Governor Romney’s points against the treaty. The piece is well written and actually makes you wonder if Kerry was lying about the terms of the treaty in order to attack Romney, or if Washington Democrats really are that far off base with the Russian interpretation of the agreement. See below:
Romney pointed out that the linkage in the preamble of the treaty between strategic offensive weapons and missile defenses could limit our defenses. His critics scoff, It’s just a meaningless preamble. They should tell that to the Russians. The Russians believe that if we increase our strategic defenses, we are in violation of the treaty and that they will be justified in withdrawing from it. Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said, “Linkage to missile defense is clearly spelled out in the accord and is legally binding.” Members of the Duma have said the same thing.
Apparently, it is not only the National Review pointing out that Kerry is wrong. Moscow seems to agree as well.
Along with discrediting Kerry, the piece researches into the background of the treaty to highlight the points, alluded to by Romney, in which the treaty heavily favors the Russians. On bombers:
Similarly, as Romney wrote, the new treaty counts a bomber as one weapon no matter how many warheads are loaded onto it. The Russians, unlike us, have decided to start a new heavy-bomber program — once again, the treaty is laxest in just the area most convenient to the Russians. Notably, the Russian press has been reporting that Moscow will game the treaty to retain 2,100 deployed strategic nuclear weapons.
Strangely enough, Romney’s critics also seems to have ignored this point. The piece itself is worth reading, more so than I can do it justice on here. The main point lies in the title however. Romney was right. Clearly, the facts support that Governor Romney did his homework before putting together his op-ed, unlike John Kerry and his fellow critics on the left, who are either entirely clueless or are taking negotiations with the Russian Federation entirely too lightly. The facts behind the treaty reinforce the truth that Mitt Romney is ready to provide a strong reasoned approach to the issues challenging the United States. He doesn’t see the path to leadership in scoring political points, or developing a catchy slogan as other politicians do. This is Mitt Romney ready for 2012, an individual who is by no means a foreign policy lightweight, and who is ready to tackle the many various responsibilities of President of the United States.
Talent correctly explains how Kerry never addressed or disproved any of Romney’s points, just dismissed or ignored them. Not to spoil the article, but Talent sums this up best at the end when he states. “The more the administration ignores or dismisses the concerns of critics, the clearer it is that the changes embodied in this treaty will not be for the better, and could be disastrous.” How true, but of course ignoring those critical of its policy has been standard form for this administration…
Governor Romney is championing the conservative cause, this time from a foreign policy perspective. In an op-ed for the Washington Post, Romney lists the many foreign policy failings of the Obama administration, before rightfully declaring New-START, Obama’s “worst foreign policy mistake yet.” The article is excellent and a must read. Although, one can argue that as Governor of Massachusetts, Romney has had almost as little foreign policy experience as Obama had before taking the Presidency, the article once again shows the fundamental flaw of the Obama administration: a lack of leadership ability and executive experience. Romney details the points of the treaty with a keen eye, noting the many loopholes within that benefit Moscow at the cost of our national defense. Romney then outlines the fact that the terms of New-START will ignore the thousands of Russian tactical nuclear missiles that are ignored under the limits of the treaty, and threaten the safety of our European allies, concluding that due to its many flaws “New-Start is a non-starter.” Of course, my brief summary does not do it justice. If you’ve read this far without clicking the link above, then click the one below to read the piece for yourself.
Once again the issue is leadership, something I have a feeling I’ll be arguing on here quite a lot over the next two and a half years. Mitt Romney has shown it as CEO of Bain & Co. and Bain Capital, as Governor of Massachusetts, and as a leader of the conservative movement in exile, endorsing and financing dozens of campaigns in this year’s quest to take back America. Mitt Romney has leadership skill; Barack Obama does not. The treaty is riddled with goal-defeating loopholes and dangerous missteps over which a capable executive would have confronted Moscow or scrapped the treaty. Obama, presumably read these stipulations, and willingly signed away a fair share of our national defense. Of course Obama should not take the entirety of the heat for this. Before thinking that the solution to 2012 lies in the Democratic primaries, remember that as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has her thumbprint all over this. The U.S. delegation negotiating this travesty was led by Assistant Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller.
Looking at this treaty point by point, one is forced to wonder whether the administration is entirely incompetent or is deliberately and systematically weakening this country piece by piece. Romney is once again correct, in not only should the Senate resoundingly reject New-START but also “demand and scrutinize the full diplomatic record underlying the treaty.”