Maddow on Romney’s Foreign Policy Speech

Rachel Maddow had a very good segment on her show Monday night about Mitt Romney’s much-anticipated foreign policy speech at VMI. As I noted previously, it was almost entirely devoid of substance.

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

"He's just upset they won't let him into their clubs or bathrooms..."

Two Misogynists Explain Lesbianism, Make It ..."
"She's got them scared shiteless, just like Pelosi does.They can't face a capable woman without ..."

Two Misogynists Explain Lesbianism, Make It ..."
"I bet their Mommas would SLAP THE SHITE out of either of these emasculated whiners ..."

Two Misogynists Explain Lesbianism, Make It ..."
"You can understand their sense of superiority. After all, he made predictions which can be ..."

Barton: 2nd Amendment Means Right to ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • StevoR

    Rachel Maddow rocks!

  • It seems pretty clear that Romney meant to say “2000,” and not “2008” when mentioning the lack of Presidential debate on terrorism. This is clear from the next sentence, “Only one year later…”

    Other than that, it’s a damned good analysis of Romney’s lack of coherent foreign policy.

  • Reginald Selkirk

    Policy, schmolicy. What really matters is that Romney has picked the all-important Lindasy Lohan endorsement

  • Yes, he clearly meant to say 2000. And I don’t know if that was entirely true. The Bush administration famously criticized Clinton for being obsessed with bin Laden. A feather in Clinton’s cap was thwarting the millennium bomb plot. I’d be surprised if Gore hadn’t brought up terrorism, but maybe he didn’t.

  • Mr. Upright: Gore didn’t bring up much of anything, except lockboxes. That’s one reason why he lost (sort of) to a smirking chimp who couldn’t even form complete sentences.

  • kantalope

    The only thing I’ve been getting from Ro-money and foreign policy is “war with Iran — count on it”.