<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Talk About Chutzpah</title>
	<link>http://larison.org/2007/04/28/talk-about-chutzpah/</link>
	<description>n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:46:22 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Eunomia &#187; Romney Should Not Discuss Foreign Policy If He Can Help It</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2007/04/28/talk-about-chutzpah/#comment-8944</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 21:13:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2007/04/28/talk-about-chutzpah/#comment-8944</guid>
					<description>[...] As Ackerman knows quite well, Romney&#8217;s ignorance on this point has not lessened since he was running for the nomination last time. This is what I said about Romney&#8217;s foreign policy views almost three years ago: Suffice it to say that a man who rattles off the two major sects of Islam in a list with various other Islamic groups, none of which has anything to do with the other, is profoundly unfit to head the executive branch in time of war with jihadis or indeed at any time. Someone who can look at the sectarian warfare in Iraq (or, say, Lebanon) and talk about how ”they” have all “come together” against “us” is hopelessly confused about the international scene. Someone who cannot demonstrate even the most basic understanding of the fissures and divisions in the Islamic world and the different political organisations within that world should not even be a party to the debate, much less should he be considered a viable “top-tier” candidate for a major party’s nomination. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] As Ackerman knows quite well, Romney&#8217;s ignorance on this point has not lessened since he was running for the nomination last time. This is what I said about Romney&#8217;s foreign policy views almost three years ago: Suffice it to say that a man who rattles off the two major sects of Islam in a list with various other Islamic groups, none of which has anything to do with the other, is profoundly unfit to head the executive branch in time of war with jihadis or indeed at any time. Someone who can look at the sectarian warfare in Iraq (or, say, Lebanon) and talk about how ”they” have all “come together” against “us” is hopelessly confused about the international scene. Someone who cannot demonstrate even the most basic understanding of the fissures and divisions in the Islamic world and the different political organisations within that world should not even be a party to the debate, much less should he be considered a viable “top-tier” candidate for a major party’s nomination. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
