Skip to main content

View Diary: NYT: US-Iran Agree to Talks | WH: Not Really! | Reuters: Pretty Much! (333 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Could be a strategic leak (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    natedogg265, Fury, KJB Oregon, PorridgeGun

    It inserts Iran into the conversation.  Romney's radical views on Iran will expose him for being pro-war.  This country is tired of fighting.  We put 2 wars on a credit card while cutting taxes on the rich.  I think Romney will have to explain how he plans to pay for another war without raising taxes on the rich.  Obama can nail him for his stubborn insistence upon protecting the rich while the rest of America pays the bill.

    I feel like Iran has entered the conversation because Obama wants to move on from Libya - he nailed Romney in debate 2 on Libya.  But the media keeps trying to keep it relevant so that Romney can land some more blows on it.  But Libya is small potatoes compared to Iran.

    The last thing Romney wants is Iran to be relevant in this debate.  

    Guess what?

    •  Seems Iran wants to talk nukes, Syria, etc. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KJB Oregon, PorridgeGun

      The White House wants to focus talks on nukes.  So while Iran has agreed to talk nukes they have not agreed to talk nukes as an independent issue.  The WH is getting close but we're not there yet and it seems these negotiations are very sensitive as they progress ever so slowly.  President Obama is not going to provide details but he will explain our foreign policy goals with respect to Iran and force Romney to justify his radical pro-war posture.  This Iran issue is really going to make Romney look bad in the debate because he's going to have to explain how, as a deficit hawk, he plans to pay for a war.  I mean how can he pay for a war without exploding the deficit?  Is he going to tax the rich?  Let's hear Romney on record.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site