Iowans Won't be Fooled on START

“…Romney, in this Op-Ed, joined
the
likes of John Bolton, Monica Crowley, Michelle Bachmann and Steve King
as one more shrill voice echoing in its own emptiness.“

If you blinked,
you could have missed the political skirmish over former Massachusetts
Governor Mitt Romney’s Op-Ed
in the Washington Post on Tuesday, July 6th. Romney criticized the
Obama administration over the New START treaty, saying that they had
been “out-negotiated” and that the treaty was a “non-starter.” The Op-Ed
was flawed on many levels, although he had his moment in the media. It
lasted a little more than 24 hours. For once, the hollow noise of the
conservative right was answered quickly and effectively in the media.

It started in
the blogosphere with posts by the Center for
Strategic and International Studies and Russian
Strategic Nuclear Forces shortly after the Op-Ed appeared. There
was a point by point refutation
by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman, Senator John Kerry in
the Washington Post Wednesday
morning. Later that morning, an article in Slate by Fred Kaplan appeared on
line. By afternoon, even Ian Lazaran of Conservatives
4 Palin said, “Romney's editorial has pretty much been roasted as
it has received little to no support  from conservatives or the
center-right.” So what happened?

During the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee hearings on START, it became clear that the treaty has broad
bipartisan support. Former opponents of the treaty, like former
Secretary of Defense in the Nixon and Ford administrations, James
Schlesinger, testified in favor of it, as did key cabinet officials that
included George W. Bush appointee, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.
The roll call of veteran conservatives who support ratification of the
New START treaty is long, including Henry Kissinger, Colin Powell,
Howard Baker, Warren Rudman, Alan Simpson, and Nancy Kassebaum-Baker.
With a solid basis of support from people who are respected in the
Republican Party, Romney, in this Op-Ed, joined the likes of John
Bolton, Monica Crowley, Michelle Bachmann and Steve King as one more
shrill voice echoing in its own emptiness.

As he did when he recently asserted the success of
the Massachusetts health care model, in the START Op-Ed, Romney
demonstrated that he is willing to step into the public arena arguing
points that are wrong on merit. Because the New START treaty matters,
not only to Democrats, but to anyone who takes time to consider what
nuclear arms reductions means in a post-911 world, Romney went out on a
limb that was easy to cut down as Senator Kerry and others did. Romney
couldn’t tell the difference between flotsam in the media as opposed to
what is grounded in reality: the role New START plays in moving our
nation forward towards the our vision of a world without nuclear
weapons.

So what does this mean for Iowans?
For one thing, this skirmish was about the 2012 Iowa caucuses, where
Romney is expected to appear as a candidate for president. In taking
what is potentially one of President Obama’s signature successes and
throwing bogus crap against the wall about it, Romney demonstrates his
lack of consideration about issues that matter to most Americans. When
things matter, Iowans get it and Romney's Op-Ed serves his presidential
aspirations poorly.

Something else this skirmish
represents is that there is, from time to time, a role played by the
media on certain issues. In Iowa it is often hard to tell whether a
political issue we support has its origins in the corporate media or in
our lives. The Romney Op-Ed and the quick and effective response is
evidence that when an issue, like nuclear disarmament matters, people
understand, and can and will react to set the record straight. In his
poorly researched and written Op-Ed, Romney did not stand a chance in
misleading Iowans. Let's encourage both Senator Harkin and Senator
Grassley vote for ratification when the treaty is considered, hopefully
later this year.