Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Debating a Warren-Brown Post

Because I haven't watched them:

"Scott Brown, Elizabeth Warren face unique challenges in first debate" by Frank Phillips  |  Globe Staff, September 20, 2012

In their first face-to-face meeting, US Senator Scott Brown and his Democratic rival, Elizabeth Warren, face delicate challenges: She must engage him on issues without seeming aggressive; he must fend off her charges without hurting his likable image.

Brown and Warren are set to take the stage in a Boston television station Thursday evening, stripped of their political handlers and media specialists. The debate, which will give the public its first unspun look at how they handle themselves, is scheduled to air live on WBZ-TV (Channel 4) and C-SPAN at 7 p.m.

The two will face a difficult balancing act, analysts say. Warren is strong on substance and in step with many voters on the issues, but she can also come across to some as a wonk and even preachy. Brown is seen as approachable and popular with voters, but must work to show that he has policy chops....

Some analysts say Warren, in particular, could have trouble connecting with voters. Her advisers are counting on her to win the debate on the issues, but at the same time, not to lose ground on tenor and delivery. 

I don't know what they are talking about. 

“It’s a difficult dance,’’ said Paul Watanabe, a political science professor at the University of Massachusetts Boston. “In going after Scott Brown, she may not display a personable and likable side of her.’’ 

I'm sorry, but I VOTE on ISSUES and SUBSTANCE not all this OTHER SHIT the mouthpiece media spends so much time on. 

Presidential elections have long turned on debate styles. In 2000, Al Gore loomed over George W. Bush in gravitas, but turned off voters with what appeared to be aggressive arrogance, a sharp contrast to Bush’s casual, friendly style. Gore’s standings in the polls dropped in the days that followed and never really recovered....  

I remember the sighs (as if it mattered in that rigged and stolen election). 

--more--"

"Brown, Warren hit hard on taxes and allegiances; In first debate, senator assails rival’s character, gets blasts at his record" by Noah Bierman and Frank Phillips  |  Globe Staff, September 21, 2012

Senator Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren, in their highly anticipated first debate, wasted no time attacking each other heatedly as they tangled over her heritage, his tax record, and which candidate would help the struggling middle class.

Brown went after Warren from the opening seconds, saying she has not “passed a test” of character, truthfulness, and honor necessary to be a senator because she “checked the box” as a Native American when “clearly she’s not.”

Warren, in a later exchange, struck at the heart of her argument, accusing Brown of holding “98 percent of families hostage” to protect tax breaks for the wealthiest.

The Republican senator was more personal in his attacks than his Democratic challenger, who tried to tie him to select elements of his record. Brown repeatedly referred to Warren as “professor Warren” and  seemed eager to get under her skin, while Warren, though also in attack mode, was less animated than she appears on the trail.

The debate did not appear to produce a seismic moment that would change the course of what has been a consistently tight race, but rather hewed closely to many of the same issues that the candidates have been emphasizing on the stump and in a cascade of competing television commercials.

Brown took swipes at Warren and her husband’s salaries and benefits at Harvard Law School, where they both teach, to make a point about the rising costs of higher education. He pointed out that she did not voluntarily pay a higher income tax rate, as is allowed on state forms, in an attempt to accuse her of hypocrisy.

Warren tried to align Brown with national Republicans, big oil, and the interests of millionaires and billionaires. She said that regardless of his moderate reputation, he would support a broader GOP agenda that would hurt the middle class and empower climate change skeptics to make environmental policy. She repeatedly tried to make the point that Brown’s election could swing Senate control to Republicans, a central theme in her campaign.

Though Brown was elected as the “41st vote” to block President Obama’s health care law, the nationally contentious issue was never mentioned.

After a year of fighting through press releases and commercials, the candidates stood just feet away from each other in the WBZ-TV (Channel 4) studios in Brighton, in the first of four debates, this one moderated by political analyst Jon Keller.

Brown’s image as an affable political figure might have taken a hit with his needling of Warren. At the same time, he may have countered the criticism that he is a lightweight by lacing his responses with policy- heavy language.

Warren, on the other hand, shelved the lecture-hall tone that has come under criticism, in favor of a methodical attack on Brown and his voting record. But in doing so, she may also have sacrificed some of the passion that has driven her campaign.

The fireworks started immediately, as Brown challenged Warren to release personnel records from Harvard Law to prove that she did not use undocumented claims of Native American heritage to advance her career. He pointed to evidence that Warren had listed herself as a Native American in legal directories and in official documents at the universities where she worked.

“Professor Warren claimed that she was a Native American, a person of color, and as you can see she’s not,” Brown said. “When you want to be a United States senator, you have to pass a test, and that’s one of character and honesty and truthfulness. . . . She’s failed that test.” 


We don't care about that issue, and yet it's at the top of the media's list. Pffft. 

Warren did not agree to release the records. But she insisted “I never used it” and pointed to numerous past hiring deans, including former Reagan administration solicitor general Charles Fried, who have said her heritage played no part in her hiring.

“When I was growing up, these are the stories I knew about my heritage,” Warren said. “I never asked anybody for any documentation. I don’t know any kid that did.”

The debate, which was nearly canceled because of concerns that Brown might be delayed by business in Washington, was carried locally by WBZ and nationally on C-Span.

Warren went back on the offensive when the argument turned to taxes, as both candidates threw out a slew of figures to paint the other as hostile to the middle class. Warren highlighted Brown’s vote over the summer against extending the Bush tax cuts for those making less than $250,000, and pointed to a statement he made last week that he would not agree to cast such a vote if there is no other alternative.

“Senator Brown voted no,” Warren said. “Because there weren’t enough tax breaks for the top 2 percent. . . . He will hold the other 98 percent of families hostage.”

Brown argued that he would not raise taxes on anyone during the tough economy, including those responsible for creating jobs. Those employers, he said, have been hampered in their efforts to grow because of uncertain tax and regulatory policy favored by Warren.

“The criticism that you’re hearing from professor Warren and her supporters is that I don’t want to raise taxes,” he said. “Guilty as charged.”

The tax debate was again central to the candidates’ dispute over energy policy.

Warren attacked Brown for voting to protect oil subsidies worth billions of dollars.

Brown insisted that gas prices would increase if they were removed, which could lead the country back into recession. He said it was typical of Warren’s approach to solving problems. “She’s obsessed with raising taxes,” Brown said.

The two also sparred over abortion, reproductive health, and other women’s issues, with Warren disputing Brown’s statement that he is a “moderate prochoice Republican.”

Warren criticized Brown for cosponsoring an amendment that would have allowed employers to deny coverage for birth control and other medical care if they had moral objections. Brown said it was a conscience objection that was in line with the beliefs of Edward M. Kennedy, who held the seat for nearly five decades. The late senator’s family disputes that contention. “Stop scaring women,” Brown said. “I’m not going to pit women against their church and their faith.”

Warren said it wasn’t a question of religious freedom. “This was really an open invitation for employers to say to insurance companies: ‘You can knock out birth control coverage for women,’ ” she said.
When Warren criticized Brown for voting against confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, a former dean of Harvard Law and solicitor general, Brown made it personal again. “I’m sorry I didn’t vote for your boss,” he said. “I know that you and Justice Kagan are very close.”

He said his vote was based on Kagan’s lack of courtroom experience, not her support for legalized abortion. 

Both candidates said they agreed climate change is real and a crisis. But Brown criticized Warren for opposing the Keystone pipeline, saying it will cost jobs. Warren said that regard less of what Brown said about climate change, his reelection could give Republicans control of the Senate and elevate a climate change skeptic, James Inhofe, to lead the committee that oversees environmental policies.

--more--"


Former mayor Ray Flynn adds voice to Senate race

Those articles didn't win the debate over whether I would read them. 

"Brown, Warren fire away over voting, work records; Heritage issue argued again in combative second debate" by Michael Levenson  |  Globe Staff, October 02, 2012

Senator Scott Brown, in a fast-moving, highly combative debate Monday night, vigorously attacked Elizabeth Warren’s legal work on behalf of corporations, while she blasted votes he took in lock step with the Republican leadership.

The hourlong debate, the second of four, skipped quickly from issue to issue, bouncing from immigration to Afghanistan to whether Bobby Valentine should be ousted as the Red Sox manager. 

Really, who cares about that last one? Good frikkin' Christ!

At times, policy took a back seat to sniping over some political flash points that have animated the nation’s most expensive, most fiercely fought Senate race.

While no one appeared to score a knockout blow that would instantly change the shape of the race, both will probably pounce on moments they believe could give them an edge.

Brown, asked to name the Supreme Court justice he considers a model, hesitated and then cited Antonin Scalia, a conservative firebrand known for his outspoken criticism of gay rights, abortion, and liberal social causes.

Facing some boos in the audience of 5,700 at the University of Massachusetts Lowell, Brown quickly added three more justices across the ideological spectrum: Anthony Kennedy, a frequent swing vote; Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative who voted to uphold President Obama’s health care law; and Sonia Sotomayor, a liberal.

Pressed by the moderator, David Gregory of NBC’s “Meet The Press,” to name a Republican senator with whom she could work, Warren mentioned Richard Lugar of Indiana, who was defeated and will not be in the Senate next year.

Reminded of this fact, Warren did not name another Republican senator with whom she could collaborate, but said she worked with Republicans on a panel that oversaw the federal bank bailout and could work with Republicans to overhaul Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the troubled mortgage giants.

Both candidates were aggres sive, attacking each other throughout, while often complaining that they were being misrepresented by their opponent and not being given time to correct the record.

“Excuse me, I’m not a student in your classroom. Let me respond,” Brown chided Warren during one heated exchange.

In a 2010 debate with Attorney General Martha Coakley, Brown used a similar jab, telling her: “I’m not in your courtroom. I’m not a defendant.”

Brown, who has gone to lengths to distance himself from national Republicans, insisted that he was undecided on whether to support Mitch McConnell, the minority leader, to lead his party in the Senate next year.

“I have already let it be very clearly known to Mitch McConnell that I’m completely disgusted as to what’s going on down there," Brown said. “And he has a lot of work to do to earn my vote, because I don’t work for him or Harry Reid.”

Brown also repeatedly sidestepped questions about his support for presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who is polling at just 30 percent in Massachusetts, the state he once led as governor, according to a Boston Globe poll Sunday.

“Listen, he is out campaigning all over the country,” Brown said. “I’m running in Massachusetts.”
In an exchange that allowed him to take the offensive, Brown slammed Warren for representing two giant corporations, saying the work flies in the face of her reputation for standing on the side of consumers and working people.

He seized on Warren’s work for Travelers Insurance in an asbestos lawsuit. At the time, the company was seeking to unlock a $500 million settlement account for victims in exchange for receiving immunity from future lawsuits, a step many asbestos victims supported. 

Related: Liz Warren Lied

Yeah, turns out she is a Republican. 

After Warren left the case, however, Travelers won a separate court ruling that allowed the company to avoid paying out the settlement. That ruling is under appeal. 

Warren pointed out that asbestos workers unions and plaintiffs’ attorneys have said her involvement in the case was intended to preserve payments for victims, not undercut them.

Brown also blasted Warren for helping to write a petition to the Supreme Court for LTV Steel in the 1990s, assisting the former industrial conglomerate in its fight against a congressional requirement that it pay millions of dollars into a fund for retired coal miners’ health care.


“When no one was watching and when she had a choice to make, when the cameras weren’t rolling, she chose to side with the steel conglomerate,” Brown said.

Warren pointed out that victims in the LTV case were paid. “It was a question of protecting a particular legal principle, but everyone was going to get paid,” she said. “And let’s be clear: Senator Brown is the  one who is not working with the unions.”

When the debate turned to policy, Warren said she wants to accelerate the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan while Brown, a longtime member of the National Guard, said he supports Obama’s plan for withdrawal in 2014.

Warren said she supports the DREAM Act, which would give certain young illegal immigrants a pathway to citizenship. Brown said he opposes the bill, calling it “backdoor amnesty.”

Warren criticized Brown’s votes against Obama’s jobs bills, against closing tax subsidies for oil companies, and against the so-called Buffett Rule to raise taxes on the wealthy. The votes, she said, show Brown is not the bipartisan moderate he claims to be.

Brown argued that oil companies will pass the cost of higher taxes on to drivers and homeowners and said that the Buffett Rule “makes a great sound bite, but it funds the government for a day.” He said that, in general, Warren’s drive to raise taxes will hurt business in a slow economy.

On a less weighty subject, Brown dodged on whether to fire Valentine after the deplorable Red Sox season, while Warren said she would keep him another year.

The controversy over Warren’s heritage fueled one of the most personal exchanges of the night. 

Globe just doesn't want to let that go, 'eh?

Brown argued that Warren “misled the voters” by not acknowledging more quickly that she told Harvard Law School, after she was hired, that she has Native American heritage.

“I do question the fact that she misled the voters for over five weeks by saying she had no idea how Harvard came to know she was a Native American and she, in fact, was the person who self-reported,”  Brown said.

Warren reiterated that she believes she is part Native American, based on family lore, and that she never sought or received any professional advan tage because of that claim.

“I wish I had been faster in answering the question, but the truth is the truth,” Warren said. “I believe my mother. And I can’t imagine what kind of test of character it would be to say that my mother lied to me from the day I was born until the day she died.”

Minutes before the debate, Warren made a surprise disclosure intended to defuse a line of attack that Brown was expected to deploy. She released a list of 13 legal cases she has worked on, bowing to a request from Brown, and called on him to do the same.

Warren did not indicate whether the list represented a complete accounting of the clients she has represented.

Brown had been criticizing Warren for refusing to disclose her clients, and the move seemed designed to allow her to turn the tables on him.

When the subject came up in the debate, Brown insisted he already has released a list of his legal clients. In fact, he disclosed some of his clients in a recent press conference, but has not produced a complete list.

--more--" 

"Senate candidates make some illuminating stumbles" by Glen Johnson  |  Globe Staff, October 02, 2012

LOWELL — The second debate between Senator Scott Brown and Democrat challenger Elizabeth Warren featured a lot of friction but not much new illumination, lacking a game-changing moment even if it was marked by two stumbles that illustrate lingering challenges for each candidate.

For Brown, the Republican incumbent, it came when his careful efforts to modulate his apparent dislike for Warren slipped and he asked her to stop interrupting.

“Excuse me, I’m not a student in your classroom,” he told the Harvard Law School professor. The tartness stirred boos from Warren supporters in the crowd of some 5,700 at the University of Massachusetts Lowell’s Tsongas Center, a huge audience that gave Brown and Warren the aura of gladiators as they squared off on the floor.

It also was unlikely to wear well with viewers of their first debate on Sept. 20, many of whom remarked that Brown was too hot-headed in that encounter. Both occasions have fueled questions about Brown’s true temperament, and whether his carefully honed nice-guy, everyman image is just that, an image.

Yet Warren raised questions about her own authenticity, although not in response to another series of opening questions about her Native American heritage. She countered them with perhaps her best explanation yet of the campaign, saying, at root, the issue is not whether she has a character flaw, as Brown has suggested. He has accused her of using unjustified claims of minority status to advance her academic career.

“You know, I think character is how you live your life,” Warren told moderator David Gregory, host of NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“I am the daughter of a janitor who ended up as a professor at Harvard Law School and working for the president of the United States,” she said. “I have taught school, I have taught generations of students, and I hope occasionally inspired a few of them. And I have worked hard for 30 years to make the legal system just a little bit fairer for people.”

When Gregory pressed her for regrets, Warren said: “You know, I wish I had been faster in answering the question. But the truth is the truth.”

For Warren, though, her authenticity as a candidate — or at the very least, her articulateness — was drawn into question when she was asked to rebut the suggestion she would be overtly partisan as a senator by naming which Republican colleagues she might be able to work with in the Senate.

She immediately named Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, even though he is leaving Congress in January after being beaten in his own party primary earlier this year. Brown and Gregory replied in unison, “He’s not going to be there.”

Warren then backpedaled, saying, “But he’s not going to be there, and that’s a problem.”

She then tried to right herself by avoiding specifics and saying, “It depends on what the subject matter is.”

That fueled Brown’s argument that in an overtly partisan political landscape that has exasperated and turned off many voters, he is a more bipartisan figure than Warren, putting aside, that is, his choice of ultra conservative Antonin Scalia when asked to name his model Supreme Court Justice — a moment that again elicited boos from liberals in the audience.

Warren, he said repeatedly, would be less likely than he to cross the aisle and work with the rival party.

“With regard to working with any person on the opposite side of the aisle, she couldn’t reference one person except for someone who is retiring, a truly bipartisan gentleman, Senator Lugar. I have a history  since Day One,” Brown said.

Most recent polls have shown Warren with a slight lead over Brown, not an especially good place for him given that Democrats are counting on big turnout on Election Day with President Obama on the top of the ticket.

As he did throughout the debate, Brown focused on Warren’s character as a means to disqualify her from taking his seat. Yet Warren did not lack ammunition to respond.

Both Gregory in his questioning, and Warren in her counterattacks, forced Brown to explain how — with the security of a full, six-year Senate term, and the Republican Senate and White House he seeks — he would retain his bipartisan character.

In two cases, his explanations strained credibility against the clear realities of party life in Washington.
First, asked if he would support Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky to be majority leader in the Senate, Brown replied, “I have already let it be very clearly known to Mitch McConnell that I’m completely disgusted by what’s going on down there. And he has a lot of work to do to earn my vote.”

The truth, though, is that McConnell’s name will be the only one on his party’s ballot.

And when asked if he would support the economic plan rolled out by a hypothetical President Mitt Romney, Brown also tried to maintain an unlikely distance from his party’s leader. “I want to read them, see how they affect Massachusetts, our country, and our deficit, and vote,” he replied.

For Brown the Republican to win enough votes in what remains heavily Democratic Massachusetts, he has to convince a lot of voters he is sincere in those statements.

--more--" 



What I have seen on TV: 

"Warren may retool TV ads; Is urged to show a personal side" by Frank Phillips, Globe Staff  /September 12, 2012

The pressure on Elizabeth Warren to shift her media strategy comes as Democrats, including some in Washington, have become worried that her commercials give off an unappealing image.

Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren — amid growing unrest from party activists and leaders — is facing pressure to make a major shift in her television advertising with a new series of commercials that seek to soften her image, while focusing more directly on her GOP rival, Senator Scott Brown.

According to top Democratic leaders in Massachusetts, Warren campaign advisers are considering a new strategy that will be aimed at toning down what those leaders call the preachy tone that has dominated her ads until now. Instead, some of the spots would rely more on the voices of voters from all walks of life describing what Warren’s supporters say is the warm personality of a popular university professor. They would also zero in on Brown, acknowledging that while he is a likable public figure, he is not the moderate Republican that he makes himself out to be....  

With her animated speaking style and tendency to gesticulate, Warren at times comes across as a “scolding advocate,” they said, while Brown’s own ads have helped him polish his image as a likable, Massachusetts-rooted political figure....  

Still, the consensus is that Brown has won the TV ad war to date. His feel-good spots, often shot with familiar Massachusetts scenes, show him driving his pick-up truck, rubbing shoulders with firemen, and  receiving strong words of support from a MassachusettsMedal of Honor winner.

Dan Payne, a longtime state Democratic media consultant, called Brown’s ads “organic’’ to Massachusetts, while Warren’s, he said, do not seem to connect with the local scene.

“Brown looks and acts like a Massachusetts political figure,’’ Payne says. “He is engaged with people and their problems. Her commercials could be for any Democratic candidate for Senate anywhere in America. They feel like cookie-cutter. There is no feeling in those ads that she is even in Massachusetts.’’

--more--"

"Brown, Warren do battle in TV ads; Senate contenders show bold moves" by Frank Phillips and Noah Bierman  |  Globe Staff,  September 15, 2012

Brown and Warren have competed fiercely over women’s issues because women are believed to be key swing voters in the closely fought election.

The ad provoked more rhetoric, most of it aimed at Brown from abortion rights groups weighing in from around the country. Warren has received the backing of several prominent groups that support abortion rights.

Warren supports legalized abortion in most cases, but her campaign spokeswoman, Alethea Harney said Warren would not try to overturn a federal ban on a late-term procedure that opponents call “partial birth abortion.” Harney did not say whether the candidate supported legalizing the procedure. Harney also said Warren supports the state’s parental notif ication requirement, which can be bypassed with the approval of a judge.

EMILY’S List, a national Democratic campaign group that supports candidates who favor abortion rights, including Warren, called the ad “shockingly dishonest.”

“Scott Brown is straight-up lying to Massachusetts voters with his latest ad,” the group said....

Brown was on the defensive this week about a third ad, in which he says that President Obama signed into law a bill he filed to prevent members of Congress from using insider infor mation to profit in the stock market. Though Brown filed a bill on the subject and worked on its passage, the version that reached Obama’s desk was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, the Connecticut independent.

--more--"

"Brown, Warren share centrist view on many foreign policy matters" by Michael Levenson  |  Globe Staff, September 27, 2012

Senator Scott Brown wants to arm some of the rebels battling Syria’s brutal dictator, a step his challenger, Elizabeth Warren, is not ready to embrace. Warren wants to accelerate the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan while Brown wants to stick to President Obama’s timeline. Both candidates support a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but Brown is adamant that Jerusalem be the undivided capital of Israel, a condition past administrations have left open to negotiation.

Brown, a Republican, and Warren, a Democrat, have barely mentioned foreign policy on the campaign stump. But in written responses to questions from the Globe about Syria, Russia, Iran, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and other areas, Brown and Warren provided a broader picture of their views on some of the thorniest foreign policy questions facing the United States. The winning candidate will, as a US senator, be in a position to help shape policy and act on treaties and declarations of war.

The candidates’ responses revealed several key areas of disagreement, and Brown’s answers were striking for the way he distanced himself from Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s views and aligned himself with President Obama. Brown has also been distancing himself from Romney on domestic issues, reflecting the challenge he faces as a Republican running in a traditionally Democratic state.

Brown and Warren agreed, perhaps to a surprising extent, on many areas, and their responses often restated longstanding American foreign policy rather than offer their own policy prescriptions. Their caution suggested they do not see any political advantage in staking out bold stances on foreign policy at a time when voters are more focused on economic issues.

Brown, who serves on the Armed Services Committee, was at times more substantive in his answers than Warren, a foreign policy neophyte.

But “neither is taking crazy positions,” said Leslie H. Gelb, a former president of the Council on Foreign Relations who reviewed the responses from Brown and Warren. Both candidates embrace “pretty much centrist and White House policies.” 

In other words, not much of a difference. 

One of the key areas of disagreement between Brown and Warren was over Syria....

Brown said he wants to go beyond the nonmilitary and humanitarian aid the Obama administration is currently providing the rebels.... 

Except we already are arming them. 

Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, and former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice have also urged the United States to arm moderate rebels. Many foreign policy specialists say the idea is good in theory, but has not been feasible because no one knows who those moderates are....

Another area of disagreement between Brown and Warren centers on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While both said they support the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel, Brown said a two-state solution must affirm “Jerusalem as the undivided capital of the state of Israel,” among other conditions.

An undivided Jerusalem enjoys support among many elected officials and influential voices in the Jewish community. But past administrations, both Republican and Democratic, have left Jerusalem’s status open to negotiation, said Gelb.

“We favor Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, but we don’t say all of Jerusalem,” Gelb said. He said the issue of whether Jerusalem should be undivided “would be worked out in a final settlement. That’s the reality.”

Warren offered a more general answer, with no outlines of an agreement, and, like Brown, emphasized that Israel must remain an ally.

 “The role of US legislators is to make it clear that the United States will support those who support peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians,” she wrote, adding that “I do not believe that a lasting peace can be imposed from the outside.”

 Brown and Warren are also at odds over Obama’s timeline for withdrawing troops from Afghanistan by 2014. Brown, a longtime National Guard member, backs that deadline.

 “I’m concerned less with the precise pace of the withdrawal in Afghanistan than I am with doing it responsibly, defeating the enemy, rooting out corruption, and improving the Afghan military and police  forces so that we can leave Afghanistan in a better position than when we arrived,” he wrote.

Warren said she wants a withdrawal “as quickly as possible, consistent with the safety of our troops.”

“We need to transition to Afghan control because, ultimately, it is the Afghans who must take responsibility for their own future,” she wrote.

 A quicker pullout is popular with many Democrats and war-weary voters. But “the risk there is the Afghans aren’t ready to take over,” Gelb said.

 Asked about Romney’s declaration that Russia is “our number one geopolitical foe,” Brown said he disagrees with that assessment. He said he is concerned, however, that Russia is not doing enough to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

 Warren said she, too, disagrees with Romney’s view of Russia and indicated she does not consider the country either friend or foe. She said the United States must work with Russia to pressure Iran, Syria, and North Korea, and “stand up vigorously” when Russia tramples its citizens’ rights.

 “In short, we have interests, and they have interests,” she wrote. “We work together where we can, and we pursue a separate course where it makes sense for us.”

 Asked about another Romney argument, that Obama conducted an “apology tour” early in his term that projected a weak image overseas, Brown made clear he does not share that view.

 “I’ll let the pundits characterize how the president’s ‘tone’ is perceived abroad,” Brown wrote. 

“President Obama has had some notable successes in his foreign policy, including the battle against terrorism around the world.”
Warren bashed Romney’s line about an “apology tour.”

“Nothing like that ever happened, and Republicans should be called out for making false claims,” she wrote. “President Obama has taken a tough, smart, and pragmatic approach to foreign policy that has not only gotten results but also repaired our image and leadership around the world.”

--more--" 

Now I am debating whether to continue blogging because the HTML codes and tools are really causing me problems now.  I just spent the last five hours constantly reediting and recopying posts and really have no more patience for such things.  
Posted by at
Labels: , ,