- By Daniel W. Drezner
Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and a senior editor at The National Interest. Prior to Fletcher, he taught at the University of Chicago and the University of Colorado at Boulder. Drezner has received fellowships from the German Marshall Fund of the United States, the Council on Foreign Relations, and Harvard University. He has previously held positions with Civic Education Project, the RAND Corporation, and the Treasury Department.
Your humble blogger is badly behind on many day-job activities. As a result, I’m afraid that I can’t comment in detail on Mitt Romney’s foreign policy VFW speech. There was stuff in there that resonated with me and stuff that had me shaking my head.
My key takeaway, however, is that there was actual stuff in the speech. The contrast with Rick Perry’s VFW speech is pretty striking. Looking at the two of them back-to-back, one can see a similar set of applause lines. The difference is that Romney’s speech contains actual, specitic critiques of Obama’s foreign policies. These critiques can be debated, but at least there’s content to debate about in this speech.
In contrast, as previously noted, Perry’s speech lacked anything remotely resembling content.
Perry is a late entry to the 2012 nomination, so maybe this is just a case of being new to the campaign trail. Maybe foreign policy is not a subject that Perry likes to focus on. I honestly don’t know, and I’ll be looking for more content as the campaign intensifies.
Am I missing anything?