His political faux pax was to offend a pundit class that wants to cede the foreign policy debate to Mr. Obama without thinking seriously about the trouble for America that is building in the world.Faux pax? False peace? Once you get started with the silent x, it's hard to stop, isn't it? Anyway, what was Mitt's misstep — faux pas — in making a prominent statement on a day of foreign policy crisis?
Was it "awesomely awful"? — as Paul Krugman put it, sounding as if he'd like to write titles for Judith Viorst kid's books. Was it exactly normal, another day on the campaign, chewing through whatever comes up in the news, letting people see how the challenger would differ from the incumbent, who's stuck handling whatever happens as part of his job? Or was this a specific and important occasion for drawing attention to Obama's instinctive apologizing for America?
Yesterday was a key day — perhaps the day — in the campaign. Convention bounce and the Chicago teachers strike were instantly overshadowed. There was an opportunity to go for the win, and Romney took it. The media noticed, of course, and sprang into such intense, concerted action that it was obvious that they knew it was a day to be won and if the other side was going to go for the win, they had to act quickly and ensure that their guy won the day. Shock and awe, baby. Awesomely awful, indeed.
Posts
188 comments:
You nailed it, Annie. Amazing how few people are figuring our what's happening.
Right on. Win or lose, the September through November period before the presidential election is when you have the actions of the other candidate as an alternative president. It relieves the pressure in the republic as the challenger speaks for those who the current president hasn't spoken for.
FACT CHECK: Romney Misstates Facts On Attacks
Romney lied to attack the president. Of course he is being condemned.
Another bullshit factcheck from Andy the bigot.
Romney was exactly right. We were attacked, and the first response from the Zero administration was to apologize for free speech.
I don't even like the guy, but he was right here. And right in his overall statement that Zero's policies have brought us here.
Andy, did the NPR fact check come with an assist from CBS news?
Excellent commentary, Professor.
Ah, I was wondering which way the bitter internal power struggle between Andy, Mocker of Religion and Andy, Shill for Obama would come out.
The fact check is idiotic because it mischaracterizes what Romney said. This is why fact checkers are stupid; they twist Republicans and sometimes stupidly so (insisting that since Obama did not walk into a bank and steal money he could not have robbed anything, hence, a lie!)
The fact is that what Romney said is accurate: The initial embassy statement was weak willed and did not take a strong stand in defending American values while showing a willingness to accept that the offended parties had some moral ground to stand on by being offended.
It was such a horrible statement that Hillary Clinton and Obama both worked to get it deleted, thrown out, memory holed and forgotten.
Stop fighting that battle Andy, because even the leaders on your side hated the initial response.
FACT CHECK: Romney Misstates Facts On Attacks
"In fact, neither a statement by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo earlier in the day nor a later statement from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton offered sympathy for attackers. The statement from the Cairo Embassy had condemned anti-Muslim religious incitement before the embassy walls were breached."
AFTER the walls were breached, they REITERATED that condemnation of "anti-Muslim religious incitement" and then, later, deleted the tweet.
Your fact checker is pretty bad at their job.
Hard to be "false" when what you said was correct.
They even NOTE the deleted tweets later in that same article, debunking their entire premise.
It's not any less of a lie when people restate the same mistake that Romney made.
Romney got a 3am call and he actied impulsively and recklessly, and lied about what happened to try to win some political points. It's his "Lehman Brothers" moment.
Romney knows he is losing and has to gamble by making these absurd attacks, but it's only going to hurt him even more when they don't land.
But, instead of getting distracted, as usual, by the left-leaning posters here, let's focus on the actual topic of discussion.
Should the media have spent more time focused on Romney's response than finding out why four dead men were protected by only locked doors at a building that had been hit by an IED only a few months ago, when they reported that people were taking photos of their building and during a time there is -always- heightened security at every government installation in the world?
Obama lied and people died.
Again.
It sounds like the press attacks on Romney have made Ann more protective of him.
Don't worry Paul Z. Andy R will be back mocking religion in the next thread. When you simply cite other's thoughts, there's no need to keep your own straight.
Andy; leave the Alinsky rules out of the discussion. You don't control the narrative. What we are seeing for ourselves is the abject failure of Obama and his strategy of bowing in the face of those who perpetually hate apostates, infidels and non-believers. The weakness is Obama's and the enemies of free people jumped in to fill the vacuum he created.
From the middle east to Chicago teacher's unions on strike Obama's appeasement is coming home to roost. Obama is under attack from all sides and he doesn't know what to do. All your water carrying for him is a sham. You are carrying empty buckets.
Obama is toast.
"Romney got a 3am call and he actied impulsively and recklessly, and lied about what happened to try to win some political points. It's his "Lehman Brothers" moment. "
Stop lying. Romney's comments were so dead to rights that Obama's administration came out and -also- said the embassy's statement was bad and walked it back. Not only that, the only "Lehman" brothers moment was when Obama insisted the private sector was doing fine.
Look, I give everyone the benefit of the doubt in every new thread, but you've burnt a lot of good will by flat out lying in the first two posts you've made. Stop being a hack and think.
The MSM has more than earned the sobriequet "presstitutes". Andy - took a look at the NPR piece. Nothing more than misdirection from the big questions around lack of security, especially on an anniversary of 9/11.
Obama admitting the statement was bad.
Biggest story continues to be the pro-Obama media.
Romney was right, that statement from the Cairo embassy was awful
Romney's account of Egypt embassy attack flawed
O_o
Not only that, Obama literally went to bed while his ambassador was MIA, kidnapped by terrorists. He couldn't be bothered to stand vigil and learn his fate, at least, that's what reports said yesterday. If true, the man is a failed leader.
Romney got a 3am call and he actied impulsively and recklessly, and lied about what happened to try to win some political points. It's his "Lehman Brothers" moment.
Regurgitated talking points. Also, note that the "Lehman brothers" moment was McCain stopping the campaign to do something.
Moral: NEVER. STOP. THE. CAMPAIGN.
We can feel free to ignore you now.
Stop lying. Romney's comments were so dead to rights that Obama's administration came out and -also- said the embassy's statement was bad and walked it back. Not only that, the only "Lehman" brothers moment was when Obama insisted the private sector was doing fine.
You could be cruel and say that Obama ignord his 3AM call and slept through the incident.
It'd be more factually accurate than Hat Boy's bilge.
Andy R - you seem as desperate as the party you blindly worship.
WaPo has a good timeline.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/world/cairo-libya-attacks-timeline/
I don't remember any Dems foregoing foreign policy issues in the run up to 2008. Here is part of an article at the time.
State Department officials said Thursday they made it quite clear they did not want Pelosi to visit Syria, a nation that is listed as a state sponsor of terror and is home to terror group Hezbollah, which started a low-grade war with Israel last summer.
Pelosi is the highest ranking U.S. official to go to Syria since former Secretary of State Colin Powell visited the nation in 2003. Defying the White House's Middle East policy by meeting with Syrian President Bashar Assad, Pelosi said, "The road to Damascus is a road to peace
... Andy, you do know that Reuters is ignoring that the embassy re-issued its statement later in the day to stand by its initial statement, right?
Which is what Romney was responding to?
When Reuters can't get the chronology right, and you can't do basic research, I can be a bit more forgiving of your ignorance of current events. Try and do more research though, it makes it easier to discuss things.
Americans were killed by Islamist mobs.
The first official statement by the United States made excuses for the killers.
The media response Is to shame Mitt.
You can't parody this. It IS a parody.
Andy is going to have to spend the day in the Daily Kos/DU echo chamber to regain his bearings.
Romney's account of Egypt embassy attack flawed
"But the embassy statement was issued several hours before the protests in Egypt began, according to Reuters journalists in Cairo. In an apparent attempt to head off any demonstrations, the embassy posted the statement on its Facebook page on Tuesday morning local time.
"
They tweeted that they stood by their initial tweet AFTER the walls were breached.
Can you make your "fact checkers" remotely difficult to not smack down as nonsense?
Paul Krugman is the main reason our nation is in this economic hole.
Obama uses the Keynesian Krugman doctrine as an economic guide.
Andy R. said...
Romney lied to attack the president
You're hysterically ignorant and full of shit.
Let's see what we've learned about the media over the last few days. A) They don't know that April 2009 is within Obama's term as president. B) They can't create basic time lines of events.
Someone needs to buy these people personal organizers and calendars.
How many embasssy's have to burn before Obama suspends his campaign?
>>Romney knows he is losing and has to gamble by making these absurd attacks, but it's only going to hurt him even more when they don't land<<
Have you seen the polls today?
I'm just posting a comment to keep the discussion going. Andy R.'s comments are rully rully stupid! There, that should do it. Keep digging, lefties!
The press has to attack Romney because Obama has given them nothing to praise.
Its awfully hard to prop up someone whose attitude toward doind his job is "Can't I just eat my waffle?"
Romney lied to attack the president. Of course he is being condemned.
By that standard, Hat, every Democrat who sneered that Bush knew there were no WMDs in Iraq should be swinging from lampposts.
Go back to obsessing over your genitals. At least there you have some vague idea of what you're talking about.
Watching the reaction of the media and silly, ignorant people like Andy, proves that Romney is both right and effective.
That's an excellent catch too, I went right past that faux pax faux pas thing without even noticing it and yet I'm the guy who is completely stopped when presented with 'sugary' in place of 'surgery' in ASL, even when a knife is shown. Boy, was that embarrassing.
Romney couldn't have said anything to make the press or the AndyRs of the world happy. If he makes a strong statement, he's interfering or using the wrong tone. If he makes a weak statement, then he's a weak weakling who can't handle the job. If he says nothing, then he doesn't dare tackle tough issues.
You know what else we've learned? When McCain was asked by Harry Reid to come back to Congress to help work to a bipartisan solution and he did, he was held up as being an idiot.
When Obama decided to head to Vegas (note this is after he told corporations to stop going to Vegas) while dead bodies were still being examined, we learned that this was acceptable.
I'm not sure what message to take away from this except, I guess, that dead people are less important than the economy? Maybe?
Someone help me figure this out.
They tweeted that they stood by their initial tweet AFTER the walls were breached.
There is no point in trying to correct the gay boy. He is not that bright and easily misled and it is much easier to swallow a lie then engage in a critical analysis of Obama's foreign policy failures.
The US Embassy attacks are horrible, but the unified Democrat-run MSM attacks against Romney are worse.
No condemnation of the barbarians, no tough questions about diplomatice failure, no concern about the dead man and how his body was used as a prop, no criticism at all.
Except for Romney.
Yesterday and the day before I was sputtering mad. Today I can still barely type.
Coddled Prince Barry must not be allowed to trip and skin his knee.
Others must be blamed!
Forget the US.
Forget its safety and forget the violent murderers abroad and in our country.
Save Barry!
Goddamne assholes.
And fuck Peggy Noonan, too: ( "I don't feel that Mr. Romney has been doing himself any favors in the past few hours.")
Unfortunately, there is a large segment of the voting public that still believes the mainstream media is a reliable news source. I weep for my country.
It is important to point out people's lies so that other people reading don't assume they are truths. This is an error that the I have made for years when discussing politics that I regret.
Andy says "THERE ARE NO AMERICAN TANKS IN BAGDAD! IGNORE THOSE DIESEL FUMES!"
AndyR. Why then did the govt. disavow the very statement for which Romney is criticized for disavowing? It is not more nuanced or complex than that
Isn't this a pretty good indication of how "gutsy" the OBL raid really was for Obama?
We know how the press would have treated him had it failed (and we heard about it)- just as they are treating him now. Obama would have been protected, and critics would have been told to shut up in this time of terrible loss of life.
You know what else is terrible? Besides burying the news of a dead ambassador, which is the real tragedy and should be the news story, other damaging to Obama news stories were buried yesterday.
Like, who here knew that it was determined yesterday that Sebelius admitted to and was proven to have broken the law?
But, hey. Romney said something everyone agreed with, but he said it too fast. No need to focus on the abuse of government power or dead bodies.
Hey, where are all the "9/11 happened on Bush's watch" people now?
I mean, a US Ambassador is dead on Obama's watch. Where is the outrage & blame?
Andy is as funny as he is dishonest. It's a lie when Romney says it, but not when the Administration says it, or repeats it. I'm guessing he's a journalism major.
Jeez could even one MSM reporter think it might be reasonable to ask the president or Jay Carney "did you put in place more rigorous security precautions at all embassies on the anniversary of 9/11?" and "if not, why didn't you think that was necessary?"
Bucks only stop on Republican president's desks apparently. Maybe this is another inherited problem. Look, I've been pretty relaxed in my criticism of Obama.
This though? If he really -did- sleep through the attacks? He's a failure as a leader, and he let his people down. Even if he could not have done anything for them, you don't go to sleep while your people are in danger.
I think I hold team loyalty as an extreme virtue, and so this is actually offensive to me, as opposed to economic and policy debate where it simply is "We disagree on the best way to reach our mutual goals."
The good news is that Andy will go off shift, followed by the other lefties armed with the usual talking points.
Re Pogo's comment about Peggy Noonan--that girl has lost it entirely and should be put out to pasture--
Andy R: Fact-checking from your side is Newspeak for propaganda-alignment.
Unless you want to make the argument yourself, I'm not interested in whatever links, summaries, or talking points you toss over the transom here.
Please explain how Romney "acted impulsively and recklessly." It's not enough that you disagree with Romney.
I've come to the conclusion that Andy, shiloh, garage et al. are just here to annoy and waste time while expending as little effort as possible.
You can skip the fact checks. This is bad news for Obama. The Arab Spring which is Obama's signature Foreign policy endeavor is exploding.
http://macsmind.com/wordpress/2012/09/romney-is-right-obamas-foreign-policy-summed-up-in-weakness/
Douchehat: It's his "Lehman Brothers" moment.
Raise your hands if you think the Douche came up with the Lehman Brothers on his own, rather than mindlessly parroting someone else's talking points.
Anyone? Anyone?
Didn't think so.
Jack Moss: on the bright side for Mr Obama is that his inept foreign policy is shifting the spotlight away from his inept domestic economic policy. (just trying to find a ray of hope for Zero here)
There are a few Obama screw-ups: Solyndra, "shovel-ready", Fast and Furious, etc. Now that Benghazi is on the list, do any of the people on the left who thought Hillary Clinton, Mrs. "3:00 AM", would have been a better choice? She was Obama's person in charge.
Andy R cites Rooters (aka Reuters) as a source. That, in itself is laughable.
From the NPR "fact check":
Tuesday, Sept. 11, Cairo, Egypt
Early Tuesday morning, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo got word that demonstrators, angry about an anti-Islamic film produced in the U.S., were gathering in the streets. It issued a safety warning to Americans: Stay out of the streets.
As the situation became increasingly tense— but while the crowd was still peaceful — the U.S. Embassy in Cairo issued a statement condemning what it called "religious incitement" as it worked to calm the tensions.
"The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions," the embassy said at 6:18 a.m. EDT, shortly after noon Cairo time.
That's the statement that Romney referred to as the administration's "first response." By Wednesday morning, the Republican nominee was at a podium in Jacksonville, Fla., saying that statement "appeared to be an apology for American principles." It's a theme Romney has hammered against Obama throughout his presidential campaign, including in his campaign book, "No Apology."
But the embassy's condemnation of religious incitement hardly amounted to an apology.
In response to an angry mob creating a tense situation outside their walls, the embassy issued a statement condemning the 1st Amendment. As has been pointed out ad nauseum, our embassies speak for our administration abroad. Like it or not, until it was retracted, that condemnation of one of our most basic rights was the official position of the Obama administration. That Obama has now agreed that the embassy was wrong, and then essentially repeated the embassy's position ("We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.") is just icing on the cake. On the question of whether Romney lied in his statement about the embassy, the obvious answer is no.
Pookie Number 2 said...
Raise your hands if you think the Douche came up with the Lehman Brothers on his own, rather than mindlessly parroting someone else's talking points.
He read it yesterday at ThinkProgress.
He has no clue what the reference is and therefore believes it is accurate.
But the embassy's condemnation of religious incitement hardly amounted to an apology.
Notice that the goofy gay boy accepts subjectivity as fact.
Of course the goofy gay boy doesn't even know what he's reading or referring to.
I am so tired of "fact checkers" who neither know the facts or check them--and I suspect most Americans dont give a shit about fact checkers--they have oversaturated the media and have marginalized themselves. No one gives a shit about "fact checkers."
Jay, "goofy gay boy" is bad.
"Can't believe how the media made a foreign policy veteran like Mitt Romney look like a bumbling neophyte. Diabolical, really."
Matthew, I think we all saw that. And as we read the article we all thought, well yes, but then so what? What punishment can we expect to see? None. And so skipped down to comments and every single one said exactly that. But, from the story she can either be fired or pay a hefty fine and that suited me ... or be completely excused. !
I don't really get the "Lehman Brothers" moment thing. Lehman was allowed to collapse even as the government facilitated relief for Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch. What does that have to do with Romney criticizing the communications of Obama's embassy in Cairo?
Oh, knock it off machine and you other dumb asses nobody is falling for that bullshit. #Jornouralistfail.
MayBee: fling enough poo against the wall and hope something resonates.
Althouse,
Make sure you tag this for your "How Obama Lost Me" post.
Roger J. said...
I am so tired of "fact checkers" who neither know the facts or check them--and I suspect most Americans dont give a shit about fact checkers--they have oversaturated the media and have marginalized themselves. No one gives a shit about "fact checkers."
I think the real irony here is that news organizations didn't used to need to specifically publish fact checkers. News organizations just used to be expected to report facts. The very fact that a news organization can't just run a story without putting a banner above it calling it factual speaks volumes about how much faith they expect anybody to put in their veracity. And I suspect that most people have been quick to catch on that just calling something fact checking doesn't make it any more accurate than the rest of the propaganda that news organizations distribute.
And as predicted, Andy goes off shift and lo and behold here is machine with his approved talking points. This blog is certainly more predictable than the foreign policy situation that Mr Obama has created and now has to face two months before the election.
"FACT CHECK: Romney Misstates Facts On Attacks Romney lied to attack the president. Of course he is being condemned."
Ironically, it's a misstatement to call a misstatement a lie. It's only a lie when you know you're getting it wrong and you proceed to do so with intent.
So then is your misstatement a lie? That's the question.
Unlike the press, I listened to Romney's statement.
The collective pro-Obama media are blowing it way out of proportion. Romney was measured and sensitive and also forceful with his disapproval of what came out of The Embassy in Cairo.
Andy, you disappoint me. Did you even read the NPR "fact check"? Clearly not, because, if you had, you'd have realized that their headline was not true. Following what's apparently standard fact-check template now, the truth is conveniently placed at the end of the piece:
"The embassy did use its Twitter account to say, at about 8 p.m. EDT, that "this morning's condemnation ... still stands." The tweet was later deleted."
Just because the Embassy tried to stuff it down the memory hole doesn't actually make it not have happened.
And at 10:09pm Romney responded with his criticism. Responding to the original tweet (which the Administration disowned the next day) which the Embassy just said "still stands", even after the oh-so-peacful protestors turned violent.
Followed by Administration officials, who agreed with every single thing Romney said.
This media coverage is disgraceful. Stupid and pathetic.
None of this would have happened if Romney just...
I don't think anyone in the press has the credentials to indicate whether Romney's condemnation of Obama was on or not. I doubt even the professors of ME studies, or American studies can know.
It's simply a disagreement about policy.
Here is how I would write it.
Romney reacted. Obama slept while Americans died.
The CBS interview with Rob Portman was disgustingly biased.
After the interview, some douche comes on to agree with Charlie and Norah and say Portman is just flat our wrong. Probably a stinking liar like Romney.
These pukes at CBS deserve massive failure.
So then is your misstatement a lie? That's the question.
Is it a lie if your deep emotional desires override the thinking part of your brain?
In this case, Andy really wants Romney to lie, and perhaps the meanings of words become crossed in his mind, due to the emotional part of his brain overriding the thinking part.
Or maybe he is merely projecting. I get the feeling liars tend to think others lie. Same thing happens in marriages. Cheaters think their husbands/wives are cheating, and those who would not think to expect the same from their spouse.
MSNBC was in full-on attack Romney mode. The attacks on our embassies and personnel were secondary. So far in the backgroudn as to be barely noticable. But, those horrid remarks by Romney? WELL!!!
When I was a kid, the murder of four Americans abroad would have been considered awful. The murder of four Americans representing America would have been warfare.
Our President is on Telemundo, wondering how to think about this "tragedy". What an asshole!
Other than a few people here, I think most agree that the media are flat-out in the tank for the O administration. This stuff is going to get worse from here to November, and if Romney wins, every time he takes a dump there will be someone reporting that he's hurting the environment.
That said, what is to be done? If I were Romney's press secretary, I wouldn't speak to ANYONE in the mainstream press at all. In the press briefing room, I'd either kick out these sycophants, or never answer any of their questions (maybe only answer Fox's questions). And I'd unequivocally state to the Fox interviewer that the other media aren't fair and that's why I'm black them out.
How else to tackle this issue? We can't have a free country if the press is choosing sides.
What is this "Tweet" and why does a country with any self respect use one for serious diplomatic communications?
Ironically, it's a misstatement to call a misstatement a lie. It's only a lie when you know you're getting it wrong and you proceed to do so with intent.
One of the rules of journalism is you are never allowed to say that a politician is lying. In many ways, knowing that Romney was being intentionally misleading makes him look better. If it really was a misstatement, then it just means he is clueless.
First there was the fiasco with his foreign policy adviser that Romney backed down over rather than defend the man. Then his disastrous trip abroad. Now this. Romney has no foreign policy experience, and it shows.
If only Romney had kept on the gay foreign policy spokesperson, who everyone held in high esteem, maybe this whole mess could have been avoided. Kind of ironic, that.
NPR/AP:
Not quite. Almost five hours after the Cairo Embassy issued its statement — at about 11:15 a.m. EDT — Associated Press images show protesters atop the Cairo Embassy's walls. At about 11:33 a.m. EDT, the American flag there had come down.
The embassy did use its Twitter account to say, at about 8 p.m. EDT, that "this morning's condemnation ... still stands." The tweet was later deleted.
Help me here, the embassy reiterated it's statement 8.5 hours after the embassy walls were breached and the flag torn down and some two hours before Romney criticized their statement?
How is this an embarrassment for Romney?
I posit the media is in the tank for Obama but I still think this was a huge problem for Romney. Without all the facts, he jumped to a conclusion and tried to score political points. That's hardly presidential behavior.
As someone pointed out earlier today, Reagan, in 1980, refused to hit Carter on Iran, even after the failed hostage rescue. How far the GOP has fallen.
If only Romney had kept on the gay foreign policy spokesperson, who everyone held in high esteem, maybe this whole mess could have been avoided.
Paul Z - you were wondering about Andy's internal power struggle? As you can see, there is none. He's letting his schwantz do his thinking in either case, as the above shows.
Good morning fellow infidels. Ready to apologize for existing to worldwide muzziedom? No? But that's the path our very best and brightest have ordained. So fall in line and SUBMIT!
Good grief, the Wall Street Journal prints "faux pax"!
I make silly mistakes like that when I scribble a blog comment in five or ten minutes. But I am not writing for millions of people to read in a major, global venue with several fact and grammar checkers behind me to correct my obvious mistakes.
"Faux pax" is bad enough, but what do we do with concerted propaganda efforts to destroy a Republican candidate presented as facts?
Meanwhile, an ambassador and several other Americans are dead, an American embassy is apologizing to Muslim fanatics for American freedom of speech, it appears that that this is an al-Qaeda operation on 9-11, and the Secretary of State and the Commander-in-Chief are scrambling around trying to avoid responsibility.
But yes, the real story is Romney's outrageous behavior saying things that no one really disagrees with. What's more, Romney's campaign is now toast, they gleefully tell me.
Without all the facts, he jumped to a conclusion and tried to score political points. That's hardly presidential behavior.
What facts did he not get? And what part of his statement was wrong?
As someone pointed out earlier today, Reagan, in 1980, refused to hit Carter on Iran, even after the failed hostage rescue. How far the GOP has fallen.
I sense a moby here.
"If only Romney had kept on the gay foreign policy spokesperson, who everyone held in high esteem, maybe this whole mess could have been avoided."
-- Actually, the problem was that people on the left were saying all sorts of vile things about how he was a turn coat, not a "real" gay man, etc., so on, so forth. The left went into a frothing hatred of the man that he became a distraction from the campaign because he wasn't a True Scotsman.
Also: Romney's statement is completely true. So true, in fact, that Obama agreed with it, ultimately forcing the embassy to remove the offending message.
That's what is so hard for you to grasp. Romney did not lie; he told the truth. But, since you enter with the assumption: He must've lied! You can't ever see it.
I think it strains credulity to believe that the embassy was not in contact with higher ups at the State Dept if not the White House 8.5 hours after the embassy walls were breached and, hence, when that morning's apologetic statement was reiterated.
"How is this an embarrassment for Romney?"
Dude, you're not supposed to read that far down. Nobody reads that far down! Look at that awesome headline you've just gone and spoiled.
Romney is inside Obama's OODA Loop. The Obama Administration's first impulse was to criticize Romney. They didn't get around to criticizing the embassy attacks until hours later, and they did a poor job of that. Obama is toast.
Keep digging! I've got a room full of shovels here. Let me help you out! Go, go, go!
Andy R is trying to teach us something-- as if he knows something. Delightful! Andy-Rhoid is moving up in the world.
I Callahan, if Romney were a little better on his feet speaking-wise, he could very well use these next two months to get the press to fully come out of the closet as the biased bitches and bastards that they are. I wouldn't avoid them if I were him. The public will catch on after watching them constantly badger him about everything. In the process, he is free to say what he wants, as nothing he will say can satisfy them.
Good grief, the Wall Street Journal prints "faux pax"!
It's the Lefties at the Journal in the "news" division. Like bedbugs, we're going to have to bring back DDT to get ris of them.
Once again Althouse makes her flock happy w/her pandering. Otherwise nothing to see here as it's to be expected from someone smitten w/mittens!
Again, it's amazing Dutch, Bush41/43 ever got elected w/this die hard liberal MSM. Boo frickin' hoo!
As always, feel free to stop whining at any time ... or not!
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/barack-obama-used-troop-deaths-to-ding-bush-mccai?s=mobile
Obama blasted Bush and McCain and used the death of nine troops to do it.
The media was slightly biased through the mid to late 90s. In early 2000s there was an internal struggle for balance to come through again. Until about 2007, at which point the floodgates really opened.
"Good grief, the Wall Street Journal prints "faux pax"!"
Given the circumstances, "false peace" is an apt little Freudian slip.
Glad that Andy R has learned that many small lies are far more effective than one big one.
Gas just hit $3.99/gallon throughout our entire metro area. Not a peep in our local paper. Nada. Nothing for weeks as fuel continues to climb.
My guess is they'll discover that story in early November after Romney wins.
If only Romney had kept on the gay foreign policy spokesperson, who everyone held in high esteem, maybe this whole mess could have been avoided.
If you like, you can read Richard Grenell's tweets on recent events here.
Again, it's amazing Dutch, Bush41/43 ever got elected w/this die hard liberal MSM. Boo frickin' hoo!
Get bent Shiloh.
The idea that the media are the same today as they were back then is laughable. Today, they're militantly in the corner for the left.
This blog post is barely readable. But it , and most comments, seem to miss something vital. Romney attacked Obama about a statement Obama had not yet made about events that had not yet happened. Check THOSE facts! if you dare. Some people do not want to see the light.
I know right? Romney's response was AWESOME! Even more awesome than Clint Eastwood! He's got Obama right where he wants him! The fact that the Lame Stream Media is attacking Romney proves this!
Ahhh--a new poster emerges. Offering to show us the light. Welcome to Althouse, Miridunn. Hope to see you around some more. The blog is reasonably inclusive and tolerates alternative opinions fairly well.
Miri the embassy speaks for the President.
if Romney were a little better on his feet speaking-wise, he could very well use these next two months to get the press to fully come out of the closet as the biased bitches and bastards that they are. I wouldn't avoid them if I were him. The public will catch on after watching them constantly badger him about everything. In the process, he is free to say what he wants, as nothing he will say can satisfy them.
Agreed. I think Romney comes off very well under press interrogation/ attack-- strong, calm, in control, presidential. In stark contrast to an extremely thin-skinned POTUS who subjects himself to softball press conferences only once in a blue moon.
And the more Americans hear from Romney himself directly, the less they're relying on the dizzyingly spinning MSM's interpretation/ narrative of what Romney says.
The absurdity of a day like yesterday, with a full-on international crisis going on, and Mitt Romney-- candidate Romney, not the POTUS-- fielding tough questions from the press. Unreal.
miridunn,
So, then, what was the Obama administration doing vis-a-vis the Cairo embassy in the 8.5 hours between the breach of the walls and the reiteration of the embassy statement.
When did Obama take charge of the situation?
After Romney spoke?
If so, good for Romney.
He's letting his schwantz do his thinking in either case, as the above shows.
Well, sure, show me the guy who doesn't! Even so, you'd think that being called un-American by both the President and the Secretary of State would get his attention, schwanz or no.
If you like, you can read Richard Grenell's tweets on recent events here.
Andy, was your statement a mistake or a lie?
EDH: my thought is that Mr Romney's post drew blood and forced the Obama clowns to go into defense--rather like Mr Ryan's standing with Mayor Emmanuel on the teacher's strike. I do admit to a Republican bias, but it does seem to me the RR team is doing quite well. They dont have to appeal to the press, which they will never have--they do have to appeal the electorate. And so far they do seem to be doing OK
Ann,
If you're right, then this is just like 2008 again - all reaction and no thought - based on a single event.
Idiocy on parade,...
"The blog is reasonably inclusive and tolerates alternative opinions fairly well."
hmm, would pretty much agree for a 90/10 con blog. And their are fools like Jay, Alex, Fen, edutcher, Mick, etc. at most political blogs.
Plus skipping over their posts is a real time saver ...
>
Rhetorical question: Do you think any president will ever have a 90% Gallup job approval rating like Bush did, Sept. 2001, right after he embarrassingly got caught w/his pants down on 9/11?
I just saw Hillary Clinton going on live about how the video in question, the supposed pretext for the murder of our people, was rully, rully bad.
What kind of an idiot runs our State Department? She's a lawyer. She must have at least read the first amendment at some point. Does she understand the concept?
Obama, Hillary, say this: "We Americans have the freedom to say what we want, when we want, where we want, because that is our creed. If you don't like it, too bad for you. We've got a military ready to back up our freedoms."
Clinton betrayed our creed by even mentioning this stupid video pretext. What an asshole!
The Romney camp has acknowledged that the Romney statement came before he had any knowledge that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and two other staffers had also been killed.
I know this is embarrassing, but how can this be defended? Foreign Policy 101...
"Romney attacked Obama about a statement Obama had not yet made about events that had not yet happened."
-- I'll check these facts.
A) Romney attacked a statement from the Obama administration, not Obama. The administration DID make a statement
B) The Obama administration had made those statements.
C) The events HAD happened (you'd know this if the embassy had not deleted its tweet or you read about them destroying public information that made them look bad.)
Facts checked; you were wrong through pretty much the whole thing. Try again.
Miridunn, you've got it wrong in so many ways. To start, Romney attacked the statement of the Embassy tweet (written by someone in the US). For clarity's sake, I suppose you should also mention that both the President and HRC quickly disavowed the tweet after taking Romney's lead.
Machine: Seeing as Romney's comment was about the EGYPT embassy and not the LIBYA one, it doesn't matter. He was talking about a completely different event.
Bush didn't see the first 9/11 coming.
Obama didn't see the eleventh.
People are aware more than one embassy was hit, right? I think that might be causing the confusion. The murders happened in Libya, which Romney was not talking about. The statement that Obama and Romney both agreed was bad came from Egypt, which ultimately was forced to remove their statement by the President because, as Romney pointed out, it was bad.
Miridunn will not be seen again--she was on TDY from some lefty site.
If only Romney had kept on the gay foreign policy spokesperson, who everyone held in high esteem, maybe this whole mess could have been avoided. Kind of ironic, that.
One minute its a film insulting Muslims... then somebody said no, it was a coordinated attack possibly AlQaeda on the anniversary of 9/11... now Andy says that it was Romney's firing his gay spokesman that angered Muslims and got an American killed.
Why cant you guys keep anything straight?
machine said...
The Romney camp has acknowledged that the Romney statement came before he had any knowledge that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and two other staffers had also been killed.
Um, Ambassador Stevens was not in Cairo.
Romney's comments were directed toward the embassy in Cairo.
Keep conflating.
Carter 2.0 Electric Boogaloo is the best way to sum up obama's term at this point. It is a dangerous time to be a U.S serviceman now, as the jug eared jesus will make damn sure he doesn't look week to prop up his saggin presidency. Very scary indeed.
Andy R. said...
If only Romney had kept on the gay foreign policy spokesperson, who everyone held in high esteem, maybe this whole mess could have been avoided.
Hey idiot, the foreign policy spokesperson resigned.
You do understand what that word means, right?
As someone pointed out earlier today, Reagan, in 1980, refused to hit Carter on Iran, even after the failed hostage rescue. How far the GOP has fallen.
I sense a moby here.
The approved term is "concerned Christian Conservative," Inspector. Usually followed up by a lament that their family has voted GOP since Chester Alan Arthur, but today's Republican party is just too, too, extreme. Seminar callers, as Rush says.
I Callahan, if Romney were a little better on his feet speaking-wise, he could very well use these next two months to get the press to fully come out of the closet as the biased bitches and bastards that they are. I wouldn't avoid them if I were him. The public will catch on after watching them constantly badger him about everything. In the process, he is free to say what he wants, as nothing he will say can satisfy them.
Joe, a poster at Protein Wisdom says that at his next presser, Romney should have an empty chair front and center and tell three-quarters of the press that they can go home, since the chair is for the head of the DNC.
Andy R. said...
First there was the fiasco with his foreign policy adviser that Romney backed down over rather than defend the man. Then his disastrous trip abroad. Now this. Romney has no foreign policy experience, and it shows.
Only someone as comically stupid as you would say that after 3 embassy's come under attack and the death of an Ambassador takes place.
machine said...
The Romney camp has acknowledged that the Romney statement came before he had any knowledge that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and two other staffers had also been killed.
I know this is embarrassing, but how can this be defended?
So, the new standard is you have to wait until after someone dies before you can speak?
And you wouldn't be as critical of Romney if he made the comments after learning of the deaths?
Machine: are you abysmally ignorant or did you stay at a holidy inn last nite?
The Romney camp has acknowledged that the Romney statement came before he had any knowledge that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and two other staffers had also been killed.
How do those deaths in any way invalidate his statement? They don't. On the contrary! Those deaths only magnify the disgrace of the administration response (condemning and apologizing for "abuse of free speech") that Romney criticized.
Just remember: Obama thought it was more important to comment on Romney's statements than the attacks on the embassies. Since he responded to that first.
Priorities, you see.
machine said...
The Romney camp has acknowledged that the Romney statement came before he had any knowledge that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and two other staffers had also been killed.
Both Hillary Clinton & President Obama criticized the embassy in Cairo before they had any knowledge that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and two other staffers had also been killed.
Duh.
Well put, Madame.
The Demos had no problem going after Dubya, but now dissent is unpatriotic.
And, yes, the last 2 days (and there may be more coming - this is clearly Al Qaeda's revenge for bin Laden) have illustrated the abject failure of Choom and Hilla's foreign policy.
Andy R. said...
It's not any less of a lie when people restate the same mistake that Romney made.
Romney got a 3am call and he actied impulsively and recklessly, and lied about what happened to try to win some political points. It's his "Lehman Brothers" moment.
Romney knows he is losing and has to gamble by making these absurd attacks, but it's only going to hurt him even more when they don't land.
No, the race is dead even, according to the skewed polls and, from the way the media and the trolls are trying to distract, the overnights don't look good for Choomie.
"Mr President, you've just had several US Embassies attacked and 4 Americans murdered. Where are you going?"
"I'm going to a fund raiser in Vegas!"
Lousy optics.
shiloh said...
hmm, would pretty much agree for a 90/10 con blog. And their are fools like Jay, Alex, Fen, edutcher, Mick, etc. at most political blogs.
Our fools are shiloh, machine, Hatman, and Diamond.
Rhetorical question: Do you think any president will ever have a 90% Gallup job approval rating like Bush did, Sept. 2001, right after he embarrassingly got caught w/his pants down on 9/11?
Willie always got caught with his pants down, but he didn't get any 90% ratings after
February 26, 1993 - bombing of the World Trade Center
June 25, 1996 - attack on the Khobar Towers
August 7, 1998 - Kenya and Tanzania embassy bombings (a twofer)
October 12, 2000 - attack on the USS Cole
And let's not forget the most avoidable of all
October 3 and 4, 1993 - Bokara Market, Mogadishu
mittens, cons, mama grizzly, lol
U) N: W" A;
What Romney offended against was good sense and good judgment. He should have just shut up and waited to respond to the official White House and State Department statements. Instead, he wanted to make his moronic "no-apology-for-America" point. Regardless of what's written on this blog, Romney has lost the respect of the American foreign policy establishment.
What Romney offended against was good sense and good judgment. He should have just shut up and waited to respond to the official White House and State Department statements. Instead, he wanted to make his moronic "no-apology-for-America" point. Regardless of what's written on this blog, Romney has lost the respect of the American foreign policy establishment.
I seem to be living 1980 all over again. The year I joined the navy this same exact shit is happening again with a President even weaker than Carter. Sir Winston summed it up:
There is nothing new in the story. It is as old as the Sibylline Books. It falls into that long, dismal catalogue of the fruitlessness of experience and the confirmed unteachability of mankind. Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong -these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.
Romney has lost the respect of the American foreign policy establishment.
Good.
Considering the "American Foreign Policy Establishment" is feckless and weak.
I see Stonestools (ducolax allieves those, BTW) has checked in--one post and he will be gone. Are you reimbursed for your posts? inquiring minds want to know.
Stonetools is right: The three embassies coming under attack sure makes President Romney look bad.
(Shamelessly borrowed from Dan Foster's tweet)
"He should have just shut up and waited to respond to the official White House and State Department statements."
-- PS: The Embassy? That makes official White House/State Department statements. Try to understand diplomacy a bit more.
I seem to be living 1980 all over again. The year I joined the navy this same exact shit is happening again with a President even weaker than Carter. Sir Winston summed it up:
There is nothing new in the story. It is as old as the Sibylline Books. It falls into that long, dismal catalogue of the fruitlessness of experience and the confirmed unteachability of mankind. Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong -these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.
The MSM - and the Democrats - are criticizing Romney for saying things he did not say.
I heard the President's response to the events in Cairo, and it sounded flat and rather petulant that he was obliged to speak to this minor matter when he was so busy campaigning.
But violent attacks on United States embassies and legations are not minor matters, and certainly not when there are several more or less simultaneous attacks that appear to have at least some coordination with possible nation-state involvement.
What Romney offended against was good sense and good judgment. He should have just shut up and waited to respond to the official White House and State Department statements.
Romney did Obama a favor. He clued Obama in that the "we work really hard not to offend Mulims please don't hurt us" line is a loser.
So Obama dropped it. Imagine if he'd taken that route yesterday, in an address to the nation.
Obama has a "rapid response team"... and SURPRISE... so does Romney.
Clinton had a "war room" that eviscerated Bush 41... Bush 43 didnt make that mistake... Rove set up a rapid response team.
Up until yesterday... a rapid response team had never, that I can recall, been fingered as a source of a "major meltdown".
Rapid Response used to be held in high steam... to borrow Andy's phrase.
Americans in American embassies were killed! Their dead bodies were paraded through the streets.
Please remember that single overriding fact when making judgements about how politicians acted.
I bet the foreign policy establishment cheered when the President visited with David Letterman and went to Vegas while our embassies were under attack.
Our foreign policy experts probably thought it was great that Obama decided to sleep while some of them were murdered.
I bet the foreign policy establishment cheered when the President followed Mitt Romney's lead and disavowed the stupid tweet from the US emabassy.
I bet the foreign policy establishment cheered the President's willingness to admit that he doesn't speak Austrian.
Putin couldn't be more proud.
What Romney offended against was good sense and good judgment. He should have just shut up and waited to respond to the official White House and State Department statements.
He's a racist, too. Axelrod won't pay if you don't add "racist!" to all of your comments.
Instead, he wanted to make his moronic "no-apology-for-America" point.
After nearly four years of the Chocolate Crackhead's "I'm ashamed of America" tour, I can see why standing up for the country might be distateful to you.
Regardless of what's written on this blog, Romney has lost the respect of the American foreign policy establishment.
The Foggy Bottom striped pants crowd? As if anything other than a RINO squish like McStain would be acceptable to them.
Damn--I owe stonetools an apology--I thought for sure he said stonestools--for which duclolax works very well.. Now we have mini whats her name and stonestools on board--what are the chances they will be here in the future? How much do these douchebags get paid to troll sites?
If I may posit a thought: when you deal with the middle east Muslims, you are dealing with primarily a tribal and pride culture. Strength is respected but feckless is not. One might also suspect that Vladimir Putin is taking note. As the Romans said--we dont care if they love us, as long as they fear us. It is really time to put fear back into the mix.
@Andy
All you need to learn about "fact check"ing in 1 easy lesson. President Obama never went to Israel. Fact Check: True but basically False.
About politicians "lying" yes you are right, all politicians lie. The problem you engender is that you only point out 1 sides lies. I don't trust ANY politician to tell the truth. Why should I? They're salesmen. They are selling themselves.(it's called whoring)
If you could get outraged by both sides lying to you, it would help your cause immensely.(same for everybody)
This is why I gave up TV news, even FOX. I can get more honest coverage by surfing multiple websites, and actually seeing what happens. As a disclaimer, I do watch the occasional news commentary for the entertainment value...O'reilly, Daily show, Hannity, Colbert. It's an innocent diversion if you don't take them seriously. Much like pro-wrestling. For breaking news I will watch Shep Smith, but only in emergencies.
Also, if the Osama raid had turned bad does anyone really doubt that Panetta would have been thrown under the bus? From the behind the scene stories floating around you've got to give Leon "props" for doing the right thing, and not CYA, which is SOP for DC.
Errrr...CYA is what Zero does almost exclusively.
I bet the foreign policy establishment cheered when the DNC used Russian ships in their video tribute. Cuz really, aren't we all on the same side?
Andy R, shiloh and the machine have Obama's dick so far up their ass they can't even see straight from the fecal matter build up. Notice their gripe is what Romney said about an absolutely assinine tweet from the Cairo Embassy. Not about the tweet itself which vetted by none other that that brilliant Secretary Of State H. Rodham Clinton and her boss (or is he her bitch?). Of course it's too much to expect the competence level of a 8 year old from Obama and H. Rodham Clinton to actually foresee a possibility of attacks on our consulates and embassies on a date that attracts muzzie terrorists like flies to manure. Hillary forget about any dreams of getting elected president in 2016. She also hit the snooze button on the alarm clock when it ranged at 3am. And where was our Pseudo-President while this was going on? In Vegas, fundraising, that following his radio 'interview' with the Pimp With A Limp.
Professional prostitutes have higher ethical standards than these rank amateurs.
I wonder how our foreign policy people feel when, how many is it? Five? Embassies were so inadequately defended they've been raided.
Nah, I'm sure they're more worried by accurate things Romney said that Obama agreed with.
Other things I'm sure they are glad to hear: Egypt? Not an ally.
Now that the trolls have done their drive-bys, and things have slowed down, it bears repeating.
The press HAVE to attack Romney (no matter how incoherently) because Obama has given them nothing to praise.
As others have noted, its only going to get worse.
The Romney camp has acknowledged that the Romney statement came before he had any knowledge that U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and two other staffers had also been killed.
...and?
Criticism is only valid if a dead body exists?
Slightly amusing concept ie payin' anyone to troll Althouse or any political blog.
What would be the ROI? Since political blogs don't affect elections. Although some self-righteous blog owners may think they do.
Again, basically preaching to the choir like fixednoise ...
Obama is stung by Romney's "shoot first aim later" criticism of his administration's apologize-first-recant-later foreign policy.
Obama:
We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.
Please note that his choice of words for those who denigrate religious beliefs is the same for the brutal acts:
"reject"
That's it. He won't seek justice for the dead. He won't punish those who committed an act of war. By his very word choice, he demonstrates that those who engage in free speech are equal to those who attack an embassy and kill an ambassador.
He should never have been elected President.
He certainly should not be re-elected.
President Obama should withdraw from the election and resign now. He is a disgrace to his Office.
The press HAVE to attack Romney (no matter how incoherently) because Obama has given them nothing to praise.
Obama should be at least 15 points behind. That he is not says something about our voting public....and it is not good.
"Obama is under attack from all sides and he doesn't know what to do."
That's not what he thinks. And his hands rest on many levers.
Do you think these attacks work against him? Do you think they are against him? If he thought they do and are, he would by in the WH situation room. Is he? What really is the game afoot?
Wow. I don't come to this site often, but the feelings of victimization and self pity that are evidenced are just off the scale. Guys (and gals), what is so hard to understand that when there is an emergency and people's lives are in danger you don't go off half cocked and create extra work for those responsible. Doing so just possibly creates further danger and, oh yeah, possibly encourages the terrorists.
Yeah, Obama always knows what's best.
Thanks for your concern!
Paul Krugman thought it was awful?
...
Therefore, it was farkin' brilliant.
(I kid, but only a little.
Krugman's beclowned himself by attempting to use his aura of Nobel legitimacy on subjects he has no expertise in, and worse, by letting his partisanship infect his economic analysis.)
"We're all Osama, Obama!!" The Al Qaeda backed mob chanted and shouted over and over again, as they burned and destroyed and murdered. THEY WERE SENDING A MESSAGE TO BARACK OBAMA PERSONALLY-A leader of the mob in Cairo stepped up to the cheers of protestors to say to Arab media gathered:
"We are not afraid of you, we hold you and now all America in utter contempt, and we will with great pleasure kill anything American every chance we get".
If Paullie (The Beard) Krugman says it, it must be so!
Paul Krugman teaches at Princeton and won the Nobel prize. Who are you? An unknown professor in Wisconsin for Pete's sake.
This is how I see it. The U.S. was attacked on the 11th anniversary of 9/11 by Muslims affiliated with, or at least very sympathetic with al Qaeda. The Administration response to the attack on what is officially U.S. soil in two countries and the murder of four U.S. government employees, including an ambassador, was conciliatory to the attackers, at least until they figured out that Romney had them in a box, at which time, they somewhat switched.
And, yes, it does remind me quite a bit of Carter's last months, with the U.S. embarrassed by his weakness in responding to the takeover of our embassy there (by, among other, the current president of Iran).
Democratic Presidents, from Carter on, have seemed to be quite weak in expressing American resolve, and, as a result, have, I would suggest, greatly emboldened our enemies. And, a lot of people believe that the apparent weaknesses of both Carter and Clinton in responding to Islamic attacks is what emboldened al Quaeda to attack us on 9/11/01.
How long did it take for Obama to stop reading My Pet Las Vegas Fundraiser and leave the classroom?
Paul Krugman teaches at Princeton and won the Nobel prize. Who are you? An unknown professor in Wisconsin for Pete's sake.
In a study published in the Econ Journal Watch, a peer reviewed publication, Krugman was found to be the most partisan - read that "political hack" - among 17 prominent economists whose work was surveyed. That is to say his opinions varied widely depending on which party held the White House.
Althouse is hardly "unknown" and as a Constitutional Law specialist is arguably better equipped than Krugman to reflect on politics and foreign policy.
Any other questions?
sandycosign, whose 2:40 pm post was a "shut up" to Althouse, just joined Blogger, and is apparently a new troll assigned to the Althouse Blog - or perhaps a sock puppet.
Welcome, sandy.
Wow
Since last commenting, two more drive-bys have shown up. And not just drive-bys, but totally unknown to me.
Perhaps the Althouse veterans can set me straight, but I cannot recall an Althouse post that brought out this many drive-by trolls.
Why is that?
hmm, anyone who disagrees w/Althouse is a troll. Shocking!
Indeed, as many of Althouse's flock would prefer this blog be a 100% con circle jerk! :::zzz:::
Gosh Shiloh,
You're hardly a drive-by, but if you want the promotion, so be it.
shiloh's favorite phrases
- Althouse hillbillies
- neocon circle jerk
repeat ad nauseum until we are all nauseated.
Obama against the 1A until he was for it again.
Sort of.
Apologies to hillbillies ...
Well, the Professor nailed me for putting the wrong comment on the wrong topic. I messed up there, and I don't have the brilliant prose stored, and maybe this is still the wrong topic, but the essence of it was this:
Our Secretary of State represents our government and our President, and she (Hillary Clinton) said today that that dumb YouTube video was a bad thing that she didn't like (but she doesn't think killing Americans is an OK response).
She is a buffoon. She should, of course, have said "WE SAY WHAT WE WANT, WHEN WE WANT TO, BECAUSE THAT'S THE AMERICAN WAY. I, HILLARY CLINTON, APOLOGIZE FOR NOTHING, NOR DOES MY BOSS, BARACK OBAMA, BECAUSE YOU IDIOTS ARE TOO NAMBY-PAMBY TO APPRECIATE OUR MOST FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOM. SUCK IT, LOSERS."
Post a Comment