Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Seriously, Mittens?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/mitt-romney-criticism-president-obama-national-moment-grief-backfires-article-1.1158095?pgno=1

Mitt Romney's criticism of President Obama amid national moment of grief backfires
Romney claimed President sympathized with protesters who stormed embassy in Cairo. Statement made before news broke that Ambassador Chris Stevens was killed by protesters in Libya.

Mitt Romney drew fire on Wednesday for slamming the Obama administration during a national moment of grief.
The Republican presidential candidate pounced on what he described as President Obama’s poor handling of the crisis in the Middle East — but ended up fending off criticism even from within his own party for seeming to politicize a national tragedy.
“I think President Obama has demonstrated a lack of clarity on foreign policy,” Romney declared during a campaign stop.
Obama hit back hours later, slamming his Republican rival.
“Gov. Romney seems to have a tendency to shoot first and aim later,” Obama told CBS. “And as President, one of the things I’ve learned is you can’t do that.”
Facing his first true foreign policy test during the general election season, the former Massachusetts governor first weighed in Tuesday after protesters stormed the American Embassy in Cairo and staffers there issued an apology about an anti-Islamic video in an attempt to quell the violence.
The White House did not authorize the apology, which the embassy later withdrew. But the Romney camp saw an opening.
“It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions,” Romney said in a statement, “but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

That campaign note, sent in a blast email to reporters, was released before news broke that Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed outside the consulate in Benghazi.
It drew a heated response from Democrats and a few within the GOP fold, who accused Romney of grandstanding against the backdrop of a tragedy — and for breaking an agreed-upon campaign ceasefire on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
“We are shocked that, at a time when the United States of America is confronting the tragic death of one of our diplomatic officers in Libya, Gov. Romney would choose to launch a political attack,” said Ben LaBolt, an Obama spokesman.
But after the news of the four deaths emerged Wednesday, the GOP nominee did not back down.
“The first response of the United States must be outrage at the breach of the sovereignty of our nation,” Romney said in Jacksonville, Fla., “and apology for American values is never the right course.”
“The President takes responsibility not just for words that come from his mouth,” insisted Romney, who said the confusion over the statements “reflects mixed signals to the world.”

Romney, who expressed his condolences to the families of those lost, did not second-guess his campaign’s decision to release its initial critical statement.
The statement was originally embargoed until midnight — meaning it would be released after the Sept. 11 anniversary passed — but that prohibition was lifted just before 10:30 p.m.
“I don’t think we ever hesitate when we see something that’s a violation of our principles," Romney said.
The crisis was Romney’s first chance to respond to a fast-moving international incident, and Democrats have gleefully painted him as a foreign policy neophyte.
“This is one of those moments when Americans must unite as Americans,” said Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), a leading candidate to succeed Secretary of State Clinton if Obama wins reelection. “It is exactly the wrong time to throw political punches.”
Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) went further, labeling Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, a “threat to national security.”
The reaction to Romney among Republicans was mixed.
Some conservatives, like South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, ex-Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, supported their party’s standard-bearer.
“Mitt Romney looked extremely presidential,” said Giuliani during a news conference at City Hall. “He seemed to have the force and the strength that sometimes is lacking in our President.”
But, tellingly, several conservative columnists and high-profile Republicans did not echo Romney’s criticism of the White House.
“We honor the Americans we lost in Libya, and we will stand united in our response,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
“I think he was right on the larger point,” said Rep. Pete King (R-L.I.). “But I probably would have waited a day or half a day.”

There's a thread already MGS

Not about Mitt Romney using it for political gain there isn't.

Good copy

Oh dear.

He's just the worst, I'm no longer going to say take a gak or take a dump, I'm gonna say take a romney.

Just for entertainment value. I hope he wins so I can watch everyone wig out...or Obama wins so everyone can wig out. Either or I no longer care. I'm just going to laugh at the posts here

Did you have anything to add other than posting the article?

 Crablezworth wrote:
He's just the worst, I'm no longer going to say take a s**t or take a dump, I'm gonna say take a romney.

That is degrading to gak actually.

It was a dumb comment and appalling timing.

 Mannahnin wrote:
It was a dumb comment and appalling timing.

et tu Manny?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
It was a dumb comment and appalling timing.

et tu Manny? How was it dumb and bad timing?

He jumped the gun and spoke too soon, and he did so because he was so eager to try to gain a political advantage that he chose to break the campaign truce on 9/11. He can play hide and go feth himself.

 Mannahnin wrote:
He jumped the gun and spoke too soon, and he did so because he was so eager to try to gain a political advantage that he chose to break the campaign truce on 9/11. He can play hide and go feth himself.

My thoughts/feelings exactly.

This pic really set me off; nice smirk....

 agnosto wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
He jumped the gun and spoke too soon, and he did so because he was so eager to try to gain a political advantage that he chose to break the campaign truce on 9/11. He can play hide and go feth himself.

My thoughts/feelings exactly.

This pic really set me off; nice smirk....

Wow...

Ya'll dislike this guy...okay... that's fine. I don't like the other guy.

What was it that he said that you didn't like?

And what the feth is all this "too soon" business?

I'm looking at this whole event, and I'm appalled at the media bias...

Dang...didn't notice that. I was busy watching Kim Kardasian mom interview on NBC....what happen again?

 agnosto wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
He jumped the gun and spoke too soon, and he did so because he was so eager to try to gain a political advantage that he chose to break the campaign truce on 9/11. He can play hide and go feth himself.

My thoughts/feelings exactly.

This pic really set me off; nice smirk....

I'm sure you summoned up all your righteous indignation just a shade over a year ago when Obama smirked at the 9/11 memorial. Supposedly Michelle made a funny about a damn flag, but I don't read lips.

 AustonT wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
He jumped the gun and spoke too soon, and he did so because he was so eager to try to gain a political advantage that he chose to break the campaign truce on 9/11. He can play hide and go feth himself.

My thoughts/feelings exactly.

This pic really set me off; nice smirk....

I'm sure you summoned up all your righteous indignation just a shade over a year ago when Obama smirked at the 9/11 memorial. Supposedly Michelle made a funny about a damn flag, but I don't read lips.

Aaaand... that's the press conference where the reporters were caught unaware of live mics "colluding/conspiring" to ask the same questions over and over again in order to make Romney look bad... and yet, on the SAME day, Obama did NOT take a questions from his conf.

 whembly wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
He jumped the gun and spoke too soon, and he did so because he was so eager to try to gain a political advantage that he chose to break the campaign truce on 9/11. He can play hide and go feth himself.

My thoughts/feelings exactly.

This pic really set me off; nice smirk....

Wow...

Ya'll dislike this guy...okay... that's fine. I don't like the other guy.

What was it that he said that you didn't like?

And what the feth is all this "too soon" business?

I'm looking at this whole event, and I'm appalled at the media bias...

Timeline from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/09/12/us/politics/libya-statements.html

Romney basically spoke before getting all the facts....but then he's already said he doesn't want fact checkers in his campaign...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AustonT wrote:
I'm sure you summoned up all your righteous indignation just a shade over a year ago when Obama smirked at the 9/11 memorial. Supposedly Michelle made a funny about a damn flag, but I don't read lips.

No righteousness here but then I don't present myself as a paragon of virtue like some people do...

Actually, I don't have a dog in this fight because I actively dislike both major candidates and the general premise of a two party system. I don't care about the politicians, just the policies. I've voted Republican, I've voted Democrat; I would probably vote Independent at some point as well if my damn state allowed it. The point here is that the Dems and the Reps are two sides of the same sleazy coin and only out to push whatever whack-job agenda they think will garner the most votes; meanwhile, the economy's in the toilet, our soldiers are spilling their precious blood for people that would rather stab them than say hello, and people are more concerned with their own religious freedom than anyone else's.

Sorry, carry on with your own diatribe I won't disturb you with reality any longer.

You mean this one?

 agnosto wrote:

Spoiler:

 whembly wrote:

 agnosto wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
He jumped the gun and spoke too soon, and he did so because he was so eager to try to gain a political advantage that he chose to break the campaign truce on 9/11. He can play hide and go feth himself.

My thoughts/feelings exactly.

This pic really set me off; nice smirk....

Wow...

Ya'll dislike this guy...okay... that's fine. I don't like the other guy.

What was it that he said that you didn't like?

And what the feth is all this "too soon" business?

I'm looking at this whole event, and I'm appalled at the media bias...

Timeline from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/09/12/us/politics/libya-statements.html

Romney basically spoke before getting all the facts....but then he's already said he doesn't want fact checkers in his campaign...

I still don't follow... is the criticism this?

I'm outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It's disgraceful that the Obama administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.

Seems factual there...

Did I miss something else that he said? If there was something else... my bad...

Here's a better timeline of the events that started on 7/1/12 :
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/heres-a-timeline-of-the-confusing-statements-on-libya-and-egypt/262264/

 whembly wrote:


Did I miss something else that he said? If there was something else... my bad...

Here's a better timeline of the events that started on 7/1/12 :
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/heres-a-timeline-of-the-confusing-statements-on-libya-and-egypt/262264/

Attributing a statement from an embassy to the entire administration is like saying former Pres. Bush was responsible for 9/11 because Rice ignored all the information pushed in front of her by the CIA. Bush was a mental midget but at lest his handlers kept him out of trouble most of the time, Romney's making enemies out of the Russians, insulting our biggest allies and claiming credit for the Olympic Games before he even enters office. Somebody needs to put the brakes on his mouth like they did with Reagan.




edit1: typo


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:



You mean this one?

Yeah, and next you'll tell me how I can save $400 or more on my car insurance. Fox is about as trustworthy a source as MSNBC...probably less so because they blatantly make stuff up.

I like this site:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jun/26/chain-email/river-school-lip-reading-damn-flag-first-lady/

whembly wrote:Did I miss something else that he said? If there was something else... my bad...

When did the Obama administration "sympathize with those who waged the attacks"? I'm not seeing it.

 Mannahnin wrote:

When did the Obama administration "sympathize with those who waged the attacks"? I'm not seeing it.

They didn't; Romney said they did though:

The embassy in Cairo put out a statement after their grounds had been breached," Romney told reporters. "Protesters were inside the grounds. They reiterated that statement after the breach. I think it’s a terrible course for America to stand in apology for our values. That instead, when our grounds are being attacked and being breached, that the first response of the United States must be outrage at the breach of the sovereignty of our nation.

He didn't bother to check any facts though or he would have known that the Cairo Embassy released the statement hours before the grounds were breached...unfortunately that wasn't politically expedient so he just made it up as he went along.

A good rundown of the events:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/sep/12/romney-says-us-embassy-statement-was-apology-was-i/

I've found politifact to be fairly unbiased.

 agnosto wrote:

 whembly wrote:


Did I miss something else that he said? If there was something else... my bad...

Here's a better timeline of the events that started on 7/1/12 :
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/heres-a-timeline-of-the-confusing-statements-on-libya-and-egypt/262264/

Attributing a statement from an embassy to the entire administration

Um... the embassy IS the administration.

is like saying former Pres. Bush was responsible for 9/11

No, it's not... there were structural problems in the intelligence community that led up to 9/11... not because of willful ignorance.

because Rice ignored all the information pushed in front of her by the CIA.

wut?

Bush was a mental midget but at lest his handlers kept him out of trouble most of the time,

Yup.

Romney's making enemies out of the Russians

His agressive stance on Russia is perplexing... but, no, we ain't "friends" with Russia

, insulting our biggest allies and claiming credit for the Olympic Games before he even enters office

Really... that was insulting? When tough questions were ask, he gave a tough answer... and whats this about claiming credit for Olympic Games? You talking about the Wintergame in Utah? Yeah, that's his fault that the program was turned around.

Somebody needs to put the brakes on his mouth like they did with Reagan.

? Were you even politically active during the 80's? They *couldn't* shut Reagan up!

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:


You mean this one?[/quothttp://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jun/26/chain-email/river-school-lip-reading-damn-flag-first-lady/

Bah... that's old news. But poltifacts has problems too dude...

Just want to clarify your reading the smirk the same way some people are reading her lips.

 whembly wrote:
Wow...

Ya'll dislike this guy...okay... that's fine. I don't like the other guy.

What was it that he said that you didn't like?

Romney came out and complained that the first response made by the administration was to sympathise with those who waged the attacks. Forget how this might have been poorly considered and poorly timed, what matters is that the claim was completely wrong, and then consider where Romney got his information from.

Romney's complaint was that the first response to this issue was a press release condemning the film that caused all this controversy. Romney got this information from the right wing blogs. The problem is that it was wrong, straight up bs. The press release in question preceded the attacks, it wasn't a response to that press release at all.

So we have a presidential candidate who not only relies on false information, he's getting that false information from highly political right wing blogs.

If that doesn't scream 'not ready to govern' I don't know what does.

Politifact's breakdown is solid. Romney's an ass, who's distorting the facts of the situation to push his bs "apology" meme, and making political hay of the deaths of Americans. I used to think he was a decent guy, to be honest.

I think its a waste of american lives. They should not have been there in the first place till it was more stable.

 Mannahnin wrote:

whembly wrote:Did I miss something else that he said? If there was something else... my bad...

When did the Obama administration "sympathize with those who waged the attacks"? I'm not seeing it.

Oh... okay...

The official US Cairo Embassy tweet account ( @USEmbassyCairo ) tweeted this: "US Embassy condemns religious incitement" with a link to a statement on the Embassy's official page that reads:

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. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.

That's what set off the snafu... and the @USEmbassyCairo folks reiterated this position for most of the day until the States Dept. walked back this original statement.

Now, had the States Dept corrected @USEmbassyCairo quickly, this wouldn't have been an issue.

Sure, he smiled when leaving, but was their a maniacal laugh later?