Glenn Beck weighs in. (Ridiculously, but without, at least, mentioning Obama or Romney.)
Under other circumstances Romney’s comments would not have received this much attention or required so much explaining, so there might not have been any talking points. He’s talked about these themes before (every Republican presidential candidate does) and even has a campaign book called “No Apology: The Case for American Greatness.” The response wasn’t planned or expected. The talking points aren’t overly defensive, but the point is that they would not have been necessary otherwise. The campaign didn’t want to take back the comments and they can’t do so now anyway, so they are trying to manage the negative response. So they’re continuing to say the attack had something to do with “perceived weakness” and banging away about the Cairo embassy statement that is very outdated, wasn’t made by Obama or Clinton, and just isn’t relevant given what’s happened since then. He meant to say what he said. He just didn’t mean for it to come off the way it did because other events were transpiring that put his statements in a different light.
I think the salient point here is other Presidential candidates have criticized the government vis a vis action or inaction in the past, but the problem is this candidate chose to jump the President on the media release.
This can only work if he has all the information before him, and clearly he didn’t. His campaign relied on a thin embassy release, out before the attack occurred, and tweets .
This makes it VERY different from any other presidental candidate who has criticized the administration on foreign policy.
There is nothing wrong with providing critical notes, but this is political opportunism, not commentary on policy.
Someone attacks America and Romney attacks the President? Yeah, like I’m gonna vote for this schmuck.
The Libyans have already got one perp, and others are in process of getting arrested.
http://amanpour.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/13/libya-pm-arrests-have-been-made-in-us-consulate-attack/
The latest polls don’t look good for Team Mitten:
An article about the producer of the film with a potential identity as a guy convicted of bank fraud who now wants the local police to protect him. What a total wank! I hope the PD tells him that he has the same access to 911 as all the other citizens that they are responsible for protecting.
Huntsman weighs in
His entire statement:
“This is a time when we all should reflect on those who continue to give, even the last measure, of service and sacrifice, to promoting and defending America’s interests abroad,” Huntsman added. “This is above all a reminder that politics should end at the waters edge.”
Adelman & Kochs better crank those money machines even faster.
If Mitt can’t turn things around fast (and I don’t see how he can), the money men are going to abandon him and invest in the down-ticket races. They didn’t get rich by flushing money down the toilet.
I liked what Digby had to said in this:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2012/09/911-is-what-happens-when-modern.html
Romney and many Republicans are schmucks indeed.
So, oddly enough, I see no mention of this yet.
(Oh, I’m sure somehow, someway, someone will turn this into a positive spin for Obama.)
“Oddly” why?
Okay then. As long as you’re sure.
It’s called tongue-in-cheek. It’s not odd at all. Why would any of you guys mention it? You all were having too much fun playing “Obama-can-do-no-wrong”. But since you’re here, what say you about the link? Obviously, you can’t discredit it as a “right-wing rag”. Pretty damning, no?
Oh, I’m sure.
Clearly the only reason we wouldn’t have posted a link to a “exclusive” story which only appeared in one UK paper this morning is because of a massive liberal coverup and not, say, because most of us hadn’t seen it yet. “Oddly”, anyone else would have just posted the link and asked about it without suggesting that the fact that no one else had posted it yet was the result of a deliberate act. But then, you’re one of a kind.
And it’s concerning, yes, but short on facts about what the State Department knew. We get this:
but nothing else on the “warning”, so I have no idea yet whether or not they acted inappropriately given what they knew. Could eventually be damning, but we need to know more. I think we’ve already seen what happens when one comments prematurely.
More worrying is the fact that the consulate in Benghazi appears to have had massive security breaches. One wonders whether other embassies and consulates have similar problems.
Not explained: why anyone gives a fuck about the Cairo embassy statement today, and why Romney’s people have been lying or misexplaining the timing and circumstances that went into that statement.
And here we all thought it was more an example of head-up-ass.
Well, his tongue is in his head; his ass does have cheeks. No reason you can’t both be right.
Oh, bullshit. Nobody here plays “Obama-can-do-no-wrong.” :rolleyes:
“Obama-can-do-no-thing-that-would-justify-putting-a-Republican-in-the-White-House,” OTOH, is a perfectly valid position.
On account of being 100% verified, non-debatable FACT.