I was so glad to see Hillary Clinton so fiesty with Congress after her recent illness. Of course the Tea Party didn't cut her any slack - she was grilled mercilessly by Congressmen and Senators over the Benghazi incident. Chris Matthews compared her to Gulliver among the Lilliputians, a giant among the little people, in Jonathan Swift's famous novel. Their questions were really ad hominem attacks used to boost their own pitiful careers with an ever-diminishing GOP. The Good Old Boys belched out Fox News talking points that bore little resemblance to reality. "Read the report," Hillary kept saying to them, because it was obvious they hadn't read anything, and were playing "gotcha" more than trying to get to the bottom of the murders of four government officials.
Poseurs like John McCain were especially egregious. He has been using Benghazi since before the election to help himself to another committee chairmanship (Harry Reid nixed that idea) and to wring out more air-time on Sunday morning talk shows. He pretended that Benghazi is somehow different from every other overseas attack, as if this time we should have known from the first moment everything that happened and why. McCain, who has more top secret security clearance than almost anyone, surely knows better. His performance was disingenuous faux-outrage. By contrast Hillary appeared dignified and full of common sense.
The joke of the day was when Senator Rand Paul said if he had been President, he would have fired Hillary for not reading every telegram from Benghazi. President? Delusions of grandeur much? Not to mention the fact that if George W. Bush had read all his telegrams and reports from, say, FBI agents here in the United States, then 911 need not have happened either. Right, Senator Paul? 3000 people died in that attack, plus thousands more over the course of two wars longer than any our military has ever engaged. But please, Senator Paul, proceed with your delusional life. We all know Hillary is much more likely to be President someday, not you.
With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.
LOL! This is surely a new experience for Bob Schieffer. After a long career as a journalist at CBS he is now starring in animated gifs and youtube parodies.
Yeah, I bet, LOL. Lehrer was a slug compared to Martha Raddatz. And while your boy Ryan tried to talk as fast as the Music Man, Biden managed to get more words in than Obama.
Sarah Palin had to say something, of course, and it was actually a sort of compliment made in Palin's Alaskinesque - Northern Shaman way: Joe Biden is the mighty musk ox of the tundra:
"Really tough format, Sean, for someone like a Paul Ryan or anybody else up against Joe Biden, when the moderator allowed one candidate to absolutely run roughshod over the conversation, over the opponent," Palin told Fox News Channel’s Sean Hannity on Thursday night. "That’s a tough format. It reminded me ... of watching a musk ox run across the tundra with somebody underfoot. And in this case, when it came to style, it was Paul Ryan underfoot because of the moderator allowing Biden to do the interrupting, to kind of take control of the conversation."
The RNC released an unintentionally funny video with ominous music playing as Joe Biden laughs his head off. I dare anyone to watch this without giggling or at least smiling. Great job, Brownie - I mean Reince Priebus!
Peggy Noonan, who took Republican candidate Mitt Romney to the woodshed multiple times just a few weeks ago, now has jumped back on the GOP loyalty train, and is spinning like there's no tomorrow. She won't say that Biden won, but she won't say that Ryan lost either:
Tea Partier Erick Erickson wrote on Red State that Joe Biden spent half an hour "Braying like a Biblical Donkey," whatever that means.
Erick also went on Soledad O'Brien's show slamming the moderator, Martha Raddatz.
And remember while reading the following transcript that Erickson works for CNN now, so he is one of the so-called "journalists" he implies are covering for Raddatz. Also he seems to be insulting Soledad, who is his colleague now - ugh. In his comments he echoes Karl Rove because he misses Jim Lehrer who "got out of the way" and let Romney run roughshod over Obama. Ha - not so fun when the shoe is on the other foot, as it was last night.
ERICKSON: . . . I did think it was interesting in how much Martha Raddatz pressured Paul Ryan on specific policies and specifics of his proposals, and she didn't do that so much with Joe Biden. It's striking that for all the lack of specifics she may be getting from the Romney campaign, you're not getting them any more from the Obama campaign for what they're going to do for the next four years.
O'BRIEN: You know, you tweeted that about Martha. You tweeted this. I'm sorry, but I think Martha did an atrocious job as a moderator, lost control of both sides repeatedly.
ERICKSON: I absolutely think she did.
O'BRIEN: I think you've lost your mind.
ERICKSON: I think you're a journalists and journalists are going to give her cover. I thought she was horrible.
O'BRIEN: I've never met her before today. She walked by. I said hi. In terms of information --
ERICKSON: Look, you've got to --
O'BRIEN: Let me just finish and I'll let you respond. Hang on a second.
ERICKSON: -- with Joe Biden and Paul Ryan.
O'BRIEN: Right. For me a moderator who let's them go at it each other a little bit so you can get the argument but then jumps in and moves it to the right direction that's very helpful as someone who was just watching. I got to watch it in the hall. Why do you disagree?
ERICKSON: Because I think she only interrupted to move the debate forward when Paul Ryan was speaking. She rarely did it with Joe Biden. She let Joe Biden do the interruption. Her wheel-house was foreign policy. Two-thirds of the debate was on foreign policy. And, you know, when you're debating foreign policy in a vice presidential debate, I guess that's all well and good but we have this unemployment number, jobs decline and I just think moderators shouldn't make the focus of the debate their wheel-house.
O'BRIEN: I'm going to disagree with you on that. I thought she did a terrific job, thought she was super strong. Did you think Jim Lehrer did a good job? We can disagree.
ERICKSON: At least -- I think with Jim Lehrer, at least he got out of the way and let them talk. I think when Joe Biden was so aggressive last night you need the moderator to intervene a little more. With Jim Lehrer, I thought he was asleep for most of the debate but wound up being substantive. I haven't been impressed with the moderators so far this year. But Candy Crowley will hit it out of the park, I guarantee.
Mother Jones has posted another portion of the "Secret Video." This time Mitt talks to his wealthy donors about Israel and the Palestinian Problem, but also get other glimpses into his foreign policy agenda. Perhaps this is what he talked about with his old friend Bibi Netanyahu on his trip to Israel?
He paints Obama as "naive" on foreign policy and someone who gets by merely on charm alone. Romney misses the intense irony of this statement, coming from someone who bungled his European trip so badly and insulted our closest and most easily charmed ally, Great Britain. Obama never did that, LOL. Note: My daughter just pointed out to me that Romney made these statements in May, before his ill-fated European Tour. Little did he know just how naive he was.
The president's foreign policy, in my opinion, is formed in part by a perception he has that his magnetism, and his charm, and his persuasiveness is so compelling that he can sit down with people like Putin and Chávez and Ahmadinejad, and that they'll find that we're such wonderful people that they'll go on with us, and they'll stop doing bad things. And it's an extraordinarily naive perception.
He also rambles on about Iran again. I think he is fixated.
If I were Iran, if I were Iran—a crazed fanatic, I'd say let's get a little fissile material to Hezbollah, have them carry it to Chicago or some other place, and then if anything goes wrong, or America starts acting up, we'll just say, "Guess what? Unless you stand down, why, we're going to let off a dirty bomb." I mean this is where we have—where America could be held up and blackmailed by Iran, by the mullahs, by crazy people. So we really don't have any option but to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon.
Good idea - a man who wants to be President of the U.S. suggesting that the Iranians should attack Chicago, which also happens to be Obama's hometown. It was a sure bet he wasn't going to say "Boston."
The other side of the West Bank, the other side of what would be this new Palestinian state would either be Syria at one point, or Jordan. And of course the Iranians would want to do through the West Bank exactly what they did through Lebanon, what they did near Gaza. Which is that the Iranians would want to bring missiles and armament into the West Bank and potentially threaten Israel. So Israel of course would have to say, "That can't happen. We've got to keep the Iranians from bringing weaponry into the West Bank." Well, that means that—who? The Israelis are going to patrol the border between Jordan, Syria, and this new Palestinian nation? Well, the Palestinians would say, "Uh, no way! We're an independent country. You can't, you know, guard our border with other Arab nations."
And now how about the airport? How about flying into this Palestinian nation? Are we gonna allow military aircraft to come in and weaponry to come in? And if not, who's going to keep it from coming in? Well, the Israelis. Well, the Palestinians are gonna say, "We're not an independent nation if Israel is able to come in and tell us what can land in our airport." These are problems—these are very hard to solve, all right?
And I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say, "There's just no way." And so what you do is you say, "You move things along the best way you can." You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem.
And Rachel Maddow reminded us on her show last night that one reason this ceremony was so moving and remarkable was that during the Bush Administration, displaying the flag-draped coffins of the dead was prohibited. The Bushies didn't want anyone to think about how many soldiers were dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama rescinded that order within 6 months of beginning his first term.
Maddow also covered the latest violence going on in the Middle East.
"This has clearly moved beyond demonstrations against an offensive internet video. It's become an opportunity for radicals in many countries to express their anger with the United States. And they've learned from watching each other that U.S. diplomatic facilities overseas aren't as protected as they thought."
~ Richard Engel on MSNBC
When all you have is a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail.
When the only advice you get from your party is to "be aggressive" and "attack Obama" and you desperately want them all to like you and to never be criticized for being wimpy, that is what you will do. You will attack Obama in every situation, even if it makes no rational sense, and even if it threatens international peace.
Just a few days ago, Romney was getting loads of armchair advice from frustrated Republicans who are livid because he is crashing and burning in every national poll. But their efforts to light even more of a fire under Romney seems to have lit the fuse to the bomb that is Romney's Libya response. For instance:
He (Romney) should be very aggressive and he should be adamant in his attacks . . . he needs to be severely aggressive.
~ Sarah Palin on Fox, via Last Word
The Romney campaign's going to have to make some changes. They're going to have to go ideological! They cannot continue on this 'Obama Mr. Nice Guy' bit. They just can't do it. It isn't going to work.
. . . I'm not saying go out and say Obama's a bad guy. But he's got to be tied to this economy. His policies, his ideas, his ideology. Liberalism is still a dirty word in this country - use it! Rush Limbaugh on his radio show
Speak Up, Mitt!
. . . It’s not enough to float like a butterfly. You have to sting like a bee. No sting, no victory.
~ William Kristol on the Weekly Standard
I keep going back to the millions and millions of dollars paid to these political consultants.
Election after election, we hire people who have lost previous campaigns; who've run campaigns that have failed; who have message campaigns where the message fell flat, and they keep getting re-hired. I don't understand that. I don't know why those are the people you hire.
. . . you're in this, you have one shot, man. This is going to be the first line of your obituary: you won or you lost. It's all on the line for the country, and it's all on the line for you.
~ Conservative Laura Ingraham on her radio show 9-10-12
Ouch - no candidate wants to see the word "obituary" especially when he is sinking in the polls. That's scary talk.
And finally, this from Jennifer Rubin who wrote a scathing analysis of Romney's 9/11 speech on the same day that the campaign decided to push back on Libya. Rubin told them to "seize the moment" and not put things through the "mushy" "Boston Blender," which is a pointed slap at Romney's closest surrogates from his Massachusetts days, the guys Romney trusts to write his policies and speeches:
On Romney's 9/11 Speech to the National Guard Association
This was a wasted opportunity when he could have shown some mettle. His foreign policy message, not unlike his domestic policy message, is getting put through the Boston blender, it seems, coming out mush. That would be mush with no flavor.
. . . Now is not the time for sweet vignettes; it’s time for him to seize the moment. That requires Romney to sharpen and beef up his message.
~ Jennifer Rubin on Washington Post
"Beef it up" guys, or your foreign policy is "mush." I wonder what Jennifer Rubin will write about today, if she still has a job?
All this free advice is looking strategically WRONG on so many levels now, going against the best interest of the candidate and the party. But perhaps they did all the voters a huge favor by throwing the spotlight on Romney's foreign policy incompetance.
On Tuesday night, the Cairo Embassy issued a statement trying to cool things down surrounding a volatile situation involving an anti-Islamic film made by an Israeli, which said:
"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. 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 a rather standard representation of the U.S. position on freedom of religion, right? But because it wasn't anti-Islam in a Moslem country, the stupids came out of the woodwork to condemn it.
Apparently President Obama can’t see Egypt and Libya from his house. On the anniversary of the worst terrorist attacks ever perpetrated on America, our embassy in Cairo and our consulate in Benghazi were attacked by violent Islamic mobs. In Cairo, they scaled the walls of our embassy, destroyed our flag, and replaced it with a black Islamic banner. In Benghazi, the armed gunmen set fire to our consulate and killed an American staff member. The Islamic radicals claim that these attacks are in protest to some film criticizing Islam. In response to this, the U.S. embassy in Cairo issued a statement that was so outrageous many of us thought it must be a satire. The embassy actually apologized to the violent mob attacking us, and it even went so far as to chastise those who use free speech to “hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.” (Funny, the current administration has no problem hurting the “religious feelings” of Catholics.)
But where is the president’s statement about this? These countries represent his much touted “Arab Spring.” How’s that Arab Spring working out for us now? Have we received an apology yet from our “friends” in the Muslim Brotherhood for the assault on our embassy?
It’s about time our president stood up for America and condemned these Islamic extremists. I realize there must be a lot on his mind these days – what with our economy’s abysmal jobless numbers and Moody’s new warning about yet another downgrade to our nation’s credit rating due to the current administration’s failure to come up with a credible deficit reduction plan. And, of course, he has a busy schedule – with all those rounds of golf, softball interviews with the “Pimp with the Limp,” and fundraising dinners with his corporate cronies. But our nation’s security should be of utmost importance to our Commander-in-chief. America can’t afford any more “leading from behind” in such a dangerous world. We already know that President Obama likes to “speak softly” to our enemies. If he doesn’t have a “big stick” to carry, maybe it’s time for him to grow one.
- Sarah Palin
Clearly, Priebus, the guy who compared women to caterpillars, and Ms. Palin Malaprop are two of the stupidest people EVER to reach a level of eminence in our society.
So why does the Romney Camp follow their lead? I guess we have to assume they are just a confederacy of dunces as well. Because look at Romney's statement from Tuesday night, which echoes Palin and Priebus: via Washington Post
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.
I also believe the administration was wrong to stand by a statement sympathizing with those who had breached our embassy in Egypt, instead of condemning their actions. It’s never too early for the United States government to condemn attacks on Americans and to defend our values.
The White House distanced itself last night from the statement, saying it wasn’t cleared by Washington. That reflects the mixed signals they’re sending to the world.
The attacks in Libya and Egypt underscore that the world remains a dangerous place and that American leadership is still sorely needed. In the face of this violence, American cannot shrink from the responsibility to lead. American leadership is necessary to ensure that events in the region don’t spin out of control. We cannot hesitate to use our influence in the region to support those who share our values and our interests.
Today Republicans want answers about who is running the show:
Who told Mr. Romney to issue a political broadside against the commander-in-chief the day after a U.S. ambassador was murdered?
~ Joe Scarborough of MSNBC
O'Donnell points to Richard Williamson, Romney foreign policy adviser, quoted in The Daily Beast:
When asked if the Romney campaign did the right thing by releasing a statement slamming Barack Obama for a failure of leadership in the wake of a series of brutal attacks on foreign embassies in Libya and Egypt, Richard Williamson paused for several seconds before saying just three words: “It was accurate.” . . . Pressed further if it was right to issue a political statement before the dust had cleared and the death toll was known, a statement that condemned President Obama but didn’t mourn those lost, Williamson said simply, “Sure.”
“Ty Cobb was the greatest hitter of all time and he batted about .355. And he is still the greatest hitter,” Williamson explained later in the interview. “There isn’t something in my 63 years I couldn’t have done better except con my wife into marrying me.”
O'Donnell calls that "The craziest thing I've ever read from a campaign spokesman . . . it is absolutely nutty." And rightly so. Foreign politics, especially in the Middle East, is not a game, so spare us the lame sports analogies. However, with advice like that, it's easy to see why Romney went to Britain and insulted their Olympic Games.
O'Donnell goes on to presume that Williamson would be fired post haste, but I'm not so sure. Look at Eric Fehrnstrom, hapless "etch-a-sketch" guy who is still running Romney into the ground months later. For a man who "likes to fire people," Mitt is almost too loyal to his inner circle of clownish advisers.
That is also the opinion of Washington correspondent Sam Stein of The Huffington Post who said on the show:
"No, I think he'll stay on the payroll, unfortunately. Unfortunately, it's a bad analogy.
There's an issue here which is Mitt Romney could have conceivably waited twelve hours, woken up, seen the news, and said, 'Listen, we all mourn the loss of life here, but it's time to really look at President Obama's strategy, vis-a-vis the Arab Spring.' And that would have sparked a conversation that may have been more damaging to President Obama than what's transpired currently.
The problem I think Mitt Romney has is that there's about three different factions within the Republican Party with respect to foreign policy. There's the people who are unapologetically pro-international engagement, the Neocons who think you can use military might to shape the world in your image. There are people who want to do it more subtlely, they're more realistic. And then there are the people, the Rand Paul types who want to disengage from the international community. So whenever Mitt Romney wants to put out a statement on Libya, he has to contend with three separate factions within his own party about what that statement is. And I think they look at that and say 'It is a lot easier for us to just go after President Obama on character grounds, accuse him of sympathizing with the protestors,' than it is to craft something that might be a little bit confusing to members of their own party.
And that's where he gets in trouble. . . .
. . . What you had this morning was Mitt Romney's advisers literally tearing down a campaign rally to set up a more somber setting so that he could deliver this statement in a sort of drabby dark Jacksonville office. Whereas Obama, all he does is step out into the Rose Garden and by sheer fact that he's President, he looked Presidential. And you know sometimes we look too much at the optics and the setting, and I think in this case the optics and the settings are a huge part of the story.
. . . There was supposed to be a partisan detente yesterday for 9/11. They knew about the embassy being breached. They planned their statement and they actually lifted the embargo to get ahead of the news cycle. They were very much aware of what they were doing. The statement was signed off by Romney himself according to the New York Times report tonight. They knew what was happening and if it were a gaffe they would have backtracked today. Instead they went back and they said 'No, we stand by that statement in condemning what the Cairo Embassy put out.' So no, this planned from the beginning and they totally miscalculated what would happen once they decided to say that Obama was sympathizing with the protestors.
A picture really is worth a thousand words. This pic from AP photographer Charles Dharapak probably deserves a Pulitzer Prize for capturing the self-satisfied smirk of a candidate who just made a complete fool of himself but has so little self-awareness that he thinks he has won a huge victory. It's Mitt Romney believing he is Ronald Reagan when really he is Ted Baxter from the Mary Tyler Moore Show.
PHOTO: Mitt Romney leaves podium after speaking about U.S. consulate killings in Benghazi, Libya via @aptwitter.com/CharlesDharapa…
Romney grabbed a hornet's nest when he tried to use a volatile situation in Libya for political purchase last night right at the time that our Ambassador to that country was being murdered. Yes, Romney and his minions are that craven. His weird idea that Obama is "apologizing for America" makes no sense anyway, but to layer it on top of an American death on foreign soil is simply a jerkface thing to do.
That Romney decided it was wise to throw down on foreign policy when 9/11 was barely over is unforgivable. That he decided to do it at all has probably put the nail in the coffin for his chances at the Presidency, mainly because his own party is so disgusted with him now that they probably won't vote for him.
Romney rode on the plane with a Press entourage all week, but his handlers didn't treat them well.
On Friday outside 10 Downing Street Romney only took questions from the British Press.
On Saturday, he told both the U.S. and Israeli press that they were shut out of a fundraiser.
On Sunday after an uproar, he allowed the press into the fundraiser after all.
On Monday, Greta Van Susteren of Fox said they were being held on the bus in Poland like "animals in a petting zoo" and not allowed to ask questions.
On Tuesday in Warsaw as Romney was leaving a soldier's tomb to go make his speech in Warsaw, frustrated reporters shouted questions and were told off by a Romney operative named Gorka.
This "Curse the Press" thing can only go so far, although I'm sure it's resonating with the far-right who loved Sarah Palin's characterization of the "Lamestream Media." The problem is, some of the people in the press are far to the right of mainstream.
And if Romney is going to talk about Israel and Poland as beacons of democracy, he's going to have to accept that a free press is crucial to a free society.
They also should have realized that when people like Rupert Murdoch, Charles Krauthammer, and Greta from Fox are complaining about the candidate, they should try to be nice once in a while and answer questions, even if Romney has to say "no comment." In fact, that's what he should say sometimes, but he doesn't know how.
CNN: “Governor Romney are you concerned about some of the mishaps of your trip?
NYT: “Governor Romney do you have a statement for the Palestinians?
Washington Post: “What about your gaffes?
NYT: “Governor Romney do you feel that your gaffes have overshadowed your foreign trip?”
CNN: “Governor Romney just a few questions sir, you haven’t taken but three questions on this trip from the press!
Gorka: “Show some respect”
NYT: “We haven’t had another chance to ask a question…”
Gorka: “Kiss my ass. This is a Holy site for the Polish people. Show some respect.”
Hey, Gorka ~ respect works both ways!!! And you should have more faith in your candidate and let him practice answering questions before you tick off more journalists. Things are not going to get easier after this trip - Romney has seen to that will his gaffes.
Of course now the Romney camp says they are sorry it happened, and they've rolled it back. As David Corn of Mother Jones said on Hardball - "They should call this the 'moonwalking tour' because every time Mitt Romney speaks he has to walk backwards while seeming to go forward. How many remarks can you walk back?"
Gorka subsequently called a pair of reporters to apologize, saying he lost his cool. “It was inappropriate,” Gorka said. Romney was at the square to visit the Polish Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. After he did that, laying a wreath and greeting Polish military veterans, the GOP hopeful decided to walk down to a monument on the other side of the square. Romney has not held a media availability for his traveling press corps since taking three questions outside 10 Downing Street in London last Thursday.
In a speech that will delight Jewish extremists and Evangelicals alike, Mitt Romney stated that he believes Jerusalem is the "capital of Israel," trying to sound like the guy who is going to rebuild the Temple of Solomon single-handedly while also fulfilling the Mormon White Horse Prophecy, which will save the Constitution of the U.S. but also bring about the Rapture and Armegeddon.
Isn't that special? The problem is, he hasn't been elected to anything yet.
So mainly Romney wants to get that sweet money from Sheldon Adelson, and everything else is secondary. By the way, the Romney camp has reversed their policy of yesterday and will now allow journalists inside the fund raiser in Jerusalem. Apparently that includes both the American Press Corps, as well as the Jewish Press. But stay tuned in case another etch-a-sketch happens.
JERUSALEM—On Israeli soil, U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Sunday declared Jerusalem to be the capital of the Jewish state and said the United States has "a solemn duty and a moral imperative" to block Iran from achieving nuclear weapons capability.
"Make no mistake, the ayatollahs in Iran are testing our moral defenses. They want to know who will object and who will look the other way," he said. "We will not look away nor will our country ever look away from our passion and commitment to Israel."
The presidential election hovered over the speech, with the Old City forming a made-for-television backdrop behind Romney, while some of his campaign donors listened in the audience.
I have been enjoying the heck out of Romney's British Invasion so far, even before he landed in the country. One (or possibly two) of his surrogates went nuts yesterday and told the British tabloid Telegraph UK a few bizarre things about what Romney wants from British relations, including several racist dog whistles about how Romney is "more Anglo Saxon" than Barack Obama, who "hates NATO." You can't make this stuff up.
We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage, and he feels that the special relationship is special,” the adviser said of Mr Romney, adding: “The White House didn’t fully appreciate the shared history we have.
. . . Obama is a Left-winger," said another. "He doesn’t value the Nato alliance as much, he’s very comfortable with American decline and the traditional alliances don’t mean as much to him. He wouldn’t like singing ‘Land of Hope and Glory'.”
. . . He is naturally more Atlanticist.
Despite his promises that politics stops at the water's edge, Gov. Romney's wheels hadn't even touched down in London before his advisers were reportedly playing politics with international diplomacy. . . . The comments reported this morning are a disturbing start to a trip designed to demonstrate Gov. Romney’s readiness to represent the United States on the world’s stage. Not surprisingly, this is just another feeble attempt by the Romney campaign to score political points at the expense of this critical partnership. This assertion is beneath a presidential campaign.
Romney spokesman Ryan Williams quoted in the LA Times: The Vice President of the United States used an anonymous and false quote from a foreign newspaper to prop up their flailing campaign. We have very serious problems confronting our nation and American families are hurting, yet the Obama campaign continues to try to divert voters' attention with specious shiny objects. We have more faith in American voters, and know they will see this latest desperate ploy for what it is.
Obama Spokesperson Jen Psaki: One of his advisers violated exactly what they said they wouldn't do which is criticize the president beyond the borders of the U.S.
This is a case where there is a continuous fumbling of the foreign policy football here, and it does raise a question as to whether Mitt Romney and his team are ready to have serious conversation about a foreign policy
