Thursday Reads: The Campaign That Can’t Shoot Straight
Posted: September 13, 2012 Filed under: 2012 presidential campaign, Barack Obama, Egypt, Foreign Affairs, Libya, Mitt Romney, morning reads, U.S. Politics | Tags: bullying, Chris Stevens, emotional immaturity, personality development, temperament 55 Comments
(Cartoon from the Hartford Courant)
Good Morning!!
After watching Mitt Romney’s undignified behavior in horror yesterday morning, and thinking about it for much of the day, I finally came to the conclusion that Romney is a spoiled teenager in an adult man’s body.
This man has been cosseted and catered to throughout his life. Everything has been handed to him on a silver platter–early on because of his father’s money, power, and influence and later because he was a wealthy and powerful CEO who could shout orders and expect instant obedience.
It has been evident to me for a long time that Romney is still the same bully who rounded up a group of classmates to hold down a younger student whose clothing and hair had drawn Romney’s disapproval and cut his long hair off. His wife and children have frequently talked about how he still loves to play “practical jokes” and “pranks” on family and friends. I honestly don’t think Romney has matured emotionally since those high school days.
As far as we know, Romney has never faced a serious life problem except for a car accident he got into in France while he was on his Mormon mission there. Yes, his wife Ann has had serious health problems, but I’m not sure Mitt has enough empathy for that to affect him personally.
In my opinion one of the most important ways people grow emotionally is by going through serious problems. But even after that accident, Romney didn’t have to do much. His father sent people over to handle the situation and bring Mitt back home. Although a woman was killed in the accident, and Romney was driving, he apparently never even contacted the woman’s family to offer condolences. So the main challenge Romney faced was simply to recover physically. When his wife Ann was sick, Mitt had all the money in the world to make sure she had the finest health care.
Romney’s behavior on Tuesday night and Wednesday morning suggests to me that he has an even more serious problem than his obvious emotional immaturity. He seems unable to inhibit his impulses and delay gratification, at least in the context of the presidential campaign. We saw this play out over the past two days in his gleeful reaction to the tragic events in Libya, treating them as an opportunity to launch political attacks on the Obama administration.
On Tuesday night Romney’s staff e-mailed a statement to news organizations, but told them to embargo it until after midnight, presumably to avoid a negative attack on 9/11. But a short time later, the campaign removed the embargo and told the media to release it. The statement was issued around 11PM, before Romney knew what had actually happened. Did Romney himself make these decisions on his own because he just couldn’t wait to get his nasty message out? Here’s the gist of the first statement.
“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,” Romney said in the statement. “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.”
This attack was based on a statement issued by the American Embassy in Cairo in an attempt to prevent protests that happened a few hours later. Here is the statement.
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.
According to Politico, the State Department tried to dissuade embassy officials from releasing the statement, but they went ahead and did it, probably hoping to stave off an attack like the one that happened later in Libya.
Again on Wednesday morning Romney quickly arranged a press conference in order to get his message out before President Obama spoke. By this time, Romney knew that the the American ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens had been murdered, along with three other embassy employees. But instead of changing course, he continued the same attack on President Obama that he had begun the night before, claiming that somehow the statement from the Cairo embassy demonstrated that Obama was “apologizing for American values.”
You can read the full transcript of the press conference here. The gist of Romney’s attack:
America will not tolerate attacks against our citizens and against our embassies. We’ll defend also our constitutional rights of speech and assembly and religion.
We have confidence in our cause in America. We respect our Constitution. We stand for the principles our Constitution protects. We encourage other nations to understand and respect the principles of our Constitution, because we recognize that these principles are the ultimate source of freedom for individuals around the world.
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.
What did Romney think he would gain from these false and undignified attacks during a time of national crisis? Why couldn’t he wait a few days for events to play out and then attack if it made sense? I think it is because Romney just doesn’t have and adult ability to control his impulses. We’ve seen this again and again, particularly on his disastrous trip to Europe. He simply says whatever comes into his head, with seemingly no ability to adjust his words to what is appropriate to a situation–or even to stick to basic facts.
Michael Cohen of the New York Daily News asks rhetorically:
Within hours of finding out that a U.S. ambassador was killed in the line of duty, Romney is engaging in a rather naked and blatant political attack against the President. It’s the type of criticism you might expect from a pundit or a back-bencher in Congress, not from a man who aspires to be President of the United States. It makes Romney look small and inclined to put politics ahead of the national interest. It is the equivalent of John McCain’s suspension of his 2008 campaign during the financial crisis and should be treated as such.
But aside from the politics of this, what does it say about a candidate who would issue a statement based on incomplete information and then double down on it even after it’s been disproven? What does it say about a candidate who actually accuses the President of openly siding with those who would harm U.S. diplomats? What does it say about a candidate who would, in a moment of grief over the death of U.S. personnel serving overseas, take the opportunity to cravenly engage in a dishonest political attack?
What it says to me is that this is a man who simply is not up to the awesome responsibilities of being President of the United States.
I’ve thought that for a long time. Now the mainstream media is beginning to understand how disastrous it would be if Romney managed to win the election and become president. A president needs to be able to stop and think before talking or taking action. Romney is apparently incapable of that level of self-control. as a child and young man, he had all his needs met by others. As an adult, he has been accustomed to issuing orders and having them followed immediately by “the help.”
Quite simply, Romney is temperamentally unsuited to the presidency. As a nominee of a major party Romney will soon receive intelligence briefings. Can he be trusted with such confidential information? Remember when he was in Great Britain and he revealed that he had had a secret briefing with MI6?
Fortunately, it looks like Romney has destroyed his credibility with the media, and he isn’t likely to recover it. He’s falling behind Obama in the polls, and unless something very dramatic happens to turn things around, it sure looks like he’s toast. But I won’t feel safe from this blundering doofus until the returns come in and he’s forced to concede the election the night of November 6.
This is a fast-moving story, so I’m sure there will be stories breaking rapidly today. But here are a few links to get you started this morning.
CNN: Romney’s political pretzel over Libya. That’s a bit of a timeline of the events of this Romney attacks and events in Egypt and Libya.
A very detailed timeline from TPM: A Timeline Of The Attacks In Libya And Egypt — And The Responses
Politico: Mitt Romney digs in on Obama ‘apology’
Washington Post: FACT CHECK: Mitt Romney rhetoric on Egypt, Libya out of step with timeline of events
The New Republic: Former Romney Adviser on Libya: “They Stepped in It”
Bloomberg Businessweek: Anti-Islam Filmmaker Who Provoked Attacks Used Pseudonym
At TPM Josh Marshall discusses some odd switches in the NYT coverage of the Romney/Libya story.
[E]arlier this evening the Times ran a story entitled “Behind Romney’s Decision to Attack Obama on Libya.” The byline was David Sanger and Ashley Parker. The big news out of the story was that Romney himself had been the driver of last night’s decision making. That and a lot of other color and interesting news. As I write, it’s still that piece and lede that’s on the front page. But now it’s been replaced (same url) by an almost unrecognizable piece entitled “A Challenger’s Criticism Is Furiously Returned”, bylined by Peter Baker and Ashley Parker….
The thrust of the piece is dramatically different and, unless I’m missing something, leaves out this critical quote from a Romney senior advisor explaining their rationale. “We’ve had this consistent critique and narrative on Obama’s foreign policy, and we felt this was a situation that met our critique, that Obama really has been pretty weak in a number of ways on foreign policy, especially if you look at his dealings with the Arab Spring and its aftermath.” [….]
What happened to the other story? Pieces get rewritten all the time, especially with a breaking news story. But this would seem to require some explanation.
Here’s a satirical piece from the LA Times: Mitt Romney should triple-down on Libya: Rally with Rev. Jones!
Mitt Romney’s campaign to make the world safe for anti-Muslim hate speech breaks new ground for a presidential nominee.
But why won’t the former governor of Massachusetts take his brand of audacious truth-telling to its logical conclusion?
President Obama, or at least his State Department, is “apologizing” for the video that makes the prophet Muhammad out to be a cretinous, bed-hopping party fool — so says Romney. So why wouldn’t Romney (who has twice affirmed his critique of the administration) triple-down — with a more explicit endorsement of the talented artists who put together the 14-minute “Innocence of the Muslims.”
I’m recommending, of course, a joint rally featuring Christian Pastor Terry Jones and his proxy, former Massachusetts Gov. Romney.
This one from ABC’s The Note is scary: Who’s Advising Mitt Romney on Foreign Policy? Here’s a list from Romney’s website. Some of the names are very familiar. Eight of them were members of the Project for a New American Century, the group that pushed for Bush to attack Iraq.
Cofer Black
Christopher Burnham
Michael Chertoff
Eliot Cohen
Norm Coleman
John Danilovich
Paula J. Dobriansky
Eric Edelman
Michael Hayden
Kerry Healey
Kim Holmes
Robert Joseph
Robert Kagan
John Lehman
Andrew Natsios
Meghan O’Sullivan
Walid Phares
Pierre Prosper
Mitchell Reiss
Daniel Senor
Jim Talent
Vin Weber
Richard Williamson
Dov Zakheim
I’ll wrap this up for now, and check for breaking news in the morning. So…what are you reading and blogging about today?
peej
Carissa
ecocatwoman
mablue2
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
Some new links this morning:
Turmoil spreads to US embassy in Yemen
Obama calls presidents of Egypt, Libya
Yemen doesn’t surprise me … Al Quada presence and general disarray there with their economy and our drone strikes. Yemen and Syria are the unstable places right now although it sounds like Libya has porous borders now.
Boston Globe Editorial: Romney’s comments raise doubts about his foreign-policy savvy
CBS News: How badly did Romney botch response to Libya attack?
The only ones that are defending Mitt’s response are the total nuts. I can’t believe we have those damned Neocons back. Didn’t any one learn anything from the Iraq invasion? I guess not … we’ve still got the Bush economic policies being put forward and you think they’d have learned from that too. Romney is Dubya without a single lick of sense. I thought Dubya was bad … Romney makes him look like a skilled diplomat and statesman.
Too true. It’s difficult to believe that anyone could out “inept” W. W embarrassed me as an American. MItt hits the embarrassment button along with hide under your desk fear. Maybe Skydancers could all chip in to buy an abandoned missile silo – would that be safe in a nuclear war?
Gail Collins: Mitt’s Major Meltdown
Mitt Romney’s total Neocon meltdown: A return to George W. Bush? http://thebea.st/PvTKMr
BB, you want me to try and embed the youtube video in your post?
You can try. Something very strange was going on with WP this morning.
I had that problem last night, I thought it was my internet, but I bet it was WP.
I tried to embed the video at least 20 times. It just didn’t work.
I got it in there…I left the title blank, and it seemed to take…
Thanks. I don’t know what happened–it never happened before.
Yeah, it never happened to me either…
Roger Simon shreds Romney: Mitt Romney won’t stop attacking
Wonderful post BB, especially telling are those smirks Romney had when he gave that “condolences” presser.
This is what sympathy looks like:
Photo is from the front page of the Guardian…
I saved these links early this morning:
Romney Smiles At News Of American Deaths In Libya (IMAGE) | Addicting Info
Romney Jumps the Shark: Libya, Egypt and the Butterfly Effect | Informed Comment
Mitt Romney’s ill-judged attack on Obama over Libya backfires | Ana Marie Cox | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
Sociopathic Mitt Romney Smiles During and After Presser on Embassy Tragedies
US Politics | AMERICAblog News: Romney blasted by GOPers for jumping gun, politicizing death of US ambassador to Libya
Some of those sites should be taken for what they are worth…that last link has a break down of all Mitt’s smiles and smirks during his speech.
Wow, the photos of Mitt smiling at that Politicus link are damning.
From PoliticusUSA:
Romney gets capital of Libya wrong in press conference critiquing Obama.
http://www.americablog.com/2012/09/romney-gets-capital-of-libya-wrong-in.html
Hey, you have some great links in your post…still reading them but I have to say, that NYT rewrite is disturbing…wow.
He got it wrong three times.
I’m with you BB. Romney strikes me as the sort of guy who has never suffered the consequences of his actions. There was always a butt man there to clean him up and tell him how great he was. Even in his failures he thinks he is special. Even in the devastation he left behind in closing businesses and dismantling retirement programs and destroying jobs and devastating the lives of those who worked as those businesses, he had a butt man to tell him how well he’d performed. I don’t have to know Mitt Romney, to know Mitt Romney. I worked for men whose only goal in life was money and winning. They could walk across the battlefied of their destruction and smile all the way, because they got what they came for.
bb: I couldn’t agree with you more regarding Mitten’s profile: a spoiled brat for sure.
But let me add one more theory that has been niggling at my brain for the past 24 hours:
Because of Citizens United we really have no idea who is steering the outcome of this election. It sure as hell is not us.
Sheldon Adelson found himself a “treasure” in Newt Gingrich who questioned the culture of the Palestinian people in contrast to the Israelis and opened up a can of worms all on his own.
Exit Newt, enter Mitt. Adelson pledged 100 million dollars toward this campaign and his reasons are not all based on his anti union focus but much of it on the Israeli political situation. He is a friend of Bibi as well.
Mitt goes to Israel and makes the claim that “we must never criticize Israel’s tactics” which must have warmed the heart of Mr. Adelson whose money is needed to steer the conversation in foreign affairs.
Obama has offered support to Israel but with stipulations. This did not go down well with Bibi who wants a free hand and the backing of US troops to begin a war over there that would be an open conflagration that he has been wanting for decades.
I cannot dismiss the Adelson/Yetanahu/Romney ties without considering Mitt’s efforts yesterday when he spoke out against Obama in such an offhand manner. Who was he really speaking for? My money is on the other two.
Citizens United has permitted wealthy people to “decide” our course by way of the money they are capable of pouring into campaigns. They want something in return. That “something” in this instance is a war with Iran that will include US forces as a cover.
Mitt did not stand up there yesterday on his own steam but with the surety of sending a message to his puppetmasters. Mitt is “their boy” in achieving what they have wanted to do for a very long time and that is to set the mideast on fire without regard of what comes after.
Makes sense?
It makes sense, Pat. I’ve thought of that too. From what I’ve read Adelson is even to the right of Netanyahu, and he wants war with Iran. Romney even said in a debate that he would check his foreign policy decisions with Israel and follower their guidance!
Bibi has been “itching” for this as a revenge for his brother’s death from decades ago. He keeps getting closer each time he is elected. Only now has he found an “agreeable ally” in Adelson who has placed his bets on Romney.
A war with Iran will be a replay of the Holocaust in that part of the world with much of it seeping into other parts of the globe when the access to those oil fields are at stake.
We ventured into Iraq with no other purpose than “revenge” and no exit strategy for the outcome. No one seems to have contemplated what this excursion may cost us and I fear it will much, much greater than just the toppling of a statue. The Iranian culture is much different than Iraq.
I agree with the Adelson connection, but is he so driven, so ego-centric, so, dare I say ‘dumb,’ as to jeopardize his candidate’s chances of winning by pushing for more inane , blatently WRONG comments from Willard? Or is Willard’s staff as wrong-headed as their leader and will just stay with the “plan” no matter what?
The American voters can be lead but they’re not stupid.
All of the worst of the Likkud Neocons have been interfering in our internal politics. This really bothers me. The head of the Knesset hs been doing the same thing. And these are our FRIENDS?
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/159670#.UFIDB1H4WSo
Romney asked VP shortlisters for ten years of taxes.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/13/romney-asked-vp-shortlisters-for-ten-years-of-tax-returns.html
I really do hate this guy but the way he has been given a pass on all the other times, I wonder if his actions this time around finally do him in.
I just started reading through the links and I’m not finished but I wanted to mention that the first link in the list in your post about Romney’s Political Pretzel doesn’t work. Just FYI. Back to reading.
OK, thanks. I’ll fix it.
And the Bloomberg link doesn’t work. I think I’ll stop looking at the links for now, lol!
Also, the one labeled Washington Post Fact Check takes you to an LA Times article.
Janicen,
I’ve double-checked every link and they are all working for me now. I was pretty tired when I wrote this last night–so sorry!
Not sure if this has been linked yet: When failure is a team effort – The Maddow Blog
Once again, bb, another great post in a long list of great posts. Even though I watched Mittens’ presser yesterday, reading the transcript fired me up. OUTRAGEOUS on so many points. It spurred me to write a post for my blog on the “speech” alone. Thanks for the motivation. I’ll be putting it up soon.
Hillary has done a wonderful job speaking to world this morning………….like to see it in full.
I think one of the bigger issues involved in all these conflicts is learning how much we are postively hated by other people. Particularly those who have been forced to live under the tyranny of governments aided and financed by the US.
For us it boils down to a question of “safeguarding” our interests in these regions. For them it translates into their how it effects their way of life.
As we continually pat ourselves on the back with the USA chants and references to our “exceptionalism” many of these people live under the yoke of slavery in some respects, unable to express themselves without fear of death or retribution.
The Bush Folly of invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 only deepened that hatred and distrust of all things American and really, can they be blamed for thinking that way? Had the tables been reversed and we found ourselves invaded by China as one example would we not want to “fight back” against the subjugation?
If we see them as “the enemy” surely it only stands to reason that they view us in the same way. We may declare our intent is to “foster democracy” but the fact is that we value the oil a whole hell of a lot more.
The imposition of our form of democracy cannot be fully appreciated by those who have never known it. They know more understand us than we do them.
Colonialism, occupation – who wouldn’t rebel against it. I’m on the same page with you, Pat. Keep reading my mind because you articulate it so much better than I do.
So true, Pat.
Agree, Agree, agree. They still remember how we installed the Shah and backed Mubarak, Sadaam Hussein etc. And they think we wanted them to live under dictatorship. They remember and our people don’t even know history.
Romney Jumps the Shark: Libya, Egypt and the Butterfly Effect
http://www.juancole.com/2012/09/romney-jumps-the-shark-libya-egypt-and-the-butterfly-effect.html
Romney’s Fatal Libya Blunder
http://www.thenation.com/blog/169902/romneys-fatal-libya-blunder#
Has anyone here given thought that with Citizens’ United & Super PACs that some of that anonymous money came from foreign nationals? It seems logical to me that the election(s) have, at least, been partially bankrolled by the Saudis & the Israelis.
I think that’s pretty much a certainty. After all a big chunk of Adelson’s money is likely Chinese.
Wow, this is one great post BB! I completely agree about Willard. Spoiled brat who has never really grown up and it shows.
Thank you! I hardly knew what I was writing last night after a long, weird day.
Apparently Willard has changed his tune and is trying to be more “appropriate” today. I would guess the republican establishment threatened him,
Spencer Ackerman with a “what happened” story. It’s as credible as any until we learn more.
wired: What Happened in Benghazi Was a Battle
They are reporting that the Libyan attack was coordinated in advance, possibly as a rejointed to 9/11.
My hope is that Gov. Stupid’s reply to these events is not helping to incite more fanatics over there as in what we are seeing from Yemen.
This region is so unpredictable and just waiting to go up in flames that it wouldn’t take much to set them all off on a frenzy of attacks that may leave this whole region more unstable than what it already has become.
Just for somebody like Romney to offer them a handy excuse to go forward with the intent to make the US look more foolish in response.
This stuff is bigger than some dumb movie because we have no idea what forces are working either separately or in tandem. Almost impossible to know when there are so many “actors” and fanatics at work.
This will require these “new states” to deal with these issues as the US at this point has no clue at what these new coalitions are all about.
The days of strong armed dictators like Mubarek and Khadafi are over and we have no idea how these new leaders will react.
I don’t envy Obama for one minute having to face this one.
The embassy protests in Yemen looked a lot like Egypt, hundreds of people with flags etc. Obama is in the unenviable position of leading in interesting times, as the Chinese curse goes, but he seems to be as up to it as anyone else at the moment.
More than anything it would seem a calm and deliberative approach is required if we are to have any chance of successfully helping with the Arab Spring. It’s certain that any return to the cowboy “gut” actions and reactions of the Bush era will be a disaster all around,
I agree that calm & thoughtful is the best approach. I also think that not being a fundamentalist or another white guy has to keep “the door open, at least a crack” more so than a chest-thumping neocon Christian. Not saying that I don’t have problems with some of Obama’s handling of several issues, but I certainly feel safer with him in the WH than I would have with W or Rombot. Although Hillary has gained much respect around the world, the Middle East has even more disdain for powerful women than Americans do. Hard to believe, I know, but their disdain is more overt while ours is mostly covert. I’m just not sure that some of those “guys” would answer the phone call from President Hillary Clinton. Reality sucks.
Hani Shukrallah, an Egyptian journalist, has a good story about the motivations of everyone involved which is worthy of consideration.
Conspiracies of convenience: what’s behind the film fracas?
Whew! I’m a pathetically slow reader which usually means I only grab a few links from each post or I’d be spending my entire day in front of my laptop. This story however, has been so interesting to read about and to digest all of the analyses, that I think I’ve gotten through most of them. Thanks to bb and all of the commenters. There is no shortage of coverage out there and I think it’s because Mitt’s reaction has been so shocking, even for Mitt. Maybe the people who have currently co-opted the Republican Party, I’ll call them the Christo-fascist Republicans, were working in concert with the film (trailer) makers and maybe they weren’t, but it’s clear that Mitt pounced without any effort to deliberate or even consider the political consequences of his actions. Certainly he didn’t consider the impact on the human beings affected by this tragedy but then that’s to be expected since it’s one of the first descriptors of Christo-fascist Republicans.