Four Reasons Why Romney’s Statements On Libya & Egypt Attacks Are Cynical & Dishonest & Potentially Suicidal
Romney foreign policy adviser,
Robert O’Brien, September 11, 2012
@ BuzzFeed
Suddenly, Foreign Policy Is Not A “Distraction” Just a day after Romney foreign policy advisor Robert O’Brien characterized presidential campaign foreign policy issues as “a shiny object,” and, “another distraction,” the extent to which Mitt Romney will stoop to win the presidency on any terms whatever took another giant leap downward. Last night, before all of the dead had even been identified, Romney issued the following:
“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.”
The statement Romney cites was made, not by the Obama administration at all, except in the loosest terms imaginable. Here’s the Cairo embassy statement, published online:
“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,”
(1) The statement was published prior to the embassy attacks in an attempt to distance the embassy from growing anger about a scurrilous internet movie produced by an Israeli-American real estate developer that blasphemes Muhammad in outrageously provocative ways. The producer, sensibly, is now in hiding.
(2) The embassy statement was not cleared by the Obama administration, and it has since disavowed it.
“The statement by Embassy Cairo was not cleared by Washington and does not reflect the views of the United States government.”
(3) The sudden turn-on-a-dime shift by Romney to foreign policy is as transparently political as it is cynical as it is potentially suicidal. Why? Precisely because the Romney camp has done all it could do to avoid discussing foreign policy, it has thereby failed to establish any credibility whatever, in fact, quite the opposite. I think this will 
prove to be a big mistake for Romney. Yippee!
(4) Romney’s interference in this crisis may be more than a mistake, it may be suicidal. Why? He’ been forced to avoid discussing foreign policy precisely because his campaign advisers are rife with discredited neocon holdovers from the Bush II administration. Given his unforeseen and impulsive entrance as a foreign policy guy, it is unlikely that he’ll be able in a heartbeat to abandon his new found role. The crisis is a multi-day, perhaps multi-week, event fraught with danger. Given that reality, he and his foreign policy guys will be smoked out, and interviewed. There, they may be forced to reveal their ideas and characters and sullied provenance as Bush II operatives.
Discussing their views – which have not been enlightened by the experiences of the past eleven years – would remind the American voter of two things:
1. George W. Bush, a president the GOP has run from like a rabbit runs from a dog, and
2. The clear implication that a President Romney would once again pursue the same dangerous, imperialistic, and militaristic foreign policy as George W. Bush. No need to wonder why both Romney and Ryan seek to slash the federal budget while simultaneously increasing the defense budget; we are to be moved conclusively to a Spartan culture.
Certainly, these attacks are a legitimate topic for the presidential campaign. The administration’s response ought to be examined in the coming days. Yet, how cynical, how opportunistic is the Romney campaign to release its statement prior to the administration’s response – in fact, prior to the administration having time to even fully assess the situation or contact the next of kin of two victims.
Beyond the outrage Romney ought to hear directed his way, isn’t it ironic that he now finds the cajones to address foreign policy in detail? This is the same man who failed to mention the Afghanistan war in his presidential nomination acceptance speech, and compounded the event (or non-event) by trying to mislead voters with his assertion that he had fully addressed the war the prior day (which he did in approximately 12 words).
In sum, the Romney campaign’s skittishness about foreign policy is understandable. As noted above, his campaign is riddled with neocon termites. Have no doubt and that is who would accompany him to the White House where they could again have access to the walls and foundations of our nation.
Mitt Romney is one of the sleazier and more irresponsibly amoral persons our country has ever produced. Opportunism is fine, it’s an American characteristic, yet opportunism does not have to be accompanied, as in Mitt’s case, with rampant and unrepentant self-conceit.
Mitt, your campaign spokesperson the other day said that you had foreign policy cred, in part, because you are “a well-traveled businessman” and that you also “spoke French.”
