Newspaper editorials across America eviscerate Romney after his shameful lies about the tragedy in Libya

  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1980

    Sep 14, 2012 3:09 AM GMT
    Romney's campaign of lies about the murders in Libya has essentially destroyed what little credibility he had. And the editorial boards of the nation's newspapers are ripping him a new one. Well deserved and overdue.

    New York Times: "An extraordinary lack of presidential character"
    Mitt Romney, who wants Americans to believe he can be president but showed an extraordinary lack of presidential character by using the murders of the Americans in Libya as an excuse not just to attack Mr. Obama, but to do so in a way that suggested either a dangerous ignorance of the facts or an equally dangerous willingness to twist them to his narrow partisan aims.

    Washington Post: "A discredit to his campaign"

    Los Angeles Times: "An outrageous exercise in opportunism."

    Boston Globe: “His statement was offensive on many other levels…Romney’s actions raise more doubts about himself than Obama.

    Miami Herald: “Profoundly inappropriate

    Ft. Lauderdale Sun Sentinel: "Inappropriate. And totally unwarranted."

    Cleveland Plain Dealer: “Mitt Romney's trigger finger was so quick that he didn't even get it right

    Boulder Daily Camera: “For someone whose campaign has been studded with tone-deafness abroad, this was stunning, undiplomatic and undemocratic rhetoric.

    Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: “Yes, it was sad and pathetic to see such callous and uninformed statements from politicians who couldn't wait until they had the facts to use an international incident for political gain.”

    http://www.americablog.com/2012/09/editorial-boards-savage-romney-over.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 14, 2012 3:28 AM GMT
    The left wing media outlets are very concerned because Romney's comments provide contrast to the weak, apology tour and statements that characterize the Obama policy and nauseate many in the middle and on the right.

    ***********************

    This opinion is absolutely on the mark. The "shoot first and aim later" blather results from Romney making comments while Obama and company were tying to assess the political impact. What must send chills down the spine of the Obama team is this clearly shows the contrast between Romney sending a strong statement and the "apology" comment from the Obama Administration in Cairo. Even though the Administration distanced itself from those comments, they still reflect what everyone knows, that Obama's policy is based on apologies, mixed messages, and weakness. The mid-east is more dangerous and Russia is more emboldened as a result.

    The contrast between Romney's strong message and Obama's continued apology posture, starting with his apology tour in 2009, is stark. That's why the RJ folks and the media are so shrill denouncing Romney. Won't work people.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443884104577647830171289116.html?mod=ITP_opinion_2

    Romney Offends the Pundits - Doesn't he know he's not supposed to debate foreign policy?

    Tuesday's assaults on the U.S. Embassies in Benghazi and Cairo have injected foreign policy into the Presidential campaign, but suddenly the parsons of the press corps are offended by the debate. They're upset that Mitt Romney had the gall to criticize the State Department for a statement that the White House itself disavowed.

    We're referring to the statement issued Tuesday under the headline "U.S. Embassy Condemns Religious Incitement." The statement came in response to Muslim protests against a 13-minute anti-Islamic video making the rounds on YouTube.

    In response to anger in Egypt at the video, the Embassy in Cairo issued its statement saying that "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." It added that, "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."

    One problem is that the statement came not long before Egyptian protestors stormed the Embassy and some of them made it over a wall and into the compound. An Embassy Twitter post after the assault said its earlier statement "still stands."

    Mr. Romney reacted late Tuesday with his own 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. 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." He followed Wednesday with a press conference reinforcing his criticisms of the Administration's "mixed signals" on "our values."

    The Obama Presidential campaign jumped on the remarks Wednesday as inappropriate, yet a "senior Administration official" had told the website Politico later on Tuesday night that "The statement by Embassy Cairo was not cleared by Washington and does not reflect the views of the United States government." So the White House can walk away from its own diplomats, but Mr. Romney can't criticize them?

    Whatever the timing of the Cairo Embassy's statements, Mr. Romney is right that a U.S. Embassy ought to ignore YouTube videos produced by obscure cranks. As Tuesday's events showed, pandering to Islamists who would use the video to inflame anti-American sentiment isn't going to stop the protests. The video "Innocence of Muslims" is inflammatory and its producer is a fool, but in the U.S. we don't censor fools.

    The broader point is that the attacks on the embassies do raise questions about how America has fared in the world in the last four years. (See above.) Throughout his candidacy, Mr. Romney has supported the necessity of America's global leadership, sometimes against the wishes of Republican voters. His comments this week are consistent with that worldview, which is also consistent with that of every recent conservative President.

    His political faux pax was to offend a pundit class that wants to cede the foreign policy debate to Mr. Obama without thinking seriously about the trouble for America that is building in the world.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 14, 2012 3:30 AM GMT
    http://spectator.org/archives/2012/09/13/mr-president-mitt-romney-is-no

    By Ben Stein

    So, let me get this straight:

    It is September 11, 2012. An Al Qaeda sponsored mob is marching, running, screaming towards the U.S. Embassy in Cairo. Supposedly they are angry about an e-mail cartoon about the Islamic figure, Mohammed. It is known right away that the organizers of the march are the same entity that did the mass murder of Americans on 9.11.01.

    The Embassy issues an apology for an American using his free speech rights about a matter of deep concern. They attempt to appease the mob. It doesn't work. The mobs acts violently and disrespectfully towards the U.S. Embassy. They are al Qaeda. This is what they do.

    No comment or almost none from Mr. Obama.

    Then an al Qaeda mob attacks the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, Libya, burns it, kills the U.S. Ambassador and three other heroic American diplomats. Again, in a classic al Qaeda move, it is all timed perfectly to infuriate the USA. It isn't spontaneous. It was 9/11, for Pete's sake.

    No comment from Mr. Obama except terse condolences.

    Then along comes Governor Romney, who rightly says, "Hey, why are we appeasing an al Qaeda mob? Why aren't we calling these guys the vicious killers that they are? Why are we back in this apology to bad guys mode?"

    Then, and only then, the Obama White House goes into hyper drive. It turns out that the real problem is not al Qaeda. No, and it's not Mr. Obama's appeasement. No, the real threat to America is (wait for it), Mitt Romney. Yes!!! According to White House uber-pal, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, Romney is working with the terrorists against the U.S. government by calling for criticism of the al Qaeda!

    Yes, Romney is the enemy for pointing out that Mr. Obama is ass kissing the terrorists!


    This is terrifying. The media line up to get their marching orders from the Obama Ministry of Truth and suddenly it's Gospel: the problem is not al Qaeda. It is Romney. With a "more in sorrow than in anger…" look and tone, Mr. Obama pities Romney's naïveté.

    This is disgusting. It is nauseating. This is what happens when you have a one-party media. The lie becomes the truth. George Orwell saw it coming. In 1984, his MiniTrue had up its mission.

    Who controls the present, controls the past.
    Who controls the past controls the future.

    It has happened. The MSM and the White House have outlawed truth. Some of us old ones can remember when it was legal and the media worked to keep it alive. Now, like the firemen in Fahrenheit 451, the MSM press exists to obliterate truth -- not to preserve it.

    Meanwhile, Mr. Netanyahu begs the U.S. to do something to protect it and the world from the Iranian bomb. Mr. Obama bobs and weaves to avoid contact with reality and responsibility. No one even mentions that if we had allowed Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush to build ABM defense, the whole world would be a safer place, and we race towards war or an Islamic control of our expression or both, and the master politician gets ready for his turn on Letterman.

    God help us.

    How I wish that someone that Mr. Obama respects (I have no idea if there is such a person) would look him in the eye and say, "Look, Mr. President, those Muslim terrorists in al Qaeda are not our friends. They have done terrible things to us. They have just done something brand new and horrible to us: they murdered our ambassador to Libya. No matter how much you kiss up to them, they will not be our friends. Maybe you think they'll be your friends because you have so many Muslim friends in the black community in Chicago.

    "But they won't. They hurt us whenever they can. They are blood brothers to the people who run Iran. THEY ARE NOT REASONABLE PEOPLE. You cannot appease them into peace any more than Chamberlain could appease Hitler.

    "The only thing they respect is strength. That's it. Their guru, Osama bin Laden, put it well. 'Between a strong horse and a weak horse, people will favor the strong horse.'

    "That's what we have to learn, Mr. President. We have to be the strong horse. Not the buttering up horse. The strong horse. Get it?"

    The big problem is that there is no one Mr. Obama really respects to tell him the truth and we will all have to pay for it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 14, 2012 4:01 AM GMT
    jprichva saidBen Stein.
    The big problem is that no one gives a shit about HIM. Except the deranged.
    You really have no idea how this is playing out to the public, do you.
    Hint: It isn't good for Romney.

    I think you're the one in your liberal bubble. How do you think it will play in ads that will saturate the swing states with Romney making a strong statement compared to Obama apologizing for a bad video and bowing to foreign leaders, criticizing America, especially when the real motivation for these attacks was 9/11?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 14, 2012 5:00 AM GMT
    jprichva said
    socalfitness said
    jprichva saidBen Stein.
    The big problem is that no one gives a shit about HIM. Except the deranged.
    You really have no idea how this is playing out to the public, do you.
    Hint: It isn't good for Romney.

    I think you're the one in your liberal bubble. How do you think it will play in ads that will saturate the swing states with Romney making a strong statement compared to Obama apologizing for a bad video and bowing to foreign leaders, criticizing America, especially when the real motivation for these attacks was 9/11?

    I'm not going to argue about this.
    I'll just break out the champagne.


    Me too. Romney has to be the worst candidate in the history of presidential elections.

    And the campaign staff should be fired.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 14, 2012 6:53 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    jprichva said
    socalfitness said
    jprichva saidBen Stein.
    The big problem is that no one gives a shit about HIM. Except the deranged.
    You really have no idea how this is playing out to the public, do you.
    Hint: It isn't good for Romney.

    I think you're the one in your liberal bubble. How do you think it will play in ads that will saturate the swing states with Romney making a strong statement compared to Obama apologizing for a bad video and bowing to foreign leaders, criticizing America, especially when the real motivation for these attacks was 9/11?

    I'm not going to argue about this.
    I'll just break out the champagne.


    Me too. Romney has to be the worst candidate in the history of presidential elections.

    And the campaign staff should be fired.




    100% agree.
    Mittens is DEFINITELY the worst presidential candidate in my lifetime.

    Mitt certainly should fire his campaign staff - but I doubt that he will.
    Romney's campaign staff keep Mitt insulated from reality - feeding him only positive info, polls, and happy talk.
    Mitt has little idea how this campaign has slipped through his fingers - because his staff haven't let him know.

    Mittens is in for a rude surprise on election night.
    And so is poor old SoCal.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Sep 14, 2012 7:17 AM GMT
    RickRick91 said

    Mittens is in for a rude surprise on election night.
    And so is poor old SoCal.



    One thing is for sure... Many will be in for a rude surprise on Election Night.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 14, 2012 7:36 AM GMT
    Everyone:

    Instead of focusing on the talking heads, the noise from pundits, and, the assumptive behavior by those in search of ratings . . . .

    Do yourself a worthwhile favor: come to Washington, D.C. - sit down in any restaurant or bar (whether budget or upscale) patroned by those (whether Republican or Democrat) that work in the government...there you will witness firsthand exactly the reality re the health of each presidential campaign.

    It is dramatic. Those that work in it know the score:

    The score for Romney is unfavorable. Romney's score has been declining these past several weeks and accelerating in that direction as well...it is widely known they're losing the game bit by bit. And this latest misstep (foreign affairs) sliced and diced Romney and his campaign dramatically.

    The score for Obama is favorable. In contrast, Obama's score has been gaining and accelerating similarly in that direction bit by bit...the buzz is: they're winning the game. Obama's message is taking hold, and, is favorable w/ voters more and more each day.

    Lastly, while opinion is good entertainment - all it is: is opinion. Confusing opinion (laced with preferred or spun facts/figures) with the true reality of what is happening is a disservice to yourself and others around you.

    Finally, regardless of which party or candidate you feel compelled to support: buck up and accept the truth (whether good or bad). And, instead of playing the antagonist card trying to tear something/someone down - use that energy towards building a bridge or life affirming action.

    B787