Romney made a critical point on Middle East
E. Thomas McClanahanFor Republican Mitt Romney, it must have seemed a clear shot: A mob storming the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, and a limp embassy statement apologizing for an anti-Islam YouTube film produced in the U.S.
“The Embassy of the United States,” the statement said, “condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.”
Romney quickly put out a release highlighting the misplaced emphasis on Muslim feelings, but it was badly worded and he would have been better advised to wait. He had a valid point to make, but in his haste he unwittingly triggered a media bonfire.
It’s not hard to understand why the embassy statement cried out for a retort.
Obama began his administration with what many have dubbed an “apology” tour, including a speech in Cairo in which he sought to ingratiate himself with the Muslim world and contrast his administration with that of George W. Bush.
And few could forget Obama’s creepy habit of bowing to various foreign leaders, or his inability to articulate the concept of American exceptionalism. Or his administration’s laughable attempt to rebrand war as “overseas contingency operations” and terrorist attacks as “man-caused disasters.”
The Obama administration was and is vulnerable to accusations of insufficient vigor in defending U.S. interests and values, and Obama’s “lead from behind” approach has arguably contributed to the spectacle of a Middle East in flames.
But Romney’s initial statement was marred. Its key passage said the Obama administration’s “first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”
That made it sound as if he was accusing the administration of sympathizing not only with the attackers in Cairo but those in Libya, where a coordinated assault by terrorists resulted in the death of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other U.S. personnel.
Yet in his statement the next day, Romney made it clear that his “sympathize” remark had applied only to Cairo. The administration, he said, “was wrong to stand by a statement sympathizing with those who had breached our embassy in Egypt, instead of condemning their actions.”
Many in the media worked themselves into a how-dare-you-lather, arguing that Romney had been too hasty (agreed), and claiming the Cairo statement wasn’t fair game (absurd).
It turns out that administration officials in Washington also saw the Cairo release as appalling.
Josh Rogin of Foreign Policy magazine reported that the embassy official who put out the “feelings of Muslims” statement first sent it to Washington and was told not to release it without revisions.
It went out anyway, angering top people at the White House and State Department, according to Rogin. Rogin’s source told him officials in Washington found the statement “tone deaf.” That’s putting it mildly, which explains why it was later disavowed.
A subsequent statement by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justificiation for violent acts of this kind.”
In other words, she put in what Romney said the Cairo statement had left out.
Romney was also assailed for “conflating” the embassy statement with administration policy, which strikes me as weird. How was he to know the Cairo official was a loose cannon? Don’t U.S. embassies represent the U.S. government?
And yet, had Romney waited a few hours he might have avoided a good bit of this muddle, leaving his main point clear. As is evident from this — as well as the antagonistic coverage of foreign trip during the summer — Romney is facing an extremely hostile press, and he will have to learn to manage that problem more adroitly.
To reach E. Thomas McClanahan, call 816-234-4480 or send email to mcclanahan@kcstar.com.
JR Beillenhouser
8 months, 1 week agoIt doesn’t matter what Romney says or when he says it. This is Obama’s press, and Romney is going to get it no matter what he says. Unfortunately, the press is going to find out that they don’t have the power they once had.
Romney might as well come out swinging. The palace guard is going to deflect all criticism of Obama regardless, but the people aren’t as stupid as the press thinks they are.
One thing is for sure…Romney is right. This is 1979 all over again. Obama and his foreign policy is in shambles. Hillary should be pulled in front of a congressional panel for failing to act on the threats they had received 48 hours earlier and for failing to adequately protect embassies.
Obama and Hillary own this. This is where the naivety of the left costs our country big time. Israel is in the mix next. Any Jew who votes for Obama is a moron. It has been editorialized that you’ll know who is going to win the election shortly. If it looks like Obama is going to win, Israel will attack Iran before the election.
George Hunsucker
Northland
8 months, 1 week agoAnother view of the big 0’s “performance” here…
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/14/president-obama-stop-blaming-victim-for-mideast-violence/
And this is by a leftie…. good ole fair and balanced foxnews libs….
George Hunsucker
Northland
8 months, 1 week agoEveryone should be sooooooooooooooo proud of him….
http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill/policy-and-strategy/249651-obamas-proud-statements-on-improving-us-image-might-backfire
George Hunsucker
Northland
8 months, 1 week agoAnd there is this one of course of the chief bower….
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/09/14/FLASHBACK-Obama-The-Day-Im-Inaugurated-Muslim-Hostility-Will-Ease
Mark Hastert
8 months, 1 week agoYa know GH, looking at the references you cite I’m beginning to think that the inputs you read hear are your only excursion out of the echo chamber. I’m your fragile link to reality!
Phil Cardarella
8 months, 1 week agoGotta admit, I do not see what the big deal is with the embassy’s statement.
Does Mitt ( a Mormon!) think that it is not a bad idea (even if constitutionally protected) to intentionally insult the religion of another? Hey, I am big on the 1st Amendment (and, unlike the GOP, it is not new ground for me) but that does not mean I think mean-spirited insults to Mohammed or Joseph Smith should be encouraged or praised. The Nazis had the right to march through Skokie, Ill., but that does not mean that sane folks could not denounce their behavior as despicable.
Fact is, Mitt shot off his mouth before he had any idea what was going on. And, he attacked an Embassy for being — uh, diplomatic. Then he doubled-down. He gave a clear idea of just how unprepared he is to sit in the Oval Office.
George Hunsucker
Northland
8 months, 1 week agoIs out fearless leader dealing with reality?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/17/obama-administration-libyan-president-clash-over-explanation-on-consulate/
Kent Mueller
8 months, 1 week agoPhil, who are you saying is encouraging insults to Mohammed and Joseph Smith? No one is, Phil. That sounded nice in your treatise, but it has nothing to do with the subject matter.
And Phil, if the message on the Consulate’s website was productive or even neutral, why did the Obama Administration take it down so fast?