Romney Becoming A Pariah Over Libya Attack Screw-Up

[Cleon]

Not dishonest at all.

Tricky is against using dead Americans for political point scoring. Then he's for it.

No, he didn't say he was for using dead Americans for political point scoring. He said he was for "flagging lies and hypocrisy."

But frankly, we both know you knew that. Because you took the effort to cherrypick my post as well.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Does anyone know whether or not this has had any kind of influence on polling, etc? I'd be really interested in knowing just how much this has hurt Romney.

Looks like it. But Obama was already winning. The daily polls show Obama's lead widening but only a tiny bit, and you need to wait for more of an average of poll results and for news of Romney's faux paus to amplify a bit.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

Not dishonest at all.

Tricky is against using dead Americans for political point scoring. Then he's for it.

No one else was going to break ranks and point it out.

And you think that this was trying to score partisan political points because Obama is running against George Bush?

 

[JeanFromBNA]

There are things to be worried about in the Middle East, in case you missed the news:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/13/us-protests-idUSBRE88C0J320120913
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19584734
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/09/20129112108737726.html

Instead of following this serious situation becoming more widespread and serious by the moment, the US media broadcasters has everybody focused on Romney's statement; avoiding the discussion of our government's response to the murder of our ambassador and three other American diplomats, the likeliness of a preconceived attack coordinated with Al Queda, and the deterioration of the "Arab Spring" of democracy into a theocracy with distinctly anti-western views.

Really? Romney must be stopped, but all that violence in the mideast is just a a bunch of sociopaths having fun.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Not dishonest at all.

Tricky is against using dead Americans for political point scoring. Then he's for it.

No one else was going to break ranks and point it out.

For the record, I wasn't comparing incidents/death counts to say Obama was better, I posted them to counter the claim Obama was weak on defense. I do happen to think Obama is doing a much better job, but that wasn't my point.

 

[Tricky]

Not replying to any post here, but just making some editorial comments:

Romney has backed off a bit on his attacks, but he still calls Obama a "weak" leader. He suggests that the US has lost respect worldwide since Obama has been president. He suggests that if Obama had been stronger, these attacks would not have occurred.

Well, Mr. Romney, you are full of it. Obama is not weak on foreign policy. He is so good that that he is absolutely smashing the Republicans in a category that has long been the domain of the GOP. He was part of a coalition that helped cause the downfall of Khadaffi without losing a single American life. To compare him to the most recent Republican, you only need to see that Obama was given the Nobel Prize, simplly for not being Bush.

And tell us, Mr. Romney, exactly what would you do differently? No, don't tell us "I would be more strong" or "I would stop giving mixed messages." Tell us EXACTLY what you would do. Would you tell the embassy not to make that statement, even if you were fearful for your life? Would you invade them? It is easy to be an armchair quarterback, but unless you can prove that you can throw the ball, then you're just another couch potato.

And while your at it, show us some evidence that respect for the US has declined during the Obama administration. Yeah, some of Israel is miffed at him, though that's really a party struggle there too. But overall, has anyone rioted when Obama came to their country? They did it in England when Bush visited. They'd do it again for you, after what you said during the Olympics. But name us a country besides Israel that is more pissed off at the US than they were four years ago. Okay, maybe Iran. Do you think you could soothe things over with them? Would you stop drone attacks? Tell us something concrete, Mr. Romney. Show us how you would improve respect for America.

No, Mr. Romney, you prefer to lie and point fingers rather than making any sort of positive statement that could actually be used to evaluate what kind of President you would be. You are still the whiny bully that you were when you threw that young schoolmate to the ground and cut his hair because he was gay. You are not a leader. You are a lying coward with no principles other than the conviction that you want to be President, whatever it takes.

 

[SezMe]

No one else was going to break ranks and point it out.

Uh-oh. There's a pecking order, rules, Bosses, etc. Those troops better stay in line. But somebody help me out here - I didn't get the memo.

 

[applecorped]

Not replying to any post here, but just making some editorial comments:

Romney has backed off a bit on his attacks, but he still calls Obama a "weak" leader. He suggests that the US has lost respect worldwide since Obama has been president. He suggests that if Obama had been stronger, these attacks would not have occurred.

Well, Mr. Romney, you are full of it. Obama is not weak on foreign policy. He is so good that that he is absolutely smashing the Republicans in a category that has long been the domain of the GOP. He was part of a coalition that helped cause the downfall of Khadaffi without losing a single American life. To compare him to the most recent Republican, you only need to see that Obama was given the Nobel Prize, simplly for not being Bush.

And tell us, Mr. Romney, exactly what would you do differently? No, don't tell us "I would be more strong" or "I would stop giving mixed messages." Tell us EXACTLY what you would do. Would you tell the embassy not to make that statement, even if you were fearful for your life? Would you invade them? It is easy to be an armchair quarterback, but unless you can prove that you can throw the ball, then you're just another couch potato.

And while your at it, show us some evidence that respect for the US has declined during the Obama administration. Yeah, some of Israel is miffed at him, though that's really a party struggle there too. But overall, has anyone rioted when Obama came to their country? They did it in England when Bush visited. They'd do it again for you, after what you said during the Olympics. But name us a country besides Israel that is more pissed off at the US than they were four years ago. Okay, maybe Iran. Do you think you could soothe things over with them? Would you stop drone attacks? Tell us something concrete, Mr. Romney. Show us how you would improve respect for America.

No, Mr. Romney, you prefer to lie and point fingers rather than making any sort of positive statement that could actually be used to evaluate what kind of President you would be. You are still the whiny bully that you were when you threw that young schoolmate to the ground and cut his hair because he was gay. You are not a leader. You are a lying coward with no principles other than the conviction that you want to be President, whatever it takes.

It would be shocking if Obama lost to someone like this.

 

[Robrob]

Romney has backed off a bit on his attacks, but he still calls Obama a "weak" leader. He suggests that the US has lost respect worldwide since Obama has been president. He suggests that if Obama had been stronger, these attacks would not have occurred.

Romney must really be incensed over the 9/11 attacks happening during the Bush administration then?

 

[Tricky]

It would be shocking if Obama lost to someone like this.

It would be, but if you have enough money, you can convince people that white is black red is blue. Just repeat it often enough.

 

[jj]

Romney must really be incensed over the 9/11 attacks happening during the Bush administration then?

No, no, no, those people weren't the rich elite. An ambassador is much more likely to be someone he would care about.

(do I need the irony warning here?)

 

[JeanFromBNA]

Romney this morning at a campaign rally was such a jerk. He said something about this all being because we have a weak military and he'd restore it (sour grapes John McCain is also out there spewing this trash). The crowd started shouting USA, USA. Then Romney said, [paraphrasing as best I can recall]: "I was going to ask for a minute of silence for the lives lost, but someone out there doesn't want to be silent." Then he went on with his tripe.

It came across so insensitive and rude I was flabbergasted.

Yesterday evening at a campaign rally in Las Vegas, President Obama attempted to begin the topic of the previous 24 hours in the mideast, by saying "We (Americans, I'm presuming) had a tough day," but was met with chants of "Four More Years!" He valiantly pressed on with the grim news, while the fanboys in the cheap seats yelled, "We love you Barack!" and hooted and hollered like they were at a rodeo. Its the first five minutes or so of the video (you may need to turn your speakers up. I did.)

http://www.fox5vegas.com/video?clipId=7718684&autostart=true

I can relate to watching insensitive and disrespectful behavior and being flabbergasted by it.

 

[JeanFromBNA]

Not replying to any post here, but just making some editorial comments:

To compare him to the most recent Republican, you only need to see that Obama was given the Nobel Prize, simplly for not being Bush.

What kind of achievement is winning a Nobel prize when you haven't done anything except be Mr. Awesome-who-is-not-Bush. If the Nobel committee awarded you the prize (I'm presuming that you have not engaged in the extraordinary thinking and hard diligent work that achieves results that can change world history. I may be wrong; please let me know), would you accept? Not refuse it out of sense of overwrought humility, embarrassment, or because the committee got the wrong Tricky, but wouldn't you feel that you hadn't accomplished goals worthy of this reputable award, and if forced to accept, would feel that it had been given too cheaply. I've been writing as if I am you, which I'm obviously not. But these are my sentiments.

 

[not_so_new]

Romney has evidently decided that appealing to "the base" is more important than winning over swing voters. I have heard the idea proposed (mostly from wingnuts) that the middle is disgusted and apathetic, the Democrat's base is disillusioned with Obama, so Romney can win simply by appealing to the Republican base (batcrap crazy wingnuts) and win, because a lot of the Democratic base and swing voters will stay home. Personally, I think this is exactly the strategy that Obama's campaign would want Romney to follow. At this point, it seems that Romney is trying to put forward the notion that his foreign policy will be Bush II, or maybe Bush light. Sure, that worked so well.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/06/obama-would-be-big-favorite-with-fired-up-base/

 

[Tricky]

What kind of achievement is winning a Nobel prize when you haven't done anything except be Mr. Awesome-who-is-not-Bush.

None, and I said as much. It was just to point out that Obama is not disrespected by other countries.

If the Nobel committee awarded you the prize (I'm presuming that you have not engaged in the extraordinary thinking and hard diligent work that achieves results that can change world history. I may be wrong; please let me know), would you accept?

Obama made comments that indicated that he didn't think he deserved it. I seem to recall he donated the money or perhaps refused it. He knew exactly what was happening. Are you going to criticize him for being flattered?

I've been writing as if I am you, which I'm obviously not. But these are my sentiments.

No, it's okay. You were clear what you meant. I understood. And I even agree that Obama did nothing to deserve the prize. I think it would be undiplomatic for him to tell the Nobel Prize committee to stuff it, but have you ever heard him brag about how he won a Nobel Prize? Ever?

 

[fuelair]

Looks good to me.

And it's not "desperation spin".

Nope, you are right, it is not spin. It is bloody evil lies. Again. And I would expect no less from a thing with Romney's spineless background

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

There are things to be worried about in the Middle East, in case you missed the news:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/13/us-protests-idUSBRE88C0J320120913
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19584734
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/09/20129112108737726.html

Instead of following this serious situation becoming more widespread and serious by the moment, the US media broadcasters has everybody focused on Romney's statement; avoiding the discussion of our government's response to the murder of our ambassador and three other American diplomats, the likeliness of a preconceived attack coordinated with Al Queda, and the deterioration of the "Arab Spring" of democracy into a theocracy with distinctly anti-western views.

Really? Romney must be stopped, but all that violence in the mideast is just a a bunch of sociopaths having fun.

How is the "situation becoming more widespread and serious by the moment"? There have been 15 attacks against American embassies in the past 11 years.

What about the attacks indicates that Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia are all becoming theocracies with anti-Western views?

 

[Noztradamus]

But name us a country besides Israel that is more pissed off at the US than they were four years ago.

Poland.

 

[not_so_new]

Poland.

Really? I didn't know this... what's the story? (he says as he heads to Google)

Oh wait, I remember that. I can see where they are coming from but I think it is a little over blown. But that is off topic I guess.

 

[mhaze]

It would be shocking if Obama lost to someone like this.

Especially after the drone of repetition of the primary message to Romney:

"SHUT UP!"

It's soooooo articulate.