Unfit For Government

September 12, 2012
by Andrew Sullivan

The obvious responsible thing to do when American citizens and public officials are under physical threat abroad and when the details are unknown, and events spiraling, is to stay silent. If the event happens on the day of September 11 and you are a candidate for president and have observed a political truce, all the more reason to wait to allow the facts to emerge. After all, country before party, right? American lives are at stake, yes? An easy call, no?

But that's not what the Romney camp did. What they did was seize on a tweet issued by someone in the US Embassy before the attacks in order to indict the president for "sympathizing" with those who murdered a US ambassador after the attacks. Unfuckingbelievable. Here's the embassy statement from earlier in the day that set off the neocons:

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.

The statement came from someone in the embassy, and was not formally issued by the State Department or the White House, both of which have subsequently disavowed the tweet for not also defending absolute freedom of speech. The facts were still murky last night. But the Romney campaign immediately tried to shoe-horn yesterday's fog of mob violence into the "apology" rubric Romney loves so much. The Priebus tweet is disgusting. The first Romney statement is no better:

Read more: http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/09/unfit-for-government.html

nt

If I could wipe it off! The arrogance!

nt

same as the old smirk

(same policies as Dubya's; this time they'll take us into Iran)

the full impact of his smirk is understood.

... the unemployment figure/jobs report a the beginning of each month.

The smirk always belies his feigned concern every time he tries to speak with some gravitas about serious matters or bad news.

The smirk reveals what he's really feeling. He is unable to conceal his glee over the suffering of others, which suffering he tries to exploit for political points.

by Hunter for Daily Kos

It was the smirk that did it.

We are used to the politicization of tragedies. It is unseemly, and it is often condemned, but it is also commonplace enough, so when Mitt Romney launched into a political attack against the president almost concurrent to the actual violence it was perhaps vile in timing, but otherwise not all that surprising. ....

So yes, Mr. Romney is a political panderer, an avid devotee of attack politics, and a fantastical liar. These are all known qualities. It was the smirk, though, that turned things. The smirk before, during and after discussing an attack in which American diplomats were killed, a rancid little twitch of a smirk that flickered in and out as he talked about murders, or rather not about murders, but how they would affect him, personally, and his own ambitions. The smirk seemed to make the inner thoughts of the man quite clear: Today was going to be a good day for Mitt Romney. The murder of diplomats was not quite enough to prevent him from condemning the statements of their fellow diplomats before and during the attacks upon them; an attack on an American compound overseas was not in and of itself seen as reason to at least delay verbal abuse of those diplomats for even a scant day, if there was opportunity to be had in not doing so.

One does not smirk when discussing a horrific act. No matter how much you feel the act may benefit you personally, presuming you are the sort of monster that thinks such things, one does not smirk when discussing acts of murder and violence. Even if you have the emotional capacity of a gnat, even if your own ambitions are so great that you cannot help it, one does not smirk. Not, at the very least, when the event is fresh, and the repercussions of the act still unknown, and the possibility of further violence still unclear. Even if you are indeed an outright monster, there ought to be no inner glee visible on your face as you stand before the nation to discuss how a set of still-fresh murders proves your own worth. That was the part where Mr. Romney turned from being a deplorable politician to being a repulsive human being. It is not worth condemning him, or demanding apologies from him, or even making fun of him; that one damn smirk told too long a story. Here is someone whose ambition outshines their empathy. Here is a person who, in times of stress, is first to probe whether it is exploitable to his advantage. Here is a person who focuses on such things to such a degree that he cannot even fully pretend to hide it.


That damned smirk, though. That smirk spoke to a political heart no bigger than a cinder. That was a malevolent smirk;. That was the smirk of a true son of a bitch, a crooked man, a man that even a political crook like Richard Nixon would find it hard to find common cause with.

Read more: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/12/1131090/-Open-thread-for-night-owls-The-Romney-smirk

Romney fails critical leadership test

By Steve Benen
Wed Sep 12, 2012

We talked earlier about the violent protests that killed four Americans in Libya, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens. Politically, Mitt Romney, relying on false information, called the Obama administration's response "disgraceful," and accused the administration of "sympathiz(ing) with those" who killed U.S. officials abroad.

It seems as if Romney has finally gone too far. NBC News' First Read called out "one of the most over-the-top and (it turns out) incorrect attacks of the general-election campaign," which looks "worse and worse" as more information comes to light

This was news-cycle campaigning by the Romney campaign gone awry. Why didn't the Romney campaign wait until it had all the facts? On his overseas trip in the summer, Romney was so careful not to criticize Obama while on foreign soil. But how much time do you give an administration to work through a diplomatic and international crisis before trying to score immediate political points? You'd expect the Sarah Palins of the world to quickly pounce on something like this, and she predictably did. But a presidential nominee running for the highest office in the land?

After the facts have come out, last night's Romney statement only feeds the narrative that his campaign is desperate.

Read more: http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/09/12/13828189-romney-fails-critical-leadership-test

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Monday, September 17, 2012



New ad asks whether Romney is ‘fit to lead’ after Libya opportunism

Full-page ad from MoveOn will run in largest Va. and N.H. papers, quotes scathing editorial board criticism of Romney

NORFOLK, VA AND MANCHESTER, N.H. – What does Mitt Romney’s response to the deaths of U.S. officials in Libya say about whether he’s “fit to lead?”

That’s the question posed by a full-page print ad MoveOn.org Political Action will run in key swing-state newspapers this week. As an answer, the ad quotes editorial boards that rebuked Romney for “vile,” “profoundly inappropriate,” “sad and pathetic” “opportunism amidst a deadly crisis” that reveals “an extraordinary lack of presidential character.”

http://front.moveon.org/new-ad-asks-whether-romney-is-fit-to-lead-after-libya-opportunism/