Getty Images
Romney thinks this mob would respect his presidency more. That's nuts.
I've never worked on a presidential campaign, but I can imagine how insular it can become. If a campaign team isn't careful, epistemic closure can take over -- a candidate thinks he or she is great, aides only look at polls and news stories that reinforce their preferred beliefs, and those who question the agreed-upon narratives are held suspect.
But if Mitt Romney's campaign actually believes its own rhetoric about foreign policy, the Republican and his aides aren't just embracing bravado; they're also slipping into delusions.
Advisers to Mitt Romney on Thursday defended his sharp criticism of President Obama and said that the deadly protests sweeping the Middle East would not have happened if the Republican nominee were president.
"There's a pretty compelling story that if you had a President Romney, you'd be in a different situation," Richard Williamson, a top Romney foreign policy adviser, said in an interview.... Williamson added, "In Egypt and Libya and Yemen, again demonstrations -- the respect for America has gone down, there's not a sense of American resolve and we can't even protect sovereign American property."
Again, I don't know Williamson personally, and his comments to the Post may be little more than partisan chest-thumping.
I'm more concerned, however, with the notion that Williamson might actually believe his own nonsense.
In Team Romney's mind, the protests in the Middle East, and the deadly raid on the consulate in Libya, are President Obama's fault. Why? Because Muslim protestors don't "respect American resolve."
If Romney were in office, the argument goes, there wouldn't be protests -- angry Muslims simply wouldn't take to the streets because they respected America too much.
The Obama campaign responded to this rhetoric by continuing to criticize the Romney campaign for shamelessly politicizing a foreign security crisis, and that's certainly a legitimate point of debate. The fact that the inexperienced Republican with no working understanding of foreign affairs is pursuing such an ugly and divisive strategy while Americans abroad are in danger is a dynamic Americans should take seriously.
But I'm inclined to think the larger problem is with the perspective itself. It's simply impossible to take such transparent nonsense seriously.
For one thing, "American resolve" looks pretty secure in the Obama era. Romney and his team may not realize this, but this president ordered the strike that killed bin Laden, decimated al Qaeda, helped topple the Gadhafi regime, and has maintained a strong, steady hand in negotiations with foreign leaders around the globe. To blame Obama for these protests is, on its face, ridiculous.
For another, Romney and his team may not remember recent history, but angry protests in the streets of countries in the Middle East and North Africa sometimes occurred before January 2009. It's shocking, I know, but it's true. What's more, there were plenty of attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities abroad before Obama took office -- many took place during Ronald Reagan's and George W. Bush's presidencies.
By the Romney campaign's reasoning, Americans should have blamed Reagan and Bush for those incidents -- they didn't command enough respect or show enough resolve.
And finally, I honestly want to know if, in the minds of Romney and his advisors, they see the angry mobs protesting in the region this week and think Romney's mere presence would make the unrest disappear. "Well, I was going to express my rage today in the streets of Cairo," the young Egyptian would say, "but since President Mitt Romney is in office and I respect his resolve, I guess I'll do something else."
I mean, really. Just how far has the Romney campaign gone? Is there no one in the entire operation who can stand up and say, "Guys, maybe we should rethink this line of attack"?
Leave a Comment:
So, I'm wondering how this train of thought fits in with the "Obama is a secret Muslim" theory. You would think that the Muslims would be Obama's best friends. Oh that's right. these things don't have to make sense...
messianic [ˌmɛsɪˈænɪk]
adj
2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy)
a. of or relating to any popular leader promising deliverance or an ideal era of peace and prosperity
FUBARRomney's opinion of himself is higher than most folks are giving him credit for. Underestimating FUBARRomney's desire to put mormonism in the Oval Office and to be recognized as the "One" who got it there while basking in the attendant self perceived glories which he would derive from that accomplishment is to miss a prime, if not the prime, motivation for FUBARRomney's whole "campaign".
Just listen to him. He is infallible in his eyes. He brooks no scrutiny. He looks down on the world around him in every sense imaginable. And he is angry and getting angrier that the world around him doesn't just acknowledge his superiority and give him the f'n crown already. He's really put up with just about all he should have to.
His fuse box is getting very hot. He's tried to be patient. But people just aren't seeing the light and he's not about to refrain from explaining their big mistake to them in no uncertain terms. He may get carted off in a straitjacket before this whole thing is done.
It was the Bush administration who strongly touted the policy that politics should stop at the shores. When it comes to issues of foreign unrest and danger, we should be standing as a united country and show strength in our resolve for justice. Bush believed that it hugely discredited our country and endangered our troops to show this kind of discord in such moments. Now the same neocons are doing exactly what they said should not be done, and for their own political gain. Its scary and pathetic. They need to quit pretending that America can somehow control the actions of these protesters. Their brand of selective amnesia is dangerous, and laughably transparent as a political power play that is backfiring in their smug, self-absorbed faces.
They only think "politics" should "stop at the shores" when they're in control of the politics...
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
Shooter242
No, he didn't say that. That's your fabricated strawman spin. Try again.
Take a look at the article, and see for yourself that he did, indeed, say just that (unless you are a Ryan supporter, in which case you may not believe your own eyes!)
“There’s a pretty compelling story that if you had a President Romney, you’d be in a different situation,” Richard Williamson, a top Romney foreign policy adviser, said in an interview.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/romney-team-sharpens-attack-on-obamas-foreign-policy/2012/09/13/9b3f2744-fdd3-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_story.html
A story in The Independent notes that the attacks are thought to be retaliation for a drone strike that killed a Libyan terrorist leader -- itself a display of American might and resolve. So is Mitt arguing he wouldn't be conducting such strikes?
Of course not. Rather, he is merely seizing on bad news and blaming Obama. And surprise, surprise, he is giving no details on what Obama did wrong or what he would do differently.
I mean, really. Just how far has the Romney campaign gone? Is there no one in the entire operation who can stand up and say, "Guys, maybe we should rethink this line of attack"?
Evidently not. All this is doing is reinforcing the opinions of voters here that Romney has no clue what he's doing. It is really unbelievable how badly he has run his campaign. As much as Republicans want to get Obama out, many are really starting to cringe at the prospect of a Romney presidency and I suspect are starting to think about staying at home on Nov. 5th. At least they will still have Obama to complain about for another 4 years.
Rape-Public-CONs? Delusional? Of course! It's part of the "definition" at this point. Just for fun, let's make a list of some of our "favorite" Rape-Public-CON delusions - I'll start with a few of mine:
1) Barack Hussein Obama can't "really" be President because he wasn't born in America, no matter what those pesky Hawaiians say - we all know they're "in the bag" for him, anyway.
2) George W. Bush "kept us safe".
3) "Waterboarding" isn't torture.
4) There really were "weapons of mass destruction" worth going to war over in Iraq (seriously - I still hear this one).
Next? Feel free to jump in...
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
It's time for Mittens to put his missionary hat back on, brush up on his French, charter a plane, (Nothing but first class, don'tcha know!) and head off to save Europe, along with the Middle East. His business acumen will undoubtedly replace any need for diplomacy or knowledge of history. His military experience will make the bad guys cower and convert to Mormonism. We will all live happily ever after.
re: Delusion vs. Bravado:
If only it were the adoring campaign advisers and the pro-conservative Fox News that created the delusions of grandeur for presidential candidates. That could be the most potent campaign weapon of all. Probably egotism contributes to a lot to candidates losing their way. Ironically for business experience, very few will criticize management or you get put down as not a team player, whereas government officials get a lot more criticism, although it's questionable how much they pay attention to it. When you're president, unless you choose carefully, the people closest to you could just be sycophants.
If Romney's behavior was just a consequence of the insular world of the campaign, though, imagine what he'd be like as president surrounded by yes-people. People would be even more careful to avoid offending.
As Rachel Maddow and Steve Benen have pointed out, Romney often misstates, and most likely misunderstands, the meaning of the books he cites. The Romney campaign has declared they won't be constrained by fact checkers. Romney isn't exactly known for his empathy or his ability to relate to middle class people (the incidents with the dog, the high school bullying, the borrow-from-your-parents approach to finance and scholarship). So Romney isn't someone who seems really in touch with the world.
Romney could be naturally stubborn and prone to misunderstandings and misconceptions. He probably hasn't been challenged in his assumptions or world view that much, given his position in his church and his extreme wealth. Since he's the Republican presidential candidate, his advisers, the hard right supporters and media buffer him from criticism/reality. These attempts to bolster Romney may be his undoing.
Well the far right seems like they're very willing to get caught up in denial and avoidance of the facts.
Ironically, what worries me even more than Romney's politics is this unwillingness to concede to facts or reality. A candidate has to project confidence, but I find Romney's approach... crazy. To be effective, you have to work to some extent with reality.
It's a shame but I'm truly nauseated by the fantastic delusion machine that's running wide open out of Romney's campaign fortress. Now he's Super Statesman with all the answers. I long for an intelligent, fact and policy based run for the presidency but it's too much to hope for. I'm convinced Ingram, Limbaugh and Hannity have effectively manipulated their inexerienced views in to a huge goading/baiting puppet show with Romney and his staff gobbling it up like a CEO that's been handed a fresh retirement package. The fog that surrounds any thought or spoken word Romney dreams up is brutally disasterous for those who ride on the bus he's driving and there's a No U-Turn sign every few feet. Godspeed to all of us if any of his words are allowed to become actions.
It's now obvious to me that our foreign policy needs a few platoons of young able bodied Mormon Missionaries on bicycles, and maybe throw in a few platoons of aging "Hush Puppies On The Patio Warriors" / "Chicken Hawk Warmongers" with bloody hands stuffed full of student deferments sent to the Middle East to try and convert or confront any troublesome street terrorists. It may be the only hope our Nation has to maintain our precious freedom - look at how well this solution assisted in W.W.I, W.W.II. Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq......Mormons on bicycles getting angry and rushing towards the world's hotspots just in time. "Chicken Hawks" and "Hush Puppies On The Patio Warriors" staying their distance from any war zone by many thousands of miles...all while misplanning or botching any current war from inexperience, and strangely inherited military tactical visions. They remain oh so eager to send someone else's boots on the ground to any of the Earth's dangerous four corners for their misguided missions. Sign 'em up. "Doc" V.N., Draftee, 1968....P.S we missed you G.W. Bush, Dangerous Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Mush Numbnuts, Etc., Dan Quale, and especially Mitt Romney. The troops in all wars "long" to have able bodied folks show up to help in the War Of Their Generations.
I think that in order to make these Anti-American demonstrations decrease, maybe even stop, we need to give them a reason to like us. These countries are WAY worse off than America financially, and they know it. From their point of view, the democracy that we advocated for so long is now happening for them and they are not enjoying any financial benefits. I do not mean we should just give them money endlessly, but we do need to help that government create opportunities for regular Middle Easterners to work. Maybe create some trade agreements to boost some mutual interest or something. Honestly, there must be something we can do to help them become their own people without making it look like charity. Maybe if we can change the narrative from "the Western Civilizations have done nothing but take advantage of us and cheat us at every turn" to "Western Civilizations have become our partners in participating in the the larger global economy, maybe they are not as bad as we thought." Just a thought.
It will take a long time. Watching the live coverage of large crowds in Tahrir Square at 4am, the obvious question is "Don't these people have jobs?" The answer is obvious, too, and that's the problem. Some analysis suggests that these demonstrations are not just religious and anti-American, but opportunistic jockeying for influence in new fragile governments that don't yet have the ability to maintain control, much of this jockeying by Islamists using angry jobless and disaffected youths as tools.
We're already doing a lot, but we do need a government that plays ball, and, for example, a confident Egyptian President who condemns the violence contemporaneously with condemning the assault on Islam. (I think Obama's statement that Egypt was neither an ally nor an enemy was a not-so-subtle warning, and put Morsi on notice that he had to make some decisions.)
Of course, the 20-man military operation against the consulate in Benghazi was not a "protest." It was planned and carried out by implacable enemies of the US. They must be exterminated.
I might add that young Arabs whose only education is in the contents of the Koran are going to have a hard time finding meaningful employment.
Romney will bring this country to world war 3 I'm pretty sure of that. Because of two extreme philosophies he lives by. One would be religion, Romney believes his religion plays a role in how he leads this country I believe that religion and politics DON'T MIX! The Republican Religion platform goes back as far as I can remember ( Christian Coalition) but I think Bush and Romney have taken it to the next extreme. Of course not to leave out the Tea Party and the holier then now party. The second issue and the one that will ultimately put us at war would be the old divide and rule law which basically means who ever dies with the most toys wins. This is the real reason why the middle east has a hatred for us. As for Obama he has been working on these relationships however Romney and the Republicans look at this as a weakness. So if you think the economy is the number 1 issue this year you would be greatly mistaken. Because Foreign affairs should be the number 1 issue this year. Mitt Romney will kill this country... Literally!
"There's a pretty compelling story that if you had a President Romney, you'd be in a different situation,"
Really?. What makes you so sure of that, Williamson.? Your candidate's foreign experience record seems to indicate exactly the opposite: he have made a fool of himself all over the world, insulted the peoples of England and Israel, treated Latin and Muslim countries with either indifference or disdain, and volunteers stupid opinions about sensitive issues just for the sake of wining an election.
"In Egypt and Libya and Yemen, again demonstrations -- the respect for America has gone down".
No, that is incorrect. Americans have been disrespected in these three countries for many years, due to the macho BS attitude of presidents like Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. The USA have chosen to support in one way or another the same dictators that the Arab Spring brought down, so it is only understandable that their peoples don't feel cozy and warm every time they talk about America. Another ignorant cowboy clown like Romney will just make things worse, much worse. Foreign Policy seems to be a continuous pissing competition for Mitt the Twit. If America has gained any respect in the international arena in the last 12 years is because of the peace and humanitarian efforts of President Obama.
Check your facts before opening your mouth, Williamson
As my father used to say, "There are none so blind as those who will not see ........"
Here is what the Obama camp needs to understand: The hate movie, the small, made for TV demonstrations against it and the murder of Ambassador Stevens by the Ansar al Sharia death squad were all engineered by their political opponents, the neocons around Romney. Netanyahu and Romney go way back to business school. Netanyahu needs Romney to start a war with Iran. The neocons are salivating to get back in and continue their foreign policy. They have control over some elements in our clandestine forces including terrorist groups they manipulate. Relations between Obama and Netanyahu are strained to the breaking point. I'm telling you, these neocons were in charge on 9/11 and they are responsible for it. Obama came in thinking he could avoid facing these facts, avoid prosecuting the crimes of Bush and "look forward", but now it is obvious that this is impossible and he will have to confront them. Come on, Rachel, 9/11 WAS an inside job. Ask Brzezinski. At this point I think he might tell you the truth. Rachel, save our country! These traitors must be exposed!