This week's release of the secretly-recorded Mitt Romney fundraiser generated all kinds of news, but there may have been one more element that didn't make the original cut.
We know about the revelations involving the "47 percent," Romney wishing he were Latino, his confusion over what a dirty bomb is, and his decision to give up on the Middle East peace process before he's even elected.
But BuzzFeed reported yesterday that this is the video "that keeps on giving," and flagged this portion of the recording.
For those can't quite hear the exchange, a donor noted, "When Carter was president, we had hostages. Ronald Reagan was able to make a statement even before he became, he was actually sworn in, and the hostages were released." Romney immediately added, "On the day of his inauguration."
Let's pause for a moment to note that the Republicans' preferred myth on this is completely wrong.
Regardless, the donor asked how Romney can "duplicate that scenario." The candidate began responding by complaining about voters' lack of interest in international affairs, followed by additional complaints about President Obama withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. Romney added:
"In [the 1980] election, in the Jimmy Carter election, the fact that we had hostages in Iran, I mean, that was all we talked about. And we had the two helicopters crash in the desert, I mean, that was the focus, and so him solving that made all the difference in the world. I'm afraid today that if you simply got Iran to agree to stand down on nuclear weapons, they'd go, 'Now hold on. It's really a-' I mean, if something of that nature presents itself I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity."
The charitable interpretation of this is that Romney would see a hostage crisis as an "opportunity" related to foreign policy and Iran.
And then there's a less charitable interpretation.
Josh Marshall had an item on this:
He has a couple stopped and started sentences and at some points it's not entirely clear to me what his meaning is. But on this last point he seems to be saying that if a major international crisis erupted he'd do what he could to turn it to political advantage.
In light of Romney's actions last week, when he tried to exploit a crisis in the Middle East for partisan gain, he hasn't exactly earned the benefit of the doubt in this area.
That said, it's not entirely clear to me in this clip whether Romney meant "opportunity" in a policy sense or a political one. Take a listen and see what you can make of it.
Leave a Comment:
If the very thought of Romney meeting with heads of state as our president does not scare the hell out of you then you must be dead.
Or if you are in the group that absorbs the shock of his towering duplicity , soon to be dead .
Speaking of duplicity, MJ has admitted the video is edited/doctored/incomplete. You'd think after the edited tapes of George Zimmerman were exposed the left would be more careful about fraud.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/19/Mother-Jones-Admits-Romney-Tape-Missing-One-or-Two-Minutes
All they have is attacks on Mitt because BO's record is so bad he can't run on it. This 47% is Mitt's "you didn't build that", "I believe in re-distribution" moment, it'll will fade once the debates hit or before. BO post-con up tick was fading, this is a distraction, nothing more.
Wasn't the lack of this congress acting the fault of this congress ? I always thought that is was the legislature that legislates . Oops ! My bad ...
Oh, Sh**ter, I guess Breitbart would know about doctoring video. But what, exactly, would Romney say in the 1 minute missing (certainly not edited) that would undo the sheer vileness of the other 68 minutes? Have fun with your conspiracy theory, anyway, you psychotic idiot.
ooooh, "one or two minutes", Shoots. Maybe so please do show why this matters? Come on, tell me in your own words, rather than having a link to a source that I know repeatedly lies. Take responsibility for what you want to claim, rather than trying to create some deniablity. I want to see what could have been said in those "one or two minutes" that could make a difference. Surely you can think of something? Romney himself had no problems with the tape as it stands, missing minutes and all.
and Golly Eric, please do show how President Obama isn't running on his record. I do recall seeing some very nice videos on just what he's accomplished put out there for all of the world to see. You see, Eric, if you are willfully ignorant, your lies never work. You also seem to have to rely on more lies about the "you didn't build that" nonsense that you seem to be intent on ignoring the context of. As has be repeatedly pointed out, no one does anythign on their own. They may build a business but they need the community to help them. A business is nothing without others to buy product or services, to supply infrastructure for the benefit of all, etc. Now, rather than lying so pitifully, how about addressing some real problems that President Obama has, like the NDAA, limitless incarceration, etc. But hmmm, I suspect you might like those things, since you supported them when Bush had similar. Can't attack that then can you? Nope, just stuck with the same old lies.
So you think the presentation of a news event is comparable to a gentleman , running for a high American office , espousing particularly cruel and unusual anti American phiosophical positions to faceless internationlal corporate types is comparable ?
Good to know ...
MJ admits the speech is incomplete. Breitbart.com implies it's edited or doctored. Unless the two minutes is Romney saying "just kidding! Man, could you imagine if people believed I was just that big of a dick?" I doubt anything that is said in the context of what is there changes.
Shooter should notice I was polite and kept on topic. My apologies if that makes him lose his rage-erection.
http://moelane.com/2012/06/09/troll-hunting-101/
Ahhh, leave it to Blanks to send you to the home base of proven deceiver, filmmaker James O'Keefe to find the truth. That's rich!
Do you suppose they cut out the part where Mitt praised the hard working single mothers that work two jobs and still have to get food stamps to feed their kids? Or maybe they burned the part where he applauded our veterans for risking life and limb to protect our free market system. Or, possibly they took out the part where he told his rich friends that he wanted to help young people get an education because they were the future of America.
Sorry, not likely. The missing two minutes are probably more of the same condescending dribble that marked the rest of the speech. I don't know if I could watch another minute without getting sick. Forget entitlements! This guy thinks he's entitled to be president because he won the "ovarian lottery".
LOL. Aren't you all about context? Are you saying context doesn't matter now? Obama really meant 'If you have a business you didn't build that' after all? C'mon bud, get a story and stick to it for a change.
Aside from that, are you asserting it's OK to present edited video as complete? People got fired for doing that in the Trayvon Martin case. Are you now advocating fraud? Tsk. Is there no depth to which the left will not sink?
So RimKitty, if Fox starts to creatively edit Obama speeches you're fine with that? Good to know.
Vel, care to talk about unemployment rate (8%+ for 40 months), growing deficit (he said he'd cut in half in first term and unpatriotic to keep it growing), more on food stamps instead of more spinning? Lap it up. All that is Bush's fault though, right? Yeah, that's not going to work again. If I am ignoring "context" of "you didn't build that", you are on the 47%, right? Right. Of course a Business needs support, but who took the risk "on their own", who had the idea,? Gov't? Who is the Gov't? Aren't WE the Gov't? Yeah, WE built that! Nice try, but not really.....you gotta be getting dizzy by now.
I was wondering, if Mitt was elected, what do you suppose he'd do for the ecomony and unemployment?
If you reply to my question, please don't copy and paste a bunch of BS...I won't read it. Just give me a simple plan that Mitt has proposed since he took up running for the highest office in the land.
Right now, it's Mitt's job to win votes, to beat Obama. Right? So, if I'm unemployed and Mitt is promising me a job and to turn the economy around, I'd be more inclined to vote for him.
IF Mitt had a plan to put people back to work and turn around the econmy, well, in the aftermath of him kicking 47% of the population in the face...NOW, right now would be a great time to explain his plan.
*crickets*
I'll take this. The plan is to get Govt out of the way. My own version of that would be to put everything on hold, keep taxes where they are, no new regs for 2 years, and open up energy production.
Economies are all about making money. If people think they'll make money spending and investing, they'll spend and invest. If they think they'll lose money, they won't. It's just that simple.
@Shooter - And I'd like a shiny hat and a pony too. That's not a plan, that's a wish list that has absolutely no bearing on reality. The problem you have is that, well, taxes have been this low for a long time, and while the economy is picking up somewhat, it's obviously not enough. Number of new regulations are down compared to the previous administration, and businesses admit it's lack of demand, not regulation that keeps them from hiring.
Domestic energy production is higher than it has been in the past, so that's not going to work either.
Your whole "plan" is basically "drill baby drill"...which is, well, not realistic at all. You don't even try to bring a realistic opposition to this do you? It's sad, but I've read local newspapers with better right-wing trolls.
I actually enjoy reading Shooter242. It's very entertaining. Projection at its best. And yes, context matters....alot. On this we agree. But that's about it. You know better not to repeat the 'you didn't build that' quote, because you've been ripped to shreds countless times. But, whatever. So, if you're asking the world to just put Mitt's video contribution to all things stupid in context, then ok. Let's see the 1-2 minutes to put everything in it's proper context. I guess what we're missing is instead of being a moron, Mitt is just an idiot.
Aside from the fact that energy production has already been opened up, taxes aside from the richest 2% are intended to be kept on hold and government isn't exactly standing in people's way unless their ideas for making money are awful for Americans or their environment, Shooter's ideas are bold and innovative. I'd discuss them more, but I can hear him breathing heavy at alllll this attention.
http://moelane.com/2012/06/09/troll-hunting-101/
....and what is Obama's?
What do you mean starts to? Fox has been creatively editing everything for years...
*loud crickets and maybe a tumble weed or two*
Wow, the two dumbest trolls on the internet are really get slapped around today, eh? Couldn't happen to a better pair of asswipes.
TC!! So funny, I love the school yard name calling like a 6 year old with nothing behind it. Nothing just "you are dumb". It's pathetic really.
Yeah, but you can bet your sweet bippy that they think they're winning the argument.
In a weird ironic twist, I read a snippet of news this morning that it was Carter's grandson who convinced the person who filmed Romney to release the tape publicly.
Whoever it was did his country a favor so they obviously are not dyed in the wool republican.
@Eric, if by that, you mean, what is Pres. Obama's plan, it's called the American Jobs Act, and Paul Ryan and his congressional cohorts have been quashing it for over a year now - refusing to let it come to the House floor for a vote and filibustering it in the Senate. Moody's concluded the American Jobs Act could create over 1M jobs and lower the unemployment rate by a full percentage point - yet, Paul Ryan pretends it doesn't exist and that he himself hasn't been deliberately keeping over a million Americans out of a job for over a year. And the GOP-crafted jobs plan that Ryan did vote "aye" on, the so-called JOBS Act? Moody's concluded the GOP plan could actually cost jobs and lead to a second recession. Color me surprised - not.
WOW, we are gaining the benefit of Mitt's "wisdom" without paying $50,000 a plate. Thanks James Carter IV, you and your source have done America a great service.
Just like an Obama supporter to get it for free when hard-working American's had to dish out 50K to hear this.
/sarcasm
maybe if iran halts nuclear weapons testing then his opportunity would be to strick at them when they were least prepared. i don't know probably not but his language is coded and awkward. he just has a lot of slime and hate in his voice.
also did he say the presidents charm and magnetism lead to terrorists in north korea, iran and egypt? some one coughed and it's hard to understand him but i think he said that obama's weak approach lead to bad things happening in already bad countries.
Has it occurred to anyone besides myself that the video might actually have been funded and distributed by someone who was trying to help Romney, precisely with this kind of exploitation in mind?
If so, then Romney would need fewer enemies if he had more friends like that.
They're talking about getting Mitt elected. Of course the "opportunity" they're looking for is political. Or perhaps a better word would be "opportunism."
Whichever, Romney will find a way to bait his own trap and test by falling into it.
Benen, at this point in the game why does Romney deserve any benefit of the doubt? His craven, disgraceful behavior last week with regard to the events in Libya tell us all we need to know. It is always 'political' with Romney - he has nothing else to offer. That goes for his running mate, too.
I wsa offended by the way he treated Shannon O'brien in a debate .
Of course it's political exploitation that he's talking about! Never let a chance to thump your chest and beat the war-drums pass you by, that's the GOP way! Ever the bullies, these chicken-hawks have no conscious or shame about sending other people's children to die in their needless wars! The "new GOP" political failures that should be relegated into the dust-bins of history!
In all fairness, here. BOTH political parties take every opportunity to exploit each other politically. If Barack Obama had been in Mitt Romney's shoes during the Libyan Consulate Attack, he probably would not have inserted himself into the narrative as it was unfolding, but I can guarantee you he would try to make it a political issue after a day or two. He just would have done it in a different way- probably with less chest thumping :) I disagree with the war-mongering the GOP exaults, too, but the political exploitation is rampant in our system. Just saying.
For a party that was delighted to point to their big inclusive tent you would think the strain on their ligaments would snap 'em . However the shameless gene apparently provides an extra elasticity for those moments when human credulity is just stretched beyond breaking .
Romney and his ilk love their Corporate Welfare. So they don't want competition from poor folks who are taking welfare money out of the mouths of the 1%.
Regulated markets are now protected monopolies which essentially defeats the purpose of a representative government . Starting with the Reagan administration the failure to prosecute monopolistic behavior has given an unneeded impetus towards that most poisonous of human tendencies . Now we see an unimpeded course towards fewer , and fewer , possibilites which has not been corrected to date (Reagan era) . Unless the tendency to collect and centralize is corrected the theatrical sham of "meritocracy" will be very hard to continue .
For an example of how much more difficult it is to create in America because of the mistaken policy of permitting monopolistic ventures to gain market , please note the paucity of manufacturing . This goes foot in mouth with the sort of vuturistic Bain idea of getting government to fund formerly private pensions , as well as insurance . To complete the emptying of the treasury we have "Walmart family values" operation providing salaries that require government assistence to feed the families of walmart salary peoples , when they aren't too , too , busy bribing their way into international monopolies .
The thought of a free people having the wherewithal to decide policy for themselves , without the deciding faces being the solons of inherited trust fund equities , is anathema to the sort of mandarin type ticket republican demogagues produce at every turn Romney / Ryan merely being the latest and greatest . The weakness starts at the republican party being fundementally anti American . A large hurdle to overcome for the sizzling personalities of Romney , and every word of Ryan must challenged .
The hope being that the fear mongering has worn outs its welcome , and the raw , naked grab at America's vital composition of shared history and responsibilty is not a thing to be ashamed of , but exactly what is needed to permit America to keep from becoming another museum exhibit in a rich mans study .
These folks really do have money to burn. Hope their dinner was good. For their 50 grand each they got a nice pile of Mittpoo as a main course.
So really Mitt is NOT running for the Presidency of the United States, he is running for the 53% of the United States he thinks agree with him about everything and nothing. I wonder where that country is located -- "Wonderland?"
I think is running for the 1% but needs the 53% to win.
How much money is enough? America is not a Monopoly game, to bankrupt everyone else for the opportunity to sneer.
If Romney and his kind were hoarding matchbooks or mustard packets or snowglobes instead of dollars, everyone would see them as the sickos that they are. But, somehow, it's not an illness when it's money that's being hoarded. I don't believe there's any good reason to make that distinction.
If I were paranoid -- which I am -- I would be concerned about Romney's relationship with Netanyahu and what Israel might do to "assist" in the creation of such an "opportunity."
The only voters who have a lack of interest in foreign affairs are his 1% base, who cannot think beyond their own pampered small world in which they live. Contrary to the popular belief of Republicans the 99% have joined with the 99% of the World in protest of said such words coming from the Republicans. We are aware that oil is not our childrens' future, Peace among all nations is their only chance of survival, and we know that even after suffering the Bush coma. There is no end to his insulting of our intellegience...watch as 99 red balloons go bye.
Nothing charitable here, just assume it's pernicious and let him defend it not being so, mine the gold Steve.
This man is as dumb as a bag of nails.......its like watching a 12 year old try to explain foreign policy.......his explanations are so devoid of any understanding of the issues
This particular set of 'words' (below) from this particular set of 'Seven scholars' may be exactly true.
But the facts remain that through the actions of the Iranians, the election was turned toward Ronald Reagan.
It was very generous to the American people of Carter and Reagan to jointly agree to this historical for the record interpretation.
For this they are to be commended.
But the Election was swayed toward Ronald Reagan, who we must see as taking a far different direction. The Reagan direction was to take the Military whole new level, leaving the country more Energy Dependent, with less financial regulation and the propensity to conduct all wars off budget.
The Reagan Direction, after 32 years, has let the nation's infrastructure crumble; destroy the countries manufacturing base, to cut taxes and to reduce wages. Because the failure to address energy policy using native manufacturing capacity for alternate energy and to build strength at home, we are now all the more dependent on foreign oil energy, accompanied by the historic redistribution of the nation's financial wealth to those foreign counties. All the world's financial wherewithal is now global, and the vast majority of Wall Street's wealth is made with financial trades, and very little invested in production capacity and utilization. If you wanted to plan for the ruin of United States, this is the same plan our enemies would use, but those enemies were so clever that they could affect and American Election, and not be blamed for it.
Today, with the infrastructure in disarray, with spending opportunities being wasted, and the opportunity to manufacture and install alternate energy, what are we doing? What we are doing is bailing out those fine bankers, using monetary policies that merely prop up the markets, drain revenues, and prevent opportunity to manufacture jobs and install alternate energy. This is exactly the kind of policies that those selling oil drugs to the dependent economy would what us held hostage for. Now look out windows of the plush high rise condominium complex at the seething traffic below, and all you see is prosperity. While the workers below spends endless time in traffic looking at the crumbling infrastructure, and sensing a problem, take second look, and see iPhones on every ear. Instead of seeing information infrastructure being used wisely, we see the investment potential of making more iPhones, small and smaller ones, costing less and less, and doing less and less of what is essential and nothing of what is essential.
Again the American voter is responsible for the Reagan Era, and will be responsible for this election all at the influence of foreign powers.
But at least pay attention, we don't need a Reagan Era again.
And Experts Say Reagan Has Little To Do With The Release Of The Hostages
Thank you, Rich. It's hard to drum loud enough to break through the crazy, Republican-consuming Reagan hagiolatry.
Regarding the video clip portion about Romney "taking advantage" of a situation:
I've listened several times starting where one of the guests brings up the issue of the hostage crisis during the Carter administration, and somehow segues to the present.
I think you can't really figure out what on earth Romney means, unless you can enhance the audio on that question and figure out what the guy is asking. They're talking about Iran's nuclear ambitions, and the bit of Republican lore that says Reagan was able to secure the release of the hostages before he actually took office. I think they may be asking whether, in the next few months (and this was back in May) Romney could resolve an issue directly with Iran.
In other words, whether he could do an end-run around President Obama and conduct some kind of foreign policy with Iran, if some kind of crisis event were to happen.
It's hard to tell whether the remark is preceded by a discussion of Iran, or by a discussion of political strategy. The guest who is talking doesn't quite project as loudly as Romney does. It's possible that Romney was saying that he could take political advantage of a foreign policy crisis for political reasons -- because they comment that this kind of thing "would really resonate". But, at a minimum, they do seem to believe that Reagan solved the hostage crisis before he was actually inaugurated, and it seems as though they're suggesting some foreign policy crisis could arise and Romney should sweep in and save the day.