_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Mitt Romney and War By Other Means

"When our grounds are being attacked and being breached, the first response of the United States must be outrage at the breach of the sovereignty of our nation."

The first response of the United States must be outrage.

Yes, outrage!

That’s what we need, some good old fashioned American outrage.

Because really, we haven’t spent enough time in the last ten years paying the tab on decisions that were made in the throes of outrage, right?

Our first response should be outrage.

That was wannabe Decider In Chief, Mitt Romney, in response to a statement issued by the United States Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, as Muslim extremists prepared to storm the consulate grounds.

And it’s not enough that the nation should be outraged, Mitt himself is personally outraged:

“I’m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It’s disgraceful that the Obama Administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.

Say what?

President Obama sympathized with who now?

I’ve read through the President’s public statement regarding the attack last night on American embassies in Egypt and Libya.  I’ve read through them twice.  I watched the videos. Hell, I even watched Fox News, because I figured if anybody would have tape of Obama palling around with terrorists, it would be them.

Nowhere, no Goddamned where, did I see President Obama express anything even vaguely resembling sympathy with those who waged the attacks – unless Mittens was implying that the family of US Ambassador to Libya, the late J. Christopher Stevens, and the families and friends of the other three slain State Department employees were in fact Muslim extremists who assaulted the embassies in Egypt and Libya.  See, because those were the only people President Obama expressed sympathy for.  

What Obama actually said was:

“I strongly condemn the outrageous attack on our diplomatic facility in Benghazi, which took the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. Right now, the American people have the families of those we lost in our thoughts and prayers. They exemplified America’s commitment to freedom, justice, and partnership with nations and people around the globe, and stand in stark contrast to those who callously took their lives. I have directed my Administration to provide all necessary resources to support the security of our personnel in Libya, and to increase security at our diplomatic posts around the globe. While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants. On a personal note, Chris was a courageous and exemplary representative of the United States. Throughout the Libyan revolution, he selflessly served our country and the Libyan people at our mission in Benghazi. As Ambassador in Tripoli, he has supported Libya’s transition to democracy. His legacy will endure wherever human beings reach for liberty and justice. I am profoundly grateful for his service to my Administration, and deeply saddened by this loss. The brave Americans we lost represent the extraordinary service and sacrifices that our civilians make every day around the globe. As we stand united with their families, let us now redouble our own efforts to carry their work forward.”

Today, the President pledged to bring those responsible for the attacks to justice.

"We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."

Given Obama’s track record, justice will very likely be done indeed.

Justice is likely to fall on the attackers from the sky, delivered via drone or at the hand of US Special Forces – at which point, of course, Conservatives will have some other complaint about how Obama isn’t focused on the economy or some such thing. Also, Nazis.

Looking at this event in the cold light of a rainy Alaskan afternoon, this is what see I immediately:

Barack Obama condemned the attacks, he spoke against violence and expressed sadness for the dead and sympathy for their families and friends, he told us what he was doing to protect our people in similar situations around the globe, and he promised us justice.  About what you would expect from your President in such a situation.

Mitt Romney attacked his own government and his fellow Americans.

The President was coldly angry, but determined in his public response to prevent further bloodshed, further violence.

Mitt was outraged.

The President’s concern was for the dead, for their families, for people.

Romney’s concern was that somebody touched our stuff.

Obama responded like a president.

Romney acted like a businessman.

Do the math for yourself.

"When our grounds are being attacked and being breached, the first response of the United States must be outrage at the breach of the sovereignty of our nation."

Outrage.

As a first response.

Outrage must be our first response. Outrage at  the breach of sovereignty of our nation.

Our first response shouldn’t be measured action to ensure the safety of our people, both in the midst of the unfolding violence and elsewhere in the world – even if that means holding our tongue.  No.

Our first response shouldn’t be to ascertain ground truth before acting on impulse or making rash statements or beating our sword against our shield – or wading into yet another ill-considered military action.  No, certainly not that.

Our first response shouldn’t be to avoid putting more of our people at immediate risk by inflaming tempers and hatred elsewhere in the Middle East.

Our first response shouldn’t be a call for calm, for reason, for an end to the violence, or to make an appeal to common ideals. No, not that either.

Our first response shouldn’t be to stand together as Americans. Oh fuck no, wouldn’t want that.

No, no.

Step 1: Outrage! Outrage, by God! Outrage, because that’s what Angry Jesus would do! Outrage!

Step 2: Blame our fellow countrymen.

And then what?

Based on the recently adopted GOP platform and past performance by Republican administrations I suspect Step 3 is probably “bomb some random brown people.”  Then a year or so later realize that we killed the wrong people, but stubbornly pretend that they had it coming anyway, because, well, you know, brown people. Fuck ‘em.

This morning Mitt Romney said America should set the example:

“In the face of this violence, American cannot shrink from the responsibility to lead. American leadership is necessary to ensure that events in the region don’t spin out of control. We cannot hesitate to use our influence in the region to support those who share our values and our interests.”

How, exactly, leading with outrage as your first response keeps things from “spinning out of control” is beyond me.  But that’s far from the only thing Romney has said regarding this matter that perplexes me.  Romney was upset that the embassy had issued, apparently without authorization from the White House, the following statement:

“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 attacks, at least the one in Cairo, were apparently sparked by a YouTube video.  The video allegedly was uploaded by an “Israeli-American” living in California. The man is supposedly a real estate developer and filmmaker named Sam Bacile, though it seems that both the name and alleged professions are fake. The uploader may not even be in north America at all.  The film portrays an, extremely, unflattering depiction of the prophet Muhammad and Islam, and is obviously designed to inflame Muslim extremists and goad them into action against the United States.

And that’s exactly what happened.

The filmmaker has apparently gone into hiding. Why am I not surprised?

Now, here in America, that kind of assholery is permitted under the First Amendment.  In America we have the right to freedom of speech, and freedom from having to be responsible for the consequences of what we say. Somebody else will do it for you, suffer the consequences that is.  You make a film or burn somebody’s holy book and generally act like an asshole, and somebody else, a soldier or a diplomat or even just some random American who happens to be in the wrong place, why they’ll be happy to step up and take responsibility for your freedom of speech.  And you? Well you can hide behind your rights and your internet anonymity and your God and bask in your patriotism.  Good on you.

Ironic, isn’t it?

Ironic that the very people who scream loudest and demand that the “poor” and the “socialists” and the “liberals” and the “parasites” start taking responsibility for their lives are the very same florid patriots who never seem to take responsibility for their own actions, for their own words, for the consequences of their hatred and bigotry. They’ll condemn the violence inspired by the Occupy movement, but defend the violence inspired by Right To Lifers or some hateful bigot on Talk Radio.  One has to wonder if Romney and his followers would be so quick to defend freedom of speech if that YouTube video depicted Jesus gay marrying Brigham Young.

Funny how these patriots, these Great Americans, always hide behind anonymous uploads and anonymous comments on blogs like this one.

Funny how a conservative like Romney would condemn his fellow Americans under attack in the Cairo embassy for exercising their right to speak freely in an attempt to save lives and quell rising violence, but defend an anonymous bigot’s right to free speech when he posts a film that may have gotten Americans killed.

In an interview this morning Romney outlined the first step in his, as yet, mysterious foreign policy:

First, confidence in our cause, a recognition that the principles America was based upon are [not] something we shrink from or apologize for. That we stand for that principles.

Christ, it’s like the second coming of Word Salad Sally.

What principles are those again? What principles was Mitt Romney talking about? Up there, above, when he said, “We cannot hesitate to use our influence in the region to support those who share our values and our interests.”

Bigotry? Hatred? Attacks on other peoples’ religions?  The bile in the video that supposedly sparked this firestorm? Are those the founding principles of America Mitt was talking about?

Excuse me while I go consult my copy of the Federalist Papers. 

"I think it's a terrible course for America to stand in apology for our values."

I’m pretty good with the English language. I score extremely high in reading comprehension.  I have a very large vocabulary.  I spent most of my life as a military Cryptologist and an Intelligence officer, I’ve had some very specific and extensive training and more than twenty years experience in ferreting out meaning from all forms of communication. I’ve read that offending statement, the one from the Cairo embassy, over and over.

I just don’t see where the embassy, or President Obama for that matter, was apologizing for anything

The statement was issued before the attack began, while there still might be time to de-escalate the situation, while there still might be time to prevent violence and bloodshed, while there still might be time for reason and not mindless outrage to prevail.

Look at the message again:

“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.”

Go over it line by line.

First, we’re the embassy. The embassy, not the United States, not the President. The embassy you are thinking about attacking. Embassy. First line, you can’t miss it. We condemn bigots, we understand why you’re pissed off, really we do. And we don’t agree with those who would deliberately give insult to Muslims, i.e. the religion of our host nation and the region by which we are surrounded right now.  On this of all days, we Americans know only too well what the end results of bigotry and intolerance and violence are. We honor our own, those who fought the terrorists and oppressive regimes, something you Egyptians are familiar with yourselves – this is yet another thing we have in common.  Respect for religion and speech is a cornerstone of American democracy, and by implication your fledgling democracy too. We firmly reject those who would abuse such freedoms.

Even if I squint my eyes and put on my Genuine George Dubya Bush rubber mask, that statement still looks exactly like what it is: an attempt by US State Department personnel to defuse a bad situation.   To be diplomatic.  Before they were overrun.

It looks exactly like what it is, the embassy doing its job with the only tools it had, diplomacy, words, information.

You better believe that the people besieged in those embassies, the folks who issued that statement, were very, very, very well versed in previous attacks on US facilities. I know that for a fact, I’ve had similar training and for similar reasons.  And I will bet you anything you’d like that they were thinking of only one thing: Iran.  Iran and the Iranian Hostage Crisis, when revolutionary religious extremists stormed our embassy and took our people hostage and held the United States at gunpoint for more than a year.

The embassy’s job wasn’t to make the situation worse.

Their job isn’t to get America into another war.

Their job isn’t to get America mired in another diplomatic nightmare.

The first job of diplomacy is to prevent war, to avoid conflict and violence, to preserve civilization.

They’re diplomats, not Marines.

And even Jarheads know better - especially when on foreign soil in an unstable land, you better believe they know it.  Their job, and the job of the diplomats, is to prevent violence. 

You’d think somebody who wants to manage US Foreign policy would understand that.

Frankly, I’d like to see Mitt Romney under siege. I’d like to see him put his millions where his mouth is.  I’d like to see him, for once, suffer the consequences of his speech. I’d like to see his policy of outrage in action when facing a crowd of crazed religious extremists – and when I say “crazed religious extremists” I’m not talking about the Church of Latter Day Saints storming across the California border en mass waving their checkbooks and hell bent on burning down gay marriage, though I suppose that works too.

Now, I’m not particularly hard pressed to guess what an officially authorized Romney Administration message to the attackers would be.

But while Come at me, Bro! makes a funny de-motivational poster, as foreign policy it’s juvenile and idiotic and counterproductive. 

These people have spent their entire lives immersed in violence, in war, in death, and blood, and torture.  They just overthrew an oppressive regime that had no reticence whatsoever about killing people. Do you really think that America, Fuck Yah! intimidates these people? Really?

They fought tanks with sticks for fuck’s sake.

Of course, there’s nothing particularly surprising about Romney’s bluster today, given where he gets his foreign policy advice. Romney campaign foreign policy adviser Rich Williamson told Foreign Policy magazine that the attacks were related to Obama’s “failure to be an effective leader for U.S. interests in the Middle East.” Go on, tell me how that’s different from Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s similar assertion that America invited 9-11 though its foreign policy.  No really, please explain the difference to me, because I’m not seeing it.

Conservatives have a self esteem problem.

They’re terrified of apologies. They’re so damned afraid on having to admit a mistake, of having to apologize, of appearing weak or unmanly – despite the very specific admonishment of their avowed lord and savior to turn the other cheek and to act in humility – that they see apologies where none were ever given. 

Sort of like how a lot of them call other people queer so nobody will suspect them of being gay themselves, but I digress.

Today is a perfect example, Mitt Romney knows that his response was wrong. He knows his attempt to make this terrible event into just another campaign sound-bite is crass and beneath anybody, anybody, who would aspire to the Oval Office. He knows it. Look at his eyes, read his words and watch him keep shifting the goal posts and tell me that he doesn’t damned well know that his comment last night was wrong.

Both conservatives and liberals alike have condemned him for it. 

But he is too insecure, too immature, too afraid, too filled with self doubt and little man syndrome to admit it. 

Instead, like a petulant child, he’s doubling down, feet spread, bottom lip out, arms akimbo.

And like a child, he’s outraged.

 

Come November, Americans have a choice. 

They can chose a guy who’s outraged over something that never happened, who wants you to be outraged over an apology that never happened, and who would  allow himself to be goaded into war over the “rights” of an anonymous troll (who might not even be an American) in the guise of shallow patriotism.

Or they can chose the guy who behaves like an actual statesman.

For me, the choice is clear.

135 comments:

  1. Mr. Wright - once again a spot-on brilliant post. Your ability to boil the issue down to its pithy core, then present it with passion and clarity is impressive.

    I haven't followed the issue too closely - honestly, I'm already exhausted trying to dig my way out of the pile of droppings left by the recent elephant convention. So having you manning the barricades is much appreciated.

    And Nazis.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nits, feel free to disregard, no need to respond. Love ya.

    "Looking at this event in the cold light of a rainy Alaskan afternoon, this is what I immediately:"

    Perhaps:

    surmised? figured out? put together?

    "I just don’t see where the embassy, or President Obama for that matter, was apologizing for anything. "

    were apologizing?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does anyone really like their Grammar teacher? No.

      Delete
    2. 'Was' is correct. The subject of the sentence is 'embassy'. The use of 'and' instead of 'or' would have made it plural.

      Delete
    3. Thank you Helen. I hate it when people try to correct grammar incorrectly. :)

      Delete
    4. As one who is inflicted with and constantly challenged by grammar dyslexia, Helen's clarification is welcome.

      Delete
    5. This is the interwebs. So long as the point is made and understood (which it is), a bit of nit-picking over grammar is just people being pedantic. Besides, grammar is not a one-size-fits-all prospect; intelligent people often play with grammar to project a certain tone (in this case, tongue-in-cheek political observation).

      That said, I'm reassured (as always) by blogs that aren't highly polished. It means that the writer was more intent on getting his message across than in presenting an essay. On a post like this, I know which I consider more important ;)

      And all that being said and done, I reckon this guy makes some important points. I'm not American, so my opinion doesn't really matter in American politics, but the principle of "who is leading your country?" stands everywhere. In my opinion, Romney is scary. Obama's not perfect, but at least he has his head screwed on straight and has decent priorities.

      But yeah, grammar in legal documents? Important. Grammar in a blog on the interwebs? Not so much. And I'll say one thing: at least it's not text speak *grins*

      Delete
  3. Well said.
    The Romney campaign had Ryan start walking this back this afternoon.
    We now have Marines on their way to secure the Embassy-like you said, given Obama's past, this will end quickly and harshly if necessary.
    Andy Borowitz said today: When our embassy is attacked, we are attacked. Romney's Libya comments display the patriotism of someone who keeps his money in Switzerland.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The more I look at this outing of outrage, the more I see pundits on both sides of November scratching their heads.

    Dr. Phil

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jim, if only I could meet with you once a week at the local waterin' hole (or one of our kitchens) and you could just talk and I could nod and listen. Maybe I'd learn a thing or three. I'm your age (pretty sure) but running behind a bit. Running farther behind the older I get. I know less and less. I think it boils down to "just be kind."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And how about get out and vote for liberal/progressive candidates please??

      Delete
  6. Yes, sir.
    Outstanding.

    Been hoping you would comment on this bullhit - was afraid I'd have to write something myself. I feel bad about waiting for you, but figured it'd be worth the wait. I was right. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Jim, dammit, just thank you. Add the little sidebar of the Israel PM's buttinsky into our national election and it's a cluster fuck right out of a Daniel Silva bestseller. I think I knew in the back of my mind that Romney and the Prime Minister were old business buddies back in Boston, but somehow it just sunk in today. Between the two of them, they seem to be determined to bring on WWIII.

    ReplyDelete
  8. JuJu Co - I also saw the missing word.

    But on your second example, the singular "was" is correct, because Jim used the conjunction OR. The two scenarios: I don't see where the embassy [singular] was apologizing..." OR "I don't see where President Obama was apologizing..."
    If it had been AND instead, then the verb would need to be plural.

    Just sayin'.

    Jim - as usual, you hit this one outta the park. Mitt screwed up epically, and I'm not sure this one is survivable. The President was, as usual, presidential.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I've said elsewhere, I should write for conservatives, they have much lower standards when it comes to grammar.

      Delete
    2. Oh STFU, we just want you to look good. Cindy, thanks kindly, I stand corrected. THANKS!!

      Delete
    3. Well, as long as you're correcting, it's Youtube, not Youtude. But I wasn't going to say anything since I'm feeling the seriousness of this great post. With every passing news day, filled with more crap than I can digest lately, I find myself wondering what Stonekettle will have on the latest outrageousness. Thanks, Mr. Wright for not disappointing me yet again.

      bd

      Delete
    4. YouTude seems cooler. I'm just saying.

      It's fixed. So is a bunch of other stuff, including the typo in the first line that, oh, about ten thousand people have read by now. Damn it.

      Delete
    5. Youtude, Metude, Ustude, ain't those all current conjugations of 'attitude'?

      If they ain't, they is now.

      Delete
    6. "Attitudinous" is my personal favorite current conjugation and it definitely applies to Mitt the Twit.

      Delete
    7. Well, while you're fixing things, add an 'r' into the 'though' in 'I’ve read though the President’s public statement'. *chuckle*

      Delete
    8. I just put that in there to see if you were paying attention.

      Delete
    9. Youtude IS cooler. I thought it was Youtard. Thanks for the clarification. ; )

      Delete
    10. When you're pissed off, as I am, you type fast, maybe not proofread, and get it out fast. Keep on being pissed off, Jim!

      Delete
    11. Jim...

      Fantastic work. Thank you for expressing it all so well. I was hoping you would comment on this but then life events overtook and I missed reading this until tonight.

      And if it is not too much to pick a small nit, in paragraph 9, it should be President Obama sympathized with whom (not with who)... Easy way I test such is to replace the who with I ... If as in this case the word is the object of the dative preposition, me (or whom) surfaces as the correct option. I apologize...it is years of Catholic schooling, diagramming sentences, and studying foreign languages that leads me down these nit picking paths.

      Keep up the good work!

      Old Navy Comm O

      Delete
    12. I am THE worst at grammar. This is a beautifully written and composed opinion that I think so many people share, myself included, but are having a hard time expressing. Thank you for giving us a voice for our pent-up sentiments. And with your background, that experience lends a level of credibility that is refreshing. All that said - I hope this doesn't sound small but I have a correction *shuffles feet sheepishly*. I offer it mainly because the sentiment is so perfect that I want it all to be just as perfect. (OCD?) In the last statement you make (last paragraph), I think the word should be "choose" instead of "chose" (used two times). If it's a pain in the toockus to correct, then don't worry about it; I agree that the idea is so dead on that the rest seems trivial. I would much rather read something that is eloquent and a superbly crafted argument, than something with no spelling mistakes but says: "Obama is a socialist"... Thanks! You have given me a little more hope that the country hasn't all gone bat sheet crazy.

      Delete
  9. How did I get through ten Presidential election years without you?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With a gaping empty hole in your soul, that you knew was there, but didn't know what was missing from it?

      Just sayin'.....

      Delete
  10. Right on the mark, as usual.

    ReplyDelete
  11. All one can hope is that Mitt Romney shortly finds out that "his values and his interests" have little to do with the values and interests of a large majority of US citizens.

    As many have said - after 7 years in the role of wannabe President - he has not a clue as to the role of the President of the United States - who'd have thought he has so much in common with Sarah Palin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, and some of his recent comments have been stolen from her word salad style(?), also too, you betcha. They're evil twins under the skin.

      Jim - all I have to say is "You are so awesome Dude!" Thanks for another great one. I've been sending people here as a must read. Every time I think you can't get any better - you do!

      Delete
    2. Couldn't agree more. Thank you all and especially Jim.

      Delete
  12. It was eerie yesterday morning, how exact the weather was to 2001 here in the GWTP. That these events should transpire on the same day is tragic (as it would be for any given day).
    That the same team should instantly advocate the same response is even scarier.
    Like you Jim, I spent over 20 years wearing the uniform and subscribing to the fact that I was an instrument of policy, not an advocate (I always had the option of resigning my commission). I didn't always agree, but could usually see my part in the big picture and stood up , saluted and marched.
    That these folks can so easily advocate the commitment of our young men and women without any of their own "skin in the game," is disgusting.
    What have we become ?????? ....... and absolutely no doubt in my "military mind"about the choice.
    Great Post.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Easy fixed; let those who want to start wars as knee-jerk put on a uniform. But don't hand them a gun, who knows what they'd get up to. Maybe with a little war experience under their belt, they won't be so trigger-happy.

      I've got nothing against soldiers, by the way, just the ijits who send them out for no good reason. There'd be fewer wars if the "leaders" had to do their own dirty work.

      Delete
  13. Lemme see. Right! No, wait. Wright!! Nah, not quite. Wrrrrrrright!!! Ha! There. That's it. Rrrrrrolllll that sucker. Okay, okay. {{ahem}}

    WrrrrrrRIGHT! Fuck YEAH!!!

    {{dusts hands off}} My work here is done.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thank you for an excellent piece. Often times I appreciate just being able to read something that makes total sense, is understandable, and is intelligently written. Somehow it reassures me that there are others out there that have the same thoughts, feelings, and responses, even when it seems the world is being overrun by idiots.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Exactly. Exactly. Thank you for this post.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Excellent posts! Let's hope that Rob-Me will continue to talk (like he did yesterday) and say ignorant things (like he did yesterday) and that Obama will continue to rise in the polls (like he did yesterday). See the correlation there? Let's also hope that the GOP won't be able to figure out a way to shut him up, even though it's clear that they are TRYING.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I could not agree with everything that I am readin. I hope you will be gentle with my grammer and spelling. As for as what the Party will be doing. It is the Pacs that will be moving all those billions of dollars not to help Rob-ME, but to Congressal and Senate races once they realize that Rob-ME can not win after the fist debate.

      Delete
  17. I'm going to be disgusted and saddened when the election is thrown by hacked voting machines, suppressed voters and endless dark money. Our hard-earned (that description is inadequate) democracy is dying of apathy. How can it be that this is being perpetrated in full view with little or no outcry? I'm going to be OUTRAGED (I know!) when the election has been found to be bought as surely as a fucking car elevator. It will require a pretty good dose of single-malt to watch that smug weasel (with apologies to actual weasels) with his hand on the book of Mormon being sworn in with John Boehner and Mitch McConnell group-smirking in the wings. My poor liver won't survive with all the medication I'll need.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We share the same fear.

      Delete
    2. Save my liver; vote Obama!

      Delete
    3. In the end, even Hunter Thompson couldn't stand up to that particular brand of fear.

      After decades of watching the same thing play out over & over, growing bigger & uglier with every cycle, even automatic weapons, hard liquor and hallucinogens couldn't erase the pain.

      Nothing short of turning off your brain AND your heart will save you. We are in pain cuz we haven't done this yet......

      IMHO, the smallest bit of intelligence when mixed with honesty, makes viewing the daily news like watching a Fellini movie on some real bad acid.

      All I can say is - Thank Gawd for Jim and John Stewart. Without you two, I don't want to go on. ; )

      Delete
  18. Nicely done, Jim.

    The part that impresses me most is that the Romney campaign's furious 'outraged Obama apologised' statement was put out (a) in response to an Embassy statement, as you say, (b) before any deaths had occurred, (c) on September 11 but embargoed for ~2h until Sept 12 - presumably to avoid causing any offence to people who were reflecting and mourning on the day of the 11th - because we wouldn't want to cause offence, would we?

    Oh, and from everything I've read about Mr Williams, he sounds like the kind of guy the US should be incredibly proud to have had serve them abroad, and an excellent ambassador for all that is good about y'all. Would that there were more of him and fewer Romneys. A sad, sad loss.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Outrage. It seems, in the last 11 years, that outrage isn't much part of it...sadness, concern, fear (not for me, for those we put in harm's way). Outrage, for me, is best left to 'better' souls.

    I do have a concern, that I would like you to consider, if not address. Why these two countries? Didn't they change leadership earlier this year? At our insistence?

    Thanks, Jim. A well ordered and organized post, per normal. Will leave me much to consider.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probably because the rule of law is not yet firmly entrenched in those countries after the regime changes. There still are a lot of armed insurgent types roaming Libya at this time. Egypt is a bit farther along the path to law, even if we don't particularly agree with some of it, at least they are heading that way.

      Delete
  20. Thanks Jim!
    As you write as Wright your right!

    ReplyDelete
  21. I still think all you need to understand about Mitt Romney can be summed up by the smirk he had while giving the statement.

    [im]http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/5977/large/MittromneyFinalRemark.jpg?1347461822 [/im]

    ReplyDelete
  22. Excellent piece, thank you. With all my being, I hope the election will not be hijacked and our country plunged into the darkness that surrounds this awful man.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It won't be a thousand years of darkness; Chuck Norris will save us with incandescent Freedom bulbs.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, 'cause Chuck wouldn't want us to use any of those sissy "curly-bulbs"!

      Delete
  23. From Down Under what I saw was Mitt Romney criticizing an American Ambassador's attempt to save his own life. And failing.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I have to say, as a member of the LDS church I am absolutely embarrassed, disgusted and horrified by mitt romney. Please know that not all of us are raging bigots, will-fully ignorant racists like this jackass.

    Your post was brilliant, spot on. Good job.

    ReplyDelete
  25. My first response to Romney and his surrogates on CNN and the Newshour was OUTRAGE!
    Thanks, Jim.

    ReplyDelete
  26. My new favorite nickname for Mitt is "Mittanic."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mittanic! Oh that's good! *actually laughing out loud*

      Delete
    2. I've always liked "Reversable Mittens".

      Delete
    3. Idiot Mittens, remember those?

      Delete
    4. I like Mutt Romney (nod to poor Seamus) - but Mittanic is just perfect!

      Delete
  27. THis is an awesome, spot on post! I am a new fan for life!
    Would you mind if I re-posted this on my FB wall?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You may certainly post a link to this essay on your facebook wall. Have at it.

      Delete
    2. Good, because I plan to post this on my facebook wall also.

      Delete
  28. You know, Jim, if you weren't retired, maybe just once I might be able to say what I want to say... before you go and do it better!

    Just sayin' maybe you could not be so on the ball all the time?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Thank goodness there are thinking people in Alaska!

    ReplyDelete
  30. Watching the election campaign from the other end of the Great White North in Ontario like people watch a car wreck (horrified fascination, can't... look... away!). Mitt the Twit baffles me. The THINGS that come out of his MOUTH! Does he actually think this stuff is in any form what Jesus would say or do? (Or for that matter fill in any minority he has trashed). I'm totally rooting for Obama in the election! Then Jesus whispers in my ear "My child, free will means YOU have to vote." I'm Canadian, I can't. I'm the cheerleader on the sidelines, you guys are the linebackers! So go vote Obama and remind all your friends and family and coworkers and aquaintances to vote.
    -Jessica

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I just had a thought. What if Starbucks and McDonalds would not serve coffee/food to people who hadn't voted? Talk about a revolution in voter #s after that!!!!

      Delete
    2. Aren't you discriminating against those who choose not to vote for any of the candidates????

      Delete
    3. Um, you spoil your ballot to show that. It's like a cat peeing on your clothes to let you know it's angry. At least that is what you do in Canada (spoil ballots, not pee on clothes). Never 'just don't vote'!
      -Jessica

      Delete
  31. Well done, Jim. This is one of your best.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Someone shared this on Facebook and I did the same. You spoke so well- I'm an instant fan. Good on you, sir. And thank you for saying what needed to be said. --Jon in NJ.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Well thought out, and well put. This most recent kerfuffle is yet more evidence of what I believe to be the right's secret motto:

    Don't confuse us with the facts. They are pesky, and do not serve us.

    ReplyDelete
  34. All I can say is you expressed my thoughts so much better than I could have.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I think this episode illustrates my thesis. Certain insidious and dangerous forces in this country have decided that Mr. Romney is not going to win the election. These secret forces have decided to use the campaign and Mr. Romney in an all-out effort to discredit the President and elect anybody to the Congress who is willing to say no. This may result in a Congress so inimical to the President's plans as cripple all recovery efforts. What unethical pledges have YOUR Congressional candidates made?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Carl, I think you're on to something here. The fact is that the power has ALWAYS rested with Congress when it comes to actually doing anything, and the right knows it. They love having a President as polarizing as Obama (though really, it's his skin that's polarizing, and only then because there are enough complete idiots to let it be so). That way, they can get their racist, ignorant, xenophobic, wack-o-loon base out to vote their tea party activists into Congress. When they gridlock to the point that the POTUS can't do anything at all, he gets replaced by one of their shills, who just signs everything the tea party proposes.

      Mark my words, it won't happen this year, but I suspect the next four years will look an awful lot like the last two, since the teabaggers took over the House.

      God I hope I'm wrong...

      Delete
    2. Sadly, (and terrifyingly), I think this too.

      Jim is the only place I see that succinctly tells the truth. It is crystal clear.

      I wish he were running. No one could bull__ their way through a debate with him.

      Becky

      Delete
    3. I've often fantasized about a candidate one day just looking at his opponent and saying "that's bullshit and you know it." I could totally see Jim doing that. What a fine day that would be!

      Delete
    4. Hmmm...

      Wright/Colbert 2012.

      >.>

      <.<

      There's always write-ins...

      Delete
    5. Nahhhh. However: Elzabeth Warren/Jim Wright 2016. I'd get behind that one! :)

      Delete
  36. Well you see Mitten's first statement can be explained by his lack of reading comprehension skills and ADD. What Mitt thought the President has said was "I strongly CONDONE the AWESOME attack..."

    Then he just got confused.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Rant on, Mr. Wright. From what I'v read Ambassador Williams was one of our stars. We will miss him.
    Outrage is a natural reaction to what happened. I felt it. Is it what needs to happen? No, we need to ask questions. What happened? Who is responsible? Why did they do it? Where are they now? Outrage is what we need to get over.
    Keep 'emcoming, Jim.
    I'm off to Youtude.

    ReplyDelete
  38. You expressed bafflement about what comes after #2, Jim. But you stated it, you just didn't know it. It's the Underpants Gnome theory of business. Regardless of what #1 and #2 are (or whether they're even known), #3 is always "Profit". Well, if you're a morality-free MBA with no respect for human life or human dignity, anyhow.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Which observation dovetails neatly with my own: That Romney sees people as headcount. Stats on spreadsheets. Fungible assets/debits.

      Delete
  39. It's that fucking creepy smirk that gets me. That piece of shit smirking when Americans have died serving their country. Asshat.

    Mittus Dickus

    knittingbull

    ReplyDelete
  40. From Memory- "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent"

    -Dr. Issac Asimov

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Asimov was an optimist

      Violence is the first refuge of the incompetent

      Delete
  41. Thank god Mittens continues to perfect the art of "Pooch Screwing".
    He doesn't require exposes,leaks from insiders or anonymous sources...he just wakes up every day and publicly give that dog a good rodgering!
    The problem is, he has been pounding that pup for a good year or more now, and is still polling within viewing distance of what may be the most gifted statesman of my life time. That says more about this country than I care to think about...

    ReplyDelete
  42. Jim, excellent post. I was listening to the news this morning, and the local coverage of R-Money's attacks was pathetic, like the reporters had orders to make him sound almost reasonable. Even NPR handled it with delicacy, instead of pointing out his lies.

    What's the grammar equivalent of typographical error? Grammo? Anyway, you wrote: "They fought tanks with with sticks..."
    Two too many many words words.

    ReplyDelete
  43. "I don't read the script, the script reads ME!" Mitt Romney is a spoiled, over privileged, ethics deprived, tin eared dickhead - playing a caring Morman elder, 'my 3 sons' father figure and loving husband - playing a hard nosed, pragmatic, very SERIOUS candidate for President. In a dream sequence about Mitt obtaining the Oval Office as his ultimate personal best, because he deserves it. A very wealthy, self delusional ASSHOLE!

    But the chorus backing up Mitt's blather is even worse. The channel of choice at my undisclosed work location is Faux News. For the last two days FNC has been accelerating, winding up and starting to scream like a Geo Metro reaching for 80 mph. "We make shit up" is the perfect motto for FNC. Jesus on a pogo stick! But these motherfuckers can talk and talk and whine and bitch and talk and howl non-stop spewing of lie after falsehood after bullshit of Obama hating/blaming vomit.

    After Faux News has chewed on the embassy assault story awhile you start to think that Obama was on that Benghazi street, waving a Salafist banner, exhorting his Muslim brothers to higher acts of anti-American fervor. And maybe ir was Obama hisself who offed that whitey ambassador cause Stevens was getting too threatening to Hillary and her pimp boss. Fair and balanced. It COULD happen.

    Mitt's an asshole who truly does not give a shit about regular Americans, or even being President. He just wants to win so bad he is starting to lose his mind. But, I worry about the supporting cast directly feeding the fear and hatred of the 20% of mouth breathing "REAL American" morans with too many guns and toes, and not enough brain cells or teeth.

    Mitt has no concept of the damage he can do by being stupid, and he does not care. This foreign policy and diplomacy stuff is serious shit sometimes, with real people getting really dead. But, why respond when you can react - badly. Tommy D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Someone I know stated that he (not Mitt) was a borderline Sociopath. Diagnosed and under treatment. What HE sees is that Mitt is a full-blown sociopath. He sees others as objects, or at best the cast members of his personal movie. We aren't real to him so it doesn't matter what he says to anyone.

      Delete
    2. You can't treat sociopaths. He is the creepiest candidate for President since Tricky Dick.

      Delete
    3. As someone who was there, I can say categorically that Romney is way worse than Nixon. For all the bad things about Nixon, there was also some good, including the EPA, Clean Air Act, and Clean Water Act. Nixon had a dark side to be sure but he did accomplish some good things as well. I don't think Romney would because he would be too busy staying square with the Tea Partiers and other fringe elements who got him elected. It is a scary prospect.

      Old Navy Comm O

      Delete
    4. I agree with Old Navy. All these categorical comparisons to past presidents, by people half my age who weren't even born, is amusing but dangerous. Dangerous? Yes, because our population fails pretty dramatically at history and geography, in general, and they wont fact check the info.

      Regarding Romney, I think his attitude towards the country, is the same as his Bain philosophy. Borrow alot of money to buy the company (Koch bought him the election and hence the country), Then heap the company/country with alot of debt, all the while ASSURING them to just "TRUST ME", Then pay yourself big profits (tax cuts for the wealthy - no guarantees that the middle class will keep their cuts), then take the money and get out quick! I think we should prepare ourselves to be seen as the next hostile takeover. And the ones who cant get jobs under his plan are just the losers that didnt want to work hard enough anyway right? He's a danger to the country.

      I also find it interesting that he goes to Israel for a secret fundraiser with all the Israeli hardliners and war hawks; rakes in a "seven figure amount in campaign contributions" (as stated by the campaign manager); then just weeks after he gets back, a Romney advisor is in Congress lobbying HARD for a war resolution against Iran. I'm tellin' ya - I think that man has sold our brave soldiers for campaign contributions.

      Delete
  44. I have been saying for months that Mitt doesn't actually want to HAVE the job of President -- he just wants to get elected. Kind of like he wanted to be governor of Massachusetts. Where does he think he can be leader next? Some planet where he is a god? Did I say that out loud?

    ReplyDelete
  45. To paraphrase Emily Dickenson, "the truth is so rare, it is a delight to hear it." Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Fantastic post, Jim. This has to be one of your best.

    You are spot-on about the choice we have in November--and yet, I still hear the whine from some that there isn't a difference between President Obama and Governor Romney. If the past couple of days convinced them that there is a vast difference between the two men that's equivalent to the distance between the Milky Way and the Andromeda galaxy, I don't know what else will convince them.

    ReplyDelete
  47. I can see it now... "I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message". Hey, it could happen. It would make an impression on voters

    ReplyDelete
  48. Good point about people who don't have the guts to take responsibility for their hate-speech. Here's my experience: 4 years ago, after Obama received the Democratic nomination, I put an Obama/Biden sign in my front yard. The next morning, the sign was defaced, and the message "F*** THE N****R" was spray-painted on the street in front of my house, 4 feet tall by 5 feet wide. At first, I was shocked (not outraged) that this would happen in California (not a Klan hotspot, to my knowledge). Then, after shepherding my 8 year old back into the house (imagine that conversation), it hit me: Okay, neighborhood bigot: If you want to put up a sign saying 'F*** The N-word' in your own yard, go ahead. That's your 1st Amendment right. BUT DON'T WRITE IT IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE. P.S. After I calmed down, I went to the hardware store, bought red, white and blue cans of spray-paint, and covered the graffiti with an American flag -- the faded remains of which still show today. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a really great response to bigotry. Well done.

      Delete
  49. Oh, and of course, the rest of your post was awesome, Jim. As always. Goes without saying.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Great read, thank you for this.

    ReplyDelete
  51. OK, so I think it's quite reasonable to be at least angry that an Ambassador was killed. Maybe even outraged? What if it were your Father that was killed?

    Yeah, and how about if you were employed over there at that embassy while it was getting raided and you were inhaling your last living breath as smoke overwhelmed your lungs (not exactly sure how they died, but that's the most pleasant way I suppose compared to the other rumors that I've heard circulating)? Would you be finding comfort in your last dying breath knowing, or at least hoping, that the leadership of your country was not responding in anger or rage but in "cold anger"? That they were planning to appeal to their "common ideals" as they watched you choke to death? REALLY? What common ideals do we share with the likes of these people?

    I don't agree with Romney. I also don't agree with you, either. We share absolutely NO COMMON IDEALS with Islamic Extremists.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a darn nice strawman you threw up there, Victoria, nicely done.

      Delete
    2. You're wrong-we have our own version of religious fundamental wackaloons in Robertson, Falwell (okay, he's dead but he is still a loon), Santorum, Akin, and our own Jerry Prevo. Do you seriously think they wouldn't use every tool the Muslim extremists use against hose they hate (gays, women, blacks, Hispanics, any one who wasn't white and male) if they could get away with it? They got Dr. Tiller murdered and the asshole was proud of it!

      Unfortunately, every society has its fringe elements and the USA has them as well. And if you haven't noticed, lately they're becoming a lot more comfortable operating in the open which makes me very, very leery. Just because they're American wackaloons doesn't mean they're not dangerous. Remember McVeigh. So don't give us that American superiority spiel, the only difference between ours and theirs is that most of ours only aren't willing to die for theirs beliefs.
      Sorry about the spelling, writing on an iPad.

      knittingbull

      Delete
    3. There's a conservative "christian" group that is trying to make it so that "Christian" children can bully gays in school if it's due to "deeply held beliefs". In other words they don't have to be any different than the people who attacked our embassies because they're "christian".

      Delete
    4. Point taken. I wonder how many Christians would be willing to lay down their own lives for their beliefs? I'll give the extremists that-they're faithful. I wish I had their level of dedication in my own Christian walk.

      I just stumbled on this blog recently after a friend shared on FB. I like it:)

      Delete
    5. Lucas M - I hope you dont mind but I copied you comment and posted it to facebook. I gave you credit by including your moniker "Lucas M". I felt it was interesting and profound. Thanks

      Delete
  52. "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." ~ Voltaire

    The man known as Sam Bacile didn't get those 4 Americans killed. No speech, however hostile, crass or denigrating, justifies the actions taken against those embassies. People are going to have to realize at some point that it is easier to deflect critics of Islam by not continuing to do exactly what critics of Islam are criticizing Islam for doing.

    And, in the case of the majority of the people present at those protests, they were rising to the bait.

    Prior to Tuesday, there were probably all of 45 people in the whole of the U.S. who even knew about the existence of the crap-tastic video in question. 40 of those had acting roles in the thing, and the majority of those people appear to have had no idea what the video was going to be about; all the offensive language was rather amateurishly dubbed-in after the fact.

    In all likelihood, there were a handful of extremists in Egypt & Libya who planned to carry out high-profile attacks on the 9/11 anniversary. For those extremists, that movie wasn't offensive, it was a dream come true. It was the absolute most perfect tool they could have ever devised to facilitate an attack that they had already determined to carry out. What they needed were a few hundred useful folks to rise to the bait & provide the cover they needed to complete their assaults.

    Was (Bacile's) movie an affront to Islam? Yeah. Was it an affront to the art of movie-making? Oh, most definitely. Was it cause to carry torches & pitchforks to the nearest American Embassy? Not by a mile. Seriously, stop doing that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unless Bacile has been out of touch for a very long time, the response to that video was entirely predictable. If I were a Smarty-Legal person, I'd call that "Inciting an international riot" or whatever the real term for that sort of thing is.

      Delete
  53. I'm a little bit curious as to the timing of Mitt's response. Wasn't it a bit early? One could suspect that his egregious lack of any sense of appropriateness was because it was off-the-cuff, but ...

    Didn't he read his speech *before* the casualties were in?

    Wouldn't that lend some suspicion that he had a hand in precipitating it? I'll gladly accept a simpler explanation, or a more logical one, but at this point I would honestly not be surprised if Mitt, or one of his rather pernicious outliers, bankrolled the rather amateurish movie that led to the event. It all seems so stage-managed from the Republican side.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'll go you one better. Romney goes to Israel. Has a "closed" Breakfast fundraiser with all the Israeli hardliners and war hawks - some from Israel, some from the US. He walks out with what the campaign chairman called a total - "seven figures" in donations. While he's there he proclaims that if Israel acted unilaterally to attack Israel we would approve of it an follow them in (look it up). Then just a few weeks after he gets back, a Romney advisor is in Congress pushing for a war resolution against Iran. The resolution would essentially commit us to unilateral action if Israel takes the plunge. WTF. And then just a few weeks later, we have this mess?

      Delete
    2. *CORRECTIONS* I was writing too fast. "I'll go you one better. Romney goes to Israel. Has a "closed" Breakfast fundraiser with all the Israeli hardliners and war hawks - some from Israel, some from the US. He walks out with what the campaign chairman described as a total - "seven figures" in donations. While he's there he proclaims that if Israel acted unilaterally to attack **Iran**, we would approve of it and follow them in (look it up). Then, just a few weeks after he gets back, a Romney advisor is in Congress pushing for a war resolution against Iran. The resolution would essentially commit us to unilateral action if Israel takes the plunge. WTF. And then just a few weeks later, we have this mess?

      Delete
  54. Dude,

    I will have gallon of whatever you are drinking!

    I shared on FB - please do not send the badgers after me. I only have a lacrosse stick, but I know how to use it.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Romney’s criticism of the “Obama Administration's first response” was a reference to the following statement issued by the American embassy in Cairo: “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."

    It wasn't until AFTER Romey said what he said the the president FINALLY came forward with the response you quote. This article is misleading.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Robin:
      Compare the Embassy statement you quoted with this official Romney Campaign statement:

      "Questions & Answers:
      Don’t you think it was appropriate for the embassy to condemn the controversial movie in question? Are you standing up for movies like this?

      – Governor Romney rejects the reported message of the movie. There is no room for religious hatred or intolerance.

      – But we will not apologize for our constitutional right to freedom of speech.

      – Storming U.S. missions and committing acts of violence is never acceptable, no matter the reason. Any response that does not immediately and decisively make that clear conveys weakness.

      – If pressed: Governor Romney repudiated this individual in 2010 when he attempted to mobilize a Quran-burning movement. He is firmly against any expression of religious hatred or intolerance."


      1. Gov. Romney attacked the Embassy's statement. His campaign later said the above, which essentially said the same thing as the Embassy. Neither the President nor the Embassy ever attacked free speech. Please explain to me how this justifies attacking the President in the middle of a crisis.

      2. The Associated Press examined Gov. Romney's statements. They concluded that he was misleading, so much so that their headline was "FACT CHECK: Romney misstates facts on attacks". See:
      http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_EMBASSY_ATTACKS_FACT_CHECK?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-09-12-19-31-31&utm_source=buffer&buffer_share=05d64

      Let me break it down for you in small phrases:
      "Misleading" is a kind way to say that he lied.
      About the President's response to a foreign policy crisis.
      During the crisis.
      Before he had all of the facts.
      When Americans who served their country died.
      Therefore, he is unfit to lead the country.

      Delete
    2. Uh huh. Try reading the essay again.

      Delete
    3. Wow, Robin. I wasn't aware that the U.S. Embassy possessed time travel machines so that they could respond to attacks on them *before* the attacks happened. How does that work, anyhow? Is there, like, some goofy guy with curly hair and a long multi-colored scarf who rushes into a traditional UK-style police box the moment he sees an attack happening, and the police box disappears with some "whoop whoop WHOOOP!" noises and reappears several hours before the attacks and the guy rushes out so that the Embassy can issue a response to the attack *before* they're attacked? That'd be really cool!

      Hint, Robin: This is the real world, not some bad UK children's sci-fi show. There ain't no time travel to the past here in this reality, unlike in the fantasy world apparently existing in your head. Just sayin'.

      Delete
  56. Damn son, let me buy you a beer!

    ReplyDelete
  57. Put this incident in context, and think about who Mitt was addressing.

    There are people in this country who applaud Romney for what he said.

    But . . . this might have been the shark-jumping moment (or, at least that is my sincere hope) for the make-up-whatever-shit you think will play in the deep south Rethug party.

    They have been spoon feeding stupid to their stupid base for so long, that is has become reflexive. Then, they doubled down on the stupid, as they always do.

    Could it be that some portion of the American electorate will finally see through their bull shit and realize that Rethugs don't give a hairy rat's ass about this Country, its Constitution, not its people?

    Or will it be close enough to steal - again.

    I have never been this frightened.

    JzB

    P.S. I linked and quoted you on my blog. Outstanding post.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Mitt Romney Serious Bad News For the US Foreign Affairs! Read all the details from Mitt Romney Bad News For the US Foreign Affairs!

    ReplyDelete
  59. Google Dr. Turi Mitt Romney Serious Bad News For the US Foreign Affairs! Read all the details from Mitt Romney Bad News For the US Foreign Affairs!

    ReplyDelete
  60. There was coverage of this (Romney to Receive Intelligence Briefings) various places.

    That made me wonder, what about the security clearance process? Particularly Romney's parents and Romney's overseas financial interests.

    For average people like "you people" it is easy to find information such as this: Foreign Influence and Security Clearances

    What do you think? I can't imagine him being turned down, but would this prompt some backlash from those who have been denied for less?

    ReplyDelete
  61. Yesterday, Fox Nation had the following headline:

    "Obama Calls Libyan President to Thank Him After US Ambassador is Murdered"

    Obama, of course, called President Magariaf to thank him for extending his condolences for the deaths, so technically the statement is true; but if there is an award for "most misleading headline of the decade" I'd put my money on this this being the winner.

    ReplyDelete
  62. It would seem Mitt learned diplomacy from Don Rickles

    ReplyDelete
  63. I was reminded of this old adage written by a former Anapolis graduate--

    "'Inciting to Riot' is no excuse for a riot. Nothing is."

    Poor Thorby. He received three days bread and water.

    ReplyDelete
  64. I'm always fired up and feel the need to fucking CUSS after I read one of your posts Jim...thanks for that. My kids mostly think I should speak up more...maybe if I read enough of your blog they'll finally get what they wish for...and probably live to regret it too, hehe. Bloody hell...there are so many days that I wish I could just surgically implant the intelligence and sincerity of your words DIRECTLY into some of the mush brains I meet. Can you invent the device that would allow that please...or find us all someone who can? Cuz I know I'm not the only one who would give my left...well, my left SOMETHING for such a tool. Thank you for your voice...that snarky, no punches pulled, laser focused voice. We need it.

    ReplyDelete
  65. I'm always fired up and feel the need to fucking CUSS after I read one of your posts Jim...thanks for that. My kids mostly think I should speak up more...maybe if I read enough of your blog they'll finally get what they wish for...and probably live to regret it too, hehe. Bloody hell...there are so many days that I wish I could just surgically implant the intelligence and sincerity of your words DIRECTLY into some of the mush brains I meet. Can you invent the device that would allow that please...or find us all someone who can? Cuz I know I'm not the only one who would give my left...well, my left SOMETHING for such a tool. Thank you for your voice...that snarky, no punches pulled, laser focused voice. We need it.

    ReplyDelete

Comments on this blog are moderated. Each will be reviewed before being allowed to post. This may take a while. I don't allow personal attacks, trolling, or obnoxious stupidity. If you post anonymously and hide behind an IP blocker, I'm a lot more likely to consider you a troll. Be sure to read the commenting rules before you start typing. Really.