Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Mitt Romney's fallout on Libyan terrorist attack continues

The fallout from Mitt Romney's disastrous political attack against the Obama administration over the events happening in Libya just continues on.

First up, is a small error on the part of the Romney campaign staff.  According to Americablog, the Romney campaign issued a press release on Mitt Romney's statement regarding the attacks on the U.S. embassy in Cairo, Egypt and U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.  Within the statement, the word "embassy" was used three times--especially with the phrase "the attack on our embassy at Benghazi, Libya."  The capitol of Libya is actually Tripoli, where the U.S. embassy is located.  The terrorist attacks took place at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.  According to John Aravosis, "Any first year international relations student knows that our diplomatic offices in the capital are "embassies," and our offices in cities that are not the capital are "consulates."  Mitt Romney never caught the error.  He just simply read through the statement:

I went back into my previous post, and I also made the mistake as well.   It is a dumb mistake that possibly any ordinary American can make.  However, I am a small blogger, and I am not running for the Oval Office--Mitt Romney is running.  I can probably understand Mitt Romney not knowing the difference, or even caring about the difference, and just reading through the script.  But I would expect that someone on the Romney campaign staff would know the difference, and make sure that the correction was made.  Did any Romney campaign staffer with foreign policy experience, or credentials, even proofread the statement?  Is there even anyone on the Romney campaign that even has foreign policy knowledge or experience?  Or do the top Romney foreign policy advisers feel it is demeaning for them to proofread  press releases in the wake of an American foreign policy crisis?   Because if you think about it, this is a crisis that a president will be confronted with, and the Romney campaign is showing just how screwed up they are in dealing with this crisis.  You can also bet that the Obama campaign is not making such a juvenile mistake as we're seeing with Mitt Romney.  So this dumb mistake really shows an incredible level of incompetence that Mitt Romney has in running his own presidential campaign.  Do we really want this level of incompetence in the White House?

However, there is an even worst fallout from the Romney campaign that has taken place in the wake of this crisis.  Throughout his press conference, Mitt Romney had the unfortunate habit of smirking.  Daily Kos' Jed Lewison caught these smirks here, here, and here, while Americablog's John Aravosis catalogs 15 different images of Mitt Romney's smirks.  Here are a couple of photos for your viewing pleasure:

Finally, here is a photo of Mitt Romney walking away from the podium, after his press conference, with another smirk.  This photo was taken by Associated Press photographer Charles Dharapak:

I can not say if Mitt Romney's smirks are an emotional response to this crisis, or are the smirks an unconscious tick that Romney has when speaking before a group?  Is Mitt Romney happy that this crisis presented him with an opportunity to crassly attack President Obama as sympathizing with the terrorists?  Or is this just his speaking style?  In one sense, it does not matter--A smirking photo is worth more than a thousand-word political spin.  American moderates and independents will be watching the news of this crisis on TV at 6pm.  They are going to see both President Obama and Mitt Romney, making their statements on the attacks.  They are going to see the smirk.  Perhaps in the back of their mind, these moderates and independents may wonder if Mitt Romney cares that four Americans died in the wake of these attacks.  Will they see Romney as a callous, uncaring individual who has no morals, other than his crass, political desire to win the presidency and gain political power?  Again, is this the kind of individual you want in the Oval Office--especially when he get the 3am wake-up call?

No comments: