by Jeff Swanson
Google the search string: White House Response to Embassy Attacks. Do it. Don’t be afraid. Did you find the White House response to the Embassy attacks?
I didn’t think so.
So then, can we actually get the White House response? Here it is. Oops, sorry about the broken link, looks like the White House via the embassy doesn’t want you to read it. To be quite honest, it’s rather hard to find the original White House response to the attacks. For the record, here it is (we hope):
“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.”
A video on You Tube is published and thereby, it’s claimed, to have offended the soon to be embassy attackers on September 11th. On September 11th.
While American soil oversees is breached, desecrated, people killed and the sovereignty represented by our flag is pulled down to be replaced with a protest banner, our White House thinks the issue is with the video….not the killing of U.S. citizens.
Enter Mitt Romney. Mitt criticized the president. We all know this is a no no. I’m waiting for when this episode gets characterized as racially motivated…but that’s another story.
Mitt said, ‘Dude’s, that’s all ya got? President Obama, aren’t you gonna, like, talk about the people who died or something?’
Oh the blasphemy. Mr. Romney, when will you learn to never criticize the Great One, and President Obama too.
If you were to follow that Google search string, you’d notice that’s where the real blasphemy happened. Instead of the total evisceration by the press of a week kneed Presidential response, it’s all about Mitt gettin’ political. Not that letting a crisis going to waste is political.
Rachel Maddow said that Mr’s Romney was the attacker. National Journal’s Sophie Quinton said that Mitt was no Ronald Reagan on Iran…and when did progressives like Reagan? Perhaps Sophie, in recalling that Reagan stood with Carter, didn’t realize that Carter said:
“I’m determined that the United States will remain the strongest of all nations, but our power will never be used to initiate a threat to the security of any nation or to the rights of any human being. We seek to be and to remain secure—a nation at peace in a stable world. But to be secure we must face the world as it is.”
I guess it’s the convenience of selectivity. Carter, for as much as we criticize him, he did take a stand and even tried a military option. I’m not sure we will see this from Obama.
Yet, when America gets attacked, don’t blame the guy that did nothing about it (Obama), blame the guy pointing out the obvious (Romney). To the main stream media, this is a heresy that must not stand.
…and thus why you see nothing about the flaccid Obama team response and only histrionics about the Romney response.
Fortunately, Romney doubled down on his bet.