Home / Culture and Society / Romney’s Lack of Judgment and Hypocrisy

Romney’s Lack of Judgment and Hypocrisy

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Mitt Romney’s behavior in the last 24 hours has been repulsive. Faced with an attack from a crowd of angry protestors in Cairo over the release of an anti-Muhammad film in the United States, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo released the following statement in an attempt to appease the mob and prevent violence:

“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.”

Romney apparently sensing a political opening attacked the Obama administration over the statement claiming it was “sympathizing with those who waged the attack”. Back on the offensive the next morning, Romney reiterated his criticism of the administration’s handling of the attack and stated, “It’s never too early for the United States government to condemn attacks on Americans and to defend our values.”

That Mitt Romney would play politics while an attack on an American Embassy was in progress is more than disgusting; it is indicative of his unfitness to hold the office of the presidency. It shows impulsiveness and a readiness to shoot first and ask questions later that we can ill afford in a president.

But, Romney’s actions frankly did not surprise this commentator. Those advising him on his national security team are basically retreads from the George W. Bush years, renowned neoconservatives and Zionists. All are itching to reacquire the reins of power in order to involve America in more foreign military adventures, namely Syria and Iran. So, when Romney went on the offensive, it became clear that the same gang that gave us the “axis of evil”, and the “you are either for us or against us” campaigns and over a decade of continuous war was at it again. Apparently they are willing to stoop to any depth in an effort to score political points to win this election so as to recommence their murderous rampage specifically through the Islamic World.

There is no question that Governor Romney has surrounded himself with dangerous advisers on national security, but through his recent actions he has proven himself to be a hypocrite as well.

On Wednesday morning he went to great lengths to claim that the Obama administration had failed to defend our values with the Embassy’s statement. Specifically, he accused them of “effectively apologizing for the right of free speech”.

This is outrageous coming from a man whose campaign just conducted a party gathering in Tampa described by one political commentator as a “Brownshirt Convention”. At the Republican National Convention, brown-shirted guards and police cordoned off a large section of downtown Tampa to keep protestors out of sight. Anything not specifically approved by the Romney people, including signs of rival factions within the party, were confiscated on the streets inside the cordoned off area and on the floor of the RNC. Lastly, leaving nothing to chance, all speakers were censored by the Romney campaign and those that refused were denied a platform to speak. This all makes Romney’s criticism that the administration did not defend the right to free speech hypocritical given his personal squashing of the same in Tampa.

At the end of the day, Governor Romney’s political attack on the Obama administration while Americans were in harm’s way shows a lack of judgment on his part. His criticism of the administration that it did not defend the right of Americans to freedom of speech was pure hypocrisy in light of his campaign’s abuses at the RNC. It is these traits that make him unfit to be our president.

Powered by

About Kenn Jacobine

  • Clav

    I usually don’t even read your posts…

    Not a problem, Igor. You have nothing worthwhile to contribute anyway.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Igor –

    I strongly suspect that Clavos is speaking what he really believes to be the truth, and it’s probably based on the corruption he saw as an airline executive – the backroom deals, the quid-pro-quos, and so forth from all parts of the political spectrum. His combat experience may also have colored what he has learned, but that’s a guess on my part and nothing more.

    Problem is, it seems to me that he’s largely given up on humanity. I suspect that if you were to meet him, you’d find him one quite forthright, personable, and trustworthy. But I just wish he’d see the problem that his cynicism causes for his arguments on here by not restricting it to a level of moderation.

  • Igor

    Romney is skating on thin ice when he stirs up the Libyan mess. He hurts himself, mostly.

    Daniel Webster

    Daniel Webster (1782-1852), while encouraging men to enlist in 1814 (during the War of 1812), said it first:

    “Even our party divisions, acrimonious as they are, cease at the water’s edge. They are lost in attachment to the national character, on the element where that character is made respectable. In protecting naval interests by naval means, you will arm yourselves with the whole power of national sentiment, and may command the whole abundance of the national resources.”

    Romney and Ryan have disgraced themselves. And I think that most Americans will agree at the polls in November. This may well sink their ship.

  • Igor

    IMO, Clav, you make such a poor case for The Right that I usually don’t even read your posts. They are always just cheap shots at the left, never good evidence and well-argued points. Dreary. Self-poisoned with irony.

  • Clav

    to cover his enthusiasm for the right.

    I cover my “enthusiasm for the right” in politics?? You’re kidding. Is there anyone, anyone at all on this site who has any doubt on which side of the fence I stand? Why would I “cover?” I’m proselytizing here Igor; promoting the right.

    What rock have you been living under?

    My cynicism is directed at the political class and the government, plus the ideas and tenets of the left Igor, not the right. How can you be so utterly clueless?

  • Igor

    IMO Romney made a bald-faced attempt to gain elective advantage by manipulating foreign Affairs. That’s disloyal.

  • Igor

    Can someone explain to me what Clint Eastwoods point was?

  • Igor

    @21-Glenn is right. Clav just uses a pretense of cynicism to cover his enthusiasm for the right.

  • Agreeing with, Clav, here. Not gonna argue though. You see it or you don’t.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Clav –

    Since the end of the Vietnam war, please name even ONE scandal in the Democratic party that compares with Iran-Contra, much less the Iraq war and the enthusiastic approval of torture (which George Washington refused to allow even in the darkest days of Valley Forge when the very existence of the nation was in doubt).

    You can’t.

    What I speak of, Clavos, are matters of degree. You are never ever going to find one perfect person or one perfect group of people…but what you’re missing is that the degree of their faults is what makes all the difference. Everyone has feet of clay, Clav – but just as with real feet, there’s a whole wide range of the size of those feet of clay.

    The same thing goes with groups of people, whether political, religious, fraternal, or business. Are you going to claim that every business is just as bad as every other business? I don’t think so! But every business is comprised of people, just as are political parties.

    Cynicism is a good thing to have, but as with all other things, it is good in moderation only. I’m not asking you to become a Pollyanna – I’m simply reminding you that blanket judgments are fallacious as a rule, that you’re forgetting that no judgment concerning the actions of a person or a group can be valid if said judgment does not fist take into consideration the degree of the good or the ill of those actions.

    Iran-Contra, the Iraq war, torture. Matters of degree, Clav.

  • Clav

    our assumption that all parties are just as bad as all other parties is just that – an assumption

    No. Over the years, I’ve seen it — repeatedly.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Clav –

    Your assumption that all parties are just as bad as all other parties is just that – an assumption. What you should do is examine the actions and words of the parties objectively, and then make your judgments.

  • Libertarian distaste for war and jingoistic bluster is one of those things that is to their credit. It is also why they are censured and marginalized in the Republican Party.

    I think that Eastwood’s “performance” could have been quite successful in another venue. However, the tone, manner and conflicting policy of his act in the RNC was bizarrely incongruous in such a tightly scripted event. It was like all the musicians suddenly using kazoos for the 3rd movement of a Mozart symphony. No matter how well they play those kazoos, its gonna sound weird.

  • If you want someone who honestly doesn’t know what he’s talking about, then Clint’s routine certainly filled the bill. He doesn’t think it’s “a good idea for attorneys to be president” yet supports Mitt, holder of a JD from Harvard. He also thinks it’s time for a businessman, demonstrating poor short-term memory as a businessman was in charge from 01-09 when the economy went south.

  • Clav


    You can call it a “false equivalency” all you want, but I disagree with your opinion.

  • Clav

    Seems to me it was just a waste of time.

    Apparently you weren’t listening; which doesn’t surprise me.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Clav –

    Your criterion is honesty? Then stop with the false equivalency that all parties and politicians are just as bad, just as dishonest as all the others. Reject the ones that are most dishonest, and remember that if you require total honesty all the time, it will be very hard to find anyone you could ever trust. Instead of cutting off someone because of this or that dishonesty, look first to see why they were (in your book) dishonest.

    Remember – too much cynicism is every bit as bad (and perhaps worse) than too little cynicism. Moderation in all things, friend.

  • Igor

    “Honesty”? How does that figure? Seems to me Clints address was just a wandering diatribe, not very pointed or astute.

    Seems to me it was just a waste of time.

  • Clav

    Not a new, definition EB. Mine. My criterion is honesty. Clint was honest; neither of the liars running for president ever is.

  • “He did better than the pols at either convention…”

    Must be a new definition of “better” you are using, especially considering the studio of his upcoming movie created a new ad campaign downplaying Clint’s role just after his convention “performance”.

  • Clav

    He doesn’t seem to be doing well on his own.

    He did better than the pols at either convention…

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Which is not exactly in line with “stay there till we say the job’s done” Republican dogma, is it?

  • Kenn Jacobine

    He called for bringing the troops home!

  • Igor

    Perhaps someone should?

    He doesn’t seem to be doing well on his own.

  • Kenn Jacobine

    Unlike the other lackeys, no one tells Clint Eastwood what to say.

  • pablo

    Also don’t forget the TSA frisking people at that convention as well as the Democratic one. Transportation? I dont fucking think so.

  • Flutie

    Nice article. The more I hear Romney speak the less like him. Not sure why anyone would vote for him.

    One point though. You write “Lastly, leaving nothing to chance, all speakers were censored by the Romney campaign and those that refused were denied a platform to speak.”

    Anyone who saw Clint and the campaign’s reaction knows all speakers weren’t censored.

  • Excellent article Kenn. Good points, well stated.

  • Zingzing

    Romney: “”This president’s done something I find hard to understand. Ever since FDR, we’ve had capacity to be engaged in two conflicts at once, he’s saying, ‘No, we’re going to cut that back to one conflict.'”

    Jesus h. Christ.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    *leans back and raises his eyebrows in respect*

    Kenn, you and I go at it hammer-and-tongs when it comes to economics and certain facets of history, and I’m not about to pretend that your article is meant to reflect well upon Obama in any way, but I think that you and I do share some common ground when it comes to expected conduct between leaders of nations.