Romney: The Foreign Affairs Poser

In jumping up to that mic and jumping ahead of the Benghazi incident, Mitt Romney was also revealed for what he is – an opportunist, desperate to be President.


The United States maintains several hundred embassies, consulates and diplomatic missions around the world, many of them located in extremely dangerous places and vulnerable to attack. On September 11th of this year the diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya was victimized by just such an attack. It started at 10:00pm local time in Benghazi (4:00pm in Washington D.C.) and left four Americans dead including the U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Oddly, one of the first statements made about the attacks came that same evening (despite a pledge not to campaign on the anniversary of 9/11) from Mitt Romney. Romney was, needless to say, critical of President Obama’s response to the developing crisis, though the President himself would make no statement regarding Benghazi until the following morning.

On the surface, this may not seem like such a big deal. Politicians running for office will leap at any opportunity to criticize or embarrass their opponents. But there is something extraordinarily cynical about Romney’s effort to discredit the President. Romney’s hasty “foreign policy” remarks, formulated before anyone really knew what had happened, came from a man with virtually no foreign policy experience at all, unless spending time in France as a Mormon Missionary as a way of avoiding service in the Vietnam War, a war championed by Romney, counts as foreign-service. In Romney world such things are possible. In fact, Romney’s own campaign cited those draft-exempted years (the only religious exemption recognized by the U.S. government) and the fact that he traveled a lot on business as exactly that – talk about a thin resume! And if that was not bad enough, we heard even more about Romney’s foreign policy strategy in his now infamous, secretly recorded “47%” remarks.

On that tape we hear Romney discussing President Carter’s failed Iranian hostage mission, and how much political hay was made of that. Romney reassures his donors that “if something of that nature presents itself, I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.” In other words, I will exploit any opportunity to politicize any overseas event that might cast a shadow over President Obama’s considerable foreign policy success. Lacking any credentials or meaningful experience myself, I will hop up to the nearest microphone, at the earliest and even uninformed moment and demonstrate to the world my foreign policy chops. And that is exactly what Mitt Romney did shortly before midnight on September 11th.

In typical American political and media-frenzied style Romney has actually gained traction on the issue. How is it though that this singular, small, albeit tragic event has become the primary focus of our debates and discussion when the much broader, relevant and positive resolution of the Libyan Revolution is virtually ignored? Wasn’t it genuine foreign policy skill that enabled President Obama to work with NATO and regional powers on the sensitive matter of deposing an Arab dictator? Wasn’t it his maturity, deftness and experience that enabled America to contribute to the fight for Libyan freedom in a measured fashion with relatively little cost to our Treasury and no cost in American lives? Doesn’t all of that matter much more than a nuanced evaluation of the crisis response, and the words that were or were not spoken regarding the sneak attack in Benghazi? Or is it just too irresistible for us to play the “gotcha” game, indulge the picking of minor but irritating political scabs, and forget almost entirely and meaningfully about all that is truly important about our politics and our politicians.

In coping with the real-world crisis in Libya, President Obama was revealed for what his is – a steady and competent leader capable of recognizing and defending American interests while also doing the right thing (unless the continued control of Libya by the dictator Muammar Gaddafi is considered the “right” thing, and some on the Right who care not a whit about other people’s freedom might feel exactly that way). In jumping up to that mic and jumping ahead of the Benghazi incident, Mitt Romney was also revealed for what he is – an opportunist, desperate to be President, or as Woody Allen might put it, a haircut definitely posing as a man.”

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

The MOG October 25, 2012 at 10:41 PM
Robert, your pointing out Barak HUSSEIN Obama served on a Senate Sub-Committee somehow equates with Foreign Affairs "Experiance" is laughable. Think about what you're saying, why don't you?LOL BTW, you do realize the Prez only served 2 yrs of a 6 yr Senate Term? And B4 Barak HUSSEIN Obama ran for Senate (Against who? Alan Keys!LOL- How'd Keyes end up getting the Republican Nomination again? LOL Let's not get started on Obama's Chicago Days!), he occuppied a State Senate Seat, where he hardly ever bothered to show up & vote! No, as I was saying, Mitt has comparable experience in "foreign affairs", or arguably more experiance, than Barak HUSSEIN Obama did, when he was a candidate. Mr. Romney has served as the Chief Executive Of A State. A LIBERAL State, I might add. Obama had ZERO Executive experiance when he ran. That is a fact. BTW, Leaning Left (LEANING???), I notice you're a student of Saul Alinski's "Rules For Radicals". As you completely ignore my entire comment, only to latch on to the last sentence,(which was left incomplete, due 2 a lack of characters remaining) from which you use for an ad hominen attack. You're suppose to address your opponents points, not ignore them. Very bad debate form, my friend. You also demonstrate ignorance, vis a vis The Senate's responcibilities re: Foreign Affairs. Foreign Policy is executed by The Executive, through The State Dept. The Senate Advises & Consents, it does NOT oversee.Treaties are another matter.U know zip about LDS Missions
Robert Defulgentiis October 26, 2012 at 05:59 PM
Mog - "U know zip about LDS Missions" I know who does know a lot about them though....that would be the French beachcomber Willard Romney. Another "I'm for war" see you later Republican Presidential candidate. Shameful.
Robert Defulgentiis October 26, 2012 at 06:08 PM
Chicken B. - "But, it is how they get over." It's how Republicans win national elections: they offer the candy of tax cuts for all, retain their 30% base no matter what and pander to the most unhinged single-issue voters they can: guns, gays, abortion, God - voila! Of course that combination can never properly govern given its disparate agendas, and that too suits the Republican model. Government is bad. Run it bad. Who cares. Give me more tax cuts while I "create jobs."
KingSlav October 27, 2012 at 06:50 PM
Just vote Romney. And YES on 32.
Cerro Gordo October 29, 2012 at 04:54 PM
Robert, please refrain from "ad hominen" attacks and instead focus on important issues like the President's middle name being "HUSSEIN" (!!!)


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »