Mitt Romney's latest laughable attempt to "prove" he would have ordered the bin Laden raid is now based on comparing himself, supposedly as tougher, to former naval officer and President Jimmy Carter.
President Carter served as a submarine officer in the United States Navy for seven years, eventually serving under Admiral Hyman Rickover who pioneered our nuclear submarine program.
By complete and utter contrast, when duty called Mitt Romney, when his fellow citizens were being drafted and dying in the fields of Southeast Asia, when similarly well-off contemporaries like John Kerry were volunteering, Mitt first did a Mormon mission in France and, when he returned, did not volunteer.
Romney seems to have convinced himself that he has demonstrated that he is tougher or has more capacity to make military judgments than Jimmy Carter.
If it were not dangerously delusional, it would be laughable.
Romney seems to believe that the comparison with President Carter, helps his case that he has the experience and/or independence of thought and/or cajones to make the decision, against most of the advice he would have received, to find, capture and kill Osama bin Laden?
It doesn't. It shows that Romney is even weaker, even more sniveling, even less prepared, even a worse judge of character than he has already displayed.
We know that President Carter's order to proceed with rescuing the hostages was strongly opposed in his own administration because his Secretary of State, Cyrus Vance, resigned because of it. (Yes, America, there was a time when people resigned over matters of principle).
It happened that President Carter's mission failed, and, because of it, many months later, he lost his bid for re-election to Ronald Reagan. President Carter was blamed for the failed mission. That is what happens to leaders when they make difficult decisions.
It would be interesting to learn the factual or psychological basis, from his personal history, that would have made it even remotely probable that Mitt Romney would have decided to proceed against the advice of his generals. Even the "dispel-the-wimp" theory does not work because the risk of failure was more than Mitt could have borne.
Others have looked closely at Romney's conflicting statements about what he thought about finding Osama bin Laden.
The series of articles linked here, instead, explore Romney's background, experience, and life decisions to understand his expertise and psychological capacity to make a huge decision with a high chance of failure against the advice of the generals in an area he knows nothing about.
As President Roosevelt used to say, "the tears, the crocodile tears..."
Follow Paul Abrams on Twitter: www.twitter.com/pabrams2001
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
Romney feels free to be arrogant about a decision he most certainly wouldn't have taken. He's said, on the record, 'I'd rely on the generals' and 'I don't need to know about foriegn policy, as president I'd have a huge State Department to advise me.' President Obama's chiefs of staff and State Deparment officials counseled AGAINST going into Pakistan. End of disgussion, Mitt. End of case. How dare you make fun of President Carter?
I wonder how many times Willard went ahead with a hand having higher losing odds, in which case he would have ended up far worse then he started from...
The Panama Canal Treaty--- Interestingly, John Wayne helped Carter pass the Treaty, and John Wayne criticized Ronald Reagan's stance!
Camp David Accords---the first Israeli peace treaty in modern times.
Hostage Rescue Mission---the daring, tragic attempt to rescue our citizens in 1980.
Human Rights---Carter's human rights stance inspired Lech Walesa to create Solidarity in 1980.
Promoting Democracy---Carter has courageously gone out on a limb to help democratize dozens of countries.
These are all profiles in courage. They are principled decisions that can't be erased like an Etch-a-Sketch.
Gas lines around the block for all Americans ( try getting up at 4 am tomorrow just to get in line to get gas and then go to work=Great Democratic President
Horrible economic state..was Destroyed by Reagan with huge Dem support
Gas lines were bad for a few months (not 4 years!). The reason we had long gas lines in the Spring/Summer of '79 was because OPEC was trying to punish Carter for the Camp David Accords (which were signed in Spring, '79).
The original gas lines occured in 1973-74, under Richard Nixon. OPEC became an international force, partly because Nixon was involved in the Watergate debacle.
We already have heard, ad nauseum, the bad parts of the Carter presidency. I am pointing out the good points, to give some balance to our 39th president.
Who, other than a small group of financiers and campaign hangers-on, ever asked Romney to run?
And that was all the "experience" the Democrats needed..they adored him how about you was that enough experience for you?
True, he didn't serve in combat, but he was a heck of a lot closer to being put into combat than Romney, or George W. (whose father was very much in combat), or Dick Cheney, or Rush Limbaugh or a lot of people who demanded we go to war in Iraq, some of whom are now demanding we go to war in Iran, and want us to conveniently forget that Bush let bin Laden get away and said, "I truly am not that concerned about him" in March 2002, just 6 months after 9/11.
The point is, Jimmy Carter -- like Al Gore and John Kerry -- chose to man up when he didn't have to. Romney chose otherwise. Whether Romney's method of avoiding combat was honorable (as a religious mission, or foreign teaching or medical work, or the Peace Corps, could be) is incidental. What is relevant is that Romney doesn't know what the hell he's talking about -- concerning Obama OR Carter.
http://www.comunitee.com/comunitee/showComuniteeBarArticle/4227009/19181/4
Fanned and faved.
#3.
Reagon was able to get the hostages released after he paid off the Iranian terrorists with weapons. Which was prearranged with the Iranian terrorists during the Presidential campaign of 1980. It was and still is illegal to do so.
GWB started the war in Afghanistan...with a good possibility of ridding the world of Bin Laden and Al Quida...but dropped the ball to go after Saddam Hussein.
Just like his predecessor, GWB, Romney would be less likely to go after Bin Laden...he'd be more interested in bombing Iran.
Having never had a principled stance in his 6 years running for president - to suddenly say that he could make a tough call like this is laughable.
This decision takes guts, princile, determination and the ability for you to take advice and then make a decision YOURSELF. Mitt is incapable of this and totally not up to the job as Commander in Chief. He is not capable of the responsibility and is not fit for office.
Their actual records are meaningless at this point and have been reduced to a soundbite. Welcome to the dumbing down of America