The Left has gone nuts on Twitter and other social media because GOP nominee Mitt Romney spoke out about the attacks on U.S. embassies in Egypt and Libya.
Dem-friendly media have apparently forgotten 2008.
After our embassies were attacked on a day of remembrance, Romney expressed condolences for the victims’ families.
Romney then did something no other leader did—he mentioned the right to freedom of expression. Dem-allied media may be upset, but any human being who values freedom will applaud Romney’s stance. His remarks were timely and appropriate.
Media claim the attacks were because of a video by an obscure filmmaker in the U.S. Personally, I think that explanation is an affront to Americans. Two obviously organized attacks on two embassies on September 11?
The Left often forgets, and it’s useful to remind that Obama didn’t exactly shrink from statements when President George Bush was in office and Obama was campaigning. Obama went further than Romney, however.
In October, 2008, The US Report took note of an article in The Washington Examiner. The WE alleged:
Sen. Barack Obama “tried to convince Iraqi leaders in private conversations” that President George W. Bush should not be able to seal a deal to keep the U.S. military in Iraq. The Times says the UN mandate sanctioning troop presence expires Dec. 31. Already there’s a back and forth between Iraqi leaders and the Obama camp, a classic case of 'he said we said.'
Then there was this:
Iraqi leaders told the paper, “Mr. Obama urged Baghdad to delay an agreement with Mr. Bush until next year when a new president will be in office.”
Where was the outcry from media over that?
Media advocated for Obama in 2008 just as they do now—as a matter of fact, one major newspaper ran an article that should have outraged every American.
In October, 2008, The Boston Globe published an editorial by two Harvard professors who wanted Obama to take office early. The two professors laid out a sophistic plan for the transition to occur. They wanted to suspend the U.S. Constitution. Hello, Banana Republic!
Those profs assumed Obama would win because of polls, and we all know how polls were wielded as a political weapon in 2008. One leading Democrat blogger admitted he thought his own polls were fraudulent after Obama took office. Those polls were included in averages, by the way.
Media now defend our president who apologizes to the world. Obviously, you cannot trust the sector we once viewed as a government watchdog.
Dem-friendly media may opt to run interference for a president whose initial statements were an affront to freedom, whose foreign policy has unglued the Middle East and whose continued bungling of our economy has made us weaker, thus weakening freedom around the globe.
The only option those media have is to attack Romney.
Romney’s statement sounded presidential and he handled a hostile media in Jacksonville with dignity and grace. Unlike the president, Romney even took questions although he did not have to.
Most importantly, Romney defended freedom.
Fortunately, Americans are not as stupid as media believe. We know who looked like a leader in the aftermath of another attack on America.
If media functioned as watchdog, they’d be grilling the president who refused to take a single question.
Start with asking our president why, as the body of a dead American was being desecrated, the U.S. apologized for hurting feelings over religion.
Bill Maher, comic Sarah Bernhard and other entertainers have levied vile statements at evangelical Christians. No soothing words were forthcoming from the Left when that happened, but then, those Christians didn’t kill anyone for what was said. Bernhard's comments were so offensive the video was taken down to protect her reputation.
No one spoke out when the UN showed an anti-Israel film in 2011 either.
The silence says it all. Our enemy is now emboldened.
The last ambassador killed at his post was Adolph (Spike) Dubs, the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan in 1979. Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, was president.
(Commentary by Kay B. Day/Sept. 12, 2012)