Romney's Press Secretary Cusses Out Media after Romney Photo Op in Poland

Another country, another bad headline for Romney on his foreign trip this time in Poland.

Would bet many press secretaries over the years would have loved to make similar comments to the media but they had the class not to act like jerk.  Romney has been dissing the American press on this foreign trip starting with his ignoring the American press when he was at a press conference with Prime Minister Cameron.  Instead only the British press were recognized which goes against protocol but Romney seems to make it up as he goes as we have been witnessing.

Talk about zero class -- read this transcript with remarks from his press secretary:

When members of the press tried to ask Romney about some of the mishaps on his trip, his traveling press secretary Rick Gorka verbally dressed down reporters. 

Here's a transcript of the questions and Gorka's response: 

CNN: "Governor Romney are you concerned about some of the mishaps of your trip? 

NYT: "Governor Romney do you have a statement for the Palestinians?

Washington Post: "What about your gaffes? 

NYT: "Governor Romney do you feel that your gaffes have overshadowed your foreign trip?" 

CNN: "Governor Romney just a few questions sir, you haven't taken but three questions on this trip from the press! 

Gorka: "Show some respect" 

NYT: "We haven't had another chance to ask a question..." 

Gorka: "Kiss my ass. This is a Holy site for the Polish people. Show some respect." 

Moments later, Gorka told Jonathan Martin, a reporter for Politico, to "shove it." About a half-hour later, the aide called reporters to apologize. 

Gorka's comments to the media came just hours before Romney's foreign policy speech in Warsaw. 

Source:  CNN

Juvenile behavior seems to be the norm with this Romney campaign not to mention not living in reality.  When they tried to keep all media out of the fundraiser in Israel, they finally relented but the bad taste was left with the media.  Best reason I can think of for excluding all press was Romney didn't want the media to see him pandering to his billionaire campaign bank roller Adelson whose dollars from his gambling empire in McCau are helping fund the Romney campaign.

It looks like when Adelson says jump, Romney says "how high" because nothing else makes sense about Romney's comments in Israel that has the Palestinians very disgusted not to mention the fact that he declared Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.  That's okay in Romneyland as it pandered to Adelson while playing to the conservative pundits and the far right who refuse to acknowledge that Jerusalem is not recognized as the capital of Israel by 99% of countries because it is the home to many religions.

Romney has spent a lot of time walking back comments he made on this trip starting  London dissing the British handling of the Olympics, couldn't remember the opposition leader's name (where was his staff to remind), and the Anglo Saxon comment against Obama for starters.  We must not forget his dissing his wife and her horse at the Olympics which was another one of those "I know nothing" moments which he has a lot of in this campaign as he hides his taxes prior to 2010 and even then doesn't release all of 2010.

His pandering to the far right is leaving a lot of Republicans shaking their heads and asking why because he is fast losing support of the more common sense Republicans who want someone with a backbone to be President.  Speaking of backbone, Michael Tomasky, at The Daily Beast has an excellent article about Mitt's Missing Backbone:

Romney’s defenders say his combative remarks in Israel prove he’s no wimp. What they really show is the same cowardly deference to the right that has inspired countless flip-flops. 

What’s in a word? I guess a lot. All of us here at NewsBeast knew the word “wimp” would carry a charge and get people to pay attention. So to the extent that I have people’s attention, what I really would like them to focus on is the question of what makes this guy tick, and more specifically on his total lack of political backbone, because that seems to me a very serious potential shortcoming in someone who’s aiming to be president of the United States, and one that ought to be discussed more than we’re discussing it. 

What’s in a word? I guess a lot. All of us here at NewsBeast knew the word “wimp” would carry a charge and get people to pay attention. So to the extent that I have people’s attention, what I really would like them to focus on is the question of what makes this guy tick, and more specifically on his total lack of political backbone, because that seems to me a very serious potential shortcoming in someone who’s aiming to be president of the United States, and one that ought to be discussed more than we’re discussing it.

All of Romney’s ideological somersaults can be similarly described. Good policy has nothing to do with any of them. Passing muster with the right is the only thing. And no, everyone doesn’t do this. Soledad O’Brien said to me on CNN Monday morning: come on, if we had a dime for every time a politician flip-flopped, we could retire. Put that way, true enough. But actually, if you look at really successful politicians, they are surprisingly constant in their views, especially the views that truly define their character and identity.

It isn’t fine that Romney has changed his view on every issue. It’s pathetic. It suggests that he lives in fear of America’s right wing. That’s the real wimp factor.  

Read more from Tomasky's article at The Daily Beast

Watching Tomasky last night on one of the shows was struck at how articulate he was at getting his points across and had his facts lined up.  No one was going to put words in his mouth.  I have yet to run across anything he has said not backed up with the facts but yet he is trashed in conservative circles because he doesn't play their game of pandering to Romney.  He tells it like it is which is refreshing.  BTW, I have seen him go after Obama as well as Romney.  He is a true journalist in my book who isn't afraid to make people mad with his comments which are based on fact not spin.

The headline with "Wimp" IMHO was perfect to bring in readers but also describes Romney exactly as he panders to donors like Adelson in Israel and the far right wing who is out of control today with their 'my way or no way' demands.  Only thing Romney stands up on is his taxes so the question from most thinking people is "What is he hiding?"  With every passing day you have to wonder if the tax experts are correct that he took the amnesty offered by the Federal Government for Swiss Bank Accounts.  That would make more sense then the Romney statement if he overpaid his taxes he couldn't be President.  For some reason when the media brings up taxes, Romney says some pretty dumb things -- that was one of the dumbest.

If Obama made gaffes like Romney has made overseas which Romney keeps trying to walk back, the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Fox News, Republicans in the House and Senate, and establishment types would be all over the air trashing Obama for not being ready for prime time to be President.  When it comes to Romney, those same people, for the most part, report he has had a great trip and if there have been any hiccups, it is the media's fault.  The exception is when the media talks to Republican consultants who want to remain anonymous who will say Romney has had a horrible trip with all the gaffes and misstatements.

Anyone with a brain knows this visit has been nothing but a fundraising junket for Romney along with photo ops but Romney has turned the trip into a foreign policy nightmare.  Someone needs to tell Romney he is not the President and the Cold War has been over for years.  He wants to give the Defense Department over $2 trillion more dollars to counter the geopolitical threat of the Russians, Iran, and China. Sitting here shaking my head at how ludicrous that would be.

No wonder the head of Lockheed was with Cheney lobbying in the Congress.  He smells more dollars coming their way if Romney wins.  That is another reason not to vote for Romney -- defense needs to take some cuts maybe not as drastic as sequestering but there is plenty to cut if members of Congress would quit pandering to defense contractors for donations and in exchange for funding programs they want.

Romney with his advisers are a disaster waiting to happen every day.  When Romney goes off the script from reading from his teleprompter he gets in even bigger trouble with his comments.  Speaking of teleprompters, Obama isn't the only politician to use them as Romney and most others use them as well.  Imagine that with all the stories coming out of the conservative media focusing on the Obama teleprompter like he was the only one who used a teleprompter.

What are we learning from this election so far?  Romney on foreign soil could not control his mouth along with his aides making foreign policy situations worse and leaving the adults to clean up his mess.  Didn't take the Israeli's long before leadership was praising Obama for what he has done for the security of Israel after Romney's remarks against Obama.  This trip gave us a glimpse he would be the pander in chief in the White House to what people like the billionaire Adelson tell him.  Looks like Bibi convinced Romney not to meet with the opposition leader in Israel when the meeting was already set.  He cancelled at the last minute leaving people to wonder if  Netanyahu is now telling Romney what to do.

Is that someone you want as President who panders almost every day?  Not this Republican -- would suggest that people with blinders still on, take them off and discover that Romney would be the worst person to be President.  The conservative media is feeding all of us a bunch of lies in order to get us to hate Obama so we will vote for Romney.  That is no way to run an election and the big donors behind Romney who are funding this disaster should be ashamed but you have to have a conscience to be ashamed and obvious from the last few months that a person with a conscience doesn't exist in Romneyland as they would quit.

White House Obliterated at Briefing; 'Doesn't There Come a Point Where You Have to Make a Decision?'

Not only is the President over his head with what is happening in Libya and other places around the world but so is his new press secretary Jay Carney who seems to also be extremely arrogant.

The White House press corps is showing even more signs of disgust with the new press secretary and this Administration for giving no answers. This time it is Chip Reid of CBS who got fed up with no answers to questions and Carney's spin. Personally thought that Carney didn't have the experience to be press secretary but he is worse than I thought as he tries to spin. He sure forgets the days when he was a reporter.  Chip Reid of CBS and Jake Tapper of ABC have been two of the more outspoken members of the White House Press Corps for months but others are starting to join them with the tough questions but Carney gives no real answers only spin to most reporters.

This exchange is mind boggling and at the end of the day Carney never got it. Probably the type of press secretary that Obama wanted. Are there any adults in this Administration who will tell it like it is?

Why should the media even ask a question if they are going to get spin like this. Obvious to most Americans that Obama is not a leader and prefers to follow the United Nations so he doesn't have to make a decision. Media covered up the fact that Obama had no experience of anything but community organizing and spending other people's grant money. They continued to prop him up during the election and now the whole world is seeing the mistake the voters made in 2008. This is a dangerous world and we have a President who cannot make a decision and a press secretary that talks and says nothing.

March 15, 2011

White House Obliterated at Briefing; 'Doesn't There Come a Point Where You Have to Make a Decision?'

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney barely survived the briefing today. CBS' Chip Reid was clearly fed up watching the administration do nothing about Libyan atrocities while claiming they were responding with "unprecedented" speed. Today the clock ran out on the White House and their dithering was exposed.

Q On no-fly zone, what exactly is the U.S. -- the administration's position before the Security Council?

MR. CARNEY: Our position, Chip, remains that we are evaluating a number of options, military options, including --

Q But a decision has to be made now.

MR. CARNEY: -- including a no-fly zone. We feel that it is important that any action like that that might be taken should be done in concert with our international partners. Through the United Nations would be our preferable vehicle for that, and therefore we would look to the U.N. as a forum for evaluating that option. I think I mentioned yesterday that today is the deadline for the no-fly zone option to -- preparations or plans to be submitted in Brussels at NATO. And I believe the NAC will review those tomorrow. So this process is moving forward.

But our position is that action like that should be considered and taken if decided upon in coordination with our international partners, because it's very important in the way that we respond to a situation like we see in Libya, that it be international and not unilateral; that it include the support and participation, for example, of the Arab League and other organizations and countries in the region.

And that is our sort of focus as we proceed with these conversations.

Q Is the President satisfied to follow, not lead, on deciding whether to do it?

MR. CARNEY: I take issue with the characterization. We think it is precisely because the President believes that the best outcome in a situation like we see in Libya, as we have seen in different forms in other countries in the region, that the best outcome will come when the action taken by countries -- third-party countries outside of the country where the unrest is happening -- be done in consensus with international partners, precisely so that it is not viewed by those who oppose positive democratic reform as the dictate of the West or the United States.

Q But wouldn't it be fair to say -- accurate to say the United States is still sitting on the fence on this? Isn't it time to make a decision, yes or no?

MR. CARNEY: Well, Chip, you tell me if as an American citizen would you want your President not to consider all the implications and ramifications of taking military action.

Q Doesn't there come a point to make a -- where you have to make a decision?

MR. CARNEY: And I would go back to what I said to Jill, that we have acted with great haste, and we have coordinated international -- led and coordinated an international response, the likes of which the world has never seen in such a short period of time. And we have -- we continue to consult with our international partners. We meet -- we have met with, as the Secretary of State did, with the Libyan opposition discussing new ways we can put pressure on Qaddafi.

And when it comes to considering military options, this President will always be mindful of what the mission, should it be engaged, what it entails, the risks that it poses to our men and women in uniform, and its likelihood of having the kind of impact that we set out for it to have. And that is his responsibility as Commander-in-Chief.

And I would suggest to you that that is what leadership is all about.

Source: FoxNews.com

Donald Trump for President? Why Not?

Decided to take a look at this poll that just came out on an Obama/Trump match-up and am still chuckling. Maybe Trump can fire Obama like he has the interns on his reality show who don't meet the standards required for the position. If Obama had to meet the standards to be President before announcing, he never would have been able to run with his very weak resume. He wouldn't have made it past week one as an intern for Trump because he would have been expected to work.

Barack Obama barely beats business tycoon Donald Trump in a head-to-head race for the presidency.

In the Newsweek/Daily Beast poll, Obama received 43 percent of the votes, while Trump — who has announced that he is seriously considering a run for the White House in 2012 — was right behind with 41 percent.

Frankly Obama and Clinton have been lousy interns in his job as President and in her job as Secretary of State for starters. Obama came into the job with no practical experience in anything but community organizing and it shows. Only thing he made comments immediately on was the Wisconsin Senators fleeing the state and his solidarity with the public service unions. Hillary had practical experience in hiding Rose Law firm records and ... Only foreign policy experience came when she was in the White House as First Lady and showed her true colors like the famous picture of her and the terrorist Yassar Arafat's wife.

As for Libya, Obama's schedule was too heavy for him according to Carney is press secretary to have any meeting on Libya including something important like getting American citizens out of Libya. The State Department answer was to send in ferries and not talk to the Defense Department? Our State Department is run by the same type person who runs the White House -- both kumbyya types who never met a dictator they didn't like and like to dis our allies. State Department spokesman refused to acknowledge Khaddafi was a dictator. From Stephen Hayes article, 'An Administration Adrift' in this week's The Weekly Standard:

On February 15, thousands of demonstrators filled the streets of several Libyan cities demanding the departure of the strongman who has ruled the north African nation for more than four decades. The Libyan regime immediately ordered state-backed militias and mercenaries to put down the violence, with force. A bloody battle followed. As the crackdown began, and then escalated, it was early afternoon on February 16, halfway around the world in the State Department briefing room, when the Obama administration faced questions about how it regarded Muammar Qaddafi.

“Is Qaddafi a dictator?”

State Department spokesman P. J. Crowley, at the podium for his daily briefing, smiled at the question and turned his head to call on another reporter.

“Are you stumped?”

“I’m not stumped,” Crowley responded tartly.

“So what’s your answer to the question? Is he a dictator?”

Crowley smirked. “I don’t think he came to office through a democratic process.”

It wasn’t a trick question. Qaddafi has survived as the unelected leader of Libya through a combination of wanton brutality and strategic bribery. His reign has been characterized by the systematic suppression of his own people and the eager exportation of terror.

Crowley’s answer—uncertain, hesitant, and morally ambiguous—would come to symbolize the Obama administration’s response to the massacre in Libya. Within days there were numerous, credible reports that the Libyan regime was using fighter jets to strafe protesters. Regime-hired mercenaries from other African countries roamed the streets of Libyan cities exercising Qaddafi-style restraint. First they fired warning shots in the air. If that didn’t work, they fired at the ground near the protesters’ feet. And if the demonstrators still refused to disperse, the mercenaries gunned them down.

Then there is the famous quote from his new press secretary that it was a scheduling conflict. Excuse me but Obama had time to dis the Governor of Wisconsin and insert himself into a state's rights matter in Wisconsin immediately but no time to make a statement on Libya or hold a meeting on the subject? Give me a break!

Yet pressure mounted for the White House to do something or, at the very least, say something. White House press secretary Jay Carney took the podium on February 23 to answer numerous questions about Obama’s bizarre silence. When CBS News Radio’s Mark Knoller pushed Carney for a better sense of when Obama might speak on Libya, Carney explained that Obama would be meeting with Clinton that afternoon.

“This is just a scheduling issue,” Carney said. “As I said, the president will meet with Secretary of State Clinton this afternoon, his regular meeting, and they will obviously discuss Libya. We will have something to say out of that meeting, and if possible, the president will speak this afternoon or tomorrow.”

Carney came off as inept -- we thought we had seen the last of that with Scott McClellan from the Bush Administration. Robert Gibbs, the previous press secretary came across as a buffoon who liked to talk around the questions and would ignore other reporters when he didn't want to answer but the remark by Carney was one dumb remark about Obama and his scheduling conflict. Would have thought the Americans still in Libya would have been a priority since our embassy is filled with public service types but they obviously received a priority way below the public service unions in Wisconsin that the White House and DNC helped organize events.

Another F for the Obama Administration when it comes to foreign policy.

At least Donald Trump knows something about running a huge business! His resume is also quite a few inches thicker than Obama, but then most of our resumes are thicker than Obama. You won't see any of us talking about 57 states or that the United States is one of the larger Muslim countries. Makes you wonder where Obama took his history courses with comments like that!

We will support Donald Trump if he gets the Republican nomination. Would be an interesting race.