2016 Postmortem

grantcart

(53,061 posts) Sat May 5, 2012, 06:32 PM May 2012

Romney's criticism on handling of Chinese dissident: Foolish or Very Foolish?

as babylonsister's thread on Joe Conason's article in the Nation points out even the right wing found Romney's responses regarding the handling of Chen Guangcheng's initial sanctuary at the embassy and the problems that followed less than competent:

Clearly, Romney had no knowledge or experience with which to judge the situation unfolding in Beijing, which concluded much differently than his harsh remarks suggested. In fact, both the Chinese and the Americans were seeking a face-saving solution that was achieved when New York University (whose president John Sexton happens to be a close friend of Secretary Clinton and is well-connected in Beijing as well) offered a fellowship to Chen, which the government had agreed he could accept.

The result, of course, was that Romney looked either “foolish” or “very foolish,” depending on whether the assessment came from Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol or from Abby Huntsman Livingston, the daughter of former Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, who lived in the Beijing embassy when her father served as US ambassador to the People’s Republic.

But Romney’s error was worse than a misguided political tactic. It showed a woeful ignorance of diplomacy and a callow opportunism that don’t befit the next occupant of the Oval Office. To endanger Chen’s safety and the prestige of the United States in those difficult hours was an act of weak character as well as stupidity.

Now let's not take Conason excerpting skills for granted.

Here is what Kristol said;

http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/05/kristol-calls-romney-weighing-in-on-chen-foolish-122478.html

"I’m happy to be critical of the Obama administration as anyone is, but I think this is fast moving story. And if I were advising Governor Romney, I’d say you don’t need to get in the middle of this story. If this turns out badly, and it would be a terrible thing, it will turn out badly. People will know. … To inject yourself into the middle of this way with a fast moving target I think is foolish. [...]

There is no need to butt into a fast moving story when the secretary of state is in Beijing with delicate (negotiations)."

and this is what Huntsman's daughter said about Romney

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/abby-huntsman-romneys-chen-guangcheng-criticism-was-very-foolish/

Livingston dubbed Romney “very foolish” for wading into diplomatic issues such as this, especially when “he really didn’t have really any facts yesterday about what was going on.”

“What happens in the U.S. embassy in China should be within the hands of the officials on the ground and the State Department,” Livingston said. “It should not be a political issue here in the U.S.”

So let's help the Republicans out.

Was Romney's actions "foolish" or "very foolish"?

Romney's effort to try and insert himself into the fast moving events of Beijing was (please try and be objective):

4 votes, 0 passes \| Time left: Unlimited
	"foolish" callow opportunism ala Kristol
	0 (0%)
	"very foolish" callow opportunism ala Huntsman
	1 (25%)
	shows how Romney's caving on the departure of his foreign policy spokesman Richard Grenell as a sop to homophopes is fucking insane and is going to inflict multiple cuts into Romney because Grenell would have handled situations like this gracefully and now we get to see Romney in his full blown callow opportunism.
	3 (75%)
	other
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll