Quote:

---

Mr. Romney’s rhetoric on embassy attacks is a discredit to his campaign.
.....
At a news conference, Mr. Romney claimed that the administration had delivered “an apology for America’s values.” In fact, it had done no such thing: Religious tolerance, as much as freedom of speech, is a core American value. The movie that provoked the protests, which mocks the prophet Muhammad and portrays Muslims as immoral and violent, is a despicable piece of bigotry; it was striking that Mr. Romney had nothing to say about such hatred directed at a major religious faith.

Mr. Obama struck the right tone on Wednesday, saying that “we reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others” but that “there is absolutely no justification for this type of senseless violence.” Lauding Mr. Stevens’s service, the president promised “justice” for “this terrible act” while also committing the administration to continue cooperating with Libya’s democratic government — which apologized for the attack. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-death-of-an-ambassador/2012
/09/12/ed3b719e-fcfa-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_story.html]

There is lots more from Republican pundits, aides, etc., who didn't want to be quoted publicly, but the above are sufficient to show that a good number of Republicans think Romney screwed the pooch. When your own party starts to turn against you, you know you're in trouble.

I don't know what was described in the other tit-for-tat thread, but in case anyone doesn't know the facts:

There was mounting tension over an on-line video (not a movie or anything else) which those involved with it have disclaimed. (More on that in next post)

The statement in question:

Quote:

---

The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.
— September 11, 2012

---

The timeline:

Quote:

---

It is clear now that much of the misunderstanding surrounding the statement by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo stems from the fact that some commentators thought it had been issued after protesters stormed the embassy compound. Instead, the embassy had released it hours before the protests began, in an apparent effort to cool down emotions over a film that defamed the prophet Muhammad.

But elements of the statement also were placed in the embassy’s Twitter feed — and it gained new prominence in retweets after the storming of the embassy.

On Fox News, host Brent Baier shows scenes of protesters storming the embassy and replacing the American flag with a black flag. Then, reading from a piece of paper, he adds, “A statement by the U.S. Embassy just moments ago: ‘The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.’”

After quoting from the embassy statement, Baier turns to Charles Krauthammer and asks for his reaction. Krauthammer, apparently under the misimpression the statement had just been released, terms it an embarrassment. “That's a hostage statement,” Krauthammer said. “That's a mob of al-qaeda sympathizers in Egypt, forcing the United States into making a statement essentially of apology, on 9/11 of all days, for something of which we are not responsible.”
Small wonder Mitt Romney campaign officials thought they should take advantage of that.

On Wednesday morning, Romney incorrectly reiterated the idea that the statement had been issued after the attacks, apparently hoping to place the incident in the campaign’s narrative that President Obama had been on an “apology tour” — a claim that has earned Romney Four Pinocchios.

“The embassy in Cairo put out a statement after their grounds had been breached,” Romney told reporters on Wednesday. “Protesters were inside the grounds. They reiterated that statement after the breach. I think it’s a terrible course for America to stand in apology for our values.”

Romney’s reference to the idea that the statement was “reiterated” appears to be a reference to a tweet — since deleted — that said: “This morning’s condemnation (issued before the protest began) still stands. As does our condemnation of unjustified breach of the Embassy.”

Even in this day and age, a tweet seems a pretty thin reed on which to hang a major policy pronouncement. In fact, the so-called reiteration makes clear that the first part of Romney’s comment — that the statement was issued after the breach — is incorrect.

In context, the embassy statement appears similar to previous statements issued by embassies or spokesmen for the U.S. government in response to provocative actions that might inflame Muslims. The practice dates back at least to the appointment of Karen Hughes as undersecretary of state for public affairs in the second presidential term of George W. Bush.

The Bush administration had been stunned by the violent anti-American protests in 2005 that erupted after Newsweek erroneously reported that U.S. interrogators had tried to rattle an al-Qaeda suspect by flushing a Koran down a toilet. Hughes pushed for a much more proactive communications effort, in an effort to get ahead of such reports.

The longest and most thorough statement is by the State Department spokesman in 2006. But a statement made at the daily briefing carries the full weight of the U.S. government, whereas the embassy statement is just that — a statement by the embassy, drafted in house, with little or no coordination with Washington (let alone senior State Department officials who are political appointees of the current administration).

Indeed, an interesting inside account published by Foreign Policy magazine says the statement and tweets were the work of communications staffer Larry Schwartz. The article says he cleared the statement with only one person at the embassy — not the ambassador, who was in Washington — and he posted it even though Washington, once it got wind of it, told him not to post it without changes. When The Fact Checker was diplomatic correspondent for The Washington Post, he knew and respected Schwartz as a blunt professional who was not afraid of ruffling a few feathers every so often.

Without the tragic events of this week, the Cairo statement likely would have passed unnoticed — along with the other embassy statements on Facebook contests, the ambassador’s visits to polling stations and so forth.

However, Romney picked up on the statement and said: "That amounted to an apology for America and its values of freedom of speech", Mr. Romney said—first in a statement late Tuesday as the situation remained unclear–and again at a news conference on Wednesday. “Apology for America’s values is never the right course,” he said at the news conference in Jacksonville, Fla.

“There is nothing wrong in principle with making clear to people, who have yet to embrace the categorical right to free speech, that Americans and their government deplore the deplorable, that we reject vile attacks on Muslims as vigorously as we reject vile anti-Semitic attacks,” said Mark Salter, former chief of staff, longtime speech writer and top campaign aide to Sen. John McCain. “To do so does not constitute sympathy for the people besieging our embassy, as Gov. Romney alleged. Nor is at an apology for America, as some Obama critics have claimed.”

We have looked in vain for an “apology” in the Cairo statement, as well as significant differences between that statement and earlier ones. One could criticize the Cairo statement for lacking a meticulous defense of freedom of speech. But that is not the same thing as an apology — especially since the embassy clearly issued the statement long before the protests began.

This all started because some people got the timeline wrong. In the fog of war and protest, it often helps to get the facts straight before you act — or speak. (all material excerpted from above cites, as well as http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/an-embassy-state
ment-a-tweet-and-a-major-misunderstanding/2012/09/12/a2d32a8c-fd24-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_blog.html

---

Condemnation is not an apology.
Sympathy is not an apology.

Romney was using this tragic even to attempt to score political points. Unfortunately for him, the points he scored were AGAINST HIMSELF, and show him to be as inept in foreign affairs as he's previously shown with his misguided statements in England and Israel, as well as his claiming Russia was our "number one enemy".

This is a man you Repubs want to put in as Commander in Chief, to decide how our country should be represented, to speak for us, and to make determinations on how our military should behave on the global front? The epitome of folly.