Everyone should have their own 'Kraut'!

He's such a tonic!  Or perhaps 'antidote' is a better word.  For example, I was somewhat disheartened when the Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, came here, opened his mouth and attempted to put both feet in it!  Of course, the ratbags of Canary Wharf were on him in seconds and for their usual reason, er, that's circulation in case you don't know it, they blew it up into a far bigger gaffe than it was.  Even so, he's a practiced politician and should have known better. 

He then went off to Poland and Israel and, according to the American MSM, he went on hurling gaffes around like Obama hurls drones!  The MSM 'over there' are, for the most part, the communications wing of the Democrat machine and so they even managed to outdo the Canary Wharf rats in their hyping of Romney's bloopers.  I didn't follow the details of exactly what he was supposed to have said which is why I tell you that you really should have a 'Kraut' to turn to in need.  I mean, of course, Charles Krauthammer, who, in The National Review, turned his steely gaze at this minor hoo-ha-ha and injected some realism into it.  First of all, he castigated Romney for his British blooper:

In answer to a question about the Olympics, he expressed skepticism about London’s preparations. The response confounded and agitated Romney supporters because it was such an unforced error. The question invited a simple paean to Olympic spirit and British grit, not the critical analysis of a former Olympic organizer.

So much for that but then, turning to the Polish trip, it transpires that Romney did not say anything untoward, in fact, just the opposite:

The Warsaw leg was a triumph. Romney’s speech warmly embraced Poland’s post-Communist experiment as a stirring example of a nation committed to limited government at home and a close alliance with America abroad, even unto such godforsaken war zones as Afghanistan and Iraq, at great cost to itself and with little thanks.

Especially little from the Obama administration, which unilaterally canceled a Bush(43)-era missile-defense agreement with Poland to appease Russia. Without any overt criticism of the current president, Romney set out a foreign policy of radically greater appreciation of and fidelity to American allies.

The only unfortunate language was used by an understandably irritated staffer who snapped at members of the (Democrat) press corps for shouting out stupid questions.  But by now the (Democrat) MSM were in full cry and when Romney, during his trip to Israel, told the absolute truth concerning the differences between Arab and Israeli societies and how, in effect, the former could not run the proverbial whelk stall whilst the latter would have a chain of discount whelk stalls up and running in weeks, they tore into him.  'The Kraut' Korrekted, ooops, sorry, must stop with the aliteration jokes, put the non-story into context: 

What about the alleged gaffe that dominated reporting from Israel? Romney averred that Israeli and Palestinian economic development might be related to culture. A Palestinian Authority spokesman obligingly jumped forth to accuse Romney of racism, among other thought crimes.

The American media bought it whole, despite the fact that Romney’s assertion was a direct echo of the U.N. Arab Human Development Report, written by Arab intellectuals and commissioned by the U.N. It unambiguously asserted that “culture and values are the soul of development.” And went on to report how existing cultural norms — “including traditional Arab culture and values” — are among the major impediments to Arab economic progress. (My emphasis)

The report deplores the rampant corruption, repressive governance, and lack of women’s (and human) rights as major contributors to backwardness in the Arab world. (In the Palestinian case, it faults Israeli “occupation,” but a U.N. document that doesn’t blame Israel for every Palestinian sorrow, if not the world’s, has yet to be written. Moreover, that excuse doesn’t work for today’s occupation-free, Palestinian-run Gaza.) Is there any question about Romney’s assertion? PLO/PA corruption is a legend. Palestinians are repelled by it. Why do you think the PA lost the 2006 (and last) free election?

Romney’s point about “culture” was to highlight the improbable emergence of Israel from resourceless semi-desert to First World “startup nation,” a tribute to its freedom and openness.

In addition, Romney made clear that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel, no ifs or buts.  Also, he made clear to the Israeli government that if he is president and they feel the need to defend the existence of their country he will not stand in their way.

So, courtesy of 'The Kraut' we now know that apart from treading on 'Dim Dave's' shiny shoes, and who really cares about that,  his trip was a great success, that is, the exact opposite of what was reported. 

So, there is hope - not a lot, but some!

 

Comments

[JK]

"...But by now the (Democrat) MSM were in full cry and when Romney, during his trip to Israel, told the absolute truth concerning the differences between Arab and Israeli societies and how, in effect, ..."

Don't know you know it David, but "some portion of Israelis" kinda wonder at stuff. Mostly textual stuff and probably no need for either of the two of us to concern ourselves about.

After all, who believes in an "Angel" named Moron?

First Book of Nephi, chapters 14 through 22. Notice the named "Ishmael" which (in some quarters) causes some consternation:

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/mormon/

Course down there in America's South we're in full agreement with Krauthammer. Nothing so crass or so obviously rascist would ever effect us enlightened people. You did notice Kraut also mentioned, 'nothing racsist about it?' da da da etc.

http://gypsyscholarship.blogspot.com/2008/10/barack-hussein-obama-is-not-muslim.html

Probably catch hell when I get home.

[David Duff]

As ever, Jk, you are a mine of information, er, or should that be minefield? Anyway, thanks.

[H]

Anyone interested in Mitt Romney's clumsiness should have a look at the career of his father, the erstwhile governor of Michigan, who in his ill-fated run for the Republican nomination in 1968 managed to hold several contradictory opinions on the burning issue of the day, namely the Vietnam War (on which eventual winner Richard Nixon succeeded, with customary guile, in expressing no views at all). In short, he can't help it, it's hereditary.

[David Duff]

Oh dear, the sins of the father and all that! Still, trying desperately to remain optimistic, it is not unusual for sons to spend their lives doing the opposite of their fathers.

Well, I can hope, can't I?