Romney’s “National Security” Speech: This Is A Test

In his speech supposedly about national security, Mitt Romney again said that President Obama has “apologized” to foreign countries for the United States.

This is a lie.

It is also a test: members of the Fourth Estate, will you report on this without saying that it is untrue?

UPDATE:  The invaluable Heather Hurlburt finds five more “untruths” (more commonly known as “lies”) in Romney’s speech.  Will the press call him on any of them?

Author: Jonathan Zasloff

Jonathan Zasloff teaches Torts, Land Use, Environmental Law, Comparative Urban Planning Law, Legal History, and Public Policy Clinic - Land Use, the Environment and Local Government. He grew up and still lives in the San Fernando Valley, about which he remains immensely proud (to the mystification of his friends and colleagues). After graduating from Yale Law School, and while clerking for a federal appeals court judge in Boston, he decided to return to Los Angeles shortly after the January 1994 Northridge earthquake, reasoning that he would gladly risk tremors in order to avoid the average New England wind chill temperature of negative 55 degrees. Professor Zasloff has a keen interest in world politics; he holds a PhD in the history of American foreign policy from Harvard and an M.Phil. in International Relations from Cambridge University. Much of his recent work concerns the influence of lawyers and legalism in US external relations, and has published articles on these subjects in the New York University Law Review and the Yale Law Journal. More generally, his recent interests focus on the response of public institutions to social problems, and the role of ideology in framing policy responses. Professor Zasloff has long been active in state and local politics and policy. He recently co-authored an article discussing the relationship of Proposition 13 (California's landmark tax limitation initiative) and school finance reform, and served for several years as a senior policy advisor to the Speaker of California Assembly. His practice background reflects these interests: for two years, he represented welfare recipients attempting to obtain child care benefits and microbusinesses in low income areas. He then practiced for two more years at one of Los Angeles' leading public interest environmental and land use firms, challenging poorly planned development and working to expand the network of the city's urban park system. He currently serves as a member of the boards of the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy (a state agency charged with purchasing and protecting open space), the Los Angeles Center for Law and Justice (the leading legal service firm for low-income clients in east Los Angeles), and Friends of Israel's Environment. Professor Zasloff's other major activity consists in explaining the Triangle Offense to his very patient wife, Kathy.

12 thoughts on “Romney’s “National Security” Speech: This Is A Test”

  1. Well, he did the next worst thing. Occasionally, he has shown a little tiny bit of respect to foreign leaders.
    Obama does not get this; therefore, he hates America.

    1. Ed,
      Many of your readers don’t read Republican, and sometimes trip up on linguistic cognates. You should therefore have given them a translation from Republican to English when needed. Specifically, you should have translated the Republican word “respect.” There is no precise English equivalent, but “fear” would work okay, to first order. So would “fellatio.”

      1. If we in the DP stopped giving it to them, for free no less! ; P, they would stop expecting it.

        Boy, the salty language around here today.

  2. In answer to your question, Jonathon, yes.

    This has been today’s edition of simple answers to simple questions, and a plea for an end to post-modern journalism.

  3. It’s not a ‘lie’. It’s true, but in a higher, better, realer way.

    Today, one must ask, “Does the statement in question promote the interests of the Party? Does it support the Party’s unique role as Vanguard of the Revolution?” For if it does, then the statement possesses revolutionary Truth, which subsumes, and transcends, the old, bourgeois concept of ‘true’, as in ‘comporting with reality’.

    Correctly oriented cadres know this.

    All power to the soviets of preachers and hedge-fund managers!

    (Today’s GOP is the last major Leninist parliamentary party in the developed world.)

  4. What was the true story on White House political leaks of the raid on bin Laden and possibly other classified information? Romney made a big deal out of these leaks, but my memory is rather rusty on just what happened. Selective and strategic leaking of classified information is common practice in the White House of both parties; since much classified information does not threaten national security if made public, this charade can occasionally serve a legitimate purpose.

    In any case, Heather Hurlburt did not confront this accusation. Does anyone have fresher memories of that cotroversy?

    1. = = = What was the true story on White House political leaks of the raid on bin Laden = = =

      There was a guy across the street tweeting the raid in realtime, so I’m not sure how much longer that top secret was going to be “secret”.


Comments are closed.