September 13, 2012 05:15 PM UTC

Editorial Boards Across America Rip Romney

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

Briefly citing a few responses from editorial boards around the nation to the unfolding story of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s shrill and factually questionable criticism of President Barack Obama–after an attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya Tuesday resulted in the first violent death of an American ambassador in 25 years.

Washington Post:

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.

New York Times:

Mr. Romney could easily have held his fire during this crisis, if he could not summon the decency to support the United States government. Instead, he misrepresented the administration as “sympathizing” with the attackers. There was no truth in what he said. In fact, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton made the first official comment on the killings, a strong condemnation, before Mr. Romney released his statement. Even after having a night to reconsider his response, Mr. Romney merely doubled down on his false charges, as he is prone to do.

Los Angeles Times:

Former President George W. Bush expressed similar sentiments in 2006 when Muslims around the world were angered by the publication of cartoons depicting Muhammad. And it was absurd for Romney to suggest that the embassy statement was the administration’s “first response” to the Benghazi violence given that the attack hadn’t even occurred yet.

On Wednesday, an unchastened Romney reiterated his indictment of the administration, coupling his condolences for the slain Americans with the observation that Tuesday’s events showed that “American leadership is still sorely needed” – leadership he is eager to provide. In mixing sympathy with specious attacks and self-promotion, Romney has diminished himself.

The Denver paper calls Romney “out of line” in an editorial today that primarily focuses on the attacks themselves. We visited the Colorado Springs Gazette this morning expecting to see a full-throated defense of Romney from reliably pro-Republican editorial board chair Wayne Laugesen; it appears he is still writing it. Politically, we’ll have to wait and see what this incident amounts to. Attacks on American embassies in the Middle East reportedly continue, and with Romney showing no signs of walking back his remarks despite broad condemnation even in his own party, there’s a good chance that more Republicans will begin to “double down” with him.

The fact is, if this is a step toward unprecedented levels of acrimony for a presidential campaign, it’s really not Romney’s first. Perhaps it’s the first one to shock neutral observers, who might have dismissed an idle joke about Obama’s birth certificate. Romney’s willingness to accuse Obama of “sympathizing” with the attackers and “apologizing for American values” before the full circumstances were known, then to refuse to back off those accusations after it became obvious his timeline and facts were completely wrong is, objectively speaking, not responsible behavior.

But the editorial boards will have to wait for voters to affirm that judgment.