Anatomy of a famous blunder/The transcript of what Romney said: Following a rare social engagement, we now give you the transcript of Candidate Romney’s great and soon-to-be-famous historic debate blunder.
Below, you see what Romney said. Given the bullroar which has reigned for a month, it’s easy to see why he said it:
ROMNEY (10/16/12): I think interesting— The president just said something which, which is that, on the day after the [Benghazi] attack, he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror.Oof! Obama should have followed up by seeing if Romney knows the price of a loaf of bread!
OBAMA: That’s what I said.
ROMNEY (with an air of vast assurance): You said in the Rose Garden, the day after the attack, it was an act of terror. It was not a spontaneous demonstration. Is that what you’re saying?
OBAMA: Please proceed, governor.
ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.
OBAMA: Get the transcript.
CROWLEY: It, it, it—he did in fact, sir. So let me—let me call it an act of terror—
OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy?
Kidding aside, Romney’s language shows how a month-long con can come back to bite the con man.
Over the past month, everyone has agreed to pretend that Susan Rice went on the Sunday shows on September 16 and said that a spontaneous demonstration somehow turned into a deadly attack.
That simply isn’t what she said. But Republican hacks—and mainstream journalists—have said that's what she said.
Again and again in the past few weeks, we’ve had this experience:
We’ve watched some know-nothing cable host describe what Rice said on the Sunday shows. He then plays tape of Rice on one of the shows—and she isn’t saying what the cable host just got through saying she said.
We’ll grant you—many of these cable hosts don’t have the intellectual skill to see that Rice wasn’t saying what they just said she said. They had memorized the prevailing narrative—or they were reading from prompter.
At any rate:
Right up through that disgraceful report in yesterday morning’s Washington Post, “journalists” have claimed that Ambassador Rice said that a spontaneous demonstration somehow got out of control.
Plainly, that isn’t what she said. But Romney got conned by the con.
In the transcript we show you above, Romney is sweetly reciting the con. By last night, it seems fairly clear that Romney must have believed it.
Sorry—that isn’t what Susan Rice said! But last night, seeming sure he was right, Romney got conned by the con.
By the way, concerning the politics: This remains a very dangerous topic for Obama’s re-election. Liberals should learn to correct the bogus narratives concerning what Rice really said.
Alas! On cable, the children won’t do that unless Axelrod says. On cable, the liberal children pretty much do what they’re told.
Perhaps they can have their favorite policy analyst explain what Ambassador Rice really said. Progressive interests are put in danger by the way they recite and fawn.