Editorial: (emp add)
If Mitt Romney’s trip abroad is meant to burnish his foreign-policy bona fides, he’s off to a reasonably good start — even if the usual boo-birds are painting his remarks in London yesterday as a gaffe. ...If a foreigner came to the United States and bitched about all sorts of things, would a subsequent statement about wanting to have a portrait of George Washington on the wall quell the outrage? Or would it look like a phony gesture of sympathy?
Of much more significance is what Romney said later: “I’m looking forward to the bust of Winston Churchill being in the Oval Office again.”
That would be the bust meant to celebrate — and cement — the special relationship that has informed US-British relations for a century or more.
The bust that was a gift to the American people from Britain in the wake of 9/11 — meant to recall America’s succor as night was falling across Europe in 1940.
There's already a permanent Churchill bust in the White House residence.
ReplyDeleteObama merely returned the one expressly lent to GWB by Tony Blair to stiffen his resolve in the GWOT. It wasn't a gift.
Obama's returning it was not an insult, but an expected courtesy.
Your George Washington parallel is brilliant. Silly and craven.
The bust of Churchill might be R-MONEY'$ reminder that Churchill was a prodigious drinker and cigar smoker, apparently two no-nos for Mitt.
ReplyDeleteWhat if all the things they bitched about turned out to be true?
ReplyDeleteI mean, what could Mitt Romney possibly know about running an Olympics?
"I mean, what could Mitt Romney possibly know about running an Olympics?"
ReplyDeleteR-MONEY'$ in the running to win the GOLD for FLIP-FLOPPING and DRESSAGE-IN-MOUTH.
"I mean, what could Mitt Romney possibly know about running an Olympics?"
ReplyDeletePossibly about as much as he did about running a state. One term was about all he could muster. He hung around long enough to build up cred for a presidential run. Didn't matter anyway, because his constituents hated his guts.
rgdfgsdf
ReplyDelete