Mitt Revere Rides Again
Due to the busted terror plot in the UK, surprise, surprise, Governor Romney was the first to get his mug on the TV. He called up the National Guard on placed them on state duty. Romney says it relates to both visible deterrents (machine guns) and to assist with searches.
While I understand his role as Governor and ensuring the protection of the citizens of Massachusetts, but can he be more blatantly playing the media?
Is it really necessary to call up the National Guard in MA? I wonder if any other Governors will be following suit…New York, Arkansas??
While I understand his role as Governor and ensuring the protection of the citizens of Massachusetts, but can he be more blatantly playing the media?
Is it really necessary to call up the National Guard in MA? I wonder if any other Governors will be following suit…New York, Arkansas??
posted by Caucus Cooler at 8/10/2006
22 Comments:
No fair guys, Logan Airport is a big concern since 9/11 hijackers came through there. What he's doing is totally appropriate. As Governor, he is keeping his own citizens informed and protected.
The nat'l cable nets take the feed because of his status as a rising national figure. It's not his fault. I'm sure other Governor's have been doing press conferences locally but they aren't getting picked up by Fox, CNN or MSNBC.
Give him a break...
From: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/08/10/romney_to_activate_national_guard_for_logan_airport/?p1=MEWell_Pos5
"I don't know what other governors are doing. Logan has a specific history with regards to the initiation of terrorist activity on airlines, and therefore we have a heightened degree of concern here," he said.
Since Sept. 11, Logan has become a pioneer in testing and using the latest aviation security technology. It was the first airport in the country to launch a permanent system that scans all checked baggage for explosives."
Also, we don't know what the specific threats were/are.
It may be, in part, influenced by his presidential ambitions, but until we know the details, to jump to that conclusion is a bit overboard.
One of those that was called up said in the article:
"It's still safe to fly. At the same time everyone should be aware and be on alert for people who are acting out of the ordinary," said Sgt. Steven Hines, who carried an MP-5 machine gun on his patrol.
"I think sometimes people get complacent and they forget and think the threat isn't there anymore," Hines said. "As you heard the threat is there."
P.S.
I didn't make that anonymous comment above.
Give him a break?? What??
This has nothing to do with protecting the citizens; it has everything to do with his total lack of foreign policy experience and his trying anything possible to fill that gap.
He should leave playing politics with lives lost to terrorism to the NY wannabees.
I thought Romney was better than this, I'm disapointed.
Question of the day:
Do you think the Governor's office has spent more time drafting plans for prevention of terrorism, or more time drafting plans on how to most effectively exploit the media if a terror threat arises?
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/world/060810i_wire.aspx
"U.S. authorities raised the threat level to “red” for flights from Britain, the first time the highest threat of terrorist attack had been invoked since the system was created. All other flights were under an “orange” alert - one step below red."
I'm guessing that Logan Airport has plenty of flights in from Britain. Those are "RED alert" flights . . . action can and should be taken. Romney has been VERY intertwined in developing disaster and homeland security plans. (see http://iowansforromney.blogspot.com/2006/07/romney-on-homeland-security-part.html )
He's communicating to his local folks what's going on. If national feeds decide to pick it up that's their business.
Sure we're not scared here in Iowa, but I don't see people there complaining about Romney's actions.
Jeff, I am going to ask this again:
Do you think the Governor's office has spent more time drafting plans for prevention of terrorism, or more time drafting plans on how to most effectively exploit the media if a terror threat arises?
His quick response looked far too organized for being "thrown" together this morning.
Even President Bush just got in front of a mic and gave 60 seconds of comments.
Romeny had a stage full of suits flanking him, and a mouthful of remarks. Looked much too scripted...
I thought playing politics with people's emotions was only in the Democrat's playbook...apparently it is in Romney's as well.
I don't feel too compelled to respond to anonymous posters (i.e. paid staffers for other candidates)
However,
I'm sure Romney DIDN'T throw this together this morning. Responding to a threat and effectively communicating that to the people IS PART of the deal and shows strong leadership. That he has probably planned for this shows that he's serious about his job as governor.
Sorry if you wanted some lame and thrown together response . . . that's just something that you won't get from Romney.
Also, I didn't see the press conference, but heard from others that it was well done (granted, they're Romney supporters already).
However, in answer to your question, I'm sure he's put more money and effort into contingency plans to prevent this than he put into a potential press conference.
See this link.
http://iowansforromney.blogspot.com/2006/07/romney-on-homeland-security-part.html
Jeff makes some good points... Even though the Mittster seemed to grab the opportunity to jump into the spotlight. Boston is as vulnerable as any place besides NYC, LA and DC.
We stand by our position that he was playing the media, but he certaintly had reason to make some agressive decisions.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Thanks Cooler!
An FYI to the naysayers:
"Schwarzenegger activates Guard in wake of London terror plot"
http://www.dailynews.com/ci_4162404
A snippet:
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger activated the National Guard Thursday to bolster security at California airports after authorities said they had foiled a terror plot involving U.S.-bound planes from Britain.
"I have ordered the redeployment of security assets to high priority locations to respond to this threat,"
"These assets include bomb-sniffing dogs, the California National Guard, and the California Highway Patrol, in concert with local and federal law enforcement agencies."
*****
Is this a play by Arnold as well? Has Cali ever been attacked? How answer you all anonymous paid staffers for non-Romney candidates?
Maybe Romney just woke up earlier being on the east coast and was prepared for such an event.
Yes, I think that's a bit unfair. McCain is on every single news show under the sun doing nothing but being a media whore (more power to him), but the minute Mitt deploys the Guard at an airport where two 9/11 airplanes originated, that's news, plain and simple. Pataki could do it too, Huckabee would be a stretch, yes. But in Boston and NY, people need to know they're being protected both for safety assurances, and for the traveling aspect so as to not again cripple the airline industry.
BTW, has anyone seen if Vilsack is at DM International? HA!
Mitt is a little bit of media ball hog. He may become uninteresting by Caucus night, having peaked to early.
So what do you prefer? A leader who is out in front, communicating what he is doing, why he is doing it, and where he is going with it; or a leader who only communciates with us when he absolutely has to, or when his handlers decide he needs to?
Mitt Romney is the first type. It is the way he has always operated. It is his M.O. from the beginning -- hands-on, get out in front, and lead.
George W. Bush is the second type. Getting the man to actually tell us what is going on, and why we should be following him is like pulling teeth. Think Hurricane Katrina. Think Social Security reform. Think even his signature issue, War on Terror, for crying out loud.
Yes, Romney made contigency plans. Yes, they included communicating to the public the whys and wherefores. Are you saying they shouldn't?
Mark-
You're not going to win many points with likely caucus goers trashing the Prez...
It's nearly 6pm and still only two states to deploy their National Guard troops to the airports (Cali and Mass). Interesting...
Also, i just caught a clip of Romney explaining his reasoning for actions today and he indicated that it would only expedite the process at the airport. They would compliment the security procedures already in place and ultimately not add any additional security only "an extra set of hands".
Is this really worthy of calling a press conference? His remarks this morning were much stronger this morning than this afternoon.
I am absolutely sick of politicians exploiting terror. Just do you job and protect the citizens.
All the attacks on Romney indicate a few very clear facts: 1. He's the guy to beat and 2. The rest of the field is desperate and are paying their hacks to attack him.
Weak.
Near as I can tell, the Romney supporters are outpacing the Romney detractors by about a 3-1 margin. If the paid Romney detractors are to be admonished, then so must the paid Romney Supporters. The compliments and the criticisms are all biased and must be ignored.
Definition of a paid supporter - a decided supporter of a specific candidate - whether paid or not paid in cash.
For the record . . . I'm not opposed to hearing opinions from supporters of other candidates (paid or not). I'm well on the record as a Romney supporter that does not get paid (actually, that's not entirely true, last month I made $1.24 by having a link on my website that goes to where people can buy Romney's book at Amazon.com . . . I'm now considering quitting my day-job).
"Paid" or "not paid" doesn't bother me as much as the whole anonymous thing. I'm willing to go on the record for the guy who I'm supporting. I'd suggest others do the same.
Oh, and as a "nail in the coffin" for Romney's response see this link and quotes below:
http://news.bostonherald.com/localPolitics/view.bg?articleid=152338
“I think the governor’s actions were most appropriate, under the cirumstances,” said U.S. Rep. Martin T. Meehan (D-Lowell). Asked how Romney’s take-charge persona is playing out on the national political scene, Meehan replied: “Anytime an executive makes the right decisions under pressure, voters respond.”
U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Newton) agreed, saying: “I think what he’s done is appropriate. We have bad guys trying to kill people and you’ve got to respond.”
Another quote from the article:
Alexander Lamis, a political professor at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, said Romney’s response to the Big Dig collapse and the latest terror plot make him “somebody who certainly has to be taken seriously in the presidential race.”
“Whether he’s doing it because it’s something that’s needed or to enhance his own position, I don’t know. But I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. He’s certainly a proven leader,” Lamis said.
******
The left-wing liberals who jump on Romney at every chance don't seem to have a problem with it . . . why the cynnics here?
"I'm now considering quitting my day-job"
Hmmmm..... LMAO! Good one Jeff...
FYI, Jeff is a freaking Eye surgeon....
Post a Comment
<< Home