As I wrote in my previous blog posting about Mitt Romney; there is this little story about Romney getting his facts wrong about Ronald Reagan.
It comes via the Weekly Standard:
The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that Mitt Romney is recounting a Jim Baker anecdote in which President Reagan ordered Baker, as White House chief of staff, to hold no national security meetings over a hundred day period early in his first term so that President Reagan and his team could focus on the economy. If the Journal‘s reporting is accurate—and I don’t believe the Romney camp has challenged it—Romney should stop telling this false and foolish tale.
[….]
“Given the challenges a Romney administration will face – from a spiraling Syria to key decisions on the way forward in Afghanistan to dealing with Iran’s nuclear program and the threats from al Qaeda in Yemen and East Africa – it is unlikely Romney will have the luxury of ignoring foreign policy for his first 100 days….But the fact that Romney thinks it would be desirable to ignore the world for his first 100 days is troubling. Yes, the American people are focused on the economy – and understandably so. But Romney isn’t running for treasury secretary – he is running for Commander in Chief. And those responsibilities begin on Day 1 of his presidency.”
What’s more, I can’t believe the story is true. Or if Reagan did once say what Baker says he said, it was an expression of exasperation after one (presumably unsatisfactory) meeting that neither Reagan nor Baker followed through on. In fact, I’ll buy Jim Baker a very good dinner next time he’s in Washington if he or anyone else can find a 100-day stretch (or a ten-day stretch) of the Reagan presidency in which President Reagan was involved in no national security meetings. I encourage interested readers to research this eminently researchable topic, and e-mail us what you find at webeditor@weeklystandard.com. I was able to spend just a few minutes scrolling thought the Reagan Foundation’s helpful account of President Reagan’s daily schedule, and I see no week, let alone three months, in which President Reagan doesn’t seem to have held some sort of national security and foreign policy meetings. To say nothing of the fact that he ran for the presidency highlighting national security issues, and was a historic president in large part because of his national security accomplishments.
So, reminder to Mitt Romney: With respect to the presidency, national security isn’t a bug; it’s a feature.
To be quite honest, I do not believe this to be overly damaging to his campaign; like the previous story I reported, this just seems to be a matter of getting his message tightened up a bit. It might be that Romney was fed some inaccurate information. Although, I have to wonder if this piece by Bill Kristol is not some sort of underhanded Neoconservative attempt to kneecap Romney. It would make sense, Romney has not been exactly thundering hawk, when it comes to Iran. Maybe this is supposed to be a gentle reminder as to who controls the strings in the GOP. Of course, I have to watch it, or the Wilsonian Republican Blogosphere will start a crusade against me again. 😉
One thought on “Did Mitt Romney get his facts wrong on Reagan?”
Comments are closed.