Posted on 01/13/2015 8:34:57 AM PST by Kaslin
When the members of Barack Obama’s administration say that concerns for the president’s safety at the historic march in Paris on Sunday prevented him from traveling to France, and they say this often, they are really only guessing. More accurately, they should say that they believe security concerns would have prevented Obama from traveling to Paris if they had bothered to investigate the prospect of providing him with a security detail for that trip. According to the Secret Service, the agency was never even asked to consider the precautions necessary to get the President of the United States to France.
“The White House cited security concerns and the fact that the rally came together quickly, in about 36 hours. Earnest said presidential or vice presidential security for events such as the march are ‘onerous’ and have a ‘significant impact’ on those who attend,” The Washington Post reported. “A Secret Service official said the agency was not asked or notified about a potential trip to Paris.”
“Officials acknowledge that the Secret Service could have pulled it off,” reported CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta on Monday. “The agency was not asked or notified about a trip. It would have been a challenge, but he did not say it was impossible.”
It increasingly seems as though the backlash against the president’s decision to skip the march is taking on a life of its own. Presidents often miss events, and many of them are historic in nature. So why is this one capturing the imaginations of the public and the press so completely? They say that the most damaging stumble for a politician is that which accentuates an already widely acknowledged character flaw. It could be that Obama’s aloof, professorial nature has been emphasized to the point of near caricature by his decision to pass on an appearance in France.
The dissembling nature of the White House’s excuses for Obama’s absence, culminating in an admission of fault and shortsightedness, is equally unique. White House Press Sec. Josh Earnest’s admission that the White House failed to meet the demands of posterity by not sending a higher ranking official to the march has led even the media to note that this administration is rarely so contrite.
“No White House likes to admit being wrong,” Politico reported on Monday. “This White House especially has a tendency to respond to political and media criticism by digging in.”
There’s an impatience with optics — the ceremony and staging of the presidency — that flows right from the president, and any staffer hoping to do well in the West Wing dismisses concerns about appearances raised by reporters, Republicans or uncooperative Democrats.
Indeed, when Earnest was asked to respond on Monday to the many criticisms of the president’s absence, his first instinct was to reply, “Criticism from who?”
Of course, to answer Earnest’s question would have taken an hour. It is a criticism coming from the left and the right, the commentary class and the nonpartisan press, the apolitical American and the plugged in pundit alike. Earnest quickly abandoned this reflexively defensive tick, but it was instructive. It suggested, as Politico noted, that the press secretary’s first instinct was to question the character or the associations of the president’s critic rather than to answer the criticism.
This has been an interesting moment for the Obama presidency. The White House clearly made a mistake by not attending the rally, but, unlike so many other failures of this administration, the press and the public seems less inclined to forgive this infraction so quickly.
LOL!
This is what happens when NO ONE IS IN CHARGE . Obama is the one who should have said I’m going , but that would be above Obama’s pay grade
“Criticism from who?”
___________________________
that should have been “Criticism from WHOM?”
He could have sent someone. Instead he waited to see what the polls said. Any halfwit could have predicted the backlash.
This is what happens when people are convinced of their own “superior intelligence”.
Are you kidding me trust me he don’t want to go
I think SS could do fast forward that security precaustion if they knew this President want to go
NO he was too busy under cover in bed with Reggie Love watching NFL Playoffs bottom line
He would have gone in a New York minute if it had been a pro Muslim rally. Besides there was a rally in DC, he could have gone to that one, or the one in NYC
Oh, well, then.
Incredible that Obola would throw the distinguished
Secret Service — who protect him — ‘under the bus’.
Incredible that Obola would throw the distinguished
Secret Service — who protect him — ‘under the bus’.
Obama never saw`the Paris massacre on the News ,so he and the White House knew nothing about it
Geez, get over it.
I’m glad he didn’t go to that pointless, phoney-baloney march.
Actually saved taxpayers some money for once.
Sounds like an excuse a Woman would make. Valerie (Communist Traitor) Jarrett.
This is all fine and dandy, but...
Answer this: Why did WithHolder go to Paris and then purposely NOT attend the gathering as a representative of POSOTUS?
Everything points to this guy being a muslim. His background, his speeches, his actions, all muslim. It’s as obvious as the nose on your face.
With all the foreign dignitaries and royalty there I can’t imagine a more safe place in the world.
The Democrat Party should move immediately to force POTUS, Obama to resign, or impeach him for “Treason”!!! What a low life person this Obama is!!! He is an real Muslim, enemy of the state (USA)!!!
Just wait until you try to remove him from the White House Jan 2017
Ha...can you imagine the “it costs taxpayers X dollars for Obama to go to Paris for a POINTLESS march” stories?
I bet the wood peckers made the hole in Obama’s head but the bats live in it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.