In Sarah Palin’s Footsteps

How many unforced errors is a presidential candidate allowed to make? Mitt Romney made several at the outset of his visit to the London Olympics. While some of his Tea Party movement fans may have been thrilled by his shirt-sleeved appearance, it is imperative that he avoid making any more foreign policy blunders because the average American voter wants a president with grandeur.

Good luck, Mitt Romney! With the kickoff of his tour through Great Britain, Poland and Israel, the U.S. Republican made it abundantly clear that he ushers in an American decade of politics as he promised because he’s not one of those cuddly politicians who only tells people what they want to hear when invited by the Olympic organizers to say a few words. He showed that he addresses problems without regard to diplomatic niceties.

Be nice to the Brits? Why? The arch-conservatives back home didn’t name themselves after a rebellious act against British colonial power back in 1773 just by coincidence. The Tea Party movement has always felt Mitt Romney was far too liberal for their tastes. He really showed them with these samples, didn’t he?

Examples:

After a meeting — a secret meeting — with the chief of the British intelligence agency MI6 he told the press he appreciated the insights he got from MI6, at which point the meeting ceased to be secret. The British Guardian newspaper awarded Romney 5 out of 10 possible points on the blushes scale.

“Disturbing signs” is what Romney says he saw when asked whether London was sufficiently prepared to hold the games in their city. He said it was hard to say how the games would turn out. Romney organized the winter Olympic games in Salt Lake City in 2002, prompting British Prime Minister David Cameron to comment, “Of course it’s easier if you hold an Olympic games in the middle of nowhere.” The Guardian awarded Romney 8 out of 10 possible points for that one.

London’s Mayor Boris Johnson (nicknamed the blond danger) called to the crowd assembled for the lighting of the Olympic torch in Hyde Park, “I hear there’s a guy called Mitt Romney who wants to know whether we’re ready. He wants to know whether we’re ready. Are we ready?” The crowd’s unanimous answer was a rousing “Yes!” For that humiliation, the Guardian awarded the maximum points possible and added the question, “Time to go home?”

As an aside, Romney addressed British opposition leader Ed Miliband as “Mr. Leader,” which may be usual practice in the United States, but to British ears sounded a lot more like North Korea (3 points for that one). Then he referred to “the nation of Great Britain,” which is total nonsense because the Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is made up of England, Scotland and Wales (no points awarded for that one).

It’s hard to get more shirt-sleeved than that when beginning a tour. By now he must be completely palatable to any observer who thinks the president has to be a reckless “Commander in Chief” who tells the world exactly what’s on his mind. But, in actuality, the American conservative media still seems suspicious. No applause or praise for Romney. Nowhere.

On the other hand, the scorn of the U.S. liberal media is that much greater. “How to Royally Piss Off an Ally,” the blog Daily Beast wrote. Their colleagues at Daily Kos ran an article titled “Mitt Romney’s very, very bad day.” Even the right wing Fox News couldn’t get around using a negative headline: “Romney causes London stir over Olympic readiness remark.”

And that doesn’t even take into account what was posted on Twitter. Under the hashtags #Romneyshambles and #AmericanBorat a colorful collection of spiteful comments is on display. Alternatively, one may search the term “Sarah Palin” and discover her name is being mentioned in the same breath with Mitt Romney’s.

Palin tried to bolster her foreign policy expertise during the 2008 election by claiming one could see Russia from parts of Alaska. Palin was Republican nominee John McCain’s running mate. McCain also briefly considered asking Mitt Romney to be his vice president but opted in favor of Palin. Perhaps the British media is prophesying doom because Romney is now seen as being even worse than Palin.

His Democratic opponent, meanwhile, has a significant lead in the foreign policy competition. The New York Times notes that he got Osama bin Laden and was on the right side of the Arab Spring. Romney’s response to this has thus far been a deafening silence.

Romney’s foreign tour to Great Britain, Poland and Israel was planned as an attempt to establish his foreign policy profile. How bad is it for him that he bungled the beginning?

Traditional Republican voters seem unimpressed by foreign policy on the one hand. At least, that’s the conclusion reached in a January survey where 81 percent thought President Obama should focus first and foremost on domestic politics. The economy will decide the outcome of the election was the conclusion then. Most experts today are still in agreement with that assessment.

On the other hand, many Americans — and especially Republicans — worry that their nation could lose its status as a superpower and thus fall under the domination of other nations. A New York Times article last year noted that Americans were torn between being war weary and wanting employment while also worrying about China’s rise and America’s decline. They want a president who stands for American greatness.

Pitfalls of the Past

Romney’s appearance in London has little to do with greatness. The Republican has to hope that his blunders are just passing idiosyncrasies. But during his coming trips to Poland, where everything will be about America’s rival Russia, and in Israel, where the whole Middle East conflict awaits him, he can’t afford any such gaffes.

His advisors are urged to exercise caution on the remainder of his foreign tour. Gaffes are a part of Romney’s past as well, such as the observation in his 2010 book “No Apology” in which he said, “England is just a small island. Its roads and houses are small. With few exceptions, it doesn’t make things that people in the rest of the world want to buy. And if it hadn’t been separated from the continent by water, it almost certainly would have been lost to Hitler’s ambitions.”