White House says it erred in not sending higher level official to anti-terror march in Paris

[Sopkoviak]

Once again the tin ears at the White House apologise for nothing.

The Associated Press @AP · 9m 9 minutes ago
BREAKING: White House says it erred in not sending higher level official to anti-terror march in Paris.
0 replies 407 retweets 109 favorites
Reply Retweet407 Favorite109
More

https://twitter.com/AP

[Mass]

1. Why apologize for having done the right thing ?

I would have preferred the protest without elected officials. Just people showing their solidarity. I would have liked the media focusing on how people in the crowd were diverse, of all origins and social classes. This would have been much more meaningful.

[KoKo]

2. +1

[JaneyVee]

3. +1

[branford]

4. You're expressing what you wanted the rally to be, not what it was.

Simply, many world leaders and heads of state, including notable anti-terror allies from Europe and the Middle East, chose to march in solidarity at the rally. The absence of anyone of high-rank from the USA was obvious, disappointing and inexplicable. You can find reasonable excuses for the president's and others lack of attendance, but it doesn't change the politics and entirely expected criticisms from both the right and left.

There were any number of appropriate executive branch officials that could have attended the rally besides the president, including the vice-president, Sec. of State, Sec. of Defense, First Lady, etc. Heck, I though that the vice-president's jobs was to attend rallies and funerals, and Eric Holder was actually in France and but did not attend the rally.

[msongs]

6. the politicians' "march" was a PR stunt photo op nt

[branford]

9. Yes, it was. What's your point?

Politicians are expected to engage in politics, particularly symbolic acts. This is hardly a revelation.

The White House obviously realized the blunder, and has apologized.

The mistake was relatively minor, and should disappear withing the news cycle. Trying to excuse a poor political choice by the White House, however, extends the life of the story.

[JaneyVee]

7. Why no Canada, Australia, Mexico, India, South America?

Canada is basically France.

[LordGlenconner]

11. The eastern part of the country is "like france"

Whereas the western part of the country is completely unlike France in just about every way possible. More reminiscent of the NW United States if anything.

[branford]

12. What's your point?

Are you really comparing the political stature and importance of the USA, particularly as it pertains to Islamic terror, to Canada, Mexico or anywhere else?

Is the standard for American presidential action the choices made by countries in South American, India or Australia?

If conservatives like Stephen Harper or Tony Abbot attended the rally, would you then criticize the president?

As to your claim that Canada is basically France, which I assume would not be kindly received by a great many Canadians, my response is simply that they too should have sent a suitable representative along with the USA.

[B2G]

17. Canada was represented

by Canada's Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney.

This is a cabinet level position.

[HappyMe]

8. I'll squeeze in and add my +1 to this.

Nothing to apologize for.

[Fred Sanders]

14. They did not apologize, which would mean they did something wrong, they said they erred, as in

WTF difference would it have made in expressing solidarity with France and a rally the leaders did not attend anyway?

[Blue_Tires]

38. +1

[Vinca]

5. This was essentially the only question at the White House press briefing today.

It boggles the mind. Entire communities on the African continent (that's right, Sarah, Africa is not a country) have been eliminated by terrorists over the past few days and the inquiring minds of the press - especially Ed Henry of Fox - have their panties in a knot over who did and did not attend a rally of 3 1/2 million people which would have been impossible to secure. Even MSNBC has jumped on the bandwagon. Mrs. Greenspan was all stirred up over the lack of a more prominent U.S. official at the rally and Ronan Farrow - who I thought was smarter than the average talking head - is following in lockstep. What's wrong with these people???????

[countryjake]

29. It's people like Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio...did you hear Steve Holland's answer?

During this morning's press briefing, when Josh Earnest responded to the question of whether "plenty of criticism" of the President was fair, he asked the Reuter's correspondent, "Criticism from who?"

Holland answered that there's a wide variety, then Josh interjected with, "Anybody that comes to mind?"

Steve Holland laughed and said it was people like Ted Cruz, Jake Tapper, Marco Rubio (whose name was echoed by other correspondents throughout the room, along with laughter), and other Republicans.

We should never underestimate the knack of the right-wing, especially the fanatical ones, to frame, control, and dominate a conversation.

[Dreamer Tatum]

10. I agree with the White House. It erred. nt

[branford]

18. I think a lot of the problem is tribalism.

Our Democratic president is under attack, and many are engaging in a knee-jerk defense of the White House.

The problem is that the initial defenses appeared very partisan and therefore made the issue far more prominent in the media. The White House has realized this and is trying to cut their political losses. Their defenders are not doing them any favors, and actually prolonging the issue in the news cycle.

[Dreamer Tatum]

19. When you have the leaders of France, England, and Germany present

then the leader of the free world should be there too, or else it simply looks bad.

Optics, they matter. Howl all you want, folks, but they matter.

[branford]

20. It didn't even need to be the president,

just someone of sufficiently high rank and exposure. If the vice-president or Sec. of State attended, the criticism would have been far more muted. The fact that Eric Holder was actually in France, but was still a no-show, was also really embarrassing.

What surprised me the most was that notable Republicans and 2016 contenders failed showed up, such as Speaker Boehner, Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, or Hillary or Bill Clinton.

[Dreamer Tatum]

21. Kerry would have sufficed.

As for Republicans, they had no role there and it would have been even more awkward. Worse than awkward: off-putting. Romney is a private citizen.

The Clintons maybe...but without an official govt rep there of equal stature, it would have been weird.

[branford]

22. Kerry was actually engaged in important negotiations and dealings in India.

His cancelling events in India would have been problematic given the time and attention devoted to his trip, and the important economic, political and security relationship with India and its new government.

If Obama chose not to go for personal or logistical reasons, Vice-President Biden should have been at the rally. The march was a perfect "vice-president" event.

[Dreamer Tatum]

24. Kerry would have SUFFICED. I believe Obama should have been there. nt

[branford]

26. We agree.

I'm really curious why he chose not to attend.

At first I believed security might be a concern, but given the raw number of extremely high-value VIPs, including heads of state and big targets like Benjamin Netanyahu, I doubt the president would have been in any more danger than usual. Obama also wasn't engaged in any high-level political negotiations or entertaining other heads of state. He also just returned from a few week vacation in Hawaii

Could it have been simple laziness and failure to appreciate the extraordinarily bad optics of not attending? I hope that wasn't the case.

[McCamy Taylor]

13. Because they didn't realize this would be THE protest event of the year

with the press (for once) not underestimating the number of people attending and the names of VIPS.

[TwilightGardener]

15. Admit your mistake, move on. The right thing to do.

[Warren Stupidity]

16. I support President Obama for apologizing!

All of you not standing with the president on this issue are obviously something or other and have failed some misguided loyalty test.

It is like a re-run of the CPUSA whirly-gig in the 1930s around here sometimes.

[Ykcutnek]

23. I don't care about stuff like this.

Whether they showed up or not, my life wouldn't be affected in any meaningful way.

I hate when meaningless garbage like optics occupies the news cycle.

[branford]

27. You might not care, but many others certainly do, including both the liberal and conservative press.

Politics is hardball, and the White House screwed-up and apologized.

I hope that by admitting they flubbed, it quickly removes it from the news cycle. Trying to defend their choices would have made the story even worse and extended its life.

[geek tragedy]

25. Oh jeez whining over the lack of an apology?

Trash thread.

[Warren Stupidity]

35. uh no, whining over the act of apologizing

The Faithful, who this morning were busy poo-pooing the criticisms of the White House no show in Paris were wrong footed by the White House itself, which just apologized for not showing up.

[geek tragedy]

36. Ah, I misread the complaint.

I thought they were complaining that he never apologizes.

Nevertheless, why has this become about Obama?

[uppityperson]

28. He should not apologize for missing a photo op. The march was about the French people, not

about what politicians flew in to get their photo taken on a blocked and guarded side street for a 20 yard march.

[countryjake]

30. +100

(and nobody apologized, that entire briefing this morning was a farce on the part of the press, they all knew it and so did Josh Earnest)

Only reason the White House even held that presser was to shut up Republicans like Marco Rubio.

[Paladin]

34. Well said. No point in being coerced by a right-wing griping point. (nt)

[ecstatic]

31. why do anti-Obama pols and news stations always want him to comment or appear

at various functions? You'd think they'd be happy that he was absent.

[countryjake]

32. Their noise would be even louder today if he'd gone to France. n/t

[deurbano]

37. Yeah, they'd call him a rank opportunist... or say his trip would be costing the taxpayers a billion

dollars... ETC.. (And if Michelle Obama dared to accompany him, of course her outfit would be seen to be in very poor taste.)

[countryjake]

39. Ha! I was going to welcome you to DU...

but I'll just give ya a wave, instead...you've been here almost as long as I have!

[deurbano]

40. Thanks! That low post count is deceptive.

[old guy]

33. I rarely do this but +1