It is interesting to see how the attendance of this march by RF's Sergej Lavrov lead to a rebuke from Le Monde (one of "those" MSMs). They classified him as a "questionable person" and were saying something about absence of "freedom of mass media" (note the formulation!). They also bundled the head of Hungary Orban (he is guilty of not toeing the American line and doing what is best for Hungary):
http://russian.rt.com/inotv/2015-01-12/Uchastie-Lavrova-v-parizhskom-shestviiI think this really is just another "let's bash Obama" thread by Wilikon.
But to follow your lead, I thought Wikileak's comment on the leader's attendance of the solidarity rally in Paris was pretty good:
This is getting remarkable. We’re seeing some possibly unexpectedly hostile reactions to the administration’s decision not to send anybody to participate in France’s anti-terrorism unity march:
Mike Lupica: “Everybody knows how complicated this country’s relationship with France has been, in war and in peace. Certainly there have been times when the leaders of France could have done better by us. We should have done better by them on Sunday. Only you couldn’t find us.”
Jake Tapper: “I say this as an American — not as a journalist, not as a representative of CNN — but as an American: I was ashamed.”
Michael Tomasky: “Look, it’s just my opinion, but extraordinary event; it’s our fight too. I, as a citizen, feel underrepresented.”
Fareed Zakaria: “Fareed Zakaria, host of CNN’s “Global Public Square,” called the absence of top U.S. officials a mistake… France is the United States’ “deepest ideological ally,” he said, and it would have been a meaningful image to have a senior administration member, or the President, standing shoulder to shoulder with other leaders.” (via Gateway Pundit, who is doing his own round-up.)
The New York Daily News (endorsed Obama for President): “The United States of America, Barack Obama, President, was inexcusably absent from one of the most critical turning points in the war between radical Islam and the West since 9/11.”
I picked these people because they represent a spectrum of folks who are not hostile to the current President. I mean, sure, it’s hardly difficult to find a bunch of Righties who (correctly) think that the President was being an unfeeling dunderhead at best for shrugging off a horrific terrorist operation last week simply because it was directed at the French. But it’s very interesting to see people who normally at least give Barack Obama the benefit of the doubt not do so, in this case.
And that’s the Harriet Miers thing, right there. As I recall, that particular situation started off with a bunch of folks who were normally supporters of George W Bush (or at least well-wishers of the man) deciding that they couldn’t go back to the well just one more time for this one. They had clear expectations of President Bush on what was to them (and me) an important issue, and the President did not live up to those expectations. Bush might have gotten away with that if it had happened in, say, 2003: and Barack Obama might have gotten away with it if this had happened in 2010. But it didn’t.
PS: I understand that there are many people still invested in the idea that there’s nothing that can be done about Barack Obama, and that he’s always going to end up winning and getting whatever he wants. I can’t really do anything to penetrate that level of cynicism and despair; and, truth be told, at this point I kind of have better things to do with my time than try to talk somebody out of having a good case of masochism. But I will note this: despite Obama’s best efforts, he is not actually a king. Every time his support from Democrats corrodes like this, it becomes just a little harder for Barack Obama to do anything. Including the things that might help the Democratic candidate in the next Presidential election.
http://moelane.com/2015/01/12/barack-obama-harriet-miers-paris-terrorism/***********************************************
Even Liberal Rosie O'Donnell Hits Obama's Absence From FranceEven ardent liberal Rosie O'Donnell on Monday attacked the Obama administration for not sending representatives to the massive anti-terrorism rally in Paris. Yet, Nicolle Wallace, a former John McCain adviser who was supposed to represent conservatism on The View, defended the President. O'Donnell railed, "Couldn't Joe Biden have been there and wasn't Eric Holder in Paris?
The comedian described the event as "'We are the World,' but we didn't show up." Wallace spun, "I don't think we should say anything bad about our own country or our own leader, because he wasn't there, because I'm sure there were reasons. No leader didn't want to be there."
Fighting back against O'Donnell's critique, Wallace lectured, "People need to understand that when the American president goes somewhere, thousands of people go with him." She added, "I'm guessing that the White House decided that it would have taken away from this event."
The best Wallace could do was admit that "we should have done a better job."
When even the liberal O'Donnell is making the same point as conservatives and Wallace is defending Obama, clearly ABC failed in finding a conservative replacement for former host Elisabeth Hasselbeck.
[...]
ROSIE O'DONNELL: To switch to a serious note, how about what happened in Paris? World leaders united and marched yesterday to show support after last week's terror attack, and the U.S. is getting a lot of criticism for not having a top official present. I mean, shouldn't we have been there? It was like "we are the world," but we didn't show up.
MARIO CANTONE: Someone should have been there.
NICOLLE WALLACE: Let me explain – I don't work for the White House –
CANTONE: But you used to.
NICOLLE WALLACE: People need to understand that when the American president goes somewhere, thousands of people go with him. And I don't know this for a fact, I'm just guessing, but I'm guessing that the White House decided that it would have taken away from this event. This event was exquisite.
I balled when I watched this. The leader of Jordan was standing in a line. He's a direct decedent of the prophet who was ridiculed in the magazine that inspired the terrorist attack, linked arms with the Israeli Prime Minister. These were world leaders of all different faiths and political theories. And they walked arm-in-arm. It was really beautiful. And the crowd was made up of people, you know, Jews holding up signs that said, "I'm Arab." Christians holding up signs saying, "I am Jew." And this was an incredible event, for the moment. You can YouTube it. You can look it up on the internet and I don't think we should say anything bad about our own country or our own leader, because he wasn't there, because I'm sure there were reasons. No leader didn't want to be there.
O'DONNELL: Couldn't Joe Biden have been there and wasn't Eric Holder in Paris?
WALLACE: He was there and we should have done a better job. We should have thought this through. But this really was a day about standing with France. I wish we'd been there.
CANTONE: What about Johnny Depp? Someone should have been there.
http://www.mrc.org/biasalerts/even-liberal-rosie-odonnell-hits-obamas-absence-france?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed**********************************************************
White House Effort to Insulate Obama from Criticism Falls ApartWhite House Press Secretary Josh Earnest Monday insisted that President Obama could not have attended Sunday’s march in Paris because security arrangements would have had an adverse impact on the event, but he admitted that the White House had not even consulted the Secret Service on the matter.
Earnest acknowledged that some high ranking U.S. official other than the president or the vice president should have attended. But his effort to insulate the president from criticism appeared to fall apart when Julie Hirschfeld Davis of the New York Times asked if it was correct, as the Secret Service and told her, that the White House had not consulted with the Secret Service about security arrangements for a presidential visit.
The decision, it turns out, was based on a feeling about past events. Earnest said:
I’m not going to get into the planning or the logistics that went into the decision related to the march.
What I have merely reiterated is something that we have talked about on many occasions and applies to every time the president wants to attend an event alongside thousands or hundreds of thousands or even millions of other people, which is that that requires significant, onerous security precautions that necessarily have an impact on the ability of those who are attending that event to fully participate.
There is no doubt that had the president attended that march on short notice yesterday, the security precautions around his participation would have had an impact on those who attended the march.
Earnest provided no information on who, if not the Secret Service, made the judgement based on past experience about whether the security would be too onerous in this particular case.
Nor did Earnest indicate how the White House came to the conclusion that Vice President Biden, whose security requirements are far less than the president’s, couldn’t attend. Is Biden’s security really much greater than that used by someone like Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu or German Chancellor Merkel, both of whom were at the march?
While he said he thought Obama would have liked to attend, Earnest gave no indication about whether the president ordered anyone to run the traps and find out whether it was possible.
Obama spent the day at home at the White House. Earnest said he had no idea what Obama was doing. Biden was at home in Delaware. No one knows what he was doing either or whether he asked to go to Paris.
http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2015/01/12/white-house-effort-insulate-obama-criticism-falls/---------------------------
