Did Romney Flub Libya Because He Agrees with Obama?

by John R Guardiano on October 17, 2012

“It’s noteworthy that Romney did not mention Libya in this afternoon’s speech in Virginia,” tweeted Washington Post reporter Philip Rucker.

For “whatever reason,” responded the Washington Examiner’s Byron York, [I] don’t think he feels comfortable with it.”

Indeed, he doesn’t. And the reason Romney doesn’t want to talk about Libya, it seems, is because he essentially agrees with Obama and holds the president blameless for the terrorist attack there.

I know this sounds absurd given Obama’s manifest failures of leadership and penchant for “leading from behind,” but consider what Romney said during last night’s debate:

I think the president just said correctly that — that the buck does stop at his desk, and — and he takes responsibility for — for that — for that — the failure in providing those security resources, and those terrible things may well happen from time to time [emphasis added].

I — I’m — I feel very deeply sympathetic for the families of those who lost loved ones. Today there’s a memorial service for one of those that was lost in this tragedy. We — we think of their families and care for them deeply.

[But] there were other issues associated with this — with this tragedy…

Those other issues concern how Obama responded to the terrorist attack after it happened (belatedly and with little apparent understanding for what transpired and why it occurred).

Romney tried to attack Obama for his weak response to the terrorist attack, but got hung up on whether Obama uttered the precise words “acts of terror.”

And now it seems, after getting beaten badly by Obama on this issue, Romney has decided to ignore Libya altogether until he absolutely must again broach the subject.

The problem with this approach is that it won’t work. Libya is a hot topic right now, in large part because Romney fumbled the question so badly during last night’s debate. And with the third and final debate (on foreign policy) rapidly approaching, Romney will be forced soon to speak anew on this vital topic.

But if he really doesn’t think Obama’s policy of “leading from behind” helped precipitate the massacre in Libya, then there’s not much Romney can and should say.

All of which means that this third and final debate could go very badly for Mitt Romney and the Republican Party. Stay tuned.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: