“And — and we’re going to have to recognize that we have to do as the president has done. I congratulate him on — on taking out Osama bin Laden and going after the leadership in al-Qaeda.” ~ Willard (Mitt) Romney, candidate
Boca Raton, Fla. – Last night’s Presidential Debate between President Barack Obama and former Massachusetts Governor Willard (Mitt) Romney had the Commander in Chief comfortable in his role as he presented the Nation’s foreign policy platform.
Taking charge from the start the President had his opponent waffling between agreement with the present and future foreign relations policies set forth by the Obama administration and frustration with his own inability to answer key questions posed by moderator, Bob Schieffer.
The first topic, Libya, was posed in a series of questions aimed at addressing the recent terrorist attack in Benghazi resulting in the death of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Directed first to former Governor Romney, Schieffer asked six specific questions regarding the attack and controversy surrounding failed security measures.
Calling to mind the Governor’s previous comment, “you said this was an example of an American policy in the Middle East that is unraveling before our very eyes,” Shieffer lay the groundwork for what should not have been an arduous topic for a candidate seeking role of Commander in Chief.
The Governor chose not to address the situation in Libya directly out of the box. Instead, setting forth a fumbling narrative loosely including Libya, “We see in — in Libya, an attack apparently by, I think we know now, by terrorists of some kind against — against our people there, four people dead,” Romney chose to side-step the Benghazi attack and the failed policy comments, altogether.
In fact, Romney in another flip-flop moment, commended the President’s dealings in the Middle East.
“And — and we’re going to have to recognize that we have to do as the president has done. I congratulate him on — on taking out Osama bin Laden and going after the leadership in al-Qaeda,” offered Romney.
What he didn’t offer was an answer to the moderator’s questions regarding the attack in Benghazi, possible intelligence and policy failures, or define what it is that is “unraveling before our very eyes.” The governor’s solution to dealing with al-Qaeda and unrest in the Middle East – more flip-flops.
On one topic, in one segment, in one very crucial debate, the challenger again proves that one thing he can offer as President is inconsistency and confusion.
In his stance on the Middle East, he begins, “But we can’t kill our way out of this mess.”
Just moments later the governor countered the President with “Well, my strategy is pretty straightforward, which is to go after the bad guys, to make sure we do our very best to interrupt them, to — to kill them, to take them out of the picture.”
To kill or not to kill? Somehow his non-killing or killing policy on the Middle East will be accomplished by coming up with a plan, a robust plan.
The President countered by addressing the tragedy in Benghazi, answering the questions posed by the moderator, and counseling the former governor that the United States stood in a leadership position in ridding Libya of the reign and terror of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi on the coming eve of the anniversary of his death.
Owning both the topic and the remainder of the debate, the President reminded the former governor on several occasions that he is comfortable and knowledgeable in his position as Commander in Chief.