Would Romney have been in this meeting?
Late last week, as part of the anniversary of the mission that killed Osama bin Laden, President Obama's campaign unveiled an ad that celebrated the successful strike, while asking, "Which path would Romney have taken?" Today, the presumptive Republican nominee tried to answer the question.
Seeking to neutralize one of President Obama's recent arguments, Mitt Romney said on Monday that "of course" he would have ordered military forces to make the 2011 raid that ended with the death of Osama bin Laden.
Asked by a reporter during an appearance here whether he would have gone after the al-Qaida leader, Romney responded: "Of course." He was then asked if he would have given the specific order to kill bin Laden.
"Of course," he said. "Even Jimmy Carter would have given that order."
Romney's cheap shot at the former president notwithstanding, there are a few noteworthy angles to this. The first is this notion, common in Republican circles, that this was an easy call for the president to make, and that anyone in the same position would have done the same thing.
The truth is far more complex. The president had a very difficult decision to make -- was the intelligence solid enough? Was it better to use a drone attack or send in U.S. troops? What role, if any, should Pakistan play, and what would be the consequences of going in without notifying Pakistani officials?
There's also the larger shift in administrative strategies. Whereas the Bush/Cheney administration made a conscious, deliberate decision to deemphasize capturing the al Qaeda leader, Obama chose to shift the emphasis back, making bin Laden a central focus of Obama's counter-terrorism strategy.
And then there's Romney's own stated positions. The former governor, who has no background in military policy, national security policy, or international affairs, really did say "it's not worth moving heaven and earth" to get the terrorist responsible for 9/11. Around the same time, Romney said he would not order a strike into Pakistan to get bin Laden, rejecting Obama's willingness "to enter an ally of ours" to target the terrorist leader.
This morning, Romney said "of course" he'd do what Obama did. It's effectively the same thing as saying, "Never mind everything I said during my first presidential campaign."
Leave a Comment:
"Never mind everything I said
during my first presidential campaignbefore this precise moment." Isn't that Romney's slogan?It's even worse than that, it's "now that the answers have been given out, I get to take the test again, right?"
These sorts of real-world political science experiments are really rare -- ones where a candidate for president makes a clear-cut statement about how he'd deal with something, and it actually occurs, and we find out how completely wrong he was, and then he runs again. With Romney, we have at least two. What a special guy!
Just shake the etch-a-sketch and turn the knobs in a different direction.
Dems should be using Romney's waffling about Bin Laden to show he is indecisive, particularly as it relates to foreign policy. That would be a very effective message for Obama.
He's not indecisive -- he'll do as the Constitution requires and have Mitch McConnell tell him what to do.
Well, if what just happened with Romney's camp trying to erase his damning editorial, "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" by TAKING CREDIT for saving the auto industry ("Obama just did what Mitt advised") is any criterion, this will end with Romney taking credit for getting bin Laden.
Meanwhile his real supporter, Arianna Huffington, who's fast becoming the Murdoch of bloggers, is calling 'despicable' Obama's ad reminding voters of what Romney said about bin Laden not being worth all the money needed to 'get him' --
But then, Huffington is an A no. 1 sleaze bag: She began as a right winger, pretended to be a liberal, but in the end, she's just a conservative, wealthy exploiter of those who work for her and is therefore acting in solidarity with a true member of her own class.
She's quite a bit responsible for liberals being 'turned off' to Obama and for the success of the GOP in the midterms. She's a skunk.
JJFFMM, Huffingtonpost won a pulitzer. Hell, I didn't know they gave out pulitzers for being a secret part of the mighty wurlitzer.
I don't know, Ron. I just stopped by Huff Post for the first time in ages and was shocked at how right wing it appears to be. I thought I had happened onto the Fox News web site by mistake. The Pulitzer might be for one great piece of reporting; that doesn't mean that the rest of its posts are of equal quality.
Today's headline posts look like ads for Romney and the Republicans. I'm deleting it from my "favorites" list.
Romney wouldn't know the truth if it was staring him right in the eyes. He's just not used to telling the truth
Etch a Sketch.
Etch-a-sketch has already been forgotten by the media and the public.
so true . Just a waitin' on the next shiny object
Joe Biden has the best line of the campaign so far. Mitt Romney would have let GM die and Bin Ladin live.
it's quite amusing to watch Romney continue with the delusion that recording media doesn't exist.
A fourth-grader could put together the anti-Romney Back-to-the-future ads.
There will be millions of people vote for Romney and how could they possibly know where he stands on issues?
he couldn't even stand up to Rush Limbaugh.
take out Bin Laden...
doubt it.
The next thing you know the campaign is going to pull a stunt like landing a jet on an aircraft carrier with a big banner in the background or boast about their survival in a Vietnam POW camp! Oh wait, those have already been used! :-)
Remember those people when you were growing up that used to like things & ideas until you liked them. Then they made fun of you for liking those same things? They are now Republican Congressmen in the US House and Senate.
You have SO hit the nail on the head, Rodney. Not only are they Republican congressmen and senators, they are also the run-of-the-mill Republican voter. Hypocritical to a capital T.
You don't even understand, Steve. They've already neutralized the issue. Most people think the decision to go after bin Laden was as easy as pulling a trigger. All that nuance of possibilities and probabilities of incorrect data, etc. slips right past people. Nuance and complexity is for thinking people. America doesn't have many of those, else how do you explain zombie supply-side economics, zombie notions that climate change is a hoax, zombie beliefs of the Kenyan Keynesian Socialist Muslim racist in the White House, ...
Republican lies work. And there's no punishment for it. The media won't do it's job.
For too many, the media's new job now is to entertain, not inform.
Tomorrow Mr. Waffles will have a different answer. It's like Obama having multiple front runners to deal with - each with a different RNC message.
How many Mitts are actually running for President? I know already that there are 2 Obama's - there's the first one we know as President of the United States, who does pretty much what he says he'll do and takes his duties as CofC seriously; then there's the cartoon Obama that Romney thinks he's running against.
Frankly, I'm looking forward to the debates when Real Life Obama starts pushing Etch-a-Sketch Romney's buttons until he explodes right there on my TV Machine.
Chicago seems to be pretty savvy (or at least I hope so). I hope they've already got a spot up to run simply showing Romney saying both things. Maybe a couple of ads, one showing Romney talking about Osama and another talking about GM.
You know, I like having a competent Democratic campaign organisation...
The dissing of Jimmy Carter is especially galling coming from one of the most over-privileged pricks ever to walk to face of the Earth, and one with ZERO foreign policy experience. What happened to Carter after the failed attempt to rescue the American hostages in Iran was another thing Obama had to heavily consider. Imagine what the right wing press would have done to Obama had the mission failed. Jimmy Carter not only made a tough decision that Mittens most likely wouldn't make, he also served his country in the Navy rather than serving in Bain Capitol f*cking American workers.
Nor will Mitt ever win the Nobel Peace Prize like Carter did in 2002. President Carter has used his life after the presidency to do good works. Another thing you'll never see Mitt Romney doing.
Who doubts that if Romney had been in office, GM would be dead and OBL live and loving it!
His utter superficiality reminds me of "newsman" Ted Baxter, of the old Mary Tyler Moore Show.
THAT'S it. Thanks, Day, you nailed it.
Romney is fast loosing what little credibility he had as a serious politician.
Which is a very interesting thing to observe about someone who may well become our next President.
Thank you. All of our men and women defending this country always do a great job wherever their focus and resources are directed, so leadership matters. This president and Democrats are rightfully pointing out that they directed more focus and resources on Afghanistan, Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden and the effects of such leadership are clear. Before bin Laden was killed Republicans including Mitt Romney defended less focus and resources on this and the results of this leadership are equally clear. Beyond the demonstration of leadership it is also relevant to this election because Iran could be our next focus.
Romney is right, Carter would have given the order ... just as he did in 1980, knowing full well the risks of the mission and the consequences if it failed. Unlike Romney and his chickenhawk revisionist ilk, Carter made the difficult decision to green light the rescue mission, and took full responsibility when the mission failed. Romney tries to turn Carter into a pejorative when he isn't even qualified to shine Carter's Annapolis-trained shoes.
You're so right! It is so sad to have President Carter's name used so poorly. He made a risky and courageous decision, but "No battle plan survives contact with the enemy".
The idea here is that the decision to raid Bin Laden's compound was just an up/down kind of call. What is not mentioned by conservatives is that it took years of background work to lead up to that single decision. The raid and killing of Osama Bin Laden was a sustained and focused effort that was performed with discipline and restraint. Rather than release chest-thumping announcements about how they are 'closing in' on his hideout, or some such, the Obama administration kept its progress quiet.
Could Romney have sustained this kind of discipline and focus? He strikes me as a loudmouthed grandstander, just like W.
Certainly, if Romney had been presented with the completed Bin Laden project, needing only his OK, he would have approved it. (OK, I give him too much credit for guts here, but bear with me) But I think he would never have been able to bring it all together over the course of years. He would have milked it too early for PR points, or would simply have lost interest.