Video: Obama kinda sorta accuses Romney of flip-flopping on Bin Laden

posted at 5:23 pm on April 30, 2012 by Allahpundit

Not really a fair cop — read Morgen’s post yesterday for essential context — but the White House wants to push both the “Romney is more conservative than Barry Goldwater” message and the “Romney stands for nothing” message this fall, no matter how incoherent that might be. So here’s O taking an easy shot at the latter.

Asked about Romney’s comments from earlier this morning belittling how difficult the decision to go after bin Laden may have been, the president said “As far as my personal role and what other folks would do, I’d just recommend that everybody take a look at people’s previous statements in terms of whether they thought it was appropriate to go into Pakistan and take out bin Laden. I assume that people meant what they said when they said it. That’s been at least my practice.”

The president was alluding to Romney’s 2007 comments about bin Laden that “it’s not worth moving heaven and earth and spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.” The Obama campaign last Friday released a web ad suggestion that this sentence suggests he would not have been willing to take the risk and order Navy SEALs to cross into Pakistan and infiltrate bin Laden’s Abbotabad compound…

The Romney campaign argues that his 2007 comments about “not moving heaven and earth” to get bin Laden are being unfairly twisted by the president, that the full context indicates that he was saying the war against the extremist Islamist movement was bigger than just one man – not that he wouldn’t go after that one man. According to the Associated Press’s Liz Sidoti, Romney said capturing bin Laden would made the U.S. safer by only “a small percentage” resulting in “a very insignificant increase in safety” since someone else would take bin Laden’s place. Romney supported a broader strategy against.

I explained in the last post why Romney (and Jimmy Carter) would have given the order to go grab Bin Laden given the state of Pakistani treachery circa 2011, so go read that if you haven’t. All I’ll add here is that I’m surprised Obama’s passing on an opportunity to tout his broader record on counterterrorism for a cheap knock on Romney the flip-flopper. Romney’s point in context is that the war on terror is bigger than one man. Indeed, O could say, which is why over the past four years he’s ramped up drone strikes in Pakistan, resulting in the near-collapse of “core Al Qaeda.” WaPo reported within the past week that not only has the drone campaign been extended to Yemen, Obama’s given Petraeus and the CIA authority to fire without first confirming the identity of whom they’re firing at. Why forfeit an excuse to talk about all that? “Bin Laden week” at the White House should be an occasion to tout broader progress against AQ, not syrupy reminiscences about who said what to whom in the situation room once they got the news about “Geronimo.” By making it purely about OBL, he’s risking minimizing his own accomplishment in the minds of low-information voters.

Exit question via the Washington Free Beacon’s Andrew Stiles: When O says “I assume that people meant what they said when they said it,” does that also apply to the various nonsense he spouted on the trail in 2008? Opposing the mandate, ridding his administration of lobbyists, civilian trials for terrorists, etc etc. Back before he tore up the War Powers Act, he was a pretty peace-minded guy, you know. See Peter Kirsanow’s post at the Corner for more examples.

Update: Lefty Josh Marshall says the White House chatter about Bin Laden is less a matter of politics than meta-politics:

But as I first argued back in 2004, national political campaigns are only loosely about ‘issues’ as news obsessives construe them. Contemporary American campaigns are much more meta-battles over power, masculinity and dominance, what I once called “bitch-slap politics.” Not pretty perhaps but you’ll never understand campaigns without understanding things through this prism. And that’s very much what’s happening with the Obama campaign’s latest fusillade against Mitt Romney. This isn’t simply – maybe not even mainly — about the actual decision to risk so much to kill bin Laden. It’s a dance to – let’s not run away from what it really is – unman Romney in his contest with the president.

People don’t expect Democrats to make such brash moves on national security politics. It’s been a very long time since a Democratic president has been in a position to do it. Its aforementioned obviousness aside, it’s garnered a collective gasp from the pundit class. It was a smack right across the face of Mitt Romney right as he’s making a reasonably successful reintroduction of himself to the American people.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Barrack just won’t let go of the chew toy.

Must be something he ate.

coldwarrior on April 30, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Fools, just by making terror the issue Dems lose, even in a area they believe ripe for advantage as the killing of Bin Laden.

rob verdi on April 30, 2012 at 5:27 PM

They’d better bring back the dog attacks soon.

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 5:28 PM

Hmmmm let’s look at the Obumbler’s positions on; the Health Care Mandate, Raising Taxes, Christianity, Executive Orders, Czars, wait, he didn’t mean him. It only applies to others. I won’t even mention Transparency in Government, Lobbyist in the White House…there I go again. The rules don’t apply to the Obumbler, but they will in November, I’m just happy he doesn’t believe it yet!!

Tbone McGraw on April 30, 2012 at 5:28 PM

Obama is reduced to preposterous statements. And eating dogs.

Curtiss on April 30, 2012 at 5:28 PM

But… but… it was such a hard choice to make the order to “get” Osama Bin Laden, as long as nothing changes from the way they told hime it wouldm go.

AverageJoe on April 30, 2012 at 5:28 PM

By next week, Obama will be attacking Romney over Romneycare. And the number of children Romney has.

TexasDan on April 30, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Obama’s a hypocritical twerp for trying to say both “radical right” and “goes whichever way the wind blows.”

Simultaneously, he’s right to beat Romney over the head on bin Laden. Romney indicated going after bin Laden was strictly a cost-benefit analysis for him, and that we wouldn’t move heaven or earth or spend billions to get just him. Instead, he wanted to focus on jihadists more generally.

Going after jihadists in general is all well and good, but you should also be focusing on bin Laden, because ultimately he’s the one responsible for 9/11, which is the event that precipitated our military actions to begin with, not to mention the intelligence gleaned from his compound.

It’s not the sort of gaffe that alone will doom Romney (he has so many other things that will do that), but it’s preposterous to keep insisting that Romney didn’t have his head stuck up his rectum when he uttered his comments.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Obama is reduced to preposterous statements. And eating dogs.

Curtiss on April 30, 2012 at 5:28 PM

If Obama had another daughter she’d look like this.

The bulldog finally did bite her back in self-defense,” Smith said. “There were no charges against the dog.”

Fallon on April 30, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Fallon on April 30, 2012 at 5:31 PM

That’s just mean. And amusing.

Curtiss on April 30, 2012 at 5:32 PM

Obama gets credit for OBL? And Richard Nixon landed on the moon. Literally. He was in the Lunar Module, really!

ParisParamus on April 30, 2012 at 5:33 PM

OT but breaking:

Walker raises $13 million in first quarter. Barret raises $750,000.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/walker-raises-13-million-since-january-8o57q7r-149561525.html

Bring it on.

Nelsen on April 30, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Grasping at straws. That’s what he’s doing. The man is desperate and the reason? He’s despicable and has no record to draw on except the success of our military. He deserves about as much credit for their success in bringing down a wanted terrorist leader/coward as he does for getting a Pulitzer.

scalleywag on April 30, 2012 at 5:35 PM

…IT’S THE ECONOMY STUPID…!!!

KOOLAID2 on April 30, 2012 at 5:35 PM

Simultaneously, he’s right to beat Romney over the head on bin Laden. Romney indicated going after bin Laden was strictly a cost-benefit analysis for him, and that we wouldn’t move heaven or earth or spend billions to get just him. Instead, he wanted to focus on jihadists more generally.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Obama didn’t move heaven and earth or spend billions either.

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 5:38 PM

OT but breaking:

Walker raises $13 million in first quarter. Barret raises $750,000.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/walker-raises-13-million-since-january-8o57q7r-149561525.html

Bring it on.

Nelsen on April 30, 2012 at 5:34 PM

The Dems didn’t anticipate the unintended consequences in their attempts to recall pretty much every Republican in the state. There’s been severe backlash and although it’ll be extremely difficult for Romney to win WI this time, the state will continue to trend red.

GOPRanknFile on April 30, 2012 at 5:38 PM

He’ll be desperate by late summer…looking forward to the good times.

d1carter on April 30, 2012 at 5:39 PM

.

It was a smack right across the face of Mitt Romney right as he’s making a reasonably successful reintroduction of himself to the American people.

Josh Marshall is an idiot..what it is a little man trying to look like a big man and coming across like a braggart in the process..makes me think of Barney Fife.

BTW, Are we to assume then that Obama actually meant what he said when he spouted that he would close Gitmo and that in his America people would not be held without trials?

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 5:41 PM

So which Super Pac is going to be first out with a video of Obama believing what he is saying and saying what he believes?

ctmom on April 30, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Obama’s right. We should believe what people say. That’s why I believe him when he said that having to raise the debt-ceiling was a sign of failed leadership. I also believe that he meant it when he said that adding $5T in debt was unpatriotic. Thanks for the reminder, Barry.

JohnInCA on April 30, 2012 at 5:42 PM

Obama didn’t move heaven and earth or spend billions either.

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 5:38 PM

‘scuse me? Obama didn’t spend billions? Does Obama do anything other than spend billions?

Where have you been for the past 4 years?

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:42 PM

Whatchyu talkin’ ’bout Barry?

BHO Jonestown on April 30, 2012 at 5:42 PM

Who is the dope liberal playing straight man for Obama?

Jaibones on April 30, 2012 at 5:42 PM

You know what Romney wouldn’t do? Open up the war room to a bunch of celebrities.

scalleywag on April 30, 2012 at 5:42 PM

Obama didn’t move heaven and earth or spend billions either.

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 5:38 PM

This is true.

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 5:45 PM

He probably wouldn’t invite Lohan and Kardashian to a WH function, either.

scalleywag on April 30, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Obama didn’t move heaven and earth or spend billions either.

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 5:38 PM

‘scuse me? Obama didn’t spend billions? Does Obama do anything other than spend billions?

Where have you been for the past 4 years?

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:42 PM

Actually, Chuck is half right, Obama spent Trillions!

Kini on April 30, 2012 at 5:45 PM

‘scuse me? Obama didn’t spend billions? Does Obama do anything other than spend billions?

Where have you been for the past 4 years?

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:42 PM

Specifically on killing bin Laden? Nope.

And I don’t recall heaven and earth moving either. Seem to be in the same place.

So it’s all pretty silly. But what else do you really have?

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 5:45 PM

If Obama actually ran on his drone strikes, shoot to kill orders, infringement of sovereign nations’ territory, renditions,and death warrants on US citizens he’d have to explain all these to his lefty base. Can you really see Jerry Nadler or Pete Stark publicly supporting these actions. Killing bad guys is a good program, but Obama can’t tout it, lest he lose his OWS base and see a replay of Chicago ’68 in Charlotte.

xkaydet65 on April 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Grasping at straws.

scalleywag on April 30, 2012 at 5:35 PM

Exactly! Obama has nothing, but invented rumors.

Kini on April 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Man, this little narrative is spinning away from Barack — “excessive celebration”? That’s gonna leave a mark. And then he gives the Romnery campaign this little gem of a quote:

“I assume that people meant what they said when they said it. That’s been at least my practice.”

Oops! That clip will find its way into series of ads this fall, followed by the many, many, many, many campaign promises he has failed to keep. Everything Barack says — EVERYTHING — has an expiration date. For example, did he mean it when his campaign said this about Shrillery in 2008?

It’s ironic that she would borrow (President Bush’s) tactics in her own campaign and invoke bin Laden to score political points. We already have a President who plays the politics of fear, and we don’t need another.

Did he mean it when he said this about health care reform?

“These negotiations will be on C-SPAN, and so the public will be part of the conversation and will see the decisions that are being made.”

Did he mean it when he said this about recess appointments?

a recess appointment is “damaged goods” and has “less credibility” than a normal appointment.

Did he mean it when he said this about Gitmo?

“The detention facilities at Guantánamo for individuals covered by this order shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than one year from the date of this order (January 22, 2009).”

That’s just a start, but these ads really do write themselves. Sorry, Barack, but your assertion that it has “been your practice” to mean what you say is just another lie from the mother of all liars. Thanks for saying this particular lie on tape!

Rational Thought on April 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM

I assume that people meant what they said when they said it.

Sooo….does that mean that his quote about “Energy prices will necessarily skyrocket” is back in play?

Good to know.

TeresainFortWorth on April 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM

I just realized something…

Romney is going to win this election.

William Eaton on April 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Going after jihadists in general is all well and good, but you should also be focusing on bin Laden, because ultimately he’s the one responsible for 9/11, which is the event that precipitated our military actions to begin with, not to mention the intelligence gleaned from his compound.

It’s not the sort of gaffe that alone will doom Romney (he has so many other things that will do that), but it’s preposterous to keep insisting that Romney didn’t have his head stuck up his rectum when he uttered his comments.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:31 PM

It was not a gaffe. Romney never said he would not go after bin Laden…he just said he would not move heaven and earth to get one man and then stop there.

Really..It is all so absurd anyway.

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Specifically on killing bin Laden? Nope.

And I don’t recall heaven and earth moving either. Seem to be in the same place.

So it’s all pretty silly. But what else do you really have?

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 5:45 PM

How much did the entire hunt for bin Laden operation cost then? ’cause I’m guessing it was more than $5.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:48 PM

How much did the entire hunt for bin Laden operation cost then? ’cause I’m guessing it was more than $5.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Have you ever been in an argument before? The reason I’m asking is because you really suck at it.

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 5:49 PM

We should attack Obama through Clinton. Bill Clinton paved the way for Al Queda.

rubberneck on April 30, 2012 at 5:49 PM

Dreams from my fodder.

rogerb on April 30, 2012 at 5:49 PM

This is what will hurt RonMe throughout the campaign. The accusers proving that Romney is flip-flopping on many of the important issues will cause voters to believe even the lies, and we can thank the GOP Insiders and Sketchy’s liberal supporters for that in November.

Google it for yourself. Google Governor Romney +
Judicial pics
Planned Parenthood
donations abortion clinics
Healthcare
Individual Mandate
Raising taxes

And be sure to try out any other issue you are concerned about.

DannoJyd on April 30, 2012 at 5:50 PM

scalleywag on April 30, 2012 at 5:42 PM

Ya got that one 100% right.

That’s what happens when everybody in the club gettin’ tipsy…”let’s enjoy our wagyu and rose petal salads and Cristal and then I’ll show you the really cool stuff. Fiddy Cent, Kanye, this’ll make your media room look like a old time nickelodeon.”

coldwarrior on April 30, 2012 at 5:51 PM

How much did the entire hunt for bin Laden operation cost then? ’cause I’m guessing it was more than $5.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Oh for heavens sakes, the hunt for bin Laden began on 9/11..and it did not end until he was dead..It also included the use of enhanced interrogation techniques which Obama still says he does not support. All in all, George Bush also expended a lot of resources looking for Osama…the point Romney made was simple..don’t spend all that money looking for one guy and then call it a day. All you have to do is actually listen to what he said.

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 5:51 PM

Too bad this isn’t an election year…

Seven Percent Solution on April 30, 2012 at 5:51 PM

I assume that people meant what they said when they said it. That’s been at least my practice.”

Oh really…where is the reduction in spending, the reducing of the deficit, the most “transparent” administration evah‘,the lack of lobbyists in the administration,the uniter, the closing of Gitmo, the creation of new jobs, the promise that unemployment would not go above 8%, the call for a “new civility”…

…yeah, that’s what I thought, hypocrite in chief!

I loathe obaka.

ladyingray on April 30, 2012 at 5:51 PM

Also, when it comes to the bin Laden raid, we may have blown at least a billion dollars on the downed stealth helicopter. Remember that a single F-22 costs (depending on your accounting) between $137 and $678 million, and the F-22 is not a black ops project.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Obama’s all about the straw man…throwing out the thing that cannot be proven.

albill on April 30, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Obama admitted that killing Bin Laden was easy as he represented a different Islamic sect than the president worshipped and that Romney wouldn’t have done anything because he was too busy looking for extra wives to marry.

Smedley on April 30, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Barrack just won’t let go of the chew toy.

Must be something he ate.

coldwarrior on April 30, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Hee, hee!
I swear, the Obama8Dog meme will never get old.

Dark Star on April 30, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Oh for heavens sakes, the hunt for bin Laden began on 9/11..and it did not end until he was dead..It also included the use of enhanced interrogation techniques which Obama still says he does not support. All in all, George Bush also expended a lot of resources looking for Osama…the point Romney made was simple..don’t spend all that money looking for one guy and then call it a day. All you have to do is actually listen to what he said.

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 5:51 PM

Yeah, George W. Bush did spend a lot going after Osama. It was worth it. So did Obama, and finally the spending paid off. Huzzah for the USA.

My problem with Romney (on this matter) is his dismissal of Osama bin Laden’s importance.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Obama’s right. We should believe what people say. That’s why I believe him when he said that having to raise the debt-ceiling was a sign of failed leadership. I also believe that he meant it when he said that adding $5T in debt was unpatriotic. Thanks for the reminder, Barry.

JohnInCA on April 30, 2012 at 5:42 PM

This will make a great ad.

LASue on April 30, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Also, when it comes to the bin Laden raid, we may have blown at least a billion dollars on the downed stealth helicopter. Remember that a single F-22 costs (depending on your accounting) between $137 and $678 million, and the F-22 is not a black ops project.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Hahaha. Keep digging, dumbass.

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Thanks for saying this particular lie on tape!

Rational Thought on April 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM

+7%…!

Seven Percent Solution on April 30, 2012 at 5:55 PM

Hahaha. Keep digging, dumbass.

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Consulting your self-help book again, Chuck?

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:56 PM

I just realized something…
Romney is going to win this election.
William Eaton on April 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM

It’s going to be Reagan-esque….

TeresainFortWorth on April 30, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Obama’s all about the straw man……
albill on April 30, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Good thing we’ve got all these matches….

TeresainFortWorth on April 30, 2012 at 5:59 PM

If you look at the YouTube version of the clip… Um, what’s with the wink at the start?

Sue Anne on April 30, 2012 at 5:59 PM

Well at least we aren’t air-raiding villages and killing children anymore..oh wait.

HumpBot Salvation on April 30, 2012 at 6:00 PM

I assume that people meant what they said when they said it. That’s been at least my practice.”

Is that so puppy muncher ?
So when can we see those C-Span tapes about the debates on
Obama-scare, before it was passed ?

burrata on April 30, 2012 at 6:00 PM

Was Josh Marshall typing from his knees when he was fantasizing about Obama bitch-slapping Romney?

OxyCon on April 30, 2012 at 6:01 PM

I just realized something…
Romney is going to win this election.
William Eaton on April 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM

It’s going to be Reagan-esque….

TeresainFortWorth on April 30, 2012 at 5:56 PM

I’ve actually heard from quite a few people over the past few days that they think it’ll be a landslide victory for Romney and a few of them even voted for Obama. I don’t see a landslide victory for Romney (I think Romney will win, but it’ll be close), but I would love to be proven wrong. :)

GOPRanknFile on April 30, 2012 at 6:01 PM

Video: Obama kinda sorta accuses Romney of flip-flopping on Bin Laden

You mean kinda sorta like voting against raising the debt ceiling when you were a senator before freaking out when republicans voted against it when you were president?

Scrappy on April 30, 2012 at 6:02 PM

So, is killing terrorists good now? It’s ok to kill them, and it’s ok to send them to Guantanamo prison too, right?

Don’t let me hear the democrats whining about any of these things when they come up again. Obama has done everything he has whined and made a fuss that Bush was doing it.

Fleuries on April 30, 2012 at 6:03 PM

TeresainFortWorth on April 30, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Was about this time in 1980 when Reagan was all but written off…even by the Right.

Then came Nashua…and that one line…”"I am paying for this microphone, Mr. Green!”

The rest, as they say, is history.

coldwarrior on April 30, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Bryan Williams is going to do a long Obama butt kiss on Wed night…

d1carter on April 30, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Come on Barry, RUN ON YOUR RECORD!

Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!

GarandFan on April 30, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Nothing wrong with Romney’s comment, Obama is just hoping – and this is what he is counting on for November – that enough Americans are stupid.

Chessplayer on April 30, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Obama should be a bit more careful about what he says about other people saying what they meant.

I meant what I said, and I said what I meant.
An elephant’s faithful, one hundred percent.

Not a word about the donkey.

Guess the donkey is a bit less than faithful 100%?

[Thank you, Doctor Seuss.]

coldwarrior on April 30, 2012 at 6:07 PM

This whole Obama Bin Laden ad story illustrates how different this election is going to be from the last. Barack is damaged goods. The media is still certainly in his corner, but he is the president now, and they cannot simply ignore that. When his campaign does something cheap and stupid, like with this ad, or like with the Romney dog story, and the Romney campaign fires back, the Obamamedia has to cover it. And because Barack has always been a smarmy (I actually believe sociopathic), lying, punk, it starts to show. In 2008, they just ignored everything — just acted like none of it existed, the racist minister, the terrorist friend, etc. — but the landscape has changed, the old media is hanging by a thread, and they’ve got to cover some of this stuff. Look at NPR this weekend changing its laughable “Is slow growth good for the economy?” headline. NPR changed a headline because the new media humiliated them into it! NBC got nailed for editing the Zimmerman tape. Barack’s EPA guy gets fired for revealing that they intend to “crucify” American businesses. These stories got covered! Barack’s in big, big trouble. The truth about who and what he is just cannot be concealed anymore by his friends in the media. They are outnumbered and going bankrupt. They are all one humiliating Barack cover-up story away from total annihilation.

Rational Thought on April 30, 2012 at 6:09 PM

kind of glad they are talking about this now…cuz he can’t play this card til nov…get real old quick

wasn’t it a dead cat bounce for him last year anyway?

cmsinaz on April 30, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Yeah, George W. Bush did spend a lot going after Osama. It was worth it. So did Obama, and finally the spending paid off. Huzzah for the USA.

My problem with Romney (on this matter) is his dismissal of Osama bin Laden’s importance.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 5:53 PM

No, he did not dismiss Osama’s importance..I have read his book and heard what he said..his point is that there are literally millions of jihadis out there and concentrating on one man is not enough to deal with the threat in the long run.

His point is obvious…do not spend all that money and time and then say to hell with it when bin Laden is gone…it is more important to keep pressure on the whole network.

Besides, we did not have him then..they had been looking for years. A lot of people thought bin Laden was already dead..Romney was saying what a lot of other people were saying at the time..it is not all about one man.

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 6:12 PM

kind of glad they are talking about this now…cuz he can’t play this card til nov…get real old quick

wasn’t it a dead cat bounce for him last year anyway?

cmsinaz on April 30, 2012 at 6:10 PM

It was a 10-point bounce for Obama that lasted about a week.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:12 PM

I assume that people meant what they said when they said it.”

Says the man who hasn’t meant anything he’s said. Evah.

If you like…..

….taxes won’t go up one dime..

Geithner is the only one who can………

The entire list is just too long to include here.

BobMbx on April 30, 2012 at 6:13 PM

his point is that there are literally millions of jihadis out there and concentrating on one man is not enough to deal with the threat in the long run.

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 6:12 PM

You may contend that that’s what Romney meant, but the problem is that it’s not what he said.

I do grant that he said he wanted to eliminate jihadists in general. Again, good for Romney on that. The problem is that he downplayed the importance and targeting of the guy who was ultimately responsible for 9/11.

Yes, you spend billions and move heaven and earth to get bin Laden. And you do so for the rest of al Qaeda too. That’s what he should have, but didn’t, say.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:15 PM

So, in Bin Laden’s case, Obama was for death panels.

profitsbeard on April 30, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:12 PM

thanks buddy

cmsinaz on April 30, 2012 at 6:21 PM

So it’s all pretty silly. But what else do you really have?

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Ummmm, let’s see…what do you think of water-boarding?

ladyingray on April 30, 2012 at 6:23 PM

You may contend that that’s what Romney meant, but the problem is that it’s not what he said.

I do grant that he said he wanted to eliminate jihadists in general. Again, good for Romney on that. The problem is that he downplayed the importance and targeting of the guy who was ultimately responsible for 9/11.

Yes, you spend billions and move heaven and earth to get bin Laden. And you do so for the rest of al Qaeda too. That’s what he should have, but didn’t, say.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Yes, it is what he said, if you actually listen to his entire quote or read what he wrote on the subject rather than cherry picking a statement and taking it out of context in an attempt to change the meaning of his comment. You and Obama are distorting what Romney actually said.

And btw, it has happened before. Romney made a point that in terms of immigration he could support some illegals becoming legal…but they would have to leave the country and come back in at the back of the line…people who wanted to hurt Romney..cut his statement off at the but. What you are doing is just as dishonest.

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Barack Strawman Obama.

Dreams from my fodder.

rogerb on April 30, 2012 at 5:49 PM

FIFY

profitsbeard on April 30, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 6:12 PM

But, but…according to Team Obama isn’t the War on Terror over now that Osama is gone?

That Romney message, as it were, about this being about more than getting Osama is very true, and has been since the first Presidential findings were signed following 9/11…and even long before Osama was turned into a lead magnet, there were loud very loud voices on the Left that this war should stop, be ended, because Bush couldn’t “find” Osama or that the war was lost…and we were merely encouraging jihadis to take up arms against the West…and, of course, all of it was Bush’s fault. Can’t leave that out.

We still have a long way to go…and Romney has indicated he already understands this.

One road is to do whatever it takes to stop violent Islamist jihad. Destroy it.

The other is to rebuild American institutions, and allow most Americans to return to a more normal way of life without, for example, having to have their sexuality checked by various TSA gropers.

The first is difficult but pretty straight forward.

The second is going to take the wisdom of Solomon to accomplish…lest we allow government in the name of our security to take over all aspects of our lives, and by then, it’ll be too late.

coldwarrior on April 30, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Yes, it is what he said, if you actually listen to his entire quote or read what he wrote on the subject rather than cherry picking a statement and taking it out of context in an attempt to change the meaning of his comment. You and Obama are distorting what Romney actually said.

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 6:23 PM

No, I’m not distorting it. Again, for your reading:

LIZ SIDOTI: “Why haven’t we caught bin Laden in your opinion?”

GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: “I think, I wouldn’t want to over-concentrate on Bin Laden. He’s one of many, many people who are involved in this global Jihadist effort. He’s by no means the only leader. It’s a very diverse group – Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood and of course different names throughout the world. It’s not worth moving heaven and earth and spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person. It is worth fashioning and executing an effective strategy to defeat global, violent Jihad and I have a plan for doing that.”

SIDOTI: “But would the world be safer if bin laden were caught?”

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: “Yes, but by a small percentage increase – a very insignificant increase in safety by virtue of replacing bin Laden with someone else. Zarqawi – we celebrated the killing of Zarqawi, but he was quickly replaced. Global Jihad is not an effort that is being populated by a handful or even a football stadium full of people. It is – it involves millions of people and is going to require a far more comprehensive strategy than a targeted approach for bin laden or a few of his associates.”

If he wants to go after global jihad, as he does in that quote, great. The problem is he does it while simultaneously downplaying bin Laden’s importance, and turns the targeting of bin Laden into a cost-benefit analysis.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Yet again, Obama runs from his horrible failed record, and instead props out this carnival side show full of straw men and bogus scenarios.

gatorboy on April 30, 2012 at 6:29 PM

Ummmm, let’s see…what do you think of water-boarding?

ladyingray on April 30, 2012 at 6:23 PM

For it.

Chuck Schick on April 30, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 6:23 PM

So are Obama/Stoic Patriot ignorant about what Romney truly said about Osama or are they just pretending to be in order to win some straw man argument.

It can only be one or the other honestly. Either way they’re both wrong about Romney’s position.

Ampersand on April 30, 2012 at 6:30 PM

So are Obama/Stoic Patriot ignorant about what Romney truly said about Osama or are they just pretending to be in order to win some straw man argument.

It can only be one or the other honestly. Either way they’re both wrong about Romney’s position.

Ampersand on April 30, 2012 at 6:30 PM

I find it ironic that you ask if I’m ignorant of what Romney truly said when I’m the one who has provided the full quote.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Grasping at straws. That’s what he’s doing. The man is desperate and the reason? He’s despicable and has no record to draw on except the success of our military. He deserves about as much credit for their success in bringing down a wanted terrorist leader/coward as he does for getting a Pulitzer.

scalleywag on April 30, 2012 at 5:35 PM

Or a Nobel Prize. Its sad really because Hillary and Panetta either dragged him to the decision kicking and screaming or they went around him as a report from a Washington insider suggests.

Zero is really desperate. Nothing is working for him or his campaign.

BTW, consider this: Who is remembered for stopping Dillinger? The President at the time? J. Edgar Hoover? or Melvin Purvis?

Who was President at the time?

dogsoldier on April 30, 2012 at 6:32 PM

OH MY …. another manufactured controversy for the liberal SCUM media to drool all over.
.
Maybe OBL’s wives should be allowed contraception… now THAT’S a talking point Jay.

BTW- did you now the Obamunist gave the order to take out OBL ?
Just Checkin.

FlaMurph on April 30, 2012 at 6:32 PM

I just realized something…

Romney is going to win this election.

William Eaton on April 30, 2012 at 5:47 PM

I don’t know if you’d call it a win-win for Romney, but Obama is going to lose, in a landslide in both popular vote and in the electoral college. As in 2010, people are going to be coming out in droves, not to vote for someone, but AGAINST Obama, once again.

TXUS on April 30, 2012 at 6:33 PM

wasn’t it a dead cat bounce for him last year anyway?

cmsinaz on April 30, 2012 at 6:10 PM

It was a 10-point bounce for Obama that lasted about a week.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:12 PM

More like a 5-6 point bounce.

I doubt any other President would have done better poll-wise had they “gotten” bin Laden.

Del Dolemonte on April 30, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Liberal, Democrat party President bragging about killing somebody?

Liberal democrats are now for killing people without a trial???

albill on April 30, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Everything Romney said there is true. And it has no bearing on whether or not Romney would have made the call to go into Pakistan or not.

Ampersand on April 30, 2012 at 6:35 PM

More like a 5-6 point bounce.

I doubt any other President would have done better poll-wise had they “gotten” bin Laden.

Del Dolemonte on April 30, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Nice find!

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:36 PM

I find it ironic that you ask if I’m ignorant of what Romney truly said when I’m the one who has provided the full quote.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:32 PM

I find it ironic that you provided “a” full quote and still don’t understand what Romney said.

Ampersand on April 30, 2012 at 6:36 PM

OT, a bit:

New Obama campaign slogan: FORWARD A Dog in every Pot!

TXUS on April 30, 2012 at 6:37 PM

We should attack Obama through Clinton. Bill Clinton paved the way for Al Queda.

rubberneck on April 30, 2012 at 5:49 PM

..tempting, but — as someone said up thread (or on another thread) — it would be a distraction and Clinton is popular. Keep the focus on Obama and HIS failures 24/7.

The War Planner on April 30, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Del Dolemonte on April 30, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Tanks DD…that’s why I can’t see him using this til nov…folks will acknowledge and move on

cmsinaz on April 30, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Keep the focus on Obama and HIS failures 24/7.

The War Planner on April 30, 2012 at 6:38 PM

amen

cmsinaz on April 30, 2012 at 6:38 PM

ugh…preview girlfriend
thanks DD

cmsinaz on April 30, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Everything Romney said there is true. And it has no bearing on whether or not Romney would have made the call to go into Pakistan or not.

Ampersand on April 30, 2012 at 6:35 PM

I think the areas I put in bold are where it has relevance.

Had bin Laden not been caught, it is eminently plausible given what Romney had said that he would have called off the search for bin Laden and then reappropriated the savings from the cancelled operation towards other anti-terror activities.

That’s why there’s a sh*tstorm going on over this that the Obama team is shamelessly using for the sake of political expediency.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:39 PM

I find it ironic that you ask if I’m ignorant of what Romney truly said when I’m the one who has provided the full quote.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Full quote? No you did not…..there was a lot more to Romney’s position than what you are talking about.

Truth is by the time Osama was killed, he was not the big man he had once been and Romney realized that if we made it all about him, we ran the risk of putting our guard down too soon.

Terrye on April 30, 2012 at 6:39 PM

I find it ironic that you provided “a” full quote and still don’t understand what Romney said.

Ampersand on April 30, 2012 at 6:36 PM

I find it ironic that bold print is less visible to you than a regular font.

Stoic Patriot on April 30, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3