Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

If Romney ignores Benghazi, does he deserve to win the election?
11/1/12 | Vanity

Posted on 11/01/2012 12:25:33 PM PDT by pabianice

With the Rancid Media protecting Obama from any discussion --- hell, any NEWS -- of his lethal failure in Libya, does not Romney have to bring this into the campaign? If he does not, does he deserve to win the election? If he does not, can he win the election?


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: 2012issues
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last
OK. Flame away.
1 posted on 11/01/2012 12:25:35 PM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: pabianice
I believe his (Romney's) failure to pursue the Bengazi Treason, coupled with the opportunity to put the State-Run-Media on the spot for hiding it, will be his biggest blunder of the Campaign.

In fact, this may cost him the Election, IMHO.

2 posted on 11/01/2012 12:27:15 PM PDT by traditional1 (Don't gotsta worry 'bout no mo'gage, don't gotsta worry 'bout no gas; Obama gonna take care o' me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Deserve has nothing to do with it. Do you want 4 more years of Obama?


3 posted on 11/01/2012 12:27:54 PM PDT by NonValueAdded ("Why not eliminate the middle man and have whoever feeds Obama his lines debate Romney directly?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

The answer is: NOPE.

Romney will be a quiet about this as the MSM. The only way he talks about Benghazi, is if he’s asked - and even then, it’s not going to be with the kind of vociferous outrage that the treason deserves.

Romney IS Ruling Class after all.


4 posted on 11/01/2012 12:28:58 PM PDT by INVAR ("Fart for liberty, fart for freedom and fart proudly!" - Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

No candidate should drop his campaign plan for an issue that is classified. Classified means he can’t get any inside information. He has no power.


5 posted on 11/01/2012 12:29:18 PM PDT by donna (Pray for revival.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

No. And I don’t believe for one second he’s ignoring it. I’ll bet all I own that he and Ryan have shed the same tears as us and they can’t wait to get in there and punish the guilty. And the “talk” is behind the scenes with Generals as it should be.


6 posted on 11/01/2012 12:29:54 PM PDT by liberty or death
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
It's The Economy Stupid!

He's mentioned it. Let others prosecute this.

7 posted on 11/01/2012 12:30:49 PM PDT by McGruff (Obama lied. Heroes died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
What's the realistic alternative to Romney?

Oh Yeah...

I'd love Romney to have access to what is not shredded or burned.

8 posted on 11/01/2012 12:30:52 PM PDT by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Nope. It wouldn’t help Romney. Let things keep playing out like they are.

Romney is doing things very well. Why change?


9 posted on 11/01/2012 12:31:08 PM PDT by justice14 ("stand up defend or lay down and die")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Good Lord. Apparently the Monday-morning quarterbacking starts on Thursday, nowadays.


10 posted on 11/01/2012 12:31:14 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

It’s God that makes leaders and unmakes them. If Romney gets in and fights against God, he will take a rather large fall.


11 posted on 11/01/2012 12:31:19 PM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
Romney was the first to bring this bs treason into the open, and he caught hell fire from the left and their pit bull mediots.


12 posted on 11/01/2012 12:31:34 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (We are the 53%, who pay taxes and keep this country going inspite of the 47% rat moochers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
Romney was the first to bring this bs treason into the open, and he caught hell fire from the left and their pit bull mediots.


13 posted on 11/01/2012 12:31:46 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (We are the 53%, who pay taxes and keep this country going inspite of the 47% rat moochers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

If he has inside information, he should say something. If he doesn’t, he should let those couple of reporters who are on it keep digging.

Newt and McCain are into the issue. Let them run with it.


14 posted on 11/01/2012 12:31:53 PM PDT by married21 (As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donna

Actually he gets classified briefings. However he doesn’t have the power to de-classify any of the information. Hence he’s rather in a spot on this subject. He likely knows a lot more than he is allowed to say.


15 posted on 11/01/2012 12:32:03 PM PDT by drbuzzard (All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

He doesn’t have to say anything, it will only come across as negative. Drudge, which reaches a larger audiance than the MSM and Romney himself combined, is already carrying the water for Mitt. I don’t know a single person unaware of Bengazi.


16 posted on 11/01/2012 12:32:48 PM PDT by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

10 years ago, I’d have said, Yes, he deserves to lose for not attacking the risen one. Now, however, I know better — the American voter is an ignorant pig-dog, (note who occupies the White House) and if Mitt says one negative thing about the messiah, Katie Couric will, in 10 seconds flat!, successfully turn the ENTIRE election into a referendum on one thing and one thing alone: is Mitt a big meanie head? The pig-dogs will nod like the retards they are, and Mitt will lose.


17 posted on 11/01/2012 12:33:05 PM PDT by Doctor 2Brains (If the government were Paris Hilton, it could not score a free drink in a bar full of lonely sailors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Since he cannot trust any of the information he is fed from any briefings he has, no. Anything he says can make him look foolish as the Obama administration can select or make up any information to leak. While we have no way of checking that what comes from the intelligence agency ‘leaks’ is true. There were times before the first debate where he missed initiative, but he has since been running on all cylinders.


18 posted on 11/01/2012 12:33:25 PM PDT by HenryArmitage (it was not meant that we should voyage far.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

An incompetent Democrat president fails to properly
deal with an attack on a U.S. embassy by Islamic
radicals....................................................

sound familiar?


19 posted on 11/01/2012 12:33:27 PM PDT by NeverForgetBataan (I am become Barry... destroyer of wealth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Nope, Romney shouldn’t win. In fact he should drop out. Since he won’t talk about the murder of 4 Americans, he should withdraw so we can re-elect the person culpable in those murders instead. Obviously, not talking about it in the campaign is a much more serious dereliction of duty than actually committing the crime.

Geez.


20 posted on 11/01/2012 12:35:55 PM PDT by tnlibertarian (I am not going to vote for Romney..... I already have.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drbuzzard

Mitt should trust Obama-briefings?


21 posted on 11/01/2012 12:36:30 PM PDT by donna (Pray for revival.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

This, believe it or not, is a security issue. Mitt has been privy by now to what is going on in the Middle East. He should NOT be talking about Benghazi when there is an ongoing investigation. He can talk about it after he is elected. His position is not that of the media and he shouldn’t be spouting off all that he knows. That’s what the Liberals/Dems do.

So yes, consider yourself flamed.


22 posted on 11/01/2012 12:36:45 PM PDT by madison10 (I love it when a plan comes together ~~God)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
If Romney ignores Benghazi, does he deserve to win the election?

Is this a trick question?

Romney's job is to use any and every tool at his disposal to win. If he loses, we are finished as a nation.

Romney may be anything his friends or enemies want him to be. What he isn't, is incompetent. If his research department thought The Arab Spring would have helped, he would have used it.

Let's see what he does as President before we decide he doesn't deserve the job.

23 posted on 11/01/2012 12:37:44 PM PDT by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
Romney is in a delicate situation right now. He now receives intel briefings. A President can says things a candidate Romney cannot. He walks a tightrope now of almost knowing too much, as it were.
24 posted on 11/01/2012 12:38:08 PM PDT by 5thGenTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donna

Well he can trust the CIA or not, that’s up to him. I make no comment on the veracity of said briefings. There is little doubt, however, that they do provide information which are not generally available.


25 posted on 11/01/2012 12:38:08 PM PDT by drbuzzard (All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
Not at all. Those of us who know.....will vote Romney

Those of them that don't.........weren't voting Romney anyway.

Romney is not able, cannot do anything about Benghazi NOW. When he is President, then he can get involved.

Romney is simply avoiding being trapped into this by the MSN's, who then would say "He doesn't know what he is talking about, or Why is he putting his 2cents worth in, or SEE there Romney is Politicizing it".

26 posted on 11/01/2012 12:38:59 PM PDT by annieokie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

For once I am speechless... that should tell you something.

LLS


27 posted on 11/01/2012 12:40:34 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (OUR GOVERNMENT AND PRESS ARE NO LONGER TRUSTWORTHY OR DESERVING OF RESPECT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drbuzzard

So, my point still stands:

No candidate should drop his campaign plan for an issue that is classified. Classified means he can’t get any inside information. He has no power.


28 posted on 11/01/2012 12:40:36 PM PDT by donna (Pray for revival.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Romney thinks he is winning, and there will be no resolution on this before the election. So throwing out accusations and challenges is counterproductive at this point.

Besides, this is the job of CONGRESS and the MEDIA. Whether they will do there job is up for debate.

Romney being so cautious shows you they like their internal polling.


29 posted on 11/01/2012 12:40:59 PM PDT by Crimson Elephant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Romney’s team is correct with their approach. Being specific provides the other side, meaning NBC-CBS-ABC-PBS-NYT; to find fault.

Look what happened when he threw out the number 47% (inadvertently)?

His team’s message: end the failure that is Obama.

Leave it at that.


30 posted on 11/01/2012 12:41:09 PM PDT by cicero2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

2 things Mitt did: 1. came out strong on the night of the attack 2. came at Obama strong in the second debate. And guess what happened ? The national press killed him for speaking up that first evening. Then the corrupt media working through thier pawn fat-Candy set Mitt up to be sandbagged at the debate. And somehow Mitt should keep walking into these media traps...I don’t think so.


31 posted on 11/01/2012 12:43:56 PM PDT by LongWayHome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
Good afternoon.

If Romney ignores Benghazi, does he deserve to win the election?

If 0bama ignores Benghazi, does he deserve to win the election?

No, and he did ignore Benghazi.

5.56mm

32 posted on 11/01/2012 12:45:09 PM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

This (or any other foreign policy topic) isn’t a winning issue for Romney. Think about the small number of replies you see on this website to foreign policy postings. Non-freepers are far less engaged. Ultimately, this election is about pocketbook issues. Obama has waved bin Laden’s assassination around as proof of his foreign policy chops. Benghazi obviously takes the shine off that, but the message has been sent, and everyone knows Obama flubbed this one. At bottom, though, people aren’t interested in the deaths of a handful of American personnel in Libya - they want to know that the economy will improve, and they can get that raise they need to replace the jalopy that’s on its last legs or do that major home improvement that’s been postponed indefinitely.


33 posted on 11/01/2012 12:49:21 PM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
I think Romney is smart to not get pulled into this so close to the election.

His campaign has correctly seen that the economy is the biggest concern for most voters, at this point.

Because there has been no official "proof" for final expose' about Benghazi, he could be pulled into an obama "rope-a-dope", in fact, obama maybe be using his silence to lure Romney into such a plan.

Obama has all the documentation, knows all the classified date, Romney does not. IF obama manages to massage himself out of the Benghazi scandal - which, with his compadres in the media he is capable of doing - then he could make Romney look foolish for "leveling false charges".

Either way - whether I'm right or wrong - this is NO excuse to even consider voting for obama, or staying home. Remember, if obama gets re-elected, he'll get away with Bengahazi clean, but there is always the chance that if Romney wins he'll either initiate and investigation, or not get in the way of one.

deserving
34 posted on 11/01/2012 12:50:32 PM PDT by FrankR (They will become our ultimate masters the day we surrender the 2nd Amendment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traditional1

Impatience is a bad quality.

What would come of it by TALKING about it to give some a feel good moment. Nothing substantive will happen for months anyway. Look at Fast and Furious.

If he is elected I’m certain he will DO something about it but he has to get elected first.

What happened after the Dolittle attack Tokyo after Pearl Harbor? Nothing much. It was just basically a feel good moment in the scheme of things. The enemy was too strong, so we had to slog through the Pacific to really achieve the goal.

If you want to be stupid and vote against Romney. But be prepared for a dozen or more Bengahzi’s and then some. I don’t know about anyone else, I’m sick to death of politics and positioning the message, I want some gd action.

Time to get with the program, go for the Big Win(FMJ).


35 posted on 11/01/2012 12:51:50 PM PDT by ImJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: stevem

Free beer for you!!!


36 posted on 11/01/2012 12:52:47 PM PDT by ImJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

The answer is yes.


37 posted on 11/01/2012 12:53:02 PM PDT by SaxxonWoods (....The days are long, but the years are short.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donna
Indeed.

In addition, Romney will likely have to deal with this in an official capacity in the very near future.

During a time of war, keeping a closed mouth is wise.

38 posted on 11/01/2012 12:56:44 PM PDT by Aevery_Freeman (All Y'all White Peoples is racist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ImJustAnotherOkie

NOTE: I am 100% for Romney. I posted the question as a discussion topic. No implied approval one way or the other.


39 posted on 11/01/2012 12:56:44 PM PDT by pabianice (washington, dc ..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ImJustAnotherOkie
Talking about Bengazi at least will make it more public, as opposed to the all-out cover-up in the State-Run-Media.

2)Who said that meant no vote for Romney?

He's wasting an opportunity to re-focus on the issue, as opposed to the full-blown promotion of The Messiah, walking on the waters in the streets of NJ and NYC.....get a grip.

40 posted on 11/01/2012 12:59:17 PM PDT by traditional1 (Don't gotsta worry 'bout no mo'gage, don't gotsta worry 'bout no gas; Obama gonna take care o' me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Let him win first. Then...I bet it will be pursued.

He doesn’t have the classified info, yet.


41 posted on 11/01/2012 1:01:15 PM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Romney is TOO DECENT a person to bring this up. And if he did, half of the American public with its head up its a$$ wouldn’t know what he is talking about (since the media buried it) and think he is insane.


42 posted on 11/01/2012 1:01:47 PM PDT by I want the USA back
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Although I am dismayed about it, I also think that he is correct in not pursuing it. The media needs to step up their game on coverage. They only coverage that will occur if Romney jumps on this will be attacks on Romney politicizing Benghazi and the 4 dead americans.

He is in a no win situation if he brings it up! You all know that the media would trash him to no end on this subject. Let FOX expose the trash for him.


43 posted on 11/01/2012 1:05:17 PM PDT by jcsjcm (This country was built on exceptionalism and individualism. In God we Trust - Laus Deo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

My take on it FWIW:

Romney’s getting security briefings, including classified information which he cannot use. Rather than walk a fine line now (he’s still a candidate and has no Presidential immunity) and risk leaking classified information, he’s staying quiet on the issue at this time.

The facts are coming out on Benghazi without his help. No use interfering when an opponent is beating himself. And on this issue, Obama & the administration are beating themselves soundly over the head with it.

Granted, the mainstream media is very slow on the uptake, but information is getting out there through other means.

Also, one of the things I’ve noticed about Romney is that he doesn’t hurry; he takes his time and takes careful aim so that when he does unload, it’s effective. His first debate performance proved that.


44 posted on 11/01/2012 1:07:01 PM PDT by meyer (Proud member of the 53%.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

That’s the whole ‘effin problem. The right and republicans are completely paralyzed with fear over how the MSM will spin things.

NEWSFLASH: The media is in bed with and actively aiding and abetting the obama regime. Their boy can do no wrong, period, and the MSM will crucify anyone who challenges that assumption.

This is murky territory we’re wading in now. This time is similar to the times of the Bolsheviks, or early 1930’s Germany, with the rise of communism and fascism. I doubt the US would fall to communism, but it could very easily become a fascist state. With trading among communist and socialist regimes, one would expect a dictator to get help from outside influences, along with priming the population for totalitarian control. Communist china and socialist central & south america have us over a barrel right now, along with crazy arab muslims in the ME. All of these groups would love to see the US become a fascist state, and they groomed the perfect person to pull it off.


45 posted on 11/01/2012 1:07:42 PM PDT by factoryrat (We are the producers, the creators. Grow it, mine it, build it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

There are many sound reasons described on this thread, but I think the best one is this: when your opponent is busily self-destructing, don’t interfere.


46 posted on 11/01/2012 1:09:29 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NATURAL BORN CITZEN: BORN IN THE USA OF CITIZEN PARENTS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

The polling number for Obama’s handling on Benghazi are already in the toilet. Get the focus back on the lousy economy.


47 posted on 11/01/2012 1:09:57 PM PDT by Homer1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Apparently you weren’t paying attention in the second debate when Romney tried to hammer Obama with it. He was ambushed and pounded into the ground by Obama and Candy Crowley. Obama set him up so the press could mock Mitt and then bury the story.


48 posted on 11/01/2012 1:12:50 PM PDT by Deb (If you wanna laugh everyday, follow Deepak Chopra on Twitter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: factoryrat

This is murky territory we’re wading in now. This time is similar to the times of the Bolsheviks, or early 1930’s Germany, with the rise of communism and fascism. I doubt the US would fall to communism, but it could very easily become a fascist state. With trading among communist and socialist regimes, one would expect a dictator to get help from outside influences, along with priming the population for totalitarian control. Communist china and socialist central & south america have us over a barrel right now, along with crazy arab muslims in the ME. All of these groups would love to see the US become a fascist state, and they groomed the perfect person to pull it off.”

Since the Clintoon years and now the Obozo years, like you I fear a fascist movement and takeover.

One can see the progressives lining up with the mediots to promote super TSA’s/EPA’s and other fascist power structures in America.


49 posted on 11/01/2012 1:16:47 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (We are the 53%, who pay taxes and keep this country going inspite of the 47% rat moochers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: ImJustAnotherOkie

What happened after the Dolittle attack Tokyo after Pearl Harbor? Nothing much.

wrong! it convinced the imperial navy the home islands were vulnerable to air strikes from our carriers and that it needed to destroy the pacific fleet at sea in a final solution engagement. this allowed the us navy to destroy the akagi, hiryu, soryu and kaga at sea near midway.


50 posted on 11/01/2012 1:26:09 PM PDT by RitchieAprile (look out for the Bull!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson