Skip to comments.If Romney ignores Benghazi, does he deserve to win the election?
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?
In fact, this may cost him the Election, IMHO.
Deserve has nothing to do with it. Do you want 4 more years of Obama?
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.
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.
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.
He's mentioned it. Let others prosecute this.
I'd love Romney to have access to what is not shredded or burned.
Nope. It wouldn’t help Romney. Let things keep playing out like they are.
Romney is doing things very well. Why change?
Good Lord. Apparently the Monday-morning quarterbacking starts on Thursday, nowadays.
It’s God that makes leaders and unmakes them. If Romney gets in and fights against God, he will take a rather large fall.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
An incompetent Democrat president fails to properly
deal with an attack on a U.S. embassy by Islamic
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.
Mitt should trust Obama-briefings?
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.
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.
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.
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".
For once I am speechless... that should tell you something.
So, my point still stands:
No candidate should drop his campaign plan for an issue that is classified. Classified means he cant get any inside information. He has no power.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
Free beer for you!!!
The answer is yes.
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.
NOTE: I am 100% for Romney. I posted the question as a discussion topic. No implied approval one way or the other.
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.
Let him win first. Then...I bet it will be pursued.
He doesn’t have the classified info, yet.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The polling number for Obama’s handling on Benghazi are already in the toilet. Get the focus back on the lousy economy.
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.
This is murky territory were wading in now. This time is similar to the times of the Bolsheviks, or early 1930s 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.
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.
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.