The last debate between Mitt Romney and President Obama will deal with foreign policy. Make no mistake, the moderator, Bob Schieffer, is much like Candy Crowley in that he tries to portray an image of fairness, but he is a liberal. The question is how he try to manage the debate. My fear is that he will try to squeeze Libya in between numerous other foreign policy issues to dilute the effect.
When it comes to the Middle East, Obama is incredibly weak in terms of his record. No doubt he will stand up there and remind the audience that HE killed Osama bin Laden. Beyond that, he has little to show for his outreach to the Islamic world and support of the "Arab Spring". In his first campaign, Obama promised us that he would repair America's standing in the world-especially in the Middle East. That is now a joke. If he tries to present the Arab Spring as a budding democracy, Romney should be quick to bring him back to reality. The truth is that Obama has supported the growth of the Muslim Brotherhood as they spread their tentacles beyond Egypt. He has also distanced the US from Israel and done little to nothing to stop the advance of nuclear weaponry in Iran. It is hard to say that he has improved relations with the Islamic world when our embassies are under attack or flag-burning protests. In short, Obama's foreign policy is in a shambles. It can even be charged that he is trying to reduce America's influence in the world by design. He should also be asked why he is drastically reducing our armed forces in such a dangerous world.
Of course, China will come into the debate as it should, but here again is a chance for Romney to point out that Obama is letting China get away with (economic) murder against us.
But it is Libya where the President is most vulnerable. Romney needs to pounce on that and hit him hard. If Obama wants to insist that he called Benghazi a terrorist attack in that Rose Garden speech September 12, then it makes it even more egregious that for two weeks, his surrogates blamed it on a video protest that spun out of control. There was no protest in the first place. If Obama called it a terror attack one day later, why did Susan Rice tell all the talk shows 4 days after that that there was no sign of a pre-planned terrorist act?
And who sent her out there to spin that yarn?
Romney should also remind Obama that he (Obama) never answered the question from the man in Hempstead who wanted to know who refused the requests for enhanced security in Benghazi and why.
In addition, Romney might want to ask Obama why his Justice Department continues to keep that infamous film maker in prison for some chickensh** probation violation now that the video scenario has been discredited. Is that man really a "danger to society" as the judge said-or has he become a political prisoner to appease the Muslim world? It is a serious question.
This might sound like beating a dead horse to some, but to millions of viewers, they are still getting up to speed on Benghazi now that there has been so much controversy over Candy Crowley's coming to Obama's rescue. Keep in mind the main stream media has been downplaying the issue, but if it is front and center at the debate, people will see it in spite of the best efforts of the media.
I would also suggest that Romney bring up Operation Fast and Furious, which is another great scandal within this administration. He mentioned it in the last debate, but I got the impression that he is not entirely up to speed on it. It is within the realm of foreign policy because one of the biggest victims here was Mexico. Aside from everything else, it is a foreign policy debacle.
Everybody says that the economy and jobs are the biggest issues in this campaign. Maybe so, but the public does need to pay attention to what is happening around the world and how it affects us. Hopefully, Romney can advance that cause.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Should Obama bring up the fact that Mitt Romney skipped out on Vietnam and instead ran off to France?
As a veteran yourself Gary, how do you feel about a chickenhawk being Commander in Chief.
Been watching The View, Have you?
Romney served a Morman mission in France. It did not replace military service because Mormons have always served in the military. I served with a Mormon in the Army who had already done his missionary time in Brazil.
I don't know the circumstances with Romney. Was there a draft at the time or had they gone to the lottery system, or had the draft ended altogether?
If you want to question Romney then you need to show that he evaded the draft when he was subject to it.
I cannot condemn a politician because he never served in the military. Fewer and fewer politicians have military experience because the draft ended.
Now if you want to talk about a certified draft dodger-that would be Bill Clinton. He used lies and trickery to avoid service.
Regarding Libya, I don't agree that the security of the Consulate at Benghazi is an issue that Obama needs to defend. While he most certainly would have known of its vulnerability had he been receiving, or paying attention to his daily security briefings. But for him to have assumed that Hilliary was handling it would be reasonable in my view. What I do find outrageous is the cover-up. There is no doubt Obama did not want it to come out that this was a pre-planned terrorist attack aince he had already claimed to have solved the terrorist problem. Romney should hit him hard on the cover-up, and leave the security issue alone.
What Romney needs to do in the final debate is continue doing the only thing that has revived his campaign: Lie. A lot. About everything, particularly himself.
Post a Comment