Yeah, which other president in U.S. history would be brave enough to give the kill order on somebody who masterminded the murder of 3,000 people on American soil?
And this will come as a shock: That Romney quote is crap. Courtesy of Ace of Spades, linking to the reporting of our own Matt Lewis back in 2007 when he was at Townhall.com, here’s what Romney actually said to Liz Sidoti of the Associated Press:
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.
SIDOTI: Do you fault the administration for not catching him though? I mean, they’ve had quite a few years going after him.
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: There are many things that have not been done perfectly in any conduct of war. In the Second World War, we paratroopered in our troops further than they were supposed to be from the beaches. We landed in places on the beaches that weren’t anticipated. Do I fault Eisenhower? No, he won. And I’m nowhere near as consumed with bin Laden as I am concerned about global Jihadist efforts.
His point was: Taking out Bin Laden would make the world safer, but there are a lot of other guys out there still causing trouble and that needs to take priority. Whether or not you agree with that, whether you think it’s heartless of him to put it in those terms, that’s a long way from “Romney wouldn’t give the order to kill Bin Laden.”
I also like that they included Wolf Blitzer’s question, but not the answer. Obama thinks you’re stupid. And if you voted for him, he’s right.
Did we really hear Obama talk a lot about getting Bin Laden before he got to take all the credit for getting Bin Laden? If so, was that before or after he failed to close Gitmo and failed to prosecute the CIA guys responsible for the intel that eventually led to his big PR victory?
Nothing the Democrats have done since Romney became the putative GOP candidate has worked one bit. They’re reeling. Now, six months out, they’re already resorting to football-spiking.
Obama 2012: Four More Years of Having Killed Bin Laden.
I love the smell of desperation in the morning. Any time of day it’s a treat.
Update: In case you don’t get the “spike the football” reference.
We don’t need to spike the football… until Obama’s reelection campaign runs into trouble.
Update: In 2008, Obama accused Hillary of using Bin Laden to “score political points.” Now he’s got Bill doing that very thing for him.
Update: Memo reveals the “gutsy” Bin Laden call that wasn’t. Would you care to revise your statement, Tom Hanks?