Romney Spokesman: Bin Laden Doesn't Matter

First, George W. Bush said he didn’t “spend much time” on Bin Laden. Then President Obama, with laser focus, hunted down Bin Laden and killed him. And now Mitt Romney’s people don’t think he mattered too much because al-Qaeda is somehow stronger than ever. Here’s Mitt Romney foreign policy adviser Walid Phares:

“Al Qaeda after Bin Laden’s killing is stronger everywhere it has a presence. From Yemen to Somalia, to the Sahel, as wel [sic] as in Pakistan and Afghanistan, al Qaeda has more militants, more battlefields and a new generation of commanders. Killing Bin Laden was one single operation in a war that is raging and growing.”

It’s worth noting here that most of al-Qaeda’s leadership has been killed or captured under President Obama. So it’s not “one single operation,” either.

Print Friendly
This entry was posted in Election 2012 and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • i_a_c

    Maddening. Once you think the RMoney campaign has told the biggest lie possible (the auto bailout was Willard’s idea), an even bigger whopper comes out a few days later.

    I think this is Karl Rove strategy. Attack the president on his strengths. Remember how they swift-boated war veteran John Kerry? If you think it’s bad now, it’s going to get much worse.

    • Victor_the_Crab

      Except that Team Obama will be ready to counter the lies that spill out of the mouths of Romney, Rove, et al. He’s won before. No reason he can’t do it again.

      • i_a_c

        Sure hope so. The president started up his campaign rallies today. Time to gear up for November.

  • http://www.osborneink.com OsborneInk

    Walid Phares is a Maronite Christian from Lebanon. Knowing this, all the rest of the pieces of his neocon bio fall into place, starting with his unreserved Israel-love and running all the way to his senior fellowship at FDD:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_for_Defense_of_Democracies

  • kushiro -

    Also: sure we won in World War 2, but look at all the neo-Nazi groups running around.

  • http://twitter.com/freenezwandring Bill

    This very simply is not going to play, and the Romney campaign is not showing itself tactically shrewd by reminding the public of the President’s most broadly popular foreign policy achievement.

  • GrafZeppelin127

    I’m just loving the Romney campaign’s new “HYPE & BLAME” bumper sticker. Anybody seen that? It’s awesome. Because, you know, Republicans never hype their own accomplishments, and certainly never blame others for anything. They’re the party of “personal responsibility,” which means they don’t blame, they take responsibility. We need to remember that:

    - Republicans blamed themselves, not President Clinton, and took responsibility for the intelligence failures that enabled the 9/11 attacks.

    - Republicans blamed themselves, not state and local Democratic officials, and took responsibility for the inadequate emergency response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

    - Republicans blamed themselves, not Democrats, and took responsibility for the decision to invade Iraq, the failure to find WMDs there, and the disastrous consequences and costs (fiscal, human and otherwise) of that war.

    - Republicans blamed themselves, not the Democratic-controlled 110th Congress, and took responsibility for the economic collapse that occurred in 2008.

    - Republicans blamed themselves, not some lone Democratic congressman, and took responsibility for the lax regulatory enforcement environment in the mid-2000s that led to the housing/mortgage collapse.

    - Republicans blamed themselves, not Democrats and not President Obama, and took responsibility for the TARP bailouts of 2008.

    - Republicans blamed themselves, not Democrats and not President Obama, and took responsibility for the surge in unemployment that occurred in 2008-2009.

    - Republicans blamed themselves, not Democrats and not President Obama, and took responsibility for the policies to which the lion’s share of the federal budget deficit is directly attributable.

    - Republicans blamed themselves, not Democrats and not President Obama, and took responsibility for turning surpluses into deficits in 2001-2003 and more than doubling the national debt from $5T to $11T from 2001 to 2009.

    - Republicans blamed themselves, not the “liberal media”, not ACORN and not “voter fraud”, for their electoral losses in 2006 and 2008.

    - Republicans blamed themselves, not Democrats, and took responsibility for the national debt more than quadrupling from less than $1T in 1980 to more than $4T in 1992.

    • mzmijewski

      Don’t forget the doubling of the debt during Georgie’s time in office.

      • GrafZeppelin127

        See next-to-last bullet.

    • mrbrink

      I’m just going to go ahead and nominate this for post of the day.

    • GrafZeppelin127

      Adding:

      - Republicans never hyped George W. Bush’s foreign-policy credentials or terrorism-fighting prowess.

      - Republicans never hyped the threat posed by Iraq, Saddam Hussein and his WMDs.

      - Republicans never hyped the effectiveness of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques™.

      - Republicans never hyped the economic benefits of Tax Cuts™.

      - Republicans never hyped the importance of keeping the Job Creators™ happy.

      - Republicans never hyped Ronald Reagan’s fiscal conservatism or his single-handedly ending the Cold War.

  • http://twitter.com/KQuark KQµårk™

    The only problem with this nutbag’s assessment is that Obama is going after Al Qaeda all over the world at the dismay of some purist liberals.

  • http://twitter.com/themattmcd Matt McDaniel

    Remember, according to Mitt Romney, what terrorists hate is to be left alone. The thing they love most of all is being shot in the face.

  • sherifffruitfly

    So…. killing OBL has made AQ stronger. And Romney said OF COURSE he would’ve killed OBL.

    So Romney is trying to strengthen AQ?

    • Zen Diesel

      or had he not killed OBL, AQ would be stronger and the pres is weak on national security. Mittens with his years of foreign policy experience of outsourcng jobs and securing offshore bank accounts would keep us safe from the terrorists.

  • mrbrink

    Romney’s a foreign policy doofus, and therefore dangerous.

    There’s a great piece up at The Nation, by Ari Berman, that has lefty radio talking today:

    Mitt Romney’s Neocon War Cabinet

    On a related note, in an interview with T. Boone Pickens recently, the 83 year old billionaire says that the Koch’s are THEE major impediment to a national energy policy(Money fight!), but the thing that stood out to me more so than anything else, was when Pickens predicted Israel is going to unilaterally attack Iran, sometime in August, or September. He said it as though it was a matter of fact. Now, according to the article by Berman, Mitt Romney has had a chummy relationship with Israeli-neocon, Bibi Netanyahu, since the 70′s. This is what is so bug fuck stupid about people who insist Obama is no different from Bush, and that Mitt Romney is some sort of “gee-golly” moderate, who has yet to lay his foreign policy agenda on the table. Mitt Romney seems to think this is 1980 and he’s Ronald Reagan trying to overthrow Jimmy Carter. He’s talking about massive military build up, defense shields in Europe, aircraft carriers stalking Iran, staying in Afghanistan indefinitely, doubling Guantanamo, and is there any doubt Mitt Romney’s administration would back an attack on Iran? He’s trying to start shit with Russia and China, for fuck’s sake, and he has no clue what the hell is going on in the world. This is all disturbing to me, because Jimmy Carter was sabotaged by Reagan during the Iranian hostage situation, sinking his chances at re-election, and on the day Reagan was sworn in, the hostages were magically set free in what was nothing short of an act of treason by Reagan’s people, based on backdoor deals they were making with the Iranians to undermine Carter’s presidency.

    Never underestimate the willingness of right wing nutjobs, or their sculpted tools like Mitt Romney, to overthrow and suppress democratic uprisings(Arab Spring might as well be Communist bar soap to these people)or start wars they have no intention of paying for, to steal power and loot national treasuries in the name of “American Exceptionalism,” and to preserve this, they are very willing and ready to lie and cheat the American people out of their sensibilities.

    Mitt Romney is a dangerous man. These political puppies who muddy reality flooding message boards asserting that Obama is worse than Bush, or that Romney couldn’t be worse than Obama, have no fucking understanding of how ugly the institutional war pigs really want to get. I’ve always maintained that President Obama was coming in as a hostage negotiator, trying to keep the Pigs at Bay as best he can, but if history is any guide, you can’t negotiate with right wing terrorists who hide openly among the general population.

    • i_a_c

      Wouldn’t surprise me to see the wingers plotting some kind of “October Surprise” for Obama.

      On the other hand, I think the GOP’s visceral hatred of and diametric opposition to Obama will come back to bite them. I don’t think the electorate will stomach much more warmongering, as polls consistently show the public would like to get out of Afghanistan sooner than later. Bush ran on “we kept America safe” and Obama can, too.

      • mrbrink

        I don’t like it. Between Mitt Romney’s neocon foreign policy team and Romney’s belly-up, submissive master-and-the-dog relationship with Netanyahu, his 1980 Reagan/Carter obsession, the disconcerting T. Boone Pickens prediction, and the ubiquitous right wing propaganda machine, this could be 1980 all over again.

  • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

    You know what’s even funnier about this latest Romney crapola? The fact that Bin Laden himself was worried about the future of Al Qaeda because it’s leaders were being killed off and couldn’t be replaced fast enough (this is per Bin Laden’s writings released yesterday). I find it ironic and lovely that Bin Laden is himself proving Mittens wrong on this point.

    • i_a_c

      To add to that, the writings also reveal that the Obama Admin’s shift in messaging from “Global War on Terror” to military action against al Qaeda made it more difficult for al Qaeda to sell the idea that the US was warring against Islam. That made it easier for moderate Muslims to say that they opposed al Qaeda, which most everybody does.

    • Zen Diesel

      It’s a damn shame we have wasted so much money and so many lives, when all we needed was good non waterboarding intel, a president with chutzpah, and a seal team six. Bush, Romney and all of the neocons, really need to go back to middle earth and have a cup of shut the fuck up.