Watch Live: Congressional Hearing on IRS Scandal

Live Now on TheBlaze Radio: ‘The Buck Sexton Show’

Media

Obama’s Handling of Benghazi a No-Show in Final Foreign Policy Debate

Oct. 23, 2012 12:57am Mytheos Holt

Benghazi and Libya All But Ignored in Third Presidential Debate

BOCA RATON, FL – OCTOBER 22: U.S. President Barack Obama (R) debates with Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney as moderator Bob Schieffer listens at the Keith C. and Elaine Johnson Wold Performing Arts Center at Lynn University on October 22, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida. The focus for the final presidential debate before Election Day on November 6 is foreign policy. (Credit: Getty Images)

Tonight’s debate included a number of surprises, and many surprising omissions. Despite this being allegedly a debate about foreign policy, there was no mention of the crisis in the Eurozone. There was no mention of drug cartels in Mexico, or of Fast and Furious. And perhaps most surprisingly of all, there was no attempt by GOP nominee Mitt Romney to seriously prosecute the case against President Obama on his handling of the Benghazi attacks. Indeed, even CNN contributor and former White House green jobs czar Van Jones noted with some bewilderment that Romney had declined to further “politicize” the issue.

This was not what many commentators had expected. The spicy exchange between Romney and Obama in last week’s town hall debate over Libya, in which some commentators half expected the two to come to blows, was widely anticipated to be an opening bell for a much more contentious attempt to re-litigate the issue tonight. Instead, voters were treated to 50,000 foot rhetoric from both sides on the tragedy of Libya, with little to no attempt by Romney to punch at the President’s handling of the crisis. Indeed, Obama gave probably the most detailed answer on Libya, and got no pushback.

“I think it’s important to step back and think about what happened in Libya,” Obama said. “Keep in mind that I and Americans took leadership in organizing an international coalition that made sure that we were able to, without putting troops on the ground at the cost of less than what we spent in two weeks in Iraq, liberate a country that had been under the yoke of dictatorship for 40 years. Got rid of a despot who had killed Americans and as a consequence, despite this tragedy, you had tens of thousands of Libyans after the events in Benghazi marching and saying America is our friend. We stand with them.”

Romney’s only response was, “It’s wonderful that Libya seems to be making some progress, despite this terrible tragedy.”

He then pivoted to Egypt.

It’s unclear what motivated this abrupt decision to concede ground, though most of Romney’s more hawkish supporters don’t seem to have cared. Charles Krauthammer called the debate decisively for Romney.

“Now, I would have gone after Obama on Libya with a baseball bat, but that’s why Romney has won elections and I have never even contested them,” Krauthammer remarked.“The high point of that debate for Romney is when he devastatingly leveled the charge of Obama going around the world on an apology tour. Obama’s answer was: ‘ask any reporter and they will tell you it wasn’t so.’ That’s about as weak an answer you can get.”

Bill Kristol – one of the more militarily focused commentators in Romney’s corner – focused on Romney’s Presidential bearing rather than critique him point by point:

Only two other challengers have done as well debating foreign policy with an incumbent president—Ronald Reagan against Jimmy Carter in 1980 and, to a lesser degree, Bill Clinton against George H.W. Bush in 1992. Reagan and Clinton won. Romney is now on track to becoming the third challenger to win in the last 32 years—and the first in 80 years to defeat an incumbent who didn’t have a primary challenge.Generally, the consensus was that the President won the debate on points, though many commentators critiqued his demeanor for being overly aggressive.

Nevertheless, this decision by Romney to avoid critiquing Benghazi may serve to keep the election narrowly focused going forward. This may or may not help President Obama, given that the absence of a foreign policy fight upon which to engage Governor Romney means that the election will likely be fought over the economy, where Romney himself has a substantial advantage with voters.

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (33)

Libermerican
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 2:57pm
The good news is the media will finally get off the Libya story and move on.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
sw12
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 11:09am
I believe it just came to me. Kissinger said Obama is primed to create the New World Order and we either do it or fall into chaos. The world loves Obama and they couldn’t have him looking so bad on foreign policy. Obama had to look strong and knowledgeable there.

Now I can still see Romney winning because Obama could lose now and save face in the rest of the world because us rich, christian, bible thumping, bigoted Americans just couldn’t stand a black man as president. Then they could blame the fall of the world economy on US / us and the rich one percent that just wanted to rule the world. Because I believe a world wide economic fall is coming.

Now I could also see Obama winning to finish off the country. Now a few days ago I would have thought that would bring civil unrest if not war and that’s why our government agencies have bought so much ammo, but I’m about to the point that America is so deceived they just don’t get it and will go down sitting on billions of rounds of ammo.

America was over when we allowed our government to push Obama care down our throats and I beliee we are watching the final few nails go in now.

I pray that I’m wrong but get ready

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
sw12
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 11:09am
I’m telling everyone that you witnessed something last night that should have blown your mind. Romney had since the 16th to study and be ready to correct his mistake on Benghazi and knowing the commenter wasn’t going to jump in this time after Cindy Crowley did and he blows it on the first question of the night.

Matter of fact he blows basically the entire foreign policy debate talking about anything other than foreign affairs. If NOBODY NOTICED the Middle East has been on FIRE. Arab spring that has lead to the Muslim Brotherhood taking over who want to implement sharia law. Again the president is so worried about contraceptives but not worried about women rights under sharia and Romney points none of this out?

Now you either witness someone that is scared for his life after all the death threats that he “ Romney “ has received from the community, Chicago Thugs, Muslim Brotherhood, or you are watching a scam from “ Romney and Obama “ . that they have sold this country out.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
firefiteco
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 9:49am
Romney is going to let Obama tell the lie. The american people already know there is a coverup and many lies have been told. Obama will hang himself if there is time.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
hauschild
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 8:49am
Certainly not surprising, and it’s why I don’t watch these debates; one would have to be insane to do so.

It’s a rigged game. Who in their right mind would want to take part in that? By viewing them, you’re doing exactly that – validating and perpetrating the lie.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Gonzo
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 8:08am
I think Romney had the right strategy on this. Obama would have lied through his teeth about it like he did last time and muddied the waters for the uninformed voter who makes his decision based on debate performances. Romney came off as the adult and Obama as the petulant child that he is.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- SquidVetOhio
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 8:52am
  I hope your right. I thought Romney should have let him have it after his condescending remarks about bayonets and horses (which we still use by the way). As if Obama was some military expert. Last I checked, he was accusing our guys of “air raiding villages and killing civilians”.
  
  Report this comment
NOFX
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 4:48am
When/If the UN assists/monitors/intervenes with the election then Mitt is going to need all the help he can get, as many leaders within the UN hate Romney. I hope Romney wins by a landslide; otherwise, this may end up like the 2004 election (tied up in court) but much worse. I have no wish for any president to align America’s values and policy with the international laws set by the UN. Sure, we’re probably headed for a fiscal cliff or grand canyon but I’d rather not have Obama nor the UN in control of policy when we go off that cliff.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
oblique
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 3:37am
As someone said, chess versus checkers. Before the debate I thought Mitt would’ve had Obama on a platter if the terrible events at Benghazi became a talking point. But watching it unfold, I changed my mind, and now bow to the superior intelligence of how a debate should be won. It wasn’t about point scoring here. Mitt was right. Others are already doing this, particularly through the media. The Romney campaign knows this is case is being prosecuted very publicly anyway. Those who don’t care won’t care about the facts anyway. If Mitt took the bait that was offered, I think he would have played into the hands of those who wanted to paint him as a neocon war monger. Mitt won, Obama lost.

Also bear in mind, Mitt is not in office, therefore he cannot argue on specifics that he doesn’t have (nor it seems anyone else has). But, the people know, or can at least sense there’s been some kind of cover up. For Romney to accuse Obama of executing some sort of cover-up about this issue during this debate would have lowered the tone and made it look as if he politicized the deaths of the four Americans. Mitt did well to leave it alone, after all there were bigger fish to fry.

The truth will come out about Benghazi, eventually with or without the debate. Mitt Romney showed the world the kind of man he is, and he WILL be the next President of the United States.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- thebigsamoan
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 5:14am
  Amen, brother! I hope you’re right. My fear though is that if Romney wins, the radicals within the Democratic Party will explode and start rioting which will have catastrophic consequences to the nation. Already there are threats against Romney’s life and people calling for his assassination and widespread rioting if he wins. I hope that won’t happen. I hope America is better than that. God bless our beloved nation!
  
  Report this comment
- amy8877
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 6:57am
  very well said. I feel the exact same way.
  
  Report this comment
crawdad
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 3:04am
I wanted to see Romney shatter Obama by exposing Fast & Furious and Benghazi to those who haven’t heard about either one, as hard as that is to believe. But this is likely what the Obama camp expected. Perhaps wisely, Romney took the unexpected course. Like Stallone in Rocky. He absorbs every blow, and he’s still standing. I mean, who were you with at the end? The arrogant, shallow Apollo Creed, or the humble, prayerful Rocky? In the process of getting all his practiced hits in, Obama came out looking overly aggressive, interrupting, angry and petty. After all, the goal here is not just to win a debate, but to win the presidency. Obama may have fallen into a trap.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Diane TX
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 2:00am
It has been said that Obama is playing checkers, while Romney is playing chess. This 100% true. Romney is trying to unseat a President who mainly won his position for the historical purposes – The First Black President. Romney is fighting an uphill battle because of this, and then there’s the mostly far left press.

In tonight’s debate, Romney’s strategy was amazing. Obama spent time and energy practicing his “brilliant” responses to what he “thought” would be Romney’s responses. The thing is, Romney out thought Obama, and didn’t ever take Obama’s bait.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 1st a Father
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 2:39am
  It really doesn’t matter who won this debate.
  
  I have an aunt who believes that anything anyone comes up with against Obama is a lie and comes from racial prejudice. Absolutely illogical, but yet the truth. There are many who voted for Obama last time who will continue to deny they made a mistake. We have to cancel-out such people’s votes.
  
  I firmly believe our only hope of ousting Obama is to convince all our conservative friends to get out and vote. Don’t waste your time on the those who cannot see. I’ve helped my 3 voting age children see the importance of voting for Romney this election and made sure that each of them is registered and I will personally drive them to the polls if needed. This is not a brag, it is merely an example of what must be done.
  
  I will be at the polls for early voting tomorrow. How many of you will be taking someone else to the polls who didn’t vote in the last election? I’ll have 3 new voters at the polls, how about you. Activate your friends now.
  
  It may be your last chance to bring someone into the fold of sanity. In my state, tomorrow is the last day to register, to be able to vote in this election.
  
  Report this comment
- Diane TX
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 3:30am
  1st a Father
  
  Good job getting your kids to vote. Most young adults don’t place any importance on their right to decide who runs their Country. Obama is a cultural Marxist. They don’t throw bombs and destroy physical buildings. Instead, they insidiously change the culture of the Nation. The indoctrination of public education is now federally based, when it should be State or County based. America just doesn’t need the Federal Government dictating to the States what their curriculum should be. The Federal Dept. of Education is an useless, and expensive waste. Since all States have a Dept. of Education, why do they need a plantation overlord?
  
  There are far too many federal government employees. Mitt Romney will end that.
  
  Report this comment
raybaker35
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:47am
Do you know why Romney beat the heck out of Obama in the first debate? Because he aggressively threw punches that connected.
Do you know why Obama beat the heck out of Romney in this last debate? Because he aggressively threw punches that connected.
That was the worst strategy i ever saw. I’m flabbergasted by that performance! Romney came off like Obama did in the first debate!!! Like he was sleep walking!!! He looked tired and out of touch.
I cant even believe it went off like that!!!! What was he thinking??!!
The polling after the debate was very conclusive, and Romney go his but kicked.
Time will tell, but for me that was one of the worst moves in American presidential politics.
Mit got up this morning and thought, “hey ill just coast tonight, and agree with the president, and not go after his abysmal foreign policy.
What in the world…….

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Ditto Head
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 2:27am
  Romney did seem tired, but hammered on the economy,
  which is what people are primarily concerned with.
  Obama was a smug, petty @$$#01e as usual.
  This debate probably didn’t help either candidate.
  Romnet got enough momentum from the first debate to carry him to the finish.
  
  Report this comment
- Master.Debater
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 6:20am
  Romney’s debate performance was part of a a greater strategy for winning the election and to look at it tactically is to misread its purpose. Unlike Obama appearing flustered and unprepared for the first debate, Romney’s performance in the final debate was deliberate and measured. No, he didn’t take it to Obama as Obama surely expected and planned for, but he had already established his ability to do that in the first two debates. Why give Obama and the Media any opportunity to change the trajectory of the race? Romney also surely knew that with the MLB Playoffs and Monday Night Football going on at the same time, that only those closely tuned in to politics (most likely already decided) were likely to be watching and the rest would hear about it from the MSM.
  
  This debate was like the final possession in a football game when you are a fieldgoal ahead with a minute left in the 4th quarter. Do you throw deep and go for the end zone and give the other team a chance to intercept a pass or stop the clock? No, you play it safe and run the the ball straight up the middle running out the clock and going home with a victory.
  
  Report this comment
voting-for-romney
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:30am
It was clear to me that Mitt Romney wanted to throw a curve ball at the debate, highlighting the importance of domestic policy and the ability to react, project, and protect foreign policy interests, in order to do that, he had to practice time management, and it worked, with the moderator saying, wait, I want to talk about foreign policy?

They really are connected, and it showed me that Mitt Romney does not just go after the low hanging fruit. I don’t think President Obama was prepared for that strategy, and he tried to adopt to this tactic and it did not work in his favor, instead highlighting both his weaknesses in not only foreign, but domestic policies?

Are we going to nation build on food stamps? No, the numbers do not add up on your web site President Obama, and the only way the numbers work on Mitt Romney’s web site is if we free American Enterprise from the fear mongering of clean energy, the one policy agenda of tax the rich, and the study of the US Constitution as a means to redistribute wealth?

We need to find out why the current teachers are not able to teach math and English? Could it be the current teachers can not teach in an anti-parent environment that says you don’t have to listen to your parents here is some free birth control? So much for math homework? You think they are watching Tom Hank movies, or thinking about Morgan Freeman asking them whats going to be in their wallets, in four more years?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
RaydocX
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:14am
Romney was wise not to attack this obvious target, as they had ample foils and shills to deflect any blame and it would have made Mitt look too aggressive.

i’m curious why Chrissy Matthews is rambling about ‘pandering to Israel’ and wassername shitz is insisting that Obama has better understanding for that country, the latter ‘because he went to the east bank.’ Israel was another obvious target and was not exhaustively addressed.

i did wish Obama’s cavalier willingness to let guns walk and kill Mexican citizens in an attempt to increase gun control support would have been a nice discussion, but understand the varied statements on immigration could have made that a trap.

not that it matters… everyone on yahoo and the Obamanetworks are spouting that he won. curiously i see more arguments than support of that on their audience feedback boards. the ‘fewer horses and bayonets’ comment is popular,

i just wish they had an extra horse so Obama can stop riding the SEALs who took out Bin Laden.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- NOFX
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:27am
  You’re right. Hitting Obama about Benghazi would have hurt Romney. Obama tried and tried to get Romney to loose his cool but Mitt stayed centered and on point.
  
  Report this comment
- Master.Debater
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 6:26am
  Mitt is winning the election. He doesn’t need to take any risks at this stage. He was smart, especially considering that the moderators and Obama campaign are working together to trip Romney up as was clearly illustrated by Candy “I just happened to have the transcript” Crowley last week. He didn’t fall into any of their traps.
  
  Report this comment
bearclawws
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:14am
Whats next? FAKE JUSTICE? Obama manufactures attack on Al Qaeda in Benghazi in an Act of desperation/deception, to swing votes? I wouldn’t be surprised at the length of corruption they will go to in order to win this election. I just want people to be aware of this ahead of time, and that it is a possibility.

Please Add me twitter: @bearclawws
My blog Interpretations of Obama’s Dream: http://bearclawws.blogspot.com/

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Master.Debater
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 6:37am
  Romney is winning. Obama is losing and desperate. The lid is getting ripped off the massive Benghazi scandal after the election no matter who wins. Whether Romney chose to go after Obama on Benghazi in the final debate wouldn’t have changed anything about the outcome of the election. He played it safe.
  
  Report this comment
LeadNotFollow
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:13am
.
Mitt Romney pulled a wimpy John McCain on us.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- marine249
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:17am
  what did you watch? a 2008 tape of o-bo and mccain.
  
  Report this comment
Ilikepeople
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:12am
Here’s my take on the debate: Bob Schieffer proposed the question to them “Lets say you get a call from Israel saying our bombers are in the air on their way to Iran.” Now you tell me which candidate did the job of the President of the United States when Bob asked that imbecilic question?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Ilikepeople
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:16am
  If you need more evidence than that to know who should be President, then you probably shouldn’t be allowed to come within 100 feet of Presidential polls.
  
  Report this comment
- marine249
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:18am
  not o-bo
  
  Report this comment
- Master.Debater
  Posted on October 23, 2012 at 6:22am
  Yes, Romney handled that perfectly. If he’d have tried to answer that question he would have looked foolish. He failed to take Schieffer’s bait.
  
  Report this comment
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:08am
I noticed that with Romney avoiding the subject; I wonder if Romney has an October surprise on his own in store for Obama?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
marine249
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:06am
how many times do you have to say o-bo lied.
he hit o-bo on other points.
the point he hit most– weak leader.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
mrs.janet.murgatroid
Posted on October 23, 2012 at 1:04am
Rumor has it that Shiro Ishii developed a Unit 731 type “water purification plant” for the Muslims after WWII and the Benghazi catastrophe is a cover up of the technology developed from that facility being readied for use by a Muslim organization.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.