Mitt might want to shut up

By Carl 

It's bad enough that Mitt Romney has stuffed his foot in his mouth all the way up to his hip on any number of occasions, but yesterday's criticism of President Obama for not being forthright enough on the attacks in Libya is treading dangerously close to treason:

Mitt Romney accused President Obama of failing to level with the American people by refusing to label the Sept. 11 attack that killed the U.S. ambassador in Libya as an act of terrorism.

"I think they want to do their very best to keep the people of America from understanding what happened," Romney said Tuesday in an interview with Fox News in Ohio. "We expect candor. We expect transparency, particularly as it relates to terrorism." 

Some White House officials, including Press Secretary Jay Carney, have described the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi as an act of terrorism, but Obama has said only that it was something more than a "mob action." The administration has said that some of those who killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans "may have had connections" to Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, an offshoot of the terrorist network that is active in eastern Libya. 

Mitt, in case you missed the class in Harvard or whatever pitiful excuse of a school you went to -- I say that, because it's obvious you learned nothing in there -- this is called "diplomacy." For the leader of a nation engaged in a delicate surgical operation in a hostile region of the world, this is how you proceed: you let the underlings rail about "terrorism" and "al Qaeda," but the president must remain neutral until hard evidence, and I stress hard evidence, is presented that, indeed, al Qaeda or some other terror organization was behind the plot.

To speak otherwise is both futile and inflammatory. Much like your comments yesterday.

Now, I understand that you have to cling to whatever miniscule hope you have to unseat Obama, but you're starting to grasp at straws where the other end, if pulled out, could lead to a serious landslide as you climb that slippery slope.

Already, the Libyan president has moved against domestic militias, ordering the army into oversee their work. It's clear he believes there is more to this attack than just a movie on YouTube. At least one of the militias was responsible for organizing the demonstration at the Benghazi compound.

It's hard to say that's a terror attack, even if the evidence suggests it was. And that's why Obama won't.

Publicly.

To put pressure on him to reveal more of his thoughts could put the entire "Arab Spring Project," designed to protect Israel as well as American interests in the region, into peril. As a friend of Israel, you know this already.

So shut up and let the man do his job, mmmmmmmmmmmmK?

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)