Oct 31, 2012 Comments Off Pat Dollard
Excerpted from Jennifer Rubin’s piece in WAPO: President Obama is having no luck convincing voters and the media there is nothing amiss regarding his handling of the Benghazi attack.
My colleague David Ignatius is among the latest to acknowledge that there are real questions about what happened on Sept. 11, 2012, and why there was no deployment of forces for a rescue attempt. (“Why didn’t the United States send armed drones or other air assistance to Benghazi immediately?.?.?.Looking back, it may indeed have been wise not to bomb targets in Libya that night. Given the uproar in the Arab world, this might have been the equivalent of pouring gasoline on a burning fire. But the anguish of [slain Tyrone] Woods’s father is understandable: His son’s life might have been saved by a more aggressive response. The Obama administration needs to level with the country about why it made its decisions.”)
Interestingly, likely voters don’t like what they have seen. In the latest CBS/New York Times poll likely voters disapprove of Obama’s handling of the Libya attacks by a margin of 51 percent to 38 percent. Among independents disapproval is even higher at 57 percent.
Libya won’t be the decisive issue for the vast majority of voters, but it has cast Obama’s foreign policy leadership in a negative light. Moreover, win or lose next week, Obama owes the country an explanation of what he knew, when he knew it and what he did. Or was he AWOL during the first murder of a U.S. ambassador in 33 years?
Read the whole thing…