Q: Where Is Mitt Romney on Libya? -- A: Other than critical of Obama...all over the map. (ABC News)

[jefferson_dem]

Where Is Mitt Romney on Libya?

Have you had any difficulty discerning Republican presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney’s precise position on the US involvement in the NATO mission in Libya?

The one consistency has been criticism of President Obama.

But beyond that, he’s seemed a bit all over the Libyan map.

To wit:

Position 1: Obama was weak in not doing this sooner

On March 21, Romney told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt: ”I support military action in Libya. I support our troops there and the mission that they’ve been given.” Asked if the president waited too long to strike against Libya, Romney said: “There’s no question but that his inability to have a clear and convincing foreign policy made him delegate to the United Nations and the Arab League a decision about our involvement there. And I happen to have a very personal concern. I mean, 270 people were killed as a result of that tragedy over Lockerbie. We now know that that was ordered directly by Muammar Gaddafi. One of my colleagues at Bain & Co, and a friend, named Nicholas Bright, was killed in that flight. And the President had every piece of information he needed to be able to take action in America’s interest” Asked if the president appeared weak, Romney said, “I think one of the comments I’ve heard from individuals abroad is that in the past, America has been feared sometimes, has been respected, but today, that America is seen as being weak. We’re following the French into Libya. I appreciate the fact that others are participating in this effort, but I think we look to America to be the leader of the world.” Romney attacked the president’s decision to rule out ground forces there, saying “I think that’s something he’s doing for political purposes back home. I can’t confirm that. I can only speculate, but that he wants to make sure that his base here understands the limited role he plans on playing.”

Position 2:

On April 2, Romney traveled to Las Vegas to speak to the Republican Jewish Coalition, where he attacked the president’s foreign policy in the Middle East. As was noted at the time by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, ”Romney was silent on Libya, the newest and stickiest military and U.S. policy problem as the United States and its NATO allies enforce a no-fly zone to help rebels oust Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi. After his speech, Romney refused to take questions from reporters about his position on Libya. Instead, he and his wife, Ann, fled down a hallway and escaped up an escalator at The Venetian, where the event was held. ‘I’ve got a lot of positions on a lot of topics, but walking down the hall probably isn’t the best place to describe all those,’ Romney said, deflecting a Libya query as he walked quickly with half a dozen journalists trailing him.”

Writing in the American Conservative magazine, Daniel Larison observed at the time ”Romney seems unable to stake out a foreign policy position until after the Republican consensus has formed, and he then adapts himself to whatever that consensus happens to be…This does save him from the acrobatics required to maintain an anti-Obama position when Obama switches from restraint to starting a war, but it is just another reminder that Romney doesn’t hold foreign policy positions so much as he mimics those who do….For someone who is so fond of mocking Obama’s leadership or lack thereof, it is revealing that when Romney has to stake out a position one way or the other on a controversial question he is unable to show any leadership at all.”

Position 3: Obama is being too aggressive

<SNIP>

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/where-is-mitt-romney-on-libya/

[Laura PourMeADrink]

1. Love your "to wit" JD !! All his positions are squishy. IMHO it is

a symptom of his personality disorder. I truly believe he is anal retentive - seriously. I know an AR, very well, and
Mittens exhibits the exact same charactistics....Hyper-defensive, gets physically stiff when challenged, his speech speeds up,
his voice gets higher and it is more about the fact that he is being questioned vs. the content itself. Because of this, he doesn't want to to be challenged for a bad decision, so he bends and changes with the wind.

[Major Hogwash]

2. Yesterday the media was trying to save Perry because Mitt obviously won Tuesday's debate.

The media, even the so-called "liberal" programs like Chris Matthew's program was trying to defend Perry to the hilt, trying to make him sound as if he still has a chance to beat Romney for the nomination.

But to me, it is obvious that Mitt owns the GOP right now. And he has the Wall Street financiers behind him to back him up. When Perry kept calling Cain "brotha", as if he liked Cain, it didn't help him at all. The last thing most of the racists in the tea party coalition want is someone who sounds like they are familiar with people from "the hood". So, Perry did himself a huge disfavor by doing that. But, when he kept interrupting Mitt it was even worse because later Mitt put him into his place.

I don't know which one of those loons Mitt is going to pick to be his Vice Presidential candidate, but I don't think the GOP will go with an "all Mormon" ticket, so I doubt that Mitt will pick Huntsman to be his running mate.
Which is why Huntsman skipped Tuesday's debate.

Huntsman is going for the whole cookie jar, not just for a couple of cookie crumbs.

I also think that Mitt dislikes Santorum as much as the rest of us, so I doubt he will be Mitt's running mate.
Newt is too old, Paul is is too loopy, so that only leaves Cain, Perry, and Bachmann to be Mitt's VP.

[Hutzpa]

3. I think google map can't even find him

on his positioning.

[Yavin4]

4. Must Be Great Having Sex with Mitt Romney

He takes all the positions.