Obama should High Hat Romney in Monday's debate

[cthulu2016]

On foreign policy an incumbent President has a built-in advantage, if he uses it.

While Romney has been running around saying any irresponsible thing that entered his head, the President has been constrained in how he could respond. When Romney has said things he imagined or hoped that were contradicted by the CIA the President has not always been in a position to set the record straight because there is classified information involved. Lives are at stake.

I would focus on these things:

1) Romney's entire response on Benghazi has been irresponsible and at odds with the CIA. A president cannot just make things up for political advantage.

2) The Republicans in congress attempted a political stunt to try to help the Romney campaign, and released sensitive information about US contacts in Libya, putting lives at risk. (Describe how brave the people are who Congress outed trying to score political points.)

3) Play up the recent US win in the WTO on Chinese tires. Recall that Romney said Obama's actions on tires were trying to start a trade war, and say, "If Governor Romney is worried that I started a trade war over Chinese tires then he ought to mention then it was a war we won."

4) That all of Romney's foreign policy team were architects of the Iraq War. His entire approach to foreign policy has been tried, and it has failed. And that the USA has gone four years without getting into any new wars precisely because Romney's team has been kept out of power.

[DavidL]

1. Good points, I'd suggest he use #4 first!

The people on the Romney team ought to be called out for who they are: BUSH PEOPLE!!!

That should sway a few tens of thousands of young and veteran voters to show up and vote for Obama.

[Flashmann]

2. A president cannot just make things up for political advantage.

No?......See Boy Georges WMD claims for just one.....Nixons Watergate lies....

ETA:I don't expect our President is classless enough to do that and did not mean to imply otherwise...

[Enrique]

3. maybe throw Mitt's "take advantage of the opportunity" quote in his face

Ask Mitt, are the deaths in Benghazi an "opportunity" to you?

from the 47% video:

Romney: And yet, in that election, in the Jimmy Carter election, the fact that we have hostages in Iran, I mean, that was all we talked about. And we had the two helicopters crash in the desert, I mean that's—that was—that was the focus, and so him solving that made all the difference in the world. I'm afraid today if you said, "We got Iran to agree to stand down a nuclear weapon," they'd go hold on. It's really a, but…by the way, if something of that nature presents itself, I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.

[cthulu2016]

4. +1

[pinto]

5. Good points. Unsure about #2, though. Obama's got to run against Romney/Ryan specifically, imo.

[cthulu2016]

7. You make a valid point. I would take some rhetorical nuance

but several pugs on that committee must be honorary Romney campaign chairs or Romney foreign policy advisers.

There is probably some way to phrase it that is more damaging to Romney to deny than to accept.

[libguard]

6. You forgot the biggest one.

Obama should say that Romney has been deemed dangerous to national security. Then, say he doesnt go that far, but!

[cthulu2016]

8. .