I posed this question on the twitter machine Wednesday night…

Has anyone figured out why it matters what Obama called the attack in Benghazi and why it should be a campaign issue?

While what happened in Benghazi was tragic (a consulate, not an embassy, overrun, ambassador and three others killed), but outside of the shrieking abyss that is Michelle Malkin’s empty cranium, it really isn’t a dealbreaker for the majority of America’s populace who are about to cast their ballots. Sure, it’s red meat designed to dampen the drawers of the Jennifer Rubin (or back-stabbing douche Roger Simon) crowd for whom ‘scary mooslims’ equals a threat to America’s Most Important Ally™ According AIPAC and, of course, the End Timers who need Israel (but not its people) as a precondition for flying off to see the spirit in the sky, but it’s not something I would blow up my campaign over which Romney seems to have figured out overnight:

In two appearances Wednesday in the critical battleground state of Virginia, Mitt Romney focused on what he called the president’s lack of a second term agenda, while avoiding Libya, a major flashpoint from Tuesday night’s debate.

In Romney’s case, this is what happens when you let the rightwing echo chamber dictate your electoral strategy.



Yeah. Like I would tell you....