So, what did Romney actually commit himself to?

Defending the people of the United States from foreign attack. Which is exactly the opposite of what Obama said. Obama’s statement says that while the American people are under attack, he would make it his business to not piss off the rest of the world. Which invites more attacks from people who don’t really care how “nice” the U.S. government is. What the hell kind of leadership is that? We had that with Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton (and sometimes with Reagan and both Presidents Bush), and don’t need a repeat of that from Obama.

File this under Duh!, No Shit, Common Sense, Master of the Obvious, and Who Wouldn’t.

I can tell who wouldn’t: Obama. Back in April, he said the following in response to a question from Brian Williams regarding what he would do if a terrorism attack occurred:

Obama said he first would assure there was an effective emergency response and not a repeat of what happened in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

He then turned his attention to the issue of intelligence. “The second thing is to make sure that we’ve got good intelligence, A) to find out that we don’t have other threats and attacks potentially out there, and, B) to find out, do we have any intelligence on who might have carried it out so that we can take potentially some action to dismantle that network.”

He went on to say that what the United States must avoid at such a moment is alienating the world community “based on faulty intelligence, based on bluster and bombast,” adding that “we’re not going to defeat terrorists on our own.”

Clinton has been hammering Obama since, so much so that Obama has now stated how much he wants, at minimum, to copy what Bush has done regarding Pakistan. At least Romney answered correctly with an answer Americans need to hear from someone who wants to be their President.