Romney then eagerly leapt into a parsing battle (which he lost) as to whether Obama actually had called it “an act of terror.” But who cares what Obama called it? It is far more important if Obama failed to protect American lives. Why didn’t Romney pursue that?
It was a mistake and one he failed to correct in the final debate when moderator Bob Schieffer raised it in his very first question. But Romney muddled about again: “We see in — in — in Libya an attack apparently by — well, I think we know now by terrorists of some kind against — against our people there, four people dead. Our hearts and minds go to them.”
The problem the RW conspiracy folk have is that Romney is now being briefed on foreign affairs and everything else that serious candidates get briefed on, and he knows that there is no "there" there, so he can't just lie about it to Obama's face. That "stare" that Obama was giving him during the FP debate was saying, "You know that what people are saying isn't true, are you really going to shamelessly repeat those ridiculous lies here in public when we both know that that is what they are, and we both know that we both know that?"
What is surprising and comforting about that piece is that Roger Simon wrote it. Simon is part of the RW. If I am recalling this correctly, he was even one of the people in favor of Clinton's impeachment back in the day. It is nice to see someone like that writing more sensibly about this.