Obama's Bin Laden Ads Appropriate

Recently the Obama reelection campaign has come under criticism for citing the President's successful effort to assassinate Osama bin Laden, the terrorist leader who authorized the 9/11 attacks that killed nearly 3,000 Americans, in recent ads.  I can understand why the Republicans would oppose this: it was a crowning achievement of his administration and demonstrated how, as commander-in-chief, he was performing his proper duty to protect the country from terrorism.  You can be sure that the GOP will paint Obama as being soft on national defense and terrorism, and I predict an avalanche of lies coming out in THEIR ads about him in the upcoming months.  So what's wrong with Obama bringing up the truth about something very pertinent to his performance as President? Already, the opposition is describing President Obama's role in the mission as being essentially passive, while in reality he was intricately involved in the planning and decision making. The mission itself was fraught with all sorts of potential traps and disasters, and its successful outcome was anything but "slam dunk". Ironically, Mitt Romney, who as with just about every other issue, has flip-flopped his position on the bin Laden raid (he used to be opposed to it, now is in favor), has contributed to the perception that the presidency is just a passive element in the undertakings of the military by flippantly stating that had the opportunity come up while he was President, he would have given it approval, too.  What, with a casual wave of the hand? Talk about passive disengagement from your job!

It is obviously the Republican Party's strategy to divide Barack Obama's decisions and record as President into two categories.  The controversial decisions are O.K. to bring up in campaign ads, but those actions on the part of the President that unified the nation are apparently verboten and almost sacrilegious, somehow.  Don't people like Arianna Huffington, who has criticized the Obama campaign recently for these ads, see that they are playing into the strategy of people who would be doing the very same thing were their "guy" sitting in the Oval Office?!