Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it's safe to say the debate was a draw. None of the poll numbers being thrown around indicate that either side put the smackdown.
More importantly, Barack Obama was 0-1 coming into the debate. It was IMPERATIVE that he win last night's showdown just to even the score. He may have BARELY tied the game. It was not the decisive win his supporters were looking for, though. The polls clearly indicate that.
If the Benghazi attack was declared a terrorist attack on 9/12, why were we told it was a 'spontaneous demonstration' 5 days later? Why did the President refuse to call it a terrorist attack on 9/25 on The View? It doesn't make sense. If it was a terrorist attack on 9/12, then it was on 9/13, 9/14, etc. Instead, the American people were told the death of the ambassador was due to a demonstration from a tasteless video, proven to be 100% false essentially on 9/12 by the Libyan government who noted there were no demonstrators there.
Biden schools Ryan and Obama makes mincemeat of Romney - all in less than a week!
No one schooled anybody in any of the last 2 debates. They had their high and low moments. I thought Obama was slightly better than Romney last night, but much of the analysis was working to compare Obama last night to 2 weeks ago. Obama would have to have shown up comatosed to do worse than he did then.
Can anyone believe the pompousness and ignorance of this goon to actually stand there and offer to "give advice" to the President of the United States, during a debate in which he is getting his arse handed to him? It was a sure sign that HE felt he was losing.
Huh? Were you sleeping? Clearly, Romney was mopping the floor with Obama, who could only stumble and bumble as he did in the last debate, wandering way off topic, throwing anything that came to mind out in the hope that it might make sense. It didn't. He looked like the fool that he is.
At one point, he cowered as Romney rebuked him for his rud interruption, and returned to his chair.
For a fleeting instant, Americans saw Obama the way that Putin, Jiang, Khamanei, and Jihadis see him. It was not an impressive sight, and it cannot be made up for.
Romney was desperately clinging to his usual misguided platitudes. Completely outclassed and decimated by President Obama, Romney lost what little composure he had. Empty, is what he represents.
Once again, Romney appeared confident, and Presidential. He appeard as the only adult in the room, as Obama whined prevaricated and palliated his way through the debate, never really answering questions, but deflecting off topic. He rambled and wandered spouting meaningless gobbledygook. And everybody knows it.
Amazing how Romney supporters insist on twisting the truth. They would have us believe:
1. The speech in the Rose Garden was about and in response to the attack in Libya.
2. The President said that acts of terror will not shake the resolve of the US and then proceeded to talk specifically about the Libya attacks.
but
3. The talk of acts of terror not shaking US resolve has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the Libya attacks.
What kind of backwards, twisted logic is THAT? It totally ignores reality trying desperately to score political points. Here is the part of Obama's speech that is in question:
Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.
As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe. No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.
So Obama says last night we learned about the attack in Benghazi (where our reps died), then says our freedom is sustained and our country is strong due to the character of the people who represent us around the world, then immediately says no acts of terror will ever shake our nation, immediately speaks of the 4 American lives lost in Benghazi, then concludes that we will get justice for their deaths.
But Republicans want us to believe that although the speech was about Benghazi, although EVERYTHING immediately surrounding the "no acts of terror" sentence was about Benghazi and the 4 deaths, both immediately before the sentence and immediately after the sentence, that somehow the sentence itself had NOTHING to do with the Benghazi attacks. Again, what kind of warped and twisted logic is THAT? Answer- the kind from people like Romney, who, when a tragic event like this happens, thinks only of personal political points that can be gained from it and will say or do anything to try to win those political points. His own party called him out for his reckless statements trying to score political points in the wake of the attacks, but now his own party is adding to the warped and twisted logic whose purpose is to score political points by intentionally miscronstruing what Obama said about the attacks being an act of terror- by trying to make us believe that the sentence had nothing to do with Benghazi when the sentences all surrounding that sentence are CLEARLY about Benghazi. This Republican attempt at deception and logic twisting is just plain pathetic. Good for Candy Crowley fact checking Romney on his lie- she was THERE in the Rose Garden when the speech was given. And shame on Republicans for trying to continue to perpetuate the Romney lie after Romney was corrected.
We learned about Benghazi, our nation is great because of our reps around the world, no act of terror will shake our resolve, today we mourn for the 4 reps killed, and we will get justice for them EQUALS Obama referring to the Benghazi attacks which killed the 4 reps as acts of terror and EQUALS Republicans trying hard to perpetuate the Romney lie that the acts of terror Obama referred to in the speech about Benghazi had nothing to do with Benghazi. Shameless vulturous liars!
Clearly the Republicans had no idea what was going on.
Each statement is a revelation to them, I'm surprised they even know where the Rose Garden is, let alone what the President was doing there.
Huh? Were you sleeping? Clearly, Romney was mopping the floor with Obama, who could only stumble and bumble as he did in the last debate, wandering way off topic, throwing anything that came to mind out in the hope that it might make sense. It didn't. He looked like the fool that he is.
At one point, he cowered as Romney rebuked him for his rud interruption, and returned to his chair.
For a fleeting instant, Americans saw Obama the way that Putin, Jiang, Khamanei, and Jihadis see him. It was not an impressive sight, and it cannot be made up for.
Once again, Romney appeared confident, and Presidential. He appeard as the only adult in the room, as Obama whined prevaricated and palliated his way through the debate, never really answering questions, but deflecting off topic. He rambled and wandered spouting meaningless gobbledygook. And everybody knows it.
I think you may have been watching the wrong debate.
It was wrong for the moderator Candice to inject her misleading terror fact-check into the debate. Obama never said the Benghazi killing was an act of terror in his rose garden address.
Of course he did. The sentences immediately before his "acts of terror" quote were about Benghazi, the sentences immediately after his "acts of terror" quote were about Benghazi, therefore the sentence itself WITH his "acts of terror quote" was likewise about Benghazi. This is proven by the actual transcript of the Rose Garden address. By the way, the TOPIC of the Rose Garden address- the attacks in Benghazi. Basic English.
ROMNEY: We have not made the progress we need to make to put people back to work. That's why I put out a five-point plan that gets America 12 million new jobs in four years and rising take-home pay. It's going to help Jeremy get a job when he comes out of school. It's going to help people across the country that are unemployed right now.
Quote:
ROMNEY: Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs.
To those who understand English, act of terror = terrorist attack. To suggest otherwise is to engage in some weird bizarro-anti-logic.
Nobody is denying he used those words. The issue is he did not call Benghazi a terrorist attack and for weeks after, referred to it as the result of a dumb video and a bump in the road.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What were you watching?
Good post.
