"The Debate"

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from cookie-rojas. Show cookie-rojas's posts

    Re:

    In response to Newtster's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to UserName99's comment:

    Unless you are a moron, you can see that it is in direct reference to the Libya attack. 

     

     

    Unless they are morons, yes. Or liars. I'm gonig with both.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, only tools like you and Losername would see some generic political statement from Obama followed by two weeks of claims the incident was a response to a movie as proof he called it a terrorist attack.

    I am surprise you can come up for air and type in a comment when your lips are glued to Obama's a55 so tightly.

    What does his a55 taste like?

    [/QUOTE]

    Tastes like Chris Mathews' aftershave........

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re:

    So was Obama just willfully ignorant, lying, or just trying to downplay it and cover his a55 for 2 weeks?????

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The righties seem mighty embarassed they were caught with both feet in their mouths!

    [/QUOTE]

    ....an act of terror [now add context] from a mob protesting an offensive movie is far differerent then a terrorist attack on the anniversary of 911 without any mob protest.  The administration went over two weeks before it admitted it was more then an angry mob committing an act of terror.  The president's well placed an act of terror doesn't excuse his administrations handling of the post attaack spin.

    The President was either performing a political obfuscation or he didn't know (not hard to believe) because he reportedly attend less then 1/2 of the daily security briefings.

    The Presidnet is either in-charge and knows or delegates and just trusts without verification a dangerous way to lead.  So did the buck stop with Hillary or the President.  There is one clear way to fix the problem, vote Obama out.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re:

    Still a tie...

    http://www.boston.com/news/politics/specials/hofstra_debate_stronger_performer/

    http://www.sfgate.com/news/

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re:

    Big win for Obama.  The third debate (foreign policy) won't be as widely watched, so it had to be last night. I thought it was going to be hard to attack Romney at a town hall, but both men seemed happy to more or less disregard the audience and have at it.

    Romney's bump from the last poll had already begun wearing off - I wouldn't be surprised if come Monday, we're back to where we were before the debates began.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from cookie-rojas. Show cookie-rojas's posts

    Re:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    The president's well placed an act of terror doesn't excuse his administrations handling of the post attaack spin.

     

    You're right. He didn't handle your side's spin well. He never does. He lets the conservative lie fester and fester until other conservatives feel comfortable repeating it blindly.

    Take these boards as an example.

     

     

    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.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya

     

     

     

    Your first move was to say he didn't call it a terorrist attack. As the above demonstrates, he did.


    You are now trying to backpedal and find fault with his failure to lay out exactly what happened. Trouble is, the intelligence on what exactly happened was developing.


    Nevermind the disgusting shamefulness of conservatives slamming Obama for listening to his intelligence here, but defending Bush's War - which costs a trillion+ and thousands upon thousands of lives - by saying Bush was just listening to intelligence.


    So f**king dishonest. Really is disgusting.

    [/QUOTE]

    You can always tell when Airborne, I mean WDYWN, gets all pi-$-$-y, he starts swearing and throwing around the "B" word. (Bush)

    Tomorrow you'll have a bigger headache when you realize what a putz you really are defending such a buffoon of a President.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from newman09. Show newman09's posts

    Re:

    Like I posted after the first debate, if the next debate ends up being more even, the dem's would claim victory. I guess in their minds a tie goes to the President, since he lost so poorly the first time around.

    I don't think the President won over any independents last night, which he needs badly!!

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    The president's well placed an act of terror doesn't excuse his administrations handling of the post attaack spin.

     

    You're right. He didn't handle your side's spin well. He never does. He lets the conservative lie fester and fester until other conservatives feel comfortable repeating it blindly.

    Take these boards as an example.

     

     

    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.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya

     

     

     

    Your first move was to say he didn't call it a terorrist attack. As the above demonstrates, he did.


    You are now trying to backpedal and find fault with his failure to lay out exactly what happened. Trouble is, the intelligence on what exactly happened was developing.


    Nevermind the disgusting shamefulness of conservatives slamming Obama for listening to his intelligence here, but defending Bush's War - which costs a trillion+ and thousands upon thousands of lives - by saying Bush was just listening to intelligence.


    So f**king dishonest. Really is disgusting.

    [/QUOTE]

    Remember context its a powerful thing, it was all about the movie, apology apology apology and a brief reference to an act of terror.

    Go back to you're own posts during that time frame, you were right there with him and still are.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    The president's well placed an act of terror doesn't excuse his administrations handling of the post attaack spin.

     

    You're right. He didn't handle your side's spin well. He never does. He lets the conservative lie fester and fester until other conservatives feel comfortable repeating it blindly.

    Take these boards as an example.

     

     

    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.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya

     

     

     

    Your first move was to say he didn't call it a terorrist attack. As the above demonstrates, he did.


    You are now trying to backpedal and find fault with his failure to lay out exactly what happened. Trouble is, the intelligence on what exactly happened was developing.


    Nevermind the disgusting shamefulness of conservatives slamming Obama for listening to his intelligence here, but defending Bush's War - which costs a trillion+ and thousands upon thousands of lives - by saying Bush was just listening to intelligence.


    So f**king dishonest. Really is disgusting.

    [/QUOTE]

    Remember context its a powerful thing, it was all about the movie, apology apology apology and a brief reference to an act of terror.

    Go back to you're own posts during that time frame, you were right there with him and still are.

    [/QUOTE]


    I thought he was trying to do 2 things in the Rose Garden address.  One,  talk about Benghazi but also try to prevent what happened in Benghazi from spreading to other places.

     

    I truly believe the the attack on the Benghazi Consulate was timed to coincide with the the video going viral.  I believe the intent was to a) provide cover for the attack in Benghazi and b) hope that the attack sparks more violence at other US embassies and consulates.

    I don't think the 2 can be seperated.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Go back to you're own posts during that time frame, you were right there with him and still are



    I do not believe Obama lied about Libya, nor do I believe Bush lied about Iraq.

     

     

    You dishonestly believe that Obama lied about Libya, but that Bush was just listening to intelligence on Iraq.

    [/QUOTE]


    Right but that is the point.  When there were no WMD's the Right was fine to acknowledge that sometimes intelligence is wrong and people make mistakes.  As opposed to the Libya situation where the Right seems bent on proving it was some massive conspiracy.

    They prove over and over again they have no problem with double standards and blatant hypocrisy of the highest degree.  Romney is the perfect candidate for them.  A guy with no core who will say anything that seems politically adventageous in the moment he says it.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from cookie-rojas. Show cookie-rojas's posts

    Re:

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    The president's well placed an act of terror doesn't excuse his administrations handling of the post attaack spin.

     

    You're right. He didn't handle your side's spin well. He never does. He lets the conservative lie fester and fester until other conservatives feel comfortable repeating it blindly.

    Take these boards as an example.

     

     

    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.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya

     

     

     

    Your first move was to say he didn't call it a terorrist attack. As the above demonstrates, he did.


    You are now trying to backpedal and find fault with his failure to lay out exactly what happened. Trouble is, the intelligence on what exactly happened was developing.


    Nevermind the disgusting shamefulness of conservatives slamming Obama for listening to his intelligence here, but defending Bush's War - which costs a trillion+ and thousands upon thousands of lives - by saying Bush was just listening to intelligence.


    So f**king dishonest. Really is disgusting.

    [/QUOTE]

    Remember context its a powerful thing, it was all about the movie, apology apology apology and a brief reference to an act of terror.

    Go back to you're own posts during that time frame, you were right there with him and still are.

    [/QUOTE]


    I thought he was trying to do 2 things in the Rose Garden address.  One,  talk about Benghazi but also try to prevent what happened in Benghazi from spreading to other places.

     

    I truly believe the the attack on the Benghazi Consulate was timed to coincide with the the video going viral.  I believe the intent was to a) provide cover for the attack in Benghazi and b) hope that the attack sparks more violence at other US embassies and consulates.

    I don't think the 2 can be seperated.

    [/QUOTE]

    You can believe what you want, is it grape today?  Cherry tomorrow?

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re:

    Still a tie...

    http://www.boston.com/news/politics/specials/hofstra_debate_stronger_performer/

    http://www.denverpost.com/index.html?_requestid=27390502

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re:

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    The president's well placed an act of terror doesn't excuse his administrations handling of the post attaack spin.

     

    You're right. He didn't handle your side's spin well. He never does. He lets the conservative lie fester and fester until other conservatives feel comfortable repeating it blindly.

    Take these boards as an example.

     

     

    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.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya

     

     

     

    Your first move was to say he didn't call it a terorrist attack. As the above demonstrates, he did.


    You are now trying to backpedal and find fault with his failure to lay out exactly what happened. Trouble is, the intelligence on what exactly happened was developing.


    Nevermind the disgusting shamefulness of conservatives slamming Obama for listening to his intelligence here, but defending Bush's War - which costs a trillion+ and thousands upon thousands of lives - by saying Bush was just listening to intelligence.


    So f**king dishonest. Really is disgusting.

    [/QUOTE]

    Remember context its a powerful thing, it was all about the movie, apology apology apology and a brief reference to an act of terror.

    Go back to you're own posts during that time frame, you were right there with him and still are.

    [/QUOTE]


    I thought he was trying to do 2 things in the Rose Garden address.  One,  talk about Benghazi but also try to prevent what happened in Benghazi from spreading to other places.

     

    I truly believe the the attack on the Benghazi Consulate was timed to coincide with the the video going viral.  I believe the intent was to a) provide cover for the attack in Benghazi and b) hope that the attack sparks more violence at other US embassies and consulates.

    I don't think the 2 can be seperated.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    So tell us what is the party line today?

    Was it a spontaneous attack because of a video or was it a premeditated terrorist attack?

    Which lie is true today?

    Where is the media??????

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re:

    REPORT: White House contradicts president's statement on Benghazi terror attack...

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re:

    American Crossroads, taking exception to Obama’s announcement last night that he really had declared Benghazi to be an act of terrorism, has sent out a memo, which reads:

    The President clearly misled the American people with this claim, because if Obama’s Rose Garden speech was indeed the White House position, it did not inform any subsequent statement by the White House press office — and was even directly contradicted by his own spokesman several days later.
    On September 20 — eight days after Obama claims to have called the Benghazi attack an “act of terror” — Jay Carney affirmed to reporters that the White House had never called it “a terrorist attack.”
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: "The Debate"

    Back to the topic of the thread:

    Still a tie...

    http://www.boston.com/news/politics/specials/hofstra_debate_stronger_performer/

    http://www.denverpost.com/index.html?_requestid=27390502

    (Shortcut: 2:1 in the Globe.  3:1 in the Denver Post, lower right column.)

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    Go back to you're own posts during that time frame, you were right there with him and still are



    I do not believe Obama lied about Libya, nor do I believe Bush lied about Iraq.

     

     

    You dishonestly believe that Obama lied about Libya, but that Bush was just listening to intelligence on Iraq.

    [/QUOTE]

    This what I believe from another post and it greatly concerns me because either we have a problem with Obama or our military/security.  Either Obama is so disconnected from security because he misses most briefing our there is a military/security cover up going on.  This also may have been Bush's Iraq problem; or they may have had bad intelligence.  But I find the Libyan debacle more troubling.

    ...., its most likely worse as the government lied to us about the nature of the Libyan embassy attack.

    They said it had to do with the stupid movie and a protest that got out of hand that resulted in acts of terror.

    Then it was that terrorists took advantage of the protests to pull off the attack in a cloud of confusion; the only confusion was with our government.

    Then two weeks later they admit there was no protest and that there were two distinct attacks on the embassy.  Why did they admit this, because they had to; news is now coming out that we watched this unfold via satellite and drone imagery and people on the ground reporting into the command center.  All this and we sat on our hands and then lied and mislead the public about it.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re:

    The gentleman who asked empty chair who made the decision to pull the security in Benghazi is still in Hempstead standing in the hall waiting for the answer from president empty chair.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re:

    In response to ThatWasMe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The gentleman who asked empty chair who made the decision to pull the security in Benghazi is still in Hempstead standing in the hall waiting for the answer from president empty chair.

    [/QUOTE]

    Actually I just found this on Politico

    Debate questioner: Obama gave me private Libya answer

    By DONOVAN SLACK |

    10/17/12 4:28 PM EDT

    President Obama may have acknowledged for the first time Tuesday night that his administration deliberately delayed calling Libya a "terrorist attack."

    He reportedly conceded the point in a private conversation with one of the questioners after the debate in New York. Kerry Ladka, who asked the president about the delay during the event, told the Washington Post's Erik Wemple about the exchange:

    "After the debate, the president came over to me and spent about two minutes with me privately, " says the 61-year-old Ladka, who works at Global Telecom Supply in Mineola, N.Y. According to Ladka, Obama gave him "more information about why he delayed calling the attack a ter[r]orist attack."...The rationale for the delay, Obama explained to Ladka, was to make sure that the "intelligence he was acting on was real intelligence and not disinformation," recalls Ladka.

    As to Ladka's question about who turned down the Benghazi security requests and why, Obama reportedly told him that "releasing the individual names of anyone in the State Department would really put them at risk," Ladka says.

    Publicly, the administration has insisted that there was no delay in calling the raid a terrorist attack. Although the president did say the day afterward that "no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation," he and his administration did not explicitly call the Benghazi raid a terrorist attack until a week later. White House press secretary Jay Carney has continued to maintain that they have given out the facts as they got them.

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re:

    Obama said that the day after the attach he called it an Act of Terror.  Romney over and over again asked Obama to confirm the he called it an Act of Terror.  Romney used the term Act of Terror in the debate.  Romney basically called Obama a liar and said Obama never called it an Act of Terror.

    Obama clearly called it an Act of Terror.  There is no disputing it.  Romney was clearly wrong. 

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re:

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Obama said that the day after the attach he called it an Act of Terror.  Romney over and over again asked Obama to confirm the he called it an Act of Terror.  Romney used the term Act of Terror in the debate.  Romney basically called Obama a liar and said Obama never called it an Act of Terror.

    Obama clearly called it an Act of Terror.  There is no disputing it.  Romney was clearly wrong. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Not the point. Empty chair is now implying that he meant it was commited by terrorists not a spontaneous mob.

    Learned it from Bubba.

    Dummy.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThatWasMe. Show ThatWasMe's posts

    Re:

    When are we going to learn who denied the consulate security?

    Who decided to remove the plane provided for his exit.

    Who ignored their pleas for more protection.

    Obama dodged this question during the debate, remember???

     

Share