2nd Presidential Debate Tonight 9 EST!!!!!!!

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

The Rose Garden speech was a response to Benghazi. Given the context of the entire speech, Obama referred to what happened at Benghazi as a terrorist attack. If not, then why even use that phraseology?

JD, why did they send Susan Rice out on the Sunday talk shows to say five different times that it was a spontaneous riot I'm reaction to the video? Why when asked on The View if it was terrorism he wouldn't say it was? Why did he speak of the video and religious offense when speaking at the memorial for the ambassador and the three other men? Why did he go before the UN and talk about the video and religious offense? Why did they stick with the spontaneous riot storyline for two whole weeks when the evidence suggests and State Dept officials testified under oath before Congress that they knew it was an organized, premeditated terrorist attack the day of the attack? He may have said "acts of terror" and a "terrible act" that day, but it's obvious they tried to hide the truth about what they knew for 14 days afterward. And thats the point Romney was trying to make.

[canam]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

JD, why did they send Susan Rice out on the Sunday talk shows to say five different times that it was a spontaneous riot I'm reaction to the video? Why when asked on The View if it was terrorism he wouldn't say it was? Why did he speak of the video and religious offense when speaking at the memorial for the ambassador and the three other men? Why did he go before the UN and talk about the video and religious offense? Why did they stick with the spontaneous riot storyline for two whole weeks when the evidence suggests and State Dept officials testified under oath before Congress that they knew it was an organized, premeditated terrorist attack the day of the attack? He may have said "acts of terror" and a "terrible act" that day, but it's obvious they tried to hide the truth about what they knew for 14 days afterward. And thats the point Romney was trying to make.

Bin laden is dead ,yep so is agent Terry and Ambassodor Stevens ,The committmEents i made ive kept ,what a fool ! gonna cut the debt in half the unemployment,eveerthing is gonna b online before its passed ,!he has done nothing except destroy this country,IF TERRORISTS WANNA DESTROY AMERICA THEY BETTER HURRY UP BEFOR OBAMA BEATS THEM TO IT !!!!

[scotty]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

The Rose Garden speech was a response to Benghazi. Given the context of the entire speech, Obama referred to what happened at Benghazi as a terrorist attack. If not, then why even use that phraseology?

Not even close. Given the context of the speech he was simply labeling the event as an 'act of terror', that is a 'terrifying action' . It was a smooth attempt, but grasping at straws. Furthermore, if he was actually saying that it was a terrorist attack then the whole rest of the speech can be labeled as really soft on terrorist. Your not going to bring a group of 2 or 3 dozen terrorist 'to justice'.

Also, if what your saying is true then it makes the following two weeks of denying a terrorist attack look even more stupid.

Furthermore, admitting it was a planned terrorist attacks makes them look even worse for denying repeated request for extra security. Ryan nailed this in his debate when he talked about our embassy in France having a marine contingent but an embassy in a muslim country having practically nothing.

[Aquila]

I so wish Gary Johnson would have been in on this debate.

[AmericanAngel]

Originally Posted by CC1

Obama spoke 4 minutes more than Romney. I think Romney appeared more to be interrupting because the moderator kept trying to shut him up a lot more than she did Obama.

I see your mission to demonize Romney and Ryan is still at full force in this thread and others.

I have a feeling you now realize that there is a reasonable chance Romney can win and that makes you even madder.

It blows my mind you would rather Obama serve as President the next four years than Romney. Very sad. Oh, and you used the word "delusional" in a response to another poster. I think you might want to look in the mirror.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Where we live, it won't matter, as this is a predominantly republican/Morman state.

I understand your theory behind the lesser of two evils... that voting either way empowers one of them... so I guess you could just not vote at all....

I am going to vote. I will vote third party.

This is a poll that CNN put up after the debate:

Who did the debate make you more likely to vote for?

25% - Obama
25% - Romney
48% Neither

I am part of the 48% and if we can effect change and cause a shift away from the two party system, I want to be a part of that. It's not that we will win this go round, but it will make a statement. I am proud to stand with Americans who are not afraid to voice opposition or to fight for change. If not now, when?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I so wish Gary Johnson would have been in on this debate.

Just got news that Larry King will be the moderator.

http://freeandequal.org/updates/larr...ential-debate/

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I am going to vote. I will vote third party.

This is a poll that CNN put up after the debate:

Who did the debate make you more likely to vote for?

25% - Obama
25% - Romney
48% Neither

I am part of the 48% and if we can effect change and cause a shift away from the two party system, I want to be a part of that. It's not that we will win this go round, but it will make a statement. I am proud to stand with Americans who are not afraid to voice opposition or to fight for change. If not now, when?

Read the history of third parties, not any evidence that they do anything but elect the worst candidates and ruin the careers of the participates in third party campaigns. Even a strong former president, Teddy Roosevelt ruined his career as a third party candidate.
What makes this new crop of third parties believe they can change the record??? Every hear of Ross Perot? He recieved 19% of the vote and accomplished nothing but to elect a liberal Democrat.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

JD, why did they send Susan Rice out on the Sunday talk shows to say five different times that it was a spontaneous riot I'm reaction to the video? Why when asked on The View if it was terrorism he wouldn't say it was? Why did he speak of the video and religious offense when speaking at the memorial for the ambassador and the three other men? Why did he go before the UN and talk about the video and religious offense? Why did they stick with the spontaneous riot storyline for two whole weeks when the evidence suggests and State Dept officials testified under oath before Congress that they knew it was an organized, premeditated terrorist attack the day of the attack? He may have said "acts of terror" and a "terrible act" that day, but it's obvious they tried to hide the truth about what they knew for 14 days afterward. And thats the point Romney was trying to make.

Because that would prove his incompetence. So, they had to soft soap the attack.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by crakjak

Read the history of third parties, not any evidence that they do anything but elect the worst candidates and ruin the careers of the participates in third party campaigns. Even a strong former president, Teddy Roosevelt ruined his career as a third party candidate.
What makes this new crop of third parties believe they can change the record??? Every hear of Ross Perot? He recieved 19% of the vote and accomplished nothing but to elect a liberal Democrat.

Don't presume this will hurt Romney. I posted stats in Virginia, as well, showing that when the polls shifted, voters were moving in either direction and not coming from the Independents. In fact, when Romney got out of the way, the shift actually helped him.

“When Gary Johnson’s included he gets 3 percent and actually takes mostly from Obama, pulling his lead over Romney down to 48/47,” PPP explained. “That could be something worth keeping an eye on.” - Daily Caller

And don't forget, after the primaries and the Convention, the Republican Party is left with a huge group totally ticked off at their criminal acts they engaged in. That's going to factor into this election as well. They only have themselves to blame for it.