Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by ERASER, Oct 18, 2012.
This will still be on the mind of American voters on November 6th. We are inside the window of a very short American attention span. Anything brought up now will still be fresh on everyone's mind.
Expect a desperate act by Barry soon. He'll have an attack launched against the terrorists then claim he was downplaying the whole thing as a strategy to keep the attackers from knowing we were on to them. Probably before the debate.
Oh, what a tangled web we weave...
The foreign policy debate couldn't be any timelier...
We should all be thanking Candy Crowley. All she did in trying to help Obama with his lie, was shine a big spotlight on it.
BUT, Obama got away with his lie.
The United States suffered another terrorist attack that left Americans dead. Obama lied to cover it up so it wouldn't hurt his chances of re-election.
It looks like that he's gotten away with it, because nobody is looking at it from that angle.
Not necessarily. We will find out on election day whether he got away with it, or not.
the bases will continue to believe what they want to believe..... the undecided will continue to say..."Duh."
We're talking very small sample groups here, but it's interesting that both Fox News and MSNBC had focus groups of "undecideds" following the most recent debate -- and the majority of both groups favored Romney.
but I wondered how representative those undecideds were of the undecideds nation wide.
Of course, that is the bigger question -- as I mentioned, we were dealing with pretty small sample sizes.
However, I still prefer this narrative to the alternative.
During O's righteous indignation moment over Libya in debate 2, I had this peculiar flashback to Bill Clintion's finger wagging I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN moment.
I wonder if the nationally televised "I lied" speech comes before or after he moves out in January.
I have to say that "righteous indignation" moment struck me as very contrived and artificial because -- well, because there's nothing righteous about the man. Thin-skinned as he is, he might have been pissed -- but righteous indignation comes from the core of a person's beliefs, and it's hard to fake it.
Not so sure about that. In less than 3 wks, we should truly know whether he got away with it.
You can get debate tactical points but that may not have any linkage to the subliminal perception in the voters' mind.
There wasn't any "debate" about what happened among the folks in the Libyan gov't back when it occurred.
"The idea that this criminal and cowardly act was a spontaneous protest that just spun out of control is completely unfounded and preposterous," he says. "We firmly believe that this was a precalculated, preplanned attack that was carried out specifically to attack the U.S. Consulate." --- Libyan President, immediately after the U.S. embassy attack.
Hmmmm...I wonder how the intel "professionals", that Hussein, Biden and Hillary keep talking about, managed to miss that little tidbit of info?
The answer, of course, is that no doubt it was duly noted in the intel report. It just inconveniently didn't fit the requisite political spin needed to paper Hussein's ***.
The only "debate" seemed to be in the Obama administration as to how long to perpetuate the lie about that stupid video.
This all misses the original question, which was:
That is much more devastating than this banter about who said wheter it was a terrorist attack and when did they say it. It was Obama who deflected the question and no one looked back. Why did the State Department, on May 3, 2012, deny the request for extra security???
Given Obama's reaction to that question the last time, we can only assume he will tap dance around it and try to run out the clock yet again. It might be harder to do in a debate totally dedicated to foreign policy, but I have no doubt he'd try it.
Alternately, as he sort of did in the previous debate, he may just swallow his lumps and say something like, "I won't say who is at fault, but the buck stops with me and I take full responsibility..." -- and try to come out of it looking "noble." Given THAT possibility (which sort of drops the issue right then and there), the "why did you all keep lying about the terrorist attack and blame it on a video?" question might actually be the more sustaining one.