Presidential Debate Thread - Obama vs. Romney (2 Viewers)

[pantagrapher]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

Maybe but I think his strategy was different... Obama had to be beyond prepared for this question...it seemed very obvious it was going to be asked... being the Commander-in-Chief he would be able to deliver a heartfelt/how dare you question me answer whether it was true or not...that is a tough pissing contest to get into with an incumbent...by not addressing it Romney is going to get far more bang for his buck as this story unfolds and causes political damage to Obama...at the time I was not happy that Romney did not hit this topic harder but in hindsight it could turn out to be a very wise move as it appears a cover-up may have happened...if that is the case Obama is going to have to deal with this with less than two weeks left in the campaign and that is a huge negative...

The more I read about the Libya situation, the more it's clear the administration's assertions square with what the CIA was telling them at the time. This isn't the "game-changing" scandal you guys are counting on. Romney didn't press it because it's over.

 

[Boston]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

Maybe but I think his strategy was different... Obama had to be beyond prepared for this question...it seemed very obvious it was going to be asked... being the Commander-in-Chief he would be able to deliver a heartfelt/how dare you question me answer whether it was true or not...that is a tough pissing contest to get into with an incumbent...by not addressing it Romney is going to get far more bang for his buck as this story unfolds and causes political damage to Obama...at the time I was not happy that Romney did not hit this topic harder but in hindsight it could turn out to be a very wise move as it appears a cover-up may have happened...if that is the case Obama is going to have to deal with this with less than two weeks left in the campaign and that is a huge negative...

The more I read about the Libya situation, the more it's clear the administration's assertions square with what the CIA was telling them at the time. This isn't the "game-changing" scandal you guys are counting on. Romney didn't press it because it's over.

If that is the case than over the past week I have heard at least five "military/intel experts" (including Colonel David Hunt) completely lie about how that situation went down...if that is the case I hope they are discredited but they all described in fine detail about how the intel works in this type of situation and all unequivocally said that the video excuse was a complete sham from the get-go...Regarless of that the fact that the Administration is going to have to spend time discussing this is a negative with two weeks to go...this story involves a potential cover-up and there is absolutely nothing positive for Obama with regard to this story...

 

[pantagrapher]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

Maybe but I think his strategy was different... Obama had to be beyond prepared for this question...it seemed very obvious it was going to be asked... being the Commander-in-Chief he would be able to deliver a heartfelt/how dare you question me answer whether it was true or not...that is a tough pissing contest to get into with an incumbent...by not addressing it Romney is going to get far more bang for his buck as this story unfolds and causes political damage to Obama...at the time I was not happy that Romney did not hit this topic harder but in hindsight it could turn out to be a very wise move as it appears a cover-up may have happened...if that is the case Obama is going to have to deal with this with less than two weeks left in the campaign and that is a huge negative...

The more I read about the Libya situation, the more it's clear the administration's assertions square with what the CIA was telling them at the time. This isn't the "game-changing" scandal you guys are counting on. Romney didn't press it because it's over.

If that is the case than over the past week I have heard at least five "military/intel experts" (including Colonel David Hunt) completely lie about how that situation went down.

You're going to have to accept that if you watch Fox News, you are being lied to. Constantly.

 

[Boston]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

Maybe but I think his strategy was different... Obama had to be beyond prepared for this question...it seemed very obvious it was going to be asked... being the Commander-in-Chief he would be able to deliver a heartfelt/how dare you question me answer whether it was true or not...that is a tough pissing contest to get into with an incumbent...by not addressing it Romney is going to get far more bang for his buck as this story unfolds and causes political damage to Obama...at the time I was not happy that Romney did not hit this topic harder but in hindsight it could turn out to be a very wise move as it appears a cover-up may have happened...if that is the case Obama is going to have to deal with this with less than two weeks left in the campaign and that is a huge negative...

The more I read about the Libya situation, the more it's clear the administration's assertions square with what the CIA was telling them at the time. This isn't the "game-changing" scandal you guys are counting on. Romney didn't press it because it's over.

If that is the case than over the past week I have heard at least five "military/intel experts" (including Colonel David Hunt) completely lie about how that situation went down.

You're going to have to accept that if you watch Fox News, you are being lied to. Constantly.

Yes, some day I will see the light and get the truth from the NY Times, Boston Globe, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC...

 

[pantagrapher]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

Maybe but I think his strategy was different... Obama had to be beyond prepared for this question...it seemed very obvious it was going to be asked... being the Commander-in-Chief he would be able to deliver a heartfelt/how dare you question me answer whether it was true or not...that is a tough pissing contest to get into with an incumbent...by not addressing it Romney is going to get far more bang for his buck as this story unfolds and causes political damage to Obama...at the time I was not happy that Romney did not hit this topic harder but in hindsight it could turn out to be a very wise move as it appears a cover-up may have happened...if that is the case Obama is going to have to deal with this with less than two weeks left in the campaign and that is a huge negative...

The more I read about the Libya situation, the more it's clear the administration's assertions square with what the CIA was telling them at the time. This isn't the "game-changing" scandal you guys are counting on. Romney didn't press it because it's over.

If that is the case than over the past week I have heard at least five "military/intel experts" (including Colonel David Hunt) completely lie about how that situation went down.

You're going to have to accept that if you watch Fox News, you are being lied to. Constantly.

Yes, some day I will see the light and get the truth from the NY Times, Boston Globe, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC...

Do what you want. I'm just telling you that if you let Fox whip you into a frenzy about the Libya conspiracy that's about to blow up and change the election, you're going to be disappointed.

 

[17seconds]

haven't followed this thread, don't know if this was posted yet or not but here's a great example of why a lot of people on the left are seemingly caught by surprise when events on the ground don't match up with what they see in the media. This guy is a ####### idiot and a waste of oxygen. He makes you dumber for having heard him and he gives people on the left, in the media in general, and NBC in particular, a very bad name.

http://www.bizpacrev...-racial-hatred/

only thing missing is the pompoms and a straightjacket.

While Matthews emphasizes racism more than I would, I think the gist of his comments here are absolutely on target. In all three debates, Romney has completely repudiated the conservative movement in this country. He has essentially ripped apart everything the Tea Party believes in, and most of what the social conservatives believe in. Last night he tore into neo-conservative foreign policy and basically aligned himself with Obama, just as he's done all along. All of this should make the right wing in this country outraged, even as it makes me (a moderate centrist) very happy. But it doesn't matter. The right hates Obama so much that they'd vote for anyone to defeat him, which is what they're doing. Chris Matthews is correct.

calling people that support Romney racists is wrong, and stupid. I hope you don't agree with that, for your sake.we have two choices for president, if the tea party was a major 3rd party, they could nominate their own guy, but it isn't and they can't. Like all elections, people vote for the guy that most aligns with their own beliefs and values. In this case, we have a man that has a 4 year track record, and it is horrible. You don't have to be a racist, or "hates Obama so much" is your words, to vote against him. Just look at his record. chronic 8% unemployment, 16 Trillion in debt, annual Trillion dollar budget deficits, haven't passed a budge in almost 4 years, credit downgrades, resurgence of Al Qaeda, putting a man in jail for freedom of speech (by the way the guy is still in jail and will not get a court apperance til 3 days after the election), ramming Obamacare down our throats, record numbers of disability and food stamp recipients, high energy costs, thousand of more federal regulations, and no plan for the next 4 years.

Chris Matthews was so wrong, and so out of line that it makes me wonder if he isn't mentally ill.

And here's another tip for you, the "right wing" in this country is about as big as the "left wing" in this country. There's like 10-15% hardcore partisans on either side of the spectrum, those are your wings. The other ~70% of us are somewhere inbetween. This is a big problem on the left, they imagine their political opposition is a bogeyman right winger that loves nothing but "Merica, guns and white people. In fact their opposition is people just like them that think maybe we can do this better than the last 4 years.

I can't watch the video here but I've heard Matthews rant about this in the last couple of months. Is he saying all Romney voters are racist? Clearly that's wrong. When I've seen him make these rants I take it he means a segment of Romney voters.If you think Romney doesn't get votes in the millions from whites who don't like Obama because he's black, you are kidding yourself. I can think of 3 people I know through extended family and friends who will flat out tell you they'd never vote for a black guy. Then there's another 7 or so who make racist comments all the time, probably wouldn't admit it influences their vote, but it's pretty easy to deduce.

Obama gets a lot of votes from people who hate all rich white guys and from blacks who vote for him because he's black. It's just a reality, and it is silly for Matthews (and you) to get so worked up.

 

[JoePlumber]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

Maybe but I think his strategy was different... Obama had to be beyond prepared for this question...it seemed very obvious it was going to be asked... being the Commander-in-Chief he would be able to deliver a heartfelt/how dare you question me answer whether it was true or not...that is a tough pissing contest to get into with an incumbent...by not addressing it Romney is going to get far more bang for his buck as this story unfolds and causes political damage to Obama...at the time I was not happy that Romney did not hit this topic harder but in hindsight it could turn out to be a very wise move as it appears a cover-up may have happened...if that is the case Obama is going to have to deal with this with less than two weeks left in the campaign and that is a huge negative...

The more I read about the Libya situation, the more it's clear the administration's assertions square with what the CIA was telling them at the time. This isn't the "game-changing" scandal you guys are counting on. Romney didn't press it because it's over.

If that is the case than over the past week I have heard at least five "military/intel experts" (including Colonel David Hunt) completely lie about how that situation went down.

You're going to have to accept that if you watch Fox News, you are being lied to. Constantly.

Correct, for unbiased coverage tune to MSNBC.

 

[chet]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

Maybe but I think his strategy was different... Obama had to be beyond prepared for this question...it seemed very obvious it was going to be asked... being the Commander-in-Chief he would be able to deliver a heartfelt/how dare you question me answer whether it was true or not...that is a tough pissing contest to get into with an incumbent...by not addressing it Romney is going to get far more bang for his buck as this story unfolds and causes political damage to Obama...at the time I was not happy that Romney did not hit this topic harder but in hindsight it could turn out to be a very wise move as it appears a cover-up may have happened...if that is the case Obama is going to have to deal with this with less than two weeks left in the campaign and that is a huge negative...

The more I read about the Libya situation, the more it's clear the administration's assertions square with what the CIA was telling them at the time. This isn't the "game-changing" scandal you guys are counting on. Romney didn't press it because it's over.

If that is the case than over the past week I have heard at least five "military/intel experts" (including Colonel David Hunt) completely lie about how that situation went down.

You're going to have to accept that if you watch Fox News, you are being lied to. Constantly.

Yes, some day I will see the light and get the truth from the NY Times, Boston Globe, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC...

Do what you want. I'm just telling you that if you let Fox whip you into a frenzy about the Libya conspiracy that's about to blow up and change the election, you're going to be disappointed.

Intrade moved from 60/40 to 54/46 last night.

 

[Boston]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

Maybe but I think his strategy was different... Obama had to be beyond prepared for this question...it seemed very obvious it was going to be asked... being the Commander-in-Chief he would be able to deliver a heartfelt/how dare you question me answer whether it was true or not...that is a tough pissing contest to get into with an incumbent...by not addressing it Romney is going to get far more bang for his buck as this story unfolds and causes political damage to Obama...at the time I was not happy that Romney did not hit this topic harder but in hindsight it could turn out to be a very wise move as it appears a cover-up may have happened...if that is the case Obama is going to have to deal with this with less than two weeks left in the campaign and that is a huge negative...

The more I read about the Libya situation, the more it's clear the administration's assertions square with what the CIA was telling them at the time. This isn't the "game-changing" scandal you guys are counting on. Romney didn't press it because it's over.

If that is the case than over the past week I have heard at least five "military/intel experts" (including Colonel David Hunt) completely lie about how that situation went down.

You're going to have to accept that if you watch Fox News, you are being lied to. Constantly.

Yes, some day I will see the light and get the truth from the NY Times, Boston Globe, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC...

Do what you want. I'm just telling you that if you let Fox whip you into a frenzy about the Libya conspiracy that's about to blow up and change the election, you're going to be disappointed.

And you can bury your head in the sand and have Chris Mathews, Lawrence O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow or George Stepanopoulos tell you Obama walks on water...there's no frenzy here...the facts will speak for themself...it's obviously a big story and hopefully the truth will come out prior to the election because it's not fair to have this hurt Obama if it's nothing but it's not fair to Romney if the Administration did use the video as a cover-up...regardless of that I don't think there's any question that this is not going to be a plus for Obama over the next few weeks...whether it's very minor or something major will depend on the facts but either way it has the potential to be a distraction for Obama...

 

[mr roboto]

haven't followed this thread, don't know if this was posted yet or not but here's a great example of why a lot of people on the left are seemingly caught by surprise when events on the ground don't match up with what they see in the media. This guy is a ####### idiot and a waste of oxygen. He makes you dumber for having heard him and he gives people on the left, in the media in general, and NBC in particular, a very bad name.

http://www.bizpacrev...-racial-hatred/

only thing missing is the pompoms and a straightjacket.

While Matthews emphasizes racism more than I would, I think the gist of his comments here are absolutely on target. In all three debates, Romney has completely repudiated the conservative movement in this country. He has essentially ripped apart everything the Tea Party believes in, and most of what the social conservatives believe in. Last night he tore into neo-conservative foreign policy and basically aligned himself with Obama, just as he's done all along. All of this should make the right wing in this country outraged, even as it makes me (a moderate centrist) very happy. But it doesn't matter. The right hates Obama so much that they'd vote for anyone to defeat him, which is what they're doing. Chris Matthews is correct.

calling people that support Romney racists is wrong, and stupid. I hope you don't agree with that, for your sake.we have two choices for president, if the tea party was a major 3rd party, they could nominate their own guy, but it isn't and they can't. Like all elections, people vote for the guy that most aligns with their own beliefs and values. In this case, we have a man that has a 4 year track record, and it is horrible. You don't have to be a racist, or "hates Obama so much" is your words, to vote against him. Just look at his record. chronic 8% unemployment, 16 Trillion in debt, annual Trillion dollar budget deficits, haven't passed a budge in almost 4 years, credit downgrades, resurgence of Al Qaeda, putting a man in jail for freedom of speech (by the way the guy is still in jail and will not get a court apperance til 3 days after the election), ramming Obamacare down our throats, record numbers of disability and food stamp recipients, high energy costs, thousand of more federal regulations, and no plan for the next 4 years.

Chris Matthews was so wrong, and so out of line that it makes me wonder if he isn't mentally ill.

And here's another tip for you, the "right wing" in this country is about as big as the "left wing" in this country. There's like 10-15% hardcore partisans on either side of the spectrum, those are your wings. The other ~70% of us are somewhere inbetween. This is a big problem on the left, they imagine their political opposition is a bogeyman right winger that loves nothing but "Merica, guns and white people. In fact their opposition is people just like them that think maybe we can do this better than the last 4 years.

I can't watch the video here but I've heard Matthews rant about this in the last couple of months. Is he saying all Romney voters are racist? Clearly that's wrong. When I've seen him make these rants I take it he means a segment of Romney voters.If you think Romney doesn't get votes in the millions from whites who don't like Obama because he's black, you are kidding yourself. I can think of 3 people I know through extended family and friends who will flat out tell you they'd never vote for a black guy. Then there's another 7 or so who make racist comments all the time, probably wouldn't admit it influences their vote, but it's pretty easy to deduce.

Obama gets a lot of votes from people who hate all rich white guys and from blacks who vote for him because he's black. It's just a reality, and it is silly for Matthews (and you) to get so worked up.

Do you think there was a significant number of both white and black votes in 08 to be part of the 'Historic First Black President' vote? I know a few who listed that as a primary reason. And I think there is a significant constituency on the left who don't see anything wrong with that. Diversity in and of itself is justification for a vote.

 

[squistion]

haven't followed this thread, don't know if this was posted yet or not but here's a great example of why a lot of people on the left are seemingly caught by surprise when events on the ground don't match up with what they see in the media. This guy is a ####### idiot and a waste of oxygen. He makes you dumber for having heard him and he gives people on the left, in the media in general, and NBC in particular, a very bad name.

http://www.bizpacrev...-racial-hatred/

only thing missing is the pompoms and a straightjacket.

While Matthews emphasizes racism more than I would, I think the gist of his comments here are absolutely on target. In all three debates, Romney has completely repudiated the conservative movement in this country. He has essentially ripped apart everything the Tea Party believes in, and most of what the social conservatives believe in. Last night he tore into neo-conservative foreign policy and basically aligned himself with Obama, just as he's done all along. All of this should make the right wing in this country outraged, even as it makes me (a moderate centrist) very happy. But it doesn't matter. The right hates Obama so much that they'd vote for anyone to defeat him, which is what they're doing. Chris Matthews is correct.

calling people that support Romney racists is wrong, and stupid. I hope you don't agree with that, for your sake.we have two choices for president, if the tea party was a major 3rd party, they could nominate their own guy, but it isn't and they can't. Like all elections, people vote for the guy that most aligns with their own beliefs and values. In this case, we have a man that has a 4 year track record, and it is horrible. You don't have to be a racist, or "hates Obama so much" is your words, to vote against him. Just look at his record. chronic 8% unemployment, 16 Trillion in debt, annual Trillion dollar budget deficits, haven't passed a budge in almost 4 years, credit downgrades, resurgence of Al Qaeda, putting a man in jail for freedom of speech (by the way the guy is still in jail and will not get a court apperance til 3 days after the election), ramming Obamacare down our throats, record numbers of disability and food stamp recipients, high energy costs, thousand of more federal regulations, and no plan for the next 4 years.

Chris Matthews was so wrong, and so out of line that it makes me wonder if he isn't mentally ill.

And here's another tip for you, the "right wing" in this country is about as big as the "left wing" in this country. There's like 10-15% hardcore partisans on either side of the spectrum, those are your wings. The other ~70% of us are somewhere inbetween. This is a big problem on the left, they imagine their political opposition is a bogeyman right winger that loves nothing but "Merica, guns and white people. In fact their opposition is people just like them that think maybe we can do this better than the last 4 years.

I can't watch the video here but I've heard Matthews rant about this in the last couple of months. Is he saying all Romney voters are racist? Clearly that's wrong. When I've seen him make these rants I take it he means a segment of Romney voters.If you think Romney doesn't get votes in the millions from whites who don't like Obama because he's black, you are kidding yourself. I can think of 3 people I know through extended family and friends who will flat out tell you they'd never vote for a black guy. Then there's another 7 or so who make racist comments all the time, probably wouldn't admit it influences their vote, but it's pretty easy to deduce.

Obama gets a lot of votes from people who hate all rich white guys and from blacks who vote for him because he's black. It's just a reality, and it is silly for Matthews (and you) to get so worked up.

No he didn't say that in this edited clip. He made a reference to some numbers regarding southern whites (I am guessing some recent polling) but he has never stated or even inferred that all Romney voters are racist.

 

[pantagrapher]

And you can bury your head in the sand and have Chris Mathews, Lawrence O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow or George Stepanopoulos tell you Obama walks on water

I don't watch any of them. Hell, I don't even watch The Daily Show.

 

[the moops]

There's like 10-15% hardcore partisans on either side of the spectrum, those are your wings. The other ~70% of us are somewhere inbetween.

 

[mr roboto]

And you can bury your head in the sand and have Chris Mathews, Lawrence O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow or George Stepanopoulos tell you Obama walks on water

I don't watch any of them. Hell, I don't even watch The Daily Show.

So you don't watch any news, but the guy who watches Fox is less informed than you?

 

[Slapdash]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

Maybe but I think his strategy was different... Obama had to be beyond prepared for this question...it seemed very obvious it was going to be asked... being the Commander-in-Chief he would be able to deliver a heartfelt/how dare you question me answer whether it was true or not...that is a tough pissing contest to get into with an incumbent...by not addressing it Romney is going to get far more bang for his buck as this story unfolds and causes political damage to Obama...at the time I was not happy that Romney did not hit this topic harder but in hindsight it could turn out to be a very wise move as it appears a cover-up may have happened...if that is the case Obama is going to have to deal with this with less than two weeks left in the campaign and that is a huge negative...

The more I read about the Libya situation, the more it's clear the administration's assertions square with what the CIA was telling them at the time. This isn't the "game-changing" scandal you guys are counting on. Romney didn't press it because it's over.

They sure really want this to be more than it is.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

And you can bury your head in the sand and have Chris Mathews, Lawrence O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow or George Stepanopoulos tell you Obama walks on water

I don't watch any of them. Hell, I don't even watch The Daily Show.

So you don't watch any news, but the guy who watches Fox is less informed than you?

I'm not sure I'd call any of the above listed shows "news." There are other ways to get news than watching people talk on cable TV, no?

 

[pantagrapher]

And you can bury your head in the sand and have Chris Mathews, Lawrence O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow or George Stepanopoulos tell you Obama walks on water

I don't watch any of them. Hell, I don't even watch The Daily Show.

So you don't watch any news, but the guy who watches Fox is less informed than you?

Not less informed, ill-informed. And no, you don't have to watch political commentary shows on the teevee to be well-informed.

 

[pittstownkiller]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

I would not say that you are wrong in having that opinion but I do not agree with it; I thought that Romney came across very strong on that exchange with the close-up of Romney turning to the President with and raising his eyebrows in disbelief, which could be a seminal moment in political history. If Benghazi blows up for the Administration Romney questions about Libya will go down in debate history and will always be linked to the call for more investigation of this story; if Benghazi is an afterthought so will his actions.

 

[Jewell]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi.

Also from his brother, Carl Ghazi.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

Maybe but I think his strategy was different... Obama had to be beyond prepared for this question...it seemed very obvious it was going to be asked... being the Commander-in-Chief he would be able to deliver a heartfelt/how dare you question me answer whether it was true or not...that is a tough pissing contest to get into with an incumbent...by not addressing it Romney is going to get far more bang for his buck as this story unfolds and causes political damage to Obama...at the time I was not happy that Romney did not hit this topic harder but in hindsight it could turn out to be a very wise move as it appears a cover-up may have happened...if that is the case Obama is going to have to deal with this with less than two weeks left in the campaign and that is a huge negative...

The more I read about the Libya situation, the more it's clear the administration's assertions square with what the CIA was telling them at the time. This isn't the "game-changing" scandal you guys are counting on. Romney didn't press it because it's over.

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

 

[Slapdash]

And you can bury your head in the sand and have Chris Mathews, Lawrence O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow or George Stepanopoulos tell you Obama walks on water

I don't watch any of them. Hell, I don't even watch The Daily Show.

So you don't watch any news, but the guy who watches Fox is less informed than you?

TV news is in the business of entertainment, not informing.

 

[Politician Spock]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

Romney learned that bringing it up during the debates only gives Obama the opportunity to spin the situation in his favor in front of a national audience.The issue is far more dangerous to Obama when congress and the media can just randomly attack him on the issue and Obama has to respond with damage control.

 

[squistion]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

I think it is why Romney left it on the table during the debate; why become the political spearhead going after the President when Congress is going to go after him maybe from a cover-up angle.

I think there is a simpler answer: Romney came off very poorly doing this in the previous debate.

I would not say that you are wrong in having that opinion but I do not agree with it; I thought that Romney came across very strong on that exchange with the close-up of Romney turning to the President with and raising his eyebrows in disbelief, which could be a seminal moment in political history. If Benghazi blows up for the Administration Romney questions about Libya will go down in debate history and will always be linked to the call for more investigation of this story; if Benghazi is an afterthought so will his actions.

You got that right, but not for the reasons you think. Romney tried for a "Gotcha" moment and made a horse's patootie out of himself. Yes this will be remembered and replayed for decades but only because of a serious miscalculation on Romney's part (based on a false right wing talking point that his staff failed to research by not looking at what Obama actually said in The Rose Garden the day after the attack).

 

[17seconds]

Do you think there was a significant number of both white and black votes in 08 to be part of the 'Historic First Black President' vote?

Yes

 

[tommyGunZ]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

This is shtick, right?

 

[squistion]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

This is shtick, right?

Sadly, no. The people on the far right actually believe this, that this is another Watergate. FOX has been pushing this narrative as a game changer for the election for the last few weeks.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

the close-up of Romney turning to the President with and raising his eyebrows in disbelief, which could be a seminal moment in political history

I predict that in our lifetimes, this image will replace the portrait of Lincoln on the $5 bill.

 

[tommyGunZ]

And you can bury your head in the sand and have Chris Mathews, Lawrence O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow or George Stepanopoulos tell you Obama walks on water

I don't watch any of them. Hell, I don't even watch The Daily Show.

So you don't watch any news, but the guy who watches Fox is less informed than you?

Pretty much. Multiple studies have shown that Fox News viewers are actually less informed than folks who don't watch any news at all.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

This is shtick, right?

Sadly, no. The people on the far right actually believe this, that this is another Watergate. FOX has been pushing this narrative as a game changer for the election for the last few weeks.

I've seen Hannity spewing his nonsense, and many of my mouth-breathing facebook friends parrotting it, but I figure a guy like chet is far too intelligent to push this crap.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi.

Why would he have problems from Jackie Treehorn? Also, isn't he dead?

 

[Slapdash]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi.

Why would he have problems from Jackie Treehorn? Also, isn't he dead?

Jackie Treehorn still draws a lot of water around here.

 

[chet]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

This is shtick, right?

Sadly, no. The people on the far right actually believe this, that this is another Watergate. FOX has been pushing this narrative as a game changer for the election for the last few weeks.

I've seen Hannity spewing his nonsense, and many of my mouth-breathing facebook friends parrotting it, but I figure a guy like chet is far too intelligent to push this crap.

Just reacting to the intrade move. I almost never watch Fox News.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

This is shtick, right?

Sadly, no. The people on the far right actually believe this, that this is another Watergate. FOX has been pushing this narrative as a game changer for the election for the last few weeks.

I don't think it is the game-changer than some on the right think it is, but it isn't the non-story that some on the left think it is, either. As usual, the truth falls somewhere in the middle.

 

[squistion]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

This is shtick, right?

Sadly, no. The people on the far right actually believe this, that this is another Watergate. FOX has been pushing this narrative as a game changer for the election for the last few weeks.

I don't think it is the game-changer than some on the right think it is, but it isn't the non-story that some on the left think it is, either. As usual, the truth falls somewhere in the middle.

Do you have a link to some poll numbers that back this up? It appears that only a small segment of the American public consider this a major issue as far as the election is concerned.

 

[pantagrapher]

I don't think it is the game-changer than some on the right think it is, but it isn't the non-story that some on the left think it is, either. As usual, the truth falls somewhere in the middle.

DEAR GOD MAKE IT STOP

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

This is shtick, right?

Sadly, no. The people on the far right actually believe this, that this is another Watergate. FOX has been pushing this narrative as a game changer for the election for the last few weeks.

I've seen Hannity spewing his nonsense, and many of my mouth-breathing facebook friends parrotting it, but I figure a guy like chet is far too intelligent to push this crap.

Just reacting to the intrade move. I almost never watch Fox News.

You'd love it.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Major problems for Obama from Ben Ghazi. Rightfully so.

This is shtick, right?

Sadly, no. The people on the far right actually believe this, that this is another Watergate. FOX has been pushing this narrative as a game changer for the election for the last few weeks.

I've seen Hannity spewing his nonsense, and many of my mouth-breathing facebook friends parrotting it, but I figure a guy like chet is far too intelligent to push this crap.

Just reacting to the intrade move. I almost never watch Fox News.

Why do you assume the intrade move is due to Benghazi?

 

[Jim11]

Coverup exposed.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57538689/emails-detail-unfolding-benghazi-attack-on-sept-11/

The emails are just a few in what are likely a large number traded throughout the night. They are likely to become part of the ongoing political debate over whether the administration attempted to mislead in saying the assault was an outgrowth of a protest, rather than a planned attack by terrorists.

http://www.foxnews.com/

STATE DEPARTMENT EMAILS obtained by Fox News again challenge Obama administration claims they were in the dark about deadly Sept. 11 terror attack on consulate in Benghazi, Libya — including one email within hours of attack that specifically points to Al Qaeda-affiliated terror group Ansar al Sharia claiming responsibility.

 

[squistion]

Coverup exposed.http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57538689/emails-detail-unfolding-benghazi-attack-on-sept-11/The emails are just a few in what are likely a large number traded throughout the night. They are likely to become part of the ongoing political debate over whether the administration attempted to mislead in saying the assault was an outgrowth of a protest, rather than a planned attack by terrorists.http://www.foxnews.com/STATE DEPARTMENT EMAILS obtained by Fox News again challenge Obama administration claims they were in the dark about deadly Sept. 11 terror attack on consulate in Benghazi, Libya — including one email within hours of attack that specifically points to Al Qaeda-affiliated terror group Ansar al Sharia claiming responsibility.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Coverup exposed.http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57538689/emails-detail-unfolding-benghazi-attack-on-sept-11/The emails are just a few in what are likely a large number traded throughout the night. They are likely to become part of the ongoing political debate over whether the administration attempted to mislead in saying the assault was an outgrowth of a protest, rather than a planned attack by terrorists.http://www.foxnews.com/STATE DEPARTMENT EMAILS obtained by Fox News again challenge Obama administration claims they were in the dark about deadly Sept. 11 terror attack on consulate in Benghazi, Libya — including one email within hours of attack that specifically points to Al Qaeda-affiliated terror group Ansar al Sharia claiming responsibility.

Much prefer the calm rational approach of the Obama administration when compared to the knee jerk reaction that characterizes the last republican administration.Also Obama gets his men, the people responsible with pay for this - without invading another country and costing trillions of dollars.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Coverup exposed.http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57538689/emails-detail-unfolding-benghazi-attack-on-sept-11/The emails are just a few in what are likely a large number traded throughout the night. They are likely to become part of the ongoing political debate over whether the administration attempted to mislead in saying the assault was an outgrowth of a protest, rather than a planned attack by terrorists.http://www.foxnews.com/STATE DEPARTMENT EMAILS obtained by Fox News again challenge Obama administration claims they were in the dark about deadly Sept. 11 terror attack on consulate in Benghazi, Libya — including one email within hours of attack that specifically points to Al Qaeda-affiliated terror group Ansar al Sharia claiming responsibility.

Yea, that group made a post on Facebook saying it was them, and then that same group denied responsibility. Real time updates does not equal knowing the motives or the truth. It would be irresponsible to jump to conclusions or start announcing things without having the intelligence community fully analyze everything including but not limited to chatter and evidence leading up to the event, things coming through during and immediately after the event, and things that surface post event.The video riots could have been used as a cover by the group to hide intent. The administration may have been fooled, or they may have been attempting to make these terrorists believe they were getting away with it. I do not think classified intelligence needs to be disseminated to the public as soon as it's discovered.

 

[Mello]

Coverup exposed.http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57538689/emails-detail-unfolding-benghazi-attack-on-sept-11/The emails are just a few in what are likely a large number traded throughout the night. They are likely to become part of the ongoing political debate over whether the administration attempted to mislead in saying the assault was an outgrowth of a protest, rather than a planned attack by terrorists.http://www.foxnews.com/STATE DEPARTMENT EMAILS obtained by Fox News again challenge Obama administration claims they were in the dark about deadly Sept. 11 terror attack on consulate in Benghazi, Libya — including one email within hours of attack that specifically points to Al Qaeda-affiliated terror group Ansar al Sharia claiming responsibility.

Much prefer the calm rational approach of the Obama administration when compared to the knee jerk reaction that characterizes the last republican administration.Also Obama gets his men, the people responsible with pay for this - without invading another country and costing trillions of dollars.

Yeah, because it's OK to bomb foreign countries and terrorize its citizens as long as you don't actually invade. Oh, that seems to only be OK when American Democrats do it.

 

[tommyboy]

No ####. I posted that info in here on sep 13

 

[quickhands]

haven't followed this thread, don't know if this was posted yet or not but here's a great example of why a lot of people on the left are seemingly caught by surprise when events on the ground don't match up with what they see in the media. This guy is a ####### idiot and a waste of oxygen. He makes you dumber for having heard him and he gives people on the left, in the media in general, and NBC in particular, a very bad name.

http://www.bizpacrev...-racial-hatred/

only thing missing is the pompoms and a straightjacket.

While Matthews emphasizes racism more than I would, I think the gist of his comments here are absolutely on target. In all three debates, Romney has completely repudiated the conservative movement in this country. He has essentially ripped apart everything the Tea Party believes in, and most of what the social conservatives believe in. Last night he tore into neo-conservative foreign policy and basically aligned himself with Obama, just as he's done all along. All of this should make the right wing in this country outraged, even as it makes me (a moderate centrist) very happy. But it doesn't matter. The right hates Obama so much that they'd vote for anyone to defeat him, which is what they're doing. Chris Matthews is correct.

Or maybe you misread the people you don't agree with. Maybe the right sees the lesser of two evils.Kind of like the left not being up in arms about stuff they'd normally freak out about. But keep their mouth shut because they want obama to win.

 

[squistion]

Coverup exposed.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57538689/emails-detail-unfolding-benghazi-attack-on-sept-11/

The emails are just a few in what are likely a large number traded throughout the night. They are likely to become part of the ongoing political debate over whether the administration attempted to mislead in saying the assault was an outgrowth of a protest, rather than a planned attack by terrorists.

http://www.foxnews.com/

STATE DEPARTMENT EMAILS obtained by Fox News again challenge Obama administration claims they were in the dark about deadly Sept. 11 terror attack on consulate in Benghazi, Libya — including one email within hours of attack that specifically points to Al Qaeda-affiliated terror group Ansar al Sharia claiming responsibility.

Much prefer the calm rational approach of the Obama administration when compared to the knee jerk reaction that characterizes the last republican administration.

Also Obama gets his men, the people responsible with pay for this - without invading another country and costing trillions of dollars.

Yeah, because it's OK to bomb foreign countries and terrorize its citizens as long as you don't actually invade. Oh, that seems to only be OK when American Democrats do it.

Actually it isn't to many of us on the left. I am not in favor of drone strikes or assassinations authorized unilaterally without judicial review.

 

[tommyboy]

haven't followed this thread, don't know if this was posted yet or not but here's a great example of why a lot of people on the left are seemingly caught by surprise when events on the ground don't match up with what they see in the media. This guy is a ####### idiot and a waste of oxygen. He makes you dumber for having heard him and he gives people on the left, in the media in general, and NBC in particular, a very bad name.

http://www.bizpacrev...-racial-hatred/

only thing missing is the pompoms and a straightjacket.

While Matthews emphasizes racism more than I would, I think the gist of his comments here are absolutely on target. In all three debates, Romney has completely repudiated the conservative movement in this country. He has essentially ripped apart everything the Tea Party believes in, and most of what the social conservatives believe in. Last night he tore into neo-conservative foreign policy and basically aligned himself with Obama, just as he's done all along. All of this should make the right wing in this country outraged, even as it makes me (a moderate centrist) very happy. But it doesn't matter. The right hates Obama so much that they'd vote for anyone to defeat him, which is what they're doing. Chris Matthews is correct.

calling people that support Romney racists is wrong, and stupid. I hope you don't agree with that, for your sake.we have two choices for president, if the tea party was a major 3rd party, they could nominate their own guy, but it isn't and they can't. Like all elections, people vote for the guy that most aligns with their own beliefs and values. In this case, we have a man that has a 4 year track record, and it is horrible. You don't have to be a racist, or "hates Obama so much" is your words, to vote against him. Just look at his record. chronic 8% unemployment, 16 Trillion in debt, annual Trillion dollar budget deficits, haven't passed a budge in almost 4 years, credit downgrades, resurgence of Al Qaeda, putting a man in jail for freedom of speech (by the way the guy is still in jail and will not get a court apperance til 3 days after the election), ramming Obamacare down our throats, record numbers of disability and food stamp recipients, high energy costs, thousand of more federal regulations, and no plan for the next 4 years.

Chris Matthews was so wrong, and so out of line that it makes me wonder if he isn't mentally ill.

And here's another tip for you, the "right wing" in this country is about as big as the "left wing" in this country. There's like 10-15% hardcore partisans on either side of the spectrum, those are your wings. The other ~70% of us are somewhere inbetween. This is a big problem on the left, they imagine their political opposition is a bogeyman right winger that loves nothing but "Merica, guns and white people. In fact their opposition is people just like them that think maybe we can do this better than the last 4 years.

I can't watch the video here but I've heard Matthews rant about this in the last couple of months. Is he saying all Romney voters are racist? Clearly that's wrong. When I've seen him make these rants I take it he means a segment of Romney voters.If you think Romney doesn't get votes in the millions from whites who don't like Obama because he's black, you are kidding yourself. I can think of 3 people I know through extended family and friends who will flat out tell you they'd never vote for a black guy. Then there's another 7 or so who make racist comments all the time, probably wouldn't admit it influences their vote, but it's pretty easy to deduce.

Obama gets a lot of votes from people who hate all rich white guys and from blacks who vote for him because he's black. It's just a reality, and it is silly for Matthews (and you) to get so worked up.

find a time and place to watch the whole clip, its an epic meltdownhere's one quote i found on the net from this clip

“I think they hate Obama. They want him out of the White House more than they want to destroy al Qaeda. Their No. 1 enemy in the world right now, on the right, is their hatred, hatred for Obama. And we can go into that about the white working class in the South and looking at these numbers we’re getting the last couple days about racial hatred in many cases … this isn’t about being a better president, they want to get rid of this president,”

 

[Phil Elliott]

Coverup exposed.

http://www.cbsnews.c...ack-on-sept-11/

The emails are just a few in what are likely a large number traded throughout the night. They are likely to become part of the ongoing political debate over whether the administration attempted to mislead in saying the assault was an outgrowth of a protest, rather than a planned attack by terrorists.

http://www.foxnews.com/

STATE DEPARTMENT EMAILS obtained by Fox News again challenge Obama administration claims they were in the dark about deadly Sept. 11 terror attack on consulate in Benghazi, Libya — including one email within hours of attack that specifically points to Al Qaeda-affiliated terror group Ansar al Sharia claiming responsibility.

Much prefer the calm rational approach of the Obama administration when compared to the knee jerk reaction that characterizes the last republican administration.

Also Obama gets his men, the people responsible with pay for this - without invading another country and costing trillions of dollars.

Every admin as their scapegoats but I wonder what Nakoula thinks. I guess its just one person.Nakoula

 

[tommyGunZ]

And here's another tip for you, the "right wing" in this country is about as big as the "left wing" in this country. There's like 10-15% hardcore partisans on either side of the spectrum, those are your wings. The other ~70% of us are somewhere inbetween. This is a big problem on the left, they imagine their political opposition is a bogeyman right winger that loves nothing but "Merica, guns and white people. In fact their opposition is people just like them that think maybe we can do this better than the last 4 years.

Do you have any data or evidence to back up these assertions, or are you just doing the false equivalency thing to minimize the idiocy of the right wing and their takeover of the GOP?

 

[Otis]

Ten thousand dollars says there is a flash card in Mitt Romney's house that on one side reads:



Haqqani ("HA-KAHNI") Network

 

[Otis]

Jesus Christ am I excited to spend Chet's money.