Debate #3: What's the point?

No one thinks it interesting that Rmoney supporters were willing to cough up as much as $34m individually?
 
I think the Obama campaign set this up beautifully.

The last debate pits POTUS (who gets a security briefing every day) with Mitt Romney who will get 1 courtesy briefing.

One of the most successful FP presidents in modern history, working with his 'Co-president' Hilary Clinton, is debating a businessman who embarrasses himself every time he leaves the country.

I predict that the President will be pulled away in the middle of the debate to oversee a mission to capture the terrorists responsible for the Benghazi attack.

Mitt will stand there talking to himself. Joe Biden will walk on stage, laugh at him and say, "Please proceed, Governor..."

The one who embarrasses the country is the one who bows to Arab kings low enough to lick their dick.

The one who embarrasses the country is the one who apologizes for history long past.

On the other hand, Romney had the knowledge, the honesty and the integrity to say (in London) that security is never to be taken for granted with as long as there are Muslims in the world.

I predict that this president - sometimes in the last few days in his undeserved and botched tenure - will be pulled away in the middle of a debate to be told that Al Qaeda is alive and Chris Stevens and three other Americans are dead.
 
The last debate pits POTUS (who gets a security briefing every day) with Mitt Romney who will get 1 courtesy briefing.

The same intel briefing Biden told the nation was wrong ?

Yea. I think the only point of debates is to judge them like they are Olympic events. I keep hearing about eye contact, forcefullness when they speak, body language, etc.

Some will just count the zingers. Or maybe the uh, er, ums..........

It would be nice if the question was asked, "Between the lack of security that allowed the attacks to happen and Hillary taking responsibility (which has since been passed to a British Security firm) who the hell came up with the fake story about protesters?" We know it wasn't the State Dept. because Hillary already said so.

Someone pulled that story about protesters attacking over a video out of their ass and they did it for a reason. We need to hear it.
 
Foreign policies is the last thing Obama wants to talk about right now. Ironically it will be the last thing he talks about as POTUS.
well i hope not. but true if obama messes up on monday night , then romney might clinch the deal.
 
The last debate pits POTUS (who gets a security briefing every day) with Mitt Romney who will get 1 courtesy briefing.

The same intel briefing Biden told the nation was wrong ?

Yea. I think the only point of debates is to judge them like they are Olympic events. I keep hearing about eye contact, forcefullness when they speak, body language, etc.

Some will just count the zingers. Or maybe the uh, er, ums..........

It would be nice if the question was asked, "Between the lack of security that allowed the attacks to happen and Hillary taking responsibility (which has since been passed to a British Security firm) who the hell came up with the fake story about protesters?" We know it wasn't the State Dept. because Hillary already said so.

Someone pulled that story about protesters attacking over a video out of their ass and they did it for a reason. We need to hear it.
their no doubt that it going to be very tough question for president to deal with . romney be all out attack on him with this. outcome of those exchanges be massive.
 
Foreign policies is the last thing Obama wants to talk about right now. Ironically it will be the last thing he talks about as POTUS.
well i hope not. but true if obama messes up on monday night , then romney might clinch the deal.

You sound like you have some keen insights.

Share with us how you would advise Obama on foreign policy to put his best foot forward in the debate ?
 
:eusa_whistle:

Former Obama advisor: Our foreign policy is a mess — especially in the Middle East
POSTED AT 12:01 PM ON OCTOBER 19, 2012 BY ED MORRISSEY

With the last of the three presidential debates taking place in just three days, and with Barack Obama on his heels in polling after the first two, one would expect Obama allies to come out of the woodwork to sing his praises on foreign policy, the topic of Monday night’s forum. After all, Democrats — including Obama himself — bragged six weeks ago at the Democratic convention that Obama would bury Mitt Romney in this arena.

Instead, former Obama administration Defense undersecretary and State Department adviser Rosa Brooks writes at Foreign Policy that her former boss’ team on foreign policy desperately needs an intervention, and that Obama needs to finally get involved by doing more than giving a few speeches:

In foreign policy as in life, stuff happens — including bad stuff no one could have predicted. Nonetheless, to a significant extent, President Obama is the author of his own lackluster foreign policy. He was a visionary candidate, but as president, he has presided over an exceptionally dysfunctional and un-visionary national security architecture — one that appears to drift from crisis to crisis, with little ability to look beyond the next few weeks. His national security staff is squabbling and demoralized, and though senior White House officials are good at making policy announcements, mechanisms to actually implement policies are sadly inadequate.

By the way, Brooks hammers Obama on point 3 for letting cronyism conquer over talent and experience:

President Obama promised to ensure transparency and competence in government, but too often, nepotism trumps merit. Young and untried campaign aides are handed vital substantive portfolios (I could name names, but will charitably refrain, unless you buy me a drink), while those with deep expertise often find themselves sidelined.

Former Obama advisor: Our foreign policy is a mess — especially in the Middle East « Hot Air
like i said romney will do all out attack on obama on monday. it will be tough but obama got to find response to it by monday. otherwise bad times indeed.
 
Foreign policies is the last thing Obama wants to talk about right now. Ironically it will be the last thing he talks about as POTUS.
well i hope not. but true if obama messes up on monday night , then romney might clinch the deal.

You sound like you have some keen insights.

Share with us how you would advise Obama on foreign policy to put his best foot forward in the debate ?
Well i said that he regrets what happened, it was mistake what happens but they were trying to get all the fact straight. he take full responsablity from what happened. that he will hunt down those who commited crime and he doing it every day.

i would explain like they said in bloomberg that it best to be honest of what they knew and why they said things they said.

this is best response. it might not work but i think all he can say. no doubt the whole issue become a election gift for gop
 
A chance for Obama to explain his self for all his fuck ups.


Read all about it...Obama spins and lies!!!!


Time line of lies!

Obama's Benghazi Lies - Home

Destroys Obama's case. It wasn't about a fucking terrorist attack, BUT the protest over our freedom of speech.

On the 13th he was talking about the protest when he said terrorized.

Susan Rice said on the 16th that this wasn't a pre-planned attack. LIES

On the 18th Obama went on the letterman show and blamed our first amendment for the attack. LIES!!!

If the terrorized was supposed to mean a terrorist attack. Well, Obama sure inserted his foot in his ass.

Clinton on the 21st was the first to say it was a Terrorist attack. SPIN!

Obama on the view on the 25th said it was about the fucking video! Spin some more!!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD4a9GHBF_U&feature=related]Carney maintains Libya attack was not preplanned - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPzjayOh-PU&feature=relmfu]Who is responsible for the attack in Benghazi? - YouTube[/ame]




Biden blatantly lied about Chris Stevens wanting more Security
The Fact Checker


“We weren’t told they wanted more security there. We did not know they wanted more security.”

— Biden, speaking of the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya

Biden’s bold statement was directly contradicted by State Department officials just this week, in testimony before a congressional panel and in unclassified cables released by a congressional committee.

“All of us at post were in sync that we wanted these resources,” said Eric Nordstrom, the top regional security officer in Libya earlier this year. A Utah national guardsman who led a security team, Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, said: “We felt great frustration that those requests were ignored or just never met.”



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIxjz5wEcF0]September 12, 2012 - President Obama Speaks on Libya Attacks that killed US Ambassador Chris Stevens - YouTube[/ame]

@ 5:00-6:20 you can hear the context in which he mentioned terrorism, Romney was correct in his assertation as, in context, Obama was referring to terrorism in general and not specifically the attack
====

Candy wasn't even right here as Obama said "terror" in the context of the protest.



Crowley to Axelrod: Obama Never Said Benghazi Attack Was 'Act of Terror
Breitbart ^ | 17 Oct 2012, 3:44 AM PDT | Tony Lee
Crowley to Axelrod: Obama Never Said Benghazi Attack Was 'Act of Terror'
On CNN's "State of the Union" on September 30, Candy Crowley insisted David Axelrod, President Barack Obama's chief strategist, was wrong when Axelrod tried to claim President Barack Obama called the Benghazi attack "an act of terror" on the day after.
"First, they said it was not planned, it was part of this tape," Crowley said when Axelrod tried to spin her.
This was Crowley the journalist, unlike the pro-Obama advocate who moderated Tuesday's debate between Obama and Mitt Romney and interjected herself into an argument between Obama and Romney on the exact same issue -- and took Obama's side.
During the debate, Crowley affirmed Obama's assertion that he referred to the Benghazi attacks as acts of terror on the day after.
After Romney correctly said it took Obama 14 days before Obama said the the Benghazi attacks were acts of terror, Crowley took Obama's side -- to an ovation from the town hall audience -- and she proclaimed Obama had indeed claimed the Benghazi attacks were acts of terror the day after the attacks in the White House Rose Garden.
On September 12, the day after the attacks, Obama did say the words "acts of terror" but he was not referring to the attacks that killed U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.
Crowley knew that on September 30 and she conceded it again hours after the debate when she went on CNN and said while Romney "was right in the main, but he just chose the wrong word." But the damage had already been done.
With Obama's reelection on the line, Crowley seemed to have conveniently forgotten the facts she knew two weeks before when she grilled Axelrod in a way she should have Obama.


---
Yet we learn today that Stevens was begging for months for security??? WTF is wrong with the Obama Admin. If you leftist had any honor you wouldn't vote for Obama.


Documents show Stevens worried about Libya security threats, Al Qaeda before consulate attack
Fox News ^ | 10-19-2012 | James Rosen
Documents show Stevens worried about Libya security threats, Al Qaeda before consulate attack | Fox News

Across 166 pages of internal State Department documents -- released Friday by a pair of Republican congressmen pressing the Obama administration for more answers on the Benghazi terrorist attack -- slain U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and the security officers assigned to protect him repeatedly sounded alarms to their superiors in Washington about the intensifying lawlessness and violence in Eastern Libya, where Stevens ultimately died.

On Sept. 11 -- the day Stevens and three other Americans were killed -- the ambassador signed a three-page cable, labeled "sensitive," in which he noted "growing problems with security" in Benghazi and "growing frustration" on the part of local residents with Libyan police and security forces. These forces the ambassador characterized as "too weak to keep the country secure."[/quote]
 
:eusa_whistle:

Former Obama advisor: Our foreign policy is a mess — especially in the Middle East
POSTED AT 12:01 PM ON OCTOBER 19, 2012 BY ED MORRISSEY

With the last of the three presidential debates taking place in just three days, and with Barack Obama on his heels in polling after the first two, one would expect Obama allies to come out of the woodwork to sing his praises on foreign policy, the topic of Monday night’s forum. After all, Democrats — including Obama himself — bragged six weeks ago at the Democratic convention that Obama would bury Mitt Romney in this arena.

Instead, former Obama administration Defense undersecretary and State Department adviser Rosa Brooks writes at Foreign Policy that her former boss’ team on foreign policy desperately needs an intervention, and that Obama needs to finally get involved by doing more than giving a few speeches:

In foreign policy as in life, stuff happens — including bad stuff no one could have predicted. Nonetheless, to a significant extent, President Obama is the author of his own lackluster foreign policy. He was a visionary candidate, but as president, he has presided over an exceptionally dysfunctional and un-visionary national security architecture — one that appears to drift from crisis to crisis, with little ability to look beyond the next few weeks. His national security staff is squabbling and demoralized, and though senior White House officials are good at making policy announcements, mechanisms to actually implement policies are sadly inadequate.

By the way, Brooks hammers Obama on point 3 for letting cronyism conquer over talent and experience:

President Obama promised to ensure transparency and competence in government, but too often, nepotism trumps merit. Young and untried campaign aides are handed vital substantive portfolios (I could name names, but will charitably refrain, unless you buy me a drink), while those with deep expertise often find themselves sidelined.

Former Obama advisor: Our foreign policy is a mess — especially in the Middle East « Hot Air
like i said romney will do all out attack on obama on monday. it will be tough but obama got to find response to it by monday. otherwise bad times indeed.

Romney won't attack Obama. He'll simply ask him for the truth and Obama supporters will call it an attack.

CIA found militant links a day after Libya attack

By KIMBERLY DOZIER AP Intelligence Writer
Posted: 10/19/2012 12:27:46 AM PDT
Updated: 10/19/2012 09:14:00 AM PDT

WASHINGTON—The CIA station chief in Libya reported to Washington within 24 hours of last month's deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate that there was evidence it was carried out by militants, not a spontaneous mob upset about an American-made video ridiculing Islam's Prophet Muhammad, U.S. officials have told The Associated Press.
It is unclear who, if anyone, saw the cable outside the CIA at that point and how high up in the agency the information went. The Obama administration maintained publicly for a week that the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans was a result of the mobs that staged less-deadly protests across the Muslim world around the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks on the U.S.
GOP pounces after news of CIA cable on Libya raid - San Jose Mercury News
 
:eusa_whistle:

Former Obama advisor: Our foreign policy is a mess — especially in the Middle East
POSTED AT 12:01 PM ON OCTOBER 19, 2012 BY ED MORRISSEY

With the last of the three presidential debates taking place in just three days, and with Barack Obama on his heels in polling after the first two, one would expect Obama allies to come out of the woodwork to sing his praises on foreign policy, the topic of Monday night’s forum. After all, Democrats — including Obama himself — bragged six weeks ago at the Democratic convention that Obama would bury Mitt Romney in this arena.

Instead, former Obama administration Defense undersecretary and State Department adviser Rosa Brooks writes at Foreign Policy that her former boss’ team on foreign policy desperately needs an intervention, and that Obama needs to finally get involved by doing more than giving a few speeches:

In foreign policy as in life, stuff happens — including bad stuff no one could have predicted. Nonetheless, to a significant extent, President Obama is the author of his own lackluster foreign policy. He was a visionary candidate, but as president, he has presided over an exceptionally dysfunctional and un-visionary national security architecture — one that appears to drift from crisis to crisis, with little ability to look beyond the next few weeks. His national security staff is squabbling and demoralized, and though senior White House officials are good at making policy announcements, mechanisms to actually implement policies are sadly inadequate.

By the way, Brooks hammers Obama on point 3 for letting cronyism conquer over talent and experience:

President Obama promised to ensure transparency and competence in government, but too often, nepotism trumps merit. Young and untried campaign aides are handed vital substantive portfolios (I could name names, but will charitably refrain, unless you buy me a drink), while those with deep expertise often find themselves sidelined.

Former Obama advisor: Our foreign policy is a mess — especially in the Middle East « Hot Air
like i said romney will do all out attack on obama on monday. it will be tough but obama got to find response to it by monday. otherwise bad times indeed.

Romney won't attack Obama. He'll simply ask him for the truth and Obama supporters will call it an attack.

CIA found militant links a day after Libya attack

By KIMBERLY DOZIER AP Intelligence Writer
Posted: 10/19/2012 12:27:46 AM PDT
Updated: 10/19/2012 09:14:00 AM PDT

WASHINGTON—The CIA station chief in Libya reported to Washington within 24 hours of last month's deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate that there was evidence it was carried out by militants, not a spontaneous mob upset about an American-made video ridiculing Islam's Prophet Muhammad, U.S. officials have told The Associated Press.
It is unclear who, if anyone, saw the cable outside the CIA at that point and how high up in the agency the information went. The Obama administration maintained publicly for a week that the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans was a result of the mobs that staged less-deadly protests across the Muslim world around the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks on the U.S.
GOP pounces after news of CIA cable on Libya raid - San Jose Mercury News
well he will attack him for not dealing with it well.

either way this has been election gift for gop and could seal the election for them.
 
A chance for Obama to explain his self for all his fuck ups.


Read all about it...Obama spins and lies!!!!


Time line of lies!

Obama's Benghazi Lies - Home

Destroys Obama's case. It wasn't about a fucking terrorist attack, BUT the protest over our freedom of speech.

On the 13th he was talking about the protest when he said terrorized.

Susan Rice said on the 16th that this wasn't a pre-planned attack. LIES

On the 18th Obama went on the letterman show and blamed our first amendment for the attack. LIES!!!

If the terrorized was supposed to mean a terrorist attack. Well, Obama sure inserted his foot in his ass.

Clinton on the 21st was the first to say it was a Terrorist attack. SPIN!

Obama on the view on the 25th said it was about the fucking video! Spin some more!!!

Carney maintains Libya attack was not preplanned - YouTube

Who is responsible for the attack in Benghazi? - YouTube




Biden blatantly lied about Chris Stevens wanting more Security
The Fact Checker


“We weren’t told they wanted more security there. We did not know they wanted more security.”

— Biden, speaking of the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya

Biden’s bold statement was directly contradicted by State Department officials just this week, in testimony before a congressional panel and in unclassified cables released by a congressional committee.

“All of us at post were in sync that we wanted these resources,” said Eric Nordstrom, the top regional security officer in Libya earlier this year. A Utah national guardsman who led a security team, Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, said: “We felt great frustration that those requests were ignored or just never met.”



September 12, 2012 - President Obama Speaks on Libya Attacks that killed US Ambassador Chris Stevens - YouTube

@ 5:00-6:20 you can hear the context in which he mentioned terrorism, Romney was correct in his assertation as, in context, Obama was referring to terrorism in general and not specifically the attack
====

Candy wasn't even right here as Obama said "terror" in the context of the protest.



Crowley to Axelrod: Obama Never Said Benghazi Attack Was 'Act of Terror
Breitbart ^ | 17 Oct 2012, 3:44 AM PDT | Tony Lee
Crowley to Axelrod: Obama Never Said Benghazi Attack Was 'Act of Terror'
On CNN's "State of the Union" on September 30, Candy Crowley insisted David Axelrod, President Barack Obama's chief strategist, was wrong when Axelrod tried to claim President Barack Obama called the Benghazi attack "an act of terror" on the day after.
"First, they said it was not planned, it was part of this tape," Crowley said when Axelrod tried to spin her.
This was Crowley the journalist, unlike the pro-Obama advocate who moderated Tuesday's debate between Obama and Mitt Romney and interjected herself into an argument between Obama and Romney on the exact same issue -- and took Obama's side.
During the debate, Crowley affirmed Obama's assertion that he referred to the Benghazi attacks as acts of terror on the day after.
After Romney correctly said it took Obama 14 days before Obama said the the Benghazi attacks were acts of terror, Crowley took Obama's side -- to an ovation from the town hall audience -- and she proclaimed Obama had indeed claimed the Benghazi attacks were acts of terror the day after the attacks in the White House Rose Garden.
On September 12, the day after the attacks, Obama did say the words "acts of terror" but he was not referring to the attacks that killed U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.
Crowley knew that on September 30 and she conceded it again hours after the debate when she went on CNN and said while Romney "was right in the main, but he just chose the wrong word." But the damage had already been done.
With Obama's reelection on the line, Crowley seemed to have conveniently forgotten the facts she knew two weeks before when she grilled Axelrod in a way she should have Obama.


---
Yet we learn today that Stevens was begging for months for security??? WTF is wrong with the Obama Admin. If you leftist had any honor you wouldn't vote for Obama.


Documents show Stevens worried about Libya security threats, Al Qaeda before consulate attack
Fox News ^ | 10-19-2012 | James Rosen
Documents show Stevens worried about Libya security threats, Al Qaeda before consulate attack | Fox News

Across 166 pages of internal State Department documents -- released Friday by a pair of Republican congressmen pressing the Obama administration for more answers on the Benghazi terrorist attack -- slain U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and the security officers assigned to protect him repeatedly sounded alarms to their superiors in Washington about the intensifying lawlessness and violence in Eastern Libya, where Stevens ultimately died.

On Sept. 11 -- the day Stevens and three other Americans were killed -- the ambassador signed a three-page cable, labeled "sensitive," in which he noted "growing problems with security" in Benghazi and "growing frustration" on the part of local residents with Libyan police and security forces. These forces the ambassador characterized as "too weak to keep the country secure."[/quote]
we all make mistakes but no doubt big one. but they never do this on purpose. they cocked up and their no doubt about that
 
I'm surprised the Romney people are not looking for a way out of this.

They probably realized too late that they were being set up.
 
I think the Obama campaign set this up beautifully.

The last debate pits POTUS (who gets a security briefing every day) with Mitt Romney who will get 1 courtesy briefing.

One of the most successful FP presidents in modern history, working with his 'Co-president' Hilary Clinton, is debating a businessman who embarrasses himself every time he leaves the country.

I predict that the President will be pulled away in the middle of the debate to oversee a mission to capture the terrorists responsible for the Benghazi attack.

Mitt will stand there talking to himself. Joe Biden will walk on stage, laugh at him and say, "Please proceed, Governor..."







Ummmm, most successful foreign policy president in modern history? I think Ambassador Stevens would disagree with that statement....oh wait, he's dead....he can't comment anymore.
 
Last edited:
The final debate is there so President Obama and team lefty can pray for a major screwup by Romney.

The only way Romney loses this debate and the election, is if he busts out with, "When I'm president, the very first day I walk into the Oval Office, I'm declaring war on the world and pushing that little red button."

President Obama really messed up with the whole Lybia murders of 4 Americans. Hell, he messed up running this country.

Just hang it up lefties, it's over. President Obama is done, he won't be back.

Careful what you wish for. Republicans do not represent ordinary Americans. Right now, you can see seniors on motorized wheel chairs with Romney signs. You'd think they'd have those wheelchairs or medicare or social security if Republicans had their way? Or Pell grants which will be cut drastically. Or the cuts to medicaid? All so the very wealthy can pay fewer and fewer taxes and no more inheritance tax. How is this going to grow an economy? IMO anyway.
 
The final debate is there so President Obama and team lefty can pray for a major screwup by Romney.

The only way Romney loses this debate and the election, is if he busts out with, "When I'm president, the very first day I walk into the Oval Office, I'm declaring war on the world and pushing that little red button."

President Obama really messed up with the whole Lybia murders of 4 Americans. Hell, he messed up running this country.

Just hang it up lefties, it's over. President Obama is done, he won't be back.

Careful what you wish for. Republicans do not represent ordinary Americans. Right now, you can see seniors on motorized wheel chairs with Romney signs. You'd think they'd have those wheelchairs or medicare or social security if Republicans had their way? Or Pell grants which will be cut drastically. Or the cuts to medicaid? All so the very wealthy can pay fewer and fewer taxes and no more inheritance tax. How is this going to grow an economy? IMO anyway.
agree but if romney wins they don,t care. they just want rid of obama
 
Yea, well Romney was supposed to be getting intel briefings as soon as he was nominated as the Republican candidate. That didn't happen, Romney had no intel on September 12, yet he knew it was a terrorist attack but Obama didn't??

Yea, Mitt's going to tear him up over Benghazi. Wonder if he's getting those briefings now??

Romney to receive intel briefings starting next week – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs
no doubt romney going to have lot of attacking gifts to go at president with

it going to be tough for president to deal with anwser to these exhchanges.

it was such election gift to gop. all had to do in week afterwards was say it was a terrioist attack. simple as that
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top