He did NOT say "The attack on our consulate in Benghazi was an act of terror", and he NEVER called those who attacked our consulate terrorists.
He simply waffled on like all politicians do, and then said "no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation."
That's a distinction without a difference. He called it an act of terror. The Mormon Shitstain tried to claim he didn't. Crowley called him on it.
It IS a distinction, with a big difference. In his speech he was talking about the attack on the consulate. Then his speech shifted toward the greatness of America, and then he said "no act of terror will ever weaken our resolve." He NEVER called the attack a terrorist attack.
I'm guessing that you are so biased that no amount of reason will penetrate your shield of President Obama. While you will give President Obama wide latitude on everything, like on this issue saying it is a "distinction without difference,", I'm sure you just think Mitt Romney's "Binders full of women" remark to be horrific, right?