Mavric
Yoda
From the same site:
Ohio: Obama +1.3
Florida: Romney +1.4
Wisconsin: Obama +2.3
Obama has "lost" 68 electoral votes in the last 10 days. Pretty substantial swings in the last week-plus.
2012 Presidential Election Polls
- Thread starter carlfense
- Start date
Ohio: Obama +1.3
Florida: Romney +1.4
Wisconsin: Obama +2.3
Obama has "lost" 68 electoral votes in the last 10 days. Pretty substantial swings in the last week-plus.
carlfense
New member
knapplc
Active member
Fact-checkers are having a field day with this one as well. Looks like both guys got in plenty of lies:
http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-slips-vice-presidents-debate-023354584--election.html
And people wonder why I don't watch these debates. They're not entertaining and they're not informative. It's a beauty pageant.
http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-slips-vice-presidents-debate-023354584--election.html
And people wonder why I don't watch these debates. They're not entertaining and they're not informative. It's a beauty pageant.
huskerXman
Banned
carlfense
New member
Comish
Active member
At first I wasn't going to take the time to even respond to this. It's one of your favorite games to ignore the obvious and believe (in your lawyerly mind) that having the last word is tantamount to "winning". Sometimes it's preferable to just let your latest assertions lay out there for everyone to digest. But, since you claim to need sources EVEN for the obvious, here are a couple from various sources. Disagreeing is fine, but condescension is best left to the professionals like Biden. (hopefully, the next time someone mentions that grass is green or that BO has difficulty with with mobile quarterbacks, you won't demand sources for that as well).
Vice President Biden Blamed The Intelligence Community For The Shifting Story About Benghazi – A Claim Disputed By His Own State Department:
Vice President Biden, On The Shifting Story About The Acts Of Terror In Benghazi: “The Intelligence Community Told Us That.” “Biden said the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, was repeating what intelligence sources had told her when she blamed the video as a ‘proximate cause’ of the violence in an interview five days after the attack. ‘The intelligence community told us that,’ Biden said. ‘As they learned more facts about exactly what happened, they changed their assessment.’” (Julian Pecquet, “Biden Blames Intelligence Community For Changing Story About Libya Attack,” The Hill, 10/11/12)
“The State Department Says It Never Concluded That An Attack That Killed The U.S. Ambassador To Libya Was Simply A Protest Gone Awry…” “The State Department says it never concluded that an attack that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya was simply a protest gone awry, a statement that places the Obama administration’s own foreign policy arm in sync with Republicans. That extraordinary message, appearing to question the administration’s initial description of the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, came in a department briefing Tuesday — a day before a hearing on diplomatic security in Libya was to be held by the Republican-led House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.” (Larry Margasak and Bradley Klapper, “State Dept. Description Of Attack In Sync With GOP,” The Associated Press, 10/10/12)
For Weeks Following The Terrorist Attacks In Libya, President Obama And His Advisers Offered “Shifting Accounts Of The Fatal Attacks.” “The Obama administration’s shifting accounts of the fatal attack on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, have left President Obama suddenly exposed on national security and foreign policy, a field where he had enjoyed a seemingly unassailable advantage over Mitt Romney in the presidential race.” (Mark Landler, “Shifting Reports On Libya Killings May Cost Obama,” The New York Times, 9/28/12)
“After First Describing The Attack As A Spontaneous Demonstration Run Amok, Administration Officials Now Describe It As A Terrorist Act…” “After first describing the attack as a spontaneous demonstration run amok, administration officials now describe it as a terrorist act with possible involvement by Al Qaeda. The changing accounts prompted the spokesman for the nation’s top intelligence official, James R. Clapper Jr., to issue a statement on Friday acknowledging that American intelligence agencies ‘revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists.’” (Mark Landler, “Shifting Reports On Libya Killings May Cost Obama,” The New York Times, 9/28/12)
USA Today: “In Fact, Every Aspect Of The Early Account — Peddled Most Prominently By U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice — Has Unraveled.”“Three weeks after an attack in Libya killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans, we now know that it did not spring from a spontaneous protest, spurred by an anti-Muslim video, as the Obama administration originally described it. In fact, every aspect of the early account — peddled most prominently by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice — has unraveled.” (Editorial, “Shifting Libya Attack Story Raises Red Flags,” USA Today, 10/1/12)
carlfense
New member
I didn't actually see the quote from Susan Rice that you seems to so offend you. I see a series of editorials that claim that there is a shifting narrative . . . but very few actual quotes. It would seem that you prefer to rely on the conclusions of people who share similar viewpoints instead of making an argument yourself. Do you have Rice's quote? Do you have Hillary's quotes? Even better . . . since you want to pin blame on Obama . . . do you have quotes from Obama?
Most importantly: what exactly is your complaint? If you could sum it up in one sentence so I can get a feel for why you're so angry. I see that different intel leads to different conclusions. You seem to think that there is something truly nefarious afoot. What is that, exactly?
Also, I trust that you'll get to the apology tour eventually.
Last edited by a moderator:
carlfense
New member
Why don't any of the Examiner's articles contain actual quotes? I'd like to see the raw statements in addition to their interpretation of the meaning. The links seem to go down a rabbit hole of Before It's News, Daily Caller, Daily Mail circles . . . and still no quotes.
What did Hillary actually say?
How bout you give quotes that disprove what everyone is saying? When did Obama call it an act of terror? When did Rice, Clinton, or press sec Jay Carney say it was an attack not based on a video but a preplanned attack. Which I said it was shortly after the attack happened on this board. And most of you agreed with me.
carlfense
New member
President Obama the day after the attack:
http://www.whitehous...ssy-staff-libya
Hillary Clinton:
http://www.politico....1012/82359.html
Now could you reciprocate? You do know that it's rather ridiculous to make assertions and state that they're true unless someone proves otherwise, right?
Last edited by a moderator:
Problem is he is blaming the video for creating the situation. That the act of terror was in response to a video that insulted the Prophet Mohammad.
From your first link which he said before ever mentioning terror.
"Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts."
the Clinton quote....hahahahah, that was a MONTH after the attack happened. You can not be serious.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/world/middleeast/anger-over-film-fuels-anti-american-attacks-in-libya-and-egypt.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
“Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet,” she said. “The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”
You yourself during the first few days after the attack, thought it was a terrorist attack and disagreed about the administrations assertion that
From your first link which he said before ever mentioning terror.
"Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts."
the Clinton quote....hahahahah, that was a MONTH after the attack happened. You can not be serious.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/world/middleeast/anger-over-film-fuels-anti-american-attacks-in-libya-and-egypt.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
“Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet,” she said. “The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”
You yourself during the first few days after the attack, thought it was a terrorist attack and disagreed about the administrations assertion that
carlfense
New member
This was your question:
I showed you when he used those exact words to describe the attack. Would you now like to change your question?
I guess you answered your own question. You'd asked when. Now you are shocked that someone would seriously show when the statement that you sought was said.
Perhaps you need to ask better questions? I only say that because you don't seem to like the answers.
I did. I still do. What exactly are you getting at?
Last edited by a moderator: