Social Media Marketing Boot Camp: April 16

Need Help?

Employers

Join Today or Log in

Jobs

Hiring?
Post your open positions on our job board.
Satisfaction guaranteed. Learn more.

FAQ Contact Us

Courses

June 6, 2013 | An Interactive Online Event
Implement a complete social media campaign in six weeks. Register now.

FAQ Contact Us

Events

June 4, 2013 | San Francisco

Explore how you can — and should — approach Twitter to make the most of it for your brand. Learn from social media pros at the San Francisco Giants, SFGate, and more. Learn more.

News

How To Network in Any Situation
Our networking guide will help you finally get over your new-people phobia and schmooze with the best of them. Read more

FAQ Contact Us

Shortcuts: scoop jobs, social media jobs, online courses

Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Current Events > Topic: Prez debate #2

Prez debate #2

Post Reply Back to Forums

1–25 out of 37 messages

Author	Message

it's just tv folks	Posted - 10/17/2012 12:53:36 AM \| show profile \| flag this post It's clear that the President was much more effective tonight. The President accurately called Mittens a liar on numerous occasions tonight though not on every lie of the republican standard bearer. The "self-described unemployed guy" did seem to have taken less hits of coke (or whatever stimulant, a no no in the Moron religion) tonight. He did change his "gassy infant face" to one of an "angry infant gassy face". Willard was rude and showed his incompetence . He is completely unfit for the job he seeks. The idiot Romney continued to politicize the deaths of Americans ... should I point out that the families of the dead Americans have pleaded with Romney to stop politicizing the deaths of their family members ... and Romney gave the families a big middle finger, "FU", tonight? Oh yeah, that jackass should be called out for his inhumane, self-serving using of dead Americans to advance his political aspirations. Disgusting piece of sh^t. The republitard, OPPS (as blackedretardedtaped would say), I should say a once proud Republican Party would be disgusted by the present evil sh*ts who inhabit the legacy of the great President Abraham Lincoln. Romney continued his idiot, rude, stupid presence. The President hit all the right notes.

newscred	Posted - 10/17/2012 1:07:51 AM \| show profile \| flag this post interesting responses So you watched the debate through blinders, huh?

it's just tv folks	Posted - 10/17/2012 1:39:51 AM \| show profile \| flag this post No.

cdnreprtr	Posted - 10/17/2012 4:26:21 AM \| show profile \| flag this post i found it a lot easier to take ... .. after taking a sip every time mitt flashed his smug smile and obama said "look". hic. GOP will say Mitt won, Dems will say Obama ..all regardless. tetrabytes of data and hours of time will be wasted. And a few hundred thousand undecideds in swing states, too busy or tired or bored to watch any of these debates will roll into a voting booth in a few weeks .. hold their noses, say "meh". And then the Party lawyers will be called in, to spend all the money the PACS left behind. And y'all will pat yersleves on the back for The Great Exercise in Democracy. (Reps. have about three months of rest before they get back to their real work of campaigning for 2014 election, Everyone else gets a year, maybe, before governing is trumped by partisan politics)

con	Posted - 10/17/2012 8:00:53 AM \| show profile \| flag this post exposing the obama adminsration lies and cover up isn't politicizing the deaths of americans. its standing up for truth and america. when does the truth and america ever matter to the left?

etaoin shrdlu	Posted - 10/17/2012 9:09:17 AM \| show profile \| flag this post Actually, con(artist)... it was Romney who was lying about Libya -- saying that Obama waited two weeks to call it a terrorist act. Crowley called Romney on the carpet for that lie and Obama asked that it be fact checked. Romney's foreign policy faux pas follies were back from his glory days touring Europe! From that point on, Romney could not recover in the debate. It was all Obama's.

etaoin shrdlu	Posted - 10/17/2012 9:38:01 AM \| show profile \| flag this post Newscred asked... "So you watched the debate through blinders, huh?" Did you mean "binders?"

Ron Mexico	Posted - 10/17/2012 9:55:34 AM \| show profile \| flag this post "it was Romney who was lying about Libya -- saying that Obama waited two weeks to call it a terrorist act.' Obama did wait two weeks and chose to blame America first. Crowley since admitted Romney was right. Obama continues to lie about Libya. Maybe fact checking yourself would be a good idea.

cruiser	Posted - 10/17/2012 10:47:59 AM \| show profile \| flag this post "Crowley called Romney on the carpet" Crowley did no such thing. In her wholly misguided attempt to once again rescue Obama from his own untruth, she pointed out a vague, oblique reference to a generic terrorist act that Obama mentioned in his remarks. He emphatically DID NOT specifically refer to the Benghazi attack as a terrorist undertaking. It was not Crowley's place to bring up the transcript...it was Obama's. And if he missed the opportunity that's on him. In fact, Obama and members of his administration were still blaming the film trailer more than a week later. Obama, in his remarks to the UN, six times referred to the attack as a spontaneous demonstration by those who objected to the film. It is Crowley who should be called on the carpet 1) for her wholly inappropriate attempt to bail Obama out of his own lies and 2) for trying on other occasions to favor Obama with her comments and moderating missteps.

etaoin shrdlu	Posted - 10/17/2012 11:04:56 AM \| show profile \| flag this post Wrong, cruzo... Here's the quote from Obama on September 12, 2012: "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for." It was made in a speech SPECIFICALLY about the attack the night before...titled: "Remarks by the President on the Deaths of U.S. Embassy Staff in Libya" http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya You're about as clueless as Romney was. And remember, Romney's reaction was to lie about an "apology" that never happened. It nearly ended Romney's campaign.

Grateful Deadline	Posted - 10/17/2012 11:23:43 AM \| show profile \| flag this post Romney's real failing wasn't his error about when Obama called the Libya attack an act of terrorist. American voters really don't care as deeply about this as MB Current Events posters do. Romney's big failing was his description, or lack thereof, of tax cuts, tax loopholes, and the quick fix for the economy and the deficit that he's going to achieve without revenue.

mpdodgson	Posted - 10/17/2012 11:28:13 AM \| show profile \| flag this post C'mon cruise " a vague, oblique reference to a generic terrorist act that Obama mentioned in his remarks" huh? It was day AFTER the attacks. The president said "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for." What do you think he was talking about? 9/11? Oklahoma City?? NEXT sentence: " Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America." Oh. THOSE four Americans. Who were killed yesterday. Wonder what he's talking about. (you again) "It was not Crowley's place to bring up the transcript...it was Obama's. And if he missed the opportunity that's on him." Uh..."Obama interrupted Romney, telling the Republican presidential candidate to "get the transcript" of his remarks. When the governor doubled down on his charge, Crowley interjected, saying the president "did in fact" call the attack an act of terror" Ooops. We called this yesterday--if Obama won, the response(s) would be "it's the moderators fault"

cruiser	Posted - 10/17/2012 11:34:02 AM \| show profile \| flag this post It's always the same old story Left wing radicals lie, cover for each other, then try to shift the blame to others.

cruiser	Posted - 10/17/2012 11:38:33 AM \| show profile \| flag this post "We called this yesterday-- if Obama won, the response(s) would be 'it's the moderators fault'" Hell, even Robert Gibbs, former Obama press secretary and current campaign staffer, said it sometimes seemed Romney was having to debate Crowley. And I called THAT yesterday.

mpdodgson	Posted - 10/17/2012 12:05:53 PM \| show profile \| flag this post Well, you didn't address how you were wrong on the presidents remarks that were CLEARLY about Benghazi; you didn't address how you were wrong about Obama not saying 'check the transcripts' first, And Romney debating Crowley was a surprise to no one. He did that the first time. The guy is just not used to ANYONE telling him to shut up...someone reigning in his rhetoric is not in his history. Bottom line again--First debate? Romney--on his own--cleaned Obama's clock. This time?? Moderators fault--donchaknow.

cruiser	Posted - 10/17/2012 12:10:54 PM \| show profile \| flag this post "a vague, oblique reference to a generic terrorist act" is exactly what it was. It did NOT refer to the attack on the Benghazi consulate. No amount of revisionism will change that. For a period of about two weeks, virtually every member of the administration who spoke on the topic was calling it a spontanuous demonstration. Ambassador Susan Rice...several days later...told the hosts of five Sunday talking head shows that it was spontaneous, many Obama spokespersons and surrogates said it was spontaneous, the preident himself in remarks to the UN two weeks later was still saying it was a result of the film trailer. And that continued until the facts began to leak out of State and the intel community. The president and his administration were busy trying to convey the impression that the attack was a response to the film trailer. The admission that it was an act of terrorism was delayed for more than two weeks, until it became undeniable due to Charlene Lamb's testimony.

beenthere	Posted - 10/17/2012 12:16:23 PM \| show profile \| flag this post "Sixth verse, same as the first, a little bit louder and a little bit worse" Post as many times as you want, doesn't make it true. "Seventh verse, same as the first, a little bit louder and a little bit worse"

cruiser	Posted - 10/17/2012 1:07:30 PM \| show profile \| flag this post I don't EVER say something without a factual basis. Whether you left wingers are honest enough to accept is the perpetual question.

etaoin shrdlu	Posted - 10/17/2012 2:55:13 PM \| show profile \| flag this post Cruzo... the facts blew you out of the water on this one. Obama called a news conference in the in the White House Rose Garden that began at 10:43 am on September 12, 2012 for the SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF ADDRESSING THE ATTACK ON THE CONSULATE IN LIBYA. In the course of that statement -- SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE ATTACK -- Obama said: "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for." Don't believe me? Read the transcript of that speech. It is entitled: "Remarks by the President on the Deaths of U.S. Embassy Staff in Libya" You can find it at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya Our "casual readers" have no doubt by now clicked on the link, read the direct quote in the statement about the attack and have rolled their eyes at how little you know about the facts.

con	Posted - 10/17/2012 4:29:33 PM \| show profile \| flag this post Cruzo... "the facts blew you out of the water on this one." not so much. the "No acts of terror" was a blanket statement- even liberals like mike allen and candy crowley admit so- not related to the benghazi attack. let us say it was related. why, for the next nine days, did the obama administration lie to america and say the attack was based on a video and spontaneous?

con	Posted - 10/17/2012 4:44:22 PM \| show profile \| flag this post obama refused to call it terrorism on the view. sept. 20 presser, carney said the whitehouse had not called benghazi a terrorist attack. the obama administration is so practiced at lying. why do they find it so hard to keep their lies straight?

Village Gal	Posted - 10/17/2012 4:52:36 PM \| show profile \| flag this post my take: stylistically, Obama seemed smooth and confident. Romney seemed stiff and robotic, like a wind up toy. in terms of substance, when Romney spoke, I kept yelling at my tv, "How? How? tell us how you plan to do that."

cruiser	Posted - 10/17/2012 7:18:16 PM \| show profile \| flag this post "the facts blew you out of the water on this one" I know you WISH that were true but it is not. Obama's reference was oblique and to a generic terrorist act. He did NOT specifically characterize the Benghazi attack as terrorist. He couldn't have. He and members of his administraiton were too busy characterizing it as a spontaneous demonstration against an obscure film trailer. And he continued to pound that point until data from State and the intel community simply would no longer support his false contention.

mpdodgson	Posted - 10/17/2012 9:11:24 PM \| show profile \| flag this post There is "dense" and then there is "granite"- Look at this document. It's titled "Remarks by the President on the Deaths of U.S. Embassy Staff in Libya" http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya It's been on the WH site since that morning. "Yesterday, four of these extraordinary Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi. Among those killed was our Ambassador, Chris Stevens, as well as Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith. We are still notifying the families of the others who were killed. And today, the American people stand united in holding the families of the four Americans in our thoughts and in our prayers." "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done" YET. You STILL say "Obama's reference was oblique and to a generic terrorist act. He did NOT specifically characterize the Benghazi attack as terrorist." What part of YESTERDAY...BENGHAZI...ACTS OF TERROR.. "Remarks by the President on the Deaths of U.S. Embassy Staff in Libya" did you not read?? The NEXT day, at the campaign stop in Las Vegas: "As for the ones we lost last night: I want to assure you, we will bring their killers to justice. (Applause.) And we want to send a message all around the world -- anybody who would do us harm: No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America. (Applause.) "Last night" "No act of terror" That's also been on the WH site since that day. They keep public records for all (but wingnuts and Fox) to see. I don't blame Romney for not having these quotes at his fingertips. That's why the president (not the moderator) asked him to check the transcript. But since these remarks are always on the record, for some arrogant know-it-all to lie about it is just inexcusable. You cruise, were 'blown out of the water' on this one, and to continue your harpy screed just enhances your reputation.

cruiser	Posted - 10/17/2012 10:20:37 PM \| show profile \| flag this post I know I'm a burr under the saddle of the committed Obama supporters here. I know you people want this place to be like a birds-of-a-feather lounge for radical leftists. You want to be able to...unopposed and unchallenged...support the lies Obama tells. And you want to be able to post leftist talking points with impunity. That ain't gonna happen while I'm here.