dayman Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Not really sure what the high points for Mitt were...I mean I am not saying Obama slaughtered him but it seemed much better than Mitt
Koko78 Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Unofficial Fox News time count gives Obama about 3 minutes more speaking time than Romney.
DC Tom Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Darn, Fox calls it for Rimney They should have called it for Obama, just to !@#$ with people. They're an entertainment station anyway, so why not? Not like they're worth **** for news.
3rdnlng Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 MSNBC--Chris Mathews saying that the Benghazi attack still included "protesters".
Doc Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 They should have called it for Obama, just to !@#$ with people. They're an entertainment station anyway, so why not? Not like they're worth **** for news. Which station is?
DC Tom Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Not really sure what the high points for Mitt were...I mean I am not saying Obama slaughtered him but it seemed much better than Mitt Conversely, Romney blew it SO badly on the Libya issues that he may have put that whole story to bed.
DC Tom Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Which station is? Some would say Russia Times on YouTube. But for me...BBC? Or CNBC. If I absolutely have to watch the news.
OCinBuffalo Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Conversely, Romney blew it SO badly on the Libya issues that he may have put that whole story to bed. You're nuts
Doc Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Conversely, Romney blew it SO badly on the Libya issues that he may have put that whole story to bed. He might have blown it on Libya, but it's going to be a raging issue for awhile still. And the next debate is foreign policy.
dayman Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 BTW why did Romney think that cutting federal drilling while issuing more overall permits was a winner?
Rob's House Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Conversely, Romney blew it SO badly on the Libya issues that he may have put that whole story to bed. It was bad, but the issue is not done. They still have a lot to answer for & that one sound bite won't get him off the hook.
DC Tom Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 He might have blown it on Libya, but it's going to be a raging issue for awhile still. And the next debate is foreign policy. But probably not until after the election, which is what I was specifically talking about. I can't see Romney's campaign trying to push that issue again...Obama knew it, too. The stupidest thing is that it was a purely semantic difference. "Act of terror" is not equivalent to "terrorist attack" in any real sense. Too bad for Romney this is politics, not reality.
TakeYouToTasker Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 I wasn't listening. He didn't actually say that, did he? He may as well have. He expressed the importance of his faith, and spoke to his missionary work, and how he spent nine years as a pastor to his church. There will be inevitable natural extensions.
Rob's House Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 BTW why did Romney think that cutting federal drilling while issuing more overall permits was a winner? B/c President (*^*&%^$^#keeps taking credit for increases in oil production despite the fact that oil production on Federal land, the only oil production he has any real control over, is down 14%.
DC Tom Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 B/c President (*^*&%^$^#keeps taking credit for increases in oil production despite the fact that oil production on Federal land, the only oil production he has any real control over, is down 14%. J.W. Nordquist didn't discover the Bakken formation in 1953...somebody else made that happen!
dayman Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 But probably not until after the election, which is what I was specifically talking about. I can't see Romney's campaign trying to push that issue again...Obama knew it, too. The stupidest thing is that it was a purely semantic difference. "Act of terror" is not equivalent to "terrorist attack" in any real sense. Too bad for Romney this is politics, not reality. Also the bottom line as Mitt conceded (rightfully so)...is that there will be stuff like this from time to time certainly in a middle east that is in a historic revolution as a region with so many radical groups. I mean if you can't basically say this is a scandal...people basically get it...it's terrible it's tragic and certainly people will want to know what happened but in the end..this "a group attack and consulate" = Obama is making the middle east unravel...that's not a winning argument...if they were smart given the botches so far they would scale back and use it as a knife and not a bazooka b/c it's effective as a knife but ridiculous as a bazooka. B/c President (*^*&%^$^#keeps taking credit for increases in oil production despite the fact that oil production on Federal land, the only oil production he has any real control over, is down 14%. And when he says oil production has increased in response to a question about why gas prices increased the rebut is that federal land should be drilled more? Even when Obama has the comeback that the permits were not being used, retracted, and are in the process of being released.
DC Tom Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Also the bottom line as Mitt conceded (rightfully so)...is that there will be stuff like this from time to time certainly in a middle east that is in a historic revolution as a region with so many radical groups. I mean if you can't basically say this is a scandal...people basically get it...it's terrible it's tragic and certainly people will want to know what happened but in the end..this "a group attack and consulate" = Obama is making the middle east unravel...that's not a winning argument...if they were smart given the botches so far they would scale back and use it as a knife and not a bazooka b/c it's effective as a knife but ridiculous as a bazooka. No, I don't think it's a scandal (hell, I STILL think the incident in Egypt is more important, being an international incident and all). The unbelievably incoherent and asinine handling of the messages afterwards is what I consider "scandalous".
Rob's House Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 NBC is dutifully doing Obama's dirty work.
dayman Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) No, I don't think it's a scandal (hell, I STILL think the incident in Egypt is more important, being an international incident and all). The unbelievably incoherent and asinine handling of the messages afterwards is what I consider "scandalous". Mishandling a message (compared btw to Romney's handling of everything related to this) in an election year matched up w/ Obama's foreign policy record as a whole makes the realm of foreign policy as a whole a winner for Repubs? Every surrogate on Fox and CNN for Romney doubling down on defending the act of terror issue on behalf of Romney. Krauthammer doing his best to keep Libya in the game. Repubs will keep this alive for Romney certainly leading into next week. Also over under "Israel" being mentioned next week is at 50 IMO...but the entire post debate coverage on Fox is Libya that signals problems Edited October 17, 2012 by TheNewBills
truth on hold Posted October 17, 2012 Posted October 17, 2012 Obama first statement after Libya: "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." Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/12/transcript-president-obama-remarks-following-deadly-attacks-at-us-consulate-in/#ixzz29WPB2gGj
Recommended Posts