Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  1. #1
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts

    Third Presidential Debate : Obama VS Romney

    The bias of Bob Schieffer: Top 7 moments
    By Michelle Malkin • October 22, 2012 10:35 AM


    In August, I blasted the Commission on Presidential Debate’s choices of three Beltway lib journo-tools — CNN’s Candy Crowley, PBS’s Jim Lehrer and CBS’s Bob Schieffer. So far, they’ve acted just as expected and predicted. As I noted: http://michellemalkin.com/2012/08/22...ols-for-obama/

    While the debate panel trumpeted the gender diversity of its picks, the chromosomal diversity is far outweighed by the political uniformity, class conformity and geographical homogeneity of the group.

    Crowley has lived and worked in D.C. for liberal CNN for a quarter-century. Raddatz worked for liberal National Public Radio for five years before joining ABC News; she has been based in the D.C. bureau for the better part of a decade. Schieffer has been a fixture in the nation’s capital at CBS News, home of the faked Rathergate documents, for three decades. Lehrer, the liberal patriarch of PBS News, is nearly as aged a Beltway monument as the Washington Monument itself.

    The presidential debates are the last bastion of “mainstream” media self-delusion in the 21st century. They are a ritual laughingstock for tens of millions of American viewers who have put up with leading, softball questions for Democratic candidates and combative, fili-blustery lectures for Republican candidates campaign cycle after cycle.


    Tonight, Schieffer takes the stage. Here is the format and topic order he selected: http://www.debates.org/index.php?mac...t01returnid=80

    America’s role in the world
    Our longest war – Afghanistan and Pakistan
    Red Lines – Israel and Iran
    The Changing Middle East and the New Face of Terrorism – I
    The Changing Middle East and the New Face of Terrorism – II
    The Rise of China and Tomorrow’s World

    The debate will be held on Monday, October 22 at Lynn University in Boca Raton, FL. The format calls for six 15-minute time segments, each of which will focus on one of the topics listed above. The moderator will open each segment with a question. Each candidate will have two minutes to respond. Following the candidates’ responses, the moderator will use the balance of the 15-minute segment to facilitate a discussion on the topic. All debates start at 9:00 p.m. ET and run for 90 minutes.

    Schieffer has steadfastly refused to acknowledge his biases over the years. http://blog.seattlepi.com/thebigblog...-im-a-liberal/

    But his words below speak for themselves. Can he contain himself tonight? Like Crowley, he’s signaled to the media that he will “interject” himself to stop candidate “filibuster[ing]” when necessary. http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...e-umpires.html He has already taken the liberty of redefining what the foreign policy debate is about for voters, arguing to the left-wing Daily Beast: “While the third encounter is devoted to foreign policy, ‘what these debates are about are really about character.’” And liberal L.A. Times columnist James Rainey happily predicted that Schieffer will “throw some curves” tonight. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,7614835.story Which way will he lean?

    You be the judge:

    1. Schieffer penned a book in 1989 titled “The Acting President: Ronald Reagan and the Supporting Players Who Helped Him Create the Illusion That Held America Spellbound.” Nope, no bias there! Newsbusters reported that 23 years after it was published, Schieffer finally acknowledged that it was “not entirely true.” http://newsbusters.cloud.clearpathho...ot-entirely-tr



    2. In June, Schieffer hosted RNC chair Reince Preibus on his “Face the Nation” program, and lambasted Republicans for focusing on “silly and petty” things — like the $500 million Solyndra bankruptcy. No, really. Preibus held his own. Schieffer showed his true blue colors: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bob-schie...paign-tactics/

    Priebus contrasted the president’s leadership with Governor Scott Walker‘s, an executive who Priebus argued has actually kept his promises. On the other hand, he said that President Obama just loves hearing the sound of his own voice.

    At this point, Schieffer jumped in to turn the tables on Priebus and the Republican party, pointing to a recent Republican protest of a David Axelrod speech in Boston and Mitt Romney taking reporters to the Solyndra plant as a kind of campaign stunt. This led Schieffer to ask Priebus just how seriously his party is taking this election.

    “Isn’t that kind of silly and petty when you look at it? This campaign should be, it seems to me, about very serious things and very serious issues.”

    Priebus argued that Solyndra is a serious, legitimate issue for Republicans to address, because of how well it represents “political cronyism” under Obama. And as for Axelrod’s speech, Priebus dismissed the whole thing as a stunt to make a point in Romney’s home state, and even found it amusing that “these tough guys from Chicago” were “cry[ing] about it.”
    3. Schieffer condemned Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer for defending herself against thin-skinned Obama’s tarmac hissy fit over her book. http://michellemalkin.com/2012/01/27...-cranky-pants/ Remember: It was Obama who stalked off rudely after whining about her book (which he hadn’t read), not Brewer. In Schieffer’s reality bubble, Brewer was the “vulgar” aggressor — and he used the incident to complain inexplicably about “social media.” Via MRC: http://www.mrc.org/node/38963

    A question we’ve never posed and likely no one outside of CBS News has ever considered: ‘We wondered what Bob Schieffer thinks of all of this?’ Yet that’s how CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley on Thursday night cued up Schieffer to take up CBS air time to convey his personal disgust with Arizona Governor Jan Brewer for supposedly failing to show the proper respect to President Barack Obama on the tarmac near Phoenix.

    ‘This is just another sign of the growing incivility and really vulgarity of our modern American politics,’ Schieffer declared, fretting ‘these campaigns have gotten so ugly and so nasty, that they’re now tarnishing the whole system.’ He despaired it demonstrates ‘the coarseness of our culture in this age of social media.’ Then he got personal in condemning Brewer as an historic embarrassment to the nation:

    I can never recall a President stepping off Air Force One, which is itself a symbol of the presidency in American democracy, and being subjected to such public rudeness. I think really we’re a better people than this little incident illustrates.

    [UPDATE: Schieffer's hometown newspaper, the Washington Post, which is hardly anti-Obama, didn't follow Schieffer's lead and instead held the President the most accountable. 'Heated exchange shows Obama's testy side,' read the headline in the Friday, January 27 newspaper, above the subhead: 'Critics say he's unwilling to be second-guessed — or to see other points of view.']
    4. Listen to this testy exchange between conservative talk show host Steve Malzberg and Schieffer, in which Schieffer complains again about the “Internet” for spreading false rumors (pssst…it was the “Internet” that exposed the monumental CBS Rathergate scandal http://michellemalkin.com/category/m...as/rathergate/ ) and stubbornly defends double standards in coverage of Sarah Palin versus Joe Biden.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jp-xm...layer_embedded
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement Third Presidential Debate :  Obama VS Romney
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #2
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    5. Schieffer moaned in February that it was the GOP that was obsessed with birth control, criticized the party for being “too far to the right,” and falsely stated that Obama had “backed away” from his religious liberty-crushing Obamacare abortion mandate. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-b...l-while-obama-

    6. Schieffer gushes about Obama during the inaugural celebration, compares him to Lincoln: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-dr...-obama-lincoln

    On Monday’s CBS Early Show, Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer shared his thoughts on Barack Obama’s inauguration and made this comparison: “Well, people just want to be a part of it. It’s like who wouldn’t want to be a part of it if you could have been there when Lincoln gave one of his addresses or something…People really do feel this is a moment in history. And they want to be part of it.”

    Earlier, co-host Harry Smith observed: “And there is an amazing feeling here, especially contrast with the feeling of eight years ago.” Schieffer agreed: “Yeah, it really was, because don’t forget, you had that really difficult thing down in Florida. People were not convinced. Some people were not convinced that George Bush really was legitimately-” Smith interjected: “Still not convinced.” Schieffer continued: “-the president. There was a lot of rancor. People had fun, they came up, and — but nothing like the spirit that you see here…There is a real spirit here. I’ve never seen anything quite like it.”

    Smith later declared: “They’re here from Canada, California, Colorado, Ohio. They’re from all over the country. Every color of the rainbow. And there really is a sense of togetherness, of unity.” He then concluded the segment by exclaiming: “It really is that sort of a sense of E. Pluribus Unum, right?…Out of many, one.” Schieffer agreed: “It really is.”
    7. Schieffer’s fair and balanced assessment of Bill Clinton’s DNC speech on September 5: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/conve...ts-star-struck

    “Just an amazing speech.”

    http://michellemalkin.com/2012/10/22...top-7-moments/

    I’m betting Romney will have to bring up the truth about Benghazi if it’s brought up at all. Sheiffer will probably do whatever he can to avoid the subject.

    ...

    You may be right. I heard on the top of the hour news on ABC (7am hour) that the debate will focus on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, China and Iran. No mention of Libya other than they expect Romney to bring it up.

    I think this Brit headline says it all about the debate tonight: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ets-polls.html

    Obama’s final stand: President and Romney go head-to-head on foreign policy in last TV debate as Romney rockets in polls
    (so how long will it take Barack to make bin Laden boast?)

    ...

    Schieffer wll make Candy Crowley look fair. Romney will be interrupted every time he tries to speak. Total disruption will be the order of the evening. Two on one for 90 minutes.

    If the debate on this topic were fair, the Obama Presidency would end tonight in disgrace.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  4. #3
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Obama hits Romney hard in final presidential debate showdown
    By Justin Sink and Amie Parnes - 10/22/12 11:51 PM ET

    President Obama and Mitt Romney took each other on in the final presidential debate of the 2012 campaign Monday night, fighting to prove their credentials as the right leader for America on the world stage.

    Obama battled aggressively, repeatedly throwing darts at Romney and seeking to portray his opponent as "wrong and reckless" on foreign policy.

    In return, Romney mostly avoided sharp conflict, frequently agreeing with the president.

    The president was the consensus winner among the snap polls take in the immediate aftermath of the debate, albeit by varying margins. A poll by CBS News was most favorable to the president, giving Obama a 53 percent to 23 percent advantage over Romney. Similar surveys by Democratic firm Public Policy Polling gave Obama a 53 percent to 42 percent advantage, with CNN turning in the narrowest margin for the president, a 8-point advantage for Obama over Romney.

    In the PPP poll, the president led swing-state independents, 55 percent to 40, and led among both men and whites in the swing states — two categories he has struggled to attract thus far in the election. Yet the president only carried a 51 percent to 47 percent advantage on foreign policy, the debate's scheduled theme, suggesting he may have scored points on style and the frequent diversions into economic policy.

    The debate, held in Boca Raton, Fla., was to focus on national security and foreign policy issues. It was the last chance for the candidates to make their pitch to millions of voters, who head to the polls two weeks from Tuesday.

    The president, for whom foreign policy has seemed to be a strong suit throughout the campaign, especially since the killing of Osama bin Laden, asked voters to "judge who's going to be more effective and more credible" representing the country's interests abroad.

    Obama came to the debate in Boca Raton, Fla. armed with stinging quips, arguing that "the 1980s called" wanting Romney's foreign policy back and blasting his challenger as seeming to treat military policy like a game of Battleship.

    Romney, who has made significant gains in polls since their first debate last month, repeatedly criticized Obama as having failed in his dealings with upheaval in the Middle East or to weaken al Qaeda.

    He also repeatedly pivoted the discussion back to a question of the economy — terrain where he clearly believed he held the advantage.

    Right off the bat, the debate's moderator, Bob Schieffer asked a question about the violence in Libya, a story that has dominated the headlines since fighters attacked the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi last month, killing an ambassador and three other Americans.

    While Romney has frequently questioned the Obama administration's handling of the attack on the campaign trail, he mostly sidestepped that attack, instead arguing that the president had failed to present a broader vision for the future of the Middle East.

    "We're going to have to put in place a very comprehensive and robust strategy to help the world of Islam and other parts of the world reject this radical violent extremism which is certainly — it's not on the run," Romney said.

    But Obama argued that he had kept the American people safe as commander in chief and went on the attack, saying that Romney's criticism on foreign policy had been scattershot.

    "I have to tell you that, your strategy previously has been one that has been all over the map and is not designed to keep Americans safe or to build on the opportunities that exist in the Middle East," Obama said.

    Romney punched back, saying that his strategy was "pretty straightforward."

    His plan is "to go after the bad guys, do our best to interrupt them, kill them, to take them out of the picture. But my strategy is broader than that," Romney said.

    The president quickly pivoted back onto attack, reminding the audience that it was Romney who called Russia the number one "geopolitical foe" to the United States.

    "I know you haven't been in a position to actually execute foreign policy, but every time you've offered an opinion, you've been wrong," Obama said, adding that: "The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back."

    Romney shot back with a reference to Obama's "hot mic" moment with then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

    "I’m not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia, or [Russian President Vladimir] Putin. And I’m certainly not going to say to him, I’ll give you more flexibility after the election. After the election, he’ll get more backbone," Romney said.

    But by the halfway point, the debate shifted almost fully to domestic issues, with both Obama and Romney repeatedly moving questions to the economy.

    For the first time in the presidential debates, Obama looked to explicitly tie the Bush-era economy around Romney's neck.

    "He's praised George [W.] Bush as a good economic steward and Dick Cheney as somebody who shows great wisdom and judgment, and taking us back to those kinds of strategies that got us into this mess are not the way that we are going to maintain leadership in the 21st century," Obama said.

    Romney replied by saying he was presenting "an agenda for the future."

    "When it comes to our economy here at home, I know what it takes to create 12 million new jobs and rising take-home pay," Romney said. "What we've seen over the last four years is something I don't want to see over the next four years."

    During the debate, Obama sought to reaffirm U.S. ties to Israel, calling the nation a “true friend and “our greatest ally in the region.”

    “As long as I’m president of the United States, Iran will not obtain a nuclear weapon,” the president said, adding “A nuclear Iran is a threat to our national security, and it is a threat to Israel’s national security.”

    The candidates also battled on the issue of sequestration — a top issue in pivotal swing states like Colorado and Virginia with a large military presence that could be directly impact by the looming budget cuts.

    Romney repeatedly suggested his budget was what was needed "to make sure that we are safe."

    The president looked instead to pin the sequestration on Republicans in Congress, and he pledged the deal would not come to fruition.

    "It is something Congress has proposed," Obama said. "It will not happen. The budget we are talking about is not reducing our military spending. It is maintaining it."

    Obama also delivered a sharp rebuke of Romney's assertion that the Navy was weakening under the president's budget, with the Republican nominee pointing out that the number of ships in the naval fleet was the lowest in nearly a century.

    "Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military's changed," Obama quipped. "We had these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines. So the question is not a game of Battleship where we're counting slips. It's what are our capabilities."
    Last edited by Jolie Rouge; 10-23-2012 at 04:51 AM.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  5. #4
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    As the discussion pivoted to Israel, the candidates continued to lob tough blows at one another. Romney accused the president of undermining the relationship with the key ally by not visiting Israel during his trip overseas. He also accused Obama of conducting "an apology tour, of going to various nations in the Middle East and criticizing America."

    "I think they looked at that and saw weakness," Romney continued. "Then when there were dissidents in the streets of Tehran ... holding signs saying, is America with us, the president was silent. I think they noticed that as well."

    The president called Romney's accusations of an apology tour the "biggest whopper" of the campaign and hit back with a sharp critique of Romney's own trip to the Middle East, insinuating the Republican nominee had made the trip for publicity and fundraising.

    "If we're going to talk about trips we've taken, when I was a candidate for office, the first trip I took was to visit our troops," Obama said. "And when I went to Israel as a candidate, I didn't take donors, I didn't attempt fundraisers, I went to Yad Vashem, the Holocaust museum there, to remind myself the nature of evil, and why our bond with Israel will be unbreakable."

    Romney looked to capitalize on Chinese trade issues, saying the president had failed to be aggressive enough with the country. A Pew Poll released earlier this month showed American voters favored getting tougher on China relative to building a stronger relationship 49 percent to 42 percent, and the Republican nominee looked to make it a wedge issue.

    "China can be our partner, but that doesn't mean they can just roll all over us and steal our jobs on an unfair basis," Romney said.

    The president, as he had all night, pivoted back into an attack on his opponent.

    "You are familiar with jobs being shipped overseas because you invested in companies that were shipping jobs overseas," Obama said, adding that exports to the country had doubled during his time in office.

    But Romney, showing a willingness to let Obama seem the aggressor — repeated his familiar refrain that "attacking me is not talking about an agenda for getting more trade."

    As the debate concluded, each candidate was given time to give closing arguments in a presidential race that appears destined to go down to the wire.

    Obama, going first, spoke of a "different vision for America" from the policies of the George W. Bush administration.

    "If I have the privilege of being your president for another four years, I promise you I will always listen to your voices. I will fight for your families, and I will work every single day to make sure America continues to be the greatest nation on earth," Obama said.

    Romney, in his closing remarks, said he was optimistic about the future of the country and touted past success working with Democrats.

    "Washington is broken. I know what it takes to get this country back," Romney said. "And we'll work with good Democrats and Republicans to do that, this nation is the hope of the earth. We've been blessed by having a nation that's free and prosperous thanks to the contributions of the Greatest Generation. They've held a torch for the world to see: the torch of freedom and hope and opportunity. Now it's our turn to take that torch."

    http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign...n-final-debate

    comments

    Obama was a drowning man grasping at straws. He saw his presidency slipping away and he got angrier and angrier by the minute. Mitt on the otherhand appeared presidential, while Obama appeared like the challenger.

    ...

    Facts are not a friend of Obama, that's why he has to argue petty things. It's a distraction mechanism to keep his low information voters entertained.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  6. #5
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    10/22/2012
    Fact Check: Obama Challenges Us to Look Up Romney’s Op-Ed, So I Do
    Patterico @ 8:29 pm

    Guess who was telling the truth?

    Here’s the transcript: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/...8#.UIYJemn4qFE

    ROMNEY: I just want to take one of those points, again, attacking me as not talking about an agenda for — for getting more trade and opening up more jobs in this country. But the president mentioned the auto industry and that somehow I would be in favor of jobs being elsewhere. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    I’m a son of Detroit. I was born in Detroit. My dad was head of a car company. I like American cars. And I would do nothing to hurt the U.S. auto industry. My plan to get the industry on its feet when it was in real trouble was not to start writing checks. It was President Bush that wrote the first checks. I disagree with that. I said they need — these companies need to go through a managed bankruptcy. And in that process, they can get government help and government guarantees, but they need to go through bankruptcy to get rid of excess cost and the debt burden that they’d — they’d built up.

    And fortunately…

    (CROSSTALK)

    OBAMA: Governor Romney, that’s not what you said…

    (CROSSTALK)

    OBAMA: Governor Romney, you did not…

    ROMNEY: You can take a look at the op-ed…

    (CROSSTALK)

    OBAMA: You did not say that you would provide government help.

    ROMNEY: I said that we would provide guarantees, and — and that was what was able to allow these companies to go through bankruptcy, to come out of bankruptcy. Under no circumstances would I do anything other than to help this industry get on its feet. And the idea that has been suggested that I would liquidate the industry, of course not. Of course not.

    (CROSSTALK)

    OBAMA: Let’s check the record.

    ROMNEY: That’s the height of silliness…

    (CROSSTALK)

    OBAMA: Let — let — let’s…

    (CROSSTALK)

    ROMNEY: I have never said I would liquidate…

    (CROSSTALK)

    OBAMA: …at the record.

    (CROSSTALK)

    ROMNEY: …I would liquidate the industry.

    (CROSSTALK)

    OBAMA: Governor, the people in Detroit don’t forget.

    Obama 1) implied Romney said he would liquidate the industry and 2) claimed that Romney did not say we should provide government help. He later doubled down on point #2:

    OBAMA: The — look, I think anybody out there can check the record. Governor Romney, you keep on trying to, you know airbrush history here. You were very clear that you would not provide, government assistance to the U.S. auto companies, even if they went through bankruptcy. You said that they could get it in the private marketplace. That wasn’t true. They would have gone through a…

    (CROSSTALK)

    ROMNEY: You’re wrong…

    (CROSSTALK)

    OBAMA: …they would have gone through a…

    (CROSSTALK)

    ROMNEY: …you’re wrong.

    (CROSSTALK)

    OBAMA: No, I am not wrong. I am not wrong.

    (CROSSTALK)

    ROMNEY: People can look it up, you’re right.

    OBAMA: People will look it up.

    ROMNEY: Good.
    Again, Obama is saying Romney was clear that he would not provide government help.

    So, I did look it up. And here, in relevant part, is what Romney said. Focus on Obama’s claims. Does Romney push for liquidating the auto industry? Does Romney rule out any government help for the auto industry? Let’s look: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/op...mney.html?_r=0

    It is not wrong to ask for government help, but the automakers should come up with a win-win proposition. I believe the federal government should invest substantially more in basic research — on new energy sources, fuel-economy technology, materials science and the like — that will ultimately benefit the automotive industry, along with many others. I believe Washington should raise energy research spending to $20 billion a year, from the $4 billion that is spent today. The research could be done at universities, at research labs and even through public-private collaboration. The federal government should also rectify the imbedded tax penalties that favor foreign carmakers.

    But don’t ask Washington to give shareholders and bondholders a free pass — they bet on management and they lost.

    The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.

    In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.
    Romney did not indicate that he wanted to liquidate the auto companies. He did say there should be guarantees and government help.

    Obama lied. Let’s see how the Fact Checkers do on this.

    http://patterico.com/2012/10/22/fact...op-ed-so-i-do/

    comments

    This was the biggest disputed fact in the debate, with each guy saying the other one was wrong.

    Romney was right.

    And so far, Politifact has not bothered to mention it. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...ential-debate/ Meanwhile, they call Romney’s characterization of the “apology tour” as a “pants on fire” lie.

    ...

    I’m also wondering about the tale about the girl that was supposedly 4 @ 9/11 and ten now … that math doesn’t seem to work & sounded like one of those things he strays on & makes up on the fly when he has to go off-prompter.

    ..

    Ay yai yai. And WaPo ignores the controversy that actually erupted in the debate and claims Obama has the edge because Romney’s managed bankruptcy would not have worked in 2008 with a frozen credit market. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ustry-bailout/

    ...

    OOps another big correction — campaign(Plouffe) backpedalling on Obama’s “sequestration will not happen” statement.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=-uPDPFibrUY

    ..

    Contrast Politifact’s bold claim that Obama did not go on an apology tour, with their attempt two years ago to just claim that since Obama never said the word “sorry”, it wasn’t an apology tour. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-true-apology/

    ..

    Romney missed a big slam-dunk on “liquidation”: “Mr. President, you’re the one who liquidated hundreds of viable auto dealerships, three-quarters of whom were registered Republicans–I’m sure that was a coincidence.”

    It’s not so much that Mitt missed wide-open slam dunks: he dribbled for possession time. He’s better than Obama, but all this stuff about “renewable energy” and “working across the aisle” makes my blood run cold. I hope he wins. But if he does, we’re going to have our work cut out for us, because he’ll be Bush Act IV.

    ...

    Foley’s got some other good examples of Obama’s lies and misrepresentations, and how they are all part of his snark act. http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/155096/
    Last edited by Jolie Rouge; 10-23-2012 at 04:52 AM.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  7. #6
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Obama compares naval ships to horses and bayonets; Twitter explodes in snark-storm;
    Marines fact check Obama


    Barack Obama got a Twitter drubbing tonight as a result of comparing US Navy ships to obsolete war horses and bayonets. We’re sure that all of our fine sailors appreciated hearing their Commander in Chief declare them obsolete. As for us denizens of the interwebs, well, someone should have told the president how memes work before they gave him that line. Oh, right, he was being prepped by John Kerry. Never mind.

    Charles Lane@ChuckLane1

    Did the President just liken ships to horses and bayonets? He's got a mocking and belittling tone here. #debates

    22 Oct 12
    Seth Mandel@SethAMandel

    Love the "bayonet" crack from the president who blamed ATMs for unemployment. #debate

    22 Oct 12
    Kurt Schlichter@KurtSchlichter

    I still like my bayonet. But what do I know. I only served in two wars. #caring #LynnDebate

    22 Oct 12
    Johnny Jones@Johnny_Joey

    @ChuckLane1 as he suggested Submarines are new technology. I mean didn't we use horses and bayonets in the civil war.. Oh and submarines

    22 Oct 12
    Infidoll@infidoll

    @KurtSchlichter My Marine husband didn't find it amusing when I told him if Obama won, at least he'd still have his bayonet.

    22 Oct 12
    Steve Doocy✔@sdoocy

    News Flash to President Obama, Marines still use bayonets... #debate

    22 Oct 12
    Kurt Schlichter@KurtSchlichter

    .@dpczech Nice to know bayonets are out of fashion, huh? But then, Marines don't follow fashion. That's why they're Marines. #SemperFi

    22 Oct 12
    Ed Baker@EdBaker3000

    Marines still use bayonets. You would think someone who has been Commander-in-Chief for 4 yrs. would know that. #debates #tcot

    22 Oct 12
    RNC✔GOP

    RT @RNCResearch: .@BarackObama You know who thinks bayonets aren't obsolete? The Marines: bit.ly/VkW085 #lynndebate #debates

    22 Oct 12

    Captain Dreadlocke@CaptDreadlocke

    What do Marines use Bayonets for? To pick Socialists out of their teeth.

    22 Oct 12

    http://twitchy.com/2012/10/22/obama-...n-snark-storm/

    Patronizing commander-in-chief touts America’s ‘ships that go underwater’

    With his sarcastic comments about aircraft carriers, horses, bayonets, and submarines, President Barack Obama may narrowly edge out Vice President Joe Biden for the coveted Most Condescending Debater award:

    Little Miss Rightie@LilMissRightie

    I didn't dream up the 'we have these ships that go underwater' line did I? My mouth is still on the ground.

    22 Oct 12
    Mary Katharine Ham@mkhammer

    Obama: "We have these things called aircraft carriers & planes land on them." Nasty sarcasm or just learned it in debate prep? #debates

    22 Oct 12
    http://twitchy.com/2012/10/22/patron...go-underwater/
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  8. #7
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    Biggest gaffe of the night: Obama’s sequestration blunder

    Posted at 2:13 am on October 23, 2012 by Twitchy Staff

    During the final debate tonight at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney excoriated President Obama over proposed military budget cuts and cuts through sequestration. http://twitchy.com/2012/10/01/lockhe...fter-election/

    Transcript:

    Let me — let me step back and talk about what I think our mission has to be in the Middle East, and even more broadly, because our purpose is to make sure the world is more — is peaceful. We want a peaceful planet. We want people to be able to enjoy their lives and know they’re going to have a bright and prosperous future and not be at war. That’s our purpose. And the mantle of — of leadership for promoting the principles of peace has fallen to America. We didn’t ask for it, but it’s an honor that we have it.

    But for us to be able to promote those principles of peace requires us to be strong, and that begins with a strong economy here at home, and unfortunately, the economy is not stronger. When the — when the — the president of Iraq — excuse me — of Iran, Ahmadinejad, says that our debt makes us not a great country, that’s a frightening thing. The former chief of — chief of the Joints Chief of Staff said that — Admiral Mullen — said that our debt is the biggest national security threat we face. This — we have weakened our economy.

    We need a strong economy. We need to have as well a strong military. Our military is second to none in the world. We’re blessed with terrific soldiers and extraordinary technology and intelligence. But the idea of a trillion dollars in cuts through sequestration and budget cuts to the military would change that.

    Obama : Bob, I just need to comment on this. First of all, the sequester is not something that I proposed. It’s something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen. The budget that we’re talking about is not reducing our military spending. It’s maintaining it.

    But I think Governor Romney maybe hasn’t spent enough time looking at how our military works. You — you mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets — (laughter) — because the nature of our military’s changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.

    And so the question is not a game of Battleship where we’re counting ships. It’s — it’s what are our capabilities.
    Fact-check: Obama did propose sequestration, Bob Woodward says: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/22/fa...sed-sequester/

    Via the WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...ics_And_Policy

    By far the biggest gaffe—or deliberate evasion—of the evening was made by Mr. Obama when he denied paternity for the sequester defense cuts now set for 2013 and said they “will not happen.” Mr. Obama’s aides rushed out after the debate to say he meant to say the cuts “should not happen.”

    But the truth is that Mr. Obama has been using the fear of huge defense cuts as a political strategy to force Republicans to accept a tax increase. As Bob Woodward describes in his recent book, Mr. Obama and the White House helped to devise the defense sequester strategy—no matter the actual risk to defense.
    Question of the night. Question of the last four years:

    Romney made absolutely no gaffes in tonight’s debate. The President, however, made quite a few. For starters, those ships Obama doesn’t want to build are built in the swing state of Virginia and we still use bayonets. Obama’s biggest gaffe, though, was his utterly bizarre comments about how there will be no “sequester” and how he had nothing to do with it. Both assertions are simply not true. He signed the sequester into law and it is law…

    Debates are won in post-debate and Obama’s going to lose this one.

    No wonder there were so many long faces over at MSNBC.
    http://twitchy.com/2012/10/23/bigges...ation-blunder/

    White House now back pedaling on Obama's comment about sequester not happening : http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=-uPDPFibrUY


    Obama is so confident that sequestration will not happen that he has instructed defense contractors to BREAK THE LAW by not issuing notices of potential layoffs on November 1st as required by law. On November 7th, my guess is he'll say "Never mind" whether he wins or loses.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  9. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    111
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 119 Times in 57 Posts
    I was surprised at how Presidential Romney came across. Obama continued to act like a school yard bully.

  10. #9

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,400
    Thanks
    849
    Thanked 444 Times in 312 Posts
    Romney missed the point when O said that when he was campaigning (2008) he did stop in Israel - what does that have to do with the here and now? When netanyahu (spelling) ask to meet with him when he was going to be at the UN, O said he was too busy - dang I thought that israel was an ally and O made it sound like he and israel were best friends but he doesn't have time. Amazing how he found time for the muslim brotherhood....... This debate was in Boca where there are quite a few jews so it would have been advantageous to put O on the hot seat.

    After O's remarks about those boats that go underwater and other insults to the navy, I am sure there are parts of virginia that will rally around Romney I can just see the US forces riding around on horseback with their bayonets towing their boats that go under water wearing shirts with O's name all ex'd out.

    If O is re-elected then I think it would prove that are educational system is totally broken, the people are brain washed by discriminating media and Pinocchio styled truths are a set standard of washington.

  11. #10
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts
    The major Obama foreign policy flub the MSM will not call him out on
    Posted by: ST on October 23, 2012

    First, let me say what I suspect many of you are feeling this morning: THANK GOD THE DEBATES ARE OVER. They are behind us, out of the way, and now we can focus on the critical two weeks before voters go to the polls and cast their ballots in the Presidential election. While I’m happy Mitt Romney decisively won the first one, and won on the key points that mattered in the second (the economy and the deficit), and Paul Ryan held his own against a rude and disrespectful VP, as I have said before I am generally not a fan of debates as they become all about one liners, zingers, and flubs for people who do not (but should) judge a candidate based on their life’s work rather than just what they say in 60 second bits during a debate.

    Which brings me to the third and final debate from last night: Post-debate polling shows Obama “won” on points but everything else is unclear. A CNN poll indicated that there was virtually no change from undecideds in terms of whether or not this debate was a game-changer for them. The liberal Public Policy Polling outfit had “insta-results” from ALL “swing states” within 30 minutes of the debate that declared Obama “definitively won” across all groups, which I found highly suspect and, frankly, don’t find credible considering the short amount of time they had to compile all that alleged information. A Fox News focus panel of undecided voters gave Romney high marks on his grasp of the economy last night, and Obama high marks on foreign policy, which I found baffling. In short, people were all over the map and I don’t think this debate really changed many, if any, minds one way or the other.

    What I also found baffling was why Romney wasn’t more hard-hitting on Barack Obama, especially on the issue of Benghazi. If on NO OTHER ISSUE he should have nailed the administration to the wall for their sidestepping, incompetence, and lies on this one because it’s fresh in the minds of the American people. But it didn’t happen. Romney’s strategy last night seemed to be to “look presidential” without coming off as overly aggressive in attacking the Commander in Chief. That may have played well with some people but it did not do much for me. This President is NOT going to be held to account by the mainstream media before the election on Benghazi, and the various hearings held by Congress will not get to the bottom of the issue due to admin stonewalling and lies. So last night was really the last true opportunity for Mitt Romney to lay out his case against Obama unfiltered on the Benghazi issue but he didn’t. Oh well. He did emphasize the US’ need for a strong relationship with Israel, which was important.

    In contrast to Mitt Romney’s attempt at looking Presidential, the President himself came off as wildly juvenile, combative and defensive – he misled and lied frequently as usual – and his contemptible comments in particular on military funding and the “bayonets and horses” sneer will hopefully sink his chances of winning Virginia and in other state where the military plays a significant role in the economy.

    That being said, what will go largely unnoticed by the MSM in their attempts at plumping the pillow and clearing a path for Barack Obama in the final days before Election Day 2012 is that this President made a huge flub last night on the issue of “geopolitical foes.” Here’s the transcript of this segment of the debate (bolded emphasis added by me):

    [GOV. ROMNEY] But what’s been happening over the last couple years as we watched this tumult in the Middle East, this rising tide of chaos occur, you see al-Qaida rushing in, you see other jihadist groups rushing in.

    And — and they’re throughout many nations of the Middle East.

    It’s wonderful that Libya seems to be making some progress, despite this terrible tragedy, but next door, of course, we have Egypt. Libya’s 6 million population, Egypt 80 million population. We want — we want to make sure that we’re seeing progress throughout the Middle East. With Mali now having North Mali taken over by al-Qaida, with Syria having Assad continuing to — or to kill — to murder his own people, this is a region in tumult. And of course Iran on the path to a nuclear weapon. We’ve got real gaps in the region.

    MR. SCHIEFFER: We’ll get to that, but let’s give the president a chance.

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Governor Romney, I’m glad that you recognize that al-Qaida’s a threat because a few months ago when you were asked, what’s the biggest geopolitical threat facing America, you said Russia — not al-Qaida, you said Russia. And the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because, you know, the Cold War’s been over for 20 years.
    What’s key here is that there are two things Romney was talking about, which FactCheck correctly pointed out here http://factcheck.org/2012/10/false-c...-final-debate/ in scoring this point for Romney: geopolitical foes and national security (physical) threats. Romney corrected Obama in response by noting that when he called Russia a geopolitical foe that he did NOT exclude Al Qaeda and Iran from being a threat and in fact warned that Iran getting a nuclear weapon was the greatest national security threat:

    GOV. ROMNEY: But I’ll respond to a couple of the things you mentioned. First of all, Russia, I indicated, is a geopolitical foe, not —

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Number one —

    MR. ROMNEY: Excuse me. It’s a geopolitical foe. And I said in the same — in the same paragraph, I said, and Iran is the greatest national security threat we face. Russia does continue to battle us in the U.N. time and time again. I have clear eyes on this. I’m not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin, and I’m certainly not going to say to him, I’ll give you more flexibility after the election. After the election he’ll get more backbone.
    Unfortunately, the “fact checkers” at Politifact wrongly scored this point to Obama, http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...opolitical-fo/ and I repeatedly pointed out to them last night on Twitter (which I appreciate Jim Geraghty writing about this morning http://www.nationalreview.com/campai...tifact-you-lie ) that they completely took the geopolitical foes/threats argument made at the debate out of context.

    Technically they were correct in terms of Obama saying at one point “geopolitical threat” but Obama was clearly trying to mix national security threats with geopolitical foes, implicitly stating that he thought the two were one in the same! The transcript makes it very clear. First, Obama mentioned “threats” in the context of Al Qaeda, then tried to call Romney out on the Russia is geopolitical foe comments he made earlier this year, http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/20...political-foe/ which is a completely separate issue. Russia is a country that presents strategic geopolitical challenges to us at useless world bodies like the UN and is therefore a foe. Al Qaeda is a global physical national security threat to PEOPLE both here at home and abroad.

    The POTUS does NOT understand what geopolitical means! And he doesn’t know the difference between a national security threat and a geopolitical foe. I tweeted to David Axelrod last night to ask the President in their next strategy session where Al Qaeda the country was on the map.

    Does a President who can’t tell the difference between a national security threat and a geopolitical foe really deserve to have his hand anywhere near the nuke button? I don’t think so!

    Anyway, like I said – I’m the debates are behind us. Priority One from now until election day for us all will be to amplify the fact that Barack Obama has had four years to “change” America for the better, as he promised, and he has done just the opposite – and does NOT deserve another four years to “fix” the numerous mistakes from his first administration.

    Buckle up, gang – very bumpy ride ahead to the finish line. But we can do it!

    http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/20...ll-him-out-on/

    comments

    Clearly Romney did not stumble during the debate. I believe that was his main strategy, while your opponent is flailing allow him to look weak and less than presidential. I think the internal polling shows Romney over 50% in the battleground states so all he had to do was NOT make an unforced error. If Obama’s ceiling is truly 47% as it appears to be then Romney will landslide with a 53-47 victory and a clear mandate to finally grapple with our fiscal woes.

    ..

    I guess in this society being the most rude and smirky of the two during a debate means you “won”. Obozo brought nothing new and made no major points against Romney. This debate won’t mean a thing come November 6th.
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Jolie Rouge For This Useful Post:

    boopster (10-23-2012)

  13. #11
    Jolie Rouge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Lan astaslem !
    Posts
    60,656
    Thanks
    2,750
    Thanked 5,510 Times in 3,654 Posts


    FACT CHECK: Romney RIGHT On All Debate Disputes


    "Chris Wallace fact checked the disputes between Obama and Romney on the Status of Forces agreement that would have left more troops as well as the auto bailout. As you might have expected, Obama lied his butt off."
    Laissez les bon temps rouler! Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car.** a 4 day work week & sex slaves ~ I say Tyt for PRESIDENT! Not to be taken internally, literally or seriously ....Suki ebaynni IS THAT BETTER ?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in