2nd Presidential Debate Tonight 9 EST!!!!!!!

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Now JD, you know good and well that the president and the admin worked hard for fourteen days to avoid labeling this a terrorist attack, a pre planned, premeditated attack. They obviously continued a narrative that what happened in Benghazi was a spontaneous demonstration as the result of the YouTube video, even though they had facts to the contrary within 24 hours.

I think that Obama's people saw the political failure of identifying this as a terrorist attack right away, not to mention that there were definitely people associated with the GOP that smelled the blood and became politically insatiable for the demise of Obama's perceived foreign policy prowress.

Obama knew Libya was a terrorist attack. In the immediate days following the attack, the idea that maybe it did have something to do with the video was not completely debunked. But Obama knew it was a terrorist attack.

In his speech in the Rose Garden, Obama referred to Libya as a terrorist attack in the same way that the Bible identifies baptism in the Name of the Father, in the Name of the Son, and in the Name of the Holy Ghost.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I actually thought both candidates did a good job tonight. They were evenly matched, IMO. Romney was more pushy than in the first debate, but I thought he needed to be--he wasn't strong enough in the first debate.

The one point in the debate that I felt was solidly in Obama's favor is when he accepted responsibility for what happened in Libya. That was the most graceful way to handle that question, and really the only smart answer. He still evaded the question, though, which was to ask who refused the extra security request and why.

Candy Crowley, on the other hand, was incorrect about Obama's statement in the Rose Garden and even if she had been correct, she should have stayed out of the argument. Except for that moment about the Rose Garden, I thought she did a good job remaining neutral--and enforcing the time limits.

Obama is going to have a tough time in next week's debate. Liberals are obviously going to like him, conservatives are going to like Romney, but most importantly: IMO, undecided voters are going to lean toward Romney.

Fox had a roomful of Obama voters from 2008 in a room monitoring the debate, and about 80% said that they were swayed by seeing & hearing Mitt, and were going to vote for him. That was shocking!!

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

I think that Obama's people saw the political failure of identifying this as a terrorist attack right away, not to mention that there were definitely people associated with the GOP that smelled the blood and became politically insatiable for the demise of Obama's perceived foreign policy prowress.

Obama knew Libya was a terrorist attack. In the immediate days following the attack. The idea that maybe it did have something to do with the video was not completely debunked. But he knew it was a terrorist attack.

In his speech in the Rose Garden, Obama referred to Libya as a terrorist attack in the same way that the Bible identifies baptism in the Name of the Father, in the Name of the Son, and in the Name of the Holy Ghost.

LOL, you got that right, of course, Candi bailed the president out at the most critical moment.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by crakjak

No, you just go to such lengths to demonize Mitt, when he is the most experienced and presidential choice that the GOP has had since Reagan.

This is simply not true.
Romney on his best day can't hold Reagan's athletic supporter.

cj, your characterization of Romney is delusional-- similar to Chris Matthew's man crush on Obama.

[MissBrattified]

From the Rose Garden Speech transcript

In the first comments (below), The President alludes to the idea that this was prompted by some religious offense:

Originally Posted by President Obama

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.

...Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.

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.

If you read the entire context, it appears he was referring to 9/11 with his "no acts of terror." He calls what happened in Libya a "terrible act." Romney told the truth; Obama fudged.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by crakjak

Fox had a roomful of Obama voters from 2008 in a room monitoring the debate, and about 80% said that they were swayed by seeing & hearing Mitt, and were going to vote for him. That was shocking!!

I think Romney did very, very well tonight.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by crakjak

No, you just go to such lengths to demonize Mitt, when he is the most experienced and presidential choice that the GOP has had since Reagan.

LOL! I have no words for this. If he was so great, he would have been re-elected as Governor. He wasn't. Even Gary Johnson was re-elected and served two terms in a large Democratic state - 2 to 1 Democrats.

Your Reagan remark, after Romney's record, and laying the blueprint for Obamacare, is delusional at best.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Light

Where did 4 people die? The talk in the rose garden was about the 4 dead.
Get real!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUWm5...e_gdata_player

She admits Romney was right...

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

I think Romney did very, very well tonight.

I thought he was rude by all of his interrupting. He certainly did not follow the rules tonight.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

I think Romney did very, very well tonight.

I agree; however, Obama's closing comments about the 47% remark was brilliant. He saved the best for the last word. I also sort of agree with him (and others) about Romney's comments. While I understand the gist of what Romney was saying and his overall point, it's quite short sighted to think that everyone who receives government assistance is a liberal, a victim, or that they enjoy not being able to provide for themselves--or that they even believe that is ideal. My mother is on Medicare and Social Security and she is a staunch conservative. Being a hard worker doesn't mean you can always make enough money to provide for yourself, and there are times when hard working people will need help.