Ryan: No, Obama didn’t tell America in the Rose Garden that Benghazi attack was terrorism; Update: Carney admitted it nine days later

posted at 10:41 am on October 17, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Even the debate moderator who claimed otherwise has since changed her tune, which leaves a pretty big opening for Republicans to address on Barack Obama’s response to the Benghazi attack — both in real terms and in the debate last night.  After Candy Crowley cut off Mitt Romney by erroneously claiming that Obama had declared the act terrorism — which she recanted after the debate — most other fact checkers reached the opposite conclusion.  Here’s Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post, for instance:

What did Obama say in the Rose Garden a day after the attack in Libya? ”No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation,”  he said.

But he did not say “terrorism”—and it took the administration days to concede that that it an “act of terrorism” that appears unrelated to initial reports of anger at a video that defamed the prophet Muhammad.

Politico’s Mike Allen also said that Obama’s reference to “terror” wasn’t related to the Benghazi attack, but a general statement:

There’s going to be a bunch of fact checks, but just to do a fact check here. … And I’m looking at the transcript of that White House event the day after and he started by referring to them as selfless acts, which is casted very differently than the sort of very planned action that we now have. Later toward the end, he makes a reference to 9/11 and he says, very generally, we will not let acts of terror go unpunished. So that’s going to be an arguable point.

Arguable point?  Four days later, the Obama administration sent Susan Rice to five Sunday talk shows to argue that the attack was a “spontaneous demonstration” that “spun out of control.”  Obama himself went on the David Letterman Show to say the same thing two days later, and then blamed the attack on the YouTube video at the UN.  He explicitly said that “the future should not belong to those who insult the prophet of Islam.”

Today, Paul Ryan proceeded to argue that “arguable point,” and claim that Obama fibbed a bit last night:

GOP vice presidential nominee Rep. Paul Ryan (Wis.) on Wednesday defended Mitt Romney’s debate attacks on Libya, repeating charges that President Obama had waited two weeks to dub the violence at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi an act of terrorism.

“It was a passing comment about acts of terror in general, it was not a claim that this was a terrorist attack,” Ryan said on ABC’s “Good Morning America. “Nobody believes that that Rose Garden speech from the president was suggesting that that [individual act] was an act of terror.” …

Ryan doubled down in three separate appearances on broadcast morning shows. He went over the timeline distributed by the Romney campaign that documents statements by the White House and the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations for two weeks following the incident, where it was called spontaneous and the violence was blamed on an anti-Islam YouTube video. The administration has since acknowledged it was a terrorist attack.

Ironically, the President’s reaction to Romney’s criticism on Libya provided Obama with his best optics of the night.  However, his false claim will likely revive this story once again in the media, which will hurt more than the optics will help, writes Stephen Hayes, and even more ironically, that will happen because it was perceived as a stumble on Romney’s part:

The second 2012 presidential debate featured a sharper Barack Obama, a series of tough exchanges, and one memorable back-and-forth on Libya. And just as Joe Biden’s answers on Libya in the vice presidential debate drove several days of news, the discussion of Libya Tuesday night will be central to the presidential contest over the next week.

There are several reasons for this: Obama’s answer on Libya was highly misleading; Romney stumbled in his response; the debate moderator fact-checked Romney during the debate but later acknowledged his broader point was correct; the administration hasn’t even begun to answer the questions at the center of the controversy; and the debate next Monday will focus on foreign policy.

Here’s the irony: Mitt Romney flubbed his response to the Libya question, and to average voters it probably seemed as though President Obama handled the exchange well. But the persistence of Libya as an issue, and the inability of the Obama administration to reconcile its early narrative with, well, reality—means that the issue is certain to help Romney and hurt Obama. And the fact that Romney’s answer was inartful virtually ensures the exchange will get more attention than it would have if the only mistake had been Obama’s.

Indeed.  I’d expect Romney to have these fact-check citations memorized for next Monday’s debate on foreign policy — and the extra attention this will receive might produce even more inconvenient truths about what State, the intelligence community, and the White House knew, and when they knew it.

Update: American Crossroads dug up an admission by Jay Carney on September 20th that the administration had not called it an act of terror up to that point, emphases mine:

Q    Can you — have you called it a terrorist attack before?  Have you said that?

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t, but — I mean, people attacked our embassy.  It’s an act of terror by definition.

Q    Yes, I just hadn’t heard you –

MR. CARNEY:  It doesn’t have to do with what date it occurred.

Q    No, I just hadn’t heard the White House say that this was an act of terrorism or a terrorist attack.  And I just –

MR. CARNEY:  I don’t think the fact that we hadn’t is not — as our NCTC Director testified yesterday, a number of different elements appear to have been involved in the attack, including individuals connected to militant groups that are prevalent in eastern Libya, particularly in the Benghazi area.  We are looking at indications that individuals involved in the attack may have had connections to al Qaeda or al Qaeda’s affiliates, in particular al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.

That seems pretty conclusive.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Did you read Ed’s comments? Candy Crowley – after the debate – conceded that Romney was correct. Mike Allen did too.

Did you see Ed’s update? Obama’s press secretary stated the Obama administration had not deemed it a terrorist attack. Obama was asked several times after his Rose Garden remarks if it was a terrorist attack and each time he refused to say they were.

gwelf on October 17, 2012 at 12:44 PM
———

The transcript clearly says it was an act of terror.

I don’t give a shit what spinners or Candy Shitmoderator say.

Dave Rywall on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

You mean the actual attack?
I think that’d have to happen in a different thread…at a different blog :)

verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 12:45 PM

The attack and why we were completely unprepared for it despite repeated requests by a number of people for increased security.

And why Obama claimed Al Qaeda was on it’s heels.

And why Obama lied to cover up his administrations incompetence.

gwelf on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Crowley On September 30th: Administration Took Weeks To Admit Benghazi Might Be A Terrorist Attack

ShadowsPawn on October 17, 2012 at 12:51 PM

CROWLEY knew it too… Look at her questions to Axelrod and McCain about Jay Carney’s “admission” on Sept. 30…

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/333937.php

She knew it, and she lied. Obama knew it and HE lied. And they both used “the transcript” to back them up, even though Carney admitted they hadn’t called it a terrorist attack until Sept. 30.

Lying pit of vipers, all of them!

Hat’s off to Mitt for taking them on.

UnderstandingisPower on October 17, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Didn’t read the whole thread, don’t know if someone else has linked it, but Crowley knew she was lying when she intervened to help Obama with her BS “fact check”.

Crowley confronted Axelrod over false claim that Obama called Benghazi attack as “terror” on Sept 30!

Crowley on Sept. 30: Obama Never Said Benghazi Attack Was ‘Act of Terror’

novaculus on October 17, 2012 at 12:51 PM

The transcript clearly says it was an act of terror.

I don’t give a shit what spinners or Candy Shitmoderator say.

Dave Rywall on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Did you read the whole transcript? Obama did not leave the impression that Benghazi was a terrorist attack. You interpret it that way? You don’t care what spinners or moderators say? What about Obama himself? He was asked several times if it was a terrorist attack and he refused to call it one. Which Obama are you going to believe?

gwelf on October 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Candy Crowley graduates from the Joesph Goebbels school of Journalism.

SWalker on October 17, 2012 at 12:40 PM

Thank you for the link.

Steveangell on October 17, 2012 at 12:53 PM

“Both Rasmussen and Survey USA have Obama +3 and solidly winning Independents (the key to NV). Obama wins the state.

gumbyandpokey on October 17, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Have you been living on Mars?

Rasmussen has Romney up by 3.
Gallup also has Romney up by 4.

Ignore this idiot who has obviously been living on Mars since before the first debate.

Steveangell on October 17, 2012 at 12:38″

Rasmussen has Romney up 3? Where? When?

gumbyandpokey on October 17, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Dave Rywall on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

You have a reading comprehension problem, Dave. Obama was talking about the 1st 9/11 attack, not 9/11/12.

Try something else.

kingsjester on October 17, 2012 at 12:55 PM

So was this before or after the me/caskets/me/caskets Obama-not-making-it-a-political-point part?

rogerb on October 17, 2012 at 12:56 PM

The transcript clearly says it was an act of terror.

I don’t give a shit what spinners or Candy Shitmoderator say.

Dave Rywall on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

So why did Susan Rice lie her ass off five days later? Why did Obama blame it on that video in his UN speech. Explain that genius.

Happy Nomad on October 17, 2012 at 12:56 PM

That’s a different poll, but shows the same trend as Rasmussen. Nevada is breaking for Obama and he is winning Independents in both polls.

I don’t think you can really make that case as the +3 Rass difference towards O poll over poll is within the MoE and if you look at the other polls (poll over poll) you see no change. And, of course, you have modeling assumptions of a 2008 turnout in a state that historically is R+3-R+1.

Just saying.

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Why was the legacy media not more aggressive and precise in their questioning of the administration in the two plus weeks following the Benghazi attack? Candy’s reasoning this morning was since it was in the Rose Garden speech it is not a leap to assume that he meant it was an act of terror. Wow! “Journalism” at its best! Forget about all the times since then that the POTUS, Hillary, Susan Rice, Jay Carney and others said otherwise.

d1carter on October 17, 2012 at 1:01 PM

New Gallup Poll – Likely Voters

Romney: 51%
Obama: 45%

http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx

sentinelrules on October 17, 2012 at 1:03 PM

The transcript clearly says it was an act of terror.

I don’t give a shit what spinners or Candy Shitmoderator say.

Dave Rywall on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Obviously it was lost in translation…yes, 9/11, the World Trade Center was an act of terror…but no such statement about Big Ben and the murdering of our Ambassadors and his guards.

Reread it again, listen again…but I bet you will only hear what you want to hear…which further proves facts are of no use to a liberal.

right2bright on October 17, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Rasmussen has Romney up 3? Where? When?

gumbyandpokey on October 17, 2012 at 12:54 PM

Links provided

Steveangell on October 17, 2012 at 1:03 PM

If you wanna see a real ‘apology tour’ –
check out Fox News for Romney debate performance excuses….

verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Gumby and Pokey – the Rasmussen poll in Nevada was conducted on October 15th, the day before the Second Debate.

It will take three days for the effects of this second debate and for the current trend to show up in the polls.

ETAB on October 17, 2012 at 1:04 PM

When I read the Transcript I see;

Obama refer to the Benghazi Attack as Outrageous, Shocking, Terrible, Brutal, and Senseless Violence.
He also refers to the Attackers as Killers and Attackers.

“The United States condemns, in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. We’re working with the government of Libya to secure our diplomats. I’ve also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world.

And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people. 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.”

Let’s look at the Context of the only place in the transcript where the word terror shows up…

Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourn 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.”

So the context of the word terror is remembering back to Sept 11 2001, not September 11 2012.

jaydee_007 on October 17, 2012 at 1:05 PM

gumbyandpokey on October 17, 2012 at 12:54 PM

You can’t beat that poll…what a great day for you, you have another poll to point to…another poll to show us….

HAHAHAHAHA!!!

right2bright on October 17, 2012 at 1:05 PM

New Gallup Poll – Likely Voters

Romney: 51%
Obama: 45%

http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx

sentinelrules on October 17, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Suck it gumby.

wargamer6 on October 17, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Steveangell on October 17, 2012 at 1:03 PM

I have a feeling she is about to slink away…

right2bright on October 17, 2012 at 1:06 PM

If you wanna see a real ‘apology tour’ –
check out Fox News for Romney debate performance excuses….

verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Bazing!

=)

gwelf on October 17, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Links provided

Steveangell on October 17, 2012 at 1:03 PM

It won’t matter to him.

ShadowsPawn on October 17, 2012 at 1:06 PM

verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Funny…I don’t see any actual physical bowing going on. You must be b.s.’ing again.

As usual.

kingsjester on October 17, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Barack Obama and his administration KNOWS ONLY LIES and spins and distortions they use constantly for the never ending failed policies in all arena’s…. they state the lie then the lie is spread by to news lapdogs and media complicit.

I wonder if we are ever going to see or hear from the film maker of the video that started WWIII…… He was arrested and hasn’t been seem or heard from since.

Obama and the gang stirred up more violent acts at other embassy’s and all over by creating a following to You-Tube to the video… best example of yelling fire in a theater I’ve ever seen.

ActinUpinTexas on October 17, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Gallup: Romney up by 6 points, 51-45 with Likely Voter

Conservative4ev on October 17, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Suck it gumby.

wargamer6 on October 17, 2012 at 1:05 PM

And may I add, two weeks ago I predicted these numbers…as many of us did.

The only difference I stated 3-5% by the end of this week, and 5-7% next week, so I was “pessimistic”…I am afraid to say any more than 7%, but by election are we looking at 10%???

I am happy with 6%, that’s a blow out….

right2bright on October 17, 2012 at 1:08 PM

And why Obama lied to cover up his administrations incompetence.

gwelf on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Again, it wasn’t incompetence. Security was deliberately denied in Libya because the administration wanted to give the impression that Libya was a safe and happy place after Obama’s war.

blink on October 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Did Obama Stage Benghazi Attack?

http://www.westernjournalism.com/october-surprise-gone-horribly-wrong/

workingclass artist on October 17, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Nevada also isn’t a “must have” for Romney. Now Ohio…that is a different story.

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Please people… This was preplanned and rehearsed. The outcome they were looking for happened! Obama Tells Crowley to check a “Transcript” from an obscure moment/comment from an obscure speech. How did Obama know Cowley’s notes & reading better than she did? That’s number one! Number two, they had 60 million people watch Cowley defend Obama. Maybe a couple million Wonks heard about the retraction! This was planned & executed in coordination with the Obama campaign staff! The chicago thug machine tactics will not stop until after the court fight, that’s bound to happen after Obama loses Nov.6th!
Update on:How to take on the Enemy media & Win: http://paratisiusa.blogspot.com/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-those-who-should-know.html?spref=tw

God Bless America!

paratisi on October 17, 2012 at 1:09 PM

What I don’t understand in the kerfuffle about this issue is this: Obama said: “Show him the transcript, Candy.” Now will someone tell me exactly HOW Obama knew that Candy had a ready transcript to show for that particular talking point? Just think of all the talking points/questions about the myriad of things that could/would have been discussed and this EXACT one just happens to have a handy “transcript” that Obama obviously knew about in ADVANCE? Short of some other explanation, I see nothing but an implication that Candy Crowley leaked all the questions to Obama’s camp in advance so he could be fueled by his “intense study and debate prep” by knowing those questions in advance. Nothing else, seems to fit the circumstances in any logical way.

Webrider on October 17, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Poll Troll Roll Call
verbaluce
gumbyandpokey

Any others? The Usual Suspects?
The quality never seems to improve.

spiritof61 on October 17, 2012 at 1:10 PM

The transcript clearly says it was an act of terror.

Why did the President go the View a few days later and say it wasn’t?

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 1:10 PM

If you wanna see a real ‘apology tour’ –
check out Fox News for Romney debate performance excuses….

verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 1:04 PM

You mean like CNN’s graphics showing that Mitt won in all the major categories of policies, but lost the debate?

I will give Obama the debate…and take the votes thank you….

HAHAHAHHA!!! Schooled again, Obama won the debate, but lost votes…Casey at the bat.

right2bright on October 17, 2012 at 1:10 PM

“Oooooh. My brain hurts.”

Mr. D.P. Gumbyandpokey, standing in the Hudson River.

either orr on October 17, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Petulant in Chief yelling “Candy, say it again louder” regarding “terror act” comment needs to be placed into an ad immed followed by Candy Eat Crowley’s confession she didn’t have all the facts right…

Curious as to the time frame she selected questions and when debate began..me thinkey she was rushing to research those selected questions so she would have her lib talking points ready to toss out when she was refereeing post discussion pieces….

hillsoftx on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Here you go…

http://www.businessinsider.com/debate-poll-obama-romney-independents-colorado-ppp-public-policy-polling-2012-10

gumbyandpokey on October 17, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Wait! You are citing PPP, which you trashed the other day when it had Romney up in 10 out of 11 swing states?

I swear, Dumby, try not to trash too many more polls, networks, etc, that I have to add to your growing list of “Do Not Believe A Word Of What They Are Saying” has tripled since yesterday. All you are going to be left with is the poll deciding what the theme should be for Lennox Middle School prom and my post is going to consume the all available bandwidth.

Resist We Much on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Gumby and Pokey – the Rasmussen poll in Nevada was conducted on October 15th, the day before the Second Debate.

It will take three days for the effects of this second debate and for the current trend to show up in the polls.

ETAB on October 17, 2012 at 1:04 PM

HAHAHAHAHAHA…. that’s all I can do… HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

As if there was actually any doubt, gumby is an absolute moron.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM

The attack and why we were completely unprepared for it despite repeated requests by a number of people for increased security.

gwelf on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Of course no question that they lacked adequate security in Benghazi.
But only with the benefit of hindsight can one suggest what would have been sufficient to repel this attack.
Also, the requests for extra security from some folks were for Tripoli – though having a a stronger marine contingent there might have had an impact, as far as being able to respond.

verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Romney should at the next debate:

“What are you doing to facilitate the release of the Pakistani doctor, who sits in jail that helped drop the dime on Osama.

Are we giving money to Pakistan w/o expecting good behavior in return?

Typicalwhitewoman on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Whoa. Gallup: Romney +6?

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 1:12 PM

The transcript clearly says it was an act of terror.

Dave Rywall on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Except it doesn’t.

happytobehere on October 17, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Again, it wasn’t incompetence. Security was deliberately denied in Libya because the administration wanted to give the impression that Libya was a safe and happy place after Obama’s war.

blink on October 17, 2012 at 12:52 PM

That’s certainly a possibility but has this been proven?
Was this something that came out during the congressional hearings?

gwelf on October 17, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Notice how drywall never answers why he posts on an American political site? Coward.

wargamer6 on October 17, 2012 at 12:46 PM

It’s because freedom of speech is so broken in the PRC that a site like HA cannot exist there. That’s what liberalism does.

slickwillie2001 on October 17, 2012 at 1:13 PM

The transcript clearly says it was an act of terror.

No, it does NOT. The transcript clearly states that it was a “senseless act of violence.” You know, like a drive-by shooting…

In Obama’s speech from the Rose Garden, before the phrase “acts of terror” ever leaves his lips — in fact, 6 paragraphs before — HE BLAMES THE VIDEO.

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.” (Paragraph 4 of 13)

[snip]

“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.” (Paragraph 10 of 13)

The first two lines of paragraph 4 would be irrelevant if he was going to designate the attack “terrorism.”

Also, under Federal law, acts of terrorism, BY DEFINITION, are premeditated. Thus, they cannot be “spontaneous uprisings”…ever.

Here’s the full transcript:

http://www.forextv.com/forex-news-story/full-transcript-of-obama-s-rose-garden-speech-after-sept-11-benghazi-attack

Further…

“No acts of terror” is plural and non-specific.

Is this how you synonymously refer to terrorism:

“But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence.

Paragraph 4 of 13 from his Rose Garden statement….6 paragraphs before the word terror is mentioned.

Is “senseless acts of violence” just another way of describing terrorism?

Resist We Much on October 17, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Obama will get 43% of the vote thats it

Conservative4ev on October 17, 2012 at 1:15 PM

And I expect next 2 Fridays’ unemployment numbers reported to decline to 6.7% and 5.9% respectively. Just in time for the General.

What is really scary about the so called “independents” is not that a number of them are still “undecided”, but just how clueless and uninformed they are on such huge subjects as unemployment, economy, government regulations, Fast & Furious and Benghazi.

Its nice to live under a rock, I guess…

riddick on October 17, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Whoa. Gallup: Romney +6?

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 1:12 PM

It’s over, Obama was speaking in past tense last night…

MGardner on October 17, 2012 at 1:16 PM

1980 Deja Vu. I’m lovin’ it.

kingsjester on October 17, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Also, the requests for extra security from some folks were for Tripoli – though having a a stronger marine contingent there might have had an impact, as far as being able to respond.

verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Always living in a world where you make up you own facts. Typical.

Monkeytoe on October 17, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Of course no question that they lacked adequate security in Benghazi.
But only with the benefit of hindsight can one suggest what would have been sufficient to repel this attack.
Also, the requests for extra security from some folks were for Tripoli – though having a a stronger marine contingent there might have had an impact, as far as being able to respond.

verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM

All other western nations had pulled out of Benghazi. Our consulate had already been attacked several times. There were lots of other signs that terrorists were active in the region. But it’s hard to ascertain how much security we needed or where we needed it? That’s not very convincing. We should have provided a secure and staffed facility or not been there.

gwelf on October 17, 2012 at 1:18 PM

The transcript clearly says it was an act of terror.

Dave Rywall on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Did Obama say, “let me be clear” during the Rose Garden address? Because he always does that when he’s being clear.

Let me be clear, Obama will be lucky to even get 47% of the vote in November. And it has nothing to do with his debate performance. It’s because his record is awful and even people who want to vote for him have no idea why he should be given a second term.

happytobehere on October 17, 2012 at 1:18 PM

It’s over, Obama was speaking in past tense last night…

MGardner on October 17, 2012 at 1:16 PM

No candidate, in the history of Gallup, has ever been above 50% this late and lost

Conservative4ev on October 17, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Whoa. Gallup: Romney +6?

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 1:12 PM

gumby will ignore this, of course.

ShadowsPawn on October 17, 2012 at 1:19 PM

And I expect next 2 Fridays’ unemployment numbers reported to decline to 6.7% and 5.9% respectively. Just in time for the General.

What is really scary about the so called “independents” is not that a number of them are still “undecided”, but just how clueless and uninformed they are on such huge subjects as unemployment, economy, government regulations, Fast & Furious and Benghazi.

Its nice to live under a rock, I guess…

riddick on October 17, 2012 at 1:15 PM

I thought I read somewhere that they already revised last figures up…

right2bright on October 17, 2012 at 1:19 PM

Of course no question that they lacked adequate security in Benghazi.

But only with the benefit of hindsight can one suggest what would have been sufficient to repel this attack.

verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Really? So, the fact that terrorists blew a hole in a perimeter wall that “40 men could rush through” on 6 June 2012 requires “hindsight” to understand that there were clear and present threats to the consulate? Okey-dokey.

Also, the requests for extra security from some folks were for Tripoli – though having a a stronger marine contingent there might have had an impact, as far as being able to respond.

verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM

They were also requested for Benghazi. Unfortunately, the Obama administration decided to outsource the consulate’s security to a Welsh firm with little experience in Libya, which then turned around and hired locals for $4 an hour.

Ooooh! $4 bucks an hour! Yeah, I bet those “poor rebels” in a “hotbed of Islamist terrorism” were just lining up for the $4 an hour and the knowledge that same-sex domestic partnerships were approved of by consulate personnel.

Resist We Much on October 17, 2012 at 1:20 PM

gumby will ignore this, of course.

ShadowsPawn on October 17, 2012 at 1:19 PM

gumby has moved on, she always does when she is finally cornered and beaten up with facts…

right2bright on October 17, 2012 at 1:20 PM

gumby will ignore this, of course.

Whether he ignores it or not, is his perogative. But it doesn’t change reality.

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 1:21 PM

HEY GUMBY! NEW WISCONSIN POLL

Marquette WI poll

Obama at 49%, Romney 48% among likely voters in WI

sentinelrules on October 17, 2012 at 1:22 PM

The Gallup numbers deserve a mushroom cloud post.

Hint, hint, AP.

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Romney should at the next debate:

“What are you doing to facilitate the release of the Pakistani doctor, who sits in jail that helped drop the dime on Osama.

Are we giving money to Pakistan w/o expecting good behavior in return?

Typicalwhitewoman on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM

“How much of the financial aid we are providing to Egypt, Libya and Pakistan ends up in Al Qaeda pocket?”

riddick on October 17, 2012 at 1:24 PM

The transcript clearly says it was an act of terror.

Why did the President go the View a few days later and say it wasn’t?

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Yep!

“Unfortunately for the President, it may well turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory.

Why? Because, in order to score that debate point, the President professed – indeed, insisted — that he believed the Benghazi attack to be a terrorist attack from day one; believed it so strongly that he said so publicly in his Rose Garden address on September 12, 2012.

Of course if that’s the case, if we are to read the Rose Garden remarks the way the President insists we must, then President Obama is going to have explain his administration’s convoluted, misleading, and ultimately inadequate response to a terrorist attack against American lives and interests.

Here are just a few of the hard questions he must now answer:

If he knew the attacks were the work of terrorists on September 12 in the Rose Garden, why did the President and his “team” continue to mislead the American public by calling the attacks “protests” against an “offensive video” for more than two full weeks afterward?

Why, if the President knew these attacks were the work of terrorists, did go on The View to say something different?

When asked in an interview with Univision about the attack more than a week after it occurred, why did the President continue to blame the “protests” and on a YouTube video and then go to great lengths to distance his administration from that video?

If the President knew the attacks were the work of terrorists from day one, why was Vice President Biden claiming otherwise three weeks after the attack when he insisted at the VP Debate that the “intelligence community” was pointing to protests, not terrorist attacks?

If the President knew the attacks were the work of terrorists from day one, why did the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, go on a press tour five days after the attacks to insist that this was a protest, “a response to a hateful and offensive video,” “a spontaneous reaction to a video”? And when asked directly if it was an act of terror, why did Ambassador Rice call the attack “a copycat of the demonstrations against our facility in Cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video”?

If the President knew this was an act of terror from day one, why did he go before the United Nations himself, two weeks after the attack, and blame a YouTube video six times without once uttering the word terror or terrorist in reference to Libya or the murder of our ambassador?

If the President knew the attacks were the work of terrorists from day one, why did White House Press Secretary, Jay Carney, refuse to admit as much for more than two weeks?

If the President knew that terrorists had attacked our consulate and killed our ambassador, was a press-conference en route to a Las Vegas fundraiser a remotely appropriate response?

And of course, if the President is responsible for his team, why is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton taking the blame?

The President seemed very proud of the point he scored in last night’s debate. He wants credit for calling the Benghazi attack an act of terror from day one. The question is, having definitively undermined every different story his administration has told in the last month, will he also take “credit” for his administration’s coordinated campaign of disinformation and half-truths?

http://www.catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?p=37674

workingclass artist on October 17, 2012 at 1:24 PM

…about the Obama administration’s priorities in assessing security needs in Benghazi, the notorious jihadist hotbed that has long been one of the most dangerous spots on the planet for Americans:

In the months leading up to the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, the U.S. Embassy in Libya was seeking to hire two bodyguards with “limited” English language skills at salaries of about $13,000 per year.

Job descriptions for these openings that the U.S. Embassy in Libya posted online said the State Department would give preference in filling them to qualified U.S. citizens who were family members of U.S. government employees. The job descriptions explicitly stated that this included the “same-sex domestic partners” of U.S. government employees.

In addition to the two bodyguards, the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, Libya was also seeking a security guard, a surveillance detection specialist, a chauffeur for the consulate in Benghazi and a “Senior Guard” for the Local Guard Force working to secure the embassy.

One of the duties of the Local Guard Force that this Senior Guard would join was “providing limited emergency response in the event of a terrorist attack, criminal incident, or major accident.”

All the job descriptions for these positions were posted online by the embassy, and all, except the security guard position, said that applicants needed to be fluent in Arabic. None required full fluency in English. All of them said the State Department would give preference in filling the position to a qualified U.S. citizen who was the “same-sex domestic partner” of a U.S. government employee.

The rest is here.

Words fail.

Resist We Much on October 17, 2012 at 1:24 PM

He should be allowed to jaywalk, smoke weed, speed, underpay taxes, and spit on the sidewalk. He should be fully ignored – even at the expense of him being allowed to violate parole conditions.
It took Obama too long to make a forceful defense of free speech – and his delay on that diminished his credibility on the issue when he finally did.
verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 12:33 PM

You have your facts wrong (again). It wasn’t a “parole violation”, it was a “probation violation”…BIG DIFFERENCE.

Strike Hornet on October 17, 2012 at 1:25 PM

The transcript clearly says it was an act of terror.
I don’t give a shit what spinners or Candy Shitmoderator say.

Dave Rywall on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Good Lord. Your candidate instructs the woman to get the transcript, which she seems to already have in front of her, in the most fortuitous coincidence to ever occur for any human being on TV ever. She intervenes to chime in in your candidates favor with a statement that is false both technically and in substance, when she is ostensibly an unbiased moderator.

And this is how you repay her?

RINO in Name Only on October 17, 2012 at 1:26 PM

“…about the Obama administration’s priorities in assessing security needs in Benghazi, the notorious jihadist hotbed that has long been one of the most dangerous spots on the planet for Americans:

In the months leading up to the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, the U.S. Embassy in Libya was seeking to hire two bodyguards with “limited” English language skills at salaries of about $13,000 per year.

Job descriptions for these openings that the U.S. Embassy in Libya posted online said the State Department would give preference in filling them to qualified U.S. citizens who were family members of U.S. government employees. The job descriptions explicitly stated that this included the “same-sex domestic partners” of U.S. government employees.

In addition to the two bodyguards, the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, Libya was also seeking a security guard, a surveillance detection specialist, a chauffeur for the consulate in Benghazi and a “Senior Guard” for the Local Guard Force working to secure the embassy.

One of the duties of the Local Guard Force that this Senior Guard would join was “providing limited emergency response in the event of a terrorist attack, criminal incident, or major accident.”

All the job descriptions for these positions were posted online by the embassy, and all, except the security guard position, said that applicants needed to be fluent in Arabic. None required full fluency in English. All of them said the State Department would give preference in filling the position to a qualified U.S. citizen who was the “same-sex domestic partner” of a U.S. government employee.”

The rest is here.

Words fail.

Resist We Much on October 17, 2012 at 1:26 PM

The attack may not have been initiated at all if better security had been in place. Better security may have prevented the attackers from having the incredibly specific intel that they had – which they likely had because the Libya “security” was providing it to the attackers. US Marines wouldn’t have been providing intel to attackers.

blink on October 17, 2012 at 1:19 PM

Amb. Stevens had no reason to be in a consulate in the first place. He should have been receiving Turks in an EMBASSY, in Tripoli, much better protected in every way, especially on 9/11.

Let’s not confuse things and not sway the story. There is way more to all of this than we are being let on.

riddick on October 17, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Unfortunately for the President, it may well turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory.

It already is. The CBS snap poll gave the President a 7 point win, but on the top issue (the economy) respondents favored Romney nearly 2-1. This is why CNN called it a push as even their polling which showed an 8 point win for the President had Romney winning the economy issue 58-40.

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 1:29 PM

The Gallup numbers deserve a mushroom cloud post.

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Hey, Gumby, try not to trash too many more polls, networks, etc, that I have to add to your growing list of “Do Not Believe A Word Of What They Are Saying” has tripled since yesterday morning. All you are going to be left with is the poll deciding what the colour theme should be for Lennox Middle School prom and your MiniTru post is going to consume all of the available bandwidth.

Resist We Much on October 17, 2012 at 1:30 PM

NEW WISCONSIN MARQUETTE POLL:

Obama: 49%
Romney: 48%

Senate:

Thompson: 46%
Baldwin: 45%

sentinelrules on October 17, 2012 at 1:30 PM

IF, I repeat, IF Obama had claimed, in the Rose Garden, that Benghazi was an act of terror – and I don’t interpret his words to mean that – then, WHY did his office have the UN Ambassador, Susan Rice, go out on five media shows, and declare that the Benghazi attack was a ‘spontaneous reaction to a hateful video’? Why?

Rice isn’t under the Secretary of State; she reports directly to Obama. IF Obama himself concluded that Benghazi was an ‘act of terror’, then how could he allow his UN ambassador to openly and deliberately misinform and mislead the American public? Well?

And IF Obama concluded, as he now claims he publicly did, in the Rose Garden, that Benghazi was an act of terror, then, why did he refuse, himself, to say that when asked on The View? Instead, he said he didn’t know and that it was being ‘investigated’. He said the same on another pop culture show. At no time did he say in public that it was an act of terror.

It’s a logical fallacy to state that a universal claim refers to a particular instance. Because I say that All apples are good, does NOT mean that THIS PARTICULAR apple is good. Obama was using the universal in his closing remarks in the Rose Garden.

Furthermore, why did Obama allow Ms Rice to declare it was a spontaneous reaction, a demonstration, to a ‘hateful video’, when the White House, the Intelligence Service and the Sec of State Dept ALL were receiving live time data and watching live time video reports of the attack in Benghazi…and KNEW that there was no demonstration.

The consulate had been silent; no demonstration. Nothing. Then, suddenly, the shots, the mortars, the attack. Obama’s administration knew, from the first data input which was LIVE, that there was no demonstration. They knew that it was coordinated and organized and thus, a terrorist attack.

ETAB on October 17, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Romney should at the next debate:

“What are you doing to facilitate the release of the Pakistani doctor, who sits in jail that helped drop the dime on Osama.

Are we giving money to Pakistan w/o expecting good behavior in return?

Typicalwhitewoman on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM
“How much of the financial aid we are providing to Egypt, Libya and Pakistan ends up in Al Qaeda pocket?”

riddick

This poor doctor sitting in a jail should be treated like a hero.
Obama should have had him flown here after he personally had him released from jail, given a visa, a house, and never having to pay taxes for the rest of his life. Lot’s of opportunity for good p.r.

Obummer treats this man as badly as his own relative that sits in a hut or picks out some poor bastid that made a dumb video, where he now sits in jail. Yeah, Obummer is for the average guy.

I want Mitt to do everything to get this doctor out of jail, I am outraged and stop giving aid to countries that treat us like shit.

Typicalwhitewoman on October 17, 2012 at 1:37 PM

And what is the dominant issue of this post debate news cycle?
Romney’s gaffe on Libya.
That doomed his campaign.
gumbyandpokey on October 17, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Having to defend the murder of an Ambassador is not what they want to be talking about.
When you are defending your actions and words after a terrorist attack, you are losing, ESPECIALLY when you’re main talking point is “Osama bin Laden is dead and the terrorist are on their heels.”
Doesn’t seem to jive.

Strike Hornet on October 17, 2012 at 1:38 PM

NEW WISCONSIN MARQUETTE POLL:

Obama: 49%
Romney: 48%

Senate:

Thompson: 46%
Baldwin: 45%

That’s a very big deal. Last WI Marquette poll taken 9/27-9/30 had Obama +11

newtopia on October 17, 2012 at 1:38 PM

He should be allowed to jaywalk, smoke weed, speed, underpay taxes, and spit on the sidewalk. He should be fully ignored – even at the expense of him being allowed to violate parole conditions.

verbaluce on October 17, 2012 at 12:33 PM

It was an alleged probation violation. Currently, he is in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT in the Federal Metropolitan Detention Centre in Los Angeles and has been DENIED bail FOR AN ALLEGED PROBATION VIOLATION.

Can you please tell me how many people that you know that have been picked up by TEN FEDERAL AGENTS in the MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, PERP-WALKED FOR THE INTERNATIONAL MEDIA, THROWN INTO SOLITARY CONFINEMENT and DENIED BAIL for an ALLEGED PROBATION VIOLATION?

I’m an attorney and I’ll tell you what my profession thinks:

It was political and outrageous.

Resist We Much on October 17, 2012 at 1:42 PM

August 2012
Gumby: “You losers relying on Rasmussen are a joke. Everyone knows that it is the Gallup poll that is the most accurate and Obama is crushing on it!!”

October 2012
Gumby: “You losers relying on a Gallup poll showing Romney ahead by 6 are a joke. Everyone knows that it is the Rasmussen poll where Romney only has a one point lead that is the most accurate!”

AirForceCane on October 17, 2012 at 1:42 PM

And what is the dominant issue of this post debate news cycle?
Romney’s gaffe on Libya.
That doomed his campaign.
gumbyandpokey on October 17, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Except a) everyone is now admitting that Romney’s “gaffe” was in fact not a gaffe and was instead correct and b) the polls show Romney’s lead widening.

So, except for the facts, you are correct.

Monkeytoe on October 17, 2012 at 1:43 PM

Update: American Crossroads dug up an admission by Jay Carney on September 20th that the administration had not called it an act of terror up to that point, emphases mine:

Who you gonna believe? Me, or that lyin’ sack o’ sh!t press secretary of mine?
/BhO

ted c on October 17, 2012 at 1:45 PM

August 2012
Gumby: “You losers relying on Rasmussen are a joke. Everyone knows that it is the Gallup poll that is the most accurate and Obama is crushing on it!!”

October 2012
Gumby: “You losers relying on a Gallup poll showing Romney ahead by 6 are a joke. Everyone knows that it is the Rasmussen poll where Romney only has a one point lead that is the most accurate!”

AirForceCane on October 17, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Man She’s a mess

Conservative4ev on October 17, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Obama is President Casket Greeter

John the Libertarian on October 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM

The transcript clearly says it was an act of terror.

I don’t give a shit what spinners or Candy Shitmoderator say.

Dave Rywall on October 17, 2012 at 12:50 PM
Apparently you also don’t give a shat being the only one that thinks the transcript clearly says that…

blink on October 17, 2012 at 1:06 PM

…told you Dick Dryrot‘s brain cells were rotting too!…if you’ve noticed over the years Dryrot has been declining…I think the poor guy is somewhere in the third stage of syphilis

KOOLAID2 on October 17, 2012 at 1:57 PM

What I don’t understand in the kerfuffle about this issue is this: Obama said: “Show him the transcript, Candy.” Now will someone tell me exactly HOW Obama knew that Candy had a ready transcript to show for that particular talking point? Just think of all the talking points/questions about the myriad of things that could/would have been discussed and this EXACT one just happens to have a handy “transcript” that Obama obviously knew about in ADVANCE? Short of some other explanation, I see nothing but an implication that Candy Crowley leaked all the questions to Obama’s camp in advance so he could be fueled by his “intense study and debate prep” by knowing those questions in advance. Nothing else, seems to fit the circumstances in any logical way.

Webrider on October 17, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Great point.

This debate was fixed. Obama was given the questions or at least told what questions Crowley would allow in advance and this one in particular.

28 times she stopped Mitt when he was making points.

4 time she stopped Obama for going over time.

5 times she stopped Obama to help him against Romney.

She gave Obama 11% more time and the last chance to speak.

Romney still did not allow Obama a manufactured win.

Steveangell on October 17, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Romney should at the next debate:

“What are you doing to facilitate the release of the Pakistani doctor, who sits in jail that helped drop the dime on Osama.

Are we giving money to Pakistan w/o expecting good behavior in return?

Typicalwhitewoman on October 17, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Great reminder.

INC on October 17, 2012 at 2:00 PM

With regard to Benghazi -

the Obama Administration acted stupidly.

You had to love the way that Obama completely ignored the actual Benghazi question he was asked last night, and then set his jaw and said how offended he was. What’s offensive, Mr. President, is that members of your adminstration ignored/denied requests to increase the security for the ambassador in Benghazi. We’re not talking about our post in Barbados or Singapore here. This is freaking Libya, just recently disengaged from a brutal dictator of many decades, and still awash in weapons and militias willing to use them. This isn’t somewhere where you just burnish your foreign policy chops by saying that you ordered for beefed-up security in the region AFTER your ambassador and three others get murdered. This is where you prevent the consular attack from happening in the first place by being prepared IN ADVANCE.

So when is the Sec. of State resigning?

dissent555 on October 17, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Romney still did not allow Obama a manufactured win.

Steveangell on October 17, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Mammy, where are my smellin salts? Stevie is defending evil Mitt.

Resist We Much on October 17, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Check out all the trolls. No surer sign that Obama and Crowley screwed up.

Christien on October 17, 2012 at 2:23 PM

The next debate is on foreign policy. Obama will be fried. He might as well face an execution squad.

SC.Charlie on October 17, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Not only did Obama not declare it an act of terror, he thought so little of the event that he left went to a campaign event in Las Vegas the same day as his rose garden speech! I was happy to hear Romney nail him on that! Obama’s look was priceless. Perhaps Candy Crowley has hurt Obama more than helped, because one of the top google searches last night was about the rose garden speech.

GrannySunni on October 17, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5