Candy

[Busybody]

Nine Days After Deadly Attack On Benghazi Consulate, White House Explicitly Denied Calling It A Terrorist Attack…




Like Biden said, “facts matter.”

Via Beltway Confidential:


President Obama claimed during last night’s debate that he cried terrorism immediately after the Libya attack, but in doing so, he contradicted his own spokesman.

Nine days after the assault, a reporter asked White House Press Secretary Jay Carney if they had called the Libya assault a terrorist attack.

“I haven’t,” Carney replied on September 20th. And he was speaking for the White House, not just himself, as was made clear when he cautioned reporters against thinking it was significant that “we hadn’t” called it a terrorist attack yet.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Busybody]

I honestly do not understand....is the truth so foreign to them that they claim victory through semantics and actual believe it!

yes

they

care

about

SEMANTICS

DOGS

ROCKS

DRESSAGE

HAIRCUTS

WASHING POTS AND PANS

you know, VITAL ISSUES of the day

 

[Busybody]

Obama and Co

STILL

HAVENT

CALLED

THE

FT HOOD

TERROR ATTACKS

A

TERROR ATTACK!

 

[mercury14]

The President lied about Benghazi and Candy swore to it, No two ways about it.

And linking Obama directly calling the attacks an "Act of Terror" on Sept 12th and again on the 13th doesn't prove he called it an Act of Terror, right?

 

[Busybody]

And linking Obama directly calling the attacks an "Act of Terror" on Sept 12th and again on the 13th doesn't prove he called it an Act of Terror, right?

TERROR

is

not

TERRORISM



Even YOU know the truth

EVEN YOU

 

[unregistered]

 

[VaticanAssassin]

And linking Obama directly calling the attacks an "Act of Terror" on Sept 12th and again on the 13th doesn't prove he called it an Act of Terror, right?

Yes or No please...

So...you believe that Obama told the public this was terrorism from the start?

You do not believe that the administration tried to make the public believe it was because of a video?

 

[RobDownSouth]

And linking Obama directly calling the attacks an "Act of Terror" on Sept 12th and again on the 13th doesn't prove he called it an Act of Terror, right?

So far, we've seen AJ, Miles, Vetty and VatAss dutifully regurgitatin' the Republican Talkin' Point of the Day.

AJ, Miles and Vetty can't back down now, because as Literotica Marines Without Honor™ they cannot retreat from their lies because doing so would be cowardly.

VatAss Von Ishspawn never served in the military (by the time Dubya lowered the intelligence minimum standards, he was too old). He is the MWH company mascot.

 

[Busybody]

Yes or No please...

So...you believe that Obama told the public this was terrorism from the start?

You do not believe that the administration tried to make the public believe it was because of a video?

he wont answer

 

[Busybody]

While

PED ANTZ

argue seman ticks


EXCLUSIVE] 77% likelihood Romney wins popular vote, according to famous U of Colorado study







2002 658Google +82 434


By Levi Fox, on Oct 16, 2012






The University of Colorado (CU) prediction renowned for perfect accuracy will predict a popular-vote win for Mitt Romney later this month, Campus Reform has learned.

The poll has accurately predicted every presidential election since it was developed in 1980. It is unique in that it employs factors outside of state economic indicators to predict the next president.

CU Political Science Professor Dr. Michael Berry, who spoke with Campus Reform at length on Tuesday, said there is at least 77 percent chance that Romney will win the popular vote.


Professor Michael Berry from the University of Colorado told Campus Reform in an exclusive interview that there is a 77 percent chance Romney will win the popular vote.

“Our model indicates that Governor Romney has a 77 percent likelihood of winning the popular vote,” said Berry.

That number is significant, not only in its size, but because of the fact that only four presidents since the nation’s founding have won the presidency without capturing the popular vote, the last being George W. Bush in 2000.

Berry noted his model has never been wrong at predicting the outcome of a presidential election.

“For the last eight presidential elections, this model has correctly predicted the winner,” he said.

Berry also acknowledged that while his poll is accurate, however, that his model does not “calculate a specific confidence level for the Electoral College result.”

The study, conducted every four years, is non-political and employs historical data as well as current unemployment numbers and income levels.

In the crucial swing states of Florida, Ohio, and Virginia, a recent poll reveals that a majority of voters believe the health of the economy is the most important issue of this election.

Additionally, more than double of the respondents in a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll trust Romney over Obama to fix the economic state of our country (63%-29%).

Along with the economy, unemployment adds an element which only increases the probability of the CU prediction.

“The apparent advantage of being a Democratic candidate and holding the White House disappears when the national unemployment rate hits 5.6 percent,” Berry said.

Kenneth Bickers of CU-Boulder adds, “the incumbency advantage enjoyed by President Obama, though statistically significant, is not great enough to offset high rates of unemployment currently experienced in many of the states.”

The Colorado model has had such accuracy over the years, these results have received no criticism from academic peers, according to Berry.

Berry emphasized that the overall accuracy of this model is based on the premise that American elections circle around the major issues. The day-to-day campaigning, gaffes, and political jabs are quite ineffective to the general population’s decision, come November 6th.

Campus Reform's Levi Fox had the chance to discuss this prediction with Dr. Michael Berry. Here is the exclusive interview.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Yes or No please...

So...you believe that Obama told the public this was terrorism from the start?

Look at little VatAss Von Ishspawn, moving those goalposts allllll by himself.

 

[Busybody]

Speaking of the BLOB/Candy


If LIBZ are really honest and they arent

They would admit to be ashamed of BYE!DUMB!

 

[unregistered]

 

[Busybody]

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/TranslationGuide.jpg

 

[pornstarwannabe]

Back away from the fucking cheeseburgers.



You make Chris Christie look svelte...



You look hungry & angry.



Have a Snicker...

She had a very rough childhood. Her therapist said she swallowed a lot of aggression, along with a lot of pizzas.

 

[Wrong Element]

~Snore~


More evidence of deception
By Jennifer Rubin
President Obama’s attempts to wriggle free from his own words and actions on Libya are making things worse.

American Crossroads, taking exception to Obama’s announcement last night that he really had declared Benghazi to be an act of terrorism, has sent out a memo, which reads:


(assorted bullshit)

Jesus, how big a hack do you have to be to use Karl Rove's outfit to rebut Obama on an issue of substance?

Seeing you all trying to dance out of the fact that your man shit his pants in front of 60 million people has been great fun, though. Please keep it up!

 

[unregistered]

 

[Busybody]

OOPS


Debate Questioner Says Obama Admitted His Delay in Calling Benghazi a “Terrorist Attack” in Private






One of the bigger arguments arising out of the debate was from an incredible moment when Obama pushed Candy Crowley to say Mitt Romney was wrong about his accusation that Obama had delayed in calling Benghazi a terrorist attack.

Obama immediately and very angrily denounced the accusation in a terse exchange with Romney, that ended with Crowley saying Obama was right, and the biased audience applauding.

Romney’s attack seemed to be undone by the moderator and the crowd.

But that’s not the whole story [emphasis added]:


“After the debate, the president came over to me and spent about two minutes with me privately,” says the 61-year-old Ladka, who works at Global Telecom Supply in Mineola, N.Y. According to Ladka, Obama gave him “more information about why he delayed calling the attack a terorist [sic] attack.” For background, Obama did apparently lump Benghazi into a reference to “acts of terror” in a Sept. 12 Rose Garden address. However, he spent about two weeks holding off on using the full “terrorist” designation. The rationale for the delay, Obama explained to Ladka, was to make sure that the “intelligence he was acting on was real intelligence and not disinformation,” recalls Ladka.

via the Washington Post

Of course, in front of the cameras, Obama made it seem like it was a ridiculous charge, and Crowley was more than eager to enthusiastically lie for him.

If Romney’s accusation was wrong, then why did Obama have to explain it at all to Ladka? According to her statement, Obama completely contradicted himself just a few minutes after denouncing Romney…

Wonder if the celebrant liberal media will retract their support of a lie? Nah.. why start now after getting so good at it for four years?

 

[mercury14]

Are the facts incorrect? Where?

Why do you you care so much if it was "declared" terrorism on Day A or Day B?

How come you didn't care that Bush didn't declare 911 terrorism in his initial response?

 

[Busybody]

^^^pretty weak

 

[Busybody]

Why do you you care so much if it was "declared" terrorism on Day A or Day B?

How come you didn't care that Bush didn't declare 911 terrorism in his initial response?

better question

a day or 2 after the Gates/Police thing, Obama said HE DIDNT HAVE ALL THE FACTS, but still said teh POLICE ACTED STUPIDLY


Ft Hood, the gunmen screamed ALLAH AKBAR, had years worth of Jihadi acts and writings (which was IGNORED), Obama said LETS NOT RUSH to judgement.....Still NOW they dont call it terrorism


WHY????????????????











Bush doesnt matter, WE, AMERICANS BELIEVED HE WOULD DO RIGHT

We, AMERICANS, DONT BELIEVE THAT OF OBAMA!

 

[blobfish]

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/TranslationGuide.jpg

Fox News also uses all those words. The only left wing PC phrase is "man-caused disaster", and I think they've distanced themselves from that tripe.

 

[Busybody]

Why do you you care so much if it was "declared" terrorism on Day A or Day B?

How come you didn't care that Bush didn't declare 911 terrorism in his initial response?

He did call it terror
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP1K84iRZPo

a REAL PRESIDENT http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uefmqCZbW4

Not someone who plays on on TV

 

[RobDownSouth]

How come you didn't care that Bush didn't declare 911 terrorism in his initial response?

Silly Mercury!

That....that....THAT'S DIFFERENT!