Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Fox News takes a gigantic bite out of Candy, asks for seconds   (foxnews.com) divider line 332
    More: Fail, Candy Crowley, Fox News, CNN, obama, John Sununu, Daily Caller, Soledad O'Brien, Boone Pickens  
•       •       •

5407 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Oct 2012 at 1:29 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



332 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-17 11:32:06 AM  
3.images.comedycentral.com

I'll make your pinky all stinky.
 
2012-10-17 11:40:16 AM  
If you're complaining about the moderator...
 
2012-10-17 11:43:21 AM  
Even the NFL had the decency to pull the replacement ref that was a Saints fan from officiating the Saints game. To expect as much courtesy in our debates, well, that is asking tooo much.

When you best hope of a win is to tag team with the moderator, then you really don't have much to run on;
 
2012-10-17 11:44:17 AM  
Losers whine about the moderators
 
2012-10-17 11:48:19 AM  

EnviroDude: When you best hope of a win is to tag team with the moderator, then you really don't have much to run on;


And when you have to work the refs to dispel the notion you lost....

Well, its pretty well covered in this thread already.
 
2012-10-17 11:48:37 AM  
Awww. She didn't let Romney lie to the camera with a big smile on his face. Boo farking hoo.

But that's not where Obama won the Benghazi point. He won that when he savaged Romney for making political hay over the attack. He seemed empathic and imminently presidential during that part and rightly painted Romney as the opportunistic douchebag he clear is.
 
2012-10-17 11:48:57 AM  
If your excuse for every failure is that the world is biased against you then maybe you're just farking wrong.
 
2012-10-17 11:52:29 AM  
Fox News being the ultimate arbiter of "fair and balanced" they have a lot of credibility on this subject.
 
2012-10-17 11:53:20 AM  

EnviroDude: Even the NFL had the decency to pull the replacement ref that was a Saints fan from officiating the Saints game. To expect as much courtesy in our debates, well, that is asking tooo much.

When you best hope of a win is to tag team with the moderator, then you really don't have much to run on;


Get a new line.

http://www.fark.com/comments/7378391/79971963#c79971963

EnviroDude [TotalFark] 2012-10-12 12:46:33 PM

oldfarthenry: Poor Ryan. He spent hours in the gym doing all those crunchies & reps only to get slapped into submission by Biden's liver-spotted dick.

Considering that Martha Radzattz and Biden double teamed him, Ryan didn't do bad. I suppose if he had told Biden to STFU, then the left would have had puppies for him dissing the VP. Radzattz should have controlled the debate, but as she is in titz deep in the Obama campaign, you wouldn't expect anything less.

As I was told in High School by my coach, "When you are biatchin' about the refs or how the other teams acts, well, you're usually getting your arse kicked." Of course, even the NFL had the courtesy to remove the pro-Saints replacement ref from the Saints game he was scheduled to officiate. Guess having an insider to double team is fair if you are Obama and losing a campaign you were winning two weeks ago.
 
2012-10-17 11:57:03 AM  
Yep. Candy Crowley forced Romney to be uninformed about POTUS's comments in the Rose Garden. She also forced him to lie about seeking out women to put on his staff (heh heh, heh heh.)

Truly, she is history's greatest monster.
 
2012-10-17 11:59:44 AM  
so remember - the god like John Galt Job Creators who bestride the world in their greatness, the ones from whom all blessings flow and who are smarter, faster, stronger than us mere mortals...can be defeated by a debate moderator.

kind of a let down, isn't it?
 
2012-10-17 12:01:22 PM  
Well, they do sort of have a point. Since reality has a liberal bias, and Ms. Crowley was attempting to make Romney stick to the truth, she was in effect supporting a left-leaning agenda.
 
2012-10-17 12:01:46 PM  
Romney didn't lose, and if he did lose it's cause you cheated!
 
2012-10-17 12:11:46 PM  

I love how these assholes are putting a NewsBusters article on their main page:

Dan Gainor is the Boone Pickens Fellow and the Media Research Center's Vice President for Business and Culture.



i45.tinypic.com
"I'm Brent Bozell and I approve this vomitous blog post masquerading as news commentary. It's what we do best."
 
2012-10-17 12:12:30 PM  

EnviroDude: Even the NFL had the decency to pull the replacement ref that was a Saints fan from officiating the Saints game. To expect as much courtesy in our debates, well, that is asking tooo much.

When you best hope of a win is to tag team with the moderator, then you really don't have much to run on;


Poor baby.

Romney's boxed himself in. He's shown in two debates that he'll try to bully the moderator and Crowley showed how you shut him down. His only options for the third debate are to double down and hope the third moderator is submissive, or else he has to be the submissive one and let Obama run wild. It's Romney's own fault for not being clever enough to pivot from debate to debate like Obama did.
 
2012-10-17 12:13:50 PM  
If Romney actually had anything of substance to say last night it would be all over the news. Instead we get this.

I think I will actually listen to Rush today just to hear him cry
 
2012-10-17 12:15:40 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Losers whine about the moderators


"Winnahs goo hoom an fook the proom quen."

/He says in his best Sean Connery voice.
 
2012-10-17 12:16:10 PM  
catching the Limbaugh hour right now (@weaverXP if you want to join me) and it looks like the official GOP mantra on this debate loss is going to be 1. Romney won. 2. Obama lost badly and 3. MODERATORS omg moderators so many moderators!
 
2012-10-17 12:22:26 PM  

Weaver95: catching the Limbaugh hour right now (@weaverXP if you want to join me) and it looks like the official GOP mantra on this debate loss is going to be 1. Romney won. 2. Obama lost badly and 3. MODERATORS omg moderators so many moderators!


This is exactly what they did in 2008. I hate that they simply cannot accept defeat, ever. There is NO grace and no effort on their part to be anything but rash and stubborn.
 
2012-10-17 12:26:15 PM  

Elandriel: Weaver95: catching the Limbaugh hour right now (@weaverXP if you want to join me) and it looks like the official GOP mantra on this debate loss is going to be 1. Romney won. 2. Obama lost badly and 3. MODERATORS omg moderators so many moderators!

This is exactly what they did in 2008. I hate that they simply cannot accept defeat, ever. There is NO grace and no effort on their part to be anything but rash and stubborn.


Rush is saying that the GOP won, that debates don't matter and that you are stupid if you think Obama beat Romney. Oh, and that debates don't matter, but Romney won and Obama was stuttering and sweating and failure incarnate...not that it mattered because MODERATORS and the lying, so many lies and none of it mattered but if it did matter than Romney won.

or something. Limbaugh is more than a bit incoherent today.
 
2012-10-17 12:28:09 PM  

James!: Romney didn't lose, and if he did lose it's cause you cheated!


So you're listening to Rush this afternoon too?
 
2012-10-17 12:28:44 PM  
Gotta keep the base fired up after all. Gotta try to hold on to those undecideds.

Extremely disappointing that the fate of the country is decided by wishy washy people who can't be bothered to pay attention until the last 5 minutes of the game.
 
2012-10-17 12:29:15 PM  

Dogberry: James!: Romney didn't lose, and if he did lose it's cause you cheated!

So you're listening to Rush this afternoon too?


I just remembered what they said after the VP debate.  It's like a broken record.
 
2012-10-17 12:29:59 PM  

Weaver95:

or something. Limbaugh is more than a bit incoherent today.


Winning on points!! winning on points!!
 
2012-10-17 12:30:52 PM  

Elandriel: Gotta keep the base fired up after all. Gotta try to hold on to those undecideds.

Extremely disappointing that the fate of the country is decided by wishy washy people who can't be bothered to pay attention until the last 5 minutes of the game.


Nah, everyone's talking about undecideds but the REAL race is for each party to get more of their people to their polling places.
 
2012-10-17 12:31:17 PM  

Weaver95: Limbaugh is more than a bit incoherent today.


A bit more accurate, dontcha think?
 
2012-10-17 12:31:29 PM  

Weaver95: Limbaugh is more than a bit incoherent today.


Rush sounds upset. Did somebody change the setting on his Sleep Number(tm) bed? Or maybe he missed a payment on his Quicken Loan?
 
2012-10-17 12:32:08 PM  

Weaver95: Rush is saying that the GOP won, that debates don't matter and that you are stupid if you think Obama beat Romney. Oh, and that debates don't matter, but Romney won and Obama was stuttering and sweating and failure incarnate...not that it mattered because MODERATORS and the lying, so many lies and none of it mattered but if it did matter than Romney won.


What Rush Limbaugh saw:

imageshack.us

What the rest of us saw:

imageshack.us
 
2012-10-17 12:32:14 PM  
FTA: Conservatives were outraged, arguing that Crowley's interruption spoiled a key Romney point.

So, they are mad that Romney didn't get the chance to keep lying? What a bunch of dickwads.
 
2012-10-17 12:34:55 PM  
its looking like the GOP shills groupmind response to Romney getting his ass kicked last night is gonna be something along the lines of 1. blame the moderator 2. Romney won and Obama lost and 3. debates don't matter...but if they DO matter then Romney won.

i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.
 
2012-10-17 12:36:19 PM  

Weaver95: i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.


They've been like that for at least three years, dude.
 
2012-10-17 12:36:48 PM  

Weaver95: its looking like the GOP shills groupmind response to Romney getting his ass kicked last night is gonna be something along the lines of 1. blame the moderator 2. Romney won and Obama lost and 3. debates don't matter...but if they DO matter then Romney won.

i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.


For some reason I keep thinking of a river in Egypt
 
2012-10-17 12:36:52 PM  

Aarontology: Weaver95: i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.

They've been like that for at least three years, dude.


yeah but it's getting worse!
 
2012-10-17 12:40:14 PM  
Republicans sure are whiny.
 
2012-10-17 12:41:38 PM  

Weaver95: yeah but it's getting worse!


They're getting older, more senile, and increasingly willing to drive right through Farmers Markets filled with their perceived enemies.

/I'm listening too. Day off today.
//Can only take a little more of his idiocy.
 
2012-10-17 12:43:09 PM  

WorldCitizen: Republicans sure are whiny.


you have no idea.
 
2012-10-17 12:46:08 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Weaver95: yeah but it's getting worse!

They're getting older, more senile, and increasingly willing to drive right through Farmers Markets filled with their perceived enemies.

/I'm listening too. Day off today.
//Can only take a little more of his idiocy.


Listening too. This is so childish.
 
2012-10-17 12:47:09 PM  

Weaver95: yeah but it's getting worse!


I'm really curious what they'll do when Obama wins re-election and the Democrats hold onto the Senate. Especially if the GOP loses seats in the House.

I'll bet Mitch McTurtle flat out says they're going to block everything and anything that comes through.
 
2012-10-17 12:51:47 PM  

sammyk: NewportBarGuy: Weaver95: yeah but it's getting worse!

They're getting older, more senile, and increasingly willing to drive right through Farmers Markets filled with their perceived enemies.

/I'm listening too. Day off today.
//Can only take a little more of his idiocy.

Listening too. This is so childish.


pay attention to the first hour tho, this is what the GOP shills will be saying for the rest of the week.
 
2012-10-17 12:52:07 PM  

Weaver95: Aarontology: Weaver95: i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.

They've been like that for at least three years, dude.

yeah but it's getting worse!


They're seeing a previously winning strategy start to get holes poked in it. They are desperately hanging on and flailing as madly as they can because they don't have a backup plan in place yet as they hung all their hats on this one. They have been the party of guns, god and gay(bashing) for years now, 30+ years, and they don't have a ground game that is as inclusive as the (D) because they put all their energy in satisfying an increasingly selfish and demanding base.

Yeah they're getting worse, because every single demographic shift is against their party, so they need to do as much damage and instill as much preventative legislation as possible to try and hold on to a way to maintain power in a world that finds them increasingly hostile and out of touch.

In other words, actually being conservative, inasmuch as resisting change that is happening all around them.
 
2012-10-17 12:56:40 PM  
Limbaugh just accused the Candy of 'journalistic terrorism' against Romney. I can't make this shiat up. He's REALLY desperate today.
 
2012-10-17 01:00:07 PM  

Aarontology: I'm really curious what they'll do when Obama wins re-election and the Democrats hold onto the Senate. Especially if the GOP loses seats in the House.


Blame the Moderator?
 
2012-10-17 01:00:39 PM  

Weaver95: Limbaugh just accused the Candy of 'journalistic terrorism' against Romney. I can't make this shiat up. He's REALLY desperate today.


At least Limbaugh didn't wait 14 days to call her a terrorist.
 
2012-10-17 01:04:51 PM  
I'm afraid this is one of those instances where I'll have to side with the conservatards...

Check out the timeline further down in the article. Sure, he mentions "terror" on Sept. 12, but refuses to tie in the Libya incident as a terrorist attack on Sept. 25.

According to the article, anyway.
 
2012-10-17 01:06:37 PM  

James!: Aarontology: I'm really curious what they'll do when Obama wins re-election and the Democrats hold onto the Senate. Especially if the GOP loses seats in the House.

Blame the Moderator?


well yeah, I mean that's what they're doing right now. but the problem is that the GOP is telling itself that Romney is winning, that nothing has gone wrong and that Obama has already lost. what happens when the rank and file find out that they lost? remember - to most of them, they really honestly and truly believe that Romney has already won the race. when cold, hard facts get shoved into their face and they can't ignore them any longer...what then? these are people who've lied to themselves for a long time. they don't handle reality very well.
 
2012-10-17 01:07:47 PM  

give me doughnuts: Well, they do sort of have a point. Since reality has a liberal bias, and Ms. Crowley was attempting to make Romney stick to the truth, she was in effect supporting a left-leaning agenda.


...which she later countered by saying Romney was right "in the main", but later added that he "picked the wrong word."

Romney seems to have that habit of picking the wrong word. :P
 
2012-10-17 01:08:12 PM  
EnviroDude is so precious.

There's two possibilities: Either they think they're a clever troll or they actually are that detached from reality.

Both are just *precious*. It's like watching an 8 year old try to engage in political discussion and wants to be taken seriously.
 
2012-10-17 01:08:23 PM  

Aarontology: Weaver95: i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.

They've been like that for at least three 30 years, dude.


FTFY

When they decided that Reagan's treason was best dealt with by renaming Washington National and trying to get his face on Rushmore it was pretty clear they would never fix their own issues.
 
2012-10-17 01:09:42 PM  
Do those poor Republicans, always being picked on, need the help of the moderator? Can they not pick themselves up and not rely on someone else to do their work and make their case for them?
 
2012-10-17 01:12:51 PM  

Weaver95: sammyk: NewportBarGuy: Weaver95: yeah but it's getting worse!

They're getting older, more senile, and increasingly willing to drive right through Farmers Markets filled with their perceived enemies.

/I'm listening too. Day off today.
//Can only take a little more of his idiocy.

Listening too. This is so childish.

pay attention to the first hour tho, this is what the GOP shills will be saying for the rest of the week.


I wasn't aware the whole "messiah" talking point was still alive and well. Seems like forever since the Fark Independents dropped that crap.
 
2012-10-17 01:13:02 PM  

xanadian: I'm afraid this is one of those instances where I'll have to side with the conservatards...

Check out the timeline further down in the article. Sure, he mentions "terror" on Sept. 12, but refuses to tie in the Libya incident as a terrorist attack on Sept. 25.

According to the article, anyway.


The speech he referenced was absolutely, positively about the incident in question, first off.

Second, the paragraph in question:

"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."

The text very clearly refers the incident in question as an act of terror.

Furthermore, it is becoming increasingly clear that the attack did, indeed, use an existing protest as cover/excuse to begin the operation.

This is what it means to understand something in context.
 
2012-10-17 01:15:12 PM  

Mentat: At least Limbaugh didn't wait 14 days to call her a terrorist.


republicans never wait to call anyone a terrorist.
 
2012-10-17 01:16:39 PM  

WorldCitizen: Do those poor Republicans, always being picked on, need the help of the moderator? Can they not pick themselves up and not rely on someone else to do their work and make their case for them?


its interesting, isn't it? the contradictions are glaringly obvious: the big, strong John Galt types felled by a tiny little moderator just doing her job....and they can't get past it. they lost - they KNOW they lost...but they can't admit it. and if you can't admit you lost, that you failed, then how can you learn and improve? you can't. so they fail again...and again...and again....
 
2012-10-17 01:18:37 PM  

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: xanadian: I'm afraid this is one of those instances where I'll have to side with the conservatards...

Check out the timeline further down in the article. Sure, he mentions "terror" on Sept. 12, but refuses to tie in the Libya incident as a terrorist attack on Sept. 25.

According to the article, anyway.

The speech he referenced was absolutely, positively about the incident in question, first off.

Second, the paragraph in question:

"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."

The text very clearly refers the incident in question as an act of terror.

Furthermore, it is becoming increasingly clear that the attack did, indeed, use an existing protest as cover/excuse to begin the operation.

This is what it means to understand something in context.


So why the hell did Crowley backtrack!? She's just making things worse, and now the conservatives have something ELSE to use. Her own goddamn admission! :/
 
2012-10-17 01:21:38 PM  

xanadian: So why the hell did Crowley backtrack!? She's just making things worse, and now the conservatives have something ELSE to use. Her own goddamn admission! :/


I don't know the answer to that. I did, however, notice that she was quite concerned with how she appeared in the context as a moderator, instead of being mostly concerned with making sure the debate was informative. I think she was conflicted about her role.

But you'd have to ask her.
 
2012-10-17 01:23:19 PM  

xanadian: I'm afraid this is one of those instances where I'll have to side with the conservatards...

Check out the timeline further down in the article. Sure, he mentions "terror" on Sept. 12, but refuses to tie in the Libya incident as a terrorist attack on Sept. 25.

According to the article, anyway.


This has been a winning strategy for the GOP. I have to hand it to them. Romney comes off looking like a complete asshole, politicizing the Libya ambassador killing, and they turn it around into a "Obama got the ambassador killed so you see, Romney politicizing it wasn't that bad after all" thing.

Kudos, GOP. Kudos.
 
2012-10-17 01:26:37 PM  

Weaver95: Rush is saying that the GOP won, that debates don't matter and that you are stupid if you think Obama beat Romney. Oh, and that debates don't matter, but Romney won and Obama was stuttering and sweating and failure incarnate...not that it mattered because MODERATORS and the lying, so many lies and none of it mattered but if it did matter than Romney won.


I liked the part when he implied Fox News was part of a media conspiracy to make Romney look bad. Then he started saying the problem was that people were comparing Obama to Romney, when what they should have been doing was comparing Obama to Obama's performance in 2008, and since he wasn't as good last night as he was in 2008, that means Romney won.
 
2012-10-17 01:27:40 PM  

Lando Lincoln:

This has been a winning strategy for the GOP. I have to hand it to them. Romney comes off looking like a complete asshole, politicizing the Libya ambassador killing, and they turn it around into a "Obama got the ambassador killed so you see, Romney politicizing it wasn't that bad after all" thing.

Kudos, GOP. Kudos.


Romney did NOT like being called out by Obama on that score. He was generally pissed off for the majority of the debate but getting a lecture from the President about where the lines are drawn did NOT go over well with Romney at all.
 
2012-10-17 01:29:49 PM  

ShawnDoc: Weaver95: Rush is saying that the GOP won, that debates don't matter and that you are stupid if you think Obama beat Romney. Oh, and that debates don't matter, but Romney won and Obama was stuttering and sweating and failure incarnate...not that it mattered because MODERATORS and the lying, so many lies and none of it mattered but if it did matter than Romney won.

I liked the part when he implied Fox News was part of a media conspiracy to make Romney look bad. Then he started saying the problem was that people were comparing Obama to Romney, when what they should have been doing was comparing Obama to Obama's performance in 2008, and since he wasn't as good last night as he was in 2008, that means Romney won.


Did you catch Limbaugh calling Crowley a 'journalistic terrorist'? Rush is really off his game these days.
 
2012-10-17 01:31:12 PM  
Because after the initial bit, they hemmed and hawed for the next few weeks, without firmly declaring their findings or actual position on the incident. She took Romney to task on the actual lie, but confirmed the waffling of the administration. She gave them bullets for their guns, but at the same time handed Obama a grenade.
 
2012-10-17 01:31:55 PM  

Weaver95: Lando Lincoln:

This has been a winning strategy for the GOP. I have to hand it to them. Romney comes off looking like a complete asshole, politicizing the Libya ambassador killing, and they turn it around into a "Obama got the ambassador killed so you see, Romney politicizing it wasn't that bad after all" thing.

Kudos, GOP. Kudos.

Romney did NOT like being called out by Obama on that score. He was generally pissed off for the majority of the debate but getting a lecture from the President about where the lines are drawn did NOT go over well with Romney at all.


The way I see what happened:

Sept 12: Obama did, essentially, all but stop short of calling the Libya attack "terrorism." He sure didn't say it wasn't.
...TIME PASSES...
Sept 25: Obama essentially said, "the jury's still out."

I kind of wonder if Obama kinda-sorta backtracked on September 25. There's nothing wrong with saying you don't know all the facts yet. Because we didn't.

And this makes more sense, considering Obama's reaction at the debate, because Obama probably HAD meant that he thought the attack was terrorist in nature, but had to reel it back in a bit so he didn't come off as presumptuous.

At least, that's what I see.
 
2012-10-17 01:32:59 PM  

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: The speech he referenced was absolutely, positively about the incident in question, first off.

Second, the paragraph in question:

"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."

The text very clearly refers the incident in question as an act of terror.


Yeah, but INVISIBLE OBAMA said the following:

"No acts of terror - not that THIS incident was an act of terror, I'm just mentioning it today because this incident reminded me of actual acts of terror, that's all - will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for."
 
2012-10-17 01:33:12 PM  
Conservatives were outraged
 
2012-10-17 01:33:53 PM  

Weaver95: Did you catch Limbaugh calling Crowley a 'journalistic terrorist'? Rush is really off his game these days.


Nah, missed that part. I don't listen to him other than on the drive in to work these days, and even then I often skip it.

Ever since he failed to stop McCain getting the 2008 nomination, Rush hasn't been anywhere near as fun to listen to as he used to be. That, plus losing ratings/advertising to guys like Hannity and Beck has caused Rush to get more extreme. I prefer to old partisan Rush who was having fun at his job, not the new paranoid schizophrenic Rush who always seems to be on the verge of having a heart attack on air.
 
2012-10-17 01:34:07 PM  
I can't believe that there's people who think EnviroDude is serious.
 
2012-10-17 01:34:10 PM  
Why? For politely interrupting Rmoney every time he went more than 100% past his time limit?
 
2012-10-17 01:34:11 PM  

Elandriel: Because after the initial bit, they hemmed and hawed for the next few weeks, without firmly declaring their findings or actual position on the incident. She took Romney to task on the actual lie, but confirmed the waffling of the administration. She gave them bullets for their guns, but at the same time handed Obama a grenade.


Yeah, that. But I don't think it was "waffling." I still think Obama reeled it back a bit. He probably didn't want to come off as being 'OMG TURRIST!' without knowing all the facts first.
 
2012-10-17 01:34:34 PM  
fark you guys! We're having a ladder and a glass of orange juice moderate the 3rd debate. Will that shut you assholes up?

/probably not
 
2012-10-17 01:34:36 PM  
There are two things that are definitely true:

1. The set of people who won a debate and the set of people whining about the moderator is a null set.

2. The set of people who say "well it was a tie" and the set of people who did not lose a debate is a null set.
 
2012-10-17 01:35:27 PM  

EnviroDude: Even the NFL had the decency to pull the replacement ref that was a Saints fan from officiating the Saints game. To expect as much courtesy in our debates, well, that is asking tooo much.

When you best hope of a win is to tag team with the moderator, then you really don't have much to run on;


Obviously. Only if you assume that acts of terror = terrorism.
 
2012-10-17 01:35:34 PM  

lilbjorn: Why? For politely interrupting Rmoney every time he went more than 100% past his time limit?


Or correcting him when his statement did not jive with reality?
 
2012-10-17 01:35:36 PM  

kronicfeld: EnviroDude: Even the NFL had the decency to pull the replacement ref that was a Saints fan from officiating the Saints game. To expect as much courtesy in our debates, well, that is asking tooo much.

When you best hope of a win is to tag team with the moderator, then you really don't have much to run on;

Get a new line.

http://www.fark.com/comments/7378391/79971963#c79971963

EnviroDude [TotalFark] 2012-10-12 12:46:33 PM

oldfarthenry: Poor Ryan. He spent hours in the gym doing all those crunchies & reps only to get slapped into submission by Biden's liver-spotted dick.

Considering that Martha Radzattz and Biden double teamed him, Ryan didn't do bad. I suppose if he had told Biden to STFU, then the left would have had puppies for him dissing the VP. Radzattz should have controlled the debate, but as she is in titz deep in the Obama campaign, you wouldn't expect anything less.

As I was told in High School by my coach, "When you are biatchin' about the refs or how the other teams acts, well, you're usually getting your arse kicked." Of course, even the NFL had the courtesy to remove the pro-Saints replacement ref from the Saints game he was scheduled to officiate. Guess having an insider to double team is fair if you are Obama and losing a campaign you were winning two weeks ago.


Well, the Saints *do* suck...
 
2012-10-17 01:36:14 PM  

fruitloop: fark you guys! We're having a ladder and a glass of orange juice moderate the 3rd debate. Will that shut you assholes up?

/probably not


The orange juice was made from California oranges. LIBERAL California oranges.
 
2012-10-17 01:37:00 PM  
Yeah. Complaining about the moderator means you know you lost. Suck it up.
 
2012-10-17 01:37:19 PM  
If Republicans want to turn the national debate towards a war of semantics on an issue where independents overwhelmingly support our President, and their candidate looks like he's using the death of an American to score political points. I can get behind that.

Aside from that, I don't even know what their underlying point is on Benghazi. Is it that the President "apolugized fuhr Murica"? No one outside of their echo chamber believes that nonsense. Is it that the President should have prevented the attack on Benghazi? I was previously told that no President could ever foresee, much less prevent, acts of terrorism, even acts of terrorism in which you receive memos explicitly warning you of said attacks of terrorism. Besides, you do know that you're own Vice Presidential Candidate voted to slash the budget that provides defense and protection of diplomats overseas right?
 
2012-10-17 01:37:24 PM  
I think part of what I find so fascinating about the GOP these days is their absolute belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. there is zero doubt among any of them. the Democrats watched the first debate and most of them admitted that hey, Romney came out ahead. the GOP tho - Romney got his ass kicked last night and today ALL the Republicans are saying Romney won. they can't admit their guy did poorly.

that's amazing to watch...the almost fanatical religious belief in their own cause. scary sometimes too but still fascinating.
 
2012-10-17 01:37:32 PM  

Weaver95: ShawnDoc: Weaver95: Rush is saying that the GOP won, that debates don't matter and that you are stupid if you think Obama beat Romney. Oh, and that debates don't matter, but Romney won and Obama was stuttering and sweating and failure incarnate...not that it mattered because MODERATORS and the lying, so many lies and none of it mattered but if it did matter than Romney won.

I liked the part when he implied Fox News was part of a media conspiracy to make Romney look bad. Then he started saying the problem was that people were comparing Obama to Romney, when what they should have been doing was comparing Obama to Obama's performance in 2008, and since he wasn't as good last night as he was in 2008, that means Romney won.

Did you catch Limbaugh calling Crowley a 'journalistic terrorist'? Rush is really off his game these days.


Rush might be worried that he's about to get Bained
 
2012-10-17 01:38:31 PM  

Weaver95: i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.


So alcoholics then.
 
2012-10-17 01:40:17 PM  

Weaver95: Limbaugh just accused the Candy of 'journalistic terrorism' against Romney. I can't make this shiat up. He's REALLY desperate today.


wait a minute...
was it "an act of journalistic terror" or "an act of journalistic terrorism"? because apparently there is a difference.
 
2012-10-17 01:41:26 PM  

EnviroDude: Because the UN ambassador never said the video was responsible

/ Obama never attributed it as being terrorist attack

//unless acts of terror = terrorism


Nothing can make you look as stupid as yourself.
 
2012-10-17 01:41:45 PM  

xanadian: The orange juice was made from California oranges. LIBERAL California oranges.


No, orange juice comes from Florida. Where that black kid was shot. So the moderator is a racist.
 
2012-10-17 01:41:53 PM  
I decided to turn to Fox News after the debate and see what they were saying.

They started by saying it was a split. In Fox terms that means Obama won.

Then they went to a group of undecided voters and asked them who they think won. Romney of course was the answer. 90% of these people were over 60, and all were white.

Then Hannity said something like "when we return we'll discuss these two things that the President lied about".

All that in the two minutes I turned to Fox News. It amazes me that people think of them as a trusted news source.
 
2012-10-17 01:42:03 PM  

EnviroDude: Even the NFL had the decency to pull the replacement ref that was a Saints fan from officiating the Saints game. To expect as much courtesy in our debates, well, that is asking tooo much.

When you best hope of a win is to tag team with the moderator, then you really don't have much to run on;


Yeah, the way she corrected a bald-faced lie from one party with those damned liberal leaning objective facts was REALLY flagrant.
 
2012-10-17 01:42:27 PM  
She would have let it go (like every other falsehood or truthy point made that night) if Romney hadn't tried to challenge Obama on it. She was merely trying to facilitate the debate and not let two minutes get wasted on arguing over an easily verifiable fact.

It's Romney's fault. He doubled down and is now biatching that the dealer outdrew him on his two seventeens.
 
2012-10-17 01:42:55 PM  

Aarontology: Weaver95: i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.

They've been like that for at least three thirty years, dude.


FTFY
 
2012-10-17 01:43:55 PM  

Gilligann: I decided to turn to Fox News after the debate and see what they were saying.

They started by saying it was a split. In Fox terms that means Obama won.

Then they went to a group of undecided voters and asked them who they think won. Romney of course was the answer. 90% of these people were over 60, and all were white.

Then Hannity said something like "when we return we'll discuss these two things that the President lied about".

All that in the two minutes I turned to Fox News. It amazes me that people think of them as a trusted news source.


Ideological people "trust" them as their echo chamber news source.
 
2012-10-17 01:44:04 PM  

Aarontology: Weaver95: yeah but it's getting worse!

I'm really curious what they'll do when Obama wins re-election and the Democrats hold onto the Senate. Especially if the GOP loses seats in the House.

I'll bet Mitch McTurtle flat out says they're going to block everything and anything that comes through.


That's been their policy already, why would they change it?
 
2012-10-17 01:45:15 PM  

That article sure is a lot of

ih2.redbubble.net
 
2012-10-17 01:45:49 PM  
I think her interjection into the debate was inappropriate. But what is done cannot be undone. Beautiful.
 
2012-10-17 01:46:15 PM  

wooden_badger: Rush might be worried that he's about to get Bained

pfffffffffchchchchchchch...


Poor Rush.

NOT
 
2012-10-17 01:46:28 PM  
If rMoney lost why is he up in the Gallup poll even high than before the debate?

Link
 
2012-10-17 01:46:42 PM  
The tragedy is that Candy did a really good job and will never be allowed to moderate another debate. She covered a lot of issues, got the candidates actually debating with each other rather than spouting talking points to the TV, and wouldn't allow them to pivot. And on top of that, she had to work with the town hall style where it's easiest for candidates to pivot. Even conservative commentator George Will called the debate the best in history.
 
2012-10-17 01:47:15 PM  

EnviroDude: Even the NFL had the decency to pull the replacement ref that was a Saints fan from officiating the Saints game. To expect as much courtesy in our debates, well, that is asking tooo much.

When you best hope of a win is to tag team with the moderator, then you really don't have much to run on;


Especially with the audience clapping, right?!
 
2012-10-17 01:47:20 PM  

Weaver95: I think part of what I find so fascinating about the GOP these days is their absolute belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. there is zero doubt among any of them. the Democrats watched the first debate and most of them admitted that hey, Romney came out ahead. the GOP tho - Romney got his ass kicked last night and today ALL the Republicans are saying Romney won. they can't admit their guy did poorly.

that's amazing to watch...the almost fanatical religious belief in their own cause. scary sometimes too but still fascinating.


http://www.peirce.org/writings/p107.html

In judging this method of fixing belief, which may be called the method of authority, we must, in the first place, allow its immeasurable mental and moral superiority to the method of tenacity. Its success is proportionately greater; and, in fact, it has over and over again worked the most majestic results. The mere structures of stone which it has caused to be put together -- in Siam, for example, in Egypt, and in Europe -- have many of them a sublimity hardly more than rivaled by the greatest works of Nature. And, except the geological epochs, there are no periods of time so vast as those which are measured by some of these organized faiths. If we scrutinize the matter closely, we shall find that there has not been one of their creeds which has remained always the same; yet the change is so slow as to be imperceptible during one person's life, so that individual belief remains sensibly fixed. For the mass of mankind, then, there is perhaps no better method than this. If it is their highest impulse to be intellectual slaves, then slaves they ought to remain.
 
2012-10-17 01:47:26 PM  
Fox looks tired.
 
2012-10-17 01:47:54 PM  
Fox News can't figure out why a journalist would have problems allowing lies to be told as the truth.
 
2012-10-17 01:48:02 PM  

wooden_badger: Weaver95: ShawnDoc: Weaver95: Rush is saying that the GOP won, that debates don't matter and that you are stupid if you think Obama beat Romney. Oh, and that debates don't matter, but Romney won and Obama was stuttering and sweating and failure incarnate...not that it mattered because MODERATORS and the lying, so many lies and none of it mattered but if it did matter than Romney won.

I liked the part when he implied Fox News was part of a media conspiracy to make Romney look bad. Then he started saying the problem was that people were comparing Obama to Romney, when what they should have been doing was comparing Obama to Obama's performance in 2008, and since he wasn't as good last night as he was in 2008, that means Romney won.

Did you catch Limbaugh calling Crowley a 'journalistic terrorist'? Rush is really off his game these days.

Rush might be worried that he's about to get Bained


now that was an interesting read. thanks for pointing it out!
 
2012-10-17 01:48:44 PM  

Weaver95: Limbaugh just accused the Candy of 'journalistic terrorism' against Romney. I can't make this shiat up. He's REALLY desperate today.


Words have goddamn meanings.

// not even convinced that Benghazi WAS a terrorist attack in the traditional definition
// if a CIA station was there, it was a legitimate target by a technical definition of military target
 
2012-10-17 01:48:51 PM  

Weaver95: I think part of what I find so fascinating about the GOP these days is their absolute belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong


OMG. You just broke the record for interwebz projection.
 
2012-10-17 01:49:24 PM  
cdn2.mamapop.com

"I'm just going to leave this here for all you libcontards."
 
2012-10-17 01:49:26 PM  

Weaver95: catching the Limbaugh hour right now (@weaverXP if you want to join me)


Thanks Weav. Didn't realize you did more than just give us the occasional summary here on Fark.
 
2012-10-17 01:49:37 PM  

Weaver95: its looking like the GOP shills groupmind response to Romney getting his ass kicked last night is gonna be something along the lines of 1. blame the moderator 2. Romney won and Obama lost and 3. debates don't matter...but if they DO matter then Romney won.

i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.


Sniveling insipid butthurt. Got it.

Is anyone really surprised with this?
 
2012-10-17 01:50:10 PM  

Gilligann: Then they went to a group of undecided voters and asked them who they think won. Romney of course was the answer. 90% of these people were over 60, and all were white.


I watched that too. Loved the fawning for 'job creators'. And the last guy that spoke...in the baseball hat....let's just say I'd be very curious to find out what that Fark Independent does for a living.
 
2012-10-17 01:50:38 PM  
Sounds like someone has their magic underwear all in a bunch....

If the Right could admit at least once that they were wrong/lost/said the wrong thing I might have a little respect for them
 
2012-10-17 01:50:50 PM  

THX 1138: Weaver95: catching the Limbaugh hour right now (@weaverXP if you want to join me)

Thanks Weav. Didn't realize you did more than just give us the occasional summary here on Fark.


one nice thing about technology is that I have so MANY ways to be opinionated!
 
2012-10-17 01:50:52 PM  

Smeggy Smurf: If rMoney lost why is he up in the Gallup poll even high than before the debate?

Link


Could it be because the poll was conducted before the debate? Pro tip: If a poll is released after an event but the interviews were all conducted before the event, that poll actually reflects the reality before the event, not after.
 
2012-10-17 01:50:56 PM  

riverwalk barfly: I think her interjection into the debate was inappropriate. But what is done cannot be undone. Beautiful.


it was inappropriate to call out bullshiat?
i wish the moderators would do it more often. hell, they should have a buzzer and when a candidate is talking out of his ass like
i.ytimg.com
BZZZZZZZZZZZZ
sorry sir, but you are full of shiat, talking out of your ass, and have now lost the floor. please sit down so that your butt cannot produce any more sounds.
 
2012-10-17 01:51:12 PM  

Aarontology: Weaver95: yeah but it's getting worse!

I'm really curious what they'll do when Obama wins re-election and the Democrats hold onto the Senate. Especially if the GOP loses seats in the House.

I'll bet Mitch McTurtle flat out says they're going to block everything and anything that comes through.


Would that be such a bad thing, though? If nothing gets done, taxes go up and spending - largely defense - gets cut.
 
2012-10-17 01:51:14 PM  
"Tingler-in-Chief Chris Matthews"

WTF does that mean?
 
kab
2012-10-17 01:51:28 PM  

Dr. DJ Duckhunt: Fox looks tired.


They're betting on the whole "if we just keep repeating it enough, it will stick" angle with this.
 
2012-10-17 01:51:34 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Losers whine about the moderators


While winners whine about magic handkerchiefs.
 
2012-10-17 01:52:14 PM  

ShawnDoc: Weaver95: Rush is saying that the GOP won, that debates don't matter and that you are stupid if you think Obama beat Romney. Oh, and that debates don't matter, but Romney won and Obama was stuttering and sweating and failure incarnate...not that it mattered because MODERATORS and the lying, so many lies and none of it mattered but if it did matter than Romney won.

I liked the part when he implied Fox News was part of a media conspiracy to make Romney look bad. Then he started saying the problem was that people were comparing Obama to Romney, when what they should have been doing was comparing Obama to Obama's performance in 2008, and since he wasn't as good last night as he was in 2008, that means Romney won.


Sweet. By that logic I can beat Michael Phelps in the 200m fly. Hey, he did better when he broke his own world record in 2009 than he did smoking the shiat outta me just now. So I win!!!
 
2012-10-17 01:52:16 PM  
Romney is incredibly thin skinned. I can't imagine him going head-to-head with an adversarial head of state. He's never had anyone stand up to him his entire life as Obama did last night. It's totally threw him off his game. Closest he's ever gotten to somebody that looks like Obama is the guy that shines his shoes. He can't fathom why he can't win against Obama, it's beyond his belief system.
 
2012-10-17 01:52:35 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Weaver95: yeah but it's getting worse!

They're getting older, more senile, and increasingly willing to drive right through Farmers Markets filled with their perceived enemies.

/I'm listening too. Day off today.
//Can only take a little more of his idiocy.


Great metaphor. I'm stealing it.
 
2012-10-17 01:52:44 PM  

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: EnviroDude is so precious.

There's two possibilities: Either they think they're a clever troll or they actually are that detached from reality.

Both are just *precious*. It's like watching an 8 year old try to engage in political discussion and wants to be taken seriously.


Pretty much.
 
2012-10-17 01:53:10 PM  
Conservatives were outraged, arguing that Crowley's interruption spoiled a key Romney point. misstatement.

FTFFox
 
2012-10-17 01:53:38 PM  

TwoHead: trying to get his face on Rushmore


WTF, really? I've never heard this before, and I lived in Rapid City for three years. (Put another way, I had a view of Mount Rushmore on 9/11.)

Assuming it's true, that's hilarious/sad.
 
2012-10-17 01:53:52 PM  

Snarky Acronym: Romney is incredibly thin skinned. I can't imagine him going head-to-head with an adversarial head of state. He's never had anyone stand up to him his entire life as Obama did last night. It's totally threw him off his game. Closest he's ever gotten to somebody that looks like Obama is the guy that shines his shoes. He can't fathom why he can't win against Obama, it's beyond his belief system.


yeah, I noticed a lot of people making similar observations. Romney did NOT like being talked back too, and looked like he was barely containing his petulant rage.
 
2012-10-17 01:54:22 PM  

Hollie Maea: There are two things that are definitely true:

1. The set of people who won a debate and the set of people whining about the moderator is a null set.

2. The set of people who say "well it was a tie" and the set of people who did not lose a debate is a null set.



3. Romney is a dickbag that always has to get the last word.
 
2012-10-17 01:56:18 PM  

Weaver95: I think part of what I find so fascinating about the GOP these days is their absolute belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. there is zero doubt among any of them. the Democrats watched the first debate and most of them admitted that hey, Romney came out ahead. the GOP tho - Romney got his ass kicked last night and today ALL the Republicans are saying Romney won. they can't admit their guy did poorly.

that's amazing to watch...the almost fanatical religious belief in their own cause. scary sometimes too but still fascinating.


Which will make Obama (hopefully) winning next month all the more satisfying. The biatching and moaning will be delicious.
 
2012-10-17 01:56:31 PM  

Larry Mahnken: I can't believe that there's people who think EnviroDude is serious.


He's not as good at it as Pocket Ninja, what can I say?

/Poe's Law
//and he's using actual talking points
 
2012-10-17 01:56:34 PM  

Mentat: Weaver95: Rush is saying that the GOP won, that debates don't matter and that you are stupid if you think Obama beat Romney. Oh, and that debates don't matter, but Romney won and Obama was stuttering and sweating and failure incarnate...not that it mattered because MODERATORS and the lying, so many lies and none of it mattered but if it did matter than Romney won.

What Rush Limbaugh saw:

[imageshack.us image 400x276]

What the rest of us saw:

[imageshack.us image 500x412]


Speaking of Newt, am I the only person who noticed that Obama stole Romney's line from the primaries? When Newt was going on about the moon bases, Romney said "If an executive came to me with a plan to build a trillion dollar moon base with no idea on how it was going to be funded, I would have that man fired." Obama said basically the same exact line about Romney's tax plan when he was going over how many trillions it would cost
 
2012-10-17 01:56:34 PM  

Weaver95: yeah, I noticed a lot of people making similar observations. Romney did NOT like being talked back too, and looked like he was barely containing his petulant rage.


ANSWER THE QUESTION

Well, I-

ANSWER THE QUESTION

The answer i-

ANSWER THE QUESTION

Can I get a wo-

ANSWER THE QUESTION
 
2012-10-17 01:56:40 PM  
Oh, cry moar you petulant children.
 
2012-10-17 01:56:50 PM  
GOP Goes Full Mcenroe. Romney nearly got laughed out of the room last night for being a disinformation dispenser, and rightly so.
 
2012-10-17 01:56:56 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Hollie Maea: There are two things that are definitely true:

1. The set of people who won a debate and the set of people whining about the moderator is a null set.

2. The set of people who say "well it was a tie" and the set of people who did not lose a debate is a null set.

3. Romney is a dickbag that always has to get the last word.


Bzzt. Sorry, your assertions must be phrased in terms of set theory.
 
2012-10-17 01:57:01 PM  

Larry Mahnken: I can't believe that there's people who think EnviroDude is serious.


He's serious. We shouldn't take him seriously, but he's serious.
 
2012-10-17 01:57:08 PM  

indylaw: Weaver95: i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.

So alcoholics then.


Hey, don't lump me in with these bozos!
 
2012-10-17 01:57:25 PM  

xanadian: I'm afraid this is one of those instances where I'll have to side with the conservatards...

Check out the timeline further down in the article. Sure, he mentions "terror" on Sept. 12, but refuses to tie in the Libya incident as a terrorist attack on Sept. 25.

According to the article, anyway.


So you think he just said "terror" for the hell of it on the 12th, then?
 
2012-10-17 01:57:25 PM  
Why haven't I seen as much anti-moderator outrage at Crowley for suggesting that Mitt Romney might have to alter his plan if it turns out that the numbers don't work.

Sure the Washington Post shows that even setting the cap to the lowest mark he's suggested ($17,000) would only cover less than a quarter of the cost of his tax cuts, but Romney swears he's done the math on whatever the number the cap will turn out to be and it will be revenue neutral. I mean, it's not like their role model of a perfect president passed a tax cut that was too severe and had to spend several years tweaking it to try to cover the revenue losses. Surely the fact that he knows it will work is all the proof you will ever need.

MittRomney-WalterWhite-because-I-say-so.jpg
 
2012-10-17 01:58:00 PM  

CPennypacker: Yeah. Complaining about the moderator means you know you lost. Suck it up.


Lehrer did genuinely suck, though.
 
2012-10-17 01:58:20 PM  
FTA: "In the baseball playoffs, many fans believe the tie goes to the runner."

What they believe is irrelevant. The MLB rulebook states that the runner must beat the ball to the base, and that is how umpires are expected to judge.

If the arbitrator appears to be siding with the other guy against your guy, it might just be because the other guy is objectively correct and yours isn't.
 
2012-10-17 01:58:23 PM  
I think Romney is in a bit of trouble in regards to the final debate. The only topic that snap poll responders scored him good on last night was the economy (apparently undecided voters like platitudes...who knew?). But the final debate will only be on foreign policy topics, so Mitt will be hard pressed to spend the whole time bleating about the economy. He's at a decided disadvantage when it comes to foreign policy; the only foreign policy topic for which some considered him to have an advantage was Libya, and he shat the bed with that one last night.

Conservative commentators are already howling about how much it sucks for the final debate to be on foreign policy.
 
2012-10-17 01:59:09 PM  

HeartBurnKid: CPennypacker: Yeah. Complaining about the moderator means you know you lost. Suck it up.

Lehrer did genuinely suck, though.


But somehow the liberal pundits still admitted Obama lost

Hell Chris Matthews almost had a meltdown on live television.
 
2012-10-17 01:59:23 PM  

Weaver95: Romney did NOT like being talked back too, and looked like he was barely containing his petulant rage.


Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs.

Reminded me of my first portable cd player. It too tended to repeat the same line over
and over
and over
when it was breaking down.
 
2012-10-17 01:59:32 PM  

Lando Lincoln: 3. Romney is a dickbag that always has to get the last word.


That's what made it so awesome to see Obama drop the 47% bomb in the only possible way that would guarantee that Romney could not respond.
 
2012-10-17 02:00:26 PM  
I find the whole issue stupid.  As a country we historically tend to make REALLY stupid policy decisions when the first reaction is to play the blame game before getting all the facts.
 
2012-10-17 02:00:52 PM  

James!: If you're complaining about the moderator...


She gave Obama a three minute speaking advantage (which he still biatched about) and interrupted Romney something like 20 more times than she did Obama. Not to mention some obviously planted questions.

Yeah, no bias there.

Despite all of that, polls show that Obama didn't win by all that much and Romney cleaned his clock on the most important subject (the economy). Even with the deck stacked in O's favor he still couldn't pull out the sort of momentum swinging victory he needed.
 
2012-10-17 02:01:15 PM  
Romney has now critically blown every foreign policy moment in this campaign. He insulted the British on their own territory, he jumped up and down with glee on the bodies of four dead Americans, and he can't even get his most basic facts right in his trumped up attacks on the administration.

It's pretty clear: this man is not fit to handle foreign policy. He might even be worse at it than Bush.
 
2012-10-17 02:01:55 PM  
The terrorist attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and four others in Benghazi has become a sore point for Obama
 
2012-10-17 02:01:58 PM  

Hollie Maea: I think Romney is in a bit of trouble in regards to the final debate. The only topic that snap poll responders scored him good on last night was the economy (apparently undecided voters like platitudes...who knew?). But the final debate will only be on foreign policy topics, so Mitt will be hard pressed to spend the whole time bleating about the economy. He's at a decided disadvantage when it comes to foreign policy; the only foreign policy topic for which some considered him to have an advantage was Libya, and he shat the bed with that one last night.

Conservative commentators are already howling about how much it sucks for the final debate to be on foreign policy.


WE NEED TO START A LANDWAR IN EAST ASIA.
 
2012-10-17 02:02:09 PM  
Here are 1000 words about how the night went for Romney/Republicans.

i1159.photobucket.com

Spin away, but Romney just showed everyone what an easily perturbed asshole he is. We'd be invading Iran 5 minutes into his presidency. And that's only if he has to eat a sandwich first or something. Loose Cannon.
 
2012-10-17 02:02:11 PM  

Fuggin Bizzy: Lando Lincoln: Hollie Maea: There are two things that are definitely true:

1. The set of people who won a debate and the set of people whining about the moderator is a null set.

2. The set of people who say "well it was a tie" and the set of people who did not lose a debate is a null set.

3. Romney is a dickbag that always has to get the last word.

Bzzt. Sorry, your assertions must be phrased in terms of set theory.


Okay, fine.

3. The set of candidates named Mitt Romney and the set of candidates whose egos will allow them to not get the last word in a debate topic is a null set.
 
2012-10-17 02:02:20 PM  

tomcatadam: Weaver95: Romney did NOT like being talked back too, and looked like he was barely containing his petulant rage.

Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs.

Reminded me of my first portable cd player. It too tended to repeat the same line over
and over
and over
when it was breaking down.


I caught that. it was strange to see Romney go off like that. I think he was really starting to lose it by that point in the debate.
 
2012-10-17 02:02:35 PM  

Weaver95: Snarky Acronym: Romney is incredibly thin skinned. I can't imagine him going head-to-head with an adversarial head of state. He's never had anyone stand up to him his entire life as Obama did last night. It's totally threw him off his game. Closest he's ever gotten to somebody that looks like Obama is the guy that shines his shoes. He can't fathom why he can't win against Obama, it's beyond his belief system.

yeah, I noticed a lot of people making similar observations. Romney did NOT like being talked back too, and looked like he was barely containing his petulant rage.


Another thing I noticed was that Obama was really laser sharp. He didn't stammer and hmm and uh a lot like he has in the past when he's had to think on his feet. It was remarkable turn around.
 
2012-10-17 02:02:47 PM  

Aarontology: I'll bet Mitch McTurtle flat out says they're going to block everything and anything that comes through.


"The Republican party's singular focus is to make Obama a one-term president. Two terms at most. No more than that! The Republican party will not allow Barack Obama to rewrite the Constitution and serve a third or fourth term."
 
2012-10-17 02:02:51 PM  

tomcatadam: Weaver95: Romney did NOT like being talked back too, and looked like he was barely containing his petulant rage.

Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs.

Reminded me of my first portable cd player. It too tended to repeat the same line over
and over
and over
when it was breaking down.


now vote for me so i have have a job in the government and use the government to create 12 million jobs.
christ, what an asshole.
 
2012-10-17 02:02:53 PM  
I'll take any opportunity to post the last words of the debate. I'm so happy that Romney won the coin toss, guaranteeing that Obama would end the night.


I believe Governor Romney is a good man. Loves his family, cares about his faith. But I also believe that when he said behind closed doors that 47 percent of the country considered themselves victims who refuse personal responsibility, think about who he was talking about.

Folks on Social Security who've worked all their lives. Veterans who've sacrificed for this country. Students who are out there trying to hopefully advance their own dreams, but also this country's dreams. Soldiers who are overseas fighting for us right now. People who are working hard every day, paying payroll tax, gas taxes, but don't make enough income.

And I want to fight for them. That's what I've been doing for the last four years. Because if they succeed, I believe the country succeeds.

When my grandfather fought in World War II and he came back and he got a G.I. Bill and that allowed him to go to college, that wasn't a handout. That was something that advanced the entire country. And I want to make sure that the next generation has those same opportunities.
That's why I'm asking for your vote and that's why I'm asking for another four years.


The only way that could have been better would be if Obama had dropped his mic when he was done.
 
2012-10-17 02:03:01 PM  

dameron: Awww. She didn't let Romney lie to the camera with a big smile on his face. Boo farking hoo.

But that's not where Obama won the Benghazi point. He won that when he savaged Romney for making political hay over the attack. He seemed empathic and imminently presidential during that part and rightly painted Romney as the opportunistic douchebag he clear is.


Do liberals honestly not believe it was a political calculation to blame a movie without any facts to assert that proposition? Holy shiat what a dumb stance to take.
 
2012-10-17 02:03:50 PM  

Hollie Maea: I think Romney is in a bit of trouble in regards to the final debate. The only topic that snap poll responders scored him good on last night was the economy (apparently undecided voters like platitudes...who knew?). But the final debate will only be on foreign policy topics, so Mitt will be hard pressed to spend the whole time bleating about the economy. He's at a decided disadvantage when it comes to foreign policy; the only foreign policy topic for which some considered him to have an advantage was Libya, and he shat the bed with that one last night.

Conservative commentators are already howling about how much it sucks for the final debate to be on foreign policy.


Actually now Romney gets to revisit the Libya situation again and this time he has quotes from Anderson Cooper, Politico, and even Crowley that back up his statement on the situation. Obama talked about how bad it was for Romney to try and score political points over the attack all while Obama was trying to paint a narrative that made him look blameless before the election.
 
2012-10-17 02:03:51 PM  

culebra: Here are 1000 words about how the night went for Romney/Republicans.

[i1159.photobucket.com image 850x471]

Spin away, but Romney just showed everyone what an easily perturbed asshole he is. We'd be invading Iran 5 minutes into his presidency. And that's only if he has to eat a sandwich first or something. Loose Cannon.


Are they slow-jamming the news in that picture?
 
2012-10-17 02:03:53 PM  
To me, the point is most illustrated by this:

Question to Obama (paraphrased): Are you responsible/to blame for Ambassador Stephens' death?

Obama (paraphrased): Yes, the buck stops with me. I'm ultimately accountable. I'm responsible.

General public reaction to debate: Obama won.

GOP: *fingers in ears* LALALALALALLALALALALALA can't hear you over our victory celebration 'cause Mitt pwned so fantastically. We won! We won! Wargggghhhaaaaarrrrbbbllllll

So, basically:
Obama: I own that failure.
GOP: We still refuse to acknowledge failure or even the remote possibility.
 
2012-10-17 02:03:53 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Yep. Candy Crowley forced Romney to be uninformed about POTUS's comments in the Rose Garden. She also forced him to lie about seeking out women to put on his staff (heh heh, heh heh.)

Truly, she is history's greatest monster.


Crowley stated after Romney was right, but poorly worded. Please step out of your echo chamber.
 
2012-10-17 02:04:05 PM  
Great Republicans cry and be butthurt more. That just makes it more obvious you lost.
 
2012-10-17 02:04:20 PM  
Romney Wins

GOP: "Romney won!"
Dems: "Romney won!"

Obama Wins

GOP: "Romney won!"
Dems: "Obama won!"

This and the fact that the whining is reaching a frequency that only my dog can hear is pretty damned telling...
 
2012-10-17 02:04:22 PM  

Brubold: James!: If you're complaining about the moderator...

She gave Obama a three minute speaking advantage (which he still biatched about) and interrupted Romney something like 20 more times than she did Obama. Not to mention some obviously planted questions.

Yeah, no bias there.

Despite all of that, polls show that Obama didn't win by all that much and Romney cleaned his clock on the most important subject (the economy). Even with the deck stacked in O's favor he still couldn't pull out the sort of momentum swinging victory he needed.


She was totes mean!  And it doesn't matter anyhow!
 
2012-10-17 02:04:28 PM  

indylaw: Weaver95: i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.

So alcoholics then.


hey now, there's no call for that.
 
2012-10-17 02:04:31 PM  
i1159.photobucket.com

please proceed Governor.
 
2012-10-17 02:04:33 PM  

Brubold: ) and interrupted Romney something like 20 more times than she did Obama.


She did her job. Romney went off-topic/off-question and over each time limit respectively.

biased questions
Debatable, but even if they were - it's bloody New York. Their undecideds aren't southern undecideds (i.e. "I'm undecided but still probably going to vote GOP"); their questions aren't going to be targetting Obama.

I still can't believe people are trying to sell the one guy's question ("Obama, you promised X, but now my life looks worse than ever..." and so on) as anti-Romney.
 
2012-10-17 02:04:47 PM  

Markoff_Cheney: tomcatadam: Weaver95: Romney did NOT like being talked back too, and looked like he was barely containing his petulant rage.

Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs.

Reminded me of my first portable cd player. It too tended to repeat the same line over
and over
and over
when it was breaking down.

now vote for me so i can have a job in the government and use the government to create 12 million jobs.
christ, what an asshole.

fixed.
damn this hangover, i need to go for a run and sweat this shiat off.
 
2012-10-17 02:04:57 PM  

MyRandomName: AdolfOliverPanties: Yep. Candy Crowley forced Romney to be uninformed about POTUS's comments in the Rose Garden. She also forced him to lie about seeking out women to put on his staff (heh heh, heh heh.)

Truly, she is history's greatest monster.

Crowley stated after Romney was right, but poorly worded. Please step out of your echo chamber.


So can you show where Obama said it was NOT an act of terrorism like Romney pretends?
 
2012-10-17 02:05:42 PM  
Joe Girardi is writing for FoxNews now?
 
2012-10-17 02:06:03 PM  

Weaver95: [i1159.photobucket.com image 850x471]

please proceed Governor.


Romney is only truly happy when Americans die.

deathandtaxesmag.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com
 
2012-10-17 02:06:08 PM  

Hollie Maea: I think Romney is in a bit of trouble in regards to the final debate. The only topic that snap poll responders scored him good on last night was the economy (apparently undecided voters like platitudes...who knew?). But the final debate will only be on foreign policy topics, so Mitt will be hard pressed to spend the whole time bleating about the economy.


Oh, that's easy.

"That's a great question about the Arab Spring, but I'd like to go back to last week's debate question about how awful Obama has been for the economy."

"That wasn't even one of the questions last week."

"Well, it SHOULD have been. Anyway...about that Obama failing us on the economy thing..."
 
2012-10-17 02:06:25 PM  
I was waiting for Romney to touch Obama, and see the secret service pounce.

www.nationalconfidential.com
 
2012-10-17 02:06:33 PM  
Ah geez! Here comes the crying jag!
i1151.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-17 02:06:40 PM  

CPennypacker: HeartBurnKid: CPennypacker: Yeah. Complaining about the moderator means you know you lost. Suck it up.

Lehrer did genuinely suck, though.

But somehow the liberal pundits still admitted Obama lost

Hell Chris Matthews almost had a meltdown on live television.


With Lehrer, everyone was observing that Lehrer sucked, but no one was spinning that as a factor in the debate. Republicans were saying that Romney won and that Lehrer sucked. Democrats were saying that Romney won and that Lehrer sucked.
 
2012-10-17 02:06:51 PM  

sammyk: If Romney actually had anything of substance to say last night it would be all over the news. Instead we get this.

I think I will actually listen to Rush today just to hear him cry


So by your assertion, Obama stated nothing of substance either. Good to know.

Why aren't liberals asking what Obama's specific plan to get 1 million manufacturing jobs is? You would expect then to ask the guy actually in government what his detailed policy is before the guy who is outside and will need to work with congressional leaders to formulate a plan... but that would require being logically consistent which fark liberals are incapable of.
 
2012-10-17 02:07:22 PM  

Brubold: Not to mention some obviously planted questions.


1st question: College students can't get jobs. Planted to make 0bummer look good!

2nd question: High gas prices. Again, this is an obvious plant to make Barry Hussein look good.
 
2012-10-17 02:08:32 PM  

Corvus: Weaver95: [i1159.photobucket.com image 850x471]

please proceed Governor.

Romney is only truly happy when Americans die.

[deathandtaxesmag.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com image 585x400]


hey now, im sure he gets sad when americans die, he isnt that evil.
but when it could be to his advantage when they die?
gravy.
 
2012-10-17 02:08:39 PM  

MyRandomName: Crowley stated after Romney was right, but poorly worded. Please step out of your echo chamber.


Romney said that the Obama camp did not call it an act of terror.
You can, in fact, look up his statements - where directly refers to it as an act of terror.

To conflate "act of terror" and terrorism is disengenious, true, but Romney did not say terrorism. Obama caught him on a technicality, and instead of flipping this on Obama - reiterating that the point was terrorism, not the specific wording - he chose to double down and had it shoved in his face.

Romney had a lot of room to manuever because Obama isn't free to discuss extremely confidential security issues - he's bound by his presidency in that regard. Yet Romney still farked that up.
 
2012-10-17 02:08:45 PM  
Look at how RED Romney's eyes are in that picture, like he didn't get a wink of sleep the night before the debate due to intense worry/violent butt rash. Imagine this snippy little tyrant when he gets the 3AM call.
 
2012-10-17 02:09:08 PM  

Brubold: Hollie Maea: I think Romney is in a bit of trouble in regards to the final debate. The only topic that snap poll responders scored him good on last night was the economy (apparently undecided voters like platitudes...who knew?). But the final debate will only be on foreign policy topics, so Mitt will be hard pressed to spend the whole time bleating about the economy. He's at a decided disadvantage when it comes to foreign policy; the only foreign policy topic for which some considered him to have an advantage was Libya, and he shat the bed with that one last night.

Conservative commentators are already howling about how much it sucks for the final debate to be on foreign policy.

Actually now Romney gets to revisit the Libya situation again and this time he has quotes from Anderson Cooper, Politico, and even Crowley that back up his statement on the situation. Obama talked about how bad it was for Romney to try and score political points over the attack all while Obama was trying to paint a narrative that made him look blameless before the election.


Counterpoint: Obama will probably kill the terrorists responsible for the attack 4 hours before the debate. Cause that's how he rolls.
 
2012-10-17 02:09:24 PM  

Snarky Acronym: Romney is incredibly thin skinned. I can't imagine him going head-to-head with an adversarial head of state. He's never had anyone stand up to him his entire life as Obama did last night. It's totally threw him off his game. Closest he's ever gotten to somebody that looks like Obama is the guy that shines his shoes. He can't fathom why he can't win against Obama, it's beyond his belief system.


It is kind of unbelievable to think that a black man could beat a white almost-protestant business fella in American politics. If I told you that would be the case in... sh*t... 2000, you'd call me insane.
 
2012-10-17 02:09:43 PM  

MyRandomName: sammyk: If Romney actually had anything of substance to say last night it would be all over the news. Instead we get this.

I think I will actually listen to Rush today just to hear him cry

So by your assertion, Obama stated nothing of substance either. Good to know.

Why aren't liberals asking what Obama's specific plan to get 1 million manufacturing jobs is? You would expect then to ask the guy actually in government what his detailed policy is before the guy who is outside and will need to work with congressional leaders to formulate a plan... but that would require being logically consistent which fark liberals are incapable of.


www.romneytaxplan.com - Because only 53% of Americans matter, fark the other 47%.
 
2012-10-17 02:10:38 PM  

MyRandomName:
Why aren't liberals asking what Obama's specific plan to get 1 million manufacturing jobs is? You would expect then to ask the guy actually in government what his detailed policy is before the guy who is outside and will need to work with congressional leaders to formulate a plan... but that would require being logically consistent which fark liberals are incapable of.


Obama covered that in some detail last night. closing loopholes, punishing companies who move jobs out of the country/rewarding companies who bring jobs back AND making it illegal for corporations to hide money overseas to dodge US taxes.

Romney's answer? tax cuts for the rich.
 
2012-10-17 02:11:05 PM  

MyRandomName: Why aren't liberals asking what Obama's specific plan to get 1 million manufacturing jobs is? You would expect then to ask the guy actually in government what his detailed policy is before the guy who is outside and will need to work with congressional leaders to formulate a plan... but that would require being logically consistent which fark liberals are incapable of.


Anerican Job Act
 
2012-10-17 02:12:47 PM  
i.imgur.com

/you knew it was coming
 
2012-10-17 02:13:28 PM  
c'mon MNBC...bring up the body language expert! you promised!
 
2012-10-17 02:13:36 PM  

Snarky Acronym: Another thing I noticed was that Obama was really laser sharp. He didn't stammer and hmm and uh a lot like he has in the past when he's had to think on his feet. It was remarkable turn around.


I noticed that too. He's been practicing.
 
2012-10-17 02:13:42 PM  
The real concern should be, where's Romney's handkerchief?!?
 
2012-10-17 02:14:18 PM  
If you're splitting hairs between calling something an "act of terror" and "terrorism" you've long since lost.

Seriously Republicans, get some goddamned pride.
 
2012-10-17 02:15:15 PM  

Hollie Maea: Lando Lincoln: 3. Romney is a dickbag that always has to get the last word.

That's what made it so awesome to see Obama drop the 47% bomb in the only possible way that would guarantee that Romney could not respond.


I half expected Romney to jump up and try to get the last word.
 
2012-10-17 02:15:58 PM  
for those of you NOT on my twitter feed...MSNBC is promising a 'body language' expert who will give us some insights into last night's debate. the newscasters keep walking RIGHT UP to a joke about Obama's five point palm exploding heart technique...but keep failing to make the connection.
 
2012-10-17 02:16:00 PM  

MyRandomName: sammyk: If Romney actually had anything of substance to say last night it would be all over the news. Instead we get this.

I think I will actually listen to Rush today just to hear him cry

So by your assertion, Obama stated nothing of substance either. Good to know.

Why aren't liberals asking what Obama's specific plan to get 1 million manufacturing jobs is? You would expect then to ask the guy actually in government what his detailed policy is before the guy who is outside and will need to work with congressional leaders to formulate a plan... but that would require being logically consistent which fark liberals are incapable of.


There is a clear difference. Many of us in the middle class fear that Romny's secret magic is "fark the middle class and lower taxes for the wealthy". We aren't sure what Obama's plan is either but we are pretty clear it isn't "fark the middle class and lower taxes for the wealthy" so he gets to get away with less scrutiny.
 
2012-10-17 02:16:10 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: MyRandomName: Why aren't liberals asking what Obama's specific plan to get 1 million manufacturing jobs is? You would expect then to ask the guy actually in government what his detailed policy is before the guy who is outside and will need to work with congressional leaders to formulate a plan... but that would require being logically consistent which fark liberals are incapable of.

Anerican Job Act


Ah, I see you're trying to combat GOP views with reason. Here's how this is going to go:

Them: "0bama doesn't have a plan!"
You: "Here's a link to his detailed plan."
Them: "He's spending money we don't have!"
You: "...but he has a plan. This is different from you saying he doesn't have a plan."
Them: "Benghazi!"
 
2012-10-17 02:17:17 PM  
complaining about the moderator comes off as weak.
 
2012-10-17 02:17:25 PM  
I can only conclude, based on the screams of the rightwing media that Romney got beat by a girl
 
2012-10-17 02:17:41 PM  

Snarky Acronym: He didn't stammer and hmm and uh a lot like he has in the past when he's had to think on his feet.


Really? Not as much as before, sure, but the one thing I noticed is that both him AND Biden stuttered and stammered a lot. Particularly at one point where he was trying to point out that Romney was treading offtopic and dangerously over time - there was an "a-a-a" stutter that lasted at least 20 syllables.

Not that it's even relevant to the points they made or how well they hammered their opponents overall.
 
2012-10-17 02:18:43 PM  

qorkfiend: I half expected Romney to jump up and try to get the last word.


It showed remarkable constraint compared to the rest of the debate.
 
2012-10-17 02:19:51 PM  

Hollie Maea: CPennypacker: HeartBurnKid: CPennypacker: Yeah. Complaining about the moderator means you know you lost. Suck it up.

Lehrer did genuinely suck, though.

But somehow the liberal pundits still admitted Obama lost

Hell Chris Matthews almost had a meltdown on live television.

With Lehrer, everyone was observing that Lehrer sucked, but no one was spinning that as a factor in the debate. Republicans were saying that Romney won and that Lehrer sucked. Democrats were saying that Romney won and that Lehrer sucked.


There were a few right-wing shills on Fark who accused the "libtards" of "working the refs".
 
2012-10-17 02:19:54 PM  

tomcatadam: qorkfiend: I half expected Romney to jump up and try to get the last word.

It showed remarkable constraint compared to the rest of the debate.


I think by that point Romney knew he'd been beat, so he laid that golden fiddle on the ground at....

wait. wrong thread. never mind!
 
2012-10-17 02:20:00 PM  

EnviroDude: Even the NFL had the decency to pull the replacement ref that was a Saints fan from officiating the Saints game. To expect as much courtesy in our debates, well, that is asking tooo much.

When you best hope of a win is to tag team with the moderator, then you really don't have much to run on;


s3.amazonaws.com
 
2012-10-17 02:20:31 PM  

qorkfiend: I half expected Romney to jump up and try to get the last word.


Indeed. The only thing that pleasantly surprised me about Mitt Romney last night was that he was able to dimly sense that you can't keep talking after you have given your closing statement.
 
2012-10-17 02:20:54 PM  

Hollie Maea: Lando Lincoln: 3. Romney is a dickbag that always has to get the last word.

That's what made it so awesome to see Obama drop the 47% bomb in the only possible way that would guarantee that Romney could not respond.


This that there what you said.

I loved it.
 
2012-10-17 02:21:10 PM  

xanadian: I'm afraid this is one of those instances where I'll have to side with the conservatards...

Check out the timeline further down in the article. Sure, he mentions "terror" on Sept. 12, but refuses to tie in the Libya incident as a terrorist attack on Sept. 25.

According to the article, anyway.


He himself accused Obama, at least twice, of not calling it an "act of terror" - those are the words he used - and that's what he got called out for by the moderator (at Obama's insistence). The other stupid points he was raising don't matter as far as this particular exchange was concerned. He was wrong about something which could have trivial in the broader scope of whatever dumbass argument he was making - it was his own decision to try make some big point out of it that turned it into the highlight of this debate (indeed, probably of all three debates thus far).
 
2012-10-17 02:21:18 PM  

aug3: I can only conclude, based on the screams of the rightwing media that Romney got beat by a girl


Yep, and my goodness was he angry about it.
 
2012-10-17 02:21:24 PM  

tomcatadam: Snarky Acronym: He didn't stammer and hmm and uh a lot like he has in the past when he's had to think on his feet.

Really? Not as much as before, sure, but the one thing I noticed is that both him AND Biden stuttered and stammered a lot. Particularly at one point where he was trying to point out that Romney was treading offtopic and dangerously over time - there was an "a-a-a" stutter that lasted at least 20 syllables.

Not that it's even relevant to the points they made or how well they hammered their opponents overall.


My favorite Romney stutter of the debate was "He's great as a - as a - a - a - as a speaker".
 
2012-10-17 02:22:00 PM  
i1159.photobucket.com
"DID I SAY TO BRING UP THE '36 DUESENBURG, PORTERHOUSE? THEN WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING? I ALWAYS DRIVE THE '47 ROLLS ON TUESDAYS! YOU HAVE NO EXCUSE FOR NOT KNOWING THAT! HURRY WITH THAT, AND IF I SEE SO MUCH AS A SPOT ON THE LEATHER INTERIOR, I SWEAR TO GOD..."
 
2012-10-17 02:23:45 PM  
It is a serious problem that people actually use this "generic comment about terror, not specifically calling it a terrorist act" logic.

The problem is much larger than this specific instance. It happens all the time and (yes) with people of many different beliefs. This is not to say they all do it equally, and it is clear that this has been a major problem in the thinking of the modern day Republican party.

This type of logic is an "avoidance obsession". What happens is that someone facing a thought that would bring discomfort will expand all of the events around that thought. They will look around wildly as if it were all under a microscope, which throws out any contextual continuity and focuses entirely on a "small field of view". Then, they will look for a way to interpret any event around the thought in a way that brings some harmony to their desires and avoids cognitive dissonance. Once found, they can keep the tight focus on this very narrowly interpreted event and anytime they face the broaching of the subject causing the discomforting conclusions, they leap to the "happy place" they have found nearby.

So, when the President points out that he called the actions terroristic immediately, he is telling a truth that doesn't fit into the whole narrative that was being developed. It doesn't contradict that the administration suggested for some time that it was a spontaneous attack for reasons unrelated to US policy, which is the core outrage being attempted, and an open minded person who had not committed a worldview to the idea could easily take this information and still have questions about why there were these public professions of cause different from what was later revealed. But some people have made that commitment and inserted associated stories into their narrative that are threatened by the simple act of point out that the president called it an act of terror. Now, no thinking person would misunderstand "acts of terror" and "terrorist acts" as being vastly different references to the type of act perpetrated - in our modern world, these refer to violent, often deadly, acts used to promote some message and inflict fear on those with other beliefs or political goals. But just saying they are different allows a thought process where it is believed that again the President is lying and he can't be trusted and he didn't refer to them as terrorism and there is a big difference between a terrorist group like Al Qaeda and a mob inflicting terror and... so the outrage can continue and one doesn't need to concede anything.

Of course, when you actually consider the whole events, that there apparently was some information early on that it was a coordinated attack and there were mostly unrelated members of the administration making the few comments about it being due to the video, and eventually it was stated more bluntly that it was not, a few potential scenarios come to mind. This includes things like not wanting to blame any organisations or give certain organisations notoriety without proof, or possibly there were counter-intelligence operations underway that required the organisation that perpetrated the attack to believe it was not suspected, or possibly the intelligence community was weighing the potential explanations before committing to the administration, ... Many of the scenarios don't actually involve anything that people would be outraged about from the administration if the details came out. But it's hard to see what the political advantage would be to, say, simply lying (which I have seen suggested), and it doesn't seem like incompetence is being played as the primary source of anger here. The security detail was obviously incompetent, but there appear to be other reasons not being mentioned for why this is taken as such a negative moment.

When you see actions like this hyperfocus, it makes it clear that a large component of this talk about the Benghazi attacks is just trying to find some narrative which puts the administration in a bad light, beyond any actual analysis of what actually occurred. And that's why this type of action is such a serious problem. People in general find it far too easy to justify their worldviews by excluding data and using a variety of avoidance obsessions to prevent any real communication.

/or whatever
 
2012-10-17 02:27:09 PM  

Weaver95: Aarontology: Weaver95: i'm actually worried about the GOP. its looking like they've decided to simply ignore reality and not even bother trying to fix their own issues.

They've been like that for at least three years, dude.

yeah but it's getting worse!


I've been seeing their evolution from conservative, to insane. At least the vocal ones, there are still some conservatives left.
 
2012-10-17 02:28:00 PM  

MyRandomName: Why aren't liberals asking what Obama's specific plan to get 1 million manufacturing jobs is?


Step 1) Get rid of all Republicans in Congress
Step 2) Finally pass the American Jobs Act
 
2012-10-17 02:28:08 PM  
Waiting for somebody to update the list of people scheming against the GOP to now include moderators.
 
2012-10-17 02:30:15 PM  
" MSNBC Tingler-in-Chief Chris Matthews ..."

Annnnd we have a win.
 
2012-10-17 02:30:46 PM  

EyeballKid: [i1159.photobucket.com image 850x471]
"DID I SAY TO BRING UP THE '36 DUESENBURG, PORTERHOUSE? THEN WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING? I ALWAYS DRIVE THE '47 ROLLS ON TUESDAYS! YOU HAVE NO EXCUSE FOR NOT KNOWING THAT! HURRY WITH THAT, AND IF I SEE SO MUCH AS A SPOT ON THE LEATHER INTERIOR, I SWEAR TO GOD..."


Does anyone know when that "Angry Romney" photo was taken? Was it after the Libya pwnage, or at at some other point?
 
2012-10-17 02:30:50 PM  

fruitloop: My favorite Romney stutter of the debate was "He's great as a - as a - a - a - as a speaker".


I like the Romney stutters because they're the indication that the bullshiat he was about to spout was fresh - something he hadn't prepared before, or something that he and his staff went over only very briefly.

You can just imagine his campaign managers crapping their pants every time he started to stutter.
 
2012-10-17 02:30:55 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: MyRandomName: Why aren't liberals asking what Obama's specific plan to get 1 million manufacturing jobs is? You would expect then to ask the guy actually in government what his detailed policy is before the guy who is outside and will need to work with congressional leaders to formulate a plan... but that would require being logically consistent which fark liberals are incapable of.

Anerican Job Act


That's what Republicans don't get: the media isn't pressing Obama on more specifics because even if he doesn't go into major detail he's actually put forward bills related to the issue and will be happy to argue the issue on them.

Mitt Romney doesn't have these policies written up in a way it could be submitted to Congress. The closest we have is the Paul Ryan budget, a plan that Romney has said he supports and actually has the backing of the vast majority of Republican members of Congress. However if you ask him about anything controversial in the Ryan plan he immediately backs off, says his plan won't have anything people don't like about the Ryan plan, and he knows it cuts the deficit even without anything some people dislike because he's a businessman and he knows how to make it work.
 
2012-10-17 02:31:08 PM  
If I had to rank the "terror act" exchange on the scale of things I even remotely gave a fark about last night, with 1 being "not a single fark was given" and 10 being "I gave a lot of farks", I think that the exchange in question ranked about a 2, maybe a 3. Who gives a rats ass about who was quicker to call it an act of terror. Is it considered an admirable trait now to leap to conclusions before all the facts are in and just give a judgment based on your gut feeling when you're arguably the most powerful person in the world? How is that to be considered a good thing?
 
2012-10-17 02:31:27 PM  
i47.tinypic.com
 
2012-10-17 02:31:42 PM  

tomcatadam: To conflate "act of terror" and terrorism is disengenious, true


I don't think it is - most people would see "act of terror" and "terrorist act" as synonymous, I think. Indeed that's probably why Mitt himself went with the former when trying to advance his "Obama is weak on terror" case.
 
2012-10-17 02:31:43 PM  
Just an FYI -- the Democrats didn't whine this much after the last debate.

/life-long unaffiliated voter
 
2012-10-17 02:31:44 PM  

ex0du5: It is a serious problem that people actually use this "generic comment about terror, not specifically calling it a terrorist act" logic...


To make a long story short: They took something and reinterpreted it to their own ends.
 
2012-10-17 02:33:15 PM  
If we're discussing Rush Limbaugh, and I say that people should know better than to listen to braindead hacks, did I or did I not just call Rush Limbaugh a braindead hack?
 
2012-10-17 02:34:33 PM  

HellRaisingHoosier: Just an FYI -- the Democrats didn't whine this much after the last debate.

/life-long unaffiliated voter


Even when attempting to present "excuses" for the results of the previous debate, supporters of President Obama attempted to explain causes of the President's poor performance rather than suggest a bias against the President by the moderator.
 
2012-10-17 02:34:52 PM  

HellRaisingHoosier: Just an FYI -- the Democrats didn't whine this much after the last debate.

/life-long unaffiliated voter


I don't score debates on the "media" analysis. I know who won or lost by the volume and frequency of the whining coming from the tea partiers in my office.
 
2012-10-17 02:35:20 PM  
I wonder what it's like for Mitt to be thoroughly shown up, (embarrassed really), in front of a worldwide audience. How he processes that in light of the fact that he obviously feels entitled to the highest office must be a work of hideous cognitive art. I suspect he said "how dare they" or "don't they know who I am" at some point today.
 
2012-10-17 02:35:38 PM  

NateGrey: I was waiting for Romney to touch Obama, and see the secret service pounce.


Hmm. Considering that Romney now has Secret Service protection too, would they really have pounced, or would it have to be an obvious attack first?
 
2012-10-17 02:37:24 PM  
So, serious question, FarkCons: Romney finally blurted out his "five point plan" almost as a non-sequitur during that question about "Assure me you're not going to be another Bush" and this is what I got:

1. Energy Independence (it's implied)
2. Rattle the saber with China
3. Balance the budget
4. ???
5. Championing small business

The transcripts do nothing to help since Romney sucks even at basic counting, apparently.

What's number 4?

/number 4 count
//string 4 words
 
2012-10-17 02:37:54 PM  

3_Butt_Cheeks: " MSNBC Tingler-in-Chief Chris Matthews ..."

Annnnd we have a win.


so what was your view of the debate last night?
 
2012-10-17 02:38:18 PM  

Brubold: Actually now Romney gets to revisit the Libya situation again and this time he has quotes from Anderson Cooper, Politico, and even Crowley that back up his statement on the situation. Obama talked about how bad it was for Romney to try and score political points over the attack all while Obama was trying to paint a narrative that made him look blameless before the election.


"Question to Obama (paraphrased): Are you responsible/to blame for Ambassador Stephens' death?

Obama (paraphrased): Yes, the buck stops with me. I'm ultimately accountable. I'm responsible.

General public reaction to debate: Obama won.

GOP: *fingers in ears* LALALALALALLALALALALALA can't hear you over our victory celebration 'cause Mitt pwned so fantastically. We won! We won! Wargggghhhaaaaarrrrbbbllllll

So, basically:
Obama: I own that failure.
GOP: We still refuse to acknowledge failure or even the remote possibility.


Yup, sure looked like he was trying to weasel out the blame to me.
 
2012-10-17 02:38:26 PM  

HellRaisingHoosier: Just an FYI -- the Democrats didn't whine this much after the last debate.


Who's whining? The Left is calling it like it is, just like they have for every debate so far, and the Right is going crazy on how it wasn't an Obama win, and let me tell you exactly why, in 47 parts...
 
2012-10-17 02:38:31 PM  

dameron: Awww. She didn't let Romney lie to the camera with a big smile on his face. Boo farking hoo.


Uh, she admitted that she and Obama are liars on national tv today...

Obama never called the attack in Libya an act of terror.
 
2012-10-17 02:38:42 PM  

Weaver95: I think part of what I find so fascinating about the GOP these days is their absolute belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. there is zero doubt among any of them. the Democrats watched the first debate and most of them admitted that hey, Romney came out ahead. the GOP tho - Romney got his ass kicked last night and today ALL the Republicans are saying Romney won. they can't admit their guy did poorly.

that's amazing to watch...the almost fanatical religious belief in their own cause. scary sometimes too but still fascinating.


My step sister is one of the die hard republican types but she did admit she thought Obama won the debate. She then proceeded to call the moderator biased.
 
2012-10-17 02:39:30 PM  

notShryke: Weaver95: I think part of what I find so fascinating about the GOP these days is their absolute belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong

OMG. You just broke the record for interwebz projection.


Amazing stuff.
 
2012-10-17 02:39:58 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Yep. Candy Crowley forced Romney to be uninformed about POTUS's comments in the Rose Garden.


Except in the actual transcript Obama never calls it an act of terror. She admitted to lying in order to help Obama this morning on national tv.
 
2012-10-17 02:40:28 PM  

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: So, serious question, FarkCons: Romney finally blurted out his "five point plan" almost as a non-sequitur during that question about "Assure me you're not going to be another Bush" and this is what I got:

1. Energy Independence (it's implied)
2. Rattle the saber with China
3. Balance the budget
4. ???
5. Championing small business

The transcripts do nothing to help since Romney sucks even at basic counting, apparently.

What's number 4?

/number 4 count
//string 4 words


www.notentirelystable.com

"There... are... four... points!" 
 
2012-10-17 02:40:51 PM  

Biological Ali: tomcatadam: To conflate "act of terror" and terrorism is disengenious, true

I don't think it is - most people would see "act of terror" and "terrorist act" as synonymous, I think. Indeed that's probably why Mitt himself went with the former when trying to advance his "Obama is weak on terror" case.


The thing that annoys me is that this happened a month ago and just today is the first time I've ever heard anyone make that distinction. It just smacks of goalpost moving.
 
2012-10-17 02:41:31 PM  
Reactions from my local Tea Party meeting at the diner this morning --

The Grand Poobah walked up behind me and started to talk directly to me, but instead turned to the passing waitress (to avoid talking to me) and angrily shouted, "THEY'RE BOTH CLOWNS! So what we're gonna do is vote the black clown out, vote the Republican clown in, and then replace him in four years!"
 
2012-10-17 02:42:10 PM  

PanicMan: The thing that annoys me is that this happened a month ago and just today is the first time I've ever heard anyone make that distinction. It just smacks of goalpost moving.


This is where we are? A few weeks before the election and Romney's people are arguing f*cking semantics? Guys, get your sh*t together. Seriously.
 
2012-10-17 02:44:00 PM  

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: 1. Energy Independence (it's implied)


P.S. Romney's Energy Independence plan is apparently "build more pipelines from Canada".

He also mentioned the USA could be Energy Independent in 8 years. My jaw dropped.
 
2012-10-17 02:44:10 PM  

Bullseyed: AdolfOliverPanties: Yep. Candy Crowley forced Romney to be uninformed about POTUS's comments in the Rose Garden.

Except in the actual transcript Obama never calls it an act of terror. She admitted to lying in order to help Obama this morning on national tv.


Please post the link in which she admits lying to help Obama just so everybody here doesn't think you're partisan hack who's full of sh*t. Go on... post it...
 
2012-10-17 02:45:06 PM  

Fuggin Bizzy: Lando Lincoln: Hollie Maea: There are two things that are definitely true:

1. The set of people who won a debate and the set of people whining about the moderator is a null set.

2. The set of people who say "well it was a tie" and the set of people who did not lose a debate is a null set.

3. Romney is a dickbag that always has to get the last word.

Bzzt. Sorry, your assertions must be phrased in terms of set theory.


Romney {x | x is a dickbag that always has to get the last word}?
 
2012-10-17 02:45:27 PM  
Candy Crowley, 10/17/12: "Now, did the president say this was an act of terror? The president did not say it."

So either she is a liar this morning or was a liar last night.
 
2012-10-17 02:45:33 PM  

Bullseyed: dameron: Awww. She didn't let Romney lie to the camera with a big smile on his face. Boo farking hoo.

Uh, she admitted that she and Obama are liars on national tv today...

Obama never called the attack in Libya an act of terror.


Get the transcript and search for terror. Tell me what you find.
 
2012-10-17 02:46:00 PM  

MyRandomName: sammyk: If Romney actually had anything of substance to say last night it would be all over the news. Instead we get this.

I think I will actually listen to Rush today just to hear him cry

So by your assertion, Obama stated nothing of substance either. Good to know.

Why aren't liberals asking what Obama's specific plan to get 1 million manufacturing jobs is? You would expect then to ask the guy actually in government what his detailed policy is before the guy who is outside and will need to work with congressional leaders to formulate a plan... but that would require being logically consistent which fark liberals are incapable of.


You sound irritable. Bad evening?
 
2012-10-17 02:46:10 PM  

Weaver95: 3_Butt_Cheeks: " MSNBC Tingler-in-Chief Chris Matthews ..."

Annnnd we have a win.

so what was your view of the debate last night?


Boring for the most part, the interruptions were annoying and some of the questions picked were pretty weak. Overall, nothing new and nothing I would see as swaying any of the hopelessly undecided.
 
2012-10-17 02:46:33 PM  

MyRandomName: dameron: Awww. She didn't let Romney lie to the camera with a big smile on his face. Boo farking hoo.

But that's not where Obama won the Benghazi point. He won that when he savaged Romney for making political hay over the attack. He seemed empathic and imminently presidential during that part and rightly painted Romney as the opportunistic douchebag he clear is.

Do liberals honestly not believe it was a political calculation to blame a movie without any facts to assert that proposition? Holy shiat what a dumb stance to take.


You're just pissed that Romeny's farked up his attempt to sling shiat at Obama over the Benghazi attack.

So, just to be clear, what do you think the political motivation was? What nefarious scheme was Obama hatching by waiting to clearly say that the attack was part of an al Qaeda affiliated group's attack? What OUTRAGE! was he trying to hide?
 
2012-10-17 02:46:34 PM  

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: So, serious question, FarkCons: Romney finally blurted out his "five point plan" [...] What's number 4?


Collect underpants.

/oh, serious question ... can't help you
 
2012-10-17 02:47:16 PM  
The whole point of this stupid "act of terror" attack angle is to try and portray Obama as incompetent against terrorism, and suggest that there was some kind of cover-up.

This all gets blown to stinky little paranoid bits when you remember just how many terrorists Obama has captured or killed, including Bin Laden and many of his top commanders, and how the Right was previously attacking him for being TOO AGGRESSIVE against terrorists (drone strikes and so forth). Not to mention, there WAS a protest going on at the same time as the terror attack, which was a source of confusion.

Add to that the fact that the GOP was trying to reduce security at embassies before this happened, and there is NO high ground for Romney or the GOP at all on the issue. It's a political trap issue and they'd best walk away from it fast instead of whining about the moderator or being fact-checked.
 
2012-10-17 02:48:01 PM  

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: So, serious question, FarkCons: Romney finally blurted out his "five point plan" almost as a non-sequitur during that question about "Assure me you're not going to be another Bush" and this is what I got:

1. Energy Independence (it's implied)
2. Rattle the saber with China
3. Balance the budget
4. ???
5. Championing small business

The transcripts do nothing to help since Romney sucks even at basic counting, apparently.

What's number 4?

/number 4 count
//string 4 words


I don't remember if he said it or not, but it's supposed to be "expanding trade with Latin America".
 
2012-10-17 02:48:04 PM  

Bullseyed: Obama never called the attack in Libya an act of terror.


You're precious.
 
2012-10-17 02:48:09 PM  

mpirooz: Bullseyed: dameron: Awww. She didn't let Romney lie to the camera with a big smile on his face. Boo farking hoo.

Uh, she admitted that she and Obama are liars on national tv today...

Obama never called the attack in Libya an act of terror.

Get the transcript and search for terror. Tell me what you find.


Be aware that Bullseyed is a "birther". Do not expect rationality.
 
2012-10-17 02:48:44 PM  
You knew that Fox News and Limbaugh would be spinning and biatching all day
Predictable republicans are predictable.
Fact is Romney got rattled and we saw who he really was under pressure. Everything the Democrats painted him out to be.
 
2012-10-17 02:49:19 PM  

Bullseyed: So either she is a liar this morning or was a liar last night.


Obama did in fact say "acts of terror". She's just trying to appease everyone at once.
 
2012-10-17 02:49:32 PM  

Bullseyed: Candy Crowley, 10/17/12: "Now, did the president say this was an act of terror? The president did not say it."

So either she is a liar this morning or was a liar last night.


He did call it an act of terror. He didn't endorse that it was an official terrorist attack - simply because it was too soon. The media (specifically CNN) will try to play to the middle on this issue to appease the right but it simply won't work. He directly referred to it as an act of terror. There is simply no way around this. Romney just failed in articulating the question - he focused on the Rose Garden comments and in those comments, as I said, Obama explicitly referred to the situation at Benghazi as an act of terror.
 
2012-10-17 02:49:44 PM  

PanicMan: Biological Ali: tomcatadam: To conflate "act of terror" and terrorism is disengenious, true

I don't think it is - most people would see "act of terror" and "terrorist act" as synonymous, I think. Indeed that's probably why Mitt himself went with the former when trying to advance his "Obama is weak on terror" case.

The thing that annoys me is that this happened a month ago and just today is the first time I've ever heard anyone make that distinction. It just smacks of goalpost moving.


And the best part is: let's just say that Romney's right. Let's pretend that Obama never said "act of terror" in the speech.

So, the accusation is that the Commander in Chief refused to jump to conclusions that could escalate a bad situation out of control? This is really what he wants to accuse Obama of? Being responsible?

"American people, if elected I will be wildly clownish, unlike this boring professional we have as a President today."

If the Republicans are smart they'll drop the subject and hope people forget about it in the next three weeks.
 
2012-10-17 02:49:44 PM  

vastcat: Waiting for somebody to update the list of people scheming against the GOP to now include moderators.


List of People Conspiring Against the GOP, and therefore, America
(LOPCATGOPATA for short):
Liberals
Democrats
Socialists
Community Organizers
Geologists
Biologists
Meteorologists
Climatologists
Atheists
Muslims
Jews
Satan
ABC
NBC
CNN
CBS
PBS
All of cable news except FNC
The New York Times
The LA Times
The Washington Post
The Associated Press
Reuters
BBC
The Guardian
Black People
Mexicans
Human Rights Activists
SCOTUS
Europe
Movie Industry
Television Industry
Environmentalists
ACLU
The United Nations
Labor Unions
Colleges
Teachers
Professors
ACORN
National Endowment for the Arts
Gays
Judges
NPR
Paleontologists
Astrophysicists
Museums (*except Creationism Museum)
WHO
WTO
Inflated tires
The Honolulu Advertiser
The Star Bulletin
Teletubbies
Sponge Bob and Patrick
Nobel Prize Committee
US Census Bureau
NOAA
Sesame Street
Comic Books
Little Green Footballs
Video Games
The Bible
CBO
Bruce Springsteen
Pennies
The Theory of Relativity
Comedy Central
Young People
whatever the hell a Justin Beiber is
Small Business Owners
Math
CPAC
Navy SEALs
The Economist
The Muppets
Iowa Republicans
Low-Flow Toilets
Breast Cancer Screenings
Chrysler
Clint Eastwood.
Robert Deniro
Tom Hanks
Glenn Frey
Norman Rockwell
James Cameron
Dr. Seus
Nuns
Supreme Court Justice John Roberts
Jonathan Krohn at age 17
Fact Checkers
Australia
Mitt Romney
Rasmussen
Fox News
Lockheed Martin
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Paul Ryan
Debate Moderators 

/most recent I could find
 
2012-10-17 02:50:09 PM  
MusicMakeMyHeadPound:

But seriously:

this is what I got:

1. Energy Independence (it's implied)
2. Rattle the saber with China
3. Balance the budget
4. ???
5. Championing small business


1. Energy independence on North America by 2020.
2. Trade (confront China, open new markets).
3. Education (public schools, access to higher education, job retraining).
4. Cut the deficit.
5. Champion small business.
 
2012-10-17 02:50:16 PM  

PanicMan: It just smacks of goalpost moving.


Nah, it's desparately clinging to anything that Obama can be attacked with. At this point, they're trying to give him a paper cut with tissue paper.
 
2012-10-17 02:50:23 PM  

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: So, serious question, FarkCons: Romney finally blurted out his "five point plan" almost as a non-sequitur during that question about "Assure me you're not going to be another Bush" and this is what I got:

1. Energy Independence (it's implied)
2. Rattle the saber with China
3. Balance the budget
4. ???
5. Championing small business

The transcripts do nothing to help since Romney sucks even at basic counting, apparently.

What's number 4?

/number 4 count
//string 4 words


1. Drill, baby, drill
2. Fix public education by eliminating teacher's unions
3. Slap China's knuckles with a ruler for cheating on trade policies
4. Cut the deficit with magic
5. Repeal Obamacare, deregulate the hell out of everything and eliminate more unions
 
2012-10-17 02:51:08 PM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: PanicMan: The thing that annoys me is that this happened a month ago and just today is the first time I've ever heard anyone make that distinction. It just smacks of goalpost moving.

This is where we are? A few weeks before the election and Romney's people are arguing f*cking semantics? Guys, get your sh*t together. Seriously.


I always knew those bigoted assholes were anti-semantic
 
2012-10-17 02:51:42 PM  

Lando Lincoln: MusicMakeMyHeadPound: So, serious question, FarkCons: Romney finally blurted out his "five point plan" almost as a non-sequitur during that question about "Assure me you're not going to be another Bush" and this is what I got:

1. Energy Independence (it's implied)
2. Rattle the saber with China
3. Balance the budget
4. ???
5. Championing small business

The transcripts do nothing to help since Romney sucks even at basic counting, apparently.

What's number 4?

/number 4 count
//string 4 words

1. Drill, baby, drill
2. Fix public education by eliminating teacher's unions
3. Slap China's knuckles with a ruler for cheating on trade policies
4. Cut the deficit with magic
5. Repeal Obamacare, deregulate the hell out of everything and eliminate more unions


Or, here in reality where specifics matter:

1. ?????
2. ?????
3. ?????
4. ?????
5. ?????
 
2012-10-17 02:51:59 PM  

lordjupiter: The whole point of this stupid "act of terror" attack angle is to try and portray Obama as incompetent against terrorism, and suggest that there was some kind of cover-up.


The Right's MO is to begin carpet bombing news sites with buzz words and how the perpetrators were a nefarious organization with deep pockets and worldwide agents on par with C.H.A.O.S., then explain why we have to take them out, while we're moving troops to the engagement area.
 
2012-10-17 02:52:09 PM  

codergirl42: Weaver95: I think part of what I find so fascinating about the GOP these days is their absolute belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. there is zero doubt among any of them. the Democrats watched the first debate and most of them admitted that hey, Romney came out ahead. the GOP tho - Romney got his ass kicked last night and today ALL the Republicans are saying Romney won. they can't admit their guy did poorly.

that's amazing to watch...the almost fanatical religious belief in their own cause. scary sometimes too but still fascinating.

My step sister is one of the die hard republican types but she did admit she thought Obama won the debate. She then proceeded to call the moderator biased.


Is she also adopted from a "special needs" family?
 
2012-10-17 02:52:16 PM  

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: PanicMan: The thing that annoys me is that this happened a month ago and just today is the first time I've ever heard anyone make that distinction. It just smacks of goalpost moving.

This is where we are? A few weeks before the election and Romney's people are arguing f*cking semantics? Guys, get your sh*t together. Seriously.


Not even semantics in a policy or law. That I could understand. Semantics in a speech responding to the death of an ambassador is just bizarre.

That'd be like when FDR said "date that will live in infamy" responding: "dates are not alive, they can't live in infamy, how dare you!" Um, what.
 
2012-10-17 02:53:22 PM  

Bullseyed: Candy Crowley, 10/17/12: "Now, did the president say this was an act of terror? The president did not say it."

So either she is a liar this morning or was a liar last night.


Telling the truth vs. lying is not the same as being right vs. being wrong.
 
2012-10-17 02:53:38 PM  

Hebalo: MusicMakeMyHeadPound: 1. Energy Independence (it's implied)

P.S. Romney's Energy Independence plan is apparently "build more pipelines from Canada".

He also mentioned the USA could be Energy Independent in 8 years. My jaw dropped.


Oh, I'm not even getting into the ludricous details. The fact that Romney was openly and repeatedly talking about bullying a world superpower last night is downright terrifying, really.

However at this point I'll settle for anything. I think it's amazing that the election is now less than three weeks away and we're just now getting an outline of an idea from the challenger.
 
2012-10-17 02:54:11 PM  
It seems awfully hypocritical that the same party that wants to blame someone else for their debate loss gets all uppity when the other party wants to blame someone else for the awful economy they inherited.

GOP, if you're not willing to accept Democrat excuses regarding the economy, don't make them for your candidate's performance.
 
2012-10-17 02:55:08 PM  

Bullseyed: So either she is a liar this morning or was a liar last night.

Crowley: "No... Did the President say this was an act of terror? The President did not say.... He said 'these acts of terror,' but he was in the Rose Garden to talk about Benghazi


So it's down to "this" vs. "these".

Maybe next you'll lecture us all on the meaning of the word "is". Really, this is all you idiots have?

Also, the headline from that quote on CNN reads: "Crowley says she did not backtrack on Libya 'acts of terror' debate moment"

So you can argue with her about what she said. Either way you look like an idiot.
 
2012-10-17 02:56:10 PM  

Ambitwistor: MusicMakeMyHeadPound:

But seriously:

this is what I got:

1. Energy Independence (it's implied)
2. Rattle the saber with China
3. Balance the budget
4. ???
5. Championing small business


1. Energy independence on North America by 2020.
2. Trade (confront China, open new markets).
3. Education (public schools, access to higher education, job retraining).
4. Cut the deficit.
5. Champion small business.


Ah, thank you. He failed to articulate that last night.
 
2012-10-17 02:59:07 PM  

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: Ambitwistor: MusicMakeMyHeadPound:

But seriously:

this is what I got:

1. Energy Independence (it's implied)
2. Rattle the saber with China
3. Balance the budget
4. ???
5. Championing small business


1. Energy independence on North America by 2020.
2. Trade (confront China, open new markets).
3. Education (public schools, access to higher education, job retraining).
4. Cut the deficit.
5. Champion small business.

Ah, thank you. He failed to articulate that last night.


He can't even explain how he will make his 6.5 trillion in additional spending revenue neutral, let alone fix the current deficit.
 
2012-10-17 02:59:29 PM  
Listen libtards, Fartbongo might have said that "No act of terror" will something something America, and it might have been said while he was talking about the Benghazi attacks, but that doesn't mean he said that it was an act of terror! It's math!

What he needed to say was,
"This was an act of terror. And by 'this' I mean the attack on Benghazi. It was an act of terror in Benghazi. It was a terrible act of terror in Benghazi that was an act of terror. Terror. Benghazi. Benghazi was under a terrorist attack when terrorists attacked Benghazi which was attacked by terror. Benghazi. Terror."
 
2012-10-17 03:00:55 PM  

ex0du5: It is a serious problem that people actually use this "generic comment about terror, not specifically calling it a terrorist act" logic.

The problem is much larger than this specific instance. It happens all the time and (yes) with people of many different beliefs. This is not to say they all do it equally, and it is clear that this has been a major problem in the thinking of the modern day Republican party.

This type of logic is an "avoidance obsession". What happens is that someone facing a thought that would bring discomfort will expand all of the events around that thought. They will look around wildly as if it were all under a microscope, which throws out any contextual continuity and focuses entirely on a "small field of view". Then, they will look for a way to interpret any event around the thought in a way that brings some harmony to their desires and avoids cognitive dissonance. Once found, they can keep the tight focus on this very narrowly interpreted event and anytime they face the broaching of the subject causing the discomforting conclusions, they leap to the "happy place" they have found nearby.

So, when the President points out that he called the actions terroristic immediately, he is telling a truth that doesn't fit into the whole narrative that was being developed. It doesn't contradict that the administration suggested for some time that it was a spontaneous attack for reasons unrelated to US policy, which is the core outrage being attempted, and an open minded person who had not committed a worldview to the idea could easily take this information and still have questions about why there were these public professions of cause different from what was later revealed. But some people have made that commitment and inserted associated stories into their narrative that are threatened by the simple act of point out that the president called it an act of terror. Now, no thinking person would misunderstand "acts of terror" and "terrorist acts" as being vastly different references to the type of act perpetrated - in our modern world, these refer to violent, often deadly, acts used to promote some message and inflict fear on those with other beliefs or political goals. But just saying they are different allows a thought process where it is believed that again the President is lying and he can't be trusted and he didn't refer to them as terrorism and there is a big difference between a terrorist group like Al Qaeda and a mob inflicting terror and... so the outrage can continue and one doesn't need to concede anything.

Of course, when you actually consider the whole events, that there apparently was some information early on that it was a coordinated attack and there were mostly unrelated members of the administration making the few comments about it being due to the video, and eventually it was stated more bluntly that it was not, a few potential scenarios come to mind. This includes things like not wanting to blame any organisations or give certain organisations notoriety without proof, or possibly there were counter-intelligence operations underway that required the organisation that perpetrated the attack to believe it was not suspected, or possibly the intelligence community was weighing the potential explanations before committing to the administration, ... Many of the scenarios don't actually involve anything that people would be outraged about from the administration if the details came out. But it's hard to see what the political advantage would be to, say, simply lying (which I have seen suggested), and it doesn't seem like incompetence is being played as the primary source of anger here. The security detail was obviously incompetent, but there appear to be other reasons not being mentioned for why this is taken as such a negative moment.

When you see actions like this hyperfocus, it makes it clear that a large component of this talk about the Benghazi attacks is just trying to find some narrative which puts the administration in a bad light, beyond any actual analysis of what actually occurred. And that's why this type of action is such a serious problem. People in general find it far too easy to justify their worldviews by excluding data and using a variety of avoidance obsessions to prevent any real communication.

/or whatever


Who told you critical analysis was allowed around here? More herp derp, on the double!
 
2012-10-17 03:04:12 PM  
the fact checkers say Romney was right, therefore he is. but as for all that stuff they say Romney is lying out of his ass on, nice try libs.
 
2012-10-17 03:04:21 PM  

Hebalo: MusicMakeMyHeadPound: 1. Energy Independence (it's implied)

P.S. Romney's Energy Independence plan is apparently "build more pipelines from Canada".

He also mentioned the USA could be Energy Independent in 8 years. My jaw dropped.


Annexing Canada counts as achieving energy independence, right?
 
2012-10-17 03:04:34 PM  

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: And the best part is: let's just say that Romney's right. Let's pretend that Obama never said "act of terror" in the speech.

So, the accusation is that the Commander in Chief refused to jump to conclusions that could escalate a bad situation out of control? This is really what he wants to accuse Obama of? Being responsible?

"American people, if elected I will be wildly clownish, unlike this boring professional we have as a President today."

If the Republicans are smart they'll drop the subject and hope people forget about it in the next three weeks.


Even if Obama had direct knowlege it was a terrorist attack and lied to the American people for two weeks...so what? The Commander in Chief is allowed to keep secrets about intel gathering operations and military movements and actions. That's not even controversial.
 
2012-10-17 03:04:48 PM  

Carn: He can't even explain how he will make his 6.5 trillion in additional spending revenue neutral, let alone fix the current deficit.


Listen. He's a businessman, okay? He knows what he's doing.

Businesses don't die out due to shady accounting practices and chuckleheaded morons at the helm. They die out because of Obamacare and China; they always have.

By getting rid of NPR and PBS and giving you the interest on your savings account tax free, we'll grow the economy. Companies will be so desperate to hire people they'll even hire women. They'll even let women take time off from work at five to get their children and make dinner so that they can be back in the office later that night. You'll see.

Trust me.
 
2012-10-17 03:06:48 PM  
If you talked to a derper they'd tell you benghazigate ranks right up there with solyndra and arugula on the outrage meter.
 
2012-10-17 03:09:00 PM  

3_Butt_Cheeks: Weaver95: 3_Butt_Cheeks: " MSNBC Tingler-in-Chief Chris Matthews ..."

Annnnd we have a win.

so what was your view of the debate last night?

Boring for the most part, the interruptions were annoying and some of the questions picked were pretty weak. Overall, nothing new and nothing I would see as swaying any of the hopelessly undecided.


so you weren't bothered by Romney's loss?
 
2012-10-17 03:09:52 PM  
Amusing how the Party of Personal Responsibility likes to blame everyone else for their problems and failures.
 
2012-10-17 03:11:43 PM  
Yeah, it was all about the moderator.

Link
 
2012-10-17 03:15:39 PM  

Zapruder: Listen libtards, Fartbongo might have said that "No act of terror" will something something America, and it might have been said while he was talking about the Benghazi attacks, but that doesn't mean he said that it was an act of terror! It's math!

What he needed to say was,
"This was an act of terror. And by 'this' I mean the attack on Benghazi. It was an act of terror in Benghazi. It was a terrible act of terror in Benghazi that was an act of terror. Terror. Benghazi. Benghazi was under a terrorist attack when terrorists attacked Benghazi which was attacked by terror. Benghazi. Terror."


It's all about terror, baby!

clclt.com
 
2012-10-17 03:17:18 PM  
Before these debates started I really didn't think much about the moderators. I don't think anyone did. But now it's pretty clear that the moderators themselves are having a direct impact on the outcome of the actual debates.

In the first debate Lehrer didn't really pick sides. In the VP debate the moderator was clearly biased against Ryan. She let Biden interrupt Ryan multiple times and kept asking for "details" and "specifics" after Ryan finished speaking. In yesterday's debate.. Well. Just RTFA. She should be ashamed of herself.

Four major debates and no moderator from Fox News or any other form of alternative news station/websites. Only the MSM, which have a proven liberal bias, are represented.

Romney is still going to win.
 
2012-10-17 03:19:30 PM  

Hebalo: MusicMakeMyHeadPound: 1. Energy Independence (it's implied)

P.S. Romney's Energy Independence plan is apparently "build more pipelines from Canada".

He also mentioned the USA could be Energy Independent in 8 years. My jaw dropped.


Crash the economy so badly that no one can afford food, fuel or electricity.
 
2012-10-17 03:20:23 PM  

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: they'll even hire women


That was a little snapshot into his soul, wasn't it.
 
2012-10-17 03:22:00 PM  

evoke: Four major debates and no moderator from Fox News or any other form of alternative news station/websites. Only the MSM


unfortunately fox news is part of the MSM or they wouldn't be able to influence the narrative with derp so much.
 
2012-10-17 03:22:52 PM  

costermonger: Paul Ryan
Debate Moderators 

/most recent I could find


I was only missing Paul Ryan so I think the list is fairly up-to-date.
 
2012-10-17 03:30:24 PM  

evoke: Before these debates started I really didn't think much about the moderators. I don't think anyone did. But now it's pretty clear that the moderators themselves are having a direct impact on the outcome of the actual debates.

In the first debate Lehrer didn't really pick sides. In the VP debate the moderator was clearly biased against Ryan. She let Biden interrupt Ryan multiple times and kept asking for "details" and "specifics" after Ryan finished speaking. In yesterday's debate.. Well. Just RTFA. She should be ashamed of herself.

Four major debates and no moderator from Fox News or any other form of alternative news station/websites. Only the MSM, which have a proven liberal bias, are represented.

Romney is still going to win.


Yeah, that would really have been the ticket. A moderator from Fox News:

"President Obama, in the next section I'd like you to explain why every one of your administration's policies has been an utter and undeniable failure, why you've broken nearly all of your campaign promises, and why the US is in the worst economic and social condition it's ever been in. You have two minutes."

"Governor Romney, in the next section I'd like you to explain how your background makes you uniquely suited to be President, how you deal with the continual lies and distortions about your proposals and plans from the media, and a little more detail about your job creation and charitable activities. You have two minutes."
 
2012-10-17 03:31:57 PM  

Zapruder: Listen libtards, Fartbongo might have said that "No act of terror" will something something America, and it might have been said while he was talking about the Benghazi attacks, but that doesn't mean he said that it was an act of terror! It's math!

What he needed to say was,
"This was an act of terror. And by 'this' I mean the attack on Benghazi. It was an act of terror in Benghazi. It was a terrible act of terror in Benghazi that was an act of terror. Terror. Benghazi. Benghazi was under a terrorist attack when terrorists attacked Benghazi which was attacked by terror. Benghazi. Terror."


This reminds me of the "you didn't build that" bullshiat. Conservatives do not seem to handle context well.
 
2012-10-17 03:33:24 PM  

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: Carn: He can't even explain how he will make his 6.5 trillion in additional spending revenue neutral, let alone fix the current deficit.

Listen. He's a businessman, okay? He knows what he's doing.

Businesses don't die out due to shady accounting practices and chuckleheaded morons at the helm. They die out because of Obamacare and China; they always have.

By getting rid of NPR and PBS and giving you the interest on your savings account tax free, we'll grow the economy. Companies will be so desperate to hire people they'll even hire women. They'll even let women take time off from work at five to get their children and make dinner so that they can be back in the office later that night. You'll see.

Trust me.


You just earned the blue tag of funny! I thoroughly enjoyed the "shady deal" quip from the debate. Because it is.
 
2012-10-17 03:34:42 PM  

EnviroDude: Even the NFL had the decency to pull the replacement ref that was a Saints fan from officiating the Saints game. To expect as much courtesy in our debates, well, that is asking tooo much.

When you best hope of a win is to tag team with the moderator, then you really don't have much to run on;


Mentat: EnviroDude: Even the NFL had the decency to pull the replacement ref that was a Saints fan from officiating the Saints game. To expect as much courtesy in our debates, well, that is asking tooo much.

When you best hope of a win is to tag team with the moderator, then you really don't have much to run on;

Poor baby.

Romney's boxed himself in. He's shown in two debates that he'll try to bully the moderator and Crowley showed how you shut him down. His only options for the third debate are to double down and hope the third moderator is submissive, or else he has to be the submissive one and let Obama run wild. It's Romney's own fault for not being clever enough to pivot from debate to debate like Obama did.


Don't forget the fact that Romney *MUST* have the last word no matter what. He even went back two questions so he could get the last word. And Obama handled it well. Said something like "We are talking about X now".

Obama crushed him this time around.

Can't wait for the third one.
 
2012-10-17 03:40:19 PM  

evoke:
Four major debates and no moderator from Fox News or any other form of alternative news station/websites. Only the MSM, which have a proven liberal bias, are represented.


At what point does Fox News become mainstream? Do you believe that Fox News is independent?
 
2012-10-17 03:43:39 PM  

Weaver95: I think part of what I find so fascinating about the GOP these days is their absolute belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. there is zero doubt among any of them. the Democrats watched the first debate and most of them admitted that hey, Romney came out ahead. the GOP tho - Romney got his ass kicked last night and today ALL the Republicans are saying Romney won. they can't admit their guy did poorly.

that's amazing to watch...the almost fanatical religious belief in their own cause. scary sometimes too but still fascinating.


I noticed there was no backtracking or admission of error whatesoever re the Ryan soup kitchen debacle. There is nothing more clear that that was a major screwup and embarrassment. Yet in an interview, a republican (senator?) wouldn't even answer the direct question about whether Ryan was wrong to do what he did.

Admission of error = weakness? It's a terrific pity if the general electorate really thinks that.
 
2012-10-17 03:45:41 PM  
If you're dumb enough to be "undecided" at this point there's probably nothing a moderator can do or say to sway you.
 
2012-10-17 03:47:48 PM  

JusticeandIndependence: evoke:
Four major debates and no moderator from Fox News or any other form of alternative news station/websites. Only the MSM, which have a proven liberal bias, are represented.


At what point does Fox News become mainstream? Do you believe that Fox News is independent?


Fox will always claim to be the underdog and not be part of the MSM....

imageshack.us
 
2012-10-17 03:51:46 PM  

Weaver95: WorldCitizen: Republicans sure are whiny.

you have no idea.


A friend who is voting for Rmoney is reduced to "when did poor people hire anyone?". Makes me sad/cringe
 
2012-10-17 03:51:54 PM  

evoke: Four major debates and no moderator from Fox News or any other form of alternative news station/websites.


Please tell me that you don't seriously think that Fox News is some sort of "alternative news station"! The number one news (or "news") network is some minority underdog?! LMAO!
 
2012-10-17 03:52:28 PM  

Headso: complaining about the moderator comes off as weak.


There's a sputtering rant at Fox News about the Biden / Ryan debate. They tout the "82 interruptions", "moderator was a lib!", etc etc ad nauseam, but do concede in the middle of the article that the speaking times for each candidate were within a minute of each other.

Whine moar, GOP crybabies.
 
2012-10-17 03:53:13 PM  

culebra: [i.imgur.com image 548x302]

/you knew it was coming


Yes...I still lol'd
 
2012-10-17 03:56:03 PM  

wildsnowllama: Zapruder: Listen libtards, Fartbongo might have said that "No act of terror" will something something America, and it might have been said while he was talking about the Benghazi attacks, but that doesn't mean he said that it was an act of terror! It's math!

What he needed to say was,
"This was an act of terror. And by 'this' I mean the attack on Benghazi. It was an act of terror in Benghazi. It was a terrible act of terror in Benghazi that was an act of terror. Terror. Benghazi. Benghazi was under a terrorist attack when terrorists attacked Benghazi which was attacked by terror. Benghazi. Terror."

This reminds me of the "you didn't build that" bullshiat. Conservatives do not seem to handle context well.


Context requires thought, and thinking is hard. Absorbing and regurgitating memes generated by others is much easier.

/not really a "conservative" problem, more of a general lack of respect for or education in critical, rational thought
 
2012-10-17 03:58:37 PM  
FoxNews' Dan Gainor

i14.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-17 04:00:37 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Larry Mahnken: I can't believe that there's people who think EnviroDude is serious.

He's serious. We shouldn't take him seriously, but he's serious.


Serious or not, he's a perfect stand-in for my uncle, who would sometimes render me utterly speechless with his bizarre claims. And he is most definitely serious.

Thanks to Dude and his ilk I am no longer caught off guard by his insanity.
 
2012-10-17 04:01:57 PM  

Flaming Yawn: Headso: complaining about the moderator comes off as weak.

There's a sputtering rant at Fox News about the Biden / Ryan debate. They tout the "82 interruptions", "moderator was a lib!", etc etc ad nauseam, but do concede in the middle of the article that the speaking times for each candidate were within a minute of each other.

Whine moar, GOP crybabies.


They're hilarious! They are always trying to paint "libs" as nothing but useless emotional saps, devoid of intelligence, logic and facts, but when it comes right down to it, not only is this obviously false, but it's all projection. All they have is an appeal to emotion. They have nothing.
 
2012-10-17 04:02:34 PM  

falcon176: the fact checkers say Romney was right, therefore he is. but as for all that stuff they say Romney is lying out of his ass on, nice try libs.


I recall this sentiment coming from the Left when Romney won the first debate and the Right told the Left to 'suck it'.

Turnabout is fair play?

/Romney lost
//Deal with it
///4 more years coming your way!
 
2012-10-17 04:07:01 PM  

vrax: codergirl42: Weaver95: I think part of what I find so fascinating about the GOP these days is their absolute belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. there is zero doubt among any of them. the Democrats watched the first debate and most of them admitted that hey, Romney came out ahead. the GOP tho - Romney got his ass kicked last night and today ALL the Republicans are saying Romney won. they can't admit their guy did poorly.

that's amazing to watch...the almost fanatical religious belief in their own cause. scary sometimes too but still fascinating.

My step sister is one of the die hard republican types but she did admit she thought Obama won the debate. She then proceeded to call the moderator biased.

Is she also adopted from a "special needs" family?


Not adopted but each of us have "special needs" siblings...
 
2012-10-17 04:14:27 PM  

James!: If your excuse for every failure is that the world is biased against you then maybe you're just farking wrong.


Conservatism cannot fail, it can only be failed.
 
2012-10-17 04:18:28 PM  

Zapruder: Listen libtards, Fartbongo might have said that "No act of terror" will something something America, and it might have been said while he was talking about the Benghazi attacks, but that doesn't mean he said that it was an act of terror! It's math!

What he needed to say was,
"This was an act of terror. And by 'this' I mean the attack on Benghazi. It was an act of terror in Benghazi. It was a terrible act of terror in Benghazi that was an act of terror. Terror. Benghazi. Benghazi was under a terrorist attack when terrorists attacked Benghazi which was attacked by terror. Benghazi. Terror."


Too subtle.
 
2012-10-17 04:19:35 PM  

codergirl42: vrax: codergirl42: Weaver95: I think part of what I find so fascinating about the GOP these days is their absolute belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. there is zero doubt among any of them. the Democrats watched the first debate and most of them admitted that hey, Romney came out ahead. the GOP tho - Romney got his ass kicked last night and today ALL the Republicans are saying Romney won. they can't admit their guy did poorly.

that's amazing to watch...the almost fanatical religious belief in their own cause. scary sometimes too but still fascinating.

My step sister is one of the die hard republican types but she did admit she thought Obama won the debate. She then proceeded to call the moderator biased.

Is she also adopted from a "special needs" family?

Not adopted but each of us have "special needs" siblings...


It's nice that you can look at one another that way. :)
 
2012-10-17 04:19:41 PM  

James!: If your excuse for every failure is that the world is biased against you then maybe you're just farking wrong.


when did we start talking about black people?

/who said that??!
 
2012-10-17 04:19:59 PM  
Oh jesus farking christ. This is so predictable. The two candidates were arguing over an objective fact. Obama said "I said it was an act of terror." Romney said "no you didn't."

The moderator did her farking job and set the record straight, and suddenly she's part of the Obama campaign? This stupid farking outrage machine - partisan hacks who have the gall to accuse real journalists of being partisan hacks based on the fact that they're doing their job - is one of the reasons (among many) why our media is so farked up.


And the talking point on this is so farking stupid. Who cares what they said right after it happened? Everyone was trying to figure shiat out at the time. Did we know exactly what happened as the towers were falling on September 11? Give me a break.

What this is, is disgusting political opportunism. A U.S. ambassador is killed, and Romney's douchey, smirking self stands up and basically says "Oh, see, this fits my campaign narrative. Obama killed this ambassador because he went on an apology tour and loves muslims too much."

God I hate Romney. What a farking piece of shiat.
 
2012-10-17 04:20:04 PM  

Weaver95: Limbaugh just accused the Candy of 'journalistic terrorism' against Romney. I can't make this shiat up. He's REALLY desperate today.


I wonder how long until the term "Rape" starts showing up...
 
2012-10-17 04:21:51 PM  

Brubold: Actually now Romney gets to revisit the Libya situation again and this time he has quotes from Anderson Cooper, Politico, and even Crowley that back up his statement on the situation. Obama talked about how bad it was for Romney to try and score political points over the attack all while Obama was trying to paint a narrative that made him look blameless before the election.


No, not really. The way Obama framed the situation last night made Romney look like a complete dickwad for politicizing the deaths of four Americans. Does he really want to grab the shovel and pile on that one? Not to mention, bringing it up again will only reinforce how foolish he looked during the debates.
 
2012-10-17 04:22:07 PM  

Chummer45: Did we know exactly what happened as the towers were falling on September 11?


Yes. We learned, within the first hour of the attacks, that even the most capricious of goats can capture a car thief and redeem themselves.
 
2012-10-17 04:22:49 PM  

lordjupiter: If you're dumb enough to be "undecided" at this point there's probably nothing a moderator can do or say to sway you.


I heard a caller on NPR this morning that claimed to be undecided. She said she was waiting for the candidates to give more details on their economic plans before deciding. Since she wasn't getting that, she would fall back on the social issues because she knew their stance on those. She didn't say which direction she was leaning. Anyway, apparently that is a common feeling among "undecided" But I agree with you - if you have decided by now with as long as this campaign season has been....
 
2012-10-17 04:24:03 PM  

Hebalo: MusicMakeMyHeadPound: 1. Energy Independence (it's implied)

P.S. Romney's Energy Independence plan is apparently "build more pipelines from Canada".


"Build more pipelines from Canada that actually reduce US oil supply, most notably our agricultural center", more like it.
 
2012-10-17 04:24:08 PM  

riverwalk barfly: I heard a caller on NPR this morning that claimed to be undecided. She said she was waiting for the candidates to give more details on their economic plans before deciding. Since she wasn't getting that, she would fall back on the social issues because she knew their stance on those. She didn't say which direction she was leaning. Anyway, apparently that is a common feeling among "undecided" But I agree with you - if you have decided by now with as long as this campaign season has been....


Obama's plans are too full of numbers, and Romney's plans have no numbers. I want someone with just a few numbers. But I guess I can vote based on keeping Mexicans out if I can't have that.
 
2012-10-17 04:24:39 PM  

Weaver95: Elandriel: Weaver95: catching the Limbaugh hour right now (@weaverXP if you want to join me) and it looks like the official GOP mantra on this debate loss is going to be 1. Romney won. 2. Obama lost badly and 3. MODERATORS omg moderators so many moderators!

This is exactly what they did in 2008. I hate that they simply cannot accept defeat, ever. There is NO grace and no effort on their part to be anything but rash and stubborn.

Rush is saying that the GOP won, that debates don't matter and that you are stupid if you think Obama beat Romney. Oh, and that debates don't matter, but Romney won and Obama was stuttering and sweating and failure incarnate...not that it mattered because MODERATORS and the lying, so many lies and none of it mattered but if it did matter than Romney won.

or something. Limbaugh is more than a bit incoherent today.


Limbaugh was coherent to begin with?

/He's like a bad rapper. You can't understand anything except the swearwords.
 
2012-10-17 04:39:18 PM  

vrax: codergirl42: vrax: codergirl42: Weaver95: I think part of what I find so fascinating about the GOP these days is their absolute belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. there is zero doubt among any of them. the Democrats watched the first debate and most of them admitted that hey, Romney came out ahead. the GOP tho - Romney got his ass kicked last night and today ALL the Republicans are saying Romney won. they can't admit their guy did poorly.

that's amazing to watch...the almost fanatical religious belief in their own cause. scary sometimes too but still fascinating.

My step sister is one of the die hard republican types but she did admit she thought Obama won the debate. She then proceeded to call the moderator biased.

Is she also adopted from a "special needs" family?

Not adopted but each of us have "special needs" siblings...

It's nice that you can look at one another that way. :)


Well on her side it's genetic, on my side it's environmental...
 
2012-10-17 04:40:01 PM  

Zapruder: What he needed to say was,
"This was an act of terror. And by 'this' I mean the attack on Benghazi. It was an act of terror in Benghazi. It was a terrible act of terror in Benghazi that was an act of terror. Terror. Benghazi. Benghazi was under a terrorist attack when terrorists attacked Benghazi which was attacked by terror. Benghazi. Terror."


That's like every right wing broadcast, ever.
 
2012-10-17 04:43:54 PM  

Lando Lincoln: He's serious. PhilHerup We shouldn't take him seriously, but he's serious Philherup.


ftfy

/internet dentist-like typing detected
 
2012-10-17 04:45:58 PM  

Blowmonkey: Zapruder: What he needed to say was,
"This was an act of terror. And by 'this' I mean the attack on Benghazi. It was an act of terror in Benghazi. It was a terrible act of terror in Benghazi that was an act of terror. Terror. Benghazi. Benghazi was under a terrorist attack when terrorists attacked Benghazi which was attacked by terror. Benghazi. Terror."

That's like every right wing broadcast, ever.


Wasn't this a direct quote from a Very Special Episode of Hannity?
 
2012-10-17 04:48:45 PM  

vrax: evoke: Four major debates and no moderator from Fox News or any other form of alternative news station/websites.

Please tell me that you don't seriously think that Fox News is some sort of "alternative news station"! The number one news (or "news") network is some minority underdog?! LMAO!


Yeah that's the thing I don't get about these conservatives when they whine about the "big bad Liberal media" and crow that FOX News is "#1".

Gee if your network is #1 why would you give a crap what the other networks are saying? And furthermore if you're network is #1 doesn't it make it part of that vaunted "Lamestream Media"?
 
2012-10-17 04:49:52 PM  

sprawl15: the most capricious of goats


Aren't all goats infinitely capricious?
 
2012-10-17 04:53:18 PM  

Hollie Maea: sprawl15: the most capricious of goats

Aren't all goats infinitely capricious?


Some are more infinite than others.
 
2012-10-17 05:08:45 PM  

skullkrusher: James!: If your excuse for every failure is that the world is biased against you then maybe you're just farking wrong.

when did we start talking about black people?

/who said that??!


Well, if you want to talk about black people, we can start with the fact that the world, or at least the US job market, provably is biased against them.

/arrr threadjack
 
2012-10-17 05:20:23 PM  

fruitloop: fark you guys! We're having a ladder and a glass of orange juice moderate the 3rd debate. Will that shut you assholes up?

/probably not


Definitely a no on the ladder, it obviously leans to the left.

images04.olx.com

/hot
 
2012-10-17 05:24:32 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Losers whine about the moderators


Winners go home and screw Michelle.
 
2012-10-17 05:26:18 PM  

Blowmonkey: Brubold: Actually now Romney gets to revisit the Libya situation again and this time he has quotes from Anderson Cooper, Politico, and even Crowley that back up his statement on the situation. Obama talked about how bad it was for Romney to try and score political points over the attack all while Obama was trying to paint a narrative that made him look blameless before the election.

No, not really. The way Obama framed the situation last night made Romney look like a complete dickwad for politicizing the deaths of four Americans. Does he really want to grab the shovel and pile on that one? Not to mention, bringing it up again will only reinforce how foolish he looked during the debates.


I absolutely think Romney will bring it up in the foreign policy debate.

You have to remember that Republicans believe they are never wrong. They believe that the only reason they didn't score the point on Libya was because Candy was a meanie-head.

What else do they have? Greece? Arab Spring? Apology Tour? Iraq? The Obama administration's foreign policy has been remarkably successful. With the exception of Benghazi the Republicans have nothing.
 
2012-10-17 06:01:52 PM  
Something something Fox News.

/derp
 
2012-10-17 06:07:11 PM  
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2012-10-17 06:13:22 PM  

sprawl15: Hollie Maea: sprawl15: the most capricious of goats

Aren't all goats infinitely capricious?

Some are more infinite than others.


Not to this guy...

i14.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-17 06:20:31 PM  

Mitt Romneys Tax Return: Blowmonkey: Brubold: Actually now Romney gets to revisit the Libya situation again and this time he has quotes from Anderson Cooper, Politico, and even Crowley that back up his statement on the situation. Obama talked about how bad it was for Romney to try and score political points over the attack all while Obama was trying to paint a narrative that made him look blameless before the election.

No, not really. The way Obama framed the situation last night made Romney look like a complete dickwad for politicizing the deaths of four Americans. Does he really want to grab the shovel and pile on that one? Not to mention, bringing it up again will only reinforce how foolish he looked during the debates.

I absolutely think Romney will bring it up in the foreign policy debate.

You have to remember that Republicans believe they are never wrong. They believe that the only reason they didn't score the point on Libya was because Candy was a meanie-head.

What else do they have? Greece? Arab Spring? Apology Tour? Iraq? The Obama administration's foreign policy has been remarkably successful. With the exception of Benghazi the Republicans have nothing.



Which will allow Obama to remind people of Rmoneys smirking press conference and attempt to politicize a tragedy that the blame for which has already been accepted. Not a very bright move. Especially if widows of some of the ones killed go on and condemn the GOP for trying to take advantage.
 
2012-10-17 06:45:35 PM  

sdd2000: Which will allow Obama to remind people of Rmoneys smirking press conference and attempt to politicize a tragedy that the blame for which has already been accepted. Not a very bright move. Especially if widows of some of the ones killed go on and condemn the GOP for trying to take advantage.


I agree with you that's it a bad idea, but that won't stop him.

The candidates don't always get to choose what they're going to talk about. The moderator is going to ask about Libya. What is Romney's response? Does he walk his remarks back? Apologize to Obama? Pivot to another subject? I think Romney's ego will prevent him from letting it go. He's going to want to "clarify his position."
 
2012-10-17 08:32:50 PM  
I just love how the article forgoes the normal cleaning up that quotations always get in favor of making Crowly look like a stammering idiot. Dude, that's just how people talk in real life. Want me to start quoting Romney word for word and see what kind of bumbling jackass he looks like?

But you know it's pure partisan masturbation when comments on the article are disabled. You know the voices of dissent and skeptical dissatisfaction would permeate the page, so they just shut off conversation.

Stay classy, Fox.
 
2012-10-17 08:48:38 PM  
Just wondering, in all 3 debates, the moderators are liberals.
Why no conservative moderators?
Even if there is no bias, it leaves the illusion that there is.
 
2012-10-17 09:58:12 PM  

artthehypnotist: Just wondering, in all 3 debates, the moderators are liberals.
Why no conservative moderators?
Even if there is no bias, it leaves the illusion that there is.


5/10

A picture of a crying eagle would have raised your score.
 
2012-10-17 10:09:08 PM  
Actually, that was a serious question.
In all the debates, the moderators lean liberal.
Why is that?
 
2012-10-17 10:29:47 PM  

artthehypnotist: Actually, that was a serious question.
In all the debates, the moderators lean liberal.
Why is that?


The answer is "they don't".
 
2012-10-17 10:42:44 PM  
.............................
 
2012-10-18 12:39:58 AM  

artthehypnotist: .............................


i hear ya, not one question bout where his real one true birth certificate is, or his social security number, or about rev wright, or how george soros and obama's body double were plotting the lybian attacks in hiding with saul alinksy because obama was too busy gay marrying global warming cult initiates and gave away free abortion certificates to be bothered to hand select the A team to prevent it from happening in the first place.
 
2012-10-18 01:07:31 AM  
Fox is whining about (alleged) political bias?

They're really hilarious when they want to be.
 
2012-10-18 04:09:29 AM  
This.

DRUDGE today reports that the Presidential Debate moderators representing PBS, CNN, CBS and ABC will be Jim Lehrer, Candy Crowley, Bob Schieffer and Martha Raddatz, respectively.
So, once again, we can look forward to softball questions lobbed toward President Obama, and "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" -like questions fired at Governor Romney.
 

OK, how are they NOT all liberal moderators?
 
Displayed 332 of 332 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report