So what Romney said during the debate was a bald faced lie?
A women’s group proactively put together a list for Romney, and now he’s claiming he asked them to do it?
You seem shocked.
You seem scarcastic…
But yeah - I am a little.
I hope that people jump all over this, especially when coupled to the totally wrong accusation he made of Obama’s lie
If he acted upon it, took them at their word and did something about it, I’d be willing to give some slack on that. Not like we’re running low, or anything, and he will open his mouth tomorrow…
I’m back. I rewatched the debate. The President had a good opening strategy that he executed masterfully during the debate - listen.
Indeed. Romney mentioned Ronald Reagan’s recovery. What about Bill Clinton’s recovery?
Runner up: “Please proceed, Governor.”
Obama made a self-referential joke: “Read the transcript.” 
The President won tbe debate on substance, on style, and on delivery. Today - in this 24-hour news cycle - Mitt Romney is licking his wounds. And everyone is talking about the “binders full of women” remark. Also add to that remark, “get a green card stapled to their diploma”. Romney is clueless.
Not only clueless, but stupid. For example, Romney said: “He had a Democratic House, Democratic Senate - why didn’t he do it?” Are you suggesting, Governor Romney, that a Republican House and a Republican Senate would not have passed the bill?
Mitt Romney - clueless and stupid.
Never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake.
This. I honestly do not see what the flap is all about. The Romney camp is going to focus on this to the exclusion of every other thing that Obama said. Because they have nothing else to nitpick.
How can anyone say this was a draw or that Mitt won??
If there is anyone within the sound of my post who feels Romney won, on what basis are you claiming this?
So the third debate is all foreign policy. Romney better come up with something, because after tonight I’m pretty sure Benghazi is dead as an issue.
Iran should be big. Romney will try to claim “we must do more,” without scaring anyone into believing that war is imminent. As usual, there will be some drooling-moron “undecideds” who will buy his smooth Janus act.
And, expect Romney to steer back to the economy, via two “foreign policy” routes: China (currency manipulation, etc.), and Europe (their recession being a supposed example of too much debt but with high taxes anyway).
Speaking of the economy, I’m surprised Obama has never brought up simple Keynesian notions of debt spending during a (Bush-generated) economic crisis, to defend recent (even current) deficits.
Is there really an issue he can make outta Iran? News is the sanctions are biting and Obama has already pledged he won’t let hem get the bomb.
Also, I hope that Obama brings up the fact that he authorized a more militant intervention than anyone advised him to do, when we did airstrikes to support the Libyan rebels defending Benghazi from Qaddafi. (But maybe he’s still reluctant to utter the word “Libya,” even after Romney’s accusation backfired last night.)
Oh, and expect Romney to have memorized another list of unfulfilled Obama promises (I actually thought that was a good moment for Romney last night) – like, Guantanamo (not that Romney has an alternative plan, mind you.)
Sorry you found out this way; I didn’t want to shock you. Hell, I’m still trying to figure out how to let you know that there is gambling going on in this establishment.
Not sure what he can come up with, other than a note from his doctor allowing him to stay home.
You misspelled “hydra”.
Ha! Or, The Hero with a Thousand Faces (a book by Joseph Campbell, IIRC).
Something I don’t get: isn’t it playing right into the hands of the terrorists to turn this attack into a big bad act of terrorism? I mean, which of these do you think the perpetrators would rather hear Obama saying to the public after the attack:
“Indeed, this was a terrible and terrifying act of terroristic terrorism committed by terrorists, and I will not rest until every American is filled with pants-shitting terror over this terrific terrorist act. Terrorism.”
vs.
“Meh. Sounds like some jerks got some sand in their vaginas over a stupid video.”
The whole point of terrorism is to make a big splash with your big bad act of violence. Why do Republicans insist that we give them the satisfaction? It seems to me that the best strategy would be to downplay it in public and send Special Forces after the perpetrators in private. Unless, of course, you wanted to put on a big showy military strike so that same public thinks you’ve got a big dick, or you want the public to be so scared that they don’t care which brown people you bomb.
I don’t know that this is Obama’s thinking on the matter, but it makes sense to me.
Because the Republicans want everyone to be terrified. They want everyone terrified that the Muslim hordes are going to show up any time now and kill us all. That want to relive the “good old days” of the Cold War, just with a new bogeyman.
I would love to see the next debate be moderated by some blatantly Fox-y pro-Romney person, because it would be hilarious to watch Obama win anyway. 
Great night for the Forces Of Goodness last night. When they showed the audience watching Romney talk, you could almost feel the chill from where I was some 500 miles away. If looks could kill, I think we’d be watching Romney’s funeral in a few days.
If the best you can argue with right now is “he didn’t say it was a terrorist act! He said it was an act of terror! We win! Neener neener neener!”, then give it up. You lost the point. Big time. Personally, I think the more effective attack against Romney was when Obama pointed out how he issued a press release trying to score political points while the attack was ongoing. I wish he had added the phrase “while the bodies were still warm” but you can’t have everything.
Romney was pathetic on women’s issues. Ask him about equal pay and he comes back with how proud he was to hire a bunch of Vagina-Americans. And he’s all in favor of flexible schedules! How awesome is that?
Any gains Romney had made with Hispanics is now history. Obama nailed him good with the self-deportation line. Romney’s answer on immigration was long and pointless.
If Obama had performed like this in Round 1, the election would have been over. As it is, he has given himself a much needed shot in the arm.
Conservatives live every day in near pants shitting terror. They would feel validated if other people joined them.
The whole thing is a farce. There’s no “and thus” to the whole thing. For a while the administration was saying it wasn’t sure if the incident occurred in the context of the protests or independently. Then they said it was independent. What is the conspiracy even supposed to be?
Even the level of security thing is not a clear Republican win, since they were the ones cutting the funding for the security.
But, Hannity told them something was bad, so they ran around clucking to each other about how terrible it was.
I’ll let the Republicans blame 9/11/12 on the Obama administration ignoring the intelligence, when they also admit that the Bush administration did the same thing on 9/11/01.
From another angle: terrorism is kind of pointless unless everybody knows it was a terrorist act and who did it, or at least why it was done. So if you really wanted to frustrate the terrorists you’d play up the confusion–“Gee, we really don’t know what happened. We think it may have been just a ragtag bunch of misfits.”
If you’re lucky in that scenario you might even flush out the leaders as they take responsibility. “This is Abdul al-Abdul al-Bazari, of 203 Death to Infidels Lane, president of Al Qaeda Local 127. We claim responsibility for this strike against the Great Satan and their perpetration of Western decadence and…oh, shit, is that a Navy SEAL? (stream ends abruptly)”
Again, I don’t know that this is the White House’s thinking, but it seems like a better strategy to me than openly shitting the national pants like the GOP wants us to.