The final Presidential debate
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
Love it!
Now I would pay real money to see Nigel Tufnel take part in the debates! Who's with me?
"What is your foreign policy?"
"What will you do to stimulate the economy?"
"These all go to eleven."
It's freaking brilliant! If I were American, I'd vote for him.
Plus we would likely see guitar solos become a regular part of State of the Union speeches, which might help the ratings.
Maybe instead of Hail to the Chief they could play Big Bottom at the inauguration.
During the last debate Obama slammed Romney of the phrase - act of terror- Problem is Obama was making a statement- that could provide cover. And it did.
Romneys error was not singling out the Benghazi attack as a terrorist attack that took the WH a number of days- 2 weeks - to define as such. -
Why Benghazi matters | Full Comment | National Post
Romney’s mistake, of course, was to assert that the president waited 14 days to use the phrase “act of terror” to describe the Sept. 11 attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, an attack that killed four Americans including the ambassador to Libya.
You can see why Romney made his mistake, but a mistake it was. On Sept. 12, the president had said this: “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. “
People familiar with the language of presidents will understand what Obama was doing here. Notice he did not say: “This act of terror.” Instead, he offered a statement of principle about acts of terror in general, avoiding mention of whether the particular incident in Benghazi happened to belong to that category.
The president’s words gave him deniability in two directions: He protected himself against Republican charges just like the charge Romney leveled at him, while simultaneously refraining from any definitive characterization of the attack as terrorism.
The language was ambiguous — and intentionally ambiguous. (A statement like this would have been reviewed by at least a dozen senior White House staff, including both political and counter-terrorism advisers, and then circulated to relevant officials at State, CIA, Defense and maybe the Department of Justice, too.
Still, Romney led with his chin, and the president walloped him. By delivering the wallop, Obama also prevented the follow-on challenge before it could even be framed, and that challenge was this:
Romneys error was not singling out the Benghazi attack as a terrorist attack that took the WH a number of days- 2 weeks - to define as such. -
Why Benghazi matters | Full Comment | National Post
Romney’s mistake, of course, was to assert that the president waited 14 days to use the phrase “act of terror” to describe the Sept. 11 attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, an attack that killed four Americans including the ambassador to Libya.
You can see why Romney made his mistake, but a mistake it was. On Sept. 12, the president had said this: “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. “
People familiar with the language of presidents will understand what Obama was doing here. Notice he did not say: “This act of terror.” Instead, he offered a statement of principle about acts of terror in general, avoiding mention of whether the particular incident in Benghazi happened to belong to that category.
The president’s words gave him deniability in two directions: He protected himself against Republican charges just like the charge Romney leveled at him, while simultaneously refraining from any definitive characterization of the attack as terrorism.
The language was ambiguous — and intentionally ambiguous. (A statement like this would have been reviewed by at least a dozen senior White House staff, including both political and counter-terrorism advisers, and then circulated to relevant officials at State, CIA, Defense and maybe the Department of Justice, too.
Still, Romney led with his chin, and the president walloped him. By delivering the wallop, Obama also prevented the follow-on challenge before it could even be framed, and that challenge was this:
Romney has another opportunity to bring this up... Again.
The American people know exactly what is being brought up and no one is so easily fooled as to believe that Libya was/is not the focal point of those exchanges.
Last debate, it became very evident that Obama was upset that it was being brought up... And it showed
The American people know exactly what is being brought up and no one is so easily fooled as to believe that Libya was/is not the focal point of those exchanges.
Last debate, it became very evident that Obama was upset that it was being brought up... And it showed
"The final Presidential Debate" That is the truth, a fact, concrete, solid, undeniable and certain justice. A dream come true about a dream gone bad. Things will be different without big Satan.
Monday’s Debate Puts Focus on Foreign Policy Clashes
When President Obama and Mitt Romney sit down Monday night for the last of their three debates, two things should be immediately evident: there should be no pacing the stage or candidates’ getting into each other’s space, and there should be no veering into arguments over taxes.
This debate is about how America deals with the world — and how it should.
more
Monday's Debate Puts Focus on Foreign Policy Clashes - NYTimes.com
When President Obama and Mitt Romney sit down Monday night for the last of their three debates, two things should be immediately evident: there should be no pacing the stage or candidates’ getting into each other’s space, and there should be no veering into arguments over taxes.
This debate is about how America deals with the world — and how it should.
more
Monday's Debate Puts Focus on Foreign Policy Clashes - NYTimes.com
Monday’s Debate Puts Focus on Foreign Policy Clashes
When President Obama and Mitt Romney sit down Monday night for the last of their three debates, two things should be immediately evident: there should be no pacing the stage or candidates’ getting into each other’s space, and there should be no veering into arguments over taxes.
This debate is about how America deals with the world — and how it should.
more
Monday's Debate Puts Focus on Foreign Policy Clashes - NYTimes.com
How to Address Saudi Royalty | eHow.com
On President Obama’s Bow to the Japanese Emperor, An Academic Friend Writes That Both the Left and the Right Are Wrong - ABC News
An old friend — an academic with expertise about the Japanese Empire, and in general a supporter of President Obama — sends me the following note, relating to photographs of President Obama bowing to Emperor Akihito of Japan.
rt obama akihito 091115 main On President Obamas Bow to the Japanese Emperor, An Academic Friend Writes That Both the Left and the Right Are Wrong
"This picture shows two things," my friend writes.
"1) The 'right' is wrong about Obama's bow.
"2) The 'left' is wrong about Obama's bow.
"His bow is neither (1) unprecedented nor (2) a sign of cultural understanding.
"At their 1971 meeting in Alaska, the first visit of a Japanese Emperor to America, President Nixon bowed and referred to Emperor Hirohito and his wife repeatedly as 'Your Imperial Majesties.'"
Actually Obama created a mess that is unequalled since the great depression
The people are angry because it couldn't be corrected in four years. Remember
the average citizen has been going through money with abandoned for over
twenty years without realizing the hay ride was over long time ago.
Two things, Obama wins and I think things will get better, not great but better.
America is in a conservative deep freeze, not a fiscal conservative deep freeze
but a social conservative deep freeze. These people believe in simple solutions
and Jesus will make it all better if we all just believe. Of course they also believe
the communists are at the gates and somehow adopting some for of social safety
net is out right evil.
On the Romney side, in the short term, things will get better but in the long term
America will begin its descent into becoming a second rate nation involved in more
wars they can't afford with no more attention on the credit card to pay for them.
The believers scare me more than the Iranians even because they actually believe
in the end times nonsense and when you drag religion into a political ideology
it usually does not end well.
The people are angry because it couldn't be corrected in four years. Remember
the average citizen has been going through money with abandoned for over
twenty years without realizing the hay ride was over long time ago.
Two things, Obama wins and I think things will get better, not great but better.
America is in a conservative deep freeze, not a fiscal conservative deep freeze
but a social conservative deep freeze. These people believe in simple solutions
and Jesus will make it all better if we all just believe. Of course they also believe
the communists are at the gates and somehow adopting some for of social safety
net is out right evil.
On the Romney side, in the short term, things will get better but in the long term
America will begin its descent into becoming a second rate nation involved in more
wars they can't afford with no more attention on the credit card to pay for them.
The believers scare me more than the Iranians even because they actually believe
in the end times nonsense and when you drag religion into a political ideology
it usually does not end well.