Posted on 10/16/2012 11:16:33 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
........“I heard the president speak at the time. I, sort of, reread a lot of stuff about Libya because I knew we’d probably get a Libya question so I kind of wanted to be up on it,” said Crowley. “I knew that the president had said, you know, these acts of terror won’t stand. Or, whatever the whole quote was.”
“Right after that I did turn around and say, but you’re totally correct that they spent two weeks telling us this was about a tape and that that there was this riot outside the Benghazi consulate which there wasn’t,” Crowley added.
“He was right in the main, I just think he picked the wrong word,” Crowley concluded. She went on to say that her instinct forced her to correct Romney even though his “thrust” was correct."...........
(Excerpt) Read more at mediaite.com ...
I’d like to thrust her.....EEEWWWWW!
“.................Responding to Crowley’s intervention, Obama said: ‘Candy, could you say that a little louder?’ That tense moment saw the audience burst into a round of applause - despite rules meant to restrict any displays of partisanship from the crowd.....”
I was really wondering about the choice of questions..Thought they were odd during this time of grave problems threatening to destroy us and found it interesting that Megan Kelly of FOXNEWS, called attention to the strange questions almost immediately after the debate was over. She noticed, too. Crowley chose those questions to satisfy her passion for Obama. The other thing I wonder about is whether Obama received the questions in advance. Is that possible?
They had a refutation of Romney’s reply before he began to speak. The question was set up so Obama could come across righteously indignant at any hint of incompetence. That’s the gambit for the next debate. One could tell that when Romney looked back incredulously at Obama knowing he’d been trapped. They can run but they can’t hide nexttime.
She said "kind of wanted to be up on it", as if she didn't really give a crap about it.
"I knew we’d probably get a Libya question so I kind of wanted to be up on it," said Crowley.
I watched this debate in a room of 200 well-informed Republicans. When Obama uttered his lie about the Rose Garden, the room exploded in outrage. The tumult was so great that I didn’t hear Crowley’s traitorous lying defense of Obama, and when the noise died down, I heard the applause and didn’t realize what it was for. Drudge and FR had to clear that up.
What I said would happen happened. Don’t mean to say I told ya, but I knew that somehow a lie would be told and not contradicted (in fact it was corroborated), and the lie would live on in the memories of about 50 million people who do not bother with follow-ups on the debate.
This is a standard dirty trick of the Dems. Barack did it right before the 2008 election on the issue of the live birth (”failed” abortion) law in Illinois. No time to refute the lie before the vote.
Somehow this nonsense has got to be stopped. It is a threat to the Republic.
And I might add that the denial of terrorism is a Dem article of faith and an Obama dogma. This is the biggest issue of our time—not the economy, serious as that is. It puts us all in grave danger to deny that we are targeted by terrorists or to pretend that Obama somehow got them all when the SEALs killed bin Laden.
The Romney campaign and the Super Pac’s better come charging out the gate tomorrow in commercials with her b.s.. I am so pissed off about this you all have no idea. It made me so pissed and sick to my stomach when she did this I just literally felt like we were watching a debate in Russia.
Obama has a BIG problem on his hands next week...and those problems are all called Iran, Israel, Syria, Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya, Fort Hood, Muslim Brotherhood etc...all of these issues are HIS RECORD. Not Mitt’s.
Mitt will wipe the floor with Obama next week and Obama will come coasting in off a false sugar high that he thinks he actually won something tonight because his cheer squad back at the networks said so.
NOW is the time for Romney and Ryan to flood the nation with TV spots showing the video of their own words...patterns, lies, and bias.
I understand she has booked to go on ALL the Sunday shows, will be talking to Wolf Blitzer, Bill Marr, Ellen, Oprah, The View etc even gonna give R Limbaugh a call and ask if she can go on his show.
The reason for the above is so she can set the record straight and make sure the truth gets out.
Now, about that oceanfront property in Arkansas we were talking about.
CC and Billary will be able to park their brooms and catch one of those pigs that will be flying around also.
You will be hearing from the lawyers for the Bovine Anti Defamation League!
TRANSLATION:
"I definitely reread a lot of stuff about Libya because the president's staff told me to be ready to defend him since he was going to lie about it, as he would do the whole evening. We knew Romney was going to bring it up when our planted Libya question came up so I really wanted to be able to stun Romney by double-teaming him when he told the truth. Then I walked it back a bit to appear impartial. In my opinion, I pulled it off perfectly.” said Crowley.
I don’t mean to play the liberal here.
But if you forget about what everyone else said and just focus on what obama said at the rose garden. He did say ‘ACTS OF TERROR’. So when you’re bickering with your liberal friends. You need to be ready to answer for romney saying that he didn’t say it.
The truth is, if you remove all context, obama did say acts of terror. The day after the attack, obama said this: “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation”
The Context of obamas statements will be LOST on your liberal friends. Their question will be ‘Did he or Did he not say “Acts of Terror”. And you will spend the next several minutes trying to explain to their Joe Biden Style grin why Romney said that obama didn’t say that and the transcript plainly says he did. Because for them, at their convenience, rhetoric is more important than context or content.
Am i wrong here?
I wouldn’t doubt Obama and Crowley got together beforehand and Candy assured Fearless Leader she’d throw him a lifeline if he appeared to be floundering. Probably didn’t happen, but it sure seemed something like that was pre-arranged. Crowley lived up (or down) to the worst expectations of conservatives. She just couldn’t help herself.
What Romney needs to say in the debate on foreign policy is this:
“The murder of the Libyan ambassador provides further evidence that the Middle Eastern foreign policy of this administration has been a dismal failure. The American people will have their opportunity to remedy the situation on election day.”
The only difference between the replacement refs and that fat, wet, sow Candy Crowley is that this time the heifer was ON the field.
It doesn’t really matter that he called it an act or terror or not. The point is that he sent around his surrogates blaming a US citizen for making a movie that caused the violence. The facts remain that people died because they did not have the security they needed after Obama’s middle east policies failed.
Do you think more American citizens were murdered by weapons Obama provided to our enemies?
Q Can I ask one more -- are criticizing the President for not classifying what happened in Benghazi as a terrorist attack, going as far as you did or the NCTC director. Can you respond to that and explain why that is?So, the motive becomes irrelevant. If the attack was motivated by the movie, it was terrorism, too.MR. CARNEY: The President spoke eloquently I believe about the attack that took the lives of four Americans at the United Nations General Assembly, and I think made very clear that it is wholly unacceptable to respond to a video, no matter how offensive, with violence, and it is wholly unacceptable, regardless of the reason, to attack embassies or diplomatic facilities and to kill diplomatic personnel. The President -- our position is, as reflected by the NCTC director, that it was a terrorist attack. It is, I think by definition, a terrorist attack when there is a prolonged assault on an embassy with weapons.
The broader questions here about who participated, what led to the attack on the facility in Benghazi -- all those questions are under investigation at two levels, by the FBI and by the Accountability Review Board established by Secretary Clinton to look at issues of security in Benghazi and security at other diplomatic facilities. So, let's be clear, it was a terrorist attack and it was an inexcusable attack.
you are correct that the left will play word games, sophism, and claim a win. But anybody who paid attention to the administration line about the motive for the attack knows that the administration blamed the movie, first. Obama did, in his Rose Garden remarks, and Rice obviously did. Protest over a movie, gone bad. That was a lie. There was no protest, and the administration knew it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.