At the next question, the moderator lost all control. “Candy,” Mr. Obama said. “Hold on.” “Mr. President,” the governor said, “I’m still speaking.” They mixed it up for a bit, then Ms. Crowley said: “Sit down, Mr. Romney.”
The most shocking exchange took place on the Benghazi attack that left the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three others dead.
Mr. Romney: “You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror? It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you’re saying.”
Mr. Obama made no defense. “Please proceed, governor.”
“I want to make sure,” Mr. Romney said. “Get the transcript,” the president said. Then Ms. Crowley jumped in to do her own fact-check, on the spot. “It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. … He did call it an act of terror.”
The truth is, he didn’t. The day after the attack, he said only 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.” It took another two weeks before the White House would label the attack an act of terror........"
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?