Obama just handed Romney the win

Margin Call wrote:

Nekochan wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

stormwatch89 wrote:Neko is far from ignorant, Margin.

Neko doesn't even understand the phrase "I posted the link for the video content..." Further, Neko still can't explain how reiterating something that she said in the debate is backtracking.

It's OK, Margin. Even YOU are wrong sometimes!

I've explained several times how Crowley corrected herself with Cooper in admitting that Obama referred to "acts of terror" in the Rose Garden instead of calling the Libya attack an "act of terror" as she had insisted during the debate. The video clearly shows what I said to be true and the commentary in the link that YOU posted is spot on.
Again, thanks for posting the Crowley-Anderson exchange which confirms what I have said. No matter how you spin it, you have yourself posted a link backing up exactly what I have been saying on this thread.

Next week, the debate will be solely about foreign policy--and Crowley won't be there to wrongly correct Romney.

Dear God...you are flat-out bat-shit crazy.

Nekochan wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

Nekochan wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

stormwatch89 wrote:Neko is far from ignorant, Margin.

Neko doesn't even understand the phrase "I posted the link for the video content..." Further, Neko still can't explain how reiterating something that she said in the debate is backtracking.

It's OK, Margin. Even YOU are wrong sometimes!

I've explained several times how Crowley corrected herself with Cooper in admitting that Obama referred to "acts of terror" in the Rose Garden instead of calling the Libya attack an "act of terror" as she had insisted during the debate. The video clearly shows what I said to be true and the commentary in the link that YOU posted is spot on.
Again, thanks for posting the Crowley-Anderson exchange which confirms what I have said. No matter how you spin it, you have yourself posted a link backing up exactly what I have been saying on this thread.

Next week, the debate will be solely about foreign policy--and Crowley won't be there to wrongly correct Romney.

Dear God...you are flat-out bat-shit crazy.

So that is what you call someone when you post a link that backs up what you've been arguing against.

Margin Call wrote:

Nekochan wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

Nekochan wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

stormwatch89 wrote:Neko is far from ignorant, Margin.

Neko doesn't even understand the phrase "I posted the link for the video content..." Further, Neko still can't explain how reiterating something that she said in the debate is backtracking.

It's OK, Margin. Even YOU are wrong sometimes!

I've explained several times how Crowley corrected herself with Cooper in admitting that Obama referred to "acts of terror" in the Rose Garden instead of calling the Libya attack an "act of terror" as she had insisted during the debate. The video clearly shows what I said to be true and the commentary in the link that YOU posted is spot on.
Again, thanks for posting the Crowley-Anderson exchange which confirms what I have said. No matter how you spin it, you have yourself posted a link backing up exactly what I have been saying on this thread.

Next week, the debate will be solely about foreign policy--and Crowley won't be there to wrongly correct Romney.

Dear God...you are flat-out bat-shit crazy.

So that is what you call someone when you post a link that backs up what you've been arguing against.

For the 3rd time, I posted the link for the video content, not for the nuttie talking points.

Nekochan wrote:
And I told you that I saw the Crowley-Anderson exchange last night. She backtracked with Anderson Cooper when she admitted that she had not remembered exactly what Obama had said in the Rose Garden.

Margin Call wrote:

Nekochan wrote:
And I told you that I saw the Crowley-Anderson exchange last night. She backtracked with Anderson Cooper when she admitted that she had not remembered exactly what Obama had said in the Rose Garden.

You are digging a deeper hole. She never admitted that. Are you watching something that some nuttie has edited?

Nekochan wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

Nekochan wrote:
And I told you that I saw the Crowley-Anderson exchange last night. She backtracked with Anderson Cooper when she admitted that she had not remembered exactly what Obama had said in the Rose Garden.

You are digging a deeper hole. She never admitted that. Are you watching something that some nuttie has edited?

Maybe you didn't understand the first and second time I told you that I watched the exchange between Crowley and Cooper last night. She backtracked, plain and simple. She went from saying that "he (Obama) did in fact call it an act of terror" during the debate to admitting to Cooper that she wasn't sure during the debate exactly what Obama had said in the Rose Garden. It's plain and clear what she said in the video link that you posted.

I'm not digging anything. You posted a link (video plus commentary) that supports the opposite of the point you've been arguing. You're the one who's dug a deep, deep hole and all your name calling and blustering doesn't change anything.

Margin Call wrote:

Nekochan wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

Nekochan wrote:
And I told you that I saw the Crowley-Anderson exchange last night. She backtracked with Anderson Cooper when she admitted that she had not remembered exactly what Obama had said in the Rose Garden.

You are digging a deeper hole. She never admitted that. Are you watching something that some nuttie has edited?

Maybe you didn't understand the first and second time I told you that I watched the exchange between Crowley and Cooper last night. She backtracked, plain and simple. She went from saying that "he (Obama) did in fact call it an act of terror" during the debate to admitting to Cooper that she wasn't sure during the debate exactly what Obama had said in the Rose Garden. It's plain and clear what she said in the video link that you posted.

I'm not digging anything. You posted a link (video plus commentary) that supports the opposite of the point you've been arguing. You're the one who's dug a deep, deep hole and all your name calling and blustering doesn't change anything.

She used the exact words that Obama spoke in the Rose Garden during the debate! You have a problem with the fact that she was accurate, especially when it mattered most. You are incorrigible. Truth and accuracy really are difficult propositions for the bonafides this go-around.

AND FOR THE FOURTH TIME...I POSTED THE LINK FOR THE VIDEO CONTENT ONLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you are over the age of three, it should be crystal clear what that means. Clearly, I don't care what the commentary says...the author is as misinformed, mislead and lacking in a reasonable perspective as you are.

Nekochan wrote:
s. Clearly, I don't care what the commentary says...the author is as misinformed, mislead and lacking in a reasonable perspective as you are.

Nekochan wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

Nekochan wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

Nekochan wrote:
And I told you that I saw the Crowley-Anderson exchange last night. She backtracked with Anderson Cooper when she admitted that she had not remembered exactly what Obama had said in the Rose Garden.

You are digging a deeper hole. She never admitted that. Are you watching something that some nuttie has edited?

Maybe you didn't understand the first and second time I told you that I watched the exchange between Crowley and Cooper last night. She backtracked, plain and simple. She went from saying that "he (Obama) did in fact call it an act of terror" during the debate to admitting to Cooper that she wasn't sure during the debate exactly what Obama had said in the Rose Garden. It's plain and clear what she said in the video link that you posted.

I'm not digging anything. You posted a link (video plus commentary) that supports the opposite of the point you've been arguing. You're the one who's dug a deep, deep hole and all your name calling and blustering doesn't change anything.

She used the exact words that Obama spoke in the Rose Garden during the debate! You have a problem with the fact that she was accurate, especially when it mattered most. You are incorrigible. Truth and accuracy really are difficult propositions for the bonafides this go-around.

AND FOR THE FOURTH TIME...I POSTED THE LINK FOR THE VIDEO CONTENT ONLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you are over the age of three, it should be crystal clear what that means. Clearly, I don't care what the commentary says...the author is as misinformed, mislead and lacking in a reasonable perspective as you are.

Now you're SHOUTING. Crowley was not accurate during the debate no matter how loudly you shout that she was right.

Floridatexan wrote:
On which outer galactic planet did Romney "win" the debate. He did not. He revealed himself even more for the public to understand what makes him tick. He's the epitome of the worst prescription for America that could possibly exist. His policies would only destroy any gains that have been made to right the economy. I hope, when he goes down, that he takes a bunch of members of Congress with him.

Ghost_Rider1 wrote:Neko it seem as if some people have a hard time comprehending the difference between a singular word and a plural word. That makes all the difference in the world.

Nekochan wrote:

There is a difference between making a general reference to "acts of terror" in a speech than calling a particular attack an "act of terror", which Obama did not do in his Rose Garden speech. Crowley got it wrong during the debate, but she got it right when she spoke with Anderson Cooper after the debate. And those are the facts, in black and white, no matter how much you want to dispute it. And-you did post a link which in every way went against the point you were trying to make. No matter how you try to twist and spin it, that is what you did. Your link went against your own argument.

Ghost_Rider1 wrote:Neko it seem as if some people have a hard time comprehending the difference between a singular word and a plural word. That makes all the difference in the world.

Ghost_Rider1 wrote:Neko it seem as if some people have a hard time comprehending the difference between a singular word and a plural word. That makes all the difference in the world.

Margin Call wrote:

Ghost_Rider1 wrote:Neko it seem as if some people have a hard time comprehending the difference between a singular word and a plural word. That makes all the difference in the world.

Seems the nutties can't figure out that a plural is made up of more than one singular and when discussing one of the singulars, one should never refer to it in the plural. ENG 101.

salinsky wrote:

Ghost_Rider1 wrote:Neko it seem as if some people have a hard time comprehending the difference between a singular word and a plural word. That makes all the difference in the world.

Un-fucking-believable. Is comprehending the English language beyond the average wingnut's paygrade?

Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe. 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. - Obama | September 12, 2012

Seeing as how this was a press conference on Benghazi, just to whom do you think "civilian and military who represent us around the globe" refers, immediately preceding the reference to "acts of terror"? To whom do you think the "four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America" refers, immediately following the reference to "acts of terror"? See if you can connect the dots.

“So what I want all of you to know is that we are going to bring those who killed our fellow Americans to justice. I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America.” - Obama | September 13, 2012

Oops. This one's in the singular, so I guess it doesn't need to be parsed.

I have never seen people be so block-headed and obstinate about something which is so glaringly obvious. I've seen this behavior before from Neko. She's simply incapable of admitting when she's wrong. On the other hand, I'm genuinely embarrassed for you, Ghost.

Nekochan wrote:

Ghost_Rider1 wrote:Neko it seem as if some people have a hard time comprehending the difference between a singular word and a plural word. That makes all the difference in the world.

Apparently you are right.
Crowley and Obama were right during the debate only if the attack in Libya was "acts of terror".

salinsky wrote: On the other hand, I'm genuinely embarrassed for you, Ghost.[/font]

Ghost_Rider1 wrote: He was referring to acts of terrorism collectively.

Margin Call wrote:

Nekochan wrote:

Ghost_Rider1 wrote:Neko it seem as if some people have a hard time comprehending the difference between a singular word and a plural word. That makes all the difference in the world.

Apparently you are right.
Crowley and Obama were right during the debate only if the attack in Libya was "acts of terror".

Proper English dictates that "the attack" would never be referred to as the plural "acts" in this context. Get it: Libya embassy = one ACT. Libya plus 9/11 = ACTS.

Ghost_Rider1 wrote:
Don't be embarrassed for me Sally, it is well with my sole. His statement was "acts of terror". Did more than one attack occur in Benghazi. No it was a singular "act of terrorism". He was referring to acts of terrorism collectively.

Nekochan wrote:

The problem with your reasoning is that Obama didn't specify. In fact, 9/11/2001 consisted of several "acts" of terror.