Jeffrey Goldberg looks at the Benghazi disaster and the debate debacle, decries the lack of serious debate, and makes with the rhetorical questions:
What we've got now is a discussion about who needs to be fired, and
which candidate is in a better position to score cheap points. Does Mitt
Romney actually think that Barack Obama doesn't believe that what
happened in Benghazi was an act of terror?
GREAT question. Of course, I am not a mind reader so I can only guess as to what Mitt Romney or Barack Obama have been thinking. But let me toss out a few questions of my own:
1. Did anyone think Barack Obama would have taken a political hit if he had entered the Rose Garden on Sept 12 and said something like "Terrorists killed out ambassador to Libya on the anniversaty of 9/11 in an attack we failed to anticipate, after turning down repeated requests for more security in Libya. Oops."? I am just guessing that Axelrod et al advised against walking that road since it clashed with "Osama is dead and General Motors is alive".
2. Here is the White House press release of Sept 12 responding to the death of our Ambassador:
Statement by the President on the Attack in Benghazi
I strongly condemn the outrageous attack on our diplomatic facility in Benghazi, which took the lives of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. Right now, the American people have the families of those we lost in our thoughts and prayers. They exemplified America's commitment to freedom, justice, and partnership with nations and people around the globe, and stand in stark contrast to those who callously took their lives.
I have directed my Administration to provide all necessary resources to support the security of our personnel in Libya, and to increase security at our diplomatic posts around the globe. While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants.
On a personal note, Chris was a courageous and exemplary representative of the United States. Throughout the Libyan revolution, he selflessly served our country and the Libyan people at our mission in Benghazi. As Ambassador in Tripoli, he has supported Libya's transition to democracy. His legacy will endure wherever human beings reach for liberty and justice. I am profoundly grateful for his service to my Administration, and deeply saddened by this loss.
The brave Americans we lost represent the extraordinary service and sacrifices that our civilians make every day around the globe. As we stand united with their families, let us now redouble our own efforts to carry their work forward.
Which part of that should have suggested to Gov. Romney (or does suggest to Mr. Goldberg) that on Sept 12 President Obama considered this to be an act of terror? FWIW, my takeaway is that senseless violence provoked by an offensive video sparked the tragedy.
In his Rose Garden appearance the President did mention terror generically and as an afterthought. My question - if he was labeling this tragedy an act of terror, how come no one was listening? How did,for example, the NY Times completely miss that in their coverage of his comments? Why did the press ignore the obvious follow-up questions, such as what groups sponsored the terrorists and was there an Al Qaeda connection?
Why did UN Ambassador Susan Rice harp on the seemingly irrelevant video in her Sunday talk show appearances on Sept 16? Why was it newsworthy when Hillary Clinton described the incident as terror on Sept 21? Why was the President specifically asked whether it was terror as late as Sept 25 on The View (he ducked the answer)?
Is it now the case that when Obama speaks no one listens, including Obama? Does Mr. Goldberg really think that the President clearly described the death of our ambassador as an act of terror on Sept 12 but no one noticed?
Just when should it have been obvious to Gov. Romney and the rest of us that President Obama viewed this as an act of terror?
IF WE CAN BELIEVE THE QUESTONER...
Apparently Obama chatted privately with Kerry Ladka, who asked the fateful Libya question, after the debate:
President Obama, though, wasn’t done with Kerry Ladka. “After the debate, the president came over to me and spent about two minutes with me privately,” says the 61-year-old Ladka, who works at Global Telecom Supply in Mineola, N.Y. According to Ladka, Obama gave him ”more information about why he delayed calling the attack a terorist attack.” For background, Obama did apparently lump Benghazi into a reference to “acts of terror” in a Sept. 12 Rose Garden address. However, he spent about two weeks holding off on using the full “terrorist” designation. The rationale for the delay, Obama explained to Ladka, was to make sure that the “intelligence he was acting on was real intelligence and not disinformation,” recalls Ladka.
Wait - now the President is admitting he waited two weeks to call this terror while the intel came in?
There's no way out of this for Obama. And it won't go away between now and November 6.
As the late, great Chick Hearn used to say, "This ballgame's in the refrigerator. The door is closed, the light is out, the eggs are coolin', the butter's gettin' hard and the Jello's jigglin'."
He also coined the phrase "slam dunk."
Posted by: Danube of Thought on Ipad | October 17, 2012 at 02:21 PM
Does Mr. Goldberg really think that the President clearly described the death of our ambassador as an act of terror on Sept 12 but no one noticed?
Certainly the President himself appears not to have noticed.
Posted by: jimmyk | October 17, 2012 at 02:26 PM
"Does Mitt Romney actually think that Barack Obama doesn't believe that what happened in Benghazi was an act of terror?"
Well TM,
Last week in Twitter Wars highlighted by Taranto, we had the Smartest Atheist alive, Richard Dawkin's tell us that Obama wasn't a Christian. When Taranto brought it up that Obama says he is a Christian Dawkin's reply (as I understand it) was that Obama is too smart to believe in God so he is only saying that he believes in God in order to remain politically viable.
See what a can of worms one opens when one tries to figure out what Obama believes. It even cause Lefty's to come to the conclusion that he's lying.
From that bit of logic I take it that trying to figure out what Obama believes is a fruitless exercise, much like Piers Morgan asking Bill Clinton to comment on Mitt Romney's lack of principles.
Posted by: daddy | October 17, 2012 at 02:35 PM
ObamaCo in full spin mode. he knows he is toast. Time to get the fork out. This turd is done.
Posted by: maryrose | October 17, 2012 at 02:35 PM
much like Piers Morgan asking Bill Clinton to comment on Mitt Romney's lack of principles.
Have to disagree, daddy. Why not ask an expert?
Posted by: jimmyk | October 17, 2012 at 02:42 PM
Sent the Detroit Free Press coverage of the 'flag draped coffins' to Megyn and Drudge.
Four days later Obama's administration was downplaying the 'terrorism' aspect IN FRONT OF those flag draped coffins he tried to wrap his outrage in last night.
LUN for the DFP coverage
Still haven't found a transcript of the remarks...
Posted by: Stephanie | October 17, 2012 at 02:46 PM
JimmyK,
Clinton wisely dodged the question rom Piers Morgan.
Posted by: daddy | October 17, 2012 at 02:54 PM
JimmyK,
On baseball, I caught most of the game last night very on very staticky AM radio stations over Canada. Verlander obviously was great, but I was glad to see Ichiro never gave up and got the only hits off of him through 8 Innings. Were either one of them well hit singles, or were they his standard rinky dink infield slow rollers? Couldn't tell from reading the papers.
Posted by: daddy | October 17, 2012 at 02:57 PM
God is competing deity to BO.
Posted by: lyle | October 17, 2012 at 03:06 PM
Verlander had far from his best stuff, but the guy is a horse.
Posted by: Danube of Thought on Ipad | October 17, 2012 at 03:06 PM
Well Verlander might be slightly distracted,
ahem, from the New York Post piece,
I suppose Goldberg is being rhetorical, but that is too much to infer.
Posted by: narciso | October 17, 2012 at 03:10 PM
Daddy, I think I only saw the first one in the 4th inning, and it was legit, an opposite field hard hit just in the hole, the Yanks' first baserunner.
Posted by: jimmyk | October 17, 2012 at 03:11 PM
As you allude, Obama really doesn't want to have to admit that Americans are still being targeted and killed by Islamic terrorists.
First, that undercuts his arguing that he has done a masterful job of keeping us safe from attack; he's left arguing that one attack shouldn't be taken out of context. It also lessens his ability to brag that killing Bin Laden was bigger than it was. Obama would like killing Bin Laden to be the 'end' of the war on terror that he doesn't even like to mention. The attack in Libya proves that it isn't over.
Second, Obama believes that we are somehow responsible for people not liking us. Being able to blame a movie for the violence is preferred over having to admit that we are being targeted by a bunch of freaking lunatics who need to be eradicated.
Posted by: steve | October 17, 2012 at 03:12 PM
DEVASTATING new ad!!
Unanswered Questions: Who Denied Security to the Benghazi Consulate?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ARintSTCWw4
Posted by: Paula | October 17, 2012 at 03:22 PM
Assuming they are diligent in their choice of targets, there shouldn't be a problem;
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_polit
ics/view_from_chicago/2012/10/drones_attacks_in_libya_an_unprecedented_expansion_of_presidential_power.html
Posted by: narciso | October 17, 2012 at 03:24 PM
Thanks JimmyK.
DoT,
When I saw Norv Turner on the postgame interview, it looked to me like he had aged a decade. Did it strike you that way, or was your boot through the Television screen?
Posted by: daddy | October 17, 2012 at 03:25 PM
Finally got a sec to look at the transcript for some of favorite bits from the Narcissist-in-Chief:
Well, let me first of all talk about our diplomats, because they serve all around the world and do an incredible job in a very dangerous situation. And these aren't just representatives of the United States, they are my representatives.
Isn’t that just precious!
‘These brave men and women aren’t merely the representatives of the United States, but they are something MORE! So much more. What more you ask? ME! That’s what!’
Posted by: Some Guy | October 17, 2012 at 03:31 PM
Breaking: @CBSNews has learned the FBI has thwarted a plot to detonate a massive bomb outside the Federal Reserve in New York
Posted by: Jane - Mock the media | October 17, 2012 at 03:32 PM
OMG, wag the dog
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 03:33 PM
... Ron Paul denies responsibility...
Posted by: NK | October 17, 2012 at 03:34 PM
Good point, Some Guy.
"...they are my representatives."
Representing the Country and upholding the Constitution I swear an oath to? Not bad and all, but golly I get to personally represent a guy who won the Nobel Peace Prize. Shizamm!
Posted by: daddy | October 17, 2012 at 03:37 PM
Here’s another gem from the transcript:
And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the Secretary of State, our U.N. Ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we've lost four of our own, governor, is offensive.
Oops!
O had his rehearsed faux outrage response all ready and fired it away. Too bad though, Romney never accused him of playing politics or misleading, he deftly avoided both and instead focused on his policies, leading from behind, and it all unraveling before our eyes.
O responded with outrage to charges never made. Guilty conscience?
Posted by: Some Guy | October 17, 2012 at 03:39 PM
Stephanie:
Still haven't found a transcript of the remarks...
WH.gov
Posted by: hit and run | October 17, 2012 at 03:41 PM
There's a lot of speculation that Norv won't survive this bye week. One can only hope that A.J. Smith gets the boot as well.
The best news would be if somebody bought out the Spanos family and the club went back to the powdwe-blues full time.
Posted by: Danube of Thought on Ipad | October 17, 2012 at 03:47 PM
Gallup:
"These results are for likely voters, who are the respondents Gallup deems most likely to vote based on their responses to a series of questions asking about current voting intentions, thought given to the election, and past voting behavior. Each seven-day rolling average is based on telephone interviews with approximately 2,700 likely voters; margin of error is ±2 percentage points."
No particular reason for posting that, except that it makes me feel so good to think, read and write about it, and it's excellent for the trolls.
R took the lead by one on Oct. 9, and it has gradually widened since.
Refrigerator.
Posted by: Danube of Thought on Ipad | October 17, 2012 at 03:51 PM
Henry, HENRY!!-- you come down this instant and explain why Bam is up 49-48 in the Marquette Law poll!
Posted by: NK | October 17, 2012 at 03:53 PM
... Ron Paul denies responsibility...
Awesome, NK.
Posted by: lyle | October 17, 2012 at 03:55 PM
The 'known fellow' in the Federal Reserve
case, is a Bangladeshi national, must be Episcopalian.
Posted by: narciso | October 17, 2012 at 03:56 PM
That twit, Kirkpatrick, still thinks it wasn't AQ.
Posted by: narciso | October 17, 2012 at 04:01 PM
.... yes, that Bangladeshi 'known fellow' is a member in good standing of the Trinity Church Congregation, a King James version bible was in his possession at the time of his arrest.
Posted by: NK | October 17, 2012 at 04:01 PM
There's a lot of speculation that Norv won't survive this bye week. One can only hope that A.J. Smith gets the boot as well.
The best news would be if somebody bought out the Spanos family and the club went back to the powdwe-blues full time.
If I plug this into my Ipad will it make sense?
Posted by: Jane - Mock the Media! | October 17, 2012 at 04:02 PM
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 04:04 PM
Jane, if you enter DoT's statement properly into your IPad, you should see this:
Posted by: Threadkiller | October 17, 2012 at 04:14 PM
Jane, Norv Turner is the Chargers' head coach, Smith is the general manager, and the Spanos family owns the team. When they bought it, they did away with what Sports Illstrated called the best uniforms in any sport, because they said the uniform was associated with prior owners.
The whole bunch suck stack gas.
Posted by: Danube of Thought on Ipad | October 17, 2012 at 04:16 PM
Yep, that sounds about right;
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danbigman/2012/10/17/fbi-arrests-would-be-terrorist-in-alleged-plot-to-bomb-ny-fed/
Posted by: narciso | October 17, 2012 at 04:17 PM
Just FYI, four years ago today the RCP average had Obama up 6.7%, just half a point off his eventual MOV.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/election_2012_vs_election_2008_four_years_ago_today.html
Romney is + .4% in the current average.
Sure, I'd like a wider lead, but I think Romney's doing A-OK for a challenger against an incumbent (not the case in '08) in October.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 04:19 PM
"In a written statement intended to claim responsibility for the terrorist bombing of the Federal Reserve Bank on behalf of al-Qaeda, Nafis wrote that he wanted to 'destroy America' and that he believed the most efficient way to accomplish this goal was to target America’s economy," the Justice Department press release said. "In this statement, Nafis also included quotations from 'our beloved Sheikh Osama bin Laden' to justify the fact that Nafis expected that the attack would involve the killing of women and children."
Posted by: Mike Huggins | October 17, 2012 at 04:20 PM
A little sherbet--from a school essay. the last sentence is my fave:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10101125364766883&set=a.780906859333.2458070.10239999&type=1&ref=nf
Posted by: Clarice | October 17, 2012 at 04:23 PM
What is your father saying these days, Porch?
Posted by: Frau Krimmi | October 17, 2012 at 04:26 PM
LOL, that's irrefutable logic,
Posted by: narciso | October 17, 2012 at 04:27 PM
Gee, Obama, I guess al-Qaeda is still alive and GM and the economy are still dead.
Posted by: derwill | October 17, 2012 at 04:27 PM
Thanks Dot. Good thing I asked!
Posted by: Jane - Mock the Media! | October 17, 2012 at 04:34 PM
When they bought it, they did away with what Sports Illstrated called the best uniforms in any sport, because they said the uniform was associated with prior owners.
I've got one of the dark blue Junior Seau uni tops.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 17, 2012 at 04:35 PM
Frau, same as before. Romney takes it with 52-53% of the vote. He agrees with me that Romney will flip IN NC FL OH VA at minimum and after that, neither of us knows for sure which other state will put him over the top. I think it will be CO.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 04:38 PM
Obama would like killing Bin Laden to be the 'end' of the war on terror that he doesn't even like to mention. The attack in Libya proves that it isn't over.
Yep; that's the big takeaway. Except for that point, it's a fairly minor attack on a non-Embassy in a country with a barely functioning government. But it completely debunks the Democrat story line that the WoT was all about getting Bin Laden. (And reinforces the GOP impersonal approach as espoused by Bush and reiterated by Romney.)
Romney actually made the point fairly well in the last debate, but then he muddled it up immediately afterward with a segue into mideast policy.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | October 17, 2012 at 04:39 PM
Good vibes, Porch.
Posted by: Frau Krimmi | October 17, 2012 at 04:40 PM
Fed Reserve Bomber Statement-- typical Episcopalian extremeist!
Posted by: NK | October 17, 2012 at 04:45 PM
Thanks, Porch. I'd sure like to see more polls showing what Gallup shows, and it's hard to see how Gallup finds a seven point movement in ten days while Raz finds almost none.
Posted by: Danube of Thought on Ipad | October 17, 2012 at 04:45 PM
Yes, Frau! The confidence today generally reminds me much more of '04 than '08.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 04:45 PM
I would like to see those polls too, DoT. But the movement is showing elsewhere too - 10 points toward Romney in WI per Marquette poll today, for example.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 04:47 PM
Except it had to be in Libya, for all the reasons involved, and in the East, just like with Khost outpost back in 2010
Posted by: narciso | October 17, 2012 at 04:47 PM
"In a written statement released just after the arrest of Nafis, the White House thanked the Freedom Fighter in joining their effort to destroy the US economy.
A spokeswoman from the Obama campaign urged supporters to redouble their efforts to get the president re-elected so Mr. Nafis' efforts do not go in vain. The spokeswoman added, 'we are so close to the total destruction of the US economy. In the president's second term we can accomplish our dream.'"
Posted by: lyle | October 17, 2012 at 04:48 PM
I always thought those powder blue unis were pretty wimpy looking, but the old white helmet with the lightning bolts was one of my favorites.
Can't think of the white helmet without thinking of Lance Alworth.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | October 17, 2012 at 04:54 PM
--it's hard to see how Gallup finds a seven point movement in ten days while Raz finds almost none.
Posted by: Danube of Thought on Ipad | October 17, 2012 at 04:45 PM--
It's simple really. Obviously Gallup has moved from Barry's payroll to Mitt's, while Ras is holding out for more dough from both sides. :)
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | October 17, 2012 at 04:56 PM
Jen Rubin: More evidence of deception Uh oh.
Posted by: DebinNC | October 17, 2012 at 04:57 PM
Poll Dancing-- Gallup spots trends-- the fact they see the RR being up trend is great. Raz has the best LV database-- the fact Raz has Bam stuck at 48% is good, the fact that Raz shows no movement to RR is... troubling.
Posted by: NK | October 17, 2012 at 04:57 PM
For what it's worth, I have given up trying to analyze Ras' special sauce but this is from a HotAir commenter in response to someone asking why Gallup and Ras are so divergent right now:
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 04:59 PM
All I can say is thank goodness Obama ended terrorism.
Posted by: Jane - Mock the Media! | October 17, 2012 at 05:01 PM
Raz-- his stock in trade is accuracy. That commenter's statement still leaves me troubled.
Posted by: NK | October 17, 2012 at 05:01 PM
Or maybe Gallup is doing this in order to demoralize the GOP even more by showing a steadily decreasing lead, and then Obama ahead, by election day. Yeah, that's it.
Posted by: Danube of Thought on Ipad | October 17, 2012 at 05:01 PM
Poll Dancing-- Gallup spots trends-- the fact they see the RR being up trend is great. Raz has the best LV database-- the fact Raz has Bam stuck at 48% is good, the fact that Raz shows no movement to RR is... troubling.
I still strongly suspect that Ras puts too much weight on education in the likely voter screen.
Posted by: Ranger | October 17, 2012 at 05:03 PM
Ranger-- Ras was very accurate in 2004, 2008 and 2010-- challenging his evolving methodology is probably not a good bet.
Posted by: NK | October 17, 2012 at 05:06 PM
Ok, this is something I noticed before but forgot until now... Obama has this rather odd sequencing:
So Stevens was based in Benghazi during Obama's Kinetic Foreign Aid Operation, and then became ambassador afterwards? So just what the heck were all of these American agents doing in Benghazi, both before and after Khadaffi was overthrown?Another thing that I thought on Sept 12 -- isn't it obvious to blame Khadaffi loyalists for Stevens' death? As in guys getting revenge for his overthrow? How the heck did we completely skip that and go right to the absurd video story as a cover-up to al Qaeda assassinating a US ambassador on US soil?
So much about this whole incident and cover up is just downright squirrelly!
Posted by: cathyf | October 17, 2012 at 05:14 PM
Interesting discussion of recent polls at the LUN.
Posted by: Danube of Thought on Ipad | October 17, 2012 at 05:15 PM
Sandy Daze has an outstanding suggestion in our last thread at 02:54. I have decided to enlist in his American Liberation army and have reposted it here.
"Here is a downloadable file for voldemort/obama/JEF yardsigns, similar to the bumpersticker note.
When you are walking the dog(s), jogging or just out and about, and you see an obama yardsign, place one of these small leaflets in the mailbox &/or tape it to the sign.
We are about to rout the enemy, they are demoralized.
But, we must stand.
Three leaflets a day, that's all I ask.
You need to stand and place three leaflets per day.
Posted by: OWG Sandy Daze | October 17, 2012 at 02:54 PM"
You can read about his army at that thread at 02:48.
I urge every one to sign up and make the American Liberation Army stronger.
--------------------------------------------
I would also like to remention the great ad that Paula put up in that thread at 03:20
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ARintSTCWw4
Who denied Security to the Benghiza Consulate
Please forward it to everyone you know.
Posted by: pagar | October 17, 2012 at 05:16 PM
My dad sent me that, DoT. Cost posted it before Gallup started to break open for Romney IIRC. But I think he's right that the race is very close.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 05:17 PM
Has anyone seen this?
http://octsurprise.com/
Weird. I have been wondering about October surprises and why we haven't really seen any yet. Sounds to me like this one is coming from the Dems.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 05:18 PM
I did, porch. I've heard of something breaking before the election, but I don't know if this is it.
Posted by: Clarice | October 17, 2012 at 05:21 PM
For extra humor in Clarice's last link, try hearing the letter in Obama's voice.
the FBI has thwarted a plot to detonate a massive bomb outside the Federal Reserve in New York
Makes no sense. When was the last time anybody at the New York Fed produced a movie?
Posted by: bgates | October 17, 2012 at 05:22 PM
Well the link didn't post for the handouts for the American Liberation Army. Maybe someone else can get it posted over here or you can go back to the :
http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2012/10/obama-labeled-benghazi-terror-on-sept-12/comments/page/5/#comments
and pick it up at 02:48 or 02:54.
Posted by: pagar | October 17, 2012 at 05:23 PM
Thanks Clarice. In the Twitter feed it says something about documents irrefutably contradicting public statements. Obama puts out a lot more public statements than Romney, so given the odds, maybe I'm wrong - maybe it's against Obama.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 05:23 PM
Porch,
Do you think it is Romney's tax returns?
Posted by: Sue | October 17, 2012 at 05:23 PM
Peter Hamby @PeterHambyCNN
The buzz from Columbus: Ohio race was reset by Romney's first debate (and he may have even been up heading into debate #2)
Posted by: Sue | October 17, 2012 at 05:24 PM
Maybe, Sue. That was my first thought.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 05:25 PM
--So much about this whole incident and cover up is just downright squirrelly!--
What I haven't seen is any proof that there was a mention of the video in the Arab world prior to the apology made by our embassy in Cairo during the attack. So if the Arab "street" rioted and attacked our embassy in Cairo over the video--how did they hear about it? The internet wasn't abuzz over it, al Jazeera didn't mention it, yet somehow hundreds of Arab "yuts" rose up simultaneously en masse to protest a video nobody had heard about until AFTER our own embassy mentioned it first.
Something really stinks about this whole thing, but I doubt we'll ever get the real truth.
Posted by: derwill | October 17, 2012 at 05:26 PM
Something I find squirrelly is publishing film guy, American citizen Nakoula B. Nakoula's name and sending "the feds" to perp walk him out of his home before a herd of filming media while telling the world he's to blame for the Cairo and Benghazi melees. Who made the decision to target and then ostentatiously arrest Nakoula is a question no one seems to care about, even after the film-as-cause was debunked via Issa's hearing.
Posted by: DebinNC | October 17, 2012 at 05:27 PM
...the notion that attacking a building is targeting the economy. There is attacking buildings in order to terrorize people and make them afraid of going about their daily business -- the core logic of terrorism. But AQ has always had this weird thing about infusing buildings with god-like powers, and blowing them up as pure witch-doctoring. For people who have such a hard line on idolatry, they sure do believe in magic idols!
...the notion that attacking the fed would be bad for the economy.
The layers upon layers of irony here...Posted by: cathyf | October 17, 2012 at 05:29 PM
Remember the hackers who demanded $1M for R's tax returns? As I recall, their deadline was September 25.
Posted by: Danube of Thought on Ipad | October 17, 2012 at 05:30 PM
One of the hints says watch the candidates at last night's debate. One of them will look extremely nervous because he knows it's coming. Mel thought Romney looked nervous.
This is such utter bullshit.
Posted by: Sue | October 17, 2012 at 05:33 PM
I still don't read most polling comments, but it's hard to miss all the references to "R+3" or "D+7" sampling normalizations. I don't remember any of this math being discussed in previous elections. Was I just not paying attention or is this a new thing, where relatively average people are now scrutinizing polling methodology in terms of their specifics?
Posted by: Extraneus | October 17, 2012 at 05:34 PM
Probably, Sue. But I still am nervous about the lack of October surprises thus far. Surely something is going to break at some point.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 05:35 PM
OctSur? Romney born in Kenya?
Posted by: NK | October 17, 2012 at 05:35 PM
All of the tweets seem to be from Obama supporters.
Posted by: Sue | October 17, 2012 at 05:36 PM
A must see tape of the Dem political geniuses of L.A.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UrOmhH2PeI&feature=player_embedded
Posted by: Clarice | October 17, 2012 at 05:37 PM
The Salafi channel El Nas, aired a segment, on the 8th ,but it really had to do with the pro Sheikh Rahman demonstration,
Posted by: narciso | October 17, 2012 at 05:37 PM
No they aren't she argued with herself.
Posted by: Sue | October 17, 2012 at 05:37 PM
I didn't watch but I saw no credible reports of Romney looking nervous.
Posted by: Clarice | October 17, 2012 at 05:38 PM
Was I just not paying attention or is this a new thing, where relatively average people are now scrutinizing polling methodology in terms of their specifics?
It is a new thing. And it is all due to our centralcal tweeting Bret Baier back in July!
See her 10:12 am comment on this page:
http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2012/07/as-the-earnest-feminist-awaits-her-white-knight/comments/page/2/#comments
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 05:38 PM
The person says that the documents are easily identifiable to the person, or he will recognize them immediately. There are "5 docs. One has two pages. All related, however".
Posted by: Sue | October 17, 2012 at 05:40 PM
challenging his evolving methodology is probably not a good bet.
Fair enough. It's just my educated guess as to what is behind it results. The higher the education level, the more the sample leans Dem. Those with higher educaiton levels are also generally higher paid, and have more stable employment. They also tend to vote at a higher rate over time, so they are generally seen as more likely to actually vote.
The result is that if you use education as a significant screen for likelyhood to vote, you get a sample that leans more Dem and more towards Obama.
Posted by: Ranger | October 17, 2012 at 05:41 PM
CathyF.
You'll find out a lot more next Monday at 9:00PM from Lynn University from the Mouth of the Rat. [I am talking about Boca Raton, not Obama].
This is now on the front burner. I can't wait to hear the JEF's explanation of his explanation last night and how it has "evolved", to a degree.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | October 17, 2012 at 05:41 PM
Clarice,
Mel noted last night at the beginning of the debate that he thought Romney looked unsettled, nervous, I can't remember the exact word he used but that was the thought he conveyed.
Posted by: Sue | October 17, 2012 at 05:42 PM
Could they be Obama's college transcripts?
Posted by: Sue | October 17, 2012 at 05:43 PM
Actually, scratch that. It is something to do with Romney, if it is real. Pretty sure of that from the hints.
Posted by: Sue | October 17, 2012 at 05:44 PM
Remember the hackers who demanded $1M for R's tax returns? As I recall, their deadline was September 25.
That one was such total, unbelievable garbage, that I had forgotten.
My guess that the October surprise will answer the shocking question, boxers, briefs, or celestial garmants. And will do so inaccurately.
Posted by: Appalled | October 17, 2012 at 05:45 PM
Enjoy delicious post from Allahpundit on the Obama 4 state firewall report:
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/17/report-obama-campaign-backing-away-from-florida-virginia-north-carolina-and-colorado/
I was pretty sure they were conceding CO since it's not on the firewall list and RCP average has it Romney +.7.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 05:45 PM
Actually, scratch that. It is something to do with Romney, if it is real. Pretty sure of that from the hints.
That's my guess. It just smells like a Dem operation. Well, we'll see, I guess.
Posted by: Porchlight | October 17, 2012 at 05:47 PM
Damn. If it is about Romney, why would Team Obama be giving up those 4 states?
Posted by: Sue | October 17, 2012 at 05:47 PM
--The person says that the documents are easily identifiable to the person, or he will recognize them immediately. There are "5 docs. One has two pages. All related, however".--
That doesn't sound like tax returns.
Posted by: derwill | October 17, 2012 at 05:48 PM
derwill,
Not Romney tax returns, anyway. I would imagine they are several pages thick. But it could be the front page of his tax return, with one of them having page 1 and 2.
Posted by: Sue | October 17, 2012 at 05:49 PM