edit: How is it undecided women can vote for a man (MYTH Romey) who constantly deceives.

4 more 4 44

Obama/Biden 2012

No surprise here. Romney lies just about everything.

TAX RETURNS! TAX RETURNS! TAX RETURNS! WHATCHA HIDING, ROMNEY!

O&JOE 2012

Eva....it's 'Gallup' not 'gallop' (as in a three-beat gait of a horse - that's 'gait' as in walk not 'gate' as in hinged barrier) - so that might be why your figures are wrong.
The Gallup poll I see is a four point difference - President Obama 46% and Gov Romney 50% - in the national poll. You could also take a look at the electoral college which still shows President Obama having a 66% chance of winning.

Eva, another point up for Romney since this morning? Really? Lets inflate likely voters tally. doesn't really matter, likely doesn't mean will, so point is really moot.

Romney caught with usual old stats, does anyone do some truth telling and check for veracity before that man regurgitates old news.

Eva, do you believe in equal work for equal pay? Do you believe you should have control over your personal health decisions? If you do not believe in these concepts then Romney is your man. I wish you well.

Obama 2012

Of course Romney continues to profit from outsourcing jobs at the same time complaining about the practice. If he ever got consistent or stopped flip flopping, he wouldn't be Mitt.

Hey things aren't that bad... we're doing fine, let's be a little patient. it could be worse!

More lies from Romney. He does not pass the "integrity" test for President. He will do and say just about anything to get your vote.

Romney cannot be trusted.

OBAMA 2012

Romney is very out of touch with FACTS of any kind.

Even more so when it comes to women.

Point proven with this FACT CHECK.

Bobby -- Here is some facts:

THE FACTS: Both statements ring true, as far as they go. Obama more correctly describes the bigger picture.

According to an Energy Department study published in the spring, sales of oil from federal areas fell 14 percent between 2010 and 2011 and sales of natural gas production fell 9 percent, supporting Romney's point. The lower oil production was a result mainly of a moratorium on offshore drilling imposed by the Obama administration after the April 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history.

According to the same report, though, oil production from federal areas is up 13 percent since Obama took office despite last year's dip, and analysts say Gulf oil production is expected to soon exceed its pre-spill levels.

Natural gas production from federal areas has been declining for years because drillers have found vast reserves of natural gas in formations under several states that are cheaper to access than most federally controlled areas.

http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-stumbles-latest-presidential-debate-015330844--election.html

There are no undecided voters!.....Those folk are just playing the game "pay attention to me"!.....

Jim Mahoney....You can thank the Administration that took us into wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and at the same time, gave us "tax cuts" and Medicare Part D without including these items in the actual BUDGET! All on borrowed money. Isn't it funny how, when supposedly conservative Republicans were in office, according to Dick Cheney; "Deficits don't matter" and everything is perfect. But.....man those EVIL "lib'rul democrats got elected and THEY are ruining EVERYTHING...." right?

Politicians from both sides if the aisle, Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin. As long as they keep us fighting amongst ourselves....they can continue to raid our treasury with impunity. There are some treasonous bastards out there.....pulling these strings, inciting/exploiting anger and hatred for their own political gain. I suspect the solution will be more of a grass roots upswell in public outrage, where all American Citizens are speaking with one voice...."NO MORE!"

Romney incorrect on women's jobs at debate

Whoa! Romney lied? I need a chair to sit down -- I'm just Shocked. SHOCKED, i tell you!

Romney is a fraud and any woman that votes for this sack of feces is either brainwashed or a slave of the right-wing. Why would any woman vote for a Republican that wants to give government control of her own body and refuse to pay them for equal work, cut their children's education and food stamp assistance, and drive the economy off of another cliff like Bush did? They are brainwashed...

Another day, another distortion. I don't know why Romney can't stick with the truth, unless he thinks the truth just isn't good enough to get him elected. Come to think of it, he's probably right.

I think it is very interesting to note that in that one month between January of 2008 and February of 2008, more than 200,000 women lost their jobs. That is how bad the Bush recession was - that 'bump in the road' that republicans think Obama should have fixed by snapping his fingers.

The first task Obama had was stopping the recession. He actually did that pretty fast; by mid 2009 the economy had stopped its free fall. The numbers I would like to see then are the ones that start at that point: once he stopped the free fall, what happened then? Since women were losing jobs in the recession so fast, I can guarantee you all that many, many more women are working today than at the bottom of the recession. I don't know the numbers, but democrats should calculate them, because they are probably the most relevant to the job Obama has done in growing the economy.

However, the overall numbers from the bottom of the recession until now are known: Unemployment down over 2%, more than 5 million jobs created, manufacturing job growth for the first time in more than a decade, exports doubled, energy production 'soaring' (according to the AP), consumer confidence rising, home values and starts rising, the deficit cut by $380 billion (first time since Clinton), GDP growing, etc. And these numbers are consistently growing; every month for over two years the UE has fallen, and the GDP has grown, etc. This is not a boom and bust economy, this is long-term, sustained growth.

I think president Obama has earned the right to continue to fix the economy from the meltdown caused by trickle-down economic policies. I do not think we can afford to change to a guy whose only consistent position is that we need to return to trickle-down economics.

For all the supposedly Women on this posting - Really!!! Women are not that stupid and the majority will not vote against their own interest - no matter how many times post polls or how hard you try to convince them otherwise.

Sorry to use this example - but seriously any women that votes for Romney/Ryan are co-dependent and are enablers that are unable to think for themselves period and need a "man" to tell them what to do.

Why else would you vote to have your "medical health decisions" dictated to by Romney - Ryan

Why else would you vote for someone that doesn't think you deceiver to be paid the same as a man.

Why else would you vote for someone that can't tell you the truth - ever! "Really honey I have to work late - No I have a business trip this weekend"

Why else would you vote for someone that says can't have an abortion if you or your daughter is raped(RYAN does believe this - one heartbeat away from POTUS) So if Romney supports Ryan he support this.

Why else would you vote for someone that he isn't for Affirmative action and then requests "binders of women" to fill positions. (I know sounds bad)

Before you RWNJ's jump on me -I have been married to the same loving woman for 15 years have 3 beautiful daughters and would never vote for someone that would restrict medical benefits or procedures that could effect their health. Nor would I vote for anyone that doesn't respect their value and education and treat them as equals and not second class citizens.

Women need to keep moving "Forward" not back to the 1950's - VOTE OBAMA/BIDEN

Sally Rocks classically: I was never undecided! I knew that Obama was inept and in over his head a long, long time ago.

That's nice, Sally. And, if you were a mormon female, Romney and others would tell you (a female) to sit down and STFU, and they (the men) will give you your opinion when they want to hear it. There's a neat cultist to support... Good for you!

You have to laugh at the RWNJ's braying about the Gallup numbers...

These very same clowns were screaming two weeks ago, about all the polls being skewed!

Two words for you'll - ELECTORAL COLLEGE!

lol

All you women out there going to vote for Romney...did your man promise you a pair of slippers so you don't have to be barefoot in the kitchen, or perhaps a diamond ring so you can compete with your friends...because that is what matters. You realize you are nothing more than a plaything, right? I suggest woman voting for Romney are being told to do so by a man in their life who buys her stuff to shut her up. She may even realize this and not care because that is what she values.....stuff. She likely does not work for a living or if she does she hasn't noticed that she gets paid less then her male counterpart who typically looks at her as less of a contributor. Wake up! if you have a sugar daddy well then this message is not for you. if you work for a living...sit down and calculate how much money you lose in your 401(k) your 401(k) match if you have it, your social security, medicare, percentage raises over your working life...and on and on and on. Mitt Romney has said he does not support the fair pay act. You should be insulted that it takes an act in the first place. Screw Mitt Romney, the men that think like him and the women who are stupid enough to vote for him.

For those of you poor little low information voters who think our President is in way over his head; how do account for:

1. Romney's governorship in Massachusetts was the at the bottom; 47 out of 50 to be exact.
   
2. Jobs created in China rather than America due to outsourcing even Staples
3. Receives profits from outsourcing jobs through Bain
4. believes cutting taxes for small business is profitable when in essence many of the owners are rich because they’re partners in hedge funds

In Contrast President has created more jobs than that liar MYTH romney says. His only stagety is to lie about the economy so you'll believe he is a honest buisnessman.

Eva....it's 'Gallup' not 'gallop'

lol, maga's always there with his spell check pen! How precious!

Actually. maga, The Electoral College is a process, not a polling place dear! That's another Fact Check for ya!

Dont -

From Lies, Damned Lies, and Obama's Energy Statistics / IBD ...

According to the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management, in 2008 under President Bush a total of 55,085 oil and gas leases were in effect on federal land. In 2011 under Obama, there were just 49,174, a decrease of 11%.

Federal acreage under lease shrank from 47.2 million in 2008 to just 38.5 million, a drop of 19%. And 6,617 oil and gas permits were approved in 2008 vs. 4,244 permits in 2011, a decrease of 36%.

The Heritage Foundation's Nicolas Loras points out that a recent report from the EIA documents the fact that energy production fell 13% on federal lands in fiscal 2011 compared with fiscal 2010.

A snail-like permitting process has reduced planned capital and operating investments by $18.3 billion and cost the Gulf more than 162,000 jobs in just the past two years.

Loris notes that in Utah and Wyoming, for instance, projects held up by the National Environmental Policy Act process are preventing the creation of 64,805 jobs, $4.3 billion in wages and $14.9 billion in economic impact every year.

The EIA also reports that a record-high 57 coal-fired generators will shut down in 2012, representing 9 gigawatts of electrical capacity. In 2015, nearly 10 gigawatts of capacity from 61 coal-fired generators will be retired, largely due to regulations and costs imposed by the EPA.

Two words for you'll - ELECTORAL COLLEGE!

yep, im sure Dennis will be along shortly to demonstate. problem is, that those numbers Dennis keeps posting show Obama trending in the wrong direction. poor Feisty doesnt realize the 'trends' are indicating Romney leading (not talking polls).

Feisty is sounding a bit nervous. lower lip might even be quivering now.

The only way to end all the BS is by electing HILLARY CLINTON IN 2016!!!!!

Many In Romney's "Binder Full Of Women" Were Campaign Donors

The former Massachusetts Governor touted hiring "binders full of women" for his cabinet, but many were donors to his gubernatorial campaign.

Share
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/many-in-romneys-binder-full-women-were-campaign

4 more 4 44

Obama/Biden2012

I find it interesting that Obama said he called the Libya attack an act of terror the day after the attack, Romney said he didn't, the video of his speech proves that he did - and the right wing true believers still says he didn't!

What is it between your ears and your brain, Reality Check? Kool-aid?

No...he never called it an act of terror. He said we will not abide acts of terror. Watch the tape and watch this, Snake:

http://thehill.com/video/campaign/262811-american-crossroads-charges-obama-with-misleading-public-on-benghazi

No comment on the GALLUP poll?

It is unfortunate I have to "you're welcome."

The White House claiming to be all things to women pay the female staff less than the male staff. They need to put their money where their mouth is.

EvaP....got that, your point?
And who says I am a 'him'?

Oh, poo, Gov Romney did it again....

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/18/14538316-fact-check-romney-incorrect-on-womens-jobs-at-debate?lite

FACT CHECK: Romney incorrect on women's jobs at debate

what else is new? He makes it up as he goes along.

lulu,

A reliable source, if you don't mind. I mean it's easy to just slap words in a box but can you back it up with credible evidence? Thank you.

Bobby -- Why oh why do you righties insist on IGNORING that production has increased on PRIVATE lands? I'll grant you a few in the PRIVATE sector are pissed because they had their leases YANKED for REFUSING to use it for its intended purpose.

Here's a great article for you. It explains how GOVERNMENT made all that fracking possible. That's right, GOVERNMENT BUILT THAT. That "free enterprise" wouldn't be possible without government funding.

Decades of federal dollars helped fuel gas boom

Pioneers in gas drilling say government research and tax breaks helped launch boom

By Kevin Begos, Associated Press | Associated Press – Sun, Sep 23, 2012

PITTSBURGH (AP) -- It sounds like a free-market success story: a natural gas boom created by drilling company innovation, delivering a vast new source of cheap energy without the government subsidies that solar and wind power demand.

"The free market has worked its magic," the Barnett Shale Energy Education Council, an industry group, claimed over the summer.

The boom happened "away from the greedy grasp of Washington," the American Enterprise Institute, a think tank, wrote in an essay this year.

If bureaucrats "had known this was going on," the essay went on, "surely Washington would have done something to slow it down, tax it more, or stop it altogether."

But those who helped pioneer the technique known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, recall a different path. Over three decades, from the shale fields of Texas and Wyoming to the Marcellus in the Northeast, the federal government contributed more than $100 million in research to develop fracking, and billions more in tax breaks.

Now, those industry pioneers say their own effort shows that the government should back research into future sources of energy — for decades, if need be — to promote breakthroughs. For all its success now, many people in the oil and gas industry itself once thought shale gas was a waste of time.

"There's no point in mincing words. Some people thought it was stupid," said Dan Steward, a geologist who began working with the Texas natural gas firm Mitchell Energy in 1981. Steward estimated that in the early years, "probably 90 percent of the people" in the firm didn't believe shale gas would be profitable....

Read the rest here:

http://news.yahoo.com/decades-federal-dollars-helped-fuel-141648115.html

lulu98

The White House claiming to be all things to women pay the female staff less than the male staff.

prove it

But you are tight about one thing: that women on the Hill do make less than their male counterparts - especially the GOP female staffers. The GOP women make even less than their Democratic counterparts!

Sad, isn't it? Now we know why GOP is against LLFPA bill. They're saving a fortune!

You are entitled to your unshakable partisanship, and you can live in an echo chamber if you wish, but facts are still facts. I watched that video several times, start to finish, and tried to figure out what you guys are saying about 'vague and general' reference to terror. I cannot contort my brain enough to find your position.

He said acts of terror will not shake our resolve, and in the same breath said that we will get justice. So, you think he was being vague and general about justice, too? And what exactly would he be getting justice for - something other than an act of terror? What do you think 'acts of terror' referred to? Do you even think he was talking about the Libya attack in the speech, or was it just a vague and general policy speech to you? Do you realize how far you have to contort the english language to make it work out for you?

Romney listened to the right wing echo chamber, and got his butt handed to him, because reality doesn't match your fantasy. If you wanna stop that, might wanna check in with reality sometime, reality check.

JERSY GIRL - Your posts prove over and over again you not only don't own a business - you've probably never worked. Oh, I guess the lemonade stand counts as a business - sorry.

Your lack of understand of any of the issues is magnified every time you post. But, go ahead and vote Romney - he'll make sure you make even less than you are now.

Obama/Biden for men and women who actually get it!

EvaPeron

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012..to get America working again!

...in a minimum wage, benefitless, Staples job that will not support a family

Romney/Ryan to ensure that the US becomes 47th in job growth because if it was good enough for Romney's Massachusetts, it's good enough for the rest of the states

Anyone that is truly undecided at this point is either 1. a idiot. 2. just not paying attention. or 3. if number 2. applies then see number 1.

Jersey Girl - sorry for all that you had to go through. But then I have to put you two categories -

1.) You are an enabler - to vote for Romeny/Ryan basically says it is OK to treat women the way you were treated.

AND/OR

2.) You are a racist - It is ok, my own mother falls into this category. I still love my mother but she can't stand that fact that there is a black man in the White House.

Either way you are doing women in this country a disservice supporting and voting for Romney/Ryan.

I agree that there are additional issues with the Hill. And that people confuse what the
Ledbetter act does. There are many laws to enforce already about equal pay going back to 1964. The Ledbetter Act was meant to deal with statue of limitations in filing suit. It is not really equal pay.

Jersey Girl:

So you want a president or a boss?

Running a business doesn't qualify or disqualify a person for running for president; it really doesn't relate. Does a person's business experience qualify him for dealing with international crisis, running the military or helping the middle class?

The only relevance Bain has to this election is that as CEO, Romney demonstrated that he was willing to outsource jobs and destroy American lives to pad his own pocket - that's just a character issue. He did that many times, so there are people who think that shows a level of greed and selfishness unbecoming a presidential candidate. Of course, I'm one of them.

The only experience Romney actually has to be president is his role as governor of MA. Fascinating that his supporters don't want to talk about that...

The Gallup poll I see is a four point difference - President Obama 46% and Gov Romney 50% - in the national poll. You could also take a look at the electoral college which still shows President Obama having a 66% chance of winning.

ever taken a Gallup poll? I have. You can count as much on what they say coming down on either side of the fence about as much as you can count on a puce plaid pig backstroking by your window this afternoon on a lilting breeze.

Their questions are beyond ridiculous.

In one poll they asked something like: Do you like George W Bush or do you think now that he has been elected the world with disappear in a nuclear fireball? I know, I know, economic meltdown wasn't a choice.

I said, you're absurd then hung up on the person.

oops, fact-checking myself. In my post at 1.20 I said 200,000 women lost their jobs between January 2008 and February 2008. I meant January 2009 and February 2009, the year Obama took office.

Eva,

Gallup's poll is an outlier and has been for the past four days. If it had shown Romney up by 2 or even 4 maybe it could be accurate. But up by 7 makes it the pink elephant in the room. Nate Silver has Obama gaining momentum again. Oh and another fact, Gallup is polling the deep south more than anywhere else. In the south Obama is behind by 22 points where as everywhere else Obama is ahead by 2 to 4.

Rass only has Romney up by 2.

Follow Nate Silver's advice:

If a poll looks like an outlier it usually is.

@Snake

They cannot. Romney has been lying about his Mass. record for the past couple of weeks. He vetoed over 800 bills and 89% of them were overruled by the Mass. legislature. Yeah, that looks like real bipartisanship from Romney.

Obama's newest campaign slogan:

Only 82,000 women lost their jobs because of me!

Reality Check... you've outed snakebone who has a propensity to 'stretch the truth' a bit. Would like to see his mom DumbFux slap his hand with a ruler... but she's his mentor so that ain't gonna happen.

Romney/Ryan 2012 to stop the liberal lies!

I find it really hard to believe that a Republican woman would actually defend and vote for Romney. You all must be barefoot, pregnant and stuck in the kitchen. BREAK OUT NOW! This man will not do a darn thing for woman rights but send us backwards to the 1950's. I have been working for over 43 years and have had jobs (in one right now) where there are different salaries for women and men. Women very low for the same job that a man has. As the saying goes - Been there, done that.

This is call CIVIL RIGHTS for women.

Regarding the Gallup Poll, it's a 7 day rolling average. As a liberal, my concern meter is at zero at this point regarding the Gallup Polling numbers. FiveThirtyEight still has Obama at a 67% Chance to take the White House, mainly due to state level polling of the swing states. Ohio is still in Obama's favor by at least +3, and that's factoring in the first debate, but not the second.

Regarding Benghazi and the "Act of Terror", you Con's are completely right (pun intended :).

Of course Obama wasn't talking about Benghazi when he referenced "Acts of Terror" in a speech about Benghazi, the day after the Benghazi Consulate attack. Of course he wasn't talking about Acts of Terror in Benghazi, despite referencing the 4 Americans who died there RIGHT after the "Acts of Terror" comment. He also used the phrase "act of terror" in a speech that night, and another one again that morning. 3 Mentions of the phrase "Act of Terror" in his first three speeches after the incident. But no, obviously he wasn't talking about Benghazi.

Obama (and the moderator) were 100% factually correct in what was discussed.

This whole issue is a crock regardless. Obama claimed for the two weeks after the attack, in every speech or interview he gave on it, that an investigation was still in progress and they are still receiving information. I have no problem with my POTUS taking his time to reach a conclusion, that's the sign of a smart person. If you'd rather have someone who constantly has knee-jerk reactions to international incidents, then by all means vote Romney. Hell, you did it 12 (and 8 years ago) years ago with another person who acts without sufficient or correct intelligence, and look where that got us. Thanks GW, and thanks to you people who want to vote those types into office.

FactCheckers have gone over this debate and it's quite apparent who was more truthful. I don't know what the conservatives current feelings on FactCheckers are, I'm assuming it's negative since they didn't come down on the GOP side this time.

Has anyone else noticed how the GOP is so quick to dismiss evidence/studies/polls/factcheckers when they aren't on their side, but as soon as they are, they're 100% Accurate and can be quoted as if they were Gospel. Fast forward a few weeks/days/hours to when they aren't favorable to the GOP, and it's back to "LIBERAL LIES! LIBERAL MEDIA! LIBERAL BIAS!"

Kind of like how their candidate likes to quote the Tax Policy Center (documented non-partisan) in their talking points when they can twist their studies into something favorable, but when they favor the other side it's "LIBERAL BIAS! LIBERAL THINK TANK!"

Know what turned that last debate? It wasn't the stupid Acts of Terror exchange, or the "Binders full of women" comment, they're both trivial matters. The right and the left seems to latch onto meaningless stupidity and semantics because of the LOL factor.

What turned the debate was when Pres. Obama turned around and stared Gov Romney in the eye and said the following:

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. That's not what we do. That's not what I do as president, that's not what I do as Commander in Chief.

In this same debate he owned responsibility for the Benghazi attacks. He took responsibility for his teams actions (or lack thereof) like a leader should.

That is what I want in a President. I want a person who knows when Politics are appropriate and when to speak. I don't want a guy who issues a knee-jerk press release WHILE AN INTERNATIONAL INCIDENT IN WHICH AMERICANS WERE KILLED was STILL GOING ON, JUST to SCORE POLITICAL POINTS.

This election Republicans have made clear what their priorities are.

Party > Country.

Undecideds, is that who you want running your country?

So, Romney lies and Bush was a bad president.... blah,blah,blah..... Just get over it!

fhill: I'll agree that Romney changes his mind constantly, but when does he ever admit to being wrong? I still laugh when I hear him say the reason he put a healthcare mandate in place in MA, yet opposes the mandate in Obamacare, is that the issue is about 'state's rights'. And his explanation for changing his mind about saying the Arizona law was a 'model for the nation'? Oh, he only meant PART of the law. And on, and on.

Whom do you think Obama threw under the bus?

Weeelllll, you have to admit, they told us up front they were not going to let their campaign be governed by fact checkers. I mean fair is fair, they warned us.

Obama/Biden 2012

Whom do you think Obama threw under the bus?

Hillary, for one.

Latest Polls Show Obama's Pa. Lead Slipping

President Obama's once significant lead over Gov. Mitt Romney in the Keystone State has slipped, according to the latest polls

New polls out this week show Gov. Mitt Romney has substantially narrowed what once seemed like an insurmountable lead for President Barack Obama in Pennsylvania.

The polls were taken after the first presidential debate but before Tuesday's second town hall-style debate at Hofstra University.

Bloomberg News reported that a Quinnipiac University poll of 1,519 likely Pa. voters favored Obama by just four percentage points over Romney. The poll was conducted between Oct. 12 and Oct. 14. Just one month ago, Obama held a 12 point lead in the state, and some news reports indicated that the Romney campaign had begun to focus its resources elsewhere. Obama carried the state by more than 10 percentage points in the 2008 election.

Obama is still under 50 percent and Pennsylvania is still in play according to the latest poll from the Allentown Morning Call and Muhlenberg College.

The latest Public Policy Polling shows Obama above 50 percent and leading Mitt Romney by 7 points in Pennsylvania.

"President Obama continues to disappoint voters here by breaking the promises he made as a candidate, and failing to offer a legitimate case for four more years of the last four years," said Billy Pitman, director of communications for the Republican National Committee in Pennsylvania, in an email message to media outlets. "Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan offer a clear choice for leadership and a new direction that will create jobs, fix our economy and strengthen the middle class."

Male voters in the poll substantially favored Romney, while Obama held a commanding lead among women. Voters who described themselves as independent reportedly favored Obama, 50 percent to 43 percent.

The President's lead nationally has been slipping since his widely-criticized performance in the first presidential debate on Oct. 3. Tuesday evening's debate will take the form of a town meeting, in which citizens will ask questions of the candidates on foreign and domestic issues. Candidates each will have two minutes to respond, and an additional minute for the moderator to facilitate a discussion.

Q22: Obama threw Hillary under the bus? Did he do it when Hillary placed the blame on herself for the lack of security? Or did he throw her under the bus during the debate, when he said he was the President, the buck stops here, and it was his responsibility?

Snakebone

I find it interesting that Obama said he called the Libya attack an act of terror the day after the attack, Romney said he didn't, the video of his speech proves that he did - and the right wing true believers still says he didn't!

I think what the confusion is over is the fact that even though Obama made statements that this was an act of terror, he didn't come at in saying that it was a premeditated act of terror. He believed that the video released spurred anger and so those who attacked the embassies did it in a spur of the moment of retaliation. It wasn't until all the facts came in that he realized that it wasn't a general terrorist attack that was spurred by the video, but instead a premeditated terrorist attack that had nothing to do with the video. So yes, he did say this was an act of terror as he had stated, but he didn't say that it was a premeditated attack which Romney was probably trying to say and failed to do so. Either way, Romney failed to clarify this and made the decision to cry foul without getting his thoughts organized enough to use the moment to his advantage. Romney didn't make the distinction between the general act of terror statement by Obama and the specified premeditated act of terror that was later determined. Obama made the right decision to wait until all facts were in, but did the wrong thing by assuming the video was what started the conflict. And Romney jumped the gun in his accusations as well as using Obama's own quote from his statements that day instead of making his case.

There was a sharp exchange between the candidates on the issue of the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi and the question of when the president acknowledged it was a terrorist attack. Obama said he called it an “act of terror” the day after the attack. Romney said that “it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.”

Obama is correct that he referred to “acts of terror” in a Sept. 12 speech in the Rose Garden. But after that Obama refused to characterize it as a terrorist attack while it was under investigation — even though other administration officials did.

Obama: The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people in the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened. That this was an act of terror and I also said that we’re going to hunt down those who committed this crime. …

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?

Obama: Please proceed governor.

Romney: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.

Obama: Get the transcript.

The transcript does show that Obama said in a Rose Garden speech on Sept. 12: “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.” That night, he said at a Las Vegas fundraiser: “No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America.” Obama employed the “act of terror” phrase a third time a day later at a campaign event in Colorado.

But Romney isn’t entirely wrong. Romney claimed Obama refused for two weeks after the Benghazi attack to call it a terrorist attack and, instead, blamed it on a spontaneous demonstration in response to an anti-Muslim video that earlier that day triggered a violent protest in Egypt.

The president did seem to suggest in his Rose Garden speech that a reason for the Benghazi attack was the video. Obama said: “Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None.”

It is also true that Obama refrained from characterizing the attack as an premeditated act of terrorism. The administration adopted a wait-and-see position, deflecting questions until the investigation into the attack could be completed. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, for example, was asked in a Sept. 17 press briefing if the administration considered the Benghazi attack an act of terror. She said: “Again, I’m not going to put labels on this until we have a complete investigation, okay?”

A day later, Obama was asked about the Benghazi attack on “The Late Show with David Letterman.” The president said “here’s what happened” and began discussing the impact of the anti-Muslim video. He then said “extremists and terrorists used this as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies, including the consulate in Libya.” He also said, “As offensive as this video was and, obviously, we’ve denounced it and the United States government had nothing to do with it. That’s never an excuse for violence.”

Matt Olsen, head of the National Counterterrorism Center, testified on Sept. 19 that it was a “terrorist attack.” He also said the administration still lacked “specific intelligence that there was a significant advanced planning or coordination for this attack.”

A day later, White House press secretary Jay Carney said it is “self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.” And on Sept. 21 — two days after Olsen’s testimony — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said “what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.”

Yet, when asked on ABC’s “The View” whether it was a terrorist attack, Obama refused to say. That was on Sept. 24. He said, “We’re still doing an investigation. There’s no doubt that the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn’t just a mob action. We don’t have all the information yet, so we’re still gathering it.”

The Romney campaign has accused the administration of misleading the public by claiming the anti-Muslim video was to blame for the attack in Benghazi, rather than admitting it was a failure to detect and prevent an act of terrorism on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. We cannot say if there was a deliberate attempt to mislead the public or whether, as the administration says, the conflicting statements in the weeks after the attack were the result of an evolving investigation. We’ll leave that for readers to decide.

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/factchecking-the-hofstra-debate/

As far as Romney's calculations on the women's jobs, it's already been shown his numbers were way off and instead of looking into the information himself, he went off of what someone told him or old figures. He screwed up on that end.

no matter how numbers are distorted or spun the stock prices are still up and have been going up for more then 3 years. no one has made any mention of that undistorted fact. looks like Obama going to win in 2012

"The only experience Romney actually has to be president is his role as governor of MA. Fascinating that his supporters don't want to talk about that..."

Yet you hung your (now, non) future on an angry community organizer who overwhelmingly voted "present" and told us it was "unconscionable" to have a large deficit?

Give me a break.

And who exactly would be OK with Romney being Commander in Chief? Someone who relies on 8 month old data and quotes it as if it's still correct today?? Seriously? This is the rigor and due diligence that he brings? Really?

Ask yourself this...if he can't get something this simple right, why would you trust him with your life?

Seriously...think about it....

The market is up because interest rates are non existent and folks like me are looking for a return and companies are turning profitable after realizing they can be more efficient by having fewer employees and working leaner in spite of what is going on in gov't. These companies are sitting on a ton of cash and if 'bama gets reelected it will stay under the mattress, but you will probably continue to get your welfare check, as the figures released today told that ENTITLEMENT spending is up 33% mostly funded by the stimulus, or your new best friends, the Chinese. How's your Mandarin?

You have to love right wing nuts. Two weeks ago, they claimed the polls were unfair and heavily sampling democrats. Now those same wing nuts are praising and citing the very same polls.

This story didn't surprise me. Romney and Ryan both spread lies and misinformation. It is a shame when everything you say ends up going through fact checkers because of your past history of having issues with the truth.

Both Obama and Romney lacked experience when running for President. It was a concern for me with Obama and why I voted for Hillary during the Primaries.

That being said, I'm perfectly happy with the way Pres. Obama has run things. I'm perfectly unhappy with the way the Republicans in congress have blocked him at every turn, setting records for the amount of obstruction they've done during the past 3.5 years.

You ask Dems how we can vote for a Pres. whose policies have failed so miserably? Well for one, the fact of the matter is they haven't failed at all. He managed to stop the economic free fall we were in within his first 6 months in office. The economic free fall that REPUBLICAN policies led us straight to. Blame Bush? I'm done blaming Bush, I'm just not stupid enough to try his policies again when they failed so spectacularly the first time.

Pres. Obama has accomplished alot of things. You can view a partial list here:

--edit damn my URL didn't link. Just google "President Obama Accomplishments List".

and he did it despite being saddled for half his term with an obstructionist congress.

What was it? 7% Approval for Congress? And who was in control during the approval ratings free fall? Oh, the GOP.

Why am I not surprised?

You ask Dems how we can vote for a Pres. whose policies have failed so miserably? Well for one, the fact of the matter is they haven't failed at all. He managed to stop the economic free fall we were in within his first 6 months in office.

The freefall ended with TARP1 which Bush did. Nothing the President has done since has had any effect. TARP2 was a giveaway to Wall Street, the stimulus was a giveaway to the government unions, the bailout was a giveaway to the UAW. The regulations imposed by the various departments under his administration have done more to prevent growth than anything. His green initiative is a complete bust. Nothing but failure.

@ EvaPeron,

I Googled your Gallop poll and can't seem to find the numbers you state in your post or the way you state them. I did find the President 52% Willard 49%.

Can you please post a link to back up your statement?

Q22, what was the job loss number in January of 09?

Look, you can't have it both ways. Either Obama was responsible for things as of Jan 09 or he wasn't. The GOP is constantly pinning late '08 / early '09 negative numbers on Obama. Yet as soon as someone points out something positive that happened during the first 6 months of his Presidency, it's "BUSH DID THAT!".

Some of you people flip-flop as much as your candidate does.

Regarding Green Energy, spend some time googling "Fact Check Green Energy" and get your facts straight. From CNN:

Then, there's the matter of whether half of those companies that have gotten money "have gone out of business."

A few recipients of the government funds have hit hard times. The most well-known of them is solar panel maker Solyndra, which received a $535 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy. Two years later, it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Still, it is unclear where Romney got his figure that "half" those businesses are no longer operating.

The Energy Department cites several success stories like one of the world's largest wind farms in eastern Oregon, massive solar power plants in Arizona and grants to Ford to produce fuel-efficient cars.

In fact, of the 28 funded projects -- involving 23 companies -- listed in a 2012 congressional report, only four involve businesses that were either sold or are not in operation.

Try and get some information from other places then the GOP Echo Chamber.

Confused; they're correct in that Gallup has Romney with a 7 point lead over Obama. You can see it at www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/elections (I manually typed that, so if it doesn't work just goto the realclearpolitics homepage). However what they're not mentioning is that the Gallup poll is a rolling 7 day average, so it's got 6 days of Post Debate 1 numbers and 1 day of Post Debate 2 numbers.

I wouldn't worry too much.

PS, from the CNN Fact Check I C&P earlier regarding Green Investments.

With 4 companies out of business of 28 projects funded, that puts the success rate at 79%. That's WAY above the success rate of companies after being bought by Bain Capital.

Source please Ed unless you mean ones that failed to come out of bankruptcy alone. Two more filings in the last three or four days.

Self Educated--where did you get such embellished and incorrect characterizations of Romney or women in genereal. Lets discuss your points. I also am married to a lawyer and have two profession female daughters all three who will vote for Romney while both daughters voted for Obama in 08.

1) Give me some Romney proposals that indicate he will eliminate decisions you can make over your health care. Are you saying that because he wants you to pay your copay just like anyone else for your contraceptives? Because he wants planned parenthood to be treated like a charity no different than the American Cancer Society, he somehow hates women? So are you telling me that just because you are a woman regardless of your economic circumstances, you should get a lifestyle choice free? Are you saying woman's health issues with planned parenthood are more important charities than children's health issues like SIDS or pediatric cancers or AIDS or senior mental disability issues? Why shouldnt planned parenthood be funded based on personal choice like every other charity? I dont see how this is a Romney taking any of your health care decisions away from you.

2) Can you provide me the statement were Romney wants women to make less than men? Because he doesnt support the Trial Lawyers gift bill Lilly Ledbetter you think he is against equal pay? What current laws dont already protect gender discrimination? This is a big loser because all Obama was doing was paying back one of his largest campaign contributors--crony capitalism at its worst. Smart women see this and understand it

3) Are you telling me that because Romney panders for votes, women shouldnt vote for him. That would mean that they shouldnt vote for Obama either and if you remember thats what Hillary called Obama has he lied for votes through the 08 campaign. Give it a rest and why not use facts that matter. Why not look at Obama's record for the last 4 years. Obama says he is the champion of the poor, middle class, african americans, latinos and of course the Trial Lawyers and Unions. Now compare those groups to their counterparts and see how they have fared over the last 4 years economically. Not too well so the daughters and professional women in my household are smart enough to understand he really isnt their champion.

4) Yes, this is definitely a difference including in my household. However, no GOP president has done anything to stop a woman's right to choose since Roe v Wade and Romney isnt going to either. Just not the primary voting issue in my household because no one sees this as truly impacting their right to choose.

5) Affirmative Action? Really? You think woman should vote for Obama because you think they need preferences even though they may be less qualified? Thats what affirmative action is. Romney was affirmatively recruiting qualifed woman which is far different than making allowances for less qualified candidates in order to fill a quota. Even liberal college professors are seeing the destructive aspects of affirmative action with their recent studies showing that it hurts minorities. My wife and daughter's would be appalled to think someone would give them a job, college admission etc on anything but their merit.

So I think maybe going back and getting more self educated would make a better debate. Its ok to like Obama, but it doesnt have anything to do with his gender policies.

Get your head out of the computer, Confussed, and turn on your tv or radio; the poll results are all over the airwaves....Romney 52% to Obama 45%. Just because Eva didn't provide a "link" doesn't mean a thing. The left wing sites where I suspect you hang out are not going to go out of their way to publicize these figures.

Oh, by the way, do you realize how damned difficult it is for an incumbent to overcome a 7% lag in 20 days?

From the link about the Gallup poll. Note the severe caveats:

"Gallup's daily tracking poll is subject to day-to-day fluctuations and could be an outlier. Romney leads Obama by less than 1 percentage point, 47.4 to 46.9, in the Real Clear Politics average of national polls."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/262809-gallup-poll-romney-opens-up-7-point-lead-among-likely-voters

Even the headline is forced to admit that swing states are close. We'll have to wait for more polls to see how accurate this one bizarre poll outcome really is. Republicans are the first to admit that polls can be wrong. We also haven't what effect, if any, President Obama's terrific showing in the second debate had on the polls.

State of Awareness: That was about as fair an explication of the right-wing spin on this thing as I can imagine, thanks for that. I think you are right that what these guys 'hear' is what they wish Romney would have said, and what they want to believe Obama meant, in relation to their obvious desire to score some political points, somehow, on the Libya thing.

If the right wants to score points by criticizing a president for not prejudging the results of their ongoing investigation, fine, good luck to them. But there are two things that ought to be taken into account, that you did not mention:

First, the report by Reuters and AP the day after the attack - while everybody, including the protesters, were talking about the youtube video - that quoted US officials as saying they believed the attack was preplanned. This was the first I'd heard that idea, and it came from the administration, not the GOP.

Second, the AP report the next day, which said that two US military ships, armed with precision ordinance used to take out individual targets painted by drones, were moving into position off the coast of Libya.

Those two reports, taken together, clearly demonstrate that the administration was both trying to figure out who was responsible, and immediately coming in 'guns drawn' to take them out, without wasting time waiting to find out what the 'reasons' for the attack were. It obviously did not matter to the president whether it was preplanned or not. The results were the same: it was an act of terror, and those responsible would pay.

Far from dissembling for political gain or being out of touch, that shows a president on the job with his priorities straight. He said he would get justice for those murders, and given his successful history in hunting other killers in the region, I have no doubt that he is working hard to do just that. I have no doubt as well that the terrorists know that any minute a missile could come through their roof - not a good feeling, I imagine.

Over the past few months, the polls have been more of a measurement of the lack of intelligence of the electorate, or a measure of those that have taken advantage of, or plan to take advantage of our redistibutionist President's plan to take from the producers to support the takers. How anybody that has survived the last four years could still think Obama is the saviour is mind boggling. I would be interested in seeing how many voters like myself, who voted for Obama last time are now going to vote for Romney. That would be a telling poll for sure.

The Republicans don't deny that they lie.

They just want to convince voters that "everyone does it".

In the last debate was Romney's remark ("Binders of women") a psychological misstep showing his real opinion of women placed in binders/shackles under the man's control? This Gestapo has a real problem of being respectful to a Pres. and thinks he is the Lord on Earth. He and his Party think they have the right alone to decided what measures of healthcare is to be used for women. Everyday he sounds more and more like Hitler and that is exactly how he behaves on stage. We had Bush for a Gestapo Pres. and we certainly don't need to be regressing to elect another Gestapo eager to start more wars while trampling over women's rights. The next thing you'll know is he'll demand that women stay barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen while taking away their right to vote. Personally, I think it's long past overdue that we have a woman for a President because the men sure haven't displayed the ability to get the job done. But the U.S. certainly doesn't need a practicing witch, or a slave trader for a Pres. Those days have long since passed even if their beliefs haven't changed. Other than Romney's blond bimbo parrot wife, I can't imagine any woman in her right mind would want a flip-flopping Gestapo for a President. Maybe those men and women supporting this regressive Republican duo should be the ones to enlist to fight in the wars that Romney/Ryan are so eager to start. Or maybe they should work 6 jobs to pay for those wars to protect the elites, fat cats, lazy a$$es.

Also, isn't it odd how this last debate set-up chose not to have a democratically balance representation from all types of voters rather than narrowing down to an extremely limited number of independents/undecided voters, who appear to be seeking a Grandstand with their 15 minutes in the public "Hall of Fame"?? I find it hard to believe that anyone (in their right mind) with just a few days left for voting has not already made up their mind as to whom they'd vote for as the president. Their selection of questions were just as bad. Why wasn't there a far better selection of people from different races, religions, parties, socioeconomically backgrounds, educational backgrounds, professional backgrounds, etc., etc. used to represent the people in the Town Hall Debate? Instead it of a Town hall, it was a bunch of indecisive/ignorant Grand-standers seeking their 15 minutes Hall Of Public Fame. They obviously haven't spent any time doing some research on both the candidates. So they have to wait to rely on one debate before coming to a conclusion, and even then some still could not decide. Perhaps they should not vote at all.

A word to the wise votes and to middle class, keep our Govt. away from the hands of the Corporate elite (Koch Brothers), etc. who threaten their employees as to whom they will vote for, OR ELSE. Keep the Govt. from falling into the hands of CEO's who send the jobs overseas as Romney has done and still condones the same actions. Beware of those, who claim they didn't do anything wrong and never make mistakes. Beware of the candidate, who says he won't raise their taxes, and yet refuses to say how he'll cover the lost revenue from reduced taxes while at the same time increasing the expenditures for Defense spending, education, technology (if he does have anything in mind at all), etc., etc. Yet, at the same time they turn around with saying they want to reduce the Governments role in the U.S., except for telling women what healthcare plan they are allowed to have.

Don't ever sell your souls to the wealthy elite, who want to keep the middle class in chains (and women in binders) for their profits through lower wages, less and unstable healthcare with vouchers to gamble in their stock market, and covering the share of unpaid taxes by the wealthy elite. If you are fed up with the rich getting richer at your expense along with the loss of benefits which you have paid into, then vote the self-serving greedy Republicans out of office. Otherwise, don't complain later when discovering that you don't like the Republican plans for their constituents.

Finally, isn't it strange how no one has questioned Romney's overstretched remark when saying, the top 5% pays 60% of America's taxes????? Isn't it strange at the lack of complaints with Romney's testy behavior in the first debate; but when Obama became more assertive in the second debate, there is loud whining about the testy behavior? Are the good ole' American white boys and women still bigoted, and just can't stand having a well educated black leader in charge? Why else would Romney ever have the nerve to tell a Pres. (while pointing a finger toward his face) with saying that he'll get his turn later after he finishes talking (out of turn)? Isn't it odd how no one questions Romney's remark on the vast majority of citizens want to have the healthcare vouchers, while not saying where those statistics came from?

Updated for Thursday, October 18:

Real Clear Politics is consistently cited by both FOXNEWS and NBCNEWS as a current source for reliable averaged polling data at every level of American politics.

Real Clear today reduced the number of total 'toss-up states' still in play at the national level from eleven to ten, having moved North Carolina into the 'leans Romney' column.

As a result, the ten states of Florida (FL), Pennsylvania (PA), Ohio (OH), Michigan (MI), Virginia (VA), Colorado (CO), Wisconsin (WI), Iowa IO), Nevada (NV) and New Hampshire (NH) are the only states yet to be placed in either the Obama or Romney camps.

Beyond that, of the forty states no longer considered toss-up, Romney can lay claim with relative certainty to receiving 206 electoral votes to Obama's 201, with 270 winning the Presidency outright. At present, however, with only 19 days left in the 2012 presidential campaign, Obama leads in eight of the ten remaining toss-up states and Romney leads in two.

In descending order of 'percentage of lead' in favor of Obama, followed in ascending order of 'percentage of lead' in favor of Romney, here are the published averaged polling numbers from Real Clear Politics as of 4pm EST on Thursday, October 18:

In PA, with 20 electoral votes, Obama's lead is 5.0%.

In MI, with 16 electoral votes, Obama's lead is 4.2%.

In NV, with 6 electoral votes, Obama's lead is 3.0%.

In OH, with 18 electoral votes, Obama's lead is 2.4%.

In IO, with 6 electoral votes, Obama's lead is 2.3%.

In WI, with 10 electoral votes, Obama's lead is 2.0%.

In NH, with 4 electoral votes, Obama's lead is 0.8%.

In VA, with 13 electoral votes, Obama's lead is 0.8%.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

In CO, with 9 electoral votes, Romney's lead is 0.2%.

In FL, with 29 electoral votes, Romney's lead is 2.5%.

For Obama to win re-election, the easiest route still appears to be through maintaining his existing lead in the six toss-up states where his current margins are widest: PA, MI, NV, OH, IO, and WI. Doing so would bring his electoral vote total on Election Day to 277.

Should Obama lose the critically important and highly-contested toss-up state of OH, the loss could be overcome by a victory in Virginia where he presently holds a lead of 0.8%, resulting in an electoral vote tally of 272.

An alternative route to victory for Obama, should he fail to win either OH or VA, would be to capture NH where he presently leads by 0.8%, combined with a come-from-behind victory in CO, where he presently trails by an extremely narrow 0.2%. This alternative non-OH/VA route would also bring Obama's electoral vote total to 272.

In the final Obama scenario, a less probable but not altogether unlikely come-from-behind victory in FL where he presently trails Romney by 2.5%, would allow the President to emerge as victor while sacrificing wins in the five toss-up states where his current lead is smallest: OH, IO, WI, NH, and VA. This FL route also gives Obama 272 electoral votes.

For Romney to unseat Obama, he not only would have to capture the two states in which he presently leads, FL and CO, bringing his electoral vote total to 244, but also steal victories in NH, VA, and WI where Obama's current lead is most narrow. By so doing, Romney's electoral vote total reaches 271.

Should Romney come-from-behind in OH, his path to victory would only require that he maintain his lead in FL and CO while stealing VA where Obama's present lead of 0.8% is most narrow. This scenario would give Romney 275 electoral votes.

With nineteen days left in the campaign, OH and FL appear to be the most crucial toss-up states, but this one is going to go down to the wire.

It will be interesting to watch unfold on election night.

Snakebone, Obama had to do something. Especially after his administration spouted false narratives regarding a riot that never happened for days after it happened. Trying to prop up this failed administration based on getting Bin Laden and sending ships to the coast of Libya with drones to find a group of 30+ terrorists rings hallow. But I do understand. There isn't much else left to praise about his tenure in office.You probably won't acknowledge that our intelligence folks were looking for Bin Laden long before Obama ever dreamed of being President. Those like yourself act like he had a rifle in his hand and went on this mission. I guarantee you Obama was brought up being told never to join the military.

I seem to see a lot of crowing on the Republican side about the polls. I'm not worried at all. As long as we go out and vote we will win. The media is owned by the 1%,even so called neutral media. What do you expect they would say in the last days until the election. After one bad debate,Joe won the VP debate,and the President exposed Romney for the "bad boss" he is at the second. The third one is on Foreign Policy.

Lets take Europe to begin with. Could you imagine Romney dealing with Putin,the ex-KGB officer that tamed his own 1% by imprisoning or exiling them.And Romney starts that "bad boss" attitude. He'd be lucky is Putin didn't knock a few teeth out of his mouth,just for fun. And that's just the second largest world nuclear power.Our greatest ally Britain already doesn't like Romney,"Mitt the Twitt" is their nickname for him as I recall.In the first debate he managed to piss of our Spanish and German allies.And in his 'goodwill tour" he upset our Polish allies. He's pretty much "persona non-grata" in Europe already.

In the far-east,he's threatening China.The second greatest economic power and third greatest nuclear power. He will surely make things worse there in the East Asian region. The Australian government thinks the Republicans are bat-@!$%# crazy as their government official commented,so not any help for Mitt there. Latin-America,is increasingly turning left-wing,so the "bad boss" routine will just make them hate us more.

Now for the icing on the cake,the Middle East. Romney already said to his donors he doesn't see any hope for peace and we should just 'kick the can down the road' there. Does anybody think those words weren't reported to all the ME leaders. He wants to involve us in the Syria mess. Which means lots of money,and possibly Americans troops lives. He wants confrontation with Iran.And encase anybody is stupid enough to not know what that means. Think Iraq times 4,at least.

Yes,from just in the last 4 years being respected again.After 8 years of America being,not trusted at best and hated at worst under Bush.We would return to the failed neo-con policies of dead Americans and trillion dollar wars. Something I don't think Americans want. Those Americans that want those war days to return vote for Romney,you'll be happy with him. But those Americans that reject war,and want that money spent on America instead,vote Obama. He got us out of one horrible war,is getting us out of the second Republican war.And works hard to bring our enemies to justice,just ask Osama Bin Ladin. Ooops,my bad,you can't.The President made sure we got him. Something the Republicans just talked about for years.While at the same time working in co-operation with our allies,to keep a strong peace in the world. Is everything fine and dandy in the world,of course not. There has never been a time in my life that there was not some problem to solve. But I want a calm cool head like the President's dealing with those problems.And not the example of the Alpha male, "bad boss",we saw in Romney the other day dealing with our future in the world.

Obama/Biden 2012.

FACT CHECK this one......

"The fiscal year (FY) 2013 budget estimate for all components, including programs, within the EOP
is $710,753,000, which represents a decrease of $7,260,000, or 1.0 percent, from the FY 2012
enacted level. This restrained budget further represents the Administration's commitment to
aggressively pursuing control of deficits as the Nation works to rebuild and grow the economy.
Reducing domestic non-security discretionary spending in FY 2013 and beyond is one important
step in accomplishing this priority." - 2013 EOP Budget

"This restrained budget...." What is that about? And there's ANOTHER $462,000,000 in "Program" money...

Grand total for the EOP (Barry & Co.) $1.272 TRILLION for the Office of the President

I think the Dems feel the walls closing in on them :-D

Obama and Romney on the Wage Gap

By Diana Furchtgott-Roth
October 17, 2012 1:12 A.M.
Comments
9

We hear it over and over again: the myth of the wage gap. In Tuesday’s presidential debate, Katherine Fenton asked President Obama what he intended to do about “women making only 72 percent of what their male counterparts earn.”

Just one problem: Women make about 95 percent of what their male counterparts earn, if the male counterparts are in the same job with the same experience.

Obama’s answer was to brag about the increased regulations he’s put in place through the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which he signed into law in January 2009 — even though women have brought only about 35 lawsuits under the new law.

Romney talked about the women he hired when he was governor of Massachusetts. He also said that we need to “have a strong economy, so strong that employers that are looking to find good employees and bringing them into their workforce and adapting to a flexible work schedule that gives women opportunities that they would otherwise not be able to afford.”

Neither candidate pointed out that women don’t make 72 cents on a man’s dollar, or 77 cents on a man’s dollar, one of Obama’s favorite statistics. This comes from comparing the earnings of all full-time male employees with all full-time female employees. This averages together women who work as social workers with men who work as investment bankers; female English-literature majors with male engineers; and male loggers with female administrative assistants. Part of the gap is differences in hours worked, because full-time means any number of hours above 35 hours, and full-time women work fewer hours than men, on average. When comparisons are made between men and women who work 40 hours per week, women make 87 percent of men’s earnings.

There’s really no reason that, on average, men and women should be paid the same if they choose different majors in college, different jobs when they graduate, and different hours of work. What’s important is comparing men and women with the same job tenure in the same position in the same firm. If there’s a big difference under those circumstances, then there may be discrimination, giving women grounds to sue.

When economists compare men and women in the same job with the same experience, they earn about the same. Studies by former Congressional Budget Office director June O’Neill, University of Chicago economics professor Marianne Bertrand, and the research firm Consad all found that women are paid practically the same as men.

Moreover, federal law for decades has provided legal remedies for women who encounter pay discrimination. If women actually were paid 77 cents — or even 90 cents — on the dollar for the exact same work as men, they could sue. It turns out that American women do not suffer from systematic discrimination.

President Obama says he’s in favor of equal pay, but women staffers in his White House are paid 90 cents on a man’s dollar — if one calculates the figure, incorrectly, based on simple averages.

Women have unparalleled freedom to choose their fields of study and careers. But many prefer to work part-time in order to combine work and family. Family-friendly jobs with flexible hours pay less than jobs with longer, inflexible hours.

It’s not the glass ceiling that keeps women out of the corner office; it’s a choice of how much time and effort to put into one’s career. The millennials call it “work-life balance.” For men and women, to make it to the corner office requires hours of work and travel and little time for family. That means missed birthdays, football games, and school productions. Women seem to mind missing these events more than men.

Look at women at Yale Law School, for instance. In 2012, as it has done in many other years, Yale Law Women — a group that features some of the smartest people in the world — made a list of “Top Ten Law Firms,” in categories related to family friendliness. Yale Law Women picked firms that supported part-time and flex-time work, and had generous parental-leave policies. “One of the goals of the Top Ten List,” the group wrote on its website, “is to generate discussion about family friendly policies at top law firms.” These are women who have the credentials to aim for the C-Suite at major corporations, but some are already planning for part-time and flex-time. There’s no problem with those choices, but these same women shouldn’t cry “discrimination” when they don’t make it to the top.

The myth of the wage gap is pervasive, but demonstrably false. Too bad neither presidential candidate had the guts to say so.

— Diana Furchtgott-Roth is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research.

The women who vote for Romney are the same ones who stay with their man after he beats her black and blue.

But I love you baby, I didn't mean to hit you so hard.

Sounds like you have experience Ed. I never could have dreamed that statement up. Do you see what liberals think of you women that dare to vote against their messiah?

Ron: two things. First, the riots over the youtube did happen, all over the middle East and beyond. The only question was whether Libya was part of that.

Second, the question of whether it was preplanned or an outgrowth of a protest quite obviously doesn't matter, and didn't matter to our President. The bottom line was the same: it was an act of terror, and those responsible would pay. Do you think it should matter? Wanna give a pass to them for murdering Americans if they were just protesters who went out of control? Wanna say that wasn't an act of terror?

I'll guarantee you the President and his military had only two questions after the attack: who did it, and where are they now? That's what Obama will say at the debate, so you guys better come up with something fast.

And by the way, Bush famously said it wasn't important to get bin Laden, and Romney echoed that 'he wouldn't move heaven and earth' to get bin Laden, and that's a guy who killed 3,000 Americans on our soil. What makes you think he'd move heaven and earth to get the guys who only killed 4 Americans oversees? And of course, Obama didn't just get bin Laden, he killed many more al Qaida leadership than Bush, because he focused on special forces rather than battlefield activity. Romney wants to put big bucks on battlefield components - think that's the way to go when we're fighting individual terrorists? And on and on...

Who'd have thought the right would be so weak on defense? Amazing.

Ed:

Really? Classy.

Old Bob the Boob is out with his quote from the Bush years and comparing the drop in leases in a convenient 2011 factoid. It has already been fact checked the decline in 2010-11 numbers was in large part due to the Macondo Well Blow-out fiasco.

But, hey you RWNJ's I thought you no longer allowed anyone to reference anything in the Bush days...lol HYPOCRISY AT WORK!

Jefferson, yes; Hamilton, no Post # 1.90:

If the deciding election comes down to FL, then don't be surprised if Romney wins after the voter suppression and suspiciously lost/misplaced ballots. In one family of 4 eligible voters, and all 4 absentee ballots were dropped off at the appropriate office at the same time by one person from that family (one of the 1 Democratic voters), only one of the four ballots were logged in later as being received. In this family of four voters, one voter was a Republican, two were Democrats, and one was an Independent. Guess which ballots were not logged in later as being received?? It's not too hard to figure that one out. The ones to conveniently disappear were the 2 Democratic ballots and the 1 Independent ballot. A rather strangely odd coincident coming from a Republican Tea party State. Fortunately, with the ability to track the receipt of your ballot, the missing ballots from those 3 voters were able to get a provisional replacement ballot to resubmit (providing the first absentee ballot never shows up). So folks, if you want to know if your absentee ballot arrived and was logged in, there is a small instruction sheet inside your ballot that provides the information on how to check.

I don't want a boss, I want a president!!! Women who are smart enough, know exactly who Romney is & some are happy with that. This one is not!!!!

Gotta love our GOP friends. They are among the biggest hypocrites and their posts prove that. They sit around watching Fox news, and listening to Rush Limbaugh and believe every word they are told, they then call all other sources of news "the liberal media" and everyone that doesn't agree with them a "liberal" whether they are or are not. They like to say that people who will vote for Obama are "drinking the kool aid" failing to see that they already did that many years ago with Fox and Rush's brainwashing. They don't have any REAL facts to go on so they just repeat what they are told to think and insult anyone who gets in their way(a clear sign of someone not confident in their beliefs).

A few weeks ago polls didn't matter, they were wrong and heavily favored Democrats, but this week all of a sudden polls are important and accurate. What next week when the polls swing again? Remember John Kerry was going to win and that didn't happen?, Oh and lets not forget we need to cherry pick our polls, lets see, ABC news Obama leads, nope not that one, Politico nope, Obama leads.. Ahh here we go Gallup Romney leads in that one. Never mind that popular vote means nothing and electorate means everything, yes the electorate has to vote on who the popular vote selects but it doesn't matter, Obama leads in VA, OH, WI.,IA, NH, NV, MI and PA.

Finally people are saying Obama hasn't laid out a plan for his next term, so they'll vote for Romney who hasn't laid out ANY plan except his tax cuts that don't add up. Now I know some of you brainwashed Fox people will say that xxx website said his plan will work, well my answer to you is sites with an agenda and blogs don't count. The CBO said his plan doesn't add up. You'll blindly vote for someone just to get another person out of office because your masters at Fox and Rush has brainwashed you into believing that Obama will eat your children if re-elected, they have you so afraid that you would vote for Satan himself, over Obama! I promise you this, if Mitt is elected he will be a 1 term president, unemployment will skyrocket, the debt will go from $16 trillion to well over $20 trillion, we will either be at war on the verge of war with Iran, or worse our "#1 enemy" according to Mitt, Russia, personal freedoms will be taken away, It will not be roses. If Obama wins the worse that can happen is we stay right where we are at, Which I'll take any day over someone who is running on "you get to see my plan when I'm elected"

Romney lemmings - be careful what you wish for, it might come true.

Reality Check-1104333

you over pointed my point. Stocks are up and been going up for 3 years. It just the fact that they have been going up . Why does not matter. in the equation on who will be the next president. A president seeking another 4 years with the stock going up for that amount of time never lost.

Florida, a Tea party State, has paid for a group called, A.L.E.C. (a radical extremist right wing organization with shady backgrounds) outside of their State to write up the FL State Legislature Laws (some of which are not Constitutionally valid). Some of these laws has appeared on their State ballot such as: a very deceptively written amendment requesting that public State funds/Taxes be given to Religious institutions for educational vouchers, etc. What happened to the U.S. Constitution that says Church and State are to remain separated?? Wouldn't that have to be changed first? However, FL wants to give the public funds/taxes over to religious schools as vouchers, etc. This Amendment was very lengthy and cleverly written to mislead the voters with their real intentions. That's called Democracy at work in the State of FL with Voter's Suppression, etc.

Beverly in Chicago

When your done looking over Obamas college records would you mind sending them to me?

I'm just a little curious.

Snakebone

But there are two things that ought to be taken into account, that you did not mention:

First, the report by Reuters and AP the day after the attack - while everybody, including the protesters, were talking about the youtube video - that quoted US officials as saying they believed the attack was preplanned. This was the first I'd heard that idea, and it came from the administration, not the GOP.

Second, the AP report the next day, which said that two US military ships, armed with precision ordinance used to take out individual targets painted by drones, were moving into position off the coast of Libya.

You're right, I failed to mention those as well and, quite honestly, I wasn't aware of two military ships moving into position. This is the first I am hearing about it lol.

But from what I have seen from both candidates, you have both of them embellishing facts or giving incorrect information. What scares me though, from the start of the campaigns, Romney has back tracked a lot of what he's said. Not so much the last month or 2, but he was doing it quite a bit earlier this year. Even those, earlier in the year, running in the Republican race for being the next candidate were pointing out Romney's revisions and renouncements of what he said/supported. Obama hasn't done the best job either with a lot of the things he said he was going to do and some of the policies he's passed, but he has done a notable amount to slow down the bleeding that was happening with the economy. Not as quickly as I would have like to see, but at least it's slowed down. All I have to say is that Romney better produce what his foreign policy is and how he is going to achieve what he has in mind for us if he wants to pursuade the swing vote, because right now he's disappointed me with his back tracking and witholding details of how he is going to get us on a better road. These general answers and refusing to give additional details that are severely needed right now may come to bite him in the butt if he doesn't do anything in the final debate.

I should also mention, before people start making accusations towards me as to who I supposedly follow, I do not fully support either candidate. I'm one of the swing voters these two candidates are fighting for. I've been disappointed by both, but Romney is failing to grab my attention right now because he won't lay it out there and prefers to fall back on his answer of "I am going to work with Congress on getting things fixed once I'm elected". That's someone that comes across as a tool for his party, has plans that are going to screw people over even more, or someone that really has no plan. So he better deliver in the final debate if he wants to convince me that my vote should be his and not Obama's.

Jim Mahoney,

"How is it anyone can vote for a sitting POTUS who starts yelling LIAR LIAR really presidential there."

It is obvious you did not watch the debate. President Obama never once used the word "liar" during that debate. He often told Romney that what he had said was not true because it wasn't. But he never used the word "liar". Romney told many untruths, but you just don't like it when your "hero" Romney is put in his place for, in fact, lying, although Obama was too polite to use that word.

Sorry.... been looking at budget numbers all day...... EOP should be $1.272 BILLION budget not the trillion that I stated.... of course, Barry wants it to be trillion, so no one tell him.....

If you want to know why Romney wants to be president, here's the reason. Under his tax plan he'd pay less than a Doctor, Lawyer or small business owner making $600,000 a year even though he made over 21 million. There's a reason billionaires are threatening their employee's if Romney isn't elected. Romney's tax rate would drop from around 14% to less than 1% and so would the billionaires throwing tantrums. If 14% is too high will 0.82% be low enough?

Under Paul Ryan's plan, Mitt Romney wouldn't pay any taxes for the next ten years — or any of the years after that. Now, do I know that that's true. Yes, I'm certain.

Well, maybe not quite nothing. In 2010 — the only year we have seen a full return from him — Romney would have paid an effective tax rate of around 0.82 percent under the Ryan plan, rather than the 13.9 percent he actually did. How would someone with more than $21 million in taxable income pay so little? Well, the vast majority of Romney's income came from capital gains, interest, and dividends. And Ryan wants to eliminate all taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends.
Romney, of course, criticized this idea when Newt Gingrich proposed it back in January by pointing out that zeroing out taxes on savings and investment would mean zeroing out his own taxes.

Almost. Romney did earn $593,996 in author and speaking fees in 2010 that would still be taxed under the Ryan plan. Just not much. Ryan would cut the top marginal tax rate from 35 to 25 percent and get rid of the Alternative Minimum Tax — saving Romney another $292,389 or so on his 2010 tax bill. Now, Romney would still owe self-employment taxes on his author and speaking fees, but that only amounts to $29,151. Add it all up, and Romney would have paid $177,650 out of a taxable income of $21,661,344, for a cool effective rate of 0.82 percent.
But what about corporate taxes? Aren't they a double tax on savings and investment, so Romney's "real" rate is higher than his headline rate? No. As Jared Bernstein of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has pointed out, Romney has structured his investments as "pass-throughs" that avoid corporate tax. In other words, the 0.82 percent tax rate is really a 0.82 percent tax rate.
It might seem impossible to fund the government when the super-rich pay no taxes. That is accurate. Ryan would actually raise taxes on the bottom 30 percent of earners, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, but that hardly fills the revenue hole he would create. The solution? All but eliminate all government outside of Social Security and defense — a point my colleague Derek Thompson has made in incredible chart form.

Maybe Harry Reid's mysterious source that Romney didn't pay taxes for a decade was really a time-traveler from the future. If Romney wins, it could very well be true.

State of Awareness:

Ahhh, an independent undecided voter. You're in great demand right now. But at least that explains why you haven't called me an idiot or a socialist. Yeah, Obama sent in the USS Laboon and the USS McFaul on sept. 12, both armed with Tomahawk missiles, still there. I don't think he's messing around.

I'm glad you see a notable amount done to slow down the economic bleeding, but I'd argue, staying strictly within the facts, that Obama did a bit more than that economically. He 'officially' stopped the overall economic downturn in mid-2009, and although jobs were so slow to come back that for at least a year after that it was called a 'jobless recovery', the GDP did start to grow at that time. However, as you know, home values were still falling, foreclosures were still rising, banks were still not lending, consumer confidence was sinking, and nobody would have called that a 'real' recovery.

However, at this point, most of the indicators are pointing in the right direction. Home values and starts are rising, UE is falling, jobs - even manufacturing jobs - are being created, consumer confidence is rising, exports are up, energy production is up, the deficit is going down, the stock market is way up, etc. And since these indicators are not boom and bust, but are consistently moving, with some indicators like UE and GDP growth for over two years now, I think it is fair to say that he not only slowed the bleeding, but stopped it and has turned it around.

At that point I jump off my bandwagon, and agree that many think the recovery is not fast enough, and I understand that position. But in my opinion we are clearly in the midst of a real, solid recovery.

My two cents. Good luck making your decision. And by the way, nice to see someone on the list who isn't into name calling.

Left/Right, right/wrong. Whatever. ALL politicians are wrong about women. And men, children, animals and facts. They make @!$%# up to suit their purposes. How is anyone surprised?

If Romney had even once interjected that he was "interested in finding qualified people" it would have been less revolting.

But the concept of women being part of the big picture escapes him. A chip is missing in his brain.

Romney's war on Women continues! Who needs the right numbers when you are at war and why not use republican math. to make the numbers look worse than they are. Lies seem to fit Romney now that he has our Lying Ryan from Janesville, Wisconsin. We got smart to him long ago with his "Plan to Ruin America!"

Okay, here is Silverton's Shout-Out of the Day:

Hey, Mr. Romney, how long do you think it will be before the Tea Party figures out that 99% of its members are part of the 47% of Americans that you disdain?

I found a list of Obama's 'accomplishments':

WHERE DID IT ALL GO?

Obama has given TAXPAYER $BILLIONS to cronies, supporters, unions, and bundlers...
Here are just a few of the Obama FAILURES...

JUST THIS WEEK... 10/16/2012...

GM Has Lost $6.5 BILLION Overseas Since Bailout!

The CBO Reported That $65 BILLION in TARP funds Remain Outstanding!

Battery Maker A123 Systems Files Bankruptcy Owing $249 Million to Taxpayers!

Romney said Obama is a loser, this is NOT a loser, this is corruption of the highest
order... OBAMA SHOULD BE PROSECUTED AND THROWN IN JAIL ALONG WITH BERNIE
MADOFF!

Solyndra (FAILED! - $535 Million)

SunPower (FAILED! - $1.2 BILLION)

First Solar (FAILED! - $3 BILLION)

Beacon Power (FAILED! - $43 Million)

ECOtality (FAILED! - $126.2 Million)

Abound Solar (FAILED! - $400 Million)

Brightsource (FAILED! - $1.6 BILLION)

General Motors (FAILING! - $16 BILLION)

Raser Technologies (FAILED! - $33 Million)

Solar Trust of America (FAILED! - $2.1 BILLION)

Nevada Geothermal Power (FAILING! - $98.5 Million)

Since Obama can't waste it fast enough in the US, He hands out TAXPAYER $BILLIONS to
our enemies...

Most recently...

TERROR WARNINGS FOR AMERICANS IN EGYPT!

...Obama Sends Egypt $450 Million Cash!

SYRIA STOCKPILES CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS!

...Hillary Clinton Announces $45 Million to Syria!

Then...

$2 BILLION to Egypt!

$25 Million to Libyan Rebels!

$7.5 BILLION to Pakistan!

$400 Million to Palestinians!

73 Loans to Libyan Banks!

Taxpayer $$$ to Build Mosques!

Another $150 Million to Palestinians!

Taxpayer $$$$ to Afghan Banks!

$23 Million to Kenya for ABORTIONS!

Stimulus Grants to the Muslim Brotherhood!

$900 Million to the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO)!

How about those jobs on which Obama is "FOCUSED LIKE A LASER?"

Obama outsourcing jobs...

$2.0 BILLION (Petrobras, BRAZIL)

$529 Million (Fisker Automotive Inc. FINLAND)

$1.2 BILLION (Pemex, MEXICO)

$105.9 Million (General Motors Corp. SOUTH KOREA)

$299.2 Million (Johnson Controls Inc. FRANCE)

$95.5 Million (Advanced Power Solutions, FRANCE)

$249.1 Million (A123 Systems Inc. CHINA)

$161 Million (Kokam Co. SOUTH KOREA)

$151.4 Million (LG Chem Ltd. SOUTH KOREA)

$118.5 Million (EnerDel Inc. RUSSIA).

Add to that... Obama dumped 800,000 illegal Mexicans into the unemployed pool.

ARE YOU STILL BREATHING :)

Vote American This Time... It May Be Your Last Chance!

You are the math teacher I always hated!

LOL!!!

Math was NEVER the strong suit of the Left.

ssmithlg

Where did BUSH maths get us to? How did surplus ended up been a deficit? What was he thinking when he was signing the check books perhaps he thought he was coloring. Bush couldn't differentiate be +/- and so is Mitt.

To be fair, I just noticed that Domenico did say this earlier in the article:

And the share of women in the workforce is essentially unchanged with a slight decrease (see charts 3 and 4)

Alan...lol. Sorry...I work with numbers all the time and got my degree in math. It's a compulsive thing with me. :-)

A little politics meets NFL humor: I saw a poll earlier that showed Klobucher 58, Bills 30. My first thought was good grief...the Bills can't keep anyone under 50 points can they?

It must be Wrongmemath.

duplicate post

Math was NEVER the strong suit of the Left.

We are still waiting for the Willard math to make his tax cuts revenue neutral. Of course, we all know Willard failed arithmetic.

Mitt knows arithmetic. He simply lies whenever it serves his purpose. He has chosen to make winning Job 1 and he is willing to sacrifice whatever integrity he ever had to do it.

Romney cannot be trusted.

His jobs record as Governor of Massachusetts according to Mass. Budget and Policy Center was pretty bad, yet he lies about that too:

Massachusetts is just one of nine states that failed to register a net gain in employment between the start of the national recession in March 2001 and June 2006; it is one of only six states that failed to register a net employment gain between the end of the recession in November 2001 and June 2006. In fact, of the states in these two groups, only Michigan and Louisiana have experienced deeper job losses than Massachusetts since 2001.

Romney failed at job creation, but you wouldn't know that from listening to him.

Romney...failed at creating jobs....failing at telling the truth

ssmithlg: Math was NEVER the strong suit of the Left.

Sure it is! While all of you on the Right were busy licking Dumbya Bush's butt, we knew that MISSION ACCOMPLISHED didn't add up. But you guys -- you all just kept on licking!!

There is a problem with these numbers as you pointed out Frank. However it is not the actual math it is the fact that this likely includes both Men and Women. We would need to know the percentage for Men in order to correctly find the remaining percentages for Women.

There were 306,000 jobs added Women filled according to these numbers. The percentage goes down because more of the positions were filled by Men, hence my above argument.

Leave it to liberals to try to spin an overall decline into a gain...

But what else can one expect from the likes of MSNBC?

DMorgon, I think it would be prudent to make Obama take all those red diapers with him when he's forced to move out of the White House in January. Not much at all has been accomplised since Bush left office. I'm not a Bush guy, but to keep bringing his name up whenever your guy is failing his job is pure smokescreen. In just 4-years, Obama has surpassed the national debt caused by Bush in his eight years in that office.Try wiping Obama's okole before licking it next time, will you?

We Democrats just need to get out and vote and we win this election. That is the bottom line. The only way the Republicans can win if they can suppress our vote. Not by fraud alone,but by them convincing us that we will lose,so why vote. They are just playing mind games,with help from their media friends. But don't let it work for them. Get out the vote and we win.

The proof of that is in the electoral college numbers. We just need to go through them. Me,Vt,Ct,RI,Ma,NY,NJ,DC,De,Pa,Il,Ca,Or,Wa,NM, are almost certain to be Democratic on all maps. And I don't see Oh,Mi,Wi,IA,buying Romney as President. Those alone are enough to win the election. And New Hampshire,Virginia,North Carolina,Florida,Colorado, and Nevada are still in play. So even though the Republicans on this and other boards want us to believe they are winning. Americans are too smart to buy another used car from them. We got stuck with the Bush "lemon" and now they threw a paint job on the clunker and think we'll buy the Romneymobile. That dog might hunt will the Republicans,but not with thinking Americans.

Obama/Biden 2012,we vote and we win.

What's he ever correct about.......nothing. He's for everything and against everything at the same time. He should be tagged Mr walk back.

(women who say they worked for pay)

Adding this as a qualifier is pandering to Queen Ann especially after the brouhaha concerning Hilary after her statement that Queen Ann never worked a day in her life.

Trust him, he was a CEO from the business world for God's sake, so of course his numbers add up. Just like they added up at Enron, and AIG, and Anderson Cooper.

We're supposed to be impressed by Mitt's competence and he can't fact-check his own speech or have a team that does it for him? Why do I suspect he doesn't care and will keep repeating that lie?

Not to mention the fact that the losses early on were clearly the result of the cratering Bush economy. But Romney would never point that out either.

Man you guys are getting desperate.

Opposition research now being done for the DNC by NBC News.

At least you guys use to hide it, but now all bets are off, eh?

Domenico, I seem to remember at one time you called yourself a reporter right here on these threads in response to a question I asked.

Care to change that to Obama Shill?

What a douche bag.

I'm sure Fiesty knows the numbers - what is the decrease in the labor participation rate your president does not account for when bragging about ONLY 7.8% unemployment? 5,000,000 or so??? If 1/2 of those who dropped out are female, Romney has clearly understated how many jobs for females were lost.

Take the math above and add another 2.5 million to it. You will get closer to the actual number of women's jobs that have been lost... Romney paints too rosey a picture!

Romney / Ryan 2012

Nice attempt at a post, concernedone. But, what you fail to acknowledge (or you're just too cowardly) -- it's the policies of the prior GOP President who lost all those jobs. Don't blame the guy after him simply for not cleaning up the Colossal GOP Mess quickly enough to suit you...

Dumbya Bush walked out the front door of the White House, and left a turd on the doorstep the size of the Washington Monument.

Just the Facts, ma'am

From the article above:

Romney said the following: "In the last four years, women have lost 580,000 jobs."

There are several ways to look at this.

But the bottom line is Romney's count is incorrect.

This, along with the Governor's 'binder' analogy just tanked his poll numbers.

You are doing a great job "wooing" the women, Governor!

Any man out there who is married and has half a brain knows they can never lie to a woman and get away with it.

The majority of women in America know the Governor is a pathological liar.

They are going to vote for President Obama on November 6th.

Salud

Hello Feisty.

Enjoy your posts. I believe I know the answer to your question. Many won't like my answer, and I can't prove my belief. Many just absolutely hate the President more than they love their country. I don't care that they say it's his policies, he hasn't fixed the economy, whatever their latest excuse is. They hate him and his family in the White House. This shouldn't matter, but just in case anyone gives a darn...I'm white, female, and over 50. I'm a mother, grandmother, married to a Vietnam Vet for 43 years. My husband doesn't vote for draft dodgers who supported the war and said to say Semper Fi to all his fellow Marines!

They hate him and his family in the White House.

Hi Patricia!

I've been saying the same thing for years, they can't stand having a black man occupy their perceived White House!

Now, they're going so far as to wear it on T-Shirts at Willard rallies!

Stop by more often! ☺

PS: My husband is also a Viet Nam vet with two tours under his belt... like yours no way in hell will he support a yellow belly draft dodger!

Fesity I saw the t-shirt you speak of. What a great example to have for children. I try to stop by every day. I'm on the west coast and you guys are already off and running ! Again, I really enjoy your posts along with Jody of Iowa, David Walker and Independent Redneck...just love their well thought out writings. Lots of passion. Tomas Grande...great. Have a wonderful day and lets's win this for our POTUS, USA, and Phinephancy !

Have a wonderful day and lets's win this for our POTUS, USA, and Phinephancy !

Absolutely!

Enjoy your day!

Feisty and Patricia: My husband is also a Viet Nam vet...Force Recon Marine...we are both voting for the Romney/Ryan ticket...we don't hate the President...we don't have any issues with a black President living in the White House...we just disagree with most of his policies...as far as your draft dodger comments. Draft dodgers were dealt with according to the law. I have never heard that Mitt Romney was arrested or served any time for being a draft dodger. I also don't seem to recall that President Obama served in the military, nor have I ever heard that any of his relatives did...that being said, Semper Fi to both of your husbands and thanks as well for their service to our country.

Wow, one person in one picture wearing a T-shirt saying let's put White back in the white house and now all conservatives are totally racist. Love the spin. You getting dizzy yet?

Happy birthday Fiesty.

Patricia A Little redheaded Birdie told me you had some nice things to say about me and a few of my compatriots. Thank you very much it is appreciated. I did two tours of Lyndon's little shindig my self so a big ol' Semper Fi to your husband. And juanita rather than argue over things long past why don't we agree that no matter who wins the election those of us who have seen war up close and personal cannot support sending more of our best and brightest to fight in them unless it's necessary and a last resort. And I ain't seen that set of circumstances in a long time including the Nam.

Patricia 48-

Have a wonderful day and lets's win this for our POTUS, USA, and Phinephancy !

Thank you for the kind words.

I can't think of a better reason than your statement above.

Salud

Patricia, thank you!

As a draftee I can not follow a draft dodger. If someone wants to be a warmonger he needs to be a hawk, not a chickenhawk like Romney.

Hi juanita. Thank you for you post. This is what is great about the USA...we can agree to disagree! A big welcome home to your husband. Mine was USMC 3/9 1966-67.

His problem is that Romney supported the war and the draft and then hid behind his religion and went to France. Had he been a CO and not supported the war it would be a different story. It is called a chicken hawk. Anyway, that was a long time ago and I think he still has the same character, or lack there of.

Semper FI to both you and your husband :)

Wow, one person in one picture wearing a T-shirt saying let's put White back in the white house and now all conservatives are totally racist. Love the spin. You getting dizzy yet?

just one person's accepted presence in a group can color someone's opinion of the whole group.

for example, a conversation in my mind:

"would you like milkshake?"
"I'd love one"
"it's just that it's 3% s**t ... but hey, not enough that you'd taste it."
"well I don't want a s**t milkshake"
"no it's not a s**t milkshake, it's only 3% s**t..."

PETER KING on CNN last night: I'm going to use my words very carefully. I think the president's conduct and his behavior on this issue has been shameful. And — first of all, as far as it being an act of terror, the president was almost four minutes into his statement on September 12th before he mentioned an act of terror. It followed a paragraph in which he was talking after September 11th.

Rep. King (R) just acknowledged it to be true ... Fact Check done

Uh....4 minutes is a little less than 14 days.

Peter King is not creditable on terrorism. he has strong ties to the IRA, he is connected to terrorists.

Caesar Augustus-

FACT CHECK about Obama and the libya/debate thingy?

This has been fact-checked to death.

Governor Romney had egg on his face Tuesday night with the ultimate Fact-check right on Live Television for all of America to see.

The majority of Americans have seen this BS before from the Right wing media.

Seams the Psycho-Conservative noise machine of Faux/Drudge/Rush/Beck and the rest of them can't make their usual before-the-election-conspiracy BS stick this time.

Perhaps you should bring up the "birther" thingy again.

Salud

Dennis - I am so tired of the left wing claiming "act of terror" is the same as "act of terrorism". Had Obama, on Sept 12 said "This is an act of Terrorism" then I might have agreed with him, but he never. Now you and the other left wingers can spin it all you want, Obama never did mention TERRORIST/TERRORISM. There is a big difference in terror and terrorism.

First, if Obama knew it was an act of TERRORISM on Sept 12th why did Susan Rice and Others keep saying it was spontaneous and based on a Video?

Second, Why did Obama go on the View and when asked "was this a terrorist attack or not" answered by saying we don't have all the facts yet."

Third, In his speech at the UN he mentioned the Video a half dozen times and not once, to my knowledge, used the word TERRORISM.

Fourth, to claim now that when he mentioned "acts of terror" to be the same as a "act of terrorist", is just a bald faced lie. You can call it a "play on words" or "semantics" but it doesn't change the truth.

Obama and his administration will do or say anything to not use the word "TERRORIST/TERRORISM. The attack in Libya was "an act of Terrorism" by Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda supporters. Further the attack at Fort Hood, TX was an act of TERRORISM and not a work place incident as claimed by Obama's Administration.

Sarge,

Bush used the same term

AP - WASHINGTON (01/03/2009) — President George W. Bush on Friday branded the Hamas rocket attacks on Israel an "act of terror" and outlined his own condition for a cease-fire in Gaza, saying no peace deal would be acceptable without monitoring to halt the flow of smuggled weapons to terrorist groups.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28476147/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/bush-hamas-attacks-israel-act-terror/

Dennis, Columbus, Ohio -

President George W. Bush on Friday branded the Hamas rocket attacks on Israel an "act of terror"

Ouch!

Game, Set, Match.

Salud

Dennis - I don't give a damn what Bush said in 2009. You can spin this all you want and I for one am tired of you and others referring to Bush or something he did or said years ago. I suppose in your mind it would be o.k. for Obama to invade Iraq again because Bush did it.

If you think the "act of terror" meant a "terrorist attack", that's your right, then you should be able to give logical explanations to the first, second and third points in my above post. The fact that Obama committed and failed at a cover up is evident to all but those on the left.

I will admit it would have been much better for Romney to have used the word "terrorism" instead of "terror", but it doesn't change the facts. Just like Obama calling the Navy Medic a "corpseman" instead of "corpsman".

Dennis to sfcret----"Proceed, sarge"

Steeler Fan - Thank you, when you can't dispute or give rebuttal you just don't reply or say "proceed." BTW, I see the Democrats are still spinning this Obama lie. The Intelligence Community is now complaining in private of being "thrown under the bus." Senator Feinstein is now trying to lay the blame on James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence. Just more proof that the cover up continues.

Democrats just can't get their stories straight, let's see what Obama says on the John Stewart show. BTW, good old Joe Biden in Las Vegas, NV today asked "How many of you know someone who has served in Iraq or Iran, How many of you know someone who was injured in Iraq or Iran"? Senator Harry Reid was one of the dolts that raised his hand, no one moved to correct Biden or to tell him we have not fought in Iran.

Sfcret

You are obsessed with parsing words. There is no coverup and no intelligence agency has been thrown under the bus. It is people like you and the Romney campaign that are trying to throw our country under the bus.

You ought to worry more about how Romney is going to get tough with all those counties like Russia and China and Iran and Libya and Egypt and Yemen and any others he needs to impress us with how tough he is. Will his empty threats ever need to be backed up with action? How much damage will he do to our diplomatic relations with our friends like England?

Are you willing to go to war for your guy Mitt? The recklessness he has shown so far does not bode well for the future. Mitt will be bad for America and bad for the world.

sfcret and others, perhaps this post is not to late for the uninformed to have the knowledge of what Pres. Obama said in the 48 hours after the attack, then compare that to what Mitt the Nitt said before the family's of those killed were informed of their passing,,,,,,,,,,,,,

three speeches in 24 hours of the attack, yet the Repugs are not convinced,,,, unreal ethics.....

The world according to Nitt and Faux News is differant then our commitment to stand straight during acts of terrorism,,,,,,,,,,,,"

While the timeline does note that Obama said "acts of terror" on September 12, Fox didn't note Obama's statement on the attack at a campaign stop in Las Vegas, Nevada. There, Obama said, "As for the ones we lost last night: I want to assure you, we will bring their killers to justice. And we want to send a message the world -- anybody who would do us harm: No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America."

Nor did Fox note that during an appearance the same day in Golden, Colorado, Obama made a very similar statement : "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."

That is 3 speeches talking directly about the terrorist attack and those victims within 24 hours of the incident,with citation(credible sources, The White House website),,,,,,,,,,of course Repuglican media voices would not include these facts in their blemished account, and Nitt's politicising the attack before those who were personally involved were informed is the real truth in this tragic attack. Can't you see the differance in Nitt's reaction and the Obama's administration, for the love of God, people wake up, and get your a** out of your head. You are discussing symantics, as Nitt wants you to, when Nitt spoke out of turn, and was unpatriotic to his country and fellow man. Mitt the Nitt is the jerk, just like the schoolyard bully, and you appear to be afraid of him.

Blame Bush: The Saga Continues...........

The rocket attack on 01/03/09 that someone is trying to draw parallels from to try to justify the current 'President's' actions:

Were any Americans killed?

Was there an obvious attempt to cover up the reason behind the attack that resulted in lives lost following the attack? If the answer is 'yes', did FORMER President Bush coldly describe them as 'a bump in the road'?

I didn't think so.

Why are we even bothering to decide who to vote for?

The winner of the 2nd debate was made clear for the whole world to see.

It wasn't Obama.

It wasn't Romney.

It was, in fact, Candace Crowley.

CROWLEY/CNN 2012!

Shaak - Your reply doesn't answer my questions in the above posts. You are just another left wing nut case that waits for your talking points before you respond. BTW, it's the Obama Administration and their supporters like you that are parsing words. I'm not worried about Romney's foreign policy because he will at least select some with foreign policy experience. If elected and his foreign policy is not to my liking I will vote in 2016 to get rid of him.

BTW, I am a really to old to go to war for anyone, but I did go to war in Vietnam for John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. I did 20 years in the Army, how about you, did you serve?

Bob - Your whole article keeps mentioning Fox News. Why don't you do some independent research and get the real facts. Maybe instead of making snarly remarks about where heads are you should get your head out of Obama's a$$. I will ask you just one simple question and if you can't answer it don't bother to reply because you aren't worth trying to have a discussion with. The question: If, as you claim, that all these statements from the Obama Administration within 24 hours stated this was definitely a terrorist attack and not spontaneous why in the hell was Susan Rice and even the Presidents Press Secretary still blaming the Video days later? I await your answer.

sfcret, deflect again,,,,,,,,, and your response to the White House account of the two speeches Pres. Obama gave within 24 hours of the "Rose Garden Speech, before thousands of Americans and journalists,,,,,,None, yet you and your sort conspire to not inform but deflect and revise history to sort your own revised thinking........No more answering your "just answer me one question, a astute resemblance to Faux News, and Rush Limprod,,,,,,,respond to Nitt Witt's comments before the members of the deceased family were informed, and how Nitt's statement was a "stand down" or not politically motivated, and not concerned with National Security?I crown you the new National Enquirer of Newsvine for your uninformed politically motivated, revisionist comments. "Snarly remarks" as Joe would say "malarkey". What do you believe "blame " is? No one was blaming anyone, dummy. Have you looked into all sources and forms of media coverage about the attack, or do you just skim Faux News and BrierBrat, and CNN and take it as not sensationalized or condensed news coverage? You are one uneducated revisionist when you depend on your sources that have been refuted and fact checked by others, and have no response but deflection ala Sean Hannity, and the others who are full of "malarkey".You trully do not believe in the virtue of this country and people,,,,,,,,,you sir are a demigod, one who value's their own openion above all others.

Here is your homework little Jimmy,,,,,,,, read and count the days ,,,,,,,,http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/13/remarks-president-golden-co and http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/13/remarks-president-campaign-event-las-vegas-nv, go cry on somebody else's shoulder......now take what I had to give you, yes it is a handout to those who are not personally responsible for their knowledge, and try to have your news sources reply or distort the truth, as they have for you before.

Bob - Are you really that stupid to think this was not a cover up by the most incompetent Administration in history? I read your little references from the WH press office. Now show me in those two speeches that you posted when the President referred to TERRORIST or TERRORISM? He mention terror in each canned speech and the fact no "act of terror" would go unpunished, blab, blab. I really don't consider political speeches and WH press reports as good news sources.

But to cut this short, if you can't answer the questions I posed in post 4.5 above, don't bother to reply, since you can't post anything of substance or answer any questions just keep you head buried up your a$$ and keep drinking the left wing cool-aid. Oh, by the way it is Obama and the left that is deflecting on this subject. It's getting worse for the administration each and everyday. The CIA Station Chief said today that Washington was informed within 24 hours that this was a TERRORIST attack and not spontaneous.

You gave it your best shot and you failed just like the Obama Administration has failed.

Have a good day and if you really care about the U.S. vote for Romney/Ryan.

do you think most people are more stupid than you? well your wrong,,,,,,,LOL..... read and learn Francis.http://www.fair.org/blog/2012/10/19/cbs-libya-factcheck-will-live-in-infamy/

You don't scare anybody, you old stupid fool, and now your entitled to a government pension and benefits that you will vote against others having,,,,,,,you are sour grapes. Nitt, did not stand down on the attack but used it for politics, and conspiracy,,,,,,and you dummy bought right into it, hook line and sinker.......... When did Nitt show Presidential leadership? When he spoke politically, against the administration and the military before those family's were informed of the death of their loved one's. You are one arrogant old fart. And a true revisionist, one who will not believe reality. Go watch your Faux News and be happy that you are ignorant of what others believe or think,,,,,,,,,, "because you won't answer my question", LOL.

" I really don't consider political speeches and WH press reports as good news sources." than research what others have said about those same speeches and reports from reputable sources,,,, you fool, admit to not covering your ass, just deny their existence, fool...... Do you need more references, or affidavits from the thousands, if not millions who read or heard the three speeches and comments from Pres. Obama within 2 days of the attack,,,,,,,,,,, or do you deny that they exist, fool. And tell Mitt the Nitt about the speeches so he can get his story straight next time. Oh his wife said "Nitt won't run again when he losses" today.... talk about a pessimist, but a rich one at that.

Bob - You still haven't answered the questions. All you can do is deflect and call people names. You are the one looking for government handouts. I earned by retirement from the military so STFU. If you can't show proof for your comments don't bother to comment. Just keep drawing your Obama welfare checks and keep your head up your ass.

Bob - You fool, you reference the 3 speeches after the attack by President Obama, and I suppose, in your feeble mind, if Obama said it then it has to be true. Just answer the questions about Obama's little talk on the View, Carney's press briefing and Susan Rice going to the Sunday talk shows. If you can't see the cover up you are really blind and stupid. Now if you can't answer the questions, just go away and hang your head in shame.

Amen to all of that!!!! His response his tone and his expression were condescending. The comment of being flexible was just a heads up that he understands you don't do your fair share because after all it is your job to cook right? Thats womens work right? Romney is a fraud.

Yeah, I still want to know what 'flex-time' has to do with anything. Is he saying that he'll pass a law requiring business to give flex-time to women? Or is he saying that somehow, if he's elected, we're all going to stand in a circle singing Kum-Ba-Yah? How stupid does he think we are? And why flex-time for women to greet the kids and cook dinner? Men can't do that? Does he still watch 'Father Knows Best'?

My wife found that whole 'looking for women for my cabinet' speech condescending and creepy.

This whole stupidity from the left about "binders" is just that stupid. What the hell do you think was in the binders, I would think it would contain school records, degrees held, resumes and recommendations. Now if they are not in a "binder" what the hell would they be in, a brown paper bag. This is nothing but another deflection by the left wing because they can't defend Obama's policies and Obama can't explain what his plan for the next 4 years are in detail.

BTW, Romney never asked for "binders" he promised women's groups that he would consider women for positions in his Administration and asked them to refer some women so he could consider them. This BS about why didn't Romney know some qualified women, he probably did but he was keeping a promise, something Obama knows nothing about. First it was "Big Bird" and now its "binders", no wonder Romney is now ahead in the polls.

"...because if you don't have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters. If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things."

- Barack Obama

2008 Acceptance Speech

sfcet, answer the question, "What is flex-time, and how would the President's policy help woman in this case? Simple question that you have avoided, ala Nitt, because you don't have a answer, but deflect like a true politician. So who is playing the game better You or your opponent?,,,,and when did he say he was "keeping a promise" as Governor, you or Nitt? Your conjecture is shamefull and void of facts, but heavy on rhetoric, just like Eddie Munster.....

Nitt said," when the economy really gets going, under me, employers will be bending over backward to accept the woman's terms for employment",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,LOL. Did that happen at Bain or Mass. during his term,,,,,,,,,,LOL. Mass. was nearly last in job creation from the 2002 recession until Nitt left office, compared to the other States, Louisiana was last, but they had Katrina instead of Nitt.

Well Oscar, I guess Lily Ledbedder would not agree with you, we are regulated to a lesser class, medical insurance companies have higher premiums for women because of gender issues, even my local cleaners charges me more because of gender, Vaginal Probes, ultra sounds, personhood amendments, Blunt-Rubio amendment, egg-drop legislation (Ariz,) Ryan voted No on the Equal Pay for Equal Work Amendment, Violence Against Women Act still has not passed the House. Of course there is a War on Women Texas Defunding Planned Parenthood, all this should give you a clue.

Obama 2012

Oscar Rules.......

Have you noticed that "women" and "men" are NOT the same words. Why do you suppose that is? Do you think it is, perhaps, because women are NOT men? That is, they constitute a "different class".

Apparently, employers recognize that difference. That is, they pay WOMEN less than they pay MEN for the same work. This is a reliably established FACT. Do you deny it?

FYI - http://www.iwpr.org/publications/pubs/the-gender-wage-gap-by-occupation-updated-april-2011

It seems you fault liberals for our recognition of REALITY. Perhaps, in your circles, rational realism is a handicap.

OK, skyparrot, I think I understand your need to be a victim. My medical insurance is the same for male or female. If my local cleaners charged more for gender, I would switch (wtf??? for real??? and you still go there??)....

"women" and "men" are not the same words.....LOL!!!!!!!

Oscar, no victim-hood here, just reality check, meanwhile you have not disputed any of my post, true or not? I noticed no body is trying to regulate your flopper and what you do or not do. When you grow some tatas you may have some validity. Tell me about your position on Equal Pay for Equal Work? Curious.

Obama 2012

skyparrot, I *DID* dispute some of your post. I said my medical insurance doesn't charge more based on gender.....and I wondered why you're still going to a cleaners that charges more for women (even though I've personally never run across that one, and wonder how they're still in business).

Equal pay for equal work? I'm all for it.

Oh, and sorry I don't speak liberal. What is a "flopper" and why is someone trying to regulate it?

Maybe your insurance company and how would you know, a boss are you? Check with your cleaner and see what they charge to wash and light starch a shirt as opposed to a women's shirt, betcha there's a difference. Am glad we can agree on at least one much needed policy. Oh, bye the bye, my husbands shirts $1.49 my shirt $1.79, was told that it was due to women's body configuration that required price difference.

Obama 2012

Selfeducated voter - You get an F- in your self education. The health plan under Romney/Ryan will not dictate medical health care of anyone. Obamacare has bureaucrats making those decisions. Romney/Ryan advocate equal pay for women. Obama's female employees in the WH are paid less then male employees. Obama's debate coach Anita Dunn stated, about working in the WH, "This place would be in court for a hostile workplace...Because it actually fits all of the classic requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women". Obama's former economic advisor Christina Romer is reported as saying (about working in the WH) "I felt like a piece of meat". Romney/Ryan are both pro-life but agree it is acceptable in cases of rape or danger to the health of the mother. You say Romney lies - who has lied more to the American people than Obama? He's even lied about the tragic events of Benghazi.

Your reply to Jersey Girl was pure racism on your part yet you had the audacity to accuse her of it. Because she's voting for the man she believes is the right one to lead this country. Since when are we to be told who to vote or not vote for. We all argue politics but in the end it all boils down to the fact we vote with our conscience and not because of the candidate's skin color. At least those of us with open minds do. You, sir, are an overbearing control freak and your words prove it.

Skyparrot - Your cleaner is correct. Women's blouses are cut differently and often have frills and darts which takes longer to iron. Have you never ironed a blouse? If so then you would know it takes longer than to iron a man's shirt which is straight hemmed, no darts, etc. Do you not know that women employees in the WH earn less then the male employees? They earn approximately 23% less then the men. Obama is quite aware of this. The WH is a hostile work environment for women. Obama's debate coach Anita Dunn has stated "The place would be in court for a hostile workplace...Because it actually fits all of the classic requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace for women". And his former economic advisor Christina Romer said about working there "I felt like a piece of meat". So, just how much do you believe of the President's so-called caring for female employees? I think his credibility is zilch!

Oscar, the "war on women" is a fabrication of the Liberals. The right has no war on us and never has. Obama has his own war on women going on in the WH. Read my response to Skyparrot and you'll see why. The women for Obama are mainly those who 1) vote for his looks/charisma, 2) want free contraceptives (at our expense), 3) have not checked out the facts as to what he has done and is still doing to our country. I am a widow, mother, grandmother, veteran and retired law enforcement officer. I want us to get our economy and jobs back. I want a good healthcare plan that does not penalize or mandate citizens. I want our country to once more be the leader of the world and not down at 8th place where we currently are (since 2009). And I want our country to stop being dependent on oil supplied by our enemies and I do not want to ever again see our enemies invited into OUR house.....never again!

Oscar, and others. How many annual tests that are recommended by your Dr. are covered for woman compared to men? Men have fewer annual tests recommended by Dr.'s and you know it, pap smears mammograms etc., and men ? Less testing and less to pay out of pocket, maybe no deductible.

As far as the cleaners, I don't believe you as a man would pass up the "savings" that men get when woman pay more at the local,,,,,,your not that ethical because you are a Republican...........

"Romney/Ryan advocate equal pay for women." when and where? What law is on the books passed by Repugs that addresses the issue that you support, saying it and actually doing it is two different things to Repugs. What is the platform of the Repuglican Party on abortion? Answer: No, abortions in any instance, but Nitt says different and so will eddie munster, and you buy that crock as truth and moral........What is the platform of the Republican Party on Wade v. Roe? Repeal and make a Constitutional amendment outlawing all abortions,,,,,,,get real, that will never happen as most if not all Repuglican Platforms have in the past, no action, just words, but let's change our tune each election for our candidate, never mind what our Platform agenda says at the time, no one cares about that as long as we keep changing the story and lie more.

Joan, your lack of knowledge is astonding,,,,"The women for Obama are mainly" how sweet not to include the rich that can buy their own contraceptives, or perhaps you could explain "mainly" is that most, or all or sometimes, or when I feel like it,,,,LOL. Your a page out of Rush Limprods manual of "astounding revelations". Get real and stop spouting your like's and dislike's, because "I pay my taxes", most of the time, honey.

"I want us to get our economy and jobs back. I want a good healthcare plan that does not penalize or mandate citizens. I want our country to once more be the leader of the world and not down at 8th place where we currently are (since 2009)" and where were you before that in that stinking economy of 2007-2008. You are a political hack with no intention of "public service" to your country, without pay.

Exactly. The fact that he called a press conference the next morning had ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the Benghazi attacks, and anyone that thinks that needs to simply watch more Fox.

Rep. Peter King (R) on CNN last night: I'm going to use my words very carefully. I think the president's conduct and his behavior on this issue has been shameful. And — first of all, as far as it being an act of terror, the president was almost four minutes into his statement on September 12th before he mentioned an act of terror. It followed a paragraph in which he was talking after September 11th.

Rep King acknowledges Rose Garden speech as acknowledging terrorists attack. Fact Check completed by Republican Congressman.

We all saw the Arab street erupt in demonstrations, incited by clerics, over the anti-Prophet "movie," in Eygpt, Yemen, etc. and now the Republicans claim the Obama administration somehow mislead the American people over the danger of insulting another religion? I don't get the point. And Romney attacking the administration over Libya on the very day it hapened was distasteful, so say the least.

Rep King acknowledges Rose Garden speech as acknowledging terrorists attack

hang your hat on it Dennis. Still enjoying that Fields Medal? Facts Dennis, Facts

If a Republican says it, it must be true

If a Republican says it, it must be true

Dennis I dont care how big and bold you post your silliness, its still silly. Now how bout some Electoral numbers.

Amy, the Libya incident wasnt based on a video no matter how much you libs still try to spin it. Now call the cover up a conspiracy. Your Emperor has no clothes. bye bye Caligula

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.

ZMan2012: But he never once referred specifically to Benghazi as a terrorist act.

_______________________________________________________________________________

The WHOLE SPEECH was about the Benghazi incident. jesus h nipple! get a life and a brain!!! he doesn't have to start each sentence with the word BENGHAZI for those of you who are too goddam stupid to connect the dots and understand the context and his reason for making the whole speech!

I wonder if the fact that the very next line and the previous multiple paragraphs about Benghazi alone, are enough to sway your view?

Exact transcript.

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. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

Zman - You fall on your head as a kid??? Act of Terror is performed by

• A.) Postman
• B.) Race Car Drivers
• C.) Kids with candy
• D.) Terrorist

Great you picked (D) Great Job - there is hope for you yet. So Terrorist performed an Act of Terror on our Consulate. Obama didn't lie - keep grasping at those straws.

Moving Forward - not back to the 1950's

Aurora Co was also an act of terror right? wouldnt you agree? Would you say it was Terrorism? You know what, a reporter even went out on a limb to loosely accuse the tea party. Now we know Benghazi wasnt a spontaneous act, it wasnt a result of a youtube video. They (Obama and Admin) blamed a G-D VIDEO. Nice spin libs.

E. all of the above are capable

Since your self educated, Friday the 13th movies invoke terror, you think it's a terrorism movie or an act of terror?

.

Zman2012-

Once again; FACT CHECK....OBAMA LIED DURING THE DEBATE!!!!!

Sorry, amigo. But as usual, you are wrong again.

There never was, never will be, any scandal in Libya.

May I suggest you upgrade to Reynolds Heavy Duty Aluminum for your foil cap.

You have some serious problems if you think Faux/Drudge/Rush/Beck and the rest of the Kool-aid drinking psychos are telling you the truth.

I'm afraid they are making you out to be a chump.

Oh, and one more thing. The greatest act of terrorism on America was 9/11, and President Bush did NOTHING while Americans died.

Salud

Tommy - you must work hard to be this much of an ignorant moron! You are definately in that 47% that Romney was talking about - simple idiots that can't think, breath, eat, or work without the help of the government and without the liberal pupetiers pulling their strings. You must have been living in a cave during September not to have heard the Obama Administration blaming the Youtube video for what happen in Libya. Now they are trying to act as if that never happened. I know you watched your hero on The View and on Letterman - so you can't tell us you didn't here Osama blame the video. We were attacked by a terrorist group on 9/11 and the President scams you brainless idiots into thinking it was a simple uprising caused by the video, now he tells you he knew it was a terror attack all along and you moron believe him! That my empty headed friend is some powerful kool-aid you be drinking! Swim back down to to the bottom of the tank where all you bottom feeders belong and let the adults discuss how we will fix all the problems that Osama has caused the past 4 yrs.

@TomasGrande

Sorry Juan Baldez.......but it is you who is wrong.

But then again, cultivating all that coffee up in those columbian mountains, I can understand the reason why you can't read, and therefore cannot decipher the truth from a lie. (Or for that matter your @$$ from a whole in the ground.)

One of these days you're going to awaken from your dream, and realize that you're not the most interesting man in the world; but rather, you're a drunk who consumed too much of that stuff they advertise on TV & radio.

You're right about 911, by the way.

But you see, "el tonto".....I never voted for George Bush to begin-with.

The problem with you is that your hangover-induced state of halucination has made you believe Obama is keeping you safe, and that he even gave a damn about those people who died in Bengahzi.

Take four aspirin, and drink a BIG glass of water. The alcohol will eventually wear off.

Stay Thirsty, El Tonto, and remember; fat, drunk, stupid, and jobless is no way to spend the next four years

DEMOCRATS FOR ROMNEY 2012!!!!!

@self edcuated voter.....Your teacher has a fool for student, and vice-versa.

READ the damned transcript! Obama DID NOT refer specifically to Benghazi as "an act of terrorism," as he claimed to have done in the debate Tuesday night.

He DID talk about making light of people's religious beliefs. Then said it was still no excuse for killing those four people.

WHICH SUPPORTS the assertion that he and the rest of the administration claimed the attack was NOT an act of terror by an organized group; but rather, a spontaneous demonstration against the anti islamic video that had just been released overseas.

He even went to the UN a week later, and gave a lecture to the general assembly about "freedom of speech."

The proof is all there. You're only lying to yourself, if you refuse to acknowledge it.

DEMOCRATS FOR ROMNEY 2012!!!!!

Liberal and Zman -

You have some serious problems if you think Faux/Drudge/Rush/Beck and the rest of the Kool-aid drinking psychos are telling you the truth.

I rest my case.

Salud

BTW, GALLUP, not Gallop. No desperation, likely voters are just that a maybe as opposed to voters.

Your point means nothing.

Obama 2012

hey teabaggernut: IPSOS/Reuters poll:

Obama 67%

Romney 15%

Not For Obama, But Can't Bring Themselves to Vote For a LIAR Like Romney 18%

Gallup polls means squat. If the election were held today President Obama would win the electoral votes and win an second term.

And yet, a couple months ago, kkwilson said that polls didn't matter, because her cultist candidate was several points down...

That's some pretty remarkable hypocrisy!

And all of you libs say the only thing that counts is the Electoral College:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html

Whoops! What happened?

Kevin and DMorgan -

Evidently, you havent looked at the most recent electoral maps...

So did AIG and every bank in the Nation, Ryan voted yes, and Bush's stimulus. Ryan voted no on every GI Bill submitted to the House, Voted No on Vets Job Bill, Voted No for Equal Work for Equal Pay and Ryan begged for Stimulus money both Bush's and the Presidents. What is your point anyway.

Obama 2012

You obviously did not hear what the President said, and only read a blog. He stated that the BANKS have repaid there TARP money. Fannie and Freddie are not banks.

AIG has not, and what about the failed ones, tax-payers ate those, point still moot.

Obama 2012

Dear "Socialism":

Skyparrot and t are correct. And btw, do you have the slightest clue what socialism actually is? I'm betting you don't, because if you did you'd realize you are off by a long shot as far as the President is concerned. Yep, he may have introduced a socialized medical program that has the possibility of serving us all, but what else has he done as a "socialist?" Can't wait to hear your response.

Obamaphones, encouraging people to go on foodstamps, extending unemployment benefits, taking over student loan program........

sky parrot, read up son and learn the truth,,,,,not political crap............http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/09/10/160886823/where-the-bailouts-stand-in-1-graphic and http://money.cnn.com/2012/05/03/markets/aig-earnings/index.htm the loans are being paid back and those in business are doing better...........as for failed banks, perhaps the deregulation in the 90's thru 2008 had more to do with it than that "socialist" Obama, and Barney Frank.

Here's a "fact" for you.

"Total federal and state "welfare" spending topped $1 trillion last year, marking a nearly 30 percent increase since the start of the Obama administration -- according to a new congressional report which documented spending across more than 80 benefit programs for low-income families."

It is just a matter of time and the welfare system is going to completely crash for lack of funds. It's simple arithmetic. And four more years just might do it.

Maybe the increase of welfare was an effect from the largest economic depression in decades. Stating that it has gone up as you note does not automatically connect it to Obama, like you presume But that is ok, everyone is entitled the their opinion. That stats might be right but your attaching it around the neck of Obama is your opinion.

Can You Spell,

Is your memory impaired? Two terms of George Bush left us with a financial crisis, debt from his tax cuts, two wars and staggering unemployment. I suppose you were all for letting people go hungry who lost their jobs, letting people die for lack of medical care and watching teachers get laid off because states couldn't pay them?

I am so glad Barack Obama was President during the crisis. We need him, to make sure the recovery continues. We all know the wealthiest in this country made money during the recession - we need to make sure the middle income folks don't end up paying for Republicans' mistakes.

Is it true President Obama just referred to the deaths of the four Americans as "Not Optimal" on John Stewart's The Daily Show? Please tell me there is no truth to this!

You heard correctly.

Optimal - "Not the best, most favourable or desirable, outcome"

Obama is a F'n idiot, and anti-American. Vote him out in 17 days!

You can't spell Libya, died OR Texas. Doubt anyone with any sense takes you seriously.

Romney's advisers got plenty of people killed on 9-11 and in the needless Iraq war. Thousands. The same people that will be back in office if Mitt ever got elected.

Romney would never get any women killed as he is against women anywhere but in the kitchen and barefoot. Dubya had a lot of men and women killed and Romney wants more war?? If he hasn't get any women (or men) killed, he sure plans to.

dmwt -- you should be more concerned with bad educational standards over anything else.

how appropriate that your acronym is remarkably close to dimwit.

i'm jus sayin...

Right after your own cowardly candidate offers us full disclosure.

Since when is 47.2% less than 47.0%? - because this is what the reprter is calling a 'gain'.

Looks like the reporter and many of the liberals here need to go take math again in elementary school. But, that's what we get from the modern education system - people who can't comprehend what they read, write intelligibly, and people unable to do basic mathematics.

*you're

They but at least he has some of those special under-ware.