Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Libyan president to NBC: Anti-Islam film had 'nothing to do with' US Consulate attack

Libyan president to NBC: Anti-Islam film had 'nothing to do with' US Consulate attack
Thread Tools
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2012, 06:36 AM
 
Obama continues to blame the "Mohammed movie trailer" for the "Bump in the road" that resulted in the death of Ambassador Stevens even as more and more evidence comes out proving that this was a well planned attack. Will this be Obama's "Tehran Embassy taker over?" (especially when people find out that the State Department was given warning and did nothing to beef up security).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZDg_cJCxZ4


[VIDEO]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZDg_cJCxZ4[/VIDEO]







Not meeting with any Foreign leaders while in NY for his UN speech ( blaming the movie again) doesn't look good either. He did, however, have time to visit "The View"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hG_Erp-Osyc


[VIDEO]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hG_Erp-Osyc[/VIDEO]
45/47
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2012, 09:04 AM
 
I'm just blown that he won't be meeting with any world leaders to discuss the problems the world is facing today, but will be appearing on "The View" to further his campaign. Disgusting.
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2012, 09:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
(especially when people find out that the State Department was given warning and did nothing to beef up security)
This was proven false over a week ago.

But then again, I'm talking to a guy who thinks Jimmy Carter is personally responsible for the revolution in Iran in 1979, so I shouldn't expect much.
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2012, 09:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
I'm just blown that he won't be meeting with any world leaders to discuss the problems the world is facing today, but will be appearing on "The View" to further his campaign. Disgusting.
Are you sure it's not Bebe refusing to get on a plane to meet with Obama? Why should the leader of a nation of 300+ million people have to make time for him? It should certainly be the other way. It's time for Bebe to figure out who wears the pants.
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 26, 2012, 03:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
This was proven false over a week ago.
But then again, I'm talking to a guy who thinks Jimmy Carter is personally responsible for the revolution in Iran in 1979, so I shouldn't expect much.
By who, the State Department? They're still trying to figure out how CNN got a hold of Stevens' diary. Reports are list of Libyans working with US has gone missing, putting their lives in danger.
45/47
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 27, 2012, 08:36 AM
 
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday suggested there was a link between the Qaeda franchise in North Africa and the attack at the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed the American ambassador and three others. She was the highest-ranking Obama administration official to publicly make the connection, and her comments intensified what is becoming a fiercely partisan fight over whether the attack could have been prevented.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/world/africa/clinton-cites-clear-link-between-al-qaeda-and-attack-in-libya.html?hp


This woman want to BE PRESIDENT????? She can't even manage her own department. Imagine what a HORRID president she'd be. PEEEEE-YOUUUU!
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 27, 2012, 10:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday suggested there was a link between the Qaeda franchise in North Africa and the attack at the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed the American ambassador and three others. She was the highest-ranking Obama administration official to publicly make the connection, and her comments intensified what is becoming a fiercely partisan fight over whether the attack could have been prevented.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/world/africa/clinton-cites-clear-link-between-al-qaeda-and-attack-in-libya.html?hp
This woman want to BE PRESIDENT????? She can't even manage her own department. Imagine what a HORRID president she'd be. PEEEEE-YOUUUU!
I still think she would have been twice as effective as Barry.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 27, 2012, 10:25 AM
 
Not that it would have made a difference, since Obama would have won this state regardless, but I still kick myself for not voting for Clinton in the primary.

I considered, get this, voting for Romney, but in Chicago if you don't vote in the Democratic primary, you've disenfranchised yourself from 95% of local politics.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 27, 2012, 11:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
This woman want to BE PRESIDENT????? She can't even manage her own department. Imagine what a HORRID president she'd be. PEEEEE-YOUUUU!
When you type in all-caps, do you consider that to be emphasis, or yelling?

I think most people read it as yelling, FWIW.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 27, 2012, 12:03 PM
 
FWIW, his entire posts read as yelling, I assume all caps is where he's so incensed spit starts flying.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2012, 03:28 AM
 
Emphasis......... for the speed readers to scan over.

Can you stay on topic?
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2012, 08:16 PM
 
Bad. Someone is lying.

U.S. intelligence now says Benghazi attack "deliberate and organized"

(Reuters) - The top U.S. intelligence authority issued an unusual public statement on Friday declaring it now believed the September 11 attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya, was a "deliberate and organized terrorist attack."


Even worse.
U.S. Move to Give Egypt $450 Million in Aid Meets Resistance
U.S. Move to Give Egypt $450 Million in Aid Meets Resistance
By STEVEN LEE MYERS
Published: September 28, 2012 230 Comments

The Obama administration notified Congress on Friday that it would provide Egypt’s new government an emergency cash infusion of $450 million, but the aid immediately encountered resistance from a prominent lawmaker wary of foreign aid and Egypt’s new course under the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood.
$450 million more?
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 28, 2012, 11:31 PM
 
What exactly is the lie?
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2012, 03:30 AM
 
"In the immediate aftermath, there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo," he said. "We provided that initial assessment to Executive Branch officials and members of Congress, who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available. Throughout our investigation we continued to emphasize that information gathered was preliminary and evolving."

However, sources have told Fox News that intelligence officials knew within 24 hours the attack that left the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans dead was terrorism, and that they suspected it was tied to Al Qaeda



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/28/no-threat-assessment-in-benghazi-prior-to-ambassador-arrival-source-says/#ixzz27rD2Q7mz
If so, why did members of the Obama administration go on national TV (Susan Rice was on all 5 Sunday news shows) with the line about it being a spontanious reaction to a trailer that was put on YouTube over three months ago? (featuring RPG's at the consulate and mortars at the not so safe house)
45/47
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2012, 05:37 AM
 
Wait a second: we've all known it was a planned terrorist attack since the day after it happened. In fact, that was one of the big factors that made Romney's remark look not only respectless and tactical, but made him look like a bumbling fool.

And Obama's administration is somehow thought to have provoked it by the statement issued by the embassy about the Mohmammed film. Except we all knew from the start that this wasn't the case.

Now, somehow, the Administration supposedly claimed that the attack was a fanatist response to the video, despite the fact the the only ones who ever claimed this were Republicans, and that we've all known it to be a lie, and this now somehow speaks against the administration?

I are confused.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2012, 01:51 PM
 
The Administration sent Rice to all the weekend news shows (so, five days later) saying they still thought it was spontaneous and based on the video.

One of the big three-letter-acronym agencies has since claimed that's what they told the Administration.
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2012, 12:21 PM
 
And it get worse.

White House Has No Comment on House GOPers’ Assertions that Libyan Mission Requested Security Prior to 9/11/12 Attack

White House press secretary Jay Carney declined to comment on an assertion by the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that requests from diplomats in Libya for added security prior to the September 11, 2012 attack on the diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya, were denied.
“I’m not going to get into a situation under review by the State Department and the FBI,” Carney said.
Earlier today, chairman of the committee Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, the chair of the subcommittee on national security, homeland defense, and foreign operations, wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, asserting that “multiple U.S. federal government officials have confirmed to the Committee that, prior to the September 11 (2012) attack, the U.S. mission in Libya made repeated requests for increased security in Benghazi. The mission in Libya, however, was denied these requests by officials in Washington.”
The two congressmen also listed thirteen incidents leading up to the attack – ranging from I.E.D. and RPG attacks to a “posting on a pro-Gaddafi Facebook page” publicizing early morning runs taken by the late Ambassador Chris Stevens and his security detail around Tripoli
Revealed: Jihadists had threatened to kill ambassador on FACEBOOK and the U.S. consulate in Libya was attacked TWICE before 9/11 anniversary


The U.S. consulate in Libya was attacked twice in the months leading up to the deadly attack that claimed the lives of four Americans, it was revealed today.
The militants responsible for the bombings were also active on social networks, and used Facebook to issue additional threats - including some against Chris Stevens, the U.S. ambassador who was killed in the strike.
The information is likely to increase pressure on the Obama administration as it suggests little was done to secure the facility despite the fact that it was a prime terror target.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2211736/U-S-consulate-Libya-attacked-twice-9-11-anniversary-jihadists-issued-threats-Facebook.html#ixzz28AugdLlI
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2012, 01:10 PM
 
The irony here is if Romney had just shut up for a day or two, he could have really unloaded on Obama for how things are going down.

Or, to put it another way, much easier to sell Obama as a ****up as opposed to an apologist.
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2012, 02:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The irony here is if Romney had just shut up for a day or two, he could have really unloaded on Obama for how things are going down.
Or, to put it another way, much easier to sell Obama as a ****up as opposed to an apologist.
How about selling Obama as an apologetic ****up?
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2012, 02:41 PM
 
You tell me.

538 has an election held now with a 97.8% chance of Obama beating Romney. It's an 85.7% chance in November.
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2012, 02:58 PM
 
It shouldn't be too hard, especially after he asked defense contrators to violate the WARN act. Anyway U of C Boulder election model has Romney winning.

Analysis of election factors points to Romney win, University of Colorado study says

A University of Colorado analysis of state-by-state factors leading to the Electoral College selection of every U.S. president since 1980 forecasts that the 2012 winner will be Mitt Romney.

The key is the economy, say political science professors Kenneth Bickers of CU-Boulder and Michael Berry of CU Denver. Their prediction model stresses economic data from the 50 states and the District of Columbia, including both state and national unemployment figures as well as changes in real per capita income, among other factors.

“Based on our forecasting model, it becomes clear that the president is in electoral trouble,” said Bickers, also director of the CU in DC Internship Program.

According to their analysis, President Barack Obama will win 218 votes in the Electoral College, short of the 270 he needs. And though they chiefly focus on the Electoral College, the political scientists predict Romney will win 52.9 percent of the popular vote to Obama’s 47.1 percent, when considering only the two major political parties.

“For the last eight presidential elections, this model has correctly predicted the winner,” said Berry. “The economy has seen some improvement since President Obama took office. What remains to be seen is whether voters will consider the economy in relative or absolute terms. If it’s the former, the president may receive credit for the economy’s trajectory and win a second term. In the latter case, Romney should pick up a number of states Obama won in 2008.
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2012, 03:48 PM
 
The fact things right now poll so far off this model just shows me the extent to which Romney has ****ed up what should have been a gimme.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2012, 05:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
It shouldn't be too hard, especially after he asked defense contrators to violate the WARN act. Anyway U of C Boulder election model has Romney winning.
Analysis of election factors points to Romney win, University of Colorado study says
Query: Do you believe this model is right?
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2012, 07:50 AM
 
According to the University of Colorado at Boulder, it has correctly predicted the POTUS election since 1980
45/47
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2012, 07:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
According to the University of Colorado at Boulder, it has correctly predicted the POTUS election since 1980
That is totally not what I asked.
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2012, 10:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The fact things right now poll so far off this model just shows me the extent to which Romney has ****ed up what should have been a gimme.
Exactly. A strong economy favours the incumbent, a weak economy favours the challenger.

The fact that Romney isn't winning by this metric is a showcase on what a tremendous screw-up he is. He lost this election by stepping on his own tongue, over and over again.
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2012, 11:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
It shouldn't be too hard, especially after he asked defense contrators to violate the WARN act. Anyway U of C Boulder election model has Romney winning.
Analysis of election factors points to Romney win, University of Colorado study says
Who the hell wrote that study, Baghdad Bob?
5911/width/200/height/400[/IMG]
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2012, 06:16 AM
 
Chongo?
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2012, 07:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
Who the hell wrote that study, Baghdad Bob?
5911/width/200/height/400[/IMG]
Questions

If you have questions about the methodolgy:

Contact:
Kenneth Bickers, 303-492-2363
[email protected]
Michael Berry, 303-556-6244
[email protected]
45/47
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2012, 08:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Query: Do you believe this model is right?
C'mon Chongo, it's not a hard question. Are you or aren't you buying it?
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2012, 04:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Questions
If you have questions about the methodolgy:
Contact:
Kenneth Bickers, 303-492-2363
[email protected]
Michael Berry, 303-556-6244
[email protected]
I think they're pretty clear ...

Originally Posted by The Article
“For the last eight presidential elections, this model has correctly predicted the winner,” said Berry. “The economy has seen some improvement since President Obama took office. What remains to be seen is whether voters will consider the economy in relative or absolute terms. If it’s the former, the president may receive credit for the economy’s trajectory and win a second term. In the latter case, Romney should pick up a number of states Obama won in 2008.”
Basically, they're saying that they've made an assumption in their model. They're assuming that voters will consider the economy in absolute terms, thereby favouring the challenger. But, they're giving themselves an out, so that they can preserve their model's record: they're saying that their model isn't capable of determining if voters will consider the economy in relative or absolute terms. Should their model prove wrong this time, they only need to say that the voter perception of the economy was a rare wildcard that they couldn't accurately represent this time around.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2012, 06:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
C'mon Chongo, it's not a hard question. Are you or aren't you buying it?
I'll take the lack of response as no. Nothing like "honest" discussion.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2012, 03:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Query: Do you believe this model is right?
My first thought was the same as yours Dakar and then I started picking off the States. What's ludicrous at this point? What State? Why?
ebuddy
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2012, 05:11 PM
 
The model was run again by UC Boulder, same result. This was before the latest jobs report.

Updated election forecasting model still points to Romney win, University of Colorado study says

Updated election forecasting model still points to Romney win, University of Colorado study says
October 4, 2012 •
Social Sciences

An update to an election forecasting model announced by two University of Colorado professors in August continues to project that Mitt Romney will win the 2012 presidential election.

According to their updated analysis, Romney is projected to receive 330 of the total 538 Electoral College votes. President Barack Obama is expected to receive 208 votes -- down five votes from their initial prediction -- and short of the 270 needed to win.

The new forecast by political science professors Kenneth Bickers of CU-Boulder and Michael Berry of CU Denver is based on more recent economic data than their original Aug. 22 prediction. The model itself did not change.
The model is as accurate as the data used to run it. I can only rely on it's track record of correctly predicting the outcome of election back to 1980. (it correctly predicted Clinton and Obama wins.)
45/47
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2012, 07:53 PM
 
Another thing to consider is that polls themselves can influence voter behaviour as well. Recently in a provincial election here, the polls were strongly one party was going to dominate the election. As a result of that suggestion, many of the undecideds appeared to swing the other way, also, people who had traditionally voted for a party that had little chance of winning appeared to swing to a party that had a greater likelihood of beating the party being favoured by the polls.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2012, 03:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Another thing to consider is that polls themselves can influence voter behaviour as well. Recently in a provincial election here, the polls were strongly one party was going to dominate the election. As a result of that suggestion, many of the undecideds appeared to swing the other way, also, people who had traditionally voted for a party that had little chance of winning appeared to swing to a party that had a greater likelihood of beating the party being favoured by the polls.
Polling may carry slightly different weight in Canada, but in the US campaign-financing is extremely important and most affected by a candidate who appears to be slipping. i.e. it hurts their funds. There are also other factors at play and the first study I found shows two different types of voters; strategic and contagious and was centered on a Canadian election;

What they found:
1. Polls affected voters’ perceptions of the various parties’ chances of winning.
2. Polls affected the vote.
3. Polls affected strategic voting as some voters became less inclined to support a party whose chances of winning appeared slim.
4. Polls did not have a contagion effect, since voters did not come to evaluate the parties and leaders who were doing well in the
polls more positively.

Most of the polling of late in the US has over-sampled Democrats using turn-out numbers from the last election (and then bloated some more); numbers no one believes will be met this time around when measuring the degree of enthusiasm for their candidate and other factors. This leads to polling that consistently shows a greater edge for the Democratic candidate in spite of the fact that this may truly not be the case and it can damage one's desire to fund their candidate.
ebuddy
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2012, 07:58 AM
 
This will be front and center for the next two debates.


U.S. Security Official in Libya Tells Congressional Investigators About ‘Inappropriately Low’ Security at Benghazi Post


Attack on Benghazi Consulate 'Unprecedented,' State Department Official Says

State Dept reveals new details of Benghazi attack

WASHINGTON (AP) — All was quiet outside the U.S. Consulate as evening fell on Benghazi and President Barack Obama's envoy to Libya was retiring after a day of diplomatic meetings.

There was no indication of the harrowing events that night would bring: assailants storming the compound and setting its buildings aflame, American security agents taking fire across more than a mile of the city, the ambassador and three employees killed and others forced into a daring car escape against traffic.

The account answers some questions and leaves others unanswered. Chief among them is why for several days the Obama administration said the assault stemmed from a protest against an American-made Internet video ridiculing Islam, and whether the consulate had adequate security.
So, there was no protesters that were hijacked. All was quiet until the attack began.
45/47
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2012, 10:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
My first thought was the same as yours Dakar and then I started picking off the States. What's ludicrous at this point? What State? Why?
Ha, nice try. Chongo won't take ownership of his map, but you want me to disprove it? Why? Apparently no one believes in it strongly enough to endorse it.


Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
The model is as accurate as the data used to run it.
Yes, this is pretty much as spineless response as possible. "Hey, I"m not saying anything, I'm just posting this cause it's interesting!"


Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
I can only rely on it's track record of correctly predicting the outcome of election back to 1980. (it correctly predicted Clinton and Obama wins.)
…and if there are other successful models that disagree, how do you choose? Oh yeah, because it supports your narrative.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2012, 02:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Ha, nice try. Chongo won't take ownership of his map, but you want me to disprove it? Why? Apparently no one believes in it strongly enough to endorse it.
So you're taking issue with it, but aren't at all committed enough to suggest how or why?

Of course it appears optimistic-red, but given the nature of polling out of any one of the more contentious states of late, I'm not as certain as you that it's off the mark.
ebuddy
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2012, 07:25 PM
 
CNN story: Mother of slain State Dep't official is tired of being ignored by Obama Admin
[VIDEO]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3ldyGsZ1Io[/VIDEO]
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2012, 07:35 PM
 
Sorry. I don't trust the MSM. They're in Obama's pocket.
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2012, 07:41 PM
 
I guess they're turning on him, except MSDNC of course.
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 10, 2012, 07:55 PM
 
I still wouldn't go around using CNN as a source if you want to maintain credibility.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2012, 03:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I still wouldn't go around using CNN as a source if you want to maintain credibility.
Why is CNN lacking in credibility for what the mother of the slain State Dept worker says?
ebuddy
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2012, 06:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
So you're taking issue with it, but aren't at all committed enough to suggest how or why?
My level of commitment mirrors the person who posted it apparently.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2012, 06:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
MSDNC
Oh the irony.
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2012, 07:32 AM
 
Its not a good sign when SNL starts making fun of a sister network

MSNBC Debate Fallout
45/47
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2012, 10:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Why is CNN lacking in credibility for what the mother of the slain State Dept worker says?
I'm sure they coached her to make Obama look good.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2012, 03:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I'm sure they coached her to make Obama look good.
Are you really saying they coached her to make Obama look bad? Am I supposed to believe CNN has a strong reputation for slandering Democrats now?
ebuddy
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2012, 11:57 AM
 
Coached her to make Obama look good.

If CNN wasn't part of the vast MSM conspiracy, they would have let her tell the truth, which is Obama sympathizes with the people who killed her son.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:24 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,