Hello Friends,

I find it interesting that the progressive liberal MSM is going berserk after the second debate not cause their savior won the debate but for the simple fact that he didn't look as big an idiot as he did after the first debate. On all the issues he had no answers aside from trying to attack Mitt Romney. After the debate all the fact checks found that he was wrong, I mean lied on most of the issues he spoke about as previous posts show clearly and without the assistance of the "moderator" who not only lied for him also but force fed him answers with her leading questions. The below article also shows his lies and absurd and ridiculous answers.

The moderator was the most biased of the 3 so far and they too had their moments assisting either the fraud and great pretender B Hussein or the buffoon Joe Biden. Add to that lard a$$ Michelle clapping when Candy Crowley outright lied to support B Hussein during the debate on the "terrorist attack" issue which she later retracted. The whole thing was in actual fact a farce cos B Hussein never answered the direct questions and facts that Romney raised but darted away by "attacking" Romney with additional lies.

So, as you'll see in the below article and previous articles posted by Evelyn and others this was an outright win for Romney on truthful facts he raised but B Hussein was given credit cos he wasn't the zombie he was in the first debate. For the Dems and all the other progressive liberals, MSM and addicted entitlement and freebie lovers that alone gives him the win.

Face it, he lost but he at least was there imitating the buffoon Biden by trying to be aggressive. Aggressiveness doesn't win debates but truthful facts do and this was a one sided show in that regard. So far it's Romney 2 - B Hussein 0.

The below article shows the idiocy of B Hussein with his attempts to reply to the issues raised and his lack of minimal comprehension of economics and as far his failed foreign relations are concerned he was considered a failure by the majority of the world and world leaders over three years ago. He should wake up to the fact that Benghazi Gate won't go away and in the end will show just how dismal this administration is and might possibly be the final nail in his "coffin" (and no I'm not threatening the fraud and great pretender :)).

I'm looking forward to the third debate and since this regime has such a dismal record and no accomplishments he'll probably have to be even more of a pit bull in the last debate but I have a feeling that Romney will as he has in the first two debates be there well prepared and will KO the pathetic excuse of a president.

Shalom,

Peter

Romney's Secret Blowout

While the left cheers President Obama’s second debate performance with the excitement of Chris Matthews on a prom date with The One, the fact remains that this was not just a bad debate for President Obama. It was a disastrous debate for President Obama. He may have achieved firing up the base, but the base had already been fired up by Vice President Joe Biden’s bizarre performance in the vice presidential debate. He may have achieved not looking comatose, but instead he looked angry and puerile.

Actually, Obama lost in three major ways.

Economy. The first loss is the most obvious. Mitt Romney absolutely dismembered Obama on economics. Obama wasn’t merely outclassed. He was out-leagued. Take, for example, the Romney-Obama exchange on gas drilling. After Obama blathered on about how he’d been great for oil supply (false), Romney gutted him with a single line:

The proof of whether a strategy is working or not is what the price is that you're paying at the pump. If you're paying less than you paid a year or two ago, why, then, the strategy is working. But you're paying more. When the president took office, the price of gasoline here in Nassau County was about $1.86 a gallon. Now, it's $4.00 a gallon.

Obama’s response was perhaps the worst economic gaffe in modern debate history:

Well, think about what the governor -- think about what the governor just said. He said when I took office, the price of gasoline was $1.80, $1.86. Why is that? Because the economy was on the verge of collapse, because we were about to go through the worst recession since the Great Depression, as a consequence of some of the same policies that Governor Romney's now promoting. So, it's conceivable that Governor Romney could bring down gas prices because with his policies, we might be back in that same mess.

This is perhaps the dumbest economic argument ever. Obama is essentially arguing that gas prices were low four years ago because low gas prices cratered the economy. He even says that if Romney brings down gas prices, it would crater the economy again. This is pure insanity.

The highlight of the debate was Romney’s thorough, two-minute dismantling of the Obama record on the economy after Obama gave a tepid defense of his awful record. Never has the case against Obama been made so eloquently:

I think you know better. I think you know that these last four years haven't been so good as the president just described and that you don't feel like you’re confident that the next four years are going to be much better either. I can tell you that if you were to elect President Obama, you know what you're going to get. You're going to get a repeat of the last four years. We just can't afford four more years like the last four years.

He said that by now we'd have unemployment at 5.4 percent. The difference between where it is and 5.4 percent is 9 million Americans without work. I wasn't the one that said 5.4 percent. This was the president's plan. Didn't get there.

He said he would have by now put forward a plan to reform Medicare and Social Security, because he pointed out they're on the road to bankruptcy. He would reform them. He'd get that done. He hasn't even made a proposal on either one.

He said in his first year he'd put out an immigration plan that would deal with our immigration challenges. Didn't even file it.

This is a president who has not been able to do what he said he'd do. He said that he'd cut in half the deficit. He hasn't done that either. In fact, he doubled it. He said that by now middle-income families would have a reduction in their health insurance premiums by $2,500 a year. It's gone up by $2,500 a year. And if Obamacare is passed, or implemented -- it's already been passed -- if it's implemented fully, it'll be another $2,500 on top.

The middle class is getting crushed under the policies of a president who has not understood what it takes to get the economy working again. He keeps saying, "Look, I've created 5 million jobs." That's after losing 5 million jobs. The entire record is such that the unemployment has not been reduced in this country. The unemployment, the number of people who are still looking for work, is still 23 million Americans. There are more people in poverty, one out of six people in poverty.

How about food stamps? When he took office, 32 million people were on food stamps. Today, 47 million people are on food stamps. How about the growth of the economy? It's growing more slowly this year than last year, and more slowly last year than the year before.

The president wants to do well. I understand. But the policies he's put in place from Obamacare to Dodd-Frank to his tax policies to his regulatory policies, these policies combined have not let this economy take off and grow like it could have.

You might say, "Well, you got an example of one that worked better?" Yeah, in the Reagan recession where unemployment hit 10.8 percent, between that period -- the end of that recession and the equivalent of time to today, Ronald Reagan's recovery created twice as many jobs as this president's recovery. Five million jobs doesn't even keep up with our population growth. And the only reason the unemployment rate seems a little lower today is because of all the people that have dropped out of the workforce.

The president has tried, but his policies haven't worked. He's great as a -- as a -- as a speaker and describing his plans and his vision. That's wonderful, except we have a record to look at. And that record shows he just hasn't been able to cut the deficit, to put in place reforms for Medicare and Social Security to preserve them, to get us the rising incomes we need. Median income is down $4,300 a family and 23 million Americans out of work. That's what this election is about. It's about who can get the middle class in this country a bright and prosperous future and assure our kids the kind of hope and optimism they deserve.

This is the sort of monologue that gets people elected. Blaming your predecessor, channeling Occupy Wall Street, and whining about Mitt Romney’s specificity on tax deductions does not.

That’s why the polling universally showed a vast gap in favor of Romney on the economy last night.

Libya. At first glance, this issue looked like a loss for Romney. Romney’s attack on Obama’s Libya policy was anything but smooth, and he allowed Obama to play the wronged man of honor – even though it is Obama who refused to take responsibility for a month, lied for weeks about whether Benghazi was a terrorist attack, blamed a YouTube video, and threw the intelligence community under the bus.

But the exchange drew light to the Libya issue. And not in a way Obama liked. When Romney called out Obama for not labeling the murder of our ambassador in Libya and three other Americans a terrorist attack, both Obama and moderator Candy Crowley wrongly claimed that Obama had immediately labeled it a terrorist attack.

If that were true, why did Obama appear on The View on September 25, a full two weeks after the attack, and refuse point blank to call it a terrorist attack? Why did he show up at the UN and mention a YouTube video 12 times, but never describe the Benghazi assault as a terrorist attack once? Now we’re going to spend another week or two hashing out just why this president, who wants to claim he’s tough on terror – and a quick labeler of terror – has trotted out administration official after administration official to deny that Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Even Candy Crowley admitted that Romney was basically right, and that Obama had not called Benghazi a terrorist attack for weeks.

The Media. The greatest threat to a Romney victory after a good debate tonight was the mainstream media. It was obvious before this debate that they would spin anything but a full-on catatonic episode from Obama as a full-on Obama triumph. And it was also obvious that they’d jump all over Mitt Romney as a liar, a cheat, a fraud, a racist, a murderer, and a genocidal maniac. A desperate media with the patina of objectivity would have been Romney’s worst nightmare.

Thanks to abysmal moderator Candy Crowley, however, the mask is gone. Crowley handed Obama three minutes of extra time. She interrupted Romney far more than she did Obama. She stacked the questions two-to-one in favor of Obama-friendly questions. And she jumped into the Libya question to save Obama when he was on the ropes. Even Crowley recognized what a booboo she’d committed with that one. Meanwhile, as Obama played his class warfare card, media types cheered – literally cheered – in the other room.

The media is out of the closet. We know who they are. As the details of Crowley’s catastrophic intervention hit the airwaves, the American public will be wide awake to the mainstream media’s agenda. And they won’t believe them.

Here’s the bottom line: Mitt Romney got everything he needed from this debate. Obama didn’t. He got everything he already had: a devoted media and a vitriolic base. There are no independents who will turn his way after that debate. He turned them off with his aggressive style and his failure to even bother defending himself on his record.

Mitt Romney was the big winner last night. And he’s an even bigger winner if the media continues to pretend that last night was an Obama victory, even as the American people ignore them and move toward the Republican challenger.

Hey Peter and Friends, This is a pretty good expose on the Libya Front.  Who is responsible for the mess in Libya? By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano Published October 18, 2012 FoxNews.com 101712_libya_opinion.jpg File: Sept. 14, 2012: Libyan military guards check one of the burnt out buildings at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, during a visit by Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif to express sympathy for the death of American ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and his colleagues in the Sept. 11, 2012 attack. (AP) How many times have you heard the truism that in modern-day America the cover-up is often as troubling as the crime? That is becoming quite apparent in the case of the death of Chris Stevens, the former US ambassador to Libya. Stevens and three State Department employees were murdered in the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, last month, on September 11th. About an hour before the murders, the ambassador, who usually resides in the U.S. embassy in Tripoli but was visiting local officials and staying at the consulate in Benghazi, had just completed dinner there with a colleague, whom he personally walked to the front gate of the compound. In the next three hours, hundreds of persons assaulted the virtually defenseless compound and set it afire Around the same time that these crimes took place in Benghazi, a poorly produced, low-grade 15-minute YouTube clip was going viral on the Internet. The clip shows actors in dubbed voices portraying the prophet Mohammed and others in an unflattering light. The Obama administration seized upon the temporary prevalence of this clip to explain the assault on the consulate. Indeed, the administration sent U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to represent it on five Sunday morning TV talk shows on September 16th, to make the claim that the attack on the consulate was a spontaneous reaction to the YouTube clip, that it could not have been anticipated, and that the perpetrators were ordinary Libyans angry at the freedom movie makers in America enjoy. Soon, US intelligence reports were leaked that revealed that the intelligence community knew the attack was not as described by Rice. The intelligence folks on the ground in Libya reported before September 16th that the attack was well organized, utilized military equipment and tactics, and was carried out by local militias with ties to Al Qaeda. In response to these leaks, the State Department, for which Rice works, acknowledged that the assault was an organized terrorist attack. The Obama administration has publicly rejected the intelligence leaks and insisted as recently as last week during the vice presidential debate that “we” did not know the assault was an act of terrorism against American personnel and property. The word “we” was uttered by Vice President Biden, whose credibility hit a new low when he insisted that the government did not know what we now know it knew. A day after the debate, the White House claimed that the “we” uttered by Biden referred to the president and the vice president, and not to the federal government or the State Department. This is semantics akin to Bill Clinton’s “it depends what the meaning of 'is' is.” Earlier this week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in one of her rare forays into domestic politics, backed up the White House. She actually claimed that the White House was kept in the dark by the State Department. What’s going on here? What’s going on here is the unraveling of a value-free foreign policy and its unintended consequences. The whole reason that the streets in Libya are not safe and the country is ruled by roving gangs of militias is because the U.S. bombed the country last year. In an unconstitutional act of war, the president alone ordered the bombing. It destroyed the Libyan military, national and local police, roads, bridges, and private homes. It facilitated the murder of our former ally Col. Qaddafi and ensured the replacement of him by a government that cannot govern. The consulate attack defies the claims of the president, articulated loud and long during this presidential campaign, that because he killed Usama bin Laden, Al Qaeda is dead or dying, and the terrorists are at bay. Thus, in order to be faithful to his campaign rhetoric, the president has been unfaithful to the truth. I personally have seen excerpts from intelligence cables sent by American agents in Libya to Washington on September 12th, the day after the attack and four days before Rice’s TV appearances, acknowledging the dominant role played by Al Qaeda in the attack. So, who is to blame here? The president. He is responsible for destroying the government in Libya, and he is responsible for the security of U.S. personnel and property there. He is accountable to the American people, and he is expected to tell the truth. Instead, he has leaked the possibility of more bombings in Libya. These bombings would be more than a month after the Benghazi consulate attack and would attack the very government that Obama’s 2011 bombs helped to install. Is it any wonder that Bill Clinton, in an unguarded private moment, referred to Obama as “the amateur”? Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written six books on the U.S. Constitution. His latest is “ It is Dangerous To Be Right When the Government Is Wrong: The Case for Personal Freedom.” Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/18/who-is-responsible-for-mess-in-libya/#ixzz29fMIHaW7

Hey Friends, This is just for the info.  WHI - DW ULSTERMAN: My guess is that for the first debate the word to the moderator was to help Obama. This time it was to save Obama. That’s what she did. We expected they would try and help. We were caught maybe just a bit off guard on how aggressive she was in being so open about saving him. The questions she chose. That group of so called “undecideds”???? Nope. It was about 80% pro-Obama all the way. Again, I’ll say whatever. So what. Now I know you are angry at how it went down like that. How Benghazi got shoved into the background. Hell, did you see how Crowley totally buried any discussion of Fast and Furious? Can’t help but laugh at how obvious it all was. But here is some very good news. At least regarding the spine of these Romney people. After the debate, there isn’t complaining. There isn’t finger pointing. There isn’t whining. They just pick up where they left off. Upward and onward. So we got shoved around a bit by a bull**** debate scenario. Lots of people watching that debate could see how it was manipulated against the governor. Romney handled it about as well as he could. Might have missed a few opportunities here and there, but overall, he did just fine. And the campaign wasn’t rattled. Not one bit. That shows class. That shows strength. That shows a team really in its stride as we head to the finish line. And as far as Benghazi. Obama had his little canned moment speech of outrage. But we got the tapes. We got the evidence. He gets a short term reprieve. We get the much more important longer term news cycle. The guy lied. He’ll be caught. There will be some of his base who won’t give a sh-t. But the rest? Those voters will care. Any undecideds left? We win them. All of them. As for “Obama’s base”? Sh-t. That base of his has been shrinking big time for months. Fire those people up all they want. Big f-cking deal. That’s only about 35% of the electorate. They can have them. This election cycle, there just isn’t enough of them to win this thing and the Obama team knows it. They are totally in the f-cking weeds right now. The media is gonna try and spin the “comeback kid” scenario for Obama the next few . Fine. We don’t care. They were going to do that regardless what the actual outcome of this debate was. Let them high five themselves all they want. By the weekend a different tune is coming. Of course, there are lots of whispers of plans to alter this outcome. Hit Romney up with a scandal, maybe Obama bombs the f-ck out of Libya just for sh-ts and giggles. Anything is possible. But this Romney team is tough. I really like how they are running this campaign. That doesn’t mean anyone can afford to sit back and hope it happens. Everybody needs to keep the pressure on. That’s you. That’s everyone you know. Talk to people about what is really going on. Don’t let the media hijack this thing. They are trying. But if enough people stay connected and educated, the media don’t have a chance. I’m just starting to really appreciate the power of this new media thing you call it. Forget the Crowleys of the world. She is dinosaur just like me. We are all on the way out. President Romney. Just keep saying it. Sounds good doesn’t it? Sounds like the right thing at the right time.

Hey Rick,

Thanks for 2 interesting posts. You're d*amn right they (the MSM/moderator) were out to save his a$$ and in the end I believe it didn't work. He never replied to any questions or was able to repudiate any of the myriad of facts Romney brought up. All he could do is attack like a deranged idiot and I think the majority of the viewers saw through this pathetic strategy.

As I said the MSM believes he "won" simply cos he attacked but when you can't logically answer any questions and then comes up with his deranged gas price theory the viewers have no alternative other then to see how idiotic and stupid he is.

Even the Libya/Benghazi gate issue is a loser for B Hussein and "Candy" the obese strippers "help" in the end turned out to be a loser for B Hussein. We all know he lied and we all heard him say it's the video so many times including his UN General Assembly speech. We all heard the American UN Ambassador along with Hillary say it's the video so all his lying rhetoric is for naught. We all know about the enormous amount of money the B Hussein regime spent on ads in Pakistan saying they had nothing to do with the VIDEO.

So, lie away you fraud and great pretender we (the thinking and logical amongst us.......not the mindless and addicted entitlement and freebie lovers) know what you are doing and it isn't working.

Come November B Hussein and lard a$$ Michelle will be on their way to their home in Chicago and he can go back to being the only thing he has any experience at ..........a community organizer.

Shalom,

Peter

Quote:
Hey Friends, This is just for the info. WHI - DW ULSTERMAN: My guess is that for the first debate the word to the moderator was to help Obama. This time it was to save Obama. That’s what she did. We expected they would try and help. We were caught maybe just a bit off guard on how aggressive she was in being so open about saving him. The questions she chose. That group of so called “undecideds”???? Nope. It was about 80% pro-Obama all the way. Again, I’ll say whatever. So what. Now I know you are angry at how it went down like that. How Benghazi got shoved into the background. Hell, did you see how Crowley totally buried any discussion of Fast and Furious? Can’t help but laugh at how obvious it all was. But here is some very good news. At least regarding the spine of these Romney people. After the debate, there isn’t complaining. There isn’t finger pointing. There isn’t whining. They just pick up where they left off. Upward and onward. So we got shoved around a bit by a bull**** debate scenario. Lots of people watching that debate could see how it was manipulated against the governor. Romney handled it about as well as he could. Might have missed a few opportunities here and there, but overall, he did just fine. And the campaign wasn’t rattled. Not one bit. That shows class. That shows strength. That shows a team really in its stride as we head to the finish line. And as far as Benghazi. Obama had his little canned moment speech of outrage. But we got the tapes. We got the evidence. He gets a short term reprieve. We get the much more important longer term news cycle. The guy lied. He’ll be caught. There will be some of his base who won’t give a sh-t. But the rest? Those voters will care. Any undecideds left? We win them. All of them. As for “Obama’s base”? Sh-t. That base of his has been shrinking big time for months. Fire those people up all they want. Big f-cking deal. That’s only about 35% of the electorate. They can have them. This election cycle, there just isn’t enough of them to win this thing and the Obama team knows it. They are totally in the f-cking weeds right now. The media is gonna try and spin the “comeback kid” scenario for Obama the next few . Fine. We don’t care. They were going to do that regardless what the actual outcome of this debate was. Let them high five themselves all they want. By the weekend a different tune is coming. Of course, there are lots of whispers of plans to alter this outcome. Hit Romney up with a scandal, maybe Obama bombs the f-ck out of Libya just for sh-ts and giggles. Anything is possible. But this Romney team is tough. I really like how they are running this campaign. That doesn’t mean anyone can afford to sit back and hope it happens. Everybody needs to keep the pressure on. That’s you. That’s everyone you know. Talk to people about what is really going on. Don’t let the media hijack this thing. They are trying. But if enough people stay connected and educated, the media don’t have a chance. I’m just starting to really appreciate the power of this new media thing you call it. Forget the Crowleys of the world. She is dinosaur just like me. We are all on the way out. President Romney. Just keep saying it. Sounds good doesn’t it? Sounds like the right thing at the right time.

 Hey Peter, Thanks for your reply and come to think of it, did they change the editor here at ALP. It is totally different for me today. I was in FB today and came across the standard they all lie and we need to pick the right lie to vote for. This was in Bill's post. I found a number of our friends are still supporting BO for whatever reason and one of the topics these "Useful Idiots" brought up was the pre-existing condition problem. While I feel for this lady and presently have no coverage myself I am not of the mind to give up the basic freedoms that BO has been exercising over the last 3-4 years by writing in new laws into his major reforms such as Obama Care, The Finance Laws and etc. These laws are giving the heads of his new programs unlimited powers to further erode our rights and subvert the rights of the congress and citizens. So there I was in Bills post and to his question of why isn't there more conversation about the election I saw every reason by the normal crowd talking about why they could stand up for their opinions when others would have a different idea. I would merely point out that they would rather land in a dictatorship befor they would have the nerve to become brave. Tiss a hopeless world for the Koolaid PC idiots. Have a good day.