How do you think the moderator did tonight, James?

@Sarah -

Hoffa thought that she did fine up until she did the un-necessary, and grossly inaccurate 'fact-check' on Libya. She also ended up giving Obama an additional 4 minutes of talking time over Romney.

Over the three debates thus far, Obama/Biden are up by about 12 minutes (5 minutes in the first debate, 3 minutes in the VP debate, and 4 minutes in this debate) of additional talking time over Romney/Ryan.

Just imagine how much more severe the time disparity would be if Romney wasn't fighting for every second of talking time he did get during these debates.

Given that we've all been exposed to the incumbents over the course of their previous term (in this case nearly 4 years), if anything, shouldn't these debates allot slightly more time in favor of the challenger if we can't achieve equal time?

Crowley lost ALL credibility when she fact-checked Romney, but failed to even call out any of Obama's whoppers - the bias is clear to anyone who's being honest with themselves.

And the easily influenced, non-thinking American voter is the loser because of it.

Hoffa's dead and under cement.

Keith, just man up and pay the guy the 50 bucks you owe him. Being a notorious welsher isn't the badge of honor you seem to think it is. You look like a complete fool.

I think Crowley's job of moderating was more along the lines of what I expected from all of the moderators - to show favor to Obama. I think it also demonstrated, by comparison, how Martha Raddatz, whom many expected to be completely in the bag for the Democrats, did a commendable job handling the VP debate.

I also think that Romney does need to rein in the over-talking a bit. It's going to start wearing thin on folks who are still in the process of making up their minds at this point. As for Obama, I don't think there's much he can do to improve his performance. He's just not the exceptionally brilliant person he's built up to be and it shows when he's in an unscripted, one on one situation like this. He does an okay job, but he's just as prone to missteps, mistakes and looking average rather than exceptional as anyone.

Neither candidate's performance matches their respective media enhanced image, which works to Romney's advantage and Obama's disadvantage. If you harken back to the initial debates during the 2000 election, you'll remember Bush got points just for not being the complete dolt the press made him out to be. Someday the press is probably going to figure out that when they attempt to play king maker, it generally backfires. But, obviously, they haven't as of yet.

President Obama won on both style and substance - anyone who says otherwise isn't being honest with themselves or others!

http://www.romneytaxplan.com/

That's a lie, Hoffa. According to the local Fox coverage, Romney had 40 sec. more talking time than the President... meaning they pretty much talked for equal time.

Nice try! Romney's entitlement mentality was deeply challenged last night and his temper got the best of him. Didn't need my highest-percentile EQ to recognize that. If you mistake his histrionics for "style" perhaps you (in the words of the late Groucho Marx), "don't get out much." ; )

I don't understand what was inaccurate about the fact-check on Libya. There is video documentation of the White House press conference in question. She also, very clearly, pointed out the area where Romney was correct about taking 14 days to present an accurate picture of what happened. It was right there on my tv set.

In the interests of national security I am all for withholding information from the general public until it is safe to do so. People all over the world listen to U.S. news and broadcasts, including terrorists.

According to CNN's timekeeping, Obama got 44:04 minutes of speaking time, while Romney got 40:50.

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/10/obama-gots-more-time-138699.html

@Hoffa,

As much as I hate to say it, Obama won the debate. Sure, he did it by pandering and playing the class-warfare card, but he did win. The audience, and the moderator, were on his side as well.

Romney will dominate the 3rd debate, as Obama won't have any women or minorities to pander directly to. And, the audience won't be able to sway the mood of the debate.

JRH –

Willard clearly fumbled, stumbled, bumbled and lost the 2nd Debate (?).

Reviewing his ‘binders full of women’ , his over-aggressiveness, his walking all over Candy Crowley and brazenly interrupting and physically confronting the President, his totally incoherent and Math challenged economic plan; finally, the coup de grace, the Benghazi statement: when President Obama stated in the Rose Garden the day after the incident that it was “an act of terror”, while Willard said President Obama took 14 days to say it was an “act of terror” – Candy “fact checked” – and found, as usual, that Willard was “Completely Wrong.”

The look on Willard’s face went from one who was about to deliver the “kill stroke” to a man who had just been kicked in the testes… priceless!

ALL the polls and analysts – with the exception of Faux News – declare President Obama won.

Anyone who thinks that Willard won has to be a GOP, Reince Priebus ScrewUSA Maximus devotee, dominated by Wishful Thinking…

JRH –

When Willard sycophants have to argue about unfair TIME given to their candidate, you know they know they lost…

“And the easily influenced, non-thinking American voter is the loser because of it.” Will you be standing behind this statement when Willard is elected president on November 6, 2012?

@JRH And just what color were the Emperor's clothes ?

Hoffa is a kid. Don't fall for the bait.

Read it and weep Bren:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya
Obama was clearly lying in the debate. The terror comment was made after mentioning the anniversary of 9/11.

I was watching MSNBC after the debate, they were cutting that tape up to make it look like he was mention a terror attach in Libya. But they have a long record of doing this kind of garbage reporting. I'm sure Bren was watching the same thing.

Just look at Romney's face when caught in more lies...The first sign Romney lost is when all you wannabe republicans whine about the moderator and equal time.....
You lose!

Steve - "...they were cutting that tape up to make it look like... hey have a long record of doing this kind of garbage reporting."

I actually thing that is Fox News and Breitbart.com you are thinking of.

Well as usual the Hoffas have it upside-down and backwards Just got back from some of my ramblings. Picked up some interesting tid bits.
Just in; early polls of people who have already voted from Illinois and Ohio
President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney are neck and neck in opinion polls, but there is one area in which the incumbent appears to have a big advantage: those who have already cast their ballots.
Obama leads Romney by 59 percent to 31 percent among early voters, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling data compiled in recent weeks.

On the debates Obama pulling ahead. After a lackluster performance in the first debate of his re-election campaign, President Barack Obama scored a victory over Republican nominee Mitt Romney in their second encounter, according to post-debate network polling.
An instant poll of undecided voters by CBS after the contentious town hall session ended found Obama beat Romney 37 percent to 30 percent, with 33 percent calling it a tie.

Bernard - I guess that explains why the Republican Gov. and AG are working so hard to supress the vote over in OH

►I actually thing that is Fox News and Breitbart.com you are thinking of.◄

No, I noted MSNBC

here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvJPG6KURV8

real video with side by side: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X_-QDmzxPA

Different occurrence http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lyEOLtUhCM&feature=related

I can keep going if you like

David: Emperor? As in Emperor Penguin? What does the first lady have to do with this?

Hoffa finds it funny how all of the liberals posting under his original comment cite belly-aching as being indicative of an Obama victory - and yet, look at all the belly-aching taking place by the liberals above this comment!

Proof once again that the liberal left are highly hypocritical and targeting the low-information, non-thinking voter!

@Bren -

You may want to try buying another vowel, as Hoffa doesn't know what a "highest-percentile EQ" is??? When engaging in the self-indulgent brags, you should at least check your spelling, or look a fool!

Once again, Hoffa is laughing at the superior intellect!

http://www.hark.com/clips/vjmzqwxfqs-laughing-at-the-superior-intellect

JRH -

I guess I am always cursed with bringing facts and fact based information to my favorite low forehead friend on the Patch, and the other TeaGOP folks, as well.

EQ stands for Emotional Quotient, which refers to Emotional intelligence (EI) the ability to perceive, control, and evaluate emotions…Of course, that is something you totally lack, just one of many other human characteristics that are totally devoid from you...

You have to be a developed human being to possess an EQ…

IF you can find someone to open, read, interrupt the following link, then please have them explain it to you...

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-emotional-quotient-eq.htm

JRH -

Stop your whining!

I have consulted the supreme source of all knowledge and truth, the Bible. We finally have the definitive answer regarding the TRUTH of Debate 2.

When we reference the TIME element in the last debate, Leviticus 6:66 clearly states, that although it is true that the great President Obama did receive approximately 4 minutes more in actual time to speak during the last debate, Willard, because of his aggressiveness and over-emotionalism, actually spoke twice the amount of words…

Therefore: Willard spoke twice the amount of text and still got spanked on national TV...

Finally, Willard's "Binders Full of Women" are on sale for only $99.99.

Hoffa’s dilemma. Only facts he can now accept has to be grounded within their illusional delusional comic book tabloid world. Not much there to work with. Like trying to find a wet river of knowledge in Death Valley. Lordy, lordy how the wing nuts are spinning tonight. Something in the air is disturbing them. Perhaps its all the dust arising from our Main Street USA. Cleaning and repairs running full tilt after that big bash of the Wall Street cronies’ party. How long will it take to burnish, cleanse and repair, our Main Street USA? Hard to tell with all the sabotaging efforts, that the republicans continuously promote to our Main Street USA.
Republicans are exhibitionist of a no, no, no leadership party and their juvenile hostage/ransom of our Main Street USA. Observe when Wall Street was bailed out. They partied and rewarded their executives, with $ millions of tax free dollars. Same executives’ that FAILED our economy. USA rewards FAILURES? Bailouts of the golden parachutist. Elitist Welfare? Republicans REWARDS failures of Wall Street. This is what the right wing nuts support with their venom of lies and deceits.

Craig, here's the pertinent paragraph in the transcript you linked:

"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." Pres. Obama conflated the two incidents, as is clear from reading the entire transcript or watching the video.

The only thing we should be "weeping" about is the cancer of terrorism in our world. Romneyshambles chose to try to politicize this tragedy and it's backfired on him. I'm sure something else will happen in the next few days to wipe this latest gaffe away. I wouldn't worry about it overmuch.

Steve, I'm proud of you for providing links. I've actually seen several versions of edited video. I'll stick with the transcript that Craig provided, which proves beyond a doubt that Barack Obama identified the assassination of the ambassador and three others as terrorism.

I'm having a .gif made of Romneyshambles' eyebrow-raising moment. It was such a pride-comes-before-the-fall moment.

@Bren -

Last week, the Vice President claimed that intelligence made up a story out of thin air (also known as a LIE) about a protest that turned violent, claiming that's all they knew the day after the event took place, remember? And the WH confirmed that Biden was referring to him and the President, remember?

So, which is it exactly?

If Obama is now claiming that he knew Libya was a terrorist attack the day after it happened, then why did he go on Univision, The View, Letterman, the floor of the United Nations, etc., a considerable time later, stating that he didn't yet know and refusing to label it an act of terror when directly asked?

And why did the Vice President LIE to us last week during his debate with Paul Ryan?

ACTIONS speak louder than words.

Clearly, the speech in the rose garden was never meant to be a declaration that the events in Libya amounted to a terrorist attack, otherwise Obama would have been consistent in all those other venues.

You're only LYING to yourself and others when you try to spin this any other way, so give it up already!

►I'll stick with the transcript that Craig provided, which proves beyond a doubt that Barack Obama identified the assassination of the ambassador and three others as terrorism.◄

And you continue to lie to yourself. For over two weeks the entire administration went around blaming a video. They bought $70,000 of advertising in Pakistan apologizing for the video, Obama even went to the UN and blamed the video. Why call it an act of terror one day then for the next 14 never mention the word and blame a video?

Steve ® -

Much of what is released to the general public in the area of national security – a much broader arena than 4-Americans killed at an Embassy in Benghazi – is delivered in bits and pieces, over time. Then, mostly in a very careful and structured manner. You might give some thought to the notion that our government knows much more about any of these matters, consequences, unintended consequences, and a great deal of back channel dealings in Libya and Pakistan than you and I ever will. Further, although most Americans do not know or understand this, we have many deep undercover CIA and Black Ops people, some of who might well be deeply infiltrated into various al Qaeda groups; we do need to contact these folks for information and to ascertain if they are safe, before running off with the mouth.

Clearly, President Obama announced that the attack in Benghazi was an act of terror on September 12, what happened beyond that in terms of specific announcements by various government spokespersons, the media frenzy, the rabid conspiracy theorists, is all nothing but blather.

If you care to engage in why on the first day, then on the second day and then on the third day, and further on the tenth day speculation, you are welcome to do so. I would suspect it is a colossal waste of time; however, it is your time.

Finally, patience will win the day, and we will all know what really happened, specifically, by whom and how.

It was an organized terrorist attack. For two weeks they went around blaming a youtube video no one saw in order to save an election. They continue to lie to the families of the fallen about what happened. It is one thing after another with this administration you have to lie to yourself about in order to support.

The lie is always worse in the end.

Whine, whine, whine. The fact that you are crying about the moderator proves The President won. Romney is a dick last night and he proved it to the country.

Keith Schmitz's lack of memory fails to provide that Obama and his media cheerleaders did the same thing after the first debate.

At least the Denver air didn't play apart in Obama's failed arguments this time around. It must have got to you though Keith.

"Romney is a dick last night and he proved it to the country."

***********************

Thus spake the political insider. Brilliant.

As the saying goes, "nothing good happens after 2 am". You should have put a cork in it and stumbled off to the couch long before you weighed in with this gem.

Why is Schmitz allowed to post on here? Seriously. Everything he writes is trash. How embarrassing does this have to be for Patch? You should unequivocally reject his brutal drivel.

What about the poor woman who asked mittens how his war policy will differ from bush's & she gets mittens 5 part economic plan. Say what? Hello, mittens! Either mittens didn't understand the question or he doesn't know the difference between a tank & a balance sheet.

@Walker The Romney plan for closing loopholes had no specifics. The Obama plan for spending cuts had no specifics either. Both sides don't want to offend anyone, which makes both sides utterly spineless.
Vote for Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and we'll have someone with balls in the White House!

Ahh the sweet smell of victory. Alas I didn’t think the right wing nuts would take it so hard . Now they desperately grasp for straw to help pull them out of their quagmire existence. Snapping at anything that resembles a fact. As the walls come tumbling down. Their worlds are in collusion with reality. Right wing now exhibit fears of biblical proportions. Egad their masters may have to yet pay the fiddler after all. Soon they will be inventing all kinds of illusions from their chicken little comic books. Why here we have an example of that now; Ryan do your thing. {“Was it a good idea to spend taxpayer dollars on electric cars in Finland, or on windmills in China?”} As PolitiFact has pointed out, the money for electric cars in Finland did not come from the stimulus. Rather, it originated with the Energy Department’s Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing program, which predated the Obama administration. The claim about “windmills in China” is also inaccurate. Ahh sorry Ryan just another weak straw your grasping, back slide to the quagmire. TA, TA

@Stormy -

Allowing Schmitzy to go even deeper into debt on a parlay is not advisable.

Hoffa would prefer to collect his winnings already earned and call it a day.

; )

Did you see Romney's face during that entire exchange? At least he didn't push anyone to the ground and cut their hair.

Bren -

"Did you see Romney's face during that entire exchange? At least he didn't push anyone to the ground and cut their hair."

You are just too good to be posting on the Patch... KUDOS!

Brittany: You forgot to include the part where there was a demonstration that grew out of hand....

Don't be so modest, John. Bren's not the only one just too good to be posting on the Patch. Here's a suggestion for the both of you...

http://pinterest.com

Enjoy.

Brittany please read the entire press conference, and get some help with reading comprehension. It is clear the President is talking about the 9/11 anniversary when he mentions terrorism. Read the entire (but short) teleprompter here...
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya
Don't jump to conclusions until you have all of the facts.
Mitt was 100% right, Obama and Crowley were 100% wrong.

"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."

Let's not allow fact to get in the way of a good lie.

Excellent Brittany I put that in my files back in Sept. Just can't find it right now. Knew this was going to be an issue with the menataly handicap right wingers. Whatch how they spin and spin..Like little Foxies chasing their tails.

Bernard: I found it and posted a link. Read it you putz. Terror is only mentioned after talking about the 9/11 anniversary. It was not linked to the Libya issue at all. This may have been a strategic lie, but it is still a lie.

So Craig, let me get this straight... you are basing your entire argument that the President is out of touch with foreign policy because of the order he placed in mentioning terror after brining up 9/11? And that he mentioned Al Queada days later?

I am sorry. That's really lame.

President Bush didn't mention Al Quaeda until days after the Terror Attacks of 9/11. That's not a knock on Bush. It's keeping your mouth shut until more investigation is done. I know that is difficult to grasp as Willard Mitt opened his mouth and pooped all over himself before the attack was even over (proving how UN-qualified he is in foreign affairs). But this whole argument is weak - at best and as immature for calling someone a putz who points out how ridiculous the argument is at worst.

Troy: I am sorry if I hurt your feelings, but this was about the President's lies.
The order of each segment of the press conference in the rose garden IS TOTALLY relevant. It is writing 101. Maybe I can illustrate it in another way:
The Little League Baseball Team is having problem with recruitment.
blah blah blah
The man who killed the gas station owner was a gang banger.
We need to rid the planet of this filth.
According to your reading capacity, you think I hate Little Leagues?

@Bren & @John Wilson -

Did you see that hungry look on Obama's face last night - good thing there weren't any dogs around!

Hoffa - there was Romney's wife. She was there

KIDDING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are right. That was classes. Mrs. Romney, like all women, are beautiful.

That was below the belt. I couldn't help it - sorry.

If Obama is now claiming that he knew Libya was a terrorist attack the day after it happened, then why did he go on Univision, The View, Letterman, the floor of the United Nations, etc., a considerable time later, stating that he didn't yet know and refusing to label it an act of terror when directly asked?

ACTIONS speak louder than words.

Clearly, the speech in the rose garden was never meant to be a declaration that the events in Libya amounted to a terrorist attack, otherwise Obama would have been consistent in all those other venues.

You're only LYING to yourself and others when you try to spin this any other way, so give it up already!

The very chunky and manly Candy Crowley is most certainly a liberal democrat.

H.E., where's your documentation? And nice petulant insults for the moderator, too. I thought she did a fine job of maintaining the format and clock.

@Brittany -

Cite your source please!

If it's a cover-up, how do we know about it?

It took 14 days for the President to admit it was a PREPLANNED terror attack, proir to that it was a protest that grew out of hand.
Maybe the President wasn't in the loop, too busy golfing or something. But Romney knew the truth, as did foreign media.

@Bren -

Was Watergate a cover-up? How is it that we know about that?

The "superior intellect" sure is getting sloppy as of late!

Mr. Hoffa, seems like you're the one taking it on the chin here on Patch this week. ; )

The reason the facts rolled out so quickly about Watergate was because the entire operation was pathetic, including the attempted cover-up.

Obama discussed Christopher Stevens' and the other three Americans' murders at the White House the day after as per the WH transcript. Yes, there was conjecture, and I frankly don't want to hear news important to national security that could also be heard by terrorists.

@Bren -

Last week, the Vice President claimed that intelligence made up a story out of thin air (also known as a LIE) about a protest that turned violent, claiming that's all they knew the day after the event took place, remember?

So, which is it?

And what's this matter of national security nonsense that your spewing exactly? How does labeling something as a terrorist attack, which it clearly was, jeopardize our national security exactly?

If Obama is now claiming that he knew Libya was a terrorist attack the day after it happened, then why did he go on Univision, The View, Letterman, the floor of the United Nations, etc., a considerable time later, stating that he didn't yet know and refusing to label it an act of terror when directly asked?

ACTIONS speak louder than words.

Clearly, the speech in the rose garden was never meant to be a declaration that the events in Libya amounted to a terrorist attack, otherwise Obama would have been consistent in all those other venues.

You're only LYING to yourself and others when you try to spin this any other way, so give it up already!

Brittany where is your outrage for the fact that your Leader, Barack Hussein pays his own staff of women less? How can you vote for this scoundrel?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2128513/Women-paid-significantly-Obama-White-House-male-counterparts.html

Daily Mail is a British tabloid.

What is this source, dear? a blog is your proof?
http://blog.thephoenix.com/BLOGS/talkingpolitics/archive/2012/10/16/mind-the-binder.aspx

@Brittany -

Perhaps Romney was confused by the question, as was Hoffa, considering that women are already guaranteed equal pay for equal work pursuant to the Equal Pay Act of 1963.

What more needs to be said?

The fact that Obama appears to believe that we need redundant laws is what's ridiculous!

H.E., "dear," (!) the blog is political analysis linked to an established paper. Does this help? http://www.boston.com/politicalintelligence/2012/10/17/binders-full-women-mitt-romney-claim-not-entirely-accurate/jrKRRGSIPqjvuKX8dgq6gL/story.html

Bren, the Obama Zombie, please splain why your hero, Barack Hussein Obama can't pay his own staff equally?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2128513/Women-paid-significantly-Obama-White-House-male-counterparts.html

Namecalling, H.E.? I'm sorry that I intimidate you. Nice link to one of Britain's great fishwraps, the Daily Mail. As one of the first comments in your link points out, there's no detail about what types of work the lower-paid women are making, in comparison with the higher paid men. Your article also points out that the alleged percentile discrepancy (11% or 18%, it's not quite clear) is better than the U.S. national average of 23%. Please do some more research to determine if this is a valid topic or just some of the typical Daily Mail muckraking. Thanks,

Bren, did the lobotomy hurt?

I can post more proof if you like, too bad to be you, losing Walker Recall, and now losing this.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/16/obama-touts-fair-pay-for-women-despite-records-showing-women-paid-less-in-his-own-white-house/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/annual-records/2011

It's all here sweetheart.

As long as tax payers pay for his daughter's abortions and contraceptives — as long as Obama can trespass on religious freedom and punish the Catholic Church (along w/other religious bodies who abjure abortion) by forcing payment from religious institutions for woman's abortions and contraceptives - as long as women do not take a vital stand and demand this man who has destroyed the US economy be defeated - Obama will claim to all the fools that listen that it's Conservatives who have launched a war on women. Not the cheapskate himself who paid female staffers in his jr. senate office an average of $6000 less for doing the same job as males - and then continued this crapola while occupying the White House

I see this is the second time you've posted this article. You need to find a more reputable source than a tabloid.

Didn't realize that the Whitehouse is a tabloid, thanks for point this out dear. Funny that you post your proof from a blog above and you discount data from Barack Hussein.

Bren, if I were in your shoes, I would be very sensitive about being called dear in any kind of discussion with increased passion on the issues.

I just want to express my opinion that calling a woman Dear or Honey in this environment is a very condescending attitude. It only confirms the ongoing issues a certain party has towards women and their inferior status in this country. They apparently lack the accumen to make their own medical choices. They need government to intervine on their bahalf - despite the party's constant claiming of the need of personal freedom and over reaching government. And please spare me the freedom of religion argument. The text of the First Amendment reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... " I read nothing that states religious believes need to be enforced on individuals by the government. I believe the 98% of Catholic Women who have used birth control would agree with this, also.

Bren's name is Bren-not honey.

So Bren, you are totally excusing Obama from the murder of the ambassador and the three other men? The fact that he did NOT cancel his Las Vegas fundraiser just out of mere respect for the four fallen men speaks volumes. And why is Hillary now taking the blame? A true leader takes responsibility and shows leadership in handling the issue. He initially sent his UN ambassador, Susan Rice, to speak on his behalf on the Sunday news shows. You cannot deny Obama's lack of leadership experience! He himself said in 2008 that his biggest accomplishment was running his 2008 presidential campaign...he was never qualified to be the president, Bren! Now the country is paying big time for this. So I do not understand how you can say Romney and Ryan are not capable when they have PROVEN business and political records. Ryan is a lot more politically experienced than Obama was four years ago.

Annie - did you watch the debate last night? When the issue of Hillary taking the blame, the President IMMEDIATELY pointed out the Secretary of State works for his administration and it all untimately goes to him. So he did take responsibilty - esp. giving Hillary props for her performance as Secreatry of State (one of the best ever in my opinion).

So based on this argument, is George W. Bush responsible for the murder of thousands of Americans on 9/11?

The President has not excused himself from the responsibilty. Anyone who believes that has their head in the sand (or somewhere). I certainly trust him to figure out how to bring those behind the attacks to justice a whole lot more than the prior administration, who flat out gave up on the issue of the terror attacks in New York and the Pentagon.

Binder full of women, lol.
People find this hard to believe?
It screams fear of affirmative action lawsuits.
I would guess they also had a black binder as well.
The difference is Mitt Romney has business experience, he knows how and where to place the "quota" of people, yet still get the job done.
'Binder full of women' may not have been the right comment, but it was certainly believable.

Craig –

“The difference is Mitt Romney has business experience, he knows how and where to place the “quota” of people, yet still get the job done.”

The question was about being an [advocate for women] to break the glass ceiling.

Willard may or may not have been aware of any QUOTA. Alternatively, IF you are posing as an advocate for women, you simply do not do the bare minimum to comply with the law; you do not answer the question, “How do you feel about the Lilly Ledbetter Act”, with… “We’ll get back to you…” and then, never answer the question…

Significantly, Willard spent 25 years at Bain – no high level women – 2-years at the Olympics, again, no high level women. It has all been the Anglo-Saxon, clearly white, old man’s gang. You tell me, a man with all this “business experience” does not know 50 to 100 high level women on his own, but has to have his staff come to him with “binders full of women”?

Willard must live in an “Accounts Receivable” book, coming out occasionally to impregnate his wife…

We will not talk about the 763 vetoes of legislation, while he, “Learned to play nice with the democratically controlled legislature.” Bipartisanship at its best!

MA ranked 47th – remind you of some other 47 – in job creation during his administration.

He left the state with a 1.2B deficit!

But it is okay for Obama to underpay female staff?

Ummm... clearly Romney was referring to a binder of women's names - was that not obvious to liberals?

Time for you guys on the left to seek out some competent mental health professionals!

@Bren -

"I also appreciated the audience's applause when Candy fact-checked Mitt's false claim that it took Obama 14 days to call the embassy attack an act of terror."

1) A clearly erroneous so-called 'fact-check,' that also violated the agreed to rules of the debate concerning the moderator's conduct.

2) The audience agreed to remain silent during the debate, except those who were called upon to ask questions. So, you're happy with the fact that people LIED and violated the agreement that they made. One of the LIARS was first lady Michelle Obama, who was clearly seen inappropriately applauding.

To the contrary, Romney's family actually observed the rules and fulfilled the agreement that they made when they entered the hall that night, remaining silent during the debate.

Really, it's no surprise that you endorse CHEATING, LYING, and VIOLATING the established and agreed to rules, as you defend low life POS scum bag Schmitzy!!!

The Romney's = CLASS
The Obama's = LYIN' ASS

FreeThought Troy, I'm amused by H.E.'s assumption that I'm female. ; ) I do appreciate that H.E. is making an attempt to prove his points. With a little encouragement I hope we can transition him from posting partisan links to actually conducting independent research from a variety of sources as we do.

H.E., The Daily Caller? Please check official news sources: NY Times, Washington Post, Boston Herald, etc. If you are going British, look at the London Observer, Guardian, BBC, etc. If the partisan talking points are correct, they will be verified by legitimate news sources.

Annie, FreeThought's right. Obama took responsibility on national television in front of 65.6 million people. If you are trying to make Obama personally responsible for this tragedy, let's stand George W. Bush up there with him. By the same token he is responsible for 3,000+ deaths on 09/11/2001 for ignoring a series of reports/warnings in favor of taking more vacation time by that date than any modern president (including 3+ termer FDR). Let's call it what it is, a terrible tragedy and a reminder of why nations must work together to stamp out terrorism.

Dirk - you are correct - it has been two against one in these debates. The first debate was the least noticeable because Romney was not barked at by the moderator as Ryan and Romney were in the last two debates with the female moderators.

Dirk -

You forgot to add that Willard also had to take on TIME, the alignment of the planets his own arrogance, his alpha personality, his sense of entitlement, his lack of Math skills, his “Gosh”, comments, you get the picture…

In Debate (?) three – will be held in a secret location and a secret time, will be broadcast at a future date – Willard will be allowed to produce his own Debate (?), with only himself, debating himself… then you can say his debate opponent wasn’t ready for debate time…

John Wilson - you would get a grade 'D" for your 10:55 AM post to Dirk. Fragmented, incoherent, poor grammar, etc. Are you trying to say you dislike Romney, perhaps?

Annie Nominous –

I am sorry your 8th grade mastery of English prevents you from comprehending anything beyond your extraordinary level of accomplishment in language.

One would have to conclude that when the loincloth wearing Willardbots start to grade your posts, they not only know they lost, they know they are on their way to anti-depressants or suicide.

I am sure that Reince Priebus ScrewUSA Maximus will soon be there to assist you…

After making the mistake that Romney would not blatantly lie and completely shift position in a nationally televised debate, Biden and Obama have both shown up to the subsequent debates armed with actual facts and the preparation to call the Romney/Rand ticket on their lies. Whether it's Romney's "half truth" on oil drilling (up 13% on govt land since Obama took office), his outright lie in trying to use the tragedy in Benghazi to score political points (Obama called it an act of terror the next day, as well as the day after that), or his mathematically impossible 20% rate cut, the President and VP have now shown how to deal with liars - call them out on the lies. Romney looked like a foolish child last night, incurring the rightful repudiation of the President for his politicization of Benghazi, and even smaller when he showed he wouldn't even be bothered to get the facts right in his mad dash to seize a Fox News-generated controversy. Romney didn't lose the debate last night; he lost the election.

Your basing assumptions of liberal bias on false accusations. Thus your comment is null and void. More research is needed before making another comment defending the liberal bias of the Candy man.

Steve - first point, I would like to apologize to Hoffa and the rest of the blog posts if I was inaccurate on the speaking time. I was at the gym when I saw the report and could have easily mis read the time. I will do better in fact checking before I post. Sorry gang.

To the point of my assumptions based on liberal bias. You, of all people, should really be careful in criticizing others on bias. You also have no right to judge my opions. I made an observation. It is as equal an observation to any and all those I have seen on this blog.

I made a comment once about how Conservatives alway blame a non-existent "liberal media bias" any time their positions are shown to be out of step and on the wrong side of history.

Nothing in this accusation has swayed my opinion.

I am saying that republicans and conservatives were complaining about other bias about Candy. She also came out before the debate and said she would not bide by the the no follow up rule where she can inject other questions of her own into the debate.

She said this back in August : CNN's Candy Crowley who claimed some Republicans (unnamed, of course) think this "looks a little bit like some sort of ticket death wish."

Not to mention her failed attempt to fact check Romney.

@FreeThought Troy -

1) How is Fox News different than any other news source exactly?

2) Lehrer did adhere to the rules of the debate. Crowley did not and breached her agreement with the debate commission.

And again, had it not been for Romney fighting for every second of talking time, the debates would have been little more than a giant Obama/Biden re-election infomercial, as the Dems are ahead +12 minutes in talking time over the GOP thus far in these debates! Imagine how greater the disparity would be had Romney not fought for every second as he did!

Are you honestly saying that you want the debates to be as biased as possible towards the Dems as opposed to being as fair and neutral as humanly possible?

I saw Romney posing for pictures with people in the crowd afterward, maybe you changed the channel to watch big bird too soon.

Brittany - you seem to confuse "rudeness" with correcting the lies that Obama spews out about Romney. What kind of man would just sit there and allow Obama to lie about him? Romney was the gentleman. You are okay with Obama lying? It seems if Obama had a real record to run on then he would not have to lie about Romney...Obama feels threatened...hence the lies.

Brittany -

Willard had to leave early to call Lyin' Ryan for support, get his prescription Valium and change his severely soiled "magic underwear."

Remember, Willard is one of the most progressive thinkers of the 1920's...

@Brittany -

Hoffa was watching on CSPAN, and Romney stayed behind to take pictures with people from the crowd.

At least try to spin something that's realistically spin-able, as opposed to just making up flat out LIES!

Doing her part Saturday (Aug 11th) was CNN's Candy Crowley who claimed some Republicans (unnamed, of course) think this "looks a little bit like some sort of ticket death wish."

She admitted her comment was wrong.
http://newsbusters.org/people/candy-crowley

@Brittany -

Repeating a LIE multiple times does not make it true - it's still a LIE.

H.E. Pennypacker –

It is so unfair! It is not right! It is not fair!

What an enlightening post! [Place kindergarten tears here]

Little Lord Fauntleroy finally got reined in a tad from bastardizing and running roughshod over ALL THE AGREED TO RULES in the debate and his sycophant’s announce, like little 7-year old children, it is so unfair, it is not right!

You poor little baby… everything will be all right, mommy will pick you up today from grade school and buy you some ice cream…

Lee - at least we can still debate freely (for the most part) in this country. You are not forced to watch TV or read the news.

Lee -

"There was far too much bickering at the debate." I agree with you, especially because this is SUPPOSE TO BE a discussion regarding the USA and the 2 people who desire to lead this great country for the next 4-years.

One would look for a great deal more decorum, respect and honesty.

The Patch, on the other hand, is merely a place for people, mostly over-emotionally driven and ideologically driven to vomit their personal - received from their respective political party - hatred of the tanned guy and inane opinions...

@Lyin' John Wilson -

And vomiting all over the Patch is something you know intimately well!

If Crowley would have stayed out of it she would have been following the rules. She always was part of Obama's team, yet Romney managed to beat both of them...with the facts. Too bad Romney was not allowed to counter all of the lies Obama spoke. If you think Obama won on style, what about substance. Just what successful record does Obama have to run on, other than resorting to lies?

Watts - at least you recognized Candy Crowley's unethical journalistic "flub on stage" when she interrupted Romney and interfered with her "opinion" on Libya, which she later was forced to retract.

Maybe all of that took place in Bizarro World, but back here on planet Earth, it went nothing like that.

Actually it went exactly like that. Have some coffee and wake up.

http://newsbusters.org/people/candy-crowley
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya
I apologize for multiple posts of proof, seems Watts can't see in such poor lighting.

Really Craig? First of all Newsbusters is a goofball site. You may as well send a link to Glenn Beck or some other right wing freak site like that.

And your other link actually counters the point that I think that you are trying (woefully) to make.

Speech topic: "Remarks by the President on the Deaths of U.S. Embassy Staff in Libya"

Quote: "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation..."

Checkmate.

Watts: Again you disregard factual info. The press conference covered a multitude of topics. Terrorism was not mentioned while the subject matter was on Libya. It only came up after mentioning the anniversary of 9/11.
Go and see the Wizard...
ask him for some balls.

@Watts -

And what makes Politifact such an authority?

According to Rachel Maddow, Politifact lost their credibility, remember? So why are you citing to them for?

Maybe you should actually trying researching and thinking for yourself, as opposed to constantly allowing others to do it for you and accepting their conclusions as gospel, as that only makes you the lemming that you've proven yourself to be!

BTW - Even the Politifact piece that you linked to shows that Obama lied just as much as Romney, if you believe Politifact, and the stuff that Obama was lying about was far more objective and substantive than the subjectively judged 'apology tour' comment.

Try again!

Are you really so delusional to think that referencing sites like hotair.com lends any credibility to what you have to say?

@Watts -

Again, what makes Politifact so credible? Rachel Maddow denounced Politifact as being unreliable, remember?

So, "are you really so delusional to think that referencing sites like [Politifact.com] lends any credibility to what you have to say?"

Gotcha again!

CNN poll?

H.E. Penneypacker -

I disagree!

I hardly think that an INSTANT poll, minutes after a debate, is going to change any serious thinking person’s mind; one would expect, and certainly hope, that a decision this important would be thought about - not impulsively - for days/weeks to come. Then too, there is debate 3, another Jobs Report November 2, and much may happen to influence the election before November 6, 2012.

[Lyin' Ryan may wash more already washed dishes or have a few dirty ones brought in for a new photo op... to prove?]

In an effort to assist me in making up my mind, I’ve ordered 125 copies of Willard’s “Binders Full of Women” from Reince Priebus ScrewUSA Maximus…

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157817/election-2012-likely-voters-trial-heat-obama-romney.aspx

GALLUP: R 51% O 45%

Watch the liberals do into despair!! Good good fun

H.E. Pennypacker -

GALLUP has been relegated to the dust heap of Republican bought-and-paid-for Polls some time ago; it is only being quoted by the "magic underwear" and "magical thinking" conservatives as a last ditch attempt to not slide into the 1st step of the five step grief cycle... DENIAL…

John Wilson,

I will enjoy rubbing your face in your own filth with Romney/Ryan beat the Kenyan Marxist and Plugs Biden. Good Good times.

H.E. Pennypacker -

You've always been such a class act on the Patch...

And once again, lyin' John Wilson shows his religious bigotry!

Can't say that Hoffa is surprised by this!

Obama has proven he is impotent as commander in chief. He preplans his lies to protect his self interest. I would not trust him with a key to my house, would you?
Romney was correct about Obama's denial of terrorism in LIbya. You seem to think it is acceptable that the President lie to us. Guns, terrorism, deficit spending- he can do no wrong in your eyes?
The past four years would have been much better if we had Hillary running the show, she knows a thing or two on how to deal with liars.

Because Willard Mitt has never lied to us, right?

I guess it is difficult to pin him down to a lie, right? He changes his position so much it is really tough to keep track

LOL Wilson, you took the bait. Even you agree she would be far better than Obama.
So would Jimmy Carter!
'Hope and Change' never meant hope that the first two nitwits die so Hillary is put in place. Hope for that if you want, but I would rather vote for Romney and be assured we can turn this mess around.

Craig -

"The past four years would have been much better if we had Hillary running the show, she knows a thing or two on how to deal with liars."

I hope you still feel that way on January 20, 2017, when President Obama hands the reigns over to Hillary...

Craig -

Nice to know you are fishing...

I'm telling you Obama will be in office until January 20, 2017 and then hand the reigns over to Hillary... slow down on the MEDS and read my post B/4 they come to get you... stay well...

John, LOL. I laughed so hard I peed a little.
Hillary is clearly done, she even fell on the sword for Obama. She has stated as much when she announced she would retire at the end of this year.

Oh, Craig - you rip on my comprehension...

Hilary is stepping down end of year to recouperate. She will be re charged at the end of the President's second term. She will then run (I really hope).

If she does run - she'll win.

Not unless the Republican Party can come to reality and not nominate such crazy people.

If Obama wins there will be nothing left in this Country for Hillary to run.
Another four years at $1.3+ Trillion/ year deficits, there will be defaults on US Debt.
No more Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, even food stamps will be gone.
If interest rates climb at all, we are already unsustainable. Imagine hyper inflation where prices double or worse. This will be the only answer if we can't reign in spending. In effect it will make grannie take a SS cut of 50%. In effect the Debt to GDP ratio will then be cut in half. Experts from both parties know this is the worst scenario, but have done nothing to stop the spiral.
Hillary would not be my choice, but I would prefer she was in charge today rather than the nitwit we have now. Her IQ is double that of BHO.
Another four years of Obama will make this a moot point.
Don't hold your breath for Hillary to rescue US.

Is the sky falling, Craig? Are you crying wolf, again?

Romney's plan for this country is a return to George W Bush's policies. We all know how well those have worked out.

A truly objective review of both candidates can only conclude Obama's balanced approach is such a better option than the extreme alternative it's hardly worth discussing.

But I guess that has never stopped the radicals h*ll bent on consolidating all the money and power leaving the rest of us to support them and fight the wars they start.

Sounds pretty lame to you, too, right?

Troy: Did you eat a lot of paint chips when you were young?

No Craig, just a lot of critical thinking eductation.

You should try it. It really makes you better off than the fog of ignorance that is the TeaParty GOP

@FreeThought Troy -

"Romney's plan for this country is a return to George W Bush's policies."

That's not true at all - that's just liberal propaganda. Romney addressed this at the debate last night.

FTTroy: "No Craig, just a lot of critical thinking eductation"
I didn't know there was a major in critical thinking eductation- doesn't eductation have something to do with melting steel with magnetic energy?
Oh wait that is induction....Eductation must be a measurement of dead brain cells.

Hoffa's Response discrediting the Tax Policy Center as not a "primary source" and calling to make one's own informed discision - based on Romney's website, of couse, in

5...4...3...2...

@FreeThoughtTroy
Hoffa usually discredits everything and everybody except his imaging TeaGOP friend.

Meanwhile here is a little humor:

Ban T-shirts ‏@BanTshirts

Ladies, Mitt has got your back: http://bit.ly/T0H8JO #tshirt #debate
Retweeted by SnarkyProgressive#47

@FreeThought Troy -

Ordinarily, you'd be correct, however, Hoffa has learned to ignore Bernie's cut and paste ramblings that derive from the pages of the Daily Kos and other such similar sites.

But you're right - the TPC 'study' is not a primary factual source. Additionally, the 'study' makes many assumptions, speculations, conjectures, etc. - so anyone who is relying upon it to make a point is making a fool of themselves!

I want a t-shirt of Paul "The Dishwasher" Ryan! With an image of Ayn Rand on the back, upper center. This could sell.

Liberal 'humor,' if you can even call it that, evades Hoffa, fortunately!

Mr. Hoffa, you have to read the entire post, then you might understand the humor.

그 때문에...

; )

@Bren -

Amazing that of all the comments that Hoffa has made on this board, including direct retorts to you, that this is the one you reply to!

다시 어려운 문제를 피하고?

;-)

James R Hoffa
5:33 pm on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Liberal 'humor,' if you can even call it that, evades Hoffa, fortunately!

Bernie replies.
Humor evades our Hoffas as does fact checking, books, facts, researching and so on and so on.

You heard the stammer after Obama urged Romney to "please continue." There was a sudden awareness of danger, but arrogance took over and -splat-. In front of 65.6 million folks. I'm sorry to share that I appreciated the round of applause from the undecided audience. I think every reasonable person is finding Romney's attempt to politicize the assassination highly distasteful.

I understand that Romney has abandoned (at least for today) mentioning Benghazi. Better late than never.

Bren - "I'm sorry to share that I appreciated the round of applause from the undecided audience." Which proves how shallow you are. BTW, you forgot Michelle - who should know better. Well, maybe not.

"I think every reasonable person is finding Romney's attempt to politicize the assassination highly distasteful." Um, I find find Obama lying about Benghazi highly distasteful. Which again, since you don't seem to mind that our leader has blood on his hands, jumped in front of cameras at the UN meeting and blamed it on a youtube video - you can somehow compartmentalize that since it they are already bloody from "Fast & Furious" it is okay to have them bloody once again.

temper temper...

John Nichols ‏@NicholsUprising

"Mitt, I'm worried about Tagg. I heard him talking about hitting the president." @thenation @WeGotEd @edshow

All this baloney on Libya of he said she said they did they did not is just a waste of time. Of what relevance is it, UNLESS of course we get the Romney / Ryan ticket in. Then they get their $ 2 Trillion for another war. OUTSOURCING your children to foreign soils once again, again, again, again. We should be more concerned with how healthy are our candidates’ for office are. Observe the peculiar symptoms of Romney’s.
Romney has been backtracking on his conservative-leaning promises.
"He's forgetting what his own positions are, and he's betting that you will, too. I mean, he's changing up so much and backtracking and sidestepping, we've gotta ... name this condition that he's going through," Obama said.
"I think it's called Romnesia,"
"If you say you'll protect a woman's right to choose, but you stand up at a primary debate and said that you'd be delighted to sign a law outlawing ... that right to choose in all cases — man, you've definitely got Romnesia," he said.
"If you say earlier in the year you're going to give tax cuts for the top 1 percent, and then in a debate you say, 'I don't know anything about giving tax cuts to rich folks,' you need to get a thermometer, take your temperature, because you've probably got Romnesia."
Note Ryan exhibits same symptoms..

@Sharpie -

Romney is not involved in Bain Capital anymore, and hasn't been for quite some time. His current investment in Bain is about $7M, or .01% of Bain's assets under management - hardly a controlling interest!

The video that you link to is grossly unfair and does not tell the whole representative story of the situation with Sensata in Freeport.

If anything, people should be holding Obama accountable for losing those jobs to China, as he's the current President, not Romney. Obama is in a far better position to be able to offer things that could potentially save those jobs.

Let's get real please!