The Washington Free Beacon:
Moderator: Romney was ‘right in the main’ on Benghazi, but ‘picked the wrong word’
After the debate, debate moderator Candy Crowley said Republican nominee Mitt Romney was “right in the main” but “picked the wrong word” on the Obama administration’s immediate response to the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, that left four Americans dead.
Crowley interrupted Romney during the debate, insisting that President Obama had in fact called the attack an “act of terror.”
ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.
OBAMA: Get the transcript.
CROWLEY: It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. So let me — let me call it an act of terror…
OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy?
CROWLEY: He — he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take — it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.
In a statement given in the Rose Garden on Sept. 12, Obama emphasized an anti-Islam video, before saying that “no acts of terror would shake the resolve of this great nation.”
The administration’s narrative on the attack over the next two weeks was muddled.
On Sept. 16, U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice attributed the attack on the U.S. Consulate to violent protests stemming from a “heinous and offensive” video.
On Sept. 25, the president himself declined to call the attack an act of terrorism during an interview with “The View,” saying that an investigation was still ongoing.
Related:
And now: CNN walks back false “act of terror” fact check
https://twitter.com/justin_hart/statuses/258410193837252608
Now, they tells us?
Twitchy told you immediately during tonight’s second presidential debate that President Barack Obama and CNN debate moderator Candy Crowley falsely characterized his Rose Garden statement about Benghazi in front of an audience of millions.
Forceful pushback from social media and the Romney camp has CNN on the run.
http://twitter.com/#!/NY4Mitt/status/258410782168068097
http://twitter.com/#!/RangerSG/status/258412045781827585
http://twitter.com/#!/CoreyClayton/status/258409018786189312
http://twitter.com/#!/KerriHT/status/258412921170837505
https://twitter.com/itsallgoodonok/statuses/258412999734349824
The moderator had no business “correcting” Romney in the first place. That is for the opponent, not the moderator. That’s also what fact checkers are for. The moment she did that, she took sides in the debate, and that should disqualify her being ever chosen to moderate any future debate. It has been said that she decided what questions would be asked. Listening to what questions were asked, and watching how she “managed” the debate, I give her a grade of “F”.
Crowley “researched” this topic prior to the debate. When she “corrected” Romney, she did so knowing that he was correct in his statement. It’s time to tell it like it is. She lied which makes her a liar.
@Ditto: It’s debatable what the moderator has the right to do. To clarify an issue which might act as a bone of contention, and bog down the entire debate needlessly, seems to me to be a valid role for a moderator—especially since she acceded the Romney was partially correct.
@another vet: Candy Crowley acceded that Romney was partially correct on this issue. Perhaps you should consult a dictionary at to the meaning of the word ‘liar’.
Now that we know the truth, Romney will continue to soar in the polls. But the real truth is that the polls are usually skewed towards Obama. The real test is going to be a landslide in favor of Romney come June 6th, 2012.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
Candy Crowley ‘acceded’ that Romney was more than “partially correct”, Lib1. Minutes after the debate ended, she acknowledged that Romney was right to make the claim that he did.
Crowley’s exact words were, “was right in the main, but he just chose the wrong word.” That is not “acceding Romney is partially correct”. That is acknowledging that Romney was right.
Spin it however you want, but truly ‘objective’ people know what the actual score is, Lib1.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity): Spin it how ever you want. One definition of lying is a deliberate attempt to deceive.
I used to read your posts here and they all had two things in common- abrasiveness and ignorance. Notice I don’t respond to them anymore. As a matter of fact I don’t even read them but while scrolling down, I happened to notice a response to me. Awhile back I told Tom that despite differences of opinions with some on this site, with few exceptions I would have no problem sitting down with anyone and having a few beers. You are one of those exceptions. Save yourself some time and don’t respond to my posts.
Today on CNN, Crowley backtracks on her backtrack. She got the facts wrong, but in smug MSM fashion, refuses to admit it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/17/candy-crowley-i-didnt-backtrack-on-libya-in-debate/?wprss=rss_election-2012
So, this is taking a weird turn.
Military intelligence may have tracked location of a guy called “Khattalah” who apparently organized the Benghazi attack.
Will Obama order drone strikes or possible all out bombing operation on his position???
Will Obama then make a claim that the “perpetrators have been brought to justice” to squash Benghazi questions and play part of hero???
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
It’s not “debatable” at all. There were rules and format that were agreed on by the CPD and the candidates that govern how the debate will take place. This “moderator” chose to ignore the agreed on rules and instead decided to do what she damn well pleased. Both campaigns were very concerned about her announcement of unilaterally making changes prior to the debate, and strongly suggested she be replaced. You and other Democrats would not be so cavalier about it if had she instead favored Romney.
After Candy and the other moderators were time checked and found to have all favored Biden or Obama on time allotted, one leftist pundit tried to convince a panel of pundits that the number of words spoken ought to be considered rather than the number of minutes and seconds.
Some people speak slowly.
We saw a video of just Obama’s ”uh’s, um’s, er’s and aaaa’s” from his first debate.
Sure enough, Obama ate up 57 seconds with word-whiskers!