Sat, Jan 31, 2015, 12:55 PM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Oracle Corporation Message Board

  • balongnieponey balongnieponey Oct 17, 2012 10:52 PM Flag

    Why did Candy crowley have a transcript of Obamas Rose Gaerden Speech?

    And Obama clearly said, "Go to the transcript!"

    Candy Crowley was supposed to be an unbiased moderator, not a fact checker representing Obama's interests!

    And she just happened to have a transcript of Obama's Rose Garden speech handy to fact check.

    Sentiment: Strong Sell

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Candy Crowley’s Debate Moderation Exemplifies Why Americans Do Not Trust Their Media
      video
      by Noah Rothman | 8:42 am, October 17th, 2012
      » 697 comments

      On Monday, I wrote that it would be wrong to prejudge CNN host Candy Crowley before she turned in her performance as a debate moderator. Just the week prior, ABC reporter Martha Raddatz was preemptively criticized for inviting President Barack Obama to attend her wedding in the 1990s, but she ended up being a straight moderator who advanced the vice presidential debate admirably. I wanted to extend the benefit of the doubt to Crowley, to not preemptively criticize her before she was worthy of criticism. Well, the verdict is in and criticism is entirely warranted.

      My singular take away moment of last night’s debate was one that elevated Crowley from moderator to debate participant. Crowley shot from the hip and echoed a talking point from the Obama campaign regarding their handling of the Libya attack to criticize Mitt Romney mid-debate. What’s more? She was wrong. Crowley did her profession a disservice last night and confirmed many Americans deepest suspicions about the media in the process.

      RELATED: Candy Crowley: Romney ‘Right’ That Obama Didn’t Call Libya Terror, But Thought ‘He Picked The Wrong Word’

      During the debate, when President Obama was challenged – as his administration has been for weeks – about the White House’s handling of the attacks in Libya, he bristled with indignation over the suggestion that he was taking this attack with anything but the utmost seriousness.

      Romney responded by criticizing the president for his administration’s efforts to create the public impression that the attacks in Libya arose from a series of demonstrations against an offensive YouTube video. He accused the president and his administration of refusing to call the attack in Libya an act of terrorism for nearly two weeks. Obama objected and told him to look at the transcript. Crowley, rather than moderate the exchange, jumped into the fray and said that Obama had, in fact, called the incident terrorism.

      The timeline of events regarding Libya is clear. After weeks of the president’s surrogates, and the president himself on programs like Late Night with David Letterman and at the United Nations, saying the Libya attack resulted from a spontaneous demonstration, the story began to unravel. Drip by drip, it became clear that security at the consulate was lax, the station had come under attack before and there was never any demonstration outside the Benghazi consulate.

      Knowing they were caught in a distortion of the truth, the Obama campaign began pointing to the president’s Rose Garden address on the day after the 9/11/12 attacks to show that his administration had always referred unambiguously to Libya as an act of terrorism.

      “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,” said Obama in the Rose Garden on September 12, after two paragraphs of recounting how Americans responded to the attacks of September 11, 2001.

      The Obama campaign, knowing that they had advanced a false narrative for weeks and were being called on it, found the word “terror” in his initial response and relied on that speech to show that the president had known the Libya attack was terror all along.

      This is wildly offensive to everyone who followed the story closely. The president seemed to think that he could perhaps get away with it if he had the assistance of complicit journalists who would not fact check that hard. He could not have known the kind of gift he would receive from Candy Crowley — amid a presidential debate, no less.

      Following the debate, Crowley appeared on her network where she shrugged and half-heartedly admitted that Romney was correct – that the Obama administration never described the Libya attack as a terrorist act and that they spent the better part of a month trying to convince the nation that what happened in Benghazi was anything but a premeditated assault. Crowley’s instincts in the moment led her to chastise Romney because she felt “he used the wrong word.”

      It was a shameful display and an indictment of so much of what is wrong with the media today. Broadly, it is also the reason why so few Americans trust the fourth estate –reporting means never having to say you’re sorry. Sometimes engaging in inaccurate opinion journalism does require a correction.

    • Obama on comedy central: 'when four americans get killed, it's not optimal'

    • Biden: ‘How Many of You Know Someone who Served in Iraq or Iran?’

      BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
      October 18, 2012 3:55 pm

      Vice President Joe Biden asked supporters Thursday at a Nevada campaign event, “How many of you know someone who served in Iraq or Afghanistan?”

      Biden was joined at the event by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and embattled Senate candidate Rep. Shelley Berkley. At Biden’s question, Reid raised his hand.

      At the event, Biden also said that when it comes to the Young Guns – a group of younger Republicans, including Rep. Paul Ryan — the “bullets are aimed at you.”

    • ... because the Rose Garden Speech didn't specifically refer to the attack.

      Obama didn't say it DID refer to the attack because even HE isn't THAT brazen with the truth...

      ... but he left the audience with an "insinuation" that it did... which was just as dis-honest on his part.

    • Wrong question. The question you should be asking is how did Romney screw that up so badly? He went all in on trying to nail Obama and it backfired on him badly. He got into the nitty gritty details rather and staying on the broad theme that security was botched, that we should have been better prepared than we were, etc. Instead he tried to nail him on specific words in the Rose Garden speech, got an arrogant "now I've got you!" gleam in his eye, and then got humiliated on national TV. If you think this is the moderator's fault, you're not being honest or you're just one of those "excuse people" who want to blame everyone else for your failures. This was simply Mitt making a mistake and pulling defeat out of the jaws of victory on this one point. He screwed up, plain and simple.

      Full disclosure: I'm not a US citizen (Australian), but if I could vote I would vote for a younger, more charismatic version of Ron Paul, if such a person existed...

    • And Obama clearly said, "Go to the transcript!"

      Candy Crowley was supposed to be an unbiased moderator, not a fact checker representing Obama's interests!

      ***

      OMG!!!

      North Korean Lib Media protecting Dear Leader!!!

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

    • Campaign 2012 , Politics , President Obama
      Democratic convention funded in part by corporate donations
      E-mail | Print | Comments (0) 10/18/2012 12:39 PM

      0
      0

      4
      E-mail

      By Callum Borchers, Globe Correspondent

      Despite a promise to shun corporate money, the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte was funded in part by millions of dollars in such donations, according to Federal Election Commission filings.

      Democrats used at least $5 million from corporations and took a roughly $8 million loan from Duke Energy, the country’s largest electricity provider. The Associated Press was the first to report the corporate fund-raising.

      It is legal for convention organizers to accept corporate cash, and Republicans did the same for their convention in Tampa. But Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz promised “the first convention in history that does not accept any funds from lobbyists, corporations or political action committees.”

      “This will be the first modern political convention funded by the grassroots, funded by the people,” Wasserman Schultz added last year, during a convention kickoff event.

      Much of the other $24 million raised by Democrats came not from grassroots donors but from corporate foundations, special interest groups and wealthy individuals, some of whom exceeded the convention’s self-imposed, $100,000 cap on individual gifts.

    • Haven't figured out that these things are all scripted in advance yet? The one'
      s that really run things put on a show for stupid people to gawk at when it really means nothing. They don't intend for you to have a choice. They own BOTH horses in the race.

    • Pension Envy: Who Has More—Obama or Romney?
      Published: Wednesday, 17 Oct 2012 | 2:37 PM ET
      Text Size
      By: Jeff Cox
      CNBC

      Retirement packages sparked one of a series of confrontations during the Tuesday debate between President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney.

      The exchange took place during a discussion of China policy, with the president accusing the former Massachusetts governor of hypocrisy when it came to tough talk against the nation that boasts the world's second-largest economy.

      Romney conceded that a blind trust that manages his money does have investments in China, but countered that he wasn't alone.

      "Mr. President, have you looked at your pension? Have you looked at your pension? Mr. President, have you looked at your pension?" Romney challenged.

      In one of the debate's lighter moments, Obama countered, "I don't look at my pension. It's not as big as yours so it doesn't take as long. I don't check it that often."

      The remarks sparked some audience laughter — and yet another Romney rebuke.

      "Let me give you some advice: Look at your pension. You also have investments in Chinese companies, you also have investments outside the United States," he said.

      On that score, Romney is likely correct.

      Many public pension funds have a diversified foreign investment portfolio that includes China. For instance, the California Public Employees Retirement System, or CalPERS, recently announced a $530 million investment in two real estate funds that target China.

      Most other public pension funds have directed increasing allocations to emerging markets and alternative investment classes to generate returns and bridge exploding funding gaps.

      As far as size?

      From the standpoint of a public pension, Obama is well-heeled.

      As president, he will receive $191,300 annually for life — win or lose in next month's election — and receives a travel allotment as well as mailing privileges. Should Obama lose, his presidential pension kicks in immediately after leaving office.

      Given that the president enjoys a normal life span, the pension allotment would be worth upwards of $6 million.

      The federal budget spends about $3 million annually for the four living ex-presidents. Obama also will get Secret Service protection.

      In addition, Obama may be due a nice pension for the eight years he served in the Illinois Legislature as a state senator.

      Illinois is infamous for its lavish pension plan for former lawmakers. A Freedom of Information Act request for Obama's pension amount submitted Wednesday to the General Assembly Retirement System of Illinois was not immediately answered, nor was a call to the Obama campaign.

      But what about Romney?

      It's extensively documented that Romney is, well, a rich guy. He earned untold millions —though famously circumspect about releasing tax returns — while leading private equity giant Bain Capital and has a substantial retirement plan.

      His Individual Retirement Account could be worth in the neighborhood of $87 million, as documented in an extensive report from the Washington Post.

      But as for a strictly public pension? Zip, zero.

      Romney only served one term as governor of the Bay State and did not take a salary, so he is eligible for nothing.

      So while Romney appears headed for a happier retirement financially, he'll be footing his own bill — unless, of course, he wins next month. In that case, his nest egg will be even that much bigger than Obama's.

    • And after all the hemming and hawing, Crowley said Romney was right "in the main". Fox has been raking her over the coals for the amateur she is. The fat lady will be singing Nov 6th.

    • View More Messages
 
ORCL
41.89-0.97(-2.26%)Jan 30 4:01 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Visa Inc.
NYSEFri, Jan 30, 2015 4:00 PM EST
Amazon.com Inc.
NASDAQFri, Jan 30, 2015 4:00 PM EST