Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Are the republicans desperate or something?
On CBS they're about to complain about how the Obama Administration failed to label the Libyan embassy attack a terrorist attack immediately.
Who gives a shit?
I mean, what difference does it make? Its not like they had all the fucking answers immediately.
And I doubt a Romney administration wouldn't have done anything different.
Unless jumping the gun and screaming "TERRORIST" at every opportunity is good intelligence gathering.
"Assault" "Riot"? The label "Terrorist" gets thrown around far too easy anyway.
To clarify: I meant that labelling something as "terrorist" without knowing if it has a terrorist goal or is perpetrated by known terrorists is just fearmongering.
edited 14th Oct '12 7:41:50 AM by 3of4
"You can reply to this Message!"Uh, not exactly...
It was originally reported that there was a protest going on, but it turns out that in Libya there was no such thing at the Benghazian embassy. The embassy in Benghazi was just straight out attacked immediately with no protest to cover themselves. There are claims that the state department was trying to cover its ass.
edited 14th Oct '12 8:22:03 AM by Completion
Oh it could just be the fact that it's hard to get accurate information about crimes that happen halfway across the city let alone halfway across the world and they just didn't want to say anything inciting until they knew for certain.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. DickAnyone here from Pennsylvania?
edited 14th Oct '12 10:18:22 AM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016It's mostly Democrats, actually, which for more specific definitions includes the working poor who are less likely to be able to get that specific day off of work, and also blacks and Latinos. I mean, I know you don't want me to say Democrats, but it's people who are more likely to vote that way, which is why the Republicans specifically this time around are trying to restrict it.
Also poll workers, because they know they're going to be working that day to help other people vote.
Deviant: Oh boy...
Yeah, I'm from PA.
RIP Senator Specter.
Inhopelessguy: Generally people that are either elderly or lower income. It's primarily anyone who doesn't have good transportation and can't get to the polls reliably.
edit: I think people in the military do that too since they're overseas.
edited 14th Oct '12 10:28:59 AM by Kostya
Which would make sense if the claim that the ordinary people of Libya freaked out and started murdering people over a youtube video were actually less inciting than the claim that calculating terrorists infiltrated the country and organized a direct attack.
<><If Obama manages to lose the foreign policy debate, I'm going to be absolutely amazed. All of the controversial actions he's undertaken in this area aren't mainstream issues so they aren't going to be mentioned, and Romney himself is so incompetent in this area that it's kind of awe-inspiring.
edited 14th Oct '12 12:39:44 PM by HilarityEnsues

Honestly, this comes from a very simple fact: The Founders didn't plan for political parties forming since they thought they'd be able to stop them.
Honestly, that's where the majority of the problems in our political system come from.
edited 14th Oct '12 6:09:38 AM by deathpigeon