Ok, folks, can I just say something here? In all fairness, did President Obama really call the Benghazi attack terrorism, or did he just mention it in a 'generalized term'? I know, Romo had it coming, but let's be fair, did he CLEARLY state that the particular attack was terrorism? I think not, just sayin'
Obama called it 'acts of terror' which is really the smarter way of calling it until you have all the facts. His administration did not have all the facts, and there was some serious miscommunication because the press secretary and Hillary Clinton called it 'terrorism' but he would not until the 2nd or 3rd week. Now, the folks in Libya also did not know what was going on until weeks later. I am glad that he took responsibility for everything (which is what he should do) but he didn't throw anyone under the bus, which is commendable.
I would rather have this than declaring 'terrorist' and 'weapons of mass destruction'.
History books are written by the victors, but the losing party gets a say if you look hard enough.
Lend me your ear
He did call it an act of terror. Whether he did in general terms or not he was giving a speech on the Benghazi issue therefore Benghazi attack is an act of terror.
However, this is where Rawmoney blew it. The President did not answer the question and what Rawmoney should have done was to press him to answer it and if Prez didn't he should go on the attack and make the Prez look stupid for incompetence. Lo and behold he completely forgot about the question being asked and concentrated on what he thought the President said. I just put my hands on my head like...kai this guy just handed the Prez the debate on a platter of gold! Everybody and their mama knew the Benghazi question was coming and the Prez knew he couldn't lie to American people if pressed on it but only Rawmoney didn't see this! Speechless!!
Get rich or die trying!!!