So during the debate (10-16-2012), Romney and Obama sparred over Obama's reaction to last month's 9-11 anniversary terror attack on the U.S. embassy in Egypt. Romney pointed out that Obama's reaction to the attack was to fly off blithely the next day to raise money for his campaign -- as if that act of war in Egypt had never happened.
Romney also pointed out that the O administration took two weeks to emphatically state that the attack on the U.S. embassy was indeed a pre-meditated terror attack and NOT merely a spontaneous outbreak of ordinary criminal activity.
IN HIS OWN "DEFENSE," Obama stated that he actually knew it was a terror attack all along, and the CNN "moderator" conveniently backed Obama up on that.
While Obama did make a generic remark about terrorism shortly after the attack in Benghazi, Egypt, for two weeks the O administration sent a flurry of mixed signals about whether the violence was a terror attack or not.
The question is still unanswered: If Obama knew from the very beginning that the violence in Benghazi on 9-11-12 was a terrorist attack, why did he jet off to Las Vegas the next day for a fundraiser?
Why did it take the rest of the O administration two whole weeks to get up to speed? (Was it because Obama was virtually AWOL, preoccupied by the election campaign?)
If Obama knew that this attack was a premeditated act of terrorism, as he now suggests, his actions immediately following the attack (and for the next two weeks) are utterly incomprehensible. Let's make sure that this point is not lost in all of the post-debate "fact checking."
*post edited for clarity; image hat tip: Joshuapundit