The Obama administration is certainly taking its time in admitting what everyone else already knew: that the attack which killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three others on Sept. 11 wasn’t the act of a crappy YouTube video, but of terrorists.

For whatever reason, President Obama only seems comfortable addressing the issue from a comfy couch in a television studio. A week ago on “The Late Show with David Letterman,” he laid the violence at the feet of a “sort of a shadowy character” in the U.S. who made an “extremely offensive video directed at Mohammed.” While taping “The View” on Monday, he evolved a bit in his stance, acknowledging at last that the attack was planned and not just a spontaneous uprising.

Sen. John McCain, always eager to reach across the aisle, reached a bit by tweeting that Obama finally used the words “terror attack.”

As Fox’s Todd Starnes and others report, the president stopped short of using those words, but he does at last seem to be putting the pieces together, at least in public where the rest of us can see. Maybe attending that intelligence briefing paid off?

The president might not yet go that far, but others certainly will.

According to The Hill, the president suggested that “the best way to marginalize” the kind of speech found in the “Innocence of Muslims” video “is to ignore it.” Is this why the U.S. spent $70,000 on ads to apologize for the video during Pakistan’s deadly “Day of Love” protests?

Obama is expected to address the video in his remarks to the United Nations Tuesday. Will his warm-up with the ladies of “The View” help toughen up his message?

  • syvyn11

    Obama knows if he uses the term ‘terrorism’ about this, it’s another nail in his reelection coffin. He’ll parse and twist words, and the dummies (Hasslebeck too) will eat it up.

    • Jedd McHead

      I agree with the latter part of your comment but disagree with the first.

      I honestly don’t think Odrama gives a hoot about getting reelected. He’s offered no plan, takes no meetings, all his speeches are recycled from his first run for office and he’s completely checked out during recent HEAVY news cycles. When he doesn’t look just plain tired he looks stoned.

      All that said, I think the reason he won’t EVER admit this or any mistake has less to do with winning reelection than it does with his unbridled ego.

      After all, WHEN he loses the election you know he’ll be the first to state that it wasn’t his fault — he’s chalk the loss up to: voter fraud, voter suppression, George Bush, the TEA Party, the Coch brothers, racism, tsunamis, Israel, “birthers”, George Bush, the Republican House, ATM’s, the Cambridge police, George Bush and the fact that ballots were lost in seven of our 57 states.

      I could be wrong, of course, but I don’t care — as long as he loses, I’m fine with that.

      • NWFL Conservative

        But you can bet your next paycheck if he loses it will wind up in court. Mark my words. I wouldn’t be surprised if even if he finally concedes there will be no concession speech.

        And stand by for 2 months of the worst “scorched earth” policy making this country has ever seen. And if he does win, gird your loins, because this country is going to explode.

        • nc

          I know it seems contradictory, but I really think you (Jedd and NWFL) are both right.

        • Otter2

          Agree — there will be no concession speech *if* he loses. But I’ll too bet there will be rioting. An Americanized Arab spring. Lock and load.

          • NWFL Conservative

            Forewarned is forearmed. I am for for sure, rest assured of that.

      • redheadgrl

        I’ve noticed that, too, Jedd – unless he is giving a major campaign speech, he looks exhausted, or stoned, like he just showed up where he was told to be and read what was on the teleprompter. Like the statement in the Rose Garden after the Ambassador was killed.

    • tjp77

      Another nail?

      The problem is that there don’t seem to be nearly enough nails in that coffin already.

  • Mr Writing III

    Maybe it was just workplace violence?

  • PennyRobinsonFanClub

    Whoops! Stand by for another update from the Ministry of Truth!

  • NWFL Conservative

    Of course and after all the death of 4 Americans and the compromising of vital classified material was simply a “bump in the road” to him. I simply cannot wrap my head around the utter self serving, malignant arrogance of that statement.

    Tell the families and friends of those who were killed that their loved ones were “just a bump in the road”.

  • nc

    If it “wasn’t just a mob action” then what the H was it????

    And why has it taken two weeks for BHO to spit it out? Not that he actually has yet.

  • Mary Ball

    Ok … So … When will he be telling the American people it wasn’t “a mob” ?? (Ya know, those of us who still -somehow- have jobs and can’t watch The View) … I’ve been waiting for two weeks now …

  • redheadgrl

    Is he practicing his foreign policy on Letterman and the girls on the View? Has he talked to the press corp about any of the attacks?

  • Streetiebird

    I’m sure Conservatives would have preferred him to call them names on national TV and make the whole situation worse, but it turns out he has some class.