Initially, when the attack on the United States consulate in Libya happened, the president called it an act of terror against the United States. I believe it was during his speech in the White House rose garden. This same topic was brought up during the 2nd presidential debate. I think people are trying to say Obama lied about the attack, but as of right now, there is no proof that he did, and he did call it an act of terror.
Whether or not the attack was due to an anti-Islam video or because it had been planned ahead of time, no one could be sure at the time it happened. The act of attacking a US embassy is clearly terrorism in any form, regardless of cause. In this case, in the transcripts of Obama's press release he quite clearly stated that it was terrorism.
During his comments in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, President Obama did not specifically call the attack in Libya a terrorist act. In speaking about the attack on Benghazi, he stated that “no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation”. This quote is in stark contrast to the previous two presidents, who referred to the attacks on September 11th and the attack on the USS Cole as an act of terrorism. The argument that he referred to the attack in Libya as a terrorist act is weak, and an argument based on semantics. The choice of the phrase “acts of terror” was to avoid taking away from the campaign’s narrative that Al-Queda was on the run. If the president would have called the attack what it was, a terrorist attack, he then could no longer tell the American people that Al-Queda was on the run.
President Barack Obama originally told the American people the attack on the consulate in Libya was due to a protest of an anti-Muslim film. Only later did we find out it was a coordinated terrorist attack. It doesn't matter what was said when or how. Four Americans died and the entire incident was a travesty.
The US public was mislead. The initial assessment of the attack led Americans to believe that it was caused by general anti-Western sentiment among the Libyan population, not a focused attack by our enemies which could have been prevented with diligence and an understanding of our foes.
The administration ignored the militant threat to Americans because a belief in enemies that must be resisted with force is a traditionally neo-con stance. Admitting our enemies exist is to admit that the Democratic foreign policy platform is wrong.