Mitt Romney spent Wednesday's debate apparently channeling Al Gore and even going him one better. Romney didn't merely look wooden. He appeared to be carved in granite, wearing a gaping, almost demented smile throughout the debate. His pre-planned 'gotchas' and 'zingers' had been rehearsed since August, and the candidate delivered them with robotic monotony, sometimes without regard to the discussion topic.
Immediately after the debate, numerous reports of muffled thuds flooded police switchboards as prominent Republican's heads exploded.
(Just remember - you read it here first!)
Quote from: Ed W on October 02, 2012, 08:40:55 PM
Mitt Romney spent Wednesday's debate apparently channeling Al Gore and even going him one better. Romney didn't merely look wooden. He appeared to be carved in granite, wearing a gaping, almost demented smile throughout the debate. His pre-planned 'gotchas' and 'zingers' had been rehearsed since August, and the candidate delivered them with robotic monotony, sometimes without regard to the discussion topic.
Immediately after the debate, numerous reports of muffled thuds flooded police switchboards as prominent Republican's heads exploded.
(Just remember - you read it here first!)
Whew. Don't have to bother watching now (as if I was going to). Thanks. :D
Listening to talk radio and reading facebook posts from friends shows some real upset republicans. They just can't believe they are losing to Obama.
If Romney does poorly in the debates, it is going to get ugly around here.
I don't think the heads exploding was due to Romney's poor performance, although it was dismal. Their heads exploded because Obama came out as Stalin's great grandson, declared an alliance with Iran and North Korea, announced the bombing of Israel was to begin in five minutes, and unveiled the new 2,000 foot tall minaret at the WTC site. The pictures of Michelle and the kids in matching hijabs is probably what sent the brain hemorrhages into full on explosions, though.
You gotta hand it to him, though. It's one ballsy campaign strategy.
Quote from: nathanm on October 02, 2012, 09:19:31 PM
I don't think the heads exploding was due to Romney's poor performance, although it was dismal. Their heads exploded because Obama came out as Stalin's great grandson, declared an alliance with Iran and North Korea, announced the bombing of Israel was to begin in five minutes, and unveiled the new 2,000 foot tall minaret at the WTC site. The pictures of Michelle and the kids in matching hijabs is probably what sent the brain hemorrhages into full on explosions, though.
You gotta hand it to him, though. It's one ballsy campaign strategy.
There are/were (whatever tense you are writing in) more instances of "I told you so" than heads exploding. Those admissions of the truth from the real Obama will unite the independents and conservatives to overwhelmingly defeat Obama.
. . .and people call me clairvoyant. :D
It may indeed be a good debate for President Obama. New videos are surfacing showing he's quite comfortable without a teleprompter.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/02/obama-speech-jeremiah-wright-new-orleans
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 03, 2012, 08:07:14 AM
Clair who?
(http://static.desktopnexus.com/thumbnails/547096-bigthumbnail.jpg)
Quote from: Gaspar on October 03, 2012, 07:06:40 AM
. . .and people call me clairvoyant. :D
It may indeed be a good debate for President Obama. New videos are surfacing showing he's quite comfortable without a teleprompter.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/02/obama-speech-jeremiah-wright-new-orleans
New video? This has been going around since the last campaign. Haha!
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/10/tucker-carlson-already-reported-tucker-carlson-exclusive/57539/#
Pivot! PIVOT!
On Eve Of First Debate, NPR Poll Shows Romney Within Striking Distancehttp://kwgs.com/post/eve-first-debate-npr-poll-shows-romney-within-striking-distance (http://kwgs.com/post/eve-first-debate-npr-poll-shows-romney-within-striking-distance)
QuoteThe latest poll by NPR and its bipartisan polling team [pdf] shows President Obama with a 7-point lead among likely voters nationally and a nearly identical lead of 6 points in the dozen battleground states where both campaigns are spending most of their time and money.
But the poll also finds former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney very much within striking distance of the incumbent as the two men begin a series of three debates Wednesday in Denver. More than 80 percent of respondents said they planned to watch the first televised clash Wednesday and one in four said the debate could influence their vote.
The poll found 51 percent of the likely voters planning on or leaning toward a vote for the president, with 44 percent voting for or leaning toward his challenger. In the battleground subsample, the numbers were 50 percent Obama and 44 percent Romney. Those numbers were slightly better for the president than his job approval rating in the poll. Nationally, the president was at 50 percent approval (46 percent disapproval), but in the battleground he was at 48 percent approval and 49 percent disapproval.
Battleground voters were also more downbeat about the direction of the country. Asked whether things were generally going in the right direction or "pretty seriously off on the wrong track," 59 percent in the battleground said wrong track and just 36 percent said right direction. That gap of 23 points was only 16 points on the same question in the national sample.
The poll of 800 likely voters was conducted over the final five days of September by Stan Greenberg of Democracy Corps and Whit Ayres of Resurgent Republic. About a third of those polled live in the 12 states considered in play for the Nov. 6 election: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.
Ayres, the Republican half of the team, noted that the actual electorate in November may not have as many Democrats as this NPR poll's likely voter sample, which he called "a best-case scenario" for the president's party.
"When you sample voters over time, you inevitably get varying proportions of Democrats and Republicans in the sample. It's nothing nefarious, just the vagaries of sampling," Ayres said. "This sample ended up with seven points more Democrats than Republicans. In 2008, there were seven points more Democrats than Republicans in the electorate, according to exit polls. But in 2004, there were equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans."
If this year's voters were to split evenly again between the two major parties, Romney would have an advantage. The NPR poll found him a 4-point favorite among independents.
Most observers expect this year's party ratio to be somewhere between the Democratic tilt of 2008 and the even split of 2004 (which recurred in the midterm elections of 2010). Greenberg, the Democratic member of the polling team, said polling this year has generally found fewer people self-identifying with the GOP.
"They're moving into the independent category," Greenberg said, "where also if you look at the brand position of the Republican Party and Democratic Party, the Republican Party favorability has been dropping throughout this whole period."
But while the ranks of independents are growing, that does not imply a large number of undecided voters with five weeks left to Election Day. The pollsters found only 2 percent calling themselves undecided. Moreover, only 11 percent of the president's supporters and 15 percent of Romney's said they might still change their minds.
"We have a very polarized electorate where people go to their tribal corners and fight it out," Ayres said. "But in an election this close, even a point or two could make a difference."
The poll indicates that the Republican challenger has a tall order to fill Wednesday night and in the remaining weeks, as he has fallen behind on issues such as taxes, the economy and Medicare.
Ayres said that means his party's nominee needs "to paint a compelling picture for a better economic future, and explain why his emphasis on small businesses and private sector solutions is more likely to succeed than Obama's emphasis on governmental and public sector solutions."
Ayres also noted that when his firm tested the statement "Obama's economic plan is working and we need to stay the course" versus the opposing option, "Obama's economic plan is not working and we need to try something different," the latter choice was easily the more popular. But when the statements were altered to emphasize Romney's video quotation about "the 47 percent who don't pay taxes," the results were different.
"That reinforces the argument that Obama cannot win a referendum on his economic record," Ayres added. "The only way he can win is to so thoroughly trash Romney that he becomes an unacceptable alternative."
The NPR poll, like others in recent weeks, showed half the electorate giving Romney an unfavorable personal approval rating. Ayres said that was the other imperative for Romney in the debates: "He needs to come across as knowledgeable and compassionate about people who are hurting in this economy. ... If he does that, then he will help to close this gap."
Democratic pollster Greenberg maintained that efforts to make the election a referendum on the economy had been under way for months and had yet to take hold. Nonetheless, he said, the president cannot afford to sit on his current lead.
"He's got to decide on one thing that he wants to communicate here," Greenberg said. "My guess is he'll want to communicate a presidential — but not arrogant — empathetic style. He's got to focus in a way that seals the deal."
Copyright 2012 National Public Radio. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/.
If Romney could just rally the Aryan Brotherhood...
Quote from: Conan71 on October 03, 2012, 09:58:19 AM
If Romney could just rally the Aryan Brotherhood...
(http://www.cinemablend.com/images/sections/20269/TV_Recap_20269.jpg)
How Politicians Get Away With Dodging The Questionhttp://www.npr.org/2012/10/03/162103368/how-politicians-get-away-with-dodging-the-question (http://www.npr.org/2012/10/03/162103368/how-politicians-get-away-with-dodging-the-question)
Quoterett O'Donnell is a debate consultant who trains Republican candidates. He has worked with George W. Bush and John McCain, and for a short time earlier this year, he helped prep Mitt Romney.
O'Donnell is an expert on "the pivot."
If you have watched a debate, you have watched a pivot. "The pivot is a way of taking a question that might be on a specific subject, and moving to answer it on your own terms," O'Donnell says.
Take, as just one small example, a moment from the 2004 debate between President George W. Bush and Sen. John Kerry.
You could, by the way, just as easily use an example from Kerry — both Bush and Kerry used pivots roughly the same amount of the time.
In this case, the moderator, Bob Schieffer of CBS News, asked President Bush about job loss. What, Schieffer wondered, would Bush say to someone who has lost his job? Bush began by promising to "continue to grow our economy" and then, subtly, changed course. Suddenly, Bush was talking about education, specifically his signature No Child Left Behind legislation. "I went to Washington to solve problems," he explained. "And I saw a problem in the public education system."
In two or three sentences, Bush had moved from a question about lack of jobs to an answer about education and a promise fulfilled. That is the power of the pivot. Which is why, in the age of debate coaches like O'Donnell, candidates in both parties use them all the time — "frequently," O'Donnell says, "better than 60 or 70 percent of the time, I would say."
The question is, how good are viewers at identifying these "pivots" — or, in the language of my people (journalists who ask questions), "dodges"?
How good are you?
There's a man at Harvard who actually has an answer to that question.
The Pivot And The Brain
Todd Rogers, a behavioral psychologist at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, got interested in looking at pivots, or dodges, or whatever you want to call them, after watching the 2004 Bush-Kerry debate I quoted earlier.
To him, the dodging on both sides of that debate was enraging, and he couldn't understand why others didn't feel the same.
To figure it out, he decided to do a study that tried to replicate what typical viewers see when they watch a debate.
He recorded a moderator asking candidates a series of questions.
In the first question, the moderator asked the candidates about health care in America, and the politician answered with a health care answer — a long disquisition on why Americans could not afford the care they needed.
Rogers then took that answer and used it as a response to a totally different moderator question, this one about the problem of illegal drug use. So one set of people saw a candidate answering a health care question with a health care answer, while another group saw an illegal-drug use question answered with a health care answer. Essentially, the second group saw a relatively subtle pivot, from drug use question to health care answer.
Finally, he had a third group view the moderator asking a question about terrorism, which was answered again with the exact same health care answer — a much more blatant shift.
At the end of this he asked the different groups two things:
Can you remember what question the person was asked?
How honest, likable and trustworthy is this person?
'Exploiting Our Cognitive Limitation'
What he found was that when a politician answered the health care question with a health care answer, viewers could recall the question and thought the candidate was likable, honest and trustworthy.
When the politician pivoted a little bit and answered the illegal drug question with a health care answer, viewers could not recall the question — but they didn't penalize the politician at all. "Listeners thought he was just as honest, trustworthy and likable as the guy who actually answered the question," Rogers says.
It was only when the politician answered the terrorism question with a health care answer that people could actually tell. "Everyone noticed, and they thought he was a jerk," Rogers says.
This led Rogers to the conclusion that people are capable of detecting dodges — but only if they're egregious. They don't seem capable of detecting subtle evasions.
Rogers believes this is because we have limited attention, and most of the time when we're watching debates, we spend that attention on social evaluation — Do we like this person? Do we trust this person? — and only generally monitor content.
It's only when the speaker is wildly inconsistent that some deep mental wire is tripped. "It raises some flags, and we direct our limited attention to assessing whether this person is doing something unusual by failing to answer the question and offering an egregiously different answer," Rogers says.
This, Rogers believes, is why politicians can get away with dodging questions as much as 70 percent of the time.
"Politicians," he says, "are exploiting our cognitive limitation without punishment."
Quote from: Townsend on October 03, 2012, 10:24:19 AM
How Politicians Get Away With Dodging The Question
http://www.npr.org/2012/10/03/162103368/how-politicians-get-away-with-dodging-the-question (http://www.npr.org/2012/10/03/162103368/how-politicians-get-away-with-dodging-the-question)
President Obama does this with 12 minute answers to simple questions. On CNN this morning they were talking about how difficult the debates may be for President Obama because he is limited to only a couple of minutes for an answer. This has always been a problem for him going back to the 2008 election. When he doen't have an answer he will talk until people get tired of listening, and sometimes people even think he has answered their question. That, or they faint. Whichever comes first. He doen't like to answer anything that he doesn't already have prepared remarks or a 2,500 word stump speech for.
I think this is one of the reasons that many in the media complained that he never stopped campaigning all through his first term.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/04/obamas-17-minute-12-second-answer-on-taxes/1#.UGxZ2_l25hY
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/04/06/obamas_17-minute_non-answer_answer_105059.html
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/04/04/wapo-headline-obamas-17-minute-2-500-word-response-womans-claim-being
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/08/20/obama_dodges_question_on_rising_health_care_costs_for_military.html
http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/06/obama-dodges-reporters-questions-solicits-them-from-political-donors/
Quote from: Gaspar on October 03, 2012, 10:34:56 AM
President Obama does this with 12 minute answers to simple questions. On CNN this morning they were talking about how difficult the debates may be for President Obama because he is limited to only a couple of minutes for an answer. This has always been a problem for him going back to the 2008 election. When he doen't have an answer he will talk until people get tired of listening, and sometimes people even think he has answered their question. That, or they faint. Whichever comes first. He doen't like to answer anything that he doesn't already have prepared remarks or a 2,500 word stump speech for.
The questions should be posted on screen and the moderator should force the debaters to answer.
I'd imagine we'd have very different candidates to choose from if this had been in practice over the last 30 years.
Quote from: Townsend on October 03, 2012, 10:52:48 AM
The questions should be posted on screen and the moderator should force the debaters to answer.
I'd imagine we'd have very different candidates to choose from if this had been in practice over the last 30 years.
I would love to see a debate like that!
Quote from: Gaspar on October 03, 2012, 02:05:41 PM
I would love to see a debate like that!
The embarrassments we've witnessed with a large group of candidates would've actually been helpful.
("Welp, he/she's out")
(http://www.philzone.org/discus/messages/439459/803877.jpg)
QuotePresidential debates are an integral part of a healthy democracy. Unfortunately, tonight's debate will be moderated and controlled by a private company which is stifling it. Since 1988, the Commission on Presidential Debates, created by the Republican and Democratic parties and funded by the largest corporations , has "exercised a monopoly over the presidential debates", including topics of debate and which candidates are included.
This year, the secret contract negotiated between the Romney and Obama campaigns and approved by the CPD has angered media watchdogs even more, after the CPD announced the unprecedented decision to share the topics of the debate with the candidates ahead of time.
18 pro-democracy groups have demanded the CPD begin a major overhaul and 2 corporate sponsors have pulled support for excluding third party candidates. Longtime watchdog George Farah, founder of Open Debates, explains:
"The Commission on Presidential Debates undermines our democracy. Because of the Commission's subservience to the Republican and Democratic campaigns, the presidential debates are structured to accommodate the wishes of risk-averse candidates, not voters."
Watch George Farah's interview on Democracy Now and learn how the debates have become 'a fraud perpetrated on the American people", as described by the League of Women Voters which moderated the three televised presidential debates prior to 1988.
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/3/ahead_of_first_obama_romney_debate
shot of tequila every time the word "socialist" comes up.... except for Conan. His word will be "class."
I love the debates. The back and forth arguing of both sides of the issues...and that is just Mitt Romney.
Quote from: Gaspar on October 03, 2012, 07:06:40 AM
http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/02/obama-speech-jeremiah-wright-new-orleans
Try the Daily Beast. Not everyone there has lost their mind.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on October 03, 2012, 03:40:43 PM
I love the debates. The back and forth arguing of both sides of the issues...and that is just Mitt Romney.
Mitten's big line tonight:
"You know Mr. President, if you lose to me you lose your job and get thrown out of your house."
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 03, 2012, 04:13:15 PM
Mitten's big line tonight:
"You know Mr. President, if you lose to me you lose your job and get thrown out of your house."
That would be rough, especially since the last guy he bought a house from in is jail.
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 03, 2012, 04:13:15 PM
Mitten's big line tonight:
"You know Mr. President, if you lose to me you lose your job and get thrown out of your house."
"Mr. President as someone who has fired thousands upon thousands of Americans, I'd like to fire you next!"
"If terrorists attack and kill, I will stay in Washington and do my job. I won't run to Las Vegas to party with Beyonce."
How about
"Excuse me, but do you really want to take credit for that statement? Or shall we blame your teleprompter?"
Quote from: Gaspar on October 03, 2012, 04:44:41 PM
"If terrorists attack and kill, I will stay in Washington and do my job. I won't run to Las Vegas to party with Beyonce."
If you really think that getting the Libyans to reject the extremism all on their own without bombs raining down on them from our war planes is a foreign policy failure, I don't even know what to tell you. Most countries do not appreciate it when we meddle. By standing back and giving them a chance to get things right on their own, we build more solid relationships for the future. I know you prefer Bush-style diplomacy, but perhaps one of these days you'll recognize what a failure it was.
"Never in my life have I EVER referred to the private sector as "the enemy."
"If I have an off mic comment for a Russian leader .. it will be to convey our strength, not my weakness."
"As President, I will not use taxpayer's money to bribe companies into breaking laws I approved of and voted for."
"I have not sought, nor would I accept the endorsement of Hugo Chavez."
"As president I would work to lower the number of poor Americans, not rich ones."
Freekin target rich environment.
Quote"I saw my father march with Martin Luther King." (Romney's campaign later admitted that they didn't march on the same day, or in the same city)
"My sons are all adults and they've made decisions about their careers and they've chosen not to serve in the military and active duty and I respect their decision in that regard. One of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping me get elected because they think I'd be a great president."
"You sit down with your attorneys and tell you what you have to do, but obviously the president of the United States has to do what's in the best interest of the United States against a potential threat." --on whether he would consult Congress about invading Iran
"I purchased a gun when I was a young man. I've been a hunter pretty much all my life." (Romney's campaign later said he'd been hunting twice, once when he was 15, and once in 2006 at a Republican fundraiser
and
"I'm not a big-game hunter. I've made that very clear. I've always been a rodent and rabbit hunter. Small varmints, if you will."
"Hugo Chavez has tried to steal an inspiring phrase 'Patria o muerte, venceremos.' It does not belong to him. It belongs to a free Cuba." --invoking a phrase that translates to "Fatherland or death, we shall overcome," which Fidel Castro has used to close his speeches for years, and which is associated with Cuban oppression
"Well, the question is kind of a non sequitur, if you will. And what I mean by that -- or a null set." --after being asked during a Republican debate whether is was a mistake to invade Iraq
"I'm happy to learn that after I speak you're going to hear from Ann Coulter. That's a good thing. I think it's important to get the views of moderates." --right before Coulter called John Edwards a "friendly fellow"
I don't have high hopes for either side.
(http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/q/h/4/paul-ryan-deserve-better.jpg)
(http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/z/c/4/romney-gaffe-tour.jpg)
Mitt got one thing right - he almost said that it is shameful for our generation to load our kids up with all this debt. Wish Baby Bush would have understood that.....
Gotta wonder how either of these guys got through high school. Mitt was going on about 90 billion of green subsidies being 50 times the 4 billion subsidy that big oil gets. Obama didn't correct him...
Well, we got to see Mitt's positions evolve once again and a few more of his famous factual inadequacies along with more of Obama's famous professor professor routine. What fun that was.
Big claims about Massachusetts having the best schools in the nation.... I bet the top 45 ahead of them would be somewhat surprised by that...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/05/20/america-s-best-high-schools.html
Quote from: nathanm on October 03, 2012, 09:37:33 PM
Well, we got to see Mitt's positions evolve once again and a few more of his famous factual inadequacies along with more of Obama's famous professor professor routine. What fun that was.
They both delivered about what I expected. Romney driving home his $716 billion dollar meme, telling people he loves coal AND green energy
The prez? He was pretty underwhelming tonight.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 03, 2012, 09:28:03 PM
Gotta wonder how either of these guys got through high school. Mitt was going on about 90 billion of green subsidies being 50 times the 4 billion subsidy that big oil gets. Obama didn't correct him...
Math is not Obama's strong suite either.
Quote from: Hoss on October 03, 2012, 09:59:50 PM
telling people he loves coal AND green energy
I don't see coal, petroleum, and green energy as mutually exclusive. Maybe some day when you and I are both long gone we won't need coal and petroleum but until then we need all three.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 03, 2012, 09:40:37 PM
Big claims about Massachusetts having the best schools in the nation.... I bet the top 45 ahead of them would be somewhat surprised by that...
You have a link to someone actually ranking schools by the states rather than just individual High Schools? I'm not going to spend the time going through 1000 schools and doing the analysis.
The link you provided seems to be based exclusively on preparing kids for college. Not everyone wants or needs to go to "college". Not getting further education is foolish but VoTechs etc are often not considered "college". One friend told me several years ago that his two sons were NOT going to college. They went to Okmulgee Tech to become auto mechanics. I think the second son did eventually decide to go to college and become an engineer. I haven't kept up with his progress.
If you post a link, it really ought to support your statement referring to it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manure
Quote from: Townsend on October 03, 2012, 05:00:22 PM
(http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/q/h/4/paul-ryan-deserve-better.jpg)
After tonight's debate you might replace Ryan with Obama and that would be a perfect headline.
Quote from: nathanm on October 03, 2012, 09:37:33 PM
Well, we got to see Mitt's positions evolve once again and a few more of his famous factual inadequacies along with more of Obama's famous professor professor routine. What fun that was.
Obama had a few inaccuracies too. I didn't see Obama as so professorial as you apparently did. But then, I went to engineering school and only had to put up with one or maybe two classes per semester from the non-engineering or non-science community. That must be how the liberal side of colleges convert so many students, constant indoctrination of inaccurate "facts".
Quote from: Hoss on October 03, 2012, 10:39:27 PM
After tonight's debate you might replace Ryan with Obama and that would be a perfect headline.
I believe you have stated in the past that you are not particularly enthused with either candidate. Did tonight's debate reinforce that opinion?
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 03, 2012, 10:45:30 PM
Obama had a few inaccuracies too.
Sure, in the sense that when Obama talked about Romney's plans, Romney's response was "that's not my plan any more". His criticisms were still factually accurate with regard to what Romney maintained up until tonight.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 03, 2012, 10:45:30 PM
Obama had a few inaccuracies too. I didn't see Obama as so professorial as you apparently did. But then, I went to engineering school and only had to put up with one or maybe two classes per semester from the non-engineering or non-science community. That must be how the liberal side of colleges convert so many students, constant indoctrination of inaccurate "facts".
(https://twimg0-a.akamaihd.net/profile_images/2563015037/kpsrcm2jsmgixlw8s88t.png)
Quote from: nathanm on October 03, 2012, 10:53:50 PM
Sure, in the sense that when Obama talked about Romney's plans, Romney's response was "that's not my plan any more". His criticisms were still factually accurate with regard to what Romney maintained up until tonight.
Feel free to add any words you want.
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 03, 2012, 10:54:40 PM
(https://twimg0-a.akamaihd.net/profile_images/2563015037/kpsrcm2jsmgixlw8s88t.png)
I know they got you a L O N G time ago. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. You should have fought back. The Force would have been with you.
Sorry, "that's not my plan [any more]." The [any more] is implied by his plan suddenly not being the plan he has been touting for the last several months. Presumably. Either that or Romney was lying, but surely that wasn't the gambit.
Quote from: nathanm on October 03, 2012, 11:04:06 PM
Sorry, "that's not my plan [any more]." The [any more] is implied by his plan suddenly not being the plan he has been touting for the last several months. Presumably. Either that or Romney was lying, but surely that wasn't the gambit.
If you insist. (But you can guess I don't really agree.)
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 03, 2012, 11:00:31 PM
I know they got you a L O N G time ago. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. You should have fought back. The Force would have been with you.
(http://www.philzone.org/discus/messages/439459/803571.jpg) ;)
You know bottom line, it does not matter what we think of the debate here in Oklahoma. Our Electoral Votes will go to Mitt Romney that is a 100% certainly.
What I'm interested in is what the so called swing states thought. Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, Ohio. The people in those states will decide this election.
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 03, 2012, 11:08:34 PM
(http://www.philzone.org/discus/messages/439459/803571.jpg) ;)
I'll pass on the paste. You can have all you want.
Here's how dooshbag Maher saw tonight:
(http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/mah.jpg)
Tingles loses his religion:
I probably would have seen that, too, if I hadn't been too busy taking a shot for each statement that came out of Romney's mouth with a deficit of truth.
In other news, we learned Romney likes regulation and Jim Lehrer, and that Obama subscribes to the "everybody gets a trophy" philosophy.
Quote from: guido911 on October 03, 2012, 11:24:56 PM
Here's how dooshbag Maher saw tonight:
(http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/mah.jpg)
Tingles loses his religion:
Mr. Ad-Hominem...to the rescue!
(http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/269068_421085657953110_1926249032_n.jpg)o
All I'm going to say on it tonight
(http://i1.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/011/436/hswaTcZ8.jpg)
Quote from: custosnox on October 04, 2012, 12:15:40 AM
(http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/269068_421085657953110_1926249032_n.jpg)o
All I'm going to say on it tonight
Neil..smart guy. Kinda quirky.
Oh and cust, finally did see Avengers last week (bought the blu-ray blind). Good movie. Like the avatar.
Quote from: Hoss on October 04, 2012, 12:30:18 AM
Neil..smart guy. Kinda quirky.
Oh and cust, finally did see Avengers last week (bought the blu-ray blind). Good movie. Like the avatar.
Love Neil, would write him in the ballet if I could
Glad you enjoyed it, I bought the blu-ray too. Maybe I should take the time to do a higher quality gif now instead of the one from a cam I had to grab to make it after seeing it in the theater.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 03, 2012, 10:35:49 PM
If you post a link, it really ought to support your statement referring to it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manure
Sooooo...your link is the support to the fact that your posts are a load of carp...?? (Sorry...just couldn't resist...)
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 03, 2012, 10:24:16 PM
Math is not Obama's strong suite either.
That's exactly what half that post was about....neither one of them has enough brains think his way out of a brown paper bag....
It's one of those "if brains were dynamite, they couldn't blow their nose..." things.
That's the engineer-centric view, but not surprisingly, very accurate. Bumper sticker: Have you hugged an engineer today?
Quote from: nathanm on October 03, 2012, 11:04:06 PM
Sorry, "that's not my plan [any more]." The [any more] is implied by his plan suddenly not being the plan he has been touting for the last several months. Presumably. Either that or Romney was lying, but surely that wasn't the gambit.
Red understood exactly what you meant - he's just being contrary.
Quote from: GG on October 03, 2012, 11:09:43 PM
You know bottom line, it does not matter what we think of the debate here in Oklahoma. Our Electoral Votes will go to Mitt Romney that is a 100% certainly.
What I'm interested in is what the so called swing states thought. Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, Ohio. The people in those states will decide this election.
You'd think Oklahoma was a swing state if you only read this forum... :P
Romney debated an empty chair last night.
Poor President Obama had nothing to offer. Nothing new, but sound bites he was fed. Unfortunately for him, Romney was well practiced at Axelrodisms.
The Washington Times offers an interesting account:
Bewildered and lost without his teleprompter, President Obama flailed all around the debate stage last night. He was stuttering, nervous and petulant. It was like he had been called in front of the principal after goofing around for four years and blowing off all his homework.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/3/hurt-obama-debater-making-jimmy-carter-look-awesom/
. . .and this from Bill Maher: "Obama made a lot of great points tonight. Unfortunately, most of them were for Romney."
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 04, 2012, 01:54:19 AM
Sooooo...your link is the support to the fact that your posts are a load of carp...?? (Sorry...just couldn't resist...)
No, of course. My first thought was to post a completely unrelated link to either of our posts to demonstrate how disconnected you are but then moved more toward the horse$hit that your link was. I decided to tone it down a bit.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 04, 2012, 02:04:12 AM
Red understood exactly what you meant - he's just being contrary.
Contrary to the concept of adding words and then repeating it frequently enough that it becomes the "truth".
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 04, 2012, 01:58:20 AM
That's exactly what half that post was about....neither one of them has enough brains think his way out of a brown paper bag....
It's one of those "if brains were dynamite, they couldn't blow their nose..." things.
That's the engineer-centric view, but not surprisingly, very accurate. Bumper sticker: Have you hugged an engineer today?
Unfortunately, I also find
your manipulation of numbers to be somewhat less than rigorous at times.
I liked the. I have five children. And they think if they say the same thing over and over again, That I will begin to believe it.
I think President Obama had his Jimmy Carter moment last night. After all the cheap shots, smears, and half (and less) truths coming from the Obama campaign and all the PAC's, people can finally see how their "leader" stacks up to Romney.
Romney did a very good job of contrasting what leadership and celebrity look like side-by-side.
From what I've heard so far this morning, Romney got a huge bump with the undecideds in the swing states.
While a bit surprised the President took the high road and didn't mention Romney's weakest points (47%, Bain, etc.), I'll wait to call the whole debate battle until after the next two.
I'm guessing the puppet masters will ensure more practice by Obama before the next one. Possibly some suggestions to come out swinging.
I'll agree with someone I heard this morning. No reliable polling will be available for another day or two.
Obama got thrown off his game when Mitt came out with. Mitt basically took Obama's positions before he could and anything negative about his plans were no longer his plans. Its like crapping on the rug with everybody watching and then saying its not yours.
1) Rich people don't need tax cuts and WON'T get any.
2) His tax plan of cutting income taxes by 20% thus causing 5 trillion in lost revenue over 10 years isn't really his tax plan anymore (just touted by Ryan as the plan http://video.foxnews.com/v/1869261696001/exclusive-paul-ryan-on-fox-news-sunday/ (http://video.foxnews.com/v/1869261696001/exclusive-paul-ryan-on-fox-news-sunday/))
3) He wants to repeal Obamacare, then he only wants to repeal some of obamacare. Although he didn't really say he had a problem with any of it other than cutting the Medicare payouts to doctors.
4) lied about covering pre-existing conditions, he wants the states to do that.
5) Romney no longer wants to increase the defense budget to 4% of GDP (the $2 trillion increase over, i belive, 10 years) http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-29/romney-s-defense-budget-growth-tops-cold-war-pace-bgov-insight (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-29/romney-s-defense-budget-growth-tops-cold-war-pace-bgov-insight)
I liked how Romney said his tax cut will be "revenue neutral". He didn't say when it would be revenue neutral though. Of course he has no real specifics. His tax cut might increase the deficit from year 1 to 490 but year 490 to 500 we will make it all back!
Quote from: CharlieSheen on October 04, 2012, 10:39:07 AM
I liked how Romney said his tax cut will be "revenue neutral". He didn't say when it would be revenue neutral though. Of course he has no real specifics. His tax cut might increase the deficit from year 1 to 490 but year 490 to 500 we will make it all back!
Sounds about like all the unknowns and lack of specificity in Obamacare as of today.
It was the altitude's fault.
I once had to give a speech in Breckenridge (9600 feet) and the altitude clearly affected me. I couldn't think straight and appeared lost (very similar to Obama last night).
Of course, Denver is only half that high and shouldn't have had the same effect.
I think Obama was stunned by Romney's answers. They were totally different than what Mitt has been saying this summer and it caught Obama off-guard. Romney also started aggresive and I think Obama thought it would be better to stay respectful and civil than to fight back. It proved to be a bad strategy last night.
The real winners were the press corps and political pundits. They now have a reason to stay on the campaign trail and be relevant. They are the ones who want it to be a close race until the end.
The obligatory fact checking of the debate:
Wa-Po
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/factchecking-the-first-presidential-debate-of-2012/2012/10/04/9d47934e-0d66-11e2-bb5e-492c0d30bff6_blog.html
The Prez's hometown rag:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-potus-debate-fact-check-20121004,0,5248662.story
Politifart:
http://www.politifact.com
Just that one thing...
(http://www.nypost.com/r/nypost/2012/10/04/news/web_photos/Untitled-1010247--525x415.jpg)
Quote from: Townsend on October 04, 2012, 10:35:21 AM
I'll agree with someone I heard this morning. No reliable polling will be available for another day or two.
I expect the polling would be quicker and more reliable if Obama had decisively obliterated Romney.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on October 04, 2012, 11:54:29 AM
I once had to give a speech in Breckenridge (9600 feet) and the altitude clearly affected me. I couldn't think straight and appeared lost (very similar to Obama last night).
I love Breckenridge. As for altitude, I feel that pain. I got off a plane at 4:00 p.m. in Denver, drove to Keystone and was on Schoolmarm within hours. Altitude sickness kicked in and I was wiped out for 24 hours.
Quote from: Townsend on October 04, 2012, 10:35:21 AM
No reliable polling will be available for another day or two.
"reliable polling". You are kidding; correct?
Quote from: guido911 on October 04, 2012, 12:52:52 PM
"reliable polling". You are kidding; correct?
I think if you look at enough polling you may get a feel for something.
If you look at one with a sample of 300 over a land line, then it won't work.
Quote from: Townsend on October 04, 2012, 01:06:21 PM
I think if you look at enough polling you may get a feel for something.
If you look at one with a sample of 300 over a land line, then it won't work.
Especially if they're all southern states...wait, what?
Quote from: Townsend on October 04, 2012, 01:06:21 PM
I think if you look at enough polling you may get a feel for something.
If you look at one with a sample of 300 over a land line, then it won't work.
You know I hate polls. That's all I was getting at.
Gwee-doh, you hate too much.
QuoteA fired-up Obama today at a post-debate rally: "Now, last night, we had our first debate. And when I got on stage, I met a very spirited fellow who claimed to be Mitt Romney. But it couldn't have been Mitt Romney -- because the real Mitt Romney has been running around the country for the last year promising $5 trillion in tax cuts that favor the wealthy. But the fellow on stage last night said he didn't know anything about that."
Perfecto....set up.
Quote from: guido911 on October 04, 2012, 11:41:54 AM
It was the altitude's fault.
I find that entertaining since the president spends several hours a week on Airforce one at or above 30,000 ft. The corrected air pressure in the cabin of an airliner is around 6,500 - 7,000 feet depending. So basically President Obama can blame the last 4 years on altitude sickness.
Al Gore is a treasure, almost as good as Special Joe.
Congratulations to you Mr. Romney, you proved you don't actually need to have any principles or plans to be a Republican candidate for President. Surprisingly, your supporters don't even mind!
Quote from: nathanm on October 04, 2012, 03:02:03 PM
Congratulations to you Mr. Romney, you proved you don't actually need to have any principles or plans to be a Republican candidate for President. Surprisingly, your supporters don't even mind!
According to the various fact checkers neither does his opponent.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 04, 2012, 03:41:22 PM
According to the various fact checkers neither does his opponent.
If you say so.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 04, 2012, 12:44:13 PM
I expect the polling would be quicker and more reliable if Obama had decisively obliterated Romney.
Nate Silver reported the widely disseminated CNN 'instant' poll that said 67% said Romney won the debate, yet he's careful enough to point out that we'll learn more about the debate's impact as polls are taken over the next couple of days.
My take: The president could have been more effective and animated, but as the front runner, he had to avoid gaffes and mistakes rather than be seen as aggressive and arrogant. His performance was defensive. Romney, on the other hand, decidedly appeared animated and engaged, but when you look at what he said, there's not much of substance.
When any politician on either side of the aisle says, "Trust me!" it's time to grab your wallet and run - do not walk - to the door. We all know that the large print giveth and the small print taketh away. Mitt is print writ large, absent those critical details.
Quote from: Ed W on October 04, 2012, 05:40:53 PM
When any politician on either side of the aisle says, "Trust me!" it's time to grab your wallet and run - do not walk - to the door. We all know that the large print giveth and the small print taketh away. Mitt is print writ large, absent those critical details.
I was thinking about Mitt's lack of details earlier and it struck me as odd that the people who cry that "uncertainty" in Obama's policies is holding back the economy. Isn't there a lot of uncertainty associated with Romney's policy proposals? After all, they lack details such as whether or not the mortgage interest deduction will go away or what he plans to replace Obamacare with or how his Medicare "reform" will work. Yet another example of people completely unable to think straight, I guess.
Quote from: nathanm on October 04, 2012, 06:32:11 PM
I was thinking about Mitt's lack of details earlier and it struck me as odd that the people who cry that "uncertainty" in Obama's policies is holding back the economy. Isn't there a lot of uncertainty associated with Romney's policy proposals? After all, they lack details such as whether or not the mortgage interest deduction will go away or what he plans to replace Obamacare with or how his Medicare "reform" will work. Yet another example of people completely unable to think straight, I guess.
You weren't (apparently) guessing earlier when you seemed to know exactly what Romney's tax plan was.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 04, 2012, 06:43:36 PM
You weren't (apparently) guessing earlier when you seemed to know exactly what Romney's tax plan was.
I have never claimed to know exactly what Romney's tax plan is. That would be hard, given that he doesn't apparently know (or refuses to share).
Andrea Mitchell making an absolute @ss out of herself. Seriously, asking a Romney surrogate to "take back" calling, oh my gosh, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES....lazy. Sheesh.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 04, 2012, 07:41:52 AM
Contrary Adhering to the concept of adding words and then repeating it frequently enough that it becomes the "truth".
Quote from: guido911 on October 04, 2012, 07:00:23 PM
Andrea Mitchell making an absolute @ss out of herself. Seriously, asking a Romney surrogate to "take back" calling, oh my gosh, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES....lazy. Sheesh.
I guess you are too young to remember John Sununu. George H W Bush's Chief of Staff. He was the guy that Baby Bush finally had fired for taking massive amounts of personal trips (ski vacations in Colorado...) on military jets and not paying for them. (Using resources that W wanted maybe??)
Leaked rumors about financial problems in his family, then took a government limo to New York from Washington to attend a rare stamp auction - spending $5000 on rare stamps. After the auction, sent the limo back empty while he traveled back in a corporate jet.
The voice of credibility....
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 04, 2012, 07:03:32 PM
Contrary Adhering to the concept of adding words and then repeating it frequently enough that it becomes the "truth".
Nathan was the one adding words, not me.
You must be in Denver and suffering from altitude sickness.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 04, 2012, 07:41:01 PM
Nathan was the one adding words, not me.
You must be in Denver and suffering from altitude sickness.
OKC right now. It's that rarified atmosphere here in the Holy Land of Oklahoma....
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 04, 2012, 07:50:49 PM
OKC right now. It's that rarified atmosphere here in the Holy Land of Oklahoma....
Holy Land air or not, if you are having difficulties in OKC (regarding the quantity of oxygen in the air) you need to see a doctor. You probably need a few more red blood cells. :D
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 04, 2012, 08:08:12 PM
Holy Land air or not, if you are having difficulties in OKC (regarding the quantity of oxygen in the air) you need to see a doctor. You probably need a few more red blood cells. :D
Lot's of O. Not much anything else of interest....always glad to get back home after these little adventures.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 04, 2012, 07:25:35 PM
I guess you are too young to remember John Sununu. George H W Bush's Chief of Staff. He was the guy that Baby Bush finally had fired for taking massive amounts of personal trips (ski vacations in Colorado...) on military jets and not paying for them. (Using resources that W wanted maybe??)
Leaked rumors about financial problems in his family, then took a government limo to New York from Washington to attend a rare stamp auction - spending $5000 on rare stamps. After the auction, sent the limo back empty while he traveled back in a corporate jet.
The voice of credibility....
Well I guess all of that dirt under Sununu's nails justifies the unbiased, objective Andrea Mitchell's outrage over someone calling a president lazy. I mean, the nerve of that guy showing that level of disrespect, contempt, and irreverence to the boy king. Here she is dissing Bush and stroking Obama at the same time.
This encapsulates the problem with Romney's debate performance, leaving aside the continued difficulty with the truth, anyway:
(http://blog.chron.com/nickanderson/files/2012/10/and100512blog-600x446.jpg)
Quote from: Ed W on October 04, 2012, 05:40:53 PM
When any politician on either side of the aisle says, "Trust me!" it's time to grab your wallet and run - do not walk - to the door. We all know that the large print giveth and the small print taketh away. Mitt is print writ large, absent those critical details.
Whenever I hear "Trust Me" this immediately comes to mind.........
Quote from: guido911 on October 04, 2012, 08:54:46 PM
Well I guess all of that dirt under Sununu's nails justifies the unbiased, objective Andrea Mitchell's outrage over someone calling a president lazy. I mean, the nerve of that guy showing that level of disrespect, contempt, and irreverence to the boy king. Here she is dissing Bush and stroking Obama at the same time.
Goes to the point of living in a glass house and throwing stones...he's got less than NO room to talk. If he is going to anyway, well then people should have the frame of reference from whence he comes (it's called balance...something unknown in Foxland).
Nice try to deflect, though. You got the Murdochian Method down pat.
President Obama spoke for several more minutes than Romney. Here's how he spent one of those minutes covering the issues important to him. http://themorningspew.com/2012/10/04/important-obama-debate-highlights/
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 04, 2012, 07:25:35 PM
I guess you are too young to remember John Sununu. George H W Bush's Chief of Staff. He was the guy that Baby Bush finally had fired for taking massive amounts of personal trips (ski vacations in Colorado...) on military jets and not paying for them. (Using resources that W wanted maybe??)
Leaked rumors about financial problems in his family, then took a government limo to New York from Washington to attend a rare stamp auction - spending $5000 on rare stamps. After the auction, sent the limo back empty while he traveled back in a corporate jet.
The voice of credibility....
I submit that the current president has wasted far more on superfluous travel while purporting to being in touch with the suffering middle class and claiming he was going to cut deficits in half.
This might be the funniest thing I'll see all day. LOL.
(http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/terminal05/2012/10/5/10/enhanced-buzz-17437-1349446726-2.jpg)
Quote from: nathanm on October 04, 2012, 06:32:11 PM
I was thinking about Mitt's lack of details earlier and it struck me as odd that the people who cry that "uncertainty" in Obama's policies is holding back the economy. Isn't there a lot of uncertainty associated with Romney's policy proposals? After all, they lack details such as whether or not the mortgage interest deduction will go away or what he plans to replace Obamacare with or how his Medicare "reform" will work. Yet another example of people completely unable to think straight, I guess.
Obama hasn't been terribly specific either. He's never raised taxes on the rich, he just likes using the wealthy as a bogeyman to fool the middle and underclass into believing that he's their ally. I've never seen any evidence Obama consorts with anyone other than the wealthy and famous. Is he going to raise taxes on the wealthy if he's re-elected or isn't he? Is he going to hit oil companies with more taxes and onerous regulations to try and benefit green energy or isn't he? No one will fully know the costs of Obamacare until all of it is in effect. Even the CBO realizes it is a moving target. Does Obama have a jobs plan or doesn't he? Where's the specifics and don't cite the pile "jobs act" as a specific jobs plan, it's not.
His jobs plan he trotted out in Dec. of '08 hasn't turned the jobs picture around, it's the typical raft of government spending meant to benefit his supporters:
Quote
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16258.html
—ENERGY: "[W]e will launch a massive effort to make public buildings more energy-efficient. Our government now pays the highest energy bill in the world. We need to change that. We need to upgrade our federal buildings by replacing old heating systems and installing efficient light bulbs. That won't just save you, the American taxpayer, billions of dollars each year. It will put people back to work."
—ROADS AND BRIDGES: "[W]e will create millions of jobs by making the single largest new investment in our national infrastructure since the creation of the federal highway system in the 1950s. We'll invest your precious tax dollars in new and smarter ways, and we'll set a simple rule – use it or lose it. If a state doesn't act quickly to invest in roads and bridges in their communities, they'll lose the money."
—SCHOOLS: "[M]y economic recovery plan will launch the most sweeping effort to modernize and upgrade school buildings that this country has ever seen. We will repair broken schools, make them energy-efficient, and put new computers in our classrooms. Because to help our children compete in a 21st century economy, we need to send them to 21st century schools."
—BROADBAND: "As we renew our schools and highways, we'll also renew our information superhighway. It is unacceptable that the United States ranks 15th in the world in broadband adoption. Here, in the country that invented the Internet, every child should have the chance to get online, and they'll get that chance when I'm president – because that's how we'll strengthen America's competitiveness in the world."
—ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS: "In addition to connecting our libraries and schools to the Internet, we must also ensure that our hospitals are connected to each other through the Internet. That is why the economic recovery plan I'm proposing will help modernize our health care system – and that won't just save jobs, it will save lives. We will make sure that every doctor's office and hospital in this country is using cutting edge technology and electronic medical records so that we can cut red tape, prevent medical mistakes, and help save billions of dollars each year."
Regardless of what you believe from using FRED charts as a crutch, the threat of:
-Higher taxes
-Higher payroll costs (Obamacare)
-More regulation
are an anathema to the creation of new jobs to small business. These are the business owners who are more prone to hold off on hiring in what they consider an uncertain environment, real or imagined. Large corporations like IBM or Ford fluctuate their payroll based on demand, not emotion. Only problem is large corporations don't employ the majority of the adult workforce in our country.
Wealthy small business owners who pay quite a bit in payroll tax, property tax, income tax, etc. don't respond well to rhetoric telling them they don't contribute enough. That is something Obama has never realized: you cannot bash a huge percentage of American job creators as ungrateful takers when they create the majority of the jobs in our country. I really don't understand why that doesn't resonate with people like you. You work with small business people on a regular basis as do I. I listen to what they tell me their concerns are in the current environment so I don't pull this out of my exit.
Here's Romney's plan:
Quotehttp://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,7556272.story
Achieve North American energy independence by increasing access to domestic fossil fuels, streamlining regulations and the permitting process, drilling offshore and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and approving the Keystone oil pipeline from Canada. "No. 1, we're going to take advantage of our energy, and that's going to create millions of jobs."
Improve education and job training, in part by increasing school choice and changing the way teachers are hired and evaluated. "We've got fix our schools.... It's time for us to put the kids and the parents and the teachers first, and the teachers union behind."
Curtail unfair trade practices, especially those of China. "I will call China a currency manipulator and stop them in their tracks from killing American jobs."
Cut the federal deficit by reducing federal spending below 20% of GDP. "You're not going to get entrepreneurs to go out and start an enterprise ... unless they realize we're not headed to Greece."
Champion small business by cutting taxes and regulations, and by overturning Obamacare. "We need small business to grow. ... Small businesses have been crushed these past four years."
See the contrast?
Quote from: Conan71 on October 05, 2012, 09:56:23 AM
That is something Obama has never realized: you cannot bash a huge percentage of American job creators as ungrateful takers when they create the majority of the jobs in our country.
And yet, according to the MurdochianBizzroWorldLackOfNews organization, not only have jobs not been created but are being lost at record rates. So raising taxes won't make a difference to job creation, since these alleged "job creators" aren't doing their job to start with. So if they aren't gonna do their job, they can still make a contribution by paying a couple extra dollars in tax.
But of course, jobs are being created, but just at too slow a pace (still...+200,000 is much better than -800,000). And not due to any kind of uncertainty, but due to the fact that so many of them are no longer here, but in the Pacific rim. The slow pace we see now if due to what is left in this country of the job creation machine.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 05, 2012, 11:40:43 AM
And yet, according to the MurdochianBizzroWorldLackOfNews organization, not only have jobs not been created but are being lost at record rates. So raising taxes won't make a difference to job creation, since these alleged "job creators" aren't doing their job to start with. So if they aren't gonna do their job, they can still make a contribution by paying a couple extra dollars in tax.
But of course, jobs are being created, but just at too slow a pace (still...+200,000 is much better than -800,000). And not due to any kind of uncertainty, but due to the fact that so many of them are no longer here, but in the Pacific rim. The slow pace we see now if due to what is left in this country of the job creation machine.
You don't get it either, apparently.
I have never seen so many adults fixated on big bird. You want PBS, you can have it. Just frequent their advertisers just like any other tv network has to. If you folks want big bird, he'll be around in the same manner as spongebob or scooby.
Quote from: guido911 on October 05, 2012, 01:51:12 PM
I have never seen so many adults fixated on big bird. You want PBS, you can have it. Just frequent their advertisers just like any other tv network has to. If you folks want big bird, he'll be around in the same manner as spongebob or scooby.
I'd rather not have 100% of my news chosen by Nabisco.
http://www.nextgenjournal.com/2012/10/the-case-for-keeping-pbs/ (http://www.nextgenjournal.com/2012/10/the-case-for-keeping-pbs/)
QuoteRomney sees the subsidy to PBS from a business angle, not a news one. PBS is currently one of the only channels on television that provides programming with limited commercial interruptions. PBS' "NewsHour" is highly regarded as one of the best news sources around because of its in-depth analysis, innovative news angles and hard-hitting stories. You'd be hard pressed to find another news show on television that gives you a straight hour of news, without a company trying to sell you something every 10 to 15 minutes.
And the main reason PBS is able to do so is because it's not dependent on ad revenue to sustain itself. The government subsidy and private donations work together to make PBS the only network that is insulated from the ratings-obsessed corporate culture that is the news industry. PBS can provide in-depth news coverage and can showcase programming like "Frontline" and "NewsHour" because it's not forced to cater to advertisers and, in turn, it's not forced to play the ratings game. By pushing to eliminate the subsidy, Romney is pushing to eliminate that very independence. In fact, Romney himself has claimed that PBS could use a few more commercials.
Higher taxes are inevitable regardless of who gets elected.
Remember the last president put (not one but) two wars on credit.
Every president before him knew you had to raise taxes to go to war, but someone figured out a way to make it someone else's problem.
The lack of a teleprompter was apparently the problem.
http://landing.newsinc.com/shared/video.html?freewheel=69016&sitesection=breitbart&VID=23834113
Quote from: Townsend on October 05, 2012, 01:57:09 PM
I'd rather not have 100% of my news chosen by Nabisco.
http://www.nextgenjournal.com/2012/10/the-case-for-keeping-pbs/ (http://www.nextgenjournal.com/2012/10/the-case-for-keeping-pbs/)
What do you have against these:
(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSrzT9U_eFaQfQojJoiPDNbis5iRA-5ylZ0aqyX-dJO_iz-dHa4)
As for your link, here is a passage from nextgenjournal's "about" page:
QuoteNextGen Journal is the website for the 'next generation'- our generation. Run by a nationwide team of college students, NGJ features focused reporting, sharp insight & analysis, timely music and sports coverage, and more. Above all, though, we aim to engage our generation, showcase our voices and opinions on topics that are relevant to us, and bring those voices into the national conversation.
http://www.nextgenjournal.com/about/
The opinions from a bunch of college kids means less than little to me. Besides, if I want news, there is so much out there in cable, internet, and whatever. I do not see a need to drop $400M on PBS when we need to look at spending cuts.
The only disturbing thing I see coming is that after the landslide, your kind will still be out there hammering away with ridiculousness instead of moving forward.
Quote from: guido911 on October 05, 2012, 02:07:02 PM
What do you have against these:
(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSrzT9U_eFaQfQojJoiPDNbis5iRA-5ylZ0aqyX-dJO_iz-dHa4)
As for your link, here is a passage from nextgenjournal's "about" page:
http://www.nextgenjournal.com/about/
The opinions from a bunch of college kids means less than little to me. Besides, if I want news, there is so much out there in cable, internet, and whatever. I do not see a need to drop $400M on PBS when we need to look at spending cuts.
Those look delicious.
As for my link, you watch Fox?
I see a much bigger need to drop $400M on PBS than on outdated text books, for profit education, and funding for coal.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 05, 2012, 12:04:51 PM
You don't get it either, apparently.
Unfortunately for the Murdochian, I do get it. Along with the other 47%....
"Wealthy small business owners who pay quite a bit in payroll tax, property tax, income tax, etc. don't respond well to rhetoric telling them they don't contribute enough."
Cmon Conan.. Its all about money. They aren't hiring cause their feelings are hurt. Also if they aren't meeting the demand required of their customers then somebody else will fill the need.
Quote from: Townsend on October 05, 2012, 02:15:54 PM
Those look delicious.
As for my link, you watch Fox?
You think I would, but I rarely watch anything other than food network, travel channel, and sports. That's it.
Quote from: CharlieSheen on October 05, 2012, 03:15:08 PM
"Wealthy small business owners who pay quite a bit in payroll tax, property tax, income tax, etc. don't respond well to rhetoric telling them they don't contribute enough."
Cmon Conan.. Its all about money. They aren't hiring cause their feelings are hurt. Also if they aren't meeting the demand required of their customers then somebody else will fill the need.
Nobody said their feelings are hurt. You obviously don't understand the concept of a hostile business or regulatory environment in the mind of a small business owner.
My company, like many others in the energy and construction segments, is quite busy right now and we are more than taking care of demand of our customers. They simply wait longer for projects to be finished these days. The owner won't hire anyone else until after the November election and we aren't doing any major capital spending right now in case the economy falls back off a cliff or if the tax situation changes.
Start a company and employ 25 to 50 people then I think you will get it.
Quote from: guido911 on October 05, 2012, 04:06:29 PM
You think I would, but I rarely watch anything other than food network, travel channel, and sports. That's it.
It's funny, I think about the only people who watch Fox are liberals. I never hear what's on Fox from my uber conservative friends, just the liberal leaning ones.
Quote from: guido911 on October 05, 2012, 04:06:29 PM
You think I would, but I rarely watch anything other than food network, travel channel, and sports. That's it.
Kudos. Travel Channel is rife with commies though.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 05, 2012, 04:14:42 PM
I never hear what's on Fox from my uber conservative friends,
That's because they don't say "on Fox I saw...". They say "on the news, some say...".
Quote from: Townsend on October 05, 2012, 04:15:09 PM
Kudos. Travel Channel is rife with commies though.
Bunch of libs on Food Network, but boy they sure can cook!
Quote from: Conan71 on October 05, 2012, 09:56:23 AM
Regardless of what you believe from using FRED charts as a crutch, the threat of:
-Higher taxes
-Higher payroll costs (Obamacare)
-More regulation
are an anathema to the creation of new jobs to small business. These are the business owners who are more prone to hold off on hiring in what they consider an uncertain environment, real or imagined.
Funny how uncertainty isn't uncertainty if it's caused by Romney. How surprising.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on October 05, 2012, 02:34:24 PM
Unfortunately for the Murdochian, I do get it. Along with the other 47%....
At least you think you do.
Quote from: nathanm on October 05, 2012, 04:42:53 PM
Funny how uncertainty isn't uncertainty if it's caused by Romney. How surprising.
Depends on what the perceived uncertainties are. If there are multiple acceptable alternatives, no one cares about the uncertainty. If some of the alternatives are unacceptable, then people start caring. What is acceptable or not is what makes politics such a hot spot.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 05, 2012, 04:58:55 PM
Depends on what the perceived uncertainties are. If there are multiple acceptable alternatives, no one cares about the uncertainty. If some of the alternatives are unacceptable, then people start caring.
I doubt many people will find it acceptable when they lose their mortgage interest deduction and house prices take a nosedive, or when they find that they can't get coverage for their pre-existing condition because they were out of work for 92 days, or when their kids end up dead in Iran, or when Sesame Street goes off the air, but whatever.
Quote from: nathanm on October 05, 2012, 05:05:25 PM
I doubt many people will find it acceptable when they lose their mortgage interest deduction and house prices take a nosedive, or when they find that they can't get coverage for their pre-existing condition because they were out of work for 92 days, or when their kids end up dead in Iran, or when Sesame Street goes off the air, but whatever.
You, of course, perceive nothing but the worst options.
With regard to Iran, I remember the 1964 Presidential elections when the Democratic party successfully labeled Goldwater as the warmonger in the Viet Nam "situation". There is a War Memorial, and a traveling one, to remind us of
Goldwater's oops, make that Johnson's policies.
I don't see the pre-existing condition coverage changing whether Romney changes his mind about it or not, even if Obamacare is repealed. A repealed Obamacare will be replaced with something besides anarchy.
Please find the percentage and $ of funding to Big Bird from PBS. I remember seeing (unfortunately I don't remember where but doubt it was on FOX) that our favorite PBS shows are not receiving a majority of their funding from PBS. If enough people want Big Bird, they can send $30/yr to the semiannual fund drives. Don't buy a couple of six packs of beer or cartons of cigarettes if your kids are at all important to you.
I will need to see the balance between the actual tax savings (not the value of the deduction) vs. the proposed lowering of the marginal rates and those tax savings before going into full panic mode. I believe Romney is smart enough about the economy to not do something that will trash the housing market. I don't expect you share my beliefs. But then, I don't share your faith in Obama.
Quote from: nathanm on October 05, 2012, 04:42:53 PM
Funny how uncertainty isn't uncertainty if it's caused by Romney. How surprising.
What matters right now is the business owners hooked on Beck, Hannity, and Limpbag who fear Obama is a socialist and collectivist, they believe Romney is their free market messiah. Like I said real or imagined, that's their personal reality and they are free to run their business into the ground or prosper under such notions.
As far as the home mortgage interest deduction, due to the high exemptions and personal deductions, the mortgage interest deduction is pretty much worthless to folks in the lower to mid middle class. I did the calcs a few years ago and I believe at the time if you had financed anything less than $115K or so, there was little benefit to the mortgage deduction unless you had a crap ton of medical expenses to go with it.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 05, 2012, 05:54:57 PM
Like I said real or imagined, that's their personal reality and they are free to run their business into the ground or prosper under such notions.
You are still thinking like a Republican. You need to adapt to the philosophy that those business owners are NOT free to run their businesses into the ground. That is the government's responsibility.
;D
Quote from: Conan71 on October 05, 2012, 05:54:57 PM
What matters right now is the business owners hooked on Beck, Hannity, and Limpbag who fear Obama is a socialist and collectivist, they believe Romney is their free market messiah. Like I said real or imagined, that's their personal reality and they are free to run their business into the ground or prosper under such notions.
Better to let them run themselves out of business if they're that out of touch with reality. It will make room in the market for those who do have a grasp on reality.
So what happens next week when Biden looks the fool but makes President Obama seem only slightly less inept?
Someone needs to start a thread labeled "Ryan blows it during the debate", come on, go for it Ed!
Quote from: Gaspar on October 05, 2012, 08:00:13 PM
So what happens next week when Biden looks the fool but makes President Obama seem only slightly less inept?
The next day everyone will look at the transcripts and realize they've been subjected to another night of the Republican campaign's incessant lies and still have no idea what Romney and Ryan's actual plans are since they refuse to provide any detail. Or maybe that will be their strategy, they'll finally provide some detail. It would totally be worth Ryan crushing Biden for us to get some actual information about what they plan to do.
Quote from: nathanm on October 05, 2012, 08:08:32 PM
The next day everyone will look at the transcripts and realize they've been subjected to another night of the Republican campaign's incessant lies and still have no idea what Romney and Ryan's actual plans are since they refuse to provide any detail. Or maybe that will be their strategy, they'll finally provide some detail. It would totally be worth Ryan crushing Biden for us to get some actual information about what they plan to do.
I think I have not lost too many neurons yet but I don't remember a whole lot of details with Hope and Change 4 years ago. It worked for Obama. Maybe Romney is trying the same thing.
Bill Maher Rips Obama's Debate Performance: 'Looked Like He Took My Million And Spent It All On Weed'
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-rips-obamas-debate-performance-looked-like-he-took-my-million-and-spent-it-all-on-weed/
It's OK, Romney spent all of Sheldon Adelson's money on speed.
Quote from: nathanm on October 05, 2012, 10:29:06 PM
It's OK, Romney spent all of Sheldon Adelson's money on speed.
Wow, speed rhymes with weed.
Quote from: nathanm on October 05, 2012, 06:13:08 PM
Better to let them run themselves out of business if they're that out of touch with reality. It will make room in the market for those who do have a grasp on reality.
Ahhh, maybe some guys like you and Sheen can start your own companies and learn the realities of actually owning and running a business! ;)
Sounds like a genetically modified business opportunity...speedweed...
Quote from: Conan71 on October 05, 2012, 04:13:49 PM
Nobody said their feelings are hurt. You obviously don't understand the concept of a hostile business or regulatory environment in the mind of a small business owner.
My company, like many others in the energy and construction segments, is quite busy right now and we are more than taking care of demand of our customers. They simply wait longer for projects to be finished these days. The owner won't hire anyone else until after the November election and we aren't doing any major capital spending right now in case the economy falls back off a cliff or if the tax situation changes.
Start a company and employ 25 to 50 people then I think you will get it.
Your wording "don't respond well to rhetoric telling them they don't contribute enough" makes me think emotional response. Instead of, they will have to pay more in taxes. If your customers need their job done faster they will have to go elsewhere.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 05, 2012, 05:54:57 PM
As far as the home mortgage interest deduction, due to the high exemptions and personal deductions, the mortgage interest deduction is pretty much worthless to folks in the lower to mid middle class. I did the calcs a few years ago and I believe at the time if you had financed anything less than $115K or so, there was little benefit to the mortgage deduction unless you had a crap ton of medical expenses to go with it.
When I was younger I kept hearing about the mortage interest deduction and storie of people buying bigger houses so they could take the deduction. I think I got enough deductions to itemize a few years and then only beat the standard deduction by like $1000. At that point I wasn't paying a huge amount of deductible state taxes. I still don't understand why anybody in their right mind thinks its a good idea to spend money on interest to get 0-35% of it back.
Quote from: CharlieSheen on October 08, 2012, 09:36:32 AM
When I was younger I kept hearing about the mortage interest deduction and storie of people buying bigger houses so they could take the deduction. I think I got enough deductions to itemize a few years and then only beat the standard deduction by like $1000. At that point I wasn't paying a huge amount of deductible state taxes. I still don't understand why anybody in their right mind thinks its a good idea to spend money on interest to get 0-35% of it back.
You spend money on interest because you want a house. That's made easier because some or all of the interest is tax free. If you don't want to own a house (and I wouldn't blame you), the existence of the mortgage interest deduction should have no bearing on your decision.
Quote from: CharlieSheen on October 08, 2012, 09:36:32 AM
When I was younger I kept hearing about the mortage interest deduction and storie of people buying bigger houses so they could take the deduction. I think I got enough deductions to itemize a few years and then only beat the standard deduction by like $1000. At that point I wasn't paying a huge amount of deductible state taxes. I still don't understand why anybody in their right mind thinks its a good idea to spend money on interest to get 0-35% of it back.
Some people view the mortgage interest deduction as the only reason to buy a house. Some look at a house as a long-term investment while yet others say a house is a terrible investment or a piss poor savings plan at best.
Where I'm at in life right now, I don't care to own a house that would give me a big enough interest deduction to bother with itemizing. I view home ownership and building equity for myself as a preferable alternative to building equity for someone else's property as a renter. I also like having the freedom to make improvements as I see fit. Sure, I'm also responsible for repairs, but I'm also responsible on repairs for everything else I own.
Quote from: nathanm on October 08, 2012, 02:25:41 PM
That's made easier because some or all of the interest is tax free.
Just to clarify, I believe the interest is a deduction from your income which will reduce your tax based on your marginal tax bracket. It is not a direct reduction of your tax. I don't know about the modern funny money mortgages but the old fashioned (almost) interest on the unpaid balance type also result in a declining deduction as you pay off the mortgage.
Yup, just reduces taxable income so it comes off the top end of your marginal tax rate. There isn't an "all of" your interest being free.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 08, 2012, 04:09:36 PM
Just to clarify, I believe the interest is a deduction from your income which will reduce your tax based on your marginal tax bracket.
Indeed. You don't pay (federal income) tax on the income used to pay the interest on the mortgage. It is not a tax credit, but a deduction from income.
Either way, it doesn't seem like a wise idea to pull $70 billion a year out of the economy at the present time. If the deduction were eliminated and federal spending (preferably on infrastructure and research) increased commensurately until the economy stops requiring the extra juice, it might end up being a good thing in the long run. Short term, it's a bucking disaster, because it will further increase the length of the period of deleveraging we are currently inhabiting.
Now this is funny. . .
The Princeton Economist Harvey Rosen, the author of the "Study" that President Obama kept pointing to in the debate concerning Romney's Tax plan is now upset that President Obama completely misinterpreted his study.
I can't tell exactly how the Obama campaign reached that characterization of my work. It might be that they assume that Governor Romney wants to keep the taxes from the Affordable Care Act in place, despite the fact that the Governor has called for its complete repeal. The main conclusion of my study is that under plausible assumptions, a proposal along the lines suggested by Governor Romney can both be revenue neutral and keep the net tax burden on taxpayers with incomes above $200,000 about the same. That is, an increase in the tax burden on lower and middle income individuals is not required in order to make the overall plan revenue neutral.
Just like when they were pushing Obamacare it was necessary for them to double-dip on the numbers to make it work. Now they are double-dipping to defend it!
Quote from: Gaspar on October 09, 2012, 03:57:44 PM
Now this is funny. . .
The Princeton Economist Harvey Rosen, the author of the "Study" that President Obama kept pointing to in the debate concerning Romney's Tax plan is now upset that President Obama completely misinterpreted his study.
I can't tell exactly how the Obama campaign reached that characterization of my work. It might be that they assume that Governor Romney wants to keep the taxes from the Affordable Care Act in place, despite the fact that the Governor has called for its complete repeal. The main conclusion of my study is that under plausible assumptions, a proposal along the lines suggested by Governor Romney can both be revenue neutral and keep the net tax burden on taxpayers with incomes above $200,000 about the same. That is, an increase in the tax burden on lower and middle income individuals is not required in order to make the overall plan revenue neutral.
Just like when they were pushing Obamacare it was necessary for them to double-dip on the numbers to make it work. Now they are double-dipping to defend it!
Apparently this guy has not gotten the message that Romney is lying. I will give him a call tomorrow.
You're mistaken once again, Gaspar. Rosen was responding to comments made by the campaign after the debate. During the debate, Obama was referencing TPC's numbers, which he stated several times. Maybe lay off whatever it is that's messing up your memory?
Also:
Quote
Rosen's paper did find that families making more than $100,000 per year would have to pay $81 billion more in taxes under Romney's tax plan, a 12 percent increase.
What a misrepresentation that is!
Rich Lowry weighs in on the "Romney Lied" reason why Barry took a whuppin:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/329765/romney-lied-defense-rich-lowry
edited.
What is it with the media and their lack of memory? Are they just stoned all the time or what? You'd think they could at least watch the debate again (it's on C-SPAN's video site, without any outside commentary) before falsely claiming that Obama did not dispute Romney's lies during the debate.
No way. Obama left the debate last week thinking he won?
QuoteWhen President Barack Obama stepped off the stage in Denver last week the 60 million Americans watching the debate against Mitt Romney already knew it had been a disaster for him.
But what nobody knew, until now, was that Obama believed he had actually won.
In an extraordinary insight into the events leading up to the 90 minute showdown which changed the face of the election, a Democrat close to the Obama campaign today reveals that the President also did not take his debate preparation seriously, ignored the advice of senior aides and ignored one-liners that had been prepared to wound Romney.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2215173/Obama-believed-beaten-Romney-Denver-debate-ignoring-advice-aides.html
Quote from: guido911 on October 09, 2012, 06:34:04 PM
No way. Obama left the debate last week thinking he won?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2215173/Obama-believed-beaten-Romney-Denver-debate-ignoring-advice-aides.html
Maher may be right. Obama bought a bunch of weed with that $1 mil he gave him.
Either that or he is a real life Chauncey Gardner
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_1km5YoKnDLg/ScqE0A8_HGI/AAAAAAAAAY8/R8alixAUaE0/s400/there.jpg)
Now this is rich, some blogger has latched onto the notion.
http://capitolcommentary.com/2012/10/04/being-there-president-obama-exposed-at-the-debates-for-the-chauncy-gardner-he-is/
I think we all need a little recap:
Quote from: Conan71 on October 06, 2012, 11:05:43 AM
Ahhh, maybe some guys like you and Sheen can start your own companies and learn the realities of actually owning and running a business! ;)
::)
(http://tinfoilhatman45.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/wpid-facebook_-1598318897.jpg?w=595)
Quote from: TulsaRufnex on October 09, 2012, 10:25:44 PM
::)
(http://tinfoilhatman45.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/wpid-facebook_-1598318897.jpg?w=595)
Good meme!
Quote from: Conan71 on October 05, 2012, 12:04:51 PM
You don't get it either, apparently.
Quote
US To Tax Chinese Solar Panels Up To 47%
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/us-tax-chinese-solar-panels-2012-10#ixzz28w8K8rsX
UPDATE: The New York Times now reports Commerce has officially announced tariffs of up to 47 percent on solar products imported from China.
EARLIER: Bloomberg's Brian Wingfield is reporting the Obama administration will impose duties of between 18 and 250 percent on solar power products from China, citing an anonymous source familiar with the matter.
The administration determined the goods were being sold in the U.S. below cost, the source said.
Wingfield appears to have scooped the Commerce Department, which is set to formally announce a decision later today.
I guess it's a little late to save
a bundler Solyndra.
Quote from: Teatownclown on October 10, 2012, 05:11:03 PM
I guess it's a little late to save a bundler Solyndra.
I take it you support illegal dumping?
Tariffs would be a better alternative than raising taxes on American business owners in terms of job creation.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 10, 2012, 08:47:30 PM
Tariffs would be a better alternative than raising taxes on American business owners in terms of job creation.
Huh?
Quote
The New York Times now reports Commerce has officially announced tariffs of up to 47 percent on solar products imported from China.
(emphasis added)
So now Romney who, as we should all remember, stated he would put our education system on the right track with more teachers is now criticizing Obama for proposing yet again to spend money on hiring more teachers. Can the man pick a position and stick with it please?
Quote from: nathanm on October 10, 2012, 09:38:47 PM
So now Romney who, as we should all remember, stated he would put our education system on the right track with more teachers is now criticizing Obama for proposing yet again to spend money on hiring more teachers.
What $hipburger is packaged with that spending on teachers?
Quote from: TulsaRufnex on October 09, 2012, 10:25:44 PM
(http://tinfoilhatman45.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/wpid-facebook_-1598318897.jpg?w=595)
How about if you can only afford a Representative?
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 10, 2012, 10:13:38 PM
What $hipburger is packaged with that spending on teachers?
None yet, it's just a proposal that Romney disagrees with for some known-only-to-Romney reason.
Quote from: nathanm on October 10, 2012, 10:19:57 PM
None yet, it's just a proposal that Romney disagrees with for some known-only-to-Romney reason.
And then the next day he'll disagree with that reason. And then flip-flop 180 degrees and disagree again!
Quote from: nathanm on October 10, 2012, 10:19:57 PM
None yet, it's just a proposal that Romney disagrees with for some known-only-to-Romney reason.
If politicians were only capable of putting together a bill without 1000 extra ticks & fleas attached, it might be a whole lot easier to see what the true merits of the bill were in the first place.
President Obama's secret relationship with Big Bird uncovered:
(http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver/Breitbart/Big-Government/2012/10/11/obama-bigbird-obamacare.jpg)
(http://www.breitbart.com/mediaserver/9970F8DF8A734D85AD47A2CDFA08F213.jpg)
(http://www.breitbart.com/mediaserver/650A72F2EA36431BB8CC55885346C284.jpg)
(http://www.breitbart.com/mediaserver/D00380A2AEEB4FC1A24224AE10F5E065.jpg)
(http://www.breitbart.com/mediaserver/E7EC282EC1094693BFDE2CA8B7FB7344.jpg)
(http://www.breitbart.com/mediaserver/2369CF097E2B44DAA668B2912467DD53.jpg)
(http://www.breitbart.com/mediaserver/A8FCD77E3B344DC38077DC89EF0B367B.jpg)
(http://www.breitbart.com/mediaserver/5F0AB02D7652410084B29FBAD74E5E42.jpg)
(http://www.breitbart.com/mediaserver/CF409F73883348EFAD31E92FCE2D6585.jpg)
(http://www.breitbart.com/mediaserver/65FAC8A79D2F4D4BAA74B359616578BA.jpg)
(http://www.breitbart.com/mediaserver/6BBBD39FCB95487C8AA0EF5B030D4D31.jpg)
Quote from: Conan71 on October 11, 2012, 08:51:52 AM
If politicians were only capable of putting together a bill without 1000 extra ticks & fleas attached
There are no more ticks and fleas than there are with Romney's tax plan. Neither have progressed to the stage of actual legislation.
Gassy, speaking of Solyndra, there's another related Romney debate lie. He said that half the green energy loan recipients had failed. If three is half of 15. Otherwise, arithmetic fail.
Quote from: nathanm on October 11, 2012, 01:53:36 PM
There are no more ticks and fleas than there are with Romney's tax plan. Neither have progressed to the stage of actual legislation.
That's been Obama's consistent style: Put something(s) objectionable to the GOP so it paints the GOP in the worst light possible when they won't go for his crapburger.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 11, 2012, 02:06:15 PM
That's been Obama's consistent style: Put something(s) objectionable to the GOP so it paints the GOP in the worst light possible when they won't go for his crapburger.
Um yes, that's what compromise is. Giving up something to get something. This is the principle on which our government was founded. If the GOP doesn't like it, they should go home.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 11, 2012, 02:06:15 PM
That's been Obama's consistent style: Put something(s) objectionable to the GOP so it paints the GOP in the worst light possible when they won't go for his crapburger.
Romney and Armstrong are guilty of the same exact character defect. Lance just had his local mob to cover up his. Mitt's got his...btw, who are his handlers? Romney comes on and does an about face only to have his operators issue "the correct" interpretation of his comments. That's just beyond the pale. How is America going to be led with constant confusion and lack of leadership? Let's stick with consistency. At least Lance was consistent.
And Conan, if those GOPeers are incapable of turning the other cheek, maybe they should quit counting on that religious pandering. They need to work to make this a better country as opposed to a bitter country.