Breathtakingly ignorant post. Keep'em coming. Makes me long for basso's posts. People seeing what they want to see. Never ceases to amaze me. Romney's changed his position on the major issues so often that lying is simply second nature. He will literally say anything, even in this age of youtube (Romney + flip flop), because he knows that this is the United States of Amnesia.
That's not entirely correct, the media plays a pretty big role in shaping the narrative and the response of the audience by the terms of the questions they ask. For example, Krugman had a decent note a few days ago about while Romney lied profusely, since Obama didn't really raise the issue until after the debate, it's basically being disregarded as a narrative theme. Is the media really constrained by such a procedural rule (didn't raise it then, so it's a non-issue) and obligated to more or less shut their eyes or is there a larger obligation there? I would suggest it's the latter but by the time a storyline takes off (and let's face it, the "romney as an inveterate loser" meme for all of september wasn't going to suffice to inject enough october drama) it's too late to really affect anythingg.
Certainly - but no one has argued that the moderator was unfair in his questions or that the questions didn't give Obama an opportunity to make his points. In fact, the two candidates ran over the moderator, so they basically both had the opportunity to make whatever arguments they wanted to make. And snap polls and talking to people who watched it live and were tweeting / Facebooking / etc pretty much confirms the result as well. People thought Obama lost before the media had a chance to promote the narrative that Obama lost.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/cPgfzknYd20" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
the point of a debate is to prove your argument. so we can argue point for point about the debate, if you want to argue about what talking heads have to say, start another thread and refrain from commenting about my posts directly or indirectly. thanks
the narrative of the debate being won by romney is media driven. stupid voter who doesn't know issues sees talking head say romney won therefore he thinks because he can't think for himself
!!!! <table style='font:11px arial; color:#333; background-color:#f5f5f5' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='512' height='340'><tbody><tr style='background-color:#e5e5e5' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;'><a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com'>The Daily Show with Jon Stewart</a></td><td style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; text-align:right; font-weight:bold;'>Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c</td></tr><tr style='height:14px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;' colspan='2'><a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-october-9-2012/democalypse-2012---vague-against-the-machine---romney-s-wizardry'>Democalypse 2012 - Vague Against the Machine - Romney's Wizardry</a></td></tr><tr style='height:14px; background-color:#353535' valign='middle'><td colspan='2' style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; width:512px; overflow:hidden; text-align:right'><a target='_blank' style='color:#96deff; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/'>www.thedailyshow.com</a></td></tr><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><embed style='display:block' src='http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:item:comedycentral.com:419961' width='512' height='288' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' wmode='window' allowFullscreen='true' flashvars='autoPlay=false' allowscriptaccess='always' allownetworking='all' bgcolor='#000000'></embed></td></tr><tr style='height:18px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><table style='margin:0px; text-align:center' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='100%' height='100%'><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/'>Daily Show Full Episodes</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.indecisionforever.com/'>Political Humor & Satire Blog</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.facebook.com/thedailyshow'>The Daily Show on Facebook</a></td></tr></table></td></tr></tbody></table>
i can remember at least three times obama asked romney how can he pay for his tax cuts and mention that he himself could go into specifics. wtf else can he do
the stupidiest thing i saw from the talking heads was friday morning brian williams moderator of nbc on the today was making fun of obama for taking notes during the debate. seriously? edit: and then the unemployment number comes out. hilarious edit again: not williams but david gregory whoever the moderator is
No. Romney has never proposed $5 Trillion in tax cuts. As he explained quite eloquently several times during the first debate, he is proposing to reform income taxes by eliminating loopholes and special deductions, while at the same time lowering marginal rates across the board. He is not proposing a "tax cut" in the sense that tax revenues will be reduced. In fact, Romney is trying to increase total tax revenues by increasing the number of tax payers, which can be achieved by creating an environment that results in job creation. This is Romney's plan. Anything that Obama and his supporters have said to the contrary is, to put it charitably, not correct. The Obama campaign, together with their sycophantic supporters in the media, have been promoting a dishonest attack campaign against Romney, led by hundreds of millions in negative and dishonest attack ads. Until the last debate, Obama and his crew had been able to very cleverly divert the focus of the campaign coverage to one absurd topic after another, while effectively working to "define" Mitt Romney through their preposterous attack ads. At no point has Obama been asked to put forward his own agenda for a second term. And it appears clear at this point that he does not have one. Prior to the first debate, Romney had not been able to break through and present his own case, as he was constantly being shouted down or called on to answer silly questions about dogs on top of cars and that sort of thing. But during the debate, he was able to define himself for the first time, which an enormous number of people witnessed for themselves, without any filters or interpretations from spin doctors, attack ads or partisan journalists. It was at this point that the Obama campaign's "defining" of Mitt Romney was jettisoned by the American people (not including Obama's die-hard supporters, of course). And that is the real significance of the debate. The core of Obama's campaign strategy has been to "define" Mitt Romney as an unacceptable candidate. That strategy fell to pieces last Wednesday night for all to see. And the current cry of "Liar! Liar!" by Obama and the left is their last ditch effort to reassemble the pieces of that shattered strategy. It is not working. What Obama and his supporters in the media are trying to say is that Obama's "defining" of Mitt Romney is what should be believed, and that Romney's own presentation of his own views and ideas should be dismissed as lies. In other words, you can believe Obama and his spin machine, or you can believe your lying eyes. It is pretty easy to see how people are coming down on that choice. Which is a big problem for Barack Obama, as this was his campaign strategy. It does not appear that he has a Plan B, at least not up to this point.
Like your candidate you like to play fast and loose with the truth. The nonpartisan center for tax policy has estimated that Romney's tax plan would cut 5 trillion over 10 years. This is not up for debate. It is FACT. They also concluded that "closing loopholes and cutting waste (DIE BIG BIRD) will come nowhere near enough to offset the costs. But you and Romney go ahead and play your little semantics game.
This is, of course, one of his proposals - and one that has universally been met by analysts on the left and right as being mathematically impossible given the constructs he has given (20% rate cut, closing loopholes, wealthy don't pay less, middle class don't pay more). And, of course, it's completely different from the tax policy he outlines on his campaign website: http://www.mittromney.com/issues/tax Individual Taxes America’s individual tax code applies relatively high marginal tax rates on a narrow tax base. Those high rates discourage work and entrepreneurship, as well as savings and investment. With 54 percent of private sector workers employed outside of corporations, individual rates also define the incentives for job-creating businesses. Lower marginal tax rates secure for all Americans the economic gains from tax reform. Make permanent, across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates Maintain current tax rates on interest, dividends, and capital gains Eliminate taxes for taxpayers with AGI below $200,000 on interest, dividends, and capital gains Eliminate the Death Tax Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) Nowhere in that plan is a mention of closing loopholes or maintaining revenue - in fact, just the opposite. It only talks about things that cut taxes - and not a single mention of anything that would increase revenue. Did Obama supporters create his website?
