Current Events & Hot Topics

Featured Posts
radioheid
Why Are People Saying Romney Won The Debate?
October 3, 2012 at 11:23 PM
He couldn't answer a single question, couldn't give any details...he just blew hot air over and over about Obama's policies without explaining how his would work better, even when given the opportunity. All I heard was "cut PBS", "repeal Obamacare", constant interruptions and politely telling Jim Lehrer to shut up. This wins the debate???

Replies

  • meriana
    by meriana
    October 4, 2012 at 9:48 PM


    Quoting Carpy:

    Obama claimed to support the same thing.

    Quoting meriana:

     

    Quoting grandmab125:

     

    Quoting EmilysMom2010:

    The thing Romney supporters don't get is that when you give big companies more money they don't hire more people. They pocket more profits. It does not help the economy to give "small" companies big tax breaks because all they do is pocket the difference. They are already rich. They don't need to expand their businesses.


    Stop believing the bs lies from the dems.  Romney is not lowering the taxes on large corporations.  Romney plans to close a lot of the loop holes in corporate taxes.  Small businesses, which are classified as 50 or fewer employees) are the majority of the employers in this country.  Most small business owners file their company taxes as individual taxes, not corporate taxes.  If you raise the taxes on the small business owners, they will either lay people off, not higher more, won't expand, etc., because they won't be able to afford it.

     

     

     

     

    From Romney's web-site:

    Cut the corporate rate to 25 percent

    Since he has hever said anything to the effect of cutting the tax rate only for corporations that employ under X number of people, this tax cut would include all corporations no matter how large.

     



     

    Grandmab said the Romney was not lowering taxes on large corporations and that saying he was, was a bs dem lie. I was just pointing out from Romney's own web-site that he in fact would cut taxes on large corporations. Wasn't trying to get into a discussion about anything right then or now. I'm tired, and not enough coffee.

  • Sisteract
    October 4, 2012 at 9:53 PM

    Damn it I thought this said why did ANN Romney win the debate. I was going to say because she was rockin that off white outfit- me like.

  • Sisteract
    October 4, 2012 at 10:03 PM

    Tax cuts for all

    No change in SS/MC for current recipients

    No adding to the deficit debt.

    Repeal the ACA{ what would that cost in terms of time and money}- no solid alternate plan put forward.


    Close loopholes (which ones)- wouldn't that mean a tax hike for some?


    If he is such a great business man with a solid, superior, fiscally responsible plan why can't he disclose that plan-NOW?

    If he could do everything he has promised to date and actually show me how it could be done- dollars in /dollars out, while paying down the debt, I'd vote for him.

    He has NOT done that.

    And we haven't even talked about his  bogus job creation BS-

  • glitterteaz
    October 5, 2012 at 12:26 AM

    Mittens promised to “not reduce the taxes paid by high-income Americans” and also to “lower taxes on middle-income families,” but didn’t say how he could possibly accomplish that without also increasing the deficit. That is where the math does not work.

    Quoting Carpy:

    Explain it then, genius.

    Quoting glitterteaz:

    well this explains a lot

    Quoting Carpy:

    Could you both explain how it is mathematically impossible?

    Quoting radioheid:

    That's what my sister and I saw as well. Mathematical impossibility mixed with aggression.

    Quoting Sisteract:

    He had a more aggressive presentation.

    Although he presented no mathematically viable economic  or hc plan.





  • glitterteaz
    October 5, 2012 at 12:32 AM

    sidesplittinglaughter

    Quoting Naturewoman4:

    That's great for your area of Ohio.  But, I don't think it's a representation of the whole State.  Let alone the whole Country.  IF people care more about the Country & all the people here, and NOT just themselves, they will see the FACTS/RECORDS right in front of them.  IF they want.  The facts are right there.  The FACT that our Country as a whole, has unemployment of OVER 8%, & it's not even the TRUE numbers. 

     The FACT is whether you or anyone else wants to believe this, our unemployment is way over 15%.  NO President has every won with a stat. like that.  Plus, don't forget the more Americans are living in proverty.  More people are on FS & PA.  Only about 1/2 of Americans are paying taxes.  Gas prices have sky rocketed!!  Food prices too!!!  That is just a FEW of OBAMA's record as our President.  HE can't continue to blame Bush.  I have supported Romney from day 1.  Before, the GOP debates.  Whether people want to accept this or not, but Obama has had NO experience in handling of an Economy & have the experience at creating jobs.  Romney has. 

     IF people are TRULY honest, they know that Romney would be our best Candidate to turn this economy around.  To GET AMERICANS back to work again.  Like it or not, that IS the facts.  People that vote for Obama and are on PA, wants to hang on to their PA.  They DON'T want to get out there & work.  Obama has NEVER made them.  Obama doesn't want them to.  This WAS Obama's plan from the start.  To have our Country EXACTLY the way it is right now.  A dependent America.  Dependent on the Gov.  It's SHAMEFUL!!!


  • glitterteaz
    October 5, 2012 at 12:34 AM

    don't forget bobble head!!! :o)

    Quoting Veni.Vidi.Vici.:

    naturewoman gets my vote for the most fallacious, illogical dim-wit.


  • grandmab125
    October 5, 2012 at 12:42 AM


    Quoting stacymomof2:

    I thought about that for a minute, too...I watch the PBS discussion after the debate and all of the people on the panel said that Romney "won" the debate.  I thought that was pretty funny...isn't PBS the bastion of socialism, government obedience and liberal spin?  lol

    Quoting Moniker:

    Slow down a minute....you mean the liberal media announced Romney the winner?? How can that be? 


    Apparently, even they couldn't put a positive spin on the debate.

  • BigRoni
    by BigRoni
    October 5, 2012 at 1:57 AM


    Quoting glitterteaz:

    THat is what me and hubby are saying he was aggressive yes but offered nothing. He is a big fat nothing but rich entitled attitude. I am dissappointed Obama didn't nail his ass to a fence with his 47% BS.

    high five Romney lied his fuckin' ass off... he's a damn snake!!! Anyone voting for that fool is committing an act of treason...

  • Carpy
    by Carpy
    October 5, 2012 at 6:21 AM


    ABC: Obama Falsely Claims He Has a Plan to Cut $4 Trillion from the Deficit

    BY JOHN MCCORMACK | The Weekly Standard
     

    "I've put forward a specific $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan,"

    President Obama said during his debate with Mitt Romney on Wednesday night. "It's on a website. You can look at all the numbers, what cuts we make and what revenue we raise."

    ABC's Jon Karl correctly calls Obama's claim "mostly fiction."

    Does President Obama have a plan to cut the deficit by $4 trillion?

    No.  The “$4 trillion plan” he is referring to includes about $1 trillion Congress has already agreed to and $1 trillion in savings from ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which are already ending.

    This would be Mostly Fiction.

    The Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler has also noted Obama's claim is "simply not accurate," and pointed out that “virtually no serious budget analyst agreed” with the administration’s accounting.

    ====================

    Obama Repeats False $4 Trillion in Spending Cuts Line

    BY Washington Free Beacon Staff

    President Obama repeated the false claim that he had put forward a budget that would reduce the federal deficit by $4 trillion over the next decade in the first presidential debate Wednesday night in Denver, Colo.

    OBAMA: "I've proposed a specific $4 trillion deficit reduction plan. ... The way we do it is $2.50 for every cut, we ask for $1 in additional revenue."

    THE FACTS: In promising $4 trillion, Obama is already banking more than $2 trillion from legislation enacted along with Republicans last year that cut agency operating budgets and capped them for 10 years. He also claims more than $800 billion in war savings that would occur anyway. And he uses creative bookkeeping to hide spending on Medicare reimbursements to doctors. Take those "cuts" away and Obama's $2.50/$1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases shifts significantly more in the direction of tax increases.

    Obama's February budget offered proposals that would cut deficits over the coming decade by $2 trillion instead of $4 trillion. Of that deficit reduction, tax increases accounted for $1.6 trillion. He promises relatively small spending cuts of $597 billion from big federal benefit programs like Medicare and Medicaid. He also proposed higher spending on infrastructure projects.

    OBAMA: "Over the last two years, health care premiums have gone up — it's true — but they've gone up slower than any time in the last 50 years. So we're already beginning to see progress. In the meantime, folks out there with insurance, you're already getting a rebate."

    THE FACTS: Not so, concerning premiums. Obama is mixing overall health care spending, which has been growing at historically low levels, and health insurance premiums, which have continued to rise faster than wages and overall economic growth. Premiums for job-based family coverage have risen by nearly $2,400 since 2009 when Obama took office, according to the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. In 2011, premiums jumped by 9 percent. This year's 4 percent increase was more manageable, but the price tag for family coverage stands at $15,745, with employees paying more than $4,300 of that.

    When it comes to insurance rebates under Obama's health care law, less than 10 percent of people with private health insurance are benefiting.

    More than 160 million Americans under 65 have private insurance through their jobs and by buying their own policies. According to the administration, about 13 million people will benefit from rebates. And nearly two-thirds of that number will only be entitled to a share of it, since they are covered under job-based plans where their employer pays most of the premium and will get most of the rebate.

    Quoting motha2daDuchess:

    http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/108125/romney-debate-details-tax-medicare-pre-existing-contradictions-deceptions#



  • Carpy
    by Carpy
    October 5, 2012 at 6:29 AM

    The math does work when you count the increase in tax payer base.  More people working, means more people paying in.  Take away the threats to viability businesses have (such as my own) and you WILL see business increase in this country.  No matter how you slice it, the US is the preferred place to do business, the cost is just prohibitive.

    Quoting glitterteaz:

    Mittens promised to “not reduce the taxes paid by high-income Americans” and also to “lower taxes on middle-income families,” but didn’t say how he could possibly accomplish that without also increasing the deficit. That is where the math does not work.

    Quoting Carpy:

    Explain it then, genius.

    Quoting glitterteaz:

    well this explains a lot

    Quoting Carpy:

    Could you both explain how it is mathematically impossible?

    Quoting radioheid:

    That's what my sister and I saw as well. Mathematical impossibility mixed with aggression.

    Quoting Sisteract:

    He had a more aggressive presentation.

    Although he presented no mathematically viable economic  or hc plan.






Current Events & Hot Topics

Active Posts in All Groups
More Active Posts
Featured Posts in All Groups
More Featured Posts