Presidential Debate
POSTED BY: WULFENSTAR
UPDATED: Sunday, October 7, 2012 22:30
VIEWED: 7250
PAGE 4 of 8
Your boy Obama got owned, schooled, and all but bitch-slapped last night. Without a teleprompter, or a pre-scripted play, he is revealed for the empty suit he is.
Clint Eastwood was right.
Puny god.
It has been said that the Obama legacy will be one that definitively shows socialism, or communism, does not work. Thats a kind version.
"None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you... YOU are locked in here with ME."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So... Are you for Romney now, Wulf?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ugg. Im on the fence. Throw my vote to Romney, or write in Ron Paul.
"None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you... YOU are locked in here with ME."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Two, from what I hear you pretty much nailed it. I don't generally watch debates--or speeches--because they're choreographed to make each person sound and look like what the people want them to. The dissections afterward and clips that I see are sufficient for me.
Most of what I'm hearing is that Romney lied like a fishwife and Obama didn't call him on it: that as you said, Romney swung amazingly to the center and either avoided or lied about the stances he's taken right up to a couple of days ago. The Woos in Chief apparently didn't go at him at all, so it's a win for Romney. This thing about being so careful not to look like an "angry black guy" has got to be tough to get around, but I wish he'd grow a spine.
Unlike FauxNews and their ilk, the "left-wing media" has been quite clear that Romney won and Obama did a hack job...I'd love to see things reversed and hear the spin from FauxNews, who would NEVER admit Obama won anything even if Romney DID show up with his pants on backwards. At least the lefties can honestly call a loss a loss.
I hope the public isn't as dumb as they often are and see through the performance, because from what I'm hearing (both from left-wing pundits AND centrists), that's precisely what it was--an enormous pretend shift to the middle, much of which directly contradicts the stances he's taken all along.
I've also heard a few people talk about how Lehrer did a pretty poor job...many saying this wasn't "his kind of format". Such is life.
It's a shame Wulf is back; I keep forgetting that he makes Rap look like an actual, semi-intelligent human being, Wulf is so out there and over the top. Such is life.
We'll see what happens next time--I sincerely hope the Woos in Chief grows some balls in the meantime. I don't have much hope for the VP debates, I fully expect Ryan to win--especially if he fakes pivoting to the center like Romney did. There will no doubt be the inevitable Biden gaffe(s), and Ryan always looks like he's had too much caffeine or something, which will no doubt make him appear as a young go-getter. Aside from that WEIRD look on his face (I've tried to immitate it, best I can figure it's a tight-lipped grimace...), he's young, he's good looking, and I expect he'll wipe the floor with Biden. We'll see.
I just wish the public had been paying attention all along instead of just tuning in for the debates, and that they'd start using their BRAINS instead of being swayed by a "good" debate performance.
Time will tell.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It was clear that Mitt moved to the centre in this debate - denying a plan for massive tax cuts, or huge cuts to education, talking about the importance of regulation, and of bi-partisanship. And it worked. I wonder if Republicans will learn from this, and see that moderation is their best bet for the future?
Nah, I'm confident zealotry will prevail 
It's not personal. It's just war.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's easy to win a debate when you are willing to shift your position and make new promises and claims up on the spot.
Mitt abandoned his tax plan, stated he wants to keep the "good" parts of Obamacare and Dod-Frank, and would have promised everyone free Kittens had he had a chance.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by WULFENSTAR:
Your boy Obama got owned, schooled, and all but bitch-slapped last night.
Remember, kiddo - Kerry won his first debate, too. Look how that went.
And Mondale beat his Conserva-Holiness, Ronny Reagan. That obviosuly was a game-changer, right?
And Id remind you to look at the electoral map, and how things are going in the swing states - but I know you won't actually look at anything that might burst your ideological bubble.
Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.
"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum
"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
From here... http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-first-debate-mitt-romney
s-five-biggest-lies-20121004
Mitt Romney turned in a polished performance in last night's presidential debate – and revealed himself to be an accomplished and unapologetic liar. In an evening where he sought to slice and dice the president with statistics, Romney baldly misrepresented his own policy prescriptions, made up numbers to fit his attacks and buried clear contrasts with the president under a heaping pile of horseshit.
Here are mendacious Mitt's five most outrageous statements:
1. "I don't have a $5 trillion tax cut." Romney flatly lied about the cost of his proposal to cut income-tax rates across the board by another 20 percent (undercutting even the low rates of the Bush tax cuts). Independent economists at the Tax Policy Center have shown that the price tag for those cuts is $360 billion in the first year, a cost that extrapolates to $5 trillion over a decade.
2. "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high-income Americans." Romney has claimed that he will pay for his tax cuts by closing a variety of loopholes and deductions. The factual problem? Romney hasn't named a single loophole he's willing to close; worse, there's no way to offset $5 trillion in tax cuts even if you get rid of the entire universe of deductions for the wealthy that Romney has not put off the table (like the carried interest loophole or the 15 percent capital gains rate.) The Tax Policy Center report concludes that Romney's proposal would create a "net tax cut for high-income tax payers and a net tax increase for lower- and or middle-income taxpayers." Moreover, some of Romney's tax cuts are micro-targeted at American dynasties, particularly his proposal to eliminate the estate tax, which would reduce his own sons' tax burden by tens of millions of dollars.
3. "We've got 23 million people out of work or [who have] stopped looking for work in this country." Romney is lying for effect. The nation's crisis of joblessness is bad, but not 23 million bad. The official figure is 12.5 million unemployed. An additional 2.6 million Americans have stopped looking for jobs. How does Romney gin up his eye-popping 23 million figure? He counts more than 8 million wage earners who hold part-time jobs as also being "out of work."
4. Obamacare "puts in place an unelected board that's going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have." Romney is reviving Sarah Palin's old death panels lie here. Obamacare does establish an Independent Payment Advisory Board to help constrain the growth of Medicare spending. The body has no authority to dictate the practices of the private insurance marketplace. And the law also makes explicit that this body is banned from rationing care or limiting medical benefits to seniors.
5. "Pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan." In the biggest whopper of the night, Romney suggested that his health care proposal would guarantee coverage to Americans with pre-existing conditions. This is just not true. Under Romney, if you have a pre-existing condition and have been unable to obtain insurance coverage or if you have had to drop coverage for more than 90 days because you lost your job or couldn't afford the premiums, you would be shit out of luck. Insurance companies could continue to discriminate and deny you coverage, as even Romney's top adviser conceded after the debate was over.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Technically the soda thing changed. The church elders came out just this year and finally said that the line long interpreted as a condemnation of caffeine in general really just applied to hot coffee.
Jesus loves Dr. Pepper...its in the Bible.
H
Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME