If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Fact Checkers find that both Perry and Romney might have, perhaps, been not entirely forthcoming in the claims they made during last night's debate   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 232
    More: Obvious, romney, Michael Dukakis, median household income, hourly workers, Mitts, fact checking, scientific consensus, Massachusetts Governor  
•       •       •

14236 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Sep 2011 at 9:03 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



232 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-09-08 09:05:11 AM
Um, I didn't see anything about Romney, actually:

"ROMNEY: "At the end of four years, we had our unemployment rate down to 4.7 percent. That's a record I think the president would like to see. As a matter of fact, we created more jobs in Massachusetts than this president has created in the entire country."

THE FACTS: To be sure, 4.7 percent unemployment would be a welcome figure nationally. But Romney started from a much better position than President Barack Obama did. Unemployment was only 5.6 percent when Romney took office in 2003, meaning it came down by less than 1 percentage point when he left office in 2007. Obama inherited a national unemployment rate of 7.8 percent."

And that rate is at least 9 percent now. Exactly what is Romney distorting?
 
2011-09-08 09:05:12 AM
Well, I'm shocked.
 
2011-09-08 09:05:40 AM
Perry: I can eat 20 cheeseburgers!

Romney: I can eat 21 cheeseburgers!
 
2011-09-08 09:05:50 AM
People would believe them on face value?
 
2011-09-08 09:06:04 AM
Its not news its...what the hell is this anyway? We'll just start with 'its not very surprising'.
 
2011-09-08 09:06:04 AM
Well, if I can't trust what any politician says as fact, what am I supposed to believe? If they say it on TV, it has to be true.

Right?
 
2011-09-08 09:07:18 AM
Inference without implication.
 
2011-09-08 09:07:55 AM
Remember, the thing to take home from this debate is that both sides are equally dishonest.
 
2011-09-08 09:08:29 AM
img42.imageshack.us
 
2011-09-08 09:08:53 AM
Paul Cellucci, even with fatassed Jane Swift in there for a short time, put MA on a solid footing, so the less Romney did, the better. The jagoff was out of state for half his term when he was running around trying to be president, anyway.
 
2011-09-08 09:08:59 AM
They're politicians.

This surprise anyone?
 
2011-09-08 09:09:56 AM
Were their lips moving? There's your problem.
 
2011-09-08 09:10:05 AM
So apparently if minimum wage is $7.25 and the company pays $8.00 that is still a minimum wage job, because Perry sucks, thats why.
 
2011-09-08 09:10:41 AM

uofwi92: And that rate is at least 9 percent now. Exactly what is Romney distorting?


I'm guessing it's that Romney was saying that the situation in Massachusetts when he assumed office and the situation in America when Obama assumed office are analogous.
 
2011-09-08 09:10:46 AM

uofwi92: Um, I didn't see anything about Romney, actually:

"ROMNEY: "At the end of four years, we had our unemployment rate down to 4.7 percent. That's a record I think the president would like to see. As a matter of fact, we created more jobs in Massachusetts than this president has created in the entire country."

THE FACTS: To be sure, 4.7 percent unemployment would be a welcome figure nationally. But Romney started from a much better position than President Barack Obama did. Unemployment was only 5.6 percent when Romney took office in 2003, meaning it came down by less than 1 percentage point when he left office in 2007. Obama inherited a national unemployment rate of 7.8 percent."

And that rate is at least 9 percent now. Exactly what is Romney distorting?/i>

That he actually has positions on things, for starters.

 
2011-09-08 09:11:21 AM
I still say that we should just give up completely, and make these debates like an American Gladiator's episode. Seriously, at this point wouldn't you prefer to have this man in the White House?

www.moviesonline.ca
 
2011-09-08 09:11:21 AM
Did anyone else read this as "Fat Chicks"?
 
2011-09-08 09:11:41 AM
Main page Derp.

I haz popcorms
 
2011-09-08 09:11:51 AM
Woooo, politicians lie. Big news flash.
 
2011-09-08 09:12:20 AM

jayg22: So apparently if minimum wage is $7.25 and the company pays $8.00 that is still a minimum wage job, because Perry sucks, thats why.


The moderator said "low-paying jobs".

Perry moved the goal posts because Perry sucks, that's why,
 
2011-09-08 09:12:54 AM
Lying sacks of shiat in my republican debate? It's more likely than you think.
 
2011-09-08 09:13:01 AM
Pon Raul
 
2011-09-08 09:13:20 AM
Well, they was very upfront about da burrito coverings situation.
 
KIA
2011-09-08 09:13:21 AM
They didn't show even one misstatement by Ron Paul. Not one!

/ yes, yes, it's a softball
 
2011-09-08 09:14:07 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: [img42.imageshack.us image 318x707]


I love the fact that the argument about social security isn't if it is truly unsubstantial but if "ponzi" is the correct word for what kind of scheme it is. The goverment prefers to call it a "pay-as-you-go" system.
 
2011-09-08 09:14:30 AM

jayg22: So apparently if minimum wage is $7.25 and the company pays $8.00 that is still a minimum wage job, because Perry sucks, thats why.



Yeah, I'm usin my giant 75 cents windfall to buy me a extra big ass fries for my kids. They is starvin.
 
2011-09-08 09:14:52 AM

Wendy's Chili: The moderator said "low-paying jobs".


What is a low paying job?
 
2011-09-08 09:16:54 AM
I was most proud of Perry for give propes to SEAL Team 6. I was all like, you go man, I am up with that music, for real, my white man. Lower the roof!
 
2011-09-08 09:17:17 AM
Color me surprised.
 
2011-09-08 09:18:36 AM
MICHELE BACHMANN: "Obamacare is killing jobs. We know that from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, but I know it firsthand from speaking to people. We see it this summer. There are 47 percent of African-American youth that are currently without jobs, 36 percent of Hispanic youth."

THE FACTS: The health care law that Obama pushed and Congress passed last year has long been labeled a job killer by Republicans, who often cite a Congressional Budget Office analysis to buttress their claims. But the CBO at no point said the law would result in job losses. Instead it made the more nuanced assertion that fewer people would chose to work.

"The legislation, on net, will reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by a small amount - roughly half a percent - primarily by reducing the amount of labor that workers choose to supply," the CBO said in an analysis. That's not job-killing, that's workers choosing not to work because of easier access to health care. The budget office said some people might decide to retire earlier because it would be easier to get health care, instead of waiting until they become eligible for Medicare at age 65.

The Minnesota congresswoman also states the percentages of unemployment among minority youth. But there is no evidence that the health care law is responsible for that level of unemployment. In fact, the health care law is still largely unimplemented, with some of its key provisions not taking effect until 2014.


Michelle Bachmann is either massively ignorant, or a liar. What a surprise.
 
2011-09-08 09:18:53 AM

jayg22: derp


Pathetic derp at that.
 
2011-09-08 09:19:15 AM

jayg22: Wendy's Chili: The moderator said "low-paying jobs".

What is a low paying job?


just about anything you can get with only a GED.
 
2011-09-08 09:19:31 AM
Wait, subby, you aren't suggesting that a politician lied or misrepresented during a debate are you? Say it ain't so!

Politicians lie, it's part of who and what they are. They make things up on the spot in debates. They use hyperbole to push their point or get their own way. The funniest part is that they do it bald faced and in public and people don't lynch them for it. So the question is, who is at fault for that, the politician or the public who elect them?

To paraphrase Hanover Fiste
They're nothing but low-down, double-dealing, backstabbing, larcenous perverted worms!
Hangin's too good for em'
Burnin's too good for em'
They should be torn into little bitsy pieces and buried alive.

/Every single one of them.
 
2011-09-08 09:20:30 AM

jayhawk88: I still say that we should just give up completely, and make these debates like an American Gladiator's episode. Seriously, at this point wouldn't you prefer to have this man in the White House?

[www.moviesonline.ca image 509x346]


I'm voting for Not Sure.
 
2011-09-08 09:20:31 AM

ghare: jayg22: derp

Pathetic derp at that.


troll.me
 
2011-09-08 09:20:36 AM
But... but... but Fartbongo Hope n Change!
 
2011-09-08 09:20:38 AM

jayhawk88: I still say that we should just give up completely, and make these debates like an American Gladiator's episode. Seriously, at this point wouldn't you prefer to have this man in the White House?

[www.moviesonline.ca image 509x346]


Didn't that guy get elected already?
 
2011-09-08 09:22:09 AM

jayg22: Wendy's Chili: The moderator said "low-paying jobs".

What is a low paying job?


A job with low pay.
 
2011-09-08 09:22:43 AM

KIA: They didn't show even one misstatement by Ron Paul. Not one!


Ron Paul would have to had made a coherent statement to be criticized. I think the only thing he actually stood firm on was the price of silver.
 
2011-09-08 09:23:28 AM

KIA: They didn't show even one misstatement by Ron Paul. Not one!

/ yes, yes, it's a softball


You know, I had this argument/discussion with my roommate last night.

There's no media blackout on Dr Paul, and here's why:

We've done this dance before. The American media (if not those of us who follow politics closely) has covered Paul campaigns for 25 years. He's got the same positions, and the same fervent support, so why not assume the result will be the same?

Take, for example, 2007. Ron Paul won the CPAC straw poll, had the largest (IIRC) campaign war chest, and was able to get something like $4M out of a one-day moneybomb (which I think his campaign was the first to use). His support was well above McCain's, Romney's, Guiliani's, Thompson's, and people thought he was going to un-eventuate the eventual Hillary presidency.

In 2011, it looks about the same. His support is fervent (though not on par with Perry/Romney), and his positions are the same. The country is no more ready to elect him (even just to win the presidential nomination) than they are ready to elect Yelnick McWawa (I-Boston).

I wish some of his more civil-libertarian ideas made it into the mainstream, and chances are even that some of his ideas (the not-batshiat ones, even) will make it into the political mainstream. He will not be president, and it's not a media conspiracy.

// what about the media blackout of Herman Cain?
// the only things I read about him are that he's an also-ran, and used to own a pizza joint
 
2011-09-08 09:23:36 AM

Jake Havechek: Paul Cellucci, even with fatassed Jane Swift in there for a short time, put MA on a solid footing, so the less Romney did, the better. The jagoff was out of state for half his term when he was running around trying to be president, anyway.


Obama's been running around politicing for a second term since he was elected. What's your point? They all do it. Every farking politician on the face of the earth. The farkers preach about their commitment but are committed to no one but themselves.

/rant off
//fark em all may they all DIAF
 
2011-09-08 09:24:02 AM
I missed the part where Perry bragged about creating a 3-year-drought in Texas, then left the state to father an earthquake and hurricane in the northeast, followed by vast flooding.
 
2011-09-08 09:24:21 AM

thurstonxhowell: A job with low pay.


Oh, so if your in a debate and some one says "How many low paying jobs did you create' you wouldn't look for a federally mandated bar on what a low paying job was?
 
2011-09-08 09:25:26 AM

willwonk: Did anyone else read this as "Fat Chicks"?


I read it as "Fact: Checkers find that both Perry and Romney might have, perhaps...."

That's some old dog.

/probably has his head preserved like Nixon's
 
2011-09-08 09:25:36 AM

sprawl15: KIA: They didn't show even one misstatement by Ron Paul. Not one!

Ron Paul would have to had made a coherent statement to be criticized. I think the only thing he actually stood firm on was the price of silver.


His on-stage presence makes 2008 John McCain seem like John F. Kennedy.
 
2011-09-08 09:25:51 AM

sprawl15: KIA: They didn't show even one misstatement by Ron Paul. Not one!

Ron Paul would have to had made a coherent statement to be criticized. I think the only thing he actually stood firm on was the price of silver.


He did say that too many federal regulations caused 9/11.

/Then he had to pay Giuliani a quarter
 
2011-09-08 09:26:07 AM

WTFDYW: Jake Havechek: Paul Cellucci, even with fatassed Jane Swift in there for a short time, put MA on a solid footing, so the less Romney did, the better. The jagoff was out of state for half his term when he was running around trying to be president, anyway.

Obama's been running around politicing for a second term since he was elected. What's your point? They all do it. Every farking politician on the face of the earth. The farkers preach about their commitment but are committed to no one but themselves.

/rant off
//fark em all may they all DIAF


Move to Somalia, farkface.
 
2011-09-08 09:26:09 AM
Did anybody claim any facts last night? All I heard was "Obamacare bad. Republicans good."
 
2011-09-08 09:27:14 AM

uofwi92: Exactly what is Romney distorting?


His own record.
 
2011-09-08 09:28:20 AM

Lord_Baull: Did anybody claim any facts last night? All I heard was "Obamacare bad. Republicans good."


It was like a chicken coop of 'tard.
 
Displayed 50 of 232 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report