Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Think Progress)   Mitt Romney set a new debate record last night - by lying 27 times in only 38 minutes   (thinkprogress.org ) divider line
    More: Fail, Mitt Romney, fuel efficiency standards, Douglas Elmendorf, fuel economy in automobiles, National Federation of Independent Business  
•       •       •

5366 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Oct 2012 at 4:14 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



311 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-10-04 02:46:34 PM  
Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?
 
2012-10-04 02:50:43 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


It makes me curious. Perhaps there are enough people who don't pay attention to the day-to-day news, but do watch the debate, that lying your ass off during the debate is fine, because lots of people won't ever watch the news after the debate to hear that you did so.

On the other hand, if they don't follow the news, how likely is it that they would know the debate was scheduled?
 
2012-10-04 02:52:08 PM  
Meanwhile, Obama set a new debate record for the number of times he inexplicably failed to even attempt to rebut or call bullshiat on an opponent's obvious lies.
 
2012-10-04 02:52:40 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along?


He kinda did the same thing in the 2008 debates.. Laid low the first go-round, let McCain throw some punches, then round 2 and 3 he cleaned John's clock.

In that case, I think Obama actually had respect for McCain, so it wasn't the utter evisceration that it could have been.

This time though, the gloves will be off completely for the second and third debates..  Mitt doesn't even respect himself enough to debate on his own campaign.
 
2012-10-04 02:54:03 PM  

Cyberluddite: Meanwhile, Obama set a new debate record for the number of times he inexplicably failed to even attempt to rebut or call bullshiat on an opponent's obvious lies.


True as well, and something I was disappointed to see. On the other hand though, I'm not sure how well it would have played if he sat there the whole time calling Romney out on each and every point he made. Sure, it would look/sound great to those of us here that are hyper-in tune with the campaigns, but the average voter would just see POTUS in a petty back and forth with the other guy.
 
2012-10-04 02:56:28 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along?


I think you're right. We'll see over the next couple of weeks, but I think we'll see some ads featuring Romney contradicting himself. Obama is already hammering him on the lying. Maybe it would have been more effective last night, but there are 2 more of these debates. Might be better to start slow and finish strong.
 
2012-10-04 02:58:26 PM  
I guess that's one definition of "winning"
 
2012-10-04 03:00:24 PM  
Classic rope-a-dope. Give the dope enough rope and let what is bound to happen happen.
 
2012-10-04 03:00:41 PM  

markie_farkie: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along?

He kinda did the same thing in the 2008 debates.. Laid low the first go-round, let McCain throw some punches, then round 2 and 3 he cleaned John's clock.

In that case, I think Obama actually had respect for McCain, so it wasn't the utter evisceration that it could have been.

This time though, the gloves will be off completely for the second and third debates..  Mitt doesn't even respect himself enough to debate on his own campaign.


Obama plays the long game. That's something you have to remember, especially when people panic and gloat over last night's debate. He wasn't throwing punches. He was getting ammunition while not giving Romney's campaign much of an opportunity to get their own.
 
2012-10-04 03:00:46 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: True as well, and something I was disappointed to see. On the other hand though, I'm not sure how well it would have played if he sat there the whole time calling Romney out on each and every point he made. Sure, it would look/sound great to those of us here that are hyper-in tune with the campaigns, but the average voter would just see POTUS in a petty back and forth with the other guy.


How about at least calling him out on the ones he kept repeating over and over and over--most notably, the "Obamacare cuts grandma's Medicare by $716 billion" thing he repeated a half-dozen times? Yeah, it may be bullshiat, but that doesn't matter if you repeat a lie enough times and don't get called on it. At this point, it might as well be true, because Obama didn't really deny it.
 
2012-10-04 03:14:28 PM  
Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.
 
2012-10-04 03:16:14 PM  

Cyberluddite: Grand_Moff_Joseph: True as well, and something I was disappointed to see. On the other hand though, I'm not sure how well it would have played if he sat there the whole time calling Romney out on each and every point he made. Sure, it would look/sound great to those of us here that are hyper-in tune with the campaigns, but the average voter would just see POTUS in a petty back and forth with the other guy.

How about at least calling him out on the ones he kept repeating over and over and over--most notably, the "Obamacare cuts grandma's Medicare by $716 billion" thing he repeated a half-dozen times? Yeah, it may be bullshiat, but that doesn't matter if you repeat a lie enough times and don't get called on it. At this point, it might as well be true, because Obama didn't really deny it.


That's the thing, Obama DID call him out on it and explained where that money was going and that it was beneficial for Medicare. Romney then ignored what Obama said, repeated the $716b line and added in that there was an unelected board that would be making your personal health care decisions. He covered lies with other lies.
 
2012-10-04 03:20:43 PM  

manwithplanx: Cyberluddite: Grand_Moff_Joseph: True as well, and something I was disappointed to see. On the other hand though, I'm not sure how well it would have played if he sat there the whole time calling Romney out on each and every point he made. Sure, it would look/sound great to those of us here that are hyper-in tune with the campaigns, but the average voter would just see POTUS in a petty back and forth with the other guy.

How about at least calling him out on the ones he kept repeating over and over and over--most notably, the "Obamacare cuts grandma's Medicare by $716 billion" thing he repeated a half-dozen times? Yeah, it may be bullshiat, but that doesn't matter if you repeat a lie enough times and don't get called on it. At this point, it might as well be true, because Obama didn't really deny it.

That's the thing, Obama DID call him out on it and explained where that money was going and that it was beneficial for Medicare. Romney then ignored what Obama said, repeated the $716b line and added in that there was an unelected board that would be making your personal health care decisions. He covered lies with other lies.



It's one of the problems I've always had with Oxford-style debates. You can win almost every time by repeating lies that sound good for the entire debate, and completely chucking reality out the window.
 
2012-10-04 03:23:03 PM  

GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.


I think that was his point. Let Mitt dig himself a hole, don't help him. I don't agree with it, he should've called him out on it.
 
2012-10-04 03:29:48 PM  

Introitus: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

I think that was his point. Let Mitt dig himself a hole, don't help him. I don't agree with it, he should've called him out on it.


I don't know. Instead of smacking his lies down then and there, he's leaving it up to the people to talk about them and debunk his bullshiat. The story now has legs.
 
2012-10-04 03:34:09 PM  

Vodka Zombie: Introitus: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

I think that was his point. Let Mitt dig himself a hole, don't help him. I don't agree with it, he should've called him out on it.

I don't know. Instead of smacking his lies down then and there, he's leaving it up to the people to talk about them and debunk his bullshiat. The story now has legs.


It is almost as if someone realized that a 24 hour news cycle wasn't suspended between debates.
 
2012-10-04 03:35:43 PM  

Sid_6.7:


On the other hand, if they don't follow the news, how likely is it that they would know the debate was scheduled?


Because they tuned in expecting to see The Voice, X Factor, So You Think You Can . . . etc.
 
2012-10-04 03:37:46 PM  
Only 27?
 
2012-10-04 03:42:30 PM  
People are surprised Obama's playing the long game? STILL?
 
2012-10-04 03:45:47 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


markie_farkie: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along?

He kinda did the same thing in the 2008 debates.. Laid low the first go-round, let McCain throw some punches, then round 2 and 3 he cleaned John's clock.

In that case, I think Obama actually had respect for McCain, so it wasn't the utter evisceration that it could have been.

This time though, the gloves will be off completely for the second and third debates..  Mitt doesn't even respect himself enough to debate on his own campaign.


Introitus: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

I think that was his point. Let Mitt dig himself a hole, don't help him. I don't agree with it, he should've called him out on it.


Vodka Zombie: Introitus: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

I think that was his point. Let Mitt dig himself a hole, don't help him. I don't agree with it, he should've called him out on it.

I don't know. Instead of smacking his lies down then and there, he's leaving it up to the people to talk about them and debunk his bullshiat. The story now has legs.



Welp, theres the hope.

When's the change?
 
2012-10-04 03:46:53 PM  

mrshowrules: Vodka Zombie: Introitus: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

I think that was his point. Let Mitt dig himself a hole, don't help him. I don't agree with it, he should've called him out on it.

I don't know. Instead of smacking his lies down then and there, he's leaving it up to the people to talk about them and debunk his bullshiat. The story now has legs.

It is almost as if someone realized that a 24 hour news cycle wasn't suspended between debates.


So, last night I saw a somewhat disengaged Obama debate a somewhat spastic Romney. Outside of their general demeanor, I distinctly remember Big Bird, Obama liking "Obamacare" and $700 billion. Additionally, I remember Obama running long and Romney constantly interrupting to get the last word and coming across as a dick.

I accepted that Romney would likely be viewed as the clear "winner" of the debate-whatever that really means-and that the fact checking would start up and make a news cycle or two.

Today started off with Dead Big Bird memes all over. Really made that seem like a Romney fark up in the end. Pretty much unanimous "yeah, Romney pretty much left reality and/or lied on just about every subject and in every statement" while simultaneously acknowledging he "won" the debate.

As the day passes, more and more ridicule is poured on Romney's "win" and is starting to look closer to the end of the movie "Cars" with Obama more Lighning McQueen and Romney more the Green Douche.

In the end, Obama should have clearly and strongly refuted the Medicare nonsense. He should have pilloried Romney on his stupid tax plan and didn't. Maybe long-game, maybe just off-game. Who knows at this point (outside of his campaign)? I think he should have held a couple of points to kick Romney in the yambag over and repeated them, but he didn't do that either.

In a week we'll find out if, by "winning" the way he did, whether Romney put himself in a worse position than he was before. He's clearly established a debate performance standard he's going to have to maintain and this will be difficult for him. If he underperforms in the next one, he's going to get beaten mercilessly in the press.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-10-04 03:48:11 PM  
It doesn't matter. There comes a point when anyone who cares has already been turned off and more lies have no effect.
 
2012-10-04 03:50:20 PM  
In a row?
 
2012-10-04 03:50:32 PM  

ceebeecates4: Welp, theres the hope.

When's the change?



What are you babbling about? Obama's already using Romney's lies from last night in campaign ads. I don't know if that qualifies as "change" to a moran like yourself, but hey! Whatever.

Maybe you should just go back to eating the kitty litter or something.
 
2012-10-04 03:57:24 PM  
You know, I'm gonna vote for, campaign for and donate to the president, but you people making him sound like some evil genius are giving him too much credit.

I think he had an off night, and I think that he probably had more important things to do yesterday- like stop a war between Syria and NATO- than practice for a debate against a man he is going to beat like a middle age housewife in her 50 Shades of Gray fantasy.
 
2012-10-04 03:58:27 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


If so, it was a pretty farking dumb plan.
 
2012-10-04 03:59:57 PM  

what_now: I think he had an off night, and I think that he probably had more important things to do yesterday- like stop a war between Syria and NATO- than practice for a debate against a man he is going to beat like a middle age housewife in her 50 Shades of Gray fantasy.


This. Keeping us out of another war has got to be pretty taxing on a person.
 
2012-10-04 04:02:27 PM  

ceebeecates4: Welp, theres the hope.

When's the change?


WOW you should design bumper stickers
 
2012-10-04 04:03:03 PM  

manwithplanx: That's the thing, Obama DID call him out on it and explained where that money was going and that it was beneficial for Medicare.


Not an any coherent way that the average listener would understand--and even if they had, he let Romney repeat the lie over and over again without any response. He should've said something along the following, the very first time Romney said it:

Governor Romney, I can't believe you're standing here repeating this utter falsehood yet again. You need to stop doing that--we owe it to the American to have a debate based on facts, not one based on fabrications and false scare tactics. Here is the truth: That $716 billion figure you keep waving around does not represent any cut of a single dollar of benefits to any senior citizen on Medicare. What it does represent it a reduction in reimbursements to insurance companies and hospitals, which they voluntarily agreed to in consideration of the fact that the passage of Obamacare will greatly reduce their current costs of providing free health care to uninsured people who are unable to pay. It's a win-win-win--for the taxpayers, who will no longer have to pick up so much of the cost of paying for emergency health care for uninsured people, for insurance companies and health care providers who will no longer have to absorb the rest of those costs, and for the Medicare system, which will be strengthened and made more solvent by having its expenses reduced in an intelligent matter.

And you know what? Your own running mate, Paul Ryan, in his budget proposal, proposed keeping that $716 reduction in payments in place, even while advocating the repeal of the rest of Obamacare! The difference? While I use those savings to pay for health care for people who currently can't get or can't afford insurance, your running mate wants to use those savings to fund yet another tax cut that would mostly benefit the wealthiest Americans!! So it's more than a little hypocritcal for you to criticize me over something your campaign supports, just because my plan benefits people who need health care--mostly those "47 percenters" you seem to think are all freeloaders--rather than solely benefitting the rich. Shame on you.
 
2012-10-04 04:03:56 PM  

Vodka Zombie: ceebeecates4: Welp, theres the hope.

When's the change?


What are you babbling about? Obama's already using Romney's lies from last night in campaign ads. I don't know if that qualifies as "change" to a moran like yourself, but hey! Whatever.

Maybe you should just go back to eating the kitty litter or something.



For the past few months, the Obama campaign has been working hard to define Romney as an out-of-touch dishonest old white guy. At this point, demonstrating "his lies" is simply doubling down on the tactic that is already undergoing diminishing returns.

Besides, no matter the veraciy of what Romney said, he put Obama on the defensive. Initiative is important.

Also, your attitude sucks. Maybe stop drinking so much?
 
2012-10-04 04:05:26 PM  

what_now: You know, I'm gonna vote for, campaign for and donate to the president, but you people making him sound like some evil genius are giving him too much credit.

I think he had an off night, and I think that he probably had more important things to do yesterday- like stop a war between Syria and NATO- than practice for a debate against a man he is going to beat like a middle age housewife in her 50 Shades of Gray fantasy.


I really think that's it. The guy had a bad night. Given Citizen's United and the SuperPAC's I'm not donating this year, but as a voter in a swing state I'm sending in my early ballot today.

I would, however, donate my maximum the moment, on a live nationally televised debated, Obama turned to look at Mitt and say "That's a load of horseshiat and you know it Mitt."

I would donate the max in my name and my two kids name if he would just bluntly state the truth.
 
2012-10-04 04:06:36 PM  
A candidate lied? GTFO! Seriously? Holy shiat. This is shocking... SHOCKING!
 
2012-10-04 04:07:05 PM  
He did kind of remind me of the Martin Short's Nathan Thurm, Attorney character.
 
2012-10-04 04:08:01 PM  

what_now: You know, I'm gonna vote for, campaign for and donate to the president, but you people making him sound like some evil genius are giving him too much credit.

I think he had an off night, and I think that he probably had more important things to do yesterday- like stop a war between Syria and NATO- than practice for a debate against a man he is going to beat like a middle age housewife in her 50 Shades of Gray fantasy.


I kind of think that the build-up where everyone was talking about how Obama was gonna eviscerate Romney, or whatever, was pretty damaging to him (Obama). Romney didn't get rich by simply stumblebumbing his way into hapless situations where he suckered everyone; the guy is smart, and probably ruthless, and had plenty of time to prepare for this along with mountains of footage of himself showing exactly what not to do. The guy is just feckless and a poor fool on the campaign trail, but that's because he can't script human interactions. A debate is a completely scripted thing from start to finish and he was in his element: giving a business speech.]

I agree with you that Obama had an off night. The border patrol nonsense and Turkyria madness could not have helped.
 
2012-10-04 04:08:52 PM  

what_now: You know, I'm gonna vote for, campaign for and donate to the president, but you people making him sound like some evil genius are giving him too much credit.

I think he had an off night, and I think that he probably had more important things to do yesterday- like stop a war between Syria and NATO- than practice for a debate against a man he is going to beat like a middle age housewife in her 50 Shades of Gray fantasy.


I pretty much agree, and I don't think he really hurt himself too much. The more I think about it the more I think the debate will be fodder for SNL this week and Romney's interruptions, jokes about Big Bird, and Lehrer being completely useless will probably win the hour over Obama's rather boring policy discussions.
 
2012-10-04 04:16:09 PM  

dr_blasto: In a week we'll find out if, by "winning" the way he did, whether Romney put himself in a worse position than he was before. He's clearly established a debate performance standard he's going to have to maintain and this will be difficult for him. If he underperforms in the next one, he's going to get beaten mercilessly in the press.


Your whole post is about as complete as a summary as should ever be needed. Certainly nothing much beyond that will be retained in the collective memory.
 
2012-10-04 04:16:16 PM  
It was probably the altitude.
 
2012-10-04 04:20:43 PM  

Cyberluddite: Governor Romney, I can't believe you're standing here repeating this utter falsehood yet again. You need to stop doing that--we owe it to the American to have a debate based on facts, not one based on fabrications and false scare tactics. Here is the truth: That $716 billion figure you keep waving around does not represent any cut of a single dollar of benefits to any senior citizen on Medicare. What it does represent it a reduction in reimbursements to insurance companies and hospitals, which they voluntarily agreed to in consideration of the fact that the passage of Obamacare will greatly reduce their current costs of providing free health care to uninsured people who are unable to pay. It's a win-win-win--for the taxpayers, who will no longer have to pick up so much of the cost of paying for emergency health care for uninsured people, for insurance companies and health care providers who will no longer have to absorb the rest of those costs, and for the Medicare system, which will be strengthened and made more solvent by having its expenses reduced in an intelligent matter.

And you know what? Your own running mate, Paul Ryan, in his budget proposal, proposed keeping that $716 reduction in payments in place, even while advocating the repeal of the rest of Obamacare! The difference? While I use those savings to pay for health care for people who currently can't get or can't afford insurance, your running mate wants to use those savings to fund yet another tax cut that would mostly benefit the wealthiest Americans!! So it's more than a little hypocritcal for you to criticize me over something your campaign supports, just because my plan benefits people who need health care--mostly those "47 percenters" you seem to think are all freeloaders--rather than solely benefitting the rich. Shame on you.



Yeah, but if he said that, a lot of couples would not have had sex that night as jizz by the pantload would have been expressed across Democratic circles nationwide.
 
2012-10-04 04:20:55 PM  
Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


If they are going to lie about what romney said they should put some effort into it
 
2012-10-04 04:22:25 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


If that is 0bamas thinking then at least it would explain his disastrous foreign policy

No terrorism here, I'll just call it work place violence to piss them off
 
2012-10-04 04:23:09 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


What are the deductions Romney is going to eliminate, and what's the cap on total deductions?
 
2012-10-04 04:23:23 PM  

GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.


wat

They went back-and-forth over "teh maff" in Mitt's "if we cut, there's more!" plan and went back-and-forth over the $716B. Obama didn't say "That's a farking lie, you farking liar," but he said everything but.
 
2012-10-04 04:23:23 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


If they are going to lie about what romney said they should put some effort into it


Now THIS is irony.

/Apologize for quoting tenturds
 
2012-10-04 04:24:02 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


If they are going to lie about what romney said they should put some effort into it


i am sure tenpounsds will deliver a list of romney's deduction reductions any time. Surely, he will deliver.
 
2012-10-04 04:24:08 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Classic rope-a-dope. Give the dope enough rope and let what is bound to happen happen.


Hmm.

That would indicate Obama will come out swinging in round 2. Let's hope so.
 
2012-10-04 04:24:55 PM  
romney's a lying liar and obama's words in the transcript are printed in red, like the words of Jesus.
 
2012-10-04 04:25:10 PM  

Aarontology: tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions

What are the deductions Romney is going to eliminate, and what's the cap on total deductions?


I'm not even sure Romney knows. :P Can't flip-flop what you don't know.
 
2012-10-04 04:25:34 PM  
The strategy of the Rmoney/Rand campaign seems to be lie and say whatever the fark you need to, then have someone from your team come along and "clarify" what the candidate actually meant.

and no one calls them on this bullshiat.

I'm beginning to think this liberal media might be a conservative...lie....
 
2012-10-04 04:25:42 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Only 27?


They didn't include the offshore tax breaks that Romney IS well aware of.

Clinton and Obama went after the same thing in 2008

At issue is the U.S. tax code's treatment of profits earned by foreign subsidiaries of American corporations. Profits earned in the United States are subject to the 35% corporate tax. But multinational corporations can defer paying U.S. taxes on their overseas profits until they return them to the USA - transfers that often don't happen for years. General Electric, for example, has $62 billion in "undistributed earnings" parked offshore, according to recent Securities and Exchange Commission filings. Drug giant Pfizer boasts $60 billion. ExxonMobil has $56 billion.

"If you had two companies in Pittsburgh that both were going to expand capacity and create 100 jobs, our tax code puts the company who chooses to put the plant in Pittsburgh at a competitive disadvantage over the company that chooses to move to a tax haven," says former White House economist Gene Sperling, a Clinton adviser.
 
2012-10-04 04:26:20 PM  

brap: He did kind of remind me of the Martin Short's Nathan Thurm, Attorney character.


Who's getting defensive? YOU'RE the one getting defensive!
 
2012-10-04 04:26:30 PM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: People are surprised Obama's playing the long game? STILL?


Came here to say this.

If you haven't noticed yet, Obama has consistently played long games. He takes longer than most people want to make a move, but it's because he takes time to consider all the angles and decides the best way to get what he wants, and it will stick.

He then moves, and the move he makes is a checkmate.

Some examples are:
- Universal Health Care
- Osama bin Laden
- Pirates
- Ending gay military ban
 
2012-10-04 04:27:16 PM  
Cyberluddite
Meanwhile, Obama set a new debate record for the number of times he inexplicably failed to even attempt to rebut or call bullshiat on an opponent's obvious lies.

Yep. Romney lied again and again and most of the time Obama didn't bother pointing it out. That's why he sucked in this debate. That and he didn't even respond to some potentially damaging attacks that have good responses, most notably Romney's attacks on $90 billion for green energy.

Money for green energy. That's farking great! Defend it, Obama. WTF?

As for Obama trying to explain the $716 billion Medicare "cut", he did. Once. Romney kept repeating the attacks. Obama needed to reiterate.
 
2012-10-04 04:27:17 PM  
I find this one interesting...

And the oil and gas industry is sitting on 7,000 approved permits to drill, that it hasn't begun exploring or developing.

Yet we constantly hear how "unfriendly" Obama is to the oil industry... All these permits and they're not doing anything.
 
2012-10-04 04:27:35 PM  
So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."
 
2012-10-04 04:28:11 PM  
While watching the debates I honestly thought that at least part of the reason Obama seemed so subdued was his complete astonishment of just how much bull Romney was throwing out there.

/did it look like to anyone else that Barry had a black eye?
 
2012-10-04 04:28:18 PM  

Sid_6.7: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?

It makes me curious. Perhaps there are enough people who don't pay attention to the day-to-day news, but do watch the debate, that lying your ass off during the debate is fine, because lots of people won't ever watch the news after the debate to hear that you did so.

On the other hand, if they don't follow the news, how likely is it that they would know the debate was scheduled?


Chess while everyone else plays checkers. There are two more debates to go. This one was on the more boring subject, and likely will therefore be forgotten by election day. BY getting "trounced" (honestly I didn't see it that way) Obama has effectively lowered his own expectations and re-set Romney's so high, that Romney has to now pull off being JFK's reincarnation not to "lose" the next debate, which IIRC is the one that includes national security stff- an area that matters much more to men with whom Obama is trailing slightly, than women with whom he has a commanding lead.

Or Obama had an "off night" because he tried to talk to the American people like grown-ups...either/or
 
2012-10-04 04:28:51 PM  

xanadian: I'm not even sure Romney knows. :P Can't flip-flop what you don't know.


Oh, I'm sure he knows. It's why he and Ryan have been f*cking terrified of giving details about it.
 
2012-10-04 04:29:45 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


Can you explain what deductions Romney will take away from the middle class?

or how he intends to pay for his plan to be deficit neutral, reducing taxes on everyone, while increasing spending?
 
2012-10-04 04:29:51 PM  
And why didn't Obama call out Romney's obvious lie when Mitt denied that there are tax breaks for moving jobs overseas? Call him out, damn it.

Dr Dreidel
They went back-and-forth over "teh maff" in Mitt's "if we cut, there's more!" plan and went back-and-forth over the $716B. Obama didn't say "That's a farking lie, you farking liar," but he said everything but.

But most people won't remember that part. Romney kept repeating the "$716 billion" attack and Obama stopped responding to it. Repetition works, even, or maybe especially, when you're lying your ass off.
 
2012-10-04 04:30:14 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


It's hard to take those into account since Romney doesn't even know what the fark they are.

One way, for instance, would be to have a single number. Make up a number, $25,000, $50,000. Anybody can have deductions up to that amount. And then that number disappears for high-income people. That's one way one could do it. One could follow Bowles-Simpson as a model and take deduction by deduction and make differences that way.

The first time he mentioned it (a few days ago), he said it could be $17,000.

He doesn't have a plan, just a fuzzy idea of what he wants to do. So how in the fark can you measure that?
 
2012-10-04 04:30:17 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


he didn't look so hot to me yesterday, but we'll see what happens.


that said, I've been looking for a RW farker to give me the RW take on Mitt's line about not ending the preexisting condition rule when he dismantles Obamacare.

is the RW take that he meant he expects the states to set these rules up themselves? or what?
seriously, any RWer got an answer there?
 
2012-10-04 04:30:33 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


Perhaps you'd care to make it interesting...
 
2012-10-04 04:30:43 PM  
The general public is quite stupid, this is why he won the debate.
 
2012-10-04 04:31:00 PM  
BTW, something that came up last night that I hadn't heard before from Romney, probably got jumbled in with all of his other bullshiat...

How, exactly would making Medicare a state run thing, with no federal oversight be a good thing? Different states, different regulations. You could be covered in one state, move to another, and be totally farked. Am I missing something here? If this shiat isn't federal, or has no federal oversight, then it is more or less like the current health insurance scenario we already face: You're at the mercy of the place you're in to decide what your coverage is. With health insurance, it's all based on which insurance company they deal with, how big your company is, and how good your company's negotiator is. I see state-regulated Medicare going the same way.
 
2012-10-04 04:31:01 PM  
HAHAHAHA!!!! This is priceless. Gore is saying the altitude of Denver got to Obama...

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/04/video-al-gore-blames-obamas-piti f ul-debate-performance-on-the-thin-denver-air/
 
2012-10-04 04:31:03 PM  
I don't think this was Obama playing Jedi mind chess, although there was a point when Mitt almost lost his mind where I thought the rope-a-dope was in play. I think he's just tired in general. He's out campaigning so he has to be "on" at all times. Turkey is shelling Syria and NATO's getting antsy. And on his 20th anniversary he has to show up to debate a lying blowhard in order to win reelection to a country where about a sizable amount of the electorate would like to see him executed for giving people access to health care.

His eyes had that "Is this shiat really worth it?" look.
 
2012-10-04 04:31:05 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: I guess that's one definition of "winning"


Pyrrhic victory, like I said. He won the debate, but had to lie through his teeth and make himself look like a prick to do so, and this victory is going to come back to bite him in the ass. Hard.
 
2012-10-04 04:31:22 PM  

Aarontology: Can you explain what deductions Romney will take away from the middle class?

or how he intends to pay for his plan to be deficit neutral, reducing taxes on everyone, while increasing spending?


Not just increasing spending, increasing cold-war era style military spending of the nation that outspends the next dozen or so nations combined in military spending, as a percentage of GDP
 
2012-10-04 04:32:04 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


The next presidential debate is a town hall.

Romney is so comfortable around random people, I'm sure he'll do fine. And Obama did so badly last night...

I mean...there's just no way that Obama could possibly beat him, is there?
 
2012-10-04 04:32:07 PM  
Anything that Mitt said that didn't contain the phrase "I'm going to fark over the middle class for another tax cut for the rich" was a lie.
 
2012-10-04 04:32:15 PM  
The big bird comment reminded me a lot of my father; always finding humor in the cruelty and misfortune of others.

Romney changes positions because he doesn't care about you humans. That's the head fake; the misdirection, so he can achieve his real goals.

I'm enjoying the fall of America! I'm living in the making of history!

Soon, the debates will be between scumbags like, Nero vs. Caligula.
 
2012-10-04 04:32:36 PM  

Ed Finnerty: Mr. Coffee Nerves: People are surprised Obama's playing the long game? STILL?

Came here to say this.

If you haven't noticed yet, Obama has consistently played long games. He takes longer than most people want to make a move, but it's because he takes time to consider all the angles and decides the best way to get what he wants, and it will stick.

He then moves, and the move he makes is a checkmate.

Some examples are:
- Universal Health Care
- Osama bin Laden
- Pirates
- Ending gay military ban


- Dream Act-related executive order
- Libya/Ghaddafi
- Auto industry
- offshore tax havens
- fuel efficiency standards
 
2012-10-04 04:32:44 PM  

O.M.G. politicians lie to suit their own needs?

STOP THE PRESS


/dunning-kruger
//opinions are like assholes: everyone has one and everyone's stinks but yours
 
2012-10-04 04:32:57 PM  

mark12A: HAHAHAHA!!!! This is priceless. Gore is saying the altitude of Denver got to Obama...

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/04/video-al-gore-blames-obamas-piti f ul-debate-performance-on-the-thin-denver-air/


Aarontology: mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."

Can you explain what deductions Romney will take away from the middle class?

or how he intends to pay for his plan to be deficit neutral, reducing taxes on everyone, while increasing spending?

 
2012-10-04 04:33:00 PM  
On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.
 
2012-10-04 04:33:18 PM  
Though you do have to let the teabaggers enjoy their "victory"

It's the first good news for Romney in months, and he had to accomplish it by flat out lying, and moving to the left. I mean, he did come out in favor of wall street regulation, individual mandates, governmental involvement with health care, and an increase of $700 Billion in spending on socialized health insurance. As well as praising Massachusetts' education with it's high taxes and powerful teachers unions.
 
2012-10-04 04:33:32 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


...

What?
 
2012-10-04 04:34:17 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


Really? Somehow I don't think he planned this and weather or not he can use Romney statements as sound bites in his ads well Romney can do it also. And to think that farkdom thinks that Obama thought of this in advance is down right laughable.
www.newsbiscuit.com
I bet you will see a different Obama in the next debate.
 
2012-10-04 04:34:22 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


You keep believing that, Sparky.
 
2012-10-04 04:34:33 PM  

Aarontology: Though you do have to let the teabaggers enjoy their "victory"

It's the first good news for Romney in months, and he had to accomplish it by flat out lying, and moving to the left. I mean, he did come out in favor of wall street regulation, individual mandates, governmental involvement with health care, and an increase of $700 Billion in spending on socialized health insurance. As well as praising Massachusetts' education with it's high taxes and powerful teachers unions.


He was for it before he was against it before he was for it before he was against it before he was for it.
 
2012-10-04 04:34:54 PM  

mark12A: HAHAHAHA!!!! This is priceless. Gore is saying the altitude of Denver got to Obama...

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/04/video-al-gore-blames-obamas-piti f ul-debate-performance-on-the-thin-denver-air/


That's nice.

How is Romney going to increase military spending but stay revenue neutral, as he claimed last night?
 
2012-10-04 04:35:13 PM  

patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.


They haven't won the election yet and, by the number of brave independents seen in FARK threads today, they're pretty chickenshiat until after they've had victory declared for them.
 
2012-10-04 04:35:13 PM  

zarberg: Not just increasing spending, increasing cold-war era style military spending of the nation that outspends the next dozen or so nations combined in military spending, as a percentage of GDP


Indeed. That's a lot of money he's going to have to take from the middle class' deductions to make his math match up.
 
2012-10-04 04:35:21 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


If they are going to lie about what romney said they should put some effort into it


Offer them your "consulting" skills.

Use your fark posts for references and you are a shoe in.
 
2012-10-04 04:35:26 PM  

urban.derelict: //opinions are like assholes: everyone has one and everyone's stinks but yours


I dunno, back in college I was going 69 with this girl when she faked an orgas ... I mean when I totally got her off for umm .. the 24th time ... and she sat up, pushing her cornhole right onto my nose, and it wasn't all that bad smelling.
 
2012-10-04 04:35:32 PM  

bdub77: - offshore tax havens

sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net



/mittens doesn't care about war vets who desire medicinal cannabis to ease their pain
//utah was the first state anywhere, ever, to outlaw cannabis -- yes the morons were behind it
/tinyurl.com/1mn
 
2012-10-04 04:35:47 PM  
A house of cards built with a stack of lies and held together with an ignorant public.....vote GOP!
 
2012-10-04 04:36:20 PM  
In the game of chess you let your pawns do the fighting for you, and I think that's what Obama did. Romneybot 4.0 came to the debate that night because that version promoted stability and a friendly user interface, unlike previous versions that simply looked horrible or deleted data when it wanted to.

Obama didn't have to do crap that night but look calm and speak in a plain tone, obviously if the President argued his case passionately it would seem desperate and there's no need to speak grandly because the economy is looking like a 20 dollar whore that's saving up enough money to get the second breast job done.

So he let Romney "get away" with his lies only because he knew the media aka his pawns would beat Romney up post-debate.

Lose a battle, win a war.
 
2012-10-04 04:36:32 PM  

patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.


Been like that since 2008. That's why they're known as Fark IndependentsTM here.
 
2012-10-04 04:36:51 PM  

patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.


That's why we have the phrase "Fark Independent™" round these parts.
 
2012-10-04 04:36:51 PM  

bdub77: He was for it before he was against it before he was for it before he was against it before he was for it.


Romney's now going to have to stay to the left or else he'll demonstrate that he really did spend 90 minutes flat out lying to the American people.

of course, the teabaggers are going to have a fit with their newly liberal nominee. but I'm sure they won't mind a Massachusetts liberal in office, right?
 
2012-10-04 04:37:30 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


I've heard this already, and it's a shiatty plan if it's true. Let's talk about undecided voters. At this point, less than 2 months from election, your only remaining undecideds are so low-info, they probably can't find Canada on a map of North America. So, allow me to suggest:

Proposal 1: almost no one this clueless and disengaged from US society actually watched the debate. Proposal 2: of the few that did, almost none of them will be excitedly firing up their computers today or tomorrow with a hardon for reading what the fact checkers have to say.

There is a perfect time and place to call Willard out on his nonstop stream of lies, and it is called LAST NIGHT AS SOON AS THE LIES ESCAPED HIS LIPS. Instead Romney looked like a man on fire, re-energizing a mostly disengaged right, while Obama just looked bored and unhappy to be there, put in the minimal effort, and demoralized a left that is probably already too complacent going into this election.

/Just my $0.02, not to be taken as gospel.
 
2012-10-04 04:37:40 PM  
Right now there seems to be 5 candidates running for president: Governor Romney, Primaries Romney, Candidate Romney, Debate Romney, a relative newcomer, and finally Barack Obama.
 
2012-10-04 04:37:43 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


That's a shame. Because the very next one (#3) explained this:

If Romney hopes to provide tax relief to the middle class, then his $5 trillion tax cut would add to the deficit. There are not enough deductions in the tax code that primarily benefit rich people to make his math work.
 
2012-10-04 04:37:46 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-04 04:38:08 PM  
Fortunately John Kerry and Al Gore have shown that inconsistent pathological liars don't win the Presidency.
 
2012-10-04 04:38:39 PM  

gilgigamesh: mark12A: HAHAHAHA!!!! This is priceless. Gore is saying the altitude of Denver got to Obama...

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/04/video-al-gore-blames-obamas-piti f ul-debate-performance-on-the-thin-denver-air/

That's nice.

How is Romney going to increase military spending but stay revenue neutral, as he claimed last night?


See, it's like this. Romney is totally full of sh*t. He will hire plenty of aides and work with Congressmen that are also totally full of sh*t. He will convince people that his ideas are good so that they become totally full of sh*t. He will then invest in Clean Sh*t, then all the people full of sh*t will release their sh*t into special sh*t containers which will fuel all our energy needs for the next 3 days.

After that, it's a crap shoot.
 
2012-10-04 04:38:45 PM  

LegacyDL: he knew the media aka his pawns


Oh, whatEVER.
 
2012-10-04 04:39:34 PM  
I wanted Obama to close with "I urge each of you to go to various fact-checking sites and see how this debate has scored. It keeps me and my opponent honest.". That would have been the rope-a-dope. This was weak.
 
2012-10-04 04:40:27 PM  
That's funny. The right wingers around here pop up to gloat over Romney's debate victory last night, but when you ask them a pointed question as to their candidate's position they vanish in a puff a smoke.

There's got to be a winning strategery right in there somewhere.
 
2012-10-04 04:40:33 PM  

theorellior: patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.

That's why we have the phrase "Fark Independent™" round these parts.


It's because they're embarrassed (rightfully) to be associated with them. Republicans tend to be good at closeting their true feelings.
 
2012-10-04 04:41:44 PM  

PC LOAD LETTER: I wanted Obama to close with "I urge each of you to go to various fact-checking sites and see how this debate has scored. It keeps me and my opponent honest.". That would have been the rope-a-dope. This was weak.


Hot damn. That would have been a masterstroke that would have put Romney on the floor.
 
2012-10-04 04:41:55 PM  
I've been looking for a RW farker to give me the RW take on Mitt's line about not ending the preexisting condition rule when he dismantles Obamacare.

is the RW take that he meant he expects the states to set these rules up themselves? or what?
seriously, any RWer got an answer there?
 
2012-10-04 04:41:55 PM  

gilgigamesh: That's funny. The right wingers around here pop up to gloat over Romney's debate victory last night, but when you ask them a pointed question as to their candidate's position they vanish in a puff a smoke.

There's got to be a winning strategery right in there somewhere.


I've been noticing the same thing.

It's amazing how happy they are until they have to defend their candidate moving to the left.
 
2012-10-04 04:41:57 PM  

theorellior: LegacyDL: he knew the media aka his pawns

Oh, whatEVER.


No lie, tell me why right after the debate MSNBC basically shrieked out Obama's talking points for him? Obama knew that if he called Mitt out on his BS it would look ineffective and dire. The last thing the Administration would want to do is make Mitt look like the victim.
 
2012-10-04 04:42:27 PM  

Cyberluddite: Meanwhile, Obama set a new debate record for the number of times he inexplicably failed to even attempt to rebut or call bullshiat on an opponent's obvious lies.


Well, I don't see how he could in just a couple of minutes. Romney obviously practiced for months saying his prepared lies and flipping his position at a mile a minute. It would take Obama longer to refute each one with facts. Romney can say "gas prices doubled under your administration" and "all of your green money went to bankrupt companies" in 10 seconds, but Obama would have to take 5 minutes to refute each one. That was apparently the Republican plan, pull out the stops with the lies knowing that it would be impossible to counter a wall of derp in the given time.

.
 
2012-10-04 04:45:06 PM  

LegacyDL: theorellior: LegacyDL: he knew the media aka his pawns

Oh, whatEVER.

No lie, tell me why right after the debate MSNBC basically shrieked out Obama's talking points for him? Obama knew that if he called Mitt out on his BS it would look ineffective and dire. The last thing the Administration would want to do is make Mitt look like the victim.


Steve Schmidt was on the MSNBC panel last night, crowing about Romney's victory.

Also, by "talking points" I assume you mean pointing out Romney's bald face lying.
 
2012-10-04 04:46:14 PM  

LegacyDL: theorellior: LegacyDL: he knew the media aka his pawns

Oh, whatEVER.

No lie, tell me why right after the debate MSNBC basically shrieked out Obama's talking points for him? Obama knew that if he called Mitt out on his BS it would look ineffective and dire. The last thing the Administration would want to do is make Mitt look like the victim.


Apparently, Chris Matthews is The Media™ now. The entire thing. All Matthews, all channels, all the time.
 
kab
2012-10-04 04:46:42 PM  

pacified: i am sure tenpounsds will deliver a list of romney's deduction reductions any time. Surely, he will deliver.


Don't hold your breath.
 
2012-10-04 04:46:57 PM  

pacified: tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


If they are going to lie about what romney said they should put some effort into it

i am sure tenpounsds will deliver a list of romney's deduction reductions any time. Surely, he will deliver.


Right..he got called out on the other thread and still hasn't done it..just more bob and weave and deflect.

Whatsamatter, Cheeseboy?....Can't answer one simple farking question?
 
2012-10-04 04:47:35 PM  
Think Regress Tears of Impotent Rage. So delicious. So sweet. They feed me.
 
2012-10-04 04:48:11 PM  

HeartBurnKid: Apparently, Chris Matthews is The Media™ now. The entire thing. All Matthews, all channels, all the time.


If there's a hell, that's what it would look like.
 
2012-10-04 04:48:43 PM  

zappaisfrank: Whatsamatter, Cheeseboy?....Can't answer one simple farking question?


Again. remember what they're gloating about: Their candidate had to become a liberal and advocate liberal positions in order to beat Obama in a debate. They really don't seem to like that.
 
2012-10-04 04:48:52 PM  

zappaisfrank: Whatsamatter, Cheeseboy?....Can't answer one simple farking question?

 
2012-10-04 04:49:24 PM  

beta_plus: Think Regress Tears of Impotent Rage. So delicious. So sweet. They feed me.


Can you explain how Romney's plan can work? Or which deductions he's going to eliminate?

Or are you just happy that your candidate is now a liberal?
 
2012-10-04 04:49:24 PM  

urban.derelict: O.M.G. politicians lie to suit their own needs?


BSAB

So you know what to do.
 
2012-10-04 04:50:08 PM  
its good to see the threadshiatters all full of piss and vinegar again.
we needed that.
 
2012-10-04 04:50:35 PM  

born_yesterday: zappaisfrank: Whatsamatter, Cheeseboy?....Can't answer one simple farking question?

 
2012-10-04 04:50:43 PM  

beta_plus: Think Regress Tears of Impotent Rage. So delicious. So sweet. They feed me.


How will Mitt Romney pay for increases in military spending without increasing the deficit?

You can run away from the question if you want (and you will), but Romney can't. It will hound him every time he shows his face from now til election day.
 
2012-10-04 04:50:45 PM  

LegacyDL: theorellior: LegacyDL: he knew the media aka his pawns

Oh, whatEVER.

No lie, tell me why right after the debate MSNBC basically shrieked out Obama's talking points for him? Obama knew that if he called Mitt out on his BS it would look ineffective and dire. The last thing the Administration would want to do is make Mitt look like the victim.


You're aware that Fox News, Rush, Hannity, Lars Larson, and conservative media are still "the media", right? Despite their attempts to state the contrary. Stop pretending that only the news channels that spin left constitute the entire media.

"B-b-but the librul media is so much more mainstream!"

Except that Fox News' numbers absolutely trounce MSNBC. But no, they aren't the media.
 
2012-10-04 04:51:25 PM  
a man he is going to beat like a middle age housewife in her 50 Shades of Gray fantasy.

thank you for that horrifying mental image.
 
2012-10-04 04:52:25 PM  

Markoff_Cheney: its good to see the threadshiatters all full of piss and vinegar again.
we needed that.


It doesn't last. Same as before: fly over a thread, drop a steamer, and fly on.

I'm amazed any of them bother. It's so transparent.
 
2012-10-04 04:54:30 PM  
23) "It's why Republicans said, do not do this, and the Republicans had - had the plan. They put a plan out. They put out a plan, a bipartisan plan. It was swept aside." The Affordable Care Act incorporates many Republican ideas including the individual mandate, state-based health care exchanges, high-risk insurance pools, and modified provisions that allow insurers to sell policies in multiple states. Republicans never offered a united bipartisan alternative.

Yeah, Romney's claim on this was was such utter bullshiat. It's been known the whole time that Obama's plan contained a large amount of Republican ideas, they just keep ignoring that fact that many of the provisions they are attacking are actually their own, all while trying to deny their obstructionist tactics.
 
2012-10-04 04:54:36 PM  

beta_plus: Think Regress Tears of Impotent Rage. So delicious. So sweet. They feed me.


I've been looking for a RW farker to give me the RW take on Mitt's line about not ending the preexisting condition rule when he dismantles Obamacare.

is the RW take that he meant he expects the states to set these rules up themselves? or what?
seriously, any RWer got an answer there?
 
2012-10-04 04:54:57 PM  

Ed Finnerty: Mr. Coffee Nerves: People are surprised Obama's playing the long game? STILL?

Came here to say this.

If you haven't noticed yet, Obama has consistently played long games. He takes longer than most people want to make a move, but it's because he takes time to consider all the angles and decides the best way to get what he wants, and it will stick.



Got it. So how long do we have to wait until we get unemployment to around 6% (which he originally said would be 2012)?

How long is this game he is playing?
 
2012-10-04 04:54:57 PM  

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: I don't think this was Obama playing Jedi mind chess, although there was a point when Mitt almost lost his mind where I thought the rope-a-dope was in play. I think he's just tired in general. He's out campaigning so he has to be "on" at all times. Turkey is shelling Syria and NATO's getting antsy. And on his 20th anniversary he has to show up to debate a lying blowhard in order to win reelection to a country where about a sizable amount of the electorate would like to see him executed for giving people access to health care.

His eyes had that "Is this shiat really worth it?" look.


You're going to get called an apologist but this is a very succinct look at reality and the reason why you couldn't pay me enough to be President. Used to be a time when crazy self-destructive people were rightfully ignored and told to shut up when grown folk were talking. Now we give them a political party, a voice on news shows, and remind them that their vote counts as much as the aforementioned grown folk. Huge mistake on society's part.
 
2012-10-04 04:55:11 PM  
He's a Rape-ublican. I would have expected better from him. At least a lie a minute. He'll get better at it.

He has to get better at not smirking--it wastes precious lying time.
 
2012-10-04 04:55:32 PM  
This is what people call #WINNING
 
2012-10-04 04:55:52 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Got it. So how long do we have to wait until we get unemployment to around 6% (which he originally said would be 2012)?

How long is this game he is playing?


What are the deductions Romney is going to eliminate for the middle class, and how does he intend to pay for his plan while keeping it budget neutral.

Followup: How do you feel about Romney going hard left?
 
2012-10-04 04:56:35 PM  

gilgigamesh: Markoff_Cheney: its good to see the threadshiatters all full of piss and vinegar again.
we needed that.

It doesn't last. Same as before: fly over a thread, drop a steamer, and fly on.

I'm amazed any of them bother. It's so transparent.


they seem to be so busy gloating that they are forgetting the fact that mitt stated positions many of them have happily carpet bombed threads against in the past.

TPOC seems to like to snipe more than once, but after 3-4 posts his sniping position has been given up and he hast to post up in the next thread.
 
2012-10-04 04:56:38 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Ed Finnerty: Mr. Coffee Nerves: People are surprised Obama's playing the long game? STILL?

Came here to say this.

If you haven't noticed yet, Obama has consistently played long games. He takes longer than most people want to make a move, but it's because he takes time to consider all the angles and decides the best way to get what he wants, and it will stick.

Got it. So how long do we have to wait until we get unemployment to around 6% (which he originally said would be 2012)?

How long is this game he is playing?


Aarontology: tenpoundsofcheese: Got it. So how long do we have to wait until we get unemployment to around 6% (which he originally said would be 2012)?

How long is this game he is playing?

What are the deductions Romney is going to eliminate for the middle class, and how does he intend to pay for his plan while keeping it budget neutral.

Followup: How do you feel about Romney going hard left?

 
2012-10-04 04:57:37 PM  

pacified: tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


If they are going to lie about what romney said they should put some effort into it

i am sure tenpounsds will deliver a list of romney's deduction reductions any time. Surely, he will deliver.


is your google broken? maybe you should reinstall?

here, I will help: www.romney.com
 
2012-10-04 04:57:45 PM  

Aarontology:

Followup: How do you feel about Romney going hard left?


The ends justify the means...
 
2012-10-04 04:58:48 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: pacified: tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


If they are going to lie about what romney said they should put some effort into it

i am sure tenpounsds will deliver a list of romney's deduction reductions any time. Surely, he will deliver.

is your google broken? maybe you should reinstall?

here, I will help: www.romney.com


Answer it yourself, coward.
 
2012-10-04 04:59:30 PM  

Zapruder: LegacyDL: theorellior: LegacyDL: he knew the media aka his pawns

Oh, whatEVER.

No lie, tell me why right after the debate MSNBC basically shrieked out Obama's talking points for him? Obama knew that if he called Mitt out on his BS it would look ineffective and dire. The last thing the Administration would want to do is make Mitt look like the victim.

You're aware that Fox News, Rush, Hannity, Lars Larson, and conservative media are still "the media", right? Despite their attempts to state the contrary. Stop pretending that only the news channels that spin left constitute the entire media.

"B-b-but the librul media is so much more mainstream!"

Except that Fox News' numbers absolutely trounce MSNBC. But no, they aren't the media.


They are a cable station under the surveillance of Homeland Security, the FBI and CIA. So they got that going for them.
 
2012-10-04 05:00:14 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: is your google broken? maybe you should reinstall?

here, I will help: www.romney.com


No specifics there.

Answer the questions.
 
2012-10-04 05:00:42 PM  

born_yesterday: mark12A: HAHAHAHA!!!! This is priceless. Gore is saying the altitude of Denver got to Obama...

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/04/video-al-gore-blames-obamas-piti f ul-debate-performance-on-the-thin-denver-air/

Aarontology: mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."

Can you explain what deductions Romney will take away from the middle class?

or how he intends to pay for his plan to be deficit neutral, reducing taxes on everyone, while increasing spending?


Silly lib! Policies don't matter, it's all about my team winning and your team losing! RAH RAH GO REPUBLICANS!
 
2012-10-04 05:00:42 PM  
I'm surprised that people aren't pointing that Romney is playing weasel word semantics with his pledge to cut taxes.

Romney is pledging to cut the TAX RATES. He intends somehow to balance this by cutting unspecified deductions. This can mean that some people will PAY MORE TAXES because they can't deduct things they did in the past.

Cutting deductions itself is a TAX INCREASE.
 
2012-10-04 05:01:10 PM  
The only thing he didn't lie about was wanting to kill Big Bird.
 
2012-10-04 05:01:18 PM  
How is Romney going to increase military spending but stay revenue neutral, as he claimed last night?

You seriously expect me to lay out, in detail, how EITHER of these candidates are going to fix this mess? Are you prepared to lay out, in detail, how your guy the Obamessiah, is going to fix it? Seriously?

I'm looking at this at a macro level. One guy is a farking "Community Organizer" with ZERO executive experience, NOTHING in his background that suggests he knows jackshiat about how to run large enterprises, who is obviously in so far over his head it isn'r funny anymore..

versus,

someone who has extensive executive experience, Governor of a state, a proven track record of success in business, who actually knows something about finance.

Congress has given up, and is currently on a spending spree that WILL crash the dollar. I want a moneyman in charge, someone who knows what he's doing, not some loopy, in-over-his-head, BS artist who only got the job because the MSM is in love with the guy, and did everything they could to cover for him and get him into office.
 
2012-10-04 05:01:46 PM  

Markoff_Cheney: gilgigamesh: Markoff_Cheney: its good to see the threadshiatters all full of piss and vinegar again.
we needed that.

It doesn't last. Same as before: fly over a thread, drop a steamer, and fly on.

I'm amazed any of them bother. It's so transparent.

they seem to be so busy gloating that they are forgetting the fact that mitt stated positions many of them have happily carpet bombed threads against in the past.

TPOC seems to like to snipe more than once, but after 3-4 posts his sniping position has been given up and he hast to post up in the next thread.


Thems the rules.
Got quotas and numbers to hit.
Required to not respond to certain known trolls (even though i don't put them on ignore, for the lulz)
 
2012-10-04 05:02:04 PM  
The entire Republican Party is now built on nothing but lies and ignorance, and they seem to be pretty damn proud of it.
 
2012-10-04 05:02:35 PM  
Haliiburton was up almost 3% today. Cha-ching! Get it while it's cheap boys! War with Iran means wonderful dividends.
 
2012-10-04 05:02:37 PM  

Sid_6.7: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?

It makes me curious. Perhaps there are enough people who don't pay attention to the day-to-day news, but do watch the debate, that lying your ass off during the debate is fine, because lots of people won't ever watch the news after the debate to hear that you did so.

On the other hand, if they don't follow the news, how likely is it that they would know the debate was scheduled?


NPR had a segment on this a couple of days ago. Essentially undecided / low-information voters don't watch the debates and get most of their opinions about them from the media in the days that follow, the only things they find out about are total zingers or otherwise entertaining and easy to understand stories, like declaring you're killing off Big Bird.
 
2012-10-04 05:02:52 PM  

born_yesterday: Followup: How do you feel about Romney going hard left?


Be specific.
What hard left positions are you referring to?
 
2012-10-04 05:02:59 PM  

mark12A: How is Romney going to increase military spending but stay revenue neutral, as he claimed last night?

You seriously expect me to lay out, in detail, how EITHER of these candidates are going to fix this mess? Are you prepared to lay out, in detail, how your guy the Obamessiah, is going to fix it? Seriously?

I'm looking at this at a macro level. One guy is a farking "Community Organizer" with ZERO executive experience, NOTHING in his background that suggests he knows jackshiat about how to run large enterprises, who is obviously in so far over his head it isn'r funny anymore..

versus,

someone who has extensive executive experience, Governor of a state, a proven track record of success in business, who actually knows something about finance.

Congress has given up, and is currently on a spending spree that WILL crash the dollar. I want a moneyman in charge, someone who knows what he's doing, not some loopy, in-over-his-head, BS artist who only got the job because the MSM is in love with the guy, and did everything they could to cover for him and get him into office.


I have no idea what my candidate actually stands for, how he intends to accomplish his goals, or what those goals actually even are. All I know is that I support him and his transformation into a liberal


FTFY
 
2012-10-04 05:02:59 PM  
But Remember, Republicans are the party of family and morals.

/even if Romney did call all his sons liars on stage last night.
 
2012-10-04 05:03:30 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Markoff_Cheney: gilgigamesh: Markoff_Cheney: its good to see the threadshiatters all full of piss and vinegar again.
we needed that.

It doesn't last. Same as before: fly over a thread, drop a steamer, and fly on.

I'm amazed any of them bother. It's so transparent.

they seem to be so busy gloating that they are forgetting the fact that mitt stated positions many of them have happily carpet bombed threads against in the past.

TPOC seems to like to snipe more than once, but after 3-4 posts his sniping position has been given up and he hast to post up in the next thread.

Thems the rules.
Got quotas and numbers to hit.
Required to not respond to certain known trolls (even though i don't put them on ignore, for the lulz)


Translation: "I can't answer a direct question, so I'm going to continue to ignore the calls for it, then act like I'm somehow a superior intellect for doing so".

ANSWER THE QUESTIONS!
 
2012-10-04 05:04:23 PM  

mark12A: Obamessiah


*chug*
 
2012-10-04 05:04:32 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: What hard left positions are you referring to?


HIs pledge to increase spending on socialized medicine by $716 billion.
Or his support for governmental regulation of wall street. Or his support for the individual mandate.

You know. The things you've been calling Obama an America hating socialist about for four years.
 
2012-10-04 05:04:48 PM  
Obama: You intend to end the rule stopping insurers from dropping people because of preexisting conditions.

Mitt: No, not at all. My plan would cover those people.

Mitt's campaign: what Obama said.


/that's a gigantic lie, on live tv.
 
2012-10-04 05:05:35 PM  

GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.


Did you all like how Obama kept trying to repeat the same lies over and over and Romney kept calling him on it? It was awesome to see Obama without his teleprompter and without the liberal media to cover for him. The next debate is going to be even better, and Ryan is going to make Biden look even dumber than he does on his own.
 
2012-10-04 05:05:50 PM  

vernonFL: The only thing he didn't lie about was wanting to kill Big Bird.


when did he say he was wanting to kill Big Bird?
Are you lying again?

Since when is not funding PBS the same as killing off a highly profitable business? Sesame Street has a highly profitable licensing business. Big Bird can stand on his own feet...and afford to have 10 servants hold him up if he ate too many worms.
 
2012-10-04 05:06:05 PM  
It really is amazing how f*cking terrified the teabaggers are about talking about what Romney actually said last night
 
kab
2012-10-04 05:06:54 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: born_yesterday: Followup: How do you feel about Romney going hard left?

Be specific.
What hard left positions are you referring to?


Have you posted specifics about Romney's exact plan for deductions yet? We're waiting.
 
2012-10-04 05:07:03 PM  

mark12A: One guy is a farking "Community Organizer" with ZERO executive experience, NOTHING in his background that suggests he knows jackshiat about how to run large enterprises, who is obviously in so far over his head it isn'r funny anymore..


Why are Republicans so desperate today? I would have thought they'd be basking in the glow of their debate victory, declaring their love for Romney, singing about all things Republican. Instead, they seem more deranged than ever.
 
2012-10-04 05:07:12 PM  

shotglasss: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

Did you all like how Obama kept trying to repeat the same lies over and over and Romney kept calling him on it? It was awesome to see Obama without his teleprompter and without the liberal media to cover for him. The next debate is going to be even better, and Ryan is going to make Biden look even dumber than he does on his own.


how is Romney going to pay for his plan, and which specific deductions is he going to take away from the middle class?
 
2012-10-04 05:07:28 PM  
mark12A

Too obvious. Go back and practice; you're clearly off your game.
 
2012-10-04 05:07:35 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Ed Finnerty: Mr. Coffee Nerves: People are surprised Obama's playing the long game? STILL?

Came here to say this.

If you haven't noticed yet, Obama has consistently played long games. He takes longer than most people want to make a move, but it's because he takes time to consider all the angles and decides the best way to get what he wants, and it will stick.

ZING!

Got it. So how long do we have to wait until we get unemployment to around 6% (which he originally said would be 2012)?

How long is this game he is playing?

 
2012-10-04 05:07:45 PM  

shotglasss: trying to repeat the same lies over and over


Such as?
 
2012-10-04 05:08:11 PM  

nevirus: mark12A: One guy is a farking "Community Organizer" with ZERO executive experience, NOTHING in his background that suggests he knows jackshiat about how to run large enterprises, who is obviously in so far over his head it isn'r funny anymore..

Why are Republicans so desperate today? I would have thought they'd be basking in the glow of their debate victory, declaring their love for Romney, singing about all things Republican. Instead, they seem more deranged than ever.


Because they know that the only reason Romney won last night was because he took a left wing turn.

Hell, Romney was talking about the necessity of a public option when he was going on about medicare reform.
 
MFK
2012-10-04 05:08:33 PM  
WHICH DEDUCTIONS SPECIFICALLY???
 
2012-10-04 05:08:59 PM  

mark12A: a proven track record of success in business, who actually knows something about finance.


What good or service does Bain provide?
 
2012-10-04 05:09:49 PM  

kab: tenpoundsofcheese: born_yesterday: Followup: How do you feel about Romney going hard left?

Be specific.
What hard left positions are you referring to?

Have you posted specifics about Romney's exact plan for deductions yet? We're waiting.


One thing you should remember about Tenturds is that while the internet grants people anonymity, it does not grant them a personality.
 
2012-10-04 05:09:49 PM  

WhyteRaven74: mark12A: a proven track record of success in business, who actually knows something about finance.

What good or service does Bain provide?


Well, there's the whole abortion waste processing that Romney made a bunch of money on...

So they're pretty good at providing disposal of murdered babies, to use the conservative view of abortion.
 
2012-10-04 05:10:05 PM  

shotglasss: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

Did you all like how Obama kept trying to repeat the same lies over and over and Romney kept calling him on it? It was awesome to see Obama without his teleprompter and without the liberal media to cover for him. The next debate is going to be even better, and Ryan is going to make Biden look even dumber than he does on his own.


The worldview of Rightwingistan, ladies and gentlemen.

Perhaps you can answer the question TPOC and others have dodged all day..

What are the deductions Romney is going to eliminate for the middle class, and how does he intend to pay for his plan while keeping it budget neutral.

I suspect TPOC and shotglass are the same person, but we'll see....
 
2012-10-04 05:10:31 PM  

Aarontology: shotglasss: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

Did you all like how Obama kept trying to repeat the same lies over and over and Romney kept calling him on it? It was awesome to see Obama without his teleprompter and without the liberal media to cover for him. The next debate is going to be even better, and Ryan is going to make Biden look even dumber than he does on his own.

how is Romney going to pay for his plan, and which specific deductions is he going to take away from the middle class?


What plan are you talking about? And who said anything about taking anything away from the middle class?

Perhaps you should swing over to www.mittromney.com and do some reading on his plans.
 
2012-10-04 05:10:45 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: vernonFL: The only thing he didn't lie about was wanting to kill Big Bird.

when did he say he was wanting to kill Big Bird?
Are you lying again?

Since when is not funding PBS the same as killing off a highly profitable business? Sesame Street has a highly profitable licensing business. Big Bird can stand on his own feet...and afford to have 10 servants hold him up if he ate too many worms.


Just looked it up. Sesame Street toys made $515M. The average licensing fee is 8.7% so just from toys, they make $44M. They also get licensing fees from shows, books, etc.

So why do you want the government to prop up this .001%er?
 
2012-10-04 05:10:45 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


You'll have to come back on here on the night of November 6 and tell us what the barrel of a gun tastes like.

/...so scared...
 
2012-10-04 05:11:08 PM  

shotglasss: What plan are you talking about?


His plan to lower tax rates but get rid of deductions.
 
2012-10-04 05:11:59 PM  

WhyteRaven74: mark12A: a proven track record of success in business, who actually knows something about finance.

What good or service does Bain provide?


You do realize you're arguing with somebody who just described the President as somebody "with ZERO executive experience", right? Do you honestly think he even believes his own posts?
 
2012-10-04 05:12:04 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: So why do you want the government to prop up this .001%er?


There's all the other stuff on PBS...
 
2012-10-04 05:12:05 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: vernonFL: The only thing he didn't lie about was wanting to kill Big Bird.

when did he say he was wanting to kill Big Bird?
Are you lying again?

Since when is not funding PBS the same as killing off a highly profitable business? Sesame Street has a highly profitable licensing business. Big Bird can stand on his own feet...and afford to have 10 servants hold him up if he ate too many worms.


Still ducking the question, I see...

What are the deductions Romney is going to eliminate for the middle class, and how does he intend to pay for his plan while keeping it revenue neutral?

Whattsamatter? Pee Wee Prebius hasn't answered your email about this yet?

ANSWER THE QUESTION.
 
2012-10-04 05:12:23 PM  

shotglasss: What plan are you talking about? And who said anything about taking anything away from the middle class?


Romney's tax plan. The one he was rambling on about last night. And the deductions to pay for that he said he'd take away from everyone. And since there aren't enough deductions in the tax code that primarily effect rich people to pay for it, he has to come after the middle class in order to keep his promise of his plan being deficit neutral.

You watched the debate last night, right?

And if it's so easy to find on his site, you oculd have copy pasted. Admit it, you don't know what he actually says, but you support it anyyway.
 
2012-10-04 05:12:47 PM  

Aarontology: tenpoundsofcheese: Got it. So how long do we have to wait until we get unemployment to around 6% (which he originally said would be 2012)?

How long is this game he is playing?

What are the deductions Romney is going to eliminate for the middle class, and how does he intend to pay for his plan while keeping it budget neutral.

Followup: How do you feel about Romney going hard left?


NASCAR style
 
2012-10-04 05:12:49 PM  

WhyteRaven74: mark12A: a proven track record of success in business, who actually knows something about finance.

What good or service does Bain provide?


They're really good at harvesting providing profitable companies with the freedom to grow, running up their credit giving them liberty, and selling them off when they're toxic helping them reach the American dream. Those are all good services.
 
2012-10-04 05:12:55 PM  

zappaisfrank: shotglasss: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

Did you all like how Obama kept trying to repeat the same lies over and over and Romney kept calling him on it? It was awesome to see Obama without his teleprompter and without the liberal media to cover for him. The next debate is going to be even better, and Ryan is going to make Biden look even dumber than he does on his own.

The worldview of Rightwingistan, ladies and gentlemen.

Perhaps you can answer the question TPOC and others have dodged all day..

What are the deductions Romney is going to eliminate for the middle class, and how does he intend to pay for his plan while keeping it budget neutral.

I suspect TPOC and shotglass are the same person, but we'll see....


Who is saying that the middle class is going to have deductions eliminated? Former Obama flacks? The same people who haven't kept one campaign promise from four years ago?
 
2012-10-04 05:13:21 PM  

shotglasss: Who is saying that the middle class is going to have deductions eliminated?


Mitt Romney said it last night.
 
2012-10-04 05:13:24 PM  

Aarontology: It really is amazing how f*cking terrified the teabaggers are about talking about what Romney actually said last night


oohhhh, ohhhhh, yeah, we are shaking....ohhhhhhh we are so scared.

unlike the left, we didn't create strawman about who Romney is.

But again, what hard left positions do you claim Romney holds that people should be so scared about?
 
2012-10-04 05:13:32 PM  
This is like 4chan-level trolling in here. Really pathetic.
 
2012-10-04 05:13:35 PM  

WhyteRaven74: shotglasss: What plan are you talking about?

His plan to lower tax rates but get rid of deductions.


What deductions is he getting rid of?
 
2012-10-04 05:14:14 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: But again, what hard left positions do you claim Romney holds that people should be so scared about?


I answered this already.

But how about increasing spending by $716 Billion dollars on socialized health insurance for starters?
 
2012-10-04 05:14:30 PM  

Biological Ali: You do realize you're arguing with somebody who just described the President as somebody "with ZERO executive experience", right? Do you honestly think he even believes his own posts?


I would not be surprised if he did.
 
2012-10-04 05:14:49 PM  

Wooly Bully: This is like 4chan-level trolling in here. Really pathetic.


Don't be too upset about it, you should have expected the libs to come out raging after the way Obama got his clock cleaned last night.
 
2012-10-04 05:14:51 PM  

shotglasss: Aarontology: shotglasss: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

Did you all like how Obama kept trying to repeat the same lies over and over and Romney kept calling him on it? It was awesome to see Obama without his teleprompter and without the liberal media to cover for him. The next debate is going to be even better, and Ryan is going to make Biden look even dumber than he does on his own.

how is Romney going to pay for his plan, and which specific deductions is he going to take away from the middle class?

What plan are you talking about? And who said anything about taking anything away from the middle class?

Perhaps you should swing over to www.mittromney.com and do some reading on his plans.


tenpoundsofcheese: pacified: tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


If they are going to lie about what romney said they should put some effort into it

i am sure tenpounsds will deliver a list of romney's deduction reductions any time. Surely, he will deliver.

is your google broken? maybe you should reinstall?

here, I will help: www.romney.com



AH HA!!!!

We've just found proof that TPOC and shotglasss are the SAME GUY!

You've been outed, putzo.
 
2012-10-04 05:15:00 PM  
Apparently, MItt Romney didn't say anything at all last night.

But he still won.

This is what teabaggers actually believe.
 
2012-10-04 05:15:48 PM  
ct.fra.bz
 
2012-10-04 05:16:05 PM  

shotglasss: zappaisfrank: shotglasss: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

Did you all like how Obama kept trying to repeat the same lies over and over and Romney kept calling him on it? It was awesome to see Obama without his teleprompter and without the liberal media to cover for him. The next debate is going to be even better, and Ryan is going to make Biden look even dumber than he does on his own.

The worldview of Rightwingistan, ladies and gentlemen.

Perhaps you can answer the question TPOC and others have dodged all day..

What are the deductions Romney is going to eliminate for the middle class, and how does he intend to pay for his plan while keeping it budget neutral.

I suspect TPOC and shotglass are the same person, but we'll see....

Who is saying that the middle class is going to have deductions eliminated? Former Obama flacks? The same people who haven't kept one campaign promise from four years ago?


No, Mitt Romney said it last night! Answer the question.
 
2012-10-04 05:16:16 PM  

WhyteRaven74: shotglasss: What plan are you talking about?

His plan to lower tax rates but get rid of deductions.


No, he is placing a cap on deductions, not eliminating deductions.

That has a bigger burden on the rich

Oct. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Mitt Romney's idea for capping individuals' tax deductions at $17,000 would impose a burden that would fall hardest on the wealthiest taxpayers, who make the most use of the breaks.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/bloomberg/article/Romney-s-17-000-Deduc tion-Limit-Part-of-Tax-3919020.php#ixzz28MpQUpN7

Only the third of people who itemize would be affected, the rich more so than others.
They get to chose which of the deductions they take.
 
2012-10-04 05:16:46 PM  

Aarontology: Apparently, MItt Romney didn't say anything at all last night.

But he still won.

This is what teabaggers actually believe.


I have never heard anybody say nothing so well.
 
2012-10-04 05:16:46 PM  

Bloody William: markie_farkie: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along?

He kinda did the same thing in the 2008 debates.. Laid low the first go-round, let McCain throw some punches, then round 2 and 3 he cleaned John's clock.

In that case, I think Obama actually had respect for McCain, so it wasn't the utter evisceration that it could have been.

This time though, the gloves will be off completely for the second and third debates..  Mitt doesn't even respect himself enough to debate on his own campaign.

Obama plays the long game. That's something you have to remember, especially when people panic and gloat over last night's debate. He wasn't throwing punches. He was getting ammunition while not giving Romney's campaign much of an opportunity to get their own.


My fantasy is that the Obama campaign strategized like this: What do we know about romney? He's over-prepare and be macho aggressive. So how do you counteract? Let him attack, he'll overstep himself (PBS? Really?) he'll throw out stuff you can use for the next 3-4 weeks. Because the debate is just one nights, and the instant analysis wasn't likely to be the best. In the haste to declare a winner, the media never caught onto the fact that peoples snap reaction was likely to change upon further thought and review. And then Obama gets to control the news cycle for the next few days, using Mitt's overconfidence to attack him. They figured it's more important to control the reaction to the debate than the debate itself.
 
2012-10-04 05:16:49 PM  

MFK: WHICH DEDUCTIONS SPECIFICALLY???


We'll find that out just as soon as McCain reveals his secret plan to capture or kill OBL.
 
2012-10-04 05:17:00 PM  

Zapruder: WhyteRaven74: mark12A: a proven track record of success in business, who actually knows something about finance.

What good or service does Bain provide?

They're really good at harvesting providing profitable companies with the freedom to grow, running up their credit giving them liberty, and selling them off when they're toxic helping them reach the American dream. Those are all good services.


So, Bain Capital was pretty much Paulie from Goodfellas?
 
2012-10-04 05:17:17 PM  
"Mitt Romney is the Ron Jeremy of political campaigning. It's a different position every night" ~Martin Bashir
 
2012-10-04 05:17:19 PM  
It's like the teabaggers shouting at town hall meetings in 2009 before RomneyCare ObamaCare was passed.
 
2012-10-04 05:18:47 PM  
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2012-10-04 05:18:55 PM  

shotglasss: What deductions is he getting rid of?


That's what we're all wondering if you know, since he refuses to say which ones he's going to get rid of but he said last night he'd get rid of them.
 
2012-10-04 05:21:08 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Mitt Romney's idea for capping individuals' tax deductions at $17,000 would impose a burden that would fall hardest on the wealthiest taxpayers


So, which deductions would that play out on?

born_yesterday: So, Bain Capital was pretty much Paulie from Goodfellas?


No, Paulie actually had a sense of ethics, however twist they may have been.
 
2012-10-04 05:22:06 PM  

bglove25: My fantasy is that the Obama campaign strategized like this: What do we know about romney?


They didn't think that Romney would shamelessly abandon everything he's campaigned on. I think that caught Obama off guard.

The strategy for Obama was to keep cool under all the accusations and not make a big mistake.
The strategy for Romney was to come out and stay on the offensive, as to never talk about his lack of plans or ideas.

Remember, Romney needs to play to the moderates while not completely abandoning his extremist teabagger base. That's... difficult to do. The best plan is to have no plan at all.
 
2012-10-04 05:22:27 PM  

born_yesterday: So, Bain Capital was pretty much Paulie from Goodfellas?


Except that it's legal, and it affects a lot more people.
 
2012-10-04 05:22:57 PM  

zappaisfrank: shotglasss: zappaisfrank: shotglasss: GAT_00: Too bad the President didn't point out a single one of them.

Did you all like how Obama kept trying to repeat the same lies over and over and Romney kept calling him on it? It was awesome to see Obama without his teleprompter and without the liberal media to cover for him. The next debate is going to be even better, and Ryan is going to make Biden look even dumber than he does on his own.

The worldview of Rightwingistan, ladies and gentlemen.

Perhaps you can answer the question TPOC and others have dodged all day..

What are the deductions Romney is going to eliminate for the middle class, and how does he intend to pay for his plan while keeping it budget neutral.

I suspect TPOC and shotglass are the same person, but we'll see....

Who is saying that the middle class is going to have deductions eliminated? Former Obama flacks? The same people who haven't kept one campaign promise from four years ago?

No, Mitt Romney said it last night! Answer the question.


No, that is NOT what he said, don't be so dishonest.
He said that there would be a dollar limit on deductions.

You can still claim 1000 different deductions, but the amount you get to actually deduct is capped.

It is a more elegant and fair approach than saying that "person X no longer gets to deduct Y, but person Z gets to still deduct Z".

It keeps a lid on runaway deductions that the left whines so much about that the rich get.
 
2012-10-04 05:23:10 PM  
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2012-10-04 05:23:29 PM  

patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.


i865.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-04 05:25:11 PM  

bglove25: In the haste to declare a winner, the media never caught onto the fact that peoples snap reaction was likely to change upon further thought and review.


I watched the post-debate commentary on PBS hoping to avoid excessive derp but man, what a bad plan that was.

It was particularly disgusting to hear Mark Shields vomiting this tripe about how the debate looked good for Romney because he looked assured, while criticizing Obama for not challenging him more. You expect that type of idiocy from David Brooks. But "assured"? Really? F*cking sociopaths are "assured".
 
2012-10-04 05:25:25 PM  

nevirus: bglove25: My fantasy is that the Obama campaign strategized like this: What do we know about romney?

They didn't think that Romney would shamelessly abandon everything he's campaigned on. I think that caught Obama off guard.

The strategy for Obama was to keep cool under all the accusations and not make a big mistake.
The strategy for Romney was to come out and stay on the offensive, as to never talk about his lack of plans or ideas.

Remember, Romney needs to play to the moderates while not completely abandoning his extremist teabagger base. That's... difficult to do. The best plan is to have no plan at all.


Dude, I know they didn't think that, that's my fantasy.
 
2012-10-04 05:26:20 PM  

WhyteRaven74: shotglasss: What deductions is he getting rid of?

That's what we're all wondering if you know, since he refuses to say which ones he's going to get rid of but he said last night he'd get rid of them.


The point is there is a cap on deductions. You don't have to mess around with trying to re-write the convoluted tax code that is filled with special interest deductions if you just cap the amount you can take.
 
2012-10-04 05:26:52 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: He said that there would be a dollar limit on deductions.


He never said that last night.
 
2012-10-04 05:27:32 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: The point is there is a cap on deductions.


So why didn't Mitt say that last night? All he mentioned was lowering tax rates and getting rid of deductions.
 
2012-10-04 05:27:45 PM  

Wooly Bully: bglove25: In the haste to declare a winner, the media never caught onto the fact that peoples snap reaction was likely to change upon further thought and review.

I watched the post-debate commentary on PBS hoping to avoid excessive derp but man, what a bad plan that was.

It was particularly disgusting to hear Mark Shields vomiting this tripe about how the debate looked good for Romney because he looked assured, while criticizing Obama for not challenging him more. You expect that type of idiocy from David Brooks. But "assured"? Really? F*cking sociopaths are "assured".


come on though. when Romney said that 0bama was just picking losers, 0bama just stood their and gave a big smile...as if he agreed.
 
2012-10-04 05:28:48 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: when Romney said that 0bama was just picking losers


As opposed to what Mitt did at Bain, which was turn companies into losers.
 
2012-10-04 05:30:53 PM  

MFK: WHICH DEDUCTIONS SPECIFICALLY???


If I had to guess, the ones that affect lower income people.
- children
-mortgage
-gambling
-farm
 
2012-10-04 05:31:07 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: WhyteRaven74: shotglasss: What plan are you talking about?

His plan to lower tax rates but get rid of deductions.

No, he is placing a cap on deductions, not eliminating deductions.

That has a bigger burden on the rich

Oct. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Mitt Romney's idea for capping individuals' tax deductions at $17,000 would impose a burden that would fall hardest on the wealthiest taxpayers, who make the most use of the breaks.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/bloomberg/article/Romney-s-17-000-Deduc tion-Limit-Part-of-Tax-3919020.php#ixzz28MpQUpN7

Only the third of people who itemize would be affected, the rich more so than others.
They get to chose which of the deductions they take.


Have no fear, he made sure he offset the deductions and took care of the wealthy while hanging the rest out to dry.

Romney's new incentive-based strategy also could hold pitfalls for consumers.

Analysts say the use of heath savings accounts favors the affluent, while statistics indicate that high-deductible plans can mean big out-of-pocket costs for people with lower wages and little disposable income.

"It remains a very significant tax shelter, and with all tax shelters, it means a lot to people in high (income) brackets," said Henry Aaron of the Brookings Institution.
 
2012-10-04 05:32:03 PM  

WhyteRaven74: tenpoundsofcheese: He said that there would be a dollar limit on deductions.

He never said that last night.


You are lying.

"And I'm going to work together with Congress to say, OK, what are the various ways we could bring down deductions, for instance? One way, for instance, would be to have a single number. Make up a number - 25,000 (dollars), $50,000. Anybody can have deductions up to that amount. And then that number disappears for high-income people."
 
2012-10-04 05:32:54 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Make up a number


How specific.
 
2012-10-04 05:33:36 PM  

WhyteRaven74: tenpoundsofcheese: when Romney said that 0bama was just picking losers

As opposed to what Mitt did at Bain, which was turn companies into losers.


weird that you can build a business that has over $40,000,000,000 under management by never having any success.
 
2012-10-04 05:34:04 PM  

nyseattitude: tenpoundsofcheese: WhyteRaven74: shotglasss: What plan are you talking about?

His plan to lower tax rates but get rid of deductions.

No, he is placing a cap on deductions, not eliminating deductions.

That has a bigger burden on the rich

Oct. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Mitt Romney's idea for capping individuals' tax deductions at $17,000 would impose a burden that would fall hardest on the wealthiest taxpayers, who make the most use of the breaks.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/bloomberg/article/Romney-s-17-000-Deduc tion-Limit-Part-of-Tax-3919020.php#ixzz28MpQUpN7

Only the third of people who itemize would be affected, the rich more so than others.
They get to chose which of the deductions they take.

Have no fear, he made sure he offset the deductions and took care of the wealthy while hanging the rest out to dry.

Romney's new incentive-based strategy also could hold pitfalls for consumers.

Analysts say the use of heath savings accounts favors the affluent, while statistics indicate that high-deductible plans can mean big out-of-pocket costs for people with lower wages and little disposable income.

"It remains a very significant tax shelter, and with all tax shelters, it means a lot to people in high (income) brackets," said Henry Aaron of the Brookings Institution.


I rescind my post.

I just realized I was replying to a self admitted paid troll.
 
2012-10-04 05:34:40 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Just looked it up. Sesame Street toys made $515M. The average licensing fee is 8.7% so just from toys, they make $44M. They also get licensing fees from shows, books, etc.

So why do you want the government to prop up this .001%er?


You're right, Sesame Street doesn't need government money now. But it did when it first started, and there is other programming that needs funding.

But, you bring up a good point, if Sesame Street is profitable, the government shouldn't be funding it now, and perhaps Sesame Street could even return some of its profits to the government now that it is profitable.
 
2012-10-04 05:35:14 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: tenpoundsofcheese: Make up a number

How specific.


He was talking about the concept and his willingness to work with Congress about what the number would be (unlike the current President)...but he proposed $17k as the number earlier this week. There was a thread about that here also.
 
2012-10-04 05:36:25 PM  

nyseattitude: nyseattitude: tenpoundsofcheese: WhyteRaven74: shotglasss: What plan are you talking about?

His plan to lower tax rates but get rid of deductions.

No, he is placing a cap on deductions, not eliminating deductions.

That has a bigger burden on the rich

Oct. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Mitt Romney's idea for capping individuals' tax deductions at $17,000 would impose a burden that would fall hardest on the wealthiest taxpayers, who make the most use of the breaks.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/bloomberg/article/Romney-s-17-000-Deduc tion-Limit-Part-of-Tax-3919020.php#ixzz28MpQUpN7

Only the third of people who itemize would be affected, the rich more so than others.
They get to chose which of the deductions they take.

Have no fear, he made sure he offset the deductions and took care of the wealthy while hanging the rest out to dry.

Romney's new incentive-based strategy also could hold pitfalls for consumers.

Analysts say the use of heath savings accounts favors the affluent, while statistics indicate that high-deductible plans can mean big out-of-pocket costs for people with lower wages and little disposable income.

"It remains a very significant tax shelter, and with all tax shelters, it means a lot to people in high (income) brackets," said Henry Aaron of the Brookings Institution.

I rescind my post.

I just realized I was replying to a self admitted paid troll.


Bullshiat. There's rules against that, and they're clearly posted over ther---hey, where'd the rules go? Why is the post count dropping? Why am I disappearing?
 
2012-10-04 05:36:30 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: weird that you can build a business that has over $40,000,000,000 under management by never having any success.


When your own tactics force companies to lay people off, send jobs overseas and add hundreds of millions in debt, that's not succeeding.
 
2012-10-04 05:36:31 PM  

WhyteRaven74: tenpoundsofcheese: when Romney said that 0bama was just picking losers

As opposed to what Mitt did at Bain, which was turn companies into losers.


well, after sucking them dry, that is.

what romney did at bain is the same thing that the mobsters do in the restaurant sequence in goodfellas: take over a business, steal everything that isn't nailed down, run up its credit until it can't pay anymore... then burn it to the ground (declare bankruptcy).
 
2012-10-04 05:37:32 PM  

vernonFL: tenpoundsofcheese: Just looked it up. Sesame Street toys made $515M. The average licensing fee is 8.7% so just from toys, they make $44M. They also get licensing fees from shows, books, etc.

So why do you want the government to prop up this .001%er?

You're right, Sesame Street doesn't need government money now. But it did when it first started, and there is other programming that needs funding.

But, you bring up a good point, if Sesame Street is profitable, the government shouldn't be funding it now, and perhaps Sesame Street could even return some of its profits to the government now that it is profitable.


Or they can fund those new programs that need funding and get the government out of that business.
 
2012-10-04 05:39:15 PM  

mark12A: One guy is a farking "Community Organizer" with ZERO executive experience...


It's a hell of a world when four years as POTUS doesn't count as executive experience. Especially when there are only two men in the entire world with more experience, and two men with equal experience. And Mitt Romney is not one of them.
 
2012-10-04 05:40:19 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: He was talking about the concept and his willingness to work with Congress about what the number would be (unlike the current President)...but he proposed $17k as the number earlier this week.


Last week it was $17K and last night is was make up a number. It's a wonder his tax plan is being so scrutinized, what with it being so concrete and finalized and all. 

And this really is the whole point. Romney performed better at the debate, that's a fair assessment. But for some that only matters if you ignore all of the lies and lack of specifics. And it appears from today's chatter the GOP is happy to do just that.
 
2012-10-04 05:40:29 PM  

Gecko Gingrich: Classic rope-a-dope. Give the dope enough rope and let what is bound to happen happen.


I said the same thing this morning after thinking about it.

/high-five
//or something
 
2012-10-04 05:42:06 PM  

nyseattitude: nyseattitude: tenpoundsofcheese: WhyteRaven74: shotglasss: What plan are you talking about?

His plan to lower tax rates but get rid of deductions.

No, he is placing a cap on deductions, not eliminating deductions.

That has a bigger burden on the rich

Oct. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Mitt Romney's idea for capping individuals' tax deductions at $17,000 would impose a burden that would fall hardest on the wealthiest taxpayers, who make the most use of the breaks.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/bloomberg/article/Romney-s-17-000-Deduc tion-Limit-Part-of-Tax-3919020.php#ixzz28MpQUpN7

Only the third of people who itemize would be affected, the rich more so than others.
They get to chose which of the deductions they take.

Have no fear, he made sure he offset the deductions and took care of the wealthy while hanging the rest out to dry.

Romney's new incentive-based strategy also could hold pitfalls for consumers.

Analysts say the use of heath savings accounts favors the affluent, while statistics indicate that high-deductible plans can mean big out-of-pocket costs for people with lower wages and little disposable income.

"It remains a very significant tax shelter, and with all tax shelters, it means a lot to people in high (income) brackets," said Henry Aaron of the Brookings Institution.

I rescind my post.
too late it has been read and logged.

I just realized I was replying to a self admitted paid troll.
whoa, who is getting paid here?

 
2012-10-04 05:42:15 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: You can still claim 1000 different deductions, but the amount you get to actually deduct is capped.


So after saying that your candidate was going to eliminate certain unspecified deductions, you're now saying that's wrong - he will leave all the present deductions in place, but simply place a cap on the total deductions a taxpayer may claim.

All right, then - what's the cap? $17,000? $25,000? $50,000? What's the actual number, and how was that number chosen? How many taxpayers will be affected, and at what income levels? Will this deduction cap work in a way that is revenue neutral, as your candidate said his plan will be, or will it work in a way that will help address the deficit, as your candidate said his plan will do?

You can squirm all you want - that's what you do, after all - but until you can offer even one specific, concrete feature of our candidate's alleged plan, no one here will let you off the hook.
 
2012-10-04 05:42:32 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal coiled up in the fecal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


pet peeve
 
2012-10-04 05:43:06 PM  
Update: Romney has now admitted that number 26 was not true.

No wai!
 
2012-10-04 05:45:17 PM  

patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.


This, so much this. I'm really sick of the Romney defenders (and conversely, Obama attackers) telling me their independent, then going on and on about Obama's muslim Kenyan socialist policies that are going to destroy the country.

But but but I'm INDEPENDENT! I hate Romney too!

//RON PAUL
 
2012-10-04 05:45:27 PM  

WhyteRaven74: tenpoundsofcheese: when Romney said that 0bama was just picking losers

As opposed to what Mitt did at Bain, which was turn companies into losers.


wasn't that one of the prepared zingers that were released earlier in the day.
 
2012-10-04 05:48:39 PM  
it took all day to get out the talking point.

whar deduction. whar?

needs more repetition. repeat after me.

whar deduction? whar?

there you go, please carry on. and remember; whar deduction?? whar?
 
2012-10-04 05:49:19 PM  

BMulligan: tenpoundsofcheese: You can still claim 1000 different deductions, but the amount you get to actually deduct is capped.

So after saying that your candidate was going to eliminate certain unspecified deductions, you're now saying that's wrong - he will leave all the present deductions in place, but simply place a cap on the total deductions a taxpayer may claim.

All right, then - what's the cap? $17,000? $25,000? $50,000? What's the actual number, and how was that number chosen? How many taxpayers will be affected, and at what income levels? Will this deduction cap work in a way that is revenue neutral, as your candidate said his plan will be, or will it work in a way that will help address the deficit, as your candidate said his plan will do?

You can squirm all you want - that's what you do, after all - but until you can offer even one specific, concrete feature of our candidate's alleged plan, no one here will let you off the hook.



$17000 was so last Tuesday. During the debate he said "$25,000″ or "$50,000," and "pick a number." $17000 was what he said on Tuesday before the debate.
 
2012-10-04 05:50:57 PM  
Obama should have called Romney on all the BS but during a debate it's a lose-lose. You basically come off as having no response and all you are saying all night is nuh-uh you are lying and you know you are. As true as it might be, you're going to come off looking like the loser.
 
2012-10-04 05:52:16 PM  

bglove25: My fantasy is that the Obama campaign strategized like this: What do we know about romney?


1.) That he is Schroedinger's candidate, capable of all positions at all times.
2.) That the best sound bytes this campaign have come from Rmoney's own words and actions. America The Beautiful, 47 Percent, etc.

Hmm.
 
2012-10-04 05:55:25 PM  

Krymson Tyde: In a row?


I wonder if Mitt could try not to tell any lies on the way through the parking lot.
 
2012-10-04 05:55:40 PM  
Bullshiat!

Mitt looked so good & sounded spectacular! He won hands down. Obummer just looks sad up there trying to explain math, what a loser!

so what if Mitt didn't say anything worthy of being called "truth", what is truth after all? it's nothing when you look as good as Mitt did, i would have bought a bridge from him easily.

What America needs now is a prim looking stargazer, a Republican, to bring us back to the prosperous days of 2004. Listen, cutting taxes has been proven to encourage job growth. nobody has to purchase products & widgets, we just need to make them & revenue will explode! but you dirty Libs just don't want to try something new.
 
2012-10-04 05:56:54 PM  

KarmicDisaster: Cyberluddite: Meanwhile, Obama set a new debate record for the number of times he inexplicably failed to even attempt to rebut or call bullshiat on an opponent's obvious lies.

Well, I don't see how he could in just a couple of minutes. Romney obviously practiced for months saying his prepared lies and flipping his position at a mile a minute. It would take Obama longer to refute each one with facts. Romney can say "gas prices doubled under your administration" and "all of your green money went to bankrupt companies" in 10 seconds, but Obama would have to take 5 minutes to refute each one. That was apparently the Republican plan, pull out the stops with the lies knowing that it would be impossible to counter a wall of derp in the given time.

.


Bingo!

What Romney did is a common debating technique. We called it a shiat spread back when I was in high school debate.

The Gish Gallop, named after creationist Duane Gish, is the debating technique of drowning the opponent in such a torrent of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments that the opponent cannot possibly answer every falsehood in real time.
 
2012-10-04 05:59:34 PM  

Isitoveryet: Bullshiat!

Mitt looked so good & sounded spectacular! He won hands down. Obummer just looks sad up there trying to explain math, what a loser!

so what if Mitt didn't say anything worthy of being called "truth", what is truth after all? it's nothing when you look as good as Mitt did, i would have bought a bridge from him easily.

What America needs now is a prim looking stargazer, a Republican, to bring us back to the prosperous days of 2004. Listen, cutting taxes has been proven to encourage job growth. nobody has to purchase products & widgets, we just need to make them & revenue will explode! but you dirty Libs just don't want to try something new.


Feel the Republican mirth...trickling down all over you...
 
2012-10-04 06:01:54 PM  
So, the next questions: If we reform taxes in a completely revenue neutral manner, and we are only going to bring the deficit down by expanding the tax base and cutting federal spending, A) specifically, how are you going to expand the tax base and B) specifically what federal programs will you cut, given that you also pledge to double the amount spent on the military?
 
2012-10-04 06:02:04 PM  

colon_pow: it took all day to get out the talking point.

whar deduction. whar?

needs more repetition. repeat after me.

whar deduction? whar?

there you go, please carry on. and remember; whar deduction?? whar?


You don't think this is a question that needs to be asked?

Why?
 
2012-10-04 06:06:47 PM  
Romney says:

"We agree; we ought to bring the tax rates down, and I do, both for corporations and for individuals. But in order for us not to lose revenue, have the government run out of money, I also lower deductions and credits and exemptions so that we keep taking in the same money when you also account for growth."

So which deductions Governor? He won't say. What we do know is that his plan isn't written out in specifics and that an independent Brookings Institute review of Romney's tax plan says that it is mathematically impossible to reduce rates for the wealthiest Americans from 35% to 28% without raising taxes on the middle class.

It's important to note that Romney would repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax which would allow the rich to avoid paying some minimum tax bill. It was put in place precisely because millionaires were able to pay almost no taxes whatsoever. He would also eliminate the estate tax which already is exempted up to 2.5 million; so it's a handout to mostly millionaires and billionaires.

Here is what you need to know about the tax cut bait and switch. In the late 1980′s - Republicans and Democrats agreed to reduce marginal rates in return for removing of deductions thus there was no revenue loss. Grand bargain. What happened after that? Those tax deductions and loopholes found their way back into the tax code within a couple of years and wouldn't ya know it - effective tax rates went down for the wealthiest Americans. That's what history shows us.
 
2012-10-04 06:07:21 PM  

Mrtraveler01: colon_pow: it took all day to get out the talking point.

whar deduction. whar?

needs more repetition. repeat after me.

whar deduction? whar?

there you go, please carry on. and remember; whar deduction?? whar?

You don't think this is a question that needs to be asked?

Why?


it's a fair question i suppose. i just find it interesting that it took most of the day for the cacophony to begin.
 
2012-10-04 06:09:27 PM  

Mitt Romneys Tax Return: Bingo!

What Romney did is a common debating technique. We called it a shiat spread back when I was in high school debate.

The Gish Gallop, named after creationist Duane Gish, is the debating technique of drowning the opponent in such a torrent of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments that the opponent cannot possibly answer every falsehood in real time.


Romney is the motherfarking ZERG RUSH KEKEKE MASTER of spewing half-truths, lies and strawman arguments. He's like goddamn Michelangelo up there.
 
2012-10-04 06:12:10 PM  

colon_pow: Mrtraveler01: colon_pow: it took all day to get out the talking point.

whar deduction. whar?

needs more repetition. repeat after me.

whar deduction? whar?

there you go, please carry on. and remember; whar deduction?? whar?

You don't think this is a question that needs to be asked?

Why?

it's a fair question i suppose. i just find it interesting that it took most of the day for the cacophony to begin.


People have been repeatedly asking this question (and others) right from the moment when Mitt first made those astounding claims. What you find "interesting" appears to be a product of your own imagination.
 
2012-10-04 06:12:41 PM  
This is fun. I do love being correct on predictions.

Keep proving me right. I said days before the debate that if Romney won you would think that he stood on stage alone for 90 minutes for all that the left would talk about Obama.

Because the story must never, ever, be about Obama unless it makes him look good. It must be about how bad anyone who makes Obama look bad is. Earlier I saw people actually saying Obama did so poorly because he was 'baffled' by all the lies coming from Romney.

Seriously, that's what some of you are actually going with... That Obama is so brilliant and smart that he can be confused and befuddled by somebody "lying". Then we had Obama's pitiful excuse as Romney turned out to be something other than what Obama imagined him to be.
 
2012-10-04 06:16:08 PM  
I thought Obama was a playing a game of "nicest negro you know." He was damn near deferential. fark, the moderator said "I suck at this" and Obama said he did a fine job. He politely giggled at Mitts sorry "zingers." And didn't set him up for what I'm sure was an epic 47% "zinger." He was charming as can be and his smiles were genuine. One of his best lines of the night, "If you're 53 or 54, you might want to listen" was called "disrespectful" by some. That's what he's up against. A disgustingly large part of the population who say things like "Obama talks down to his betters."

Let us talk about lies and Obama leaving them unchallenged. Show the people he has a GODDAMN RIGHT to be mad. Let him come out swinging. I've never seen a better politician than Obama. Never.
 
2012-10-04 06:17:19 PM  

colon_pow: Mrtraveler01: colon_pow: it took all day to get out the talking point.

whar deduction. whar?

needs more repetition. repeat after me.

whar deduction? whar?

there you go, please carry on. and remember; whar deduction?? whar?

You don't think this is a question that needs to be asked?

Why?

it's a fair question i suppose. i just find it interesting that it took most of the day for the cacophony to begin.


It's been all over since early today. Just looks late because of when the last two were greened.
 
2012-10-04 06:22:01 PM  

schubie: I've never seen a better politician than Obama. Never.


Bill Clinton?
 
2012-10-04 06:23:32 PM  

Citrate1007: Anything that Mitt said that didn't contain the phrase "I'm going to fark over the middle class for another tax cut for the rich" was a lie.


I have you Farkied as having said, "Romney without the TeaTarded GOP would be a glorious candidate." Have you changed your mind on him?
 
2012-10-04 06:26:09 PM  

randomjsa: This is fun. I do love being correct on predictions.

Keep proving me right. I said days before the debate that if Romney won you would think that he stood on stage alone for 90 minutes for all that the left would talk about Obama.

Because the story must never, ever, be about Obama unless it makes him look good. It must be about how bad anyone who makes Obama look bad is. Earlier I saw people actually saying Obama did so poorly because he was 'baffled' by all the lies coming from Romney.

Seriously, that's what some of you are actually going with... That Obama is so brilliant and smart that he can be confused and befuddled by somebody "lying". Then we had Obama's pitiful excuse as Romney turned out to be something other than what Obama imagined him to be.


Just for the record, the debate thread and the CNN survey thread are full of Obama supporters critical of his debate performance (myself included). The topic of this thread is Mitt's lies so - surprise, surprise - people are taling about Mitt's lies.
 
2012-10-04 06:26:28 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: WhyteRaven74: tenpoundsofcheese: when Romney said that 0bama was just picking losers

As opposed to what Mitt did at Bain, which was turn companies into losers.

weird that you can build a business that has over $40,000,000,000 under management by never having any success.


Admit it, you were touching yourself when you wrote that number...
 
2012-10-04 06:32:24 PM  

Maud Dib: patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.

[i865.photobucket.com image 360x450]


I consider myself to be an Independent and I will be voting for Obama. So put that in your crack pipe and shove it up your urethra! The biggest lie that shiatstain Romney told last night: "We are nation that believes we are all children of the same god."
 
2012-10-04 06:36:40 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


It is the same strategy he has employed all along. Let the crazy person with the rope tied around his neck run off the cliff and don't get in his way. The GOP is Charlie Brown over and over and over, but they think they are Lucy, and that is hillarious and sad.
 
2012-10-04 06:36:42 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


Doesn't matter.

Mitt Romney lied more smoothly, more suavely, and with more smirking than Obama, so Romney was the clear winner of the debate - at least, if you ask any major media outlet.

Americans don't want the truth. They want pretty lies. The truth makes them feel bad, and having that nasty half-black sekrit Muslim Kenyan man making them feel bad all the time by telling them the truth isn't as happy as having a nice white God-fearing American man making them feel better by lying in their faces, especially if he does it with a grin.
 
2012-10-04 06:38:11 PM  
http://www.mittromney.com/jobsplan

Zero useful numbers. None. His plan is to wave his hands around and hope the economy gets better.
 
2012-10-04 06:38:14 PM  

burnvictim: Maud Dib: patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.

[i865.photobucket.com image 360x450]

I consider myself to be an Independent and I will be voting for Obama. So put that in your crack pipe and shove it up your urethra! The biggest lie that shiatstain Romney told last night: "We are nation that believes we are all children of the same god."


You are an exception not a rule.
 
2012-10-04 06:38:31 PM  

markie_farkie: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along?

He kinda did the same thing in the 2008 debates.. Laid low the first go-round, let McCain throw some punches, then round 2 and 3 he cleaned John's clock.

In that case, I think Obama actually had respect for McCain, so it wasn't the utter evisceration that it could have been.

This time though, the gloves will be off completely for the second and third debates..  Mitt doesn't even respect himself enough to debate on his own campaign.


Just as I think conservatives like to create this two dimensional caricature of of what they NEED Obama to be (aka Angry Black Militant Socialist) rather than what he is, so too does the left. The left wants Obama to be JFK meets MLK, but he's simply not. In his heart of hearts, he's a policy wonk. He's a moderately passable communicator, an abysmal negotiator and certainly not a fighter. In particular, he's really not a great debater. At the very best, he managed to squeek out a draw against McCain in the 2008, and that might be kind. Ultimately, McCain's goose was already cooked thanks to Dubya/Finanical Meltdown, so it ultimately didn't matter. But Romney, for all his faults, is a much more dangerous opponent to face in debates. McCain was not a business man who was always closing a sale. He didn't like to lie, and when he did it was with a pained labor. I've never seen a politician lie as effortlessly and shamelessly as Romney can. 

Basically, what I'm saying is there was no rope a dope, no Machavallian tricks, no longview at work here. Just a crappy debater having a crappy debate night, and the continuation of a President who's had serious problems selling his message for the better part of 3 years.
 
2012-10-04 06:39:00 PM  

zappaisfrank: [sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net image 725x534]


Yupyup. Tax deduction for business expenses. Even a mom-and-pop store owner knows this one.
 
2012-10-04 06:45:38 PM  

burnvictim: I consider myself to be an Independent and I will be voting for Obama. So put that in your crack pipe and shove it up your urethra! The biggest lie that shiatstain Romney told last night: "We are nation that believes we are all children of the same god."


Creepy.

What's funny is that people who are Bible literalists (of the Southern Baptist ilk) say they would never vote for anyone who believed in a religion that followed someone who touted themselves as a prophet of the same stature as Moses, but they are about to.

I mean what the hell is the major difference between voting for a Mormon, someone who doesn't believe the Bible is the complete word of god in that it is corrupted and insufficient, and a Muslim, someone who doesn't believe the Bible is the complete word of god in that it is corrupted and insufficient? The Koran is a newer testament of God, just like the Book of Mormon.
 
2012-10-04 06:45:58 PM  

The Jami Turman Fan Club: http://www.mittromney.com/jobsplan

Zero useful numbers. None. His plan is to wave his hands around and hope the economy gets better.


He admitted that a few weeks ago. In Romney's mind, the sheer fact of him being elected President will be such a positive effect that businesses all across the country will suddenly start hiring and creating jobs all over the place. That wasn't paraphrased either; he truly believes just him being in the WH is all it will take to get the economy going again.
 
2012-10-04 06:46:18 PM  
www.gannett-cdn.com

Ahhh, Obama's troll face...i'm guessing in the next few days Romany's "win" will look less and less like a win.
 
2012-10-04 06:47:35 PM  

Cyberluddite: Meanwhile, Obama set a new debate record for the number of times he inexplicably failed to even attempt to rebut or call bullshiat on an opponent's obvious lies.


i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-04 06:55:22 PM  

The Jami Turman Fan Club: http://www.mittromney.com/jobsplan

Zero useful numbers. None. HIS PLAN IS to wave his hands around and HOPE the economy gets better.

has a CHANGE
 
2012-10-04 07:09:12 PM  

Cyberluddite: Meanwhile, Obama set a new debate record for the number of times he inexplicably failed to even attempt to rebut or call bullshiat on an opponent's obvious lies.


There's not much point when the opponent is willing to stand there screaming "NUH UH! NO U!" and blatantly contradict himself and lie through every orifice of his body. At that point you may as well let the other guy continue on his way and give him all the rope he could possibly want to hang himself later through the media and political ads. It's kind of like arguing with a Fark IndependentTM.

Case in point, Obama actually calling Romney on his bullshiat and rebutting him thoroughly for the first twenty minutes of the debate, which had Romney pretty bad off, and stopping about 25-30 minutes in to let Romney gleefully throw the tea party under the bus, contradict the entirety of the past 18 months of his campaign, and truck out demonstrable lies and talking points so thoroughly debunked only the 26%ers still buy it.
 
2012-10-04 07:31:19 PM  
It is nearly unimaginable that Obama's poor performance wasn't intentional - he's too good at all this stuff. Sure he has his ups and downs, but last night bordered on dismal and feckless. Not quite sure what the game plan is, but will the undecided voters remember the first debate after the next two? It's an old poker (and SunTzu) gambit - look weak when you are strong, let your opponent feel strong when he is weak. All I know is don't count team Obama out - they are really good at this.
 
2012-10-04 07:38:37 PM  

Unemployedingreenland: It is nearly unimaginable that Obama's poor performance wasn't intentional - he's too good at all this stuff. Sure he has his ups and downs, but last night bordered on dismal and feckless. Not quite sure what the game plan is, but will the undecided voters remember the first debate after the next two? It's an old poker (and SunTzu) gambit - look weak when you are strong, let your opponent feel strong when he is weak. All I know is don't count team Obama out - they are really good at this.


I know they say that you only remember the first one but I watched all three McCain/Obama debates and I only remember the last one. The town hall format.
 
2012-10-04 07:41:50 PM  

The Jami Turman Fan Club: http://www.mittromney.com/jobsplan

Zero useful numbers. None. His plan is to wave his hands around and hope the economy gets better.


Ho. Lee. Fark. You aren't kidding. There isn't a single detail in this five point plan AT ALL.

Energy independent by 2020?
How? How does that create jobs now?
Open up new trade avenues? How? And jobs in the meantime while America waits for these miraculous new trade partners to happily give us their money?
Better skills through better education and training? How? In what way? Paid for how? And this creates jobs now...how?
Cut deficit, reduce government, get debt under control? HOW, MOTHERFARKER? God damn it! Who DOESN'T want those things you farking moron? How will you do it? What specifically will you suggest?
Champion small business? In what way? What tax reform are you talking about? Is there ANY detail to any part of your so-called plan?

He has ONE number listed in his entire plan, and that is the entirely-pulled-out-of-his-ass 12 million jobs. There is NO, ZERO, NADA, ZILCH data to suggest that number or ANY number of new jobs from his completely vague and detail-free un-plan.

God, I wish this country wasn't so farking stupid. There is no way this guy should even be getting 10% of the vote right now.

I'd rather vote for Bobby Newport. At least I'd get some free Sweetums.
 
2012-10-04 07:56:31 PM  
Hmm, did Obama really think of a "long game strategy" purposely letting Romney lie and lie and lie without rebuttal only to prove what a lying liar Romney is and to gather dirt for ads and the next debate? Is he that bright? Well, I thought of this strategy more than a week ago and I'm certainly not a Harvard JD with one of the most expensive re-election campaign teams in the history of modern American politics. So, yes. Yes, it is indeed possible that it was an "evil genius" 0bama 3-d nerd strategery chess move and not spin to make an "off night" seem more palatable.

But, whatever. Believe what you want. I will just say that whether you love him or hate him, you have to admit that Obama doesn't make rookie mistakes.
 
2012-10-04 07:58:51 PM  

Sid_6.7: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?

It makes me curious. Perhaps there are enough people who don't pay attention to the day-to-day news, but do watch the debate, that lying your ass off during the debate is fine, because lots of people won't ever watch the news after the debate to hear that you did so.

On the other hand, if they don't follow the news, how likely is it that they would know the debate was scheduled?


Are you not aware that it pre-empted virtually every form of programming such that even morans would see that it was on? That's it's whole point.

Which is why body language and "spiritedness" matter way more than talking, since most Americans are drinkin' and fightin' like usual during any television program. Not everyone lives alone with one TV set. (47% don't?)
 
2012-10-04 07:59:27 PM  

gadian: Hmm, did Obama really think of a "long game strategy" purposely letting Romney lie and lie and lie without rebuttal only to prove what a lying liar Romney is and to gather dirt for ads and the next debate? Is he that bright? Well, I thought of this strategy more than a week ago and I'm certainly not a Harvard JD with one of the most expensive re-election campaign teams in the history of modern American politics. So, yes. Yes, it is indeed possible that it was an "evil genius" 0bama 3-d nerd strategery chess move and not spin to make an "off night" seem more palatable.

But, whatever. Believe what you want. I will just say that whether you love him or hate him, you have to admit that Obama doesn't make rookie mistakes.


Whatever. I so have a hard time with that. Only a rookie himself would say that about Obama.
 
2012-10-04 08:00:36 PM  
Just like libs, when you lose you cry and point and blame. Tsk tsk.
 
2012-10-04 08:01:41 PM  

manwithplanx: and added in that there was an unelected board that would be making your personal health care decisions. He covered lies with other lies.


Umm, Obama went back and forth with him on this issue, admitting that there would be a board and that it is a good idea. The existence of a medical efficiency review board is in the ACA and dems in the senate shiat a brick when they actually read the law that they signed.
 
US1
2012-10-04 08:18:59 PM  
img140.imageshack.us
 
2012-10-04 08:21:23 PM  
This thread had all the classic and stupid right wing phrases. "Obomessiah," "teleprompter," etc. It's almost as if you all get your info from the same hyper-partisan pundit or something.

Can at least one of you break the mold from time to time? Because this kind of sh*t is just tiresome. That, or you're all alts of the same asshole.
 
2012-10-04 08:35:56 PM  

Unemployedingreenland: It is nearly unimaginable that Obama's poor performance wasn't intentional - he's too good at all this stuff. Sure he has his ups and downs, but last night bordered on dismal and feckless. Not quite sure what the game plan is, but will the undecided voters remember the first debate after the next two? It's an old poker (and SunTzu) gambit - look weak when you are strong, let your opponent feel strong when he is weak. All I know is don't count team Obama out - they are really good at this.


You seem to know very little about humans and human nature. These are just real people.
 
2012-10-04 08:37:00 PM  

dickfreckle: This thread had all the classic and stupid right wing phrases. "Obomessiah," "teleprompter," etc. It's almost as if you all get your info from the same hyper-partisan pundit or something.

Can at least one of you break the mold from time to time? Because this kind of sh*t is just tiresome. That, or you're all alts of the same asshole.


Strongly suggest using iggy button during presidential elections. You can undo it later if it amuses you.
 
2012-10-04 08:38:19 PM  

Kimothy: patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.

This, so much this. I'm really sick of the Romney defenders (and conversely, Obama attackers) telling me their independent, then going on and on about Obama's muslim Kenyan socialist policies that are going to destroy the country.

But but but I'm INDEPENDENT! I hate Romney too!

//RON PAUL


Honorary ignore list member; reason: makes no sense.
 
2012-10-04 08:48:07 PM  
TFA: 9) "The president's put it in place as much public debt - almost as much debt held by the public as all prior presidents combined." This is not even close to being true. When Obama took office, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. Now the national debt is over $16 trillion. That $5.374 trillion increase is nowhere near as much debt as all the other presidents combined.

Debt held by the public, which excludes intragovernmental debt. 6 trillion to 11 trillion. It is true.
 
2012-10-04 09:00:30 PM  
It is so amazingly cute how liberals latch on to a single analysis, ignore all competing analysis (even analysis that calls out the original analysis), pretend it's the only truth in the world, then call everything else lies. farking hilarious.

http://www.american.com/archive/2012/october/the-romney-tax-plan-not- a -tax-hike-on-the-middle-class

OH NOES, other analysis shows TPC was full of shiat! However will you survive your mantra of only your biased analysis is correct!

I really would love for one of you liberals to link to me a study showing only the economists that agree with your pre-concieved bias are correct. The TPC report has been shown to be crap by a multitude of economists, sorry you don't get to choose which one is true and which one is a lie. Your bias is not a meter for truthfulness.
 
2012-10-04 09:03:05 PM  

krelborne: TFA: 9) "The president's put it in place as much public debt - almost as much debt held by the public as all prior presidents combined." This is not even close to being true. When Obama took office, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. Now the national debt is over $16 trillion. That $5.374 trillion increase is nowhere near as much debt as all the other presidents combined.

Debt held by the public, which excludes intragovernmental debt. 6 trillion to 11 trillion. It is true.


Only by contious redefining of words and mental gymnastics.
 
2012-10-04 09:04:12 PM  

MyRandomName: It is so amazingly cute how liberals latch on to a single analysis, ignore all competing analysis (even analysis that calls out the original analysis), pretend it's the only truth in the world, then call everything else lies. farking hilarious.

http://www.american.com/archive/2012/october/the-romney-tax-plan-not- a -tax-hike-on-the-middle-class

OH NOES, other analysis shows TPC was full of shiat! However will you survive your mantra of only your biased analysis is correct!

I really would love for one of you liberals to link to me a study showing only the economists that agree with your pre-concieved bias are correct. The TPC report has been shown to be crap by a multitude of economists, sorry you don't get to choose which one is true and which one is a lie. Your bias is not a meter for truthfulness.


You know what "projection" is (in the psycological sense of the word)? You just did it.
 
2012-10-04 09:08:32 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Mitt Romneys Tax Return: Bingo!

What Romney did is a common debating technique. We called it a shiat spread back when I was in high school debate.

The Gish Gallop, named after creationist Duane Gish, is the debating technique of drowning the opponent in such a torrent of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments that the opponent cannot possibly answer every falsehood in real time.

Romney is the motherfarking ZERG RUSH KEKEKE MASTER of spewing half-truths, lies and strawman arguments. He's like goddamn Michelangelo up there.


Don't think I've ever seen warbargle like this before. WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
 
2012-10-04 09:10:54 PM  

MyRandomName: It is so amazingly cute how liberals latch on to a single analysis, ignore all competing analysis (even analysis that calls out the original analysis), pretend it's the only truth in the world, then call everything else lies. farking hilarious.

http://www.american.com/archive/2012/october/the-romney-tax-plan-not- a -tax-hike-on-the-middle-class

OH NOES, other analysis shows TPC was full of shiat! However will you survive your mantra of only your biased analysis is correct!

I really would love for one of you liberals to link to me a study showing only the economists that agree with your pre-concieved bias are correct. The TPC report has been shown to be crap by a multitude of economists, sorry you don't get to choose which one is true and which one is a lie. Your bias is not a meter for truthfulness.


If you can't trust the non-partisan American Enterprise Institute, who can you trust? 

/And I haven't seen that kind of projection since I went to the IMAX theatre
 
2012-10-04 09:12:32 PM  
I am shocked about all the code words Romney used. Every time he used the word people, you know who he meant.
 
2012-10-04 09:14:55 PM  
I can point out several half-truths, errors, and lies in in the list provided in the link. Whoever wrote that has no credibility with me. Is this how liberals really think? There shiat isn't grounded in reality.
 
2012-10-04 09:17:04 PM  

gearsprocket: I can point out several half-truths, errors, and lies in in the list provided in the link. Whoever wrote that has no credibility with me. Is this how liberals really think? There shiat isn't grounded in reality.


Really? You racist, homophobic, wal-mart shopping plebe. This discussion for the big boys. You go sit with your mommy and have a good cry.
 
2012-10-04 09:24:43 PM  

Propain_az: gearsprocket: I can point out several half-truths, errors, and lies in in the list provided in the link. Whoever wrote that has no credibility with me. Is this how liberals really think? There shiat isn't grounded in reality.

Really? You racist, homophobic, wal-mart shopping plebe. This discussion for the big boys. You go sit with your mommy and have a good cry.


Your schtick isn't even funny the first time. It's Half-Hour News Hour.
 
2012-10-04 09:31:57 PM  

Atypical Person Reading Fark: dickfreckle: This thread had all the classic and stupid right wing phrases. "Obomessiah," "teleprompter," etc. It's almost as if you all get your info from the same hyper-partisan pundit or something.

Can at least one of you break the mold from time to time? Because this kind of sh*t is just tiresome. That, or you're all alts of the same asshole.

Strongly suggest using iggy button during presidential elections. You can undo it later if it amuses you.


Back in the days of Gato ***** and winterwh***, I used the ignore function for only the most transparent trolls and threadsh*tters who weren't even worth laughing at. Lately I've been persuaded to the "ignore lists are for p*ssies" crowd. But man am I tempted. As a general rule, anyone using a "0" in "Obama" isn't worth talking to, even if it's just to mock them mercilessly.
 
2012-10-04 09:36:09 PM  

dickfreckle: Lately I've been persuaded to the "ignore lists are for p*ssies" crowd.


I never understood this philosophy. Why would I care about what the very people I put on ignore think of me? This is like if a homeless guy got on the bus and said "anyone who refuses to smell me is a p*ssy!" And then you smell him. And he's gross, just like you knew he was.

What do I get out of not putting alt accounts and threadshiatters on ignore?
 
2012-10-04 09:37:27 PM  

GhostFish: Regarding "rope-a-dope" and "long game", please stop embarrassing yourselves.

Last night was a clusterfark. And it's no surprise.

You'd look foolish too if you were up on stage trying to swat away something that had the consistency, friendliness, and fixed position of a swarm of bees.


Last time I did that it turned out to be the DTs.
 
2012-10-04 09:44:55 PM  

LegacyDL: So he let Romney "get away" with his lies only because he knew the media aka his pawns would beat Romney up post-debate.


It is brilliant: rob the challenger by letting him run over everybody (including the moderator), then let the media point out all the flaws a day after. Romney can't attack Obama because it looks like defensive spite, and Obama is now able to rail on those things about Romney because...well, Romney did get a chance to speak.

On the other hand, the way the media fell over itself to praise Romney minutes after the debate ended shows how desperate the entire Right is about this thing. They feel the need to start editing the narrative immediately, to give the appearance of strength where it does not exist. Romney is weak, and his manic appearance made him look skittish and strange. Obama's way of speaking emphasized it, and now Romney is going to have to keep the energy. In short, a gaffe-prone man now has to keep up the energy at all times. That should worry a lot of Republican party members right there.
 
2012-10-04 10:01:14 PM  
Just waiting to see what Jon Stewart and SNL do with this. And that includes Lehrer.
 
2012-10-04 10:36:26 PM  

d23: krelborne: TFA: 9) "The president's put it in place as much public debt - almost as much debt held by the public as all prior presidents combined." This is not even close to being true. When Obama took office, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. Now the national debt is over $16 trillion. That $5.374 trillion increase is nowhere near as much debt as all the other presidents combined.

Debt held by the public, which excludes intragovernmental debt. 6 trillion to 11 trillion. It is true.

Only by contious redefining of words and mental gymnastics.


Wat? Debt held by the public. It has a specific meaning. TP was the one doing the redefining. Most of these are OK, but they totally missed the mark on that one.
 
2012-10-04 10:46:54 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


Well, kinda.

Romney is all CEO and he is only responsible to the stockholders. His base. It's pretty obvious that is a rather limited group.

You aren't one of them.

But, by all means, keep begging for treats.
 
2012-10-04 11:09:37 PM  
1.bp.blogspot.com

/LEAVE BARACK ALONE!
 
2012-10-04 11:19:50 PM  

randomjsa: This is fun. I do love being correct on predictions.

Keep proving me right. I said days before the debate that if Romney won you would think that he stood on stage alone for 90 minutes for all that the left would talk about Obama.

Because the story must never, ever, be about Obama unless it makes him look good. It must be about how bad anyone who makes Obama look bad is. Earlier I saw people actually saying Obama did so poorly because he was 'baffled' by all the lies coming from Romney.

Seriously, that's what some of you are actually going with... That Obama is so brilliant and smart that he can be confused and befuddled by somebody "lying". Then we had Obama's pitiful excuse as Romney turned out to be something other than what Obama imagined him to be.


QUIET!

Adults are talking
 
2012-10-04 11:20:26 PM  

patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.


It's an old, old game. There has always been "rebellion" and the conceptual paradigm that it is better to be an individual making your own way than a sheep following the herd. That mindset opposes membership of ANY group as a matter of course, and in recent history (about since Reagan) the GOP has been manipulating that sociological paradigm to their own ends, painting democrats as being just as (or more) authoritarian as themselves in their long-running campaign of false-equivalence and BSABSVR.

Also worthy of consideration: this "rebelling against rebellion" the GOP does started around the same time the baby boomers were hitting their 30s, and starting to be really upset about all those damn kids running around (doing the things they used to do) and making trouble for their comfy suburbs and slowly-settling lifestyles.

"Fair and balanced": it happens with democrats too, but much less. Thusly;

i75.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-05 12:17:08 AM  

shotglasss: What deductions is he getting rid of?


All of them
 
2012-10-05 12:20:44 AM  

cretinbob: shotglasss: What deductions is he getting rid of?

All of them


All 'em that, um, have...have been in front of him over all these years?
 
2012-10-05 12:28:09 AM  
One thing I've observed about Obama is this: when he looks like he's just sitting there, doing nothing - he probably is not.
What did he do with the Somali pirates? Talked them into being pulled within range of the navy ship, then had the SEALS shoot them.

He did this a whole bunch of times during the 2008 campaign, and the press was yapping that he was too passive back then, too.

If he's real quiet, enough that liberals start wringing their hands, that means something is in the works.

Most democrats aren't like that. If the average Democrat is sitting there doing nothing, it's probably because they are indecisive and have no spine.
 
2012-10-05 12:38:11 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama just stood their and gave a big smile...as if he agreed.


That was his "ha ha sucker" troll smile. Not sure why over that particular point though.
 
2012-10-05 01:49:58 AM  
Romney finally reveals his plan.....he will be Obama, just the white version. Rmoney is back in the race if he energizes enough crackers to turn out on election day.
 
2012-10-05 01:55:53 AM  

TheBigJerk: patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.

It's an old, old game. There has always been "rebellion" and the conceptual paradigm that it is better to be an individual making your own way than a sheep following the herd. That mindset opposes membership of ANY group as a matter of course, and in recent history (about since Reagan) the GOP has been manipulating that sociological paradigm to their own ends, painting democrats as being just as (or more) authoritarian as themselves in their long-running campaign of false-equivalence and BSABSVR.

Also worthy of consideration: this "rebelling against rebellion" the GOP does started around the same time the baby boomers were hitting their 30s, and starting to be really upset about all those damn kids running around (doing the things they used to do) and making trouble for their comfy suburbs and slowly-settling lifestyles.

"Fair and balanced": it happens with democrats too, but much less. Thusly;

[i75.photobucket.com image 600x457]


Pic stolen and reposted. Nice one.
 
2012-10-05 04:11:40 AM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


But conservatives are already declaring him King of the World! They don't care that he has campaigned for over a year and said the exact opposite of things he said in the debate, facts have no meaning in conservativeland, and everyone is biased against conservatives!
 
2012-10-05 05:21:06 AM  

Vodka Zombie: I don't know. Instead of smacking his lies down then and there, he's leaving it up to the people to talk about them and debunk his bullshiat. The story now has legs.


More importantly, time is limited during the debate. You can crank out lies as fast as you can talk but properly detailing how and why they are lies takes more than a few minutes afforded to each speaker.

=Smidge=
 
2012-10-05 07:20:16 AM  

cloud_van_dame: One thing I've observed about Obama is this: when he looks like he's just sitting there, doing nothing - he probably is not.
What did he do with the Somali pirates? Talked them into being pulled within range of the navy ship, then had the SEALS shoot them.

He did this a whole bunch of times during the 2008 campaign, and the press was yapping that he was too passive back then, too.

If he's real quiet, enough that liberals start wringing their hands, that means something is in the works.

Most democrats aren't like that. If the average Democrat is sitting there doing nothing, it's probably because they are indecisive and have no spine.


Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, and thank you.


/also, 'thank you' for the part about the average Democrat
//truth is truth
 
2012-10-05 08:26:13 AM  

Cyberluddite: Meanwhile, Obama set a new debate record for the number of times he inexplicably failed to even attempt to rebut or call bullshiat on an opponent's obvious lies.


At least Romney called out Obama on his lies.

And Obama took it.
 
2012-10-05 08:29:37 AM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


Obama's team (it is rumored) had a strategy of not trying to real-time fact check Romney. They were affraid it would go on too long and make Obama look reactive, not proactive.

Then, as Obama realized that Romney was simply a volcano spewing layers of lies Obama let is slide. They probably didn't plan on letting 2/3 of the debate slide. That made Obama look a little weak but the strategy still holds. Obama let Romney keep digging and now they can spend all the time from here to the next debate calling him a liar.

This will probably cause Romney to tone it down. At the next debate Obama can go medieval with impunity. Romney will be assumed to be lying at least part of the time and everybody now expects Obama to be more aggressive.

It's a slow motion rope-a-dope and Romney is the dope. It was part strategy and part luck but I think the Dems can make it work in their favor unless they fark it up.
 
2012-10-05 11:34:22 AM  

Cyberluddite: Meanwhile, Obama set a new debate record for the number of times he inexplicably failed to even attempt to rebut or call bullshiat on an opponent's obvious lies.


The problem is a timed debate. You can't just say "nuh-uh" when someone lies, you have to explain why each is a lie. That's difficult to do when there's nearly a lie every minute. Your explanation must similarly be shorter than a minute. Tough to do in most cases.
 
2012-10-05 01:28:42 PM  

Atypical Person Reading Fark: Don't think I've ever seen warbargle like this before. WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?


It's a Starcraft reference.
 
Displayed 311 of 311 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report