Printable View
[QUOTE=Esten; 427602]Translation:
[i]Wahhhhhhhh. Biden won and I'm a sore loser. I can't refute that Biden repeatedly exposed Ryan's weak and dishonest talking points. So I'll just complain about his style. [/i][/QUOTE]I am just wondering who looks more ridiculous now, Biden or Esten.
[QUOTE=Member #2041;427559]Actually, It is entirely appropriate to be rude when calling someone out for lying to the American People.[/quote]I strongly disagree, being rude in a debate format is just wrong, make your case and let it stand or fall based on its merits. If everyone acted like Biden, debates would become uncontrolled screaming matches.
[i]'Unfortunately his patronizing arrogance mirrors that of many (not all) in the Democrat party today.'[/i] If the shoe fits my friend.
[QUOTE=Wild Walleye;427609]'While I may come off as a fire-breathing right-winger, I am not. I believe in the US and I believe in the founding documents and the intentions of the founders. I do not believe that those values are irrelevant, today. I don't accept disinformation or dissembling from our govt, regardless of who is in power.[snip][/QUOTE][B][size=+2]Hear Hear! [/size][/B]
[QUOTE=Esten; 427602]Translation:
[i]Wahhhhhhhh. Biden won and I'm a sore loser. I can't refute that Biden repeatedly exposed Ryan's weak and dishonest talking points. So I'll just complain about his style. [/i][/QUOTE]Translation:
[i]Wahhhhhhhh. I can't really defend Biden's rude and crude behavior so I'll just do like I've done so many times before and try to 'kill the messenger'. [/i]
[QUOTE=Punter 127; 427617]I strongly disagree, being rude in a debate format is just wrong, make your case and let it stand or fall based on its merits. If everyone acted like Biden, debates would become uncontrolled screaming matches.
[i]'Unfortunately his patronizing arrogance mirrors that of many (not all) in the Democrat party today. '[/i] If the shoe fits my friend.[/QUOTE]That's your opinion only. One that has exactly as much merit as mine. Every voter gets exactly one. Frankly, I consider the problem is that there is not enough aggressive calling out of lying in these debates and discussions. And as a result, the lies have become a far greater portion of discourse than they ever have been before, because the perpetrators are not being called out for it in the strongest possible manner.
This is a tough election for me. Even if I think that Romney's policies are better for the economy, I am the minority in that I have done exceptionally well under Obama's policies. If you compare 4 years of Obama to 8 years of Bush, I have far superior performance. Under both administrations, I will receive a tax hike. In any revenue neutral tax policy change as Romney is proposing there will be winners and losers. In the Reagan tax example that Ryan pointed to in the debate, my taxes were raised because I was using a preference that was eliminated.
Actually agree with Obama that Defense should be on the table for budget purposes. For example, I do not think reducing the number of ships in the Navy from 330 to 300 will weaken US image in the world as Romney proposes.
I thought that Ryan's view on Syria were naive. 30, 000 dead in a civil war are not that many. In America's Revolutionary war, there were 25, 000 dead according to Wikipedia. In US Civil war there are estimates of 750, 000 combat deaths alone. I listen to NPR which I know is anathema to most of you but NPR regularly reports that Americans are on the ground in Syria distributing weapons to the rebels.
All Presidents in my lifetime have had incidents similar to Liberia. If we would have reinforced the embassy, there would have been 25 dead Americans instead of 4. Here is a list of embassy attacks. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attacks_on_diplomatic_missions[/url] I doubt Republicans will be able to prevent them in the future. It is a very high standard Romney is setting for himself. One prediction. Issa will not hold a congressional hearing when an embassy attack occurs under Romney.
[QUOTE=Big Boss Man; 427637]This is a tough election for me. Even if I think that Romney's policies are better for the economy, I am the minority in that I have done exceptionally well under Obama's policies. If you compare 4 years of Obama to 8 years of Bush, I have far superior performance. Under both administrations, I will receive a tax hike. In any revenue neutral tax policy change as Romney is proposing there will be winners and losers. In the Reagan tax example that Ryan pointed to in the debate, my taxes were raised because I was using a preference that was eliminated.
Actually agree with Obama that Defense should be on the table for budget purposes. For example, I do not think reducing the number of ships in the Navy from 330 to 300 will weaken US image in the world as Romney proposes.
I thought that Ryan's view on Syria were naive. 30, 000 dead in a civil war are not that many. In America's Revolutionary war, there were 25, 000 dead according to Wikipedia. In US Civil war there are estimates of 750, 000 combat deaths alone. I listen to NPR which I know is anathema to most of you but NPR regularly reports that Americans are on the ground in Syria distributing weapons to the rebels.
All Presidents in my lifetime have had incidents similar to Liberia. If we would have reinforced the embassy, there would have been 25 dead Americans instead of 4. Here is a list of embassy attacks.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attacks_on_diplomatic_missions[/url]
I doubt Republicans will be able to prevent them in the future. It is a very high standard Romney is setting for himself. One prediction. Issa will not hold a congressional hearing when an embassy attack occurs under Romney.[/QUOTE]Big Boss Man, I hope that you realize that there is no place for a reasonable viewpoint in the center here. Don't you realize that it's not sufficient to argue that Obama may simply have had some policy and execution failings, but rather, you must demonize him as a Marxist who does not hold core American values? But my compliments for using a word such as "anathema" which will either blow right by the righties who dominate this board, or send them scurrying to the dictionary if they actually want to know what you said (admittedly doubtful).
Paul Ryan is an articulate and intelligent guy. But whether he is honest is an entirely separate question. A few points from the debate.
1. Ryan has panned the Stimulus over and over. But we learn he wrote the DOE several letters, requesting Stimulus funds for Wisconsin businesses. Ryan claimed the Stimulus funds would create growth and jobs, and help promote green energy.
2. Ryan portrayed stimulus spending as full of cronyism. But we learn an investigation found no evidence of cronyism.
3. Ryan says we are putting American soldiers at risk in Afghanistan by leaving fewer and fewer of them in dangerous places. But we learn American soldiers are being replaced one-for-one by Afghan soldiers, who are being trained to provide security in parallel with the US drawdown of troops.
4. Ryan says he wants to protect small businesses. But we learn that the segment of small business he wants to help (beyond Obama's plan) includes Wall Street hedge funds.
5. Ryan says 'Obamacare' takes $716 billion from Medicare. Without explaining the details, there is a clear implication this will hit seniors. But we learn in fact this doesn't affect benefits, it's a reduction in future overpayments to insurance companies (some call it waste). And it extends Medicare to 2024 and helps close the prescription drug donut hole - both good for current and future seniors.
That's just five. People can judge what Ryan's motive is in what he said and what he didn't say. Romney / Ryan also continue to be vague on their alternate plans for taxes and healthcare. Trust us, we have a plan. And they profess to want to work with Democrats in a bipartisan manner, even though congressional Republicans have had a deliberate strategy of obstruction since Obama took office !
Ryan was all about rehearsed talking points. Biden crushed Ryan's attempts at deception.
I expect more of the same next week.
[QUOTE=Big Boss Man;427637]30, 000 dead in a civil war are not that many.[/QUOTE]México lost one-eighth of its population during their (second) revolution, about two [B]million[/B] people.
He didn't sound intelligent at all.
[QUOTE=Esten;427640]Paul Ryan is an articulate and intelligent guy.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Esten; 427640]Paul Ryan is an articulate and intelligent guy. But whether he is honest is an entirely separate question. A few points from the debate.
1. Ryan has panned the Stimulus over and over. But we learn he wrote the DOE several letters, requesting Stimulus funds for Wisconsin businesses. Ryan claimed the Stimulus funds would create growth and jobs, and help promote green energy.
2. Ryan portrayed stimulus spending as full of cronyism. But we learn an investigation found no evidence of cronyism.
3. Ryan says we are putting American soldiers at risk in Afghanistan by leaving fewer and fewer of them in dangerous places. But we learn American soldiers are being replaced one-for-one by Afghan soldiers, who are being trained to provide security in parallel with the US drawdown of troops.
4. Ryan says he wants to protect small businesses. But we learn that the segment of small business he wants to help (beyond Obama's plan) includes Wall Street hedge funds.
5. Ryan says 'Obamacare' takes $716 billion from Medicare. Without explaining the details, there is a clear implication this will hit seniors. But we learn in fact this doesn't affect benefits, it's a reduction in future overpayments to insurance companies (some call it waste). And it extends Medicare to 2024 and helps close the prescription drug donut hole. Both good for current and future seniors.
That's just five. People can judge what Ryan's motive is in what he said and what he didn't say. Romney / Ryan also continue to be vague on their alternate plans for taxes and healthcare. Trust us, we have a plan. And they profess to want to work with Democrats in a bipartisan manner, even though congressional Republicans have had a deliberate strategy of obstruction since Obama took office!
Ryan was all about rehearsed talking points. Biden crushed Ryan's attempts at deception.
I expect more of the same next week.[/QUOTE]For some reason Democrats believe they're always truthful and the other side is not. Here's a list of Biden's "untruths" during the debate from a conservative web site:
[url]http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/12/Fact-Check-Top-Ten-Worst-Lies-by-Joe-Biden-in-VP-Debate[/url]
I'd add to it the $5 trillion in tax cuts that Biden and Obama keep mentioning.
On your list,"1" and "2" sound like business as usual in Washington. All Congressmen except Ron Paul seek pork for their districts. Ryan is probably less aggressive than most. Undoubtedly cronyism played a part in the stimulus. Look at Solyndra, or the United Auto Workers.
Item "3" doesn't sound reasonable to me. From what I've read, mostly in a liberal publication (the New Yorker) , Afgan troops aren't competent. When they're involved in joint operations, they put our troops in danger. They're not well armed or well trained. While I'm to the left of you and just about everyone else on this board when it comes to keeping American troops overseas, Ryan was right.
Item "4", about the hedge funds, is true solely because hedge fund management companies are small businesses. So if Ryan protects small business then theoretically he protects hedge funds because they're small businesses? I maintain (and you'd disagree) that Romney and Ryan stand a better change of eliminating carried interest for hedge fund managers than Obama. At least Obama didn't do it when he had a majority in the house and 60 votes in the Senate. (Apologies Walleye)
Item "5" I don't know enough about to offer an opinion.
I commend you for not calling him a liar. That's getting really common, and the accusations are coming a lot more from the left than the right, although there are some conservatives doing it, like the writer on Breitbart's site.
[QUOTE=Big Boss Man;427637]This is a tough election for me. Even if I think that Romney's policies are better for the economy, I am the minority in that I have done exceptionally well under Obama's policies. If you compare 4 years of Obama to 8 years of Bush, I have far superior performance. Under both administrations, I will receive a tax hike. In any revenue neutral tax policy change as Romney is proposing there will be winners and losers. In the Reagan tax example that Ryan pointed to in the debate, my taxes were raised because I was using a preference that was eliminated.[/QUOTE]Good post, thanks. I did well under Clinton and have done well under Obama too. In Clinton's case, it was partly because he did a good job with the economy, balancing the budget among other things. The only big thing that he did wrong was raise taxes on ordinary income. He cut them on capital gains. In Obama's case, it's sheer coincidence. And if not for Republicans in the Senate and House he would have screwed me over. Romney would do a better job with the economy. Obama, however, might make more sense for older people who don't mind burdening the young and future generations with debt they can't repay.
I don't think the two sides really have different positions on Syria, although they claim to. And agree that Syria and Libya aren't big issues compared to the economic ones, and defense should be cut.
[QUOTE=Member #2041;427639]Big Boss Man, I hope that you realize that there is no place for a reasonable viewpoint in the center here.[/quote]How would you know that?
[quote=]Don't you realize that it's not sufficient to argue that Obama may simply have had some policy and execution failings, but rather, you must demonize him as a Marxist who does not hold core American values?[/quote]I'm still waiting for one of you lefties to list a few of his successes (I. E. The kind that more than just hardcore leftists consider to be successful). I did not demonize him as a Marxist, I accurately identified him as a Marxist because that is what he is. Wait, that is probably racist, you know, to truthfully identify what Obama is, as opposed to accepting what we are told he is.
[quote=]But my compliments for using a word such as "anathema" which will either blow right by the righties who dominate this board, or send them scurrying to the dictionary if they actually want to know what you said (admittedly doubtful).[/QUOTE]Please feel free to use the search function containing "wild walleye anathema" and see what you come up with.
I am curious as to whether you have read Marx. I haven't heard anything from Obama about workers receiving the full marginal product of their labor, owning the means of production, or inevitably revolting. He has some socialist leanings but not Marxist leanings. Who has Marxist leanings any more anyway? Shit's been discredited. Passing a national health care law is a major achievement, regardless of whether one is for or against the law. I'm not even sure whether I am for or against it, but it's a memorable achievement. I think it was Tiny who said gridlock is good and under our political system, the chief executive can't just simply implement his program (then it would be Argentina). What truly memorable achievements did Bush II have? Clinton? Bush I? Do you see a pattern here?
[QUOTE=Esten; 427640]Paul Ryan is an articulate and intelligent guy. But whether he is honest is an entirely separate question. A few points from the debate.
1. Ryan has panned the Stimulus over and over. But we learn he wrote the DOE several letters, requesting Stimulus funds for Wisconsin businesses. Ryan claimed the Stimulus funds would create growth and jobs, and help promote green energy.[/QUOTE]Extreme and unaware of the realities that are the US Congress. Ryan is an elected representative of the State of Wisconsin and is serving both his state and his country. In his role representing the former, he needs to promote the interests of his constituents. Just because Obama, Pelosi and Reid made a $1T slush fund, deliberately excluding republicans, doesn't absolve him of his responsibilities to his constituents. However, I agree with Ryan, we would have been better off without the profligate spending.
[quote=]2. Ryan portrayed stimulus spending as full of cronyism. But we learn an investigation found no evidence of cronyism.[/quote]There really is no hope for you, is there? Solyndra, Fisker, Lightsquared, any of this ringing any bells?
[quote=]3. Ryan says we are putting American soldiers at risk in Afghanistan by leaving fewer and fewer of them in dangerous places. But we learn American soldiers are being replaced one-for-one by Afghan soldiers, who are being trained to provide security in parallel with the US drawdown of troops.[/quote]Ever heard of "blue on green?"
[quote=]4. Ryan says he wants to protect small businesses. But we learn that the segment of small business he wants to help (beyond Obama's plan) includes Wall Street hedge funds.[/quote]You believe that to be true because Joe said it during the interruption fest? Please show me where the plan targets that type of small business.
[quote=]5. Ryan says 'Obamacare' takes $716 billion from Medicare. Without explaining the details, there is a clear implication this will hit seniors.[/quote]Will you pick that same bone with the OMB, the source of the $716B number?
[quote=]But we learn in fact this doesn't affect benefits, it's a reduction in future overpayments to insurance companies (some call it waste).[/quote]Do you honestly believe that Medicaid overpays anyone to the tune of $716B, in the absence of fraud? Please, you can call a flaming pile of sh*t an overpayment, that doesn't make it one.
[quote=]And it extends Medicare to 2024 and helps close the prescription drug donut hole - both good for current and future seniors.[/quote]You mean taking the money away from those programs is good for seniors?
[quote=]That's just five.[/quote]You count like a liberal, too. That is zero.
[quote=]People can judge what Ryan's motive is in what he said and what he didn't say.[/quote]I have judged that his motive is to help save America from a Marxist ideologue who is doing his best to destroy the country. I don't think that I am the only one to draw that conclusion.
[quote=]Romney / Ryan also continue to be vague on their alternate plans for taxes and healthcare. Trust us, we have a plan.[/quote]No successful presidential candidacy gets too deep into the details of their plan. To do so is to open your self up to a wider variety of attacks. Why should Romney and Ryan do something Obama didn't due in the previous presidential race? Sh*t, Obama has been president for more than 3. 5 years and he can't give any details.
[quote=]And they profess to want to work with Democrats in a bipartisan manner, even though congressional Republicans have had a deliberate strategy of obstruction since Obama took office ![/quote]Why the false argument about Republican obstructionism? Did you miss the first two years (24 months, on some calendars) of the Obama administration? Please. The only thing that has kept Obama's increase in the national debt to 50% has been that for the last 21 months, there have been a few grown ups in the House. If it weren't for the Tea Party, Obama would have rung up $10T in national debt as opposed to his $5T.
[quote=]Ryan was all about rehearsed talking points. Biden crushed Ryan's attempts at deception.[/quote]We must have been watching two different debates. In the one I was watching, there was a respectful, competent individual, familiar with all of the issues, trying to squeeze a word in edgewise between the 84 interruptions from the buffoon next to him and a handful more from the moderator, who was clearly trying to prevent him from making his case. Despite the bizarre behavior of the vice president and the predictable behavior of the moderator, Ryan was a class act from the beginning to the end. I would have wanted to vault the table and beat old Joe with a chair (a sentiment shared by millions and millions of viewers, who oddly seem to be leaving the Obama / Biden ticket).
[quote=]I expect more of the same next week.[/QUOTE]I expect that no matter what happens in the debate, you will claim the Obama won, Romney was just putting out well rehearsed talking points and that Romney didn't want to be there, he would rather have been out giving some steel worker's wife cancer.
You're a broken record. Unfortunately, the recording is of fingernails on a chalkboard.