Presidential debate summary

[A+]

I know this isnt the forum so i understand if its is redirected to the proper forum but judging by the people that post there regularly, it doesnt get much traffic. So this sums it up a little for people who would like a little more information on what was said. If you want to argue this, lay off the Kool-aid man.

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/

Obama accused Romney of proposing a $5 trillion tax cut. Not true. Romney proposes to offset his rate cuts and promises he won’t add to the deficit.
Romney again promised to “not reduce the taxes paid by high-income Americans” and also to “lower taxes on middle-income families,” but didn’t say how he could possibly accomplish that without also increasing the deficit.

Obama oversold his health care law, claiming that health care premiums have “gone up slower than any time in the last 50 years.” That’s true of health care spending, but not premiums. And the health care law had little to do with the slowdown in overall spending.

Romney claimed a new board established by the Affordable Care Act is “going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have.” Not true. The board only recommends cost-saving measures for Medicare, and is legally forbidden to ration care or reduce benefits.

Obama said 5 million private-sector jobs had been created in the past 30 months. Perhaps so, but that counts jobs that the Bureau of Labor Statistics won’t add to the official monthly tallies until next year. For now, the official tally is a bit over 4.6 million.

Romney accused Obama of doubling the federal deficit. Not true. The annual deficit was already running at $1.2 trillion when Obama took office.
Obama again said he’d raise taxes on upper-income persons only to the “rates that we had when Bill Clinton was president.” Actually, many high-income persons would pay more than they did then, because of new taxes in Obama’s health care law.

Romney claimed that middle-income Americans have “seen their income come down by $4,300.” That’s too high. Census figures show the decline in median household income during Obama’s first three years was $2,492, even after adjusting for inflation.

Obama again touted his “$4 trillion” deficit reduction plan, which includes $1 trillion from winding down wars that are coming to an end in any event.

[Ruffdaddy]

Lmao holy fucking bias. You didn't watch the debate did you?

[A+]

Lmao holy fucking bias. You didn't watch the debate did you?

i was in and out of the break room while they were going but i caught most of it. im gonna have to youtube it to see it in its entirety. How is it bias? It looked to me like Romney did most of the talking so he had more chances to make mistakes.It also debunks a lot of what both Romney and Obama said. and thats just a short summary, the rest can be seen at the link provided...

[Ruffdaddy]

i was in and out of the break room while they were going but i caught most of it. im gonna have to youtube it to see it in its entirety.

You should re read what you posted to catch The missed context and bias of what you posted.

I am assuming you are an Obama supporter because you were jonseing so hard for this article you had to post in the wrong forum to get attention.

You do realize middle income and median income change are drastically different right? Romneys measure is the income change of middle income...this goes to show just how dumb you have to be to support Obama.

[A+]

You should re read what you posted to catch The missed context and bias of what you posted.

I am assuming you are an Obama supporter because you were jonseing so hard for this article you had to post in the wrong forum to get attention.

You do realize middle income and median income change are drastically different right? Romneys measure is the income change of middle income...this goes to show just how dumb you have to be to support Obama.

I assume that you are a romney supporter since you are arguing the short list of facts that i just posted, even though i posted a link to the full article. i posted this in the forum to give undecided voters like MYSELF some reading info. on last nights debate. I dont know how i feel about Obama but apparently you know how i feel about him. As for your candidate, i like what he says but dont know how he plans to follow through. I can see it now, Romney wins and after 4 years he says, im gonna need more time to do ________ Why are Romney supporters do defensive?

[Ruffdaddy]

I assume that you are a romney supporter since you are arguing the short list of facts that i just posted, even though i posted a link to the full article. i posted this in the forum to give undecided voters like MYSELF some reading info. on last nights debate. I dont know how i feel about Obama but apparently you know how i feel about him. As for your candidate, i like what he says but dont know how he plans to follow through. I can see it now, Romney wins and after 4 years he says, im gonna need more time to do ________ Why are Romney supporters do defensive?

I'm not a Romney supporter. But I damn sure don't want to give Obama a chance to really do damage.

It's sad that even posting a short list, you can't get it correct. So you're not only dumb, you're trying to sling a bias by cherry picking lies while screaming for attention? Yep...there no doubt you're an Obama supporter.

[Ruffdaddy]

Sorry for being a dick, I just hate to see this much intentional bias and skewing of details.

[A+]

I'm not a Romney supporter. But I damn sure don't want to give Obama a chance to really do damage.

It's sad that even posting a short list, you can't get it correct. So you're not only dumb, you're trying to sling a bias by cherry picking lies while screaming for attention? Yep...there no doubt you're an Obama supporter.

go ahead and tell me one of the lies said so i can do my own research, since what i posted is bias

Sorry for being a dick, I just hate to see this much intentional bias and skewing of details.

usually when i read an article about both canidates, it goes one way, either to the left or right. factcheck call both out so i guess i just dont see it..

[Sean88gt]

Read up on the Annenberg Foundation. They hold left leaning biases. I believe Obama even worked with them at one point.

[A+]

Read up on the Annenberg Foundation. They hold left leaning biases. I believe Obama even worked with them at one point.

ill check it out. thanks....right now im trying to figure out what romneys beef is with PBS. How much money are they giving them that romney felt that he should single them out? I fuckin love pbs, who doesnt? Bob Ross is turning in his grave right about now. If anything, lets stop funding those p.o.s countries that killing our troops, although im sure its a bad idea some way an the other.

[4bangen]

PBS, and NPR are both a waist of our tax dollars. The Fed gives them around 401 million a year, and if you add up all the state level governments, its about 1.6 billion. And the fuckers still ask for money every month.

When money gets tight around my house cable is the first thing to go.

[Dlachance]

i was in and out of the break room while they were going but i caught most of it. im gonna have to youtube it to see it in its entirety. How is it bias? It looked to me like Romney did most of the talking so he had more chances to make mistakes.It also debunks a lot of what both Romney and Obama said. and thats just a short summary, the rest can be seen at the link provided...

Obama has several, I believe 8, more talking mintues than Romney.

[Forever_frost]

His beef with PBS is it's an unconstitutional expenditure and makes more than enough to support itself without tax dollars.

[Forever_frost]

So what’s the real story behind FactCheck and it’s liberal bias? Who owns it? Well, the answer to that question is the now liberal group, the Annenberg Foundation. The Annenberg Foundation was founded by Walter H. Annenberg, who was at one point a loyal Reagan conservative and diehard Republican. However, Old Walter’s family have changed their tune. Now, the family has close ties to Barack Obama, Bill Ayers and the liberal front in general.

For those who don’t know who Bill Ayers is, do a google search. However, in a nutshell, he led a group of extreme leftists called the Weather Underground (or Weathermen) during the Vietnam War era. His group took credit for bombing the Pentagon, the Capital Building, and the New York City Metro Police Department, as well as over thirty other bombings. Basically, he’s a leftist nutcase psycho fucksack and he’s not in prison.

So how is Obama tied to Ayers and tied to the Annenbergs and thus FactCheck.org?

To start, Ayers was the key founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was a Chicago public school reform project from 1995 to 2001. Upon its start in 1995, Obama was appointed Board Chairman and President of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Geesh, that alone connects all three. Well, it branches out even more from there.

Ayers co-chaired the organization’s Collaborative, which set the education policies of the Challenge. Oddly enough, Obama was the one who was authorized to delegate to the Collaborative in regards to its programs and projects. In addition to that, Obama often times had to seek advice and assistance from the Ayer’s led Collaborative in regards to the programmatic aspects of grant proposals. Ayers even sat on the same board as Obama as an “ex officio member”. They both also sat together on the board of the CAC’s Governance Committee. Obama and Ayers were two parts of a group of four who were instructed to draft the bylaws that would govern the CAC. Keep in mind that the “A” in CAC is for Annenberg, the owners of FactCheck.org. The funding for Ayer’s projects and those of his cronies was approved by Board Chair, Barack Obama. Together, Ayers and Obama guided money to ACORN. Everyone in America should be familiar with the ACORN bullshit, well unless you’re on Olbermann’s cock or you’re off titty-fucking Chris Matthews.

When analyzing the source of FactCheck.org, one has to also take into account that the Annenberg owned site is ran through the Annenberg School for Communication which is a part of the University of Pennsylvania. UPenn, which I am calling it for abbreviation sake, is a liberally biased institution that has had its fair share of controversies in the past. In recent years, they have had several free speech issues, even though they were awarded the highest possible free speech rating by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

So, doesn’t all this make FactCheck.org, the Annenberg owned company, at least a little bit biased towards the left? When the issue of Obama’s birth certificate came up, FactCheck.org nipped it in the bud before it had the chance to truly become a scandal. They denied that the birth certificate was even an issue and Obama turned to them to “prove” that his birth certificate was legitimate. Clueless Americans and biased media outlets accepted the “proof” because, well.. it came from a website that no one knows much about. I’ve heard of faith in God, faith in man, faith in one’s self but never have I heard of faith in a mysterious website. I guess people just need something to believe in and Kool-Aid is tasty.

Now I am not a so-called “birther” but I do not trust FactCheck.org’s findings and facts to be authentic. The birth certificate issue is just the tip of the iceberg. Their bias towards the left and especially Obama is obvious to anyone with half a brain cell. They demonize Republican politicians much more so than the Democratic ones. Every questionable thing Obama does is seemingly justified and logical if you reference FactCheck. While the often times common sense approach of libertarians and some in the GOP is stripped down and made to look like pipe dreams and idiotic wishful and naive thinking.

So when it comes down to it, FactCheck.org’s power and legitimacy comes from “We the People”. Perception is king and if you perceive their “facts” to be facts, well then, in you’re mind, they are facts. Unfortunately, the internet has made people lazy. People no longer question things and look for the answers and the facts for themselves. They just do a google search and take either the first thing that pops up or they take the version that best suits their needs or what they already believe or perceive. But anyway, who the fuck am I? This could all be complete bullshit. You’ll never know though unless you look into it for yourself. In the end, depending upon where you stand, the truth could be anything or it could be nothing. I just tell myself that it’s all lies.

So who is fact checking FactCheck.org?

http://theswash.com/liberty/who-fact-checks-factcheck-org

[Vertnut]

ill check it out. thanks....right now im trying to figure out what romneys beef is with PBS. How much money are they giving them that romney felt that he should single them out? I fuckin love pbs, who doesnt? Bob Ross is turning in his grave right about now. If anything, lets stop funding those p.o.s countries that killing our troops, although im sure its a bad idea some way an the other.

LOL! The producers of those shows make MILLIONS. Yeah. We spend taxpayer money to a station for their "employee's" and the writers/producers/actors are getting rich. The Dems need the income from their donations, or PBS would be gone. Any or all of those shows could be signed up with any cable channel and do just fine.