Romney's brazenness surprised Obama at debate.

[eflatminor]

So far, crickets...

With so many of our resident lefties screaming about lies, you'd think it would easy to point to just one of those lies. I've been asking for a single example ever since the debate and have yet to find a taker.

Come on Jim, you're the OP. You claimed he lied. Show us just one and why you think it's a lie. How hard could it be when you claim so many lies were uttered.

Mitt Romney debates himself - YouTube

This is your evidence of a lie? Sorry, but the first example in this little video does no such thing. Romney said "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income Americans". There, he is referring to tax revenue realized from wealthier Americans. When he later says "We're going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%..." he's talking about tax rates.

Just because you cut tax rates for a certain income class, does not mean they'll pay less in taxes. History has shown that often, tax revenues INCREASE following a tax rate decrease. More importantly, Romney includes the idea that the number of tax loopholes will be reduced, therefore further insuring the taxes paid by high income Americans will not likely be reduced.

You're free to suggest the economy could worsen following a tax rate decrease and therefore less revenue could be realized. You're free to suggest Romney wouldn't eliminate enough loopholes to make up for the potential of reduced revenue. Those are differences in economic philosophy but under no circumstance do those two statements represent a lie.

Want to try again?

 

[naturegirl]

With so many of our resident lefties screaming about lies, you'd think it would easy to point to just one of those lies. I've been asking for a single example ever since the debate and have yet to find a taker.

Come on Jim, you're the OP. You claimed he lied. Show us just one and why you think it's a lie. How hard could it be when you claim so many lies were uttered.

Mitt Romney debates himself - YouTube

This is your evidence of a lie? Sorry, but the first example in this little video does no such thing. Romney said "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income Americans". There, he is referring to tax revenue realized from wealthier Americans. When he later says "We're going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%..." he's talking about tax rates.

Just because you cut tax rates for a certain income class, does not mean they'll pay less in taxes. History has shown that often, tax revenues INCREASE following a tax rate decrease. More importantly, Romney includes the idea that the number of tax loopholes will be reduced, therefore further insuring the taxes paid by high income Americans will not likely be reduced.

You're free to suggest the economy could worsen following a tax rate decrease and therefore less revenue could be realized. You're free to suggest Romney wouldn't eliminate enough loopholes to make up for the potential of reduced revenue. Those are differences in economic philosophy but under no circumstance do those two statements represent a lie.

Want to try again?

Careful, that's a lot of info to be processed. It might take them a while.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Ahhh, Romney was supposed to be nice to the black messiah like McCain.

The media is nice to the black messiah, so Romney must follow them too.

Romney should've giggled and smiled at Obamination like McCain, not actually attack him for being an idiot....

 

[WillowTree]

Axelrod: Romney

Axelrod said Romney was dishonest during the debate, pointing to a contentious charge Obama waged Wednesday evening about his opponent’s tax plan involving $5 trillion in cuts for the wealthy - a claim CNN has rated as false.
“When he said he never proposed $5 trillion in tax cuts, that was dishonest,” said Axelrod, stopping short of saying the Republican challenger lied during the debate. “I'm saying that he was dishonest in his answers. You can characterize that any way you want.”

I guess Obama didn't exspect a devote Mormon to brazenly lie like Mitt did. That was after he pulled the notes from his pocket, which was againsr debate rules. God cannot be happy with Mitt...

he's even less happy with libtards It's amazing to me that you guys keep lapping up the bullshit david axelrod drops along the way. truly amazing.

 

[Rinata]

With so many of our resident lefties screaming about lies, you'd think it would easy to point to just one of those lies. I've been asking for a single example ever since the debate and have yet to find a taker.

Come on Jim, you're the OP. You claimed he lied. Show us just one and why you think it's a lie. How hard could it be when you claim so many lies were uttered.

Mitt Romney debates himself - YouTube

This is your evidence of a lie? Sorry, but the first example in this little video does no such thing. Romney said "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income Americans". There, he is referring to tax revenue realized from wealthier Americans. When he later says "We're going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%..." he's talking about tax rates.

Just because you cut tax rates for a certain income class, does not mean they'll pay less in taxes. History has shown that often, tax revenues INCREASE following a tax rate decrease. More importantly, Romney includes the idea that the number of tax loopholes will be reduced, therefore further insuring the taxes paid by high income Americans will not likely be reduced.

You're free to suggest the economy could worsen following a tax rate decrease and therefore less revenue could be realized. You're free to suggest Romney wouldn't eliminate enough loopholes to make up for the potential of reduced revenue. Those are differences in economic philosophy but under no circumstance do those two statements represent a lie.

Want to try again?

What for?? If God Himself sent you a post you would find fault with that, too. If you had wondered why nobody wants to respond to questions from the right, it's because we know better than to waste our time.

 

[Rinata]

Mitt Romney debates himself - YouTube

This is your evidence of a lie? Sorry, but the first example in this little video does no such thing. Romney said "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income Americans". There, he is referring to tax revenue realized from wealthier Americans. When he later says "We're going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%..." he's talking about tax rates.

Just because you cut tax rates for a certain income class, does not mean they'll pay less in taxes. History has shown that often, tax revenues INCREASE following a tax rate decrease. More importantly, Romney includes the idea that the number of tax loopholes will be reduced, therefore further insuring the taxes paid by high income Americans will not likely be reduced.

You're free to suggest the economy could worsen following a tax rate decrease and therefore less revenue could be realized. You're free to suggest Romney wouldn't eliminate enough loopholes to make up for the potential of reduced revenue. Those are differences in economic philosophy but under no circumstance do those two statements represent a lie.

Want to try again?

Careful, that's a lot of info to be processed. It might take them a while.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Politico]

More Bullshit.

 

[Rinata]

Ahhh, Romney was supposed to be nice to the black messiah like McCain.

The media is nice to the black messiah, so Romney must follow them too.

Romney should've giggled and smiled at Obamination like McCain, not actually attack him for being an idiot....

You must not even watch the debates. Where do you get your feedback?? Apparenty Fox News. McCain was a pickle puss ass hole to Obama. All he did was scowl and he refused to even look at him. You just really made yourself look stupid.

Black Messiah??? Oh, you're not racist.

 

[eflatminor]

Mitt Romney debates himself - YouTube

This is your evidence of a lie? Sorry, but the first example in this little video does no such thing. Romney said "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income Americans". There, he is referring to tax revenue realized from wealthier Americans. When he later says "We're going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%..." he's talking about tax rates.

Just because you cut tax rates for a certain income class, does not mean they'll pay less in taxes. History has shown that often, tax revenues INCREASE following a tax rate decrease. More importantly, Romney includes the idea that the number of tax loopholes will be reduced, therefore further insuring the taxes paid by high income Americans will not likely be reduced.

You're free to suggest the economy could worsen following a tax rate decrease and therefore less revenue could be realized. You're free to suggest Romney wouldn't eliminate enough loopholes to make up for the potential of reduced revenue. Those are differences in economic philosophy but under no circumstance do those two statements represent a lie.

Want to try again?

What for?? If God Himself sent you a post you would find fault with that, too. If you had wondered why nobody wants to respond to questions from the right, it's because we know better than to waste our time.

I seriously doubt God would post Romney quotes that in no way demonstrated a lie as evidence of a lie. But let's set the rhetoric aside...

YOU provided the "evidence" that Romney lied by showing Romney making two statements:
1) "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income Americans"; and
2) "We're going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%..."

I say this does not represent a lie, it represents an economic philosophy that contends lower tax RATES boosts the economy and results in more tax REVENUE, particularly if accompanied by the elimination of tax loopholes.

You may disagree that's what will happen, but you said he lied. So, I ask again, tell us why making these two statement equates to a lie. Be specific please, use logic and reason in making your points...if you can.

 

[JimH52]

Okay, let's see if you can discuss this with logic, reason and specificity. Another troll we do not need. So, here goes:

Maybe he did lie, I'm not saying either way, but please quote from Romney that which you believe to be a lie and tell us in your own words why you think it's a lie.

I'm not looking for a links to biased opinions, I'm looking for just one example and why you think it's a lie. Maybe I'll agree and that will be it. Let's see.

So far, crickets...

With so many of our resident lefties screaming about lies, you'd think it would easy to point to just one of those lies. I've been asking for a single example ever since the debate and have yet to find a taker.

Come on Jim, you're the OP. You claimed he lied. Show us just one and why you think it's a lie. How hard could it be when you claim so many lies were uttered.

3 of 38 failed green businesses is "Half" Mitt needs a lesson in math. I work for a living. I cannot sit around and blog idiot remarks all day. Mitt pushed the limit of truth. That is just one.

But maybe you can blog all day? maybe you are part of Mitt's 47%.....wow

 

[kwc57]

Mitt Romney debates himself - YouTube

This is your evidence of a lie? Sorry, but the first example in this little video does no such thing. Romney said "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income Americans". There, he is referring to tax revenue realized from wealthier Americans. When he later says "We're going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%..." he's talking about tax rates.

Just because you cut tax rates for a certain income class, does not mean they'll pay less in taxes. History has shown that often, tax revenues INCREASE following a tax rate decrease. More importantly, Romney includes the idea that the number of tax loopholes will be reduced, therefore further insuring the taxes paid by high income Americans will not likely be reduced.

You're free to suggest the economy could worsen following a tax rate decrease and therefore less revenue could be realized. You're free to suggest Romney wouldn't eliminate enough loopholes to make up for the potential of reduced revenue. Those are differences in economic philosophy but under no circumstance do those two statements represent a lie.

Want to try again?

What for?? If God Himself sent you a post you would find fault with that, too. If you had wondered why nobody wants to respond to questions from the right, it's because we know better than to waste our time.

Rinata, I serve God, I know God, God is a friend of mine. Rinata, you're no God.

 

[eflatminor]

So far, crickets...

With so many of our resident lefties screaming about lies, you'd think it would easy to point to just one of those lies. I've been asking for a single example ever since the debate and have yet to find a taker.

Come on Jim, you're the OP. You claimed he lied. Show us just one and why you think it's a lie. How hard could it be when you claim so many lies were uttered.

3 of 38 failed green businesses is "Half" Mitt needs a lesson in math. I work for a living. I cannot sit around and blog idiot remarks all day. Mitt pushed the limit of truth. That is just one.

But maybe you can blog all day? maybe you are part of Mitt's 47%.....wow

First, thank you for the attempt to identify a lie. I can't seem to get anyone to be specific when claiming Romney lied. At least you had the balls to point to something.

Okay, first, let's look at the EXACT statement Romney made:

"And these businesses — many of them have gone out of business. I think about half of them, of the ones have been invested in, they've gone out of business."

Clearly, Romney was incorrect. Half did not go out of business. It is also clear Romney was not sure about this statement, given he prefaced it with "I think about...".

So, you're right to call him out on a factual error. He was wrong. But is that a lie?

The definition of a lie is making an intentionally false statement. Do you have evidence Romney knew it wasn't half the companies that had gone out of business but said so anyway?

I suspect he pulled a wild ass guess, which turn out to be incorrect. Seems rather weak evidence of a lie, especially if you believe he uttered so many lies. Do you not have a more concrete example of a lie?

 

[kwc57]

Interesting read.

"After President Obama’s sour showing in last week’s debate, he and his team adopted a curious seeming response.

Team Obama said Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, a man Democrats (and Republicans) have long been saying is a stiff, awkward, un-relatable bore, was a slick and artful politician.

Huh?

Obama’s senior political adviser, David Axelrod, even told CBS News on Sunday that Romney’s performance was “Gantry-esque.” That was a reference to Elmer Gantry, Sinclair Lewis’ con artist evangelist whom Burt Lancaster played in spellbinding fashion in the movie version.

Gantry was a fraud -- a hard-drinking womanizer whose fire and brimstone sermons were just a means to con rubes out of their money. He was an undoubtedly evil character.

So Romney, previously jeered as a gaffe-prone, bumbling blueblood who couldn’t connect with voters, suddenly turned into an evil, mesmerizing, tent-revival hustler?........."



Read more: Obama Kicks Up Character Attacks After Debate Drubbing | Fox News

 

[Rinata]

This is your evidence of a lie? Sorry, but the first example in this little video does no such thing. Romney said "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income Americans". There, he is referring to tax revenue realized from wealthier Americans. When he later says "We're going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%..." he's talking about tax rates.

Just because you cut tax rates for a certain income class, does not mean they'll pay less in taxes. History has shown that often, tax revenues INCREASE following a tax rate decrease. More importantly, Romney includes the idea that the number of tax loopholes will be reduced, therefore further insuring the taxes paid by high income Americans will not likely be reduced.

You're free to suggest the economy could worsen following a tax rate decrease and therefore less revenue could be realized. You're free to suggest Romney wouldn't eliminate enough loopholes to make up for the potential of reduced revenue. Those are differences in economic philosophy but under no circumstance do those two statements represent a lie.

Want to try again?

What for?? If God Himself sent you a post you would find fault with that, too. If you had wondered why nobody wants to respond to questions from the right, it's because we know better than to waste our time.

I seriously doubt God would post Romney quotes that in no way demonstrated a lie as evidence of a lie. But let's set the rhetoric aside...

YOU provided the "evidence" that Romney lied by showing Romney making two statements:
1) "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income Americans"; and
2) "We're going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%..."

I say this does not represent a lie, it represents an economic philosophy that contends lower tax RATES boosts the economy and results in more tax REVENUE, particularly if accompanied by the elimination of tax loopholes.

You may disagree that's what will happen, but you said he lied. So, I ask again, tell us why making these two statement equates to a lie. Be specific please, use logic and reason in making your points...if you can.

Very funny. I'll do the first one and I need my head examined for doing even that!!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJzUQwJFW7k]Mitt Romney calls Mitt Romney a liar: Taxes edition - YouTube[/ame]

Romney has claimed that he will pay for his tax cuts by closing a variety of loopholes and deductions. The factual problem? Romney hasn't named a single loophole he's willing to close; worse, there's no way to offset $5 trillion in tax cuts even if you get rid of the entire universe of deductions for the wealthy that Romney has not put off the table (like the carried interest loophole or the 15 percent capital gains rate.) The Tax Policy Center report concludes that Romney's proposal would create a "net tax cut for high-income tax payers and a net tax increase for lower- and or middle-income taxpayers." Moreover, some of Romney's tax cuts are micro-targeted at American dynasties, particularly his proposal to eliminate the estate tax, which would reduce his own sons' tax burden by tens of millions of dollars.

Read more: The First Debate: Mitt Romney's Five Biggest Lies | Politics News | Rolling Stone

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkkRF-l-wvE]Romney on 60 Minutes: I will not lower the share of taxes paid by high income individuals - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Rinata]

This is your evidence of a lie? Sorry, but the first example in this little video does no such thing. Romney said "I will not reduce the taxes paid by high income Americans". There, he is referring to tax revenue realized from wealthier Americans. When he later says "We're going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%..." he's talking about tax rates.

Just because you cut tax rates for a certain income class, does not mean they'll pay less in taxes. History has shown that often, tax revenues INCREASE following a tax rate decrease. More importantly, Romney includes the idea that the number of tax loopholes will be reduced, therefore further insuring the taxes paid by high income Americans will not likely be reduced.

You're free to suggest the economy could worsen following a tax rate decrease and therefore less revenue could be realized. You're free to suggest Romney wouldn't eliminate enough loopholes to make up for the potential of reduced revenue. Those are differences in economic philosophy but under no circumstance do those two statements represent a lie.

Want to try again?

What for?? If God Himself sent you a post you would find fault with that, too. If you had wondered why nobody wants to respond to questions from the right, it's because we know better than to waste our time.

Rinata, I serve God, I know God, God is a friend of mine. Rinata, you're no God.

What are you talking about, you lunatic?? If you REALLY new God you would not be such a hateful bitch.

 

[kwc57]

/\

Getting desperate.

 

[Stephanie]

Romney's "Brazenness" surprised Obama

Then how the hell is Obama FIT to run this country when a foreign country shows, Brazenness?

my gawd people vote Obama out he is UNFIT to be a leader of our country he is surprised by a Presidential candidate being Brazen

 

[eflatminor]

Romney has claimed that he will pay for his tax cuts by closing a variety of loopholes and deductions. The factual problem? Romney hasn't named a single loophole he's willing to close; worse, there's no way to offset $5 trillion in tax cuts even if you get rid of the entire universe of deductions for the wealthy that Romney has not put off the table (like the carried interest loophole or the 15 percent capital gains rate.)

The flaw in your thinking is highlighted in bold. You cannot state with certainty that reducing tax RATES will result in reduced revenue. Often, the exact opposite occurs.

Romney need not specify which loopholes will be cut, if for no other reason than Congress gets to have input on the subject. But more importantly, you cannot state with certainty which direction tax revenues will go following a change in the tax rates or loopholes. In other words, he may not have to "pay for his tax cuts" at all because revenue may actual increase following a tax cut.

Romney believes cutting tax rates and eliminating loopholes will boost the economy and therefore will result in more tax revenue, despite the lower rates. While he has plenty of historical evidence to support that position (as well as Dr Laffer), you are free to disagree. However, that does NOT mean Romney lied.

 

[jreeves]

Romeny did not lie, and he did not have any notes.

Looks as if you're the liar here.

Are you fucking kidding? He had 37 lies, at last count, in 38 minutes.

Obama and his liberal regime were pissed that Romney contradicted their definition of him. Obama was owned just admit it.

 

[jreeves]

So far, crickets...

With so many of our resident lefties screaming about lies, you'd think it would easy to point to just one of those lies. I've been asking for a single example ever since the debate and have yet to find a taker.

Come on Jim, you're the OP. You claimed he lied. Show us just one and why you think it's a lie. How hard could it be when you claim so many lies were uttered.

3 of 38 failed green businesses is "Half" Mitt needs a lesson in math. I work for a living. I cannot sit around and blog idiot remarks all day. Mitt pushed the limit of truth. That is just one.

But maybe you can blog all day? maybe you are part of Mitt's 47%.....wow

Speaking of lies did hear the one about the Consulate being attacked because of an Internet video?