Romney's First Debate Shows He Has A Problem W/ Honesty!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by JimofPennsylvan, Oct 7, 2012.

  1. JimofPennsylvan
    Offline

    JimofPennsylvan VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Messages:
    385
    Thanks Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Ratings:
    +83
    The American Public should be outraged with Mitt Romney’s behavior in last Wednesday debate because he cheated. He changed his major policy planks he was running on during the primary season. He has made a mockery of the country's election process. If Mitt Romney is allowed to get away with this it will set a very destructive precedent for America, presidential candidates will be under the impression they can say whatever they need to during the primaries to secure the nomination then totally change course during the general election. This undermines our country's system of democracy and subverts the American people's civil rights to have a say in who governs them because they won't be able to find out what the candidates stand for before the elections are held; moreover, such a system lacking integrity will further increase the cynicism of the American people toward politics and result in less people voting which is really bad for the welfare of the nation long-term!



    Mr. Romney changed his major policies in at least two major areas. First, he has repeatedly proclaimed during the primaries that if he becomes president he is going to lower everyone's tax rates twenty percent saying this will create lots of jobs because it gives the American people more money to spend on consumption and investment and this policy has worked in the past. This policy of Romney brought out a lot of criticism because the wealthy in America pay a disproportionately large amount of the tax income paid to the federal government so if all taxpayers rates are reduced twenty percent they would get a bigger tax break than nonwealthy Americans! During the debate Mr. Romney in fact in his opening remarks disavowed his policy by saying that President Obama has been mischaracterizing Mr. Romney's policy when Mr. Romney said "not the one the president describes as a top-down, cut taxes for the rich. That's not what I am going to do.". Later, Mr. Romney said "First of all, I don't have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don't have a tax cut of a scale that you're talking about. ----- But I'm not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people." Later Mr. Romney says " (In Mr. Romney's plan) But in order 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." Besides Mr. Romney's new post-primary policy about capping deductions, credits and exemptions he also displayed a problem with the truth about projections about taxable income growth due to his tax cuts that it won't increase the deficit this is not credible. Later Mr. Romney says "Look, I'm not looking to cut massive taxes and to reduce the the revenues going to the government. My my number one principal is, there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. I want to underline that no tax cut that adds to the deficit. ----- And I and to do that, that also means I cannot reduce the burden paid by high-income Americans. So any any language to the contrary is simply not accurate." Later Mr. Romney says "Well, but but virtually virtually everything he (President Obama) just said about my tax plan is inaccurate. ---- So if the tax plan (President Obama) described were a tax plan I was asked to support I'd say absolutely not. I'm not looking for a $5 trillion tax cut. What "I've said is I won't put in place a tax cut that adds to the deficit. That's part one. So there's no economist that can say Mitt Romney's tax plan adds $5 trillion if I say I will not add to the deficit with my tax plan. Number two, I will not reduce the share paid by high-income individuals. I know that you and your running rate keep saying that and I know it's a popular thing to say with a lot of people, but it's just not the case. ----- But that that is not the case. All right? I will not reduce the taxes paid by high-income Americans." Later Mr. Romney says "I think first of all, let me let me repeat let me repeat what I said. I'm not in favor of a $5 trillion tax cut. That's not my plan. My plan is not to put in place any tax cut that will add to the deficit. That's point one. So you may keep referring to it as a $5 trillion tax cut, but that's not my plan. Number two, let's look at history. My plan is not like anything that's been tried before. My plan is to bring down rates, but also bring down deductions, and exemptions and credits at the same time so the revenue stays in, but that we bring down the rates to get more people working." Mr. Romney's performance during the debate on this tax cut topic makes me think of the fictional book "Animal Farm" that many Americans read during their school years where the characters in the book that wanted to take power changed the mantra/slogans (to make it favorable to them) that members of the community heard and just repeated them ad infinitum and this enabled them to take power; the American people are smarter than these fictional characters we won't let ourselves be duped!


    Secondly, Mr. Romney repeatedly said during the primaries that if elected President he would vigorously pursue repealing the Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley pieces of legislation, regulations of the financial industry and public companies from a financial standpoint. However, during the debate Mr. Romney embraced a significant portion of the regulation embodied in Dodd-Frank.


    Pundits have criticized Mr. Romney for changing his position on healthcare reform in the debate. That may not be the case. The discussion on that topic got confusing. President Obama repeatedly referred to Mr. Romney's legislation in Massachusetts which mandated insurance companies accept applicants with pre-existing conditions and held down premium increases by mandating everyone in the state must carry health insurance just like Obamacare. The debate discussion led the viewers to believe Mr. Romney would do this on the national scene as President which is definitely not the case, his national plan probably includes state pools for people with pre-existing conditions and states are left with the burden of how to pay for this which is lousy protection for people with pre-existing conditions because most states have no money. Moreover, which was not focused on is that Mr. Romney's plan is on the first day in office as president is to repeal Obamacare through executive order, what the hell do the American people do when this occurs until the Congress passes replacement healthcare reform legislation for this is a very contentious issue politically, there is a lot of protections in Obamacare that most Americans don't want to lose.


    Romney supporters describe Romney's behavior as a pivot to the political center which he has to do if he is going get the needed votes to win the November 6th election. This was no pivot it was a dramatic move and there is at least just one big problem with this to those of us that are not right wing Americans which is how will Mr. Romney govern as president when he knows that in four more years he will have to again go through the Republican primary process which is unmerciful to non-right wing candidates - to us we fear that based on Mr. Romney's self-interested character this concern will cause him to be a right-wing President which we certainly don't want! The right thing for the American people and the American media to do for the best interest of the country and the integrity of the nation's system of democracy is not allow Mr. Romney to make this policy change, Mr. Romney should be held bound by the policies he espoused prior to securing his party's nomination!



    A lot of the political pundits have tried to characterize last Wednesday's debate as a disaster for the Obama campaign. They say President Obama lost and had a terrible night. But they don't focus on the big picture, the big picture is Is President Obama making the better case for being President for the next term? And I think he did because his overall performance in the debate showed he has done a lot of good things and has good values and will move the country forward in his next term, he is a known entity that if the American people elect him in November things will continue to improve in the country!

    The political pundits have blasted the Obama Administration with their debate strategy. In a lot of areas the pundits are wrong. The Obama Administration was not wrong in avoiding Mr. Romney's Bain record and his "47 percent" remarks because that would have obviously unleashed a barrage of personal attacks against President Obama and the American people don't want to hear this personal stuff they want to hear how are the problems in the country going to be fixed; moreover, the American public knows those personal issues well and they are quite capable of making the appropriate evaluations about those items. The Obama Administration was right in not having President be an attack dog during the debate and just standing toe to toe with Mitt Romney pursuing a slug fest, that is not what the American people want they want solutions. That is not to say the President doesn't need to do a better job in pointing out the problems with what Mr. Romney is saying in the debate. The President needs to do a better job in addressing the major points Mr. Romney makes in a debate, the President prepared some for the debate because he occasionally got on a roll banging out the points why he was right on the issue and Mr. Romney was wrong but it sure seemed like he didn't prepare enough because again he was sometimes weak in countering the major thrust of what Mr. Romney was doing. Moreover, if the President had practiced more his advisors would have seen how on numerous occassion when Mr. Romney was trying to rebut the points President Obama had made the President chuckled as if he was caught doing something inappropiate like the President was playing games and was not to be trusted which was not case the President was being honest during the debate he just wasn't paying attention to his demeanor. The President performance had some positive elements, he was at times concise and he didn't let Mr. Romney get away with changing his policy on the big policy issue of the tax cut and the President showed himself as not prickly or oversensitive in saying he didn't mind people referring to the 2010 healthcare reform law as Obamacare. The pundits are right though that the President didn't play up his assets well enough during the debate like his administration saving well over a half-million Americans from losing their homes through mortgage modification either through government programs or pushing banks to do it through their programs, saving the U.S. auto industry, restoring the banking industry to health in part with the stress-test, etc..
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Seawytch
    Offline

    Seawytch Information isnt Advocacy

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    28,998
    Thanks Received:
    3,962
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Peaking out from the redwoods
    Ratings:
    +7,043
    If it took the first debate to show you that, welcome back Rip Van Winkle.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Meathead
    Offline

    Meathead Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    16,104
    Thanks Received:
    2,355
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Prague, Czech Republic
    Ratings:
    +8,962
    What you're saying is that the American public should be outraged since Obama got handed his ass I suppose. Get over it. Thousands of excuses are not going to make a difference. Few give a rat's ass.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Duped
    Offline

    Duped Senior Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,256
    Thanks Received:
    671
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +672
    The big picture is that Obama is a anti USA; Marxist!
     
  5. blackhawk
    Offline

    blackhawk Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2012
    Messages:
    17,777
    Thanks Received:
    3,404
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Deep in the heart of Texas.
    Ratings:
    +9,108
    You mean much like Obama ran way to the left of center in Democratic primaries in 2008 then ran as a centrist in the general election? Obama lost the debate get over it.
     
  6. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,620
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,215
    Actually it shows:
    1) Obama is incompetent
    2) His supporters will trot out any ole lie to make him look better
    3) Romney is far more presidential than Obama ever was.
     
  7. regent
    Offline

    regent Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Messages:
    7,934
    Thanks Received:
    874
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Ratings:
    +1,774
    It only proves Romney is flexible, Romney takes different positions on issues and so who can say he changes his views, or is lying?
    For example, if one takes the position that the world is flat he is stuck with that response as part of his belief system. If one takes the position the world is round he too is stuck with that belief. Suppose, however, one takes the stance that the world is round for one group and flat for another. Can that individual then be accused of lying if he says the world is flat or even round? Just sounds like good politics. Romney doesn't lie he is flexible.
     
  8. Grampa Murked U
    Offline

    Grampa Murked U Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    Messages:
    47,712
    Thanks Received:
    8,798
    Trophy Points:
    2,055
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Ratings:
    +23,969
    China called, they want their wall back.

    Ps. Romney's first debate shows YOU have a problem accepting a loss for your side.
     

Share This Page