The Many Lies Of The Left

[gekaap]

Perhaps not now, but did you vote for him one or more times?

MOST people are embarrassed by voting for Obama now that he has been in office and ******* up for two years, but some 30% of the voting public HAD to have voted for him. (Considering the multiple votes by democrats, this adds up quick! And the dead overwhelmingly supported the Chicago candidate!)

I'll respond when you have something more than BS conspiracy theories to talk about.

 

[drsmith1072]

Then he claimed that the Stimulus would create jobs, which it never has.
They change the way the unemployed are counted so they can fudge the stats. We are currently over 10% but nobody really knows how much.

Two more lies.

1.) Do you have any evidence that it has been "the left" and "the left" alone that has been fudging the statistics about unemployment? Last I checked, both parties are guilty of doing so. Carter did so by disregarding those unemployed after a year for example, Reagan did after six months.

2.) Whether you agree with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 or not, it did create jobs. The debate is whether it created the number of jobs it was suppose to or whether it was worth the cost. However, to claim that the Stimulus has never created any jobs is such a blatant falsehood.

3.) Tax incentives for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was worth $288 billion total, $237 billion for individuals and $15 billion for companies.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tax incentives
Total: $288 billion

[edit]Tax incentives for individuals
Total: $237 billion

$116 billion: New payroll tax credit of $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010. Phaseout begins at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers.[29]

$70 billion: Alternative minimum tax: a one year increase in AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for 2009.[29]

$15 billion: Expansion of child tax credit: A $1,000 credit to more families (even those that do not make enough money to pay income taxes).

$14 billion: Expanded college credit to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000.

$6.6 billion: Homebuyer credit: $8,000 refundable credit for all homes bought between 1/1/2009 and 12/1/2009 and repayment provision repealed for homes purchased in 2009 and held more than three years. This only applies to first-time homebuyers.[41]

$4.7 billion: Excluding from taxation the first $2,400 a person receives in unemployment compensation benefits in 2009.

$4.7 billion: Expanded earned income tax credit to increase the earned income tax credit — which provides money to low income workers — for families with at least three children.

$4.3 billion: Home energy credit to provide an expanded credit to homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient in 2009 and 2010. Homeowners could recoup 30 percent of the cost up to $1,500 of numerous projects, such as installing energy-efficient windows, doors, furnaces and air conditioners.

$1.7 billion: for deduction of sales tax from car purchases, not interest payments phased out for incomes above $250,000.

[edit]Tax incentives for companies
Total: $51 billion

$15 billion: Allowing companies to use current losses to offset profits made in the previous five years, instead of two, making them eligible for tax refunds.

$13 billion: to extend tax credits for renewable energy production (until 2014).

$11 billion: Government contractors: Repeal a law that takes effect in 2012, requiring government agencies to withhold three percent of payments to contractors to help ensure they pay their tax bills. Repealing the law would cost $11 billion over 10 years, in part because the government could not earn interest by holding the money throughout the year.

$7 billion: Repeal bank credit: Repeal a Treasury provision that allowed firms that buy money-losing banks to use more of the losses as tax credits to offset the profits of the merged banks for tax purposes. The change would increase taxes on the merged banks by $7 billion over 10 years.

$5 billion: Bonus depreciation which extends a provision allowing businesses buying equipment such as computers to speed up its depreciation through 2009.

Are you going to try and sit there telling me that tax cuts don't work all of a sudden?

What tax cuts?

Obama raised 8 taxes. Cigarette taxes, alcohol taxes, several others while he was supposedly lowering our taxes a few bucks.

How many tax-cuts did he give the the Middle Class?

Don't include the Bush Tax Cuts because all he did was extend the cuts that were already in place. Two years into his term we have received nothing more then a $13 dollar per pay period exemption that we have to give back at the end of the year. Whoopee!!!!!!

This year the Health Care bill taxes kick in. But to date we still don't know if they'll ever go into effect because a federal judge has ruled the entire bill unconstitutional. Course Obama is ignoring the court order. So the tax increases are going through as planned.

No, tax cuts work....and the Democrats have been claiming all along that they don't.

Btw, you've opened up a couple more issues. How the **** does $250k a year make you a millionaire or a billionaire?

Where the Bush tax cuts are concerned......the Dems have been lying to us for years that they benefit only the rich but it turns out they benefited everyone who pays taxes, including the Middle Class. How do you reconcile that fucken lie dip-shit???

How typical, this hack chooses exclude facts that counter his spin. So we can't include his extention of the "bush tax cuts" and yet if they had expired according to how they were written by republicans and signed into law by republicans the right was more than willing to hold obama accountable for them expiring. Due to the fact that the right was going to hold him accountable for them expiring on his watch shouldn't he also deserve the credit for extending them??

Thanks for showing the hypocrisy of the right in a thread that was meant to show the dishonesty of the left but failed miserably. LOL

Furthermore, what you call a lie of the left is a lie by YOU. the left has argued that the TOP taxcuts should go because they only benefit the rich. Next time you try to point out what you call a lie make certain that you aren't the one lying.

 

[drsmith1072]

So sad when Cons post after hitting the sauce.

Here they come, can't argue truthfully so they start in. Here is one for you, sit down libtard. Idiot.

In the words of one pretend crazy person to a real crazy person.

"YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"

LOL

Examples of how mudwhistle got things wrong or just made shite up have been given.

 

[drsmith1072]

Good question.

Of course, the response will be "Well the right is lying about...." as if that is some justification.

You're right, one side lying does not justify the other side doing so. But, I would question whether this stuff constitutes lying, or if it's just failure to follow through on promises whether through distraction or incompetence or some combination thereof (the bit about his religion is unfounded speculation with no evidence). Not the same thing.

I also would wonder what is the alternative that the right has to offer. If it is no better in this regard, then shouldn't the "people in glass houses" rule apply?

Also, since the right seems to so detest Obama's promised actions, why should the right complain if he fails to follow through?

He failed to follow through with his lies because he is incompetent.

You can't have it both ways. If intentionally misled then that would be considerd a lie, however, if he failed to follow through out of incompetence thn that could not be considered a lie.

Not admitting to either, I am just pointing out the flaw in your argument.

 

[drsmith1072]

Is it really?

There are Repubicans...and then there are Conservatives...

Whom are you speaking of?

Really, I'm speaking of any political flavor one can find out there. Republicans don't lie, conservatives don't lie, Democrats don't lie, liberals don't lie, centrists don't lie, independents don't lie, Libertarians don't lie....PEOPLE lie. You can find it on any side of any issue.

PEOPLE DO Lie...Bully for you saying that...I'd be more impressed had you said Career POLITICIANS however.

Conservatives are for the vision of the Founders. Citizen legislators that do their bit, and go home back to REAL commerce producing jobs... and don't make a CAREER of politics on the public dole.

You're close...but not close enough.

LOL In other words there are no conservatives in washington. LOL

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'll respond when you have something more than BS conspiracy theories to talk about.

So then you DID vote for Obama.

I understand your embarrassment.

 

[Uncensored2008]

LOL In other words there are no conservatives in washington. LOL

Rand and Ron - that's about it....

 

[drsmith1072]

PEOPLE DO Lie...Bully for you saying that...I'd be more impressed had you said Career POLITICIANS however.

Conservatives are for the vision of the Founders. Citizen legislators that do their bit, and go home back to REAL commerce producing jobs... and don't make a CAREER of politics on the public dole.

You're close...but not close enough.

Like who?

Republicans haven't had a real Conservative since Barry Goldwater and he was a five-term Senator from Arizona.

The Republican Party has lost it's way by abandoning it's principles which once made it a great party. These days, Republicans seem more worried about making laws about Abortion than they do protecting the civil liberties of citizens.

You've been listening to Glenn Beck too much.

Oh, when it comes to your GD civil liberties the Dems are slowly removing them one by one. You just don't know it yet. You won't till one day you try to take advantage of them. Like, going through airport security with a bottle of water, or buying a gun. How about eating whatever food you like. Or try getting a plastic bag in SF. How about smoking in Times Square or in any beach in New York State.

Next comes the right to listen to Talkradio, or freedom of speech on the internet. Soon they'll find a way to get rid of Fox News. Those are all coming soon. Rush is a racist so he's got to go. Beck, gone. Bet you'll love that.

LOL mud was asked a specific question but gave no responses and the went into a rant where he makes baseless and unsubstantiated accusations against the left as he tries to argue that it's a gateway to "more" rights being taken away. Talk about someone listening to beck too much? you seem to be parroting his scare tactics quite nicely. LOL

BTW mud which party controlled congress and the WH when the new standards were set concerning what you could take on an airplane?? Hmm? it was after 9/11 and W was in the WH and republicans controlled congress for most of the first 6 years of W's two terms so I wonder who could it have been that made these changes that you are attributing to the left?

 

[gekaap]

So then you DID vote for Obama.

I understand your embarrassment.

No, I did not. I wrote in Romney's name.

 

[drsmith1072]

You found one error. It was not widely announced that he attended.

How can anyone believe anything you say?

The fact that he's willing to be corrected for one.

Deleting said incorrect comment and then pretending it never happened as he did a few pages back when he claimed that no one proved anything he said was wrong is not what I would consider "willing to be corrected." Is that REALLY what you consider it??

 

[drsmith1072]

Well as for someone who resides pretty clearly on the left (by today's standards) I'll say this. There is no excuse for the lies and deception of Obama and the Democrats. That is why they will never again get my vote. As for the alternative, please apply the same logic to the conservative party and quit voting for the liars in that fold. If anything, Republican leaders have betrayed conservatism more than Democrats have betrayed liberalism.

When they reveal themselves we get rid of them.

The left in Congress tends to celebrate their liars.

Under W the right increased the size of government and revealed themselves and those in charge are still in charge of the the party. Boehner is speaker AGAIN so how can you say that you will get rid of them when he is still there and is speaker AGAIN??

You know you would have better arguments if they were based solely on partisan BS. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

Not that I condone lying in the past, but it's been almost 10 years since we had this debate. Can we just leave it in the past?

You might have some credibility if you had made this post when mudDipshit had first posted this. But waiting until after I exposed his lie is just a dodge.

Ha, ha, ha. Wow. You exposed my lie?

That's news to me.

Btw, Bush went into Iraq for several reasons, not just WMDs like you fools claim he did. The reasons have been explained untold number of times and of course you fuckwads keep ignoring them.

LOL So bush went in for reasons other than just WMDs? WMDs which he used to scare up support after 9/11 with claims of mushrooms clouds over our cities if we didn't stop saddam? Yes you claim that there are other reason but fail to list them and then make lame excuse for not giving any specifics. Imagine that. LOL

Furthermore, the real question is would the country have supported the invasion as much as they did had 9/11 not been exploited as it was by the right and WMD's weren't used to drum up fears based on the memory of and possibility of another 9/11?? Were those unlisted other reasons enough to justify the invasion on their own or were they propped up bythe false WMD arguments and scare tactic employerd by the right??

 

[drsmith1072]

Prove it.

The Burden of Proof

The burden of proof is always on the person making an assertion or proposition.

Wrong:

burden of proof may be upon the defendant rather than upon the plaintiff.

Facts about Napoleonic Code: insurance,
as discussed in insurance: Government regulation:
An important legal force influencing insurance regulation in such countries as France, Belgium, Egypt, Greece, Italy, Lebanon, Spain, Turkey, and the former French African colonies is the Napoleonic Code. The influence of the code may be seen, for example, in the matter of third-party liability, in which the burden of proof may be upon the defendant rather than upon the plaintiff.

What does that have to do with US law and the conduct on the US message board where most people seem to argue that the burden of proof lies with the one making the claim. The only people who argue you have to prove them wrong are usually the ones that can't prove their own arguments.

Do you usually try to justify your accusations with such bs that does not apply or is this a first with you?

 

[drsmith1072]

You might have some credibility if you had made this post when mudDipshit had first posted this. But waiting until after I exposed his lie is just a dodge.

Mud has been talking about the current administration. Not rehashing a decade old debate that you lost.

Actually mud was the first to bring up W and talk about how he thought it was unfair that the left accused him of lying about WMD's. That is why someone mentioned those quotes that you discarded as something of the past.

Furthermore if it is not important then why did you feel the need to try and claim that the left lost that debate as if winning something decade old debate was somehow important? LOL

 

[mudwhistle]

You might have some credibility if you had made this post when mudDipshit had first posted this. But waiting until after I exposed his lie is just a dodge.

Mud has been talking about the current administration. Not rehashing a decade old debate that you lost.

Actually mud was the first to bring up W and talk about how he thought it was unfair that the left accused him of lying about WMD's. That is why someone mentioned those quotes that you discarded as something of the past.

Furthermore if it is not important then why did you feel the need to try and claim that the left lost that debate as if winning something decade old debate was somehow important? LOL

I'll have to go back an double-check. I've brought up a lot of issues. Seems Bush just got caught up in it as a comparative rather then the main topic.

Sorry if it's got your panties in a bunch.

 

[gekaap]

What does that have to do with US law and the conduct on the US message board where most people seem to argue that the burden of proof lies with the one making the claim. The only people who argue you have to prove them wrong are usually the ones that can't prove their own arguments.

Do you usually try to justify your accusations with such bs that does not apply or is this a first with you?

We're not in a court room, and your attempt to cite court rules of evidence under the Napoleonic Code is fallacy of accident. It's a special circumstance from which you are trying to infer a general applicability. That's what it has to do with the US message board, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

The burden of proof DOES lie with a the person making a claim. This is logical principle. If you don't like that fact, fine. But that means you're abandoning logical argumentation in favor of, well, whatever tickles your ball sack, I suppose.

 

[mudwhistle]

Two more lies.

1.) Do you have any evidence that it has been "the left" and "the left" alone that has been fudging the statistics about unemployment? Last I checked, both parties are guilty of doing so. Carter did so by disregarding those unemployed after a year for example, Reagan did after six months.

2.) Whether you agree with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 or not, it did create jobs. The debate is whether it created the number of jobs it was suppose to or whether it was worth the cost. However, to claim that the Stimulus has never created any jobs is such a blatant falsehood.

3.) Tax incentives for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was worth $288 billion total, $237 billion for individuals and $15 billion for companies.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Are you going to try and sit there telling me that tax cuts don't work all of a sudden?

What tax cuts?

Obama raised 8 taxes. Cigarette taxes, alcohol taxes, several others while he was supposedly lowering our taxes a few bucks.

How many tax-cuts did he give the the Middle Class?

Don't include the Bush Tax Cuts because all he did was extend the cuts that were already in place. Two years into his term we have received nothing more then a $13 dollar per pay period exemption that we have to give back at the end of the year. Whoopee!!!!!!

This year the Health Care bill taxes kick in. But to date we still don't know if they'll ever go into effect because a federal judge has ruled the entire bill unconstitutional. Course Obama is ignoring the court order. So the tax increases are going through as planned.

No, tax cuts work....and the Democrats have been claiming all along that they don't.

Btw, you've opened up a couple more issues. How the **** does $250k a year make you a millionaire or a billionaire?

Where the Bush tax cuts are concerned......the Dems have been lying to us for years that they benefit only the rich but it turns out they benefited everyone who pays taxes, including the Middle Class. How do you reconcile that fucken lie dip-shit???

How typical, this hack chooses exclude facts that counter his spin. So we can't include his extention of the "bush tax cuts" and yet if they had expired according to how they were written by republicans and signed into law by republicans the right was more than willing to hold obama accountable for them expiring. Due to the fact that the right was going to hold him accountable for them expiring on his watch shouldn't he also deserve the credit for extending them??

Thanks for showing the hypocrisy of the right in a thread that was meant to show the dishonesty of the left but failed miserably. LOL

Furthermore, what you call a lie of the left is a lie by YOU. the left has argued that the TOP taxcuts should go because they only benefit the rich. Next time you try to point out what you call a lie make certain that you aren't the one lying.

Liar

 

[Uncensored2008]

Actually mud was the first to bring up W and talk about how he thought it was unfair that the left accused him of lying about WMD's.

It isn't "unfair" that the leftists make such accusations, just hypocritical and dishonest. But then, hypocritical and dishonest are pretty well the definition of the left, aren't they now?

 

[drsmith1072]

Ha ha. Another lie. My argument had no failings that you could find.

Actually, I posted many points against your arguments as flaws. Maybe you should go back and review the thread.

And you're projecting. I showed you an example of the kind of tangent the left goes out on and you attempted to attribute it to me.

Not very convincingly I might add.

Wait a second, you admit right here that you took things off on a tangent, and somehow pointing that out means that I'm projecting on you? Makes even less sense considering I'm not "the left" of which you speak.

Why would he go back and review how the flaws of his arguments were exposed when he can just pretend that it never happened. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

OMG




Go back and read the thread.

why?

Because I never said he was a Muslim. I also said I think he's an Atheist trying to act like he's a Muslim. Maybe he thinks he'll get something from them for it.

like I said. try reading the thread.

Obama claims he's not a Muslim but supports them at every turn.

The intent behind phrasing it the way that you did was to claim that obama is lying about NOT being a muslim meaning that he is a muslim but is lying about it.

So either you claimed he is a muslim or english is your second language and you don't have a proper grasp on how to phrase the claim correctly to get across you new claim that he is PRETENDING to be muslim. So which is it??

Maybe your error in how you phrased it is the reason why people believe that you are claiming him a muslim??