Where did the facts stand during fierce presidential debate?

WASHINGTON (AP) - In the rough-and-tumble of a town hall-style presidential debate, the facts took something of a beating Tuesday night.
Mitt Romney wrongly claimed that it took 14 days for President Barack Obama to brand the assault on the U.S. Consulate in Libya a terrorist act. Obama yet again claimed that ending the Afghanistan and Iraq wars makes money available to "rebuild America," even though it doesn't.
A look at some of their claims:
OBAMA: The day after last month's attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, "I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened. That this was an act of terror and I also said that we're going to hunt down those who committed this crime."
ROMNEY: "I want to make sure we get that for the record, because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror."
OBAMA: "Get the transcript."
THE FACTS: Obama is correct in saying that he referred to Benghazi as an act of terrorism on Sept. 12, the day after the attack. From the Rose Garden, he said: "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. ... We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act."
But others in his administration repeated for several days its belief that the violence stemmed from protests over an American-made video ridiculing Islam. It took almost a month before officials acknowledged that those protests never occurred. And Romney is right in arguing that the administration has yet to explain why it took so long for that correction to be made or how it came to believe that the attack evolved from an angry demonstration.
___
OBAMA: "Let's take the money that we've been spending on war over the last decade to rebuild America, roads, bridges, schools. We do those things, not only is your future going to be bright, but America's future is going to be bright as well."
THE FACTS: What Obama didn't mention is that much of the money that has been paying for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was borrowed. In fact, the government borrows nearly 40 cents for every dollar it spends. Thus, using money that had been earmarked for wars to build schools and infrastructure would involve even more borrowing, adding to the federal deficit.
___
ROMNEY: "As a matter of fact, oil production is down 14 percent this year on federal land, and gas production was down 9 percent. Why? Because the president cut in half the number of licenses and permits for drilling on federal lands and in federal waters."
OBAMA: "Very little of what Governor Romney just said is true. We've opened up public lands. We're actually drilling more on public lands than in the previous administration and my — the previous president was an oilman."
THE FACTS: Both statements ring true, as far as they go. Obama more correctly describes the bigger picture.
According to an Energy Department study published in the spring, sales of oil from federal areas fell 14 percent between 2010 and 2011 and sales of natural gas production fell 9 percent, supporting Romney's point. The lower oil production was a result mainly of a moratorium on offshore drilling imposed by the Obama administration after the April 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history.
According to the same report, though, oil production from federal areas is up 13 percent since Obama took office despite last year's dip, and analysts say Gulf oil production is expected to soon exceed its pre-spill levels.
Natural gas production from federal areas has been declining for years because drillers have found vast reserves of natural gas in formations under several states that are cheaper to access than most federally controlled areas.
___
OBAMA: "For young people who've come here, brought here oftentimes by their parents, have gone to school here, pledged allegiance to the flag, think of this as their country and understand themselves as Americans in every way except having papers, we should make sure we give them a pathway to citizenship. And that's what I've done administratively."
THE FACTS: His administrative actions do not provide a pathway to citizenship. The administration is allowing as many as 1.7 million young illegal immigrants to apply to avoid deportation for up to two years and get a work permit. And the government has begun a policy of prosecutorial discretion under which illegal immigrants with longstanding ties to the U.S. and no criminal history are generally not arrested and deported by immigration authorities. But these steps do not extend legal status or a process resulting in citizenship.
___
ROMNEY: "I know he keeps saying, 'You want to take Detroit bankrupt.' Well, the president took Detroit bankrupt. You took General Motors bankrupt. You took Chrysler bankrupt. So when you say that I wanted to take the auto industry bankrupt, you actually did. And I think it's important to know that that was a process that was necessary to get those companies back on their feet, so they could start hiring more people. That was precisely what I recommended and ultimately what happened."
THE FACTS: What Romney recommended did not happen, and his proposed path probably would have forced General Motors and Chrysler out of business. He opposed using government money to bail out the automakers, instead favoring privately financed bankruptcy restructuring. But the automakers were bleeding cash and were poor credit risks. The banking system was in crisis. So private loans weren't available. Without government aid, both companies probably would have gone under and their assets would have been sold in pieces.
___
OBAMA: "And what I want to do is build on the 5 million jobs that we've created over the last 30 months in the private sector alone."
THE FACTS: As he has done before, Obama is cherry-picking his numbers to make them sound better than they really are. He ignores the fact that public-sector job losses have dragged down overall job creation. Also, he chooses just to mention the past 30 months. That ignores job losses during his presidency up until that point. According to the Labor Department, about 4.5 million total jobs have been created over the past 30 months. But some 4.3 million jobs were lost during the earlier months of his administration. At this point, Obama is a net job creator, but only marginally.
___
ROMNEY: "The proof of whether a strategy is working or not is what the price is that you're paying at the pump. If you're paying less than you paid a year or two ago, why, then, the strategy is working. But you're paying more. When the president took office, the price of gasoline here in Nassau County was about $1.86 a gallon. Now, it's $4 a gallon. The price of electricity is up. If the president's energy policies are working, you're going to see the cost of energy come down."
THE FACTS: Presidents have almost no effect on energy prices; most are set on financial exchanges around the world. When Obama took office, the world was in the grip of a financial crisis and crude prices — and gasoline prices along with them — had plummeted because world demand had collapsed. Crude oil prices have since risen even as U.S. oil production has soared in recent years because global demand is reaching new heights as the developing economies of Asia use more oil.
Other energy prices have fallen during Obama's term. Electricity prices, when adjusted for inflation, are down, and homeowners are finding it much cheaper to heat their homes with natural gas. That's because natural gas production has surged, reducing prices both for homeowners and for utilities that burn gas to generate electricity.
___
OBAMA: "What I've also said is, for (those earning) above $250,000, we can go back to the tax rates we had when Bill Clinton was president."
THE FACTS: Not exactly. The Bush tax cuts set the top income rate at 35 percent. Under Obama's proposal to raise taxes on households earning more than $250,000, the president would return the top rate to the 39.6 percent set during the Clinton administration. But he neglected to mention that his health care law includes a new 0.9 percent Medicare surcharge on households earning over that amount — and that tax would be retained. The health care law also imposes a 3.8 percent tax on investment income for high earners. So tax rates would be higher for the wealthiest Americans than they were under Clinton.
___
ROMNEY: "I'm going to bring rates down across the board for everybody, but I'm going to limit deductions and exemptions and credits, particularly for people at the high end, because I am not going to have people at the high end pay less than they're paying now."
THE FACTS: Romney is proposing to cut all income tax rates by 20 percent, eliminate the estate tax and the alternative minimum tax, maintain and expand tax breaks for investment income, and do it all without adding to the deficit or shifting the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class. He says he would pay for the tax cuts by reducing or eliminating tax deductions, exemptions and credits, but he can't achieve all of his goals under the budget rules presidents must follow.
The Tax Policy Center, a Washington research group, says in a study that the tax cuts proposed by Romney would reduce federal tax revenues by about $5 trillion over 10 years. The study concludes that there aren't enough tax breaks for the wealthy to make up the lost revenue, so the proposal would either add to the deficit or shift more of the tax burden onto the middle class.
Romney's campaign cites studies by conservative academics and think tanks that say Romney's plan will spur economic growth, generating enough additional money to pay for the tax cuts without adding to the deficit or shifting the tax burden to the middle class. But Congress doesn't recognize those kinds of economic projections when it estimates the budget impact of tax proposals.
___
ROMNEY: "A recent study has shown that people in the middle class will see $4,000 a year in higher taxes as a result of the spending and borrowing of this administration."
THE FACTS: Romney's claim is based on an analysis by the conservative American Enterprise Institute that examines the amount of debt that has accumulated on Obama's watch and in a potential second term and computes how much it would cost to finance that debt through tax increases. Annual deficits under Obama have exceeded $1 trillion for each year of his term.
However, Obama is not responsible for all of the deficits that have occurred on his watch. Most of the federal budget — like Medicare, food stamps, Medicaid and Social Security — runs on autopilot, and no one in a leadership position in Washington has proposed deep cuts in those programs. And politicians in both parties voted two years ago to renew Bush-era tax cuts that have contributed to the deficit. Even under the strict spending cuts proposed by Romney, the debt would continue to rise, just not as quickly.
___
Associated Press writers Jonathan Fahey, Tom Krisher, Stephen Ohlemacher, Andrew Taylor, Bradley Klapper, Matthew Daly, Matthew Lee and Alicia A. Caldwell contributed to this report.
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.
Part 1:
Part 2:
Part 3:
Part 4:
Well more and more facts are showing there is a cover up on Libya and the White House is smack dab in the middle of it. This could be bigger than Watergate, but of course the media is assisting in the cover up.
What I am concerned about is NOT what Romney is saying, but what he did not say. A day or two after the second debate an article was posted at http://www.thenation.com/article/170644/mitt-romneys-bailout-bonanza# which was posted that the Romneys made $15.3 million dollars from the bailout of General Motors. He did not put it on his financial disclosure statement while running for President because he left it in his wife's name so he would not have to disclose it to the Federal Elections commission. Under the F.E.C. rules anything under $50 million dollars has to be disclosed. I WONDER WHAT ELSE HE IS HIDING FROM AMERICANS.
The polls are all showing the race pretty much dead even, which is a bad sign for the incumbent. Getting just 47 percent of the vote with just two weeks to go before the election means voters still arenât buying what the Obama campaign is selling.
When people, groups, etc., start lying to you...in this case, "what happened in Benghazi?" has been proven to be chock-full-of-lies by the Obama administration....if they lied about something so simple to have told the truth in the first place I wonder just how many lies we've been fed and when will it all come back to bite us....
ROMNEY: "The proof of whether a strategy is working or not is what the price is that you're paying at the pump. If you're paying less than you paid a year or two ago, why, then, the strategy is working. But you're paying more. When the president took office, the price of gasoline here in Nassau County was about $1.86 a gallon. Now, it's $4 a gallon. The price of electricity is up. If the president's energy policies are working, you're going to see the cost of energy come down." THE FACTS: Presidents have almost no effect on energy prices; most are set on financial exchanges around the world. When Obama took office, the world was in the grip of a financial crisis and crude prices â and gasoline prices along with them â had plummeted because world demand had collapsed. Crude oil prices have since risen even as U.S. oil production has soared in recent years because global demand is reaching new heights as the developing economies of Asia use more oil. Other energy prices have fallen during Obama's term. Electricity prices, when adjusted for inflation, are down, and homeowners are finding it much cheaper to heat their homes with natural gas. That's because natural gas production has surged, reducing prices both for homeowners and for utilities that burn gas to generate electricity.
The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies: Evergreen Solar ($24 million)* SpectraWatt ($500,000)* Solyndra ($535 million)* Beacon Power ($69 million)* AESâs subsidiary Eastern Energy ($17.1 million) Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million) SunPower ($1.5 billion) First Solar ($1.46 billion) Babcock and Brown ($178 million) EnerDelâs subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)* Amonix ($5.9 million) National Renewable Energy Lab ($200 million) Fisker Automotive ($528 million) Abound Solar ($374 million)* A123 Systems ($279 million)* Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($6 million) Johnson Controls ($299 million) Schneider Electric ($86 million) Brightsource ($1.6 billion) ECOtality ($126.2 million) Raser Technologies ($33 million)* Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)* Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)* Olsenâs Crop Service and Olsenâs Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)* Range Fuels ($80 million)* Thompson River Power ($6.4 million)* Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)* LSP Energy ($2.1 billion)* UniSolar ($100 million)* Azure Dynamics ($120 million)* GreenVolts ($500,000) Vestas ($50 million) LG Chemâs subsidiary Chemical Power ($150 million) Nordic Windpower ($16 million)* Navistar ($10 million)*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.
In new news that Obama would rather hide, today's weekly unemployment numbers are out. It's much larger than last weeks numbers which oddly were small due to one large states numbers mysteriously being left out (just before the debate). So today's numbers are  388  Thousand brand new unemployed people applying for first time unemployment. That's a real bad number for Obama, but it's a worse number for those folks and bad news for America. We are still waiting Obama. What's your plan for the next four years? Don't bring up Romney or Ryan, what is YOUR PLAN?
@last boyscout That is the point isn't it?  What is the plan?  Jobs. Economy. Taxes. And while we are at it, why can't we, the people, the employers of these 'leaders', have honesty.  Â
@NorthernBlackBear The only way to get the economy back on its feet is to get the cash moving again and circulating. That means small and medium business that were killed during the last 10 years( Obama chose to kick start this growth because he doe not belive in having the people self sustaining and prosperous) and get people employed.
Â
Romney knows how to do this an knows how to get bi-partisain support. Obama could not even get this done when he had the house and senete in his pocket the first two years.
Â
I am getting sick of hearing the liberals ignoring the fact that Obama has failed in just about everything during his term ( no Obama did not get UBL , the United States spent 11 years with the help of at least 5 countries to find him and Specops piut bullets in his head as well as his son's)
Â
Just like Obama said in the debate , something to the effect of, " I find if offensive that the deaths of 4 americans would be used as a political ploy", I find it offensive that the POTUS uses the death of UBL as a political ploy on the backs of our US servicemen.
"There is an issue about the definition of terrorism."...exactly
Â
And it's important to those , and espessially romney (note the name) to make that arguement that he claims obama didn't say terroist act, though obama did say , "an act of terror"
Â
Play on words AND definition !
Â
But also I note that you set a timeline for when the admin was to come out to the podium and claim "terroist act" when it could have been possible that not all intell was in yet !
Â
What I don't get is the exagerated play on this...simply a ploy to "look at the shiny thing" and not the glaring issue that we "shouldn't worry" about romneys tax plan
"just vote for me" and I'll get-r-done !
Â
As obama said, "romneys not telling you and I more specifics because it's gonna be so wonderful and great for us" !
Â
Play on words keeps our eyes off the ball !
"act of terror"...terrorist act"
Â
A play on words ?
Â
" "I never said that. I never said we don't know if it's terrorism. There is an issue about the definition of terrorism."  " Â
Â
The words of the administration. Those "word Carney's and Obama's".
"And we are being played over words at the expense of lives. Â Â Again."
Â
It sure looks like that !
Â
"act of terror"...terrorist act"
Â
A play on words ?
Â
Besides where doe sthis fall as of such importance in the world of things ? Obama took it as an "act of terror" ok, not worded to what "word smiths" have brought to the forefront as an "issue".
Â
As for hilary....why did the wall street journal hold onto an intervioew with her where she stated "it was terrost attack" for one full week ?? Got to ask yourself, was rupert involved in that decision ?
Â
Â
http://factcheck.org/2012/10/factchecking-the-hofstra-debate/
 @Civ Nothing fundamentally has changed in the economy.  That must change to recover.
Â
I too, find the Benghazi 'event' very offensive. Obama has says he called it terror immediately. .
Â
Really ?? OK.  Let's give him that - though many disagree. (You give Obama 5 minutes to ramble onn and you've got a novel.)
Â
With what intelligence information did Obama label it as Terror?
Â
Why did no one else have that information?
Â
Why did Hillary and Rice on the 14th and 16th tie it to the video?
Â
Why was Obama (On Sept 20th Univision Town Hall) still saying  "Although we had nothing to do with the video, we  find it offensive, it's not representative of America's views, how we treat each other with respect when it comes  to their religious beliefs.... But we will not tolerate violence."  Â
Â
**He ties the 'violence' here as tightly here to the video as he tied it to Benghazi at the Rose Garden on the  12th.**
Â
On Sept. 20, Jay Carney called the event a "terrorist attack" but maintained that there was no evidence it was  "significantly preplanned."
Â
Why did did Carney say on October 10th: "I never said that. I never said we don't know if it's terrorism. There is an issue about the definition of terrorism."   "Youâre making a distinction between an act of terror and what led to the attack."
Â
This is beginning to sound an awful lot Clinton and the definition of sex.
Â
The definition of terrorism contained in Title 22 of the US Code, Section 2656f(d):Â "The term "terrorism" means premeditated, . . ."
Â
What information did Obama have to call it terror?  Premeditation?
Â
[Right there by Carney's own use of definitions, the event is being mischaracterized in a single breifing.]
Â
So if Obama is telling the truth, then Romney is correct. And we are being played over words at the expense of lives.   Again.
Â
"Romney knows how to do this an knows how to get bi-partisain support.", Really
cite your source on this as I have done !
Â
"In a 2008 campaign ad, Romney actually bragged about taking on his Legislature: "I like vetoes; I vetoed hundreds of spending appropriations as governor," he said.Romney issued some 800 vetoes, and the Legislature overrode nearly all of them, sometimes unanimously."
Â
Link to the truth about robdmes NON bipartisan work !
Â
http://www.thenation.com/blog/170637/romneys-false-claims-bipartisanship-massachusetts#
Â
"Obama could not even get this done when he had the house and senete in his pocket the first two years."
Â
Ok, again, cite your "2 years control" as I have !
Â
They actually had 151 TOTAL days of filabuster proof majority and of those you woulld need to exclude 92 days off , YES 92 DAYS OFF, for congressional summer and winter recess.
Â
Before you question look at the link below for the schedule of the 111th congress that I cite.
Â
So that real number is 59 days...GOT IT ! Now state the true facts , don't do these half truth or blatant lies that faux nooze has been doing
Â
http://www.dsca.mil/programs/LPA/2009/recesscalendar2009.pdf
Â
This link shows the numbers by party during the 11th congress !
Â
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/did-the-democrats-ever-really-have-60-votes-in-the-senate-and-for-how-long/
I liked Matt Lauer's interview with Ryan this morning. Again he asked "where are the details for the economic plan?" Ryan came back with the "six studies" bla bla bla show that bla bla bla. So you don't offer specifics why? Ryan basically said you can't take a plan to congress give them all the details. You have to say this is my framework and let congress figure it out. I was wonder if they will be eliminating my mortgage interest deduction?... Since the wizards have no details I will just have to assume they are and vote for Obama.
 @CorporateCowMoo If Obama would allow the pipeline, open oil and gas and coal exploration, refining and production to pre Obama levels, dump any regulations that he has put in place, freeze all taxes at their present level for 4 years, and require every green company that he has given millions or in some cases billions to return every cent, I will gladly vote for him.
You do know keystone pipeline is already to oklahoma refineries right ?
Â
The oil industry claims "theres a bottle neck at oklahoma" yet they are refining oil for much of the midwest from that supply. so why do they want the pipeline to continue to houston ??
Â
Can you say "ocean port city" ?? You do know our production of oil has been increasing yearly since obama took office yet prices are climbing ?
Â
Why, world market prices ! You do know we exported more oil than we imported last year AND this year ??
Â
So ask yourself, why do they want that pipeline to extend to houston, a seaport" ??
Â
Could it be to give americans more supply to lower prices or is it so oil conglomerates can export MORE oil to the world markets ??
Â
http://stateimpact.npr.org/texas/tag/keystone-xl-pipeline/
Â
http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=us&product=oil&graph=production
Â
http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=us&product=oil&graph=production
"But lets keep on point , this article IS about oil products"
Â
I did mean to say "comment string" NOT "article"
Â
KATU, this comment board is weak ! go back to "intense debate" product, at least I could edit my comments !
This is getting to be like ,"act of terror", vc, "terrorist attack"
Â
Yes , it's "oil products".....not "CRUDE oil", there is my mistake, not being specific and labeling "products" but again I didn't say "crude" either, same with you !Although my link DID say "oil products" if you would have read it, my meaning was stated in the links !
Â
But lets keep on point , this article IS about oil products, specifically "FUEL oils" so.....
@sargerator    Â
Â
Keep on point !
Â
You said:Â Â Â Â "You do know we exported more oil than we imported last year AND this year ??"
Â
Your claim is patently false.  Your reference is OIL-PRODUCTS which is true.   Read. It might help.
Â
Lava Sus Manos !!  If you are going to handle truth, you have to have clean hands.Â
No ! From blomberg, and this is how he got rich, understanding comodities markets !
Â
And we are talking about fuels here !
Â
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-29/u-s-was-net-oil-product-exporter-in-2011.html
"You do know we exported more oil than we imported last year AND this year ??"
Â
Wrong . . . .
Â
As usual selective reading, understanding, and comprehension. Â
Â
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MTTIMUS1&f=M
Â
This comment has been deleted
@wahoo   Never trust a man who doesn't drink.
Do we really want a wealthy CEO who loves to fire people and who regards 47% of Americans to be victims as President?
 @noneofyourbizzness noneyo please! I don't think he regards them as 'victims', I think they regard themselves as 'victims'. The 47% er's that I know do.
Ah...so he says it but doesn't "regard" certain people as "victims"...thats odd but oh wait....robdme doesn't mean ANYTHING he says right ?
Â
The Quote "There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it -- that that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. ... These are people who pay no income tax. ... [M]y job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."
 @RamsesthegreatÂ
 I would like to know
where " those senior citizens, war vets who were sent to die for a foreign nation"  Seniors and soldiers  and vets come into play? Oh you read that somewhere probably on a liberal rag somewhere. Soldiers pay taxes ( even over seas) , vets pay taxes on thier benefits, and seniors pay taxes on thier retirement .
Â
 What is an insult is that you are saying those taxes are being used to give drug dealers, drug addicts, baby factories , illegals , and all around bums because they dont have the drive to work for a living??? As for those who wernt "lucky"enough to have the drive to better themselves, well they get what they deserve!!!
@Civ yeah, how dare those senior citizens, war vets who were sent to die for a foreign nation by the Bush administration, people who weren't lucky enough to have everything handed to them their entire lives like Romney think they should have access to homes, life, and healthy living. HOW DARE THEY!!
@sargerator That is a true statement from  Romney, just take alook around downtown portland. All the bums vagrants and Panhandlers that accost people that will vote for Obama idf they are clean enough to make it into a voting booth.
Â
 Then across the nation you have drug dealers, drug addicts, Ilegals and criminals that will all vote for Obama ( since we cant check for ciitizenship and legal age,based on Obamas administraiton, you cant stop illegal voting) because it pays for them to do so  .
Â
Dont forget about those who can work but choose not to because unemployment benefits are so good . it pays not to work.
Â
Yes 47 percent of this country will vote for Obama , no matter what, be cause they want to keep thier entitlements and the illusion that things are getting better .
Â
 47 % of the country will Vote for Romney no matter what because of what he brings to the table so that looks like it is even. There is no use to argue the point of what Rmney said as it does not matter.
@last boyscout I don't consider myself a victim.Ive never taken one dime in handouts from the government.
 @noneofyourbizzness Never thought you did noneyo. You definitely do not sound like a victim, you have always sounded like a can-do kind of person. But whenever I hear of people that would not mind paying more in taxes, the rest of us wish that they would just put their check book where there mouth is and write a check to the IRS and leave us out of it. I can't afford to.Â
 @last boyscout  @noneofyourbizzness You need to find better friends I guess.
Â
The Obama supporters I had to deal with today were independently wealthy business owners and one of them is world famous among his trade. I suppose I hang out with a different quality of 47%er?Â
@last boyscout @Playanekes Like myself and many of the wealthy democrats that I know don't consider ourselves victimms.Matter of fact the democrats that I know who are in the 1% don't have a problem with the Bush tax cuts expiring.
 @Playanekes Why do your 'friends' consider themselves victims?
The choice is an easy one, a man who has created jobs for the last 25 years and balanced many budgets or a community orginizer who cant even get his own party to agree on a single budget plan. Hmmmmm. The prsident has tried hard but his plan simply has not worked, why would it start working now?
@USA_FAN   Romney has also destroyed jobs and companies. And let's not forget the president had to work with an obstructionist congress and the Republican's admitted goal of defeating Obama at all costs. The Rabid Right doesn't care about Main Street. I've seen what self-serving politicians on both sides have done to our country over the last four decades. This isn't the same country I grew up in, and probably never will be again.
What on earth is a "binder woman"Where we're all the women executives of Bain that he could have chose for his cabinet as governor?
 @noneofyourbizzness On CNN this morning, one of the talking heads said Romney's had the same woman as his top 'man' for 30 years. She's got to be good.
This comment has been deleted
@wahoo It means a lot taking in the fact that the governor wasn't exactly http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/17/romney-binders-full-of-women_n_1974092.html
@last boyscout http://frrole.com/o/fact-check-no-women-partners-at-bain-ca-bostondotcom-boston
This will be another great skit on SNL...I thought the skit on first debate was hilarious.
Â
Unfortunatly , this skit will be wacking on robdme and the repubs won't be able to laugh at their own side...too bad !
This whole discussion is like watching two 3 year olds fighting on the playground. Â Your guy lies! Â Does not! Â Your guy lies!
Â
They both lie a little. Â They both stretch the truth and nuance answers to present themselves in the best light. Â They both try to paint their opponent into a idealogically unappealing corner. Â It's the nature of a political race, and it has never been any different in the life of this Republic. Â
Â
Get the hell over it and vote for the person who most agrees with the direction you think the country should move. Â
 @Festivus ...Everyone seems to forget that Obama had the first 2 years of his term with complete Democratic backing and all he could do was push through a healthcare plan that everyone says won't work and will cost taxpayers more money. If he is so supportive of gays, why didn't he push through for gay marriage rights? He promised to cut the deficit... instead he has increased it by over 6 TRILLION dollars -- more than all other presidents combined! He says he is for religious freedom, but kowtows to everyone who "might be offended" by someone else's point of view. Now, he lies to everyone about Libya because he is afraid to admit he hasn't made a dent in terrorism. As far as I am concerned, he hasn't done his job and should be replaced.
 @KHEB  @Festivus "admit he hasn't made a dent in terrorism"
Â
OBL would probably beg to differ if he wasn't busy feeding fish right now.
"Obama had the first 2 years of his term with complete Democratic backing", you listen to limpball right ?  Either you're ignorant of the truth or you lie (as twit wilson said)
Â
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/did-the-democrats-ever-really-have-60-votes-in-the-senate-and-for-how-long/
 @KHEB Sigh.  You completely missed the point, didn't you?Â
Â
I'm not here to tell you who to vote for.  I'm here to tell you that both men are flawed and that you're blind to Romney's faults. You should vote for Mitt - he's your man  Just be careful what you wish for.  If you think he isn't lying to you when he says he'll put a 20% marginal tax rate reduction in place, end capital gains taxes,  close loopholes (but not the mortgage deduction) , remove $5T from the deficit, and improve employment simultaneously, you're a fool who is being willfully ignorant.
Â
I'll only pause long enough to remind you that a president without 60 votes in the Senate does NOT have complete control of congress. Â All politics is compromise.Â
Â
Â
He not only missed the point, he missed the WHOLE barn !
Here, Here.....
Â
but robdme lied more ;)
Prove it , and dont use the liberal rag websites like you keep trying to push out. Why not post something from , like CNN, or NBC, or ABC,or CBS??
Twice Mr. Obama claimed the Ambassadors represent him. This is so consistant with his narcisicm and it is completely untrue. The oath that each Ambassador takes is sworn to the people of the United States, not to any individual.
Â
Some of the more astute readers out there may feel a nudge of history in that way of thinking. It didn't turn out so well.
An ambassador represents the head of his state abroad, sorry , you're wrong, he is "employed" at the will of the "Head" (in this case, prez)of the State he represents. Obama appointed him or reappointed him when obama took office. The ambassador conveys the presidents foreign policies....don't know how you got "he doesn't represent the prez" from ???
@sargerator By the way ... here is that Oath of Office. It is administered by a Justice not a representative of the Executive Branch.
Â
The current oath was enacted in 1884:I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
Â
I hope that helps.
 @agateriver  @sargerator Well then you should rush right out there and arrest him. Sic Semper Tyrannis, et al.
So , refering to that same outh...the prez doesn't serve the people right...whos the twit here ?? An oath is to your duty, you still serve your boss....ie; service personell serve all their superiors, INCLUDING THE PREZ...JEEEEZEE talk about bonehead !
@sargerator From the Oath of Office dumbo. He represents us, he is not us. The Ambassadors do serve at the pleasure of the President, they do not serve the President. Where did you go to school; Moscow under Lenin or Stalin?
Â
Clearly you are not amoung the more astute out there. Too bad.