ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this holiday season!

Friday Talking Points [230] -- Biden's Big Night

[ Posted Friday, October 12th, 2012 – 16:36 PDT ]

We come to you live from the arena, the day after the vice-presidential debate. The lights are being removed, the podiums are gone, and the cleanup crew is sweeping up the tiny, tiny pieces of Paul Ryan which were left all over the stage last night.

Heh. Well, maybe not really, but it certainly seems that way, doesn't it?

Bill Maher definitely had the best tweet of the night, which summed up what we were watching very nicely (if not very grammatically): "Hello 9 1 1? There s an old man beating a child on my tv".

The Republican spin afterwards was priceless, as well. Here's a quick rule of thumb: when you're complaining about stylistic points, your guy lost. A commenter on my own site reacted to my "snap judgment" column on the debate and so succinctly defined what was going on, I find I cannot improve upon the language:

1 week ago: President Obama is calm, unflustered, respectful and solid. Conservatives pan his performance, he was "destroyed" in the debate! Romney was aggressive, confident, energetic, forceful -- he showed true leadership!

1 week later: Paul Ryan was calm, unflustered, respectful and solid. Conservatives say this is just what we need in a leader! Biden was far too aggressive, far too confident, too energetic and too forceful -- not what America needs in a leader!

This falls into the category: "It's funny because it's true."

Conservative doublethink aside, though, we're going to spend the entire column focusing on Joe Biden's debate performance, so we'd better get on with it (I feel a rather longish column coming on, just to warn everyone).

 

Most Impressive Democrat of the Week

Last week, the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week was pretty obvious to one and all. This week, the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week is likewise crystal clear. Vice President Joe Biden is the only possible nominee this week.

In fact, we'd like to go right ahead and forge a new award for him -- Most Impressive Democrat Of The Campaign. Yes, Joe Biden's performance last night was even better than Bill Clinton's at the Democratic National Convention. It was that good. For the entire 2012 campaign season, Joe wins our new MIDOTC.

Way to go, Joe!

[Congratulate Vice President Joe Biden on his White House contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat of the Week

Strangely enough, our Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week is also debate-related. California is trying a bizarre (to me, at least) experiment this election, where no third parties are on the general election ballot. Are you a Green voter, or a Libertarian? Tough luck, your guy or gal will not be found on the ballot. It's called "top two" and what it means is that only the top two vote-getters in the primary election appear on the general election (except for the president and vice president, where voters still have multiple options).

What this has led to in a few races is a Democrat running against another Democrat. Not even the Republican Party is on the ballot in these races -- which is why I used the word "bizarre" earlier.

Enough set-up. In one of these races, the two Democratic candidates debated each other, and things got a little physical. Brad Sherman grabbed his opponent's shoulders in a rather menacing fashion, and shouted "You want to get into this?" to his face.

Now, we like a spirited debate as well as the next guy, and we also love metaphors about fighting (see: the entire rest of this column, Bill Maher's tweet in particular), but there are lines which you should really not cross. Grabbing your opponent and trying to pick a fight is definitely on the wrong side of the line.

For crossing this line from metaphor to physicality, Brad Sherman wins this week's Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week. Take a chill pill, Brad.

[Contact Representative Brad Sherman on his House contact page, to let him know what you think of his actions.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 230 (10/12/12)

Where to begin?

I guess malarkey is as good a place as any. Now, the sources I consulted tell me that malarkey (or malarky) isn't really an Irish term. If anything, it's Irish-American, and made its way into the lexicon in the early 20th century. The real Irish term for what Joe Biden called "stuff" is actually "shite" (rhymes with "kite"). My sources could be wrong, of course, but I've never actually heard an Irish person use the word "malarkey," while I literally cannot count the number of times I've heard them say "shite." Just a personal observation.

Enough blarney, though. Let's get to the meat of the debate. First, a few random thoughts and phrases to point out, and then we'll spotlight seven quotes that rise to the level of damn fine talking points for Democrats to use.

Paul Ryan had three "unforced errors" last night. The first was bringing up the subject of a car crash. Many years ago, Joe Biden lost his wife and baby daughter in a car crash, so you'd think someone would have warned Ryan against giving Biden an easy way to generate some sympathy.

The second Ryan misstep was to mention the name "Jack Kennedy," which was like painting a target on himself. What is the most famous moment from any previous vice-presidential debate? "You, Sir, are no Jack Kennedy." Biden saw this opportunity and immediately responded with "Oh, now you're Jack Kennedy." A completely avoidable mistake on Ryan's part.

There was a third unforced error from Ryan, but we're saving it for the talking points.

Biden hit so many high points during the debate that we're just going to whip through some of them, quickly.

On foreign policy, Biden's repeated refrain of "loose talk" from Mitt Romney was particularly effective, I thought.

Biden's most devastating moment against Ryan was when he brought up the two letters Ryan had sent him, begging for some of that nasty old stimulus money. So much for principles, eh, Paul? The hypocrisy was there for all to see.

Biden's repeating Ryan's "30 percent" and Romney's "47 percent" was expected, and was used to particularly good effect, but again, we'll get to that in the talking points.

Biden's best smackdown of Ryan was a back-and-forth on whether Ryan's Medicare plan was "bipartisan" or not. Biden crushed Ryan on this, stating "not one Democrat" had signed the plan, and the one Ryan was using for political cover no longer supports it.

Ryan had two odd moments, one where he condescendingly explained what the "fighting season" in Afghanistan was, and one where he made a joke about Canada being "overseas" because it was across Lake Superior. Must be some species of Wisconsin humor with which I am unfamiliar.

Biden had one moment that almost devolved into a line the comedians would have had a field day with. This, at least to my ears, was the only near-gaffe of the entire evening for the supposedly gaffe-prone Biden. Towards the end, Biden was making the point that everyone knows what he stands for, and he said: "I never say anything I don't mean. Everybody knows whatever I say, I do." As I said, this was rather uncomfortably close to the Dr. Seuss character Horton the Elephant's trademark line: "I mean what I say, and I say what I mean." Thankfully, Biden didn't use exactly the same phrasing.

Biden's funniest moment was when he brought up his previous vice-presidential foe: "You know, I heard that death panel argument from Sarah Palin. It seems that every vice-presidential debate, I hear this kind of stuff about panels." This also harkened back to his earlier "stuff" malarkey.

More seriously, Biden's best debate tactic was to occasionally look straight into the camera and address the viewers at home. Biden asked, in more than one way, "Who do you trust? Them or us?" on all sorts of issues that Democrats usually have a natural-born edge on, like Medicare and Social Security. This was absolutely brilliant, and put the cap on his whole "you cannot trust anything these guys say" theme of the entire evening.

OK, enough random thoughts. Let's enumerate the biggest and best talking points of the night. The entire debate transcript is worth reading, if you've got the time (it is rather long), but if not, here are our choices for the best bits.

 

1
   Stuff and nonsense

OK, this isn't really a talking point, but it was the funniest part of the entire debate, hands down, so we're providing it as a public service. Biden, earlier, had answered Ryan with: "With all due respect, that's a bunch of malarkey," and then explained why, when asked: "Because not a single thing he said was accurate."

This led to a later exchange, where Biden paused a little too long before saying the word "stuff" -- almost as if considering a different word beginning with "S"...

BIDEN: This is a bunch of -- stuff. Look, here's the deal...

MODERATOR: What does that mean, "a bunch of stuff"?

BIDEN: Well, it means it's simply inaccurate.

RYAN: It's Irish. (Chuckles.)

BIDEN: It is. (Laughter.) We Irish call it malarkey.

MODERATOR: Thanks for the translation. OK.

BIDEN: No, we Irish call it malarkey. (Laughter.)

 

2
   Forty-seven percent

This one is long, but Biden packs a lot into it. Not only does he hinge the whole thing on Romney's "47 percent" and Ryan's "30 percent," he also manages to humanize it and present the entire Democratic case in stark contrast to Republican ideals. Towards the end of the debate, Biden managed to repeat the whole charge, and hinged it on how it was disgusting that some people think of active-duty soldiers as part of that "47 percent," which was also brilliant. Why should you vote Democratic instead of Republican? Here's Joe's explanation -- which should be made into a stand-alone television ad, because it really is that good.

We knew we had to act for the middle class. We immediately went out and rescued General Motors. We went ahead and made sure that we cut taxes for the middle class. And in addition to that, when that -- and when that occurred, what did Romney do? Romney said, "No, let Detroit go bankrupt." We moved in and helped people refinance their homes. Governor Romney said, "No, let foreclosures hit the bottom."

But it shouldn't be surprising for a guy who says 47 percent of the American people are unwilling to take responsibility for their own lives. My friend recently, in a speech in Washington, said 30% of the American people are "takers." These people are my mom and dad, the people I grew up with, my neighbors. They pay more effective tax than Governor Romney pays in his federal income tax. They are elderly people who in fact are living off of Social Security. They are veterans and people fighting in Afghanistan right now who are, quote, not paying any taxes.

I've had it up to here with this notion that 47 percent -- it's about time they take some responsibility here. And instead of signing pledges to Grover Norquist not to ask the wealthiest among us to contribute to bring back the middle class, they should be signing a pledge saying to the middle class, we're going to level the playing field. We're going to give you a fair shot again. We are going to not repeat the mistakes we made in the past by having a different set of rules for Wall Street and Main Street, making sure that we continue to hemorrhage these tax cuts for the superwealthy.

They're pushing the continuation of a tax cut that will give an additional $500 billion in tax cuts to 120,000 families. And they're holding hostage the middle-class tax cut because they say, we won't pass -- we won't continue the middle-class tax cut unless you give the tax cut for the superwealthy. It's about time they take some responsibility.

 

3
   Get out of the way

Joe Biden was superb at directing the public's attention to the real reason there has been no bipartisanship in Washington -- the extremist Republicans in the House of Representatives (which is germane, since Ryan is one of their leaders). This was phrased, repeatedly, as "if you'd just get out of the way..."

I have never met two guys who are more down on America across the board. We're told everything is going bad. We have 5.2 million new jobs, private sector jobs. We need more, but 5.2 million -- if they'd get out of the way, if they get out of the way and let us pass the tax cut for the middle class, make it permanent, if they get out of the way and pass the -- pass the jobs bill, if they get out of the way and let us allow 14 million people who are struggling to stay in their homes because their mortgages are upside-down, but they never missed a mortgage payment -- just get out of the way. Stop talking about how you care about people. Show me something. Show me a policy. Show me a policy where you take responsibility.

 

4
   I knew Ronald Reagan, Sir

This was Ryan's third unforced error. Even though the following quote preceded it, Ryan still had to bring up Ronald Reagan's big dealmaking on Social Security. Did nobody on his prep team realize that Biden was one of the participants in that deal? I certainly didn't know that, but then I'm not paid a bunch of money to do opposition research on Democrats or anything. This was the flip side of the Bentsen/Quayle coin for Biden -- the part where he trotted out his own experience versus Paul Ryan's fuzzy history. Here's how Biden took Ryan to school on the subject of Ronald Reagan:

I was there when we did that with Social Security, in 1983. I was one of eight people sitting in the room that included Tip O'Neill negotiating with President Reagan. We all got together, and everybody said, as long as everybody's in the deal, everybody's in the deal, and everybody is making some sacrifice, we can find a way. We made the system solvent to 2033.

 

5
   What's fair is fair

This one really needs to be pushed harder by Obama and Biden in the future. They might helpfully point out that if Ryan's budget had gone through, Mitt would be paying less than one percent, while they're at it.

Governor Romney, on 60 Minutes, I guess it's about 10 days ago, was asked, "Governor, you pay 14 percent on $20 million. Someone making $50,000 pays more than that. Do you think that's fair?" He said, "Oh, yes, that's fair; that's fair."

 

6
   Between a woman and her doctor

Biden's answer to the abortion question framed the issue perfectly. It's not about what a politician believes on religion, it's about whether they're forcing that belief on others or not (this is the only quote I slightly edited for clarity and length, I should mention).

With regard to abortion, I accept my church's position on abortion... I accept it in my personal life. But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews and -- I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the congressman. I do not believe that we have a right to tell other people that women, they can't control their body. It's a decision between them and their doctor, in my view.

 

7
   Not exactly a favorite son

We saved this one for last, for two reasons. One, it's downright snarktastic. Two, we've actually been suggesting using this line for quite a while now (including in last week's column), and we're pleased to see that Joe Biden has apparently been paying attention. Ahem. Joe Biden is speaking here about Mitt Romney ("he"), after Paul Ryan tried to extol Romney's governorship.

If he did such a great job in Massachusetts, why isn't he even contesting Massachusetts?

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
Cross-posted at: The Huffington Post

 

73 Comments on “Friday Talking Points [230] -- Biden's Big Night”

  1. [1] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    I'd just like to publicly acknowledge michty6 here, for providing the brilliant comment used in today's column. I never publish people's names (even screen names) in columns without their express approval, and I didn't have time to get it, sorry. But I did want to give credit where it's due, here on my site.

    -CW

  2. [2] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    1 week ago: President Obama is calm, unflustered, respectful and solid. Conservatives pan his performance

    Err, Dems/libs panned it even more, since O was anything but "solid."

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    In fact, we'd like to go right ahead and forge a new award for him -- Most Impressive Democrat Of The Campaign. Yes, Joe Biden's performance last night was even better than Bill Clinton's at the Democratic National Convention. It was that good. For the entire 2012 campaign season, Joe wins our new MIDOTC.

    Wow! Better than Bill Clinton!? Now, that's some high praise.

    I think I'm going to frame this week's edition of FTP! :)

    By the way, I sure hope someone around here makes their way to his White House contact page to let him know how much his efforts are appreciated ...

  4. [4] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    LizM -

    Yeah, I thought you'd like today's column.

    :-)

    -CW

  5. [5] 
    michty6 wrote:

    This is probably one of the best CW columns I've seen and I'm not just saying that because you quoted me ;)

    Only got a few things to add really:
    - On point (2) - 47%gate - I read a cool stat today that Tivo revealed that this was the most watched part of the debate. I think Obama will hit Romney with this hard (perhaps in the Town Hall meeting a '47%er' will ask a question which would be a great chance).
    - I thought Biden's phrasing of the 47% comments was excellent. Very hard for Ryan to rebut.
    - On point (5), where Romney thinks his 13% tax rate is 'fair' this is indeed the latest battleground wide campaign video released (today I believe) by Democrats.

    Other than that great column. And I'd add that malarky is more an English than Irish word I thought. Definitely used in the UK but not a lot...

  6. [6] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Biden had been using the phrase, "that's a bunch of malarkey" for as long as I've been following his career - 20 years, give or take - and I'm sure he'd been using it long before that.

    "A bunch of ... stuff" was a new one for me. :)

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    Can anyone show me ANY comparison between Romney and Biden, debate wise??

    Nope.. No one can...

    Ergo saying that debate Biden = debate Romney is nothing but pure unadulterated politically biased spin and has absolutely NOTHING to do with reality..

    But, hay.. It's Friday.... :D

    Michale.....

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    Don't get me wrong, michty...

    It's a great line. It's perfectly partisan...

    It just has absolutely NOTHING to do with factual reality....

    Michale.....

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    What???

    No mention of Libya!????

    Shocked!! I am SHOCKED, I tell ya!!! :D

    Com'on.. Libya was the hot topic when Obama was spinning the lies.. Everyone wanted to talk about Libya when they thought Obama was the hero..

    Now that we come to find out that Obama and his minions were lying thru their teeth about what went on, all of the sudden no one wants to talk about Libya...

    Once again... It's the '-D' after the name that is all-important... All consuming...

    {sssiiiiggggghhhhhhh}

    Michale.....

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    There IS one good thing about ya'alls spin of Biden's performance..

    Obama will likely conclude that Being Biden (obnoxious, rude, arrogant) is the best way to win a debate.

    I think we can ALL agree that Obama will not do Biden very well...

    Can't wait for the next debate! :D

    Michale.....

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    This was phrased, repeatedly, as "if you'd just get out of the way..."

    I believe the historical reference you are looking for is, "Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest!!"

    Yea, get out of the way and let Democrats ruin this country even MORESO than they already have...

    Yea, THAT's a good plan... :^/

    The ONLY reason this country has a small chance of recovery is that the GOP stood up to Democrats and tried to save what precious influence, prestige and self-confidence this country has left...

    Or have ya'all forgotten Obama's "you didn't build that" message to the American people???

    Michale.....

  12. [12] 
    Buckeye54 wrote:

    "...GOP stood up to Democrats and tried to save what precious influence, prestige and self-confidence this country has left..."

    I guess you must be delusional, Michale, if you think we had very much influence and prestige after the 8 disastrous years of the Bush regime. After nearly four years of President Obama's calm and deliberate leadership, we finally have our foreign allies respecting us again instead of wondering what stupid or ill-advised foray we're going to venture this time.

    Anyone who would listen to John Bolton or Dan Senor for foreign policy advice should have all sharp objects removed from their possession and placed, for their own safety, in a well-padded room.

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    . After nearly four years of President Obama's calm and deliberate leadership, we finally have our foreign allies respecting us again instead of wondering what stupid or ill-advised foray we're going to venture this time.

    Once again, you must be living on a different Earth..

    Our allies are, at best, laughing at us and, at worse scorning and avoiding us..

    It's what happens when you burn a foreign nation's assets for political gain...

    If you HONESTLY believe our position with our allies is better under Obama, then I have no response to such blatant misrepresentation of reality...

    Ironically enough, enemies like Iran and allies like Saudi Arabia have the same opinion of the capabilities and reliability of the United States.

    It's bad when our enemies and our allies BOTH think we're weak...

    Michale.....

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    Buckeye,

    WOuld you like to discuss Egypt?? Syria?? Libya???

    No??

    Then you obviously recognize, as all other Americans do, that Obama's foreign policy prowess was nothing but smoke and mirrors...

    Michale.....

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why doesn't Obama talk about his record??

    Why doesn't Obama outline specifics for the next 4 years??

    Are Americans better off now than they were in 2009??

    He can't..

    He won't..

    NO...

    It's really THAT simple...

    Michale....

  16. [16] 
    Buckeye54 wrote:

    Michale,

    Two points about President Obama's foreign policy even someone as partisan as you (and as delusional) cannot refute:

    Osama Bin Laden is dead;

    and our drone strikes have devasted the Al Qaeda leadership. How many of their top leaders are still standing, eh?

  17. [17] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Michale,

    Wow you really should calm down the Fox watching. I don't know where to start with your rants on here.

    I can tell you, as someone who lives in the rest of the world, that the amount of repair Obama has done to Bush's foreign policy is immeasurable. Period. Heck there is even statistical data to back this up as perceptions of America in international polls have DOUBLED in 4 years.

    If UK or Canadian citizens voted in the election it would be 90-10 for Obama. Even my Conservative friends think Republicans are a crazy bunch of maniacs. The closest thing we have to how far right Republicans are in the UK are the British National Party, who are often referred to as the British Nazi Party by the media and got 2% of the vote.

    And btw Fox/right-wing media/Romney know that Obama has a MASSIVE advantage in foreign policy. This is why they are talking about Libya, Libya, Libya and won't let it go (like you). They feel that they can use this to dent Obama's foreign policy credentials. Good luck with that. Again you won't see this because you are stuck in right-wing media world. When you don't see other outlets reporting about Libya you think it is 'bias' and completely miss the point that your own media outlet is actually using it for their own biased attacks.

    And the performance of Biden is indeed very similar to Romney: scoffing at the opposition, talking over the moderator, being on the offense the whole time - aggressively attacking the opposition. Obviously since Biden is on the Obama ticket and you have a personal hatred for Obama so you don't see this and probably never will.

  18. [18] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Veep debate ratings, for anyone who's interested: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/biden-ryan-debate-draws-fewer-viewers-obama-romney-202615204.html

    Also...

    FOXNEWS 10,019,827
    CBS 8,308,421
    ABC 8,287,610
    NBC 7,851,757
    MSNBC 4,378,671
    CNN 4,145,951

  19. [19] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris1962,

    What about PBS - that's the network I watched the debate on ... ?

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    Wow you really should calm down the Fox watching. I don't know where to start with your rants on here.

    No matter how many times you say this BS, it will NEVER be a fact, michty..

    But, that seems to be how you do things. Spout complete BS until you find yourself believing it.. :D

    As to the rest.... two words for you..

    Libya

    and

    Debacle

    Still don't want to talk about that, eh??

    Another point. Speaking as an intelligence expert, I can assure you that the UK intelligence agencies amongst MANY others look with disdain and disgust upon the Obama Administration..

    Ironically enough, so does American intelligence agencies..

    Obama is a legend in his own mind.. And, apparently, in the minds of those drunk on the Obama koolaid... :D

    Michale.....

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    What about PBS - that's the network I watched the debate on ... ?

    3

    :D

    Michale.....

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    Wow you really should calm down the Fox watching. I don't know where to start with your rants on here.

    What I mean to say is that I haven't watched Cable/Network news in about a decade...

    Michale.....

  23. [23] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    3

    That explains a lot.

  24. [24] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Speaking as an intelligence expert, I can assure you that the UK intelligence agencies amongst MANY others look with disdain and disgust upon the Obama Administration..

    I have refrained from commenting on Libya until I had a chance to watch the hearing on this subject held by the House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform this past Wednesday. It was an extremely noteworthy hearing which lasted just over 4 hours.

    As an intelligence expert, you should be horrified by how the Republican chair of this committee handled this hearing. I know the CIA is deeply concerned by what is just another example of the dangerous behavior of the congressional Republicans.

    If you haven't already taken the time to watch this hearing looking into what happened at the Benghazi mission, in its entirety, then you really owe it to yourself to do so.

  25. [25] 
    Buckeye54 wrote:

    "Speaking as an intelligence expert, I can assure you that the UK intelligence agencies amongst MANY others look with disdain and disgust upon the Obama Administration.."

    Getting a secret decoder ring from a cereal box doesn't qualify you as an intelligence expert. Judging by the tenor of your remarks on this site, your ideology has bent your worldview so much that you no longer offer rational or objective analysis.

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    As an intelligence expert, you should be horrified by how the Republican chair of this committee handled this hearing. I know the CIA is deeply concerned by what is just another example of the dangerous behavior of the congressional Republicans.

    Assumes facts not in evidence..

    The CIA is infinitely more concerned with the Executive branch trying to blame the CIA and other intelligence agencies for their politicizing of the Benghazi Terrorist attack...

    Benghazi was an Obama cluster-f*ck from the word GO...

    From the first denial of extra security thru when Obama FINALLY admitted that there was no protest (as I had said within 12 hours) that the video had NOTHING to do with the attack (as I had said within 12 hours) and ending where we are now.. Obama et al STILL denying ANY responsibility for the brutal murder of our Ambassador and our citizens...

    Obama's foreign policy capabilities are non-existent. Our allies think we're stupid and incompetent. Our enemies thing we're gullible and incompetent..

    It's what happens when you LEAD FROM BEHIND...

    A policy that I said at the very beginning would be doomed to failure and do MUCH more harm than good..

    Once again, events have proven me dead on ballz accurate...

    Buckey,

    Getting a secret decoder ring from a cereal box doesn't qualify you as an intelligence expert.

    True..

    But two and a half decades in the field, including civilian and federal security, military and law enforcement DOES qualify me as an intelligence expert.

    Judging by the tenor of your remarks on this site, your ideology has bent your worldview so much that you no longer offer rational or objective analysis.

    That's the opinion of a partisan ideologue..

    A partisan ideologue will ALWAYS project that others are the same as they, simply by virtue of disagreement..

    In other words, just because someone disagrees with the fanatical partisan ideologue, does not make that person the same as the fanatical partisan ideologue.

    My bi-partisan bona fides are well established..

    Because I disagree with ya'all, it only APPEARS to you that my ideology is as skewed and biased as ya'alls...

    Michale.....

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    Because I disagree with ya'all, it only APPEARS to you that my ideology is as skewed and biased as ya'alls...

    For example...

    Who are the registered Democrats here and who is the registered NPA???

    That, pretty much, says it all...

    Michale......

  28. [28] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    That, pretty much, says it all...

    Not really.

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let me put it another way..

    Is there ANY question that ya'all are biased in favor of Democrats??

    Michale.....

  30. [30] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    That's much better! :)

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:
  32. [32] 
    akadjian wrote:

    The closest thing we have to how far right Republicans are in the UK are the British National Party, who are often referred to as the British Nazi Party by the media and got 2% of the vote

    I'm curious, michty, if the British have heard of Ayn Rand?

    While I wouldn't call the Tea Party folks Nazis, at the heart of their philosophy is Ayn Rand.

    If you haven't heard of her, it's worth a quick look-up.

    -David

  33. [33] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Michale,

    Again: you don't know how the rest of the world perceives America because you don't live there. If you want a clue as to what the UK thinks of the Republican party, look at the media reaction to Romney's 2 day visit there. People in the UK (and my Canadian friends here) are genuinely scared about the fact there is a chance Romney might actually be President. Most of the discussions I have with my friends, including Conservative ones, are basically to mock and laugh at America for being dumb enough to consider the Republican party a legitimate political option (I try to point out there are sane, rational Americans but perceptions are sadly based on the crazy ones...)

    And btw I have friends and family in the UK Army. Trust me when Obama signalled the Iraq pull-out he was instantly their best friend.

    Blair had a solid reputation in the UK but it was completely shattered by his involvement in Iraq - people still hate him for this war to this day. Even in America opinions on this have changed drastically (even BILL O'REILLY said it was a mistake!). Nobody in the UK or Canada wants to see these neo-con political advisors back in charge.

    The CIA is infinitely more concerned with the Executive branch trying to blame the CIA and other intelligence agencies for their politicizing of the Benghazi Terrorist attack

    You have to be kidding me. From the very instant, moment and second this happened Republicans have done nothing but politicize this attack. It is the most ironic laughable statement to accuse Democrats of politicizing this.

    And Liz is absolutely right about the Congressional hearing, they were an embarrassment to Republicans showing their absolute desperation (giving away intelligence information) in an attempt to find something - anything - to try and dent Obama's foreign policy credentials.

    The reason why I accuse you of being lost in Fox/right-wing media is because only they have been constantly talking about Libya, Libya, Libya for weeks now. Anyone with half a brain knows why they're doing this, it is a blatant politicizing of the attack. Luckily for Americans it only works on people like you, who are already incredibly bigoted against Obama anyway.

  34. [34] 
    michty6 wrote:

    David,
    I'm curious, michty, if the British have heard of Ayn Rand?
    While I wouldn't call the Tea Party folks Nazis, at the heart of their philosophy is Ayn Rand.
    If you haven't heard of her, it's worth a quick look-up.

    No, there is nothing as extreme as her in UK politics. As far as I'm aware, for example, not 1 party - minority or otherwise - wants to get rid of the NHS or drastically overhaul the Welfare System.

    I am familiar with her and Atlas Shrugged and it is extremely worrying that one of your VP Candidates considers her an 'inspiration' and (literally) made his staff read her book. Although, like a true believer in the Mitt Romney philosophy of politics, he denies this lol.

    I would say Ayn Rand's ideals of 'selfish individualism' are probably my mortal enemy in terms of her views on the world. You might have noticed from my posts on here that helping the poor in society is a big belief of mine. It sickens me to see people in the world that have the attitude of Ayn Rand towards peoples circumstances. It just shows me that they have literally no clue how the world works. This whole notion of the '47%' is another example of how completely and utterly clueless some people are to the daily struggles in poor peoples lives.

  35. [35] 
    akadjian wrote:

    I would say Ayn Rand's ideals of 'selfish individualism' are probably my mortal enemy in terms of her views on the world. You might have noticed from my posts on here that helping the poor in society is a big belief of mine.

    Agreed. And interestingly enough, I believe the objectivist philosophy deconstructs itself when you consider that helping others not only helps them, but helps you.

    If you build a society with public education, a solid safety net, and benefits for everyone, you have a freer society with less crime and misery.

    So ironically, even from Rand's own selfish philosophy, you can argue for helping others (to help yourself).

    But it's an interesting dilemma for Republicans as their base is composed of 2 almost completely different philosophies: evangelical Christianity & Ayn Rand objectivism.

    This is the reason Ryan hides his views on Rand.

    BTW- This would be the question I would like to ask Romney/Ryan: You talk a great deal about religion and Ayn Rand objectivism. Which do you really believe?

    -David

  36. [36] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Here's a quick comparison of Rand vs. Jesus:

    Ayn Rand:
    - "Faith is the worst curse of mankind, as the exact antithesis and enemy of thought."
    - “Nobody has ever given a reason why man should be his brothers’ keeper”
    - “What I am fighting is the idea that charity is a moral duty”
    - “I am against God. I don’t approve of religion. It is a sign of psychological weakness … I regard it as evil.”

    Jesus
    - "For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?"
    - "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven."
    - "If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same."
    - "For God so loved the World that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."

    This is not to argue that one is more right than the other. But it's easy to see how these philosophies are almost exact opposites.

    It's also the reason some Catholic friends of mine, who used to be Republican, are now Democrats. :)

    -David

  37. [37] 
    michty6 wrote:

    David,
    So ironically, even from Rand's own selfish philosophy, you can argue for helping others (to help yourself)

    Exactly. Buddhists call this 'selfish altruism'. The idea being that you are altruist in this life because it effects how you will be reincarnated (making it selfish). It applies to many other aspects of life too.

    My favourite cartoon (can't find it online, saw it in a book) depicts a millionaire in a limo being driven along a street which has been ravished with pot holes everywhere, things falling apart and a school falling to pieces and he says 'I just got a $250k tax cut... but why is my neighbourhood so bad to live in??' :)

    BTW- This would be the question I would like to ask Romney/Ryan: You talk a great deal about religion and Ayn Rand objectivism. Which do you really believe?

    I can tell you their answer: "what do you believe? Because we believe exactly that, even if we've held policies the opposite of that in the past" ;)

    It's also the reason some Catholic friends of mine, who used to be Republican, are now Democrats. :)

    There are so many places you can point out the paradox between supporting Republicans and being Christian/part of another religion. Take an easy one where Romney/Ryan haven't reversed their policy (yet): they want to spend an ADDITIONAL $2 trillion on the military in the coming years. Because taking (REDISTRIBUTING) money from social services to instead building up an army to kill people who don't do what America wants is so Christian/Catholic/whatever religion...

  38. [38] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Buddhists call this 'selfish altruism'. The idea being that you are altruist in this life because it effects how you will be reincarnated (making it selfish). It applies to many other aspects of life too.

    Buddhism ... now there's a religion I can support!

    I can tell you their answer: "what do you believe? Because we believe exactly that, even if we've held policies the opposite of that in the past" ;)

    Now that sounds Ayn Randian ... Say whatever it takes to whoever to attain power.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZfXvFAeHVo&feature=player_embedded

    Think you'll enjoy the above as it demonstrates exactly their only belief! :)

    You wouldn't believe the show of money that's going on in this election though. Here in Ohio, you can't turn on a television/radio w/o hearing an anti-Obama ad.

    I honestly don't believe the debates will have nearly the influence that the advertising does. Talking to my mom the other day, I happened to mention that I hoped she wasn't voting to have Medicare/Social Security privatized and she said, "Isn't that what Obama is going to do?"

    I think you Brits are lucky because you still seem to have some semblance of truth in the media. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but here, the corporate media only prints the fight and very rarely calls out any of the lies.

    -David

  39. [39] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    Talking to my mom the other day, I happened to mention that I hoped she wasn't voting to have Medicare/Social Security privatized

    Romney's plans don't affect anyone 55 or over, David. No need to Mediscare your mom.

  40. [40] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Romney's plans don't affect anyone 55 or over, David.

    True, and I told her as much. However, this is how Romney is trying to buy off the current seniors. You're fine ... it's your kids we're going to screw.

    I've paid in to the system for over 25 years and would prefer Medicare/SS over Mr. Romney's voucher program.

    -David

  41. [41] 
    michty6 wrote:

    David,
    Now that sounds Ayn Randian ... Say whatever it takes to whoever to attain power.</I.

    Very good point. I guess when obtaining power is the ultimate goal over everything else it doesn't matter if you lie your ass off and step over a few people along the way. This is Mitt Romney 101 in politics and in business.

    I think you Brits are lucky because you still seem to have some semblance of truth in the media. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but here, the corporate media only prints the fight and very rarely calls out any of the lies.

    I don't think any democratic election system in the world is as corrupted by money as the American system. Your whole system baffles me. I mean this election has pretty much been going for almost a year now, since the Republican primaries began - ONE year of electioneering to elect a FOUR year President - 1/4 of the term of your Government is spent in election mode. Absolutely insane. Talk about inefficiencies in Government!

    Luckily for us our public TV system is (imo and many others I know outside the UK) the best in the world, particularly the BBC. I don't know if you knew this but the BBC is ADVERT-FREE. Because it is pubic TV/radio/what-not they cannot have commercial adverts as that creates a conflict of interest. So, for example, during the Olympics the BBC showed every single match of every single event with no adverts. Man I missed it during the Olympics! It is also very neutral, for the same reasons. However, some of their international channels (not shown in the UK) like BBC Worldwide do have adverts...

  42. [42] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Whoops those 1st paragraphs should've read:

    Now that sounds Ayn Randian ... Say whatever it takes to whoever to attain power.

    Very good point. I guess when obtaining power is the ultimate goal over everything else it doesn't matter if you lie your ass off and step over a few people along the way. This is Mitt Romney 101 in politics and in business.

  43. [43] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    I've paid in to the system for over 25 years and would prefer Medicare/SS over Mr. Romney's voucher program.

    Folks will have a choice of whether they wish to do traditional Medicare or Premium Support. I thought liberals liked choice.

  44. [44] 
    akadjian wrote:

    I mean this election has pretty much been going for almost a year now, since the Republican primaries began - ONE year of electioneering to elect a FOUR year President - 1/4 of the term of your Government is spent in election mode.

    It's worse than that. FoxNews began campaigning the minute Republicans lost in 2008.

    Conservatives say there's a liberal media. But we don't have anything like Murdoch's propaganda network. Or anything like ClearChannel.

    If the other networks (corporate-owned, btw), truly broadcast liberal propaganda in the style of FoxNews or ClearChannel, the election wouldn't even be close.

    But truth of the matter is that the media is corporate. And if you call out a lie, you might find yourself on the wrong side of the US Chamber of Commerce losing corporate advertising dollars.

    So what do they broadcast? Entertainment.

    Ah, the BBC ... I miss it. When I lived in Turkey it was the only English programming we'd get.

    -David

  45. [45] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Folks will have a choice of whether they wish to do traditional Medicare or Premium Support. I thought liberals liked choice.

    Ah yes. Conservative choice. I've seen it before. Every time your job tells you that they're going to "improve" a plan by giving you more "choice".

    Let me translate "conservative choice" for you: it means you're going to get less.

    And what's going to happen to the 25 years worth of money I put in?

    -David

  46. [46] 
    michty6 wrote:

    David,
    Conservatives say there's a liberal media. But we don't have anything like Murdoch's propaganda network.

    If you get the chance, look into Murdoch's political operations in the UK. Heck the Wikipedia section on him has a whole area called 'Political Activities in United Kingdom'. This is why I laugh at anyone who doesn't think Fox News, a company owned by Murdoch, doesn't have a political agenda because I know his history in the UK going back to Thatcher... Every business he owns has a political agenda.

  47. [47] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Chris1962-

    I believe you are an Ayn Rand fan.

    How come you don't talk about Rand much?

    -David

  48. [48] 
    michty6 wrote:

    David,
    Did you know there are Atlas Shrugged movies?? The 2nd part, just released, even has Sean Hannity and other Fox News contributors in it!

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/click/2012/09/hannity-to-debut-in-atlas-shrugged-part-ii-134631.html

  49. [49] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Did you know there are Atlas Shrugged movies??

    Absolutely.

    I was a big science fiction fan growing up and picked up Atlas Shrugged when I was in junior high thinking it was sci-fi (In fact, I think it was even cataloged in the sci-fi section).

    I never finished it though because ... well, here's my one word review from back in the day: boring .

    So I can only imagine how good the movie is ;)

    Interestingly enough, I also read L. Ron Hubbard at the same time for the exact same reason. At least his books were a little better though the Battlefield Earth movie was nothing short of awful.

    I mean, good Lord, read some Robert Heinlein, or Philip K. Dick, or William Gibson, or Kurt Vonnegut, or any of a thousand lesser writers who are better than Rand.

    She has no sense of plot, character, scene, language, and her philosophy is basically a 6th-grader's wet dream- me, me, me, me, me.

    I did not know Hannity was a part of it though. I may have to watch this if it comes to Netflix (because I simply refuse to pay otherwise) just for grins.

    -David

  50. [50] 
    michty6 wrote:

    I watched the trailer for the 1st one. Movie-wise it looks horrendous. I would actually watch it though just for grins as well! Although I would guess it would make me more angry than make me laugh...

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    Mitchy,

    Again: you don't know how the rest of the world perceives America because you don't live there.

    Again: I don't give a RAT'S ASS how the rest of the world perceives America...

    America's ulturistic bona fides are WELL established...

    If not for America, YOU would be speaking German...

    'nuff said...

    The rest of your BS is spoken from complete and utter ignorance of the field and is not worthy of response...

    Michale.....

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/10/15/swing-states-poll-women-voters-romney-obama/1634791/

    Anyone wanna discuss polls????

    :D

    "Kahn.... I'm laughing at the 'superior intellect'."
    -Admiral James T Kirk, STAR TREK II, The Wrath Of Kahn

    :D

    Michale

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    Coal miners ask Obama to stop ‘absolute lies’
    http://www.heraldstaronline.com/page/content.detail/id/578941/Coal-miners-ask-Obama-to-stop--absolute-lies-.html?nav=5010

    More information showing Obama's popularity...

    Michale.....

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    Obama camp uses guilt in fundraiser email
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82427.html

    Apparently, Team Obama thinks that the middle class doesn't have enough financial pressure..

    They are using guilt-pressure to force people to donate to Obama's re-election...

    One has to wonder (not really) how the Left would react if Romney tried such disgusting tactics to secure donations....

    Michale.....

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/images/-16.img_assist_custom-640x465.png

    There's the perfect graphic example of Obama's "recovery"...

    And ya'all want FOUR MORE YEARS of that!!????

    Whatever ya'all are smoking, please pass it along... :D

    Michale.....

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    Obama: ‘We Got Back Every Dime’ of Bailout; CBO: Bailout Will Lose $24 Billion
    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-we-got-back-every-dime-bailout-cbo-bailout-will-lose-24-billion

    Any cries of "OBAMA LIED" from the Left???

    {{{chhiiiirrrrrpppppppp}}} {{chiiiiirrrrrpppppp}}

    Cricket city....... :^/

    Michale.....

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    New Threats to Riot if Obama Loses Election

    Despite the issue receiving national media attention, Obama supporters continue to threaten to riot if Mitt Romney wins the presidential election, raising the prospect of civil unrest if Obama fails to secure a second term.

    http://www.infowars.com/new-threats-to-riot-if-obama-loses-election/

    Well, it worked to insure a totally politically motivated prosecution in Florida...

    I guess it might be enough to scare the country into voting for Obama...

    Doesn't say much for this country, though, does it??

    So much for the era of racial enlightenment that Obama's election was supposed to bring, eh??

    Michale.....

  58. [58] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Me in other Biden thread:

    "I love the right-wing conspiracy world. It is so far out of touch with reality it amazes me. If you seriously think that the details of the debate, especially the moderators, but right down to the colour of the chair they sit in, the angle of the chair, the elevation of the stage, the colours of the table (etc) are not jointly approved by both parties beforehand you really do live in a fantasy world"

    From Huffington Post today:
    "Time's Mark Halperin has released the full-length, previously secret, contract governing the presidential debates.

    Every four years, the two campaigns sign a contract that establish the rules of the debate, from the time allotment for candidates' answers to the type of chairs Joe Biden and Paul Ryan were allowed on October 11"

    Not a brag (well sort of) but I think its funny that they also picked the chair thing as an example!!

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/15/presidential-debate-memo-released_n_1968323.html

  59. [59] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Sorry Michale I know we go off topic every now and then but introducing 10 different topics wont really do anything to advance the discussion on here...

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    Sorry Michale I know we go off topic every now and then but introducing 10 different topics wont really do anything to advance the discussion on here...

    Especially since no one has ANY response to ANY of them, as there is NO possible justification for this kind of garbage... :D

    But, it's OK... Yer denial of the inevitable just makes 7 Nov all the more sweeter for me.. :D

    Michale.....

  61. [61] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Yes that's correct no-one has no answers for right-wing media junk.

    Yer denial of the inevitable just makes 7 Nov all the more sweeter for me

    And your denial of reality and conspiratorial reaction to everything is what makes Stephen Colbert funny!

  62. [62] 
    Chris1962 wrote:

    I believe you are an Ayn Rand fan.

    I don't know why. I'm not a libertarian, and I've never mentioned Ayn Rand. And I don't believe in zero regulation any more than I believe in over-regulation.

  63. [63] 
    akadjian wrote:

    I don't know why. I'm not a libertarian, and I've never mentioned Ayn Rand.

    My apologies. It was probably because the Tea Party got brought into some prior discussion.

    Not a brag (well sort of) but I think its funny that they also picked the chair thing as an example!!

    Hahahahahah.

    That Halperin post was quite interesting. I thought I remembered hearing of such an agreement, but this was the first I saw it. It reminds me of when Van Halen had a clause in their contract demanding that that all brown M&Ms be removed from their candy bowl.

    And speaking of Stephen Colbert ... I think this is one of the funniest clips I've ever seen

    http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/420061/october-11-2012/formidable-opponent---mitt-romney?xrs=share_copy

    -David

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yes that's correct no-one has no answers for right-wing media junk.

    It's only "right-wing media junk" when A-It's dead on Bballs accurate and 2-No one has any logical or rational rebuttal.

    Some of the sources for the posts are LEFT WING sites...

    Why do you think Obama is losing ground with women??

    Why are there many many MANY examples of people saying their will be rioting if Obama loses??

    Why did Obama lie about getting "every dime back" from the Porkulus when the CBO says taxpayers will lose 24 BILLION??

    Why is Team Obama using guilt and debt-collector tactics to pressure Americans into donating??

    Why is it that, under Obama, for every 1 person that enters the job market, TEN people LEAVE the job market??

    Why are coal miners asking Obama to stop telling lies about their profession??

    These are all FACTS, michty...

    You claim to be only interested in FACTS..

    But when the FACTS are against your golden boy, you run and hide..

    Why is that???

    Michale.....

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    But when the FACTS are against your golden boy, you run and hide..

    OK, that was a little harsh... My apologies..

    Let's amend that to say that when the facts are against Obama, you don't want to address any facts, but would rather just write it off as right-wing propaganda....

    David,

    And speaking of Stephen Colbert ... I think this is one of the funniest clips I've ever seen

    http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/420061/october-11-2012/formidable-opponent---mitt-romney?xrs=share_copy

    I dunno.. The hysteria from the Left over Romney's hanky was pretty funny too... :D

    Michale.....

  66. [66] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Here's a bi-partisan moment for you, Michale.

    Chris Wallace from Fox w/ asks the best question I've seen the media ask so far:

    Why is it ok to tell voters the specifics about the candy (the 20% tax cut), but not the spinach (the loss of deductions)?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkQK4_FJ1Jw&feature=player_embedded#!

    The answer is obvious. Roms plan is give the tax cut to everyone, pay for it through the middle class.

    -David

  67. [67] 
    michty6 wrote:

    Michale,
    In the interests of fun I'll answer your 10 topic question but only lightly since it is boring to argue with you when you quote a bunch of bigoted anti-Obama nonsense:

    Why do you think Obama is losing ground with women??

    - He isn't. He has lost some ground with women in 1 polling company (Gallup) polls. The average polls, which you know I am a fan of, do not show any plunge with women. If that was the case Romney would've broken 250 in EV by now!

    Why are there many many MANY examples of people saying their will be rioting if Obama loses??

    - Because right-wing news like to make stuff up. And that sounds like a stupid thing to make up that people would believe. I'm sure there are some crazy Democrat media blogs out there saying the exact opposite thing...

    Why did Obama lie about getting "every dime back" from the Porkulus when the CBO says taxpayers will lose 24 BILLION??

    - Obama "we got back every dime we used to rescue the financial system". Actually Obama is wrong. They didn't just get back every dime, the Government actually made a profit in their rescues to the financial sector. The $24b refers to the CBO estimation of subsidies THAT HAVE NOT YET BEEN MADE. It has nothing to do with the financial system bailout. The actual figure you're looking for is $65 billion, which still has not been repaid - but this wasn't part of the financial system bailout either.

    Why is Team Obama using guilt and debt-collector tactics to pressure Americans into donating??

    - Sounds like right-wing made up nonsense to me. See comment above.

    Why is it that, under Obama, for every 1 person that enters the job market, TEN people LEAVE the job market??

    - Lololol seriously? You need to read up on your facts before you quote them. If this was the case the unemployment rate would be like negative 5% lol.

    Why are coal miners asking Obama to stop telling lies about their profession?

    - Because they blame Obama for the decline of an outdated industry that has been in decline for decades? I mean seriously COAL MINING?? You believe this is the future of America??? I think the UK emptied out 99% of the coal mines in the 80s... Almost all of the decline of the coal industry in America recently is due to cheap natural gas (FREE MARKET FORCES that Republicans love so much!) making it an unviable, inefficient and uneconomical product.

  68. [68] 
    michty6 wrote:

    David,
    Why is it ok to tell voters the specifics about the candy (the 20% tax cut), but not the spinach (the loss of deductions)?

    The guys answer is even more hilarious. It sums up the stupidity of calling a tax plan that completely overhauls the tax system 'revenue neutral' - since if it were really revenue neutral WHY DO IT?? For shits and giggles?!?! Here is what he says:

    "...we're not going to change the share of taxes paid by upper income earners and we're going to give tax relief to the middle class and it's going to be deficit neutral..."

    How can you give TAX RELIEF without increasing taxes elsewhere and it be DEFICIT NEUTRAL!?!?! It is baffling to me that people are actually believing this crap. Basically he is saying:

    Middle class pay less tax + Upper income pay the same = Deficit neutral!!!

    Fair play to Chris Wallace though btw, even he isn't falling for their bullshit.

  69. [69] 
    akadjian wrote:

    since if it were really revenue neutral WHY DO IT?

    Yep. That was Colbert's excellent point.

    If it is revenue neutral, the only point in doing it is to redistribute who is paying and how much.

    My guess is that Romney will do the right thing and raise how much the wealthy are paying while lowering rates for the middle class and poor.

    (Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!)

    -Dave

  70. [70] 
    michty6 wrote:

    I think John Stewart sums up the reaction of the right to the VP debate perfectly:

    "To sum up Fox's post-debate coverage, Biden was an angry, demented, abusive, drunk, old, crazy person who mopped the floor with our guy!"

  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michty,

    So, your response is to simply make stuff up and deny reality and deny the facts..

    I provide cites and documentation for the facts..

    You provide nothing but BS and spin...

    Gotcha... :D

    Michale.....

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    At least I have put to rest the totally ludicrous idea that everyone is just interested in FACTS... :D

    Michale....

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    Here's another interesting fact.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/16/green-party-candidate-arrested-outside-debate-site/

    Wasn't Stein the candidate that many of ya'all most identified with??? :D

    Michale.....

Comments for this article are closed.
[Powered by WordPress]