Democratic Convention 2012

[Lucky]

Yeah, and I'm not sure saying our automakers are "on top of the world" equates to #1 in sales. Granted, it's not as vague as the Republicans saying we're the greatest country in the history of the world.

I wonder how the fact checkers would handle that one? I'm not sure we have enough data to make that as a factual assertion. I think it's more of an expression of a feeling of pride. Sort of like saying our automakers are on top of the world.

[Lucky]

Assuming, arguendo, that we are the greatest nation in the history of the world, who would round out the Top Five? And does greatest nation mean right now, or over our history, or since WWII, or since Ronald Reagan, or what?

[onejayhawk]

politicians lie and stretch the truth. The One is no exception.

Rarely outright lie. They weill stretch, misapply, take out of context and obfuscate, but raely say something completely false.

J

[OaklandA's]

Since all we know is that Romney will cut taxes by 20% thats all we go by. Speculating on what he might do is outside the realm of facts.

No, we know that he wants to cut marginal tax rates by 20%, and also keep the system revenue neutral by closing loopholes. There are not many ways the math works out.

[Hornsby]

politicians lie and stretch the truth. The One is no exception.

Again, fine...but in this case it's a fact. I don't know what else to say other than factcheck missed the boat.

[cardboardbox]

No, we know that he wants to cut marginal tax rates by 20%, and also keep the system revenue neutral by closing loopholes. There are not many ways the math works out.

most sensible people would not call any of the deductions you listed a loophole. Unless Romney has a $2000 middle class tax increase in his plan, attacking him for it is lying.

[cardboardbox]

Again, fine...but in this case it's a fact. I don't know what else to say other than factcheck missed the boat.

Unless you really stretch the truth, you cannot say US automakers are on top of the world. But its vague enough that I dont really care.

[OaklandA's]

most sensible people would not call any of the deductions you listed a loophole. Unless Romney has a $2000 middle class tax increase in his plan, attacking him for it is lying.

I would love for Romney/Ryan to identify these loopholes that can make up for the huge loss from 20% rate cuts and capital gains elimination. Since he refuses too, all we can do is use our own brains to do the math ourselves. Everyone who has studied it agrees that the only way to get that much money back would require eliminating some very popular deductions. That's not lying, it's just math. If you or the GOP could state the actual plan, that would be great. I'm surprised no one in the GOP seems to care.

[swampdragon]

check out this piece on "religious persecution"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-em...b_1845413.html

[onejayhawk]

check out this piece on "religious persecution"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-em...b_1845413.html

It cracks the walnut with a sledge hammer. There might be some meat in alll the shell pieces, but its hard to tell. Pretty typical HP.

J

[Gregg]

Wrongo (shocker).

That piece pretty much nailed it. Christians crying about religious persecution are a total joke. It's a pretty insidious move to try and inflict your own f'd up belief system on everyone else around and then cry foul if it doesn't work.

Please do not read this as angry. I am writing it in a calm way to express my opinion.

#1 Below would be the kind of testimony I heard from a Pastor visiting from India yesterday morning. Churches burned, people beaten or killed for their beliefs.

#2 Would be more of the general happenings when someone trys to have a Christian Religious discussion in here. I would never go so far as to say that I think I have or anyone else has been persecuted. I would say that sometimes we have not been treated very nicely and have had to weather some attacks for assumptions based on our confessions or defense of our faith.

1.oppress people: to systematically subject a race or group of people to cruel or unfair treatment, e.g. because of their ethnic origin or religious beliefs

2. pester somebody: to make somebody the victim of continual pestering or harassment.


I would expect you as an American to fight for the same freedom of speech as you would any Atheist, Non-Christian Religion, Gay, Pro-Choice, Democrat, Rebublican, etc. It is one thing to disagree with me, it is quite another to prevent me from talking about it.

[swampdragon]

Please do not read this as angry. I am writing it in a calm way to express my opinion.

#1 Below would be the kind of testimony I heard from a Pastor visiting from India yesterday morning. Churches burned, people beaten or killed for their beliefs.

#2 Would be more of the general happenings when someone trys to have a Christian Religious discussion in here. I would never go so far as to say that I think I have or anyone else has been persecuted. I would say that sometimes we have not been treated very nicely and have had to weather some attacks for assumptions based on our confessions or defense of our faith.

1.oppress people: to systematically subject a race or group of people to cruel or unfair treatment, e.g. because of their ethnic origin or religious beliefs

2. pester somebody: to make somebody the victim of continual pestering or harassment.


I would expect you as an American to fight for the same freedom of speech as you would any Atheist, Non-Christian Religion, Gay, Pro-Choice, Democrat, Rebublican, etc. It is one thing to disagree with me, it is quite another to prevent me from talking about it.

Churches burned, people beaten or killed for their beliefs. - of course this is having religious liberty threatened. I don't think that it happens to Christian churches in this country - but it happens to mosques and temples.

Gregg - I don't get what you are trying to say in regards to the article. Do you agree with the pieces of the article?

[cardboardbox]

I would love for Romney/Ryan to identify these loopholes that can make up for the huge loss from 20% rate cuts and capital gains elimination. Since he refuses too, all we can do is use our own brains to do the math ourselves. Everyone who has studied it agrees that the only way to get that much money back would require eliminating some very popular deductions. That's not lying, it's just math. If you or the GOP could state the actual plan, that would be great. I'm surprised no one in the GOP seems to care.

In the interview, Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, also said he would offset his proposed tax cuts by closing loopholes for high income taxpayers.

"We're not going to have high-income people pay less of the tax burden than they pay today. That's not what's going to happen," he said.

When pressed, however, Romney declined to provide an example of a loophole he would close.

"I can tell you that people at the high end, high-income taxpayers, are going to have fewer deductions and exemptions. Those numbers are going to come down. Otherwise they'd get a tax break. And I want to make sure people understand, despite what the Democrats said at their convention, I am not reducing taxes on high-income taxpayers," Romney said.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_1...CBSNews.com%29

[DMT]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_1...CBSNews.com%29

And yet can't name a single example? What a joke the Republican party has become.

[nullnor]

i heard that Romney did actually close some tax loopholes in massachusetts.

it's not like the office of the president is without massive dimensions. it's not like there is some conspiracy to wreck the future. if H. W. Bush can say read my lips than raise taxes.. things between then and now are still just academic.


businesses aren't stupid. if there's eventually an unavoidable link between the number of employed and number of consumers they will capitulate.