Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Obama told Romney was saying "never mind" about his tax plan. Mittens claims that somehow he will lower taxes, lower deductions, and get the same revenue. How does the same revenue, lower the tax expense on businesses? I don't get that one. Is he going to get his Republican friends in congress to tighten deductions only on the top earners, the very same ones he claims are the "job creaters?"

And he claims he "will not support a tax increase that raises the deficit." He said that several times, replying to Obama that the $5 trillion tax cut is "not my plan," and that his plan has never been tried before. We don't know what that means. Is he claiming his plan will not raise the deficit, because supply side will work and thus increase revenues? But, he'll have to lower taxes and increase the deficit first, before supply side even gets a chance to work (assuming it works at all)! Or is he saying he won't lower taxes after all, and so how is this going to "create jobs" according to the usual trickle-down economics/supply side/don't tax "job creaters" theory?

It is clear that any further lowering of taxes will drastically explode the deficit. In fact, the deficit will continue to be huge unless taxes are raised-- or unless spending is cut that hurts many people "severely," as Obama said. So it amounts to saying he is not going to lower OR raise taxes; just try to cut domestic spending, and at the same time raise defense spending. So deficits will continue to be huge; we will just be spending on the wrong things; and which don't create jobs (defense).

If elected Rmoney will lower the tax burden on the wealthy. That is the prime directive. Everything else is just window dressing to get there.

Originally Posted by the bouncer

all he needs to do is point out that romney lied about his economic plan and his health care plan. i would wager that obama's advertising team is working on some good material right now as we speak.

because etch-a-sketch gave them a ton of good stuff.

I'm sure his marketing team is going to be working hard to fix the damage that Obama did to his own image last night. Last night, Obama confirmed that he's nothing more than a blue twit.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

If elected Rmoney will lower the tax burden on the wealthy. That is the prime directive. Everything else is just window dressing to get there.

Rmoney, I like that one. (Our-Money)

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

I'm sure his marketing team is going to be working hard to fix the damage that Obama did to his own image last night. Last night, Obama confirmed that he's nothing more than a blue twit.

By just letting Romney get in a few more blows? Romney will be seen as the twit, because everything he said was lies, and Obama told the truth.

Originally Posted by Aldaris

I'll give it to Romney, he definitely showed his prowess. But he was hardly put on the defensive. I'm just looking at the history, and the trend I see with Obama is he has a weak first performance that improves tremendously as it gets closer to election day. If Romney is smart, he'll need to be prepared for what could be a pretty harsh shellacking.

It seems to me Obama will do better with a town meeting format; he can relate to an audience while Romney cannot.

There is an interesting discussion on DU on why Obama did not vigorously call BS on Mitt's Gish-Gallop (or Glick-Gallop, LOL) speed-lying. He realized that the GOP was trying to goad him into looking like the racist stereotype of the "Angry Black Man".

Originally Posted by playwrite

someone poses this question -



3% of small business employ 25% of all US workers????


If you don't find that really funny and bizarre, then you are about as good at magic pony math as Romney is!

As far as business goes, I was in the bottom three percent as far as income who employed people. Romney's point was if you raise taxes on me (small business) the result will be low growth and job losses as far as the future is concerned and he's right. I'll give up on the whole idea of owning/running a business and focus my efforts on making money for myself and spending the money on myself. Liberals aren't very sharp when it comes to business and understanding business.

Originally Posted by Odin

There is an interesting discussion on DU on why Obama did not vigorously call BS on Mitt's Gish-Gallop (or Glick-Gallop, LOL) speed-lying. He realized that the GOP was trying to goad him into looking like the racist stereotype of the "Angry Black Man".

i caught a live clip of obama from ed schultz's radio show this morning. sounded like he was already counter-punching romney's bullcrap from last night.

that's what all that note-taking was for, perhaps.

feel your opponent out, get a sense of where he's coming from. catch his misstatements.

then move in.

brilliant.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Hey Odin. Do you really want to open that door?


Sincerely,

Prince

ironic, considering that "weave" posted a cartoon of romney administering a whuppin' to the black guy.

but "weave" gets a pass.

typical.

Originally Posted by Aramea

Big Bird needs to get off his lazy yellow ass and get a real job ...

Big Bird is a big enough franchise to support himself without the taxpayers having to subsidize him. There are 500 cable channels among those a plethora of childrens networks. Big Bird could easily find a home among them. Is there really a need for PBS? How many people besides effete liberals even watch PBS? Certainly NONE of my students watch PBS...they are too busy watching some loser 16 year old mom on MTV or other garbage...

Originally Posted by the bouncer

ironic, considering that "weave" posted a cartoon of romney administering a whuppin' to the black guy.

but "weave" gets a pass.

typical.

I think I'm pretty attuned to racist dog-whistling. That cartoon wasn't one of them. Romney's white. Obama is black. Should all cartoons involving a caricature of a political candidate avoid what the candidate looks like?

Originally Posted by playwrite

... 3% of small business employ 25% of all US workers????

If you don't find that really funny and bizarre, then you are about as good at magic pony math as Romney is!

It's not hard to arrive at these number at all. First, define small business anyway you wish. Maybe Walmart is a small business. Who knows?

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Hey Odin. Do you really want to open that door?


Sincerely,

Prince

What door?

Originally Posted by the bouncer

ironic, considering that "weave" posted a cartoon of romney administering a whuppin' to the black guy.

but "weave" gets a pass.

typical.

Come on, you're going to have to do better than this crap.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Come on, you're going to have to do better than this crap.

When they get desparate expect them to play the race card.....

Originally Posted by Aramea

This is where Obama has hurt himself with the Democratic base and liberal libertarians. Indefinite detention and drone assassinations would seem to violate our principals regarding "due process".

Fixed that for you.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Obama told Romney was saying "never mind" about his tax plan. Mittens claims that somehow he will lower taxes, lower deductions, and get the same revenue. How does the same revenue, lower the tax expense on businesses? I don't get that one. Is he going to get his Republican friends in congress to tighten deductions only on the top earners, the very same ones he claims are the "job creaters?"

And he claims he "will not support lowering taxes if it raises the deficit." He said that several times, replying to Obama that the $5 trillion tax cut is "not my plan," and that his plan has never been tried before. We don't know what that means. Is he claiming his plan will not raise the deficit, because supply side will work and thus increase revenues? But, he'll have to lower taxes and increase the deficit first, before supply side even gets a chance to work (assuming it works at all)! Or is he saying he won't lower taxes after all, and so how is this going to "create jobs" according to the usual trickle-down economics/supply side/don't tax "job creaters" theory?

It is clear that any further lowering of taxes will drastically explode the deficit. In fact, the deficit will continue to be huge unless taxes are raised-- or unless spending is cut that hurts many people "severely," as Obama said. So it amounts to saying he is not going to lower OR raise taxes; just try to cut domestic spending, and at the same time raise defense spending. So deficits will continue to be huge; we will just be spending on the wrong things; and which don't create jobs (defense).

PW may ride his magic ponies a bit too often, but here ... this is their home.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

I'm sure his marketing team is going to be working hard to fix the damage that Obama did to his own image last night. Last night, Obama confirmed that he's nothing more than a blue twit.

... except, wisely or not, he chose to be truthful.

Originally Posted by Weave

When they get desparate expect them to play the race card.....

While super-sensitive people on both sides argue about racism, most people are moving on.

I'll attempt to channel The Rani here:

Originally Posted by the bouncer

i caught a live clip of obama from ed schultz's radio show this morning. sounded like he was already counter-punching romney's bullcrap from last night.

that's what all that note-taking was for, perhaps.

feel your opponent out, get a sense of where he's coming from. catch his misstatements.

then move in.

brilliant.

I'd associate that style and approach with ignorance. Brilliance knows the strengths and weakenesses of his/her opponent going in.

Originally Posted by Weave

When they get desparate expect them to play the race card.....

Says the one playing the "race card" card.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

As far as business goes, I was in the bottom three percent as far as income who employed people. Romney's point was if you raise taxes on me (small business) the result will be low growth and job losses as far as the future is concerned and he's right. I'll give up on the whole idea of owning/running a business and focus my efforts on making money for myself and spending the money on myself. Liberals aren't very sharp when it comes to business and understanding business.

Sorry, your magic pony doesn't fly.

Obama is talking about getting rid of the Bush Tax Cuts for only the top 2%. For "small business owners" in the top 2% include hedge fund managers and dudes like Donald Trump who through tax accountants get to claim themselves as "small business" employing very few people while making 10s of millions and in some cases a billion dollars a year. No one is talking about raising your taxes even if you were raking in as much money as your local WalMart or Costco which I very much doubt that you are.

The magic pony you need to take out and shoot is that by giving Donald Trump and hedge fund managers’ small business tax breaks that is going to do something for you, me or the economy. It is beyond stupid to believe that it will. Wake the F up!

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

As far as business goes, I was in the bottom three percent as far as income who employed people. Romney's point was if you raise taxes on me (small business) the result will be low growth and job losses as far as the future is concerned and he's right. I'll give up on the whole idea of owning/running a business and focus my efforts on making money for myself and spending the money on myself. Liberals aren't very sharp when it comes to business and understanding business.

Gee, when I had a small business, I hired because I had more work than my current staff could handle. I wasn't a charity, so I hired by need. I hired when my taxes were high and when they were low, when it was sunny and when it rained. In fact, other than excess demand, nothing encouraged hiring. Other than lack of demand, nothing precluded it.

But maybe you're different, and won't "work for the man", even when it hurts you too.

Originally Posted by Weave

Big Bird is a big enough franchise to support himself without the taxpayers having to subsidize him. There are 500 cable channels among those a plethora of childrens networks. Big Bird could easily find a home among them. Is there really a need for PBS? How many people besides effete liberals even watch PBS? Certainly NONE of my students watch PBS...they are too busy watching some loser 16 year old mom on MTV or other garbage...

I realize you're a little slow on the draw, so let me help you out some.

It's not the value of Big Bird to your students (what, you're running a "buy gold" or "small arms" class for your local militia?) that is the issue. The issue is even BIG Bird doesn't have enough feathers let alone dollars to make up for Romney adding $5T to the deficit with his tax cuts for the rich and another $2T for defense spending that even the generals don't want.

If you believe otherwise, you are about as far removed from a conservative deficit hawk as you can be or, you need to wake the F up.

Originally Posted by Weave

Big Bird is a big enough franchise to support himself without the taxpayers having to subsidize him. There are 500 cable channels among those a plethora of childrens networks. Big Bird could easily find a home among them. Is there really a need for PBS? How many people besides effete liberals even watch PBS? Certainly NONE of my students watch PBS...they are too busy watching some loser 16 year old mom on MTV or other garbage...

There is a need for non-commercial programing, period. Not every message should be brough to you by Abba Zabba Bars, or some online brokerage site. Right now, NPR has the only broadcast organization in the US that does consistent long-story reporting. Even PBS can't do it any more, due entirely to funding cuts. Of course, not having real reporting available is fine, when your data-free version of events can be transferred from the Inner Party to the Proles through the mouths of 10 or 12 RW talking heads.

I guess that's par for your course; not for mine.