Many will say it better and in more details why, but the bottom line is: Clinton killed tonight...."/>

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Clinton killed.

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Friday, September 14, 2012 19:46
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3932
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, September 5, 2012 6:10 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Many will say it better and in more details why, but the bottom line is:

Clinton killed tonight.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 5, 2012 6:43 PM

FREMDFIRMA



HEHEHEHEHEHE.
Accidental trolling - can't wait for the rightwingnuts to rush in here and start dancing for joy only to shit bricks.

Never liked the guy, and the Dems really ain't got nothin to say that I wanna hear so I am watching a new series, but yanno, all he really had to say was "NOT BUSH" and laugh.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 2:46 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Clinton killed tonight.



The truth, apparently.

http://www.wtop.com/209/3022260/FACT-CHECK-Clinton-claims-of-compromis
e-a-stretch

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 5:17 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Oh, gawd, you would DARE say that after the wall-to-wall, blatant, repeately debunked LIES that flew around the RNC with the speed of matzo balls through hot chicken broth! That takes balls...or incredible stupidity...or most likely, desperate defensiveness. You get the prize for the first flat-out laugh of the morning.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 6:00 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


OH, yeah, Billy C "stretched" some facts.

Saw a piece somewhere about how Billy oughtta be scared of fact checkers, because he lied once-- about Monica Lewinsky.

They're that desperate. 'Most everybody has long since forgiven Ol' Billy about that.

Best line in the speech-- I caught it on a coffee break at work, and can't quote it exactly, but it was something like , "The thing I admire most about Barack Obama is that he married Michelle." And cut to Mrs. O with a great happy smile on her face, and the crowd laughing and cheering, and giving HER a standing ovation.

SHE'S more of a secret weapon for him than anything, anybody else he's got. I didn't hear Ann Romney's speech, or much of anything that anybody's said about; nor Michelle's speech about Barry the other night, but none of it got that much traction.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 6:10 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Oh, gawd, you would DARE say that after the wall-to-wall, blatant, repeately debunked LIES that flew around the RNC with the speed of motzablls through hot chicken broth!




Yep. Lies are lies, regardless of who says them.

Here's some more from Charlotte, from FactCheck.org

Quote:

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — We heard a number of dubious or misleading claims on the first night of the Democratic National Convention:
¦The keynote speaker and others claimed the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, would raise taxes on the “middle class.” He has promised he won’t. Democrats base their claim on a study that doesn’t necessarily lead to that conclusion.
¦The keynote speaker, San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, also said there have been 4.5 million “new jobs” under Obama. The fact is the economy has regained only 4 million of the 4.3 million jobs lost since Obama took office.
¦Castro also insisted Romney and Ryan would “gut” Pell Grants for lower-income college students. Actually, the Ryan budget calls only for “limiting the growth” of spending for the program, and Ryan has said the maximum grant of $5,550 would not be decreased.
¦A Democratic governor said Romney “left his state 47th out of 50 in job growth.” Actually, Massachusetts went from 50th in job creation during Romney’s first year to 28th in his final year.
¦Two advocates of equal-pay legislation said women make 77 cents for every dollar men earn. That’s true on average, but the gap for women doing the same work as men is much less, and not entirely or even mostly the result of job discrimination.
¦A union president accused Romney of seeking “a government bailout” for “his company.” Not really. In fact, Romney negotiated a favorable but routine settlement with bank regulators on behalf of a former company, the one he had left to form his own Bain Capital firm. No taxpayer funds were involved.
¦Multiple speakers repeated a claim that the Ryan/Romney Medicare plan would cost seniors $6,400 a year. That’s a figure that applied to Ryan’s 2011 budget plan, but his current proposal (the one Romney embraces) is far more generous. The Congressional Budget Office says it “may” lead to higher costs for beneficiaries, but it can’t estimate how much.
¦In prepared remarks released to reporters, Rep. James Clyburn engaged in partisan myth-making with the claim “Democrats created Social Security” while Republicans “cursed the darkness.” History records strong bipartisan support in both House and Senate for the measure President Roosevelt signed in 1935.



http://factcheck.org/2012/09/democratic-disinformation-from-charlotte/

and...

Quote:


CHARLOTTE, N.C. — On the second night of their convention, Democrats misled viewers with claims about Republican economic and social policies. Among the convention canards:
¦Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy said the Republican platform would “take away a woman’s right to choose even if she is a rape victim.” The GOP platform strongly opposes abortion, but is silent on exceptions — leaving that up to the states.
¦The president of Planned Parenthood said Romney and Ryan “are committed to ending insurance coverage for birth control.” That’s not true. Both men have spoken against the government requiring employers to cover birth control at no cost to employees.
¦A venture capitalist claims that Obama is “more than 60 percent” toward his goal of doubling exports by 2015. Government figures show the exports have increased by 29 percent since Obama announced his goal.
¦Several Democrats claimed the “Romney and Ryan budget” would cut domestic spending 20 percent across the board, crippling (fill in your favorite federally funded program). The Ryan plan doesn’t say what programs would be cut. And Romney has said he would not apply cuts evenly.



http://factcheck.org/2012/09/day-2-more-convention-canards/

And in other liar news, DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz got a Pants on Fire from PolitiFact and Four Pinocchios from the Washington Post FactChecker for denying she made a comment that was caught on tape.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2012/sep/05/debbie-wasser
man-schultz/wasserman-schultz-said-she-didnt-make-comments-abo
/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/debbie-wasserman
-schultzs-false-accusation-of-a-misquote/2012/09/05/bde6f37c-f78d-11e1-8398-0327ab83ab91_blog.html?wprss=rss_fact-checker


Also, "...with the speed of motzablls through hot chicken broth!"????

This has to be the absolute worst metaphor I've ever seen.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 6:13 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Clinton killed tonight.



The truth, apparently.

http://www.wtop.com/209/3022260/FACT-CHECK-Clinton-claims-of-compromis
e-a-stretch



Compared to Ryan, who was just oozing thruthiness, right geez?


Hilarious.


Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 6:17 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Clinton killed tonight.



The truth, apparently.

http://www.wtop.com/209/3022260/FACT-CHECK-Clinton-claims-of-compromis
e-a-stretch



Ha. Geezer you can always find a fact check that agrees with your opinion. You think fact checks can't be spun? The question is always whether the fact check is a good (fair) one or not.

Quote:

The problem with compromising in Washington is that there are few true moderates left in either party. The notion that Republicans are the only ones standing in the way of compromise is inaccurate.


An interesting fact check, that deals with subjective interpretations rather than facts... Also I don't think it's the role of a fact check to bring up the dot.com bust, and Monica Lewinsky - going out of its way to discredit the person being fact-checked.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 6:21 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Oh, gawd, you would DARE say that after the wall-to-wall, blatant, repeately debunked LIES that flew around the RNC with the speed of motzablls through hot chicken broth!




Yep. Lies are lies, regardless of who says them.

Here's some more from Charlotte, from FactCheck.org

Quote:

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — We heard a number of dubious or misleading claims on the first night of the Democratic National Convention:
¦The keynote speaker and others claimed the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, would raise taxes on the “middle class.” He has promised he won’t. Democrats base their claim on a study that doesn’t necessarily lead to that conclusion.
¦The keynote speaker, San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, also said there have been 4.5 million “new jobs” under Obama. The fact is the economy has regained only 4 million of the 4.3 million jobs lost since Obama took office.
¦Castro also insisted Romney and Ryan would “gut” Pell Grants for lower-income college students. Actually, the Ryan budget calls only for “limiting the growth” of spending for the program, and Ryan has said the maximum grant of $5,550 would not be decreased.
¦A Democratic governor said Romney “left his state 47th out of 50 in job growth.” Actually, Massachusetts went from 50th in job creation during Romney’s first year to 28th in his final year.
¦Two advocates of equal-pay legislation said women make 77 cents for every dollar men earn. That’s true on average, but the gap for women doing the same work as men is much less, and not entirely or even mostly the result of job discrimination.
¦A union president accused Romney of seeking “a government bailout” for “his company.” Not really. In fact, Romney negotiated a favorable but routine settlement with bank regulators on behalf of a former company, the one he had left to form his own Bain Capital firm. No taxpayer funds were involved.
¦Multiple speakers repeated a claim that the Ryan/Romney Medicare plan would cost seniors $6,400 a year. That’s a figure that applied to Ryan’s 2011 budget plan, but his current proposal (the one Romney embraces) is far more generous. The Congressional Budget Office says it “may” lead to higher costs for beneficiaries, but it can’t estimate how much.
¦In prepared remarks released to reporters, Rep. James Clyburn engaged in partisan myth-making with the claim “Democrats created Social Security” while Republicans “cursed the darkness.” History records strong bipartisan support in both House and Senate for the measure President Roosevelt signed in 1935.



http://factcheck.org/2012/09/democratic-disinformation-from-charlotte/

and...

Quote:


CHARLOTTE, N.C. — On the second night of their convention, Democrats misled viewers with claims about Republican economic and social policies. Among the convention canards:
¦Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy said the Republican platform would “take away a woman’s right to choose even if she is a rape victim.” The GOP platform strongly opposes abortion, but is silent on exceptions — leaving that up to the states.
¦The president of Planned Parenthood said Romney and Ryan “are committed to ending insurance coverage for birth control.” That’s not true. Both men have spoken against the government requiring employers to cover birth control at no cost to employees.
¦A venture capitalist claims that Obama is “more than 60 percent” toward his goal of doubling exports by 2015. Government figures show the exports have increased by 29 percent since Obama announced his goal.
¦Several Democrats claimed the “Romney and Ryan budget” would cut domestic spending 20 percent across the board, crippling (fill in your favorite federally funded program). The Ryan plan doesn’t say what programs would be cut. And Romney has said he would not apply cuts evenly.



http://factcheck.org/2012/09/day-2-more-convention-canards/

And in other liar news, DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz got a Pants on Fire from PolitiFact and Four Pinocchios from the Washington Post FactChecker for denying she made a comment that was caught on tape.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2012/sep/05/debbie-wasser
man-schultz/wasserman-schultz-said-she-didnt-make-comments-abo
/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/debbie-wasserman
-schultzs-false-accusation-of-a-misquote/2012/09/05/bde6f37c-f78d-11e1-8398-0327ab83ab91_blog.html?wprss=rss_fact-checker


Also, "...with the speed of motzablls through hot chicken broth!"????

This has to be the absolute worst metaphor I've ever seen.



Maybe we could stick to the Clinton speech Geezer, since that was the specific title of the thread? By all means start a new thread about these other speeches.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 6:38 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Clinton killed tonight.



The truth, apparently.

http://www.wtop.com/209/3022260/FACT-CHECK-Clinton-claims-of-compromis
e-a-stretch



Compared to Ryan, who was just oozing thruthiness, right geez?


Hilarious.



Ah yes. Making up things you thought I said again.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 6:45 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Maybe we could stick to the Clinton speech Geezer, since that was the specific title of the thread? By all means start a new thread about these other speeches.



It was Niki who broadened the subject by complaining about all the lies flying around the RNC "...with the speed of motzablls through hot chicken broth!". Sort'a seems to me that that opened the floor for comments about lies at conventions in general.

Then there was Story, who chirped in with comments about Paul Ryan's "thruthiness".

Gonna ask them to get back on topic? Or learn how to spell?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:03 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


No, I RESPONDED to the ridiculous attack against Clinton's speech by pointing out that the incredibly blatant lies by those at the RNC--virtually ALL of them--made the comparison hysterical. And it did.

Clinton nailed it, I repeat. His--and Michelle Obama's--speech showed clearly just how good convention speakers CAN BE, as opposed to the washed-out, lie-after-lie speeches at the RNC, along with the fact that all they could do nothing but attack Obama, offer no details for a better future, and give remark after remark about who all "came from nothing".

Clinton make actual valid POINTS:

”We believe ‘we’re all in this together’ is a far better philosophy than ‘you’re on your own.’”

“Democracy does not have to be a bloodsport. It can be an honest enterprise.”

“So here’s another jobs score: President Obama plus 4.5 million, congressional Republicans zero.”

“No president, no president — not me or any of my predecessors, no one, could have repaired all the damage he found in just four years. But he has laid the foundation for a new, modern, successful economy, of shared prosperity, and if you renew the President’s contract you will feel it. You will feel it.”

“So are we all better off because President Obama fought for health care reform? You bet we are.”

“When Congressman Ryan looked into that TV camera and attacked President Obama’s Medicare savings as quote ‘biggest coldest power play,’ I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry. Because that 716 billion dollars is exactly, to the dollar, the same amount of Medicare savings that he has in his own budget. It takes some brass to attack a guy for doing what you did.”

“As their campaign pollster said ‘we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers.’ Now that is true. I couldn’t say it better myself.”

“I think this [debt] plan is way better than Gov. Romney’s plan. First, the Romney plan fails the first test of fiscal responsibility: The numbers don’t add up.”

“We simply cannot afford to turn the reins of government over to someone who will double down on trickle-down.”

“Now people ask me all the time, how we go four surplus budgets in a row. What new ides did we bring to Washington? I always give a one word answer: Arithmetic.”

“Though I often disagree with Republicans, I actually never learned to hate them the way the far right that now controls their party seems to hate our president and a lot of other Democrats.”

“The most important question is, what kind of country do you want to live in? If you want a you’re-on-your-own, winner-take-all society, you should support the Republican ticket. If you want a country of shared prosperity and shared responsibility — a we’re-all-in-this-together society — you should vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden.”

Bang on, as far as I'm concerned.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:54 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Clinton make actual valid POINTS:

“So here’s another jobs score: President Obama plus 4.5 million, congressional Republicans zero.”



Per the FactCheck I quoted earlier.

"The keynote speaker, San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, also said there have been 4.5 million “new jobs” under Obama. The fact is the economy has regained only 4 million of the 4.3 million jobs lost since Obama took office."

So not so actual or valid, perhaps.

And how about a rebuttal of the fact that Clinton praised the effectiveness of portions of Obama's health care legislation that won't even go into effect until 2014? If he has a time machine, shouldn't it be put to better use, like going back and convincing Fox to keep supporting Firefly?

Have some more Kool-aid, Niki.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 8:08 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Maybe we could stick to the Clinton speech Geezer, since that was the specific title of the thread? By all means start a new thread about these other speeches.



It was Niki who broadened the subject by complaining about all the lies flying around the RNC "...with the speed of motzablls through hot chicken broth!". Sort'a seems to me that that opened the floor for comments about lies at conventions in general.

Then there was Story, who chirped in with comments about Paul Ryan's "thruthiness".

Gonna ask them to get back on topic? Or learn how to spell?




Yep, sorry, didn't see that you were replying to what Niki said - just thought you were retreating in a blizzard of fact checks.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 8:10 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Clinton killed tonight.



The truth, apparently.

http://www.wtop.com/209/3022260/FACT-CHECK-Clinton-claims-of-compromis
e-a-stretch



Compared to Ryan, who was just oozing thruthiness, right geez?


Hilarious.



Ah yes. Making up things you thought I said again.




I did no such thing, but far be it from me to expect you to climb off your cross. Douche.

But ok, we'll play it your way -

Oh, so you called out Ryan for his lies, too? Of course you did, since you claim to not be partisan, and claim that my comment is false.

Right? Riiiight?

I just must have missed that post, huh. Please, show me where you did so, so that I may offer you my profuse appoligies.

I wait with baited breath.



Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 8:11 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


"convincing Fox to keep supporting Firefly"--well, that's pretty absurd, so I'll ignore it.

"Clinton praised the effectiveness of portions of Obama's health care legislation that won't even go into effect until 2014?" I didn't hear that, but what's wrong with him talking about something that's been put in place and will happen? Say, as opposed to Romney/Ryan saying they will do away with loopholes, but won't even give details on WHICH loopholes?

We've already gone over the 4.5 million jobs and the fact is that it's TRUE. Replacing that many out of 4.3 million lost in three years is pretty impressive, seems to me. The fact that we've LOST many jobs is something I went over previously; the vast majority of what we've lost has been in the public sector, which can be attributed directly to Republicans.

This "kool-aid" thing has gotten so old it's pathetic and is irrelevant anyway. I'm quite clear that I decry lies on both sides and that I don't like any number of things the Dems have done (like that woman's cancer ad especially). The fact remains that there are no doubt omissions, twisting and spinning on the left, that's what politicians do tho' I dislike it. But the blatant, outright lies repeated over and over despite having been proven totally false by the right is far more egregious in my opinion.

Apologies for misspelling matzo balls; it's not a term with which I am familiar; when I first heard it I looked it up and found it amusing, but that was long ago.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 8:15 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Per the FactCheck I quoted earlier.

"The keynote speaker, San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, also said there have been 4.5 million “new jobs” under Obama. The fact is the economy has regained only 4 million of the 4.3 million jobs lost since Obama took office."

So not so actual or valid, perhaps.



Per another fact check: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/09/05/politics/fact-check-obama-jobs/index
.html


Quote:

But while a total of 4.5 million jobs sounds great, it's not the whole picture.

Nonfarm private payrolls hit a post-recession low of 106.8 million that month, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The figure currently stands at 111.3 million as of July.

While that is indeed a gain of 4.5 million, it's only a net gain of 300,000 over the course of the Obama administration to date.


When your fact check requires fact-checking itself, you know it's a bad one.

Quote:

Clinton praised the effectiveness of portions of Obama's health care legislation that won't even go into effect until 2014

That's not what he said at all. Seems your fact check was more misleading than the part of Clinton's speech it was criticising.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 9:41 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Hey, no fair! I quoted that exact article in my post 'About those 4.5 million jobs"! And again, that fact check says clearly several times, "The number Castro cites is an accurate description of the growth of private-sector jobs since January 2010", "While that is indeed a gain of 4.5 million...", and
Quote:

The figure of 4.5 million jobs is accurate if you look at the most favorable period and category for the administration. But overall, there are still fewer people working now than when Obama took office at the height of the recession.
In other words, the "fact check" admits the number is true, it just goes on to explain why it's not the improvement touted by expressing it. To me, that has nothing to do with checking the FACT, as the fact is the number is correct, whether there are fewer people working now or not. And their argument never covers WHY there has been so much job loss, which is largely due to the Republicans getting rid of public-sector jobs.

If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to know what Clinton actually said about the health-care legislation.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 10:54 AM

WHOZIT


Clinton killed...TIME! 50 fucking minutes! Day 2 of the DNC was a dull angry trainwreck, the MSM was so bias they didn't even know how foolish they looked. Also the ratings are waaaaaay down from 08.

FYI, they're not going to have Barrry's big speech out doors? 0% chance on rain in Charlotte tonight, but there's 100% chance of a lot of empty seats

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 11:11 AM

STORYMARK


Still topped the RNC ratings.

It's okay, you can go cry in the corner, zitboy.


Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 11:15 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:

FYI, they're not going to have Barrry's big speech out doors? 0% chance on rain in Charlotte tonight, but there's 100% chance of a lot of empty seats



And just to point out how full of shit zit and his twin rappy are, in regards to the "0% chance of rain" they're both repeating:

It's raining in Charolette RIGHT FUCKING NOW you moron. And the weather forecast says thunderstorms tonight.

http://www.weather.com/weather/right-now/35.227087,-80.843127?cm_ven=G
ooglemaps&cm_cat=googleOneBox&cm_pla=application-us&cm_ite=today



Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 4:34 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Sp hey there Geezer, care to critique Raul Ryan's speech and its whoppers, just to, yanno, demonstrate how FAIR you are?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 6, 2012 7:01 PM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Many will say it better and in more details why, but the bottom line is:

Clinton killed tonight.


Killed Obams reelection chances. Killed any chance of elderly voters staying up to watch him. But it was typical Clinton, and he looked really good. Retirement really agrees with him.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 2:45 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
I wait with baited breath.



Well, if you'd quit eating worms maybe you wouldn't have that problem.

It's "bated breath".

And why should I join the chorus pointing out Ryan's lies? Did I ever say he wasn't lying? Did I ever try and defend his every word like the Liberals here do for the Democrats?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 2:57 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:

Per the FactCheck I quoted earlier.

"The keynote speaker, San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, also said there have been 4.5 million “new jobs” under Obama. The fact is the economy has regained only 4 million of the 4.3 million jobs lost since Obama took office."

So not so actual or valid, perhaps.



Per another fact check: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/09/05/politics/fact-check-obama-jobs/index
.html


Quote:

But while a total of 4.5 million jobs sounds great, it's not the whole picture.

Nonfarm private payrolls hit a post-recession low of 106.8 million that month, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The figure currently stands at 111.3 million as of July.

While that is indeed a gain of 4.5 million, it's only a net gain of 300,000 over the course of the Obama administration to date.


When your fact check requires fact-checking itself, you know it's a bad one.



But both these articles, although they differ slightly in figures (which could be due to different sources), still note that the "4.5 million new jobs during the Obama administration" claim is pretty bogus since it doesn't mention the 4 million or so jobs lost during the Obama administration.

So I'm not sure exactly what your point is.


Quote:

Quote:

Clinton praised the effectiveness of portions of Obama's health care legislation that won't even go into effect until 2014

That's not what he said at all. Seems your fact check was more misleading than the part of Clinton's speech it was criticising.



Seems like he did.

Quote:

Clinton said that “for the last two years, health care costs have been under 4 percent in both years for the first time in 50 years.” That’s true, as reported by the journal Health Affairs in January of this year. But Clinton went too far when he added: “So let me ask you something. Are we better off because President Obama fought for health care reform? You bet we are.”

Actually, the major provisions of the 2010 law — the individual mandate, federal subsidies to help Americans buy insurance, and big reductions in the growth of Medicare spending — haven’t yet taken effect. Experts mainly blame the lousy economy for the slowdown in health care spending. As a report by economists and statisticians at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reported last year, for example (as quoted in the Washington Post): “Job losses caused many people to lose employer-sponsored health insurance and, in some cases, to forgo health-care services they could not afford.”


http://factcheck.org/2012/09/our-clinton-nightmare/

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 3:03 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
In other words, the "fact check" admits the number is true, it just goes on to explain why it's not the improvement touted by expressing it.


Which is exactly the point of such checking. To include ALL the facts, not just the ones that misleadingly make your guy look good.

Quote:

If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to know what Clinton actually said about the health-care legislation.


Okay.

Quote:

Clinton said that “for the last two years, health care costs have been under 4 percent in both years for the first time in 50 years.” That’s true, as reported by the journal Health Affairs in January of this year. But Clinton went too far when he added: “So let me ask you something. Are we better off because President Obama fought for health care reform? You bet we are.”

Actually, the major provisions of the 2010 law — the individual mandate, federal subsidies to help Americans buy insurance, and big reductions in the growth of Medicare spending — haven’t yet taken effect. Experts mainly blame the lousy economy for the slowdown in health care spending. As a report by economists and statisticians at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reported last year, for example (as quoted in the Washington Post): “Job losses caused many people to lose employer-sponsored health insurance and, in some cases, to forgo health-care services they could not afford.”



http://factcheck.org/2012/09/our-clinton-nightmare/

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 3:16 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


And lest we forget, here's the FactCheck bullet points for Obama and Biden's speeches.

Quote:

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — In a rousing double-header, Democratic delegates heard Barack Obama and Joe Biden both accept renomination on their convention’s final night. And we heard some facts being spun.
¦President Obama boasted that his plan would cut the deficit by $4 trillion over 10 years, citing “independent experts.” But one such analyst called a key element of the plan a “gimmick.”
¦Vice President Biden quoted GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney as saying “it’s not worth moving heaven and earth” to catch Osama bin Laden. Actually, Romney said he’d target more than just “one person.”
¦The president said U.S. automakers are “back on top of the world.” Nope. GM has slipped back to No. 2 and is headed for third place in global sales this year, behind Toyota and Volkswagen.
¦Biden said “the experts” concluded Romney’s corporate tax plan would create 800,000 jobs in other countries. One expert said that. She also said the number depends on the details, and foreign jobs could grow without costing U.S. jobs.
¦Obama quoted Romney as saying it was “tragic” to “end the war in Iraq.” What Romney was criticizing was the pace of Obama’s troop withdrawal, not ending a war.
¦Biden claimed Romney “believes it’s OK to raise taxes on middle classes by $2,000.” Romney actually promises to lower middle-class taxes.
¦Biden said Romney and running mate Paul Ryan “are not for preserving Medicare at all.” Actually, the plan they endorse would offer traditional Medicare as one option among many.
¦Obama said his tax plan would restore “the same rate we had when Bill Clinton was president” for upper-income taxpayers. Not quite. New taxes to finance the health care law also kick in next year, further burdening those same taxpayers.



There's more detail in the article here. http://factcheck.org/2012/09/factchecking-obama-and-biden/

And those doggone conservative Republicans at the Washington Post just keep finding more DNC speech comments to pick on.

Quote:

“And on [Mitt Romney’s] tax returns, he’s hiding. You know, you have to wonder just what is so embarrassing that he’s going to such great lengths to bury the truth. But whatever he’s doing to avoid taxes, can it possibly be worse than the Ryan-Romney tax plan that would have sliced Mitt’s total tax rate to less than 1 percent?”

— Former Ohio governor Ted Strickland during speech at Democratic convention, Sept. 4, 2012


Strickland here is referring to GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s Swiss bank accounts and investments in the Cayman Islands. The former Ohio governor implied with certainty that Romney avoided taxes with those financial arrangements.

Rep. James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.) alluded to this issue, as well, in his prepared remarks for the convention, but he worded his statement carefully by avoiding assumptions. “Did [Romney] take unusual steps to avoid paying his fair share?” he asked. “Who knows? He refuses to release enough of his tax returns to give a clear picture of his finances.”

We examined the notion that Romney avoided taxes in a previous column. Based on discussions with tax experts, we determined that it is likely but not altogether certain that Romney used offshore investments to shield his individual retirement account from the Unintended Business Income Tax. The reason for doubt: There are reasons for investing in the Caymans besides avoiding taxes — like getting in on the biggest investment game around.

Strickland cannot say with certainty that Romney has reduced his tax burden with special financial arrangements — “whatever he’s doing to avoid taxes.” He earns three Pinocchios.







Quote:

As for the issue of whether the supposed “Ryan-Romney tax plan” would reduce Romney’s taxes to 1 percent, this claim seems to be based on articles in the Atlantic and Roll Call that analyzed the effect of GOP vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan’s 2010 “Roadmap for America’s Future.” That proposal, which never made it out of committee, would have eliminated taxes on interest, dividends and long-term capital gains, on top of doing away with the Alternative Minimum Tax.

Romney derives the majority of his income from interest, dividends and long-term capital gains, so there’s no question that the Ryan plan would have significantly reduced his rate, from the 13.9 percent that he paid on $21.7 million worth of income in 2010, according to the single tax return he has made public so far.

The Atlantic calculated that Romney’s rate would have dropped to 0.82 percent under Ryan’s plan. Roll Call came up with a figure of “about 1 percent” in a separate article.

It’s worth noting that Romney criticized a Ryan-plan-like proposal from Newt Gingrich during a January GOP primary debate. “Under that plan, I’d have paid no taxes in the last two years,” Romney said.

The problem for Strickland is that Romney has not endorsed the Ryan plan. In fact, the GOP presidential nominee has a proposal of his own that includes maintaining current tax rates on interest, dividends and capital gains for anyone making more than $200,000 per year. This would not have reduced Romney’s 2010 taxes to the 1 percent range.

The fact of the matter is that the “Romney-Ryan tax plan” that Strickland referred to does not exist. The running mates have pitched separate proposals, and it’s likely that Ryan would defer to Romney on this issue if the former Massachusetts governor becomes president.

Strickland earns Three Pinocchios for pinning Ryan’s tax plan on Romney when the two candidates have made very different proposals.






Quote:

“When too many of our elderly found their lives darkened by unaffordable and inaccessible health care and assistance, Lyndon Johnson and a Democratic Congress lit the twin candles of Medicare and Medicaid while Republicans stood on the sidelines and cursed the darkness.”

— From prepared remarks by Rep. James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.) for the Democratic convention, Sept. 4, 2012


Congressman Clyburn didn’t actually deliver these remarks because of a scheduling change at the convention. But the Democratic National Committee released his prepared comments, so we’ll check them anyway.

Clyburn’s speech started with a quote from former president John F. Kennedy, who said during the 1960 Democratic convention: “We are not here to curse the darkness; we are here to light a candle.” He then played off that line, saying the fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans is that the former party has done all the candle lighting while the latter has just cursed the darkness.

In our roundup of Tuesday’s convention speeches, we covered a similar claim from the DNC Web site, which says, “For more than 200 years, our party has led the fight for civil rights, health care, Social Security, workers’ rights, and women’s rights.”

We noted that 80 percent of the Senate “no” votes against the 1964 Civil Rights Act came from Democrats and that Republican votes were critical in winning passage of the bill. We also pointed out that a book distributed by Democrats at the 1992 convention acknowledged how their party “played both sides of the slavery issue” and “reached out a welcoming hand to returning Confederates, not to blacks” after the Civil War.

As for Clyburn, his prepared remarks gave Democrats essentially all the credit for federal entitlement programs, saying Republicans “stood on the sidelines ” while Democrats lighted the candles of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Clyburn is ignoring the facts here. Social Security came out of the congressional Committee on Economic Security in 1935, and Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt proposed the program as part of the Financial Security Act that same year. The bill passed in the U.S. House and Senate with 20 Republicans and 16 Democrats voting “no.” Ninety-seven Republicans voted in favor of the measure — there were relatively few GOP lawmakers in Congress at that point.

As for Medicare and Medicaid, the programs came as a package deal signed in 1965 by Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson. But again, the legislation had broad bipartisan support. It passed both chambers of Congress with 83 Republicans and 294 Democrats voting in favor of the bill. Eighty-five Republicans and 55 Democrats voted “no,” so dozens of members of both parties opposed the programs.

Why does it appear the votes were much more bipartisan in the past? For one, voting broke more along regional lines rather than party lines, with southern Democrats in opposition and northern Republicans in support of such federal expansion of benefits. Many of those southern Democrats have since become Republicans, while the Northeast especially has turned largely Democrat.

We should point out that Republican President Richard Nixon lobbied unsuccessfully in 1974 for a health plan that would have included a mandate for employers to provide coverage and an optional health plan from the federal government. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, a Democrat, opposed that idea, saying it did not go far enough.

And let’s not forget that Republican President George W. Bush approved a prescription-drug benefit for seniors as part of the Medicare Modernization Act that he signed in 2003. The bill passed in the House by a vote of 220 to 215, with 189 out of 205 Democrats voting “no.” It passed in the Senate on a vote of 53 to 44, with 35 out of 46 Democrats voting against the measure.

Democrats did not oppose the prescription-drug benefit in and of itself, but instead wanted more money dedicated to it. They also feared that the bill would undermine Medicare as it existed, particularly because of a provision that promised subsidies for private plans to compete with the fee-for-service Medicare program.

(The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services has provided a list of the milestones and changes for the two entitlement programs.)

Clyburn earns Four Pinocchios for his fantasy about Democrats deserving all the credit for federal entitlement programs and for suggesting that Republicans alone have opposed those plans.





http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/fact-checking-co
nvention-claims-about-romneys-taxes-democrats-on-entitlements/2012/09/06/9818dc84-f835-11e1-8398-0327ab83ab91_blog.html?wprss=rss_








NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 3:21 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Sp hey there Geezer, care to critique Raul Ryan's speech and its whoppers, just to, yanno, demonstrate how FAIR you are?



Why? Plenty of folks have already done so. Have you seen me defending what he said?

I'd just like to see the folks here who pointed out his whoppers also admit that the folks at the DNC are coming out with some pretty good fibs of their own. You know. Just to demonstrate how FAIR they are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 4:34 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

But both these articles, although they differ slightly in figures (which could be due to different sources), still note that the "4.5 million new jobs during the Obama administration" claim is pretty bogus since it doesn't mention the 4 million or so jobs lost during the Obama administration.

So I'm not sure exactly what your point is


My point was to correct you and your fact check for contesting the 4.5mil figure which is perfectly accurate for the dates the democrats are measuring from. Just another example of sloppiness in your fact check. Now whether it's reasonable for the Obama admin to not factor in the job losses at their worst at the beginning of his term - that's another question. I would say that since he shouldn't be blamed for inheriting an economy that was haemorrhaging jobs, it's reasonable to measure his jobs record from some point after he took office. It just so happens that the democrats 'flattering' way of looking at the jobs figures, is also quite a fair one. But I don't expect you to go against your holy fact checks.

Quote:

Clinton praised the effectiveness of portions of Obama's health care legislation that won't even go into effect until 2014

Let's try a more rigorous critique of what Clinton said, using all the information:

"Clinton credited Obamacare for the slowdown in healthcare spending even though the major parts of the law haven't gone into effect yet, and experts mainly accredit the slowdown to the lousy economy.."

You see that if you take the underlined words into calculation there IS room for a case to be made that Obamacare has lowered healthcare spending. So in conclusion:

"Clinton's statement is misleading, since it leaves out the main accepted cause for the drop in spending, and it relies on an optimistic (maybe, I'm no expert) interpretation that the few active Obamacare provisions have already had a cost-saving effect."

There, that's a watertight criticism of what Clinton said - none of this saying things that he didn't say.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 4:55 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

I'd just like to see the folks here who pointed out his whoppers also admit that the folks at the DNC are coming out with some pretty good fibs of their own

Sure. Plenty of cherry-picked, misleading, grossly unfair or grossly flattering statements (I don't use the word 'lies' for these or Ryan's statements, as that's not what they are). I'm just not sure if any were as brazen as Ryan's. Also Ryan is the star of the GOP ticket - it's not fair to compare him with some of the low-key DNC speakers. The GOP filled their biggest stage with lies*; the democrats didn't have to, from FactCheck.org:

Quote:

Former President Bill Clinton’s stem-winding nomination speech was a fact-checker’s nightmare: lots of effort required to run down his many statistics and factual claims, producing little for us to write about.

Republicans will find plenty of Clinton’s scorching opinions objectionable. But with few exceptions, we found his stats checked out.



*Not literally

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 5:14 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Now whether it's reasonable for the Obama admin to not factor in the job losses at their worst at the beginning of his term - that's another question. I would say that since he shouldn't be blamed for inheriting an economy that was haemorrhaging jobs, it's reasonable to measure his jobs record from some point after he took office. It just so happens that the democrats 'flattering' way of looking at the jobs figures, is also quite a fair one. But I don't expect you to go against your holy fact checks.



Well, when the sources that you and I quote both seem to think that ignoring the job losses under the Obama administration while touting the job creation is less than honest, I'll take their word for it, since I figure they're probably a bit less partisan than you are.


Quote:

Let's try a more rigorous critique of what Clinton said, using all the information:

"Clinton credited Obamacare for the slowdown in healthcare spending even though the major parts of the law haven't gone into effect yet, and experts mainly accredit the slowdown to the lousy economy.."

You see that if you take the underlined words into calculation there IS room for a case to be made that Obamacare has lowered healthcare spending. So in conclusion:

"Clinton's statement is misleading, since it leaves out the main accepted cause for the drop in spending, and it relies on an optimistic (maybe, I'm no expert) interpretation that the few active Obamacare provisions have already had a cost-saving effect."

There, that's a watertight criticism of what Clinton said - none of this saying things that he didn't say.



And this is different from "Clinton praised the effectiveness of portions of Obama's health care legislation that won't even go into effect until 2014." in what way, exactly? That I specified 2014, when many of the parts of the ACA go into effect?

No matter how you slice it, Clinton was, to be kind, allocating results to Obama's health care reforms that were not the result of Obama's health care reforms. You can split hairs about what the meaning of "is" is all you like, but Clinton's statement was still untrue.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 5:18 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Sure. Plenty of cherry-picked, misleading, grossly unfair or grossly flattering statements.




And speaking of cherry-picked.
Quote:

Former President Bill Clinton’s stem-winding nomination speech was a fact-checker’s nightmare: lots of effort required to run down his many statistics and factual claims, producing little for us to write about.

Republicans will find plenty of Clinton’s scorching opinions objectionable. But with few exceptions, we found his stats checked out.



Plenty of questions about Obama's and Biden's speech are posted above, but you seem to skip right over them.

Here they are again. http://factcheck.org/2012/09/factchecking-obama-and-biden/

And some more from the Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/fact-checking-ob
amas-and-bidens-speeches-at-the-democratic-convention-in-charlotte/2012/09/07/ef79e0b6-f8a0-11e1-8b93-c4f4ab1c8d13_blog.html?wprss




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 5:22 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


"I'd just like to see the folks here who pointed out his whoppers also admit that the folks at the DNC are coming out with some pretty good fibs of their own. You know. Just to demonstrate how FAIR they are."

Why? YOU are the one who claims to be non-partisan, a claim none of us have made for ourselves. And despite our partisanship we have all criticiszed Obama and the democrats. But I have yet to see you specifically criticize ANY republican, no matter how egregious their faults.

Put up or shut up.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 5:29 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

I'll take their word for it, since I figure they're probably a bit less partisan than you are.

Wasn't asking you to take my word for it, was asking you to think for yourself.

Quote:

And this is different from "Clinton praised the effectiveness of portions of Obama's health care legislation that won't even go into effect until 2014." in what way, exactly?

One is accurate, another is completely inaccurate. Clinton did not claim the effectiveness of any specific parts of Obamacare, as you keep claiming he did.

Quote:

No matter how you slice it, Clinton was, to be kind, allocating results to Obama's health care reforms that were not the result of Obama's health care reforms. You can split hairs about what the meaning of "is" is all you like, but Clinton's statement was still untrue.

We agree more than we disagree. This was the standout dishonest part of Clinton's speech for me. But that 'standout dishonesty' would be par for the course for Republicans. Let's imagine if healthcare costs had coincidentally shot up in the past two years, for reasons completely unrelated to Obamacare. Do you dispute that Republicans would be ALL over that coincidence, and calling it a damning indictment of Obamacare?

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 5:46 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Plenty of questions about Obama's and Biden's speech are posted above, but you seem to skip right over them.

Here they are again. http://factcheck.org/2012/09/factchecking-obama-and-biden/


I haven't had time, and I wasn't aware that those speeches had created a particularly dishonest stir. I'll go back and look at them later, but were those speeches worse than Ryan's, in your view?

Also it seems your fact check has achieved some notoriety Geezer - Breitbart.com has called it 'intentionally stupid' and 'laughably unserious': http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/09/06/Ap-Creates-Intentio
nally-Stupid-Fact-Check


It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 6:32 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
I wait with baited breath.



Well, if you'd quit eating worms maybe you wouldn't have that problem.

It's "bated breath".



Actually, "baited" has become common enough in usage, it is acceptable as well.

But beyond that, it always illustrates the strength of one's argument when they latch onto spelling errors.


Quote:

And why should I join the chorus pointing out Ryan's lies? Did I ever say he wasn't lying? Did I ever try and defend his every word like the Liberals here do for the Democrats?


I was merely making the point that you are jumping all over Clinton's mostly factual speech, and asking why we aren't going after the supposed lies, while you completely gave a pass to Ryan's very obvious lies.

But you knew that, and just don't have the courage to admit it. Douche.


Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 6:37 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Sure. Plenty of cherry-picked, misleading, grossly unfair or grossly flattering statements.




And speaking of cherry-picked.
Quote:

Former President Bill Clinton’s stem-winding nomination speech was a fact-checker’s nightmare: lots of effort required to run down his many statistics and factual claims, producing little for us to write about.

Republicans will find plenty of Clinton’s scorching opinions objectionable. But with few exceptions, we found his stats checked out.




How is it cherry picking.... when even your own link says his info was accurate?


Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 7, 2012 1:03 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Ok Geeze, I've read the Obama/Biden fact checks you specifically wanted me to read. I'm underwhelmed. The fact check is reasonably fair, but it's mainly looking at half-truths and exaggerations. Nothing as brazen as Ryan's speech. And ones like Biden saying Romney and Ryan “are not for preserving Medicare at all” are subjective, and can't really be fact checked in my view. Do we fact check Republicans every time they say Obama is a socialist, or doesn't believe in the free-market or hard work, or hates America, etc.? No? It's because it comes down to subjective interpretation.

You seem to think that I'm denying that 'my side' uses spin and dishonest, misleading rhetoric. I'm not. What I'm saying is that the GOP does it more, and more brazenly. And along those lines, I want your answer to a question I asked earlier, concerning Clinton's stand out 'lie', so I'm going to put it to you again:

Quote:

Let's imagine if healthcare costs had coincidentally shot up in the past two years, for reasons completely unrelated to Obamacare. Do you dispute that Republicans would be ALL OVER that coincidence, and calling it a damning indictment of Obamacare?


It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 8, 2012 2:49 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Why? YOU are the one who claims to be non-partisan, a claim none of us have made for ourselves. And despite our partisanship we have all criticiszed Obama and the democrats. But I have yet to see you specifically criticize ANY republican, no matter how egregious their faults.

Put up or shut up.



Well, aside from criticizing their stances on gay rights, abortion, sex education, same-sex marriage, taxes, and seperation of church and state - Oh, and noting that their stand on voter ID has less to do with voter fraud and more to do with inflaming their base...



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 8, 2012 2:56 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
We agree more than we disagree. This was the standout dishonest part of Clinton's speech for me. But that 'standout dishonesty' would be par for the course for Republicans. Let's imagine if healthcare costs had coincidentally shot up in the past two years, for reasons completely unrelated to Obamacare. Do you dispute that Republicans would be ALL over that coincidence, and calling it a damning indictment of Obamacare?



Of course they would.

They are all POLITICIANS.

They all LIE.

It's WHAT THEY DO.

I just consider it sad that apparently one of the criteria folks here use for choosing to support the Democrats is that they believe that the Democrats lie to them a little less.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 8, 2012 4:05 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

I just consider it sad that apparently one of the criteria folks here use for choosing to support the Democrats is that they believe that the Democrats lie to them a little less.

The way I see it, to the extent that one side or other RELIES on mistruths and misinformation, that shows a bankruptcy of their ideas, and that the truth is not their friend. If you can't win an argument without lying more than the other guy, that doesn't say a lot for your case.

Quote:

They are all POLITICIANS.

They all LIE.

It's WHAT THEY DO.


To be honest I don't really get the near universal beating on politicians in this regard. Not that they're misunderstood decent folk or anything - but that they wouldn't lie if people weren't stupid enough to believe them. Politicians are what we (the public) make them. Everything objectionable in politics is a reflection of human stupidity.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 8, 2012 5:07 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


"Well, aside from criticizing their stances on gay rights, abortion, sex education, same-sex marriage, taxes, and separation of church and state - Oh, and noting that their stand on voter ID has less to do with voter fraud and more to do with inflaming their base..."

You have CLAIMED you maintain these positions (except voter ID which you supported, making you for it before you were against it). Yet I have NEVER seen you post any objection to any bill being voted on by republicans, never seen you criticize any specific republican for any stance or statement. You CLAIM these positions, yet you never actually TAKE them.

I bet you can't do it. I bet you can't say one specific negative thing with a particular name and a particular incident attached.

Prove me wrong.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 8, 2012 7:01 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

Killed any chance of elderly voters staying up to watch him
Watch WHO? Obama wasn't to speak until the next night, you know that, yes? So I believe there was nobody following Clinton...

The continued silly "fact check" about the "4.5 million jobs" is, as has been pointed out previously, erroneous. There HAVE been 4.5 million jobs created--how many were lost has nothing to do with it. As I said before, it's an omission, but that's what politicians DO, and the statement that 4.5 million have been created is accurate, as far as it goes.

As is "Are we better off because President Obama fought for health care reform? You bet we are.” We ARE better off if healthcare costs have lowered even a teeeeeny bit--again, spinning; again, what politicians do. "Health care costs have been under 4 percent in both years for the first time in 50 years". If THAT fact is inaccurate, then he lied, but you have to prove anything he actually stated is factually incorrect. There are many, many Americans who are legitimately better off because of those provisions which have gone into effect already. So the statement, for some who are affected by those provisions, they are better off. For all of us, if health care costs have lessened EVEN A DOLLAR, after steadily rising, we're better off.

It's silly to argue those points further, you can rightfully claim that he omitted and/or spun both, but the STATEMENTS as spoken are correct. "To include ALL the facts"--then they should have gone on and added the REASON 4 million jobs have been lost, as in all the state Republicans who have cut public jobs, if they wanted to add "all" the facts. You can nit pick all the way back to Adam if you want to, but THE WORDS THEY SPOKE are factually correct.

I believe we all agree that there are "half-truths and exaggerations". The POINT we've been arguing is that the carefully-worded material in Clinton's speech is
Quote:

Nothing as brazen as Ryan's speech. ... You seem to think that I'm denying that 'my side' uses spin and dishonest, misleading rhetoric. I'm not. What I'm saying is that the GOP does it more, and more brazenly.
Me, too.

You can count
Quote:

His most brazen lie accused President Obama of “raiding” Medicare by taking the exact same $716 billion that Ryan and the House GOP notoriously voted to slash. It was stunning.
as misleading, but I agree it's pretty stunning lie of omission.

But there's that "Obama for failing to keep open a Janesville GM plant that closed under Bush in 2008," which is an out-and-out lie, about as brazen as you can get!

Ryan blaming Obama for the credit-rating downgrade that S&P essentially blamed on GOP intransigence is also a lie; if he'd not BLAMED Obama, but just said "we've suffered a...under his administration" it would have just been misleading.

I love that he derided the president for walking away from the Simpson Bowles commission deficit-cutting recommendations when Ryan himself, a commission member, voted against those recommendations. Again, that is a pretty stunning twist, but not an actual lie, if Obama did "walk away" in the end. Simpson Bowles wasn't allowed to even come to the floor (I believe) because of Republican intransegence.

His claiming that all taxpayers got from the 2009 stimulus was “more debt,” when most got a tax cut could have been fixed by omitting "all"; as it stands, it's a blatant lie.

Then there's central lie of the GOP convention: that the President said “government gets the credit” for small businesses, not the business owners themselves. We all know by now that is NOT what Obama said, yet the Repubs have latched onto it and repeated it, hell, wrapped their entire CONVENTION around that particular lie.

He blamed Obama for a deficit mostly created by programs he himself voted for – from two wars, tax cuts, new Medicare benefits and TARP.

Romney said "unlike President Obama, I will not raise taxes on the middle class." But Obama has not raised taxes on middle-income taxpayers, and, in fact, he has targeted tax cuts and credits to benefit them. So it's a lie.

Romney says he "cut taxes 19 times" as governor. But tax rates remained unchanged under Romney, and Club for Growth, a conservative anti-tax group, determined he raised hundreds of millions of dollars by increasing fees and closing loopholes in the corporate tax structure. That's a close call if he did put through 19 tax cuts, but not a lie.

They've been asserting over and over that Obama "gutted" the 1990s' welfare overhaul, and accusing him of "waiving" the law's work requirement. The fact is, Obama has simply allowed state governors to seek waivers from the law's requirements if they can propose a more effective way to move people from welfare to work, and show that they can produce that result. Nothing has been waived yet. So "Obama" didn't gut anything; the states asked for the waivers, it wasn't his idea at all. And what is proposed definitely does NOT "gut" anything. Lie.

All this, and more, can be found at http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-08-31/mitt-romney-fac
t-check-republican-convention/57467252/1
. There's plenty more, but those are the most obvious ones.

So yes, all politicians lie, and moreso in a Presidential race, AND there were misleading statements by Obama and Biden. But Romney and Ryan have been running around spewing actual, flat-out, disproved LIES, and I have yet to find one from Obama/Biden. With the glaring exception of the woman who got cancer, which ad I decry to the heavens as grossly egregious and a flat-out, disproved lie.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 8, 2012 7:33 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Ok one more question Geezer:

Did you get more angry at Clinton's speech, from what you saw/heard about it, than you did at Ryan's speech? If so, why?

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:58 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
"Well, aside from criticizing their stances on gay rights, abortion, sex education, same-sex marriage, taxes, and separation of church and state - Oh, and noting that their stand on voter ID has less to do with voter fraud and more to do with inflaming their base..."

You have CLAIMED you maintain these positions (except voter ID which you supported, making you for it before you were against it). Yet I have NEVER seen you post any objection to any bill being voted on by republicans, never seen you criticize any specific republican for any stance or statement. You CLAIM these positions, yet you never actually TAKE them.

I bet you can't do it. I bet you can't say one specific negative thing with a particular name and a particular incident attached.

Prove me wrong.



http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=52887

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 9, 2012 2:30 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Ok one more question Geezer:

Did you get more angry at Clinton's speech, from what you saw/heard about it, than you did at Ryan's speech? If so, why?



Didn't watch either speech. Didn't watch either convention. Don't plan to vote for either Obama or Romney. Wonder why folks compare Clinton and Ryan, rather than Biden and Ryan, since they're the VP candidates. Not sure why I'd get angry, since I expect political speeches to have spin galore.

Just to be fair, I did go out and read the text of all three speeches - Clinton, Ryan, Biden. As speeches, ignoring the factuality of the information, I think Clinton did best, with Ryan second and Biden way behind.

I figure that Democrats will find the untruths in Clinton's and Biden's speeches to be mild compared to those in Ryan's. I also figure that the Republicans find the fibs in Ryan's speech to be nothing compared to the ones in Clinton's and Biden's.

Perhaps my take on this Presidential race is colored by the amazing number of attack ads shown here in Northern Virginia. During the news, there's at least one, and usually two, in each commercial break. They are on in the daytime and in primetime. I've just about worn out the "Mute" button on my remote.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 9, 2012 6:12 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Wonder why folks compare Clinton and Ryan, rather than Biden and Ryan

We're just using Ryan as a benchmark of brazen dishonesty.

Quote:

Not sure why I'd get angry, since I expect political speeches to have spin galore.

I asked the question because obviously you felt compelled to post about the unfactuality of Clinton's speech, but not of Ryan. And that fits your general pattern of taking liberals to task over their biases, and the flaws in their candidates - but not conservatives. And sometimes it seems to me, you get quite heated in doing so. Almost as if you think the Left is 'the problem'. By all means correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote:

I figure that Democrats will find the untruths in Clinton's and Biden's speeches to be mild compared to those in Ryan's. I also figure that the Republicans find the fibs in Ryan's speech to be nothing compared to the ones in Clinton's and Biden's.

This sounds like lazy equivalence - 'both sides are as bad as each other'. Fine. But that doesn't explain your passionately taking on one side, but not the other.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 9, 2012 6:38 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Amazingly, I agree with almost everything Geezer wrote. I differ in that I don't think there's any comparison between Romney/Ryan's lies and essentially anyone else's, and I don't think it's just because I'm a liberal (not a Democrat). I think any objective person would find the same, but that's just my opinion.

I didn't read all the speeches. I watched Michelle's and Clinton's, and saw clips of the others--I didn't watch the RNC because I knew it would piss me off, as most of the things they said are exactly what they've been saying all along, and too many of them are such blatant lies it boggles my mind they're getting away with them and have been all along. What it says about our country and the way elections have gone makes me very sad. But that's just my opinion too.

As for me, I'd have rated Michelle Obama's speech first and Clinton's second. That's just my take.

I do agree with KPO, tho', as to why you seem so partisan. I don't think it can be just because people here go after the Repubs, because there are enough already to give the Repubs' side and go after the Dems. So I'm not sure why, if you deride both of them, you virtually always either defend or explain the Repubs and decry or attack the Dems, but that's certainly your right to do.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 14, 2012 7:44 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:

FYI, they're not going to have Barrry's big speech out doors? 0% chance on rain in Charlotte tonight, but there's 100% chance of a lot of empty seats



And just to point out how full of shit zit and his twin rappy are, in regards to the "0% chance of rain" they're both repeating:

It's raining in Charolette RIGHT FUCKING NOW you moron. And the weather forecast says thunderstorms tonight.

http://www.weather.com/weather/right-now/35.227087,-80.843127?cm_ven=G
ooglemaps&cm_cat=googleOneBox&cm_pla=application-us&cm_ite=today


"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"




He must've been watching the weather on FauxNews. They can't even tell you the current weather without lying about it!



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 14, 2012 7:46 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:
I wait with baited breath.



Well, if you'd quit eating worms maybe you wouldn't have that problem.

It's "bated breath".

And why should I join the chorus pointing out Ryan's lies? Did I ever say he wasn't lying? Did I ever try and defend his every word like the Liberals here do for the Democrats?




So you'll call out every "lie" by any "liberal", but you'll never call out a single lie by any conservative.

That's lying by omission. Thanks for confirming that you're a known liar, Geezer.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Trump Presidency 2024 - predictions
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:54 - 15 posts
U.S. Senate Races 2024
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:49 - 9 posts
Electoral College, ReSteal 2024 Edition
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:47 - 35 posts
Are we witnessing President Biden's revenge tour?
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:44 - 7 posts
No Thread On Topic, More Than 17 Days After Hamas Terrorists Invade, Slaughter Innocent Israelis?
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:35 - 35 posts
Ghosts
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:30 - 72 posts
U.S. House Races 2024
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:30 - 5 posts
Election fraud.
Thu, October 31, 2024 20:28 - 35 posts
Will religion become extinct?
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:59 - 90 posts
Japanese Culture, S.Korea movies are now outselling American entertainment products
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:46 - 44 posts
Elon Musk
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:33 - 28 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:24 - 594 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL