2012 debates

[Guest American Woman]

Good

Yep. Ignorance is bliss, eh?

[Bitsy]

Most likely people who went into the debate undecided care more about the content than the performance, and therefore are more likely to fact-check what was said. That's not going to turn out so well for Romney.

Agreed; even Romney's own people had to immediately walk back his claim that people with pre-existing condition would be able to obtain health insurance.

[msj]

I like this picture - Obama got Bin Laden ... I'll get Big Bird.

I think reconsideration of who "won" the debate is in order if things like this keep coming up.

[Shady]

And it shows.

Exactly. He literally knows nothing about it. Likes to pretend though.

[Shady]

I think reconsideration of who "won" the debate is in order if things like this keep coming up.

Or you could listen to big Obama supporters like Bill Maher and Jon Stewart who even admit that Obama had a bad debate.

Bill Maher: "Obama looked like he took my million and spent it all On weed."

Jon Stewart: 'Our deeply divided nation has agreed - Obama's debate performance sucked."

And you know you've had a bad debate when even tingle up his leg Chris Matthews thinks you were bad...

[msj]

Or you could listen to big Obama supporters like Bill Maher and Jon Stewart who even admit that Obama had a bad debate.

Jon Stewart: 'Our deeply divided nation has agreed - Obama's debate performance sucked."

Yes, I saw Jon Stewart's take and thought he nailed it.

However, it's the aftermath that is going to be remembered and right now Romney is looking like a self-admitted "completely wrong" about that 47% comment but I'll still kill Big Bird douche-bag.

Compare that to a President who looks tired or is hilariously defended by the likes of Al Gore based on altitude and Obama comes off as, at worst, disinterested.

To most people being a douche-bag is worse than being tired and disinterested.

[BubberMiley]

What was Jon Stewart's take on Mitt Romney's debate performance?

I believe it was "LIAR!"

[msj]

What was Jon Stewart's take on Mitt Romney's debate performance?

I believe it was "LIAR!"

Yes, that was funny too.

I'm so used to Romney being a liar that it just seems normal....

[Shady]

Yes, I saw Jon Stewart's take and thought he nailed it.

However, it's the aftermath that is going to be remembered and right now Romney is looking like a self-admitted "completely wrong" about that 47% comment but I'll still kill Big Bird douche-bag.

Compare that to a President who looks tired or is hilariously defended by the likes of Al Gore based on altitude and Obama comes off as, at worst, disinterested.

To most people being a douche-bag is worse than being tired and disinterested.

Having a profitable entity that's entirely capable of supporting itself, stop using taxpayer money is hardly "killing" Big Bird. It's common sense. Big Bird will continue to make millions of dollars every year, and survive for decades and decades.

[punked]

Having a profitable entity that's entirely capable of supporting itself, stop using taxpayer money is hardly "killing" Big Bird. It's common sense. Big Bird will continue to make millions of dollars every year, and survive for decades and decades.

Yah cause you know Romney tax cut for his largest supporter alone would fund pbs for 500 years bht what is important here is a program that provides high quality, early education to our children gets cut.

[Shady]

Yah cause you know Romney tax cut for his largest supporter alone would fund pbs for 500 years bht what is important here is a program that provides high quality, early education to our children gets cut.

PBS doesn't need funding, it's self sustainable. It can continue to provide high qualty programming on its own. Why are you people so insistent on throwing tax dollars at self sustainable things? I don't get it.

[kimmy]

However, it's the aftermath that is going to be remembered and right now Romney is looking like a self-admitted "completely wrong" about that 47% comment but I'll still kill Big Bird douche-bag.

They're shaking the infamous "Etch-A-Sketch" hard right now. They've realized that the message they had been peddling was a complete flop, and they're trying to come up with a message people will like better.

Old message: a 20-percent tax cut for everybody! End the estate tax and inheritance tax! Lower corporate taxes! Lower capital gains tax!

Painful realization: nobody believes you can give everybody a 20 percent tax cut without raising the deficit or ending tax deductions that will impact lower and middle-class people a lot more than they'll impact millionaires.

New message: I won't implement any tax cut that increases the deficit!

Old message: regulations are hurting the economy! I'm going to kill Dodd-Frank and get the economy rolling again!

Painful realization: After what happened in 2008, promising to get rid of Wall Street regulations is about as popular as a turd in a punch-bowl.

New message: I oppose Dodd-Frank because it's the biggest kiss Wall Street has ever gotten!

Old message: Obamacare is a socialist takeover of the healthcare industry! It's an assault on religious freedom! People who can't get insurance can get medical care if they go to an emergency room.

Painful realization: a lot of voters support many aspects of Obamacare.

New message: I'm going to repeal Obamacare because it's hurting businesses, but trust me, I care deeply about people who can't get insurance. I have a plan! And people with pre-existing conditions are going to be protected, trust me.

And then you have Eric Fehrnstrom go out and explain the fine print on news shows the next day when 67 million voters aren't watching. "Welll, when Gov. Romney said his plan protects people with pre-existing conditions, what he really means is that people with pre-existing conditions can't get dropped if they change jobs and maintain continuous coverage. And, you know, even though we're going to end the protections provided by Obamacare, individual states could still come up with their own plans that might protect citizens..."

-k

[Pliny]

Old message: a 20-percent tax cut for everybody! End the estate tax and inheritance tax! Lower corporate taxes! Lower capital gains tax!

Painful realization: nobody believes you can give everybody a 20 percent tax cut without raising the deficit or ending tax deductions that will impact lower and middle-class people a lot more than they'll impact millionaires.

New message: I won't implement any tax cut that increases the deficit!

Soon to be realized by the left,no one really cares if millionaires are taxed more right now. It's tantamount to class bullying. It is later after Obama inflates the currency and everyone is a millionaire that they will care.

Romney explained it quite clearly how widening the tax base by creating jobs increases revenues but you and Obama are still touting the same class warfare rhetoric.

Old message: regulations are hurting the economy! I'm going to kill Dodd-Frank and get the economy rolling again!

Painful realization: After what happened in 2008, promising to get rid of Wall Street regulations is about as popular as a turd in a punch-bowl.

New message: I oppose Dodd-Frank because it's the biggest kiss Wall Street has ever gotten!

Especially among economic illiterates.

Old message: Obamacare is a socialist takeover of the healthcare industry! It's an assault on religious freedom! People who can't get insurance can get medical care if they go to an emergency room.

Painful realization: a lot of voters support many aspects of Obamacare.

New message: I'm going to repeal Obamacare because it's hurting businesses, but trust me, I care deeply about people who can't get insurance. I have a plan! And people with pre-existing conditions are going to be protected, trust me.

The success of a national healthcare program like Canada's is frightening to Americans, don't you think?

And then you have Eric Fehrnstrom go out and explain the fine print on news shows the next day when 67 million voters aren't watching. "Welll, when Gov. Romney said his plan protects people with pre-existing conditions, what he really means is that people with pre-existing conditions can't get dropped if they change jobs and maintain continuous coverage. And, you know, even though we're going to end the protections provided by Obamacare, individual states could still come up with their own plans that might protect citizens..."

-k

That explains it well.

[Shady]

Ouch, brutal new cover by The New Yorker!

The New Yorker

[Shady]

The success of a national healthcare program like Canada's is frightening to Americans, don't you think?

There is no national healthcare program in Canada. Each province has their own individual program, that has to fall under the guidelines of the Canada Health Act. Each province's programs cover different expenses and procedures as determined by the government's of those provinces. So it's similar to what Romney did in Massachussets. Crafting a health care plan that's custom to the state, and not federally mandated.

[punked]

Soon to be realized by the left,no one really cares if millionaires are taxed more right now. It's tantamount to class bullying. It is later after Obama inflates the currency and everyone is a millionaire that they will care.

Romney explained it quite clearly how widening the tax base by creating jobs increases revenues but you and Obama are still touting the same class warfare rhetoric.

Did he explain that quite well. He says he is going to create 12 million new jobs (widen the tax base to balance the budget) however he didn't explain how much each new job would have to pay to pay for his promises. How much would each new job have to pay well 500,000 dollars of course. That is crazy talk and anyone (such as yourself) who doesn't ask the follow questions of "is this even possible", "how many jobs are you actually going to create" or who doesn't look at the numbers is an idiot. Explain please how this will work in anyway.

[punked]

There is no national healthcare program in Canada. Each province has their own individual program, that has to fall under the guidelines of the Canada Health Act. Each province's programs cover different expenses and procedures as determined by the government's of those provinces. So it's similar to what Romney did in Massachussets. Crafting a health care plan that's custom to the state, and not federally mandated.

I see you don't mention that the SAME QUALITY OF CARE is a right in Canada in our constitution across the nation and the Federal government is mandated to make sure that is happening, and provides both healthcare transfers as well as Equalization to the provinces to level out the playing field. So it is nothing like Romney is promising unless Romney wants to make Healthcare and its quality a part of the American Constitution is that what you are saying because if it isn't you are a liar.

[Shady]

I see you don't mention that the SAME QUALITY OF CARE is a right in Canada in our constitution across the nation

That's completely untrue. You're either lying, or completely ignorant.

[punked]

PBS doesn't need funding, it's self sustainable. It can continue to provide high qualty programming on its own. Why are you people so insistent on throwing tax dollars at self sustainable things? I don't get it.

If you think providing good quality early childhood education at a cheep cheep price is a waste no wonder you are find giving Romney's largest donor a tax cut that in one year would pay for the Federal share of PBS funding for 500 years. I think PBS is a better place to put money then more trickle down that doesn't work.

[Shady]

If you think providing good quality early childhood education at a cheep cheep price is a waste

No, I don't think it's a waste, but it's unnecessary. They have the means to continue their quality programming without a dime from taxpayers. That's the point.

[Bitsy]

Soon to be realized by the left,no one really cares if millionaires are taxed more right now. It's tantamount to class bullying. It is later after Obama inflates the currency and everyone is a millionaire that they will care.

Romney explained it quite clearly how widening the tax base by creating jobs increases revenues but you and Obama are still touting the same class warfare rhetoric.

Old message: regulations are hurting the economy! I'm going to kill Dodd-Frank and get the economy rolling again!

Painful realization: After what happened in 2008, promising to get rid of Wall Street regulations is about as popular as a turd in a punch-bowl.

New message: I oppose Dodd-Frank because it's the biggest kiss Wall Street has ever gotten!

Especially among economic illiterates.

The success of a national healthcare program like Canada's is frightening to Americans, don't you think?

That explains it well.

Agreed, Kimmy always explains things well.

[punked]

That's completely untrue. You're either lying, or completely ignorant.

Part III, Equalization and Regional Disparities

36. (1) Without altering the legislative authority of Parliament or of the provincial legislatures, or the rights of any of them with respect to the exercise of their legislative authority, Parliament and the legislatures, together with the government of Canada and the provincial governments, are committed to (a) promoting equal opportunities for the well-being of Canadians; ( furthering economic development to reduce disparity in opportunities; and © providing essential public services of reasonable quality to all Canadians.

(2) Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation.

Again in Canada all essential public services: Education, Healthcare, Police, Fire, Right to a quick trail ARE TO BE COMPARABLE. This is why we have equalization. Shady maybe you should learn more about your home country before you start talking about other countries.

[Shady]

Old message: regulations are hurting the economy! I'm going to kill Dodd-Frank and get the economy rolling again!

Some regulations are hurting the economy. Dodd-Frank is a boon to big banks, and breaking the backs of small banks. The exact opposite of what most people would want, no?

Painful realization: After what happened in 2008, promising to get rid of Wall Street regulations is about as popular as a turd in a punch-bowl.

The turd in a punch bowl was the lowering of lending standards that was suppose to initiate more home ownership of lower income individuals, that wouldn't otherwise qualify for loans. How'd that end up working out?

New message: I oppose Dodd-Frank because it's the biggest kiss Wall Street has ever gotten!

It absolutely is, at least for anyone that actually knows the details of Dodd-Frank. Most of you don't, or just pretend you do.

Agreed, Kimmy always explains things well.

Yes, in her usual know-nothing fasion. Ignorance is bliss.

[punked]

No, I don't think it's a waste, but it's unnecessary. They have the means to continue their quality programming without a dime from taxpayers. That's the point.

After Mitt gets rid of tax deductions they wont. Or would just like to talk about all about Mitts plan separably. The only reason PBS is only 12% funded by the feds is because they are a charitable donation so much the public makes donations to a cause they believe in and get a deduction for it. Stop pretending the other parts of Romney's plan wont kill PBS.

[Shady]

Again in Canada all essential public services: Education, Healthcare, Police, Fire, Right to a quick trail ARE TO BE COMPARABLE. This is why we have equalization. Shady maybe you should learn more about your home country before you start talking about other countries.

Then why do some province's health care coverage differ in some of the procedures they cover? Why do some provinces offer full prescription drug coverage, while others do not? Would you consider that the same quality of care?