Obama v Romney debate

Post by **parrot** » October 6, 2012, 9:35 am

Maybe the Clint speech was planned all along! I have to admit, the New Yorker cover paints an accurate picture.
On the positive side, unemployment rate dropped below 8% and I suspect that'll have more of an impact than the debate.

Post by **LoveDaBlues** » October 6, 2012, 10:17 am

gudtymchuk wrote:Oh no, Clint was right!

haha great magazine cover!

Post by **WBU ALUM** » October 6, 2012, 11:01 am

parrot wrote:Maybe the Clint speech was planned all along! I have to admit, the New Yorker cover paints an accurate picture.
On the positive side, unemployment rate dropped below 8% and I suspect that'll have more of an impact than the debate.

Obama decided to add state government jobs to his unemployment numbers.

The issue is private sector jobs. Public sector jobs just take more tax revenue to fund and take more money out of the private sector. Even MSNBC and CNN questioned these numbers. Not many are fooled by this cooking of the books.

The real number of those whose benefits have run out and quit looking and those UNDERemployed is closer to 14%.

Post by **parrot** » October 6, 2012, 11:29 am

Let's see: The birth certificate is cooked. The polls are cooked. The media is cooked. The jobs numbers are cooked. We never landed on the moon. There's a second Kennedy killer out there somewhere. Surely Valerie Jarrett is about to have Obama's baby. Osama bin laden is still alive.

Meanwhile, car sales are up. Reports released yesterday on housing and manufacturing also beat forecasters’ expectations. GM reportedly $9.19 billion last year, the largest profit in its 103-year history. The company also has regained its position as the world’s top-selling automaker. Christine Lagarde, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, says the US economy is improving. Men's underwear sales are up. Housing prices are beginning to rebound. The stock market is at a 5year high.
I'm sure all the improving agencies are in cahoots with the government.

Post by **LoveDaBlues** » October 6, 2012, 11:31 am

parrot wrote:Maybe the Clint speech was planned all along! I have to admit, the New Yorker cover paints an accurate picture.
On the positive side, unemployment rate dropped below 8% and I suspect that'll have more of an impact than the debate.

Without a doubt the unemployment figures will carry more weight than the debate. Of course, now the Republicants are crying foul and saying 'the books are cooked'.

The Republicants didn't have a problem trusting the numbers when they were using them to hammer the Dumbocrats; now that unemployment is down the numbers can't be trusted according to the Republicants. This is why I left the Republican Party many years ago. Both parties lie; but the Republicants take the lies and twisting of the truth to such heights as to insult the intelligence.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The big drop in the unemployment rate a month before the presidential election brought cries of disbelief and conspiracy theories from Jack Welch and other critics of the Obama administration Friday. But the Labor Department was quick to dismiss such claims.

"Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can't debate so change numbers," tweeted Welch, the former CEO of General Electric (GE, Fortune 500).

Welch did not respond to a request for further comment. In an interview later in the day on MSNBC, he admitted that he had no evidence that the jobs numbers were manipulated, but said they "defy logic."

LDB - gee Jack.....the Americans lost the Ryder Cup after being ahead 10-6; this also "defies logic". I guess the Americans golfers must have bet against themselves after the second day (when the odds were juicy) and started missing putts on purpose on the last day.

(Note to right-wingers, every anomaly IS NOT a conspiracy.)

The unemployment rate fell to 7.8% in September, down from 8.1% a month earlier. The drop was due to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' survey of households showing that 873,000 more people had jobs than in the previous month. That was the biggest one-month gain in more than nine years.

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis criticized the conspiracy theories Friday.

"This is a methodology that's been used for decades. And it is insulting when you hear people just cavalierly say that somehow we're manipulating numbers," Solis told CNN's Richard Quest.

I (LDB) just caught a piece on the TV where they interviewed someone high-up in the Bureau of Labor Statistics (can't recall the guys name, sorry). Anyway, he basically said it would take a conspiricy of some 2,000 government employees to 'fiddle with the numbers'. I suspect the Republicants will quickly drop these comments once they realize how big the foot is they have inserted in the mouth.

BTW, in 2010 GE reported worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, and said $5.1 billion of the total came from its operations in the United States. Its American tax bill? None. In fact, G.E. claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion.

That may be hard to fathom for the millions of American business owners and households now preparing their own returns, but low taxes are nothing new for G.E. The company has been cutting the percentage of its American profits paid to the Internal Revenue Service for years, resulting in a far lower rate than most multinational companies.
Its extraordinary success is based on an aggressive strategy that mixes fierce lobbying for tax breaks and innovative accounting that enables it to concentrate its profits offshore.

hmmmm.........offshore accounts..........now which Presidential candidate does this fit?

LDB - still waiting for Romney to release the past 20 years of tax returns as Obama has. Are you hiding something Mitt?

**************************************************************

Bureau Of Labor Statistics: "Total Private Employment Rose By 104,000" In September. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported: "In September, total private employment rose by 104,000, bringing the year-to-date gain to 1.3 million." [Bureau of Labor Statistics, 10/5/12]

By Contrast, The Public Sector Expanded By Only 10,000 New Jobs. According to the most recent Bureau of Labor Statistics data, the public sector expanded by 10,000 jobs in the last month. According to the St. Louis Federal Reserve, 4,000 of these jobs were in the federal government. Public sector job growth accounts for a little more than 9 percent of job growth over the last month. [Bureau of Labor Statistics, 10/5/12, St. Louis Federal Reserve, accessed 10/5/12]

Post by **WBU ALUM** » October 6, 2012, 11:47 am

parrot wrote:Let's see: The birth certificate is cooked. The polls are cooked. The media is cooked. The jobs numbers are cooked. We never landed on the moon. There's a second Kennedy killer out there somewhere. Surely Valerie Jarrett is about to have Obama's baby. Osama bin laden is still alive.

Meanwhile, car sales are up. Reports released yesterday on housing and manufacturing also beat forecasters’ expectations. GM reportedly $9.19 billion last year, the largest profit in its 103-year history. The company also has regained its position as the world’s top-selling automaker. Christine Lagarde, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, says the US economy is improving. Men's underwear sales are up. Housing prices are beginning to rebound. The stock market is at a 5year high.
I'm sure all the improving agencies are in cahoots with the government.

Strawman arguments, Parrot. No one mentioned any of this. You were talking about employment. Now you shift the argument to something else. Always bobbing and weaving.

That said, none of your stats (if true because there are no sources ... ) matters to 23 million Americans who are unemployed. Those with jobs and income are facing gas prices that are doubled since January 2009 and inflation has rocked food prices and household budgets. All of those nice little statistics, if true, aren't helping average Americans.

In addition ALL Americans face the highest tax increases in American history on January 1, 2013. That is not providing much incentive to do anything other than batten down the hatches.

Post by **fatbob** » October 6, 2012, 11:57 am

The capitalist system always has and will run in cycles, boom and bust, high's and trough's, its been in a trough for so long now of course it is about to rebound and the government of the day probably makes little difference to this. Great time to buy a house or shares on a down market.

Post by **WBU ALUM** » October 6, 2012, 12:08 pm

coxo wrote:The capitalist system always has and will run in cycles, boom and bust, high's and trough's, its been in a trough for so long now of course it is about to rebound and the government of the day probably makes little difference to this. Great time to buy a house or shares on a down market.

You're correct about the cycles. We agree.

However, the government of the day DOES matter. Over-regulation and high taxes and bigger government takes motivation, incentives for growth and revenue out of the private sector and stagnates an economy.

Post by **Nattaya2009** » October 8, 2012, 12:04 am

It could be that the non partisan voters will simply think that a lame duck Obama with no re-election concerns is riskier than just bringing in a new one who might be better restrained for the 1st four years. Then, boot him out in 2016....rinse and repeat. I don't really worry about Romney's tax returns. I already know he's filthy rich and I'm pretty sure Team O has had the IRS scour Romney's returns for the last 40 years looking for something so I doubt there's anything else there.

Post by **WBU ALUM** » October 9, 2012, 1:05 am

Nattaya2009 wrote:It could be that the non partisan voters will simply think that a lame duck Obama with no re-election concerns is riskier than just bringing in a new one who might be better restrained for the 1st four years. Then, boot him out in 2016....rinse and repeat. I don't really worry about Romney's tax returns. I already know he's filthy rich and I'm pretty sure Team O has had the IRS scour Romney's returns for the last 40 years looking for something so I doubt there's anything else there.

Agree.

Someone else's wealth has never determined my opportunities to attain any wealth or assets.

I often wonder why these same whiners about Romney's money weren't wringing their hands over John Kerry in 2004. Kerry has considerably more wealth that Romney, and maybe as much as five to ten times more. Answer? Partisanship.

Post by **KHONDAHM** » October 9, 2012, 7:35 am

Let's say Obama did have his people peek at Robme's tax returns. He could not then simply hold them up for the world to see. He could, however, insist that Myth release them. Unless I missed something, that is exactly what happened and Robme has so many skeletons to hide that he won't do it. Of course, the right-wing nut klub is ok with that. You want partisanship? Imagine if it was Obama refusing to release his taxes. The klub would be going ape-tihs.

Post by **WBU ALUM** » October 9, 2012, 7:57 am

KHONDAHM wrote:Robme has so many skeletons to hide that he won't do it. Of course, the right-wing nut klub is ok with that. You want partisanship? Imagine if it was Obama refusing to release his taxes.

You seem to have selective memory when it comes to transparency. Who is it that has all of their college transcripts sealed? And another "independent" ignores John Kerry and the 2004 election.

Romney released several tax years. Read up. He didn't have to release any.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidmarott ... nerousity/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html

The only "MYTH" seems to be that Romney is somehow a criminal because he has wealth, but Liberals always assume guilt and require the person to prove innocence rather than what is required by the law of the land.

Post by **KHONDAHM** » October 9, 2012, 8:15 am

This Independent voted for Paul in 2004 (stated that on at least 2 other threads). But nevermind that. You still seem to be the board's juggarnaut of perpetual right-wing nut hypocrisy. Two words:

Birth certificate

I won't debate the issue because it is moot at this point. Robme won't disclose because he's a crook and a liar. And you will gleefully vote for a crook and a liar.

Post by **gudtymchuk** » October 9, 2012, 8:56 am

According to a recent poll among the active duty and retired military Gov. Romney leads the POTUS 66% to 26%. Looks like all those all volunteer soldiers, sailors and marines are not so happy with the present commander in chief.
http://militarytimes.com/news/2012/10/m ... -1-100712/

Post by **luangtom** » October 9, 2012, 8:57 am

Meanwhile, here in the States, Obama goes to Hollywood where the true power lies and Romney goes to swing-states to lie to them. Isn't this a great country? Where is Pat Paulsen when you need him?

Post by **KHONDAHM** » October 9, 2012, 9:29 am

gudtymchuk wrote:According to a recent poll among the active duty and retired military Gov. Romney leads the POTUS 66% to 26%. Looks like all those all volunteer soldiers, sailors and marines are not so happy with the present commander in chief.
http://militarytimes.com/news/2012/10/m ... -1-100712/

If you're a career soldier, would you vote for the guy who wants to use diplomacy or the guy who wants to wage more war?

Just sayin...

I'd wager a poll of those working for the State department would be overwhelmingly for Obama. Some things just make sense.

Post by **Bertie_Wooster** » October 9, 2012, 9:30 am

[/quote]
You seem to have selective memory when it comes to transparency. Who is it that has all of their college transcripts sealed? [/quote]

I read about this awhile back and did some googling... Maybe I missed something, but everything points to the fact that college transcripts are not for public display and the former student has the final say whether or not they are released. Obama, like many presidents before him has chosen not to release his transcripts.

The transcripts of Bush II were leaked by someone which was illegal.

Post by **KHONDAHM** » October 9, 2012, 9:38 am

Also, I might add, according to my nephew who was one of the very last to leave Iraq and just told to pack for Afghanistan (read: Iran), the military is overwhelmingly exposed to Faux News. It's on pretty much anywhere there is a TV. Hence they are force-fed the Kool-Aid.

Post by **gudtymchuk** » October 9, 2012, 9:38 am

KHONDAHM wrote:
gudtymchuk wrote:According to a recent poll among the active duty and retired military Gov. Romney leads the POTUS 66% to 26%. Looks like all those all volunteer soldiers, sailors and marines are not so happy with the present commander in chief.
http://militarytimes.com/news/2012/10/m ... -1-100712/
If you're a career soldier, would you vote for the guy who wants to use diplomacy or the guy who wants to wage more war?

Just sayin...

I'd wager a poll of those working for the State department would be overwhelmingly for Obama. Some things just make sense.

Obviously you were to lazy or to busy spouting your left wing rhetoric as the economy was the major concern.....just saying.

Post by **KHONDAHM** » October 9, 2012, 9:45 am

Well, we don't know their choices, now do we? If you're career military, your food, clothing, housing, and other life expenses are either covered or subsidized. You live in a government bubble of sorts without having to feel the full brunt of what civilians have to deal with. Show he choices they had, then make the arguement.