90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
The Presidential Debates

Chris Matthews and our all-star panel–left and right–hand down their verdicts on the presidential debate.

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama spar over energy policy during the second presidential debate at Hofstra University, Tuesday, Oct. 16, 2012, in Hempstead, N.Y. (AP)

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama spar over energy policy during the second presidential debate at Hofstra University, Tuesday, Oct. 16, 2012, in Hempstead, N.Y. (AP)

Talk about reality TV. Americans now used to smack-downs and face-offs and nose-to-nose TV battles had no shortage of close confrontation to see last night in the second of three presidential debates.

Mitt Romney. Barack Obama.On their feet. In each other’s faces. Right on the border of civility. Obama needed to bounce back, and he did. Romney needed to hang tough, and he did. They talked taxes and jobs and energy and women. They spoke to their big philosophies. They looked to dominate.

This hour, On Point: Obama-Romney, round two.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests

Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC’s “Hardball” and “The Chris Matthews Show.”

John McCormack, staff writer at the Weekly Standard.

Ruth Marcus, editorial writer and columnist at The Washington Post.

Jack BeattyOn Point news analyst.

From Tom’s Reading List

New York Times “A few minutes after kickoff, Ryan’s traveling press secretary, Michael Steel, led me into the suite where Ryan was watching the game with his older brother Tobin, his campaign adviser Dan Senor, the Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus and Senator Rob Portman of Ohio.”

Weekly Standard “When Mitt Romney stepped on stage at the first presidential debate in Denver on October 3, he had been losing to President Obama on the issue of taxes for two solid months. The Obama campaign bombarded Romney with TV ads claiming he would raise taxes on middle-class families by $2,000 in order to pay for his tax cut for the rich. Throughout August and September the Romney campaign did little to rebut the charge or attack Obama as a tax-hiker.”

L.A. Times “There’s at least two problems with that reasoning, though. First, much of the debate was focused on policy details, such as whether Romney’s proposed tax cuts would shift tax burdens from the rich to middle- and lower-income Americans, or whether Obamacare would let the government dictate how doctors treat patients. So while there were obvious differences in presentation, there were also big differences in substance. And maybe those differences were just as persuasive, if not more so, than the candidates’ energy gap.”

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • Michiganjf

    Romney kept lying in the debate about the deficit, claiming President Obama increased it… President Obama has DECREASED the deficit left to America by Bush!
    I wish Obama had called Romney out on this lie!

     If you are mainly concerned about the yearly deficit and the cumulative national debt, you may like to know how Democrats fare historically compared to Republicans… even how President Obama has fared.

     I’ll start with this premise:

     The U.S. economy, under President Obama, has performed better than almost every other advanced economy in the world, despite the mess he inherited from Bush… despite intentional Republican obstructionism… despite the suffering economies of other nations continually threatening the U.S recovery… despite the gutting of the American middle-class by short-sighted corporatism and policies destructive to the middle-class (I would argue primarily Republican policies)… etc., etc…

     … and yet President Obama STILL has managed to bring the Bush deficit down from 1.7 trillion/yr to 1.1 trillion/yr (keep reading), despite reduced government revenues from the recession and the need for stimulus to stem the economic downturn.

     But here are some facts regarding the debt and deficit, SUBSTANTIATED by links to the source material:

     Of the 16 trillion we now owe, Bush added 5 trillion to the debt during his eight years… then the “final Bush year deficit” of 1.7 trillion per year has added another 5 trillion to the debt during Obama’s first term.

    President Obama has REDUCED Bush’s 1.7 trillion yearly deficit by an average 300 billion/yr, EVERY YEAR HE HAS BEEN IN OFFICE, despite the reduced government revenues caused by the recession, and despite the need to stimulate economic and job growth from the Bush “job-loss spiral,” which was costing America 800,000 jobs a month at the time Obama took office.

     Take a look at this AWESOME chart, remembering that the U.S operated under Bush’s final budget through 2009 (Google “Obama’s first budget” for plenty of proof that the first Obama budget took effect in 2010, not 2009 as some Republican’s want you to believe):
    http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html
     LOOK AT HOW THE DEFICIT HAS GONE DOWN EACH YEAR UNDER OBAMA, FROM BUSH’S HORRENDOUS FINAL YEAR’S 1.7 TRILLION DEFICIT BUDGET!!!

    I LOVE this web page because the guy who created it links to sources… but he also put in some teriffic data, including marginal top-bracket tax rates, party in control of both bodies of Congress and the Presidency, etc…

    Look over the whole page and all the charts… this site is truly illuminating, WITH FULLY VERIFIABLE DATA!

    ALL of the debt added during Obama’s term is due primarily to Bush taking Clinton’s budgetary surplus and turning it into an absurdly huge, 1.7 trillion/yr deficit… Obama STILL managed to reduce the absurd Bush deficit, DESPITE reduced government revenues and the need for stimulus, WHILE NEVER INCREASING TAXES!!!

     Here’s an interesting editorial showing how some people read the Bush deficit situation BEFORE OBAMA”S FIRST BUDGET TOOK EFFECT, back in December of 2009:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/opinion/27iht-edbudget.1.20481672.html?_r=1

    As you can see, Bush already had full credit for the awful deficit situation plaguing America, as well as the debt it was creating every year, BEFORE OBAMA’S FIRST BUDGET TOOK EFFECT!

     Finally, to prove not only Bush, BUT ALL REPUBLICANS have screwed the debt and deficit whenever they get into the presidency, here’s another nice little chart showing debt under the last several presidents:

     Carter (D) – started debt/GDP 35.8% ended debt/GDP 32.5%

    Reagan (R) – started debt/GDP 32.5% ended debt/GDP 53.1%

    Bush I (R) – started debt/GDP 51.1% ended debt/GDP 66.1%

    Clinton (D) – started debt/GDP 66.1% ended debt/GDP 56.4%

    Bush II (R) – started debt/GDP 56.4% ended debt/GDP 84.2% !!!!

     Check this data for yourself:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms#Changes_in_debt_by_political_affiliation

    This entire wiki page is Awesome and worth looking over carefully!!! It has LOTS of great info!

    I know WIKI data can be faked, but it is correct and reliable over long term periods as it is revised and scrutinized by many…that is what makes WIKI work.

    I have been linking to this Wiki page for years now, and this data has held up under more than three years of scrutiny!!!

     Surprised?

    I think most Americans would be, if only this VERY IMPORTANT data was covered more thoroughly by the mainstream media, which caters primarily to short attention spans and quickie talking points.

    I’ve heard this data covered on ON POINT, one of my favorite radio shows, and on MS-NBC… Rachel Maddow even covered it tonight, but the coverage is simply NOT sufficient to get to enough of the public. The fact is, we have a terrific president who has done EXTREMELY WELL for America and Americans, EVEN WITH REGARD TO THE DEBT!!!

  • NewtonWhale

    Romney made two huge mistakes and Obama capitalized on both.

    First, Romney challenged Obama’s assertion that he had called the Libya attack an “act of terror” in the Rose Garden speech the next day. Romney was convinced he had caught the president in a lie, but was correctly fact checked in real time by Candy Crowley. 

    He looked bad, and it may become a metaphor for all the lies he has been telling throughout the campaign. Amazing he was not better prepared. I suspect his team has been guilty of believing their own spin for so long that no one bothered to tell Mitt it wasn’t true.

    Second, when the last question came up, Mitt was home free: no mention of 47% and no opportunity for Obama to raise it because the question was “which misperception ABOUT YOURSELF would you like to correct”.

    Them Romney raised it himself and opened the door wide. I could hear the collective gasp from Romney’s debate prep team as they watched in horror t what they knew was coming. And boy, did Obama deliver.

    That last answer was an almost metaphysically perfect summation, starting with the slander that Obama is a radical socialist, affirming his belief in America, then effortlessly pivoting to the 47% video, which he hung around the real Mitt’s neck, the one he only shows behind closed doors. Finally, ending with Obama asking for your vote, so he can continue to fight for the elderly, the young, the students, the veterans, all the 47% that Romney says can’t be bothered to take responsibility for their lives.

    The best debate performance of Obama’s life.

    More importantly, the best job of showing the American people what’s at stake in this election.

    • sickofthechit

       My favorite moment was the follow up by Obama on Libya.  Out of the park!

  • sickofthechit

    I watched and listened closely to Rmoney’s answer on taxes.  What I had trouble figuring out was his claim that under his plan we will continue to get 60% of our  tax revenue from the wealthy. He stated that emphatically. It has finally dawned on me.  He is planning such draconian cuts to all government spending (except defense) that the Federal Budget and our current programs will be a distant memory.  Don’t forget that his plan not only calls for a 20% reduction in all income tax rates, it also  calls for elimination of taxes on interest, dividends, capital gains and elimination of the estate tax. As I understand it, the wealthy (like Mr. Rmoney) derive the majority of their income from those first three categories and the fourth item would assure their thirtieth (30th) generation would be even more obscenely wealthy than the current generation. 

    Mr. Rmoney in fact derives over 98% of his $20,000,000.00 in income from interest, dividends, and capital gains.  So what he is supporting is that instead of paying 14% to 15% taxes on his income, he will be paying less than 1% taxes on his income.  This is based on one of his two years of released income tax returns where he received $360,000 in income from speaking fees.  I triple checked my calculation.  He makes twenty million dollars per year ($20,000,000.00/year).  His income is from interest, dividends and capital gains (in the form of carried interest) which would not be subject to taxes under his tax plan.  The $360,000 would be subject to a 39% tax except he wants to implement an across the board cut of 20% so that effectively becomes a 32% rate.  32% of $360,000 is approximately $120,000 in income taxes.  Paying .6% (that’s right point six percent! {less than one percent}) is the tax rate on $20,000,000.00 that results in a tax of $120,000.  Remarkable the audacity of their plans.  Obama may have the “Audacity of Hope” , but Rmoney has the “Audacity of Greed”.

    God help us if he wins the Presidency.
    Charles A. Bowsher 025416102012

  • ToyYoda

    I am an independent voter, who will most likely vote for Obama.  However, I only heard the debate on the radio and I like the manner in which Romney answered his questions.

    Romney answered more directly and with more assertiveness.  And I like how he kept going back to the whole issue of jobs.  It was a simple message repeated many times.

    Any good impression I got out of Obama was muddled in his circuitous replies and scrounging for background material before answering the question, verbally.  Obama’s replies seemed more appropriate for a classroom setting where his nuanced policies about the middle class, and building America could be digested.  I felt Obama’s message did not come across as crisply once juxtaposed against Romney’s smoothness and simple jobs message.

    I’d give the edge to Romney on debating-wise (as opposed to content), and I think Obama should spend more time making bullet point slides in Microsoft Outlook, if only to make his speech more assertive.

    • NewtonWhale

      Perhaps for the next debate you could neither watch nor listen but give us a critique based solely on your sense of smell.

      Because when you say that Obama lacked assertiveness and needs to practice making slides I smell something fishy.

    • Wm_James_from_Missouri

      Anyone can create jobs if they pay next to nothing, produce no real wealth or health or value. Burger joints, part-time jobs, busy work, kids with signs waving people into an oil change garage, … no benefits, no pensions. Is this what we have become ? Have you ever seen the movie, “ Eyes Wide Shut “ ?
      Everyone seems blind to the obvious effects of the last 30 plus years ! The Republicans helped the largest corporations run to China and Mexico to avoid US laws and to break Unions. Now they act as if the Chinese, acting in their own behalf, by “ rigging” currency rates is the cause of our problems. Have you ever looked at a Wall Street Journal, looked up and followed currency rates. You may notice that big money players are ALWAYS rigging something somewhere ( My dear, reader, these are Million Dollar Trades Minimum!) ! On another NPR program yesterday, it was noted that the Japanese are about to replace the Chinese as the largest holders of US debt. I guess now we will be blaming the Japanese for rigging something or other. Isn’t the Fed rigging prices when it promised to step up to G3 ? Do not the Saudis buy and sell dollars to threaten and manipulate our government to capitulate to their oil interest ? Sure the Chinese hurt us by their actions ! Do you really expect them to help you ? We are a sovereign nation, Internationalist pledge allegiance to money, not the American People.

    • RolloMartins

      So Obama’s replies can be faulted…because they were nuanced and had background material? I guess you like spoon-fed replies with a dash of prevarication thrown in.

      • ToyYoda

        What the F is wrong with you?  Where in my post did I even state I need stuff spoon fed to me?  I don’t have a problem with long and nuanced arguments.  I am stating that it doesn’t work in the venue that the President took.  And that my impressions were that Romney had a better presentation.

        If you don’t know your audience then there’s a good chance you’ll fail at transmitting your message.By the way I’m going to vote for Obama.  Everyone complains about the gridlock in congress, well no wonder.  We don’t have to look any further than your response.  If someone gives a complement to “the otherside” they get attacked.

        Stop occupying an adult body.  Grow into one.

        • Don_B1

          I would like to remind one and all that any good con man will have, must have if successful, a “good” presentation.

          It is a difficult thing to try to educate anyone in such an environment and I think people should beware someone who has just simple answers to complex questions.

          But do take note of Romney’s difficulties in his responses and how he tried to bully his way when his proposals/assertions came under fire. His hectoring the moderator in both debates and his outright disrespect to Obama on Obama’s pension (from his terms in the Illinois legislature) should be a turnoff.

    • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

      Mitt does lie very well.

  • NewtonWhale

    “Binders full of women?”

    Really?

    God bless the intertubes.

    Those cats are fast as lightning
    In fact it’s a little bit frightening
    Cos they did it with expert timing

    • MrNutso

      And, surprise!  It’s not true.

    • Steve_the_Repoman

      “Here comes the big boy, let’s get in it on.”

  • sickofthechit

     I was sitting home alone watching and recording the debate and I have to
    say I have never felt prouder of a President (any President) than when
    President Obama made his followup response on the Libyan question.
    Sitting alone, I actually started clapping when he finished. If Romney
    knows what is good for him, he will leave this alone in the future. charles a. bowsher 014417102012

  • NewtonWhale

    ‘Binders Full Of Women’: Mitt Romney’s Comment Goes Viral 
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/16/binders-full-of-women-mitt-romney_n_1972337.html

    “Why did the phrase resonate? Because it was tone deaf, condescending and out of touch with the actual economic issues that women are so bothered about. The phrase objectified and dehumanized women. It played right into the perception that so many women have feared about a Romney administration – that a president Romney would be sexist and set women back.”
    https://www.facebook.com/romneybindersfullofwomen?ref=ts&fref=ts

  • NewtonWhale

    I’m beginning to think his first name isn’t really Mitt:

    Mitt Romney ‘Binders Full Of Women’ Claim Misleads

    In fact, Romney did not direct women’s groups to bring him female candidates,Boston Pheonix reporter David Bernstein points out. A non-partisan collaboration of women’s groups called Massachusetts Government Appointments Project (MassGAP)was responsible for the effort in 2002, when the group’s leaders realized that women held only 30 percent of the top appointed positions in the state.

    Romney boasted that during his term as governor, Massachusetts had more women in senior leadership positions than any other state in America. “Now one of the reasons I was able to get so many good women to be part of that team was because of our recruiting effort,” he said.

    This statement, too, is misleading. While 42 percent of Romney’s appointments during his first 2-1/2 years as governor were women, the number of women in high-level appointed positions actually declined to 27.6 percent during his full tenure as governor, according to a 2007 MassGAP study.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/17/romney-binders-full-of-women_n_1972425.html

    • Don_B1

      That’s not the first time, and if he should be elected president, it won’t be the last time that Romney appropriates others’ work as his own.

      When a faulty installation in a Big Dig tunnel led to a car passenger death when a part of the ceiling collapsed, Mitt visited the site and then turned things over to his transportation department. But he did use it to get the Legislature to put the Mass Turnpike Authority over to the Transportation Department.

      I believe it was in that operation that the underfunded Big Dig had a lot of its debt transferred to the public transportation, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) which has struggled, unsuccessfully, to get out from under its heavy load ever since.

      The Big Dig debt arose mostly because the Federal government had capped its funding of the project, which continued to grow because William Weld’s earlier Republican administration had not taken the Dukakis administration’s recommendation that it set up an independent auditor rather than let Bechtel do the general contracting and self-audit. 

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    “Chris Matthews and our all-star panel–left and right–hand down their verdicts on the presidential debate.”

    I saw the headline and it peaked my interest.

    So Chris Matthews has a category all by his lonesome? — Because he certainly isn’t in the center.
    LOL

    I look forward to the show.

    • Shag_Wevera

      A guy from the weekly standard and one from the washington post and you are complaining?  Sheesh!

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Clearly you’ve never read any of Ms. Marcus’ work.

    • StilllHere

      I feel bad for the Weekly Standard guy.  Chris is crazy and in the bag for Obama, stay away from his leg.  Jack and Tom …. need I say more.

  • sickofthechit

    Hey, you all are a bunch of smart people out there.

    Can any of you answer this?  I was browsing through a Civics text book from the 1930′s or 1940′s last night and I ran across this section on the Post Office where they talked about the Post Office Banks where you could invest your money and receive either 2% or 4-1/2% return on your account.
    Question is, When and why did they disappear?  Would bringing them back help revitalize the Post Office?  It is of course a Constitutionally mandated entity, one that like the military should never be privatized or should I say “Profitized” as the Repugnicans seem to like to do.  I know in many countries in Europe the Post office does do banking and financial type things.

    “Profitized” and “Repugnicans” are copyrighted by Charles A. Bowsher as of 2011 and 2009 respectively.

    “Profitized” is when the Repugnicans (see below) push for dismantling a function of government so that private entities can handsomely profit instead of allowing government to do what it does best, (large programs that benefit large swaths of the population {like the post office}), or outsourcing security overseas to firms like Blackwater or Haliburton.

    “Repugnican” refers to Republican politicians who think it is more important for their party to prosper than for the United
    States to prosper and they are willing to block any piece of legislation which would have a chance of succeeding if it is proposed by a Democrat or President Obama.
    Charles A. Bowsher 020217102012

  • Wm_James_from_Missouri

    _I am sorry ladies and gentlemen but I guess I will have to play the role of dreamer and wishful thinker, again. For you see, yesterday, someone sent me a link to a Utube video called, “ The Most Important Image Ever Taken”.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcBV-cXVWFw

    _It reminded my of what Romney said about Newt’s idea about putting a “base” on the Moon. Remember? “I spent 25 years in business. If I had a business executive come to me and say they
    wanted to spend a few hundred billion dollars to put a colony on the moon, I’d say, ‘You’re fired,’ “

    _My question to Mitt would be, “ Why would you fire someone, that was showing you a way to capitalize on, literally, HUNDREDS of TRILLIONS of dollars of wealth ? ! In fact, more immediate wealth, than is owed, in total US debt ! Furthermore, a horde of wealth that exceeds the total value of over 500 years of effort of ALL the citizens that have ever lived in the United States of America !

    _Fire him ? He should be shinning his shoes, so that he may be near enough to hear more of this bold idea !

    _I can just hear some goofball saying, “ … we can’t afford…, we can’t do that because…, blah, blah, blah… Really ? I guess we will have to keep doing the same wrong things, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over and over ….

  • Duras

    In this weak’s New Yorker, Hendrik Hertzberg wrote this about the debate in Denver: “By the end of the ninety minutes, Romney had retrofitted himself as the defender of Medicare, the advocate of Wall Street regulation, the scourge of the big banks, the enemy of tax cuts for the rich, and the champion of tax relieffor the middle class.  All of these claims are spectacularly false; all went entirely, or mostly, unrefuted.”

    Say what you want republicans, but Romney is a greasy politician and Obama took some of that polish off his touch-of-gray hair job this time around.  …Or in republican lingo: Romney’s teleprompter must have shorted out.

  • Duras

    “Mr. Romney, which deductions do you plan to close to make your economic policy work?”

    “I’ve lived my life in the private sector,” Romney replies, “just trust me, I can’t believe you won’t trust me, won’t anybody trust me.  I’m a business man for crying out loud.  I can see your strings, so why are you asking me for details?”

    • MrNutso

      Condensed down to it’s most basic level, his economic policy is “I’ve lived in the private sector so I know the numbers will work” and his foreign policy “When I become president the world will suddenly resepect us too much to attack our embassies.”

  • Yar

    From the 16th to the 19th centuries, an estimated 12 million Africans were shipped as slaves to the Americas.The US still has 12 million people in slavery, a black market economy for undocumented workers who are not on a path to citizenship, who are not paid a living wage or provided healthcare.  Slavery lowers wages for everyone except slave owners, who carry wads of cash to pay current undocumented economic slaves. 
    How are we going to end slavery in America.  Not through self deportation. Not by making working conditions worse, not by making travel difficult. Mitt Romney, never apologize for slavery, “I’m running for office, for Pete’s sake, I can’t have illegals.”
    ” Those who’ve come here illegally take their place. So I will not grant amnesty to those who have come here illegally.”

  • donny_t

    Tom if you have a chance please address this: if only we could cut the two candidates in half and glue them together! Romney has great experience with the private sector and Obama has great experience with the public sector. We forget that Democrats and Republicans are two parts of a whole; like man and woman, yin and yang. It does us absolutely no good when we use rhetoric such as, “who ‘won’ the debate,” my party is better” “your party is evil” “your party is just doing this because they dislike ours” etc. This is the VERY thing that was going on last night and is also why nothing is getting accomplished in legislation!

  • Potter

    Obama hit it out of the park as far as I am concerned. He was not afraid to be angry- and he did get angry especially over Romney’s opportunistic accusations about the Libya terrorist act. He responded forcefully to the mischaracterizations and misrepresentations that Mitt got away with last time. Mitt looked positively flim flam by the end of the debate- he looked defeated, the salesman that he is, refusing to say how he is going to create all these jobs jobs jobs. Just trust him. 

    ( Did Romney balance the Massachusetts budget by the way?  Create jobs in MA? NO!!!)

    Obama looked good. He kept his head up. He looked noble actually. He was in good spirit, smiling and bright eyed, listening to Romney. Romney on the other hand looked small, his face scrunched up at times.Romney argued with Candy Crowley when she was trying to correct one of his lies ( about Obama re Libya) Obama had the high moral ground too. And Obama’s strong closing statement should seal the deal for anyone with questions about who would be best for this country, for the people.

    PS- Obama did talk about education and health care but I wish he had brought it home more that this is not only about women’s issues ( therefore helping the middle class) but to the economy of this country and JOBS JOBS JOBS. Obamacare ( which mostly has not kicked in) is not hurting businesses as Romney would have it.  Obama also did not have a chance to say that we the people ( the government that is which IS the people) have to spend, government has to spend, invest.  As a consequence we have to suffer with a slower rate of immediate decrease in the national debt and the budget deficit while we are still in recession.

    • Don_B1

      On the Libya exchange, and Chris Matthews’ comments on it, the article in The New York Times was discussed on WBUR’s program, Here&Now on Tuesday:

      http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2012/10/16/libya-attack-dispute

      I do not know why Tom downplayed it, but it does demonstrate the need to go a bit slowly sometimes so the conclusions are properly based on the WHOLE “truth” and not just first impressions.

  • Shag_Wevera

    The debates are lame.  We aren’t trying to learn anything.  We are seeking gotcha moments and who looks better.  We would be better off without them.

    • sickofthechit

       Romney supporter?

      • Shag_Wevera

        Nah, I’m a little left of Obama.

  • RolloMartins

    If this was a baseball game Obama won 9-5 with a couple of home runs. Stole a few bases, too.

    • Steve__T

       Its not a game, and you will see you and the rest of America are the ones being played.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    Romney never created jobs in Massachusetts because Our State has a lot of jobs especially in the small business sector.

    Restaurant businesses are booming in New England.

    • Don_B1

      Because the Massachusetts’ economy depended heavily on high tech, the 2001 recession was felt strongly in Massachusetts. But nationally the recovery was slow to negligible and the Bush tax cuts proved mostly ineffective, as were Romney’s attempts to improve business conditions. He hid tax increases on businesses to the tune of $750 million/year fee hikes.

      The improvement in the unemployment rate was more from unemployed workers leaving the state than from an increase in the number of jobs.

  • Gregg Smith

    Obama tried to take credit for the natural gas increases and drilling. Unbelievable. Romney didn’t stand for it and called him out. Obama had no answer and it was clearly shown he was lying. 

    • StilllHere

      Obama lied and gas prices rose.

      • Shag_Wevera

        That one doesn’t even rhyme.

        • StilllHere

          And yet it’s still true.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

        Romney’s Mittens didn’t fit cause it was soaked w/ lies.

      • adks12020

        nice argument…except that the President has little to no control over the price of gas.  Gas is sold on a world market.  There is increasing demand in developing countries creating competition for the oil that we want. No matter how much domestic production is produced the President still can’t force the oil companies to sell it to us for cheaper, or sell it to us at all, if they don’t want to. Free market baby! I thought republicans love the free market.

        • Gregg Smith

          It’s 48 cents a gallon in Saudi Arabia, 18 cents in Venezuela.

          • adks12020

            Something tells me you wouldn’t like what would have to be done to get it that low here….they have nationalized petroleum industries in both of those countries. That runs counter to the economic views of most Americans especially conservatives.

          • sickofthechit

             Not to me. Nationalize the energy companies I say.

          • Steve__T

             Yeah how about if you are not an American Co get lost.

          • Ray in VT

             “Saudi Arabia spends about $13.3 billion a year to subsidize gasoline and
            diesel prices, Abdullah Al Shehri, governor of the Electricity and
            Cogeneration Regulatory Authority, told the Gulf News.”

            That would seem to run highly counter to the laissez-faire ideology of the right.

          • hennorama

            Whoa, whoa, whoa there Gregg … 

            You’re not suggesting a Federal Oil & Gas Company now, are you?

            If so, it COULD be interesting.  Maybe something like this:

            Only on Federal land and/or in Federal waters, the Federal Oil & Gas Co. (let’s call it FOGCo) could either hire outside private contractors to do the exploration, extraction, refining, transportation, etc. OR FOGCo could hire their own employees to handle it.

            Then, FOGCo’s energy resources would be used first to supply the military, then government vehicles and facilities, then, and only if there was anything left over, energy could be sold by FOGCo on the open market.

            This would likely save tens of billions annually, maybe more.

            Great idea, Gregg!  Let’s do it.

        • StilllHere

          Then he should stop constantly talking about his efforts to reduce gas prices because they only point to the fact that he has been a complete failure on this issue and everything else.

      • jefe68

        I know this is hard for you to get your small brain around, but presidents have very little control over gas prices.

        Funny how you forget about the refinery issues, you know the fire on one on the west coast a few weeks ago, and another refinery that had other problems. It’s funny how the oil companies have been making record profits and yet they do nothing to invest in this area, at all. I guess that’s the free market at work.

        • Gregg Smith

          The hell they don’t. Just the announcement of Bush’s expansion in issuing drilling permits made gas prices plunge. Do you really believe killing the pipeline had no affect on prices. Or the moratorium? 

          • sickofthechit

             Why build a pipeline that can only transport oil?  Why not build a railroad that can transport goods and people as well?

          • BHA_in_Vermont

             What a flyer.

            The supply of oil today, tomorrow, next week, next month are not affected one iota by permits being granted or denied TODAY, pipelines being approved or delayed TODAY.
            You said yourself it takes years for a new well or pipeline to come online.

            No oil that could be pumped (or squeezed out of shale sludge) in a year or 3 is processed in a refinery today.

            Gas prices jump all over the place based on speculators setting the price of oil based on future POSSIBLE events that frequently don’t occur.

            The price of oil goes up every time a hurricane approaches the Gulf of Mexico because the oil supply MIGHT be impacted. And the price of gas goes up at the same time even though that oil hasn’t yet been produced, or not. If the rigs don’t pump oil for a day or 3, guess what, the refineries don’t run out of oil. And if they don’t shut down for a day or 3 because the hurricane hung a left, we have already forked over more money for the gasoline that was produced last week.

            And when there was war in Libya, the price of oil and therefore gasoline went up, even though the world production of oil didn’t go down. Even though we get little oil from Libya.

    • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

      Got a clue? They were talking about the energy policies in place the truth about domestic production. Fact is domestic oil production is up 12% since Bush slithered out of office.  BTW, where do you think all that sludge-derived oil is going… it’s for export! And let us not forget what drives up oil prices… speculation on Wall Street by people who have nothing to do with the oil industry itself… they’re gambling and their winnings are taxed at less than half the  rate workers income is… and Robme wants to lower those tax rates even more. Do you think that will not promote even more speculation? And who pays for all that gambling? You and I every time we go to the pump.

      • Gregg Smith

        It is up because of Bush. 

        • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

          It fell for six straight years from 2002 to 2008 under Bush. Go find a chart.

          • BHA_in_Vermont

             I guess Gregg would then blame that on Clinton.

        • Don_B1

          It is up because of the high price at the pump, which makes it economical to drill that deep or use the high-pressure water and toxins fracking fluids to free the methane and oil from the shale. As soon as the price comes down, the “supply” will go away, so the price will not come down much and it will oscillate around an increasing “normal” price.

    • MrNutso

      Crude oil production offshore and onshore is up 10.6% over 2008, including a 14% drop in 2011.  The increase peaked at 28% in 2010 which was higher than Bush’s peak in 2004.

      As for drilling and gas prices:

      http://checksandbalancesproject.org/tag/energy-production/

      • Gregg Smith

        Do you remember all the lefties saying “Drill here, Drill now” was silly because it would take years and years to come on line? Obama is taking credit for the massive expansion of permits that Bush issued. He has decimated domestic energy production.

        • Ray in VT

          Your last statement is just factually wrong.  You can argue that Obama has restricted permits and that that may have a negative impact down the road, but the fact is that U.S. oil and natural gas production is up over 2008 levels, and coal production is down from the 2008 level by about 5.5%, but that production has gone up for 3 straight years following a 13% decline from 2008 to 2009.

          • Gregg Smith

            It can take a decade for oil to come online after a permit is issued. It is up now because of permits issued long ago. The effects of the decimation won’t be felt until those permits that were denied don’t come online in coming years. I stand by the comment.

          • Ray in VT

            Well, if that is the case, then all of the permits that were issued during former President Bush during his first term should be bearing fruit now, and considering that permits issued during President Obama’s tenure have been roughly the same as those issued during the first Bush term, then we should be about looking at some similar production numbers circa 2020.

            http://www.politicususa.com/obama-oil-production.html

        • 1Brett1

          “He has decimated energy production.”

          More spinning from a spinmeister

          • Gregg Smith

            It’s true.

    • 1Brett1

      “…and it was clearly shown he was lying.” Again, no observation, there, just spin.

      • Gregg Smith

        Then, surely you did not watch it.

    • Don_B1

      There are at least two problems with your argument:

      1) The fossil fuel companies like to go where there is a high likelihood for success and big supplies: these are the Bakken Formation in North Dakota, the Barnett Shale in Texas and the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania and New York. These states, collectively, do not have that the big areas of federal public lands where the industry has wanted to explore. And in private lands, the fossil fuel developers can use a “divide and conquer” approach to intimidate homeowners/ranchers etc. to sell the drilling access rights cheaply by saying that a neighbor has sold his and they will get the oil/gas under the intimidee from the neighbor’s well(s) if they don’t get more direct access.

      2) There has been so much gas put on line that the price has dropped to barely above or below its cost of extraction and some wells have been shut down and drilling new ones slowed down for the economics. That it the reason they are proposing development of port facilities to enable the export of LNG (Liquified Natural Gas) to Europe and maybe China. Putin is quite unhappy about prospects of losing his monopoly in Europe which keeps his government popular by allowing its support of the Russian economy.

      3) Just about every drilling rig has been in operation for Obama’s term, except a few deep sea rigs during the justified moratorium. It is unlikely that much more drilling would have occurred anyway.

      • JGC

        Just a note to add to that:  I am just returning to my home in Canada after a trip to see family in western Pennsylvania.  There has been a ton of business generated from the fracking boom, 14 to 15 hour work days for some people.  A real boom, but the bust may be coming.  Some of the locals I talked to this morning said some of the wells are being capped, probably for the reason you explained above:  too much supply. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    President Obama clearly showed us last night that he is a Leader of the American people. A leader that will lead this nation to a brighter future but the journey will not be smooth it will be bumpy ride to prosperity.

    He hinted us last night the President Clinton will help him move this country “Forward” for a brighter future.

    God Bless America!!!

  • Gregg Smith

    Obama had the gall to say he called the Benghazi attack a terrorist attack on day one. Here’s what he said:

    “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America.”I looks to me like he carefully crafted the words so he did not call it a terrorist attack. Then he sent Susan Rice out to say it was a protest over a video. Then he went on the view and flat out refused to call it a terrorist attack.

    http://freebeacon.com/sept-25-obama-refused-to-describe-benghazi-attack-as-terrorism/

    Romney pinned him down to clarify that it was an act of terror and Obama STILL couldn’t say it.  He would not answer and told Romney to “proceed”.

    It was stunning.

    • StilllHere

      Obama lied and people died.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM soiled

         Are you a parrot or do you have any other one liners that you wish to fill this board with?

        • StilllHere

          You can’t handle the truth?

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM soiled

             You can do better.  If your posts are going to average 4  – 5 words, at least make those short sentences original.

          • StilllHere

            Gotcha, I’m right. Ciao.

      • Shag_Wevera

        That line is lame and its still the same.

      • Don_B1

        @StilllHere:disqus @google-327b60c55221432e499267aebfb70c09:disqus @yahoo-OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM:disqus 

        If he had lied, and he didn’t, his “lie” would not have been the cause of any deaths. See:

        http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/world/africa/election-year-stakes-overshadow-nuances-of-benghazi-investigation.html?_r=0

        and a discussion of that report here:

        http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2012/10/16/libya-attack-dispute

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM soiled

       And how is that statement not calling the attacks terrorism?  He was referring to the attack when he made that statement.  I mean do you understand the English language?  LOL.  This hilarious.  You people are so desperate you are grasping at straws.  Though, if the litmus test for being president is how quickly one deems an attack to be an act of terrorism, I find it interesting that you aren’t very quick to condemn Romney’s statement shortly after the attack.  He never once referred to the attack as an act of terrorism.  In fact, it took him a couple of days to call it terrorism. 

      • Gregg Smith

        Technically it could have but why is it so hard to say the words? It was a terrorist attack. I gave the quote, read it. He made an indirect implication. Why the denials on the view? Why send Rice out to lie? Why not say it clearly instead of saying “proceed”?

        the issue isn’t how quick he called it a terrorist attack, it’s how long they stuck to the imaginary protest story. Romney was righty to speak out, he did not go out and lie about a silly video. 

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM soiled

          If the litmus test for this particular issue is being absolutely clear that this was a terrorist attack, then Romney failed that litmus test when he refused to initially call it a terrorist attack.  Seems silly that as a Romney supporter you would harp on this issue.  Or is the platform, do as I say not as I do?  I’ve read the quote and it is clear Obama was referring to the attacks as terrorist.  I mean really, if this is all you have…if this is what you think is going to win you the election, you are in for a very sad November.

          Also, there actually was a protest going on during the attack. Both are true. There was a protest and there was an organized attack. I would rather our president take his time to get the facts straight than to have someone like Romney standing up out of complete ignorance and making statements about a tragedy that he knew nothing about.

          • Gregg Smith

            I already told you what the issue was and it wasn’t labeling it a terrorist attack. It was making up a story about a protest and lying to the American people for 2 weeks. 

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM soiled

             The issue to Romney seems to be the issue of labeling it as a terrorist attack.  He was embarrassed last night after all when he attempted to say that Obama didn’t call it a terrorist attack right away…when Obama actually did.  This has been a major conservative talking point that shockingly turned out to be false.  The protest wasn’t made up.  There was a protest going on at the time of the attack.  The protest simply had nothing to do with the attack.  Quite frankly, I think this is a non-issue that few people care about.  The only people who care about it are people such as yourself…someone who has already decided to not vote for Obama. 

          • Gregg Smith

            Obama still won’t call it a terrorist attack.

        • BHA_in_Vermont

           Let me guess, you are a lawyer. Make your case by twisting and construing words and phrases to either make them the same or different depending on your goal.

           To the average person, “acts of terror” and “terrorist attack” are synonymous without further description and detail. Talk about a waste of time during the debate and the election.

    • Sinclair2

      “Acts of terror” ARE terrorist attacks, but not to the right wingers.  OF COURSE he’s going to conduct an investigation to find out exactly who did it and then go after them. 

      The Republican spin arguments are pathetic.  Romney followers are now looking as stupid as Romney.  No wonder Obama will win.  This is no time to be a Republican.

      The only intelligent Republican analysis came from “The National Review” and they called the debate a draw which means that Obama won.

      • Gregg Smith

        If I say, “I will not tolerate stupid comments”, did I just call you an idiot?

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM soiled

          If you are referring to a specific comment a person made, then you are calling that person’s comment stupid.  Not exactly difficult to understand buddy.

          • Steve__T

             You don’t know Gregggg

        • 1Brett1

          Oh, yeah, that’s the same exact thing…hehe

          • Gregg Smith

            I liked it.

    • MrNutso

      So acts of terror are not terrorist acts?

      • Gregg Smith

        We have commenters here like Don_B1 who still say Obama thought out was about the silly video. Why? Are you really saying Obama has been clear?

        • Don_B1

          The facts have not been that clear yet, so why would anyone expect the discussion of them to be clear, except to those who have a political agenda?

      • 1Brett1

        Oh, yes, not only should he have said “terrorist acts” instead of “acts of terror,” he should have said he “declares war on terrorists” and that “we will kill all terrorists.” “Death to terrorists,” would have been appropriate. I also don’t understand why he didn’t say, “and I’m gonna personally slap around anyone I see who even mentions the incident without saying terrorists did this!” 

        • MrNutso

          Don’t forget fight them over there, so we don’t have to fight them over here.

    • jefe68

      The President Obama did make that statement on the first day. As it was pointed out it’s documented. 

      Romney lies, all the time. His record as governor is a case in point. He was awful, he left the state with more unemployment than when he came in. He raised fees and used this ploy as a way to say he did not raise taxes and yet they had the same effect. He spent more time out of state and when he did he would put the state that he was governor of down in public speeches. He was on record one of the worst governors in our states modern history.

      The man has the gall to use his record as governor as some kind litmus test to his ability as a statesman.
      The only good thing he did to get the health care bill passed, and the irony here is he thought it was his ticket to the White House. He’s the poster boy for the worst kind of political hack willing to do and say anything while hoping that the American people are to dumb enough to notice that his record stinks. It’s cynical, as was Paul Ryan’ fake photo op in a soup kitchen the other day.
      That sums up the Romney/Ryan campaign: cynicism and contempt.

    • StilllHere

      Obama has tried to have it both ways (first it was the movie-driven mob, now terrorists), then he forced Hillary to take the hit, only to backtrack because polls showed women thought he looked weak and political.  The guy is a complete slimeball who will do or say anything to get re-elected! 

      • BHA_in_Vermont

         “then he forced Hillary to take the hit, only to backtrack because polls showed women thought he looked weak and political.”

        Please cite your sources. I’m sure you were not in a room where Obama ‘forced’ Clinton to take a fall for the team.

    • NewtonWhale

      1) Stop arguing he didn’t say what the video and transcript show he did. It makes you sound like a crazy person.

      2) The people who were there have said the attack was caused by the video:

      Dispute Over Libya Attack: Reporter Says Militants Attacked Because Of Video, Not 9-11

      Election year politics has clouded public understanding of what happened one month ago during the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. In Tuesday’s New York Times, reporter David Kirkpatrick tries to try to clarify  what happened and why.He asks whether the attack grew out of anger over an American-made anti-Islam film, or whether it was waged by al-Qaida operatives seeking to mark the 11th anniversary of the 9-11 attacks.He reports that, to Libyans who witnessed the assault and knew the attackers:“…there is little doubt what occurred: a well-known group of local Islamist militants struck without any warning or protest, and they did it in retaliation for the video.”http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2012/10/16/libya-attack-dispute

    • sickofthechit

      Keep trying, using parsed quotes, but I think the real truth is that they held back calling it terrorism is that their focus was on tracking down who did it.  If the group  of terrorists who did it think that we don’t realize who did, and we say instead believe that it was spontaneous, maybe, just maybe they will not disappear so completely and we will have a better chance of finding them.  It’s called “playing the long game” instead of “playing the ratings game”.  It’s why they were able to track down Bin Laden, it’s why they continued the Stux Net program that crashed the Iranian centrifuges.

      It boggles my mind how feverishly so many Americans lust for details of everything that is going on, including highly sensitive operations.  I want someone with enough maturity in the Presidency who is willing to take a few punches of criticism while they pursue the right course behind the scenes.  I trust Obama to do this, I do not trust Romney to even handle my paltry investments let alone our country.  charles a. bowsher

    • 1Brett1

      You and the neocon brigade are trying so hard to parse the “no acts of terror…” statement to attempt a little hay making. The fact is, categorically, in every difficult situation the President finds himself, where, in hindsight anyone could second-guess, find fault, etc., you’ve stood with all of the quick criticism that occurs before any reasonable person could render any kind of judgement (kind of like what Romney did with his press release even before reports of any deaths or of what had transpired. Without exception, you do this. You throw whatever you can at the President and hope something sticks. 

      And, if the neocon media can get any traction out of an issue, you continue to beat the drum and pat yourself on the back for being on that side all the time. 

      Haymaker Smith 

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       Define “terrorist attack”.

      Latest news says it was a planned attack in response to the disgusting movie that no one had even seen 2 days before and most people protesting all over the middle east and Africa never saw. But it wasn’t an attack by a named “terrorist group”.

    • hennorama

      Gregg, you left out an important part of Pres. Obama’s remarks, the part preceding the words you quoted:

      Pres. Obama’s remarks on Sept. 12, 2012, in part:

      “Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourn with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

      As Americans let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those, both civilian and military, who represent us around the globe.

      No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.”

      see: http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012

      Note that Pres. Obama said “And then last night we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.” BEFORE then saying “No acts of terror …”

      Fox News, just after the debate last night, quoted these remarks out of sequence, making it appear that Pres. Obama was talking about the 9/11 attacks from 2001, when referring to “No acts of terror ….”

      This is not a new tactic for Fox News, but it’s important to have ALL of these remarks in sequence for the full context.

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    Mitt is definitely quick on his feet. He is a master of stringing lies together in rapid fire. It is truly his medium.

    So which Mitt are you voting for, the one who tells the lies you like or the one who tells the lies that disturb you?

  • Ed75

    The life issues didn’t come up – where they really disagree. President Obama supports abortion, embryonic stem cell research, same sex marriage, restriction of religious liberty, and probably euthanasia. Governor Romney supports none of these. We have to choose.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM soiled

      Ed, you are the poster child of the archaic Republican Party and the exact reason democrats dominate republicans in getting the woman vote.  

      Also, you are mistaken.  Romney once supported all of this.  Now he says he doesn’t.  What it comes down to is that Romney stands for nothing and will say anything to get elected.  He is a phony.  Whether it is gun rights, social issues or the economy, he flip flops on everything.  He will lose because he is disengenous and people don’t find that quality very redeaming.

    • jefe68

      What do mean we? You have to choose. Nice list of regressive policies.

      Restriction of religious liberty? Please, such hyperbolic nonsense.

      • 1Brett1

        “And probably euthanasia” …that was laughable

    • StilllHere

      Obama and Democrats hate religious liberty and will continue to work to restrict it. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

      “Restrictions of religious liberty” I am imagining the thousands of Mormons going from house to house trying to convert Americans to be Mormons.

    • J__o__h__n

      This is a rather expansive yet selective list of so-called “life issues.”  How is Romney on capital punishment, health care, not starting a war with Iran, providing a safety net, etc?

      • Ed75

        In Catholic thinking there are certain items that are non-negotiable. An example would be David Duke and racism: no matter what his views on other subjects, his racism makes him unacceptable as a candidate. Or for example, it’s non-negotiable that there be concern for the poor, but how that is accomplished is a matter of prudential judgement, on which people can disagree.

        The issues that are among the non-negotiable ones, and which really disqualify a candidate, are abortion, euthanasia, restriction of religious liberty, embryonic stem cell research, and same sex marriage. The other issues, like whether higher or lower taxes will help the economy more, is a prudential judgement on which people can disagree.

      • Ed75

        There are many concerns, of course, but there are five that are ‘non-negotiable’. For example, racism. Taking David Duke as an example, whatever his other policies, his racism disqualifies him as a candidate.

        The five are: abortion, same sex marriage, restriction of religious liberty, embryonic stem cell research, euthanasia. A Catholic can not vote for someone who supports any of these things (President Obama supports four of the five so far), without danger. The only reason to vote for such a candidate is if the other person is worse on these issues, or is outright crazy.

        In terms of the other issues, health care for example, both candidates are for health care, but they disagree on how it is best applied and achieved.

        Note that if President Obama is re-elected, Catholic medical services will have to close, and the poor will lose their medical care since the government can’t afford to fill in for the Church, and the Church will not go against its conscience.

    • 1Brett1

      “President Obama supports…Restriction of religious liberty…and probably euthanasia.” That’s almost funny, Ed. I suppose if you want to just make up stuff…Romney supports cruelty to animals, especially dogs; putting women in binders (sounds painful, no?); and, Romney wants Mormons and Catholics to dictate all governmental policy. We have to choose.

    • Duras

      You do realize that the stem cell research has already made huge steps in curing heart disease…? 

      And, do say, what religious liberty has Obama “restricted”?  …The freedom to deny gay people freedom…to make all businesses, religious or not, operate under the same laws…?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    I salute Michelle Obama for the new Food Plate chart program. She will help us raise our children in a healthier future.

    • nj_v2

      Right. The plate can be filled with genetically engineered food from companies whose leaders her husband appoints to high government positions.

  • Gregg Smith

    Romney made a brilliant pivot from the Assault Gun question to “Fast and Furious”. He laid it out and said  “For what purpose it was put in place, I can’t imagine”. Obama never addressed it when he got his turn. Devastating. 

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM soiled

       And Romney never addressed the fact that he refuses to provide any specifics on how he is going to pay for his tax cuts.  Obama destroyed Romney when he pointed out that no businessman would invest in a company that says they are going to increase spending by 7 trillion dollars and that the cost will be made up elsewhere and to not worry about the cost until after the fact.  It was hilarious.  Romney refuses to answer the question because there is no good answer.

      • Gregg Smith

        Yea, except he made up the number. So, tell me about the future vision of policy Obama laid out because I missed it.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM soiled

           The number isn’t made up.  If you cut taxes across the board by 20% it equals 5 trillion.  Romney didn’t dispute this.  Romney also didn’t dispute the fact that he wants to raise military spending by 2 trillion.  Obama’s future vision is somewhat incoherent as well.  However, if you are going to ridicule Obama for not being transparent, it seems a bit disingenuous that you are going to ignore the fact that Romney refuses to say what deductions he would cut.

      • MrNutso

        And Romney never said what he would do about assault weapons, and the moderator had to redirect him to the question at hand.

      • William

         I thought he did and his whole plan is based on working with the Congress. What is wrong with that?

        • Ray in VT

          Then should he not be promising to cut rates by 20%, as that would also need to be worked out with Congress?

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

      That arguement was irrelevant from the real problems of America. There are probabaly hundreds or thousands of secret operations like fast and furious that we don’t know about and F and F was one of them. The war on drugs is unwinnable but the war to save the economy is the main priority for all of us.

      • Gregg Smith

        “Fast and Furious” is serious stuff and not irrelevant. It wasn’t designed to fight the stupid war on drugs.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

          As you said “The Stupid War on Drugs”
          and I said it is unwinnable let us move “Forward”

    • StilllHere

      Obama lied and people died.

    • Shag_Wevera

      Is it a pivot, or changing the subject?

      • Gregg Smith

        A pivot.

    • 1Brett1

      Sorry, but, “brilliant pivot” and “Devastating” are not observations, no matter what one’s view is of how the issue is related to the overall issues with guns and citizenry. “Brilliant pivot” and “Devastating” are spin words.

    • anamaria23

      It was put in place by the Bush Administration.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         Anamaria — unfortunately your statement is not factually correct.  Bush did have a program but NO guns were lost.

        Fast and Furious was a completely different program and the admin is using executive privilege to thwart the investigation.

        Further, no one has explained what they were trying to accomplish with F&F. 

  • Gregg Smith

    This was the brutal truth and Obama had to sit there and take it:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-QTrrvgwlQ&feature=player_embedded

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM soiled

     Too bad Bain Capital didn’t have a binder full of women. 

  • StilllHere

    Moderator Crowley of the Romney/ Ryan death wish view completely rescued Obama on the question of Libya (just like Lehrer had to rescue Obama at the first debate) and showed favoritism throughout the debate.  Pathetic!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OBSUUSLNOHS3WM77YPCLBMLYMM soiled

      Rescued him how?  By calling out Romney in front of a televised audience that numbered in the  millions for blatantly lying?  Ok. 

    • Gregg Smith

      She as much as admitted it later on a show nobody watched.

      • StilllHere

        Though only after Cooper called her out on it b/c CNN was getting dragged through the mud on Twitter.

      • Shag_Wevera

        Since Romney thinks 47% of us are nobodies, nobody watching would mean 141 million.

  • Shag_Wevera

    In the photo above, it appears as though both candidates are attempting to use the force on one another. 

    • Shag_Wevera

      Romney’s hand position suggests he is trying to use force lightning, which would definately make him a Sith Lord.

    • Gregg Smith

      Nice observation.

    • hennorama

      Oh boy … I had just taken a sip of water when I read your remark, and I nearly did a “spit take.”

      Thanks for the comic relief!

  • Steve_the_Repoman

    The full transcript of the 9/12 speech regarding Libya consulate attack is available on the internet,  please read/watch and judge for yourselves.

  • Gregg Smith

    I expect the polls to continue to widen in favor of Romney, we’ll see.

    • Shag_Wevera

      I expect peppered gravy to flow from my kitchen faucett when I turn it on this morning, we’ll see.

    • nj_v2

      I expect Greggg will continue his robotically partisan trolling indefinitely. We’ll see.

  • ChevSm

    There were some odd choices for questions last night.  Why waste time with a question on assault rifles yet not get cover a topic of more relevance to this election like Medicare…??  

    • Yar

      Balloon boy, “We did this for the show.” 

  • jefe68
    • 1Brett1

      Bain were pioneers in the concept of outsourcing.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1741643803 Charlie McNamee

    Since President Obama was elected in 2008, the image I have of the GOP is of a pack of vutures circling over the White House with only ONE goal,to deny Barack Obama a second term. Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Grover Norquist, the entire FOX network team and 95% of AM talk show hosts have stoked the House of Representatives to block any and every measure proposed by the President whether or not the legislation would be helpful at alleviating the devestation caused by 30 years of deregulation of runaway corporate greed.
          As the polls before and after debates indicate, the electorate in large measure have closed their minds and drink eagerly the kool-aid, whether red or blue. Talking heads refuse to acknowledge any truth in the opposition’s position, and have no appreciation of what miracles can happen through real dialogue.
      

    • William

       That seems to be an odd choice of words “deny Barack Obama a second term”, like he is entitled to it and how dare anyone “deny” him that.

      • sickofthechit

        Actually our Senator (the ever shameless and shameful mitch mcconnell) stated that he would do everything in his power to “make him a one term President”.  I think that means deny.

        • William

            McConnell went on to say, but if he changes, I want to work with him,
          and basically that’s the attitude of if the guy will meet us halfway

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

            yeah sure if he changes party and his stance 180 degrees! what a stupid notion.

          • sickofthechit

             So McConnell is saying that even though the American People had just elected him he needed to change on day one?  Curious!

      • Steve__T

         Even if the nation were to go to hell in a hand basket. Right?  It’s an odd choice to go against your constituency to limit a president no matter what, it’s also un-American.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    The best part of the debate when Obama said that he does not think about his retirement plan because it’s not has big has Romney’s retire plan.

    He is the USA President but he does not make a lot of money compared to the 1% and Romney.

    It means that President Obama is part of 99%.

    • StilllHere

      Wrong, he is solidly in the 1% and the reason he doesn’t think about his financial situation during his retirement is he knows he won’t have a thing to worry about.  He is completely out of touch and it shows in everything he does and says!

    • OnPointComments

      $1,300,000:  Obama’s net worth 12/31/2007
       $11,473,336:  Obama’s net worth 12/31/2011
       I’d say President Obama is firmly in the 1%

      • Shag_Wevera

        He is worth arounf 5% of what Romney is worth.

        • sickofthechit

           How do you know how much Rmoney is worth?  When his IRA investment grows from a $20,000 investment to tens of millions of dollars magically it’s kind of hard to determine isn’t it?

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          So?

          John Kerry was worth 4x Romney.

          The left wasn’t worked up then about the Ketchup wealth — and the fact that Kerry paid little taxes because it was all in Muni bonds.

          • JGC

            Excuse me…but could you please pass the Grey Poupon? I think you’ll find it in the Romney’s Cayman Island pantry…

      • burroak

        show me Romney’s net worth, please.

        • OnPointComments

          No one’s making the statement that Romney isn’t in the 1%.  Akilez proffered that Obama is part of the 99% when clearly he is not.

  • J__o__h__n

    Romney’s new line about “trickle-down government” is just stupid.  He is now trying to use that phrase’s negative connotations to bash government while spouting the same tired actual trickle-down decades old Republican agenda of tax cuts for the rich (now rebranded as “job creators”) and gutting of regulation.

    • Shag_Wevera

      and since half the electorate is greedy and/or stupid, it should work well.

  • nj_v2

    It would all be a sad joke except people seem to take this crap seriously.

    The “debates” are rigged dog and pony shows run by a private company (Commission on Presidential Debates) headed by former Democracan and Republicrat party leaders and sponsored by large multinational corporations.

    Nearly everything about these sad spectacles is now controlled. Audience selected ahead of time. Pre-screened questions. Rules that preclude discussion that would get to the real issues or expose the fact that on significant, important issues, there’s hardly a bit of different between the two branches of the Corporate U.S. Party.

    Third-party candidates are systematically excluded, assuring that vast swaths of the public never hear valid arguments that challenge the pablum spewed from the mouths of the Chosen representatives of the corporate agenda.

    Clinton and Dole colluded to exclude Perot, Buchanan was excluded, Nader was excluded and not even allowed to get into the site even with valid credentials. 

    Outside last night’s charade, the Green ticket was excluded and arrested for protesting outside the venue. Gary Johnson was excluded.

    The corporate media go along for the ride, debating who “won” these charades. And here’s public radio, in the form of OnPoint, presenting the “verdicts” of what they claim are “left” and “right” on this fake event. As if Chris Matthews is somehow representative of anything that resembles the real “left.” As if the debates are somehow valid. It’s like a bunch of fourth graders who haven’t yet figured out that professional wrestling isn’t real.

    Party acolytes here in the forum defend their guy and attack the “other side” as if either of these corporate sock puppets are worth the effort. (“I want to drill for more oil!” No, I’ll drill for more oil!”) Suckers, all.

    Not a peep about civilian deaths from the Bush/Obama wars, not a peep about global warming, not a peep about poverty…

    The Democrocan/Republicrat party has given us endless tax breaks for large corporations, virtually unregulated market manipulation by the finance sector, no action of climate change,   unconstitutional wars, warrantless domestic spying, corporate manipulation of our food supply by genetic engineering, for-profit “health care”…

    History of the “debate” debacle: 

    http://www.pbs.org/now/debate.html#

    • Shag_Wevera

      Here here!!!

    • MrNutso

      Debates should be replaced by a question panel.  Each candidate answers the same questions and the sessions are recorded separately with neither candidate knowing what the other said.  Then the tapped sessions can be replayed back to back, or even spliced and shown question by question.

      • Steve__T

         Nice Idea but THAT aint gonna happen, sorry to say.

    • Duras

      Also, not a peep about unions.  Not a peep about the state of American democracy (given the Citizens United decision).  Not a peep about breaking up the banks. 

    • Steve__T

       Agreed Its a farce and a joke. And we will pay for it guaranteed.

  • StilllHere

    Obama’s energy policy is a complete failure!  Higher gas prices and hard earned tax dollars down the drain in Solyndra and A123 bankruptcies.  America is suffering and Obama wants to take more of what you make to pay off his campaign donors.  Pathetic!

    • Shag_Wevera

      When you say complete failure, do you mean no failure could have been worse?  Is this perhaps a bit of hyperbole on your part?  We are producing more oil and natural gas than we were 4 years ago.

    • Don_B1

      The gasoline prices are up because DEMAND is up worldwide.

      Solyndra was an unfortunate casualty of the marketplace and China’s subsidization of Chinese solar panel manufacturers. But as a total program, including all the companies assisted, the losses are much LESS than anticipated when the program was passed in the Bush administration.

      The assistance to A123 was a grant of $129 million taken from a total authorized of $249 million, used to build two factories in Michigan which were sold to Johnson Controls which will continue to operate. The grant will continue to achieve its goal and the breakthrough technology will stay in the U.S..

  • OnPointComments

    “In the immediate aftermath of Tuesday night’s debate, the liberals on MSNBC gave enthusiastic praise to both Obama’s performance and Crowley’s handling of the debate. Rachel Maddow said the president had given the best debate showing of his entire political career, Ed Schultz said Obama was “stellar” and Chris Matthews was so ecstatic that, as I said on Twitter, he was “wetting his pants in joy, gibbering like a meth freak on laughing gas.”
      By Robert Stacy McCain on 10.17.12 @ 6:11AMRobert Stacy McCain is co-author (with Lynn Vincent) of Donkey Cons: Sex, Crime, and Corruption in the Democratic Party (Nelson Current). He blogs at The Other McCain.

    • StilllHere

      On Point has really stacked the deck today in the hopes of making up for another disjointed performance by Obama.  He looked as incompetent and uninterested as he did in the first debate but I’m sure most on this panel will be drooling for him as usual.

      • J__o__h__n

        That liberal Weekly Standard . . .

        • Ray in VT

          Plus one works for the evil Mainstream Media, so we have to chalk her up as being in the bag for the left, right?

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Have you ever read Ruth Marcus?

            She is to the left of Gail Collins and she is an opinion writer.

            That said, I thought she was reasonably tempered today.

          • Ray in VT

            I don’t think that I had heard of her.  I thought that they all did a decent job of calling it like it was today, although I did miss the last 10-15 minutes.

          • Don_B1

            Ruth Marcus is liberal on social issues, but really ignorant, like most of the MSM and general public on macroeconomic issues. That can be understood, for the general public, as due to the fact that the current conditions have not been seen since 1938, near the end of the Great Depression.

            But Ruth Marcus has apparently not found the need to learn about economic conditions where the Federal Reserve is at the Zero Lower Bound in its control of the discount rate, the lever it uses to stimulate the economy. Neither has she deigned to read the experts on recession types, Reinhart and Rogoff, who demonstrate WHY recessions of the balance sheet, systemic financial crisis type typically have long recovery times. See:

            http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/financial-crisis-denialism/

            or go directly to the R&R experts (NOT Romney/Ryan):

            http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-15/sorry-u-s-recoveries-really-aren-t-different.html

            where you will see a table of un employment recovery times for the last four financial crises:

            Year    Onset          Four Years In
            1892    3.0%          14.4%
            1906    1.7%            5.9%
            1929    3.2%           24.9%
            2007    4.6%             9.0%

            The bottom line argues AGAINST the Republican claim that Obama’s policies have slowed the recovery:

            “Nonetheless, the comparison across systemic U.S. financial crises doesn’t support the view that:
            – the U.S. recoveries from pre-World War II systemic crises were any swifter than the general cross-country pattern;
            – in the aftermath of the 2007 crisis, the U.S. has performed worse than in previous systemic crises, In fact, so far, it has performed better in terms of output per capita and unemployment. This is true even if one excludes the Great Depression.”

            In other words, this is strong support for the claim that Obama’s ARRA was a necessary part of the current recovery and has worked to generate a better, quicker recovery than would otherwise have occurred.

      • burroak

        Really, how?

  • LeonardNicodemo

    Hoping that someone will mention PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE Jill Stein and her VP Cheri Honkala being arrested outside the debate last night.

    • Steve__T

      Not a chance, no major news organization would go there It would make people aware there is more than the two choices they are given.

        These debates are rigged by the DEM’s and REPUB’s

      Please don’t believe me look for your self then tell me how you feel. How does NPR miss or overlook this kind of news is beyond me.

      Did any one know that their are three other party’s that weren’t
      invited? That all questions will not be asked only the
      ones agreed to prior to the debate?

      This is not a debate it’s a farce.

      http://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/16/secret_debate_contract_reveals_obama_and

  • Brandstad

    The Second Presidential Debate featured repeated claims by each candidate that the other was not telling the truth–as well as at least one claim of fact by the moderator that turned out to be false. There were even questionable claims by the audience itself.
     
    Here are the top ten worst lies told during the Second Debate:
    10. “I told you I would cut taxes for middle-class families, and I did. I told you I’d cut taxes for small businesses, and I have.” President Barack Obama has made this claim repeatedly during the campaign, but it is not true, as even the liberalHuffington Post acknowledges. The few tax cuts that Obama did enact–such as the temporary payroll tax holiday–were short-term, or conditional. Furthermore, as the Romney campaign has often pointed out, Obama has raised many taxes on the middle class, including the infamous Obamacare “penalty,” and his taxes on “millionaires and billionaires” would hit small businesess.
    9. “…[H]e was asked, is it fair for somebody like you, making $20 million a year, to pay a lower tax rate than a nurse or a bus driver….And he said, yes, I think that’s fair.” Obama was referring to Romney’s recent 60 Minutes interview. But the transcript reveals Obama was not telling the truth. Romney was not saying it was fair that higher income should be taxed at a lower rate. He was referring specifically to the principle that capital gains should be taxed lower than other income because it has been taxed once already–a principle, incidentally, that Obama agrees with in his own tax policy.
    8. “He called the Arizona law a model for the nation.” Obama tried to knock Romney’s immigration policy while at the same time accusing him of flip-flopping on the issue. But as Romney pointed out, he was referring specifically to the e-Verify part of the law–the requirement of instant verification of workers’ legal status. That provision is even favored by unions. Obama made it seem Romney praised the law as a whole–which he had not. He went on to say that he himself objected to the provision that allowed police to check suspected illegal immigrants’ documentation–but that provision survived a challenge at the Supreme Court.
    7. “I want to make sure our timekeepers are working here.” For the third debate in a row, the Democratic candidate complained that he is not receiving as much time to speak as the Republican. And for the third debate in a row, the Obama/Biden ticket actually spoke for longer–much longer–than the Romney/Ryan ticket, a testament to the ability of the incumbents to pressure the moderators, and the susceptibility of the left-leaning moderators to such pressure. Obama received a full three minutes more time in last night’s debate–and the percentage difference was even higher at one point in the proceedings.
    6. “They rely on it for mammograms.” Obama attacked Romney’s proposal to cut off federal funding to Planned Parenthood by claiming that the organization provides mammograms to women to help prevent breast cancer. It’s been a repeated claim made by the left for months. The problem is that it’s just untrue–and even left-leaning mainstream media fact-checkers have acknowledged that. What is perhaps worse than Obama’s misleading claim about mammograms is the unsupported implication that Romney wants to deny life-saving health care to women–a cheap shot to which Romney was given a real chance to respond.
    5. “You can ship jobs overseas and get tax breaks for it.” We have heard the same lie for eight years from Obama. In 2004, he ran for U.S. Senate from Illinois on a promise to end such tax breaks. He did it again when he ran for President of the United States in2008. And yet he has never done anything about it–because there are no such tax breaks. There is merely a deduction that companies can take for moving, even within the U.S.–and which helps offset the double taxation of U.S. businesses abroad, which would make American companies less competitive. Repealing it would ship jobs overseas, actually.
    4. “And the production is up….What you’re saying is just not true.” Obama contested a claim by Romney that production of oil and gas is down on federal lands. He even accused Romney of not telling the truth. But Romney was right–exactly right, down to the percentage decline. Furthermore, Obama’s claim that he has been increasing oil and gas production on federal lands flies in the face of recent policy decisions, such as closing offa large part of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska to further development. Obama has tried to take credit for expansion on private lands, while opposing expansion wherever possible.
    3. “In what new ways do you intend to rectify the inequalities in the workplace, specifically regarding females making only 72 percent of what their male counterparts earn?” The false premise from a member of the audience was especially egregious because her question had been selected in advance by the moderator. The supposed wage gap between men and women for the same work is largely a myth. As Diana Furchtgott-Roth pointed out: “Women make about 95 percent of what their male counterparts earn, if the male counterparts are in the same job with the same experience.”
    2. “He wanted to take them into bankruptcy without providing them any way to stay open.” After Obama accused Romney of wanting American auto manufacturers to go bankrupt, Romney pointed out that Obama had, in fact, taken the auto companies through bankruptcy. Obama’s retort was to accuse Romney of wanting to take the companies bankrupt in order to put them out of business–a blatant lie. Romney actually suggested in his famous 2008 op-ed: “In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.”
    1. “He did call it an act of terror.” The worst untruth told by a moderator in presidential history. Candy Crowley’s intervention in favor of Obama caused the president’s cheering section to burst into applause, in violation of the rules, and there was little that Romney could say in response. But she was wrong–Obama’s reference to “acts of terror” in his Sep. 12 statement was in a general, abstract sense, and came long after he had described the 9/11 attacks on U.S. diplomatic missions as demonstrations against an anti-Islamic video. Even Crowley seemed to realize what she had done: it wasn’t long before she walked back her own comment.
     
    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/17/Top-Ten-Lies-of-the-Second-Presidential-Debate

  • Duras

    I tell you, Obama’s policy towards lightbulbs is a real failure and it has really bursted my bubble over the last term.

    The slight difference in the ambience has caused me to have headaches as I read, and now I need reading glasses.  God knows how much I’ve spent on medicine and reading glasses….

    Republicans were so right about that government overreach.

    • nj_v2

      I fully support the Incandescent Party.

      • Duras

        Today they are regulating our lightbulbs; tomorrow they will force women to have ultrasounds against their will.  Oh, wait….

    • burroak

      So, was killing Osama BIn Laden an overreach.

      • Duras

        It is obvious to all republicans that Bush got Bin Laden and Obama caused the economic collapse.  What world are you living in?  Republicanism rules!

        • burroak

          Thanks for the reply Duras; any books or publications you can recommend on this subject?

          • Duras

            Jonathan Swift…I try to be as good as the master, but like everyone else, I fall fall woefully short of.

          • burroak

            Is that a book on the OBL raid?

        • Don_B1

          The anti-science Republicans apparently believe in wormholes for time-travel, or is there some other way to go into an anti-causal world? Aha! Science fiction!

    • Steve__T

      As an aside did you know that 90% of all eyeglass frames and sunglasses are manufactured by one company in Italy? Oh and they also own most of the eye care groups.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    They looked like squabbling children.  I kept wondering when the adults would debate.

    • burroak

      Give me examples of how they were squabbling children.

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

        I give you the debate.  Did you watch?

        • burroak

          Morning. Gregg, yes, the whole debate. I

        • burroak

          Morning Gregg, yes I watched. .

          • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

             It’s Greg, not Gregg.  They both ran over the moderator; they repeatedly got into a “yes, I did; no, you didn’t” squabble; they didn’t answer the questions that they were asked.

          • burroak

            Thanks Greg, any other debate observations, curious.

          • Don_B1

            Then you wanted both candidates to perform as Obama did in the first debate.

            But that would take a strong moderator with an electric shock button attached to Romney’s sensitive parts to keep his belligerence and lies in check. I doubt, in fact I’m certain, that could ever happen.

            And you saw how Obama’s performance in that first debate was received. But if you read what he said, not watching, it comes a lot closer to what you wanted.

            Unfortunately, debating is performance art (?) and entertainment with some information thrown in for good measure. To see this, note that Romney was not punished one iota for his thorough mendacity.

          • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

             I’m in academia, so I know what a real debate looks like.  This was a brawl, while the last one was an assertion match.

          • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

             Drop that third g, please.

          • burroak

            Done….Greg, regards.

    • J__o__h__n

      How adult was it for Jill Stein to get arrested?

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

         Leaving us Gary Johnson.

  • http://www.facebook.com/marcia.camden Marcia Camden

    I particularly noticed Romney’s promise that Interest, Dividends and Capital Gains would be tax free.  Whoop-de-do!  Just how much IDC does the average middle class family have and how much would they benefit?  However, Mitt’s own taxes would go from 14% to 0%.  I know this is supposed to encourage investment and grow the economy, but the extremely low interest rates were supposed to do the same thing and look how that worked out.  Why don’t we just change the tax rate on IDCs to same as other income and then give tax breaks for net actual jobs created.  With all the form required when someone is hired, I’m sure the government has a count and knows which are the companies that create them.

    • Mike_Card

      Willard thinks the “middle class” is people with only 6 or 7 figure incomes.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

       Mitt: “I care about 100% of the people.”

      presidents who do actually care about 100% of Americans don’t need to say it.

      paraphrase of Mitt: “47% are already in his pocket and I’ll never reach them or convince them that they need to take responsibility.” If that is true then how can you say you care about them…

      • Steve__T

         You are being rational some won’t like that. This whole debate is a farce it not a debate. It’s more I’m going to do this or that with no substance on either side how, The president had his chance to call out the Congress and the Senate did he no. Why has he continued to fail on his promises from 4 years ago, he is a politician as is Romney. Even tho he says he’s not. You can’t believe either!

        • Don_B1

          The main promise Obama has “failed to keep” is the “cut the deficit [then $500 billion] in half”; the unemployment rate was not that important at the time he made the promise. But just that should tell you something: the s**t had yet to hit the fan!

          A BIG lie that Romney keeps making, with NO pushback, is that Obama doubled the deficit. But, in early January 2009, the CBO projected a 2009 deficit of $1.186 trillion, which came from the policies of the George W. Bush administration. See:

          http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9957/_selected-tables.2009.0406.pdf

          The 2009 deficit came in at $1.413 trillion, followed by:
          $1.293 trillion for 2010,
          $1.300 trillion for 2011,
          $1.089 trillion for 2012,
          and a projected deficit of
          $0.901 trillion for 2013.

          Notice that Obama HAS reduced the deficit over his term though not by half. But that was in the face of the worst recession since the Great Recession; see my previous post, to “Ray in VT” in the thread started by OnPointComments.

          The references there to Krugman’s post on his blog:

          http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/financial-crisis-denialism/

          and/or the Reinhart&Rogoff opinion piece in Bloomberg:

          http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-15/sorry-u-s-recoveries-really-aren-t-different.html

          are critical to understanding the economic mess we are in.

          And reading Michael Grunwald’s book, “The New New Deal,” will help understand the real effectiveness of the ARRA (stimulus) and how extraordinarily effectively it was implemented — good government in action.

  • ChevSm

    Romney seems to be missing the point with regard to the Libya attack.  I don’t care what Obama may or may not have said following the attack. I care that 4 Americans were brutally murdered in our own Embassy.  Romney would have more credibility in my mind if he stopped harping on what Obama may or may not have said and instead discuss how this could have happened.  

    • Mike_Card

      Consulate.

    • OnPointComments

      You’re exactly right.  The attack is about 4 Americans who died.  It should not have been about putting forth a false scenario that it was a spontaneous protest about an obscure YouTube video.  That lie was perpetrated for more than a week with the hopes that the public would buy it, and the media would move on to something else.

    • Mike_Card

      Consulate.  Marines guard embassies, but not consulates.

      • Don_B1

        Also the PRIME responsibility of the Marines is DATA protection, not personnel protection. It would take fully armored troops to provide the protection apparently needed; that is why they were working with the Libyan government to get it up to providing that protection as is done in every other country.

        And note that, despite the requests for added security, which may or may not have indicated the kind and amount, the Ambassador still found it desirable (and necessary) to get out in the public where he could interact with the different factions.Hopefully the full report will show how these pieces failed to come together to keep the consulate safe.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

    Romney got the smack in the face he needed! He is not presidential, he does not act presidential.

    my favorite line from the President “We don’t do that!” in reference to Mitt’s use of the tragic death of a diplomat to score points.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Why did you invite that self-important gasbag of Chris Matthews on?

    • burroak

      morning, fellow on-pointers, Greg, was Chris Matthews full of gas when he lambasted President Obama’s first presidential debate performance?

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

         That’s my point.  His comments then were all about himself and how good he is.

    • Ray in VT

      Hi Greg.  Do you mind if I ask you an Arkansas-related question that has nothing to do with the debate?

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

         Go for it.

        • Ray in VT

          Thanks.  I figured that I would ask seeing as how it is off topic.  What is the deal with those couple of Arkansas state reps who made news with the slavery comments?  I think that one said something about wanting to kick the Muslims out of America or something, and one said something to the effect that slavery was a blessing for black people.  Are they just a couple of nuts from areas that are a bit daffy or something?  I don’t have any idea about Arkansas state politics, so I don’t know what the internal dynamics are, and you’re the only person that I “know” from there.  I wouldn’t want to disparage your state, or even to make assumptions about the districts that those guys represent, as sometimes people go off the rails, but, seriously, what is up with that?

          • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

             I haven’t lived in this state for many years.  I’m from North Carolina, originally, and have lived in Tennessee for a decade.  I can speak about the South.  We have a cultural suspicion of outsiders.  Many times, we get confused about what that means, and sometimes it turns ugly.  A lot of us have Scots-Irish ancestry–people who didn’t want to be told what to do by our betters.  There’s also an anti-intellectual streak in this part of the world, exacerbated by people coming in from elsewhere to tell us how to live our lives.

            Now, times they are a-changing.  Lots of Northerners have moved here for the weather and simpler regulations and laws.  Good schools, including the University of Arkansas and North Carolina’s Research Triangle, open up minds.

            I do hope that we maintain our anti-authoritarian core and can share that with the rest of the country.

          • Ray in VT

            A number of your comments could also be applied to Vermont.  I think that there is some suspicion of what we sometimes call “flatlanders”, which is a sort of derogatory term for non-natives.  My dad used to rail against people who moved here and wanted to make it like New Jersey or Massachusetts, etc.

            Vermont has a long history of contrarianism.  I’m not sure where that comes from.  It may also be from the Scots-Irish, as there’s a lot of that ancestry here (most of my mom’s family is from Scotland way back when).  On the other hand, though, we’ve often gone with community solutions to some of our problems when they’ve been deemed appropriate.

            I was just talking to one of my neighbor’s kids at the bus stop this morning about the climate here.  He hates the cold, which I’ve seen get down towards -40, but he doesn’t like the heat either.  The cold bothers me more now than it used to, but I don’t think that I could ever leave or become a “snowbird”.  I just love this place too much.

            A lot of people come here for the lifestyle.  Small towns, the great outdoors, etc.  It’s expensive to live here, because a lot of our land isn’t well suited to building on, but I think that it’s worth every penny.  I was in Stowe this weekend, and I saw cars from Texas, Ohio, Tennessee and other, closer, states, and I heard several languages spoken.  The foliage draws people from all over, and I get a front row seat to it every year.

          • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

             Perhaps the better answer to your question is that all of us who live in the fly-over states wish that big-city control freaks would just stay home.

          • Ray in VT

            Perhaps.  Many natives here just don’t like big city ways.  Burlington has about 50,000 people, and that is the “big city” to many of us.  Many of us would like to stay like they are, but we know that that isn’t going to happen, but we don’t like it when people move in and try to make waves.  There’s some conflict sometimes when out of staters move in and post the land or try to shut off historic (and legal) rights of way.

            A lot of our social policy is quite libertarian, but our economic policies often aren’t.  Some people complain about Act 250 (our land use law), but whereas it does somewhat constrain land use, it is the legal bulwark for environmental protection, which most of us see as both a personal and an economic good.

          • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

             The more that I hear about Vermont, the more I see it as a model for the nation.  I also love your gun laws for the most part.

          • Ray in VT

            The box below was too small for my liking, so I’ll respond to your recent comment here.

            It’s a great place, Greg, although I’m quite biased.  Yup, the gun laws are almost non-existent, although the cops did just bust a couple of guys for having a loaded rifle in their car (they’re suspected of shooting deer out of season).

            If you can ever make it up, I would definitely recommend a visit.  Places like Stowe are really touristy, but they’re still nice.  I’m not sure of the foliage situation where you are, but the colors were great this year.  Lots of reds, oranges and yellows.  There’s a little something for everyone to do, and now, along with bidding you a good evening, I am off to try to get something out of our tourism department for my shameless promotion of our little patch of the Earth.

  • MrNutso

    That’s right Mitt.  We can’t have slow but steady job growth and a stock market that is approaching it’s highest level, since 2007 and the second highest ever.

  • http://www.facebook.com/j.krollhollister Jennie Kroll Hollister

    Romney changed again on Pell Grants

    • SomMom

       … or at least CLAIMS he has this position. I doubt it’s his real policy plan.

  • Thinkin5

    Mitt is the most arrogant bully I’ve seen. Can’t imagine him “working across the aisle” with anyone! He was rude to Crowley, rude to the president, and ignored the rules of the debate. Chris is right, Mitt is dismissive of others.
     

    • StilllHere

      Maybe he’ll follow Obama’s lead on compromise and just say, “I won” thereby ensuring another 4 years of disaster.

      • Bugsyboo

         Get over it. The Rs have been complete obstructionists and halted any governance in this county.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

    Romney wants to return to the past to power the future AND That Is Wrong!

    The future is and needs to be clean energy, Yes gas will cost more because the whole world is going to have less and less of it. But solar, wind, hydro, and tidal will never end. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/j.krollhollister Jennie Kroll Hollister

    He changed his stance on Pell Grants last night!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    The battling metaphor is one thing, and that’s cool, I guess.

    But please I have no interest in scoring a debate as if it were a boxing match. (Someone did that on TV last night; Matthews maybe?)

    Why is that not apt? Because I doubt that any voter in the last half year has made up their mind with a judge’s scorecard in their hand.

    • MrNutso

      Matthew’s score card on 10 questions:

      Obama – 6
      Romney – 1
      Tied – 3

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        So that was him.

        And now he’s talking about Patterson / Ali, reducing this down to a particular boxing match? (And how many people remember that match?)

        How do we know it’s not more like Tyson / Douglas or Ali / Spinks?

        (A bit of hyperbole from me. Matthews seems to wants to have been a sportswriter and should let that go on this beat.)

        • MrNutso

          The best boxing analogy is the “rumble in the jungle” Ali vs. Foreman.  Ali was on the ropes the entire night, but Foreman eventually tired and Ali won in the end.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/YMV2HJ2TBKMCN2QRAVI3I2OOGM Jim Jim

    chris matthews? are you kidding me? 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1522009575 Diane Chambers-Stewart

    I was horrified once I noticed that Romney seemed to be answering all the questions from women in the same kinda weird almost hushed half whisper voice but answered questions from men in a normal deeper tone. Did anyone else notice this?! I’m not sure if I can bring myself to sit through the dvr recording again, but I could not
    quite believe it was happening!!

    • SomMom

       I noticed this too, mostly in response to the questions by women about income equality for women and immigration. It was a “there, there, dear, don’t worry” kind of voice.

  • Brandstad

    POST-DEBATE CNN POLL: ROMNEY BURIES OBAMA ON ECONOMY

    Like the CBS poll, Obama won the overall debate, 46-39%, but Romney beat him senseless on all the important individual issues like the economy, health care, deficit, and taxes. 
    Unlike the CBS poll, CNN polled registered voters, not just undecideds.
    Economy: Romney wins 58-40%
    Health care: Romney wins 49-46%.
    Taxes: Romney wins 51-44%.
    Deficit: Romney wins 49-36%.
    Strong leader: Romney wins 49-46%.
    The worst news is that 25% of voters switched their vote to Romney and 25% wen to Obama.
    In other words, Obama didn’t move the ball, which is what he needed to do.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/16/CNN-Poll-Romney-Wallops-Obama-on-Economy
     

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Put “Breitbart” at the top; it saves so much time.

      • StilllHere

        So sorry the echo chamber is not to your liking today, hopefully your media filters are at full power.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          Really?

          You want “Breitbart is journalism” to be the epitath on the tombstone of (what little remains of) your good name?

          I’ve got a white parolee in a pimp costume to sell you.

  • Ellen Dibble

    I don’t know if other stations showed it, NBC caught it sotto voce in his corner, about the second time Romney was doing the tornado action and Candy Crowley wasn’t having any luck controlling things, but Obama said, from his seat, as if oh, I can take this in stride:  “It’s all right; I’m used to being interrupted.”  (Take that, pundits who say whoever occupies the presidency is used to being worshipped and never challenged.)  Someone is now saying about lack of deference as foreign to president mindset.  Another time, later, after Crawley had had tried more times to get Romney to back off, Obama too, stole some from the format, and said, “This is important,” and stood pretty near to her and laid something out, and people said he went too far, but I noticed that after that, Romney didn’t claim the last word on everything anymore.  Where the moderator couldn’t make Romney stick to form, somehow Obama did it, by stepping too far himself.  It seemed to work.

    • Brandstad

      CROWLEY INTERRUPTS ROMNEY 28 TIMES, OBAMA JUST 9

      • Duras

        Does that include the times that Romney tried to will his way despite the rules of the debate?

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

         Because He needed to be interrupted that many times if not more for speaking over the time and out of turn every chance he got.

      • Bugsyboo

         That’s because Romney was being an ass.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        And Obama got 9% more time.

        It was funny that CNN was promoting all day that they will keep the time for all candidates — please tune in.  There was ZERO coverage of the time differential in the CNN post game analysis. 

  • William

     Chris, Tom is not buying your story. Give it up.

    • Brandstad

      Tom,  How can you have Chris on your program when he is lying so much you can’t even let it slide but have to call him on it. 

      It is painfull listening today.

  • Brandstad

    Candy Crowley: Romney Was Right about September 12th Rose Garden Speach

    http://freebeacon.com/candy-crowley-he-was-right/

  • Yar

    Ask your guests if it was smart strategy to not raise the 47 percent where Romney could directly respond to it.  Everyone second guesses Obama for not doing that in the first debate.  If he had would you all still be talking about it?

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

       I like that Obama has not addressed it, everyone knows about it and by not bringing it up he has turned it into the white elephant in the room, so much so that Romney had to address it.

      “I care about 100% of Americans” If he really did then Why would he ever have to say it. Why would it ever be in question??

      • Ray in VT

        Maybe that is his “I am not a witch” moment.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

      Romney kindly gave the President that target and the President hit the bullseye.

  • toc1234

    Chris Matthews?!?!?!!?!!!  really, Tom?  Really??

  • Steve_the_Repoman

    Arrogance, journalism, Chris Mathews, McCormack?

    These gentlemen have little interest in journalism – they seem to me to be commentators.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Activism — whether the Benghazi folks were trying to make a positive point, carrying their new democracy forward?  We would be encouraging that, I suppose.  We need to think about pulling out that card democracy allows ourself.  If Obama wins, he’s going to need to be MADE to take the actions we need.  Congress is not going to do it for us.  But the Arabs seem to think that activism IS revolution, or IS violent and destructive.  No, no, no.  We can show them a better way.  I would not waste my time organizing around what they organize around.  No way. But I could make some suggestions.

  • OnpointListener

    A few months ago, Romney said he wants to defund Planned Parenthood.  

    Last night he said he believes that women should have access to contraception.

    At that point, I turned the TV off.

    I just can’t listen to Romney anymore.

    • OnPointComments

      Birth control pills have been around for more than 50 years, and condoms have been available for centuries.  Neither party is proposing banning either.  Only in Liberal Land does “access” mean “provided for free.”

      • Bugsyboo

         Planned Parenthood provides more than birth control; they are for many women a primary care provider. Look at what’s happening in TX where they’ve shut down PP; millions of women and their families have lost access to a health care provider.

      • http://www.facebook.com/marcia.camden Marcia Camden

        Do you think that people who can barely provide food and shelter are going to be able to pay for birth control?  They are the ones who need it most so they don’t have children they can’t take care of.  You can’t expect them all to be celibate.

      • OnpointListener

        I live in a relatively rural area where there is a scarcity of doctors.  We have only two ob/gyn’s to serve a very large geographic area.  It is almost impossible to make a timely appointment so many woman here travel over 50 miles to receive that type of medical care.

        This community has a relatively low median income but we do have a community college.  If it were not for local Planned Parenthood clinic, woman would not have access to proper medical care or contraceptives.  The clinic serves  many young women and many indigent people.  I shudder to think of the number of unplanned and unwanted pregnancies we would have in this community without that clinic.  The clinic also provides education to sexually active high school and college students about sexually transmitted disease.  

        • OnpointListener

          And I forgot to mention, the clinic charges on a sliding scale….

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      His (proverbial) daughter-in-law will have no problem getting access to contraception.

      He really either has a lot of contempt for voters’ memories, or is so insulated to think that everyone’s daughter or niece has all the choices his family has.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

       What he believes is you should have “Access” as long as you can pay for it on your own. But Planned parenthood does so many other things that are a net good for the whole of society that defunding it be a big mistake

  • SomMom

    On the Benghazi attack, the Obama administration was looking into it as a terrorist attack from the start, as the Boston Globe reported on Sept. 13. Yesterday’s New York Times report shows how confusing the truth is, adding to the facts that the attack DID seem to have the film as a motivation.

    Below is the Sept. 13 Boston Globe article by Bryan Bender:

    “US looks for terrorist plot in deadly Libyan assault:

    Obama vows justice in killings of four”

    Document Text

    WASHINGTON — US officials said Wednesday that they are investigating
    the four-hour -assault that killed the ambassador to Libya and three
    other Americans as a well-orchestrated terrorist attack, not a
    spontaneous reaction to an inflammatory movie about the Muslim prophet
    Mohammed.

      President Obama, who huddled with State
    Department advisers and ordered flags to be lowered to half-staff,
    called the killing of American diplomats outrageous and vowed to track
    down the assailants….

    …. The film was initially blamed for both the Cairo protest and the attack in Libya.
       But
    Senator John Kerry, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee who
    was briefed by administration officials, told the Globe that the Libya
    attack appeared to be premeditated.
    “The evidence was that attack was very well planned and very well structured,” he said. “This was not a mob.”
    But
    exactly who it was, or whether the attack was linked to the anniversary
    of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, remained unknown Wednesday.

         A senior Obama administration official described a running
    gunbattle at the Benghazi complex, which included an outlying annex
    where between 25 and 30 officials were working. The facility came under
    fire around 10 p.m. local time Tuesday and was secured with the help of
    Libyan security officials.
    “Many details of what
    happened in Benghazi are still unknown or unclear,” the administration
    official said, adding it was “clearly a complex attack.”…
     

  • Ellen Dibble

    Did Romney make Massachusetts number one in education?  He said that several times.  Someone has pointed out — must have been Obama — that if Massachusetts senate and congress got their blues and reds together on something, and then Romney would sign it, so great, would he sign off on something because the Congress presents it?  I was not paying that much attention to Romney’s accomplishments, but I thought federal education policy was beginning to kick in at the time…  Anyway, Romney seems to be saying it’s up to the states.  STATES can create optimal education.  Not federal support for it.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    “I know how to create good jobs”
    WHEN is Romney going to tell us his secret?
     

    • Duras

      …Make the rich a little richer and then have a little faith….

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

       never… cus he is lying like about everything else

    • Thinkin5

       All Mitt knows is how to be a vulture capitalist. He’s not a “job creator”. Even his claims for “saving the Olympics” involved govt. millions. He takes credit for everything good in Mass. but is Mr. Teflon on anything negative, especially at Bain.

      • Vandermeer

         Thank you Thinkin5 for that addition to this discussion. We need a supportive government!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/YMV2HJ2TBKMCN2QRAVI3I2OOGM Jim Jim

    How can you judge the past four years on on single debate that Obama “Lost”. Its so brief minded and makes no sense at all. He’s has to run the country AND run an election. All Romney has to do is get up and say “Everything Sucks, It wont Suck with me.” No Plan No anything. 

    Are we better than we were 4 years ago? Yes. The economy was taking an incredible nose dive losing jobs in the hundreds of thousands per month, and the Real Estate market nearly crippled the country.

    I’m not a huge fan of Obama but I really don’t want Bush back, or worse.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       And in a nose dive because of … GWB. Start wars, cut taxes, watch the banks play very risky games.

  • Bernadette Callister

    Congratulations to Chris Matthews for characterizing Gov. Rommney’s as arrogant, condescending and dismissive attitude to the President, and both moderators. I agree that what came through is the attitude was one of dismissive as though these people were underlings and not worthy of his serious attention. I haven’t heard anyone else point this out, instead what I hear is how commanding he was and how disengaged the President was. How do you engage with someone whose attitude who is rude and depricating of the people involved in the conversation. Do you see him at the negotiating table with hostile countries and thier representatives. 

    • John_in_Amherst

       Commentators and observers are taking issue with the combative tone of both candidates in the second debate.  In a way, it was a lose-lose for Obama – if he had tried to rise above the fray again, he would have been slammed as weak; when he countered Romney’s arrogance and aggressiveness with more of the same, he risked seeming petty and argumentative.  I personally was relieved to see that the President took the fight to Romney.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Romney did seem to say to the first questioner, who said she was worried about getting a job after graduation, that he personally would see to it that she had one, if he became president.  She could come and ask him to make good on that.  And it makes me think of the “unemployed person” that Romney said he actually had sat down with.  If you happen to be that questioner, you’re in luck.  But in my experience, unemployed people are not that hard to find, and women aren’t rare species, like African Americans in the town I grew up in.  They’re almost HALF.  Yes, I was shocked that he was surprised to find whole “binders” of us.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

       My wife and I both thought when he said that “wow, he sat down across the table from an unemployed person” 
      he said almost as if he was proud of the fact that he could  A. find one to sit down with and B. stand to be in the same room with them.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       I thought the same thing. With $20M income in 2010, you would think he could create jobs for a lot of newly graduated college students. Where are those jobs HE creates with is VERY LOW taxed wealth?

      • Ray in VT

        Well, I think that he is remodeling one of his houses, including, I think, a car elevator, so that labor probably doesn’t come cheap.

        • Vandermeer

           Ray, yes, yes, yes… Romney has no idea about the life of the average American.

          • Ray in VT

            Well, come on, his wife has a couple of Cadillacs, so he knows what it’s like to be a car owner.  I know that I have problems with my car elevator all of the time.  It’s such a hassle.  O, woe is I.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Car elevator?

            Luxury! I have to drive my Isotta-Fraschini up the stairs!

  • sickofthechit

    They both missed the bus with the college students question.  Neither asked what the young man’s major was.  How could they not have asked that and geared their answer accordingly?!

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       They were trying to answer it for “all” students. Of course, saying “I will create” jobs is a nothing answer.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Obama spelling out the ways Romney is different from Bush — after the hour or so of theater preceding it, wow!  

  • sickofthechit

    Somewhat petulant?  He is a spoiled rich brat and comes across like the father of Reince Priebus.

  • toc1234

    if On Point is such a straight-up, fair and balanced news magazine, why is Jack Beattty on every Friday and after events like the debate?  maybe the show should alternate with at least an independent voice….

    • Vandermeer

       Keep Jack on the Friday show… I wait to hear his take… it comes from knowledge of the past and a keen intellect.

      • toc1234

        right – keep Jack on the show but have him alternate with an independent voice.  it would help with the show’s middle-of-the-road façade…. 

        • Sinclair2

          It’s impossible to find an independent voice.  Keep Jack on the show.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    Ah, the Weekly Standard guy calls it a draw.

    Study question: What’s the worst that the Weekly Standard correspondent will ever say a Republican did in a debate?

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Romney says “No tax on capital gains, interest, dividends if you make < $200K" (or was it $250K?)

    But he has NEVER said what the tax rate would be on those who make more than that number. What is that rate?

    Almost ALL of Romney's income is capital gains, interest and dividends. What would Romney's personal tax rate be if his tax plan were adopted?

    • Ellen Dibble

      I was troubled by that too.  I already paid taxes on my entire retirement funds, huge taxes.  Putting them in Roth IRA’s.  Now he’s saying I could have saved that money and never have to pay taxes on those gains.  Bummer!  
          But most people earning the average of $50,000 are very hard pressed to be in a position to earn any interest, dividents, or capital gains.  It may benefit the upper middle class, but again, it betrays a very blind eye to the realities.   By the hundred millions, people might save a hundred dollars of taxes.  Might. 

    • Brandstad

      Did you watch the debate, if you did, I hope you recorded it so you could watch it again. 

      Romney clearly stated that he will make sure the top 5% of earners in the US that now pay 60% of the tax burden will continue to pay 60% of the tax burden when he passes his tax plan.

      You might ask, yea, but why should we believe him.  Look at his reccord.  He is the only candidate to balance a state budget, a companies budget, an olympics budget.  Obama promissed to cut the debt in half and he hasn’t, he promised to reduce healthcare costs by $2500 or more and he hasn’t, the unemployment rate would be 5.2% by now if we passed the stimulus, and it is 7.8%…. should I continue the list of failed promises? Obama math doesn’t add up.

      • Sinclair2

        Romney DID NOT balance the Mass. state budget.  It’s the Massachusetts STATE LAW that caused the budget to be balanced.  It is against the law to not balance the budget.  He had no choice.

      • BHA_in_Vermont

         Indeed I did, though I did not record it. And yes I heard him say the top 5% would continue to pay 60% of the tax burden.

        The ONLY WAY he can cut taxes on the middle class (as he CLAIMED he would do last night) AND have the top 5% still pay 60% of the total is to have the total go DOWN. That is arithmetic.  And if the total goes down, the deficit goes up or a WHOLE lot of government spending goes down as well. We know he wants to cut funding to public radio/tv. We know he wants to grow the military. Show us the details.

        You can bet your last dollar that for everyone who says “yeah, get rid of that” there will be another who says “we need that”.

        If he has his tax plan all figured out (even if it includes a fuzzy “deduction” bucket of “lets say $25K) it really can not be all that hard to put it on paper. If he REALLY believes it would improve the economy for everyone, he should also believe MORE people would vote for him if they saw the plan.

        He is right about one thing. We need to simplify the tax code. Even the IRS people you “assist” during tax season can’t understand it. But every one of those thousands of pages reflect some Senator or Representative’s special interest. Don’t hold your breath, I’m not holding mine.

        Let’s see the plan.

  • toc1234

    ROmney was ‘insolent’ according to the Left.  of course, when Biden snapped at Raddatz and mocked Ryan, it was Joe being Joe – and the liberals went wild with approval.  And btw all that crap thrown at W back in 2004 was called ‘truth to power’.

  • Ellen Dibble

    When Obama says the five point plan is really one point, have the rich live by a different set of rules.  Bingo.  We could elect the plutocracy.  A global plutocracy.  The fine print that Obama says creates a “sketchy” deal which even Romney would not even consider investing in — the mortgage you should not sign — yeah.  I hear the five points, and even I can deconstruct them handily.  Pie in the sky.  Words, words, words.  If you say China has to obey the rules, and we’ll make more of them, and then (you could deduce) the jobs will flow back to Ohio, I have to say, regulations for China but not for coal plants,  not for water sources in the areas under natural gas, threatened by frakking?  How do you spell that?  Sorry.  I don’t think the Republicans will regulate to protect our health, even our genes.

  • Brandstad

    To help our readers follow the path to tragedy on September 11 and its aftermath, below is a chronology of key events:
    April 6: IED thrown over the fence of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.
    April 11: Gun battle erupts between armed groups two-and-a-half miles from the U.S. Consulate, including rocket-propelled grenades.
    April 27: Two South African contractors are kidnapped by armed men, released unharmed.
    May 1: Deputy Commander of U.S. Embassy Tripoli’s Local Guard Force is carjacked, beaten, and detained by armed youth.
    May 1: British Embassy in Tripoli is attacked by a violent mob and set on fire. Other NATO embassies attacked as well.
    May 3: The State Department declines a request from personnel concerned about security at the U.S. Embassy in Libya for a DC-3 plane to take them around the country.
    May 22: Two rocket-propelled grenades are fired at the Benghazi office of the International Committee of the Red Cross, less than 1 mile from the U.S. Consulate.
    June 6: A large IED destroys part of the security perimeter of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. Creates hole “big enough for 40 men to go through.”
    June 10: A car carrying the British ambassador is attacked in Tripoli. Two bodyguards injured.Late June: The building of the International Red Cross attacked again and closed down, leaving the U.S. flag as the only international one still flying in Benghazi, an obvious target.
    August 6: Armed assailants carjack a vehicle with diplomatic plates operated by U.S. personnel.
    September 8: A local security officer in Benghazi warns American officials about deteriorating security.
    September 11: Protesters attack the U.S. Cairo embassy. U.S. Embassy releases statement and tweets sympathizing with Muslim protesters/attackers.
    September 11: U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya is attacked, Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans are killed.
    September 12: Secretary Clinton and President Obama issue statements condemning both the video and the attacks.
    September 12: U.S. intelligence agencies have enough evidence to conclude a terrorist attackwas involved.
    September 13: Press Secretary Jay Carney condemns video and violence at a news conference.
    September 14: Carney denies Administration had “actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent.”
    September 14: The bodies of slain Americans return to Andrews Air Force Base. President Obama again blames the YouTube video.
    September 16: U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice appears on Sunday talk shows and says the attacks were provoked by the video, exclusively.
    September 16: Libyan President Mohamed Magarief says, “no doubt that this [attack] was preplanned, predetermined.”
    September 17: State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland refuses to call attacks an act of terror.
    September 19: CNN reports having found Ambassador Stevens’s diary, which indicates concern about security threats in Benghazi.
    September 19: Director of the National Counterterrorism Center Matthew Olsen tells Congressthe attack in Libya was “terrorism.”
    September 20: Carney tries to back up Olsen, says it was “self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.”
    September 20: Obama refuses to call attack terrorism, citing insufficient information.
    September 21: Secretary of State Clinton, at meeting with Pakistani Foreign Minister, says, “What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.”September 25: On ABC’s “The View,” Obama says, “we don’t have all of the information yet so we are still gathering.”September 25: To the U.N. assembly, Obama blames “A crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.”September 26: Libya’s Magarief on the “Today” show says, “It was a preplanned act of terrorism directed against American citizens.”September 26: Published reports show U.S. Intel agencies and the Obama Administration knew within 24 hours that al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist were involved.September 27: Innocence of Muslims filmmaker Mark Basseley Youseff (aka Nakoula Basseley Nakoula) is arrested and denied bail on the charges of “probation violation.”September 28: Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper, Jr., issues a statement backing the Obama Administration’s changing story about the Libyan attack. Says facts are evolving.October 2: Carney declines to comment on reported requests from diplomats in Libya for additional security, citing the State Department’s internal investigation.

  • Bugsyboo

    I found Romney’s claim that he knows how to create jobs incredibly vague; he gave no specifics.

    • Vandermeer

       He never does… he has experience making corporations more profitable not creating jobs for average people. Good for you Bugsyboo for pointing this out!

  • StilllHere

    After a complete disaster of a performance that showed Obama to be less than presidental, the expectations couldn’t have been much lower for last night and yet he came up short again.  America is waking up from its “hope and change” hangover and now has sufficient evidence to understand that the president is completely out of his league and has no plan whatsoever.  America will not choose this path of indecision and ignorance again and Obama will go back to whatever community will have him and probably fail there too.

    • Thinkin5

       Romney keeps offering NO HOPE, NO CHANGE. Thanks anyway we’ll stick with hope and change even if it’s slowed by the ball & chain of the GOP/TeaCons.

    • anamaria23

      Please explain “indecision and ignorance”.  This administration has accomplished more for the common good, things that will make a better life for many, than most first terms in recent history.
      Mr. Romney, should he win,  will benefit from the slow steady recovery from the depths that we were in.
      RE: ignorance”  What is more ignorant than the calculated ill will and obstructionism put forth by the Republican Party.  It has been stunning and near evil.

  • Bugsyboo

    I think it’s about attitude and tone. Romney came off as a spoiled brat, Joe did interrupt, but he was more respectful to the moderator. 

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    I wish that the moderator could toss the candidates off the stage when they don’t answer the questions that they’re asked.  A gong or a shepherd’s hook would be appropriate.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

       or let the person asking the question ask it again as in
      ” But sir you did not answer the question, can you even give a straight answer?”

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

         That just gives the candidate another opportunity to duck.  Force them to answer our questions.  They work for us.  Fire anyone who refuses to respect the boss.

      • Steve__T

         That was thrown out in the rules the debaters insisted on and if you knew the real story you’d be as skeptical as I am. I posted this yesterday

        Did any one know that their are three other party’s that weren’t invited? that the moderator will  ask limited questions or for clarification on answers? That all questions will not be asked only the ones agreed to prior to the debate? 

        This is not a debate it’s a farce.

        http://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/16/secret_debate_contract_reveals_obama_and

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/Y7X5MAX7JX7YOPXSWOGEPT737A Timothy

    Is anyone concerned that these debates are being treated and judged as though they are episodes of American Idol? Should these three performances be the deciding factor for anyone after months of messages revealing clearly different values and policy positions? 

    • Vandermeer

       Tim, I agree; let’s judge the content of the ideas and not the drama!!

  • Ellen Dibble

    I had wondered how Obama would deal with the headwinds he’s faced from the Republicans (plus the hand dealt him by the Republican policies of the previous 10, 15, 20 years).  He said at one point, oh, now, you’re attacking me for not TRYING?  And he explained that the Republicans who had previously been for (the dream act, I think) had been approached to help with a bill for that in the first year, I believe he said, and those same Republicans were no longer for it, which he said he could understand, since their standard bearers were not (no longer) for it.  He didn’t say the extent of that stonewalling.  But I thought he said it in such a restrained way it was almost invisible.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Romney said he balanced the budget in MA. But he didn’t say he did it by raising fees. What economic group was hit most by  those fees?

    • MrNutso

      And like most states he was constitutionally required to do so.

      • Ray in VT

        I have heard that Vermont is the only state that is not legally required to do so.

        • BHA_in_Vermont

           Yet we somehow manage to do it ;)

    • Ellen Dibble

      I think he was setting himself for a presidential run, and everything was done with an eye to being able to claim experience and success in all the things that matter in a campaign like this.  Unfortunately, I don’t think it worked out so well for Massachusetts, but I’m not the one to speak to it.  Our governor can be pretty explicit about it, and what happens in Boston stays in Boston, it seems to this citizen from the boondocks of western Mass.  I mean, remember the Big Dig?  Those idiots can solve their own problems.  Or so I thought.

      • BHA_in_Vermont

        Kind of like how the legislators in New York think Albany is “Upstate” and about as far north as the state goes??

        Has Romney ever said why he didn’t seek a second term? I’m wondering if it relates specifically to your point – get some ‘cred’ and get the heck out.

        What were the chances that he WOULD have been reelected?  It seems to me if you run for the job of governor because you think you can improve the lives of a majority of the people, you would want to keep doing it for some time.

    • Brandstad

      So democrats should love him even more.

      I remember Obama passed a bill that increased fees, no i mean taxes, no I mean fees…. in Obamacare.  Guess who will pay those fees, people that can’t aford healthcare!

  • MrNutso

    Caught ya John.  There was no huge Democratic majority in 2009 and 2010.  There only 60 members of the Democratic caucus for about 4 out of 24 months.

    • Brandstad

      Please tell me who the house and senate majority leaders werein 2008, 2009, & 2010 and what date did the leadership change?

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         Please tell me how long the dems had a supermajority in the Senate, the 60 that is now required to get around the repub tactic of fillibustering that Sen. McConnell has pursued with vigor.

  • beeste

    ROMNEY IS LYING ABOUT DEFICITS!!!

    HE must be called out on this because he is LYING.  FY2009 was a budget signed by Bush, and that was a 1.5 Trillion deficit.  Obama has brought that DOWN by 300 billion.  IT IS A LIE TO ATTRIBUTE BUSH’S LAST FY IN OFFICE to Obama.  Why doesn’t the media call it out???  TOM, please call this fact out!

    • OnPointComments

      from the government website http://www.recovery.gov:    
      On Feb. 13, 2009, Congress passed the $787 billion dollar American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 at the urging of President Obama, who signed it into law four days later. In 2011, the original expenditure estimate of $787 billion was increased to $840 billion to be in line with the President’s 2012 budget and with scoring changes made by the Congressional Budget Office since the enactment of the Recovery Act.    
      Saying that President Obama had nothing to do with FY2009 spending is like saying terrorists had nothing to do with bringing down the World Trade Center towers because the terrorists weren’t piloting the planes when they took off.

      • beeste

         Onpointcomments, the budgeting of the US occurs prior to the start of the FY.  It is amended through continuing budgets, and I will refined my statement in concurrence with this bloomberg  article from September 2009:

        http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aA8lChe4zUQU

        “The spending increases and tax cuts included in the
        economic stimulus package approved in February added almost $200
        billion to the 2009 deficit, the CBO said.”

        So yes, of the 1.4 Trillion FY2009 deficit, Obama added almost 200 billion to it with tax cuts and spending from the stimulus. 

        So my numbers were a bit off AND ROMNEY IS STILL LYING!  BUSH IS RESPONSIBLE FOR A FY2009 deficit LARGER than our 1.1 Trillion deficit in FY2012, and much much larger than Obama’s projected 4th year deficit, FY2013, of ~650 billion.

        BOTTOM LINE, ROMNEY’S LYING!

    • William

       I thought Obama signed that budget?

      • NewtonWhale

        The Cato Institute, a conservative think tank, agrees with beeste:

        Don’t Blame Obama for Bush’s 2009 Deficit

        In addition to being theoretically misguided, critics sometimes blame Obama for things that are not his fault. Listening to a talk radio program yesterday, the host asserted that Obama tripled the budget deficit in his first year. This assertion is understandable, since the deficit jumped from about $450 billion in 2008 to $1.4 trillion in 2009. As this chart illustrates, with the Bush years in green, it appears as if Obama’s policies have led to an explosion of debt.

        But there is one rather important detail that makes a big difference. The chart is based on the assumption that the current administration should be blamed for the 2009 fiscal year. While this makes sense to a casual observer, it is largely untrue. The 2009  fiscal year began October 1, 2008, nearly four months before Obama took office. The budget for the entire fiscal year was largely set in place while Bush was in the White House. 

        So if we update the chart to show the Bush fiscal years in green, we can see that Obama is partly right in claiming that he inherited a mess 

        http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/dont-blame-obama-for-bushs-2009-deficit/

        • sickofthechit

           Don’t forget that Obama also started putting the Wars  and the Medicare Prescription Drug benefit into the budget as well which cheney/bush never did.

      • beeste

         Nope, FY2009 started on October 2008, and the budget had already been signed by GWB

        • William

           Obama signed it in March 2009 which seemed surprising since he said he was going to cut spending. But Pelosi ran the Congress so I don’t think he wanted to upset her spending plans.

          • beeste

             Obama signed the stimulus in March 2009… it had more to do with an Oh s… moment when the numbers were in on Q4 2008 GDP… -9%.  That’s Great Depression-like numbers, nothing much since.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        You “think” a lot of things, bub.

  • Roy-in-Boise

    At some point people need to realize that the ebbs and flows of the economy are driven more by the business cycle than the white house. 
    A second point which seems to have been lost is that congress not the executive has the “power of the purse.” If folks want to complain about deficits than blame the people who vote for the deficits like the GOP house elected in 2010.

    • abdunk

      business cycle is not what brought about this recession/depression.  a bought congress, repubs, and dems crafting legistlation to relax regulations on wall street coupled with funding 2 wars without tax increases to pay for them has a great deal to do with what ruined this economy. 

      • Steve__T

         So true, so true, so unfortunate for America.

    • Steve__T

       Why do you think the Dems and Reps voted the way they did? MONEY.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Obama also did not speak of the damage to our economy that could transpire if we get more provocative towards China.  He said Romney was supporting a company that is creating surveillance equipment the Chinese use on their own people, and next thing you know he’s talking about exactly what investments are  in OBAMA’s pension plan.  Apparently he knows Obama’s, but his own are in a blind trust.  Also blind, his taxes.  Oh, well. What about China, our trading partner, our banker, all that?  Oh, we’ll “label them currency manipulators,” on day one.  But Obama said he’s already gotten the currency to move in a helpful direction, and apparently without intentionally making them “lose face.”  Apparently only Americans are good at losing face.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PTZXETR5C6LKSGUTE7RIXRDSJU Andy

    Can we please dispatch the myth of the super majority Obama had?  In the senate, it lasted six weeks between the swearing in of Al Franken and the death of Ted Kennedy.

    • John_in_Amherst

      Romney likes to tout his ability to “work across the aisle”, as
      evidenced by his tenure as governor of MA.  In fact, his MO in MA was to
      issue over 800 vetoes that were overridden by the Democratic majority
      in the state legislature.  His one bipartisan effort, Romneycare, he now
      vilifies.  Why has no one asked Romney how he would deal with a
      congress that votes in lockstep against every program and nominee he
      puts forward?

      • Steve__T

         He has big money behind him they will see it his way $$$ Uh hows that campaign fund of yours doing? Need some help?

  • taylorhutchison

    Carl from Nashville is awesome. He calls in a lot and is always succinct and makes great points. Right on, Carl!

  • Yar

    ROMNEY: Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs.I guess Government workers don’t buy goods or services.  I guess that Medicaid and Medicare don’t boost the healthcare economy in states.
    Every federal dollar spent is a real job for someone!

    • Duras

      Republicans drive me nuts with that claim.  Public employment is around 15% of the economy, which is one of the lowest levels it has ever been.  The jobs bill would have added 1.4 million or so actual jobs, and these jobs would have boosted demand in the private markets, creating a solid multiplier effect. 

      To say, we can’t have public employment at 20% of the economy is (1) ahistorical, (2) ideologically puritanical, and (3) anti-jobs, anti-labor, etc.

    • Steve__T

       Yeah the government doesn’t create jobs but has a hell of a lot of them, from grounds keepers and janitors secretary’s the list is to long but you get my opinion   BS

  • http://openid.aol.com/ritchdume Richard Dumneu

    For me, whether the president wins a debate or not is not as important as the positons that Mitt Romney espouses through out this campaign. If anyone has observed, Mitt Romney keeps shifting and tweaking his positions on issues daily and at any least opportunity. This behavior is what I think is most important for voters to identify. A person of that caliber is not worthy to be president, since like a snake oil salesman, which he is, wil say anything and do likewise just so that he sell. This trait actually confirms the mindset of the business man that he is – thinks only of his profit margin. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

    This is what I thought was striking about Romney’s answers.  He kept on saying “I know how to do this…” but without any specifics.  It just came across as a bit arrogant and/or condescending.  I came across 10 instances in the transcript:

    I know what it takes to get this economy going

    I know what it takes to create good jobs again

    I know what it takes to make sure that you have the kind of
    opportunity you deserve.

    I know what it takes to bring them back

    I know how to make that happen.

    I know why jobs come and why they go.

    I know what it takes to balance budgets.

    I know what it takes to make an economy work.

    I know how to make that happen.

    I know what it takes to get this to happen,

    • Brandstad

      Look at his reccord and you will be convinced that he fulfills on his commitments.

      Obama on the otherhand has what in his record that makes you confident that he will do better?

      • jefe68

        OK lets do that. Mitt Romney’s record:
        On the campaign trail in 2002, Romney promised a jobs creation program “second to none in the history of the state,” pledging to use his corporate connections to lure chief executives across America to Massachusetts.

        The results fell far short of the promise. During Romney’s four years in office, the state added a net 31,000 jobs, a growth rate of less than 1 percent compared to 5 percent nationally during the same period. State unemployment fell to 4.7 percent from a peak of 6 percent, but
        remained above the US average, then 4.4 percent. Meanwhile, as the state recovery lagged other parts of the country, a net 233,000 people — 3.5 percent of the population — left the state, many seeking jobs elsewhere.

        http://www.boston.com/businessupdates/2012/09/05/governor-romney-faced-similar-economic-situation-obama-with-similar-results/S2cHk3JRGn0hHRnbEFuh2M/story.html

        Mitt Romney was often touted as someone who was more interested in forwarding his presidential ambitions than being governor. This is a critique from former Republican governors. 

        I also would add that Mitt Romney needed a Federal bailout “fix” the Olympics in Salt Lake City.
        If it was not for that bailout he would have failed.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         I’ve been disappointed with Obama,  sure enough.  But having all three branches of government in control of republicans, with their extremists running the agenda, is unsettling to me.  We’ve seen what the bull-dozer approach can  do:  100,000 Iraq civilians  dead for a war that we were lied into.  That should give us — if we care anything about other people — serious reason to pause.

    • Steve__T

       Yeah I keep hollering at the screen DON’T TELL ME WHAT YOU KNOW TELL ME WHAT YOUR GOING TO DO, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DO IT.

      They both left me with a feeling that America is screwed.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         Yes, I think there is arrogance in both Obama and Romney.  Obama was arrogant to blow off the 1st debate.  But Romney — with his ever shifting positions — from right-center to Tea Party — comes across (to me) more as an arrogant opportunist who will do or say anything to get in the Oval Office.

        Abortion, pro, not anti.

        He’s called half the country moochers, when in a private setting with his peers. Now he’s for 100%

        He was for Obamacare in his own words before he went extreme and will repeal it.

        I’m disappointed in Obama, but to have this shape-shifter, who keeps important details to himself (sort of “I know better than you”) and would give control, possibly, of all 3 brances to one party, is a frightening prospect. 

  • Vandermeer

    The
    President WON the debate because he had substantive answers. I’m tired
    of over analyzing all the stylization of the debaters. Mitt doesn’t have
    a real plan for the economy or healthcare. He continued with vagaries
    in all his answers. I am very tired of Romney taking credit for balancing the MA budget when he was governor… that is the MA law… You HAVE to balance the budget according to the Commonwealth’s laws. Do people know that? And Romney cut funds to towns and cities to balance that budget and that hurt schools. Romney deserves no credit for how good MA schools are. Parents, teachers and students are deserving of the credit. The President took a country in free fall from the
    abuses of Wall Street and now employment is back up, the Stock Market is up, and housing starts
    are up. Also, we, through our President, are more respected around the
    world.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    “It’s getting a bit old with people” blaming the state of the economy on GW Bush.

    Economists have talked about the historic collapse of 2008, and have revised the GDP to incredibly bad numbers, even worse than we thought then back when the sky was falling. Pollsters show that people still blame G. Bush for the ditch the economy was in.

    Can Ruth Marcus have gone the last four years without being subjected either of these things? Perhaps she should do less “intuiting”.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    Matthew Arnold said that Greek philosophy was sweetness and light, while that of the Jews was fire and strength.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/QMDZ3LH5U2B4GAT7J2HS4TCP6E Jim

    Ruth mentioned the voters are running thin on obama’s policy…?

    We are talking about an economic meltdown that is worse than the 1929 crash! do you think you can return an economic catastrophe in 4 years??!!!

    i don’t think so. if some american voters do not have patience… then they should ask themselves why they have patience to give GW 4 more years when he did NOTHING in his first 4 years except giving unnecessary tax breaks and built a real estate bubble that nearly bring this country to its knees.

    • MrNutso

      I seem to recall something about some wars as well.

      • Steve__T

         Didn’t you think it was odd nobody asked about that elephant not a word about the wars, not even the new one were about to start?

    • Vandermeer

       Jim, I agree… the real estate bubble built by unethical banking almost took our country down. We are lucky that we are not in a depression right now. Instead the Stock Market is almost back to pre-recession heights, employment continues to improve and today’s news mentions how housing starts and real estate sales are UP!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1044564149 Geoff Kornfeld

    Why is no one talking about the fact that Green Party candidate  Jill Stein was arrested last night at the debate last night?
    http://www.examiner.com/article/green-party-candidate-stein-arrested-at-debate

  • Don_B1

    Ruth Marcus needs to learn about macroeconomics!

    Then she could appreciate how the stimulus was not big enough, though it was better crafted than most people understand. She could read Michael Grunwald’s book, “The New New Deal.”

    Then she could work on helping the American people understand the depth of this Great Recession and what is now the Lesser Depression.

    But she misses the true argument that the whole pivot to the deficit was a feint by the Republicans to prevent enough stimulus passing to get a strong recovery. That is hard for Obama to make directly because he would be attacked for “whining.” Of course, the Republicans regularly whine and get away with it.

    • jefe68

      It is interesting how the Republicans do that all the time.
      It was the GOP in the house that slashed the budget for security at embassy’s all over the world, which is one small factoid that seems to be left out of their meme.

      Funny how this kind of mindset is reflected in the right wing commentators here.

      • Steve__T

         All most reminds me of the Wizard of OZ line
        “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”

  • catherine14

    Can someone speak to Romney’s repeated response to the tax question when he kept saying that the wealthiest will “continue to pay 60% of the tax revenue”?  I felt that this was a wily answer. 

    • abdunk

      he likes to use that number because it sounds like they pay alot, but that would be becuase they have a lot.  the rate is what is important.  romneys is embarrasingly low, lower than most if not all middle class americans.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/QMDZ3LH5U2B4GAT7J2HS4TCP6E Jim

    there is no way we can simply ignore blaming GW for what happened in 2008… this country nearly went down to its knees.

    Obama did everything he can to prevent another depression. that is not an easy feat.

  • Ellen Dibble

    The Libya attack — whatever the president said the next day in the Rose Garden — when Romney had accused him of going to Las Vegas to a fundraiser, and then to  Chicago for a fundraiser, without much deference to the dead — Obama said he was there to meet the bodies coming home.  Anyway, I knew from the Rose Garden that it was a terrorist attack.  When on Sunday Susan Rice was talking about the protest turning violent, I thought, surely they’ve listened to what the Americans had to say who survived the attack, and there were quite a few.  So maybe there was a protest.  But even at the height of the exasperation in Egypt last spring, there was nothing remotely like the Benghazi attack.  There was terrorism in it, and we all knew, as with bin Laden, that perpetrators would be found and called to account.  Sometimes it’s better to get that done in the shadows, so to draw attention AWAY from that focus.  So that’s how I read it.

  • Thinkin5

    It took Romney just a few hours to blunder and say that the President of the U.S. was supporting terrorists! What a desperate man!
    “But in the hours after the death of the first U.S. ambassador killed in
    decades, Mitt Romney — panicked as his poll numbers have slipped —
    punched hard against the president, unleashing an unwise, inaccurate and
    unpresidential attack on the Obama administration.
    No wonder a wide array of Republican foreign policy experts rose to condemn Romney’s comments, including the longtime speechwriter and senior aide to Sen. John McCain, Mark Salter, who wrote: “to condemn (Obama) for policies they claim helped precipitate the attacks is as tortured in its reasoning as it is unseemly in its timing.”

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    The smoke is still in the air and the government should declare “We know everything there is to know about the attack on the Consulate in Benghazi even though we don’t know much of anything yet.”

    Yeah, makes sense to me.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Patrick-Dwyer-Jr/100002088204784 James Patrick Dwyer Jr.

    The Pres found his backbone! About time.

  • MatthewNashville

    This idea of either of them representing the office by their body language is ridiculous.  President Obama took the high road on the 1st debate and was hammered for it, I’m glad he fought back last night. Dammed if you do, dammed if you don’t.

  • http://www.facebook.com/valerie.langdon.3 Valerie Langdon

    After listening to the debate on VPR last night, I was finally able to summarize my feelings about these two candidates this way:  If the American economy is a bus and all the people are trying to get on,  Romney would arrange to have all the rich people stay on the bus and throw those that don’t fit under the bus.  Pres. Obama would find another bus for the regular American people.

  • MrNutso

    Amen caller!  I know mine has done tremendously in the “last 4 years” after 8 years of stagnation.  I plan to move my account to a money market shortly before the election on the chance that Romney wins and the stock market tanks again.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PWUMXXLDZABDG2N57FEG3CR2HM A.F.G

    How can Obama hatch a definitive economic plan, if, God help us, he’s stuck with the same congressional obstructionism?    

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       I’m hoping that with no re-election to face, he can be more feisty and combative with these do-nothings.

  • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

    So they both have pensions.  Good for them.  What about all the Americans who don’t have pensions?  Neither said anything about what he would do for working class Americans.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       I think Romney (47% of Americans are moochers) and Obama (I want everyone to have a chance) have made their positions known…

      • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

         You believe that?  I have some land east of Daytona, FL that you may be interested in.  I’ll sell it to you at a discount.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

          Yes, I take Mr. Romney’s own statement as an indication of his beliefs.  That, among his wealthy peers, without media, he thinks half of Americans are moochers.  Mr. Camp.. that is A LOT OF AMERICANS.. about 150 million. 

          These are Romney’s own unfiltered words, not buffed up by speech writers.

          Why wouldn’t I take this as Romney’s actual view?  Why has he been saying NOW — in public campaign speeches — that he’s for 100%?

          That wasn’t a gaffe. A gaffe doesn’t go on across sentences.  It was an arrogant view of America.

          • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

             But you believe that Obama was telling the truth?  Good luck being a true believer.

            By the way, I’m not a Romney supporter.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             Okay, then, what are you FOR? 

          • Steve__T

             If Greg Camp is like me none of the above, that have been shoved down our throats. I’m for truth and I haven’t heard much of that from either.

          • http://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/ Greg Camp

             The Libertarian Party, with a willingness to work with the Greens.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Romney’s “Blind Trust”

    He may not know exactly what is in it but his tax rate tells us that he is directing it toward heavily tax advantaged investments, not start up companies that create jobs.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/PTZXETR5C6LKSGUTE7RIXRDSJU Andy

       Don’t forget his dismissal of blind trusts in his debate with Ted Kennedy.

    • MrNutso

      And who did he hire to manage the trust?  The guy who would stick it in a money market account in a bank, or the guy who will do everything he can to maximize returns that i’m sure Romney knows about as well.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

         The manager is his best friend.

        No. Not snark. Truth.

      • OnPointComments

        Do you believe their is anyone who places their investments in a blind trust who doesn’t look for the investment manager who will maximize returns?

  • MrNutso

    Finally the “Binder Full of Women!”

    http://bindersfullofwomen.com/

  • kmhbike

    I’m shocked that so many people think that Romney will be better for the economy.  All the growth, jobs and housing numbers are getting better.  The stock market is up.  I can’t believe that people expected the president to fix everything in less than 4 years after it took Bush 8 years to destroy the US economy and the world economy!

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      The economy is not getting better.  Every Q over Q the growth has been slowing.  The latest quarterly growth was an anemic 1.25% growth.

      The jobs market is not improving.  The U-6 is stuck at a horrible 15%.  The only reason the last month went down to 7.8% is people leaving the workforce and people doing low wage part time jobs.

      We still have 23M people unemployed or underemployed.

      You may like Mr. Obama and his programs but don’t delude yourself that this is a good economy or things are getting significantly better.
       

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

         I agree. It’s bad. The world is going to be in a deflation for a long, long time.

        But Romney will destroy the Middle Class.

        That’s what he’s made his money off of for 45 years.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Romney was clearer than I’ve heard him about the deductions he’ll preserve for the middle class.  He spoke of allowing a limit — I think it is $25,000 — and you can use that for charitable deductions or for mortgage, he said, fill up your basket.   I’m thinking what about the health insurance deduction, which I think Obamacare gets rid of.  What about the Social Security (FICA) deduction?  I mean, specifics can mean the difference between — medicine, good food, adequate heat, air conditioning.  You know?

    • MrNutso

      The limit is BS, since deductions are already limited based on income and we have the alternative minimum tax.  I spend extra time every year doing my taxes, because I have calculate limitations on deductions and the AMT.

      • Ellen Dibble

        Ah, the AMT.  That relates to deductions…  I wish Romney would lay it out.  It matters a lot.  To people with extra money, money enough to save for that fiction we call retirement, it may not matter.  But for plenty of Americans, the fine print here matters.  And issues of a thousand dollars or so tax-wise are huge.  Maybe not for everyone, but for plenty.

    • jefe68

      That figure, $25,000 was made up. He does not have the figures because they will slash everything. From Pell grants to Medicaid. That you can bet on. 

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       He was pretty clear that he won’t raise taxes on the middle class. 

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

       Don’t believe this. Because it will be based on income.

      So the limit for the middle class will be much lower.

      Another thing, state taxes are deductible. Most Blue States have higher state taxes then Red States.

      So Blue State people will be hurt worse.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    I thought Romney hit a wall with his answer (OK, NON answer) to what he would do about illegal immigrants who are working in the USA. 

    • Ellen Dibble

      That’s the sort of thing that makes me think who can ever take his plans seriously?  Does he really think that several million people will see the light and self-deport?  To where?  Islandia?  The Cayman Islands?  The questioner should have had a followup.  It seems if you come to the USA with a million dollars and a PhD and an idea for an enterprise, then you are welcome.  No, I think both of them will take the price down a bit from that million dollars.  But Romney thinks in terms of people who have already made it.  American has improved itself by taking in people who have been totally crushed where they came from, actually.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         I thought his statement that the “illegals” will “make a choice” as to whether or not they want to stay.

        What the hell does that mean?  I can only mean that Romney policies will make their lives difficult so that they will rip up their lives and go elsewhere.

        Pretty cold, just as his assessment of 47% of us was terribly cold.

        • BHA_in_Vermont

          Given what we hear of the circumstances some of the illegals leave, I can’t imagine how Romney could make it so “uncomfortable” here that they want to go back for a “better life”.

          It isn’t like they come here because they are living a decent life but only make the equivalent of $40K in their home country and cross the border to make $60K.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    Romney: “I wanna make sure we get that for the record.”

    Schooled, fact-checked, by a CNN moderator, in the middle of the debate.

    Maybe Romney thought it was just another lie he could get away with.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Candy Crowley back tracked after the debate and said she was wrong and that Romney was correct on the bigger point.  It sure sounded like she regretted butting in.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         Yes, perhaps.  But Romney sort of stepped in it with his insistence on word-finding in a particular speech.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          Oh, I agree that he fumbled the opportunity in this debate but Mr. Obama has some explaining to do in the next debate and with the press over the next 20 days.

          He he is now on record that he knew this was a terrorist attack on day 2 — in the Rose Garden because he doubled down in the debate.

          He will now have to reconcile this with his administrations bizarre statements by Susan Rice and himself over the next 14 days.

          Either he was misleading last night OR misleading in numerous press events over the next 14 days.
           

        • Ellen Dibble

          I’m wondering if that was a “fact” produced by, say, Portmon, one of the debate partners.  A lot of the “facts” trotted out that Obama then handily shot down were probably ferreted out by people not campaigning and fund-raising and debate-preparing sort of 24/7.  And those “facts” get as far as sounding “attractive” (Romney’s idea of what he wants to make America, its laws vis-a-vis corporations) but don’t then get over the hurdle of a dead-on counterpunch from the President.  Biden might have mostly “raised the issue, the doubt” by an eyebrow or a wince, but Obama took aim and shot a number of them out of the water, even in the couple minutes he had.  This was magnificent.  Truly magnificent.  But I’m sorry for the “fact” generators on the Republican side who keep generating half-truths — about the Massachusetts record notably, though Obama apparently knows less than the commenters on this board do, in that case.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

          Yep.

          Too bad. Maybe if Romney didn’t try to make a jab into a roundhouse knockout for this particular right-wing propaganda point. That’s what happens when demagogues make a mistake.

  • Yar

    Why is flexibility in the workplace a gender issue?
    Don’t men deserve time to spend with their family as well?

  • Gary Trees

    The whole repetition of “Have you looked at your pension?” comes off as pedantic and immature. Not to mention completely ignorant to the fact that most Americans will never be the beneficiaries of a pension.  It’s rich white guy bullworting.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1522009575 Diane Chambers-Stewart

    Rather late in the debate I noticed that Romney seemed to be answering all of the women’s questions in the same weird kinda hushed whisper-like voice; but his answers to the mens questions were in a more normal, lower tone. Did anyone else notice this?! I’m not sure I can sit through the dvr recording again but I could not believe it was happening!!

  • TomK_in_Boston

    As a professional financial con man, romney’s job description includes being a good liar, and he is. What struck me last night is his rudeness and arrogance. That is no doubt from being an oligarch who is not used to being questioned, even by a President. He sounds just like a guy telling you that you’re fired, and it’s not his problem. Don’t you want to just slap him?

    It still drives me crazy that we’re discussing cutting taxes at all. With taxes at the top at historic lows and income at the top at historic highs, why is this on the agenda?  Don’t get me wrong, I know the answer – the real righty agenda is grabbing even more for the rich – but it makes no sense for the USA.

    I would have liked to hear more about the “six studies” that support Lord R’s tax cut plan. Y’know, where the “6″ include blog posts and real studies that don’t really support the “plan”, or simply throw in some voodoo and say no problem, the economy will be so stimulated it will make up the $8 trillion or so. It was good when BHO told Lord R that as an investor he would not swallow that.

    It was pathetic when Lord R tried to suggest that having some chinese stocks in a fund was equivalent to actually owning and promoting a company that is a “pioneer of offshoring”. But, he is a fine liar.

    Geez, couldn’t the right find a more honorable financial con man, if they have to have one? Bernie Madoff isn’t doing anything and he’s more honest.

  • Ellen Dibble

    Obama said that the jobs Romney will create will be in India, China, and so on.  Something about the way the corporate incentives would be.  I thought that was a shared point of view. Corporate misbehavior in the Cayman Islands and outsourcing will have to stop.  

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/DX3XE4RGFCXAGFIKQ5JGCED2OQ Qing

    About Romney’s tax cut — no tax on investment gain, dividend and interest? — So Romney will pay 0% tax instead of 14% that he is paying now?  How much does an average income family’s income depends on investment gain? If this is the tax relief for the middle class not the rich, if this mean everyone, rich or poor will pay the same rate, you got be kidding me!  This means if you work, you pay tax, if you have plenty money already, just watch your money grow, and pay no tax.  Why didn’t the president even catch this in his debate?

    • OnPointComments

      Romney’s plan for the 0% tax rate on investment income applies to couples with income less than $200,000.

      • Ray in VT

        What about for those over $200k?

    • TomK_in_Boston

      The absurdity of cutting taxes at the top when they are already so low is never mentioned. I don’t understand why. Tax cuts should be on the agenda in a high-tax environment, not in an ultra-low tax environment.

  • John_in_Amherst

    Romney likes to tout his ability to “work across the aisle”, as evidenced by his tenure as governor of MA.  In fact, his MO in MA was to issue over 800 vetoes that were overridden by the Democratic majority in the state legislature.  His one bipartisan effort, Romneycare, he now vilifies.  Why has no one asked Romney how he would deal with a congress that votes in lockstep against every program and nominee he puts forward?

    • Ellen Dibble

      We’d still have a wingnut in the oval office, it seems to me.  The fact we held together as well as we did under Bush II says something for the good old USA.  First our morals were being undercut, by our waterboarding and abuses of Islamic prisoners in general, and then by witchhunting among American Muslims, it seems to me.  Then our budget and then our economy was distorted and stretched without any reference to reality, as if the rules and regulations were there to be overlooked.  That was the new meaning of “oversight,” to overlook.  I’m sure Republicans could find a viable candidate, but not with their current modus operandi.  Or should I say, SCOTUS’s modus operandi.  Time to turn some pages, Reds.  Please!

  • shmarcus

    Mitt Romney is blatantly lying about his record in MA. He did not reach out to increase the number on women in high level positions, he was pressured to do so by women’s groups. In fact the number of women in high level positions decreased by 27% when he was gov. Also, his relationship with democrats is not at all what he states.  He vetoed more legislation than any past gov. and many dems complained that he never took the time to connect with them. Finally he inherited a state the had made education a priority.  All he dis was get out of the way.

    • MrNutso

      And over 700 vetoes were overridden.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Seven hundred? Wow.

        I wasn’t paying attention then, as I’m not in Mass, but that’s a shocking number.

        Was it really that much of a loggerhead between the Gov and Beacon Hill?

        And what do you consider the one big thing that the Dem lege overrode which Romney is trying to take credit for happening on his watch?

        • MrNutso

          I live in PA so I don’t know the specifics.  What I do know is that Romney claims he’s bipartisan by working with a democratic legislature in MA.  The numbers say something different.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Well, a couple of trustable folks have said numbers of overrides in the high-three digit range here today, and it seems to check out.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             NPR, which has to walk on eggshells has reported the following about Romney vetoes:

            1. Romney actually bragged about taking on his Legislature: “I like vetoes;
            I vetoed hundreds of spending appropriations as governor,” he said.

            2. Romney issued some 800 vetoes, and the Legislature overrode nearly all of them, sometimes unanimously.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Thank you.

            I woulda thought “work with” meant, y’know, “work with”.

            Maybe it’s an offshoot of being MittRomneyCEO, going long stretches without being told “No” by anybody. Sorta gets those “work with” muscles out of practice.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             This is what we get when a true elite-of-the-elite, with very little contact with the hoi polloi (save his shoe-shine boy), wants to be president.  Especially if that person will say a lot of different things to people to get elected.

        • BHA_in_Vermont

           Yeah, but if you only show the “executive summary” you get to hide the underlying facts.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Well we know his Lt. Gov and chief of staff are both women.

      Why did he get an award for diversity as he mentioned in the debate?  Were they in the tank too?

      And I disagree with your assessment of Romney’s eduction record.  It was quite activist and had quite a bit of resistance.

      -Expansion of Charter schools
      -MCAS expanded and a graduation requirement
      -Adams scholarship

  • Rex Henry

    Obama should just run commercials of Mitch McConnell’s comment on making sure Obama is a one term president/we are working for ourselves, not the people.

    • Duras

      There’s tap of Romney saying “Obama’s failed policies” before they took effect.  It is obvious that republicans got together and figured out their political strategy and wordings regardless of the way Obama would govern.

      Complete obstructionism and unwillingness to agree to policy even when the republicans use to back certain ideas and policy.

      Republicans say they didn’t compromise their principles, but when they bash Obama for backing the same policy Reagan pushed for and passed during the 80s, it is obvious republicans have no principles to compromise.  They won’t compromise political footing, and that is it.

  • MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

    House T-party Republicans = American Taliban… economic terrorists.

    • OnPointComments

      The Democratic Party delights in holding the country hostage, for ransom, unless they are given more money.  Democrats are perfectly willing to push the country over the fiscal cliff if they aren’t paid their tribute in the form of higher taxes.

  • MatthewNashville

    does Brook pay for her own insurance or does it come out of her paycheck?
     

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       And the whole employee-provided insurance is becoming more elitist, as companies aim to cut costs. 

      Why do we have this uneven,  unfair system?  Because of a wage-freeze policy back in the Truman era, where employers offered fringes to get around the wage freeze.  Back then, HC was not so crazily expensive.  Now that approach is failing more and more.

      • cft_in_Canada

        Health care “insurance” is insurance. Like all insurance, it is best if you don’t need it, but great to have if you do. If you don’t use it, your nieghbours and family might. It is insurance for personal tragedy and responsible support of society, not Socialism.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

           Our system is extremely expensive.  It only takes a day of hospital care to run up a 10,000 $ bill.  

          I would agree with you if our system wasn’t exorbitantly expensive.  But people go bankrupt as a result of hospital bills and people die because they cannot afford insurance.

      • BHA_in_Vermont

         And Romney thinks the unemployed should borrow money from their parents to start a business.

        There are a few problems with that:

        1) Not everyone has a “great idea” for a viable business, nor is everyone equipped to run a company. It isn’t just “build something in your shop and sell it”.
        2) Not everyone has parents with cash they can afford to lose if your new business goes bust, as more do than don’t in the first year.
        3) It is really hard to afford health insurance when you have the buying power of ONE. The big groups get big breaks, the little people pay the max.
        4) Self employed people pay both the employer and employee share of SS, medicare, medicaid.

  • toc1234

    umm, Obama had the house and senate for his first 2yrs…  and he dithered…

    • MrNutso

      For only 2 months out of 24 did democrats have 60 = the new 51 votes in the Senate.

      • toc1234

        when people say a party controls the Senate, it means they have 51+, not that they have a 60+… 

        • Ray in VT

          True, but if you want to be able to avoid the filibuster, which has been heavily used over the past several years, then you do need 60 votes to end debate.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

           That’s certainly not the POV of Senator Mitch McConnell.

        • BHA_in_Vermont

           With 51 you need to work with the other side. With 60 you can say “screw you and your followers”.

          There IS a difference.

          GWB had a Republican House for his first 6 years and a Republican Senate for years 2-6.  Gee, I wonder how he managed to get his disastrous policies enacted.

          Obama had a super majority in the Senate for only the 67 days that the Senate was in session September 24, 2009 through February 4, 2010 and never had a super majority in the House.

          You can’t overcome a “one term President” policy without a super majority. Bush didn’t need one. There was no “Block everything until you are out of office” call by the Democrats. 

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/PTZXETR5C6LKSGUTE7RIXRDSJU Andy

    Too bad Obama didn’t take the opportunity to point out the number of Bush’s foreign policy ‘experts’ who on his team.
     

  • Ellen Dibble

    And is Romney enough without daylight between him and Netanyahu that he can actually effectuate the stoppage of settlements in the West Bank?  Foreign policy — persuading the jihadis that the West is not dead set on destroying Islam — would be vastly vastly easier if Israel could achieve that one feat.  It’s like the appendix of the Middle East, and it’s infected. Can he do that?  Apparently Obama can not — or could not.  He tried.  I heard that.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       The only way a president of the USA can stop the illegal settlements in the West Bank is to bring out the tough love. Israel either starts adhering to UN resolutions or the torrent of USA cash stops.

      We put sanctions on many countries to “entice” (or force if you like) them to toe the “International Citizen” line. Why not Israel?

  • MatthewNashville

    Those of us who are self-employed and cut a check every month for overpriced healthcare and rarely use it would like to see the reform from the Affordable Healthcare act be allowed to take place.

  • BHA_in_Vermont

    Re: Brooke the health care caller. 

    I’m glad she apparently has enough money that she can pay for her health care, that isn’t the case for a lot of people. What she apparently doesn’t understand is the the private insurance companies are limiting her health care so they can maximize profits for their investors and the compensation for their executives.

    • Rex Henry

      and she’s not paying for those ER visits by the previously uninsured

  • lorettasig

    To Caller Brooke
    You want the American people to make decisions about their own healthcare.  That’s fine.  The problem is the people who make no decision.  The rest of us end up paying for them.  People who opt out and then need emergency service  -  We pay for them.  

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/BQCXJB4TE7L7QIIG7NKDZ5BNJQ JoeJ

    The lady who called in stating that “let people make their choices on healthcare”. She doesn’t understand that there are many people who have only one choice, which means “no care”. Die at your own merit. Easy for her to say until she is one of the people who have no choice. Thanks to people like this lady who cares for nobody.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      I don’t know about you, but it comes across as even more isolated than that to me, and I haven’t been w/o health insurance for dozens of years.

      She said that in October. This is the month where tens of millions of middle-class American families find out how their HR department did at the “healthcare roulette” casino for the upcoming year.

      All that fine print, hoping one’s GP and specialists are in network, getting the news that there’s some more money out of pocket, a check through the spec of what procedures and drugs have changed. It’s an annual, grim ritual.

      And she’s got it in her head that “the government” is gonna ruin her perfect system.

  • Ellen Dibble

    I think it will be a judgment on the American people if we fall for the Super Offer proposed by the Republicans, and some will get horrendously rich, and do we envy them?  In my opinion, that kind of power — “corrupts absolutely,” as they say — probably functions as an addiction and like alcoholism functions as a brake upon the evolution of the human personality.  There will be emotional pigeons at the helm.  I know I overstate, but that seems to be the objective.  One worships them.  I’m thinking of North Korea.  It is the exception not the rule that such plutocracies create humane and wise leaders.  What did Jesus say?  It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven?  Hmm.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       I think that the “Judgement on American people” fell when GWB got a second term.

      “fool me once…..”

  • manganbr

    Where was the climate/environment in any of these debates so far? Since a narrow majority of Americans believe human caused warming is a reality, wouldn’t it be advantageous to put Romney on the spot? Unlikely to come up in foreign policy debate I imagine. 

    • Ellen Dibble

      That, and the fiscal cliff.  I suspect that by the time climate becomes front and center globally, the chief offenders will be China and India.  Obama says he doesn’t want the new technologies of safe energy to be developed there. That’s sort of the next big opportunity for huge profits.  But if they don’t develop safe, cheap energy technologies real fast, we’ll be taking the high moral ground and blaming the developing nations for rising tides (not lifting all boats but drowning New York City and Polyponesia).  It is an international issue, and the campaign funding sorts are probably not rooted in wind and solar and wave and geothermal.  If you were a windmill tycoon, whose campaign would you give to?  Maybe don’t unleash them till after the campaign?  Romney says corporate taxes are 15% in Canada and 35% in the US, something like that, and I believe some of those rather rigorous and healthy enterprises do therefore root themselves in Canada.  But maybe some of the benefits to “old energy” could be transferred to them?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

    Regarding health care… it is bankrupting us.  In the 1960′s, it consumed 5% of our GDP.  Now it is consuming 17% of our GDP.  This is a bottom-line argument for fixing this broken, expensive system. 

    We pay the most among industrialized countries, but do NOT have the best outcomes.

    Pharmaceuticals benefit from government-sponsored research on their drugs, but they charge U.S. citizens THE MOST, world wide, for our medications.  Why is that? 

    The whole notion of employee paid health care is an odd artifact from the Truman era, resulting from wage freezes.  Is there any other country with this unstable and uneven way of providing health care?

    Our health care system is killing us. And what Obama did was the most lame, republican-endorsed plan.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       I agree that IF you want national health care, then Obamacare is probably the worst possible implementation.

      And it is clear now that it won’t meet the promises made:
      - Not deficit neutral — not even close
      - You will be able to keep your insurance — employers are starting to shed plans
      - It is starting to kill jobs
      - It is not lowering health care costs but increasing them
      - there is much more to come

      And here is the killer.  The latest estimate is 30M Americans will still be uninsured under Obamacare in 2023.  So why are we doing Obamacare?  At a cost of $2.3T?

      The estimate for the number of Americans that have pre-existing conditions is 1.6M.  Certainly we could devise a less intrusive and less costly system to resolve the 1.6M problem.

      • Steve__T

         Only if you stop the insurance company’s from raising prices astronomically and drug company’s   from gouging us and Dr’s and hospitals raising prices to the point of unbelievability.

        There should be no such thing as a Cadillac plan. Medical care should the same for everyone not better for some with more money.

        • BHA_in_Vermont

           I disagree. We SHOULD have a good, comprehensive single payer plan that covers everyone, rich or poor, employed or not, as does every other civilized country in the world.

          BUT if you are rich like Romney and could burn $20 bills continuously and never run out of money, I see no reason you shouldn’t be able to buy additional coverage. Same as Medicare supplemental plans.

          • Steve__T

             Ok if you can afford a room on the upper floor and want to pay for it fine, but when it comes to what you receive as care their should be no difference.
            You should not have to lay on a gurney in great pain waiting for help while someone comes in with a minor injury gets precedents over you. Because they have that caddy plan. Yes it happens.

          • BHA_in_Vermont

             I can’t imagine anyone would disagree with that. Sad to know that it does happen.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

           I don’t think you can get rid of “Cadillac plans”.  The very rich will always get what they want, period.  And I guess that’s okay. 

          But this notion that we all are responsible for our healthcare equally is nonsense. 

          Many more well-off work for companies that provide health care and those people never really see the costs. 

          Many less well-off have either poorer plans or none at all.  So many are at the mercy of this terribly unfair system where the richer get better and the poorer get the ER.

          I really dislike people who say they worked hard and got their own health care and that all others should too.  It is arrogant and uncaring.  I think the “uncaring” aspect is a disease in our country.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Agreed on the main.

            The key about “Cadillac plans” is the notion of “on top of”. Even in England, there are private companies who sell additional medical goods and services to those who would buy them.

            But nobody there is whining about “going Galt” on it, are they? The American uberlords have it stuck in their craw that the hoi polloi are just draining everything, and the rich can get along without the latter very well.

            Maybe it’s because England is a physically smaller place with less separation, where a speech professor can still run into a Cockney guttersnipe selling flowers outside Covent Garden? Who knows?

            (For some reason I don’t trust Republicans, conserva-Dems, or our mainstream media on the subject.)

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             Yeah.  The media really doesn’t cover health care.  There are very few investigative reports or panels about it.  It is a stunning lack of professionalism.

            Health costs are bankrupting us and making U.S. business uncompetitive.  So said the former CEO of GM, repeatedly.

            Lazy, lazy, lazy.  To our peril.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         But look what happened… the Republicans, without exception, attack Obama for doing something that they used to be for!  This system was floated by Republicans (in addition to Romneycare) way before Obama apporpriated it.  So it was the most tepid thing Obama could do, probably.

        Cost control is the biggest problem.  When I was a kid in teh 1960′s, HC consumed 5% of our GDP.  Now it consumes 17%.  HC is a big player in bankrupting our country.  That graph of increasing cost is a straight line.  Without some efforts at cost control (Obamacare), we are sunk.

        No other (modernized) country pays as much and no other (modernized) country leaves so many without care.

        We are whistling past our metaphorical grave if we do nothing.  And the Republicans want nothing.  Profit over health.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          I agree that something has to give.

          I am disappointed that Charlie Baker didn’t win as Governor because he knows exactly why health care costs are high and had some really good reform ideas to bring costs down.

      • Thinkin5

         The French have a great healthcare system. We should copy theirs. Just get over the “socialist” label and do what works. American business will save big time too!

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          I could make a bunch of French jokes but I just read they are about to ban homework in France for all schoolchildren.

          I’ve never heard anyone put the French system on a pedestal before but I’ll keep my eye out.

          • Thinkin5

            My house guest, who is British, and has lived in France and Australia, was telling me yesterday that the French healthcare is top quality and well run. It’s been ranked top in the world. From Business Insider:
            Like the American system, the French system prides itself on choice. “The vast majority of ambulatory care physicians in France are in private practice and patients enjoy extraordinary freedom of choice among them. Virtually all primary care providers and specialists participate in the nation’s public health insurance system, Sécurité Sociale”, Dutton writes. Notably, France also has the largest private hospital system in Europe.

            This system, whether its socialized or not, is (at worst) fairly successful. Last year a Deloitte poll found that 55% of French respondents believed their system was the best in the world. Contrast that with a March 2012 Gallup poll which found that 81% of US respondents had a great deal or a “fair amount of worry about the availability and affordability of healthcare.” That’s probably a pretty unsuccessful health care system, and remember — in 2010 the US spent 17.4% of its GDP on healthcare, while France spent around 11.8%.

            Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/french-healthcare-system-2012-7#ixzz29ZVSNTS7

          • abdunk

            france england luxembourg and many others, national geographic  graph http://thesocietypages.org/graphicsociology/2011/04/26/cost-of-health-care-by-country-national-geographic/ 

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Tangent: I’ve worked in a hospital. Like “golf pants” or “used car salesman sports jacket”, I consider “hospital food” a stereotype which no longer reflects reality.

            But part of me is very interested to know if French hospital food is superior to American hospital food.

        • TomK_in_Boston

          Yep – france, germany, switzerland all are good.

          It’s funny how all the ideologues point to the horrors of the national systems. Based on that you’d expect the citizens to be dropping like flies, but they all live longer than us! That’s the ultimate test, isn’t it?

          It’s also funny how the righties scream so much about the deficit, and then cover their eyes and ears when they hear about systems that produce longer lives at half the cost.

    • TomK_in_Boston

      We pay the most and have some of the worst outcomes. And, we have the only system run by the corporations. Could this be coincidence?

      The ACA is a baby step in the right direction, but the only real solution is national health care. If we were serious instead of ideological and bought by corporations, we would be looking at the diverse national plans in the rest of the developed world and adopting the parts we liked best.

    • abdunk

      not just obama, but most dems as well, led by pelosi.  universal was off the table at the start.  it should have been our starting point, there is lots of data showing better measureable outcomes for less money in other countries.  both parties are hostage to big business, insurance being one.  it will never? happen, but business funded congressional campaings will never deliver anything good for the public at large, and they need to be prohibited from funding.  

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    “Did the president regain the upper hand” last night?

    Am I missing something, or did NPR totally miss the narrative of how candidate Obama (mid-October 2008) had the upper hand on his way to a ~7 point popular vote victory?

    Because candidate Romney (mid-October 2012) is getting favorable horserace treatment that a Democrat never, ever gets, no matter what kind of victory they go on to score.

    Tom, less Beltway Inbred memes, please.

  • beeste

     Thanks

  • http://www.facebook.com/laura.matson.39 Laura Matson

    Romney’s energy plan is to use more of this country’s resources.  The press/media has not informed the public of the environmental consequences of his plan.  Obamo’s plan seems more realistic for our future.

    • Duras

      It is pretty sad that Obama won’t be a stronger fighter for renewables - especially since the scientific community backs renewables while saying that we need to get off the more environmentally corrosive materials, and especially since renewables are paying off economically for Germany.

      How did the political reality become pro-drilling dispite the scientific community and the success of Germany…?

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         I think his stance has been calibrated due to the Solyndra bankruptcy.

        • Duras

          Yeah, I agree.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             I was referring to “the optics”.  The Republicans are masters at this. 

            Just think about the “Death Tax” crap, something 98% never have to worry about and there is a $5,000,000 exemption for.

            Or the whole Job Creators nonsense.

          • Duras

            I was referring to the optics as well. 

            Also, I will say that at least we went from “drill baby drill” to an encompassing energy plan.  But I doubt republicans are serious about renewables because it is not likely that they will push bills that increase competition for their oil company donors.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

           I really wish the American people understood that the U.S. Congress is responsible for the bankruptcy of Solyndra.

          The U.S. Congress knew in 2010 that China’s stated goal was to flood the world with cheap solar panels and drive every other company out of business and capture the market.

          And that’s what they proceeded to do with 30 billion dollars from the gov of China.

          The U.S. Congress could have slapped tariffs on their imports and saved our companies but as usual did nothing.

          THEY ARE TO BLAME.

          • Steve__T

             That’s free trade for you, free for them 0 for the US. Well except for that 30 billion that went Where?
            Would that be the bulge in the congresses pocket’s?

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/GYOKNNUKGSRTSA4RNFMUJRO5WE Greg

              The 30 billion went into China’s green energy.

            Not congress’ pockets.

            Just to clarify.

            Our companies going out of business was completely preventable but our DO NOTHING CONGRESS DID NOTHING.

          • StilllHere

            Yeah, I remember Obama and Geithner giving the Chinese hell about that with lots of press conferences and photo ops.  I just can’t remeber who it was going over to China begging them to buy all the US debt they possibly could!!! and saying nothing about yuan manipulation!!

        • BHA_in_Vermont

           And A123 just announced they will declare bankruptcy.

    • BHA_in_Vermont

       People also seem to forget that the “country’s resources” are not owned by the people, they are owned by FOR PROFIT corporations.

      Romney talked about making sure the Keystone XL pipeline gets built to bring Canadian oil to the refineries in the gulf. He chided the President for “blocking it”. He doesn’t say that it was planned to go through an environmentally sensitive area in Nebraska and the Republicans in congress pushed through a bill that set an “up or down” approval in 60 days a week after the governor of Nebraska signed 2 bills to fund a study of the alternate routes proposed by TransCanada. The President stated that TransCanada could put in a new application  when he rejected the application because there was not enough time to do a proper study. Romney needs to look at his own party to see why the pipeline was TEMPORARILY blocked.

      First: Oil from Alberta is not “the country’s resource” is it?
      Second: The price of oil is set globally, the price of gasoline is related to the price of oil. As President Obama mentioned: global demand is up. China and India are on a steep increase curve. The COMPANIES that own the resources will sell them to the highest bidder. The only way the USA can get as much oil it needs is to be the highest bidder for that quantity.

      The ONLY way the USA can be guaranteed “energy independent” is to have energy that can not be exported for profit.

      • Steve__T

         Hit the nail on the head. That’s why Venezuela has gas at 18 cent a gallon, they don’t play that game with their resources.

        I still don’t get how a foreign corp. buys American soil and the rights to the minerals. When an American does not have those same rights. Try drilling for oil or any mineral in your own back yard and you will lose it because you don’t have the rights to it. You have to purchase them and good luck with that.

    • Steve__T

      They are both going to destroy our National Park system to get that money out of the grounds and flatten more more mountains.
       Here’s a question for you How does a  foreign  company buy federal lands drill for oil and sell it to the highest bidder. And we get bubpkis and no lower prices?

  • mortimerpickle

    The true story behind the Binder of Women lies with MassGap, a bipartisan women’s group that compiled a binder of qualified women who could serve in MA government under Romney. He did not solicit for ‘eligible’ women, as he claims.

    • Thinkin5

       Romney is a legend in his own mind. He just goes around taking credit for everything, even Obama saving the auto industry! Narcissist of the highest order!

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         I think one has to be a bit narcissistic / arrogant to run for president.  But yes, Romney is worse. I just don’t see sincerity in him… just a running drive to be president… at all costs.  Not good.

      • William

         Just so he does not say he can lower the sea levels we are ok.

  • Steve__T

    No questions about the wars, war on drugs, SS Ad nauseam, no third party’s invited, just disappointing. Truly a joke on the American people.

    It angers me how some think it was some kind of game like they were watching football or baseball and that saddens me the most because our, future is at stake. Whoever you think won America lost.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/DX3XE4RGFCXAGFIKQ5JGCED2OQ Qing

    Can Romney really make China behave the way he wanted? Or is this another of his arrogant thought that he is the CEO of the world and everyone just follow his instruction?

    • MrNutso

      It’s grandstanding.  He can call China a currency manipulator, cross if off his “day one” list and move on to something else.

  • PastorKath

    On Point is such a great show,  Tom, you’re one of the best moderators ever!  I’m bothered about the direction the discussion has taken since the first debate.  I don’t believe my opinion is based simply on being an Obama supporter (which I am), but I never agreed that Obama did such a terrible job in the first debate.  I felt he had been trying to be more presidential, not getting into a brawl with Romney.  Now, maybe that was a mistake, because people felt he was lackluster, but on the basis of what he said versus what Romney said, I believe Obama by far won on substance.  So now the talk is mostly about style.  How did they appear?  How did they take each other on?  We complain about the way ads and photo ops tend to lead us to nothing more than sound bites.  Shouldn’t the debates be those times when we move beyond sound bites?  Yes, there is some fact-checking going on, but I still feel much of the analysis tends to focus on perception and style.  I’d like to know, for example, how well did the candidates answer the questions?  How much did they vear off in order to address their pet themes.  (I know, I know, they both did some of that last night.)

    • robin

      I have been wondering the same thing
      about myself for the past several weeks – am I just so biased (I don’t think
      so) or am I as pissed as the President seemed to have to be in the dog and pony
      show?   I find the whole modern debate
      thing juvenile and this new rancorous political system – it stimulates half-truths,
      testosterone fueled bickering and unnatural and especially now, impolite conduct.  I liked that our President did not engage in
      that in the first debate and loathed that he felt he had no choice to do so in
      this one.

      • notafeminista

        Oh now now…it worked fine when the Left could make fun of now former President Bush.   Have some consideration.

    • ttajtt

      yes, its polices, not MMA/WWF how does TV influence this violence?  english language is so highly versatile for smart/dumb talk.

  • Bruce94

    When Obama mentioned Big Bird, I expected Romney to respond with his campaign rejoinder that Obama is trying to “make a big election about small things.”  Here’s why Big Bird is NO small potatoes.

    Romney’s goal is to reduce total fed. spending to 20% of GDP while at the same time increasing defense spending by $2 trillion and implementing a $5 trillion tax cut providing most of the relief to the wealthy by dropping the top income tax rate from 35% to 28%, repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax, repealing the Estate Tax, and decreasing the corporate rate from 35% to 25%–a recipe that most independent analysts view as impossible to achieve without ultimately removing deductions, exemptions and credits benefiting primarily middle-class taxpayers (effectively raising their taxes) and/or exploding the national debt.

    It’s also worth noting that if we actually did reduce spending to 20% of GDP, the U.S. would then lag behind nearly every other advanced, industrialized country in the world in terms of public spending as a share of GDP–something we cannot afford to do if we hope to remain competitive in the global economy.  Moreover, we know what such irresponsible, supply-side tax cuts under Reagan and Bush produced:  inadequate revenues, record deficits, ballooning national debt and draconian cuts in discretionary spending for programs like Big Bird and Educational TV that benefit mainly the middle-class and working poor.  And even if discretionary spending were slashed to the bone, the trajectory of our mounting debt would remain unaltered because there is simply not enough savings in those line items to make a real difference.

    History teaches that the economic growth promised by “trickle-down” snake oil salesmen like Romney is never sufficient to offset the loss of revenue to the fed. govt., and invariably leads to a so-called “fiscal crisis” that cynical, right-wing opportunists use as a smoke-screen for advancing a radical agenda, which would be politically impossible without a manufactured “fiscal crisis.”  What is that radical agenda?  It’s shredding our social contract, gutting our social ins. and safety net programs, and reducing our investments in education, job training, infrastructure, research & innovation–all of which are vital to a thriving middle-class and to our competitiveness in a global economy.  And if we dig more deeply into history (e.g. the Reagan/Bush recoveries), we also find that without sufficient public investment, economic growth alone is no cure-all and can be accompanied by increasing income inequality and declining economic mobility.

    Think of Romney’s attack on Big Bird as a metaphor for what America loses if the oligarchs win.  For all his posturing about closing tax loopholes to prevent the wealthy’s tax burden from shrinking too much, Romney still leaves the biggest loophole intact, namely, the reduced rate paid on capital gains & carried interest that, for instance, allows the earnings of hedge-fund managers (and coincidentally much of Romney’s own income) to be taxed at the lower rate of 15%.  It’s estimated that if the earnings of the top 13 hedge-fund managers in 2010 had been taxed as ordinary income, the revenues generated would have been enough to pay for the salaries & benefits of approx. 300,000 teachers, which underscores another lesson from Big Bird.  Most of us probably agree that 300,000 teachers are of greater value to society than 13 hedge-fund managers, but not Mitt Romney (see his post-Wisconsin recall election stump speech).

    Finally, remember that in a futile effort to stem the red ink flowing from all of his ill-conceived tax cuts for the rich, Reagan froze the fed. min. wage and wound up slashing Food Stamps, Education, Medicaid, Aid to Cities & States, Public Housing and Sect. 8 Subsidies.  The Romney/Ryan budget would be MUCH WORSE because it would not only eviscerate these and similar programs, but also end Medicare and Social Security.  Reagan, in spite of his delusional supply-side thinking, preserved Medicare and SS because he was willing of compromise with his ideological  opponents to get things done unlike the intransigent Tea Party wing-nuts who hijacked the GOP and created Congressional gridlock in a transparent scheme to “make Obama a one-term president.”

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/6E5M4YACHDJ7AFL5D2XK3IMCL4 James P.

    Major changes to the tax code are coming no matter who is going to be the next president. The tax code is going to be radically revised as part of the negotiation over adverting the fiscal cliff. I trust the president to do a better job negotiating with a Republican congress than Mitt Romney.
    If Mitt Romney is elected and the Republicans controlled the House, I am not confident that the long term interests of the middle class will be protected.

    • TomK_in_Boston

      To say the least! If Lord R is in the WH you can be sure the oligarchs and the corporations will pay even less than the historic low rates they are paying now, and then they will scream about the deficit they created and cut more of everything that helps the middle class and the poor. It will be really convenient for them if they implement vouchercare, they can just cut the value of the voucher.

      Unfortunately Rockefeller republican Obama will not advocate the tax hikes at the top we need. Returning to the clinton rates is inadequate.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    Keystone pipeline is bad for the environment and to the health of the American people. It is more dangerous when the Koch Industry – the company that will be building those pipelines.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

       Exactly! and by choosing to save the environment, and our health instead of a few pennies at the pump temporarily, I think The President made the right choice.

      Mitt is Wrong, again!

    • William

      Why is it bad for the environment? Canada is not some 3rd world country dumping oil on the ground and has endorsed the project. 

  • ttajtt

    mother earth has no more nature naturally to give us.  no clean air, water, soil, sea, surface mines, or oil.  so does 12-21-2012 start the last aka seven year countdown.   how can we keep up this way of life,  plastic-recycled job fairs? clean up nucler waste sights.   i love life, but it is not looking good to me.   I won’t get on no UFO trip to mars or other escape route.   some asked me once, who’s a smarter, the chicken or the cow???   

    • Gregg Smith

      I have a much higher regard for “Mother Earth” than that. She’s no wuss.

      • Steve__T

         So when you gas someone rip holes in them and fill them with trash and poison and they start to show signs of passing out, their a wuss?

        • TomK_in_Boston

          Standard righty script. The earth is so vast that any suggestion we might be damaging her is a socialist hoax. Doesn’t matter how much CO2 we pump into the atmosphere, Mama Gaia can handle it. Very convenient if you’re a Koch.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            …which leads to my standard reply:

            “At some point the earth will shake mankind off like a bad case of fleas*.” I simply am selfish enough to want to not get to that point any sooner than necessary.

            *h/t George Carlin

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=507593666 Josh DeYoung

            Agent Smith:
            I’d like to share a revelation that I’ve had during my time here. It
            came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that
            you’re not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively
            develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you
            humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until
            every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is
            to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that
            follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings
            are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You’re a plague and we are the
            cure.

          • notafeminista

            Standard lefty script.  Man is so evil he cannot help but ruin the Earth with his evil ways.  Doesn’t matter how many people we put out of work and bankrupt due to failed green projects, money also is evil and should be ignored.  Very convenient if you are Al Gore.

      • ttajtt

        same here but i am not going to be around 1million or more years to prove it rightful. 

  • TomK_in_Boston

    Finally! The details of Lord R’s tax plan:

    http://www.romneytaxplan.com/

  • jefe68

    Mitt Romney keeps on using Staples as an example of success in his ability to create jobs. Yet Staples is hardly a model that one would want to use in my view. Staples, has 40,000 part-time employees out of its approximate 90,000 total head count. This is a good model and an example of a success?
    This is what is going to work for our nation as a whole?
    I think not.

    If Mitt Romney is going to use his years at Bain as he does then it’s important to look at the record, very, very carefully.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/10/14/david-stockman-mitt-romney-and-the-bain-drain.html

    • Gregg Smith

      Whatever you do, don’t look at Obama’s record very, very, very carefully.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

        Not relevant to this thread, Mr. Smith.

      • 1Brett1

        You defend Romney’s approach while at Bain and their ways of conducting business? Is this the right model for making America strong?

        • TomK_in_Boston

          It’s the right model for replacing the real economy with the scam financial casino economy and redistributing wealth to the top.

          Geez, you buy a company with the absolute minimum of your own money, borrowing the rest, then you rape the company and the workers and load it up with debt to pay back what you borrowed and to pay you huge fees so that you win even if it goes bankrupt. Even better, your fees are taxed at 15%, and you get to deduct the interest on the money you borrowed to raid the company! Yee-hah, it’s a great model – for a pirate, but not for a President.

          • Steve__T

             Greggg thinks its the American way. Why else would he continue day after day saying the same thing, that he knows all about Romney and likes him thinks he a great fellow and a generous person and a stand up guy? It has nothing to do with him hating Obama that would be sick.

            I don’t care for Obama’s failures but I won’t accept crap for an exchange or throw away my personal love of country just cause he’s not lived up to my expectations.

        • Gregg Smith

          Short answer: Yes. The thing is, Romney did not outsource jobs while CEO of Bain. He closed some plants and some people lost jobs but the alternative for these troubled companies was to close ALL the plants and lose ALL the jobs. Obama did the same thing with GM. Thousands of jobs were lost when he propped them up… for what it’s worth.

          At this point none of that really matters to me. As much as I’ve come to admire and respect Romney, I’m first and foremost voting against Obama. He’s gotta go.

          • 1Brett1

            Okay, “respect,” that’s gentlemanly. BUT, “admire”? 

            …So, “he closed some plants and some people lost some jobs”? That’s the characterization you wish to go with? And you juxtapose that with what was happened with GM? And you finish this all up with you don’t really care about Romney’s behaviors/history, you just want Obama out? The latter, I believe, has been your position since Obama’s Inauguration. This seems to coincide with the rise of the T Party, the Republican worries about the deficit, jobs, etc., and McConnell’s statement that he would work to make Obama a one-term president.I see a pattern.

      • jefe68

        Gregg for a guy who keeps on asking people to not put words into his mouth you seem to like doing that to others. I have looked into President Obama’s record and I’m not happy. 

        But that’s not the point here and if you don’t get it that says more about you’re complete lack of mental ability to parse the subject being presented. To understand what Bain Capital was about and how it became so successful. That’s the issue. Why? Because Mitt Romney is using it as a major talking point to him being of presidential character.  It’s the heart of this mans entire ideology on how to run an economy.

        It’s not based on free markets that’s for sure.
        When you open the hood here, it’s not good and he’s nothing short of a lair of what his company did. He’s not into eliminating capital gains taxes because he’s into helping the middle class, he wants to do this because that’s how Bain and other capital investment companies (including hedge funds) who are into LBO’s make a lot of money. Do you get this stuff and how it really speaks volumes to the critique that Romney is presidential in any way or form. Romney was is very lucky and he was good at speculating but not at business or creating any. That was not the model of Bain Capital. To say they were creating jobs is just not correct. The job factor was not neither here nor there.

    • 1Brett1

      Bain pioneered the idea of reducing full time ranks to part time, thus reducing pay for benefits or allowing vacation/sick time accrual. This not only makes companies less accountable to employees, but employees can be more easily manipulated to work whatever hours/schedules companies demand them to work. It also forces people to work two jobs to make up for lost hours. The effect of this is that a lot of people are working 50-60 hours a week without any overtime pay.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         That’s just awful.

    • William

      Amazing…can’t really argue with that logic…..

    • Steve__T

       I thank you for posting this, I tried months ago and was ignored.

  • Gregg Smith

    Looking at the replies I received 400 comments ago, I am astounded folks are actually saying Obama said this was a terrorist attack from day one. He jumped through hoops to not say it. He still won’t say it. He even distanced himself from it last night when Romney called him on it. “Proceed”. What a joke. I try not to get personal but you guys are idiots if you think Obama was truthful to the American people. He lied and he sent others to lie. Even his Rose Garden appearance is a lie. He said an act of terror would not be tolerated but he can’t even call it what it is, it’s tolerated. Ft. Hood, Underwear bomber, Times Square bomber, etc. were ALL terrorist attacks or attempts. The word was never used. The lack of out rage is astonishing. Don’t ever call me an ideologue again. 

    You make me laugh. Watch the polls.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

      You are wrong. it took him 7 days to tell America that it was a Terrorist attack and he explained his reasons why it took him days to finally agree to his conclusion.

      • Gregg Smith

        Thank you Akilez (can I call you that?), that’s my point. That was Romney’s point last night. 

    • 1Brett1

      You seem to want to make some point with this issue, but you never get around to it. So, what is it? That Obama mishandled characterizing the act of terror? That he should have shot from the hip before compiling all of the information and making a measured response? That cool heads shouldn’t prevail when talking about incidents in the Middle East? What, pray tell?

      • Gregg Smith

        Several. The over-arching point is Obama is not being square with the American people about the war on terror and the threat of radical Islam. He would like us to believe that since he killed Bin Laden, Al Qaeda is decimated. They are not. The Middle East is at a tipping point and America is sitting on the sideline. I’m not far from concluding he is on the wrong side. Our embassy was breeched and our Ambassador, soldiers and another were murdered. An Al Qaeda flag was raised. It was the anniversary of 9/11. The Muslim Brotherhood is running Egypt. Iran is close to nukes. The Islamic caliphate is not imagined, they are lining up to die for it. They want us dead. The Muslim people are oppressed. This is serious shit and we have a President trying to sell us some song and dance about a stupid video.

        It’s insulting for him to think anyone would now buy the notion he didn’t blame the video but instead told the nation we were attacked by Al Qaeda. His use of the parse was a farce. This was an act of war, was it not? And relax I’m not calling for it, I’m just saying there is a list of stuff like sinking ships or downing jets or invading sovereign nations that rise to the level of the definition. This does.

        The reason I took it nasty is pure snark. It’s been teed up. Every now in then I’ll go there. Two weeks ago I dared comment the State Department knew it was a terrorist attack and I was crucified around here. It’s cool, I expected it. I got it from Fox, I was brainwashed by Rush, you know the drill. Last week the thoughtful ones were telling me they were open to the notion and had not watched any news so they could have missed it. But they knew I got it it from Fox who was wrong. One commenter was still telling me I was lying and making up quotes to assert the State Department knew from day one it was a coordinated terrorist attack not related to the silly video. Now all of the sudden, lo and behold, everyone is with me. Obama said it in the Rose Garden. Think Lynn Anderson when you sing it.

        And don’t get me started on Candy Crowley.

        • 1Brett1

          Wow! Aside from this being a rant-and-rave comment…specifically, you seem to vacillate between saying you are persecuted on this forum and claiming to read minds/know what another thinks, e.g., re: Obama: “He would like us to believe that since he killed Bin Laden, Al Qaeda is decimated.” And, “it’s insulting for him to think anyone would now buy the notion he didn’t blame the video but instead told the nation we were attacked by Al Qaeda.”   

          Calling the attack on our consulate “an act of war,” as you state, appears to be what you would have liked him to say, or some facsimile, if I read that right. If I didn’t why all of the mentions of incidents you also claim are acts of war then mention you aren’t calling for war? I can’t glean your point on that one…

          …At least we can rest a little easier that Gregg Smith isn’t in charge! ;-)  

          The issues in the Middle East are complex and complicated, yet you’ve reduced them to not only their lowest common denominator but have engaged in what could be considered fomentation. 

          • Gregg Smith

            He told us what he would like us to believe. And he didn’t tell us the gravity of the situation but instead lied about the silly video. You don’t have to read his mind, just listen to his words. I love the persecution, I thrive on it. Especially when the blog does a 180 to my argument. I said they knew it was an attack from day one and not related to the video, they howl. Now they’re howling just as loud in the opposite direction. Do you think I’m not going to point that out?  

            Yes, he should have said it was an act of war. He was asked, at the very least he should have answered one way or the other. He didn’t. Why? Because it clearly was and that kills the meme.

            And please, do ya’ think telling us this was all about a stupid video that no one saw might have been reducing a complicated issue to the lowest common denominator? That was my point. When Obama went to the UN and distanced himself from the stupid video he was appeasing the murdering rioters. And as far as fomentation, look no farther than Obama thumping his chest about killing their leader. 

        • Ray in VT

          Hmmm, do I note a reference to myself in there, Gregg?

          Now, at some point last week you provided a link, which I followed and read, discussing the attack.  That article was dated somewhere around October 2nd, and it said that the consular videos showing the status on the ground prior to the attack had been retrieved about a week before and that the administration’s stance regarding it having been a protest that got hijacked came from an intelligence report gathered from individuals at the scene.

          Given the nature of what was known, what was not known and what was still unclear on the day following the attack, I don’t know how anyone could have definitively said how the attack went down and who was behind it.

          The attack need not have been a pre-planned, coordinated attack by an organized terrorist group for it have been an act of terror.  I take issues with jumping to conclusions before the facts are established and citing questionable sources as though they are supreme fonts of knowledge.

          Also, I’ve seen you refer to the “Islamic caliphate” a number of times.  What exactly do you mean by that?  Now, historically I am familiar with the Ummayads, that Fatimids and the Abbasids, but there hasn’t been a Caliph in hundreds of years.  Someone can certainly call oneself that, and someone may presently, but global Islam, much like other global religions, is so fragmented that no one can seriously claim to speak for it.

          • Gregg Smith

            You are one of the “thoughtful” ones. I’ve been through the details a number of times with multiple commenters. I made a comment for you with 5 or so links to prove it after you said you had been off line. They knew on day one. If the argument is they could not of known so early then where did the story of the nonexistent protest come from? If they didn’t know, they didn’t know. They made something up. But the point on this day is Obama himself in the debate last night said he told us it was terrorist attack in the Rose Garden the next day. He said it himself.

          • Ray in VT

            I’m honored to be so highly regarded.

            I followed one of the links (I can’t remember which one), or maybe more.  I can’t recall.  Anyways, the one that I do remember readings said that there were multiple intelligence reports on day one, including one that supported the original hijacked protest line.  That report turned out to be wrong, and the video retrieved, according to the article, some 10-14 days after the attack shows that.  These things happen.  So, taking that story, they didn’t just “make something up”.  They took one of the intelligence reports and went with it.

            The President said that it was an act of terror.  If it had been a hijacked protest, then one could still call it that in my opinion.  Given that it was an actual attack, then it certainly qualifies.  In the debate he said that he stood in the Rose Garden and said that it was an act of terror, and in his remarks in the Rose Garden, referring to the Benghazi attacks, he referred to acts of terror.  I think that you’re trying to make something out of nothing on this one.

  • libraryshortcake

    Not only did Romney come across as unlikable and arrogant, but he actually looked like a zombie slowly lurching forward to attack the moderator!

    Welcome back, Obama! Romney is grasping at straws to demonize you but he still can’t put forth a credible plan or vision, and can’t hide the fact that he’s out for the best interest of his billionaire cronies!

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Gee, Candy said she had no problem with either Obama or Romney.

      Maybe she was feeling a little guilty because she interrupted Romney 28 times but Obama only 9 times.  She also allowed Obama to have 9% more airtime.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         A conservative Republican, Joe Scarborough said on his show this morning that Romney treated the moderator poorly and came across as disrespectful to the president… things you shouldn’t do.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           Sure they both had weak moments.

          Joe Scarborough is a joke and has been ridiculed by the conservative community over the past few months.

          So that is like quoting David Brooks — the NYTimes token ‘conservative’ — aka not a real conservative.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             That’s convenient.  Just play the RINO card?  That’s been done to McCain, too. 

            So how does a republican, exactly get the “True Republican” label?

            Have you gotten your “True Republican” credential?

            And who, exactly is dispensing them?

            (Scarborough has repeatedly shot this RINO notion down and has little patience for it).

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            I never mentioned republican.  I said conservative.

            If you followed the conservative community you would know exactly what I was speaking to.
             

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

            He certainly supports St. Reagan.  And he calls himself a conservative.  So its a you-said / he-said issue and my points still apply. 

            Today’s Republicans and conservatives, I suspect, would not like many of Wm F. Buckley II’s statements.  He used to be the conservative standard bearer.  Now it’s the less moderate and less tolerant tea party that is leading the republican party.  Thus, Romney-car Mitt says he is a “severe conservative”.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    Romney won the night.

    Sure on the theater of the debate it was mostly a draw.  Obama dramatically improved his performance from the last debate.  They both had strong moments and they both had weak moments.  Supporters of each side are happy with their standard bearer.

    However, the flash polls show that Romney dominated on the economy, taxes, debt, energy, and even healthcare.

    The CBS poll gave Romney a 30 point advantage on the economy. Since that is ISSUE #1 in the election this cannot be good for Obama.

    So Obama may have energized his base a bit (although Biden already did that with the Joker performance) but on the key issues he made no headway.  He offered no vision for his next 4 years.

    Further, the Libya issue is NOT dead.  The Candy Crowley fiasco may have elevated the issue and Obama may have boxed himself into to an incongruity about when his administration knew when it was a terror attack and what his administration (including himself) was communicating to the American people over the two weeks following the terror attack.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       That goes against most polling and most analyses.  Commentators on Fox TV were griping about Mitt’s performance.

      Any you told me you weren’t a Romney supporter.  Are you sure?

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         I’ve been a Romney supporter for a year now. He is the best qualified candidate to run in my lifetime and his skills are uniquely suited to our times and troubles.  Mitt’s biggest weakness — in my view — is politics.  For me, that is a plus.

        I’m not affiliated with any party.  Maybe that is the confusion.  If you were to force me to characterize my ideology it is fiscal conservative and libertarian on keeping government out of my life — so I don’t agree with the platform of either party.

        With our fiscal and jobs crisis — this election is a no brainer.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

           My error and my apologies.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            No problem.

          • http://twitter.com/tunnelman3 jason keedy

            If we went back in time, I would assume that you woud have been saying the exact same things, except that instead of Romney, you would be saying Hoover.
            Just like Hoover’s belief, I guess you think that governments only role is to provide a comfortable enviroment for private industry.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Sorry, I’m not up on the Herbert Hoover campaign.

            I’m more of a Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan fan.

            FDR — not so much.  However, FDR was a strong leader.  I don’t see Mr. Obama as a strong leader.

        • jefe68

          So Mr. fiscal conservative/libertarian how do come down on the GOP having one of the most overreaching platforms in terms of controlling woman’s health and reproduction rights?

          By the way Mitt Romney’ busniess acumen is more about speculating markets and hedging than creating anything. Are you aware of that? Also that does not mean he has the wherewithal to be president.
           

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Both parties have problems with health care.  I don’t want Obamacare to force my insurance policy to cover contraception or Viagra — or anything else for that matter.

            My view on abortion is it should be safe, legal and rare.  Also, it wouldn’t bother me to have it outlawed after 5 months unless the life of the mother is at risk.  The fetus starts to have rights, in my view, as it approaches viability.

            So no, I don’t agree with the GOP positions on abortion and I don’t agree with the Dems promotion of late term and partial birth abortions.

            Generally, I dislike the abortion debate in politics all together.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             Mitt has repeatedly shown that he is willing to change his views for political expediency. 

            That attitude indeed might work to maximize profit in the profit-driven world of big capital/investment, where profit is everything. 

            But it is not the way to lead a country, where moral leadership and pushing inspirational ideas is important .  Also not holding half the nation in contempt would be helpful.

            I suspect Romney looks at this process as simply gaining the most votes (as in money), with less interest in captivating the public with sincerity.  With all his flip-flops, he’s low on sincerity.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             Mr. Romney has proven leadership skills.  He proved this in both the public and private sector.

            You mis-characterize his business experience.  He started as a business consultant — making failing companies become stronger.   He then started his company to purchase and invest in these type of companies and later sell them at a profit after the turn around.

            So no, his business model is not as a passive investor like a mutual fund manager.

            He was a venture capitalist for companies like Staples and Sports Authority.

    • 1Brett1

      Maybe in your partisan mind he did. Anyway, it’s not so tidy as you suggest

      http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57533850/poll-obama-edges-romney-in-second-debate/
      You and Mr. “Smith” are trying so hard to make hay out of the “act of terror” statement…What do you want from a president when there’s trouble in the Middle East? A chest-beating hothead? 

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         When you have David Gergen and John King on CNN saying Mr. Obama has some serious explaining to do and that this issue isn’t going away……

        Something smells and we don’t know why.

        The amazing thing is this wouldn’t be an issue IF they came out from the beginning and simply said they are investigating.  Instead the kept pushing this bizarre video story for 2 weeks.

        Wait and see.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1550427523 Akilez Stamatelaky

    I was with my daughter in the car last weekend. Suddenly she popped a question regarding the election.

    Dad are you for Obama or Romney? I said I support Obama. she said why? As I about to answer her an Obama Political Ad came on the radio and after the ad she said.

    Romney does not like women?

    I kept quiet did not say anything. because I don’t want an 8 yr old girl to think about politics at her age.

    We went inside the house and turned on the TV.
    Mitt Romney was one and my daughter said instantly Yayaya!!!

    that was funny

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       Well, Mitt’s grandpa might have helped formed Mitt’s view on women.  Gives “binders full” a different take.

  • 1Brett1

    Mitt the misogynist? …He’s proud of his idea to put women in “binders”? …What’s next? I can hear him now stumping along the campaign trail: “a chastity belt and an iron maiden for every woman in America!” …Of course, his admiring base will cheer at anything…

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

      And, as we learned, he didn’t bind them! They were delivered to him by a 3rd party. So a weird statement and a lie, too.

      • 1Brett1

        Yes, a bipartisan women’s group did so! …Another Romney lie!

    • Denis

      has anyone looked at the pay of the women in his administration?  How did it compare with the men?

  • hennorama

    If, before last night’s debate, you were on Mr. Romney’s side or Pres. Obama’s side, you were pretty happy, because your guy made a number of very good points.

    But it seems to me that Mr. Romney made some critical errors:

    1.  He was dismissive of and disrespectful to a sitting President.

    The middle of a heated exchange on drilling permits went like this, in part:

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: I’ll give you your time. Go ahead.
    MR. ROMNEY: — and gas on federal lands and in federal waters. And coal — coal production is not up, coal jobs are not up. I was just at a coal facility where some 1,200 people lost their jobs. The right course for America is to have a true all-of-the-above policy. I don’t think anyone really believes that you’re a person who’s going to be pushing for oil and gas and coal.
    (Waving his hand at Pres. Obama)
    You’ll get your chance in a moment. I’m still speaking.
    (Chuckles.)

    2.  Mr. Romney thought he had a winning argument on personal Chinese/foreign investments.  He claimed Pres. Obama also had some Chinese investments, but he flubbed this topic pretty badly.
    Mr. Romney, discussing his “blind trust” said “…I understand they do include investments outside the United States, including in — in Chinese companies…”

    “I understand…” As if he didn’t know.  Right.

    Then he made a specious argument about Pres. Obama’s personal investments, claiming “You also [have] investments in Chinese companies.”

    This was pretty silly, because the President’s “investments in Chinese companies” consists of owning shares in the vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund.  This is such an indirect connection to Chinese investments that’s it’s almost laughable.  Even the audience laughed during Pres. Obama’s remarks.

    MR. ROMNEY: Have you looked at your pension?
    PRESIDENT OBAMA: I’ve got to say — (inaudible) —
    MR. ROMNEY: Mr. President, have you looked at your pension?
    PRESIDENT OBAMA: You know, I don’t look at my pension. It’s not as big as yours, so it — it doesn’t take as long. The —
    MR. ROMNEY: Well, let me — let me give you — (laughter) — let me — let me give you some advice.
    PRESIDENT OBAMA: I don’t check it that often. (Chuckles.)
    MR. ROMNEY: Let me give you some advice. Look at your pension.
    PRESIDENT OBAMA: (Chuckles.) OK.
    MR. ROMNEY: You also [have] investments in Chinese companies.

    3.  Mr. Romney was surprised that Pres. Obama used the term “acts of terror” in reference to Benghazi in the Rose Garden on Sept. 12th.  Mr. Romney thought he had caught the President in a lie, but he was wrong.

    This was horrible for Mr. Romney.  I’m sure he’d like that whole exchange back.

    4.  Mr. Romney “opened the door” on “the 47%” right at the end, with his “I care about 100%…” remark, which was a HUGE mistake, tactically.

    MR. ROMNEY: … I care about a hundred percent of the American people. I want a hundred percent of the American people to have a bright and prosperous future….

    My personal impression at the time was “Oh S**T – Romney opened the door on “the 47%” – here comes the knockout punch”

    Then, when I heard Pres. Obama say “I believe Governor Romney is a good man…,” I knew the left hook was coming:

    PRESIDENT OBAMA: … I believe Governor Romney is a good man. He loves his family, cares about his faith.

    But I also believe that when he said behind closed doors that 47 percent of the country considers themselves victims who refuse personal responsibility — think about who he was talking about: folks on Social Security who’ve worked all their lives, veterans who’ve sacrificed for this country, students who are out there trying to, hopefully, advance their own dreams, but also this country’s dreams, soldiers who are overseas fighting for us right now, people who are working hard every day, paying payroll tax, gas taxes, but don’t make enough income.

    BOOM.  OUCH.  FIGHT OVER.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       I noticed that too.  He also seemed to badger Ms. Crowlyy in a CEO-underling way. 

      Then his penchant for trying to be all pal-y with the audience/questioners came across as insincere.

      Hard to walk back that 47% comment.

      • TomK_in_Boston

        Exactly. Oligarch CEOs don’t expect to hear anything but “Yes, sir!”, and they struggle when they try to act like they have anything in common with the peons. He’s like the man central casting would send if you had a part for the evil boss who fires everyone and enjoys it.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

           Right.  It seems that Romney really does not like to have his statements questions.  Too long in control of too much, with a poor notion of what the typical American deals with.

          • TomK_in_Boston

            Who’s the best Romney character? Not Scrooge McDuck, he can be lovable. Ebeenzer Scrooge before the ghosts? Maybe. Mr Potter in “Wonderful life” or Mr Burns on the Simpsons? I like those two. Suggestions?

        • MordecaiCarroll

          Yep. I think that was especially apparent last night, and I think Romney’s flustered and angry behavior throughout the night won’t sit well with undecideds.  That kind of angry manner might work well in a boardroom, but it looked really bad on tv.  The guy bulldozed over Candy Crowley several times, and spent a good chunk of time whining about the rules, whose turn it was, etc. 

          He acted like a spoiled child.  “Mom! it’s my turn!  Mom!!!!”  Very unbecoming behavior for someone seeking the office of President

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Small ball stuff.

      Both Romney and Obama had their weakest moments when they went small ball.

      However, Romney’s big ball moments were much stronger and that is why he won the day on the economy.
       

      • http://twitter.com/tunnelman3 jason keedy

        What debate were you watching? How did he win the economy issue when Obama slammed him over his 20% tax cuts and no way to fund them. Romney looked perpetually flustered and tried  to hold on to that senior executive persona (you know, talking down to the President). As usual he had no details concerning economic or foregin policy.
        On the one issue in which Romney could have scored (the Libya incident), Obama turned the table and provided the most moving moment of the debate.
        Romney only has one gear and is incapable of adjusting. He is a wind-up, gear driven candidate.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           The CBS flash poll that had Obama winning the debate on style +7 had Romney winning on the economy +30.

          I disagree that Obama was able to tear down Romney’s plan.  The irony is Obama’s corporate tax reform plan details are similar to Romney’s approach on income taxes — broad outlines, 20% cut and work with congress on details on deductions to eliminate.  Why aren’t you calling out Obama for not offering enough details?

          Look at how Obama ran on health care in 2008.  Did he offer ANY specifics?  The only specific that I recall was that he said the individual mandate was dead wrong.

          Look at what we got — the individual mandate and 2800 pages of disaster to go with it.

          • Steve__T

             What did you expect he took it from Romney?

        • brettearle

          I wish you were right–but I think you are, in part, wrong.

          Romney’s candidacy–but NOT Romney himself–offers voters a change for the sake of change…..because voters are very, very insecure about the Economy.

          Obama has NOT identified specific measures for the Economy, in the future.

          I support him, strongly–but he may have missed his real chance to enunciate a real policy for the future, when he foundered in the First Debate.

      • Thinkin5

         Mitt is a winner to those who want to continue shrinking the middle class. He’s anti-union and wages keep shrinking along with unions. Mitt’s on the Koch Bros. bus.

    • 1Brett1

      Romney tried to bully the President into simplistic answers of either “yes” or “no.” Romney then became rude and interruptive when the President didn’t take his bullying bait. 

      • Mike_Card

        Those tactics worked very well for Willard in the primaries.  I suppose it’s hard for such a dick head to play against type.

      • brettearle

        At those moments, the Moderator did NOT do her job.

    • notafeminista

      Don’t you think people ought to know where their money is going?  After all, there are a number of perfectly acceptable stocks/funds out there with “social justice” in mind. 

      • hennorama

        Thank you for your response.

        My understanding of your comment assumes you mean “the Obamas’ money” when you said “their money.” If this is not the case, please correct me.

        Yes, there are other so-called “socially responsibile” investment choices. That wasn’t the point. Mr Romney was talking about “…investments in Chinese companies.”

        It’s an enormous stretch to call a passive investment in a widely-diversified, generic S&P 500 index fund as “…investments in Chinese companies.” Yes, many large US companies have operations in China. But Pres. Obama has no control over any of their operations.

        This is in stark contrast to Mr. Romney, and his former firm Bain Capital. The investments they have made, many of which are currently held by Mr. Romney, were and are much more direct and more controlling interests.

        MUCH more direct than a passive investment in a mutual fund.

        see: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/16/fact-check-china-investments/

        • notafeminista

          You are correct in that President Obama has no control over the operations of US company in or out of China.  He does however have control of his income and private investments.  It is incumbent upon any investor of any size to be aware of where his/her money is going.  It is not the slightest bit difficult to discover where mutual funds put their investment money – less than one hour’s worth of research will do the trick.  If one is socially aware and concerned about such things, he or she will take pains to make sure their money is invested in funds operating in a manner in which the investor approves.  

          Did President Obama knowingly invest in Chinese companies?  No he probably did not.  Should he know whether he’s invested in Chinese companies?  Oh yes he should.

    • brettearle

      Romney’ll lose part of the crucial women’s vote with his overbearing, aggressive, and sometimes disrespectful demeanor, directed towards the President.

      And that may be enough to stop the President’s slide in the polls.

      However, anytime Romney brings up Oil and Coal, the President is going to lose–because these subjects are connected to:

      (1) Price costs for survival or near-survival

      and

      (2) Jobs

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/T7W6YL634C7SMJD6SRNVWYGUKA scorpio

    Tom I love your show but the minute I heard Chris Matthews on you lost a listener.  He’s a train wreck and I thought your show was better than that.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       Matthews can be a bit much, but he does have a good repository of how Washington works.

      I’m thinking that perhaps Ashbrook had him on because Matthews was apoplectic about Obama’s first debate performance and wanted to check his reaction now.

      • brettearle

        Agreed.

    • brettearle

      Anyone who sees Matthews as a train wreck must have been the locomotive engineer, who derailed his own cars and caused the accident, heading in the opposite direction and on collision course with the Matthews rail-line.

      Matthews may have moved a bit further Left (even though he was quite Left, anyway and is more bombastic than he was 2 years ago) because Management has forced him in that direction and because Matthews feels there is more at stake–and so he needs to go after the Right even more aggressively

  • 1Brett1

    George Pataki was trying so hard to score some points in his commentary on MSNBC last night and on FOX today. He brought up the pipeline by saying we lost 60 thousand jobs over it! Well, more like 6 thousand, and those would have been temporary jobs…hardly worth ruining our environment over…

    • brettearle

      True, but, nevertheless, it’s a point that can hurt the President, with some sectors of the voting bloc, I believe.

  • MAfemalevoter

    Maybe I am overly sensitive, but I found Tom Ashbrooks’s comments about the name Candy to be embarrassing.  Is Candy really such a funny name?  Maybe I should snicker the next time I meet a “Richard”…

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       People snicker a lot about Dick.

      • hennorama

        I dunno if Ms. Crowley is “sweet” enough to merit a nickname of “Candy”, but I do think VP Cheney’s nickname is actually pretty apt.

    • notafeminista

      “Snicker” ??  ;)

  • gendermaven

    Gov. Romney’s unfortunate comments about binders full of women reveal his old world approach to addressing gender imbalances and improving the status of women in the United States.   In a Romney administration we should expect women to be relegated to peripheral roles rather than be at the heart of the President’s circle of advisors -where they belong. 

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      Romney’s Lt. Gov and chief of staff were women.  These are the two most important positions in the admin.

      So the evidence belies your accusation.

      Please explain why the women in the Obama administration are paid less than the men.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         The “71%” cited last night was not correct. It is currently 81%

        And this oft-cited statistic is criticized as it does not account for the fact that women enter/leave the workforce more than men. 

        Job-pay inequity does exist, but it is uneven and depends upon your job category.   But again, there is discrimination.  Ask Lilly Ledbetter

  • 1Brett1

    Romney has tried to make hay out of Obama’s being away from the WH, on several occasions. Last night he did so, as well.

    Here’s Romney’s record when he was governor of MA.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/14/us/politics/mitt-romney-often-away-when-he-was-governor.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    • brettearle

      Romney was absent so often, back then, you wonder whether he needed to call AAA, for a road map, to figure out how to return to the state where he was its standard bearer. 

      Romney has received virtually a total pass on this matter–`cept for one mention of it, towards the end of the Primary Debates, by Newt Gingrich.

      It’s about time the Media pounced on it.

      Romney’s No-show speaks to porous character and driving ambition, at the expense of the public.

      Democratic Media Groups ought to consider this matter as an issue to showcase in TV/Radio ads.

      Pride Goeth Before the Fall

    • MordecaiCarroll

      There’s a reason why a recent poll has Obama ahead of Romney in MA by 30 points.  People here don’t like him.  Despite Mitt’s attempt to tout his his record as governor of MA, the people whom he governed for 4 years favor the other guy by 30 points!  Pretty damning statistic.

      Of course, people here are well aware of what an opportunistic phony he is.  They saw firsthand how he used the governor’s job as a stepping stone towards a higher profile within the national Republican party.  And they saw firsthand how he went around to other parts of the country, making MA the butt of jokes in an attempt to ingratiate himself with voters in more conservative parts of the country.  This while still serving as governor!  Pretty tasteless on his part.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Rob-Russell/100003523811851 Rob Russell

    One is reminded that the 1960 debate between Kennedy and Nixon was perceived as a victory for Kennedy by the television viewers and a Nixon victory by the radio watchers. Demeanor is thus something that both candidates should consider, but it appears that both have risen to the top by being obstinate and argumentative, with little intellectual discussion with underlings…

    • brettearle

      Every report suggests that the President typically listens to all opinions and perceptions and then makes a decision.

      If you wish to believe that those close to him are lying, about this, then go ahead and believe what you want to believe.

    • ttajtt

      yes, when little bush spoke of going to war.   and those who turned up the sound so he was not mumbling to himself.   

  • Michiganjf

    Romney’s “binders full of women” comment does indeed say something about how he sees women in the workplace, as does his comment about working women needing to hurry home, fix dinner, and take care of the kids.

    However, that “binders full of women” comment ALSO says something about how Romney sees American workers in general… not as people, but as pages from a report, to be used or discarded at will, as his discretion sees fit.

    THIS IS WHAT HAS DESTROYED EARNINGS FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS!!

    A CEO sees a number on a page, like how much the company will save if it cuts pay or fails to raise salaries, say for all cashiers in a store like STAPLES.
    Cashiers make up a vast number of the workforce in a company like STAPLES, so the dollar amount on the page will be HUGE if you cut their pay, and the CEO gets a “big woodie” from that “BOTTOM LINE” number, knowing how it will affect the value of his stock options that year.
    He then sees a number showing how much he’ll save if he cuts pay for a handfull of corporate headquarters jobs instead… the number is relatively small, compared to the savings of cutting pay for those thousands of cashiers, so he goes with the big number that gave him a “woodie,” and leaves pay for the people at corporate alone this quarter, especially as he actually SEES those corporate workers in person every day, as he walks to his upstairs office.

    Now, imagine this same dynamic happenning over and over again, quarter after quarter, for years on end.

    … pretty soon, you’ve got a MASSIVE wage disparity between the vast numbers of workers who ACTUALLY work hard every day in the stores, and those who get paid much more, simply because they’re walking through doors at corporate headquarters instead of walking into a brick and mortar retail outlet.

    I see this in MY company, where I’ve seen AN ENTRY LEVEL, NO SPECIAL SKILLS REQUIRED job at corporate pay TWICE what a full-time worker of twenty years gets paid at the store level.

    The ONLY reason this has happened, across America over time, is because people like Romney DON’T consider fairness, or how American business needs a healthy middle-class FOR THE COMPANY’S OWN LONG-TERM HEALTH… instead, all the Romney types consider is what will be good for thier own pay compensation and that of investors, NEXT QUARTER!

    This thinking has KILLED THE AMERICAN MIDDLE-CLASS, the original “goose that laid the golden egg” for American business, and the disappearing wealth of the middle-class IS WHAT HAS REALLY DESTROYED JOB GROWTH IN OUR COUNTRY!!!!

    • William

       Just so he does not see and treat woman like Bill Clinton does we are in good shape.

      • Michiganjf

        Spoken like a Righty Repugnican!

        • William

           Living in the real world is tough.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

        I think B. Clinton’s scandal with an intern is small potatoes compared to the policies that a president promulgates. 

        BC got in trouble with his lawyer-like wiggling.  Pretty bad. But policies (like budget-busting tax cuts “meant” to expire (hah) ) can cause widespread damage… and has.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

           How about the groping and alleged rapes?

          btw – the sexual conduct with an intern would be considered workplace harassment and result in automatic firing in every company I’ve worked in.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             Not if your top dog.  There are plenty of Reps and Sens of both parties that have done this.  Not saying its right, but these folks, including BC, live in these “privileged bubbles”.  I bet this is true with a lot of CEO’s too.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             Exactly who is alleging these alleged rapes?  Please site your source so you don’t sound like your spreading negative gossip.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             Still waiting to hear substantiation of your charge of “alleged rapes”.

          • Steve__T

             Your kinnda new here, you’ll catch on but don’t wait for a response or at lease one that makes sense or intelligence with substance.

        • William

           Over spending cause more harm than tax cuts since letting people keep the money they earn is never a bad policy.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             What?  both equally cause deficits.

            I’m not for “over spending”… who is?

            But I’m also not for saying “screw you” to the fortunate among us who are suffering… some of whom die for lack of our ultra-expensive (17% of the GDP) health care “system”.

    • Bruce94

      Very perceptive comments.  Seems as if Mitt Romney’s true character showed up last night–that of a bully and blowhard.

      He reminded me of the boss who tries to command respect by intimidation and bluster rather than by the force of his ideas, energy or example.  Made me think that the choice in this election is between a candidate who wants to continue as President of the U.S. vs. a candidate who aspires to be boss of the U.S.

      I was wondering when someone would pick up on the “binders full of women” remark.  Sounded like the blathering of an out-of-touch plutocrat.  When I first heard it, I did a double take and thought maybe he had uttered “concubine-ders of women.”  You know, a kinda of Mormon thing… :)

  • Etta1890

    The repetition of the statement that Obama has not given us his plan for the next four years is inaccurate. It will be more investment in infrastructure;more consumer protection;enactment of healthcare reform; equality for women; investment in renewable energy. Four more years of the same? Yes Please!

    • brettearle

      The issue, ultimately, it seems to me for the voter (as the voter might see it, not as I see it) is not what the President has already accomplished.

      But rather whether the voter wants to trust the President with a sluggish economy–regardless of Congressional opposition.

      Does the voter want to believe that Romney’s plan will surpass Obama’s–regardless of the fallout from the 2007 Economic Collapse? 

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    New daily tracking poll from Gallup — likely voters

    Romney 51%
    Obama  45%
     
    No candidate that hits 50%+ in gallup likely voter poll in October has EVER lost.

    • Michiganjf

      Keep wishin’!

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         When Romney schedules a campaign rally in MI next week then you will know Mr. Obama is in deep trouble.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       Well, then.  perhaps Republican voters need not vote? ;)

    • brettearle

      Wait until we see the breakdown in the battleground states.

      Your arrogant, elitist candidate still has an uphill fight in the Electoral College–depending on how these states break for either candidate, especially Ohio.

      I wouldn’t count on your tax breaks-that-will-increase-the-deficit Funds, yet, my friend….    

    • MordecaiCarroll

      “The new numbers, of course, don’t include much or any data collected
      after Tuesday night’s debate. It will take days to determine what effect
      that might have had.”

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/10/17/mitt-romney-leading-president-obama-by-six-in-gallup-poll/

      • WorriedfortheCountry

         You are absolutely correct.

  • http://www.facebook.com/kyle.rose Kyle Rose

    Chris Matthews is as much a bomb-throwing ideologue as Sean Hannity. Can you please try to book guests that raise, not lower, the level of discourse?

  • OnPointComments

    It surprises me that more women don’t voice the opinion that it is demeaning to talk about the women’s vote as if it only relates to “women’s issues,” the whole “vote with your lady parts” idea, as if other thoughts wouldn’t survive in their pretty little heads.  The women I know are much smarter than that, and if you asked them what issues are most important to them in the election (and I have asked them), they say the economy, jobs, tensions in the middle east, taxes, and government overreach, and “women’s issues” is far down the list.  Can you imagine how a campaign would be received if one of its principal tenets was “men’s issues,” prostate exams, testosterone replacement, and free condoms?

    • OnPointComments

      Another question I’ve been asking people is “How often, without any prodding by the media, politicians, or anyone else, do you give significant thought to the issues of same sex marriage and abortion?  On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being ‘It’s regularly on my mind,’ and 5 being ‘I never think about it.’ ”  I’ve yet to find anyone who didn’t answer “5,” and I’ve got a lot of liberal friends.

      • jimino

        Except when they vote.  However, I would agree that these zealots have nothing on their mind when they do it.

    • Thinkin5

       Sat. Night Live did a great satire of “women’s issues” and the GOP. “If men could get pregnant, abortion clinics would be like Starbucks. There would be two on every block and four in every airport- and the morning after pill would come in different flavors like sea salt and cool ranch.”
      How on earth do men in this country get to control women’s health and their bodies??!

      • notafeminista

        Women permit it..in the name of “women’s health” and “reproductive rights.”    No man has consensual sex without a woman permitting it.

        • Ray in VT

          Some sure do.  They’re called gays.

          • notafeminista

            Ha…fair point! 

    • hennorama

      Let’s talk about “demeaning” just a bit.

      Imagine how a man might feel if:

      - He received less than 80% of the pay women received
      - Men made up about 17% of the national government
      - Some legislators proposed requiring a rectal exam before a man could get a vasectomy
      - A political party wanted to restrict a man’s right to use a condom
      - A candidate for the presidency said “We’re going to have to have employers in the new economy, in the economy I’m going to bring to play, that are going to be so anxious to get good workers they’re going to be anxious to hire men.”

      Might a man feel “demeaned?”

      • notafeminista

        Let us do talk about “demeaning” just a bit.
         
        Imagine how anyone might feel if:

        -The co-worker next to him/her made exactly the same salary despite working significantly fewer hours.

        -Basic biology is ignored when discussing matters of physical health.  It is relevant for a woman to have a vaginal examination prior to sterilization so that a pregnancy is not compromised.  Presumably  you recognize that rectal exams have no relevance to vasectomies.

        -A political party held people responsible for their neighbor’s circumstances…..(oh wait…)

        -A sitting president said, “If you don’t buy this, we will penalize you for not having purchased it”…..(oh wait again….)

        Might not an electorate feel “demeaned”?

         

        • hennorama

          Thank you for your response.

          My apologies if it was unclear that I was being non-literal. Given that there is no direct male equivalent to abortion, I used other male reproductive procedures and contraceptive measures in my musings.

          My use of “Some legislators proposed requiring a rectal exam before a man could get a vasectomy” was a reference to the Virginia legislature and a proposal to require an invasive vaginal ultrasound procedure prior to a woman receiving an abortion.

          My use of “A political party wanted to restrict a man’s right to use a condom” was another reference to abortion restrictions.

          Hope that helps.

          I’ll respectfully decline to comment on the remainder of your post, as it will likely simply lead to further disagreement and potential acrimony.

          Thanks again for your response.

          • notafeminista

            Thank you for your response. 

            Yours response was perfectly clear.  In fact, It is precisely why I responded in exactly the manner I did.

            l state again, it is relevant for a woman to have a vaginal exam prior to sterilization so as not to compromise a pregnancy.  (It may be difficult for you to believe but a woman may either be unaware she is pregnant or may lie about a pregnancy – the vaginal exam protects both the doctor and the mother from any unforeseen circumstances.)

            Thanks again for your response.

  • notafeminista

     Contrast, how does President Obama relate your “typical American”?

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      xxx

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

      Way more than someone who tells his wealthy friends & supporters that half the population of Americans are moochers.

      • notafeminista

        Maybe not.  51% of the population of this country is female.  How does President Obama relate to the “female” experience?

        President Obama is of combined races.  How does he fully relate to either of his origins?  (black or white)

        Andrew Sullivan believes that President Obama may in fact be, a “lightworker” (those of you who are “spiritually attuned, not coweringly religious” will know to what I refer. How does he relate that to the “typical American?

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

           I’m not following you.  What do you mean by “relate”?

          And Romney did speak disparagingly about 47% percent — of US — when the media were absent.

          • notafeminista

            I think it’s pretty straightforward.  How does President Obama relate his personal experience as a mixed-race male raised by his maternal grandparents to that of the “typical American”.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

            Honestly don’t know.  But do know — thru his tax proposals (stop with tax policies that cause greater and greater income disparity) and education and science emphases — that Obama cares more about the middle class. 

            Again, Romney called 47 of Americans victims and people who won’t take responsibility and that he can’t worry about them.

            Really. 

            That is just condescending and highly judgmental.

            How many people do you know who’d say that?

            And that for someone who tells students… if you can’t afford college, ask your parents.

          • notafeminista

            I don’t see how someone who’s never been a part of “the middle class” can possibly care about them in the manner in which you state. 
             
            1)It is fundamentally impossible to cut or control costs without cutting services.
             
            2)Throw out the college argument.  If parents can pay for children’s health insurance until age 26, then parents can certainly pay for college.  Or maybe you would prefer Grandma’s Social Security checks to continue to be garnished.
             
            3)Mr. Romney did not say the 47% are moochers, nor did he say they are victims.  He said, they believe they are victims. Well who wouldn’t? Reading this board alone we know gays are victims of straights, the poor are victims of the rich, women are victims of men, blacks are victims of whites and so on.  The Left never lets anyone forget just who is a victim of whom and why.  Mr. Romney simply reiterated what the American public has been hearing for 40 years.

          • Duras

            When Obama talked about paying off student debt at the same time as saving money more their kids’ rising tuition – that is relating to the American people.

            Contrast that to what Mitt Romney recommends about college tuition: borrow money from your parents.

            Personally, my college was paid for, but I knew many students who worked more hours than I did and had to take out student loans as well.

            Mitt Romney had a stock portfolio in college.  Who can relate to that?  Who expects someone who has not lived a day outside the upper class to save the middle class?

          • notafeminista

            The college tuition argument does not hold water.  If parents can afford to keep children on a health insurance policy until the age of 26, then parents can afford to pay for college.  Unless you want Grandma’s Social Security check to continue being garnished.

          • Duras

            You do realize that that is not actually happening.  Most people get health care through their employers and middle income people cannot afford college tuition without help for student loans. 

            There is a student loan bubble that is being blown up by republicans.  The biggest exploiter of student loans are for-profit, online colleges that give worthless degrees yet the republicans support because they put money in republicans pockets.  Mitt Romney supports these worthless colleges.  More over, college scholarships have been cut to due to under funding by government.  I live in Florida, and our universities recently took huge cuts, the tuitions have gone up, scholarships have been cut, and universities’ national rankings have dropped yet people still want to go to college.

            Sorry, but you and the republicans are clearly wrong and you should change your opinion.

          • JGC

            Franklin Delano Roosevelt  and Eleanor Rooosevelt were able to relate. I know you know that.  But what is the Secret Sauce?  Why is Romney so blinking-in-the-headlights clueless as to the aspirations of the 99.99% of Americans?

        • abdunk

          not following either.  black or white, male or female, we are humans.  we all want to be treated fairly, have some sense of justice.  

          • notafeminista

            Tsk. “Black Liberation Theology” and Henry Louis Gates say otherwise – that in fact, the “black experience” is not that of the whites.

          • abdunk

             if one has to rely on the same experience to have an opinion on any issue, nothing would get accomplished.  finding the things that are common to all, having an open mind and insisting on justice and fairness as humans any color any creed is what gets big things done

          • notafeminista

            So.  What is “fair” to you?  I need to see if it matches what is “fair” to me.

    • jefe68

      Considering Obama’ childhood and upbringing I would say he is more in tune with more Americans than Mitt Romney, who was born a child of privilege and wealth.

      By the way, your comment is a load of malarkey.

    • hennorama

      President Obama is like a “typical American” in many ways:

      He comes from a non-affluent background, just like the “typical American.”
      He is a child of the 1960s, like many typical Baby Boomers.
      His parents divorced, again pretty common.
      He struggled to find his identity.  Nothing unusual there.
      He “inhaled” fairly often; again not atypical.
      He went to college.  Nothing odd there.
      He found a church he liked and joined it.  Pretty typical.
      He worked to help those less fortunate than he.  Not unusual.

      Pres. Obama IS a “typical American.”  Why would he have any problem relating to others?

      Pres. Obama is also unbelievably ATYPICAL.

      He overcame all the disadvantages of his youth to acheive great historical success, becoming the first African-American President.

      Where else but in America could a man of his background have such success, in spite of his background?

      Is this a great country or what?

      • notafeminista

        Well.  We know he didn’t build that.

        1)He is of mixed race, not typical American.

        2)Apparently entirely abandoned by his father until said father’s death and abandoned by his mother at grade school age.  Again, not your typical American (Furthermore, while ’tis more prevalent today for parents to go off and leave children for their own selfish pursuits, it was NOT the norm in 1960s America)

        3)Neither was divorce the norm in 1960s America. Not for at least another decade.

        4)I will absolutely applaud your nod to American exceptionalism because you are correct, nowhere else but America could such a story be a success.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/5JMSMWUQ6MLDZUDWYNKROQXFOE Hawk45

    I am very disappointed that the debates have not addressed, examined and/or discussed Congress’ role and inability to function in the recovery process. While it was true that Obama had a Democratic majority for only 4 months during the first two years of his presidency, I would not characterize Blanche Lincoln, Mary Landrieux, Ben Nelson, and three other Dems as true democrats. However, when the GOP took over the House in 2010 on a Promise-of-Jobs agenda, they did not pass any legitimate jobs bills despite Mr Boehner’s insistence otherwise. I would not count 17 bills to stall EPA regulations and 18 bills to unblock the oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico as broad-based Jobs bills. The only true Jobs bill was to create jobs for high-skilled immigrants, not Americans. Other than that, McConnell and the GOP senate utilized a record number of filibusters for everything that the President tried to do to create jobs. GOP open hostility started on Inauguration Day and has continued unabated to this day with a ‘My way or the highway’ attitude. Since it is highly unlikely that either party will obtain a majority, to suggest that having a Republican President would result in a Congress that would function more smoothly is inaccurate and naïve. What would make a reasonable person believe that a Democratic minority will be any less obstructive?Many of the president’s proposals were originally Republican ideas including Obamacare which came from the Heritage Foundation and passed into law in Massachusetts by a Republican governor named Romney. In previous administrations, other bills to create jobs to get us out of recessions were also supported by Republicans. So I have concluded that they are not governing on principle. The hostility and obstruction has to do with something else. Maybe the answer starts with Semi-secret ultra-conservative organizations whose exclusive membership is made up of the wealthy corporatists and powerful politicians. Whether you call them The Fellowship, The Bohemian Club or The Illuminati, these individuals and corporations control virtually every aspect of our lives. Many, maybe all, are part of the 200,000+ American corporations that have outsourced good paying jobs. Bain Capital was a large part in that outsourcing. The truth be told, this country is already an Oligarchy and the exorbitant campaign contributions being spent by the Koch Brothers, Sherman Adelson, Karl Rove groups, and secret Super PACs is indicative of how corporations have taken over our lives. I look at the candidacy of Mitt Romney as an extension of that control. I see his tax, energy, and social policies as those that will lead to further expansion of the income gap between the 1% and everyone else. Women will take a huge hit on their healthcare access. Romney will be a puppet to the Corporations, Grover Norquist, the Religious Right, and other ideological zealots on the right. He will sign any bill put in front of him. I believe that as this election goes, so goes America.

    • Steve__T

       Agreed how sad for us. Will we ever get our country back?

      • StilllHere

        No, stay on your couch waiting for your government check.

    • abdunk

      well put. and the genius of the right wing sales pitch is they purport to be for free market, low taxes, individual responsibility and small business opportunity.  when in fact the vast majority of small businesses are scraping by competing in a rigged game where its not what you know, its who you know and how much you have contributed.  and in that game we all lose. 

      it used to be different and i dont know how it can be changed.  you can be a great candidate like we have in our mass senate race, Elizabeth Warren- hands down for main street, smart, capable.  her race is close.  to a guy who does the bidding for wallstreet.  does anyone remember?We have a plutocracy 

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    I thought Romney handled the ‘how are you different than Bush-43′ question very well.

    The big business vs. small business contrast was powerful.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       And I thought Obama did a decent job providing more distinctions.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        This question was in Obama’s wheel house but he didn’t open new ground.  Romney has ignored the Obama attack trying to paint Romney as Bush III  to his detriment.   However, this direct question allowed Romney to answer this charge for the first time in front a huge audience. 

        He also did it without trashing Bush –much.

        Therefore, I believe this was a net positive for Romney.

        • StilllHere

          Would it have been dirty pool to say we’ve been mired with Carter II these last 4 years?

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Exactly.

            The happiest ex-President right now is Carter.  He is no longer the worst President in the modern era.
             

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             You know, we all can do without this trashing. 

            Whether of Carter or fellow bloggers (i.e., fellow human beings).

            Carter was sincere, honest, and it was a risky, botched helicopter rescue mission that sunk him

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            I’ll pay attention when you complain about the  vitriol spewed at Romney.

            Carter was a much better President than Obama in my view.

          • StilllHere

            Exactly! Correct on all counts.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             Yes.

    • Steve__T

      You would have thought he did a great job if he never opened his mouth, and you have an excuse for him as if he were your very best personal friend.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Matt-MC/69207889 Matt MC

    Kind of sick of seeing 100 posts by Worried. Stop trolling all day long. Make one point and leave it at that. No one really cares what you think anyway. You’re like those annoying pro-life protesters that troll around campus on registration day and yell at everyone. Occasionally, someone stops to yell back at them, but not much is gained other than yammering back and forth. 

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       Feel free to ignore every one my comments.

      I guarantee you that I won’t be offended in the slightest.

    • J__o__h__n

      I probably disagree with 99% of Worried’s posts but they aren’t trolling.  They discuss the topic, respond to other posts, and aren’t like the utter crap Modatroll would post.

      • Mike_Card

        I guess I disagree with you about WTFC; are you in the same boat with Stilll and Moda and William?  I’m looking for honest argument, but those creeps are not here for anything beyond their “pennies for posts.”

        Greggggg is not an agreeable poster, but he at least presents an honest point of view, despite his tendencies to drift into mere argumentation.

        • StilllHere

          LOL, you’re a joke.  Your best post ever is above and I quote “google.com” Really added a lot to the discussion, very honest argument.  Pathetic troll!

  • Kenneth Rubenstein

    Aren’t we a bit spoiled. We’re impatient, and want a President who will have the great plan complete with magic wands that will fix everything and bring on nirvana for all. Forgot it, it’s not gonna happen. Bush allowed us to play Monopoly and screw things up, and no government in a capitalist country can fix it quickly. 

    Furthermore, the President got dumped on for being too passive in the last debate, and too aggressive in this one. What’s that about?

    • jefe68

      That’s about people projecting their insecurities about the world onto the president. It’s part of the job.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       I agree. 

      We are a money-driven society which causes a lot of bad side effects.  To fix a system that tilts toward the very rich, allows investment firms to bet against their own investors, insider trading, while arresting very few of these big swindlers will require a lot of soul searching.

      Something we are not “into” these days.

      • Steve__T

         It’s not so much what we are “into” but their protectors won’t let it happen. Why do you think no one but Maidoff  went to jail?

        • StilllHere

          No other crimes were committed.  Prove otherwise!

  • 1Brett1
  • 1Brett1

    I agree about the quick-fix, magic-wand mentality. I would also rather have a stable economy that grows slowly than a roller coaster one where winning is big and losing is catastrophic. 

    As far as the “Obama’s porridge is too cold; Obama’s porridge is too hot” routine, I suspect we all know what that’s about…and “partisanship” would be a euphemism.

  • 1Brett1

    response is to Kenneth Rubenstein

  • 1Brett1

    DISQUS[T] seems more f**ked than usual today

  • Potter

    The caller Carl who rejects this notion that bringing up what Obama inherited from Bush “is getting old” now is right.  Obama should not talk about what huge handicaps he had right from the beginning?

    About “patience running thin” about how long it is taking for this economy to get going already– look around at what is going on in the world. We are in a global economy. We can’t be unaffected.

    How about NOT blaming a president for what he cannot do?  How about more blame for oppositional Congress? Somehow a president has to be all powerful. We do not have a dictatorship.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       Okay, then, let me try this:  The conservative Supreme Court stole an election and we’re all asked to “get over it”.

      we’ll, it’s just a little bit of election stealing, after all…

  • TomK_in_Boston

    Couple items in the big picture:

    1. It’s crazy that tax cuts at the top come up at all. With wealth and income flowing to the top in a torrent and rates at the top at or near post-1929 lows, why would any sane policy include more cuts? It’s pure class warfare.

    2. B-a-i-n is E-v-i-l (I prefer “Bane”) and Lord R can’t walk away from it. He created the monster, he designed the strategy of collecting such huge fees via junk bonds issued by the victim company that he profits even if he drives the company into bankruptcy, he was “sole shareholder” for years after he supposedly “left”, and he continues to profit from the scams. He obviously still has enormous influence at Bane, but he won’t pick up the phone to help the workers being laid off, pensions busted, and health care stopped, today. Lord R’s “business experience” as a Bane con man disqualifies him from the presidency. I’d take Bernie Madoff in a heartbeat.

    3. Why isn’t anyone talking about Sensata? It’s a Bane scam company that is buying profitable American companies and shipping the jobs to China. No, I don’t accept that Lord R is free and clear of Bane. He created the monster, he profits, and his buddies there will listen to him:

    “If privatizing Social Security and taking away Medicare isn’t enough to scare the middle-class pants off you, how about the thought of a President who sees no problem with closing a “profitable” (as Sensata reportedly is) American plant down and shipping jobs to China for even more profit.

    There are at least four U.S.-owned Sensata/Bain factories in China, including a large manufacturing facility in northern Jiangsu Province, which was built by the Government of China for Sensata. Much of the machinery that is moved into the new plant in Jiangsu is from the Freeport, Illinois factory Sensata is shutting down on November 5, the day before the Presidential Election in the U.S.

    By the way, most Sensata workers in China make around 99 cents an hour, work 12 hour shifts, 7 days a week. Female workers account for over 90% of the workforce and the hiring of men is very limited (women believe that management prefers to hire females because they are thought to be easier to control) Unfortunately, labor unions are not too popular in China.

    Mitt Romney says he wants to “get tough on China.” Really? Well, the workers have asked Romney to come to Freeport and help them. The can’t understand why the plant is closing given its profitability. “The week before they (Chinese workers) came they took the American flag down outside the plant. The week after they left they put it back up” said a Sensata worker referring to the Chinese replacements. Are you kidding me? So not only is Bain taking away these workers’ incomes and livelihoods, the company is allowing them to take down the American flag and forcing them to train their replacements from China.” Sheesh, is this the business model Romney wants for the country?”

  • jefe68

    I’m not sure anyone else caught this, but Romney contradicted himself to the point where he was disagreeing with himself. Response to the question from a college student(Jeremy).

    ROMNEY: “2014. When you come out in 2014, I presume I’m going to be president. I’m going to make sure you get a job. Thanks Jeremy.”

    ROMNEY: “Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs.”

    OK Mitt, which is it going to be, when you’re going to be president you will be creating jobs or you wont…

    • notafeminista

      Making sure he gets a job and creating jobs are not the same thing no matter how much you want it to be.

    • Gregg Smith

      Government does not create jobs. That’s not their job and they have no money. Repealing Obamacare, easing regulation, making a fairer flatter tax code, growing the economy and generally getting government of the back of small business is the best way to make sure Jeremy gets a job. It’s amazing you see a contradiction.

      • StilllHere

        Obama sees government as the employer of first resort, especially if they’re going to be in a union.

    • katpower

      Logically you really can’t have it both ways but somehow the people who agree with this type of simplistic conservative rhetoric and lies don’t see through the basic  philosophical contradictions…. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

    deleted by poster.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

    Another posting error. sorry

  • MordecaiCarroll

    John McCormack re: Obama’s pledge to raise taxes on people earning more than 250 grand: “Why is it going to be any different in the next four years?  If you couldn’t pass this the first time around, why are the next four years going to be better?”

    This statement conveniently overlooks Republican Mitch McConnell’s central role in the dysfunction currently grinding almost all business in Washington to a halt.  His use of the filibuster (or threat of the filibuster, and insistence on cloture votes to ensure that anything that passes the Senate not be able to pass by a simple majority of 51, but instead pass by a super-majority of 60) has contributed in a huge way to the gridlock and dysfunction in Washington

    From a 2010 National Journal piece:

    “Since 2006, the number of cloture motions filed has exploded, from 68
    just four years ago to at least 132 motions in the 111th Congress,
    according to Senate statistics.

    The Senate averaged about one filibuster a year until 1970, while in
    the last two sessions it has averaged 70 per year, according to
    Democracy Rules, a coalition pushing for reform.

    The time has come to reexamine the Senate rule, said Caroline
    Fredrickson, executive director of the American Constitution Society.

    “Looking at the Constitution shows that the filibuster was never a
    part of the Framers’ original plan,” she said. “The filibuster is
    created in Senate rules, and has no basis in the Constitution. It is
    ripe for reconsideration.”

    The number of filibusters has many observers calling the Senate broken and dysfunctional, and some senators agree.”

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/majority-does-not-rule-in-filibuster-filled-111th-congress-20101216

    In his desire to see to it that his stated goal of making sure Obama is a one-term president is realized, McConnell has engaged in the sort of scorched earth opposition that virtually guarantees that nothing gets done in the Senate.  But of course McCormack doesn’t mention that.  Such an admission would get in the way of his far-right Weekly Standard talking points.

    • Gregg Smith

      Those wascally Wepulicans!

    • Gregg Smith

      Those wascally Wepulicans!

      • StilllHere

        Gosh, he thought when he got to Washington that Congress would just roll over the same way the media did; and when they didn’t, he didn’t want to play anymore…. Meanwhile America sinks.

  • http://www.facebook.com/tee.fallon Tee Fallon

    Obama gave 1.5 Billion Dollars to the Muslim Brotherhood, Why? What about giving Mexican Drug dealers guns that killed Americans? Obama has no business skills and it shows.

    • StilllHere

      And even less sense.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

      And G.W. Bush held hands with an Ay-rab during a nice semi-private stroll.

  • http://www.facebook.com/tee.fallon Tee Fallon

    The
    only thing is up is our debt, food-stamps, gas prices, and unemployment, thanks to Obama!

    • StilllHere

      It’s incredible that 47% just blindly vote for the guy!

  • StilllHere

    The debate should be about who is going to cut government spending more and more quickly; not about who is going to confiscate more of American’s hard-earned wages, but Obama wants to grow the government and have all of our earnings go to the government in the hopes of trickling down prosperity to all.  If he only had a payroll to support or had to deal with government regulators making his business more inefficient, he wouldn’t have so much faith in the government and would see it as the solution to all.  I guess it doesn’t help that the public and private employee unions are giving his campaign hundreds of millions again this election.

    And for all you communists who don’t know how private equity works:  if they are issuing debt, sophisticated bond buyers are making a reasoned decision that they will be paid back; if not, the leverage would not be possible.

    • Mike_Card

      Your comment is uninformed and insulting to those who follow this discussion board.

      • notafeminista

        So explain private equity then.

        • Mike_Card

          google.com

          • StilllHere

            Look who’s insulting now. Tsk, tsk, tsk; what would your mother say?

          • jefe68

            I would hope yours  told you to mind your manners.

          • notafeminista

            You cannot?

      • StilllHere

        Gotcha, you got nothing except you’re overly sensitive, probably from breasting feeding for too long or rejection by your father at an early age but it would only be conjecture on my part.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

           Not the kind of conversation I’d tolerate in my house.  There’s too much meanness in our society.

  • Outside_of_the_Box

    If Americans want a taste of true democracy, for the first time, every energy should be spent pushing to reform the elecotral process. We desperately need more candidates who aren’t complete pawns for special interests. The parties vet these candidates well in advance, they make sure they are pawn material. By the time a candidate makes it to presidential elections, they have gotten into bed with all the major players, and have given up any hope of maintaining a shred of dignity, autonomy, authenticity, authority. Everything the 2 party system does, is aimed at keeping all challengers out of the system. They need the illusion of choice, so they have reds and blues. They are generally happy to work with either. Because ont he issues that matter to special interests, there is no red and blue to speak of. The people think they have a choice, and the Elite can carry on with their business relatively unmaligned. Make no mistake, the Elite interests run America. And generally, they couldn’t give a rat’s ass about politics, religion, democracy, or anything other than preserving and expanding their interests – money, greed, power, control, skewed ideologies. The country will NEVER BE RETURNED TO THE PEOPLE, if this rigged system is allowed to continue! Period.

    • Steve__T

      Amen I have the same outlook, our system has been corrupted and it seems no one noticed. I have continued to say there is no left no right just the top and they pull the strings and every body hops. A sad thing our country has become, just a veneer of true Americanism. The rich own this country and they wont give it back. the saddest is most Americans don’t even know it, and when you tell them you are a conspiracy theorist, wacko nut job. And I don’t want to have the last laugh saying I told you so.

      • Outside_of_the_Box

        Absolutely man. And like you said, the politicians, MSM, think tanks, academics, lobbyists…..all play within this illusory system, and so, even if they wanted to, they have to play along and demonise anyone who challenges it as nutty, conspiracy heads, fringe, etc. If they do happen upon the truth, and also discover they have a consciense, they generally leave the system for alternative media options. Where they can be more true to their convictions. That’s how it works. The truthers get pushed out. And like you, no one who cares about this country, wants to have the last laugh here. Let’s reform the system, so that doesn’t have to happen.

        • Steve__T

           I just wish I knew where to start I try here I talk to my friends and associates, but we are the few. Waiting for this to get to the point where they start to see the truth maybe to late to do anything other than what I would deplore, I hope for a quiet revolution but we must wait and see if ether enough wake up and realize this aint the America they thought it was or will we have a violent up rise when the masses realize they have been lied to and there is no other choice. I pray not the latter.

          • Outside_of_the_Box

            Yes, as we wake up to the reality of it, we can become quite cynical about the possibility for real change. Because we know how deep-seated it is, and how the Elite will do anything to preserve (and expand) their power. So we know, that it could well require a revolution to overturn. And no one wants to see that, if it can be avoided. Thing is, they’re so smart, so organized, so entrenched in all walks of life, they would just find a way to turn that revolution into a quasi-reform where it appeared the system had changed, but all of the Elite structures would remain in place. This is why I’m so cynical these days.

      • notafeminista

        Fortunately we have this board to keep us posted….heh.

  • Steve__T

    Disqus is at it again

    • Ray in VT

      I see people complain about Disqus a lot, but I don’t think that I’ve ever had it mess with my posts.  Could some issues be browser related?  I always use Firefox and have yet to experience any difficulties.

      • Steve__T

         I use Firefox also not browser related. It’s when you go below the first page answering post, if you don’t quickly do your post it will not go to reply but post at the top. It may have to do with the amount of post being sent not sure.

        • Ray in VT

          Weird.  I’ve done posts long and short, top, middle and bottom of the page and never had any problems.  I guess that I’ve just lucked out.

        • 1Brett1

          Today was the first time I’ve experienced the problem you describe…It does, however, seem to mess up line breaks/paragraph breaks

      • Mike_Card

        I’m plain vanilla IE9 and get trouble all the time; Disqus is a kluggey piece of software that is using this site as their beta test.

      • 1Brett1

        Yes, it does seem to be more compatible with Firefox
         

      • Gregg Smith

        I use Safari and haven’t had problems recently.

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    An Al Qaeda attack on the Federal Reserve Bank in NYC was thwarted today.  Thank God!.

    In related news the Obama administration have now blamed this attempted attack on the ‘hate’ movie “Wall Street” and have detained the movie’s director Oliver Stone for questioning.
     

    • Mike_Card

      That’s sick.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Sometimes levity and satire is required.

        Try Jonathan Swift.
         

        • StilllHere

          Mike is always funny, he just doesn’t get the joke!

        • Duras

          …A conservative recommending Swift…that’s a new one.

          • notafeminista

            Because?

          • Duras

            While Swift was influenced by the philosophic writings of George Berkeley, which is Western Metaphysics and leans more towards the theological side of philosophy rather than the scientific side … if you read particularly the back half of Gulliver’s Travels, it will become easy to presume that Karl Marx read Swift as well while he was writing his philosophies in the Library of London over a hundred years later.

          • notafeminista

            I am whatever passes for a classical liberal these days (big surprise I know).  I read the Communist Manifesto and would recommend it to anyone wanting to avoid social and economic disaster or at the very least preserve liberty.

            People of all political affiliations read all kinds of things.  Maybe you don’t, but please don’t paint them all with the same brush. 

          • Duras

            I found it queer that a conservative would recommend Swift because his narratives are liberalizing. 

            As for Marx, what conservatives don’t understand about Marx is that 90% shows ways that people exploit other people regardless whether the economic system is capitalism, socialism, and communism.  I’m a pretty solid capitalist: I believe that there should be a public police, public justice system, public schools and universities, public prisons, public fire departments, public roads, public fire departments–but if you read Das Kapital you will find Marx accurrate and often humane, and a lot of what you will see is the same exploitation techniques that the republicans in America and the communists in China take advantage of.  Liberalism rises above economic systems and is focused on the treatment of other human beings.

            I, and most liberal democrats, recognize that a level of inequality is necessary for productivity, but there are unhealthy levels of inequality that the conservatives don’t understand.

            I also love Adam Smith.  Now you read in the Manifesto the importance of unions, well, Adam Smith also stresses the importance of unions.  But republicans and Communists in China hate unions.  Do you see my point?

            I think republicans need to realize that FDR was the most liberal-progressive president this country has ever had.  He was far more left than Obama is now, but he didn’t bring this country to socialism or communism.  After 3 terms, he brought us to a middle class and a world superpower.  Once you realize how off base this “slippery road to socialism” crap is, you might begin to realize that republicans are driving America toward the same conditions of all those bad communist countries that you hear about. 

    • jimino

      Much more likely to be a Ron Paul supporter or other Fed hater.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       It seems really tough for you to say anything positive about Obama.  I can take policy criticisms, but ad hominem attacks are really below the belt.

      What would you say, I wonder, if the attack wasn’t thwarted.  You seem hard to please.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        You consider that an ad hominem attack?

        Boy you really have a thin skin – even thinner than Obama’s. I didn’t think that was possible.

        I’ll be watching to see if you have anything positive to say about Romney.

      • notafeminista

        As do you.  Begging pardon, can you point out your positive statement regarding Mr. Romney?  I seem to have missed it.

  • Patrick McCann

    This is Tom Ashbrook at his finest. I’m a long time listener and this ranks as one of his best moderating jobs.

  • TomK_in_Boston

    What do you think? 
    Mitt Romney most resembles:

    1. Scrooge McDuck without the humor
    2. Bernie Madoff without the humor
    3. Gordon Gekko in “Wall Street”
    4. Mr Potter in “It’s a Wonderful Life”
    5. Mr. Burns in The Simpsons
    6. Ebenezer Scrooge at the start of “A Christmas Carol”

    Any others?

    • Linda Wilson

       The guy who sells OxiClean?

    • Gregg Smith

      The next President.

      • TomK_in_Boston

        Wow, that would be a character in a Stephen King movie.

  • mcconnell9

    I am frustrated to keep hearing the refrain that re-electing President Obama will bring four more years of the same thing. What people fail to notice is that “four more years of the same thing” will mean four more years of constant improvement in the economy, four more years of stabilization and growth in the housing industry, four more years of digging ourselves out of the incredibly deep fiscal hole that was dug for us by the Bush policies. I am happy to vote for four more years of that kind of improvement in our country’s fiscal health.

    • StilllHere

      Even bigger deficits and a downgraded credit rating.  There’s nothing healthy about Obama’s policies of fiscal destruction.  

      • jimino

        We don’t all yearn for the days when our stock value was half of what it is now, nobody could sell their house and our economy was shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs every month.  In fact, only a traitor or someone who could cash in on that misery would.  I suppose someone who is literally wrong about everything would too.  Which category do you fit into?

      • hennorama

        Not so much:

        Federal Deficits in CONSTANT (FY 2005) DOLLARS, AND AS PERCENTAGES OF GDP: [in Billions of Dollars]

        YEAR  DEFICIT   % of GDP

        2009  -$1,274.4  -10.1%
        2010  -$1,153.0  – 9.0%
        2011  -$1,127.6  – 8.7%
        2012  -$1,123.1  – 8.5%(estimated)

        This assumes that all of the deficit for 2009 would be attributed to Pres. Obama, which is far from accurate.

        Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist01z3.xls
        or http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals Table 1.3

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         Let’s see, when exactly did all the destruction and melt-down of the economy occur?  It started well before Obama was sworn in.  Be good to stick with history, not how you might want to spin it.  Once Obama took office, there has been steady but slow improvement.  Look at the stock market, housing starts, consumer viewpoints, etc.

        He inherited “fiscal destruction” brought about by 2 UNFUNDED wars (oh, yeah, Iraq war was supposed to “pay for itself”) a huge TEMPORARY tax cut (yeah, right… temporary) and loose Wall Street regulations.

        You might strongly dislike Obama, but your man will head us back to that path of destruction. 

        Question:  which Presidents, Republican or Democratic, run up the bigger deficits?

    • Gregg Smith

      GDP was 3.9% the 2nd quarter of 2010. A year later it was .4%. It rebounded to 3% Q1 of this year. Q2 was 2% and Q3 is 1.3%. That is not steady improvement.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

        I think you mean to say “GDP growth”.

        And you are cherry picking the data in attempt to prove a malarkey point.  You are guilty of “data abridging”, leaving off data that tells another story.

        Let’s look at the whole time during O Presidency and then I say, you’re not showing the true mess Obama inherited.  So the full data tell quite a different story.

        2009 1: -8.9  (that would be inauguration, right?)
        2009 2: -6.7
        2009 3: -0.7
        2009 4: +1.7
        2010 1: +3.8

        All subsequent growth rates positive.  Oh, and here’s G.W.Bush’s last year in office:

        2008 1: +1.7
        2008 2: -1.8
        2008 3: +1.3
        2008 4: -3.7

        So in his last year in office, Bush averaged a growth rate of -0.63%

        In Obama’s last available 4 quarters, the growth averaged +2%.

        Not good, but way better than what G.W.B. left us with:  The Disaster.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

        here’s the data source for GDP growth:
        tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth

  • http://www.facebook.com/larkin.oates Larkin Oates

    One of O’bama’s health care actions vs. insurance agencies riping off customers got me a refund of $750 because they overcharge!

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       Yep.  He requires 80% of insurance cost to go to actual health care, leaving 20% (pretty darn good) for middle-man mark-up.

      • hennorama

        There can be a perverse disincentive for medical care cost containment for health insurers if they are required, in effect, to spend 80% of the premiums they charge on medical care for their clients.  Insurers call medical costs “losses,” and use the term “medical loss ratio” (MLR) when they talk about the percent of premiums spent on health care.

        Here’s what I mean – let’s says an insurer charges its clients a total of $100 million in premiums.  If their MLR is 80% minimum, this means they get to keep a max of $20 mil for admin. expenses and profit.

        Let’s say their clients’ medical care costs are $77 million.  This is an MLR of 77% and means that the insurer would need to refund $3 million to its clients.  Trust me, this is the LAST thing insurers want to do. 

        The insurer may be tempted to overpay medical claims by $ 3 mil rather than give it back to clients.
        It would also mean that regulators would look a bit harder at any proposed premium increases, since the company now has a history of a 77% MLR.

        The $77 mil spent on medical care would justify premiums of only $96.25 million, leaving a max of $19.25 million for admin. and profit.  That’s definitely NOT what the insurer wants.

        According to TIME, prior to the passage of the ACA, a CBO report “…said insurers might react to new thresholds by “cutting back on efforts to restrain benefit costs through care management.” Translation: Anything that doesn’t count as “medical costs” may be on the chopping block, including exorbitant executive salaries but also programs to keep patients healthy. There is also a fear among health policy experts that some insurers could raise premiums in reaction — higher premiums means more money spent on health care, but also more left over for profits. Another unintentional consequence might be insurers overpaying for some health services to keep their MLR averages high.”

        sources: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1949390,00.html and http://www.americanbar.org/newsletter/publications/aba_health_esource_home/Stein.html#_ftn21

        • notafeminista

          I’m sure we can count on those who receive overpayment to return any surplus to which they are not entitled.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

             I don’t understand your point.

            These refunds are for insurance holders who pay for private insurance.  Obamacare has stipulated that insurers cannot charge more than 20% overhead.  If they violate that, their customers get a refund.

            So it is cost control that favors more efficient service delivery.

            What do you mean by “not entitled”?

          • notafeminista

            If you overpay someone, you are paying more than the bill indicates. 
             
            The entity to whom you are paying is entitled to that which is on the bill and the bill only.
             
            If you buy a Big Mac for $5 and pay $7, McDonald’s should return $2 as they are only entitled to $5

            Incidentally overhead is operating costs.  Things like printing, clerical services, rent, utilities and so on. If 80% must be spent on actual health care, who covers the rest if the light bill goes up or the administrative assistant wants a raise?

  • Gregg Smith

    So Candy Crowley interrupted Obama 9 times and Romney 28 times. She gave Obama 4 minutes and 18 seconds more time than Romney. Lehrer only gave Obama an extra 3 minutes and 14 seconds. She inserted herself to buttress Obama’s lie and later admitted she was wrong. All and all she was very fair for CNN. They need to step up their game if they want to get Romney. They will.

    • jimino

      If you violate the rules more often a good referee will penalize you more often.  Of course, fabulously wealthy CEO’s don’t have to pay attention to the referees. They can just fire ‘em.

      • Gregg Smith
        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

           Of treating “underlings” (or even the president) with respect.  Romney gets peeved when directly questioned… something he clearly needs to get over if he wants to be a real leader and not just someone on top of a big money pyramid, especially one that gambles on businesses and produces nothing but money.

          • notafeminista

            Money’s a nice thing to have…especially at rent time and grocery shopping.   I’ve convinced neither entity to accept kittens for payment as yet.

          • StilllHere

            Only the Fed and the Treasury get money for nothing.  Businesses have to live in the real world where people expect something in return for the money they give you.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Maybe right-wingers are so used to “working the media refs” (until the mainstream press takes special pains not to hurt the GOP’s fee-fees) that some actual officiating is unrecognizable.

    • jefe68

      Oh heavens forbid, President Obama had 3 minutes and 14 seconds more than Mitt Romney!

      You whine a lot about insignificant stuff.

      • Gregg Smith

        You must not have read buy comment. I said it was fair for CNN. To correct you it was 4 minutes and 18 seconds. You are referring to the first debate Obama edge. Biden got more time too. It’s just the way it is and always will be. No probs. I’m saying they need to do better next time. Maybe 10 minutes extra for Obama.

      • brettearle

        Don’t like to admit this–because I can’t stand Romney and I don’t particularly like Gregg.

        But Crowley was so bad, she almost made Lehrer’s performance seem pristine.

        It only SEEMED like she was better than Lehrer–because she talked so much more than taciturn Lehrer.

        The fact is she kept the debate OUT OF CONTROL by interrupting too often at the wrong time and not interrupting enough, at the right time.

        She was terrible.

        And she helped to make it almost a Circus.

        The tension was predictable–before the debate was to even begin.

        And the next moderator won’t be much better–maybe worse.

        We need Marvin Kalb, Ted Koppel, or Brian Ross, or Michelle Martin, or Susan Stamberg

        • jefe68

          I thought the debate was awful and I dislike our entire election process. I wish this could be done in a few months and it’s over.

          Mind you I though some of the audience did ask some very good questions that not one of the candidates answered. It was a medium for them to pander.

          Mitt Romney does have some issues about control, that’s for sure. But I do think the level of lying and bending the truth has reached ridiculous heights, so something has to give here.

          I was not happy about here performance, but I thought she was trying to control these to alpha males who looked to me as if they could have gone a few more rounds.

          I kept hearing the sound track for Rocky…
          or better yet Ragging Bull… because there was a lot of bull being bantered about that night.

          • brettearle

            Well-said

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

      And Romney was disrespectful to the sitting President.  I didn’t say that.  A republican on tee-vee did. Same republican noted that Romney was too often in Crowley’s face, too.

      Perhaps a good chunk of media has a lefty bias, but perhaps they are tired of:

      1. Romney limiting his media exposure “severely”, even cutting off local t.v. interviews when they got uncomfortable.

      2. Romney being vague on details. We heard him say “I know how to fix this…” or a variant, 10 times during the debate. Then he drops silent about the how. That is an arrogant way of treating the public.

      3. Romney switching positions on Obamacare, abortion, saying he is a “severe conservative”, then tacking midground when it suits him.

      all these things are fodder for reporters. They want a story and Romney’s are sometimes dotted with omissions, twists, and lies… like the “you didn’t build it” crap or his cheap birther shot, etc.

      • Gregg Smith

        If so:

        !) When was the last Obama press conference or appearance on TV other that “The View” or “Letterman” or some other softball arena?

        2) What is Obama’s stated 2nd term agenda?

        3) When has Romney ever supported Obamacare? What about Obama’s flip-flops on Gitmpo, indefinite detention, no lobbyist or gay marriage?

        And these are the things that are not fodder for reporters.

  • 1Brett1

    Binders full of Women! 

  • Gregg Smith

    The first debate focused on domestic policy. Last night’s debate included both foreign and domestic policy. Romney has soundly won the day on the domestic side, everybody knows it. IMO he struck a fatal blow on Libya too. Romney elicited the “deer in the headlights” face from Obama when he held him to his own words as Obama tried to imply he didn’t say what he just said he said he said. Here’s the moment:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzdWnigWY0o

    “I want to make sure we get that for the record…”

    Yep, we did. Now the question becomes: “Why did he lie for 2 weeks?” The next debate is solely on foreign policy. It’ll be saucy.

    • StilllHere

      Very powerful, Obama caught in a lie and the moderator doing everything she can to rescue Obama from himself.  Really set the tone for the whole event.

    • hennorama

      Interesting.  I guess I missed Pres. Obama’s “deer in the headlights” look.  I interpretted his visage while saying “please proceed, governor” as more of “I’m just going to let him walk into this one…” Sort of like the political adage “Never interrupt your opponent when he’s destroying himself.”  Plus the merest hint of a Cheshire cat smile.

      It literally depends on your point of view.  The video you linked to showed Mr. Romney from the back when Ms. Crowley corrected him on Pres. Obama’s remarks.  Now, look at Mr. Romney’s face right after Ms. Crowley tells him he’s wrong, in this clip:  (It’s at about 2:45 in, but the whole clip is worth watching)

      http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-17-2012/democalypse-2012—the-second-debate—now-including-the-president—benghazi

      I believe that could more accurately be characterized as “a deer in the headlights.”  Maybe even “Oh gosh, I just messed that up” in Romney-speak.

      • Gregg Smith

        It occurs at 1:20. You seem like a reasonable person, what do you say? Did Obama say it was an act of terror on day one or did he indirectly imply it? How does either square with two weeks of saying it was a spontaneous incident as a result of a video?

        • hennorama

          Thanks for your response.

          Gregg I didn’t mean to imply that I missed Pres. Obama’s expression that you referred to, just that I had a completely different interpretation of it.

          As to Pres. Obama’s Rose Garden remarks on Sept. 12, 2012, when the entire topic was Benghazi, yes he said “acts of terror” when referring to Benghazi. I already pointed this out to you and this board yesterday:

          “Pres. Obama’s remarks on Sept. 12, 2012, in part:

          “Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourn with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

          As Americans let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those, both civilian and military, who represent us around the globe.

          No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.”

          see: http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012

          Note that Pres. Obama said “And then last night we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.” BEFORE then saying “No acts of terror …”

          The sequence of Pres. Obama’s Sept. 12, 2012 remarks on Benghazi is quite clear:

          1. The topic of the Rose Garden remarks was Benghazi and the deaths and injuries of Americans
          2. The President referred to Benghazi numerous times, AS THIS WAS THE TOPIC OF HIS REMARKS
          3. The President discussed many of the details of the attack in Benghazi and his sorrow over Amb. Stevens’ death
          4. The President said “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation” when referring to these attacks in Benghazi

          Here’s yet another link to the entire speech. watch it, then decide for yourself:

          http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2012/09/12/president-obama-speaks-attack-benghazi

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

    The negativity and personal attacks that appear on this and 1000′s of other blogs indicate our dysfunctionality.   We care way too much about scoring nasty points than solving problems.  The Obama haters here — and everyone else — can look in the mirror first before projecting all our own weakness and anxieties and antisocial tendencies on the President.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      I’m sure your lapse in admonishing the Romney haters, since they are more numerous, was simply an oversight .

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

        Sure, I can add the Romney haters.  But I made the point that we ALL need to look in the mirror. 

        I’m not impressed by name calling — or warping available data — to smear someone. It is childish and disrespectful to all humans that are on this blog.

        • Steve__T

           Welcome to On Point you want civility you may want to check another blog. Many have tried to hold a decent discourse, let just say you have been warned.

  • JGC

    I am sick of being held hostage by undecided voters. 

    • notafeminista

      Darn those freedoms anyway.

  • brettearle

    What Charles Miller said about Romney, Miller’s third comment below, some 45 minutes ago, is on target.

    Romney is literally a Barker selling snake oil.

    We tend to mistrust any political opponent–but it is REALLY TRUE about Romney:

    He….will….say….anything….to….become….
    …..President 

    And the sad thing is that not only is he selling the Brooklyn Bridge to the American people; but the American people may be on the verge of buying it.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      I disagree.

      Snake oil == 2008-Hope and change
      * based on the record.

      • brettearle

        And you would be wrong, Venom breath….

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

        Based on his record.  I might suggest that you look at GDP growth under G.W. Bush’s last year and Obama’s first year.

        It is clear the economic disaster started with Bush and Obama (and simply the economy) pulled us out of large negative growth.

        I have posted this data below.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          The recession ended June 2009 — BEFORE the stimulus had time to take effect.

          Bush’s actions with TARP ended the recession.

          The stimulus was badly mismanaged.

          Obamacare and Dodd-Frank are an increasing drag on the economy.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

            No.
             
            Health care costs are the increasing drag on our economy. 

            Know how much of our GDP goes to this bloated “system”?  17%  It has increased LINEARLY over the last 50 years.

            I suspect all the greedy parties are charging more b/c they know their rapacious ways will be checked by Obamacare.

            Exactly where do you get your knowledge of how fast direct stimuli takes to boost the economy? Or is this more made-up stuff?

            Our economy tanked by 2nd quarter of GWB;s last full year.

            Again, reposting GDP quarterly growth over Obama’s first year and GW’s last year.

            2009 1: -8.9  (that would be inauguration, right?)2009 2: -6.72009 3: -0.72009 4: +1.72010 1: +3.8

            All subsequent growth rates under Obama are positive.  Here’s G.W.Bush’s last year in office:

            2008 1: +1.72008 2: -1.82008 3: +1.32008 4: -3.7

            So in his last year in office, Bush averaged a growth rate of -0.63%

            In Obama’s last available 4 quarters, the growth averaged +2%. 

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            I can show you a study that Obama added regulations cost the economy $1.8T per year.  This is on top of the regulations that were strangling the economy before Obama came to office.

            Any interest?
             

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      “He….will….say….anything….to….become….
      …..President”

      Let’s hold team Obama to this standard for a change.

      The disgusting character attacks that has been launched by team Obama are despicable.   It started as soon as Romney announced his bid and Axelrod started on “Romney has no core”.  They’ve called him a felon, tax cheat, murderer, heartless, vulture, liar and on and on.

      I think you need hold your candidate to this scrutiny:

       “If you don’t have a record to run on then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from.”
      -Barack Obama 2008

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    The record:
    Obama since January 2009—Now

    Gas Prices
    $1.84—$3.88

    Food Stamp Distribution
    32 million—47 million

    Unemployment
    7.6%—7.8%

    Gross Federal Debt
    $11.9 Trillion—$16.7 trillion

    Median Income
    $55,000—$50,054

    Hours spent on the Golf Course 520
    Hours spent with the President’s Job Council—20

    • StilllHere

      Thanks for the stats, hard to argue with, especially the last one.

    • jimino

      Thank you for conceding that continuing the same tax and economic policies implemented by the Republican party during the Bush administration, which is what has been done during the Obama administration, is not effective.  I agree.

  • JGC

    My favorite tumblr so far on “binders full of women”:

    3 rings to rule them all and in the darkness bind them

  • brettearle

    Mister Worried For The Country,

    Romney leaves excerpts out of the paperback version of his book because it made him look bad on the health care issue.

    An accomplished CEO signs SEC documents improperly?

    A Private-Equity Executive who infuses dying companies with money–and those that go under, do so AFTER the investors get their money back.  That’s what I call true no-risk capitalism. 

    Pins a gay man down and bullies him?  Sounds like it’s close to a hate crime to me.

    Puts a dog on the roof, for a long journey?  Sounds like a case of potential animal cruelty to me….

    Believes that the Garden of Eden is in the state of Missouri? 

    Changes his positions on gun control, abortion, green energy and government-sponsored medical coverage, to suit his etch-a-sketch political mentality?

    Tries to make a $10,000 wager with the governor of Texas, in a live debate, before a national audience

    Was out of the state of Massachusetts, when running for President in 2008, longer than any NASA module was, when launched into outer space, heading to Jupiter. 

    LITERALLY TELLS NEARLY HALF THE PEOPLE IN THE COUNTRY THAT THEY ARE LAY-ABOUT FAILURES.

    LITERALLY TELLS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT HE CAN CUT THE DEFICIT WITHOUT TELLING US, SPECIFICALLY HOW

    That’s what I call a stellar candidate…

    AND THERE’S MORE….MORE THAN SIMPLY A FEW THINGS MORE….

    The guy is your basic personal and political disgrace…..

    • notafeminista

      No.  Read the transcript.  He didn’t say they were lay-about failures.  He said THEY believed they were lay-about failures. (Precisely, he said they believed they were victims).
      We know this because the Left tells us it is so:

      Gays are victimized by straights
      Women are victimized by men
      The poor are victimized by the rich
      Blacks are victimized by whites.

      Mr. Romney did nothing more than reiterate exactly and precisely the Left has been telling the American public for 40 years.  It can be read in today’s posts or posts for past programs going back as far as one permits him/herself to imagine.

      • brettearle

        You’re full of Bull.

        Every competent journalist backs up my point of view.

        So do millions of other people who have heard his behind-closed-door remarks.

        MR ROMNEY BELIEVES THAT THE 47% BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE VICTIMS.

        MOST OF THEM….DO…NOT…BELIEVE….THEY…. ARE….VICTIMS

        BUT MR. ELITIST BELIEVES THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE.

        YOUR INACCURATE CLAIM WAS REFUTED, SHORTLY AFTER THE REMARKS BECAME PUBLIC, BY THE PRESIDENT AND BY MANY OTHERS.

        IT IS TYPICAL OF PEOPLE, LIKE YOU ON THE RIGHT, TO EMBRACE THIS KIND OF PRIMITIVE, SUPERFICIAL, AND IGNORANT DISTORTION.

        The Right has literally NO CLUE, as to what Rugged Individualism truly is.

        The Right will eventually destroy the country.  It may take a while–but that’s where things are going….especially when you believe that half the country has that sort of attitude.

        Your perception is literal bullshit.

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          Watch out — Chuck Miller will call you a hater.

          • StilllHere

            Chuckie is only outraged by opinions he doesn’t agree with, opinions he doesn’t allow in his house!

        • jimino

          Technically, it’s not actual BS, because they appear to believe what they’re saying.

          It is stupidity, as in unable to understand plain English. 

        • notafeminista

          Whether or not YOU believe it is irrelevant.  However, Mr Romney never said they are moochers, or victims or lay-about failures.  Read the transcript.   He said they believe they are – a significant difference. 

          And as I said – read this board right here every day.  In fact your own post I’m replying to  – “The Right will destroy this country”  – meaning?  The smarter faster better Left (despite being smarter better and faster) will somehow become victims of the Right.

          You perpetuate the very stereotype you claim does not exist.l

          • brettearle

            Wrong again, twisted breath.

            Spin anything, anyway you want.

            Like Romney, you’ll say anything to convey the pseudo-impression that you’ve prevailed.

            If Romney thinks that THE 47% think they are victims and THE 47% refute such a claim, it ultimately means

            ….THAT IS THE WAY ROMNEY ACTUALLY PERCEIVES THEM….SINCE HE DID NOT RECEIVE THAT PERCEPTION FROM ANY OF THE 47%.

            You truly believe that you are full of clues….but you are, indeed, CLUELESS.

        • notafeminista

          So that I’m clear, you don’t actually believe any or all of the below statements to be true?

          Gays are victimized by straights

          Women are victimized by men

          The poor are victimized by the rich

          Blacks are victimized by whites.

      • StilllHere

        Exactly right, but the left is not going to like you for being so blunt and accurate.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

       thanks for this litany.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

      That is really pathetic.

      And Chuck, below — where is your outrage?

      Oh it is pious baloney.  I get it.

      At least Romney didn’t eat the dog.

      Good night.
       

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

         Wow.  The eating-the-dog comment is really mean-spirited birtherism stuff. 

        and what the hell does “pious baloney” mean?

        This is just mean spirited angry talk.  There is way too much of that.

        It’s clear you want to tweak and engage others, but only to be disrespectful. 

        • WorriedfortheCountry

          Birtherism?

          Obama ate dog as a kid per his memoir.  He talks about it in his own voice if you listen to the book on tape.  btw — he said dog meat was tough.  I think he needs a better butcher.

          And regarding pious baloney — google it.
           

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

            so you come out with some nasty comment and then sophomorically back away from it.  I’m done with responding to you.  I would find this disrespectful if someone said this in my house.  Enough.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Fine with me but your continued righteous indignation  is really something.

            And I didn’t back away from anything.  My ‘Obama ate the dog comment’  was a rejoinder to earle’s attack on Romney’ Seamus the dog.  Maybe you missed that subtle point.

          • J__o__h__n

            Romney’s inhumane treatment of his dog is worse than someone eating one where dogs are considered food.  If Romney put a chicken on the roof of his car it would be just as cruel. 

          • WorriedfortheCountry

             The dog loved it.

            Remember the old Letterman skit:  My dog Bob?

          • Steve__T

             Subtle as a sledge hammer driving a finishing nail.

          • StilllHere

            Your selective outrage is noted. (I hope that wasn’t too harsh.)

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            He was FED dog, the same way as a 5-year-old I was FED mincemeat pie, and also that apple pie with the raisins in it. (I eat neither of them now.)

            Please stop pretending that as a child he was ordering it off a menu.

          • Steve__T

             Come on TF what do you expect from WFTC He’s one of the best twist artist I have seen, he should have a job at FOX he is better at it than a whole crew for talking heads there.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        Please stop pretending that as a child Barack Obama was choosing between “dog” and “chicken” on a menu.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       “If you don’t have a record to run on then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from.”
      -Barack Obama 2008

      • Steve__T

         That was taken from his acceptance speech, so how about some context: 

        They claim that our insistence on something larger, something firmer,
        and more honest in our public life is just a Trojan horse for higher
        taxes and the abandonment of traditional values.

        And that’s to be expected, because if you don’t have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters.

        If you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as
        someone people should run from. You make a big election about small
        things.

        And you know what? It’s worked before, because it feeds into the
        cynicism we all have about government. When Washington doesn’t work, all
        its promises seem empty. If your hopes have been dashed again and
        again, then it’s best to stop hoping and settle for what you already
        know.

        I get it. I realize that I am not the likeliest candidate for this
        office. I don’t fit the typical pedigree, and I haven’t spent my career
        in the halls of Washington.

        But I stand before you tonight because all across America something is
        stirring. What the naysayers don’t understand is that this election has
        never been about me; it’s about you.

        It’s about you.

    • Wm_James_from_Missouri

      “Was out of the state of Massachusetts, when running for President in 2008, longer than any NASA module was…”

      _Very funny !

  • WorriedfortheCountry

    The Obama campaign has given up on FL, NC and VA.  They are now circling the wagons around 4 states – IA, NH, NV and Ohio.

    http://nationaljournal.com/politics/what-s-next-in-the-obama-romney-duel-20121017?page=2
     

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

    I’ve seen nasty, sarcastic, disrespectful from bloggers across the political spectrum.  We are seeing it here in increasing intensity.

    This is clearly reflective of a disrespectful and antagonistic attitude toward people we don’t agree with.

    It is the same poison that makes Congress dysfunctional.  We all have to try hard not to take the bait and join in the mud slinging.  I think this is really a troubling trend.

    • WorriedfortheCountry

       I actually agree with your sentiment but I don’t think it applies much to congress.  Congress’s problem is lack of leadership.

      However, the voters deserve much of the blame because they keep reelecting bad representatives.

      You may not agree but the Senate leadership appears to be the primary source of rancor and gridlock over the last two years. The Senate is a black hole right now.

      Hopefully, the voters will hold them accountable.

    • brettearle

      Look….Charles….you’re right.

      But first, we are facing an EXTRAORDINARY moment– where Gordon Gekko may very well take over the White House.

      When you consider the fact that this comes on the heels of the 2007 economic collapse, it is a frightening prospect to know that the country STILL doesn’t know what it’s doing.

      It is ABOUT TO MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE AGAIN.

      Therefore, at this moment the GLOVES ARE OFF.

      And I have seen much worse for a long, long time on this web site.

      The term `Bullshit’ is NOT slander.  It literally may not even be mudslinging.

      When the Right buys into the belief that 47% think of themselves as victims, THEY DESERVE THE TERM.

      That belief compounds the problem and it makes things even more dysfunctional than pure Invective, in any discourse.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        Yeah, that Gordon Gekko ruined the state of MA while taking no salary.

        You got me.
         

        • jefe68

          Actually Mitt Romney was an awful governor so much so that even former Republican governors such as Governor Weld have been very critical of his poor performance.

        • Duras

          Isn’t it bs that Romney is bragging about good education in MA, when blue states have better universities and secondary education than red states across the board?   

      • TomK_in_Boston

        Well put. Lord R could deliver that “greed is good” speech better than Michael Douglas, since he’s lived it. The prospect of responding to a disaster caused by financial con men by putting a financial con man in the WH is horrifying and unbelievable.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000894438466 Charles Miller

        I’m just concerned about civility.  That we aim to converse, not abuse.  Think of how we all feel about our Congress failing us by not engaging in fixes, but just scoring political points. Think of the “you lie” moment during the State of the Union speech. Unprecedented rudeness. 

        There are probably lots of reasons one can be angry:  job loss, feeling that (as one ages) society doesn’t reflect what one grew up with, perhaps bias/prejudice (think of birthers), fear of science (think of only 50% of Americans believing in evolution… a luxury a modern tech/science-based society cannot afford), social alienation, etc.

        There are lots of reasons one can be angry.  But if that is too front-and-center in one’s world, it makes constructive conversation difficult.

        So we have more and more folks less able to compel or argue ideas and less able to control their anger so that constructive conversation is possible.

        Not good.

        • brettearle

          No, no.

          You misunderstand me.

          Civility needs to prevail–but NOT when you are on the verge of possibly losing, what may be, the most important election of our lifetime.

          Under those circumstances, one must give back even better than one is getting.

          DUKAKIS DIDN’T FIGHT BACK AND LOST

          KERRY DIDN’T FIGHT BACK AND LOST.

          Don’t you get it?

          You can’t stick to your pacifism–at a time when your country needs you.

          When the war’s over, you can return to a more peaceful, civilian life.

          ….unless you want to be like other Democrats who wind up, on the junk heap.

          INCIVILITY IS LITERALLY THE ONLY LANGUAGE THE GOP UNDERSTANDS.

          All the examples you offer above, come from the uncivil tongues of the GOP.   

          If you want to sit there and contemplate your navel, you will do so, at your own peril.

          You are MISSING THE POINT–at least temporarily, you are.

          You want to be true to your convictions and lose–or do you want to operate on a double standard–for a short time–for a GREATER GOOD?

          Do you not remember Deval Patrick, at the convention, announcing, “that it’s time for Democrats to develop a backbone?”

          You sit on the sidelines and THE GOP WILL WALK ALL OVER YOU. AND YOU WILL LOSE.

          THE PUBLIC CAN BE SWAYED IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.

          AND….YOU…KNOW….IT

          If you do not respond to my comments, by your silence we will know you….

    • Duras

      The economy, per se, will improve eventually no matter who is president, but what will the political economy look like?  Political economies change the most coming out of recessions and depressions (as you probably know very well).  After 3 terms of FDR, unions and the New Deal had built the middle class and America emerged has a superpower.  By the 1970s, government was over-regulated, high taxes on the top, and powerful unions.  In my opinion, that was the moment for supply side economics, but this country would have been better off if Carter had won relection: (1) Carter’s energy policy (if Reagan hadn’t trashed it) would have put us way ahead of where we are now, (2) taxes on the rich wouldn’t be religion for republicans, and (3), in terms of the political economy, we would have not gone from Nixon creating food stamp programs to Clinton repealing Glass-Steagall (which is by far too much deregulation).
       
      The last 30 years we have lived in the Reagan era of political economics, and look what has happened to poverty and the middle class over time.  Unions are so weak that the wage ratios are the same as right before the Great Depression, republicans have fought very hard to get as much money into politics as possible and it has been destroying our democratic voice, we imprison more people than China, our public institutions are falling apart, and 400 super rich people have more money than the poorer half of the nation.

      Today, the economy is improving, and if we come out of this depression with a republican president, America will move further to the right and America might look like the Gilded Age.  The levels of discretionary spending are significantly lower than the levels of the 1970s.  Bloated government exists in the military, homeland security, and medicare.  Fraud is all over medicare and Obama targets it with his cuts (which the real version of efficient government), while republicans demagogue him for it and they want to cut consumer end medicare and leave the fraud untouched (which is not small government conservativism but destruction).  It is hard to be civil when republicans want to weaken our social security checks to give tax breaks to people who can be taxed more.  And I think republicans have become narrow sighted–they don’t have a historical or global perspective–partly because this country is closer to a privatized utopia and they are deluded by the thought that America’s government looks like Greece. I think republicans have become tribalized while the Occupy movement is the same revolutionay occurance since the Enlightenment that is mostly driven by an unhealthy level of inequality rather than the writings of Karl Marx.

      I wish republicans would realize that today’s conditions are more similar to the 1930s depression than the 1970s recession.  And most importantly, I wish republicans would realize that although the conservatives of the 1930s called FDR a traitor to his class, he actually saved American capitalism, saved the wealthy class, and perhaps American democracy as well.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1042404403 Lisa Shaw

    Who was the caller who said the President was yelling?  Was she only paying attention to one half of the debate?

    I agree, both were too combative and rude to the moderator.  I hate
    debates and feel they really serve no purpose as by this time many
    people’s minds are already made up.

    As to the intelligence of the American people, yes, probably the listeners to this show but if you travel through the US you will find many who do not pay attention at all, who only listen to attack ads or who are programmed to believe in one party or the other.

    Sorry, I don’t have much optimism when it comes to the human race when it comes to intelligence, common sense, patience and compassion.

  • hennorama

    “UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE WEEKLY CLAIMS REPORT
              SEASONALLY ADJUSTED DATAIn the week ending October 13, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 388,000, an increase of 46,000 from the previous week’s revised figure of 342,000. The 4-week moving average was 365,500, an increase of 750 from the previous week’s revised average of 364,750.”

    source: http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/current.htm

    Let’s see how quickly Mr. Romney and his campaign jump on the this info, and if they claim it too was skewed by the Obama administration.  I mean, we can’t trust any unemployment figures from THEM, right?

  • notafeminista

    To Duras further down as the format is starting to narrow:  I’m not sure which you part  you say is “not happening”, but let’s start here:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-rhode/more-losing-social-security_b_1773159.html

    http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/05/01/student-loans-meet-social-security-seniors-stuck-school-debt/

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/senior-citizens-continue-to-bear-burden-of-student-loans/2012/04/01/gIQAs47lpS_story.html

    As for people who can’t get a college education without a student loan?  Complete “malarkey” as our fellow poster jefe68 would say.  People can and do.  I attended a Division I University from 2006-2010,graduated on time with a bachelors degree(during which,  I might add, the economic “meltdown”) without a nickel of debt.    It takes sacrifice, time management and a willingness to think both critically and creatively, not just “I can’t”

    Stop saying “I can’t” , “we can’t” blah blah blah.  What CAN you do? 

    Please…feel free to list at least 12 reasons now why this cannot be done.

    • MarcusXH

       “As for people who can’t get a college education without a student loan? 
      Complete “malarkey” as our fellow poster jefe68 would say”

      Amen!

      What I did was  “get a scholarship.”

      While student loans are more popular (and easier to get), there’s always options to have your higher education funded in ways that won’t result in debt.

  • notafeminista

    Oh..and for the poster whose name currently escapes me…we’ll stipulate up front that “anec” is not a prefix for data.

  • 228929292AABBB

    Wow.  Chris Matthews.  I thought he was doing a clown act on TV to make his show eye-catching, little did I know he’s been holding back 90% of the insanity.  Strange guy.

  • buddhaclown

    On Point has basically become Fox News Lite. I can’t stand Tom or Jack anymore, after listening to you guys for a decade, I’m done. Good luck. 

  • jasonmacalpine

    Neither Governor Romney nor President Obama has revealed a plan that will significantly reduce the deficit or our national debt.
    But one of them will have the opportunity to lead the US congress through the neccessary steps over the next four years
    without fear that it will cost them the election in 2016.

  • Outside_of_the_Box

    You continue to reinforce the illusion of a democratic 2 party system in the US, so I will continue to remind the reader, that they are living in a special interest-controlled prison. I only wonder if Tom is aware of this fact, but chooses to play the game for the sake of taking a paycheck and being a part of it. Or if he is actually oblivious to the reality of the political system we have today? Since I know he is an intelligent and informed person, I refuse to believe the latter. So I can only assume that he knows very well that his job, and that of the MSM, is to perpetuate the illusion, which serves to keep the American people down. I welcome any comments.

  • ExcellentNews

    Here is the Romney FIVE POINT plan:

    - 1 Trillion tax cut for billionaires paying a 10% tax rate
    - another 1 Trillion
    - and another 1 Trillion
    - and another 1 Trillion
    - and another, to make it 5 Trillion

    On everything else, Romney is flexible.

ONPOINT
TODAY
Jul 28, 2014
This June 4, 2014 photo shows a Walgreens retail store in Boston. Walgreen Co. _ which bills itself as “America’s premier pharmacy” _ is among many companies considering combining operations with foreign businesses to trim their tax bills. (AP)

American companies bailing out on America. They call it inversion. Is it desertion?

Jul 28, 2014
U.S. Secretary of War Newton D. Baker watches as wounded American soldiers arrive at an American hospital near the front during World War I. (AP Photo)

Marking the one hundredth anniversary of the start of World War One. We’ll look at lessons learned and our uneasy peace right now.

RECENT
SHOWS
Jul 25, 2014
Guest Renee McLeod of Somerville, MA's Petsi pies shows off her wares. (Robin Lubbock / WBUR)

There is nothing more American than a piece of pie. We taste and talk pies.

 
Jul 25, 2014
Pallbearers carry a coffin out of a military transport plane during a ceremony to mark the return of the first bodies, of passengers and crew killed in the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, from Ukraine at Eindhoven military air base, Eindhoven, Netherlands, Wednesday, July 23, 2014. (AP)

Secretary of State Kerry to Israel. Obamacare back in the courts. Mourning as remains of Malaysia Flight 17 victims come home. Our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
Our Week In The Web: July 25, 2014
Friday, Jul 25, 2014

Why the key to web victory is often taking a break and looking around, and more pie for your viewing (not eating) pleasure.

More »
Comment
 
The Art Of The American Pie: Recipes
Friday, Jul 25, 2014

In the odd chance that our pie hour this week made you hungry — how could it not, right? — we asked our piemaking guests for some of their favorite pie recipes. Enjoy!

More »
Comment
 
Hillary Clinton: ‘The [Russian] Reset Worked’
Thursday, Jul 24, 2014

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton took time out of her global book tour to talk to us about Russia, the press and the global crises shaking the administration she left two years ago.

More »
2 Comments