| RotoGuru Politics Forum View the Forum Registry XML Get RSS Feed for this thread | Self-edit this thread |
|
| 0 |
Subject: Barack Obama Lies Posted by: weykool - [542292223] Fri, Jun 08, 2012, 20:25 President Obama told reporters that "the private sector is doing fine," as he attributed the high unemployment rate to a lack of government jobs. Obama is by far the most out of touch president this country has ever seen. | |||||||
| 1 | Perm Dude ID: 3210201915 Fri, Jun 08, 2012, 20:31 |
I saw that earlier. Clearly a goof--he knew it right when he said it and tried to correct it. I think he also knew the Right would try to make hay out of it. Try harder, OK? Goofs and errors in speaking aren't really on the same level as "lies." Romney, for example, continues to repeat untruths in prepared statements, speeches, and ads that he approves. Kinda typical, though: Present spin as a rebuttal to a series of lies. | ||||||
| 2 | Boldwin ID: 1557712 Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 03:07 |
Administration and the media claim he did not mean it. Hilarious, but c'mon. We all know he meant it. | ||||||
| 3 | biliruben ID: 59551120 Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 12:38 | That's hysterical. | ||||||
| 4 | Boldwin ID: 1557712 Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 13:57 |
This smile... ...is the most dishonest smile you will ever see. Watch him manufacture it. But then what portrait smile isn't unnatural so... And you tell me what's going thru Laura Bush's mind? | ||||||
| 5 | Perm Dude ID: 3210201915 Sat, Jun 09, 2012, 23:33 |
Really--is this all your side has? A mispoken moment. A snippet of a joke. A "fake" smile by a politician. These are your "lies"? | ||||||
| 6 | Boldwin ID: 1557712 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 01:15 |
Just having some fun. What about the broken promise of a post-racial presidency? | ||||||
| 7 | sarge33rd ID: 34536813 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 01:59 |
What about the obstructionist House of representatives? What about, the multiple GOP initiatives, once endorsed by Obama, then opposed by the very GOP who proposed them? IOW, GOP obstructionism, refusal to even go ahead with their own ideas...is largely to blame. | ||||||
| 9 | Frick ID: 14082314 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 08:19 | How about we nuke both of these threads. The very titles are troll bait to members of the opposite party and are never going foster discussion, only used to flame the other side. | ||||||
| 10 | Perm Dude ID: 3210201915 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 09:32 |
Yeah, you are probably right, Frick. I was hoping, in the Romney one, to perhaps find that I was wrong about some of them (missing context, for instance, or Romney just misspoke and corrected or refined his point). Instead, we get the standard, sputtering, "But but but they do it too!" from the Right, not even bothering to offer a defense of their own candidate. Their reply is to offer up a series of grievances which aren't lies at all. Jokes, obvious misstatements, etc. | ||||||
| 11 | Nuclear Gophers ID: 29542105 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 09:43 |
prove them wrong then | ||||||
| 12 | biliruben ID: 59551120 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 09:56 |
When you cut and paste from somewhere, you should provide a link, or at least some attribution. Even if it's a pile of horseshite. Obama lies I've already spent more time on this than you, and I'm not about to waste any more, when a simple glance and the list shows that the vast majority don't fit the category you think they do. | ||||||
| 13 | Nuclear Gophers ID: 29542105 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 10:54 | obamas lies are a pile of horseshite then what are romneys? | ||||||
| 15 | Frick ID: 14082314 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 11:19 |
Romney saying that Obama harmed the economy is an opinion based on a book written by someone (presumedly friendly to Obama) with insider access to the White House. The fact that he interpreted differently than the writer (and the write admitted that his interpretation was not what he intended, but is valid) does not make it a lie. It makes it an opinion of Romney's and a valid point of discussion for the election that Obama put more resources into Healthcare reform first, rather than the economy. As I said before, both of these threads are never going to be productive with their titles. The right and left leaning members are going to hate one and love the other. | ||||||
| 16 | Perm Dude ID: 3210201915 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 12:27 |
Frick: He made a statement based upon the book, which the write says is not correct. But here's the thing: He's got no other source than a book for which the writer of the book says he is wrong. Either it is true, or not. His only evidence on such a sweeping charge is in doubt. #13: Romney's are actual lies. Prove them right. | ||||||
| 17 | Nuclear Gophers ID: 29542105 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 12:33 |
15- simply amazing that nothing is said when romney lies come up but when obama lies come up all of a sudden the threads are counter productive lol 16-prove the obama lies are right lol | ||||||
| 18 | sarge33rd ID: 34536813 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 12:44 |
well NG, just to pick out one of your "lies" and shoot hell out of it: ObamaCare Fee is not a new tax Obama denies healthcare is a new tax on all Americans OK, if the fee *IS* a tax, that is constitutional without question. The Fed Govt has the right and power to tax. So, if you call the mandate Unconstitutional, you can not call the fee a tax. In so doing, you solidify the constitutionality of the Act. The mandate can ONLY be questioned on constitutional grounds, if the fee is not a tax. So qwhiqch do you want? (A) Concede that the Act is constitutional (B) Concede that your so called lie, is not a lie, but your claim that is was, IS a lie Your choice | ||||||
| 19 | Tree ID: 17039238 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 13:41 |
15- simply amazing that nothing is said when romney lies come up but when obama lies come up all of a sudden the threads are counter productive lol psssst...Frick isn't exactly an Obama supporter. | ||||||
| 20 | Mith ID: 23217270 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 13:42 | I haven't seen the Romney lies thread but if it's also filled with out-of-context quotes and opinions presented as dishonest statements then both threads are useless. | ||||||
| 21 | Mith ID: 23217270 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 14:02 |
Frick isn't exactly an Obama supporter He isn't teeming with seething hate for the President of the United States and doesnt eagerly espouse every last negative word written and said about him, so he is a the same thing as a supporter in their eyes and therefore subject to the same abject derision. | ||||||
| 22 | DWetzel ID: 31111810 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 15:52 |
I love how "Rich doesn’t pay their fair share", which is obviously a matter of opinion, is listed as an outright LIE. Shows what kind of buffoons are working on that list. And, for that matter, copy/pasting it without thinking. | ||||||
| 23 | Tree ID: 17039238 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 16:15 | re: 21 - sadly, true. Ronald Reagan would be ashamed. | ||||||
| 24 | Pancho Villa ID: 597172916 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 17:02 |
Regarding the title post: Obama is by far the most out of touch president this country has ever seen. Turns out that claiming Obama is lying about the private sector doing fine in relation to the public sector is what's out of touch. Here's what really happened to the private sector under Obama | ||||||
| 25 | Frick ID: 52182321 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 20:39 |
From the article that you originally posted about the topic. Speaking to an audience at USAA, an insurance and financial services company headquartered in San Antonio, Romney cited a book, "The Escape Artists: How Obama's Team Fumbled the Recovery," by the liberal journalist Noam Scheiber. In the book, Scheiber discussed Obama's thinking on the question of whether, early in his term, to focus more attention on passing a national health care law or to devote more energy to bringing about economic recovery. As Scheiber put it, Obama saw health care as a bigger long-term accomplishment. Scheiber recently wrote that Romney is "misreading" his book. But Scheiber's explanation essentially conceded that Romney is, in fact, reading the passage correctly. PD, I think you generally do a good job of being fair on issues, but I don't think you are on this one. Romney might be spinning the content differently, but that sadly, is how politics works. I disagree that he is lieing. | ||||||
| 26 | Perm Dude ID: 3210201915 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 21:22 |
Scheiber clarifies his remarks here. Romney says that Scheiber claims something he didn't about Obamacare--that putting it into place would harm the economy. | ||||||
| 27 | Perm Dude ID: 3210201915 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 21:36 |
Also, I wouldn't be such a bulldog on this point if Romney had some other source he was using. Or even a well-informed opinion that didn't rely upon the writings of an author who is challenging the assumptions Romney is making. If Romney were a journalist, he would need some corroboration before publishing the point. | ||||||
| 28 | sarge33rd ID: 34536813 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 21:48 | unless he worked at FOX | ||||||
| 29 | Frick ID: 52182321 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 22:01 |
So we should hold all politicians to the standards o journalists? I would have no problem that, but just apply to all politicians from this point forward. It would definitely cut down on the muckraking. As far as the source. It isn't some unnamed person in the administration. It is a published book from a journalist who had access to the WH administration. Should he use the MLS standard citing technique for all of his sources from now on? “Romney’s imputing one big claim that I just do not make and that I just do not believe to be true,” he said. “Which is that there’s something substantively, sort of intrinsically about the Affordable Care Act that would derail the recovery. That, I personally don’t believe, and I don’t believe they believe it. The only argument I make in the book is an opportunity cost argument — that they deprived themselves of capital and time and space to do more stimulus.” There is, however, a “kernel of truth” to the interpretation, Scheiber said, explaining that he believes, as many of the administration’s critics do, that Obama should have focused on more economic stimulus before moving to health care. The administration’s plan was to finish up the bill by the fall of 2009 and then return to the economy for a second stimulus — that prospect was quashed by the time the bill was finally enacted in March 2010. A Romney spokesperson, reached for comment, noted that in the book, Obama’s top adviser Larry Summers says he would have supported the health care bill anyway because of its historical import. Just because the author doesn't believe the rationale, doesn't mean that it isn't possible. To say that the author didn't mean to say that is fine. But if the facts that he lays out in the book support Romney's assertion, which they mostly do, it makes it hard to call a lie. | ||||||
| 30 | sarge33rd ID: 34536813 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 22:08 |
Actually, Romneys's is a lie and here is why: "I always admired the president's courage for recognizing that fifty years from now people would remember that all Americans had health care," former Obama economic adviser Larry Summers told Scheiber. "And even if pursuing health care affected the pace of the recovery, which was unlikely in my view, people wouldn't remember how fast the recovery from this recession was." (from PDs original link) Romney alledges that Pres Obama KNOWINGLY slowed the pace of the recovery, in order to pursue healthcare. Yet, Obama advisor here, says that he did not believe it WOULD slow the recovery. Hence, Obama did NOT "knowingly" slow down the recovery. It is, in point of fact, Mitt's use of the word knowingly, which establishes the statement as a lie. | ||||||
| 31 | Pancho Villa ID: 597172916 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 22:08 |
The right and left leaning members are going to hate one and love the other. Doesn't leave much room for me. I believe I was the only person on this board who expressed support for Romney in 2008. And I find myself defending Obama when charges against him are outrageously fictional. For instance, the charge that he's responsible for driving this country into economic ruin just isn't based on facts, at least according to a Murdoch-owned media outlet. US Debt Load Falling at Fastest Pace Since 1950s As much as we hear politicians, pundits, tea-party patriots and the Congressional Budget Office obsessing about government debt, it was excessive private debt — not public debt — that caused the 2008 financial meltdown. And it was private debt — some of it since transferred to the public — that lies behind the current European debt crisis. (Greece is unique in having a public sector that ran up spending while its private sector is rather conservative.) As the political rhetoric about the federal deficit has heated up, we’ve lost sight of the progress that’s been made in bringing total debt back under control. The U.S. is actually doing much better than you’d think if you just listened to the conventional fears about how we’re rushing headlong into a debt Armageddon. In fact, since the recession ended in June 2009, total U.S. debt has risen at the slowest pace since they began keeping records in the early 1950s. While Washington has taken on a lot of debt since then, the private sector has paid off, written off or dumped on the government almost as much. Maybe Romney can do better, but in the past two and a half years, the debt load had dropped, unemployment is down, housing starts are up and the stock market is up. It would be refreshing if debate about the economy were based on reality instead of focusing on phony lies, phony personality flaws and phony ideological brandings. Romney is a seasoned administrator, capable of working with the other side of the aisle, which I think he'd do if elected, much to the consternation of the hyper-conservatives who simply want the economy to fail between now and November for political advantage. It would be refreshing if this forum could return to discussions more fitting the ages of its participants. | ||||||
| 32 | sarge33rd ID: 34536813 Sun, Jun 10, 2012, 22:30 |
you know PV, reading that link, one could almost alter the terms of the Laffer curve and apply it to debt. To a point, debt drives the economy. But let debt get out of hand, and recession/depression will follow. We need taxes to one degree or another, and our economy needs debt, to one degree or another; in order to function. It is questionable, how much impact high tax rates have on high incomes )progressive taxation), when one looks ta the rate of 95% in the upper tier during Eisenhower's term in office. It is NOT questionable, the impact of total debt, when one looks at history. | ||||||
| 33 | Tree ID: 17039238 Mon, Jun 11, 2012, 00:14 |
It would be refreshing if this forum could return to discussions more fitting the ages of its participants. no doubt. but the person here waving the Conservative flag the most is the one person who believes that compromise and cooperation are dirty words - despite the fact that his "hero" lived by those words and understood their necessity in making our system of government work. i'd love to see other conservatives come here - and stick around - to make for intelligent debate and discussion. sorry your buddy in our baseball league didn't contribute more. | ||||||
| 34 | Frick ID: 14082314 Mon, Jun 11, 2012, 08:13 |
I agree Tree, I try to interject a more conservative viewpoint in occasionally, as does Khahan and PV, but it seems like Boldwin will come in, make an outrageous claim or statement and the liberal posters will respond to Boldwin, not the, IMO, more sensible postings of non-extremeists. I think it is a rare example of when the right leaning agree or support him. I'm sure that makes us RINO's in his mind, but I don't consider myself Republican by today's standards anyway, so I'm fine with that. My point being, if people who are right leaning disagree, why are you, or anyone, willing to try and enter a debate with someone who doesn't want to debate? | ||||||
| 35 | Tree ID: 17039238 Mon, Jun 11, 2012, 10:15 |
My point being, if people who are right leaning disagree, why are you, or anyone, willing to try and enter a debate with someone who doesn't want to debate? i think it's because for every sensible post someone else makes, Baldwin makes a dozen or more outrageous and false posts. makes it harder to "hear" the others for all the din around them. but a very solid point from you, and something i'll ponder. | ||||||
| 36 | Mith ID: 23217270 Mon, Jun 11, 2012, 10:21 | One guy drives the discussion into a brick wall, the rest of us can't resist rubbernecking. | ||||||
| 37 | Razor ID: 551031157 Mon, Jun 11, 2012, 10:29 | Yes you can. The rubberneckers are almost as infuriating as the bad drivers. | ||||||
| 38 | Pancho Villa ID: 597172916 Mon, Jun 11, 2012, 11:15 |
Hard as it is to comprehend, Boldwin's thought process is representative of a rather large segment of the population that is involved in the national political discussion. But this presidential election is not going to be won because of those who Boldwin considers "the base," neither will it be won by rabid followers of the MSNBC pundits. It will be won by votes of independents and moderates. So, if Romney wins and governs in a moderate fashion, he'll be castigated as a traitor to conservatives, but he'll actually be a more honest representative for those who elected him. | ||||||
| 39 | Perm Dude ID: 3210201915 Mon, Jun 11, 2012, 14:09 | I agree. I just don't think Romney has it in him to move to the middle. | ||||||
| 40 | DWetzel ID: 49962710 Mon, Jun 11, 2012, 14:34 |
I don't know about that, I think he's got a demonstrated ability to move wherever he needs to! And my sense is that a lot of what he's been saying the last few months is pandering to the right wingers to get them to lift a finger come election day. | ||||||
| 41 | sarge33rd ID: 34536813 Mon, Jun 11, 2012, 19:59 | my chief concern with the potential of a Romney win, is that I have no clue, none at all, which Romney we would be getting. The one who installed Universal Healthcare in MA? The on who calls himself a "severe conservative"? The one who buys a company, makes it take out massive loans, then takes his management fee from those loans, then trashes the company? The one with the foresight to invest in a company like Staples? Which Romney is running???? | ||||||
| 42 | Frick ID: 14082314 Tue, Jun 12, 2012, 08:07 |
Well, since this is the Obama lies thread, is it a lie to say that Romney's company only drained capital from businesses? Vampire Capital | ||||||
| 43 | biliruben ID: 41431323 Tue, Jun 12, 2012, 10:53 |
I'll give you a hint - if you are looking for the balanced story, as a long time subscriber, I recommend you look someplace other than the WSJ editorial pages. I don't recall Obama saying Bain ONLY drained capital from businesses. It certainly did have some success stories, and it often took over companies that were only in trouble. My problem is with Romney touting his record at Bain as something which will be more than extremely tangentially useful experience if he were to become president. Presidents shouldn't be picking winners and losers among citizens and throwing the losers under the bus. | ||||||
| 44 | Frick ID: 14082314 Tue, Jun 12, 2012, 12:35 |
My point was only that in one of the "Lies" threads we were arguing Romney's interpretation of a book was a "lie". To then turn around and imply that Bain routinely loaded up companies with debt so they could cash out seems to be on a similar level. If you want to criticize Romney on his prior experience, his record on education would be a great place to start. The Miseducation of Mitt Romney | ||||||
| 45 | sarge33rd ID: 34536813 Tue, Jun 12, 2012, 12:39 |
Not to pick nits Frick, but I dont believe the concern re Romneys position, was with his interpretation as much as with his statement, his allegation; that Pres Obama KNOWINGLY slowed the economic recovery. Had he said something like, 'it turns out that the recovery may have been slowed, as the Pres took his eyes off that ball and focused instead on his healthcare reform". That would then be a true statement, or at least mostly so. In point of fact, it would be materially, no different from Obama's statements in his 2008 campaign, that Pres Bush had taken his eyes off the prize, when he turned pursuit of OBL over to the local warlords in Afghan, and focused than on invading Iraq. | ||||||
| 46 | weykool ID: 542292223 Wed, Jun 20, 2012, 08:02 |
4 lies Obama need America to believe. Pretty good commentary from Larry Elder. | ||||||
| 47 | Pancho Villa ID: 597172916 Wed, Jun 20, 2012, 09:48 |
The most disturbing thing about Elder's column is his determination of what constitutes a lie. His #1 lie, Obama inherited a "Great Recession" Nowhere in his two paragraphs of analysis does he pinpoint an actual lie. Simply stating that Obama inherited a "Great Recession" is a lie is a semantic distortion that, in itself, could constitute a lie, if one were obsessed with finding a way to use the word. Lie #2 every "independent" economist supported the "stimulus" I suppose Obama saying "there is no disagreement" could be considered a lie, though it's really just political posturing, since obviously there's always disagreement on issues such as this. If this rises to to the level of a lie, then every politician who begins a sentence, "The American people......" is similarly guilty, since there's no consensus among the American people about anything. Lie #3 "bipartisan" economists agree that Obama's stimulus worked Nowhere in this passage is there anything even close to a lie that can be attributed to Obama. Lie #4 as actor Morgan Freeman puts it, racist Republicans say, "Screw the country ... we're going to do whatever we can to get this black man outta here" -- nothing to do with deeply held policy differences. What? Where's the Obama lie? Where's the statement by Obama, in quotation marks, that can be documented as a false statement? What does Morgan Freeman have to do with any of this? It's really sad that there can't be a discussion about something as vitally important as the economic health of this country(and the world, for that matter), without inserting "liar, liar, liar" claims that only serve to cloud issues and distract from intelligent discourse. | ||||||
| 48 | biliruben ID: 59551120 Wed, Jun 20, 2012, 09:51 |
Indeed. The economic issues are worthy of discussion, but when I read the "pretty good commentary", all I could do was throw up my hands and count to 10. Then go read something useful, like how to fix my bike. | ||||||
| 49 | Seattle Zen ID: 10732616 Wed, Jun 20, 2012, 13:39 |
You have an interesting definition of "good", weykool. Excellent refutation, PV. | ||||||
| If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect, you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com | ||||||||
| ||||||||
Post a reply to this message: Barack Obama Lies | ||||||||