PDA

View Full Version : Debate/New Hampshire: Repubs Slew Of Lies



Gayle in MD
11-13-2011, 07:11 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The candidates made a number of false or misleading claims that they’ve said before, which we covered in an earlier posting soon after the debate concluded. For example, Romney continued to claim that the health care law he signed affected only 8 percent of the population (not true) and that he didn’t raise taxes to pay for it (he left that for his successor). Bachmann claimed that a Medicare advisory board will make health care decisions for over 300 million Americans (it’s specifically prohibited from rationing) and repeated her claim that the U.S. is borrowing 40 cents of every dollar spent (the correct figure is 37 cents). Huntsman committed a real howler by claiming that the Internal Revenue Service is hiring 19,500 new employees to administer the “mandate” in the new health care law. The IRS has actually requested only 1,269 new employees, and much of their work will involve handing out tax credits.

We have continued to research other statements made during the debate. Here are some new ones we find worthy of note.


</div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Summary
Our research has turned up some more dubious and misleading claims from the economic debate among Republican candidates in Hanover, N.H.

Cain claims his 9-9-9 proposal to overhaul the tax code is “simple, transparent, efficient, fair, and neutral.” But his campaign has provided few details of how the plan would work, and a consultant hired by the campaign to analyze the plan could not provide evidence of how the plan would impact different income groups.
Gingrich left out important facts on a government-backed panel’s recommendation that healthy men not get routine prostate screening tests. And he said that Sarah Palin’s bogus “death panel” claim had merit.
Bachmann made the confusing and unsubstantiated claim that Obama secretly aims “for Medicare to collapse, and instead everyone will be pushed into Obamacare.”
Perry claimed that a state program for small businesses offering health insurance has “driven down the cost of insurance by 30 percent.” But the cost is lower because Texas taxpayers subsidize the plans.
Gingrich claimed that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke had “spent hundreds of billions of dollars” on secret bailouts. But the Fed made loans, and actually reported billions in profits from interest income.
Perry misquoted Romney’s economic adviser. Glenn Hubbard did not say that “Romneycare was Obamacare.” Hubbard said the two laws were similar and that the “main components” were the same.
</div></div>



<span style='font-size: 11pt'>Analysis:</span>

http://factcheck.org/2011/10/tales-from-new-hampshire/

eg8r
11-14-2011, 09:12 AM
It is so funny to sit back and see the hypocrisy of Dems talking about Rep lies. Are the Dems stupid enough to forget all the lies they have been accepting from Obama while he was on the campaign trail. None of what he said was true and he looks more like Bush than anyone would have guessed.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
11-14-2011, 10:54 AM
Ah, the old hypocrisy deflection again!

With a bit of thought, it's clear this is no defense at all of the GOPrs, and as written, instead AGREES that they lied, but in titanic cynicism, says more or less, 'so what? the other guy lied (and earlier), so...'

We've been through this exercise before, but with no evidence it's sunk in yet.

Pretty simple. Was it WRONG when, as alleged, Obama lied? Did you oppose his alleged lying? Did you think Dems blinded or naive or wholly partisan when they denied the lying charges?

Then hold the GOP candidates and their supporters' responses to the same standard, so that you now do not become a hypocrite just like those you oppose. Or not, and do, your choice.

LWW
11-14-2011, 11:05 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain claims his 9-9-9 proposal to overhaul the tax code is “simple, transparent, efficient, fair, and neutral.” But his campaign has provided few details of how the plan would work ...</div></div>

Are you admitting to being so dumb you can't figure out something that is remarkably simple?

eg8r
11-14-2011, 12:08 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With a bit of thought, it's clear this is no defense at all of the GOPrs,</div></div>Again, you are correct. The Reps might be lying but then when did lying ever bother a Democrat?

eg8r

Soflasnapper
11-15-2011, 04:21 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain claims his 9-9-9 proposal to overhaul the tax code is “simple, transparent, efficient, fair, and neutral.” But his campaign has provided few details of how the plan would work ...</div></div>

Are you admitting to being so dumb you can't figure out something that is remarkably simple? </div></div>

If it so simple, why do we have quotes from Cain about his own plan, stating, 'I do not know'? Why did he turn over the dais to someone else to explain his own plan that time?

Why and how did 9-9-9 suddenly become 'really' 9-0-9?

And why hasn't it been submitted to real economists for scoring to compare its effects with other extant tax plans? (If you claim it has, who, and why haven't they published their analysis?)

Gayle in MD
11-16-2011, 05:52 PM
Very Quiet!


/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif