***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[futuremd]

Lets not front. They picked Jim Lehrer on purpose. He's not a threat to the establishment. 

 

[cj863]

Soooo not looking forward to Candy Crowley's fat *** moderating the second debate :x

 

[AEA18]

I read through 13 pages of this thread and most say Romney won but no one posted about what his actual plans are.

When da economy is this bad, Romney shining a light on Obama's record was

Hurting his debate.

That is not a plan. Almost every republican has been doing that since Obama became president.

I want to know what his plans on fixing the economy are.

 

[boys noize]

Just once I'd like to see someone like Jon Stewart moderate a debate. Yes, he's a liberal but he's shown throughout his decade plus career of not shying away from the truth. Just once I'd like to see someone not chuck these softballs and actually check the nominees when they lie.

 

[rashi]

Lets not front. They picked Jim Lehrer on purpose. He's not a threat to the establishment. 

This guy has moderated 11 debates, dude. Stop it.


EDIT: And who the hell is "they"?

 

[gllahone84]

 

[knightngale]

Romney is indeed a fraud but Obama looked bad because he let Romney spew BS and not call him out on it. The debate was supposed to make Romney look bad due to his policies and bs but Obama was not aggressive. Most voters probably know very little about the facts so they may take Romney's bs as truth since Obama did not call him out on it.

This does not mean that Obama does not come up with bs either but Romney was calling him out on anything he could.

 

[ryda421]

after romney said his plan was to cut PBS, i turned it off

 

[futuremd]

[h1]Romney Goes On Offense, Pays For It In First Wave Of Fact Checks[/h1]
Categories: 2012

12:31 am

October 4, 2012

• Twitter  (136)
• Facebook  (12596)
• E-mail
• Share
• Print
• Comments (323)
•  

by MARK MEMMOTT  and SCOTT MONTGOMERY

In their first of three debates, President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney "traded barbs" and stretched some facts, say the nonpartisan watchdogs at PolitiFact.com.

Similarly, the researchers at the Annenberg Public Policy Center's FactCheck.org  found examples of truth-stretching by both men.

Overall, it was a debate packed with facts, a wonk's delight. From the very first remarks, with President Obama saying 5 million jobs have been created in the private sector over the last 30 months, the debate was very number focused. So there were some things to check. And because Romney made more factual assertions, he's getting dinged more — at least in the early hours after the debate — by the fact checkers.

Here is a sample of what's being reported about the truthiness of what Obama and Romney had to say Wednesday night on stage at the University of Denver:
 
— One of the biggest disputes was over tax cuts. Obama argued that Romney's plan to stimulate the economy includes a tax cut totaling $5 trillion that, Obama said, isn't possible because the Republican nominee is also promising to spend money in other places.

Romney flatly disputed that number. "First of all, I don't have a $5 trillion tax cut," he said.

Who's right? The Washington Post's Fact Checker says  the facts on this one are on Obama's side. The New York Times  notes  that Romney "has proposed cutting all marginal tax rates by 20 percent — which would in and of itself cut tax revenue by $5 trillion."

FactCheck.org has weighed in too, tweeting during the debatethat "Romney says he will pay for $5T tax cut without raising deficit or raising taxes on middle class. Experts say that's not possible."

PolitiFact has given a "mostly true" rating  to the charge that "Romney is proposing a tax plan "that would give millionaires another tax break and raise taxes on middle class families by up to $2,000 a year."

— Has the president put in place a plan that would cutMedicare benefits  by $716 billion? Romney says yes. The president says no. According to PolitiFact, Romney's charge is "half true."

"That amount — $716 billion — refers to Obamacare's reductions in Medicare spending over 10 years, primarily paid to insurers and hospitals," says PolitiFact. So there is a basis for the number. But, it adds, "the statement gives the impression that the law takes money already allocated to Medicare away from current recipients," which is why it gets only a "half true" rating.

The New York Times  writes  that Obama "did not cut benefits by $716 billion over 10 years as part of his 2010 health care law; rather, he reduced Medicare reimbursements to health care providers, chiefly insurance companies and drug manufacturers. And the law gave Medicare recipients more generous benefits for prescription drugs and free preventive care like mammograms."

Still, as NPR's Julie Rovner has reported, "some of the money does indeed reduce future Medical spending, and the fact is, you can't reduce health care spending and preserve Medicare for 78 million baby boomers without slowing its growth."

— In listing his objections to the Affordable Care Act, Romney said it "puts in place an unelected board that's going to tell people, ultimately, what kind of treatments they can have. I don't like that idea."

But the Times  and National Journal  have reported that the board in question wouldn't make treatment decisions, a point Obama made during the debate. National Journal  calledRomney's characterization of what this board would do "one of the biggest whoppers of the night." PolitiFact gave Romney's claim  a "mostly false" rating.

Under the law, the board's job would be to keep Medicare spending within a particular target (not a dollar figure, but as a factor of GDP) but the board is prohibited from choosing the benefits to be restricted to achieve savings, so it cannot make treatment decisions.

FactCheck.org, which has likened the charge about this panel to the earlier claim from Republicans that Obama would create "death panels," writes that  "the board, the Independent Payment Advisory Board, cannot, by law, 'ration' care or determine which treatments Medicare covers. In fact, the IPAB is limited in what it can do to curb the growth of Medicare spending."

— On cutting the federal deficit, PolitiFact writes, "Romney claimed that Obama had said he would 'cut the deficit in half.' That's the case. ... Obama said he put forward 'a specific $4 trillion deficit reduction plan.' That's true if you combine the 10-year impact of his budget with the 10-year impact of cuts already approved. (For that reason, we've previously found his claim that his budget plan would 'cut our deficits by $4 trillion' Half True.)"

— As for Obama's claim that under his watch the economy hascreated 5 million jobs  in the past 30 months, NPR's John Ydstie says that's true. But it also ignores an inconvenient truth (for the president), that about the same number of jobs were lost during Obama's first year in office.

— And on a lighter note, the debate opened with a tender moment and a fact that soon was disputed on Twitter. In acknowledging his wedding anniversary, Obama said that "20 years ago I became the luckiest man on Earth because Michelle Obama agreed to marry me." An astute tweeter noted that 20 years ago, the first lady's last name was Robinson.

 

[futuremd]

Lets not front. They picked Jim Lehrer on purpose. He's not a threat to the establishment. 

This guy has moderated 11 debates, dude. Stop it.


EDIT: And who the hell is "they"?

They refers to the debate committees that maintain the debates.

The debates are scheduled and organized by both parties coming together. There is no third party organizers at stake here. 

Lehrer is a pushover and thats exactly what they wanted. 

Why do you think he keeps getting invited back? He does this **** every 4 years. 

 

[futuremd]

[h1]At Last Night’s Debate: Romney Told 27 Myths In 38 Minutes[/h1]
By Igor Volsky  on Oct 4, 2012 at 9:08 am

Pundits from both sides of the aisle have lauded Mitt Romney’s strong debate performance, praising his preparedness and ability to challenge President Obama’s policies and accomplishments. But Romney only accomplished this goal by repeatedly misleading viewers. He spoke for 38 minutes  of the 90 minute debate and told at least 27 myths:

1) “[G]et us energy independent, North American energy independent. That creates about 4 million jobs”. Romney’s plan for “energy independence” actually relies heavily on a study that assumes the U.S. continues with fuel efficiency standards set by the Obama administration. For instance, he uses Citigroup research based off the assumption that “‘the United States will continue with strict fuel economy standards that will lower its oil demand.” Since he promises to undo the Obama administration’s new fuel efficiency standards,  he would cut oil consumption savings of 2 million barrels per day by 2025.

2) “I don’t have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don’t have a tax cut of a scale that you’re talking about.”  A Tax Policy Center analysis of Romney’s proposal for a 20 percent across-the-board tax cut in all federal income tax rates, eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax, eliminating the estate tax and other tax reductions, would reduce federal revenue $480 billion in 2015. This amount to $5 trillion over the decade.

3) “My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle class. But I’m not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people.”  If Romney hopes to provide tax relief to the middle class, then his $5 trillion tax cut would add to the deficit. There are not enough deductions in the tax code that primarily benefit rich people to make his math work.

4) “My — my number-one principal is, there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. I want to underline that: no tax cut that adds to the deficit.”  As the Tax Policy Center concluded, Romney’s plan can’t both exempt middle class families from tax cuts and remain revenue neutral. “He’s promised all these things and he can’t do them all. In order for him to cover the cost of his tax cut without adding to the deficit, he’d have to find a way to raise taxes on middle income people or people making less than $200,000 a year,” the Center found.

5) “I will not under any circumstances raise taxes on middle-income families. I will lower taxes on middle-income families. Now, you cite a study. There are six other studies that looked at the study you describe and say it’s completely wrong.”  The studies Romney cites actually further prove  that Romney would, in fact, have to raise taxes on the middle class if he were to keep his promise not to lose revenue with his tax rate reduction.

6) “I saw a study that came out today that said you’re going to raise taxes by $3,000 to $4,000 on middle-income families.”  Romney is pointing to this study  from the American Enterprise Institute. It actually found that rather than raise taxes to pay down the debt, the Obama administration’s policies — those contained directly in his budget — would reduce the share of taxes  that go toward servicing the debt by $1,289.89 per taxpayer in the $100,000 to $200,000 range.

7) “And the reason is because small business pays that individual rate; 54 percent of America’s workers work in businesses that are taxed not at the corporate tax rate, but at the individual tax rate….97 percent of the businesses are not — not taxed at the 35 percent tax rate, they’re taxed at a lower rate. But those businesses that are in the last 3 percent of businesses happen to employ half — half of all the people who work in small business.”  Far less than half  of the people affected by the expiration of the upper income tax cuts get any of their income at all from a small businesses. And those people could very well be receiving speaking fees or book royalties, which qualify as “small business income” but don’t have a direct impact on job creation. It’s actually hard to find a small business  who think that they will be hurt if the marginal tax rate on income earned above $250,000 per year is increased.

“Mr. President, all of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened on private land, not on government land. On government land, your administration has cut the number of permits and licenses in half.”  Oil production from federal lands is higher, not lower: Production from federal lands is up slightly in 2011 when compared to 2007. And the oil and gas industry is sitting on7,000 approved permits  to drill, that it hasn’t begun exploring or developing.

9) “The president’s put it in place as much public debt — almost as much debt held by the public as all prior presidents combined.”  This is not even close to being true. When Obama took office, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. Now the national debt is over $16 trillion. That $5.374 trillion increase is nowhere near as much debt as all the other presidents combined.

10) “That’s why the National Federation of Independent Businesses said your plan will kill 700,000 jobs. I don’t want to kill jobs in this environment.”  That study, produced by a right-wing advocacy organization, doesn’t analyze  what Obama has actually proposed.

11) “What we do have right now is a setting where I’d like to bring money from overseas back to this country.”  Romney’s plan to shift the country to a territorial tax system would allow corporations to do business and make profits overseas without ever being taxed on it in the United States. This encourages American companies to invest abroad and could cost the country up to 800,000 jobs.

12) “I would like to take the Medicaid dollars that go to states and say to a state, you’re going to get what you got last year, plus inflation, plus 1 percent, and then you’re going to manage your care for your poor in the way you think best.”  Sending federal Medicaid funding to the states in the form of a block grant woud significantly reduce federal spending for Medicaid because the grant would not keep up with projected health care costs. A CBO estimate  of a very similar proposal from Paul Ryan found that federal spending would be “35 percent lower in 2022 and 49 percent lower in 2030 than current projected federal spending” and as a result “states would face significant challenges in achieving sufficient cost savings through efficiencies to mitigate the loss of federal funding.” “To maintain current service levels in the Medicaid program, states would probably need to consider additional changes, such as reducing their spending on other programs or raising additional revenues,” the CBO found.

13) “I want to take that $716 billion you’ve cut and put it back into Medicare…. But the idea of cutting $716 billion from Medicare to be able to balance the additional cost of Obamacare is, in my opinion, a mistake.  There’s that number again. Romney is claiming that Obamacare siphons off $716 billion from Medicare, to the detriment of beneficiaries. In actuality, that money is saved primarily through reducing over-payments to insurance companies  under Medicare Advantage, not payments to beneficiaries. Paul Ryan’s budget plan keeps those same cuts, but directs them toward tax cuts for the rich and deficit reduction.

14) “What I support is no change for current retirees and near-retirees to Medicare.”  Here is how Romney’s Medicare plan will affect current seniors: 1) by repealing Obamacare, the 16 million seniors receiving preventive benefits without deductibles or co-pays and are saving $3.9 billion on prescription drugs will see a cost increase, 2) “premium support” will increase premiums for existing beneficiaries as private insurers lure healthier seniors out of the traditional Medicare program, 3) Romney/Ryan would also lower Medicaid spending significantly beginning next year, shifting federal spending to states and beneficiaries, and increasing costs for the 9 million Medicare recipients who are dependent on Medicaid.

15) “Number two is for people coming along that are young, what I do to make sure that we can keep Medicare in place for them is to allow them either to choose the current Medicare program or a private plan. Their choice. They get to choose — and they’ll have at least two plans that will be entirely at no cost to them.”  The Medicare program changes for everyone, even people who choose to remain in the traditional fee-for-service. Rather than relying on a guaranteed benefit, all beneficiaries will receive a premium support credit of $7,500 on average in 2023 to purchase coverage in traditional Medicare or private insurance. But that amount will only grow at a rate of GDP plus 1.5 percentage points and will not keep up with health care costs. So while the federal government will spend less on the program, seniors will pay more in premiums.

16) “And, by the way the idea came not even from Paul Ryan or — or Senator Wyden, who’s the co-author of the bill with — with Paul Ryan in the Senate, but also it came from Bill — Bill Clinton’s chief of staff.”  Romney has rejected  the Ryan/Wyden approach — which does not cap the growth of the “premium support” subsidy. Bill Clinton and his commission also voted down these changes to the Medicare program.

17) “Well, I would repeal and replace it. We’re not going to get rid of all regulation. You have to have regulation. And there are some parts of Dodd-Frank that make all the sense in the world.”  Romney has previously called for full repeal  of Dodd-Frank, a law whose specific purpose is to regulate banks. MF Global’s use of customer funds  to pay for its own trading losses is just one bit of proof that the financial industry isn’t responsible enough to protect consumers without regulation.

1 “But I wouldn’t designate five banks as too big to fail and give them a blank check. That’s one of the unintended consequences of Dodd-Frank… We need to get rid of that provision because it’s killing regional and small banks. They’re getting hurt.”  The law merely says that the biggest, systemically risky banks need to abide by more stringent regulations. If those banks fail, they will be unwound by a new process in the Dodd-Frank law that protects taxpayers  from having to pony up for a bailout.

19) “And, unfortunately, when — when — when you look at Obamacare, the Congressional Budget Office has said it will cost $2,500 a year more than traditional insurance. So it’s adding to cost.”  Obamacare will actually provide millions of families with tax credits  to make health care more affordable.

20) “t puts in place an unelected board that’s going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have. I don’t like that idea.”  The Board, or IPAB is tasked with making binding recommendations to Congress for lowering health care spending, should Medicare costs exceed a target growth rate. Congress can accept the savings proposal or implement its own ideas through a super majority. The panel’s plan will modify payments to providers but it cannot “include any recommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or Medicare beneficiary premiums…increase Medicare beneficiary cost-sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and co- payments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria” (Section 3403 of the ACA). Relying on health care experts rather than politicians to control health care costs has previously attracted bipartisan support and even Ryan himself proposed two IPAB-like structuresin a 2009 health plan.

21) “Right now, the CBO says up to 20 million people will lose their insurance as Obamacare goes into effect next year. And likewise, a study by McKinsey and Company of American businesses said 30 percent of them are anticipating dropping people from coverage.”  The Affordable Care Act would actually expand health care coverage to 30 million Americans, despite Romney fear mongering. According to CBO director Douglas Elmendorf, 3 million  or less people would leave employer-sponsored health insurance coverage as a result of the law.

22) “I like the way we did it [health care] in Massachusetts…What were some differences? We didn’t raise taxes.”  Romney raised fees, but he can claim that he didn’t increase taxes because the federal government funded almost half of his reforms.

23) “It’s why Republicans said, do not do this, and the Republicans had — had the plan. They put a plan out. They put out a plan, a bipartisan plan. It was swept aside.”  The Affordable Care Act incorporates many Republican ideas including the individual mandate, state-based health care exchanges, high-risk insurance pools, and modified provisions that allow insurers to sell policies in multiple states. Republicans never offered a united bipartisan alternative.

24) “Preexisting conditions are covered under my plan.”  Only people who are continuously insured  would not be discriminated against because they suffer from pre-existing conditions. This protection would not be extended to people who are currently uninsured.

25) “In one year, you provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy world. Now, I like green energy as well, but that’s about 50 years’ worth of what oil and gas receives.”  The $90 billion was given out over several years and included loans, loan guarantees and grants through the American Recovery Act. $23 billion  of the $90 billion “went toward “clean coal,” energy-efficiency upgrades, updating the electricity grid and environmental clean-up, largely for old nuclear weapons sites.”

26) “I think about half of [the green firms Obama invested in], of the ones have been invested in have gone out of business. A number of them happened to be owned by people who were contributors to your campaigns.”  As of late last year, only “three out of the 26 recipients  of 1705 loan guarantees have filed for bankruptcy, with losses estimated at just over $600 million.”

27) “If the president’s reelected you’ll see dramatic cuts to our military.”  Romney is referring to the sequester, which his running mate Paul Ryan supported. Obama opposes the military cuts and has asked Congress to formulate a balanced approach that would avoid the trigger.

[h5]UPDATE[/h5]
Romney has now admitted that number 26 was not true.

 

[futuremd]

Romney is a management consultant.

You let him come in, smear some BS in your face, and you walk out not knowing what the hell happened because you're too aloof to know what just went down. 

Its what he does professionally. 

 

[rarefiedair24]

Tax plan: Cut PBS, Save the Military. 

Love how individuals hear something and put their own spin on it.. 

Romney didn't say he was simply going to cut PBS just because.. You're leaving out the fact that he stated he'd cut PBS because it's being sub'd through BORROWED money from China! 

I'm sorry, I love Big Bird as much as anyone but not at the expense of having to borrow money to keep him! seems like PBS is popular enough that it surely could lure some commercial support.  Why does the government have to borrow money to from China to subsidize the PBS network when it can support itself.. 

 

[rarefiedair24]

[h1]At Last Night’s Debate: Romney Told 27 Myths In 38 Minutes[/h1]
By Igor Volsky  on Oct 4, 2012 at 9:08 am

 ​

How many did Obama spew, cause' he talked a good 3-4mins longer.. just sayin' be objective.... 

 

[spizike231]

This is what's wrong with America.

Future MD is correct.  Whatever you're affiliation, the win/lose should be based on articulately stating positions / stances on issues that are important to the American people, not how 'aggressive' you were.  

We're not comparing NBA point guards, we're supposedly gaining value insight into the two would-be presidents of the next 4 years.  What does aggression have to do with anything?

Through all my Facebook posts and college friends who have to watch and analyze the debate for different classes, this is by far the most intellectual statement about the debate that I have read.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Kimchi Papi]

I read through 13 pages of this thread and most say Romney won but no one posted about what his actual plans are.

When da economy is this bad, Romney shining a light on Obama's record was

Hurting his debate.

That is not a plan. Almost every republican has been doing that since Obama became president.

I want to know what his plans on fixing the economy are.

Romney’s economic plan has been very vague until he got Ryan on board. If you use Ryan’s Path to Prosperity, as Romney’s blue print, we will most likely see more than 4 million jobs lost. Also house republicans like Ryan voted 3 times to extend the Bush era tax cuts that helped to enrich billionares like the Koch brothers by reducing the tax rate for them from 35% to 25% while also lowering corporate rates to 25% also. They also ended the alternative minimum tax. Romney actually wants to further these tax cuts for the rich. It’s estimated that Romney’s tax plan would give the rich $1 trillion over a 10 year period. They would also slash government by getting rid of funding for PBS, arts endowments, money to Amtrak, NASA, social security, highways, & financial aid for student would be drastically cut. All this & not to mention healthcare would be slashed to pieces.

 

[Kimchi Papi]

Tax plan: Cut PBS, Save the Military. 

Love how individuals hear something and put their own spin on it.. 

Romney didn't say he was simply going to cut PBS just because.. You're leaving out the fact that he stated he'd cut PBS because it's being sub'd through BORROWED money from China! 

I'm sorry, I love Big Bird as much as anyone but not at the expense of having to borrow money to keep him! seems like PBS is popular enough that it surely could lure some commercial support.  Why does the government have to borrow money to from China to subsidize the PBS network when it can support itself.. 

But that's where money for Military spending comes from to...

 

[futuremd]

---

October 4, 2012
[h1]An Unhelpful Debate[/h1]
The first debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney, so long anticipated, quickly sunk into an unenlightening recitation of tired talking points and mendacity. With few sparks and little clarity on the immense gulf that truly separates the two men and their policies, Wednesday’s encounter  provided little guidance for voters still trying to understand the choice in next month’s election.

The Mitt Romney who appeared on the stage at the University of Denver  seemed to be fleeing from the one who won the Republican nomination on a hard-right platform of tax cuts, budget slashing and indifference to the suffering of those at the bottom of the economic ladder. And Mr. Obama’s competitive edge from 2008 clearly dulled, as he missed repeated opportunities to challenge Mr. Romney on his falsehoods and turnabouts.

Virtually every time Mr. Romney spoke, he misrepresented the platform on which he and Paul Ryan are actually running. The most prominent example, taking up the first half-hour of the debate, was on taxes. Mr. Romney claimed, against considerable evidence, that he had no intention of cutting taxes on the rich or enacting a tax cut that would increase the deficit.

That simply isn’t true. Mr. Romney wants to restore the Bush-era tax cut that expires at the end of this year and largely benefits the wealthy. He wants to end the estate tax and the gift tax, providing a huge benefit only to those with multimillion-dollar estates, at a cost of more than $1 trillion over a decade to the deficit. He wants to preserve the generous rates on capital gains that benefit himself personally and others at his economic level. And he wants to cut everyone’s tax rates by 20 percent, which again would be a gigantic boon to the wealthy.

None of these would cost the Treasury a dime, he insisted, because he would reduce deductions and loopholes. But, as always, he refused to enumerate a single deduction he would erase. “What I’ve said is I won’t put in place a tax cut that adds to the deficit,” he said. “No economist can say Mitt Romney’s tax plan adds $5 trillion if I say I will not add to the deficit with my tax plan.”

In fact, many economists have said exactly that, and, without details, Mr. Romney can’t simply refute them. But rather than forcefully challenging this fiction, Mr. Obama chose to be polite and professorial, as if hoping that strings of details could hold up against blatant nonsense. Viewers were not helped by a series of pedestrian questions from the moderator, Jim Lehrer of PBS, who never jumped in to challenge either candidate on the facts.

When Mr. Romney accused the president of supporting a “trickle-down government,” Mr. Obama might have demanded to know what that means. He could then have pointed out that it is Mr. Romney whose economic plan is based on the discredited idea that high-end tax cuts trickle down to the middle class and poor.

Mr. Romney said he supported the idea of regulation but rejected the Dodd-Frank financial reform law because it was too generous to the big “New York banks.” This is an alternative-universe interpretation of a law that is deeply despised and opposed by the banks, but Mr. Obama missed several opportunities to point out how the law limits the corrosive practices, like derivatives trading, that led to the 2008 crash and puts in place vitally important consumer protections.

On health care, Mr. Romney pretended that he had an actual plan to replace the Affordable Care Act, and that it covered pre-existing conditions. He has no such plan, and his false claim finally roused the president to his only strong moment of the evening. The country doesn’t know the details, he said, of how Mr. Romney would replace Wall Street reform, or health care reform, or tax increases on the rich because Republicans don’t want people to understand the hard trade-offs involved in these decisions.

There are still two more presidential debates, and Mr. Obama has the facts on his side to expose the hollowness of his opponent. But first he has to decide to use them aggressively.

 

[futuremd]

Tax plan: Cut PBS, Save the Military. 

Love how individuals hear something and put their own spin on it.. 

Romney didn't say he was simply going to cut PBS just because.. You're leaving out the fact that he stated he'd cut PBS because it's being sub'd through BORROWED money from China! 

I'm sorry, I love Big Bird as much as anyone but not at the expense of having to borrow money to keep him! seems like PBS is popular enough that it surely could lure some commercial support.  Why does the government have to borrow money to from China to subsidize the PBS network when it can support itself.. 

We're not borrowing money from China to directly support PBS.

Thats ANOTHER lie that gets perpetuated.

Most of this countries debt is NOT to china. Its to OURSELVES.

Thats another lie that people keep touting just to make political gain.

Its just not true. 

On top of that, they lie when they say its 29% Thats complete BS. Its more like 15% based on liberal estimates. 

 

[Kimchi Papi]

^ How do you come to that conclusion FutureMD? China has $1 trillion in US debt holdings....

edit - & we're still borrowing money...

 

[sreggie101]

Neil deGrasse Tyson ‏@neiltyson
Cutting PBS support (0.012% of budget) to help balance the Federal budget is like deleting text files to make room on your 500Gig hard drive

 

[Kimchi Papi]

Neil deGrasse Tyson ‏@neiltyson
Cutting PBS support (0.012% of budget) to help balance the Federal budget is like deleting text files to make room on your 500Gig hard drive

Ahhhh, someone with powers of reason & deduction...My man...Was hoping someone would grasp that...

 

[futuremd]

^ How do you come to that conclusion FutureMD? China has $1 trillion in US debt holdings....

edit - & we're still borrowing money...

The fact is that, yes, china does own some of our debt, HOWEVER China's debt is not structured in the way that people misrepresent it to be. A lot of it is in real estate for example. 

Its more complicated than saying China owns PBS or something stupid. Nor is the debt that china owns as high as people fear-monger that it is. 

 

[Kimchi Papi]

^ How do you come to that conclusion FutureMD? China has $1 trillion in US debt holdings....


edit -

The fact is that, yes, china does own some of our debt, HOWEVER China's debt is not structured in the way that people misrepresent it to be. A lot of it is in real estate for example. 

Its more complicated than saying China owns PBS or something stupid. Nor is the debt that china owns as high as people fear-monger that it is. 

I'll agree with some of that in that China's US debt holdings aren't the evil monster Romney made it out to be at the RNC. The size of the debt is the real problem & the fact that we are continuing to borrow money...

 

[rarefiedair24]

We're not borrowing money from China to directly support PBS.

Thats ANOTHER lie that gets perpetuated.

Most of this countries debt is NOT to china. Its to OURSELVES.

Thats another lie that people keep touting just to make political gain.

Its just not true. 

On top of that, they lie when they say its 29% Thats complete BS. Its more like 15% based on liberal estimates. 

Yes, WE are the largest holder of our debt, China is the LARGEST foreign holder... China currently has 1 trillion.. round a bouts.  And again, putting a spin on it.. Romney NEVER stated we OWE most of our debt to China, so how is that a lie??  HE implied borrowing money from CHINA to SUPPORT PBS!  be objective! 

Some people have such a hatred or dislike for a political affiliation or a person that they close off their minds and don't think objectively.. That's one of the major reasons why there will never by any bi-partisan cooperation.. Both sides have valid points regarding various topics and issues.. But people think I'm Republican so it's Republican or nothing.. Or I'm Democrat, to hell with Republicans and they're thinking.. BE OBJECTIVE!