How does one debate an invisible plan. Romney is a shape shifter who's agenda charges direction like a weather vane.

What we saw in this debate was a performance... with no substance...

Sounds like nervous laughter from a right winged loon.

MD, Obviously you are a typical un-educated GOP racist with no clue of how to recognize intelligent journalism when you see it. President Obama is real, and his efforts are saving America from the wacked out GOP policies and extremely unresponsible GOP.

How is he lazy? How is he unqualified and how is he and idiot?

MDscott is correct that the world is watching. And every time a gibbering joke choke like MD exposes themselves, I find it a little more embarrassing and difficult to defend.

If you think the point of Romney's comments was that eliminating PBS would reduce the deficit then you were engaged in the debate about as much as Obama.

Romney's point was that he would evaluate federal programs by the standard of "was it worth borrowing money to support." If the answer was "no," then it would be eliminated. It's like putting your cable service on your credit card, it doesn't make sound financial sense. Sorry you don't see that.

Let me add, proliferating programs are like the broken window phenomenon. Waste begets waste. Personally I like PBS, but do we really want to borrow from China to pay farmers not to plant, crony companies, build Chevy Volts, or wage war?

Gee no, Shooter!

We should borrow money:

1. to give Exxon subsidies,

2. to make sure our CEO's get massive paychecks and people like Trump get to buy more toys,

3. to ensure that MORE of our jobs go overseas,

4. to make sure Romney and all of those other draft dodger presidents like Bush and wannabe Romney get to have their wars and kill young soldiers,

5. to make sure that there are enough "inspectors" to make sure women aren't taking contraceptives or having abortions,

6. to make sure that Americans that might vote Democratic are named "enemies of the government" and have their voting rights taken away,

7. to make sure more Americans go into poverty so that big companies can make more money off of them by making them work cheaper

8.....I can keep going.......

Why in the world would a government spend money to support programs that help all of it's people when it is only the RICH that count??? How SILLY!!!

But if you pass any government policy that effects people that would be trickle down government. You are creating a logical paradox. If government helps you in any way that means that government is trickling down benefit to you. So by cutting your taxes the government is being trickle down. Do you realize this? I am also not sure how money is "spread around." All money is government tender, you do understand this, yes? No money exists unless it is by the US government. By you earning a paycheck the government is spreading wealth to you. This is another logical paradox. How is the free market not her thing? Rachel benefits from the same market forces that are in play as everyone else. I do not ever recall Rachel saying that she does not like the free market or that she doesn't want private entities to be protected. What I do recall her saying is that she believes wealthier individuals like her should have to pay a higher tax rate because they use more social services than the general population and they benefit more from those services. Remember every dollar you have was printed by the government which means the wealthier you are the more you need government to exist and be stable (or else your wealth evaporates). Remember also that no wealthy person got wealthy on their own fruition. They got wealthy by using the services provided to them by the government- everything from the police forces, to the roads, to the education system. And they rely on it more since they need those services to move product, protect their business ventures, and to train their employees- all of which are necessary if they want to make more money. And, as you have so brilliantly argued here, by cutting taxes (I.E. by requiring less of it's own tender back) the government further facilitates wealth from the population. Sounds to me like you've created a paradise in which the wealthy are entirely dependent on trickle down government.

Or we could just not fall for stupid slogans without an ounce of economic understanding, or whatever.

Cartoonthenews: You really took to the Big Brother thing there didn't you? My mouth nearly dropped when I read, "So by cutting your taxes the government is being trickle down". If you are being serious, that statement along with your entire post, is utterly frightening. The government does not own my money nor my property. When the government gives me a tax break I get to keep more of *my* money, it's not that the government is giving me money.

colorofnew is basically correct. This whole passage is incorrect and frightening.

So by cutting your taxes the government is being trickle down. Do you realize this? I am also not sure how money is "spread around." All money is government tender, you do understand this, yes? No money exists unless it is by the US government. By you earning a paycheck the government is spreading wealth to you.

Saying this is like saying since your neighbor is no longer taking fruit off the tree in your yard, your neighbor is now helping you out.

Meanwhile the scavengers gather around "your" fruit tree to eat the fruit as it falls . So open that mailer,say yes to that phone sales pitch and buy the crap so those Chinese can get to work for American profiteers! While the already upper class Chinese get wealthy off of those loans and the politically connected get bribes from greedy CEOs.

@RobDon, I'm surprised at you. How many people go into another's yard to take excess fruit without asking? More common is the tree's branches hanging over the property line fence, from which maintenance, waste removal, and fruit befalls the neighbor.

Sensible neighbors compromise on simple solutions to this. But there is a new class of neighbor now who would insist the law be changed so that all the fruit hanging over the fence belongs to the tree owner, while any waste remains the neighbor's responsibility. Or worse, the tree owner hacks all the main fruit bearing branches that hang over the fence, jeopardizing the survival of the tree simply to deny the neighbor fruit while hoping to increase the production of the remaining branches for themselves.

Oh, and because this neighbor is selfish, no one has volunteered to teach them how to can the fruit to minimize waste. But that's okay, because this neighbor now plans to use the excess fruit to feed the horse he will rely on for mobility because he no longer wants to pay taxes for the street maintenance to the end of the block where his house is.

I've been craving apple pie all day, and refuse to feel guilty for it.

??? Please show us your facts. Companies pay more tax?I pay a gas tax too along with income taxes.I pay a property tax -most companies get waivers on this tax,You are in real need of an education.

Duuuuuude, put down the pipe. Defunding PBS would not result in the end of your precious Sesame Street. PBS and NPR can exist without public funding and should exist without it. Further, even if PBS couldn't exist without tax payer funding, the free market would pick up the good programs that people actually want to watch. Further, would you rather have us borrow money from China to fund Sesame Street or let the American people and free markets fund Sesame Street? I think the choice is pretty clear, at least for the sober and sane, duuuuude.

I would much rather have our government fund Sesame Street than Wall Street or oil companies...or rich people who hide their money in the Cayman Islands (or wherever).

If the average middle class/middle income person pays 20% of his/her gross income in federal tax but the upper income person pays 14% of his/her gross income in federal tax, who is being subsidized? A Romney "20% cut across the board" tax cut would not work.

HyperTyler: I pay nearly 50% of my paycheck in taxes. I'm by no means "the rich" but do work my ass off and make a decent amount. How is that fair when GE pays ZERO percent?

By Romney's logic, all government programs are funded by China.

Romney IS making this asertion. Maybe not by China, but that all government programs right now should be assumed to be funded through borrowed money. Here's the same analogy on a smaller scale.

If I currently send more money than I make and then choose to by a $2.00 fountain drink, then I'm funding that $2.00 drink via credit even if I pay for it with the five dollar bill in my pocket. The $5 would not be in my pocket if I weren't borrowing money.

If we are borrowing a trillion dollars a year to fund government, to which program is it going? In essence, all of them. The borrowing makes all of them possible. If we weren't borrowing, all of them would not be possible.

It is very sound logic.

You're essentially saying Romney should just dissolve the government completely because it is all funded by China, or by something else.

Exactly how does Romney know what's funded by China, specifically?

He seems certain PBS is. Consulting his magic underwear?

To choose between cutting $444M in programming that gets our nations' youngsters talking about their ABC's and 123's, and $4B in subsidies to oil companies that are making record profits YoY, the choice is clear - "Big Bird must go?"

Yeah, that's SOUND deficit reduction strategy, there.

Give me a break.

Exactly how does Romney know what's funded by China, specifically?

I agree...you don't. But if you are borrowing money that borrowed money is making possible whatever you are doing, for without it you would not be able to do all of whatever you are doing.

If I am borrowing $100 a month to pay my bills then I need to examine what I'm spending money on that is NOT worth borrowing money to buy. If I can eliminate $100 dollars worth of spending, I no longer have to borrow.

Now it might be everything I'm spending money on is NEEDED and thus worth borrowing the $100. But, until I make the first examination, I don't know that.

I saw that too. He definitely pulled something out of his pocket. I didn't watch the end, but apparently he slipped the cheat-sheet or whatever to his son right after the debate. I hope someone in the media makes a big deal of this.

Nice to see that you've bought the 30 second advertisements Obama has been running. Bain Capital is not the "creator of outsourcing (no need to capitalize that) jobs". Put down the pipe, duuuude.