One of the more common criticisms of President Obama from the left, especially over the last couple of weeks, is that he hasn't been forceful enough in highlighting his accomplishments. With that in mind, the president's remarks in Mt. Vernon, Iowa, yesterday are worth considering in detail.
Rachel noted some excerpts of the speech on the show last night, most notably the remarks on pay equity and health care for women, but I was also struck by the extent to which Obama is no longer shy about touting an economic success story. After taking stock of his accomplishments on foreign policy, national security, tax policy, Wall Street reform, health care reform, civil rights, the auto industry, and student loans, the president noted:
"Today, four years after the worst economic crisis of our lifetimes, we're moving forward again. After losing 800,000 jobs a month when I took office, our businesses have now added more than 5 million new jobs over the past two and a half years.
"Unemployment has fallen from a peak of 10 percent to 7.8 percent. The stock market has nearly doubled, which means your 401(k)s have started to recover. Foreclosures are at their lowest point in five years. Home values are back on the rise. Manufacturing is coming home to America. Our assembly lines are starting to hum again."
I've been writing a fair amount about this lately, in large part because it seems to be something of a secret in the political discourse -- in nearly every key area of the American economy, we're seeing a strengthening recovery, the best since before Obama even took office. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are desperately trying to convince voters that conditions are deteriorating, but all available evidence points in the opposite direction.
Greg Sargent noted yesterday, "Romney is very, very good when reciting his fusillade of statistics about the Obama economy. And Romney and his allies are absolutely nuking the swing states with ads that paint a dire picture of widespread economic suffering and that brazenly distort the unemployment statistics to do so."
The more Obama offers a spirited defense of an economy that's picking up steam, the better his odds of victory.
Incidentally, the president's critique of Romney's arithmetic was also pretty compelling.
"Governor Romney also took another stab at trying to sell us his $5 trillion tax cut that favors the wealthy. Once again, he refused to tell us how he's going to pay for it. He said he'd let you know after the election. Now, here's a tip: Usually when a politician tells you he's going to wait until after the election to explain a plan to you, they don't have a pleasant surprise in store for you. And in this case, it's because just about everybody who's looked at Governor Romney's $5 trillion in tax cuts says he can't pay for it without blowing a hole in the deficit or raising taxes on middle-class families. It can't be done.
"Governor Romney says he has a plan to create 12 million new jobs in the next four years. But when folks started crunching the numbers, it fell apart even faster than his tax plan. Turns out his jobs math isn't any better than his tax math. The Washington Post called it a "bait and switch."
"So let's recap what we learned last night. His tax plan doesn't add up; his jobs plan doesn't create jobs; his deficit reduction plan adds to the deficit. So, Iowa, everybody here has heard of the New Deal; you've heard of the fair deal; you've heard of the square deal. Mitt Romney is trying to sell you a Sketchy Deal.
"We are not buying it. We know better. We've been there. We've tried that. We're not going back. We're moving forward. That's why I need your vote. We've got to finish what we started in 2008. You don't want to invest in that sketchy deal."
Leave a Comment:
The President is a bright fellow, went to Harvard where there were a lot of other bright fellows. So he thinks we are ALL "bright fellows".
And, therefore, he does not have to continually tell us of his accomplishments over the past 4 years.
Meanwhile, Romney is telling us- continually- that Obama is a failure, did nothing, etcetera, ad infinitum.
Mr. President. Remember what the inestimable George Carlin told us:
“Just think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize half of them are even stupider!”
Uh, Romney went to Harvard as well. Maybe Romney is taking George Carlin's words to heart.
Well Day, are you part of the stupid?...or the half that is "stupider"?
All you hear Barry do during that debate is just keep repeating the dem talking points over and over and over and slam Romney's character, his success, etc.
And to top it all off Candy and Barry team up on Gov. Romney.
Day, if you are not the stupid...then surely you realize the day after the attack on Sept. 11, 2012 that Barry was in the rose garden before he flew out to Vegas.
He mentioned the word "terror" but it was NOT about what had just happened...if you look at what he said just before that, he was referring to Sept 11, 2001.
You know good and well that he kept saying video, video, reaction to video,...even his UN speech was about the video.
So please Day, prove to us you are not one of the "stupid" as you refer to good Americans....and especially..prove to us that you are not the "stupider" of the stupid...your words.
are even more stupid.
The testors told me I have the pretty big IQ but, all that smarts mostly tells me how much I don't know.
I believe Mitt told one of his audiences, probably in his 47% video, that the economy will improve when he is elected even if he did nothing new. This is not due to his dazzling personality. It is becoming more apparent that this recession is running its course. Of course we need jobs, but not everyone is broke and some of them are starting to spend again which will increase jobs. Mitt is superfluous which is the kindest thing I have ever said about him.
"Mitt is superfluous..."
And full of hot air. Now that's better...
I have news for you Zora,
If that is all you can throw at Gov. Romney........just think if you were on the other side, what you would be saying about Barack.
You people had better start defending Barack's great record in the last 4 years instead of slamming Mitt Romney at every turn.
Remember what Barack said in 2008. THESE ARE GREAT WORDS. LISTEN TO THEM ZORA....
"If you don't have any fresh ideas, you use stale tactics to scare the voters"
"If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone to run from"
Oh, how true Barack.
OOOOOPS!!!! ISN'T THAT WHAT YOU ARE DOING NOW BARACK?
Actually, Johnny boy, those words you are quoting from the President are not HIS ideas or plans. Once again, the reichwing has twisted and distorted a soundbite so they can manufacture faux outrage. The president was talking about how the GOP runs a campaign, how the GOP deal with a nominee that has no fresh ideas.
It's nice that we get new trolls in every couple of days, but could we PLEASE get one that at least has a frigging clue. Check the numbers Johnny boy. The economy is improving. Pull our head outta your ass and stop watching Faux news and listening to Limpy.
OOOOOPs, Johnny boy doesn't know what he's talking about!
Johnny - go to the Google and search "List of Obama accomplishments so far." Then take your pick of the numerous results. The lists are longer than you will care to read.
Now, after doing this you will no doubt argue that "these are all lefty accounts." And that is probably true. But that doesn't change the lists of accomplishments in any way. After all, what righty sources would compile and publish such a list when the result would hurt their cause?
There - I just defended Obama's record and didn't attack Romney. What do you say now?
@Johnny - actually I was being nice. And you must be new so you don't know my "voice" yet.
I know full well what the President's accomplishments are, I'm also well aware that Nancy Pelosi (demonized by the right as she is) was THE MOST effective "Speaker of the House" as over 200 pieces of legislation was passed under her tenure! And I hope that on November 7th - she can look forward to having the gavel returned to her by Bonehead!
All right 80sGirl, you rock. Good catch on the source and your response.
This election will reflect upon the voter more than it will upon the incumbent or the lying challenger for if voters do not see measures necessary to recover from the immense woe of economic ruin as a lengthy process, and one that is trending well, they may find themselves in more woe when the flim-flam challenger becomes president and returns us back to the policies that produced the painful economic woe in the first place!
If ignorance reigns in the November election, whale oil beef hooked! -Kevo
Obama doesn't practice what he preaches. The women in the White House make almost 20 percent less than the men. Why not call him on that?
Source
I have an idea what's coming...
This lie has been debunked many times. I've actually debunked it to you.
When you look at the WH salary list, and compare women and men who perform the SAME JOB there is no discrepancy in salary.
You already know this, but you're trying to misinform those who don't.
I think it's despicable.
Hmmmm......
Aren't all of the people who work in the White House governmental employees? If so, then Obama doesn't decide what they get paid, OPM does as it does for every federal employee! OPM even desk audits to determine if they are at the right pay grade, so I don't see what Obama has to do with this!!
Another red herring???
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/annual-records/2012
Sampling sorted by job:
Aberger, Marie E.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumPRESS ASSISTANT
Cunnane, Patrick J.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumPRESS ASSISTANT
Lee, Monica M.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumPRESS ASSISTANT
Lewin, Jesse M.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumPRESS ASSISTANT
Rangel, Antoinette N.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumPRESS ASSISTANT
Xu, Kevin S.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumPRESS ASSISTANT
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/annual-records/2012
More sampling sorted by job:
Alcantara, EliasEmployee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Babler, Joseph L.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Bollinger, Chelsea M.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Duceman, Katherine I.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Duncan, Julia L.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Fitzgerald, Quinn S.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Gottschalk-Marconi, Emily C.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Jones, Corey J. Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Jones, Isabel C.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Kulma, MonikaEmployee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Lierman, Kyle J.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Manus, Linda S.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Norris, Amanda J.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Pan, Elizabeth H.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Perkins, Nathaniel M.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Robertson, Dominique E.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Schuelke, James D.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Woodbury, Victoria M.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
Wylie, Allison G.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
McCullough, Victoria M.Employee$45000.00Per AnnumSTAFF ASSISTANT
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/annual-records/2012
More sampling sorted by job:
Sullivan, Sarah E.Employee$41000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Avila, Steven A.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Burger, Jillian M.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Durheim, Joseph T.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Harris, Jacqueline B.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Hendricks, Catherine L.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Larrimore, Zachary T.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
McAferty, Stacie I.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Payne, John H.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Roberts, Brian D.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Schuelke, Gregory L.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Tedmon, Dirk A.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Upperman, Christopher R.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Van Es, Christopher J.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Williamson, Justina R.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
Wohlleben, Karen E.Employee$42000.00Per AnnumANALYST
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/annual-records/2012
More sampling sorted by job:
Hughes, Caroline E.Employee$70000.00Per AnnumREGIONAL COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR
Lepow, Brandon D.Employee$70000.00Per AnnumREGIONAL COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR
Rosholm, Joanna S.Employee$70000.00Per AnnumREGIONAL COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR
Here, in a nut shell, (perhaps "nut' being the operative word!) is the problem.
RobDon makes a statement that appears to be true, and many will take it as factual.
Only when someone challenges him- with hard data- does the truth emerge.
"Ever vigilant in the defense of freedom."
RobDon why don't you just come out of the closet and admit that you actually work for someone and are paid to Troll left leaning blogs. Seriously no one is this dumb by accident.
Looks like RobDon melted into the ether.
I could have predicted most of these responses, the biggest, there's no pay gap in the WH when you compare like jobs. YET, the Left love to throw out that women only make 77 cents on the dollar compared to men. But, that figure is NOT comparing like jobs. Is it?
So, you are saying if we just lump all the WH male employee pay together and do the same with the female, there is a 20% or so difference. But, if we compare "apples to apples" that different disappears. YET, the 77 cents on the dollar does the former, lumps all wage earners together.
Look, there is a wage gap and it should continue to be addressed. But, saying it is 77 cents on the dollar is not accurate.
This from the Washington Post:
Lastly, Karensc, I didn't melt...had to do some work. I am glad to have dialog.
oncearepublican,
Here's an article from Slate detailing that the White House has lots of say in who gets paid what...within limits and with the knowledge that the figures will be published. But, it is not a cut and dry process. Just determining job titles determine pay and there is little guidelines to assigning those.
RobDon,
Slate only has half the story. Congress decides how many employees each agency in the Executive Branch can have and how many of them can be SES's, GS 15's etc., but it is OPM that classifies each employee based on a desk audit of their duties. Once they are classified by DUTIES, NOT by job title, then the OPM rules kick in about how much they are paid. If you REALLY think it is by job title - go search USAjobs for General Engineer, GS-0801 - you will see that there are advertisements at just about every pay grade for that title.
There can be some give and take - for instance if you apply for a government job at the GS-11 and GS-13 levels (government jobs are normally advertised at different GS levels), and the agency wants to hire you at the GS-11, you DO have the opportunity to show that you meet the KSA's for a GS-13 and possibly get the job at a GS-13. If you don't meet the KSA's for a GS-13, then NO, the person hiring can't give it to you, no matter how badly they want you. It isn't any different for ANY government employee!
Wow this caught my eye.
I know some women that I work with that they are not keeping up their end of the deal. They need to stop working so hard.
Once, while I'm certain the GS levels apply to many in the White House, I do not think it applies to some of the Executive Office of the President staff. Here's one note of that there is an exemption on the US Office of Personnel Managment website:
Yes it is. That's what the phrase "equal pay for equal work" means. Every time we discuss this, conservatives, right up to Republican congressmen on Meet the Press arguing with Rachel, try to say "well, that's just because they work different kinds of jobs."
No, it isn't. The statistic is that women are paid less than men for the same work. If you're arguing that it's because of different jobs or because of different hours, you either don't know the facts or you're willfully distorting the argument.
I'm not arguing that it doesn't exists, I'm arguing that it is less than the 77 cents on the dollar because that lumps all jobs together without taking into account equal pay for EQUAL work. Just like lumping all White House staff into the same group doesn't tell the whole picture, you have to compare like jobs.
Here's several sources. Realize that the fact checker sites link to other sites for analysis.
Here's several sources:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jun/21/barack-obama/barack-obama-ad-says-women-are-paid-77-cents-dolla/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-white-houses-use-of-data-on-the-gender-wage-gap/2012/06/04/gJQAYH6nEV_blog.html
http://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/pub_assets/pdf/re/2011/d/gender_wage_gap.pdf
A couple of things that I do understand, and a few that I don't: we were losing hundreds of thousands of jobs, and just stopping that bleeding is never counted as a numbers' gain. And what part of the American psyche is all about the next five minutes, and nothing more? Wars have consequences. Leaders who lie and mis-lead should be tried as criminals, and should have faced consequences--not become spin-meisters of recent history. Americans aren't that dumb, but too many are spending their time getting detached. How a moron like Romney is even considered for higher office is amazing.
Thank you! I used to think that Americans could see thru the bs, but then again too many watch FAUX NOOSZ and are highly uninformed. Not only is Romney a moron, but most of the GOTP in Congress and from what I can see many state governments! I don't know what they said to gain office, but I do know that they should all be removed from office for "mental defects"!
I'm from MA. Will Steve, Rachel or someone do a piece that Obama should emphasize Romney's failure in creating jobs in MA, as we went down to 47th in the nation for job creation. People think Romney is a job creator. He's a successful businessman and can take apart and build back up companies, but that will not make him a successful president, as the president has to care about 100% not 53% of the nation. If people had Romney's record as governor of MA. in the front of their mind, this would help people understand Obama is our man.
Sunshine, before you go yapping dem talking points, get your facts straight and study on what you are going to say:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/sep/04/deval-patrick/did-mitt-romneys-massachusetts-rank-47th-job-creat/
Read and study and learn a little.
Johnny: What's your point. It's still half true. Just because the governor isn't responsible for the whole problem he's still responsible for some of it. And I don't appreciate you telling me to read and study a little. I have a doctorate and masters and still read and watch politics about 2.5 hours/day.
Sunshine, now he'll just call you an elitist snob. These trolls are mind-bendingly arrogant in their ignorance.
He's defending Romney for inheriting a big problem that takes time to fix while, at the same time, bashing the president who has the exact same problem.
80sGirl: True and thanks.
Why is it that every time I hear anything about Romney's Economic "Plan"I start hearing Tennessee Ernie Ford singin 16 Tons?
People need to remember that that song is based on a very real way life was back when Calvin Coolidge said "The business of America is business"
It is an interesting story about Adam and Eve, since when you really get into that story you can understand some things better. First of all Adam and Eve never did live together so such a thing as marriage never existed. And the idea of marriage is indeed a very man-made concept. Now since Adam and Eve never did live together, Eve who ate from the supposed tree of life for knowledge did it so probably very much in reality she could feed her family that she was left to fend for. Adam in reality being more like the primitive ape species probably had more of a tendency to hog the food he found. But Adam came upon Eve knowing she knew something more and of course in his behavior liked what Eve discovered, because it improved survival and took it as his own. Thus Adam more likely looked to take and use those ideas however he could obtain them. But you see something happened in Eve and Adams environment, because initially food was plenty and than there had to be very little left. The Adams in the world at the time were not living with the Eve’s, but it was the Eve’s that figured out how to survive. In which, the Adams took for their own, since in reality these Adams did hog all the food leaving the Eve’s to struggle for ideas so the species could survive. Yea, really getting into these Bible stories can be interesting at times, especially when you really do get the real facts about things from Science, knowledge, and technology. But one thing that does become very transparent here is how some very narrow-minded men twisted the truth to make it look like they were so much better than women and women needed to stay as subservient and ignorant to men. but in reality, it has been narrow-minded men plainly causing too many of these problems in the world.
And when are we going to hold the Republican Congress accountable for blocking and filibustering every single jobs/infilstructure/veterans bill that would make the economy better and create more jobs and opportunity? This should be shouted from the rooftops!
Yes, Vicki. I just commented above and wanted to also say this but I was at work and got distracted. I wish Obama clearly laid out his jobs bill at the second debate and how the Republican Congress has obstructed it because they have an axe to grind with Obama being in office and how this isn't looking out for the country.
On one of the morning show's I think it was the Today Show, it was said that "Tagg"Romney wanted to punch President Obama during the debate tuesday.WhyTagg, because the President called your father on his lies?This family think's they are "entitled " to the White House.But I do'nt understand why they would want to move into a smaller house?It does'nt even have a car elevator!
Be honest now - didn't you want to slap Romney just a little?
When Ann Romney said that with five sons every evening was like World War III at their house, it made me shudder. Violence between siblings in the family was absolutely not permitted in any family I've ever known or been close to. I imagine there are others like the Romneys, but their acceptance of their children's violence with each other, their indulgence, is utterly reprehensible.
Because they were boys, they were probably allowed to do anything they wanted to.
If Tagg Romney is such a tough guy, why hasn't he served in Iraq or Afghanistan?
In the first debate when Obama mentioned closing the loophole for moving overseas Romney answered that he didn't know what Obama was talking about and that "maybe I need to get a new accountant." It sounds like this is a confession that he has moved factories etc overseas. I've been waiting for someone to bring this up but so far no one has.
Yesterday in Mt. Vernon, Obama noted that Mitt's job creating math isn't any better than his tax math. A few minutes later, Obama was talking about creating 100,000 new math and science teaching jobs to put the US back at the top of education.
It occurred to me about that point - Mitt needs one of those new math teachers.
In the 1st debate after Obama said he would close the loophole for moving factories etc. overseas Romney answered that he had been in business for 25 years and never heard of that and that "maybe I need to get a new accountant." Sounds like a confession to me.
Romney has a great accountant, it was dramatized in "The Firm."
Hey, Obama fans. What about the latest Gallup poll? Romney 51 Barry 45. Your bump may come, but it has not come yet.
Unlike leftie Day said earlier in this conversation, he thinks America is stupid. But everyone who watched this debate knows Candy and Barry were working together at times. Yet Gov. Romney kept his cool.
Hey, what about the theatrical "mean looks" Barry gave Gov. Romney. I about feel out of my chair. This guy is such a con.
Wake up left. Barry is not the man you want for the next 4 years. I don't see how yuou can even let anyone know that is how you feel.
Errrrr.....Johnny, Fox News isn't "everyone". Go crawl back into your hole....
A short time ago, Gallup changed its polling from registered voters to polling their idea of who 'likely voters' are. In virtually all polls they count 'likely voters' as predominantly Republicans. That accounts for a lot of the 'change.' They changed their methodology and presto changeo, Romney is mysteriously leading...
Day is right - any country that would elect G. W. Bush even once, let alone twice, and then allow Romney to run neck and neck with Obama, is most decidedly half stupid.
Deficits
According to Republicans, President Obama's out of control spending is destroying the country. As proof they cite the trillion dollar plus deficits we've had since he's taken office. Review of the actual federal budget history seems to tell a different story.
Last federal budget for each President (total annual government spending):
Obama - $3.6 trillion
Bush - $3.3 trillion
Clinton - $1.8 trillion
The annual federal spending under Bush has grown from $1.8 to $3.3 trillion, and now it is $3.6 trillion.
So Obama's spending is destroying the country? Really?
Remember what Barack said in 2008. THESE ARE GREAT WORDS. LISTEN TO THEM EVERYONE BLINDLY FOLLOWING BARACK.
"If you don't have any fresh ideas, you use stale tactics to scare the voters"
"If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone to run from"
Hey...isn't that what Barack is doing right now?...and his entire campaign has been doing?
How about someone on the left explaining this to me? It seems....no...it is absolutely true....
HE IS DOING THE EXACT SAME THING HE ACCUSED HIS OPPONENT AND SLAMMED HIS OPPONENT IN 2008 OF DOING.
What a hypocrite!!!!!!
Lets look at some other great promises in 2008:
I will never have any closed door meetings, no secret meetings. DID NOT HAPPEN
I will close Gitmo. DID NOT HAPPEN
I will never allow Lobbyists on Capitol Hill. DID NOT HAPPEN
I will never allow lobbyists to control any decisions. DID NOT HAPPEN
I will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term DID NOT HAPPEN
"I am not somebody that supports same sex marriage" OOOOPS!
"I will walk the picket line with you if you decide to bargain" DID NOT HAPPEN
Tell you what, there are way too many to list:
Go to this website and take a look:
http://obamalies.net/list-of-lies
It may be a bias site...but a lot of the statements are fact. Just go take a look. It will really wake up you.
You guys on the left figure it out.
Ahh Johnny,
You really HAVE been your hole a long time, haven't you? Don't you know EVERY stupid troll who comes to this site posts the exact same crap?
What makes YOU different?
From Johnny's post #2.2 above:
Now look at Johnny's post #16 here. Not a single mention of his boy Romney - just slamming Obama at every turn.
Hypocrite.
The president should give a policy speech on the economy (like the speech he gave about race in the last election) and lay out his entire plan soup to nuts. He should take me from 2008 - 20012 - future. Lay it out for me a la Clinton. He shouldn't be afraid to make me feel that i have to make a contribution. He thinks that he has laid all this out before, but he has only spoken in generalities. And ,yes, he should use the word "plan" a thousand times just as Romney does, so that people know that he has one. It would be great for him to get the jump on Romney and lay out specifics and talk to me about airports, bridges, scientific research and higher education. Don't tell me to look it up on the web, because I don't want to. I want you to inspire me. I need you to inspire me. I have come through a tough four years, and I want to know that my slogging away has been worth something. He should talk to me about how healthcare reform will add to my security and to my wallet and lay out how much money we will save when we get out of these wars. I want the figure. Tell me something radical like every school will stay open until five, because we just can't educate our children in the amount of time we have currently allotted. I don't know. Something. Tell me how you are going to innovate. Give me a vision of the future. I have been around the world this year and it is embarrassing how old fashioned our infrastructure is. Our grid is jeopardized. Our water treatment plants are out of date and old fashioned. Give me ideas as to how it could be made better. The housings stats are up. Good. Let's build on that. To me both of candidates have been saying "I am not the other guy". Please President Obama show me the future.
I hope all will take note of the recently published study by the Kaiser Family Foundation, that privatizing Medicare will raise premiums for 59% of recpients. Rachel, please cover this!
http://links.mkt1985.com/servlet/MailView?ms=NDQxNTY1NwS2&r=MjMwMjc0Nzc3NzIS1&j=MTMyMDU1MzU5S0&mt=1&rt=0#1
One way to reduce the cost of Medicare is to have Medicare cut out the insurance companies coverage of of part B. Insurance companies don't do anything for seniors other than simply pay a portion of the bills that medicare determines. Why are they making money for doing nothing other than paying a bill? Cut them out and the medical providers aill also save money on eliminating keeping track of part B ccoverage.
Al,
You could say that about ALL insurance companies that provide "health" insurance!!! They do absolutely NOTHING but collect money for "health care". The hospitals or physicians could do everything they do for us and charge us less!!
GREAT NEWS THAT IS IGNORED
The stock market is a leading economic indicator of the future of the economy and it looks bright for 2013.
Why havn't the Democratic economists pointed that out and also pointed out the enormous gains people have made in their retirement funds as well as state, local, and company retirement funds.
Mitt's entire policy is trust me, I will give the details later. He has nothing concrete to offer especially if he changes his story from day to day and lets his handlers correct what he says, in the dark of night.
Save seniors and medical providers a bundle on Medicare costs.
It's easy, have Medicare cover part B instead of the insurance companies. The insurance companies do nothing for you, they simply pay part of the charges that Medicare determines are appropriate. It would also save providers from having to process and account for two paymnets for the same exact service.
It's time for the insurance gravy train to end.
Now that I read that comment back to myself, I think it is me that is wrong. Sorry for the inaccurate post.
Yikes, I messed up the above. Disregard #22.1 and this one.
johnny #1.2 --
So the President and Candy teamed up against Romney? Poor baby. How is he going to take it when our friends and neighbors from other countries do not listen to his diatribes with open-mouthed wonderment? Act presidential -- as he did when corrected onstage in front of God and everybody?
Goodman #19
And Kaiser Family Foundation doesn't have a dog in this fight? Ha!
Yet you can not tell us what dog thatis , go figure , more gop failed logic
IT IS SO SIMPLE! Third grade arithmetic is enough to see the ABSURDITY of "TAX" promises of Romney:
1. Mr. Romney says he will not raise or lower the top 5% income earners. Meaning that the TAX REVENUE WILL STAY THE SAME from this group.
2. He says he will "LOWER THE TAX BURDEN OF MIDDLE CLASS." Meaning that the TAX REVENUE WILL GO DOWN from this group.
3. As a result TOTAL TAX REVENUE WILL DECREASE by the lowered tax burdens of middle and lower income earners.
4. He says "DEFICIT WILL WILL NOT GO UP!"
Now: WHERE IS THE MISSING MONEY coming from??? CHINA??
So, the bottom line is: There is only one way: SPENDING MUST BE CUT. Please tell us Mr. Romney, WHAT EXACT SPENDING CUTS ARE YOU CONSIDERING??? Please give us some truthful numbers!
Any other answer will be nothing but gibberish. DOES MR. ROMNEY THINK WE ARE ALL STUPID??
I'm not great with the tax stuff but I thought the tax "loopholes" Romney wants to close are things like the mortgage credit, child tax credit, etc in other words things that help the middle class pay fewer tax dollars. So essentially, while the middle class tax rate itself may go down, the amount of money in dollars we pay will essentially stay the same or go up. It's smoke and mirrors; yeah, I'm lowering your tax rate, but I'm closing the tax credits you used so that now you actually pay more.
While these same "loopholes" will affect the very wealthy, they will barely notice it. And since the capital gains tax will not go up, the wealthy will still get richer. The rest of us pay more, despite the lower tax rate. Same old thing, the plutocrats play and the middle class pay.
IT IS SO SIMPLE! Third grade arithmetic is enough to see the ABSURDITY of "TAX" promises of Romney:
1. Mr. Romney says he will not raise or lower the top 5% income earners. Meaning that the TAX REVENUE WILL STAY THE SAME from this group.
2. He says he will "LOWER THE TAX BURDEN OF MIDDLE CLASS." Meaning that the TAX REVENUE WILL GO DOWN from this group.
3. As a result TOTAL TAX REVENUE WILL DECREASE by the lowered tax burdens of middle and lower income earners.
4. He says "DEFICIT WILL WILL NOT GO UP!"
Now: WHERE IS THE MISSING MONEY coming from??? CHINA??
So, the bottom line is: There is only one way: SPENDING MUST BE CUT. Please tell us Mr. Romney, WHAT EXACT SPENDING CUTS ARE YOU CONSIDERING??? Please give us some truthful numbers!
Any other answer will be nothing but gibberish. DOES MR. ROMNEY THINK WE ARE ALL STUPID??
Why has it taken so long to tout this. Why isn't he screaming at the top of his lungs, Look at how much we have accomplished, even with a congress that has fought him every step of the way!" Even the first two years, when democrats controlled congress, the Republicans set a record for the most fillibusters in the history of congress. Imagine where we would be if he actually had a congress that supported him.
And why is the media letting Congress off the hook? Their obstructionism gets mentioned in passing, but no one seems to really be holding them accountable for anything that is happening in this congress. The election would have been over if they had passed (or even voted on) the American Jobs Act. It would have taken away Romney's biggest talking point.
Keep the faith, Sam. There are 3 weeks left. A boxer doesn't expend all his energy in the 12th round of a 15-round fight. Obama will cover these issues strategically, when the timing gives him the biggest benefit. He knows he needs to lay out his plan, and he knows that Congress needs to be called out for their anti-American obstructionism.
It won't all come out in Monday's debate either; it will be in speeches and targeted ads between now and Nov. 6th. His campaign knows what they are doing; I've seen it time and again. Be patient.