|
FMRFGOPGAL -> RE: Now let's look at cumulative factual analysis of the debate........ (10/4/2012 8:50:35 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: subrob1967
Let's see what the REAL Fact Check had to say, shall we?
The Boston Globe is about as legitimate as the NYT
Actually Robbie... the sources cited in the article provided by Sternskipperwere from outside sources with impeccable reputatuions. Calling them names or calling names will never lower them to say, your level for instance. have you ever considered Lucy may have completely nailed your modus, by questioning if you axctually read the articles you cite? Example:
"
However, Romney continued to struggle to explain how he could possibly offset such a large loss of revenue without shifting the burden away from upper-income taxpayers, who benefit disproportionately from across-the-board rate cuts and especially from elimination of the estate tax (which falls only on estates exceeding $5.1 million left by any who die this year). The Tax Policy Center concluded earlier this year that it wasn’t mathematically possible for a plan such as Romney’s to cut rates as he promised without either favoring the wealthy or increasing the federal deficit.
Except for saying that his plan would bring in the same amount of money “when you account for growth,” Romney offered no new explanation for how he might accomplish all he’s promised. He just repeated those promises in some of the strongest terms yet.? = Romney is making it up as he goes along.
Vote for bullshit artists all you want. You are as you love to say counting eggs... but in your case before you even have them. Sorry, your "Aha" moment fizzled.
On the bright side Letterman said "The debate was so popular in terms of viewership, Mitt's money watched from the Caman Islands."
|
|
|
|
