Get HuskerMax™ on your iPhone. Click here for details. Get tickets for all home and away games here.
Page 13 of 29 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 195 of 432

Thread: Why is the Obama campaign not giving up on this blatant misrepresentation?

  1. #181
    Red Shirt

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2,334
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownHusker View Post
    As I said earlier, he is not claiming any credit for investment decisions made after 1999. He is taking credit for the benefits of investment decisions made before 1999, even if those benefits did not arise until later. No hypocrisy in that position.
    Please see the following, Chi: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...PK0U_blog.html

    From the article linked above:

    The other problem with this statistic — at least as the Romney campaign uses it — is that many of these investments took place long after Romney had left the firm, some 13 years ago, which makes it increasingly irrelevant to his skills or performance. (Gillespie, in his comment on CBS, rattles off figures for the current employment of companies in which Bain invested, even though this has virtually nothing to do with Romney’s involvement.)
    [Sorry, still fairly new here: Is it ok to quote from that article as long as I've provided the link?]

  2. #182
    Red Shirt

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2,334
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownHusker View Post
    It's a semantic quibble. I think you could fairly say that Obama's policies made the economy worse insofar as the economy would have been better without those policies. There's a reason why Obama's lie is all over the news and has been thoroughly and repeatedly analyzed and rejected by the fact checkers (unlike the "made the economy worse" statement, which no one is talking about. And that is because Obama has continued to peddle this lie because he wants to unleash the attack about the abortion company in October on Christian radio.

    As your New York times article stated:



    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/us...pagewanted=all

    There's always going to be some measure of dissembling by both candidates, and making misleading statements that cannot strictly be backed up by the facts. Both candidates have done their share. The "made the economy worse" statement falls in the category of the misleading statements that are made by both candidates regularly.

    Obama's lie on Bain falls in another, more egregious, category because (a) it has no good faith basis, and Obama has to know that and (b) he is disregarding the objective fact checkers and continuing to spend millions of dollars pushing this lie.
    So, again, I'll ask the same question. What is the good faith basis for saying Obama made the economy worse? You've repeatedly explained to me the good faith basis for a claim that Obama made the economy worse than it needed to be -- but that's not what Romney has said and continues to say, even after the fact checkers have debunked it. If he really means the latter, why not say it? I can offer an answer: because it doesn't sound as good and it doesn't score the same political points.

    If I may, I'd like to quote the full paragraph from the article you quoted above, along with the start of the next paragraph:

    Each side regularly accuses the other of lying, and in any campaign there is a temptation to write both sides off, as if every misleading statement were equivalent. In reality, some are more fundamental than others, more egregious, more central to the larger argument. Mr. Romney, for example, called his 2010 book laying out the rationale for his candidacy “No Apology” — charging, falsely in the eyes of many independent fact-checkers, that Mr. Obama had traveled the world apologizing for America.

    But determining who is the worse dissembler can be a subjective exercise, even in an age when news organizations, blogs and partisan groups blitz out regular fact-checks. When PolitiFact, the Pulitzer-winning project of The Tampa Bay Times, evaluated the statements, it found that more of Mr. Romney’s were misleading than Mr. Obama’s. Glenn Kessler, who writes the Fact Checker column at The Washington Post, on the other hand, has awarded roughly the same average “Pinocchio scores” — his measure of falsity — to both men.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/us...pagewanted=all

    You may feel that Obama is the greater dissembler, while I may feel Romney is. So is the real difference in the issue about which you complain here that Obama is pushing his lie in advertisements, while Romney is only pushing his lie in speeches and interviews? (For all I know, Romney may be saying the same thing in ads. As I said earlier, thankfully I'm spared listening to both sides' attacks!)

  3. #183
    Society Crazy Indeed
    Pops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    47,665
    Quote Originally Posted by CornfieldCounty View Post
    I don't ever expect you to ever criticize a birther again, your argument is beyond idiotic.

    Chi has continually blown apart why this is fruitless, yet you continue to un-waiver.
    No he really hasnt as I showed by his own link...Romney is claiming what isnt true with the jobs creation.....I've never criticized a birther


    I cannot be bought, compromised, detoured, lured away, turned back, deluded, or delayed. I will not flinch in the face of sacrifice, hesitate in the presence of adversity, negotiate at the table of the enemy, ponder at the pool of popularity, or meander in the maze of mediocrity.I wont give up, shut up, let up, until I have stayed up, stored up, prayed up, paid up, and showed up for all wounded children.

  4. #184
    Society Crazy Indeed
    Pops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    47,665
    Quote Originally Posted by CornfieldCounty View Post
    I don't ever expect you to ever criticize a birther again, your argument is beyond idiotic.

    Chi has continually blown apart why this is fruitless, yet you continue to un-waiver.

    fact check
    from your post
    Looking at all the evidence made public so far, we do not think Romney was actively involved in the day-to-day management of Bain after 1999. But it doesn’t mean his influence disappeared after he left.


    I cannot be bought, compromised, detoured, lured away, turned back, deluded, or delayed. I will not flinch in the face of sacrifice, hesitate in the presence of adversity, negotiate at the table of the enemy, ponder at the pool of popularity, or meander in the maze of mediocrity.I wont give up, shut up, let up, until I have stayed up, stored up, prayed up, paid up, and showed up for all wounded children.

  5. #185
    Society Crazy Indeed
    Pops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    47,665
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownHusker View Post
    As I said earlier, he is not claiming any credit for investment decisions made after 1999. He is taking credit for the benefits of investment decisions made before 1999, even if those benefits did not arise until later. No hypocrisy in that position.

    reminder from fact check

    And we’ll just note for the record that FactCheck.org has also found numerous instances in which Romney has also strayedfrom the facts in accusations against Obama. He also claimed that he created 100,000 jobs at Bain Capital — a claim we foundlacked support because it took credit for jobs added by companies long after Romney had left the Bain.


    I cannot be bought, compromised, detoured, lured away, turned back, deluded, or delayed. I will not flinch in the face of sacrifice, hesitate in the presence of adversity, negotiate at the table of the enemy, ponder at the pool of popularity, or meander in the maze of mediocrity.I wont give up, shut up, let up, until I have stayed up, stored up, prayed up, paid up, and showed up for all wounded children.

  6. #186
    Ayyy!

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Approximately 41° 12' 19" N, 96° 9' 29" W
    Posts
    39,616
    Quote Originally Posted by Pops View Post
    No he really hasnt as I showed by his own link...Romney is claiming what isnt true with the jobs creation.....I've never criticized a birther
    Maybe not directly, but you've taken digs.

  7. #187
    Ayyy!

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Approximately 41° 12' 19" N, 96° 9' 29" W
    Posts
    39,616
    Who gives a crap if he was involved after 1999 or not? Every indication is that he was out of the loop. Maybe they called him up every now and then, maybe they didn't. It's unlikely that he severed all ties to everyone in the company, but none of this means a damn thing.

    If one of the companies that Bain invested in was going to fail and the only way to save it was to move some jobs overseas, then I actually applaud Bain for doing that. A move like that probably kept the company from closing down and losing ALL jobs.

  8. #188
    Travel Squad

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Occupying HuskerMAX
    Posts
    9,301
    Quote Originally Posted by Warhorse View Post
    And you were the one chiding me earlier in this thread about not taking the opportunity to "show a little impartiality." Yeah, right.
    Of course there are a couple of major differences here.

    1. Chi said Romney shouldn't have said those things.

    2. You have yet to condemn Obama's campaign for the lies.

    As I read these threads it always amazes me how disconnected you posts are from reality. Wowsers!!

  9. #189
    Travel Squad

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Occupying HuskerMAX
    Posts
    9,301
    Quote Originally Posted by huskrthill View Post
    Who gives a crap if he was involved after 1999 or not? Every indication is that he was out of the loop. Maybe they called him up every now and then, maybe they didn't. It's unlikely that he severed all ties to everyone in the company, but none of this means a damn thing.

    If one of the companies that Bain invested in was going to fail and the only way to save it was to move some jobs overseas, then I actually applaud Bain for doing that. A move like that probably kept the company from closing down and losing ALL jobs.
    Exactly... These are COMPANIES we are talking about. How about the fact that Obama spend OUR money (tax-payer money) to send jobs overseas??

  10. #190
    Junior Varsity

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by ChitownHusker View Post
    Some great stuff from the Washington Post's Fact Checker. Overall, the Washington Post is indisputably a left leaning newspaper.







    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...g.html?hpid=z4
    not their editorials. Just sayin...

  11. #191
    All Legend
    huskernut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Louisville, CO
    Posts
    17,919
    Quote Originally Posted by Husker Mort View Post
    This one. The one where you just were not a man if your truck did not have a Chevy or a Ford emblem on its grill and your tractor was not red or green. The one where patriotism and retail decisions went hand-in-hand. The one that firmly believed that "foreign" products were inferior and hurtful to the cause of American manufacturing. The one who belted out the lyrics to Alabama's "40 hour week" and managed to respect the auto workers instead of resenting them for having benefits.

    Your claims that Republicans have always been about international trade are about as shortsighted as claims that free trade has only benefited the US. Maybe the Republicans that sat in offices in Manhattan have always believed this, but it sure as hell was not the parents, grandparents, aunts, and uncles of my classmates in rural Nebraska who were about as salt-of-the-Earth as they come and still are today.
    I wasn't trying to "call you out", Mort, just was injecting a little levity about how there are two camps on this. You have good arguments, particularly in your post right after this one. I would like to reply, but I am very busy during the day today, and won't get a chance til later.

  12. #192
    Junior Varsity

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby and Bruce View Post
    Buggy whip manufacturers probably felt the same way when the horseless carriage was first introduced...adapt or die.
    Did buggy whip manufacturers move jobs out of the country or close up all together? Apples n oranges.

  13. #193
    Ayyy!

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Approximately 41° 12' 19" N, 96° 9' 29" W
    Posts
    39,616
    Quote Originally Posted by cactusboy View Post
    Did buggy whip manufacturers move jobs out of the country or close up all together? Apples n oranges.
    Are you saying you'd prefer that a company close up completely (losing ALL jobs) rather than move some jobs to a different country in order to stay in business?

  14. #194
    Junior Varsity

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by SeattleHusker View Post
    Again, I think you're so far down in the weeds that you're missing the bigger picture. Even assuming Romney had no input from 1999 through 2002, he still, by his own admission and confirmed by the SEC filings, (1) had legal responsibility for the actions the company for whom he was CEO/President/Chairman took during the time period he was CEO/President/Chairman, and (2) profited from those actions as the company's owner/shareholder. Romney is trying to have it both ways here: take credit for the good things Bain did while denying responsibility for the bad things.
    Kinda like how Bobby Bowden got credit for when FSU won and blame for their losses. EVen if he wasn't doing anything more than walking along the sideline. Joe Pa probably falls in this category too.

  15. #195
    Junior Varsity

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by SeattleHusker View Post
    I think we're just starting to talk past one another rather than listening to what the other is saying, something I think we've avoided in prior threads. Should the Obama campaign have hinted that Romney may have committed a felony with the SEC filings? No. Should the Obama campaign continue to say that Romney made the decisions that resulted in jobs being shipped overseas? No. But for the 1999 to 2002 time period, the company which Romney owned and for which he was ultimately legally responsible and for which he was the CEO/Chairman/President, did do those things, and Romney profited from them. Is that as relevant as if he'd made those decisions personally? No. Is it as irrelevant as if his blind trust had invested in a company that did those things? No. Might we not be asking questions about his investment strategy if Romney invested in a company with whom he'd had no prior relationship that did the things that Bain did during 1999-2002? Yes, especially if he maintained that investment after those sorts of actions came to light. And in this situation, he's not just an investor -- he's also the founder, owner, CEO, Chairman and President. Even if he didn't personally make those decisions, do you not see how it still might be relevant?





Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •