Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Romney Goes On Offense, Pays For It In First Wave Of Fact Checks

Posted by   + Show Post

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 debate that "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 cut Medicare 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 called Romney'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 has created 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.

New World Peace

by on Oct. 4, 2012 at 8:40 AM
Replies (11-20):
ramonafrog
by Bronze Member on Oct. 4, 2012 at 12:54 PM
1 mom liked this
Really? Obama was the one who was snarky sarcastic and rude...

Quoting NWP:

Obama was certainly off his game. If you go by louder and pushier, which is what makes for good tv, yes this is why Romney won. He could have been on an episode of Maury Povich the way he treated the process. But American Pop culture loves that kid of rudeness.

However, based on actual facutal information, he lost. Unfortunately, many do not care about that part.

Quoting Jesi_79:

 They are declaring Romney the winner because Obama lost big time.


Quoting nb34:


I can't believe people are declaring him the winner. 




Quoting NWP:




It is because those who do not like O will believe anything that will affect him in a negative way. Like R said last night, repeat the lie long enough hoping someone will believe you. It is his strategy


Quoting mikiemom:


I'm left wondering why Romney continues to lie about things that are so easily fact chected. I Tivo'd the debate and only watched the first part but his lies were so obvious it was rather sad.






 


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Sisteract
by Whoopie on Oct. 4, 2012 at 12:58 PM
2 moms liked this

As a 3rd party supporter, I disagree.

While Romney was clearly more forceful  and commanding in getting his poitn across last night, he often spoke over the mod and Obama. He was inconsiderate and rude, but needed to be. It was clearly win, no matter what, or go home empty for MR.

In the infamous words of GWB, "mission accomplished."


Quoting ramonafrog:

Really? Obama was the one who was snarky sarcastic and rude...

Quoting NWP:

Obama was certainly off his game. If you go by louder and pushier, which is what makes for good tv, yes this is why Romney won. He could have been on an episode of Maury Povich the way he treated the process. But American Pop culture loves that kid of rudeness.

However, based on actual facutal information, he lost. Unfortunately, many do not care about that part.

Quoting Jesi_79:

 They are declaring Romney the winner because Obama lost big time.


Quoting nb34:


I can't believe people are declaring him the winner. 




Quoting NWP:




It is because those who do not like O will believe anything that will affect him in a negative way. Like R said last night, repeat the lie long enough hoping someone will believe you. It is his strategy


Quoting mikiemom:


I'm left wondering why Romney continues to lie about things that are so easily fact chected. I Tivo'd the debate and only watched the first part but his lies were so obvious it was rather sad.






 



Separation of church and state is for the protection of BOTH church and state.
Leading with hate and intolerance only leads to MORE hate and intolerance.
Jesi_79
by Bronze Member on Oct. 4, 2012 at 1:00 PM
2 moms liked this

According to the AP factcheck both candidates were guilty of not fully disclosing every detail (not unexpected since they have limited time and cannot conduct a college level course on economics int he alloted time).  But Obama actually is guilty of more actual falsehoods.

And Obama had the benefit of Lehrer, not just tossing softballs at Obama, he was setting up tee ball and Obama still couldn't do it.

So the end result is Obama lied as much as Romney, but Obama couldn't deliver.

Quoting NWP:

Obama was certainly off his game. If you go by louder and pushier, which is what makes for good tv, yes this is why Romney won. He could have been on an episode of Maury Povich the way he treated the process. But American Pop culture loves that kid of rudeness.

However, based on actual facutal information, he lost. Unfortunately, many do not care about that part.

Quoting Jesi_79:

 They are declaring Romney the winner because Obama lost big time.

Quoting nb34:

I can't believe people are declaring him the winner. 

 

Quoting NWP:


It is because those who do not like O will believe anything that will affect him in a negative way. Like R said last night, repeat the lie long enough hoping someone will believe you. It is his strategy

Quoting mikiemom:

I'm left wondering why Romney continues to lie about things that are so easily fact chected. I Tivo'd the debate and only watched the first part but his lies were so obvious it was rather sad.



 


 

Sat.Wed
by Bronze Member on Oct. 4, 2012 at 1:09 PM
1 mom liked this
Does NOT mean Romney will be president *shudders*


Quoting Jesi_79:

 They are declaring Romney the winner because Obama lost big time.


Quoting nb34:


I can't believe people are declaring him the winner. 


 


Quoting NWP:




It is because those who do not like O will believe anything that will affect him in a negative way. Like R said last night, repeat the lie long enough hoping someone will believe you. It is his strategy


Quoting mikiemom:


I'm left wondering why Romney continues to lie about things that are so easily fact chected. I Tivo'd the debate and only watched the first part but his lies were so obvious it was rather sad.






 


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Naturewoman4
by Platinum Member on Oct. 4, 2012 at 1:15 PM
2 moms liked this

way to gorolling on floorRomney CRUSHED Obama!!!!!!!  It was painfully embarassing to see Obama.  BUT, I'm happy :)  Just wait for the VP Debate, Ryan will CRUSH Biden too!!!  Then, look out Obama!!!!  Romney is going in for the kill on the next Debate.  Obama you better come up with something better than this first debate.  But, I doubt it that Obama will do any better.  Romney have the facts on his side.  Romney has Obama's HORRIBLE record on his side.  I think at this point, Obama wishes he didn't have to debate anymore.  He acts like he didn't even want to be up there.  Like, he's above all the debating anymore.  Why?  Because, he's SO full of himself!!  LOOK OUT OBAMA........ROMNEY IS GOING TO KILL YOU ON THE NEXT DEBATE!!!  OBAMA LOOKED SO EMBARASSED, STUPID & DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL IS WAS TALKING ABOUT...LOOKING DOWN AT HIS NOTES..NOT ABLE TO LOOK INTO THE EYES OF ROMNEY....WHEN ROMNEY THAT'S ALL HE DID..WAS LOOK DIRECTLY INTO HIS EYES!! 

GO ROMNEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

nb34
by Silver Member on Oct. 4, 2012 at 1:19 PM
4 moms liked this

He sure won in the category of most obnoxious candidate ever! He did not offer any real solution to our problems and he lied more times than I can count. He even looked Obama in the eye and denied his tax policy as his own. Why people consider that a win, is beyond me. Unless it was a "whose voice is louder?" contest I don't see based on what logic the media announced Romney as the winner!!

Quoting Jesi_79:

 They are declaring Romney the winner because Obama lost big time.

Quoting nb34:

I can't believe people are declaring him the winner. 


Quoting NWP:


It is because those who do not like O will believe anything that will affect him in a negative way. Like R said last night, repeat the lie long enough hoping someone will believe you. It is his strategy

Quoting mikiemom:

I'm left wondering why Romney continues to lie about things that are so easily fact chected. I Tivo'd the debate and only watched the first part but his lies were so obvious it was rather sad.



 


candlegal
by Judy on Oct. 4, 2012 at 1:19 PM
1 mom liked this

Yep, obama certainly didn't look Presidential last night, oh yeah, he didn't have his teleprompter.

Romney was awesome


Quoting Naturewoman4:

way to gorolling on floorRomney CRUSHED Obama!!!!!!!  It was painfully embarassing to see Obama.  BUT, I'm happy :)  Just wait for the VP Debate, Ryan will CRUSH Biden too!!!  Then, look out Obama!!!!  Romney is going in for the kill on the next Debate.  Obama you better come up with something better than this first debate.  But, I doubt it that Obama will do any better.  Romney have the facts on his side.  Romney has Obama's HORRIBLE record on his side.  I think at this point, Obama wishes he didn't have to debate anymore.  He acts like he didn't even want to be up there.  Like, he's above all the debating anymore.  Why?  Because, he's SO full of himself!!  LOOK OUT OBAMA........ROMNEY IS GOING TO KILL YOU ON THE NEXT DEBATE!!!  OBAMA LOOKED SO EMBARASSED, STUPID & DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL IS WAS TALKING ABOUT...LOOKING DOWN AT HIS NOTES..NOT ABLE TO LOOK INTO THE EYES OF ROMNEY....WHEN ROMNEY THAT'S ALL HE DID..WAS LOOK DIRECTLY INTO HIS EYES!! 

GO ROMNEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1


candlegal
by Judy on Oct. 4, 2012 at 1:22 PM
2 moms liked this

Nothing happened, you saw O live and in person when he doesn't have his teleprompter to tell hin what to say.

Quoting NWP:

I am still wondering what happened right before the debate to throw O off his game. He was distracted.


cammibear
by Gold Member on Oct. 4, 2012 at 1:44 PM
Romney patiently waited as Obama spoke slowly, and went over his two minutes time and time again. Had Romney not pushed back and aggressively took extra time, Obama would have had way more time than Romney. As it was Obama only had several extra minutes. The moderator was clearly doing all he could to help Obama. It was quite amusing, and it didn't help. At all.

Im not a fan of either one, but my perspective is totally different than yours. You may not vote for Obama, but you clearly like him better than Romney. I'm the opposite of that.


Quoting Sisteract:

As a 3rd party supporter, I disagree.

While Romney was clearly more forceful  and commanding in getting his poitn across last night, he often spoke over the mod and Obama. He was inconsiderate and rude, but needed to be. It was clearly win, no matter what, or go home empty for MR.

In the infamous words of GWB, "mission accomplished."


Quoting ramonafrog:

Really? Obama was the one who was snarky sarcastic and rude...



Quoting NWP:

Obama was certainly off his game. If you go by louder and pushier, which is what makes for good tv, yes this is why Romney won. He could have been on an episode of Maury Povich the way he treated the process. But American Pop culture loves that kid of rudeness.

However, based on actual facutal information, he lost. Unfortunately, many do not care about that part.

Quoting Jesi_79:

 They are declaring Romney the winner because Obama lost big time.



Quoting nb34:



I can't believe people are declaring him the winner. 






Quoting NWP:






It is because those who do not like O will believe anything that will affect him in a negative way. Like R said last night, repeat the lie long enough hoping someone will believe you. It is his strategy



Quoting mikiemom:



I'm left wondering why Romney continues to lie about things that are so easily fact chected. I Tivo'd the debate and only watched the first part but his lies were so obvious it was rather sad.









 




Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Sisteract
by Whoopie on Oct. 4, 2012 at 1:47 PM
2 moms liked this

We clearly watched different debates.

Quoting cammibear:

Romney patiently waited as Obama spoke slowly, and went over his two minutes time and time again. Had Romney not pushed back and aggressively took extra time, Obama would have had way more time than Romney. As it was Obama only had several extra minutes. The moderator was clearly doing all he could to help Obama. It was quite amusing, and it didn't help. At all.

Im not a fan of either one, but my perspective is totally different than yours. You may not vote for Obama, but you clearly like him better than Romney. I'm the opposite of that.


Quoting Sisteract:

As a 3rd party supporter, I disagree.

While Romney was clearly more forceful  and commanding in getting his poitn across last night, he often spoke over the mod and Obama. He was inconsiderate and rude, but needed to be. It was clearly win, no matter what, or go home empty for MR.

In the infamous words of GWB, "mission accomplished."


Quoting ramonafrog:

Really? Obama was the one who was snarky sarcastic and rude...



Quoting NWP:

Obama was certainly off his game. If you go by louder and pushier, which is what makes for good tv, yes this is why Romney won. He could have been on an episode of Maury Povich the way he treated the process. But American Pop culture loves that kid of rudeness.

However, based on actual facutal information, he lost. Unfortunately, many do not care about that part.

Quoting Jesi_79:

 They are declaring Romney the winner because Obama lost big time.



Quoting nb34:



I can't believe people are declaring him the winner. 






Quoting NWP:






It is because those who do not like O will believe anything that will affect him in a negative way. Like R said last night, repeat the lie long enough hoping someone will believe you. It is his strategy



Quoting mikiemom:



I'm left wondering why Romney continues to lie about things that are so easily fact chected. I Tivo'd the debate and only watched the first part but his lies were so obvious it was rather sad.









 





Separation of church and state is for the protection of BOTH church and state.
Leading with hate and intolerance only leads to MORE hate and intolerance.
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Featured