Democratic dis-information at convention...Fact Check.org

Democratic Disinformation from Charlotte

Posted on September 5, 2012 , Corrected on September 5, 2012





CHARLOTTE, N.C. — We heard a number of dubious or misleading claims on the first night of the Democratic National Convention:
■The keynote speaker and others claimed the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, would raise taxes on the “middle class.” He has promised he won’t. Democrats base their claim on a study that doesn’t necessarily lead to that conclusion.
■The keynote speaker, San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, also said there have been 4.5 million “new jobs” under Obama. The fact is the economy has regained only 4 million of the 4.3 million jobs lost since Obama took office.
■Castro also insisted Romney and Ryan would “gut” Pell Grants for lower-income college students. Actually, the Ryan budget calls only for “limiting the growth” of spending for the program, and Ryan has said the maximum grant of $5,550 would not be decreased.
■A Democratic governor said Romney “left his state 47th out of 50 in job growth.” Actually, Massachusetts went from 50th in job creation during Romney’s first year to 28th in his final year.
■Two advocates of equal-pay legislation said women make 77 cents for every dollar men earn. That’s true on average, but the gap for women doing the same work as men is much less, and not entirely or even mostly the result of job discrimination.
■A union president accused Romney of seeking “a government bailout” for “his company.” Not really. In fact, Romney negotiated a favorable but routine settlement with bank regulators on behalf of a former company, the one he had left to form his own Bain Capital firm. No taxpayer funds were involved.
■Multiple speakers repeated a claim that the Ryan/Romney Medicare plan would cost seniors $6,400 a year. That’s a figure that applied to Ryan’s 2011 budget plan, but his current proposal (the one Romney embraces) is far more generous. The Congressional Budget Office says it “may” lead to higher costs for beneficiaries, but it can’t estimate how much.
■In prepared remarks released to reporters, Rep. James Clyburn engaged in partisan myth-making with the claim “Democrats created Social Security” while Republicans “cursed the darkness.” History records strong bipartisan support in both House and Senate for the measure President Roosevelt signed in 1935.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=160658674

Another fact check of Old Bills speech - Gong!!!

Complete nonsense..........you take 5 trillion out of a budget and give that money to the top 3% of the country, and you do not tell the American people how you are going to make up that budget hole.......who in the hell is going to pick up the tab for a five trillion dollar give away.

I read the NPR article no chain........you got nothing in that article other than the president got a BJ and lied........I agree he was the liar in chief.......but as I said on the other thread......I consider myself an honest man, but if I am getting a BJ from a 24 year old in the same house my wife is living in.......well the truth is not something I am going to consider......unless I am a fricking idiot........but cigars, pizza, and Bjs........yep.........the truth sometimes gets lost........I cannot imagine why. You know like as Romney bends the American middle class over and asks us politely to squeal like a pig.

2seaoat wrote:Complete nonsense..........you take 5 trillion out of a budget and give that money to the top 3% of the country, and you do not tell the American people how you are going to make up that budget hole.......who in the hell is going to pick up the tab for a five trillion dollar give away.

I read the NPR article no chain........you got nothing in that article other than the president got a BJ and lied........I agree he was the liar in chief.......but as I said on the other thread......I consider myself an honest man, but if I am getting a BJ from a 24 year old in the same house my wife is living in.......well the truth is not something I am going to consider......unless I am a fricking idiot........but cigars, pizza, and Bjs........yep.........the truth sometimes gets lost........I cannot imagine why. You know like as Romney bends the American middle class over and asks us politely to squeal like a pig.

And as I said: Careful cherry picking and obfuscation of facts has become the mantra of both parties.

[quote="Gunz"]Democratic Disinformation from Charlotte

Posted on September 5, 2012 , Corrected on September 5, 2012


I don't know where you found this, Gunz, but I don't buy a lot of it. And I'm not even a Democrat.


CHARLOTTE, N.C. — We heard a number of dubious or misleading claims on the first night of the Democratic National Convention:
■The keynote speaker and others claimed the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, would raise taxes on the “middle class.” He has promised he won’t. Democrats base their claim on a study that doesn’t necessarily lead to that conclusion.

Doesn't "necessarily" lead to that conclusion? What study? Where is it?

■The keynote speaker, San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, also said there have been 4.5 million “new jobs” under Obama. The fact is the economy has regained only 4 million of the 4.3 million jobs lost since Obama took office.
■Castro also insisted Romney and Ryan would “gut” Pell Grants for lower-income college students. Actually, the Ryan budget calls only for “limiting the growth” of spending for the program, and Ryan has said the maximum grant of $5,550 would not be decreased.

Define "limiting the growth", please. How can they purport to keep the max grant the same yet "limit the growth" at the same time? What will change?

■A Democratic governor said Romney “left his state 47th out of 50 in job growth.” Actually, Massachusetts went from 50th in job creation during Romney’s first year to 28th in his final year.
■Two advocates of equal-pay legislation said women make 77 cents for every dollar men earn. That’s true on average, but the gap for women doing the same work as men is much less, and not entirely or even mostly the result of job discrimination.

Don't even try to sell me this pig in a poke! It sounds as if the writer is saying it's A-OK to pay women less than men for the same work, as long as it's not the precise 77 cents touted by the Dems. And what is this "not entirely or even mostly" the result of job discrimination bull? What accounts for the difference? Your writer kindly left that part out.

■A union president accused Romney of seeking “a government bailout” for “his company.” Not really. In fact, Romney negotiated a favorable but routine settlement with bank regulators on behalf of a former company, the one he had left to form his own Bain Capital firm. No taxpayer funds were involved.

I actually spit out my coffee on this one. A "favorable but routine settlement with bank regulators?" Really??? How stupid does this writer think we are?

■Multiple speakers repeated a claim that the Ryan/Romney Medicare plan would cost seniors $6,400 a year. That’s a figure that applied to Ryan’s 2011 budget plan, but his current proposal (the one Romney embraces) is far more generous. The Congressional Budget Office says it “may” lead to higher costs for beneficiaries, but it can’t estimate how much.

Ha!!! "Far more generous?" More generous than what? Compared to what? Compared to the 2011 proposed budget? Numbers, please. I want numbers.

■In prepared remarks released to reporters, Rep. James Clyburn engaged in partisan myth-making with the claim “Democrats created Social Security” while Republicans “cursed the darkness.” History records strong bipartisan support in both House and Senate for the measure President Roosevelt signed in 1935.

So gender based income disparity exists, but has nothing to do with discrimination........Gunz.....you copied and pasted this response.....did you read it.......you know better than that........you tell me 30 years ago how many women were firefighters.......you tell me 60 years ago how many blacks were firefighters.........now tell me with a straight face that discrimination had nothing to do with it........you know Women cannot meet the physical challenges of the job.....and blacks do not have the cognitive skills to be a firefighter.........I respect your opinions, but did you read what you posted?

2seaoat wrote:So gender based income disparity exists, but has nothing to do with discrimination........Gunz.....you copied and pasted this response.....did you read it.......you know better than that........you tell me 30 years ago how many women were firefighters.......you tell me 60 years ago how many blacks were firefighters.........now tell me with a straight face that discrimination had nothing to do with it........you know Women cannot meet the physical challenges of the job.....and blacks do not have the cognitive skills to be a firefighter.........I respect your opinions, but did you read what you posted?

seaoat, are the words from your comment i highlighted in red YOUR words?

Im a little bit appaled..

2seaoat wrote:So gender based income disparity exists, but has nothing to do with discrimination........Gunz.....you copied and pasted this response.....did you read it.......you know better than that........you tell me 30 years ago how many women were firefighters.......you tell me 60 years ago how many blacks were firefighters.........now tell me with a straight face that discrimination had nothing to do with it........you know Women cannot meet the physical challenges of the job.....and blacks do not have the cognitive skills to be a firefighter.........I respect your opinions, but did you read what you posted?

Damn bother!! KKK much? I dont even know where to start with this.

Here is the writers' clarification from factcheck.org regarding the 77 cent gender gap:


The 77-Cent Exaggeration

Making a pitch for “equal pay for equal work,” Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut said “America’s women still make just 77 cents for every dollar men earn.” And the equal-pay crusader Lilly Ledbetter used the same figure and added: “[W]hen we lose 23 cents every hour, every day, every paycheck, every job, over the entire lives, what we lose cannot be measured in dollars.”

But that oft-cited 77-cent statistic exaggerates the actual gap between women and men doing the same work.

As we noted back in June, the most recent Census figures show that in 2010, “the earnings of women who worked full time, year-round were 77 percent of that for men working full time, year-round.” But that’s the median (midpoint) for all women in all jobs, not for women doing “the same work” or even necessarily working the same number of hours.

The actual gap for doing the same work varies by occupation but tends to be much less. We cited a study by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research that found, for example, that female registered nurses made nearly 96 percent of male nurses, female elementary and middle school teachers made 91 percent of what their male counterparts earned, secondary school teachers made 94 percent, and police officers made 99 percent.

A senior program analyst wrote recently in the Department of Labor’s official blog: “Economists generally attribute about 40% of the pay gap to discrimination – making about 60% explained by differences between workers or their jobs.” As we noted at the time, women tend to work fewer overtime hours, tend to choose jobs that offer more “family friendly” fringe benefits in lieu of higher pay, and sometimes leave the workforce for years to rear children, for example.

nochain wrote:And as I said: Careful cherry picking and obfuscation of facts has become the mantra of both parties.

Next I suppose you will try and say that Obama has no business experience, when we all know that he successfully ran a private equity firm. Then you will try and beef up Romney's resume when we all know that he was just a community organizer and never did anything in the private sector. Right? Right.

Cough cough.

boards of FL wrote:

nochain wrote:And as I said: Careful cherry picking and obfuscation of facts has become the mantra of both parties.

Next I suppose you will try and say that Obama has no business experience, when we all know that he successfully ran a private equity firm. Then you will try and beef up Romney's resume when we all know that he was just a community organizer and never did anything in the private sector. Right? Right.

Cough cough.

Weird.

nochain wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

nochain wrote:And as I said: Careful cherry picking and obfuscation of facts has become the mantra of both parties.

Next I suppose you will try and say that Obama has no business experience, when we all know that he successfully ran a private equity firm. Then you will try and beef up Romney's resume when we all know that he was just a community organizer and never did anything in the private sector. Right? Right.

Cough cough.

Weird.

It's my alternative universe! I made that! And if I keep repeating it, it's true!

WASHINGTON (AP) — It's a fact of life in Washington that what one party considers a principled stand, the opposition considers pigheadedness. Compromise? That's the other guy's problem.
But when former President Bill Clinton took the stage at the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday, he portrayed President Barack Obama as a pragmatic compromiser who has been stymied at every turn by Republicans. There was no mention of the role that the president and the Democrats have played in grinding compromise to a halt on some of the most important issues facing the country.
That was among the lines by the former president and others Wednesday that either cherry-picked facts or mischaracterized the opposition. A look at some of them:
CLINTON: "When times are tough, constant conflict may be good politics but in the real world, cooperation works better. ...Unfortunately, the faction that now dominates the Republican Party doesn't see it that way. They think government is the enemy and compromise is weakness. One of the main reasons America should re-elect President Obama is that he is still committed to cooperation."
THE FACTS: From Clinton's speech, voters would have no idea that the inflexibility of both parties is to blame for much of the gridlock. Right from the beginning Obama brought in as his first chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel, a man known for his getting his way, not for getting along.
One of the more high-profile examples of a deal that fell apart was the outline of a proposed "grand bargain" budget agreement between Obama and House Speaker John Boehner in 2011.
The deal would have required compromise from both sides. It slashed domestic spending more than most Democrats wanted and would have raised some taxes, which most Republicans oppose.
Boehner couldn't sell the plan to tea party factions in the House or to other conservative activists. And Obama found himself accused of going too far by some Democratic leaders. The deal died before it ever even came up for a vote.
In another instance, Obama appointed a bipartisan group, known as the Simpsons-Bowles Commission, to recommend ways to fix major fiscal problems like Social Security and Medicare. The commission issued its recommendations but fell three votes short of formally endorsing them. And Obama mostly walked away from the report. He later incorporated some of the less contentious proposals from the report into legislation he supported.
But that ensured the tough compromises would not get made.
The problem with compromising in Washington is that there are few true moderates left in either party. The notion that Republicans are the only ones standing in the way of compromise is inaccurate.

Read the rest of Bill's BS at:
http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-clinton-claims-compromise-stretch-043255807--election.html

obama set the tone... when you tell the minority to sit in the back of the bus and shut up while you cram legislation down the public's throat... you wind up with an election like the 2010. i haven't forgotten... discount that result or ignore it... but obama got his referendum with it.