Moderator bias?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

What is reality, really?

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...tes/?mobile=nc

---

To pick an easy one:

5) “I believe very much in our renewable capabilities; ethanol, wind, solar will be an important part of our energy mix.” Romney is actually against a one-year renewal of the wind production tax credit. The wind production tax credit has led to $14 billion of investment in 2011 and tens of thousands of American jobs.

So to say that wind will be an important part of the energy mix requires Romney to support every wind production tax credit?

Another easy one:

8) “I will fight to create more energy in this country, to get America energy secure. And part of that is bringing in a pipeline of oil from Canada.” Even with generous assumptions, the impact of the pipeline on oil prices is unclear and may raise prices in midwest states. After all, a lot of that refined tar sands crude will be sold on the international market.

Somehow this "myth" is suggesting Romney stated pipeline of oil from Canada would be the sole reason America gets energy secured. It was *part* of the solution.

If this is the kind of fact checking you and ziggy want in a live debate... you could see why I don't think this is a good idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

To pick an easy one:

5) “I believe very much in our renewable capabilities; ethanol, wind, solar will be an important part of our energy mix.” Romney is actually against a one-year renewal of the wind production tax credit. The wind production tax credit has led to $14 billion of investment in 2011 and tens of thousands of American jobs.

So to say that wind will be an important part of the energy mix requires Romney to support every wind production tax credit?

Another easy one:

8) “I will fight to create more energy in this country, to get America energy secure. And part of that is bringing in a pipeline of oil from Canada.” Even with generous assumptions, the impact of the pipeline on oil prices is unclear and may raise prices in midwest states. After all, a lot of that refined tar sands crude will be sold on the international market.

Somehow this "myth" is suggesting Romney stated pipeline of oil from Canada would be the sole reason America gets energy secured. It was *part* of the solution.

If this is the kind of fact checking you and ziggy want in a live debate... you could see why I don't think this is a good idea.

---

I'll readily concede that some--at least two--of the 31 major criticisms on that list are dubious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

I'll readily concede that some--at least two--of the 31 major criticisms on that list are dubious.

---

Makes me doubt the research and review the put in the other 29... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Makes me doubt the research and review the put in the other 29... ;)

---

The perfect way to explain every thread Lewk has started...ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Makes me doubt the research and review the put in the other 29... ;)

---

Yes but let's not forget the possibility that you cherry-picked claims due to bias or an aversion towards work :o in that case a decision to dismiss the entire list would be misguided.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Do guns make us safer? I can cherry pick facts to indicate yes they make us safer. And you can cherry pick facts to indicate no they don't make us safer.

We can do the same for the cost of Obama's health care plan.

We can do the same for a whole host of issues. Do you really believe that this team of fact checkers are going to be unbiased?

---

I said fact checkers, not opinion checkers. But this was pointed out to you already.

By the way, I'm still waiting for an answer to post 74. Not quoting it, since your post in it is relevant. So park that whaaaaaambulance and start producing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Journalists have wanted to see and write about Romney's tax returns for a long time. Not just to compare reality to his 'promise' that he's never paid lower than 14% effective rate, but to compare his off-shore investments, use of carry-trade loopholes and special tax exemptions....and contrast that to his proposed tax plans.

---

If you-

A) Define what a "carry trade loophole" is and
B) Explain how that remotely explains reporters openly applauding Obama calling Romney a rich fuck in a presidential debate

I will mail you a five dollar bill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

I can never figure out where these two stand on China, esp. after Romney's whining about China's cheating and Obama's grim declaration that some jobs are simply not going to come back and nor should they.

---

China has become the new Mexico of US politics. Or maybe the new Israel of US politics. Our politicians are obligated to say certain things about it no matter what they think or do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

If you-

A) Define what a "carry trade loophole" is and
B) Explain how that remotely explains reporters openly applauding Obama calling Romney a rich fuck in a presidential debate

I will mail you a five dollar bill.

---

A) Journalists would write about tax loopholes financiers and corporate CEOs use to lower their effective tax rates, that aren't available to JQ Public. That's the point. Those carried trades include extending certain money (profits) to the next fiscal year, to be off-set by planned expenditures (losses); and using fuzzy accounting tricks to make their bottom line (profit/debt ratios) appear stronger to investors and lenders. Case in point GE.

But also how they can exploit terms as a work-around to employee/staff liabilities, and what's considered earned income. ie, an "Advisory" job title isn't taxed the same as "labor". This is why our tax code is so loathed. But it sure pays well for corporate and high-end tax attorneys and CPAs. :bored:

B) Are you high? :donkey:

You may want to look up "carry trade", which has nothing to do with "carried capital losses". This, in turn, has virtually nothing to do with "carried interest", which is what I think you were referring to.

Except you're blending the three together and then not explaining why it's acceptable for a room full of journalists to openly applaud Obama for calling Romney a rich fuck. Which is what he did, and it had nothing to do with tax policy. Obama simply called him a rich fuck in a Presidential debate, and a bunch of journalists were seen applauding down the hall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

B) Are you high? :donkey:

---

I know high. I worked high for many years. GGT, Dreadnaught is no high.

He's a very funny young man.

edit: with a stutter.

Oh, you think being high is your ally. You merely adopted the high. I was born in it, molded by it. I didn’t see sobriety until I was already a man. By then, it was nothing to me but blinding! The pot smoke betrays you because it belongs to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Except you're blending the three together and then not explaining why it's acceptable for a room full of journalists to openly applaud Obama for calling Romney a rich fuck.

---

I have to admit I didn't think that was the most appropriate or well-executed jab in the world. However, in his defense, he was probably telling the truth when he said that Romney's was bigger than his.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Except you're blending the three together and then not explaining why it's acceptable for a room full of journalists to openly applaud Obama for calling Romney a rich fuck. Which is what he did, and it had nothing to do with tax policy. Obama simply called him a rich fuck in a Presidential debate, and a bunch of journalists were seen applauding down the hall.

---

Paul had a bunch of funny posts about the hoity toity rich which were more or less this, just... Not the way you're trying to paint it :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Oh, you think being high is your ally. You merely adopted the high. I was born in it, molded by it. I didn’t see sobriety until I was already a man. By then, it was nothing to me but blinding! The pot smoke betrays you because it belongs to me.

---

I'm Dutch. Checkmate :o

Spoiler:

No really, well played Senator :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

You may want to look up "carry trade", which has nothing to do with "carried capital losses". This, in turn, has virtually nothing to do with "carried interest", which is what I think you were referring to.

Except you're blending the three together and then not explaining why it's acceptable for a room full of journalists to openly applaud Obama for calling Romney a rich fuck. Which is what he did, and it had nothing to do with tax policy. Obama simply called him a rich fuck in a Presidential debate, and a bunch of journalists were seen applauding down the hall.

---

No, I think he's high or something, Ziggy. :popcorn:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

I have to admit I didn't think that was the most appropriate or well-executed jab in the world. However, in his defense, he was probably telling the truth when he said that Romney's was bigger than his.

---

Phrasing. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nessus

Paul had a bunch of funny posts about the hoity toity rich which were more or less this, just... Not the way you're trying to paint it :D

---

Yes, but Paul is a self-hating Je--wealthy person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust

I'm Dutch. Checkmate :o

Spoiler:

No really, well played Senator :up:

---

Hope I can make it to Amsterdam in the next month. Not for marijuana, but for beer and cheese. But Brussels may win out on that front.

Champagne socialist is so dated

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Phrasing. :p

---

It's why Romney looks at his more often

Contrast that with trying to call the president a liar without really having the facts to back you up

Calling people liars is so passé these days, I hear/read it 15 times a day before lunch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Hope I can make it to Amsterdam in the next month. Not for marijuana, but for beer and cheese. But Brussels may win out on that front.

---

Glad to hear you're liking your government-related job, with all sorts of related "perks".....like generous vacation time overseas work, reduced international airfare, and reduced group health insurance premiums.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Calling people liars is so passé these days, I hear/read it 15 times a day before lunch.

---

This doesn't make you examine your life at all? Good to know, I guess

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Calling people liars is so passé these days, I hear/read it 15 times a day before lunch.

---

If you feel that being rich is worse than being a liar then I must ask which chapter of OWS has sent you to kill and replace Dreadnaught :mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nessus

This doesn't make you examine your life at all? Good to know, I guess

---

In the press. :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

If you feel that being rich is worse than being a liar then I must ask which chapter of OWS has sent you to kill and replace Dreadnaught :mad:

---

:haha:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Again of course you see *no* problem with the moderator siding with the liberal side because of course they are just "fact checking."

---

Actually, I think a moderator in such debates should do their best to act in a neutral fashion. It's your judgement that I doubt, rather than the principle.

Quote:

---

Completely ignoring the idea that people cherry pick facts that support their positions.

---

We can't ignore it Lewk, your contributions exemplify the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

Hope I can make it to Amsterdam in the next month. Not for marijuana, but for beer and cheese. But Brussels may win out on that front.

---

The beer is good in Brussels, but you can do better with a trip to England - York or Norwich are probably the best for beer aficionados.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't both parties agree to the moderator before the debate? So they surely can't be that bad - though it's nice to be able to blame someone I suppose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

P
Hope I can make it to Amsterdam in the next month. Not for marijuana, but for beer and cheese. But Brussels may win out on that front.

---

If you're going for MJ you might want to hurry! Beer is better in Belgium but all good Belgian beers are readily available in Amsterdam as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unheard Of

The beer is good in Brussels, but you can do better with a trip to England - York or Norwich are probably the best for beer aficionados.

---

No.

Systembolaget is the best for beer afficionados.