Obama, Romney clash on economy in first debate
»Play Video
DENVER (AP) — In a showdown at close quarters, an aggressive Mitt Romney sparred with President Barack Obama in their first campaign debate Wednesday night over taxes, deficits and strong steps needed to create jobs in a sputtering national economy. "The status quo is not going to cut it," declared the Republican challenger.
Democrat Obama in turn accused his rival of seeking to "double down" on economic policies that actually led to the devastating national downturn four years ago — and of evasiveness when it came to prescriptions for tax changes, health care, Wall Street regulation and more.
With early voting already under way in dozens of states, Romney was particularly assertive in the 90-minute event that drew a television audience likely to be counted in the tens of millions — like a man intent on shaking up the campaign with a little less than five weeks to run.
He seemed at ease in debate with the man who has been in the White House for four years. "It's fun, isn't it?" Romney said. In a rare post-debate concession, some Democratic strategists not involved in the campaign conceded the president was not at his best and missed opportunities to challenge his rival.
The former Massachusetts governor virtually lectured Obama at one point after the president accused him of seeking to cut education funds. "Mr. President, you're entitled to your own airplane and your own house, but not your own facts," he said.
The economy dominated the evening, as it has the race for the White House all year. Pre-debate opinion polls showed Obama with a slight advantage in key battleground states and nationally.
Romney said he had plans to fix the economy, overhaul the tax code, repeal Obama's health care plan and replace with a better alternative, remake Medicare, pass a substitute for the legislation designed to prevent another financial crash and reduce deficits — but he provided no new specifics despite Obama's prodding.
Said Obama: "At some point the American people have to ask themselves: Is the reason Governor Romney is keeping all these plans secret, is it because they're going to be too good? Because middle class families benefit too much? No."
The two men debate twice more this month, but they were first going their separate ways on Thursday. Obama had campaign stops in Colorado and then Madison, Wis., while Romney was booked into Virginia. All three states are among the nine battlegrounds likely to settle the race.
At times the debate turned into rapid-fire charges and retorts that drew on dense facts and figures that were difficult to follow. The men argued over oil industry subsidies, federal spending as a percentage of the GDP, Medicare cuts, taxes and small businesses and the size of the federal deficit and how it grew.
Obama sometimes seemed somewhat professorial. Romney was more assertive and didn't hesitate to interrupt the president or moderator Jim Lehrer, who seemed to struggle to maintain control.
The wonky tone of the debate was a stark contrast to the harsh, broad-brush and sometimes personal attacks the two men make in person and in multimillion-dollar television advertising. Obama made no mention of Romney's videotaped remark that 47 percent of the country doesn't pay income taxes and believe themselves to be victims, entitled to government benefits. And Romney did not repeat a key theme from his national convention, that Obama's "you didn't build that" statement was a putdown of American initiative.
At the same time, Romney managed to make some points by personalizing his comments with recollections of people he said he had met on the campaign trail. In another folksy reference, Romney told Lehrer, a veteran of the Public Broadcasting Service, that he would stop the federal subsidy to PBS even though "I love Big Bird."
Generally polite but pointed, the two men agreed about little if anything.
Obama said his opponent's plan to reduce all tax rates by 20 percent would cost $5 trillion and benefit the wealthy at the expense of middle income taxpayers.
Shot back Romney: "Virtually everything he just said about my tax plan is inaccurate."
The former Massachusetts governor and businessman added that Obama's proposal to allow the expiration of tax cuts on upper-level income would mean tax increases on small businesses that create jobs by the hundreds of thousands.
The two campaign rivals clasped hands and smiled as they strode onto the debate stage at the University of Denver, then waved to the audience before taking their places behind identical lecterns.
There was a quick moment of laughter, when Obama referred to first lady Michelle Obama as "sweetie" and noted it was their 20th anniversary.
Romney added best wishes, and said to the first couple, "I'm sure this is the most romantic place you could imagine, here with me."
Both candidates' wives were in the audience.
Without saying so, the two rivals quickly got to the crux of their race — Romney's eagerness to turn the contest into a referendum on the past four years while the incumbent desires for voters to choose between his plan for the next four years and the one his rival backs.
Romney ticked off the dreary economic facts of life — a sharp spike in food stamps, economic growth "lower this year than last" and "23 million people out of work or stropped looking for work."
But Obama criticized Romney's prescriptions and his refusal to raise taxes and said, "if you take such an unbalanced approach then that means you are going to be gutting our investment in schools and education ... health care for seniors in nursing homes (and) for kids with disabilities."
Not surprisingly, the two men disagreed over Medicare, a flash point since Romney placed Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan on his ticket.
The president repeatedly described Romney's plan as a "voucher program" that would raise out-of-pocket costs on seniors.
He continued, directly addressing the voters at home: "If you're 54 or 55 you might want to listen because this will affect you."
Romney said he doesn't support any changes for current retirees or those close to retirement.
"If you're 60 or 60 and older you don't need to listen further," he said, but he contended that fundamental changes are needed to prevent the system from becoming insolvent as millions of baby boom generation Americans become eligible.
Romney also made a detailed case for repealing Obamacare, the name attached to the health care plan that Obama pushed through Congress in 2010. "It has killed jobs," he said, and argued that the best approach is to "do what we did in my state."
Though he didn't say so, when he was governor Massachusetts passed legislation that required residents to purchase coverage — the so-called individual mandate that conservatives and he oppose on a national level.
Romney also said that Obamacare would cut $716 billion from Medicare over the next decade.
The president said the changes were part of a plan to lengthen the program's life, and he added that AARP, the seniors lobby, supports it.
With a two-minute closing statement, Obama said he had spent his first four years in office fighting for those in the middle class and those seeking to make it there. "If you'll vote for me, I'll fight just as hard in my second term," he said.
Romney was as critical of Obama's tenure as he was the moment the two men walked onto the stage.
If the president is re-elected, he predicted continued economic trouble for the middle class, chronic unemployment, higher costs for health insurance and "dramatic cuts to the military."
Obama took office in the shadow of an economic crisis but promised a turnaround that hasn't materialized. Economic growth has been sluggish throughout his term, with unemployment above 8 percent since before he took office.
The two presidential rivals also are scheduled to debate on Oct. 16 in Hempstead, N.Y., and Oct. 22 in Boca Raton, Fla.
Vice President Joe Biden and Republican Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin have one debate, Oct. 11 in Danville, Ky. Both men have already begun holding practice sessions.
___
Associated Press writer Kristen Wyatt contributed to this report. David Espo reported from Washington.
Democrat Obama in turn accused his rival of seeking to "double down" on economic policies that actually led to the devastating national downturn four years ago — and of evasiveness when it came to prescriptions for tax changes, health care, Wall Street regulation and more.
With early voting already under way in dozens of states, Romney was particularly assertive in the 90-minute event that drew a television audience likely to be counted in the tens of millions — like a man intent on shaking up the campaign with a little less than five weeks to run.
He seemed at ease in debate with the man who has been in the White House for four years. "It's fun, isn't it?" Romney said. In a rare post-debate concession, some Democratic strategists not involved in the campaign conceded the president was not at his best and missed opportunities to challenge his rival.
The former Massachusetts governor virtually lectured Obama at one point after the president accused him of seeking to cut education funds. "Mr. President, you're entitled to your own airplane and your own house, but not your own facts," he said.
The economy dominated the evening, as it has the race for the White House all year. Pre-debate opinion polls showed Obama with a slight advantage in key battleground states and nationally.
Romney said he had plans to fix the economy, overhaul the tax code, repeal Obama's health care plan and replace with a better alternative, remake Medicare, pass a substitute for the legislation designed to prevent another financial crash and reduce deficits — but he provided no new specifics despite Obama's prodding.
Said Obama: "At some point the American people have to ask themselves: Is the reason Governor Romney is keeping all these plans secret, is it because they're going to be too good? Because middle class families benefit too much? No."
The two men debate twice more this month, but they were first going their separate ways on Thursday. Obama had campaign stops in Colorado and then Madison, Wis., while Romney was booked into Virginia. All three states are among the nine battlegrounds likely to settle the race.
At times the debate turned into rapid-fire charges and retorts that drew on dense facts and figures that were difficult to follow. The men argued over oil industry subsidies, federal spending as a percentage of the GDP, Medicare cuts, taxes and small businesses and the size of the federal deficit and how it grew.
Obama sometimes seemed somewhat professorial. Romney was more assertive and didn't hesitate to interrupt the president or moderator Jim Lehrer, who seemed to struggle to maintain control.
The wonky tone of the debate was a stark contrast to the harsh, broad-brush and sometimes personal attacks the two men make in person and in multimillion-dollar television advertising. Obama made no mention of Romney's videotaped remark that 47 percent of the country doesn't pay income taxes and believe themselves to be victims, entitled to government benefits. And Romney did not repeat a key theme from his national convention, that Obama's "you didn't build that" statement was a putdown of American initiative.
At the same time, Romney managed to make some points by personalizing his comments with recollections of people he said he had met on the campaign trail. In another folksy reference, Romney told Lehrer, a veteran of the Public Broadcasting Service, that he would stop the federal subsidy to PBS even though "I love Big Bird."
Generally polite but pointed, the two men agreed about little if anything.
Obama said his opponent's plan to reduce all tax rates by 20 percent would cost $5 trillion and benefit the wealthy at the expense of middle income taxpayers.
Shot back Romney: "Virtually everything he just said about my tax plan is inaccurate."
The former Massachusetts governor and businessman added that Obama's proposal to allow the expiration of tax cuts on upper-level income would mean tax increases on small businesses that create jobs by the hundreds of thousands.
The two campaign rivals clasped hands and smiled as they strode onto the debate stage at the University of Denver, then waved to the audience before taking their places behind identical lecterns.
There was a quick moment of laughter, when Obama referred to first lady Michelle Obama as "sweetie" and noted it was their 20th anniversary.
Romney added best wishes, and said to the first couple, "I'm sure this is the most romantic place you could imagine, here with me."
Both candidates' wives were in the audience.
Without saying so, the two rivals quickly got to the crux of their race — Romney's eagerness to turn the contest into a referendum on the past four years while the incumbent desires for voters to choose between his plan for the next four years and the one his rival backs.
Romney ticked off the dreary economic facts of life — a sharp spike in food stamps, economic growth "lower this year than last" and "23 million people out of work or stropped looking for work."
But Obama criticized Romney's prescriptions and his refusal to raise taxes and said, "if you take such an unbalanced approach then that means you are going to be gutting our investment in schools and education ... health care for seniors in nursing homes (and) for kids with disabilities."
Not surprisingly, the two men disagreed over Medicare, a flash point since Romney placed Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan on his ticket.
The president repeatedly described Romney's plan as a "voucher program" that would raise out-of-pocket costs on seniors.
He continued, directly addressing the voters at home: "If you're 54 or 55 you might want to listen because this will affect you."
Romney said he doesn't support any changes for current retirees or those close to retirement.
"If you're 60 or 60 and older you don't need to listen further," he said, but he contended that fundamental changes are needed to prevent the system from becoming insolvent as millions of baby boom generation Americans become eligible.
Romney also made a detailed case for repealing Obamacare, the name attached to the health care plan that Obama pushed through Congress in 2010. "It has killed jobs," he said, and argued that the best approach is to "do what we did in my state."
Though he didn't say so, when he was governor Massachusetts passed legislation that required residents to purchase coverage — the so-called individual mandate that conservatives and he oppose on a national level.
Romney also said that Obamacare would cut $716 billion from Medicare over the next decade.
The president said the changes were part of a plan to lengthen the program's life, and he added that AARP, the seniors lobby, supports it.
With a two-minute closing statement, Obama said he had spent his first four years in office fighting for those in the middle class and those seeking to make it there. "If you'll vote for me, I'll fight just as hard in my second term," he said.
Romney was as critical of Obama's tenure as he was the moment the two men walked onto the stage.
If the president is re-elected, he predicted continued economic trouble for the middle class, chronic unemployment, higher costs for health insurance and "dramatic cuts to the military."
Obama took office in the shadow of an economic crisis but promised a turnaround that hasn't materialized. Economic growth has been sluggish throughout his term, with unemployment above 8 percent since before he took office.
The two presidential rivals also are scheduled to debate on Oct. 16 in Hempstead, N.Y., and Oct. 22 in Boca Raton, Fla.
Vice President Joe Biden and Republican Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin have one debate, Oct. 11 in Danville, Ky. Both men have already begun holding practice sessions.
___
Associated Press writer Kristen Wyatt contributed to this report. David Espo reported from Washington.
they are both the same. they offer the same policies and have no change for this country. they can never explain their policies. its time we wake up and stop voting for these same politicians and expect any change. Â
 @Eric Gugger I wouldn't say they are both exactly the same. However neither is interested in Constitutional government, or listening to their constituents. I will say that if Obama gets reelected, as a 2nd term President, he will do anything he pleases without fear of not being reelected. I fear what those things are. And he has not made this country better in the last 4 years. I want Ron Paul or Gary Johnson in the Oval Office. Will that happen? Likely not. Too many people with too much $$$ at stake to allow it to happen. I guess all I can do is vote with my convictions and see what happens. Then at least I can say I wasn't part of the problem. If I had to choose between the two, Romney, absolutely. But I don't like him either, and voting "against the other guy" is a losing game; playing right into their hand.
The fact is that whoever wins will do exactly what he is told to do by the 6 industries that control our "Elected Representatives" with corporate campaign contributions. Both of these candidates are illustrating how dishonest they are by claiming what they will do if elected. The fact is under our law a president cant do anything but sign or veto so anytime you hear them say what "they" are going to do, they are lying and they know it. In my estimation, I'd say half of you are cheering for one liar while the rest of you cheer for the other liar. Either way, you must like liars for leaders because thats all we've had for forty years now. I would think americans would get tired of these two parties whipsawing the US citizens off of each other and enriching the few while handing the middle class defeat at every turn. We need a party made up of working people to run this country if were ever going to get out of this mess. This country cannot survive anymore bought off liars and thieves for leadership. I have little hope that americans will ever figure out something as elementary as these divide and conquer tactics that the rich have been using for decades at our expense.
President won't be distracted by his anniversary next time! At least we have a president that loves his wife and family and would much rather be with them than doing some debate. Also, by not flapping his lips and bashing the other guy he didn't say things that would get him into trouble. I think he did an excellent job and there is no way anyone is going to fix our economy in 4 years, perhaps 15 years, look how long it takes to pay off a credit card!
I think these debates make it even more clear that all that is important is to get reelected/elected. I'm sure Obama's will practice to do a lot better next time, but do we want the truth from these candidates or just some more rhetoric? I think the shape this country is in attests to the fact that neither party has done a great job for a
long time. We should hold all our elected officials to a higher standard.  Results is what we need, not more fancy game playing.Â
Why does Romney want to slash money for PBS (how many millions of children have benefited from Sesame Street? Good-bye Big Bird!), which accounts for One One-Hundredth of One Percent of the Federal Budget, but wants to send Two Trillion dollars extra to the military; money to fund things the military hasn't even asked for.  And Romney says he cares about education and investment in the future?Â
@hsk In my opinion there are way too many programs that are funded by our government. They need to start somewhere!  To me, PBS, Sesame Street, heck, even a tv is a luxury, not a necessity!  This country relies way too much on the government. We all need to learn to be self sufficient and take care of ourselves and especially to learn the difference between wants and needs and learn to pay cash for our wants or do without!Â
 @hsk PBS, NPR, Planned Parent Hood have been "Targets" for the GOP for about 20ish years now.Â
Everytime PBS comes up, they bring out Big Bird as a defense, and it works everytime. Romney was dumb to go there.Â
Â
I'm ok if we cut funding for all three. We have way too much deficit.Â
Â
But, you can not tell me that we can not afford to pay for these while we are spending 8 times what China and 10 times what Russia is spending on military spending.Â
Â
If it was me, we'd cut the military in roughly half (except development) over 10 years, cut federal funding to these and many other small programs, and double the Nasa Budget, and have a real world infrastructure plan to keep the country's economy moving. Â
Â
IN short, invest in science and infrastructure, have enough military for "DEFENSE" not "OFFENSE" and sure as hell not TWO "OFFENSES," and everything else in the chopping block.Â
Â
I am not an Obama supporter nor am I a Romney supporter. I would cast a vote against this President regardless of who was running against him. I consider Obama's 1st term as President a complete failure. Any President who has achieved so little during his/her 1st term deserves to be defeated in election. Give Romney a chance. he sounds like he has some conviction with his ideas and his success as a business operator makes me think he might be able to get the country on the right path again. If not then REPLACE him as Obama deserves to be replaced today. I was hoping Obama would prove me wrong when I suspected he had neither the wisdom nor the experience to succeed. Unfortunately Obama has proven he is unable to even achieve even neutral results both domestically and in foreign relations. We are worse off in so many ways today than we were four years ago.Â
Soetoro is having a rough day today but I bet he is glad to have his teleprompter back.Â
my question is romney/ryan aren't telling us what there plan is or what was accomplished in his time as gov in Massachutes. what's he hiding and why won't he tell his plans without lying to the middle class who claim to be in his own words the 47% of freeloaders who pay more in taxes then he does.
This comment has been deleted
 @TruthinAdverts no they won't
they will blame Romney for not being "conservative enough" and they will blame the "liberal media" and they will blame all the "sheep" in the country who are "drinking kool-aid."
Â
But they will never step back and think that maybe they are a bit too far to the right and they put Romney in a difficult position.Â
@TruthinAdverts -- Of course he will win because you can't fix stupid.Â
Obama was revealed for who he actually is, totally incompetent and over his head.
I do feel that Obama was not on his game last night. But I think today will be a day of Romney vs Romney.Â
 @Darn it! When people start putting what he said last night against what he said up until last night, yes. Even his own campaign had to fact check Romney by clarifying that "No, pre-existing conditions will not be covered under Romney's plan."
Â
Like I've been telling everyine. Romney might have "won last night," but it will benifit Obama in the long term. Romney has just contradicted himself too many times, and it will be too easy to cast him as inconsistant at best, and dishonest at most.Â
 @Star Shooter Integrity may not win a debate but it will garner the President votes.
As an Obama supporter, I did not feel he prepared for the debate. Mitt was very aggressive toward the President and moderator. Â Too aggressive. Obama needs to be on his "A" game during the next debate. I think many were stunned at how unprepared the president was for this debate. Mitt lied and lied and lied. Now that those lies are out there, Obama needs to capitalize on it with what the truth is. Compare and contrast. I've never seen such a flip flopper as Mitt is.Â
All of this preprepared material should make him "more" prepared. However, does it tell us what the truth of the matter is? Obama isn't being completely honest with the American people either and he will say whatever is necessary to win reelection and to discredit Romney. I would for once like to hear some clear honest answers from any of these people or better yet see some results from our politicians.
@HallandOates   Seriously? What other excuse can you come up with other the talking points from MSNBC or the Huff? Get some of your own ideas. Lehrer has done this job a dozen times and never criticized before.Maybe I can come up with an idea for Obama's inept performance. How about his record, or perhaps he can blame it on the weather.
Not a fan of either, but I gotta say Romney smacked down Obama HARD. First round definitely goes to Romney.
Obama looked like he was very tired and NOT ready for the debate !
 @scychan That's what happens when you have a job as demanding as the President of the USA.  Handling his daily job duties is more important than preparing for an argument with an arrogant, dishonest, hateful man who's only driving factor is his own personal desire to be President.
 @Sovereign Romney
Arrogant? Sure, a little. Anyone running for president is. That includes OBama
Dishonest? He is inconsistant, so maybe
Hateful?  Don't see it. Its a stretch at best, and hyperbole at worst.
Actually, that's what happens when you spend all your time taping television talk shows, talking with morning drive dj's on the radio, skipping out of daily intelligence meetings, blowing off leaders of our allied countires and hanging out with Jay-Z and Beyonce. Whew, makes me tired just thinking about it!
@Sovereign @scychan --- Say what?
It was a simple case of:
1. FACTS and DATA can blow a Liberals mind.
2. You can't tell lies on national TV about the person when they are standing in front of you and can respond! Obama is a LIAR and Romney called him out!!
Â
OBAMA lie - Exon and Mobile get 2.8 Bil in tax breaks. IT's a LIE - they are 100 year old tax breaks it is mostly the little guys that drill, the grunts of the oil world!!
Â
WOW- Obama gave 90 Billion to Green Energy which is more than what Big Oil has gotten for the past 50 years combined. The MAJORITY OF GREEN INDUSTRIES FAILED (most were run by Obama donors anyway!!)
Â
Obama Lie - Companies get tax breaks to move jobs overseas. They save money via lower labor costs and fewer restrictions as examples they do not get tax breaks from the USA!!Â
Â
Obama Lie - Romney is going to cut spending 5 Trillion and increase military spending 2 Trillion. BOLD FACED LIE by Obama - Romney refuted this at least THREE TIMES!!  The Saul Alinsky Democrat political rule of repeating a LIE often enough will eventually make it true doesn't work when it's Obama having to be face to face with Romney and Romney has the opportunity to clarify! However the Lame Stream Media will try to keep repeating the lie but now we know the truth!
Â
Obama is a FAILURE and a LIAR!!!Â
Â
Romney 2012!!
 @Truth Percolates Romney is Lair too, but we have to choose one who lies less than another...Facts even show Romney as not being successful in MA, How can he make it possible for U.S ??
 @Truth Percolates How about Romney lies?
Romney lie;  Mr. Obama has doubled the deficit.  When Obama took office, the deficit was 1.4 trillion.  For 2012 it is expected to be 1.1 trillion.  Measured as a share of the economy, as economists prefer, it's down from 10.1% of economy's output to 7.3% in 2012
Â
Romney lie:Â Obama's healthcare law is a "government takeover."Â Â Medicaid will be expanded, but most of the program involved the same *private* companies and *private* doctors that we deal with already.
Â
Romney lie: Obama's healthcare law takes $716 from Medicare.  Fact is that his plan cuts nothing from benefits; it just cuts reimbursements to insurance and drug companies. If Romney is right about the private sector, they should be able to innovate and provide the same coverage. And this is *identical* to Paul Ryan's plan. Â
Â
@hsk @Truth Percolates                                                http://newsflavor.com/politics/us-politics/the-ulsterman-report-obamas-double-down-deficit-spending/
@hsk @Truth Percolates "On July 24, the Congressional Budget Office sent a letter to House Speaker John Boehner, detailing the budget impact of repealing the Affordable Care Act. If Congress overturned the law, âspending for Medicare would increase by an estimated $716 billion over that 2013â2022 period.â Read more: http://blog.beliefnet.com/watchwomanonthewall/2012/10/obamacare-cuts-medicare-by-716-billion-heres-how.html#ixzz28MCN9d3L
This comment has been deleted
 @rockguy That was an interesting experience, and I really would like to see the presidents do that during a debate.
Â
Â
Â
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html
Romney clearly came out looking better, but how is he going to increase funding to medicare, military, education, etc while lowering taxes? When asked what his secret plans were he just said he had lots of options, implying that he hadn't actually got one (or at least one that can be independently analyzed). Did he really win the debate if everything he said was based on empty promises?
 @therunner I love how Romney talks about wasteful programs in government and how he would cut them, since the private sector can do stuff better?  But why doesn't he apply that to the military?  Instead of planning to cut the bloat that exists in military, he just wants to throw $2 trillion at the military for items the military hasn't even asked for.  Our military is the best there is, they don't need government money that will just line the pockets of big hardware companies. We're out of Iraq and leaving Afghanistan, the military can afford to get less. And I trust that they can innovate and cut unnecessary costs and still do an excellent job protecting our country.
Â
@therunner Obama won an election based on empty promises.
Some things Romney said are bizarre:
1) He said that the well-off are doing fine. Â Why, then does he want to lower their taxes?
2) He said private health care is innovative and efficient. Â He has obviously never had to directly deal with his health care provider. Â Â
3) He kept trying to defend Romneycare by saying it should just be a state-by-state thing. Â But if left to the states, there is no guarantee they would do anything at all to address the insurance shortfall.
 @hsk You confuse marginal tax rates with actual taxes paid.
"innovative' and "efficient" can be used as relative word, not absolute measurements. Compared to government -run options, private insurance IS innovative and efficient (and would be more so if it was not for large amounts of regulation)
Apparently you do not understand the nature of Federalism. States are NOT SUPPOSED to all do the same thing, and thus act as "experiments" in what works, and what doesn't. That is BY DESIGN. If what they try doesn't work, people will leave the state (like CA and NY). If what they try does work, then people will move to them.
 @RN1  @hsk I'm not confusing the two.   We're talking about the government. The government sets tax rates, and Romney wants to reduce the tax rates on the wealthiest.
* You do not understand the Affordable Care Act. It just sets parameters and rules.  States and private companies are still entirely free to innovate and compete based on those parameters. You also seem to forget that this whole concept was a Republican idea as an alternative to single-payer, government-run healthcare. Romney even said that a duty of the Federal government is to set regulations.  Also rich that Republicans tout that states should be allowed to do their own thing when it comes to healthcare, yet support DOMA which is Federal intrusion in an area that is clearly a state matter according to the Constitution.
 @hsk OTOH, Obama keeps not explaining how spending far more than we take in tax revenue, punishing success, and rewarding failure will make things better. And, Ryan HAS been long on specifics WRT simplifying the tax code. FAR more so than Obama and his Senate that cannot even pass a budget.
 @RN1  @hsk Yet Romney consistently avoided specifying which "deductions and loopholes" he'd close. Convenient that.  And how exactly will he get Congress to do that?  Do you know how many times in the past people have tried to "simplify the tax code"?  It's been a mantra of politicians for decades, yet the tax code keeps getting more and more complicated. Romney has given zero detail as to how he would accomplish what so many have failed at in the past.
 @hsk Tax rates: There you go again! Romney is talking about lowering the marginal tax rate, from something like 35 to 25%, while also eliminating deductions and loopholes. If a high income earner NOW pays an effective rate of 20% after all is said and done, then after the RATE reduction he'd STILL pay about 20%, because he's paying a lower rate *on a larger portion of his income*, but he'd do so without the accounting details and economic distortions caused by fighting with the tax code. Marginal Rates are NOT the same as actual effective rates.
Same garbage, different piles!! As Paul Simon once quoted in music: "Anyway you look at it, you lose!!"
No new bright ideas here tonight. If you want to get the debt under control you have to restructure military spending and end aid to other nations. The only two options for solvency. I would rather keep our costs low than buy the other guy a military.
If you vote for either man you vote for more war.
Romney made the part of the music bow we see look good.
Romney can sure tell lies smoothly. If he does end up winning the election, people are sure going to be disappointed to find out you can't balance the budget by cutting taxes by 20% all across the board while increasing military spending. Even Ryan can't figure out the math behind that genius.
 @stargunner Oh please, they are all crooked! Are you so oblivious to that fact the Obama is a lair as well? Read this link ... this is just the tip of the iceberg.Â
http://stpeteforpeace.org/obama.html  Â
Â
 @rightandexact never said anything about Obama. he doesn't have my vote either.
 @stargunner All politicians lie and make empty promises. Are you with a straight face gonna tell me Obama has kept every promise he made 4 years ago? If you don't know that, there isn't much hope for you. If you aren't gonna make an informed decision, do us all a favor and don't vote.
 @skcusomok  @stargunner never said anything about Obama. don't assume i'm an Obama supporter. I'm not voting for either of them. But you can vote for whichever empty suit you'd like. It's cute thinking your vote will count , at least in this state.