Paul Ryan's RNC Speech "Stunning for its Dishonesty," "Full of "Brazen Lies"

reply to post by Indigo5


I have no idea what you're talking about, but I think you'll find most of the answers in the link that OptimusSubprime just posted.

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
Here's another perspective... Fact checking the fact checkers on Paul Ryan's speech.

I'm no Romney fan, and I think Paul Ryan is nothing more than a war loving Neo-Con, but I also like to look at all sides.

Fact Checking the Fact Checkers

"The Blaze" is not a fact-checker...they are a right wing gossip rag...honestly, they don't even pretend to be unbias...they make Fox News look like the Huffpost,

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Indigo5

 

I have no idea what you're talking about, but I think you'll find most of the answers in the link that OptimusSubprime just posted.

A gazillion sources and links...Politifact, factCheck, CNN, Business Insider, Fox News etc. etc. and one poster posts a crazy spin piece, from "The Blaze" no less, trying to defend Ryans lies...and you settle on that for your truth?

Just sayin...you gotta want it pretty bad...Don't know what to say there.

Originally posted by beanandginger
Silly Liberals - your fear is showing.

I think you should merge this thread with one highlighting Obama's accomplishments in office

Killing Bin Laden
Ending Iraq War
Healthcare Reform
"Saving" the Auto Industry
Improving fuel efficiency standards

Just a few off the top of my head. I'm not a big Obama supporter, but saying he has zero accomplishments is a dumb GOP talking point. Be smarter than that. Engage your brain.

reply to post by Indigo5


And your link is better when it makes statements like this?

According to Ryan, President Barack Obama's administration "didn't have enough money" to fund health care reform, "so they just took it all away from Medicare. Seven hundred and sixteen billion dollars, funneled out of Medicare by President Obama."

Politifact.com, a non-partisan fact-checking group, called this claim "mostly false" on their truth-o-meter.

"Neither Obama nor his health care law literally cut funding from the Medicare program's budget," according to Politifact.

What kind of a play on words is that? We all know that Medicare providers just took a 30% cut in pay regardless!!

I like that Ryan guy. Looks good, energetic, forceful, believe in what he says as if he meant every word, but then...so do I like Garfield the cat, who is only a figment of escapist imagination.

Ryan, unfortunately is all image and ambitions, not true substance, just as Garfield is but an imagination of one's mind and projection without the indepth quality necessary, more so for one who leads.

Just based upon what he said, and as a public official now, to back it up the american way, it was a horror to behold.

Privatise profits but Socialize debts anyone? That's what he is proposing by reducing taxes for the rich, and we had seen how 'effective' it had been for the rich to use those savings 'to create jobs' but ended in reality on the property bubbles, CDOs and the casinoe stock market.


Cutting budget for social expenditure? That's where MOST of the money is being shared and circulated within the country to fund the secondary economy such as homes, necessities of life, food, etc by civil servants, welfare recipients, doctors, lawyers, trade, etc.

The imperative of all economics is to CIRCULATE WEALTH. Cut the circulation with austerity drives such as happening in Europe, and all will suffer.


There is more, but I will stop now. He can fool some, but not all. I can understand how desperate the Republicans and the right wingers can be, to ensure discriminationatory practises, foolishness, dumbing down, enrichment of corporations, etc continues on. It is only part of the political circus.

But NEVER, EVER screw with the economy. Screw it, and everyone, including the rich, will suffer when nothing is shared and barbarism, brigandry results. For the sake of the country to prosper again, regardless of political affilation, DON'T SCREW with the growing economy!

May the GOP be wise if it wants to win or have credibility, either tone down Ryan before it is too late, or dump him now till he grows up wiser instead of just growing old.

reply to post by Deetermined


I will try to put this simply... Hoping you are actually open to rational thought and not just wed to the BS and prepared to defend whatever BS is fed to you unto death...

Ryan said that President Obama took 700B from Medicare beneficiaries...from Medicare.

The HCR bill limited the amount that doctors could CHARGE Medicare for certain procedures.

And Ryan agreed with those SAVINGS...over 10 years...so much that he included them in his plan as well.

IF the government steps in and says that your power company can't charge you some crazy amount and limits it to X....did they just take money from you?

That 700B wasn't CUT from Medicare...it was SAVED from future expense...

THAT is what makes the lie so blatant.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

For the sake of the country to prosper again, regardless of political affilation, DON'T SCREW with the growing economy!

You must have gotten the impression that our economy is growing from Garfield the cat.

Stop reading the comic section if you want to know the truth about our economy.

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Indigo5

 

I have no idea what you're talking about, but I think you'll find most of the answers in the link that OptimusSubprime just posted.

A gazillion sources and links...Politifact, factCheck, CNN, Business Insider, Fox News etc. etc. and one poster posts a crazy spin piece, from "The Blaze" no less, trying to defend Ryans lies...and you settle on that for your truth?

Just sayin...you gotta want it pretty bad...Don't know what to say there.

Factcheck is Annenberg project which is Bill Ayers which is Obama which is Soros. Follow the bread crumbs my dear. CNN has been in the tank for Obama since 08 and clearly liberal.

Politifact....apparently more biased left than right

ethicsalarms.com...

Fox? I guess only when they diss the RNC.

reply to post by Indigo5

Ryan said that President Obama took 700B from Medicare beneficiaries...from Medicare.

and transferred those monies to pay for Obamacare. It's pretty much the same as saying you are cutting the deficit by taking money out of defense and applying it to Medicare.

But go on listening to Democrat talking points

from The Foundry

The rhetorical Medicare wars have heated up this week, after President Obama declared in his Saturday radio address that his proposed reforms “won’t touch your guaranteed Medicare benefits. Not by a single dime.”
This is incorrect. Obamacare cuts $716 billion from Medicare over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and uses these “savings” from Medicare to fund other entitlement expansions mandated by Obamacare. Medicare becomes a cash cow for Obamacare, and the Medicare “savings” from payment cuts are not put back into making Medicare solvent. Such massive payment cuts do impact Medicare benefits, as well as seniors’ access to those benefits.
Heritage’s Alyene Senger explains how this hurts America’s seniors:

The impact of these cuts will be detrimental to seniors’ access to care. The Medicare trustees 2012 report concludes that these lower Medicare payment rates will cause an estimated 15 percent of hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, and home health agencies to operate at a loss by 2019, 25 percent to operate at a loss in 2030, and 40 percent by 2050. Operating at a loss means these facilities are likely to cut back their services to Medicare patients or close their doors, making it more difficult for seniors to access these services.

blog.heritage.org...

reply to post by Indigo5

That 700B wasn't CUT from Medicare...it was SAVED from future expense..

No, I'm open to the truth, but I'm not seeing any of it yet.

Yes, 700B was saved from future expense.

Unfortunately, that doesn't mean crap when we're now raking up expenses through Obamacare. For that matter, it's still raking up higher expenses for those of us who have private insurance on top of it through our premiums. I never used to see more than a 10% increase in premiums with my coverage. As of 2012, it went up 48%.

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Indigo5

 

That 700B wasn't CUT from Medicare...it was SAVED from future expense..

No, I'm open to the truth, but I'm not seeing any of it yet.

Yes, 700B was saved from future expense.

Unfortunately, that doesn't mean crap when we're now raking up expenses through Obamacare. For that matter, it's still raking up higher expenses for those of us who have private insurance on top of it through our premiums. I never used to see more than a 10% increase in premiums with my coverage. As of 2012, it went up 48%.

Then change insurance companies,

I thought the market was supposed to self regulate.

reply to post by BritofTexas


This can only apply when the free market isn't interfered with by Big Govt.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Factcheck is Annenberg project

Even if you choose to play Glen Beck instead of recognize facts...your argument still fails...

Annenberg...Both husband and Wife were close friends and supporters of Reagan and Bush...even receiving medals and white house appointments...fierce and loyal republicans...they just thought the TRUTH was more important than idealogy...if only some posters on ATS felt the same way...

Here are the Annenbergs...can you name the other guy?



Lets stop the derail..Glen Beck whiteboard BS and get back to facts.

Romney will lose...and Chris Christie believes so too. Why? Because the first 20min of his speech were basically about him and his vision, and he only mentioned Romney after 20min

They thought Ryan might still turn the loss around, but by now some are losing faith...especially those considering to run in 2016.

My prediction:

Rubio and Christie will both in 2016, whoever's more popular will be president, the other vice president...candidates I mean. They will then face Hillary. She's arguably more experienced than both, but ultimately it'll come down to two things...will the GOP be able to tone down their over the top fanatism and disregard for facts (women "closing down" their vaginas when raped, etc.) enough to appeal to more than hardliners, and will Obama improve things over the next four years.

If Obama doesn't manage to improve the economy and unemployment or enters another pointless war (Iran!), then I believe either Christie or Rubio will become president in 2016. And it won't matter if Hillary's more experienced. The only thing that could then hurt the GOP is alienating too many important voter blocks like they did this time (latinos, blacks, women...) by being STUPID and making STUPID comments that aren't even remotely factual.

If Obama manages to improve the economy and other stuff, or at least stabilises it to decent levels (note, this obviously doesn't only depend on him), then Hillary or whoever runs on the Democrat side will stand a good chance. The reason I believe Hillary would be the toughest Democrat candidate is that she's very experienced by then (and already now), and people remember the "good days" under Clinton when the economy and unemployment were ok.

Either way, Romney will lose because he alienated too many important voter blocks and because he represents everything people hate about crony capitalism. He's an Etch A Sketch sock puppet of the highest order.

reply to post by BritofTexas


I thought about it, unfortunately, I'm afraid that switching would actually cost me more than the most recent increase. I got a pretty sweet deal when I signed up 10 years ago and I think the length of time I've invested in this policy is still keeping my premium lower than if I started all over again.

reply to post by Indigo5


The fact is that whatever Annenberg WAS during the Reagan time, Ayers is heavily involved now. Get with the program.

As for the Medicare thing, I chose the Foundy as a source, not one of those Soros propaganda mills.

Originally posted by Deetermined
I never used to see more than a 10% increase in premiums with my coverage. As of 2012, it went up 48%.

The name/state of the insurer?? That gives away zero personal data.

Under HCR any insurer that wants to increase premiums by more than 10% is required by law to get approval first from the department of Health and Human Services.

You are saying your rates jumped by 50%?

Nothing personal...but I call BS...the name of the insurer and the State? Cuz it would have made news...

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Indigo5

 

The fact is that whatever Annenberg WAS during the Reagan time, Ayers is heavily involved now. Get with the program.

Ayers is one of dozens on a local Chicago board implementing the Chciago Annenberg Challenge...a program that has "Challenges" across 400 plus cities in the USA...but somehow he controls Fact-Check.org???

You need to be Glen Beck on crack to connect those dots..

reply to post by Indigo5


Blue Cross Blue Shield / Missouri

It was an individual policy.