Biden

[JJ Husker]

i think the issues is how petty this type of political discourse is and how it completely diverts the real issues all while influencing people's opinions. they make the person talking more important than the person's words.

I agree that the political discourse is out of control. But, the source or skew does not change facts. Biden was in fact interrupting and rather rude at times. These comments from Fox News are slightly exagerrated but nonetheless accurate.

Shockingly, the other side disagrees:

Dude totally got Bidened…
The epic performance last night by Vice President Joe Biden is destined to go down in history as one of the finest debate showings ever. Three things conspired against Congressman Paul Ryan: the truth, a debate opponent well prepared with facts and a ‘tude, and a debate moderator that was skilled and educated enough not to put up with any bullsh#t. This perfect storm left Ryan flopping on the beach like a fish, mouth gawping for air, completely knocked out of his zone.

It’s not easy to debate someone who tells lie after lie after lie. You risk spending your entire time refuting the lies without ever getting your own message out. Last night, Joe Biden taught us how to do it. He started out grinning whenever Ryan lied. By the end, he was openly laughing and, in what was almost like a live-tweeting of his own debate, responded in the background to each lie that rolled out of Ryan’s mouth with a refutation so that, when it was his own turn, he could actually deliver his message.

I'm not sure that is shocking but it is way more of an inaccurate account of what transpired than the slightly overblown claims made by the Fox people. If anybody who watched the debate came away with this result, they need serious psychiatric help. That is not disagreeing, that is seeing a giraffe and telling everyone else it was a rhinoceros.

 

[NebraskaHarry]

I'm a registered Democrat, but I would say this debate came out either as a draw or (gulp) Ryan may have slightly won. Just my humble opinion of last nights debate. I'm not going to sit here shocked that each side was calling the other liars. Who didn't see that coming?

What I do want to mention is my disappointment with Biden's closing statement. He didn't look at the camera, wasn't engaged with the American viewer, spoke more briefly with Martha and called her honey. With his head down, fumbling through his choice of words as he spoke he almost looked like he was using notes to help him say what he wanted to say. I was unimpressed and frankly quite disappointed.

Ryan on the other hand did quite well in his closing statement. I wish I could say otherwise for my party, but it is what it is.

 

[knapplc]

Giraffes and rhinos, huh? I'm thinking a lot of people saw giraffes last night...


Footnoting the vice-presidential debate!

About those 20 million Americans who will “lose insurance”

Paul Ryan says that under the health care law about 20 million Americans will lose insurance coverage. The figure comes from a 2010 Congressional Budget Office report that estimated the impact of the health care law. There, the neutral agency estimates that the “ACA changes the number of people who will obtain health insurance coverage through their employer in by an amount that ranges from a reduction of 20 million to a gain of 3 million relative to what would have occurred otherwise.” (Bold emphasis is mine)

That’s a pretty decently-sized range and the CBO thinks the most likely situation is one where “about 3 million to 5 million fewer people, on net, will obtain coverage through their employer each year from 2019 through 2022 than would have been the case under prior law.”

It’s worth pointing out that not receiving insurance through an employer doesn’t necessarily mean losing insurance altogether. The CBO expects that many of those that no longer have employer sponsored insurance will obtain coverage on the federally-subsidized state health insurance exchanges.


A Debate With Clarity and Fervor

Vice President Joseph Biden Jr. would not sit still for a parade of misleading and often blatantly untruthful descriptions of the state of the economy and the Republican prescriptions for it. Though his grins and head-shakes were often distracting, he did not hesitate to interrupt and demand an end to “malarkey.” The result, expertly controlled by the moderator, Martha Raddatz of ABC News, was both entertaining and enlightening.

Mr. Ryan, as always, refused to acknowledge the improvement in the economy, at one point throwing out a canned talking point about the increase in unemployment in the depressed industrial city of Scranton, Pa., Mr. Biden’s hometown. “That’s how it’s going all around America,” he said, ignoring the steady reduction in the national jobless rate, which dipped to 7.8 percent last month.


Debate: Paul Ryan used PolitiFact’s Lie of the Year, just like Mitt Romney did

A distinct similarity between the first debate, and Thursday night’s debate with Congressman Paul Ryan and Vice President Joe Biden was an egregious lie, a lie so big that it was named by PolitiFact as Lie of the Year. Ryan and Romney have more than one similarity, but this particular lie stood out like a nun at a nude beach.


At The Vice Presidential Debate: Ryan Told 24 Myths In 40 Minutes

1) “It took the president two weeks to acknowledge that [the Libya attack] was a terrorist attack.” Obama used the word “terrorism” to describe the killing of Americans the very next day at the Rose Garden. “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for,” Obama said in a Rose Garden statement on September 12.

2) “The administration was blocking us every step of the way. Only because we had strong bipartisan support for these tough [iran] sanctions were we able to overrule their objections and put them in spite of the administration.” Even the Israeli President has effusively praised President Obama’s leadership on getting American and international sanctions on Iran, which have significantly slowed Iran’s progress.


I could go on and on.

If it looks like a giraffe, and it walks like a giraffe, and it smells like a giraffe, most folks are sensible enough to see that it's a giraffe.

 

[sd'sker]

i think the issues is how petty this type of political discourse is and how it completely diverts the real issues all while influencing people's opinions. they make the person talking more important than the person's words.

I agree that the political discourse is out of control. But, the source or skew does not change facts. Biden was in fact interrupting and rather rude at times. These comments from Fox News are slightly exagerrated but nonetheless accurate.

that is still your opinion. and that is ok, you are entitled to that and some opinions are better than others, but it all comes down to perception and what informs that perception.

was romney rude when he interrupted the moderator and insisted he have the last word?

 

[BigRedBuster]

Giraffes and rhinos, huh? I'm thinking a lot of people saw giraffes last night...


Footnoting the vice-presidential debate!

About those 20 million Americans who will “lose insurance”

Paul Ryan says that under the health care law about 20 million Americans will lose insurance coverage. The figure comes from a 2010 Congressional Budget Office report that estimated the impact of the health care law. There, the neutral agency estimates that the “ACA changes the number of people who will obtain health insurance coverage through their employer in by an amount that ranges from a reduction of 20 million to a gain of 3 million relative to what would have occurred otherwise.” (Bold emphasis is mine)

That’s a pretty decently-sized range and the CBO thinks the most likely situation is one where “about 3 million to 5 million fewer people, on net, will obtain coverage through their employer each year from 2019 through 2022 than would have been the case under prior law.”

It’s worth pointing out that not receiving insurance through an employer doesn’t necessarily mean losing insurance altogether. The CBO expects that many of those that no longer have employer sponsored insurance will obtain coverage on the federally-subsidized state health insurance exchanges.


A Debate With Clarity and Fervor

Vice President Joseph Biden Jr. would not sit still for a parade of misleading and often blatantly untruthful descriptions of the state of the economy and the Republican prescriptions for it. Though his grins and head-shakes were often distracting, he did not hesitate to interrupt and demand an end to “malarkey.” The result, expertly controlled by the moderator, Martha Raddatz of ABC News, was both entertaining and enlightening.

Mr. Ryan, as always, refused to acknowledge the improvement in the economy, at one point throwing out a canned talking point about the increase in unemployment in the depressed industrial city of Scranton, Pa., Mr. Biden’s hometown. “That’s how it’s going all around America,” he said, ignoring the steady reduction in the national jobless rate, which dipped to 7.8 percent last month.


Debate: Paul Ryan used PolitiFact’s Lie of the Year, just like Mitt Romney did

A distinct similarity between the first debate, and Thursday night’s debate with Congressman Paul Ryan and Vice President Joe Biden was an egregious lie, a lie so big that it was named by PolitiFact as Lie of the Year. Ryan and Romney have more than one similarity, but this particular lie stood out like a nun at a nude beach.


At The Vice Presidential Debate: Ryan Told 24 Myths In 40 Minutes

1) “It took the president two weeks to acknowledge that [the Libya attack] was a terrorist attack.” Obama used the word “terrorism” to describe the killing of Americans the very next day at the Rose Garden. “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for,” Obama said in a Rose Garden statement on September 12.

2) “The administration was blocking us every step of the way. Only because we had strong bipartisan support for these tough [iran] sanctions were we able to overrule their objections and put them in spite of the administration.” Even the Israeli President has effusively praised President Obama’s leadership on getting American and international sanctions on Iran, which have significantly slowed Iran’s progress.


I could go on and on.

If it looks like a giraffe, and it walks like a giraffe, and it smells like a giraffe, most folks are sensible enough to see that it's a giraffe.

Just curious, were you going to list the points that were false or misleading in Biden's "facts"?

 

[Junior]

While those comments may come from a certain view point, are you claiming they are totally inaccurate accounts of Biden's behavior in the debate? I think they are slightly exagerrated but factually fairly correct.

Shockingly, the other side disagrees:

Dude totally got Bidened…
The epic performance last night by Vice President Joe Biden is destined to go down in history as one of the finest debate showings ever. Three things conspired against Congressman Paul Ryan: the truth, a debate opponent well prepared with facts and a ‘tude, and a debate moderator that was skilled and educated enough not to put up with any bullsh#t. This perfect storm left Ryan flopping on the beach like a fish, mouth gawping for air, completely knocked out of his zone.

It’s not easy to debate someone who tells lie after lie after lie. You risk spending your entire time refuting the lies without ever getting your own message out. Last night, Joe Biden taught us how to do it. He started out grinning whenever Ryan lied. By the end, he was openly laughing and, in what was almost like a live-tweeting of his own debate, responded in the background to each lie that rolled out of Ryan’s mouth with a refutation so that, when it was his own turn, he could actually deliver his message.

What other side?? Fox News is fair and balanced.

 

[knapplc]

Just curious, were you going to list the points that were false or misleading in Biden's "facts"?

You didn't read the links, did you?

 

[sd'sker]

i wonder why old cranky joe was so indigent?

@maddow

Under Rs, spending creates jobs and grows the economy; under Ds, spending costs jobs and stunts growth: http://is.gd/Bw88qv

It's not just that Ryan advocated for constituents who were applying for grants, as all members of Congress do; he also argued at the time that government spending creates jobs and boosts the economy -- the exact opposite that Ryan now claims to find so offensive.Worse, the far-right lawmaker soon after got caught lying about the requests for funds.

And just to add insult to injury, our friends at "Up With Chris Hayes" uncovered a 2002 clip in which Ryan said he loved the idea of economic stimulus from the federal government. "You have to spend a little to grow a little," Ryan argued 10 years ago.

Seriously, that's what he said.

<snip>

Update: Ryan said there were "two" occasions. In reality, it was four. He's not great with numbers.

 

[sd'sker]

VIDEO: Paul Ryan defended stimulus in 2002, when George W. Bush wanted it

“What we're trying to accomplish here is the recognition of the fact that in recessions, unemployment lags on well after a recovery has taken place,” Ryan said at the time. “We have a lot of laid-off workers, and more layoffs are occurring. And we know, as a historical fact, that even if our economy begins to slowly recover, unemployment is going to linger on and on well after that recovery takes place.”Ryan’s advocacy of stimulus spending wasn’t limited to Washington, either. When he returned home to face constituents, he used similar language to make the case for the Bush stimulus bill. “You have to spend a little to grow a little,” Ryan told constituents at a town hall in Wisconsin in January 2002, according to the Journal-Times, a local newspaper. “What we're trying to do is stimulate that part of the economy that's on its back."

<snip>

“We've got to get the engine of economic growth growing again, because we now know because of recession, we don't have the revenues that we wanted to, we don't have the revenues we need, to fix Medicare, to fix Social Security. To fix these issues we've got to get Americans back to work,” Ryan said. “Then the surpluses come back, then the jobs come back. That is the constructive answer we're trying to accomplish here on, yes, a bipartisan basis.”

Ryan also argued in 2002 for helping workers pay for their health insurance and extending unemployment benefits. Since Obama has been in office, Ryan has voted against extending unemployment insurance.

“It's more than just giving someone an unemployment check,” Ryan said of the Bush stimulus bill. “It's also helping those people with their health insurance while they've lost their jobs and more important than just that unemployment check, it's to do what we can to give people a paycheck.”

Ryan called such measures “time-tested, proven, bipartisan solutions to get businesses to stop laying off people, to hire people back, and to help those people who have lost their jobs,” and urged congressional Democrats to break ranks and join Republicans in supporting the president’s plan.

“I've just recently read in our local Capitol Hill newspaper that members from the majority party in the other body want stimulus. They're breaking with their party leadership and asking for stimulus legislation to pass because in their home states they have a lot of people who are losing their jobs,” Ryan said. “I urge members to drop the demagoguery and to pass this bill to help us work together to get the American people back to work and help those people who've lost their jobs.”

 

[JJ Husker]

If it looks like a giraffe, and it walks like a giraffe, and it smells like a giraffe, most folks are sensible enough to see that it's a giraffe.

I guess I don't equate one parties spin on an issue with a blatant lie. Most of these issues can be explained from either side by using different studies etc. Heck, even the debate last night looked like a draw to me and many others but there are some who claim it was a huge victory for Biden and yet others who claim Ryan won. Does that mean somebody is lying? No, it doesn't. So, just because you can trot out a list of articles claiming that Biden won or that Ryan lied, doesn't prove anything. I am sure you believe the dems talking point that Romney's economic plan has to result in middle class tax increases. They arrive at that conclusion through some simple math but they fail to consider how it could be possible. Romney has only provided a framework within which to make policy and that framework includes a promise to not raise taxes on the middle class. The democrats consistently fail to acknowledge that eliminating tax loopholes for the rich does in fact increase tax collections from the rich. But that doesn't stop them from claiming Romney is a liar. The main problem is that too many people can't think outside the boxes they have created for their beliefs. If you are trying to convince me that the democrats or Obama are more trustworthy or more truthful, well, that issue is already settled in my mind. And besides that, I was not judging the debate solely by who may have been more truthful. From what I witnessed (mostly style and etiquette) it was a virtual draw. Biden's smirking, interruptions, and mild cases of rudeness were offset in my mind by a lackluster and rather boring performance by Ryan. People can call my perception wrong all they want but that doesn't make their perception of what transpired any more valid than mine. I didn't see a clear win by Biden and I didn't see any more or less spin by either side. The only point that I felt either one of them got nailed on was when Ryan claimed it had been done before, Biden retorted that it had not, Ryan gave the Kennedy example, and Biden's only defense of his own false statement was "Oh, now you're Jack Kennedy". If that is how some determine a debate winner, well good luck to them.

 

[strigori]

Neither side will admit a good idea (even if it was their idea before) when they hear it. Can we just outlaw political parties?

 

[knapplc]

If it looks like a giraffe, and it walks like a giraffe, and it smells like a giraffe, most folks are sensible enough to see that it's a giraffe.

I guess I don't equate one parties spin on an issue with a blatant lie. Most of these issues can be explained from either side by using different studies etc. Heck, even the debate last night looked like a draw to me and many others but there are some who claim it was a huge victory for Biden and yet others who claim Ryan won. Does that mean somebody is lying? No, it doesn't. So, just because you can trot out a list of articles claiming that Biden won or that Ryan lied, doesn't prove anything. I am sure you believe the dems talking point that Romney's economic plan has to result in middle class tax increases. They arrive at that conclusion through some simple math but they fail to consider how it could be possible. Romney has only provided a framework within which to make policy and that framework includes a promise to not raise taxes on the middle class. The democrats consistently fail to acknowledge that eliminating tax loopholes for the rich does in fact increase tax collections from the rich. But that doesn't stop them from claiming Romney is a liar. The main problem is that too many people can't think outside the boxes they have created for their beliefs. If you are trying to convince me that the democrats or Obama are more trustworthy or more truthful, well, that issue is already settled in my mind. And besides that, I was not judging the debate solely by who may have been more truthful. From what I witnessed (mostly style and etiquette) it was a virtual draw. Biden's smirking, interruptions, and mild cases of rudeness were offset in my mind by a lackluster and rather boring performance by Ryan. People can call my perception wrong all they want but that doesn't make their perception of what transpired any more valid than mine. I didn't see a clear win by Biden and I didn't see any more or less spin by either side. The only point that I felt either one of them got nailed on was when Ryan claimed it had been done before, Biden retorted that it had not, Ryan gave the Kennedy example, and Biden's only defense of his own false statement was "Oh, now you're Jack Kennedy". If that is how some determine a debate winner, well good luck to them.

You're going to swallow the Republican story hook, line and sinker, we know this. No amount of proof, fact-checking or explanation will change your mind. Romney's economic plans have been widely, bipartisanly, debunked.

Continue to believe what you believe. I'm not concerned with changing your mind.

 

[JJ Husker]

You are correct, I'm not going to change my mind, at least until the plan is put into action and THEN proven it doesn't work. You can condescendingly call it hook, line, and sinker mentality if you wish but, I have seen how Obama leads for the last four years and I want no part of another four like those. You can also call someones interpretation of a loosely defined plan "debunked" if you wish but I have a little higher standard for calling things like this debunked. Once again you are very actively defending a party and candidate that have not proven squat except possibly that even when they do control both the congress and executive branches, things still don't improve. I don't get it. Some were ready for hope and change four years ago. It wasn't delivered. Now I'm ready for some hope and change. Although unlikely, it is at least possible with my candidate.

 

[zoogs]

I don't really care about decorum here. Biden presented himself as a highly capable, skilled vice president, and Paul Ryan came off as a talking point speech-maker.

This is coming from someone who has considered the race a fair dead heat in recent weeks and has no favoritism towards any party.

 

[JJ Husker]

I don't really care about decorum here. Biden presented himself as a highly capable, skilled vice president, and Paul Ryan came off as a talking point speech-maker.
This is coming from someone who has considered the race a fair dead heat in recent weeks and has no favoritism towards any party.

That's fair. I just didn't get the highly capable and skilled VP angle from that debate at all. I was somewhat impressed that he seemed to know a little bit about some of the foreign policy matters. If I recall that was supposed to be his strong suit and was one of the major reasons Obama originally tabbed him as his running mate. In retrospect, I guess that could be construed as capable. The skilled part must be when he was perpetuating the administrations lies about not receiving requests for additional security at the Libyan embassy.