Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Deicide on September 08, 2011, 11:39:51 AM
-
http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-perry-romney-twist-records-debate-021556685.html
WASHINGTON (AP) — When Mitt Romney and Rick Perry thumped their chests over their job-creation records as governor during the Republican presidential debate Wednesday night, they left the bad parts out.
Yes, employment has grown by more than 1 million since Perry took office in Texas. But a lot of those jobs are not well paid.
True, unemployment dropped to 4.7 percent when Romney was Massachusetts governor. But the state's employment growth was among the nation's worst.
A look at some of the claims in the debate, and how they compare with the facts:
___
PERRY: "Ninety-five percent of all the jobs that we've created have been above minimum wage."
THE FACTS: To support the claim, the Perry campaign provided federal statistics for December 2010 showing only 5.3 percent of all jobs in Texas pay the minimum wage.
But those figures represent all workers, not just the new jobs, for which data are unavailable. And that does not account for low-wage jobs that may be barely above the minimum wage. According to the Texas Workforce Commission, 51 percent of all Texas workers make less than $33,000 a year. Only 30 percent make more than $50,000 a year. Nationally, Texas ranked 34th in median household income from 2007 to 2009.
About 9.5 percent of Texas hourly workers, excluding those who are paid salaries, earn the minimum wage or less, tying Mississippi for the highest percentage in the nation.
___
ROMNEY: "At the end of four years, we had our unemployment rate down to 4.7 percent. That's a record I think the president would like to see. As a matter of fact, we created more jobs in Massachusetts than this president has created in the entire country."
THE FACTS: To be sure, 4.7 percent unemployment would be a welcome figure nationally. But Romney started from a much better position than President Barack Obama did. Unemployment was only 5.6 percent when Romney took office in 2003, meaning it came down by less than 1 percentage point when he left office in 2007. Obama inherited a national unemployment rate of 7.8 percent.
___
PERRY: "Michael Dukakis created jobs three times faster than you did, Mitt."
ROMNEY: "Well, as a matter of fact, George Bush and his predecessor created jobs at a faster rate than you did, governor."
PERRY: "That's not correct."
ROMNEY: "Yes, that is correct."
THE FACTS: Romney was correct.
Romney accurately stated that George W. Bush — even without his predecessor — saw jobs grow at a faster rate during his 1994-2000 years as governor than Perry has during his 11 years governing Texas. Employment grew by about 1.32 million during Bush's six years in office. Employment during Perry's years has grown about 1.2 million, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
As for Perry's claim about Romney's record and that of Dukakis, he was at least in the ballpark.
Democratic Gov. Dukakis saw Massachusetts employment grow by 500,000 jobs during his two divided terms, 1975 to 1979, and 1983 to 1991, a rate of more than 41,000 jobs a year.
Romney, governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007, saw employment grow from 3.23 million to 3.29 million, growth of about 60,000 jobs, or a rate of 15,000 a year. That means Dukakis' job growth rate was nearly three times Romney's.
___
MICHELE BACHMANN: "Obamacare is killing jobs. We know that from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, but I know it firsthand from speaking to people. We see it this summer. There are 47 percent of African-American youth that are currently without jobs, 36 percent of Hispanic youth."
THE FACTS: The health care law that Obama pushed and Congress passed last year has long been labeled a job killer by Republicans, who often cite a Congressional Budget Office analysis to buttress their claims. But the CBO at no point said the law would result in job losses. Instead it made the more nuanced assertion that fewer people would chose to work.
"The legislation, on net, will reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by a small amount — roughly half a percent — primarily by reducing the amount of labor that workers choose to supply," the CBO said in an analysis. That's not job-killing, that's workers choosing not to work because of easier access to health care. The budget office said some people might decide to retire earlier because it would be easier to get health care, instead of waiting until they become eligible for Medicare at age 65.
The Minnesota congresswoman also states the percentages of unemployment among minority youth. But there is no evidence that the health care law is responsible for that level of unemployment. In fact, the health care law is still largely unimplemented, with some of its key provisions not taking effect until 2014.
___
PERRY: On global warming, "The science is not settled on this. The idea that we would put Americans' economy at jeopardy based on scientific theory that's not settled yet, to me, is just, is nonsense. ... Find out what the science truly is before you start putting the American economy in jeopardy."
THE FACTS: The scientific consensus on climate change is about as settled as any major scientific issue can be. Perry's opinion runs counter to the view of an overwhelming majority of scientists that pollution released from the burning of fossil fuels is heating up the planet. The National Academy of Sciences, in an investigation requested by Congress, concluded last year: "Climate change is occurring, is very likely caused primarily by human activities, and poses significant risks to humans and the environment."
___
BACHMANN: "It's wrong for government, whether it's state or federal government, to impose on parents what they must do to inoculate their children."
THE FACTS: She was correct that Perry supported mandatory immunization of girls to reduce future risks of cervical cancer, although the measure was blocked by Texas lawmakers and parents would have had some ability to file a conscientious objection to the requirement. Perry signed an executive order in 2007 directing his state health department to make the human papillomavirus vaccine available to "mandate the age-appropriate vaccination of all female children" before they enter sixth grade. Texas would have been the first state to require the immunizations.
___
PERRY: "What I find compelling is what we've done in the state of Texas, using our ability to regulate our clean air. We cleaned up our air in the state of Texas, more than any other state in the nation during the decade." He specifically mentioned successes in reducing nitrous oxide emissions by 58 percent and ozone levels by 27 percent.
THE FACTS: Texas has reduced emissions as Perry described, but most of those reductions were required under the federal Clean Air Act. However, the Environmental Protection Agency recently rescinded the state's authority to grant some air pollution permits because the state did not comply with federal regulations. Texas, home to America's oil and gas industry, still emits more carbon dioxide — the chief greenhouse gas — than any other state in the country, according to government data. Several metropolitan areas in Texas still violate health-based limits for smog, and the county that is home to Houston is one of the biggest emitters of hazardous air pollution in the country. The Texas Legislature also passed, and Perry signed, a law that will delay enforcing stiffer clean air regulations by two years.
-
It's too bad they can't fact check them during the debate and then make the comment on the actual facts and why they lied about them.
Or, they could start the next debate with fact checking from the prior debate
that would make for some good TV
-
Again, as I said before, FACTCHECK had to really dig when they correct Republicans. A lot of times it seems like they are almost splitting hairs. When they fact check Democrats they are easily correcting blatant lies.
-
Again, as I said before, FACTCHECK had to really dig when they correct Republicans. A lot of times it seems like they are almost splitting hairs. When they fact check Democrats they are easily correcting blatant lies.
who is the "they" you're referring to?
-
the perry fact check seems like a reach to me, they cant disprove his comments only allude to the fact that a certain % of ppl in tx make so much...
thats not a fact check, that is a opinion and kinda shows their bias if you ask me.
whats the cost of living in tx as opposed to other states?
we also dont have state income tax which means that you get to keep what? 5 to 15% more of your paycheck than states that have state income tax.
very very misleading comments from politifact
-
the perry fact check seems like a reach to me, they cant disprove his comments only allude to the fact that a certain % of ppl in tx make so much...
thats not a fact check, that is a opinion and kinda shows their bias if you ask me.
whats the cost of living in tx as opposed to other states?
we also dont have state income tax which means that you get to keep what? 5 to 15% more of your paycheck than states that have state income tax.
very very misleading comments from politifact
Lets see if they fact check obama tonight.
-
the perry fact check seems like a reach to me, they cant disprove his comments only allude to the fact that a certain % of ppl in tx make so much...
thats not a fact check, that is a opinion and kinda shows their bias if you ask me.
whats the cost of living in tx as opposed to other states?
we also dont have state income tax which means that you get to keep what? 5 to 15% more of your paycheck than states that have state income tax.
very very misleading comments from politifact
That's a nice thing about Texas. I wish northeastern states were like that. :-\
-
Oh no...that would mean that Obama would fail 3 times in a second as opposed to his 2 times and the universe would implode.
-
That's a nice thing about Texas. I wish northeastern states were like that. :-\
OR you can just nut up and move to Tx ;)
-
OR you can just nut up and move to Tx ;)
No, I don't think I could, too religious for me, maybe with Austin being an exception because of U of T-Austin.
-
I was unaware that the Texas Taliban would drag you into church. Oddly enough I may be as secular as you but churches and church people don't scare me...do what you want. Apparently everything scares you, America, God, Koreans....
-
I was unaware that the Texas Taliban would drag you into church. Oddly enough I may be as secular as you but churches and church people don't scare me...do what you want. Apparently everything scares you, America, God, Koreans....
I have friends from the northeast who moved, not to Texas but another southern state and they felt pretty ostracised by not going to Church since it is a communal expectation.
I can't really say I am afraid of Koreans since I have a very good understanding of them now and there is no Korean controlling my paycheque.
-
I have friends from the northeast who moved, not to Texas but another southern state and they felt pretty ostracised by not going to Church since it is a communal expectation.
I can't really say I am afraid of Koreans since I have a very good understanding of them now and there is no Korean controlling my paycheque.
they are full of shit, never seen anybody ostricized for not going to church anywhere and that includes the extensive traveling ive done around the country not just Tx.
Tell your friend they are sensitive liberal hippies....
-
they are full of shit, never seen anybody ostricized for not going to church anywhere and that includes the extensive traveling ive done around the country not just Tx.
Tell your friend they are sensitive liberal hippies....
Well in that case I would consider it. First they need to get rid of the federal income tax as well. ;D
-
Lets see if they fact check obama tonight.
you really can't help yourself can you. What's this thread have to do with Obama? It's not enough that every other thread on the forum is about Obama and you have all the room in the world to make any issue about Obama you want to, why do you keep attempting to change everything into an Obama thread? Cut the shit already. And yes, fact checking sites fact check Obama all the time ::)
-
you really can't help yourself can you. What's this thread have to do with Obama? It's not enough that every other thread on the forum is about Obama and you have all the room in the world to make any issue about Obama you want to, why do you keep attempting to change everything into an Obama thread? Cut the shit already.
Go back to bed.
These things are bogus listed above. Most are nitpicking at best.
-
Go back to bed.
These things are bogus listed above. Most are nitpicking at best.
That's all you have to say and explain why yet you instead try to change it into a thread about Obama along with HH again... You need to stop doing that. Do not intentionally derail threads. Last warning.
-
why don tyou comment on the thread huggy?
you feel politifact was reaching with their perry comments?
-
That's all you have to say and explain why yet you instead try to change it into a thread about Obama along with HH again... You need to stop doing that. Do not intentionally derail threads. Last warning.
yawn. Go back to bed. when you treat 240 the same way maybe you will be taken seriously.
-
yawn. Go back to bed. when you treat 240 the same way maybe you will be taken seriously.
I don't care if I'm taken seriously. Many here get away with bending the rules a little without the mods making a big deal. I'm no different. You seem to intentionally attempt to derail threads. You do it constantly and it's a problem. Nobody has sent me any pms telling me that 240 is intentionally derailing threads. If you think my warning is a joke, go ahead and laugh it up. I will the whole time I'm deleting you for 30 days.
-
I don't care if I'm taken seriously. Many here get away with bending the rules a little without the mods making a big deal. I'm no different. You seem to intentionally attempt to derail threads. You do it constantly and it's a problem. Nobody has sent me any pms telling me that 240 is intentinally derailing threads. If you think my warning is a joke, go ahead and laugh it up. I will the whole time I'm deleating you for 30 days.
again - why don't you treat 240 the same way?
-
I don't care if I'm taken seriously. Many here get away with bending the rules a little without the mods making a big deal. I'm no different. You seem to intentionally attempt to derail threads. You do it constantly and it's a problem. Nobody has sent me any pms telling me that 240 is intentionally derailing threads. If you think my warning is a joke, go ahead and laugh it up. I will the whole time I'm deleting you for 30 days.
so you have ppl pming you about 3?
if you want ill start pming you about 240, so you have reason to treat him the same...
-
so you have ppl pming you about 3?
if you want ill start pming you about 240, so you have reason to treat him the same...
Hugo refuses to hold 240 to the same standard.
-
so you have ppl pming you about 3?
if you want ill start pming you about 240, so you have reason to treat him the same...
I've only told you to do so half a fucking dozen times by now and never ever once recieved a single pm from anyone on something that 240 is doing which is a problem on the forum and ongoing breaking of the rules. Yes people have complained about 333 derailing threads/changing the topic. 3333 keeps over and over making Obama the issue when the thread doesn't have anything to do with the thread. All he has to do is take the issue he's thinking about and start a new thread. As mod that's all I've asked for him but instead he just tells me to fuck off and pretty much say he'll do what he wants.
Look, I know you are just sure I'm a hypocrite, I've passed out more warnings and enforced more bans against people leaning left here than I ever have for the right leaning. Yes, 3333 has gotten warning from me in the past and he got kinda pissed at me over it too. In fact some on the right have had the benefit of getting more warnings while people on the left have been banned after a few warnings.
-
I've only told you to do so half a fucking dozen times by now and never ever once recieved a single pm from anyone on something that 240 is doing which is a problem on the forum and ongoing breaking of the rules. Yes people have complained about 333 derailing threads/changing the topic. 3333 keeps over and over making Obama the issue when the thread doesn't have anything to do with the thread. All he has to do is take the issue he's thinking about and start a new thread. As mod that's all I've asked for him but instead he just tells me to fuck off and pretty much say he'll do what he wants.
Look, I know you are just sure I'm a hypocrite, I've passed out more warnings and enforced more bans against people leaning left here than I ever have for the right leaning. In fact some on the right have had the benefit of getting more warnings while people on the left have been banned after a few warnings.
333 derails topics? Look at his fucking followers. They refuse to discuss anything and seem to post on this board for no other reason than to personally insult the guy. If you're going to hold him to some perceived standard for "derailing" threads then I'd expect you to start either deleting the personal attacks or banning the useless dipshits like Garebear and Co. who bring nothing to the table whatsoever.
-
I've only told you to do so half a fucking dozen times by now and never ever once recieved a single pm from anyone on something that 240 is doing which is a problem on the forum and ongoing breaking of the rules. Yes people have complained about 333 derailing threads/changing the topic. 3333 keeps over and over making Obama the issue when the thread doesn't have anything to do with the thread. All he has to do is take the issue he's thinking about and start a new thread. As mod that's all I've asked for him but instead he just tells me to fuck off and pretty much say he'll do what he wants.
Look, I know you are just sure I'm a hypocrite, I've passed out more warnings and enforced more bans against people leaning left here than I ever have for the right leaning. In fact some on the right have had the benefit of getting more warnings while people on the left have been banned after a few warnings.
that's because many of us don't whine like little bitches over bullshit! I like 240 and laugh at his derailments and we laugh at each other in jest.
Those who complain about me are probably the butt hurt 95ers and douchebags I have utterly decimated with their obama worship.
-
333 derails topics? Look at his fucking followers. They refuse to discuss anything and seem to post on this board for no other reason than to personally insult the guy. If you're going to hold him to some perceived standard for "derailing" threads then I'd expect you to start either deleting the personal attacks or banning the useless dipshits like Garebear and Co. who bring nothing to the table whatsoever.
the funny thing is that I never complain about that! I have never pmd people seeking bans on people etc etc.
-
I've only told you to do so half a fucking dozen times by now and never ever once recieved a single pm from anyone on something that 240 is doing which is a problem on the forum and ongoing breaking of the rules. Yes people have complained about 333 derailing threads/changing the topic. 3333 keeps over and over making Obama the issue when the thread doesn't have anything to do with the thread. All he has to do is take the issue he's thinking about and start a new thread. As mod that's all I've asked for him but instead he just tells me to fuck off and pretty much say he'll do what he wants.
Look, I know you are just sure I'm a hypocrite, I've passed out more warnings and enforced more bans against people leaning left here than I ever have for the right leaning. Yes, 3333 has gotten warning from me in the past and he got kinda pissed at me over it too. In fact some on the right have had the benefit of getting more warnings while people on the left have been banned after a few warnings.
alright bro, Ill take you up on your offer...what do I have to do? hit the report to mod button right?
-
333 derails topics? Look at his fucking followers. They refuse to discuss anything and seem to post on this board for no other reason than to personally insult the guy. If you're going to hold him to some perceived standard for "derailing" threads then I'd expect you to start either deleting the personal attacks or banning the useless dipshits like Garebear and Co. who bring nothing to the table whatsoever.
those threads that just attack 3333 without an issue get moved. I even moved my own thread against 3333 that didn't have any real political issue. refusing to discuss isn't really breaking the rules. I know people get called out all the time for running away from a topic but I've never heard that they should be banned for not answering. I don't like it when people ignore it when I feel I make a decent point but it happens all the time but I don't think they should be banned or a rule written requiring people to respond lol...
Again, if you guys feel someone is a problem, point out what they are doing and send it to me. I've asked that over and over and yet nobody does it... I along with the other mods to look into complaints when they are made.
-
alright bro, Ill take you up on your offer...what do I have to do? hit the report to mod button right?
How about people stfu and stop acting like babies tattling to the mods?
-
those threads that just attack 3333 without an issue get moved. I even moved my own thread against 3333 that didn't have any real political issue. refusing to discuss isn't really breaking the rules. I know people get called out all the time for running away from a topic but I've never heard that they should be banned for not answering. I don't like it when people ignore it when I feel I make a decent point but it happens all the time but I don't think they should be banned or a rule written requiring people to respond lol...
Again, if you guys feel someone is a problem, point out what they are doing and send it to me. I've asked that over and over and yet nobody does it... I along with the other mods to look into complaints when they are made.
are you kidding? I have a legion of stawkers and have I ever asked you to ban one of them?
-
alright bro, Ill take you up on your offer...what do I have to do? hit the report to mod button right?
If you want me to see it, you have to pm me with it. I've also stated that over and over here. try to make sure it's something that they are doing over and over. The only reason I'm yelling at 3333 about it is because he's doing it often. If someone wants to talk about Perry supporting Al Gore, they should be able to do without 3333 attempting to make the thread about Obama.
-
those threads that just attack 3333 without an issue get moved. I even moved my own thread against 3333 that didn't have any real political issue. refusing to discuss isn't really breaking the rules. I know people get called out all the time for running away from a topic but I've never heard that they should be banned for not answering. I don't like it when people ignore it when I feel I make a decent point but it happens all the time but I don't think they should be banned or a rule written requiring people to respond lol...
Again, if you guys feel someone is a problem, point out what they are doing and send it to me. I've asked that over and over and yet nobody does it... I along with the other mods to look into complaints when they are made.
LOL bro gare trolls 3 left and right and none of those threads get moved.
-
If you want me to see it, you have to pm me with it. I've also stated that over and over here. try to make sure it's something that they are doing over and over. The only reason I'm yelling at 3333 about it is because he's doing it often. If someone wants to talk about Perry supporting Al Gore, they should be able to do without 3333 attempting to make the thread about Obama.
oh trust, 240 breaks the rules on a daily basis bro.
Ok ill pm you with a link.
-
If you want me to see it, you have to pm me with it. I've also stated that over and over here. try to make sure it's something that they are doing over and over. The only reason I'm yelling at 3333 about it is because he's doing it often. If someone wants to talk about Perry supporting Al Gore, they should be able to do without 3333 attempting to make the thread about Obama.
LMFAO! sad bro. You obviously don't pay attention to what goes on here. sure I am guilty of derailing some threads, but to act like I am alone in this? GMAFB.
-
are you kidding? I have a legion of stawkers and have I ever asked you to ban one of them?
personal attacks on you get moved or deleted all the time.
-
LOL bro gare trolls 3 left and right and none of those threads get moved.
the thing is I don't care! Don't want him banned or moved. even that troll lurker - dude stalks me like crazy. Don't care one bit.
-
LMFAO! sad bro. You obviously don't pay attention to what goes on here. sure I am guilty of derailing some threads, but to act like I am alone in this? GMAFB.
threads do get derailed all the time and there's nothing that can be done about that. You obviously attempt to derail threads intentionally by coming in early on with an attempt to change the topic. HH needs to stop doing this too but he doesn't do it as much as you.
I usually don't go chasing down people here for breaking the rules and really only say something when it looks like a habitual daily problem. I'm not going to nit pick everyone's every move here, it's only when someone keeps at it over and over that I'm going to say WTF.
-
3333, is it really so much to ask that you start a new thread instead of changing the subject. Is it hard to type out "Yahoo hypocritical calling out Perry Romney and not Obama" then make your case in the new thread? Is that really such a harsh thing for a mod to ask? Just stop doing it all the time and I wouldn't bitch about it.
-
3333, is it really so much to ask that you start a new thread instead of changing the subject. Is it hard to type out "Yahoo hypocritical calling out Perry Romney and not Obama" then make your case in the new thread? Is that really such a harsh thing for a mod to ask? Just stop doing it all the time and I wouldn't bitch about it.
it's hard not to contrast things lately.
-
No, I don't think I could, too religious for me, maybe with Austin being an exception because of U of T-Austin.
Austin, more specifically Travis Country.. is pretty liberal
-
it's hard not to contrast things lately.
it probably has more to do with your personal belief that nobody should be comparing the candidates because you think they're all better than Obama so all these topics are not valid to you. You want to keep it about Obama and skip the primary or twart any comparisons between the candidates. It's clear you're on a mission to make sure it's about Obama.
I'm actually going to vote repubican this time around. I want to see these primary threads. That you don't is your problem, not the rest of the forum's.
-
I already listed my preferance many times.
Paul
Bachmann
Cain
Newt
Huntsman
Santorum
Romney
Perry
In that order so far.
-
I already listed my preferance many times.
Paul
Bachmann
Cain
Newt
Huntsman
Santorum
Romney
Perry
In that order so far.
fantastic, but has nothing to do with what I just said.
-
Again, as I said before, FACTCHECK had to really dig when they correct Republicans. A lot of times it seems like they are almost splitting hairs. When they fact check Democrats they are easily correcting blatant lies.
I am not sure what you meant by this, but a lie is a lie. Remember this, a politician's (no matter whether they are Democrat of Republican) main job is to get elected and then reelected, unfortunately.
-
That's a nice thing about Texas. I wish northeastern states were like that. :-\
You might be surprised to learn that some states which have low or no income tax have a total tax burden greater than those who have income tax. I live in Oregon. Oregon has an income tax. We don't have a sales tax. When one files their Federal income taxes they get a deduction for what they paid in state taxes (this is true, regardless of which state you are in). Oregon's total tax burden ranks 40 th out of fifty states. Texas ranks 44 th. Here are the high and low states for total tax burden by percentage of income:
Top Five States with Highest State Tax Burden
(as a percentage of income)
· Maine 13.5%
· New York 12.9
· Ohio 10.0
· Minnesota 11.9
· Hawaii 11.7
United States average is 10.6%
Five states with the lowest tax burden
· Alaska 6.6%
· New Hampshire 7.3
· Delaware 8.4
· Tennessee 8.6
· Alabama 8.8
-
I don't care if I'm taken seriously. Many here get away with bending the rules a little without the mods making a big deal. I'm no different. You seem to intentionally attempt to derail threads. You do it constantly and it's a problem. Nobody has sent me any pms telling me that 240 is intentionally derailing threads. If you think my warning is a joke, go ahead and laugh it up. I will the whole time I'm deleting you for 30 days.
333386 is like a broken record, isn't he? No matter what "station" one tunes to, there he is playing the same sad one note song. Personally, I think he is amusingly annoying....if such a thing is possible.