Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama argues anti-Romney case not pro-Obama ----wont defend his own record
Marketwatch ^ | Oct. 4, 2012, 12:54 a.m. EDT | Diana Furchtgott-Roth

Posted on 10/04/2012 10:06:19 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

Commentary: President says he’ll fight but won’t defend his own record

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — President Obama entered the first debate of the 2012 general-election campaign having been president for just a few months short of four years. He focused primarily not on his record as president but on his interpretation of Mitt Romney’s proposals — which Romney vigorously defended.

Obama never claimed that, based on his record, he deserves four more years. Rather, he said that he’s been fighting “every single day on behalf of the American people, the middle class, and all those striving to get into the middle class.” He continued, “I’ve kept that promise, and if you’ll vote for me, then I promise I’ll fight just as hard in a second term.”

(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; election2012; elections; nobama2012; obama; obamatruthfile; romney

1 posted on 10/04/2012 10:06:27 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Is Obama still running against George W. Bush for President in 2012 ? just wondering...


2 posted on 10/04/2012 10:11:27 PM PDT by American Constitutionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
won’t defend his own record

CAN'T defend his own record

3 posted on 10/04/2012 10:17:51 PM PDT by Roccus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

What is Obama’s plan for anything? All his commercials and speeches are are anti-Romney. Romney should embarrass him in the second debate by asking him what his plans are for a second term.


4 posted on 10/04/2012 10:18:01 PM PDT by MDLION ("Trust in the Lord with all your heart" -Proverbs 3:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Constitutionalist
Another opinion piece from MW:

An impassioned Romney reinvents himself — again---For Obama, it’s just the facts — not the fire (??)

5 posted on 10/04/2012 10:21:12 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ((The Global Warming Hoax was a Criminal Act....where is Al Gore?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

IMHO, the deleterious affects of all that coke and all that pot are showing more than ever.


6 posted on 10/05/2012 3:28:01 AM PDT by upchuck (I miss my dog Snoopy. May 16, 1997-September 24, 2012 -- 15 years, 4 months. Forever in my heart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Historically, campaigns that only attack their opponents and not promote their agenda loose.


7 posted on 10/05/2012 4:37:07 AM PDT by TMA62 (Al Sharpton - The North Korea of race relations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Historically, campaigns that only attack their opponents and not promote their agenda loose.


8 posted on 10/05/2012 4:37:07 AM PDT by TMA62 (Al Sharpton - The North Korea of race relations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Just to be fair, it isn’t only Obama that can’t defend his own proposals. Romney also promised an across-the-board 20% cut that would be revenue-neutral by either eliminating deductions or capping withdrawing, though he has ruled out the deduction that most greatly benefits the wealthy: preferential treatment of capital gains. Many economists say this is a mathematical impossibility, that only by eliminating deductions enjoyed by the middle class - which would in effect raise their taxes - can this be achieved. Romney says no but offers nothing concrete. Ryan says, if push comes to shove, lower taxes trumps deficit reduction.

Boy, did he dance and dance around that point. He answered nothing - in fact, all his dancing simply raised more questions, one being: His whole act may well be a red herring to divert attention from the need that most serious politicians acknowledge to balance spending cuts with revenue increases to balance the budget. Even if he managed to make his proposed tax-cuts revenue neutral, the budget would be no closer to being balanced than it is today unless he adopted draconian spending cuts.

Instead of serious discussion of the budget, he dangles 20% magically self-paid for tax breaks and eliminating Big Bird. He may have been smiley and avoided major gaffes, but he hardly made his case on that point. IMO.


9 posted on 10/05/2012 4:59:59 AM PDT by erlayman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: erlayman
...divert attention from the need that most serious politicians acknowledge to balance spending cuts with revenue increases to balance the budget

What budget? There has been no budget in over two years.

As well, we need no balanced approach to continue funding big government. The problem is not funding -the problem is spending! Your analysis is premised upon a statist persective...

Government is not the answer -Government is the problem!

10 posted on 10/07/2012 3:19:42 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson