• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

"Romney's 10 Most Shameless Debate Lies Debunked" Debunked.

LowDown

Curmudgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,768
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Here Alternet does us the favor, instead of just screaming 'Romeny lied', 'Romney lied' all the time, of actually saying what they think he lied about during the first Presidential debate. Let's take a look and see if their claims hold water:

1. An ‘Unelected Board’ Controlling Your Health Care

They call this a Romney lie because the board that is in fact set up by the PPACA is not allowed to ration. But what it can do is determine which treatments and procedures will be paid for. There is no real difference between "rationing" care and deciding what will be paid for, so Romney was not lying, the unelected board is going to control our health care in important ways. Cutting Medicare spending is going to mean less care. There is simply no way of getting around that.

2. Romney's claim to be bipartisan.

They call this a Romney lie because, get this, the Massachusetts Democrats found Romney a pain to work with even if they did pass a bipartisan health care package under him. That Romney drove a hard bargain with the dems does not make it a lie to say that he was bipartisan.

3. Dodd Frank labels banks as "too big to fail."

They call this a Romney lie because Romney doesn't buy their semantics about Dodd Frank. It is a fact that Dodd Frank removes much of the moral hazard from the big banks by having the government step in when they are in trouble. Again, it is not a lie for Romney to say so.

4. Obamacare leads to loss of health care.

They call this a Romney lie because not everyone will lose coverage (I think). But a lot of people will, so, ipso facto, it's not a lie.

5. The failure of the Obama economy.

They call this a lie because they don't think that the Obama economy failed. But a lot of people do, including Romney, so it's not a lie.

6. Obamacare cuts billions from Medicare.

Oh, come on guys we know this one is true. There are cuts to Medicare Advantage. How much more of your crediblity are you going to waste trying to keep that clown in office?

7. Gas prices increased.

No, really? You are really going to try to dispute that? Really? They don't think we should blame this on Obama, you know, because Obama isn't ever responsible for anything. Nevertheless, it's hardly a lie for Romney to voice the opinion that Obama is responsible. Because, you know, he's been the President for 4 freeking years.

8. Health care costs rising under Obama.

Well, they are rising under Obama. But only by $1,700 per family, not $2,500 as Romney claims, so that makes it a Romney lie. How silly.

9. Oil and gas increases only on private land.

Obama is cutting oil and gas permits on federal lands. But again Romney got the figure wrong. Leases have been cut by 37% and not 50% as Romney claims. It's a silly basis on which to claim that Romney lied when he got the main point of the statement right.

10. No tax cuts for the rich.

Romney proposes to cut tax rates and close loopholes. The intent is to leave the level of taxation for the rich the same or higher. They claim that this won't work, that tax rates for the rich will be lower. I think their full of beans since they don't know exactly what Romney's plan will be. In any case it's silly to call Romney's plans for taxes a lie.

So there we have 10 out of 10 of the worst lies, and not a single one of them is actually a lie. Therein we see how silly this business of accusing people of lying all the time has gotten.

10 Most Shameless Romney Debate Lies -- Debunked | Alternet
 
Hey liberals?

*crickets*
 
Here Alternet does us the favor, instead of just screaming 'Romeny lied', 'Romney lied' all the time, of actually saying what they think he lied about during the first Presidential debate. Let's take a look and see if their claims hold water:

1. An ‘Unelected Board’ Controlling Your Health Care

They call this a Romney lie because the board that is in fact set up by the PPACA is not allowed to ration. But what it can do is determine which treatments and procedures will be paid for. There is no real difference between "rationing" care and deciding what will be paid for, so Romney was not lying, the unelected board is going to control our health care in important ways. Cutting Medicare spending is going to mean less care. There is simply no way of getting around that.

Doubling down on a lie doesn't make it not-a-lie. With regard to IPAB's recommendations, the law says "The proposal shall not include any recommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or Medicare beneficiary premiums under section 1818, 1818A, or 1839, increase Medicare beneficiary cost sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and co-payments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria." All the board will do is recommend overall Medicare funding, and their recommendation can be overridden by Congress.

2. Romney's claim to be bipartisan.

They call this a Romney lie because, get this, the Massachusetts Democrats found Romney a pain to work with even if they did pass a bipartisan health care package under him. That Romney drove a hard bargain with the dems does not make it a lie to say that he was bipartisan.

Who called that a lie? Link?

3. Dodd Frank labels banks as "too big to fail."

They call this a Romney lie because Romney doesn't buy their semantics about Dodd Frank. It is a fact that Dodd Frank removes much of the moral hazard from the big banks by having the government step in when they are in trouble. Again, it is not a lie for Romney to say so.

I think you're a bit confused, but in any case, Dodd-Frank does NOT provide a means to keep banks going. What it does is require them to provide sufficient information so that they can be shut down and unwound.

4. Obamacare leads to loss of health care.

They call this a Romney lie because not everyone will lose coverage (I think). But a lot of people will, so, ipso facto, it's not a lie.

This is a flat-out lie. Obamacare will extend insurance to approximately 30 million Americans who don't presently have it. That is a huge increase in the amount of health care that will be provided.

5. The failure of the Obama economy.

They call this a lie because they don't think that the Obama economy failed. But a lot of people do, including Romney, so it's not a lie.

Strawman. Who labeled that a lie?

6. Obamacare cuts billions from Medicare.

Oh, come on guys we know this one is true. There are cuts to Medicare Advantage. How much more of your crediblity are you going to waste trying to keep that clown in office?

Strawman. Who called that a lie?

7. Gas prices increased.

No, really? You are really going to try to dispute that? Really? They don't think we should blame this on Obama, you know, because Obama isn't ever responsible for anything. Nevertheless, it's hardly a lie for Romney to voice the opinion that Obama is responsible. Because, you know, he's been the President for 4 freeking years.

Strawman. Who called that a lie?

8. Health care costs rising under Obama.

Well, they are rising under Obama. But only by $1,700 per family, not $2,500 as Romney claims, so that makes it a Romney lie. How silly.

Romney lied. Moving the goal posts doesn't change that.

9. Oil and gas increases only on private land.

Obama is cutting oil and gas permits on federal lands. But again Romney got the figure wrong. Leases have been cut by 37% and not 50% as Romney claims. It's a silly basis on which to claim that Romney lied when he got the main point of the statement right.

Link?

10. No tax cuts for the rich.

Romney proposes to cut tax rates and close loopholes. The intent is to leave the level of taxation for the rich the same or higher. They claim that this won't work, that tax rates for the rich will be lower. I think their full of beans since they don't know exactly what Romney's plan will be. In any case it's silly to call Romney's plans for taxes a lie.

Romney's plan is a lie. What isn't clear yet is HOW he's lying. Either he will not cut rates as much as he claims or he will raise taxes or he will increase the deficit. He can't keep all three of his promises.

So there we have 10 out of 10 of the worst lies, and not a single one of them is actually a lie. Therein we see how silly this business of accusing people of lying all the time has gotten.

10 Most Shameless Romney Debate Lies -- Debunked | Alternet

Most of them or pure strawmen. The others are lies.
 
Doubling down on a lie doesn't make it not-a-lie. With regard to IPAB's recommendations, the law says "The proposal shall not include any recommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or Medicare beneficiary premiums under section 1818, 1818A, or 1839, increase Medicare beneficiary cost sharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and co-payments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria." All the board will do is recommend overall Medicare funding, and their recommendation can be overridden by Congress.


No, the board can establish criteria for deciding which treatments/procedures/drugs are worthy of being paid for. For example, they can increase primary care and reduce specialist care. Again, reducing Medicare spending will mean less care somehow. There is no getting around that.

Romney did not claim that the IPAB would be rationing, only that it is an un-elected board that will be controlling our health care, and there is simply no question that he is right to characterize it that way.

But you are correct in one respect. Congress can override the IPAB, and they probably will, which means that the PPACA will cost many times more than they said it would.

This is a flat-out lie. Obamacare will extend insurance to approximately 30 million Americans who don't presently have it. That is a huge increase in the amount of health care that will be provided.

Yes, but many will lose the coverage that they are used to and want, which is what Romney was talking about.

I think you're a bit confused, but in any case, Dodd-Frank does NOT provide a means to keep banks going. What it does is require them to provide sufficient information so that they can be shut down and unwound.

Keeping big banks going is not the issue. The issue is labeling them too big to fail, which is what Dodd Frank does. Such banks get special treatment from the government under the law.

The main point that Romney was making concerning the cost of health care was that it was rising a significant amount. That he got the specific amount it is going up a little wrong, if indeed he was wrong at all, does nothing to detract from the point he was making.

As for where all the "straw men" came from, the link was provided for that. It was Alternet, and they relied on the authority of such as thinkprogress, etc., for their claims.

Again, the claims that Romney is lying are mostly bogus.
 
I'll start with the first one:

1. An ‘Unelected Board’ Controlling Your Health Care

They call this a Romney lie because the board that is in fact set up by the PPACA is not allowed to ration. But what it can do is determine which treatments and procedures will be paid for. There is no real difference between "rationing" care and deciding what will be paid for, so Romney was not lying, the unelected board is going to control our health care in important ways. Cutting Medicare spending is going to mean less care. There is simply no way of getting around that.

You are factually incorrect. They look to eliminate "NON EFFECTIVE" treatments. Insurance companies do this as well, and they don't have death panels or ration either. Rationing means we have x number, so we'll only give y to each. it is not saying this is what we will pay for (you can pay for more if you want) and this we won't.

In our area, this has lead to more working providing better care for less. This doesn't sound like a bad thing to me, but then I'm not trying to tar something dishonestly.
 
Here's more on why Romney was not lying about the IPAB:

WHY OBAMACARE = RATIONING FOR SENIORS: Dr. Mark Neerhof explains why Obamacare’s Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) will ineluctably lead to rationing of health care for seniors enrolled in Medicare. In a nutshell: severely ratcheting down payment for certain health care services will lead to a decreased supply of those services. Decreased supply will lead to waiting lists. For example, pacemakers may still technically be “covered” under Medicare, but if there aren’t enough physicians and hospitals willing to implant them (because of unprofitable levels of reimbursement), seniors will be forced to wait, as they are under the UK’s National Health Service. The queue for access may be too long for many.
 
I'll start with the first one:

You are factually incorrect. They look to eliminate "NON EFFECTIVE" treatments. Insurance companies do this as well, and they don't have death panels or ration either. Rationing means we have x number, so we'll only give y to each. it is not saying this is what we will pay for (you can pay for more if you want) and this we won't.

In our area, this has lead to more working providing better care for less. This doesn't sound like a bad thing to me, but then I'm not trying to tar something dishonestly.

As I posted above, cutting costs in this way will lead unavoidably to rationing, and it is not dishonest to say so. Please stop falsely accusing people of lying. Besides which, Romney didn't even claim that it would lead to rationing, only (to paraphrase) that it was an unelected board that would be controlling our health care in important ways.
 
No, the board can establish criteria for deciding which treatments/procedures/drugs are worthy of being paid for.
As I posted above, cutting costs in this way will lead unavoidably to rationing, and it is not dishonest to say so. Please stop falsely accusing people of lying. Besides which, Romney didn't even claim that it would lead to rationing, only (to paraphrase) that it was an unelected board that would be controlling our health care in important ways.
As already stated, what you just described is what every private insurance corporation does now.
 
Do people always trust that everything you say is the truth? Or do they ask for proof? I like clicking the resources link at the bottom of the cnsnews web page, and seeing a blog cited.
 
Last edited:
Do people always trust that everything you say is the truth? Or do they ask for proof? I like clicking the resources link at the bottom of the cnsnews web page, and seeing a blog cited.
try using the "reply with quote" link at the bottom of each post so we know who you are addressing.

Is this directed to me?
 
As I posted above, cutting costs in this way will lead unavoidably to rationing, and it is not dishonest to say so. Please stop falsely accusing people of lying. Besides which, Romney didn't even claim that it would lead to rationing, only (to paraphrase) that it was an unelected board that would be controlling our health care in important ways.

No, it won't. By your definition, everything is rationing. I can't afford a procedure, so it is rationed. That is simply false. Like your insurance company, they are just saying they won't pay for for everything (nor should they). And as they are likely to pay for more than your insure company, as they seek to pay for effective procedures, it is the opposite of rationing .

And yes, Romney made many more than a few mistakes on this board, one of which was his claim that it would ration care.

Romney repeatedly claimed that a new government board was “going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have.” Not true.

FactCheck.org : Dubious Denver Debate Declarations
 
What would a shameful lie be?
 
No, it won't. By your definition, everything is rationing. I can't afford a procedure, so it is rationed. That is simply false. Like your insurance company, they are just saying they won't pay for for everything (nor should they). And as they are likely to pay for more than your insure company, as they seek to pay for effective procedures, it is the opposite of rationing .

And yes, Romney made many more than a few mistakes on this board, one of which was his claim that it would ration care.

Romney repeatedly claimed that a new government board was “going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have.” Not true.

FactCheck.org : Dubious Denver Debate Declarations

IPAB isn't going to tell people what kind of treatments they can have? They certainly are going to do that. Sorry, but this weasel-oid business of trying to distinguish between not getting care because of rationing and not getting care because the IPAB decides not to make the care available, or decides not to pay for specialist care, or limits availability of specialist care, or whatever it is they decide to do to limit costs, is pretty lame. And they you try to claim that Romney lying just because he cuts through the BS... The welfare of our country is at stake an you guys want to play these ****ing games.
 
IPAB isn't going to tell people what kind of treatments they can have? They certainly are going to do that. Sorry, but this weasel-oid business of trying to distinguish between not getting care because of rationing and not getting care because the IPAB decides not to make the care available, or decides not to pay for specialist care, or limits availability of specialist care, or whatever it is they decide to do to limit costs, is pretty lame. And they you try to claim that Romney lying just because he cuts through the BS... The welfare of our country is at stake an you guys want to play these ****ing games.
The welfare of the country is at stake?

FFS, hyperbolic or what?

The welfare of millions IS the reason for this first movement towards national health care, something every major industrial state has....except the US. Every single insurance company decides what is covered and what is not, it is not a matter of rationing and your continued semantic game has been called out.
 
No, it won't. By your definition, everything is rationing. I can't afford a procedure, so it is rationed. That is simply false. Like your insurance company, they are just saying they won't pay for for everything (nor should they). And as they are likely to pay for more than your insure company, as they seek to pay for effective procedures, it is the opposite of rationing .

And yes, Romney made many more than a few mistakes on this board, one of which was his claim that it would ration care.

Romney repeatedly claimed that a new government board was “going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have.” Not true.

FactCheck.org : Dubious Denver Debate Declarations

Sorry, with private insurance you get what you pay for. There are ranges of coverage within private insurance and if you want a full blue ribbon plan you can get it, or if you just want basic care you can get that too. With medicare you get a basic plan, then you have the option of several supplemental plans all with different coverages at a different price. But getting back to the basic medicare coverage it is rather limited. And what Obamacare is doing is making it worse, by taking 715 billion to fund Obamacare reducing payment to Dr.'s and hospitals even further driving them away from taking medicare patients. This is rationing in of itself, making it harder for those on medicare to get treatment. Further better known as Death Panels they are there among other things is to eliminate procedures to patients. Which in fact minimizes the available treatment a Dr. can give a patient.
 
The welfare of the country is at stake?

FFS, hyperbolic or what?

The welfare of millions IS the reason for this first movement towards national health care, something every major industrial state has....except the US.

Yes, and the health care of each of those nations has famously suffered for it.

Every single insurance company decides what is covered and what is not, it is not a matter of rationing and your continued semantic game has been called out.

Again, it's rather misleading to imply that coverage by an individual insurance company, which is something that we can all choose to have less of or more of depending on what we want to pay, and to which the insurance company can be held accountable in court, is the same thing as the coverage dictated by a single national unelected and unaccountable all powerful federal commission. It ought to be obvious that the former leaves people with plenty of freedom to choose and some degree of power to push back against adverse decisions and the latter leaves them with no choice or power at all.
 
Yes, and the health care of each of those nations has famously suffered for it.



Again, it's rather misleading to imply that coverage by an individual insurance company, which is something that we can all choose to have less of or more of depending on what we want to pay, and to which the insurance company can be held accountable in court, is the same thing as the coverage dictated by a single national unelected and unaccountable all powerful federal commission. It ought to be obvious that the former leaves people with plenty of freedom to choose and some degree of power to push back against adverse decisions and the latter leaves them with no choice or power at all.

We need to open up insurance across state lines. What happen to the Commerce Clause? Congress only enforces it when it's in their best interest.
 
IPAB isn't going to tell people what kind of treatments they can have? They certainly are going to do that. Sorry, but this weasel-oid business of trying to distinguish between not getting care because of rationing and not getting care because the IPAB decides not to make the care available, or decides not to pay for specialist care, or limits availability of specialist care, or whatever it is they decide to do to limit costs, is pretty lame. And they you try to claim that Romney lying just because he cuts through the BS... The welfare of our country is at stake an you guys want to play these ****ing games.

Can have, no. What they will pay for yes. There is a difference. If there is no help, you have more you have to pay for and thus less you can have. Death panel? No. If you rely on your insurance company alone, they will not pay for everything. Death panel? No. If the government helps with your health care, they will not pay for everything. Death panel? Again no. The government does not tell physicians what to offer, what consumers can buy, but only what they will pay for. This is proper and exactly what your insurance company does. It is dishonest to say that getting more paid for is rationing.
 
Sorry, with private insurance you get what you pay for. There are ranges of coverage within private insurance and if you want a full blue ribbon plan you can get it, or if you just want basic care you can get that too. With medicare you get a basic plan, then you have the option of several supplemental plans all with different coverages at a different price. But getting back to the basic medicare coverage it is rather limited. And what Obamacare is doing is making it worse, by taking 715 billion to fund Obamacare reducing payment to Dr.'s and hospitals even further driving them away from taking medicare patients. This is rationing in of itself, making it harder for those on medicare to get treatment. Further better known as Death Panels they are there among other things is to eliminate procedures to patients. Which in fact minimizes the available treatment a Dr. can give a patient.

And you can buy more if you think government doesn't pay enough. Again, it is dishonest to say having more paid for is rationing.
 
Back
Top Bottom