Letter: Advocate report unfair to Romney

I was amazed at the lack of a descriptive caption on the front page and the poor choice of opinions you published the morning after the first presidential debate.

While it was obvious to most that Mitt Romney was the more articulate, the better-prepared and the more factual, you chose to spin it as low key and make it appear a tie. Romney won, hands down. You need to report news, and report who was the better debater, Romney, not President Barack Obama.

As for your selection of people to interview, try to be a little more even-handed. Only one Republican of the four you interviewed? I am just wondering how you are going to spin Romney’s victory in November: “Obama almost wins!” Nah!

Robert Conger

environmental scientist

Prairieville

Comments

1) Comment by Whatnow - 09/10/2012

DMJ, most people would. I don't understand the second part of your comment, though. Did Romney complain or something? Clue me in. Tea_Slayer has become my personal rock throwing judge. I only have one judge and it's not him, although he'd like to think so. He doesn't add anything to any conversation except personal attacks. I'm glad I can be of service to run a tingle up his leg even when I'm not talking to him.

2) Comment by Warp7 - 09/10/2012

Get real Robert, if you want fiction watch the make believe news station Fox.

3) Comment by DMJ - 09/10/2012

Can't we leave religion out of this? When did this become about religion? And Whatnow, I would take Romney's money in a second....I just wouldn't complain about being taxed at the same rate as my new personal sushi chef/martial arts coach/bodyguard.

4) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 09/10/2012

this is what the good christian has to say about an award winning foreign language immersion program at a local school: "With all the new illegal citizens we have, they should be learning Spanish. Next it should be Chinese. " and he wonders why I bug him so much…

5) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 09/10/2012

I would not want Romney's wealth if I had gained it the way he did. Of course, the good christian would. And that, my friends, is quite telling.

6) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 09/10/2012

my animosity is towards ignorance. Since whatnow shows so much of it every day, he thinks it’s personal. Now that's funny. Of course he can't refute my factual post that Romney's supposedly deficit neutral plan relies on a grossly inflated and unsubstantiated “assumption". Of course, he believes chain emails are factual, so what should I expect. How much do you want to bet that he is a birther too...

7) Comment by Whatnow - 09/10/2012

ABayouBoy, and we all know that all you "progressives" and Obama would not accept Romney's wealth if it was given to you. “The worst part of success is trying to find someone who is happy for you.” ― Bette Midler

8) Comment by Whatnow - 09/10/2012

@Tea_Slayer, I'll bet you stayed up all night to think of that one. Nope, you're so wrong. Is that another "plausible assumption" or an " extremely aggressive assumption" on your part? LOL! Your animosity against me is so pathetic that it's funny!!

9) Comment by nimby? - 09/10/2012

and Fox is the evil empire . not to worry , nothing is wrong . people are happy , life is good , carry on . and I agree , but didn't the birth certificate say Hawaii ?

10) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 09/10/2012

as for whatnow and his absolute hatred for Obama, I bet his daughter and son-in-law told him they were changing their vote to Romney just to get him to shut up. Christians are called sheep for a reason. They are easily begiled. So feel free to keep your blinders on and fall for every chain email you get. I think there is a Kenyan prince who needs some assistance.

11) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 09/10/2012

Rosen's "plausible assumptions" --- "Rosen concluded that Romney could pull off his tax plan without losing revenue assuming an extra 3 percent “growth effect” to the economy resulting from Romney’s rate cuts. That’s an extremely aggressive assumption, and in conflict with recent experience. Despite Bush’s large tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, for example, real GDP grew by 3 percent or more for only two of his eight years in office. The average of the year-to-year changes was just over 2 percent." ---http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/

12) Comment by ABayouBoy - 09/10/2012

Romney the super rich messiah. More power to you, less to the people....

13) Comment by Whatnow - 08/10/2012

Tea_Slayer, my words may be wrong but the meaning was apparent to all but Obamabots. They couldn't have their messiah saying anything so definite about the future. Another "cleaner" job for the media and the campaign. How's this one..http://www.factcheck.org/2012/07/romneys-bain-years-new-evidence-same-conclusion/

14) Comment by Old Man Kensey - 08/10/2012

The problem is that he is making "plausible assumptions." If there were a plan, giving out to the public, those assumptions would not be necessary. Problem 2- Obama didn't only say it can't be done. He said it couldn't be done without increasing the debt. Which, is what all economist I have read stated too. If the plan is that good, let him show it before the election so we can decide. If he can't show it, that means he can't do it.

15) Comment by caucajun - 08/10/2012

obama lies again, This from the economist who obama refers to when he lies about Romney tax plan costing $5 Trillion. Princeton economist: Obama’s campaign is misrepresenting my study of Romney’s tax plan. I can’t tell exactly how the Obama campaign reached that characterization of my work. It might be that they assume that Governor Romney wants to keep the taxes from the Affordable Care Act in place, despite the fact that the Governor has called for its complete repeal. The main conclusion of my study is that under plausible assumptions, a proposal along the lines suggested by Governor Romney can both be revenue neutral and keep the net tax burden on taxpayers with incomes above $200,000 about the same. That is, an increase in the tax burden on lower and middle income individuals is not required in order to make the overall plan revenue neutral.

16) Comment by 8point6 - 08/10/2012

Mr. Conger. You sure hit a nerve with my "progressive" friends. Great letter. Short and to the point. Thanks.

17) Comment by nimby? - 08/10/2012

auto insurance is mandatory , yet an estimated 30 percent of cars on the road are uninsured , leading to the un-insured motorist insertion . is mandatory insurance enforceable ? proper identification will be necessary , perhaps even photo ID's , hmmmm .

18) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 08/10/2012

hmm, your paraphrased quote is a lie. Teh actual quote is " if I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition" It was a direct response to a question about TARP spending and geting bang for our buck ... http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/fact-check-obama-and-the-one-term-proposition/ and full transcript of teh conversation with Matt Lauer http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/28975726/ns/today-today_people/t/obama-were-suffering-massive-hangover/#

19) Comment by Whatnow - 08/10/2012

Yeah, a made up word, too, Tea_Slayer. From a comedian, of course. Yes, some of those things I posted might be hard to pull off, but he did say that if the economy was not fixed in three years, he would be a one term President. I guess that wasn't a lie, either. Okay, say what you want. Romney lies and Obama doesn't. Yeah, right.

20) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 08/10/2012

Here's one for you, DMJ. "I like mandates. The mandates work." -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dSy9G_4_Uk&feature=player_embedded

21) Comment by DMJ - 08/10/2012

So employers wouldn't have to worry about health insurance and employees wouldn't have to stay at jobs they hate just because they have insurance and don't want to lose it. Of course, it companies wanted to provide insurance, that'd be fine. Currently, a lot of part-time employees want to be full time, but can't get enough hours, because then they'd also be eligible for benefits. This is what happens at WalMart, for instance. I still favor the mandate, because it keeps people from gaming the system, thus negating the very functionality of insurance, but I don't think should be the responsibility of the employer to provide health insurance, nor do I think health insurance should be the determining factor in where someone works.

22) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 08/10/2012

"I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I believe that since Roe v Wade has been the law for over 20 years, that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that decision." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFMdK0TWtks&feature=player_embedded

23) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 08/10/2012

yes, your chain email does have an air of truthiness about it. Merriam-Webster's #1 Word of the Year for 2006: truthiness (noun)1 : "truth that comes from the gut, not books" (Stephen Colbert, Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report," October 2005) 2 : "the quality of preferring concepts or facts one wishes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true" (American Dialect Society, January 2006)

24) Comment by Whatnow - 08/10/2012

Yes it is, but I have to question their motives. Why would you like to see health insurance completely decoupled from employers?

25) Comment by DMJ - 08/10/2012

But that's your employer's fault...not Obamacare's....which proves my point. Personally, I'd like to see health insurance completely decoupled from employers. Neither party is offering a viable solution in that direction though.

26) Comment by Whatnow - 08/10/2012

DMJ, I just got a letter from my former employer (where I retired) and they are changing my insurance. I get to pick from three policies that cover less and make me pay more. I have no choice but to pick from these. So, yes, my insurance did change. It hadn't changed at all before Obama. And just because your insurance hasn't changed doesn't mean that it's the same for everyone. I feel that my former employer is pushing us retirees toward Obamacare. Saving jobs is subjective, too. He only saved union jobs, (http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2012/09/06/fibbing-with-gm-job-creation-statistics-bill-clinton-edition/) (http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/313125/auto-bailout-casualties-john-berlau) ( http://nlpc.org/stories/2012/10/04/ask-gm-bondholders-and-delphi-retirees-about-economic-patriotism ) Talk about fairness to all in spite of cronyism.( http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/79042.html) Also, Tea_Slayer, I was sent that in an e-mail, so I didn't even know it was an article. Thanks, now I can attribute it to someone. Oh, and I guess anything that you read and and know to be true means you can't think for yourself either.

27) Comment by nimby? - 08/10/2012

our president asked if we were better off than we were four years ago . I gave my answer , listed my personal , selfish reasons . I will vote for who I feel will serve my best interests . I will base my decision on intelligence rather than emotion. I hope all would do the same .

28) Comment by DMJ - 08/10/2012

I'm with you on the Guantanamo issue. But in that case, he failed...he didn't lie. He tried to close Guantanamo. He couldn't. And a lot of the other "lies" you listed are things he tried to do but couldn't get through Congress, like reducing the deficit, increasing minimum wage. Some of the points you listed are either made up or poorly paraphrased, like how we've run out of places to drill. Some of those points are subjective, like "the most transparant admisistration." Also, some of the things you listed are true, like the Stimulus creating and saving jobs or being able to keep your insurance after the passage of Obamacare (I know it's true because I still have the same insurance as before). Did you mean to list things that were true, or was that an accident? Were you just writing random sentences? You're kind of all over the place.

29) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 08/10/2012

You can add plagiarist to whatnow's list of accomplishments. http://articles.superhunky.com/4/406 and his post just proves that he is incapable of thinking for himself.

30) Comment by Whatnow - 08/10/2012

Just a few examples: The USA is producing more oil than ever before Fence between US and Mexico is “Practically Complete” No signing statements to nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law U.S. Involvement in Libya Will Last 'Days, Not Weeks' No “boots” on the ground in Libya I will not rest until the BP Oil Spill stops The health care bill will not increase the deficit by one dime. If you like the health care plan you have you can keep it “Under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions We have run out of places in the US to drill for oil. The Health Care Package will pay for itself We shouldn’t Mandate the purchase of health care I am immediately instituting PayGo “Pay as you go” I will cut the deficit in half by end of first term Health Care deals will be covered on C-span Recovery Act will save or create jobs No Earmarks in the $787 Billion Stimulus Guantanamo bay to be closed within a year Minimum Wage will increase to $9.50/hr I will have the most transparent administration in History We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line I’ll get rid of earmarks When a bill lands on my Desk, the public will have 5 days to review it before I sign it. I will have troops out of Iraq by March 31, 2009 Seniors Making less than 50,000 will not have to pay taxes I don’t Have Lobbyists I was never an ACORN trainer and never worked for ACORN in any other capacity. I Barely Know Rezko My Church Is Like Any Other Christian Church I didn’t know Jeremiah Wright was radical

31) Comment by DMJ - 08/10/2012

"I will not reduce the taxes paid by high-income Americans." - Mitt Romney......."We're gonna cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20%, including the top 1%." - also Mitt Romney. You should hear his flip flop on covering pre-existing conditions...or how the uninsured can simply get health care at the emergency room. You can't write this stuff.

32) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 08/10/2012

ohh jdk, for someone who has had pretty much every one of his posts picked apart for being lies, you have the gall to to call someone else's posts laughable?

33) Comment by [e-mail] - 08/10/2012

It's amazing that Obama apologists can be so deliberately myopic; I suppose that some might say that it's possibly a proof of evolution but I think it's learned behavior.

34) Comment by DMJ - 08/10/2012

"More factual"? Hmm... People not only get the news they want to hear; they get the facts they want to believe as well. Gotta love consumerism in our news and politics! Actually...no, you don't.

35) Comment by jdk944 - 08/10/2012

Mr. Conger, The Advocate is a "liberal/Democrat National Committee" Cheerleader. To Tea Slayer, you defend a President who when he speaks lies, your comments are laughable.

36) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 08/10/2012

"the more factual"… au contraire... While Obama may have skirted the truth more, Mitt actually told more LIES. For instance, the Romney tax plan that Obama claimed would add to the deficit is being considered a untrue only because Romney/Ryan haven’t actually released the details and EVERY economist who has looked at what has been released has stated that it can’t be done and remain deficit neutral. And Romney’s counterargument that 6 studies refute that is an outright lie. There are no studies, just opinion pieces by Romney surrogates claiming it is neutral. Just one example. For more, just Google” factcheck debate” and go to ANY of the sites…

37) Comment by quirkmaguirk - 08/10/2012

Silly Obama, preparing to debate Romney's platform he has been running on for the last 18 months, instead of the one he was taught the week or so before the debate.