Mitt Romney is a Liar (as a GOP Candidate)

According to Pro, he is up with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 15, 16, and 17 which is 13 of the original 17 claims. I am only allowed 5 responses. If I can successfully rebut four of his points, that will bring him down to 9 and I will win according to his rules (he said he would come up with 10). I thank Pro for the debate. I enjoyed it! Here are my responses to five of the points Pro made. 2) My opponent takes me out of context. Paying attention to rate cuts and ignoring other proposed reforms is misleading. A tax cut on the wealthy is when the immediate consequence of some tax reform policy will reduce the real income of the government and increase the real income of the wealthy. Romney has specified cuts in deductions. One is the mortgage interest deduction, which is one of the largest deductions the Federal government gives out and almost exclusively benefits the wealthy. [1] I gave evidence that eliminating these loopholes could drastically raise taxes on the rich. Obama correctly brings up that many wealthy people pay a relatively small rate, but that's not because the rates are too low. Romney's personal income tax rates would still be higher than the rates Obama claims the wealthy pay. It's mostly because of ridiculous deductions and loopholes, as well as the problem with capital gains and corporate income taxes constituting double taxation. That's the problem with our tax code. It's too complicated and lobbyists rig it to reward the politically connected. Romney has proposed to fix that. I win. 4) Regardless of long term affects, eliminating the ACA would cut $1.76T from outlays over the next ten years according to the CBO report I posted. There are disagreements about the affects on the long-term deficit reduction of the ACA. The Medicare trustee reported just the opposite of the CBO — that it could raise the deficit as much as $527 billion. [2] My opponent's claim relies on long-term projections, which are almost always inaccurate and depend heavily on which source you're looking at. The cost of nearly every one of Obama's fiscal policies have been underestimated by his administration, including his promises to reduce the deficit while President. What evidence do we have to believe this will be any different? Romney did not lie about this. I win. 8) I never said Medicare has never been cut. I said none of the Presidents you listed actually cut Medicare spending, which is in agreement with Romney's statement. Certain policies moved around the money and changed the organization, but Medicare spending always went up under Reagan, Nixon, Bush, etc. Obama on the other hand, through the ACA, cuts Medicare funding as is discussed in several of the articles both of us have posted. Romney did not lie about this. I win. 15) Romney said, "Obama has not completed his campaign goals." My opponent said, "The statement Romney said (currently, in the past few hours the link went down) was that Obama has not completed his campaign goals. Now, that is not true Obama has completed at least 47% of his campaign promises, with others 'in the works.'" My opponent claimed Obama has completed at least 47% of his campaign goals and there is no doubt that he has not completed all of them. I listed several. I showed PolitiFact had four pages of campaign promises broken. PolitiFact says 14% of Obama's campaign promises have been broken. In short, Obama may have completed some of his campaign goals, but it is clearly not a lie to say he has not completed his campaign goals. Guantanamo Bay is still open and he promised his White House would be without lobbyists. There are countless others. My opponent has conceded on this and I win. 17) According to the PolitiFact article my opponent shared, "That's how an independent health care trust for UAW beneficiaries ended up owning Chrysler and GM stock. As of February 2012, the trust holds a 41.5 percent stake in Chrysler and a 10.3 percent stake in General Motors." These percentages are more than enough for these beneficiaries to have a strong part of the corporate decision making. UAW had a lot of power during the auto bailouts because of Obama's partiality to the unions. [3] This is a classic example of crony capitalism, in which politically connected organizations get control over things they previous did not have much of a stake in through government intervention. Romney never claimed any false details. I win. Conclusion: I have given a rebuttal to 5 of Pro's points. Most of these statements from Mitt Romney were "gotcha" type quotes that are easy to take out of context and are open to multiple interpretations. With these types of interpretations that Pro presented, pretty much everything that almost any politician says is a lie. I concede that Romney has said some deceitful things, but Pro failed to adequately defend most of the statements he claimed were lies. Consider voting Con based on the evidence I have presented and the defense I have given. People may very well completely disagree with Romney's ideas on policy, but he is not a blatant liar. I'd say that to be a liar, one has to pretty consistently make false statements with the intention of deceit. On a day-to-day basis, both Romney and Obama tell the truth about what their visions for the country are and they both bring up valid concerns about each other's policies. They've both occasionally said deceitful and false things, but not enough to earn either of them the title "liar". [1] http://townhall.com... [2] http://www.forbes.com... [3] http://online.wsj.com...