Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → Debate lies on both sides
Debate lies on both sides
2004-10-07, 5:36 PM #1
Basically just a thread to discuss what you feel are any lies that come up in any of the four presidential/vice presidential debates we're going through in America right now. Feel free to respond to any "lies" that are posted.

I'll start with a real "mis-statement" from Edwards. In the recent VP debate he said something to the effect that millionaires sitting around their pools pay a lower tax rate on dividends than soldiers serving in Iraq. The "lie" here is that soldiers' pay are tax exempt each month that they spend just one day of that month in a combat zone. For example, last year I was in Iraq from August through December and this year January and February. All of my pay in those months is non taxable. No tax was witheld nor was any of that pay taxable on my W2 at the end of the year.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2004-10-07, 5:43 PM #2
Don't include any of the many many Cheney lies though :rolleyes:
Think while it's still legal.
2004-10-07, 5:46 PM #3
It's like a one-at-a-time thing, ya know? Plus, what Cheney lies? Post them if you care to discuss. :rolleyes:
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2004-10-07, 5:46 PM #4
Since you seem to be so certain Cheney lied, SAJN, why dont you go ahead and list them? :rolleyes:
2004-10-07, 5:58 PM #5
Yeah, because you know then we'll get another :rolleyes:
D E A T H
2004-10-07, 6:00 PM #6
Quote:
Since you seem to be so certain Cheney lied, SAJN, why dont you go ahead and list them?


Okay...

Quote:
Cheney wrongly implied that FactCheck had defended his tenure as CEO of Halliburton Co., and the vice president even got our name wrong. He overstated matters when he said Edwards voted "for the war" and "to commit the troops, to send them to war." He exaggerated the number of times Kerry has voted to raise taxes, and puffed up the number of small business owners who would see a tax increase under Kerry's proposals.


Quote:
Cheney claimed Edwards has such a poor attendance record in the Senate that he was just meeting Edwards for the first time during the debate, even though Cheney visits the Senate every Tuesday. But the Kerry-Edwards campaign quickly documented at least two instances in which Cheney had met Edwards previously. Edwards escorted Elizabeth Dole when she was sworn in as North Carolina's other senator on January 8, 2003, according to Gannet News Service. Cheney administered the oath.

Cheney also was present with Edwards at a National Prayer Breakfast on Feb. 1, 2001, when a transcript shows Cheney acknowledged Edwards among those at the gathering:

Cheney: (Feb. 1, 2001): Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I are honored to be with you all this morning.


Quote:
Cheney made a puffed-up claim that "900,000 small businesses will be hit" should Kerry and Edwards raise taxes on individuals making more than $200,000 a year, as they promise to do.

As we've explained before, 900,000 is an inflated figure that results from counting every high-income individual who reports even $1 of business income as a "small business owner." Even Cheney and his wife Lynne would qualify as a "small business owner" under that definition because Mrs. Cheney reports income as a "consultant" from fees she collects as a corporate board member, even though she had no employees and the business income is only 3.5% of the total income reported on their 2003 tax returns.

A better figure comes from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, which recently calculated that the Kerry tax increase would hit roughly 471,000 small employers. That's barely half the figure Cheney used.


Quote:
Cheney got our domain name wrong -- calling us "FactCheck.com" -- and wrongly implied that we had rebutted allegations Edwards was making about what Cheney had done as chief executive officer of Halliburton.

In fact, we did post an article pointing out that Cheney hasn't profited personally while in office from Halliburton's Iraq contracts, as falsely implied by a Kerry TV ad. But Edwards was talking about Cheney's responsibility for earlier Halliburton troubles. And in fact, Edwards was mostly right.


Quote:
Cheney used a misleading figure to support the idea that the administration was "deeply concerned" about the toll that AIDS has taken on poor countries, stating that the administration has "proposed and gotten through the Congress authorization for $15 billion to help in the international effort." That's true, but the $15-billion figure was to be spread over five years -- and when it came to asking for money to be actually appropriated and spent Bush sought only $2 billion for the fiscal year that just ended. Congress increased that to $2.4 billion.


Quote:
Cheney said Edwards "has got his facts wrong. I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11." But The Washington Post reported Oct. 6 that Cheney often "skated close to the line in ways that may have certainly left that impression on viewers," especially by repeatedly citing the possibility that hijacker Mohamed Atta met with an Iraqi official, a theory disputed by the 9/11 Commission.


Quote:
Cheney claimed Kerry had voted 98 times to raise taxes. As we've pointed out before, that's an inflated figure that counts multiple votes on the same tax bills, and also counts votes on budget measures that only set tax targets but don't actually bring about tax increases by themselves.


P.S. Because people are to lazy to read and recognize the obvious, I got these quotes from Factcheck.org

P.S.S. I hope Sine is happy. I know it wouldn't be a thread without SAJN bashing.
Think while it's still legal.
2004-10-07, 6:05 PM #7
You know, it's poor form to rip quotes from other people's work without citing it. I guess asking you to put it in your own words would be a little silly.

I thought Edwards' comment about Bush ordering that Afghan troops be used at Tora Bora (where Bin Laden was surrounded) was ridiculous. If Kerry was so profoundly affected by Vietnam like he says, he would appreciate the fact that Bush does not tell the ground commanders how to fight wars.
A desperate disease requires a dangerous remedy.

A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.

art
2004-10-07, 6:10 PM #8
It says FactCheck.org right in the freaking quotes!
Think while it's still legal.
2004-10-07, 6:10 PM #9
Quote:
Originally posted by Sine Nomen
You know, it's poor form to rip quotes from other people's work without citing it. I guess asking you to put it in your own words would be a little silly.


Exactly. His post really isn't worth responding to since he didn't actually say much of anything.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2004-10-07, 6:17 PM #10
Quote:
You know, it's poor form to rip quotes from other people's work without citing it. I guess asking you to put it in your own words would be a little silly.


Err, WTF? The site name is in the quotes. If you used your eyes you'd see that. We are discussing lies from canidates, I posted lies from canidates, it doesn't matter if they are in my own words or not. Also notice I 'quoted' what I posted, I didn't just post it and say, THIS IS MINE!

Quote:
Exactly. His post really isn't worth responding to since he didn't actually say much of anything.

What the heck? You asked for my supposed Cheney lies and I gave you them. Is it because you didn't expect me to find any, and you don't want to respond to them? Or what? I mean, the thread is post lies, so I did. So what if they are from another site? The site can say it better then I can. Either way you are getting the same info.
Think while it's still legal.
2004-10-07, 6:30 PM #11
In response to SAJN:

No SAJN. I totally assumed someone would list supposed Cheney lies. I would have hoped this thread would have been more of a give and take than a total listing of rhetoric but that's fine.

SAJN Cheney lie #1:
Quote:
Cheney wrongly implied that FactCheck had defended his tenure as CEO of Halliburton Co., and the vice president even got our name wrong. He overstated matters when he said Edwards voted "for the war" and "to commit the troops, to send them to war." He exaggerated the number of times Kerry has voted to raise taxes, and puffed up the number of small business owners who would see a tax increase under Kerry's proposals.


Selective reading. From the same page:

Quote:
Cheney got our domain name wrong -- calling us "FactCheck.com" -- and wrongly implied that we had rebutted allegations Edwards was making about what Cheney had done as chief executive officer of Halliburton.

In fact, we did post an article pointing out that Cheney hasn't profited personally while in office from Halliburton's Iraq contracts, as falsely implied by a Kerry TV ad. But Edwards was talking about Cheney's responsibility for earlier Halliburton troubles. And in fact, Edwards was mostly right.


Quote:
We can only give Edwards partial credit for his Halliburton attack, however. He implied that Cheney was in charge of the company when it did business with Libya in violation of US sanctions, but that happened long before Cheney joined the company.

Edwards was also slightly off when he said Halliburton paid millions in fines "while he (Cheney) was CEO." What he meant was that it paid fines for matters that took place while Cheney was in charge. And in fact, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced Aug. 3 that Halliburton will pay $7.5 million to settle a matter that dates back to 1998, when Cheney was CEO.

Halliburton failed to disclose a change in its accounting procedures that resulted in making its earnings look better. Cheney himself was not charged with any wrongdoing, however. The SEC said Cheney "provided sworn testimony and cooperated willingly and fully in the investigation."


SAJN Cheney lie #2
Quote:
Cheney claimed Edwards has such a poor attendance record in the Senate that he was just meeting Edwards for the first time during the debate, even though Cheney visits the Senate every Tuesday. But the Kerry-Edwards campaign quickly documented at least two instances in which Cheney had met Edwards previously. Edwards escorted Elizabeth Dole when she was sworn in as North Carolina's other senator on January 8, 2003, according to Gannet News Service. Cheney administered the oath.

Cheney also was present with Edwards at a National Prayer Breakfast on Feb. 1, 2001, when a transcript shows Cheney acknowledged Edwards among those at the gathering:

Cheney: (Feb. 1, 2001): Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I are honored to be with you all this morning.


A lie? Debatable. Cheney made it clear that his frame of reference was him presiding over the senate. Him acknowledging his presence is not really meeting him. Not sure that he actually met him at Dole's swearing in. He's certainly been in proximinty to him a few times. Just apparantly not in the senate where you would think Edwards would spend alot of time.

The rest of SAJNs "lies" aren't lies at all. He simply seems to have found some areas of contention where facts were stretched for political gain. Like everybody doesn't do that!
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2004-10-07, 7:52 PM #12
[http://blargh.mine.nu/test/173/3.jpg]
[http://blargh.mine.nu/test/173/41097202980.jpg]
Read.

Furthermore, Cheney has only presided over the Senate twice in the last four years.

That's all I have time for.
2004-10-07, 8:05 PM #13
Quote:
Originally posted by Wookie06
It's like a one-at-a-time thing, ya know? Plus, what Cheney lies? Post them if you care to discuss. :rolleyes:

Well, there's a summary of the lies on both sides at http://www.factcheck.org, which Cheney himself cited (incorrectly in fact). Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be working right now.
There were a lot more lies from Cheney than from Edwards.
[which I see has already been mentioned]

Quote:
A lie? Debatable. Cheney made it clear that his frame of reference was him presiding over the senate. Him acknowledging his presence is not really meeting him. Not sure that he actually met him at Dole's swearing in. He's certainly been in proximinty to him a few times. Just apparantly not in the senate where you would think Edwards would spend alot of time.

BS. The co-chaired the presidential prayer breakfast and sat next to each other. Of course they met.

Quote:
The rest of SAJNs "lies" aren't lies at all. He simply seems to have found some areas of contention where facts were stretched for political gain. Like everybody doesn't do that!

Again, BS. Those are just as much lies as what Edwards said. The fact that you would dismiss them like that makes you as good as a liar too. Hypocrite.
It's not the side effects of cocaine, so then I'm thinking that it must be love
2004-10-07, 8:54 PM #14
Another response to Cheney's claims of never meeting Edwards comes from Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont. We all of course are familier with Cheney's cordial and professional request that the Senator fornicate himself. At any rate, while it is true that Cheney visits the Senate each Tuesday, Sen. Leahy says "Unlike all of the vice presidents before him, he meets only with Republicans."

I can see why it would be hard for them to run into each other. Good to see that bipartisanship is alive and well, and that our represenatives can work so well together.

:rolleyes:
"Our hero chucks a few rocks..."
2004-10-08, 6:26 AM #15
As I inferred above, I would concede that the two have been in other places together and probably have met at that prayer breakfast. I think the frame of reference was clearly the senate so that is why I said "debatable". Personally I think it was a poorly worded statement and I'm not sure why he said it. Unless Edwards is just so un-impressive that he actually didn't remember him. Either way ...

The factcheck.org cites, as I quoted above, do far more to back Cheney up than Edwards so I'm not sure what "the frog" is talking about as well as the other cites being political rhetoric that I clearly acknowledged is a case of one (Cheney in this case) stretching facts for their benefit.

So we should all know where we stand on Cheney's "lies" and nobody has bothered to respond to the Edwards "lie" I posted. Anyone else?
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2004-10-08, 2:42 PM #16
Quote:
As I inferred above, I would concede that the two have been in other places together and probably have met at that prayer breakfast. I think the frame of reference was clearly the senate so that is why I said "debatable". Personally I think it was a poorly worded statement and I'm not sure why he said it. Unless Edwards is just so un-impressive that he actually didn't remember him. Either way ...

Cheney is known to only meet with Republicans. I can try to find a cite if it matters to you.

Quote:
The factcheck.org cites, as I quoted above, do far more to back Cheney up than Edwards so I'm not sure what "the frog" is talking about as well as the other cites being political rhetoric that I clearly acknowledged is a case of one (Cheney in this case) stretching facts for their benefit.

I'm sorry, but I do not see how the page backs up Cheney more. It lists more lies and/or factual errors by Cheney.
I still think it's hypocritical to call what Edwards said a lie and then dismiss what Cheney said as just stretching the facts a bit.
Quote:
So we should all know where we stand on Cheney's "lies" and nobody has bothered to respond to the Edwards "lie" I posted. Anyone else?

One of us is remembering this wrong. I don't remember him mentioning how the troops are taxed, he said that the secretaries pay higher taxes. Could you cite it please?
Googling "vice presidential debate transcript" will show several transcripts that you can choose from.
It's not the side effects of cocaine, so then I'm thinking that it must be love
2004-10-09, 8:32 AM #17
Quote:
Originally posted by dry gear the frog
One of us is remembering this wrong. I don't remember him mentioning how the troops are taxed, he said that the secretaries pay higher taxes. Could you cite it please?
Googling "vice presidential debate transcript" will show several transcripts that you can choose from.


Quote:
EDWARDS: Yes. Let me say first, on an issue that the vice president said in his last answer before we got to this question, talking about tax policy, the country needs to know that under what they have put in place and want to put in place, a millionaire sitting by their swimming pool, collecting their statements to see how much money they're making, make their money from dividends, pays a lower tax rate than the men and women who are receiving paychecks for serving on the ground in Iraq.


As I stated, servicemembers pay no tax while they're in a combat zone.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

↑ Up to the top!