Citizens should be interested in the issues, not debating skills

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • HaHaHaHa Othello, WA
    Oct. 7, 2012 7:53 p.m.

    "What does he think he's running for, fabricator in chief?"

    Well somebody needs to take BHO's place.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Oct. 5, 2012 6:05 p.m.


    Why not start with the Government and see what it says about Obama and Obamacare? Why not start with the BLS and see how Obama has "changed" the way that unemployment is measured since he took office? Why not question how less than 150,000 "jobs" can swing the unemployment figures by 0.5% one month before the election when many more jobs did not swing the unemployment figures last month? Why not see what the CBO has said about Obama's "projections" on costs? Why not ask the IRS whether Obama had the "right" to give G.M. $39 billion in tax credits? Why not ask a lawyer whether Obama had the "right" to seize personal property from the G.M. bond holders and transfer that property to the unions WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT (contrary to the 5th Amendment)?

    If you can't trust the "government", whom can you trust - Obama's assertations notwithstanding?

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 5:28 p.m.

    Hey, if the media are saying romney 'won', issues don't matter a lick in utah. The chosen one has succeeded to put one in the win column.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 3:38 p.m.

    Where does someone find the facts mike? And aren't facts just lies and opinions when it comes politics?

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Oct. 5, 2012 2:24 p.m.

    A debate shows which candidate has answers. Obama had no answers. He thought that his position was the answer. Obama has had no answers. He has never had any answers. He still has no answers. Even today, he claimed a 0.5% drop in unemployment, as if no one had lost a job in the last month. Do thethe math yourself. Obama lies. That is a fact. Anyone can check that out. Romney had facts that are supportable, Obama did not. Check the facts, not the "facts" supplied by Obama, because he is a proven liar, but the FACTS.

  • wrz Ogden, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 2:11 p.m.

    @Kent C. DeForrest:

    "...I didn't say anything about Obama. He also has a very loose relationship with the truth, but he's an amateur fabricator compared to Romney."

    Obama doesn't necessarily lie all that much... He just promises things to get elected than never implements or follows through... such as closing Gitmo, for example. There's much much more. Which is all common practice f0or politicians.

    Also, manipulating facts to make you look good is not lying... such as the unemployment numbers that just came out. First, who provided the numbers? Obama's Labor Department, that's who. Undoubtedly tweaked to show a reduction in unemployment to make Obama look good as we near the elections. And, of course, timed to come out just after the first debate in case Eye Candy didn't do so well. This is corruption of the highest order... not lying, just plain ol' corruption.

  • On the other hand Spanish Fork, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 2:08 p.m.

    @joe5, I happen to know the letter writer. Go read what he wrote one more time. He's arguing in favor of a Romney presidency. He would indeed have had the same sentiments if Obama had been declared the winner.

    Regardless of the side the letter writer supports, his point is a good one: we ought to support candidates based on their positions on the issues, not based on whether their rhetorical skills are superior to their opponents'.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 1:12 p.m.

    Obviously Romney must have lied, flip-flopped, or just deceived people because the man everyone saw on the debate stage was completely different than the caricature that liberals have painted him as.

    He wasn't the rich snob who is clueless, incompetent, and couldn't care less about everyday folks that everyone on the left (including most of the press) says he is. So that couldn't have been the "Real Romney". Right??

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 11:43 a.m.

    joe5, to answer another of your questions, I didn't say anything about Obama. He also has a very loose relationship with the truth, but he's an amateur fabricator compared to Rmoney.

    Also, it is not possible for his lies to "jive" with my version of the truth. It is possible for them to "jibe" with my version, but they don't.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 11:38 a.m.

    joe5, they are fabrications because the numbers don't add up, because the half-dozen fact checkers I follow agree that he's talking out of both sides of his mouth, and because his words contradict what he has said before. So which Rmoney am I supposed to believe? He's so all over the board, I can't keep track of where he is. This man is as slippery as greased lightning.

  • wrz Ogden, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 10:07 a.m.

    The candidate who can come up with the most quotable zinger is the winner.

  • joe5 South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 10:07 a.m.

    Kent: So are those actual lies? Or are they lies merely because they don't happen to jive with your version of "truth?"

    It would be impossible for you to have first-person knowledge of the claims of either candidate. You had to rely on other sources to forumulate your opinion. The questions that raises in my mind are:
    - What makes you trust those sources to the extent that you dismiss other sources that might provide contradictory information?
    - Do you pick your sources simply because they reaffirms what you already want to believe?
    - Do you believe both candidates lie or just the one you happen to oppose?
    - What makes Romney's lied more egregious than Obama's lies?

    Sports pundits make predictions the same way you assess candidate. They choose, then go looking for data. And guess what? The find data that validates their choices. Data that contradicts their choices goes unnoticed or ignored. In sports, it's all in good fun since the outcome is really insignificant. But is that really the best decision-making process for something as important as choosing our president?

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 9:30 a.m.

    The media treated this debate as if it were the Academy Awards. Who had the best "performance"? Who cares who had the best performance. If this were the Timpanogos Storytelling Festival, I would give Rmoney high marks. But I'd really like to hear something other than fiction from someone running for the highest office in the land. What does he think he's running for, fabricator in chief?

  • joe5 South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 5, 2012 7:38 a.m.

    Would the letter writer have the same sentiments is Obama had been declared the winner. I can't help but think this is sour grapes after the fact. Why wasn't this letter submitted prior to the debate when the winner was still undetermined?

    On message boards all over the internet (including DesNews), I've been reading comments by Obama apologists who either claim he really won the debate, that Romney didn't play fair during the debate, or that the debates don't really matter. Since virtually every pundit on both sides of the political spectrum disagree with those assertions, aren't those comments a reflection of the writer's personal biases and blind adherence instead of a truthful and honest commentary?

    I find it ironic that, for years, Democrats and leftists have accused the righties of political blindness for voting Republican. Rather than acknowledge that there might be honest disagreement over issues, they fall back on this claim when they run out of other arguments. But the response to this debate has reaffirmed that ovine (sheep-like) behavior is very prevalent on the left.