The Debate

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/03/mitt-romney-taxes_n_1937785.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/10/03/953591/thinkprogress-liveblog-of-the-first-presidential-debate/

http://newsone.com/2053205/presidential-debate-fact-check/



http://newsone.com/2052947/presidential-debate-2012-2/

Note by Me: Mitt Romney was aggressive the whole night. The President wanted to act Presidential, but Romney wanted to act more in your face. The debate was allowed Mitt Romney expressing his views strong, albeit how reactionary & extreme they were. The President in the middle of the debate composed himself and suddenly responded and the debate was even at the end. This debate was interesting. Both men controlled the debate themselves not the moderator. Romney denied doing a 5 trillion tax cut over and over again. He made an error since his across the board tax cut will cost 5 trillion dollars. Just because a man is aggressive, doesn't mean that a man is correct. A flat tax won't work since the poor will pay more taxes in proportion to everyone else (if all people regardless of income are taxed the same). The GOP acts like that a 1 cent of tax increase is a sin against the Lord or something. It is not. Also, the government hired millions of Americans (working in education, health, manufacturing, etc.), so all of the government isn't some beast as Rudy Guiliani lies about. Also, rich people have record low taxation, record tax cuts, record bailouts and job growth can come via a variety of means (the poor should recieve public help and the middle class should recieve tax cuts. Massive spending during the Great Depression increased the power of economy, so more spending in the right way can assist our financial instruments. Spending money isn't taboo). Also, regardless of what Romney support Rand Paul says, not all private endeavors are good (and private charities and private program can't end poverty by itself). Mitt Romney strongly expressed his viewpoints. The President looked down and was kidding around and Mitt Romney came for political jolting. In the middle of the debate was when the President gave his best rebuttals to Mitt Romney. The President was not overly aggressive, because he was afraid of being seen as angry or too aggressive. A debate is about winning, because you can't play tiddy winks in a debate. Even when I debate, I show my aggression. So, what you have here is two moderate men debating each other for your vote basically. Romney is wrong, because massive tax cuts for the wealthy, sucking up to Big Oil, the worship of privatization, continuing the war on drugs, continuing our prison system as it is, creating more nuclear power, having war mongering, etc. don't work. Likewise, the President compromised with the reactionaries (via Simpson/Bowles, his support of NATO war crimes in Libya, etc.). Now, the reactionaries want more extremism. The debate was substantive. The story of the debate is that the President allowed Romney to get away with a lot of stuff of his plans to cut federal aid to the school system, regulations, etc.

The lesson of the debate is: Never underestimate your opponent.

By Timothy