Head-scratchers from the GOP debate

Posted at 12:25 PM on October 10, 2007 by Bob Collins (4 Comments)

I'm not saying they're right; I'm not saying they're wrong. I'm just saying "prove it" to candidates that cited certain things in yesterday's GOP debate:

* "And make sure you do something about legal reform, so that our legal system doesn't -- it's 2.2% of our GDP now, is spent on all these frivolous lawsuits." -- Rudy Giuliani (A properly constructed sentence might have made the point more clear, of course).
It's possible this comes from a U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, something the WSJ tackled in a column in April

* "It's always the poor people -- those who are on retired incomes -- that suffer the most." -- Ron Paul. Huh?

* "It ends the underground economy that right now makes it so that folks like us end up paying taxes, but drug dealers don't; illegals don't; prostitutes and pimps, they don't. But we do." -- Mike Huckabee on his "fair tax" plan. In this context, to end the underground economy he cited, one would have to believe that it will end drug dealing and prostitution. How will that happen?

* "There will be no tax increase under my administration." -- Numerous candidates. OK, this is a bit of a lawn dart. The president can veto legislation that includes an increase in taxes, but cannot guarantee any such thing. The question was not asked correctly. And it ignores the concept of a balanced budget.

* "I did not increase taxes in Massachusetts. I lowered taxes." -- Mitt Romney. PolitiFact.com has the other side of the story. But beyond that, what does it mean to cut taxes any more, candidates, especially in a state that relies on the property tax as much as Massachusetts, where taxes increase as property increases? Sure the tax rate may not change -- and by the way, in Massachusetts, the property tax limiting Prop 2 1/2 law takes a lot of this out of the governor's hands -- but Aunt Martha's taxes still go up. Additionally, the conservative CATO Institute noted, "If you consider the massive costs to taxpayers that his universal health care plan will inflict once he’s left office, Romney’s tenure is clearly not a triumph of small-government activism.”

There's also that "fee thing."

* "50,000 people make their living off E-Bay," -- John McCain. I've seen this claim here and there and, like I said, I'm not saying it's right and I'm not saying it's wrong. But 50,000 people make their living off E-Bay? That's their job? Or does that include people who make a living writing books and holding weekend seminars -- for a fee, of course -- on how to make a living off E*Bay. Oh, and the spammers who phish using phony E*Bay messages. Are they included? (And will they pay the fair tax?)

* "The average family in America is $9,000 a year richer because we have the ability to sell products around the world." -- Mitt Romney. Please tell me he didn't take our total exports and divide them by the number of "average families" in America.

---

Comments (4)

I hear all the comments about illegals and tax and a burdon on our economy, the poor, the rich, the problems. Address real issues like why we still allow our american companies and corporations to leave the U.S. for cheaper labor. How does that help the American people? What about giving the people a summary on the profits created thru social security, where does that go and how is it used? I know they invest the money, where is the profit? This other issue of illegals not paying taxes is rediculous, of course they pay taxes they just don't get taxes back because they would be caught for being illegals. They still have to produce a social security card and identification in order to work and yes it would be false information. They still have to pay taxes. What happens to those unclaimed funds. Why won't these candidates address the issues of the people. Americans deserve to get straight answers not giberish. You who have posted here wether I agree with you or not deserve a straight answer from these candidates. They laugh and joke about nonsense and address no real issues. Look there are many problems to address but I just want one question asked to all these candidates just one to see who they benefit, the people or the corporations and big business. The questions is, Why when we have such a deficiet in the economy and in lack of labor for the American people do we as a government allow and incourage American companies to leave the U.S. for cheaper labor? Follow up question. Do the American People not come first?. That is what I as an American want to really know. I want to know why we would choose to become consumers instead of producers to the world. We are a power I don't want to give that away by becoming soley consumers. Look at China, they make everything and are now reaching the top of the food chain as a Power. Buy American and support your local mom and pop shops. Thank you

Posted by Rolando Cano | October 10, 2007 2:16 PM

---

You know, you point out an interesting ...point. The candidates are speaking to us as if we're not to "blame" for whatever challenges face the country.

If we really cared about U.S. manufacturing, for example, we could have chosen not to buy, say, product made in China, back when we had a choice, of course.

In a way, it reminds me of people who lament how a downtown in small towns has disappeared because a big discount store opened on the outskirts of town.

Sure, we COULD blame it on the big discounter who opened a store on the outskirts of town, or we could just admit that the discounter didn't kill the downtown, we did with our freedom of choice.

If we valued downtowns more than saving a buck or two on cheap junk from China, we would've; but we didn't.

So how is that China's fault?

If we really want straight talk from the politicians, maybe it's time to stop talking to the American people as though we're victims.

Posted by Bob Collins | October 10, 2007 3:11 PM

---

* "It's always the poor people -- those who are on retired incomes -- that suffer the most." -- Ron Paul. Huh?

Huh? Inflation, inflation, inflation! Inflation hurts those with the least, the most.

(Collins: I was referring to the apparent use of "poor people" and "retired" as synonyms)

Posted by Jim Rongstad | October 13, 2007 11:16 AM

---

(Collins: I was referring to the apparent use of "poor people" and "retired" as synonyms)

Not synonyms, but rather a list. Many retired people are like my father who has a private pension. My father is 94, his pension amount is the same as when he first started receiving it. There is NO inflation factor built in. His pension never increases.

Posted by Jim Rongstad | October 13, 2007 8:07 PM

---

Post a comment

The following HTML tags are allowed in your comments:
+ Bold: <b>Text</b>
+ Italic: <i>Text</i>
+ Link: <a href="http://url" target="_blank">Link</a>
Fields marked with * are required.

Name*:

Email Address*:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments*:

Comment Preview appears above this form upon pressing the "preview" button. Edit your comment and press "preview" again, until you are satisfied with your comment.

Your comment may not appear on the blog until several minutes after it was submitted.

• E-mail this page
• Print this page
• Save to Delicious
• Submit to Digg
• Share this

Services

• Hourly Newscast
• HD Radio
• iPhone App / Mobile
• E-mail newsletters
• RSS feeds
• Podcasts
• Submit your photos
• Videos
• Weather
• Most e-mailed stories

Become a Sponsor