I'm sure every Obama supporter knows a trillion is a thousand times a billion, or a million times a million, or a thousand times a thousand times a thousand times a thousand.
Posted on 10/07/2012 6:55:07 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Almost 25 minutes into last Wednesday night’s presidential debate, it was already clear Mitt Romney was doing better than expected, and that Barack Obama was a bit flat. But it wasn’t yet obvious at the end of the debate’s first segment that the debate would produce a decisive winner.
Then moderator Jim Lehrer moved from taxes to a discussion of “what to do about the federal deficit, the federal debt.” Mitt Romney spoke first. His two-minute answer was the inflection point in the debate. After that, he was on a roll—a conservative roll. And President Obama would be reduced to an ineffectual defensive crouch—a liberal crouch.
Romney’s statement deserves to be reproduced in full:
***
Romney: Good. I’m glad you raised that, and it’s a—it’s a critical issue. I think it’s not just an economic issue, I think it’s a moral issue. I think it’s, frankly, not moral for my generation to keep spending massively more than we take in, knowing those burdens are going to be passed on to the next generation, and they’re going to be paying the interest and the principal all their lives.
And the amount of debt we’re adding, at a trillion a year, is simply not moral.
So how do we deal with it? Well, mathematically, there are three ways that you can cut a deficit. One, of course, is to raise taxes. Number two is to cut spending. And number three is to grow the economy, because if more people work in a growing economy, they’re paying taxes, and you can get the job done that way.
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
WINNING ANSWER (CONTINUED)
Romney: The presidents would—president would prefer raising taxes. I understand. The problem with raising taxes is that it slows down the rate of growth. And you could never quite get the job done. I want to lower spending and encourage economic growth at the same time.
What things would I cut from spending? Well, first of all, I will eliminate all programs by this test, if they don’t pass it: Is the program so critical it’s worth borrowing money from China to pay for it? And if not, I’ll get rid of it. Obama-care’s on my list.
I apologize, Mr. President. I use that term with all respect, by the way.
Obama: I like it.
Romney: Good. Okay, good. So I’ll get rid of that.
I’m sorry, Jim, I’m going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I’m going to stop other things. I like PBS, I love Big Bird. Actually like you, too. But I’m not going to—I’m not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for. That’s number one.
Number two, I’ll take programs that are currently good programs but I think could be run more efficiently at the state level and send them to the state.
Number three, I’ll make government more efficient and to cut back the number of employees, combine some agencies and departments. My cutbacks will be done through attrition, by the way.
This is the approach we have to take to get America to a balanced budget. The president said he’d cut the deficit in half. Unfortunately, he doubled it. Trillion-dollar deficits for the last four years. The president’s put it in place as much public debt—almost as much debt held by the public as all prior presidents combined.
***
Keep preaching CONSERVATIVE values. It will win every time.
Yes, but preaching it and believing it are two different things.
Remember “Read my lips” ?
I’m sorry, wasn’t Kristol burying Romney for the 47% comment not long ago?
That is refreshing to hear a politician say they won't spend more money. It seems like such a silly thing to spend money on, yet here we are still spending the money after all these decades.
Anyone who finds that answer reassuring doesn’t understand how much a $trillion really is. Getting efficient won’t close it. Growth won’t close it. Zeroing out the discretionary budget won’t close it.
Obama is a fully owned enemy president.
And 20-30% of the American people is a fully comitted fifth column.
I'm sure every Obama supporter knows a trillion is a thousand times a billion, or a million times a million, or a thousand times a thousand times a thousand times a thousand.
US NATIONAL DEBT: currently just over 16 TRILLION dollars!! That’s 16 thousand times a billion!!!!
Current debt per citizen: ~$51,000!!
Current debt per taxpayer: ~$141,000!!!!
US NATIONAL DEBT CLOCK:
(continually updates)
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
He wasn't mean, just laid it out and why and he has the resume and credibility to back it up.
His delivery got away from him a bit and he could have said it better, but otherwise, I could not be more impressed or surprised.
You're right. If this was just to score debate points and he doesn't walk it as President, he'll be politically ripped apart by everyone from all sides, but I think he means it.
Twice in our histortee have paid off MASSIVE amounts (1/3) in eight years. While below the level of debt- to- GDP. Weave ow, it was still astrono iCal interms of the day. It is possible,and inafairly short time.
Obama surely lost the debate, but the Liberal media lost something even more important. Their credibility.
They’ve been painting Romney with a broad brush, and that white wash melted away and more than 60 million Americans who actually show up to vote (because non-voters don’t watch debates), were introduced to the ‘real’ Romney, not the caricature that the liberal media has been talking about for the past few months.
During the 1980 election the debates made the difference too. Reagan didn’t come close do the performance of Romney, but he did show the American electorate that the caricature assassination perpetrated by the liberal media of that day, was false. That made him electable and desirable compared to Carter who was clearly a failure as President.
Romney proved the media (who Americans trust less than politicians) wrong. His path to the Presidency is set and they’ll do their best to knock Mitt down, but his fortitude appears to be solid. My prediction is the mainstream’s will call it too close to call, with a likely Obama victory. They did the same on the morning of the 1980 election and the result was a 10% advantage to Reagan.
Twice in our histortee have paid off MASSIVE amounts (1/3) in eight years. While below the level of debt- to- GDP. Weave ow, it was still astrono iCal interms of the day. It is possible,and inafairly short time.
Larry, what are you drinking? Or is that your spellcheck acting up?
The Meet the Press crowd was reveling in character assassination of Mitt this morning and Mike Murphy stepped in and shut them down.
Dem strategist Hillary Rosen was asked what Obama’s plan for a second term was and she went on about how Mitt would deny students, women, Gays, illegal immigrants their rights, etc.
Murphy jumped in and said that was proof the Obama campaign has nothing in their bag but negative attacks. But that after the debate, those attacks were now going to ring hollow since Rommey got those 90 minutes of unfiltered access with the public.
The BEST attack and phrase I heard was the “trickle-down government” attack, where The Messiah was pointed out to be creating Government dependency, and trying to SUSTAIN Government dependency, which is what all SOCIALIST/PROGRESSIVES do....with OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.