New Romney ad: “The choice”

posted at 2:06 pm on October 17, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Ed argued earlier that Mitt Romney’s best moment at last night’s presidential debate came when he made a direct pitch to middle-class voters based on economic issues, effectively countering much of the Obama campaign’s middle-class rhetoric. It appears that Team R also thought it was a great moment, ’cause they clipped it for their first-out-of-the-gate post-debate ad:

So much of Barack Obama’s manufactured campaign image centers on being some big champion of the middle class, but so many of Obama’s both enacted and proposed policies — from the costs and taxes inherent in ObamaCare, to energy policies that boost utility and gasoline prices, to tax hikes and red tape that make it more difficult for small-business owners to operate — are direct hits on middle-class prosperity. As Romney points out, median incomes have fallen, and Obama’s utter failure to even attempt major entitlement reform to make solvent demonstrably unsustainable programs like Social Security is a boon to exactly nobody.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Yeah, but….Rose Garden speech…check the transcript!

d1carter on October 17, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Instead of “hope and optimism”, he should have said “optimism and opportunity”.

“Hope” has become a dirty word.

Shy Guy on October 17, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Everyone deserves a fair shot. Let’s level the playing field so there are no winners and losers. Medals and trophies for everyone. Also, food stamps.

a capella on October 17, 2012 at 2:10 PM

A choice: A bright future or continuing decline to darkness.

VorDaj on October 17, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Romney surely blew it, so why talk about Obama?

Love,
The Left

Liam on October 17, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Best moment of the debate, IMO.

Spannerhead on October 17, 2012 at 2:11 PM

New daily Gallup poll Romney 51 Obama 45

Rockshine on October 17, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Obama may have “won” the debate, but I thought this moment won the election for Romney. And what makes it more devastating for Obama is that he didn’t even try to rebutt it.

tkyang99 on October 17, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Romney won the facts portion of the debate.

Obama won the lies portion.

Bitter Clinger on October 17, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Dave “Benghazi Bob” Axlerod here!

By Obama, I think Obama slaughtered Romney in this debate and will slaughter him again in the next debate if he even shows up! Obama will go on to an easy 57 state landslide. Any talk of his defeat is merely an insane prattle. The fact is that as soon as Mitt Romney reached the stage, Obama besieged him and slaughtered him. Wherever Romney tried to run away on the stage he found himself encircled by Obama’s great intellect and command of the facts. Mitt Romney was burnt. Mitt Romney was buried. Obama tackled him. Obama hit him with shoes! Obama’s opponents will soon be committing suicide by the thousands as they realize that Obama can not lose. My feelings – as usual – we will slaughter them all!

RasThavas on October 17, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Romney won the election in that 3:40 response.

It was devastating for Obama.

nicktjacob on October 17, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Obama was defensive during the entire debate. With his record, and zero for the next 4 years, how could he be any other way?

Schadenfreude on October 17, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Obama is just now out on the stump “Romney’s folders, Romney’s folder”. He’s got nada.

Schadenfreude on October 17, 2012 at 2:17 PM

So much of Barack Obama’s manufactured campaign image centers on being some big champion of the middle class, but so many of Obama’s both enacted and proposed policies — from the costs and taxes inherent in ObamaCare, to energy policies that boost utility and gasoline prices, to tax hikes and red tape that make it more difficult for small-business owners to operate — are direct hits on middle-class prosperity. As Romney points out, median incomes have fallen, and Obama’s utter failure to even attempt major entitlement reform to make solvent demonstrably unsustainable programs like Social Security is a boon to exactly nobody.

Change.

visions on October 17, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Obama lied most of the night but here are the two Big Turds:

1. “I cut taxes for small businesses 18 times”.

2. “I’m for small gov’t and for free enterprise”.

May god strike him for such charlatanry.

Schadenfreude on October 17, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Bitter Clinger on October 17, 2012 at 2:13 PM

I may not be authorized but – Threadwinner!

HomeoftheBrave on October 17, 2012 at 2:19 PM

I see King Obama took notes from crazy Uncle Joe on the fine are of smirking.

JPeterman on October 17, 2012 at 2:19 PM

I see King Obama took notes from crazy Uncle Joe on the fine art of smirking.

JPeterman on October 17, 2012 at 2:19 PM

When you have nothing you smirk defensively.

Schadenfreude on October 17, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Romney won the facts portion of the debate.

Obama won the lies portion.

Bitter Clinger on October 17, 2012 at 2:13 PM

THIS!!!!!

Gunlock Bill on October 17, 2012 at 2:22 PM

It’s all over the net-news that there are thousands of “Stingers” unaccounted for, Barry. How long before airliners are being knocked out of the air by missiles made by Northrop and Lockheed? Is everybody at State and CIA out to lunch? Do we have no Congressional oversight committees? I’d call for media scrutiny but those bastards are worse than useless. When they’re not hiding the truth, they’re perverting it.

RasThavas on October 17, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Good ad. Now run it, and others, nationally. Effect the national conversation which to a large degree will overwrite pinpointed swing state advertising.
And run up the score if you must. Build coattails on a national basis. We need 60 senators, or at least 55.

anotherJoe on October 17, 2012 at 2:23 PM

American undercover agents selling automatic rifles to Mexican drug dealers is one thing. The CIA putting SAMs in the hands of Muslim militiamen is another.

RasThavas on October 17, 2012 at 2:24 PM

“Romney won the facts portion of the debate.

Obama won the lies portion”

I must have seen this exact comment about 5 times in different parts of hotair… lol

BrianVII on October 17, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Everyone deserves a fair shot. Let’s level the playing field so there are no winners and losers. Medals and trophies for everyone. Also, food stamps.

a capella on October 17, 2012 at 2:10 PM

……except for those elected ruling Democrat’s…who are exempt!

KOOLAID2 on October 17, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Obama is just now out on the stump “Romney’s folders, Romney’s folder”. He’s got nada.

I’m tellin’ ya, the Obama campaign is entirely fueled by stupid leftard Facebook memes. My FB feed is wall-to-wall “EHRMAGERHD WEHRMENS IN BEHRNDEHRS!” this morning–they really do think this is a game-changing gaffe. Expect TV spots about it by tonight.

Fabozz on October 17, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Of all the snide remarks that came out from Obama last night, the one that stuck with me the most was his “my portfolio isn’t as big as yours” snide comment. That short remark basically summed up everything about this election and Obama.

We have elected as president a man who is class warfare and class jealousy, personified.

That one comment summed up how he really feels and how his supporters feel. The fact that he said it so flippantly that it came out as if it was unprepared, makes it even more telling.

tkyang99 on October 17, 2012 at 2:26 PM

If liberals don’t lie. they have nothing.

tarpon on October 17, 2012 at 2:26 PM

New WI poll just released (Marquette University). Barry up by 1 point, 49/48. On October 3rd this poll has Barry up by ELEVEN, 53/42. I’d say that’s quite a swing.

fatigue on October 17, 2012 at 2:27 PM

That’s it. Keep hitting the Failure-in-chief with his record of Epic Failure after Epic Failure! The Marxist Messiah’s, Extreme Ideology needs to be in the limelight, for the next 3 wks. The chicago thug machine tactics will be a lot less effective now that the Obama Enemy media is so blatantly exposed for the Frauds they are!
Update on:How to take on the Enemy media & Win: http://paratisiusa.blogspot.com/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-those-who-should-know.html?spref=tw

God Bless America!

paratisi on October 17, 2012 at 2:28 PM

The official story of what led up to the attack is just plain weird. Supposedly, the U.S. ambassador arrived back in the country and immediately ran off to Benghazi virtually by himself allegedly to investigate building a new school and a hospital there yet without any real security. His protection was to be provided by relatively untrained Libyans who a few months earlier had been rebels in the civil war.

It is quite true that the State Department and ultimately Secretary of State Hillary Clinton bear responsibility for the ambassador being in Benghazi and for ensuring his protection. The president would not be consulted on such a “minor” event. But the story hinges on why the ambassador was in Benghazi that day.

If he was, as accounts by sources in the U.S. intelligence community suggested, negotiating with a terrorist, anti-American group to obtain the return of U.S. weapons provided during the civil war, that would have been a much higher-priority matter. I have been asked by sources not to reveal the specific weapons system that was Washington’s highest priority to buy back, but the details make sense. The fact that the ambassador was not accompanied by a delegation of foreign aid experts to evaluate these alleged projects shows that the reason for the ambassador’s presence in Benghazi is being covered up. This situation transcends State Department jurisdiction and brings in the CIA and higher-level national security officials. The plan would have been in the presidential briefing and it is quite conceivable he would have been called on to approve of it.

Obama and his administration immediately lied to the American people about the cause of the attack, what happened, and who appeared to have done it.

– They said the attack was due to the video rather than a revolutionary Islamist attempt to hit at the United States and subvert the regime in Libya.

– They said the attack was a spontaneous act in the context of a peaceful demonstration when it was a planned assault.

– They said that there was no idea who was responsible when it was almost certainly al-Qaeda.

RasThavas on October 17, 2012 at 2:28 PM

This will backfire and it’s schadenfreudig.

Schadenfreude on October 17, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Romney looked presidential,Obama looked like a pool hustler.

docflash on October 17, 2012 at 2:31 PM

On TV today I saw a bit of Obama campaigning. Does Obama ever look like a scowling, angry agitator! If he weren’t already in the WH, he’d be crying out Occupy Pennsylvania Avenue. Most of those behind him were women. Enthusiasm wasn’t there for all but a few.

INC on October 17, 2012 at 2:33 PM

If liberals don’t lie. they have nothing.

Have you not learned that rules are only required for the American people to follow? Lib elitists truly believe that they are above the rules.

Kingfisher on October 17, 2012 at 2:33 PM

As Romney points out, median incomes have fallen, and Obama’s utter failure to even attempt major entitlement reform to make solvent demonstrably unsustainable programs like Social Security is a boon to exactly nobody.

Keeping these programs around automatically destroys the bright and prosperous future argument he makes.

First things first, they work to damage the family by making children less valuable on the whole as they naturally are with out the programs.

First, having a child is harder when fully 15.2% and growing of your wealth creation is stolen from you the potential parent to pay for people to leave the workforce early.

Second, once grown, that 15.2% and growing of wealth creation being stolen to pay for other people to leave the workforce early will not be in the pockets of the children to help their parents and grandparents.

Third, due to 1 and 2, people want to have more abortions than otherwise. People do not want to be stuck in marriage and demand easy divorces. People do not care so much about their children’s education, as they already know they will not be able to rely on their wealth creation in bad times and old age.

Get rid of them completely and make the old people go back to work or get real charity from the communities they have (likely failed to) served during their life.

astonerii on October 17, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Obama lied most of the night but here are the two Big Turds:

1. “I cut taxes for small businesses 18 times”.

2. “I’m for small gov’t and for free enterprise”.

May god strike him for such charlatanry.

Schadenfreude on October 17, 2012 at 2:19 PM

There’s a good reason why people don’t know those things about Obama–they have nothing to do with Obama or his policies.

I laughed aloud when I heard that. To me, it was as if Paul Ryan got up in his debate in response to the abortion question and his faith and declared that he’s pro-choice.

The only small businesses that love Obama are those getting stimulus money or green-energy subsidies from him.

BuckeyeSam on October 17, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Get rid of them completely and make the old people go back to work or get real charity from the communities they have (likely failed to) served during their life.

astonerii on October 17, 2012 at 2:34 PM

I’m sure they’ll just be able to find work, just like that, or that the communities will be financially able to support them.

MelonCollie on October 17, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Obama looked like a pool hustler.

docflash on October 17, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Who uses a borrowed cue stick. That way, when he loses, it’s someone else’s fault.

Liam on October 17, 2012 at 2:36 PM

I missed this, can somebody confirm?

I heard that the audience was questioned after the debate. One or two women blurted out the usual Obama “Romney hates women” talking points but a third woman told the first two that they were wrong.

If true, that should be in one of Romney’s commercials

Kingfisher on October 17, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Of all the snide remarks that came out from Obama last night, the one that stuck with me the most was his “my portfolio isn’t as big as yours” snide comment. That short remark basically summed up everything about this election and Obama.

And then what happened? Romney fired back about Barry’s portfolio and wouldn’t back off.

I guess I’m still just so amazed at how much backbone Romney’s been showing in these debates against both Barry and the moderators. I haven’t seen anything like it in my life.

Dack Thrombosis on October 17, 2012 at 2:38 PM

On TV today I saw a bit of Obama campaigning. Does Obama ever look like a scowling, angry agitator!

INC on October 17, 2012 at 2:33 PM

Obama looks every bit what he is. An angry arrogant sociopath who can’t believe that he’s losing to Mitt Romney, which makes him even more angry and arrogant. He also can’t believe he has to show up at debates and be challenged by some governor.

Happy Nomad on October 17, 2012 at 2:40 PM

I heard that the audience was questioned after the debate. One or two women blurted out the usual Obama “Romney hates women” talking points but a third woman told the first two that they were wrong.

If true, that should be in one of Romney’s commercials

Kingfisher on October 17, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Rush was talking about this. First two apparently were of the Sandra Fluke variety where nothing matters but federal subsidies for their lady parts.

Happy Nomad on October 17, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Obama wants to pick the winners and that’s not you, if the middle class were his focus his cockamamie collectivist policies would have made us all rich by now.

Speakup on October 17, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Obama is just now out on the stump “Romney’s folders, Romney’s folder”. He’s got nada.

Schadenfreude on October 17, 2012 at 2:17 PM

What was that romney’s reference to ‘binders of women’ all about? Or was that his phrasing? I didn ‘t see the debate in real time, just this morning I saw the most important parts of their exchange, but don’t think the ‘binders’ comment was there….what exactly was he referring to?

jimver on October 17, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Obama lied most of the night but here are the two Big Turds:

1. “I cut taxes for small businesses 18 times”.

Schadenfreude on October 17, 2012 at 2:19 PM

I have heard that lie several times now but have not seen a fact check. Anyone have a link to the truth?

Brat on October 17, 2012 at 2:46 PM

I heard that the audience was questioned after the debate. One or two women blurted out the usual Obama “Romney hates women” talking points but a third woman told the first two that they were wrong.

I’m not sure if you’re talking about the Luntz focus group, but at the end two women said they support Obama cuz Romney will destroy women’s rights and the 3rd women basically said she has no idea what the hell they’re talking about. It was awesome. :D

tkyang99 on October 17, 2012 at 2:55 PM

I’m sure they’ll just be able to find work, just like that, or that the communities will be financially able to support them.

MelonCollie on October 17, 2012 at 2:35 PM

They made their bed by their immoral voting practices. They should at this point in their lives have enough savings to be able to get themselves to a job, even if it is a few years in the making. They should have skills that make them valuable. If not, they should have some built up charity they did in the past to the community where the community will feel obligated to help them.

If given a choice between letting the welfare collapse on its own weight and making it solvent for a few more years, I chose let it collapse and let those who counted on it suffer instead of forcing everyone else to have to suffer for the bad choices these leeches made.

astonerii on October 17, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Of all the snide remarks that came out from Obama last night, the one that stuck with me the most was his “my portfolio isn’t as big as yours” snide comment. That short remark basically summed up everything about this election and Obama.
And then what happened? Romney fired back about Barry’s portfolio and wouldn’t back off.

I guess I’m still just so amazed at how much backbone Romney’s been showing in these debates against both Barry and the moderators. I haven’t seen anything like it in my life.

Dack Thrombosis on October 17, 2012 at 2:38 PM

To me, this was the dog fart under the dining room table. “You see, Romney, he, he likes to invest in China.”

“Mr. President, have you looked at your portfolio, your pension plan? Have you looked at your pension plan? Have you looked at your pension plan?” “No, I…” You have investments in China too!”

Tenwheeler on October 17, 2012 at 2:58 PM

If he was, as accounts by sources in the U.S. intelligence community suggested, negotiating with a terrorist, anti-American group to obtain the return of U.S. weapons provided during the civil war, that would have been a much higher-priority matter. I have been asked by sources not to reveal the specific weapons system that was Washington’s highest priority to buy back, but the details make sense. The fact that the ambassador was not accompanied by a delegation of foreign aid experts to evaluate these alleged projects shows that the reason for the ambassador’s presence in Benghazi is being covered up. This situation transcends State Department jurisdiction and brings in the CIA and higher-level national security officials. The plan would have been in the presidential briefing and it is quite conceivable he would have been called on to approve of it.

This! Fast and Furious in Libya! Man, that would just be something. Providing Stinger missles to Al Quaeda…..

Tenwheeler on October 17, 2012 at 3:01 PM

A question for libs…When did “most-improved player” equate to winning?

fbcmusicman on October 17, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Rush was talking about this. First two apparently were of the Sandra Fluke variety where nothing matters but federal subsidies for their lady parts.

Happy Nomad on October 17, 2012 at 2:42 PM

And I wish more of them were smart enough to understand that if someone else pays for your lady parts – they effectively own and control those lady parts.

dentarthurdent on October 17, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Keller’s pain is soooo schadenfreudig.

Schadenfreude on October 17, 2012 at 3:04 PM

heard that the audience was questioned after the debate. One or two women blurted out the usual Obama “Romney hates women” talking points but a third woman told the first two that they were wrong.

If true, that should be in one of Romney’s commercials

Kingfisher on October 17, 2012 at 2:38 PM

This was from Frank Luntz’s focus group, shown on Hannity.

Barred on October 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM

What was that romney’s reference to ‘binders of women’ all about? Or was that his phrasing? I didn ‘t see the debate in real time, just this morning I saw the most important parts of their exchange, but don’t think the ‘binders’ comment was there….what exactly was he referring to?

jimver on October 17, 2012 at 2:44 PM

When Romney was Running for governor a womans group asked the candidates how they would go about hiring women.

When he was elected, he asked his staff to compile a list of qualified women for him to look at. This was a binder his Lt. Governor put together for him.

Barred on October 17, 2012 at 3:15 PM

The plan would have been in the presidential briefing and it is quite conceivable he would have been called on to approve of it

Oh! Now I understand why he didnt know! He rarely attends those, you know….

kcd on October 17, 2012 at 3:15 PM

And I wish more of them were smart enough to understand that if someone else pays for your lady parts – they effectively own and control those lady parts.

dentarthurdent on October 17, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Hey remember that 0bama ad with those super intelligent actresses released the other day?
Lookie lookie at what one of them retweeted last night

http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-campaign-co-chair-eva-longoria-promotes-vulgar-romney-tweet/article/2511022#.UH8DEpG9KK3

Brat on October 17, 2012 at 3:17 PM

What was that romney’s reference to ‘binders of women’ all about? Or was that his phrasing? I didn ‘t see the debate in real time, just this morning I saw the most important parts of their exchange, but don’t think the ‘binders’ comment was there….what exactly was he referring to?

He was referring to binders of qualified women’s resume’s, just cam out awkward.

right of the dial on October 17, 2012 at 3:18 PM

A question for libs…When did “most-improved player” equate to winning?

fbcmusicman on October 17, 2012 at 3:03 PM

New daily Gallup poll Romney 51 Obama 45

Rockshine on October 17, 2012 at 2:12 PM

It doesnt, except in their little pea brains :)

kcd on October 17, 2012 at 3:20 PM

I see King Obama took notes from crazy Uncle Joe on the fine art of smirking.

JPeterman on October 17, 2012 at 2:19 PM

When you have nothing you smirk defensively.

Schadenfreude on October 17, 2012 at 2:21 PM

That smirk was hiding a burning rage, straining to come out. Governor Romney came close to finding little Bammie’s breaking point. If he ever finds his buttons, the explosion will be epic.

slickwillie2001 on October 17, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Obama and the left can not with stand the effective attacks on the economic numbers they have created.

The Romney team has been relentless in stating and restating them. The numbers cannot be refuted and Romney is ellquent and ruthless in ticking them off.

Kudos to Mitt and company for using the one sledge hammer in the tool box.

rickyricardo on October 17, 2012 at 3:43 PM

I missed this, can somebody confirm?

I heard that the audience was questioned after the debate. One or two women blurted out the usual Obama “Romney hates women” talking points but a third woman told the first two that they were wrong.

If true, that should be in one of Romney’s commercials

Kingfisher on October 17, 2012 at 2:38 PM

As others have mentioned, that was from Frank Luntz’s focus group.

Here’s a link to the video, very worth watching:

http://www.therightscoop.com/frank-luntz-focus-group-overwhelmingly-thought-romney-was-more-presidential/

ITguy on October 17, 2012 at 3:43 PM

I love Team Romney’s ad when they show Pantload filling his pants…

… Classic!

Seven Percent Solution on October 17, 2012 at 3:48 PM

What was that romney’s reference to ‘binders of women’ all about? Or was that his phrasing? I didn ‘t see the debate in real time, just this morning I saw the most important parts of their exchange, but don’t think the ‘binders’ comment was there….what exactly was he referring to?

jimver on October 17, 2012 at 2:44 PM

When Romney was Running for governor a womans group asked the candidates how they would go about hiring women.

When he was elected, he asked his staff to compile a list of qualified women for him to look at. This was a binder his Lt. Governor put together for him.

Barred on October 17, 2012 at 3:15 PM

So that’s all? Romney expressing his interest in tapping more women for positions in his admin – slightly awkwardly…goodness, you’d think he made The Gaffe of his life, if you read the leftist twitters on this…

jimver on October 17, 2012 at 4:06 PM

That ad kind of butchered his best moment. Enough of these 30 second spots, go for the full minute.

Daemonocracy on October 17, 2012 at 4:08 PM

Obama lied most of the night but here are the two Big Turds:

1. “I cut taxes for small businesses 18 times”.

Schadenfreude on October 17, 2012 at 2:19 PM

I have heard that lie several times now but have not seen a fact check. Anyone have a link to the truth?

Brat on October 17, 2012 at 2:46 PM

I have no doubt Obama could back that up. Remember, Obama is a Soviet-style top-down, command-economy guy. He’s offered dozens of incentives to various groups, if they only follow his byzantine set of rules. “If you only buy solar panels, you get this and this back.” That kind of thing.

It doesn’t work because small business owners realize that if arbitrary rules and incentives can be created out of thin air, they can disappear the next minute as soon as the regime changes its mind. So there’s much wailing and gnashing of teeth by tax-cheat Geithner and Commerce Secretary Blank that small business owners are too stupid to take advantage of all the “tax breaks” being offered.

Burke on October 17, 2012 at 4:20 PM

hmmmm, where is Gumbypokey?

katablog.com on October 17, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Obama may have “won” the debate, but I thought this moment won the election for Romney. And what makes it more devastating for Obama is that he didn’t even try to rebutt it.

tkyang99 on October 17, 2012 at 2:13 PM

I agree completely with you on this one, tkyang99. Also, if you look back at Obama at parts of when Romney is tearing him down, I think he is even nodding along with some of the points Romney makes! He says NOTHING against anything Romney put across…even though he had PLENTY to say about anything Romney had to say about his own ideas for the future. Obama was made small…diminished…absent and a failure in this two minute speech by Romney. And the poll internals are showing it. The next couple of days worth of polling will be interesting, and maybe crucial to both campaigns.

Also, with less than a week until the last debate, Obama doesn’t have much time to try to change people’s minds. And in that debate, I firmly believe that between the Middle East, Russia, F&F, and Benghazi/Libya Romney will firmly establish himself as the leading candidate right up until election day.

Highlar on October 17, 2012 at 9:36 PM

He’s offered dozens of incentives to various groups, if they only follow his byzantine set of rules

Burke on October 17, 2012 at 4:20 PM

If I am remembering correctly, this is a fallacy that Obama promotes, by calling tax BREAKS with tax CUTS. He has offered all KINDS of tax breaks all over the place for different reasons, and likes to label them as “tax CUTS” instead of what they are. A tax break means people/businesses pay the taxes first, then get money back later. A tax CUT is when they don’t have to pay the tax at ALL, which is much better for the economy. I’m thinking this is what he is referring to when he talks about “18 tax cuts” for the middle-class.

Highlar on October 17, 2012 at 9:42 PM