From:Biden Claims He Voted Against Afghanistan, Iraq Wars in The Washington Free Beacon

Vice President Joe Biden accused Rep. Paul Ryan of putting two wars on the “credit card,” and then suggested he voted against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“By the way, they talk about this great recession like it fell out of the sky–like, ‘Oh my goodness, where did it come from?’” Biden said. “It came from this man voting to put two wars on a credit card, at the same time, put a prescription drug plan on the credit card, a trillion dollar tax cut for the very wealthy.”

“I was there, I voted against them,” Biden continued. “I said, no, we can’t afford that.”

Then Sen. Biden voted for the Afghanistan resolution on Sept. 14, 2001 which authorized “the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.”

And on Oct. 11, 2002, Biden voted for a resolution authorizing unilateral military action in Iraq, according to the Washington Post.

…for more details on Biden’s misleading statements and inconsistencies read Biden’s Private Reality in The National Review

According to Project Vote Smart he also voted for the Medicare Prescription Benefit. He did vote against the tax cuts.

At the liberal Politics USA Jason Easly writes Paul Ryan’s 5 Biggest Lies of the First Half of the Vice Presidential Debate.

1). Ryan claimed the Obama administration has blocked sanctions on Iran and tried to stop them.

The truth: In July, the Obama administration ordered new sanctions on Iran. According to The Hill, “Obama signed an executive order that imposes new sanctions on the Iranian energy and petrochemical sectors to block the country from circumventing existing sanctions. The order also expands sanctions on Iran’s petrochemical industry by making the purchase or acquisition of Iranian petrochemical products sanctionable.

But:  While sanctions were imposed, exceptions were also made and this is what Ryan was referring to. Read here.  Perhaps there were good reasons for these exceptions but there was a basis for Ryan’s comment.  It is possible to disagree on the subject without being a liar.

2). Ryan claimed that Obama slashed security funding for embassies.

The truth: Paul Ryan and the House Republicans slashed funding for diplomatic security. According to The Washington Post, “For fiscal 2013, the GOP-controlled House proposed spending $1.934 billion for the State Department’s Worldwide Security Protection program — well below the $2.15 billion requested by the Obama administration.”

Really: “well below the $2.15 billion requested”- the difference using your numbers seems to be only 10%. Is that really even a significant factor? From USA Today:

Claim: Biden said Ryan’s budget called for a $300 million cut to security of the U.S. Embassy in Libya.

The facts: Ryan’s budget plan would have cut non-defense discretionary spending by 19% in 2014, according to The Hill newspaper. The blueprint doesn’t specify cuts to embassy security, but the Obama campaign says the figure — if applied across the board — would result in a $300 million decrease in funding for protection, construction and maintenance of all U.S. embassies. The Romney campaign disputed the claim, saying no specific cuts were recommended.

sorry but this is not a lie- it is just Biden playing with numbers, trying to mislead. also read here.

3). Ryan said a Medicare board appointed by Obama will be making healthcare decisions for seniors.

The Truth: According to PolitFact Ohio, “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act creates the 15-member Independent Payment Advisory Board to suggest ways to limit Medicare’s spending growth. It can be overruled by Congress. Its appointments will be done in public. It will not make decisions on individual cases.

HKO: this is just plain BS.  Whether or not it decides “individual cases” its influence will certainly impact available care. Just ask any doctor who deals with this stuff, and then explain why more and more doctors are not taking Medicare. This is certainly not a lie. It is a valid conclusion based on the law.

4). Ryan said Obamacare takes $716 billion out of Medicare for seniors, and turns Medicare into a piggy bank for Obamacare.

The Truth: According to, “Republicans claim the president’s $716 billion “cuts” to Medicare hurt the program’s finances. But the opposite is true. These cuts in the future growth of spending prolong the life of the Medicare trust fund, stretching the program’s finances out longer than they would last otherwise…It’s true that experts, including Medicare’s chief actuary, doubt that some of those spending cuts will actually be implemented.

Again BS:  A cut is a cut. Just to say that it will extend the life of the program, and the author even admits these cuts are not likely to happen, does not mean it is not a cut. Again there may be a difference of opinion on the justification and effectiveness of the cuts, but to call these cuts a cut certainly does not make Paul Ryan a liar.

5). Ryan claimed 6 studies guarantee that the Romney tax cut math adds up.

The Truth found that there aren’t 6 studies. There aren’t five studies. In fact, there are no studies, “But the five “studies” aren’t all studies and none of them was nonpartisan. Of the three that could be considered studies, two were written by Romney campaign advisers and a third was written by a former economic adviser to President George W. Bush.”

HKO : The tax cut math that Biden claim has never happened before has happened many times. While one may doubt the independence of these specific studies, history is clearly on Ryan’s side.  Calvin Coolidge, John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton (he raised income taxes, but cut capital gains and taxes on dividends), and  George W Bush all increased revenue dollars after cuts in taxes. Read further here and here.


Those who are so quick to brand the opposition a liar are trying to stifle debate by debasing them morally. The conservatives think the liberal are uninformed and can thus be educated into agreement, but the liberal think the conservatives are evil and thus not worthy of debate.  Calling them a ‘liar’ just like calling them a ‘racist’, is an intellectually lazy way to try and win an argument without wasting time on understanding. Both sides will use the part of the truth that furthers their arguments and may be presenting less than a complete picture, and common news venues for short attention spans encourages this, but this doesn’t make one a liar.

At American Thinker I recently wrote The Biggest Lie.


The biggest lie is not getting facts and promises wrong; it is the total denial of the truth.

It is a truth that a bureaucrat who makes decisions on your behalf is totally detached from both the benefit and the loss of that decision and will thus serve you poorly.

It is a truth that paying citizens with cash and benefits for extended periods of time will reduce their incentive to work and will keep unemployment high.

It is a truth that increasing the friction costs for employers to hire workers will reduce the incentives to hire and will keep unemployment high.

It is a truth that the uncertainty and volatility of taxes and fiscal policy and the mere threat of higher taxes reduces the incentive to invest and create jobs.  Capital will sit in low yielding treasuries and money market accounts, or will leave for countries friendlier to investment capital.

It is a truth that real wealth, human potential and creativity, cannot be controlled.  It can be allowed to flourish or it can be extinguished, but it cannot be otherwise micromanaged and controlled.

It is a truth that the best intentions when detached from economic reality can yield disastrous results.

Juvenile name calling may satisfy the true believers. Turning, twisting, and ignoring details to extract insults for public consumption may suffice for political strategy when there is no substance to employ.  But denying the truths and principles that have led to a prosperous economy is a far more egregious act and has caused far greater harm to the country.

Read more:

This obsession with so carelessly and recklessly accusing the opposition of lying is just a lazy man’s way of avoiding the truth.