Tax Whisper

[fearthereaperx]

"It is unclear who it is that says it, but it was not said by any of the candidates"

NBC just reaffirms more credible evidence that Romney is being coached..they just theorize its from an audience member. could be true...and this same person could be his advisor as well.

 

[ArrestPoliticians]

Yay!! Lets give everyone more fire to call our campaign Conspiracy Theorists and Kooks!!!

YAY, POLITICS AS USUAL!!!

 

[amy31416]

This isn't the thread for that bling video (I am freaking amazed that it was actually true... anybody who thinks I'm a Mitt lover needs to realize I couldn't believe anybody could be so out of touch to say this stuff but I guess he did ...http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/who-let-mitt-romney-out/) It's for people who are calling me crap because I'm pointing out the obvious - there is no conspiracy here. The Paulbots are becoming just as bad as Bushbots ever were.

To think there is some evil conspiracy of debate rigging involving God knows who simply because of this one little thing displays, if not a lack of intellect, a lack of critical thought or at best, a desire to find conspiracies to such a degree that you have to come up with plainly idiotic explanations.

I'm not trying to win any formal debate, so the rules of formal debates don't bother me. Anybody who thinks that the clear answer here (and there are many of them in this thread) is that there is some MSNBC/Mitt Romney/dark evil forces conspiracy (they are even posting new threads about other voices they are hearing in video clips) is either not a smart person, or is a smart person with a very very intense need to believe in conspiracies.

You are right, I think it is more the latter that populate this forum than the former.

You couple that with OMG DIEBOLDZ COCUS RIGGGING OMG after every state's primary that Ron Paul doesn't get 87% of the vote.... it gets old.

So you admit to being gullible in *not* believing something so outrageous could be true?

I'll give myself the "touche" on that one, since I doubt you will.

If you must know, the notion that there could be some credence to the hypothesis doesn't come from my lack of critical thinking, nor does it come from being a conspiracy theorist (I'm absolutely not), nor do I come up with plainly idiotic suggestions-I didn't come up with this one, but I always look for more information and ask questions. Which is the thing that brought me around to Ron Paul, see. I'm a borderline obsessive-compulsive researcher. Some of the things that seem to be simple 'conspiracies' and easily brushed off, often have some credence to them. And I'm not talking about 9/11 or that sort of BS, I'm talking about the National ID, the slippery slope of the Patriot Act, manipulations of our economy, etc.

Not answering questions, implying I'm stupid for asking them is a ridiculous way to try to deal with anyone like myself. I'll only ask more questions and research it more. So, if Romney is being coached, I'd like to know and was interested in finding out, not concluding first that he was, and screaming it over the 'net.

With this issue, I'm honestly not even that interested in it because it will have zero negative affect on Romney and will not be covered, true or not. It was simply you avoiding the original questions and implying that I'm an idiot. My thought was not that you are a troll, but that you needed some help in communicating and reading comprehension.

 

[Swmorgan77]

Hmmm so both of the "whispers" happen to be during Romney answers and immediately precede him mentioning the subject that the whisper is about....

 

[Chadd Murray]

It sounds like paper being shuffled imo. It's a moderator or candidate looking through their notes.

 

[Chadd Murray]

It sounds like paper being shuffled imo. It's a moderator or candidate looking through their notes.

People hear all sorts of sounds when they go over video, that's why 'paranormal investigators' who listen to 'white noise' can sometimes hear voices etc. The human brain is trained to hear familiar patterns.

On top of that we have the bias that before you click the link it tells you that there's a whisper feeding him an answer... I think you guys are getting worked up over nothing.

 

[BeFranklin]

Someones telling him what to say in an earpiece?

Little CIA guy.

 

[reaver]

If you can find one post from a person who joined this forum before January 2008 with more than three hundred posts to their name who doesn't think Willard Mitt Romney was fed the answers to the questions I will drop the arguement. Otherwise, every single post about this being some 'reasonable' explanation are all coming from these people.

It was for Russert.

 

[Paulite]

It was for Russert.

kid yourself all you want. the reality is another

 

[Molly1]

That is very strange. Somebody whispering 'not support.' I do not support any new legislation.

Why would you need help making such a simple statement? And who would know better than you how to respond to such a simple question?

I don't know what to make of it.

 

[austinchick]

This isn't the thread for that bling video (I am freaking amazed that it was actually true... anybody who thinks I'm a Mitt lover needs to realize I couldn't believe anybody could be so out of touch to say this stuff but I guess he did ...http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/who-let-mitt-romney-out/) It's for people who are calling me crap because I'm pointing out the obvious - there is no conspiracy here. The Paulbots are becoming just as bad as Bushbots ever were.

To think there is some evil conspiracy of debate rigging involving God knows who simply because of this one little thing displays, if not a lack of intellect, a lack of critical thought or at best, a desire to find conspiracies to such a degree that you have to come up with plainly idiotic explanations.

I'm not trying to win any formal debate, so the rules of formal debates don't bother me. Anybody who thinks that the clear answer here (and there are many of them in this thread) is that there is some MSNBC/Mitt Romney/dark evil forces conspiracy (they are even posting new threads about other voices they are hearing in video clips) is either not a smart person, or is a smart person with a very very intense need to believe in conspiracies.

You are right, I think it is more the latter that populate this forum than the former.

You couple that with OMG DIEBOLDZ COCUS RIGGGING OMG after every state's primary that Ron Paul doesn't get 87% of the vote.... it gets old.

explain a second clip with whisper #2

 

[Chadd Murray]

That is very strange. Somebody whispering 'not support.' I do not support any new legislation.

Why would you need help making such a simple statement? And who would know better than you how to respond to such a simple question?

I don't know what to make of it.

It makes a kind of 'shhht' sound, but it's clearly (imho) just paper being shuffled...

 

[aspiringconstitutionalist]

It's your ears playing tricks on you.

There is a significantly delayed echo after everything he says, and the one after "I do not believe we need new legislation" and the echo of "-slation" sounds a little bit like "support," mostly because you're trying to hear it.

It's the same principle as hearing those hidden messages when you play records backward.

 

[Chadd Murray]

Nah I don't think it's an echo... just paper being rifled through, makes a shht sound, you hear the exact same thing a fair bit if you watch CSPAN lol.

 

[Molly1]

It makes a kind of 'shhht' sound, but it's clearly (imho) just paper being shuffled...

I have bose earphones.

First he says, "I do not believe we need new legislation"

This is a wishy washy statement, not strong, not sending a strong message.

He follows this with a very strong statement.

"I do not support any new legislation."

So I can see why you might want him to make the second statement, to hit it out of the park.

But, who knows.

An even stronger statement would be, "I will not support any new legislation."

 

[Chadd Murray]

Yea but politicians when they speak often repeat themselves/clarify to hammer home ideas.

As for bose earphones, it's not the gear, it's the person listening... there's a whole heap of possible biases/mindgames which could lead someone to thinking it's a word. In this case though I think merely reminding people of that paper shuffling sound should be enough to make them see through it.

 

[dannno]

I'm just gonna put this out there. After watching all these debates these past 8 months now why is it only today the first time we have heard whispers like this, obviously something was different at this debate to make us act this DIFFERENT after the debate. It could have been anyone, but why hasn't anyone ever done this before tonights debate? Mitt was given a shit load of time, the talking heads all praised him afterwards, and he was made out to be the star of the debate.

This debate is more important. It's closer to election time.

 

[Goldwater Conservative]

What I find most interesting about NBC's explanations is that they're reporting the whisper as saying "raise taxes" or "not raise taxes" when to me it sounded fairly clear, even when I first heard it live, that it said "HE raiseD taxes." That is, whoever said it was talking about Reagan and what he did in the past tense. Am I alone in thinking this?

 

[Drknows]

I bet we could find some more whispers....

does anyone have some good audio software?

The mics at the MSNBC debate were loud and crisp. I bet if you turn the decibels all the way up and filter out the excess noise you could hear more faint whispers.

I have a feeling.

 

[shaggy240v]

I'm not a backward masking or hidden messages kind of person but... if you listen closely,,, and maybe because the word support has been thrown out there quite a bit on this thread... I am hearing a whisper in there! And it does sound like the word support. I've went into this objectionably and listened for papers and I just don't here the papers.

Just my opinion...

RON PAUL RULES!!!!