Getty Images
There's often a gap between Romney's rhetoric and reality.
There may come a point at which the issue of Mitt Romney's propensity for falsehoods reaches some kind of critical mass. In fact, we may have already reached that point.
David Bernstein argued persuasively this week, "I think we've seen, over the past couple of months, an important tipping point where much of the national political media now recognizes ... that, in the Romney campaign, they are dealing with something unlike the normal spin and hyperbole. They are realizing that Romney and his campaign simply cannot be trusted, in any way, about anything."
I thought of Bernstein's piece on Tuesday when MSNBC's "Morning Joe" did two segments on Romney lying, rather blatantly, about his record on health care. It came the day before Rick Santorum also began targeting Romney as someone willing to "not tell the truth" to win.
Once a candidate earns a reputation for being shamelessly dishonest, it's awfully tough to reclaim a degree of credibility. And with that, here's this week's installment of Romney's biggest falsehoods of the week.
1. Commenting on his health care reform law in Massachusetts, Romney told voters in Ohio this week, "Early on, we were asked if what you did in Massachusetts should be something you'd have the federal government do? I said no from the very beginning. No. This is designed for our state and our circumstance."
2. Romney said of President Obama and veterans' health care, "He's going after TRICARE. Saying, 'Ok, we're going to raise the co-pays. We're going to cut the benefits.' Why is it we go after military families?"
This isn't even remotely accurate.
3. Romney said of Obama this week, "He gave a speech the other day at his State of the Union address. He didn't even mention the deficit or the debt."
Obama mentioned the deficit and the debt six times in his State of the Union address.
4. Pretending to understand U.S. policy in Iran, Romney said Obama "failed" to place sanctions on Iran.
That's the opposite of reality.
5. Also on Iran, Romney said this week that Obama "failed to communicate that military options are on the table" with regards to Iran's nuclear program.
That's also the exact opposite of reality.
6. On Tuesday night, Romney said Obama has "doubled" the deficit.
It's amazing Romney keeps saying this -- he's either lying or he's bad at arithmetic. When Obama took office, the deficit was about $1.3 trillion. Last year, it was $1.29 trillion. This year, it's on track to be about $1.1 trillion. Does Romney not know what "double" means?
7. In the same speech, Romney said Obama "lost our AAA credit rating."
No, actually, he didn't.
8. In the same speech, Romney argued, "President Obama wants to raise your taxes; I'm going to cut them."
Actually, Obama only wants to raise taxes on those making over $250,000 a year. Romney proposes massive tax breaks, except for those struggling most -- their taxes would go up under Romney's plan.
9. On Social Security and Medicare, Romney claimed, "I have a plan that saves both of them, and I have the courage to put that plan on the table."
No, actually, he doesn't -- at least not yet. Romney has presented no details about his "plan" for Medicare and Social Security.
10. Romney told AIPAC that Reagan's philosophy of "peace through strength" is why "the Iranians released the hostages on the same day and at the same hour that Reagan was sworn in."
Romney isn't just lying about what transpired in 1981; he's making a claim that's laughably untrue.
Paul Waldman wrote this week, "So here's my question: Just what will it take for reporters to start writing about the question of whether Mitt Romney is, deep within his heart, a liar?"
With each passing week, I find myself asking the same question.
Leave a Comment:
Concerning number 8
8. In the same speech, Romney argued, "President Obama wants to raise your taxes; I'm going to cut them."
Actually, Obama only wants to raise taxes on those making over $250,000 a year. Romney proposes massive tax breaks, except for those struggling most -- their taxes would go up under Romney's plan.
If you look at who votes for Romney in the primaries, and who is likely in the audience, this might be accurate. Obama will raise taxes on those making over $250k and Romney want to cut them. So "young" blogger, it might be true, from a certain (distorted, twisted) point of view.
Of course this would mean that only very wealthy individuals would be listening to the speech. But if that is his only constituency, good for the rest of us.
It's a republican tradition to lie remember Kyl from Ariz. saying 99% of planned parenthood money went to abortions on the floor of the congress. Then he didn't have the huevos to come out and say he lied and apolgize he let his staff make an announcement it wasn't meant to be a factual statement????? Duh?????
So the best thing to do is think, if their mouths are moving their lying !!!!!!!l
Concerning number 8
8. In the same speech, Romney argued, "President Obama wants to raise your taxes; I'm going to cut them."
Actually, Obama only wants to raise taxes on those making over $250,000 a year. Romney proposes massive tax breaks, except for those struggling most -- their taxes would go up under Romney's plan.
Dear blooger, this may be true from a certain point of view. If you recall from the data, the only group to vote for Romney were those whose incomes are above $100k. Maybe he is assuming that everyone listening to him makes $250k a year (who else can take the time to go see him during the day). He only wants to be president of those anyway.
The thing that kills me is Mitt lies so MUCH the voters will be able to believe anything he says he'll do cuz he's said it at least ONCE. And just for fun..I sent this to a friend and he sent back
'The audacity of mendacity'....yep.
At least one MSM pundit has called Romney a liar:
Date: December 5, 2011.
Who?
Nah, you'll never guess. Of all MSM pundits, this guy's got to be one of the most unlikely to call Mitt out on this.
If this place had spoiler tags, I'd hide the name in a spoiler. Instead, I'll just leave y'all to try to guess (no fair Googling the quote!), and pop back in later tonight with the answer and a link.
As far a Mitt being a Mormon he was a deacon for the Latter Day Saints and something else of a higher power then that years ago ... which leads me to believe the possibility that he was fraudulent with his tax returns at some point and claimed to be exempt from paying taxes.
I for one think it is time all houses of religion should start paying taxes. Syndicated TV evangelists are at the top of the list.
As far as his lying ability ...
I dont know ... just thinking here why or what was his problem of not wanting to disclose his tax information. He was found fraudulent with Bain Capitol but was never held accountable ... left Bain but with a stipulation where he still receives money ... somehow someway he come out smelling like a rose. He basically went to France during the Vietnam war and stayed there till his draft # was 300. So he is a draft dodger. Returning when it was safe to come back to America.
He has major anger issues as well from what I have heard from a source during the Olympics. He was stopped military police and because he was asked to see documentation of who he was he became belligerent to the MP. Basically ripping him a new A hole. The MP was only doing his duty as MITT had placed high security ... it was his baby afterall. Anyway any young soldier I doubt would know at the time what Mitt even looked like.
Romney was a bishop, which is the equivalent to a Roman Catholic parish priest (a parish is called a ward among Mormons, for the record). I'm not certain what you mean by "higher power." Romney was never more than a bishop. The next rank up in the Mormon hierarchy is called a 'stake president' ('stake' being the equivalent to diocese, making a stake president equal to a Roman Catholic bishop). At the ward and stake levels, Mormon 'clergy' are unpaid and part-time gigs.
As for the rest about taxes, I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Apart from the fractured grammar, I'm not aware of Romney having every claimed he was exempt from paying taxes.
I am sorry about my mistaken remarks and did not think they were posted. I have been trying to look into how to delete and repost. You are right he was a bishop ... the higher power that I was referring to was the 'stake president' as you stated. So thank you for correcting my post.
I have never posted in this forum and was not sure as to how it all worked. A bit slow when I noticed I had time to change things it had become to late.
The next rank up in the Mormon hierarchy is called a 'stake president' ('stake' being the equivalent to diocese making a stake president equal to a Roman Catholic bishop). At the ward and stake levels. Mitt Romney was a 'stake president' FYI
What I am "trying" to say is all religions are and have been exempt from taxes and I think its about time to put an end to it.
OK, I get you now. I was reading it as if Romney personally was claiming to be exempt from taxation. I'm sure that, deep in the empty socket in his chest where a heart normally would sit, he would like to be personally exempt, but I doubt that even Mr. Corporations-Are-People would say that out loud.
As for religious entities losing tax-exempt status, you may get your wish. At least partly. There's been a movement among religious-right groups to challenge the ban on political advocacy by tax-exempt groups. In case you haven't heard of this yet, they make their challenge by endorsing candidates from the pulpit in order to try to attract the wrath of the IRS in order to challenge the ban in the courts. The simplest way around the ban is just to get rid of the exemption, but these wingers want it both ways. If they cause enough trouble, maybe the IRS will have the stones to just take away their tax exempt status. Considering what a big money-maker religious-right groups have become, that probably would make sense from a federal revenue point of view.
I had wondered IF Romney was not wanting to show documentation of his tax returns to the public because he may have found a way or loop hole to declare him to be exempt. Using and or abusing the system.
I think he has come up with proof of some kind so I have been told of his tax returns ... but what was the hold up if nothing to hide. Or was he just buying time to get the proper paperwork in order before being presented. Money can buy you a lot these days.
Happy to hear the possibility of religious entities may be losing their tax exempt status. Its time, NO one has a free ride to heaven. Charitable donations could still be used as a write off ... so the proof of how much they contribute is noted and deducted. HOW do we know how much they are helping vs how much they are stuffing in the pockets. Sin-Dictated (intentional play) TV evangelical churches are at the top ... of the list. BUT to be fair its across the board. NO one is exempt from death or taxes!
As far a Mitt being a Mormon he was a deacon for the Latter Day Saints and something else of a higher power then that years ago ... which leads me to believe the possibility that he was fraudulent with his tax returns at some point and claimed to be exempt from paying taxes.
I for one think it is time all houses of religion should start paying taxes. Syndicated TV evangelists are at the top of the list.
As far as his lying ability ...
I dont know ... just thinking here why or what was his problem of not wanting to disclose his tax information. He was found fraudulent with Bain Capitol but was never held accountable ... left Bain but with a stipulation where he still receives money ... somehow someway he come out smelling like a rose. He basically went to France during the Vietnam war and stayed there till his draft # was 300. So he is a draft dodger. Returning when it was safe to come back to America.
He has major anger issues as well from what I have heard from a source during the Olympics. He was stopped by the military police and because he was asked to see documentation of who he was he became belligerent to the MP. Basically ripping him a new A hole. The MP was only doing his duty as MITT had placed high security ... it was his baby afterall. Anyway any young soldier I doubt would know at the time what Mitt even looked like.
When does he become a God and how many brothers and sisters did Jesus have again? I forget. This is why there needs to be a separation of religion and state.
He has to die first. And I'm going to back away from that line of thinking right now.
I am very interested in what the Mormon dogma is on lying. Do they regard it as a major affront to their religion or are they more into the idea that it isn't a big deal?
If anyone knows, I would appreciate hearing it.
There's a post above that cites literal chapter and verse. No, it not grinned upon. Why attack religion anyway? There's plenty of substantial evidence on this world we can safely object to.
And it's only there because of a sarcasm fail. Still, I preemptively answered dkm's question, so not a complete waste of time.
Steve - word to the wise. When I first started practicing law, someone told me not to use roman numerals to number paragraphs or sections, but use Arabic numbers instead. Why? Because if the pleading is very long, roman numerals get pretty confusing pretty fast. It's that way for the Super Bowl and we're only in the forties. Who knows what all those Cs and Ls mean?
A list of Romney's lies is going to surpass the number of Super Bowls very soon, and will most likely exceed even the longest pleading on record. OTOH, you will get to use M, maybe even MM, and that's kind of cool.
You critics of the guy's religion are as irrelevant as most GOP discussion these days. Who cares about his personal beliefs? Don't we have enough reason to criticize these dolts without scraping that barrel? Put yourself above the fray: stay relevant. Avoid pointless and distracting ad hominem attacks; they are the province of the Rove-inspired right. No one knows a damned thing about religious truth; no one. Who knows? The Mormons might be right! Certainly there's no data this side of the grave. Why not focus on the wrong we know is being done, as Maddow & Co. are herein doing so well?
When do the articles on Obama's lies get featured? I would be interested in that...
When do the articles about Obama's lies come out? Patiently waiting...
Your going to be waiting a long time there aren't any.
Mr. Romney began this year with a Television AD that attributed John McCain's words to the President. He hasn't changed his lying ways and instead doubled down. He can't be believed in anything he says. He can only be believed in his desire to be the President in the worst way. And, like Bush, he would be the worst.
I think the Republicans realized long ago that confirmation bias wins out over the truth, that is, the majority of their audience is not interested in the truth and just wants to hear what they already believe to be true. It's a strategy that works pretty well, actually, especially with a mostly submissive media that is reluctant to challenge any statements by anyone (at least not in the moment). What we need are some journalists with some gonads.
American politics!
Quote from Professor Krugman
(America's) political culture has become not just dysfunctional but deeply corrupt.
My own opinion: America is and Americans are deeply dysfunctional. Yes, I am trying to leave.