Getty Images
Back in February, Paul Krugman argued that Mitt Romney is "running a campaign of almost pathological dishonesty." Was this an intemperate analysis? Perhaps. Three months later, does it seem fair? Put it this way: take a look at the 18th installment of my weekly series, chronicling Mitt's mendacity.
1. Romney promised in a speech this week, "I will lead us out of this debt and spending inferno."
Given that his stated agenda would add trillions to the debt, and Romney refuses to say how he'd pay for his tax cuts and increased Defense spending, the claim seems pretty misleading.
2. Romney claimed in the same speech that Obama has "bailed out the public-sector."
I really wish that were true. It's not.
3. Romney also argued that Obama has "added almost as much debt as all the prior presidents combined."
That's not even close to being true.
4. Romney insisted that the national debt is responsible for "the most tepid recovery in modern history."
That's ridiculously false. If the debt were holding back the economy, we'd have high interest rates and high inflation. We have the opposite.
5. Romney also said the national debt is the reason "half of the kids graduating from college can't find a job that uses their skills."
There is no universe in which this is true (or really, even coherent).
6. On the Recovery Act, Romney said, "President Obama started out with a near trillion-dollar stimulus package -- the biggest, most careless one-time expenditure by the federal government in history. And remember this: the stimulus wasn't just wasted -- it was borrowed and wasted."
The Recovery Act rescued the economy. Romney doesn't have to like it, but he shouldn't lie about it.
7. Romney added, equating the debt with a prairie fire, Obama "fed the fire. He has spent more and borrowed more."
That's false, too.
8. Referencing the Affordable Care Act, Romney argued, "Then there was Obamacare. Even now nobody knows what it will actually cost."
"Nobody" except the Congressional Budget Office, the Office of Management and Budget, and every budget expert with access to a calculator.
9. Romney argued that the Affordable Care Act is a "massive, European-style entitlement."
No, it's not. Most of Europe has socialized or government-run health care systems. Obamacare doesn't resemble France; it resembles Massachusetts' Romneycare.
10. Romney also insisted Americans "can't afford" the health-care reform law.
Actually, the ACA lowers the deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars.
11. Romney argued, "When you add up his policies, this president has increased the national debt by five trillion dollars."
That's an obvious lie. It's not Obama's policies that are driving the debt.
12. Romney claimed that more of the economy is being "absorbed ... into government."
That's the opposite of the truth.
13. Romney argued, "Medicare and Social Security are also easy to demagogue, and I expect the president to continue doing that in this campaign."
Romney has said several hundred times that Obama cut $500 billion from Medicare and is the only president to ever cut Medicare benefits. Neither is true, but both are excellent examples of demagoguery.
14. On gay adoption, Romney said "all states but one allow gay adoption."
That's not even close to being true.
15. The Romney campaign said of Obama, "He promised he would cut the debt, and he has not done that."
Obama made no such promise. He promised to cut the deficit, not the debt -- presidential campaigns really should know the difference if it's going to talk about these issues -- and Obama has cut the deficit.
16. Romney said of his controversial private-sector background, "We were able to help create over 100,000 jobs."
This is one of the more important lies Romney will tell this year.
17. On the president's watch, about 100,000 jobs were lost in the auto industry and auto dealers and auto manufacturers, so he's hardly one to point a finger."
First, the comparison is absurd. Second, the claim about the auto industry is demonstrably ridiculous.
18. On GST Steel, Romney said of his critics, "They said, 'Oh, gosh, Governor Romney at Bain Capital closed down a steel factory.' But their problem, of course, is that the steel factory closed down two years after I left Bain Capital. I was no longer there, so that's hardly something which is on my watch."
Actually, Romney retained full, sole ownership of the firm at the time GST collapsed.
19. Romney's campaign said yesterday that it's "clear" that the Obama campaign "is running a campaign of character assassination."
Asked for an example of Obama engaging in character assassination, the Romney campaign so far hasn't come up with anything.
I continue to think about something Fox News' Brit Hume said a few months ago. Reflecting on Romney's flip-flops, said, "You're only allowed a certain number of flips before people begin to doubt your character."
I'm curious -- is Romney also allowed a certain number of falsehoods before people begin to doubt his character? And if so, what is that number?
Previous editions of Chronicling Mitt's Mendacity: Vol. I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII,XIII, XIV, XV, XVI, XVII
Leave a Comment:
thank you for this service to your country.
I know I write this every week, but I MEAN IT.
my anger rises every week as I read this, and realize that you are one of only a handful of people in the press that focus on the depth of Willard's lies.
I totally agree with you. There should be statues of Steve Benen and Rachel Maddow (among a few others in the media world-of-words) in all the places where people who love truth congregate.
agree also .
We should start a Mitt Dictionary
First Entry
Truth : (N) Character assassination when told by a Democratic opponent.
We can fill a Websters in no time.
Hear, hear!
And I wish President Obama would give a shout-out to Steve Benen, which would force the so-called mainstream media to give this some attention.
Or maybe that's a job for Joe Biden (unsung hero of the vice-presidency).
I liked my own idea so much, I sent the following e-mail to VP Biden:
I just want to tell you I think you are doing a terrific job for the American people. A lot of jokes are made about the gaffes that come out of your mouth, but I think what comes out is honesty and decency.
If you are not aware of it already, I would like to point out to you something called "Chronicling Mitt's Mendacity." This is a blog entry published every Friday by Steve Benen on Rachel Maddow's Maddow Blog. Here is the url:
http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/18/11758220-chronicling-mitts-mendacity-vol-xviii#comments
Please consider mentioning these Mendacity Chronicles at every opportunity on the campaign trail. They are well written and sourced, and scrupulously factual, and they deserve wider attention. Romney's dishonesty isn't something the people and the media should be laughing off -- it is deeply disturbing; it needs to be scrutinized and held out in the light.
So, please, when the subject of Mitt Romney comes up, give a shout-out to Steve Benen, the hardest working progressive blogger in the business, and make Mitt Romney's mendacity the front-and-center issue it ought to be.
One word sums up Romney better than any other. "LIAR"
Yup. Everyone lies from time to time, but you have to be pretty pathological to lie so much that you can have the noun form -- "liar" -- applied to you.
Mitt Romney is a liar.
Is there no one at Romney's events who wants to be told the truth? If his audiences weren't so eager to be lied to, Romney would not be able to get away with this non-stop nonsense. But apparently he's giving his "base" what it wants, someone to makes fools of them every time he opens his mouth.
Is there no one who buys Playboy to read the articles?
They don't really need his help, do they?
Mitt Romney is a liar and even the republicans know that. I'ma little upset to "learn" that Scott Walker is "gaining in strength" over Tom Barrett in Wisconsin. Surely the republicans wouldn't mislead Americans about numbers. I will be very surprised and dissapointed if Walker come out ahead. What's the real numbers?
"...."running a campaign of almost pathological dishonesty."
If we take out the word "almost" - Paul Krugman would have been spot on! Once again Paul K. is correct.
No, it's not the economy -- it is the stupid, who fall for the lies that are destroying the great American experiment.
It is, however, true of both Reagan and GW Bush. (Or so I've read. That may not include adjusting for inflation, but I doubt Mitt is either.)
He lies with a look of such sincerity on his face! Guys like him always remind me of Ted Bundy, the serial killer who shmoozed and romanced the young ladies who became his victims.
Character assassination is so harsh. With Mitt I would like to propose character verification. Other than his wife and kids, who would vouch for him, under oath?
Frank Burns: I'll sue you all!
Hawkeye: No doubt for definition of character.
(Oh, God, I just realized that MASH went on the air 40 years ago this year. And I watched it new from the beginning.)
What is the number of falsehoods Rmoney is allowed before people doubt his character? As Buzz Lightyear says: To infinity and beyond!
Regarding #18, where Romney distances himself from jobs lost after he left Bain: doesn't this mean he can't claim credit for all the jobs created by Bain-owned companies after he left Bain? I know this came up before, the one time his campaign tried to justify the numbers and they included post-Romney-era jobs. But it seems he's boxed himself in by evading responsibility for post-Romney-era job losses.
Begin!
What continues to amaze me is how little anyone expects of his "character".
It seems to me that if Romney keeps talking about the debt, he is going to paint himself and the Republicans into a corner. After the conventions, Obama will be able to campaign on the theme that he has tried to get a bipartisan agreement to reduce the deficit in a balanced way with taxes and budget cuts. But Republicans are refusing to negotiate any deal that includes increase in taxes while demanding the Bush tax cuts be made permanent and massive cuts in domestic spending. The president can argue that the Republicans are going to be responsible for the tax increase when the Bush tax cuts expire which will reduce the deficit by half. Obama reduces the deficit while blaming the Republicans for the tax increase.
If Obama starts using this theme after he wins renomination, the Congress will reconvene in September and he will be able to beat the Republicans over the head for any failure to negotiate. That leaves Republicans two months to come to an agreement before the election. But they will not negotiate because of the pledge not to increase taxes. And that failure to negotiate will cause the increase in taxes. Republicans are not going to want to campaign on cuts in Medicare, student loans and a host of other domestic programs as a solution to the deficit because that will create voter backlash. And they don't want to be blamed for a tax increase.
Regarding number 6: "President Obama started out with a near trillion-dollar stimulus package -- the biggest, most careless one-time expenditure by the federal government in history. And remember this: the stimulus wasn't just wasted -- it was borrowed and wasted."
A lot of the stimulus package was dedicated to tax cuts (far too much, IMHO). So Romney is saying that the tax cuts were a waste of money? I thought that they thought that tax cuts were the bestest thing since EVER...
Actually, stimulus was much smaller,about $786 billion...and many of the projects were not shovel ready. Also, much of the money went to states for teachers, police and fire....another $billion and he could have done infrastructure jobs!
This list was wonderful....and I shared it on FB.
http://unitedrepublic.org/mccain-whitehouse/?akid=114.136857.sP5NRO&rd=1&t=1
Turn the Supreme Court ruling around NOW!
It's kind of sad - people who vote R arent going to care enough to look into this stuff. We have a govt that does stuff the ppl dont want done and that isnt in our best interest. Obama reversed some of that. Mitt will just make it worse mainly because the radical right will roll him.
So political speech is now subject to fact checking. Hmmmm. Are you folks going to vet Obama's promises and statements for follow through?
I always enjoy the implication that President Obama was not properly vetted and that somehow, we need to go back and do a more thorough job...I've heard this routinely inferred by the right wing media which has worked well as many folks now believe it to be true. This theory presupposes that Fox News, the McCain/Palin campaign and all their wealthy backers sat on their hands and did no digging. I find this difficult to believe. I find it even harder to believe that the Clintons did none of their own investigation during the long primary season. If I were a conspiracy nut, I would even suspect them of being the ones to point folks in the direction of Rev Wright!!! In any case, I have no doubt that these highly motivated organizations all strongly opposing an Obama election dug thoroughly into his past. Since what was found was effectively feeble, their are left with suggesting that no vet occurred. Ironically admitting their own incompetence...
Shooter242 - Yes to your statement and question. Are you suggesting that we should just accept anything and everything that candidates say as they campaign for political office? Or, when they are in office? That would be ridiculous!
If I recall the campaigning during the 2010 election cycle, many folks who won election campaigned on "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs." They got into office and "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs" was thrown to the winds and they began focusing on chipping away Rights and protections from fellow Americans. Therefore, in my opinion, are you folks going to vet their promises and statements for follow through?
Again, I will say this: Mitt Romney just wants to be President! He is not interested in governing! All he wants is the title and the pomp! Mitt Romney will serve as the puppet and front for the plutocrats headed by the Koch Brothers' syndicate! Mitt Romney is counting on Voter Suppression, his lies and misleading rhetoric, all who will just accept what he says, the negativity and divisiveness coming from his Super Pacs and the tactics being used by the Koch Syndicate to help him to achieve his goal.
Mitt Romney will be the agent to help to end our democracy and to change our Republic to a dictatorial Plutocracy. He doesn't care as long as he achieves his goal!
busbus I completely agree that all Romney wants is just to be president and also he will be the front man for the plutocrats. If Romney wants a smaller government then I wish the media would press him in naming exactly what agency's will be reduced. Exactly what is your plan Mitt ?
In all fairness we should consider the fact that Mitt is the perfect candidate--he lies just like the rest of the republicans do.
FOX and Rush must be proud of him.
GoldmanSachsDEM vs GoldmanSachsREP; either way, we lose!
Here's what disturbs me. There are so many people looking for the quick fix that will not lower their current standard of living, that they will believe anyone who offers that to them. And when it doesn't work, these people will readily assign blame to those most negatively impacted, because they are still are still looking for the quick, easy "doesn't affect me" fix.
The man even lies about his name. It is Willard, not Mitt
Inasmuch as it is absolutely stunning Romney lies it is alarming that he does so without fear of being called on it. Even if the media did, do you think it would make a difference given that his audiences have not even bothered to ask Romney to specifically address how he plans to create jobs, lower the deficit or exactly what he means when he vows to protect Medicare, etc., probably not. No they just take his word at face value.
When I hear someone repeat one of Romney's many sound byte lies I want to pull my hair out. But when they say something so ignorant -- with conviction nonetheless -- for example, "Romney will reverse the 'socialist' direction the country is heading" then it is obvious there is nothing that I or anyone else can do or say to change that.
Irrational fears based on myth & fiction have driven them into a blind determination to get rid of the man in the WH. If that should god forbid come to fruition, then & only then will they realize what a regrettable, horrible mistake they made by not asking questions. That is their fault for not taking off their blinders. It is the media's fault for not calling out Romney on his lies. Whether it would have made a difference or not we'll probably never know. But it might. Moreover it is the right thing to do especially while there is still time.
Paul Krugman is a progressive liberal and an Obammy shill for the White House. No one should take him seriously.