Getty Images
Joe Klein reflected briefly on Mitt Romney this week, noting, "I can't remember a candidate so brazenly allergic to facts. What a travesty." Kevin Drum offered some related thoughts.
[I]t's common to twist and distort and cherry pick. But Romney has flatly claimed that Obama said something that, in fact, a John McCain aide said. He's snipped out sentences from an Obama speech and spliced the two halves back together so nobody can tell what he did. Then he did it again to another Obama speech. And he unequivocally said that Obama plans to drop work requirements for welfare even though he's done nothing of the sort.
This really is a post-truth campaign. It's different. It's one thing to be nasty. All campaigns are nasty. It's one thing to twist and distort and mock. Every campaign does that too.... But this is different. This is a presidential candidate just baldly making stuff up on the assumption that nobody will ever know.
The same afternoon, in an apparent attempt to push the 2012 campaign even deeper down the rabbit hole, a Romney spokesperson tweeted, "After months of distortions and lies, how can we trust anything the Obama campaign says?" She wasn't kidding.
Of course, if months of distortions and lies causes irreparable harm to a presidential candidate, Romney might as well pack up and go to one of his mansions now. To consider this problem in more detail, consider the 29th installment of my weekly series, chronicling Mitt's mendacity.
1. In a radio interview yesterday, Romney said of the president, "His campaign and the people working with him have focused almost exclusively on personal attacks."
That's both ironic and untrue.
2. In an attack ad launched this week, Romney said Obama "quietly announced a plan to gut welfare reform by dropping work requirements."
This is as obvious a lie as any presidential candidate has ever told.
3. In the same ad, Romney claims, "Under Obama's plan, you wouldn't have to work and wouldn't have to train for a job. They just send you your welfare check."
Even putting aside the racial subtext, the claim has no foundation in reality whatsoever.
4. In reference to voting rights in Ohio, Romney wrote on Facebook that Obama believes "it is unconstitutional for Ohio to allow servicemen and women extended early voting privileges."
This is ridiculously untrue. Obama wants servicemen and women to have extended early voting privileges, just like every other eligible voter in Ohio
5. In the same written message, Romney argues that Obama intends to "undermine ... the voting rights of our military."
No sane person could believe this.
6. In a speech in Des Moines, Iowa, Romney said, "Do you know what's happened to the median income in America over the last three-and-a-half years? It's dropped by $4,000 a family."
That only makes sense if we count Obama's first year in office, which relies on a standard Romney believes is fundamentally unfair.
7. In the same speech, Romney said in reference to the deficit, "Instead of cutting it half, he actually doubled it and more."
Maybe Romney doesn't know what "double" means. The deficit on Obama's first day was $1.3 trillion. Last year, it was also $1.3 trillion. This year, it's projected to be $1.1 trillion. When he says the president "more than doubled" the deficit, as he has many times, Romney's lying.
8. He went on to say in Iowa that Obama is "the first president in history to have a deficit above $1 trillion."
That's a lie. George W. Bush was the first president in history to have a deficit above $1 trillion.
9. Romney added, "He's on track in four years to put together almost as much debt held by the public as all the prior presidents combined."
Romney has said this before. It's still a lie.
10. Romney also said, "We must restore and I will restore work into welfare."
There's nothing to "restore"; the work requirements weren't removed.
11. In reference to the budget deficit and debt, Romney argued, "If entrepreneurs and business people around the world and here at home ... think we're going to get to a point of massive deficits and the potential for economic challenge, why they're going to have a hard time investing in America."
At a minimum, this is misleading. Despite our deficits and debt, there's a negative yield on U.S. Treasuries, with investors around the world willing to pay us to borrow their money.
12. Romney added, "[W]e're going to have to get ourselves on track to balance our budget and I know how I'll do that."
No he doesn't. Romney says his plan "can't be scored," but independent budget analysts have found his agenda would make the deficit bigger, not smaller, and add trillions to the national debt.
13. In the very next sentence, Romney said, "I'll begin by looking at every single government program and ask this question: Is this program so critical, it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it?"
The implication here is that U.S. debt is financed by the Chinese, but this isn't true -- China only holds about 8% of the nation's debt.
14. Romney went on to say, "[A]t the top of my list of programs we don't need is one that costs $100 billion a year I'm going to get rid of and that's Obamacare."
The Affordable Care Act doesn't add $100 billion a year to the deficit. On the contrary, Obamacare saves the country hundreds of billions of dollars. If Romney "gets rid of" it, the deficit goes up, not down.
15. Romney also argued, "I want to make sure that those with pre-existing conditions are able to get insurance."
No he doesn't. Under Romney's approach, millions of people with pre-existing conditions would be denied coverage -- and occasionally his campaign even admits it.
16. The Romney campaign last night sent an email blast arguing that Obama admitted he wants to do government bailouts for "every industry."
That's not what the president said.
17. In an interview with Bloomberg Businessweek, Romney argued that "higher productivity means higher wages for the American worker."
The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming. Productivity rates saw sharp increases during the Bush/Cheney era, but wages remained stagnant.
18. Romney told voters in Nevada this week, "I've been interested in seeing that the president continues to not only in speeches but in ads say things that are patently untrue. I've made it very clear. My tax policy will not reduce the taxes paid by high income Americans."
That's the opposite of the truth. Romney's plan, according to independent analysis, will reduce taxes for the wealthy, and these breaks will be paid for by tax increases on everyone else.
19. At a press availability in Nevada, Romney said, "The president has now raised taxes on the middle class."
He was off by only one letter: the president has not raised taxes on the middle class.
20. At the same event, he added, "I've laid out a plan that will get Americans working again, will create 12 million new jobs over these next 4 years."
If we do nothing, we're on track to create 12 million new American jobs over the next four years anyway.
21. Romney went on to say, "With regards to middle income Americans, I want to lower the taxes paid by middle income Americans."
According to independent analysis, Romney intends to raise taxes paid by middle income Americans.
22. In a different speech in Nevada, Romney claimed, "I know the president now has a plan to raise taxes on small business, taking the tax rate from 35 percent to 40 percent."
That's not true. Only about 3% of American small businesses would be affected by the higher rate.
23. Romney went on to say, "The president, the other day, you heard what he said. I simply couldn't believe what he said. It may go down as the most famous quote of his entire presidency. When he said, 'If you have a business, you didn't build that, someone did that for you.' He does not understand that it's entrepreneurs of all kinds that have built this country, free individuals reaching excellence, reaching for achievement."
That's not even close to what the president said.
24. At an event in Elk Grove Village, Illinois, Romney said Obama falsely claimed four years ago that "he was going to help create more jobs."
Obama has helped create more jobs -- over 4.4 million of them in the private sector.
25. Romney added, "[Obama] said if we passed his stimulus, that we would never see unemployment go above 8 percent."
As Romney surely knows by now, that's simply not true.
26. Romney blamed Obama for the fact that "gasoline prices have doubled."
To call this comically misleading would be an understatement.
27. Romney went on to say, "The president's solution for all these problems is to do more of the same. He wants another stimulus. The last one didn't work."
The last one rescued the economy from collapse, grew the economy, created jobs, and at least technically ended the recession.
28. Romney boasted, "When I was governor of my state ... we balanced the budget every year [and] we were able to build a rainy day fund of over $2 billion."
Actually, Romney left his successor with a deficit.
29. And Romney said his fiscal plan "is very similar to the Simpson-Bowles plan."
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, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV, XXVI, XXVII, XXVIII
Leave a Comment:
"11. In reference to the budget deficit and debt, Romney argued, "If entrepreneurs and business people around the world and here at home ... think we're going to get to a point of massive deficits and the potential for economic challenge, why they're going to have a hard time investing in America."
At a minimum, this is misleading. Despite our deficits and debt, there's a negative yield on U.S. Treasuries, with investors around the world willing to pay us to borrow their money."
Yes your reply certainly is misleading. If investing in America only takes place in Treasuries, then all the stimulus that has either passed or been proposed for the last 3 years makes no sense, especially as the context of Romney's statement clearly mentions entrepneurs and business people.
Why do you start off with a bunch of really strong Romney lies and then veer into this penny ante nonsense?
Let's also include the fact that it isn't the world that keeps our interest rates down. Most of the Treasury buying is by the Fed. It's also known as printing money.
Wrong again, dumba$$! Fed is not buying most of the Treasuries.
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/06/who-else-is-buying-u-s-treasuries/
"Mom-and-pop investors, and not the Federal Reserve, have been the ones most responsible for driving the mad dash to government debt, according to newly released data. The Fed’s ambitious Treasury-buying program has pushed the central bank’s balance sheet to $2.83 trillion and, by many accounts, the benchmark 10-year Treasury yield to record lows, most recently to 1.56 percent. But despite the low yields, it’s been retail investors most responsible for the recent move plunge. “The conventional view is that 10-year Treasury yields have been pushed down to 1.5 percent and 10-year (Treasury Inflation Protected Securities) yields to -0.5% by the actions of the Federal Reserve and the safe haven demand from foreign investors,” Capital Economics said in a research note. “The reality, however, is slightly different.” The demand among average investors has swelled so much, in fact, that they bought more Treasurys in the first quarter than foreigners and the Fed combined. Households picked up about $170 billion in the low-yielding government debt during the quarter, while foreigners increased their holdings by $110 billion. The Fed, meanwhile, ..."
QE1 and QE2 are so last year!
If you knew anything about Treasuries you would know that retail investors don't set rates, ever, anywhere anytime. Treausries are sold at auction to the large dealers who subscribe in various durations and amounts. After the auction, the bid to cover ratio will tell you how under or over subscribed a particular denomiation is.
So yes they buy, no they never ever set rates.
Wingnuts and wingnut kook libertarians since 2009 have been predicting high interest rates and terrible inflation. And they've been consistently wrong, wrong, wrong over and over again. Ain't gonna happen till the economy takes off.
The Fed foes not print worthless money; it buys bonds. Ignorance abound.
disgusted:
I agree with you. There's no chance of inflation without an improving economy
Disgusted,
Thanks for showing bb to be the idiot that he is.
"Romney boasted, "When I was governor of my state ... we balanced the budget every year [and] we were able to build a rainy day fund of over $2 billion."
Actually, Romney left his successor with a deficit."
Why do you keep linking the same incorrect website. He started off with a 2 billion dollar deficit, so in reality he cut it half at least, and the pooint about more debt per capita is plainly false on it's face since his predecessor had twice the debt.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/05/31/news/economy/Romney_tax_record/index.htm
Umm, let's see here, these are your 'figures and facts' so let's just take a look at what you are bringing to the table - "He started off with a $2b deficit," according to you, "cut that in half", so umm, ohh, dum-de-dum, $2b minus one half, doesn't that leave a $1b deficit? One half of 2 does equate to 1, doesn't it? Subtracting 1 from 2 equals 1 does it not? 2 minus 1 equals 1 period, end of statement. So, according to your own 'facts and figures', the statement that "Romney left his successor with a deficit" is NOT incorrect it is not false, you and your figures support that statement, and by your own account is indeed a fact. With further assessment of your 'facts & figures' you have, and rightly so pointed out that Romney's statement, "When I was governor of my state ... we balanced the budget every year [and] we were able to build a rainy day fund of over $2 billion" is a flat-out lie, (imagine that). Your post supports the fact that there was no 'rainy day fund' there was no balancing, and Romney, as is his usual, is fabricating and fantasizing his wanna-be accomplishments. So, what is your forever whining, rambling, and again, illiterate point?! The "incorrect website" that you refer to as being "the same incorrect website", supports the exact same figures that you just gave in this ignorant post. Your statement, in fact, gives the same figures published at what you refer to as "the same incorrect website". (That statement in itself says volumes about your intelligence and makes you borderline illiterate in that a website can't be incorrect, nor can it be correct.) Really, the more you allow your fingers to spew your rhetoric, the more evident it becomes that your mental capacity is limited. Learning to use your language effectively would give you a much better edge with your arguments - that is if there were any truth whatsoever within your ramblings. If there is one person in this world that cares for you, the most humane and kind act that they could bestow upon you, would be to glue your fingers to your wrists in an attempt to spare yourself of inflicting further embarrassment and degradation to yourself.
Meanwhile, please everyone, have some pity upon this poor soul - he knows of nothing of what his fingers are spewing.
I agree, but you were not very nice.
"When I was governor of my state ... we balanced the budget every year [and] we were able to build a rainy day fund of over $2 billion"
These are not mtutally exclusive concepts. It depends on whether the deficit was structural or not. States have a capital budget that is separate from their operating budget usually, unlike the Federal government, so you could balance the operating budget and still have a big hole overall.
getting your ass handed to you again, bb.
No matter how you twist yourself into a pretzel, you still are wrong, wrong, wrong.
LOL!
"25. Romney added, "[Obama] said if we passed his stimulus, that we would never see unemployment go above 8 percent."
As Romney surely knows by now, that's simply not true."
Your link is plainly wrong on it's face:
http://www.ampo.org/assets/library/184_obama.pdf
Whats more, since books like Confidence Men and The New New Deal have come out, we know that the "nobody had any idea" excuse is also false. Romer Bernstein and Summers in an effort to blame each other have disclosed that it was administration infighting that produced the figures in the report cited above. If you believe Romer, she thought that twice the stimulus money was necessary.
You seem not to be able to read or comprehend the thing you cite to.
Starting with the date. And the fact that it no where says anything about 8%. And the complete absence of any promises. Or the fact they the actual authors, neither of whom, as it happens, were Barack Obama, made it clear that they were engaging in rough modeling without knowing how bad things were really going to get or what the stimulus package Congress ultimately passed would actually end up looking like.
And wouldn't you know it, the data that came in later showed that unemployment was already worse at the time they wrote the report, by several percent, than anyone knew and the stimulus package ended up being both smaller and more heavily directed toward tax cuts than made anything other than political sense.
But then, if you belong to the party that thinks "bumper sticker slogan" is synonymous with "serious policy analysis," these kinds of things don't really matter much to you.
You mean you didn't read the Figure 1 chart?
"And wouldn't you know it, the data that came in later showed that unemployment was already worse at the time they wrote the report, by several percent, than anyone knew and the stimulus package ended up being both smaller and more heavily directed toward tax cuts than made anything other than political sense."
Well then you are calling Romer a liar, because she says she asked for double the amount of stimulus, more than was in the report, which doesn't align at all with your idea that nobody knew.
Looking at chart 1, I think I see where you're coming from, banned - but a picture doesn't mean the President said it. The report seems to have been authored by Romer and Bernstein.
As far as the amount of stimulus, it was clearly not as much as the President asked for - and not the kind of stimulus that would help. You know unemployment figures lag calendar dates, so the comment that unemployment was worse than anyone knew makes sense to me.
gene
Thank you for being civil. This report was the one sent to Congress and the media in support of the stimulus package (that's why it has embargoed on it)
As such it represents the official position of the new Obama administration put forth by his two top economic advisors. As far as the amount, it was almost exactly what the president asked however you are correct that the mixture was different than they would have liked
No economist on either side ever says I was wrong. They all blame bad data, as if somehow they had they only profession in the world where the results were data dependent if you know what I mean. All the people involved have since departed the administration because quite frankly they were poor choices, but that's another post.
Thanks again for being polite
Nope. 25 is correct.
- http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-09/politics/31138584_1_stimulus-christina-romer-unemployment-rate
- http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/feb/08/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-president-promised-peak-8-percent/
Yes, Obama wanted more but his advisers could not agree. Steve, the unemployment was down to 8.1 percent until the states laid off 600,000 of necessary employees. Keep firing gov't employees and unemployment will climb. The unemployment only climbed from 8.1 per cent to 8.25. In reality, unemployed was reduced from 9% in early 2009 to the present percentage. Obama did want a larger stimulus and his economic staff did not agree; thus, bye bye to them, but no one should forget the failed policies of Geitner.
disgusted:
That's the same incorrect information I debunked above. If they didnn't know how bad things were, why did Romer according to her later accounts, ask for a stimullus twice the size of the one in the report? The excuse making in the sources you cite doesn't jive with the facts.
Once busted, double down on your post.
Good work, bb! NOT! LOL
You debunked nothing. The figure asked for was based on a decision by a team of economists and took into account political considerations as well as economical ones. Romer, whatever the figure she suggested gave her estimate. There was no way the economists , specifically Romer, knew at that time how bad it was. Simply not possible. The burden is on you is to show the economists knew what wasn't known until Spring of 2011.
Wrong again, dumba$$. You're just making shhit up.
Note how this column has so hit a nerve that "our friends across the aisle" now lie in wait for its publishing each Friday in order to be able to get the first comment in. Classic. Keep up the great work, Benen!
Keeping track of all Romney's lies is becoming beyond the ability of the average person like me. Whether trying to figure out the Son of Boss scam, or following all the links and stories about Romney's ties to right wing death squads in El Salvador in 1984, it is very time consuming and challenging.
"20. At the same event, he added, "I've laid out a plan that will get Americans working again, will create 12 million new jobs over these next 4 years."
If we do nothing, we're on track to create 12 million new American jobs over the next four years anyway."
Sorry, that's a plain everyday lie. Here's what it actually says, not Greg Sargent's mistaken gloss:
How is this related? Oh, it's not. BTW, yes, we have added 100-300,000 jobs per month on average, meaning 5 miliion jobs would be lowballing it and 10 plus is possible with no new action.
you mean because i quoted the assumptions that the author of the 12 million jobs study used to get his number as plainly stated in the given link, it's not relevant?
ok
Congress has tried to make that deal in the past. Everything the pres. and senate try to pass, there is the barter system to contend with, one reason we are going nowhere.
mar:
Yes, that's why the assumptions in the !2 million piece were so unrealistic.
BTW, thank you for being polite.
It's nice to see a conservative acknowledge that not extending the Bush-era tax cuts for those over $250,000 would actually create jobs. I also agree with your implication that that specific tactic would be responsible for creating the bulk of those jobs, meaning that, yes, the point you bring up is a good one. It's just a strange one to bring up because it flies in the face of 30 years of governance that you yourself have supported.
Well, thanks for at least acknowledging that 1-10 are "really strong Romney lies."
#11 is just Romney repeating what all the Chicken Littles in congress keep squawking about the deficit. Yes, eventually high deficits can lead to inflation which weakens the economy. But there is no evidence to date that we are anywhere near an inflationary level of deficit, especially considering the weakness of the other economies in the world.
It's not just Treasuries, although the fact of negative yields is to me the best empirical indication that the world is still betting on the US. But the Wall Street indices are also generally back to where they were before the free-fall of 2008, if you consider that a better metric.
When the right inveighs against deficits AND taxes, it is proposing one thing: austerity. We can see how well that is working in Europe.
oh Romney is a serial liar, no question about it. I just don't think you need to become like him to beat him.
For instance his budget plan clearly does not work and his foreign policy wouldn't either
There is no danger of becoming like the Lyin' Sack of Mitt. Not in the least.
I'm going to have to disagree with # 1-11 being strong
So out of the first eleven claims three are valid. Like I said before, Benen is more interested in quantity, not quality.
There you have it. Our pathetic Mr. Mitty isn't convinced.
And tomorrow the sun will rise in the East.
Shooter - you really are exhausting:
1. The ad does not suggest Romney killed the woman, the Romney campaign know this as demonstrated by Andrea Saul (Romney Press Secretary) when she said “To that point, if people had been in Massachusetts, under Governor Romney’s health care plan, they would have had health care,” Andrea Saul, Romney’s campaign press secretary, said during an appearance on Fox News.
2. Republicans have not proved it is illegal and most importantly the President will later drop or change work requirements. Romney is definitely on the wrong side - as usual - but give him a moment he will flip.
6. Romney would not know the truth if it came up and bit him the rear. Your Pinocchio is the one is crying - please stop do not attack me on my business - oh but he is running on his business experience.is unfair. Whining doesn't change a fact.
7 and 8 asrre problematic in this respect.
It is literally impossible to tell what the deficit is on a randomly given day in January such as Inauguration Day. No such daily statistics are kept by anybody. It's all guesses with a wide variety in assumptions. I didn't refer to it because both sides are wrong in declaring that we can nail down these figures.
Well we can certainly nail it down to "not doubling," can't we dumbo? So they're not problematic.
"17. In an interview with Bloomberg Businessweek, Romney argued that "higher productivity means higher wages for the American worker."
The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming. Productivity rates saw sharp increases during the Bush/Cheney era, but wages remained stagnant.'
Correct, and in the Obama era and Clinton era and Reagan era and in every era since 1970.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/08/compensation_productivity.jpg
Since productivity has not correlated to higher wages for the last 3 decades, you'd think a smart businessman like Romney would know that.
He is saying, "increase productivity and wages will rise," and that is mendacious.
It used to be true, in the era before world competition and world markets. Now increased productivity for the same or lower wages is simply what is required to keep jobs in the US.
Now there is actually some fascinating (in a wonkish way) literature about why this is so from various angles, decline of unions, machines replacing people, tremendous reduction in transport costs creating a worldwide labor pool over national or regional ones, etc.
Mike: Increasingly lower American wages relative to worker productivity is indeed the price we pay for global competition to keep American businesses profitable for wealthy investors and produce record profits for American business with all the sacrifice coming from the worker. Social services the worker has been paying into all their work life, as in "entitlements", are needed as never before and are all the middle class has left which the conservatives want redistributed to business and the wealthy as necessary to improve the economy and get people employed, which is actually what we'd been doing since the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. All this Romney wants more of.
Again, the Fed does not print money, it buys bonds. Obama has released his birth certificate and it has been checked and rechecked. And what does Obama's transcripts have anything to do with Romney releasing tax forms? It is just a ply to back Romney whether he comes across with them or not.
Obama only has more debt than Bush because Bush's deficit is being added to Obama's. What about Medicare D (never funded), and the wars (never funded) plus others. I am not acknowledging here whether some of his policies were good or bad.
Even the middle class try to invest, not just the rich.
And why doesn't anyone mention corporate welfare and their incentives, loop holes and tax breaks if they hire certain people?
"No sane person could believe this", however we are in the United States of Amnesia and the bat-crap right wing will believe and have a frenzy. Mittens is Michelle Bachman in drag! Don't tell Marcus B.
1) Can we make Mittens go away, far away, and forgotton forever?!
2) Wouldn't/shouldn’t voter suppression -- and all this corruption -- be cause for a nice, big immediate revolution? ! Shall we spread the idea? or succumb to docilness.
Ryan for VP? He will run the show if Romney is elected.
"No sane person could believe this."
Sorry, we're talking about the sheeple GOTP here, they aren't sane, they're sociopaths! Selfish sociopaths! Rawmoney is the lead psychopath! While politics has grown courser especially this cycle - the level of lying, cheating, bribery, selling off to the highest bidder is truly astonishing.
Is it just me because - Social Security, Medicare, & Unemployment - are really paid for by working people and therefore add NOTHING to the deficit!! Why these programs must be on the chopping block when we could close:
1) mortgage loopholes for those making over $1 million dollars
2) loopholes for people like Mittens that off-shore both jobs and money!
3) loopholes for Rafalca - because if you can afford to buy/train/keep a horse - you don't need to deduct for it as though it's a child!
4) WELFARE for BIG OIL/COAL/PHARMA/AGRICULTURE!
5) Carried interest along with Capital Gains loopholes!
6) CUT DEFENSE SPENDING!
7) Loopholes for a whole lot of what's claimed as 501(3)(c) corporations!
8) Ending the war in Afghanistan, after all bin Laden is dead!
That along with raising the rates on the top 5%, should be a good start in getting our fiscal house back in order!
Zora I've asked this question before,even emailed Rachel.If Romney can take a $77,000 deduction for his wife's horse,can the parent's of the kid's that train for the Olympic's take that deduction also?Or is Rafalca classified as a professional dancer that work's for his oat's.
" "I know the president now has a plan to raise taxes on small business, taking the tax rate from 35 percent to 40 percent."
uh, no....there's a proposal to raise the top marginal tax rate from 35% to 39.6%...certainly not the total tax rate
And that is only on 'earned income' which excludes the income from capital, which is basically what the wealthy are most concerned about.
the big picture here is that the GOP strives to establish an autocracy that takes care of the 1% and especially the .01%. They don't like that we are quickly moving toward a population shift of many cultures (scary darker skinned folks) that threaten their version of America A version that resembles an episode of "Leave it to Beaver" where the biggest problem is that the Beve loses his lunch money . . .
Just think about what the conservatives are trying to conserve . . . Not voting rights for elderly, African Americans or students. We are witnessing a daring daylight robbery of voting rights and the press is completely out to lunch . . .
A non-functioning press if informing the public is the job/purpose/mission of the Fourth Estate. The standard exchange being a press (or show host) question getting a self-serving campaign statement without giving an answer germane to the question and thus no information that is necessary for making informed decisions about those people who are not giving us that information. Plenty of misinformation, though, that serves to confuse and waste resource proving false.
The press is not out to lunch. They are owned by and their daddies are the same people that are doing all this. Therefore, they are a part of it.
In regards to "After months of distortions and lies, how can we trust anything the Obama campaign says?" I am gonna keep repeating this 'til I'm blue! When the Republicans/Romney do something particularly egregious, they immediately blame Obama for doing it...to take the heat off them. See Fehrstrom TODAY...It is the way they roll.
Every news station should be running with this story 24/7, not questing for a false equivalency between the two campaigns. The fact that a man who could be president of the U.S. has repeatedly lied to the entire country - and surely is not done yet - should be the only thing we're talking about. As the Drum article notes, "...it's common to twist and distort and cherry pick... But this is different. This is a presidential candidate just baldly making stuff up on the assumption that nobody will ever know." Romney's lies are easily proven. These aren't opinions, they aren't spin, or even malicious distortions - they're willful propaganda and flat-out lies, and if you're not aware of it, you're not fulfilling your obligation as a citizen of this country.
The man is an inveterate liar! This must be somebody's full time job (see, he IS a job-creator!).
thank you for this service to your country
It's true that Mitt's spin on the electoral situation in Ohio is easily disproved. But since he isn't admitting to it, and since his followers won't believe it if it's disproved by someone other than the candidate, they're still publicizing it. Over the last three days, I have gotten several posts about this. People are creating memes that are "too good" not to share. And this stuff gets shared and shared and shared. Logic and truth are not going to change minds. Spin and sourcing are the only things that will do so. If you're predisposed to believe only Republicans, disproving things from a Democratically-leaning position is simply not going to be believed.
Thanks!.....I'm sure, "He" will keep the lies coming.
There should be a list of all his lies on one page.
they won't fit on one page!
How can you tell mit the twit is lying? His lips are moving.
Shooter,I really hate myself whenever i do this,but i will over simplyfied it for you : You are certified idiot.
I'll bet that this does not get a good reception but, here goes my opinion . Everything the Democratic Party and Obama say is filled with lies . Thanks to Obama and his party thousands of aerospace and coal workers not to mention construction no longer have jobs .
Four more years of Obama and the U.S.A. will no longer be the home of the Free and brave . We will be just another socialist country like France .
As soon as Obama releases his college transcripts and real birth certificate then Romney will release his tax records .Sounds like a reasonable exchange of information to me as a legal UNITED STATES CITIZEN .
Well the French don't seem to lead a horrible life :) Pass the croissants!
Both of our canidates suck..next
Glad to see some truth about Mitt!
Maybe your candidate (if you are a Democrat) might not be a good choice but , my choice for President and his V.P. are sure to at least try and bring back the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA that our founders set up in 1776.