Getty Images
Mitt Romney gave a speech Beallsville, Ohio, this week, and presented an unfortunate attack against President Obama. "How can you go out there and tell people things that just aren't true?" he asked rhetorically. He added, "This is a time for truths."
In context, Romney was referring to Obama's claim that "we're adding jobs in the coal industry." In reality, the nation really is adding jobs in the coal industry -- Romney was looking for an example of the president saying something that "just isn't true," and he pointed to an Obama quote that happened to be accurate, though he told his audience the opposite.
It's hard not to appreciate the ironic circle -- the president said something true, Romney lied when he said the accurate claim is false, and then he complained about falsehoods in the campaign.
I don't know the Republican candidate personally, but from a distance, it appears there's a part of his brain that allows him to create some kind of deliberate blind-spot. It's actually a little scary to think of a leader -- a man who'd be given enormous power and influence, literally making life and death decisions on a regular basis -- who can convince himself that his falsehoods are true, and that others' truths are falsehoods.
But here we are. If this is, as Romney claims, a "time for truths," I can only hope the Republican candidate will take a few moments to consider the 30th installment of my weekly series, chronicling Mitt's mendacity. (This is the biggest list I've ever done.)
1. At an impromptu event in South Carolina yesterday, Romney said on Medicare policy, "Our plan [has] no change for current seniors and those 55 and older."
That's plainly false. Romney's plan eliminates all new benefits for seniors under the Affordable Care Act, which necessarily means higher prescription drug costs for seniors, and more expensive preventive care.
2. At the same event, Romney argued, "Under the president's plan, [Medicare] goes bankrupt... Under the plan I propose, it is solvent."
That's the exact opposite of reality. Obama's policy strengthens Medicare's finances, and under Romney's plan, the system would be closer to insolvency faster.
3. In Chillicothe, Ohio, Romney said that under Obama, "We've got lower economic growth."
Actually, we got higher economic growth.
4. In the same speech, Romney said that under Obama, "We've got higher unemployment."
Actually, we got lower unemployment.
5. He went on to say the annual budget deficit has hit the $1 trillion mark under Obama for the "first time the history of our country."
Not true. The first time in the history of our country that the deficit hit $1 trillion was George W. Bush's last year in office, when the annual shortfall was $1.3 trillion.
6. Romney added that Obama promised "he'd get the unemployment down to under 5.6 percent today if we pass that $1 trillion stimulus package."
That's actually two falsehoods wrapped as one. For one thing, the stimulus wasn't $1 trillion (Romney's off by over $200 billion, and that's real money). For another, that's not what Obama promised.
7. Romney added, "You see unlike President Obama, I won't raise taxes on small business."
Obama has repeatedly cut taxes on small businesses -- by some counts, 18 times -- and if given a second term, his tax plan would have no effect on 97% of small businesses.
8. In an interview with Fortune magazine, Romney said the president's stimulus measures "have not put Americans back to work."
9. In the same interview, Romney said he would create jobs by "taking advantage of America's energy resources, particularly natural gas, as well as coal, oil, nuclear, solar, and wind."
Much of this is contradicted by Romney's own agenda. He opposes the wind production tax credit, no matter how many jobs it costs the nation, and has vowed to cut off investments in renewable energy programs (Romney has said wind and solar do not constitute "real energy.")
10. Romney went on to say, "A nation which is a highly productive nation as we are benefits by trade with others... The Obama administration has negotiated no new [trade] agreements."
Did Romney not hear about the trade agreements with Panama, Colombia, and South Korea?
11. Romney added, "We have to cut the deficit and get America on track to a balanced budget in order to convince investors that America is a good place to invest long term.... The president has done virtually nothing other than to propose a series of tax increases."
Actually, Obama proposed a massive, $4 trillion "grand bargain," most of which was made up of spending cuts. Congressional Republicans turned it down anyway.
12. Romney also said, "We're at a 30-year low in new business startups."
13. Romney went on to say, "I indicated as I announced my tax plan that the key principles included the following. First, that high-income people would continue to pay the same share of the tax burden that they do today."
At a minimum, this is ridiculously misleading. Under Romney's plan, high-income people would get an enormous tax break.
14. Romney added, "Obamacare is a tax. It's been so determined by the Supreme Court, and it falls predominantly on the middle class."
He's referring to an individual mandate that would apply to 1% of the population. And if President Obama's health care policy "raised taxes on the middle class," then Mitt Romney raised taxes on the middle class.
15. Romney also said, "President Obama raises taxes on the middle class. I will under no circumstances raise taxes on the middle class."
There's overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
16. Romney went on to say, "I will follow a model similar to Simpson-Bowles."
17. Romney also said, "I believe infrastructure is going to see very substantial investments over the coming decade."
He may believe that, but he's also endorsed a budget plan that drastically curtails infrastructure investments.
18. Romney argued, "I believe that you're going to see us having created 12 million new jobs."
If we do nothing, we're on track to create 12 million new American jobs over the next four years anyway.
19. In a televised ad, Romney said Obama "cut $716 billion dollars from Medicare ... to pay for Obamacare."
20. The ad goes on to say, in reference to seniors, "So now the money you paid for your guaranteed healthcare is going to a massive new government program that's not for you."
That's plainly false. Under the Affordable Care Act, seniors pay less for prescription medication and preventive care -- meaning the policy is "for" them, too.
21. At a campaign stop in Ohio, Romney said under Obama we're not "adding jobs in the coal industry" and not "producing more coal."
Romney's lying. In reality, we're adding jobs in the coal industry and producing more coal.
22. Romney said this week that Paul Ryan reached out to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) to "co-lead a piece of legislation that makes sure we can save Medicare."
According to Ron Wyden, that's ridiculously untrue.
23. In another attack ad this week, Romney once again accused Obama of "quietly ending work requirements" in the welfare law."
He's still blatantly lying.
24. In Beallsville, Ohio, Romney argued, "President said he'd cut the deficit in half. He's doubled it."
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.
25. In the same speech, Romney added that Obama has "raided that [Medicare] trust fund."
Obama has strengthened the Medicare trust fund.
26. Romney went on to call the Affordable Care Act an "unproven federal government takeover to health care."
There is no universe in which this makes sense -- "Obamacare" relies on private insurers, not a government takeover. (Also, it's not "unproven" -- the policy works quite well in, ahem, Massachusetts.)
27. Romney also said, "My number four [goal] is to stop spending massively more than we take in to get America on track to have a balanced budget. And I'll do it."
No you won'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.
28. Romney went on to say, "Seventy-five percent of small businesses in this country surveyed by the Chamber of Commerce said that Obamacare makes it less likely for them to hire people."
The "survey" is a joke. The Chamber, a pro-Republican lobbying institution heavily invested in helping Romney, put up an unscientific online survey. Treating this as a legitimate poll of businesses is fundamentally dishonest.
29. Romney also said, "I'm going to put work back into welfare."
Work hasn't been taken out of welfare.
30. Romney went on to say, "[Obama] said if you have a business, you didn't build that. Someone else did that."
That's not even close to what the president said.
31. At an event in St. Augustine, Florida, Romney said the president "won't want to remind people of Greece because that's where he's taking our country if we don't get off the road we're on."
32. In the same speech Romney said of the president, "He said he'd measure progress also by whether people were able to have a good job that kept them in their home and paid their mortgage. Well, 8.5 million homes foreclosed, a record level, is not success, Mr. President."
Putting aside how dishonest it is for Romney to blame the housing crash on the president, let's also not forget that Romney intends to deliberately avoid any efforts to curtail foreclosures.
33. Romney added, "I'm going to take every government program and apply this test: Is this program so critical it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it? And if it's not, we'll get rid of it."
This continues to be misleading. 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.
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, XXIX
Leave a Comment:
You know, for the first ten of these articles, I was pissed. For the next ten, I was flabbergasted. Now, it's just pins-and-needles deadened nerves. I'm not even surprised about any of this lying, and a lot of the public feels exactly the same way.
Romney's gaggle of Yes Men and sycophants are really failing him badly, and on top of just being a liar, it's not working out well. My mom is basically a libertarian (she voted for Ross Perot ... twice!) and she thinks that Mitt Romney is a total douche.
It's really sad what the GOP has devolved into, because there are no choices now. You either vote for some whackadoodle Tea Partier, or you take your chances with the Democrat. Or, you don't vote and take your chances of getting the greater instead of the lesser of two stupids.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a Democrat through and through, but I'd like to at least have to think about my choices. Right now, there's absolutely no choice, whatsoever.
When Governor Romney and his wife feel that asking for them to disclose their tax returns is an invasion of their privacy, and asks us to trust him, but he doesn't trust the United States and its citizens will be fair to them. Wow!! He wants a Bain-type deal to be elected President.
I say, " When a fox wants to get into the hen house dressed as a rooster, shouldn't the hens ask him to get undressed and prove himself?"
Romney has claimed that the release of the tax returns would be a distraction that could be gone through and used against him.
Why is there nothing to be used against Obama with his release of twelve returns?
Quite a contrast. Of course there is something Mitt is hiding.
And Mitt has lied about his tax returns in Massachusetts. He assured everybody that they were filed in Massachusetts when it was found that in fact they were filed in Utah. He knowingly told this lie.
Should we believe him now? Why would we?
Does this guy (Romney) just blurt things out to placate people? Jeez-he must really hold the American people in actual contempt. If these two clowns ( no disrespect to real working clowns) get elected-God help this country. It is like giving the keys of a semi truck to a 3 year old. Righteous Republican tea baggers-why can't we all work together to help make this country what it once was?
Whats even more frustrating is the lack of anyone calling him on it. They say the same lies over and over, and the more they say it, the more it become perceived as truth. Why doesnt the campaign simply run ads showing these lies?
12 million new jobs in Mitt's first term?
Republican Presidents first term avg 2,503,000 new jobs
Democratic President first term avg 6,727,000 new jobs*
Full Democratic President first term avg 9,925,000 new jobs
More jobs data:
Obama
Great Recession started December 2007
January 2008 = 115,647
January 2009 = 110,985 - NOTE: loss of 4,662 in 2008
Low point was February 2010 = 106,773 - additional loss of 4,212
April 2012 = 110,956 - back to where we were in January 2009 - 3 yrs 4 mos
-----------
G.W.Bush
Started his term with a recession.
January 2000 = 110,210
January 2001 = 111,631 - Note: jobs were added in 2000 1,421
Low point was July 2003 = 108,232 - loss of 3,399
June 2005 = 111, 844 - back to where we were January 2001 4yrs 6 mos
Jobs were added - to January 2008, then were flushed down the toilet.
-----------------------------------
We were half-way down the "Jobs hole" when President Obama took office and we kept falling.
We are halfway out of the hole but the distance we have climbed is farther than we climbed when led by G.W.Bush and it didn't take us as long.
Thank you for all this data. The only way to fight a bunch of liars is with hard facts.
Thank you so much for all this hard evidence.
Waaaa if this is nothing but a bunch of Horse C*&^. Liberal Lie out right.
Private sector job creation under President Obama has far exceeded private sector job creation under President Bush. 40 months into his presidential term, there are currently more private sector jobs in the economy than when Obama came into office. At the same point in President Bush's term, the total number of private sector jobs was still down 1.7 percent from where it began.
The numbers are even starker when measuring each president's record from the moment job creation returned. Private sector job creation returned in February of 2010, the 13th month of President Obama's term. Since then, the economy has added 4.3 million private sector jobs, a 4 percent increase.
Under President Bush, the economy stopped shedding private sector jobs in July of 2003, fully 30 months into his administration. From that point until May of 2004, the economy added just 1.5 million private sector jobs, an increase of only 1.4 percent.
But there is one area of job creation where President Bush clearly outshines President Obama: the public sector. Public sector employment is now down 608,000 workers since January 2009, a 2.7 percent decline. At the same point in President Bush's term, public sector employment was up 3.7 percent. If, over the past 40 months, public sector employment had grown at the same pace as it did in President Bush's first term, there would be 1.4 million additional people at work right now. That'd be enough to bring the unemployment rate down by nearly a full percentage point.
With few exceptions generally speaking, Corporate media is complicit in every lie the GOP purports. If corporate media does not correct the lies, then corporate media is as guilty of the lies as the original perpetrators. The thing is that the corporate media is paid by corporate America who also back the GOP overwhelmingly. Only 10% of Americans now trust/approve of political media. Americans know when the fix is in. Corporate media is corporate by definition. . Gobama!
One big lie is Romney's claim that people on medicare now will see no change.Any senior on medicare should be aware that prescription drug cost's will increase dramaticly especially if they have debillitating disease such as diabetes .It is possible to reach the gap within a few month's.Once we hit the gap we pay full price for brand name drug's.Under the AHCA we pay less than 50%for brand name drug's,then by 2019 the gap disappears altogether.Right now my diabetes insulin cost is $214.00 twice per month I pay $36 per month copay until I hit the gap.Then once I'm in the gap I have to the pay full price of $214.00 twice per month, but thank's to the AHCA I get a discount, I pay $90.00 twice per month.Under Romney's plan my cost's go up to the full $214.00 twice per month, under AHCA I save $248.00 per month.And that's just one medication,think of senior's that take more of the expensive brand name drug's.I hope you can understand my explanation.If so make sure you tell all the people you know whether senior's or not,dem's or repub's. Everyone will be affected sooner or later.
I'd like to add one thing to item 11: ""We have to cut the deficit and get America on track to a balanced budget in order to convince investors that America is a good place to invest long term"
Aren't investors literally paying us to take their investments right now?
"21. At a campaign stop in Ohio, Romney said under Obama we're not "adding jobs in the coal industry" and not "producing more coal."
Romney's lying. In reality, we're adding jobs in the coal industry and producing more coal."
Sorry Steve you're 100% lying, that's why you don't produce any charts:
http://ycharts.com/indicators/us_coal_production
@banned Re: #35
You are calling someone a liar and the "Proof" you offer is data that is not related and is incomplete.
The graph you provided a link to is Coal Production, not jobs in the coal industry.
The graph shows that after coal production dropped 2008 and 2009 (Great Recession?)- with some peaks and valleys, production stabilized and increased to nearly match that during 2004-2008 - again with peaks and valleys.
There is a dramatic drop in April 2012 - the last data point. what is the explanation for this? Is it just another valley among the peaks and valleys?
The links in the post "adding jobs" get its data from the WV Coal Production & Employment.
I can't believe you're up to EDITION 30.
once again, thank you for this service to your country.
Hey, maybe conservatives would read it if we told them there was a "XXX-rated edition". *grin*
Yes, thank you, Steve! I look forward to each new edition. Kudos for your tenacity, hard work, and service to others by Chronicling Mitt's Mendacities.
I love this blog, I agree that the main stream media should be calling
out Romney for his lies.
Here's another:
Mitt keeps claiming that there are 20 million people unemployed. The official level is 8 million. U6, which includes part-time and discouraged workers, is 16 million
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm
Beyond the reality of so much pathological lying is this earlier quote from Steve:
"I don't know the Republican candidate personally, but from a distance, it appears there's a part of his brain that allows him to create some kind of deliberate blind-spot. It's actually a little scary to think of a leader -- a man who'd be given enormous power and influence, literally making life and death decisions on a regular basis -- who can convince himself that his falsehoods are true, and that others' truths are falsehoods."
That's it in a nutshell: a man like Dubya who believes the lies he needs and runs the country (with a Cheney-like monomania) in touch with only that perverted reality.
There once was a man named Mitt
On his millions he may sit
And for whom a lie is a truth
And the truth is an untruth
As he would have the masses
Flat on their asses.
Right on!!!!
I think the only thing the Mitt campaign is contributing to is the price of olive oil...for bathing. Slippery.
So we're up to the XXX week just as we had the XXX Olympics. Fitting, I guess, for a blog post on mendacity.
While it seems that the list keeps growing, is is definitely great to keep this written history and to see the checking/refutation with each lie. I love charts, so someday it would be great to see some sort of chart where we can see which lies appear week over week and watch it grow. Since we're seeing a lot of repetition, it might be easier to just keep a running list on a web page and then link to that page item by item. If it made it easier...
I would love to see this kind of information used in coverage for the debates and even for the conventions: we can expect to see many of these claims trotted forth yet again. I wish that the mainstream media could just have these refutations on hand to review immediately after the debates, after the parties present their platform/sides. Usually after the debates, they have the partisan spinners ready to provide analysis, but why not cut to the chase and/or include fact review efforts immediately. We might be able to get a more substantive discussion rather than the usual talking points or evasive tactics on whether someone is "mean". Maybe people would be less aggressive/"mean", if they knew that they wouldn't keep hearing the same false claims, which I imagine leads to a lot of frustration. From the ongoing election reporting on each sides' campaign rhetoric, I imagine the news organizations would already have ready access to a lot of the pertinent facts.
Perhaps politicians would not repeatedly misrepresent things if they knew that journalists/media were keeping track of the lies and were prepared to call them immediately (and possibly repeatedly) on it, especially during nationally televised events. Perhaps...
Romney implication that America's debt is financed by China, while in reality China only holds around 8% of the USA's debt, hides some disturbing facts about Mitt's real intentions: Why China, Mitt? What did you consider China-USA business relationship something so disgusting as to deserve the disapproval of the American people? Why are you using the Chinese people as a justification to bring President Obama's government down? Is this the way you are going to do business with the second (soon-to-be-the-first) largest economy in the world.? Aren't you satisfied with alienating England, Israel, and Iran in one lazy summer trip? You are a threat to American progress and world peace, Mitt.
Guys I feel your pissed-off-ness ... (if that's a word), but I'm not sure this matters. Everything mentioned here is damning evidence that would cause any sane person to balk at Romney's bid for president. That's for liberals though. Consider the reason Romney is running. At least, the reason people are voting for him.
He's a disingenuous liar, but he's not stupid. He's seen the polls. The people who are voting for him aren't doing so because they believe him to be a great guy, or because they believe he's going to be an awesome president. He's a bouncer. The rich are backing him because of less taxes and less regulation. Everyone else either hates Obama, are die hard Republicans, or are mentally disabled.
Also keep in mind. The American public isn't the brightest. What the public knows about politics and government can fit into near full thimble. In order to win the presidency, he doesn't have to focus on facts. If you can confuse, create the illusion of false equivalence; what's real loses its force of meaning. Romney may be unethical, but it's the public that ultimately lets him get away with it. His campaign is a 2 minute Google search away from imploding. But are people going to do the search?
http://theprogressivesoapbox.org/the-abdicated-responsibilities-citizenship-threat-our-democracy/
I keep wondering why more of us aren't saying what you are, that we have exactly the government the majority of us are comfortable with. Not *us*, the relatively tiny number of liberals/progressives, perhaps, but the majority who choose not to vote at all.
That huge number of non-participants would seem to be dismissing all the historical struggles for the franchise that continue to this day -- unless you believe, as some apparently do, that non-voters are exercising their choice to vote by not voting, or effectively saying "none of the above."
News from DK today: among those not planning to vote this November, 2-to-1 are "Obama supporters." (my quotation marks; I don't buy that self-characterization) Yet we decry the GOP's carefully-planned efforts at voter suppression, while more than half of our neighbors can't be bothered.
It is difficult not to notice that many self-identified independents tend not to be, well, history- or fact-rich. Whose fault is that? It's theirs, yes, and it's OURS. We have wimped out, shying away from loud voices and judgmental oratory, avoiding hard discussions about common good and the Social Contract, shunning direct action when it is required; tearing up when we sing the Anthem while choosing to ignore the complex and sometimes tragic centuries of our history.
Thank you for your words, for the link, and for the messages there. I would add just a bit to what you say above: "Everyone else either hates Obama, are die-hard Republicans, can't be bothered to get involved, or are mentally disabled." I'm in no position to judge the last, but the uninvolved? There are more of them than there are of "us."
Rachel,
What would you call a person who has a history of telling lies, even when that person knows that evidence exists which would refute those lies? Well, I submit that that person is either incredibly stupid or that person exhibits characteristics of a sociopath. I do not believe that Mitt Romney is stupid.
Back when Bush/Cheney began spreading their lies of weapons of mass destruction, there was, actually, a fair amount of written opposition, pictures that were being debunked from their usage to support the lies, interviews with people on the ground. Our young daughter was in a bowling league and we would discuss politics with the other parents, pointing out that there was no proof of the weapons and so on. I had to give them kudos for at least listening but it didn't change anything. Their ministers had spoken to them from the pulpit that they were to support Bush regardless of the truth.
Does anyone know how much religious influence there is on this election? Are people still being guided in politics by their ministers/churches? Are there churches opposed to Romney because of his LDS background? And why is there SO MUCH that's off-limits to discuss anymore? It's politics, for pete's sake - it's supposed to be an offensive topic! If you're not offending someone, you're doing it wrong.
1776 (musical), Stephen Hopkins says, "In all my years, I ain't never seen, heard, nor smelled an issue so dangerous that it couldn't be talked about." And yet, even online, there is enormous restraint. I can tell Rachel frequently bumps up against the barriers of what she's allowed to say. How do we raise or remove those barriers?
I have been told that they won't discuss politics because her parents have lost friends over that.
I thought to myself "are you saying we may not be friends if I disagree politically and say so?" Sad.
I believe you speak in facts, but know many people I know don't agree. Please cite references so that I may share them. Thanks for all you do.
"Double-think" (noun): the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct.
How come a murdering tax cheat felon is running for public office?
'I will transmit this information to Vladimir'...
Now, why did I think the link was going to lead me to a story about Romney's Bain and the contras?
presidential best bet..Romney plus 150...get in on now ,and make some money..
Instead of describing the RomneyRyan plan for Medicare as changing "Medicare was we know it," I think we should start calling the RomneyRyan plan for replacing Medicare as "Vouchercare." Medicare versus Vouchercare. Which would you prefer?