Last week, Mitt Romney pretended to be amazed. "[I]n the past, when people pointed out that something was inaccurate, why, campaigns pulled the ad," Romney said. "They were embarrassed. Today, they just blast ahead. You know, the various fact-checkers look at some of these charges in the Obama ads and they say that they're wrong, and inaccurate, and yet he just keeps on running them."
It was among the more ironic complaints ever registered by anyone.
Romney launched a ridiculous welfare lie two weeks ago. People pointed out that it's inaccurate, but instead of feeling embarrassment and pulling the ad, Romney just blasted ahead, even after the various fact-checkers proved the smear isn't true. Today, the post-truth campaign continues apace.
In this new spot, released this morning, Romney once again accuses President Obama of "gutting welfare reform," by ending the work requirement in the law. While the Romney-Ryan ticket has been talking a lot about Medicare, the advertising focus has been on welfare -- this is the third ad Team Romney has released on the subject in the last 11 days.
For those who still care about reality, Romney's lying. Two Republican governors asked the Obama administration for some flexibility on the existing welfare law. The White House said that'd be fine, so long as the work requirement isn't weakened. It's consistent with the policy endorsed by many Republican governors, including Mitt Romney himself, just six years ago.
Indeed, with reality in mind, just about everyone -- Democrats, Republicans, reporters, editors, fact-checkers, policy wonks -- is well aware of the fact that Romney's blatantly lying. It is as demonstrably dishonest as any claim ever aired by a major-party presidential candidate -- it's not spinning details; it's not hiding in gray areas; it's just making up garbage to deceive the public. Worse, the racial subtext of the disgusting smear only adds insult to injury, raising questions anew about Romney's character and just how far he'll go to acquire power.
What's more, to reiterate a point from last week, if Obama were as awful a president as Romney claims, the Republican attack machine wouldn't have to make stuff up -- the truth would be so brutal that voters would recoil and flock to the GOP candidate naturally. What does it say about Romney's strength as a candidate that he has to make up garbage and hope voters don't know the difference?
And then there's an even larger question: shouldn't this be a scandal?
I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the political world's strange standards. If a super PAC puts a video online with a dubious timeline, it's a multi-week scandal, and evidence of a campaign stuck in the gutter. If Vice President Biden uses a poorly-worded, off-the-cuff metaphor, it's a multi-week scandal, and proof that 2012 has become excessively ugly.
But if Mitt Romney gets caught repeatedly making an unambiguous, racially-charged lie, it's seen as somehow routine.
Why do gaffes and unaired web ads dominate the political world's attention, while shameless lying leads to shrugged shoulders?
Look, I realize politicians, especially those seeking national office, are known for stretching the truth, and the elasticity of our standards accommodate quite a bit of "spin." But the welfare smear is based on a clear falsehood -- Romney is saying a work requirement was removed that was not removed. When campaign officials and surrogates have been asked to defend the claim, they've come up empty.
So why does Romney keep repeating the lie? Because he thinks voters are idiots and he's certain political journalism isn't equipped to deal with a campaign predicated entirely on falsehoods.
This remains, in other words, a test. The fact that Romney feels confident in his ability to lie with impunity -- effectively taunting reality -- suggests the American political system is failing this test badly.
Leave a Comment:
"...shouldn't this be a scandal?"
In a reality based, truth-telling media world - yes the citizens should be outraged and the candidate should quit. But in the hypocrisy led, amoral fantasy world of liars and illusionists it's standard fare...Unfortunately!
Mittens can NOT say what he would really like to say to his white audience about the 'lazy welfare queens' so is the closest set of buzz words to "n!gger, n!gger, n!gger".
Bill and Hillary need to get out in front of this . Put the LIE on the front burner. Call them out as Romney feels fine about using their images in his adds. They should be blasting it non stop until the stenographer corps and chattering classes sit up and take notice.
>> But if Mitt Romney gets caught repeatedly making an unambiguous, racially-charged lie, it's seen as somehow routine.
Because for the Romney campaign, "unambiguous, racially-charged lie" is routine.
Its too bad that TV stations cant refuse to air ads they know are blatantly false. What I would love to see is each ad carry a rating like TV shows do. It would be a truthfulness rating. The rating would be assigned by some third party fact checking group. It couldnt air unless it was rated.
Maybe this is a weak link? Sue the TV stations for complicity for the act of libel?
The Supreme Court, with its recent decision on people who were wearing military awards that they have not earned, stated that lying is free speech and protected.
Lying is free speech. Libel (harming someone's reputation with a lie) is not.
Good grief, Eileen from PA. Just because something is protected as free speech doesn't mean it shouldn't be responded to, or that the press shouldn't report it as such!
Lie, double down on your lie, then call your opponent a liar..
Please don't blame the media,, real journalism cuts into the bottom line..
Lie, double down on your lie, flip flop, lie about flip floping, call your opponent a liar,,, seems like if you lie about both sides of an issue,, you might be accidently telling the truth part of the time...
It should be a scandal, yet my local news keeps reporting Romney/Ryan's disgraceful, dishonest tactics through endless variations of,
"The Romney and Obama campaigns traded more barbs today over which of the candidates would best handle welform reform and Medicare... Romney accuses the president of "gutting" both programs, while the Obama campaign says the Romney plan emphasizes more tax cuts for the wealthy."
Period. That's the extent of their "reporting." And Romney knows it. That's why he's planned a campaign to try to get elected on nothing more than offering up gobsmacking lie after gobsmacking lie.
June ... you summed up every news show in every city in 'merica
Will Mitt's defense of his lying be, 'I was just following orders'?
I again appeal to everybody to contact the major "news" sources. Don't comment in their articles. e-mail them. Call them. Irritate the living shhit out of them. Reporters, editors, station managers, etc. Let 'em know what you think of their irresponsible "journalism."
At this point, the scandal is the press. It would stop if it wasn't for the press not doing the job society expects of them. We've got to let them know it's indefensible.
I suggest taking this week's NYT Sunday editorial "Truth and Lies about Medicare"
and e-mailing it to all local news stations.
Yes, I saw that. What is needed is a more organized approach to alerting the media and press as to just how their lame, intentional acts are. We need lists of organizations and contact information put in a single place ...
Working on this.
How about Newsweeks: "Hit the Road, Barack: Why We Need a New President."
This is a pretty big outrage. See Steve's post on it. I gave a lot of links that debunked in detail Ferguson's deliberate lies.
It's not so hard to understand.
IOKIYAR
Post truth campaign??? It's more like post SANITY campaign.
And it's getting pretty hard on those of us refusing to turn to the dark side...
Why does Romney keep repeating the lie, you ask. What a great question for the debate monitors. Would any of them have the fortitude to press Romney and follow up when he gives his mealy mouth answer?
RE: "The fact that Romney feels confident in his ability to lie with impunity -- effectively taunting reality -- suggests the American political system is failing this test badly."
It's not the political system. It's the media.
I watched Jan Crawford report about this new Romney advertisement this morning on CBS. She repeated the claim that the ad contains without pointing out that the claim is false.
Our traditional media absolutely sucks, and it is entirely because of them that Romney has confidence that he can get away with such lies.
More evidence of our dysfunctional media... Here are two headlines currently on the Google News home page.
1. "Fact check: Obama running against outdated version of Ryan Medicare plan."
2. "Romney renews Obama welfare criticism in new ad."
With a media like this, out country can't win.
Jan Crawford is a Republican. That's all you have to know about her.
Rachel, i used to watch CNN i thought they were Center, but ive realized no one truly center could let republicans get away with so much lying and evil and then i found MSNBC and your show, i wasnt quite sure what to think at first but now, i am so glad i found you, you will be stunned to learn that i am a Christian, this is the only place u and I differ, i agree with everything else you say, you are an amazingly brave and smart lady, you have my respect and thanks for being a champion of TRUTH....you rock!!!
There are many many Christian liberals out here, people who believe and live like they believe and want the poor and the orphaned to be taken care of, who want good stewardship of the earth, who want peace and who still believe in kindness.
Look, the corporations that own the vast majority of media outlets have a vested interest in Mitt being elected, it's that simple.
Only the American people can change this. We must elect those for reform campaign finance, get big money out of the process, then continue to elect like-minded people who will then break up the media monopolies.
This is the only way. Our current system is broken. Forget about what is going to happen to our great country if we let this stuff slide. it already has happened. This is why we are at this moment in our nation's history. We have prevailed before and we can do so again. But it has to come from the bottom up.
Rachel, i use to watch CNN, i thought they were CENTER, they are not, no one who is truly CENTER would let Republicans get away with so much lying and evil, then i found MSNBC and your show, and ive been a fan ever since, i watch you every day...you will be shocked to know that i am a Christian, this is the only discussion we have a difference on, i agree with all else you say..i have so much respect for you, for being a champion of truth....in an age where that word has almost become extinct...you rock!!!
i cant believe that with the entire world in the street protesting what the richest 1% in our society have been doing to the rest of us, that the GOP would have the nerve, the unmitigated gaul!!! to nominate Mr 1% himself! The 1% has heard our cries and global protests ...and this is what they are proposing to fix the financial, political and tax systems they have spent 40 years corrupting...another HUGE tax cut for the rich and the utter gutting of whats left of the poor and middle class in this country... thats their actual plan, and they arent kidding, its like some kind of a bad joke, i keep waiting for someone to yell "April Fools!" but it doesnt happen...
Did you know that when you go into a voteing booth all your guuns will be confiscatered, a 666 will be invisibly tattoooed on your forehead, and you will be vacinated against all cancers... I'm having trouble with the mental gymnastics of just who it should be to run this add...
I really can't do the gymnastics.... lol
this is really interesting the blatant lies, people covering for them, and the conflict fo interest in voter suppression laws basically veiled electioneering.
There are 3 kinds of lies - lies, damned lies, and oh look - Mitt Romney's lips are moving.
My husband used to be a Republican until the last election, and he became so disillusioned that he came over to the right side with me. He just couldn't believe the blatant lies that the Republicans repeat over and over.
Why do gaffes and unaired web ads dominate the political world's attention, while shameless lying leads to shrugged shoulders?
Follow the money. The alleged reporters know which side their corporate bread is buttered on.
Some commenter at WaMonthly called Obama's the 'worst campaign ever.' I heartily disagree. Had the Obama team not started out early and aggressively against Romney, Bain, his heartlessness and his possibly felonious tax returns, the very first thing that the country would have started to take notice of would be Romney's / Rove's swiftboating of the president. They were pretty sure they would be in first with the most, in terms of aggressive attacks, and they are whining and whining that Obama has been 'too aggressive.'
The reason they are repeating these lies is that they think the country is now paying attention. But I have confidence that team Obama will meet this challenge and add new problems for the GOP.
My opinions:
"Worst campaign ever"? If the Obama campaign is the worst, I don't wanna be best. We can't rely on the media, beyond MSNBC, to suddenly grow a conscience. We have to rely on ourselves and our own ability to get the truth out.
If I didn't have to work for a living, I would fly out to Iowa and help you folks. I'd go anywhere to help the ground game. This situation is very scary to me. I swear I would never have thought it possible for a presidential candidate to be so blatantly secretive and dishonest...with impunity from the press.
This weekend on Up with Chris Hayes, Chris showed a videotape of Paul Ryan arguing very deliberately and clearly FOR GOVERNMENT STIMULUS SPENDING, right there on the House floor. My word, people! The evidence of what Republicans did to the Obama presidency from day one is right there on videotape: They KNEW how important stimulus spending was in times of economic strige, they KNEW how necessary it is to spend on unemployment insurance, aid to states, tax breaks for the middle class, and help to keep businesses afloat while the economy slowly recovered--oh, heck, besides these things, Ryan even states succinctly on that tape how employment IS A LAGGING INDICATOR of recovery!
All things he and the Republican party denies now and fought against (resulting in a massive watering down of the resutls) after Obama was elected.
Didn't know that? THAT'S BECAUSE YOUR ONLY SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS THE MEDIA--and it sure as shytting didn't bother to tell you. How do you feel about that, people?
I HATE Nazi analogies, but, golly gee, surely, SURELY, these are the conditions that enabled the nazi propagandists to succeed: a compliant media and an intellectually lazy, resentful and/or just plain ignorant electorate?
While we have free speech, I thought there were laws against slander and libel. Granted public figures are prime targets; however if the candidates are blatantly lying, isn't that gross negligence? Aren't there laws or regulations against blatantly false advertising, even political ones?
If enough credible news sources report these ads as lies and keep holding the candidates accountable while the ads continue to play, that should have some affect. The far right will never acknowledge the lies, but Romney can't win on the GOP alone. Even if voters don't agree with welfare policies, they would have to acknowledge that leadership that blatantly lies may not be in their best interests, although they probably think Romney wouldn't lie to them.
Wrt another issue, Medicare, Soledad O'Brien was able to counter John Sununu and Tim Pawlenty with facts from the CBO and factcheck.org. While this was one journalist, it was something worth cheering. The disappointing part was when Sununu told her, she might as well have a bumper sticker on her forehead that read Obama. Is this how the politicians intimidate the media, by telling them that fact checking the right doesn't like shows that the media is partisan? What would be worse are those journalists who let these tactics deter them.
Yes, Romney counts on people not having access to the facts or not knowing which facts are true. Are there ways to let Romney's campaign and media outlets know that people are bearing witness: letters to the editor, etc.?
At this point in the campaign, we're starting to get a more complete picture of the candidate. Things that used to look like isolated incidents no longer seem as coincidental and start to look part of a systematic whole. An incident of lying is not just a mistake, but a consistently, dogged pattern of deception. Seemingly isolated incidents of putting the dog on the roof of the car or bullying a teenager over a hair cut, which to me seem more indicative of a lack of empathy... these taken in context with policies which are unsympathetic to the middle class or seniors or people needing health care, these seem indicative of a man who really doesn't see beyond his societal scope.
With blog features like "Mitt's Mendacity," we're starting to see a rather solid picture of where the candidate is. What I wonder is, shouldn't some of these "trends"/issues be documented somewhere where the history of these patterns is aggregated and the information is more easily accessible than a weekly blog post, say a link on the blog as an ongoing feature? Because the picture becomes more compelling as we see in totality the candidate's persistence in certain actions. Perhaps only blog readers will see the post. Post-election, whoever wins, this kind of information will surface in some biography of the candidate, although yeah, that'll be a little late...
@j4comments - I like to share good articles/blogs like this on Facebook (publicly). I'll also share on pages of like-minded folks and on Romney's and Ryan's pages-- I'm a troll and enjoy it, as are about half the people who comment. No, I don't bother sharing with right-wing or tea party groups -- the ground has been salted there and nothing can grow.
Basically, my FB page is, in part and intermittently, a sort of ad. A means to convey my POV, which also has the possibility to inform others. I'm not going to wait for the MSM to get on board.
Some look, some read, some don't, some react with ditto-isms, some have thoughtful comments. Some friends share to their friends. And on and on. Social media is actually a really interesting way to get the truth out -- and has the potential of reaching as many people as a costly primetime ad on network TV.
Sharing is good. :D My mom always told me that.
The problem with blog posts and articles with titles like "Mitt's Mendacity" is the number of people who don't even know what the word "mendacity" means. I got into an argument with not one, but THREE people who absolutely, positively could not address even what the word "precedent" meant in the context of Mitt getting away with such blatant lies and secrecy...and all three were good friends of mine (albeit Republican or republican-leaning).
Democrats need to stop talking to themselves with the language THEY understand. The independents and even many who vote against their interests by being ignorantly conservative DO NOT UNDERSTAND the language we use! Worse still, they resent us for using it (because they don't understand it and don't want to expend the effort to find out either). It is just, plain stupid for us to fail to take into account the literacy levels of our targeting audiences.
In another post, I mentioned how eloquently Paul Ryan argued in favor of government stimulus spending back in 2002. You should listen to that tape. He speaks in PLAIN LANGUAGE with SHORT SENTENCES and lots of emphasis. Every time I hear Debbie Wasserman Schultze speak, I cringe. Chuck Schumer gets it, but MAN! there are so few other Democratic mouthpieces who have even a clue how to address less literate people! No wonder they criticize us for being "elite": Wouldn't you, if every time someone opened their mouth, you went glassy-eyed over their long words and never-ending sentences?
(Yeah, yeah--I know. I'm as guilty of that as the next Dem.)
The blame lies squarely with the Mainstream (or Lamestream) media which apparently are incapable of doing their job of informing.