Just over the last two weeks, Mitt Romney's presidential campaign has released three television ads and two online videos devoted exclusively to -- you guessed it -- welfare. The issue was a complete non-factor in the 2012 race until the Republican decided the racially-charged, peripheral issue could be exploited by telling a transparent lie.
The latest video was released overnight.
In this new clip, viewers hear from Danny Vargas, the former National Chairman of the Republican National Hispanic Assembly, who again accuses President Obama of removing work requirements from federal welfare law.
In this plane of reality, President Obama did not remove work requirements from federal welfare law. The Romney campaign simply made this up. The facts are unambiguous: governors asked the Obama administration for some flexibility on the existing welfare law, and 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 Romney himself, just six years ago.
And yet, it's the basis for a ridiculous lie, predicated on Romney's assumption that voters are easily fooled, and his campaign will pay no price because the media won't call him on it.
For his part, President Obama weighed in on the subject yesterday, and as Greg Sargent noted, it was "the first time Obama himself has charged that virtually Romney's entire campaign is based on a 'centerpiece' that's flat out false." Take a look at these comments from the president's press briefing:
"I don't think that Governor Romney is somehow responsible for the death of the woman that was portrayed in that ad. But keep in mind this is an ad that I didn't approve, I did not produce, and as far as I can tell, has barely run. I think it ran once.
"Now, in contrast, you've got Governor Romney creating as a centerpiece of his campaign this notion that we're taking the work requirement out of welfare, which every single person here who's looked at it says is patently false. What he's arguing is somehow we have changed the welfare requirement -- the work requirement in our welfare laws. And, in fact, what's happened was that my administration, responding to the requests of five governors, including two Republican governors, agreed to approve giving them, those states, some flexibility in how they manage their welfare rolls as long as it produced 20 percent increases in the number of people who are getting work.
"So, in other words, we would potentially give states more flexibility to put more people back to work, not to take them off the work requirement under welfare. Everybody who has looked at this says what Governor Romney is saying is absolutely wrong. Not only are his super PACs running millions of dollars' worth of ads making this claim; Governor Romney himself is approving this and saying it on the stump.
"So the contrast I think is pretty stark. They can run the campaign that they want, but the truth of the matter is you can't just make stuff up. That's one thing you learn as President of the United States."
That certainly sounds reasonable. In theory, part of leadership is realizing that you "can't just make stuff up."
But Romney believes he can ignore this maxim and win anyway. He's working under the assumption that the political rules have changed, we've entered a new era of post-truth rhetorical norms, and there are no longer punishments for deliberately saying the opposite of the reality.
Indeed, we've created a system of incentives -- Romney will benefit by crafting a racially-charged lie, which has no bearing in fact, but which rallies his base, for whom the distinction between fact and fiction isn't terribly important. At the same time, the lie will begin to permeate the mainstream's understanding of current events, thanks to reporting that tells voters, "Romney claims Obama gutted welfare law; Obama disagrees."
Greg Sargent added, "It's true that there's serious truth-stretching on both sides.... But it remains the case that we are seeing nothing from the Obama side that's anything like what Romney is attempting. Romney right now is premising one of the central arguments of his whole campaign on a complete lie."
And with each passing day, Romney appears increasingly certain he can get away with it.
Michael Tomasky explained today, This is not normal. Normal is to stretch the truth.... But the Romney welfare ads have no grain of truth at all."
Romney is testing American politics, pushing past boundaries, raising uncomfortable questions about just what kind of man he really is. Eleven weeks before Election Day, however, Romney just doesn't seem to give a damn.
Leave a Comment:
And the odds of this particular lie being addressed in the first debate are? Perhaps zero for the moderator, but hopefully 1.0 for our president?
It is amazing that the so called "liberal media" airs these lies with little or no rebuttal. Then again considering how the main stream media is owned by corporations...
It should be the first question. I can see it now... Mittens will get all huffy and complain about the lame-stream-liberal-media not focusing on the issues. He will never answer the question because his feet will never be held to the fire.
Then, no one will ask another question like that because they are afraid the right wing will claim bias against them.
I'd actually appreciate it if anyone could point out to me where the Obama reelection campaign, or any of their allied SuperPacs, are even stretching the truth? Please be specific.
As long as long as Willard Reversible-Mittens Rawmoney only has to deal with the national
pressstenography corps, his campaign will have a measure viability it doesn't deserve.Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
In MSMland, any time a Democrat reduces a complex policy issue to something more suited to a 30 second ad the Democrat is "stretching the truth" even when joined to an invitation to read the whole thing on the website.
The problem is that Republicans don't have any complex policy positions. For them, any policy proposal that can't fit, in its entirety, on a bumper sticker is socialist Big Gubbmint librulism by definition.
But, unfortunately, the Both Sides do It Broderian Balance Rule imposed by all large news orgs at the editorial level means that any sin by Republicans must, absolutely must, be mated with, and deemed equivalent to, some sin by Democrats. Thus, outright lies by Republicans are just like Democrats condensing complex policy positions into something appropriate to 30 second ad.
Thank you! I was beginning to think I was the only one thinking this!
The odds are 100 percent to none that this will come up in the first debate, and the odds are 100 percent to none that Romney will brazen it out by simply reasserting the claims he's been making, and when Obama calls him out on it, Romney will theatrically roll his eyes and run out the hoary old "there he goes again" chestnut, to the approving laughter of all. He did the same thing to his primary foes, and doubled down in the debates, all with that genial shark smile that his eyes don't follow.
Romney knows he cannot win by running his campaign on the same virtues his father campaigned on. The take home lesson for Mitt is that the cost of honesty is too high.
But, it goes with Mitt's biography, especially at Bain -- he did well by not doing good.
Romney is right, it is a new political world where you can say anything you want. He is not being called out by the media for any of his lies, so why would he stop? I still run into people on a weekly basis who mention "the government takeover of health care" - if that lie can stick, any lie can stick. Never underestimate the gullibility and lack of knowledge of the general public.
Especially if the media refuse to do its job.
You all noticed that the President's comments at yesterday's presser, which were very pointed and newsworthy, were all but ignored by the working press.
He should have pointed to the press pool and in his best Hillary Voice
"Shame on you press ! Shame on you" Do your effin job.
The one from ABC started with the false equivalency meme and he shut her down pretty quick .
They all buy into the "They both do it" and it seems whomever works the refs best gets the most attention
Maybe it's time that WE the PEOPLE actually start writing to complain that the lame-stream media is losing money because WE know that they're lying! If enough of US start complaining and boycotting even "the corporation" understands "the bottom line".
I just finished reading an online article from AP with comments made by VP hopeful Paul Ryan...again, twisted reality with no basis in fact that were not disputed in the article. They simply reported what was said. What scares me is the sheer number of folks buying the lies...the media is part of the problem but the fault lies with we the people. Multiple resources are available to obtain the facts, yet most are content with this version or that version aligned to an individual preference.
Case in point was a few months back on the Ed Show...obviously a regular viewer of his program and he was discussing the Post Office financial issues pointing to a law that passed in 2006 by a republican controlled Congress. The law pilfers $5 billion annually from postal revenues to pay for other things. All true...what wasn't reported was the bill passed the House by voice vote and the Senate by unanimous consent. Republicans had the majority but it wasn't fillibuster proof and the manner by which it passed demonstrates democratic compliancy or complacency. Bernie Sanders has been a routine guest talking about correcting the issue but was a member of the House at the time and did nothing to stop it. Yet he was not called out on this fact, only praised for his efforts to try to fix it. This was easy to find and thus easy pickings for anyone so inclined to subvert as liberal bias in the press. Yes, hold republicans accountable for pilfering, hold democrats feet to the fire for being asleep at the wheel. Let BOTH parties know you are watching and not in one corner or the other...
Dude,
YOU are the one who writes a weekly column on Willard's LIES.
there simply should be nothing that surprises you about this campaign of his.
when has he ever told the truth in an ad?
when has he ever told the truth
in an ad?Sorry had to fix it
Don't one wife, one religion, and two tax returns make him a virtuous man?
And I guess, in the Rovian worldview, creating their own reality is a virtue too.
Even Politifact calls this a "Pants on Fire" lie by Mitt. See:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/07/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-barack-obamas-plan-abandons-tenet/
And, for those of you who still are inclined to believe Mitt, the HHS memo itself (no, this was NOT an Executive Order as some are saying):
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/policy/im-ofa/2012/im201203/im201203.html
I encourage everyone to share this memo with everyone you know, especially your crazy Republican uncles who swear by Mitt's accusations. It's only a couple of pages long. They might be able to get through it.
For those without the time or inclination to read the memo and accompanying letter, this line from the letter sums it up in one sentence:
Perhaps it would be helpful to e-mail these two links to every reporter that doesn't call out the lie.
Summarizing like in your 2nd post would be a good idea before providing the link.
So the e-mail could look like this:
"I noticed in your column that you failed to alert your readers to the fact that Mitt Romney claims on the Obama Administration handling of the work requirements for Welfare (TANF) are false. You owe it to your readers to make reference to the falsity of the Romney campaign ads. A short "...Mr. Romney repeated his false claim that ..." would probably suffice every time the matter presents itself. This matter has been looked into extensively. Here are a few sources:
Politifact: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/07/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-barack-obamas-plan-abandons-tenet/
HHS to states requesting waivers: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/policy/im-ofa/2012/im201203/im201203.html
Politifact concluded:
From that last link (HHS to states requesting waivers):
The links below provide additional information on the Romney campaign lie:
FactCheck.org : Does Obama's Plan 'Gut Welfare Reform'?
How Romney's Getting Away With Playing The Welfare Card Against Obama | The New Republic
Mr. Romney's welfare politics - The Washington Post
The American Debate: Despicable and desperate - Philly.com
Excellent, DWIA.
Hmmm - I wonder why Mr. Airball and our other friends on the right aren't out here defending Mitt. "Bueller?.......Bueller?"
There is no defense for Mitt Romney and Team Republican lies. The only thing the wingnut trolls do (and can do) is intentionally attempt to disrupt discussion with transparently specious arguments in order to divert attention away from their Team's wrongs so criticism of the Team is deflected.
DDD: disrupt, divert, deflect.
The thing is, guys, the rot comes from above. It's imposed by management at the editorial level. It's true that any reporter who aspires to the plum positions like the White House press corps or the rarefied heights of Seven Figure Club, like David Gregory, must fully and eagerly comply with the dictate. But the fact is that there are plenty of reporters who'd write that story in a minute but know it would only be edited out, followed by an ass-chewing by their boss.
The blog metareporting on the MSM blackout on Mann and Ornstein's "It's Even Worse Than You Think" opened my eyes to this. Here you have Republican think tank guys, consummate Villages who were Sunday show darlings who suddenly can't get the time of day from the Sundays when they publish a book saying "Republicans are the problem." And boom, suddenly, they couldn't get their calls returned when they tried to get on the Sundays to plug the thing.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/06/mann-and-ornstein-still-sunday-chat-show-radar
http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/05/18/report-who-media-turns-its-back-on-experts-who/184783
So, we should send those emails to the Editor, then. And the Op Ed and the owners.
Yes, sandy, I've been sending to the individual reporter and to the managing and executive editors and maybe departmental editors.
@Steve: I understand all that, Steve. But I've had some (rather testy) "discussions" with reporters who definitely defend what they're doing, so it is not just a phenomenon that is dictated from above. It really isn't. It's ingrained in the system from top to bottom.
Pressure is going to have to be applied.
I should have said we should also send emails to…. because I do think many reporters are not so much journalists as "mind molders".
It's absolutely clear that Team Romney was absolutely certain they knew they could get away with this. At this point, the thing that makes me wonder most is how did they know with such certitude that they could do it? I don't think it's explained by simply being able to exploit the facts that the average American is an ignoramus on the body politic, or that the press is an irresponsibly incompetent referee of the political life of the country. This has been done with such obnoxious audacity and disregard for decency that there has to be something else.
Maybe that's exactly how, obnoxious audacity. Like the group of Americans that was polled about Ryan's plan and decided it couldn't be true because politicians just wouldn't be that ridiculously obvious in taking from the poor to give to the rich.
Either that, or Fox News' infiltration into the brains of conservatives has finally made mush out of them.
Well, one way to get away with a crime is to do it in broad daylight. Then there's the possibility they concluded it was absolutely the only way possible they could win. And that almost certainly has to be true. But that leaves a really empty feeling and I think there has to be more. Think of the outrageous Niall Ferguson article in Newsweek. Just a pile of absolute crap. And Newsweek published it with the cover it did. Something seems to be really wrong. Something just ain't right.
Big money! Romney is sure that one billionaire and a few other big spenders can buy him this election. There is no rationale left in the GOP - they are power and money crazed and in my opinion, scared to death of "the Other", primarily because they are afraid others will treat them like they have treated others. Just ask any Native American Indian how it worked for them.
Why is a guy with 250 million dollar's running for Pres?Is it patriotism?No not when he put's his money in offshore account's to evade paying taxe's to his country.Is it prestige?That's probably part of it, although I think his socialite wife want's it more than he does.Is it for financial gain?Bingo!Romney is a cold calculating Wall St.business man that care's about Mitt Romney,his son's trust fund's and his wealthy friend's.If he is elected,he will lower their tax burden's by million's.He will also attempt to repeal the inheiritance tax, saving million's for his son's, while putting the burden on the middle class and the poor.He does'nt care about us peon's,he showed his disdain for us while at Bain Capital.He's a weathy man who would use the Presidency for personal gain.That is why he's running.
That's it. Precisely. We actually are witnessing the attempted completion of the overthrow of our government by the 1% oligarchy (long underway, but now nearly completed).
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-(
All of this discussion proves two things to me:
1~Many of us really do care, pay attention, and actively object to the mindf*c& that is the GOP.
2~We do it with better vocabulary.
That said, it would seem that many people here...look carefully...still don't know that an apostrophe is to be used in the formation of a contraction ("don't" from "do not" or "she's" from "she is") OR to indicate possession ("That highly insightful commentary was Rachel's"). An apostrophe will never, ever create a plural. That is to say, one peon, joined by another peon, equals two PEONS. NOT "peon's."
Spelling and grammar do, and always should, count. And, when writing in an attempt at proving one's (possessive here, so the apostrophe is correct) point, the more articulate we sound, the more frightened the opposition becomes, and this may serve our cause well. Perhaps a little diligence will improve the likelihood of gaining an audience. Rachel Maddow and Barack Obama are incredibly articulate; so, let us all take our cue from them!
We are seeing the direct results of the right's destruction of the "Free Press", they had to purchase most if not all of the media outlets. Then they had to ween the real brains out and replace them with stenographers. This part of the great conspiracy has worked. As we all started to look at ALEC and the Kochs, and the rest of the "conspirators" the pace of the anti-democratic forces accelerated. The veil of secrecy has been mostly lifted by freedom loving internet bloggers and the "replaced thinkers". Most of the damage has already been done, with SCOTUS in the bag for the right wingers, the states, at least the red states, have been savaged by the republican wingers, the House of Representatives in which Mr. Boehner has been de-balled has been a sham, and I think close to sedition with all of their anti-government actions and beliefs. We as a country are getting very close to a disaster of unimagined consequences.
Here is the best graphic I have seen about the "Big Six"
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1665600/infographic-of-the-day-the-mega-companies-behind-90-of-media
"You have no choice" George Carlin
Really interesting graphic in that link sick-n-effin, although I disagree with the conclusion reached by the author whose blog posting presented it:
Even granting that the author's focus of interest seemed to be more on the entertainment products of those media corporations than on the news reporting produced, I didn't think he'd really made his case. I believe the graphic you reference explains a lot more than that the author seems to think.
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
The useful idiots in the GOP base buy and gleefully suck down every single lie that their overlords pass down to them. I have a lot of respect for a few conservative talking heads, but for the most part they echo the GOP talking points and lies, and their voters do the same. They do it while actively making up new lies and conspiracy theories to keep the whole ball of wax rolling.
They don't care about lying, they're lying for Jesus. Read Jeff Sharlet's book The Family. That's the GOP endgame, and it's terrifying to anyone who's not a Christbot. I can't recommend it enough.
So how long will it be before we start seeing ads about Obama's history of violent crime?
Romney still needs to appeal and motivate his base. Fortunately for him, he has the Fox TV network on his side. Fox is not going to challenge Romney's claims, it will endorse them. When a Fox viewer hears contradictory information elsewhere, then they will blame the "liberal media" and continue to believe what they want to believe and what Fox tells them. At some point, Romney may have to venture beyond the safety of Fox and he hopes that the waters are muddy enough so that he won't be seen clearly for what he is.
I'm just curious about why the press can't simply ask him if he is a liar?
I know that goes against the so called "rules" in journalism, but this lying is his actual political policy, so surely he can be asked about it.
The press demanded that Obama talk to them, and he caved yesterday. Why doesn't te campaign press demand the same thing and demand Romney answer their simple question:
Why are you intentionally lying to the American people?
I actually believe the explanation goes something like this: a few decades ago, the corporations that were consolidating their ownership of our nation's major news media decided that news had to become a profit-center, more than something to be done in the public interest.
With that in mind, ratings become of paramount (no relation to the media giant owned in turn by Viacom) importance. A campaign in which the better choice was overwhelmingly obvious (say, e.g., because one set of candidates were complete lying-sacks-of-crap) would probably not be close, and thus boring and bad for ratings.
Thus, in the event that one set of candidates, are, in reality, complete lying-scheming-nasty-stinking-sacks-of-liquid-crap, it is the function of media employees (once upon a time known as reporters, LOL) to try to obfuscate that as much as possible, in order to encourage the "horse race" and thus, their employer's ratings.
Clear now? I wish I had a happier answer, but recourse to the "rules" of journalism does no good when journalism isn't what the "media" is doing.
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-(
All you have to say is President Obama, you can follow this with "Space Muslims" and you've got an audience, you can start a religion with "Space Muslim Death Panel" included..
GOP, same Mitt, different day!
A better name for Willard Romney: I. Lyle Lott.
Romney lies that raising taxes is a job killer. Clinton raised taxes steadily for 8 years and 23 million jobs were created. Romney lies that cutting taxes and budget cuts will make our country economically healthy. Reagan cut taxes and TRIPLED our debt. G.W. Bush massively cut taxes and our debt doubled. Clinton raised taxes and our debt went DOWN. Budget cuts and "our number one issue is jobs" don't go together. If the cuts aren't deep, they do no good. If they are deep, millions must lose their jobs. All spending goes to provide employment. Even if the cuts were $500 billion per year, at $50,000 per employee, 10 million Americans would lose their jobs. Cut $1 trillion and 20 million jobs will be lost. Cut $1 trillion and that money comes out of our economy (7.5% of our GDP). If we grow at 2.5%, we have a 5% RECESSION. The math simply doesn't work.
I still think the GOP/TP/Rove thought they'd first out of the gate with their Swift Boats, Niall Ferguson, and the Dinesh D'Souza film whamming a weak president who was, in their mind, easy pickings.
Wrong: Obama was first out of the gate and it is HIS definition of Romney and now Ryan that have set the terms of this particular electoral season.
This is, like the Ryan pick, a desperation move on Romney's part.
Rachel, Rachel, Rachel, do you not know that Mitt's temple garment shields him from the evil of Obama truth? Any truth about Obama just bounces right off because, Mitt's magic garment is working for him.
Even more offensive is the horrible Romney/Ryan ticket logo. It looks like it says "OMNEY / RYAN". Stupid.
As long as there are stupid americans politicians will lie! As long as there are social issues Republicans will continue to divide us over those issues while raping the poor and elderly.
But, they're ALL "making stuff up": non-existent voting abuse, ridiculous "levels" of rape, who did what in what bailout, as well as welfare requirements. And no one is paying attention. Those that DO pay attention ... in sound bites, of course ... believe whatever they're spoon-fed by Fox. This campaign was never about anything as paltry as issues, for both Romney and all republicans, this is about Obama.
what happened to televisions stations taking political ads off the air that they know and can prove are patently false?
They only become false when the check from the campaign, RNCC, or Super PAC bounces. And that ain't happening.
These folks are just nut's... Wow... I can't help but chuckle, but the sad part about it, is there is sht-tons of nut balls who think like they do and believe their Corporate owned theories...
That ad is once again an appeal to those thinking in terms of "welfare Queens" based on some concoction they "see", similar to Beck's blackboard. Not that I watch Beck, but I saw his dot connecting, once was enough.
I would compare this to the "swift boaters" making up lies that appeal to the choir, with very few exceptions. They spend millions of dollars on ads to reach a microscopic audience target, the rest is just to have arguments and flood inboxes with crazy emails.
How's that Rmoney and surrogates? I think of this ad with all it's soft music and family success story as a swift boat or Beck blackboard. Just as crazy. Stick a beautiful family and success story and insert a lie like "Obama removed work requirement in welfare".
The problem is, so far, Romney is RIGHT. He can MAKE UP ENTIRE LIES about what Obama is doing or has done and no one other than cable news is calling him on it. I have watched Diane Sawyer (ABC), I have watched Brian Williams (NBC) and I have watched Scott Pelley (CBS). Not a single one of them has come out and said "What Governor Romney is saying about X or Y or Z is untrue." They may mention what he is saying, but they make NO ATTEMPT to correct him, explain to viewers that what he is saying is false, etc. NONE. They play clips of both Obama and Romney at campaign speeches and if Romney says in his "The sky is purple because Obama made it that way" they continue with their reporting as if there was nothing at all wrong with what Mitt Romney just said in the clip! It's appalling!
I am not asking the MSM to be biased against Romney. I would expect the same treatment for Obama.... but Mitt Romney is lying his way through the entire Presidential campaign with absolutely no remorse or guilt of any type. So, let's cut to the chase.. the GOP has nominated a pathological liar for President and the press (who knows he is lying) is OK with such a person being elected President without setting off any flashing red lights. Obama was right, every reporter in that room knows what Romney is saying is false.. none of reporting it. This tells the Romney campaign they can get away with anything.
That said, my silent prayer is the debates. A moderator SHOULD ask about these topics with Romney and Obama standing side by side. Certainly Romney will be asked about these assertions on camera and Obama will be right there eagerly waiting to hear Romney lie to a massive TV audience. A moderator who does not call out either candidate on such claims shouldn't be a moderator. By the end of the Presidential debates, it should be very clear to the American people that Mitt Romney has made up most of what he has said in ads, is hiding his finances from the public for a reason only he knows, has selected a very out of touch right wing VP candidate and is not worthy of the office of President.
Hopefully we will get a real moderator(s) that asks for specifics and not allow wishy washiness. I can't see how it is possible to say Obama gutted the work requirement for welfare.
There's no evidence of that, there's no evidence for much of these claims, aka LIES! It's not from Obama camp, it's from Republicans, ideology, not substance.
I have to wonder of news folks hear the gauntlet thrown down by the public. We demand some real news and not just let people go on the air and read off talking points.