Mitt Romney tells 533 lies in 30 weeks, Steve Benen documents them

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

By Fred Clark

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slackti...ocuments-them/

I’ve written about or linked to a great deal here “chronicling Mitt’s mendacity” — to borrow Steven Benen’s phrase.
Mitt Romney says many, many things that are not true. He says this despite being in possession of the correct facts of the matter.



Which is to say that Mitt Romney lies. A lot. He lies more than any other national candidate for office in my lifetime. And I was born before the Nixon administration.

This is documented. Proven. Validated, verified, demonstrated, catalogued and quantified. Mitt Romney lies.
Here are 30 — 30! — of Benen’s weekly “chronicling” posts. These are all backed up and sourced. These are not assertions, interpretations or allegations. These are facts, actual instances.

Over the past 30 weeks, Mitt Romney has told lie after lie after lie: 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, XXX.

Click those links. Read the lists. List after list of lie after lie. Hundreds of them — 533, to be exact, although Benen does not make any claim to providing a comprehensive chronicle.

This is unprecedented. “We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers,” Romney’s pollster, Neil Newhouse, said.

This has produced what James Fallows calls the “post-truth” age — a relentlessly dishonest onslaught of brazen falsehoods with which the media and the political system are struggling to cope. What do you do when every article, every “fact-check,” every arbiter denounces a lie and corrects it, but then a politician just keeps repeating it?

It’s remarkable to behold.

One of the weirder aspects of this for me is watching this unfold in the politically conservative culture of my evangelical world. The most partisan evangelical conservatives are also those most likely to rant against “relativism” and to trumpet their status as defenders of “absolute truth.” Those same folks will dismiss this post — and all 30 of Benen’s posts above — as mere partisan attacks without ever bothering to examine the 533 factual instances of Mitt’s mendacity, chronicled.

That’s the only cognitive defense they have, I guess. Jam fingers in ears and shout la-la-la-you’re-being-partisan!

Because, you see, the fact that Mitt Romney said something he knew to be false is a partisan fact. And the fact that he has done this at least 533 times in the past 30 weeks is also partisan.

I suppose the other approach for Romney defenders who cannot bear to face the fact of those 533 facts will be to angrily pore over all of Benen’s lists, reading each one with a lawyerly eye.

Have at it. Please. Cherry-pick. Spin. Split hairs. Hand-wave away whichever lies you wish as mere misdemeanors and not full-fledged felonies against honesty.

But how many of those charges do you think you can get dismissed? 10 percent? 20 percent? Maybe, if you’re that sort of person and you work really hard at it — if you’re willing to get even more pedantic and semantic and technical than even you are usually comfortable with — maybe you could half convince yourself that 50 percent of those lies somehow shouldn’t really count against Romney.

That still leaves more than 260 lies. That still leaves Mitt Romney as a convicted liar, 260 times over. And at that point you’ll have to join your friends with their fingers in their ears.

But you’ll still know.

Because everyone knows. Mitt Romney lies. A lot. That is what he does. That is who he is. And friend or foe, he does not care if you know it.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

No response from the Romney supporters.

Bottom line: The people who are going to vote for Romney don't care that he's lying to them nearly every time he opens his mouth.

[Paladin]

On Meet The Press, filmed today and to be shown Sunday, Mitt the Twit says that the GOP made a mistake to agree to the sequester of funding the Defense Budget. Said the Obama proposed it. Damn fool. Didn't he read about the "bipartisan Committe"? Interestingly Lyin' Ryan voted for it!

Mitt the Twit is such a fricking tool! He is in over his head.

[myMind]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

No response from the Romney supporters.

Bottom line: The people who are going to vote for Romney don't care that he's lying to them nearly every time he opens his mouth.

Im as liberal as you can get and your constant instigations are starting to annoy even me. Do you honestly think this is an argument you can actually win? Of course he's a liar, he's a politician. Obama lies, Romney Lies, Bush lied, Clinton lied. I personally despise politics in general as it is less about being the voice of the people, and more about catering to corporate financiers.

[Bacchus]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

No response from the Romney supporters.

Bottom line: The people who are going to vote for Romney don't care that he's lying to them nearly every time he opens his mouth.

I'll speak for them, uhhh, uhhhh... liberal media sucks

[Bacchus]

Originally Posted by myMind

Im as liberal as you can get and your constant instigations are starting to annoy even me. Do you honestly think this is an argument you can actually win? Of course he's a liar, he's a politician. Obama lies, Romney Lies, Bush lied, Clinton lied. I personally despise politics in general as it is less about being the voice of the people, and more about catering to corporate financiers.

Well, that is a blanket statement that is not really true. Go ahead and fact check the DNC and the RNC and see who the liars are. You can say they all lie but the reality is only one of them is basing their whole campaign on lies and deceit.

Clinton, Biden and Obama did not lie. Where as Romney, Ryan and hell just about every Republican at the RNC spread all sorts of lies.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by myMind

Im as liberal as you can get....

L0L!

That's a good one.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

[myMind]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

L0L!

That's a good one.

Wait, are you trying to say Im not a liberal? Just because I get annoyed by your onslaught of truth? I wasn't arguing with you buddy, just trying to say dial it back a notch, we all already get plenty of it from the media. Your efforts arent going to have the slightest of impact in this election.Hopefully you realize that all you are doing here is participating in a bipartisan circlejerk. I agree with most everything you say, why must you keep arguing with those who don't? Do you realize that convincing them of our veracity is equivalent to you abandoning all your beliefs and saying a living breathing woman doesnt have the right to choose. Not gonna happen. Circle...Jerk.

[TonyR]

Apparently Romney has been flip-flopping on the Obamacare/healthcare issues. That or he's just confused, which is possible because he sometimes doesn't seem to know where he stands on some issues, because where he stands is constantly changing. Here's a good summary:

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast....obamacare.html

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by TonyR

Apparently Romney has been flip-flopping on the Obamacare/healthcare issues. That or he's just confused, which is possible because he sometimes doesn't seem to know where he stands on some issues, because where he stands is constantly changing. Here's a good summary:

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast....obamacare.html

So it's a flip-flop-flip that's also a lie. A Romney threefer! Or rather, the abstract ideological arguments against Obamacare can disappear upon engaging the reality of the details, which are sane, moderate and popular.

Great quote from the article there, and exactly what the Romney stance is doing.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by myMind

Wait, are you trying to say Im not a liberal? Just because I get annoyed by your onslaught of truth? I wasn't arguing with you buddy, just trying to say dial it back a notch, we all already get plenty of it from the media. Your efforts arent going to have the slightest of impact in this election.Hopefully you realize that all you are doing here is participating in a bipartisan circlejerk. I agree with most everything you say, why must you keep arguing with those who don't? Do you realize that convincing them of our veracity is equivalent to you abandoning all your beliefs and saying a living breathing woman doesnt have the right to choose. Not gonna happen. Circle...Jerk.

Are you sure you didn't mean to say "libertarian" instead of "liberal?"

In any event, this is a War, Politics, and Religion forum.

If you don't like it, then GTFO.

You're also welcome to use the ignore feature anytime you like.

[maher_tyler]

One thing i learned about watching Ron Paul is what an idiot Mitt Romney is. If only Ron Paul were running in his spot...he'd get my vote in a heart beat!

[Arkie]

There's plenty of qualified honest people out of 300 million, but we have to settle for Romney or Obama (or Bush, Gore, Kerry, McCain, wtf?)

This is not a government for the people. These are not the people we would choose. We serve the elite, and we choose from their candidates.

[maher_tyler]

Originally Posted by Arkie

There's plenty of qualified honest people out of 300 million, but we have to settle for Romney or Obama (or Bush, Gore, Kerry, McCain, wtf?)

This is not a government for the people. These are not the people we would choose. We serve the elite, and we choose from their candidates.

YEP!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Snubbed again...

Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 03:03 PM PDT

National Police Union Refuses to Endorse Romney, First Such Refusal in 98 Years

For the first time in 98 years, the 330,000-member Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) will not endorse a candidate for president this year. The FOP supported the Republican candidate for President in 2008, 2004, and 2000, and its non-endorsement is seen as a refutation of Mitt Romney.

Why the change? One big reason was Mitt Romney's support of Senate Bill 5 in Ohio, which stripped collective bargaining rights from police officers.

People familiar with the group's decision said leaders had been disturbed by Mr. Romney's statements of strong support for several antiunion initiatives, particularly the move in Ohio to restrict the collective-bargaining rights of public-union employees, including police and firefighters. The measure was overturned by voters in Ohio last year.

[houghtam]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Snubbed again...

Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 03:03 PM PDT

National Police Union Refuses to Endorse Romney, First Such Refusal in 98 Years

For the first time in 98 years, the 330,000-member Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) will not endorse a candidate for president this year. The FOP supported the Republican candidate for President in 2008, 2004, and 2000, and its non-endorsement is seen as a refutation of Mitt Romney.

Why the change? One big reason was Mitt Romney's support of Senate Bill 5 in Ohio, which stripped collective bargaining rights from police officers.

People familiar with the group's decision said leaders had been disturbed by Mr. Romney's statements of strong support for several antiunion initiatives, particularly the move in Ohio to restrict the collective-bargaining rights of public-union employees, including police and firefighters. The measure was overturned by voters in Ohio last year.

Damn.

[Arkie]

Originally Posted by maher_tyler

YEP!

looks like he has the same tractor

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Matt Taibbi: The Secret to Mitt Romney’s Fortune? Greed, Debt and Forcing Others to Foot the Bill

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/8/3...secret_to_mitt

Matt Taibbi writes: "What most voters don’t know is the way Mitt Romney actually made his fortune: by borrowing vast sums of money that other people were forced to pay back. This is the plain, stark reality that has somehow eluded America’s top political journalists for two consecutive presidential campaigns: Mitt Romney is one of the greatest and most irresponsible debt creators of all time.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

ANOTHER racist birther-fest CANCELLED! Maybe America is tiring of the TeaPublicans' blatantly racist attacks on the president...

Arizona’s Birtherpalooza Canceled Over Low Ticket Sales

Not even the promise of crooner Pat Boone singing oldies from a spinning stage could save what was intended to be the premier birther event of the year later this month in Arizona.

Organizers of the gala, which would have featured Boone alongside Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio and some of the nation’s other prominent conspiracy theorists, broke the news online Friday that it was canceled “due to inadequate ticket sales.”

The Sept. 22 event was meant to bring together people from throughout the nation who believe Barack Obama’s birth certificate is fake and therefore he is ineligible to be president. Organizers planned to use it to call on Congress to take up Arpaio’s yearlong investigation into the documents.

The announcement was disappointing to the few people who did plan to attend, as evidenced by a handful of web postings about the cancellation. It didn’t take long for true believers to spin elaborate conspiracy theories about why the event was called off.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

[barryr]

, and Obama's first promise was to make his admin. transparent

[Bacchus]

Originally Posted by barryr

, and Obama's first promise was to make his admin. transparent

I agree with you on that.

Obama promised a lot of things that he did not deliver on but the things he did not deliver is because he is too ****ing conservative. There is very little difference between Obama and McCain policy wise. We need a true liberal in office.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Bacchus

I agree with you on that.

Obama promised a lot of things that he did not deliver on but the things he did not deliver is because he is too ****ing conservative. There is very little difference between Obama and McCain policy wise. We need a true liberal in office.

FTW.

[BroncsRule]

A "True Liberal" would be every bit as unellectable as a "True Conservative".. and for exactly the same reasons.

The President will always be a centrist.

Deal with it.