- Comments (80)
- aAFont Size
What we will see tonight in the big debate is the newest image of Mitt Romney on his campaign’s human Etch A Sketch.
Surely you remember when one of Romney’s aides called the candidate an Etch A Sketch. The aide explained that Mitt, in the way of the child’s toy, would present an image in the primary and then shake that one clear and redraw afresh for the general election.
What Romney was doing in his most recent incarnation wasn’t working. Simply blaming President Obama for George W. Bush’s collapsed economy and promising to re-impose George W.’s presidency of reduced taxes and lax regulation to make life wonderful again—that was no good.
Bill Clinton got hold of that image on the Etch A Sketch at the Democratic National Convention and stomped the entire device flat.
Romney has fallen behind by five to seven points in Ohio and by two to four points in Florida. As you know, those states will decide the presidency. The rest of us are just watching.
So tonight Obama will look across the stage at the University of Denver and see Mitt 3.
First there was primary Mitt. Then there was general-election Mitt. Now there is new general-election Mitt.
Actually, if we go back to when Romney first ran for president in 2008, this would be Mitt 5. If we go back to when Romney was governor of Massachusetts, this would be Mitt 7 or Mitt 8.
Or Mitt Ad nauseam. Maybe that’s it.
Once upon a time there was a version of Mitt running as a liberal for the U.S. Senate in Massachusetts. In a debate, the late Ted Kennedy assessed the abortion rhetoric coming from Romney and said that Mitt was neither pro-choice nor anti-choice, but “multiple choice.”
For most everything Romney now says, there is a video contradiction.
While it’s true that he can shake away his image on his Etch A Sketch, it’s also true that some wiseacre almost assuredly will have taken and saved a digital recording of the image shaken away.
On “60 Minutes” the other night, for example, Romney said, as if approvingly, that we essentially had universal health care in America already. That’s because, he said, some poor sap having a heart attack can get an ambulance sent for him and get attention at the emergency room.
Never mind the heartlessness and absurdity of telling a man that he need only confront death to get last-gasp defibrillation courtesy of the taxpayers and the already-insured.
More to the point: Somebody found a clip from 2007 in which Romney was lamenting the very thing he was now approving.
He said then: More and more people are either getting on Medicare or on Medicaid or receiving uninsured and uncompensated care at emergency rooms on the tabs of the rest us. “If that’s not socialized medicine, I don’t know what it is,” he said.
So is that no longer socialized medicine? Or does Mitt now like socialized medicine?
Who knows? Who can say?
Signals for tonight are that the newest Mitt will hit Obama freshly in this way: Shaking away his disparagement of half of Americans as moochers who are unreachable by his personal-responsibility policies, Romney will say that it actually is he, not Obama, who wants to cut taxes for the middle class and raise taxes on high incomes.
He will say, furthermore, that Obama already has raised taxes outrageously on the middle class by mandating that everyone buy health insurance.
That is to say Mitt is going to try on a populist mask nearly a month before Halloween.
So let’s look behind the shaken Etch A Sketch.
First, there’s an old image way back there of Mitt imposing the same . . . uh, tax, if you please. It was when he was governor of Massachusetts.
Second, Mitt’s assertion that he will cut taxes for the middle class is based on the fact that—in doubling-down on trickle-down—he wants to cut income tax rates across the board for everyone. And that, naturally, accrues to the greatest cash benefit of already-undertaxed multi-millionaires such as himself.
Third, Mitt claims he will put a fair tax burden back on higher-income persons by closing loopholes and eliminating tax exemptions and deductions and general favors in the tax code. But he refuses to provide the least specific—even one—about what he is talking about.
Is he going to try to take way your home mortgage interest deduction?
He says the campaign is no time to get laden with the devilish details, but only with the angelic policy.
His position is that a campaign shouldn’t get bogged down in divisive specifics that ought to be deferred to congressional sausage-making after the election. But a candidate hardly deserves credit now for brave policy to come, especially when he cowers from brave policy now.
Essentially, he is asking Americans to trust his over-worked Etch A Sketch.
Anyway, the way to build support for brave policy is to put it on the table in the campaign and, by then winning, assert a credible mandate for it. By Romney’s way, he’ll have no constituency at all for whatever specific he might propose, assuming he ever intends actually to propose one.
Fourth, and finally, Romney’s assertion that the individual health insurance mandate is a tax is contradicted directly and fully by his campaign’s assertion only months ago that it was not a tax. And it’s contradicted by Romney’s oops moment of boomeranged spontaneity only days ago from the stump.
Mitt alleged in that incident that the one thing Obama would do in a second term that he hadn’t done in the first is . . . drum roll, please—raise taxes.
Got it? Romney said days ago that Obama didn’t raise taxes in the first term, but, by golly, he would sure-enough raise them in the second. And now he says in a new commercial, and likely will say in the debate tonight, that Obama indeed raised taxes in the first term, and by record amounts.
Here’s the thing: Shaking the Etch A Sketch doesn’t change history or truth. It only changes the momentary re-invention.
Even if you agree with Dirty Harry that Obama is an empty chair, you have to admit that an empty chair is a more knowable and reliable image than a human eraser.
John Brummett’s column appears regularly in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Email him at jbrummett@arkansasonline.com. Read his blog at brummett.arkansasonline.com.
Comments on: Mitt’s next big reveal
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.
You must login to make comments.
TimberTopper says... October 3, 2012 at 6:29 a.m.
Seems for the Republicans, the old saying is true, the one about tell one lie and you have to tell another and another. It's to the point that they seem to be willing to lie about anything and anybody. And the bad part is, some Americans are either to dumb, too lazy , or too closed mind to search for the truth.
( permalink | suggest removal )
morebeer says... October 3, 2012 at 8:08 a.m.
Pretty early in the morning to be running your blood pressure that high, razr. Hope you have good health care. And they say liberals are angry and unhappy. Must be the Hogs.
( permalink | suggest removal )
RonalFos says... October 3, 2012 at 8:25 a.m.
Jeez Kenneth, you need make sure you stay on your meds between now and the election or you may not make it through it all!
( permalink | suggest removal )
LevitiCuss says... October 3, 2012 at 8:40 a.m.
Multiple-Choice Romney! The Dems need to pound THAT! At this point it seems as if the Republicans would lie if the truth sounded better.
( permalink | suggest removal )
davidscherrey_sbcglobal.net says... October 3, 2012 at 9:01 a.m.
It would be better off for the nation if Obama would find the chair in the Oval Office instead playing around in Hollywood, Vegas picking up campaign checks. Maybe spend a little more time in the chair instead of on the golf course.
Obama is asking for four more years to perfect cronyism, four more years of high unemployment, high deficit, mismanaged foreign policies, drop in the wealth for the average American, Obama wants four more years to further ruin the U.S. economy and to further lie to us. In four more years we will be a food stamp nation with a national debt of 21 trillion growing by more than $4 billion per day, health insurance premiums has risen by $3,000 since Obama took office. With his record there is only one place for him to sit and that is the unemployment chair.
Yes we need a human eraser a man with accomplishments to take over and erase the failed policy's of the last four years. “When somebody doesn't do the job we have to let him go."
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... October 3, 2012 at 9:08 a.m.
If you rightwingers would stop watching Fox News, Glenn Beck, and listening to Rush, you would realize that we are going to be fine. Housing prices are going back up and the economy is expanding. We do not need to drastically change anything. We need to cut back on the wars and the military spending, and cut back on certain other programs while we expand education and spending in American on infrastructure. This President gets that hard work and education are the answers to all of our problem. We do not need more tax cuts for the superwealthy, and we do not need any more wars. The Republicans better get used to losing in states with educated citizens, or they need to change their message. The Republicans have become the cheerleaders for robber barons and polluters, and they can spend and spend on ads full of lies, but most people are not going to buy it.
( permalink | suggest removal )
ArkansasObserver says... October 3, 2012 at 9:11 a.m.
Truth? Let's just talk about the truth for a minute:
Does any Obama backer really believe this is the most transparent administration ever? Even Obama's proudest achievement, Obamacare, was wrapped in such secrecy that nobody was allowed to read it until AFTER it passed... not even most lawmakers.
Does any Obama backer really believe that Ambassador Stevens' death was the result of a movie? Or that our government had no prior knowledge of the attack despite the Libyan government's assertion that it provided warnings, and despite there being multiple Facebook posts from the attackers themselves in advance of the 9/11 anniversary?
Does any Obama backer really believe that Obama still blamed the movie for Ambassador Steven's death in his UN speech a full 10 days after it was established that the real cause of the deaths of he and 3 others was a terrorist attack combined with an utter lack of security... despite Ambassador Stevens having requested that additional security?
Does any Obama backer really believe that the approval for Fast and Furious, where guns illegally furnished by the US Government were used to kill our own border agents and 14 high school kids at a birthday party did not come from Attorney General Holder? Have you read about the cover-up uncovered by Univision? Do you know that Holder is still withholding over 80,000 documents requested by the House Oversight Committee? Even if you manage to believe Holder had no knowledge, is there not such a thing as taking responsibility for your agency?
Does any Obama backer really not believe that Obama's ultimate goal is to create a socialist society in the U.S. that is similar to those in Europe and Venezuela? One which sees the U.S. power degraded to match that of France?
Wake up Brummett and know that the re-election of Barrack Obama will cause more harm to our beloved USA than Iran can inflict with a nuclear bomb. He has already told Putin that once he has the election wrapped up, he can do anything he desires with foreign policy... the likes of which we are witnessing in the middle-east today. He has already proven what he can do with executive orders that dreasically alter federal law, by removing the work requirement from most welfare programs, quadrupling the dependence on those programs.
Quote all the fake polls you like, but if my fellow countrymen still have the American spirit and the good sense I think they have, they will ignore the likes of people like you and will elect Romney in such a landslide that it will overwhelm the illegal efforts of democrats to allow the votes of illegal aliens while suppressing the absentee ballots of our military.
I pray, for the good of my country that it is so.
( permalink | suggest removal )
ArkansasObserver says... October 3, 2012 at 9:17 a.m.
Just one more word... "Obamaphone". If you have not seen the video, google that word and watch for yourself where this country is headed.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Bigpop says... October 3, 2012 at 9:51 a.m.
that the "razzer" brought up sicking the taliban on Brummett, in reference to journelists like him, is confirming why some of us have already refered to many of his ilk the new American taliban, do it our way or we'll eliminate you! And we want religious freedom to believe and worship our way, and you better too! And now they put distrust in the press or new acronym, MSM, this mistrust originated from sources of the most outrageous untruthful sources around!
( permalink | suggest removal )
RZRBKINTXS says... October 3, 2012 at 11:02 a.m.
I think Brummet must get paid directly by the DNC. And these libs on here will never accept the facts that are right in front of their faces. They refuse to acknowledge that they made a collossal mistake in electing this man, but their pride and lack of reason simply won't let them admit it.
( permalink | suggest removal )
KCSAP says... October 3, 2012 at 11:09 a.m.
This opinion piece superbly demonstrates the bias of Brummett and the Democratic Gazette. If the paper would publish more current information, like maybe, the facts behind the mess in Libya; they may find the readership would improve!
( permalink | suggest removal )
RZRBKINTXS says... October 3, 2012 at 11:21 a.m.
The better question is which Obama we'll see tonight. Pathological Liar Obama? Union Thug Obama? Race baiter Obama? Foreign Appeasement Obama? Corporate Crony Obama?
I can't wait.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Jjackk says... October 3, 2012 at 11:24 a.m.
Yes, it is labeled commentary and yes it is current, there is a Presidential race going on. If you want Libyan information why would you want third person hearsay? To get accurate information you would need a reporter on the ground. Surely you don't think this newspaper would have a reporter on the ground in Libya. I really doubt if you would watch Al Jezeera but they would be the most accurate.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Jfish says... October 3, 2012 at 11:49 a.m.
The better debate to watch would be Bill O'Reilly and Jon Stewart, although both can be outlandish at times to prove their points, you would get alot more honesty and truth from these two. Tonight, I doubt that you will hear anything that you have not heard before and after the debate, you will have to go to a site like politifact.XXX to determine if what they actually said was true. And of course John will say that Obama clearly won the debate and Gitz will say that Romney won without question.
( permalink | suggest removal )
harley1305121514 says... October 3, 2012 at 12:05 p.m.
ArkansasObserver has said it all truthfully! Well done!! I will just say I couldn't agree more.
BUT....Populist has informed us all that...."we are going to be fine" and now how could I or anyone else be concerned about Obama being re-elected?
Thanks Populist! I was worried about 4 more years of NOTHING BUT DOOM & GLOOM but....YOU, POPULIST, have soothed my mind! Let's hear a cheer for Populist. GOD HELP HER PLEASE!!!!! That's mine!
( permalink | suggest removal )
harley1305121514 says... October 3, 2012 at 12:08 p.m.
Jfish....great post and very ture!
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... October 3, 2012 at 12:18 p.m.
Harley,
The rest of the country will be fine. If Arkansas sells itself to the Koch brothers, then there is going to be lots of formaldehyde in the rivers and cancer everywhere, but maybe the formadehyde can clean up some of the chicken poop flowing in Arkansas rivers. That fracking sure is making a mess too! Well, new Jersey calls itself the "Garden State"; there is no reason why Arkansas can't call itself the "Natural State". Hopefully, the feds and EPA can step in and do something. The Justice Department has been cracking down on the election fraud and the drug cartels in Arkansas; they can concentrate on the environmental offenders next. (When I was a Republican, I complained about election fraud in eastern Arkansas some 22 years ago under the first Bush administration. They sent some moron to my office who took some notes on a pad, and I never heard from them again. If they are still cheating over there, at least they are cheating for the right team now. I wish that Halter had beaten Blanche though.)
( permalink | suggest removal )
BillSmith says... October 3, 2012 at 12:23 p.m.
ArkansasObserver You just need to pray for your soul for spreading lies and rumors.
You say "He has already proven what he can do with executive orders that drastically alter federal law, by removing the work requirement from most welfare programs, quadrupling the dependence on those programs."
PolitiFact checked a Romney campaign ad's claim that Obama ended welfare work requirements earlier this month, rating it Pants On Fire. In reality, the Obama administration has said it will consider proposals from states that are aimed at finding better ways of getting welfare recipients into jobs. FactCheck(dot)org and the Washington Post Fact Checker have also said the claim is false.
This is reason enough to not believe anything ArkansasObserver has said in his post.
People can you not see ArkansasObserver's Fox News spin analogy, tell a lie to enough people enough times and some will believe it. It works great with the Fox News ditto heads in Arkansas
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... October 3, 2012 at 12:31 p.m.
BillSmith,
They are just getting riled up in nervous anticipation over the debate. They know that Romney is going to be twitching and flailing his arms as he promises the moon and tries to explain how he has changed his position on every issue. He will look in the camera and say how he sincerely cares about the American people, but we all know that we heard how he really felt on the secret tape. Romney is going to choke just like he did when he debated Teddy Kennedy in the senate race. I hope that everybody will be watching. Of course, Fox will declare Romney the winner.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Reason says... October 3, 2012 at 12:55 p.m.
In the 2011 continuing resolution, Congress, at the insistence of the House of Representatives, slashed the president’s request for embassy security and construction and forced another cut in fiscal year 2012. Altogether Congress has eliminated $296 million from embassy security and construction in the last two years with additional cuts in other State Department security accounts.
Sequestration required under the Budget Control Act of 2011 will take more than $100 billion more out of the program in 2013 if the current Congress does not overcome the impasse over budget cuts and tax revenues by yearend. Those cuts are largely the result of the draconian and unrealistically low budget caps placed by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) on all discretionary spending, falling particularly hard on the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee with responsibility for embassy security.
( permalink | suggest removal )
morebeer says... October 3, 2012 at 1:06 p.m.
Bill, you miss the point. pants on fire lies are right-wing facts!
( permalink | suggest removal )
morebeer says... October 3, 2012 at 1:40 p.m.
Populist, Fox News declared Romney the winner at 10 a.m. today, and they're busy deconstructing the future debate.
( permalink | suggest removal )
cliffcarson says... October 3, 2012 at 2:34 p.m.
As I read the bashing of Obama and his policies causing the failing economy, I wonder how even a Republican can just ignore the Bush years and what it did to the American economy. Today CNN is really doing its best to denigrate Obama while trying to put their bias on as revelation of the wondrous Mitt Romney. And the Republicans call it "the Liberal Media". The Arkansas Democrat Gazette is Media and I wouldn't be surprised to here some claim that the ADG is Liberal.
As long as we are wondering, I wonder what would have happened had McCain and Palin been elected. Think about this long and hard. Would the dynamic duo have stemmed the 800,000 per month job loss? Obama did, in spite of the most rejectionist Senate in the History of the United States. Even though the Senate was equally divided, Republicans were able to stymie any recover by invoking the cloture rule (three fifths of the senate =60 votes to stop a filibuster) meaning that 41 Senators can stop, the stopping of a filibuster, and in fact stop any measure from passing the Senate if they so desire.
This is what the Republican Senators did over these four years of Obama, never did more than 4 Republican Senators ever vote for an Obama recovery bill and with more than 45 Republican Senators in the Senate, recovery became extremely difficult.
And these same people who brought the misery, who prolonged the misery, and then who blames Obama for both problems, want you to allow them to fix it all. I believe that if we had elected McCain and Palin, we would right now be wallowing in a Depression equal to the Great Depression. And the Republicans would be blaming the Democrats. You can bet on it.
( permalink | suggest removal )
ladyLiberty says... October 3, 2012 at 2:44 p.m.
in aarp today it say arkansas folks 65 and + account 70% of their income from social security. it is CRITICAL for us to know where are candidates stand on social security and medicare! watch PBS for debates of 4 arkansas candidates Oct. 23 - oct 25.
as the AARP will ask them their viewpoints on these important issue.
Arkansas need to be more aware than any other state! if you expect to save SS or medicare please watch these debates.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... October 3, 2012 at 2:46 p.m.
John is absolutely correct about how many times Romney has changed his opinions back and forth, the films and transcripts are out there to prove it. It cannot be denied.
Morebeer, Fox "news" is usually opinion, they just don't label it as such. They specialize in shoddy, dishonest journalism.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... October 3, 2012 at 2:58 p.m.
John says our choice is between an empty chair and an eraser.
South Park says much the same thing a little differently - a choice between a douche bag and a s**t sandwich.
~
I agree with both Johnny B and South Park. You republicans and democrats have divided this country and we are ruined because of it. Neither party has an ounce of compromise in it. Republicans and Democrats both want inordinate control our private lives, with democrats playing the nanny and republicans playing the prison guard. To hell with both of them.
~
When I was young and carefree, I was an idealistic democrat. Older hard working me, saddled with the responsibility of a family, became a republican. Now that I am old and wise, I am independent. Let's all become independent and starve out the artificial two party system.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... October 3, 2012 at 3:14 p.m.
We are all caught between the republicans wanting to know the minutiae of our personal business and democrats wanting to control every nuance of our lives. We are doomed unless we can abondon these artificial party affiliations and become independents. Quit sending money, people!!! Starve them enough and they will be forced to the middle to win the independent vote.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Jjackk says... October 3, 2012 at 4:05 p.m.
I'm with you. A true independent would not vote for either party.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... October 3, 2012 at 4:14 p.m.
Populist, I just saw Obama's "secret" tape that reveals him as the hater and divider he really is. Talking with a fake dialect, saying the federal goverment discriminated against the blacks of New Orleans during Katrina. Spouting his dividing lies. He is no better than Romney. Neither party serves the American people.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... October 3, 2012 at 4:21 p.m.
Thanks, JJack, but you've got to vote, man! Hold your nose and vote out whoever is in office. Just keep throwing the bastards out until you get someone you can stomach; because for now, voting for politicians is like changing dirty underwear.
( permalink | suggest removal )
TomN says... October 3, 2012 at 4:22 p.m.
Thank God, that congress, representing the collective wisdom of the whole nation, and by extension the entire citizenry of this nation, obstructed this President. That's why it's called democracy, maybe sloppy at times but practical, not entirely given to one idiot (used in the Latin/Greek sense). And should the President win re-election come November 6 (which I believe he will not), mind you because of the electoral college but not the majority of states, more than likely the congress will be controlled by the opposing party to "check" this President before he destroys what remains. So, let's say this President wins, even with the electoral college votes, the US Constitution safeguards us because of its checks and balances. But be prepared for little to be done, especially by the Democrats measure, because it cannot achieve its soci-economic paradigm shift for America. That said, we will still have to live with his rule by fiat (executive orders) for 4 more years.
( permalink | suggest removal )
TomN says... October 3, 2012 at 4:32 p.m.
"Just keep throwing the bastards out until you get someone you can stomach; because for now, voting for politicians is like changing dirty underwear."
Agree!
( permalink | suggest removal )
davidscherrey_sbcglobal.net says... October 3, 2012 at 5:22 p.m.
To BillSmith: Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation – who helped draft the actual welfare reform legislation – called Obama's HHS announcement "the end of welfare reform as we know it." The tough work requirements at the heart of the bill would be "waived or overridden" by the HHS. "In the past, state bureaucrats have attempted to define activities such as hula dancing, attending Weight Watchers, and bed rest as 'work'. Welfare reform instituted work standards to block these dodges," Rector wrote. "Now that the Obama administration has abolished those standards, we can expect 'work' in the TANF program to mean anything but work."
If the revision wouldn't single-handedly cripple the work requirement, it "has opened the door to changes in welfare reform that could destroy it from within." So concludes New York University political scientist Lawrence Mead, one of the experts whose research paved the way for the "workfare" law passed in 1996. Brookings Institution analyst Ron Haskins, who as a committee aide helped draft the historic welfare reform measure., told The Fiscal Times that if the administration "wanted to undermine the work requirement," the new policy "is a way to do it."
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... October 3, 2012 at 5:35 p.m.
Thanks, TomN - you sound like an independent voter. LIKE +1
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... October 3, 2012 at 5:46 p.m.
The only problem with being an independent voter is not being able to vote in the primaries. The democrats and republicans do conspire together to eliminate competition. Libertarians caucus with the republicans and Greens with the democrats, so....phbbbtttttt.
( permalink | suggest removal )
T6 says... October 3, 2012 at 6:16 p.m.
Wait until Seniors find out after they vote for Obama he's going to cut another 250 Billion on top of the 750 Billion he's already cut from Medicare. Yet, Obama Bin Lying says Romney/Ryan going's to cut Medicare!
( permalink | suggest removal )
GAITOR says... October 3, 2012 at 10 p.m.
If the debate was a WWF match, Romney body slammed BHO.
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... October 3, 2012 at 10:50 p.m.
Now Obama will be seeking the pity vote.
( permalink | suggest removal )
morebeer says... October 3, 2012 at 11:44 p.m.
Don't see the body slam. Best line of the night was Obama pointing out Romney's lack of detail on three main issues of the debate. He could have put Romney on the defensive more, on outsourcing, Bain, the 47% comment, but that's not Obama's style. He's a high road guy and it's always worked for him. Obama did what he had to do, show he was on top of things. And he clearly won the Obamacare debate, which Romney should have made some points on.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... October 4, 2012 at 1:23 a.m.
People who haven't read a lot this political season may have been impressed by Romney's rapid fire clattering, vague and full of hot air, saying the opposite of what he has said before, trying to make people think he understands ordinary people. Obama, though a slower, more measured speaker, had facts on his side. Be watching for the fact check articles to come out.
( permalink | suggest removal )
davidscherrey_sbcglobal.net says... October 4, 2012 at 4:45 a.m.
Debating an empty chair was easy.
( permalink | suggest removal )
TomN says... October 4, 2012 at 9:15 a.m.
Putting all BS aside, Obama was taken to the Principal's office and severely spanked last night. Resounding and clear defeat for Obama. Wondering if the ADG editorial staff even watched the debate. Appears they simply picked and chose lines from pieces they read to soot their taste. Romney showed incredible acumen in his far superior understanding of how the American economy works. Obama could only stutter and stammer. Obama is spent and has nothing to offer but distortion and lies regarding his opponent. It was obvious last night he has no record to run upon. Kind of hard to run upon failure. Romney finally had the opportunity to point blank stand up to Obama (and his Chicago style thug spin masters) who has done his best to define Romney other than he is. Romney put Obama in his place last night. Obama is gone! Good riddance!
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... October 4, 2012 at 10:21 a.m.
Romney kept talking about what a success he was in Massachusetts, but they are all voting against him. He keeps on lying and changing his positions. Now he is going to cover preexisting conditions? For whom? With what coverage; he is getting rid of Obamacare. He says he is going to decrease taxes, but not decrease revenue? Romney is going to increase military spending and cut the deficit? It's all voodoo math.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... October 4, 2012 at 5:50 p.m.
Populist, Romney only plans to cover pre existing conditions for those who have had no break in coverage, pretty much like the current law. The TRULY uninsured, and currently uninsurable, he will leave as they are. Hard hearted SOB.
( permalink | suggest removal )
ladyLiberty says... October 4, 2012 at 9:49 p.m.
Pobucker,
i am an independent and i can vote in either primary, well one or the other whichever
i choose. or do you mean there is not a primary for the independent?. sometimes i vote in the republican one and another time in the democratic one.
i did not enjoy the debates. But i did notice how Obama looked right into the camera and talked directly TO the american people. Romney looked at Obama and talked to him. it did appear that Obama was the more intelligent of the two and could think on his feet not just memorize zingers and punch points.
( permalink | suggest removal )
RonalFos says... October 4, 2012 at 10:39 p.m.
Who cares what Romney said during the debate. He will say the opposite tomorrow or the next day.
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... October 5, 2012 at 12:03 a.m.
Obama sold us a bill of goods when he ran as candidate Obama. Now those chickens have come home to roost, and he can not defend his record.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... October 5, 2012 at 7:05 a.m.
Inquire,
Of course, Romney is only going to cover preexisting conditions if you have health insurance, but Romney acted in the debate as if his "plan" was going to take care of everybody. Romney promised lower taxes for everybody, more military spending, a lower deficit, and the same level of benefits for everybody. The math does not add up. Romney is just a liar. At least, Obama is truthful that taxes on the rich will go up and military spending must go down and other cuts must be made in order to start cutting the deficit.
( permalink | suggest removal )
GAITOR says... October 5, 2012 at 7:50 a.m.
If Obama were speaking the truth Wed. night, that would be the first time. 32 days to go.
( permalink | suggest removal )
ladyLiberty says... October 5, 2012 at 12:39 p.m.
speaking of first time...Romney is now flopping to the center. he is going to say all the things to get the independent center folks to vote his way. notice his change on taxes, on health care? he is now copying what obama says to get votes...which is the real Romney? he will say anything he needs to get votes. he thinks the donars and lobbists represent america?!!! no way he is disconnected from what the american citizens want. he thinks if he gets millions from military contracts, that we all want that? or if he gets billions from health care industry to get rid of obama care that we all want that? he does NOT know or care what the 98% want at all. Obama in contrast is in touch with the americans esp. middle class and he does know what they need and want. (even if the people of Arkansas refuse to help theirselves, he will help them anyway).
all arkansas folks over 65 are using their social security for 70% of their income!!
read the new AARP magazine this month. yet they will vote for Romney?! that is just bizare.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... October 5, 2012 at 1:31 p.m.
There is a film clip on line of Romney on the Letterman program, in which he said the uninsured should not be allowed to buy insurance because that isn't the way the game is played. Only one candidate understands how people can fall through the insurance cracks, or be dropped by a company, and how difficult this makes their lives. It sure isn't Romney, despite his pretending to believe differently than what he has said his whole campaign during the debate. That wasn't a debate on his part, it was a performance, coldly calculated to deceive. Remember, he has been taught by his church to lie to achieve his goals......"lying for the Lord."
( permalink | suggest removal )
GAITOR says... October 5, 2012 at 5:58 p.m.
The Liar in Chief was exposed Wed. night for the acter he truly is. If he is given the lines written by somene else via teleprompter, he can really deliver them well, but when he has to rely on his own words off the cuff, he looks like, well as he did the other night, a lying bumbler.
( permalink | suggest removal )
RonalFos says... October 5, 2012 at 7:38 p.m.
Speaking of liar. Romney said half of Obama’s clean energy investments had failed. That’s simply false. While a handful of companies granted loan guarantees have folded, hundreds of other companies are succeeding. In fact, the failure rate for clean energy loan recipients was only 1.4 percent by the end of 2011.
The $90 billion the Obama administration has invested in clean energy since then has already delivered amazing returns: wind power has doubled in three years, solar power has quadrupled in four years, and more than 1 million homes have received energy-saving retrofits. More than 150,000 Americans have jobs making parts for and assembling clean cars—hybrids, electric cars, and other advanced vehicles that weren’t even available 10 years ago. And consumers can find nearly 60 fuel-efficient models in showrooms today—up from 27 in 2009. These cars are putting more money in Americans’ pockets and helping American automakers come back from the brink.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... October 5, 2012 at 9:07 p.m.
It was Romney who has been caught in many lies from the debate. It was Romney who claimed entirely different positions from what he has been campaigning on. He is an absolutely pathological liar. He forgets that films and transcripts exist.
The president spoke in facts, provable.
Romney's followers accuse the president of lying while Romney is proven to lie constantly. Republicans complain about voter fraud, while they are the ones paying firms to commit voter registration fraud all over the country. it is 1984 and Republicans speak Doublespeak.
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... October 5, 2012 at 10:05 p.m.
GM could have gone through bankruptcy and would not have interrupted production.
~
Oh now the tax payer is into hock of untold amounts of billions of dollars and no telling when that money, if ever will be returned from the GM boondoggle.
( permalink | suggest removal )
harley1305121514 says... October 6, 2012 at 1:28 a.m.
All of you Obama posters that declare Obama the winner of the debate are the only ones that must not have watched it! Even ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and ofcourse Fox newscasters ALL gave the win to Romney! Obama was at a loss of how to debate. Oh now Democrats are saying things like he wasn't allowed a teleprompter and the altitude caused him to be off balance. Obama needs a machine that tells him what to say? Face it.....Obama got his butt kicked big time!!!!!
( permalink | suggest removal )
aimee says... October 6, 2012 at 1:54 a.m.
Mitt Romney's biggest FLIP FLOPS..!!!
.
rollingstone. com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/mitt-romneys-biggest-flip-flops-20120801
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... October 6, 2012 at 11:18 a.m.
Harley,
If you think you win by telling everybody lies that they wanted to hear, then Romney won big time. I loved the whopper that his "plan" was going to cover preexisting conditions since he doesn't even have a healthcare plan except go to the emergency room and maybe they will treat you. I also loved the whopper about how he was going to cut taxes for the middle class; of course, Romney's idea of middle class are those who make between $250,000 and 5 million a year.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... October 6, 2012 at 11:32 a.m.
I don't make any excuses for Obama except that he was obviously off his game, maybe tired, probably stunned by Romney suddenly supposedly changing his position from everything he has said the whole campaign.
The fact remains that Romney has been caught in at least 28 lies in that debate. He is on film and transcript as having previously said totally different things than what he suddenly said in the debate.
Romney won on glibly lying, acting like he had some sort of hyperactivity condition, weirdly smirking. He was the rudest debater I have ever seen in my life, running roughshod over the moderator like a schoolyard bully.
Obama won on facts.
Another one of Romney's lies was saying half of the green companies that got stimulus money failed. There were thirty some green companies, and THREE of them failed. Maybe MittMath is the reason his proposed budget is so vague and he refuses to elaborate.
( permalink | suggest removal )
lazybar says... October 6, 2012 at 12:12 p.m.
donald trump is a small business and you claim romney is out of touch.......obozo makes up his own facts as he goes and his dumb blank looks explains why he is a failure
( permalink | suggest removal )
GAITOR says... October 6, 2012 at 1:40 p.m.
Obama's lies go back to what he said in 2008 and since. Close Gitmo, get us out of Afgan., unemployment will not get above 8%, will work across the aisle, taxes will not increase for middle class (Obamacare made that a huge lie), will have the most transparent adminitration ever...
Do I need to go on and on and on, becuase you know I can?
I didn't think so.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... October 6, 2012 at 3:04 p.m.
Obama would have liked to work across the aisle, but it can't be all one way. Before he even took office, McConnell and Cantor held meetings with the Republicans insisting that they had to vote against everything Obama wanted, period. They made it rough on the few who dared to work with the president. This is why vote after vote, the Republicans voted as a solid block against the President, even on issues that most of them voted FOR when Bush was in office. There is no accounting for this except for pure, evil, unpatriotic obstructionism. It's impossible to compromise with people like that.
( permalink | suggest removal )
GAITOR says... October 6, 2012 at 8:09 p.m.
Your view of the facts are skewed. What about the other cited lies? No answer for them. Again, I can go on and on...
( permalink | suggest removal )
ladyLiberty says... October 6, 2012 at 9:41 p.m.
Gaitor says "obama promised to get us out of afgan"
wrong: Obama promised to get us out of Iraq. which he did.
Gaitor:
Obamacare did NOT increase tax for the middle class! Obama care will save
middle class medicare and it will save social security. it is the Romney Ryan plan
to end medicare as we know it and also social security..see the AARP debates on PBS for the candidates of Arkansas on oct 23-oct 25 as AARP is worried about the state of Arkansas especially as residents 65 and over average 70 % of their income from social security. and beneficiaries still spend $4,500 out of pocket health care costs. see PBS on oct 26 at 6:30 p.m for a review of the issues.
don't let anyone else think for you. (especially Fox news) Arkansas needs to forget the national issues now and focus on what is good for our citizens.
( permalink | suggest removal )
GAITOR says... October 7, 2012 at 12:40 p.m.
Jan 2009 the natiinal debt was approx. $12tril. Now, $16tril plus. Obama promised to cut the deficit in half, yet he has increased the national debt and not passed a budget in 4 years. Also, the Liar in Chief was to "restore" U.S.'s standing in the world. How has allowing the murder of the ambassabor and three other Americans in Libya and allowing thugs over run embassies an consulates around the world good for America's standing in the world? I can go on and on...
( permalink | suggest removal )
DontDrinkDatKoolAid says... October 7, 2012 at 8:46 p.m.
"Obama would have liked to work across the aisle, but it can't be all one way."
~
What a FKING joke.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... October 8, 2012 at 1:38 a.m.
I just finished reading the September 7 issue of TIME. Even more quotes from people who were at the McConnell/Cantor meetings right before Obama took office. Quotes about how they were ordered to vote against everything Obama was for and not allow him to have any victories. This policy had them voting against things they voted FOR when Bush was in office. These unpatriotic lawmakers were more interested in this spiteful behavior than in working to solve the problems of a country in crisis. They drove the best members of their party away.
Those of us who deal in truth don't have to punctuate our writing with veiled filthy words.
( permalink | suggest removal )
GAITOR says... October 8, 2012 at 10:04 a.m.
Is it partiotic to travel around the wolrd and apologize for the U.S. acting in its self-interest? Is it partriotic to bring Maoists, bent on demolishing the American way of life from within, into the administration? Is it patriotic to ignore requests from your ambassador for additional security and just dys later he and 3 other Americans are murdered, all the while blaiming the violence on some lame Utube video? Is it patriotic to promise to cut the deficit in half, yetjust 3 1/2 years later the facts are the national debt has increased by more than $4.5til? Is it partriotic to jam Obmamcare through Congress against the majority of Americans and say you have to pass it to see what is in it? Is it partiotic to say you will close Gitmo, yet no even attempt t do so. I can go on, and on and on....
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... October 8, 2012 at 10:25 a.m.
Gaitor,
I believe the Republicans were the ones who cut the security budget at the embassies. It also was Romney who went to the Middle East and started insulting the Arabs. The deficit increased because Ryan led the Republicans away from any compromise of cutting spending and raising revenue. The republicans also walked away from jobs bills. I have no idea who the Maoist is; I am sure that is something you heard from Rush or Fox news.
( permalink | suggest removal )
GAITOR says... October 8, 2012 at 11:36 a.m.
Populist: You are as blind as the Liar in Chief. Obama and H. Clinton are the ones that have been in charge of the diplomatic crops for the last 3 1/2 years and ignored the requests for more security in June, July and August 2012. It happened on their watch. DUH!
*
Oops, there is a dorp of Koll-Aide on your chin...left...left...right there.
( permalink | suggest removal )
TomN says... October 8, 2012 at 11:51 a.m.
Hey Inquire, what is it you do not understand about D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y? Would the Republicans had been true patriots if they had voted YES to every thing Obama and the Democrats wanted to pass? Your hyperbole is such a joke! You might want to engage your mind before you speak. Questioning others' patriotism because they didn't vote the way you and others desired. So childish and illogical.
( permalink | suggest removal )
aimee says... October 8, 2012 at 2:09 p.m.
Gaitor:
.
You keep insisting that the President was telling "lies" when he was campaigning BEFORE the Bush meltdown... So, are we going to HOLD Mitt Romney to HIS campaign promises....and IF so, WHICH ONES exactly..?????????
.
Abortion..???
.
"Don't Ask, Don't Tell"..???
.
Gun control..???
.
Health care reform..???
.
Climate change..???
.
The Bush tax cuts..???
.
Tax pledges..???
.
EVEN "Flip Flopping" itself..!!!!!
.
"Flip
'I’m a strong believer in stating your position and not wavering.' — Comments to NARAL Pro Choice Massachusetts, 2002
.
Flop
'I changed my position.' — Iowa straw poll debate, 2007"
.
rollingstone. com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/mitt-romneys-biggest-flip-flops-20120801
.
So, which is it, Gator..??? Which campaign PROMISES are we to HOLD Mitt to exactly..??? (since he is so ALL OVER THE BOARD on everything..!!!!)
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... October 8, 2012 at 7:53 p.m.
Aimee.
Good points.
Gaitor,
Our country always will be attacked by enemies. This should not be a political issue unless a political figure or party did something negligent or reckless which caused the harm. From thehilldotcom from 9/18/12:
"Democrats enacted $1.803 billion for embassy security, construction and maintenance for fiscal 2010, when they still controlled the Senate and House. After Republicans took control of the House and picked up six Senate seats, Congress reduced the enacted budget to $1.616 billion in fiscal 2011, and to $1.537 billion for 2012."
Again, I think that it is stupid to politicize this issue. The attack may not have been prevented by more funding. Romney made this an issue. He and the Republicans just attack Obama no matter what. If something good happens, the Democrats have conspired to fix the numbers. If something bad happens, it's all Obama's fault. We need more people in this country with some intellectual integrity and honesty. The Republican Party is severely lacking. No wonder Olympia Snowe refused to run for reelection.
( permalink | suggest removal )
GAITOR says... October 8, 2012 at 8:02 p.m.
Aimee: When Mitt is elected potus, you can choose your favorite ones.
*
Just remeber this about the Liars in the Obama administration.
*
"We need more security."
*
"NO. Make do with what you have."
*
Four American patriots die and the potus, H. Clinton and UN Abassador blame some lame Utube movie. THOSE THREE ARE LIARS or indifferent KILLERS. You chosse which!!
( permalink | suggest removal )
Populist says... October 8, 2012 at 8:28 p.m.
Gaitor,
I just gave you a citation which disproves your argument that the Democrats were responsible for cutting the security budget. Instead of attributing fictional quotes to Democratic leaders, why don't you try to cite some facts and sources? Oh, you don't have any?
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... October 8, 2012 at 9:45 p.m.
TomN, I answered you on another thread. Again......It would be normal for SOME Republicans to vote against a Democratic president SOME of the time. What was wrong was meeting as a cabal, before Obama even took office and plotting to vote as a solid block against everything he proposed just to keep him from winning any votes. The fact that this meant voting AGAINST things they had voted FOR in other administrations shows how absurd and irrational it was. This level of obstructionism for spite has slowed down our country's recovery. Please reread until you can comprehend why this behavior was unpatriotic.
You are the one guilty of hyperbole. I never said they were unpatriotic for voting against the president, or for not approving every single thing he wanted. They were unpatriotic for plotting to vote against him as a total block no matter what he wanted, to deny him any success, including voting against things they previously supported.
If you cannot differentiate between what you accused me of saying and what I actually said, perhaps you are the one who is illogical and whose mind is disengaged.
( permalink | suggest removal )
BillSmith says... October 8, 2012 at 10:59 p.m.
I say all Christains thinking of voting for Romney, think again. But if the following is not true where is it not?
WHAT DO MORMONS BELIEVE? Acording to Pat Robertson. This is from the CBN website.
Mormons are some of the most exemplary human beings, especially in regard to their behavior patterns and their adherence to the fundamental values of our society. But their religious beliefs are, to put is simply, wrong. They believe that an angel named Moroni left some gold tablets in upstate New York and that these tablets were discovered by a man named Joseph Smith. From these tablets, Joseph Smith "translated" the Book of Mormon, which is the foundation upon which Mormonism is built. Mormons also consider two other books, Doctrine and Covenants and The Pearl of Great Price, to be divinely inspired.
Mormonism differs from biblical Christianity in several areas. Mormons do not believe, for example, that salvation comes through faith in Jesus Christ. Mormons must work their way to heaven. (B. R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City:1958), p. 191.)
Mormonism teaches that God is not the only deity and that we all have the potential of becoming gods. (Ibid., p. 576.) (Remember that Satan's fall came about because he wanted to be like God.) God, according to Mormons, is not just Spirit but has "a body of flesh and bones as tangible as a man's." (Doctrine and Covenants, 130:22.) They teach, "As we are, he was. As he is, we shall become." (Joseph Smith, "The King Follett Discourse," p. 9.) There has been constant revision of Mormon doctrine over the years, as church leaders have changed their minds on a number of subjects including polygamy, which was once sanctioned by the church.
In summary, the Mormon church is a prosperous, growing organization that has produced many people of exemplary character. But when it comes to spiritual matters, the Mormons are far from the truth.
*
My question is if Pat Robertson believes what he just said, why does he support Romney?
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... October 9, 2012 at 1:13 a.m.
Bill, the information you provide is absolutely correct. I've read about Mormons for many years, long before I ever heard of Romney. Another thing they believe is that a woman cannot get into heaven unless her husband calls her in by her secret name.
It is incredible that so many preachers of religions who once tried to be sure their flock knew about what Mormons believed are now seemingly oblivious and support Romney. I feel this is because the religious "right" is showing their true colors; they care more for power than for morals. Or else they hate Obama so much they would risk everything to get rid of him.
I don't care what foolishness Mormons believe until they threaten me with it. The part that scares me about Romney is that as a member of the priesthood, he took a vow to do everything in his power to set up a Mormon kingdom in the US. They have an alternate constitution waiting. It was written by Joseph Smith. The Mormon organization Kingdom of God exists for the purpose of creating the theocracy. Romney has been rumored since his college days to be The One Mighty and Strong of Mormon prophecy, the one who will take over the country.
It is of real concern that they are taught there is no sin in lying to non Mormons. Is that why Romney has been caught in more lies than any candidate ever? Fact checkers found 28 lies just in the debate, besides all the others he has been caught in.
The Mormon plan is to give infidels--that's anybody not Mormon--a period of time to convert after they assume control of the government. WHAT THEN?
All this information is available in countless places.
( permalink | suggest removal )
aimee says... October 9, 2012 at 2:33 a.m.
Gaitor:
.
You're missing the point. Since Romney professes both sides of every issue he INSURES that he will get 50% of the vote X 2.....except for those who NOTICE it..!!!
.
The question is how many will realize his duplicity .???
( permalink | suggest removal )
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.