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

Stay in touch with the Slacktivist on Facebook:

Deny them the use of 'we'
Smart people saying smart things (11.11)
The day after
The Sunday before Election Day
  • Adriaandolleman

    Not much integrity hoe could anyone believe in a man that is this dishonest

  • Robert M. Anderson

    Reply to LOKI:  Your reply is so stupid it’s hard to respond. ‘Getting into’ Harvard means being the best of the best, academically and intellectually; you don’t just ‘fill out an application and get in”.    My question revolves around where those properties were presented, since he won’t release his transcripts. All the ‘birther stuff’ you simply ignore happens to be factally accurate; if you are too lazy to look up the things I stated, that’s on you! There is absolutely NOTHING to suggest that any of Romneys’ finances are illegal, except wild nutcase slander from – people like you! It is a FACT that: Romney gave away to charity the fortune his father left him, and made his millions the old fashioned way, by eaning it. He took over the Olypic mess in 1999, and worked for three years WITHOUT PAY to turn into a monumental success. He served four years as governor of Mass, taking a state left in the red by the previous DEMOCRATIC incumbent, and leaving it in the black – and again, took NO pay for those four years. Hardly the behavior of a man who has ”possibly illegal finances”. It is so difficult to have a reasoned conversation with the liberal left, since you cannot deal with facts, cannot think logically or rationally, or analyze properly. Get back to me when you know what you’re talking about (I shan’t hold my breath waiting for that miracle).

  • EllieMurasaki

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204468004577168972507188592.html –and that’s the Wall Street Journal, which isn’t exactly a bastion of liberal thought–says Romney’s IRA is suspiciously large and Romney’s admitted to moving money offshore to avoid taxes.

    I suppose that’s technically legal, but that doesn’t mean it should be legal, and it is still infuriating as all hell that Mister Multimillionaire pays fewer pennies per dollar in taxes than my entry-level ass does.

  • Loki100

    Your reply is so stupid it’s hard to respond.
    No, that would be your post.

    ‘Getting into’ Harvard means being the best of the best, academically and intellectually; you don’t just ‘fill out an application and get in”.

    While Harvard has strict requirements, the process of  getting into Harvard is much the same process as getting into any private university. Essentially it is, filling out an application and the university considers it.

    My question revolves around where those properties were presented

    The application. That’s the entire point of having an application.

    since he won’t release his transcripts.

    So, you are actually making the claim that Harvard never saw Obama’s transcripts before enrolling him? Are you really that stupid?

    All the ‘birther stuff’ you simply ignore happens to be factally accurate

    No, it isn’t. It’s been completely falsified. You can log onto snoopes and check. All your birther claims originate as chain emails, all of which have been proven false.

     if you are too lazy to look up the things I stated, that’s on you!

    Nope. I went straight to this Snopes page which conveniently has all of your claims on it. And conveniently shows them all to be false. It also shows that you were lying earlier when you said that you went to the library. You got them off the email.

    There is absolutely NOTHING to suggest that any of Romneys’ finances are illegal,except wild nutcase slander from – people like you!

    Except for the fact that he won’t release his tax returns. We know about his Swiss bank accounts, we know about his Cayman Island accounts. It all screams “tax evasion.”

    Also you were the one who just claimed Harvard enrolled a student without looking at his transcripts. So “wild nutcase” really only applies to one of us, and it isn’t me.

    It is a FACT that: Romney gave away to charity the fortune his father left him, and made his millions the old fashioned way, by eaning it.

    Well all this is pretty blatantly misleading. Romney’s father died in the mid ’90s when he had already been running Bain for a decade. And his inheritance was hardly a fortune. By Romney’s own admission it wasn’t much. Romney himself was given enough stock from his parents that he could live off it his entire way through school (along with a free car).

    He took over the Olypic mess in 1999, and worked for three years WITHOUT PAY to turn into a monumental success.

    This is just false. The Salt Lake City Olympics was no where near a success from any perspective other than watching it on TV. It was a massive sinkhole of money and graft. And SLOC had already secured all the funding it needed prior to Romney even coming on. Romney not only accepted a $476,000 severance package from the Salt Lake Organizing Committee, according to federal tax records, but he helped to lobby the committee for similarly large pacts for his 25 senior managers, 17 of whom contributed to his 2002 Massachusetts gubernatorial campaign or the state Republican Party soon after the Winter Games.

    He served four years as governor of Mass, taking a state left in the red by the previous DEMOCRATIC incumbent, and leaving it in the black – and again, took NO pay for those four years.

    And, in the process, utterly destroyed Mass.’s economy.

    Hardly the behavior of a man who has ”possibly illegal finances”.

    This makes no sense. But then again, I’m not crazy. Once again, your ending paragraph is hilariously ironic.

  • Daughter

    The two governors of Masschusetts prior to Romney were both Republicans. When Deval Patrick was elected governor in 2006, he was the first Democrat in that position in 16 years.

  • Daughter

    Whoops, missed one. There were three Republican governors of Mass. in the years just prior to Romney.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    PJ Evans:  One store closure does not a company make; also, of course, it has been over thirteen years since he turned it around, and he is no longer in charge.  If they current owners cannot manage it, that’s not Romney’s responsibility.  As for the rest of my ‘talking points’, those are called ‘facts’.   As a left wing liberal, I realize you are unfamiliar with the concept, so I will be courteous enough to enlighten you.  (I am an Independent; I voted, for example, for Jim Webb(D) and Mark Warner(D) here in VA).  As a trained analyst, though, I am in interested in facts and reason.   You presented NO factual information, either regarding Romney’s alleged (by the left) misdeeds.   You presented NO factual evidence regarding supposed GOP ‘talking poinst’ being lies.  Until you can provide some of that FACTUAL evidence (not wild accusations with no backing),  you have no standing in a rational discussion (i.e., you don’t know what you are talking about).    

  • AnonymousSam

    Forget quibbling over semantics or he-said-she-saids. The fact that the Texas GOP isn’t being condemned by the rest of the Republican party for publicly and proudly declaring their wish to repeal the Voting Rights Act seems like that ought to be a big red flag for virtually every citizen of the United States. How many innocent explanations do you have for a party wanting to restrict–or eliminate–the rights of people to vote?

  • Loki100

     As a trained analyst, though, I am in interested in facts and reason.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    When you lie, at least make the lie believable. I also like how you are a “trained analyst.” You do realize that isn’t an actual thing, right? You can’t be trained in analysis. You are only trained in analyzing specific things.

  • PJ Evans

     I didn’t know that Staples had stores any more, since all I ever see is their trucks delivering to businesses. That’s not ‘turning it around’, that’s turning it into a specialty supply.
    As for the rest of your comment, and the one before that: tl;dr. And you don’t have a clue.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    Actually, Staples was a small chain in Mass (where I grew up);  Bain Capital under Romney turned it into a NATIONWIDE chain, with over 2,000 stores and 90,000 employees.   Of course, since he has not been running Bain since 1999, any failures they might have now are not his!

  • PJ Evans

    he has not been running Bain since 1999

    Evidence lacking for this claim.
    He was signing SEC statements for them after that year, for Ghu’s sake. This is a very strong indication that he was still working for them.

  • Eagles02

    Unfortunately a sociopath will lie and do anything they can to get what they want. Look at the traits of a sociopath. While, certainly no Jeffery Dahmer, Willard Mitt Romney does seem to exhibit symptoms of someone who is a sociopath.

  • AnonymousSam

    *Clears throat* I’m a sociopath and I can tell you with some certainty that it’s a little more complicated than “he’s lying through his teeth, therefore he’s probably a sociopath.” He’s a more likely candidate for narcissism than sociopathy. There’s overlap between the two personality disorders and his “my experiences are characteristic of anything I could ever possibly need to know about America” overtures are certainly indicative of that sort of archetype.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    It could be argued, though, that the kind of policies Romney would push through the executive and (if the Repubs get both Houses of Congress) through the legislative would enable his cronies, who Robert Hare would dub ‘subcriminal psychopaths’, to conduct ever more blatant self-serving rip-offs of the 99%.

    So even if he’s just a narcissist himself, his close compatriots almost certainly are more than that.

  • Guest

    And if you believe that Obama & Dems tell you only the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth than they have been successful in persuading you to accept their vision and goals as pure.  Surely, there must be a desire somewhere in the Democratic voters to question their leadership.  As a Public Relations professional and former educator, I can assure you that messaging can be quite successful in framing positions — as evidenced here.  Please don’t be sheep.  Question, question — not just the Republican way but also the Democratic vision.  Anyone that works in any company knows that there is always more behind the walls that is going on than the public is aware of … but we bank on the public accepting it — hook successfully planted…

  • Loki100

    Surely, there must be a desire somewhere in the Democratic voters to question their leadership.

    If you actually have to ask this, then you aren’t actually looking. There’s a fairly large contingent of people who think Obama’s been a weak disappointment bought by the exact same corporate interests as the Republicans. That’s the fundamental difference between the parties, Democrats lack the authoritarianism that causes them to have unquestioned faith in their leadership. You don’t see anything like the veneration of Ronald Reagan among Democrats. The fact that you actually would insinuate this is the case means you are either woefully ignorant of the discourse, or you are outright lying.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    LOKI100:  Of course you can be a trained analyst.   What do you think any good scientist, engineer, or economist is?   Scientific methodology IS analysis, by defintion.   The fact that one is usually trained to analyze specific things DOES NOT ALTER the basics of the methods used.  Gathering data, assessing it according to well defined parameters, checking it against other data to see if they support or fail to support, and, finally, drawing conclusions  which are then presented to others.  In the case of formal academics, they publish the results in reputable journals, where others can try to replicate their work, check their methodology for errors, and so on.   My analaytical training was courtesy of the U.S. Navy;  unfortunately, it was the analysis of classified data.   Since YOU clearly have no ability to analyze, reason, think rationally, or deal with facts, I find it the height of hypocrisy for you to call me a liar.  (By the way, an AD HOMINEM attack is a sure way to prove you are in the wrong; you have to present facts to suggest that I might have made an error; failing that, your response is really not worth the ‘paper’ on which it’s written.

  • Loki100

    Of course you can be a trained analyst.

    No, you can’t.

    What do you think any good scientist, engineer, or economist is?

    They are scientists, engineers, or economists. They analyze fields of science, economics and so on. And they would never describe themselves as “a trained analyst” full stop, because they know they are trained to analyze a specific field.

    Scientific methodology IS analysis, by defintion.

    Yes, and it is analysis of specific things. The word that comes closest to what you actually claim is “epistemology,” but no one who actually studies epistemology would refer to themselves as “a trained analyst.”

    The fact that one is usually trained to analyze specific things DOES NOT ALTER the basics of the methods used.

    One can’t be trained to analyze non-specific things. That’s not how our educational system works. The closest you can find are the fields of English and Geography, and they are firmly embedded in the discipline system.

    Gathering data, assessing it according to well defined parameters, checking it against other data to see if they support or fail to support, and, finally, drawing conclusions  which are then presented to others.

    And an economist can’t assess the data of geologist. That’s just not how the disciplines work. In fact, the discipline system is so rigid that each discipline has a specific style of writing that firmly (if unconsciously) delinites between those inside and those outside of the discipline.

    My analaytical training was courtesy of the U.S. Navy;  unfortunately, it was the analysis of classified data.

    Are you attempting to say that you analyzed classified data, or that you analyzed the clarification of data? Either way, it is hilariously convenient. At best it would make you a data analyst, which would be a complete joke, hence why you would feel the need to claim you were a “trained analyist” rather than just saying you sat around listening to the radio and occasionally writing reports. Of course that’s even assuming any of this is true, and it is most likely not. Hence why you can’t actually discuss the data you analyzed.

    Since YOU clearly have no ability to analyze, reason, think rationally, or deal with facts, I find it the height of hypocrisy for you to call me a liar.

    Nope, you are a liar. And have repeatedly proven that all this is what we refer to as “projection.”

    (By the way, an AD HOMINEM attack is a sure way to prove you are in the wrong; you have to present facts to suggest that I might have made an error; failing that, your response is really not worth the ‘paper’ on which it’s written.

    Really, darling? You posted this sentence exactly one sentence after your AD HOMINEM attack on me. Which, of course, makes you guilty of hypocrisy. Oh, and you do not actually understand what an “Ad hominem” attack is. An “Ad hominem” attack is when you attempt to discredit the person to discredit their argument (hence your claim that “[I] clearly have no ability to analyze, reason, think rationally, or deal with facts” is an ad hominem.”  Taking the person’s argument and using it as a basis of judgement of them as a person is not an ad hominem. You lied, therefore you are a liar. Your argument is blatantly false, therefore you are gullible and foolish if you believe it.

  • Me_dorn

    Wow you publicly spanked this guy…very well done.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    LOKI100:   You make the classic ‘straw man’ argument.   I did not state that Harvard had never seen his undergraduate transcripts, so you are incorrect in that criticism.   The ‘birther’ stuff I included IS factual;  as I mentioned, I go to the library to look up material;  I don’t know about SNOPES – although I am going to check into it, and I am willing to bet right now it is just a mouthpiece for the liberal left -, but I do know I would not use the wild stuff on the internet to either buttress or attack an argument.   Did you GO to a library (after reading his 1961 long form birth certificate which says his father was from Kenya)?  Did you look to find out whether the nation of Kenya existed then?  As I noted, and as any reference book from that era can tell you, it was the British East African Protectorate in 1961; it wasn’t the free nation calling itself Kenya until December of 1963.  Those are irrefutable facts; if you were too lazy to research them – and I don’t mean with internet gossip columns – that is on you.  I have fulfilled the basic requirements of a rational argument:   I have presented data, which I verified in a library, and which you can check in a library.  Just saying things aren’t true because you refuse to do your homework is silly.  His severance package from the Olympic committee is not the same as receiving a salary, which he did refuse, just as he refused his Mass governor’s salary for four years.   (And did your info come from the internet – hardly trustworthy -, or from open source materials available to anyone).  Again, his refusal to release his tax returns is a red herring; his tax returns are nobody’s business.  He may have money in foreign accounts;  amazingly, that’s his money and his business, not yours.  The notion that it ‘suggests’ possible wrong doing is not in any way shape or form proof that he has done any wrongdoing; it speak more to the paranoid delusions of those who think it suggests that!   Since I come from New England, including going to college in Massachusetts, your assertion that he “utterly destroyed Mass’s economy’ is faulty on two points.   First, you don’t bother to say HOW it ‘utterly destroyed’ the Commonwealth’s economy;  next, he in fact took over a state that was in the red from the failed socialist Democrat who preceded him; when he left office the state was in the black.   Except for his health care mistake, going from red to black in four years sounds pretty good to me.  I have got to go, need to check this SNOPES stuff to see if it has any validity.

  • Daughter

    You claim to be from Massachusetts? So who is this so called socialist Democrat who preceded Romney? The Republicans Jane Swift, Paul Celucci, or William Weld?

    If someone’s current taxes are irrelevant, why is someone’s nearly 30 year old college transcripts relevant? Which tells you more about who the person is now?

    Btw, paragraph breaks would help make your posts more readable.

  • EllieMurasaki

    I don’t know about SNOPES – although I am going to check into it, and I
    am willing to bet right now it is just a mouthpiece for the liberal left

    I suppose so, but only because nobody else seems interested in facts.

    As I noted, and as any reference book from that era can tell you, it was
    the British East African Protectorate in 1961; it wasn’t the free
    nation calling itself Kenya until December of 1963.

    The argument you’re trying to make here is that no one was born in any place then called Louisiana until 1812 when the state of Louisiana joined the US. Our response to this is (as I desperately hope, since you seem to be USian, you know enough US history to verify) to smack you upside the head with a history text, call you a dipshit, and remind you of this thing called the Louisiana Purchase, which happened in 1803 and involved a lot of land the French had had control over since like 1680, much of which was called Louisiana.

    *smack* Since 1920, the part of Africa we’re discussing was called the Kenya Colony. Dipshit.

  • Loki100

    You make the classic ‘straw man’ argument.

    No, I didn’t. That’s you not knowing what a “straw man argument” actually is. At best you can make that claim that you phrased your statement so poorly I couldn’t properly understand it.

    I did not state that Harvard had never seen his undergraduate transcripts

    Yes. You did. You said, quoting here, “‘Getting into’ Harvard means being the best of the best, academically and intellectually; you don’t just ‘fill out an application and get in”. My question revolves around where those properties were presented since he won’t release his transcripts.” Which explicitly means you are claiming that Harvard did not see his transcripts. That’s the premise that your question is predicated upon. You literally ask how the properties Harvard judges merit upon would be viewed, since Obama didn’t release his transcripts. Which is so wildly stupid that you now claiming you never said it in the first place.

     The ‘birther’ stuff I included IS factual

    Nope. It’s both discredited, and something you picked up in a chain email.

     as I mentioned, I go to the library to look up material

    No, you didn’t. This is a lie. You simply regurgitated a chain email. That’s why your statements happen to match, exactly, the chain email published on Snopes.

     don’t know about SNOPES – although I am going to check into it, and I am willing to bet right now it is just a mouthpiece for the liberal left -,

    Which is completely irrelevant to whether it is true or not. This is another example of that ad hominem you being hypocritical about earlier.

    but I do know I would not use the wild stuff on the internet to either buttress or attack an argument.

    Except you did. Thus you are lying.

    Did you GO to a library

    I don’t have to. I have access to most every research data base on the planet. As well as a little thing called “google” which allows me to fact check your statements. And find them hilariously false.

    Did you look to find out whether the nation of Kenya existed then?

    As many, many, many people have pointed out, the colony of Kenya existed then. And I can look at this map of Africa in 1950 and clearly see Kenya.

    As I noted, and as any reference book from that era can tell you, it was the British East African Protectorate in 1961

    No, it wasn’t, it was the Colony and Protectorate of Kenya.

    Those are irrefutable facts

    Then how is it so easy to refute them?

    if you were too lazy to research them – and I don’t mean with internet gossip columns – that is on you.

    Actually that would be you. You, lazily, copied and pasted an email and hoped no one would notice, liar.

    I have fulfilled the basic requirements of a rational argument

    Actually you haven’t. You’ve repeatedly demonstrated you don’t understand logical fallacies. You’ve been caught lying. Your information is flagrantly wrong. And you fail to think critically.

    I have presented data

    No, you just lied.

    which I verified in a library

    Also a lie.

    and which you can check in a library.

    Which is completely unnecessary.

     Just saying things aren’t true because you refuse to do your homework is silly.

    Pure projection. All your claims are simply you asserting that your copy and paste job off an email are true. Once more you reek of hypocrisy.

    His severance package from the Olympic committee is not the same as receiving a salary, which he did refuse, just as he refused his Mass governor’s salary for four years.

    Weren’t you the one making a hissy fit about semantics earlier? Oh, right you were. So now that he got almost half a million in compensation for the Olympics, you are hanging it onto it not being a “salary?” 

    Again, his refusal to release his tax returns is a red herring; his tax returns are nobody’s business.

    If they are nobody’s business, then why is it legally required that presidential candidates release their tax returns?

    He may have money in foreign accounts;  amazingly, that’s his money and his business, not yours.

    Actually the man running for president of America taking his money out of America is not only my business, but everyone’s business. Particularly the staggering amount of money taken out of America.

    The notion that it ‘suggests’ possible wrong doing is not in any way shape or form proof that he has done any wrongdoing; it speak more to the paranoid delusions of those who think it suggests that!

    If there’s no wrongdoing, then there’s no reason not to disclose. His father disclosed, why won’t he?

    Since I come from New England, including going to college in Massachusetts, your assertion that he “utterly destroyed Mass’s economy’ is faulty on two points.

    I highly doubt any of this is true, but let’s play along.

    First, you don’t bother to say HOW it ‘utterly destroyed’ the Commonwealth’s economy

    After Mitt got done, Mass. was ranked 47th in job growth, suffered the second-largest labor force decline in the nation, lost 14 percent of its manufacturing jobs, and caused Mass. to experience bellow average (often close to the bottom) economic growth.

    next, he in fact took over a state that was in the red from the failed socialist Democrat who preceded him; when he left office the state was in the black.

    This is several different lies. The previous three governors of Mass. were all Republicans. And Mass. had the highest per capita debt in the nation at the end of Romney’s term. 

  • Robert M. Anderson

    LOKI100:  Interestingly, although I had been sceptical, I have been looking at SNOPES, and have come away impressed.   Your claim that he received a severance package from the Olypics was true; what you failed to mention was that he donated all of that to charity, and donated a million to the Olympics.   Nice how you cherry picked your ‘data’.   Also, you said the Olypics was not a success; but he received the severance pay based on the contract that he signed when he started that he would only take it if the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics were highly profitable.   Contrary to your claim that the Olympics did not do well, it made so much that he received said moneys.   Again, YOUR assertion that the Olypics did not do well was incorrect.  I could get to like this SNOPES.

  • http://dpolicar.livejournal.com/ Dave

    Interestingly, although I had been sceptical, I have been looking at SNOPES, and have come away impressed.

    I can’t tell you how delighted I am that there’s a chance of identifying a common source of reported/verified facts, here. It’s like a ray of sunshine.

  • Loki100

    Also, you said the Olypics was not a success; but he received the severance pay based on the contract that he signed when he started that he would only take it if the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics were highly profitable.

    Really? Because the federal government chipped in 1.5 billion dollars alone on those games (after Romney begged for it). Oh, and you shouldn’t have alerted me to that article. It’s even more proof that you are simply regurgitating facts from chain emails, liar.

  • Rachel Demasal

    I love you how hyperlinked each week to each word in the final paragraph.  That was slick!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1011737463 Stace Houk

    “He Told The Truth!”  One of the best commercials from my youth to convey to children the importance of not lying and having better morals, brought to you by the Mormons!  I loved these moral commercials and their message…Mitt, what a shame he didn’t watch these or forgot their message.

  • N2bbuilding

    Your links for those lies are taking me to a Mac cleaner page and won’t let me go any further until I click on their link to clean.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    I would strongly suggest doing an immediate virus scan by a trusted program. Just in case.

  • KurtRexCooper

    If the national media from the WSJ to USA today to the NY Times and the networks endorsed Obama because of Romney’s lies (it really is in their self interest to do so — do they really want to degrade themselves to tabloid status for Romney? ) the 2014 campaign would be cleaner & 2016 a pleasure.

  • Beroli

     Chanting “the liberal media” has been very effective for the right-wing.

    The national media is, unfortunately, not going to risk …it getting chanted louder by siding with reality and its well-known liberal bias.

  • Bes_stpmn

    Mitt may indeed be lying. That’s not my point here. Benen’s responses – those I read – are on the order of “no, that’s not true” or, “that’s a lie”. Those responses are NOT ” Validated, verified, demonstrated, catalogued and quantified” as Mr Clark claims. Not in any historical or scientific definition of “validated, verified, demonstrated, catalogued and quantified”.

  • DrV57

    I believe if you go to the responses where Benen says “no, that’s not true” you will find that they are links that demonstrate the untruth being illustrated. At least that has been the case in the 50-60 I have checked.

  • Misha_Noonan

    Good Job sleuthing out relevant “stuff”.  Keep it coming!!

    The Main Problem, as I see it, is what has been termed “The Low Information Voter”… the Guy (or Gal) who DOESN’T WNAT to know … just react … with LOTS of emotion!!

    “The Low Information Voter” is tired of all the onslaught of information and counter-information, which means, of course … SOMEONE IS LYING !!. and lying makes us all MAD AS HELL!!   Critical Thinking is required to sort out the lies from the “truth” … what ever THAT is.  Critical Thinking is work.  The Low Information Voter “would rather just watch the game”!!  Foot Ball, NasCar, sitcom, novella.  “Just Make It GO AWAY!!” is their un-spoken mantra.  Unfortunately it won’t “just go away”, but come back to haunt all of us.

    AND  all indications are that they (The Low Information Voter ) will vote for the candidate who tells them “stuff” that validates how they ALREADY FEEL.  In other words tells them that they are right .. and HAVE BEEN right … all along.  Both Republican and Democratic Pollsters estimate that the majority of  “undecided voters” are these “The Low Information Voters”.  A scary prospect for the Republic. 

    Stokely Carmichael gets “recent credit” for observing that “Denial AIN’T JUST a river in Egypt”.  ( I believe D. B. DuBoise is the original source of that observation.” )
    You don’t like it? … Just deny it !!  Comfy !!  The American Way. ( I’m not anti-American, far from it.  I just wish that more Americans would turn off “The Game”, and engage that fatty organ between their ears in some CRITICAL THINKING.  Critical Thinking is the PATRIOTIC THING TO DO … and begins with asking “Does this make sense?”)

    Does a guy who grew up the son of the Chairman of General Motors really know how I feel, what’s important in MY life?  Does a guy who grew up in a family of TENS IF NOT HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of NET WORTH really feel WHAT I feel when I can’t put food on my table, or when I struggle paying my rent / mortgage?

    From the latest entry on this blog …

    Like
    Reply1 week ago46 Like   from an entry by Andrew Rothman

    Misha Noonan

  • DrV57

    Actually, he did not claim #2 or #3. Please provide actual links from credible sources to back up your claims.

  • DrV57

    That is not the definition of either a narcissist or a sociopath. What credentials do you hold that enable you to make that diagnosis, anyway?

  • AnonymousSam

    No one has the credentials to make a diagnosis based purely on secondhand knowledge*. I would simply point out that patients with narcissistic personality disorder show a tendency to take advantage of others for their own ends, exaggerate their own achievements, spin fantasies about themselves, lack empathy for others, pursue selfish and unrealistic goals and require constant attention and positive reinforcement. Much of these traits seem to apply to Romney. Of course, from our limited perspective, it’s impossible to see whether he meets the other criteria for such a diagnosis.

    As for credentials, do several dozens of credit hours in advanced psychology courses in college with an emphasis on abnormal psychology count enough for the purposes of engaging in meaningless speculation?

    * Criminal profilers do this all the time though. They take leaps of intuition which frankly disturb me. While it’s hard to argue with results, I wonder how well their technique works with people who aren’t pathological killers and whatnot?

  • Lori

    Actually, their record isn’t as good as most people think. Plenty of profiles prove to be inaccurate and many a supposedly accurate profile was  so general that calling it accurate is like saying that your horoscope came true. I’m not saying that profiling has no value (although other people have basically said that), but they aren’t mind readers.

    As far as non-pathological folks go, the basic methodology would work the same way.  You can look at a person’s pattern of behavior and make educated guesses about their background and other habits based on that.  I could see it being more difficult because the patterns aren’t as distinctive, but I don’t know if that’s actually true.

  • Skloss

    I had planned to expose these lies, one by one, on my Facebook page. Although sources are provided, they are usually the Rachel Maddow blog….which we all know is a partisan source–meaning that no one whom I may be trying to convince will give any creed to it.  I kept clicking back and back through various articles, trying to get to a non-partisan source. Sadly, I only found two before it was too exhausting to keep doing it. So sad that ORIGINAL fact-checking sources were not provided. 

  • Karlarove

    A half-truth is a whole lie. Arguing about how much of a lie is kinda crazy. If its not the whole truth, its a lie. “You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness” That means do not lie.

  • http://nomadicpolitics.blogspot.com/ Nomad

    Some of Romney’s lies are really weird. Like the time he lied about his childhood memories. Apparently he lifted his memories from a bio of father which was factually incorrect and simply incorporated them into his past. He did this twice by the way.  Once about marching with Martin Luther King and another about some local celebration in Detroit he was supposed to have attended. He remembered it although it actually happened about the time he was conceived.  During the debates he even lied about his first name. Huh?
    How voters can’t see this as a serious warning sign is beyond my imagination.

    One other point, his LDS Church has said nothing about his non-stop  lying and whatever one might think about the Mormon Church, dishonesty is not condoned (publicly, at least.) Especially when it comes to a former(?) bishop of the Church!!

    In the Teachings of Presidents of the Church, Brigham Young told his flock:
    “If we accept salvation on the terms it is offered to us, we have got to be honest in every thought, in our reflections, in our meditations, in our private circles, in our deals, in our declarations, and in every act of our lives”
     In fact, according to the tenets of the faith, 

    “Complete honesty is necessary for our salvation. An Apostle of the Lord has said: “Honesty is a principle of salvation in the kingdom of God. . . . Just as no man or woman can be saved without baptism, so no one can be saved without honesty.”

    I would hate to see Romney  lose the election AND risk his immortal soul at the same time.  

    http://nomadicpolitics.blogspot.com/2012/07/mitt-romney-lies-and-mormon-church-33.html

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    The strange thing was he explicitly made reference to his father, who did those things, in the NAACP speech.

    Someone who weaves together truth and falsehood so easily – that’s really not someone you want as a President, no matter how much the omg Obama does that TOO SO THERE folks might roll on around.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mary-Blaisdell/100002547833453 Mary Blaisdell

    With Mitt’s Libya/Egypt fiasco of a massive lie that Obama apologized for America’s free speech, the tipping point has been reached — the American public is seeing Romney as a liar, he’s sinking  badly in the polls.  Americans don’t want a liar as President.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1176355049 Scot Miller
  • Dee

    Mitt Romney Sociopath:

    “Antisocial Personality Disorder is also known as psychopathy or
    sociopathy. Individuals with this disorder have little regard for the
    feeling and welfare of others. As a clinical diagnosis it is usually
    limited to those over age 18. It can be diagnosed in younger people if
    the they commit isolated antisocial acts and do not show signs of
    another mental disorder.

    Antisocial Personality Disorder is chronic, beginning in adolescence and
    continuing throughout adulthood. There are ten general symptoms: not
    learning from experience

    no sense of responsibility

    inability to form meaningful relationships

    inability to control impulses

    lack of moral sense

    chronically antisocial behavior

    no change in behavior after punishment

    emotional immaturity

    lack of guilt

    self-centeredness”

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Mitt Romney finally ‘fesses up: can’t make taxes do what he claims they’ll do.

    The second obstacle, as shown by the Tax Policy Center,
    a joint venture of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute,
    is that Mr. Romney’s plan is mathematically impossible, even if it were
    politically feasible. Take away every deduction from every wealthy
    household, the center calculated, and you still couldn’t make up the
    revenue the government would lose by reducing rates without raising
    taxes on middle-class households.

    I think that says it all, people. Mitt wants to be all things to all people, just like Reagan, even if it means blatantly abusing present-day economic problems by presenting oversimplistic solutions.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    LOKI100:  And where did you find that the Feds chipped in money; also, chain emails? What the hell are you talking about? As for calling me a liar, you have just PROVEN that you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. Try providing proof of a falsehood before you make a claim like that. I believe it was Mark Twain who said: “Never argue with an idiots; they’ll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience”. Since I am clearly dealing with a mongoloid idiot, I shall not bother with your nonsensical falsehoods anymore.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    LOKI100:   It is of course easy for you to refute facts when you use falsehoods.  As for the chain mail thing, I still don’t know what the f you’re talking about.  Go to the blinking library;  find books from the 1960s about World Geography, Britsh Colonies, and the like.  It is a verifiable fact (see, you never verify them, you just refuse to acknowledge them) that in 1961 the country later to be known as Kenya did NOT exist as such; it was still the British East African Protectorate.  No amount of sophistry on your part changes that fact.  Also, if you check in the library, you will indeed find that the British gave up their colony and it became the nation of Kenya in 1963.  It is for YOU to answer as to why his long form birth certificate has “Kenya” on it and not the British East African Protectorate.  Also, every time you resort to an ad hominem attack, you are only demonstrating the lack of substance for what you have to say.    Also, YOU claim to use Google for your so-called fact checking; the reason I use the Library (besides being older) is that the internet is full of lies, and people like you foolish enough to believe them.  I bet you used Wikipedia; no wonder you have everything wrong.

  • EllieMurasaki

    http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/80007/British-East-Africa

    In 1888 the Imperial British East Africa Company established claims to territory in what is now Kenya. In 1890 and 1894 British protectorates were established over the sultanate of Zanzibar and the kingdom of Buganda (Uganda), respectively, and in 1895 the company’s territory in Kenya was transferred to the crown as the East Africa Protectorate (after 1920, the Kenya Colony and the Kenya Protectorate).

    Are you going to say that the Encyclopedia Britannica is “full of lies”?

  • Robert M. Anderson

    LOKI100:  Since you still have yet to demonstrate a lie on my part, I am astonished at your arrogance. Of course scientists and economists can and do analyze other things than just their own disciplines. For example, Dr. John Lott, an economist, correctly analyzed the nonsense of gun control in his book “More Guns, Less Crime”. Most of the scientists who promote Global Warming ARE not climatologists; in fact, most climatologists do not accept the Global Warming hypothesis (it is not a theory). After you insult me, you have the audacity to accuse ME of ad hominem attacks! Of course I am irritated when some ignorant fool calls me a liar; that is only (irrational) human nature. My arguments have yet to be rebutted with any viable data on your part; for example, my mention of the fact that Kenya did not exist in 1961; you provide nothing in refutation, you simply say it is false. Check your facts (not with the Internet) and then get back to me. Your other note saying that you have an enormous data bank full of facts (the internet and Google) makes me think of the commercial with the dumb blonde telling her friend “It has to be true if it’s on the interent”.   

  • EllieMurasaki

    in fact, most climatologists do not accept the Global Warming hypothesis (it is not a theory).

    [citation needed]

  • PJ Evans

     He’s well into the ‘making shit up’ stage, I think.

  • Lori

     

      He’s well into the ‘making shit up’ stage, I think.  

    He’s a birther. He is by definition well into making shit up. There is no actual “there” there. If the birthers didn’t make shit up they couldn’t be birthers.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    EllieMurasaki:  No, you have just proven what I said; the area know as the Nation of Kenya today was, in the past, part of the British East African Protectorate.   If you’re using the Encyclopedia Brittanica, then it should (if published after the appropriate date) note that Great Britain relinquished it’s colonial control over the British East African Protectorate and the NATION of Kenya was established in Dec of 1963.  I used this as a reference in the Library; that has been the whole point behind my posts.   An anonymous funtionary in Hawaii in 1961 would be looking at a booklet of named countries and s/he would NOT see Kenya as an independent Nation to type on a Birth certificate; nor, except for chance, would s/he know that the Brit used the term Kenyan Protectorate.   As YOUR quote from the Encyclopedia shows,  it was stll the Kenya Colony or the Kenya Protectorate.   You are only doing the correct thing, looking it up in a real source, which shows what I said is factual.  It was not the Nation of Kenya until AFTER 1961.   Thank you for your post;  I was AGREEING  with the Encyclopedia Brittannica, NOT taking issue with it.   Bob

  • EllieMurasaki

    You say the name ‘Kenya’ first came into use in the 1960s and therefore any use of ‘Kenya’ supposedly dated to before then but after 1920 is false. The Encyclopedia Britannica says the name ‘Kenya’ first came into use in 1920.

    If this is you agreeing with the Encyclopedia Britannica, what happens when you disagree?

  • Robert M. Anderson

    LOKI100:  Citation 1 – “Unstobbable Global Warming; Every 1,500 Years”, written by Dr. S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery, Bowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2007;   Dr. Singer is  Professor Emeritus from the U of VA, and one of the world’s senior climatologists; known as the ‘Father’ of the modern weather Satellite. 
    Citation 2 – The climatologist who founded the Weather Channel and who stated:   Global Warming is the biggest scam in the history of Mankind in an interview (not on hand).
    Citation 3 – “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism” by Christopher C. Horner, Regnery Publishing, Inc, 2007

    Citation 4 – For Kenya being a colony:  (Thanks to EllieMurasaki):   Encyclopedia Brittannica:
    In 1888 the Imperial British East Africa Company established claims to
    territory in what is NOW Kenya. In 1890 and 1894 British protectorates
    were established over the sultanate of Zanzibar and the kingdom of
    Buganda (Uganda), respectively, and in 1895 the company’s territory in
    Kenya was transferred to the crown as the East Africa Protectorate
    (after 1920, the Kenya Colony and the Kenya Protectorate).  This is all I have at home, since I am not sitting in a library in Fairfax.  Also, EllieMurasaki sent me the Brittannica link to try to suggest I was incorrect about British East Africa, but it was just a confirmation of what I had read in the library (not sure what she was taking issue with, sincce it just confirmed what I had written, i.e., Kenya was a colony not a nation.  She failed to cite the passage confirming Kenya emerging as an independent nation in 1963, but an edition after that date would have that in it.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Your assertion is that nobody called Kenya Kenya before 1963. The bit I quoted says very clearly that the area was called the Kenya Colony after 1920. Which means Obama’s birth certificate referencing Obama’s father’s post-1920 Kenyan birth is not anachronistic. Which means you can shut up about Obama’s birth certificate being forged any fucking day now.

  • PJ Evans

     California was called California before there were Europeans present. Having a name doesn’t have anything to do with legal status.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    EllieMurasaki:   What I am taking issue with is that the Nation now known as Kenya was not then a nation known as Kenya, which you yourself proved by citing the Encyclopedia.   It was still the Kenyan Protectorate or Kenyan colony.  Of course the British used the local name in their reference to it; my point is that a functionary in Hawaii, typing a birth certificate, would have referred to it as the British did in 1961; not until Dec 1963 would it be called simply Kenya (which means it probably wouldn’t have shown up as just Kenya, realistically, until 1964).  Thank you, Bob  (I am not taking isssue with you; your citation in the Encyclopedia only confirms what I claimed, and that is the only point I am making).  

  • EllieMurasaki

    To quote your original claim:

    I do not know how old you are, but when I looked at the Birth
    Certificate I knew it was forged right away. Under “Father’s Place of
    Birth” it reads: Kenya. KENYA DID NOT EXIST IN 1961!!!! I know,
    because it was still the British East African Protectorate; it did not
    become a free country called Kenya untl Dec of 1963, when I was in High
    School!

    If you want to change your claim from ‘Kenya did not exist till 1963’ to ‘no one in Hawaii called it Kenya till 1963’, feel free, but that is called ‘moving the goalposts’ and is dishonest of you and will not persuade anyone that you are correct. Meanwhile, your initial claim, that Kenya did not exist till 1963, is false, because it was the Kenya Colony starting in 1920.

  • PJ Evans

     Y’know, there’s more evidence for him being born in Hawai’i than there is for him being born anywhere else. Including that there was a civil war going on in Kenya at the time he was born, and no pregnant young woman would have gone halfway around the world just to give birth there, especially a young white woman.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    And some bored official in Hawaii really gave two craps about the name of some two-bit country in Africa? Jesus fuck, you have no idea how insular and provincial the USA is in real life, do you?

    Back then I’d be surprised if the official in question could have named off the parts of Africa or Asia, especially since “decolonization” was all the rage back then and it seemed like a new country or three was getting formed every minute.

    Like, consider Yugoslavia back in the day. Or Venezuela now. They had (have) formal names, but the majority of people would likely refer to them by their common names (i.e. not the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia or the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela).

    You’re straining at gnats. Period.

  • LisaI68

     I have four kids. None of them has a birth certificate on which a “functionary in the hospital” looked up the birthplace of my husband or myself. In all four cases, *I* wrote down our birthplaces on the form. My mom says it was done the same way when we were born (including my brother, who was born in 1963, not long before President Obama). The formal name, or what was in the encyclopedia, has nothing to do with what appeared on the birth certificate! If his mother or father wrote down “Kenya” as his father’s birthplace, then “Kenya” would have appeared on the forms. (The anonymous “functionary” – more likely in the government than the hospital – may have looked up a place he/she had never heard of, but there’s no reason to assume they’d never heard of Kenya.)  Your entire argument is based on the flawed assumption that an “anonymous functionary” named President Obama’s father’s birthplace in the first place.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    PJEVANS:  Since I am sitting at home, I am forced to do something I am loathe to do.  Here goes:  DINKS FINANCE,   Article, Presidential Candidates and their Net Worths,  31 January 2012.  (Article’s Source:  Financial Disclosure Statements Filed by Each Candidate in 2011).   (Gingrich was worth over 30 Million!).  Damn, wish I’d been Speaker of the House.  At any rate, it lists the POTUS net worth at somewhat over 11.8 Million.   However, I have seen that reference in other financial sources,  so I see no reason why it shouldn’t be correct. 

  • Robert M. Anderson

    PJ Evans:  He relinquished his active daily role in running Bain in 1999, in order to run the Olympics.   He remained technically the ‘head’ of the company until 2002, but had to active part in running the day to day operations.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    Your assertion is that nobody called Kenya Kenya before 1963. The bit I quoted says very clearly that the area was called the Kenya Colony after 1920. Which means Obama’s birth certificate referencing Obama’s father’s post-1920 Kenyan birth is not anachronistic. Which means you can shut up about Obama’s birth certificate being forged any fucking day now

    Wow!  Are you a hater or what!  Such language!  I said that it was not known as the NATION of Kenya until the British relinquished colonial control.  Again, the birth certificate would NEVER have read simply “Kenya” in 1961.  It is anachronistic; it should, by your own reference, have been typed “Kenyan Colony” or “Kenyan Protectorate”;  against, an anonymous clerk would not be looking at anything other than the source material available to him at that moment in time, which would NOT say simply Kenya, just as s/he would not have put down, say, Zaire instead of the Belgian Congo.   If you can’t post without vulgar insults, and worse still, by clearly identifying yourself as an Obama zombie who will believe any lie he tells, I guess I shouldn’t have expected you to be anything other than a vulgar liberal, ready to swear at anyone who dares to criticize the worst President this nation has ever had (and after Carter, Nixon, FDR, LBJ, and Woodrow  Wilson, that’s saying something). 

  • EllieMurasaki

    So, point one, you are definitely moving the goalposts. Point two, were you actually in the birth certificates office in Hawaii in 1961, or are you just making assumptions about what people who were there then would have thought in order to support your point, while hoping we don’t notice that your assertions are your assumptions rather than actual fact?

    (Was there even enough room in that space on the birth cert to put ‘Kenya Colony’? Because it sounds kind of like you’re saying someone was wrong to write ‘America’ instead of ‘United States of America’. Crap analogy, because there are many parts of the Americas that are not part of the United States while any reference to Kenya is certain to mean the same part of Africa, but.)

    Point three, I am not going to vote for Obama. I am going to vote for Jill Stein. I admit that if I lived in a swing state I would vote Obama, because I can imagine no circumstance in which I would want Romney in office and Obama has done spectacularly well considering Bush and Boehner, but my state is all but called so I’m voting for someone with more integrity than Obama has shown.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    PJEvans:   If that were true, why would his own grandmother say she traveled to the Kenyan Colony to see him born?  Why does the sign outside his home village read (in both English and the native tongue):   Such and Such, Birthplace of Barack Hussein Obama.  Also,  why, when he was first elected to the Senate, did the major English Speaking paper in Kenya have a headline reading:   “Kenyan Born Barack Obama Elected to the U.S. Senate”.  Those are, I feel, at the very least, legitimate questions.

  • EllieMurasaki

    Or they would be legitimate questions if you could provide any evidence that any of those things happened.

  • AnonymousSam

    That claim (about his grandmother) comes from a truncated recording of a telephone call Ron McRae and Sarah Obama. That recording is here.

    As for the newspaper.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Is there a transcript of that recording?

  • EllieMurasaki

    Downloaded the recording. It is fourteen minutes long and if it starts off that crackly I don’t much want to listen to the rest of it. I don’t suppose you know where I could find a transcript?

  • AnonymousSam

    Sorry, I guess listening to magnetic tapes for a living inured me to terrible recording quality. Here’s the succinct version, starting at about 4:20:

    McRae: “Could I ask her about his actual birthplace? I would like to see his birthplace when I come to visit Kenya in December. Was she present when he was born in Kenya?”
     
    “She says yes she was. She was present when Obama was born,” said the translator.

    McRae immediately followed up by saying, “Okay, when I come in December, I would like to go by the place, the hospital where he was born. Could you tell me where he was born? Was he born in Mombasa?”

    The translator can be heard translating, and then, he said, “No. Obama was not born in Mombasa. He was born in America.”

    Said McRae: “Whereabouts was he born? I thought he was born in Kenya.”

    The response came back, “He was born in America, not in Mombasa.”

    “Do you know where he was born?” McRae continued. “I thought he was born in Kenya. I was gonna go by and see where he was born.”

    “Hawaii. She says he was born in Hawaii,” the translator said. “In the state of Hawaii, where his father, his father was also learning there. The state of Hawaii.”

    “I thought she said she was present,” McRae said. “Was she able to see him being born in Hawaii?”

    “No, no,” the translator said. “…She was not … she was here in Kenya. Obama was born in America … Because the grandmother was back in Kenya and Obama was born in America, where he is from, where his father was learning, learning in America, the United States.”

  • EllieMurasaki

    So McRae has a birther agenda and the grandmother contradicts herself? I’m not sure what this is supposed to prove.

    Thank you.

  • AnonymousSam

    Either that or she went where she thought he was being born, but either way, she clearly says he was born in Hawaii. Cutting the dialogue short before that is nothing short of quote mining.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    PJ Evans:  In a way, you are making my point.  The British referred to the area as the Kenyan Colony or the Kenyan Protectorate.   An anonymous clerk typing a birth certificate in Hawaii would have a source book giving them the names of places in the world (for example, s/he wouldn’t have written Zaire on a birth certificate, s/he would have typed Belgian Congo).  Same for the Kenyan Colony.   Realistically, since the nation of Kenya did not exist until Dec of 1963, it would probably have been the start of 1964 before ‘Kenya’ was simply typed.   It’s not a big deal, it just raises a legitimate question, and needs a legitimate answer.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    Invisible Neutrino:  You just made my point!!!   An anonymous flunky typing in Hawaii would use whatever source book s/he used to type in a name.  Since, at that time, the nation later called “Kenya” did not exist as such, said person, who, as you noted, wouldn’t have cared less, would in drone like fashion simply put “Kenyan Colony” or “Kenyan Protectorate”.   (Just as, for example, the same person would have put down “Belgian Congo” on a document, not “Zaire”, as it was later known).   Kenya alone would not have been used because, as you  note, the person wouldn’t care.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    You’re assuming they even bothered to look in the book in the first place instead of just taking it verbally.

  • Lori

     

    An anonymous flunky typing in Hawaii would use whatever source book s/he used to type in a name.    

    Actually an anonymous flunky typing in Hawaii would use whatever she was told. Why do you suppose the flunky would look it up rather than simply go with what the family said?

    Oh yeah, because you’re a birther and facts don’t matter to you.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    EllieMurasaki:   What ‘things’ do I need to prove?   His birth certificate gives his father’s place of birth as Kenya;  as YOU took the trouble to check and find in the Encyclopedia, an anonymous funtionary would put down whateve his or her list of countries showed.  It would not have shown simply “Kenya” in 1961.   What else is there to prove?  Not to mention his own GRANDMOTHER stated that she traveled to Africa to see him born!  This raises legitimate questions.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    If you want to change your claim from ‘Kenya did not exist till 1963’ to ‘no one in Hawaii called it Kenya till 1963’, feel free, but that is called ‘moving the goalposts’ and is dishonest of you and will not persuade anyone that you are correct. Meanwhile, your initial claim, that Kenya did not exist till 1963, is false, because it was the Kenya Colony starting in 1920.
    EllieMurasaki:  That is and has always been my point;  the fact that it was, as YOU noted, the Kenya Colony, NOT Kenya (and what goalposts did I move; I am confused on that one).   If, as you say,  I can ‘feel free’ to say that no one in Hawaii called it Kenya till 1963, then my assertion still stands.  Why would his father’s birtplace be typed as “Kenya” and not the “Kenya Colony” or the “Kenya Protectorate”.   This is a legitimate question, nothing more.  Your dislike of it doesn’t change it’s legitimacy.

  • EllieMurasaki

    You seem to be saying that no one would ever dream of referring to the Kenya Colony by a shortened name. This is absurd.

  • AnonymousSam

    Do you realize you’ve been arguing for the legitimacy of the Hawaiian birth certificate for the last few posts because it should somehow prove a point that his father was born in “Kenya” and not “Kenya Colony”?

    Also, Kenya was flirting with the idea of being an independent colony since the mid 50’s and birth certificates from Kenya occasionally refer to it as “Kenya” as well.

  • Lori

     

    This is a legitimate question, nothing more.  Your dislike of it doesn’t change it’s legitimacy.   

    It’s a dumb, pointless question, nothing more. Your dislike of Obama doesn’t change his legitimacy as a US citizen or as president. Suck it up, Bob. Your president is black.

  • LisaI68

     “Why would his father’s birtplace be typed as “Kenya” and not the “Kenya Colony” or the “Kenya Protectorate”. ”

    Probably because either Obama’s mother, or his father, entered the father’s birthplace as Kenya.  Is that really so hard for you to understand? You keep talking about a source book, but the information about the birthplace of a baby’s parents come from the *parents*. No functionary looked up where I was born in a “source book”when the completed a birth certificate for one of my children. They looked up my birthplace – and that of my husband – on the form that *I* filled out!

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Hell, the person typing it up probably just took it verbally and maybe checked the spelling afterwards, but people like that probably aren’t nitpickily fussy about how the write down country names, especially long-ass ones. Who wants to spend all that time squeezing it on with a manual typewriter when at the time, Barack Obama was just another of many babies born that day?

  • EllieMurasaki

    Not to mention that ‘Kenya’ is perfectly adequate in itself to identify that part of Africa at any time after, what was it, 1920?, rather as ‘Massachusetts’ and ‘Pennsylvania’ and ‘Kentucky’ and ‘Virginia’ are perfectly adequate in themselves to describe the respective parts of North America, and there’d be as much need to say ‘Kenya Colony’ in full as to say ‘Commonwealth of Whichever’ in full. Which is to say, on documents issued by that government and really nowhere else.

  • P J Evans

    Having a copy of mine in front of me, it’s typed except for three signatures, and my mother signed it as the informant. I really doubt that the hospital would have checked on the information provided.

  • Robert M. Anderson

    Lori:  That’s too all encompassing an assertion.   You are implying that most do not deserve what they earn or did not earn it honestly.  Without a lot of proof, I have a hard time with that one.  As to what they do with it, good question; by and large, they create jobs and wealth with it.   This has nothing to do with imaginary “Right Wing Lies” and everthing to do with Econ 101.   Why don’t (liberal) billionaires like Warren Buffet, Oprah Winfrey, Ben Johnson, Bill Gates, and a host of others  multimillionaires many times over in the entertainment industry give all but, say, 1 million of their riches to the IRS (and I am being generous; I’ll never have 1 million dollars).  When they do that, I’ll be more sympathetic.  (For example, Bono, of U2 fame, and ‘champion’ of the downtrodden, wants to relocate to Denmark because Great Britain’s taxes are taking too many of his millions away from him – hyporcrite).

  • EllieMurasaki

    Why do they have to give their money to the IRS for you to sympathize with them? What’s wrong with the charitable work Gates and Buffett (I don’t know about Winfrey or Johnson offhand) already do so much of?

  • Lori

    Gates and Buffet have both publically stated that their tax rate should be higher. There’s a reason why the thing the GOP fought tooth and nail against is called the Buffet rule. I’m really not sure why our birther buddy brought either of them up.

  • EllieMurasaki

    I knew Buffett had, I didn’t know about Gates, but he was talking about giving money to the IRS in a way that seemed to imply money over and above current tax rates, and really, why? I think the IRS would send it back anyway on the grounds that they’re not supposed to keep people’s overpayments. Which is not of course to say that Buffett and Gates should not have higher taxes, just that, if the government wanted Buffett’s and Gates’s money then they’d make them pay higher taxes, and since those higher taxes don’t seem to be coming, why should Buffett and Gates give their money to the IRS instead of to the various places they give money? I know for a fact Buffett’s trying to give away his entire fortune, the difficulty being that he’s got so much money that his fortune is self-sustaining.

  • Lori

     

    You are implying that most do not deserve what they earn or did not earn it honestly.  

    No, I am not. I’m simply pointing out that your feeble attempt at a gottcha over Obama’s money was pointless because having money is not the issue. I didn’t say anything about how many rich people I believe made their money in a negative way or are using it in a negative way.

    The Right Wing lie I referenced was that Liberals hate people for being successful and rich. No, that’s no imaginary. Yes, people on the Right do try to claim that. Yes, it’s a lie.

    You’re “responding” to something that I didn’t say because you think you have another gottcha to counter it. Here’s a tip for you: You’ll do better in discussions if you actually read what people say and think instead of just looking for places to insert talking points.

  • Lori

     

    You are implying that most do not deserve what they earn or did not earn it honestly.  

    No, I am not. I’m simply pointing out that your feeble attempt at a gottcha over Obama’s money was pointless because having money is not the issue. I didn’t say anything about how many rich people I believe made their money in a negative way or are using it in a negative way.

    The Right Wing lie I referenced was that Liberals hate people for being successful and rich. No, that’s no imaginary. Yes, people on the Right do try to claim that. Yes, it’s a lie.

    You’re “responding” to something that I didn’t say because you think you have another gottcha to counter it. Here’s a tip for you: You’ll do better in discussions if you actually read what people say and think instead of just looking for places to insert talking points.

  • Marcelo

    Wow a mormon lies, if he lies this way now, what can we expect from him as a president of the USA.  DANGER.

  • Rixar13

    “Over the past 30 weeks, Mitt Romney has told lie after lie after lie: – Click those links. Read the lists. List after list of lie after lie. Hundreds of them — 533, to be exact, – “We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers,” Romney’s pollster, Neil Newhouse, said.”

    If you vote for this one, bend over and grab your ankles…

  • Crazyn8dogg

    Fuck politicians, obama tried, but this country died. Long ago. So fuck that shit, now hit this spliff. I got no beef with peeps, I just wanna chill, so smoke this blunt, until ur ill, if u dont, maybe your mormon, dont freak out like a stormin norman. Hit a bowl, take a seat, this is the only way things will change, put up ur feet, hang up your coat, no one go to work, this whole nation on strike, we can unseat these jerk, there fake ass sheep with shark smerks. Thats right, look at the word politics shall we? Poli means many, tics are blood sucking parasites, am I offending anybody? Good. I hope so, but nothing could be as sad or badly, as noone doing nothing, but continuing on this maddening, bullshit happening, open your eyes, evolve, science proves that god exists, I am one who sees it, so im standing with my fist, as for romney, heres my balls, now suck that shit! :) fuck romney and the beauracratic system, I believe in equality, small business and the american dream to live peacefully and happily as part of a self sustained america. Lets go back to helping eachother build memories of pride to last forever.

  • Hatmail

    Pass that blunt please ; )

  • Rudedogy

    Can’t wait for the debates. It’s going to be better than any SNL.

  • WestVaCoalMiner

    If Obama’s lips are moving he is not telling the truth.

    So lets see, that is over 3 Billion Lies an counting…..

  • AnonymousSam

    So I take it you’re not one of the miners who forced to attend a Romney rally whether you wanted to or not?

  • P J Evans

     And the miners didn’t get paid for having to be there, either. Seems to me they should have a good legal complaint against the owner.

  • Lori

    But they weren’t forced. They were told that it was mandatory, but no one made them go. If they really didn’t want to attend the rally and act as campaign props for a man who holds workers in open contempt they could simply have quit their jobs or been fired. They had a choice.

  • EllieMurasaki

    But they weren’t forced. They were told that it was mandatory, but no one made them go. If they really didn’t want to attend the rally and act as campaign props for a man who holds workers in open contempt they could simply have quit their jobs or been fired. They had a choice.

    Is coercion not force? Or not when it’s applied by an employer to employees?

  • Lori

    Yes, at least in the reality based community. In the offices of Murray Energy, apparently not so much. Or so they’d like us to believe.

    Murray closed the mine the day of the rally, saying it was necessary for security and safety, then docked miners their pay for those hours. Asked by WWVA radio’s Blomquist about the allegations, Murray Chief Operating Officer Robert Moore said, somewhat confusingly, “Attendance was mandatory but no one was forced to attend the event.” 

    IOW, I was being hella snarky and forgot to use the old sarcasm font.

  • Hawker40

    Since there was no threat of violence, no one was *forced* to go, I guess…

  • http://dpolicar.livejournal.com/ Dave

    Heck, why stop there? If we’re defining forced that narrowly, even the threat of violence need not qualify. I mean, even if I’m threatened with violence, I still have a choice… I can do it, or I can suffer violence.

  • P J Evans

     Whereas it’s clear to more than 50 percent of the voters that Romney doesn’t know what truth is, and his running-mate just simply lies, even in small, unimportant things.

  • Lori
  • http://profile.yahoo.com/ZRL4Z6FQQLKSKTZFVG7ORM3ZW4 Frank

    Looks like a lot of these “lies” are as “seen through a Democrats” eyes. If you ask a Republican, they’ll say they are truths. So who’s right and who’s wrong? I guess the guy writing the article is right(here) only because he wrote the article. That doesn’t make it “fact”.  You play by the rules of whoever owns the ball. In this case, it’s the writer. I can write the same article only making one change. Mitt Romney tells 533 truths. And I can substantiate it. Democrats do love Unions. They may very well want to take my guns away, But they can’t. You get the idea. So don’t get your panties in a bunch, boys, just because somebody wrote an article. That’s where the Republican vs Democrat breaks down. You can’t separate the lies from the truths in most cases because both sides are lying, and both sides tell the truth)on occasion). They’ll say whatever suits their needs. How do you think Obama got elected in 2008? A whole bunch of lies(can be substantiated, just look at cutting the deficit in half my first term and Immigration Reform as 2 examples). That’s Politics, my friends. The better liar and story teller usually wins.

  • P J Evans

     You know, you really need to spend some time looking at reality.
    There’s this party called Republicans, and the members of it in Congress said, right out, before Obama was inaugurated, that they had no intention of cooperating with him, and intended to make things so difficult for him that he’d be a one-term president.
    That’s truth.
    Romney lies. He lies more (and much worse) than Obama.

  • Cvelajr

    A request was made for “3 lies that Obama made” Here is a list, organized by year, to help you sort through the morass : http://obamalies.net/list-of-lies

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1110224902 Stuart Long

    The research and fact checking is pure propaganda. The
    statements Mitt Romney makes are ordinary ones that are being twisted and
    contorted into lies. Because speaking in a way that leaves no room for
    interpretation is almost impossible, and your researchers are implying that
    every statement he makes is false. For example, if Mitt Romney said “I am
    starving and can’t wait to get something to eat” your researchers and fact
    checkers would conclude 1. Mitt Romney claims to be dying from an extreme lack
    of food, and 2. that he has become impatient and will no longer wait for any
    meal to be prepared and served to him. Then, the moment he consumes food, he is
    a filthy liar, one million Pinocchios, and a closet full of pants on fire. The manure
    is really being shoveled by this research project. 
     

  • winniepooh123

    Romney is a born liar! How can you believe anything he says. Good luck to the Republicans!

  • Mamaloni

    Wellll, lying is how Obama for elected in the 1st place. He’s also broken ALL his promises, except for pushing thru Obamacare & shoving it down everyone’s throats, even if we (the majority) didn’t want it! Not to mention that it’s unconstitutional! Helllooo people, all politicians lie, all the time! So, why is it such a big deal this time around! Romney may be considered a Liberal Republican, but I’d rather have that then a Socialist Democrate, like Obama! @least Romney us the lesser of 2 evils! Vote for Romney! ;)

  • Larysa

    There is a premise with a debate… You have to be committed to a point of view. Romney’s strategy was contradiction and denial with rude attacks sprinkled in. How do you debate someone who can deny anything and everything. You can’t. Romney doesn’t own anything he ever said.

  • james

    These are some things that I watch out for ;
    Firemen that set fires, Doctors that causes harm, Mothers that don’t like children and fathers who don’t care for there own. 
    Most of all I watch out for people that will do harm to someone who is out numbered, like cutting off the hair of a man that is hail down by others , then justify the act like we’re all fools to be toy with. 

  • http://heathencritique.wordpress.com/ Ruby_Tea

    Judging by Romney’s treatment of Jim Lehrer during the debate, he’s not done much growing up from the middle-school bully he used to be.