Romney pays surprise visit to Solyndra

[Ansgar Seraph]

Well, if we're looking for evidence of Romney lying, one need look no further than the OP's link:

Mitt Romney Visits Solyndra Amid Attack on Obama Jobs Record

“It’s a symbol not of success but of failure,” he said. “It’s also a symbol of a serious conflict of interest. An independent inspector general looked at this investment and concluded that the administration had steered money to friends and family – to campaign contributors. This building, this half a billion dollar taxpayer investment, represents a serious conflict of interest on the part of the president and his team.”

© source where applicable

That's simply not true. And when the campaign was asked for proof of the claim, they could not produce it. Instead, they listed a few people who they suggested could be involved in a conflict of interest concerning the Solyndra loan. Romney therefore lied; he could have stopped short at suggesting the Solyndra loan was made to benefit friends and family but instead tried to strengthen the claim by saying that an independent inspector general had concluded this to be the case.

When you take this along with the claim that 92.5% of all jobs lost under Obama's administration have been women, taking credit for the auto bailout he opposed and counting Obama's job-loss numbers by adding in those that were lost before he even took office, it becomes fairly clear: lying may not be the primary tool of the Romney campaign but it's certainly not a tool he's too ethical to wield.

Not that Obama is terribly better: Politifact.com ranks 31% of Romney's claims ranging from "Mostly False" to "Pants on Fire." Obama ranks at 28% (But his 1% "Pants on Fire" ranking crushes Romney's 10% PoF rank).

Yay for politics!

—Sam

[Cow Poke]

Jaecp gave you a link Cow Poke, though I am amazed that you have not seen the video for yourself.

I DID see the video myself, Jimmy, and it did NOT say what you SAID it said. Here's what you said...

not to mention his own campaign manager, you know, the etch-a-sketch guy, who admitted that lying is Romney's main campaign strategy for winning the nomination.

That is flat out untrue.

Romneys campaign manager was asked about all the things that Romney said in the primary and how they would hurt his chances in the general election and his answer was something to the effect that, it would be no problem, like an etch-a-sketch, he could erase it all and start all over.

AH, so you're etch-a-sketchin' your response, and, in effect, you lied about what the campaign manager said?

Which means that he is merely pandering, that he can't be trusted, that if he is elected he will be so under false pretenses. But this should not be a surprise to anyone who is actually paying attention. Romney has flipped on just about every issue of importance to his constituancy.

I'm fully aware that Romney tends to say whatever is "fitting" for his current audience. I'm not happy AT ALL with Romney. But you got into your liberal lala talking points, and went just a wee bit too far. How is that any better than Romney? Is lying your main strategy for winning debates?

Lemme guess, Jimmy... Romney is the biggest liar straight from Hell, but you only "fudge a teesie little bit".

[Cow Poke]

Well, if we're looking for evidence of Romney lying, one need look no further than the OP's link:
—Sam

I don't dispute for one minute that Romney seems to have a credibility problem with the truth. It was Jimmy's sloppy "reporting" that I was pointing out. When you are demonstrating that somebody is a liar, it sure helps to be telling the truth.

[Ansgar Seraph]

I don't dispute for one minute that Romney seems to have a credibility problem with the truth. It was Jimmy's sloppy "reporting" that I was pointing out. When you are demonstrating that somebody is a liar, it sure helps to be telling the truth.

No argument here: I'd say that etch-a-sketchin' is absolutely ubiquitous among presidential candidates as they move from the primaries to the general. One can't pin lying on Romney for that, at least not in and of itself. I would say that it was a tacit admission of a missing core.

[Cow Poke]

No argument here: I'd say that etch-a-sketchin' is absolutely ubiquitous among presidential candidates as they move from the primaries to the general. One can't pin lying on Romney for that, at least not in and of itself. I would say that it was a tacit admission of a missing core.

I can't say I disagree with you, Sam. And that's what concerns me about Romney. He does enough stupid stuff on his own, though, without his detractors exaggerating his faults.

I'd be interested, though, in your -- oh, I just saw ... "politifact.com". I'd be interested to know if the lies on each side were ranked by "seriousness", besides "extent". I mean... a woman can outright LIE about her age, but that's not a big deal. Another woman lying about being, for example, 1/4 Cherokee (I'm exaggerating to make the point) to be qualified as a "minority owned business" -- that's a lot more serious.

I'll take a look at it when I get back from the ASTROS game tonight , but if you have comments along those lines, I'd welcome your thoughts.

[The Moonshield]

I'd be interested, though, in your -- oh, I just saw ... "politifact.com". I'd be interested to know if the lies on each side were ranked by "seriousness", besides "extent". I mean... a woman can outright LIE about her age, but that's not a big deal. Another woman lying about being, for example, 1/4 Cherokee (I'm exaggerating to make the point) to be qualified as a "minority owned business" -- that's a lot more serious.

I know I'm not Ansgar but I'll answer anyway because that's how I roll: Politifact basically just has 6 ratings - True, Mostly True, Half True, Mostly False, False, and Pants on Fire. Pants on Fire pretty much accounts for any claim they believe to be a flat-out lie and it encompasses anything from smaller to larger lies. You have to read each entry to get an idea of how bad you think each example truly is.

Going just by their "rulings," Obama and Romney are both liars who say an awful lot of blatantly false things.

Obama's Negative Ratings: 44 Mostly False, 57 False, 5 Pants on Fire

Romney's Negative Ratings: 21 Mostly False, 20 False, 13 Pants on Fire

[Ansgar Seraph]

Riffing off what Moonshield said, I'd say that "Pants on Fire" ratings give us the only good look into the seriousness aspect of claims on Politifact . . . and then only because those are generally the case of people telling all-out whoppers, which tends to stain perceptions of character.

But looking at the actual seriousness of a false claim necessitates a lot of context and a little subjectivity — things that few web sites will be able to deliver as objective fact. I do certainly agree that lies and false statements have a wide spectrum of seriousness. Powell's presentation to the U.N. concerning Iraq comes to mind as an example of an exceptionally serious lie, even if the aspects of his statements can be somewhat subjective. Conversely, I get the feeling that Romney's bend the truth a bit concerning the now-infamous Seamus car ride but I can't see how that's very relevant as an information-point in the election. Warren's claims of Native American heritage fall somewhere in-between, depending on the facts of the matter (I haven't kept up with that at all).

Refreshing myself with Obama's and Romney's spectrum of false statements, I'd say that both have made some pretty brazen falsehoods for the sake of partisan politics. What concerns me most about Romney is the clear cynicism on parade. I don't think that Romney intends to be cynical with facts and truth but I don't think his plastic personality allows for anything else.

—Sam

[Cow Poke]

Riffing off what Moonshield said, I'd say that "Pants on Fire" ratings give us the only good look into the seriousness aspect of claims on Politifact . . . and then only because those are generally the case of people telling all-out whoppers, which tends to stain perceptions of character.

But looking at the actual seriousness of a false claim necessitates a lot of context and a little subjectivity — things that few web sites will be able to deliver as objective fact. I do certainly agree that lies and false statements have a wide spectrum of seriousness. Powell's presentation to the U.N. concerning Iraq comes to mind as an example of an exceptionally serious lie, even if the aspects of his statements can be somewhat subjective. Conversely, I get the feeling that Romney's bend the truth a bit concerning the now-infamous Seamus car ride but I can't see how that's very relevant as an information-point in the election. Warren's claims of Native American heritage fall somewhere in-between, depending on the facts of the matter (I haven't kept up with that at all).

Refreshing myself with Obama's and Romney's spectrum of false statements, I'd say that both have made some pretty brazen falsehoods for the sake of partisan politics. What concerns me most about Romney is the clear cynicism on parade. I don't think that Romney intends to be cynical with facts and truth but I don't think his plastic personality allows for anything else.

—Sam

Thanks, Sam and Moon...
I guess the thing that bugs me most about Obama is his penchant for blaming everybody, and taking personal credit for anything good. I think, quite honestly, this is the most "lesser of two evils" election I've seen in all the years I've been voting since 1972.

[Ansgar Seraph]

Thanks, Sam and Moon...
I guess the thing that bugs me most about Obama is his penchant for blaming everybody, and taking personal credit for anything good. I think, quite honestly, this is the most "lesser of two evils" election I've seen in all the years I've been voting since 1972.

Yeah . . . I remember when that used to be a recurring emotion, before widespread Internet use, cable news cycles and a hyper-partisan government. Nowadays it's just a continuous dull pain. I have the feeling that "the lesser of two evils" will become the mainstay political environment for a long time to come.

[Darth Executor]

Thanks, Sam and Moon...
I guess the thing that bugs me most about Obama is his penchant for blaming everybody, and taking personal credit for anything good. I think, quite honestly, this is the most "lesser of two evils" election I've seen in all the years I've been voting since 1972.

Romney's miles above McCain...

[JimL]

I DID see the video myself, Jimmy, and it did NOT say what you SAID it said. Here's what you said...



That is flat out untrue.



AH, so you're etch-a-sketchin' your response, and, in effect, you lied about what the campaign manager said?



I'm fully aware that Romney tends to say whatever is "fitting" for his current audience. I'm not happy AT ALL with Romney. But you got into your liberal lala talking points, and went just a wee bit too far. How is that any better than Romney? Is lying your main strategy for winning debates?

Lemme guess, Jimmy... Romney is the biggest liar straight from Hell, but you only "fudge a teesie little bit".

If everything has to be spoon fed to you Cow Poke in order for you to figure out what it means then there is no help for you. When a campaign manager implies that Romney didn't mean all the crap that he spewed in the primary, that he was just pandering to the far right base, that we can just ignore all that because like an etch-a-sketch he can just erase it all and begin again, that is as much as to say that he was lying to you all in order to garner your vote.

[Cow Poke]

If everything has to be spoon fed to you Cow Poke in order for you to figure out

You blew it. Just like the "no mechanism to give to the government...." crap. You read the liberal talking points, then you go off the reservation. I don't have to have anything spoon fed to me, Jimmy --- I just don't like being fed bull crap.

what it means then there is no help for you. When a campaign manager implies

Oh... now he IMPLIES!!!!!! Yup, walkin it back!

that Romney didn't mean all the crap that he spewed in the primary, that he was just pandering to the far right base, that we can just ignore all that because like an etch-a-sketch he can just erase it all and begin again, that is as much as to say that he was lying to you all in order to garner your vote.

That's a FAR CRY from the big fat lie you told, while falsely claiming that Romney's campaign manager "admitted that lying is Romney's main campaign strategy for winning the nomination."

Keep up the kabuki dance, Jimmy.... maybe you'll get it right eventually.

[JimL]

I don't dispute for one minute that Romney seems to have a credibility problem with the truth. It was Jimmy's sloppy "reporting" that I was pointing out. When you are demonstrating that somebody is a liar, it sure helps to be telling the truth.

Oh, so I am lying when I point out the fact that Romney's strategy is to lie, that he is in fact a blatant liar, but then you admit that he has a "credibility problem with the truth?" LOL! Isn't that just a nice way of calling him a liar Cow Poke?

[Cow Poke]

Oh, so I am lying when I point out the fact that Romney's strategy is to lie,

That's not what you said, Jimmy, and it's not what I accused you of. You MADE UP a quote supposedly from the campaign manager.

that he is in fact a blatant liar, but then you admit that he has a "credibility problem with the truth?" LOL! Isn't that just a nice way of calling him a liar Cow Poke?

Well, here's a big difference, Jimmy .... I stated my own honest opinion, I didn't flat out lie about what somebody else actually said like you did. you flat LIED about what the campaign manager actually said.

You really have a problem with this "truth" thing, don't you?

[JimL]

That's not what you said, Jimmy, and it's not what I accused you of. You MADE UP a quote supposedly from the campaign manager.

No, I did not make up a quote. Did you see any quotation marks? All I did was put into words what the campaign managers quote implied which was that Romney continuously lied throughout the campaign in order to win the primary and that now that the primary is over he can "like an etch-a-sketch" erase all that and begin again. So please stop lying.

Well, here's a big difference, Jimmy .... I stated my own honest opinion, I didn't flat out lie about what somebody else actually said like you did. you flat LIED about what the campaign manager actually said.

No, I did not flat out lie about what someone else said, you are flat out lying about what I said. I didn't quote anybody. I merely pointed out the fact that the campaign manager admitted that Romneys strategy for winning was to lie. But thank you for finally agreeing with me that in your honest opinion Romney is a liar.

You really have a problem with this "truth" thing, don't you?

No, but apparently you do, unless you made an honest mistake in believing that I made up a quote.