The growing list of Romney Untruths

[chessdev]

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/22/12359704-chronicling-mitts-mendacity-vol-xxiii?fb_ref=.T-aRe5TkCjc.like&fb_source=home_multiline

For those who are watching the 2012 presidential race closely, Mitt Romney's penchant for falsehoods is hard to miss. Michael Cohen summarized the issue nicely this week in a piece for The Guardian:

Granted

Comments

[whoasksfinds]

who argues against the auto Industry

this statement is pretty darn ironic considering the purpose of your post.

[chessdev]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/19/romney-auto-bailout-cheap_n_1610779.html

He's insisted throughout the 2012 campaign that the government never needed to bail out the auto companies, just shuttle them quickly through managed bankruptcy. But the argument ignores the role that government funds played in keeping those companies intact so they could make it to the managed bankruptcy process.

That would have effectively destroyed them...they would not have recovered without gvmt intervention - let alone as well as they did.

I dont think its ironic, nor a falsehod on the level of the itms on this list

[whoasksfinds]

calling for a managed bankruptcy (which is what actually happened) is not the same thing as arguing against the auto industry. he simply argued for a quicker path to the bankruptcy.

all your doing is propagating the same kind of misleading statements you accuse romney of making. it kind of defeats the purpose of the post.

[chessdev]

Well, first he argued for a pullout - not just a quicker path

[whoasksfinds]

your article doesn't say what you think it does.

your comment just demonstrates the inherent hypocrisy in hyper partisan posts and politics.

[chessdev]

So what does my article say? It seems pretty clear to me - Romney tells lots of lies.
It even explains why those statements are false.

And again -- you're trying to equivocate here: My statement is arguable but not necessarily untrue; Romney's statements are very much untrue. Trying to make these things equal, or have the validity of 30+ cited points somehow have the same value as an arguable statement -- *that* seems more hypocritical to me.

You're using a statement that wasnt even part of the article, and trying to make that statement be the focus *instead of* the article, and then by disagreeing with that statement -- somehow the other 30 point are to be ignored or invalidated?

I'll even withdraw that statement if it makes you feel better. We still have 30+ documented Romney lies to contend with.
Does that somehow make my position weaker?

[notmrgarrison]

Your statement makes your whole post weaker, yes, as it shows you to be quite biased and capable of taking large leaps with your wording.

[chessdev]

Of course you'd see it that way -- that way, you get to keep the focus on me (on a statement that wasnt untrue) INSTEAD of your boy Romney there.

And what's amazing is you are going to come down on my "wording" when I just presented an article with 30 points showing blatant falsehoods and distortions by your boy Romney!

Yousure you want to talk about biased?

[notmrgarrison]

I was answering the question at the end of your comment.

[whoasksfinds]

Does that somehow make my position weaker?

your untrue statement just demonstrates the inherent hypocrisy in these kinds of hyper partisan posts. that makes your position weaker.

[chessdev]

And so my 1 statement somehow has equal value of 30 points with citations and links?

I think not. But it does make for a good reason to ignore the things Romney is saying for too many people out there...

[whoasksfinds]

its just a silly post altogether. we all know that in the course of an election both candidates are going to say dumb things that are not backed up by the facts.

[telemann]

Banks wouldn't give them the capital for a managed bankruptcy in the first place.

But the billions of dollars from the federal bailout helped the bankruptcy process get done in about two months, much faster than anyone thought was possible, said Van Conway, CEO of Conway MacKenzie, a restructuring firm in Detroit. And Conway said the idea of a managed bankruptcy was not unique at the time. "Romney might very well have had the idea, but it's not an idea no one else had on their own," Conway said. Other supporters of the bailouts, and even some critics of them, say that Romney deserves no credit for the turnaround, given that he opposed the federal bailout that kept the companies alive during the bankruptcy process. Without that $81 billion in funding, the companies would have been forced to go out of business and liquidate, according to those experts. "There was no way they could get financing," said Conway. "They were burning money so fast, with no end in site, that no one but the government was going to give them money."

[whoasksfinds]

so yeah, they ended up going through a managed bankruptcy.

[telemann]

In spite of Willard's objections of the use of government money, so GM COULD survive long enough to get through an expedited bankruptcy..So yeah. Let's play word games, cuz it's fun!

[whoasksfinds]

if you think any president would let GM go out of business, you're pretty naive.