It’s funny how public opinion can be swayed by a good lie or repeating an untruth until people believe it. OK, well maybe it’s not so funny when it comes to the presidential race, but here we have it. Up to now, Hillary Clinton was seen as the less truthful candidate, but the real truth is that more than half of the public pronouncements Donald Trump has made are, well, lies. And that’s really why I said last week that Hillary’s drop in the polls was not anything to panic about. All we had to do was wait a little bit and Trump would likely say something that would further reinforce the fact that he is woefully unprepared and unqualified to be president.
We didn’t even have to wait a week.
Trump’s commitment to the birther issue is proof positive that he doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to run the Executive branch. After all, how can someone who is gullible enough to believe, and susceptible to low-level analytical arguments, be trusted to gather information and make an educated decision that might cost us lives? And he stuck with it for five years. Then, even though he received documentary proof that he was wrong, he continued to push the lie. Until Friday. Then he finally acknowledged what has never, ever been true. Trust Trump to make a decision. Nope.
But wait, there’s more. He then doubled down on the lie that Hillary Clinton wants to gut the Second Amendment and, gasp, take your guns away. Rather than making the point with a political argument, though, he repeated the idea that Hillary should be harmed by pro-gun citizens in order to…prove a point. I’m not quite sure what that point would be, but since it is not anchored in reality, it really doesn’t matter what the point is. The result is quite a backlash against Trump, and one that will reverse his momentum in the polls, and rightly so.
I’m sure that Trump will try to deflect all of this at the debates, but if he can go so far off script during a scripted campaign event, imagine what he’ll say during a debate that, evidently, he hasn’t really prepared for. September 26 should be quite a show.
Which, of course, is an absolute lie, no matter who says it. But the fact that it was Donald Trump, all-of-a-sudden apologizing and blabbering on about how in the heat of a campaign he might have said some nasty things about, oh, African-Americans, women, Hispanics, judges, pollsters, Bush, Republicans etc., makes it doubly ironic and self-defeating.
This is the Trump Pivot; the moment in the campaign where he gets serious and presidential and wants to be judged by what he says from this point forward and for us lowly voters to forget what got him the Republican nomination in the first place. That would be hate, accusation, blame, xenophobia, denial, sexism and blaming the victim. The only thing that would make his standing worse in the eyes of many Americans is if he publicly insulted the family of a fallen United States soldier because of some ethnic slur or ignorant remark.
And then the first issue he publicized was Hillary Clinton’s health. Which turns out to be rather fine, thank you very much. And that came straight from her doctor. But I guess if you’re going to deny climate change, you might as well double down and dismiss all scientific inquiry. So go ahead and smoke, right?
There will be no Trump Pivot. His new Breitbart-led campaign will be the height of cynicism and chock full of the right’s 1990 greatest hits list, which includes the Clintons murdering Vincent Foster, trying to manipulate the money supply and all of the other untruths that the fringe has been dying to run on since 1994. Dump in a heavy dose of Benghazi and e-mails, and you pretty much have the Trump campaign’s tactics right in front of you. It’s the campaign the far right has wanted to run since the Reagan era began, but the party kept nominating politicians who actually had ideas. Not good ones, but actual governing experience. With Trump, they have their perfect front man–a huckster who only cares about spreading his name and enough ignorance to just say stuff and hope that it leads the news cycle.
The truth will unfortunately have to wait its turn, if it comes at all.
Joe Scarborough is a tried and proven Republican, but after listening to Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio in Wednesday’s debate, Joe went on his MSNBC program and concluded, Marco Rubio “flat-out lied to the American people!”
Scarborough was talking about a question the debate moderator asked Rubio about the way he has mismanaged his money including a foreclosure. And the moderator wanted to know how Rubio would manage a multi-trillion dollar economy, when he can’t even manage his own personal finances.
Rubio tried evading the question, then basically called out the moderator as a liar or more politically correct, misrepresenting the truth. But Scarborough was not about being politically correct, he simply stated the truth, a fact, that Rubio “flat-out lied to the American people.” Scarborough pointed out that Rubio is lying about things that are documented in court records.
““I think it was Becky Quick who went down the list of proven things about Marco’s foreclosures and all of Marco’s economic problems. Talking about lying; Marco said ‘I’m not going to answer those lies they’ve all been discredited.’”
“Marco just flat-out lied to the American people, there,” he continued. “And I was stunned that the moderators didn’t stop there and go, ‘Wait a second, these are court records. What are you talking about?’”
The Republican Leader of the House of Representatives thought he was on safe ground when he decided to write a post on his verified Facebook page, claiming “House Republicans have protected 98% of Americans from permanent tax increases.”
For those of you following politics, you already know that the only “Americans” Republicans have fought to protect are the top 2% – the millionaires and billionaires among us. Republicans have, however, gone out of their way to make sure the middle class and poor suffer!
After posting his lie on Facebook, informed Americans began letting the Republican speaker know their feelings, some of them even calling him a “liar,” and seeing their response is a wonderful sight to behold.
Here are some of what these Americans had to say;
And there’s more! Page after page of informed Americans telling Boehner what they think of him and the Republicans in Congress!
I bet he wouldn’t try that again!
My day just got a lot happier!
During last year’s GOP presidential race, Bachmann racked up the highest ratio of Four-Pinocchio comments, so just about everything she says needs to be checked and double-checked before it is reported.
In this case, Bachmann appears to be citing the self-published book “Presidential Perks Gone Royal,” by Republican lobbyist Robert Keith Gray, though one wonders whether she actually read the book — which is only 131 pages — or just read a summary that appeared in the Daily Caller, since many of her points are highlighted in the Daily Caller article.
The Fact Checker read the book so that you don’t have to. It provides no specific sourcing for any of its claims, though in the back it provides a list of articles and books that presumably the author consulted. He claims that the book is not intended as an attack on President Obama, but only on the imperial trappings of the presidency, though the subtitle of the book is: “Your taxes are being used for Obama’s re-election.”
Bachmann, however, framed it as an attack on Obama, and we will examine her claims in that context. How does Obama compare with other presidents?
Bachmann’s headline figure is that Obama’s presidency costs $1.4 billion a year. Gray never quite explains how he developed that figure, though another self-published book, “The 1.4 Billion Dollar Man: Costs of the Obama White House,” by self-help writer John F. Groom, attempts to provide a breakdown. But what is quickly apparent is that this number covers every possible expense, including many having to do with the security that is necessary to protect the president. The figures also include the cost of the White House policy-making staffs. Are those really all “perks and excess?”
Groom’s figures include a number of somewhat fishy guesstimates (“unreimbursed campaign expenses”), but as it happens, a much more credible scholar — former White House aide Bradley H. Patterson Jr. — attempted to figure out the tab for the White House for a book, “To Serve the President,” published in 2010 by the Brookings Institution.
Patterson estimated that the cost of running the White House for fiscal year 2008 — when George W. Bush was president — was nearly $1.6 billion. About half — more than $800 million — related to the Secret Service budget. An additional $271 million was spent on the president’s helicopter squadron.
If Bush is a $1.6 billion man, does that make Obama a relative bargain at $1.4 billion?
His entire campaign could have won this dubious honor, but it was the lie he told in the final stages of his campaign that put Romney over the top and earned him PolitiFact’s liar of the year award.
It was a lie told in the critical state of Ohio in the final days of a close campaign — that Jeep was moving its U.S. production to China. It originated with a conservative blogger, who twisted an accurate news story into a falsehood. Then it picked up steam when the Drudge Report ran with it. Even though Jeep’s parent company gave a quick and clear denial, Mitt Romney repeated it and his campaign turned it into a TV ad.
And they stood by the claim, even as the media and the public expressed collective outrage against something so obviously false.
People often say that politicians don’t pay a price for deception, but this time was different: A flood of negative press coverage rained down on the Romney campaign, and he failed to turn the tide in Ohio, the most important state in the presidential election.
PolitiFact has selected Romney’s claim that Barack Obama “sold Chrysler to Italians who are going to build Jeeps in China” at the cost of American jobs as the 2012 Lie of the Year.
Joe Isuzu. Remember him? He was the “car salesman” for Isuzu cars in the 1980’s. Joe was known for making promises about Isuzu cars that were… for lack of a better word… lies. In one of his commercials he promised viewers that if they bought one Isuzu, they would get another car for free. He also said things like, “this car is so cheap, you can buy one with pocket change.” He said that while holding up a quarter he pulled from his pocket.
Well birds of a feather flock together, and Joe has seen something in Mitt Romney that made him revert to his old lying ways. Joe has substituted the Isuzu car with Mitt Romney, and he is saying some things that he know are lies.
In the ad below, lying Joe Isuzu merges into lying Mitt Romney… or is it lying Mitt Romney merging into lying Joe Isuzu?