Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Think Progress)   Mitt Romney set a new debate record last night - by lying 27 times in only 38 minutes   (thinkprogress.org) divider line 312
    More: Fail, Mitt Romney, fuel efficiency standards, Douglas Elmendorf, fuel economy in automobiles, National Federation of Independent Business  
•       •       •

5356 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Oct 2012 at 4:14 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



312 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-04 04:26:20 PM  

brap: He did kind of remind me of the Martin Short's Nathan Thurm, Attorney character.


Who's getting defensive? YOU'RE the one getting defensive!
 
2012-10-04 04:26:30 PM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: People are surprised Obama's playing the long game? STILL?


Came here to say this.

If you haven't noticed yet, Obama has consistently played long games. He takes longer than most people want to make a move, but it's because he takes time to consider all the angles and decides the best way to get what he wants, and it will stick.

He then moves, and the move he makes is a checkmate.

Some examples are:
- Universal Health Care
- Osama bin Laden
- Pirates
- Ending gay military ban
 
2012-10-04 04:27:16 PM  
Cyberluddite
Meanwhile, Obama set a new debate record for the number of times he inexplicably failed to even attempt to rebut or call bullshiat on an opponent's obvious lies.

Yep. Romney lied again and again and most of the time Obama didn't bother pointing it out. That's why he sucked in this debate. That and he didn't even respond to some potentially damaging attacks that have good responses, most notably Romney's attacks on $90 billion for green energy.

Money for green energy. That's farking great! Defend it, Obama. WTF?

As for Obama trying to explain the $716 billion Medicare "cut", he did. Once. Romney kept repeating the attacks. Obama needed to reiterate.
 
2012-10-04 04:27:17 PM  
I find this one interesting...

And the oil and gas industry is sitting on 7,000 approved permits to drill, that it hasn't begun exploring or developing.

Yet we constantly hear how "unfriendly" Obama is to the oil industry... All these permits and they're not doing anything.
 
2012-10-04 04:27:35 PM  
So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."
 
2012-10-04 04:28:11 PM  
While watching the debates I honestly thought that at least part of the reason Obama seemed so subdued was his complete astonishment of just how much bull Romney was throwing out there.

/did it look like to anyone else that Barry had a black eye?
 
2012-10-04 04:28:18 PM  

Sid_6.7: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?

It makes me curious. Perhaps there are enough people who don't pay attention to the day-to-day news, but do watch the debate, that lying your ass off during the debate is fine, because lots of people won't ever watch the news after the debate to hear that you did so.

On the other hand, if they don't follow the news, how likely is it that they would know the debate was scheduled?


Chess while everyone else plays checkers. There are two more debates to go. This one was on the more boring subject, and likely will therefore be forgotten by election day. BY getting "trounced" (honestly I didn't see it that way) Obama has effectively lowered his own expectations and re-set Romney's so high, that Romney has to now pull off being JFK's reincarnation not to "lose" the next debate, which IIRC is the one that includes national security stff- an area that matters much more to men with whom Obama is trailing slightly, than women with whom he has a commanding lead.

Or Obama had an "off night" because he tried to talk to the American people like grown-ups...either/or
 
2012-10-04 04:28:51 PM  

xanadian: I'm not even sure Romney knows. :P Can't flip-flop what you don't know.


Oh, I'm sure he knows. It's why he and Ryan have been f*cking terrified of giving details about it.
 
2012-10-04 04:29:45 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


Can you explain what deductions Romney will take away from the middle class?

or how he intends to pay for his plan to be deficit neutral, reducing taxes on everyone, while increasing spending?
 
2012-10-04 04:29:51 PM  
And why didn't Obama call out Romney's obvious lie when Mitt denied that there are tax breaks for moving jobs overseas? Call him out, damn it.

Dr Dreidel
They went back-and-forth over "teh maff" in Mitt's "if we cut, there's more!" plan and went back-and-forth over the $716B. Obama didn't say "That's a farking lie, you farking liar," but he said everything but.

But most people won't remember that part. Romney kept repeating the "$716 billion" attack and Obama stopped responding to it. Repetition works, even, or maybe especially, when you're lying your ass off.
 
2012-10-04 04:30:14 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


It's hard to take those into account since Romney doesn't even know what the fark they are.

One way, for instance, would be to have a single number. Make up a number, $25,000, $50,000. Anybody can have deductions up to that amount. And then that number disappears for high-income people. That's one way one could do it. One could follow Bowles-Simpson as a model and take deduction by deduction and make differences that way.

The first time he mentioned it (a few days ago), he said it could be $17,000.

He doesn't have a plan, just a fuzzy idea of what he wants to do. So how in the fark can you measure that?
 
2012-10-04 04:30:17 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


he didn't look so hot to me yesterday, but we'll see what happens.


that said, I've been looking for a RW farker to give me the RW take on Mitt's line about not ending the preexisting condition rule when he dismantles Obamacare.

is the RW take that he meant he expects the states to set these rules up themselves? or what?
seriously, any RWer got an answer there?
 
2012-10-04 04:30:33 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


Perhaps you'd care to make it interesting...
 
2012-10-04 04:30:43 PM  
The general public is quite stupid, this is why he won the debate.
 
2012-10-04 04:31:00 PM  
BTW, something that came up last night that I hadn't heard before from Romney, probably got jumbled in with all of his other bullshiat...

How, exactly would making Medicare a state run thing, with no federal oversight be a good thing? Different states, different regulations. You could be covered in one state, move to another, and be totally farked. Am I missing something here? If this shiat isn't federal, or has no federal oversight, then it is more or less like the current health insurance scenario we already face: You're at the mercy of the place you're in to decide what your coverage is. With health insurance, it's all based on which insurance company they deal with, how big your company is, and how good your company's negotiator is. I see state-regulated Medicare going the same way.
 
2012-10-04 04:31:01 PM  
HAHAHAHA!!!! This is priceless. Gore is saying the altitude of Denver got to Obama...

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/04/video-al-gore-blames-obamas-piti f ul-debate-performance-on-the-thin-denver-air/
 
2012-10-04 04:31:03 PM  
I don't think this was Obama playing Jedi mind chess, although there was a point when Mitt almost lost his mind where I thought the rope-a-dope was in play. I think he's just tired in general. He's out campaigning so he has to be "on" at all times. Turkey is shelling Syria and NATO's getting antsy. And on his 20th anniversary he has to show up to debate a lying blowhard in order to win reelection to a country where about a sizable amount of the electorate would like to see him executed for giving people access to health care.

His eyes had that "Is this shiat really worth it?" look.
 
2012-10-04 04:31:05 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: I guess that's one definition of "winning"


Pyrrhic victory, like I said. He won the debate, but had to lie through his teeth and make himself look like a prick to do so, and this victory is going to come back to bite him in the ass. Hard.
 
2012-10-04 04:31:22 PM  

Aarontology: Can you explain what deductions Romney will take away from the middle class?

or how he intends to pay for his plan to be deficit neutral, reducing taxes on everyone, while increasing spending?


Not just increasing spending, increasing cold-war era style military spending of the nation that outspends the next dozen or so nations combined in military spending, as a percentage of GDP
 
2012-10-04 04:32:04 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


The next presidential debate is a town hall.

Romney is so comfortable around random people, I'm sure he'll do fine. And Obama did so badly last night...

I mean...there's just no way that Obama could possibly beat him, is there?
 
2012-10-04 04:32:07 PM  
Anything that Mitt said that didn't contain the phrase "I'm going to fark over the middle class for another tax cut for the rich" was a lie.
 
2012-10-04 04:32:15 PM  
The big bird comment reminded me a lot of my father; always finding humor in the cruelty and misfortune of others.

Romney changes positions because he doesn't care about you humans. That's the head fake; the misdirection, so he can achieve his real goals.

I'm enjoying the fall of America! I'm living in the making of history!

Soon, the debates will be between scumbags like, Nero vs. Caligula.
 
2012-10-04 04:32:36 PM  

Ed Finnerty: Mr. Coffee Nerves: People are surprised Obama's playing the long game? STILL?

Came here to say this.

If you haven't noticed yet, Obama has consistently played long games. He takes longer than most people want to make a move, but it's because he takes time to consider all the angles and decides the best way to get what he wants, and it will stick.

He then moves, and the move he makes is a checkmate.

Some examples are:
- Universal Health Care
- Osama bin Laden
- Pirates
- Ending gay military ban


- Dream Act-related executive order
- Libya/Ghaddafi
- Auto industry
- offshore tax havens
- fuel efficiency standards
 
2012-10-04 04:32:44 PM  

O.M.G. politicians lie to suit their own needs?

STOP THE PRESS

/dunning-kruger
//opinions are like assholes: everyone has one and everyone's stinks but yours
 
2012-10-04 04:32:57 PM  

mark12A: HAHAHAHA!!!! This is priceless. Gore is saying the altitude of Denver got to Obama...

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/04/video-al-gore-blames-obamas-piti f ul-debate-performance-on-the-thin-denver-air/


Aarontology: mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."

Can you explain what deductions Romney will take away from the middle class?

or how he intends to pay for his plan to be deficit neutral, reducing taxes on everyone, while increasing spending?

 
2012-10-04 04:33:00 PM  
On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.
 
2012-10-04 04:33:18 PM  
Though you do have to let the teabaggers enjoy their "victory"

It's the first good news for Romney in months, and he had to accomplish it by flat out lying, and moving to the left. I mean, he did come out in favor of wall street regulation, individual mandates, governmental involvement with health care, and an increase of $700 Billion in spending on socialized health insurance. As well as praising Massachusetts' education with it's high taxes and powerful teachers unions.
 
2012-10-04 04:33:32 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


...

What?
 
2012-10-04 04:34:17 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


Really? Somehow I don't think he planned this and weather or not he can use Romney statements as sound bites in his ads well Romney can do it also. And to think that farkdom thinks that Obama thought of this in advance is down right laughable.
www.newsbiscuit.com
I bet you will see a different Obama in the next debate.
 
2012-10-04 04:34:22 PM  

mark12A: So many Farkers, curled in a fetal position in the corner, whispering to themselves, "It'll be alright, Obama will win, he WILL win...."


You keep believing that, Sparky.
 
2012-10-04 04:34:33 PM  

Aarontology: Though you do have to let the teabaggers enjoy their "victory"

It's the first good news for Romney in months, and he had to accomplish it by flat out lying, and moving to the left. I mean, he did come out in favor of wall street regulation, individual mandates, governmental involvement with health care, and an increase of $700 Billion in spending on socialized health insurance. As well as praising Massachusetts' education with it's high taxes and powerful teachers unions.


He was for it before he was against it before he was for it before he was against it before he was for it.
 
2012-10-04 04:34:54 PM  

mark12A: HAHAHAHA!!!! This is priceless. Gore is saying the altitude of Denver got to Obama...

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/04/video-al-gore-blames-obamas-piti f ul-debate-performance-on-the-thin-denver-air/


That's nice.

How is Romney going to increase military spending but stay revenue neutral, as he claimed last night?
 
2012-10-04 04:35:13 PM  

patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.


They haven't won the election yet and, by the number of brave independents seen in FARK threads today, they're pretty chickenshiat until after they've had victory declared for them.
 
2012-10-04 04:35:13 PM  

zarberg: Not just increasing spending, increasing cold-war era style military spending of the nation that outspends the next dozen or so nations combined in military spending, as a percentage of GDP


Indeed. That's a lot of money he's going to have to take from the middle class' deductions to make his math match up.
 
2012-10-04 04:35:21 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


If they are going to lie about what romney said they should put some effort into it


Offer them your "consulting" skills.

Use your fark posts for references and you are a shoe in.
 
2012-10-04 04:35:26 PM  

urban.derelict: //opinions are like assholes: everyone has one and everyone's stinks but yours


I dunno, back in college I was going 69 with this girl when she faked an orgas ... I mean when I totally got her off for umm .. the 24th time ... and she sat up, pushing her cornhole right onto my nose, and it wasn't all that bad smelling.
 
2012-10-04 04:35:32 PM  

bdub77: - offshore tax havens

sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net


/mittens doesn't care about war vets who desire medicinal cannabis to ease their pain
//utah was the first state anywhere, ever, to outlaw cannabis -- yes the morons were behind it
/tinyurl.com/1mn
 
2012-10-04 04:35:47 PM  
A house of cards built with a stack of lies and held together with an ignorant public.....vote GOP!
 
2012-10-04 04:36:20 PM  
In the game of chess you let your pawns do the fighting for you, and I think that's what Obama did. Romneybot 4.0 came to the debate that night because that version promoted stability and a friendly user interface, unlike previous versions that simply looked horrible or deleted data when it wanted to.

Obama didn't have to do crap that night but look calm and speak in a plain tone, obviously if the President argued his case passionately it would seem desperate and there's no need to speak grandly because the economy is looking like a 20 dollar whore that's saving up enough money to get the second breast job done.

So he let Romney "get away" with his lies only because he knew the media aka his pawns would beat Romney up post-debate.

Lose a battle, win a war.
 
2012-10-04 04:36:32 PM  

patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.


Been like that since 2008. That's why they're known as Fark IndependentsTM here.
 
2012-10-04 04:36:51 PM  

patrick767: On a side note, WTF is with so many Republicans claiming to be independents? I have read so farking many comments on various web pages that start with something like "For the record I'm an independent" and are then followed by the usual far right wing talking points. You're a Republican, cockbag. Own it.


That's why we have the phrase "Fark Independent™" round these parts.
 
2012-10-04 04:36:51 PM  

bdub77: He was for it before he was against it before he was for it before he was against it before he was for it.


Romney's now going to have to stay to the left or else he'll demonstrate that he really did spend 90 minutes flat out lying to the American people.

of course, the teabaggers are going to have a fit with their newly liberal nominee. but I'm sure they won't mind a Massachusetts liberal in office, right?
 
2012-10-04 04:37:30 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Meanwhile, the fact checkers in the media are already jizzing their pants today over the wealth of info they have to go over now, and it looks like the Obama camp is already pointing out the fact that he basically lied through his teeth the entire time.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong here. But, perhaps this was Obama's game plan all along? Let Romney throw the kitchen sink at him, then point out how wrong he was later?


I've heard this already, and it's a shiatty plan if it's true. Let's talk about undecided voters. At this point, less than 2 months from election, your only remaining undecideds are so low-info, they probably can't find Canada on a map of North America. So, allow me to suggest:

Proposal 1: almost no one this clueless and disengaged from US society actually watched the debate. Proposal 2: of the few that did, almost none of them will be excitedly firing up their computers today or tomorrow with a hardon for reading what the fact checkers have to say.

There is a perfect time and place to call Willard out on his nonstop stream of lies, and it is called LAST NIGHT AS SOON AS THE LIES ESCAPED HIS LIPS. Instead Romney looked like a man on fire, re-energizing a mostly disengaged right, while Obama just looked bored and unhappy to be there, put in the minimal effort, and demoralized a left that is probably already too complacent going into this election.

/Just my $0.02, not to be taken as gospel.
 
2012-10-04 04:37:40 PM  
Right now there seems to be 5 candidates running for president: Governor Romney, Primaries Romney, Candidate Romney, Debate Romney, a relative newcomer, and finally Barack Obama.
 
2012-10-04 04:37:43 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Stopped reading at the second one since they only looked at tax rate reductions not the reduction of the deductions


That's a shame. Because the very next one (#3) explained this:

If Romney hopes to provide tax relief to the middle class, then his $5 trillion tax cut would add to the deficit. There are not enough deductions in the tax code that primarily benefit rich people to make his math work.
 
2012-10-04 04:37:46 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-04 04:38:08 PM  
Fortunately John Kerry and Al Gore have shown that inconsistent pathological liars don't win the Presidency.
 
2012-10-04 04:38:39 PM  

gilgigamesh: mark12A: HAHAHAHA!!!! This is priceless. Gore is saying the altitude of Denver got to Obama...

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/04/video-al-gore-blames-obamas-piti f ul-debate-performance-on-the-thin-denver-air/

That's nice.

How is Romney going to increase military spending but stay revenue neutral, as he claimed last night?


See, it's like this. Romney is totally full of sh*t. He will hire plenty of aides and work with Congressmen that are also totally full of sh*t. He will convince people that his ideas are good so that they become totally full of sh*t. He will then invest in Clean Sh*t, then all the people full of sh*t will release their sh*t into special sh*t containers which will fuel all our energy needs for the next 3 days.

After that, it's a crap shoot.
 
2012-10-04 04:38:45 PM  

LegacyDL: he knew the media aka his pawns


Oh, whatEVER.
 
2012-10-04 04:39:34 PM  
I wanted Obama to close with "I urge each of you to go to various fact-checking sites and see how this debate has scored. It keeps me and my opponent honest.". That would have been the rope-a-dope. This was weak.
 
Displayed 50 of 312 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report