General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWillard calls The President of the USA a liar
by Olympia
This from the one being hoisted on his own petard and marched through the streets, denounced by even members of his own party. He who has a difficult relationship with the truth and has shown disrespect for the The President, the Office of The President of the USA and the Secretary of State at a time when the safety of million is at stake.
"Well I think hes going to say a lot of things that arent accurate. And you know, Id be tempted to go back to that wonderful line by Ronald Reagan, 'There you go again,'"
"But I think the challenge that Ill have in the debate is that the president tends to, how shall I say it, to say things that arent true. And in attacking his opponents."
"Ive looked at prior debates. And in that kind of case, its difficult to say, 'Well, am I going to spend my time correcting things that arent quite accurate? Or am I going to spend my time talking about the things I want to talk about?'"
This, as my Mom would say, stuck out like a sore thumb. 'spend my time talking about the things I want to talk about' Isn't that exactly what Palin did during the debates?
- more -
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/14/1131749/-Willard-calls-The-President-of-the-USA-a-liar
Remember Mitt's EPIC WHINE:
LOL!!! Romney To Obama: Truce? Asks That Business Record, Taxes Be Off-Limits
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021106010
Unfit and unstable, Liar Romney projects
Editorial boards across America savage Mitt Romney's bungled response to Libya attack
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021337712
aint_no_life_nowhere
(21,925 posts)Not one example of how Obama previously has lied during a debate to back up this vague statement about future events. Mitt's crystal ball must be cloudy today.
nc4bo
(17,651 posts)Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)to wax profound on all of Mitt's little digressions from reality, his projection, and maybe that bit about Mormons being OK with lies as long as they serve God's (i.e the Church's) purposes. And then of course the White Horse prophecy.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)malaise
(269,157 posts)remember three are pointing in your direction
Fuck this pathological LIAR
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)other violent thieves.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)madamesilverspurs
(15,806 posts)-
Smilo
(1,944 posts)Romney has nothing else.
HopeHoops
(47,675 posts)JHB
(37,161 posts)If he does, though, expect Obama to serve him Mitt-ass flambe with Fudd sauce.
In 1980 "zingers" were just not the style for presidential debates. No matter what else went on, that wasn't considered appropriate in political/press circles. But Reagan ignored them and played to his real audience, the people watching on television.
As an actor and public speaker Reagan had plenty of experience in presenting himself to an audience and "interacting" with them even when doing so remotely (on camera or an audio recording). His reputation as "The Great Communicator" may be overblown by his fanclub, but it wasn't pulled from thin air, either.
On top of that, in 1980 Reagan had a purloined copy of Carter's debate briefing book.* He knew the things Carter planned to bring up, lines of argument, etc. Just what he needed to plan in advance ways of hitting Carter hard, to press an advantage or defuse a strong point by Carter. All he had to do was wait for a good moment to deploy his line.
Romney has no such advantage in style, experience, or inside information, and in fact he's telegraphing his intent. Since every politician since Reagan has been angling to have their own "there you go again" moment, counters to that are a bit more developed than they were in 1980. And neither Obama nor his team are dumb enough to ignore that.
If Mitt really tries to use that line, my guess is that he'll end up wishing his pants had fallen down instead. Or at least his staffers will, since Mitt's too tone-deaf to know to be embarrassed.
*The Debate book story sometimes gets garbled in retelling. George Will did not steal it. That was done by some other Reagan sympathizer with White House access. What Will did is participate in Reagan's prep work (he played the Carter part in practice sessions). Then, after the debate, he sung the praises of Reagan's performance without disclosing either the purloined playbook or his direct participation with the Reagan campaign. Will was a known conservative advocate so no one was surprised at his praise for Reagan, but he was still in a position where he was commenting as a journalist and journalistic ethics would be to disclose those not-insignificant facts.
The Link
(757 posts)I smell a landslide.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)don't answer the questions, just go into a pre-prepared speech.