Political Irony

By Brainwrap

I know the season of prevarication is going on longer that most people can stand, but if you want a straight-talking rant, Helen and Margaret are on a roll. They’ve had six delicious posts this month.

The first one started out like this:

Well Margaret, once again I am going to say what the media won’t. Mitt Romney is a lying sack of shit and he wouldn’t know a middle class tax cut if it bit him in the middle of his gold plated ass. Evidently the media seems to think that the person who slings the bullshit the farthest wins the debate. Well if that ain’t the damnest thing.

Who exactly was that man debating the President last night? Clearly somebody finally decided to shake the Etch A Sketch and now Romney is against lowering taxes for the wealthy. He’s also pro choice and for entitlement programs. But what the hell he has against Big Bird is beyond me.

If lying whenever your mouth moves is what they mean by style points then, yes, I would definitely have to say that Romney won the debate. He had to temporarily become a Democrat to do it, but yes he won. And it was clear that even the President didn’t see that one coming.

In the next post, Helen says:

In the primary debates, Romney is on record as saying that he would lower taxes for the wealthiest Americans because that would lead to job growth. That’s not an assumption on my part. It’s almost a direct quote. But in the debate last week, he said that he wouldn’t lower taxes on the wealthy. Now, one of the two is a lie. So shouldn’t we be focusing on which one is the lie rather than on which candidate looked more excited to be there?

Romney actually claims he will lower taxes for everyone. At the same time he will increase defense spending, not cut Medicare or Social Security, keep most of Obamacare (while simultaneously repealing it) and somehow in the end he will decrease the deficit. I don’t know what he’s smoking but I bet its illegal in the Mormon church.

A few posts later, and we get a list of quotes from the Mitt-ster himself, including these:

“I have a gun of my own. I go hunting myself. I’m a member of the NRA and believe firmly in the right to bear arms.” ~ Mitt Romney
“I don’t personally own a gun. My son does.” ~ Mitt Romney
“I think the global warming debate is now pretty much over and people recognize the need associated with providing sources which do not generate the heat that is currently provided by fossil fuels …” ~ Mitt Romney
“I have to tell you with regards to global warming that that’s something, which, you’re right, the scientists haven’t entirely resolved…” ~ Yep. Him again.

There’s more, and it gets better…

One of my heroes, Roger Ebert, has written a must-read rant in his online journal. It is short, so I’ll repeat it in its entirety, but you should visit his site to read the comments.

A depression has descended upon me. I look at the blank screen, and those are the words that come into my mind. I do not believe for a second that Mitt Romney will win the election. I do believe that at this moment he is tied, 50-50, in various national polls. Many of my fellow Americans have at least temporarily disappointed me.

It is clear to anyone in either party that in last week’s debate Romney cast aside all of his principles and reversed himself on everything he has said he believes. As Hendrik Hertzberg worded it in the New Yorker:

“By the end of ninety minutes, Romney had retrofitted himself as the defender of Medicare, the advocate of Wall Street regulation, the scourge of the big banks, the enemy of tax cuts for the rich, and the champion of tax relief for the middle class. All these claims are spectacularly false.”

Well, they are, aren’t they? Pause with me a moment to recall the campaign before the debate. If someone had handed you that paragraph and asked you which candidate it described, would you have said it fit Obama, or Romney? The Romney who walked into the debate hall was on record for most of the previous eight years as the opponent of all the items on the list. And his running mate Paul Ryan has been even more outspokenly opposed.

I have no desire to debate the pros and cons of those issues. I simply wish to point out that Romney changed his position on each and every one.

After reversing himself on the central issues of the campaign, Romney’s standing went up in the polls. How? Why? Were the members of the electorate paying absolutely no attention to the campaign? Were they responding only to the general opinion that Romney “won” the debate? Is winning, in the pro football truism, now the only thing?

Something that puzzled me is that there were no howls of protest from the Right. Romney now presented himself as the advocate of positions hated by the Right, and there wasn’t a squeak of protest from the conservatives who have been excoriating Obama on the same issues. Did they all reach a common consensus that if it was necessary for Romney to lie, then let him lie? The Right has been advising him for months to be true to conservative issues. That wasn’t working. Now he was being true to liberal issues.

The silence from the Right reminded me of another deafening quiet when there should have been a response recently. On the infamous tape of Romney addressing a room filled with his millionaire and billionaire backers, he essentially wrote off 47% of the American electorate. But not long after, in an interview on Fox News, Romney rolled that back, saying “I said something that’s just completely wrong.”

The rich men in that room presumably pledged a fortune to the Romney campaign chest. Were any of them offended that Romney no longer agreed with what he told them? We haven’t heard from them.

Obama continues in the Presidential campaign in possession of his own lifelong principles. Romney now seeks the luxury of running on both his principles–and Obama’s. What depresses me is that the polls suggest the electorate isn’t alert enough to realize that. What allows me hope is that, given a little time, I trust the American people will figure this one out.

PolitiFact is widely acknowledged as non-partisan, and to many people even a bit conservative. Even so, it should come as a surprise to nobody that their truthfulness ratings for the presidential candidates are pretty dramatically skewed:

That’s right, the Republicans lead in “Pants on Fire” lies, False, and Mostly False, while the Democrats lead in Mostly True and True. Half True statements are a tossup. Here’s the raw data:

Mitt Romney all by himself accounts for 58% of the “Pants on Fire” lies. Does anyone really want a president who lies so much?

© Adam Zyglis

Not to mention Romney’s previous tax returns.