Quantcast

I was told by someone that Mitt Romney lied about a certain incident. Do you think Mitt Romney lied about soemthing?

2789847 2012/06/05 07:47:06
Related Topics: Mitt Romney, Romney
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Strabwee 2012/08/13 20:59:27
    maybe
    Strabwee
    why isn't there a yes option?
  • Michael Drakopoulos 2012/08/08 19:43:32
    I really dont know
    Michael Drakopoulos
    I don't know that much about Romney but I guess it could go anyway but I'm not about to decide.
  • JacquelChrissyC.May 2012/08/04 20:33:38
    maybe
    JacquelChrissyC.May
    +2
    I do recall him lying about bullying some guy in high school. if he lied about that, then I can't trust him at all.
  • Brandon 2012/07/31 16:53:56
    maybe
    Brandon
    +1
    Yes. But everyone has lied and Obama lied a whole lot more.
  • amoobrasil Brandon 2012/08/22 13:40:06
    amoobrasil
    Untrue. Bring up Politifact.com and compare the documentation of Romney's lies versus the documentation of Obama's. You are also ducking the question by making it about Obama.
  • **StarzAbove** 2012/07/30 23:10:38
    maybe
    **StarzAbove**
    +2
    He lies all the time. mitt romney lying mitt romney lying
  • amoobrasil **Starz... 2012/08/22 13:54:35 (edited)
    amoobrasil
    "Starzabove," if you are saying that Romney's strategy--the GOP strategy, actually--is to put out lies and reiterate them, then you are summarizing the foundation of GOP campaigns since Richard Nixon.

    But a comprehensive "He lies all the time" places you among the "conservatives" who rely on distortion, lies, and anger to perpetuate their messages of hate and resentment.

    Romney is a child of God. With Emmanuel Kant, I believe that all human beings are loved by God and that they therefore deserve my respect.

    Trust is another issue. It must be earned. Any candidate who changes his public positions as often as has Romney cannot earn trust.
  • Wyzard 2012/07/30 12:55:42
    maybe
    Wyzard
    +1
    all politicians lie...but none like obama
  • amoobrasil Wyzard 2012/08/22 13:56:12
    amoobrasil
    What purpose is served by an unsubstantiated, flat assertions like this one?
  • mike 2012/07/30 07:38:03
    I doubt it. He looks pretty honest
    mike
    +1
    But shouldn't we be asking this about obama? We don't know if this guy ever really got out of collage since he won't even allow those records to be seen by the public, his whole persona is probably a lie!
  • amoobrasil mike 2012/08/22 14:01:51 (edited)
    amoobrasil
    +1
    Actually, we do. It has been your choice and that of whoever "raved" your allegation to ignore reality. Cognitive dissonance is especially stressful for intelligent people who want to be informed but who, emotionally, rebel at the information. The stress is increased every time you must deny the facts in order to defend your "opinion" of Obama. Do you hate him? If so, do you hate him enough to vote for anyone and support ANY policy, no matter how much damage it will cause you country?

    How much thought do you give to the fact that a GOP victory means the privatization of Social Security, the end of Medicare, the policing of Wall Street by Wall Street, higher income taxes for the poor and middle classes, partially offset by even more tax cuts for the super-wealthy, more subsidies and tax breaks for international corporation that ship out Amercan jobs? Next to the thrill of delighting in an Obama defeat, does any of this matter to you?
  • Phyl *In God i Trust* 2012/07/30 03:46:19
    I doubt it. He looks pretty honest
    Phyl *In God i Trust*
    +2
    How many times have we seen Bama lie time and time again .To many to count.
  • amoobrasil Phyl *I... 2012/08/22 14:07:41 (edited)
    amoobrasil
    +1
    Ducking the question with an unsubstantiated (false) statements is not responsive and not informative. But since your beef is with Obama, please cite your source.
  • KingdomNow 2012/07/30 02:41:07
    I doubt it. He looks pretty honest
    KingdomNow
    +2
    Who cares?
  • amoobrasil KingdomNow 2012/08/23 02:28:38
    amoobrasil
    +1
    Then why reply?
  • KingdomNow amoobrasil 2012/08/23 02:54:27
    KingdomNow
    +1
    Why not?
  • amoobrasil KingdomNow 2012/08/23 13:35:20
    amoobrasil
    +1
    This got a rave!!?
  • KingdomNow amoobrasil 2012/08/23 21:20:00
    KingdomNow
    +1
    Go figure...
  • eyeballz 2012/07/30 02:22:03
    maybe
    eyeballz
    +1
    I'm pretty sure he has , just like I'm sure Barack Obama has and Bill Clinton has and George Bush and Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan and the list can go on forever . Are you surprised , these are all politicians and can not be trusted !
  • Patriot Unit 2012/07/30 00:52:39
    I really dont know
    Patriot Unit
    +3
    It seems to me, that no matter what political strip you follow, that you would deal in facts, As in Truth, Honesty, Ethics, Trustworthiness, and not on Political Propaganda from either side. We all should try it, we might like it.
  • amoobrasil Patriot... 2012/08/23 02:35:23
    amoobrasil
    Thanks for the good sense, Patriot Unit. Anything but easy has been my own experience in learning to accept reality when it has conflicted with beliefs of mine that I treasured and wished to defend.

    I learned, but I went through psychological torment. Such is the nature of cognitive dissonance. A major requirement for learning to recognize and accept reality is humility. Another is the courage to stand alone (Paul Tillich's Courage to Be).

    But once I did learn to challenge my own universal truths (which were seldom universal or true), I came to love myself more and to respect others more--including the folks here that spew only venomous language.

    And you are right: I do like it.
  • Piwan 2012/07/29 16:58:23
    maybe
    Piwan
    +2
    No "maybe" he DID, as do ALL politicians!
  • Lizzeh 2012/07/29 10:24:44
    I really dont know
    Lizzeh
    +2
    He lies all the time.
  • ruralntex 2012/07/29 09:00:58
    I really dont know
    ruralntex
    +2
    But I do know that Obama would rather talk about ANYTHING other than his performance and the economy and the debt and foreign relations. SO, there is a motivation there to trump shyt up to talk about, other than these I have mentioned and perhaps other subjects.
  • amoobrasil ruralntex 2012/08/22 14:11:45
    amoobrasil
    Where do you get your news? Obama is always talking about what he wants for this country, including access to quality medical care for all Americans, an updated, modern infrastructure (which would create more jobs). It is the GOP that ducks questions about its UNANIMOUS opposition to any Obama intiative that could create more jobs.

    What do you think about Mitch McConnell's campaign strategy that the only goal of the GOP must be to do whatever it takes to ensure that Obama is a one-term president?
  • ruralntex amoobrasil 2012/08/23 15:13:14
    ruralntex
    The economy sucks. Unemployment is too high. Obama is clearly enept. His policies don't work. The government has been operating for three years, about to be four, without a federal budget in place. Harry Reid doesn't think we need one. All the Dems can do is blame the entire thing on the GOP and G.W Bush. However, they realize that card is well overplayed and we need new material. Trump shyt up about the GOP candidate, maybe the public will forget that they are out of work.
  • amoobrasil ruralntex 2012/08/23 18:46:14
    amoobrasil
    I think that whatever interest you may have in a stonger economy is completely smothered by a passionate thirst to gloat that Obama went down to defeat. Nothing else really seems to matter to you; otherwise, you would eschew GOP propaganda and you would study what measures would restore a robust economy to the US. If you are so enthralled to corporatist propaganda that you know of no measures that would bring back a roaring economy, start with Robert Reich.

    If you don't know of those measures, by the way, you are less informed than are the people--especially Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers--who do know. They simply oppose those measures with all their gut.

    What folks who feel this way deliberately ignore are the consequences of a GOP win. How many jobs bills did the House propose after their 2010 victory? While there were none, what we got were votes opposing Obamacare, votes against abortion, votes against women's rights, and all sorts of attempts to pander to fundamentalist "Christians" on social issues.

    The economy could be better--and it would be had the GOP not been voting--unanimously--against bills that create jobs or that lower taxes on us all (except for the wealthiest 2%).

    I cannot begin to agree with your GOP talking points, however. Nowhere can you find a c...













    I think that whatever interest you may have in a stonger economy is completely smothered by a passionate thirst to gloat that Obama went down to defeat. Nothing else really seems to matter to you; otherwise, you would eschew GOP propaganda and you would study what measures would restore a robust economy to the US. If you are so enthralled to corporatist propaganda that you know of no measures that would bring back a roaring economy, start with Robert Reich.

    If you don't know of those measures, by the way, you are less informed than are the people--especially Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers--who do know. They simply oppose those measures with all their gut.

    What folks who feel this way deliberately ignore are the consequences of a GOP win. How many jobs bills did the House propose after their 2010 victory? While there were none, what we got were votes opposing Obamacare, votes against abortion, votes against women's rights, and all sorts of attempts to pander to fundamentalist "Christians" on social issues.

    The economy could be better--and it would be had the GOP not been voting--unanimously--against bills that create jobs or that lower taxes on us all (except for the wealthiest 2%).

    I cannot begin to agree with your GOP talking points, however. Nowhere can you find a credible source describing Obama as "inept". ("Clearly" is your "embelllishment".) Nowhere can you find a credible source for falsely alleging that Sen. Reid thinks we need no budget. "Dems" and most scholars (as opposed to lobbyist and GOP-sponsoring SUPERPACS) recognize that GWB/Cheney/Rove policies took us from high employment and budget surplus to immense debt and job net job monthly losses of about one-half million a month, but they know that putting spending money in the hands of the poor and middle classes would increase demand and create jobs by the millions. They have proposed to do so by attempting a bill that would rebuild and modernize our physical infrastructure (defeated by unanimous GOP obstruction), by trying to lower taxes for everyone but the wealthiest two percent of Americans (defeated by unanimous GOP obstruction, whose Tampa platform proposes the reverse: raise taxes on us and lower them on the ultra-wealthy!); in fact, in keeping with Mitch McConnell's cynical one-minded purpose, the GOP has opposed any Obama measure that might lower the misery index in the US, hoping that--as in 2010--the Democrats will be defeated and blamed for GOP obstructionism.

    Joshua Holland, author of "The 15 Biggest Lies about the Economy (and Everything else the Right Doesn't Want You to Know About Taxes, Jobs and Corporate America)", puts it this way:

    "…The GOP promises to create and pass some sort of tax scheme sometime over the next decade, but they've also sworn not to increase taxes in order to balance the budget and history suggests they'd fight tooth-and-nail to block such a measure. Again, we see a scam packaged as a “brave” budget proposal.

    Make no mistake, however—while the plan's deficit reduction is largely fantasy, the pain it would impose on working America is very real. Almost two-thirds of the $4.5 trillion in spending cuts over the next 10 years come from programs that help those with lower incomes…the GOP's Medicare privatization scheme would INCREASE THE COST OF THE PROGRAM BY UPWARDS OF 40 PERCENT, but it would sharply cut the tab the government picks up, instead SHIFTING THE BURDEN ONTO OLDER PEOPLE THEMSELVES.

    …the plan “creates an unprecedented new fast-track procedure to ram through Social Security benefit cuts.”

    …The GOP's plan would not only make the “Bush tax cuts” permanent As [the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities] CPBB notes, the tax proposals “place a top priority on cutting taxes for high-income people, while doing nothing to reduce budget deficits, themselves, simply redistributing more of the nation's wealth to those at the top of the economic heap.

    …Newt Gingrich has never been more correct than when he characterized it as right-wing “social engineering.” But the real crime has been committed by the corporate media—not only for calling the plan “courageous” and “serious,” but for referring to it in the context of deficit reduction in the first place."

    [View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story...
    (more)
  • ruralntex amoobrasil 2012/08/24 14:12:04
    ruralntex
    +1
    That is a lot of print that just says that the GOP wants to give the wealthy a tax cut and that it is all GWB's fault. The Dems don't cut ANYTHING! The word "DRACONIAN" comes over the air waves repeatedly from some air head Communist in Democrat attire. Government is too big. We could do with a federal government 1/2 its current size. We could get there by freezing what we have until current taxes (those on the books right now) exceed current expenditures (those on the books right now.) But alas, this to is improbable as it precludes spending money for someones brain child idea to help get he or she re-elected. Government is too damned big!
  • amoobrasil ruralntex 2012/08/24 14:27:59
    amoobrasil
    The government was established by the Constitution to represent the people.

    Some of us cannot get past the tendency embedded in human nature to react to cognitive dissonance by angrily rejecting any verifiable fact or truth that challenges our treasured prejudiced, biases, and resentments.

    But the fact remains that there is a concentrated effort by a small, fabulously wealthy élite to get Americans to reject the government set up to represent them and to accept that the élite is entitled to make all decisions.

    This throwback to caveat emptor and laissez-faire economics serves no one except those making the rules. And, as we know from the crash of 1929, many of the wealthiest of us lose in the long run.

    There has never been a communist government on this earth. Ever. The USSR was just another society run by a small aristocracy (called the nomenklatura) solely for their own benefit. Such govenment can go under the label of communist, fascist, or capitalist. The result is always the same.
  • ruralntex amoobrasil 2012/08/24 19:29:40
    ruralntex
    Capitalism, communism, or socialism would all likely work perfectly in a computer simulation. The reason they don't work perfectly in real life is because they contain PEOPLE. Each individual is working to get ahead. Each is looking for a competitive advantage. Each is willing to use a competitive advantage to stay on top. If you took every dollar in the US economy and divided it up evenly to all the people in the economy, you would see that the money would immediately begin to pool back to the few. Perhaps it would be the same few, or maybe it would be different, but it would pool up again. Those few with the better mouse trap will be on top again.
  • amoobrasil ruralntex 2012/08/24 21:29:41
    amoobrasil
    In a society with no government (hypothetically, of course) or in a society whose government had been corrupted by the wealthiest and most influential members. This is what is still occurring in Russia and what is happening in the US.
  • ruralntex amoobrasil 2012/08/25 07:27:36
    ruralntex
    The only way to fight this kind of corruption and manipulation is to audit the situation frequently. The trouble is that the auditors themselves have been corrupted. We need a situation where the auditors are never the same people and chosen randomly from a large pool of auditors. Fortunately, in the US we have fifty potential auditing entities. But the federal government isn't going to take to having the state governments look up their goings on. The federal government being supreme and in charge of the money and the spending etc.
  • amoobrasil ruralntex 2012/08/25 14:33:19
    amoobrasil
    Don't you agree with me that there is generally greater corruption at the state and local levels?
  • ruralntex amoobrasil 2012/08/25 17:33:46
    ruralntex
    Not so much in Texas and Oklahoma. It does happen though. John Wiley Price comes to mind. These situations seem far mor likely in large metropolitan cities than in smaller towns. But again, there are exceptions. People succomb to temptation. Powerful people are tempted more and therefore more likely to succomb. The only counter to corruption is to audit, audit, audit. The audits should be done in such a way that it is very difficult to corrupt the auditor. Lots of different eyes, all the time.
  • amoobrasil ruralntex 2012/08/25 17:48:14
    amoobrasil
    A native Texan, I cannot understand why you do not identify my state as one of the most corrupt in the Union. Whether the Democrats or Republicans were in power, the banks, the dairy industry, the oil industry, and corrupt millionaires have always called the shots.

    You are right about auditing--although it is meaningless without sound regulation (it is simply part of the enforcement of regulation). A former IRS employee, I think I understand where you are coming from.
  • BlondeAphrodite 2012/07/29 06:30:56
    maybe
    BlondeAphrodite
    +3
    a better question is can you find a time when hes telling the truth? or taking a stand on an ii issue wen hes already taken one afainst the same position hes currently taking
  • mike BlondeA... 2012/07/30 07:43:38
    mike
    +1
    you mean like when obama says he's against gay marraige but then says he's changed his mind. Or that he swore an oath to the Constitution and to enforce the laws of the U.S. but then sends out dictatorial executive orders not to enforce our laws?
  • amoobrasil mike 2012/08/22 14:16:24
    amoobrasil
    What EO was that, Mike?

    Obama, unlike judgmental people who refuse to tolerate any form of homosexual relationship, has from the start (like me) supported civil unions between homosexuals. He (like me) has come to recognize that only marriage will accord to homosexual couples the rights and responsibilities they should have under law.

    Now will you discuss Romney's agenda of privatizing Social Security, the end of Medicare, the policing of Wall Street by Wall Street, higher income taxes for the poor and middle classes partially offset by even more tax cuts for the super-wealthy, more subsidies and tax breaks for international corporation that ship out Amercan jobs?

    Next to the thrill of delighting in an Obama defeat, does any of this matter to you?
  • KilrQueen 2012/07/29 05:12:18
    I really dont know
    KilrQueen
    +2
    He is a politician, so I'm pretty sure he's lied about something along the way....doubt if it's any worse than Obama's lies.
  • YOUR EARTH ANGEL'S REDEMPTION 2012/07/29 05:04:56
    I really dont know
    YOUR EARTH ANGEL'S REDEMPTION
    +2
    Isn't it part of the job description of working in office.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Fun

2013/05/25 05:39:37

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals