Search Episodes (Romney s Believe It or Not)

Biblical Romney and Two and a Half Men Get Oral - NTN #126

Added 05/17/12
0 Views

Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, ...

Added 05/17/12
0 Views

Stephanie Cutter: Get the facts on Karl Rove's BS

Added 05/17/12
0 Views

John McCain Interview on ABC's This Week 05.06.12

Added 05/06/12
0 Views

Mitt Romney Whines About "Vast Left Wing Conspiracy" In Media;...

Added 04/22/12
0 Views

Mitt Romney Whines About "Vast Left Wing Conspiracy" In Media; Howie Kurtz Sympathizes

[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 23:00:03 04/22/12
Click here to view this media Playing the refs during elections is nothing new, and that's more or less what Mitt Romney might have been doing when he told Breitbart TV Tuesday there was a "quote, vast left wing conspiracy " shifting the winds of media coverage toward Barack Obama. Excuse me while I howl with laughter for a minute. There, that's better. Now Romney was being asked about Media Matters at the time. You know Media Matters , right? They clip actual words that actual people say on the air and broadcast out to viewers. They either let the clips stand as they are or sometimes post a little explanation about how wrong they are. And all the Breitbart TV interviewer was doing was offering up an invitation for Mitt to join the " revoke Media Matters' tax-exempt status " gang on the right. Media Matters is the left side's answer to the right's Media Research Center, and it does great work, but it isn't "media." Mitt chose instead to criticize all media everywhere for their alleged bias toward the President, which really did a wonderful job of highlighting Howard Kurtz' uselessness for everyone to see. I see at least two important points to make here. First, if the media was actually doing their job, they'd start calling Mitt and Ann Romney the liars they are . They lie about everything from important policy choices to minor things like the dog on the roof. They lie about what they said, they lie about what they believe, and they do it knowing full well a record is out there contradicting their position of the day. They can be this cynical because the mainstream media lets them be. They don't actually use the word "lie." They use other, kinder forms to describe what Romney does. I am not talking about things that are at all vague. These are lies like "I never said that the economy got worse under Barack Obama" when he had just said it the day before. The shifting sands under his feet kind of lies that change depending on who his audience is. Those kinds of lies, which get reported as "Did Mitt Romney Misspeak?" or something equally full of milquetoast. Yet no one in the media, critic or otherwise, will actually step up and call a lie a lie. In fact, US News & World Report claimed the "Etch a Sketch" story was proof positive of bias against Romney, despite the fact that it confirmed the cynical lies this campaign feels comfortable shooting into the mainstream. Also this week, Mitt lied about his relationship with SB1070 author Kris Kobach, trying to distance himself from Kobach's radical, draconian immigration law and his cozy relationship with ALEC. Yet again, we hear nothing from Kurtz about this, even after Romney somewhat reluctantly admitted that yes, Kobach was an advisor to his campaign. My second point is this: What happened when Hillary Clinton suggested there was a 'vast right wing conspiracy'? Kurtz himself belittled Clinton's candidacy for the 2008 nomination moaning that they'd "have to endure" all of it over again, including the "vast right wing conspiracy." Wingers had a field day , courtesy of the mainstream press. Clinton was belittled, ridiculed, and bedeviled by those words, despite the fact that she was right. Fast forward to 2012, and here's what we get from the so-called objective media: Crickets. Here's what we get from the right-biased media: Some media critic you are, Howie. There's a special place in hell for people who are too cowardly to call a lie a lie, and instead play the "everyone does it" game.

Rick Warren's Not Willing To Call Mitt Romney a Christian

Added 04/08/12
0 Views

Rick Warren's Not Willing To Call Mitt Romney a Christian

[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 19:00:02 04/08/12
video platform video management video solutions video player There are many things wrong with the presumptive Republican candidacy of Mitt Romney. Mitt is wishy-washy, a mediocre politician at best, willing to say or be for anything that will get him ahead. But that's just me as a liberal. If I was a Republican Party elder, I'd be fearful of a Romney campaign for an entire other reason. It's a terribly hard sell to convince the evangelical right (a huge percentage of Republican voters ) to consider a Mormon elder like Romney a true Christian. Rick Warren, head of Saddleback Church, which claims 20,000 weekly church goers, and co-author of the ridiculously popular book "The Purpose Driven Life" (with sales of more than 30 million units), is very influential among the evangelical community. What he told Jake Tapper has to make every Republican operative working for a 2012 victory very, very nervous . > “I have a congregation that’s very large. It talks to me all the time. Most people would not think they’re better off economically than they were four years ago,” Pastor Warren said. “I hold everybody responsible for that. I hold the people who got themselves into debt. I hold the government that got themselves into debt. I hold multiple administrations. It’s not the fault of any one person.” With Republican Mitt Romney moving closer to becoming the first Mormon presidential nominee, I asked Warren whether he believes Mormons are Christians — a contested issue among evangelicals. “ The key sticking point for evangelicals and actually for many is the issue of the Trinity… that’s the historic doctrine of the church that God is three-in-one,” Warren said. “Not three Gods; one God in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Mormonism denies that. ” Ouch. I don't see how Romney gets over that hurdle. The only hope I guess he has is to revive the whole Obama-is-a-Muslim trope to point to the only religious faction more horrifying to the evangelical voter.

Family

Added 04/06/12
1 Views

Onto the General Election

Added 04/05/12
1 Views

KISS Army~ Gene Simmons Voices Support For Mitt Romney, Regret...

Added 04/04/12
0 Views

Mitt Romney versus Reality

Added 04/04/12
1 Views

Ronald Romney Forgets Iran-Contra

Added 03/07/12
3 Views

Ronald Romney Forgets Iran-Contra

[LESS INFO] 3 VIEWS | ADDED 23:00:18 03/07/12
For the second time in four months, Mitt Romney has penned a tough-talking op-ed on the Iranian nuclear program. But this time, the almost certain GOP presidential nominee has introduced a new riff to his constant refrain that "If we re-elect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon. If you elect me as president, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon." Now in his Washington Post piece and again in his speech Tuesday to AIPAC , Romney has portrayed himself as a modern day Ronald Reagan who will force Tehran to give up its nuclear ambitions just as it did the 52 U.S. hostages in 1981. Unfortunately, Mitt forgot the full story of the Gipper's experience with Iran. As it turned out, in the Iran-Contra scandal that almost ended his presidency, Ronald Reagan gave the mullahs in Tehran not a show of American might, but a cake, a Bible - and U.S. arms. Romney first Reagan impersonation appeared in Monday's Washington Post as a follow up to November's " I Won't Let Iran Get Nukes ." In it, he cast Barack Obama as "America's most feckless president since Carter" and cast himself as the Gipper: > Beginning Nov. 4, 1979 , dozens of U.S. diplomats were held hostage by Iranian Islamic revolutionaries for 444 days while America's feckless president, Jimmy Carter, fretted in the White House. Running for the presidency against Carter the next year, Ronald Reagan made it crystal clear that the Iranians would pay a very stiff price for continuing their criminal behavior. On Jan. 20, 1981, in the hour that Reagan was sworn into office, Iran released the hostages. The Iranians well understood that Reagan was serious about turning words into action in a way that Jimmy Carter never was. Speaking by satellite Tuesday to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Policy (AIPAC) Conference, Mitt again donned his Reagan mask (around the 8:40 mark above): > "I believe the right course is what Ronald Reagan called 'peace through strength.' There is a reason why the Iranians released the hostages on the same day and at the same hour that Reagan was sworn into office. As President, I will offer that kind of clarity, strength, and resolve." Apparently, Mitt Romney wasn't paying attention to the rest of Reagan's performance. That would be the part when Ronald Reagan swapped arms for hostages with Ayatollah Khomeini. The Iran-Contra scandal , as you'll recall, almost laid waste to the Reagan presidency. Desperate to free U.S. hostages held by Iranian proxies in Lebanon, President Reagan provided weapons Tehran badly needed in its long war with Saddam Hussein (who, of course, was backed by the United States). In a clumsy and illegal attempt to skirt U.S. law, the proceeds of those sales were then funneled to the contras fighting the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. And as the New York Times recalled, Reagan's fiasco started with an emissary bearing gifts from the Gipper himself: > A retired Central Intelligence Agency official has confirmed to the Senate Intelligence Committee that on the secret mission to Teheran last May, Robert C. McFarlane and his party carried a Bible with a handwritten verse from President Reagan for Iranian leaders. > According to a person who has read the committee's draft report, the retired C.I.A. official, George W. Cave, an Iran expert who was part of the mission, said the group had 10 falsified passports, believed to be Irish, and a key-shaped cake to symbolize the anticipated ''opening'' to Iran. The rest, as they say, is history. After the revelations regarding his trip to Tehran and the Iran-Contra scheme, a disgraced McFarlane attempted suicide. (That would be the same Bud McFarlane whose endorsement Newt Gingrich touted during a reecent GOP debate.) After his initial denials, President Reagan was forced to address the nation on March 4, 1987 and acknowledge he indeed swapped arms for hostages ( video here ): > "A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not. As the Tower board reported, what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages." (For more background, read the Reagan diaries , starting with the part in which he admits in 1986, " I agreed to sell TOWs to Iran .") Of course, the sad saga didn't end there. Then Lt. Colonel and now Fox News commentator Oliver North saw his Iran-Contra conviction overturned by an appellate court led by faithful Republican partisan and later Iraq WMD commissioner Laurence Silberman. And in December 1992, outgoing President George H.W. Bush offered Christmas pardons to Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and five other Iran-Contra scandal figures. Among them were John Poindexter and Elliott Abrams, men who eight years later reprised their roles in the administration of George W. Bush. As it turns out, Elliott Abrams - one of the people who brought you the Iraq War - is also now providing ammunition for Mitt Romney. As Washington Post blogger and Romney stenographer Jennifer Rubin wrote Monday after President Obama's address to AIPAC: > As former deputy national security advisor Elliott Abrams explains, "Military and intelligence cooperation is excellent, and American diplomatic support for an isolated Israel was repeatedly (though not always, as he suggested) forthcoming. Still, any effort to paper over the differences between his administration and the Netanyahu government--or worse yet, to make believe there really are no important differences--was bound to fail." Facts are stubborn things, and Obama's record is so error-strewn and so different in tenor from predecessors that no speech can paper over the last three years. Facts are, as Ronald Reagan liked to say, stubborn things. Among those facts is that with the Iran-Contra scandal, Reagan disgraced himself and his country. Which is why Mitt Romney had it right for once back in 1994 when he proclaimed: > "I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush; I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush." Sadly, 18 years later and 25 years after Iran-Contra, Ronald Romney is trying to rewrite that history, too. (This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)

Ronald Romney Forgets Iran-Contra

Added 03/07/12
0 Views

Ronald Romney Forgets Iran-Contra

[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 23:00:18 03/07/12
For the second time in four months, Mitt Romney has penned a tough-talking op-ed on the Iranian nuclear program. But this time, the almost certain GOP presidential nominee has introduced a new riff to his constant refrain that "If we re-elect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon. If you elect me as president, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon." Now in his Washington Post piece and again in his speech Tuesday to AIPAC , Romney has portrayed himself as a modern day Ronald Reagan who will force Tehran to give up its nuclear ambitions just as it did the 52 U.S. hostages in 1981. Unfortunately, Mitt forgot the full story of the Gipper's experience with Iran. As it turned out, in the Iran-Contra scandal that almost ended his presidency, Ronald Reagan gave the mullahs in Tehran not a show of American might, but a cake, a Bible - and U.S. arms. Romney first Reagan impersonation appeared in Monday's Washington Post as a follow up to November's " I Won't Let Iran Get Nukes ." In it, he cast Barack Obama as "America's most feckless president since Carter" and cast himself as the Gipper: > Beginning Nov. 4, 1979 , dozens of U.S. diplomats were held hostage by Iranian Islamic revolutionaries for 444 days while America's feckless president, Jimmy Carter, fretted in the White House. Running for the presidency against Carter the next year, Ronald Reagan made it crystal clear that the Iranians would pay a very stiff price for continuing their criminal behavior. On Jan. 20, 1981, in the hour that Reagan was sworn into office, Iran released the hostages. The Iranians well understood that Reagan was serious about turning words into action in a way that Jimmy Carter never was. Speaking by satellite Tuesday to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Policy (AIPAC) Conference, Mitt again donned his Reagan mask (around the 8:40 mark above): > "I believe the right course is what Ronald Reagan called 'peace through strength.' There is a reason why the Iranians released the hostages on the same day and at the same hour that Reagan was sworn into office. As President, I will offer that kind of clarity, strength, and resolve." Apparently, Mitt Romney wasn't paying attention to the rest of Reagan's performance. That would be the part when Ronald Reagan swapped arms for hostages with Ayatollah Khomeini. The Iran-Contra scandal , as you'll recall, almost laid waste to the Reagan presidency. Desperate to free U.S. hostages held by Iranian proxies in Lebanon, President Reagan provided weapons Tehran badly needed in its long war with Saddam Hussein (who, of course, was backed by the United States). In a clumsy and illegal attempt to skirt U.S. law, the proceeds of those sales were then funneled to the contras fighting the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. And as the New York Times recalled, Reagan's fiasco started with an emissary bearing gifts from the Gipper himself: > A retired Central Intelligence Agency official has confirmed to the Senate Intelligence Committee that on the secret mission to Teheran last May, Robert C. McFarlane and his party carried a Bible with a handwritten verse from President Reagan for Iranian leaders. > According to a person who has read the committee's draft report, the retired C.I.A. official, George W. Cave, an Iran expert who was part of the mission, said the group had 10 falsified passports, believed to be Irish, and a key-shaped cake to symbolize the anticipated ''opening'' to Iran. The rest, as they say, is history. After the revelations regarding his trip to Tehran and the Iran-Contra scheme, a disgraced McFarlane attempted suicide. (That would be the same Bud McFarlane whose endorsement Newt Gingrich touted during a reecent GOP debate.) After his initial denials, President Reagan was forced to address the nation on March 4, 1987 and acknowledge he indeed swapped arms for hostages ( video here ): > "A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not. As the Tower board reported, what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages." (For more background, read the Reagan diaries , starting with the part in which he admits in 1986, " I agreed to sell TOWs to Iran .") Of course, the sad saga didn't end there. Then Lt. Colonel and now Fox News commentator Oliver North saw his Iran-Contra conviction overturned by an appellate court led by faithful Republican partisan and later Iraq WMD commissioner Laurence Silberman. And in December 1992, outgoing President George H.W. Bush offered Christmas pardons to Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and five other Iran-Contra scandal figures. Among them were John Poindexter and Elliott Abrams, men who eight years later reprised their roles in the administration of George W. Bush. As it turns out, Elliott Abrams - one of the people who brought you the Iraq War - is also now providing ammunition for Mitt Romney. As Washington Post blogger and Romney stenographer Jennifer Rubin wrote Monday after President Obama's address to AIPAC: > As former deputy national security advisor Elliott Abrams explains, "Military and intelligence cooperation is excellent, and American diplomatic support for an isolated Israel was repeatedly (though not always, as he suggested) forthcoming. Still, any effort to paper over the differences between his administration and the Netanyahu government--or worse yet, to make believe there really are no important differences--was bound to fail." Facts are stubborn things, and Obama's record is so error-strewn and so different in tenor from predecessors that no speech can paper over the last three years. Facts are, as Ronald Reagan liked to say, stubborn things. Among those facts is that with the Iran-Contra scandal, Reagan disgraced himself and his country. Which is why Mitt Romney had it right for once back in 1994 when he proclaimed: > "I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush; I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush." Sadly, 18 years later and 25 years after Iran-Contra, Ronald Romney is trying to rewrite that history, too. (This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)