Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.


Mitt Romney: ‘We should just raise everyone’s taxes’ and ‘America’s just another nation with a flag’

This is pretty funny, but also pitiful, a little scary and finally a small demerit for Barack Obama and a bigger one for Mitt Romney in the honest-discourse department.

In 2008, the New York Daily News quoted an unnamed John McCain adviser saying “if we keep talking about the economy, we’re going to lose.”

Obama, not knowing who said it, nonetheless quoted it as McCain’s strategy. That was, of course, captured on tape.

Now Mitt Romney’s first campaign ad digs up the tape of Obama saying “if we keep talking about the economy, we’re going to lose,” but the ad doesn’t bother to indicate that Obama wasn’t referring to himself as the one who couldn’t afford to talk about the economy. Here’s the ad:

Romney got dinged by the truth squadders for committing  deception-via-missing-context, but the Romney campaign defended the ad.

The liberal group ThinkProgress decided to have some fun. OK, if the truth-telling standard is that any words that ever came out of a candidate’s mouth can be attributed to that candidate, absent any context that might completely changes its meaning, here’s a video of some words that came out of Romney’s mouth:

You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (12)

  1. Submitted by Thomas Swift on 11/23/2011 - 09:49 am.

    So, let me see if I understand Eric; taking sound bites out of context is *bad*…but if they appeal to ones personal bias, it’s a journalistic duty to propagate them.

    “Sat about got the thrust of this post?

  2. Submitted by Joseph Skar on 11/23/2011 - 11:14 am.

    Eric – Should we be expecting your daily hit job over Thanksgiving too? I haven’t got your rotation down yet but I think you libel the same person back to back days then switch targets. So Romney again tomorrow and then maybe we can start up on Huntsman on Friday. What think?

  3. Submitted by Ray Schoch on 11/23/2011 - 11:20 am.

    Mr. Swift indulges in his usual failure to actually read what’s written.

    Nothing in Eric’s brief piece suggests that it’s OK for Democrats to do what it’s not OK for Republicans to do.

    He’s simply providing an example of how skillful editing and modern technology can twist anyone’s words to suit a partisan agenda. Nothing in his piece endorses this practice, he simply showing readers of MinnPost that it can work both ways.

    It’s a lot like Mr. Swift reading only part of an article and quoting the part that supports his position, but failing to mention the rest of the article, which shows his position to have no basis in fact – only done with video rather than the printed word.

  4. Submitted by Thomas Swift on 11/23/2011 - 01:49 pm.

    “Nothing in Eric’s brief piece suggests that it’s OK for Democrats to do what it’s not OK for Republicans to do.”

    Yeah, except for the part where he went out and dug up an instance where the Democrats *are* doing what it’s not OK for Republicans to do and then posted it here (hint: that’s called propagating something).


  5. Submitted by Ray Schoch on 11/23/2011 - 05:07 pm.

    I just hate it when Mr. Swift bruises his forehead like that, since, as I said, nothing in Eric’s piece suggests that it’s OK for Democrats to do what’s not OK for Republicans to do. Finding an example of Democrats doing the same thing is called… um… reporting. That’s not the same thing as endorsing.

    Maybe some ice will help those bruises go away more quickly.

  6. Submitted by Paul Brandon on 11/23/2011 - 08:33 pm.

    Maybe that’s why Neanderthal’s had receding foreheads.

  7. Submitted by Josh McCabe on 11/23/2011 - 09:01 pm.

    Hmm. I think it’s OK for Swift to bruise his face if he wants to.

    I like Swift. He’s my favorite.

  8. Submitted by rolf westgard on 11/24/2011 - 01:54 am.

    Now that Romney is in the gutter with the rest of his pack, the Repubs are left with Huntsman as the one intelligent and informed candidate. And we know what his chances are with those ‘informed’ Tea Party voters.

  9. Submitted by Jeff Klein on 11/24/2011 - 09:56 am.

    @1: So you actually can’t tell the difference between an ad intended to deceive and over-the-top satire intended to make a point? It’s beyond me why we bother arguing with you.

  10. Submitted by Richard Schulze on 11/24/2011 - 10:12 am.

    This is the fifth year of Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign. I still have no idea what type of president Mitt Romney would be.

    President GW Bush showed that as long as one keeps the conservative base hypnotized with the sort of rhetoric it relishes, a Republican president can govern pretty much anyway he likes.

    This kind of this stuff drives me nuts. The main reason I expect to vote for Obama next year is that whenever Republicans win big elections, they think Americans love them and believe them and believe in them, while Democrats, having won, seem to still suspect that Americans are leery of them. Since I believe most Americans don’t like Republicans or Democrats, keep1ng Romney out of office is delusion-negative.

  11. Submitted by Paul Brandon on 11/25/2011 - 10:15 am.

    Good article by a Republican about what’s happened to the GOP @

  12. Submitted by Sarah Magnuson on 11/26/2011 - 01:07 pm.

    Mr. Swift, this is an excellent illustration of what not to emulate. As a fellow conservative, please do not do me the disservice of defending a calculated ad to misinform just because it comes from our ‘side.’ It is distasteful no matter where it comes from and Mr. Black points this out. As a mother of four teenagers, I want to raise them to think critically instead of swallowing everything they hear; this is a great example to show that statements with no context deserve verification.

Leave a Reply