Mitt Romney caught blatantly lying during the presidential debate

During tonight’s presidential debate, Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney attacked President Barack Obama over what Romney said was President Obama’s failure to call the September 11, 2012 attack on our embassy in Benghazi, Libya an “act of terror” for fourteen days following the attack.

Here’s the exchange in question between Mitt Romney and President Obama (emphasis added):

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: I think it’s interesting the President just said something which is that on the day after the attack he went to the Rose Garden and said this was an act of terror.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: That’s what I said.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack it was an attack of terror. It was not a spontaneous demonstration?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Please proceed.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record. Because it took the President 14 days before he called it an attack of terror.

While I understand Mitt Romney will say just about anything to get elected, including telling blatant lies, I find the ease with which he tells lies to be more than a little disconcerting. Here’s President Obama calling the September 11 attack on our embassy in Benghazi an act of terror the morning after the attack.

Yet again Mitt Romney has proven no lie is too great for him to tell.

6 comments to Mitt Romney caught blatantly lying during the presidential debate

  • I actually don’t believe Romney was lying about this I think his staff of Neo-Con Warmongers, Right-Wing Ghouls and Toxic Conservative Commentators have been feeding the Obama is weak on Terror and He apologized for America and doesn’t call Terrorism – Terrorism and have sold him.

       0 likes

  • Moot Dorsi

    Actually, Romney caught the president in a naked lie.

    I’m guessing that his administration orchestrated the whole charade where Clinton stepped forward to take the blame for the administration’s amateurish mishandling of the situation earlier in the day. This seamlessly led into the president stating that he took full responsibility as the buck stops with him as these people work for him. And then disingenuously suggested that he called it a terrorist act in the Rose Garden the day after – or 9/12, as it were. Actually, he was talking in general terms about terrorism around the world given that 9/11 was still fresh on people’s minds. He did not say that the Benghazi terrorist attack was a terrorist attack. If he had, why did he address the UN and ONLY reference the assassination was a result of the YouTube video a mere SIX TIMES? Why did he fail to give a firm response on The View when pointedly ask if it was a terrorist attack? Why would he go on The View anyway? I digress. Why did it take 14 days for the administration to definitely admit that it was a terrorist attack and not an impromptu uprising? Even the biased moderator stepped in to help the struggling president. She has since changed her stance and said that Romney was accurate in his attack on the president, as he was caught in a lie.

    Crowley admitted she was wrong, but will you have the courage to do the same?

       2 likes

  • eggbert

    An ” act of terror” is terrorism no matter how you try to spin it Moot.

       2 likes

    • forgotmyscreenname

      Nevermind that we were misled by the President for two weeks about the cause being a video and a spontaneous protest. They even went so far as to haul in the guy who made the video! His comments in this video were generally about 9/11, not the specific attack.

         1 likes

  • PJ

    Moot,

    Romney’s shameful behavior concerning the Benghazi attack is the real story here. First by politicizing a tragedy, and doing so preemptively as it was unfolding. Both of these factors render Romney unfit for office. He’s a loose cannon lacking in sound judgement and he’s a designing opportunist. The one who needed to backtrack and have the courage to do so is Romney on September 12th when even his own Conservative cadre criticized him and implored him to back down. That he did not and is still trying to capitalize on the tragedy indicates that he is no leader.

    Minimizing worldwide protests over the inciting video – including the protests in Benghazi leading up to the attack on the consulate – only deflects from Romney’s epic failure during a time of crisis. He reacted impulsively and without all the information available and only to score political points at the expense of the victims of the attack. Romney’s behavior was shameless opportunism and it was shameful for all of America – he proved without a doubt to all the world he is undeserving to represent the United States as president.

    Your attempting to parse out a non-existent context from the Rose Garden speech is especially pitiful. Obama was referencing Benghazi and to try to spin it otherwise is nothing more than Conservative desperation to deflect criticism from Romney’s unfitness for office. Defection from his neoconservative leaning – the very neoconservatism that destabilizes our world positioning; deflection from an irresponsible Conservative economic ideology that prompted slashing the budget for our embassies and consulates around the world; and deflection from the hazardous consequences that follow in the wake of fundamentalist religious radicalism emanating from Right Wing Extremists.

    It has become plain for all to see that Conservatives simply disregard facts in order to concoct their labyrinthine obfuscations and convoluted conspiracy theories that defy rationalism, yet were Conservatives to look at the record and to examine it responsibly Obama also reiterated “Act of Terror” with respect to Benghazi on September 13th in Denver. September 19th National Counterterrorism director Matthew Olsen testified before Congress and confirmed that events in Benghazi constituted a terrorist attack and an “opportunistic attack.” Your accusation that it took Obama two weeks to call it a terrorist attack is flat out lying. Insisting that Obama didn’t call the Benghazi attack terrorism is not only false, as Conservatives are so fond of saying, it’s a “non-issue.” But when proven wrong Conservative pit bulls like you and Romney haven’t the courage to admit you are wrong because you have a single goal. And that goal isn’t truth and it isn’t the well-being or safety of this nation; it is to score some battle points in the political warfare you are waging.

    Were you to inform yourself of current events with sources outside of the Conservative propaganda echo chamber, you’d realize that unraveling the events that occurred in Benghazi doesn’t happen overnight – I realize y’all are all mired down in your magical thinking and all but when it comes to the real world intelligence debriefings and investigations take time – mucking up the process by politicizing it has only made those efforts more difficult to achieve and more confusing for the public at large. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.

    Try reading Obama’s UN speech from September 24th instead of absorbing Conservative propaganda. The gist of it was commemorating (appropriately I might add) Christopher Stevens and contextualizing his role (America’s role) in Libya and the Middle East. I only wish Conservatives could live up to the noble description Obama gave of Christopher Stevens, unfortunately, Romney and Conservatives today represent the opposite: “He acted with humility, but stood up for a set of principles – a belief that individuals should be free to determine their own destiny, and live with liberty, dignity, justice, and opportunity.”

    I read the speech and after reading it your desperately mincing narrative looks so much smaller and much more small minded than before I read it. Your characterization is not only off base, it is demonstrative of how ignorant you are of diplomacy and world affairs. Bellowing about Obama not using the words “terrorist attack” in this speech is absurd. But, I’m posting the speech below so others can make up their own minds:

    http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-un-speech-general-assembly-2012-9

    This was not a speech of vengeance and retaliation that might necessitate using the term “terrorist,” it was a speech that demonstrated conviction for a more peaceful world. It was not a speech about Benghazi, though Benghazi was its frame; it was a speech about freedom, free speech, and democracy. Another excerpt:

    “But the attacks of the last two weeks are not simply an assault on America. They are also an assault on the very ideals upon which the United nations was founded – the notion that people can resolve their differences peacefully; that diplomacy can take the place of war; and that in an interdependent world, all of us have a stake in working towards greater opportunity and security for our citizens.”

    Pity Conservatives like Romney can’t muster the foresight to recognize their neoconservative policies do more damage to this nation than not. Incidentally Moot, that idea that “people can resolve their differences peacefully; that diplomacy can take the place of war…” that is also the origin of debate – with two sides finding common ground to sort through their differences – not what Romney does in debate, which is to lie and alter debate rules to suit his purposes. That is not a leader.

    Obama’s UN speech illustrates the contrast between neoconservative foreign policy that threatens American interests abroad and how to responsibly respond to the world as a world leader. Romney failed that test in his handling of Benghazi. Obama did not.

    As to reiterating the propagandist idea that Crowley changed her stance – she didn’t. She doubled down on her decision to correct Romney’s lie after the Right Wing propaganda machine disseminated the lie that she had walked back her call. She was hardly partisan, either. But, then again, to Conservatives partisan is anyone who doesn’t acquiesce on bended knee isn’t it?

    Perhaps, Moot, you will have the courage to admit that you are either lying or that you are wrong. Tough spot, eh? I doubt anyone will be holding their breath for you to come clean on your propagandist narrative riddled with lies, decontextualizations, omissions, and mischaracterizations.

       2 likes

  • Susan Dominowski

    I do not want another President like Bush who will rush us off to another war. Nor do I want a President who is known to lie over and over. Also, read about Tagg Romney, the son of Mitt, who is heavily invested in the Ohio voting machine equipment. Princeton University said it is easy to compromise the disk in seconds, pop it back in, then counts every 3rd or 4th votes, then the disk deletes itself, the program they installed, then it would re-format itself and not SHOW that evidence. Google it for yourself. Romney and Ryan have flip-flopped with their statements over and over…they will say whatever you want to hear…just to get your vote. Romney rallied for the Vietnam war… then he got 2 deferments to go to “mission” in France. While our soldiers were fighting in Vietnam, Mitt Romney laid on the beach in France…real tough folks…real tough. Oh yes, google the official Michigan State police uniform Mitt Romney got from his Daddy and the pop-up portable light. He got a real kick out of dressing up in that official State uniform and then stopping people, then “letting them go with just a warning” after watching them squirm. Real funny jerk. If you or I would have impersonated an officer, we would have been jailed. He bragged and threw his head back laughing. Yah-right, real funny.

       0 likes

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Follow us on Twitter