Before Debate Ended, Obama Cronies Concocted ‘Liar’ Meme Against Romney


10 minutes before Barack Obama’s presidential debate face-plant ended, his panicked, damage-control, political toadies pressed speed-dial – pronto!

Before Barack Obama and Mitt Romney even gave their closing statements, the conclusion of that cobbled-together, conspiratorial conference call was: The only way to stop Romney is to relentlessly label him – LIAR:

New York Times:

On the conference call convened by aides in Denver and Chicago even as the candidates were still on stage, there was no debate in the Obama campaign about the debate. None of the advisers fooled themselves into thinking it was anything but a disaster. Instead, they scrambled for ways to recover. They resolved to go after Mr. Romney with a post-debate assault on his truthfulness. Ad makers were ordered to work all night to produce an attack ad.

Rich Lowry, in yesterday’s New York Post, writes: Team O’s pathetic ‘liar, liar’ attack

Credit President Obama’s aides with discernment. Even before the first presidential debate was over, they knew they needed to come up with an excuse, and fast. They settled on one they haven’t stopped repeating: Mitt Romney lied his way to victory.

[insert sarcasm] The president would’ve rebutted Romney’s gross deceptions, except he was too focused on answering questions about the country’s future and too taken aback by Romney’s brazenness to answer in real time. Although once he had a day or two and his witty rejoinders were cued up in a teleprompter, he was absolute hell on Romney.

The case that Romney lied so brazenly that it undid the president rests, first, on the idea that the Republican misrepresented his own tax-reform plan. Obama said that Romney proposes to cut taxes by $5 trillion over 10 years. Romney denied it. The president’s team responded, with its customary civility and nuance: “Liar!”

But this isn’t even a close call. Romney wants to cut income-tax rates 20 percent across the board and make up the revenue by closing loopholes and deductions. This isn’t a tax cut; it’s a wash. It’s been Romney’s plan ever since he proposed it during the primaries. It’s such a simple concept that only willful obtuseness keeps the president or his team from understanding it.

If Romney proposed a 1 percent across-the-board cut on rates and the elimination of all loopholes and deductions, surely Obama would accuse him of wanting to raise taxes, because people would be paying more in taxes despite lower rates.

In fact, this is the approach of the president’s own Simpson-Bowles debt commission: It suggested lower rates and fewer deductions such that the federal government would garner more revenue.

Obama’s thuggery team are falsely crowing that the real Romney didn’t show up at the debate.

Yes, he did.

67 million people saw Romney as he really is – smart, prepared, patriotic, competent, compassionate, hard-hitting while affable, and a true leader who can think on his feet. How satisfying it was to have the corrupt mainstream media manacled on the sidelines for 90 minutes! Where is the real Obama? He’s America’s magistrate of masquerade. Every time we turn around we see a different version of the man. For nearly four years, he’s gotten away with saying one thing and doing another. Remember when our contrived Commander-in-Chief called for greater civility in the public discourse?

“At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized, at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do, it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.” – Barack Obama, January 11, 2012

Oh, the sanctimony of phony baloney Barack… He laps up fawning words that cover for HIM; not so for the other guy. Blogger Doug Giles zings the excuses liberal talking heads dreamed up for Obama’s ignominious implosion (before getting the ‘liar Mitt’ memo):

Another rather amusing post-debate kabuki show the Left put on was the ridiculous excuses for Obama’s feckless performance during that 90-minute flogging by Romney.

One of my favorites was Al Gore’s “the high altitude got to him”… Obama wasn’t acclimated and thus he was a wee bit discombobulated. First off, Obama’s used to being high; he spent his entire college years Rocky Mountain high. Please. Secondly, didn’t he give his yippee-ki-yay DNC speech back in ‘08 in Denver? I think he did. Google it and get back to me, Al.

Second on my list of favorite excuses regarding Obama’s clock getting cleaned came from Bob Woodward who surmised that Obama was abysmal that night because he received some heavy bad news prior to the debate that had him distracted and upset. This could be a legit reason. Maybe something in the Middle East had gone awry? Nah, that couldn’t be it because after the Benghazi massacre he was able to party with Jay-Z and Beyoncé and fly to Vegas with no problemo whatsoever.

(more…)

Character, It Matters

We have a defining choice in November, and it is imperative that we become informed before committing to our decision; informed as to the character of those seeking the highest office in the land, for ‘character matters.’ The absence of principled character often results in negative consequences, the impact of which can seriously compromise that which matters most to our Nation and lead us down a path of decline. It doesn’t mean that everything will always go right or be easy, but in the difficult moments that come, and they have and will continue to come, character is what enables us to come through the trials with integrity, tutorial perspective and become better for the experience, individually or as a Nation. It is with principled character that we progress through trials with an ultimate positive result.

When pondering the question about who? We have to ask certain fundmental questions; for example: what are the defining and guiding principles that determine a person’s character? How and in what way is character manifest? Can I trust them to do what is right, or what I think is right. Character establishes the basis of trust; and we need to ‘trust’ our President. We need to trust him or her, to do what is right; to lead our Nation with integrity; to lead with principle and with character above reproach; we need him or her to lead with values that are consistent with our American ideals and values. We needn’t necessarily agree with them on all points, but we should agree with them on what matters to us; what we feel is important!

As we consider the two candidates for President of the United States, we should be wont to know their character; to know them as best as we are able before choosing who will secure our vote in November. Mark DeMoss, principal with the DeMoss Group, offered the following statement in his introduction of Mitt Romney when Governor Romney spoke to the 2012 graduating class of Liberty University. He said, “I was struck by the difference between knowing about someone and knowing them. You see you can know about someone simply by reading about him or her, but you can only know someone by spending time with them.” I agree with this statement completely, but it is difficult for every American to spend time with either Barack Obama or Mitt Romney. For most of us we are only able to glean insights through what we read about them, or what others might say who we have come to know and trust through personal experience, or by measuring our trust in them by and through observation over time. Another way we can come to know the candidates is by the company they keep, or observing their actions over time. Notice, I said actions, not just in the words they speak. The adage is true that states, “I can’t hear what you are saying because your actions speak more loudly.”

Why the company they keep? As individuals, or as a group, we tend to feel most comfortable associating with those most like us in key measurements; people with whom we share common values, ideals, and perspectives. We typically find discomfort being among those least like us in these key measurements. In fact, we most typically choose friends with whom we share similar core values. This point has been clearly illustrated in the current factions or divisions in our society. There are exceptions, but they are rare.

It is important that we spend time studying, reading and understanding the nature and character of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. In this regard, I am trying to remain objective, but knowing Mitt and Ann Romney personally, and having spent time with them in public and private moments, I acknowledge my bias.

Even so, there is plenty of material available to read to come to a better perspective of these two men. Of course we need to take into account (more…)

Romney Responds to Obama’s Three Year Budget Fail: “Extraordinary, Unfortunate” (radio interview)

Obama got a big ‘F’ smackdown on his budget plan – again. Fail.

On Wednesday, U.S. senators voted 99-0 to resoundingly defeat the president’s offering. In March, the House rejected his plan 414-0. That equals not a single vote of support.

Trounced:

Republicans forced the vote by offering the president’s plan on the Senate floor.

Democrats disputed that it was actually the president’s plan, arguing that the slim amendment didn’t actually match Mr. Obama’s budget document, which ran thousands of pages. But Republicans said they used all of the president’s numbers in the proposal, so it faithfully represented his plan.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, even challenged Democrats to point out any errors in the numbers and he would correct them — a challenge no Democrats took up.

“A stunning development for the president of the United States in his fourth year in office,” Mr. Sessions said of the unanimous opposition.

Amazingly, not one Senate Democrat has voted in favor of any budget for three years and they have not offered a plan of their own. Imagine that. For three years in a row, the federal government has operated WITHOUT A BUDGET.

On Hugh Hewitt’s national radio program last night, guest-hosts Guy Benson (Townhall) and Mary Katharine Ham (Townhall alum ) interviewed Governor Mitt Romney. Romney responded to Obama’s budget being bounced to the curb:

Guy Benson: Okay, Governor, last night, something extraordinary happened in the United States Senate. President Obama’s budget for the second consecutive year was defeated unanimously. This time around, it was 99-0. I’m curious what you think the implications of that vote are, and whether you see it as an indictment of this president’s leadership?

Mitt Romney: There’s no question in my view, Guy, but this is a underscoring of the president’s failure to lead. This is, after all, a body which is held by Democrats. If he wanted to see a budget passed, he should have worked with them. If they wanted to make adjustments, to make it more palatable, he should have found ways to make those adjustments. We’ve now gone on for three years without a federal budget? This is absolutely extraordinary. There’s not a business in this country that could operate the way the federal government is operating. And the fact that we have a president who is so inexperienced as a leader that he doesn’t know how to lead his own party, let alone reach across the aisle and work with Republicans, is a very unfortunate and potentially damaging element to our nation and to our economy. It’s something which I really think may well be unprecedented to have the president’s budget defeated in both the House and the Senate by unanimous votes. It’s very amazing.

GB: Right, right. It was 513-0 this year in those two bodies combined. You mentioned this failure over the last three years to have a federal budget, and this in an era of $16 trillion dollars of the national debt and growing. I know your campaign’s been spending a lot of time focusing on deficits and debt. So I really have to know, as you watch Europe, because the Euro Zone again is experiencing significant tremors this week. Greece appears to be teetering on the brink. I know the easy conservative talking point is to frame all of that, and the implosion of the European welfare state, as a cautionary tale for us here. But setting that aside, if you were president today, what would you be doing, what would you be watching over there, and how is it possible, if at all, for a president to help shield the U.S. economy from a potential damaging series of shock waves coming across the Atlantic Ocean?

MR: Well, when there is turbulence in industrial and financial markets, the best thing you can do is make America the place that people want to come both with their capital, with their innovations, with their business expansions. And so this is an opportunity for America to show that we have taken action that Europe did not take, that we have reformed our entitlements to make them solvent long term, that we are dealing with our budget crises, that we’re taking action to make America an attractive place for businesses and for job creators. This means that people will be looking to make investments elsewhere, and we want them to look towards us, not looking towards Asia, as in some cases they will be concerned about Europe. So the best thing we can do to help ourselves is to make America a more attractive place for enterprise. And unfortunately, what the president has done is make us less attractive as a place for enterprise, and he’s also failed to be willing to even address seriously either our entitlement crisis or our budget crisis. And so we will, if Europe goes through pains here, we’re going to suffer pains as well, in part because of the failure of this president to improve the attractiveness of America as a place for growth and investment and job creators.

In the 15 minute plum interview with Romney, the wide-ranging conversation not only included Obama’s failed budget, but included Jeremiah Wright, the Euro debt crisis, Biden’s hits on Bain Capitol, Obama’s personal assassination campaign strategy, and how Romney is approaching the task of selecting a vice president:

Excellent interview! Read the entire transcript here.

By Lisa Benson - May 18, 2012



(emphasis added to text)

› Jayde Wyatt