Yes, but he looks so GOOD lying; the question is if Obama looks better. - Edit 1
Before modification by Joel at 12/10/2012 03:05:16 PM
Heaven forbid we choose a president on platforms and policies rather than charisma and telegenics. This is what we get for branding an inveterate brazen liar "The Great Communicator" and electing him twice. Never mind that he gave US guns (at taxpayer expense) to someone who called America "the Great Satan," then lied about it on national TV; his apology (once caught) looked sincere, so it was fine. That, arming bin Ladens "freedom fighters" (as Reagan called them) and fleeing Lebanon when terrorists bombed our Marine barracks convinced militant Islam it could walk over America, but it did no harm. Except 911.
When America was in precisely the same situation as now Republicans called the halting recovery "Morning in America" to justify Reagans re-election; now they say, "this is not what a recovery looks like." Knowing of no GOP president who initiated an economic recovery, I think them a poor authority on the subject.
So, yeah, Mitt is convincingly lying his a-s off because that has been the chief presidential qualification for at least 30 years. We must demand better to get it.
When America was in precisely the same situation as now Republicans called the halting recovery "Morning in America" to justify Reagans re-election; now they say, "this is not what a recovery looks like." Knowing of no GOP president who initiated an economic recovery, I think them a poor authority on the subject.
So, yeah, Mitt is convincingly lying his a-s off because that has been the chief presidential qualification for at least 30 years. We must demand better to get it.