Click here to view this media
Televangelist Pat Robertson explained on Wednesday that God had empowered him to create the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) "to reaffirm His claim over this land."
In a speech marking CBN's annual "Week of Prayer," the network founder told a group of followers about how the Jamestown settlers had claimed the land for God by planting a cross at Cape Henry -- and then God later transferred that "holiness" to him to build CBN.
"I don?t care what the liberals have to say about this, America started as a Christian nation, it didn?t start as a heathen nation, it belongs to Jesus Christ, it?s his, it?s his country," Robertson opined. "What we need to do on a day like this is to reaffirm his claim over this land."
"We went down and had a celebration some years ago and we had folks dressed in costumes of various countries and areas of the world and they symbolically brought from a ship a 7-foot oak cross and we laid our hands on it and prayed, and I have experienced the anointing of the Lord on a number of occasions with miracles and thousands of people coming to the Lord, but I never had anything like what I experienced that day."
Robertson continued: "God was saying, ?You asked for it and I?m going to give it to you. We?re going to transfer the holiness that was here to this cross. You?re going to take it down to that new place you?re building and this is going to be a fulfillment of the prayers of those people. You?re going to take the Gospel all around the world.? God had a plan, he saw CBN here."
(h/t: Right Wing Watch)
Nikolai Alexeyev — a prominent Russian LGBT rights activists — is the first person to be fined under St. Petersburg’s new anti-gay propaganda law, which outlaws the dissemination of “propaganda” among minors. He has been instructed to pay “5,000 rubles ($170) for breaching the law” after being arrested last month for holding up a sign reading, “homosexuality is not a perversion.” Alexeyev pledged to appeal the decision.
It begins with Sunnydale. Joss Whedon will probably never escape the legacy of his genre-subverting feminist masterpiece Buffy the Vampire Slayer, about a Valley Girl who fights the forces of darkness, and as writer and director of The Avengers, the movie that ties together the threads begun in a series of other superhero movies, that’s an excellent thing. A grand, funny action picture, The Avengers is also fundamentally if subtly about our reaction to superheroes: it manufactures joy (sometimes to slight excess?it clocks in at almost two and a half hours) even as it argues for the importance of that reaction and that belief in great power and great responsibility. And fittingly for a movie that’s a continuation of the project he began in Buffy, Whedon’s The Avengers begins as Buffy ended: with a group of wildly talented people escaping from a town that’s collapsing into the ground.
It helps to have seen the previous movies Marvel’s released to enjoy The Avengers?each entry in the franchise builds on the other in terms of plot development and characterization?but it’s not strictly necessary. The town that’s collapsing in this case turns out to be a massive government research facility run by an agency called S.H.I.E.L.D. that’s dedicated to studying a mysterious artifact: the tesseract. In previous films we’ve learned that the U.S. came into possession of that object, which it sees as a source of cheap renewable energy (and maybe other things as well) after they defrost Captain America, who stole it from the Nazis and crash landed the tesseract and himself in the Arctic. It turns out, however, that the Nazis pinched it from Asgard, the celestial kingdom of Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Loki (a terrific Tom Hiddleston), demi-gods and brothers who have had a significant falling out, leaving Thor with a human sweetheart and a fondness for earth, and Loki with a hankering for revenge. The Avengers kicks off when Loki shows up, pinches the tesseract along with several government workers, and in the process, collapses the facility. After he gets away, S.H.I.E.L.D. director Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), his assistant Maria Hill (a largely wasted Cobie Smulders), and S.H.I.E.L.D. agent Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) regroup on a carrier ship and proceed to recruit the help they need to get it back.
Much of the band they pull together’s in fine, previously-established fettle. Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.) may be in the clean energy business and faithful to Pepper Potts these days, but he’s still an arrogant quip machine. “What’s your secret? Mellow jazz? Bongo drums? Great big bag of weed?” Tony snarks at Dr. Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo), eager first to figure out how the brilliant scientist maintains his hard-won calm, and second to convince Banner that he might enjoy taking the Hulk out for a spin. Captain America (Chris Evans), now that he’s thawed out, seems awfully depressed and displaced. “When I went to sleep, we were at war,” he tells Fury glumly, taking a break from obliterating punching bags as a form of therapy. “I wake up, they say we’ve won. They didn’t say what we’ve lost.” Thor’s still speaking in Shakespearean text?something Tony doesn’t heistate to ding him for?and getting huffy over family honor, though when Black Widow points out that his brother Loki, on a quest to conquer the world, has killed 80 people in a mere 48 hours, Thor notes quickly “He’s adopted.”
The two characters least-well served by their previous incarnations in Marvel movies, the Hulk and Black Widow, are the ones best served by Whedon’s greatest gifts and strongest tendencies. Previous incarnations have tended to reduce Bruce Banner to something of a victim?his movie depictions haven’t bothered to make the case that the good doctor is worthwhile company in and of himself, interesting not merely because of his struggle to contain what Ruffalo’s Banner ominously refers to as “the other guy.” Whedon’s gifted Banner with a mordant wit and the obligation to point out the downside to situations his more optimistically superheroic colleagues regard as alternately awesome or a piece of cake (to a certain extent, he’s Xander Harris before he gets his hands on a wrecking ball). “Last time I was in New York, I kind of broke Harlem,” he warns them in one moment. When he makes his belated arrival at a battle that’s going poorly, Banner tells his beseiged allies “So, this all seems horrible.” We have a sense of the self Banner loses when he transforms into the Hulk, an understanding that he is valuable, and in peril of losing not just his reason temporarily but his soul permanently.
When Banner explains he knows he can’t be killed because “I got low. I didn’t see a way out. So I put a bullet in my mouth and the other guy spit it out,” his self-loathing is palpable. And when he prepares to backhand a woman into oblivion, the Hulk seems less like an inconvenient condition that can be effectively deployed than a manifestation of toxic, brainless masculinity run amok. But Banner learns to rein himself in, to become a targeted weapon rather than a rampaging beast, resulting in the wittiest action sequences in the movie’s third act. This is simultaneously the funniest and most thoughtful representation of the Hulk on screen, and Ruffalo deserves enormous credit for his performance, which is the best thing in the movie.
Black Widow is a heavier lift, given her introduction into the franchise in the relatively lackluster Iron Man 2, and Johansson’s limitations as an actress. But Whedon once again enriches his final girl (Maria Hill sticks to the ship’s bridge and isn’t really in contention for the title) by giving her tight, pithy dialogue that implies but doesn’t confirm a rich inner life. Buffy Summers might tell an ex-boyfriend “I’m cookie dough. I’m not done baking,” and go on to offer an extensive explanation of the metaphor. Black Widow, given a personal stake in the fight when Loki brainwashes Hawkeye, tells the villain who wants to know if she’s in love with him, “Love is for children. I owe a debt,” and leaves it at that. Her refusal to clarify leaves room for Loki to speculate, and ultimately to reveal more than he intended. All sorts of skill sets matter in a conflict this big and complex. And without making her a victim or a lesser member of the team, Black Widow’s reactions are a regular reminder that superheroics and space invaders have real impact beyond the financial support of the Cinematic Demolition Industrial Complex. Watching her come back to herself after being badly beaten in a fight is a reminder of how damaging these powers can be when applied to ordinary people. And hearing her tell Captain America in an unconvincing deadpan “It’ll be fun,” when she tries a hugely risky gambit without the protection of enhancement or godlike abilities makes the enterprise seem more serious. These things may be entertaining as hell to watch, but they’d be terrifying to actually carry out.
The Avengers is much less a critique of the way we consume entertainment than Whedon’s meditation on horror movies, Cabin in the Woods. But it’s powerfully attuned to precisely why these movies elicit so much joy even as it’s in the process of eliciting it. S.H.E.I.L.D. Agent Phil Coulson, introduced in Iron Man as a fussy bureaucrat who tries to keep heroes in line, and who has developed into a minor badass thanks to subsequent appearances that tie the franchise together and a series of web shorts devoted to him, is, in The Avengers, a full-fledged audience surrogate. Specifically, he’s a huge Captain America fan: “I watched you while you were sleeping,” he explains when they’re formally introduced, referring to his presence at Cap’s thawing-out. “Did he ask you to sign his Captain America trading cards?” Black Widow asks Cap as they arrive for the big get-together. “They’re vintage. He’s very proud.” Coulson’s a believer both in old-fashioned ideas of service to country and humanity and in the rather more modern idea that enthusiasm and affinity are cool rather than embarrassing.
Whedon’s ideas about villains function the same way, carrying the story forward even as they comment on tropes. Loki, since his expulsion from Asgard, has acquired an alien army and somebody’s college Nietzsche library (his interpretations of the latter suggest that he, not Banner, has been relying a bit too heavily on the ganja to ease his inner pain). When he first reappears in S.H.I.E.L.D.’s Joint Dark Energy Mission laboratory to snap up a few minions (Jeremy Renner’s Hawkeye and Stellan Skarsgård’s Dr. Selvig, both introduced in Thor), he swans about declaring “Freedom is life’s great lie. Once you accept that in your heart, you will know peace.” Fury, whose order “Sir, please put down the spear” failed minutes earlier, tells the demi-god “You’re talking about peace. I kind of think you mean the other thing.” But coherence isn’t Loki’s strong suit, and not just because, as Banner artfully puts it “his brain is a bag full of cats.” Unlike supervillains of yore, it becomes clear Loki doesn’t really believe what he’s saying. He has a temper tantrum, not an ideology.
In The Avengers, the battle of ideas isn’t between the forces of good and evil: it’s between the people who are supposed to be allies. Captain America thinks Iron Man’s a showboat, while Tony thinks Steve is a hopeless square. They waste time tangling with Thor in a forest before recognizing their common aims. Once they do, those three men plus Dr. Banner, find themselves suspicious of a secret S.H.I.E.L.D. agenda they uncover in the course of gearing up to fight Loki. And Fury manipulates them into coming together as a team even as he tries to hold off the worst impulses of the S.H.I.E.L.D. council he must answer to.
In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, superhero movies like Spider-Man 2, with its famous sequence of New York City subway passengers lifting up a fallen Peter Parker, were first about what other people had done to us and our capacity to recover. In The Dark Knight, Christopher Nolan’s Batman became a representative of the terrible things we’d do to ourselves and the compromises we’d make to fight back against an external threat. The Avengers takes a third path, positing superheroes as the people who will stand firm both against terrorists and our own darkest impulses and those of the people in whom we’ve invested official governmental power. They’ll be there when we need them, but they aren’t entrenching themselves, amassing power and growing corrupt. It’s in keeping with the suspicion of institutions that’s become a major theme in Whedon’s work.
And we’ll certainly need them again. The introduction of Thor and the conception of alternate worlds and aliens to the Marvel movies opens up huge new possibilities for subsequent films, including for the adaptation of major storylines from the comics. An unwillingness to bring aliens into the mix has weakened prior movies based on Marvel stories: X-Men: The Last Stand, an adaptation of the Dark Phoenix Saga, should have ended with a showdown in an alien arena after the destruction of a planet. Instead, it concluded in a junkyard rumble. And from the extra scenes in the credits, it’s clear that Loki’s invasion was a first salvo, not the end of our heroes’ engagement in a higher kind of war with a whole new class of combatants. The Avengers may be the result of careful planning and a neatly calibrated movie-making formula that strikes some critics as rigid corporate entertainment. But this franchise, with its long-form exploration of a rich cast of characters and its embrace of a huge, complex universe, has unlocked, at long last, the wondrous, weird potential of comic books to transport us to other worlds and to render our own transformed.
The American economy added 115,000 jobs in April, and while that number fell well short of expectations, it represents the 26th consecutive month of private sector job growth. Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney was quick to harp on the report, appearing on Fox & Friends just minutes after the release to say that the economy should be growing at a much faster pace. The economy should be adding more than 500,000 jobs a month, Romney said:
ROMNEY: We should be seeing numbers in the 500,000 jobs created per month. This is way, way off from what should happen in a normal recovery.
Romney’s call for 500,000 jobs a month would certainly make for a faster economic recovery. That sort of growth, however, is hardly “normal,” as Romney claims. As the chart below shows, there have only been 16 months since 1939 — and only four in the last 50 years — in which the economy added 500,000 jobs or more:
It isn’t the first time Romney has made unreasonable claims about the economy. Romney released a tax plan in March that would reduce federal revenues by more than $6 trillion because of its massive tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations. Despite that number, Romney says his plan won’t add to the deficit, but economic analysis of the plan shows the economy would have to grow 6.8 percent a year for five years — significantly faster than it has in any five-year period in recent history. As the Center for American Progress’ Michael Linden and Seth Hanlon said at the time, Romney’s plan is “implausible, to say the least.”
Not only are Romney’s claims unrealistic and borderline impossible, his economic plan also provides no path toward such growth. Romney’s policies, according to a Republican National Committee official, would be the same as former President George W. Bush’s, “just updated.” Those tax cutting policies, of course, failed to create jobs or stimulate economic growth and instead left the country with the massive budget deficit and sputtering economy Romney now claims he’ll fix.
Romney has staked his campaign on his knowledge of the economy. But as his former primary opponent Rick Santorum said in March, “If Mitt Romney’s an economic heavyweight, we’re in trouble.”
Gov. Rick Scott’s (R-FL) opposition to President Obama’s Affordable Care Act has cost the state $200 million in funding it could have used to enroll more children in health care insurance, Health News Florida reports. Under the law, states that “adopt at least five of eight measures that make it easier for eligible children to become and stay enrolled” qualify for bonuses that could be used to enroll more low-income children in the program. But Florida passed up those dollars, along with billions more in other health grants that could have assisted millions in the state. Currently, 687,300 or 16 percent of children are uninsured in Florida — six percentage points higher than the national average. Republicans in Congress have proposed eliminating the bonus program, even though data on the bonuses “show that in the 23 states that received bonuses in FY 2011, an additional 1.1 million kids were enrolled above expected levels.”
Last week, the The Charlotte Observer endorsed Republican congressional candidate Jim Pendergraph, but quickly backtracked after the candidate joined notorious birther Sheriff Joe Arpaio on the campaign trail, and raised his own doubts about President Obama’s birthplace.
?I have reason to be suspicious,? he said of Obama’s birth certificate. ?But I don?t know. I haven?t seen the facts. I think there?s a lot of smoke and generally when there?s smoke there?s got to be fire somewhere.?
The Observer, which originally praised Pendergraph as “conservative” was not pleased, publishing a scathing retraction of its support today for the North Carolina candidate:
After winning the Observer?s endorsement in his bid for Congress, he has done nothing but embarrass us and himself.
By buddying up to one of America?s more hateful egomaniacs and then joining with fringe ?birthers? to question President Obama?s citizenship, Pendergraph has contradicted much of what he told the Observer?s editorial board in his endorsement interview last month. As a result, we have lost faith in him, and urge voters to consider Edwin Peacock or Ric Killian in the 9th Congressional District race.
The paper’s editorial board went on to say that it had originally thought Pendergraph was intelligent and reasonable and moderate, but that they don’t trust him now and are afraid he will “say whatever a given audience wants to hear, if it will help him get elected.”
Last night on Fox News, Bill Kristol advised Romney to stand down on the Chen case, calling his attacks on Obama “foolish”:
KRISTOL: I’m happy to be critical of the Obama administration as anyone is, but I think this is fast moving story. And if I were advising Governor Romney, I’d say you don’t need to get in the middle of this story. If this turns out badly, and it would be a terrible thing, it will turn out badly. People will know. … To inject yourself into the middle of this way with a fast moving target I think is foolish. [...]
There is no need to butt into a fast moving story when the secretary of state is in Beijing with delicate negotiations and say it’s a day of shame for the Obama administration. Hillary Clinton is waking up right now. Let’s see if she can pull this off in the next 12 hours or so.
Watch the clip:
The State Department announced this morning that the U.S. had reached a deal with China, with Beijing saying Chen could apply to study abroad and Washington saying an American university has offered him a fellowship.
The Heartland Institute has launched one of the most offensive billboard campaigns in U.S. history. The Chicago-based anti-science think tank is comparing all those who accept climate science — and the journalists who report on it accurately — to Charles Manson, the Unabomber, and Osama Bin Laden.
This far-beyond-the-pale ad campaign to promote their Chicago conference later this month is a moment of truth for both the think tank and the broader community of disinformers and their enablers.
Will confirmed speakers like Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) or Czech President Vasclav Klaus or Joe Bastardi or Pat Michaels or Fred Singer or former NASA astronauts show up at the conference, thereby endorsing this beyond-extremist message? Will leading deniers denounce these offensive ads — or will they implicitly endorse this kind of hate speech? Will media outlets like PBS keep quoting Heartland ‘experts’ as if they were a legitimate source of information? GM ended their financial support of Heartland earlier this month, but why are State Farm and Microsoft still supporting it — or countless other public corporations?
The UK Guardian, which broke the story this morning, calls this “possibly one of the most ill-judged poster campaigns in the history of ill-judged poster campaigns.
But let’s be clear. This is not some “oops” moment by an individual overzealous Heartland employee with catastrophically poor judgment. Quite the reverse.
This is a collective act by the Institute expressing its core worldview. These billboards aren’t cheap. A sustained campaign would be a major expense for any group, signed off at the highest levels. Heartland displays the above image on its main website, proudly announcing its campaign and linking to its robust defense of “Our Billboards” on its conference website.
Heartland’s detailed rationalization for its hate speech confirms the very worst views of this right-wing group. I’ll quote it at length since it is so self-discrediting:
Billboards in Chicago paid for by The Heartland Institute point out that some of the world’s most notorious criminals say they “still believe in global warming” ? and ask viewers if they do, too?
The billboard series features Ted Kaczynski, the infamous Unabomber; Charles Manson, a mass murderer; and Fidel Castro, a tyrant. Other global warming alarmists who may appear on future billboards include Osama bin Laden and James J. Lee (who took hostages inside the headquarters of the Discovery Channel in 2010).
These rogues and villains were chosen because they made public statements about how man-made global warming is a crisis and how mankind must take immediate and drastic actions to stop it.
Why did Heartland choose to feature these people on its billboards?
Because what these murderers and madmen have said differs very little from what spokespersons for the United Nations, journalists for the “mainstream” media, and liberal politicians say about global warming….
The point is that believing in global warming is not “mainstream,” smart, or sophisticated. In fact, it is just the opposite of those things. Still believing in man-made global warming ? after all the scientific discoveries and revelations that point against this theory ? is more than a little nutty. In fact, some really crazy people use it to justify immoral and frightening behavior.
You just can’t make this stuff up — unless you are a group of professional disinformers.
Oh, but Heartland wants you to know that not every single climate scientist — nor every member of the over 120 governments who sign off on the IPCC assessment reports nor every reporter who writes accurately — is like a psychopath:
Of course, not all global warming alarmists are murderers or tyrants.
Seriously. And yet they write:
The people who still believe in man-made global warming are mostly on the radical fringe of society. This is why the most prominent advocates of global warming aren’t scientists. They are murderers, tyrants, and madmen.
Has there ever been a more insidious attack in this country on scientists and reporters — and millions of Americans who are alarmed and concerned about global warming based solely on what the science actually says?
One can’t even get into the internal logic of this nonsense. Outside of the climate blogosphere (and viewers of Fox News), it’s doubtful that more than a few percent of the public has any notion that these crazed individuals happen to have expressed views on global warming. They aren’t “the most prominent advocates.”
One word on the late Osama Bin Laden. Terrorists try very hard to spread their disinformation. A key goal is to get others to spread it for them, especially ones who are holed up in a cave somewhere — or who are now dead. Thus terrorists craft their disinformation into a sensational message that they hope gullible members of the global media will repeat. If Heartland runs a billboard with Bin Laden’s image pushing his disinformation, it will be even a lower low for them (see here).
Heartland’s entire justification for taking anti-science, anti-scientist hate speech to a new level — and plastering it over the Dwight D Eisenhower Expressway in Illinois — are the “Climategate” stolen emails and the incident in which Peter Gleick admitted using deception to obtain Heartland documents (which Gleick subsequently acknowledged was ?a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics?).
Yet, several climate scientists who ?had their emails stolen [in 2009], posted online and grossly misrepresented,? slammed Heartland for ?spreading misinformation? and ?personally attacking climate scientists to further its goals.? The scientists specifically noted:
In 2009, the Heartland Institute was among the groups that spread false allegations about what these stolen emails said. Despite multiple independent investigations, which demonstrated that allegations against scientists were false, the Heartland Institute continued to attack scientists based on the stolen emails. When more stolen emails were posted online in 2011, the Heartland Institute again pointed to their release and spread false claims about scientists.
You can read Heartland?s reply to similar charges here. Climategate isn’t a justification for Heartland to smear those who accept climate science. Quite the reverse. It is a reason for an apology, albeit one that pales in comparison to the mea culpas needed for this billboard campaign.
Does the Heartland Board stand behind these ads? The full list is here. Many of them live in Chicago. Does this really express their worldview?
Everyone needs to go on record on this. These ads are so extremist that failing to denounce them is an implicit endorsement of the worst kind of hate speech.
UPDATE: Andrew Sullivan comments on the billboard at The Daily Beast:
In some ways, this is an almost perfect illustration of what has happened to the “right.” A refusal to acknowledge scientific reality; and a brutalist style of public propaganda that focuses entirely on guilt by the most extreme association….
Mann and Ornstein are correct. Large sections of the American right are now close to insane as well as depraved. And there is no Buckley to rein them in. Just countless Jonah Goldbergs seeking to cash in.
NOTE: ThinkProgress is among several publications to have published documents attributed to the Heartland Institute and sent to us from an anonymous and then unknown source. The source later revealed himself. The AP worked to independently verify the documents and concluded, ?The federal consultant working on the classroom curriculum, the former TV weatherman, a Chicago elected official who campaigns against hidden local debt and two corporate donors all confirmed to the AP that the sections in the document that pertained to them were accurate. No one the AP contacted said the budget or fundraising documents mentioning them were incorrect.? Heartland Institute has issued several press releases on the documents. See also ?CAPAF General Counsel Responds To Heartland Institute.?
Mitt Romney just wants a friend
(Rebecca Cook/Reuters)Willard writes a letter:
Dear Mr. President,I'm sure President Obama appreciates the sentiment, Mitt. But he doesn't arrive in Ohio until tomorrow. Plus, given that you were in Virginia and Illinois yesterday and are in Pennsylvania today, don't you think it's kind of weird to welcome him to someplace you're not?
Welcome to Ohio.
Anyway, what else do you have to say, Mitt?
I have a simple question for you: Where are the jobs?I have a simple answer for you: Ohio. But more on that later.
As we enter the fourth year of your term, unemployment is over 8 percent and has been for your entire term.I'm glad you pointed that out, Mitt. You see, the last time Republicans were in charge, you guys presided over such a economic disaster that by the time President Obama entered office, unemployment was already nearly 8 percent and was skyrocketing. Soon, it hit 10 percent. But although it took some time to turn things around, we're on the right track now and unemployment is back down to 8.1 percent and falling.
I'm sure you've got more to say though, right?
Mr. President, forgive me for being blunt, but when it comes to economic affairs, you're out of your depth. Unlike you, I am not a career politician.And also unlike President Obama, you're apparently an asshole. Perhaps that's the reason you weren't a career politician: voters didn't like you enough to vote for you. You were so unpopular as governor that you didn't even bother to run for reelection. And Rick Santorum almost beat you for the Republican nomination!
But anyway, you wanted to talk about jobs, Mitt.
If you have brought new ideas to Ohio for creating jobs, why have you waited three years to unveil them? Have you suddenly had a revelation, or is it because 2012 is an election year? Whatever the case, what you are offering Ohio now is too little, too late.Well, Mitt, let's just review the facts. President Obama passed a stimulus plan, fought for middle-class tax cuts?including the payroll tax cut?and saved the auto industry. You opposed all of those things.
By the time Obama had signed the stimulus, unemployment in Ohio was already over 9 percent. Today it's dropped to 7.5 percent. More than 100,000 jobs have been created in Ohio since the start of 2010.
Let's compare that to the Bush-Republican record. When Bush took office, Ohio unemployment was 3.8 percent. Eight years later, it was 8.6 percent and rising. 170,000 jobs had been lost and the number was climbing.
I know you hate it when we point out what a fucking mess you guys left for President Obama to deal with, but those are the facts. It's your tough luck if you don't like them. Now, please, get the hell out of our way as we continue to clean things up and move forward.
Immediately after the jobs numbers were released, the Romney campaign put out an email to highlight President Obama?s ?broken promises on jobs.? The problem, as has often been the case with Romney?s rhetoric, is that the argument is built on outright falsehoods. For example:
During President Obama?s Time In Office, The Nation Has Lost 572,000 Jobs And The Unemployment Rate Has Increased To 8.1%.
The campaign cites a chart from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which does indeed show that the unemployment rate increased to over 8 percent in January 2009. But any honest description would describe that as hangover from the previous month, when the economy had collapsed. To attribute the job losses of early 2009 to the president is to completely mislead voters with a false picture of Obama?s first year. It?s not a huge point, but it is an example of the mendacity that has defined Romney?s campaign up to this point.