{"id":283,"date":"2012-10-11T09:12:21","date_gmt":"2012-10-11T14:12:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/napervilledemocrats.org\/ntdo\/?p=283"},"modified":"2012-10-11T09:12:21","modified_gmt":"2012-10-11T14:12:21","slug":"joe-isuzu-romney-performed-well-last-night","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/napervilledemocrats.org\/ntdo\/joe-isuzu-romney-performed-well-last-night\/","title":{"rendered":"“Joe Isuzu” Romney Performed Well Last Night"},"content":{"rendered":"

Mitt Romney demonstrated again last night that he’s not going to be constrained by anything as pedestrian as the truth. He’s willing to say whatever it takes. \u00a0Anybody remember\u00a0Joe Isuzu<\/a>\u00a0from\u00a0those old ads<\/a>?<\/p>\n

Here’s Jonathan Cohn (I’ve excerpted it. \u00a0You should click through and read the whole piece):<\/p>\n

\n

The Four Most Misleading Moments in Romney’s Debate Performance<\/a><\/h2>\n

…if I knew nothing about the candidates and this was my first exposure to the campaign, I\u2019d think this Romney fellow has a detailed tax plan, wants to defend the middle class and poor, and will take care of people who can\u2019t find health insurance.<\/p>\n

Problem is, this isn\u2019t my first exposure to the campaign. I happen to know a lot about the candidates. And I know that those three things aren\u2019t true. Romney has made promises about taxes that are mathematically incompatible with one another. He\u2019s outlined a spending plan that would devastate the middle class and (particularly) the poor. And his health care plan would leave people with pre-existing conditions pretty much in the same perilous situation they were before the Affordable Care Act became law.<\/p>\n

My standard for candor in politics is whether candidates have offered the voters an accurate portrait of what they\u2019ve done and what they are proposing. Tonight, Romney did precisely the opposite. And that really ought to be the story everybody is writing, although I doubt it will be.<\/p>\n

Some details:<\/p>\n

1.\u00a0Taxes<\/strong>. President Obama repeatedly described Romney\u2019s tax plan as a $5 trillion tax plan. Romney repeatedly took exception. The figure is correct. …<\/p>\n

2.\u00a0The deficit and spending cuts<\/strong>. Asked by moderator Jim Lehrer how he\u2019d cut the deficit, Romney outlined his plan for cutting spending. It included three main provisions.<\/p>\n

First, Romney said, he\u2019d repeal the Affordable Care Act. He\u2019s serious about that, I presume. The problem is that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the health care law reduces the deficit. Repeal it and the deficit goes up. …<\/p>\n

3.\u00a0Medicare<\/strong>: Over and over again, Romney attacked Obama because the Affordable Care Act reduces Medicare spending by $716 billion. As you probably know by now, Paul Ryan\u2019s budget made the exact same cut. And less than a year ago, Romney was praising this budget to the hilt.<\/p>\n

…<\/p>\n

4.\u00a0Health care and pre-existing conditions<\/strong>. Yeah, this was the part when I jumped out of my chair. Obama said that Romney\u2019s alternative to Obamacare wouldn\u2019t protect people with pre-existing conditions. Romney said it would. Sorry, but Romney is just plain wrong here….<\/p>\n

…<\/p>\n

As part of its post-debate analysis, ABC News asked correspondent Jonathan Karl to play the role of fact-checker. He picked out one statement from each side and rated it \u201cmostly false.\u201d But the Obama statement Karl picked was the description of Romney\u2019s tax plan as costing $5 trillion\u2014a figure, again, that comes straight from the Tax Policy Center. That\u2019s not \u201cmostly false.\u201d If anything, it\u2019s \u201cmostly true.\u201d Then Karl talked about Romney\u2019s pre-existing condition promise, which really is \u201cmostly false.\u201d Sigh.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n