Things Reporters Can't Say: Mitt Romney is Lying About the Environmental Protection Agency

It's not that Mitt Romney doesn't have his facts straight about the Environmental Protection Agency. It's not that reasonable people can disagree with the Environmental Protection Agency about the best approach to solving a set of problems. Mitt Romney is choosing to lie about the Environmental Protection Agency because he thinks that will give him a political advantage.

But as Paul Krugman said on ABC's This Week, "The press just doesn’t know how to handle flat-out untruths," so you get articles like this in Politico today:

The GOP presidential nominee is telling voters in Colorado, Nevada, Ohio and Virginia that Obama’s EPA is to blame for wiping out the coal industry. Romney and his surrogates are warning Iowans of EPA plans to regulate for farm dust and railing against the agency for flying airplanes over livestock operations to spy for dirty water.

In many instances, Romney’s EPA attacks stretch the boundaries of what the agency actually does or can do. The EPA has repeatedly denied any plans for new farm dust rules, and the planes have been used as a cost-cutting enforcement measure dating back to the George W. Bush administration. Energy experts say the coal industry’s problems are a byproduct of all-time lows in natural gas prices rather than new air pollution requirements that have been subject to legal battles for more than a decade.

Mitt Romney says something that's not true. Even after widely-available facts to the contrary are pointed out, Mitt Romney keeps saying it anyway. We'll have to leave it there.

How can you tell Romney's lies are calculated and deliberate? Because he often shifts between lies and the truth depending on his audience. Talking to the Republican National Convention? Global warming's a joke. Talking to scientists? Global warming's serious business. It's part of the fabric of his campaign, as Romney's brazen lies in the first presidential debate about his $5 trillion tax cut plan and letting insurance companies deny coverage to sick people showed.

Romney is counting on articles like this to make his clear-cut lies seem debatable. As media critic Jay Rosen writes, "a post-truth campaign for president falls into the category of too big to tell."

UPDATE 10/9: As usual, The Onion can say it, but political reporters can't. "People are usually too afraid to ask me straight up if I’m lying, because that is apparently not something you ask someone who is running for president."

Big Bird vs. Big Oil

The climate crisis didn't come up in last night's presidential debate as moderator Jim Lehrer made sure Barack Obama and Mitt Romney wandered aimlessly from how much to destroy Social Security & Medicare to reduce the deficit to how many federal workers to lay off to reduce the deficit.

But Mitt Romney had another idea to cut the deficit: Fire Big Bird. It was a ZINGER!! so effective that pundits are already asking whether it will blow the bounce Romney may have otherwise received.

There's just one thing Romney won't do to cut the deficit: Ask incredibly rich people or rich corporations (or rich corporate people) to give up a dime in tax breaks or subsidies. That prompted Oil Change International & The Other 98 Percent to team up on the infographic of the night:

Paul Ryan Won't Tell You Which National Parks He'd Sell Off, Either

Everyone knows Paul Ryan doesn't want to explain the math behind the Romney-Ryan $5 trillion tax cut for the wealthy, but in a new interview with Outdoor Life, he doesn't have any more interest in explaining their plan to sell off America's public lands:

OL: In your 'Path to Prosperity' budget plan, you have several proposals to sell government property, from things like automobiles to buildings to federal land. Can you give me an example of some type of public land that may fall under that plan?

PR: Not off the top of my head, I couldn’t.

OL: What criteria, though, will you use?

PR: That would be something you have to work with Congress on. There have been lots of hearings that Congress has had on excess federal properties. The ones that we’ve looked at from budget savings were more buildings and assets like cars and things like this, a lot of vacant properties. That is really where a lot of our concern for budget savings has been. With respect to federal lands, that would take a lot more research to give you a good answer.

OL: So that’s not really a main part of that, though?

PR: That part, we thought the savings was buildings.

It's a clear part of the Romney-Ryan strategy: We won't tell you what our plans are, you just have to trust us that we'll slash taxes & it'll maybe cost nothing, gut health care but I bet you'll pull through, and auction off America's public lands but I'm sure Big Oil doesn't want the good ones so we'll fill in that blank later.

Mitt Romney's Climate Science Denial Flops with Convention Viewers

Mitt Romney's Republican presidential nomination acceptance speech that mocked global warming-fueled sea level rise got the lowest voter approval since Gallup start tracking reactions in 1996.

Four Ways Climate Reality Looms Over the 2012 Republican Convention

With reality denial dominating the Republican Party platform, how will Republican National Convention delegates reconcile that the start of their 2012 gathering in Tampa was delayed by climate-fueled extreme weather?

First, let's be clear: It's Big Oil-funded GOP leadership that's the problem, not rank-and-file Republicans. While virtually every Republican member of Congress and national party leader rejects climate science, 43% of rank-and-file Republicans see “solid evidence of global warming” according to the Pew Research Center.

Dig a little deeper and those numbers should be even more eye-catching for GOP leadership. Among moderate Republicans, 63% see evidence our climate is changing. And what about Republicans who say they still haven’t made up their minds in the presidential race? Cooperative Campaign Analysis Project polling shows they’re only half as likely to deny the scientific reality of global warming as Republicans on the whole. Polls show Republican voters support solutions, from a revenue-neutral carbon tax to giving Americans more low-carbon transit options.

But Mitt Romney’s website doesn’t even mention climate change. While Romney himself once advocated for clean energy & carbon pollution cuts, he now rejects climate science. Romney’s energy plan unveiled last week contains mostly giveaways to the oil industry and polls show it hasn’t helped him with voters - no surprise considering Big Oil remains the most hated industry in America by a wide margin.

At a time when global warming & extreme weather are dominating the headlines, Republican Party leadership is increasingly step with the American mainstream:

1. Isaac bears down on the Gulf Coast. The Republican Party was forced to cancel the convention’s first day in Tampa as Isaac sent tropical storm warnings up along the Gulf Coast. Isaac is now forecast to make landfall as a hurricane near New Orleans late Tuesday. Global warming is making storms more intense by adding the fuel of warmer air & water to their fire, while rising sea levels raise the launching pad for storm surges. 
2. Bracing for a storm surge at the pump. The threat of Isaac is already shutting down oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico, threatening to raise gas prices. It’s one of many ways that global warming threatens America’s energy infrastructure, and a problem that won’t be solved by relying more on offshore oil drilling.
3. Arctic Sea ice melt scorches previous record. This summer’s Arctic Sea ice has already receded past the previous record - and there are still weeks of melting time to go. That’s bad news for the polar bears and other wildlife who depend on sea ice for survival. There’s also increasing evidence that a warming Arctic means more weird weather here in America.
4. America’s sweltering summer. This year has been the hottest on record in the United States, with July 2012 going into the record books as America’s hottest month ever. Globally, 2012 has been the 10th-hottest on record, nearly 1 degree F above the 20th-century average. That it’s only 10th speaks to how much & how quickly our climate is changing – up until 1998, 2012 would’ve been the hottest year on record.

From a strictly political perspective, here's the real problem for Republicans: Advocating inaction isn't just stupid, it makes Republicans look weak. Reasonable people can disagree on the best way to respond to climate change, but who gets excited about a candidate who denies we have a problem and bad mouths America's ability to solve it? Mitt Romney's clean energy opposition is already costing him votes in farm states that have seen the economic windfall that harvesting clean energy can bring. 

Mitt Romney & Paul Ryan Pledge to Put Oil Above All

An analysis of the Mitt Romney & Paul Ryan "energy" plan from the League of Conservation Voters:

• Number of Pages: 21 
• Number of Words: 10,272
• Mentions of Oil: 154
• Mentions of Wind: 10 (5 of them Negatively) 
• Mentions of Solar: 14 (4 of them Negatively) 
• Mentions of Wind Energy Production Tax Credit: 0
• Mentions of Climate Change: 0 
• Mentions of Romney’s Plan to Continue Oil Subsidies: 0 
• Mentions of Oil & Gas Interests Donating More Than $2,600,000 to His Campaigns: 0
• Mentions of Koch Brothers Pledging to Spend $200,000,000+ to Elect Him: 0

Check out a more detailed analysis of the Romney-Ryan oil-above-all plan from the Center for American Progress.

Why Do Reporters Repeat Deceptive RomneySpeak?

Mitt Romney is beholden to Big Oil but knows oil drilling is much less popular than clean energy, so he uses the deceptive "energy development" and "energy production" when he really just means drilling for oil & gas and digging up coal.

Romney knows voters want a level playing field for energy sources, but he also knows his energy plan plays favorites with his oil, hydrocarbon gas & coal donors while dismissing clean energy as a "failure." That's why Romney uses the deceptive terms "comprehensive energy plan" and "all of the above" when he really just means favors for his oil, gas & coal benefactors.

I understand why Romney uses those deceptive terms - they're politically advantageous, while describing his actual energy plan would cost him support. What I don't understand is why reporters then parrot his deceptive terms. Why don't reporters translate RomneySpeak into actual reality?

As journalism professor & media analyst Jay Rosen writes, many of the political journalists covering Romney aren't interested in what's true - they're only interested in what "works" politically.

GOP VP Nominee Paul Ryan: Science Denier, Fiscal Fraud

Mitt Romney has selected Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) as his vice presidential running mate, and considering Mitt has chosen to run an anti-science, anti-environment, anti-clean energy, anti-middle class campaign, the choice couldn't be more perfect.

Like Romney, Rep. Ryan was born on third base but thinks he hit a triple. He's become rich and powerful thanks to his family's connections, but instead of being grateful, he looks down his nose at working Americans, calling them lazy and morally bankrupt. Again, that has him in lockstep with Mitt, who thinks non-wealthy Americans hate hard work.

Romney opposes environmental protections for wildlife & public lands and opposes investment in clean energy & public transportation. That makes him a big fan of The Ryan Budget, which would gut environmental laws protecting America's clean air & water and slash investments in national parks, clean energy research, and trains & buses.

But on no issue are Romney & Ryan in closer lockstep than on protecting polluters' privileges. Koch Industries is Ryan's #6 donor and Ryan has spoken at the Kochs' secretive ultra-conservative retreat. He's paid the Kochs back by being a warrior for the 1%.

While Romney has flip-flopped on climate science, Ryan has been a consistent denier of the scientific consensus that Earth is warming, man-made carbon pollution is to blame, and that we have a small window to cut emissions before the climate crisis spins out of control. Rep. Paul Ryan got just a 13% on the League of Conservation Voters scorecard for the 111th Congress. Lifetime, Rep. Ryan gets just a 20%.

That brings us to the issue that sums up the Ryan fraud: Ryan loves taxpayer subsidies for Big Oil. Ryan wants to end Medicare to fund tax cuts for the wealthy, but doesn't think wildly-profitable private oil companies should have to give up the billions in outdated subsidies they still get from taxpayers.

And the League of Conservation Voters points out that in public Ryan cowardly retreats from his support for oil subsidies, while in private his family profits from them:

 

Why Mitt Romney Loves High Gas Prices

Mitt Romney profits twice from high gas prices - Mitt can pander to your anger, then his Big Oil friends pump the money you pay at the gas station right back into Mitt's tank. That's according to an op-ed in Politico today by the League of Conservation Voters' Gene Karpinski & Priorities USA Action's Bill Burton:

Record profits now give oil executives even more cash than usual to spend on advancing their political agenda — and that begins with electing Romney. In fact, Big Oil executives pledged more than $200 million to aid Romney’s campaign and defeat Obama.

What does Big Oil get in return for its $200 million investment in Romney? It gets to keep its billions in special tax breaks every year. So middle-class families pay twice — high gas prices when they fill up the tank and $4 billion in taxpayer-funded subsidies for an industry where the top five companies combined made $137 billion in profits last year.

At the same time, Big Oil gets one of its own dictating Romney’s energy policy. Harold Hamm, Romney’s top energy adviser, is a billionaire oil executive who says clean energy is a “magical fantasy” and wants high gas prices. He admitted as much when he declared in 2009 that cheap oil would be a “disaster.”

Mitt Romney's magical gas price prescription: More drilling! And Virginia GOP Senate candidate George Allen is just as deeply snuggled in Big Oil's back pocket. But here's the problem - even Romney's own economic team knows that wouldn't lower gas prices or help the economy.

Big Oil Pledges $200 Million to Help Elect Mitt Romney

Like this ad? Donate to the League of Conservation Voters to help keep it on the air.

Terrible Ideas & Pathological Lying: Why I Don't Like Mitt Romney

While The Green Miles consumes politics like a grizzly bear consumes salmon, my girlfriend is a normal human being who pays attention to politics only occasionally. When one day she asked why I don't like Mitt Romney, I didn't want to come off as only hating Romney because he's on the Red Team and I'm on the Blue Team. So here's what I said.

First, the substance, which is pretty straightforward. Romney would raise taxes on the poor, slash taxes on the wealthy, do nothing for the middle class, and dramatically increase the national debt - and claims that would magically create jobs, an underpants gnome scheme if there ever was one. On energy, Romney's plan would be Bush-Cheney on steroids, giving even more control to polluting oil & coal companies and making even lower investments in clean energy. from the poor to give to the rich.

What's harder to convey is just how much Romney & his campaign are built on lies. Steve Benen has been chronicling how often Romney lies and the list runs into the double digits every single week - lies about himself, lies about his past positions, lies about President Obama. "At this point, the pattern here is obvious, and it’s clearly not an accident," wrote Greg Sargent. "And Romney and his team will remain secure in the knowledge that most of the media will politely look the other way as the Big Lies keep flowing, and will continue to treat them as just part of the game."

Rachel Maddow recently went in-depth on Romney's lies and how they define his candidacy (if you don't want to watch the Etch A Sketch intro, skip ahead to 6:25):

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

You Know I Love Most About Virginia? The Trees Are The Right Height.

Listen to how the audience laughs nervously at Mitt Romney's "Michigan's trees are the right height" non sequitur (though he doesn't know what public lands are for), then goes awkwardly silent as he rambles on about lakes and cars:

Washington Post's Romney/Climate Story Stiffs Science

The Washington Post has a story this morning about how Mitt Romney acknowledges the science, at least in general terms, that man-made carbon emissions are driving global warming.

Let's count the "experts" quoted:

• GOP workers & activists: 3
• Polluter-funded front groups: 2
• Rush Limbaugh: 1
• Climate scientists: 0

As Media Matters reported this week, when it comes to reporting on climate science, climate scientists are the last people the media seeks out.

Did Climate Action Deliver Florida for McCain?

UPDATE (Wed. 10:30am): Two hours after I originally posted this to DailyKos, Grist miraculously drew the same conclusions. What are the odds? :)

McCain leads in Florida.

McCain supports climate action.

Thompson drops out.

Romney picks up Thompson's supporters, who deny global warming even exists.

Romney takes lead in polls.

Romney attacks McCain for supporting climate action.

Climate action mack daddy Gov. Charlie Crist endorses McCain.

McCain regains lead in Florida polls.

McCain wins Florida.

Coincidence? I think not.

Cross-posted from Daily Kos