VIDEO: Mitt Romney slips, tells the truth, completely invalidates GOP Economics 101 + says Bain “didn’t create” jobs

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

 

The whole Republican premise of austerity GOOD, stimulus BAD just got flushed down Willard M. Romney’s gold-plated toidy. From the guy who usually lies his coiffed head off, a moment of truth slipped out.

Esquire’s Charles Pierce gives us the original quotes from the Mark Halperin interview with Mitt that Chris Hayes refers to in the video clip above. I also included part of Pierce’s perfectly-worded reaction:

Halperin: Why not in the first year, if you’re elected — why not in 2013, go all the way and propose the kind of budget with spending restraints, that you’d like to see after four years in office?  Why not do it more quickly?

Romney: Well because, if you take a trillion dollars for instance, out of the first year of the federal budget, that would shrink GDP over 5%.  That is by definition throwing us into recession or depression. So I’m not going to do that, of course. [...]

Cutting government spending will throw us into a recession or depression? No Christmas cards from the Ryan household this year, Willard.

What’s that word again? Oh yeah:

But wait! There’s more! Thanks to Jed Lewison, we have video of Willard debunking his own “Bain Capital: Job creator” claims in, count ‘em, nine seconds. First the claims (H/t: @MzYun):

Now the very succinct debunkitude:

Mitt Romney, March 13, 2012, KMOV TV St Louis, Missouri:

“We didn’t create them ourselves, they [the businesses we invested in] did.”

Note to Mitt: It’s the middle class that creates jobs.

Here’s the entire Maddow show segment:

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

  • http://nefariousnewt.blogspot.com NefariousNewt

    This is all part of a strategy called “muddying the waters.” Let’s face it: Mitt has said so many different things in so many different ways, has avoided supplying details for anything, and has been at odds with his own campaign so many times, that we don’t know what he’ll do. However, having said many and varied things, he has appealed to a broader spectrum of people, which is why this race is closer than it should be.

    Now, I know people were disappointed in the President’s first debate, but he did an important thing by letting Romney talk. Now, in the next debate, Romney will have to defend the things he said in the first debate, and President Obama will then have the latitude to ask him why the things he said the first time don’t jibe with what he said on the stump. This is an important moment, especially with the potential size of the audience; if President Obama can expose fully the breadth of Romney’s flipping and flopping, and do it in a way that makes people sit up and take notice, I think you’ll see this race loosen back up in a hurry.

  • kreypuskul

    I would be glad to attempt an answer to your question if I could understand it. Try a re-write and I’m sure there are many who could help. 

    (I mean, do you really think that the hyperactivebibby-carper really, you know, think? Huh?)

  • Wary

    Romney’s interview with Mark Halprin was totally staged, and it was done this way for Romney in saying ‘oh, no we cannot have deep cuts in one year because it would cause a ‘recession or depression’ was not a gaffe it was carefully prepared to give him an APPEARANCE’ he  is ‘moving to the center. He’s a better study than Palin was for sure.

    I don’t buy it for one minute, it gives him a sound bite he WILL be using in an ad somewhere down the line.

    We have all the proof we need that Republicans say anything during a campaign and then slam down whatever they want upon election. I’m not buying his statement.

  • Jeremyneill

    Mark my words: If you want to know the right-wing agenda for (destroying) education, ask Orwell, and I’m telling you R-F-N this REALLLY is why: From Orwell’s 1984: ”

    But it was also clear that an all-round increase
    in wealth threatened the destruction — indeed, in some sense was the
    destruction — of a hierarchical society.

    But in practice such a society could not long remain
    stable. For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass
    of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and
    would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they
    would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and
    they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only
    possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance.

  • gopfree

    The gop machine is not concerned with the truth, the economy, fair practice, the environment, equality, justice, world peace, a fair judicial system, the MIDDLE CLASS, small businesses, etc. Enough gop feces, simply vote EVERY SINGLE gop candidate out of office. 

  • Littleowlalp

    Does this mean that Mia Love will be making her debut dance onstage in a few days, as the  next Red Mama claiming the Redbubbahs Prez candidacy/poison candy producer/spreader/distrbutor – or their sweet enticing icon????