Rachel Maddow's first installment of the Romney campaign's "You're going to have to take my word for it" arrogant 'tude was in my post VIDEO: Serial hypocrite Mitt Romney lied, pointed fingers in 2002 and got away with it. It’s now 2012: Blather, wince, repeat.
Here's last night's sequel:
"We know less about Mitt Romney's finances than we do about the surface of Mars now."
"The Romney campaign did not have to prove anything. We're supposed to just trust them... 'You're going to have to take my word for it.'"
"...Mr. Romney lied yesterday when he said he had filed resident tax returns in both Massachusetts and Utah."
"He wants us to take his word for it" about his tax returns.
"Do you think he's telling the truth now? Do you trust him? Do you trust him enough to be comfortable with him as president of the United States?"
No, Rachel, no I don't, nor does Harry Reid.
Now Greg Sargent is reporting that Team Willard cares nothing about what
"you people" ordinary Americans need to know, nor what they might think of someone who is as secretive and dishonest as their guy. Their disdain for us and for democracy is appalling:
Romney advisers spelled it all out in interviews with Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei [...]
But now, in what appear to be a strategic leaks designed to mollify Republicans worried about the campaign’s lack of specificity, Romney advisers are explicitly confirming that all of this is part of a grand strategy to only signal general direction to the American people, and that they see specifics as a political peril to be avoided. The campaign is thinks sharing details about what he’d actually do as president would be politically suicidal. As Steve Benen asks: "what does it say about the merit of Romney’s policy agenda if voters are likely to recoil if they heard the whole truth?”
You know what's even worse? Americans will buy into these lies and generalities and still cast their votes for someone about whom they know way too little. And that's a very dangerous thing.
Please read the entire Sargent post here.