Ok, I'm not going to hunt links for this because it's Saturday and I don't feel like it..
so just going off what I've heard and read.. who is lying Mitt or Obama..
This is what I know.. Obama came out because of some article and slammed Mitt for his outsourcing. Poltifact (or the likes) slammed Obama for lying. Mitt used that to also slam Obama while saying he left in 1999 and had nothing to do with anything.
Another article came out that showed Mitt did in fact stay on as CEO,President, and Board Chair up until 2003. Mitt still slammed Obama for lying, Obama kept hammering Mitt on his bullshit.
Mitt did the TV rounds and flat out said he'd had zero,nada,zip,zilch to do with anything related to Bain or it's subsidiaries from 2/1999 on.. MotherJones and Boston Globe did another article proving that he
did sign stuff for the SEC in 2002, negotiated and signed a $75million contract
and gave sworn testimony is his 'trial for residency' to run for Governor, where he said he was still at Bain, or it's subsidiaries until 02-03?
MotherJones also reported that who gives a shit about 1999, since in 1998, Bain and Mitt were contracted with a huge outsourcing firm in China..
So.. if Mitt's lying.. does it really matter? If he was lying about his 'position' when he was saying he was eligible for being the Gov, but now he's saying he wasn't.. Does that make him retro-actively ineligible now?
and wow.. the guy will flip on everything won't he? Is there anything he would not 'make up'?
The irony here is Obama has been labelled some kind of stealth Manchurian candidate that planned out all these deceptions starting with being born in Indonesia, then moving to HI and getting a BC there..only to have photoshopped everything else in his life to lead him to the presidency so he could ban guns..when the reality is, it's looking more and more like Mitt's the one who's really staged his entire adult life around besting his father and winning the white house.. only, the (R)ight doesn't give a shit since it's all about 'beat Obama"
