i am just gonna copy and paste on each one of these threads.

this with the people i know, in a very red area, so they are aware they call a liar and a cheat.... a winner.

Only after their reaction of OMG, I knew he was a no good such and such, say "Oops, it was Romney that brought them"

cheat sheet. but, that suggestion is cute.

Welcome to DU

47% chance that it is contraband.

Also a 47% chance that it will be detected.

That 47% of the voters will not change their opinion of Romney.

And that 47% of Romney suporters will have a more favorable opinion of him if it is proven that he cheats.

For some reason everytime I calculate Romney's odds on anything it comes up 47%.

Seriously it may sound a little lightweight, but that is the kind of name the MSM lives to run with.

Remember Bush and the bulge in 2004. If you don't it's because it went nowhere.

Boston has it too http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/10/05/upon-further-review-mitt-romney-may-have-cheated-to-win-the-debate/

Wait for it!

"Wrongney for America!"

It just means he is sorry he was caught in the act.


The 11th Commandment: Don't get caught.

. . . he'll just retroactively make the notes not exist.

Just wondering when your prediction is gonna come true. Been a few days

hold your breath, and wait for it

The piece is in the "Political Blog Progressive" portion of the website.

This is the blurb at the end of the piece:

I didn't notice it at first, either.

The bit about "Mitt Romney needed a cheat sheet to keep the lies straight" didn't strike me as something you'd see in a straight news article, so I looked a little closer.

He will dig and dig until he ends up in China and after he gets there, he will call them cheaters while simultaneously transferring jobs and investing in their businesses, then conveniently deny that any such thing had occurred.

As I said elsewhere.

That is the thing that disproves the lie.

You're going to tell me that OCD, fussy dude is touching his face with anything that's touched anything besides the inside of his suit pocket? NO WAY.

The moment of him throwing whatever it is down in front of him on his podium shows that it was NOT a handkerchief.

You're absolutely right. Nicely done!

I think it's crushing - you know that guy regulates anything that comes within ten feet of contact with him, no less anything that touches his face.

One can only imagine the scrubbing that goes on following a round of crowd pandering and baby terrorizing.

And in a scenario he can control? Sorry. Rich fussy dudes keep their hankies in their freshly dry cleaned suit pockets. Take it from one who knows.

But the handkerchief touching the podium escaped me. It makes perfect sense.

he does drop his handkerchief onto the podium after he uses it to wipe his lips right before the closing statements. I'd have to watch again, but I'll bet that's the last time he uses that handkerchief.

has the video, and at 1:26:38 he wipes his mouth
and after the debate, you see him fold and shuffle some papers around, seemingly tucking some papers under others, although it is blocked from the podium. Then he goes out to shake hands, etc. And when he comes back to gather his things, because of edits, it is impossible to tell whether he's put the hanky back in his pocket. It is clear, though, that he has papers only in his hands as he returns to his family.
However, watching the opening, it does appear that he's unfolding papers.
Unless the unedited feed from behind the podium is revealed, we'll never know for sure.
And in that respect, with no definitive proof, this is all a silly red herring. It won't go anywhere.

Just sayin'.

yet after he threw it down there he proceeded to unfold it or something. When did it get refolded I wonder?

and harvest their souls...

Not a soft cloth handkerchief.

Fabric has drape --floppiness--to it, unless it's heavily starched.

What I saw in the vid was a 5"x7" type sheet that had the stiffness of paper.

Don't have time to look at the vid again right now, but I will, just to double check myself.

By the way, I never saw him wipe his face during the debate...which he likely would have done if he's the kind of guy who habitually takes a hankie out and sets it on the table/podium first thing. Which, on second thought, hankie users NEVER do. They use it and put it back in their pocket. PERIOD.

and he *does* toss it down in front of him onto the podium.

But I'm guessing he never picks it up again after that point.

To prove that, I'd have to watch the rest of the video, but that would involve me watching that crappy debate, and I'm not in the mood.

Maybe someone else can do the legwork on that...

at the infamous clip, anyway. I'm not up for watching the whole debate again either.

I don't think it was a hanky.

I only have my suspicions.

Rachel is way off-base, in my opinion, with her, "he used a handkerchief during the debate, thus that object was a handkerchief" logic.

We never see where he produces that handkerchief from, so there's no way to know if that's the thing he threw on the podium at the start.

Rachel is very, very bright, but she doesn't think like a lawyer, and every now and then she has a real logic fail.

Her show tonight had a number of logic fails.

he proceeded to unfold. If he unfolded the hankie, when did it get folded again. And I think the hankie he used to mop his lying lip, was smaller than what he threw down.

This is one magic hankie. I suspect it may be part of the magic underwear line.

He looked directly into the camera when he rounds the corner to
the podium, as if noting it/acknowledging its presence...then waits
to pull from his pocket whatever it was he pulled from his pocket
until he's all but leaning into and touching the podium.

Love a good c theory...

but notes or no notes, this turn the other cheek style of debating should be cast aside.

You can do if affably, but the bullshit needs to be beaten back.

I think the prez was expecting to debate an adult but became
flabbergasted by how loud, vast and fast Rmoney's lies started flying.
Mitt was manic, and it seemed to throw the prez for a loop, imo.

I'm not too worried, though. I think the prez will deliver all the
appropriate punches in the next two debates and do a damned fine job.

I showed it to my husband with no foundation or background ... just asked him what he saw in the video clip. He said, "Romney putting notes on the podium."

Should juxtapose the time when he went back to get them. There is NO HANKY in there. Handy panky, to be sure.

But there's another folded paper towards the left side, imo.




This is just a rough enlargement from bushisanidiot's screengrab here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251119479#post72

If it was a hanky it was soaked in Viagra.

before making his way to his family. As he approached, he attempted to stuff the paper into his pocket twice, but was unable to do so. He then turned to a young man standing behind him and handed the sheet to him, who then slid the folded paper into his own inside jacket pocket. I don't know if it was a cheat sheet, but it was definitely not a handkerchief.

Is that what you're saying?

People are going over the proverbial cliff without the evidence in hand.
There are real issues, and making up an accusation pales in comparison to losing Obama care.

If you want to accuse Mitt Romney of dishonesty, there is plenty of Truth to be told:

Mitt Romney’s dishonest debate
October 5, 2012
http://www.barackobama.com/truth-team/entry/mitt-romneys-dishonest-debate

PUH-LEAZE, save yourself some trouble, friend. I assure you, we can figure out what issues to address. If character is not one of them, then what is?

This is not the first time the Repugs have CHEATED during a debate. But, even if it were, it speaks to the very core of the candidates' "issues," because it is about their character. Anyone who cheats at a debate shouldn't be trusted to be the leader of this land.

I think that the video is ample evidence to show that your boy, Mitt, pulled something out of his pocket, besides a hanky, and put it on the lecturn. And, when he finished the debate, he made sure he went back and got it, and was pretty much fumbling around to make sure he got it out of sight rather quickly.

I think that it is so telling that people with very low post counts come here to this forum, and almost to a man, they are trying to tell us how we should think, and what the issues are. It really is such an authoritarian method of engaging in politics.

My post count here is far more than yours. This is not my only DU avatar.

Look, none of us here are making "excuses" for Obama's poor performance in the debate. His poor performance has nothing to do with Mitt cheating.

His good performance has nothing to do with Mitt having a hankie.

And that pointing out that Romney cheated is one of those excuses.

I really don't think that you can combat someone who just comes into a debate and flat out lies, like Romney did.

Liar and cheater!

Love the kitty in the corner with his paws up!

Sorry if already posted. Plus, do you think swing voters will even care about this? Maybe...I can't really gauge this.

about the size of a table napkin. Maybe he stole it from that fundraiser in Boca.

Notice how he brings it to the podium under view. Very deliberate move.

Clearly a slippery slimy furtive move. HE CHEATED.

to figure out where he should put his body to block the camera's view??

This is weird.

He can claim it takes a lot of brass to lie and cheat in a Presidential debate and in this one statement he would be telling the truth.

The Atlantic mentioned it before the debate. He has a debate ritual. http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/10/03/tonight-mitt-romney-will-write-dad-on-a-piece-of-paper-to-remind-himself-of-his-father

going by the '04 rules (hexola posted these in another thread), nothing should be brought to the podium by either of the candidates and, if I'm not mistaken, those items have to be placed there for them not by them.

Perhaps I'm assuming too much but I'd think the rules would be very similar.

on the video clip.

. . . "write 'Dad' on a piece of paper." Paper is provided.

But still we should be real careful about making assumptions. If this goes viral and then turns out to be something innocent, that will increase Romney's credibility. Then when his lies get pointed out people who want to continue to like him will think "false accusation." Kinda the mirror image of crying wolf. Maybe it's bait. Who knows.

when the candidates walk in. They are both provided with paper and a pen to take notes during the debate. They're not supposed to bring anything in with them.

I'll withhold definitive judgement until somebody comes out with a clearer shot. But I will say something with enough heft that it bounces as it hits the lectern is not a standard handkerchief.

look at the close ups

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=119479

The thing had some heft to it.

He has to remind himself about his father?

Romney "writes 'Dad' on the piece of paper," Ann says, to remind him that he "Doesn't want to do anything that would not make his father proud."

anything that wouldn't make his father proud?

He needs a constant monitor from beyond the grave in order to behave like a decent human being? What's he gonna do if he wins--have "Dad" embroidered on the drapes in the Oval Office?

Bush's "ranch" was built for him and ready for him the day he took office. He never owned a ranch before or since then. He wasn't a rancher, by any measure.

This whole story Ann Romney made up is such bullshit.

wonderful Will Ferrell bit of him being menaced by a horse in the background while pretending to be a rancher. I blame Reagan for most of this country's downfall in the past thirty years, but will give him credit for being a genuine horseman. Excuse the tangent.

Every time the rancher thing pops up, I get enraged because Bush was always pretending to be a Texan, and he was anything but. As a native Texas, I'm here to tell you that we do NOT claim him. Let Connecticut, where he came from, claim that asshole.

Here's his ritual as described by his wife:

9:00p.m. ET: Debate starts

Seconds later: "As soon as he gets on stage ... he takes off his watch and puts it on the podium," Ann Romney tells CNN's Gloria Borger.

Seconds after that: Romney "writes 'Dad' on the piece of paper," Ann says, to remind him that he "Doesn't want to do anything that would not make his father proud."

Seconds after that: "And then he looks in the audience and he finds me. He has to find where I am. And– he just– he needs just that connection," Ann says.

He writes DAD on the paper AFTER he's on stage, not before, and there was lots of paper available to him on the lectern to use.

the night of the debate! Go ahead, read the link that you supplied to explain away Romney's actions. Nothing in it about putting anything on the podium EXCEPT his watch. And, sorry, that wasn't his watch he put on the podium. It was something a hell of a lot stiffer than a hanky. He took it out of his pocket while he was out of view of the audience and the moderator and he took it back after the debate and tried to put it in his pocket and handed it off to his son when he couldn't put it in a pocket. Is THAT part of the "ritual" too?

Excuse me, but your explanation is baloney.

Not sneak it in and think he got away with it (he didn't)

Sorry, not buying it.

Have a nice stay.

because I knew there'd be a big discussion on the demeanor of the candidates, who was assured, who was more nervous, etc. The reach for the "hanky" stood out even then as an odd set of motions.

This was the best candidate the Repugs could dredge up. Yep.

I think he did a fine job against the speed-freak torrent of interruption and lies that night.

And by the way, enjoy your stay at DU.

I didn't think this was a big deal at first. So what if he brought a cheat sheet and that's how he kept focused on which lies he was going with the night of the debate? The lies and his overly aggressive behavior were enough to turn me off further. But then I read this:

"The rules of the presidential debates are clear about not bringing outside notes and presidents and aspirants have followed the rule for decades."

Think about it. Lying is hard work. Keeping multiple lies straight, remembering which lie you're telling to which group of people...that's gotta be exhausting. Yet he seems energized by it. He's shown a stunning lack of integrity repeatedly throughout his campaign.

This is one more telling aspect of him as a human being and, if true, it's really ugly and dishonorable.

Cheating is a trait unbecoming to a President and is a reflection of a lack of character and judgement. But you knew that, right?

He's asking us to trust him. I don't.

He/she posted in another thread that he/she does not support Obama, and something about Lyndon Larouche...

Flowers - what flowers do you like?

You confirm you are not good enough to be there.

muppet watching? I assure you, I can do both. Not a distraction but rather a curiosity. We like answers. We like to speculate. What is it that we are suppose to be so involved in that we can't think or do anything else?

Another troll bites the dust. Ba da BUMP, BUMP-BUMP

Oh, myyyy!

will pick up on it.