That is from Mitt Romney in an about-to-be-aired interview in the US. He is talking about the up coming debates he is to have with Obama, of which he says:
I think the challenge that I’ll have in the debate is that the President tends to, how shall I say it, to say things that aren’t true. I’ve looked at prior debates. . . . Am I going to spend my time correcting things that aren’t quite accurate? Or am I going to spend my time talking about the things I want to talk about?’
Since the media standard in the US is that anything said by Obama is by definition true and unchallengeable, it is a problem, an immense problem. Obama does not much need to worry about the truth content of what he says so much as its voter impact. Who you gonna believe, me or your lying ears, specially since the media will be blaring how accurate everything Obama said had been? Let me therefore return to my old favourite from Peggy Noonan:
The other day a Republican political veteran forwarded me a hiring notice from the Obama 2012 campaign. It read like politics as done by Martians. The ‘Analytics Department’ is looking for ‘predictive Modeling/Data Mining’ specialists to join the campaign’s ‘multi-disciplinary team of statisticians,’ which will use ‘predictive modeling’ to anticipate the behavior of the electorate. ‘We will analyze millions of interactions a day, learning from terabytes of historical data, running thousands of experiments, to inform campaign strategy and critical decisions.’
Here is a process that is designed to generate perfectly crafted statements designed to bring in the vote irrespective of their truth content. This, and the media who swallow Obama whole, are the reasons Obama remains in the game. It is a post-modern view of the world where truth is not much more than what you can get others to believe.