Why Mitt Romney Will Prove To Be a Feeble Presidential Nominee

[Prism]

13. It was twisted

Why not lay out the central number the economist was presumably citing? Why abruptly cut off a quote? The quote was blatantly clipped at an extremely odd point. If I had to hazard a guess, the economist was reaching towards a different, more accurate measurement while the writer translated it into the more politically friendly official number. Both number would be factually correct, but how they were arrived at would differ in accuracy and honesty.

It's a neat little trick, but it was far too blatant. The writer didn't lie, but he engaged in a dishonesty.

Which, again, I'm sure you know, but hey, let's play this pretend game "For verily, I have no idea of which you speak, and how can you sir so impugn on honor?!"

Good grief. It's only January. Pace yourself. November's a touch off.