I have noticed several comments in the Northern Virginia Daily about Mitt Romney's lies. I have not seen a lot of examples of his alleged lies.
Much also has been written about Romney changing his positions. I have been watching him closely for a year now, and I haven't seen much change in his positions. It is not uncommon for politicians to evolve, even change their positions over time. Sometimes this is a good thing. It doesn't necessarily show that he "flip-flops," or that he is dishonest. On the contrary, it may show that he is honest, and has the courage to admit that he was wrong on a topic, and his positions have changed to reflect his updated knowledge on the subject.
I find it interesting that some write of Romney's alleged lies, as if Obama is like George Washington, who "could not tell a lie." Don't forget that Obama's position on same-sex marriage "evolved" for a long time before he finally decided he was in favor of it. And, we certainly must not forget his numerous broken promises, most painfully on the economy and jobs. Finally, it's impossible to forget his lies about the Benghazi tragedy. Facts surface daily about that one, and who knows just how deeply involved he is in a tragedy that he repeatedly said was the result of an anti-Muslim film. Do those who write about Romney's lies hope that, in pointing out Romney's alleged lies, we will be made to forget about Obama's lies?
L. John Bost, Strasburg