We have to admit that the President blew it

...when he said the Supremes overturning the Affordable Care Act was "unprecedented." FactCheck.org lays it out here. 

I had hoped that he'd make a case for his opponents being one-sided by harping about ":judicial activism"  whenever judges make ruling they don't like, yet remaining silent when the Supremes seem to be making law, as with Citizens United and appointing Bush II president. 

But he veered away from that and went on to overstate his case. As FactCheck.org points out, he could have made his case without whoppers. But he threw in the whopper and left out the reasoned argument.

Both Obama and Romney--both smart men--have a tendency to overstate and even misspeak in their efforts to be politicians. 

So we Democrats have to not defend the indefensible, admit Obama goofed, and move on. "Moving on" meaning the number of American presidents who didn't make comparable gaffes is small--possibly nonexistent. But we also have to remember not to make any more or less of Romney's gaffes than we do of Obama's, if we want to act from principle and not just from tribe.

That's very hard to do. Our instincts war with our better angels. But it's worth the effort.

PS: FactCheck.org also takes the President's 17 minute campaign film to task for a string of significant exaggeration and spinning in the President's favor. See it here.

There's still plenty of reason to vote for him, considering the alternative--a pleasant-mannered, intelligent, family values guy with a successful business track record whose stated policies are profoundly counterfactual--and if the Senate falls to the GOP and the House stays there, those policies would bring back the Bush II era. They say no we won't we'll cut spending. Which is exactly what the same gang said the last time around. The Tea Part Congressmen are no better when push comes to shove. 

And I'll believe what Romney says about his policies only if he makes a binding promise not to profit personally from them. As it stands he'll make hundreds of thousands of dollars--literally--from the changes he proposes. At the very least Obama isn't profiting personally from what he espouses. Romney has a clear conflict of interest.