Morality is not determined by the church you attend nor the faith you embrace. It is determined by the quality of your character and the positive impact you have on those you meet along your journey
Monday, July 09, 2012
The Obama campaign has a few questions they would like Mitt Romney to answer.
You know, I would kind of like to hear the answers to these questions as well.
Republicans Spin a New Web of Lies About the Bush Tax Cuts
With all the evidence that giving the wealthy more tax cuts does not, has not, and will not spur jobs and the economy, it looks like Republicans are delusional in a pathological sense. President Obama said through a spokesman yesterday that he is committed to ending the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy, and the people are in agreement that it is time for the rich to start paying their fair share they have avoided for the past eleven years. The President has stated his case that the best method for preserving tax cuts for the middle class is letting the millionaire’s and billionaire’s, who have prospered beyond their wildest dreams, tax cuts expire and nearly three-quarters of the American people agree. Still, with a short amount of time left before the general election, Republicans are making extending the wealthy’s tax cuts and repealing the ACA their signature issue as a campaign strategy instead of passing the President’s jobs bills, or expediting the transportation bill to put 3 million Americans to work right away.
It may be true that Republicans suffer from pathological delusions regarding giving the wealthy more tax cuts, but their disorder is not delusion, it is deceit that affects the economic health of the nation and millions of unemployed Americans. It is not clear who they think they are kidding, but after 11 years, Americans are aware that more entitlements for the rich will not create jobs or stimulate economic growth and yet every Republican repeats the mantra that letting the tax cuts for the rich expire kills jobs.
Once upon a time a rich man named Romney ran for president. He could claim, with considerable justice, that his wealth was well-earned, that he had in fact done a lot to create good jobs for American workers. Nonetheless, the public understandably wanted to know both how he had grown so rich and what he had done with his wealth; he obliged by releasing extensive information about his financial history.
But that was 44 years ago. And the contrast between George Romney and his son Mitt — a contrast both in their business careers and in their willingness to come clean about their financial affairs — dramatically illustrates how America has changed.
Right now there’s a lot of buzz about an investigative report in the magazine Vanity Fair highlighting the “gray areas” in the younger Romney’s finances. More about that in a minute. First, however, let’s talk about what it meant to get rich in George Romney’s America, and how it compares with the situation today.
What did George Romney do for a living? The answer was straightforward: he ran an auto company, American Motors. And he ran it very well indeed: at a time when the Big Three were still fixated on big cars and ignoring the rising tide of imports, Romney shifted to a highly successful focus on compacts that restored the company’s fortunes, not to mention that it saved the jobs of many American workers.
...Now fast-forward to Romney the Younger, who made even more money during his business career at Bain Capital. Unlike his father, however, Mr. Romney didn’t get rich by producing things people wanted to buy; he made his fortune through financial engineering that seems in many cases to have left workers worse off, and in some cases driven companies into bankruptcy.
And there’s another contrast: George Romney was open and forthcoming about what he did with his wealth, but Mitt Romney has largely kept his finances secret. He did, grudgingly, release one year’s tax return plus an estimate for the next year, showing that he paid a startlingly low tax rate. But as the Vanity Fair report points out, we’re still very much in the dark about his investments, some of which seem very mysterious.
Put it this way: Has there ever before been a major presidential candidate who had a multimillion-dollar Swiss bank account, plus tens of millions invested in the Cayman Islands, famed as a tax haven?
And then there’s his Individual Retirement Account. I.R.A.’s are supposed to be a tax-advantaged vehicle for middle-class savers, with annual contributions limited to a few thousand dollars a year. Yet somehow Mr. Romney ended up with an account worth between $20 million and $101 million.
There are legitimate ways that could have happened, just as there are potentially legitimate reasons for parking large sums of money in overseas tax havens. But we don’t know which if any of those legitimate reasons apply in Mr. Romney’s case — because he has refused to release any details about his finances. This refusal to come clean suggests that he and his advisers believe that voters would be less likely to support him if they knew the truth about his investments.
And that is precisely why voters have a right to know that truth. Elections are, after all, in part about the perceived character of the candidates — and what a man does with his money is surely a major clue to his character.
One more thing: To the extent that Mr. Romney has a coherent policy agenda, it involves cutting tax rates on the very rich — which are already, as I said, down by about half since his father’s time. Surely a man advocating such policies has a special obligation to level with voters about the extent to which he would personally benefit from the policies he advocates.
Yet obviously that’s something Mr. Romney doesn’t want to do. And unless he does reveal the truth about his investments, we can only assume that he’s hiding something seriously damaging.
So Republicans are betting on hatred — for Obama (and taxes) — with the assumption that hate will negate the free-floating contempt most human beings experience when thinking of Mitt. In every presidential election of the past hundred years or so — with the exceptions of Nixon’s two victories — the more likable candidate has won, however.
From Massachusetts, the message is clear: The longer people know Mitt Romney, the less they like Mitt Romney—unless they’re in his will. But don’t voters — including the Republican base — want to love their candidate? Or at least want to imagine having a near-beer with him?
I watched the movie "Wall Street" last night w/Mike Douglas and Charlie Sheen. Recommend everyone else do so too - kinda makes you think of some of Romney's financial doings! Against the law and unethical!!
This is pretty disgusting. Talk about condescending!
A New York City donor a few cars back, who also would not give her name, said Romney needed to do a better job connecting. "I don't think the common person is getting it," she said from the passenger seat of a Range Rover stamped with East Hampton beach permits. "Nobody understands why Obama is hurting them.
"We've got the message," she added. "But my college kid, the baby sitters, the nails ladies -- everybody who's got the right to vote -- they don't understand what's going on. I just think if you're lower income -- one, you're not as educated, two, they don't understand how it works, they don't understand how the systems work, they don't understand the impact."
Why does Mitt Romney lie about EVERYTHING? Factcheck.org? Really? They have never been wrong…Oh, wait.
Anybody can call themselves a “fact checker,” but that doesn’t make it true. “Fact-checker” Glenn Kessler from the Washington Post, basically called President Obama a liar for attacking Mitt Romney for investing in companies that off-shored American jobs to other countries. The Obama campaign even cited the Washington Post article in their ad, which called Mitt Romney an off shoring “pioneer.” Yet, Glenn Kessler didn’t attack his employer, The Washington Post, for saying the same damn thing about Mitt Romney. Even after the Washington Post backed up the president’s claims, Glenn Kessler wouldn’t correct his “fact-checking” lies. Glenn Kessler is a hack.
Why are Factcheck.org, and Glenn Kessler only attacking the president? Why not the Washington Post, Vanity Fair, and others?
Here’s a question for you, troll: Is the Washington Post lying about Mitt Romney, too? Did the Washington Post "overreach" when they said that Mitt Romney was an "outsourcing" pioneer? Mitt Romney tried to get the Washington Post to retract their story, and they refused, because their reporting was accurate.
If the story wasn’t true, Mitt Romney would have a better response, but he doesn’t, because it’s true. Mitt Romney is clearly rattled. That liar Mitt Romney can put an end to all of these questions by releasing his tax returns. What is he hiding?
Yeah, Gryphen, you better get all your questions in now, while you still have a chance. Check out Number#27 on Mittens' list of "50,000 Actions President Rmoney Will Take On Day One Of His Presidency To Reverse The Widespread Devastation Caused By Barack HUSSEIN Obama"
#27: Enact legislation to make inquiring of, publicizing, discussing or questioning a wealthy individual's net worth, source of income, or expenditures or tax tranbsactions a federal offense, punishable by excommunication from LDS or death, whichever is worse.
Republicans Spin a New Web of Lies About the Bush Tax Cuts
ReplyDeleteWith all the evidence that giving the wealthy more tax cuts does not, has not, and will not spur jobs and the economy, it looks like Republicans are delusional in a pathological sense. President Obama said through a spokesman yesterday that he is committed to ending the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy, and the people are in agreement that it is time for the rich to start paying their fair share they have avoided for the past eleven years. The President has stated his case that the best method for preserving tax cuts for the middle class is letting the millionaire’s and billionaire’s, who have prospered beyond their wildest dreams, tax cuts expire and nearly three-quarters of the American people agree. Still, with a short amount of time left before the general election, Republicans are making extending the wealthy’s tax cuts and repealing the ACA their signature issue as a campaign strategy instead of passing the President’s jobs bills, or expediting the transportation bill to put 3 million Americans to work right away.
It may be true that Republicans suffer from pathological delusions regarding giving the wealthy more tax cuts, but their disorder is not delusion, it is deceit that affects the economic health of the nation and millions of unemployed Americans. It is not clear who they think they are kidding, but after 11 years, Americans are aware that more entitlements for the rich will not create jobs or stimulate economic growth and yet every Republican repeats the mantra that letting the tax cuts for the rich expire kills jobs.
http://www.politicususa.com/republicans-spin-lies.html
Go Obama!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-07-08/swing-states-poll/56097052/1
Let's just call him Tricky Mitt.
ReplyDeleteOnce upon a time a rich man named Romney ran for president. He could claim, with considerable justice, that his wealth was well-earned, that he had in fact done a lot to create good jobs for American workers. Nonetheless, the public understandably wanted to know both how he had grown so rich and what he had done with his wealth; he obliged by releasing extensive information about his financial history.
ReplyDeleteBut that was 44 years ago. And the contrast between George Romney and his son Mitt — a contrast both in their business careers and in their willingness to come clean about their financial affairs — dramatically illustrates how America has changed.
Right now there’s a lot of buzz about an investigative report in the magazine Vanity Fair highlighting the “gray areas” in the younger Romney’s finances. More about that in a minute. First, however, let’s talk about what it meant to get rich in George Romney’s America, and how it compares with the situation today.
What did George Romney do for a living? The answer was straightforward: he ran an auto company, American Motors. And he ran it very well indeed: at a time when the Big Three were still fixated on big cars and ignoring the rising tide of imports, Romney shifted to a highly successful focus on compacts that restored the company’s fortunes, not to mention that it saved the jobs of many American workers.
...Now fast-forward to Romney the Younger, who made even more money during his business career at Bain Capital. Unlike his father, however, Mr. Romney didn’t get rich by producing things people wanted to buy; he made his fortune through financial engineering that seems in many cases to have left workers worse off, and in some cases driven companies into bankruptcy.
And there’s another contrast: George Romney was open and forthcoming about what he did with his wealth, but Mitt Romney has largely kept his finances secret. He did, grudgingly, release one year’s tax return plus an estimate for the next year, showing that he paid a startlingly low tax rate. But as the Vanity Fair report points out, we’re still very much in the dark about his investments, some of which seem very mysterious.
Put it this way: Has there ever before been a major presidential candidate who had a multimillion-dollar Swiss bank account, plus tens of millions invested in the Cayman Islands, famed as a tax haven?
And then there’s his Individual Retirement Account. I.R.A.’s are supposed to be a tax-advantaged vehicle for middle-class savers, with annual contributions limited to a few thousand dollars a year. Yet somehow Mr. Romney ended up with an account worth between $20 million and $101 million.
There are legitimate ways that could have happened, just as there are potentially legitimate reasons for parking large sums of money in overseas tax havens. But we don’t know which if any of those legitimate reasons apply in Mr. Romney’s case — because he has refused to release any details about his finances. This refusal to come clean suggests that he and his advisers believe that voters would be less likely to support him if they knew the truth about his investments.
And that is precisely why voters have a right to know that truth. Elections are, after all, in part about the perceived character of the candidates — and what a man does with his money is surely a major clue to his character.
One more thing: To the extent that Mr. Romney has a coherent policy agenda, it involves cutting tax rates on the very rich — which are already, as I said, down by about half since his father’s time. Surely a man advocating such policies has a special obligation to level with voters about the extent to which he would personally benefit from the policies he advocates.
Yet obviously that’s something Mr. Romney doesn’t want to do. And unless he does reveal the truth about his investments, we can only assume that he’s hiding something seriously damaging.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/09/opinion/krugman-mitts-gray-areas.html?_r=4&ref=politics
Why are the Koch Brothers Betting on Mitt Romney?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PntVMUIZ7UI
O'MALLEY: Romney Bet Against America With Offshore Accounts
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnsSjfZCmTw&feature=relmfu
What is Mitt Romney hiding?
ReplyDeletehttp://blogs.detroitnews.com/politics/2012/07/08/what-is-mitt-romney-hiding-2/
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/romney-offshore-ira-tax-avoidance.php
Where Will Mitt Find Love?
ReplyDeleteSo Republicans are betting on hatred — for Obama (and taxes) — with the assumption that hate will negate the free-floating contempt most human beings experience when thinking of Mitt. In every presidential election of the past hundred years or so — with the exceptions of Nixon’s two victories — the more likable candidate has won, however.
From Massachusetts, the message is clear: The longer people know Mitt Romney, the less they like Mitt Romney—unless they’re in his will. But don’t voters — including the Republican base — want to love their candidate? Or at least want to imagine having a near-beer with him?
http://www.nationalmemo.com/lol-of-the-week-where-will-mitt-find-love/
I watched the movie "Wall Street" last night w/Mike Douglas and Charlie Sheen. Recommend everyone else do so too - kinda makes you think of some of Romney's financial doings! Against the law and unethical!!
ReplyDeleteThis is pretty disgusting. Talk about condescending!
ReplyDeleteA New York City donor a few cars back, who also would not give her name, said Romney needed to do a better job connecting. "I don't think the common person is getting it," she said from the passenger seat of a Range Rover stamped with East Hampton beach permits. "Nobody understands why Obama is hurting them.
"We've got the message," she added. "But my college kid, the baby sitters, the nails ladies -- everybody who's got the right to vote -- they don't understand what's going on. I just think if you're lower income -- one, you're not as educated, two, they don't understand how it works, they don't understand how the systems work, they don't understand the impact."
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-romney-hamptons-fundraiser-20120708,0,4909639.story
His answers, if we get any, will likely just be more lies.
ReplyDelete"Well, if I told you, you wouldn't vote for me."
Romney is a typical Mormon man - a liar! My experience w/them has been in the work force and personally as to extended family.
ReplyDeleteThe women are subservient and on earth to have babies/large families.
Voters need to check into the religion and NOT vote for Romney! The guy gives me the creeps!
Why is Obama lying about Romney?
ReplyDeleteObama’s ‘Outsourcer’ Overreach
The president's campaign fails to back up its claims that Romney 'shipped jobs' overseas.
http://factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-outsourcer-overreach/
@8:39 AM:
DeleteWhy does Mitt Romney lie about EVERYTHING? Factcheck.org? Really? They have never been wrong…Oh, wait.
Anybody can call themselves a “fact checker,” but that doesn’t make it true. “Fact-checker” Glenn Kessler from the Washington Post, basically called President Obama a liar for attacking Mitt Romney for investing in companies that off-shored American jobs to other countries. The Obama campaign even cited the Washington Post article in their ad, which called Mitt Romney an off shoring “pioneer.” Yet, Glenn Kessler didn’t attack his employer, The Washington Post, for saying the same damn thing about Mitt Romney. Even after the Washington Post backed up the president’s claims, Glenn Kessler wouldn’t correct his “fact-checking” lies. Glenn Kessler is a hack.
Why are Factcheck.org, and Glenn Kessler only attacking the president? Why not the Washington Post, Vanity Fair, and others?
Here’s a question for you, troll: Is the Washington Post lying about Mitt Romney, too? Did the Washington Post "overreach" when they said that Mitt Romney was an "outsourcing" pioneer? Mitt Romney tried to get the Washington Post to retract their story, and they refused, because their reporting was accurate.
If the story wasn’t true, Mitt Romney would have a better response, but he doesn’t, because it’s true. Mitt Romney is clearly rattled. That liar Mitt Romney can put an end to all of these questions by releasing his tax returns. What is he hiding?
Fuck off, asshole.
Yeah, Gryphen, you better get all your questions in now, while you still have a chance. Check out Number#27 on Mittens' list of "50,000 Actions President Rmoney Will Take On Day One Of His Presidency To Reverse The Widespread Devastation Caused By Barack HUSSEIN Obama"
ReplyDelete#27: Enact legislation to make inquiring of, publicizing, discussing or questioning a wealthy individual's net worth, source of income, or expenditures or tax tranbsactions a federal offense, punishable by excommunication from LDS or death, whichever is worse.
Good luck getting any answers...
What is leadership, and what are the qualities of a leader?
ReplyDelete