Dems Licking Their Chops Over Romney
Some analysis from progressive Greg Sargent at PlumLine, also defining the different factions of a disastrous GOP civil war. It's sad to see so many liberal Democrats get this, while so many of the party I usually support are tone-deaf on such a critical issue, given the economic times we're in. This really is a big effin' deal, as Joe Biden might say.
Oh, sure, Romney has tried to muddy his image as a complete free marketeer, throwing a few bones to working class GOPers with tough talk about “crony capitalism” and cracking down on China. But the bottom line is that at a time of rising public anxiety about inequality and undue Wall Street influence, the GOP is on the verge of nominating someone who is to the extreme right of even some leading Republicans on the morality and practicality of unfettered profit-driven free market excess. That’s the big story here.
“…the morality and practicality of unfettered profit-driven free market excess. That’s the big story here.”
No.
That’s the big lie here.
Same one as we’ve seen for decades now.
Dan it seems Palin is the only one that takes on Romney effectively.
Did Bain get bail-out money because of how Romney managed the company and did Romney benefit from the bail-out money? Why is his campaign reluctant to back up with proof the claim that he created 100 000 jobs while at Bain, and when will he release his tax records?
Excellent defense of Perry also. It is us the people against Romney and Obama, their are fair questions to ask about his time at Bain.
Look how Romney is whining now, not so long ago he told Newt to get out of the kitchen if he can’t stand the heat. We can’t stand you, slimey Romney, get it?
Video Palin on Romney, Bain etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XROys–R0XY&feature=player_embedded
“extreme right”. Fork him!
It’s not about that at all you tool. It’s about Republicans nominating a candidate who wants to have his cake, and eat it too, much like the current “occupier” of the White House.
Romney and his blue blood Republican establishment insiders mistakenly calculated that because, we have a president, his party, his administration, and an establishment media who never bothered to vet the current “occupier” in the WH, that conservatives would be willing to do the same as result of supposed “electability” and “ABO” syndrome. Wrong.
I think the big surprise to Sargent and buffoons of his ilk is that unlike liberals, progressives, and Democrats in general, conservatives hold principle over party, that transparency matters to us, and that we’re willing to engage the apparatchik as opposed to bending over and selling our souls for a few government trinkets and hand outs.
“Did Bain get bail-out money because of how Romney managed the company and did Romney benefit from the bail-out money?”
With Romney leaving the company in 1999…after bringing it back from the brink…
how the HELL do you connect his management to “bail out money”???
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney
That provides a (surprisingly) balanced view of Romney, including his time at BOTH “Bain” enterprises.
Get behind the high-risk, no reward candidate.
Romney ’12
I’m talking 1993 Rags.
But Romney left Bain & Company…after rescuing it…in 1992.
Plus, while it may be a nuance, we are talking about the FDIC forgiving interest on a loan…not payment of tax funds…as a negotiated concession (which happens a lot in bankruptcy, btw).
In 1993 Romney was Chairman and CEO of Bain & Co. They got FDIC to forgive 10 million of company debt. Nice.
“Within about a year, he had led Bain & Company through a turnaround and returned the firm to profitability without further layoffs or partner defections.[44] He turned Bain & Company over to new leadership and returned to Bain Capital in December 1992.”
Bain & Co. paid back the principle of 28 million.
http://articles.boston.com/2011-07-15/news/29778328_1_mitt-romney-loan-forgiveness-federal-bailout
My prediction:
Obama 55%
Mittens 45%
We can do much better folks!
“Bain & Co. paid back the principle of 28 million”
How kind of them.
BTW, the article doesn’t contradict anything I said.
Ok, I didn’t see page 2 of the article.
Nothing contradictory on page 2 either.
I wasn’t contradicting you, except your assertion that Romney was running Bain & Co. in 1993.
I’m not an expert on the history here. Don’t pretend to be. I was seeking to understand what you were saying.
You can have your hackles up over the FDIC forgiving part of a debt. I don’t, since I know that happens all the time, and always has (if over the last 70 years can be “always”).
Even the IRS will negotiate your debt down. It is often just good business, and less expensive than going fist-city on a debtor.
By forgiving part of the debt, the FDIC might have been assuring payment of the remainder, since they might have gotten hind teet if they forced Bain & Co. into bankruptcy.
BTW, can we see Romney’s emails during his time as Gov. Sarah had to release hers. Why did Romney have his deleted? Oh well, that was also legal, why bother.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=romney%20staff%20bought%20and%20deleted%20harddrives&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDIQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.npr.org%2Fblogs%2Fitsallpolitics%2F2011%2F11%2F21%2F142611731%2Fromneys-gubernatorial-aides-bought-their-govt-hard-drives-raising-eyebrows&ei=mVgPT-2zJu_KiQLZ_ZjHDQ&usg=AFQjCNFyPtVt0Z8cEbsgIBKbW6YnBpd-Vg
Apologies for posting an NPR link, I should have found a better link. The story is true, though.
Geez, Ricky, do you REALLY lack stuff of substance against Romney…???
If so, I can help!!!
should be ” Romney’s emails from his time as Governor”.
What about transparency Rags. What is Romney hiding is a fair question.
Character matters. Lack of character is what has contributed most to the downfall of the other candidates.
BTW, deleting emails and records sound more like something Obama and Bill Clinton would do.
Again, Ricky, I don’t think you are wrong. I don’t share your emphasis, but I understand the instinct.
I think it is generally not a wise thing to slam someone for doing something they are allowed to do under the law, fair and square. When people don’t like that, it signals that the law may need changing.
In most organizations, you will find someone writing something that…taken out of context by very badly-motivated people…can look terrible and cause a lot of expense. Still, as a general proposition, I like more information as opposed to less. You just have to be ready to eat the consequences.
A lack of character is also why Obama doesn’t care about what the people want, or about his oath to uphold the Constitution. He has no problem lying his way through life and look what his lack of character is doing to our country.
We should ask more of our leaders. What better time of making sure we get honorable, transparent and trusworthy leaders than the primaries.
I hear what you say Rags and agree to some extent. Even if the law say my wife can kill her unborn baby, her integrity and principles won’t allow her to it. Too extreme of an example, I know.
I would think Romney’s employer at the time, the people of his state, expected and trusted their governor to be transparent.. Well he wasn’t, so the rest of us has that to consider before voting for him.
Again, we agree, Ricky.
Thing is, would you expose yourself to all that? Would you volunteer for that proctological exam?
I am an intensely private person, and I work at having very high integrity.
You’d never catch me running for office.
Can you imagine George Washington exposing himself to this crap?
Anyone in public life or privately for that matter would be wise to shred their e-mails or any other bits of information unless they are willing to have some dirt bag in the media drag them up for any kind of embarrassment they could connect to.
Well if it was good for Palin, it should be good for all of them.
Btw, she got that proctological exam, 24 000 emails – journalists, lefties, everybody and their uncle went through them with a fine-tooth comb- results: Hardworking, honest and transparent governor, no scandals, no shady deals, nothing to incriminate her!
I can vote for someone like that!
Ricky, I again agree with your larger point.
I am a little dismayed that you can’t see a difference between the laws of Alaska and Massive-two-spits. Palin HAD to release her emails, according to what I know about the law there. Romney was permitted by law to trash his.
I don’t see Palin as being more virtuous just on this issue, though I sure see her as one hell of a better leader for us to support.
You are dismayed about nothing.
The law permitted, but not REQUIRED Romney to trash his emails. I’m just asking why he CHOSE to do that.
From what I remember, Reuters and other lefty jounalists filed requests for Palin’s emails to be released.
If Romney and Perry (I stand corrected) did not CHOOSE to delete their emails we could have found out how they compare to Palin in this regard. She IS more virtuous based on this issue. The others CHOSE to destroy information, hers is released and shows her to be clean as the wind-driven snow! Clearly they had something to hide, IMO as a voter, to me it is a huge red flag.
“…though I sure see her as one hell of a better leader for us to support.”
You betcha!
http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/01/you-are-invited-to-attend-good-tea.html
EBL-Can I bring my torch and pitchfork to the party?